Developing Unrest: New Struggles in Miserable Boom-Town Gurgaon

Following article tries to summarise the main tendencies of class relations in Gurgaon and based on that to come to practical conclusions and suggestions for local ‘communist activities’.

Submitted by Khawaga on May 17, 2010

GurgaonWorkersNews – no.25 (May 2010)

Gurgaon, a satellite town in the south of Delhi became the symbol of ‘Shining India’. Many people are dazzled by the glass-fronts of shopping-malls and corporate towers and fail to see the development of a massive industrial working-class behind the facade of ‘post-fordist’ display of consumerism. Together with industrial centres like the Pearl River Delta in China or the Maquiladoras in Northern Mexico the Delhi industrial belt has become a focal point of global working class formation.

A Global Working Class in Local Formation

In the industrial areas of Gurgaon a very particular class composition.1 emerged. Hundred of thousands migrant garment workers work next to the assembly lines of India’s biggest automobile hub and next to hundred thousand young workers sweating under the head-sets of Gurgaon’s call centres. We are forced to re-think our traditional understandings of what ‘workers’ are, how they struggle and how this struggle can become a process of self-empowerment towards self-emancipation.

The specific structure of industry and the composition of the work-force first of all pushes us beyond the regional and national frame-work.
On the most obvious level this happens through the global market. In spring 2008 the Rupee reached its peak to the US-Dollar, causing bad export conditions. The garment industry in Gurgaon dismissed thousands of workers and shifted orders to ‘low currency’ countries like Vietnam and Bangladesh. In autumn 2008 the Rupee plummeted, but together with it the US and European market crashed and sent shock-waves into the industrial areas of Gurgaon: credit crunch for the real estate, garment orders came down, US-banking services slumped. At one point in time, workers in one space – who might otherwise have thought that they have little in common but chai stalls – faced a common situation: cut in bonuses or piece-rates, abolishment of free company meals or transport, threat of job cuts. The potential for a socially explosive tea-party of english-speaking call centre night-shift youth, migrant garment and construction workers and young skilled workers in the car part plants entered the Industrial Model Towns – a mass base of actual ‘internal threat’2

There is a second level on which the ‘collective work-force’ has to be grasped beyond the boundaries of factory walls or company units. This level is shaped by local, regional and global division of labour. Maruti Suzuki connects their assembly lines and welding-robots via transport chains with production units of hundreds of outsourced suppliers, reaching into the work-shop slum-villages of Faridabad or the green-field industrial areas along the National Highway. Assembly plants around the globe depend on parts manufactured in Gurgaon by companies like Rico or Delphi. IT and BPO offices cooperate closely with branches oversea, while production in the huge garment factories is supplied via supervisor middlemen with piece-work from working (wo)men stitching ‘at home’.

On a third level the character of the work-force itself can not be grasped on a local level: the majority of workers are migrant workers, going back and forth between urban industrial life and village. Wages are too low to reproduce a nuclear family in Gurgaon, most workers leave their family in the villages. Similarly it is near too impossible to survive a longer period of unemployment – or for that matter, a longer period of strike – in Gurgaon. Though disintegrating, the village still functions as the main unemployment insurrance. The changes in the villages, such as introduction of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme or the general development of the agricultural market, reverberates in the working conditions in Gurgaon and echoes back into the rural. Workers arrive in Gurgaon with hopes, which are in most cases disillusioned. They survive 16-hours shifts by keeping both village misery and glorification in mind. Their urge ‘not having to be a worker anymore’ expresses itself individually in plans to open a shop back home. Reality forces us to find a collective and social expression of this urge to abolish our existence ‘as workers’.

