This is a caption.Reza Alijani

Some of the admirable advantages of workers’ protests.

Recent labor protests (especially in Haft Tappeh and Khuzestan Steel) have admirable characteristics and advantages; such as:

Internal networking for maximum collaboration among individuals, through various means, especially social networks.

“Collective management and the emergence of a shared sense of belonging to protests and understanding all its dimensions and components, thus following principles and strategies accepted by the collective wisdom and preventing fear and insecurity after drawing security lines.”

Ease of replacing field management with the detention of previous individuals.

Extensive support for our detained members and managers.

The logo design was as powerful as the collective ability and, in other words, it was a perfect match and representation.

یت

“Avoiding extremism in slogans and practicing self-control within the population.”

Avoid violence and any behavior or speech that gives an excuse to the opposing force.

The effort to establish communication and mutual support with other protests and civil movements, such as striking workers, students, teachers, etc.

“Efforts to communicate and explain our demands to other social groups, such as merchants, street vendors, etc.”

The effort to be present at all necessary centers without any pretentiousness, such as the Friday prayer courtyard and in front of the office of the Friday prayer leader, to explain our own oppression and the basic rights that have been violated.

This list can be added to.

Labor protests against the corrupt government and conservative movement.

The conservative regime sees the lower income classes as its voting base on one hand, and a source of recruitment on the other. Now this same base has risen up in revolt and protest.

Furthermore, the dominant discourse of the authoritarian current is mainly a dual-layered discourse. One layer is anti-enemy (traditionally anti-imperialism, Zionism, and regional reaction) and the other layer is the refuge of the deprived and oppressed (of course, preserving the system’s obligations and ruling over these two layers). This current has tried to counter this discourse against the discourse mainly based on freedom and human rights, which belongs to the middle class and is pursued by reformist and revolutionary movements, and sometimes by overthrowing them.

The current military-security regime carries out the training of its own social forces through the same discourse in order to prepare them for suppressing middle-class protests and also to deploy them for regional missions, such as in Syria, if necessary.

The current worker protests have intensified and have become a vulnerable point in this discourse. The oppressive force cannot easily suppress the middle class and low-income groups. As a result, they are confused and trying to secretly suppress and control them. This is because they must force their field forces to suppress the rebellious base. However, in the end, maintaining the system prevails over any analysis, slogan, or superficial appearance.

The more important point, however, is that those who seek “freedom” and “where is my vote?” can be suppressed, imprisoned, intimidated, and silenced, but the problem of someone whose home has fallen behind cannot be solved by temporary suppression and coercion, and the story remains the same.

In this way, the final analysis of the government’s economic situation and its ability to respond to the specific demands of the strikers will determine the state and future trend of these protests. But does the government have the ability to do so?

Is it possible to redistribute resources through plunder and looting?

One important difference between the urgent and short-term solution of the French government and the Iranian government in response to the Yellow Vest protests in France and the workers’ protests in Iran is that the French economy is a capitalist economy. President Macron has pursued economic reforms and cost-cutting measures by eliminating taxes on the wealthy and reducing government spending, putting pressure on the middle and lower classes. Therefore, there is a fear that reversing this trend due to the Yellow Vest protests may lead to capital flight, which is a likely and common occurrence in the global capitalist economy.

But Iran’s economy is not capitalist; it is based on oil, rent, and plunder. Therefore, the main problem is not capital flight. The current primary issue is the sale of oil and generating income, and the urgent solution after that is to redistribute public resources (mostly reliant on oil income) and reduce the share of rent-seekers and plunderers, while increasing the share of the people, including protesting workers. Of course, the discussion of fundamental and structural solutions is another issue and relates to the political and economic structures and foreign policies of the government, which is not the subject of this writing.

Is the ruling religious regime willing to reconsider its foreign policy in order to confront the (unjust) sanctions imposed by America against the Iranian people? Are the current government and ruling authorities willing to reduce the share of the addicted rent-seekers in their inflated incomes? Will reducing the share of various rent-seeking groups in a government where the conservative faction, especially its power-seeking branch, is fiercely competing, not lead to intensified internal conflicts? The answers to these three questions will determine the short-term fate of the protests and strikes of the low-income classes.

A powerful security-military government and sector that holds the upper hand has become accustomed to a repetitive approach: suppression for the purpose of elimination, increasing the cost of activity, intimidation and creating fear, wearing down and exhausting activists in every field, strengthening individualism, sowing discord, infiltration and internal control, and the like. These tools and levers can temporarily suppress and defeat class and labor protests, but because the root cause of the pain remains untreated, it cannot remain buried under the ashes for long and will quickly resurface with much greater force than the demands of the middle class. The reason for this is that a hungry stomach and growing children, and a landlord waiting for rent, do not allow for much time.

In this way, the corrupt government is eliminated and it must somehow respond to these demands and give a small share to the protesting guilds. But how long can this game of cat and mouse continue? It is clear that as long as the government has economic power and the greedy rent-seekers control the purse strings, they will not allow for a slightly larger share to be allocated to low-income groups and for a redistribution of rent income. Rent-seeking governments first and foremost cut or even eliminate development budgets. But this also has the opposite effect and increases unemployment and decreases the wages of those who have fallen behind. Therefore, there is no solution other than redistributing rent and reducing the share of the rent-seekers. The tug of war and balance of power between these two major fronts, the people – especially the low-income groups – and the government and its wide range of rent-seekers, ultimately determines the final outcome.

