Home / Throw off Your Chains – The Wobblies are Here!

Throw off Your Chains – The Wobblies are Here!

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I used to shop there on a regular basis when I lived in the neighborhood, but never realized that mini-grocery FreshPlus here in Austin was involved in rampant worker exploitation and oppression. Here I thought it was just an eclectic food store that appealed mostly to Hyde Park yuppies, but it turns out that it’s actually a seething cesspit of corporate greed and wage slavery. When my daughter was in the Girl Scouts we used to sell cookies in front of FreshPlus every Spring, and somehow I never noticed the grim aura of doom and how the workers there were bowed under the chains of capitalist enslavement.

Thankfully the light of freedom has come to the exclusive neighborhood of Hyde Park and the workers of FreshPlus have thrown off their chains – and incidentally the burden of a regular paycheck – thanks to the support of the Industrial Workers of the World. I bet you didn’t realize the IWW still existed, but they’re going strong here in Austin. They’re the international anarcho-syndicalist union which became famous as the “wobblies” in the 1930s when they staged massive work slowdowns and factory sabotage campaigns and chanted their classic slogan:

    “An Injury to one is an injury to all.
    The hours are long and the pay is small.
    So take your time and fuck them all.”

The modern Wobblies basically believe in worker-initiated involuntary collectivism, the bizarre idea that employees should shut down the businesses they work for until management is fired and the workers are allowed to take over the business and run it as an egalitarian collective. Building on their success at actually implementing this idea at local Austin recycling venture Ecology Action – which never had any real management anyway – they’re trying to spread the word of ‘One Big Union’ throughout the area.

So far the FreshPlus uprising is their other big success. Objecting to the low pay at FreshPlus – $6 per hour, which is somewhat below typical part-time, unskilled grocery worker pay in Austin – oppressed member of the proletariat Ryan Hastings began to solicit other workers at FreshPlus to form an IWW sponsored union and demand higher wages. He and co-worker Nellie Moore started distributing IWW literature on their breaks and lunches, not just to other workers but to anyone who came into or walked by the store. Not surprisingly, the store manager found this somewhat irritating. Even in ultra liberal Hyde Park, people don’t like being constantly assailed by union agitators. It’s amusing the first time, but after a while the charm of retro activism pales when it interferes with your shopping. Hastings and Moore were warned repeatedly to stop soliciting on store property, and ultimately both were fired when they refused to comply.

Strangely the manager of FreshPlus and his corporate overlords weren’t receptive to the idea of quitting their jobs and letting employees turn the store into a collective. Apparently that isn’t part of their business model, which bizarrely puts the emphasis on making money and turning a profit rather than egalitarian collectivism. The Wobblies are now going after FreshPlus with the National Labor Relations Board which is basically ignoring them, because businesses do have the right to stop employees from soliciting customers on store premises. Nothing wrong with talking to other workers about unionizing, but harassing customers is a faux pas.

This fracas has generated some real entertainment value for people who live in Hyde Park, most of whom are dilettante socialist college professors and sympathize with the Wobblies. There have been pickets with chanting and sign waving plus a couple of marches on the store with a big IWW banner. It’s like a little neighborhood throwback to the good old days of the ’60s – reassuring for aging hippies, but essentially non-threatening.

As for Hastings and Moore, champions of workers rights, they remain unemployed, but ennobled by their sacrifice. FreshPlus had no problem filling their jobs with other hungry proletarian students who now bow under the yoke and chains of corporate oppression.

When, oh when, will part-time college students be able to work in the food industries for above minimum wage without being victimized by capitalist management pigs? But when there are no bosses and we all work in collective harmony, won’t we all be bosses by default?

Dave

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

Dave Nalle is Executive Director of the Texas Liberty Foundation, Chairman of the Center for Foreign and Defense Policy, South Central Regional Director for the Republican Liberty Caucus and an advisory board member at the Coalition to Reduce Spending. He was Texas State Director for the Gary Johnson Presidential campaign, an adviser to the Ted Cruz senatorial campaign, Communications Director for the Travis County Republican Party and National Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus. He has also consulted on many political campaigns, specializing in messaging. Before focusing on political activism, he owned or was a partner in several businesses in the publishing industry and taught college-level history for 20 years.
  • Please note that I in no way endorse any of the loony ideas in any of the Amazon books referenced in association with this article, appropriate though they may be.

    Dave

  • Eric Olsen

    the great Hegelian pendulum shall reach the apex of corporatist/individualist greed, reverse course and return to smite thee, Dave, with its scythe-edge of justice rending your bourgeois flesh

  • Wow, Dave, I must be on a roll! This is the second great review written by you that I’ve hit in a row… your titles got me!!!
    Thanks and careful of that ‘scythe-edge”reverse course’ pendulum. 😉

  • I’m a member of the IWW. This review didn’t discuss the lit, but it is good to raise awareness of local struggles.

    I do appreciate the publicity and the expressed interest in the rights of working folk. I’m just wondering how accurate the account is.

    For example if we in the IWW really promoted the expression, “So take your time and fuck them all”, don’t you think a search for that phrase would give a fair number of hits in Google (it gives zero), considering that the legitimate first line “An Injury to one is an injury to all” gives more than 14 thousand hits?

    Since i’ve been a member of the IWW for only 16 years, i allow that i may have missed hearing that third line. I certainly wasn’t there in the thirties when its use is suggested. But could it be that Google is likewise unaware?

    And if it comes from some obscure passage in a book, is it really fair to ascribe it to the union as a “classic slogan” when union members have never heard of it? Or was it (as i suspect) made up for this article?

    Speaking of the thirties, it was the CIO that was staging massive work slowdowns, not the IWW. Undoubtedly many of the activists were former Wobs. But Dave Nalle should read some of the labor history that he writes about.

    So i also wonder about the flip accusation that these workers were interfering with customers’ shopping. Could there be more creativity throughout this account than there is accuracy?

    The gross over-simplification of industrial unionism (the principle economic philosophy of the IWW, similar to and often incorrectly identified as anarcho-syndicalism) as an operative tactic for attacking capitalism business by business is naive. The IWW has contracts with businesses that it does not seek to destroy. Workers depend upon their jobs; why would any union willfully destroy the livelihoods of the workers it is trying to recruit?

    Individual businesses are not the problem, capitalism is. We organize one company at a time, but we don’t fancy that capitalism will ever go away one company at a time.

    Unlike AFL-CIO unions, we in the IWW do have an ultimate strategy for empowering working folk and changing a system in which the average CEO makes 500 times what the average worker makes, but it entails the concept of a *general* strike, not self-destruction. The last significant general strike in the United States occurred in 1946 (actually there were a couple of them).

    I also think that calling a failed or stalled organizing drive a “big success” is demeaning and sarcastic. I’m left with the impression that, in spite of some suggestions of tentative sympathy for the union’s philosophy, Dave Nalle thinks the IWW is some sort of a joke, ripe for a spoof. I hope that my impression is wrong.

    My own view is that everything we do must be carefully considered and deliberate. People’s livelihoods are at risk in any unionizing effort, and if we don’t respect that, we won’t accomplish anything.

    And finally, Dave asks:

    “But when there are no bosses and we all work in collective harmony, won’t we all be bosses by default?”

    The answer is no. Being an owner of a business is not the same as being a boss. Unless you are locked into thinking like a capitalist, that is.

    best wishes,

    richard myers, member
    Denver General Membership Branch,
    Industrial Workers of the World

  • RJ

    I’m sure unemployment doesn’t bother these revolutionaries. Not when daddy keeps sending them money!

  • RJ

    “I’m left with the impression that, in spite of some suggestions of tentative sympathy for the union’s philosophy, Dave Nalle thinks the IWW is some sort of a joke, ripe for a spoof.”

    I’m thinking: BINGO!

  • “I’m sure unemployment doesn’t bother these revolutionaries. Not when daddy keeps sending them money!”

    Well, my dad died, and i worked in a factory for 33 years. No one sends me money.

    Its so easy to cast aspersions. Its so easy to attack what you don’t know.

    Some of the rich kids who join our union do seem just to want the “red card”. So i won’t say you’re wrong in all cases. But they never stick around for more than a couple of months. I can’t think of a single person in the union right now who fits your description.

    But the people in the union that i know, work with, and have come to respect over the decades are people who have learned what it means to struggle, to raise a family on poverty wages.

    I’ve sometimes worked three jobs at a time. In my circle of friends this experience is more the rule than the exception.

    My one buddy has worked in the oil fields, another at Pizza Hut while learning to become a chef. One is a carpenter, another a printer. One has driven a bus, another is a mechanic who works on ships in the harbor.

