On the side of the Engels

That old timey socialist Fred Engels described class struggle as taking place in three spheres. The ideological, industrial and political (although we'll take these terms loosely). I think this is a useful way of looking at things.

Whilst these spheres are related to each other, just because one sector is in firmament does not mean other areas of struggle will also be high.

I suppose the obvious example of this is the period immediately before the invasion of Iraq. World wide there was the largest upsurge the world has ever seen against an imperial adventure. Record breaking demonstrations were mobilised from the centre of the Western Powers to the fringes of their influence and beyond.

Were these demonstrations parallelled by mass strikes or equally impressive anti-war political parties springing up? Not one bit of it. In the UK the industrial struggle even suffered a set back as FBU leaders wobbled in the face of criticism that they were undermining the war effort, with one charming Tory MP describing fire fighters as Saddam's minions.

In the political institutions across the globe the main benefactors have been already existing left of centre parties that were able to tap into the ideals of those opposing the war without the inconvenient requirement to make any actual break with imperialism. The Socialist Party in Spain, Prodi's coalition in Italy and the Democrats in the US have all gained at the ballot box by garnering anti-war votes without going through the boring process of being genuine anti-war parties.

Whilst the separation between these spheres is obvious their connectivity is far less plain. On an abstract level its easy to claim these areas are all connected at root by capital. But how far does this get us?

It's clear the struggle against the Iraq invasion in the UK would have been that much more effective had it been able to mobilise significant industrial action or produce a shattering split in the Labour Party. But it was the very absence of an already existing solid opposition in these areas that made those events unlikely.

Whilst it's theoretically possible to re-energise a union branch with anti-war activity you can only build a solid branch through proper industrial work. Only a Muppet would join UNISON on the basis of opposing the war, and even then they would hardly hold the promise of being an effective trade union militant.

So where does this place pro-union work in the anti-war movement, anti-war work in the electoral field and electoral work in the unions? In a grey area frankly. Each sector is part of one struggle and defeats and victories in one place will have an indirect but important knock on effect. Different fronts in one war if you will. But each front has its own contours, logic and battles to be fought which cannot be won elsewhere.

Just as the defeat of Nazi Germany bore an ill wind for Imperial Japan, it did not negate the need to fight the war in the East for the Allies to win. Likewise anti-war slogans are not a substitute for serious trade union work, no matter how scientifically exact they may be.