Following on from J18 and Seattle, MayDay 2000 promises a global day of action against capitalism. From New York to Paris, from Auckland to London, thousands of people will be involved in actions aimed at protesting against the effects of capitalism. These events promise to build up a strong grass-roots movement for social change, a better environment and even an end to exploitation.
But can events such as MayDay 2000 really contribute to any radical social change? Can tactics like ‘guerilla gardening’, bike rides, co-operatives, or even ritualised riots in the financial centers really shake the power of the capitalist class?
Capitalism can destroy humanity
There is no doubt that if things stay as they are then humanity and the planet are doomed to destruction. This century has been the worst in history. Tens of millions have died in two World Wars and a long list of local conflicts. Famine and disease stalk the globe. Economic crises lay waste to whole regions ly waste to whole regions leaving poverty and unemployment in their wake. Inequality inreases every day. Environmental destruction reaches new depths. The capitalist system is rotting on its feet.
Its decomposition is tearing away at the social fabric, causing despair, hopelessness and an attitude of ‘every-man for himself’. There is no doubt then that the present system needs to be replaced if humanity is to survive into the next millenium.
Which social force can destroy capitalism?
For this to happen it is obvious that society will have to go through massive convulsions. The forces of the capitalist state will surely meet any radical social change with stiff resistance. They will defend their wealth and power with all the means of repression at their disposal.
Let no-one think that this change can be peaceful or take place through the ballot-box. But which social force is capable of leading the fight against the dictatorship of the rich and powerful? Which social force contains within it the perspective of a new society? An alliance of environmental groups, students, small farmers, t, students, small farmers, trade unions, anarchists, and any number of well-meaning individuals? No. Capitalism is the last class society in history, and it requires the action of a revolutionary social class to get rid of it.
The working class is the only revolutionary force
After the collapse of the Eastern Bloc in ’89 the ruling class proclaimed the ‘death of communism’ and the definitive victory of capitalism. They shamelessly spread the greatest lie of the century - that the horrors of Stalinist state capitalism were the direct result of the October revolution, and that any future attempt to oppose capitalism was bound to end in the same nightmare. In effect they announced the death of their mortal enemy, the working class.
Since ’89 these lies and ideological campaigns have indeed caused much confusion within the working class and it has to some extent disappeared from the social scene. But it is not defeated. This is the class that in 1917 rose up to establish the power of the workers’ councils in Russia and forced the warring states to stop the First World War.
This is mall>This is the class that from the end of the ’60s, and until ’89, launched waves of struggles at the international level. This is the only class in society that produces real wealth, that stands at the point of production and is capable of crippling the capitalist economy.
Through its collective activity and struggles in the workplace and the streets it is the only class that can become conscious of itself as a social force and lead the struggle against capitalism.
Communism is the only alternative to capitalism
There can be no ‘anti-capitalism’ which is not at the same time for communism. It’s not enough to be ‘anti-capitalist’ if that means being ‘against the multinationals’ but in favour of more ‘responsible’ and ‘democratic’ behaviour on the part of the capitalist state, which remains the focus of capitalist power, despite all the talk of globalisation.
It’s not enough to be ‘anti-capitalist’ if that means appealing to nationalist prejudices against ‘foreign’ capitalism, as the unoreign’ capitalism, as the unions are currently doing in the Rover affair.
To get rid of capitalism you can’t reform the capitalist state; it has to be demolished. To get rid of the capitalist economy, you have to strike at its roots - the whole set-up of wage labour, the world market, nation states. You have to create a world-wide community where all production is geared towards human needs. You need, in short, to create communism. Only a world-wide working class revolution can do that.
The need for communist organisations
Throughout its history the working class has created political organisations to point the way towards the communist goal, from the three Internationals to the left fractions who fought the degeneration of the Communist Parties to the groups of the communist left that exist today.
The International Communist Current is part of this tradition which, throughout the terrible crises and wars of the 20th century, has remained loyal to the genuine programme of communism against those who have betrayed and crossed the class line.
We are convinced that it’s impossible to by-pass the left communist tradition if you want to have a meaningful discussion about capitalism and its alternative.
WR, 28/4/00.
The threatened massive redundancies at Rover would destroy up to 50,000 jobs in the West Midlands. The threat to cut car assembly at Dagenham (or even close it altogether) would cause similar devastation, on a smaller scale, in East London and Essex. Tens of thousands of workers face the misery of unemployment and poverty.
Neither Phoenix nor nationalisation can guarantee jobs
We cannot rely on the Phoenix bid. It is true that the Towers plan involves only about 2,000 redundancies at Longbrige and 8,000 in the supply industries, as opposed to the much larger numbers of jobs that will be lost if Rover had gone to Alchemy or is shut altogether. But no boss, new or old, private or state, can guarantee jobs, whatever improvements are made in productivity, whatever concessions are made on wages.
