SABOTAGE AND "GOING SLOW."

Industrial Unionist, Volume 1, Issue 10, 1 November 1913, Page 2

SABOTAGE AND "GOING SLOW."

A fellow-slave, writing to this paper, asks: “ When do you use Sabotage? When labour-power is in the acendency, or when labour is solid enough to lock out the parasites ? I heard one worker say he was against Sabotage of the go-slow kind, because his two mates slackened the pace leaving the work to be done by him. The other seems to me to be wrong. Solidarity seems to me fo be obtainable only without that kind of Sabotage which tends to run counter to the workers themselves.”

The first points to be grasped about Sabotage are: That it must always be directed against the Boss'; that it is not a principle, but a weapon —which implies that it should be used intelligently or not at all. You may pick up a sharpedged sword by the blade and raise a respectable lump on an enemy’s head with the hilt, but what is the use if the gash in your hand is worse than the lump ?

In the case of the fellow who got the extra work because the others went slow, it occurs to us that his logical course was to slow down too, and if the collective output was too “ raw ” no doubt it would be up to all three to go slow with the “go slow ” tactics. “Go slow ” is most effective when collective ; concerted. But that is only a very mild form of Sabotage. We agree with our fellow-worker in deploring that Sabotage “ which tends to run counter ” to the workers’ interests, as a whole; but surely lie agrees with us that it would be good tactics, and justifiable, to put a boss-made, scabby little “ arbitration” union on the run by a few adroit acts of Sabotage. When the Boss is trying to break a strike by employing scabs, whether sheltering behind an arbitration “ union ” card or not, his success may depend on the machinery running right. The strikers may call the strike “ oft* ” and go back to see that everything runs wrong, or they may have friends in the enefliy’s camp who understand machinery. The question about using Sabotage “ when Labour is strong enough to lock out the parasites ” suggests its own answer. When we are strong enough, out the Boss

will go without compunction or compensation —he can come back as one of us. Sabotage may play an important part as a preliminary to the General Lock-out of Masters, as an alternative to the Social General Strike. We cannot say. But when once we are certain of the defeat of the capitalists Sabotage will be “ no good to Gundy.” We will have no further use for it. We would be committing Sabotage on ourselves. The I.W.W. does not idolise Sabotage; it simply recognises a very powerful weapon; an auxiliary to the strike; an answer to victimisation, etc. ; a means of forcing concessions without leaving the job or losing wages. Sabotage is a weapon for that militant minority ’ ’ whose activities tend to develop a more militant majority. Nothing succeeds like success. Unavoidably partial strikes must be made successful. When a district strike occuis the power of the capitalist class concentrates against the strikers. The organisation of the enemy’s forces depends on details; Sabotage can upset his details. Sabotage will become effective just to the degree that it is intelligently understood, with the practice that makes for dexterity. There is no set of instructions forhandling the weapon; the individual worker’s intelligence should provide that it does not run counter to the interests of the working class.