[page 19]
Trotsky: Discussion with a US union organiser We reprint below the transcript of a discussion between Trotsky and an officlal of the American Congress of Industrial Organisations (CIO), who visited Trotsky In Mexico In September 1938.
The CIO had burst onto the scene of history out of the explosive movement of American workers In the mid 1930's. As the economy emerged from the collapse of 1929-33, workers flooded into the unions. Between 1933 and 1934, 300,000 Jolned the mineworkers union, the steel workers union grew from 3,000 to 100,000 and the textile workers from 50,000 to 300,000. To answer the ruthless response of the American bosses, who used all the arms of the state to try and crush this movement, the workers ploneered their own sucessful methods of struggle, Including factory occupations, or as they were known in the 1930's, slt-down strikes. With their power to Improve workers'
conditions demonstrated, union membership tripled to 10 million by 1937. It was in the heat of this movement that the CIO developed, from a committee within the mainly craft-based American Federation of Labour to a mass organisation of Industrial unions. But 1938 saw the beginnings of a new slump in the American economy which threatened to rival that of 1929- 33. In fact It was not until the USA entered the war in 1941 CIO Officlal: Our union's policies are aimed at preventing complete unemployment. We have got the work spread out among all members of the union with no reduction in the hourly rate of pay.
Trotsky: And what percentage of their former total wages do your workers now get?
CIO Official: About 40 per cent. Trotsky: Why that's monstrous! You've won a sliding scale of working hours, with no change in the hourly rate of pay? But that only means that the full burden of unemployment falls with all its weight on the workers themselves. You free the bourgeoisie from the need of spending its resources on the unemployed by having each worker sacrifice three-fifths of his total wages.
CIO Officlal: There's a grain of truth in that. But what can be done? Trotsky: Not a grain, but the whole truth! American capitalism is sick with a chronic and incurable disease. Can you console your workers with the hope that the present crisis will have a transitory character and that a new era of prosperity will open in the near future?
CIO Official: Personally, I don't aloffensive."
present."
low myself such illusions. Many in our circles understand that capitalism has entered its era of decline.
Trotsky: But of course this means that tomorrow your workers will get 30 per cent of their former wages; the day after, 25 per cent, and so on. Episodic improvements, it is true, are possible, even inevitable; but the overall curve is towards decline, degradation, impoverishment. Marx and Engels predicted this even in the Communist Manifesto. What is the programme of your union and the CIO as a whole?
CIO Official: Unfortunately, you don't know the psychology of the American workers. They are not used to thinking about the future. They are interested in only one thing: what can be done now, immediately. Among the leaders of the trade union movement there are, of course, those who take into account the dangers that threaten. But they can't change the psychology of the masses all at once. The habits, traditions, and views of the American workers tie them down and limit what they can do. All this can't be changed Trotsky: Are you sure that history will provide you with years enough in which to prepare? The crisis of American capitalism has 'American' tempos and proportions. A sturdy organism that has not known sickness before begins that production again reached the pre-slump levels of 1929. Faced with a new downturn, the ClO, as Trotsky explained, had "two possibilities: either to manoeuvre, tack back and forth, retreat, close their eyes and capitulate bit by blt..." or "to understand the inexorable character of the present soclal crisis and to lead the masses to the Of course, there are Important differences In the situation now to that which existed In the late 1930's when fascism had triumphed In Germany, Italy, Austria and Spain. In contrast the balance of class forces today lles overwelm- Ingly with the working class. The labour and trade union movement in the advanced capitalist countries, potentially, has an enormously powerful position. But It Is precisely the disparity between the potential power of organised labour and the fallure of the trade union leaders to mobilise that power that makes the central thrust of Trotsky's argument, as society once again stands on the eve of momentous developments across the globe, even more relevant today: "The masses are better, more daring, more resolute than the leaders. The masses wish to struggle. Putting the brakes on the struggle are the leaders who have lagged befind the masses.... Such is the true state of affalrs at to deteriorate very rapidly at a certain point. The disintegration of capitalism means, at the same time, a direct and immediate threat to democracy, without which the trade unions cannot exist. Do you think, for example, that Mayor Hague 1. is just an accident?
cIO Official: Oh, no, I don't think so at all. I have had quite a few meetings in the recent period with trade union officials on this subject. My opinion is that in every state there is already-under one banner or another-a ready-made reactionary organisation that can become a support for fascism on the national level. We don't have to wait fifteen or twenty years. Fascism can conquer among us in three or four.
