💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › jeremy-r-main-obtained.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 11:31:00. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Obtained
Author: Jeremy R. Main
Date: February 2010
Language: en
Topics: IWW, Seattle, strike
Source: Retrieved November 1, 2011 from https://radsearem.wordpress.com/tag/seattle-general-strike/

Jeremy R. Main

Obtained

Part One

Seattle in 1919 would not have been much quieter than the city of today.

Automobiles were on the streets. Much like today’s buses, streetcars

rumbled throughout downtown. Overhead, the clatter of construction

sounded off. And Seattle was no less dominated by pedestrian traffic

then as now.

But one winter morning there came a new sound. From ships docked at the

waterfront. From mills downtown and throughout the city. Throughout the

streets pealed the shriek of steam whistles, a sound one might associate

with the changing of shifts at a factory.

There was a lurch, and then the streets flooded with people walking out

of the buildings, out of their places of employment, making their way

home.

The traffic stopped. The streetcars stopped. The construction stopped.

And then there was silence.

All that those in the streets could hear now was the sound of the wind,

and the waves, and the seabirds. They looked up at the grey canyons

around them that suddenly echoed with the sound of their own footsteps,

and found the city foreign. What had it become? A prison? A grave? Or

something more? As they looked up around them, they were as bewildered

as any of us would be at that moment.

The Change In Tone

The Democratic National Convention of 1912 was held in Baltimore,

Maryland, and was the venue for a contentious battle for nomination. It

was here that candidate Woodrow Wilson would state a key plank of his

campaign: “Our industries have expanded to such a point that they will

burst their jackets if they cannot find a free outlet to the markets of

the world.”

During his first failed attempt at the White House, he’d put it more

succinctly. “Concessions obtained by financiers must be safeguarded by

ministers of state, even if the sovereignty of unwilling nations be

outraged in the process... the doors of the nations which are closed

must be battered down.” After winning the nomination, then the

Presidency, Wilson put his words into action.

A change in the way America viewed the world had marked its entrance

into the 20^(th) century. Between 1897 and 1914, US foreign investment

almost quadrupled to $3 billion — about sixty billion in today’s

dollars. (All inflation-adjusted dollar amounts in this article are

given in 2006 dollars.) Having conquered a continent, the US would turn

to the world stage in pursuit of treasure. For that, Wilson could not

have asked for a better political climate. The Central and Allied powers

were mobilizing in Europe. As a third party, the US found it could trade

with both sides.

Under Their Own Management

World War I ground hard into the coming years. By 1917, American

business saw trade with the Allies increase seven-fold. Seattle now

possessed three modern shipbuilding facilities, including the huge

Skinner and Eddy yard at the foot of Atlantic Street. The massive need

for labor had forced employers to make serious concessions, and those

new to the city quickly saw the advantages of joining a union. Owners

presided over a workforce virtually 100 percent unionized, into which

even members of the International Workers of the World (IWW) had gained

dual membership in the American Federation of Labor (AFL); this was what

was then called organizational “boring.”

There was much trepidation throughout the country that labor power was

growing out of hand. That fear was only exacerbated in February of that

year, when Russia’s poor and destitute began to take power, kicking off

a “Red Scare” that would bleed into the coming decades. It was feared

that capitalism might be truly beginning to crumble — a fear skillfully

and deliberately manipulated against the labor movement. Idaho and

Minnesota were the first states to pass Criminal Syndicalism laws,

making it illegal not only to join or create a group advocating illegal

action to bring about change in government or industrial ownership, but

any statement of support for such a group as well.

The events of 1917 would make businesses look even harder at their

investments. And there they discovered a new problem. Allied powers were

relying on US banks to pay for US military and civilian products, thus

becoming incredibly in debt. The repayment of these loans now depended

on an end to the war. On April 6, 1917, Woodrow Wilson signed the

declaration of war on Germany, thus dragging the US into World War I.

Government now moved to formalize its already tight relationship with

business. On April 16, the US Shipping Board created the Emergency Fleet

Corporation (EFC). The EFC would subsidize shipyards with government

funds, then purchase the ships made for the US Merchant Fleet. For

shipyard owners, this arrangement resulted in even more massive profits.

For shipyard workers, it meant the US government now had a direct stake

in labor relations. With more and more workers drafted, and a dwindling

supply of immigrant labor — employers’ traditional strike-breaking

resource — a strike could completely grind to a halt a critical

enterprise. The power that the alliance of business and government had

now placed in the hands of workers was limitless.

