United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America (UE) Them and Us :

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14338
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America (UE) Them and Us :

Post by blindpig » Sun Aug 24, 2025 4:44 pm

Image
A large crowd gathers outside the General Motors plant in Oshawa, April 9, 1937. The strike was a key moment in the fight for industrial unionism in Canada and a significant event in the history of the United Automobile Workers (UAW). Photo courtesy the Oshawa Museum.

Class struggle unionism, auto workers, Reds, and the 1930s
Originally published: Canadian Dimension on August 19, 2025 by Ken Theobald (more by Canadian Dimension) | (Posted Aug 22, 2025)

The current moment is an ominous one for the workers’ movement in North America. In response to Trump’s tariffs and trade wars, there has been a noticeable lack of class struggle perspectives or even basic solidarity coming from labour leaders on both sides of the border. The top leadership of some of the largest unions in the United States, notably the United Auto Workers (UAW), the United Steelworkers (USW), and the Teamsters Union, have embraced the tariffs, while, in Canada, many unions have fallen into the “Team Canada” trap of allying with the largest corporations and the state.

Image
Tony Leah
Baraka Books, 2024

One of the main priorities of the now ascendant far-right is to undermine workers’ collective power in order to better serve the interests of capital. Trump and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, or “DOGE,” have terminated 30,000 federal employees, ignoring their unions and their collective agreements. The recently published Global Rights Index for 2025, produced annually by the International Trade Union Confederation, the world’s largest labour federation, states that “the Donald Trump administration has taken a wrecking ball to the collective labour rights of workers and brought anti-union billionaires into the heart of policymaking.” Many employers have followed suit, taking a hard line or refusing to bargain with unions and aggressively resisting organizing drives. At the same time, far-right politicians like Trump and Pierre Poilievre pose as friends of workers while camouflaging their true anti-union agenda.

Canada’s federal election on April 28 was yet another sobering wake-up call for the left and the labour movement. While a Pierre Poilievre government was avoided, the Conservatives did win a record high share of the popular vote, at 41.3 percent, and made significant inroads among working class voters. The Conservative gains were the most startling in the Windsor-Hamilton corridor, the former industrial heartland. This is home to auto workers, steel workers, skilled trades, and workers in many other sectors. The NDP lost all its seats in Windsor, Essex County, and Hamilton and now has no MPs from Ontario. This was the worst electoral outcome for the NDP since its founding in 1961. As Sid Ryan, former president of the Ontario Federation of Labour, noted in Canadian Dimension, the election result was “a catastrophe for the entire labour movement.”

In North America, the workers’ movement has been stagnant for far too long. Unions have seen a steady decline in membership, in bargaining strength, in impact, and in political power. Since 1954, union membership in the U.S. has been declining steadily. Union density reached a record overall low of 9.9 percent in 2024, and only 5.9 percent in the private sector. In Canada, union density has declined to 30 percent of the overall workforce and 15 percent in the private sector.

Before it descended into the morass of business unionism and embraced social democratic gradualism, organized labour had a long history of militant class struggle, direct action, and effective organizing both north and south of what was, until recently, the world’s longest non-militarized border.

Since its inception, the workers’ movement has grown in often dramatic and sometimes unexpected surges. These historic moments, when workers overcame their sense of powerlessness, brought about real change. These periods of progress were often followed by renewed offensives by employers and the state, forcing labour to constantly fight to defend its hard-won gains. There is renewed interest in these eras of union growth and militancy. They vividly demonstrate the importance of class struggle perspectives, of uniting the whole class, and of solidarity.

One period that stands out sharply is the 1930s: a time of dramatic working class struggles and radicalization against a backdrop of far-right ascendency and austerity. Against overwhelming odds and with few resources, workers built new forms of organization—industrial unions—as vehicles of class struggle, resistance and defiance.

Sam Gindin, former research director of the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW), writes about the significance of the 1930s in his article “Resuscitating the Working Class”:

When it comes to inspiring Canadian trade unionists, the 1930s stand apart. Few narratives match the era’s dramatic sit-down strikes, the on-to-Ottawa trek and the triumph of modern unionism. Moreover, the 1930s are not just an inspirational marker. It was then that capitalism last faced a degree of economic uncertainty comparable to the present and it was also at the beginning of that decade that labour last experienced an identity crisis akin to what unions now face.

Of the thousands of struggles waged by workers during the Great Depression, a number have had an enduring impact. One notable example is the dramatic sit-down strike by workers in Flint, Michigan, against General Motors, in 1937, the eighth year of the Great Depression. This was followed, within a few weeks, by workers in Oshawa, Ontario, going on strike against GM.

The Flint and Oshawa workers were members of the recently founded United Auto Workers (UAW), which held its first national convention in 1936. Previous auto unions, mainly organized by communists and leftists, laid the basis for the UAW. In Canada, communists organized the Workers’ Unity League (WUL), which pioneered industrial unionism in many industries. These WUL unions included the Auto Workers Industrial Union (AWIU). The WUL operated from 1929-36 before merging into the new CIO (Congress of Industrial Organizations).

Tony Leah has written a fascinating text about this period, The Truth About the ’37 Oshawa GM Strike, recently published by Baraka Books. Leah is a long-time union activist with extensive experience in bargaining, shop-floor representation, labour education, and political mobilization. He worked at GM Oshawa for almost 40 years and is a member of CAW Local 222. He has held many positions at the local and the national union level. He also holds a master’s degree in labour studies from McMaster University.

Based on extensive research and primary sources, Leah’s book is a captivating reconstruction of a dramatic event and period in working class history. Leah focuses on the roots of radical industrial unionism, taking a “peoples’ history” approach to researching and writing about the 1937 Oshawa strike. His book is a riveting account of what was happening on the ground in Oshawa, on the shop floor, in the workers’ frequent mass assemblies, and in the broader community. He succeeds in capturing the class and power dynamics of the time.

Leah describes the horrible working conditions in the auto plants, where assembly workers were averaging about $600 a year in income. The mammoth plants were generally filthy, unventilated, noisy, and unsafe places. Workers endured irregular shifts, speed up, arbitrary wage cuts, and long layoffs.

They were subject to relentless efforts to intensify their work and were under constant observation by supervisors who had total power to fire workers on the spot for any reason.

