The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-08-18

But the statement OF the Rank and
File Committee does raise the issue
of revolutionary policies against the
pure-and-simple job organisation tend
encies Of the secessionists. This state
ment says, in part:
Gust as this fight embodies the po-
icies Of industrial unjonism in the
class struggle, so it is true that it did
not begin yesterday, nor start from
the election or retirement OF some Of
fetal.
I'm the early years Of the I. W.
W., we were not much more than a
propaganda group, and not very big
one at that. II was always a fear Of
the rebels in our organization in those
days, that when some upheaval among
the working class would attract
large membership into the I. w. W.,
it would be watered and lose its revo-
lutionary punch. The rebels would be
in minority and unless they managed
some way to hang together and keep
up the revolutionary educational work,
making the non-revolutionary new
members absorb revolutionary
rather than a non-revolutionary policy,
they would be out-voted and the or
ganization would be ruined in the
long run, as far as its service to in
dustrial emancipation was concerned.
For we must have revolutionary EDU-
CATION and big ORGANIZATION
in order to have EMANCIPATION.
when we speak Of this fear on the
part Of the rebels in the early l. W.
W., we recognize and must admit as
fact that there have always been
two factions, conservatives and pro
gressives, in the organization. The one
contends for purely job unionism.
These fellow workers would not be
bothered with the revolutionary char
acter Of the industrial union move
ment. If they could get a union that
would function in their particular in
dustry for wages and hours, then they
would be willing to let the revolution
airy class struggle on broad scale go
to the devil.
The lack Of solidarity here is the
fatal flaw, for If, in all industries this
could work, and really advance the
general standard of the whole work
ing class-then there would be no
revolutionary or other argument
against it. But industrial union self
ishness is just as fatal to working
class interests as the craft selfshness
and narrowness of the American
Federation of Labor. Industrial union
narrowness is likely the next mis-step
from craft narrowness on the road to
the struggle for revolution. We must
avoid the mis-step, and not imagine
that we are tremendously "con-
structive" because we are fighting for
job organization
"The key to this controversy lies
in the fact that the crisis which the
rebels in the early l. w. w feared
has at last come upon us. Up to about
the time of the war, the organization
was, 90 we said before, a propaganda
league directed and led by a pretty
good revolutionary element, in fact the
revolutionary ideal dominated the
field and the purely Job unionist did
not control the I. w. w.
I'VE used to be lucky II we had FIVE
thousand members in good standing.
We got all swelled up when we got
to fifteen thousand about 1915 or 1916.
We were simply overwhelmed when
the tremendous boom Of war indus
tries, coupled with a resentment
against war that was attracted by our
old anti-militarist agitation, brought
tens OF thousands Of new members IN
to our organization in 1916-1s17. We
found ourselves with over a hundred
thousand members along the begin
ming Of the war. But we were over
whelmed in more ways than one.
Many of our best rebels were i'm
prisoned or deported. Many others
were so tickled to see members pour
ing into the organization that they
forgot the old worry about what would
happen to their revolutionary policy
and made hay while the sun shone.
In more than one way this greatly
benefited the organization. But other
things had to be considered. Among
them was the necessity for looking
out for this strong economic organize
ton We were building up. War per-
secution had to be taken into account.
We had to defend our imprisoned fell
low workers, and a whole defensive
movement took place that led, as Eel
low Worker George Williams has
pointed out, to a lack Of spirit and
aggression
"Side by side with this defensive
tactic, and the denial OF the part of
force as the decisive factor in the
class struggle, too much of a purely
Job unionism grew up. II our members
will examine the history OF our organ.
ization during recent years, they will
see that both grew up at the same
time.