| dc.description.abstract | The history of organized labour movements in the United States of America has always been typified by struggle between workers and employees. One of the targets in in the late 1910s were the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), commonly referred to as Wobblies. The existing literature fails to explain relations in the perspective from the government towards the IWW and the difference between a perceived and self-declared ‘revolutionary’ industrial union before the major Red Scare (1917-20) almost wiped out the organisation. The main research question tries to fill the hole by asking how the Industrial Workers of the World develop from its creation in 1905 to an organization deemed dangerous and revolutionary by the United States (local) government starting repressions in 1917? To answer this, the thesis is split in two parts, covering the ideological side of the IWW and a sample of actions perpetrated by the Wobblies in the period 1905-1917.From its creation, the IWW saw itself as the best kind of union for all industry workers to organise for a coming revolution. There seems to be a subtle difference in preparing passively and participating actively in one, as for the IWW could not make up its ideology in its early years. From their writing works, there seems no clear indication of further revolutionary means besides of the economic context. From works analysed in this thesis, they did not seek peril with the institutions of the government, as they would seemingly bypass them by economic means and focus on the capitalists and employees instead. In the samples of strikes investigated, the IWW only gained minor, short lasting victories on a small, local scale. Yet they were well known and successful strikes throughout the United States for the Wobblies, that their ‘revolutionary’ potential was only limited to improving conditions. It also seems like IWW adversaries were often the ones that struck first with violence to break a strike, in which the Wobblies sometimes responded with violence of their own, maybe changing perception of union where violence always seemed to follow them. The perception of reality and theory was certainly skewed, but it can be said that the IWW did not hold true to the definition of revolutionary as explained in this thesis and is as it was mentioned in contemporary times. | |
