Editorial
The Necessity for Unity in Action
The November 17th cross-Canada mobilizations against war, racism and neo-liberal globalization have been hailed as a huge success by organizers. There is no doubt that the November 17th events were important in establishing that the movement is still alive in Canada and that anti-war and anti-globalization activists are not prepared to submit to the post-September 11th pressures to abandon mass actions. However, the virtual absence of trade union delegations at the actions across the country requires serious attention. For example, at the Ottawa actions against the November 17th meeting of the G-20 countries, although many individual trade unionists participated, there were no official trade union contingents and no significant mobilization of union members was attempted. Unlike the Quebec City protests, workers were not bussed in from all over Ontario and Quebec and the number of participants - reported to be from 2,000 to 4,000 - reflected this fact.
There are a number of reasons for the drastic decline in trade union participation from the levels at Quebec City in April. One reason is that the trade union movement is split on the issue of the war against Afghanistan and the events organized on November 17th were largely organized on that issue. Furthermore, much of the trade union leadership has never actually supported the opposition to neo-liberal globalization and participated in the events at Quebec City only because of pressure from their members. Following September 11th, some of those trade union leaders have been advocating an end to mass mobilizations against globalization.
There are reports that during the organizational meetings leading up to the November 17th action in Ottawa the trade union representatives were unable to obtain assurances from some of the other participants that the demonstrations would be peaceful. Various participants insisted on their right to do whatever they pleased, including provoking confrontations with the police. On the eve of the events, an agreement was reached that the actions on Friday evening would be confrontational, while the main march on Saturday would be peaceful. As it turned out, only a very small number of people opted for confrontational tactics even at the Friday actions and the main source of confrontations and provocations was the police.
A large mobilization in Ottawa, including thousands of trade union members, would have smashed the calls for retreat which have echoed since September 11th. However, that kind of victory was blocked by those who place their own narrow interests above the needs of the movement - both the conservative trade union leaders and those who insist on the right to do their own thing despite the opinions of the vast majority within the movement. Although these groups are presented as being on opposite ends of the spectrum, the conservative trade union leaders and those who insist on confrontational tactics are actually united in their opposition to the development of a mass movement.
Those who place their own interests and whims, or those of their particular group, above the needs of the movement display a profound contempt for democracy and for the movement itself. They claim that they are correct and everyone else is wrong. On this basis, they justify doing whatever they please. They reject unity in action in favour of either "diversity of tactics" or authoritarianism, raising tactics to the level of principle and dismissing the strategic goals of the movement. This small-group mentality and liberal individualism represents a significant barrier to the emergence of a genuinely mass movement for progress and social justice.