Daily Archives: May 4, 2017

Wages is a cunning device of the devil, for the benefit of tender consciences who would retain all the advantage of the slave system without the expense, trouble, and odium of being slaveholders. Orestes Brownson, Chattel Slavery vs. Wage Slavery, Boston Quarterly Review 3 (1840).

Ignorance of history is one of the defining characteristics of our modern technological society. In a way, this ignorance is a good thing because when modern pundits do bother to argue from history, they do so only pragmatically, using the technique of the Ministry of Truth from 1984: to take something out of context or simply to fabricate a historical fact in order to argue a pre-determined opinion. One bad side effect of this ignorance, however, is that most of modern American society believes that our ancestors especially ancient ones were immoral, unethical idiots. If fact, on any given subject of pure rational thought such as morality and ethics, ancient societies were often much more sophisticated, disciplined, and logical in their thoughts than modern ethics and morality that is simply a regurgitation of economic necessity. An example of this is slavery. Ancient societies were well aware of the nature of slavery and contemplated and argued whether it was ethical to have it. The minority of philosophers concluded slavery to be unethical and should be eliminated. The majority, including such supposed greats as Aristotle and Cicero, concluded that it was ethical.

What is still interesting about their contemplation is that they saw and made distinctions that we still do not make today and most likely will never make unless there is a radical change in the nature of our modern technological society. For one, they made a distinction between chattel slavery and wage slavery. Just as ancient Greek philosophers invented the first steam engine during their search for knowledge (the aeolipile also known as a Heros engine) but apparently choose or the times were not right to use it to start an industrial revolution, they also seem to have developed a basic concept of capitalism but it went no further. One reason it went no further is that either out of selfishness or from a perverted version of pre-Christian altruism, they saw wage slavery as the greater evil.

According to the ancients, and continuing forward even to some 19th Century supposed moralists, chattel slavery was more ethical than wage slavery because it created a social bond of dependence between slave and master that contributed to maintaining an orderly and strong society. The slave was valuable to the master, valuable as property but valuable no less. There was an economic dependence between the two that created a social bond contributing to social cohesion. Such is not true of the person working solely for wages paid by the master. At any point, the master can decide to stop paying the wages and the workers would be out in the cold with no means to support themselves or their families. Whatever economic bond existed, it was a temporary one. The only social bond created between the wage earner and the master or even between wage earners was one of competition that contributed only to social disorder.

Unfortunately, from a purely cold-blooded economic perspective, this analysis was true. In every economic comparison analysis even from non-American scholars that I have ever seen, the material (clothing, shoes, housing, etc.), physical health, life stability, family stability (either nuclear or extended families), and even education opportunities of chattel slaves when compared to that of urban or rural wage workers was usually better but rarely worse for the chattel slaves than the wage workers. The abolitionist and former slave Frederick Douglas after several years of experience as a free man concluded: experience demonstrates that there may be a slavery of wages only a little less galling and crushing in its effects than chattel slavery.

Obviously, what this pure economic analysis misses is chattel slaverys effect upon the human soul. At least in their misery, the free could create independently of any family relationships social bonds among themselves almost always illegal because the law always acts to protect masters and not either their wage or chattel slaves that through threat of unified social rebellion would serve to improve their lot in life. Through the ages these social bonds varied from the Roman plebeians successful demands for the appointment of tribunes (tribuni plebis) to control the power of the patrician consuls to medieval and our modern labor unions. Except for possibly the Haitian Revolution whose success can be disputed given its present lot, I know of no similar success by slaves to organize and improve their lot in life either outside of the law or within it. From the slave revolution of Spartacus to our own Civil War, in the absence of assistance from the powers that be, successful social bonding outside of their family was not able to occur.