Trotsky: In that case what is....?
CIO Official: Our programme? | understand your question. It is a difficult situation; some major steps are necessary. But I don't see the necessary forces or necessary leaders for this.
Trotsky: Then duus wai hitan capitulation without a fight?
CIO Official: It's a difficult situation. I have to admit that the majority of union activists don't see, or don't want
[page 20]
to see, the danger. Our unions, as you know, have had an extraordinary growth in a short time. It is natural for the CIO chiefs to have a honeymoon psychology. They are inclined to view difficulties lightly. The government not only has them figured out, but even plays with them. They are not used to this from past experience. It is natural that their heads spin a little. This pleasant dizziness is not conducive to critical thinking. They are tasting the joys of today without worrying about tomorrow.
Trotsky: Well said! On this I agree with you completely. But the success of the CIO is temporary. It is merely a sympton of the fact that the working class of the United States has begun to move, has broken out of its routine, is hunting for new ways to save itself from the threatening abyss. If your unions do not find new ways, they will be ground to dust. Hague is already stronger than Lewis; 2. because Hague, despite his limited situation, knows exactly what he wants, while Lewis doesn't. Things may end up with your chiefs waking from their 'pleasant dizziness' to find themselves-in concentration camps.
CIO Official: Unfortunately, the past history of the United States with its unlimited opportunities, its individualism, has not taught our workers to think socially. It is enough to tell you that at best 15 per cent of the organised workers come to union meetings. That's something to think about.
Trotsky: But perhaps the reason for the absenteeism of 85 per cent is that the speakers have nothing to say to the ranks?
CIO Official: Hmm. That's true to a certain extent. The economic situation is such that we are forced to hold back the workers, to put brakes on the movement, to retreat. This is not to the workers' liking, of course.
Trotsky: Here we have the heart of the matter. It is not the ranks that are to blame but the leaders. In the classical epoch of capitalism the trade unions also got into difficult situations during crises and were forced to retreat, lost part of their membership, spent their reserve funds. But then there was at least the assurance that the next upturn would allow the losses to be made up, and more besides. Today there isn't the slightest hope for such a thing. The unions will go down step by step. Your organisation, the CIO, may collapse as quickly as it arose.
Leon Trotsky
CIO Official: What can be done?
Trotsky: Above all, one must tell the
masses what's what. It's inadmissible to play hide-and-seek. You, of course,
know the American workers better than I. Nevertheless, let me assure you that you are looking at them through old eyeglasses. The masses are immeasurably better, more daring and resolute than the leaders. The very fact of the rapid rise of the CIO shows that the American worker has changed radically under the impact of the terrible economic jolts of the post- war period, especially of the past decade. When you showed a little initiative in building more combative unions, the workers immediately responded and gave you extraordinary, unprecedented support. You have no right to complain about the masses. And what about the socalled sit-down strikes? It wasn't the leaders who thought them up, but the workers themselves. Isn't this an unmistakable sign that the American workers are ready to go over to more decisive methods of combat? Mayor Hague is a direct product of the sitdown strikes. Unfortunately, no one in the top layer of the trade unions has yet dared to deduce from the sharpening of the social struggle such daring conclusions as capitalist reaction has. This is the key to the situation. The leaders of capital think and act immeasurably more firmly, consistently, daringly, than do the leaders of the proletariat-these sceptics, routinists, bureaucrats, who are smothering the fighting spirit of the masses. It is from this that grows the danger of a victory for fascism, even in a very short time.
21
The workers don't come to your meetings because they instinctively feel the insufficiency, the lack of substance, the lifelessness, the outright falsity of your programme. The trade union leaders give out with platitudes at the very moment when every worker senses catastrophe overhead. One must find the language that corresponds to the real conditions of decaying capitalism and not to bureaucratic illusions.
cIO Official: I have already said that I see no leaders. There are separate groups, sects, but I see no one who could unite the worker masses, even if I agree with you that the masses are ready for struggle.
Trotsky: The problem is not leaders, but programme. The correct programme not only arouses and consolidates the masses, but also trains the leaders.
CIO Official: What correct programme?
Trotsky: You know that I am a Marxist; more precisely, a Bolshevik. My programme has a very short and simple name: socialist revolution. But I don't ask that the leaders of the union movement immediately adopt the programme of Marxism. What I do ask is that they draw conclusions from their work, from their own situation; that for themselves and for the masses they answer just these two questions: 1) How to save the CIO from bankruptcy and destruction? 2) How to save the United States from fascism?
CIO Official: What would you self do in the United States today were a trade union organiser?
yourif you
Trotsky: First of all, the trade unions shouid stand the question of unemployment and wages on its head. The sliding scale of wages, such as you have, is correct: everyone should have work. But the sliding scale of hours should be supplemented by a sliding scale of wages. The working class cannot permit a continuous lowering of its living standards, for this would be equivalent to the destruction of human culture. The highest weekly pay rates on the eve of the 1929 crisis must be taken as the point of departure. The mighty productive forces created by the workers have not disappeared nor been destroyed; they are there at hand. Those who own and control these productive forces are responsible for unemployment. The workers know how to work and want to work. The work should be divided up among all the workers. The weekly pay for
[page 21]
22 MIR Winter 1988: Trotsky each worker should be no less than the maximum attained in the past. Such is the natural, the necessary, the unpostponable demand of the trade unions. Otherwise they will be swept away like trash by historical developments. cł Official: Is this programme realisable? It means the certain ruin of the capitalists. This very programme might hasten the growth of fascism. Trotsky: Of course this programme means a struggle and not prostration. The trade unions have two possibilities: either to manoeuvre, tack back and forth, retreat, close their eyes and capitulate bit by bit in order not to 'anger' the owners or 'provoke' reaction. It was by this road that the German and Austrian social democrats and trade union officials tried to save themselves from fascism. The result is known to you: they cut their own throats. The other road is to understand the inexorable character of the present social crisis and to lead the masses to the offensive.
CIO Officlal: But you still haven't answered the question about fascism, that is, the immediate danger that the trade unions draw down upon themselves by radical demands.
Trotsky: I have not forgotten that for a moment. The fascist danger is already at hand, even before the appearance of radical demands. It flows from the decline and disintegration of capitalism. Granted that it might be strengthened for a while by the pressure of a radical trade union programme. One must openly warn the workers of this. One must set about creating special defense organisations in a practical way right now. There is no other road! You can no more save yourself from fascism with the help of democratic laws, resolutions or proclamations than you can from a cavalry unit with the help of diplomatic notes. One must teach the workers to defend their lives and their future, arms in hand, from the gangsters and bandits of capital. Fascism grows swiftly in an atmosphere of immunity from punishment. One cannot doubt for a moment that the fascist heroes will turn with their tails between their legs when they realise that for each of their squadrons the workers are ready to send two, three or four squadrons of their own The only way to save not only the workers' organisations, but also to keep casualties to the minimum, is to organisation of workers' self-defense in time. This is the trade unions' most important responsibility, if they do not wish to perish ingloriously. The working class needs a workers militia!
CIO Officlal: But what is the further perspective? Where will such methods of struggle get the trade unions in the last analysis?
