Chapter I: The Growing Power of Capitalism
AMALGAMATION
By Jay Fox
CHAPTER I.
The Growing Power of Capitalism
IN a civilized society there would be no conflicting economic interests. There would be nether master nor slave, employer nor employee, rich nor poor. Where these distinctions exist civilization is merely a name, for there is bitter conflict between the rich employers and the wealthless workers; and this conflict increases in intensity in exact ratio to the concentration of wealth and power on the one hand and the corresponding increase of poverty and knowledge on the other. This conflict Of interests in society has come to be known as the class struggle.
This war of the classes has raged throughout the ages. It is not a spectacular war, not always have the participants even been conscious of their parts in it. It is nevertheless universal and bitter, and all play their parts in it. It is the teal perpetual World War out of which all other wars have sprung. The class war will not end by one party defeating the other. Labor defeated will rise again. Capital licked will make terms and resume the exploitation of Labor. The class struggle end when the causes that give rise to it are removed. The economic structure of society must be remodeled before the basis for a real civilization can be laid. That is the work of Labor organized in its unions and equipped with the necessary knowledge. Armed with knowledge and power, Labor will change the economic basis of our common life and establish justice and equality where exploitation and misery now reign supreme.
The Free American Workers
According to the moral ethics of our capitalist society the owners of the means of life are under no obligation to see that their fellow beings, who do not possess such means, are provided with the opportunity to make a living. When the capitalist cannot make profits out of the labor of the workers he turns them out, cuts off their source of bread without the least compunction. They may starve to death for all he cares. He is not their keeper except while they keep him in fat dividends. When he needs more help he makes the announcement at the factory gate where there are plenty of free Americans anxiously waiting to serve him. They are free Americans—they cost him nothing. That is the only sense in which Americans are free today.
While differing in many respects from previous forms of exploitation, capitalism is no less cruel and merciless. The capitalists own the means by which we live and thus we are ad their mercy in no less degree than were our ancestors in the days of chattel slavery. The kings of old ruled the world with an iron hand, but they had a much smaller world to command than the Industrial Monarchs of today. The wealth of America exceeds that of the entire ancient world, and a few brainy men in New York City control the bulk of it; as cold and unscrupulous a set of men as ever dictated the policies of a nation.
The rulers of old hired thugs to pursue and capture their enemies, had them slugged and cast into prison, framed up evidence and put them through farcical trials before fixed judges who condemned them to imprisonment or death as the order was given above. Wherein does the practice of today differ from that, with the history of Labor's desperate struggles against the armed hirelings of Capital and the slaughter of men, women, and children in the great strikes at Pittsburgh in 1877; and later conflicts in Homestead, Chicago, Lattimer, Cripple Creek, Ludlow, Michigan, West Virginia, and numerous other places where the ruthless slaughter Of workers was looked upon as merely a matter of business? To pursue the analogy further we might glance over the list of recent trials of a socio-political nature where social heretics have been brought before the courts and convicted on perjured evidence and sentenced to long terms of imprisonment by hand picked judges. The jails of the country contains hundreds of such victims, martyrs to the cause Of humanity, men and women who dreamed of a better life than that which capitalism pro . Modern capitalism leaves a trail behind it as bloody as that of its predecessors and a record of cruelty and injustice just as black.
The Beginning of Capitalism
Modern capitalism had its beginning with the discovery of steam power and the invention of machinery. Before the advent of machinery the workers owned their hand tools and worked mostly in their own homes. The development of machinery soon left the hand workers without employment and they had to seek work from the capitalists who owned the costly machinery. Thus they became dependent upon the employers, who were not slow to take advantage of their new-born power. Spurred on by visions of wealth and aflluence the new capitalists began at once to exploit Labor to the limit. Without organization, the helpless workers were compelled to labor sixteen hours a day.
At the beginning of the nineteenth century factory workers a to be on the job at 4 A. M. and work until dark for a wage that was a mere pittance. A first class mechanic got 50c a day. Laborers worked for three and four dollars a month and board. Women toiled in the cotton mills from dawn till dark for $1.50 a week. The cost of food was not low in proportion to wages. M/heat was $2.10 a bushel, corn 75c a bushel. Pork sold for 20c a pound and bread was 8c a loaf. Thus it will be seen that as an exploiter of labor, capitalism made a good beginning, and the precedent then established has been loyally adhered to ever since. Every atom of energy that Labor possessed has been coined into dollars, and we have today the doubtful distinction of being the richest country in the world, while millions of our workers are without the means of life.