The time had come for government to move against radicals with direct

force. On June 16, as part of a series of nationwide attacks, hundreds

of soldiers and sailors stationed at Bremerton, Washington were given

several hours of “special leave.” During this time they would travel to

Seattle, to Second Avenue, and swarm the IWW Labor Hall there. Seattle

Police stood aside, only intervening to arrest 41 of the Wobblies

themselves.

However, if the powerful men who then controlled Seattle’s fate thought

that their shipbuilding enterprises would be eased by the persecution of

the IWW — little more than 2.5 percent of Seattle’s shipbuilding labor

force — they had missed the bigger picture.

Namely, the map of Seattle itself.

Part Two

Seattle sits more than a hundred miles, and an international border,

from the nearest comparatively sized city, with Puget Sound to the west,

the Cascade Mountains to the east, and rugged stands of open timber

everywhere in between. In the early 20^(th) century, this meant Seattle

was isolated. Compared to other cities, it was much harder for workers

here to connect with their international unions. Rather than accept

isolation, workers in Seattle developed a very simple solution: Band

together. Every union in the city, shipbuilding or otherwise, used one

single body in the majority of their bargaining and decision-making: The

Seattle Central Labor Council (SCLC). In the SCLC, the average worker

who wanted to take the floor could reasonably expect to have their

opinions taken seriously and used to shape policy. The unions of Seattle

were truly under their own management. Workers thought of themselves not

as members of a particular trade, but as part of a single unified body

to which an attack on one was indeed an attack on all.

The Demands of the Owners

With labor in high demand and well organized, Seattle shipyard workers

found themselves in a good position to ask for a much needed cost of

living wage increase. Their terms were not exorbitant: a pay scale

topping out at $8 a day, the equivalent of just $15.87/hr, roughly the

starting wage for today’s shipyard worker, and, rich with fresh

government contracts, Skinner and Eddy would initially agree.

However, the situation changed radically in August of that year, when

the EFC would join with the AFL to produce the Shipbuilding Labor

Adjustment Board. The SLAB was formed to establish standardized

nationwide and regional pay scales for all subsidized shipyards. Workers

in Seattle had good reason to fear the SLAB. A standardized pay scale

would effectively slam the door in the face of local unions, rolling

back years worth of gains made and completely destroying any negotiating

power. Outraged, the SCLC’s Metal Trades Council, which encompassed all

of Seattle’s shipbuilding unions, moved to strike.

Rather than see the closing of some of its most important yards, the EFC

would call for a Seattle delegation to come to Washington, D.C., and

state their case before the SLAB. Three Seattle union leaders would pack

their things and make the long journey cross-country. But even as they

went on the road, government was moving against them. On September 7,

the EFC demanded veto power over the SLAB, making any negotiations with

it meaningless. The Seattle union leaders, arriving to find a board

without the authority to hear them, would simply turn around and go

home. After the delegation left, however, the EFC withdrew its veto

request and restored the board’s authority.

The gambit would fail. On September 29, the shipyards were on strike,

and now it was the SLAB’s turn to run cross-country to meet with Seattle

unions. However, what the board had in mind was not a negotiation, but a

series of public hearings that lasted five days. After this, the SLAB

would leave Seattle without resolving anything.

Even without a contract, the AFL would prove its compliance in the

process, demanding that workers leave the picket line. At first they

resisted. But five international shipbuilding union presidents were

called upon to pressure workers back on the job. Using strenuous appeals

to patriotism, they would succeed.

After holding hearings in other West Coast towns, the SLAB finally

announced the establishment of a uniform wage scale for the Puget Sound

district. The SLAB — a board on which sat an AFL secretary, and which

had been backed by five international union presidents — had returned a

wage scale that cut pay for entry-level workers to a level lower than

comparable work outside the field. However, in what was advertised as a

concession, Skinner and Eddy’s regionally leading pay for skilled

workers — $10.97/hr in today’s dollars — was made the standard for

skilled labor throughout the Puget Sound district.

The AFL then forced local unions to accept the new contract, violating

the law and the AFL’s own constitution. The reason given for workers to

stay on the job was, again, patriotism — an argument the workers of

Seattle would not fight against.

The Problem of Propaganda

The SCLC was thought of as being “red,” and fully aligned with the IWW.

