نگاهی انتقادی به برنامه دومین کنفرانس بین المللی کارگران خودروسازی

To The Second International Automotive Workers Conference (IAWC)

We, a number of automotive workers in Iran, studied your draft of program of struggle for The Second International Automotive Workers Conference (IAWC). In our view, this draft is nothing but a reformist program written in an entirely unionist spirit to propagate trade unions as appropriate workers’ associations. Your draft is based on the cooperation of trade unions with the capitalist governments. This approach has nothing to do with the working-class interests and worsens the livelihood of the workers more than before. To achieve working-class demands, workers have to be organized in independent anti-capitalist organizations. We witness the incessant struggle of workers across the world even in despotic and suppressive capitalist countries such as Iran. But workers cannot achieve their demands, because their struggles are mostly subjugated to the spirit and program of trade unions.
When we emphasize on this weakness as the chief defect of the routine struggles of the working class, some critics protest claiming that some of the present workers’ achievements have been gained through the struggle of trade unions against capital. But in response to our question that where and when the unions have struggled against capital, they mention the European and American unions in nineteen century. True enough. In 19th century, European and American unions struggled for the reduction of work hours as well as increase of wages and succeeded in a number of cases. Most importantly, they founded the First International, which played a significant role in leading the international working-class struggles against capital. However, following the dissolution of this anti-capitalist organization and during the last decades of 19th century, the unions shifted towards reformism and started to become mere followers of political parties. Since then, there appeared a kind of duality in working-class organization. On the one hand, there were trade unions with the duty of leading reformist struggles through bargaining with employers and governments for wages nothing to shout about, and, on the other hand, there existed political parties with the aim of gaining political power through working-class struggles. This destructive situation is still continuing, and your conference seems to believe in the same duality.
The present conditions illustrate that most of the union leaders have been successful in servicing the capitalist classes and, in lieu of insignificant bargaining with employers, they have earned a bread that is buttered on both sides. Some of the union leaders are now the members of parliaments in Europe and US, representing a false representation of working classes. This elevation of the social status has occurred in a situation that in recent decades capital has attacked the livelihood of workers all over the world taking back a number of their historical achievements. This attack is manifested in the reduction of the retirement age, the daily growth of unemployment due to the use of various advanced technologies for obtaining higher profits (just today, Nov. 25, 2019, the automotive company Audi announced that, following its agreement with the related unions, 9500 jobs will be suspended in 2020), reduction of the governmental funds for health care and taking care of adults, suspension of child care centers, etc. Capital’s attack has occurred in front of the eyes of trade unions and their alleged millions of members, which are supported by your conference. Herein, it is necessary to mention some points in your draft that indicate your companionship with the unions’ reformism.
1-In paragraph 4 and elsewhere in the draft, you emphasize on the “multinational corporations” and “international monopolies” that deteriorate health in order to obtain maximum profits. Undoubtedly, these are the leading capitalist centers that exploit the working class and deteriorate the environment. But when you do not mention the medium and small companies as parts of capitalist class that benefit from exploitation of workers, you might imply that you are in companionship with these parts of capitalist class. Do not the medium and small capitalist companies play a role in workers’ exploitation and environmental deterioration?
2- In paragraph 5, you speak of promotion of “trade-union unity on a militant basis”. What do you mean by “militant basis”? If by militancy you mean struggling against capital, can a reformist association, which is based on cooperation with the capitalist class to control the anti-capitalist workers’ movement, struggle against capital?
3- In paragraph 9, through implicit support of the left capital and its affiliated parties and unions, you have indeed called the workers to become infantry men of the left capital against the right one. Here, too, you have given the workers a fright of the right side of bourgeoisie in order to give them a push to its left side.
4- Noting the spirit of the draft, it seems that you believe in worker as someone who works (manually) merely in industries, particularly large multinational industrial corporations. This conception of worker undermines working-class power, because it limits the huge population of the sellers of labour power to a small part of it. We define worker as the seller of labour power whose emancipation requires the annulment of the purchase and sale of labour power. In this sense, working class is comprised of all the wage slaves in different countries who are obliged to sell their labour powers to capitalists in lieu of wages, either manually or intellectually.
5- Finally, it seems that attacking private property is a red line in the draft. Nowhere in the draft you speak of the annulment of private property as a prerequisite of working-class emancipation. Is not this red line a sign of your companionship with a part of capital and its affiliated trade unions?

Regarding the above points, we suggest you to cancel the discussion of the draft and, instead, in addition to dealing with the special problems of automotive workers, discuss how the workers in general can be organized in alternative organizations in order to combat the purchase and sale of labour power. In our view, these organization are workers’ councils. Workers’ councils are anti-capitalist organizations that provide the possibility of maximum interference of wage labourers in workplaces, neighbourhoods and society at large. Their structures are bottom-up and based on direct and non-representational democracy in which even daily decisions are made on the basis of the participation of all the members including material and intellectual workers. In the cases that representation is unavoidable (mostly due to large populations), the representatives are accountable immediately and can be deposed at any time. In ordinary situation, the workers’ councils struggle for the workers’ demands, education, and elevation of workers’ self-consciousness. However, in revolutionary situation, they become the organ of administration of workplaces, neighbourhoods and society at large. In any case, a fundamental duty of any workers’ council is embarking on creation of self-reliance among the workers in order to struggle against capital through their own power. Thus, the general motto of every workers’ council is as follows: Dare to Stand on Your Own Feet!

A Number of Automotive Workers in Iran
Nov.25, 2019