In the U.S., plants were often segregated by race as well as gender. Women were in the lowest paying jobs such as sewing or sorting parts. GM frequently used spies and thugs to try to intimidate workers. Workers were not even allowed to talk during their lunch breaks, and joining a union was a fireable offense.

The militancy of the new industrial unions like the UAW had dramatic effects. The gains won by the unions made a significant difference in the individual lives of members and the working class as a whole. These unions improved workers’ wages, working conditions, and job security. They gave workers a voice on the shop floor and in the community. At a societal level, the new industrial unions advocated for social programs and fought for the rights for workers and the oppressed. They fought for racial and gender equality. They promoted workers self-activity, class and political consciousness.

Union membership in the U.S. grew from less than three million in 1933 to almost 15 million by 1945. Union growth in Canada lagged slightly behind the U.S. during this period. But, by the early 1950s, Canada’s unionization rate had caught up to the U.S. and then surpassed it beginning in the 1960s with the organizing of the large public sector unions.

The Great Depression
The 1930s were a turbulent and contradictory period which saw a devastating global depression, and the rise of militarism and fascism. It was also a decade which witnessed a heightened level of class struggle.

In corporate circles in North America at the time, there was notable sympathy for fascist ideals. Faced with a looming war against Nazi Germany, many in elite circles favoured non-intervention. Government and corporate bosses were much more worried about the “red menace” than fascism.

The Great Depression began in the fall of 1929 and lasted for a decade—one of most severe economic crises in the history of capitalism. An eight-year drought that decimated the prairie economy started the same year. The length and severity of this global economic slump, which was preceded by a drop in world commodity prices, dealt a devastating blow to workers, farmers, small businesses, and communities. Factory closures, cuts to production, and job losses soared. Homelessness, displacement, poverty, and hunger were all widespread.

After 1929, the U.S. ramped up its protectionist measures and world trade dwindled. By 1933, Canada’s GNP had fallen by 42 percent and 30 percent of the workforce was unemployed. The unemployment rate remained high in Canada until 1942. For those who still had a job, wages were cut by as much as 40 percent, hours of employment were irregular, and the conditions of work deteriorated. For many, austerity and hardship continued during the war years.

Despite the hardship and despair of a seemingly endless depression, working class people organized, mobilized and fought back on a massive scale. For workers, the 1930s was a period of struggle, resilience, and resolve.

Leah emphasizes the significance of “the particular moment in history” when the Flint and Oshawa strikes took place.

Fascism was on the rise and international rivalries were setting the stage for a world war. The Western capitalist powers were trying to respond to the deep economic crisis of the Depression, then in its eighth year. Popular movements in opposition to the devastation wreaked by the Depression, war, and fascism, were calling into question the continuation of the capitalist system.

Conditions in the early 1930s were ripe for mass radicalization. Building on the experiences of the Canadian Labour Revolt that unfolded in the period from 1917 to 1925, workers formed new radical unions and used direct action to win recognition and contracts. Workers went on strike at an astounding frequency, using new tactics such as sit-down strikes and plant occupations. There were general strikes in multiple cities. The jobless organized into Unemployed Workers’ Councils and called for “wages for all.” People physically blocked evictions and farm closures and organized rent strikes. There were frequent and militant demonstrations and mass rallies demanding relief and government assistance. Leftist were able to channel collective anger into prominent campaigns for social reforms. In the U.S., there were public campaigns against Jim Crow laws, racism, and white supremacy.

The profound shock of the economic collapse led many to question the basics and rationale of capitalism. There had been difficult periods before for workers, such as the 1919-1921 depression, which fuelled the Winnipeg General Strike and a strike wave in 1919, but nothing like this.

Many were radicalized during this period, not just workers, but also artists, writers, intellectuals, and professionals. Many became communists, socialists, left-leaning social democrats, or anarchists. After the pointless carnage of the First World War, and then the Great Depression, people were looking for an alternative social order, a better world than wage slavery.

Leah writes that:

Capitalism as an economic/political system was increasingly called into question. Communist movements gained in strength and influence as workers looked for alternatives to improve their conditions of work and life.

Job losses often hit men the hardest and the longest during the depression. Women were somewhat more insulated because they were employed in more stable sectors such as health services, teaching, domestic and clerical work. Some men abandoned their families. Others left in search of work. Women’s unpaid workload increased significantly as they were expected to maintain the household and the family during hard times with much less income.

Throughout the 1930s, women were prominent in the wave of activism and the campaigns for relief and social reform. Much of the community organizing was done by women. They provided strike support and organized protests, notably in both the Flint and Oshawa strikes. The new industrial unions were open to women and they made up a significant percentage of the membership. These new CIO unions fought for equality for women workers, including equal pay.

There were countless struggles in the garment, textile and clothing-manufacturing sectors. The bitter Dressmakers’ Strike in Toronto in 1931 lasted for two and a half months, during which the 1,500 women strikers endured assaults, arrests, and jail. In 1937, there were sit-down strikes in department stores, restaurants and hotels in the U.S. Five-and-dime sales clerks occupied their work sites.

The impact on youth growing up during the Depression was severe. In many parts of North America, schools reduced the length of the school year, or even closed altogether. Out of desperation, masses of unemployed youth and workers rode the rails, crisscrossing the country in search of work or relief. Shantytowns proliferated across the country.

Relief programs in Canada were paltry where they did exist. Single men were not eligible for any type of relief. Both the Conservatives and Liberals did not even see it as a responsibility of the federal government to intervene or to provide any help. The provinces, municipalities and private charities were expected to do that.

In his 2014 essay, “Rethinking the Great Depression,” historian Edward Whitcomb states that: “two of the most important questions in Canadian history are why Ottawa did not do more to deal with the suffering and why it did almost nothing to address the causes of the crisis.” Whitcomb notes that the federal government’s “wartime spending just a few years later jumped to over six times as much” as it spent on Depression relief.

Conservative Prime Minister R.B. Bennett, elected in 1930, did introduce make-work projects and prison-like work camps which were supervised by the military. The camps were often in remote locations and had terrible living conditions. In British Columbia, communists organized the Relief Camp Workers’ Union and took their protests demanding better relief and support to Vancouver. From there, they organized the On-to-Ottawa Trek which was brutally repressed by police and the RCMP in Regina in what was called a “police riot.” Police shot into a large crowd of strikers in Regina, injuring hundreds, and arresting 130. Two people were killed in the carnage.

