***Don’t Mourn- Organize (And Maybe Sing A Song Or Two) - In Honor Of Labor Agitator/Songwriter Joe Hill

Click on title to link to YouTube's film clip of "Joe Hill's Last Will"

Joe Hill’s Last Will

My will is easy to decide,
For there is nothing to divide,
My kin don’t need to fuss and moan-
“Moss does not cling to a rolling stone.”
My body? Ah, If I could choose,
I would to ashes it reduce,
And let the merry breezes blow
My dust to where some flowers grow.
Perhaps some fading flower then
Would come to life and bloom again.
This is my last and final will,
Good luck to all of you, Joe Hill

Joe Hill was an IWW man. The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) was, and is a radical union dedicated to abolishing the wage system and replacing it with a democratic system of workplace organization.

Joe Hill was a migrant laborer to the US from Sweden, a poet, musician and union radical. The term “pie in the sky” is believed to come from his satirical song, “The Preacher and the Slave”.

Hill was framed for murder and executed by firing squad in Salt Lake City, Utah on November 19, 1915. His last words were, “Fire!”

Just before his death he wrote to fellow IWW organizer Big Bill Haywood a letter which included the famous words, “Don’t mourn, Organize”.

The poem above was his will. It was set to music and became the basis of a song by Ethel Raim called “Joe Hill’s Last Will”.

A praise poem by Alfred Hayes became the lyrics of the best-known song about Joe Hill, written in 1936 by Earl Robinson. This was sung so beautifully by Joan Baez at Woodstock in 1969:

Joe Hill

words by Alfred Hayes
music by Earl Robinson

I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night,
Alive as you and me.
Says I “But Joe, you’re ten years dead”
“I never died” said he,
“I never died” said he.

“In Salt Lake, Joe,” says I to him,
him standing by my bed,
“They framed you on a murder charge,”
Says Joe, “But I ain’t dead,”
Says Joe, “But I ain’t dead.”

“The Copper Bosses killed you Joe,
they shot you Joe” says I.
“Takes more than guns to kill a man”
Says Joe “I didn’t die”
Says Joe “I didn’t die”

And standing there as big as life
and smiling with his eyes.
Says Joe “What they can never kill
went on to organize,
went on to organize”

From San Diego up to Maine,
in every mine and mill,
where working-men defend their rights,
it’s there you find Joe Hill,
it’s there you find Joe Hill!

I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night,
alive as you and me.
Says I “But Joe, you’re ten years dead”
“I never died” said he,
“I never died” said he.

"The Preacher And The Slave"

Long-haired preachers come out every night,
Try to tell you what’s wrong and what’s right;
But when asked how ’bout something to eat
They will answer in voices so sweet

You will eat, bye and bye,
In that glorious land above the sky;
Work and pray, live on hay,
You’ll get pie in the sky when you die

And the Starvation Army they play,
And they sing and they clap and they pray,
Till they get all your coin on the drum,
Then they tell you when you’re on the bum

Holy Rollers and Jumpers come out
And they holler, they jump and they shout
Give your money to Jesus, they say,
He will cure all diseases today

If you fight hard for children and wife-
Try to get something good in this life-
You’re a sinner and bad man, they tell,
When you die you will sure go to hell.

Workingmen of all countries, unite
Side by side we for freedom will fight
When the world and its wealth we have gained
To the grafters we’ll sing this refrain

You will eat, bye and bye,
When you’ve learned how to cook and how to fry;
Chop some wood, ’twill do you good
Then you’ll eat in the sweet bye and bye

The chorus is sung in a call and response pattern.

You will eat [You will eat] bye and bye [bye and bye]
In that glorious land above the sky [Way up high]
Work and pray [Work and pray] live on hay [live on hay]
You’ll get pie in the sky when you die [That's a lie!]

You will eat [You will eat] bye and bye [bye and bye]
When you’ve learned how to cook and how to fry [How to fry]
Chop some wood [Chop some wood], ’twill do you good [do you good]
Then you’ll eat in the sweet bye and bye [That's no lie]

THE REBEL GIRL

by Joe Hill /words updated/

There are women of many descriptions
In this cruel world as everyone knows
Some are living in beautiful mansions
And wearing the finest of clothes

There's the blue blooded queen and the princess
Who have charms made of diamonds and pearls
But the only and true kind of lady
Is the Rebel Girl

chorus:
She's a rebel girl, a rebel girl
To the working class she's the strength of this world
From Newfoundland to B.C.
She's fighting for you and for me

Yes she's there by our side
With her courage and pride
She's unequalled anywhere

And I'm proud to fight for freedom
With the rebel girl!


Pete Seeger Lyrics

Joe Hill Lyrics

I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night
Alive as you or me.
Says I, "But Joe, you're ten years dead."
"I never died," says he,
"I never died," says he

"In Salt Lake, Joe," says I to him,
Him standing by my bed.
"They framed you on a murder charge."
Says Joe, "But I ain't dead,
Says Joe, "But I ain't dead."

"The copper bosses killed you, Joe,
They shot you, Joe," says I.
"Takes more than guns to kill a man."
Says Joe, "I didn't die,"
Says Joe, "I didn't die."

And standing there as big as life,
And smiling with his eyes,
Joe says, "What they forgot to kill
Went on to organize,
Went on to organize."

"Joe Hill ain't dead," he says to me,
"Joe Hill ain't never died.
Where working men are out on strike,
Joe Hill is at their side,
Joe Hill is at their side."

"From San Diego up to Maine
In every mine and mill,
Where workers strike and organize,"
Says he, "You'll find Joe Hill."
Says he, "You'll find Joe Hill."

I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night
Alive as you or me.
Says I, "But Joe, you're ten years dead."
"I never died," says he,
"I never died," says he.

Pete Seeger Lyrics

Talking Union Lyrics

If you want higher wages, let me tell you what to do;
You got to talk to the workers in the shop with you;
You got to build you a union, got to make it strong,
But if you all stick together, now, 'twont he long.
You'll get shorter hours,
Better working conditions.
Vacations with pay,
Take your kids to the seashore.

It ain't quite this simple, so I better explain
Just why you got to ride on the union train;
'Cause if you wait for the boss to raise your pay,
We'll all be waiting till Judgment Day;
We'll all he buried - gone to Heaven -
Saint Peter'll be the straw boss then.

Now, you know you're underpaid, hut the boss says you ain't;
He speeds up the work till you're 'bout to faint,
You may he down and out, but you ain't beaten,
Pass out a leaflet and call a meetin'
Talk it over - speak your mind -
Decide to do something about it.

'Course, the boss may persuade some poor damn fool
To go to your meeting and act like a stool;
But you can always tell a stool, though - that's a fact;
He's got a yellow streak running down his back;
He doesn't have to stool - he'll always make a good living
On what he takes out of blind men's cups.

You got a union now; you're sitting pretty;
Put some of the boys on the steering committee.
The boss won't listen when one man squawks.
But he's got to listen when the union talks.
He better -
He'll be mighty lonely one of these days.

Suppose they're working you so hard it's just outrageous,
They're paying you all starvation wages;
You go to the boss, and the boss would yell,
"Before I'd raise your pay I'd see you all in Hell."
Well, he's puffing a big see-gar and feeling mighty slick,
He thinks he's got your union licked.
He looks out the window, and what does he see
But a thousand pickets, and they all agree
He's a bastard - unfair - slave driver -
Bet he beats his own wife.

Now, boy, you've come to the hardest time;
The boss will try to bust your picket line.
He'll call out the police, the National Guard;
They'll tell you it's a crime to have a union card.
They'll raid your meeting, hit you on the head.
Call every one of you a goddamn Red -
Unpatriotic - Moscow agents -
Bomb throwers, even the kids.

But out in Detroit here's what they found,
And out in Frisco here's what they found,
And out in Pittsburgh here's what they found,
And down in Bethlehem here's what they found,
That if you don't let Red-baiting break you up,
If you don't let stool pigeons break you up,
If you don't let vigilantes break you up,
And if you don't let race hatred break you up -
You'll win. What I mean,
Take it easy - but take it!

*Artists' Corner- On The Anniversary Of Their Execution-Ben Shahn's "The Passion Of Sacco And Vanzetti"

Click on the headline to link to a viewing of artist Ben Shahn's The Passion Of Sacco And Vanzetti.



Markin comment:


As we commemorate the 88th anniversary of the execution of Sacco and Vanzetti by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in 1927 this comment is easy. Those, like artist Ben Shahn, who honor Sacco and Vanzetti are kindred spirits.

*From The Archives Of The “Revolutionary History” Journal-Barricades in Barcelona (May Days 1937)

Click on the headline to link to the Revolutionary History Journal entry listed in the title.

Markin comment:

This is an excellent documentary source for today’s militants to “discover” the work of our forbears, whether we agree with their programs or not. Mainly not, but that does not negate the value of such work done under the pressure of revolutionary times. Hopefully we will do better when our time comes.

Markin comment:

There is no question that in the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s the prime driving force was the working class of Catalonia, and within that province its capital, Barcelona, was the key hot-bed for revolutionary action. The role of Barcelona thus is somewhat analogous to that of Petrograd (later Leningrad) in the Russian revolution of 1917 and deserves special attention from those of us later revolutionaries trying to draw the lessons of the hard-bitten defeat of the Spanish revolution. All the parties of the left (Socialist Party, Communist Party, left bourgeois radicals, Catalan nationalists, anarchists, various ostensible Trotskyists, the POUM, and non-party trade unionists) had militants there, and had myriad associated social and political organizations that drove the revolution forward in the early days before the working class surrendered its hard-fought gains to the bourgeoisie or in Russian revolutionary, Leon Trotsky’s memorable phrase, “the shadow of the bourgeoisie.”

