you're reading...

Winning the War of Position: Working-Class Hegemony and Class Unionism


It is readily apparent to any working-class person that the economic oppressions of capitalist society, numerous though they may be, are only one facet of the system of social control exercised by bourgeois society. The dominant culture is one of homogenous individualism, materialism, and intellectual vapidity. It is not a culture natural to a free and free-thinking people; but rather a culture designed to maintain the integrity of an unjust social order, designed to favor an exploiting class over a mass of oppressed working people – using each and every tool, political and ideological, that it can exploit in its battle for continued dominance.


This multifaceted system of oppression, which dominates the working class on an economic, political, social, and cultural level, is what Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci termed a class hegemony. He used hegemony as a term to describe the general superstructure of a class society, denoting not only the direct political and economic dominance of the capitalist class, but also its cultural ideas, social mores and institutions, and the social conventions and prejudices that it reinforces within the working class in order to prevent its coalescence along class lines. The development of such a hegemony, like the development of class struggle generally, proceeds upon lines of long dormancy, where the political legitimacy of the ruling class seems generally accepted and unassailable. Inevitably, the capitalist social system enters into profound crisis, when the dominant ideas of the ruling class no longer retain their legitimacy. The coercive powers retained by the ruling class, both through the state and through their dominance of social and cultural institutions are open to attack. Historically these crisis points are when mass movements have been able to create popular hegemonies – organizations of the oppressed classes that represent their political, social, and cultural identities – and these popular hegemonies have wrested change, by reform or revolution, from the ruling classes.


Naturally, such distinct phases of class struggle within capitalist society would necessitate differing approaches to the fight. Gramsci argued that in states where the capitalist system is newly developing and bereft of the supports of bourgeois social and cultural dominance, the resulting strategy for the oppressed class would be a direct political and economic attack on the institutions of capitalism – a war of assault. Conversely, in states where capitalism is highly developed and thoroughly integrated into the social fabric, Gramsci thought that the working class must engage in a longer term struggle, fighting to develop its own identity as a class and to build organizations to wrest control, from the ruling class, over the cultural values and social institutions that determine their identity. This approach was termed by Gramsci as a war of position – literally building the new society within the shell of the old.


This is not to say that the two strategic approaches are incompatible. Indeed, the IWW’s organizational structure, with its strategic focus on organizing industrially in the workplace and rejection of political engagement wholesale, is optimal for Gramsci’s projected war of assault. In its heyday, it functioned effectively as an organization of struggle for the working class, and was perfectly structured to attack capital at the point of production, where large masses of workers were concentrated. Yet the most lasting contribution of the IWW was to working class identity and culture, through song and poetry and stories and organizational knowledge that informed later generations of labor struggle.


Our time is a time of crisis within the capitalist system. This is not to say that revolution is around the corner, a fruit waiting to be plucked from a low-hanging bough. It does mean that our time is one in which it is possible, and absolutely necessary, to work to build a working class hegemony – one that allows us to challenge the dominance of the ruling class over our collective identity and their control over our social and political lives. The IWW’s orientation toward the organization of the working class in the workplace is fundamentally correct and necessary. In the final analysis, the the real power of our class comes from our controlling role in production, distribution, and service within the capitalist system. However, the conditions of modern capitalism do not lend themselves well to mass organization of our class solely at the points of production, distribution, or clerical management. Many social and cultural antagonisms within the working class itself impede organizational efforts on a daily basis, and resolving them in order to facilitate the organization of our class as a class cannot be done without confronting them outright.


This will require extending the model of struggle that we employ in the IWW from solely workplace disputes, involving the conflict between workers and bosses, to broader social conflicts in our communities. If we want to organize the working class as a class, we must not only work to build organizations of struggle, but also to build a culture of class solidarity and equality by whatever means possible. I would argue that the best way forward is to extend our model of direct action resistance to capitalism to the community at large, an approach that I term class unionism. The IWW could reach, and organize, a mass of the working class, by working both in the workplace and in the community. In practice, this would effectively mean two complementary modes of organization: the organizing of industrial unions within the economic framework of capitalism, and the organizing of community unions, to oppose the tyranny of capitalist social relations and foster the development of working class identity and culture, within the social relations of capitalist society. The combined social and economic power of such unions – class unionism – would give true meaning to the idea of building the new society within the shell of the old, and exemplify a working class hegemony in opposition to bourgeois society.


The IWW should not be looking solely at the current crisis, important though our efforts at resistance here and now may be. We must also look forward to the crisis 20 or 30 years from now, and our organizational strategy should reflect such a longsighted approach toward the organization of the working class. It is the historic task of the working class to abolish capitalism, and class society in general, and it is the stated task of our union to help to organize the class toward that goal. The approach of class unionism embraces fully the task of building a working class hegemony, representative of the political, economic, social, and cultural interests of the working class, and should inform the strategy of our union going forward in the struggle.

Yours for the OBU,



About theunionthug

I am a member and organizer for the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), also known as the wobblies. I organize to get people to fight back; the only way we'll change this miserable world is if we do it together, collectively. Global warming, environmental degradation, poverty, imperialism, wars, racism, homophobia, gentrification, mass incarceration and other social issues are either caused by or exacerbated by the current global economic system... Capitalism. This blog is an attempt to tie together these different social issues to it's root cause and to motivate people to organize and build a popular and broad working class movement to effectively fight the class struggle.


3 thoughts on “Winning the War of Position: Working-Class Hegemony and Class Unionism

  1. Great article. However, there is something missing from today’s societal perspective.
    You mentioned it early in this piece, “…the most lasting contribution of the IWW was to working class identity and culture through poetry and song….”
    This is where the difference of 100 yrs plays a part. It has been no small feat that this culture
    has diminished, it took decades to undermine. This culture will need to be refostered, and have labour buy in. Music festivals dedicated to the cause, tie in community groups and have the platform to raise public consciousness to the reality of today’s working class.
    This is a venture I am presently engaged in.
    I am trying to appeal to Labour Congress and Federation of Labour to assist in large union buy in. The musicians are all ready there.
    Just need to bring the two worlds together
    it should sell itself….
    Just saying…..

    Posted by Joe Reddy | April 8, 2012, 12:45 pm
  2. I liked this article because it took up questions not generally found in articles regarding union struggles. It takes-up the fact that our class needs to struggle as a whole and begin to see itself more as a class, and that this will be an important step towards revolution. I do, however, think it would be helpful to raise some specifics in an article like this. For instance, the solidarity strikes of the ILWU with other union struggles, and their strikes for Mumia, against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and against the police repression carried out against the Occupy movement all point in this direction of building broader class consciousness and a broader class struggle.

    I also think that it’s important to talk about the key factors that are preventing the organized working class from being an effective force for change:

    1. The unions are primarily wed to the Democrat Party. Without breaking from that party of capitalism, union busting, austerity, imperialism, racism, and environmental destruction there will be little progress towards the working class “hegemony” you speak of.

    2. The unions need to begin fighting effectively in order for the working class to see itself more as a class and social force. This means challenging the current union bureaucracy in their current roll over and die attitude in several key ways, not least of which is in relearning the effective class struggle methods of the 1930s which included opposition to porous picket lines, defying court injunctions, a readiness to do battle with the cops and scabs as needed, mass picket lines, and general strikes.

    I think when unions become effective in winning strikes and stop tying ourselves to our class enemies in the Democrat Party; we will naturally and organically see the growth in working class culture the article is looking for.

    Posted by Steven Argue | July 20, 2012, 12:59 pm


  1. Pingback: Winning the war of position: working-class hegemony and class unionism | WORKERS EDUCATION - October 11, 2012

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: