"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of
wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the
epoch of incredulity ...", wrote Charles Dickens of 18th century
revolutionary France. One hundred and eighty years later, in May 1968, the
students of Paris fashioned: Be realistic, do the impossible to describe two
exciting and turbulent months that shook France to its foundations.
Those were electrifying days, and not only in France. In the period 1967- 68,
the world was in turmoil: Soviet tanks were brought in to crush a popular revolt
in Czechoslovakia; police and/or the National Guard were deployed on many US
campuses; in Britain 5000 students fought police outside the US embassy and
there was daily strife on campuses.
From Germany to Japan, from Ireland to Australia, young people were taking to
the streets in their tens of thousands demanding an end to the Vietnam war,
demanding greater personal freedoms, relevant education. It was the time of the
rebirth of the women's movement, the rise of the black consciousness movement in
the US and worldwide concern for the environment. Heady days indeed.
Alain Krivine, a leader in the events of May '68 in France, explains the
student upsurge: "Here in France, in Europe, it was the same as elsewhere.
It was due to the crisis in the university. In all these countries there was a
big development in the number of students, and a large part of the student
milieu began to understand the nature of the university in capitalist society; a
consciousness developed of the contradiction between the kind of education they
were receiving and the real function of the university."
Daniel Cohn-Bendit, the most prominent leader of the students, wrote at the
time: "A modern university ... must churn out the trained personnel that is
so essential for bureaucratic capitalism". The social function of the
university was the production of a managerial elite, he concluded.
Another major factor bearing on the upsurge, Krivine explains, was "the
impact of what we called at that time the colonial revolution: the impact of
Cuba, the impact of the Vietnamese revolution."
Back in August 1953, US President Dwight Eisenhower could get away with
saying that when the US provided millions of dollars to help the French war in
Vietnam, "We are voting for the cheapest way [to protect]... our security,
our power and ability to get certain things we need from the riches of the
Indo-Chinese territory and from south-east Asia".
But 15 years later, with body bags returning home, more people in the US,
especially the young, began to question the war. The Tet offensive, in which
Saigon (now Ho Chi Minh City) and 36 provincial towns were attacked, was
launched by the liberation forces in Vietnam on January 30, 1968. The offensive
exposed the lie of the US administration that it was winning the war. It was a
crucial turning point in the conflict and prompted huge numbers of young people
to join the Moratorium movement in the US, as elsewhere.
"Those are the reasons why the May '68 movement began in the university
and not in the factory", argues Krivine, a leading member of the
Revolutionary Communist Youth (JCR) at the time.
There had been student demonstrations going back at least until 1965. In 1966
a group of students from Strasbourg issued a pamphlet calling for a "
revolution in everyday life". Despite severe overcrowding in the
universities, Prime Minister Georges Pompidou said, "The greatest success
of the 5 years of the regime has been education". Students made known their
opinions on university walls: Professors, you are past it and so is your
culture!, When examined, answer with questions!
The newspaper Le Monde in a now famous editorial said, "France is
bored". Even President Charles de Gaulle confided to a friend in April 1968
that the presidency bored him because there was nothing heroic to do. According
to one sociologist, France was a "land of command", a "blocked
society". In 1967 over 4 million working days had been lost through
strikes.
The government, completely out of step with the changing times, received a
report from youth and sport minister Francois Missoffe in late 1967. "
Youth Today" claimed that young French people wanted nothing more than
economic advancement and social integration; they supported capitalist values
and humdrum middle class ideas.
In March, at a large anti-Vietnam war demonstration, US flags were burnt.
Cohn-Bendit, "Danny the red", was arrested with other students, while
others began seizing lecture halls. The Movement of March 22 was born. On April
3, a government education reform opted for "selection" for university
places.
On May 2, with pressure building from angry students, the dean of Nanterre,
with the support of the government, closed the university.
The next day, the Nanterre students went to the Sorbonne. The slogan "
Under the pavement, the beach" resounded as students began tearing up
paving stones to build barricades, to prevent an expected attack from the
extreme right movement Occident. Later that day, the Sorbonne's rector asked the
police to clear the campus, and the May-June '68 events began in earnest.
Battles with police left 20 wounded, 30 held in custody and a further four
imprisoned. By the middle of the night, 400 students and half as many cops were
injured.
The Guardian newspaper reported: "Paris, venue later this week for the
opening of the Vietnam peace talks, was stunned last night after a day and a
night of riots by at least 10,000 students on a scale unequalled in post- war
years.
"St Germain des Pres,the capital's literary and cultural centre",
it continued, " resembled a battlefield after several hours of fierce
clashes between students and the police. Buses with their tyres slashed and
windows broken were slewed across the street. Cars up- ended with windows
smashed marked the spot where the hard core of the students put up fierce
resistance to the police who, with nerves shattered after a full day of rioting,
clubbed demonstrators when they caught them and sometimes bystanders with a
sickening ferocity."
