Back to Labour Values index
Back to section index
Back to article index
INTRODUCTION
Contrary to current left-wing propaganda the British working class does not live in a vacuum. It cannot act as though capitalism were not in crisis, cannot behave now as it did when the economy was healthy and expanding.
The roots of the current crisis have been with us throughout the post-war period:
'Since 1945 the two main things affecting the survival of the working class are
(1) the tendency for the level of investment to be too low to ensure sufficiently extended accumulation, thus threatening the continuing development of the productive forces. (One of the consequences of this is that working class consumption cannot increase sufficiently, as there is nothing additional to consume.)
(2) the inability of management to organise production on the shop floor efficiently so as to maximise the productivity of labour and capital in the production process - with the result that both labour power and capital are wasted and thus there has been comparatively less produced to be available for consumption and investment.' (Workers' Control in Britain, B&ICO Policy Statement, January 1974)
We argued that these threats to the jobs and living standards of the working class can only be overcome by workers taking control of industry. The bourgeoisie cannot do the job for us. It is no longer capable of forcing the development of the productive forces to allow for economic expansion - greater efficiency and productivity.
As G D H Cole, one of the most perceptive of British socialists pointed out sixty years ago:
'... at some time before the wage system is ended, it may become necessary for Labour to take a hand in the running of industry, and to accept what is sometimes called "a common responsibility with capitalism". There may come a time when owing to Labour pressure, capitalism and the capitalist state are no longer strong enough to control industry alone, and, at the same time, the workers are not strong enough to assume complete control ...
'... it is certain that the time for such a partnership is not yet. It could be acceptable only when the fabric of capitalism had been undermined by the perfection by the workers of their control over labour.' (G.D.H. Cole: Self Government in Industry 1917)
[In terms of?] political and economic organisation British capitalism has grown progressively weaker and less able to compete in the world market. The managers of British industry have grown ever more inept and incompetent. British industry today is characterised by gross waste and inefficiency.
As the working class has matured the bourgeoisie has degenerated to the point where it has no answer to the current crisis and can only call on the working class to restrain itself. It has no answer within itself to the problem of how increased resources for investment, from profits and public funds, can be used efficiently. Only the working class can ensure productive use of resources. To do so it must back up its acceptance of wage restraint with determination to involve itself in what have been up to the present straightforward managerial decisions, taken by capitalism's representatives in the interests of capitalism. The working class must take responsibility for decisions on manpower and capital allocation, on the whole range of questions affecting production.
The time for a common responsibility with capitalism is now. The situation of social stalemate and dual-power in industry, which Cole described sixty years ago, has finally come about. Owing to working class pressure, capitalism is no longer strong enough to control industry. The industrial power of the workers is such that only they are capable of controlling industry.
Legislation on industrial democracy is necessary to provide an effective framework within which workers can use their immense industrial power constructively to restore direction and purpose to decrepit British industry.
Not only is this the only way in which the working class can immediately protect its jobs and living standards, in the longer run it is the only coherent strategy for advance to socialism As Cole pointed out:
'A class that becomes atrophied is doomed to decay. The power of any class in any stage of human society rests ultimately upon the performance of functions. These functions may be socially useful or anti-social: an anti-social function may be just as good an instrument of survival as a social function. But as soon as a class is left without functions, the decay of its power and prestige can be only a matter of time. It was the deprivation of the noblesse of France, of all social functions that made possible the overthrow of the ancien régime; and we, in our day and generation, shall succeed in overthrowing industrial capitalism only if we first make it socially functionless.
'This means that before capitalism can be overthrow, there must be wrested from it both its control of production and its control of exchange ...
'... new conditions must geminate within the old, by the gradual assumption by Labour of functions which now are the preserves of the employers. Before Labour can control it must learn how to control; and this it will only do by actual experience of control' (Self-Government in Industry)
The working class can only advance to socialism in Britain by assuming those valid social functions which the employing class is no longer performing competently; by itself determining the goals of society and directing all social and economic activity to their achievement. Industrial democracy is the first step along that road to socialism.
The past ten years, since the Donovan Commission reported in 1966, have seen a growing awareness within the Labour movement that working class power must be extended from the shop-floor and be brought to bear in the boardroom; that policy decisions must be determined in the interests of the workers.
Since 1966 there has been the development of interest in, and a commitment to, industrial democracy within the most progressive wing of the Labour movement. Both the Government and TUC are now committed to the development of worker representation on the boards of public and private industry as a means to upset the balance of power in industry and resolve the current stalemate in favour of the workers.
At the same time the employers have rediscovered a common will to assert themselves against the working class. Following on the fall of Heath they have abandoned the conciliatory attitude which marked their involvement in the tripartite talks. All thought of compromise has gone out the window as the bourgeoisie gathers itself to defend management's right to manage without interference from the shop floor. The employers have declared class war and must learn to live with the consequences of that action. Unfortunately for them, they have backed down so often and so far in the past that they are now much too weak to prevail. They can make progress difficult but not impossible.
The development of workers' control could only have gone smoothly had the employers realised that their best hope for survival as a class was to make themselves useful to the workers. Had management accepted that in future they would be responsible to workers rather than shareholders the establishment of industrial democracy could well have signalled a period of peaceful transfer of power. As it is the employers will have to be and will be defeated as a class, not only on the immediate question of legislation, but also on operating and expanding the law in every enterprise in the country. Now the development of workers' control will lead to excitement [sic] and dislocation of the economic and political fabric of Britain. But there is still no alternative.
Workers cannot afford to stand idly by while the most incompetent managements in Europe play meaningless games with their jobs and living standards. Only the working class itself can halt the drift by itself taking on responsibility for Britain s economic performance.