Download Working Class Strategies for World Peace

36
BehaviorAnalysis and SocialAction - Volume5, Numbers 1 & 2, 1986
Working Class Strategies for World Peace
Jerry Ulman"'
Ball State University
Abstract
This papertakes the position that behavioranalysts who proposeprogramsfor eliminating war-threateningbehavior(promoting war-preventingbehavior)need to take into account the global
politicalcontext which, in turn, requires an empirically-based (materialistic)and nonreductionisticconceptualframework. It is argued that the Marxist sociohistoricalperspective(historicalmaterialism) provides such a framework. It characterizes the global
politicalcontext as a world-widestruggle betweenthe forcesof imperialistdomination and the forces of world socialist revolution.
Implicit in this framework is the necessity for a consistant classstrugglestrategyfor achievinga just and lasting world peace.
Key words: behavioranalysis, Marxism, class-struggle,
nuclearwar, world peace.
This paper does not set out to propose a behavioranalytic program for achieving world peace . Nor does it
contain very much behavioral language. Granted , the prevention of nuclear war is essentially a behavioral problem,
but this problem exists within a particular global political
context . If behavior analysts who are concerned about the
fate of the world are to he effective in eliminating warthreatening behaviors (promoting war-preventing behaviors), such plans for behavior-change must be appropriate to
the situation. Hence, we must first carefu lly examine the
global political context . But where does one begin an analysis when the context is the entire planet? Obviously some
kind of conceptual framework is needed that will lead us
through a bewildering array of facts, assertions, and fictions
and ultimatel y make sense out of the often seemingly sense less kaleidoscope of world events. The purpose of this paper is to delineate a comprehensive
framework for approaching the issue of preventing nuclear war which is both
(a) compatible with the natural science of human behavior
and (b) nonreductionistic.
A Marxist Conceptual Framework
Needed: A Nonreductionistic-MaterialisticViewpoint
In scientific discourse, reductionismis the mistake of attempting to account for a phenomenon observed at a higher
level of complexity in terms of a process derived from the
study of a phenomenon existing at a lower level of complexity . According to Webster's New CollegiateDictionary (1981)
reductionism is "the attempt to explain all biological processes by the same explanations (as by physical laws) that
chemists and physicists use to interpret inanimate matter"
(p. 962). It follows that reductionism can be the attempt to
explain all human behavior by the same explanations tha t
ethologists use to interpret nonhuman behavior (as when
sociobiologists attribute the cause of wars to an aggressive
instinct). Similarly, and of particular concern here, reductionism can also be the attempt to explain all social phenomena, including large-scale social phen omena, by the same
explanations that behavior analysts use to interpret the behavior of individuals . When the goal is to comprehend complex social relationships involving large numbers of people
- to avoid the mistake of reductionism - we must adjust
our conceptual frame of reference to an appropriately higher
level of analysis.
In the present discussion of strategies for world peace,
the frame of reference I employ derives from the materialistic
conception of history (historical materialism) as initially propounded in the works of Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels and
subsequently advanced by later revolutionary socialists. In
addition to being a political program for revolutiona ry
change , the Marxist perspective provides a set of gene ral orienting statements and concepts with which to systemati cally study large-scale social phenomena. (For discussions of
relationships between mode rn behaviorism and Marxism
see Kolbe , 1978; Ulman, 1979, 1983, in press). The concep ts
of social class and class stru ggle are, of course, central to the
entirety of the Marxist perspective. While it has been asserted that "class struggle is a crude way of representing the
ways in which men control each other" (Skinner, 1971, p.
134), when the task is to attempt to understand massive social changes (i.e., the kind of changes required to achieve .
world peace), I have not found a more appropriate framework. This framework conceptualizes
objecti ve wo.rld
events according to their actual historical development and,
by focusing on the dynamics of contending class forces,
•This paperis basedupona contributionto the symposiumPreventing Nuclear War: The Role of Behavior Analysis presentedat the annualmeetingof the
Association
for BehaviorAnalysis,Columbus,Ohio,May 1985.Reprintsmaybeobtained
fromJerryUlman,Departmentof SpecialEducation,BallStateUniversity,
Muncie,IN 47306.
WORKING Cl.ASS STRATEGIES I Jm-yUlmRnI 37
takes into full account the complexity of the global context
within which they are observed. On the other hand, it is not
uncommon to find interpretive analyses in the behavioral
literature which reduce highly complex social phenomena to
absurdly simplistic levels. (Ulman, 1983, illustr ates how
class analyses can improve our behavior analyses of largescale social phenomena.)
Thus, in our efforts to explore what behavior analys is
may have to offer in the interest of achieving world peace,
we face a dilemma of scientific interpretation . One horn of
the dilemma is the error of nonparsimony (invoking a more
complex account when a simpler one will suffice) and the
other is the error of reductionism(see above). Both types or
errors are equally problematic. Of course , if our interpreta tion is veridical with the actual material conditions of the
world, then we have escaped both horns of the dilemma.
Another caveat is in order here. When our concern is
with the promotion of massi ve social change - the kind of
change that can ensure world peace - there is no such thing
as a politically neutral position. (Even our choice of words
constitutes a political act - e.g., "terrorist" vs. "freedom
fighter ," "replacement worker" vs. "scab" and so on.) Although we cannot preclude political bias from entering into
our interpretations, as behavioral scientists we can and
should be as explicit as possible regarding our political presuppositions. If we are candid about our political biases as
we engage in the unrestricted give-and-take of scientific inquiry, I believe that behavior analysts will most quickly and
effectively discern what our discipline may have to offer in
the inte rest of the peace effort. It is in this spirit that I have
taken an unabashedly political stance.
Oass Analysis
An obvious beginning point for a discussion of "working class strategies for world peace" is to define the term
class. For Marxists, the concept of class is defined in terms of
the social relations of production. The relevant features of
the Marxist concept of class are as follows: (a) Classes are
defined, not in gradational terms (i.e., not in terms of income levels, technical divisions of labor, etc.), but in relational terms. That is, classes exist th rough their mutual opposition; (b) oppositional class relations are rooted in the
social organization of production, not in the relative relations of domination and submiss ion. Although class relations imply the domination of one class (the ruling class)
over others, the defining variable is control over the major
means of production(i.e., the social relations of production);
(c) thus defined by antagonistic relations within the social
organization of production, class postions (e.g., membership in the working class, the capitalist class, or some other
class) precede individuals who occupy and are affected by
those positions. 1 In behavioristic terminology, a class position may be viewed as a more or less stable set of reinforcement contingencies - a behavioral setting.
1
Although Marxist scholar s have analyzed the socia l
systems of the various pre-capitalist modes of production,
our concern here is with the class system of present-day capitalism - the mode of production that dominates our world.
Accordingly , in the capitalist epoch there exists two major
social classes: the very small but powerful capitalist class
which owns the essential means of productions and employs land, capital, and labor in the pursuit of financial accumulation; and the massive and potentially even more powerful working class, those who must sell their labor power to
the capitalist class in order to acquire wages with which to
purchase the necessary means of subsistance. The capitalist
class and the working class thus exist in the form of mutually
antagonistic social relations - the gain of one class is at the
expense of the other. Between these two major classes are
many middle layers (the petty-bourgeoisclass) consisting of
small merchants and pr oducers (semi-independent
craftspersons, working farmers, etc.), managerial and professional people , and so on. Some layers are more closely
aligned to the working class, some to the capitalist class. As
specific constellations of reinforcement contingencies, both
major classes as well as the middle layers are objectively
present in society regardless @f whether ind ividual class
members recog11ize the existence of classes. Essentially, a
Marxist class analysis is concerned with the contingent social relations governing the be\laviors of masses of people,
where social relations are defined according to the relations
of production. Struggle between the capitalist class and the
working class may rise or fall depending upon a number of
conjunctural conditions , but it is this class struggle that determines what fundamental social changes are or are not
possible in society in the immediate future.
In sum, a Marxist analysis focuses on the economic underpinning of class structure and upon the social and political relationships of social classes. It is a misconception to
view Marxist analysis as economic determinism, however.
The focus is on social relationships and the variables that
control those relationships; namely, the relationships between the forces of production and the relations of production (for a discussion of how class analysis relates to behavior
analysis, see Ulman, 1983).
Two Essential Concepts: "Imperialism"and "Worker States"
In discussing strategies for achieving world peace,
there are two additional Marxist concepts that are essential
to define - "imperialism" and "worker states" - concepts
that are unique to the twentieth century.
Imperialism. This is not an epithet for labeling an industrialized country that you happen to dislike. Rather,the
Marxist concept of imperialism is defined as the highest
stage of capitalism-an
international system of capitalism, a
process by which the ruling classes of the advanced capitalist
nations extend the scope of their economic, political, and
military domination to less developed nations of the world
These general features n~twithsta~ding, ~ Marxist lit~rature it is ~ommonly recogn~ed that alternative models of class structure differ markedly with
respect to the exact meaning of soc,alrelationsofpr~duct10!1
. A ~o~s1dera~on of such difference~ would be far beyond the scope of the present paper (see
Wnght, 1984). For the purpose of the present d1scuss1on, 1t 1s suffiaent to note that working class refers to a particular position within the social
relations of production vis-a-vis the employing(capitalist)class.
38 / JerryUl11111n
I WORKING
CLASS STRATEGIES
(Lenin, 1917/1939). The incentives for imperialis t expansion
include raw materials, cheap labor, and new markets - factors which greatly enhance the profits of multinational corporations that dictate U.S. foreign policy.
In the end, as Lenin in his popular outline, Imperialism:
The Highest Stage of Capitalism (1917/1939), accurately predicted, the world has become divided into a handful of usurer states and a vast majority of debtor states. For example,
Latin America alone has been saddled with a $360 billion
foreign debt by imperialism. It has become imp ossib le for
Latin American countries to pay these debts off - a system
of debt peonage between the International Monetary Fund
and its financial backers , the Wall Street bankers, and the
underdeveloped nations of the Third World. We can't even
imagine what the economic repercussions will be internationally when these debtor countries default on their loans
- financially, a veritable house of cards.
