At its 2013 Special National Congress, the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) resolved to establish a Movement for Socialism. Many anti-capitalist activists welcomed this initiative as the dawn of a new political landscape for the radical left; as a major force to overcome the crisis of political leadership that has been stifling the forward march of our struggle for socialism. An initiative that has attracted so much praise on the left should not escape our careful scrutiny to grasp its real significance for the labouring majority. This is the first in a series of articles to assess what this union-initiated political project means for contemporary class struggles. Two of its most prominent meetings over the last two years have revealed a lot about its promises and prospects. Future articles pay closer attention to debates around a political programme unfolding inside the MFS.
The Movement for Socialism (MFS) is a venture of leaders of NUMSA; a venture with the promise of culminating into a revolutionary socialist party under the democratic control of workers.
Beyond the stated intentions and militant statements of these union leaders there are many unanswered questions about their political project. To begin with, every class conscious worker must know why the NUMSA leaders have embarked on this workers party project and how it stands to benefit our struggle to overthrow the bourgeoisie and its vicious state machine. How far have they gone towards realising their aim and what does it mean for South Africa’s socialist movement, characterised by a long and rich history as well as its plural composition?
The MFS has yet to be officially launched and it is unlikely to happen before the 2016 local government elections. Moreover, union leaders at the head of this party building project glibly talk about their socialist aspirations but this is yet to be spelled out in a consistent political programme. These delays have not prevented a wide range of activities from being carried out in its name with the NUMSA Central Committee retaining tight control over all affairs of the MFS. Its chief propaganda tool is a newspaper published in its name. This newspaper simply reproduces commentaries of NUMSA leaders on topical political questions. Thus far it has excluded coverage of analyses or proposals of MFS political actions and the political significance of these activities for today’s struggles.
Two widely publicised meetings had already taken place under its auspices. The first significant meeting assembled representatives of anti-capitalist parties and leftist intellectuals from different corners of the globe on South African soil. Debates at this event concentrated on how to advance the struggle for socialism in the context of 21st century capitalism. Lessons from battles for socialism in the 19th and 20th centuries were not dismissed or ignored but served as a preface to make sense of contemporary anti-capitalist resistance. It formed the backdrop for sharing experiences and learning about the construction of workers parties in different countries at different moments in history.
The history of the Brazilian Workers Party (or PT), sometimes put forward as an organisational model for working people fighting capitalist exploitation and oppression across the third world, became a standout talking point alongside the party formation strategies that emerged from anti-neoliberal revolutions in Bolivia and Venezuela. Zigzags in Europe’s anti-austerity resistance, with special emphasis on the progress and reversals in Greece, also riveted the attention of participants in this debate.
Without a doubt this displays a progressive and laudable orientation towards working class internationalism. However, the official statements of the MFS are conspicuous for the silence on any linkage, formally or informally, with existing international socialist formations, such as the Fourth International for instance. For socialist internationalism has never been an academic
exercise. It requires the organised unity of working people across the world to defeat capitalism on a world scale.
The second major meeting took place towards the end of 2015. NUMSA leaders presented this gathering with an ambitious agenda, which included a discussion about structuring a functional relationship with organisations represented at this meeting and crafting a political programme for the MFS. Attendance was limited to about a dozen socialist formations in South Africa, including political organisations that do not share the ideological past of almost all NUMSA leaders, and a handful of trade unionists at loggerheads with a faction of the COSATU bureaucracy.
The credentials of invited organisations were carefully screened, giving a lot of weight to the size of an organisation in their selection criteria. Reasons for this bias in picking which organisations to include or exclude from exploratory discussions about uniting a pluralist left and paving the way for a broad working class party premised on a programme for socialism deserve clarification. In view of the numerical weakness of the radical anti-capitalist forces today, it cannot serve any progressive purpose to exclude non-sectarian currents from the MFS primarily because of its small membership.
If the MFS is to become a broad left political party in real life, then NUMSA leaders must resolve tensions around the full participation of other radical left formations in its structures. This gathering evidently made overtures towards this end; it took a tiny step from a secretive and inward-looking operation (which is often confused with a twisted view of ‘democratic centralism’) towards an open and democratic structure. Representatives from other left groups were allowed to join the 3 MFS task teams responsible for: coordinating public meetings and political education; publications and editorial matters; and drafting the programme based on submissions from participating organisations. Why did the NUMSA leaders take almost 2 years before co-opting individuals from fraternal leftist groups into larger MFS committees? How this arrangement will actually unfold in practice remains to be seen. It is in fact a vital test for any anti-capitalist left regroupment process.