INDUSTRIAL UNIONISM

Industrial Unionist, Volume 1, Issue 4, 1 May 1913, Page 1

INDUSTRIAL UNIONISM

3:—Form.

ETHICS

We have seen, in the foregoing sections, that Industrial Unionism, unlike the old Craft Unionism, is based upon a recognition of the Class War. War suggests tactics, and “ tactics” is an important phase of Industrial Unionism.

Approaching the question from this viewpoint it will be easy to understand I.WW. ethics. When war is on, the opposing parties do not trouble with nice ethics; each side wants to win, and, in order to do so, each will inflict the greatest possible amount of injury and loss upon the other, with the least possible amount of loss and injury to themselves. Neither side is concerned about the question of “ Right” and “Wrong.” That is exactly the position of the I.W.W. Knowing that the Ruling Class of to-day, as in all past historical epochs, have one set of “ morals” for themselves and another set for the subject class —the workers; that they, the Employing Class, maintain an army of teachers, preachers, writers. “ moralists” and politicians, for the purpose of deceiving the workers. the I.W.W. rejects, with contempt, the code of ethics the masters seek to impose upon us, and proposes the use of any tactics which will enable us to •win. Alleged advocates of Industrial Unionism who deny this position and repudiate “ Revolutionary Tactics” are preaching a spurious Industrial Unionism, and are simply helping the Master Class to impose their ideas on the workers, for, in so far as Industrial Unionism has become definitely doctrinal, Sabotage and all aggressive tactics are a part of it. Industrial Unionism rejects the principle of time agreements; rejects Arbitration; rejects Parliamentarism, and pushes the politician into the background; it takes up an aggressive attitude towards the employers.

ARBITRATION AND TIME AGREEMENTS. The introduction of Arbitration to these colonies, and much sophistic talk of its value to the workers, have helped to blind a portion of the Working Class to the fact that the strike, in one form or another, is their chief and natural weapon. Working Class leaders who essay any coquetry with Arbitration are, if they influence any section of the workers, helping to lead the latter into a worse bog than they are in today. The I.W.W. holds that there is nothing to arbitrate about.

Apart from the evil effects of Arbitration on the workers generally—encouraging dependence on something outside themselves, taking the spine out of unionism, creating parasites in the shape of judges, lawyers, clerks, etc., opening the way to trickery on the part of union secretaries and others, in manipulat-

Aim, Form, and Tactics of a National! Workers’ Union on I. W. W. Lines.

mg legal phraseology which the average worker has not time to unravel —arbitration is wrong fundamentally.

No court can regulate the law of supply and demand, or fix the real wages for any period. Arbitration recognises the right of the employer to a share of the product of labour, and the power of a court to decide some conditions in an industry it does not understand. Arbitration fosters division in the ranks of the workers.

Any time agreement which makes a strike a breach is nothing but a promise, on the part of the organisation which is a party to it, to scab on the rest of the workers during any strike which* may take place before the agreement expires. The I.W.W. holds that any understanding between workers and employers is only an armistice, to be broken, when convenient, by either side. The Employing Class, as a whole, has always recognised and acted up to this. Only the workers have been foolish enough to keep to their side of contracts. DIRECT ACTION AND PARLIAMENTARISM. The true direct method of gaining political power 'is to develop economic power, which can only come through direct action and sound industrial organisation. Political or social change follows economic change.

The introduction of a new machine, or of a speed-ing-up system, which displaces many men, increases the economic power of the master because of an increase of surplus labour offering on the market. This economic change can be most directly met by decreasing the output —slowing down, etc. —and by shortening the hours of labour through the power of organisation.

The Politician is unwelcome in the Class Organisation of the workers because lie is useless, or worse. Leaving out the arguments: that the politician seeks to lift himself to power and personal aggrandisement; that to send working men to Parliament is to remove them from the working class atmosphere into one of corruption; that the vote can only be used once in three years, etc.; the objection to parliamentarism is more fundamental.

Parliament is part of a decaying system, a bourgeois institution, a “committee of the Ruling Class;” and can never be used by workers in the interests of the workers. Every moment spent on the effort to send working men to Parliament is a moment wasted. A vote in the industrial union is a vote to do something ourselves; the other is a vote for someone else to try to do something. The direct action of the workers on the field of industry can compel any Capitalist Par-

liament to act in the interests of the workers, as has been so amply demonstrated during recent years in England, America. Australia and elsewhere. English strikers, using their economic power—though the latter was only partly developed—compelled a Premier to come to them, instead of their going to him. English transport strikers, in 1911, compelled the powers that be to ask permission to transport food for army horses, etc. American miners secured better conditions by direct action, and lost them again through dabbling in indirect action. American textile workers had to strike to enforce better conditions which had been “ legalised” in the State Legislature. Australian workers gained, recently, an extraordinary reduction of hours by a short strike, and even a “ Labour” Government dared not act against them. And now Belgian workers have been obliged to strike to attempt to obtain the Franchise ! Radical and revolutionary Labourites who support the Two-Wing Theory—often earnest enough men — will go to great trouble to explain how the workers defeat each other by organised or unconscious scabbery—by carrying scab product to the markets, supplying coal, etc., to scabs, printing false reports of strikes, supplying light to scab labour, carrying strike pickets to jail by boat, and train, and transporting police or military to the strike area, etc.; in fact, distinctly stating that the lack of industrial solidarity allows the policeman’s baton to descend and the strike to be broken; then, with simple sophistry, they will advocate sending our capable men to Parliament to hold back the police, etc.

