This article examines the labour renewal strategies implemented by Central de Los Trabajadores de la Argentina. It argues that union organizing is conditioned by historical legacies and structural constraints, while social movement unionism, which for the most part promotes building alliances with community groups, can be achieved by taking advantage of political opportunities and mobilizing resources. To maintain these alliances, trade unions and social movement organizations need to build institutionalized partnerships and compensate for their individual weaknesses. The article also argues that organizing the unorganized and building alliances with the community are not a substitute for each other. It is also argued that labour’s power derived from its location in the economic system still stands as an essential source of labour renewal.

The Central de Trabajadores de la Argentina, established in 1992, worked to expand its base, especially among nonunion organizations, to construct an anti-neoliberal front. Driven by the threat of neoliberalism rather than by political opportunities, it was initially outstanding among social movement unions in its reach and its unity. It excelled not only in building alliances with the community but in organizing the community itself. However, the structural weakness resulting from its not being located in a key industrial sector and its lack of legal privileges, which was originally compensated for by its alliances, eventually made it unable to take advantage of changing political opportunities.La Central de Trabajadores de la Argentina, fundada en 1992, trabajó para ampliar su base, sobre todo entre las organizaciones no sindicales, para construir un frente antineoliberal. Impulsada por la amenaza del neoliberalismo más que por las oportunidades políticas, inicialmente se destacaba entre los sindicatos de los movimientos sociales en su alcance y su unidad. Se destacó no sólo en la construcción de alianzas con la comunidad, sino en la organización de la propia comunidad. Sin embargo, la debilidad structural que resulta de su no estar ubicado en un sector industrial clave y su falta de privilegios legales, lo que se compensó originalmente por sus alianzas, finalmente lo hizo incapaz de aprovechar de las cambiantes oportunidades políticas.

The main aim of this article is to explore different strategies of boundary making and unmaking by a minority ethnic group. I apply the theories of “boundary work” and constructivist understanding of ethnicity and nationhood to the case of the Laz, one of the autochthons of the Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey. I analyze two main strategies—boundary crossing and contraction—in the context of three sets of encounters and interactions, with Turks/Turkishness, people of Black Sea—Karadenizli—and Kurds/Kurdishness. First, I argue that assimilating into the official Turkish identity is one of the strategies adopted by the ethnic Laz. The Laz are incorporated into Turkishness both by their search for economic mobility, status, and by assimilationist policies of the state especially aimed at the spread of Turkish. To become a full-fledged true member of the nation and access to potential benefits, Turkishness through language shift has been realized that allowed boundary crossing of the Laz. Second, I state that despite the efforts of the top-down assimilationist policies, noncontentious ethnic identities can be reproduced by means of symbolic boundaries. The Laz contextually activate symbolic boundaries in informal settings by contracting from other people of Black Sea—Karadenizli—or ethnic Turkishness. The ethnic language is substituted by nonthreatening ethnic performances and rhetoric, less marked and more subjective traits of self-asserted differences. Such symbolic boundaries correspond to unofficial forms of hierarchies and competition over local belongings. Third, the analysis of the Laz–Kurd relationship unveils that ethnic boundaries can be redefined according to changing conditions. The impact of the Kurds on the Laz identity, either by means of personal acquaintances or the relationship between the state and the Kurdish national movement, is imperative. It triggers contradictions in the Laz identity by revealing new potential redefinitions and recasting of boundaries.

No abstract

No abstract