What do you think?
Rate this book
June '36: Class Struggle and the Popular Front in France
Paperback. Very good condition. Spine is slightly faded and book is a little slanted. Front cover is faintly bowed near lower edge, affecting first few pages. Pages are sound and text is clear. TA
272 pages, Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 1986
20 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
January 3, 2026
The mass strikes in France in June 1936 are an incredible struggle with very important political lessons. This book is inspiring but also gives you lots to think about. How do you fight fascism? Is revolution possible in the stable democracies of the western world with big reformist parties and established trade unions? What’s their role in a revolutionary situation? What moves the workers into struggle? What could have taken the struggle forward? If you’ve thought of these questions before, you’ll revisit them and the history of June 1936 brings new insights.
I love this struggle particularly because of the mass strikes in retail, hospitality and the white collar industries.
The significance of the strike movement is that it surges from below, it engulfs whole industries, cities and towns, the workers occupy their factories, the unions aren’t in control, and when they try to reestablish order there is lots of rebellion from the workers who refuse to accept the decisions of the officials and the popular front government. This shows there’s room for politics to the left of the socialists, the communists and the unions.
The reformist socialist party, the stalinist communist party and the union federation the CGT are like the ultimate caricatures of how awful reformist politics are. Throughout the workers struggle, they are in talks with the heads of industry plainly saying they are the last line of defence for capitalism.
In one such meeting the CGT representatives say to the bosses
‘We will undertake to do everything in our power [to stop the strikes and occupations], but we cannot guarantee success. With a tidal wave like this, the best thing is to give it time to run its course. Maybe now you will start to regret using the years of deflation and unemployment to weed out systematically all our union militants. There are hardly any left to exercise the necessary influence on their workmates for our orders to be carried out.’
The biggest weakness of the book is that Danos and Gibelin’s criticism of the CGT is not underpinned by an analysis of the social position of the trade union officialdom. They explain the CGT’s position by saying they were committed to the popular front’s policy of ‘social peace’. Of course they were, but why? When their entire membership is pushing for more strikes, more occupations and they are winning more and more from the employers, why would their leaders hold them back?
The union leadership is fundamentally reformist because of their position as mediator between capital and labor. They accept that exploitation exists, they accept industry must be alive and well for a supply of jobs. They are also happy with the system that gives them cushy positions. Ultimately, they line up to defend the system and to subdue worker’s struggle. This is why union officials play a similar role across space and time, not just France in this period.
I love this struggle particularly because of the mass strikes in retail, hospitality and the white collar industries.
The significance of the strike movement is that it surges from below, it engulfs whole industries, cities and towns, the workers occupy their factories, the unions aren’t in control, and when they try to reestablish order there is lots of rebellion from the workers who refuse to accept the decisions of the officials and the popular front government. This shows there’s room for politics to the left of the socialists, the communists and the unions.
The reformist socialist party, the stalinist communist party and the union federation the CGT are like the ultimate caricatures of how awful reformist politics are. Throughout the workers struggle, they are in talks with the heads of industry plainly saying they are the last line of defence for capitalism.
In one such meeting the CGT representatives say to the bosses
‘We will undertake to do everything in our power [to stop the strikes and occupations], but we cannot guarantee success. With a tidal wave like this, the best thing is to give it time to run its course. Maybe now you will start to regret using the years of deflation and unemployment to weed out systematically all our union militants. There are hardly any left to exercise the necessary influence on their workmates for our orders to be carried out.’
The biggest weakness of the book is that Danos and Gibelin’s criticism of the CGT is not underpinned by an analysis of the social position of the trade union officialdom. They explain the CGT’s position by saying they were committed to the popular front’s policy of ‘social peace’. Of course they were, but why? When their entire membership is pushing for more strikes, more occupations and they are winning more and more from the employers, why would their leaders hold them back?
The union leadership is fundamentally reformist because of their position as mediator between capital and labor. They accept that exploitation exists, they accept industry must be alive and well for a supply of jobs. They are also happy with the system that gives them cushy positions. Ultimately, they line up to defend the system and to subdue worker’s struggle. This is why union officials play a similar role across space and time, not just France in this period.
Read
June 27, 2022Lu dans son édition française (pas trouvée sur Goodreads). Une lecture super intéressante, même si le style pourrait être plus plaisante (pour une approche chronologique, les renvois en arrière sont fréquents !).
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews