Re: [Marxism] IWW and anti-imperialism

["Calvin Broadbent" <calvinbroadbent@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sakai does not slander the I.W.W. as being racist. On the contrary, he
applauds the anti-racist program of the I.W.W.. However, he recognizes its
*strategic* limitations. Sakai shows how the I.W.W. often excluded Japnese
workers from its ranks in times of strikes. (He mentions the Californian hop
pickers strike of 1919 as significant in this regard. At the Third I.W.W.
convention the Californian representative claimed that, given the depth of
anti-Japanese feeling in the white working class, it was 'practically
useless' to organize Japanese workers at that time).  At other times, the
I.W.W. attempted to molify anti-Japanese racism by appealing to the levels
of industrial organization the Japanese amongst themselves had achieved as
an edifying example.

The I.W.W. did *not* fight the massive working class racist mobs ethnically
cleansing African workers from its occupational and residential ranks, with
the aid of government agencies, between 1917 and 1924. The I.W.W. totally
abjured the particular racial (colonial?) oppression of black workers. In
the Pittsburgh strike of 1919, Sakai claims that the I.W.W. left unchecked
the popular (amongst white workers) racist line that blacks were merely
compliant scabs (ignoring that the latter had been systematically decieved
and brought to the steel mills by force).

It is, I think, testament to the Communist Party formed soon after the
I.W.W. that they at least recognised the specific oppression of Africans in
America (although the efficacy of their program was also compromised by
limited strategic principles).

Sakai maintains that whilst it was possible for the I.W.W. to keep Asian
workers at some arm's length (depending on tactics and expediency- as all
syndicalism tends to), it was impossible for white immigrant workers in the
South to treat Africans in such an arbitrary fashion.

Despite the fact that the I.W.W. did organize some black workers sometimes,
in marked contrast to the exclusionist policies of other left-wing
organizations, this does not mean that it was an effective instrument to
combat America's racialised capitalist order, does it? Similarly, the fact
that there were Irish workers in British unions did not mean that the trade
union movement was anti-imperialist, did it? Are there any arabs in any
Israeli trade unions? if so, does this make them anti-imperialist?

LOUIS PROYECT WROTE:

> Nestor, you can't equate the IWW with the British labor movement, which was
> based on reformist illusions from the beginning. The IWW was composed of
> the poorest, most downtrodden workers and fought militantly on their
> behalf. It was the only trade union that would include African-Americans in
> its ranks. It is scandalous that J. Sakai would misrepesent its history.

_________________________________________________________________
Winks & nudges are here - download MSN Messenger 7.0 today!
http://messenger.msn.co.uk


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism