Setting the Record Straight

Our unionized history

By Ben Chapman
From the December 2005 Print Edition

Peace, love, and social harmony: These are the hallmarks of liberal and progressive organizations, right? They use peaceful methods that don’t accomplish much, like encouraging people to ditch work and school to “drive out the Bush Regime.” Their whole philosophy of social good is based on respect for fellow man, and the restraint from carnage and brutality. It’s the right-wing extremists who burn books and bomb abortion clinics — they’re the only ones who use violence, right?

Actually, the left does it too. Let’s begin this month’s foray into history in the late 19th century and confine our discussion to far-left liberals in the United States. It would be too easy to prove that left-wing “communists” are violent: Stalin, Castro, Kim Jong Il, Mao Zedong, Che Guevara … need I go on? So let’s stick with the good old U.S. of A.

Chicago. 1886. A massive strike against the McCormick Reaper Works, led by union organization The Knights of Labor, has won rights to an eight-hour workday the previous year. However, new technology has led to greater productivity at a cheaper price, making it unnecessary to hire as many workers. The result is violent. Amidst the chaos of the strike, policemen accidentally shoot three strikers using physical force to prevent strikebreakers from doing their job. The next day, on May 4, an anarchist loosely affiliated with the Knights throws a bomb into the crowd, killing seven police officers and one civilian in Haymarket Square.

Naturally, this event led to a police investigation, and eight men were tried and convicted. Three later had their sentences commuted — fairly understandable treatment considering that the union used terrorist tactics to achieve their goals.

Next, we see the bombing of Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer’s home by left-wing radicals associated with communist groups in June 1919. Bombs exploded at the homes of other prominent Americans that year as well. Seeing that the government has a duty to protect its citizens and punish violent crimes, there was naturally a crackdown on communist activity. About 5,000 were arrested. However, by 1920, Secretary of Labor Louis Post began releasing imprisoned socialists and immigrants, effectively ending the United States’ big, long “Red Scare.” Notice the historically connoted title, as if this were a time of great persecution in America. I choose to read this a different way, though; if your home were bombed, you’d probably be scared too.

A U.S.-based communist organization and labor union, the International Workers of the World, also plagued the United States during the beginning of the 20th century. Their charismatic leader, “Big Bill” Haywood, was a self-proclaimed Marxist who advocated the violent overthrow of the government and “class system.” One of the few things Marx was clear on was the use of violence. After the U.S. Socialist Party never gained more than 6 percent of the popular vote in a presidential election (1912, in case you were curious), after government prosecution for suspected violent activity (after you scream up and down about violence, you are bound to attract attention to yourself), and after spending some time in jail, Haywood eventually left the United States for the newly founded Soviet Union. Haywood died in the “worker’s paradise,” deeply disappointed.

The lesson to be learned is this: It is a small minority who commit these crimes. The IWW never became a viable political force because it had too few members. The American Communist Party, even amidst the Great Depression, never had more than 100,000 members. Violence simply does not appeal to most people, for obvious reasons. Also, it should be noted that the violent extremists do not represent the left as a whole. Nor do they represent most labor unions or the Democratic Party. But they do prove that the ideology of progressivism is not beyond the use of violence. There are right-wing extremists too, and they don’t represent the right. Both sides have their wackos.

Today, far-left movements are a little more subdued. But they are still annoying, and occasionally violence flares up. In 1964, during the Berkeley Free Speech Movement, 800 students occupied an administrative building, effectively shutting down school activity. Whatever their grievances or the message they were trying to express, they prevented people from going to school and doing their jobs. Later, in May 1969, the state of California, under then-Governor Reagan, tried to use state-owned property “People’s Park” to develop the university. Instead, protestors prevented the action. A crowd of nearly 3,000 people turned into a riot. Unfortunately, a handful of students were wounded in the chaos. What you don’t usually hear is that a police officer, trying to look out for the public safety, was stabbed in the leg by the “peaceful” demonstrators.

Just last month, the “Resist or Die” movement, crying that the “world can’t wait to drive out the Bush Regime!” advocated that students ditch class. They were not effective, but given that these far-left organizations have a violent history, I think we are all grateful that they didn’t accomplish much.

I guess we should be glad that violence doesn’t attract people. If it did, we’d have had millions out on the street last month in the “Resist or Die” campaign. But only a few ‘resisted.’ I guess the rest of us stayed home watching TV. Or, to use the liberal term, ‘died.’

You gotta love peace.

If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting the Patriot