Student struggleand

Assemblies of neighbourhoods

Internationalist Communists - Klasbatalo

3

Table of contents

Spring 2012 student movement

- An international economic crisis, drastic austerity measures worldwide ... and rising tuition

- The struggle against tuition fees is part of the struggle against capitalist attacks on our living

conditions

- Student unionism

- The student movement isolates itself and is isolated from the labor movement

- Social strike radical students and minorities

- The question of violence

- The beginning of the end: the elections mark the end of the movement and its defeat through

extensive student participation in those elections

- The summit on education and continuation of austerity measures

Autonomous Popular Assemblies of the neighbourhoods: our intervention in the APAQs

- ’Democracy’ gives birth to Bill 78

- The manifestations casseroles movement: the working class and the middle class in

solidarity with the student movement

- Democratic illusions and the civic “manifestations casseroles

- The casseroles seem to want to give themselves a political extension: creation of the APAQs

- The APAQs supported the student movement, but were also put in tow

- Autonomy according to the APAQs

- Struggles of tendancies: localism and anarchist individualism disrupt the APAQs

- The end of the wave of struggle, the drift to self-management

Annexes

General strike or electoral circus

The organisation of the proletariat outside periods of open struggle (workers' groups, nuclei,

circles, committees)

4

Spring 2012 student movement

This text won’t go into a precisechronology of the 2012 student strike.Instead, what we’ll present is a politicalanalysis of the struggle that unfolded lastyear. We intend this both as an assessmentof the movement, as well as a preparatoryt o o l f o r c o m i n g s t r u g g l e s .

An international economic crisis, drasticausterity measures worldwide ... andrising tuition.

Last spring’s student struggle againsttuition hikes wasn’t a bolt out of the blue.Since the 2008 US financial crisis, thedeteriorating economic situation hasbecome increasingly global andinternational in nature. Without gettingspecifically into the causes of theeconomic crisis - other texts provide goodexplanations1 - it is important tounderstand its consequences. Capitalism’scrisis is quite evident, simply in thegrowing loss of profitability of capitalistenterprise and the lack of opportunities,which necessarily entails a reorganizationof markets (through bankruptcy,concentration, etc.). For capital, this crisisis the moment of truth – a make or breaksituation – to ensure growing profitabilityfor business, in short, to fetch higherprofits than in the pre-crisis period. Thebourgeois solution to the crisis, as a lastresort, has always been and will always beimperialist war.

How to ensure higher profits? Clearly,

1 See the text of the Fraction of theinternational communist left:http://fractioncommuniste.org/ficci_eng/b42/b42_2.htmlAlso the file « Economic Crisis» ofInternationall Communist Current :http://en.internationalism.org/taxonomy/term/276Finally the texts of the InternationallistCommunist Tendency, such as:http://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2011-08-16/the-international-sovereign-debt-crisis

capitalist recovery of large parts of themarket, following the acquisition of thesmaller capitalists derailed by the crisis,puts it on track towards higher profits. Butthis comes down to the increasedexploitation of labour, of which the crisisis a pretext among many others, for boardsof directors to pull new profits out of a hatin the aftermath of an economic cataclysm.Increased exploitation is synonymous withausterity. And austerity is synonymouswith lower wages, longer working hours,delays and cuts to pensions, risingunemployment, etc. In short, for usproletarians, austerity means sacrifice,humiliation and a decline in livingstandards. This is what is happening on aninternational scale for workers: austerity inGreece, unemployment in Spain, pension‘reform’ in France to name just a few.

The state also plays a fundamental role inthe adoption of austerity. Being "thebourgeoisie’s executive committee"(Marx), the capitalist state reacts much likea captain of industry. Its watchwords arefiscal restraint, belt-tightening, andtrimming the fat, but also, and morefundamentally, as it directly affects ourliving conditions, cuts to social programs.Thus, politicians and the business sector,brandish the enormous state debt plaguingour society, against which we, as citizensfor the good of the nation (sic), must makesacrifices to resolve the crisis. It isimportant to raise a fundamental pointhere. The various national debts in theworld are symptomatic of capitalism’sadvanced state of decay. So, the bourgeoissolutions to the crisis, whether from theright (PLQ CAQ), or left (PQ2, QS), onlytemporarily defer a more violent crash tocome. Those on the right would cut allspending, causing unemployment andstagnation, but promote established big

2 For a lot of petty bourgeois militants, the PQis neo-liberal up until one has to decide in anelection booth between the PLQ and the PQ.The PQ quickly becomes less neo-liberal andrespectable ... like magic.

5

business over the long term. The left wouldfocus on state intervention for the welfareof the nation, aggravating national debtwhile pretending to lead and pacify theworkers with promises that capitalism canstill ensure them better days to come…until the next elections, a change of powerand new, even more drastic cuts resultingfrom debt exacerbated by the capitalist left.

In short, the economic crisis is at the coreof an upsurge in class struggle on aninternational level. Let's look at whathappened in Quebec last spring.

The struggle against tuition fees is partof the struggle against capitalist attacks

on our living conditions.

The tuition hikes announced for 2011 bythe Charest government, were hardlysurprising. Already, in 2005, the sameCharest had tried to cut student aid,causing one of the biggest student strikesto date. Charest ultimately backed down,but only to renew the attack two yearslater, in 2007, announcing an increase of$50 per year for five years. The trick, a‘small’ increase over several years, was toease that pill down students’ throats, whichworked rather well, as such an increasewas not likely to trigger massiveresistance.

With the five-year increase nearing itslimit, Charest decided to defer this inannouncing another tuition hike beginningin 2012. This time the pill was big – huge,in fact: a 75% hike over five years! Studentreaction was swift this time. From latewinter to early spring, college anduniversity students went on a massivestrike.

It’s important to emphasize that the logicbehind the tuition hikes is primarily one ofausterity. The basic principle of austeritymeasures employed throughout the worldtoday is to impose cuts everywhere – inprivate spending (wages) and in public

spending (social programs), in order torevive profits. Quebec is no exception. Inits role as the Quebecois bourgeoisie’s"executive committee", all the Charestgovernment is asking is for students totighten their belts, to "make an effort" togive capital some leeway, so that it canpull itself out of the current slump.

But what does this "little effort" of 75%increase represent for a large number ofstudents? First of all, this represents anincrease in debt, which on one handmortgages the lives of many young peoplefor several years, and on the other leads tohigher profits in bank capital on the backsof these students. Secondly, the need totake on menial jobs becomes moreuniversal among students to make endsmeet. This is already a harsh reality forstudents from proletarian families. Butnow it also affects the middle classes andthe petty bourgeoisie. In short, students ingeneral are becoming proletarianized. Thestudent / worker is a boon for thebourgeoisie. He often works for minimumwage, or close to it, with flexible hours – atypical mainstay in the service industry, forexample.

It goes without saying that the 2012 strikewas primarily a strike against thehumiliation and sacrifice on the altar ofcapital. For most striking students living ona tiny income, often having to bear thestress caused by debt, constantly jugglingbetween work and study… and for thecapitalist state to say "make an effort, doyour fair share ', was simply the last straw.That, among other things, proletarianizedthe students, giving the strike its massiveand rad ica l po l i t i ca l na ture .

Student unionism

This movement first began through the“Coalition large de l’Association pour uneSolidarité syndicale (CLASSE)”. Itsstudent union members went on strike first.Subsequently, the Quebec Federation of

6

College Students (FECQ) and its universitycounterpart, the Quebec Federation ofUniversity Students (FEUQ) followed suit.Although the movement was more or lessprepared in advance by the student unionbureaucracy, in particular l‘ASSE, themassive character of the movementshowed that it was, in fact, the student base"spontaneously" set in motion .

Let’s take a closer look at the studentunions. The FECQ-FEUQ represents theright-wing of the trade union movement,an elite corporatist establishment that seeksprivileges for its members throughgovernment negotiation. They have ahistory of frequent close relations withvarious governments and patronage of theParti Québécois. They also have a traditionof restraining and channeling theenthusiasm of the student movement, thenliaising with the government to negotiatedeals on the backs of students.

The FECQ-FEUQ did not betray its owntraditions during the movement of 2012. Itsmain function during the strike was topacify the student struggle. We saw theleader of the FECQ, Léo Bureau-Blouin,playing the role of the police by constantlycalling for calm and respect for order,while students rightly challenged thecapitalist order. It was even sometimesdifficult to differentiate between the speechof Bureau-Blouin and Ian Lafreniere, headof communications of Montreal PoliceService (SPVM). Of course, the media andbusiness milieu quickly made darlings ofthem. Students also soon realized that theFECQ-FEUQ had entered the movementbelatedly, under pressure from its base,intending to put an end to it as quickly aspossible. In this sense, the FECQ andFEUQ represent the most hypocriticalaspec t o f s tuden t un ion i sm.

Regarding l’ASSE, the left wing of thestudent movement, the problem is morecomplex. Indeed, CLASS is oftenportrayed by the media as the radical

organization of the student movement.Unlike the FECQ and FEUQ, CLASSEadvances a project for society. For severalyears, it championed the principle of freeeducation at all levels. These positions, inaddition to more combative tactics, ascompared with FECQ and FEUQ, ensurethat more students still have greatconfidence in CLASSE to represent theirinterests and to provide a tool for socialtransformation.

But what is the CLASS program other thanthe capitalist left adapted to students’realities? Indeed, it represents this ratherutopian, not to mention reactionary,political current that aims to transformneo-liberalism to "capitalism with a humanface." The demand for free education isquite instructive in this regard. CLASSEassumes that the state, (obviously, for thecapitalist left, the state is neutral, andtherefore above social classes), shouldfinance public education in order to makeit accessible. The mission of nationaleducation, therefore, is to educate citizens;and this national civic education is part ofa process of emancipation. So, forCLASSE, education financed by thebourgeois state is a step towardse m a n c i p a t i o n . . .

The dilemma is this: emancipation ofhumanity through transformation at theroot of society, or ‘emancipation’ throughsocial mobility afforded by highereducation for certain privilegedindividuals? Here’s the rub, sinceobviously CLASSE fights for the latter.

In short, throughout this strike, studentunions put the brakes on the movement.From the right came hypocritical appealsfor calm, with students constantlysubjected to state violence at the hands ofpolice. From the left, the mobilization ofstudents under an illusory program ofreformist capitalism full of emptypromises. Furthermore, student unions dideverything to contain students within the

7

framework of the fight against tuitionhikes. For students, or at least the mostradical amongst them, the real issuesbecame increasingly clear: austerity, crisisof capital, anti-capitalism, police brutality,a frontal fight against the State – in short,issues surpassing simple studentcircumstances to become increasinglyproletarian and revolutionary. Meanwhile,student leaders debated over and overagain and again over university funding,taxation, free education and elections!

The student movement isolates itself andis isolated from the labor movement.

Throughout our involvement in the studentstruggle, we've had as the leitmotif thatstudents alone, facing the government,could not aspire to impart anytransformation on society. Thus, it wasnecessary for them to broaden theirstruggle to other sectors of society,especially workers, the only trulyr e v o l u t i o n a r y s o c i a l c l a s s .

Clearly, student leaders who make a virtueof union corporatism never thought to callfor worker solidarity with students. Notonly had they never addressed it, but theydid everything to prevent this fromoccurring in their ranks. They had beenensuring that students keep their nosesfixed on their immediate economicinterests, as the struggle becameincreasingly political, going beyond meres t u d e n t i s s u e s .

It must be said that there were goodinitiatives on the part of the radical studentbase, initiatives that showed great promise,but unfortunately would be short-lived.Here, we can give the example of studentsdemonstrating in solidarity with Aveosworkers, a company in the aerospacesector, which had announced layoffs.

But if students remained isolated fromworkers, it is not so much their fault. Thefault lies more with the major unions and

their utterly reactionary actions during thestrike. First of all, union bosses had agreed,at Prime Minister Charest’s request, to sitat the student-government negotiatingtable. Charest's gesture was not withoutsignificance. He knew very well that theunion bosses were specialists at sabotagingstruggles. Moreover, they complained ofthe triumphalist attitude of Jean Charest inthe aftermath of the negotiations. ForMichel Arsenault, President of the FTQ,“when you catch a big fish and someoneasks you where you caught it, you answer,in the lake, and keep your trap shut aboutit. It’s the same in the aftermath of anegotiation, the employer remains silentuntil the end of the vote. It is notcomplicated; you keep your mouth shut!”3

In short, union bosses offered no solidaritywith the student movement, on thecontrary, they participated in thepreparation of negotiations for a bogusagreement, (82% increase over 7 yearsinstead of 75% over 5 years!), lateroverwhelmingly rejected by the studentsboth in their general meetings and on thestreet.

But that’s not all. With les manifestationscasseroles movement, the idea of a "socialstrike" caught on more and more. Manyworkers voted at their union meetings forthe initiation of a social strike. Themovement was so impressive and massivethat the base of the National Confederationof Trade Unions (CSN), one of the threemajor unions, adopted a mandate for asocial strike. Union tradition: union leadersprevaricated throughout the remainder ofthe conflict, saying they were questioningtheir base on the issue of a social strike,even though the mandate had already comefrom the base! In short, what better way tosabotage a movement than to nip it in thebud?

3 André Frappier, Richard Poulin, BernardRioux, Le printemps des carrés rouges, Méditeur, collection mobilisations, 2012¸ p. 104

8

Worse, the bureaucrat-in-Chief of theFederation des Travailleurs du Quebec(FTQ), Michel Arsenault, ensured with hisCanadian counterpart, Ken Georgetti, theboss of the Canadian Labor Congress, theCanadian equivalent of the FTQ, that therest of Canada would not meddle inQuebec’s affairs. Under the smokescreenof jurisdiction and spheres of influencepresented as the responsibility of each ofthe unions within their own nationalborders, it was the solidarity of Canadianworkers and students with Quebec workersand students that they wanted to silence atall costs. The exchange between these twosocial firefighters is quite instructive in thisregard.

Here are some excerpts: Arsenault calls hisCanadian counterpart about rumorsconcerning English Canadian unionizedrank and file workers and their willingnessto help thier peers in Quebec. Arsenaultsays “that the union activities andstrategies in Québec are to take placeexclusively under the responsibility of theFTQ”4 In other words, it means don’t comeand stick your nose in our affairs, andpacify your membership. Georgettiresponds: "I know that all affiliates andfederations respect the jurisdiction of theFTQ in their province and hope that theserumours are just rumours and not facts."5

In other words, to hell with solidarity, wewill deal with these overly radicalinsubordinates!

Arsenault continues regarding the struggleagainst law 78: "As well, more radicalwings are calling for social strike and wedo not believe that it is THE strategy to bepromoted for the moment. (…) We thinkthat at the moment, the best approach is tofacilitate a settlement instead of fueling thefires. It is in fact possible that theGovernment and student associations meet 4 To see the original letter :http://zinelibrary.info/files/FTQ-Students-2012-05-28-EN-1.pdf5 To see the original letter : idem

early in the week for a round ofbargaining ; we believe that it is necessaryto foster for this operation to besuccessful."6 Arsenault not only sabotagesthe solidarity that arose in English Canada,but increasingly jams sticks into the wheelsof a movement that tries more and more toescape the trade-union stranglehold.

These strike votes and initiatives ofsolidarity within the union bureaucracydemonstrate once again the high degree ofillusions of the working class towards theunions. Let’s hope that this umpteenth"betrayal" of the CSN and FTQ willdestroy these illusions! But let’s learn fromthis experience. We should have attempted,wherever possible, to establish strikecommittees outside and against the unionsin the workplace. Thus, the mass strikeagainst the government from theperspective of radical transformation ofs o c i e t y c o u l d b e p o s s i b l e .

Social strike radical students andminorities

In summary, the "social strike" failedmainly because Labour was not put onstrike.And if workers didn’t go on strike, itis mostly through the consciouslycalculated inertia of large unions.

But there was also a lot of ambiguity in thevery concept of the social strike. Nobodymuch knew what it was referring to. To us,it seemed pretty clear that the proponentsof this tactic had a rather clear idea of thenature of the call for a social strike. Thistactic was put forward by trade unionistsand the capitalist left. They basicallywanted to hold a nice little mini-strike,according to union tradition, of a few daysin some key sectors of the economy insolidarity with the students and to "driveout the neo-liberals" from government. Theneo-liberal political parties in Quebec arethe Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ), the

6 idem

9

Liberal Party (PLQ) and, depending oneach other, and the Parti Québécois (PQ).Note that the concept of neo-liberalism isone of variable geometry, especially withregard to the PQ.7 In short, if the ultimategoal of a social strike is to drive out neo-liberals, it is also logical that thegovernment wants to install the PQ andensure strong representation in QuébecSolidaire (QS). The program of theseparties is essentially that of "capitalismwith a human face" and this program hasnothing to bring to either workers orstudents. So always beware of those whopoint towards neo-liberalism and that aloneas the defect of present society, as such aposition inevitably implies that anothertype of capitalism is desirable. For us,workers, students, unemployed, this is nott h e c a s e .

Still, students demonstrated a certainradicalism. Many remained completelyindependent and wary of bourgeoispolitical parties, even those parties on theleft, although this spirit unfortunatelydisappeared the day the elections wereannounced. So, students shut the door onparliamentarism throughout most of thestrike, right up until parliamentarismswung the door wide open in their faceswith the elections. In addition, more youngpeople voted overwhelmingly in the 2012elections despite the fact that this segmentof the population is usually ratherabstentionist.

Another positive aspect was the traditionof mass demonstrations in the evenings.These demonstrations took place every dayfor several months. Invitations were sentthrough social networks. It was not unusualto see processions of a few thousand 7 We maintain the term variable geometry forthe PQ since for a lot of petty bourgeoismilitants, the PQ is neo-liberal up until one hasto decide in an election booth between thePLQ and the PQ. The PQ quickly becomesless neo-liberal and respectable ... like magic.

people meandering through the streets ofMontreal into the wee hours of themorning. Apart from the massive nature ofthese events, more importantly from therevolutionary point of view was thepolitical character of these demonstrations.Each demonstration had its themeaccording to developments in the struggle.If student leaders had just negotiated anagreement, we took to the streets thatevening to say overwhelmingly that theagreement was unacceptable. If a studenthad been seriously injured by police duringan action, we went out into the streets thatevening to denounce police brutality ands ta te v io lence , and so on .

