# The World's Trade Union Movement/Chapter 8

LECTURE NO. 8
The Relation of Forces of the Reformist and Revolutionary Trade Union Movements and Their Perspectives
The Force of the Profintern
IN the former lecture we dwelt upon the fundamental questions which face the working class, the different attitudes towards which divides the international trade union movement into a few camps. Let us now estimate the specific gravity and compare the real power of each of the existing internationals. I have pointed out that the peculiarity of the Profintern is in that part of its army is found within the ranks of the trade unions of the reformists' International.
The Profintern has eight types of affiliated organizations:
1) General trade union centers which embrace all of the trade union movement of the given country: Russia, 5,000,000; Australia, 400,000; Bulgaria, 40,000; Egypt, 50,000; Persia, 20,000; Esthonia, 25,000, etc.
2) General trade union or district revolutionary centers which exist alongside the reformists and conducts a struggle against them, where our organizations are stronger than the reformists': France, 450,000; Czecho-Slovakia, 300,000; Java, 27,000; China, etc.
3) General trade union centers which play a smaller role in the trade union movement of their countries than the reformists': Holland, 20,000; Belgium, 12,000; Germany, 150,000; United States, 25,000, etc.
4) General trade union centers which stand on the platform of the Profintern, but on account of the White Terror are not affiliated with it: Finland, 50,000; Roumania, 60,000; Jugo-Slavia, 100,000, etc.
5) Separate independent unions which are not affiliated with the general trade union centers of their countries or have been expelled from them: Germany, 40,000; Austria, 10,000, etc.
6) The minorities within the reformist trade unions, united under the direct leadership of the Communist fractions: Germany, 3,000,000; Japan, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, etc.
7) Oppositional blocs which unite all the left elements within and without the reformist and the anarcho-syndicalist unions: United States; Great Britain; Spain; Austria; Argentina; Mexico, etc.
8) Finally, the left elements united in the Councils of Unemployed as in England, Shop Steward Committees, etc., which usually support the policies of the Profintern.
This varied organizational structure of our followers does not give the possibility of getting a complete and exact number of the adherents ​of the Profintern, In many countries we have to use approximate figures as they change almost every day to our advantage. Most important it is that there is not one country, not one serious labor organization in the world, where the Profintern does not have its followers.
The Forces of the Amsterdam International
Now let us attempt to compare our figures with that of the Amsterdam International. The leaders of the Amsterdam International repeatedly in their statements declare that they unite 20,000,000 workers. And we repeatedly pointed out that this figure was a statistical mirage, that the Amsterdam International has not such numbers of members.
If we take these figures formally, perhaps such a number may be reached. But if we figure realistically, we will get something entirely different. As was stated, the Amsterdam International is mostly an European unit. In Germany, for instance, it numbers 8,000,000 members, but in fact there are no less than 3,000,000 of these who are followers of the Profintern. In England they count 5,500,000. But to this figure we have to make a few corrections: First, at the end of 1922, this figure was lowered by over 1,000,000. Second, out of the remaining 4,500,000, not less than 12 per cent are followers of the Profintern. In Austria the Amsterdam International counts 1,079,000 members, but the opposition bloc composed of our followers has over 10 per cent of that amount. In Belgium the reformist unions have 698,000 members, but here our followers are between 5 and 8 per cent. In Bulgaria, according to the Amsterdam International, they have 14,000 members, but in reality the reformist unions have at most 1,000 members. In Denmark the reformist unions have 242,000 members, out of which 10 per cent are followers of the Profintern,
In Spain the reformists unite 240,000 members, out of which about 25 per cent are followers of the Profintern. And at that there are two dual trade union centers; One a reformist, the other revolutionary-Syndicalist. We have followers of the Profintern in both these organizations. In general we may say that in both Spanish Confederations we have from 30 to 35 per cent of our followers. In France the Amsterdam International counts about 756,000 members, but in reality the reformist Confederation of Labor has at most 250,000, In Greece, according to the Amsterdam International, they have 170,000 members of the trade unions; but, firstly, this figure is exaggerated because there is no such number of organized workers in Greece, and, secondly, half of the members of the Greek trade unions are affiliated with the Profintern.