That said, the May Days in Barcelona take added importance for those of us who believe that in the ebb and flow of revolution the actions taken there by the various parties, or more pertinently, those actions not taken by some, particularly the POUM (and assorted left-anarchists) sealed the fate of the revolution and the struggle against Franco. A description of the flow of the events, a fairly correct description of the events if not of the political conclusions to be drawn, in those days by a militant who was there, Hugo Oehler, is an important aid in understanding what went wrong.

Note: Hugo Oehler was noting but a pain in the butt for Jim Cannon and others in the United States who were trying to coalesce a Trotskyist party that might be able to affect events that were rapidly unrolling here in the heart of the Great Depression. Nevertheless Cannon praised Oehler as a very good and honest mass worker. That meant a lot coming from Cannon. One does not have to accept Oehler’s political conclusions to appreciate this document. Moreover, his point about trying to link up with the Friends of Durruti is an important point that every militant in Barcelona should have been pursuing to break the masses of anarchist workers from the CNT-FAI. Time ran out before these links could be made decisive. But that is a commentary for another day. Read this (and Orwell and Souchy as well) to get a flavor of what was missed in those May days.

Books To While Away The Class Struggle By-MEMOIRS OF A REVOLUTIONARY-Victor Serge-A Book Review

Books To While Away The Class Struggle By-MEMOIRS OF A REVOLUTIONARY-Victor Serge-A Book Review

By Si Lannon

Recently I have begun to post entries under the headline- “Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By” and "Films To While Away The Class Struggle By"-that will include progressive and labor-oriented songs and films that might be of general interest to the radical public. I have decided to do the same for some books that may perk that same interest under the title in this entry’s headline. Markin

Book Review

MEMOIRS OF A REVOLUTIONARY-Victor Serge


As I have noted in my review of Leon Trotsky’s memoir My Life ( see my review elsewhere) today’s public tastes dictate that political memoir writers expose the most intimate details of their private personal lives in the so-called public square. Here, as in Trotsky’s memoir, Serge will offer up no such tantalizing details. These old time revolutionaries seem organically averse to including personal material that would distract from their political legacies. That is fine by me. After all that is why political people, the natural audience for this form of history narrative, appreciate such works. Contemporary political memoir writers take note.

Serge was a militant from his youth. However the October 1917 Russian Revolution is the real start of his political maturation and wider political influence. I believe the reader will find the most useful information and Serge’s most insightful political analysis dates from this period. Serge became a secondary Communist leader after the Bolshevik seizure of power and in various capacities, most notably as a journalist for the Communist international, witnessed many of the important events in and out of Russia in the 1920’s and 1930’s. Moreover, for a long period of time he was a key member of the Trotsky-led Left Opposition to the rise of Stalinism which formed in the Russian Communist Party and later in the Communist International in the 1920’s.

Serge eventually broke politically with Trotsky in the late 1930’s over the class nature of the Soviet state and organizational differences on the role of the revolutionary party in the struggle and in power. Serge's later politics and activities are murky, somewhat disoriented and the subject of controversy (see the Appendix in Memoirs and my review of Serge’s book Kronstadt). However, Serge’s analysis and insights as a witness to this period of history retain their value, especially his analysis of the, for leftists, very troublesome Stalinist purges and terror campaigns of the 1930’s.

Thus, as with Trotsky’s memoir, you will find a thoughtful political self-examination by a man trying to draw the lessons of the degeneration of the Russian Revolution, the subsequent defeats of the international working class movement, the devastating destruction of the fellow revolutionary cadre who made and administered the early Soviet state while still defending the gains of that revolution. Overshadowing these concerns is a constant personal struggle to maintain one’s revolutionary integrity at all costs. That is, not to wind up like Bukharin or Zinoviev and the like, compromised and lost to the struggle for socialism. All this, moreover, and perhaps hardest of all still maintain a sense of revolutionary optimism for the future organization of human society.

Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin once commented that in the run-up to the October Revolution the political whirlwind stirred up by that revolution inevitably brought those individuals and organizations looking for the resolution of the revolutionary dilemma into the Bolshevik orbit. This was most famously the case with Trotsky’s Petersburg Inter-District organization that fused with the Bolsheviks in the fateful summer of 1917. That same whirlwind later drew in the best elements of the Western labor movement as word of the revolution reached the outside world.

Previously, Serge had been close to the French anarchist and anarcho-syndicalist movement but as happens in great revolutions he, like other militant anarchists, was drawn to the reality of the Soviet experiment despite political differences over the question of the state. Despite this he, generally, like the non-Bolshevik militants served the revolution with distinction. Thus, this fateful political decision to cast his personal fate with the Russian Revolution led him to the series of political adventures and misadventures that enliven his memoir.

At the beginning of the 21st century when socialist political programs are in decline it is hard to imagine the spirit that drove Serge to dedicate the better part of his life to the fight for a socialist society. However, at the beginning of the 20th century he represented only a slightly younger version of that revolutionary generation of Eastern Europeans and Russians exemplified by Lenin, Trotsky, Martov and Luxemburg who set out to change the history of the 20th century. It was as if the best and brightest of that generation were afraid, for better or worse, not to take part in the political struggles that would shape the modern world. Those same questions posed at the beginning of that century are still on the agenda for today’s generation of militants to help resolve. This is one of your political textbooks. Read it.

From The Archives Of The International Communist League-Syndicalism and Leninism (1970)

Markin comment:

In October 2010 I started what I anticipate will be an on-going series, From The Archives Of The Socialist Workers Party (America), starting date October 2, 2010, where I will place documents from, and make comments on, various aspects of the early days of the James P. Cannon-led Socialist Worker Party in America. As I noted in the introduction to that series Marxism, no less than other political traditions, and perhaps more than most, places great emphasis on roots, the building blocks of current society and its political organizations. Nowhere is the notion of roots more prevalent in the Marxist movement than in the tracing of organizational and political links back to the founders, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the Communist Manifesto, and the Communist League.

After mentioning the thread of international linkage through various organizations from the First to the Fourth International I also noted that on the national terrain in the Trotskyist movement, and here I was speaking of America where the Marxist roots are much more attenuated than elsewhere, we look to Daniel DeLeon’s Socialist Labor League, Eugene V. Debs' Socialist Party( mainly its left-wing, not its socialism for dentists wing), the Wobblies (IWW, Industrial Workers Of The World), the early Bolshevik-influenced Communist Party and the various formations that led up to the Socialist Workers Party, the section that Leon Trotsky’s relied on most while he was alive. Further, I noted that beyond the SWP that there were several directions to go in but that those earlier lines were the bedrock of revolutionary Marxist continuity, at least through the 1960s.

I am continuing today  what I also anticipate will be an on-going series about one of those strands past the 1960s when the SWP lost it revolutionary appetite, what was then the Revolutionary Tendency (RT) and what is now the Spartacist League (SL/U.S.), the U.S. section of the International Communist League (ICL). I intend to post materials from other strands but there are several reasons for starting with the SL/U.S. A main one, as the document below will make clear, is that the origin core of that organization fought, unsuccessfully in the end, to struggle from the inside (an important point) to turn the SWP back on a revolutionary course, as they saw it. Moreover, a number of the other organizations that I will cover later trace their origins to the SL, including the very helpful source for posting this material, the International Bolshevik Tendency.

However as I noted in posting a document from Spartacist, the theoretical journal of ICL posted via the International Bolshevik Tendency website that is not the main reason I am starting with the SL/U.S. Although I am not a political supporter of either organization in the accepted Leninist sense of that term, more often than not, and at times and on certain questions very much more often than not, my own political views and those of the International Communist League coincide. I am also, and I make no bones about it, a fervent supporter of the Partisan Defense Committee, a social and legal defense organization linked to the ICL and committed, in the traditions of the IWW, the early International Labor Defense-legal defense arm of the Communist International, and the early defense work of the American Socialist Workers Party, to the struggles for freedom of all class-war prisoners and defense of other related social struggles.
***********
Markin comment on this article:

Many anarchists and anarcho-syndicialists, especially in France and the United States (from the IWW, mostly), rallied to the cause of the Communist International in the wake of the Russian Revolution of 1917. I have attached a letter from Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky to a leading French anarcho- syndicalist, Pierre Monatte, who along with Alfred Rosmer brought some of their comrades to the ranks of the early French Communist Party.
****
Leon Trotsky
The First Five Years of the Communist International
Volume 1

Letter to Comrade Monatte

MY DEAR FRIEND, I take this opportunity to send my warmest regards and to express my personal views on the state of affairs in French syndicalism – views that are, I trust, in complete harmony with the guiding line of the Third International as a whole.

I shall not hide from you that our joy in following the constant successes of revolutionary syndicalism is tinged with deepest concern over the future development of ideas and relations within the French labor movement. Today the revolutionary syndicalists of all tendencies still remain an opposition and are being held together precisely by their oppositional status. Tomorrow, the instant that you conquer the General Confederation of Labor [1] – and we don’t doubt that this day is nigh – you will come up against the fundamental questions of the revolutionary struggle. And precisely here we enter the zone of our grave worries.

The official program of revolutionary syndicalism is the Charter of Amiens. [2] In order to immediately express my thought as sharply as possible, let me say flatly – every reference to the Charter of Amiens is not an answer but an evasion. To every thinking Communist it is perfectly clear that pre-war French syndicalism represented a profoundly significant and important revolutionary tendency. The Charter of Amiens was an extremely precious document of the proletarian movement. But this document is historically restricted. Since its adoption a World War has taken place, Soviet Russia has been founded, a mighty revolutionary wave has passed over all of Europe, the Third International has grown and developed. The old syndicalists and the old Social Democrats have split into two and even three hostile camps. New questions of gigantic proportions have risen before us as practical questions on the order of the day. No answer to these questions is contained in the Amiens Charter. In the columns of La Vie Ouvrieère I am able to glean no answers to the fundamental problems of the revolutionary struggle. Can it possibly be that our task today, in the year 1921, lies in returning to the positions of 1906 and in bringing about the “revival” (réconstruction) of pre-war syndicalism? Such a position greatly resembles, in principle, the position of those political “revivalists” (réconstructeurs) who are dreaming of a return to “pure” socialism, as it existed prior to its fall into sin during the war. Such a position is amorphous; it is conservative and it threatens to become reactionary.

Just how do you envisage the leadership of the syndicalist move-ment, from the moment you obtain the majority of the General Confederation of Labor? The ranks of the syndicates embrace party Communists, revolutionary syndicalists, anarchists, Socialists and broad non-party masses. Naturally, every issue involving revolutionary action must in the last analysis be brought before the entire syndicalist apparatus, embracing hundreds of thousands and millions of workers. But who will sum up the revolutionary experience, analyze it, draw all the necessary conclusions from it, formulate the specific proposals, slogans and methods of struggle, and transmit them to the broad masses? Who will lead? Are you perhaps of the opinion that this work can be carried out through the circle of La Vie Ouvrière? If such be the case, then one can state with certainty that alongside you other circles will arise to challenge your right to leadership under the banner of revolutionary syndicalism. And besides – what about the large contingent of Communists in the syndicates? What will be the relations between them and your group? The leading organs of one syndicate may be dominated by party Communists, while in the organs of another syndicate, revolutionary non-party syndicalists may predominate. The proposals and slogans of the La Vie Ouvrieère group may diverge from the proposals and slogans of the Communist organization. This danger is profoundly real, it may become fatal, and because of it our victory in the syndicalist movement may be followed within a few months by the return of Jouhaux, Dumoulin and Merrheim to power.

I am well acquainted with bias against “parties” and against “politics” prevalent among French workers who have passed through the anarchist school. I completely agree that no single sharp blow can possibly break these moods, which were wholly justified in the past but which are extremely dangerous for the future. With regard to this question I can fully understand a gradual transition from the old state of disarrangement to the complete fusion of revolutionary syndicalists and Communists within a single party. But one must clearly and firmly set himself this goal. If centrist tendencies still obtain within the party the syndicalist opposition likewise has them within it. More education and further ideological purification are necessary among both of them. At issue is not at all the question of subordinating the syndicates to the party, but the question of uniting the revolutionary Communists and revolutionary syndicalists within the framework of a single party; and of all the members of this unified party carrying on harmonious centralized activity within the syndicates, which remain throughout autonomous and independent of the party organizationally. At issue is this, that the genuine vanguard of the French proletariat be welded together for the sake of its fundamental historical task – the conquest of power – and that under this banner it carry out its line within the syndicates, these basic and decisive organizations of the working class as a whole.

There is a certain psychological obstacle blocking a man’s crossing the party’s threshold after he has spent many years in revolutionary struggle outside the party. But to yield to this is to shy away from an outward form while causing the greatest damage to the inner essence. For it is my contention that your entire past activity was nothing else but preparation for the creation of the Communist Party of the proletarian revolution. Pre-war revolutionary syndicalism was a Communist Party in embryo. To return to the embryo would be a monstrous retrogression. Conversely, active participation in the building of a genuine Communist Party means the continuation and development of the best traditions of French syndicalism.

In these years each of us has had occasion to renounce one part of his already obsolete past in order to preserve, develop and assure victory to that other part of his past which did meet the test of events. An inner revolution of this type does not come easily. But only at this price, and at this price alone, can one acquire the right to really participate in the revolution of the working class.

Dear friend! I consider that the present moment will decide for a long time to come the de«stiny of French syndicalism, and, consequently, of the French revolution. In this decision you hold an important place. You would deal a cruel blow to the cause which numbers you among its best workers, were you today, when the choice must be definitely made, to turn your back upon the Communist Party. I have no doubt that this will not happen. I warmly shake your hand and remain devotedly yours.

July 13, 1921


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes
1. The General Confederation of Labor (CGT) is the name of the largest trade union organization in France. In 1921 revolutionary elements actually had the majority in the French labor movement and in the CGT in particular. However, the movement was never won to the banner of Communism and therefore soon slipped back into the hands of Jouhaux and Co., where it remained up to the outbreak of the Second World War.

2. The Charter of Amiens was the programmatic resolution adopted by the French trade unions at their 1906 convention in the city of Amiens. The central point in this resolution was the affirmation of the independence of the labor movement (the trade union movement) and its non-political character.
*******
Syndicalism and Leninism
Spartacist, No. 19, November-December 1970

One surprising effect of the French May-June 1968 events has been a resurgence of anarcho-syndicalism within the U.S. left. In fact, the French events completely reaffirmed the fundamental thesis of Lenin and Trotsky: that the mass reformist (Stalinist or social-democratic) party of the working class can deflect even the strongest spontaneous impulses toward revolution, in the absence of a pre-existing revolutionary party with considerable authority in its own right. Precisely what was lacking to carry the French workers from general strike to taking power was revolutionary political organization—a vanguard party. But the New Left drew the conclusion that spontaneous localism is revolutionary and all centralized parties counter-revolutionary. The glorification of spontaneity fit in with classic New Left biases toward "doing one’s own thing," and variants of syndicalism became the form under which New Left radicals turned toward the working class.

For a syndicalist, the revolutionary process is supposed to take roughly this character: A wildcat strike creates a strong factory committee, which declares its independence from the official union and establishes e.g. the "liberated area of the Metuchen GE plant." When enough such "liberated industrial areas" exist they combine and the system is thus overthrown.

However, the existing relatively centralized union structure is not a plot by bosses and union bureaucrats, but a victory gained by long, bitter struggles. Most syndicalists look back to the thirties as the heroic period of U.S. labor, but fail to realize that the main object of the labor struggles of the thirties was the consolidation of atomized factory groups into strong national unions. The principal goal of the great 1936 GM strike was to establish a single union to bargain for the thirty-odd GM plants. Before this, all bargaining was done at the plant-wide level. Some plants were organized, others not; some had localized unions, others had unions with broader aspirations. It was easy for GM to play one plant off against another or to shift production if one plant was particularly troublesome. The auto workers instinctively recognized they would have to give up a degree of local autonomy to achieve any real bargaining power.

Even now, it is the existence of 14 different unions as well as many nonunion shops that has allowed GE to walk all over its workers for so many years. The growth of conglomerates has faced a number of unions with greatly reduced leverage.

Form and Content

The existence of strong working-class institutions under capitalism—unions or parties—necessarily creates the objective basis for privileged bureaucracy. A sure-fire cure for union bureaucratism is not to have unions at all! The corollary, of course, is that the workers are then completely at the mercy of the bosses. There is no mechanical solution to the problem of democracy. The only answer is an aroused and conscious working class which controls its own organizations, whether these be hundred-man factory committees, unions of hundreds of thousands or mass parties numbering in the millions.

Another important aspect of the syndicalist perspective is what form rank and file opposition should take: unionwide caucuses based on a comprehensive radical program, or attempts to undermine the centralized power of the bureaucracy through factory-level organizations? The goal of socialists in unions is not occasional defiance of the bureaucracy, but rather its overthrow to command the tremendous power of the organized working class for revolutionary ends. Strong factory committees and wildcats can be potent weapons in discrediting an incumbent bureaucracy and strengthening internal opposition. But such localized and episodic organizations are no substitute for all-union program-based caucuses, which alone can pose an alternative leadership to the bureaucracy as a whole.

As Marxists, we do not take a fetishistic attitude toward the existing jurisdictional union structure. A bureaucracy may be so entrenched that an opposition cannot gain the formal union leadership regardless of how much support it has. In such a case, an opposition may be forced to split from the official union. The NMU and Amalgamated Clothing Workers were created when militant oppositions split from the official unions. But such splits are justified only if the opposition has gained the unquestioned loyalty of an economically viable section of the work force, leaving the official union an empty shell, not when they mean the voluntary isolation of the most militant and conscious minority of workers, leaving their fellows still under the sway of the sellouts.

Another facet of syndicalism is the belief that the main activity of revolutionaries is to foment trouble in the shops, the more trouble the better. Its fallacy is demonstrated by recent events in Italy. The anarcho-Maoists have made deep inroads among Fiat workers, who have been systematically sabotaging production. Fiat’s giant Milan plant has been operating at 50 per cent of its normal capacity. One way Fiat has reacted is to purchase 30 per cent of Citroen, the French auto firm, and they are quite capable of closing down the Milan plant and shifting production elsewhere, out of Italy altogether, if it is more profitable. Thus militancy for its own sake simply leads to unemployment.

General Strikes and Reaction

A rational syndicalist might agree that atomized militancy can be self-defeating. He would counterpose the syndicalist panacea of a general strike. While a general strike always raises the question of embryonic dual power, it cannot overthrow capitalism in itself. The capitalist state must be smashed in its most concrete manifestation the armed forces. If the army is not defeated or won over politically, it will suppress the general strike.

One of the most important general strikes in history occurred in the 1925-27 Chinese Revolution. It was an explicitly political strike, designed to extract concessions from the imperialist powers. The strike was characterized by a division of labor whereby the Communist Party ran the strike and the national bourgeoisie commanded, the army, through Chiang Kai-shek. When the bourgeoisie reached its compromise with the imperialists, it suppressed the CP and Chiang’s army forced the strikers back to work at gunpoint. The Chinese revolutionaries learned the hard way that control of the labor movement is insufficient for revolution. (The Maoists draw the wrong conclusion—namely, that the labor movement is irrelevant as long as one has an army!) Political and military as well as economic organization is necessary. And winning over the soldiers, who are not subject to the discipline of the labor movement, requires a political party.