The question of violence

Violence was pervasive throughoutduration of the strike. Indeed, the studentmovement was faced with state /policerepression unleashed. First of all, thehypocrisy of the bourgeois media shouldbe noted here. During the strike, theyfervently denounced ‘violent studentprotests’ as they turned a blind eye, or evenapproved, police violence. It must be saidthat the violence on the part of the studentsamounted to legitimate self-defense againstvery aggressive agents of law enforcement,vs. broken windows or minor damage tostreet fixtures. However, police / state /judicial violence was significant, withhundreds injured, pepper-sprayed, tear-gassed, beaten, some severely injured(partially blinded, jaws smashed, to givejust a few examples), constant socialprofiling and finally, around 3400 peoplearrested or criminalized!State violence against the studentmovement reminds us that the use ofviolence is a basic necessity forrevolutionary militants. Not that its use is avirtue in itself, but rather because stateviolence forces us to use violenceourselves. The bourgeoisie and its agencyof enforcement, the state, insist that itssystem of domination and exploitationshould last forever. And it uses violence

10

unscrupulously to achieve this end. Tooverthrow the bourgeois system, one cannot do without the use of violence, notwithout condemning ourselves toimpotence and defeat.8

Many students understood this and did nothesitate to defend themselves against thepolice and sometimes even to counter-attack (for example, the Salon Plan Nordriot). The issue of violence also helpedclearly identify class division in theopposing political camps. One of these wasthe side of order: the state in general, theCharest government, the police, the media,opposition parties, trade unions, etc. On theother side we had “disorder” and“anarchy": striking students and those insolidarity with the working class and themiddle class. This clear separation offorces also highlighted the struggle’spolitical nature, namely, a frontal attackagainst the bourgeois state.

Then there’s the “paci-flics” episode,another important occurrence. Some ratherreactionary pacifist students took up thedeplorable practice of physically andverbally attacking militants who usedcertain forms of violence – even handingthem over to police. The majority ofmilitant participants in the demonstrationspromptly denounced these police-likeactions, scathingly branding these studentzealots "paci-flics".

The beginning of the end: the electionsmark the end of the movement and itsdefeat through extensive studentparticipation in those elections

The police crackdown never overcame thestudents nor those supporting them (themanifestations casseroles, among others).The movement showed tenacious

8 On the issue of violence, see the textInternational Communist Current« Terrorism isan instrument of imperialist war».http://en.internationalism.org/node/1475

perseverance and courage for severalmonths. But police repression was not theonly weapon in the government’s arsenal.Judicial repression also battered thestrikers, with the Court legally supporting"student scabs". But it was never enough.The movement remained strong evenduring a long hot summer, less than idealconditions for motivating militancy.

The movement, because it was massiveand continuous, can not simply be guttedby force and a law-&-order agenda, thebourgeoisie and its state must thus take itover by making sure to remove anything ofsubstance. The student movement couldnot be brought into line, so long as itremained in the street. So it was forced intothe ballot box. In the streets, it could enjoya certain political and ideologicalindependence with regard to the capitalistleft. And so political radicalism, anexpansion of questioning beyond thesimple matter of tuition and even a risingconsciousness, pitting the class struggleagainst capital, began to take shape.However, with the elections and the call tovote for a new government, the students,along with the rest of the populationfollowed, and many activists fell into a trapthat they had up till then avoidedbeautifully.

The trap was in falling back into theharmless and restrictive debate on tuition,and abandoning the wider political issues,such as capitalist austerity, its internationalcharac te r . The s t r ic t ly l ega lparliamentarism ensured that themovement was brought in line and guttedthrough the September elections. On theone hand the PLQ and CAQ representedthe political wing of the bourgeoisie withcalls for repression and maintenance oforder. Charest tried, unsuccessfully, tocampaign on the theme of law & order. Onthe other hand, the PQ and QS played therole of scavengers – the left wing of thebourgeoisie, in other words – for which itwas important to address some student

11

demands, tuition of course, but in any caseit was to stop the struggle at all costs so asto avoid its engulfment of social peace.Pauline Marois, head of the PQ, essentiallycampaigned on the cancellation of tuitionhikes. It is worth noting that even CLASSEparticipated in the electoral circus that putan end to the strike. Indeed, with its sloganof "Neo-Liberals Out !", it implicitly calledfor strikers to vote QS and even PQ!

The PQ was elected, and announced thatthey would cancel the increase in tuitionfor 2012-2013, which was done. Thestudent strike, already winding down sincethe announcement of the elections, andalong with it, the spirit of solidarity that itaroused in other segments of society,especially workers and the middle classes,was stopped cold. Many cried victory.However, we do not share this opinion.Certainly, at the economic level, thecancellation of the tuition hike is a relieffor students. But this relief will be short-lived, since other attacks against the livingstandards of students are on the horizon,with either the PQ or PLQ in power.

One can judge the results of a struggle bythe degree of reinforcement of classconsciousness, unification of activists, byexpansion of struggles to a more globallevel both territorial and political, and byactions, strikes, by increasingly massivedemonstrations directed head-on againstthe state. The movement of 2012 workedin this direction for several months.However, it ended with a cry of victory,united behind Pauline Marois, symbol ofthe end of the struggle and scavenger ofthe capitalist left.The student strike of 2012 had goodprospects for long months, but ended withscraps.

The summit on education andcontinuation of austerity measures.

After their election, the PQ decided to holda summit on education in February 2013.There, they called on the business sector,university directors, students, and other"stakeholders". This summit is a farce, ofcourse, more likely to discuss a futureincrease in fees in one form or other, ratherthan the real issues affecting students. --Allthe questions about capitalism that studentsraised during the strike, having beeneliminated from the debate. This summitwould serve only to hammer the last nail inthe coffin of the strike movement.

Moreover, the PQ wasted no time in takingover from the former Liberal government.Indeed, capitalist austerity need not evenchoose between political stripes, as the PQcontinues in the same reactionary vein asthe Liberals. Hardly two months haspassed, and the new government hasalready begun to drop its campaignpromises “caviar left”for the well-heeledleft, (capital tax for example) and we starttalking about cuts and rate increases (as inHydro-Québec). In their demolition of ourliving conditions, the PQ presentlyresumed its work of 19969 and the work ofnearly ten years of Liberal government.G o v e r n m e n t s a r e p r a c t i c a l l yinterchangeable.

Thus, although government hastemporarily and partially met studentdemands, capitalist austerity measuresimplemented by the bourgeoisie continuesand will continue to overwhelm us, 9 At that time, the PQ government of LucienBourchard was launched according to thesame capitalist logic of austerity as the one wesee today, with its program of « zero deficit »The bourgeoisie simply wanted to reduce thedebt by cutting social programs and the wagesof employees and State workers. Thisdemolition program of our living conditions wasapproved by the unons in a spirit of nationalunity to safeguard « the Quebec economy’, inshort, the Quebec bourgeoisie.

12

students, workers and unemployed, alike.This austerity is felt by proletarians of allcountries, without exception. There will beno quebecois solutions to Quebec austerity,just as there are no Greek solutions to theeconomic crisis in Greece. We will prevailonly by imparting an international andinternationalist character to our struggle.

Autonomous Popular Assemblies of theneighbourhoods: our intervention in theAPAQs

’Democracy’ gives birth to Bill 78

At the beginning of summer, the Liberalgovernment of Jean Charest found itself ina particularly awkward situation. Indeed,the student movement, after severalmonths of bitter struggle, maintained itsinspiration and fighting spirit. The initialgovernment tactic, a combination ofbullshit and deaf-ear negotiations,generally proved unable to quell thestudent movement.

The government then took the initiativewith Bill 78 (now Bill 12) a notch up inrepression. Clearly, the student movementhad already undergone repression,brutalized daily by police, but this provedlargely ineffective. Rather, police brutalitycontributed often to a certain radicalizationof the student rank and file. Bill 78 was togive political and legal legitimacy to thepolice in intensifying its crackdown againststudents and those who supported theirmovement.

The content of this law is quite clear in thisregard. It was a first step in practicallycriminalizing demonstrations. For thepowers that be, it was an attempt to put anend, once and for all, to the daily massdemonstrations that had so farcharacterized the movement. As a secondstep, the law called for ridiculously steepfines for activists who did not comply. Theidea was to hit them where it hurts, right inthe throat of individuals who were already

financially vulnerable: the proletarianstudents and the workers who supportedthem.

It should be noted that this is the good old‘democracy’ that set this particularlyrepressive law into motion. The role of‘democracy’ is to pacify the socialantagonisms, of class struggle, in theinterests of the ruling class, of course, andits system of exploitation, capitalism.When this doesn’t work, democracy resortsto a baring of its teeth and truncheons. Asit stands, this situation in fact rendersobsolete these current trendy movementssuch as Demokratia Real,Ya! and Occupywhose first line of business is thedemocratization of capitalist society. Boththe student movement and the manifscasseroles movement had to deal withthese sorts of petty bourgeois pitfallshoping to democratise bourgeoisdemocracy.

