World Labor Unity/Chapter 3

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
World Labor Unity
by Scott Nearing
Chapter 3: The International Federation of Trade Unions (I.F.T.U.—Amsterdam)
4206739World Labor Unity — Chapter 3: The International Federation of Trade Unions (I.F.T.U.—Amsterdam)Scott Nearing

III. The International Federation of Trade Unions
(I.F.T.U.—Amsterdam)

Up to the time of the World War, international trade union organizations had never been much more than offices for the collection of information and conferences for the exchange of opinion.

The International Workingmen's Association, organized in 1864, had broken the ground for the later and larger associations. The miners formed an international in 1890. There were twelve such organizations in existence before 1900, and in 1914 there were 32 trade union internationals.[1]

At Copenhagen, in 1901, the International Trade Union Secretariat was organized. In 1909 it was joined by the American Federation of Labor. This International held regular conferences, and in 1913 decided to found an International Federation of Trade Unions. The membership of the I.F.T.U. in 1913 included about seven and a half million workers in 21 countries. The activities of the I.F.T.U. were to be confined largely to the collection of statistics and the issuing of reports. The war hampered the work of the I.F.T.U., but in 1919 delegates representing 14 nations gathered at Amsterdam and reconstituted the Federation.[2]

Before the war broke out there were great peace demonstrations all over Europe, with many pledges of international solidarity. August 1, 1914, found the workers throughout Europe armed and prepared to slaughter one another. Protests were feeble and ineffective. The masses of European workers had no clear-cut social philosophy, and their leaders—the leaders of the Trade Unions and of the working class political parties, generally—rushed to the defence of their respective countries.

Some of the leaders took ministerial posts; others were given lesser governmental positions. By the time the war had ended, pre-war labor leadership had become thoroughly imbued with the principle of class collaboration and quite accustomed to its practice.

Had the war brought peace and liberty, as some of its more ardent and unenlightened advocates hoped, these labor leaders might have had at least a temporary justification for their position. But the war ended with intensive exploitation and active preparation for the next conflict. Consequently the men who had put their shoulders behind the imperial war found themselves quite out of sympathy with the sharply defined class conflict that followed the outbreak of the Russian Revolution.

The leaders of the I.F.T.U. made several attempts during 1920 to take an active part in public affairs. Chief among these efforts were the attempted blockade of Hungary, as a protest against the White Terror there, and an attempt to head off the Polish War against Russia. A special conference was held in London in November, 1920. There were 100 delegates present, representing about 25 million workers.

The crest of the revolutionary wave had already passed, however. Peace and reconstruction were the watchwords of capitalist imperialism. Instead of turning their energies toward the prosecution of a struggle against the exploiters and imperialists, the leaders of the I.F.T.U. devoted themselves to a fratricidal struggle with the Moscow International.

Revolution in Russia, Germany, Hungary, and Italy forced the leaders of labor opinion to take sides. Older men and women, who had received their training before the Great War was dreamed of, sided generally against the revolutionary movements. But the war period had produced a new group—militant and determined. These men saw the world through new eyes. For them the issue lay between revolution on one hand and destruction on the other.

During the post-war years the conflict grew sharper. Its development was accentuated by the organization of the Red International of Labor Unions.

  1. American Labor Year Book, 1921–22, p. 209.
  2. Ibid., pp. 223–4.