Socialist Scholar

This theory was developed by the nineteen century French philosopher George Sorel (1847-1922). As it has been historically demonstrated, anytime it has been employed it has reached its goal. It is a highly effective way to bring down any government or corporate elite regardless of its power and strength.

In the late 19th century, although the Marxist socialism was a dominant ideology among workers, syndicalism was still widely preferred in France, Spain, and Italy. It grew out of trade unions association that espoused the utopian vision of one day controlling their industries and, eventually, the government. The strike became the central weapon of syndicalism. However, it was the concept of general strike that made syndicalism revolutionary. Many hundreds of strikes in Europe, toward the end of 19th century, presented the potential of one mighty united strike, resulting to total work stoppage that would ruin capitalism and dismantle the government.

George Sorel wrote his treaties of syndicalism in 1908. He considered general strike as a mythic belief, a wide spread acceptance of which would prompt collective action by workers, at the same time softening employers resolve against concession. He believed that the movement of revolted masses must be represented in such a way that the soul of the revolutionaries may receive a deep and lasting impression capable of evoking as an undivided whole the mass of sentiments which corresponds to the different manifestations of the struggle undertaken by the people against the controlling system.

The movement concentrates in dream of general strike; there is no longer any place for reconciliation of the issues at stake. Everything is clearly mapped out, so that only one interpretation of the new order, namely a democratic and just society, is possible. This idea has all the advantages which integral knowledge has over analysisim, a way that it will be nearly impossible to cite another example which would so perfectly demonstrate the value of the goal subject for this action.

The possibility of the actual realization of the general strike has been much discussed. To the people who think of themselves as cautious, practical, and scientific, the difficulty of setting general masses of the workers in motion at the same time, seems prodigious. Its realization is considered a popular dream and an illusion of youth, soon to be discarded. But the experience shows otherwise, that the framing of a future, in some indeterminate time, when it is done in a certain way, may be very effective, with very few inconveniences. It happens when the anticipation of the future take the form of those myths, which embodies all the strongest inclinations of the people; inclinations that recur to the mind with the insistence of instincts in all circumstances of life; and which gives an aspect of complete reality to the hopes of immediate action by which, more easily than by any other method, people can reform their desires, passions, and mental activity.

The thought of general strike by itself in the course of a movement, preparation for a revolution, or a general uprising, creates a great element of strength, if it embraces all the aspirations of a democratic and just society and if it has given to the whole body of this concept a precision and rigidity which no other method of thought could have given. All that is necessary to know is, whether the planned general strike contains everything that this concept of a new society expects of the working class. At this point, the idea of general strike is so admirably adapted to the workers mind that there is a possibility of its dominating them in the most absolute manner, thus leaving no place for the desires which the legislative and executive branches are able to satisfy. The general strike is so effective as a motive force that once it has entered the mind of the workers, they can no longer be controlled by the system.

The truth about this approach and its definite successful results are found in numerous past occasions with no space here to refer to them. To demonstrate the actual operation of a general strike, the reference is made here to one very recent and totally successful action by the Iranian people in 1979 which resulted in bringing down their government which was considered the most militarized and powerful in the region. The course of events started in 1953 but took over twenty five years of bloody struggle by the Iranians to unite in general strike.

Operation Ajax was set up by the CIA, in 1953, to overthrow the Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeg’s democratically elected government and reinstall the Shah to the throne of Iran. [1] Under Dr. Mossadeg’s leadership, the Iranian oil industry was nationalized in 1951 ousting the British Petrol (BP) which had claimed and appropriated around 85 percent of the profits accrued from it since its creation in 1908. The British Petrol (BP) allied with the American oil companies by the assistance of both governments decided to oust the Prime Minister in order to repossess the Iranian oil industries. The CIA led by Kermit Roosevelt, a grandson of Theodor Roosevelt, initiated a coup in Iran to remove the democratically elected and extremely popular Prime Minister from the office. The US led coup was successful.