The manifestations casseroles movement:the working class and the middle class insolidarity with the student movement.

The Charest government thought to maybeturn the page on this in a few weeks withits truncheon law, but the oppositehappened. In fact, the unjust and coldlyrepressive nature of Act 78 resulted in amassive wave of popular sympathytowards the students. Spontaneously, inMontreal neighborhoods, as well as inseveral other cities in Quebec, peoplebegan banging on their pots & pans indaily protest against the government andits repressive law.

 For the first time since the beginning ofthe student strike, the movementsuccessfully expanded to other segments ofthe population. With the manifestationscasseroles movement, students were nolonger isolated against the State. Broadmasses of workers and middle class peoplethen joined the movement alongside themto lend a hand.

13

From this point, the mass demonstrationsmushroomed. In addition to the daily andnightly student protests from the citycenter, processions arose spontaneously invarious Montreal neighborhoods, to theclang and clamour of pots & pans.Processions meandered through Montrealstreets, and finished by coming together. Amarch would begin with 150, often endingup with 5,000 or more!

All this was done, it must be remembered,under constant threat of repression, sincespontaneous demonstrations were nowtheoretically illegal. In the demonstrationswe shouted "La loi spéciale, on s’encaliss!" (“We don’t give a fuck about theemergency law!”). It showed a beginningof understanding in the masses that thestruggle should not comply with the lawand must go headlong against the State orbe doomed to failure and / or takeover. Butillusions, especially on the issue ofdemocracy, remained very much alive.

Democratic illusions and the civic“manifestations casseroles” movement.

Under the amorphous guise of a supposedcitizens' movement, the manifestations lescas se ro l e s movement was mostlycomprised of workers and middle classpeople, not to mention the many students.However, the petty-bourgeois ideology ofthe middle class instantly gained the upperhand over the demands and proletarianobjectives, which explains the democraticand civic illusions of the manifestationsc a s s e r o l e s movement. Illusionsundoubtedly fostered by the government tokeep the manifs casseroles harmless. Eventhe then Finance Minister, RaymondBachand, supported the m o u v e m e n tcasseroles: "Although the events of themanifestations les casseroles are designedto show outrage at the policies of the state,we can wonder about the outcome.”Finance Minister Raymond Bachand,meanwhile, welcomed the protests as a

creative and festive way to voice opinionwithout harming the tourist image of thecity. This is what he said to a conference ofmen and women in business in Montreal.10.In fact, the petty bourgeois illusions aboutthe reform and validation of democracyhad gotten its paws on the movement.Instead of seeing liberal democracy as awell-functioning system of domination ofthe proletarian masses, as many radicalizedminorities began to perceive it, themajority of the manifestations casserolesdemonstrated for ‘democracy’, for itsoverhaul. It’s come down to some ratherhilarious political nonsense: billy-clubdemocracy, imprisonment, months of legalwrangling and one sorely frustrated middleclass ’bobo’ takes to the streets to beg formore democracy or ‘real’ democracy!

The manifestations casseroles movementwas thus crossed by antagonism andserious political divisions. The majority,the reformist oriented petty-bourgeois andgood child of the middle class, led themovement with its program for QuébecSolidaire. The minority, radicalizedactivists, often workers and students, beganto perceive the importance of politicalorganization to wage a frontal struggleagainst liberal democracy and its state, theonly way to lead the class struggle begunby students to victory .

The casseroles seem to want to givethemselves a political extension: creationof the APAQs.

And so, the radical militant fringe of thecasseroles movement took the initiative tocreate and organize neighborhoodmeetings in an attempt to provide a morepolitical character to the casseroles. Suchmeetings were created quickly in all ofMontreal’s proletarian neighborhoods(notably in Hochelaga, South Central, 10 Extract from our tract General strike orelectoral circus? See the annex.

14

Villeray and Rosemont neighborhoods ofthe southwest, etc.). Their manifesto,provisional but common to all, wasopposition to Bill 78 as well as support forthe student movement.

These meetings were above all a place fordiscussion and organization of politicalactivities in connection with the studentstrike. As we have already noted above, themanifestations casseroles, and its logicalextension, the APAQs, represented anextension of the movement started bystudents in other sections of society. Themilitants congregated in APAQs had tonow ask the question: "What do we donow?" Of course, consideration wasprimarily focused on the student movementand the struggle against political / policerepression. But a more advanced reflection,namely about capitalism and itsexploitative nature, also attempted to rise.

The APAQs supported the studentmovement, but were also put in tow.

A major weakness of APAQs, which alsocame to light early on was that the majorityof militants had become partially blinkeredby the student strike. Indeed, rather thanthinking about how we could extend thestrike to the workplace, to factories, totransport, it considered only how to bringabout a "citizens” solidarity with thestudents, namely, a simple solidarity, interms of attendance at demonstrations andon picket lines. This solidarity wascertainly beautiful, but it was not enoughin terms of struggle and the balance ofpower against the state. If the students lost,it is also partly because they remainedalone in the struggle – in short because thestrike was never extended to other sectorsof society.11

To illustrate our point: Take for example a 11 Obviously, the unions did everything toensure that it didn’t happen.

worker from the STM. Neighbourhoodparticipation, solidarity activities with thestudents through demonstrations is a goodthing, but not enough. The best test ofsolidarity would be that one would pushone’s comrades at work to strike in turn.This necessarily involves struggle againstthe unions, which behave more like a fire-brigade at a barbecue than pyromaniacs inthe class struggle!

In the APAQs instead to looking at howwe, ourselves, could take action by strikingat our own work places, the majority ofmilitants, however, tagged along behindthe student movement. Everything wasdone only in the direction of and for thestudent movement.

Autonomy according to the APAQs

The APAQs were formed according to avery important principle of revolutionaryperspective. – The autonomy of assemblieswith respect to parliamentary politicalparties, and also in relation to the state.Some call this the non-partisan caviar left,others call it apolitical (anarchism). Weprefer the term independence of theworking class and other non-exploitinglayers against the bourgeoisie and its Stateparties. The first two terms being onlypetty bourgeois distortions of the latter.

The principle of autonomy at the base ofthe APAQs looked promising at first.Indeed, that mass unitary politicalorganizations see themselves clearly inopposition and independent of the currentorder and its political forces, is veryencouraging. It was also one of the firststeps toward unifying organizations, givingAPAQs a potentially revolutionarycharacter. We must remember the exampleof the workers' councils!

On the other hand, autonomy according tothe APAQs, became another thingaltogether. Indeed, rather than talkingabout political autonomy against the state,

15

individual autonomy became the dominantideology of the APAQs. This frenziedindividualism curbed and politicallyimmobilized the APAQs, rendering themunable to make collective decisions and toact in an organized and unified fashion inthe struggle.

The majority viewed these assemblies asan aggregate of like-minded individualsrather than a unified organ to equipworkers in times of struggle to take actionas a class, thus in a collective manner. Aswell, here we find the best example of thisnegative vision from the point of view ofmilitantism based on individualism:"Everyone is free to invest in projects thatinterest them and to think as they please:APAQ never takes a stand on behalf ofthose who comprise it. Thus, one can notspeak or represent others in the name ofAPAQ, since it would be proprietary tospeak for others. According to thisreasoning, every person who creates linksbetween APAQ and other groups does soas an individual. "12

What’s the use of organizing if one can noteven take a position as an organization?Might as well stay in one’s room talking tooneself, "unsullied" by a an assembly!What’s more, making connections fromorganization to organization, in a personalmanner, i.e. by affinity creates theproblems of behind-the-scene game-playing. Indeed, rather than transparency,discussions and decisions arrived at inmeetings, individual initiative, with noaccountability, takes over, so we areplunged into peer relationships with littlepolitical insight.

12 Des casseroles aux assemblées de quartier,in Relations, numéro 761, décembre 2012, p.6-7.

Struggles of tendancies: localism andanarchist individualism disrupt theAPAQs.

This individualistic spirit dominating theAPAQs was right at home with themajority of militants, who were stronglyinfluenced by anarchism. With the collapseof Stalinism misleadingly calledcommunism by the ruling class) at the endof the last century, anarchism was awardedthe monopoly of more ‘radical’ socialprotest. This proved to be the case in theAPAQs as well. The old Maoism andTrotskyism fortunately are no longerfashionable. Now, unfortunately,Anarchism has the wind in its sails.

But anarchism, with its inherentindividualism, is also as harmful toworkers’ struggles as Maoism andTrotskyism. Its anti-organization approachimpedes and disarms militants in struggle.The proletariat possesses no element offorce in capitalist society. The bourgeoisie,on the other hand, has everything: money,media, police and the army, etc.. Againstthe ruling class and its state, our onlyweapon is our organization. But here wehave anarchism’s disruption of thecollective and organized action on the altarof the inviolable individual. Therevolutionary will was therefore obstructedin the APAQs by anarchism.