Nothing could have been further from the truth. While there were radical

elements capable of exerting considerable influence, this was a union of

the Seattle working man, easily susceptible to the appeals of the state

and to the racism and sexism of the time.

The First World War was sold to the public as “The War to End All Wars,”

a horrifically violent struggle to end ages-old European autocracy and

militarism, sure to usher in a long-term era of peace, prosperity, and

participatory democracy on the world stage. Any group perceived as

standing in the way had to be shut out, both nationally and by Seattle

workers. In particular, the “boring” IWW members would be allowed to

participate but denied a vote, and the unionized Japanese were excluded

from the SCLC altogether.

African-Americans also found themselves a union target. Called upon to

take the place of drafted workers, Blacks received a warm reception

within the IWW, but would be shut out of mainstream unions in a tide of

bigotry — a racial disparity employers gleefully exploited. With few

opportunities, Blacks made perfect strikebreakers. Only after strenuous

appeals by the dual-card IWW, would some unions ease their “color bar”

and allow Blacks to join — but this was little more than an attempt by

the SCLC to break independent Black organizations. Even with Black

unionists in the workforce, employers continued to abuse the tension

through the use of segregation.

Observing the racial situation, one young reporter would opine:

And I thought: WHEN

Will the workers be as clever

At STICKING TOGETHER

As the boss is

At DIVIDING THEM?

In her writings as part of the Seattle labor movement, Dr. Anna Louise

Strong spoke out against the racism and sexism of the unions many times.

Attracted to both the natural beauty of the Pacific Northwest and the

exciting progressive attitude of Seattle, Strong was imbued with a sense

of independence, a deep love of nature, and a high-quality education.

After receiving her doctorate, she covered progressive causes for a

Chicago paper, before traveling the world with a roving children’s

exhibition.

She would become well acquainted both with the people of Seattle —

becoming the “best known of the respectable women in town” — and with

its surrounding countryside. Within a year of moving to the city, she

was considered for the Seattle School Board. The only published Ph.D. to

run, she won easily. She would later call the position “the most

completely boring of my life.”

All of this changed, however, when America entered WWI. Convinced the

nation she loved was dead, Strong spent the summer mountain-climbing and

soul-searching, until she chanced upon a copy of a small socialist

newspaper, the Seattle Call, one of many publications relaying stories

from Russia of a nation truly being run by its people. Stories that were

not true. By this point, the authoritarian rule of the Bolsheviks was

firmly in place. Cut off from the truth by propaganda, Strong and many

others would take hope from such publications that a great change was

indeed about to sweep the world. Strong wrote several anti-conscription

articles for the Seattle Call. For Strong’s upper-class constituency,

radical politics was simply out of bounds. A recall vote was called, and

Strong was ousted from the board.

Part Three

Anna Louise Strong, despite having been ousted from the Seattle School

Board in 1918, was not out of a job for long. Harry B. Ault, editor of

the Northwest’s largest newspaper, the Seattle Central Labor Council’s

Seattle Union Record, would quickly snatch her up and make her the

paper’s star reporter, in spite of her new status as a controversial

communist sympathizer. Strong had found the perfect home in the Seattle

labor movement. While there was support for America within the SCLC,

there was no love for the bosses. “I believe 95 per cent of us agree

that the workers should control the industries... but very strenuously

disagree on the method,” Ault would state. For the paper, Strong would

contribute a daily ragged-verse-style poem under the pen name Anise, and

an advice column under the pen name Ruth Ridgeway.

Strong’s writing was most concerned with labor’s treatment of women, who

were being called to take the place of men sent overseas. Her advice

column, in particular, became a forum for men and women to discuss the

complex issues of gender in union politics. The majority of working men

simply did not believe that women belonged in the workplace; however,

their opposition may have had less to do with gender than with unfair

competition. As women were not allowed to join unions, owners simply

paid them less for the same work, much to the ire of unionists. When

women attempted to join industries that unions had successfully made

“closed shop,” requiring membership to join, male unionists were

outspoken in their support of female workers. In direct defiance of

international union regulations, the SCLC would organize and recognize

these all-female unions, even giving women official positions in the

unions of their male counterparts.

Joy and Sacrifice in the “New Era”

For more than a year, Seattle shipyard workers labored under a contract

they had not voted on or approved, and tensions between owners and

workers, already strained, neared the breaking point. The state would

again crack down on the IWW, arresting and deporting nearly a quarter of

their Seattle organization.

