..,

•..

l

If

Ii

I!t

I,1~[

~I~

IfI

25~

J. Haillol

29 April 1977

chafing at the bit, Union of the Leftleaders had put a clamp on walkoutsduring the campaign period. Then twodays after the balloting was completedCGT leader Georges Seguy announced:"There is absolutely no reason towait ... to push for satisfaction of ourmost urgent demands concerning pur­chasing power, employment and work­ing conditions."

But if the bureaucrats decided toloosen the leash on the ranks for a while,letting them blow off some steam inorder to pressure the government tomodify the wage limitations, the popu­lar front holds out no perspective forvictory of these struggles. Its CommonProgram provides no solution for theproblem of mass unemployment causedby the capitalist production cycle; infact, it doesn't even call for nationaliza­tion of Usinor or steel! (In all, theprogram promised only nine statetakeovers, and these to be "compensat-

continued on page 4

...6

Abel Yesterday,sadlowski Today

BureaucraticOppositions

in Steel

represents an effort by a traditionallystrong union to defend gains (closedshop and hiring halls) won after WorldWar II. In mid-April, however, the CGTand CFDT took over an automotivecomponents plant of General MotorsFrance near Paris in an explicit protestagainst the government's Barre Plan.Prime Minister Raymond Barre haddecreed a 6.5 percent limit on wageincreases while inflation is running atover 9 percent. G M obtained a courtinjunction to dislodge the 1,000 sit­down strikers occupying the plant, butobviously feared the consequences of adirect confrontation with police tryingto clear out the workers. At last report,management is lurking in hotels andcafes outside the plant trying to figureout its next move ( Business Week, 25April).

The current wave of strikes wascertainly encouraged by the strongshowing of the left III the Marchelections. Even though workers were

Der Spiegel

·Ift~

•ii

~--------------------------~

Fran~ois Mitterrand

which became a cause ceJ(~bre in Frenchlabor during 1974-75. But Thionville isnot an isolated case. Simultaneously theport of Dunkerque (Dunkirk) has beenclosed for almost seven weeks in adispute between the CGT longshoremenand Usinor, which is attempting tointroduce lower-paid non-stevedores toman its automated docks. On fivesuccessive weekends all French portshave been shut down by 24-hoursympathy strikes in solidarity with theDunkerque dockers.

Like recent strikes in the printingindustry (notably the lengthy ParisienUbere dispute), the Dunkerque strike

Steel workers d t' Vivier RushiBolHinemons ratmg against threatened 1c osing of factory at Thionville.

~p-ular Front Holds Back Fight Against Barre

In the five weeks since municipalelections were held (in two rounds ofvoting, on March 13 and 20), Frenchworkers have repeatedly taken to thestreets and picket lines to protest thegovernment's wage-cutting, job­slashing policies. After the popular­front Union of the Left-a coalition ofthe Communist Party (PCF), SocialistParty (PS) and the bourgeois LeftRadicals-won over 52 percent of thepopular vote and captured three quar­ters of the mayoralties, thousands ofunionists declared they had had enoughof "austerity."

In several cases their protests cameafter sharp employer attacks. This wasespecially the case with steel workers inthe Moselle industrial town of Thion­ville. Repeated demonstrations therehave protested the sacking of 3,000foundry workers' at a local Usinor mill,the first mass layoffs in the French steelindustry since World War II. Theirplight was given added importance byreports that an additional 16,JOO steelworkers' jobs in the Lorraine arethreatened due to Common Marketplans to "rationalize" the industry.

On April 14 more than 12,000workers assembled in the center ofThlOnville, braving a steady rain toprotest the firings which would effec­tively shut down the local plant. Thetrade-union federations (principallyCFDT, CGT and Fa) had promised toparalyze the town. and their call washeeded by everyone down to thesmallest shopkeeper. The mood wasgrim: reportedly there were no imagi­native slogans. Instead militants de­manded occupation of the Usinor millto protect their jobs: the peF respondedby calling for nationalization of steel (Le

:Honde. 16 April).Already the press is comparing

Thionville to the year-long occupationof the Lip watch factory in Besan<;on

Strike Wave Protests AusteriPI ·

III

"Oer Spiegel

chances for its immediate realization areslim. The mobilization of the workersmovement to free all the imprisonedcomrades will only be attained when themost conscious elements untiringly takethis demand into the working class.

At a time when the bourgeois state iscarrying. out a political show trial inorder to reinforce a witchhunt atmos­phere against the left, when bourgeoisclass justice is in the process of bringingabout the death of another RAFcomrade, Gudrun Ensslin, and whenother imprisoned comrades are in anextremely critical state of health, theStalinists of the [West German pro­Moscow] DKP, [West Berlin pro­Moscow] SEW and fPekinJ!-loyaJ Mao­ist] KPD have nothing better to do thanto assure the bourgeoisie of thei.rrespectability by denouncing the RAF.While we consider the murder ofBuback, for which the KommandoUlrike Meinhof has assumed responsi­bility, to be a senseless act leadingnowhere-one which can only providethe state with a new excuse for intensify­ing its repressive measures against theleft-at the same time we recognize thatthese comrades acted out of the desire tofight a symbol of capitalist repression.And this Buback certainly was. For thisreason we say, "Down with the dragnetmeasures!" Though adopting a negativeattitude vis-a-vis such acts of individu­al terror, the workers movement mustnonetheless simultaneously mobilize forthe political defense of these comradesagainst state repression.

We demand that the shameful trial inStammheim along with its horrendousconditions of imprisonment of the jailedcomrades be brought to a halt, as well asthe trials against comrades Roth andOtto and the other trials of comrades ofthe left. But we also know that ourdemands will not be won by theintercession of "liberal circles" nor bydespairing acts of terror. Only therevolutionary mobilization of the work­ing class can put an end to bourgeoisclass terror. •

Oer

Gudrun Ensslin

Military funeral for slain prosecutor Buback.

is petty-bourgeois infatuation to believethat one can weaken in the slightestdegree the foundations of the capitalistsystem by eliminating individual repre­sentatives of the bourgeois class. Lenin­ists have always carried on a sharppolitical struggle against such tenden­cies, while nonetheless simultaneouslyseeking through sharp political confron­tation to win to the proletarian commu­nist program the best elements of thosewho direct their blows against thebourgeois state.

The Trotzkistische Liga Deutsch­lands [TLD-German section of theinternational Spartacist tendency] hasalways rejected the conception ofindividual terrorism. Two years ago the

TLD wrote in a leaflet directed againstthe police terror following the abduc­tion of [Christian Democratic candidatefor mayor of Berlin Peter] Lorenz:

"We Trotskyists consider theconception of urban guerrilla groupslike the 'Red Army Faction' or the'June 2 Movement' completely errone­ous, but we see very clearly on whichside of the barricade these comrades arefighting and we say so openly: it is ourside, and on the other side stands thecommon enemy."Our debate with comrades who out ofpetty-bourgeois despair have opted forthe false course of isolated actionsagainst representatives of the capitalistorder differs in no way from ouruncompromising struggle against allprogrammatic conceptions which mis­lead the proletariat and which are inpart much more dangerous, becausemore influential, than guerrilla terror­ism (e.g" reformism and Stalinism)."

In November 1974, following thedeath of [RAF prisoner] Holger Meins,our organization sent an open letter toother left organizations calling for theformation of a united-front action insolidarity with the comrades of theRAF. We did the same thing justrecently after the Stammheim buggingaffair became known. The demand forimmediate and unconditional release ofBaader, Ensslin and Raspe must beraised even (and especially) when the

Following the Buback assassinationthe bourgeoisie is once again calling fora strong state and even more rapidexpansion of the repressive apparatus.Federal chancellor Schmidt has joined-"without hesitating"-the ranks ofthose who are "inwardly" prepared "togo to the very limits of what is permittedby and required of a constitutionalstate" (Der Spiegel, 19 April 1977).What he and his ilk-Social Democrats,Christian Democrats and Liberals-are"outwardly" ready for is already well­known: "inwardly" Minister Maihoferwas still a member of the "HumanisticUnion" when he enriched the Germanlanguage with the term "bugging attack"[Lauschangrifj]. With the instituting ofsurveillance of defendants' writtencommunications, even with their law­yers; the introduction of state's wit­nesses, who have played a sinister role inthe trial of the RAF [Red ArmyFaction-referred to in the bourgeoispress as the "Baader-Meinhof gang"];expulsion of defense lawyers from thetrial, solitary confinement and shoot-to­kill orders; legalization of break-ins andillegalizing of demonstrations; makinglaws applying to foreigners more severe;threats to illegalize left organizations;Berufsverbote [prohibition of employ­ing "radicals" in civil service jobs], etc.:the bounds of the "constitutional state'are becoming-both "inwardly" and"outwardly"-increasingly less precise.

For the attorney general of thebourgeois state revolutionaries spendnot a single minute in mourning andshed not a single tear. Buback has beenknown as a faithful reactionary servantof the bourgeoisie since the 1962 actionagainst the Spiegel [an illegal breakingand entering ordered by then-defenseminister Franz Josef Strauss], which hedirected. In the trial of the comrades ofthe RAF he represented the state power.He was among those responsible for thehorrendous conditions of incarcerationof the RAF comrades, for the exclusionof defense lawyers and for the introduc­tion of Mi.iller as state's witness. In thewitchhunt of everything which can besubsumed under the rubric "terrorism,"his desk assumed a central place.

The real terrorists are Buback and hiscohorts. In the last analysis the reactionof the RAF and of similar groupingsstems from their petty-bourgeois impa­tience, their isolation, their frustrationand their hate for the bourgeois state. It

"

\A~:",!

Oer Spiegel

Andreas Baader

TLD Statement on Assassination ofSiegfried Buback

No Tearsfor West ! i~'Germany's ;-~~?;~Top Cop J!,' · \~/,

On April 7, Wi',11 Germall chiefprosecU/or SieKfried Buhack, Ihe mallill charKe of Ihe mammolh sholl' Irialof Ihe anarchisl Red Armr Faclioll(RA F--re/erred 10 ill Ihe hOllfKeoispress as Ihe "Baader- AleinhofKaIlK").lI'as cur dOIl'!/ hr machille-KUI/ jirelI'hile on his ":al' /() his uffice in !\arls­mhe ill a chauffi'ur-dril'en limousille,II II 'as. Ihe hourKeois press screamed,Ihe /irsl polilical assassinalion <If aleadillK Sll/Ie official sillce Worl:1War I/.

Go l'erlll/H'1lI all/horiI ie,l reslJol/dedhI' laullchinR Ihe mosl eXlensil'emallhulll ill Ihe hislOfl' of Ihe/t'deralrepuhlic. f)o;:ells of suppo.li'd "ell­emies oflhe cOIlSlilll/ion" lI'ere pickedUIJ alld delainedjiJr quesliollillg aSlhedragllel "'as ,Ipread el'er lI'ider ill (10

dalefimle) allempis 10 locale Iheall/hors of Ihe allack on Buhack,

nil' ca/Jill/hll media hlwleredagainll "lIell'-,ltI'Ie anarchisl,l" alld a"Ihreal 10 del/lOcfilcr." The Frank­furter Rundschau called Ihe aerioll a"liJul murder", a ,lireI'I allack UpOIlIhe consli/liliOllal,lliJle, " The Berlinerragesspiegel laheled il an "inroad 01harharism illlo ci,'ili;:alioll."

Credilliir Ihe killinR of Buhack lI'aslaler claimed hr Ihe "Ulrike ,Heinhof!\ommando, " ~amed a/ier one of Ih'edefendams in Ihe RA FIrial wh,; lI'asjiJund hanRed in her jail cell laslAURUSI under circumslances suspi­cious enouRh 10 lead el'en Ihe hour­geois media 10 calljur im'estiRation ofthe of/icial verdict ofsuicide, (Anoth­er ofthe original/iI'e RA Fdefendams,HolRer Meins, died while on a hUl/Rerstrike,)

As the adiacem article hI' the Trot;:­kistische URa Dewschlands (TLf)),German seerion of the internationalSpartacist lemlencl', indicates, theassassination was an aer of peltr­hourgeois despair, While Buhack lI'asindeed guiltr ol crimes aRainst thepeuple (nutahlr the massive attacks ondemocratic rights in the &ader­Meinhof trial) fur lI'hich he Imuldhave heen tried hr the trihunals ol aI'icturiuus \\'urkers state, this attackfed imo an orchestrated campaign ufami-communist scare tanics hy IheWest German stale,

A maior elemem in preparing thecurrem witchhum atmosphere in thefederal republic has been the RA Ftrial. whose wholesale violation of thedefendants' rights and brU/al condi­tions of solitary confinement make amockery of Ihe West German bour­geoisie's pious claims of "rule by lall'. "Theiudicial aU/horilies have used thetrial 10 introduce major modificationsuf criminal law, including use for the./irsl lime of informers gramed immu­nily from prosecU/ion for IUrningslate's evidence,

In addition, various defense lawyerswere repeatedly excluded andfinalll'harredfrum Ihe Irialfor supposed"disrespect" shown to trialjudReTheodur Prinzing; Iheir u[lices werehroken imo hr police of the Bundes­kriminalamt (Wesl German FBI); andlawl'ers hal'e heen disharredforsupposed criminal conspiracl'.charRed \\'ith cunl'ering appealsjiirsupport from Ihe as-yel-unconvictedanarchist prisoners,

In a major scandal Ihal erupted lastmonth, and was eclipsed only bl' theslaying of Buback. ilwas revealed thatnol only was Ihe defendants' corre­spondence wilh their lawyers inspecl­ed. bU/ Iheir supposedly privaleconversations 10 plan defense slrategyhad been bugged by Ihe prosecU/ion.Judge Prinzing was finally forced 10

wilhdrawfrom Ihe Irial when his rolein these highly illegal proceedingsbecame known.

Ulilizing Ihe almosphere of"publicindignation" whipped up over Iheassassination of Buback. the slaleprosecU/o,s office is noll' pressinRfora rapid conclusion of the Irial by theend of this week, The RA F defend­ants' chosen lawyers have withdrawnfrom court proceedings in a protestagainst the bugging opera/ions. andthe remaining RA F prisoners haveemharked on ret ano/her desperatehunger slrike, While court-appoimedlawl'ers are demanding dismissal ofthe trial for gross violalions of thedefendants' righls, Ihe state is callingfor Ihree life lerms plus an addilional15 years for each of I he accused.

2 WORKERS VANGUARD

iDown with the State of Emergency]

EDITOR: Jan Norden

PRODUCTION MANAGER: Karen Allen

CIRCULATION MANAGER: Anne Kelley

EDITORIAL BOARD: Jon Brule. CharlesBurroughS. George Foster, Liz Gordon, JamesRobertson, Joseph Seymour

Published weekly, except bi-weekly in Augustand December, by the Spartacist Publishing.Co., 260 West Broadway, New York, N.Y.10013. Telephone: 966-6841 (Editorial),925-5665 (Business). Address all correspond­ence to: Box 1377, G.P.O., New York, N.Y.10001. Domestic subscriptions: $5.00 per year.Second-class postage paid at New York, N.Y.

Opinions expressed in signed articles orietters do not necessarily express the editorialviewpoint.

3

Marxist Working-Class Weeklyof the Spartacist league of the U.S.

WfJRltERS,,1NtiU,1RD

and the mantle of true Muslim leader­ship are deeply rooted in the nature ofthe Pakistani state. The creation of anIslamic state in 1947 was attended byunspeakable communal atrocities andthe greatest forced population transferin history. Since then there has alwaysbeen simmering or open conflict withpredominantly Hindu India and strongbreakaway pressures by regional andnational groups within Pakistan.

The monstrosity of creating atheocratic state in the mid-twentiethcentury was the bitter fruit of the "divideand rule" policy which consciouslyguided British rule on the Indiansubcontinent for more than a hundredyears. Playing on the antagonismsbetween the Hindu bourgeoisie andMuslim landlords, British viceroy LordMinto in 1906 gave his blessing to the

continued on page 11

Competition between the governmentand opposition for the army's support

machinations which are the stock-in­trade of all Pakistan's political cabals.With tens of thousands winding theirway through crowded streets in themajor cities denouncing him as "dicta­tor" and "dirty dog," Bhutto offered adeal: reversal of the election results injust enough parliamentary districts togive the opposition a bloc of about 60seats in the National Assembly and a re­run of the provincial elections to allowthe PNA a second crack at the localspoils. When he was turned down, theprime minister unleashed the police andparamilitary forces on the demonstra­tors, arresting their leaders.

After giving his critics a taste of hotlead, Bhutto tested the waters a secondtime on March 28, offering to releasepolitical prisoners, allow more pressfreedom and lift the state of emergencywhich has been in effect since the 1971war with India. The PNA responded byappealing to the 400,OOO-man army tostep in, oust the "illegal government"and conduct new elections. The opposi­tion was given a boost when two leadingmilitary figures denounced the regimeand resigned from diplomatic posts.

Air Marshall Rahim Khan, theambassador to Spain, recalled how hehad escorted Bhutto back to Pakistan totake over the reins of power fromGeneral Yahya Khan, who had presidedover the crushing 1971 defeat that splitaway East Pakistan and gave birth to aBangladesh dependent on India. Cast­ing doubt on Bhutto's personal courageand trying to place the blame for the lossof East Pakistan on Bhutto, the air forceleader claimed that the paramilitaryFederal Security Force was a privatePPP police force and was responsiblefor most of the killing and shooting.

A Theocratic State

Bhutto's security police seize an oppositionist.

Carrot and StickA week after the election, Bhutto

made a peace offer to his opponentswhich highlighted the anti-democratic

Prime Minister Bhutto

opposition by enacting the stiflingpuritanical measures advocated by thePNA: prohibition of alcoholic bever­ages and gambling, censorship "inconformity with the moral standards ofIslam" and institution of a commissionon Islamic law. (Almost simultaneously,his counterpart in Bangladesh, GeneralZiaur Rahman, substituted the Muslimreligion for secularism as one of the fourguiding "ideals" in that country'sconstitution. )

own party's leadership in the state.When the PNA took only 33 out of

200 seats in the election tally, its leadersimmediately cried foul. Foreign news­men reported numerous instances ofballot stuffing, unsupervised votecounting and harassment of oppositionvoters and poll watchers. The PN Aleaders refused to take their seats in theNational Assembly, boycotted thesubsequent provincial elections andlaunched protest demonstrationsagainst the government.

The PNA has capitalized on massgrievances over the regime's blatantcorruption, the failure of land reformand Bhutto's ties to the land-owninggentry. However, the opposition itself isa sordid collection of self-servingbourgeois politicos, profit-grubbingbusinessmen, reactionary landlords andobscurantist religious leaders operatingwithin the theocratic framework of theIslamic state.

On the one side is Bhutto's "IslamicSocialism." Campaigning under thesymbol of a red sword, the landedaristocraL Oxford intellectual. popu­list politician vowed: "Almighty Allahknows that my politics are the politics ofthe poor." On the other side, the PNAdemagogically promises measures "ob-literating- . .. .social inequalities," trials of governmentleaders for "acts of violence and tyran­ny" and imposition of even more rigidlyMuslim codes of behavior. The PNApledged to "close every bar from Khyberto Karachi" and to resurrect such savagecanons of Islamic law as the cutting offof thieves' hands.

On April 17, Bhutto sought to cutsome ground out from under the

More Muslim Than Thou

29 APRIL 1977

The opposition-which groups theMuslim League, even more conservativeIslamic sects, ethnic and provincial­based parties and vaguely liberal group­ings-had expected (like India's Janata"Party") to translate a heterogenouselectoral combination into major parlia­mentary gains against Bhutto's PakistanPeoples Party (PPP).

One of the PNA's driving forces isAsghar Khan, an immensely popularfigure who resigned as air force com­mander in 1965 to campaign against themilitary dictator Ayub Khan. (A turbu­lent strike wave and mass studentdemonstrations in late 1968-early 1969drove Ayub from office, but the armedforces' ruling circle simply replaced himwith another military despot, YahyaKhan.) Two weeks before the election,Asghar Khan was welcomed to Karachiby a crowd that swelled to over half amillion.

The opposition's hopes were buoyed.Baluchistan and the North West Fronti­er province, longtime centers of separa­tist agitation and armed clashes withgovernment troops, were expected tovote solidly against the PPP. Bhutto'ssupport was declining even in thePunjab, which contains 60 percent ofthe country's population and was oncesecurely in the prime minister's pocket;he has several times had to purge his

APRIL ,25-As ~he death toll frompolitical violence edged over 200,millions of Pakistanis were placed undervirtual house arrest last week as thegovernment of Zulfikar Ali Bhuttodecreed a round-tpe-clock curfew inmajor cities. Mass detentions, savagepolice attacks and the imposition ofmartial law were the regime's desperateresponse to protests stemming fromwidespread vote-rigging in the March 7national elections.

Martial law in the three largest cities(Karachi, Lahore and Hyderabad)began the day before an opposition-lednationwide hartal (general stoppage ofwork and public activity). The volatileport city of Karachi had been in turmoilfor weeks as a result of angry demon­strations and a strike wave spearheadedby militant transport workers. Fourhartal calls since March 7 have met witha massive response from workers,students and shopkeepers.

The nine-party opposition alliance-"--­the Pakistan National Alliance(PNA)-had announced that on Friday"nothing must move, not a wheel shallturn." In response, Bhutto tumed lawenforcement over to the military in thethree cities (martial law was extended toseveral others on Saturday) and issuedorders to shoot curfew violators onsight. Additionally, 50 PN A leaderswere rounded up and clapped in jail,where they join dozens of othersarrested last month.

Despite this sharp crackdown and theslaughter of some 34 demonstrators and"curfew violators" that day, the striketook hold in much of the country.Violent anti-government protests sweptmany cities. Defiant opposition leaderscalled for a "long march" next Saturdayto Bhutto's home to demand hisresignation and new elections.

Riots in Pakistan Shake BhuttoGovernment

WV Photo

Militant picket line outside district courthouse April 15 demanded chargesagainst Bennie Lenard be dropped.

II

WV Photo

29 APRil 1971

Bennie Lenard

inside with him, as the court had packedthe room with staff employees. Lenard'sfirst hearing before the actual trial judgeis now set for May 2, at which time thetrial and jury selection dates willprobably be set.

It is necessary to rally the full supportof the union, including all necessarylegal and financial aid, behind Lenardwhile he is being dragged through thislengthy and expensive frame-up. Local6 members have already voluntarilycontributed almost $2,000 on his behalfand signed petitions protesting thepolice atrocity. However, the Localleadership has begun to undermine a fulland militant defense of Lenard throughbureaucratic maneuvers.

International representative CarlSchier pushed through a motion at theApril 17 membership meeting calling formerging the Bennie Lenard Defen~e

Committee, which had been establishedby a Local 6 membership meeting, withthe already existing (and almost totallyinactive) Fair Employment PracticesCommittee. This was an obvious effortto put a lid on the militancy generatedby the Lenard case and place it firmlyunder the current leadership's control.

The Labor Struggle Caucus (LSC), aclass-struggle oppositional groupingwhich has been active in the Lenarddefense, opposed this attempt to kill thecommittee. The LSC had earlier raised amotion, passed by the membership at itsMarch union meeting, that the unionmatch almost $1,000 raised at the plantgate for Lenard. The Local leadershiphas refused for over a month to hand

continued on page 11

CHICAGO-Bennie Lenard's night­mare of police and legal persecutiopcontinues. It all began three months agowhen Lenard, a black United AutoWorkers (UAW) member was drivinghome from work and had the misfor­tune to be the victim of a minor trafficaccident. He encouraged the whitewoman driver whose car struck his tocall the police to report the incident.However, upon arrival, the cops imme­diately slammed him across his car and,while screaming racist epithets, beat himsenseless and threw him in jail. Afterweeks in the hospital, Lenard now facesa barrage of trumped-up criminalmisdemeanor charges, including allegedbattery on the woman, resisting arrest,disorderly conduct and possession ofillegal firearms.

On April 15 Lenard's first pre-trialhearing was held at the Cook CountyFourth District Ward courthouse inMaywood. Outside the court a crowd ofalmost 100 of Lenard's co-workers andChicago-area leftists rallied to hisdefense. They were closely watched by ahorde of Chicago and Maywood cops,unprecedented in this "quiet suburb,"obviously fearful that their vicious racistassault on Lenard might blow the lid offthe simmering racial tensions beneaththe uneasy Chicago-area fa9ade of "lawand order."

Plainclothes cops loitered in clumpsof six or seven, observing the demon­strators; Chicago "Red Squad" unitssnapping photos occupied the roofs ofbuildings; riot squad and state policeunits positioned themselves down theblock and sheriffs deputies equippedwith riot sticks and gas masks weremassed near the courthouse.

Lenard's wide support from workersin UAW Local 6 at the InternationalHarvester plant in Melrose Park wasobvious at the rally-even Local presi­dent Ed Graham and other bureaucratsfelt obliged to attend. Representativesof the Partisan Defense Committee andsupporters of the Spartacist League,Revolutionary Communist Party, Oc­tober League and the RevolutionarySocialist League also rallied in supportof Lenard. Spartacist League signsdemanded: "Indict and Jail the RacistPolice Thugs''', "For Labor-Black De­fense Again;;t Racist Police Terror!"and "Stop the Racist Frame-up! Dropthe Charges'"

Inside the courtroom, the judgeinitially made the outrageous ruling thatLenard's lawyers could not even takenotes on the proceedings, although thiswas later withdrawn. At Lenard'ssecond pre-trial hearing on April 20,only his wife and daughter were allowed

UAW Ranks Turn Outfor Bennie Lenard Trial

program and organitation for a revolu­tionary mobilitation of the workingclass. that the proletariat can gatheraround it the wavering elements of thepetty bourgeoisie. Attempting to dilutethe class contradictions. seeking a falseinter-class unity inevitably strengthenst he bourgeois forces. as shown bv thehistory of popular fronts from F~ance

and Spain in the 1930\ to Chile andPortugal today.

Within the bourgeois politicalspectrum. Chi rae was in the forefront ofthose arguing for a more aggressive anti­leftist policy. "including a call for earlyelections in the expectation that th~Union of the Left's electoral fortuneswere on the rise. Giscard and the neo­Gaullists split Over this question lastAugust. While Chirac's prospects ofheading off a left victory in the parlia­mentary elections (legally required bynext spring at the latest) are question­able. he did correctly see that Giscard's"centrist" alliances were doomed.

Rallying the right wing with classicalanti-communist demagogy. the RPRleader was elected as the first mayor ofParis since the Commune drove outJules Ferry in 1871. Chirac bombasti­cally announced he had "saved" theFrench capital for the "camp of free­dom." The unmistakable vote of no­confidence in Giscard was emphasizedby the defeat of seven out of 30 ministersor secretaries of state who were seekingre-election in municipal posts (usuallyrunning in "safe" districts). Amongthose who suffered ignominious defeatwere the president's hand-picked candi­date for mayor of Paris, Michel d'Orna­no. who was defeated on the first roundof the voting.

The Union of the left

The number of cities of over 30,000population controlled by the Commu­nist and Socialist parties increased bymore than half in the March elections,to a total of 159 out of 221. The fact thatthe right took Paris would seem con­tradictory, at least to American observ­ers. But whereas in the U.S. major citiesare losing their middle-class populationto the suburbs, Paris proper has longbeen a stronghold of the right; it is theworking class that has been driven outof the city into a "red belt" of industrialsuburbs surrounding the capital. Since1971 the proletarian population of Parishas declined by over one quarter and themiddle class has risen by a roughly equalpercentage. Despite this fact, votes forcandidates of the Union of the Left inParis increased by about 600,000 over1971 (the previous municipal elections).

Bourgeois political analysts weregenerally agreed in ascribing the elector­al victory of the popular front to the factthat the "presidential majority" is totallydiscredited-internally squabbling, tar­nished by repeated scandals and com­mitted to unpopular anti-working-classeconomic policies. An analogy is widelydrawn to the French municipal electionsof May 1935, which paved the way forvictory of the popular front in the April1936 popular-front elections. Certainlythe reformist PCF and PS are actingaccordingly, for they are assiduouslyseeking to reassure the bourgeosie oftheir reliability.

Just prior to the 1935 municipalelections Stalin signed the mutualdefense pact with France. This wasfollowed up by his statement of "under­standing" for the French bourgeoisie'smilitarism ("national defense"), and thePCF obediently voted war credits to thebourgeois government. In 1977, thePCF (now campaigning as "Eurocom­munists") has made much of its new­found support for Soviet dissidents, andis agitating to open up the Union of theLeft to include other "progressive"bourgeois forces, particularly dissidentGaullists.

In a number of electoral districts,Gaullists were included on the Union ofthe Left slates. This reached the pointthat some of the Socialist and Commu-

continued on page 8

Disorder in the "PresidentialMajority"

France...(CO 111 illued fro/ll page 1)

ed" by paying a ransom to the trusts.)The Communist Party's current talk

of steel nationalilations"is a demagogicmaneu\Cr to forestall the threat of plantoccupations throughout the Lorraineregion. and the CGT CFDT FO topswill once again put the damper on thestrike struggles should their militancythreaten to escape from bureaucrati~

control. Only by breaking with thepopular front and fighting for working­class independence can the struggleagainst the Barre Plan's vicious austeri­ty measures be successful. A Union ofthe Left government would onlv lead toa modified "progressive" ~usterit\program of "voluntary" wage restraint"sand speed-up.

One of the leading French bourgeoispolitical commentators. PierreViansson-Ponte. wrote recentlv in I.e.\fonde that the elections const'ituted a"rout" of Valery Giscard d'Estaing's"presidential majority." Not only wasthe "majority" revealed to be in theminority following spectacular gains bythe Union of the Left. but the Giscardi­ans suffered a major defeat at the handsof their Gaullist allies. Former primeminister Jacques Chirac had pulledtogether the flagging Gaullist Union fort:1e Defense of the Republic(UDR) lastfaiL rebaptizing it the Assembly for thePreservation of the Republic (RPR).and in an aggressive campaign managedto take the Paris mayoralty.

Giscard's defeat had a !:>roadersignificance, marking an end to variousattempts to put together a stable"center" coalition. Ever since deGaulle's power began to wane followingthe miners' strike of 1963, a series ofbourgeois maneuverers have attemptedto put together "centrist" combinationsto head off the spectre of a left alliancetaking power. After Radical leaderJean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber (pu­blisher of ['Express) tried and failed, itwas the turn of Center stalwart JeanLecanuet, who also went down todefeat.

After the death of de Gaulle's success­or, Georges Pompidou, it was evidentthat the discredited Gaullists could nothold the bourgeois forces together.Giscard, head ofthe small "IndependentRepublicans" which had been an influ­ential appendage of the UDR, managedto become the presidential candidate ofthe bourgeois "majority." However,lacking a coherent governmental pro­gram he has been unable to make a dentin either the Union of the Left forces (forexample, by splitting away a section ofthe Socialists) or in the right-wingGaullist bloc.

Bourgeois political scientists haveattempted to explain the absence of asizeable "center" bourgeois party inFrance by reference to a "U-shapedcurve" of public opinion, reflecting apeculiar gallic propensity to gravitatetoward extremes. Reformists and op­portunist elements in the workersmovement have used the same empiricalfact to argue for the expansion of thepopular front in an attempt to isolatethe hard-core right wing. But to Marx­ists it is clear that the failure toconsolidate a liberal bourgeois party inFrance is neither a national trait, nor theresult of "flexible" coalitions by theLeft.

Rather, it is the result of the organiza­tion of the majority of the proletariat inworkers parties, i.e., of class polariza­tion. The rise of the Labour Party inBritain spelled the doom of the Liberalsas a major political force; likewise, it isbecause of the strength of Stalinist andsocial-democratic parties that no "cen­ter" bourgeois party has significantstrength in Italy.

It is by sharpening this classpolarization, providing a coherent

4

Healy's '~Yellow Brick Road" toRevolution

I,~,II,t

iItIIIIi

•,i,t,!I

l,i

,,tI

I•

I

•tr

rI

ii.,I

•!•

IIIIII,III:~

the door to the most powerful revolu­tionary struggles in India."

Truly the WL has outdone even thePabloist substitutionalists whom itprofesses to oppose from the left. But noamount of enthusing for popular petty­bourgeois currents can obscure the factthat it was the absence of proletarianleadership in India which allowed thejust rage of the bitterly oppressedworkers and peasants to be channeledinto support for a bourgeois party everybit as dedicated to the preservationof capitalist class rule as was itspredecessor. •

5

Excerpts from TLC Leaflet:

The "third camp socialist" ISO, like the British SWP and the American andCanadian I.S., bewail the lack of workers democracy in the bureaucraticallydegenerated and deformed workers states to the point where they cross the classline and refuse to defend these states from imperialist attack or capitalistrestoration. But these strident Stalinophobes ape the vilest methods of Stalinistthuggery and political suppression in order to defend their own wretchedreformist politics against left opponents. They run their own organizations likemini-Gulag Archipelagos, as the ISO, bureaucratically booted out of JoelGeier's clique-ridden caliphate, so recently discovered. Like many a victim ofan anti-democratic purge, the ISO hypocritically claims in the first issue oftheirnewspaper Socialist Worker to stand for "complete workers democracy." Butas their revolting behavior in Cleveland shows, Geier trained them well in the"democratic" traditions of Noske, Scheidemann and Helmut Schmidt.

The Trotskyist League of Canada vigorously condemns the ISO's politicalgangsterism and exclusionism in Cleveland. These violations of the norms ofworkers democracy curtail the open, public debate within the workersmovement necessary for the development of a correct revolutionary policy, cutacross the often urgent need for united working class action around particularissues, and open up the left to agents provocateurs and police attack. Thethuggery demonstrated by the ISO in Cleveland is what introduces realdisruption into the left. The international Spartacist tendency intends tovigorously defend and enforce the norms of workers democracy in order tokeep violence out of the labor movement, to better defend that movement fromthe violence of the capitalist class, and to establish the framework in whichdebate and revolutionary criticism can take place. We invite Comrade Harris,when he comes to San Francisco, to speak under our auspices where we canassure him, unlike his "fraternal" sponsors, that the norms of workersdemocracy will be defended and upheld.

No to violence on the left! Uphold workers democracy!

Trotskyist League of Canada18 April 1977

No to "Third Camp"Gangsterism!

for a revolutionary confrontation withthis administration."

-Bulletin, 8 February

Now the WL is similarly enthusingover the electoral victory of the bour­geois Janata Party in India. "On theRoad to Revolution," screams the 24March Bulletin headline for the articleon the Congress Party defeat. Whiledutifully noting the "right-wing" char­acter of the Janata Party, the articleclaims that its victory "dealt a smashingblow to the economic policies of theIndian bourgeoisie," and that "theradicalization of the masses now opens

"... We can confidently say that noforce on earth can challenge the analysismade by theIC [International Commit­tee] of this crisis." So. boasted theWorkers League (WL), American satel­lite of Gerry Healy's IC, in a recentperspectives document, under a headingappropriately called "The WorldCrisis."

For some sixteen years now, theAmerican Healyites have been crisis­mongering with strident regularity. Tothose who protested the WL's cynicalefforts to gear up its dwindling band forone last sacrifice by invoking the "crisis"just around the corner, the WL hacksreplied by charging that their criticsmust believe in the fundamental stabili­ty of capitalism. But of course thedecaying capitalist system cannot es­cape periodic severe crises. Finally theWL has got its long-awaited "crisis," buttheir general situation recalls the unfor­tunate boy in the fable who cried "wolf';vindication is likely to do the WL aboutas much good as it did him.

The WL's incessant cries of "crisis"have a political function which is morethan inspirational. For the WL, "TheCrisis" means that it is okay to supportreformists and "lesser evils," becauseeven a tiny tap is supposedly sufficientto topple imperialism in this epoch.Thus the WL's Bulletin was full ofenthusiasm for. .. Jimmy Carter's elec­toral victory!

"The intensification of the worldeconomic crisis is the direct cause oftheelection of Jimmy Carter. ... The elec­tion of Jimmy Carter is a clear sign ofthe political radicalization of the work­ing class.... Millions of disillusionedworking class Carter voters are heading

Give Him a Brain

enemies, had disrupted the Harrisforum in Boston!

The next night in Toronto, theTrotskyist League of Canada (TLC­sympathizing section of the internation­al Spartacist tendency) distributed aleaflet condemning the ISO thuggery.On the Boston meeting the leafletpointed out that "the so-called 'disrup­tion' consisted in two SL speakerspresenting their viewpoint entirelywithin the ground rules established fordiscussion by the ISO itself, andinsisting along with a majority of theaudience that these rules be appliedconsistently and fairly."

TLC leafletters were met with thethreat of violence as goons of theCanadian I.S. (allied with the ISO)carried baseball bats supposedly todefend Harris against SL "disruption"(read political criticism). Apparentlythis wasn't enough to reassure him, forat the eleventh hour the forum wascanceled because of the unfortunatepresence of several members of the"Spartacus League" (sic). It was an­nounced that another meeting would beheld where attendance would be byinvitation only. .

In Chicago the ISO's feet got cold

continued on page 9

29 APRIL 1977

The International Socialist Organiza­tion (ISO), latest clique spinoff of thesocial-democratic International Social­ists (I.s.), made its debut last week bysponsoring a U.S.; Canadian tour byNigel Harris of the British SocialistWorkers Party (SWP-formerly Inter­national Socialists) with which the ISOhas close "fraternal" relations.

The tour immediately revealed notonly the ISO's threadbare politicalprogram-essentially the same as thatof the I.S., including characterizing theRussian bureaucracy as a new "imperi­alist ruling class"-but also its despi­cable political cowardice. This led it tosubstitute bureaucratic suppression ofelementary workers democracy, anti­communist exclusions and Stalinistthuggery for open political debate at itsown "public" meeting. In fact, by theend of the tour, the ISO was choosing tocancel meetings rather than face therevolutionary criticism of the SpartacistLeague (SL).

At a forum in Boston on April 16 thechair attempted to prevent an SLsupporter from speaking by calling for avote on the question. However, theaudience repudiated this gag attemptand the Spartacist spokesman finishedher remarks in the alloted time. Thechair and ISO supporters presentcontinued to harass and disrupt SLsupporters throughout the meeting.Harris, who spoke on "the crisis,"hardly mentioned the ISO at all andflatly refused to respond to Spartacistquestions and political criticisms.

Attacking the SL's record ofunrelenting exposure of the betrayers ofthe working class, a vitally necessarytask in reforging the Fourth Interna­tional, Harris sneeringly tried to passthis off as mere prurient gossip­mongering. The SL, he claimed, is onlyinterested in "whose mum slept with themilkman" and "whose grandmum sleptwith the milkman." In an amazingdisplay of cynical contempt for his ownsupporters, Harris said the ISO doesn'thave to account for its own history,since it is only a small tendency.Therefore, he asserted, the ISO, like theSL and the entire American left, ispresently "irrelevant" to the workingclass.

