If asked
What was (or is) the longest running U.S. war? most people would say the conflict in Southeast Asia. However, in this journal I will make a case that our federal government’s longest war has been the one waged against workers, both here and abroad, who attempt to obtain a decent wage and safe work conditions. Since this battle began during the very first national strike back in 1877, it is a
Hundred Year War .
Many other so called “wars” like the War Against Black Folks (aka the War on Drugs) are actually part of this largest conflict, since racial minorities are oppressed in this country in order to depress all wages. The current right wing War Against Immigrants is also a skirmish in the Hundred Year War, designed to keep Mexican immigrants living in fear, so that they will accept low pay and poor work conditions. Women are denied a fair wage for the same reason. Divide and Conquer has become a favorite strategy of the business class, because the one thing that workers have going for them is strength in numbers. If they can be pitted against each other, then they will lose--- and the bosses will win.
Do not be fooled by the seemingly milder, more law abiding behavior of the nation’s business owners in recent years. Employers in the United States have been at war with their workers for a very, long time, and their allies in the battle have been (except for a few years during the FDR administration) our own elected officials.
I. “A Diet of Lead for the Hungry Strikers”: The Railroad Strike of 1877 Sometimes it just amazes me how (bad) history keeps repeating itself in the United States. You would think that we would learn from our mistakes.
Bush v. Gore was not the nation’s only fixed election. Way back in 1876, the president of the largest company in the United States, Thomas Scott, of the Pennsylvania Railroad, crafted a deal in which the man who got fewer votes----Rutherford Hayes---was elected president. In exchange, Scott got federal bailouts for bad investments in the Texas and Pacific Railroad. The cost of this bailout was high---Hayes supporters courted Southern Democrats in Congress by promising to end Reconstruction, effectively abandoning Southern Blacks to a century of Jim Crow and the KKK. In that election and its aftermath, the foundations for United States policy towards American workers were laid. That policy was, in a word,
war.
The nation’s economy was in a shambles. Investors had been up to their usual dirty tricks. In 1869, Black Friday was precipitated by two investors, Gould and Fisk who conspired with family members of then President Grant to corner the gold market and drive up prices. When gold prices returned to normal, many investors were ruined. A few years later, gold was in the news again, as the feds stopped buying silver thanks to the Coinage Act of 1873, also called the Crime of 1873. Domestic money supplies were reduced. Also in 1873, the major investment firm Jay Cooke & Company went under due to its bad investments in the nation’s railroad industry. The New York Stock Exchange closed for 10 days. Railroads failed----and it was the American worker who suffered the most as the nation entered the Long Depression.
A bank panic on Sept. 18, 1873 disintegrated into depression. "Weekly the layoffs, wage cuts, strikes, evictions, breadlines and hunger increased," wrote Richard Boyer and Herbert Morais in Labor’s Untold Story. The winter of 1873-74, especially in large cities, was one of great suffering for the tens of thousands of unemployed workers and their families who were starving or on the brink of starvation.
As the depression stretched into 1874, the unemployed demanded work and unions fought wage cuts. But the depression itself became a powerful weapon in smashing unions.
Millions suffered through months upon months of mounting misery. "By 1877 there were as many as three million unemployed ," according to Boyer and Morais. "Two-fifths of those employed were working no more than six to seven months a year and less than one-fifth was regularly working. And the wages of those employed had been cut by as much as 45 percent, often to little more than a dollar a day." Newspapers reported cases of starvation and suicide.
http://www.ranknfile-ue.org/uen_1877.htmlIn 1877, when the railroads attempted to trim the already low wages of their employees by another 10% and cut their hours and finally brought out scab laborers when regular employees objected, the American workers decided enough was enough, and they organized the country’s first nationwide strike.
In the summer of 1877, a nationwide upheaval brought the United States to a standstill. 80,000 railroad workers stopped work. Hundreds of thousands of other Americans soon followed: men and women, black and white, native- and foreign-born. It was America's first national strike; many observers thought a second American Revolution was at hand.