Trotsky: It is obvious that the sliding scale and workers' self- defense are not sufficient. These are just the first steps, necessary in order to protect the workers from death by starvation or the fascists' knives. These are urgent and necessary means of self- defense. But by themselves they will not resolve the problem. The basic task consists in laying the foundation for a better economic system, for a more just, rational and decent utilisation of the productive forces in the interests of all the people. This can't be attained by the ordinary, 'normal', routine methods of the trade unions. You cannot disagree with this, for in the conditions of capitalist decline isolated unions turn out to be incapable of halting even the further deterioration of the workers conditions. More decisive and deepgoing methods are necessary. The bourgeoisie, who hold sway over the means of production and who have state power, have brought the economy to a state of total and hopeless disarray. It is necessary to declare the incompetent transfer the economy into fresh and honest hands, that is, into the hands of the workers themselves. How to do this? The first step is clear: all the trade unions should unite and form their own labour party. Not the party of Roosevelt 3. or La Guardia, 4. not a 'labour' party in name only, but a truly independent political organisation of the working class. Only such a party is capable of gathering around itself the ruined farmers, the small artisans, the shopkeepers. But for this it would have to wage an uncompromising struggle against the banks, trusts, monopolies, and their political agents, that is, the Republican and Democratic parties The task of the labour party should consist in taking power into its own hands, all the power, and then putting the economy in order. This means: to organise the entire national economy according to a single rational plan, whose aim is not the profit of a small bunch of exploiters, but the material Notes 1. Mayor Hague-Democratic mayor of Jersey City who used New Jersey state forces, in cooperation with company-hired thugs, to prevent the CIO from organising. Picketting was banned and union organisers were jailed or run out of town. 2. John Lewis (1880-1969)-President of and spiritual interests of a population of 130 million.
CIO Official: Many of our activists are beginning to understand that the course of political development is moving towards a labour party. But Roosevelt's popularity is still too great. If he agrees to run for president a third time, the question of a labour party will have to be postponed for another four Trotsky: There precisely is the tragedy resulting from the Messrs Leaders look to those above them instead of those below. The coming war, the decay of American capitalism, the growth of unemployment and poverty, all these basic orocesses, which directly determine the fate of dozens and hundreds of millions of people, do not depend on the candidacy or 'popularity of Roosevelt. I assure you that he is far more popular among the well-paid CIO officials than among the unemployed Incidently, the trade unions exist for the workers, not the officials. If the idea of the CIO inspired millions of workers for a certain period, the idea of an independent, militant labour party that aims to put an end to economic anarchy, unemployment and misery, to save the people and its culture, the idea of such a party is capable of inspiring tens of millions. Of course, the agitators of the labour party would immediately have to show the masses, by word and by deed, that they were not electoral agents of Roosevelt, La Guardia and company, but true fighters for the interests of the exploited masses. When the speakers talk in the language of workers' leaders and not of White House agents, the 85 per cent of the members will come to the meetings, while the 15 per cent of conservative oldsters, worker-aristocrats and careerists will stay away. The masses are better, more daring, more resolute than the leaders. The masses wish to struggle. Putting the brakes on the are the leaders who have lagged behind the masses. Their own indecisiveness, their own conservatism, their own bourgeois prejudices are disguised by the leaders with allusions to the backwardness of the masses. Such is the true state of the United Mine Workers, 1920-60. A right wing Republican who, seeing the ground shift beneath him, moved to link with the left and other activists to lead the CIO. (1882- Franklin Roosevelt 3.
1945)-Democratic President, 1933-45 La Guardia (1882- 4.
Fiorello 1947)-Mayor of New York City, 1934- 45.
[page 22]
Unable to quell the movement of workers and youth with its South African ruling class is increasingly compelled to unles townships and workplaces. To the fore of these stands But Editorial Board statement by Inqaba Ya Basebenzi, journal of ANC, followed by a chilling account, published exclusively in against UDF and COSATU activists in Natal.
white forces of repression alone, ish auxillary forces of reaction In helezl's Inkatha. Printed below Is the Marxist Workers Tendency of the MIR, of Inkatha's barbarous
the the
an the war
For an effective national
fightback to defeat Inkatha!
On 10 December Gatsha Buthelezl broke off 'peace talks' with COSATU and the UDF, declaring that "the only reconciliation there will ever be In this country is the reconciliation of the most powerful with those who pay homage to the powerful." Against CO- SATU and the UDF, he boasts, "we are talking about a life and death struggle... We are talking of all or nothing victorles."
It is true that Inkatha and our movement cannot be reconciled. Inkatha Is the instrument of gangsters, serving counter-revolution. Buthelezi is vigllante-In-chief. COSATU and the UDF are organs of the rising revolutionary movement of the working class. For his political survival, the 'non-violent' Buthelezi is compelled to fight our movement to the death.
