Theories from the Left and Right of Labor Movement - Coursework Example

Theories from the left and right of labor movement Introduction There are various theories that are used to explain how labor movements form a part of the revolutionary transformation of the society. Marxism and the revolutionary syndicalism theories are the two main theories that are useful in giving this explanation. The traditional left wing theory has been reevaluated to give rise to a new perspective known as the new right perspective. Marxist theory of labor movement considers capitalism as an exploitative economic system that is based on distinctions of class. Marxism theory base its explanation on the perception of exploitation and oppression that took place in the age that slaves used to be exploited and worked for the benefit of a dominant class. Capitalism in the same way explains how workers who do not own property work to benefit the few capitalists who are the property owners. The capitalists are the owners of the major production means and therefore control the economic as well as the political systems. Workers on the other hand are denied of the political and economic power and capitalists rob them since they extract wealth from them and also live off their labor. There are various criticisms therefore that opposed the capitalism perception of Marxism theory (Bauder, 2006). The criticisms raised against Marxism theory of labor movements led to failure of leaning theories to take hold from mid nineteenth century to the early twentieth century in the United States. The first criticism is based on Lenin theory, which according to Larson &Nissen, (1987) focuses on trade unions as being a way of remedying the problem of capitalism raised by the Marxism theory and cares about the welfare of workers by introducing the function of trade unions. This exerted more power to the existing trade unions and was referred to as syndicalism. There was then the development of the movement known as the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). Syndicalism was also aimed at eradicating the unfairness that was perceived to exist on the immorality and wage labor of capitalism. Therefore, a conflict of interest separates workers in this case from the capitalists. Achievement of emancipation of working class is possible if only an abolishment is done by abolishing the individual based systems of owning the production methods. This was remedied by introduction of a system whereby all the means of production and all other forces of production. The working class was the only party that was capable of delivering itself from this wage-based slavery. This involves third direct action without depending on the state intervention, and being able to attain political power, which is secondary to the economic power. Syndicalism was aimed at cementing the relationship between employees, binding them together and enhancing their solidarity. The workers were therefore able to bind and operate as a single fighting force whose main goal is attainment of common goals. Politics however is likely to divide the interests of employees since political parties are composed of different groups that are in many cases heterogeneous. Direct action of workers however was considered important in the effort of overthrowing the existent capitalism. The direct action is in form of strike and its success or failure acts as a source of power to the workers and gets them prepared for future campaigns. Syndicalism would ensure that workers attain their working class consciousness and creating a form of revolutionary spirit among workers (Macintyre, Blackledge & Davidson, 2008). Whereas Marxism insisted on use of political methods and parties, syndicalism considered that as a diversion from the intended task and as a trap that would hinder the workers from attaining their goal. Another disagreement that existed between the Marxism and syndicalism is that according to Marxism, the future revolutionary society would be one that workers would control the economy through state control and ownership. Syndicalism held a different perspective where the future society would be based on association of autonomous distributive and autonomous associations. Capital was the concentrated social force while the workforce just needed to dispose their working efforts on the work (Kipnis, 2004). It was not possible to strike a contract between capital and labor on equitable terms. The force of workers would only be attained by numbers and the unions had a role of ensuring the power and unity of this force. Trade unions had a role of checking competition to ensure an improvement in the welfare of the concerned workers. There was then an aim for socialists to embrace the move for mobilizing the working class and social transformation. The socialists also had an aim of solving the problems that resulted from the operation of the trade unions. There are two perspectives that resulted from socialist theory and these are the approaches that discern the revolutionary potential in the activity of trade unions and those that argue that the activity of trade unions does not result in revolutionary transformation of capitalism. Establishment of trade unions continued to be elaborate without overthrowing the concepts of capitalism and the value of trade unions was considered limited. The trade unions were then considered insufficient in determining the economic law upon which wages are determined between the forces of market demand and supply of labor. The unions therefore remained powerless with regard to this law. In case of crises, trade unions tend to reduce wages and in case where the labor demand goes up, they cannot fix wages at a level that is higher than the level attained by the forces of demand and supply or that attained by the capitalists. Marxism theory in this case argued that wages level could only be set by the struggle between capital and labor (Macintyre, Blackledge & Davidson, 2008). Achievement of trade unions was also limited to the economic laws that tended to increase the workers’ immiseration. The main factor that was considered to give power to the unions as well as to their strikes is the fact that they were the first attempt by the workers to abolish competition. Unions directed themselves against the nerves of social orders present at the time, and were dangerous to the social order. Trade unionism was regarded as an important aspect of social revolution and workers did not stop at partial combinations but aimed at pursuing other permanent combinations that served as ramparts in the struggle with employers. In addition to pursuing higher wages, the unions created class-consciousness among the workers making them to feel a sense of belonging to a certain class. Socialists argued that capitalism was a contradiction that was responsible for decline in equality and liberty. Capitalism was also regarded to be a contradiction to the freedom of workers and therefore workers would never experience freedom as long as capitalism was inexistence. Capitalism maintained monopoly and therefore elimination of capitalism would require a prior elimination of monopoly. This led to social ownership and democratic management of the means of production. This then did not only benefit the workers in an economic sense but also provided them with social as well as political opportunities. The socialist analysis had to be confirmed by various regulations including the government regulations and the antitrust laws. These had to approve the power and wealth centralization and concentration that was proposed in the in the socialist analysis and incorporating a system of social order (Bauder, 2008). The proposed social order would respond to the pressures of the political and economic life. The social reforms that took place opposed the idea that wealth belonged to the wealthy working class and held that it is the workers who made effort to create this wealth, and therefore deserved to have its share. This therefore is what necessitated socialism since the introduction of democracy would ensure that there is a controlled economy with planned stability as a replacement of capitalists’ competition. Despite all these perception, the success on implementation of socialism was still uncertain since many people were still used to capitalism and adoption of socialism was not easy. Many unions however adopted socialism as a goal of their operation, as they aimed towards attaining maximum benefit for the workers. Different labor unions started incorporating different socialist programs indicating a move towards social revolution. Capitalists made efforts to suppress the effort made by the socialists but this did not hinder the socialists from making extra efforts of ensuring that the wealth of the state was not just concentrated in the hands of a small minority group of capitalists. Socialism was meant to have a contribution to prosperity of all workers with production of quality goods and improved standards of living (Coker, 2002). The socialists advocated for worker cooperatives that were aimed at transforming the society towards an economic benefit of all parties. Poverty and misery therefore was used as a basis for challenge to capitalism. One weakness that results from undertaking socialist movement is the inability of linking socialism to every day demand for workers. Implementation of socialism movements was therefore difficult in situations where it was difficult to meet the existing demand for labor. Capitalism was considered as a means of disabling the workers since they work without getting any motivation for the work that they do. Socialism movements would incorporate the welfare of workers ensuring that their needs are satisfied. Socialist movements were also aimed at breaking the existing capitalism monopoly that was termed as being exploitative to the workers in the United States. The movements aimed at eradicating the unhealthy conditions for workers that resulted from capitalism. The capitalists depend on more of skilled labor than unskilled labor, which is difficult to provide under the poor conditions of workers that exist in capitalism. Political ideologies in capitalism are defined based on the minority group of capitalists disregarding the majority that is made up of a large number of workers. It was therefore difficult in the United States to change the mindset of the people who believed in the operation of capitalism and this hindered the left leaning theories from taking hold from the mid nineteenth century to early twentieth century. Socialism therefore was torn by factionalism (Kipnis, 2004). Conclusion The left leaning theories consisted of militant fighters for industrial unionism, better working conditions and civil. Right wing socialists believed that they could use the existing apparatus of the state to increase growth of socialized production. Left wing socialists believed that they could immobilize the apparatus of the state by electing socialists to public office and then use revolutionary union and general strikes to lock out the employers and set a state of trade union. The left leaning theories did not however take hold from the mid nineteenth century to the early twentieth century due to factionalism and unwillingness of people to get rid of capitalism. References Kipnis, I. (2004). The American Socialist Movement 1897 - 1912. Chicago, Ill: Haymarket Books. MacIntyre, A. C., Blackledge, P., & Davidson, N. (2008). Alasdair MacIntyres engagement with Marxism: Selected writings 1953-1974. Leiden: Brill. Larson, S., & Nissen, B. (1987). Theories of the labor movement. Detroit, Mich: Wayne State University Press. Coker, J. W. (2002). Confronting American labor: The New Left dilemma. Columbia: University of Missouri Press. Bauder, H. (2006). Labor movement: How migration regulates labor markets. New York: Oxford University Press. Read More