 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
| XJCUHDUISi: AID CATHOLICISM of general caucuses try to influence union policy along sound lines* There are no A.C.T..U. slates of candidates for office, or A.C.T.U* factions within a union* But where factionalism is necessary, and it almost always is where there are Communist factions, A.C.T.U.. members as individuals will be active in the caucus which is seeking union welfare rather than . the Communist Party Line* In their unions, the A.C.T.U. members never push a program which is merely negative (anti-Communism) or which ban-be labeled as sectarian by enemies of the Church. They follow the sound ;• principle that "you canft beat something with nothing, or someone with no one," As a result they have a'positive program of good unionism and back candidates of proved ability. Since a Communist tradd union leader is necessarily loyal to the Party rather than to the union, they can usually defeat him on union grounds and not on the grounds of Communism. This may seem like a compromise of principle, but experience shows its wisdom* Communist Uichael Quill reigns unchallenged in a union which is ninety per cent Catholic, mainly because he has brought about a great* improvement in working conditions. The same is irue of Harry Bridges, Joseph Curran, and other Communist union leaders. On the other hand, there are many flaws in their performances which could be exploited by leaders who hcd a better program. This does not mean that the A.C.T.U. ' does not discuss Communism in their own closed meetings. On the contrary, they keep very good watch on the Comrades. Often the uniting force in the caucuses they join is the knowledge that Communists are trying to seize a union. But their floor and convention tactics —— the programs they use to convince indifferent members who may not be aware of the Communist danger, all these are positive proposals for the benefit of the vrorker* Of course, the A.C.T.U. only incidentally works on the Communist problem: primarily it was conceived to teach union workers sound Christian principles, so they could urge them upon their fellovr union members* The basic difference between the A.C.T.U. program and the v/orker school and adult education approach is that the former adds organization and regular meetings of members to the training program. Because of the organizational aspect, some fear that it will lay "the Church'open to charges of interference in internal union affairs. Actually, the A.C.T.U. as such does not act in internal union matters, but only trains members v/ho act as individuals of members of general caucuses. Yet the critics fear even unjust charges, and the possibility that Protestant groups might be exploited by the ICu Klux Klan or the Communists to form anti- Catholic organizations. Union officials are restive over the A.C.T.U* althoujjH. some of its most violent critics do not hesitate to solicit its support. In the opinion of this investigator, the A.C.T.U. belongs in the category of matters'best discussed in private meetings of priests interest- ed in social action. It is one of these prudential matters where abstract judgment is impossible. 7/here it has been active, it has often done excellent wor?i» The writer has studied the Detroit situation more than ai$i other, and cannot imagine any alternative method which would'have accomplished more. Certainly vrhere there is a Communist problem; there is no substitute for organization, whatever it be called. In labor, Commun- ists gain poorer "through organization, and they can be ousted only through the same method* No amount of teaching, preaching social justice, and the like will substitute for caucuses, slates, programs, and other tactics needed to handle this skillful and disciplined minority* It may be re- grettable that labor unions cannot be conducted like Altar Societies, but |