Is such distinction or benefit to being a wage slave still true in modern technological society? No. Thanks to technological progress, one can have material wealth as a wage slave in the modern world that was unimaginable to either the chattel or wage slaves of the past but one is less free now to engage in any social bonding to improve the soul of society or even for personal spiritual worth. The concept of either an extended or nuclear family is rapidly disappearing. At present, the majority of Americans have never been married and 40% of children are born to unwed mothers. It is only a matter of time before the concept of family is reserved as a hobby for the rich. Western religion has surrendered to the secular religion of law serving only the master as the standard for love, empathy, and mercy in life. Workers unions have disappeared for all practical purposes from the private economy only the masters servant government employees least in need of unions given their almost lifetime guarantee of income, job security, and pension benefits have effective unions. The wage worker has no job security nor any place to call home. It is only a matter of time before every wage worker is essentially a temporary service employee that randomly and arbitrarily can be hired, fired, transferred, and traded by the corporations paying them wages; who has neither the time, resources, nor social or physical and thus not the mental stability to create with other wage slaves social bonds strong enough to be a threat or to create a threat of a revolt against our modern masters.

So now what? Nothing one can do. As George Orwell in 1984 so accurately described, this is simply our unavoidable future. For the powers that be, power is an end in itself. Unless you become religious believing in a god other than power, the only option is to sit back and enjoy the material wealth that modern technological society provides even to wage slaves. As the saying goes, a rising tide raises all boats. Though relatively speaking in terms of economic wealth, personal self-worth, and freedom, the modern wage slave is probably no better off and may be worse off than our ancestors, we are much better off in personal material wealth. That may be the only progress that life allows for those of us not among the powers that be. The wage slave with the most toys wins!

Like Loading...

See the rest here:

Chattel Slavery v. Wage Slavery in a Technological Society ...

WAMU 88.5

Tipped Wage For Restaurant Workers Survives Possible Ballot Challenge In D.C. WAMU 88.5 The D.C. One Fair Wage campaign will keep pushing to get One Fair Wage on the ballot to eliminate the legacy of slavery that the two-tiered wage system represents for the District's 29,000 tipped workers and to eliminate the high rates of sexual ...

Continue reading here:

Tipped Wage For Restaurant Workers Survives Possible Ballot Challenge In D.C. - WAMU 88.5

Alt-Left Insanity: 'Trump Will Try to Stage A Coup' NewsBusters (blog) The asylum escapees from ItsGoingDown, said of May Day, Wage Slaves Revolt! Clearly, they don't get that slaves don't get paid. And real slavery is a heck of a lot worse than working at McDonald's. The snowflakes rioted in Portland, which isn't ...

Originally posted here:

Alt-Left Insanity: 'Trump Will Try to Stage A Coup' - NewsBusters (blog)

Rise, like lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew Which in sleep had fallen on you- Ye are manythey are few.

Shellys Masque of Anarchy has been a spectral presence for nearly two hundred years, summoned at climactic moments of civil warfare. Composed to memorialize the 1819 Peterloo massacre, the poem commemorates the sixty thousand people who gathered at the very dawn of the industrial revolution to demand a radical expansion of suffrage, especially to those laboring in Englands dark satanic mills. Dozens died, hundreds were wounded.

The poem wasnt published for over a decade, until the Chartist movement took it up in 1832. Another ten years after that, it became the anthem of an almost nationwide general strike. Participants referred to the time leading up to that moment and the strikes that preceded it as holy days.

Since then Ye are manythey are few has inspired rebellion, resistance, and liberation again and again. The New York garment worker strikes of 1911, the sit-down strikes of the 1930s, May 1968 in Paris, and, most recently, the pro-democracy congregations during the Arab Spring and the Occupy uprisings of 2011 are all etched in our collective memory.

There are also largely unknown, but hardly less remarkable, general strikes: not just those that shut down Winnipeg and Seattle in 1919, London and the Midlands in 1926, and San Francisco in 1934, but also Amsterdam under the Nazis in February 1941 and again in April 1943, Turin and Milan on April 25, 1945 which Italians now celebrate as the penultimate moment of their liberation and the Algerian general strike of January 1957, which closed schools, shops, and factories in support of the independence movement. In 1972, Quebec saw a series of province-wide general strikes that linked a quest for national identity with a cross-class protest against austerity.

The general strike in Poland, which lasted just half a day on March 27, 1981, engaged more than twelve million workers and citizens. It announced to the world and to the thin strata of Communist functionaries still in power that Solidarity constituted a majoritarian and national movement. From that moment on the elite had but two choices: military repression, which it invoked later that year, or a regime-changing, world-historic capitulation, which finally came in 1989.

Shellys immortal lines were not heard during the recent calls for a Womens Strike or General Strike against the Trump regime or even as planning proceeds for the upcoming May Day strikes, which a number of trade unions in New York, Illinois, and California have endorsed. But what is sometimes loosely called the resistance certainly gestures in that direction. Its as if something in the air evokes the unvanquishable number, the lions shaking chains to earth like dew.

How else can we explain the sudden announcements of general strikes when nothing on the ground suggests that they might happen? Less than a decade ago, elements within Occupy Wall Street issued regular calls for mass action without any chance of realizing their plans. Novelist Francine Proses call for a general strike in January went viral before fading another immaculate conception, subsequently aborted.

The idea that something radical and forceful must be done persists in the most unlikely places. In February, fifty Hollywood writers, producers, and creatives held a house meeting in Hancock Park, California, to plan their response to the Trump administration. A strike, general or otherwise, was high on the agenda.

After listening to two labor historians brief them on past insurgencies, the organizers announced that they had already hired a PR firm to write a press release and organize publicity for their movement. The firms suggested slogan Strike for Democracy isnt bad, even if the aging leftists in attendance blanched at their method for coming up with it.

Three weeks later, Salud Carbajal, Santa Barbaras newly elected House representative, held a district meeting that new locus of resistance politics. The event was packed with constituents who cheered the spokeswoman from Planned Parenthood, expressed solidarity with advocates for immigrant rights, and heartily denounced GOP efforts to gut the Affordable Care Act.

But when he tried to answer what is to be done, Carbajal got an exceedingly cool reception. He told the energized crowd to write and e-mail Congress and then prepare for the off-year elections. A veteran of the 1960s, now retired after a distinguished career as a UCLA physician, objected, recalling the years when he and his comrades at Columbia shut it down. The crowd agreed.

From the sublime to the ridiculous. But then again, this desire to conjure up something forceful could still produce results maybe not a general strike, which demands a high level of organization and preparation, but perhaps upsurges, rebellions, boycotts, demonstrations, protests, and job actions of the most varied and unexpected sort.

Surprisingly, these recent calls for strike come primarily from middle-class activists, usually without the faintest connection to the labor movement. They summon people to deploy a weapon linked, since Peterloo, to an oppressed working class in revolt while decrying what they understand as white working-class backlash. The very incongruous timing and social location of these calls makes them odd, awkward, and naive, but also socially and culturally imaginative.

After all, what remains of the organized labor movement has avoided strikes like the plague for a long time; unions are simply too weak to conduct them. As late as 1975, each year witnessed more than four hundred strikes, involving more than a thousand workers. Today, ten or fifteen work stoppages occur, mostly for defensive reasons to preserve pensions, wages, or health insurance against an aggressive employer.

Strikes have cropped up among unorganized, low-wage workers, sometimes assisted by outside unions. The Fight for $15 movement has generated a good deal of social energy and achieved some legislative success on the state and local level. But as important and even heroic as such struggles are, these strikes-cum-referendum-campaigns hardly disturb the countrys economic machinery.

Critics have blamed an ossified trade union bureaucracy, a Democratic Party elite that has marginalized the interests of the working class, and a growing conservative hegemony openly hostile to workers, regardless of the pseudo-populist rhetoric its spokespeople sometimes trot out.

However we account for it, the strike as a theater of combat has faded. As a mythic ideal, however, it is flourishing.

This years calls for work stoppages have relinquished their once-organic connection to the work site and relegated the labor movement to the margins. Nevertheless, this new, often middle-class sensibility resurrects the strike in a kind of hyperactive afterlife. It has become the newly powerlesss dream state in the wake of an election from hell.

Unlike its working-class antecedents, todays strike does not arise out of relationships formed on the factory floor, at the water cooler, or near the checkout counter. On the contrary, todays would-be picketers have highly atomized working lives, pervaded by notions of self-fulfillment both on and off the job. Contemporary labor has dissolved solidaritys connective tissue, damning the strike before it even begins.

For decades, the working class has been forcefully reminded how little it counts in the affairs of the nation. The political and cultural right has captured and channeled this disillusionment, not only in the North American Rust Belt but also in Britain, France, and other polities where social democracy once flourished.

Brexit and Trumps electoral victory may have made a substantial proportion of the white working class feel momentarily powerful, but the rest of the working class immigrants and people of color as well as the cosmopolitan and once-solid middle class saw the election as illegitimate, profoundly disempowering, and an affront to their moral sensibilities.

They now face the kind of insecurity and exclusion that Americas alienated and unorganized blue-collar workers have long experienced. High school teachers, retired architects, and medical professionals all feel as disrespected and insecure as Walmart clerks and McDonalds grill cooks.

They earn a lot more money, but these energized middle-class workers especially among that cohort labeled millennial is nevertheless affronted by the profound inequities, self-seeking, and imperial arrogance of the new ruling elite. At least under Obama, they could recognize parts of themselves in the coalition. Now, to many, electoral democracy and the conventional institutions of political life appear hollowed out, corrupt, fake.

If power is no longer accessible through party politics, if the system rolls on unperturbed, glacially indifferent to the well-being not only of the working class but also of the vanishing middle classes, then reaching back to a more combative past seems imperative.

This is happening not out of the blue, but at a moment when mass action has become a flesh-and-blood reality once again. The 2006 Day Without Immigrants was a revelation; it resembled an actual strike and conjoined political, economic, and cultural identities and desires. In Greece and all though Central and Western Europe not to mention Latin America and the Middle East social conflict has escaped the boundaries of conventional politics or carved out new spaces on the electoral map, making way for insurgencies that didnt originate in the voting booth. Reveries of recaptured power might be nurtured in this soil, where the strike implies more than a commercial impasse and becomes synonymous with taking a stand.

Strike, Strike, Strike, the closing chorus of Clifford Odets 1935 play Waiting for Lefty carries its chanters beyond the pedestrian realm in which hours and wages are negotiated. Likewise, todays strike appeals have less to do with a specific organizational form than with creating a pathway to power.

In this, they recall a time when the strike was multivalent a tactic to be sure, but also a manifestation of a fundamental social antagonism.

This hasnt always been true. Radical social reformers of the late eighteenth and the first half of the nineteenth century eschewed strikes. They saw them as selfish, fixated on the parochial needs of one class.

The socialists of that era hunted bigger prey. They sought a complete overhaul of society that would reestablish or, rather, establish for the first time the harmony of all. Hence, the founders of utopian communities like New Lanark and Brook Farm or the Shakers of the Oneida commune tried to purge their experiments of all forms of social conflict.

Industrialization imposed a different reality. Strikes became commonplace, nowhere more so and nowhere more violently than in the United States. Marx and Engels considered the strike a form of class struggle, a kind of guerilla warfare that would steadily advance from the slogan a fair days wage for a fair days work to the abolition of the wages system. Even when defeated, strikers feel bound to proclaim that they shall not be made to bow to circumstances, but social conditions ought to yield to them as human beings.

Radicals socialists, anarchists, populists, even champions of the Cooperative Commonwealth like the Knights of Labor welcomed strikes, encouraged them, led them, and theorized and mythologized about them. Why?

First, the strike sparked fierce resistance in employers, often abetted by the governments coercive arm. Blood was spilled; protesters lost their lives. Whatever particular grievance precipitated the strike, it ultimately struggled against the new and profoundly disruptive system of wage labor.

This seemed inherently radical. Talk of wage slavery and other incendiary metaphors were common even in the most common strikes. The frequency with which governments police, state and federal troops, courts, governors, even the president intervened on behalf of the ownership class immediately raised the stakes; strikes took on a political meaning even when conservative unionists like Samuel Gompers or a youthful Eugene V. Debs eschewed radicalism.

Underlying indictments about wage slavery had spread so far that every local encounter became the potential site of a mass movement.

