Some contemporary anarchist thinkers and
historians wrongfully believe that the IWW is strictly an
anarchist organization (or at least it has been in the past).
This is inaccurate. The IWW welcomes all members of the working
class regardless of their political perspective as long as they
agree to abide by the IWW Constitution and work towards the
emancipation of workers from wage slavery and the abolition of
capitalism. The followers of many ideologies as well as
non-ideological workers agree that this is a desirable goal.
Historically, self-described anarchists have been a minority of the IWW's membership, but they have never been unwelcome. Some of the most lasting contributions to the IWW's program of industrial unionism have been made by both anarchists and non-anarchists.
Recently anarchism has become associated by many with the use of consensus process to run meetings, the rejection of large scale organization (including large scale organization of smaller democratic units), internal constitutional practice, membership fees, historical context as set of guidelines for not making the mistakes of those that came before us, and elected positions of responsibility. The IWW has always had these structures and practices and most IWW members believe they should endure, even if they may need occasional reform. Anarchists, however, are as capable of dogmatism and sectarianism as any other political tendency and for some, this is not good enough, and so they equate the IWW's organizational structure and constitutional process with "authoritarianism" (even though it is the most democratic centralized structure in practice, far more than any other labor union, including even the anarcho-syndicalist AIT-IWA).
Myth #11 - The IWW was controlled by the Bolsheviks before and during the Cold War:
Even as early as 1917 hysterical anti-communists
tried to link the IWW with Bolshevism. For example, in his early
days Walt Disney created a cartoon with a live action character
named Alice (a little girl who would act and appear in the
cartoon). In one episode, "Alice" ran a dairy and owned a bunch
of egg producing hens. Alice's cat was the foreman, and he was a
typical slave driver. The cartoon then cuts to a scene of a
rooster walking by a set of railroad tracks (possibly a reference
to the IWW organizers who rode the rails as hoboes during the
1910s) with a Trotsky-like beard and a black bag with the words
"Little Red Henski, IWW" written on the side. The union
organizing hen would go on to induce the hens to strike. Whether
the cartoon is pro or anti worker is irrelevant. Disney's message
is that the IWW, in fact all unions, are Bolshevik
missionaries.
After World War II, the IWW was not as high profile as dozens of other militant unions, leftist organizations, and critics of unfettered capitalism, but the IWW was targeted by Cold War Hysteria nonetheless. In fact, from 1947-62, anybody with even moderately leftist or anti-capitalist leanings was liable to be labeled a "Communist" by the defenders and apologists of capitalism. To organize a union in a workplace at all was to risk being labeled a "Communist".
Even though the IWW was not a major target of the Cold War hysteria, this period was one of the darkest for the IWW. The Taft Hartley Act was signed in 1947. The IWW was placed on U.S. Attorney General's List of Subversive Organizations in 1949. A strong and militant Metal Workers Industrial Union in Cleveland collapsed when all of the organized shops withdrew from the organization in 1950 because the IWW refused to sign the Taft-Hartley anti-communist affidavits (one is not necessarily a communist if they are not a rabid anti-communist). These events were all attacks by the employing class on the workers of the United States, and their effect was wide spread and the IWW was not spared the onslaught.
The cold warriors conveniently overlook the fact that the IWW refused several overtures by the Bolsheviks of the USSR to affiliate with them, the most notable example being a decision by the IWW's democratically elected General Executive Board to reject an offer to join the Red Trade Union International, a Bolshevik front group. They overlook the numerous times the IWW fought against the oppression of bureaucratic state "Communism" and focus solely on the IWW's anti-capitalism. In reality the IWW has always stood for workers of the world as a class against all forms of economic oppression regardless of what it is called.
Even today, employers try to claim that the IWW is a supporter of Bolshevism, because they think it will frighten workers into thinking twice about joining our union, but even a casual reading of IWW history demonstrates the ridiculousness of that claim.
There are two distinct groups that adhere to this
misconception: (1) defenders of capitalism and (2) "green"
anarchists.
The defenders of capitalism would have workers believe that their system is the most free and enlightened economic system in human existence, even if they readily admit its many failings. They argue that all alternative economic systems lead to bureaucratic tyranny. They associate the IWW (in fact they associate most labor unions) with the worst examples of bureaucratic centrally planned economies, but this ignores the vast wealth of literature that demonstrates that other non-capitalist alternatives can and do exist, and if they were allowed to exist unmolested, they would function far better than capitalism even in its most "ideal" conception at providing freedom and prosperity to the greatest number.
"Green Anarchism" represents a broad belief system with many sub tendencies and varying beliefs. Commonly held views include the belief that large-scale industry is inherently destructive to the environment and inherently stifling to workers. They argue that most large scale industries are undesirable and unnecessary, that humans should live as "close to nature" as possible, and that where work is necessary, it should be organized on a completely ad hoc basis in workshops that are held in common by a small, local community. The goal of the working class should not be to simply abolish capitalism, but to abolish work altogether (and most would make the distinction that work for pleasure, such as carving a chair, weaving a blanket, or growing crops for personal sustenance do not count as the type of work they seek to abolish).
Adherents to either belief should know that the IWW has always argued for the emancipation of the working class, not the enslavement of it. Along these lines, the IWW has often been the first to argue for the shortening of the workweek. In the first third of the 20th Century, the IWW organized for shorter workdays as part of its demands. When the standard workday was 10-12 hours, the IWW demanded that the length of the workday be reduced to eight (with no reduction in wages). When eight-hour workdays became standard, the IWW demanded a reduction to six or even four-hour workdays (again with no reduction in wages). But this is only part of the IWW's goal of abolishing wage slavery. The IWW has also argued in favor of the use of labor saving devices to benefit workers (rather than to reduce the workforce at the expense of the working class), and increased staffing levels so that even in a short shift two workers can reduce the drudgery of a job performed by a single worker engaged in repetitive, physically demanding tasks (this is sometimes known as "15 minutes on, 15 minutes off" or some variation of the same). All of these demands if met would result in an unbelievable increase in personal freedom and an unheard of decrease in the stress and toil for all members of the working class.
As for the abolition of large-scale industry and living "close to nature", the IWW does not necessarily oppose these ideas either, but the IWW also does not necessarily endorse them. It may not be possible to have clean water; food, housing, and healthcare for everyone; and the "good things in life", even with a sustainable population without large scale industry. Even if it isn't, the IWW believes that workers have the right to demand that large-scale industry be as tolerable as possible and certainly in harmony with the earth. To argue otherwise would be foolish and ultimately suicidal.
Employers play on the fears of workers by spreading this myth, because it represents the opposite of what the IWW wants. Meanwhile it is the employing class who benefits most by subjecting the working class to increasingly regimented, longer, lower paying workdays. Whenever the US Government or subordinate state governments try to weaken overtime laws, ask yourself who are the loudest supporters of such schemes. It isn't the IWW; it's the employing class.