All general strikes create sharp political polarization, in which all sections of society come down for or against the strike. Even major industrial powers such as Japan, Italy and France contain large peasant populations which must be won over to the workers’ cause if the strike is to be successful. The demand for workers’ control of production is not sufficient; enlisting the support of the peasantry requires a program of e.g. reduced taxes and rents, changes in land tenure, easy agricultural credit, etc.—demands which can be put forward convincingly only by a revolutionary party capable of establishing a socialist government.

General strikes and serious industrial disruption create economic hardship for the entire population. It is certainly not true that all those not directly involved in a general strike will oppose it because of the hardships entailed; but such hardships must not be open-ended. Unemployed workers, welfare recipients, peasants and small shopkeepers will support a general strike if they believe it is a step toward creating a revolutionary government with a positive program to meet their needs. But if the strike appears interminable, self-centered and purposeless, these intermediate layers and backward sections of the working masses will turn to reaction.

This is demonstrated by the rise of Italian fascism. Following World War I, the Italian working class, under strong syndicalist influence, engaged in a tremendous but uncoordinated wave of industrial militancy—factory seizures, citywide general strikes. After a few years of this, demobilized soldiers and other unemployed workers, civil servants, small shopkeepers and farmers were prepared to support Mussolini’s "law and order" movement. It has been noted that fascism develops in periods when the labor movement prevents capitalism from operating smoothly but is unable to overthrow it. Syndicalism, to the extent it is successful, creates this very situation—a revolutionary situation without the strategy necessary for assuming control of the state—thus paving the way for the triumph of reaction.

The resurgence of radical syndicalism is a reaction against the economist and class-collaborationist policies of the trade union bureaucracy. But syndicalism is only economism in reverse: accepting the working class’ lack of organization, especially political organization—and refusing to recognize the dialectical character of the bureaucratized workers’ institutions—the contradiction between class-struggle and ruling-class elements which can be resolved only by principled intervention by revolutionaries to replace iron-fisted control by capitalism’s lackeys with working-class leaders armed with a real program of class struggle.

*Archives-Our Flag Is Still Red-On Marching With The Black And Red Anarchists On Boston May Day 2010

Monday, May 03, 2010
Repost

*Our Flag Is Still Red-On Marching With The Black And Red Anarchists On Boston May Day 2010


Markin comment:

Over the past several years celebrations of our international working class holiday, May Day, not only have we paid tribute to the Chicago Haymarket anarchist martyrs and the struggle for the eight hour day but the hard pressed struggle against the denial of immigrant rights and the attempt by Tea Party-types and other to “close the door” to immigration. This addition reflects the increasingly important role that Hispanics and other militants from the international working class milieu play in the left wing of the American labor movement. Thus, the call for full citizenship rights for those who make it here is an appropriate one on this day.

With this thought in mind I, and a few of the local anti-imperialist activists that I work with marched under that slogan in the 2010 Boston May Day festivities as well as the slogan for the modern equivalent of the eight hour day, especially in these times- “30 For 40”. That slogan, for those not familiar with it, is an algebraic formula, long associated with the Trotskyist movement, although not by any means exclusively raised by us. All we have proposed by the call is the eminently rational solution to unemployment (and underemployment) by spreading the work around so that all have work, and a living wage. Of course the catch is this- it ain’t going to happen under capitalist and so the question of socialism and central planning are starkly posed. And that, after all, is the idea.

What makes all of the above political lead up to my main point interesting, beyond the intrinsic value of such work, is that we found ourselves marching along with a local anarchist collective that had its own set of slogans, and... a marching band. (See linked article.) The whole atmosphere brought back the old days when such musical accompaniment, especially in the old ethnic neighborhoods, were a matter of course on May Day and other left occasions. Now here is the kicker- this group of anarchists marched under the banner of the Haymarket martyrs. That is enough to warm any old militant's heart. And, they were to a man and women, young, very young. Be still my heart, despite our political differences.

Now some may ask why are a confirmed Marxist and his comrades are walking on the same streets as those anarchist partisans. Wrong question, or better, wrong way to pose it. One of the real damaging effects that the variants of historical Stalinism have left on the international working class movement is the hard fact that different political tendencies within the movement are almost literally at war with each other, 24/7/365. To the eternal glee of the capitalists. On the political level those fights are correct. However on our common holidays, like May Day, we should be showing our united face to the international capitalists.

In that sense James P. Cannon, an old Wobblie (IWW), American Communist Party founder and Trotskyist leader had it right. One way he had it right was in his early leadership of the International Labor Defense, an organization dedicated to the struggle to free class war prisoners. All class war prisoners. The other was his long time friendships with those of other working class political tendencies like the great anarchist leader, Carlo Tresca. Hell, he even borrowed money off him. (And eventually paid it back.) I will not go and on about this but let’s leave it at this. After a spring of an anti-war agenda of what looked like a leftist variant of AARP meetings it was such nice to march with the kids. We will get back to the political struggle over differences soon enough.

*Those Who Fought For Our Communist Future Are Kindred Spirits- Honor Anarchist Leader Carlos Tresca

Click on the title to link to a "Wikipedia" entry for the great anarchist leader and Sacco and Vanzetti defender, Carlos Tresca.

Every January, as readers of this blog are now, hopefully, familiar with the international communist movement honors the 3 Ls-Lenin, Luxemburg and Leibknecht, fallen leaders of the early 20th century communist movement who died in this month (and whose untimely deaths left a huge, irreplaceable gap in the international leadership of that time). January is thus a time for us to reflect on the roots of our movement and those who brought us along this far. In order to give a fuller measure of honor to our fallen forbears this January, and in future Januarys, this space will honor others who have contributed in some way to the struggle for our communist future. That future classless society, however, will be the true memorial to their sacrifices.

Markin comment:

American Communist Party and International Labor Defense (the class struggle defense organization of the CP)leader, James P. Cannon, always spoke highly of Carlos Tresca and his work with the ILD. I might add, from other reading, that Tresca was the behind the scenes man who got the donations from the Italian community and provided the stalwart militants who went all out to save Sacco and Vanzetti. While the Brahmin-led liberal committees got the press it was these militants who formed the backbone of that defense. Has it ever been otherwise in class struggle defense cases?

Note on inclusion: As in other series on this site (“Labor’s Untold Story”, “Leaders Of The Bolshevik Revolution”, etc.) this year’s honorees do not exhaust the list of every possible communist worthy of the name. Nor, in fact, is the list limited to Bolshevik-style communists. There will be names included from other traditions (like anarchism, social democracy, the Diggers, Levellers, Jacobins, etc.) whose efforts contributed to the international struggle. Also, as was true of previous series this year’s efforts are no more than an introduction to these heroes of the class struggle. Future years will see more detailed information on each entry, particularly about many of the lesser known figures. Better yet, the reader can pick up the ball and run with it if he or she has more knowledge about the particular exploits of some communist militant, or to include a missing one.

Markin comment:

American Communist Party and International Labor Defense (the class struggle defense organization of the CP)leader, James P. Cannon, always spoke highly of Carlos Tresca and his work with the ILD. I might add, from other reading, that Tresca was the behind the scenes man who got the donations from the Italian community and provided the stalwart militants who went all out to save Sacco and Vanzetti. While the Brahmin-led liberal committees got the press it was these militants who formed the backbone of that defense. Has it ever been otherwise in class struggle defense cases?

*Films To While Away The Class Struggle By- A Film On Sacco And Vanzetti

*Click on the title to link to a "YouTube" film clip of a movie trailer of the Sacco and Vanzetti case (in Italian).


Recently I have begun to post entries under the headline- “Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By”-that will include progressive and labor-oriented songs that might be of general interest to the radical public. I have decided to do the same for some films that may perk that same interest under the title in this entry’s headline. In the future I expect to do the same for books under a similar heading.-Markin

*Those Who Fought For Our Communist Future Are Kindred Spirits- Honor Early IWW Organizer Vincent St. John

Click on the title to link to the James P. Cannon Internet Archive's copy of his appreciation of early IWW leader, Vincent St. John, from his 1955 "The IWW".

Every January, as readers of this blog are now, hopefully, familiar with the international communist movement honors the 3 Ls-Lenin, Luxemburg and Leibknecht, fallen leaders of the early 20th century communist movement who died in this month (and whose untimely deaths left a huge, irreplaceable gap in the international leadership of that time). January is thus a time for us to reflect on the roots of our movement and those who brought us along this far. In order to give a fuller measure of honor to our fallen forbears this January, and in future Januarys, this space will honor others who have contributed in some way to the struggle for our communist future. That future classless society, however, will be the true memorial to their sacrifices.

*****

Note on inclusion: As in other series on this site (“Labor’s Untold Story”, “Leaders Of The Bolshevik Revolution”, etc.) this year’s honorees do not exhaust the list of every possible communist worthy of the name. Nor, in fact, is the list limited to Bolshevik-style communists. There will be names included from other traditions (like anarchism, social democracy, the Diggers, Levellers, Jacobins, etc.) whose efforts contributed to the international struggle. Also, as was true of previous series this year’s efforts are no more than an introduction to these heroes of the class struggle. Future years will see more detailed information on each entry, particularly about many of the lesser known figures. Better yet, the reader can pick up the ball and run with it if he or she has more knowledge about the particular exploits of some communist militant, or to include a missing one.

*From The Archives Of The “Revolutionary History” Journal-Barricades in Barcelona

Click on the headline to link to the Revolutionary History Journal entry listed in the title.

Markin comment:

This is an excellent documentary source for today’s militants to “discover” the work of our forbears, whether we agree with their programs or not. Mainly not, but that does not negate the value of such work done under the pressure of revolutionary times. Hopefully we will do better when our time comes.

