¹ The Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC) and the Congress Party; the All-India Trade Union Congress and the Communist Party of India; the Hind Mazdoor Sabha and the Praja Socialist Party; the Trade Union Congress of Burma and the Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League (AFPFL); the Central Trade Union Federation of Indonesia (SOBSI) and the Partai Kommunis Indonesia; the Islamic Trade Union Federation of Indonesia (SBII) and the Masjumi Party; the General Confederation of Labor of Viet Nam (Tong Lau Doan) and the Lien Viet movementand the Lau Dong, or Workers’ Party; the All-Pakistan Confederation of Labor and the Muslim League, etc.

² This proletarian consciousness was produced by wide unemployment among the intellectuals, their exclusion from legitimate political activities, and their conception of the role of the working class in the future industrial development of their countries.

³ A clear example of this policy is the attitude of the Dutch East Indies administrationto political parties and trade unions during the 1930's. Organization of nationalist trade unionswas far less hazardous than other forms of political activity.

Labor legislation in both Burma and India not only provided trade union leaders with certain organizational advantages, but actually gave them political representation.In Burma, sharp repressive measures against the Thakin Party in 1939 led to the immediate outbreak of a series of strikes and the founding of the All-Burma Trade Union Congress. In India, this selective policy of favoring politically pliable trade unions and trade union leaders backfiredafter World War II. When the Congress Party startedits “quit India” campaign in 1942, mostCongress Party political and trade union leaders were arrested, while the Communists, who cooperated with the British in the war effort, were actually encouraged to capture the leadership of the All-India Trade Union Congress.

⁴ The major exception was France, which prevented the formation of native trade unions in its colonial empire until after World War II. In the Philippines, the concept of national liberationfrom colonial powers did not develop to the same extent as in other South Asian countries because of the unique relation between the United States and the Philippines. No revolutionary liberation movementdeveloped which required special organizational tools (other than the relatively small Huk movement). Thus the Philippine trade unions did not play a significant role in the nationalist movement.

⁵ In this connection, it is significant that while wage increases provide little incentive to work harder, payments in kind and employer-furnished welfare services provide a paternalistic tie between employer and worker. When the bulk of wage remunerations is paid in cash, serious problems of economic choice present themselves to the inexperienced workers, thereby adding to their discontent with wage employment, which in most Oriental societies is stigmatized as a social status bordering on slavery.

Communist labor leaders are fully aware of the importance of this economic phenomenon. The stress which they place upon money wages in preference to full or partial wage payments in kind is intended toweaken further the workers] ties with their jobs and their employers, thereby facilitating the disruptive activities of Communist labor agitators. Although the primary emphasis on monetary incentivesis intended to prepare the workers for the coming industrialization under socialism, it has backfired on several occasions in India, Indonesia, and Malaya, turning the discontent of the rank and file against the unions.

⁶ See Nurkse, Ragnar, Problems of Capital Formation in Underdeveloped Countries, Oxford, 1953, p. 17.Google Scholar

⁷ Royal Commission on Labour in India, Report of the Royal Commission on Labour in India, June 1931, London, 1931, pp. 317–32.Google Scholar For Congress Party policy, see Narasimhan, P. S., “Labour Reforms in Contemporary India,” Pacific Affairs, xxvi (March 1953), p. 46.Google Scholar For the attitude of the Indonesian nationalist movement toward labor in 1945, see Thompson, Virginia, Labor Problems in Southeast Asia, New Haven, Conn., 1947, P. 255.Google Scholar

⁸ Galbraith, Willard, Organized Labor in the Netherlands Indies: A Basic Labor Report, U.S. Consulate, Batavia, December 15, 1941Google Scholar; also Thompson, , op.cit., p. 8.Google Scholar

⁹ Park, Richard L., “Labor and Politics in India,” Far Eastern Survey, XVIII (August 10, 1949). PP. 181ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰ The Socialist Sutan Sjahrir was leader of the Central Labor Federation of Indonesia (Pusat Perserifcatan Buruh Indonesia) from 1932 to 1934. For Haji Agus Salijm, see Anonymous, “Trade Unions in Indonesia,” Indonesian Review, Djakarta, No. 7 (December 1950), pp. 6–10.

¹¹ Virginia Thompson and Richard AdlofE, The Left Wing in Southeast Asia, New York, 1950, p. 250. For U Ba Swe, see New Times of Burma, Rangoon, December 17, 1950.

¹² Communist failure to gain mass support is particularly conspicuous among the peasantsof Southern Asia, notwithstanding Mao Tze-tung's efforts to make a political appeal to rural elements. Attempts to gain large-scale rural support through peasant movements have never enjoyed more than temporary successes, despite Communist efforts toinfiltrate traditional leadership positions in the villages and religious institutions, and to gain rural confidence by opposing—as, for instance, in Sumatra—the introduction of modern agricultural equipment and techniques in a government-operated resettlement project. The Communists have also attempted to bolster their cause by advocating land reforms and by aiding and encouraging tribal or regional irredentist movements.

