Comrade! What is this, analytic Marxism or activist game theory or something?
> You and
> Rakesh seem to disqualify ICFTU unions, which, despite their long
> list of problems, have traditionally had some degree of credibility
> as representatives of the working class. If not them, then who? NGOs?
> If so, which NGOs, accountable to whom by what mechanisms?
I'd say take it case by case, the only way. Which country do you mean? (Sometimes the answer is: no one, yet, adequately represents the interests of the majority.) (Like in your country.)
> >By which you mean neoliberal capitalism powered by financial/merchant
> >circuits of capital, with an authoritarian global state giving out
> >orders about what kind of economic policy to follow? Or can we not
> >change some of those features by reducing the influence of neolib
> >global statecraft so that nation-states have a bit more space to
> >shift development strategies towards mass, popular interests? And if
> >we're socialists, isn't that space a necessary if insufficient
> >condition for a more radical rupture in local relations of
> >production?
> I could swear that most unions are pushing in that direction.
No, some are pushing in a corporatist direction which lessens rather than increases the chances for rupture. I'm spending more time today trying to get a handle on the new Zimbabwe workers' party ("Movement for Democratic Change"), which I've written about before with a grain of salt. It's certainly got all the signs of a mass movement, with big big working-class civil society components, huge rallies, a recent electoral victory (in a constitutional referendum), and a progressive platform. But I'm kind of worried, seeing the leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, this morning quoted on the front page of the Jo'burg Business Day (http://www.bday.co.za) calling for a short-term loan from the IMF to get over the immediate crisis (there are, e.g., still huge petrol shortages in Zim today after Mugabe was turned down rudely when he went begging to Kuwait yesterday)... but then Morgan goes on to say that the MDC won't get into a Bretton Woods debt trap and will sort out an organic economic strategy (and his handlers have just confirmed he means it). I hope to see him later this afternoon and get a better sense of whether this classical third world labour movement is going the direction of Chiluba in Zambia (bad corporatism+neoliberalism) or towards the left... seems up in the air right now, as in a good many situations.
> The ICFTU unions are profoundly flawed, I'll completely concede.
> Conservative, complicit, compromising, compromised. But that's not
> all they are. Like I keep saying, they're full of contradictions, and
> they've got good sides too. This stance of pure rejection seems like
> a dead end to me.
"Pure rejection" doesn't refer to everything the ICFTU does (they'll have a big int'l conference in SA in May, which I'm sure will generate some good outcomes). Rakesh and I are simply expressing a desire for the labour and social movements to transcend the Social Clause controversy by recognising the enormous sensitivities on both sides. Susan George has just posted an interesting argument about how to get around it with a more sophisticated global taxation system, which sounds great but isn't terribly practical. I'd go in a different direction, arguing that the best way to bridge this huge divide is to move away from global regulation--*given the existing balance of power, which would mean overwhelmingly corporate-oriented regulation (and hence further devastation of third world prospects*--and towards a restoration of nation-states' capacity to resist neoliberalism. Doug, you haven't addressed this strategic theme, yet, though it's central to the argument...
> I was on a panel yesterday, talking to Tom Dickens' Drew University
> Wall Street program class, with Ron Blackwell of the AFL-CIO. He said
> they were vigorously supporting A16 and specifically mentioned debt
> relief. Not in the way you or even I would like, but that's better
> than nothing - lots better - no?
The Jubilee South statement about Cologne was that the way HIPC debt relief has been handled is not "lots better than nothing," but rather worse than before. You can see their line of argument at http://www.aidc.org.za and decide for yourself.
> Blackwell said they can identify 75 Chinese unionists who are in jail
> for being unionists. So it's kind of hard to tell what "the Chinese
> movement" wants under those circs.
Agreed. but I'd take what Gerard Greenfield says about China very seriously, given how close he works with Asian labour movements. As I think I mentioned, when this came up at the Socialist Register conference in Toronto seven or weeks ago, Gerard was very clear--the issue is not whether or not China should be IN the WTO, the issue is whether there should BE a WTO... I think this debate will continue, but if Ron Blackwell (with his terrific internationalist reputation and contacts and resources) can get Chinese workers' and other democratic movements to make a more explicit statement about their strategy, there'd be a very strong audience for it...
Patrick Bond email: pbond at wn.apc.org * phone: 2711-614-8088 home: 51 Somerset Road, Kensington 2094 South Africa work: University of the Witwatersrand Graduate School of Public and Development Management PO Box 601, Wits 2050, South Africa email: bondp at zeus.mgmt.wits.ac.za phone: 2711-488-5917 * fax: 2711-484-2729