The situation continued to escalate, with nightly street marches: Run forward
comrade, the old world is behind you.
On May 10, at least 30,000 demonstrators gathered on "the night of the
barricades". As they marched through Paris they were greeted with
enthusiasm by the general population. Jean-Jacques Label, involved in the
events, describes the lead-up to the battle: "1 a.m.: Literally thousands
help build barricades ... women, workers, bystanders, people in pyjamas, human
chains to carry rocks, wood, iron ..."
Three hundred and seventy-six students were wounded that night and 500
arrested. More than 180 cars were burnt. The ruthless brutality of the riot
police, CRS (Compagnies Republicaines de Securit ), led to a popular chant
of "CRS-SS". Prime Minister Pompidou returned to France to be met by a
group of ministers looking "pale and scared".
"During the events in May '68, especially at the beginning, there was a
sense of admiration. Workers were saying, `It's fantastic what the students are
doing', but they didn't necessarily understand what the demands of the students
were. On the point of the repression, there was a solidarity with the victims
and against the police. It is on that point that the workers first demonstrated
on the street", says Krivine in reference to the May 13 one-day strike and
mass mobilisation of workers.
"Here you have a second explanation of May '68 which explains why only
in France the student movement had been able to initiate, to mix with an upsurge
of the workers, an upsurge of workers that existed only in France. It was
specifically linked to the fact that for 10 years the country had been ruled by
Gaullism, with a very strong power in General Charles de Gaulle."
On May 13, as 200,000 workers took to the streets, a poster at the Sorbonne
declared: "The revolution which is beginning will call in question not only
capitalist society but industrial society. The consumer society is bound for a
violent death. Social alienation must vanish from history. We are inventing a
new and original world. Imagination is seizing power." That night students
retook and occupied the Sorbonne.
On the next day, students declared the Sorbonne to be an Autonomous Popular
University, with a new, elected administration. Spontaneous strikes and
occupations began, which would culminate in an undeclared general strike. By the
weekend, more than 120 factories were occupied and 2 million workers were out.
"During 10 years de Gaulle was able to build illusions among the
population, and even among a majority of workers. De Gaulle appeared as a man
above the social classes, a real Bonaparte, until 1967. That year the real
function of this man, as a representative of big business, became
apparent." In 1967 the government began attacking the social welfare
system, a move which proved very unpopular among workers.
"This serves to explain why the main demand of the striking workers was
`10 years, it's enough!' The general strike was a revolt against 10 years of
illusion in de Gaulle", Krivine said.
"But the organised workers were under the influence of the Communist
Party and its union federation, the CGT (Conf d ration Generale des
Travailleurs). The education they received from the Stalinists said that the
students are petty-bourgeois, and that when they move into action they are
ultraleft, adventurist. There is a tradition in France of a certain separation
between the organised workers and students.
"I remember, for example, the first significant strike at the Renault
plant, a factory of 35,000 workers. When we learned they were on strike, I was
addressing a big assembly at the Sorbonne. We called on the students to
immediately organise a march from the Sorbonne to Renault to build solidarity,
to build links.
"There were a few thousand of us when we arrived. It was really
symbolic: all the workers were at the doors, at the windows of the factory, but
nobody on the pavement. The CP had locked the gates and doors. The faces of the
workers were at once very happy to see us but at the same time a little afraid,
because they had been told we were coming with bombs."
On May 15, the famous Odeon Theatre was, to quote David Caute from his book
'68: The year of the barricades, "expropriated by a cultural commando unit
... `Since the national assembly has become a bourgeois theatre, all bourgeois
theatres should be transformed into national assemblies'." Theatre and
political debate were fused.
Soon France was paralysed: no public transport was operating in Paris and
other major cities; no letters were delivered; rubbish accumulated on the
streets; workers occupied the power stations, cutting power to industry; there
was no petrol to be had; coal miners were out; no cross-Channel ferries ran
after May 20; Orly airport was closed. Even footballers took over their clubs.
On May 22, the government voted a general amnesty. The students replied:
Amnesty -
an act through which sovereigns forgive the injustices they have
committed.
De Gaulle delivered a long-awaited speech on May 24. Raising the prospect of
civil war, he went on to offer a few reforms to turn back the revolutionary
tide.
A huge demonstration listened to the speech on radio and shouted a resounding
"No" in reply. A student poster captured the feeling: The general will
against the will of the general. Later that night the stock exchange was
captured and set alight. That night was one of the bloodiest, with barricades
erected in a number of cities. "The most important aspect of May '68 in
France was not the student movement, as important as that was", Krivine
asserts, "but the general strike. There were 10 million workers on strike
during nearly three weeks, with red flags flying from factories and so on, but
most historians don't focus on this at all."
De Gaulle, an old man, refusing to send in troops and looking "
unrecognisable" on May 25 said of his government's position: "It's all
over". Two hundred thousand peasant farmers blocked roads throughout
France.