The modern factory is an evolution, a growth, an amalgamation of individual craft shops into great industrial units. When capitalism was young and inexperienced every trade had its separate existence and its separate owner, and each owner and employer was the keen competitor of every other man in his line of work. In those days competition was said to be the "life of trade," the incentive to capacity production without which men would stagnate and deteriorate. However, modern capitalists have discovered the utter fallacy of that idea, and have discarded it, after suffering tremendous losses through its ruinous application. But they still believe in it for working people, however, and insist most emphatically upon the application of its principles in their factories by the crushing of unionism amongst the workers. The policy of every man for himself and to hell with the hindmost is held to be the ideal condition for the workers. As for themselves, the capitalists prefer, the communistic idea of getting together into a compact organization.
Industrial Unions of the Capitalists
The first stage of the capitalists' getting together came when they discovered the economy and efficiency of the industrial factory. In the manufacture of a machine the products of several trades are necessary: draftsmen, patternmakers, moulders, blacksmiths, machinists, etc. Why not gather all these crafts together under one roof and one management? The idea was ideal from every viewpoint. It was adopted, and the industrial factory was born. Capitalists have always been quick to adopt new and valuable ideas. Therein lies their success. The workers, on the contrary, are suspicious of new ideas and slow to approach them. This accounts for the fact that after nearly a century of capitalist success in the application of the industrial idea the workers still adhere to the primitive craft union form of organization, although it is carrying them to destruction day by day.
The industrial factory was soon followed by the industrial corporation, which is really an industrial union of dollars. It was necessary that the small craft owner, displaced by the industrial factory, be taken into the industrial union, so the joint stock company was created. This was a most important development in the evolution of modern, capitalism. In the early stages when capital was scarce it made it possible for people with small means to become share-holders in big corporations. Thus the industrial managers were given access to large amounts of money necessary to the success of their dreams of industrial conquest.
Under, this system gigantic corporations were formed which gave their managers almost unlimited power over the workers in their employ and all others who came within the sphere of their influence. For it is a truism that a capitalist's power is measured by the amount of capital he controls, and that the men who control capital, control the means by which the people live. All opposition to the will of the new industrial monarchs has been ruthlessly crushed. The craft unions were the first to get the sword. The unions, still in their primitive form, became an easy prey for the big corporations. Not only did these refuse to recognize the unions but they ferreted out the union men that were working under cover and discharged them. When goaded to the limit of their endurance by the soulless corporations the workers struck. A private army recruited by the bosses from among the criminals and thugs of the slums and fully equipped with modern implements of murder was let loose upon them with orders to kill. Police, militia, and mounted cossacks were generally on hand to help the private gunmen terrorize the workers and drive them back to their slavery.
Capitalism Controls the Government
Not satisfied with their domination of local political and commercial life, where they are absolute masters despite our democratic form of government, the industrial monarchs have succeeded in corrupting our State and National Governments, over which they hold sway as absolute as any monarch that ever ruled the ancient world. A hundred years ago it was said by the wisest students of social economy that under our "democratic" form of government it would be impossible for a group Of rich men to get control of the government. Time has shown that little is impossible to the possessors of wealth. Men without wealth succumb to its influence. Lofty principles are fine but they don't supply their champions with the necessities and comforts of life. The masses without organization and economic education are misled by the press, to vote for the men selected by the money power. All politicians seek to curry favor with the capitalists who have the money to reward them. The politics of this republic are run by men who have made politics a profession, a means of gaining a livelihood, and their ethical code is so elastic it permits them to accept money from whatever source it happens to come. This is because the interests of the capitalists are served in every branch of the government. To all intents and purposes the Government of the United States is a branch of the associated industries. Whatever the industrial monarchs desire it to do, it does; even to the plunging of the people into a bloody war. An illuminating commentary on our democratic form of government is the fact that in every presidential election since 1860 the successful candidate has been the one with the largest campaign fund—furnished by the masters of industry.
Likewise the control of our educational institutions has passed into the hands of the industrial monarchs. Every university in the country is ruled absolutely by the corporations who furnish the funds, for its upkeep and expansion, and they see to it that nothing is taught which might lead the students to suspect that the present industrial system is less than perfect. The teacher who dares to hint at any social heresy knows his fate. Nothing but the approved brand of canned learning is taught and the student who emerges after three or four years of cramming is generally a full fledged plutocrat and snob, despising working people as lowbrow servers.