At the beginning of the Depression, there were no national standards for labour rights or social programs in North America. In the U.S., the struggles of the early 1930s created mass pressure for the programs and reforms rolled out by FDR starting in 1933 as part of the New Deal. For a variety of reasons, both jurisdictional and ideological, the Canadian state was slower to pass labour legislation, but eventually did in 1944 and 1948.

The rise of industrial unionism
The most dramatic and successful development in the workers’ movement in North America during the 1930s was the surge of industrial unionism to the forefront. Previously there had only been a few unions formed on an industrial basis, most notably miners. Workers in industry were often split into a dozen or more separate craft unions. Craft unions often excluded people based on race, sex, or even politics. In the challenging period of a depression, it became obvious that all of those employed in one industry should be united in one powerful union in order to increase the strength and effectiveness of workers’ collective power.

Scholar and activist Sam Gindin, who served as research director of the Canadian Auto Workers from 1974—2000, describes the significance of this turn:

Craft unionism, which was almost exclusively concerned with skilled workers, had exhausted its role and the mass of workers (the ‘riffraff’ as one craft official referred to the semi-skilled and unskilled) moved to a form of organization that united workers across skills, gender and—especially significant in the United States—race. But no less important, this did not just happen; the union rebirth cannot be understood apart from its intimate link to the role of the radical left, communists in particular.

There had been previous attempts to organize workers on a class basis—the Knights of Labour, the Western Federation of Miners, the Industrial Workers’ of the World (IWW), the One Big Union (OBU), and the “red unions” of the Workers’ Unity league (WUL). All of these labour centrals had storied histories and notable successes. But the emergence of the industrial unions in the 1930s was qualitatively different.

Much of the union organizing in the early 1930s was community-based, grassroots and egalitarian. There were a massive number of strikes, many of them militant, with workers using new forms of organizing and radical tactics. Between 1930 and 1941, there were 27,000 recorded work stoppages in the U.S., while many more went unrecorded. “We are All Leaders”: The Alternative Unionism of the Early 1930s, edited by Staughton Lynd, offers a glimpse into the plethora of organizing initiatives.

The Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) was formed in 1935 and began aggressively organizing the masses of “unskilled” and “semi-skilled” workers. The emergence of the CIO led to unparalleled growth of unions in mass-production industries in auto, steel, rubber, oil, chemical, textile, transport, and other sectors. Labour historian Eugene Forsey wrote that the emergence of the CIO “lit a flame” for the labour movement.

Industrial unionism proved to be a more effective vehicle of struggling against the boss. The early CIO unions were fearless, militant, and creative. Workers used new tactics. A favourite was the sit-down strike where workers would occupy the plant to stop production and to keep out management and strikebreakers. The Unemployed Councils and the women’s auxiliaries provided picket duty and strike support. Workers frequently defied court injunctions and often battled with the police and company thugs. Workers reached out and built community and international support. Sometimes these struggles escalated to general strikes in places such as Minneapolis, Toledo, San Francisco, Seattle, and Stratford, Ontario.

Leah writes:

Although there were earlier attempts to establish industrial unionism, the work of Communists in the late 1920s and early 1930s made its success possible. Combined with this was a militant approach of organizing workers to exercise their collective power against employers… Militant actions, including strikes, sit-down strikes, and the other ways in which workers organized to demonstrate their power at the point of production were essential to the establishment of the UAW in the U.S., and were important in the success in Oshawa as well.

The 1930s were a period of prominence for communists, leftists, and radicals. They were at the forefront of many of the most dramatic and militant strikes. Communists took the lead in organizing among those who had previously been ignored by established trade unions—the great mass of so-called unskilled industrial workers, the ethnic and minority communities, newcomers, Blacks, women, and the jobless.

‘Reds’ in the U.S. and Canada were recognized as being amongst the best and most effective fighters for the interests of the working class. They were the main advocates pushing for the industrial union strategy. Embedded in the working class, they were often the best organizers. They were motivated and committed enough to do the long-term work of building a core of activists on the shop floor or in the community. The communist parties showed what a relatively small and highly disciplined organization of revolutionaries could accomplish.

There was also an upsurge in anti-capitalist organizations beyond the scope of the communist parties. Former Wobblies and anarchists were still prominent and active in many struggles. There were radicals from many other tendencies in and around the Socialist Party. Trotskyists played a pivotal role in a number of labour struggles, notably the Teamsters’ strike and the general strike in Minneapolis in 1934.

Spurred on by the inability of the state to offer any real solution to the Great Depression, there were fervent debates going on in left-wing and workers’ circles. In both the U.S. and Canada, there were discussions about organizing a workers’ party, forming labour-farmer alliances, carrying out independent political action, and fighting for socialism and against fascism.

The level of repression by the state and police forces was brutal during the 1930s. The threat of violence always hung in the air. In his 1972 book, Labor’s Giant Step: The First Twenty Years of the CIO, Art Preis wrote:

Almost all picket lines were crushed with bloody violence by police, deputies, troops and armed professional strike breakers.

Image
The Memorial Day Massacre, May, 1937, where police attacked strikers outside Republic Steel in Chicago. (Photo: Chicago History Museum.)

In 1937, steelworkers in Chicago—Black, Latino and white—were on strike against Republic Steel. Union members, their families, and supporters gathered peacefully for a Memorial Day picnic and then planned to march to the steel mill. Chicago police blocked their path, threw tear gas canisters, and fired bullets into the crowd. About 100 people were shot, most of them in the back. Ten were killed. A coroners’ inquest later ruled that the police action was “justifiable homicide.” This type of state violence with impunity was common throughout the 1930s.

In their 1969 study, “American Labor Violence: Its Causes, Character and Outcome,” Philip Ross and Philip Taft stated that the U.S. had the bloodiest and most violent labour history of any industrialized nation in the world.

On numerous occasions, the Canadian state also demonstrated its willingness to rely upon its armed wing to serve the interest of capital and repress workers’ struggles, as in the case of the On-to-Ottawa trek mentioned earlier. Both countries routinely harassed and imprisoned labour leaders and deported those who were “foreign born.”

Barbara Roberts, in her book Whence They Came: Deportations from Canada 1900-1935, documents how many municipalities asked the federal government to deport immigrant workers simply because they had lost their jobs. Up to 18,000 people were deported on the grounds that they had become “public charges.”