¹³ In this connection, it must be pointed out that disruptive and opportunistic elementsare by no means exclusively characteristic of the Communist movement. They pervade other radical nationalist movements, particularly xenophobic splinter groups organized on a religious basis, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Ahrar-e-Islam in Pakistan, Darul Islam in Indonesia, and Mahasabha and RSSS in India.

¹⁴ For a recent example, see New York Times, April 26, 1953, “Reds in Indonesia Start Wage Drive”; also ibid., October 11, 1953, “Indonesia Reds’ Rift Breaks out in Open.” This rift appears to havebroken out over a no-strike pledge given by the Communist-dominated SOBSI trade union federation in October 1952 at a National Congress in connection with Communist support of the government. Recently this pledge was rescinded by the Indonesian Communistsbecause it had led to severe losses in trade union membership.

¹⁵ Except for the select small cadresthat make up the Communist trade union leadership, there is little disciplined rank-and-file participation in union affairs. Also lacking is the coherence of Western trade unions, in which, even when the members are inactive, there is at least a strong vested interest in union membership as such. In this connection, it may be of some interest to note thatthe Communist unions of India and Indonesia—and presumably elsewhere in South Asia—do not stress in their programs literacy campaigns or general workers’ education, two prerequisites forthe creation of a planned society, and two extremely important factors in promoting both national and trade union consciousness. This may be due to a lack of funds and teachers, which forces the Communists to concentrate on leadership. On the other hand, this neglect of workers’ education is not in evidence in the Viet Minh area or in Communist China, where there must be an even greater shortage of teachers and leaders. In these areas, the trade unions are very actively engaged in such literacy campaigns. In areas where the Communists have failed togain control, their unions concentrate on the creation of professional trade union cadres, which provide the Communists with additional power to disrupt their country's economy. In view of the traditional role that labor education plays in the programs of Western labor and socialist movements, which are often the prototypes of colonial trade unions, this omission would appear to be deliberate, pointing up more clearly the disruptive aspect of Communist union activities.

¹⁶ persatuan Buruh Perkebunan Republik Indonesia, or Association of Estate Workers of the Republic of Indonesia.

¹⁷ In order to reinforce their control over the workers, the traditional leaders often resort to such means as indebtedness, control of thesupply of widely used narcotics, and threats of physical violence. See Lasker, Bruno, Human Bondage in Southeast Asia, Chapel Hill, N.C., 1950, pp. 102–4.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Recognition that in Oriental society the concepts of humanism and of individual welfare are almost completely lacking tends to shock Western sensibilities. This factor is important, however, because it explains why many Asians are iiot repelled by the cruelties of the Communist system. Furthermore, it should be remembered that the methodsapplied in Europe in creating an industrial labor force and an urban proletariat were probably more cruel and ruthless, because they were used on a more extensive scale than those applied in the Orient. For a discussion of the conflict between Marxism andtraditionalism, see Mus, Paul, Viet Nam, Sociologie d'une Guerre, Paris, 1952, PP. 248–67.Google Scholar

¹⁹ This term does not refer to the leaders’ position in the East-West struggle.

²⁰ Palar, L. N., “Nationalism—Friend or Foe of Democracy?”, Indonesian Affairs, II, No. a (June-July 1952), pp. 24–28.Google Scholar

²¹ Both INTUC and the Trade Union Congress of Burma enjoy considerable advantages over rival unions because of their close link with the Congress Party and AFPFL respectively. In this connection, it is of interest to note that the success ofthe largest Communist trade union of the area, i.e., SOBSI in Indonesia, can be explained at least in part by the fact that the government's Ministry of Labor is continually favoring that organization, even when the government has elsewhere cracked down on Communists. Since attainment of independencein 1949, the government has used SOBSI for the realization of its labor policies and has constantly favored it in labor legislation and arbitration decisions. Only for a brief time in 1951 did the government proceed against Communist strikes and labor agitation.

The rise of the one other major Communist union of the area, the All-India Trade Union Congress, was also linked with the favored treatment it received from the British India government during the war.Since India's achievement of independence, it has steadily lost influence and membership.

²² Government aid is most often invoked in the elimination of rival unions, but also in the acceptance of working conditions or sending workers back to work when this entailed a political advantage to the leaders.

²³ U.S. Department of Labor, Point Four Training Project for the Indonesian Labor Group, September 1952 to March 1953, Washington, D.C., n.d., pp. 2–6.Google Scholar

²⁴ This attitude has its counterpart in Western society, where the urban population holds the farmer in contempt. See Boeke, J. H., The Interests of the Voiceless Far East, Leiden, University of Leiden, 1948.Google Scholar

²⁵ Federation of Malaya, Annual Report of the Labor Department for the Year 1948, p. 34Google Scholar; and Journal Officiel du Viet-Nam, November 1952, p. 1,686.