The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-12-24
Election and Referendum in I. w. w.

/ World" This shows that the an
archist petty bourgeois, stump rancher
type is growing powerful in the l. w.
W., and is making common cause with
the "skid road bum" and the spit
toon philosopher" group, against
whom there has been growing OPP
position. Adoption of question No. z,
will allow non-workers to join, In spite
of Article /, Section 2, which is in
elusive, not exclusive. The adoption
of this amendment would make the
l. w. w. anything but labor union,
and the Red Internationalists are fiat
ly opposed to it.
The grip Of the anarchists on the
l. w. w. is shown also by the provi-
sion to make it impossible for officers
Of political parties to join the |. w.
w. This comes as question No. g..
1t does not draw any line of distinc-
ton between parties; it makes no
difference between the parties which
represent the interests Of the work
ing class. Further 1t is violation Of
the traditional "non-poIItleaI" stand
of the /. w. w. and makes it definitely
''anti-polltIeaI.r
This is certainly an anarchist
measure OF the non-worker element
that does not base its theory on class
distinction. The group that would
open the /. w. w. to non-working
hordes, as proposed in question No.
7, would be equally happy to close its
doors to real workers, If they hap
pened to believe in class conscious
political action by the working class.
Pretending to. shut out politicians"
is only giving a monopoly to those
politicians who are known as an
archists.
Which Principles? Is the I. w. w.
Political Party?
The tendency to turn the I. w. w.
into an anarchist debating circle is
shown also in question No. 3S, for
more and quicker expulsions. This is
a grant of blanket power to conven-
tions to expel anyone for violation Of
l. w. w. principles" First, it is
autocratic. Secondly, it is idiotics as
no one knows what these principles"
are, since the 10th general convention
definitely refused to state what l. w.
w. principles consist Of. Thirdly, this
is clearly leading the way to expel
members for holding opinions, not for
actions alone.
Only political parties lay down sets
Of social ideas and demand theological
conformance to them. Passage of this
amendment makes a political party
out Of an economic organization. 1t
should be opposed. Labor unions can
not question opinions Of their mem
bers. 1t is suicidal. Give room for
all opinions and let the best one win.
ExPeI the InIunctionites.
But question No. n deals with an
other sort Of expulsion. Rowan,
Bowerman, Trotter, Ryan and Ander-
son (the injunctionites) have broken
class solidarity. This is not question
Of their opinions, nor are they charged
with holding minority opinion, but
with calling the sherin of Cook coun-
ty to place them in power over the
/. w. w. and in calling for split in
the l. w. w. when they could not win
thru the courts for lack of money to
pay lawyers.
These are the sort of things men
should be expelled for. The detective,
the CRATER, the traitor, have no place
in any labor organization. This is
quite different than to shut worker
out for having this or that political
opinion, or differing on matters Of
tactics within the movement. An In
dustrial union, especially, must take
in anybody who works for wages. SO
long as he stands by his class and
does not scab on or betray it.
Two Good Measures.