Confrontation of political forces with workers’ protests

In a general view, it can be seen that reformists are waiting for these protests to end as soon as possible so that the political scene can be set for the kind of game they are good at – namely elections. On the other hand, the overthrowers are waiting for these protests to continue and especially to be dragged from the economic arena to the political arena and overthrow the government.

Activists want change, but at first they want their demands to be met and to find salvation from the hardships of life. They are themselves “the goal” and not “the means” for political activists to achieve their goal – which is overthrowing the government.

In the second phase, which is the medium and long term, reformists pursue a project that either forces the government to step back and transform, or causes it to change and collapse in order to be replaced by a government based on the separation of religion and state and citizen rights. This path will be shaped by the people, including the low-income and middle class on one side, and the government on the other. However, it is not possible to expect a power shift from every trade and civil protest (the expectation of overthrowers) or to expect top-down reform from the structure of the government (the expectation of reformists).

A part of the problems of daily life for various classes of people, including workers, teachers, women, and students, can be solved under the same structure. This is the field of movement for reform. However, more fundamental problems and issues cannot be resolved with the same real and legal structure and remain trapped and confined within a triangle. One side of this triangle is structural corruption. Fundamental problems related to economic corruption cannot be solved while maintaining the same structure. All important financial and economic cases are stopped and not pursued further.

Another side is the suppression of the structure. The cases of serial killings and executions in the 1960s and so on never reach a conclusion in this structure.

The third side has also become a matter of moral policies and is commonly referred to as the honor of the government, which usually takes on a religious facade; such as continuing the war or intervening in Syria to protect Bashar al-Assad, but under the guise of defenders of the holy shrines and the like.

In this way, the reformists do not stop and condition the people’s transformation against the overthrowers of economic, social, civil and political life, and do not require a change in the entire government structure. Just as unlike the reformists, they do not believe that all problems can be solved within this structure.

Becoming advocates for change according to different and specific expectations and limitations, using all available tools to change the lives and future of people, including voting, demand-oriented efforts by trade unions, street gatherings and protests, and ultimately strikes by workers and civilians, as various ways to approach goals and demands for freedom, justice, human rights, and anti-discrimination, they promote, support, and participate.

From this perspective, it is possible to analyze the damage of economic and labor protests.

Pathology of labor strikes

Labor strikes encompass a wide spectrum and various types, which is not the focus of this discussion to examine all aspects and types and analyze their damages. However, overall, labor and trade strikes are periodic and intermittent (such as truck drivers, bus drivers, etc.) and contrary to expectations, they are not continuous until overthrow and do not have the full support of reformists!

With such coordinates, it may be possible to list some of the damages caused by these convulsions as follows:

The lack of formation and national unity among guilds, which can lead to all members of a guild going on strike simultaneously, in order to put effective pressure on the government to meet their demands. In some guilds, there are difficult and fluctuating efforts to form such an important unity.

Inability to cover strike expenses. A striking worker during this period is under pressure and deprived of any kind of rights and benefits more than ever before. During the revolution, this issue was handled by the market vendors. In some industrialized countries, labor unions and strike funds are responsible for this matter. However, the role of these institutions in current labor and trade strikes in Iran is vacant. One of the most important overlaps between civil and political activists and these strikes can take shape at this point, which is another important issue in itself.

Positive but insufficient solidarity among different industries and classes. Currently, there is a positive trend of solidarity and support for strikes among various industries and classes. Students support workers, teachers support both, and retirees support all three. Each group demands the release of prisoners. This is a step forward, but for reasons mentioned above, this unity and solidarity has not yet become strong and effective enough to exert concentrated pressure on the government and force it to retreat.

Not entering the scene of the middle class. This may be one of the most important damages of the current situation of labor and trade strikes from a strategic perspective. The root of this issue is also a very important strategic matter, as to why when nearly two-thirds of the people support these protests, they do not take any practical action in this direction.

The middle class is suffering from extreme individualism and prioritizing personal interests over collective matters. Collectivist and unifying ideologies have also become less prominent. The security costs associated with participation and harmony in these protests are high and are incompatible with the current intensification of individualism and pragmatism in this class. The hidden violence in some protests and riots also frightens this class. Additionally, some (but not all) of the overthrow forces supporting these protests, who themselves have a violent and exclusionary language and behavior, also make this class of change-seekers hesitant.

What should I do?

The answer to this question is different for reformists and revolutionaries, with a response that follows a reformist approach.

A significant portion of reformists want these strikes to end as soon as possible, through any economic and political means necessary, by addressing and fulfilling the demands of the workers.

Brands, on the contrary, do not want strikes to become a way for workers to go home or to work by taking part (or even all) of their rights. They are more inclined to incite and encourage workers and other trades to pour into the streets and radicalize slogans. With the belief that this will overthrow the government.

The transformation seekers, first and foremost, want workers and their families to achieve economic and trade demands, as well as mental peace and security, for a minimum human life. Every section of striking workers and tradespeople who achieve their demands bring joy to the transformation seekers, who look at the scene of Iran’s politics from the point of departure and the view of people’s lives – not the existence or non-existence of the government. However, they know well that the problem of economic strikes cannot be solved with short-term housing solutions. Therefore, they think on one hand about strengthening and sustaining workers’ and tradespeople’s organizations in the medium and long term (by participating in gradually resolving the weaknesses and damages mentioned above), and on the other hand, about structural changes and fundamental transformations in power in a gradual and national process to reach a government free of discrimination and based on economic, political, gender, legal, and national rights for all people, which is only possible in a democratic and secular republic.