Ryan
McMahon
3/29/13
Industrial
Workers of The World
The
Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) was a radical industrial union
group that was a prominent during the early 1900s. The IWW was
founded in Chicago in 1905. The group promoted the ideas of the
abolishment of capitalism and wage labor, and a movement towards all
workers being united under one social class. The group was founded by
socialists and anarchists, and radical trade unionists from across
the United States. The I.W.W was a very radical right wing
organization. It opposed left wing conservative unions mainly as the
American Federation of Labor (AFL). Though the radical actions of the
IWW were construed has detrimental it created more improvements to
the United States working class environment than it did chaos and
havoc, starting with these founding members.
William
Dudley Haywood aka Big “Bill” Haywood was the founder and leader
of the IWW. During the early 1900s Haywood was involved in many labor
disputes. The most significant of these labor disputes included
Colorado Labor Wars, and Lawrence Textile Strikes. The Colorado Labor
Wars was a bloody labor dispute between miners and mine operators in
Colorado, where eventually the National Guard was called in to
restore peace. The Lawrence Textile Strike was a strike that was led
by immigrant workers in Lawrence, Massachusetts in 1912. The
immigrant workers had the backing of the Industrial Workers of the
World. The strike was brought about when mill owners decide to lower
wages. Haywood had a very significant role in this strike as the IWW
leader. In which, “Haywood personally led the strikers in this
conflict. He marched at the head of picket lines, organized
committees, made speeches, and toured the country to raise funds.”1
With the effort of Haywood and the IWW the mill workers won their
case. They received, with shorter work weeks, an increase in both
wages and overtime. Haywood great success in striking with the IWW,
but he had a bigger picture in mind with the idea of striking. He
hoped that one day the workers would be able to control a whole city
or industrial area with this weapon known as striking. He hoped that
“this weapon was to be the final one in the arsenal of the working
class, and its ultimate use would be preventing the outbreak of world
wars.”2
This idea showed the true intentions of Haywood and what he wanted
for IWW during his years of leading the organization.
The
next leader, Eugene V. Debs was also a founding member of the IWW.
Debs was an American union leader and party candidate for the
Socialist Party of America. Debs would be arrested, like most of the
IWW members for speaking out against the United States participation
in World War I. Speaking out against United States during World War I
was in direct violation of the Espionage Act of 1917. Debs was the
most significant member to get arrested during the Red Scare Era. Not
because he was a founding member of the organization, but because of
the speech that he gave during his trial. The speech was considered
to be one of the masterpieces of American oratory. In his speech Debs
compare sailors in rough seas to the working classes struggles. He
explained that when sailors are at sea, during rough seas, they turns
his head towards the Southern Cross. And when it bends it shows the
sailors that easier times are coming. At the end of his speech he
speaks of hope being just around the corner for the people [working
class], “let the people take heart and hope everywhere, for cross
is bending, the midnight is passing, and joy cometh with the
morning.”3
Even in times of hardship Debs does not stray from his ideology and
passion of a united, free working class. Despite his passionate
speech Debs would still be sentence to a prison term of ten years.
Debs was one the most influential and significant IWW leader and
member. After his prison sentence he was met by masses of people, in
front of the Atlanta Penitentiary.
The
next member of I.W.W was not a founding member or leader but had
close ties to them. Emma Goldman was an anarchist and was best known
for the pivotal role that she played in the development of political
anarchist political philosophy in both North America and Europe. Like
Haywood and Debs, Goldman was an advocate for the working class and
was strongly against the United States involvement in World War I. On
May 18, 1917 Emma Goldman made a speech at the Harlem River Casino,
New York City. The speech that Goldman was about conscription in
World War I. Like most I.W.W members Goldman was against conscription
and the war in general. She believes that working class men and women
of the United States were suffering at the hands of the capitalists.
And that the capitalist are responsible for the war. She believed
like most of the working class that America was not in this war to
spread democracy but for conquest, money and power:
“I,
for one, am quite willing to stand up face to face with patriots
every night--patriots blind to the injustice committed in this
country--patriots who didn't care a hang. We are willing to stand up
and to say to them: "Keep your dirty hands off America."
You have no right to tell the people to give their lives in behalf of
democracy, when democracy is the laughing stock before all Europe.
