The clearest lesson learned from the current election cycle is that Americans, especially young Americans, are out of patience with both halves of our electoral system.

ara-bernieWorking people have long dreamed of having a political party that consistently represents their interests. I’ve heard radicals blast union leaders because they haven’t stepped out alone to start a workers party. I’ve heard people so desperate for a workers party that they formed a pretend one.

Once, I was actually in a group that said it was a workers party. The American Workers Party was started by Tony Mazzochi of the Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers 20+ years ago. The United Electricians were involved. I was on the Executive Board. They had a wonderful membership card with a great quote from Eugene Victor Debs on it: “As long as there is a working class, I am in it. As long as their is a criminal class, I am of it. And as long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free!”

What they didn’t have is a snowball’s chance of actually making any difference in America. Part of the deal that brought them some funding, Mazzochi admitted at the 3rd meeting I attended, was that they would not run candidates! As soon as I heard that, I quit. Never went back. It was a pipe dream.

What Would a Workers Party Look Like?

A real workers party would have significant support from organized labor. It would have a mass base. It would have a clear program. Unlike both of the bosses’ parties today, candidates would be under discipline to carry out that worker-friendly program! It might not be revolutionary in and of itself, but it would be a step on a revolutionary path.

Do We Already Have A Workers Party in America? Maybe!

As I wrote on June 5, I expect great things from the Bernie Sanders movement. I’m not sure what Bernie intends, but I think that a significant part of his young followers will stay together. I think they will endorse and work for down-ballot candidates in 2016. I think that, by 2017, they will be picking some of their own candidates in local races. By 2020, they may well be ready to run their own presidential candidate. Americans will be more than ready for them.

I don’t know what they might call it and I don’t much care. If it keeps the program it’s fighting for today, and if it continues to add supporters as it has up to now, and if the Communications Workers, Postal Employees and other progressive unions stick to their guns, — all of which seem likely — we are going to have a workers party in America!

–Gene Lantz

Movie Review, Josh Fox, “How to Let Go of the World and Love All The Things Climate Can’t Change!”

exxonregulatebaby

Dallas pickets Exxon at least once a year

Slowly, the environmentalists are winning the argument over global warming. We usually call the other side “climate denyers,” but the real argument is with the extractive industries, especially oil. We’re arguing with multi-billionaire oil men who stand to lose a lot of money if the world ever adopts a sane policy on carbon emissions.

Those oil men are buying professional liars — college professors, scientists, politicians, policy wonks — and even paying to buy the appearance of a grass-roots pro-pollution movement. That’s what we’re up against.

Josh Fox once did a pretty good dramatic movie “Gasland,” with an environmental theme behind the love story. This time, he’s out with a documentary starring himself. One might think it’s rehashing Al Gore’s excellent documentary of a few years ago. I think it was named “An Inconvenient Truth,” and it was quite effective. The new movie is different.

Fox takes a much more personal approach. He films himself going around the world to look at some of the worst aspects of global warming. He also takes a positive approach in showing some of the efforts to fight back. He dances around and celebrates the good stuff, but doesn’t try to pretend that this war is already won.

On the downside, the movie is too long. There are three good probable reasons:

  • Environmentalists are in love with statistics and facts, and they can’t stop telling them even when everybody has left.
  • Always be suspicious when a movie’s producer, director, and star are the same guy. They just can’t edit out anything they’ve filmed, especially if their own image is in it!
  • There’s just an awful lot to say about a truly critical, horrendous, world crisis!

Where are the workers?

Working people don’t want to suffocate any more than anybody else, but most of the folks leading the environmental movement are middle-class, college educated, and fairly affluent. The union movement, to its eternal credit, is working hard to grow a “blue (collar) / green (grass)” alliance. Where I live, the Communications Workers are strongest on environmental issues.

Not all unions are eager to join the environmental movement. Not all non-union workers are, either. If someone is afraid of losing their job over pollution controls, they’ll generally take jobs over clean air any day of the week. It’s a matter of feeding the family in the here and now. No amount of yelling at them will change their minds.

The people we need to focus on and yell at are the bosses in the extractive industries.

–Gene Lantz

The doomsayers who have been counting Bernie Sanders out of the Democratic primary race all along are doing it again. The pundits are asking, “what’s next?”

Marchers for Bernie

Marchers for Bernie

What’s Next?

There’s no “next” until Senator Sanders concedes the primary race, and he’s not conceding. But even if he did, would he go the way of previous candidates, including President Obama, who said they would keep the movement alive, but didn’t? The answer is no.