It was into this contentious political climate that an aggressive

mayoral candidate would appear. On March 5, 1918, riding a tide of labor

support, reform candidate Ole Hanson

[http://depts.washington.edu/labhist/strike/williams.shtml] would take

city hall. Labor had high hopes for this powerful new ally. However, the

short, fiery, red-haired man now in charge of Seattle could not have

been more strange.

Hanson had come to the city nearly two decades earlier, after a severe

spinal injury in Butte, Montana, left him partially paralyzed. Emulating

his hero Teddy Roosevelt, who had conquered illness through exercise,

Hanson would physically attach himself to the back of a covered wagon

and walk the 700 miles to Seattle’s Beacon Hill. Here a physically fit

Hanson declared to amazed onlookers that he would be mayor of the city

someday. He was a Bull Moose Republican, before becoming a Democrat,

because they “kept us out of the war,” before becoming an avid pro-war

advocate, proclaiming his mayoral candidacy a “patriotic duty.”

He would become well known for his fiery diatribes, delivered in the

frenzied shrill of his high voice, earning him the nickname “Holy Ole”

from his critics. Hanson was a man who “seemed to be wound up too

tight,” according to a political associate years later. “I never heard

anything like Old Ole until Hitler came along. He’d get so worked up

he’d be almost screaming. He sure sounded sincere.”

Throughout all his histrionics, however, Hanson remained sincere on only

one thing: Ole Hanson. Every stance he took on every issue was designed

to insure that he held onto support and power.

On November 11, 1918, the First World War finally came to a close. There

was dancing all over town. People gathered in the streets to celebrate

not only the end of a war, but perhaps the end of all wars.

However, at the SCLC, post-war glee was short-lived. Months passed and

the wartime wage controls of the SLAB showed no signs of being removed.

With absolutely no legitimate reason for them to continue, government

and business were sending a clear message to the workers of Seattle.

They would hold this contract designed to destroy union power as long as

it took.

However, as a new year dawned, it became clear how far they had

misjudged. Seattle entered 1919 in peace, with flu deaths on the

decline, and a population of about 400,000. In its five modern

shipbuilding facilities, union organizing was stronger than ever. The

SCLC now boasted over 60,000 members, an all-time high. But this “new

era” promised by the elite had turned out to be one of crushing

inflation, with employers content to allow real-world wages to decline.

The cost of living would soar to nearly twice that of pre-war levels.

Seattle unions would take a stand in this unbearable situation.

Skilled workers had voted against a contract that had personally

benefited them. On January 16, with the possibility of a strike on the

table, the SCLC’s Metal Trades Council would again meet with owners,

demanding the same thing they had in 1917: a scale topping out at $8 a

day, knowing full well this now meant a wage of just $13.33/hr in

today’s dollars.

The appearance of a mysterious telegraph at the Labor Temple would end

the negotiation. It was from EFC General Manager Charles Piez, and had

been addressed to the Metal Trades Association, a group representing the

shipyard owners — not the SCLC’s Metal Trades Council. Similar names,

and a delivery boy’s mistake, had placed in the hands of the union

Piez’s stern warning to the shipyard owners: If they gave in to worker

demands, he would not let them have their US Steel allotments. Union

anger was finally directed at government. On January 18, the Metal

Trades Council distributed formal notices that all shipyard work would

end in two days. In response, employers spread rumors that workers did

not truly wish to go on strike. They would distribute petitions to their

workers, non-binding under any legal standard, requesting a revote on

the strike. Skinner and Eddy management held a straw vote “revealing” 95

percent opposition to the strike. Unbeknownst to them, however, in only

one of the smaller unions had majority support for the strike not been

attained.

Part Four

January 21, 1919, would see the orderly walkout of some 35,000 workers

from Seattle’s shipyards and allied trades. In the meantime, Charles

Piez, General Manager of the Emergency Fleet Corporation (EFC), would

act in the most schizophrenic manner possible. First, he told yard

owners they could re-enter talks without penalty. Then, just as

suddenly, he would threaten the cancellation of any outstanding

government contracts if the wage scale was changed. He would say the

government didn’t have the power to dictate wages for yard owners, then

state that the SLAB contract was unchangeable and publicly declare it

unpatriotic for owners to grant a wage increase. Shipyard owners would

wash their hands, going on vacation, leaving the strike to simply starve

itself out.