Markin comment:

There is no question that in the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s the prime driving force was the working class of Catalonia, and within that province its capital, Barcelona, was the key hot-bed for revolutionary action. The role of Barcelona thus is somewhat analogous to that of Petrograd (later Leningrad) in the Russian revolution of 1917 and deserves special attention from those of us later revolutionaries trying to draw the lessons of the hard-bitten defeat of the Spanish revolution. All the parties of the left (Socialist Party, Communist Party, left bourgeois radicals, Catalan nationalists, Anarchists, various ostensible Trotskyists, the POUM, and non-party trade unionists) had militants there, and had myriad associated social and political organizations that drove the revolution forward in the early days before the working class surrendered its hard-fought gains to the bourgeoisie or in Russian revolutionary, Leon Trotsky’s memorable phrase, “the shadow of the bourgeoisie.”

That said, the May Days in Barcelona take added importance for those of us who believe that in the ebb and flow of revolution that the actions taken there by the various parties, or more pertinently, those actions not taken by some, particularly the POUM (and left-anarchists) sealed the fate of the revolution and the struggle against Franco. A description of the flow of the events, a fairly correct description of the events if not of the political conclusions to be drawn, in those days by a militant who was there, Hugo Oehler, is an important aid in understanding what went wrong.

Note: Hugo Oehler was noting but a pain in the butt for Jim Cannon and others in the United States who were trying to coalesce a Trotskyist party that might be able to affect events that were rapidly unrolling here in the heart of the Great Depression. Nevertheless Cannon praised Oehler as a very good and honest mass worker. That meant a lot coming from Cannon. One does not have to accept Oehler’s political conclusions to appreciate this document. Moreover, his point about trying to link up with the Friends of Durritti is an important point that every militant in Barcelona should have been pursuing to break the masses of anarchist workers from the CNT-FAI. Time ran out before these links could be made decisive. But that is a commentary for another day. Read this (and Orwell and Souchy as well) to get a flavor of what was missed in those May days.

*Labor's Untold Story- A Thwarted Bourgeois Politician- Illinois Governor Altgeld

Click on to title in order to link to Wikipedia's entry for famed Governor Altgeld of Illinois (who pardoned the surviving Haymarket Martyrs).

Every Month Is Labor History Month

This Commentary is part of a series under the following general title: Labor’s Untold Story- Reclaiming Our Labor History In Order To Fight Another Day-And Win!

As a first run through, and in some cases until I can get enough other sources in order to make a decent presentation, I will start with short entries on each topic that I will eventually go into greater detail about. Or, better yet, take my suggested topic and run with it yourself.

*Sacco And Vanzetti- The Case That Will Not Die, Nor Should It

Click on title to link to Sacco and Vanzetti commemoration site.

Below is a repost of the Sacco and Vanzetti post for 2008. The main points of the book review still tell the tale well about the fate of these class-war prisoners.

Sacco and Vanzetti- Class War Prisoners in the Dock, Circa 1920

BOOK REVIEW

Honor the Memory of Sacco and Vanzetti on this the 82st Anniversary of their execution by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Sacco and Vanzetti, Bruce Watson, Viking, New York, 2007

I like to put each item about the Sacco and Vanzetti case that I review in historical context with this well-worn standard first paragraph of mine. It, I believe, holds up today as in the past- Those familiar with the radical movement know that at least once in every generation a political criminal case comes up that defines that era. One thinks of the Haymarket Martyrs in the 19th century, the Scottsboro Boys in the 1930's, the Rosenburgs in the post-World War II Cold War period and today Mumia Abu-Jamal. In America after World War I when the Attorney General Palmer-driven ‘red scare’ brought the federal government’s vendetta against foreigners, immigrants and militant labor fighters to a white heat that generation's case was probably the most famous of them all, Sacco and Vanzetti. The exposure of the tensions within American society that came to the surface as a result of that case is the subject of the book by Professor Bruce Watson under review here.

In the year 2008 one, like myself, who openly proclaims partisanship for the heroic memory of Sacco and Vanzetti when looking for a book to help instruct a new generation about the case is not after all this time afraid of a little partisanship by its author. One is also looking to see if, given advances in modern criminology and technology, those sources have presented any new information that would change the judgments of history. That is apparently not the case with Professor Watson’s book. It is rather another garden variety narrative of the events that have been covered elsewhere by partisans on either side of the divide on the question of the guilt or innocence of the pair. Nevertheless it is good to have an updated narrative so that the youth will know that the pressing issues around the case have not gone away.

Professor Watson has presented a good description of the events that led up to the Sacco and Vanzetti trial in a Dedham, Massachusetts court presided over by an old WASP figure, Judge Webster Thayer. He details the hard work lives of the two Italian immigrants, the problems with foreigners especially South Europeans like them trying to gain a toehold in America, the future troubles to be brought on by their anarchist beliefs and more damagingly their departure for Mexico in 1917 to avoid being drafted into the American army after its entry into World War I.

Professor Watson further links the personal trials and tribulation of Sacco and Vanzetti with the general political atmosphere after World War I with its wave of anarchist bombings, the victory of the Russian Revolution and the response of capitalist America with the Attorney-General Palmer-led “ Red Scare, Part I”. He further details the South Braintree payroll robbery that set in motion the events of the next seven years that would bring world-wide attention to the cause of the two beleaguered anarchists. He gives the factual events of the day of the robbery and double murders, the subsequent search for the robbers, the narrowing of the chase to these two who were found to be armed at a later date in a very different context and their arrest and indictments for murder.

Needless to say any narrative of the Sacco and Vanzetti case needs to pay close attention to the trial itself, the personalities of the players and the evidence. In the background one has to look at the state of the law, especially its procedural aspects, at that time concerning capital punishment and further the social climate against foreigners, specifically Italians here. Watson, more than most accounts, gives special emphasis to chief trial defense lawyer Fred Moore and his various maneuvers, intrigues and, frankly, mistakes.

Of course, the heart of the book is an account of the appeals both legal and political throughout the seven year period. That included various strategies from calls for gubernatorial clemency to mass strikes by labor so the whole litany of class struggle defense policies gets a workout in the case. Although Professor Watson does a creditable job of describing these efforts as far as he goes I object, on political grounds, to his short shrift of the work of the Communist International and its class defense organization the International Labor Defense in publicizing the case. Who do you think brought the masses of workers out world-wide? It was not those Brahmin ladies on Beacon Hill, well-intentioned or not. This is certainly a subject for further comment by any reader of these lines.

The other point that I object to is Watson’s agnostic approach to the question of the guilt or innocence of Sacco and Vanzetti. At this far remove it is not necessary to be skittish about the question of their guilt or innocence in a legal sense. There is, obviously, not quite the sense of urgency of the call today for Mumia Abu Jamal’s freedom rather than retrial. However, although 80 years separate the two cases there is a steady tendency to limit justice in these cases to calls for retrial. However, in both cases the parties were innocent so the appropriate call would have been and is for freedom. This political ostrich act by Professor Watson, allegedly in the interest of being ‘objective’ and 'letting the new generation decide for itself', does a tremendous disservice to the memories of these class war fighters.

Nevertheless, this is a worthy book to use as a primer toward understanding the background to that long ago case. The end notes are helpful as is the bibliography for further research. Additionally, unlike Professor Watson’s excellent book Bread and Roses that I have previously reviewed in this space here he stays more closely with the subject and avoids bringing in every possible historical fact that might tangentially relate to the case. As always, until ultimate justice in done in the Sacco and Vanzetti case honor their memories today.

*Artist's Corner- Ben Shahn's "The Passion Of Sacco And Vanzetti"

Click on the headline to link to a viewing of artist Ben Shahn's The Passion Of Sacco And Vanzetti.

Markin comment:

As we commemorate the 83rd anniversary of the execution of Sacco and Vanzetti by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in 1927 this comment is easy. Those, like artist Ben Shahn, who honor Sacco and Vanzetti are kindred spirits.

*Remembering Sacco And Vanzetti In Song- A Guest Commentary From Bob Feldman 68

Click on title to link to Bob Feldman 68 commentary and song about the famous Sacco and Vanzetti case. A case, by the way, which is reflected in a blog on the Internet over eight years later, of the powerful creative talents from Edna St Vincent Millay, John Dos Passos, Dorothy Parker, Ben Shahn and so on who have been dramatically affected by the power of this two heroic anarchists.

*On May Day-The Anarchist Tradition In The International Working Class Movement-For Sacco and Vanzetti

Repost

Friday, May 01, 2009

*On May Day-The Anarchist Tradition In The International Working Class Movement


Markin comment:

Today, May Day, is officially celebrated extensively throughout the world by the international working class to commemorate labor’s struggles, although ironically (and sadly) not in the United States. One of the purposes for its celebration back in the late 1800’s was to highlight the struggle (the continuing struggle, I might add) for an eight hour work day. This day also commemorates Chicago’s Haymarket Martyrs, working class anarchists who were railroaded by the American justice system for being workers while ‘foreign’ and for being workers while “anarchists”.

Although this writer long ago abandoned his flirtation with the anarchist movement that had held some attraction to him in his youth and has become, as a life-long Marxist, a strong political opponent of that movement today seems an appropriate time to look back at its not altogether shabby history. The book reviewed below, Professor Joll’s “The Anarchists”, was the first book that I read when I was moving away from mainstream liberalism and looking for a revolutionary road to change society. As with all such older works (originally written in 1964) additional research is necessary to bring the story up to date (especially as it ends with the anarchist experience in Spain in the 1930’s). Nevertheless this work still stands as a good primer for the early history of the anarchist movement, its various trends and tendencies, its controversies with other working class movements, especially Marxism, and its shortcomings.