Main element of this reality ‘ as worker’ has been the casualisation of work-force. In winter 2000/2001 Maruti Suzuki used a labour dispute of minor importance to lock-out the permanent work-force and to replace them through compulsory ‘Voluntary Retirement Schemes’ with temporary workers. This has been repeated in other companies to a point where 70 to 80 per cent of the average factory work-force is nowadays hired through contractors – due to their mobility they have less interest in struggles for long running wage agreements and company pension schemes. They have more immediate desires and anger. The remaining casual and permanent workers are often young workers hired in various ITI-campuses all over India, employed with much less job security and lower wages than the old type of permanent work-force. In the garment factories the skilled tailors on piece-rate producing ‘full-piece’ garments are increasingly put under pressure by chain-systems employing 20 less ‘skilled’ workers to produce the same garment in division of labour and by introduction of CNC-cutting and embroidery machines. In Kapashera – a workers’ dormitory ‘village’ where about 200,000 textile workers and families live close to the main industrial area – dozens of ‘CNC-courses’ and six week basic tailoring courses are offered by small-scale informal schools.

Given this complex picture the majority of workers do not face a single ‘company boss’ in a formal way, they face many bosses. Due to the real estate boom which catapulted local farmers out of their fields into land-lordism and business a specific coalition of local political class, land-lords, labour contractors, police and company-hired local goons became a repressive front ready to quell expressions of workers’ unrest. This local front of ruling class is complemented by a faceless front of multi-national investment and central government policies.

Old Type of Struggles: Locked-Out in Dead-Ends

Under these general conditions struggles which remain within the boundaries of classical type of company or trade union struggle normally end in defeats and/or institutionalisation. There have been many ‘union’ struggles in Gurgaon in the last years and they seem to follow certain patterns 3 :

There is discontent amongst both permanent workers and workers hired through contractors. In most cases some ‘under-the-surface’-struggles pre-date the ‘official conflict, e.g. at Honda HMSI ‘spontaneous’ canteen occupations happened before the ‘official’ struggle for union recognition. In this phase certain sections of workers get in touch with union officials hoping that registration of a union will strengthen their position. Representatives emerge, member-lists are required for the application. The company tries to put pressure on the emerging ‘leadership’, in many cases provokes a situation where suspension of ‘outstanding’ workers can be declared. In many cases companies ask the remaining work-force to sign individual letters of ‘good conduct’, trying to single out supporters. Due to the unions self-interest they tell workers not to sign: a struggle in classical terms is easier to organise once workers are victimised, although their actual power might be greater once back inside the factory. An unofficial lock-out situation emerges, often workers hired through contractors – who expect less gains from a company union – either enter the factory or additional workers are hired to keep up production. Often these new workers are hired from the local population of surrounding villages – another division between them and the mainly migrant original work-force. Companies are normally prepared for the lock-out and subsequent problems in production, either by piling-up extra-stock or by getting parts from other suppliers. ‘Unofficial unrest’ turns into classical forms of struggle, often managed by the main union advisors: protests in front of the factory gate, demonstrations, meetings with political leaders – the martyrdom of workers becomes a stage for leaders. In most cases the conflict becomes a single company issue without attempts to connect it to the wider discontent. State and company are well capable to deal with these ritualistic forms of struggle, either through repression or through entangling it in a long legal dispute. The result of these disputes normally exclude the workers hired through contractors who had been part in the initial struggle and often the legal cases for re-instatement of victimised workers run for years. After recognition of a company union there tends to be silence afterwards4 .

Even once in the trap of a lock-out workers can do more than just wait for the next symbolic show of solidarity. In the case of the current lock-out at Maruti fuel-pump supplier Denso in Manesar 36 union members have been suspended on 17th of February 2010 and about 500 workers refused to sign papers of ‘good conduct’. Since mid-February they have been sitting outside the factory while newly hired workers are kept inside for 24 hours. Already before the lock-out Denso had ordered additional parts from its Thailand plant – an act of preparation. In nearby Faridabad workers of another Maruti supplier, AC manufacturer Sanden Vikas, were ‘locked-out’ at the same time. The union did not facilitate direct links between these two work-forces. The suggestion came up to write a common letter to Maruti Suzuki management – a rather symbolic sign of workers’ coordination which could have had a small impact nevertheless. Another idea came up to go in small number of workers to stand with placards in front of Maruti or other local factories. Denso runs factories around the globe, some effort to let workers and management in these factories know about the situation in Manesar could have been made 5 . Small steps which could help to spread the word and may be create direct links between workers of the supply-chain. This did not happen, instead we saw one or two union demonstrations of the classical type and bored young workers sitting and playing cards. According to information of a Denso worker, on 22nd of March 2010 the company took back 23 out of 36 suspended union reps and sent all Denso workers on one week training in a local ‘World Spiritual University’ ashram, to find a ‘peaceful mind’. When they returned to the factory most of the workers were shifted to new jobs in different departments, at new machines, with new neighbouring work-mates.

