The Industrial Workers of the World: Movement’s Causes, Tactics, and Change

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Why the Industrial Workers of the World Came Together
IWW’s Vision for a Just Future and How It Relates to Course Themes
The Root Causes of the Injustices They Confront
How IWW Organized for Change
Whether or Not IWW’s Strategies and Tactics Matched Their Goals
Obstacles That IWW Would Face in Realizing Their Future Vision
Conclusion
References

Introduction

A social movement organization is a broad group of individuals connected through their shared interests for social transformation. This type of alliance is organized to advocate for or oppose a particular social change supported by another entity. For decades, various social movement organizations have played a key role in providing both direct relief and longer-term transformative changes by providing solidarity mechanisms, promoting participation, defending collective interests, influencing decision-making, and challenging systemic discrimination. This way, excluded groups in society have been effective drivers of their own change by joining or creating organizations representing their interests. An example of such a social movement outfit includes the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). The organization was established in 1905 to object to the American Federation of Labor’s (AFL) capitalist tendencies and its refusal to include unskilled laborers in craft unions. The Industrial Workers of the World used strikes, propaganda, boycotts, and sabotage to fight against capitalism.

Why the Industrial Workers of the World Came Together

The IWW’s members, also known as Wobblies, came together to promote workers’ solidarity in their revolutionary efforts to subvert the employing class. In this context, the organization was intended to unite all unskilled and skilled factory workers under one giant labor union to control the means of production and promote social justice (Woods et al., 2018). IWW was organized by comrades from the socialist-based Western Federation of Miners and other units opposed to what they believed to be a class collaboration by the AFL (Wood et al., 2018). This is because most workers, especially non-whites and migrants, were barred from the workers’ unions that formed the AFL, which intended to represent only white, male, skilled laborers.

The most significant figures behind IWW included Mother Jones, Lucy Parsons, William Haywood, Eugene Debs, and Daniel De Leon. The union adopted the motto “An injury to one is an injury to all,” which saw it first organize unskilled factory laborers in the eastern part of the country. Through its shipping workers group, the organization also spread its ideology to distant territories, such as Canada. As a result, it extended its membership to loggers, farmworkers, miners, and other wage employees regardless of race, gender, color, or creed (Botkin, 2017). Therefore, unlike other unions at the time, the IWW recruited its members on a class basis, welcoming all working individuals, including the women, immigrants, and minority groups. The Wobblies were mainly composed of the most discriminated against part of the workforce and non-whites migrant workers. Therefore, from its inception in 1905, the group hoped that collective bargaining would enable workers to be in control of their own work lives and realize better pay, shorter hours, and safer working conditions.

IWW’s Vision for a Just Future and How It Relates to Course Themes

The driving forces behind IWW, such as Haywood, Debs, and other members, saw the union as the best mechanism for achieving social change. The IWW vision for the future was to overthrow capitalist dominance promoted by the ruling class and replace it with a system that prioritizes every worker’s needs rather than profit. The union endeavors to steer social transformation by protecting all laborers from the power elite who oppose its vision of industrial democracy. This includes industrial bosses, employers, and politicians whose self-interest is to multiply their wealth at the expense of ordinary workers and the environment. Therefore, IWW’s vision for a more just future is to continue representing the self-interest of the working people and design a society that is based upon the wellbeing of everyone, not the benefit of a few.

IWW’s need for social justice relates to some of the ideas discussed in the course. The theoretical approaches highlight various themes related to collective actions, including the structural features conducive for participation and the role grievances. For example, the framing focuses on how a social group appeals to potential members by presenting their problems in a way that aligns with commonly held beliefs and values. In this case, most migrant workers and non-white workers who were mainly unskilled and discriminated by the system identified with the slogan “An injury to one is an injury to all.” The theory might explain the IWW’s success and dissent on capitalism that only favored the employing class. In addition, the resource mobilization concept also explains the strategies employed by social movements and how they amass and use resources to fight for a just future by presenting members’ grievances and political claims to the state. Being a revolutionary union, IWW rejected AFL’s practices completely and opened its doors to every laborer, regardless of race, gender, or craft (Eichar, 2017). This was an astounding political statement to make at the time when the government pursued conspiracy charges against members of the IWW.

The Root Causes of the Injustices They Confront

The Wobblies identified the wage system as the main contributor to the injustices they face. They believed it to be responsible for keeping laborers in subjugation. IWW argued that capitalism only protected the needs of the elite class who controlled the means of production, such as factories, machinery, raw materials, modes of distribution, and exchange. In this case, the wage system enhanced inequity because it forced the working class to compete for wages and jobs, increasing the owners’ wealth and decreasing their own. For this reason, the Wobblies believed capitalism was inherently oppressive and exploitative and needed to be abolished (Woods et al., 2018). Therefore, through the expression “abolish the wages system,” IWW envisioned overthrowing capitalism, while a new economic system emphasizing cooperation over competition and people over profit would be established (Eichar, 2017). Therefore, the working class needed to act in solidarity to safeguard their self-interest because the government, politicians, and employers who controlled the means of production were unwilling. This is because they were only motivated to multiply their own wealth at the expense of the workers.

How IWW Organized for Change

The IWW utilized several tactics to instigate changes that supported their objectives. It advocated using direct economic actions instead of collective bargaining, political intervention, or arbitration (Eichar, 2017). The union leaders believed that actions by workers were more effective in pressuring the capitalist institutions to meet their demands. Labor strikes were fundamental for the IWW to guarantee the implementation of critical changes in the workplace. In this case, the Wobblies participated in general, slow down, and sit-down strikes. Some of the significant strikes included miners’ strikes in Goldfield, Nevada, and Colorado, a silk workers’ strike in Paterson, New Jersey, and a textile laborers’ strike in Lawrence, Massachusetts (Lossin, 2021). The union would hold mass strikes in an entire industry even if only a small section of workers was involved. They believed that if one laborer was distressed, the rest of the workforce would also be affected.