Worker states. Another essential Marxist term for
comprehending the world today is "worker states." The first
worker state resulted from the 1917 Russian Revolution, the
historic even t of the greatest significance for the world working class. A worker state is one in which has been achieved
(a) the nationalization of the major mean of production, (b)
state control over all foreign trade, and (c) centralized economic planning. These three criteria differentiate worker
states from welfare capitalist nations . The Peoples Republic
of China, the Soviet Union, Vietnam, and the Eastern bloc
countries are worker states; Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland
and France are not. Cuba is a worker state but Nicaragua is
not. Nicaragua is ruled by a workers' and farmers' government- a necessary step for becoming a worker state. (For a
detailed explication of the concept of workers' and farmers'
government, see Waters,1984.) Yet about 60% of Nicaragua's
economy remains in the private sector; capitalist property
relations still predominate. 2 Overall, it is important to note
that (a) imperialism has neyer been able to overturn a
worker state and (b) each new worker state squeezes impe rialism out of an additional area of the planet where it can no
longer exploit.
Are Some Worker States Imperialistic?
Defenders of the capitalist system reject the Marxist
concept of imperialism because, by Lenin's definition, it excludes the so-called expansionism of the Soviet Union. They
argue that the Soviet Union is imperialistic and cite as evidence its political domination of the Eastern Eur opean coun tries and, currently, the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan. Obviously, a paper that sets out to only highlight
the major conto urs of the global political con text from the
class -struggle persp ective cannot deal adequately with the
notion of "Communist expansionism." Nonetheless, some
clarifying comments are certainly called for.
2
Soviet economy. First, we should recognize that "expansionism" is not build into the economic structure of the
Soviet Union (or any worker state). Since 1917 interna tional
profit-seeking has not been the motivating force of the Soviet economy. The Soviet Union has no privately owned
banks such as the Bank of America; it has nothing comparable to the New York Stock Exchange; it has no multinational
corporations such as Del Monte, Union Carbide, or Standard Oil (or any other corporation listed in Fortune's 500)
which exploit colonial and semicolonial countries; it does
not establish military outposts throughout the world for the
purpose of maintaining the operation of the international
profit system. In sho rt, the major means of production in the
Soviet Union are in the form of socialist property, not private
property. It is ruled by a priviledged bureaucratic cast butif defined in terms of the relations of production - there is
no capitalist class in the Soviet Union (see Trotsky ,1972,
pp.248-252). Why, then, does the Soviet Union send its
troops into other countries? As a case in point, what about
Afghanistan?
Soviet military intervention. To comprehend why the
Soviet Un ion is fighting a war in Afghanistan, we must take
into account the historical context. As concisely summarized
by Jenness (1980):
a popular revolution broke out in April 1978
[which , by the way, the Kremlin was not involved in initiating]. The old dictatorship was
overthrown and a new government, pledged to
carry out social reforms, took over . The changes
that were introduced met resistance from those
who had a vested interest in the old order - the
big landlords, merchants, moneylenders, opium
dealers, and many religious chiefs. They organized a rebellion against the new government.
These counter-revolutionaries
were protected,
armed , and trained by the military dictato rs hip
in Pakistan - with the support of Washington,
which opposed the progressive changes taking
place [just as it does today in Nicaragua - J. U.] .
To counter the rightists, the [new] government
of Afghanistan turned to the Soviet Union for economic and military help. But the rightist rebels
gained strength with help from the U.S. and Pakistani governments . When it appeared that the
[counter- re volutionaries]
... might have a
chance of overthrowing the government of Afghanistan and imposing a hostile rightist regime
on the Soviet Union's border, Moscow intervened with troops to prevent this from happening . (pp. 5-6)
With U .S. suppport to the counte r-rev olutiona ry
forces, the lack of effective revolutionary leadership o( the
Afghan government, and the bureaucratic mismanagement
of the Soviet military intervention, the tragic war in Afghani-
From a revolutionary socialist standpoint, there is no particular virtue in making a swift transformation to the status of a worker state once capitalist
nile has been overthrown-as when in Nicaragua the revolution triumphed over the Somosa dictatorship. The Bolshevik government under Lenin,
having been forced by civil war and imperialist aggression to move too fast, subsequently had to reverse the process somewhat by introducing the
New Economic Policy- essentially, an incentive system for increasing vitally needed production.
WORKING CLASS STRATEGIES I JerryUlman I
stan drags on. The main point here, however, is recognition
of the fact that "when the Kremlin sent Soviet troops into
Afghanistan, it did not do so out of revolutionary motives,
but as a defensive measure" (p. 16). That is, the bureaucracy
"saw the U.S .-and Pakistani-backed guerrillas as a threat to
the Soviet workers' state, which is their base of power and
privileges" (p. 16).
In sharp contrast, "the Kremlin's invasion of Hungary
in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 ... were intended to
suppress workers fighting for democratic rights and control
over the economy ... for what the Czechoslovaks called 'socialism with a human face"' pp. 16~17). Thus , "in 1956 and
1968, Moscow's actions were solely in defense of bureaucratic privilege. They were counter-revolutionary [italics
added]" (p. 17). On the other hand, an appropriate model of
military assistance by a workers' state to a revolutionary
struggle - one that is neither bureaucratically mismanaged
nor counter-revolutionary, but based on revolutionary internationalism - is Cuba's intervention in Angola (see
Castro ,1976/1981). Moreover , Cuba's entire foreign policy
has been consistantly internationalist (see Taber,1981) .
