End game The political battles waged by Marx and Engels to give the First International an outlook and program independent of all ideology of the propertied classes has been outlined and preserved as part of the Soviet Legacy in "Marx and the Trade Unions." "Marx and the Trade Unions," by A. Lozovsky (pseudo, Dridzo, Solomon Abranovich) issued by International Publishers dated March 14, 1933 Moscow, captures every fundamental political struggle Marx conducted in the First International. It has been more than twenty years since I have had the occasion and need to restudy this wonderful text. Issued under the rising curve of Soviet power, this text contains all the historical and theoretical errors of the period in which it was issued. This period can be called the era of "Marxism-Leninism." A historical era is historical precisely because no one in the era can discern their error. This is so because the social process has not attained a degree of development to bring froth the new distinct features of the entire process. Specifically, the means of production does not move in contradiction with the relations of production but rather antagonism. The contradiction that is means of production and relations of production is the internal drive and impulse establishing the self movement of society as development of the mode of production. The mode of production is driven through successive quantitative boundaries of development. The quality that is being developed quantitatively was industrialism. Today, the industrial revolution has given way to the post industrial revolution and a new quality of means of production. The appearance of this new quality of productive forces brings to antagonism - not contradiction, the society founded on industrialism. The historical error is the conception of the "class struggle" of the proletariat as contradiction. The bourgeoisie and proletariat are birthed in contradiction as the unity of a production relations or social relations of production. These new classes - bourgeoisie and proletariat, are simultaneously birthed in antagonism with feudalism and all the old classes (old production relations) marking feudalism as distinct property relation or the landed property relations, or a specific social system (mode of production). Under the feudal system the serf could not overthrow the nobility because together them constituted the building blocks of the mode of production. What was and is required to displace a mode of production, is a qualitative development of means of production, creating new classes and new relations of production. Capitalist/industrial society, as a mode of production is no different in its historical evolution as a mode of production. During the various boundaries of development of the industrial system and capitalism the proletariat at the front of the curve of development did not and could not overthrow capital in the advanced countries until the means of production began evolution in antagonism with the relations of production. At the back of the curve of industrial development it was possible to impose a communist regime on society during the leap from agriculture to industry. Such was the case with the Russian October Revolution. This distinct law was not formulated and articulated until the mid and late 1980’s by a small section of the American communist movement. Reality Check The decay of industrial unionism is no where more striking than in the state of Michigan and the historic Detroit nexus of automotive production. The practical activity of the proletarian movement in America demanded a revisiting of this text. The post industrial revolution is the environment and context for the decay of industrial trade unionism in the same way that the rising industrial revolution was the context for the decay of craft unionism as the cutting edge of the early trade union movement. What is different today is that the struggle of the workers is spontaneously leaping outside the boundary of the trade union movement. A glance at the membership numbers of the auto workers union is instructive. (Note: These figures are for total membership rather than auto workers only. Air plane workers and agricultural implement workers are included in the early years. After the 1980 service workers are included. A real break down of all the numbers and category of workers would be revealing. At this point I do not have such information. There are roughly 90 - 100, 000 active UAW auto workers. And falling.) UAW Average Annual Dues Paying Membership 1936 through 2008
1936 27,058 1976 1,358,364 1937 231,894 " 1977 1,440,988 1938 144,097 1978 1,499,425 1939 155,845 1979 1,527,858 1940 246,038 1980 1,357,141 1941 460,791 1981 1,275,313 1942 592,447 1982 1,151,086 1943 908,374 1983 1,057,376 1944 1,065,030 1984 1,123,716 1945 891,840 1985 1,161,171 1946 677,310 1986 1,106,477 1947 855,933 1987 1,002,675 1948 893,421 1988 943,582 1949 936,702 1989 921,926 1950 1,018,440 1990 867,564 1951 1,184,507 1991 861,658 1952 1,197,730 1992 796,729 1953 1,418,118 1993 750,436 1954 1,239,171 1994 765,903 1955 1,328,634 1995 756,538 1956 1,320,513 1996 769,685 1957 1,315,505 1997 764,089 1958 1,026,050 1998 741,687 1959 1,124,362 1999 746,259 1960 1,136,140 2000 728,510 1961 1,001,018 2001 715,621 1962 1,073,547 2002 675,898 1963 908,374 2003 654,733 1964 1,168,067 2004 622,603 1965 1,326,136 2005 598,648 1966 1,402,399 2006 576,131 1967 1,403,792 2007 512,560 1968 1,472,696 2008 468,096 1969 1,530,870 