_UN-sponsored

heartland technology?

In place of the competitive positioning of
Northern, our productive capacity would
be better served by its continued regulation
(financial support, joint agreements, enfor-
ced commitments).

In particular cases, the democratic devel-
opment of our productive capacity may

The most basic point of our

argument is that accepting
competitiveness is demobiliz-
ing; it robs workers of their
independent values and weak-
ens our ability to do battle. The
competitive model ultimately
asks how to strengthen the
corporate sector.

lead to policy conclusions similar to those
reached by others on the left who support
competitiveness. In other cases, our orienta-
tion, because it will make us more produc-
tive, may incidentally make us more
competitive. But this is not the test of our

strategy. If the goal is competitiveness, we

do not defend our strategy as the way to go.

The most basic point of our argument is
that accepting competitiveness is demobiliz-
ing; it robs workers of their independent
values and weakens our ability to do battle.
The competitive model ultimately asks how
to strengthen the corporate sector. Our
perspective asserts that it is the very strength
of that sector which limits our freedom:and
belittles the meaning of “community.” Our
project is to prepare for our future by
strengthening our solidaristic and produc-
tive capacities. This necessarily means tak-
ing on and taking away the illegitimate
strength of the corporate elite.

The big question is whether we can

‘develop the space within the international

economy to carry out our strategy. We can
speculate on alternative economic ties (e.g.

‘bilateral trade with other countries, man-

aged trade, replacing GATT with a new
institution sensitive to
domestic control over investment, new
forms of solidarity). But the real issue con-
tinues to be our relationship to the United
States.

It has always been clear that a break with
an economy based on private ownership of
the main financial and industrial institu-

tions would run afoul of the elite not only in
Canada but especially in the U.S. Since such
a break is basic to fulfilling our goals and
socialists have always accepted this inevita-
ble danger.

The point that seriously trying to build a
socialist Canada means an eventual con-
frontation with the U.S. precedes the sign-
ing of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade
Agreement, but this latest development has
now focused the question of independence
from the U.S. on whether the agreement can
in practical terms be abrogated.

Those on the left advocating the prag-
matic need to accept competitiveness may
still deplore the agreement. But they have in
fact accepted it as the “new reality” or have,
by endorsing competitiveness, become
sadly ineffective critics. Our perspective, on
the other hand, positions us quite differ-
ently.

First, we are not demobilized by what the
alternative might be. In fighting to extend
democracy and expand our productive
capacities we will have to undertake daily
actions that will inevitably aggravate ten-
sions with the United States over the FTA.
Second, in these confrontations, we can
show how it is Canadian and American
business (through their support of and con-
stant reference to the agreement) that are
barriers to improving Canadian productive
capacity. The fight against the FTA and
against dependency on the U.S. will, there-
fore, be a fight for sovereignty and demo-
cratic rights.

An orientation to the democratic devel-
opment of our productive capacities does
not yet provide us with a blueprint for a
workable alternative to a capitalist econ-
omy. What it does do is give us an inde-
pendent ideology that can sustain an
alternative view of the world and direct us to
a series of activities, large and small, that

can affect our daily lives and build our col-.

lective strength for future battles.

The question for the left should not be
about the least damaging way to become
competitive, but how to move towards a
society that extends democracy into all
spheres of life, particularly the economic,
and which develops our individual and col-
lective potentials.

Sam Gindin is assistant to the president for
the Canadian Auto Workers, David Robert-
son is a researcher for the CAW’s technology
project. This article is part of a larger piece
that is due to be published soon in a collection
of essays.

May Day Greetings

CUPE Local 3351
Marpole Adult Day Care

“Providing quality service
for our seniors ...”

to our brothers & sisters
in the labour movement
on this May Day, 1990

United Food & Commercial Workers

John Steeves, Secretary-Treasurer
379-12th Street, New Westminster, 525-8811

Best Wishes

Local 2000

Leif Hansen, President

104th year anniversary
May Day greetings
Port Alberni & District Labour Council

What we desire for ourselves we wish for all.

Henry Nedergard
President

John Vezina
Secretary-Treasurer

MAY DAY
GREETINGS

Bricklayers Local #1,
BC:

C. Farish
B. Manager

F. Goldie
B. Agent

Tilesetters Local #3,
B.C. and Yukon

G. Russo
B. Manager

(MAY DAY GREETINGS

from the executive and membership of the
Cement Mason’s Union, Local 919

4457 East Hastings St. VSECAN OREN “What are you
wa doin’ mister?” 4

May Day Greetings
to the labour movement from

the executive and membership
of the

Vancouver

Printing Pressmen,
Assistants & Offset
Workers’ Union,
Local 25

Pacific Tribune, April 30, 1990 « 15