But in the Seattle Central Labor Council (SCLC), the wheels were already

in motion. The SCLC’s Metal Trades Council had requested a sympathetic

strike action to be held by all unions throughout the city, i.e., a

general strike. By January 29, 110 unions, virtually every member of the

SCLC, risking years worth of their own hard-fought concessions and, in

some cases, their unions and very jobs themselves, had agreed. The City

of Seattle was to be shut down.

The 11th Hour

Nearly all of Seattle’s labor union leaders were in Chicago, working to

organize a national general strike to free famously railroaded labor

leader Tom Mooney. According to Anna Louise Strong, among the leaders at

the Mooney Congress, they would have spoken against the strike had they

been in town. The fear was it “might easily smash something — us,

perhaps, our well-organized labor movement.”

Businessmen would react by arming themselves in droves. Riot insurance

was taken out on Seattle warehouses. Some wealthy families simply moved

to Portland. The people of Seattle prepared for a long, drawn-out siege,

with runs on supplies leaving store shelves bare.

The strike began to take shape on February 2 with the first meeting of a

General Strike Committee. Composed of three rank-and-file members for

each striking union, it was a large and unwieldy body of unacquainted

individuals. The meeting would last 16 hours. In addition to fixing a

date for the strike — Thursday, February 6 — subcommittees on tactics,

publicity, and finance would be formed. Immediately, the committee was

faced with how unique an undertaking this was. The Garbage Wagon Drivers

would ask the floor to state that Seattle Health Commissioner Dr. J.S.

McBride had told their union that if they did not take away hospital

garbage, infested with the flu, they would be arrested. The General

Strike Committee realized it was not simply to govern a walkout. It

would need to be a functioning counter-government for the entire city.

It appointed an Executive Committee of 15, which the General Committee

would have veto power over.

In its last order of business before reconvening on the 6^(th), the

General Strike Committee would set the strike’s slogan. Proving

themselves once again not to be the radicals they were portrayed as,

they rejected the incendiary “We have nothing to lose but our chains and

a whole world to gain” in favor of the union stock “Together We Win.”

The Executive Committee would get to work right away, and kept working

at virtually all hours of the day and night until the strike ended. It

would create subcommittees on exemptions for construction,

transportation, and provisions, and a subcommittee to hear general

welfare grievances. Its first exemption was to allow firefighters to

stay on the job, with the Transportation Subcommittee producing the

signage and papers necessary to indicate that those exempted were not

scabs. Two days before the strike, Mayor Hanson called Seattle union

leaders to a friendly lunch meeting. There he would say, “Now boys, I

want my street lights and my water, and the hospitals. That’s all.”

Confident they had city support, the Executive Committee began working

on the flood of city exemptions, granting only those absolutely

necessary for health and welfare. However, they would realize they could

not simply state who would work and who would not. They would be forced

to proscribe at-work behavior. In the most complicated example, the

Laundry Truck Drivers and Workers formed a plan with their employers to

leave one shop open to handle hospital laundry only, and to work in the

other shops for a short period after the beginning of the strike to

insure that wet laundry did not pose a health problem.

Rounding out that day’s meeting, the Executive Committee created

subcommittees on public relations, the care of destitute homes, and a

Law and Order Committee. Then, as the day’s final order of business, it

would ask the most important question so far unresolved: When should the

strike end? Should they even set a date? Harry Ault was joined by the

head of the SCLC, James Duncan, in ardently pushing for a closing date.

They would forward the question to the Metal Trades Council. But the

Council simply did not believe that an end date would be effective, so

the Executive Committee would not set one.

In an editorial that ran that day, Anna Louise Strong wrote:

On Thursday at 10 A.M.

There will be many cheering, and there will be some who fear.

Both these emotions are useful, but not too much of either.

We are undertaking the most tremendous move ever made by LABOR in this

country, a move which will lead — NO ONE KNOWS WHERE!

We do not need hysteria.

We need the iron march of labor.

Her editorial had captured the spirit of the moment: Hope. But it was,

for them, “a road that leads — NO ONE KNOWS WHERE!” and none could even

say exactly where they hoped it would go. Nevertheless, for the American

elite, Strong’s editorial was a declaration of revolution, and the eyes

of the nation were firmly fixed on Seattle.

Part Five

Wednesday, February 5, 1919, was the final day before the Seattle

General Strike, and for the strike’s Executive Committee, many questions

were still unanswered. Most outstanding was that of city power.