How Revolutionary Socialists View
Deformed Worker States
How should revolutionary socialists view deformed
worker states such as the Soviet Union or the People's Republi c of China - worker states tha t are sometimes even
hostile to each other? Only a consistant class-struggle analysis will provide the answer. Above all, in spite of the Stalinist governments' nefarious policy of "building socialism
in one country," the socialist property relations over which
they rule must be defended against capitalist aggression especially by mobalizing political support among people in
the imperialist nations. As Leon Trotsky (1940/1973a) wrote,
the defeat of the USSR in a war with imperialism
would signify not solely the liquidation of the bureaucratic dictatorship, but the planned state
economy; and dismemberment of the country
into spheres of influence; and a new stabilization
of imperialism; and a new weakening of the
world proletariat (p. 122).
Put briefly, the revolutionary socialist view of deformed worker states closely parallels that of bureaucraticized trade unions in the advanced capitalist countries such
as the U.S. First, in both cases misleadership has evolved
from a policy of class-collaboration. (For an explanation of
class-collaboration versus class-struggle strategies,see below.) Hence, in both cases bureaucratic domination arose
from compromising responses to capitalist domination
(e.g ., respectively, inadequate support of nationalliberation
struggles and unnecessary concessions to employers).' Second, in both cases the maintenance of bureaucratic privi3
39
leges at the expense of working people require that democratic participation in administrative decision making be
curtailed. Third, notwithstanding
the bureaucratic leadership, it is unquestionably better for the exploited and oppressed of the world that trade unions and worker states
exist than not. Furthermore, in defense of their priviledged
positions, circumstances sometimes arise that compel bureaucrats to lead militant strikes against employers or give
material and military aid to revolutionary struggles . And
fourth, given that worker states and trade unions do exist,
they offer the potential of becoming revitalized when bureaucratic leadership is replaced by genuinely revolutionary
leadership, a task that only the organized power and democratic participation of the working class can achieve. The essential fact is that" a workers' state, a far more powerful [revolutionary] instrument than a union, does not cease because
of bureaucratic deformation to be a workers' state" (Grogan,
1983-1984, p. 6).
The Global Political Context
Having defined imperialism and having differentiated
between worker states and capitalist countries, what does a
Marxist analysis tell us about the prospects of achieving
world peace? What, in general , are the conditions of the
world we live in today? We have entered a period in which
the world-wide capitalist economy is in a long downturn some ups, but the trend is downward. Beginning with the
1974-75 world recession, we see a generalized stagnation of
the world economy, an intensification of internation al capitalist competition, and the imposition of a crushing debt burden on the Third World countries. In the colonial and semi colonial nations we see mounting uprisings
against
increased misery and repression - for example, in Latin
America, South Africa, and the Middle East. In the U.S. we
have witnessed in recent years a fundamental restructuring
of our domestic economy: the colossal transfer of government spending from social programs to the military. We see
massive unemployment and underemployment; inflation; a
farming crisis; increased attacks on the living standard of
working people as needed social services are slashed; unions
being busted; democratic rights threatened; wages and benefits cut; and the gains of Blacks, Latinos, and women rolled
back. Abroad, we see the U.S. government escalate military
threats against nations who refuse to follow its dictates and, in the case of Central America, the beginning of another
Vietnam-type War.
At this time the center of the world political storm is
Central America and the Caribbean. U.S . imperialism has
never let up in its attempt to overturn the Cuban Revolution,
has succeeded in invading and occupying Grenada after its
revolution had been betrayed from within, and is dead set
on smashing the Nicaraguan Revolution - through direct
military intervention if necessary. Why Nicaragua? The real
threat of Nicaragua to the U.S. isnotmilitarybutmoral.
That
In neither case, however, does the policy of class-collaboration explain how bureaucratic rule took hold. Nor can a footnote provide an adequate
account of this complex question. In regard to the bureaucratization of a worker state, I refer the reader to Trotsky's (1937/1972)analysis of the triumph
of the Stalinist bureaucracy over the Soviet masses - particularly the sections entitled "The Social Roots of [the Soviet] Thermidor" and "Is the
Bureaucracy a Ruling Class?" (it isn't). With respect to bureaucratization of labor unions, see Clark (1983-1984), especially his assessment that the
class-collaborationist and national-chauvinist policies of the labor officialdom have their social basis only in a more or less narrow layer of privileged
workers" (p. 78).
40 / JerryUlman I WORKING
CLASS STRATEGIES
is, Nicaragua has become a model to other Latin American
countries of what can be achieved by a revolutionary government that charts a course of self-determination regardless of Washington's wishes.
Driven by a growing world-wide economic crisis, the
U.S.capitalist class and the government which serves its interests is on the offensive against working people, both at
home and abroad. As conflicts between workers and em ployers mount, we can anticipate the development of major
class battles as workers begin to fight back . These manifold
crises are no more than periodic manifestations of the era in
which we live, an era that Trotsky (1946/1973b) aptly
described as "the death agony of capitalism" (p. 72), an era
of world wars, imperialist domination, economic instability,
and social turmoil. The progressive phase in the development of capitalism, the phase responsible for the rise of industrialism and the overthrow of feudal society, has since
long past. "The objective prerequisites for the proletarian
revolution have not only 'ripened'; they have begun to get
somewhat rotten" (p. 73). From the Marxist perspective,
such is global political context of the world we inhabit.