The I.W.W. is non-Parliamentary. It advocates control of Industry by the workers in the Industries. In short, the I.W.W. aims at true political power by taking economic power out of the hands of the capitalists.

METHODS. Though individual ability and fitness for any particular function is given free play, and individual initiative and individual action, such as sabotage, etc., are encouraged, the individual is not allowed to become an autocrat; every effort is made to educate the backward ones out of the habit of dependence on others. Holding that the workers are to be the future rulers of Industry, the I.W.W. aims at developing self-reliance in its members. During strikes every effort is made to distribute the actual work of conducting the fight among as many strikers as possible. A duplicate, or “ under-study,” strike committee is formed, to act in case the others are jailed, and, though physical violence is usually avoided, the statute law is broken if used in the interests of the masters. When this fails, the workers go back and “ operate” on the job. SABOTAGE. Various definitions of sabotage have been given. An American Labour paper defines it as ex the destruction of profits to gain a definite, revolutionary, economic end.” Another writer’s definition is “ all those tactics, save the boycott and the strike proper, which are used by workers to wring concessions from their employers by inflicting losses on them by the stopping or slowing down of industry, turning outpoor product,” etc. A simple definition is “ the withdrawal of efficiency in production.” It has also been defined as ‘ ‘ hitting the Boss in the pocket book. ’ ’ A politician’s definition would no doubt be worded so as to create prejudice against its use. The use of Sabotage probably dates back from the

time man first used his fellow man in exploitation. Naturally, workers at any period would seek an easy, direct method of checking their masters’ tyranny, and it is not difficult to-day for workers, in any occupation, to see or devise methods of applying pressure on the job. Railwaymen, suffering under a pin-pricking guerilla attack by the employers, through their agents, will reply with guerilla tactics. The rule book says an engine shall haul only so many tons up a given incline; that a shunter must not couple trucks by hand ; that each wheel shall be carefully tapped before starting; that every passenger shall be aboard and every door closed before the whistle blows, etc. Contrary to the order of an immediate superior the men obey the higher authority—the rule book, and the system is disorganised.- This lias been done on a Government system. To “go slower” on a N.Z. line, however, would mean stoppage (!)

Similar tactics have been used, with success, on a tramway system. Textile workers in Lawrence, Mass., U.S.A., reduced the general efficiency of the mills by 12 per cent.; it helped them materially in gaining their point, and the masters admitted 1000 ways cloth could be damaged without detection. The writer heard of a telegraph operator who, in “ operating,” had an accident with his machine just at a time when a garbled news item (sabotaged by the Boss) should have gone through. The man, who didn’t want to scab on his fellow workers in another district, didn’t get the instrument attended to as quickly as he might; the message related to a strike, and was intended to affect the morale of men on strike in another part of the country.

There are as many ways of applying sabotage as moves in the game of chess. Sometimes small acts of sabotage practised by a large number of workers will make the Boss “ come to light.” In some circumstances the act of a single individual would disorganise a whole plant.

Of course, the employers practise sabotage on a large scale, both on the workers and on each other. Adulterating foodstuffs, “ cornering” commodities; failing to tell a man, applying for a job. what the others are getting in wages so as to start him at less; secretly paying a slogger a little extra in order to get him to speed the others up; “ editing.” or cooking up, news items so as to deceive the workers and the public generally; and in a thousand and one other ways. The sailor Nelson committed Sabotage when he didn’t see that signal.

Cement hardens too much, or too little, to suit the designs of the man manipulating the materials; paint peels off or changes colour if the mixer is careless; it is unlucky for a tyrannical boss to walk under a ladder; class conscious farm hands, or travelling rebels, would be more careless with matches when on the property of farmers who ride into town to shoot or bludgeon strikers.

Every worker will know best how to practice sabotage in his own industry ; he can get further information if required from Industrial Unionist and syndicalist papers and literature, but the job is the best place to study. A little theory and practice combined. during working hours, will soon turn an intelligent man into an artist.

In conclusion: the Industrialist calls on every worker to study the principles of this great movement —its Aim, Form and Tactics. The greater the numbers of workers who do this, and decide to endorse and adopt those principles, the sooner shall we enter into a social system where there shall be culture, comfort, and free use of all good things for all; a system based upon free access to, through the ownership and control of. all the means of life.—F.H.