Hungary has 152,000 organized workers, but it is difficult to define the minority there, because the Horthy government makes continual ​and murderous attacks upon the Communists. In Italy at the present time, thanks to the Fascist pogroms, there are probably not more than between 250,000 to 300,000 organized workers, 50 per cent of which stand on the platform of the Profintern.
Norway left the Amsterdam International yet has not joined the Profintern—she is on the road between the two and the question is not yet settled. Holland has now 200,000 members in the trade unions. Among them we have not many followers. In Poland there are 365,000 organized workers, about 50 per cent of whom are with us although it is hard to find our exact numbers there, thanks to the continuous raids on the Polish trade unions. In Sweden there are 313,000 members in trade unions, 15 per cent of whom are followers of the Profintern.
In Switzerland there are 225,000, and about 25 per cent of them are our followers. In Czecho-Slovakia the reformists unite 350,000 members and an equal number is united in the revolutionary unions. In Canada the Amsterdam International counts 164,000, and 40 per cent of them are our followers. Argentina and Peru are figured together with 100,000 members of reformist unions, and a good half of them are in the Profintern. And last, in South Africa, we have between 15 and 20 per cent of the 50,000 members of the Amsterdam unions.
Thus, if we estimate our forces, using the figures of the Amsterdam International itself, the number of its members who are ideologically or politically following us, we get between 30 and 35 per cent.
But we already know that the Amsterdam International does not embrace all countries. Thus, America is not represented, as well as many other countries. For a more correct estimate of our forces, I will dwell on those countries whose unions are not affiliated with the Amsterdam International.
From the European countries; in the syndicalist unions of Holland we have 15,000 followers; in Portugal, where the majority are organized in the anarcho-syndicalist unions, we have about 30,000 followers; in Roumania, the majority is on our side; the Esthonian trade unions are altogether for us.
In the United States of America, the American Federation of Labor is not affiliated with the Amsterdam International because the latter is "too left." But both within and outside that Federation the influence of our followers has definitely affected over 2,000,000 workers.
​In Mexico we have about 30,000 followers; in Argentina ,about 40,000; in Chile, 60,000; in Uraguay, about 15,000; in Egypt our influence affects about 50,000 members.
I will stop on Asia. From the countries which are part of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, it is sufficient to point out only Bokhara and Khiva, where we have small units. In Dutch-India we count 27,000 of our followers; in Persia, 20,000; in Japan, 60,000; in China about 100,000 workers are connected with us; in New Zealand, about 50,000 stand on the platform of the Profintern.
Thus, although the Amsterdam International is numerically stronger than the Profintern, still a point of special importance, the followers of the latter are all over the world. Therefore, the Profintern is an International in the full sense of the word.
The calculation of our forces along the industrial, vertical line, will give us the following picture: We have one half of the Transport Workers; about a half of the Metal Workers; between 40 and 50 per cent of the Building Trades; over a half of the Wood Workers; about 40 per cent of the Leather Workers.
The Tendency for Development of the Profintern
Thus, we confront two Internationals, the numerical relation of whose forces may be characterized the following way: The Amsterdam International unites between 14,000,000 and 15,000,000 members, Its bases are the British and German unions; these two countries embrace 70 per cent of all organized workers within that International.
We unite between 12,000,000 and 13,000,000, If we would describe these two Internationals graphically, by comparing two lines, the line of the Amsterdam International would be longer than ours. But the tendency for development of the Amsterdam International and of the Profintern, if we take the last years, is different in that the membership of the Amsterdam International is steadily getting smaller and that of the Profintern is growing larger.
And, because our unions are more active—they are revolutionary for that purpose—independently of the fact that they are generally smaller in numbers, they are politically more influential. Their specific gravity is greater, they are more united, not being torn with nationalist contradictions and craft jurisdictional squabbles.
The forces of the Profintern are also stronger because the Amsterdam International has no followers within our organizations, while we do have followers within the Amsterdam International.
Now, if we exclude from the Amsterdam International all those having our point of view, the remainder will be divided in two camps over the question of the United Front. The representatives of the left ​tendencies, Fimmen and Williams, consider it necessary to unite with us, and, in the right wing, are the British and French reformists, opponents of the United Front with Communists.