Nor do the children of the working people escape the polluting influence of plutocracy. The school books are published by the book trust. The state makes the rules governing the schools. In the country districts we are permitted to elect the school boards, but they have nothing to do with the education of the children except to hire the teachers and do the janitor work. In the cities there are no working men on the school boards. Bankers and business men oversee the education of the worker's children. As a result it often happens that children learn to despise the proletarian ideas of their parents.
Even the church not Immune to the poison of capitalism. Nowhere do we hear it raising its heavenly voice against the rapacity of the money power. On the contrary, it almost universally looks upon criticism of capitalism as heresy; and the clergyman who has the temerity to espouse the cause of Labor will soon find himself without a pulpit. If the founder of Christianity were to come amongst us today and preach a sermon such as he delivered when in the flesh, he would be arrested under the criminal syndicalist law and sent to prison for a term of years. Like all other institutions the church is subject to its source of income. It has its function to fulfill in the system, and the exploiters Of the people furnish the funds to pervert it from its normal course. To capitalism nothing is sacred but itself. Its motto is: "Only the Servers Shall Survive."
But of all the institutions that have come under the sway of capitalism, the press is by far the worst enemy of the people. This is because it is the great avenue for the distribution of news. It comes into daily contact with the people and subtly poisons their minds against all ideas Of change. It thus tends to keep them in perpetual bondage to the plutocracy. It is the moulder of public opinion and the chief avenue of propaganda for the powers that be—it is the mouthpiece of money. In return for this servility it receives the advertising patronage of big business, without which it could not exist. Obviously the press has full liberty to wield its scurrilous pen to the limit in attacking working people who refuse to accept the capitalist system as heaven-sent, and it is common knowledge that it takes full advantage of every strike and other expression of dis with things as they are, to malign the toilers and to incite police and mob violence against them. But the workers have not the same freedom to reply. Special laws have been devised by the henchmen of capital in control of the "people's" government for the suppression of the people's press and the punishment of editors and speakers who have the hardihood to expose the rottenness of the capitalist system and advocate a change. Freedom of speech no longer exists in this country because the people have no control over the government. It is now the pliant tool of the plutocrats, doing their strong-arm work in return for campaign funds and other forms of graft. Capitalism is master of the world today.
Chapter II: The Incapacity of Craft Unionism
CHAPTER II.
The Incapacity of Craft Unionism
UNIONS of workingmen have existed from the earliest times. Solomon's temple was a union job. Imperial Rome went down before the sword of the "barbarians" after its corrupt and greedy plutocracy, composing only 2% of the population, had gobbled up all wealth of the vast empire and reduced its workers to chattel slavery, a climax towards which our own empire builders are heading with hastening steps. During the middle ages the union workers lived and worked in their own homes, each craft occupying a separate section of the walled cities. The unions were known as guilds and included employers and workers. In those days employers were themselves workers and never employed more than a few men and apprentices.
The modern craft union, composed of workers only, is a product of capitalism. As the employers became rich and the number of their employers became large the clash of economic interests were intensified. Then the workers began to see that their interests were not identical with the interests of the employers. So they withdrew from the guilds and formed their own organizations, In our times ignorant and designing men in the labor movement have preached the false doctrine of the identity of interest between Labor and Capital. But the increase of wealth and power at the command of Capital and its ruthless grinding down of Labor has made it perfectly plain to the vast majority of workers that the assertion is a vicious lie designed to mislead the toilers and keep them in perpetual bondage to the employing class.
The craft union was the natural starting point for the organization of Labor. When unionism was young there were no industries as we have them today and the industrial trust wasn't even a dream. Shops were small and far between, and each shop employed one kind of tradesmen only. Men who worked at the same trade, having interests in common, were bound sooner or later to combine the conservation of those interests in a union. The craft union grew out of the need of the tradesmen to protect their economic interests against the aggressions of the employers.
The workers learned from observation that when a part of the crew quit, the boss was greatly hampered in the operation of the shop while seeking other help. From this they deduced that if the entire crew quit the boss would be up against it for a time at least, and that if the men hung around the shop and used their persuasive powers upon the men who came to take their places, he might have considerable difficulty in getting started, and in the meantime he would lose trade and probably his entire business. Thus was evolved an economic weapon of the highest importance, perhaps the greatest proletarian discovery of all ages—the strike. The strike is the principal weapon of consequence that the workers have at their command in the every-day struggle with which to resist the attacks of the employers and improve their working conditions. That they have not taken full advantage of this very effective weapon we shall see during the course of this discussion.