We tend to think of the trade union strike as a finite event between two parties arguing over limited, if sometimes intractable, issues. The rest of the world stands by and, for the most part, watches. But something quite different was happening during the formative stages of industrialization, as millions of people were being converted into the countrys founding proletariat.

All through the late nineteenth century and into the early decades of the twentieth, events sometimes called mass strikes embraced multitudes. They enlisted not only those immediately involved in a particular strike, but a whole social universe that included other sympathetic workers, neighbors, families, shopkeepers and handicraftsmen, merchants, clergymen, newspaper editors, writers and artists, nearby farmers, and even local militiamen unwilling to fire on their friends and coworkers.

The Great Railroad Uprising of 1877, the Haymarket Massacre of 1886, the Homestead Strike of 1892, the Pullman Strike of 1894, the Uprising of the 20,000 in New York in 1911, the Lawrence and Paterson strikes in the following two years, the Great Steel Strike and Seattle General Strike of 1919, the San Francisco and Minneapolis general strikes of 1934, the sit-down strikes later that decade all stand as landmark moments in American history. As they unfolded, they laid bare the mass strikes rhythm and social reach. These are only the most noted; in the years following the Civil War and into the new century, many localized mass strikes erupted in towns and small cities nationwide, eliciting what has been called a strange enthusiasm.

The mass strike came much closer to turning the world upside down than an ordinary strike. Transgressive by nature, these events were widespread and open ended. They shattered and then recombined dozens of more local attachments. They exploded at a thousand points, leaping across boundaries of skill, gender, nativity, ethnicity, and race, winning the support of even those whose economic interests did not depend on the outcome.

Often enough, the mass strikes momentum sufficed to win concessions on wages, hours, and other working conditions although they might be provisional, not inscribed in contracts, and subject to being violated or outright ignored when law and order returned.

The mass strikes intense heat fused disparate elements into something ever more daring and generous. Indeed, its tactical repertoire which relied on the boycott and the sympathy strike embodied that vision. These weapons fit a worker-citizen movement whose social character and capacious programmatic embrace made it look like the kernel of a new commonwealth.

Boycotts and sympathy strikes expressed solidarity as an organized social emotion, as palpable reality, the spirit come to life. The form of the mass strike was its content, the medium the message.

Everything about them was unscripted. They had a rhythm all their own, syncopated and unpredictable as they spread from workplace to marketplace to slum. There was no central command, nor were they the result of some mysterious instance of spontaneous combustion. Each had dozens of choreographers, all directing local uprisings that remained elastic enough to cohere with one another while remaining distinct.

The program resisted easy codification. At one moment, it was about free speech, at another about a foremans chronic abuse, here about the presence of scabs and armed thugs, there about a wage cut.

Ranging effortlessly from a change in the piece rate to the nationalization of the countrys infrastructure, the mass strike defied the new order. Blunt yet profound, it defined the irreducible minimum of a just and humane civilization.

In so far as the mass strike had an ideology, it was ecumenical and apocalyptic. These early twentieth century syndicalist upheavals, from Brussels to Barcelona, St Petersburg to Seattle, constituted a freedom movement, bending the arc of social justice toward equality, solidarity, and emancipation.

During the Industrial Workers of the Worldled Paterson strike in 1913, Emma Goldman sent a message to the workers, promising that [w]hen all the textile workers, machinists, taxi cab drivers . . . join you in the general strike . . . which to all appearances is but a question of a few days, that would be death knell of the commercialism which has tried to crush human sympathy.

During World War I, all the combatant countries experienced a flood of strikes, some industry-wide, some convulsing whole cities. In the United States, Helen Keller advocated a general Strike Against the War.

This supercharged atmosphere gave rise to speculative thinking about how the strike could inaugurate a new world.

Talk of general strikes, political strikes, and mass strikes ran through all the left literatures: syndicalism, anarchism, socialism, and communism all devised various formulations that described an impending revolutionary crisis in which the strike performed heroics beyond the modest work-a-day improvements we now associate with Western trade unionism.

Big Bill Haywood, a founder of the IWW, explained how the strike functioned in the syndicalist schema. His 1911 pamphlet The General Strike compared it to the Paris Commune of a generation earlier.

The strike, he wrote, gives the vote to women, it re-enfranchises the black man, and places the ballot in the hands of every girl and boy employed in the shop. Wobblies advocated a peopled strike, a form of passive resistance on the job, and outright sabotage: two strategies for moving toward industrial democracy.

While committed to electoral politics as the leader of the American Socialist Party, Eugene Debs made no bones about the fact that the Pullman strike made him a socialist: through the gleam of every bayonet and the flash of every rifle, the class struggle was revealed and the whole apparatus of the state implicated. His comrade AM Simmons agreed: strikes, boycotts, lockouts, and injunctions are the birth pangs of a new society . . . and thereby rulership and slavery shall pass from the off the earth.

Rosa Luxembourg became the mass strikes seminal theorist, drawing heavily on the abortive 1905 Russian Revolution. She referred to the soviets the Russian word for popular assemblies as a political mass strike for freedom against absolutism. She wanted her experiences to serve as a corrective to the German Social Democratic Party (SPD), which drew a sharp distinction between the political and economic struggle and insisted on a central command structure.

Luxembourg drew a sociological correlative: in periods of heightened social fracture, she argued, the unorganized elements of the working class proved to be the most radical-minded. The mass strike, she wrote, on the whole does not proceed from the economic to the political struggle, or even the reverse.

In a letter to Karl Kautsky, a theorist close to the SPD leadership, Luxembourg saluted the European workers quiet heroism for their solidarity with their Russian compatriots and for their efforts to form worker-elected factory committees to run things without the help of trade union or party hierarchs. The German trade union establishment, however, saw the general strike as general nonsense.

George Sorel went furthest in transforming the strike into a kind of permanent apocalypse. By the time Reflections on Violence was published in 1902, the general strike had become a well-established part of working-class life.

Sorel recognized the general strikes transcendent character, which he thought leapt beyond the boundaries of the More, the incremental economic advances that chained the Left to bourgeois norms, a prisoner of envy and resentment. Mass strikes were simultaneously the moral equivalent of earlier forms of proprietorship, and the pathway to a heroic conception of life an epic state of mind.

Sorel and others felt that the modern worlds disenchantment expressed a deep human need for social dreams. Emotion and the poetry of life produced wisdom, not the rationalism so celebrated by utilitarian society, a faith in reason that much of the oppositional left also held. What Sorel admired in Marx was his catastrophic conception, his refusal to block out in advance some socially engineered model of the future society.

Revolutionary syndicalism, of which there were various renditions, was often understood to dispense with parliamentary methods in favor of violence. Instead, revolutionary violence served purely tactical purposes. Sorel and others, like Haywood, saw the general strike as a vehicle of democratic takeover, one that would avoid empowering a new managerial class, even a socialist one.

There was a millenarian thinking undergirding these conceptions. Like the Christian apocalypse, the general strike especially for Sorel carried moral inspiration, nurtured devotion, and would curb meaner instincts; a living myth through which virtue could take root. It would serve as a last judgment on what capitalism had wrought. The struggle needed no fixed objective; it served as its own justification. And it had the additional appeal that it refused compromise, rejecting equivocation and delay.

The strange enthusiasm continued to light up the labor movement through the Great Depression. Leon Trotsky praised the mass sit-down strikes in the United States not merely as a shrewd stratagem that would make it harder for the police and National Guard to direct violence against the workers, but also as a movement that would shake up the principle of bourgeois property.

Indeed, the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) again and again drew on the support networks in communities, among workers, and between merchants, neighbors, coreligionists, ethnic fraternal societies, and other organs of working-class life. The last truly general strike in the United States took place in Oakland, California in 1946. It began among low-paid women retail workers and, after 130,000 stopped work for two days, called for the unionization of the whole city.

From the 1930s onward, employers and the politicians who support them have ghettoized the strike, routinized and limited its political and social meaning and consequences. This was no easy task the labor movement and its opponents have both tried to enlist the state as an ally and weapon in such combat.

The incident that touched off the Oakland General Strike, as was true in just about every other mass conflict from 1877 onward, involved employer efforts to enlist the police and militia to tilt the balance of power toward capital. Management enlisted the police with the enthusiastic support of right-wing city fathers, strongly backed by William Knowlands Oakland Tribune as escorts for trucks and scab workers resupplying downtown department stores.

Luckily for the strikers, the resultant traffic jam stopped streetcars and buses, and their unionized drivers were soon outraged by the scab-herding police. All transport came to a stop, stores and factories closed, and jukeboxes were hauled onto the street to create a festive, communal air.

After shutting down the city for more than two days, the union movement turned its energies to politics. The resultant reforms did not quite represent a municipal revolution, but they did exemplify the close relationship of midcentury unionism and political power.

The same dynamic appeared on an even bigger scale in Detroit a year later when the United Automobile Workers (UAW), then the United States largest and most dynamic union, flooded Cadillac Square with more than a quarter million workers to protest the Taft-Hartley Act. Laborites called the new legislation a slave labor law; it curbed strike power and disqualified radicals from labor leadership.

Then as now, the demonstrations leaders were divided over tactics. The Left wanted to shut down factories so that American unions could deploy, as one top officer put it, the kind of political power which is most effective in Europe. More cautious unionists, led by the ex-socialist UAW president Walter Reuther, agreed on a huge demonstration, but wanted one that began after workers clocked out for the day.

Capitalizing on these internal divisions, and on the early Cold War hostility to labor radicalism and political insurgency, the auto companies took their pound of flesh. They fired key militants and ended the tradition of working-class strike demonstrations in industrial cities for the rest of the twentieth century.

Plenty of big strikes have taken place since then, but, for both employers and workers, they have been self-contained, insular affairs, whose impact no longer resonated with the social movements and currents still roiling the American landscape. This represented a huge victory for conservatives and employers, who no longer feared that the labor movement would enlist the community or even decisive elements thereof, such as feminists, Latinos, or African Americans.

Indeed, the consignment of unions to an economic interest group all too frequently put these institutions into opposition with the social movements of the 1960s and 1970s that sought to expand the content and scope of American democracy.

By the time Ronald Reagan smashed the PATCO strike in 1981, the unions had become isolated and vulnerable. The flight of capital out of production into finance and out of the country into the low-wage global South helped neuter work stoppages and collective bargaining.

The labor movement shrank in size and potency, emboldening conservatives to further undermine union power, as the wave of so-called right-to-work laws enacted over the past few years in several Midwestern states attests. During the last decade, unions have called only 143 strikes, compared to 3,500 during a similar time frame forty years ago.

And yet we cannot divorce politics from the quest for economic and social democracy. Even as the strike and collective bargaining have become almost entirely devalued, the same issues that animated radicalism a century ago remain front and center: economic justice and liberation, social inequality, the meaning of citizenship, and the democratic character of our governing institutions.

In the 1960s, even as intellectuals like C. Wright Mills and Herbert Marcuse began to turn away from the labor metaphysic, the strike in its classic, proletarian form still retained an imaginative grasp on leftists and reformers from Memphis to Paris. Martin Luther Kings very last campaign came in the form of a black municipal workers strike, the meaning of which transcended the stolid boundaries of midcentury collective bargaining and the outlaw struggle for union recognition in the public sector.

King wanted to create a transracial organization of the poor, using weapons honed not only in the civil rights movement but borrowed from radical labors arsenal as well. As he told the striking garbage men on the eve of his assassination, You may have to escalate the struggle a bit . . . just have a general work stoppage in the city of Memphis.

Six weeks later in Paris, a fleeting alliance of students and workers seemed like the manifestation of every transformative dream to emerge from the sixties. The events of MayJune 1968 shut down Paris and swept eleven million workers into its orbit.

George Sorel, relegated to infamy thanks to Mussolinis fondness for the theorists mystifications when he was remembered at all, suddenly appeared on everyones reading list, but now with a hedonistic flavor. Under the cobblestones, the beach! chanted the Parisian students who saw utopia in distinctly Californian terms.

A year later, even the liberals who had enlisted in and assumed leadership roles in the American antiwar movement deployed a strike ethos to advance their agenda. The 1969 Moratoriums to End the War in Vietnam, among the largest demonstrations of that decade, had originally been planned as shut-it-down strikes, scheduled for a workday.

The sixties passed half a century ago; the Wobblies more than a century. But ideas of popular resistance, collective power, strike action, and Ye are many they are few are enjoying a remarkable renaissance. The May Day strike is winning support not only from many unions but also from immigrant groups and others seeking to demonstrate the power of a resistant citizenry.

This action may have the wherewithal to translate the wishful thinking of the Occupy militants, of Francine Prose and Womens Strike organizers, of Black Lives Matter allies, and of all the grassroots mobilizing against the Trump regime into a more robust reality. The proletariat remains a powerful force even if its ranks and spirit have been severely depleted.

Indeed, these mobilizations may signal the awakening of a new proletariat, one less like the industrial workers of the twentieth century than the ancient Roman proletariat the discarded and disempowered, cast-off by postindustrial society. Like the unorganized in Rosa Luxembourgs imagination, they are ready for action, neither backward nor bourgeois. Working classes both the well and poorly rewarded, both the remnants of the organized and the sea of unorganized might yet launch a mass strike that can deliver a new and humane future.

The rest is here:

Which Way to the Barricades? - Jacobin magazine

Rockland Judith Lawson died April 18, 2017, at Maine Medical Center after a brief illness. Her good friends kept vigil at her bedside.

She was born Judith Wright Zillessen April 28, 1942. As a girl in Palm Beach, Fla., she was an avid steeplechase rider. She graduated from Georgetown University.

Judith was the first American woman sailor ever to start in the legendary Original Single-handed Trans Atlantic Race. About her countless exploits as a solo sailor and Outward Bound instructor on Hurricane Island she said: The question you ask yourself is, will I do this thing as I've planned and hoped, and have dreamed about doing, and the answer is the act of doing it.

She had a wanderers heart, a brave soul, and the calluses on her bare feet to prove it.

Judith also became a tireless advocate activist for the sustainability of our blue planet home. In her own words:

"Educated for the diplomatic service, I threw over wage-slavery to go sailing and see the world. Hand-picked in 1967 to be The Washington Post's sailing writer and outdoors columnist, I was there during the paper's halcyon years -- the Watergate investigation, learning by osmosis how to follow the money and spy unprofessionally while covering the world's major yacht-racing events for The Post, The (London) Daily Telegraph and The Toronto Globe & Mail. I edited and wrote for two small newspapers in Annapolis, Md., and one in Santa Fe, N.M., which was, shall we say, provocative (The New Mexico Broadside).

"I've jumped in over my head many times. The NM Broadside was far and away the most dangerous jump, moving me squarely into the uncensored investigative reporting that's always been my first calling. Mano a mano, our tiny little paper confronted the massive corporate powers that run Los Alamos National Laboratory, aka, the heart of the global nuclear weapons industry. Retreating bloody and shocked, I moved back to Maine to once again educate and inform readers about climate change, GMOs, pollution and other less explosive subjects and in 2013 organized a major event for 350.org. In September 2014, I was a part of the Peoples' Climate March."

She was also well grounded in energy-based healing. She practiced as a professional teacher of yoga, and she was a humble student of qigung. Yoga and qigung both intend to free up the energy of life Itself so that it can flow without obstruction through the body, heart and soul. She has now jumped in over her head into life Itself. May she find herself barefoot on a beach on the other shore.

She is survived by her brother, Jack Zillessen, of Jupiter, Fla.

All donations will go towards final arrangements and can be made online at youcaring.com/judithlawsonmemorialfund-810286 or by mail to: c/o Valli Geiger, 1 Green Way, Rockland, ME 04841

The community will hold a celebration in Rockland Sunday May 21, at 2 p.m., the site is to be announced and posted on Village Soup and on the Facebook pages of Judith Lawson and organizer Gretchen Kuhn.

More:

Judith Lawson - Courier-Gazette & Camden Herald (subscription)