The remaining 65 per cent of. the Amsterdam International are not a unit within their national groups because of inner,jealousies and competition; and also along political lines because there are serious disagreements over the question of the immediate means and methods of the class struggle. It is natural that under those conditions it is easy to say whose organization has the greater specific gravity, the Amsterdam International or the Profintern.
For that purpose we can depend on the Amsterdam International itself. A sketch of the Communist influence on the world's trade union movement happened to fall into our hands. This sketch was made by the Central body of the German trade unions and was proposed to the Amsterdam International for publication. But the latter decided not to publish it in order not to advertise the Profintern and Comintern. In this chart the Comintern and Profintern are painted in the form of a spider covering the whole world in its web, capturing the trade unions, the unions of ex-service men, the unions of unemployed, the workers' athletic associations, co-operatives, factory and shop committees, the youth movement, the union of war victims, invalids, the tenants' movements, mutual aid societies. Thus, the Communist web is covering all forms of the labor movement, All this is very well drawn in a detailed way, which is characteristic for the German bureaucrats.
This is an estimation of our activities by our opponents, and as long as they are not interested in magnifying our forces, but in the contrary, we need no better compliment for our work.
There is another thing to which we should pay attention. The fundamental question is the tendency for development. If the status of the world's trade union movement, external, statistical expression is against us so far, what is the dynamic feature of this movement? In which direction does it develop?
Here we may refer to definite historical facts. We organized three years ago. The Profintern has no old traditions. It is a new organization. What are the results of the three years of work? We were blockaded for a long time. We are still blockaded because the Profintern cannot develop legally in Europe. In Hungary, Roumania, Jugo-Slavia, Finland, Italy and other countries the police terrorizes and smashes the organizations affiliated to the Profintern; and, in spite of this colossal apparatus of the bourgeoisie, which is aimed at the revolutionary trade unions, in spite of the fact that all opportunities are on the side and in the hands of the Amsterdam International, in spite of all that, there is a steady lessening of the influence of it and, at the same time, a steady growth of the influence of the Profintern.
​This is explained by the correctness of our political tactics and by the correct estimation of the relation of forces between the working class and its enemies. We may very definitely say that the development of the international labor movement will lead to the creation of one single trade union international. This international will be created upon the final disappearance of the Amsterdam International.
Such is the logical development of historical events, against which the Amsterdamers can do nothing.
The Anarcho-Syndicalist International
Do these movements we have described exhaust all tendencies there are in the international labor movement? Are there some other small streams along side the great rivers? There is one other organization which pretends to lead the international labor movement. This organization calls itself the "International Workingmens' Association," that is, they adopt the name of the First International, organized by Karl Marx.
This organization appeared at the end of 1922 at the initiative of the German syndicalists. Why was this international organized? It was organized as an opposition to the Communist tendency of the Profintern. This international is opposed to our slogan of Proletarian Dictatorship and against our policies, against our methods of struggle, and against our bloc with the Communist parties.
There is opposition against us in Spain, among the French syndicalists, among the "Industrial Workers of the World" of the United States and the syndicalist organizations of South America. To these few syndicalist organizations are added small groups of Italian, German, Dutch and Swedish syndicalists.
These anarcho-syndicalist groupings, come out against the Profintern with a few accusations. First, the connections of the Profintern with the Comintern; second, its political orientation; third, that the Profintern is advocating as one of its main slogans the dictatorship of the proletariat; fourth that it is for violence, that it is upholding Soviet Russia.
The peculiarity of anarcho-syndicalism in the post-war period is in that its pre-war unity, its pre-war clarity of principles, are gone. The war and the revolution brought colossal changes into the anarcho-syndicalist organizations. Among them appeared a faction which is for the dictatorship of the proletariat. Part of the anarcho-syndicalists went over to the Communists, another part is for co-operation with the Communists.
​Thus, this period of ideological crisis definitely affected the anarcho-syndicalist wing of the world's trade union movement and brought into its ranks a great internal confusion, dissolution and sharp variation.
