Transnational labour solidarity and the question of agency: A social dialectical approach to the field

ABSTRACT

The study of labour transnationalism remains theoretically underdeveloped. Taking this as a starting point, I focus specifically on the need to develop a critical theoretical framework for understanding different forms of transnational labour practices. This type of framework is necessary if we want, as Peter Waterman suggests, to recentre the emancipatory dimensions of transnational labour solidarities. This, I argue, means grappling with the complexities and contradictions shaping how solidarities are built and unmade. I suggest that we can elaborate on the critical paradigm proposed by Rebecca Johns that contrasts different forms of transnational solidarities and labour imperialism. Focusing on the problem of labour imperialism, I show how a dialectical materialist analysis, with attention to the social dimensions of class, can provide insights into how different forms of transnational solidarities develop.

KEYWORDS:

• internationalism
• labour transnationalism
• global labour studies
• labour imperialism
• marxism
• Nationalism
• race and racism
• transnational whiteness
• white supremacy

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. For Scipes (2010a), US labour imperialism is evident in the actions of the AFL-CIO to try and dominate other labour movements (p. xxiv). This includes their efforts to undermine democratically elected governments, as was the case in Chile and Venezuela, and their ‘support for reactionary governments and attacks by their affiliated labor movements on progressive workers and their organizations seeking democratic change,’ as was the case in the Philippines (Scipes, 2010a, p. 40). While the labour imperialism of the AFL-CIO is probably the most known and studied, many unions and federations outside of the US have engaged in these practices, including British and Canadian unions (Gupta, 1975; Nastovski, 2016b).

2. For GWF Hegel, dialectics related to the realm of ideas (1977).

3. This is in contrast to liberal conceptions of oppression. For instance, seeing racism not as a social relation but as a matter of individuals and their prejudices.

4. Rather than seeing race, gender, and class as distinct ahistorical categories, it means seeing race as embedded in the historical development of social relations. The effects of racism, patriarchy, capitalist production, and imperialism operate all together and at once in everyday experiences of social relations (Bannerji, 2005, p. 144).

5. For many Marxists, this problem of nationalism and its translation into labour imperialism became a significant dilemma during the First World War, when socialist parties, despite pledges of internationalism, overwhelmingly sided with their respective states. The decision of many socialist parties and unions to side with their respective governments during the war led to massive splits in the Second International and put into question the possibilities for international labour solidarity. Lenin wanted to know why workers and labour movements, particularly in industrialized countries, were supporting the imperialist endeavours of their governments. For Lenin, the reason workers in ‘advanced’ capitalist states have supported their government’s international actions is because imperialism creates ‘an alliance between an insignificant section at the “top” of the labor movement, and its “own” national bourgeoisie, directed against the masses of the proletariat, an alliance between the servants of the bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie, directed against the class that is exploited by the bourgeoisie’ (Lenin, 1915, as cited in Howard, 1995, p. 367).

6. The philosophy of business unionism is associated with professionalization and bureaucracy, a lack of political engagement beyond electoral politics, disinterest in concerns or struggles of the broader working class (not only the unorganized, but sometimes also those in other unions), and a view of members as individuals buying a service from professional negotiators and representatives. Business unionism as an ideology accepts capitalism and is associated with cooperative relations with employers, and sometimes also with corporatism as a strategy, in that employees see their fate as tied to their employers (Scott, 1978). Sims (1992) argues that business unionism is designed to meet immediate, concrete objectives within the general outlines of the distribution of power and other resources of a capitalist society. The tactics consequently focus on collective bargaining and negotiations in the interest of maintaining labor–business harmony. Strikes and other militant actions are considered only as last-ditch options, as are alliances with social sectors outside the labour community (p. 5).

7. Instead, in the context of huge profits for US multinationals, the American working class has experienced falling real wages due to the rise of competition between workers and a growing global reserve army of labour (Post, 2010, pp. 24–27).

8. Marilyn Lake (2003) argues that there has been an emergence of ‘a new definition of civilization, defined not in terms of antiquity, splendor or riches, but the white man’s standard of living’ (p. 360). Whiteness, as the idea of the embodiment of a set of superior qualities vis-à-vis non-white ‘others,’ has become the basis for this sense of entitlement (Allen, 1994; Harrison, 2001; Mills, 1994, 2008; Roediger, 1991). These entitlements include those provided by the state, the privileges of citizens of the North, better jobs, higher wages, and all the things that have come to be associated with white standards. An example of this is the idea of the American standard, a racialized concept obviously not meant as an indicator of – and that does not reflect – the living standards of most non-white Americans.