Sanders has already started picking down-ballot races to boost, even as far down the ballot as some state legislators. Some of his supporters are already working on a movement called “Brand New Congress” to carry the momentum for progress forward whether it’s in the presidential race or anywhere else.

Is Bernie Pure Enough?

Of course, there are activists who never actually supported Bernie and still don’t. He wasn’t pure enough for them. For some people, if V.I. Lenin’s stuffed body doesn’t reanimate and walk out of the Kremlin to lead them, nobody is good enough.

Those people don’t see all of politics as processes. Nothing stays the same, everything is changing. The Bernie Sanders campaign has already, and still is, moving America and the world toward real change. It’s true that he’s a social democrat and by definition not a revolutionary. It’s true that his program of electoral reform and restraining Wall Street wouldn’t, by itself, result in permanent gains. The workers will never make permanent gains as long as the bosses are in power, and Senator Sanders has only said he wants to restrain them, not dis-empower them.

But he has started and amplified a wonderful trend in American politics!

Look What’s Already Been Accomplished!

Millions of Americans have realized that the two-party system, neither half of it, is really democratic. Millions have become conscious of the amazing power that big money exerts over the electoral system. Millions have begun seeking real solutions, and I don’t mean they were sitting in their easy chairs and daydreaming about it. Millions are in movement! Millions are experimenting. Millions are working together. That’s amazing accomplishment!

What’s Next?

This movement is going to continue. The youth of America, already smarter and more capable than the rest of us, are taking this movement forward. This isn’t a flash-in-the-pan new trick like the Occupy movement. This is millions of young people joining together to seek fundamental change. They don’t even need the older Americans. They don’t even need Bernie. If they needed to, they could just outlast us older people. But they don’t need to, and they won’t.

The movement identified today with the Bernie Sanders election campaign is going to go on far beyond electoral politics, and it’s going to win!

–Gene Lantz

Book Review: Stead, Arnold, “Always on Strike. Frank Little and the Western Wobblies. Haymarket Books, Chicago, 2014.franklittletombstone

Almost anybody who looks at American labor history knows that Frank Little was a leader of the Industrial Workers of the World who was lynched in Butte, Montana, August 1, 1917. There are a lot of newspaper accounts, a movie, and one book about his death. However, almost nobody knows anything about his life.

He was extremely important, consequently this is a very welcome book. As far as I can find out, it’s the first published biography. Even 99 years after it should have been done, this is a very welcome work!

There’s not a lot in this work that one couldn’t find out from my own earlier postings on Frank Little, which the book’s author surely read. He mentions me three times in the book, but only in speculating whether or not I was telling the truth. The book is somewhat speculative about what really happened, and it’s filled in to a large degree with scholarly explanations of various philosophers who, I’m pretty sure, Frank Little had never heard of.

My other petty complaint about the book has to do with Big Bill Haywood, the President of the IWW. The author implies that there was bad blood between Haywood and Little. That caused me to go back and re-read The Autobiography of Big Bill Haywood (International Publishers, New York, 1929). Haywood mentions Frank Little as a Board member who was “an energetic worker, part Cherokee Indian, black-eyed, hot-blooded, and reliable.” (page 301) He doesn’t say anything about any disagreement.

Author Stead can’t be blamed for the paucity of information. After Frank was lynched, almost on signal, the U.S. Government under J. Edgar Hoover began the “Red scare” of the time. Nobody knows how many people were deported, killed, jailed, or horsewhipped during the period, but there were a lot of them. Just knowing Frank Little was a serious offense. Even his own family didn’t talk about him. I know that first hand, because I interviewed his niece in Yale, Oklahoma.

Every physical trace of Frank Little, except his grave and tombstone in Butte, disappeared.

In my opinion, the book might have emphasized Frank Little’s importance more than it did. He was the main leader of the free speech movement of his time. He pioneered nonviolent civil disobedience decades before Dr. Martin Luther King. He started the IWW in successfully organizing farm laborers decades before Cesar Chavez. At his last meeting of the IWW Executive Board, he lost a vote on firmly opposing the First Great Imperialist War. If he had won, history might have been different.

William Z Foster, another great labor organizer of the period, claimed that Frank Little agreed with him on “boring from within” the American Federation of Labor — a strategy that paid off in 1935 with the forming of the Committee for Industrial Organizing (CIO). Thus, if Frank Little had lived and continued as Chairman of the IWW Executive Board, they might have gone on to become an important part of the great labor upsurge of 1935-1947 and beyond.