It is necessary to point out that among all these anarcho-syndicalist groupings only a small part remains fixed to the old point of view. The peculiar attribute of this group is that neither the war nor the revolution has had any influence on it. Perhaps it is a virtue but, at the present moment, a very doubtful virtue. They are striving to create their own "international" on the basis of the pre-war pure syndicalism, being sure, as before, that only the trade unions are revolutionary organizations, and all other organizations, including the Communists, are the tools of the capitalist class.
What does this international represent? It embraces the German syndicalists, 30,000; the majority of the anarcho-syndicalists of Spain, about 100,000; a majority of the Portugal Confederation of Labor, about 40,000 members; a minority of the Unity General Confederation of Labor (C. G. T. U.) of France; finally, small separate groups in Sweden, between 15,000 and 20,000; in Holland, about 5,000; and smaller groups and organizations in South American countries: Argentina, Mexico and Brazil. These are all the forces of the anarcho-syndicalist international. I have already mentioned the character of their platform which was adopted by their constituent congress.
In every international one country is playing the leading role—this defines the physiognomy of the international unit. In the Amsterdam International the leading role is played by the British trade unions. In the Profintern the leading role is played by the Russian trade union movement. Who is playing the leading role in the anarcho-syndicalist international?
This role is played by the syndicalist-Tolstoian organization of Germany. The leadership in this international belongs to the German syndicalists, the main attribute of which is absolute passivity. What are the German syndicalists doing? Nobody knows. They are busy with advocating individual improvement, preaching non-resistance to evil, non-resistance to violence, defending Russian anarchists against the soviet power, they are attacking the Soviet government for its "crimes." In short, these people are busy, on one hand, with self-improvement, and on the other, in agitation that is absolutely harmless to the bourgeoisie.
More than that, this international is striving to split its followers from other organizations, It is, on principle, for splitting the trade unions and withdrawing from them all the more pure—from their point of view—elements. The organization which leads this international—the German syndicalists—is as "dangerous" to the German bourgeoisie as is, for instance, the Esperanto Association or the Skating ​Societies. Such societies may be very useful, but by no means represent any danger to the bourgeoisie.
From this characterization of the leading organization of the anarcho-syndicalists' international, it is possible to draw a conclusion as to the whole international. This international was created exclusively for the purpose of splitting away a certain part of the trade union elements of the Profintern, its aim is to fight against the Profintern and the Russian revolution.
But, to their regret, they embrace a very small number of workers. In the whole world they count only a couple of hundred thousand. Moreover, they play no role in the great battles which are being fought. This international itself, reflecting the weakness, the lack of political foresight, the backwardness of its members, represents more a society for the passing of resolutions, than an international organization for the struggle against the bourgeoisie.
The Catholic, Protestant and Other Labor Unions
To give a full picture of the world’s trade union movement it is necessary to dwell upon, also, those unions which are by no means, even verbally, connected with socialist ideology.
First of all, what is the origin of these unions? We have here attempts of the bourgeois classes, and mainly Catholicism, to exercise influence over the laboring masses and to strengthen themselves within the labor organizations. It is true these unions are nowhere strong, but of course they play a certain role. Let us take Germany, for instance. In Germany, alongside the reformist and other unions, there are about 2,000,000 workers organized into Catholic unions. There are, also, 650,000 workers organized into the democratic unions. In Italy there are also Catholic unions.
In some countries these unions play an important role, as for instance, in Holland there are six general trade union centers: Of the reformist unions with 200,000; Catholics, with 150,000; Evangelical, with 80,000; Democratic, with 50,000; and the syndicalist union which stands on the platform of the Profintern with between 15,000 and 20,000 members; and one more unit which recently split away from us and joined the anarcho-syndicalist international, with 5,000.
Thus, in one small country, there are six central trade union organizations, among which the Catholic, Democratic and Evangelical unions unite about 300,000 members.
It is understood why every bourgeois party is trying to find a foothold in the laboring masses, but why does the latter go into these unions? What are the reasons that the working class produces an element which gathers around such organizations?
​What are the principal bases, let us say, for the Catholic unions? The principal basis for these unions is contained in the formula: "Love one another." If, in general, this is not a bad principle, in the class struggle it plays a definite role, weakening the fighting spirit of the workers. In the education which is being received by the members of the Catholic unions, religion is dominant.