    Its what we call working class.

    And you?

    best wishes,
    richard myers

  • Richard Myers humorlsessly opined:

    >>I do appreciate the publicity and the expressed interest in the rights of working folk. I’m just wondering how accurate the account is.< < Well, the facts are all from the IWW website, so the accuracy could certainly be in doubt. >>For example if we in the IWW really promoted the expression, “So take your time and fuck them all”, don’t you think a search for that phrase would give a fair number of hits in Google (it gives zero), considering that the legitimate first line “An Injury to one is an injury to all” gives more than 14 thousand hits? < < Change 'fuck' to the euphemized 'buck', which isn't what they actually said, but is what it has been preserved as in news reports of the period. In fact, this version is used on the IWW website in an article on Sabotage.

    The reason you find so many instances of the first line on google is that it’s a more commonly used phrase in general parlance. Almost none of those references mention the IWW slogan. The second line shows up more than the third line, but again it’s a more commonly used phrase. For the third line, change them to ’em and you’ll find references.

    >>And if it comes from some obscure passage in a book, is it really fair to ascribe it to the union as a “classic slogan” when union members have never heard of it? Or was it (as i suspect) made up for this article?< < Yep, and I made it up for 20 years while teaching US History too. It's part of an elaborate propaganda campaign I've been running against the wobblies for years - ascribing jingles to them which exactly match their philosophy and other dastardly tricks. >>Speaking of the thirties, it was the CIO that was staging massive work slowdowns, not the IWW. Undoubtedly many of the activists were former Wobs. But Dave Nalle should read some of the labor history that he writes about.< < Not only are IWW work slowdowns and sitdown strikes in the 1930s widely documented, but they are also discussed in a number of places on the IWW website. The CIO used walk out strikes in the early 30s, but unlike the IWW they stopped striking at all after the outbreak of WW2, while the Wobblies continued to strike during the war, earning a great deal of enmity and virtually destroying the union in the US. >>So i also wonder about the flip accusation that these workers were interfering with customers’ shopping. Could there be more creativity throughout this account than there is accuracy?< < I quote from the article on the IWW website: "Nicole Warrington, sent cashier Nellie Moore home early after she spent her break passing out leaflets in front of the store." and "Wobs returned several more times to flier the generally receptive customers, both informally and for larger, planned events. " But then I suppose the article on the IWW site could be lying. >>The gross over-simplification of industrial unionism (the principle economic philosophy of the IWW, similar to and often incorrectly identified as anarcho-syndicalism) < < An identification repeatedly used on the IWW website. But I guess they could be wrong about their own political classification. >>as an operative tactic for attacking capitalism business by business is naive. The IWW has contracts with businesses that it does not seek to destroy. Workers depend upon their jobs; why would any union willfully destroy the livelihoods of the workers it is trying to recruit? < < Well, the IWW tactics did get these two workers at Fresh Plus fired. But I guess it could have been worse. Since the IWW still advocates sabotage they could have poisoned the food in the store instead of just handing out flyers. I guess we should count our blessings. >>Individual businesses are not the problem, capitalism is. We organize one company at a time, but we don’t fancy that capitalism will ever go away one company at a time. < < But you still think that capitalism will go away, so you're completely delusional - which is a good thing because if you weren't deluded you might be dangerous. >>Unlike AFL-CIO unions, we in the IWW do have an ultimate strategy for empowering working folk and changing a system in which the average CEO makes 500 times what the average worker makes, < < Please show me some evidence for this. Typical CEO salaries are less than 10 times the salary of the average worker in the same company. Your figure is based on a tiny number of very large corporations and does not represent an average or a cross-section of the business community. >>but it entails the concept of a *general* strike, not self-destruction. The last significant general strike in the United States occurred in 1946 (actually there were a couple of them).< < And there's a reason why no one has heard from the IWW since then - the general strikes so outraged the public that those who promoted them were completely discredited for a generation. >>I also think that calling a failed or stalled organizing drive a “big success” is demeaning and sarcastic.< < That's how the IWW website presents it. The article's linked from their main page. Maybe you should read it. >> I’m left with the impression that, in spite of some suggestions of tentative sympathy for the union’s philosophy, Dave Nalle thinks the IWW is some sort of a joke, ripe for a spoof. I hope that my impression is wrong.< < It's not. >>The answer is no. Being an owner of a business is not the same as being a boss. Unless you are locked into thinking like a capitalist, that is.<< I guess we can take some reassurance in the fact that if the Wobblies ever do collectivize businesses they'll quickly fail and be replaced by better organized, more capitalistic competitors. Dave

  • “Its what we call working class.”

    Yep.

    “And you?”

    I work at a hotel.

  • But to Richard and the IWW is the ‘working class’ the class of people who work for a living, or a special sub-set of people who will only work under special conditions imposed by labor on management to the overall detriment of the business for all involved.

    BTW, did you know that the IWW is working for a 4 day work week?

    dave

  • You make one valid point, but you are wrong about most everything else:

    >> Typical CEO salaries are less than 10 times the salary of the average worker in the same company. Your figure is based on a tiny number of very large corporations and does not represent an average or a cross-section of the business community. < < You are correct about the figure being based upon large corporations. But it is not a "tiny number". There are, after all, 500 corporations in the Fortune 500 (for example). But also consider this, published today: "U.S. CEO compensation climbed 60 percent to an average of $10.7 million from 1996 to 2004, New York-based pay consulting firm Pearl Meyer & Partners found in a study." http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/business/11057799.htm Do you defend CEO's making ten million dollars a year on average? When working folk are under the gun for mortgage payments and high fuel prices, i think a salary of ten million dollars a year is obscene. The article also states that many CEO's have been hiding much of their income, which seems typical for corporate honchos in this Enron era. >> Since the IWW still advocates sabotage they could have poisoned the food in the store < < You linked to the article, did you not read this? "In actuality, sabotage is a form of organized inefficiency by workers, designed to negatively impact the employer. But the one thing sabotage isn't, is destruction of the machinery of production, or the product itself. " http://www.iww.org/organize/strategy/Sabotage2.shtml Ahhh, but it also mentions: "... hostile lies spread to stir up reactionary hysteria against the union." You're doing your best, i see. The idea of poisoning people is repulsive. It comes from your mind, not from anyone in the union. >> Change ‘fuck’ to the euphemized ‘buck’, which isn’t what they actually said, but is what it has been preserved as in news reports of the period. In fact, this version is used on the IWW website in an article on Sabotage. < < You are making an erroneous assumption. Here is appropriate usage, from a song called "Dump the Bosses Off Your Back": "Boob -- why don't you buck like thunder, And dump the bosses off your back?" Therefore, the phrase "So take your time and buck 'em all" suggests bucking them off your back. The difference in meaning is subtle, but important. Bucking them off is an acknowledgement of the existing power relationship and exploitation of working people's labor. Bosses and investors get the benefit of the surplus value created by working people. In essence, working people are systematically robbed of a portion of their labor by the wage system. Considering this, maybe some might feel the sentiment to "fuck them all". But stating that this is what the union promotes as a "classic slogan" (your words) is simply hostile and untrue, and an unjust villification on your part. You seek to defame something that you do not like with lies and distortion. Appears that is par for the course on this website. >> is the ‘working class’ the class of people who work for a living, or a special sub-set of people who will only work under special conditions imposed by labor on management to the overall detriment of the business for all involved. << The current situation: management (i.e., business owners and investors) impose special conditions on working people via the wage system and supporting laws. This is the current reality and you cannot deny it. What real power do working people have? Only the right to resign from a job and go get exploited by some other business owner. The IWW seeks to put working people in control of their work lives. If you see that as a threat, then i suggest you must either be confused, uninformed about the conditions of your labor, or else you are deriving benefit from the current system above and beyond the labor that you are investing. But then i don't know, maybe you're just a boss who is getting rich off the current system and therefore feel compelled to defend it. richard

  • Tom French

    Riveting debate, I hope you keep it up. Honestly.