Officials had complained of the mass chaos, and the public health and

water supply crises, that would result from a full shutdown of Seattle

City Light. Unbeknownst to all, however, the city’s weak electrical

unions were not in a position to accomplish a full shutdown. They would,

however, attempt to bluff the mayor into allowing one by giving a

newspaper interview that morning stating they were to receive “no

exemptions,” not even for the sake of public health and safety. The

interview caused panic in the streets and anger within the Seattle

Central Labor Council. After a meeting with the SCLC’s Metal Trades

Council, the electrical unions suddenly announced they would be open to

some exemptions. The mayor, however, would state that City Light would

run in its entirety even if he had to use soldiers to run it.

With tensions on the rise and the hours before the strike ticking away,

the Executive Committee would call the mayor to an 11^(th)-hour meeting.

Hanson, who had been working on “plans for defense, including securing

cartridges, shot guns and machine guns, and drawing a map showing the

places where men were to be stationed,” would head to the Labor Temple

and restate his intention to use troops to run City Light. However, he

would also again declare his support for the remainder of the strike.

After he had left, at 3:30 a.m. on Thursday morning, the Executive

Committee would vote to allow all of City Light to run, except for the

commercial service. For the average Seattle resident, no change in

service would be noticed.

A Quiet Appeal

On the first morning of the strike, curious people gathered in the

streets long before the 10 a.m. call. They would be joined by 1,500

soldiers from Ft. Lewis (then “Camp Lewis”), who would then be stationed

at the armory and seen by virtually no one. For international union

leaders, it was also an early morning, as they arrived in town with the

first train, hoping to shut the strike down. The steam whistles blew,

and the streets emptied. Then quiet. An eerie calm that strikers and

observers alike would note. The riots did not come. In their place were

rumors of assassinations, arson, imprisonment, poisoning, pillaging, and

destruction. None were true. The streets of Seattle were empty but for

the occasional truck marked “Exempted by the Strike Committee,” and

arm-band-wearing Labor War Veteran Guards. These men, approximately 300

in number, had been organized by the Law and Order Committee to enforce

Seattle Health Commissioner McBride’s ordinance against public

gatherings, and, consequently, to prevent the strike from coming to

violence. They were unarmed, believing in a “big idea,” that, in the

words of one guard, shunned “police force with clubs” in favor of

“officers [who] understand human nature and use brains and not brawn in

keeping order.” In the eyes of this guard, “if you explain it to them

reasonably,” people will respond reasonably.

For the mothers of Seattle, the morning might have been met with concern

for keeping their babies fed. But 35 milk stations had been established

around the city by the Milk Truck Drivers to supply young children. The

Drivers had rejected a plan they created with their employers that might

have let many poor children go hungry, in favor of purchasing milk from

dairies outside the city with their own money. At the strike’s height,

the Milk Stations distributed a full 30,000 gallons of milk a day.

At noon, the second meeting of the General Strike Committee commenced.

Virtually all the SCLC’s 60,000 members had struck as promised, and they

had been joined by the Japanese unions as well. They would be invited to

send a delegation to the General Strike Committee, in spite of being

denied any say in the strike’s conduct. In addition, 40,000 non-union

workers had walked out, with no assurance of a job to go back to.

About 100,000 people were now part of the Seattle General Strike, and

with their families, this comprised well over half the city’s

population. “The strikers were at once brought face to face with the way

in which the whole community, including their own families, is

inextricably tied together,” Anna Louise Strong would later write. No

longer a union slogan, in a city without a functioning ruling class, an

injury to one family was an injury to all.

By late afternoon, the first meals were finally served at the 21

union-run dining halls around the city, serving an all-you-can-eat

buffet of beef stew, spaghetti, steak, pot roast, bread, and coffee for

$4.07, or $2.91 with a union card, in today’s dollars. Those with IWW

cards initially paid full price, but by the strike’s end even members of

the public were given the discount.

By all accounts the streets were safe. The completeness of the peace

would surprise many — not the least of which was Ole Hanson. But with no

blood on the streets, there was no blood on his hands, and a man famous

for changing his position was free to change it once more.

Friday the 7^(th) rolled in, and with it a different air. The rumors

were gone. The fear was gone. No longer something ethereal, the end of

all work in the City of Seattle was something real. Something tangible.

