Max Shachtman
Archive
Marxist Writers’
Archives
From Labor Action, Vol. 14 No. 20, 15 May 1950, p. 6.
Transcribed & marked up by Einde O’Callaghan for the Marxists’ Internet Archive.
The leadership of the trade-union movement, particularly of the CIO, gives every indication of continuing to follow the same course in the field of political action in the 1950 elections as in the 1948 presidential elections. This course has the active or passive support of the membership, including its more militant sections, and even those who have in the past been generally sympathetic to the idea of an independent labor party. Short of a sharp turn in the political situation, the prospect for the formation of such a party or even the presentation of a labor ticket under trade union auspices, will give way in the 1950 elections to the prevailing policy of working for “friendly” candidates of the capitalist parties, primarily the Democratic.
This means that the labor movement continues to act as the left wing of the capitalist parties and not yet as an independent political movement. Our problem continues to be to break this left wing – the organized working class – away from the capitalist parties so that it can constitute itself as an independent class party. Our main political slogan therefore continues to be the formation of a labor party.
If, however, it appears in the pre-election period that the unions will follow their present, policy unaltered, and if the slogan of the left wing is not accepted by the union ranks, it is permissible, and under certain conditions necessary, to present to the ranks another slogan or proposal.
Where the policy of supporting the candidate of a capitalist party is adopted by the unions, it would be corect for the left wing, after a declaration that it retains its views on the labor party and recognizes the fact that its views have for the moment been rejected, to propose that the.unions at least put forward their own candidates for the nominations, chosen democratically by the membership, and organize a fight for these candidates, in the primary elections, as against the official nominees of the capitalist party machines – pledging its support of the union nominees if they win in the primaries. The left wing should certainly give aid and comfort to those militants who may make such a proposal independently and should even stimulate them to do so.
The aim of this proposal is to help arouse rank-and-file militants, by an appeal to their class feelings and their growing awareness of the organized political strength they have shown themselves able to muster and exert in recent elections, to support a line that will deepen and sharpen the conflict of interests between the bureaucracy of the official capitalist parties and the labor leadership that has attached itself to these parties, thereby contributing to a separation between them.
Consequently, it should not be identified with any of the customary agreements by means of which the official party machines promise their support of a trade-union leader for a minor office in exchange for the support by the trade-union movement of the machine candidates for major offices. It is precisely the major and outstanding offices which the left wing should propose that trade-unionists, responsible to the unions and chosen by them, shall contest against the capitalist machine candidates.
This being a new policy for the ISL, and one which is subject to opportunist interpretation, it is important to emphasize that:
Max Shachtman Archive |
Marxist Writers’ Archives |
Last updated on 8 January 2024