Reign of terror
it seems to many that Inkatha is invincible. But the truth Is the opposite. Both Buthelezl's entry into 'peace talks' and his warlike bragging are signs of desperation. The grip of his murderous mafla in Natal Is slipping because of the heroic fightback by Congress youth over the last months. The COSATU and UDF leadership must now mobilise an effective national fightback to bury Inkatha once and for all! Let us show that there Is no power stronger than the power of the working class united in action!
Buthelezl and his collaborators have hidden behind the claim that Inkatha is a llberation movement'. That has always been a pretence. Inkatha could not, and cannot, do anything for the masses In Natal. It defends capitalism, using the Bantustan state of Kwazulu. Together with the government and the bosses, Inkatha Is responsible for mass unemployment, homelessness and poverty wages.
Inkatha was bullt to Its clalmed million members only by forcing people to join it, and by mis-leading Zulu people that their freedom could be achieved through tribal organisation and negotlations with the apartheid state. Now the lle is exposed. Even to
their own followers Buthelezi and his
thugs reveal themselves as state
agents supported by the big bosses to
try to divide the revolutlonary move-
ment. Inkatha corruption extends to
manipulating flood rellef funds, earn-
ing them the hatred of the
masses.
Buthelezi has resorted to the barba-
rous reign of terror of the last months
because, more and more, the working
people in Natal are Joining the revolu-
tlon and taking the side of Congress.
The launch of COSATU, the massive participation of Natal workers In the May 5-6 national general strike, the prolonged resistance of the BTR workers and its profound effect In the Marltzburg area-all have been decis- Ive in beginning to break the grip of Inkatha. In the tradition of 1973, the Natal working class Is again moving to the forefront.
Terror alone cannot hold down a rising class. Despite the casualtles suffered, the courageous organisation of self-defence against the impis by Natal youth and workers has begun to turn the tide against Inkatha. Many of its former supporters are coming over to the side of Congress. There are even Instances of policemen and prison warders turning against Gatsha.
The bosses are desperate for peace In Natal. The Chamber of Commerce, supported by the police, has tried to make Itself 'peacebroker' In the clvil war. They see that Inkatha's terror tactics, Instead of cowing the working class, are now arousing Its militancy. But Buthelezi Is In a dilemma. On the one hand, continuing his relgn of terror Is rebounding against him. But if he agrees to peace and calls off his Impls, he will end up losing Natal to Congress.
Of course people want to live in peace. But we have to be realistic. The UDF and COSATU leaders who engage in peace talks fail to see that Inkatha cannot abide by peace. It uses peace talks in the hope of paralysing the Congress youth and workers. Buthelezi will return again and again to war, although a war policy cannot save him. Nor can the occupation of Natal town-
ships by the SADF Gatsha Is destined to pathetlc puppet.
Congress pollcy must be to carry through the political and physical destruction of Inkatha. The conditions for this are there. But, because the big bosses and the state will continue to back their most rellable ally, it wlll require the mobilisation of the full forces at the disposal of our movement If Inkatha terror is to be ellminated. The defeat of Inkatha would be a huge victory. It would show that vigliantes everywhere in the country can be defeated. It would raise the confidence of millions of working people in the prospects for defeating the main enemy: the viclous apartheld state.
secure Inkatha.
be reduced to a
Defence committees
The Congress leaders policy of 'peace talks' with Gatsha has falled. Since the October 'truce' more than 70 people have been killed. Now another attempt at 'peace' has broken down, and the killings continue. Conciliation cannot end Inkatha terror, nor strip away Buthelezl's remaining base of support. As youth in Natal are saying, the organisation of defence committees is the only way we can stop them killing us. Inqaba salutes the fighting youth and workers of Natal. With them we say, what is required is a policy for action on the part of the whole movement. If the COSATU and UDF leadership has such a policy, they must spell It out now. The leadership must lead.
The following measures are urgently needed on the part of the natlonal and reglonal leadership. Activists must win support for this policy in every local body of the movement and ensure Immediate Implementation by the leadership.
* COSATU, the UDF and SAYCO must organise throughout Natal selfdefence committees lInking the youth with the organised workers.
* COSATU, the UDF and SAYCO must Jointly organise nation-wide action around basic soclal demands. This would strip away Inkatha's remaining
[page 23]