A New Generation of Workers’ Struggles

We have to discuss about the short-comings of traditional forms of struggle together with workers – and we can discuss new forms on the background of actual experiences of wildcat strikes and factory occupations which happened in Gurgaon during the last years. These struggles have remained largely unknown to a ‘wider public’. Unfortunately the left activists normally only get to know or interested in workers’ struggles once they have reached the ‘official’ status, which generally means: when they are repressed. The lathi-charge at Honda in 2005 mobilised the left, so did the murder of a worker at Rico – the main left position concerning these incidents was a ‘civil rights’ position, not an attempt to analyse the basis for workers’ power and self-activity. The struggles of a new generation already give some answers and ask many questions for the future, e.g. how struggles can be extended from the factory base avoiding ‘unnecessary’ direct confrontation with the state forces and pitfalls of formal representation.

In April 2006 more than 4,500 temp workers occupied the Hero Honda Gurgaon plant for several days demanding higher wages and better conditions. The company cut water and electricity, but told the police not to enter the factory. No support from outside the plant. The workers sent a small delegation for negotiations, which was bought off: the delegates returned promising fulfillment of all major demands after restart of production, they then disappeared. Only some demands were actually met by the management. When the factory occupation ended workers at Hero Honda supplier Shivam Autotech occupied their nearby plant raising similar demands. Workers at KDR press-shop in Faridabad, who supply Shivam Autotech with metal parts, worked reduced hours during these days.
In September 2006, after temp workers at Honda HMSI Manesar were not included in a union deal they occupied the canteen of the plant supported from the outside by the next arriving shift. The company reacted by cutting water supply. The company and union asked them to go back to work.
In January 2007 the 2,500 temp workers at car parts manufacturer Delphi in Gurgaon went on wildcat strike blockading the main gate. The company threatened to shut-down and relocate the factory and asked the union of the 250 permanent workers to get the temps back to work – after two days the blockade was lifted. In August 2007 the temps at Delphi struck again for few hours without prior notice, demanding the payment of the increased minimum wage and succeeded. Many of the workers lived together in back-yards of nearby villages, sharing food, mobile phones and information about jobs.
In August 2007, after the Haryana government had increased the minimum wage, over a dozen companies in Faridabad and Gurgaon faced spontaneous short strikes by mainly casual workers, demanding the payment of the new wage. In most cases these actions were successful 6 .
In May 2008 after not having been accepted as members by the permanent workers’ union the temp and casual workers at Hero Honda in Dharuhera went on wildcat strike and occupied the plant for two days. Management and permanent workers’ union both promised betterments of the workers’ situation. The temp and casual workers then tried to register their own union – a process which ended in suspension of leaders and a mass lock-out in October 2008 7 .

It would be schematic to label these struggles ‘spontaneous’. We need spaces to meet in the industrial areas for analysing the social production process and the already existing day-to-day experiences of organisation and subversion within: in factories, along supply chains, in the back-yard living quarters, in the common remote villages 8 . If there will be a communist party it will be the celebrations of the collective worker, discovering themselves by turning their social cooperation against its proclaimed precondition: capital. Part of this proletarian self-reflection must be the development of a structure of mutual aid, practical support and coordination. Comrades of Faridabad Majdoor Talmel are about to open some physical spaces for workers’ meetings in Faridabad, Okhla, Gurgaon and Manesar. Please get in touch!