With the morning had also come an additional 950 federal troops under

the command of Major General John F. Morrison. They would be stationed

at various strategic points around the city. In addition, Hanson would

hastily hire an additional 600 police officers. The only requirement for

receiving a tin star and a gun that day in Seattle was to be a white

male capable of standing in a room with a hand raised, reciting a

pledge. Approximately 2,400 stars and guns were distributed in this way,

many to youths from University of Washington fraternities who would then

attempt to provoke fights with anyone they thought was a striker.

Hanson’s set pieces were in place for a play before the national media.

He would contact the United Press bureau to declare the strike “a

treasonable Bolshevist uprising” that he intended to put down. A

messenger was sent to the Labor Temple to read an “Ultimatum to the

Executive Committee,” in which Hanson stated that, unless the strike was

ended by noon, he would declare martial law and use soldiers to run all

industries in the city. There were two problems with this, however.

First, the authority to declare martial law had been vested in Maj. Gen.

Morrison only. And second, it was already past noon when the message had

been delivered.

Hanson would state that “the faces of the very men who had been loudest

in egging on the workers turned pale, for they knew we were prepared to

go the full limit in defeating their nefarious and un-American aims.” He

spoke of faces that he, of course, had not seen because he had not been

there. The actual reaction at the Labor Temple was confusion, caused

both by the clock, and by the sudden change in attitude. Hanson would

call for the Executive Committee to come before him, and six members

would. The committee members stated that, if martial law was declared,

they would call out workers in allied unions across the state. “If you

want the strike to spread,” they told him, “declare martial law.”

Proving that business was still in power in the Mayor’s Office, the

Conciliation Board, a body which represented Seattle business leaders,

would be called to join the meeting. But the officials declared they

would have no dealings with revolutionaries. Hearing this, Hanson would

tell the committee members, “Then that’s all there is to it, boys.” The

new deadline for martial law was 8 a.m. Saturday morning.

Part Six

Eight a.m. on Saturday, February 8, 1919, had been set by Seattle Mayor

Ole Hanson as a “new” deadline for martial law to be declared in Seattle

if the general strike in effect that week had not been called off by its

leaders. The time and date would come and would go. And workers were not

back on the job.

When asked, Maj. Gen. Morrison stated that if it were necessary, he

alone would declare martial law, and it would be no bluff. The mayor,

however, would keep his fantasy going in the national press, branding

himself the savior of Seattle: “I issued a proclamation that all life

and property would be protected; that all business should go on as

usual. And this morning our municipal street cars, light, power plants,

water, etc., were running at full blast. There was an attempted

revolution. It never got off first base.” Even those who had ardently

supported an end date for the strike were now angry at the mayor’s

sudden and irrational behavior and felt strong for having violated “two”

calls for the strike’s end.

But the strike’s own success was beginning to take its toll. Anna Louise

Strong would later write, “As soon as any worker was made a leader he

wanted to end that strike... workers in the ranks felt the thrill of

massed power which they trusted their leaders to carry to victory. But

as soon as one of these workers was put on a responsible committee, he

also wished to stop ‘before there is riot and blood.’ The strike could

produce no leaders willing to keep it going. All of us were red in the

ranks and yellow as leaders.”

On Sunday the 9^(th), bowing to the massive pressure applied by their

international unions, several unions would go back on the job. Most

crushing of these were the Street Car Men and the Teamsters. Both

declared they would return if called by the General Strike Committee.

However, the roll call for Monday the 10^(th) saw even more unions

missing, including the Stereotypers, Auto Drivers, Barbers, Bill

Posters, and, most critical to the strike, the Milk Truck Drivers. Now,

under pressure from smaller unions worried about their jobs, the

Executive Committee voted to reconvene the strike the next day for its

final day.

At noon on Tuesday, February 11, 1919, the longest and most successful

General Strike in American history would come to a close.

What Was Gained and What Was Lost?

For Seattle unions, tangible gains from the General Strike were hard to

find. Shipyard workers continued to labor under the SLAB’s wage scale

until later that year, when, with government contracts drying up, all of

Seattle’s shipyards were shut down. They were the first in the nation to

be shuttered, closed a full year before the subsidized yards of other

cities.

For Ole Hanson, the strike would bring fame. He was front-page news

across America. He would resign as mayor in order to attempt to parlay

his notoriety into what seemed to have been his goal all along: a run at

the White House. He would make it as far as the Republican National

Convention, but, with his endless tirades on Bolshevism growing stale,

he would be shut out entirely. In the aftermath of the strike, Seattle

Labor pursued political goals much less lofty, but no less failed.

