1. Karl Marx, "American Pauperism and the Working Class," in On America and the Civil War, vol. 2 of The Karl Marx Library, ed. Saul K. Padover (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972), p. 7; Karl Marx, "The Possibility of Non-Violent Revolution," in The Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed., ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: W. W. Norton, 1978), p. 523.

2. Gerald N. Grob, in Workers and Utopia: A Study of Ideological Conflict in the American Labor Movement, 1865-1900 (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1969), pp. 74-78, places the eight-hour movement in its historical perspective. Also see Richard O. Boyer and Herbert M. Morais, Labor's Untold Story (New York: United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, 1955), pp. 87-91.

3. Friedrich Engels, "Engels to Florence Kelley Wischnewetsky, London, June 3, 1886," in The Correspondence of Marx and Engels, ed. Dona Torr (New York: International Publishers, 1935), pp. 448-449.

4. Grob, Workers and Utopia, pp. 78, 176-179.

5. Werner Sombart, Why Is There No Socialism in the United States? ed. C. T. Husbands, trans. Patricia M. Hocking and C. T. Husbands (White Plains, N.Y.: International Arts and Sciences Press, 1976).

6. The literature on the failure of socialism is already voluminous and still growing. A good overview can be found in John H. M. Laslett and Seymour Martin Lipset, eds., Failure of a Dream? Essays in the History of American Socialism, rev. ed. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984). For a more unified statement of the problem, see Seymour Martin Lipset, "Why No Socialism in the United States?" in Radicalism in the Contemporary Age, vol. 1 of Sources of Contemporary Radicalism, ed. Seweryn Bialer and Sophia Sluzar (Boulder: Westview Press, 77), pp. 31-149. Recent worthwhile contributions to the debate on exceptionalism include Michael Shalev and Walter Korpi, "Working Class Mobilization and American Exceptionalism," Economic and Industrial Democracy 1 (February 1980): 31-61; Theodore J. Lowi, "Why Is There No Socialism in the United States? A Federal Analysis," International Political Science Review 5, no. 4 (1984): 369-380; Eric Foner, "Why Is There No Socialism in the United States?" History Workshop 17 (Spring 1984): 57-80; and Mike Davis, "Why the U.S. Working Class Is Different," New Left Review 123 (September-October 1980): 3-44.

7. Wilbert E. Moore, "Sociological Aspects of American Socialist Theory and Practice," in Socialism and American Life, ed. Donald Drew Egbert and Stow Persons (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952), vol. 1, p. 553.

8. The logic of analyzing "deviant cases"—cases that operate in ways not anticipated by an established body of social theory—is not to refute the theory in question, but to refine it through a more precise specification of its parameters. Rather than treating unexpected outcomes as a source of embarrassment or, worse still, as something to be tidied up and explained away, deviant case analysis can "play a positive role" in theory construction by focusing on why the received explanation is inadequate; see Patricia L. Kendall and Katherine M. Wolf, "The Two Purposes of Deviant Case Analysis," in The Language of Social Research: A Reader in the Methodology of Social Research, ed. Paul F. Lazarsfeld and Morris Rosenberg (Giencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1955), p. 167. Unfortunately, the social sciences have been slow to appreciate the advantages of deviant case analysis. For students of American exceptionalism, this has meant that deviations from the anti-socialist rule either go unnoticed or are dismissed as inconsequential. As a result, theories concerning the absence of socialism have rarely had to contend with the stubborn reality of its presence among certain segments of the population.

9. Sombart's way of posing the problem has recently come under fire from several writers, mostly American historians, who argue that the antisocialist trajectory of the U.S. labor movement was not so exceptional after all. There are two versions of this argument—one "hard," the other "soft." The "hard" version maintains that "the European model," far from representing a coherent pattern of class formation against which all other industrialized countries can be compared, was itself characterized by a high degree of national diversity; see Aristide R. Zolberg, "How Many Exceptionalisms?'' in Working-Class Formation: Nineteenth-Century Patterns in Western Europe and the United States, ed. Ira Katznelson and Aristide R. Zolberg (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), pp. 397-455. The "soft" version of the same argument faults the exceptionalist school for exaggerating the differences between American and European working-class experiences, pointing out that Western European workers, despite their more flamboyant rhetoric, were animated by many of the same concerns as their American counterparts. Thus, although the language and strategies available to both groups differed along several critical dimensions, the workers' basic objectives did not; see Sean Wilentz, "Against Exceptionalism: Class Consciousness and the American Labor Movement, 1790-1920," International Labor and Working-Class History 26 (Fall 1984): 1-24. But arguing that workingclass consciousness was comparable on both sides of the Atlantic—if indeed it was—does not change the historical fact that only in America did a socialist party based in the working class fail to survive. As a nation, the United States is still paying for this failure through the underdevelopment of the American welfare state; see John D. Stephens, The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1979).

10. Recent studies of Communist trade union activity include Bert Cochran, Labor and Communism: The Conflict That Shaped American Unions (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977); Harvey A. Levenstein, Communism, Anti-Communism, and the CIO (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1981); and volume 4 of the research annual Political Power and Social Theory (1984), which is devoted to historical sociological studies of American labor and the left. The assessment of Communist strength is from Bernard Karsh and Phillips L. Garmen, "The Impact of the Political Left," in Labor and the New Deal, ed. Milton Derber and Edwin Young (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1961), p. 111.

11. Lincoln Fairley, Facing Mechanization: The West Coast Longshore Plan, Monograph no. 23 (Los Angeles: Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California, Los Angeles, 1979), pp. 2-4. Also see Paul T. Hartman, Collective Bargaining and Productivity: The Longshore Mechanization Agreement (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969), chap. 2, for a discussion of how the ILWU acquired job control.

12. Paul Eliel ("Industrial Peace and Conflict: A Study of Two Pacific Coast Industries," Industrial and Labor Relations Review 2 [July 1949]: 499) writes of the ILWU's unique brand of political unionism: "While left-wing officers of some other unions may hold similar views, some of them effectively divorce their economic beliefs from their union activity, so that, as to the latter, they are hardly to be distinguished from business unionists. From 1934 to 1948 this was not the case as to the officers of the Longshoremen's Union."

13. Wallace's 1948 campaign caught many left-wing unionists off guard. ILWU leaders, while stopping short of formally endorsing the Progressive Party, did speak out against "the evils of the two-party system"; see Joseph R. Starobin, American Communism in Crisis, 1943-1957 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1972), pp. 166, 167. The rank and file got the message, and in a coastwide referendum they narrowly voted to support Wallace's candidacy; see Eliel, "Industrial Peace and Conflict," p. 497. On the ILWU's successful efforts to overturn federal legislation barring Communists from holding union office, see Philip Bart, Theodore Bassett, William W. Weinstone, and Arthur Zipser, eds., Highlights of a Fighting History: 60 Years of the Communist Party, USA (New York: International Publishers, 1979), pp. 379, 380.

14. Estimates of Communist strength on the docks are from "Comparative Absolute Figures of Basic Industry," on microfilm, reel 3, series 2-47, p. 3, Earl Browder Papers, University Research Library, University of California, Los Angeles; and Archie Brown, interview with author, San Francisco, September 12, 1981. For a sampling of opinion regarding the ILWU's left-wing credentials, see especially Nathan Glazer, The Social Basis of American Communism (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961), pp. 111, 117; David J. Saposs, Communism in American Unions (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959), pp. 208, 212; and Starobin, American Communism in Crisis, p. 286n.

15. The American Communication Association, a white-collar union representing about seven thousand radio and television engineers and technicians—most of them employed at the New York Metropolitan Western Union offices—also survived the Cold War anti-communist offensive. F.S. O'Brien, in "The 'Communist-Dominated' Unions in the United States Since 1950," Labor History 9 (Spring 1968): 184-209, surveys the post-expulsion performance of the left-wing unions. In the case of the ILWU, the Teamsters reportedly spent more than a quarter of a million dollars on a series of raids against the union's warehouse stronghold in San Francisco, netting a total of 250 members. But the longshore division, which is the focus of this analysis, was never pierced; see Robert E. Randolph, "History of the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union" (M.A. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1952).

16. Richard L. Neuberger, "Labor's Overlords," American Magazine 125 (March 1938): 17.

17. Richard L. Neuberger, "Bad-Man Bridges," Forum 101 (April 1939): 195.

18. The views of the West Coast shipowners are quoted in Neuberger, "Labor's Overlords," p. 169. Bridges's legal difficulties with immigration are covered in Charles P. Larrowe, Harry Bridges: The Rise and Fall of Radical Labor in the United States, 2d ed. (Westport, Conn.: Lawrence Hill, 1977), chaps. 5-7; and Harvey Schwartz, "Harry Bridges and the Scholars: Looking at History's Verdict," California History 59 (Spring 1980): 66-78.

The presiding judge at the 1939 deportation hearing concluded that "Bridges' aims [were] energetically radical" but did not conflict with the Constitution; see Estolv Ward, Harry Bridges on Trial (New York: Modern Age Books, 1940), p. 230. Coverage of the trial is found in Time, August 14, 1939, pp. 15-16. The Seattle banker is quoted in Neuberger, "Labor's Overlords," p. 170.

19. David A. Shannon, The Decline of American Communism: A History of the Communist Party of the United States Since 1945 (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1959), p. 217; Business Week, July 29, 1950, p. 64. The classic theoretical statement about the importance of delivering the goods is Selig Perlman, A Theory of the Labor Movement (New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1949). For elaborations of Perlman's thesis, see Arthur Max Ross, Trade Union Wage Policy (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1948), p. 110; Philip Taft, "Theories of the Labor Movement," in Interpreting the Labor Movement, Industrial Relations Research Association, Publication no. 9 (Champaign, Ill.: Industrial Relations Research Association, 1952), p. 34; Irving Bernstein, Turbulent Years: A History of American Workers, 1933-1941 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1970), p. 783; and Saposs, Communism in American Unions, pp. 184-185. In the case of Bridges, those who attribute his durability, in the main, to economic performance include Randolph, "International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union," p. 227; Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 377; and Robert S. Keitel, "The Merger of the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers into the United Steelworkers of America,'' Labor History 15 (Winter 1974): 36.

20. Eliel, "Industrial Peace and Conflict," pp. 480, 500.

21. John H. M. Laslett, "Socialism and the American Labor Movement: Some New Reflections," Labor History 8 (Spring 1967): 136-155; David A. Levinson, "Left-Wing Labor and the Taft-Hartley Act," Labor Law Journal 1 (November 1950): 1086; Robert W. Ozanne, "The Effects of Communist Leadership on American Trade Unions" (Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 1954), p. 321; James R. Prickett, "Some Aspects of the Communist Controversy in the CIO," Science & Society 33 (Summer-Fall 1969): 319.

22. For similar critiques of economic instrumentalism as it applies more generally to problems of union loyalty and strike activity, see Douglas E. Booth, "Collective Action, Marx's Class Theory, and the Union Movement," Journal of Economic Issues 12 (March 1978): 163-185; and Michael Mann, Consciousness and Action Among the Western Working Class (London: Macmillan, 1977), pp. 50, 51.

23. Jack Barbash, Labor Unions in Action (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1948), p. 217; Max M. Kampelman, The Communist Party vs. the CIO: A Study in Power Politics (New York: Praeger, 1957), p. 251; Saposs, Communism in American Unions, p. 221. Organizational factors also figure prominently in the analyses of Glazer, Social Basis of American Communism, pp. 120-121; Albert Epstein and Nathaniel Goldfinger, "Communist Tactics in American Unions," Labor and Nation 6 (Fall 1950): 36; Henry Pelling, American Labor (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), p. 192; and Philip Selznick, The Organizational Weapon: A Study of Bolshevik Strategy and Tactics (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1960), pp. 195-215. The passage of time has apparently done little to calm the political passions that are aroused whenever the issue of union democracy and communist leadership is raised; see James R. Prickett, "Anti-Communism and Labor History," Industrial Relations 13 (October 1974): 219-227; and Walter Galenson, ''Communists and Trade Union Democracy," Industrial Relations 13 (October 1974): 228-236.

24. John H. M. Laslett, "Giving Superman a Human Face: American Communism and the Automobile Workers in the 1930s," Reviews in American History 9 (March 1981): 113. Regarding the charge of organizational domination, British socialist Harold Laski, an uncompromising critic of communists, writes that such arguments do "not go more than a little way to explain the volume of their influence in the trade unions. The fact still remains that the Communist Party secures from its members an energetic loyalty that is far and away greater than anything the ordinary member of the rank and file is likely to display"; see Harold Laski, Trade Unions in a New Society (New York: Viking Press, 1949), p. 167.

25. Ozanne, "Effects of Communist Leadership," pp. 47, 103, 104.

26. Fairley, Facing Mechanization, pp. 3-4; Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 127. For a more general and critical discussion of such practices as they influence leadership accountability within unions, see the classic study by Robert Michels, Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy (New York: Free Press, 1962), esp. pt. 5.

27. Wayne Wilbur Hield, "Democracy and Oligarchy in the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union" (M.A. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1949); Jay Selwyn Goodman, "One-Party Union Government: The I.L.W.U. Case" (M.A. thesis, Stanford University, 1963); Seymour Martin Lipset, Martin A. Trow, and James S. Coleman, Union Democracy: The Internal Politics of the International Typographical Union (New York: Free Press, 1956), p. 132n.

28. Bridges is quoted in Lipset, Trow, and Coleman, Union Democracy, p. 5.

29. In the early 1960s, Bridges was accused of not respecting due process in the dismissal of 82 "B-men." The classification "B-men" had been created in 1959 when 743 workers were added to the labor force as probationary members of the union. Four years later a joint union-management committee evaluated the work records of the 561 remaining "B-men" and found 82 of them lacking. Stan Weir, one of the aggrieved longshoremen, lays out their case in "The ILWU: A Case Study in Bureaucracy," in Autocracy and Insurgency in Organized Labor, ed. Burton Hall (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1972), pp. 80-92. Bridges vigorously denied allegations of any wrongdoing.

30. Congress of Industrial Organizations, Proceedings of the Eleventh Constitutional Convention, Cleveland, Ohio, October 31-November 4, 1949, pp. 252, 258.

31. Paul Jacobs, The State of the Unions (New York: Atheneum, 1963), p. 90.

32. Kampelman, Communist Party vs. the CIO, p. 251.

33. Much of this research is summarized in Albert Szymanski, The Capitalist State and the Politics of Class (Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop, 1977), chap. 3. Indicative of the growing concern with industry at the time, Robert Blauner, in his classic study Alienation and Freedom: The Factory Worker and His Industry (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), argues for a "systematic, self-conscious sensitivity to the diversity of industrial environments" as a prelude to developing a genuine "sociology of industries" (pp. 186, 187).

34. Seymour Martin Lipset, Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books, 1963), chap. 7, esp. pp. 263-267; Clark Kerr and Abraham J. Siegel, "The Interindustry Propensity to Strike—An International Comparison," in Labor and Management in Industrial Society, ed. Clark Kerr (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1964), pp. 105-147. For critical examinations of the Kerr-Siegel thesis, see P. K. Edwards, "A Critique of the Kerr-Siegel Hypothesis of Strikes and the Isolated Mass: A Study of the Falsification of Sociological Knowledge," Sociological Review 25 (August 1977): 551-574; Edward Shorter and Charles Tilly, Strikes in France, 1830-1968 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974); Harold Berenson, "The Community and Family Bases of U.S. Working-Class Protest, 1880-1920: A Critique of the 'Skill Degradation' and 'Ecological' Perspectives," Research in Social Movements, Conflicts, and Change 8 (1985): 109-132; and Joel I. Nelson and Robert Grams, "Union Militancy and Occupational Communities," Industrial Relations 17 (October 1978): 342-346.

35. In the Chilean countryside, for example, the radicalism of agrarian communities varies inversely with their degree of contact with the Communist-led miners; see James Petras and Maurice Zeitlin, "Miners and Agrarian Radicalism," American Sociological Review 32 (August 1967): 578-586.

36. Stanley Weir, interview with author, San Pedro, California, April 22, 1981.

37. On the isolation of New York's dockworkers, see Elizabeth Ogg, Longshoremen and Their Homes (New York: Greenwich, 1939), p. 48; and Glazer, Social Basis of American Communism, p. 120.

38. Ryan's obsessive anti-communism is readily admitted—in fact, celebrated—by a sympathetic historian of the ILA: see Maud Russell, Men Along the Shore (New York: Brussel & Brussel, 1966), esp. pp. 122-124, 137-138. Ryan's support for European fascism is mentioned in Maurice Rosenblatt, "Joe Ryan and His Kingdom," The Nation 161 (November 24, 1945): 550. The secret anti-communist fund is discussed in George Morris, A Tale of Two Waterfronts (New York, 1953), p. 29. Lundberg is quoted in Edward Rosenbaum, "The Expulsion of the International Longshoremen's Association from the American Federation of Labor" (Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 1954), p. 397.

39. Daniel Bell, The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1960), p. 165.

40. Mathew Josephson, "Red Skies over the Water Front," Colliers 118 (October 5, 1946): 17; Morris, Tale of Two Waterfronts, p. 21.

41. Guided by what is essentially an industry-based analysis, Raymond Charles Miller, in "The Dockworker Subculture and Some Problems in Cross-Cultural and Cross-Time Generalizations" ( Comparative Studies in Society and History 11 [June 1969]: 310), concludes with Lipset and others that "dockworkers are generally liberal or leftist in their political views." The ILA stands as a powerful rejoinder to this kind of industrial reductionism. For similar critiques of industry as a determinant of working-class politics, see the provocative comparative studies by Duncan Gallie, Social Inequality and Class Radicalism in France and Britain (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983); and Scott Lash, The Militant Worker: Class and Radicalism in France and America (London: Heinemann, 1984).

42. Developments on both coasts since the 1950s are covered in Larrowe, Harry Bridges; and Vernon H. Jensen, Strife on the Waterfront: The Port of New York Since 1945 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1974). The major challenge of this period—containerization—is thoroughly discussed in Fairley, Facing Mechanization . A comparison of how both unions responded to containerization can be found in Philip Ross, "Distribution of Power Within the ILWU and the ILA," Monthly Labor Review 91 (January 1968): 1-7.

43. Herbert G. Gutman, Work, Culture, and Society in Industrializing America: Essays in American Working-Class and Social History (New York: Vintage Books, 1977); Herbert G. Gutman, Power and Culture: Essays on the American Working Class, ed. Ira Berlin (New York: Pantheon, 1987); David Montgomery, Workers' Control in America: Studies in the History of Work, Technology, and Labor Struggles (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979); David Montgomery, The Fall of the House of Labor: The Workplace, the State, and American Labor Activism, 1865-1925 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). For an insightful criticism of Gutman's and Montgomery's work, see Lawrence T. McDonnell, "'You Are Too Sentimental': Problems and Suggestions for a New Labor History," Journal of Social History 17 (Summer 1984): 629-654.

The other major figure in working-class historiography is of course E. P. Thompson, whose The Making of the English Working Class (New York: Vintage Books, 1963) spans the "culturalist"—"syndicalist" divide. William Sewell, Jr. ("Classes and Their Historical Formation: Critical Reflections on E. P. Thompson's Theory of Working-Class Formation," in E. P. Thompson: Critical Debates, ed. Harvey J. Kaye and Keith McClelland [Oxford: Basil Blackwell, forthcoming]) argues that The Making of the English Working Class actually represents a third camp, which he terms "experientialist."

1. David J. Saposs, Left Wing Unionism (New York: International Publishers, 1926), p. 185.

2. Communists, often working through the Trade Union Unity League, were instrumental in forming the American Communication Association; the Food, Tobacco, Agricultural and Allied Workers' Union; the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers Union; the United Office and Professional Workers of America; and the United Public Workers. The five remaining unions within the Communist orbit that were expelled also had an early exposure to radical leadership: the Fur and Leather Workers Union, which had a strong socialist presence at its founding; the International Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, an offshoot of the radical Western Federation of Miners; and three West Coast maritime unions—the ILWU, the National Marine Cooks and Stewards, and the International Union of Fishermen and Allied Workers—all of which were influenced early on by the syndicalist perspective of the Industrial Workers of the World; see O'Brien, "'Communist-Dominated' Unions"; and Karsh and Gorman, "Impact of the Political Left," pp. 104-105.

3. Richard F. Hamilton, Affluence and the French Worker in the Fourth Republic (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964), p. 185. Also see Glazer, Social Basis of American Communism, p. 111; Szymanski, The Capitalist State, p. 72.