Section 98 was enacted by the Canadian government in 1919 in response to the period of labour unrest which culminated in the Winnipeg General Strike. This law, which allowed strike leaders to be charged with sedition, remained in force until 1936. In 1931, eight members of the Communist Party of Canada (CPC) were tried, convicted and sentenced to five years imprisonment. The CPC was declared unlawful and was banned from 1931-1936. Hundreds of immigrant party members were deported.

The 1937 Flint and Oshawa strikes against GM
On December 30, 1936, a group of auto workers defiantly took over GM’s Fisher Body Plant in Flint, Michigan. This was the beginning of the dramatic Flint Sit-Down Strike, which lasted for 44 days, and spread to 150,000 auto workers in other cities.

The UAW was in a relatively weak position before the strike and the odds seemed to be stacked against them. Leah quotes media coverage in Life magazine before the Flint strike, which characterized the UAW as “puny” and “one of the least influential labor unions.”

The tactical decision to engage in a sit-down strike in Flint was brilliant. A small number of workers stopped production, occupied the plant, and kept out management and strikebreakers. In a classic picket line, they would have been more vulnerable. By utilizing a plant occupation they were more in control.

Leah references a fascinating account of the Flint Sit-Down Strike written by union organizer Walter Linder:

Once inside they set about organizing one of the most effective strike apparatuses ever seen in the United States. Immediately after securing the plant, they held a mass meeting and elected a committee of stewards and a strike strategy committee of five to govern the strike… Then committees were organized: food, police, information, sanitation and health, safety, ‘kangaroo court,’ entertainment, education, and athletics… The supreme body remained the 1,200 who stayed to hold the plant, the rest being sent outside to perform other tasks. Two meetings of the entire plant were held daily at which any change could be made to the administration.

On January 11, 1937, heat was turned off to the occupied plant and the Flint police, armed with guns and tear gas, attacked in full riot gear. They tried to force their way in and tried to stop the delivery of food and supplies. The strikers were able to repel attacks by the police, but 14 workers were shot and wounded. After the police were forced to retreat, more than 4,000 National Guard troops then surrounded the plant and set up machine guns. The workers were defiant. They ignored two court injunctions and seized yet another GM plant.

The Flint strikers relied heavily on outside support. The Women’s Emergency Brigade, who armed themselves with clubs, played a pivotal role of providing picket duty and support activities during the sit-down strike. A women’s auxiliary helped with overall organizing.

Image
Michigan National Guardsmen set up a machine gun on the road leading to the Fisher Body Plant, Flint, Michigan, 1937. (Photo: Walter P. Reuther Library)

Even though the UAW represented only a small number of auto workers before the Flint strike, they relied upon the discontent, militancy, and solidarity of the rank-and-file across the industry and beyond. The impact of the Flint strike was huge and it quickly expanded to other plants and other cities in the U.S. and Canada. Within a few weeks, there were 87 sit-down strikes in Detroit alone. There were a remarkable 477 recorded sit-down strikes across the U.S. in 1937 involving over 500,000 workers.

On February 11, GM agreed to recognize the UAW as the sole bargaining agent for its workers. The union movement now had a renewed confidence. The following month, auto workers at Chrysler used a sit-down strike to win a union contract. Within a few years, union agreements had been signed with GM, Ford, Chrysler, and the rubber companies, followed by the packinghouse, textile and electrical industries. The UAW had grown from 30,000 to 500,000 members in a matter of months.

Leah writes:

After forty-four days, the sit-downers achieved the seemingly impossible—an agreement by GM to recognize the UAW and bargain a contract with them. It would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of the victory and its impact on workers in the United States, Canada and internationally.

The Ford Company was the last holdout and it used brute force and thugs to try to keep the union out. In the infamous “Battle of the Overpass,” on May 26, 1937, Ford’s “security service” and Dearborn police brutally attacked UAW members who were peacefully handing out leaflets. This assault was extensively covered by the press and Ford was eventually pressured into signing a union contract.

On April 8, 1937, less than two months after the end of the Flint strike, almost 4,000 workers went on strike against GM in Oshawa. As Leah relates, this strike, which lasted for 10 days, and won recognition for the union, is also regarded as a landmark struggle that helped pave the way for the expansion of the UAW and other CIO unions in Canada.

As in Flint, the odds initially seemed to be against the workers. They were organized into the newly charted Local 222 of the UAW, up against the wealthiest corporation in the world. GM dominated Oshawa, just as it did in Flint.

There was no dues check-off in the 1930s, so unions had few resources. Sam Gindin argues that this “force[d] the union to find more creative ways to gain members—the GM Oshawa local, not confident in its ability to take on GM, attracted workers through bowling leagues and hunting clubs—but when the opportunity to have a steady income came, workers and their unions generally opted to lock that in.” He continues:

The postwar struggle for unionization in Canada led at Ford to a dramatic shutdown in 1945 and an arbitrated ruling (the Rand Formula) that offered unions the dues check-off (“union security,” as it was dubbed). This was generally hailed as a victory by unionists, soon became a pattern in major industries, and was subsequently enshrined in law. But in exchange, workers were to give up the right to strike during the life of the agreement and the union was to take responsibility for policing that ban.

In addition to facing a hostile press, the Oshawa workers were confronting Ontario Premier Mitch Hepburn, who was determined to crush the union. Hepburn had mobilized 100 RCMP officers, an OPP squad, and 400 “special constables” dubbed “Hepburn’s Hussars” to be sent to Oshawa. He claimed that it was necessary to do so because he had a secret report that the CIO was working “hand-in glove with international communism.”

Leah’s analysis of the Oshawa strike reveals “a battle where rank and file workers and shop floor militants were in charge.” He examines in detail the role of women, something largely ignored in other accounts of this strike. He looks at the particular historical conjuncture, a period of intense class conflict, when workers’ class consciousness and levels of resistance were high, and when workers were prepared to take militant action. He gives credit to communists and leftists for laying the ground work for the growth and expansion of industrial unionism.

Leah contributes not only extensive research but also his perspective as a rank-and-file union activist who is intimately aware of the demands of militant class struggle. The Oshawa UAW workers had 300 shop stewards in a workforce of 3,700, with a high level of shop-floor activism. Leah highlights the importance of the steward system: “The stewards built enough shop-floor power that they forced management to resolve workers’ grievances—even before the strike, and thus before there was a collective agreement.”

