The Popular Front's victory in the legislative elections of April-May 1936 caused a great sense of relief and then a joyful upsurge of hope and idealism in its supporters. Spontaneously, thousands of workers began to occupy shops and factories. On June 4, when the Blum government came to office, the strikes had begun to paralyze the economy. In the next two weeks, perhaps because it was clear that the Blum government was not going to suppress the strikes but rather to negotiate an end to them, perhaps because by that time it was also clear that neither the Confédération Générale du Travail nor the Communist and Socialist parties would try to take advantage of the situation for an insurrectionary purpose, the strikes spread like wildfire throughout the country. Hundreds of thousands of workers apparently wanted to guarantee, through “direct action”, that the benefits of the Matignon accords and of the promised legislation would apply in their industry or region. It was in these conditions that the Blum government managed to get the conservative Senate's approval for the most progressive social reforms of the Third Republic.

In common with many other countries, Australia has had, since 1920, a Communist Party, which is an obvious and continuing symbol of international reaction to the Russian Revolution of 1917. Naturally enough the formation of this Communist Party and its subsequent history has attracted a degree of attention from historians and scholars of Communist movements and Australian politics. The impact of the Profintern, on the other hand, has been completely neglected. Even at the international level no full-scale study of the Profintern and its related trade-union organisations is yet available, and though one scholar has noticed that in Australia “the history of communism in the unions is […] separate from CPA political history”, the bases of this separation have been left relatively unexplored. This article seeks to examine Moscow's links with the Australian trade-union movement via the Profintern in the period 1920–35. It would seem that these links overshadowed the CPA as a “Communist” influence in the Australian context, at least for the first decade of the Comintern's existence. The separation of CPA history from the wider influence of Communism in the unions is discernible almost from the very start.

The origins and nature of the strike movement which affected the manufacturing districts of England during the summer of 1842 have been subject to a variety of interpretations. The very use of the term “Plug Plot” suggests some sinister motivation, and certainly belief in the existence of a conspiracy became widespread as the strike proceeded. According to the Manchester Guardian