The strike started in Martinsburg, West Virginia, on July 16, and spread along the rail lines. During the next two weeks, strikers virtually took over Pittsburgh, Chicago, and St. Louis and exercised new power in scores of smaller cities, such as Hornellsville, New York, and Louisvile, Kentucky.
The Great Strike of 1877 marked the end of America's first century and the beginning of a new age of industrial conflict and change. New industries were bringing wealth to some Americans and hardship to others. By striking and rioting on a massive scale, "ordinary" Americans opened a new era of debate over the meaning of equality--who should reap the benefits of the industrial age?
http://www.ashp.cuny.edu/1877/1877-1.htmlThe federal government responded to the nation’s first strike in a way that should be familiar by now. They resorted to murder. Because the strike was popular with locals, police and many state militias refused to do the bidding of the railroad companies that wanted the strike broken.
Tom Scott of the Pennsylvania Railroad had recommended giving strikers "a rifle diet for a few days and see how they like that kind of bread."
Fortunately for railroad executives like Scott, President Hayes was in their pocket. Federal troops were sent to Pittsburg to deal with the strikers.
"It was readily apparent that the state, whether with the National Guard or federal troops, was more than willing to make use of those troops against regular folks on behalf of interests of corporations," Stowell said.
Trying to move the crowd off the tracks, a number of Philadelphia militia men charged and stabbed several people, Stowell wrote.
The crowd threw rocks in retaliation. The militia fired their weapons. Twenty died, including one woman and three children, and 30 more were wounded.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_579635.htmlIn response, the citizens of Pittsburg went wild.
Nearly 1,200 freight cars, 104 engines, and 39 other railroad company buildings were destroyed, according to an online database maintained by the University of Houston. The night sky lit up from the flames. About 25 more people died in the riot overnight, including five guards.
The American public has been consistent in its support for oppressed workers. Too bad that officials in Washington answer to different bosses than the ones who elect them.
II. The Ludlow Massacre of 1914: Murder Paid For By the Rockefeller Family “Then came the killing of Louis Tikas, the Greek leader of the strikers. We saw the militiamen parley outside the tent city, and, a few minutes later, Tikas came out to meet them. We watched them talking. Suddenly an officer raised his rifle, gripping the barrel, and felled Tikas with the butt.
“Tikas fell face downward. As he lay there we saw the militiamen fall back. Then they aimed their rifles and deliberately fired them into the unconscious man’s body. It was the first murder I had ever seen, for it was a murder and nothing less. Then the miners ran about in the tent colony and women and children scuttled for safety in the pits which afterward trapped them.
“We watched from our rock shelter while the militia dragged up their machine guns and poured a murderous fire into the arroyo from a height by Water Tank Hill above the Ludlow depot. Then came the firing of the tents.
“I am positive that by no possible chance could they have been set ablaze accidentally. The militiamen were thick about the northwest corner of the colony where the fire started and we could see distinctly from our lofty observation place what looked like a blazing torch waved in the midst of militia a few seconds before the general conflagration swept through the place. What followed everybody knows.”
Eyewitness Account of the Ludlow Massacre
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5737/The Rockefeller family did not take kindly to the mine workers in Colorado who responded to poor wages, high death rates and restrictions of civil liberties by organizing a union. In response, they hired a gang of thugs to scare the mine workers back into submission.
http://libcom.org/history/1914-the-ludlow-massacre Through various agencies the company was able to hire men to take a more aggressive stance against the striking workers, armed guards were supplied to harass strikers and union organisers. An armoured car with a mounted machine gun was even built which was appropriately named the ‘Death Special’ by the company guards. As tensions escalated between CF+I and the strikers, miners dug protective pits beneath their tents to shield themselves and their families against random sniping and machine gun fire from the company guards. On October 17th the ‘Death Special’ was used to attack the Forbes tent colony resulting in the death of one miner. A young girl was shot in the face and another boy’s legs riddled with machine gun bullets also. Confrontations between striking miners and scab workers were also resulting in additional deaths. On October 28th the Governor of Colorado, Elias M Ammons called out the National Guard to take control of the situation.