Leah writes:

Solidarity was enhanced by ensuring that women workers were represented on the GM bargaining committee and that women, whether workers or relatives of workers, were engaged in providing support for the strike through the establishment of a Ladies’ Auxiliary (an organization for women partners or relatives of workers that engaged in strike support activities).

A particular aim of Leah’s book is to counter the conventional narrative of the Oshawa strike established by historian Irving Abella and others. Leah shows how Abella downplayed or ignored the very factors which made the 1937 strike a success—the organizing by Reds, the extensive rank-and-file involvement, the role of women strikers, the high level of community support, and the tangible support from the International UAW. Abella disparaged the role played by the international UAW in an article published in Canadian Dimension in March-April 1972, titled “The CIO: Reluctant Invaders.” While promoting a Canadian nationalist agenda, Abella often erased or glossed over the radical origins of the labour movement.

Reclaiming workers’ history
In keeping with the subtitle of his book, “They Made Cars and They Made Plans: Reds, the Rank and File, and International Solidarity Unionized GM,” Leah affirms:

The achievements of the workers in Oshawa were the result of the incredible solidarity and mobilization of the rank and file members, the establishment of radically democratic structures of decision-making, the broad support from workers and community, and the significant benefits of being part of the radically disruptive international UAW.

Leah highlights the factors which made the early CIO industrial unions so unique and so successful, including the power of the “one-plant-one-union” approach as well as the emphasis on organizing workers as a class, and not separating them based on skill or trade. He emphasizes the way that the new industrial unions conducted their affairs in a democratic and accountable manner with a system of shop stewards, plant committees, and shop-steward councils, all democratically elected. And he documents how the unions consciously strived to accommodate and welcome all, regardless of race, ethnic background, gender or political persuasion. Leah highlights the emphasis on rank-and-file involvement and engagement, the openness to radical, left-wing perspectives and leadership, the centrality of direct action and mass struggle, and the importance of building solidarity, locally and globally.

It is refreshing to read an account of working class history where the role of Reds and leftists is acknowledged as a central one.

The gains of those dramatic struggles of the 1930s and 1940s, such as the Oshawa strike, include many of the things that working class people now take for granted: union recognition, collective bargaining rights, a minimum wage, unemployment insurance, social assistance for those in need, labour standards, health and safety regulations, and pensions.

Image
GM Oshawa Strike 1937. (Photo: City of Toronto Archives, Fonds 1266, Item 44146)

Radical repression
In the late 1940s and early 1950s, communists and radicals became the targets of orchestrated purges from the labour movement. These purges involved collaboration between corporations, the state, the police, and right-wing forces within labour. Radicals were effectively excised from nearly all of the CIO industrial unions, while unions which still had left-wing leaderships were forced out of labour federations. In the U.S., the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 prohibited many of the tactics used successfully by CIO unions and forced union officials to sign anti-communist pledges.

In Canada, social democrats in the CCF played a very significant role in ousting radicals. In a remarkably candid and exhaustive manner, Irving Abella documented these purges of the left in his 1973 book Nationalism, Communism and Canadian Labour: The CIO, the Communist Party, and the Canadian Congress of Labour 1935-1956.

John Stanton’s 1979 book Life and Death of the Canadian Seamen’s Union illustrates the underhanded tactics adopted in the purging of radicals from the labour movement. The Canadian Seamen’s Union (CSU) was organized in 1936 by a few dozen communist and militant seamen. Within three years, the CSU represented 9,000 workers, 90 percent of the merchant seamen working the Great Lakes and ocean ports. The CSU was a highly effective and militant union and a thorn in the side of the half-dozen companies which controlled Great Lakes navigation. In the late 1940s, the Canadian and U.S. governments, in conjunction with the shipping bosses, collaborated with American Federation of Labour (AFL) leadership in a campaign to crush the CSU. They brought in the Seafarers International Union (SIU), an affiliate of the AFL, headed by known gangster Hal Banks. In 1949, a gang of armed SIU thugs travelled by train from Montréal and attacked a CSU picket line in Halifax, beating many with axe handles and shooting eight workers. Barely 15 years after it was first formed, the CSU was crushed and many of its members were blacklisted, never to work in the industry again. According to Stanton’s account, both the Canadian government and the RCMP collaborated with and protected the criminals of the SIU. Just as during the ignominious Cold War period in the U.S., some top labour bureaucrats collaborated with the State Department and the CIA in suppressing popular movements and trade unions around the world.

In 1944, the AFL created the Free Trade Union Committee (FTUC) designed to create divisions within labour. By 1949, the FTUC was working with and receiving funding from the CIA to try to split the European labour movement into rival ideological camps. This anti-communist work of the AFL expanded into Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Several authors have documented the collusion of top labour bureaucrats with U.S. foreign policy objectives. The latest is Jeff Schuhrke, author of Blue Collar Empire: The Untold Story of U.S. Labor’s Global Anticommunist Crusade. Schuhrke writes:

The same twentieth-century labor movement that brought a measure of economic security and personal dignity to millions of working people also participated in some of the most shameful and destructive episodes in the history of U.S. imperialism. For decades, trade unionists in the United States have struggled to make sense of this, reluctant to discuss or even think about it… It is long past time for a thorough reckoning.

This marginalization and silencing of radical voices within the labour movement had a devastating impact. It was the beginning of a steady decline for organized labour. It led to a more docile labour movement, accommodating of bosses and the state. Unions became much more reliant upon full-time paid staff and a growing labour bureaucracy, and far less on the rank-and-file. Unions began promoting a very narrow concept of political action centred mainly on the parliamentary arena and voting, every few years, for the NDP in Canada or the Democratic Party in the U.S.

As Leah writes:

The commitment to democratic and militant unionism… was eventually undermined and largely destroyed by the adoption of anti-communism by most of the union leadership during the Cold War years. The destruction of left leadership in much of the labour movement was followed by the era of concessions, team concept, and subservience to the corporate capitalist class, as the gains of workers came under increasing attack by corporations and government.