Book Review

The Anarchists, James Joll, Little, Brown and Company, Boston 1964

It is rather ironic to be discussing old time communistic working class political tendencies on a day, May Day, that celebrates the struggles of various leftist, anti- capitalist tendencies, especially Marxism and Anarchism the latter whose history is outlined in the book reviewed here, in the international working class movement. The irony is that, sadly, for all intends and purposes, in the main, the international working class movement has abandoned (at least temporarily) the struggle for socialism of any kind as part of its day to day struggles. Nonetheless, for those who seek to break out of the impasse of international capitalism a fresh look at these tendencies is warranted. I have reviewed various Marxist-oriented movements elsewhere in this space. Today Professor Joll's brief look at the history of the early anarchist movement (up to the Spanish Civil War) is a good primer for getting a handle on that political philosophy.

That there has never been a unitary working class response to capitalism and industrialization is a weakness. That there have been various left-wing tendencies fighting for political leadership of the class is not so. During most of the 20th century the great fights were between the various Marxist-oriented reformist Social Democrats and the ostensibly revolutionary Communists. However the great fights in the late 19th century were between the Marxists and anarchists of various persuasions. Those fights are extensively detailed by Professor Joll here. Given the reemergence over the past decade or various, mainly non-working class-centered, anarchist tendencies, especially of the "propaganda of the deed" variety, it is important for today's labor militants looking for some socialist political direction to learn (or learn more) about.

Professor Joll does some yeoman's work here describing the antecedents of the working class movement, especially the key trends that trace their lineage back to the 18th century French Revolution and the Enlightenment. It is the long term reaction to the failure of that revolution, the weakness of its political organization and its aborted libertarian aims to redress plebeian grievances that provided an opening to anarchist thought. Joll details the various plans, blueprints, panaceas and what not that floated thought the pre-1848 European political milieu (from Godwin to Weitling to the "Communist Manifesto") as the industrial form of organization took hold in Western society. In short, the revolutions of 1848 represented a last gasp outer limit that the bourgeoisie was willing to go to establish its rule in alliance with the working class under the sign of the French Revolution. Marx drew one conclusion from that understanding- the need to create independent working class political organization- the various anarchist trends drew others (independent communes, political withdrawal, permanent insurrection, etc.). This is where the great fight starts.

If mid-19th century Europe was a hot bed for various socialist-oriented theories those theories got hashed out through personalities as much as program. This is the age of Marx, Engels and LaSalle but also of the great anarchist thinkers Proudhon and Bakunin whose names are forever associated with the early anarchist movement, for good or ill. Those thinkers also represented, in embryo, the two great trends within anarchy that fought it out, mainly on European soil, for poltical dominance over most of the next century. If socialism has its reformist and revolutionary wings the same is true of the anarchism movement with its break between what I will call "philosophical anarchists" and "deed anarchists" that reflect the different perspectives of Proudhon and Bakunin. As with the socialist movement there is some overlap but one does not have be all that politically sophisticated to be able to distinguish between where the two lines of thought were heading.

With the defeat of the short-lived and bloodily defeated Paris Commune of 1871, an event that is commemorated with reverence in both communist and anarchist movements, although each drew different conclusions from its demise, European bourgeois society went through a period of relative stabilization with a vast expansion of the industrial enterprise. Needless to say such periods try the souls of revolutionaries, great and small. Part of this frustration worked itself out in the anarchist movement with, on the one hand, a `quietist' turn toward intellectual schemes and literary propaganda work (always appropriate, by the way) by the likes of Kropotkin, and on the other, the emergence of an individualist response by, at times, heroic anarchists committed to "propaganda by the deed".

During this period (about twenty years or so) there were some very spectacular assassinations, and attempted assassinations, of various American and European bourgeois political figures, most famously in America Alexander Berkman's (the fiery anarchist polemicist and orator Emma Goldman's companion of the time) attempt on steel magnate Ford Frick and the successful assassination of President McKinley. Also, needless to say, the wheels of bourgeois society continued working with little interruption. I would point out that the best socialists and communists have always defended such heroic, if misguided, actions by the "anarchists of the deed" while pointing out this truth- It's the system that had to go not individual representatives no matter how fitting for such actions, brothers and sisters.

If , as mentioned above, the great political battles within the international working class in the post-World War I period were between reformist socialists and revolutionary communists before that war the great fight was between various anarchist tendencies in the working class, mainly anarcho-syndicalists, and socialists. That fight reached a fever pitch around the question of defense of the Russian Revolution of 1917. In theory, at least, both anarchism and communism posit the replacement of the role of state as a "cop" with a new role as mere administrator of things (at most). The question is how to get there and how long it will take to place that possibility on the historic agenda. Here the Paris Commune experience is instructive. The anarchists, and here I admit complete solidarity with the Marxist side of the argument, apparently learned nothing from the decentralized confusion created in that revolutionary process, including the fundamental question of defense of the revolution. The Marxists, and in the case of the Russian Revolution its Bolshevik wing, took those lessons to heart and created a political/military party, worked through soviets (workers councils) and defended the revolution with a Red Army, arms in hand.

Whatever happened later in the Soviet experience and, as a supporter of the great Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky I find plenty to discuss, the Russian Revolution was the great test of the pre-war competing socialist political philosophies and that event split the anarchist movement, as well. Some like Victor Serge, Alfred Rosmer in Europe, "Big Bill" Haywood and some elements of the American-based Industrial Workers of The World (IWW) went over to the Communist International. Inside Russia, depending on the time, anarchist supported the revolution by going over to the Bolsheviks or, during the civil war formed independent "black flag" armies like those of Mahkno in the Ukraine that were generally pro-Soviet, or in the latter period became military opponents of the Soviet regime, most notably at Kronstadt in 1921. Professor Joll outlines the details here although one really needs to read more on this by one of the leading Russian anarchists of the time, Voline's "History of The Russian Anarchists". A mere paragraph here can only alert serious pro-labor militants to the need to work through the political differences. That the anarchist position came up short in Russia does not negate the need today to deal politically with the fringe reemergence of these tendencies. I would only add here that when the anarchists are reduced to talking about the "virtues" of Mahkno and of the Kronstadt sailors in 1921 there is something of an impediment to any fruitful discussion. But so be it.

Professor Joll's last and most important section, at least for today's militant's trying to sort through the questions of the state and revolutionary theory, is the Spanish Civil War of 1936-39. In the heat of revolution and civil war all theories get thoroughly tested and it was here that the anarchist attitude toward the state, any state, floundered. Although I have discussed the key questions of the Spanish Civil War elsewhere in this space those questions have been centered on the disputes among socialists and communists and the crisis of revolutionary leadership provoked by the civil war. Needless to say, in Spain at least, no discussion is complete without discussing the role of the anarchists, the largest tendency with political authority within the working class and among the landless rural laborers.

While a full discussion is beyond the scope of this book, and of this review, to sum up the anarchist experience in a nutshell- while the anarchists tried to ignore the state the state did not ignore them. When the deal went down they supported the state- the bourgeois state at a time, in the summer of 1936, when they and no other political formation could have taken political power. And made it stick. Instead the anarchist and anarchist-influenced organizations like the FAI (Iberian Anarchist Federation) and CNT (National Federation of Workers) passed the power back to the bourgeoisie (or their agents) and settled for a few (short-lived) ministerial posts. I hope I have provoked some argument here because now in the early 21st century that question of the state is again placed on the agenda for today's anarchists of the second mobilization. It is a question that will not go away for anarchists, socialists or communists alike. Read Professor Joll's book to get a primer on the historical contours of these disputes.

********

As is always appropriate on international working class holidays and days of remembrance here is the song most closely associated with that movement “The Internationale” in English, French and German. I will not vouch for the closeness of the translations but certainly of the spirit. Workers Of The World Unite!

The Internationale [variant words in square brackets]

Arise ye workers [starvelings] from your slumbers
Arise ye prisoners of want
For reason in revolt now thunders
And at last ends the age of cant.
Away with all your superstitions
Servile masses arise, arise
We'll change henceforth [forthwith] the old tradition [conditions]
And spurn the dust to win the prize.

So comrades, come rally
And the last fight let us face
The Internationale unites the human race.
So comrades, come rally
And the last fight let us face
The Internationale unites the human race.

No more deluded by reaction
On tyrants only we'll make war
The soldiers too will take strike action
They'll break ranks and fight no more
And if those cannibals keep trying
To sacrifice us to their pride
They soon shall hear the bullets flying
We'll shoot the generals on our own side.

No saviour from on high delivers
No faith have we in prince or peer
Our own right hand the chains must shiver
Chains of hatred, greed and fear
E'er the thieves will out with their booty [give up their booty]
And give to all a happier lot.
Each [those] at the forge must do their duty
And we'll strike while the iron is hot.




________________________________________

L'Internationale

Debout les damnés de la terre
Debout les forçats de la faim
La raison tonne en son cratère
C'est l'éruption de la fin
Du passe faisons table rase
Foules, esclaves, debout, debout
Le monde va changer de base
Nous ne sommes rien, soyons tout

C'est la lutte finale
Groupons-nous, et demain (bis)
L'Internationale
Sera le genre humain

Il n'est pas de sauveurs suprêmes
Ni Dieu, ni César, ni tribun
Producteurs, sauvons-nous nous-mêmes
Décrétons le salut commun
Pour que le voleur rende gorge
Pour tirer l'esprit du cachot
Soufflons nous-mêmes notre forge
Battons le fer quand il est chaud

L'état comprime et la loi triche
L'impôt saigne le malheureux
Nul devoir ne s'impose au riche
Le droit du pauvre est un mot creux
C'est assez, languir en tutelle
L'égalité veut d'autres lois
Pas de droits sans devoirs dit-elle
Egaux, pas de devoirs sans droits

Hideux dans leur apothéose
Les rois de la mine et du rail
Ont-ils jamais fait autre chose
Que dévaliser le travail
Dans les coffres-forts de la bande
Ce qu'il a crée s'est fondu
En décrétant qu'on le lui rende
Le peuple ne veut que son dû.