Guragon Workers News
Faridabad Majdoor Samachar

Originally published by Guragon Workers News.

  • 1For debates about the concept of class composition see:
  • 2We wrote an article about the wider class situation in India after the crisis blow of autumn 2008:
  • 3The list of examples is way too long. Just to mention a few in Gurgaon: Maruti lock-out in 2000, Honda HMSI in 2005, Amtek in 2006, Automax in 2008, Mushashi and Rico in 2009, Denso and Sanden Vikas in 2010
  • 4After recognition of the union at Honda HMSI the number of workers hired through contractors and general productivity even increased.
  • 5It is difficult to rely on the classical union structure for these kind of international links. When the dispute at Rico stopped GM and Ford assembly lines in the US and Canada due to missing parts the comment of a United Automobile Workers official in Michigan was: “We are experiencing the effects of outsourced suppliers, and we hope they would be able to resume production as quickly as possible so we can in turn resume production” Interestingly enough this comment was made after the UAW had signed an agreement to lower wages to ‘save jobs’, which was disputed by many workers on the shop-floor. While Denso workers in Manesar were locked-out, Denso workers in Tychy, Poland, organised protests for wage hikes matching the wages increases for FIAT workers.
  • 6Today the situation seems even more explosive, given that the April 2010 ‘minimum wage hike’ of 30 per cent for Delhi workers does not compensate for the enormous inflation of food and transport prices
  • 7For video-interview with these Hero Honda workers see:
  • 8For concept of ‘workers’ self-inquiry’ see:



7 years 10 months ago

In reply to by

Submitted by Nao on May 8, 2016

Chinese translation on Groundbreaking here:

Mainland version:



古尔冈,这个印度新德里南部的卫星城,已成为了“印度淘金梦”的标志。 购物商场和金融大厦那闪闪发亮的玻璃外墙,使多少人看花了眼,却忽视了繁华盛世背后,工人阶级辛酸的挣扎历程。 新德里工业带、中国的珠江三角洲、以及北墨西哥的马基拉朵拉工厂(美墨边境的加工出口专区)是全球工人阶级形成的聚焦点。


在古尔冈工业区,逐渐出现了一个特殊的“阶级组成”(class composition)[1]。在成千上万的外来纺织工辛勤作业的同时,旁边不仅有印度最大的汽车生产中心,还有一班年轻人戴着呼叫中心的耳机,汗流浃背。 在这里,我们不得不重新思考“工人”的传统定义,他们是如何奋力斗争,还有这些斗争如何引领工人们从自立自强走向自我解放。

首先,古尔冈特殊的工业结构和劳动人口组成,使我们的分析框架超出国家范围或者地域范围。通过全球市场便可以明显看出。 2008年春天,卢比对美元的汇率达到前所未有的高峰,造成了出口压力。古尔冈的服装制造业解雇了数千员工,并把市场转向“低货币值”国家,例如越南和孟加拉国。 同年秋天,卢比币值猛跌,祸不单行的是,欧美的金融危机也波及到古尔冈。房地产的信用紧缩,制衣业的订单减少,就连当地的美国银行也无力回天。 此时此地,昔日以为除了茶水铺之外就毫无共通点的工人们发现,在这时他们所面对的困境是一样的: 克扣奖金或计件工资,取消免费的工作餐或来回交通,还有裁员的威胁。在这座“样板工业城”, 突然出现了发生“暴力茶会”的可能性——英语呼叫中心的夜班青年、纺织业和建筑业的流动 “农民工”、汽车零件厂的年轻技工一起组成了实际“内忧” 的群众基础[2]。

第二,要了解“劳动共同体”,还得把握另外一个层次,而这层次是超越各自工厂或公司单位的范围的。通过运输链,马鲁蒂铃木(日本铃木汽车公司的一家 印度分公司)把生产线和焊接器同数百业务外包商的产区连成一体,把生产规模扩展到法里达巴德的“贫民窟车间”,还有国道旁的郊外工业区。全球各地的组装工厂都得依靠在古尔冈生产的零件。 IT和经营外包办公室与他们的海外分支紧密合作的同时,制衣厂自家的针线活儿却要通过中间商来监督。