But of course, he didn’t win that last vote and he didn’t live more than a few days longer. He went to Butte, where 194 workers had died in the Spectator Mine disaster, and made a speech in defense of job safety. He argued that the coming war was not an excuse to give in to the bosses on safety issues. Hoodlums, probably from the mine company, put a rope around his neck, knocked his crutches aside, and dragged him behind an automobile through the streets of Butte to a railroad overpass, where they strung up his wretched body and hoped everybody would forget him.

We never will.

–Gene Lantz

womanlynched

Darn, I missed the anniversary of Jane Elkins’ hanging again. It was May 27, 1853, when they carried out Judge John H Reagan’s orders and hanged her in downtown Dallas, right where the Old Red Courthouse is today. There’s an elementary school named after Reagan. Nothing for Jane. Every year, I try to remember to try to get people to commemorate Jane Elkins day.

Last year, she was a character in a play. She’s mentioned in some of the material at the Old Red Courthouse museum because she is officially the first woman ever executed in Texas. They probably hanged plenty of others, but they didn’t write it down. Most people don’t know about Jane.

Read More

Walter Reuther CIO

Walter Reuther is a pivotal character in labor history

Most union histories say little about the Taft-Hartley law except that unions opposed it, Democratic President Harry Truman vetoed it, and the Republican Congress passed it anyway. It was the axis about which the American labor movement swung from highly progressive and successful into a long downward spiral.

 

The law signaled the end of the cooperation between labor and progressive Democrats that produced such landmark improvements as the National Labor Relations Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, unemployment compensation, workers compensation, and Social Security. It was the first big anti-labor law to pass since 1932. It’s intent was to greatly weaken and isolate organized labor. It worked great!

Taft Hartley hit labor like a tsunami. It destroyed whole unions, many careers, and many lives. Combined with the “Iron Curtain” speech of the previous year, it dovetailed into the witch hunt that sapped American culture for the next decades and is affecting us still. Like a tsunami, though, it also lifted some boats. Opportunists took over the unions.

Communists and socialists had played a major role in building the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). Taft Hartley made it illegal for them to serve as union leaders. Some of them disavowed their previous connection, some of them kept their principles but lost their careers, a tiny few held fast and survived, but at great cost.

Devastation

Walter Reuther and the CIO expelled 14 unions for refusing to give in to Taft Hartley. Then they raided them. Only two survived: the United Electrical Workers  (UE) and the International Longshoremen and Warehousemen Union (ILWU). Both of them remained vigorous and progressive through the long period of growing isolation of organized labor. Both of them stood up for civil rights and against war when neither was generally popular. Both of them stood up for  solidarity when most unions increasingly adopted “go it alone” as their credo.

Prior to 1947, the CIO was the point of America’s progressive spear. They were internationalist. They pushed hard for improvements in Social Security for all. They demanded national health care for all. They demanded a shortening of the work week for all. After 1947, the union movement forgot the shorter work week, and they accepted company proposals for employer based pensions and health care. Union members continued to get higher salaries, better pensions, and solid health care into the 1970s while the rest of the working class did the best they could.

In 1980, when the employers and the government turned viciously against their old buddies running the union movement, we were largely friendless and almost helpless! Walter Reuther, who was probably the best of the mainstream union leaders, had been killed in 1971, right after protesting Nixon’s handling of the Vietnam War. American union leadership didn’t fully adapt to the hostile new situation until 1995 when the AFL-CIO, for the first time in a century, did not let the outgoing leadership pick its replacements.

Turning things around

The new leadership has been turning things around. It’s a hard job, but it’s working. Our days of isolation are over and the sun is shining on organized labor today. Taft Hartley wounded us severely, but not mortally.

Here’s how Eugene Victor Debs once put it: “Ten thousand times has the labor movement stumbled and bruised itself. We have been enjoined by the courts, assaulted by thugs, charged by the militia, traduced by the press, frowned upon in public opinion, and deceived by politicians. But notwithstanding all this and all these, labor is today the most vital and potential power this planet has ever known, and its historic mission is as certain of ultimate realization as is the setting of the sun.”

 

Mavis Belisle on KNON

Mavis Belisle reports on dumping of radioactive poison in Texas

Lon Burnam called the “Workers Beat” program on KNON radio on June 4 to ask my guest, Mavis Belisle, to explain about the Dallas company that is currently dumping low level radioactive waste in Texas and wants a permit to dump the really poisonous stuff. I’d been calling them “Waste Management,” but Mavis said the correct name was “Waste Control Specialists.”

