Earlier this week, an assertive statement by the United Auto Workers (UAW) chief, Shawn Fain, was made public. Consistent with his previous stance, he strongly supported the implementation of tariffs by the Trump administration, and condemned the concept of ‘free trade.’ In essence, his comments were reminiscent of the right-wing narrative of economic nationalism. The statement, made amidst volatile times, indirectly supported a metaphorical economic onslaught against both overseas and local workers. This pronouncement came in the aftermath of potentially the most significant protests in U.S history, signaled by Trump’s order to deploy military power in Los Angeles to deal with demonstrations advocating for the rights of immigrant workers.
The significant absence of representation from UAW or any other major unions at these protests was quite conspicuous. In spite of having an impressive member tally reaching over a million active and retired auto workers, there was no initiative from the UAW brass to mobilize their members. This was particularly surprising in Detroit, housing tens of thousands of auto and parts workers, where no visible presence of UAW was found. This under-representation can likely be attributed to the growing fear amongst the bureaucracy of the rising social resistance that threatens not only their political alliances, but also the established norm of collaborative labour management relationships which form the basis of their privileges.
For all practical purposes, Fain’s statement can be considered as the UAW’s official response to widespread demonstrations. In the ongoing political power play, the bureaucratic machine seems to align itself, quite paradoxically, against its own – the workers, thus standing on opposite sides of the proverbial barricade. Along with reaffirming his backing for the tariff war, Fain also failed to address a rather inflammatory social media post from Trump. The President had called for an unprecedentedly large-scale immigration raid, indirectly incited violence amongst his right-wing followers, and implied that the protesters were not ‘true Americans’.
Shawn Fain and the UAW management did not officially respond to Trump’s post, nor did they comment on the subsequent deployment of tanks in American cities, the numerous immigration crackdowns, or the military parade in Trump’s honour. Instead, Fain reiterated his support for trade wars, stating in his video that the disaster propagated by free trade needed termination. Fain attributed the closure of several American factories to Mexican workers and painted a picture of a world where companies exploit labour across borders to maximize profits – profits which find a route back into the pockets of executives, shareholders and politicians.
Fain’s articulation of the global economy nearly echoes the narrative fervently promoted by the far right. The primary assumption of this narrative is that the fault lies not with the capitalist structure but with ‘disloyal’ corporate titans and foreign governments systematically undermining American industries. This effectively encapsulates the appeal of economic nationalism – a false amalgamation of the interests of the working class with those of the capitalist nation-state, making policies that favour businesses appear beneficial to the workforce.
In an impassioned tirade, Fain cited Flint, Lordstown, and Belvidere – communities ravaged by economic downturns – as casualties of the current system. Such statements are rather ironic given that the UAW had a significant role in cutting jobs since the 1970s to increase the ‘competitiveness’ of US auto companies against their Asian and European competitors. UAW bureaucracy had disavowed strikes, imposed critical wage and benefit reductions and agreed to the mass closure of factories. As a result, UAW membership experienced a drastic fall, from 1.5 million in the late 1970s to fewer than 400,000 in the 2010 timeframe.
The shuttering of facilities in Belvidere, Lordstown, and other districts received tacit support of the UAW authorities. Despite the devastating consequences of these closures – spikes in divorce rates, drug addictions, suicides, and what Fain termed as ‘deaths of despair’ – there was little opposition from within the UAW. The organization remained notably mum about the passing of tradesman Ronald Adams Sr. at the Dundee Engine Plant, for example.
In his communique, Fain aimed at Mexican workers, which is a move with serious implications. His contentious remarks and the UAW leadership’s silence significantly contribute to the political blame for subsequent acts of violence against immigrants and Latinos in the U.S.
Fain’s assertions that tariffs would act as saviours for American jobs contradicts the experiences of the previous imposition of tariffs under both Trump and Biden’s administrations. Those episodes led to widespread job losses, hiked consumer prices, and plunged the economy into crisis.
The interconnectedness of global production, organized across multiple countries through international supply chains, renders the idea of safeguarding workers’ interests solely through national policies as unrealistic. This international nature of production systems forms the bedrock for a globally unified working-class movement, a prospect that unnerves the bureaucracy.
The tariffs have broader implications too. They are a part of the preparations for geopolitical conflicts, including the overt military maneuvers against Iran. The central goal of these actions is to restructure and realign the American supply chains in anticipation of a war with China and other potentially adversarial nations.
As history has demonstrated, moves towards protectionism, such as these, often culminate in an economic recession, a trade war, and eventually a world war. Sadly, instead of opposing this trend, Fain and the UAW executives are eager to showcase their relevance in such a scenario, where the broader focus is on militarization.
In a recent dialogue, Fain even touted the manufactured ‘overcapacity’ in the auto industry as a resource for building combat equipment like ‘tanks and planes and bombs.’ Simultaneously, the UAW has consistently failed to protect the interests of the workers at defence factories, including at companies such as Rolls-Royce, Lockheed Martin, and submarine manufacturer, Electric Boat.
The modus operandi of the UAW, enabled by a privileged few, mirrors the harshness of the Trump administration and underscores the organization’s dependence on maintaining industrial peace to safeguard its privileges. The UAW’s response to widespread protests further warns that effectively challenging the Trump administration requires a worker-led rebellion against the trade union apparatus. This consequently underscores the need for the development of independent worker-led committees to challenge the rigid bureaucracy and to usher in an international fight against capitalism.