Craft Unions Fall Behind
So long as industry remained in its primitive state the craft union was able to cope with the employers who were weak and without organization. Gradually, however, they accumulated more and more wealth, combined their capital and their factories into larger industrial units, thus laying the foundation for the great trusts that now dominate industry. They followed this up by the formation of employers' associations in the different industries, which were really industrial unions of capitalists for the purpose of controlling output and prices, and for fighting the unions. It was then we first heard of the "open shop" and the campaign for the "freedom" of Labor.
Within a short time the whole face of industry was changed. The primitive shop had been absorbed into the industrial factory, eliminating the individual owners. Gigantic industrial corporations with billions of dollars at their command became the masters of industry, dictating the price of commodities, the wages of Labor and the policy of our State and National Governments. While the captains of industry were creating these great industrial combinations what were the leaders of Labor doing? Not a thing except to draw down their fat salaries, and they never failed in that.
The startling revolutionary change in the organization of industry made it absolutely essential that a similar change be made in the structure of our labor unions. Movement is life. The person or the institution that does not move dies. The American labor movement has not changed to keep pace with industrial evolution and therefore is doomed unless it awakens from its torpor very soon. It was formed to fight primitive craft capitalism. It now faces. modern giant industrial capitalism, before which its antiquated tactics are as a straw in the wind.
The way to fight machine guns is with machine guns or better. Only an idiot would go up against a machine gun with a bow and arrow. Yet our Labor Generals have been leading their bow-and-arrow craft-union batallions against the industrial machine guns of capitalism with disastrous results—defeat after defeat, strike after strike lost, wages slashed right and left, and the unions in retreat before the onslaughts of capital. Such downright incompetency, such dastardly betrayal of the workers has no parallel in history. If our labor leaders had a twentieth of the brains, daring, and enterprise of the leaders of capital we would have a union movement that could at least put up a defensive fight. No suggestion of improvement in our trade union tactics, no hint even that there is anything wrong in our system of organization, has issued from the lips of our inane leaders. They are utterly helpless in the face of the enemy.
In other capitalistic countries the union movement is in the process of readjusting itself to meet the changed industrial development. The European labor movement is far more progressive than ours and its leadership has life and energy and initiative. It is not afraid of change. It knows that its only hope lies in new tactics. It is fully aware that craft unionism is out of date and must be replaced by a more powerful form of organization that will function industrially. It has learned from its defeats. In every way the European labor movement, despite its faults, is far in advance of ours. It is more progressive; it has a much larger membership; it has vastly more shop control; and it recognizes the basic economic fact that it represents, not a section of society seeking to improve conditions by petty reforms, but a sharply defined economic stave class fighting for its life and liberty against a powerful master class determined to suppress with the iron heel every aspiration of the workers.
Why Are Our Unions Weak?
When we come to seek the cause why the American labor movement is so reactionary Gt will be well for us to first learn what is the main element that makes a union movement progressive. Who is it that is forever preaching progress and kicking over the old outworn institutions? Why, the rebel, of course! He is the busybody that is perpetually hammering at us to "can" our 19th-century ideas and at ourselves to those that are new and up to date; he it is who shocks and shames us into abandoning grand-fathery ideas that are a hindrance to our progress, but that we cherish because we were brought up with them. Nowhere is the revolutionist a greater menace to old-fogy ideas and practices than in the union. The union is his stronghold because there he is up against practical problems that call for solution by the most advanced methods. Now, when the radical deserts the union and goes Off by himself we can readily imagine what happens. Lacking the stimuli to progress, it reverts back to old ideas and stagnates in them. That is what has happened to the American labor movement, and this is how it came about:
About thirty years ago the revolutionaries got the idea that they could make greater progress by withdrawing from the old unions and starting unions with radical programs. Headed by Daniel De Leon, who wasn't a worker but a college professor, the revolutionaries went off by themselves and started the Socialist Trades and Labor Alliance, a supposedly correct union believed to answer all the requirements of the social revolution. Its theory was a success except in the getting of members. When the rebels quit them, all progress stopped in the unions. In thirty years we have hardly advanced an inch. In other countries the workers have kept abreast of the times. They have the revolutionist amongst them, they have been there all the time. Only here have they deserted the unions and left them to their fate in the hands of reactionary leaders.