Here’s Mavis explaining on YouTube: https://youtu.be/UfmLy2iFa8o

The owner was infamous for making major contributions to the Texas politicians who originally permitted the dumping. If it were simply up to the Texans, few of us doubt that the company would get another permit to solve one of the most vexing problems in the world: what to do with the plutonium and other poisons being created by all the nuclear power plants.

Up to now, there has been no solution. Mavis said that the government had plans to dump it under a mountain in Nevada, but the Nevadans found out about it so those plans were cancelled. The stuff is just piling up. They keep making more of it, and there’s absolutely nothing they can do to safely store or dispose of it.

Mavis said that plutonium doesn’t degrade. It will still be around, she said, for the same length of time that the human race has existed up to now.

Why would companies and politicians allow this sorry state of affairs? Greed.

–Gene Lantz

assets/Uploads/_resampled/CroppedImage292447-PH2.jpg

Barbara Ehrenreich examines dangerous flaws in America’s thinking

Bright-Sided. How the relentless promotion of positive thinking has undermined America by Barbara Ehrenreich. Metropolitan Books, Henry Holt and Company, New York, 2009

The author of “Nickel and Dimed” and fifteen other socially conscious books dares to attack the preachers and hucksters of “feel good” America, and she does it successfully. For some, her steely iconoclasm might be hard to take at first. Almost gleefully, she reveals that preachers lie, God doesn’t necessarily want you to be wealthy, losing your job is not necessarily the best thing that every happened to you, and that pleasant thoughts will not cure cancer.

In other words, positive thinking as expounded by Norman Vincent Peale (Power of Positive Thinking), Mary Baker Eddy (Christian Science), televangelists, and the Human Resources expert in charge of layoffs is a crock. Further, all of them are essentially working for the bosses who owe their own happy thoughts to material comfort and to their confidence in their ability to pay somebody to manipulate the rest of us into a world of delusions.

The big lie of positive thinking is so pervasive that it would be difficult to read through Ehrenreich’s book without thinking of some of our own misconceptions. Do we sing with sincerity, “Dream, and it might come true…”, “Pretend you’re happy when you’re blue…”, and “Put on a happy face…”?

If we leave the TV on while reading, we’ll probably notice dozens of examples leaping right off Ehrenreich’s pages onto our television screen! All of the religion spokespersons, all of the commercials, most of the dramatic content, and much of the news promotes the same “don’t worry, be happy” misguidance.

Ehrenreich is right on, and the book has considerable value. But criticisms come to mind as well. A damaging lack in Ehrenreich’s work against positive thinking is that it doesn’t go nearly far enough. She doesn’t emphasize the millions (billions?) of dollars being spent to buy “scholars,” “newspaper columnists,” and “think tank experts.” Modern society is not merely seduced by the positive thinking preachers and gurus, the bosses actually drives us into a false philosophy much larger and stronger than that – idealism as opposed to scientific materialism. Idealists make easy victims for positive thinking hucksters and the bosses who guide them. Check out materialism versus idealism.

me-realjobsrealwages

The official report says only 38,000 jobs were added to the U.S. economy in May. Economists say 200,000/month are needed. At the same time, the unemployment rate dropped because so many unemployed people answered “no” when they were asked if they were looking for a job. They call that “dropping out of the labor force.” The participation rate has been really low since 2008.

If they counted the people too discouraged to look for a job and the millions of people forced against their will to hold part-time jobs, the unemployment rate would be 10-11% and it would make a lot more sense.

Shorten the working hours

The obvious solution to the ravages of unemployment is to shorten working hours. One could write an entire history of the United States just on the issue of the fight to decrease the hours of work. The fight reached its zenith with the worldwide political strike of May 1, 1886, which focused on Chicago. They hanged the leaders of the 8 hour day movement.

Unions in the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) demanded lower working hours throughout their history. “30 for 40 with no cut in pay” was their demand, and they kept it up until they disappeared into the AFL-CIO in 1955. Since then, unions have asked for more wages and more benefits, but not for shorter hours. I don’t know why.

Our big partial victory was the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, which mandated that employers pay time-and-a-half when hourly workers put in more than 40 hours in a week. They have been fighting over that act since then. The current battle is because President Obama wants more workers to qualify for overtime pay, and the bosses, of course, don’t. They’d like to hang the President, too.

–Gene Lantz