A Revolutionary Strategy for Achieving World Peace
So far, I have attempted to sketch some major features
of the world political situation in order to describe the context within which the preventio n of nuclear war must be considered. I have focused on working class strategies because,
as underscored by Marxist historical analysis, only the working class and its allies have the potential power to win wo rld
peace. Rather than discussing what "we" (some undefined
verbal community) should do to prevent nuclear war, I will
describe what is being done and- if humanity survives this
period - what will ultimately have to be done to achieve
world peace.
Two Opposite Strategies:
Class-collaboration vs. Class-struggle
Working-ClassStrategiesWithin
Advanced CapitalistCountries
There are basically two diametrically opposed working
class strategies for world peace: the strategy of classcollaborationand the strategy of classstruggle.•Differences between
these two strategies have both national and international dimensions. We will examine the national aspects first, the
U.S. in particular.
Class-collaboration strategy. Within the U.S . working class as well as the middle layers, the current strategy is
about 99% class-collaboration. According to this strategy,
"we" must do everything we can to get "peace cand idates"
elected and then lobby to get progressive legislation
enacted. The labor union bureaucracy is totally committed to
this strategy. Marches and demonstrations
are viewed
merely as useful tactics for pressuring elected officials. A second premise of the class collaborationist-strategy is that if we
all become more "aware" of the real danger of nuclear war,
somehow reason will automatically prevail and the danger
will be decreased, a blatently mentalistic ·(idealistic) notion .
Coupled with the class-collaboration perspective is the assum ption that both the U.S. and the Soviet Union are
equally responsible for the arms race; hence, the call for a
freeze or bilateral disarmament.
Class-struggle strategy. In contrast, the class struggle
strategy requires that working people break from the electoralist illusion that progress comes from electing "good"
capitalist politicians and from trying to influence the
decision-making behavior of elected officials. Instead, working people need to be won to the perspective that real
progress can only come from the independently organized,
massive pow er of the entire working class and its allies,
working farmers in particular. Ultimately , according to the
class-struggle strategy, the working-class and its allies must
establish a workers and farmers government and physically
disarm the warmakers in Wash ington. That is, the vanguard
of the U.S. working-class (i.e ., the most militantly anticapitalist workers) must be organized and politically educated so
that the y can lead the exploited and oppressed to the seizure
of state power, the overthrow of capitalist rule, and the
building of socialism. The pivotal role of a Leninist party is to
organize and educate vanguard workers to think socially (internationally) and act politically. When this historic task has
been achieved in the most powerful imperialist countries then and only then will the world be safe from nuclear destruction. Until then, humanity will continue to pay the
price of imperialist wars, capitalist exploitation, environmental degradation, and grinding poverty.
With respect to working people in the U.S., how do we
get there from here? What is the way forwa rd for working
class in this country? The political program of the classstruggle orientation centers on three strategically vital
arenas: fight for working class solidarity, for union democ racy, and for independent political action. Let us consider
each arena of contention.
Working-class solidarity. The natural condition of
the capitalist workplace is that of competition, one worker
pitted against another. With the current offensive of the employer class, solidarity is a life-or-death question for the labor movement. It is the opposite of collaborating with the
employers. The employers' interest lies in dividing the
working class whenever possible. Solidarity includes organizing the unorganized; championing the struggles of
Blacks, Latinos, women and younger workers; forming alliances with other exploited producers such as working
farmers; building international solidarity with workers in
other countries (especially by rejecting immigration restrictions and employer-promoted protectionist policies such as
trade barriers and import limitations); opposing every ag-
•Fora detailed and current analysis of the class-struggle strategy for peace as it applies to the U.S. working class, see Grogan (1983-1984).
WORKING CLASS STRATEGIES I JerryUlman I
gressive action of Wash ington against struggles of oppressed peoples for national liberation; countering every attack on democratic rights; and solidarizing with colon ial and
semicolonial people in the ir striving for economic development and for socialism .
Union democracy . The capacity of the unions today to
function as instruments of class struggle is blocked by the
bureaucratic stranglehold of the class-collaborationist officialdom. Hence, in order to mobilize union power to com bat the employers and the capitalist government , the rankand-file must fight for control of all union affairs and
policies. From a history of resisting attacks from the em ploye rs, militant workers will learn that to act effectively as a
fighting uni t, they must exercise democratic control over
their unions. This was the main lesson from the experiences
of the Teamster organizing drive in the Midwest during the
1930's - richly described in Farrell Dobbs ' book, Teamster
Rebellion (1972). Of course, the fight for union democracy is
inseparable from the fight for affirmative action and against
discrimination .