Les rois nous saoulaient de fumées
Paix entre nous, guerre aux tyrans
Appliquons la grève aux armées
Crosse en l'air, et rompons les rangs
S'ils s'obstinent, ces cannibales
A faire de nous des héros
Ils sauront bientôt que nos balles
Sont pour nos propres généraux

Ouvriers, paysans, nous sommes
Le grand parti des travailleurs
La terre n'appartient qu'aux hommes
L'oisif ira loger ailleurs
Combien, de nos chairs se repaissent
Mais si les corbeaux, les vautours
Un de ces matins disparaissent
Le soleil brillera toujours.


________________________________________

Die Internationale

Wacht auf, Verdammte dieser Erde,
die stets man noch zum Hungern zwingt!
Das Recht wie Glut im Kraterherde
nun mit Macht zum Durchbruch dringt.
Reinen Tisch macht mit dem Bedranger!
Heer der Sklaven, wache auf!
Ein nichts zu sein, tragt es nicht langer
Alles zu werden, stromt zuhauf!

Volker, hort die Signale!
Auf, zum letzten Gefecht!
Die Internationale
Erkampft das Menschenrecht

Es rettet uns kein hoh'res Wesen
kein Gott, kein Kaiser, noch Tribun
Uns aus dem Elend zu erlosen
konnen wir nur selber tun!
Leeres Wort: des armen Rechte,
Leeres Wort: des Reichen Pflicht!
Unmundigt nennt man uns Knechte,
duldet die Schmach langer nicht!

In Stadt und Land, ihr Arbeitsleute,
wir sind die starkste Partei'n
Die Mussigganger schiebt beiseite!
Diese Welt muss unser sein;
Unser Blut sei nicht mehr der Raben
und der machtigen Geier Frass!
Erst wenn wir sie vertrieben haben
dann scheint die Sonn' ohn' Unterlass!

*Remember The Fall Of Madrid And Barcelona, 1939

Click on title to link to the Leon Trotsky Internet Archive's article by Leon Trotsky, "The Lessons Of Spain: The Last Warning".

Commentary

This is the 70th Anniversary of the fall of Madrid and Barcelona (essentially unopposed militarily by the Republican forces)in the Spanish Civil War. That event effectively ended the war and started the forty year Franco “night of the long knives”. Normally, we of the international workers movement do not ‘celebrate’ such abject failures as defeat in Spain. However, as noted in many entries in this space, the lessons of Spain should be etched into the brain of every serious militant. Why? We could have won there and changed the whole course of history, at least Western history. The reasons for that failure are legion but I would urge every serious militant and every radical to read, for starters, the Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky’s “Lessons of The Spanish Civil War” at his Marxist Internet Archive site. We can argue out our differences on strategy from there.

*Our Flag Is Still Red-On Marching With The Black And Red Anarchists On Boston May Day 2010

Click on the headline to link to a "Boston IndyMedia" posting calling for a Red Black Anarchist contingent at the 2010 Boston May Day March and Rally.

Markin comment:


Over the past several years celebrations of our international working class holiday, May Day, not only have we paid tribute to the Chicago Haymarket anarchist martyrs and the struggle for the eight hour day but the hard pressed struggle against the denial of immigrant rights and the attempt by Tea Party-types and other to “close the door” to immigration. This addition reflects the increasingly important role that Hispanics and other militants from the international working class milieu play in the left wing of the American labor movement. Thus, the call for full citizenship rights for those who make it here is an appropriate one on this day.

With this thought in mind I, and a few of the local anti-imperialist activists that I work with marched under that slogan in the 2010 Boston May Day festivities as well as the slogan for the modern equivalent of the eight hour day, especially in these times- “30 For 40”. That slogan, for those not familiar with it, is an algebraic formula, long associated with the Trotskyist movement, although not by any means exclusively raised by us. All we have proposed by the call is the eminently rational solution to unemployment (and underemployment) by spreading the work around so that all have work, and a living wage. Of course the catch is this- it ain’t going to happen under capitalist and so the question of socialism and central planning are starkly posed. And that, after all, is the idea.

What makes all of the above political lead up to my main point interesting, beyond the intrinsic value of such work, is that we found ourselves marching along with a local anarchist collective that had its own set of slogans, and... a marching band. (See linked article.) The whole atmosphere brought back the old days when such musical accompaniment, especially in the old ethnic neighborhoods, were a matter of course on May Day and other left occasions. Now here is the kicker- this group of anarchists marched under the banner of the Haymarket martyrs. That is enough to warm any old militant's heart. And, they were to a man and women, young, very young. Be still my heart, despite our political differences.

Now some may ask why are a confirmed Marxist and his comrades are walking on the same streets as those anarchist partisans. Wrong question, or better, wrong way to pose it. One of the real damaging effects that the variants of historical Stalinism have left on the international working class movement is the hard fact that different political tendencies within the movement are almost literally at war with each other, 24/7/365. To the eternal glee of the capitalists. On the political level those fights are correct. However on our common holidays, like May Day, we should be showing our united face to the international capitalists.

In that sense James P. Cannon, an old Wobblie (IWW), American Communist Party founder and Trotskyist leader had it right. One way he had it right was in his early leadership of the International Labor Defense, an organization dedicated to the struggle to free class war prisoners. All class war prisoners. The other was his long time friendships with those of other working class political tendencies like the great anarchist leader, Carlo Tresca. Hell, he even borrowed money off him. (And eventually paid it back.) I will not go and on about this but let’s leave it at this. After a spring of an anti-war agenda of what looked like a leftist variant of AARP meetings it was such nice to march with the kids. We will get back to the political struggle over differences soon enough.

*For Sacco And Vanzetti -On May Day-The Anarchist Tradition In The International Working Class Movement

Click On Title To Link To BAAM Newsletter (local Boston anarchist collective) site for two good introductory articles about the labor struggles of the 19th century and a biographic sketch of the heroic anarchist (and later American Communist Party member) Lucy Parsons, widow of Haymarket martyr Albert Parson and revolutionary fighter in her own right. While my sympathies are clearly with the communist wing on the left wing continuum, especially the struggles led by Leon Trotsky to save the heritage of the Russian Revolution in the 1920’s and 1930’s, the main points of these articles are made by kindred spirits that all labor militants can stand in solidarity with as part of our common labor history.

Commentary

Today, May Day, is officially celebrated extensively throughout the world by the international working class to commemorate labor’s struggles, although ironically (and sadly) not in the United States. One of the purposes for its celebration back in the late 1800’s was to highlight the struggle (the continuing struggle, I might add) for an eight hour work day. This day also commemorates Chicago’s Haymarket Martyrs, working class anarchists who were railroaded by the American justice system for being workers while ‘foreign’ and for being workers while “anarchists”.

Although this writer long ago abandoned his flirtation with the anarchist movement that had held some attraction to him in his youth and has become, as a life-long Marxist, a strong political opponent of that movement today seems an appropriate time to look back at its not altogether shabby history. The book reviewed below, Professor Joll’s “The Anarchists”, was the first book that I read when I was moving away from mainstream liberalism and looking for a revolutionary road to change society. As with all such older works (originally written in 1964) additional research is necessary to bring the story up to date (especially as it ends with the anarchist experience in Spain in the 1930’s). Nevertheless this work still stands as a good primer for the early history of the anarchist movement, its various trends and tendencies, its controversies with other working class movements, especially Marxism, and its shortcomings.

Book Review

The Anarchists, James Joll, Little, Brown and Company, Boston 1964

It is rather ironic to be discussing old time communistic working class political tendencies on a day, May Day, that celebrates the struggles of various leftist, anti- capitalist tendencies, especially Marxism and Anarchism the latter whose history is outlined in the book reviewed here, in the international working class movement. The irony is that, sadly, for all intends and purposes, in the main, the international working class movement has abandoned (at least temporarily) the struggle for socialism of any kind as part of its day to day struggles. Nonetheless, for those who seek to break out of the impasse of international capitalism a fresh look at these tendencies is warranted. I have reviewed various Marxist-oriented movements elsewhere in this space. Today Professor Joll's brief look at the history of the early anarchist movement (up to the Spanish Civil War) is a good primer for getting a handle on that political philosophy.

That there has never been a unitary working class response to capitalism and industrialization is a weakness. That there have been various left-wing tendencies fighting for political leadership of the class is not so. During most of the 20th century the great fights were between the various Marxist-oriented reformist Social Democrats and the ostensibly revolutionary Communists. However the great fights in the late 19th century were between the Marxists and anarchists of various persuasions. Those fights are extensively detailed by Professor Joll here. Given the reemergence over the past decade or various, mainly non-working class-centered, anarchist tendencies, especially of the "propaganda of the deed" variety, it is important for today's labor militants looking for some socialist political direction to learn (or learn more) about.

Professor Joll does some yeoman's work here describing the antecedents of the working class movement, especially the key trends that trace their lineage back to the 18th century French Revolution and the Enlightenment. It is the long term reaction to the failure of that revolution, the weakness of its political organization and its aborted libertarian aims to redress plebeian grievances that provided an opening to anarchist thought. Joll details the various plans, blueprints, panaceas and what not that floated thought the pre-1848 European political milieu (from Godwin to Weitling to the "Communist Manifesto") as the industrial form of organization took hold in Western society. In short, the revolutions of 1848 represented a last gasp outer limit that the bourgeoisie was willing to go to establish its rule in alliance with the working class under the sign of the French Revolution. Marx drew one conclusion from that understanding- the need to create independent working class political organization- the various anarchist trends drew others (independent communes, political withdrawal, permanent insurrection, etc.). This is where the great fight starts.