The royal monarch Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was brought back to the throne who became a virtual dictator. American advisers were brought into the government.apparently to modernize it. Fearing popular uprising, his government assisted by the CIA, created the Iranian SAVAK, a vicious secret police to suppress any dissent. Reprisals took strength in early 1960s but were brutally put down. Many gave their lives and scores injured and tortured. But the movement did not die; the struggle continued and reached its summit in 1979, when all dissenting groups united behind one purpose, the overthrow of the regime. The concept of general strike had taken over. It had the difficult task of confronting the most powerful government in the Middle East, strongly supported by the United States.

First students poured on the streets nationwide, then oil industry workers stop working. Revenues from the oil industries comprised some 80 percent of the government revenues. Soon work stoppage spread to other sectors of the economy, then civil servants and finally the lower ranks of the military and solders. The economy broke down in weeks, forcing the Shah to flee this time with no place to seek refuge including the United States. A new democratic system of government was established with a total exclusion of Americans from the country.

Unfortunately, a year later the government was taken over by Ayatollah Khomeini. The secular oriented democratically elected president had to flee the country. Under the direction of Ayatollah Khomeini a new constitution was written and ratified under a controlled voting process. The new constitution established a theocratic and absolute dictatorship by one man, who had to be an attested Muslim scholar, and rule as the Supreme Leader, having veto power over any policy made by the government. He has also power over a dual military forces: the regular armed forces, and the Revolutionary Guard created to counterbalance the former. However, the constitution also created a popularly elected President as the chief administrator, and a welfare state with free education, free health care, anti-poverty provisions, subsidies to rural farmers and old-age benefits.

It is interesting to note that during the Shah’s reign, the US government cooperated with his government in developing nuclear energy known as the “Atom for Peace” program and extended a full cooperative hand to Iran in developing of two dozens nuclear energy plants. All were stopped after the 1979 revolution. The United States turned against Iran and backed and assisted Saddam Hussein after his invasion of Iran for eight years causing hundreds of thousands of Iranians to be killed. It even supplied him with chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction which he effectively used even against his own people..

At the same time, Iranians never have been happy with kind of theocratic dictatorship they have become subjected. Despite all governmental efforts to suppress dissension, opposition groups are active, though mostly underground. The likelihood is that based on their successful overthrow of the monarch in 1953, they may get united for another general strike to bring down the present dictatorial regime and establish a democratic one. In fact, recently, President Ahmadinejad, for the purpose of reducing the deficit, imposed 70 percent tax increase on the merchants and shopkeepers in bazaars. This comprises a major part of small business in the country but extremely important since religious leaders rely for their livelihood on these devout Sheet bazaaris who give one fifth of their disposable income to the clergy. Despite this fact the bazaaris have threaten to declare a general strike similar to one which helped to bring down the Shah’s government in 1979.[2] Historically speaking, no country in the Middle East is more prepared culturally and socially to accept a democratic way of life than Iran. As observed by the late Justice William O. Douglas the Iranian local life has been traditionally highly democratic. However, no new regime in Iran would be friendly with the American government, justifiably so, for what this government has done to the Iranian people since 1953.

Today, the economic, political and social life is so dire in advanced societies operating under the control and influence of the corporate elite that there seems neither hope nor chance for substantial reforms. Actually, under capitalism, particularly in the United States, the economic, political and social systems have become so corrupt and remote from the public interests that they cannot be reformed and need a total transformation to a new system of a fair and just society. With tremendous power of control that the elite enjoys in having the government, military, police and intelligence agencies on its side, any violent uprising can be easily put down. The overwhelming majority of Americans believe that something drastic need to be done to return the government back to the people. To succeed they must know what kind of a system should replace the present one. One known choice is socialism. But this regime, as shown in several countries which have tried to establish it, has transformed itself to dictatorship to be ruled by a political elite. Fortunately, there are new theories of a futuristic technological democracy developed which can replace the present system returning the government, and socio-economic systems to the people. [3] While the corporate elite and the government are equipped and ready to crash any violent anti-capitalist uprising, the general strike, through a peaceful and non-violent movement, is the only way to succeed.

References:

1. For details see Kermit Roosevelt, Operation Ajax.

2. See Maziar Bahari, “Iran Closes Shop” Newsweek, July 28, 2010, p.6.

3. See Reza Rezazadeh, We the People: Democracy as a System, A Humanistic Philosophy of the Future Society. Frederck, Mariland: Publish America 2010.

By: Dr. Reza Rezazadeh

About the Author: