i
Click Here for the rest of this issue
Book Review
 1926 General Strike: Workers Taste Power by Peter Taaffe
Evelyn Crampsie

1926 General Strike: Workers Taste Power by Peter Taaffe1926 General Strike: Workers Taste Power

By Peter Taaffe

Socialist Books, 2006

£7.50 / €10

Workers Taste Power, Peter Taaffe’s latest book comes at an exciting time for socialism. Its purpose is to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the 1926 General Strike in Britain. By outlining the background events that led to the magnificent display of workers’ unity, where an estimated four million took strike action in waves with a million miners locked out at any one time, the manner in which the nine days of the Strike unfolded and the subsequent series of events, Peter Taaffe manages to demonstrate that despite all capitalist comment to the contrary, a general strike is as possible today as it was in 1926.  

Following a period that has been marked by a lack of struggle in Britain and Ireland, recent attacks on public sector workers in Britain over pensions and raising of the retirement age and the aggressive attacks on GAMA and Irish Ferries’ workers in the South of Ireland, have made the subject matter of Workers Taste Power even more relevant and important for socialists today. Peter Taaffe believes that only by exploring the detail of the 1926 General Strike and similar events in other countries and drawing out the lessons from these, can socialists ensure that they are fully prepared for a similar situation in the future.

In his introduction, he poses a number of questions that relate to the 1926 General Strike but that are also relevant questions for socialists today: "Why did the General Strike take place when it did?" and, "what was the political outlook of the majority of the working class in the Strike?" These are both key questions in that they point to the type of conditions that would have allowed the Strike to be successful had it not been for the betrayal of the union leaders. Despite present day society appearing to be very different from that of 1926, the capitalist system still poses the same problems for the working class of today. Wages, working conditions and standards of living continue to be attacked by the bosses and the government, so the gap between the classes is as wide as it was in 1926, pointing to a collision at some stage in the future.

Therefore, Marxists need to be prepared to avoid the failures of the trade union leadership during the 1926 General Strike. British capitalism was in crisis after the First World War. It was under pressure from American and German capitalism and this resulted in high unemployment and wage cuts for British workers. This was the beginning of the tensions between the classes that culminated in the General Strike. The backdrop to this was the Russian Revolution of 1917, which, inspired the working class to join trade unions in both Europe and Britain. Union membership in Britain catapulted to eight million by 1920. The setting up of the British Communist Party and the fear of revolution spreading across Europe,  caused such fear amongst the ruling class that they decided to intervene directly against Soviet Russia using the British working class in a war against Russia if necessary. They were met by the threat of a general strike by the working class, which caused them to retreat. By 1921, the industrial slump had hit the coal industry and it was at this time that the government decided to hand control of the mines back to the mine owners. In turn the owners decided to inflict terrible wage cuts on the miners, which they resisted, but which led to them being locked out. The miners were betrayed by the union leadership who refused to call a general strike but fought on alone for 11 weeks. In the end they had to succumb to the owners’ pay cuts, which, was a huge blow not just to the miners but the entire working class.

The economic conditions continued to deteriorate during the early 1920s and again it would be the working class that would have to suffer the consequences. The Tory Prime Minister, Stanley Baldwin stated that "all the workers of this country have got to face a reduction of wages to help put industry on its feet". On 30 June 1925, the mine owners demanded more wage cuts and the government gave them their backing. The workers appealed to the Trade Union Council for support and the TUC reluctantly called an embargo on the movement of coal. The government retreated and announced an inquiry in to the coal industry to buy them more time for the looming General Strike. The ruling class used this time to prepare for war against the working class. These were the conditions that led to the mindset and level of consciousness of the working class when the General Strike was eventually called in May 1926. There was huge resentment and anger towards the ruling class, a large section had been radicalised and working class people wanted a real alternative to the capitalist system. They relished the idea of the tables being turned on the bosses and that they should come begging the workers for help.

Due to the unwavering resolve of the government to clash with the workers and refusal to meet any of their demands and the mass movement towards strike by the workers, the Trade Union Council was dragged reluctantly into calling a General Strike. However, they bided their time to sell out the workers at the first available opportunity. They feared where a General Strike may lead them and they were not willing to go the distance. I think that the conditions leading up to the General Strike are as important for modern day Marxists as the actual events that unfolded once the strike was called, as they point to the type of conditions that need to happen in the foreseeable future in order to bring about any real social alternative to the present capitalist system.

The events of the nine days of the Strike are intriguing and demonstrate the lengths that the ruling class will go to in order to maintain the status quo. The way in which the workers organised was inspirational, from their councils of action, to their workers defence corps and strike committees. These bodies began to assume the role of a rival workers government. In some parts of the country there was almost a situation of dual power. What may have begun as a dispute over wages quickly turned into something akin to the beginnings of a revolutionary movement.

Socialists can draw a number of conclusions from the heroic events of the General Strike. (1) That it was the leaders and not the working class that caused the Strike to fail, (2) that even the left wing leaders such as A.J. Cook lacked clear objectives which represented a lack of leadership for the workers, (3) that a mass Marxist working class party was missing. This would have helped develop working class power and assist towards the transformation of society, (4) that the Communist Party due to mistaken policies failed to emerge stronger from the Strike. However, despite the terrible defeat a significant section of the working class began to draw far-reaching socialist conclusions and the efforts of the British working class of 1926 have left the socialists of today with a wealth of important lessons to guide them towards achieving a socialist alternative.

As someone new to socialism, this book answered many of the nagging questions I had on how exactly conditions could be created to lay the foundations of a revolutionary movement and the mechanics of how a new socialist state could come into existence with the right leadership and guidance. Workers Taste Power is a reminder that the working class should never be underestimated and that anything is possible.
Book Review
 Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive by Jared M. Diamond
Michael O'Brien

Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive by Jared M. DiamondCollapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive

By Jared M. Diamond

Penguin (Allen Lane), 2005

£9.99 / €15

This ambitious book is an appropriate follow up to Diamond’s previous best-seller Guns, Germs and Steel, which gave a historical materialist explanation as to why European society developed to a point that allowed its ruling class in turn to subjugate the rest of the world. Here he decisively answered racist theories about the supposed innate superiority of whites.

In Collapse Diamond traverses the centuries and all corners of the planet to examine the recurring factors that have led to the collapse or survival of societies. The purpose of this book is to draw comparisons with the world of today and to shake the reader out of any assumptions they may have that the world has moved beyond a stage where societal collapse is possible. Finally Collapse explores what corrective actions can be taken to ensure our collective survival.

Diamond applies five criteria to all the societies he examines from tiny Pacific island societies 700 years ago to the China of today. These factors are management of renewable and non renewable resources, natural and man-made climate change, conflict with neighbouring societies, economic relations with neighbouring societies and finally the response or lack of response of societies to crises. One example he gives of the last factor was the contrasting fortunes of the Inuit and Norse peoples who simultaneously settled on Greenland 1,000 years ago. The Norse adopted a lifestyle in line with their Scandinavian forbears of keeping grazing animals, which the harsher landscape could not sustain, leading to declining living standards and eventual extinction. The Inuit on the other hand innovated ways of sustaining themselves through whaling and fishing that enabled them to outlast the Norse.

The role of class society is addressed as well. The early evolution of class differentiation ironically was a mark of progress in society. The development of farming techniques meant that people moved beyond having to struggle to survive and instead there was a surplus of food and other necessities created. This allowed a section of society to be freed up from the daily graft and instead devote their time to further developing science and technique, which would in turn enable society to further develop. However Diamond cites occasions where those initially freed up to play the role of developing technique and administering, go on to solidify themselves into a self-serving exploitative class and eventually cease to make a positive contribution but instead consume a disproportionate amount of produce and steer their society to destruction. The examples of Easter Island and the Maya societies of present day Mexico are given. In both these cases, vast amounts of human labour and non-renewable resources were wasted on building monuments to glorify the ruling class or gods instead of addressing challenges to ensure the long term survival of society. The irrationality of the Bush regime keeps springing to mind especially with regard to his denial of the process of global warming.

Some positive examples are also given of how challenges were met by bottom up collective management and centrally imposed planning, as in the case of the Shoguns of Japan in the 1600s who reversed the deforestation of the country leaving Japan as the first world country with the most tree cover to this day. Diamond weighs up the situation in which the world finds itself today and points out an apparent contradiction. On the one hand, the impact of economic activity as it is presently organised  is causing more damage than any of the previous societies examined and poses the possibility of making the world uninhabitable within several generations.

On the other hand, we have the advantage ancient societies did not have of learning from their experiences and, because of the technology at our disposal, arresting the destruction that is taking place. Diamond categories himself as a "cautious optimist" in terms of what is possible. Typical of many in the environmental movement, he sees the problems being addressed through a combination of ordinary people using their power as consumers to create a demand for sustainable commodities and a global system of governance that will regulate how corporations conduct themselves. He backs this up by giving isolated examples of companies like Chevron which, have responded to political pressures in Papua New Guinea and have taken precautions to decrease the impact of their oil exploration on the natural environment. He gives other examples of voluntary agreements between NGOs and some logging companies or NGOs and fish-processing companies where certain standards are agreed that ensure forests and fisheries are not overexploited.

These isolated occurrences are a very pale reflection of the concerns of people being incorporated by capitalism and turned into a market niche for a minority of first world consumers. Compared to the enormity of the problems that Jared Diamond describes, one cannot help but feel deflated by the piecemeal, gradualist "solutions" he offers. He shies away from exploring solutions that lie outside the free market. This reflects the one gap in his historical research, whereby he makes no reference to the role revolutions have played in the past in casting aside minority elites and laying the foundations for the reorganising society in order to guarantee all our survival.
Book Review
 Introducing Lenin and the Russian Revolution by Richard Appignanesi & Oscar Zarate
Mike Murphy

Introducing Lenin and the Russian Revolution by Richard Appignanesi & Oscar ZarateIntroducing Lenin and the Russian Revolution (New Edition)

By Richard Appignanesi & Oscar Zarate

Icon Books, 2000

£9.99 / €15

The Introducing series of books don’t look too impressive. Lots of illustrations in books often less than 200 A5 pages long… How could they be of much value? Well, actually, they’re pretty good. Having read those on Trotsky and Marx I was hopeful when picking up this volume, and wasn’t disappointed. As a preface, it should be said that these books are introductions. They are not sources of in-depth analysis, but for basic and solid information they are often useful. This book is a case in point.

It begins with an overview of the political and economic development of Russia, from feudalism to the rapid development of capitalist modes of production in a society still peasant-based and stifled by the political structure of the feudal period. The development of radical politics, including Marxism, is outlined. The book proceeds with good outlines of the Bolshevik-Menshevik split, the Russo-Japanese War and the 1905 revolution. The development of the Bolshevik Party, and of Russian society, is traced through to 1914 and World War One. Here the political element becomes more pronounced, with an outline of how the social democratic parties abandoned the agreed position of the Second International to organise general strikes in opposition to the war and instead supported it. Lenin’s views on imperialism, his policy of revolutionary defeatism, and the socialist anti-war conference in Zimmerwald are discussed.

From 1917 the detail expands considerably, with excellent outlines of the events of that year, the inability of capitalism to meet the workers’ and peasants’ demands, and the refusal of the Mensheviks to abandon their belief in the need to develop capitalism before a struggle for socialism could be waged– and the struggles which Lenin fought on the latter point with the "Old Bolsheviks". The taking of power in October and the dispersal of the counter-revolutionary Constituent Assembly are also dealt with well. As the book proceeds there is a good outline of much of the Party’s attitude to the peasantry, Brest-Litovsk, the period of the civil war, Kronstadt and the NEP. Finally we are presented with a summary of Lenin’s political testament and a discussion of his politics in relation to the later degeneration of the revolution.

So, a good introduction, but imperfect. For example, while many of Lenin’s major works are outlined (Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism, What Is To Be Done?, April Theses), others such as State and Revolution are ignored. Of over 200 pages, the founding of the Third International and the revolutionary upheaval around Europe in the post-war period merits only two pages. Thus the influence of events internationally on the Russian revolutionary state, and Lenin’s insistence on the need for international revolution don’t get the attention they require.

The book ends with a critique of Lenin’s last years, suggesting that his conception of the party as the "elite strike-force" of the revolution led to an inability to trust the people, and thus to the GPU and KGB. In fact, Lenin’s party was an instrument of the working class, and this interpretation flies in the face of the democracy of the soviets and the early revolutionary society.

The authors’ argument also ignores the fact that only a Marxist revolutionary party has ever proven itself capable of leading a struggle to overthrow capitalism. Indeed the experiences of left-wing social democracy in Germany and of anarchism in Spain confirm Lenin’s contention that a Marxist-Leninist party is a prerequisite of successful proletarian revolution. In addition, the authors largely ignore the impact of isolation on culturally and technologically backward Russia.

The authors compare Lenin’s ideas of the relationship of party and class unfavourably to those of Gramsci – a notion worthy of discussion but certainly not dealt with adequately in this book. In conclusion, I consider this book to be an excellent introduction to Lenin, well worth recommending to one interested in left-wing politics, but by no means an entirely adequate source.