The Great Depression only came to an end with the advent of a vast military conflict and the development of a war economy. During the Second World War, 40 percent of manufacturing capacity in North America was war related. In Canada, a surprising number of state-owned corporations were established to ramp up production in shipbuilding, aircraft, automotive, guns, heavy ammunition and a myriad of other industries and sectors. One of those government-owned entities was “Wartime Housing Limited,” set up in 1941 to rapidly build 46,000 houses for workers and later returning veterans. An obvious question is why this massive industrial capacity could not have been used at the height of the Depression, or in peace time.

Today we are seeing eerie echoes of the 1930s as the world descends into a period of instability punctuated by economic crises, military conflicts and rising global inequality. Right-wing populism, militarism, and fascism are on the rise once again. We’re witnessing increasing nationalism, protectionism, the scapegoating of migrants and newcomers, and mass deportations.

The 2025 Global Rights Index states:

We are witnessing a coup against democracy, a concerted, sustained assault by state authorities and the corporate underminers of democracy on the rights and welfare of workers… This attack is orchestrated by far-right demagogues backed by billionaires who are determined to reshape the world in their own interests at the expense of ordinary working people.

There is an urgent and pressing need to revitalize the labour movement. An effective fightback strategy would be muted without the central role of a militant workers’ movement. Such a movement is needed to defend all of those under attack—immigrants, refugees, precarious workers, trans and queer people, racialized people, and the Palestinian people, as well as workers—and to articulate a different vision of how the world could be.

There are occasional stirrings that show the potential and possibility of renewal. In the U.S., during the May Day Strong demonstrations, hundreds of thousands of workers and allies in 1,600 cities reclaimed the historic significance of the day to protest against Trump’s reactionary agenda. But much more needs to be done to revitalize the labour movement. In this context it is helpful to learn more about the history of the workers’ movement and the dramatic struggles of the 1930s. We need to reclaim that history, just as Leah’s book does, and draw inspiration from the radical dimensions of the labour movement.

As Tony Leah reminds us:

Radical industrial unionism requires radicals—people who understand that capitalism is a system designed to rob us and needs to be replaced. The successes of 1937 would not have been possible without the contribution of this outlook, and it is the ‘missing ingredient’ that we need in the labour movement today.

https://mronline.org/2025/08/22/class-s ... the-1930s/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14338
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America (UE) Them and Us :

Post by blindpig » Wed Sep 10, 2025 2:12 pm

Labor Day 2025: What We Face
Posted by Chris Townsend | Sep 7, 2025

Image

By Chris Townsend
September 3, 2025


Meet Sean Tierney – The Left Wing Doing the Work

Legendary U.S. trade union and communist leader William Z. Foster instructed workers more than 100 years ago that, “The left wing must do the work.” There are many ways to measure the multiple crises that some days seem to doom our U.S. trade union movement. And a small recent episode here in greater Washington, DC, illustrates so much of the problem we have when it comes to stimulating the trade unions to do the basic work of organizing the unorganized masses. It also reveals the simple answer to the question of “What can the scattered socialists do to get union organizing going?”

The Crisis of New Union Organizing

New union organizing in the U.S. today is sparse, especially shocking given the fact that more than 90% of the U.S. workforce is unorganized. Some new union organizing does proceed today under the steady hand of trained, veteran union staff. Some goes forward driven by young, mostly inexperienced, but highly motivated organizers. For all of that we can be grateful. Some union organizing is orchestrated without the NLRB process. Some takes place in the public sector, or in the rail and airline industries. All of it is heroic, but the cumulative results are insufficient to make even a small dent in the magnitude of the crisis. As Trump’s recent attacks on the federal unions reveal, it will take years and years just to regain these lost union members given the snail pace of new organizing by the labor movement.

Where are the unions? Mostly they just sit, inert, consumed with their own internal worlds, and increasingly surrounded on all sides by hostile elements. Taking the trade union message out to the unorganized workplaces to spread the hopeful word among the toilers is either an unknown activity or, at best, an occasional field trip reserved for paid staff. In many business unions new organizing is a bothersome “bill” that they can, and do, avoid paying. The most urgent crisis facing the labor movement today – its refusal to dramatically launch mass campaigns to organize the unorganized – has only worsened since I explored the topic last year. It has worsened every year of my entire 46 year run in this labor movement.

Where is the Left?

“Organize the unorganized!”, has been the call of our left in past decades, but not today. With some energetic exceptions, we instead see our fractured, scattered, and tiny left forces largely engaged in 101 different pursuits. Some are more compelling than others, but few, if any, are connected directly to the workplace or the trade unions. The workplace is mostly off-limits. Employer “boss rule” is complete and unchallenged by most in our left. And you can bet that the assorted moribund trade union “leaderships” that plod along are grateful that they face virtually no pressure from the left elements that do exist. With few left forces willing to demand or do the difficult work of new organizing, retreat becomes inevitable. The union officialdom draw their breath, draw their pay, while new organizing slows to a trickle.

What Can One Union Member Do?

A little more than two years ago, Sean Tierney found out about and came out to a new union organizing school I was running here in Northern Virginia. Sean works as a driver for a private contractor company in suburban, Washington, DC. He takes senior citizens and people with disabilities to wherever they need to go, and he is a member of the Teamsters Union. He is a socialist, and he keeps up with developments across our scattered labor movement and left wing. He knew he had a lot to learn about unions, and especially union organizing, since his shop was organized so long ago that nobody knows how it happened. Sean also joined Teamsters for Democratic Union (TDU) as soon as he found out about them and their mission of revitalizing the union.

Sean has helped with a number of the union organizing schools that I have run. He volunteered to pick me up and drive to the school I was running in Richmond, Virginia. We talked about a lot of things on the trip and he had one question; “Can the mechanics at my company join the union?” I answered, “Yes, of course, but you have to do the work of signing them up.” He then volunteered that he didn’t think that his union local business agent was interested in organizing them. He had been told already that they could not be organized. Sean didn’t know it yet, but he was supposed to give up right then. And he didn’t.

The Union Wins

The good news is that on August 7th, 2025, thanks strictly to the diligent work of Teamster member Sean Tierney, 8 mechanics at his company voted in an NLRB election by a 7 to 1 margin to join his local union. These workers, somehow left out when the unit was originally organized, now come under the coverage of the Teamsters union contract that covers Sean and 80-odd co-workers at the company. This is made possible by the NLRB election known as an “Armour-Globe” election, where workers can join an existing bargaining unit immediately. They do not have to wait for the union and the company to bargain an entirely new contract for the small group. Any union with an actual organizing program would have long ago identified this group and brought them into the union. Sean made it happen with his many months of persistent effort. He talked to the workers over and over again, answering their questions and keeping their morale up during the months when it looked like the union was never going to do anything.

