Herman Gorter's Open letter to comrade Lenin II. The Question of Trade Unions.

[RosaLuxembourg]

Herman Gorter, Open Letter to Comrade Lenin, 1920

http://www.marxists.org/archive/gort...etter/ch02.htm

.....Fighting against capital, in a constant opposition against its tendency of increasing misery, and enabling the working class, through the restriction of these tendencies, to keep the existence the Trade Union movement, has played its part under capitalism, and has thus become itself a member of capitalist society. It is only at the beginning of the revolution, when the proletariat, from a member of capitalist society, is turned into the annihilator of this society, that the Trade Union finds itself in opposition to the proletariat.

That which Marx and Lenin demonstrated for the State: that its organisation, in spite of formal democracy, makes it impossible to turn it into an Instrument of the proletarian revolution, must also hold good therefore for the Trade Union organisations. Their counter-revolutionary power cannot be destroyed or weakened through a change of staff, through the replacing of reactionary leaders by radical or revolutionary elements.

It is the form of organisation that renders the masses as good as powerless, and prevents them from turning the Trade Unions into the organs of their will. The revolution can triumph only if it completely destroys this organisation: that is to say, if it alters the form of organisation so fundamentally as to turn it into something altogether different. The Soviet system, the construction from within, is not only able to uproot and abolish the State, but also the Trade Union bureaucracy: it will constitute not only the new political organs of the proletariat as opposed to capitalism, but likewise the foundation for the new Trade Unions. In the party factions in Germany, the idea of a form of organisation being revolutionary has been mocked at, because it is only the revolutionary sentiment, the revolutionary mind of the members, that matters. However, if the most important part of the revolution consists in the masses conducting their own concerns – the control of society and production – then every form of organisation that does not allow the masses to rule and to guide for themselves, must needs be counter-revolutionary and harmful, and as such it must be replaced by another form, which is revolutionary in so far as it allows the workers to decide matters for themselves.

Through their very nature the Trade Unions are useless arms for the West-European revolution! Apart from the fact that they have become tools of capitalism, and that they are in the hands of traitors, apart from the fact that through their nature they are bound to make slaves of the members, no matter what the leaders may be, they are also unfit for use generally.....

[C. Flower]

Herman Gorter, Open Letter to Comrade Lenin, 1920

http://www.marxists.org/archive/gort...etter/ch02.htm

.....Fighting against capital, in a constant opposition against its tendency of increasing misery, and enabling the working class, through the restriction of these tendencies, to keep the existence the Trade Union movement, has played its part under capitalism, and has thus become itself a member of capitalist society. It is only at the beginning of the revolution, when the proletariat, from a member of capitalist society, is turned into the annihilator of this society, that the Trade Union finds itself in opposition to the proletariat.

That which Marx and Lenin demonstrated for the State: that its organisation, in spite of formal democracy, makes it impossible to turn it into an Instrument of the proletarian revolution, must also hold good therefore for the Trade Union organisations. Their counter-revolutionary power cannot be destroyed or weakened through a change of staff, through the replacing of reactionary leaders by radical or revolutionary elements.

It is the form of organisation that renders the masses as good as powerless, and prevents them from turning the Trade Unions into the organs of their will. The revolution can triumph only if it completely destroys this organisation: that is to say, if it alters the form of organisation so fundamentally as to turn it into something altogether different. The Soviet system, the construction from within, is not only able to uproot and abolish the State, but also the Trade Union bureaucracy: it will constitute not only the new political organs of the proletariat as opposed to capitalism, but likewise the foundation for the new Trade Unions. In the party factions in Germany, the idea of a form of organisation being revolutionary has been mocked at, because it is only the revolutionary sentiment, the revolutionary mind of the members, that matters. However, if the most important part of the revolution consists in the masses conducting their own concerns – the control of society and production – then every form of organisation that does not allow the masses to rule and to guide for themselves, must needs be counter-revolutionary and harmful, and as such it must be replaced by another form, which is revolutionary in so far as it allows the workers to decide matters for themselves.

Through their very nature the Trade Unions are useless arms for the West-European revolution! Apart from the fact that they have become tools of capitalism, and that they are in the hands of traitors, apart from the fact that through their nature they are bound to make slaves of the members, no matter what the leaders may be, they are also unfit for use generally.....

Lenin didn't rely on the Unions for revolutionary organisation or leadership. There was the Bolshevik Party for that.

[RosaLuxembourg]

Lenin didn't rely on the Unions for revolutionary organisation or leadership. There was the Bolshevik Party for that.

The open letter addresses Lenin's suggestion (or possibly order?) to people in western Europe to work within the unions. Even after all these years various "Marxist-Leninists" ( but not generally of the Moaist variety to be fair as they do tend to be a lot closer to the actual movement of the class) see some almost mystical power in trade unions. The purpose of Trade Unions is to mediate between the classes within the confines of the capitalist economny and therefore they are naturally hostile by their nature to emergence of the new world within the corpse of the old.

[C. Flower]

The open letter addresses Lenin's suggestion (or possibly order?) to people in western Europe to work within the unions. Even after all these various "Marxist-Leninists" ( but not generally of the Moaist variety to be fair as they do tend to be a lot closer to the actual movement of the class) see some almost mystical power in trade unions. The purpose of Trade Unions is to mediate between the classes within the confines of the capitalist economny and therefore they are naturally hostile by their nature to emergence of the new world within the corpse of the old.

I'm of the view that they are (unless demonstrably set up by bosses) spontaneous workers organisations, that are mainly defensive in character. They are, irrespective of how poor the leadership, workers organisations, not an intermediary body. The bureaucracy would be hostile, yes, but the rank and file? Why would they be ?

[RosaLuxembourg]

I'm of the view that they are (unless demonstrably set up by bosses) spontaneous workers organisations, that are mainly defensive in character. They are, irrespective of how poor the leadership, workers organisations, not an intermediary body. The bureaucracy would be hostile, yes, but the rank and file? Why would they be ?

But the rank and file in order to act as its own subject rather than as an object of capital must do so outside and against the bureaucracy, and to fully manifest itself as the human community must link up with thiose outside the "sector" dealt with by the union...The fact also that trade unions divides the class into different sections according to "trade" also is a problemn.

What though is the reality of Trade Unionism in Ireland today...How many years of "social paternship" in which the Trade Unions totally intergrated its members into capital and the state? How about the fact that the Trade Unions in Ireland are only concerned about the Labour aristocracy and have shown no interest in the often sickening levels of exploitation suffered to immigrant workers in this country no mind most of "our own" working class?

[C. Flower]

But the rank and file in order to act as its own subject rather than as an object of capital must do so outside and against the bureaucracy, and to fully manifest itself as the human community must link up with thiose outside the "sector" dealt with by the union...The fact also that trade unions divides the class into different sections according to "trade" also is a problemn.

What though is the reality of Trade Unionism in Ireland today...How many years of "social paternship" in which the Trade Unions totally intergrated its members into capital and the state? How about the fact that the Trade Unions in Ireland are only concerned about the Labour aristocracy and have shown no interest in the often sickening levels of exploitation suffered to immigrant workers in this country no mind most of "our own" working class?

Irish workers through their Unions have stood by workers like maritine workers left without wages, the Gamma workers etc.
If you turn your back on the Union membership, and their capacity to organise, where are you turning ?
Unions can't transform society but they are a gathering point, have organisational strength and can defend economic gains. They ultimately have the capacity under certain conditions to get rid of bad leadership.

[RosaLuxembourg]

http://reocities.com/cordobakaf/elephantaut.html

Im far from agreeing with all of this pamphlet but its a good starting point.