Letter from Kevin Glover

          Dear Fellow Workers and 'rades

          Howdy! Just wanted to make a couple of comments regarding F.W. Joshua Freeze's letter last D.B. issue, in part addressing his comments on Derek Devine and my exchange, and then other aspects of his letter pertaining to anarchist and Marxist ideologies and labels.

          Joshua rightly points out that Derek and my conversation went beyond discussing whether or not the I.W.W. is anarchist or Marxist. My point was not to label the I.W.W. either one - My point was simply that the I.W.W.,at it's inception was heavily influenced by members who were adherents of both of these schools of thought, and that these influences are an integral part of our union's history. I view these influences as positive and instrumental in making the I.W.W. the interesting union it became in its heyday, before state repression took it's toll. I don't believe one can honestly divest, or get around these influences, no matter how hard they try, but to whatever extent the ideologies of Marx and anarchism have been rendered archaic, or still remain valid in the present context, they still remain palpable in I.W.W. literature. For instance, in the June issue of the Industrial Worker, one of my favorite writers C.C.Redcloud, in his column Left Side mentions the Haymarket Martyrs, who of course are anarchist, and a person may still purchase from our literary dept. not the Little Green Songbook, but the Little Red Songbook in which a person can read Joe Hill's words speaking of the Red Flag Flying over the Industrial Commonwealth. Now, with a view in mind of the "common image" of "socialism or Marxism" being "of a bureaucratic totalitarian state", I think we all know what regimes people often associate with the symbolism of the color Red as well as Red flags. Kinda like one time when I handed someone an S.L.P. paper and they saw that Armand Hammer symbol and they said" Thats a dang commie symbol! Them commies had a hammer, and, uh, wuts that there other dang commie tool?" Be that as it may though, it would not in any way be desirable to me to try to excise these attributes from our pages or to try and deny our history which are all too often obscured and distorted by the upper echelon powers that be.

          I agree with F.W. Freeze on his ideas about organizing by focusing on content rather than ideological labels as he speaks of in his organizing experiences with his Fellow Workers in the A.T.U. I also think that the best way to impart the ideas and objectives of the I.W.W. is to relate their content to fellow workers in immediate concrete circumstances where they make the most sense, instead of simply relying on abstract labels or ideologies to relate them. After all, it's the content of the ideas and their practical application that will get us where we collectively want to go. So, in that line of thinking I totally agree that we should not refer to ourselves as anarchist or Marxist, but that doesn't imply that I think it is of much use to cover up those influences either. Often times people make the connection anyway when I'm trying to explain the concepts of a production for use society, or industrial democracy, even when I'm very careful to avoid any buzzwords and pipe up with" well that's some a that dang commie stuff!" So, inevitably, I end up having to explain the difference in Communism and Wobblyism and other kindred schools of thought.

          To say that anarchist thought or Marx's ideas "ideology of 100 years ago", have no relevance for workers today would be like saying the I.W.W. has no meaning for workers today, as the union's formation and structure is , in part, derived from those bodies of thought. While certainly, many of the ideas are dated, many are still as valid today as then, and even with the change in global capitalism that has transpired over the last 100 years, the I.W.W. and it's historic mission remains just as important, if not even more so today.

          The One Big Union aside though, for a moment, I wonder if surrendering aspects of our working class heritage, such as allowing the name anarchist or its pejorative definition to go unchallenged, or the word socialism or Marx and Engel's ideas to remain associated with Lenin's totalitarian regimes, and reform capitalist governments is really a good idea. I can't help thinking that we do a disservice to our class' history by allowing these symbols and bodies of thought to be coopted, and misrepresented, and that we would be better off retrieving them from the mischief done to them and stand proudly by their real meaning.

          It seems just as likely that any future body of ideas or descriptive identities that become associated with a threat to the status quo will end up meeting a similar fate. It's bad enough reading of episodes of Stalinists, or pie card unionists speaking at the tomb of the Haymarket Martyrs-I'm merely referring to them as "labor leaders," totally obscuring the fact that these men were unabashed anarchists, and that May Day, a day which both the I.W.W. and the U.S.S.R. have celebrated (another instance of retrieval of heritage) is in a large part attributable to their efforts. Do we really want to do this type of thing to ourselves, or take the extra effort to explain what we are really about. I think that the more we work to counter the negative images, that, over time the truth will get through.

          To sum up though, I agree that we should not refer to the I.W.W. as Marxist or anarchist but I do not think it is necessary or even possible to obscure its historical roots which in a large measure derive from those schools of thought. Josh mentions that the I.W.W. is compatible with certain anarchist and socialist thought. Much of that thought can be found in the pages of the D.B.. As the I.W.W. stands in relation to these other groups(may I use the term Libertarian Socialist) I hope we can all find a highly ecumenical spirit of intense solidarity towards building an industrial democracy. And remember

"You ain't done nothin' if you ain't been called a Red!"

SOLIDARITY FROM THE GULF COAST

Kevin Glover