Since the result of violence is always more violence, the strikers’ reaction should have been anticipated by the Rockefellers. The two sides---strikers and strike breakers—entered a stage of armed combat. And as always, it was the innocent who suffered.
On the morning of April 20, the day after Easter was celebrated by the many Greek immigrants at Ludlow, three Guardsmen appeared at the camp ordering the release of a man they claimed was being held against his will. This request prompted the camp leader, Louis Tikas, to meet with a local militia commander at the train station in Ludlow village, a half mile (0.8 km) from the colony. While this meeting was progressing, two companies of militia installed a machine gun on a ridge near the camp and took a position along a rail route about half a mile south of Ludlow. Anticipating trouble, Tikas ran back to the camp. The miners, fearing for the safety of their families, set out to flank the militia positions. A firefight soon broke out.
The fighting raged for the entire day. The militia was reinforced by non-uniformed mine guards later in the afternoon. At dusk, a passing freight train stopped on the tracks in front of the Guards' machine gun placements, allowing many of the miners and their families to escape to an outcrop of hills to the east called the "Black Hills." By 7:00 p.m., the camp was in flames, and the militia descended on it and began to search and loot the camp. Louis Tikas had remained in the camp the entire day and was still there when the fire started. Tikas and two other men were captured by the militia. Tikas and Lt. Karl Linderfelt, commander of one of two Guard companies, had confronted each other several times in the previous months. While two militiamen held Tikas, Linderfelt broke a rifle butt over his head. Tikas and the other two captured miners were later found shot dead. Their bodies lay along the Colorado and Southern tracks for three days in full view of passing trains. The militia officers refused to allow them to be moved until a local of a railway union demanded the bodies be taken away for burial.
During the battle, four women and eleven children had been hiding in a pit beneath one tent, where they were trapped when the tent above them was set on fire. Two of the women and all of the children suffocated. These deaths became a rallying cry for the UMWA, who called the incident the "Ludlow Massacre.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_MassacreAs usual, the owners won the war. President Wilson sent in troops. The mine worker’s union ran out of money. None of the miners’ demands were met. Though public sentiment was with the (murdered) miners....
"All over the country there were meetings, demonstrations.
Pickets marched in front of the Rockefeller office at 26
Broadway, New York City. A minister protested in front of the
church where Rockefeller sometimes gave sermons, and was
clubbed by the police.
http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/us/sp000937.txtPresident Wilson and the federal government sided with big business. Just a few years later, Wilson used WWI as an excuse to persecute the IWW—the only union in America that accepted women and minorities into its ranks---out of existence.
The government used World War I as an opportunity to crush the IWW. In September 1917, U.S. Department of Justice agents made simultaneous raids on forty-eight IWW meeting halls across the country. In 1917, one hundred and sixty-five IWW leaders were arrested for conspiring to hinder the draft, encourage desertion, and intimidate others in connection with labor disputes, under the new Espionage Act; one hundred and one went on trial before Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis in 1918.
They were all convicted — even those who had not been members of the union for years — and given prison terms of up to twenty years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_World III. From the Autobiography of Mother Jones “Murder in West Virginia” In February of 1903, I went to Stanford Mountain where the men were on strike. The court had issued an injunction forbidding the miners from going near the mines. A group of miners walked along the public road nowhere near the mines. The next morning they held meeting in their own hall which they themselves had built. A United States deputy marshal came into the meeting with warrants for thirty members for violating the injunction.
The men said, "We did not break any law. We did not go near the mines and you know we were on the public road."
"Well," said the deputy, "we are going arrest you anyway."
They defied him to arrest them, insisting they had not violated the law. They gave him twenty-five minutes to leave town. They sent for his brother, who was the company doctor and told him to take him out.
snip
The next morning I went to the station to get an early train. The agent said to me, "Did you hear what trouble they had up in Stanford Mountain last night?"
