(en) Communistes libertaires de la CGT - European elections: a timid statement (fr)

Confederal statement about the European elections is shy about the claims, bland on the 
ETUC and vaguely Republican to defend the institutions. The text is the image of the 
national leadership: unable to stimulate debates and fights the level needed to fend off 
employers. ---- The claims: ---- The declaration proposes various measures very vague to 
improve the distribution of wealth, establish protective standards and other empty 
phrases. It is a radical on one point: tax harmonization but wearing a dubious 
explanation: "tax harmonization to drain tax havens "that could be dried countries while 
interest such harmonization would course to end the fiscal dumping that offers businesses 
real reasons to outsource anything anywhere. Finally it's radio silence on the word order 
that is worth and that is not the "harmonization" but "matching" the social rights of 
European workers on the best achievements in each country.

On the CES:

Still a hollow phrase that forgets to mention that the CES is a huge bureaucratic machine 
whose function is to give a union endorsed the anti-social measures decided in Brussels. 
And that the choice to be in order not to cut large unions (very reformist) should not 
prevent us from bringing including public controversy with the ETUC and unions that 
compose (eg signatures of repetitions agreements rotten by the UGT and CCOO in Spain).

Finally, the text laments forbearance which endangers democracy. While this is the 
opposite. It is the absence of democratic issue that causes the abstention of those who do 
not trust the electoral discourse. Also not the slightest criticism of the few democratic 
foundation of our institutions. This puts the coup CGT in the wake of government parties 
who play the democracy fixed dates but quickly outdated ...

------------------------------------------------

Who are we? analyzes and reflections

CGT: Building a majority trade union left

For years, it was announced the breaking of the reformist CGT on the model experienced 
by the CFDT in the late 1970s not that simple. Majority CGT trade unionists continue to 
practice the struggle over on militant bases Cgt rest for workers union struggle and the 
red flag. So how is it that the majority orientation confederal track of prospects 
claim-inspired largely by unionism regulation of market economy?

The last Confederal Congress was marked generally by continuing guidance previous 
congresses , suggesting that the CGT is truly committed to the rails unionism proposals 
and negotiations, mixed with a few great days of strikes and demonstrations in support of 
a union strategy in which social dialogue between the social partners responsible under 
the auspices of a State that would be expected that protects employees, is the means to 
gain social conquests. This observation is partly true if you do pay attention to notices 
of its most high-profile leaders as the only reading of his texts Congress. Indeed, the 
notions and concepts such as CGT "unionism together", "social democracy", "unionism 
membership", "unionism proposals and negotiations" ... often do not have much to do in the 
way many trade union CGT conceive and implement them on the ground. And because a large 
minority, all combined sensitivities of the base to the top, have a different approach, 
marked by the primacy of the balance of power. Different approach redoubled differences 
between unions in the private and public sector.
The major problem, which is still checked last Confederal Congress in March 2013, is the 
inability to construct a coherent alternative to the guidelines proposed in the 
preparatory texts orientation. This can be verified in contradictions voted at the end of 
the congress final texts. It marks progress on many points. For example, when the CGT 
intends to open the debate on social ownership and therefore the legitimacy of private 
property. But you can read along in protest marks the CGT fights for business support by 
the various employee savings schemes of regional funds to promote sustainable employment. 
It oscillates between a timid anti-capitalist approach and assumed a non regulatory 
approach of market economy.

Yet many amendments asking to correct texts in a sense of class struggle still back in 
Congress. The thunderous applause at the last convention to greet the hardest to 
interventions against the Socialist-Green government and the MEDEF show a radical demand 
of the trade unions. How to explain this shift with much more measured response leading 
member of the national leadership? How to explain that during NCC, the majority of 
Departmental Secretaries Unions stick to implementation in fine of the reformist 
understanding most of the confederal leadership guidance of congress?

Remove obstacles to unity anticapitalist CGT

There was virtually several obstacles to the expression of an anti-capitalist alternative 
in CGT: many activists, whatever their level of responsibility, reluctant to lead the 
fight collectively, not wanting to be perceived as divisive . However, and this is a 
shame, is not it a kind of reformist fraction that is in control of most of the key 
positions in the umbrella organization? There is a real problem of collective expression 
and union democracy. The other obstacle, which is the cause and the consequence is the 
refusal to harm the organization if the CGT is torn internally, it can only weaken against 
its external enemies ( employers, other unions ...). Admittedly, this may weaken for a 
time but letting the CGT in the muddy waters of reformism is also weaken and permanently. 
Another obstacle and size: diversity, dispersion and bigotry of activists who clearly 
demonstrate their opposition to the current direction. These three factors are full as a 
foil for a majority of union CGT preferring warp somewhat genuinely reformist orientations.

So there is a responsibility that the anti-capitalist currents unite on a common basis and 
wide open, leaving aside their different ideological often related stories and militants 
different route (PCF, the "Trotskyists" revolutionary syndicalists , the "Maoists" 
libertarian ...). As we must be able to understand and hear the differences in vocabulary, 
which often result in sterile discussions and oppositions then we mean the same thing. 
What should heckle the various organized minorities is their ability to speak with one 
voice and with a language understood by all union CGT references.
The question of develop tools to afford such a policy may go through a union magazine, a 
website, by regional and national meetings, etc. ... This issue is not trivial and purely 
technical because it come the problems of union democracy.

Building a union left potentially majority

But this unity of the anti-capitalist union displayed may not be limited to be an 
anti-confederal leadership gathering. It will make sense in the desire to build in the 
struggles and the CGT alternative guidelines and practices for all workers. For most of 
the CGT union leading the class struggle on a daily basis are not part of organized 
minorities do not know most of the time or watching warily. However, if many are stowed 
CGT conventional reformist conceptions reflecting the division between social democratic 
party that structural reforms and union claims at the margin, the vast majority of 
activists and union members are fighting without perspective Overall their many battles. 
It is this ideological vacuum that reformism also wins.
It is this abyss of alternative thinking capitalism exists potentially a majority, given 
the contradictions of the period (economic, political and ecological crises) and positive 
changes in CGT although still fragile (autonomy to against political parties, societal 
struggles integrated into the overall discussion, Trade Union Unity).