Many leftists propose some form of vanguard theory of socialist change. From the Leninist idea that a vanguard party will form working-class consciousness to the identitarian view that certain identity groups will lead the way, leftists have long looked for shortcuts to change. Some – most recently, various DSA caucuses – propose unions as a vanguard. This calls to mind older ideas like workerism or certain forms of class reductionism.
But, whether new or not, is it right? Can unions be a vanguard for socialist change?
No. At least, not in anything like their present form. Nor in any form they’re likely to take in the near future. Let’s talk about why.
Unions and Rank-and-File Members
We’ve seen several great labor actions from ‘unions’ in recent years. The 2018 West Virginia teachers’ strike tops the list.
But – like many recent labor actions – West Virginia teachers worked around their unions, not through them. Draconian state laws limit what union leaders can legally do, and their decades long ties to Democrats and electoralism take care of whatever the law fails to do. Many unions also commit to anti-democratic, anti-strike, tech-driven (rather than people- or base-driven) methods.
And even when unions stay grounded and adopt better methods, they’re often wedded to the narrow interests of their members rather than to the working class as a whole. Let’s say, for example, that a developer wants to build a new luxury housing project in a city. It’ll raise housing prices and enrich developers and landlords at the expense of the people who live nearby. In many cases like this, unions come down on the side of the developers and landlords.
Why? “Jobs, jobs, jobs!” In other words, the short-term, narrow interests of members over the working class.
For these reasons, unions can’t serve as a vanguard until we build mass, base-driven organizations that look beyond the often narrow, myopic interests of mere slices of the working class. It remains to be seen what these broad groups look like. But we know we need a group like that in place before unions can take the historical role many people suppose they have.
The Politics of Union Members
Unfortunately, the data show rank-and-file union members often don’t advocate for good politics, either. This limits the DSA’s idea – or the idea of some in the DSA – that current rank-and-file union members could serve as a vanguard apart from their leaders. The rank-and-file simply isn’t yet a bastion for a radical vanguard.
We have extensive exit polling data showing that union members are only modestly more liberal than other people. And we have new polling data confirming these results. Let’s take a brief look.
At a broad level, union members are slightly more Democratic than the general population. And active union members are less Democratic than retired ones, probably showing a general shift in the politics of unions.
But the polls reveal deeper concerns. Union members aren’t more favorable to the term ‘socialism’ or to policies like Medicare for All than most other people. In terms of their ability to serve as a vanguard for socialism, this seems like the much larger problem. Perhaps union rank-and-filers could get to the vanguard point, but we’re pretty far away from that now. We need, for a start, new political education and broader base-building.
A Broader Vanguard or No Vanguard
All these facts lead me to conclude that we either need a broader vanguard – made up of working class people, unions, tenants, racial justice groups, et al. – or we need to just quit thinking in terms of ‘vanguard.’
