The Two “Souls” of Unionism

Unionism from above and unionism from below. These are the two incompatible “souls” of the labour movement. The latter is a deeply democratic and radical strategy for working-class self-emancipation, the former is antithetical to emancipation: it’s simply bureaucratic and conservative. A comrade sadly informed me of the disturbingly reactionary tactics used by SEIU members and staffers at the Labor Notes Conference held in Dearborn, Michigan. The SEIUers’ violent behaviour is no more than acts of desperation of the old, dilapidated model of contractual unionism…

Over 1,100 labour activists from North America and beyond converged in Dearborn for the annual Labor Notes Conference to discuss about how to revitalise the labour movement. New ideas were shared with the goal of building an infrastructure of radically democratic unionism and a new union consciousness. But the winds of reaction came blowing into Dearborn April 12th as several bus loads of SEIU loyalists (yeah, those who supposedly make “loyalty-oaths”; check out ) disrupted workshops and the banquet Saturday night. The confrontation became violent and SEIUers actually sent an activist to the hospital. How petty of them! That’s just what the labour movement needs. But now, historical context is of order here.

The calls for genuine rank-and-file control of unions, as well as solidarity among workers paid and unpaid, are gaining ground as the old top-down, legalistic and bureaucratic post-WWII industrial unionism is dying a slow and painful death. Traditional trade unions have not been successful in fighting capital’s major restructuring also known as neoliberalism. Instead of reaching out across industry and community lines, and broadening the struggle beyond the shop floor, they continue operating within the straightjacket labour regime that capitalists have abandoned since, oh, about the mid-1970s. The leadership of these traditional trade unions are stuck in another era. The composition of the working class has changed, therefore the form of struggle (strategies and tactics) must also change. New forms of struggle like community unionism have emerged since the 1960s and are becoming more popular.

The Vice-President of SEIU has condoned the attacks in Dearborn (see ). The leadership, along with its loyalists, wants to see an end to a movement from below growing within the SEIU. The SEIU Member Activists for Reform Today (SMART) is attempting to democratise the SEIU seeing as the leadership, including President Andy Sterns, use authoritarian methods of organising, and remove elected local leaders only to appoint groomed loyalists or trustees. I don’t know about you, but this form of organising is kinda like Stalinism!

Back to the two “souls”. The analogy is drawn from the famous pamphlet called “The Two Souls of Socialism” written by the American socialist, Hal Draper (you can read it on ). He beautifully summarises the two traditions of socialism: the top-down, statist, undemocratic and alienated “socialism from above” (see Stalinism and Social Democracy), and the radical, anti-statist, robustly democratic “socialism from below” (see the glimpses of bottom-up, revolutionary socialism throughout the last 150 years). These two “souls” clashed in Dearborn, and they will continue to clash. Before a revolution in the mode of production can occur, a revolution within the existing labour movement must occur.

I’m saddened and disgusted by the SEIU leadership. But its reactionary behaviour is a tell-tale sign of desperation. There is reason for optimism because unionism from below is once again becoming a credible threat to union autocrats everywhere. The spectre of unionism from below is haunting the majestic and palatial boardrooms of all the major trade unions. It is time to ask ourselves the question famously spelled out by Hal Draper: Who’s side are you on?

Ernest V. Schumann