If mid-19th century Europe was a hot bed for various socialist-oriented theories those theories got hashed out through personalities as much as program. This is the age of Marx, Engels and LaSalle but also of the great anarchist thinkers Proudhon and Bakunin whose names are forever associated with the early anarchist movement, for good or ill. Those thinkers also represented, in embryo, the two great trends within anarchy that fought it out, mainly on European soil, for poltical dominance over most of the next century. If socialism has its reformist and revolutionary wings the same is true of the anarchism movement with its break between what I will call "philosophical anarchists" and "deed anarchists" that reflect the different perspectives of Proudhon and Bakunin. As with the socialist movement there is some overlap but one does not have be all that politically sophisticated to be able to distinguish between where the two lines of thought were heading.

With the defeat of the short-lived and bloodily defeated Paris Commune of 1871, an event that is commemorated with reverence in both communist and anarchist movements, although each drew different conclusions from its demise, European bourgeois society went through a period of relative stabilization with a vast expansion of the industrial enterprise. Needless to say such periods try the souls of revolutionaries, great and small. Part of this frustration worked itself out in the anarchist movement with, on the one hand, a `quietist' turn toward intellectual schemes and literary propaganda work (always appropriate, by the way) by the likes of Kropotkin, and on the other, the emergence of an individualist response by, at times, heroic anarchists committed to "propaganda by the deed".

During this period (about twenty years or so) there were some very spectacular assassinations, and attempted assassinations, of various American and European bourgeois political figures, most famously in America Alexander Berkman's (the fiery anarchist polemicist and orator Emma Goldman's companion of the time) attempt on steel magnate Ford Frick and the successful assassination of President McKinley. Also, needless to say, the wheels of bourgeois society continued working with little interruption. I would point out that the best socialists and communists have always defended such heroic, if misguided, actions by the "anarchists of the deed" while pointing out this truth- It's the system that had to go not individual representatives no matter how fitting for such actions, brothers and sisters.

If , as mentioned above, the great political battles within the international working class in the post-World War I period were between reformist socialists and revolutionary communists before that war the great fight was between various anarchist tendencies in the working class, mainly anarcho-syndicalists, and socialists. That fight reached a fever pitch around the question of defense of the Russian Revolution of 1917. In theory, at least, both anarchism and communism posit the replacement of the role of state as a "cop" with a new role as mere administrator of things (at most). The question is how to get there and how long it will take to place that possibility on the historic agenda. Here the Paris Commune experience is instructive. The anarchists, and here I admit complete solidarity with the Marxist side of the argument, apparently learned nothing from the decentralized confusion created in that revolutionary process, including the fundamental question of defense of the revolution. The Marxists, and in the case of the Russian Revolution its Bolshevik wing, took those lessons to heart and created a political/military party, worked through soviets (workers councils) and defended the revolution with a Red Army, arms in hand.

Whatever happened later in the Soviet experience and, as a supporter of the great Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky I find plenty to discuss, the Russian Revolution was the great test of the pre-war competing socialist political philosophies and that event split the anarchist movement, as well. Some like Victor Serge, Alfred Rosmer in Europe, "Big Bill" Haywood and some elements of the American-based Industrial Workers of The World (IWW) went over to the Communist International. Inside Russia, depending on the time, anarchist supported the revolution by going over to the Bolsheviks or, during the civil war formed independent "black flag" armies like those of Mahkno in the Ukraine that were generally pro-Soviet, or in the latter period became military opponents of the Soviet regime, most notably at Kronstadt in 1921. Professor Joll outlines the details here although one really needs to read more on this by one of the leading Russian anarchists of the time, Voline's "History of The Russian Anarchists". A mere paragraph here can only alert serious pro-labor militants to the need to work through the political differences. That the anarchist position came up short in Russia does not negate the need today to deal politically with the fringe reemergence of these tendencies. I would only add here that when the anarchists are reduced to talking about the "virtues" of Mahkno and of the Kronstadt sailors in 1921 there is something of an impediment to any fruitful discussion. But so be it.

Professor Joll's last and most important section, at least for today's militant's trying to sort through the questions of the state and revolutionary theory, is the Spanish Civil War of 1936-39. In the heat of revolution and civil war all theories get thoroughly tested and it was here that the anarchist attitude toward the state, any state, floundered. Although I have discussed the key questions of the Spanish Civil War elsewhere in this space those questions have been centered on the disputes among socialists and communists and the crisis of revolutionary leadership provoked by the civil war. Needless to say, in Spain at least, no discussion is complete without discussing the role of the anarchists, the largest tendency with political authority within the working class and among the landless rural laborers.

While a full discussion is beyond the scope of this book, and of this review, to sum up the anarchist experience in a nutshell- while the anarchists tried to ignore the state the state did not ignore them. When the deal went down they supported the state- the bourgeois state at a time, in the summer of 1936, when they and no other political formation could have taken political power. And made it stick. Instead the anarchist and anarchist-influenced organizations like the FAI (Iberian Anarchist Federation) and CNT (National Federation of Workers) passed the power back to the bourgeoisie (or their agents) and settled for a few (short-lived) ministerial posts. I hope I have provoked some argument here because now in the early 21st century that question of the state is again placed on the agenda for today's anarchists of the second mobilization. It is a question that will not go away for anarchists, socialists or communists alike. Read Professor Joll's book to get a primer on the historical contours of these disputes.

********

As is always appropriate on international working class holidays and days of remembrance here is the song most closely associated with that movement “The Internationale” in English, French and German. I will not vouch for the closeness of the translations but certainly of the spirit. Workers Of The World Unite!

The Internationale [variant words in square brackets]

Arise ye workers [starvelings] from your slumbers
Arise ye prisoners of want
For reason in revolt now thunders
And at last ends the age of cant.
Away with all your superstitions
Servile masses arise, arise
We'll change henceforth [forthwith] the old tradition [conditions]
And spurn the dust to win the prize.

So comrades, come rally
And the last fight let us face
The Internationale unites the human race.
So comrades, come rally
And the last fight let us face
The Internationale unites the human race.

No more deluded by reaction
On tyrants only we'll make war
The soldiers too will take strike action
They'll break ranks and fight no more
And if those cannibals keep trying
To sacrifice us to their pride
They soon shall hear the bullets flying
We'll shoot the generals on our own side.

No saviour from on high delivers
No faith have we in prince or peer
Our own right hand the chains must shiver
Chains of hatred, greed and fear
E'er the thieves will out with their booty [give up their booty]
And give to all a happier lot.
Each [those] at the forge must do their duty
And we'll strike while the iron is hot.




________________________________________

L'Internationale

Debout les damnés de la terre
Debout les forçats de la faim
La raison tonne en son cratère
C'est l'éruption de la fin
Du passe faisons table rase
Foules, esclaves, debout, debout
Le monde va changer de base
Nous ne sommes rien, soyons tout

C'est la lutte finale
Groupons-nous, et demain (bis)
L'Internationale
Sera le genre humain

Il n'est pas de sauveurs suprêmes
Ni Dieu, ni César, ni tribun
Producteurs, sauvons-nous nous-mêmes
Décrétons le salut commun
Pour que le voleur rende gorge
Pour tirer l'esprit du cachot
Soufflons nous-mêmes notre forge
Battons le fer quand il est chaud

L'état comprime et la loi triche
L'impôt saigne le malheureux
Nul devoir ne s'impose au riche
Le droit du pauvre est un mot creux
C'est assez, languir en tutelle
L'égalité veut d'autres lois
Pas de droits sans devoirs dit-elle
Egaux, pas de devoirs sans droits

Hideux dans leur apothéose
Les rois de la mine et du rail
Ont-ils jamais fait autre chose
Que dévaliser le travail
Dans les coffres-forts de la bande
Ce qu'il a crée s'est fondu
En décrétant qu'on le lui rende
Le peuple ne veut que son dû.

Les rois nous saoulaient de fumées
Paix entre nous, guerre aux tyrans
Appliquons la grève aux armées
Crosse en l'air, et rompons les rangs
S'ils s'obstinent, ces cannibales
A faire de nous des héros
Ils sauront bientôt que nos balles
Sont pour nos propres généraux

Ouvriers, paysans, nous sommes
Le grand parti des travailleurs
La terre n'appartient qu'aux hommes
L'oisif ira loger ailleurs
Combien, de nos chairs se repaissent
Mais si les corbeaux, les vautours
Un de ces matins disparaissent
Le soleil brillera toujours.


________________________________________

Die Internationale

Wacht auf, Verdammte dieser Erde,
die stets man noch zum Hungern zwingt!
Das Recht wie Glut im Kraterherde
nun mit Macht zum Durchbruch dringt.
Reinen Tisch macht mit dem Bedranger!
Heer der Sklaven, wache auf!
Ein nichts zu sein, tragt es nicht langer
Alles zu werden, stromt zuhauf!

Volker, hort die Signale!
Auf, zum letzten Gefecht!
Die Internationale
Erkampft das Menschenrecht

Es rettet uns kein hoh'res Wesen
kein Gott, kein Kaiser, noch Tribun
Uns aus dem Elend zu erlosen
konnen wir nur selber tun!
Leeres Wort: des armen Rechte,
Leeres Wort: des Reichen Pflicht!
Unmundigt nennt man uns Knechte,
duldet die Schmach langer nicht!

In Stadt und Land, ihr Arbeitsleute,
wir sind die starkste Partei'n
Die Mussigganger schiebt beiseite!
Diese Welt muss unser sein;
Unser Blut sei nicht mehr der Raben
und der machtigen Geier Frass!
Erst wenn wir sie vertrieben haben
dann scheint die Sonn' ohn' Unterlass!