This is not unlike the struggle of Marx andEngels against anarchism and itsrepresentative Bakunin in the FirstInternational. They faced the same localistand apolitical spirit among anarchists ofthe AIT that we criticized amongst theanarchists dominating the APAQs. Marxand Engels satirized anarchists and theirapproach to non-organization "instead andin place of our executive committee, wewould have a simple office of statistics andcorrespondence, which would be at a lossto overcome the autonomous sections,autonomous to the point that they wouldnever recognize the governing authority,

16

born of their own consent! (...) No way togather strength, no means of commonaction! If, in any section, the minorityadapted to the majority, they would becommitting a crime against the principlesof freedom and endorse a principle leadingto authority and dictatorship! (...) Andabove all, no disciplined sections, no partydiscipline, no concentration of forcestowards an objective, and especially noweapons for combat! "13

The last, and probably the most serious ofthe APAQs’ drawbacks, from arevolutionary point of view, was localism.This is expressed through a local andimmediate view of social issues andstruggle. This attitude is also no stranger toanarchism which always favors federalismover centralism, and localism overinternationalism. The localist argumentsare quite simple. First we were told thatcentralization leads straight toauthoritarianism. Second, we are told thateach neighborhood has its owncharacteristics and peculiarities, which iswhy each APAQ is autonomous from oneneighborhood to the next. What’s strikingabout these arguments is their somewhatless troubling resemblance withnationalism.

Centralism is not equivalent toauthoritarianism. On the contrary, thisprinciple is only intended to ensureeffective collective action. We debate, wediscuss and come to a decision, accordingto a process of political unification,whereby our class speaks and acts with onevoice against a more powerful enemy.Regarding the specific characteristics ofneighborhoods, these particularities are

13 Translated from : Frederich Engels, KarlMarx, Le parti de classe. Tome 3 : questionsd’organisation, textes réunis et présentés parRoger Dangeville, Petite collection Maspéro,1973, pp. 56-57 ouhttp://www.marxists.org/francais/marx/works/00/parti/kmpc076.htm

pure petty bourgeois inventions as whenyou compare working-class neighborhoodsto middle-class ones, where it goes withoutsaying that there are antagonistic interests.But it’s not the case here, since the APAQsor ig ina t e f rom work ing -c l a s sneighborhoods. So, the rise in tuition feeshas the same effect on a student fromVerdun as a student from Hochelaga.Unemployment has the same effect inRosemont as in Villeray.

We can take it still further. The Greekunemployed faces the same situation as theQuebec unemployed. The Chilean studentis as brutalized as his comrade fromQuebec. Quebec workers are in asprecarious a position as those from Europe.The comparisons do not end here, becauseworkers have no fatherland. Everywherewe are proletarian and have the sameinterest in destroying the very foundationsof capitalist society. This unifyingprinciple that goes beyond national bordersis called internationalism and is one of themost important guarantees for the futuresuccess of the revolution.

The end of the wave of struggle, the driftto self-management14

The election of the PQ and the ruling onthe cancellation of rising tuition led to twodifferent reactions among APAQ militants.Some declared victory, but most felt that itwas no victory at all, and demoralizationprevailed. Yet, these two differentreactions led to the same effect:demobilization. The fact was that thestruggle was over after the elections.

And thus the question asked in the

14 It should be noted that we are talkingabout APAQs in general following ourexperience in the APAQs in which weparticipated. In other APAQs, the end of thestruggle has taken various forms, oftendemobilization and dissolution of the APAQ.

17

assembly. What do we do now that thestruggle is over?15

Some activists wanted to transform theassembly into a community organization,which meant the negation of the APAQ asan organism of struggle, since communityorganizations are the antithesis of thestruggle. Indeed, they are more like unionselsewhere, a ministry for the pacificationof social protest, and fully funded by thestate, at that.

Others wanted to give in to self-management. The idea was to create fromAPAQ small islands of self-government,for free and without authority. Whileseemingly very radical, such activism isharmful in that it encloses militants in theirown artificial community. Instead ofstruggling to transform society accordingto our interests, these activists are seekinga way of life according to abstractprinciples and outside of society, besides.

Finally, many APAQs took the initiative todevelop popular education workshops.This is very good because it allowsactivists to sit together and talk, think andtake stock of the last struggle. This isuseful for drawing lessons from the laststrike and preparing for the next wave ofstruggle that will surely happen becausethe economic crisis is far from over!

February 2013

The Communist InternationalistsKlasbatalo

klasbatalo1917@gmail.comBlog :http://internationalistcommunistsmontreal.blogspot.com/

15 See the annex for the text of InternationalCommunist Current The organisation of theproletariat outside periods of open struggle(workers ' groups, nuclei , circles,c o m m i t t e e s ): All the lessons of therevolutionary point of view, a decline in theclass struggle are there.

18

Annex

General strike or electoral circus

The student struggle against tuition increases has taken a new turn following the adoption ofmatraque law 78. Recall that before being used against the student movement, this law wasespecially aimed at the working class, threatening any demonstration of over 50 people withheavy fines. --Leaving it to the police to decide whether or not the demonstration is legal, ifthey’ll accept the route or not. This law is not only an attack on the students, but on theworking class as a whole. This is bourgeois ‘democracy’ for you, and this sort of law is notunique to Quebec. Faced with capitalism in crisis, several ‘democracies’ have passed similarlaws or are in the process of doing so. In 2001, under the pretext of the ‘war on terror’, severalstates passed counter-terrorism laws, which in practice, attack working class struggles. In2005, for instance, striking New York subway workers faced charges of terrorism. Recently ascore of Montreal students were accused under a similar law passed by the federalgovernment in 2001.

The struggle against rising tuition is spreading elsewhere in Canada, as well. Students haveheld actions in Ottawa and Toronto, with other groups spread across several provincespreparing to join them. A day of action took place June 5th, with a demonstration in Toronto,as well as other Ontario cities. BC students, as well, have declared solidarity with those inQuebec, condemning bill 78. Demonstrations in solidarity against this bill have been held inOttawa, Toronto, Paris, Cannes, New York, London and Chile. This is no longer just astruggle against the rising cost of tuition. Since May 21, workers, unemployed, students andpensioners have been banging on pots and pans every evening at 8 o’clock, and great numbersof people are out in the streets to demonstrate that they’re fed up with bill 78, the mass arrests,police brutality, government corruption and austerity measures. We’ve lost count of thenumber of cities and towns participating in these nightly casserole demonstrations, and theseas well are spreading throughout other Canadian provinces. This struggle is part of aninternational struggle against capitalism in crisis. It’s linked with that of workers in Greece,Spain, Portugal, China, India, France, the UK, the US and other parts of the world.

Although the casserole demonstrations are intended as an expression of outrage against statepolicies, one might question the outcome. Speaking at a Montreal business conference,Finance Minister Raymond Bachand, himself, welcomed these demonstrations as a creativeand festive means of voicing an opinion without hurting the city’s tourist industry. As in therest of the world, the bourgeoisie tries to divert struggle by persuading workers to vote incoming elections, in 6 months, a year, two years… At heart, this is what matters most to theunions and all political parties: Québec Solidaire, Parti Québécois, the Liberals, the CAQ andothers, diverting all activity into the electoral circus. Elections are by no means an expressionof “popular will”. The election of this or that political party is determined by the interests ofbig capital of which the bourgeois state is a servant. Elections are useless to the working class.It’s a terrain in which it has no real place, except when it comes time to marking an X everyfour years to elect the usual bourgeois, such as Charest, Marois, David, Khadir, Legault, etc.They’d have us believe that the ballot can help to “make change”. They perpetuate the illusionof democracy, in which all “citizens” are equal and the state is neutral.

While the Liberals and the CAQ are well known for openly serving the interests of largecapitalist enterprise, others are nastier in a sense, more insidious, as is the case with Parti

19

Quebecois nationalists and Québec Solidaire. While they denounce the implementaion ofrightwing policies by the Liberals with matraque law 78, they insist that the government’spolicies would “go against common Quebecois values” No no such ‘common values’ exist.What typical nationalist, petty-bourgeois language, propagating illusions of capitalism’s“human face”, while failing to mention the working class and its struggle. Capitalism isbankrupt and for its survival it’s carrying out the same attacks everywhere: raising energyprices, attacking pensions, increasing tuition, creating new taxes, eliminating thousands ofjobs in the public sector, cutting unemployment benefits, on top of massive factory closures.

The strength of the working class whose exploitation sustains bourgeois society, is in itscollective action, led and organized on the basis of class. Only the working class, in resistingand abolishing this rotten system, will change society. Working class struggles in Greece,Spain, Portugal, China, India, France, UK, USA, in Chile and other parts of the world areforcing bourgeois factions to unite against the working class. Hundreds upon hundreds ofthousands of demonstrators around the world are refusing austerity. The lying media iscensoring these struggles in an effort to prevent the rise of international solidarity. Thestruggle of Quebec’s students and working class is not isolated.

Workers, the unemployed, students, pensioners, we’ve got to stop going along with our faketrade union friends and politicians, such as those from QS, who are simply interested inreforming capitalism. We have to quit begging the bourgeois state through petitions and votes.We must take control of the struggle from them. Otherwise, they will divert our struggles tothe parliamentary circus or into negociation of our level of exploitation.

A general strike, is what we need to expand the struggle, as our brothers and sisters, theworking class from Greece and Spain, have shown. They set an example for us by unitingmore and more broadly in spite of nationalism and union corporatism, by rejecting politicians,and attacking the bourgeois state machine as a whole. For example, the Greek working classbesieged parliament when it approved the measures demanded by the European capitalists.It’s the capitalists who are responsible for this crisis. It’s not for the working class to pay. Asingle slogan: unite with the working class of Greece and Spain through general strike.