第三,工人阶级的性质不能从地方的层面去理解。 大多数工人是 “农民工”,在大城市工厂与乡村生活之间流动求生。 因为薪水低得难以在古尔冈养活全家,大部分工人不得不把家人留在村里。 长期失业,或者应该说长期罢工,也同样使人无法在古尔冈生存。虽然农村社会在瓦解, 它仍然是这些工人的主要“失业保险”。 农村的变化(例如“全国农村就业保障计划” 的实施或农业市场的发展)影响了古尔冈的工作条件,进而在农村形成反响。工人们怀揣着梦想来到古尔冈,到头来却发现一切都只是幻想。 脑海中关于农村生活的痛苦或者幸福的记忆,支撑着他们熬过每天16个小时的工作。 他们渴望着,有那么一天,可以 “不用再当工人”,回乡下开一家小卖部。 残酷的现实迫使他们通过集体的、社会性的方法来摆脱“工人”这一身份。

“工人”身份难以摆脱,在很大程度上是因为工作的散工化。2000年冬,马鲁蒂铃木以小规模的劳工纠纷为借口,用临时工人换掉正式工人,美其名曰遵 守“自愿退休计划”。 其他工厂也有同样的情况,多达百分之七十到八十的工人都是通过承包商招来的零工。这是由于工人们的流动性——为了尽快挣钱回乡,他们没有多少兴趣去争取长 期劳资合同和退休政策。 他们有的是干劲和冲动。 其余的临时工和长工大部分是国内信息技术高校的毕业生。同以往的正式工人相比,他们的薪水更少,而且工作也不稳定。 在制衣厂,只需请上20个低级技工分工合作,再加上由计算机操控的缝纫机,转眼间就能造出一整件衣裳,比以往老裁缝的手工制作快得多。Kapashera 这个离工业区不远的“村庄”是20万纺织工及其家属的聚居地。很多“机械纺织课程”和为期六周的初级缝纫课就在这里展开,授课单位都是当地一些不正规的小 型学校。

在这个艰难时世,工人们面对的不只是某一个企业的某一个老板——而是整个工业区背后的势力。 由于房地产市场的暴涨,农田变成商业用地,农民也成了地主和商人,他们联合当地的政治团体、包工头、警察、企业雇佣的打手,形成镇压工人运动的前线。这条前线由本地的统治阶级组成,在背后撑腰的则是多国投资商和国家政府。

旧式斗争: 罢工?不罢也罢!

在这种情况下,若工人运动只维持于“各自为政”,往往最终导致失败或被制度化。 “工会斗争”在古尔冈时有上演,它们基本符合这些条件[3]:

通过承包商聘请的临时工人和正式工人之间总是存在芥蒂。 大多数情况下,“不正式” (under-the-surface) 斗争总会早于“正式” (official)斗争,例如本田HMSI的工人“自发”占领食堂发生于工会认可的“正式”骚乱之前。 在这一阶段,某部分工人与工会接触,希望通过加入组织来壮大声势。工人代表应运而生,他们所需要的是更多的工友加入到组织中。 厂方试图给这些新兴的“工人领导”施加压力,并借此来拖延时间。 与此同时,厂方又会请剩下的工人签下保证书,进一步减弱工会的支持力量。出于工会利益,代表会反对工人签署这些文件: 尽管返回工厂会给他们带来更多好处,但当工人的利益受到损害时,典型的工会斗争能很顺利地组织起来。 当非工会组织的停工事件发生时,承包商手下的工人通常会自动返回工厂,因为他们本来就不指望从任何组织那里得到好处。其他一些新请来的工人也会保持生产进 度。 这些新来的工人一般是古尔冈周边村落里的本地人,这样能防止他们和外来工势力结为朋党。 厂方通常会为停工和随之而来的问题做好准备,把多余存货先堆放起来,或从其他供应商处购入零件。