The IWW utilized propaganda to educate and encourage laborers to unite against their employers. The organization spread propaganda through several pamphlets, magazines, and newspapers. IWW disseminated information about the union’s agendas and the need for radical actions (Lossin, 2021). It used news, songs, cartoons, and poems to urge workers to engage in strikes and sabotage to revolutionize the industries. Additionally, IWW also encouraged boycotts to show solidarity with laborers who were on strike in different industries. Similarly, the organization used supported sabotage where workers were encouraged to work inefficiently to lower the companies’ profits (Lossin, 2021). In this case, the union published leaflets, stickers, and newspapers in several languages to embolden workers to slow down their work progress.

Whether or Not IWW’s Strategies and Tactics Matched Their Goals

The strategies and tactics for making change matched the IWW’s goals. The primary purpose of this union was to eliminate capitalism and reconstruct society on a socialistic basis. Under the capitalist system, the workers had no rights over their labor. The employers controlled their work schedules and other aspects, such as where or how they worked. However, the IWW aimed to guarantee that the laborers would control the production means (Eichar, 2017). This meant that the workers would have greater control over their work processes, including the working hours, payment, and working conditions. Therefore, direct actions such as strikes aligned with the organization’s objectives because withholding labor from the management made the companies suffer extensive financial losses obliging them to agree to the laborer’s terms. For example, the IWW participated in the 1906-1907 miner’s strike in Nevada, after which the laborers won an eight-hour workday and an increase in their wages (Woods et al., 2018). This proves that the techniques adopted by IWW to stir change were in line with the union’s main goals.

Another objective of the IWW was to create solidarity among all skilled and unskilled workers. The tactics of boycott, propaganda and general strikes were intended to establish the unity of all workers. For instance, boycotts aimed to show additional support and solidarity with the striking workers. In addition, the general strikes showed the unity of all workers in different industries in their fight against capitalism. Similarly, the publications used to spread propaganda encouraged the inclusiveness of all workers regardless of race or craft (Eichar, 2017). Therefore, the strategies used by the IWW to instigate change, such as boycotts, strikes, and propaganda, promoted the solidarity of all workers, which is in line with its goals.

Obstacles That IWW Would Face in Realizing Their Future Vision

Due to their radical techniques in pushing for change, the IWW faced numerous challenges in achieving their vision of obliterating the capitalist system. One of the biggest obstacles was the immense opposition from the capitalists and governments who felt threatened by the revolutions in the industries. For instance, in 1912, the IWW led a massive strike against British Columbia’s Canadian Northern Railway to improve migrant workers’ living conditions. However, they faced stern opposition from the company and the provincial government, resulting in a defeat (Heron & Smith, 2020). In addition, the governments began using military influence to suppress the efforts of the union to minimize industrial conflicts. The police raided the Wobblies’ meeting, detaining members and leaders. Such military actions even led to the demise of leaders like Wesley Everest and Frank Little (Botkin, 2017). Authorities suppressed IWW to the extent that any membership to the union was viewed as a traitorous move, leading to the deportation of migrant workers. Thus, the opposition by the employers and the government hindered IWW from realizing its vision.

The difference in philosophies created conflicts within the union, leading to its failure. Since its initiation, the Wobblies was split into two groups; the socialists and the anarchists. The socialists such as Eugene Debs believed that change in the industries would be created through political action (Lossin, 2021). As a result, he formed the Socialist Party, which pushed for workers’ reforms in the industries. Additionally, Daniel De Leon, the founder of the Socialist Labor Party, believed that political action would instigate the necessary change in the labor industries. On the other hand, the anarchists were led by William Haywood, who perceived political participation as acquiescence to capitalism; he instead advocated for radical actions such as strikes and boycotts (Woods et al., 2018). Therefore, due to the conflicting philosophies, the union’s leadership split as Debs and De Leon left the organization due to its radical actions and position against political involvement.

Conclusion

Social movement organizations have been crucial in providing solidarity mechanisms, defending collective interests, and challenging systemic discrimination to initiate a positive social transformation. This is evident through the formation of IWW that was pivotal in opposing AFL’s acceptance of capitalism and denial to make unskilled laborers part of craft unions. The organization also intended to promote equality among workers by abolishing the wage system designed to oppress the unskilled and non-white laborers. IWW’s strategies of organizing strikes, boycotts, and sabotage greatly compelled the capitalists to meet the demand of their workers. Despite facing opposition from governments and industry owners, IWW continues to advocate for the inclusion of a wide range of marginalized populations.

References

Botkin, J. L. (2017). Frank Little and the IWW: The blood that stained an American family. University of Oklahoma Press.

Eichar, D. M. (2017). The rise and fall of corporate social responsibility. Routledge.

Heron, C., & Smith, C. (2020). The Canadian labour movement. James Lorimer & Company.

Lossin, R. (2021). No interests in common: Sabotage as structural analysis. Journal for the Study of Radicalism, 15(1), 75-108. Web.

Woods, A., Plekhanov, G.V., Engels, F., Lenin, V.I., Trotsky, L., Zinoviev, G., Kramer, A., Morozov V., Morley, D., & Mitchinson, P. (2018). Marxism and anarchism. Wellred Books.

Click Here To Order Now!