Harris claimed that the SL was withits criticims trying to "dig a hole for meto fall through" (no need of that,Comrade Harris, your own mouth willdo nicely).

The next stop on the tour wasCleveland. Not wanting to rely on bu­reaucratic suppression of SL speakers(or another fickle audience), the ISOplaced its confidence in club-wieldinggoons. When two SL supporters arrivedoutside the forum to distribute litera­ture, ISO thugs attempted to drive themaway and ripped up their newspapers.One comrade was knocked to theground, his shirt torn and his glassesknocked off. The sales team refused tobe intimidated, however, and continuedto exercise its democratic right todistribute literature. Meanwhile, an ISOthug brandishing an axe handle stood inthe doorway to exclude all recognizedsupporters of the SL.

When several members of theaudience protested this cowardly exclu­sion from the floor of the meeting, theywere themselves forcefully excluded andt.hreatened with being pushed down thestairs. The ISO's "justification" for thisgangsterism was the incredible slanderthat the SL, which stands on an immac­ulate record of workers democracyattested to even by its bitterest political

ISO Hides fromSpartacist League

$,- :~

.Abel Yesterday, Sadlowski Today

BureaucraticOppositions in Steel

6

suddenly stopped denouncing the lead­ership of this movement and beganrunning around with a new line. Nowwhat they want to do is to merge withthis rank-and-file movement.

The workers who led the rank-and­file movement were mostly from WestVirginia, from Kentucky and westernPennsylvania. They were not commun­ists. They did not have a conception offighting Lewis politically, althoughthey sure hated his guts. They wroteletter after Jetter to Lewis demandingthat he stop sitting in Washington doingnothing and get out there and organiz­ing steel workers.

What these guys wanted was a union.They were willing to play ball on Lewis'terms if necessary. They figured thatLewis had them beat. He had defeatedthe miners in 1933. He had defeatedevery attempt they had made to organ­ize a national steel strike. They finallysaid. we have no choice-if you can'tbeat him. join him. So these militants,who were members of the Amalgamatedmentioned above. were put on thepayroll.

The Communist Party at that pointswitched over to tail Lewis. When theCP came in there, instead of trying tolead the struggle against Lewis, theysimply said: this is the name of thegame--Lewis is going to do it. They got60 organizers jobs out of the deal. Therewas an interesting pamphlet put outrecently by Art Shields, who was amember of the CP's "red" union andwhat he says is a classic statementstraight from the Stalin School ofFalsification. What he says is. "The steelvictory came out of a united frontbetween the United Mine Workers andthe Communist Party."

This is pure bunk! The CP simplygave in to Lewis. When Lewis set upS WOC they got no positions of leader­ship in the union. They got no localpresidents; they got no district directors.They simply were put on the payroll.Anybody who has worked in the unionmovement knows what people on thepayroll do-they raise their hand; theydo what they're told. This is notorious insteel. Staff reps vote the way Abel orsomeone tells them to.

These were Lewis' terms and this iswhat the CP willingly did.. They simplycapitulated to everything which Lewisand Murray did. Later they came outand blamed the whole thing on EarlBrowder, who was only carrying out theStalinist popular front line in America.

Right: EdSadlowski,bureaucraton themake.Below:I.W. Abel,the onewho made it.

to steel. This was very significant. Steelworkers with no union went out in asolidarity strike with the miners; theyhad been smashed since 1919 and theywent out in solidarity with the miners.

Lewis organized a torrent of red­baiting against Ryan with the purposeof consolidating his present contractwhich sold out the captive miners andgetting the steel workers back to work.Martin Ryan was finally brought toWashington to have dinner with Roose­velt. But between 1933 and 1936a rank­and-file movement existed in steel whichtried continually to organize a nation­wide strike, and Lewis continuallyworked to prevent this from takingplace. The estimates are they got asmany workers to sign cards in 1934 and1935 as the Steelworkers OrganizingCommittee [SWOC] did in 1936 and1937. They got about 150,000 workersto sign cards with no union, nopmtection, no legal support to backthem up.

There is a sidelight to this. which iswhat the Communist Party did. The CPhad a "red" union which it organized in1929 and was fairly large. They claimedit had about 20,000 members. Of course.you can't believe their figures~so

maybe cut it in half and then divideagain by something else, but they didhave several thousand steel workers.They did lead a number of local strikes.This is during the "Third Period" and sowhat they attempted to do was tocounterpose their dual union to therank-and-file-Ied movement of steelworkers in the Amalgamated. But afterthe turn to the popular front the CP

John L. Lewis and theCommunist Party

There was virtual war in the coalfields between 1925 and 1933. This is theperiod when John Brophy ran againstLewis for the presidency of the UnitedMine Workers [UMW]. He launched a"Save the Union Movement" in 1926.The miners union was being decimatedleft and right, and Lewis was fighting tomaintain his hold on the union. He usedthe newly passed Section 7A [of Roose-velt's National Industrial Recovery Act]to work out a contract that saved a bigsection of his union but allowed thecaptive mines (mines owned by the steelcompanies) to remain unorganized. Soabout 60,000-70,000 miners were leftwith no union. .

These guys were pretty pissed off atbeing sold out. There was a wildcatstrike led by a man by the name ofMartin Ryan which shut down coal inthat section. The strike quickly spread

you think about steel and the majorevents. they are all essentially defeats.What we're talking about are theHomestead strike in Pennsylvania in1!~92. the Great Steel Strike in 1919, the"Little Steel" strike in 1937 and the1959 strike. Everyone of those wasdefeated and the result is a passive,demoralized, conservative workforce insteel.

The first union in steel was the oldAmalgamated Association of Iron,Steel and Tin Workers. At one time thiswas one of the strongest unions in thecountry. It was smashed at Homesteadin 1892. Between then and 190 I thisunion was driven out of the mills, aperiod which coincides with the organi­zation of the great steel trusts like U.S.Steel.

Up until 1919 there was basically nounion and the working conditions werevery, very bad. Let me give you a briefexample. The basic workday was 12

. hours and when you switched shifts youworked a 24-hour shift with no break.You had one day off out of 14 days. Sothe working conditions in steel werevery, very bad. They still are today butat least we have an eight-hour day.These were the conditions which werefought by the Great Steel Strike in 1919.but that was defeated. They went backagain with no union. The union doesn'tcome about until 1936.

The United Steelworkers has been avery bureaucratic union from the veryday that it was founded. It was organ­ized from the top down. essentially byJohn L. Lewis' miners union. In fact,there was no USWA at all for almost sixyears after the first organizing successesbecause·Lewis wouldn't let them get outfrom under his thumb. He kept it anorganizing committee as long as hecould, until he could clamp a loyalbureaucracy on the union.

What's very important here was therelationship between the coal minersand the steel workers. There was awildcat in coal in 1933 which if success­ful could have led to organizing steel.The role of Lewis was to smash thismovement so that he could organizesteel under his control. The CommunistParty [CP] played a big role here so Iwant to spend some time on this.

WORKERS VANGUARD

Theji)l/owing is the edited transcript ofa presentation at the recent SparwcusYouth LRague West Coast educationalhy an active class-struggle oppositionistin the United Steelworkers.

I want to begin by talking a bit aboutEd Sadlowski and his recent campaignfor president of the United Steelworkers[USWA]. However, the purpose of thistalk is not to go into the specifics of theSadlowski campaign, which you'refamiliar with from reading WorkersVanguard. Instead I mainly want to gothrough the oppositional movements insteel and place Sadlowski in context,show where he fits in, and then gothrough the responses of the left.

I haven't got the official results of theelection and they'll be bickering aboutthem for months. Sadlowski is probablygoing to go through with a courtchallenge, which is not surprisingbecause the central political issue in steelhas been the question of governmentintervention. But he lost by about athree-to-two margin. There's no majorvote fraud which has come out fromwhat I can tell. I'm sure that votes werestolen because the history of theelections in steel has been a question ofwho steals the most from the other guy.But I believe that the vote count issomewhat accurate and that Sadlowskidid in fact lose.

As a matter of fact some people weresurprised by how well Sadlowski did.He got about 230,000 votes whichcompares to the Rarick campaign in1956 which I'll go into in a bit. WhereSadlowski did well was in basic steel; hegot beat in other sections of the union.But where he really got killed was inCanada. That's important because theguy who was running for McBride upthere was Lynn Williams, the director ofthe Steelworkers union in Canada.Williams has a lot of authority inCanada. When Sadlowski went up therehe had to talk as a socialist because ofthe existence of the New DemocraticParty [NDP, a social-democratic partysupported by the Canadian LabourConfederation]. But Sadlowski didn'tcome off too well because he's beentrying to play down the socialistquestion in the U.S. in orderto duck thered-baiting, and besides Williams is amember of the NDP. So Williamscarried quite a number of votes for theMcBride ticket in Canada.

Sadlowski's program has beencovered well in the pages of WorkersVanguard.· In many ways it's a carboncopy of the I.W. Abel campaign in 1965and one of the key components of hiscampaign, what he talked about a lot, iswe have to return to the founding daysof the union. This is a myth which hasbeen carried by the Militant, the DailyWorld, etc. In a minute I want to dealwith what the founding of the USWAlooked like, because we do not want toreturn to the early days of the union. Wehave nothing to do with that tradition.We do not want to return to the days ofPhil Murray. When Sadlowski talksabout "let's go back to the old days"that's what he's talking about.

To understand where Sadlowski iscoming from, it's imp'ortant to go backand take a brief look at how the steelunion was organized. First of all when

•

-'

,i

-'

I

.'

.'

.,.,

Rarick. it was simply a question of:Gee, we're paying $3 a month; now youwant to make it $5. We only got 6percent on the last contract, etc. Nobasic challenge to the policies of theleadership. The Dues Protest Commit­tee itself was a hodgepodge whichincluded conservative anti-communistsas well as some ostensible socialists.

So what did Rarick do after he lost?He went to court: he made this bigcampaign against a dues increase andthen he sued the union for a millionhucks! Sadlowski is suing for $5million today. Rarick went to court onvote fraud and sued for slander. This isthe same suit which Sadlowski has now.

McDonald didn't have much authori­ty but he wasn't stupid. At the 1958convention (the dues protest was beatenin 1956) a big demonstration takesplace. Bureaucrats come out with thisbig casket marked DPC (Dues ProtestCommittee) and they go runningaround like they have buried theopposition. During the discussionMcDonald invited Rarick up and said:we'll give you the podium and you candefend your positions. You ran acampaign against me saying stop thedues increase. But now you're suing thisunion for $1 million. Please tell the rankand file where the money is going tocome from. And there's Rarick up theretrying to explain how on the one handhe's against a dues increase and on theother he wants to sue the union! Thatwas the end of Rarick, but there aresome roots coming out of the old DuesProtest Committee-the Rank and FileTeam (RA FT) from Youngstown essen­tially comes out of the old 1956committee.

McDonald really began to go down­hill after the 1959 strike. This was thelast national strike in steel; it's beenalmost 20 years since there's been anindustry-wide strike. There's a world ofdifference between steel and auto. Insteel there's not much tradition ofwildcats, of sitdowns, of quickie strikes.If you file a grievance you're a realmilitant. The 1959 strike was the lastmajor strike and there's good reason forthat. The union really got murderedduring this strike. They went out for 116days and went back to work with notone penny more. If you talk to oldtimers in the union they will tell you: wewent out for 116 days and we gotnothing and you bet your life I'm forthat no-strike pledge. People lost theirhomes, they lost their savings accountsand got nothing out of it. They werepaid something like $5 a week to feed afamily of six kids.

In 1959 the major confrontation wasover work rules which the company wastrying to change. McDonald wrote ademagogic response to the companyproposals, saying that the UnitedSteelworkers of America is not acompany union. Then when the strikewas over he agreed to a so-calledHuman Rights Committee, which exist­ed essentially to investigate whether ornot the companies' charges of feather­bedding were true. McDonald claimedthere was a big victory in defending thework rules, and then he agreed to form ajoint labor-management committee tofind out if in fact management's chargeswere true! That didn't help McDonald'spopularity, either.

The Abel Campaign

This is the background to Abel's riseto power. The campaign that Abel ran in1965 was the same as those run byArnold Miller in the UMW and bySadlowski. Abel said that McDonaldwas spending too much time drinkingmartinis with the bosses in Pittsburgh,that this was "tuxedo unionism." WhatSadlowski says today is the same thing,that Abel is spending too much timedrinking martinis with the bosses inPittsburgh. But Abel hit back effective­ly, saying Sadlowski was playing thebig-money liberal cocktail circuit.

The whole thing was supposedly tocontinued on page 10

Murray died in 1952 and DavidMcDonald took over. McDonald didn'tcarry the same authority as Murray andhe began to have trouble. The first realmovement to develop in steel, the firstpost-witchhunt movement, was theDues Protest Committee in the 1950's.It's funny, the way Sadlowski talks a lotabout how he's from the rank and file,how he's one of the the guys frdm theplant. This guy has been part of thebureaucracy for about 15 years. He sitson the national executive board. Theleader of the Dues Protest Committeewas a man by the name of DonaldRarick, a local president. He had a lotmore credentials as a rank-and-filemilitant than Sadlowski.

