mHerman Rosenfeld, self-defined Marxist here in Toronto, recently wrote an article in the social-democratic journal Canadian Dimension (see https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/canadian-labour-palestine-and-gaza ) titled “How is the Canadian labour movement responding to Israel’s attacks on Gaza?
Unions have largely lined up in support of Palestinians.” The article has some good points, such as pointing out that the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) (public sector) advocated the following:
[it] called on Ottawa to demand an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, ban arms sales to Israel, and work to end Israel’s virtual ‘diplomatic immunity’ at fora like the United Nations. It also called for an end to Israel’s blockade of Gaza and the restoration of aid and the basic necessities of life.
Such solutions, though undoubtedly helpful, lack any bite to them in terms of how to force the federal government to do what is demanded. Making resolutions without backing it up with action–given the urgency of the needs of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank–is more symbolic than anything else. What is needed is immediate action by unions–not resolutions. The attempted silencing of resistance by labeling such resistance “hate crimes” or anti-semitism needs to be met with directly through bold union action, not resolutions that merely express a wish list.
The article does describe some bold actions:
Cross-union activists have also challenged Israeli apartheid and the occupation and are building support among unionists to transform the wider position of the labour movement during this crisis. Labour 4 Palestine has a long history of doing this work, and its presence has ebbed and flowed over the years as generations of activists come and go. A new cadre of union activists are breathing fresh life into that organization, and it has already begun to root itself in unions and build public education and action. One of its recent activities in Ottawa involved sit-ins at the offices of 17 MPs, some of whom are NDP representatives. One of the activists told me, “the NDP were ‘appalled’ that we would challenge them.” It shows how disconnected that party is from the movement on the ground.
Another organization, Labour Against the Arms Trade (LAAT), which has a long history of opposing arms sales by Canada to Saudi Arabia, is now turning its sights on Israel. In the first week of November, the group organized an occupation and rally at INKAS, an Israeli-owned armoured vehicle manufacturing plant in Toronto. LATT, too, is planning other actions on top of organizing and educational work.
Occupations and disruptions are what is needed–not just resolutions. The dire situation in Gaza and the West Bank require nothing less.
The article fails to distinguish between effective actions that are needed immediately and those that are required over the middle- and long-term. Thus, we read:
What is required, concretely, is:
- Opposing the genocidal attacks on Gaza, and unambiguously calling for an immediate Israeli ceasefire.
How are we to oppose “the genocical attacks on Gaza?” By just “calling for an immediate Israeli ceasefire?” Would anyone seriously believe that this tactic could actually be effective?
The next “concrete demand” reads:
- Opposing Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territories and recognizing the reality of apartheid as the underlying injustice that drives the ongoing violence.
Given Israel’s evident military superiority in relation to Gaza and the West Bank, how is this going to be brought about? By opposing the occupation by whom? With what means? How is Israel going to be forced to “recognize the reality of apartheid as the underlying justicee that drives the ongoing violence?” Could this be done in the immediate future? Or is it a middle-term or long-term problem? The problem has existed for decades, has it not?
The next demand:
- Opposing the Canadian government’s delivery of military aid to Israel (which totalled $26,092,288 in 2022) and its tacit support for Israel’s current attacks on both Gaza and the West Bank.
This is necessary, but what will the form of opposition assume that will be effective? Making declarations by CUPE and Unifor? Or much more bold (and politically dangerous for those involved) measures?
Next “concrete demand”:
- Developing educational programs in the unions to build support and understanding of this critical moment as well as awareness of the indispensable role of unions in international struggles.
A long-term process, undoubtedly–but the reference to “this critical moment” seems to refer to the present genocidal situation. If so, then it is unlikely to address the immediat needs of those being bombarded in Palestine. Educational programs with unions are notoriously slow to develop. For example, Rosenfeld, Jordan House and I worked on a radical educational program for unions. We presented it a few times–and then had to wait for over two years before Rosenfeld and House again presented (I had withdrawn from the organization linked to the educational program, the Toronto Labour Committee)–and this was before Covid.
The final demand in the article:
- Boycotting Canadian companies involved in materially supporting Israel’s brutal and illegal siege, especially if they have contracts with unions.
Although this tactic may have more bite than the other proposals–it aims to hit Israel materially where it hurts–there is no mention of another tactic linked to material conditions–the occupation of factories and other facilities that provide manufactured output to Israel, directly or indirectly.
By the way, which “Canadian companies” are “involved in materially supporting Israel’s brutal … siege?” (I omit “illegal”–the idealization of law, whether national or international, by so-called Marxists would involve a much greater in-depth analysis.] It would have been helpful to know some of them, would it not?
Or is “this critical moment” referring to a more long-term situation? If so, it is still very unlikely that such educational programs will be forthcoming from unions, given the conservative nature of most Canadian unions these days.
The article does refer to the limitations of unions, but only in a vague way. Nowhere does it mention the limitations of collective bargaining in addressing the necessary exploitation and oppression of billions of workers worldwide.
Finally, the claim that what is required is
a growing movement of activists—and particularly socialists—to work in their unions and in working class communities and workplaces,
if it is to be effective, depends, among other things, on the nature of activists and socialists. Rosenfeld, for one, has expressed his own conservative radicalism or radical conservatism when it came to addressing the power of the police and the issue of its abolition–he claimed the following:
Shouldn’t that institution [the police] be thoroughly transformed, by political struggle, into a more humane, limited and less autonomous one?
I have been unable to find anything that indicates that he has made any efforts whatsoever in doing so, or what it would like. I doubt that I ever will. It is pure rhetoric; this is not what the working class needs, nor do oppressed peoples need such rhetoric.
Conclusion
Rosenfeld’s article contains some positive aspects that oppose the genocide that is currently taking place in Gaza and the West Bank. In particular he mentions some more radical interventions that could provide more powerful resistance, such as boycotting companies that provide material support for the Israeli war machine. Nonetheless, he fails to mention more radical measures that could affect Israel materially, such as occupations of factories that produce material exported to Israel. Rosenfeld’s brand of socialism, finally, will unlikely be very effective–it is too conservative.
The Abolitionary 