And therefore, friends, we stand here and we tell you that the war
which is now declared by America in the last six weeks is not a war
of democracy and is not a war of the urging of the people. It is not
a war of economic independence. It is a war for conquest. It is a war
for military power. It is a war for money. It is a war for the
purpose of trampling under foot every vestige of liberty that you
people have worked for, for the last forty or thirty or twenty-five
years and, therefore, we refuse to support such a war” 4
Goldman
was an advocate for working class. She was strong believer and
supporter of freedom of the working class. And with this speech
against conscription and World War I Goldman believed that this was a
capitalist plot and the working class was suffering at the hands of
this plot. She strongly believed, like most of the IWW that America
was losing their identity as a nation for liberty, democracy and
freedom of the people. She wanted the United States to get back to
representing the people, the working class. Rather than supporting a
war of capitalist agenda. This is the ideology that seemed to echo
with all of the members of the IWW.
A
tool used to organize and spread this ideology that the IWW had, was
the use of free speech fights. The I.W.W used this tool to publicly
speak out about labor issues. A famous free speech fight occurred in
Missoula, Montana. In September 1909 a young 19 year women name
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn moves to Missoula with her husband, Jack
Jones. A reporter reported that Flynn was the type of women “of
considerable power as a speaker and of unquestionable courage when
engaged in the work of her organization”5
Jones would be arrested on September 29 for preaching out against the
state government about labor issues and exploitation of workers in
the Montana. This free speech fight occurred on Higgins Avenue and
West Front Street. After the arrest of Jones, Flynn wrote back to
I.W.W headquarter urging for more member intervention. This request
would be granted and more IWW member arrived in Missoula to join the
fight. They too would soon be arrested. Member were often offered
their freedom but refused without a jury trial. Missoula officials
would soon grow tired of dealing with the onslaught of the IWW and
they would soon drop the charges. The free speech fight in Missoula,
Montana would become a significant IWW victory. Many other free
speech fights would occur across the United States mainly in the
mid-west and western states. These other fights would also be IWW
organized. These fights occurred in Kansas City Missouri, Fresno,
California, Aberdeen Washington, and San Diego, California.
During
the years leading up to World War I the IWW had this public view of a
violent organization. The public had such a high view that, “in
popular eye, the IWW was a conspiracy of desperate villains who set
fire to wheat fields, drove spikes into saw-mill bound logs, derailed
trains, destroyed industrial machinery, and killed policemen.”6
This reputation is what led people at the time to believe that the
IWW was an organization that was detrimental to society and was the
exact opposite of what being American was. And they had every right
to believe this at the time. But history shows that the IWW, who was
a group of based on non-violent action according to its, founder Big
Bill Haywood, only used violence in self-defense situations. But if
we look at all of the IWW protest that ended violence, like the
Colorado Labor Wars or the free speech fight in San Diego,
California. These events were preached in non-violence, and had a
purpose for growth within the United States. This was the main agenda
of the IWW, to improve the lives of the working class and protect
them from the capitalist agenda. Whether this ended in non-violence
or violence was a means to an end.
Therefore
the IWW was an organization that represented the working class of the
United States. Who were against the United States involvement in
World War I, and were against the capitalist agenda of the war. They
were a non-violent group stricken by violent situations. But their
only purpose was to protect the working class and, help the working
class environment improve and grow.
1
Fisher, William. ""Big Bill" Haywood in the American
History Class." No. 5 (1950): pp. 293-296.
2
Fisher, William. ""Big Bill" Haywood in the American
History Class." No. 5 (1950): pp. 293-296.
3
Oestriecher, Richard. "A Note on the Origins of Eugene V. Debs'
"Bending Cross" Speech." Vol. 76, no. 1 (1980): pp.
54-56.
4
Emma Goldman, “We Don’t Believe in Conscription” (speech,
Harlem River Casino, New York City, May 18, 1917), The Emma Goldman
Papers,
http://ucblibrary3.berkeley.edu/goldman/Writings/Speeches/170518.html.
5
The Butte Miner, October 4, 1904 p. 3.
6
Joseph R. Conlin. The Wisconsin Magazine of History, “The IWW and
the Question of Violence”, Vol. 51, No. 4 (Summer, 1968), pp.
316-326. Published by: Wisconsin Historical Society
No comments:
Post a Comment