This movement came from no­where-they had no support in thebureaucracy, no district directors, no­thing. And they racked up about223,000 votes. It's comparable to whatSadlowski got. Now this election, the1957 election, was really stolen. It hasbeen compared to the Brophy campaignin coal. Rarick thinks he won and so doa lot of bourgeois commentators.

Rarick's movement had essentially noprogram. The dues question has alwaysbeen a hot issue in steel and most peoplewho fight around it do so in a waydevoid' of politics. For us it's a questionof confidence in the bureaucracy: we arenot going to vote for a dues increase thatmeans more money for the politics ofAbel. But if they wanted an assessmentto give money to the striking Britishminers we could support that. For

Little Steel and 1959) were defeated.One can say that there is a tradition ofmilitancy in the UAW but that traditiondoes not really exist in the USWA. Sowhen Sadlowski wants to return to thegood old days, we can only ask, "Whatgood old days?"

By the time the first conventionoccurred, the union has existed from1936 to 1942. At this conventionMurray got up and said: there will be no"backroom talks"-meaning no cau­cuses and no political fights. He said:we're not going to quibble about de­mocracy-which meant that we're notgoing to vote on the contract. Steel­workers members in basic steel, to thisday, have never voted on a singlecontract in 35 years. So this is thesituation from which the oppositionalmovement developed: the CP wassmashed, they were put on the payroll,they served as Phil Murray's whippingboys, and then Murray threw them outin 1946 during the anti-communistwitchhunt.

This is what steel is like, this is theunion. In those six years between '36and '42 an entrenched bureaucracy wasbuilt. The top leaders doled out jobs asdistrict directors and had six years tobuild up a lot of patronage. Murrayhired the staff and called all the shots.He carried a lot of authority. If youattacked Murray from the union floor,the old bureaucrats got very, very upset.

Dues Protest and the 1959 Strike

CIO

John L.. Lewis turning over CIO presidency to Philip Murray at 1940convention.want production on lucrative militarycontracts interrupted by a Flint sit­down in steel. So he signed a contractwith Lewis without a fight. The LittleSteel b.osses (the rest of the Americansteel companies) took a harder line anddefeated SWOCs 1937 strike. The LittleSteel plants were for the most partorganized by NLRB suit during the war.

There is a real contrast here between•steel and auto workers. Both havefought major battles against the com­panies but the UAW won theirs on thepicket lines. All the steel workers' mostimportant strikes (Homestead 1919,

They say: we made some mistakes insteel. We didn't fight Murray when weshould have, because all we did at theconventions was raise our hands, etc. SoBrowder is the scapegoat.

But this is what they did and socommunist leadership was never forgedin that crucial period between 1933 and1936. This is why there is a verybureaucratically organized union today.This didn't just happen. There was apolitical defeat suffered by the left.Lewis was sharp. He knew what he wasdoing. He was probably one of thesmartest bureaucrats in this country andhe did a real job on the CP. He smashedthem and then gave them jobs. He knewthat they were the best people availableto go out and organize the plants.

With the Amalgamated militants andCP organizers now on the payroll and inno position to challenge Lewis, SWOCbegan its drive to organize the steelplants. The United States Steel Corpo­ration (known as Qig Steel and at thattime the largest steel corporation in theworld) was naturally the most impor­tant target. This was the same companythat drove the Amalgamated out of theindustry.

The major battle to organize U.S.Steel was not fought by steel workersbut by auto workers in Flint, Michigan.Myron Taylor (chairman of U.S. Steel)knew that the U.S. would eventuallyenter World War II and that Lewiswould keep the ranks in line. He didn't

Founding of the USWA

USWA

Above: 1959 strike at U.S. Steel. Below: Steel Workers OrganizingCommittee brought 250,000 union supporters to 1936 rally.

CIO

=

29 APRIL 1977 7

SPA R TA C fS T edition franCfaise

pour toute commande s'adresser a:

the popular-front slates and where theecologists were more overtly right-wing.Conversely, where PS U candidates wereincluded on the Union of the Left ticketand the ecologists spiced up theirrhetoric with some leftist phraseology,the "far left" averaged around 2 percent.

For example. in Orleans where thebloc received a surprising 13 percent ofthe vote there was no ecologist slate andthe PSU (which won 15 percent of the\ote in 1971) did not present candidates.In contrast, in Toulouse where the PSUwas in a bloc with left-talking ecologists,the LCR LO; OCT cartel got only 1.9percent, less than the combined vote ofLCR and LO presidential candidates inthe 1974 elections. The same patternheld throughout the country. In short.the votes for the "far left" bloc wereprecisely what LCR leader Alain Kri­vine labeled them: a "warning" to theUnion of the Left.

With all its components looking forinstant popularity. the election combi­nation did not project the image oflasting unity. The pressures and contra­dictions in the bloc came to the surfaceshortly before the second round whenLutte Ouvriere publicly rejected anLCR call to continue the coalition. TheLO leadership was clearly under pres­sure from its own membership forhaving formed a rotten bloc with the"petty-bourgeois" LCR and MaoistOCT. LO argued 'vociferously duringthe campaign that organizational blocshad to be based on fundamentalprogrammatic unity, and wrote severaleditorial replies to letters insisting that ithad not compromised any principles informing the electoral agreement.

Following the first round, the LCR'sKrivine wrote a front-page editorialasserting that the vote totals proved theexistence of "a unitary dynamic whichenables the revolutionaries to enlargetheir audience ...." The LCR called for acommon "action platform" whichwould encapsulate the "broad current ofmen and women workers and youthwho are ... desolidarizing themselvesfrom the policies of the reformist lead­erships... " (Rouge, 18 March).

At what was billed as an election rallyat the Mutualite that evening, the LOleadership did an about-face and reject­ed Krivine's call to extend the electoralagreement. Throughout the meeting LOspokesman Arlette Laguiller pointedlyignored her OCT bloc partner sittingnext to her on the stage. Appealing toher cheering supporters (and watchingthe Ligue leadership turn ashen), La­guiller lectured to the LCR that. "Therevolutionary workers party will beTrotskyist, or it will not be." LCRspeaker Daniel Bensai'd. whose Guevar­ist sympathies were notorious, sprung tothe defense of the OCT and attacked this"sectarian" assertion.

Lutte Ouvriere's attempt to appeasethe class instincts of its membership ismanifestly self-contradictory. For if thebloc represented insufficient program­matic agreement, then why did the LOleadership enter it at all? But suchconsiderations did not bother the"Trotskyist" LO. On the day followingthe "rally:' an article by LO published inRuuge explicitly attacked the LCR'sanalysis of the first-round voting:

"Presenting the electoral battle on thesecond round as something importantto the workers. as a chance to 'fight theright' or even as a chance to 'eliminatean obstacle' to future struggles of theworking class is merely propagatingillusion."

So what did LO do to combat theseillusions'? It. too, called for voting forthe popular front on the second round,advocating "solidarity with millions ofworkers who trust in the Union of theLeft"! It welcomed the popular front to

I

WORKERS VANGUARD

TROTSKYIST LEAGUEOF CANADATORONTO....... . .(416) 366-4107

Box 7198. Station AToronto. Ontario

VANCOUVER....... . ... (604) 291-8993Box 26, Station AVancouver, B.C.

power "to the extent it is desired by themajority of the workers" (LUlte Ou\'ri­he, 9 April). Obviously, Arlette Laguill­er is in no position to wag her finger atBensai'd and Krivine for capitulating tothe Union of the Left.

While the LCR. LO OCT bloc moreor less openly advertised its support tothe popular front, the OrganisationCommuniste Internationaliste (OCI),claimed to oppose it. However, itrefused to say "no vote for the Union ofthe Left," instead enigmatically insisting"we know who we will vote for." Thefocus for the OCl's capitulation to thepopular front was in its ostensiblysimple democratic demand for newelections to the National Assembly. In astatement on the first-round results, theOCI political bureau confirmed the realcontent of this demand. namely to putthe popular front in power:

..... the so-called majority has beencrushed. It is in the minority in France.From this point of view, to which theleaders of the Union of the Leftsubscribe, dissolution of the NationalAssembly, dominated by the Giscardand Chirac parties, should be the logicalconsequence of the first-round electionresults...."

For an Authentic TrotskyistPartyl

This squabbling among the blocpartners has continued in negotiationsover what policy to adopt in May Daydemonstrations. Traditionally, theCommunist Party has excluded the "farleft" from marching in the main parade.forcing it to bring up the rear. as muchas half a mile behind the rest of thecontingents. Organizations such as theOCT have countered by organizing their"revolutionary" demonstration separatefrom the PCFICGT parade. This yearthe LCR, LO and OCT agreed toorganize a joint contingent at the end ofthe main march, but there was a disputeover slogans.

The LCR has made a point of raisingonly those slogans which would notdisturb the popular front, such as "Outwith Giscard" and for wage increases.LO rightly takes exception to theseslogans and warned that the jointcontingent must not "appear as a far leftcover~-a minority and childish cover toboot-of the present and, in particular,future policies of the Union of the Left."A common slogan was finally ham­mered out for this propaganda bloc-

Spartacist Publishing Co.Box 1377, GPONew York, N.Y. 10001USA

$.75 US/Canada

Pascal AlessandriB.P.33675011 ParisFRANCE

3,00 F.F.

Address _

SUBSCRIBE NOW!.~

MARXIST WORKING·CLASS WEEKLY OFTHE SPARTACIST LEAGUE •

WorkersVanguard

.J

Clty _

Name _

Jacques Chirac, Gaullist victor inthe municipal elections.

Gamma/Liaison

State Zip _155

However, a careful examination ofthese statistics reveals the reality of the"far left" electoral success: rather thanconscious votes for a revolutionaryprogram, the score of theLCR;LO/OCT coalition reflects vaguediscontent with the limited program andpassivity of the Union of the Left. The"far left" bloc did well precisely in thoseareas where the PSU was not present in

One year subscription (48 issues): $5­Introductory offer: (16 issues): $2. Interna·tional rates: 48 issues-$20 airmail/$5 seamail; 16 introductory issl\es-$5 airmaiLMake checks payable/mail to: SpartacistPublishing Co., Box 1377 GPO, New York,NY 10001

-mcludes SPARTACIST

An electoral bloc of the LCR. LutteOU\Ticre and the Maoist OrganisationCommuniste des Travailleurs (OCT)presented candidates in 30 differentlarge cities and the capital. Thecoalition -demagogically baptized"For Socialism. For Workers Power:'and modeled on the Democrazia Prolet­aria joint list in Italv~scored anunexpectedly high percentage of the\ote. averaging just under 5 percent inthe districts where it presentedcandidates.

Jubilation was the order of the day inthe LCR, since its electoral combinepaid off: it had achieved nirvana.becoming a "credible alternative" whichcould now hope to court the Union ofthe Left more freely and with a certainamount of bargaining power. In a stylereminiscent of the electoral cretinism ofits American "fraternal" organization.the Socialist Workers Party, the LCR'sRouge revelled in quoting endlessstatistics to prove its success.

talists on the same minimalist basis as to

other constituencies (feminists. stu­dents, etc.), the "far left" slates not onlylost votes to the ecologists, but the LCRappeal kicked up a storm inside theorganitation as some militants found itinsulting to the ecology movement!

The "Far Left" in Shambles

(conrinuedfrom page 4)nist ranks rebelled. Thus in Brive. wherethe national leaderships proposed put­ting former Gaullist minister Charbon­nel (notorious for his anti-working-classpolicies in 1968) on the ticket. a splittook place in the popular front. forcinghim to form his own list.

France ...

The Ecology Phenomenon

.The political wild card of the electionswas the appearance of ecologist slates.which scored well on the first round. Tothe dismay of both the "presidentialmajority" and the Union of the Left,these lists averaged about 10 percent ofthe vote where they ran, thus holding thebalance of power in many closelycontested races. The "back-to-nature"candidates piled up unexpectedly highvote totals by appealing to an amor­phous electorate discontented with theelectoralism of the popular front andwith technological advance.

The ecologist movement wasgenerally counted on the left, which isthe milieu from which most of its votingbase was drawn. However, its leadersrefused to endorse either the Union ofthe Left or the Giscard; Chirac "majori­ty." The reactionary petty-bourgeoischaracter of this movement was under­scored by the fact that following theelections, Paris ecology groups acceptedpositions in neighborhood councils setup by Chirac, thus fueling the Gaullistleader's ambitions to take over lea-der­ship of the "anti-socialist" bourgeoisformations by next year.

In the last days before the voting. theecologist movement threw the Union ofthe Left into a panic, inducing PCFmayoral candidate for Paris HenriFiszbin to talk of turning the superhigh­way which encircles the capital into agiant parking lot. But it was not just thereformist left that was threatened by the"ecology phenomenon." Le Mundenoted that in Paris the "far left"candidates were particularly worriedabout losing votes to the nature freaks.

On the eve of first-round voting, theLigue Communiste Revolutionnaire(LCR) issued an appeal to votersinclining toward the ecologist slates."Becoming conscious of environmentalproblems does not 'naturally' lead toadopting an anti-capitalist conscious­ness," it said, "and especially not tojoining the workers movement" (Rouge.10 March 1977). Indeed it doesn't. Thesuccess of the Swedish Center Party inusing petty-bourgeois opposition toatomic energy as an effective lever tounseat the ruling Social DemocraticWorkers Party is proof enough that theenvironmentalist cause can be easy preyto bourgeois reaction. Nonetheless. withits history of appealing to environmen-

8

The implicit support for NATOcontained in the Common Programwhich last year's Union of the Leftpresidential candidate PS leader Fran­l;ois Mitterrand, has been makingincreasingly explicit~found its expres­sion in the attempt to run formeradmiral Sanguinetti on a joint ticket inToulon, a port city with a major navalbase. Again this was too much for localleaders to swallow and the PS split. partof it allying with the Communists todefeat Sanguinetti on the first round.

The counterpart to the popularfront's attempts to enlist potential ~llies

on the right is a hard attitude towardforces on its left. An example of this wasMitterrand's deliberate coolness towardthe Socialist candidate for mayor ofParis, Georges Sarre. who is a spokes­man for the ostensibly leftist CERESgroup (advocates of "self­management") within the party. At thesame time. Mitterrand pursued aneffective effort aimed at increasingtensions in the left-reformist UnitedSocialist Party (PSU), by adding leadersof the PSU right wing to Union of theLeft slates in several cities.

Berretty/Black Star

Workers perform skit during recent occupation of GM plant near Paris.

,I

~f'

_.

-,

MBice payable/mail to: Spar1acus YoUth·Publishing Co., Box 825, ~nal Street P.O.,New YortI, New Yock 10013

"No, I'll tell you what we'd still like todo ... we'd like to convince Maynardhe's made a mistake and that we wanthim back on our side and we want tocontinue to support him."

The entire strike strategy of theAFSCME leaders has been subordinat­ed to pressuring factions withi.n. ~he

Democratic Party, instead ofmobtlizIngthe rest of Atlanta labor behind thestriking city workers. AFSCMElaunched a $60,000 nationwide news­paper campaign ("pitched to the liberalEastern establishment," as one unionaide admitted) in an effort to bringliberal pressure on Jackson. (This atleast put AFSCME one step ahead ofthe Communist Party, which is socommitted to "progressive" black Dem­ocrats that it has yet to print one wordon the Atlanta strike in its Daily World.)AFSCME also offered from the begin­ning to submit the strike issues to federalmediation, in the forlorn hope that theanti-labor Carter administration mightbe more sympathetic.

Given the political and economiccentrality of Atlanta in the South, adefeat of the city workers' struggle willhave an impact far beyond the strikers'ranks. It will be a blow not only toAFSCME's drive to organize publicemployees but to all attempts tounionize the South. Faced with thecops, courts and city hall's union­busting, AFSCME's only road tovictory-and, at this point, even tocontinued existence-is to call on therest of Atlanta labor to strike in itssupport. Atlanta's large poor blackpopulation, which has far more incommon with the striking workers thanwith the Jacksons and Kings, should becalled on to support the strikeand bolsterthe picket lines. No progress can be madeby a fruitless search for "better" Demo­crats. The South wiH be organized bymilitant union struggles and a massmobilization of working people ... or itwill not be organized at all. •

SUBSCRIBE

YOUNG SPARTACUSmonthly paper of the

Spartacus Youth League

$2/11 Issues

ISO...(continued from page 5)even sooner, and Harris' scheduledappearance at the Red Rose Bookstore,a collective of assorted "third campers,"was abruptly canceled after Red Roseinsisted that norms of workers democra­cy be upheld. The ISO at first agreed butquickly backed out, ludicrously claim­ing that it was in danger of a physicalattack by the SL.

It was not physical threats which hadstruck fear into the heart of the ISO, ofcourse, but revolutionary politics. Onlya few weeks earlier, the ISO had beenpolitically defeated in a Red Rose­sponsored debate entitled "What Nextfor Steelworkers?" An ISO supporter inthe steel union had topped off her pro­Sadlowski presentation with a defenseof the apolitical focus of the women'scommittee in her local on more women'sbathrooms by uttering the memorablestatement: "Toilet paper is not the roadto workers revolution, but it should be."She had nothing to say in response tothe charge leveled by a class-strugglemilitant in the same Chicago-area localthat during the last big layoff she haddemanded the recalling of five womenwhile ignoring the severa.l thousandmale steelworkers who had been laidoff.

The sputtering tour petered outcompletely in Los Angeles, where therewas no attempt to hold a public meetingof any sort. The cowardly thugs of theISO could only arrange an RSVPdinner in a private horne.•

ATLANTA, GA., April 26­Atlanta AFSCME strikers, turnedaway when they attempted to returnto work Monday morning, todayoccupied the City Hall offices ofMayor Maynard Jackson. Nearly100 strikers and their supportersheld the sit-in, demanding that theyget their jobs back, that the cityresume negotiations and that Fed­eral mediators be called in to settlethe dispute.

While Jackson was predictablyabsent, Atlanta city cops showed upin force within ten minutes, arrest­ing AFSCME area director Lea­mon Hood and strike leader WillieBolen. When the rest of the strikersrefused to leave, the cops began aclub-wielding assault that resultedin eight more arrests on charges ofassault, destruction of property,disorderly conduct and inciting toriot. Six cops and four strikers werereportedly injured.

The desperate demands ofAFSCME now amount to no morethan getting back to work withoutvictimizations. At a meeting ofLocal 1644 tonight, union leaders infact urged the workers to accept thetemporary federally-funded jobsand end the strike. But the embit­tered strikers rebuffed their "lead­ers" and voted this proposal down.

\.

business financiers should not proveshocking to Marxists.

In order to rule more peaceably withan aura of "democracy," the worstexcesses of Jim Crow were eliminated,civil rights activists were pieced off with"Great Society" jobs in communitycenters and a place was found inSouthern country club politics for loyalblack Democratic toadies. Yet theirstrikebreaking calls do not represent anabout-face from the 1960's; the moder­ate leaders of the civil rights movement,including Martin Luther King, Jr.,always pursued a policy of liberalreform through the Democratic Party.

Black Workers vs. theDemocratic Party

The current all-out attack on AtlantaAFSCME may sound the death-knellfor this predominantly black unionlocal. Such a bitter setback must serve todebunk the illusion that the blackmasses will fare better under blackDemocrats than under their whitecounterparts. Jackson's union-bustingalso underscores the need for the labormovement to break with the Democratsto form a militant workers party on aclass-struggle program. Jackson hasserved notice that his strikebreakingactions are part and parcel of anemployers' war against Southern labororganizing. "If AFSCME went out ofbusiness tomorrow, I'd never think twiceabout it. ... I see myself as only the firstdomino in [labor's] Southern dominotheory" (Atlanta Journql, 10 April).

The AFSCME bureaucracy, how­ever, is so entwined with the Democratsthat it cannot learn even the mostbitterly imposed lessons. In 1969,AFSCME supported Sam Massell formayor of Atlanta; in 1970, Massell firedevery striking AFSCME sanitationworker in the last major strike of cityworkers. (At that time, vice-mayorJackson, hustling votes for his upcom­ing mayoral bid, marched with thestriking workers and declared theirwages a "disgrace before God.")AFSCME and the rest of Atlanta laborthen supported Jackson in 1973 and arebeing repaid today with billy clubs andtermination notices.

Despite Jackson's unequivocal stand,union leaders are still trying to figureout how to support him again. WhenWVasked AFSCME spokesman OwenKing if the union would considerrunning a labor candidate againstJackson, or breaking with the Demo­crats to form a labor party, King replied:

Atlanta ...(continued from page 12)

er for an economic structure based onluring irdustry from the unionizedNorth. Up for re-election in a fewmonths, Jackson saw an opportunity tosolidify business support by crackingdown on the municipal workers andtook it.

The gambit seems to have worked.Both of Atlanta's daily newspapersrallied behind Jackson, baitingAFSCME as a tool of "northern laborbosses." Bert Lance, Carter's budgetdirector and a weathervane of Atlantabusiness opinion, said that Jackson'sposition had been strengthened. And inthe second week of the strike, astatement was issued by Martin LutherKing, Sr., of the Atlanta BaptistMinisters Union, Lyndon Wade of theUrban League, the Atlanta BusinessLeague and Atlanta Chamber of Com­merce which stated:

..Although we fully sympathize with theplight of the workers of our City, wedeplore the tactics of this union whichpurports to represent some city w~rk­

ers, while using these same workers In acynical power play aimed at taking overcity government in Atlanta, and acampaign to discredit Atlanta generallyand Mayor Jackson in particular. ..."

"Daddy King" was more blunt: "If youdo everything you can and don't getsatisfaction, then fire the hell out ofthem" (Atlanta Journal, 5 April).

Ironically, this statement appeared onthe ninth anniversary of the murder ofMartin Luther King, Jr., who was shotdown in Memphis while supporting asanitation workers strike there. Someliberal observers and the SocialistWorkers Party (SWP) Militant of 22April expressed "shock" at King's crudeattack on Atlanta's miserably paid,overwhelmingly black workers. But thealliance of civil rights preachers with big

caught in the consequences of theirperennial search to find an "easy path tothe masses." As fast as they piecetogether rotten-bloc electoral combina­tions the pressure of the class strugglebreaks them up. Political struggle is nota horse race, and attempts to find a"winning combination" are doomed tofailure.

The international Spartacist tendencyand its French sympathizing section, theLigue Trotskyste de France, haveuniquely upheld the policy of refusing togive electoral support, however critical,to the candidates of the bourf(eoispopular front or to its "left" appen­dages. We hold with Trotsky and Leninthat there is one experience whichrevolutionists do not share with theworking class, that of class collabora­tion. The job of Marxists is to warnagainst its dangers, to draw the lessonsof Chile and Spain, and to defend aconsistent policy which can show theproletariat the way out of the popular­front impasse.•

stating that governments of both rightand left exploit the workers-but theLCR is insisting on demands whichspeak to the "immediate needs" of theworkers. As if clarity on the popularfront were not the most urgent andimmediate need of the proletariat!

Despite its electoral "success," theLCR I LO I OCT bloc holds no answersfor French workers. Like the Democ­razia Proletaria in Italy, it was explicitlyintended as a left pressure group on thepopular front, pledging to vote forUnion of the Left candidates on thesecond round. (The LCR held up a figleaf to cover· its capitulationist policy bycalling for abstention in Perpignan,where the popular-front slate washeaded by a Left Radical. This, how­ever, was only one more "warning" toPCF and PS leaders; perhaps nexttime around Krivine can even workhimself up to a "censure.") Because the"far left" list did not represent anattempt to fight for working-classindependooce against the class­collaborat~onism of the Union of theLeft, revolutionaries could not call forvotes to it.

Krivine, Laguiller & Co. are notconcerned with such questions ofMarxist principle: for them the test isthe number of votes in the ballot box.But even at the level of organizationalgrowth, the demagogic "far left" prop~­

ganda bloc is no success. DemocraZlaProletaria also received a substantialvote in last June's Italian elections, butsince that time two of its three majorcomponents have had major splits andthe third, Lotta Continua, has practical­ly dissolved itself into the "broadvanguard" of "autonomist" students.

The crisis of Democrazia Proletaria isreproduced in its French counterpart,not only in squabbles between the LOand LCR, but within each organizationas well. The last LCR congress wasmarked by the appearance of a sizablefeminist caucus and the leadershipreceived a bare majority of the votes.Recently several dozen members quitthe LCR by publishing a notice inLiberation that they were "on strike"against the leadership. This farce bearswitness not only to the bureaucraticpractices of Krivine and his cohorts,but also to the abysmal political level onwhich the Ligue recruits.

From the appearance of a male­exclusionist caucus in its ranks, to the"strike" of a dozen militants, to the lossof votes to PSU and ecologist candi­dates, it is clear that the widely recog­nized crisis of the "far left"-in particu­lar of the LCR --is a direct result of itsattempts to recruit by appealing to thepresent consciousness of what it calls the"broad vanguard" rather than buildinga homogeneous Leninist combat partyaround solid recruitment to the Trot­skyist program. When the constituen­cies come into conflict, the shakyorganizations or coalitions which holdthem together shatter.

These would-be Trotskyists are

iii

i

i!

Iiii•iiii

i

!~

ii•·i!!!iii!!!!

i!!

iI;•iiii

29 APRIL 1977 9

=

Having signed away the right to industry-wide strike, Abel backed thecompany's protectionist drive in 1973 ads.

..

I•II~

Limited Edition now available:

Workers Vanguardin BOUND VOLUMES

Volume 1 includes:• WV nos. 1-34• Workers Action nos. 7-10• subject index

order from/pay 10:SparlacislPUblishing Co.Box 1377, GPONew York. NY 10001

$15.00

WORKERS VANGUARD

to win. Thev know that if they go out onstrike it'll b~ a bigjoke because they'll goout there with three pickets at a gate andthey'll stay at home and lose money.

Sadlowski's program did not inspire areal movement in steel. There is no basisfor critical support to Sadlowski.Nothing in his program represents a .break from class collaboration. Hisprogram is the same as the Abelprogram in 1965. So what's his future'! Ihave pegged him for four more years.He is in a good position. He's going toreturn. His people won in District 3 I[Chicago-Gary] and I guarantee thatSadlowski's not going to go back in themills and work. He'll probably get puton the staff. Balanoff won in District 3 Iso he now takes the heat. We polemi­cized and criticized Sadlowski fordoingnothing as district director about layoffsand doing nothing about the racistmobilization in Marquette Park inChicago. Think of the labor/blackdefense that could have been built with100.000 steel workers in Chicago­Mar4uette Park wouldn't have hap­pened. As staff rep Sadlowski will nowbe taking no heat. If Balanoff is popular,he's Sadlowski's man; if not. Sadlowskican say, "Well, I'm not responsible forthose policies."

The campaign that he built was not amovcment. It was an election campaign.Office rents will expire, telephones willbe ripped out of the walls. They will notkeep the Steelworkers Fightback Com­mittee in cities around the country forfour vears, much to the chagrin of hissupp~rters on the left who believe thatthat's what he's going to do. They votefor Sadlowski and expect him to givethem office space to organize? That'scrazy. He has no intention of doing that.There was nothing in the Sadlowskicampaign which represented in any way,shape or form the building of class­struggle caucuses.

let me finish up by covering whatwe've done and some of the issues thatwe've raised. Sinking roots and building~LJthorjty in steel t~kes ~ long time. Butwe have succeeded in making two basicpoints clear about our program. We'rethe ones who are opposed to thegovernment being brought into thelabor movement. We're known for that,and we're known for being the ones whodon't support Sadlowski. We;re the onlyones who have consistently opposedhim. And the pressure to capitulate isreal. As you know, virtually all the otherleft groups have folded to it.

We are now veterans ofthe Sadlowskicampaign. Next time around we'll speakthrough direct experience. If you talk tosome of the workers who've beenaround, they will tell you that Sadlowskisounds just like Abel in '65. We can getup and say the same thing but everyoneknows we're youngsters; we weren'taround then. But we were there thistime, and we were the ones who told thetruth about Sadlowski while everyoneelse was trying to clean up his speechesand make out like he really opposed theno-strike deal. There is at least a smalllayer of militant workers who know wefought Sadlowski every step of the way;these are the people we want to reach.And, of course, Sadlowski knows it.These are small things; we have no bigsuccesses, no big caucuses. But that willcome. It takes time and a struggle forprinciple.•

want Sadlowski to win. They didn'tneed him. Abel was not like Boyle in theminers union. When Miller won Boylecould not control the ranks. There waswildcat after wildcat and Boyle couldnot stop them. This is not the situationin steel. Abel has got the union under histhumb. Sadlowski's court challenge willprobably come up, but I don't think thelabor Department will touch it with aten-foot pole. They do not want Sad­lowski in office right now. They don'tneed him-Abel is doing his job.

Now, in terms of who voted for him,most of his support of course came fromthe younger steel workers who wereopposed to the no-strike contract. Bythe way, people should be aware thatthere's a tremendous "generation gap"in steel. Just to pick up two figures thathave come out in the press: first, overhalf the basic steel workforce is nowunder 30; and second, 40 percent ofthose covered by the steel contract haveover 20 years seniority.

In steel there was a real class of '59.They support the no-strike pledge; theydon't want to go out on strike for 116days and lose their houses, because theyknow that the bureaucracy doesn't fight

David McDonald

went to court together and sued theunion.

1\ow this committee has fallen apart.Most of it went into the Sadlowskimovement, although the Ol has sud­denly come out against him. TheRevolutionary Communist Party sup­porters have a paper called the Steel­\l'Orker. They have a position of criticalsupport. which if you read their stuff, isthe bare minimum of criticism andplenty of support.

What Next?

There are two more points I want tocover: Why did Sadlowski lose? Andwhat will become of the "Sadlowskimovement"? An important point is thatthe bourgeoisie did not particularly

At the invitatton of United States SteeL.

I.W Abel tells howAmerica can become more productive.~.

Thev talk about how Sadlowski is reallyfighting for democracy, etc. Of course.thev said the same thing about Abel in1965. In many ways you could simplysubstitute pages of the CP's DailrWorld for the SWP's Militant and youwouldn't realize you were reading adifferent press. The CP has had a largeconcentration in steel for a long time.They're very cynical they supportedSadlowski, but Sadlowski wanted no­thing to do with them. Their responsewas, 'The CP always gets excluded. Weexpected that." But they will probablycome out of the Sadlowski thing in thebest shape simply because they did notli4uidate their own groupings.

There was a big debate in the pages ofthe I.S.' Workers' Power on whether ornot thev should li4uidate into Steel­workers' Fightback, and of course they1i4uidated. The SWP never discussedwhether they would li4uidate. It camenaturallv..

Jack Barnes of the SWP toured thecountry to Whip up support for Sadlow­ski. Barnes couldn't even defend hispositions without resorting to dema­gogy. The SWP would try to call on onlythe most inexperienced-looking peoplein the room, which was kind of amusingbecause even they could get up and say alot of stuff about Sadlowski thatembarrasses them. And the SWP'sanswers were the following: the Slrefuses to use court suits against theunion; therefore it refuses to use thecourts in principle. therefore it's againstcourt suits for busing, etc. Their stock intrade is to use the old Stalinistslanders the Sl is the most reaction­ary group on the left. etc. This is theSWP. For them the trick is not evencapitulating to the backward conscious­ness of Sadlowski's rank-and-file sup-

porters, which is the stock in trade ofmost of the fake-lefts. The SWP reallywants to be the waterboys for the "pro­gressive" bureaucrats, just like the CP.

The Revolutionary Socialist league[RSl] supports a tiny caucus that's beenactive in Chicago. They maintained intheir press that they're not going to votefor Sadlowski but the RSL-supportedcaucus came out with a leaflet that wasjust dying to support him. They said: IfSadlowski will meet certain conditionswe'll vote for him. But the question ofcourt suits against the union andgovernment intervention in the labormovement was not one of those condi­tions. Of course, that's because theysupported Miller.

The Workers League capitulated toSadlowski out of habit, since they havenothing in steel; and Workers Worldalso came out for him. The Maoists havebeen active in steel. A couple of yearsago the October league [Ol] wasinstrumental in putting together theDistrict 3 I Right to Strike Committee,which initiated the first court suitagainst the no-strike contract. This wasessentially a bloc between the CP, theOctober League and the SWP. They all

(continuedfrom page 7)

return the union to the rank and file"union democracy." But union democ­racv, as the officials mean it, is a farce.As ~oon as they get in office-, they act justlike their predecessors. Every leafletwhich Lloyd McBride [Abel's candi­date] put out said we're for uniondemocracy, and the Socialist WorkersParty[SWP] says Sadlowski is for uniondemocracy so we should go out and votefor him.

In 1965 Abel won in a squeaker by10,000 votes. That election has beencharacterized as which side stole themost. An old-timer once told me howthey would steal votes. When Rarickran, a lot of union members in this localvoted for Rarick and left blank the slotfor district director. They went down tothe union hall, boarded up the windowsand locked the doors. On every blankballot they just wrote in the name oftheir candidate for district director. Hepicked up 2,000 votes which nobodycast this way! This same guy told me hehimself had voted 50 times for Rarick.who was supposedly going to clean upthe union. On McDonald's side theywere voting 150 times. The same wastrue in 1965. The election boiled downto who stole more, McDonald or Abel.and apparently Abel did.

What is important is that Abel was­able to split the bureaucracy. The line­up on district directors was 15 to 14.There was a real split. Sadlowski splitnobody but himself-no other districtdirector supported him. This is why hiscampaign looks much more like Rar­ick's than Abel's in terms of organiza­tion. But' that's not a product ofprogram. it's only a product of therelationship of forces within the bu­reaucracy. Believe me, Sadlowski wouldhave liked a palace revolt. He wouldhave loved the same kind of deal asoccurred in 1965.

Then Abel turned around and didwhat McDonald had done before him.There was another wave of dissatisfac­tion directed at the newly entrenchedAbel bureaucracy. In 1969 Abel waschallenged by an obscure staff lawyer ofthe USWA, Emil Narick, who got over40 percent of the vote. Narick. of course,did not offer a programmatic alterna­tive, either. His campaign showed thatalmost anyone can get a lot of votesrunning against the International insteel.

This brings us up to the present.Steelworkers Fightback is what we havenow. Sadlowski's program is veryvague, which is not surprising. Hissupport is mainly among you~ger

workers, many of whom really believehe would end the no-strike pledge. Hisreal position is that in 1981 he wouldhave a referendum. Even McBride atone time came out and said: look, if itdoesn't work we'll scrap it. Sadlowskitalks out of both sides of his mouth,depending on his audience. In Torontohe said he was a socialist. At moreconservative plants: "Don't worry. I'mnot a communist."

10

LeU Support to Sadlowski

Let me go through what ouropponents on the left are doing. Onefunny thing is that all these groups,which supposedly hate each other, areright at home doing donkey worktogether for Sadlowski. You go to atypical Sadlowski meeting in a largecity: the SWP is selling raffle tickets andmanning the literature table, the I.S.[International Socialists] are setting upthe microphone, the CP is showingpeople to their seats, and a Maoist kicksoff the meeting by singing a folk song.

The biggest left group supportingSadlowski is the CP. Their politics arethe same old reformist pop-front stuff.

BureaucraticOppositions inSteel ...

-=

Riots inPakistan ...(continued/rom page 3)formation of the Muslim League. [tpledged to "foster a sense of loyalty tothe British government among theMuslims of India."

Although the upper-class Hindusbenefited most from the British educa­tional system and wielded dominantpositions in .:ommerce, the colonialistsencouraged fierce competition for postsin the civil service and the military. Theliving embodiment of the Muslim petty­bourgeoisie's aspirations for a state andthe opportunity to exploit their plebeianco-religionists was the wily lawyer andMuslim League leader Mohammed AliJinnah. Until the late [930's he hadadvocated cooperation between theLeague and the largely Hindu Congressmovement in a gradualist campaign forIndian independence. However, therepeated unwillingness of Hindu po[iti­cians to share the spoils in provincialelections led him to advocate partitionand the creation of Pakistan.

The British empire emerged from theimperialist World War II impoverishedand shaken to its core. There was a post­war resurgence of the "Quit India"movement and massive demonstrationsof intercommunal solidarity around the1945 trial of three leaders (a Hindu, aMuslim and a Sikh) of the militant anti­colonialist Indian National Army. Thisand the February 1946 naval mutinydemonstrated the potential for a radi­calization of the Indian masses thatcould escape the grasp of their venalbourgeois communal leaders.

While relying on Mohandas Gandhiand the Congress to keep the Hindus"non-violent," the new viceroy, LordMountbatten, began to assiduouslycourt Jinnah, softening Britain's formalopposition to partition and conniving inthe Muslim League's communal provo­cations. On [6 August 1946, the Leagueproclaimed a "direct action day" todemonstrate its determination to win aseparate state. In that single black day,6,000 Hindus and Muslims died in thestreets of Calcutta alone, victims of asaturnalia of communal carnage.

Within a year, the British overlordswashed their hands of India, acceding(as did the power-hungry Congressleaders) to the Muslim League's demandfor partition, and created the abortionof an Islamic state divided into twohalves, sharply different in their nation­alities and separated by nearly athousand miles.

The Pakistani bourgeoisie grew out ofthe same semi-feudal land-owning classwhich staffed the army. It was depend­ent from birth on direct subsidies fromthe state bureaucracy and on govern­ment manipulation of agriculturalprices to channel the peasant surplusinto the pockets of some 22 mainlyPunjabi ruling families. The stateapparatus was particularly rapacious inlooting the Bengali peasantry in theEast, whose jute and tea exportsconstituted most of Pakistan's foreignexchange earnings. When resentmentover this shameless robbery exploded in1971, the result was an Indo-Pakistaniwar (see "New Masters for BangIaDesh," WV No.4, January 1972).

Bhutto was installed in power by themilitary ruling circle which forcedGeneral Yahya Khan's resignation andopted for a bonapartist "civilian"government enveloped in populistrhetoric. But Bhutto's high-handed ruleand inability to placate the impover­ished masses or stifle centrifugal tenden­cies among the ethnically distinctBaluchis and the tribes of the NorthWest Frontier are again tempting themilitary to intervene.

Trotskyism ys. Opportunism

The states of India and Pakistantoday are nightmares of poverty, cul­tural backwardness and national! eth-

29 APRIL 1977

nic! religious oppression, a testament tothe fraud of British imperialism's claimto a noble "civilizing mission." Onlythrough a common mobilization of thetoiling masses of the subcontinent undera proletarian internationalist vanguardcan there be a truly democratic solutionto the innumerable sectional conflictsand an end to the grinding misery of themasses.

Historically the only force whichfought uncompromisingly for indepen­dence from Britain, for the right of

..Wide World

Leaders of Pakistan National Alli­ance being arrested at protest rally.

national self-determination and forproletarian unity across religious andethnic lines in the Indian subcontinentwas the Trotskyist movement. TheBolshevik-Leninist Party of India play­ed a heroic role in organizing theBombay general strike in support of the1946 naval mutiny and in opposing theimperialist Balkanization of the subcon­tinent. During the same period, theCommunist Party of India attempted toquash independence struggles in theinterest of British and U.S. imperial­ism's "war for democracy," divided theparty on religious lines (sending Muslimmembers into the League) and gave tacitsupport to the partition.

But today the remnants of ostensiblyTrotskyist forces in India and Pakistanhave abandoned the revolutionaryprogram of the Fourth International.When the Indian army subordinated theEast Bengali's struggle against genocid­al occupation by Pakistani soldiers toDelhi's revanchist schemes, the Com­munist League of India (CLI) refused totake the principled stand of revolution­ary defeatism on both sides. As FarooqAlim wrote in a letter to WV(No. 65,28March 1975):

"Trotskyists in India misguided by thetwo factions of the dis-United Secretari­at [USee] failed to adopt a correct standon Bangladesh, not to say of interveningeffectively in Bangladesh. Either theywanted to tone down all criticism of theAwami League [the petty-bourgeoisEast Bengali nationalist leadership] ortended to identify themselves with oneof the Maoist groups...."

While the USec minority led by theAmerican Socialist Workers Partycalled for "unconditional support" to"the armed struggle against the capital­ist rulers of Pakistan" (led by thecapitalist Indian army!), the European­based USec majority threw a smoke­screen around its own tacit support tothe Indian intervention with calls for a"U nited Red Benga1." Marxists certain­ly support the right of self­determination for the entire Bengalination, separated in the 1948 partition,but this does not mean actively advocat­ing the separation of the combativeWest Bengali workers from their classbrothers throughout India.

Moreover, in the context of the 1971war, this slogan was simply an evasionof the necessary call (made only by theSpartacist League) for the workers,peasants and soldier ranks to "turn theguns the other way," against both the

West Pakistani butchers and the Indianusurpers.

In an article entitled "Pakistan andBangladesh: Results and Prospects," inthe collection Explosion in a Subconti­nent edited by Robin Blackburn (Har­mondsworth England: Penguin Books,1975), Tariq Ali, a Pakistani leader ofthe USec-affiliated International Marx­ist Group in Britain, made one of themore bizarre arguments in post-hocjustification for support of the Indianinvasion.

"The decisive Indian role in the birth ofBangladesh by no means implies that itsexistence as an independent state is apure fiction .... An instructive parallelcan. perhaps. be drawn with thecircumstances wherebv Cuba becamean independent republic. In the latenineteenth century the Cubans waged atenacious war against the Spanish forindependence. However. during thecourse of the Spanish-American War ofIX9ii the US armed forces invaded andoccupied Cuba. subsequently disarmingthe Cuban liberation fighters. IheCuban Republic was eventually set upby an act of the US Congress after fouryears of US military occupation. Theother Spanish Caribbean island. PuertoRico, became a US colony. The subse­quent history of Cuba and Puerto Ricoshows clearly enough that juridicalindependence can, under certain condi­tions, become a weapon which agenuine national liberation movementcan use against imperialism."

Tariq Ali blithely ignores Cuba'ssemi-colonial status under U.S.overlordship during the first third of thecentury, codified in the Platt Amend­ment (another parallel to the vassalrelationship of Bangladesh to India).Moreover, he incredibly confuses thecorrect call for independence of theU.S.' new colonies with the process bywhich it took them over from Spain,making a case for military support tothe U.S.' first imperialist militaryadventure!

While enthusiastic for Bengali nation­alists riding on Indian tanks in 1971, Alicarefully skirted the reactionary reli­gious nature of the Pakistani state in hisearlier book, Pakistan: Military Rule orPeople's Power? (New York: Morrow,1970). He blithely dismisses the issue ofpartition ("The reasons for Partition aremany and varied, and a proper explana­tion of them would require a lengthyanalysis that is not, strictly speaking,relevant to my purpose in writing thisbook") and bows to the very architect ofpartition ("There can be no doubt thatJinnah represented the progressive wingof the Muslim League...").

In a laundry list of "transitional anddemocratic demands," Ali merelymakes a single abstract mention of theright of self-determination for EastPakistan (otherwise barely touched onin the book), and advises that "weshould distinguish between the reaction­ary Indian government and the Indianmasses...." No mention is made of thehistoric interrelationship of Hindu andMuslim workers in the Punjab, Bengaland the rest of the subcontinent, or ofthe need for a socialist federation of theIndian subcontinent.

The record of Ali on the 1971 war isfundamentally identical to that of theCLI on every major question: waveringcapitulation to the popular mood. Atthe beginning of the Indian state ofemergency in 1975 the CLI leanedtoward Indira Gandhi, giving credenceto her claims of a CIA threat; later it .leaned toward the reactionary anti­Gandhi opposition.

Genuine Trotskyists must demandimmediate abolition of the state ofemergency and all special repressivemeasures in Pakistan. While mobilizingthe masses to militant struggle againstthe Bhutto regime, they must give nosupport to the equally corrupt andreactionary opposition. Only under theleadership of a Trotskyist vanguardparty, through the establishment of arevolutionary workers and peasantsgovernment in the framework of asocialist federation of the Indian sub­continent, can the Pakistani workingmasses be liberated.•

BennieLenard ...(continued from page 4)

this badly needed money over toLenard.

Local president Ed Graham showedup at the first meeting of the nowunofficial Bennie Lenard Defense Com­

.mittee with the Fair EmploymentPractices Committee to defend theleadership's stalling. Waving a letter hereceived from Solidarity House inDetroit (which he refused to show to themembers), Graham claimed that sincethe case had nothing to do with theunion and Lenard wasn't actuallyattacked at work, the union constitutionforbids giving money to individualmembers for "traffic violations" orother causes.

This disgusting legalistic excuse is aninsult to the entire membership and toBennie Lenard~-the victim of a brutaland racist attack, not a "traffic viola­tion"! But it is consistent with the wholeapproach of the conservative and timidbureaucrats, whose strategy has been toappeal to State Attorney B.ernard Careyto "investigate" the case and who aremore interested in developing goodrelations with the local police andpoliticians than in defending their ownmembers.

Meanwhile, a small spinoff of theoriginal Bennie Lenard Defense Com­mittee has renamed itself the "ProvisioTownshi p Committee" and is calling foran April 30 rally to feature RenaultRobinson of the Afro-American Pa­trolmen's Association. This strategy notonly completely ignores the need for theunion as a whole to take up Lenard'sdefense but also fosters the dangerousillusion that the cops are the friends ofworkers and blacks. The LSC hasargued to exclude all cops from defenseactivities, pointing out that "cops havehistorically proven to be the direct andimmediate enemies of all workingpeople."

The leadership's bureaucratic ma­neuvers and reformist illusions in thecops must be resolutely opposed by theLocal 6 membership. The BennieLenard Defense Committee must con­tinue to fight for official status, for fullunion aid to Lenard and for thedemands: "Full Compensation to Ben­nie Lenard and His Family!", "Indictand Jail the Cops!" and "Drop AllCharges Against Bennie Lenard!".

SUSYLPUBLIC OFFICESMarxist Literature

BAY AREAFriday andSaturday 3:00-6:00 p.m.1634 Telegraph (3rd floor)(near 17th .Street)Oakland, CaliforniaPhone 835-1535

CHICAGOTuesday 4:30-8:00 p.m.Saturday 2:00-5:30 p.m.650 South ClarkSecond floorChicago, IllinoisPhone 427-0003

NEW YORKMondaythrough Friday 6:30-9:00 p.m.Saturday 1:00-4:00 p.m.

260 West BroadwayRoom 522New York, New YorkPhone 925-5665

11

WfJlillEliS "Nlllillil)Black Cap-italist Politician Does His Job

Maynard JacksonBreaks AtlantaSanitation Strike

AFSCMEpickets

in front ofAtlanta

cityemployment

office.

, AFSCME~ SAYS.PlOYMENT! BREEDSi CRIME

Mangiaflco/Atlanta Constitution

29 APRIL 1977

with a racist board of education todefeat a 1970 teachers strike, to ThomasBradley in Los Angeles, who revels inthe gestapo tactics of L.A. police"SWAT" squads, these black capitalistdemagogues serve only to defuse theblack masses' struggles. In an effort toappeal to disaffected black voters,"BEa's" flocked to the early conven­tions of the National Black PoliticalAssembly, yet in the "New South" theMaynard Jacksons peacefully coexistwith racist Dixiecrats like James East­land and George Wallace by imple­menting the same anti-working-classpolicies.

The "New South" is a phony for boththe black masses and labor. Its best­known spokesman, Jimmy Carter, waselected with labor and black supportonly to appoint an outright segregation­ist as attorney general and oppose jobsspending, the "common situs" construc­tion trades picketing bill and the AFL­cIa proposal for a $3 minimum wage.Another "New South" favorite, AndrewYoung, was given the job of putting abetter face on U.S. imperialism asCarter's man at the UN. And MaynardJackson has proved to be just as much astrikebreaking servant of Southernfinancial and industrial interests as hispredecessors.

Unions are still massively resisted byboth the Southern-based bourgeoisieand Northern capital which has movedSouth looking for low-wage, low-taxprofit-taking. As the corporate! finan­cial center of the "New South," Atlantais seen by the ruling class as a bellweth-

continued on page 9

Bill Mahan/II.t1anta Journal

increase in almost three years.But Jackson hardlined it all the way,

claiming that there was no money in thecity coffers. A union review of the city'sbudget, however, uncovered over $28million in unspent appropriations andcontingency monies, far exceeding the$5 million needed to meet the union'swage demand.

Undaunted, Jackson fired everystriker on the fifth day of the walkout.He quickly obtained a court injunctionlimiting picketing and put Atlanta copson 12-hour shifts to escort scabs acrossthe picket lines. The city hired hundredsof unemployed and offered to rehirestrikers who would immediately returnto work. Clashes on the picket lines ledto strikers being arrested on chargesranging from disorderly conduct toassault. It is expected that Jackson willsoon try to financially cripple the unionby revoking dues check-off.

Right: AFSCME leaflet outlin­ing Mayor Jackson's attemptsto break municipal union.Below: Atlanta cops guardingcity garage during recent strikeby sanitationmen.

Maynard Jackson, the first blackmayor of a major Southern city sinceReconstruction, was elected in 1973 by acoalition of liberals, church groups, civilrights organizations and labor unions.As one of the most prominent of anincreasing number of "Black ElectedOfficials" (BEO's) he was hailed as thesymbol of a new "spirit" transformingthe racist and anti-labor South.

But the installation of a handful ofblack Democrats in city halis has madeno difference in the conditions of theoppressed black minority. From New­ark's Kenneth Gibson, who joined

The "New South" in Action

Mayor Jackson

advertising, no-strike provISIOns, theywere eager to end the strike and orderedall strikers to return to work Mondaymorning and reclaim their jobs. Jack­son, however, proved unwilling to settlefor less than unconditional surrender.Without capitulation on everyone of hisunion-busting terms, he ordered theworkers turned back when they report­ed for work.

The strike began on March 28 whenthe 1,100 members of Local 1644­about half the city's workforce-walkedoff the job. The strikers were predomi­nantly garbage collectors, laborers andpublic works employees. Their demandscentered on a 50-eent per hour wageincrease, as well as better insurance andhospitalization coverage, more shopstewards and an increase in dues check­off. The wage demand was certainlyminimal: union members average apoverty-level $3.55 per hour (beforedeductions) and have not had a wage

12

ATLANTA--Mayor Maynard Jack­son. darling of Democratic Party lib­erals. is busy proving what the "NewSouth" really means. The "progressive"black mayor is on the verge of breakinga desperate strike by Atlanta's poorest­paid city workers, 80 percent of themblack. Jackson has fired every striker,has had cops scab-herding on overtimeand has mobilized a reactionary coali­tion spanning black civil rights leadersand white racist businessmen. While thenotoriously egotistical mayor appearsto be primarily concerned with bolster­ing his own electoral capital, his attemptto destroy Local 1644 of the AmericanFederation of State, County and Mu­nicipal Employees (AFSCME) placeshim at the head' of resistance tounionization by a solid front of South­ern corporate interests.

With nearly 500 strikers already re­turned to work, hundreds of scabs hiredwith federal anti-poverty money (!)and only 450 of the original strikers stillout, Jackson has brought the union toits knees. After a union rally lastSaturday, the city finally made its first"offer" in the month-old dispute. Local1644 spokesman Rodney Derrick toldWV that in exchange for AFSCMEcalling off the strike, ceasing all anti­Jackson advertising and guaranteeingnever to strike again, the city hadoffered to fill the remaining job vacan­cies with strikers. The remaining work­ers, up to a maximum of 200, would beoffered federally funded jobs for threemonths; after that their jobs would bereviewed on a month-by-month basis"to the extent that Federal funds are orbecome available...." Thus, the strikersare not even guaranteed their jobs back!None of the strike demands was evenmentioned.

This "offer" is nothing more than adeath warrant for the union. WhileAFSCME officials protested the no-