The confessional unions are trying to connect politics and economics with religion and to inject into the demands of the workers a somewhat religious Catholic or Protestant outlook. The harmfulness of these organizations is very clear, but why are there certain kinds of workers who join them? This is, first of all, because the working class is not all of one kind, is not homogeneous. It is not sufficiently united. It is in different stages of development: It is partly connected to the petty bourgeoisie, partly with the peasantry and the individual producers. The culture of the present society—the universities, schools, literature—all influences the working class which is a participant in this society. The children of the workers are studying in bourgeois schools, going through history with certain text-books.
Thus, the varied and heterogeneous composition of the proletariat, the existence of different layers within this class which is termed the working class—all this shows itself in the form of different ideological groupings. By this is explained the existence, alongside the Communists of the reformist and Catholic labor organizations.
The practical work of these Catholic unions does not differ much from the work of the reformists. The difference, perhaps, is that the former talk about God, while the latter talk about the League of Nations—that is, that from somewhere outside the unions, some aid should come to the workers.
In fact the tactics of the reformist and the Catholic unions are the same, and not as an accident do we find in Germany a bloc between the reformist and Catholic unions, a bloc not only on the question of wages, but also a political one. Both these organizations—Catholic and reformists—always find common ground, because the fundamental principle of both is the same—it is class collaboration and merciless struggle against Communism.
The Influence of Bourgeois Ideology
Such anti-proletarian activity by proletarian organizations we see in many countries. In the United States, the American Federation of Labor is a reactionary organization whose slogans are anti-Communism and anti-Socialism. The officials of the American Federation of Labor call themselves "independents," but in reality they are completely dependent on the bourgeois political parties. It is known that in America, ​where anti-socialism has reached its peak, corruption has also its peak. We see there such a case where a deceased leader of a yellow union left a property of $500,000 which he had "saved up" within the fifteen or twenty years of his leadership. Of course, such money the "leaders" received, not as wages, but from the bourgeoisie as reward for some kind of successful treason to the interests of the working class.
There were many proven cases where a leader of a union—its secretary—at certain moments would break a strike, receiving for it a definite amount of so many thousands of dollars. Some employer would pay money in order to cause a strike against his competitors, etc. In America there is a whole system invented by the bourgeoisie for the corruption of labor leaders and for crushing of the class struggle and diverting it into another channel.
This influence of the bourgeois state, has, in every country, its peculiarities. Each country has its method for the corruption of the working class, and the bourgeoisie of each country uses these methods very successfully for its own interests. But the opportunity itself of having such an influence on the working class, proves that the bourgeoisie has a foothold within the working class, just as we, for instance—the Profintern—have our foothold within the Amsterdam International.
Thus, the power of the bourgeoisie is contained not only in its army, police, courts, but also in its ability to influence and control a section of the working class, and to undermine the labor organizations which should conduct the struggle against it. For, if the world's 50,000,000 mass membership of the trade unions would be a really united army, the bourgeoisie would long ago have been smashed to pieces. The reason why we have not smashed it before now is not only because we have within the working class some elements of bourgeois ideology, but because it has an organized foothold within the working class.
The difficulty of the revolutionary labor movement is in the necessity of dislodging these organized bourgeois footholds from within the working class. Almost all the leaders of the reformists are infected with bourgeois ideology. We have to create new staffs of leaders who will feel themselves representatives of the always-fighting working class. The difficulty of creating such new staffs and instilling into them revolutionary ideas is one of the main causes which is delaying the victory of revolution all over the world.
Prospects of Development of the Trade Union Movement
At last, we will dwell upon the prospects of the world's trade union movement as a whole. The picture of the international trade union movement which is given here, may seem at first glance, somewhat ​pessimistic: If the bourgeoisie is so strong, can we overcome its influence? What are the methods for that conquest, and how do we visualize the further existence of the trade unions and all other labor organizations?
For those who are active politically—and you know that the Communists are such—for revolutionary fighters, pessimism has no place in the analysis of historical events.
We have given a real analysis of the relation of forces and we see our strength and our weakness. We see the power of resistance of our enemies, We see the fact of existing footholds in our ranks of the bourgeoisie, and we have to work out methods of future struggle.