De Leon and his followers deduced a theory from somewhere that the unions were not susceptible to the ordinary laws of evolution. They avowed the unions could no more change their policies and constitutions than the leopard could change his spots. Acting upon this theory, they whooped it up for the new union, but nobody joined it except themselves. All their good radical energy was wasted on that child of the professor's brain, energy that could have been used to such good effect in building up and revolutionizing the old unions.
Utopian Dual Unionism
Many similar utopian experiments have been made to cast aside the whole labor movement and to start entirely with a new organization. These have had a very serious effect upon the organization of Labor as a whole, an effect approaching disaster. They have drawn away the revolutionists and progressives from the old trade unions where they. were most sorely needed to offset the capitalistic teachings of the reactionary leadership and to give impetus to the awakening radical sentiment among the rank and file. It was like taking the ignition system out of a motor car, to withdraw these militants from the unions. The unions became dead to every urge of progress, and where they did not retrogress, they stood still: The conservative leaders rejoiced at the radical exodus. They were happy to be rid of those who watched them and questioned their policies; they would now have things their own way. And with what result we see today, a labor movement utterly demoralized and incapable of taking even a defensive stand against the attacks of industrial capitalism.
Our present labor leadership is hide-bound and capitalistic. Naturally it cannot go very far in fighting capitalism. It will not take a determined stand against capitalism, for that would be socialistic. It will dicker with capitalism where capitalism is willing to dicker with it. When capitalism gets big and strong it turns the labor leaders away. Turned down by the big capitalists they go back to Washington and dicker with the capitalist Congress. They won't tolerate a labor party, as that would be anti-capitalist. They won't favor a change in the form of the unions to meet the demands of industry, for that would be radicalism. They lean back in their swivel chairs and reflect: "The big fellows have turned us down but there are still a number of small concerns willing to dicker with us. While those remain the unions will be safe for our salaries. We stand pat."
The Failure of Craft Unionism
Now let us see if this is not literally true. Apart from the railroads there is not a large corporation in the country that has a union agreement, and not so many of the small ones for that matter. All the big corporations have turned the unions down cold, and the unions have never been able to work enough men in under cover to make even a dent in the operation of the plants by a walkout. It has been impossible to get unity of action among all the different unions that cover a big plant, either to colonize it or to make a drive for membership in the open amongst the employees. There are too many unions and not enough unionism.
Here is a case in point to prove my assertion: The General Electric was a union plant. The molders had a grievance and walked out. The company sent their patterns. to a scab foundry. Scab castings came in. Union machinists finished them up. Union metal polishers, union electricians and all the other different unions worked on them and not a thing happened. Some of the men didn't even know that the molders were out. That happened two years ago. The strike was lost. It was lost at its inception. How could it be won under the circumstances? That is the sort of unionism we have in America and the reactionary leadership is opposed to a change.
Strikes are being. lost every day for want of allied union support. Single unions strike. The other unions stay on the job and the end is disaster for the strike. Indeed, so few are the strikes that are won nowadays that one is inclined to think that if the general run of unionists knew the figures they would decide to stay on the job and lose rather than suffer the loss of a strike and bear the humiliation of being licked. But they should know the weakness of their craft unions, that they may be stirred to take measures looking to their improvement. The leaders don't suffer by lost strikes. Their pay goes on just the same, win or lose. They take no chances.
The winning of individual strikes is a thing of the past. Even where a number of unions band together and strike they fail unless the entire corporation is closed up. The recent railroad shopmen's strike has proven this. Seven crafts were involved in this strike including the entire mechanical departments of the roads. The mechanical department of every railroad in the country was tied up tight. The walkout was complete. But the trains kept on running as usual until the equipment began to break down from lack of repair. The train crews and trackmen, clerks, telegraphers, etc., stayed at work. The companies built bunk houses and gathered scabs. Some companies made settlements with the strikers but in no case did the men get the wages they struck Co maintain. The other companies refused to deal with the strikers at all. The strike has been a sad failure, and that failure is not due to the lack of solidarity on the part of the men involved. They stood loyally together, and shoulder to shoulder they faced the gaint railroad corporations and the U. S. Government that attempted to break the strike by its drastic injunction.
The opening of the book is shown; the full text loads in the reader.
Loading the full text…
The end
You’ve reached the end of Amalgamation.