“不正式的的动乱”往往会演变成典型的工人示威,由主要的工会顾问来指挥:在工厂大门前抗议,与厂方高层面谈——当不成工人,起码也当了一回“起义 英雄”。但这些挣扎最后也不过是一家工厂的事情,因为他们没有与外厂的其他工人连结成一个整体。对于政府和企业来说,处理这类型的工人示威简直易如反掌。 要么直接出面镇压,要么把它拖进耗时的法律诉讼中。若通过法律手段处理,那些通过承包商请来的临时工不会被追究责任,尽管他们参与了早期的示威;要通过法庭给被解雇的工人讨个说法会拖好多年。如果厂方认可了一个企业工会,随后再不会有抗议[4] 。即使是陷入停工状态的工人也可以贡献一点力量,总好过坐在一边看工会做形象工程。2010年2月,位于古尔冈Manesar镇的电装公司(Denso,世界500强公司之一,总部所在地日本,主要经营汽车零件;马鲁蒂铃木的油管供应商)锁厂停工,36个工会成员被停职,约500名工人拒签协议书。

2010年2月中旬起,这批工人一直在工厂门外静坐抗议,新请来的工人则被要求全天候留守工厂。早在锁厂之前,电装公司就让他们的泰国分厂送来额外的零件以作准备。在附近的法里达巴德,马鲁蒂的另一家供应商Sanden Vikas也关闭了工厂。但工会并没有把这两批工人的势力联合起来,取而代之的是一封给马鲁蒂管理层的请愿信——这种象征性的和解几乎没有实际用途。工会的另一个对策是让少数工人拿着大字报站在工厂前,同样是收效甚微[5]。电装公司的工厂遍布全球,要让其他分厂知道Manesar镇发生的事情并不困难。只要找到散播消息的途径,就能把大家凝聚起来。不过这一切最终没有发生, 我们只能看到势力单薄的一两个工人团体在无力呐喊,还有一群无聊的年轻人坐在地上打牌。据一个电装公司员工提供的信息,2010年2月22日,36个停职 人员中的23人已被公司批准复职,所有的员工都被送至当地一个类似“世界心灵大学”的修道院接受为期一周的特训,寻找“内心的平静”。当他们返回工厂时, 大部分工人被调配到新的部门,操作新的机器,连身旁的工友也是新的。


当务之急是让工人们了解到传统斗争的缺点,并根据以往的经验教训总结出新方法。这些经验包括了古尔冈以往发生的未经批准的罢工以及工厂占领。 他们的斗争仍然未被更广泛的公众所知晓。不幸的是,这些活动只有上升到“正式”状态才能让左派积极分子知道或者感兴趣,那就是说:只有在斗争已镇压时左派才得知。2005年,印度警方持警棍制服左派分子,造成Rico公司一名员工身亡——左派仅仅要求政府维护工人的“民权”,却没能分析出,工人力量的基础就是他们自己的行动本身。新一代的工人斗争已对未来的发展提出很多问题,并给出了一些答案,例如如何有效把斗争的范围扩大,同时又能避免和官方发生正面冲 突,不掉入所谓“工会代表”的陷阱里。

2006年4月,为了争取更好的待遇,超过4500名临时工人持续数天占领英雄本田汽车的古尔冈工厂。 本田公司切断了他们的自来水和电源,但叮嘱警方不要进入工厂。在失去补给的情况下,工人们派出一个代表团去与高层交涉。代表团回到工厂跟大家说,只要重新开始上班,公司便会满足他们的要求。谁知,这些代表已经被公司收买了。只有少数几个要求最终得以兑现。当本田工厂的占领告一段落时,他们的供应商 Shivam自动技术公司的工人也因为同样原因而占领位于本田附近的工厂。在这期间,法里达巴德KDR印刷厂工人的工作时间减少了,因为KDR也是 Shivam自动的金属零件供应商。

2006年9月, Manesar镇的本田HMSI临时工人在轮班前占领了工厂食堂,原因是他们没有享受到工会谈判得来的待遇。厂方立刻切断他们的自来水供应。公司和工会派人前来游说他们返回工作岗位。2007年1月,古尔冈汽车零件制造商Delphi的2500名临时工人堵在工厂正门示威。公司威胁他们,说要闭厂并且把工 厂迁到别的地方去。该厂的250名长工被公司要求到现场劝示威的临时工人返回工厂——仅仅两天,堵在门口的人群便散去了。2007年8月,还是 Delphi的临时工人再次罢工。罢工仅持续数小时,先前毫无征兆。这一次,他们争取成功到了最低工资水平上调后的差额补偿。他们当中有很多人就在邻近村 庄的后院里住在一起,分享食物、手机和招聘消息。


2008年5月,位于Dharuhera的英雄本田汽车厂发生工人罢工,工厂被占领48小时,事件的导火线是工会拒绝承认临时工人是他们的一员。本田的管理层以及正式工人的工会都承诺会改善这些工人的待遇。随后,临时工人着手成立自己的工会组织——这直接导致了组织领袖被拘留,还造成了同年10月的 大规模停工[7]。


如果真的能组成一个“共产主义舞会”(communist party)[9],那它就是集体工人的狂欢庆祝,他们将其社会合作转为打倒资本的武器,从而发现,就算没有资本,他们还可以合作,而且是按自己的需求合作。这种无产阶级的自我醒觉必定会发展出这样的一个组织架构——互助互爱、提供使用帮助以及调和人际关系。法里达巴德等地的一些志同道合的伙伴正准备为印度各地的工人提供会 议场地。请尽快与我们联系吧![email protected]


[1]. 译者注:‘“阶级组 成”(class composition) 是我们探寻革命可能性的核心概念,可以分为两个方面:一、无产阶级的“技术组成”是指资本如何把劳动人口组织起来和利用,即工人在直接生产过程中的具体条 件(分工模式、机器的特点等)和资本主义社会再生产的具体形式(居住模式、家庭结构、教育制度等);二、无产阶级的“政治组成”是指工人把“技术组成”转 为武器,用来对抗资本。他们利用集体工作的连贯性作为“自我组织”(self-organization)的出发点,把生产方式转为斗争方式。’关于“阶 级组成”的讨论,请见 。 [↩]

[2]. 针对2008年秋印度大范围的阶级危机,我们写了这篇文章: [↩]

[3]. 关于具体工厂的名单太长了,以下列举少数例子。 [↩]

[4]. 在得到认可后,本田HMSI增加了通过承包商请来的临时工数量 [↩]

[5]. 这 种类型的国际联系是难以依靠典型的工会结构来维持的。由于Rico公司的工人罢工而导致零件缺少,美国通用汽车及福特汽车在美加两国的生产线被迫中断,一 位来自密歇根州的美国汽车工会官员说:“我们正受到业务承包商的影响,希望他们能尽快恢复生产,这样我们也才能重新回到岗位。”有趣的是,在作出这样的评 论之前,美汽车工会已签署了降低工资的协议,以求“保住饭碗”,这招来了很多车间工人的反对。当电装公司在古尔冈的Manesar镇锁厂停工之时,电装在 波兰帝黑(Tychy)分厂的工人组织了示威,要求厂方加工资,并要达到菲亚特(意大利汽车公司)工人的工资涨幅。 [↩]

[6]. 现在的情况更具火药味,尤其是直到2010年四月,最低工资创下了上调30%的高峰后,新德里工人依然未能获得在通货膨胀下,伙食和交通补贴的赔偿。 [↩]

[7]. 点击这里看本田工厂工人的采访视频: [↩]

[8]. 关于“工人自我调查”的概念详见: [↩]

[9]. 译者注: 在传统意义上,“communist party”指“共产党”,但party又具有“派对”或者“狂欢舞会”的意思。 [↩]