4. Founded as the National Industrial Union of Marine Transport Workers in 1913, the MTW grew into one of the most powerful unions ever built by the IWW. Its six thousand card-carrying members in 1920 accounted for fully one-seventh of the IWW's national membership. Conducting increasingly successful forays into the guarded preserves of craft unionism, the MTW siphoned off growing numbers of disaffected maritime workers. During the last half of 1921, the MTW issued almost fifteen hundred membership cards to former AFL members. While conservative craft unions were suffering mass defections, the MTW absorbed more than twenty-four thousand new members over the next two years, making it the most viable organization in many ports. See "Minutes of the First Convention of the Marine Transport Workers Industrial Union 510, IWW," Box 70, folder 3, p. 4; and "Minutes of the Second Annual Convention of the Marine Transport Workers I. U. 510, IWW," Box 70, folder 10, p. 16; both found in Industrial Workers of the World Papers, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.

5. Bill Bailey, interview with author, San Francisco, September 15, 1981.

6. Max Weber, Economy and Society, ed. Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968), p. 929.

7. Bridges is quoted in Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 5.

8. The 1913 survey is cited in Carlton H. Parker, The Casual Laborer and Other Essays (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1972), p. 79. Labor turnover data are from Cloice R. Howd, Industrial Relations in the West Coast Lumber Industry, Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin no. 349 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1924), p. 53.

9. Eric Hobsbawm, Labouring Men (London: Wiedenfeld and Nicolson, 1964), p. 52. The 1923 study is cited in Howd, Industrial Relations, p. 53.

10. The relationship between geographic mobility and radicalism is also suggested, at least indirectly, by numerous empirical studies showing a correlation between economic insecurity and leftist politics among manual workers. Most analysts treat the radicalizing effects of unemployment and underemployment as a response to unfulfilled needs for secure income or as a reaction to felt deprivation; see, for example, Lipset, Political Man, pp. 243-248; Hamilton, Affluence and the French Worker, chap. 9; Maurice Zeitlin, Revolutionary Politics and the Cuban Working Class (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967), chap. 2; and John C. Leggett, Class, Race, and Labor: Working-Class Consciousness in Detroit (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968), chap. 5. Although such psychological orientations may incline economically insecure workers toward radicalism, their leftism may also in part be a product of greater "uprootedness," reflected not only in higher rates of labor turnover but in accelerated geographic mobility as well.

11. Living conditions aboard ship are described in James C. Healey, Foc's'le and Glory Hole: A Study of the Merchant Seaman and His Occupation (New York: Merchant Marine Publishers Association, 1936), pp. 47-53.

12. Bruce Nelson, "'Pentecost' on the Pacific: Maritime Workers and Working-Class Consciousness in the 1930s," Political Power and Social Theory 4 (1984): 141-182.

13. Ralph Winstead, "Enter a Logger: An I.W.W. Reply to the Four L's," Survey 44 (July 3, 1920): 475, 476.

14. Industrial Workers of the World, The Lumber Industry and Its Workers (Chicago: Industrial Workers of the World, n.d.), p. 50.

15. The Department of Labor official is quoted in Howd, Industrial Relations, p. 43.

16. William Preston, Jr., Aliens and Dissenters: Federal Suppression of Radicals, 1903-1933 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1963), pp. 157-161.

17. William W. Pilcher, The Portland Longshoremen: A Dispersed Urban Community (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972), p. 17; Oscar Hagan, interview with author, San Pedro, California, June 2, 1982.

18. Rosco Craycraft, interview with author, Seattle, Washington, December 16, 1981.

19. Thomas G. Plant, transcript of interview with Corinne L. Gilb, 1956, Oral History Collection, Social Science Library, University of California, Berkeley.

20. Stanley Weir, Informal Workers' Control: The West Coast Long-shoremen, Reprint series no. 247 (Urbana-Champaign: Institute of Industrial Relations, University of Illinois, 1975), p. 57.

21. Eliot Grinnell Mears, Maritime Trade of the Western United States (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1935), appendix, table IV.

22. Correspondence from E. Nichols, undated; and "Office of the General Manager of Employment Service Bureau," report dated January 15, 1924; both found in United States Shipping Board Papers, Record Group 32, General File 1920-1936, National Archives, Washington, D.C.

23. Montgomery, Workers' Control, p. 94.

24. Ibid., pp. 104, 96. American syndicalism has also been examined in Melvyn Dubofsky, Industrialism and the American Worker, 1865-1920 (Arlington Heights, Ill.: AHM Publishing, 1975), chap. 4; and Mike Davis, "The Stop Watch and the Wooden Shoe: Scientific Management and the Industrial Workers of the World," Radical America 9 (January-February 1975): 69-95.

25. Joe Dorfman, "The Longshoremen Strikes of 1922 and After" (B.A. thesis, Reed College, 1924).

26. For more on the economics of shipping, see Hartman, Collective Bargaining and Productivity, chap. 1.

27. Other industrial unionists were involved in the dockside struggles of 1919-1923, but their influence was far less than that of the IWW. The One Big Union Movement, Canada's equivalent of the IWW, had a following in the Pacific Northwest, while the Federation of Marine Transport Workers, an independent body with mild syndicalist leanings, was active in the Puget Sound area and in California, particularly San Pedro; see [Joseph] Bruce Nelson, "Maritime Unionism and Working-Class Consciousness in the 1930s" (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1982), pp. 102-107.

28. The longshoremen's role in the Seattle general strike is discussed in Robert L. Friedmann, The Seattle General Strike (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1964), pp. 17, 18; and Harvey O'Connor, Revolution in Seattle: A Memoir (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1964), pp. 158, 159.

29. Report of Agent 106, dated July 16, 1919, Broussais Beck Papers on Industrial Espionage, Suzzallo Library, University of Washington, Seattle (hereafter cited as Beck Papers). This collection contains two sets of labor-spy reports furnishing daily accounts of Seattle's labor movement during 1919 and 1920. Agent 17 submitted highly sensationalized reports, whereas those of Agent 106, the source of this information, were considerably more detailed and objective.

30. Seattle Times, May 4, 1920, p. 15.

31. Seattle Union Record, September 19, 1919, p. 1; O'Connor, Revolution in Seattle, p. 276; Report of Agent 106, dated September 18, 1919, Beck Papers.

32. Dorfman, "The Longshoremen Strikes," pp. 2-7; Dwight L. Palmer, "Pacific Coast Maritime Labor" (Ph.D. diss., Stanford University, 1935), p. 178.

33. Seattle Times, May 4, 1920, p. 15.

34. Seattle Union Record, May 8, 1920, p. 1.

35. Head of Labor Council quoted in ibid.; information from reliable informant found in report from S.B. McKenzie, executive secretary, dated May 7, 1920, Northwest Waterfront Employers Union Papers, International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union Library, San Francisco (hereafter cited as Northwest Papers).

36. Report of S.B. McKenzie, executive secretary, dated June 24, 1920, Northwest Papers; Frank P. Foisie, "Stabilizing Seattle's Longshore Labor" (Statement presented at the National Conference of Social Work, Denver, Colorado, June 11, 1925, typescript, Labor Collection, Social Science Library, University of California, Berkeley).

37. Industrial Solidarity, January 6, 1923, pp. 1, 2.

38. Portland Oregonian, June 14, 1922, p. 14.

39. Jack Mowrey, interview with author, Portland, Oregon, December 21, 1981.

40. Industrial Solidarity, January 6, 1923, p. 5; report titled "Joint Organization. Outlined by O. S. Swenson, Secretary for Portland Longshore Work," n.d., Northwest Papers.

41. Portland Oregonian, October 19, 1922, p. 1, and October 20, 1922, p. 1.

42. Art Shields, "The San Pedro Strike," Industrial Pioneer 1 (June 1923): 15.

43. Industrial Solidarity, May 19, 1923, p. 1, and May 12, 1923, p. 1.

44. Long Beach Daily Press, May 11, 1923, p. 1.

45. Hyman Weintraub, "The I.W.W. in California, 1905-1931" (M.A. thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, 1947), p. 229.

46. Long Beach Daily Press, May 15, 1923, p. 1.

47. Louis B. Perry and Richard S. Perry, A History of the Los Angeles Labor Movement, 1911-1941 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1963), pp. 188-191.

48. William Martin Camp, San Francisco: Port of Gold (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1947), pp. 443, 444.

49. Herb Mills and David Wellman, in "Contractually Sanctioned Job Action and Workers' Control: The Case of San Francisco Longshoremen" ( Labor History 28 [Spring 1987]: 167-195), demonstrate the close connection between sling load limits, size of gangs, and job control.

50. San Francisco Chronicle, September 20, 1919, p. 3. Sam Kagel ( A Right Wing Dual Union, 1930, typescript) argues that rumors circulated on the waterfront after the strike claiming that the union's final demand was inspired by agents of the shipowners in an attempt to discredit the union.

51. San Francisco Chronicle, October 14, 1919, p. 2.

52. San Francisco Chronicle, October 4, 1919, pp. 1, 2, and October 14, 1919, p. 2; San Francisco Daily News, October 13, 1919, p. 1, and October 14, 1919, p. 5.

53. San Francisco Daily News, October 15, 1919, p. 1, and October 21, 1919, p. 1. Quote is from correspondence signed by executive secretary, dated October 25, 1919, Northwest Papers.

54. Correspondence from executive secretary O.S. Swensen, dated February 2, 1920, Northwest Papers; Bernstein, Turbulent Years, p. 225.

55. Paul Ware, interview with author, Palm Desert, California, January 23, 1982; Pilcher, Portland Longshoremen, pp. 38-42.

56. Craycraft interview, December 16, 1981.

57. Joseph P. Goldberg, The Maritime Story: A Study in Labor-Management Relations (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1958), pp. 118-129.

58. Charles P. Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall: A Comparison of Hiring Methods and Labor Relations on the New York and Seattle Waterfronts (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1955), p. 9.

59. Bailey interview, September 15, 1981.

60. United States Bureau of the Census, Population 1920. Fourteenth Census of the United States (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1923), vol. 4, pp. 884, 983, 1002, 1036.

61. Weir interview, April 22, 1981.

62. Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall, pp. 2, 85; National Adjustment Commission, Longshore Labor: An Investigation in Hours, Earnings, Labor Cost, and Output in the Longshore Industry in the Port of New York (New York: National Adjustment Commission, 1920), p. 27. This same report estimates that only about twenty-one thousand out of New York's nearly forty thousand longshoremen were able to find regular employment.

63. For a discussion of the shape-up and how it operated in New York, see Vernon H. Jensen, Hiring of Dock Workers and Employment Practices in the Ports of New York, Liverpool, London, Rotterdam, and Marseilles (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969), chap 2. Unsavory hiring practices and the resulting corruption are detailed in Malcolm Johnson, Crime on the Labor Front (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950).

64. National Adjustment Commission, Longshore Labor, p. 131.

65. Ibid.; Charles B. Barnes, The Longshoremen (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1915), pp. 88, 92.

66. "Dock Employment in New York City," Monthly Labor Review 4 (February 1917): 292.

67. Louis I. Dublin and Robert J. Vane, "Shifting of Occupations Among Wage Earners as Determined by Occupational History of Industrial Policyholders," Monthly Labor Review 18 (April 1924): 37, 38.

68. United States Bureau of the Census, Population 1910. Thirteenth Census of the United States (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1914), vol. 4, pp. 573, 592, 601, 603; United States Bureau of the Census, Population 1920. Fourteenth Census of the United States, vol. 4, pp. 884, 1002, 1036, 1159.

69. Plant interview, 1956, p. 30; Weir interview, April 22, 1981; Ware interview, January 23, 1982.

70. Barnes, Longshoremen, p. 5.

71. Perlman, Theory of the Labor Movement, p. 169. On the conservative, anti-socialist influence of Catholicism, see William V. Shannon, The American Irish (London: Macmillan, 1966), pp. 140, 141; Marc Karson, "Catholic Anti-Socialism," in Laslett and Lipset, Failure of a Dream? pp. 82-102; Montgomery, Workers' Control, pp. 76-82; and Jack Barbash, "Ethnic Factors in the Development of the American Labor Movement," in Interpreting the Labor Movement, Industrial Relations Research Association, Publication no. 9 (Champaign, Ill.: Industrial Relations Research Association, 1952), p. 876.

72. Charles Leinenweber, "The Class and Ethnic Bases of New York City Socialism, 1904-1915," Labor History 22 (Winter 1981): 47, 49n.

73. The impact of Irish immigration on another group of New York City workers is discussed by Joshua Freeman in "Catholics, Communists, and Republicans: Irish Workers and the Organization of the Transport Workers Union," in Working-Class America: Essays on Labor, Community, and American Society, ed. Michael H. Frisch and Daniel J. Walkowitz (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1983), esp. p. 262.

74. Barnes, Longshoremen, p. 5; Leonard Covello, "The Influence of Southern Italian Family Mores upon the School Situation in America," in The Italians: Social Background of an American Group, ed. Francesco Cordasco and Eugene Bucchioni (Clifton, N.J.: Augustus M. Kelley, 1974), P. 513.

75. The padrone system is described in Humbert Nelli, "The Italian Padrone System in the United States," Labor History 5 (Spring 1964): 153-167; Rudolph J. Vecoli, "Contadini in Chicago: A Critique of the Uprooted," in Many Pasts: Readings in American Social History, 1865-the Present, ed. Herbert G. Gutman and Gregory S. Kealy (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973), vol. 2, pp. 164-194.

76. Barnes, Longshoremen, pp. 7, 8.

77. Russell, Men Along the Shore, p. 39.

78. Barnes, Longshoremen, pp. 6, 100.

79. Hobsbawm, Labouring Men, p. 206.

80. New York Times, October 10, 1919, p. 1.

81. Ibid., pp. 1, 7.

82. Ibid.

83. Ibid., p. 1; see also New York Times, October 28, 1919, p. 3, and October 19, 1919, p. 1.

84. Industrial Solidarity, November 15, 1919, p. 1.

85. Richard J. Butler and Joseph Driscoll, Dock Walloper: The Story of 'Big Dick' Butler (New York: Putnam, 1933), pp. 205-221.

86. Vacarelli is quoted in Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall, p. 14.

87. New York Times, October 18, 1919, p. 1, and November 2, 1919, p. 3.

88. Industrial Solidarity, August 19, 1922, p. 8.

1. Jack Barbash, The Practice of Unionism (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1956), p. 342. On the relationship between employer intransigence and labor radicalism, see Seymour Martin Lipset, ''Radicalism or Reformism: The Sources of Working-Class Politics," American Political Science Review 77 (March 1983): 1-18; Mann, Consciousness and Action, p. 42; and James Holt, "Trade Unionism in the British and U.S. Steel Industries, 1888-1912: A Comparative Study," Labor History 18 (Winter 1977): 5-35.

2. Eliel ("Industrial Peace and Conflict") examines the impact of employer responses on unionization in the maritime and the wood products industries.

3. Ryan is quoted in the ILA's national publication, Longshoremen's Journal, December 1930, p. 3. On contrasting employer responses, see Ross, "Distribution of Power," pp. 2, 3.

4. Wytze Gorter and George H. Hildebrand, The Pacific Coast Maritime Shipping Industry, 1930-1948 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1954), vol. 2, An Analysis of Performance, p. 261. For a similar view, see Betty V. H. Schneider and Abraham Siegel, Industrial Relations in the Pacific Coast Longshore Industry (Berkeley: Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California, 1956), p. 34.

5. Henry Schmidt, interview with author, Sonoma, California, January 25, 1984; Bjourne Halling, transcript of interview with Herb Mills and David Wellman, Grass Valley, California, October 16 and 17, 1979, p. 21.

6. Clinton Golden and Harold Ruttenberg, Dynamics of Industrial Democracy (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1942), p. 58. The impact of employer ideologies on industrial relations is clearly demonstrated in Philip Taft, "Ideologies and Industrial Conflict," in Industrial Conflict, ed. Arthur Kornhauser, Robert Dubin, and Arthur M. Ross (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1954), pp. 257-265; and Reinhard Bendix, Work and Authority in Industry: Ideologies of Management in the Course of Industrialization (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1956). The term "strict parallelism" is from Clarence E. Bonnett, History of Employers' Associations in the United States (New York: Vintage Books, 1956).

7. The "mirror analogy" is critiqued in Kerr and Siegel, "The Interindustry Propensity to Strike."

8. Cross-industry variations in conflict are demonstrated in ibid.; and in Dirk Kruijt and Menno Vellinga, "On Strike and Strike Propensity," The Netherlands Journal of Sociology 12 (December 1976): 137-151. The relationship between product markets and unionization is argued at some length by Robert T. Averitt, The Dual Economy: The Dynamics of American Industry Structure (New York: W. W. Norton, 1968); and by James O'Connor, The Fiscal Crisis of the State (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1973). Empirical support for this position can be found in Martin Segal, "Union Wage Impact and Market Structure," Quarterly Journal of Economics 78 (February 1964): 96-114; John E. Kwoka, Jr., "Monopoly, Plant, and Union Effects on Worker Wages," Industrial and Labor Relations Review 36 (January 1983): 251-257; and Richard B. Freeman, "Effects of Unions on the Economy,'' in Unions in Transition: Entering the Second Century, ed. Seymour Martin Lipset (San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies, 1986), pp. 177-200.

9. For statements of the corporate liberal thesis, see Gabriel Kolko, The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American History, 1900-1916 (New York: Free Press, 1963); William Appleman Williams, The Contours of American History (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1966), esp. pp. 390-413; Ronald Radosh, "The Corporate Ideology of American Labor Leaders from Gompers to Hillman," Studies on the Left 6 (November-December 1966): 66-88; and James Weinstein, The Corporate Ideal in the Liberal State: 1900-1918 (Boston: Beacon Press, 1968). One of the few empirical studies of firm behavior determined that large corporations were typically the most anti-union and that they responded like corporate liberals only when fearing retaliation from labor; see Richard E. Ratcliff and David Jaffe, "Capitalists vs. Unions: An Analysis of Anti-Union Political Mobilization Among Business Leaders," Research in Social Movements, Conflicts, and Change 4 (1981): 95-121.

10. Randy Hodson, Workers' Earnings and Corporate Economic Structure (New York: Academic Press, 1983), p. 16. Harold Levinson ("Unionism, Concentration, and Wage Changes: Toward a Unified Theory," Industrial and Labor Relations Review 20 [January 1967]: 205) argues that sheltered producers frequently pursue strategies of co-optation and resistance, often simultaneously.

11. Almarin Phillips, "A Theory of Interfirm Organization," in Interorganizational Relations, ed. William M. Evan (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978), pp. 17-26. Levinson ("Unionism, Concentration, and Wage Changes") attributes employer accommodation in coal, construction, and trucking to spatial restrictions on production that limit capital mobility.

12. See, for example, Donald Palmer, Roger Friedland, and Jitendra V. Singh, "The Ties That Bind: Organizational and Class Bases of Stability in a Corporate Interlock Network," American Sociological Review 51 (December 1986): 781-796; Beth Mintz and Michael Schwartz, The Power Structure of American Business (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985); and Michael Useem, "Business and Politics in the United States and United Kingdom: The Origins of Heightened Political Activity of Large Corporations During the 1970s and Early 1980s," Theory and Society 12 (March 1983): 281-300.

13. "Analysis of Results of Operation of Ocean-Going Shipping Services Owned by American Companies," dated August 19, 1932, General File 1920-1936, United States Shipping Board Papers.

14. Paul Eliel, "Labor Problems in Our Steamship Business," Yale Review 26 (March 1937): 513.

15. James C. Marony, "The International Longshoremen's Association in the Gulf States During the Progressive Era," Southern Studies 16, no. 2 (1977): 232.

16. Russell, Men Along the Shore, p. 70; Charles P. Larrowe, Maritime Labor Relations on the Great Lakes (East Lansing: Labor and Industrial Relations Center, Michigan State University, 1959), pp. 17-18.

17. Russell, Men Along the Shore, p. 63.

18. Hobsbawm, Labouring Men, p. 220.

19. On U.S. Steel's domination of the Lake Carriers Association, see Larrowe, Maritime Labor Relations, chap. 3. For the Gulf Coast, see Marony, "International Longshoremen's Association."

20. Camp, San Francisco, p. 413.

21. Plant interview, 1956, p. 33.

22. Mike Quin, The Big Strike (New York: International Publishers, 1979), pp. 45, 54.

23. Joyce Clements, "The San Francisco Maritime and General Strikes of 1934 and the Dynamics of Repression" (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1975), p. 113.

24. The estimate of coastwise cargo is from Business Week, July 14, 1934, p. 7. San Pedro's strikebreaking expenses are reported in William F. Dunne, The Great San Francisco General Strike (New York: Workers' Library [1934], P. 41.