Small Union Win Reveals Major Underlying Crisis

Why did this process take 15 months? Is the NLRB that slow? No, at least not yet. Did it take that long to sign up the workers? No. Sean did that in a couple days. Was it because the company resisted? No. The company never did anything to block it or slow it down, which is nearly always the case in these types of elections. Sean and I talked at least 10 times, as I was mystified why such an elementary organizing task was not proceeding. More than once I thought of calling his local union myself and explaining what was going on, but based on my own experience I didn’t want to get Sean into any “trouble.” You never know with many unions. Those reading this who belong to one of these types of unions today will know what I am talking about.

At one point, with both of us exasperated, I even gave Sean union cards from a different union. I figured maybe his union would get moving if it thought that another union was moving in to grab these workers for themselves. Sean at one point even showed the union staffer a union card from yet another union, telling him that they were going to organize these workers if his local wasn’t. These gimmicks are best avoided, but nothing else was getting the attention of the union.

From the point that the union finally requested that the NLRB conduct an election, until that election was won, it took exactly 3 weeks. That’s it. Three weeks. Again, what was the holdup? Well, the record is clear; during Sean’s entire 15-month quest to try to organize his 8 co-workers into his union each and every delay or dodge was orchestrated by one or the other staff member of his union local. That’s right. The paid staff of the union. They stared at him. Said they would get back to him. They told him they were “working on it.” Apparently being untrained, and lacking in very much real organizing interest or needed experience, the union staff knew little about how the organizing process worked. Is every Teamsters Union local like this? Certainly not. There are many who are organizing, and some are winning. So Sean kept pushing month after month, and I kept telling him that “Something would break loose, it’s bound to.”

Business Union Failure to Organize

All along the game was to see if Sean Tierney would go away. The business union goal after all is to control the members, keep them in the dark, keep them “in line” and looking up to the leadership and staff uncritically. In many unions – and there are far, far too many like this today – the members are not supposed to question things. Members asking questions are viewed with suspicion. Even if the member is trying to organize new members into their own local union. Even if the process of organizing these workers is about as simple as bending over to pick up some money laying on the ground. And you might think from this episode that this local union was overflowing with new members? No, federal government reports indicate that in the past 3 years alone this local has lost 2,800 members.

Sean Tierney is as pro-union as they come in this working class. But rather than put him to work helping to address this crisis, he gets pushed away for almost a year and a half. Sean Tierney alone expanded his shop’s union membership by 10%. Small, yes, but this opens the door to additional organizing where he lives. And in a related postscript, a different Teamster local from a nearby city just won an NLRB election and organized the shop where Sean worked prior to his current driving gig. It’s only a few miles from his home. He worked there and knows many of the workers. While we will never know, maybe if Sean had not been forced to waste time and valuable energy trying to get his own local to function, these workers might have joined his local instead? You can’t make this stuff up. Well, given that there are hundreds of unorganized shops and workers by the tens of thousands all over the area hopefully his local union will take him seriously when he brings in the next organizing lead.

Follow the Example of Sean Tierney

There are many more details in this saga as Sean has also had to wrangle with his local union over the past several years to bargain a better contract, and to encourage the members to get involved – even a little. He has been working for the past year to ensure that the members in his unit have access to a functioning and trained union steward. Sean, a socialist and a solid union man, has never become demoralized to the point of giving up. He talks with other union members he knows who face similar situations – or even worse – and shows what support he can. He calls me with union questions, or just wanting to compare notes. He stays as active as he can visiting picket lines and doing his duty to push back against Trump. He reads and studies to learn more about how the union can function better, going to meetings and seminars at his own expense. Sean checks for my articles on the Marxism-Leninism Today web site, and he reads other sites that offer useful trade union and political information. The unions tragically provide very little in the way of trade union study and training for members who want to actually build their own union. That needs to change, and has been a problem for many decades.

I want to salute the tough, unrecognized good work of Sean Tierney, as he lives out Foster’s admonition that, “The left wing must do the work.” Each small task to rebuild worker confidence in our trade unions as fighting organizations is a critical step forward. Sean sets an example for us all to follow. He has never allowed his employer, or his own union from deflecting him, demoralizing him, or aggravating him into giving up. If more on the left would take seriously the need to do their part in organizing the unorganized, and rebuilding and strengthening our unions, we would notice the difference.

https://mltoday.com/labor-day-2025-what-we-face/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14338
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America (UE) Them and Us :

Post by blindpig » Mon Sep 15, 2025 2:18 pm

Image

Labor Movement in fight for its life against neofascist threat
By Bill Fletcher, Jr. (Posted Sep 15, 2025)

Originally published: LA Progressive on September 12, 2025 (more by LA Progressive) |

In countries across the capitalist world, trade union movements are being challenged to their very core by the growth of right-wing populist and neofascist mass movements. What makes this situation especially dangerous is that labor unions and supporters are facing not just maniacal leaders or even military juntas, but a strengthening political alignment between segments of the capitalist class and these same right-wing social movements.

The post-Cold War rise of right-wing populism overlapped with, but had different roots than, neoliberal authoritarianism which, over the second half of the 20th century, curtailed the growth for left and progressive politics, while the ability to protest became increasingly limited. During this period, capitalist states reduced their role in any degree of wealth redistribution and enhanced their repressive apparatuses.

Right-wing populist and authoritarian movements arose in different countries in very different ways. In the United States, their rise preceded the emergence of neoliberalism as a growing, reactionary response to the progressive social movements of the 1930s and following decades. This later combined with the rise of neoliberalism in the 1970s and the stagnation of living standard for the average working person.

Neoliberalism also brought with it increased wealth polarization and, therefore, panic within the middle strata of society resulting in the classic dilemma for the middle strata: were they going to be crushed between the rich and the poor or was there another solution?

Neofascism (or “postfascism”) has emerged as an outgrowth of loosely entwined right-wing populist movements. In some cases, neofascism arose through a revolt against the impact of neoliberalism, and in other cases as revolt against the welfare state. In either case, what has come to unite these various movements has been revanchism, i.e., the politics of revenge and resentment by those who believe something has been taken from them by the “other.”

It is here that race, sex, gender and religion become critical categories for identifying scapegoats. Revanchism has been accompanied by the politics of the mythical return to a better time–a time that allegedly existed where everyone knew their place in society and ​“we” all lived comfortable lives.

The modern trade union movement arrived at a detente with the dominant sections of capital in most countries following World War II. This does not mean there was an absence or abandonment of class struggle, however, rather that class struggle shifted in form. In many cases it shifted to other-than-union working class organizations, or it took the form of struggles by segments of the working class–women, migrants, workers of color–resisting various forms of systemic economic and non-economic oppression.

Whether through co-determination, tripartism, or industry agreements, the leadership of much of organized labor in the United States concluded that ​“peace in our time” had arrived, despite the fact that the larger working class, particularly among marginalized populations–frequently lacking collective organization and the right to freely organize, protest or bargain–were experiencing the underside of this brokered peace between the labor movement and capital.

Nationalism meets revanchism
Up until about a decade ago, trade union movements in the advanced capitalist world largely downplayed the significance of the rising right-wing populist and neofascist movements. To the extent to which it was acknowledged, there was a tendency to treat the question of right-wing authoritarianism as a marginal movement. In the 1980s, the National Education Association took steps to educate its members about the dangers of white supremacists and other right-wing authoritarian formations which had become very active in the Midwest and North West. Among the larger trade union movement, such actions were the exception, not the rule.

Neofascists claim to be in opposition to ​“globalism,” whereas much of the established trade union movement often seems to have accommodated itself to neoliberal globalization, even when unions are critical of certain elements of neoliberalism. For the far right, globalism is only partly about the globalization of capitalism, but more commonly refers to the migrant surge of the last 40 years, relocation of jobs overseas and what is seen as the disappearance of borders. Globalism, for those on the far right, is about the breakdown in parochial ways of thinking and acting. As a result, nationalism becomes the flag to protect not the nation state, but the old ways–traditional values. Nationalism becomes linked with revanchism and the idea that these old ways of doing things have been threatened and the possibility for a good life has been taken away from the average person.

To the extent organized labor failed to pay attention to shifts in the methods of work and in the workforce itself–and particularly the growth of casualization and the informal economy–it appeared to its critics to be a movement for an ​“elite,” though it is highly unlikely that most trade union members would think of themselves as such.

Despite electoral-political engagement by trade unions, there has been a stark reluctance by most union leaders and leadership bodies in the United States to explicitly name the fascist threat, or the broader threat posed by right-wing authoritarianism. This aversion must be situated in the context of the chronic illness that has befallen the U.S. trade union movement–and, for that matter, many other trade union movements in the advanced capitalist world.

This illness amounts to a decline in the face of the neoliberal offensive and a failure to accept that the terms of the post-World War II labor/​capital truce no longer hold. In fact, unions in both the public and private sectors are currently being obliterated by more politically-reactionary segments of capital. Rather than pushing the limits on democratic capitalism, the trade union movements have up to this point largely accommodated themselves to defeat, albeit a slow-moving defeat.

With the rise of right-wing populism and neofascism, the crisis has become acute. Neofascism sees the trade union movement as its enemy while at the same time trying to appeal to the working class who make up labor’s membership. However, to win over this base, the far right is harkening back to previous pseudo pro-worker appeals by embracing racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic politics that can present as being in the interest of everyday working people.

Toward an antifascist labor movement
The response of the global trade union movement to these efforts has been uneven at best. On the one hand, an international alliance of antifascist unions was established through the work of Italy’s Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL, the left-wing trade union confederation). Similarly, a 2022 report commissioned by the German trade union movement, the Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund (DGB), indicated that there has been a high level of educational work conducted by European labor federations and confederations to raise awareness regarding the threat from the far right. These are promising efforts, but don’t yet amount to large-scale active campaigns conducted against the far right (whether in the workplace or communities) as well as campaigns against forms of discrimination and oppression that are often exploited by these same forces.

In the United States, efforts have been equally uneven. Until very recently, almost no anti-far right educational efforts were being conducted within the union movement. Though there have been some educational programs that have focused on racism and sexism, even those are more often than not very incomplete. The reluctance to touch on matters that most union leaders perceive to be ​“divisive” has repeatedly led to a retreat into the focus on the economic–including militant economic rhetoric and struggles–as if that will serve as the unifying force of union members. Despite decades of efforts in that direction, when facing down a far-right threat, they rarely succeed.

At the same time, principally in response to President Donald Trump’s second administration, resistance efforts have been taking place. In the federal sector, rank and file union members led by progressive local union leaders established the Federal Unionist Network (FUN) as a means of coordinating fight-back efforts to the attacks on federal sector workers by the Trump administration. This has been especially important in light of the anemic state of most federal sector unions.

Recently, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) displayed great courage when one of its key leaders in California was assaulted and arrested during a protest against Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) raids and kidnapping of immigrants. SEIU and other unions mobilized their members, and those of other unions, to demand their leaders release and to oppose the ICE raids.

The Chicago Teachers Union, along with other local unions, helped organize nationwide May Day protests this year and is seeking to build continued protests against anti-worker, anti-democratic practices by the Trump administration. And, in higher education, the American Association of University Professors, the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association have all engaged in active protests and other mobilizations.

Yet, with the exception of Standing for Democracy, a newly formed strategy center and mobilization group, and the recently-founded group Labor for Democracy, there have been limited efforts to contextualize the current attacks in light of the growth of a mass fascist movement. In that sense, much of the current resistance work, as powerful and as essential as it is, misses the point that these are not normal circumstances. These are not fights against the expected assaults by conservative, neoliberal forces. The trade union movement is in a fight for its very existence, and for the existence of even a semblance of democracy and economic justice.

Throughout modern history, in U.S. trade union circles, it has been suggested that building a militant struggle for economic justice will unite workers and defeat the far right. Yet the fact remains that the trade union movements in Italy in the 1920s and Germany in the early 1930s attempted just that course and were met with disastrous political results.

There is no room for silence or middle ground. Trade unionism must either be anti-fascist, or it will be nothing at all.

https://mronline.org/2025/09/15/labor-m ... st-threat/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply