You ought to be out raising hell. This is the fighting age. Put on your fighting clothes.
-Mother Jones
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Thursday February 2, 1905
From the International Socialist Review: A. M. Simons on Industrial Organization
In the current issue of the Review, A. M. Simons offers his views on the need for the working class to organization itself along industrial lines. Simons is one of the signers of the Manifesto and Convention Call which came out of the Chicago Conference held in early January. He was elected from that conference to the executive committee charged with organizing a June Convention on Industrial Organization. He is also a member of the Socialist Party of America.
Simons points out that the present bias towards craft unionism fostered by the American Federation of Labor leads to union scabbing:
An isolated trade union to day is as out of date as was the individualistic worker twenty years ago. Indeed, there are often more trades working for a single master today than there were men a generation ago. The trade unionist considers the individual laborer who seeks to make an agreement with his master apart from his fellow workers as a traitor to his class. What then shall we say of a trade that today seeks to make an individual trade bargain with its master independent of the other trades selling their labor power to the same capitalist! Is not that trade deserving of that worst of all epithets of the trade union world, scab? Yet this is what we see around us all the time. We see whole trades scabbing on the other trades of the same industry, and this in the name of trade unionism.
The proposed labor organization will embrace economic action on the basis of class struggle:
There is no question of affiliation with, or indorsement of, any political party. The union is an economic movement and not a political one. It is the recognition of the class struggle on the economic field, and as such must be judged. If the workers of America believe that such an organization will be more efficient in fighting their battles for better conditions than the present ones, then it is for them to take hold of the plan and bring it to a realization.
From the International Socialist Review of February 1905:
EDITORIAL
The Chicago Conference for Industrial Unions.
The manifesto and call for a convention to meet in Chicago next June to discuss questions relating to the economic organization of the working class and to the formation of a new organization along industrial lines, which appears elsewhere in this number, is without doubt one of the most significant facts in the labor movement of today. It is certain to raise both enthusiastic support and strong condemnation. Whatever is said here, is said entirely as the individual opinion of the editor, and is to be taken in no way as expressing the opinion of the executive committee of the proposed organization, of which he is a member, and still less of the Socialist party, to which he owes still closer allegiance.
The only question about the desirability of forming such an organization is the question of timeliness. Practically every student of the trade union movement who has any comprehension of the broader phases of laboring class evolution has realized for some time that such a movement was certain to play a part in American trade union evolution. It has for some time been evident that the American Federation of Labor was not adjusted to the economic conditions of today, and that it must give way to some organization more fit to meet and solve present industrial problems. Moreover, the general lines of the coming change have also been visible for some time. The one question then is, is the present the proper time for such a change to come? If it is not, then this organization will be a thing born out of due time, a cause of disorder, confusion and injury.
Let us then glance at the main features of present industrial life as effecting the offensive and defensive organization of the working class on the economic field. The first and most striking feature is undoubtedly the tremendous concentration in the forces of capitalism that has taken place during the last few years. Trade lines have been almost completely merged in the class struggle. Individual crafts find not only that their craft skill is no longer of avail, but that if they are to engage in collective bargaining with their masters in any effective way they must secure the co-operation of a great number of laborers working in other trades, and bargaining with the same master.
An isolated trade union to day is as out of date as was the individualistic worker twenty years ago. Indeed, there are often more trades working for a single master today than there were men a generation ago. The trade unionist considers the individual laborer who seeks to make an agreement with his master apart from his fellow workers as a traitor to his class. What then shall we say of a trade that today seeks to make an individual trade bargain with its master independent of the other trades selling their labor power to the same capitalist! Is not that trade deserving of that worst of all epithets of the trade union world, scab? Yet this is what we see around us all the time. We see whole trades scabbing on the other trades of the same industry, and this in the name of trade unionism.
Another striking phase of the present industrial situation is the growing keenness of class consciousness on the part of the capitalist class. This has expressed itself in two ways. The first, that of Parry and his followers, consists of an open declaration of class war all along the line. The other, that of the Civic Federation, seeks to take advantage of the trade scabs within the trade union world, and to use them to play against their fellow workers. The latter is a method of battle whose whole strength depends upon the unintelligent action of the working class.
Out of these two features, as inevitably as any idea ever springs from industrial conditions, has sprung the idea which has found form and expression in the call for a convention in Chicago next June. This idea is no means confined to those who are outside the organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. Indeed, the, thing which most convinced us of the necessity of such an organization was the tremendous discontent within the trade unions still affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. It seemed from the experience of the last year, during which we have addressed probably seventy-five or a hundred thousand trade unionists in different parts of the United States, that unless some means was formed to give this idea definite expression that the whole union movement was itself doomed, and we have frequently expressed this idea in speeches and writings.
