[lbo-talk] Revolutionary Leaders (was Iran Poll)

Alex Hogan alexmhogan at hotmail.com
Sat Oct 27 22:56:01 PDT 2007


What ignorant garbage. If you think anyone in the Bush Adminstration has an ounce of sympthathy for labor unions anywhere in the world, you know nothing about the last thirty years of US politics. Do you really think the CIA invites John Sweeney over to talk about ways to undermind the Iranian government in the way it used to work with George Meany in Jay Lovestone in the 50's. Even if John Sweeny wanted a space at the Bush table, he ain't going to get it. There is no room for labor unions in neocon year zero.

The job of the ITUC is not to fight commies. That was the ICTFU's job which the AFL-CIO under Meany dropped out of in the 60's becuase he thought they were not anti-communist enough. Most Iraqi trade unions activists that work most closely with the ITUC are in fact reds of various stripes.

Anyways my point was totally buried under your rhetorical spew. Should the labor movement support Mansour or any labor leader who suffers under governement repression when they ask for it? Or does Mansour deserve to go to jail for fighting for basic working class demands? Should they skip the International Transport Workers and go straight to you when he needs help?

Here are clips of the "labor wing of the empire" in action. Note the very imperialist act of the opposing the privitization of Iraq's oil.

http://blog.aflcio.org/2007/08/16/us-workers-fight-for-iraq-workers-freedom/

http://blog.aflcio.org/2007/06/13/iraqi-workers-strike-to-keep-their-oil/

http://blog.aflcio.org/2007/09/26/take-action-to-protest-murder-of-guatemalan-union-leader/

http://blog.aflcio.org/2007/08/05/i-feel-it-is-not-just-me-in-prison-it%e2%80%99s-my-union/


> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 17:07:37 -0400> From: critical.montages at gmail.com> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Revolutionary Leaders (was Iran Poll)> > On 10/26/07, Alex Hogan <alexmhogan at hotmail.com> wrote:> > > There exists an image of ideal-typical class struggle in the> > > imagination of many a leftist: the working class, united across> > > borders, fight against the capital-states. That has never> > > happened, and that never will.> <snip>> > My big problem however is your tendency to make snarky put> > downs "about Western leftists" against people who have made> > clear they are anti-war but are rightfully critical of the Tehran> > government. Yes, our main job in the US is to stop Bush from> > blowing up Tehran. However when Iranian bus drivers ask for> > the help of international trade unions in pressuring the Iranian> > govt to free Mansour Osanloo , for example, I think we have> > a duty to respond with solidarity.> > The history of the labor wing of the US-led multinational empire --> such as the International Trade Union Confederation (the result of the> merger of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the> World Confederation of Labour) of which the International Transport> Workers' Federation is an affiliate -- claiming to promote free,> independent trade unions, i.e., trade unions that are independent of> Communist parties and governments, and to act in solidarity with> workers of the global South, has not been a pretty one: see, for> instance, Beth Sims, "Workers of the World Undermined: American> Labor's Role in U.S. Foreign Policy," South End Press, 1992,> <http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Labor/AFL_CIO_WOTWU.html>. The end> of state socialism and the Cold War did not change its fundamental> role. A more recent history of it has been documented by such labor> writers as Harry Kelber and Kim Scipes among others. Here is an> example from Haiti: Jeb Sprague, " Failed Solidarity: The ICFTU,> AFL-CIO, ILO, and ORIT in Haiti," <http://labornotes.org/node/230>.> Leftists inside and outside Iran ought to be aware of what the labor> wing of the empire does.> > The labor wing of the empire, like other vehicles of "democracy> assistance," seizes upon a real problem of most post-revolutionary> governments, whether they are Communist, nationalist, or Islamic: the> fact that space for autonomy for organizations of workers and others> is restricted to various degrees for reasons of national security> (lack of autonomy is nearly complete under a one-party state-socialist> state). The absence of autonomy eventually undermines the social> gains of revolution either when the rulers abandon their commitment to> the ideology that made revolution possible or the ruled become> depoliticized and self-centered or both (the history of state> socialism in China, Russia, and Eastern Europe is a cautionary tale> for the Iranians, just as the history of the overthrows of Mossadegh,> Arbenz, Allende, and others is). However, workers who turn to the> labor wing of the empire to solve this undeniable problem usually come> to grief.> > Workers of the North, especially in the USA, are normally unaware of> the dilemma faced by workers under post-revolutionary government in> the South, who must fight for their class interests without> undermining their national interests (especially defending their> nation from the empire). In many cases, trade union members in the> USA aren't even aware of what their unions are doing at home, let> alone abroad. Naturally, they do not realize that intensified global> competition, workers of formerly socialist or nationalist countries> now competing with them for jobs, has come about in part because of> the exertion of top labor bureaucrats of the North who were supposed> to protect their interests.> > In the meantime, workers of the North are also finding out how good> their free, independent unions are, some of which are going far beyond> business as usual of concession bargaining and giving up the right to> strike altogether. See, for instance, Sam Gindin, "The CAW and Magna:> Disorganizing the Working Class."> > It is possible that, in the near future in the North, only French> workers will remember how to strike, if not to win new gains, at least> to defend their way of life.> > Even the still impressive national solidarity of French workers may> eventually be undermined by the gap between the public and private> sectors: "nearly 20 points separates the rate of sympathy [for the 18> October 2007 strike] in the public sector (69%) from that in the> private sector (49%)" (Christelle Chabaud, "The Majority Strike in> Public Opinion,"> <http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/chabaud181007.html>).> -- > Yoshie> <http://montages.blogspot.com/>> ___________________________________> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
_________________________________________________________________ Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list