25. San Francisco Chronicle, May 12, 1934, p. 1.

26. The La Follette Committee is quoted in George E. Lucy, "Group Employer-Employee Industrial Relations in the San Francisco Maritime Industry, 1888-1947" (Ph.D. diss., St. Louis University, 1948), p. 211. Lapham's Washington visit is mentioned in Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 100.

27. Plant expounded his views in a private letter reprinted in United States Congress, Senate Subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor, Hearings on Violations of Free Speech and Rights of Labor, 78th Cong., 1st sess., 1943, S. Rept. 398, pt. 1, p. 1055 (hereafter cited as La Follette Committee Hearings).

28. Lapham is quoted in ibid., p. 1056. The position of dissenting lines is documented in ibid., p. 1066. The New York Times article is cited in Louis Adamic, "Harry Bridges: Rank-and-File Leader," The Nation 142 (May 6, 1936): 579.

29. La Follette Committee Hearings, pp. 1068, 1069.

30. Nelson, "Maritime Unionism," p. 373; Casey is quoted in Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 108.

31. The Pacific Shipper quoted in International Longshoremen's Association, Local 38-79, The Maritime Crisis: What It Is and What It Isn't (San Francisco: International Longshoremen's Association [1937]), p. 15; Oregon Daily Journal, October 24, 1936.

32. Editorial from the Pacific Shipper, September 28, 1936, p. 15; International Longshoremen's Association, Local 38-79, Maritime Crisis, p. 7; Pacific Shipper, December 14, 1936, p. 7.

33. Business Week, October 24, 1938, p. 32.

34. Clark Kerr and Lloyd Fisher, "Multiple Employer Bargaining: The S.F. Experience," in Insights into Labor Issues, ed. Richard A. Lester and Joseph Shister (New York: Macmillan, 1948), p. 33.

35. Pacific Marine Review, April 1937, p. 17 (emphasis added).

36. Despite "conference agreements," "pooling arrangements," and other attempts at economic self-regulation, rate wars were an accepted, if disliked, form of competition in the maritime industry. Underbidding, in particular, was an effective weapon in the hands of larger operators who could more easily afford a temporary loss in income in order to capture a bigger share of the market; see United States Office of the Federal Coordinator of Transportation, Hours, Wages, and Working Conditions in Domestic Water Transportation (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1936), vol. 1, pp. 7-10.

37. Moody's Manual of Investments. American and Foreign Industrial Securities (New York: Moody's Investors Service, 1931), pp. 304, 2762.

38. On the 1907 strike, see Barnes, Longshoremen, pp. 118, 119. The Labor Department study is by Benjamin M. Squires, "Associations of Harbor Boat Owners and Employees in the Port of New York," Monthly Labor Review 7 (August 1918): 47.

39. Benjamin M. Squires, "The Strike of the Longshoremen at the Port of New York," Monthly Labor Review 9 (December 1919): 100, 114.

40. On the government's role in the maritime industry, see Darrell Hevenor Smith and Paul V. Betters, The United States Shipping Board: Its History, Activities, and Organization (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1931).

41. The Shipping Board's more extensive involvement in the East was largely a result of the greater number of overseas mail routes connecting New York with major population and commercial centers in Europe, Africa, and the Near East. Given this larger volume of mail, the Shipping Board found it economically feasible to maintain its own fleet in New York well into the 1930s. On the Pacific Coast, where there were fewer mail routes, the government liquidated its fleet in 1928, thereafter paying commercial shippers a small subsidy to carry mail overseas.

42. Cargo statistics for 1929 are from United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1932 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1932), p. 413. Information on the extent of government service to New York is in Smith and Betters, United States Shipping Board, pp. 92, 93.

43. The history of New York's Foreign Commerce Club is related in Marine Progress, June 1934, pp. 15, 30. The estimate of cargo carried in foreign vessels is from Frederick J. Lang, Maritime: A Historical Sketch and a Workers' Program (New York: Pioneer Publishers, 1943), p. 11. Hebermann's resignation and statement are reported in the New York Times, August 19, 1927, p. 25.

44. These figures fail to reflect the full economic significance of foreign trade for commercial shipping. First, they refer to volume, rather than to dollar values of cargo. Yet shipowners are compensated not only on the basis of volume but also according to the distance a shipment is carried. In comparing categories of shipping, then, it is important to bear in mind that although the volume of coastwise shipments is larger, owing to the shorter distance and greater frequency of sailings, the rate per cargo unit is considerably less than in intercoastal and, particularly, longdistance overseas trade. Consequently, the dollar value of foreign trade, and thus its significance for commercial shipping, far exceeds its relative importance as measured by tonnage. Second, cargo figures, of course, do not reflect revenue earned from passenger traffic. This was a far more important source of income in the East than in the West. In 1929, for example, transatlantic tourists outnumbered transpacific tourists by a ratio of 19 to 1. See Walter A. Radius, United States Shipping in Transpacific Trade, 1922-1938 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1944), p. 12. In short, foreign commerce was an even more vital part of New York's maritime industry than tonnage figures alone might indicate.

45. Business Week, January 21, 1931, p. 6.

46. Pacific Shipper, June 22, 1931, p. 6.

47. Paul J. St. Sure, transcript of interview with Corinne L. Gilb, 1957, Oral History Collection, Social Science Library, University of California, Berkeley, pp. 609, 610. In 1948, the PMA replaced the WEA as the main employers' association on the West Coast.

48. On the more compliant posture of foreign operators, see Harold M. Levinson, Determining Forces in Collective Bargaining (New York: Wiley, 1966), p. 154.

49. New York Times, September 29, 1931, p. 51, and January 28, 1932., p. 17.

50. John J. Collins, "Longshoremen of the Port of New York" (M.A. thesis, New School for Social Research, 1955), p. 28.

51. The internal procedures of the NYSA are outlined in "New York Shipping Association," dated January 24, 1939, United States Maritime Commission Papers, Record Group 157, File 095, 1938-1942, National Archives, Washington, D.C.

52. "Report of Interview" with Mr. J. E. Craig, and with E. Lyon, both dated June 1939, United States Maritime Commission Papers, Record Group 157, File 055.2, 1938-1942.

53. Bell, End of Ideology, p. 167.

54. The contractor is quoted in Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall, p. 64.

55. Mowrey interview, December 21, 1981.

56. "Minutes of General Meeting," signed by H. H. Lawson, Executive Secretary, dated July 23, 1921, pp. 6, 2, 3, Northwest Papers.

1. Earl Browder interview with W. Goldsmith, August 1955, Box 9 Closed, Daniel Bell Papers, Tamiment Institute, New York University. Levenstein argues that "in general, the Communists were almost always better off the more remote they were from the control of Browder and his theorists, who were obsessive in applying 'the line'" ( Communism, Anti-Communism, and the CIO, p. 84).

2. The quote on scientific management is taken from David W. Mabon, "The West Coast Waterfront and Sympathy Strikes of 1934" (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1966), p. 11. Cargo figures are cited in Clements, "San Francisco Maritime and General Strikes," p. 36.

3. Al Langley, interview with author, San Pedro, California, February 4, 1982.

4. Conditions in San Francisco are described in N. Sparks, The Struggle of the Marine Workers (New York: International Pamphlets, 1930), p. 40. Bridges described the shape-up in his 1950 deportation hearing; see United States District Court, Northern District of California, Southern Division, Case no. 32117-H, United States v. Harry Renton Bridges, Henry Schmidt, and J. R. Robertson, 1950, typescript (trial transcript), International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union Library, San Francisco, p. 4782 (hereafter cited as 1950 Deportation Hearing).

5. Bulcke is quoted in Frederick Chiles, "General Strike: San Francisco, 1934—An Historical Compilation Film Storyboard," Labor History 22 (Summer 1981): 437. Marine Workers' Voice, June 1933, p. 2, describes the speed-up.

6. For a closer analysis of the Third Period as it pertains to Communist trade union work, see James R. Prickett, "New Perspectives on American Communism and the Labor Movement," Political Power and Social Theory 4 (1984): 3-36. Harvey Klehr, in The Heyday of American Communism: The Depression Decade (New York: Basic Books, 1984), pp. 12-17, discusses the doctrine of social fascism.

7. Cochran, Labor and Communism, pp. 43, 357n.

8. The MWIU's preamble is reproduced in Sparks, Struggle of the Marine Workers, pp. 59-60.

9. Bridges is quoted in United States Department of Labor, Official Report of Proceedings Before the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the Department of Labor, Docket no. 55073/217, In the Matter of Harry Bridges, Deportation Hearing, 1939, typescript (trial transcript), International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union Library, San Francisco, p. 2602 (hereafter cited as 1939 Deportation Hearing); Orrick Johns, Time of Our Lives: The Story of My Father and Myself (New York: Stackpole, 1937), p. 325.

10. Sam Darcy, "The Great West Coast Maritime Strike," Communist 13 (July 1934): 665.

11. Sam Darcy, "San Francisco General Strike—1934," Hawsepipe: Newsletter of the Marine Workers Historical Association 1 (September-October 1982): 7. Slobodek is quoted in Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 13.

12. Party Organizer 6 (January 1933): 26; Waterfront Worker, April 1933, p. 2.

13. Darcy, "San Francisco General Strike," p. 7.

14. Klehr, Heyday of American Communism, p. 124; Levenstein, Communism, Anti-Communism, and the CIO, p. 24.

15. Nelson, "Maritime Unionism," pp. 188-193; Ben B. Jones, interview with author, Mill Valley, California, January 26, 1984.

16. Waterfront Worker, May 1933, P. 5.

17. Western Worker, July 10, 1933, pp. 1, 3.

18. Sam Darcy, interview with author, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, May 10, 1986. Testimony from former CP members indicates that Albion Hall was never conceived as "the beginnings of the CP's dual union for longshoremen," as Andrew Bonthius asserts in "Origins of the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union," Southern California Quarterly 59, no. 4 (1977): 423n.

19. Darcy, "Great West Coast Maritime Strike," p. 666; Darcy interview, May 10, 1986.

20. This estimate of Communist strength inside Albion Hall is based on the testimony of former member Eugene Dietrich, who testified against Bridges in 1939; see 1939 Deportation Hearing, p. 1468. Jones is quoted in Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 16.

21. Quoted in Chiles, "General Strike," p. 443.

22. Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 17.

