Andor D. Skotnes, The Black Freedom Movement and the Worker's Movement in Baltimore, 1930-1939, Rutger's PhD, 1991,
Image No: 155
   Enlarge and print image (62K)            << PREVIOUS   NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space


 

Andor D. Skotnes, The Black Freedom Movement and the Worker's Movement in Baltimore, 1930-1939, Rutger's PhD, 1991,
Image No: 155
   Enlarge and print image (62K)            << PREVIOUS   NEXT >>
155 Industrial Union a TUUL union. The MW1U had, in a sense, existed in Baltimore before its founding. Its predecessor, the Marine Workers League (MWL), had, according to its newspaper the Marine Worker* Voice, been quite active in Baltimore in 1929: MWL delegates, it was claimed, visited 123 ships during one month. Also in 1929, seamen Roy Hudson, then a member of the Industrial Workers of the World, first encountered MWL activists in Baltimore and was impressed with their work. Hudson subsequently attended the founding convention of the MWIU in April 1930, and, along with the rest of the sizable contingent of Wobblies and ex-Wobblies present (comprising perhaps half the participants), joined. He later became a key leader in the MWIU struggle in Baltimore in 1934, "\(\ and, later yet, a top Communist Party trade-union official. It is not surprising that ex-Wobblies liked the MWIU, for like the old IWW it was aggressively revolutionary, aspired to organize on an industry-wide basis, and was unabashedly dual-unionist. The Third Period trade-union strategy of the Communist Party mandated building new revolutionary unions under the aegis of the TUUL to organize the unorganized and, where necessary, to function as alternatives to existing reactionary unions. Although this strategy did not advocate abandoning all efforts in existing unions, AFL-affiliated or independent, the hostility of most existing unions to militancy (and, especially, to Communism), and the tendency inherent in the Third Period line to brand competitors as reactionaries, largely amounted to the same thing. The MWIU's dual unionism seemed quite justifiable in the face of the International Seamen's Union (ISU), the hopelessly ineffective, racist, and anti-Communist craft union that was the MWIU's main competitor among seamen. Besides, the ISU was at its nadir in both size of membership and level of activity in the early 1930s, and had a very uncertain future. The MWIU, however, aimed to be an industrial union of all waterfront workers, and on the docks its dual-unionist strategy had stiffen competition, for there it faced