The strike had created an anger and fear of Seattle Labor to last a

generation to come. In the 1919 municipal elections, every Labor

candidate was defeated. For the IWW, 1919 was to spell the beginning of

the end, both in Seattle and abroad. Within a month of the strike, its

hall was again raided and 39 members arrested as the “ring-leaders of

anarchy.” The SCLC, recognizing the existence of “one common enemy,”

would finally come to the IWW’s legal defense. However, in response to

the strike, early that year the Washington State Legislature would pass

a Criminal Syndicalism law of its own, part of a new round of vicious

repression nationwide which would ultimately break the back of the

entire IWW organization. Though Wobbly unions are still in operation

today, there are now as many members around the world as there were in

Seattle alone during its height.

The new doors to be battered down were in Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, and in

Germany and Italy right up until the very moment of WWII. The elite

would apply the lessons learned to insure that another Seattle would not

happen during this war. For its part, the AFL was only too happy to

remain loyal, the events of 1919 having spurred it to remove any trace

of radicalism from its ranks. For others, though, the year had displayed

the inability of business and government to insure a progressive

increase in the happiness and well-being of its citizenry. Modern

Progressivism would take shape, and separate itself from its previous

ally, the Labor Movement — a rift perhaps not bridged again until

another winter’s day in Seattle, when “Teamsters and Turtles” would

stand together during 1999′s World Trade Organization protest.

With the shipyards closed, Strong would later write, “workers drifted to

other cities to look for work. The young, the daring, the best fighters

went... Workers fought each other for jobs and not the capitalists for

power.” Once so unified, the SCLC was now bogged down in endless

bickering and finger-pointing over the strike’s failure, and would oust

many of its most radical leaders. Owners punished the now weakened

unions, with many concessions laid on the line not returned.

The SCLC began to grow more comfortable with the female workers in its

midst, and would gain a new racial tolerance, with several unions

dropping their color bars. The non-voting Japanese delegation became a

permanent fixture in the SCLC, and the Longshoremen, once so violent

with African Americans, now proudly welcomed them. For Strong, however,

the end of solidarity in Seattle was simply too much. She left the city

for Russia, and then China, along the way writing the book “Children of

the Revolution.” She would meet several notable leaders, including

Stalin and Mao Zedong, becoming a party-line militant, though she was

deeply disturbed by the abuses she would witness. Ultimately, under

suspicion of espionage, she would be deported from Russia, but would

return to China.

Ironically, the one who would best articulate what was perhaps the

strike’s greatest victory was Ole Hanson himself. “True there were no

flashing guns, no bombs, no killings. Revolution, I repeat, doesn’t need

violence. The general strike, as practiced in Seattle, is itself the

weapon of revolution, all the more dangerous because quiet.”

The strike had proven something that to this day is not well understood:

Non-violent revolution is possible. In the words of one labor group,

there were “[s]ixty thousand men out and not even a fistfight.” The

streets of Seattle had been flooded with guns, armed businessmen, almost

two and a half thousand soldiers, and 3,000 members of the public hired

or deputized to the police, including armed fraternity brothers. But in

spite of this, and not because of it, the strike was peaceful. The

General Strike and Executive Committees established a real-world

infrastructure that prevented violence by meeting the needs of Seattle’s

people. Its Labor Guards used consensus and understanding to defuse

violence in the face of mass provocation. In the words of one reporter,

“While the business men and the authorities prepared for riots, labor

organized for peace.”

In her history of the strike, Anna Louise Strong urges us to learn from

its mistakes and successes, and there are many lessons here for those

who fight for equality and justice today. Revolution can only be strong

when truly in the hands of its people. No matter how radical or well

meaning, at every point the leaders of the General Strike only served to

weaken it. Fear of a world no one had seen before left them completely

unprepared when the strike presented it to them. Now, after almost a

hundred years of the “new era,” as labor and progressivism inch closer

together, we make the same mistake. Revolution seems intangible,

ethereal. But simply because we cannot see it now doesn’t mean it is not

possible. The General Strike proved that it can be real. On the streets

of Seattle, it was born and died. In response to a newspaper report

amazed at how fully labor had “organized for peace and order,” Strong

would write: “And peace and order obtained.”