Yes for a general strike! No to the electoral circus!

To end this barbaric system, we need a new society. A society intent on production to meetreal human needs as opposed to a society bent on production for profit. A society in which themeans of production and distribution would be within reach of all, socialized, without anexploiter to hold the reins and appropriate our socially produced wealth. A world where theenvironment is no longer seen as a huge profit reserve – for plunder and ruin – by thecapitalist class as we see today. A world based on the participation of all, which could beexpressed through new organs of co-ordination, of production, and of distribution, through asystem of delegates elected and subject to recall at any time, and representing society as awhole.To achieve this, it is imperative to overthrow the bourgeois state along with itsparliamentary ‘democracy’, the capitalist class’s usual smoke & mirrors trick for establishingand maintaining their dominance. It’s up to the working class, with its class party as a guide,to take power by ridding itself of the the class which exploits it, by destroying its State, andestablishing its own institutions. Only the working class as a whole, though its ownautonomous bodies, workers councils for example, may establish a new classless statelesssociety. This task can not be delegated, not even to the most and conscious class Party.Internationalist Communists Klasbatalo Printemps Érable 2012

20

Internationalist Communists Klasbatalo have no organizational links with the InternationalCommunist Current and don’t share all of their political positions. We reproduce this textbecause we agree with it. The text mentions committees, circles, groups, etc. We could alsoput Autonomous popular Assembly of District or city.

Internationalist Communists Klasbatalo (ICK)

*******************************************

The organisation of the proletariat outside periods of open struggle (workers' groups,nuclei, circles, committees)

(This text was adopted by the 3rd Congress of Internationalism, the ICC's section in Belgium,February 1980.)

What is to be done outside times of open struggle? How should we organise when the strike isfinished? How to prepare the struggles to come?

Faced with this question, faced with the problems posed by the existence of committees,circles, nuclei, etc, regrouping small minorities of the working class, we have no recipes toprovide. We cannot choose between giving them moral lessons (‘organise yourselves like thisor that’, ‘dissolve yourselves’, ‘join us’) and demagogically flattering them. Instead, ourconcern is this: to understand these minority expressions of the proletariat as a part of thewhole class. If we situate them in the general movement of the class struggle; if we see thatthey are strictly linked to the strengths and weaknesses of different periods in this strugglebetween the classes, then, in this way, we’ll be able to understand to what general necessitythey are a response. By neither remaining politically imprecise in relation to them, nor byimprisoning ourselves inside rigid schemas, we’ll also be able to grasp what their positiveaspects are and be able to point out what dangers lie in wait for them.

Characteristics of the workers struggle in decadent capitalism

Our first concern in understanding this problem must be to recall the general, historicalcontext within which we find ourselves. We must remember the nature of this historic period(the period of social revolutions) and the characteristics of the class struggle in decadence.This analysis is fundamental because it allows us to understand the type of class organisationthat can exist in such a period.Without going into all the details, let’s recall simply that the proletariat in the nineteenthcentury existed as an organised force in a permanent way. The proletariat unified itself as aclass through an economic and political struggle for reforms. The progressive character of thecap_italist system allowed the proletariat to bring pressure to bear on the bourgeoisie in orderto obtain reforms, and for this, large masses of the working class regrouped within unions andparties.In the period of capitalism’s senility, the char_acteristics and the forms of organisation of theclass changed. A quasi-permanent mobilisation of the proletariat around its immediate andpolitical interests was no longer possible, nor viable. Henceforward, the permanent unitaryorgans of the class were no longer able to exist except in the course of the struggle itself.From this time on, the function of these unitary organs could no longer be limited to simply‘negotiating’ an improvement in the proletariat’s living conditions (because an improvementwas no longer possible over the long term and because the only realistic answer was that ofrevolution). Their task was to prepare for the seizure of power.The unitary organs of the dictatorship of the proletariat are the workers’ councils. Theseorgans possess a certain number of characteristics which we must make clear if we are tograsp the entire process which leads to the self-organisation of the proletariat.Thus, we must clearly show that the councils are a direct expression of working class struggle.They arise in a spontaneous (but not mechanical) way from out of this struggle. This is why

21

they are intimately tied to the development and maturity of the struggle. They draw from ittheir substance and their vitality. They don’t constitute, then, a simple ‘delegation’ of power,a parody of Parl_iament, but are truly the organised expression of the whole working classand its power. Their task isn’t to organise a proportional representation of social groupings, orpolitical parties, but allow the will of the proletariat to realise itself practically. It’s throughthem that all the decisions are taken. That is the reason why the workers must constantly keepcontrol of them (the revocability of delegates) by means of the General Assemblies.Only the workers’ councils are capable of realising the living identification between theimmediate struggle and the final goal. In this liaison between the struggle for immediateinterests and the struggle for political power, the councils establish the objective andsubjective basis for the revolution. They constitute, par excellence, the crucible of classconsciousness. The constitution of the proletariat in councils is not then a simple question of aform of organisation, but is the product of the development of the struggle and of classconsciousness. The appearance of the councils isn’t the fruit of organisational recipes, ofprefabricated structures, of intermediate organs.The more and more conscious extension and centralisation of struggles, beyond the factoriesand beyond frontiers, cannot be artificial, voluntarist action. To be convinced of the correctionof this idea, it’s sufficient to recall the experience of the AAUD and its artificial attempt tounite and centralise the ‘factory organisations’ in a period when the struggle was in reflux. [1]The Councils can only continue to exist when the permanent, open struggle continues to exist,signifying the participation of an ever-growing number of workers in the struggle. Theirappearance is essentially a function of the development of the struggle itself and of thedevelopment of class consciousness.

The attempts to bridge a gap

But we are not yet in a period of permanent struggle, in a revolutionary context which wouldallow the proletariat to organise itself in workers’ councils. The constitution of the proletariatin councils is the result of objective conditions (the depth of the crisis, the historic course) andsubjective conditions (the maturity of the struggle and the consciousness of the class). It is theresult of an entire apprenticeship, a whole maturation, which is as much organisational as it ispolitical.We must be conscious that this maturation, this political fermentation, doesn’t unfold in awell-designated straight line. It expresses itself instead as a fiery, impetuous, confused processwithin a jostling, jerky movement. It demands the active participation of revolutionaryminorities.Since it is incapable of acting mechanically in accordance with abstract principles,preconceived plans or voluntarist schemes detached from reality, the proletariat must forge itsunity and consciousness by means of a painful apprenticeship. Incapable of regrouping all itsforces on a preordained day, it consolidates its ranks in the course of the battle itself. It formsits ‘army’ within the conflict itself. But in the course of the struggle it forms in its ranksmore combative elements, a more determined vanguard. These elements don’t necessarilyregroup themselves within the revolutionary organisation (because, in certain periods, it isvirtually unknown). The appearance of these combative minorities within the proletariat,whether before or after open struggles, isn’t an incomprehensible or new phenomenon. Itreally expresses the irregular character of the struggle, the unequal and heterogeneousdevelopment of class consciousness. Thus, since the end of the 1960’s, we’ve witnessed, atone and the same time, the development of the struggle (in the sense of its greater self-organisation), a reinforcement of revolutionary minorities, and the appearance of committees,nuclei, circles, etc, trying to regroup a working class avant-garde. The develop_ment of acoherent political pole of regroupment, and the tendency for the proletariat to try to organiseitself outside the unions, both issue from the same maturation of the struggle.The appearance of these committees, circles, etc, truly responds to a necessity within thestruggle. If some combative elements sense the need to remain grouped together after they’vebeen struggling together, they do so with the aim of simultaneously continuing to ‘acttogether’ (the eventual preparation of a new strike) and of drawing the lessons of the struggle(through political discussion). The problem which poses itself to these workers is as muchone of regrouping with a view to future action as it is of regrouping with a view to

22

clarifying questions posed by the past struggle and the struggle to come. This attitude isunderstandable in the sense that the absence of permanent struggle the ‘bankruptcy’ of theunions, and the very great weakness of revolutionary organisations creates an organisationaland political void. When the work_ing class returns to the path of its historic struggle, it has ahorror of this void. Therefore, it seeks to reply to the need posed by this organisational andpolitical void.These committees, these nuclei, these proletarian minorities who still don’t understand clearlytheir own function, are a response to this need. They are, at one and the same time, anexpression of the general weakness of today’s class struggle and an expression of thematuration of the organisation of the class. They are a crystallisation of a wholesubterranean development at work within the proletariat.

