A-Infos (en) Italy, FDCA, Cantiere #36 - Learning from defeats (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

The defeat that arose with the referendum of 8/9 June is not only 
evident but also complete. In fact, it goes beyond the purely trade 
union level to take on an evidently political significance, precisely 
because it is configured as a victory of the class enemy in its 
multifaceted economic, social, political and institutional 
configurations. It is a defeat destined to cause serious consequences 
both in terms of a recrudescence of the employers' and government's 
offensive against the living conditions of the subaltern classes and 
against civil rights and freedom, and in terms of trade union 
organization and its strategic role, in one of the most complex and 
dramatic phases experienced since the Second World War.
It has become clear that if trade union action shifts to the political, 
party and institutional terrain, leaving aside the uncompromising 
defense of the living conditions of the subaltern classes, if trade 
union action is replaced by the intertwining with parliamentarism as 
happened during the referendum campaign, defeat is certain.
By choosing the instrument of the referendum, Landini and the CGIL 
leadership group had    first of all the heavy responsibility of having 
left the fate of millions of workers in the hands of the class enemy and 
   of having let the success of the general strike in November deflate 
in recent months without building passages of struggle that would 
mobilize workers at least until the referendum.
The CGIL, which had promoted four of the five referendums, therefore 
emerges weakened by the entire referendum affair that has been 
intertwined with the maneuvers of the "broad field", that is, with those 
parties that in previous center-left governments    distinguished 
themselves by adopting policies that have unloaded the costs of the 
crisis entirely on our class. Such an alliance has evidently influenced 
the will and the    ability of the CGIL to face the unprecedented attack 
of the bourgeoisie on the vital minimums of workers, so articulating a 
significant opposition to the government and the employers will be even 
more difficult from now on.
It seems that the defeat of the 1984 referendum on the sliding scale, 
promoted by the PCI following the disastrous conclusion of the FIAT 
dispute in 1980, did not sediment any serious reflection. The employers 
and their government, that of the socialist Craxi, emerged victorious, 
marking a point of no return in the affirmation of neoliberal and 
anti-worker policies.
Further confirmation of the vacuity of the referendum strategy was the 
2003 referendum on the extension of Article 18 of the Workers' Statute, 
proposed by Rifondazione Comunista with the then secretary Fausto 
Bertinotti, which also saw a disastrous defeat reaching only 25% of the 
votes. On that occasion the center-right government, led by Silvio 
Berlusconi on behalf of Confindustria, after an initial contrary 
position supported the reasons for abstention. Abstention also supported 
by the moderates of the center-left (Francesco Rutelli's Margherita, 
with a role similar to that of Renzi and Calenda at present) and, much 
more seriously, with only a few internal defections, by the Democrats of 
the Left, then led by Piero Fassino assisted by Sergio Cofferati 
himself, who had recently left the leadership of the CGIL itself.
In the face of such precedents, the criticism aimed at stigmatizing the 
indication of abstention by the government forces as a "betrayal of the 
constitutional principles that establish voting as a civic duty", moved 
both by the leadership of the CGIL and by the Democratic Party, appears 
vacuous and completely inadequate.
This further defeat will certainly favor the more concertative sectors 
that, still well present in the CGIL, look with extreme interest at the 
neo-corporatist turn of the CISL and the more moderate components of the 
Democratic Party, which objectively emerge strengthened by the 
referendum affair.
We are not interested in dwelling on the analyses of the various 
boycotts orchestrated by economic, governmental and political power, nor 
in the meanders of that part of the center-left that now claims 30% of 
the votes to minimize the defeat. We believe that this is the 
consequence of a real institutional drift of the union that has 
consciously placed itself as an alternative to the social and class 
conflict by means of the referendum shortcut.
After all, once again, history expresses those who interpret it. Thus 
the neo-corporatist leadership group of the CISL has also shifted its 
action to the institutional level, promoting a collection of signatures 
for a popular bill for "participation in work" from which, on May 14, 
with the full support of the entire government majority, the new law 
Provisions for the participation of workers in the management, capital 
and profits of companies emerged. In the face of this, the CGIL 
leadership group, flaunting a somewhat improvised activism (in apparent 
contrast only with its historic concertative attitude and subordination 
to the capitalist framework), has committed itself to the referendum 
choice, weakening the social conflict and thus maturing a burning 
defeat. Despite the fact that even within the CGIL the referendum choice 
has been considered by many to be inadequate, improbable and in any case 
a substitute for social conflict and despite the fact that these 
critical assessments have also found confirmation in numerous other 
political organizations and grassroots trade unionism, the opposition to 
the institutional drift has not taken off, it has remained largely a 
minority and the social conflict has not generalized to broader 
contexts. And now, after the defeat, it will be much more difficult to 
propose it again and carry it forward in a unitary context. Furthermore, 
the defeat is not only of the CGIL leadership group, but also and above 
all of its entire militant fabric that generously spent itself in the 
referendum choice. These considerations point not so much to the search 
for responsibilities, which certainly lie within the leadership of 
confederal unionism-responsibilities that must be identified objectively 
and historically-but above all to the real capacity of the entire class 
opposition to have an impact, which has not been and still is not 
capable of generalizing social conflict, overcoming self-referential 
logics to effectively counter the concertative, institutional, 
bureaucratic, and neo-corporatist tendencies of confederal unionism.
As workers and vanguards, beyond any paternalistic approach, we have the 
duty to question ourselves first and foremost about the subjective 
condition of the masses and the fact, confirmed by the ballot boxes, of 
a dispersed, disillusioned working class, ensnared by bourgeois models, 
largely indifferent and barely aware of its own situation of 
exploitation, unwilling to engage in conflict even in the face of a 
virulent and pervasive bourgeois offensive that is launching a thorough 
attack on its living conditions.
What has been and is still lacking is a militant network rooted in 
productive realities and mass movements, capable of expressing and 
building unified demands in defense of the interests of the subaltern 
classes and the weakest and least protected social sectors. This 
construction must be pursued not haphazardly, but with a genuine 
strategic awareness capable of safeguarding the unity and autonomy of 
the entire class movement, even and especially in the most difficult 
moments, when defeat asserts itself, as is happening in this specific 
phase. This is an increasingly necessary task, starting from the 
awareness derived from the defeats suffered by our class, which have now 
overshadowed its significant victories, thus laying the foundations for 
the current crisis of social conflict, which is increasingly turning in 
favor of capital. This is necessary, urgent, and can no longer be postponed.
Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA

http://alternativalibertaria.fdca.it/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en