"I think you are mistaken," I answered, "for I just came down from there myself last night."
"Well," he said, "they have had some trouble there, all the same."
"Anyone hurt?"
"Yes; I was taking the railway messages and couldn't get all the details. Some shooting."
I said, "Take back my ticket. I must go up to those boys."
I took the short trail up the hillside to Stanford Mountain. It seemed to me as I came to-ward the camp as if those wretched shacks were huddling closer in terror. Everything was deathly still. As I came nearer the miners' homes, I could hear sobbing. Then I saw between the stilts that propped up a miner's shack the clay red with blood. I pushed open the door. On a mattress, wet with blood, lay a miner. His brains had been blown out while he slept. His shack was riddled with bullets.
In five other shacks men lay dead. In one of them a baby boy and his mother sobbed over the father's corpse. When the little fellow saw me, he said, "Mother Jones, bring back my papa to me. I want to kiss him."
The coroner came. He found that these six men had been murdered in their beds while they peacefully slept; shot by gunmen in the employ of the coal company.
The coroner went. The men were buried on the mountain side. And nothing was ever done to punish the men who had taken their lives.
http://womenshistory.about.com/library/etext/mj/bl_mj09.htmMurders committed by thugs in the employee of Big Business. Federal government collusion with the owners. Justice denied. Just another skirmish in the war against the American worker.
IV. Banana Massacre: Protecting American "Interests" Abroad Our government has been particularly brutal in its oppression of workers in other parts of the Americas, all in the name of protecting American interests abroad.
I have the honor to report that the legal advisor of the United Fruit Company here in Bogotá stated yesterday that the total number of strikers killed by the Colombian military authorities during the recent disturbance reached between five and six hundred; while the number of soldiers killed was one.
Telegraph from US Bogotá Embassy to the US Secretary of State, dated December 29, 1928
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_massacreAn honor indeed. The folks back in Washington---and in the headquarters of United Fruit Company---must have been jubilant.
The Columbian government later claimed that it only opened fire on a crowd---in the process murdering anywhere from 47 to 2000 workers, their wives and children---because of the presence of U.S. war ships off the coast. Presumably, if the government of Columbia did not step in the “protect American interests”, U.S. troops would have taken matter into their own hands. “America interests” were actually the interests of the United Fruit Company, which has since become Chiquita.
The fruit company’s name may be different, but the tactics are the same. Almost 80 years after the Banana Massacre, Chiquita admitted to buying the services of the Columbian paramilitary group, United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC).
http://www.pacifica.org/program-guide/op,segment-page/segment_id,413/Chiquita claimed that it was paying “protection money”. However, the group they were paying off is on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations, which lead to this indictment
http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/corru/doc/indictment.htmlWhat did Chiquita buy with its $1.7 million investment in a right wing death squad?
According to the Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ), more than 6,000 people have been murdered for political reasons during the first term of President Uribe (2002-2006), 61 percent by the paramilitaries and 25 percent by Marxist guerrillas. With the establishment of the justice and peace law in 2004, a part of the AUC - the main paramilitary organisation - was demobilised and given an amnesty. But it was replaced with a network of organisations more fragmented and therefore more difficult to control. Since then, the number of murders committed by the paramilitaries has gone down, but according to the CCJ, there have been 1,060 in the past year, particularly among the peasants and indigenous people.
http://www.humanrights-geneva.info/article.php3?id_article=1353Paramilitary groups specifically target union organizers, which makes you wonder if Chiquita was buying the services of professional strike breakers.
The Colombian labor movement has been the target of a campaign of intimidation unparalleled in the contemporary world. More than 3,800 union leaders and activists have been assassinated since the mid 1980's; more than one hundred have been killed in the first six months of 2002 alone. In the past several years, links between the right wing paramilitary groups that carry out the majority of these killings and both US based corporations operating in Colombia and US military assistance to the country have become increasingly evident.
http://henningcenter.berkeley.edu/gateway/colombia.htmlAnd of course, the federal government has lavished aid upon Columbia’s government, which, all too often, has been complicit in the attacks against union organizers.
Of greatest concern are the alarming links between the official Colombian military and the ultra-right wing paramilitary organizations of the AUC (United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia), who are responsible for 90% of trade union assassinations in Colombia (and a majority of political killings in general).11 In a recent report prepared for the US State Department, prominent international human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, found clear evidence of extensive military-paramilitary cooperation. The report makes sobering reading: "…military units and police detachments continue to promote, work with, support, profit from, and tolerate paramilitary groups, treating them as a force allied to and compatible with their own." The report goes on to outline the details of this working relationship, which has included everything from the sharing of equipment and intelligence, to the hosting of paramilitaries on military bases, to active cooperation on the battlefield. Active duty soldiers from the regular army serve in the paramilitary forces and are on the paramilitary payroll.12 Under these conditions, it is often difficult to find any distinction between the military and the paramilitaries, causing many in Colombia to label the paramilitaries as the army's "Sixth Division."
Because of the extensive paramilitary-military cooperation in Colombia, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that US aid to the Colombian military is facilitating the persecution of Colombia's trade unions--and that the only "interests" that interest the people in Washington are those of their corporate masters.
V. The Hundred Years War In 1912, a massive strike in the wool mills of Lawrence, MA showed where employer violence overstepped its bounds and backfired. Despite the deployment of the militia and the arrest of strike leaders, the company could not break the strike. In order to survive economically, unionists planned to send their children to supporters in other states. The company and its supporters declared that no children would be allowed to leave the city. When the strike committee undertook to take the children to the railway station, the police and militia surrounded the station, the police closed in and began to beat mothers and children mericilessly. Despite the jailing of 296 strikers, public protest and continued resistance forced the company to raise wages although the union was never recognized.
http://www.nathannewman.org/EDIN/.labor/.files/.archive/.strike.violence.htmlThe above link, entitled “Unions and Violence” lists various other anti-union atrocities which have been committed during the Hundred Year War against the American worker. The FDR administration is described as the only period in our nation’s history in which the might of the federal government was not actively used to oppress the working class. Almost as soon as FDR was out of office, the war resumed with the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act, which Truman vetoed without success---too many Democrats as well as Republicans voted for it.
The Taft-Hartley Act prohibited jurisdictional strikes, wildcat strikes, solidarity or political strikes, secondary boycotts, "common situs" picketing, closed shops, and monetary donations by unions to federal political campaigns. It also required union officers to sign non-communist affidavits with the government. Union shops were heavily restricted, and states were allowed to pass "right-to-work laws" that outlawed union shops. Furthermore, the executive branch of the Federal government could obtain legal strikebreaking injunctions if an impending or current strike "imperiled the national health or safety," a test that has been interpreted broadly by the courts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft-Hartley_ActSixty years later, the nation finally has a Democratic Congress and a President who is on record as supporting the Employee Free Choice Act, which would attempt to level the playing field between workers and employers. However, the nation’s executives are not going to give up without a fight. Recipients of bailout money got together last fall to plot how they would use those funds for a political attack on the Employee Free Choice Act.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/27/bank-of-america-hosted-an_n_161248.html Three days after receiving $25 billion in federal bailout funds, Bank of America Corp. hosted a conference call with conservative activists and business officials to organize opposition to the U.S. labor community's top legislative priority.
Participants on the October 17 call -- including at least one representative from another bailout recipient, AIG -- were urged to persuade their clients to send "large contributions" to groups working against the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), as well as to vulnerable Senate Republicans, who could help block passage of the bill.
Snip
Donations of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars were needed, it was argued, to prevent America from turning "into France."
"If a retailer has not gotten involved in this, if he has not spent money on this election, if he has not sent money to Norm Coleman and all these other guys, they should be shot. They should be thrown out their goddamn jobs," Marcus declared.
I wonder whom the employers will hire to do the shooting this time.