The reflux of 1973-77

That is why we must be careful not to lock away these organs in a hermetic, rigidly classifieddrawer. We cannot forecast their appearance and development in a totally precise way.Furthermore, we must be careful not to make artificial separations in the different moments inthe life of these committees, getting ourselves caught in the false dilemma: ‘action ordiscussion’.This said, it must not stop us from making an intervention towards these organs. We must alsobe capable of appreciating their evolution in terms of the period, depending on whether weare in a phase of renewal or reflux in the struggle. Because they are a spontaneous,immediate product of the struggle, and because the appearance of these nuclei is based mainlyon conjunctural problems (in distinction to the revolutionary organisation which appears onthe basis of the historical necessities of the proletariat), this means that they remain verydependent on the surrounding milieu of the class struggle. They remain more stronglyimprisoned by the general weaknesses of the movement and have a tendency to follow the upsand downs of the struggle.We must make a distinction in the development of these nuclei between the period of reflux inthe struggle (1973-77) and today’s period of renewed class struggle internationally. Whileunderlining the fact that the dangers threatening them remain identical in both periods, wemust, nonetheless, be capable of grasping what differences the change in period implies fortheir evolution.At the end of the first wave of struggle at the end of the 1960’s, we witnessed the appearanceof a whole series of confusions within the working class. We could measure the extent ofthese confusions by examining the attitude of some of the combative elements of the class,who tried to remain regrouped.We saw develop:- the illusion in fighting unionism and the distrust of anything political (OHK, AAH,Komiteewerking [2] ). In many cases, the committees that came out of struggles transformedthemselves, categorically, into semi-unions. This was the case for the workers’ commissionsin Spain and the ‘factory councils’ in Italy. Even more often they just disappeared.- a very strong corporatism (which itself constitutes the basis for the illusion in ‘fightingunion_ism’).- when attempts were made to go beyond the limits of the factory, the result was confusionand a great political eclecticism.- a very great political confusion was present, rendering these organs very vulnerable to themanoeuvres of the leftists, and also allowing them to fall prey to illusions of the type held bythe PIC (cf. their ‘bluff’ about workers’ groups)[3]. Also, in the course of this period, theideology of ‘workers autonomy’ developed, bringing with it an apology for immediatism,factoryism and economism.All of these weaknesses were essentially a function of the weaknesses of the first wave ofstruggle at the end of the 60’s. This movement was characterised by a disproportion betweenthe strength and extension of the strikes and the weakness in the content of the demandsmade. What especially indicated this disproportion was the absence of any clear, politicalperspective in the movement. The falling-back of the workers, which happened between 1973and 1977, was a product of this weak_ness, which the bourgeoisie utilised to demobilise and

23

ideologically contain the struggles. Each of the weak points of the first wave of strikes was‘recuperated’ by the bourgeoisie to its own profit:“Thus the idea of a permanent organisation of the class, at one and the same time economicand political, was transformed later into the idea of ‘new unions’ to end finally in a return toclassical trade unionism. The vision of the General Assembly as a form independent of anycontent ended up — via the mystification concerning direct democracy and popular power –re-establishing trust in classical bourgeois democracy. Ideas about self-management andworkers’ control of production (confusions which were understandable at the beginning)were theorised into the myth of ‘generalised self-management’, ‘islands of communism’ or‘nationalisation under workers’ control’. All this caused the workers to put their confidencein plans to restructure the economy, which would supposedly avoid layoffs or caused them toback national solidarity pacts presented as a way of ‘getting out of the crisis”.(Report on the Class Struggle presented to the IIIrd International Congress of the ICC).

The renewal of struggles since 1977

With the renewal in struggle since 1977, we have seen other tendencies delineate themselves.The proletariat matured through its ‘defeat’. It had drawn albeit in a confused way, the lessonsof the reflux, and even if the dangers represented by ‘fighting unionism’, corporatism, etcremain, they exist within a different general evolution in the struggle.Since 1977, we have seen the hesitant development of:- a more or less marked will on the part of the avant-garde of combative workers to developpolitical discussion (remember the General Assembly of Co-ordinamenti in Turin, the debateat Antwerp with the workers of Rotterdam, Antwerp, etc, the conference of dockers inBarcelona. [4]);- the will to enlarge the field of struggle, to go beyond the ghetto of factoryism, to give amore global political framework to the struggle. This will expressed itself through theappearance of the ‘co—ordinamenti’, and more specifically in the political manifestoproduced by one of the co-ordinamenti situated in the North of Italy (Sesto S. Giovanni). Thismanifesto demanded the unification of the combative avant-garde in the factories, spelt outthe necessity for a politically independent struggle by the workers and insisted on thenecessity for the struggle to break out of factory limitations;- the concern to establish a link between the immediate aspect of the struggle and the finalgoal. This concern was particularly expressed in workers groups in Italy (FIAT) and in Spain(FEYCU, FORD). The first of these groups intervened by means of a leaflet to denounce thedangers of layoffs made by the bourgeoisie in the name of ‘fighting terrorism’, and the secondintervened to denounce the illusion of parliamentarism.- the concern to better prepare and organise the struggles to come (cf. the action of the‘spokesmen’ group of dockers in Rotterdam calling for the formation of a General Assembly).We must repeat that the dangers of corporatism, ‘fighting unionism’ and locking-up of thestruggle on a strictly economic terrain continue to exist even within this period. But what wemust take into account is the important influence of the period on the evolution of thecommittees and nuclei that appear both before and after open struggles. When the period isone of combativity and resurgence of class struggle, the intervention of such minorities takeson a different sense, as does our attitude toward them. In a period of generalised reflux in thestruggle, we have to insist more on the danger of these organs becoming transformed intosemi-unions, of falling into the clutches of the leftists, of having illusions in terrorism, etc. Ina period of class resurgence we insist more on the dangers represented by voluntarism andactivism (see the illusions expressed in this connection in the manifesto of the co-ordinamentiof Sesto S. Giovanni), and by the illusion which some of these combative workers may haveabout the possibility of forming the embryos of future strike committees, etc. In a period ofrenewal in the struggle, we will also be more open to combative minorities which appear andregroup with a view to calling for strikes and the formation of strike committees, GeneralAssemblies, etc.

The possibilities of these organs

24

The concern to situate the committees, nuclei, etc, in the cauldron of the class struggle, tounderstand them in terms of the period in which they appear, doesn’t imply, however,abruptly changing our analysis in the wake of the different stages in the class struggle.Whatever the mo5ent that gives birth to these committees, we know that they constitute onlyone stage in a dynamic, general process they are one moment in the maturation of theorganisation and consciousness of the class. They can only have a positive role when theygive themselves a broad, supple framework to work within, in order not to freeze the generalprocess. This is why these organs must be vigilant if they are to avoid falling into thefollowing traps:- imagining that they constitute a structure which can prepare the way for the appearance ofstrike committees or councils;- imagining themselves to be invested with a sort of ‘potentiality’ which can develop futurestruggles. (It isn’t the minorities who artificially create a strike or cause a General Assemblyor a committee to appear, even though they do have an active intervention to make in thisprocess).- giving themselves a platform or statutes or anything else that risks freezing their evolutionand thus condemning them to political confusion.- presenting themselves as intermediate organs, half-way between the class and a politicalorganisation, as if they were an organisation that is at one and the same time unitary andpolitical.This is why our attitude towards these minority organs remains open, but at the same timetries to influence the evolution of political reflection in their midst, and this whatever theperiod in which we find ourselves. We must try our hardest to ensure that these committees,nuclei, etc. don’t freeze up, either in one direction (a structure which imagines itself toprefigure the workers’ councils) or another (political fixation). Before all else, what mustguide us in our intervention is not the interests and the conjunctural concerns of these organs(since we can’t suggest to them any organisational recipes nor any ready-made answers), butthe general interests of the whole class. Our concern is always to homogenise and developclass consciousness in such a way that the development of the class struggle happens with agreater, more massive participation of all workers, and that the struggle is taken in-hand bythe workers themselves and not by a minority, no matter what type it may be. It is for thisreason that we insist on the dynamic of the movement and that we put the combative elementson their guard against any attempt at substitutionism or anything that might block the laterdevelopment of the struggle and of class consciousness.In orientating the evolution of these organs in one direction (reflection and politicaldiscussion), rather than another, we can give a response which will be favourable to thedynamic of the movement. But let it be well-understood that this doesn’t signify that wecondemn any form of ‘intervention’ or ‘action’ undertaken by these organs. It is obvious thatthe instant a group of combative workers understands that the task isn’t to act to constitutethemselves as a semi-union, but rather to draw the political lessons of the past struggles, thisdoesn’t imply that their political reflection is going to happen in an ethereal vacuum, in theabstract, without any-practical consequences. The political clarification undertaken by thesecombative workers will also push them to act together within their own factory (and in themost positive of cases, even outside their own factory). They will feel the necessity to give amaterial, political expression to their political reflection (leaflets, newspapers, etc). They willfeel the need to take up positions in relation to the concrete issues that face the working class.In order to defend and disseminate their positions, they will thus have to make a concreteintervention. In certain circumstances they will propose concrete means of action (formationof General Assemblies, strike committees…) to advance the struggle. In the course of thestruggle itself, they will sense the necessity for a concerted effort to develop a certainorientation for the struggle; they will support demands that will permit the struggle to extenditself and they will insist on the necessity for its enlargement, generalisation, etc.Even though we remain attentive to these efforts and don’t try to lay down rigid schemas forthem to follow, nonetheless it is clear that we must continue to insist on the fact that whatcounts the most is the active participation of all the workers in the struggle, and that thecombative workers should at no time substitute themselves for their comrades in theorganisation and co-ordination of the strike. Moreover, it is also clear that the more theorganisation of revolutionaries increases its influence within the struggles, the more the

25

combative elements will turn toward it. Not because the organisation will have a policy offorcibly recruiting these elements, but quite simply because the combative workersthemselves will become conscious that a political intervention, which is really active andeffective, can only be made in the framework of such an international organisation.