2009 355,000 1970 1,485,609 1971 1,264,902 1972 1,393,501 1973 1,501,910 1974 1,464,928 1975 1,356,670 The Walter P. Reuther Library of Labor and Urban Affairs Of the 355,000 UAW members for year 2009, less than 100,000 are autoworkers. The estimated figures for General Motors are 35,000; Ford 40,000 and Chrysler 25,000. The shift in the form of the trade union movement is expressed in the relationship between active-employed workers and non-active workers meaning retired workers. There are roughly 800,000 retired UAW workers versus 355,000 active members. These retired workers have broken their connection with production and for all practical purposes exist and spontaneously strive to protect their economic interest outside the frame work of the trade union movement as it had existed. Where in the past Marxists put forth the proposition that the struggle of the workers had to be guided outside the connecting tissue - bond, that is labor-capital at the point of production, or pushed and aided in leaping outside the narrow trade union framework, this proposition is now obsolete. The spontaneous development of means of production, revolution in the means of production, has entered the equation. A huge section of the proletariat has been effectively shoved outside the civic society of the bourgeoisie and contains a spontaneous logic that compels it to confront state and government as a fight for survival. No reform of the system can bring this new form of the proletarian movement into the inner metabolism of bourgeois commodity production. Hence, the form of the working class movement is undergoing change in real time. Today we are on the threshold of a new proletarian movement that has escaped the vision of the entire American Marxist movement, except a small group of communists with historical roots in the industrial proletariat. After this year absolutely no one will dispute the new character of the proletarian movement. Several events this year will alter the vision of the proletarian movement. I would like to point out one of these events. The auto workers union holds its Constitutional Convention in Detroit in a few months. A new president will be elected facing the ruin of the union. With a membership of 355,000 and less than 100,000 auto workers the material basis of the domination of autoworkers in the "auto workers union" has been undermined. The auto workers union is no longer a union of auto workers. The "auto workers union" is a new service type union with roots in a workforce being consolidated on the basis of advanced robotics. This is not a theoretical proposition. The new engine plants going on line in 24 - 36 months are mind boggling. To pinpoint the dynamic that is taking place requires no more than one describing the social process without imposing ideology on facts. The North Jefferson Assembly plant, producing the world famous Jeep brand has roughly 3,000 workers in total. These workers are organized as Local 7 of the UAW (United Autoworers union). Attached to Local 7 are 30,000 living retired workers. Who is going to dominate the union? Workers with a connection to production or workers without a connection to the reproduction of capital? Simple question. Of the 80,000 living Chrysler retired workers, 30,000 are Local 7 members. The retired workers cannot move impendent of the great mass of proletarians with tenuous direct connections to the reproduction of capital because the demand of these workers are the demands of the most poverty stricken sector of the American proletariat. Take the demand for health care. Health care cannot be won from the employers because we - or rather, the retired workers, are not employed. Our health care has already been detached from the employers. We have already formed ourselves into small organizations independent of the employers on the health care issue, but within the union framework. We are spontaneously compelled to open out doors - union doors, to anyone and everyone interested in a single payer health care system. This means "Everyone In and Nobody Out." What is interesting is that these small groups expressing the new proletarian movement in America are 60% women 50% minority industrial proletariat, (rising to as high as 80% in our consistent meeting) and this configuration exist no where else in America . . .yet. What has become painfully obvious is that this new form of the proletarian movement and new form of "proletarian combination" expresses a new class striving in antagonism with the exiting society. This is not an expression of contradiction between relations and means of production because there is no internally connection bond - tissue, to constitute a contradiction. We are not evolving in contradiction with an employer or an expression of the contradiction that is labor and capital driving the reproduction of capital. We are outside the system devoid of means of production and devoid of the means to reenter production of surplus value. We remain consumers but this is tenuous. Today, a section of the new proletarian movement is evolving in external collision with capital and the state. This specific self movement is not contradiction but the meaning of "society moves in class antagonism." We have long ago entered a new era of social revolution. Just as Marx and Engels sought to provide the First International with a proletarian consciousness are task is no different. Proletarians Unite WL. _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