23. Certain details of the Matson walkout are still in dispute. The book-burning incident, which has become a part of waterfront lore, appears in a number of historical accounts, including Larrowe's authoritative work ( Harry Bridges, p. 19). Yet there are no reports of any such book-burning in the available contemporary sources.

24. Bridges is quoted in Larrowe, Harry Bridges, pp. 19-21; see also Mabon, "West Coast Waterfront and Sympathy Strikes," pp. 18, 19.

25. Radical Albion Hall members led the convention in adopting resolutions against loading Nazi vessels and in support of imprisoned labor leader Tom Mooney and the Scottsboro boys; see Darcy, "Great West Coast Maritime Strike," p. 667.

26. Ibid.

27. The scene in San Francisco is reported in the Los Angeles Times, March 23, 1934, P. 1; Paul Eliel, The Waterfront and General Strike (San Francisco: Hooper, 1934), p. 11.

28. Bernstein, Turbulent Years, p. 263; Darcy, "Great West Coast Maritime Strike," pp. 672, 673.

29. Marine Workers' Voice, November 1933, p. 1; Walter Stack, interview with author, San Francisco, May 28, 1982.

30. Mabon, "West Coast Waterfront and Sympathy Strikes," pp. 8, 9, 16; Meyer Baylin, interview with author, Mill Valley, California, January 23, 1984.

31. Personal correspondence from Sam Darcy to author, dated September 22, 1982.

32. On the party's earlier condemnation of working inside the ILA, see Mabon, "West Coast Waterfront and Sympathy Strikes," p. 202. Browder is quoted in the Western Worker, August 30, 1934, p. 3.

33. "Longshore Labor Conditions in the United States—Part I," Monthly Labor Review 31 (October 1930): 7, 8.

34. Johnnie Dwyer, interview with Debra Bernhardt, November 21, 1980, Immigrant Labor History Collection, Tamiment Institute, New York University.

35. Sam Madell, interview with author, New York, October 6, 1981.

36. Roy Hudson, "The Work of the Marine Union," Party Organizer 7 (May-June 1934): 30.

37. Madell interview, October 6, 1981.

38. One of Darcy's successors, Steve Nelson, who was assigned to District 13 in 1939, offered a similar explanation for the independence of his West Coast comrades. "The California Party," he wrote years later, "... enjoyed more autonomy than most districts because the national leadership was over three thousand miles away, in New York City.... In many ways we set our own course. There was a lively internal life to the organization, due in part to an iconoclastic Western mood. It was the healthiest Party district I'd been in. People talked back to you—they argued their points and did it in plain language, freer of leftist jargon than in most places." See Steve Nelson, James R. Barrett, and Rob Ruck, Steve Nelson: American Radical (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1981), p. 255.

39. Sam Madell, interview with author, New York, May 6, 1986.

40. Party Organizer 6 (November 1933): 17.

41. Daily Worker, January 12, 1934, p. 3.

42. Hudson, "Work of the Marine Union," pp. 29, 28.

43. Madell interview, May 6, 1986; Jones interview, January 26, 1984.

44. Roy Hudson, "Rooting the Party on the Waterfront," Party Organizer 14 (December 1934): 1164.

45. Kenneth Waltzer, in "The New History of American Communism," Reviews in American History 11 (June 1983): 259, writes that "while affiliated with and obedient to the Comintern, American communism was also shaped by national experience." Prickett, in ''New Perspectives on American Communism," also emphasizes the indigenous sources of organizing strategies and tactics. The same point about the role of Communists on the waterfront is made by Bruce Nelson in "Unions and the Popular Front: The West Coast Waterfront in the 1930s," International Labor and Working-Class History 30 (Fall 1986): 59-78.

46. Staughton Lynd, "The Possibility of Radicalism in the Early 1930s: The Case of Steel," Radical America 6 (November-December 1972): 37-64; Frank Emspak, "The Breakup of the CIO," Political Power and Social Theory 4 (1984): 122, 123. The argument being made here—that the choice of which organizing tactics to follow during the 1930s had a significant impact on Communist success—has its critics; see David Brody, "Radical Labor History and Rank-and-File Militancy,'' Labor History 16 (Winter 1975): 121-122; and Harvey Levenstein, "Economism, Anti-Economism, and the History of the Communist Party," Political Power and Social Theory 4 (1984): 289-295.

47. Putting the importance of strategy bluntly, William Overholt writes: "Had Mao been a better sociologist and a worse military strategist he probably would have lived a short life" ("Sources of Radicalism and Revolution: A Survey of the Literature," in Bialer and Sluzar, Radicalism in the Contemporary Age, p. 334). On the importance of tactical innovation to movement success, see also David R. Cameron, "Toward a Theory of Political Mobilization," Journal of Politics 136 (February 1974), esp. pp. 147-153; Doug McAdam, "Tactical Innovation and the Pace of Insurgency," American Sociological Review 48 (December 1983): 735-754; and Jo Freeman, ed., Social Movements of the Sixties and Seventies (New York: Longman, 1983), esp. pt. 4. Along with discovering the importance of strategy, movement theorists have come to appreciate the significance of activists; see Richard F. Hamilton and James Wright, New Directions in Political Sociology (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1975), pp. 40, 41; Richard E. Ratcliff, "Introduction," Research in Social Movements, Conflicts, and Change 6 (1984): xii; David Montgomery, "Spontaneity and Organization: Some Comments," Radical America 7 (November-December 1973): 70-80; and Aldon D. Morris, The Origins of the Civil Rights Movement: Black Communities Organizing for Change (New York: Free Press, 1984).

1. The concept of political generations derives from Karl Mannheim, "The Problem of Generations," in The New Pilgrims: Youth Protest in Transition, ed. Philip G. Altbach and Robert S. Laufer (New York: David McKay, 1972), pp. 101-138; and Rudolf Heberle, Social Movements: An Introduction to Political Sociology (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1951), chap. 6. Also see T. Allen Lambert, "Generations and Change: Toward a Theory of Generations as a Force in Historical Process," Youth & Society 4 (September 1972): 21-45; and Maurice Zeitlin, "Political Generations in the Cuban Working Class," American Journal of Sociology 71 (March 1966): 493-508.

2. Bernstein, Turbulent Years; Art Preis, Labor's Giant Step: Twenty Years of the CIO (New York: Pathfinder Press, 1964), chap. 4.

3. The doctor is quoted in Chiles, "General Strike," p. 449. Bridges placed the number of deaths at nine (1950 Deportation Hearing, p. 4842). Arrest records in San Francisco were compiled by Herbert Resner in "The Law in Action During the San Francisco Longshore and Maritime Strike of 1934" (Works Progress Administration Project, Alameda County, California, 1936, typescript), p. 23.

4. Pilcher, Portland Longshoremen, p. 46.

5. San Francisco Chronicle, May 10, 1934, p. 1; Portland Oregonian, May 12, 1934, p. 1; Seattle Times, May 13, 1934, p. 36.

6. Langley interview, February 4, 1982.

7. San Pedro News Pilot, May 15, 1934, P. 3.

8. Quin, Big Strike, pp. 58, 59.

9. San Francisco Chronicle, May 29, 1934, p. 1.

10. Bernstein, Turbulent Years, p. 271; Quin, Big Strike, p. 85.

11. George Morris, interview with author, Los Angeles, September 2, 1980. Internal party documents are contained in United States Congress, Senate Subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor, Hearings on Violations of Free Speech and Rights of Labor, 76th Cong., 2d sess., December 16, 18, 1939, p. 18182.

12. Mabon, "West Coast Waterfront and Sympathy Strikes," p. 66; Seattle Times, June 21, 1934, pp. 1, 9.

13. Seattle Times, June 23, 1934, p. 1. Seattle's police chief is quoted in Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall, pp. 100, 101.

14. Seattle Times, July 1, 1934, p. 1; Fred Richardson, interview with author, Seattle, Washington, December 18, 1981.

15. Voice of Action, July 6, 1934, pp. 1, 4; Seattle Times, July 6, 1934, pp. 1, 9.

16. Quin, Big Strike, p. 110; Larrowe, Harry Bridges, pp. 66-68.

17. San Francisco Chronicle, July 6, 1934, p. 1; Bridges is quoted in ibid., July 11, 1934, p. 4.

18. The organizer's report appears in Grace Mettee, "Zero Hour on the Coast," The Nation 139 (July 25, 1934): 102.

19. Paul S. Taylor and Norman Leon Gold, "San Francisco and the General Strike," Survey Graphic 23 (September 1934): 407; Mettee, "Zero Hour on the Coast," p. 102.

20. San Francisco Chronicle, July 10, 1934, pp. 1, 5. For more information on the general strike, see Wilfred H. Crook, Communism and the General Strike (Hamden, Conn.: Shoe String Press, 1960), chaps. 8, 9; and Richard T. LaPiere, "The General Strike in San Francisco: A Study of the Revolutionary Pattern," Sociology and Social Research 19 (March-April 1935): 355-363.

21. Seattle Times, July 3, 1934, p. 1, and July 5, 1934, p. 1.

22. Mowrey interview, December 21, 1981; Portland Oregonian, July 6, 1934, p. 1.

23. Portland Oregonian, July 7, 1934, p. 9.

24. Roger B. Buchanan, Dock Strike: History of the 1934 Waterfront Strike in Portland, Oregon (Everett, Wash.: Working Press, 1975), pp. 78, 79.

25. Joe Werner, interview with author, Portland, Oregon, July 15, 1985.

26. Seattle Times, July 20, 1934, p. 9; Richardson interview, December 18, 1981.

27. The transformative or liberating effect of collective violence and "disruptive events" has been noted by a number of scholars, including Charles F. Sabel, Work and Politics: The Division of Labor in Industry (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), pp. 128-132; Frances Fox Piven and Richard A. Cloward, Poor People's Movements: Why They Succeed, How They Fail (New York: Vintage Books, 1979), p. 14; and Jeremy Brecher, Strike! (Greenwich, Conn.: Fawcett, 1972), chap. 7. More general discussions of collective violence and its relationship to movement success can be found in Charles Tilly, From Mobilization to Revolution (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1978), chap. 6; and William A. Gamson, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey, 1975), chap. 6.

28. Mabon, "West Coast Waterfront and Sympathy Strikes," p. 120; Longshoremen's Bulletin, March 31, 1942; Nelson, "'Pentecost' on the Pacific," p. 161.