The intervention of revolutionaries

All that glitters isn’t gold. To point out that the working class in its struggle can cause morecombative elements to appear doesn’t mean affirming that the impact of these minorities isdecisive for the later development of class consciousness. We must not make this absoluteidentification: an expression of the maturation of consciousness = an active factor in itsdevelopment.In reality the influence which these nuclei can have in the later unfolding of the struggle isvery limited. Their influence entirely depends on the general combativity of the proletariatand of the capacity of these nuclei to pursue without let-up this work of political clarification.In the long-term, this work cannot be followed except within the framework of arevolutionary organisation.But here again, we’ve no mechanism to drop in place. It’s not in an artificial manner that therevolutionary organisation wins these elements. Contrary to the ideas of organisations likeBattaglia Communista or the PIC, the ICC does not seek to fill-in, in an artificial, voluntaristmanner, ‘the gap’ between the party and the class. Our understanding of the working class asa historic force, and our comprehension of our own role prevents us from wanting to freezethese committees into the form of an intermediate structure. Nor do we seek to create ‘factorygroups’ as transmission belts between the class and the party.This presents us with the question of determining what our attitude to such circles,committees, etc should be. Even while recognising their limited influence and theirweaknesses, we must remain open to them and attentive to their appearance. The mostimportant thing that we propose to them is that they open up widely to discussions. At notime, do we adopt toward them a distrustful or condemnatory attitude under the pretext ofreacting against their political ‘impurity’. So that’s one thing we should avoid; another is toavoid flattering them or even uniquely concentrating our energies on them. We mustn’t ignoreworkers’ groups, but equally we mustn’t become obsessive about them. We recognise that thestruggle matures and class-consciousness develops in a process.Within this process, tendencies exist within the class that attempt to ‘hoist’ the struggle onto apolitical terrain. In the course of this process, we know that the proletariat will give rise tocombative minorities within itself, but they won’t necessarily organise themselves withinpolitical organisations. We must be careful not to identify this process of maturation in theclass today with what characterised the development of the struggle last century. Thisunderstanding is very important because it permits us to appreciate in what way thesecommittees, circles, etc are a real expression of the maturation of class consciousness, but anexpression which is, above all, temporary and ephemeral and not a fixed, structuredorganisational rung in the development of the class struggle. The class struggle in the periodof capitalist decadence advances explosively. Sudden eruptions appear which surprise eventhose elements who were the most combative in the proceeding round of struggle, and theseeruptions can immediately go beyond previous experience in terms of the consciousness andmaturity developed in the new struggle. The proletariat can only really organise itself on aunitary level within the struggle. To the extent that the struggle itself becomes permanent, itcauses the unitary organisations of the class to grow and become stronger.This understanding is what allows us to grasp why we don’t have a specific policy, a special‘tactic’ in relation to workers’ committees, even though in; certain circumstances it can bevery positive for us to begin and systematically continue discussions with them, and toparticipate in their meetings. We know that it is possible and increasingly easy to discuss withthese combative elements (particularly when open struggle isn’t taking place). We are alsoaware that certain of these elements may want to join us, but we don’t focus all our attentionon them. Because what is of primary importance for us, is the general dynamic of the struggle,and we don’t set up any rigid classifications or hierarchies within this dynamic. Beforeeverything, we address ourselves to the working class as a whole. Contrary to other politicalgroups who try to surmount the problem of the lack of influence of revolutionary minorities in

26

the class by artificial methods and by feeding themselves on illusions about these workers’groups, the ICC recognises that it has very little impact in the present period. We don’t try toincrease our influence among the workers by giving them artificial ‘confidence’ in us. Wearen’t workerist, nor are we megalomaniacs. The influence which we will progressivelydevelop within the struggles will come essentially from our political practice inside thesestruggles and not from our acting as toadies, or flatterers, or as ‘water-carriers’ who restrictthemselves to performing technical tasks. Furthermore, we address our political interventionto all the workers, to the proletariat taken as a whole, as a class, because our fundamental taskis to call for the maximum extension of the struggles. We don’t exist in order to feel satisfiedat winning the confidence of two or three horny-handed worker but to homogenise andaccelerate the development of the consciousness of the class. It’s necessary to be aware that itwill only be in the revolutionary process itself that the proletariat will accord us its political‘confidence’ to the extent that it realises that the revolutionary party really makes up a part ofits historic struggle.

[1] AAUD: Allgemeine Arbeiter Union Deutschlands, ‘General Workers Union of Germany’.The ‘Unions’ weren’t trade unions, but attempts to create permanent forms of organisationregrouping all the workers outside and against the unions, in Germany in the years followingthe crushing of the 1919 Berlin insurrection. They expressed nostalgia for the workerscouncils, but never succeeded in carrying out the function of the councils.[2] These were all workers groups in Belgium.[3] The French group PIC (Pour Une Intervention Communiste) was for several monthsconvinced - and tried to convince everyone else - that it was participating in the developmentof a network of ‘workers groups’ which would constitute a powerful avant-garde of therevolutionary movement. They based this illusion on the skeletal reality of two or threegroups largely made-up of ex-leftist elements. There’s not much left of this bluff today.[4] These are organised meetings regrouping delegates from different workers groups,collectives and committees.

Basic positions of the Internationalist Communists – Klasbatalo!

1 - The October 1917 Russian revolution took the first step toward real communist world revolution in theinternational revolutionary wave, which put an end to the imperialist war and lasted a few years. The failure ofthat revolutionary wave, particularly in Germany in 1919-23, condemned the revolution in Russia to isolationand rapid degeneration. The Stalinism that developed during the 20’s and thereafter was only an ideologicalrepresentation of this degeneration and isolation. It established itself as the gravedigger of the Russianrevolution, instituting a state capitalist regime, centrally planned according to the doctrine of “socialism in onecountry” which we reject.

2 - Since the First World War, capitalism has been a social system in decline. It no longer hasanything of progressive value to offer. It has twice plunged humanity into a barbaric cycle ofcrisis, world war, reconstruction, and new crisis. The theory of decadence is a point of view indynamic movement that makes it possible to foresee the direction that world capitalism seeksto take.

3 - Contrary to bourgeois as well as Stalinist propaganda, countries of the former EasternBlock, as well as China, North Korea, Cuba, etc., have never been communist. What in factexisted and still exists are countries under a particular form of state capitalism.

4 – Working class participation in the electoral circus and in the various parliaments is thebest means the bourgeoisie has found to divert the proletariat from its historic task, theemancipation of all humanity. Just as with fascism, “bourgeois democracy” is a terrain inwhich the proletariat has no real place.

27

5 - We view the trade unions as organizations bound by a thousand and one ties to the state bylaws, subsidies and dialogue. To change the trade union leadership or to attempt to transformthe unions is impossible, inasmuch as their links to the state are organic. This includes therejection of red or anarchist trade unions.

6 - We reject the tactics of the “united front”, “popular front” and “anti-fascist fronts”. Allthese tactics enmesh the interests of the proletariat with those of bourgeois factions whateverthey may be, and ultimately divert the working class from its revolutionary objectives.

7 - All nationalist ideologies, “national independence”, “right of self determination”, whatevertheir pretext, ethnic, historical, religious, etc., are a nothing but a drug for workers. Theirobjective is to make them party to one faction or other of the bourgeoisie, pitting one group ofworkers against the other, leading them to war.

8 - The working class, and only the working class, is capable of making the communistrevolution. Out of necessity, the revolutionary struggle leads the working class into aconfrontation with the capitalist state. To destroy capitalism, the working class mustoverthrow every state and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat worldwide – theinternational power of the workers councils unifying the entire proletariat.

9 - “Self-management” and the “nationalization” of the economy are not the means tooverthrow capitalism, since these do nothing to address capitalist relations of production.They are in fact just forms of capitalism. Communism requires the working class toconsciously abolish capitalist social relations and to create a stateless society, without class,without money, without national borders or professional standing armies.

10 - A first step towards this goal is the revolutionary political organization of the class-conscious proletariat, uniting us into an international political party. This party’s role will notbe to seize power in the name of the working class, but to participate, to take part in theunification and the extension of its struggles controlled by the workers themselves, inspreading and disseminating the communist program in order to raise proletarianconsciousness in its own class. Only the working class in its totality, through its ownautonomous bodies, e.g. workers councils, can institute socialism. This task cannot bedelegated, not even to the most conscious and capable of class parties.

11 - Revolutionary practice leaves no room for sectarian attitudes and isolationism. Our ideasmust be heard within our class. We see as our mandate to intervene wherever possible, inkeeping with our real forces within the various struggles of our class, to participate in theexchange of ideas, in the clarification of the proletarian program, and in building therevolutionary party.

From Nationalism to Internationalism

This booklet is very important for ICK as the habits and ideas acquired in Maoistgroups block one’s understanding of Marxism and its implementation at the level ofclass struggle and the internal organizations of Left Communism.Write to Klasbatalo to receive : klasbatalo1917@gmail.com