The men who have sought to confine a trade union movement, growing out of monopolized industry and organized employers, within the bounds of craft autonomy, are the ones who are wrecking the union movement of America. They are trying, as men have tried through all the ages, to put the new wine in the old bottles, and the rumbling of disrupting forces is but the effort to find new and more suitable forms. When the men who constitute the central ring of the American Federation of Labor lent themselves to the employers through the Civic Federation to bind and deliver the working class into the hands of its enemies they took a step which meant but one of two things. Either a momentary disruption of trade unions (for there can be no permanent disruption while the class struggle remains a fact and not a theory), or else the reorganization of trade union forces in accord with their real class interests and in correspondence with the industrial conditions amid which every battle must be waged.
Right here it is worth while to stop and call attention to the fact that the trade union movement of America is in no way to be identified with the American Federation of Labor. The American Federation of Labor in its last analysis is little more than a clique of labor politicians whose main service is on the parade ground, and who are seldom or never seen on the field of battle. The real trade union in America, even in the pure and simple form, is to be found in the constituent organizations. The American Federation of Labor declares no strikes, pays no benefits, makes no agreements, and does little effective organization. To be sure, a corps of highly paid organizers are employed, but it has long been recognized that these men are but the political lieutenants of the official clique, and that their main business is not to organize working men into trade unionists, but to organize trade unionists into rings and factions for the purpose of maintaining the rule of the leaders. The American Federation of Labor may come and go—it might be wiped off the map tomorrow with but little result on the actual working class movement of America.
We recognize thoroughly the value of the work done by those who, in accordance with the "boring from within" policy have been preaching the truths of proper organization and proper political action inside the trade unions. Neither shall we in any way relax our efforts to further such a campaign of education. But these men have "builded better than they knew." Within practically every trade union of any importance there are today thousands of men who have come to the turning of the ways. They have become convinced of the necessity of industrial organization, of the criminality of affiliation with capitalist parties and co-operation with treasonable Civic Federations.
These men are already dropping from the unions because they do not see their way to further their interests within the unions. We would be the first to condemn such action on their part. The place for a man is within the union of his craft, fighting while that union stands and no treasonable action on the part of trade union officers should lead him to leave that union, unless it be to step into a better and higher form of organization. But we are confronted with a condition, not a theory, and unless some positive stand is taken the negative attacks upon old trade union policies will simply result in the disintegration of the trade union movement.
For these reasons we believe that the time is here to urge the various trade unions now organized, and the countless thousands more who are out side any labor organization, to unite in a form of organization suited to the industrial conditions that confront us. Many of the unions already contain a majority of men who recognize these facts. It is for these men, "boring from within," to see to it that their union is represented at the convention next June. If every man within the present trade unions who realizes these facts would set himself energetically to work at "boring from within" to this end the transition could be made with scarcely a jar in the trade union world. The fakirs and misleaders who have never at any time played any part in the real labor movement save that of disrupters and traitors would be quietly left on one side.
The trade union that connects itself with the new organization need not in any way alter internal organization and management. It need only change its admission fee to agree with the general one which may be adopted at the convention, agree to pay a stipulated sum monthly to the treasury, to exchange membership cards with other unions, to make no agreements effecting men in other trades without the consent of those trades if organized, and will in return receive similar support from all affiliated organizations. In every way the union will receive much more than it will be asked to give. It will retain trade autonomy in matters that concern each trade as completely as at the present time, but when it enters into the field of other trades instead of being met by trade competition and craft antagonism, it will be met by the co-operation of affiliated unions.
There is no question of affiliation with, or indorsement of, any political party. The union is an economic movement and not a political one. It is the recognition of the class struggle on the economic field, and as such must be judged. If the workers of America believe that such an organization will be more efficient in fighting their battles for better conditions than the present ones, then it is for them to take hold of the plan and bring it to a realization.
[paragraph breaks added]
---------------
SOURCE
The International Socialist Review:
A Monthly Journal of International Socialist Thought, Volume 5
Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1905
https://books.google.com/...
ISR of February 1905
https://books.google.com/...
The editorial by Simons:
https://books.google.com/...
IMAGES
AM Simons
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
ISR, February 1905
https://books.google.com/...
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Casey Jones (Union Scab) - Haywire Mac
The Workers on the S. P. line to strike sent out a call;
But Casey Jones, the engineer, he wouldn't strike at all;
His boiler it was leaking, and its drivers on the bum,
And his engine and its bearings, they were all out of plumb.
Casey Jones kept his junk pile running;
Casey Jones was working double time;
Casey Jones got a wooden medal,
For being good and faithful on the S. P. line.
-Joe Hill
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````