We cannot rely on the government to help private businesses keep Rover going. Tony Blair may have promised to work "night and day" but the DTI has made it clear they will not do any more than facilitate negotiation, and investigate the role of English Partnership in a leaseback schish Partnership in a leaseback scheme. They have made clear that they do not intend to bail out car production.
Calling for nationalisation, for the state to become the new boss, is not the answer, particularly when the government has made clear it will not put a lot of money in. Nationalisation has been used in the past, but it certainly didn't benefit workers. Every time Rover has changed hands (and name) there have been job losses and increases in productivity, but the 54,000 redundancies when Leyland was nationalised in 1975 were among the worst ever.
Nationalisation didn't prevent massive job losses in the coal and steel industries or on the railways.
None of these proposals, the Towers bid, government intervention or nationalisation, can overcome the overproduction in the car industry. Every year it is producing around 21 million more cars than it can sell, meaning that about 80 assembly plants are redundant world-wide. This is why it is not just Rover that is threatened, but also Dagenham, and Honda is cutting its production. It is not only the car industry that is hit by overproduction, but the whole world capitalist economy.
The problem is not that it is "easier toot that it is "easier to get rid of jobs here than anywhere else in Europe" as Bill Morris of the TGWU says. A low Euro and the EU Directive on Information and Consultation haven't prevented unemployment in France and Germany. When the unions say things like this they are trying to tie us up in nationalism, to get us to identify with British capitalists rather than our class brothers across the Channel, to wave the Union Jack instead of defending our interests as workers. Workers in all countries are being hit by the crisis. British, German, ‘native’, ‘immigrant’, all workers have the same interest – to defend ourselves against capitalism’s attacks on our living standards.
How not to fight back
The demonstration organised by the unions on April 1st showed that workers want to resist this attack on their jobs. But it was like the large demonstrations against pit closures in 1992, when even Tory MPs pretended to support the miners. And still the mines were closed. On 1st April it was not just workers who demonstrated behind the unions. Local businesses were also in evidence: for instance, the Evening Mail produced posters saying "Don't let Rover die", Union Jacks were given out. It ended up being given out. It ended up being a celebration of British industry instead of a defence of workers' interests.
Demonstrations can be a place to meet other workers - from other plants, from other industries, or unemployed - to discuss, share experiences and gain a sense of our strength as a class. But this is not why the unions call demonstrations – they do it as a safety valve for discontent. If it looks as though a demo may become a real meeting place for workers, the unions do their best to sabotage it. So the demonstration on 1st May, which could have brought workers from Longbridge and Dagenham together, and also many others showing their solidarity, was sabotaged by the unions. In contrast to the well publicised Mayday 2000 riot, there were no adverts for it, hardly anyone knew it was going on.
An occupation of Longbridge will not save jobs if the focus is to prevent the company moving the Mini production line. There were many occupations in the 1970s, such as at Upper Clyde Shipbuilders, where the focus was to keep working and look for another boss. This caused the workers to become locked up in the yard, isolated from other workers who wanted to show solidarity. An occupation of Longbridge in the union framework of keeping the production line in place for a neroduction line in place for a new boss would have the same dangers today.
How can we fight back?
In order to fight back we have to understand the scale of the attack. Huge as the attack on car workers is today it is not the whole story. Many workers in other industries, especially manufacturing, are facing redundancy. Unemployed workers, single parents and disabled people are under attack through the 'New Deal'. Schools and hospitals are more and more inadequate to workers' needs. It is the whole working class that is under attack.
First of all we have to fight back as workers. Not as supporters of this or that industry - Rover was not broken up in 1998, but that didn't help the 2,500 workers made redundant. Not as 'British' people, or residents of Birmingham or Dagenham, alongside local shopkeepers. Not even as trade unionists, since the unions today support management not the workers.
Secondly, we must not let ourselves get locked up in Longbridge or Dagenham. In the factory earmarked for massive redundancies we are in a very weak position. But when workers get together across trade and industrial divisions we are strong.
Those workers who signed a petition for a mass meeting at Longbridge to discuss how to resist the attack had the right idea, getting together as workers. We cannot rely on the unions to organise workers' meetings - the TGWU binned the petition and refused the meeting. But we can and must get together and discuss, even if at first we can only do it on a small scale.
Workers outside Rover and Dagenham can show solidarity. When on the demonstrations it is important to discuss with each other as much as possible, break out of the isolation. And remember that the best solidarity of all is to defend your own interests, by struggling in your own workplaces, by taking up common demands with other workers. This will start to rebuild a movement which can change the balance of forces in favour of the working class.
The only future capitalism can offer is growing poverty, unemployment and collapse. But by recovering their identity and confidence as a class, workers can begin to offer a different future – a world communist society where production is geared towards human need and not the profits of capital.
International Communist Current, 6/5/00.
Links
[1] https://en.internationalism.org/tag/political-currents-and-reference/anti-globalisation
[2] https://en.internationalism.org/tag/geographical/britain
[3] https://en.internationalism.org/tag/general-and-theoretical-questions/economic-crisis
[4] https://en.internationalism.org/tag/recent-and-ongoing/class-struggle