One of the Russian lefts wrote, arguing, that in Tunisia cannot win Islamists:
«In Tunisian revolutions, I remind you, the great role played trade unions. Where is the menace of the local Talib to come to the power?»
From this phrase I’ve got an impression, that the guy have learned history by putting the history book in his ass as a perfocard. Cos the first serious menace for the newborn October revolution were not the cossaks of Krasnov, but… the association of the railway professional unions — VikZhel. Krasnov with his couple of thousand cossaks was nothing, comparing with the anti-Soviet all-the Russian railway roads strike. And Hitler also had his own trade unions — does the name of the «DeutschesArbeiterFront» say nothing to the guy?
I open the first book, that I have under my hand — «K.M.Shatsillo „Russian Bourgouasie in the Period of the Civil War and Emigration 1917-beginning of 20-es“. M.Nauka. 2008»
1918 — in Irkutsk the czhecho-slovakian revolt, in Tomsk thesame time opens a counter-revolutionary Extraordinary Siberian Regional Congress to constitute a counter-revolutionary goverment. Trade unions participate it, but leave due to non-principal question — from 10 delegats of the railway trade unions the Congress admitted only 4 mandates. If they have admitted all the mandates, then the trade unions will come into Temporary Siberian Government — they have shown by the fact, that they had no disagreements with constitutional democratic and s-r parties (the main amti-Soviet forces).
1918. Kharkov. The «Council of the congresses of miner-owners of Russia» — the organisation of the masters of the coal mines — actively organise their meetings. «The fighting mood of the Council have lead nearly to arrest of the members of the teprorary presidium of the Council. But they were defended by the executive commitee of trade union „Metallist“, acting on his own initiative». (p. 157)
1918. Crimea. The Soviet of worker’s deputees has all the power, but the workers: «Has claimed the factories and shops the porperty of the workers and shop assistants, but the Mesaksudy factory has voted for the former owner as a comissar of the factory, and the shops only on the boards printed the names of the assistants, but the things have left to be the same as before». That are the examples, how trade unions love their masters and what «revolutionaly heroic deeds» they are capable.
It is the only book, ocasionally I have with me — at home I’ve got at least two shelves of books, I can get much more examples from.
Trade union can be quite reactionary, why cannot it be islamist (though there are plenty of this kind in Arabian countries)? Muammar Kaddafi has done it during many years — have interwisted the social demagogy with Islam. «Economic struggle» of Palestinians have been acting together with Hamas for many years — and trade unions haven’t conflicted with muslim imams. My advise is to have look at the green banners of trade unions in Muslim countries and stop to pray trade unions. Because the trade union plays the role of the negotiator in a trade between emloyers and employee, but not the leader of the worker’s class. Only a communist party can be such a leader. The trade unions always turn where the wind blow and will never piss against the wind.
Donate to translation — BTC 16x8ZWjmPXcyigi4WdhdN3urP12YU7Ph5B