ICC meeting: international revival of workers' struggles

[London Boy]

The thing is that none of the far left has any relevance to the vast majority of peoples lives, be it this ICC group, the anarchists, socialists or whoever else.

So it is even all the more comical seeing anarchists having a go at the ICC for being redundant and irrelevant when their groups are in the same position.

 

[In Bloom]

Alfredo, I'd say the biggest problem I have with decadance theory as put forward by the ICC is that it underestimates the resilliance of capitalism, that is to say, the ability of the ruling class to adapt to crises and turn them to their own advantage. I don't see it as a straight choice between a communist revolution or a total collapse into barbarism, which isn't to say that capitalism's reactions to crises don't generally result in the working class being fucked over, but I think capitalism would manage to survive quite well* without a massive social upheaval.

When it comes to actual struggles happening in the here and now, the ICC have written some interesting stuff, though I do think you'd benefit from thinking more about how your style of writing comes across to non-politicos.


*Barring the total destruction of human life, which I can't see happening in the near future.

 

[In Bloom]

Like In Blooms Liverpool postie, talking to whoever, inneffectually. Marxism isn't about unchanging theoretical approaches (EP Thompson said that the point of politics was to act, with effect) and it is a real problem for your praxis that you cannot ever put your theory into practice. A similar problem that some anarchists have too so do not feel attacked alone - i attack all, equally

The thing is that he is active in his own workplace, which kind of destroys the whole basis of your argument.

Birkenhead isn't in Liverpool by the way, it's on the Wirral

 

[Alfredo]

In Bloom: I agree that we should not underestimate the capacity of the ruling class to consciously adapt to its system's contradictions. In particular it has used state intervention and the manipulation of fictional capital to put off the crisis. But in doing so it only further exacerbates the contradictions - it doesn't abolish them. And the consequences for humanity for the unnatural prolongation of a senile social order are extremely grave, particularly at the level of almost perpetual war since the beginning of the 20th century, not to mention the growing threat to the environment. At the social level as well, barbarism isn't just for the future, it's already with us. A particular danger facing the working class is that the tendencies towards atomisation, gangsterisation, the break-up of social ties, etc. will increasingly bury the counter-tendencies towards solidarity and resistance to capital. I don't think we have an infinite time ahead of us to determine which tendency wins out.

 

[The Black Hand]

The thing is that he is active in his own workplace, which kind of destroys the whole basis of your argument.

Birkenhead isn't in Liverpool by the way, it's on the Wirral

No it does not. So what, the Trots are 'active' too. My point is that ICC theory is mistaken for different reasons to the Trots. It does not matter at all (not one little tiny bit) that he 'exists promoting a not working ICC theory'.

 

[In Bloom]

No it does not. So what, the Trots are 'active' too. My point is that ICC theory is mistaken for different reasons to the Trots. It does not matter at all (not one little tiny bit) that he 'exists promoting a not working ICC theory'.

Why do you keep putting quotes marks around random phrases in your posts? It's really off putting.

Anyway, the point is that the "do nothing" accusation is bollocks, as is the claim that the ICC are all about theory with no action.

 

[The Black Hand]

I put 'active' in speech marks to signify some literary space as to the meaning of 'active'. You know - when people waggle their index fingers in the air.

They have theory but my criticism was that it is 80 year old, made in different places and different times. That is why it is shite. But more than that, using misleading/mistaken/wrong theory ad infinitum in the Wirral without any reflexive monitoring is futile, and partly why people get burnt out.

We need to encourage a more open democratic process in theory building rather than the closed shop political parties (and anarchists come into this too) that passes for politics and culture today.

 

[lights.out.london]

**still digesting**

 

[In Bloom]

I put 'active' in speech marks to signify some literary space as to the meaning of 'active'. You know - when people waggle their index fingers in the air.

I meant this bit actually:

he 'exists promoting a not working ICC theory'.

 

[The Black Hand]

The postie exists, promoting the not working ICC theory. Getting no feedback and not progressing politically, he did not achieve praxis, which is the blending of theory with practice and developing said theory.

He did theory, no reply, more of the same theory, no reply.... so it could be argued that he did not even reach practice IF nobody is listening.

Politically practice IS NOT repeating the same rubbish week in week out, year after year, at some point the style of the approach becomes political and if that is OBVIOUSLY not working then it must be changed too.

 

[Alfredo]

ICC comrades played an active part in the recent assemblies in the anti-CPE movement in France. On a number of occasions our proposals for extending the movement were adopted by the assemblies. Why is this not praxis?

 

[The Black Hand]

ICC comrades played an active part in the recent assemblies in the anti-CPE movement in France. On a number of occasions our proposals for extending the movement were adopted by the assemblies. Why is this not praxis?

You know - that's the first political practice I have ever heard of/noticed the ICC do in 20 years. It sounds ok but I would like to know what happened before I give it the label praxis.

What happened to those adopted motions, did they work, did they not, what happened to the movement then, what happened to the ICC? Did it move on once it had its suggested motions adopted and not hang around for the results?

 

[Alfredo]

Here is an extract from an article on the ICC's intervention in the movement against the CPE which may answer some your questions (http://en.internationalism.org/wr/296_cpe_intervention)

Our intervention in the universities…
Thanks to the students’ spirit of openness, and to their ingenious initiative in putting out a “suggestion box” where all workers could put their proposals, ICC militants were able to intervene directly in the GA, first in Paris (especially in the faculties of Censier, Jussieu and Tolbiac), then in the other provincial universities. As soon as we went to the doors of the lecture theatres, as workers (paid or retired) and parents of students in struggle, to give our solidarity to the movement, we were welcomed with open arms. It was the students themselves who suggested that we speak in the GA, to give them our experience as workers and contribute our ‘ideas’. In all the universities where we were able to speak in front of assemblies of several hundred students, the concrete proposals we made were listened to with great interest and put to a vote and adopted. So, for example, on the 15 March at Censier, we proposed a motion that was welcomed and adopted by the majority. This motion called on the students in the GA to take charge of the direct and immediate extension of the struggle to the paid workers. It proposed that a leaflet to this effect be widely distributed, especially in the stations of the Paris suburbs. In the provincial universities (especially in Toulouse and Tours) our comrades intervened in the same way, proposing that demonstrations be organised to go to the enterprises, offices and hospitals, and that leaflets should be distributed in these demonstrations calling on workers to join the students’ struggle.

Our interventions in general assemblies have not had such an echo since May 68. The concrete proposals we made in all the GA where we intervened, with the aim of extending the movement to workers, were taken up by students and applied (even if saboteurs from the unions and leftists developed all sorts of manoeuvres to recuperate our motions in order to keep control of the movement, for example by making them disappear ‘discretely’ after the GA by drowning them in a multitude of proposals for superficial ‘actions’).

However, the students succeeded in partially thwarting these manoeuvres. The ‘ideas’ that the ICC has always put forward in workers’ struggles, for more than a quarter of a century, were put into practice by the students: they went to look for the active solidarity of workers by distributing leaflets appealing for solidarity and by sending massive delegations to the nearest workplaces (especially in the stations at Rennes, Aix or Paris). Above all the students understood very quickly that “if we remain isolated we will be eaten alive” (as one student at Paris-Censier put it). The movement was able to push back the bourgeoisie thanks to this dynamic to extend the movement to the whole working class, born from the openness of the general assemblies.

One of the proposals that we made, that of organising GA between students and striking university personnel, was also taken up (especially at Paris-Censier). However, the weak mobilisation of workers in the national education sector (which has not yet recovered from the defeat suffered in 2003) did not allow them to overcome their hesitations. The workers in this sector have not been in a position to join the students massively and put themselves at the head of the movement. Only a very small minority of lecturers has spoken in the GA to support the students in struggle. And it is necessary to recognise that where we have been able to intervene, according to our limited strength, the most courageous lecturers, the most solid with the students, those most convinced of the need to widen the movement to the workers in all enterprises immediately (without waiting for union directives) were essentially the militants of the ICC. [1]

Evidently, as soon as our proposals started to win a majority, and our comrades were identified as ICC militants, the unions and leftists started to spread all sorts of rumours in order to cause distrust, to retake control of the situation in the universities, and above all prevent those looking for a clear revolutionary perspective from coming towards the positions of the communist left. [2]

In the universities where our militants were presented as members of the ICC straight away we saw a classic manoeuvre to sabotage the openness of the GA to ‘outside elements’. So, at the Toulouse-Rangueil faculty (where the ‘national coordination’ was situated), our comrades who presented themselves at the door of the GA as ICC militants were forbidden from speaking by the praesidium controlled by the Trotskyists of the Jeunesse Communiste Revolutionnaire (youth organisation of the LCR of Krivine and Besancenot).

On the other hand, at the Mirail faculty, the interventions of one of our comrades who teaches in the university were welcomed enthusiastically. At the request of the students he made a presentation on the movement of May 68, explaining our analysis of the historic significance of the movement.

… and in the ‘coordination’ meetings
We also intervened in the meetings of the ‘national coordination’ on several occasions. On 4th March the ICC went to the entrance to the ‘coordination’ meeting which was held in Paris to distribute our press (which was welcomed by a large number of students) and attempted to intervene within the assembly. After two hours of debate the GA voted on the principle of allowing ‘outside observers’ into the hall, but without speaking rights.

However, faced with these politicians’ manoeuvres to close the GA and prevent us from speaking, numerous discussions took place among the students. It was essentially the non-union students, who did not belong to any political organisation, who were most determined to unmask the sabotaging manoeuvres of the UNEF and the leftists. At Paris-Censier the students decided to allow ‘outside elements’ to speak and to open the GA to workers who came to solidarise with their movement.

So our comrades, parents of students in struggle, were able to intervene in the 8 March meeting of the ‘Francilienne coordination’ to defend the necessity to widen the struggle by going to look for the solidarity of workers (especially in the public sector such as the SNCF, hospitals and post).....
Closer to home, here's an account of workplace activity during last year's big UNISON strike
http://en.internationalism.org/wr/294_unison