  • The proletariate speaks:

    >>You make one valid point, but you are wrong about most everything else: < < So I guess all that data from the IWW site WAS a pack of lies then? >>You are correct about the figure being based upon large corporations. But it is not a “tiny number”. There are, after all, 500 corporations in the Fortune 500 (for example).< < So you're saying that all of the fortune 500 companies have that kind of salary discrepancy? I don't think so. >>But also consider this, published today:

    “U.S. CEO compensation climbed 60 percent to an average of $10.7 million from 1996 to 2004, New York-based pay consulting firm Pearl Meyer & Partners found in a study.”< < That's barely double the cost of living increase which most companies apply yearly to everyone's salaries. In addition, 10.7 million a year is only 200 times average employee salary, not 500 times. Try again. >>Do you defend CEO’s making ten million dollars a year on average? When working folk are under the gun for mortgage payments and high fuel prices, i think a salary of ten million dollars a year is obscene.< < There is not relationship between a CEO's salary and the salary of an employee. CEO salaries are not compensation for specific hourly or salaried work done, they are more like consulting fees paid for the prestige and expertise of the CEO in setting company goals and policies and in negotiating with stockholders and other groups. Comparing CEO compensation - note that it's not even called salary - and worker salaries is like comparing apples and oranges. >>The article also states that many CEO’s have been hiding much of their income, which seems typical for corporate honchos in this Enron era. < < Anyone who HAS income does everything they can to hide it from the government. >>You linked to the article, did you not read this?

    “In actuality, sabotage is a form of organized inefficiency by workers, designed to negatively impact the employer. But the one thing sabotage isn’t, is destruction of the machinery of production, or the product itself. “< < Contrary to the IWW's beliefs you cannot redefine words in the English language and change their meanings. They may wish to euphemize to avoid criticism, but we all know what sabotage actually means. >>Therefore, the phrase “So take your time and buck ’em all” suggests bucking them off your back.

    The difference in meaning is subtle, but important. Bucking them off is an acknowledgement of the existing power relationship and exploitation of working people’s labor. Bosses and investors get the benefit of the surplus value created by working people. In essence, working people are systematically robbed of a portion of their labor by the wage system.< < What flavor fairycake are they serving over there at the IWW? The chant historically used the word 'fuck'. There's no shame in that. Why try these intricate methods of excusing or explaining it away? Just accpet it and be proud. >>Considering this, maybe some might feel the sentiment to “fuck them all”. But stating that this is what the union promotes as a “classic slogan” (your words) is simply hostile and untrue, and an unjust villification on your part. You seek to defame something that you do not like with lies and distortion. Appears that is par for the course on this website.< < I don't consider the slogan defamatory with the word 'fuck' in it. That's what was chanted as confirmed by witnesses at strikes and marches, and there's nothing wrong with it. Why do you think there is? It's a perfectly good Anglo Saxon word and if you are labor protesters I don't see how the sentiment can be inappropriate. >>The current situation: management (i.e., business owners and investors) impose special conditions on working people via the wage system and supporting laws. This is the current reality and you cannot deny it.< < Those special conditions being what? That they show up and work in order to get paid? That doesn't seem unreasonable. >>What real power do working people have? Only the right to resign from a job and go get exploited by some other business owner.< < Except that businesses do not 'exploit' workers. That's a common fallacy perpetuated by people like the IWW. Expecting people to work and participate in the life of th ecompany is not exploitation, it's employment. Keeping workers happy and well disposed towards the company benefits the bottom line. Companies treat their workers well to create loyalty and increase efficiency. This sense of responsibility toi the workers is why America has such a high level of worker efficiency. More than 20% higher than any other nation in the world. >>The IWW seeks to put working people in control of their work lives.< < By destroying the efficiency of the corporate structure and replacing it with a structure which in most cases is uncompetitive and will lead to the bankruptcy of the business. It's the attitude that if you won't play by your rules you're going to take your marbles and go home. If the company won't enslave itself to the whims of the workers then you'll just destroy the company. Who benefits from that? >>If you see that as a threat, then i suggest you must either be confused, uninformed about the conditions of your labor, or else you are deriving benefit from the current system above and beyond the labor that you are investing. < < Ah, of course. If I have an understanding of economics and am not swallowing the fairycake whole I must be some sort of corporate exploiter. Nice ad hominem attack. That's usually the sign of a completely bankrupt position. >>But then i don’t know, maybe you’re just a boss who is getting rich off the current system and therefore feel compelled to defend it.<< Actually, I'm self-employed now and have never been a 'boss', though I do hire some sub-contractors for my business. I've worked in a variety of jobs, including ones which were unionized, and I have seen how destructive and counter-productive unions are and how much better the natural and efficient corporate structure is for the worker and the company. It's not that I benefit from the system, it's that I see what's obvious to almost everyone in America - that the system works and what you propose is laughably impractical, based on false assumptions, paranoia and pure fantasy. Dave

  • Eric Olsen

    Dave and Richard, I commend you both for representing quite well the poles of the labor-business debate. It is obvious throughout most of history “capital” did exploit labor to whatever extent it could get away with, but in the 20th century the pendulum (note repeated use of metaphor) swung hard the other way to the point where in the urban East and uppper Midwest, anyway, labor was able to inflict absurd rules and conditions that ended up being to the detriment of all, since if a business can’t make money it can’t employ anyone.

    The answer is a reasonable balance and it will never be perfect but we seem to be in that general range now since labor has not been able to stop NAFTA or make too great a dent in generally open and free trade, which it rather solipsistically has done all it can to inhibit.

  • The problem with groups like the IWW is that they don’t really understand how labor functions in the economy. They think that the part time hourly workers at Frech Plus, which has enormous job turnover as students move on to better jobs or go back to school, should be earning the same wage as skilled career workers in industrial occupations.

    They just can’t accept the concept that scut work gets scut wages, and if you want real wages you need to move on to a real job. With the same qualifications students working part time for $7 an hour in a grocery or convenience store have, you can get a full-time job working in data processing or any number of entry level clerical jobs for $10-$12 an hour. You just have to be prepared for the requirements of going to a 9 to 5 job and showing up looking decent and having a desk in a cubicle and all that – not to mention producing tangible output at the end of your work day.

    Alternatively, if academic skills are not your forte, you don’t have to stick with the $7 an hour job in MacDonalds. With the same qualifications you can go work a loading dock or construction or stocking in a warehouse for $10 or considerably more an hour. But again, you have to show up on time, work regular hours, and actually do the work you’re assigned during the course of the day.

    And that’s the key thing. The IWW expects people working marginal jobs to get paid the same as people working serious, full-time jobs, and that just doesn’t make any sense.

    Dave

  • Thanks, Dave and Richard. The capital vs. labour discussion is a very important element in creating global balance.

    Jamaica has a strong trade union history. The political careers of two of our national heroes, Norman W. Manley and Alexander Bustamante, arose from their work in establishing workers’ rights.

    The trade union that each established provided an important political base for the two major parties that grew out of them.

  • Nick Jones

    “Alternatively, if academic skills are not your forte, you don’t have to stick with the $7 an hour job in MacDonalds. With the same qualifications you can go work a loading dock or construction or stocking in a warehouse for $10 or considerably more an hour.

    Not where I live. When I lost my job, I tried to find something that pay me the same money, every company wanted me to take a $2-3+ an hour paycut, even though I have 10 years of warehouse/stockroom experience, with computer, database, and training included. The best offer I got was for $10/hour at a warehouse (A cut of $1.72), but the HR person told me I’d start out at $9/hour for a 90 day probationary period. So, if any of you think I got my anti-corporate/anti-capitalist ideas from a book(s), think again; I’ve earned it. And I haven’t even told you about the soul-sucking, dehumanizing job I had before I lost it.

  • Nick, I would guess that the cost of living where you are is proportionally lower just as the wages are, when compared to here in Austin. I bet you can rent a 1 bedroom apartment there in a decent neighborhood for under $500 a month. Am I right?

    And of course, if you want a higher salary you could always move to where your skills are in demand – and as you describe them I would think you could be at $15 an hour within a year in the right parts of the country.

    Dave

  • faried

    4 hour work day? I’d say bring it on. The fat cats used to scare people into believing that the economy would collapse if we were granted the 8-hour work day, but history showed otherwise.

    With 4-hour work day it’s the same thing. You just have to hire more people to do the job, which means more wages being paid out and being contributed back to the economy. Guess what? We the wage workers actually can’t help but SPEND all of our earnings on local goods and services. Money circulating in the local economy instead of being hoarded in some off-shore tax havens.

    Also, what is this crap about wobblies not having to worry about unemployment because daddy pays the bills? I’ve worked two jobs to SUPPORT my family, not the other way around. And, yeah, I’m proud to be an IWW member!

  • So, what are you planning on doing with the $560 you earn a month from that 4 hour a day job, Wobbly-boy? Just about enough to cover a car payment and car insurance. I guess the guy who gets the other half of your job gets the apartment and food.

    >>Also, what is this crap about wobblies not having to worry about unemployment because daddy pays the bills?<< That perception applies primarily to the college student wobblies who launched the particular protest referenced in the original article, not to the truly insane actual working class IWW members who are completely out of touch with reality. Dave