Independent working-class political action. Organized independent of the influence of capitalist politics (including so-called progressive candidates such as Jesse Jackson), independent working-class political action is the
alternative to the union bureaucr acy's current classcollaborationist course of subordinating labor's interest to
the framework imposed by adhering to the profit system the framework that conditions workers to think of "we" as
the company rather than the union. The capitalist class and
its labor lieutenants promote the illusion that "real" politics
is synonymous with election campaigns for public office . To
act otherwise is "irresponsible." For followers of the class
struggle strategy, however, real politics is the exact opposite: Every significant change in this country - civil rights ,
women's liberation , ending the Vietnam War - resulted
from independent political action, not electoralism . Sooner
or later, the labor movement will need to break from the capitalist two-party system and organize a labor party. 5 Above
all, independent working-class political action will need to
orient wor kers and their allies toward the formation of a government that advances their own class interests - a workers
and farmers government, a government capable of taking
political power out of the hands of the capitalist class. An
exemplary model of a workers and farmers government in
action is the government of Nicaragua. For those who want
to learn the truth of this statement for themselves, there is no
6
substitute for touring Revolutionary Nicaragua .
Having outlined what must be done within advanced
capitalist countries to win world peace, the question remains
- how to do it? What is the prospect? We can be sure that the
class -collaboration strategy will continue to be followed as
long as working people continue to respond to it as the real istic alternative. However , as gigantic economic and political
crises mount and the capacity of the capitalist rulers to maintain their rule by democratic means continues to erode, as
5
41
the social and political situation continues to deteriorate and
lead to a showdown, life for U.S. workers and the middleclass layers will become increasingly intolerable . Under such
motivating circumstances, judging from the past history of
the labor movement in this country, we can expect workers
to begin to wage mighty class battles - those of the 1930's
constituting a preview of coming events. At the same time,
as society polarizes to the left and the right, we can expect to
see a rise of a fascist movement and a drive toward dictatorial
solutions as was observed in Germany and Italy following
World War I. In that period the fascist movement , essentially a middle-class mass phenomenon, was employed by
the capitalist class as a battering ram to smash the labor
movement. The working-class in Germany and in Italy suffered the worst possible defeat, primarly because of the lack
of competent revolutionary leadership (see Trotsky, 193040/1971). Not only must revolutionary leaders win allies to
the side of the working class (i.e., build united front action
against the capitalist class forces - see Ulman, 1983), but
must approach the whole task of advancing socialism from
an internationalist perspective.
The International Dimension
ofWorking
Oass Strategies
Class struggle is an international strategy. The classstruggle strategy must be international in scope, formulated
in terms of the world relationship of class forces. This internationalist class-struggle perspective is perhaps no better
delineated than in Lenin's program for the Russian Communist Party (1919/1986). This program reje cted "the slogans of
pacifism, international disarmament under capitalism, arbitration, and so forth [as] not only reactionary utopias, but an
outright deception ... intended to disarm the proletariat
and divert it from the task of disarming the exploiters " (p.
47). According to this internationalist class-struggle per spective, war is the inevitable result of imperialist oppression and capitalist exploitation and "only a proleta rian communist revolution can lead humanity out of the deadlock
created by imperialism and imperialist wars" (p . 48).
How does Lenin's program translate into practice in
the global political context of today? As Jenness (1986) explains, this program does not imply that revolutionists
should reject the idea that governments of worker states,
including the Soviet government, establish normal diplomatic and trade relations with capitalist countries. Nor does
the internationalist class-struggle program disagree on the
importance of attempting to negotiate reductions in nuclear
weapons, to extend the nuclear test ban, and similar agree ments. Between worker states and capitalist governments
even peaceful coexistence is not excluded from the program
-in fact, Lenin favored it (Russian Communist Party, 1919/
1986). At the same time, however, "these diplomatic and
economic relations [of the Soviet government under Lenin]
were conducted within the broader framework of attempting to assemble and educate the communist vanguard in the
There are a number of historical reasons for the fact that the U.S. is the only industrially advanced capitalist country that has no mass labor party .
Among them, as Dobbs (1980)pointed out, are (a) a heritage of chattle slavery and Jim Crow laws in the Southern states that have divided the working
class afong racial lines; (?) opp~rtunities for work~r.s who found conditi~~s in the workplace intolerable to obtain l~nd and become independent
farmers; and (c) the relatively lu~her standard of hvmg of workers, proVIdmg greater latitude for employers and their government to give modest
concessions in times of social crisis (e.g. , the "New Deaf" of the stormy depression era of the 1930s). However, these unique circumstances no longer
exist; consequently linear projections into the future of the U.S. labor movement- so-called American exceptionalism - no longer apply.
6
For information concerning tours of Nicaragua write to Marazul Tours, Inc., 250 W. 57 Street- Suite 1311, New York, NY 10107or call 800-223-5334.
~or an e~planation of the Nic~aguan Revo~utio!)from ~he viewpoint of the Sandinist~ leaders ~emselvt:s, see Marcus (1985). A primary sour~e of
information about recent pohtical, economic, dielomatic, and cultural developments m revolutionary Nicaragua and Central America is Bamcada
Internacional,a news weekly of the Sandinista National Liberation Front. (For a 6-months subscription, send a $12.00 check or money order to Barricada
Internacional,Apartado 576, Managua, Nicaragua - indicate preference for either English or Spanish editions.)
42 / JerryUlman I WORKING
CLASS STRATEGIES
capitalist countries to lead the struggle to overturn
rulers" Oenness, 1986, p. 43).
their
In sharp contrast, the political content of the "peaceful
coexistence" policy of the present-day Communist Party of
the Soviet Union (CPSU) is notinternationalist; itis based on
a class-collauoration
strategy.
[It] goes beyond recognizing the current coexistence of states with different social systems. It asserts that "historical contention between the two
opposite social systems" (emphasis
added)
[quoted from the CPSU's 1986 draft program]
can be settled peacefully. This is the same as saying [that] the class struggle can be resolved
peacefully, and it leads to attempts to seek accommodation between opposing class interests
Oenness, 1986, p. 43).
As an objective assessment of twentieth century world
history clearly shows, there is absolutely no grounds for
supposing that imperialism can peacefully coexist with socialism . "As long as imperialism continues to exist, it will
never accept the social and political conquests of the
working-class and will continue to try to reverse them" Oenness, 1986, p. 43). Revolutionary advances only increase the
resistance as recently demonstrated by "Washington's attempts to destabilize the Vietnamese revolution, organize
provocations against revolutionary Cuba, and overthrow
the Sandinista government in Nicaragua" (p. 44). In short,
the struggle between opposing social systems is irrepressible. As Lenin (Russian Communist Party, 1919/1986) explained, an international socialist victory is the only sure victory against imperialist aggression.
Class-collauoration
is an internationaldisaster. The disasterous consequences of the class-collaboration
form of
"peaceful coexistence" ~ that is, giving top priority to
detente with imperialism in hope of creating a "dependable
security system" Oenness, 1986, quoted from the CPSU's
1986 draft program)were well illustrated during the Vietnam War. Under that program Richard Nixon met with
Leonid Brezhnev in Moscow and signed a number of agreements, including a treaty limiting nuclear missiles. At exactly the same time- May 1972- U.S. war planes flew over
1000 sorties against North Vietnam, dropping thousands of
tons of bombs. Jenness states, "the crime of the Stalinist bureaucracy was that they told the working people of the world
that peace was closer, when in fact one of the most devastating wars in this century was being escalated" (p. 4). And the
same class-collaboration summitry and detente is being
practiced today by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbechev,
the kind of "peaceful coexistence" which- paradoxical as it
may seem - gives Washington greater leeway in escalating
its aggression against revolutionary Nicaragua and Cuba as
well as anti-imperialist struggles in other countries.
In the framework of Moscow ' s detente-willbring-peace strategy, the summit meetings, es-
pecially if they lead to an arms agreement ... ,
will give Reagen unwarranted standing as an architect of peace . . . at the same time that he is
organizing a mercenary war against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua and backing
counter-revolutionary aggression in other parts
of the world Oenness, 1986, p. 44).
A four-point international class-struggle program. If
Gorbachev were to carry out the revolutionary class-struggle
orientation of the Lenin-led Communist Party, how would it
differ? Jenness (1986) outlined four points: (a) "recognition
that the center of world politics today is the battle between
the advances of socialist revolutions in Central America and
the Caribbean and the efforts to stop those advances by imperialism, above all U.S. imperialism" (p. 44); (b) based on
the recognition that there is no "peaceful coexistence" in
Central America, help build a massive international cam paign to hasten the defeat of Washington and its allies in
their counter-revolutionary war (e.g., "utilize every opportunity to tell the unvarnished truth about Washington's operations in Central America" [p. 45]; (c) explain "to the exploited and oppressed throughout the world that defeat for
Washington in Central America would be a victory for peace
not only in the region, but internationally" (p. 45); and (d)
"within thisframework[italics added] ... get Washington and
its allies to agree to an extension of the nuclear test ban and
reductions in nuclear weapons" (p. 45), thereby making im portant contributions to the antiwar effort. This four-point
program is basic to the class-struggle strategy for international peaceful coexistence in the true sense of the term. But
it hinges on the emergence of an internationally oriented
revolutionary leadership that follows a consistant classstruggle program.
Marxist perspective on achieving world peace. Thus, in
the coming world-wide economic and social crises the most
critical variable for world peace will be the quality of the
working-class leadershipa truly revolutionary leadership
that will lead the working class and its allies forward to the
total disarmament of the imperialist war-makers once and
for all. Ultimately, from the Marxist point of view, there are
only three possible outcomes for humanity: socialism, barbarism, or nuclear annihilation. The fate of the world hangs
in the balance of an international life-or-death struggle be tween two irreconcilably opposed forces - the force of imperialist domination and the force of world socialist revolution. As Trotsky (1946/1973) succinctly expressed over four
decades ago:
Withou t a socialist revolution, in the next historical period at that, a catastrophe threatens the
whole culture of mankind. The turn is now to the
proletariat, i.e., chiefly to its revolutionary vanguard. The historical crisis of mankind is reduced to the crisis of the revolutionary leadership . (p. 73)
WORKING CLASS STRATEGIES I JerryUlman I 43
Such is the global political situation within which I believe
concerned behavior analysts are challenged to work toward
a just and lasting peace .
Postscript
A main intent of this paper was to challenge behavior
analysts to examine their own verbal behavior with respect
to political presuppositions, tacit as well as explicit. Moore
(1984) observes that "traditions and preconceptions with
which the scientist lives and works constitute an established
matrix of social-cultural forces , and these for ces carry over
from general cultural circumstances [to our scientific work] "
(p. 78). Hence, if we are to approach the political arena as
consi stan t behavioral scientists, we must analyze political
presuppositions (mostly intraverbal behavior) as variables
th at are likely to be affecting other verbal behavior and the
ways in which we attempt to deal with the significant problems of human existence.
A scientifically consistant approach to the analysis of
our political presuppositions w ould be to (a) make them as
explicit as possible, (b) examine the context(s) within which
we express them, (c) sear ch for presuppositions/proposition s whic h are diametrically opposed to our own , (d) exam ine th e context(s) within which these opposed views are expre ssed, (e) critically ap p raise both a and c in light of their
resp ective contexts and the most accurate information available (a most difficult step when information is restricted or
presented in the form of d is tort ed tacts for political rea sons)' , and finally, (f) for mulate the the most factually defen sible positi ons possible. On ce w e have analyzed just how
politi cal conside rations affect our interpretative behaviors as
behavioral scientists, we may be able to p ropose more scien tifically sound behavior -ch ange plans for achieving world
p eace. We may then be better able to make effective contributi ons to the peace effort . Given our life-long history of
ideological conditioning and our particular social-class biases (see Ulman, in press), however, the task will not be an
easy one . More than that, it will not be enough for us to
merely emit intraverbal behavior. If we are serious about
changing the world, we must also engage in practical action
- political behavior governed by a set of scientifically and
historically sound rules . With the global tasks before us of
saving humanity from nuclear annihilation, overcoming all
forms of human oppression and exploitation, and improving the quality of life of all humankind, the conceptual
framework outlined in the present paper is offered as a guide
to effective social action.
7
References
Castro, F.(1981). Cuba's internationalist volunteers in Angol a. New International,2(2), 119-135 (Original work published 1976).
Clark, S. (1983-1984).The development to the Marxist position on the
aristocracy of labor. New International,1(2), 59-94.
Dobbs, F. (1972). Teamsterrebellion.New York: Monad Press.
Dobbs, F. (1980).Revolutionarycontinuity:Theearlyyears1948-1917.New
York: Monad Press.
Grogan, B. (1983-1984).The working-class road to peace. New International, 1(2), 9-57.
Jenness, D. (1986). From Lenin to Gorbechev . Intercontinental
Press,23,
42-45.
Jenness, D. (1980) The truth aboutAfghanistan.New York: Pathfinder
Press.
Kolbe, W.B.F. (1978). Skinner's radical behaviorism: Logical positivism
for SocialActionJournal,
or dialectical materialism? Behaviorists
1(1) 29-55.
Lenin, V.I. (1939). Imperialism:The higheststateof capitalism.New York:
International Publishers (Original work published 1917).
Russian Communist Party. (1986). Lenin's program for Communist
Party. Intercontinental Press, 24, 46-53 (Original wo rk
published 1919).
Marcus, B. (Ed.) (1985).Nicaragua
: The Sandinistapeople'srevolution.New
York: Pathfinder Press.
Moore, J. (1984). On behaviorism, knowledge, and causal explanation.
ThePsychological
Record,34, 73-97.
Skinner, B.F. (1971). Beyondfreedomand dignity. New York: Vintage
Books.
Taber, M. (Ed.) (1981). FidelCastrospeeches:
Cuba:'sinternationalist
foreign
policy1975-80.New York: Pathfinder Press .
Trotsky, L. (1973a). In defense of Marxism. New York: Pathfinder Press
(Original work published 1940).
Trotsky, L. (1973b). The transitionalprogramfor socialist revolution. New
York: Pathfinder Press (Original work published 1946).
Trotsky, L. (1972). The revolution betrayed(M. Eastman, Trans.) New
York: Pathfinder Press (Original work published 1937).
Trotsky, L. (1971). The struggle against fascism in Germany (trans.
speeches originally published 1930-1940). New York: Pathfinder Press.
Ulman, J. (in press). A behavioral-Marxist reply to Schwartz and Lacey.
Behaviorism.
Ulman,
J. (1983). Toward a united front: A class analysis of social and
political action. Behavioristsfor SocialAction Journal,4(1), 1724).
Ulman, J.D. (1979). A critique of "Skinnerism: Materialism minus the
dialectic." Behaviorists
for SocialActionJournal,1(1), 1-8.
Waters, M. (1984). The workers' and farmers' government: A popular
revolutionary dictatorship. TheNewInternational,1(3), 15-100.
Webster's new collegiatedictionary (8th ed.) (1981). Springfield, MA:
Merriam-Webster.
Wright, E.O. (1984). A general framework for the analysis of class struc ture. Politics& Society,13, 383-423.
When we conside r the reinforcement contingencies operating with respect to big business news media (i.e., editors, reporters, advertisers, chief
executive officers, etc.), it is not surprising that anticorporate viewpoints are rarely if ever expressed. For news sources from a consistantly revolutionary socialist perspective, I recommend the following: the Militant, a socialist newsweekly published for working people in the U.S. (for a 12-weeks
Press,a biweekly socialist analyst of world events (for
subscription, send $3.00 to Militant, 14 Charles Lane, New York, NY 10014); the Intercontinental
a 3-months subscription, send $7.50 to Intercontinental
Press,410 West Street, New York, NY 10014-write for overseas rates); and publications of
Pathfinder Press (for a current catalog, write to the same address as above).