Against the Cooperation between Social Classes by Alvaro Astray (2015)

* Source: Retrieved on 19/4/2022 from zeroschizo's medium

* First published: In http://puebloindomito.blogspot.com/2015/02/contra-la-cooperacion-entre-clases.html?m=1

Due to the lack of doctrinal education, in wide sectors of the “third position”, the cooperation between the social classes has been defended as a way to organize the economy. This objective stumble directly with the economy proposed by various of these ideologies, such as national-syndicalism or fascism. With the excuse of cooperation or harmonization of the social classes, victory is offered to the ruling class, in other words, to the capitalist bourgeoise. The working class cannot be subdued under the excuse of patriotism, it’s nothing more than playing the game to the right.

Class struggle is a fact, although it should not be accepted that it’s the driving force of History. While the ruling class finds itself in a better situation, the dominated class would be found in a worse situation, although this hasn’t been what moved the world, behind it there are many more factors — more or less important– complementary. To admit this, doesn’t turn you into a communist. Simply you do have to recognize the great labor of Karl Marx in his analysis of capitalism, just as Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera said in his time[1], but we don’t agree with him [Marx] in the solutions that he gives on the capitalist problem.

While it is true that during the fascist Ventennio [20-year rule] socialism wasn’t reached due to corporatism being adopted as the economic system –where certain cooperation between social classes did exist– Mussolini himself said in a date as early as 1933 that “Corporatism is a starting point not an arrival one”.

After the treason of July of 1943 by Pietro Badoglio and the monarchists against Mussolini and to the workers’ fascism, he is freed from all the agreements which he had with the bourgeoisie in order to get into power. The fascists returned to the old singing of “Down with Badoglio”[2] and restored the revolutionary platform of 1919. The historic secretary of the Italian Communist Party, Palmiro Togliatti, had already recognized the revolutionary nature of the 1919 fascism and tried to get into an alliance with the original fascists when he wrote: “We communists adopt the fascist manifesto of 1919, platform of peace, liberty and defense of workers interests. Blackshirts and Africa veterans, we call on to you in order to join us in this program. We proclaim that we are ready to fight on your side, Fascists of the Old Guard and Fascist Youth, in order to realize the fascist platform of 1919[3].

Part of the fascist manifesto of 1919 was: “the promulgation of a State law that sanctions the legal 8 hours working day for the workers; minimum wage; participation of workers representatives in the technical function of the industry; and the administration of industries and public services by the same workers organizations”

In 1943, Mussolini and his loyal ones, representatives of the authentic and proletarian fascism (worth noting are the former communists Nicola Bombacci and Alessandro Pavolini), proclaim the Italian Social Republic. It’s here when the economic experiment of the anti-capitalist fascism takes place: Socialization. Under this economic form “the enterprise management, either of the state or of the private property, gets socialized. The work takes a direct part in it”. Meaning, the producers, including here the workers and the boss (understood here as a manager and worker, not as a capitalist) are the ones who decide the course of the business, and the surplus value is delivered to the workers, not to the capitalist businessman.

Alessandro Pavolini would confess to his lover, the diva and actress Doris Duranti the following: “Fascism in which I believe… doesn’t exist yet, (…) the other day Mussolini said one thing that many did not like, but I did like. He said that the ration card would not be abolished even after victory, so the Agnelli and the Donegani would eat like his workers. Producing with intelligence or with the hands is the same thing, who is not producing, will not have a place in the Italy that we are building”.

Mussolini himself warned in Milan shortly before dying of the uselessness and inconvenience of agreeing with the bourgeoisie: “(…) Our ideal is the State of Work. In this case there cannot be any doubt: we are the working class in a struggle of life and death, against capitalism. We are revolutionaries in a search of a new order. If it’s like this, invoking help from the bourgeoisie by agitating about the red menace is an absurd. The authentic scarecrow, the real danger, the menace which we fight against without a break, comes from the right. We aren’t interested in having the capitalist bourgeoisie as an ally in the fight against the red menace, even in the best of cases it would be an unfaithful ally, that tries to make us serve their interests, as it has done more than once with some success (…)” [4]. That is to say, during this time, Mussolini rejects all of his inter-classist past.

In national-syndicalism we find another solution to the capitalist economy. Instead of socialization, unionization of the economy. In national-syndicalism, it is the workers of the company organized through the corresponding union, the ones framed in the various productive branches. In the syndicate, all producers would be framed. As we read in the article “The national-syndicalist enterprise” by Fernando Roldán: “The capitalization of the company will be carried out through the contribution of the workers and the part of the capital gain destined for this purpose. Workers will not only possess the means of production and surplus value; they will also be able vote and elect the administration congress, to approve or to reject balance sheets and other issues related to the management of the company, all without neglecting their obligations as workers.” [5] Jorge Garrido San Román affirms that the surplus value goes directly to the Union, which is in charge of its management, but that not all of the surplus value would be distributed among the producers directly, given that this could produce high inflation. Part of the capital gain would be reinvested in goods and services for workers.

We have only superficially analyzed the proposals for national-syndicalism and fascism vis-à-vis wage labor and capitalism. In both we can see that cooperation between classes is not sought, but the creation of only one class, the producers. This does not mean that, as the liberals falsely say, all producers would receive the same amount of money for their work.

Notes

[1] Conference of the Circle of the Mercantile Union (Madrid, 9–4–1935)

[2] Pietro Badoglio was an Italian monarchist military man, firstly opposed to fascism, but who participated in the politics of the Ventennial. Finally he betrays Mussolini in order to surrender to the Allies.

[3] Palmiro Togliatti, secretary of the Italian Communist Party, Manifesto for the salvation of Italy and the reconciliation of the Italian people, “Lo Stato Operario”, nº 8, 1936.

[4] Milan, April 22, 1945

[5] The national syndicalist enterprise, by Fernando Roldán