No one can tell how long it will take until we will win over this numerically gigantic mass, and will bring it to consciousness of its own interests. The only thing that we Marxians may reply to is the question: Does the labor movement really proceed on the line of eliminating from its body all that now clogs it?
We can, on account of the experience of the last few years, say that we made a colossal step ahead. If we would compare the labor movement at the time of the great French revolution with the present day movement, we can frankly state that during the six years, from October 1917 to 1923, the labor movement had greater successes, than during the period from 1789 to 1917, that is, during the 130 years from the Great French revolution until our October revolution in Russia.
Thus, from the historical point of view, events are proceeding with lightning rapidity. We think that this movement should bring about a fundamental change in all existing labor organizations, co-operative, political, trade union, etc.
What does a political party represent? What causes a political party? It is an organ of class struggle. It exists as long as the class struggle. But when classes will disappear, when a developed form of Communism will spread all over the world—will the Communist Party exist then? No. Thus, within a certain epoch of time (we cannot define it in exact figures) political parties will disappear, because all that which created them will also disappear—the classes and the class struggle.
And what will happen with the unions? They will also disappear, but along an entirely different line than the parties. Where do the tendencies in the labor movement lead? They lead to a first stage of development of the working class, when the working class conquers and organizes a dictatorship, which is a temporary dictatorship.
When we speak about a temporary dictatorship, we do not mean that the dictatorship will last five or ten years, but we mean a whole historical epoch. The dictatorship will end when there will be no more classes. The end of the dictatorship means the disappearance of all ​the apparatus and organs of state enforcement. While the transition from the dictatorship into the Communist society is going on, there is going on a gradual blending of the economic organs of proletarian dictatorship and the trade unions. A new synthetic organization is being created which directs all production.
From the trade unions, on the basis of trade unions, is being developed in society that organ which will direct and regulate production—will grow the economic organs for directing society. And as, in a developed Communist society, there will be no state organs except the organs of economic production and administration, thus, the trade unions in the process of their development become a new organ, the name of which we cannot know, but which will deal with production, regulation, distribution, accountancy, statistics, etc.
Thus we come to the conclusion that all forms of the labor movement, developing in the moment of revolution, expanding and embracing wide masses with the development of the revolution itself, in its process are changing; when the time comes of the general victory of Communism, they to a certain degress are absorbed in the new society, changing their forms, becoming filled with a new content and responding to the needs of the time.
Such are the prospects of the development of the world's trade union movement. That is about the way we active workers in the present revolution visualize the future relations between different organizations and the destiny of different forms of the labor movement created by the working class in the process of its historical development.
This analysis, or, if you please, this prognosis of future development, comes from our Marxian estimation of the relation of forces. Of course, life in the future will bring many changes into these relations. But if our fundamental analysis is correct, that we are moving toward a non-class society; if it is correct that the proletarian dictatorship is a temporary historical epoch, then it is absolutely correct, that the organs created by a class society must disappear because there will be no basis upon which these organs can exist.
For our generation, these questions will not make themselves felt practically. But we Communists have one peculiarity, we are not afraid to confront the future face to face, and in the sphere of estimating the development of events, we always follow realistic logic, no matter what the conclusion may be.
We do not know how the developed Communist society will look, but there is certainly no doubt that the historical forces, which started millions to moving and heaved up tens and hundreds of millions of people, will without fail lead humanity to that system of society.
The social revolution which began in Russia had a great influence on the whole Near, Middle and Far East. All colonial and half-colonial ​countries—China, Korea, India, Java and others—who have been dreaming for a thousand years, have been dragged into this liberating movement.
We are present at the very beginning of the dissolution of the system of exploitation which has been built up for centuries Disintegration, the destruction of the old, and the creation of the new society—all is an historical process which will last many and many decades.
For the case here depends upon the reconstruction of social relations around the whole globe. When that process will end we do not know, but one thing is clear: The stronger, the more united, the more elastic and aggressive the revolutionary wing of the labor movement will be, the more objectively we, the Communists, estimate the relation of forces outside and inside the working class—the more correct will be our conduct—the sooner will humanity arrive at the developed form of Communist society.
The End