Viewing page 24 of 56

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

-9-

There are other reasons for this failure to orientate our resolutions toward the working class. One is the unclarity of the concept of the united front. The united front does not mean unity appeals to the American people in general, but means in the first place the united front of the working class-"united action by all sections of the working class irrespective of their party or organizational affiliation directed against the class enemy." (Dimitroff).

Of course, a broad people's coalition is very important, but as Dimitroff pointed out, "The most decisive point in establishing a broad people's front is the resolute united action of the working class." An effective people's coalition against big business can be established only through the leadership of the American working class.

The second source of this failure to orientate the resolution on the working class is the isolation of the party leadership itself from the working class. I will deal with this aspect later.

What is the effect of this fundamental weakness? In the entire section on peace, there is no estimate of the trends in the working class. How is it possible for us to call on labor to lead the fight for peace if we don't analyze the situation within the ranks of labor?

In the section under "rising militancy," the trends that are indicated are one-sided and exaggerated.

We speak of rising militancy. Is this the dominant trend? No, it is not. The working class has been on the defensive and suffering defeats. Was the dominant feature of the '58 crisis one of a mass struggle for jobs? No. The main feature was the virtual abandonment of the unemployed. The struggle for the shorter work week was abandoned by the misleaders of labor. The main feature of the national AFL-CIO jobless conference was to blunt a militant struggle of the unemployed. Wasn't it a substitute for a national march on Washington? The main feature of the steel strike is its defensive nature, the relatively low level of mobilization of the steelworkers and of trade union support. This situation prevails at this time precisely because the main sections of the trade union movement are under the bureaucratic control of the Meanys and Reuthers.

Of course, the draft is not incorrect to speak of rising militancy and to give examples of it, but it must do this within the context of what is the dominant situation in the working class.

Another example of this one-sided and exaggerated estimate was the comparison of the 'big democratic sweep' in '58 to the new deal days of the 30's (see Dennis report). There are several errors that make for this faulty analysis besides the central error of not orienting our analysis toward the working class. What are these errors? One is tailing after the labor bureaucracy. Labor-endorsed candidates are not necessarily pro-labor candidates. The election of these candidates, therefore, does not necessarily represent a victory for the working class.

How then should we explain to the workers the failure of the 86th Congress to keep the mandate of the election and its all-out attack on labor. Is the lesson the one cited in the draft when it says, "It is one thing for labor to elect liberals...and it is one thing for labor to work within the two-party system, but labor cannot rely on the liberals or the two parties of monopoly." This implies that it is OK for labor to elect these phonies and to work within the two-party setup when we should state clearly that as long as labor endorses these phonies and does not develop a party of its own it can expect a shafting. Even when labor will elect labor candidates, it must develop a year-round grass-roots movement to guarantee the fulfillment of labor's demands.

How can labor emerge as an independent political force" The main direction must be the fight to help labor break with the two-party system. The main direction is for labor to run its own independent candidates. If a labor candidate chooses to run within the Democratic primaries, he should be supported. The Trotskyite position of no support to labor candidates running within the two-party set up does not advance labor's interests. However, we should say that it would be better if such candidates also ran as independent candidates and built up their own labor political machinery.

Transcription Notes:
.