Talks between the government and the unions were arranged with a view to
bringing the general strike to an end. "But the first agreement signed by
the three trade union federations and the government was refused by the workers,
forcing the bureaucrats to renegotiate", recalls Krivine.
Georges Seguy, CGT leader, told workers at the Renault plant: "This is
what we've snatched from them", to a chorus of whistles and booing. The
story was repeated everywhere: No!
The officials beat a retreat; some were later to complain that the workers
had been "ungrateful". Pompidou, who had been told by de Gaulle to
"settle at any price", had offered a 35% increase in the basic minimum
wage, with a pay rise of 10% and a 40-hour working week.
"The last days of May saw the movement at its peak. The students were on
tutoring strike, and police had retreated from the universities; that was a
victory of the student movement. And we had the maximum number of workers on
strike", says Krivine, now a leader of the Revolutionary Communist League.
"At that point the real political problem was raised by the mass
movement in terms of power. It was not dual power
- nothing so simple
- but in a certain sense the
official power had publicly disappeared. I say `publicly' because it was still
here.
"There were some ministers in Switzerland, the parliament was not
meeting, the government was all but absent
- a real paralysis of the
bourgeoisie. Even the police in Paris had disappeared; students and workers were
directing the traffic in the city."
On May 29 de Gaulle went to Germany and talked to French military commanders
there. It is generally believed he was seeking assurances of military support if
it was needed.
De Gaulle returned and again addressed the nation the next day. He promised
new elections. After his fighting speech, more than 200,000
- some say half a million
- pro-government supporters
took to the streets.
"From a revolutionary point of view, the general strike at a certain
point paralysed the working class as well", says Krivine. "The people
had no more money, they weren't working and you could not buy anything as
everywhere was closed.
"When the question of power was raised, even in the street
demonstrations, at that moment it was clear that there was no credible
alternative power to the ruling class. It was here that the betrayal of the
official workers party was evident. The CP bureaucracy was not ready to take
power, especially on the back of the mass movement. It was too dangerous because
they had been totally bypassed from the beginning by the movement."
These are not just Krivine's assertions. After one demonstration moved
towards the lys e Palace (the presidential residency), de Gaulle told
an aide: "Don't worry, the communists will keep them in order".
The students in their inimitable way cast their judgment on the CP thus:
Please leave the Communist Party as clean on leaving as you would like to find
it on entering. The CP proudly put its hands up to the charges too: "
During these events ... the Communist Party appeared as the party of order and
political wisdom", said Waldeck-Rochet, its secretary.
"It was at that moment when we saw the limit of the street
movement", Krivine explains. "What was the average worker thinking
about at that time? `Well, we're on a general strike, we're very strong, but in
any case we've got to end the strike because we have to eat'.
"And then of course, to whom do they give the power? The leaders of the
unions and CP didn't want it, and it could not be given to the student leaders.
That's the limit of the student movement. If you take Cohn-Bendit, the workers
liked him as a model for strikes and barricades, but not to take state power; he
was not credible at that level. At that point it was over."
Everything was open to question, and ideas could change suddenly, Krivine
recalls. "During a strike you have people who radicalise after one week,
they become more open to other people, even their personal lives can change in
three weeks. Here you can extend that to a national level.
"People you would normally meet on the Metro without speaking, in '68 it
was different: everybody was speaking, not just at demonstrations, but on street
corners, explaining their lives, their wants, helping each other.
"People saw it was stupid to be only one in a car. With students helping
direct traffic on the streets, people were saying: `Why do we need police? We
can do it and more politely.' They discovered a totally different life and
recognised how alienated and oppressed they had been in their normal lives of
dog eat dog. People were optimistic for the future, there was a real
solidarity."
Yet the right went on to win the elections easily and govern for next 13
years. Why?
"When the mass of the population have such hopes, even illusions as to
what is possible, and then they see that they have been betrayed, that it's
over, then they often swing away to their previous allegiances, or even in a
more radical way: they like order and peace. The victory of the right was built
on the slogan: `We want peace!' -
finish now with the barricades and the violence.
"People from their windows had even thrown down their wedding sheets
that they had saved and cared for, to the demonstrators to tear up and put over
their faces as a protection against tear gas. I saw one guy drive his car onto
the barricade and set it alight to protect the demonstrators from the police.
"These people, when it is finished, what's in their minds? They say:
`What happened?' They can easily go to the other camp and even some of them
transform their illusions into a kind of disgust for the working class, for the
left.
"May '68 was a revolt rather than a revolutionary or even a pre-
revolutionary situation. There were no police guarding the parliament, but
nobody thought to occupy it, to take power. With a bigger, more radical left, it
might have been possible, but at the time there was no credible alternative
organisation existing", Krivine concluded.
In his analysis of the May '68 events at the time, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, now a leader of the German Greens, declared: "The events in France have proved that revolution is possible in even a highly industrialised capitalist society. Those who argued that the working class had outgrown revolution stood convicted of theoretical and practical incompetence."