29. Asher Harer, interview with author, San Francisco, May 25, 1982.

30. Werner interview, July 15, 1985; Waterfront Worker, May 21, 1934, p. 4.

31. Schmidt is quoted in Chiles, "General Strike," p. 461; see also Eliel, "Industrial Peace and Conflict," p. 487.

32. Western Worker, September 17, 1934, pp. 1, 3, and September 30, 1934, pp. 1, 3.

33. Schneider and Siegel, Industrial Relations, p. 58.

34. For a discussion of the "choose your job" clause, see Quin, Big Strike, pp. 196-199.

35. The employer is quoted in Weir, Informal Workers' Control, p. 51.

36. See Mills and Wellman, "Contractually Sanctioned Job Action," for a more thorough discussion of the setting in which this control evolved.

37. Clark Kerr and Lloyd Fisher, "Conflict on the Waterfront," Atlantic Monthly 184 (September 1949): 18.

38. Camp ( San Francisco, p. 471) reports that 561 work stoppages took place between October 1934 and November 1936.

39. Marine Workers' Voice, December 1934, P. 2. Figures on productivity and work stoppages are from Richard A. Liebes, "Longshore Labor Relations on the Pacific Coast, 1934-1942" (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1943), P. 95; Leo Espy, "An Examination of the 1934 Waterfront Strike as a Turning-Point for West Coast Longshore Labor" (B.A. thesis, Reed College, 1952), p. 54.

40. Fred Nau, interview with Herb Mills and David Wellman, Sausalito, California, November 15, 1979; Waterfront Worker, October 22, 1934, p. 4; Langley interview, February 4, 1982.

41. Nelson, "'Pentecost' on the Pacific," pp. 150, 151.

42. For a brief history of the march inland, see Harvey Schwartz, "Union Expansion and Labor Solidarity: Longshoremen, Warehousemen, and Teamsters, 1933-1937," New Labor Review 2 (Fall 1978): 6-21.

43. For background on the Maritime Federation of the Pacific, see Robert J. Lampman, "The Rise and Fall of the Maritime Federation of the Pacific, 1935-1941," in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Convention of the Pacific Coast Economic Association (Corvallis, Ore.: Pacific Coast Economic Association, 1950), pp. 64-67. Bridges is quoted in Neuberger, "Bad-Man Bridges," p. 196.

44. Quin, Big Strike, p. 199; Nelson, "'Pentecost' on the Pacific," p. 162. Bridges is quoted in Voice of the Federation, October 24, 1935, p.1.

45. Bridges's opposition to Roosevelt is reported in Theodore Dreiser, "The Story of Harry Bridges," Friday 1 (October 4, 1940): 8.

46. Irving Howe and Lewis Coser, The American Communist Party: A Critical History (1919-1957) (Boston: Beacon Press, 1957), pp. 184-186.

47. New York Times, February 16, 1936, sec. IV, p. 7.

48. Voice of the Federation, December 24, 1936, p. 4. The split that surfaced within the Maritime Federation between the Communists and the syndicalist-influenced left opposition was only partly ideological. It was also rooted in ongoing disagreements between the seamen and the longshoremen about the scope and propriety of direct action tactics; see Nelson, "Maritime Unionism," chap. 7.

49. Archie Brown, interview with author, San Francisco, September 7, 1982; Waterfront Worker, February 24, 1936, p. 1. See Richard Alan Cushman, "The Communist Party and the Waterfront Strike of 1936-1937: The San Francisco Story" (M.A. thesis, San Francisco State College, 1970), for a more critical assessment of the Popular Front line on the waterfront.

50. Quin, Big Strike, pp. 218-236.

51. The Marine Worker is quoted in Cushman, "Communist Party and Waterfront Strike," p. 97. California's statewide recruitment totals are taken from William Schneiderman, The Pacific Coast Maritime Strike (San Francisco: Western Worker Publishers, 1937), p. 30. The breakdown by port and occupation is from the Party Organizer 10 (March-April 1937): 22, 23.

52. Roth is quoted in Liebes, "Longshore Labor Relations," p. 183.

53. Information on San Francisco's scrap iron incident is from Germain Bulcke, interview with author, San Francisco, September 4, 1981; Schmidt is quoted in Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 131.

54. Voice of the Federation, March 16, 1939, p. 1, and July 7, 1939, p. 1. An extensive discussion of the scrap iron protests can be found in Liebes, "Longshore Labor Relations," pp. 183-191.

55. Al Lannon, The Maritime Workers and the Imperialist War (New York: Communist Party, USA, 1939), p. 3. See Levenstein, Communism, Anti-Communism, and the CIO, pp. 84-87, for a discussion of the pact's consequences for labor.

56. The New Republic is quoted in Maurice Isserman, Which Side Were You On? The American Communist Party During the Second World War (Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 1982), p. 37.

57. Elmer Mevert, interview with author, San Pedro, California, June 2, 1981; Nelson, Barrett, and Ruck, Steve Nelson, p. 248.

58. Walter Galenson, The CIO Challenge to the AFL: A History of the American Labor Movement, 1935-1941 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960), p. 448.

59. Baylin interview, January 23, 1984. Budd Schulberg, in "Joe Docks, Forgotten Man of the Waterfront" ( New York Times Magazine, December 28, 1952, p. 29), describes the politics of New York's dockworkers: "Traditionally Democratic, as befits good New York Irish and Italians, but you might say their universal party is cynicism."

60. Vincent "Jim" Longhi, interview with author, New York, May 7, 1986.

61. The New York Crime Commission findings are reported in John Hutchinson, The Imperfect Union: A History of Corruption in American Trade Unions (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1970), p. 103. Ryan is quoted in Mary Heaton Vorse, "The Pirates Nest of New York," Harpers Magazine 204 (April 1952): 33.

62. Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall, p. 19; Hutchinson, Imperfect Union, p. 99.

63. Hutchinson, Imperfect Union, p. 98.

64. Daily Worker, May 27, 1933, p. 5; Vorse, "Pirates Nest," p. 28.

65. Bell, End of Ideology, p. 169; Hutchinson, Imperfect Union, p. 98.

66. For discussions of the effect of union decentralization and port size on industrial racketeering, see Robert Lamson, "The 1951 New York Wildcat Dock Strike: Some Consequences of Union Structure for Management-Labor Relations," Southwestern Social Science Quarterly 34 (March 1954): 37; and Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall, p. 1.

67. Testifying in 1953 before the New York State Crime Commission, Bridges pointed out that "the same evils" found in New York "flourished in San Francisco" before 1934: "There was oversupply of labor, speedup, irregularity of work, great inequality of earnings, with the majority earning less than enough to support themselves and their families. There was discrimination and favoritism. There was blacklisting, bribery, extortion, loan-sharking and kickbacks. The accident rate was high.... While conditions never became as bad as they are in New York, the seeds of corruption had begun to sprout and would without a doubt have produced full-fledged mobsters and racketeering had the sprouts not been cut off by the revolt of the men in 1934"; see Harry Bridges, President, "Statement on Behalf of the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union Before the New York State Crime Commission," 1953, typed transcript, p. 3, International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union Papers, ILWU Library, San Francisco (hereafter cited as ILWU Papers). The reporter cited is Josephson ("Red Skies over the Water Front,'' p. 90).

68. Madell interview, May 6, 1986. For a more general analysis of the factors contributing to union racketeering in New York, see Philip Taft, Corruption and Racketeering in the Labor Movement, Bulletin no. 38 (Ithaca: New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University, 1970), pp. 13-15.

69. Madell interview, October 6, 1981. Circulation figures for the Shape-Up are found in the August 24, 1936, issue. Anti-Ryan candidates were also elected in Boston and Philadelphia; see Shape-Up, January 7, 1937, p. 4.

70. Bridges's encounter with Ryan was reported by Louis Adamic in "Harry Bridges Comes East," The Nation 143 (December 26, 1936): 753. Bridges's speech is quoted in Shape-Up, December 19, 1936, p. 4.

71. Endorsement of the CIO principles is reported in unsigned correspondence to Bridges, dated August 2, 1937, East Coast file, ILWU Papers. Jones's report appeared in the ILWU Bulletin, February 5, 1938, p. 3.

72. Felice Swados, "Waterfront," New Republic 93 (February 2, 1938): 362; Edward Levinson, "Waterfront East and West," New Republic 96 (September 14, 1938): 152. The delegate is quoted in Shape-Up July 30, 1938, p. 1.

73. Madell interview, October 6, 1981.

74. Correspondence from Madell to Joe Curran, dated August 30, 1940, p. 1, East Coast file, ILWU Papers.

75. Correspondence from Curran to Bridges, dated August 10, 1940, p. 1; Curran to Bridges, dated October 1, 1940, p. 2; and Sam Kovnat to Matt [Meehan], dated July 5, 1939(?); all found in East Coast file, ILWU Papers.

76. Correspondence from Kovnat to Bob [Robertson], dated August 1939, East Coast file, ILWU Papers; Longhi interview, May 7, 1986. Subsequent investigations disclosed that Panto's murder had been ordered by Anthony Anastasia, chief executioner for the syndicate's "Murder, Inc.," and brother of Albert Anastasia, kingpin of the Brooklyn ILA; see Morris, Tale of Two Waterfronts, pp. 12, 13.

77. Madell interview, October 6, 1981; Bailey interview, September 15, 1981; Lew Amster, "Waterfront Gangsters," Sunday Worker, July 26, 1936, p. 1; the Reverend Philip Carey, interview with author, New York, October 6, 1981.

78. The solidarity that emerged out of the '34 men's historical experiences was reinforced in later years by their strong sense of community on the job; see Herb Mills, "The San Francisco Waterfront: The Social Consequences of Industrial Modernization," Urban Life 5 (July 1976): 221-250.

79. Sociology's ahistoricism is not without its critics. C. Wright Mills (in The Sociological Imagination [New York: Oxford University Press, 1954], chap. 8) long ago condemned the ahistorical bias of modern sociology. Objections have also been raised by Reinhard Bendix, whose work emphasizes not just the importance of history but also the variability and particularity of historical processes; see Dietrich Rueschemeyer, "Theoretical Generalization and Historical Particularity in the Comparative Sociology of Reinhard Bendix," in Vision and Method in Historical Sociology, ed. Theda Skocpol (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp. 129-169. Also see Hamilton and Wright, New Directions in Political Sociology, pp. 32-39, on the significance of exceptional events.

1. David Milton ("Class Struggle American Style," Political Power and Social Theory 4 [1984]: 265, 269) dates the left's decline from 1940, when Sidney Hillman and Philip Murray seized the reins of the CIO from John L. Lewis and the left. In the UE, the war stalled James Carey's bid to unseat the left; see Ronald L. Filippelli, "UE: An Uncertain Legacy," Political Power and Social Theory 4 (1984): 232-236. Harold Pritchett, Communist leader of the International Woodworkers of America, was not so lucky. In the forests of the Pacific Northwest the war came too late to deflect the right; see Jerry Lembcke and William M. Tatam, One Union in Wood: A Political History of the International Woodworkers of America (New York: International Publishers, 1984).

2. For an overview of the left's postwar decline, see Levenstein, Communism, Anti-Communism, and the CIO, chaps. 9-17; Cochran, Labor and Communism, chaps. 10-12; and George Lipsitz, Class and Culture in Cold War America: "A Rainbow at Midnight" (South Hadley, Mass.: J. F. Bergin, 1982), chaps. 7, 8. The 1948 NMU election results are reported in the New York Times, July 27, 1948, p. 45.

3. See, for example, Joshua Freeman, "Delivering the Goods: Industrial Unionism During World War II," Labor History 19 (Fall 1978): 587, 588; Stanley Weir, "U.S.A.: The Labor Revolt," in American Society Inc.: Studies of the Social Structure and Political Economy of the United States, 2d ed., ed. Maurice Zeitlin (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1977), pp. 487-524; and James Green, "Fighting on Two Fronts: Working-Class Militancy in the 1940s," Radical America 9 (July-August 1975): 38, 39.

4. See, for example, Preis, Labor's Giant Step; Joel Seidman, American Labor from Defense to Reconversion (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953); Nelson Lichtenstein, "Defending the No-Strike Pledge: CIO Politics During World War II," Radical America 9 (July-August 1975): 49-75; Martin Glaberman, "Vanguard to Rearguard," Political Power and Social Theory 4 (1984): 37-62; and Stanley Aronowitz, False Promises: The Shaping of American Working Class Consciousness (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973), p. 348.

5. Cochran, Labor and Communism, pp. 209, 211.

6. Levenstein, Communism, Anti-Communism, and the CIO, p. 163.

7. James West, "Communists in World War II," Political Affairs 48 (September-October 1969): 94. Party clubs or "cells" were dissolved in many industries by 1943; see Ozanne, "Effects of Communist Leadership," p. 136; and Isserman, Which Side Were You On? pp. 187-192.

8. See sources in note 4, above.

9. Ganley is quoted in Cochran, Labor and Communism, p. 220. The party's denunciations of wartime strikes are taken from Roger Keeran, The Communist Party and the Auto Workers Union (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1980), p. 243.

10. The NMU's wartime record is mentioned in Henry Spira, "The Unambiguity of Labor History," in Autocracy and Insurgency in Organized Labor, ed. Burton Hall (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1972), p. 251. On the UE's "Speed-Up Committees," see Hugh G. Cleland, "The Political History of a Local Union: Local 601 of the CIO Electrical Workers Union" (Ph.D. diss., Western Reserve, 1957), p. 202.

11. Emspak is quoted in Epstein and Goldfinger, "Communist Tactics in American Unions," p. 41; Bridges is quoted in Larrowe, Harry Bridges, p. 255.

12. It is significant that Reuther, Quill, and Curran all consolidated their positions by attacking the Communist Party for its wartime lack of militancy, not by red-baiting per se; see James R. Prickett, "Communists and the Communist Issue in the American Labor Movement, 1920-1950" (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Los Angeles, 1975).

13. Bridges's speech to the group of civic leaders is quoted in William Davis Waring, "Harry Renton Bridges and the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union" (M.A. thesis, University of Washington, 1966), p. 67; Bridges's comments before the CIO council are taken from Preis, Labor's Giant Step, p. 185.

14. The Bridges Plan is briefly outlined in Richard P. Boyden, "The West Coast Longshoremen, the Communist Party, and the Second World War" (Department of History, University of California, Berkeley, 1967, typescript). San Francisco's endorsement of the plan is reported in Longshoremen's Bulletin, December 16, 1941. Minutes from the "stop work" meeting show no sign of any opposition.

15. The position of the Northwest locals is reported in Longshoremen's Bulletin, April 14, 1942; employers are quoted in ibid., January 13, 1942.

16. Productivity data are from C. Thomas, West Coast Longshoremen and the "Bridges Plan" (1943), p. 13.

17. Foisie is quoted in ibid., p. 14.

18. Correspondence from Abbott Boone to Brehon Somervell, dated August 25, 1943, Army Service Forces Papers, Record Group 160, Port of Embarcation 1942-1944, National Archives, Washington, D.C.; correspondence from Hugh Fulton to Maxwell Brandwen, dated July 27, 1943, War Shipping Administration Papers, Record Group 248, National Archives, Washington, D.C. Tipp's report is found in "Analysis of Captain Tipp's Reports," Box 8, MS. 1438, Francis Murnane Papers, Oregon Historical Society, Portland, Oregon (hereafter cited as Captain Tipp's Reports).

19. Foisie's statement appeared in the New York Times, March 12, 1943, p. 22. The union's reply is in "Notes on Downey Hearing," dated April 23, 1943, p. 5, World War II file, ILWU Papers.

20. "The Union's War Record," dated February 1947, p. 6, World War II file, ILWU Papers.

21. "Statement of Chairman to Pacific Coast Maritime Industry Board, February 4, 1943," pp. 5, 6, Maxwell Brandwen Papers, Record Group 248, Box 12, Records of Maxwell Brandwen October 1942-April 1944, National Archives, Washington, D.C.

22. Harer interview, May 25, 1982.

23. Ship turnaround times are reported in "Wartime Shipping: A Plan and a Memorandum," Prepared and Submitted by Maritime Unions Affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, dated February 1943, p. 24, World War II file, ILWU Papers.

24. Work stoppages are recorded in "Chronological Index of Work Stoppages," compiled March 4, 1948, Pacific Maritime Association Papers, Pacific Maritime Association, San Francisco. Minutes from the joint union-employer Labor Relations Committee indicate that most disciplinary cases involved single individuals who were accused of violating military regulations or slacking off on the job. In 1942, for example, Portland's LRC heard eight cases involving a total of only eleven men. Six of these cases, involving nine men, concerned either drunkenness or smoking aboard ship. See Labor Relations Committee Minutes, Index to Local 8 Minutes, 1942, ILWU Papers.

25. Cronin's words were reconstructed in an interview included in Boyden, "West Coast Longshoremen," p. 34.

26. Keeran, Communist Party and the Auto Workers Union, p. 238.

27. Bailey interview, September 15, 1981.

28. Archie Brown, interview with author, San Francisco, September 7, 1982.

29. Seattle's position is reported in T. R. Richardson et al. to Labor Relations Committee, dated October 26, 1942, Local 19 file, Correspondence—General, 1936-1944 folder, ILWU Papers. Information on San Pedro is found in correspondence from N. Miller to Mr. McGowen, dated October 28, 1942, Labor Relations Committee Minutes, Local 13 file, ILWU Papers. When Bridges initially tried to sell the idea of a thirtybag limit in San Pedro, he met with little success; see Larrowe, Harry Bridges, pp. 255, 256.

30. Harer interview, May 25, 1982. Another left critic of Bridges, Ed Harris ("The Trouble with Harry Bridges," International Socialist Review 34 [September 1973]: 10), conceded that the longshoremen "maintained job control and working conditions" during the war.

31. Productivity data are from James Chester Armstrong, "A Critical Analysis of Cargo Handling Cost in the Steamship Industry" (M.A. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1947), pp. 133-135.

32. Joe Werner, interview with author, Portland, Oregon, December 14, 1981. "Four on/four off" evolved for different reasons in different ports. This account is based on a conversation with five retirees from the San Pedro local. In San Francisco the practice was already widespread by 1942; see Captain Tipp's Reports. Employer support for redundant labor is discussed in Bulcke interview, September 4, 1981.

33. "Excerpt from William Winter Broadcast—CBS—10:15 P.M. Friday May 26, '44," World War II file, ILWU Papers. Bridges's security preamble was denounced as "un-American" and worse by scores of union leaders; see PM Magazine, May 31, 1944. Even Communist leaders were reluctant to go along with an indefinite no-strike pledge; see Starobin, American Communism in Crisis, pp. 59, 77, 91.

34. ILWU Dispatcher, August 11, 1944, p. 6, and October 6, 1944, p. 7.

35. "Can We Allot Manpower by Voluntary Methods?" by William Haber, Director, Bureau of Program Planning, 1943, p. 1, War Production Board Papers, Record Group 179, Log no. 775, Class. no. 832. 2, Manpower Distribution, National Archives, Washington, D.C.

36. Stanley Weir, "American Labor on the Defensive: A 1940s Odyssey," Radical America 9 (July-August 1975): 167-169. The dynamics of union membership growth during the war are examined in Judith Stepan-Norris, "The War Labor Board: The Political Conformity and Bureaucratization of Organized Labor," in How Mighty a Force? Studies of Workers' Consciousness and Organization in the United States, ed. Maurice Zeitlin (Los Angeles: Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California, 1983), pp. 198-230.

37. "Can We Allot Manpower by Voluntary Methods?" by William Haber, 1943, p. 1, War Production Board Papers; Freeman, "Delivering the Goods," p. 587.

38. James J. Matles and James Higgins, Them and Us: Struggles of a Rank and File Union (Boston: Beacon Press, 1974), p. 137. The UE's rate of turnover is based on industry rates reported for the electrical, radio, and machine-working complex in United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Handbook of Labor Statistics, 1947 ed., Bulletin no. 916 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1948), pp. 43-46 (hereafter cited as Handbook of Labor Statistics 1947 ). The description of convention delegates is reported in Cleland, "Political History of a Local Union," p. 218.

39. This conclusion is based on Ronald Schatz, The Electrical Workers: A History of Labor at General Electric and Westinghouse, 1923-1960 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1983), esp. pp. 195-197. Analyzing the bases of factionalism in the UE, Schatz finds that supporters of the anti-communist IUE were "comparatively young workers," whereas the UE's support came from "considerably older" men and women belonging "to that generation of workers born about 1900 who had founded local unions during the Great Depression."

40. Martin Glaberman, Wartime Strikes: The Struggle Against the No-Strike Pledge in the UAW During World War II (Detroit: Bedwick Editions, 1980), p. 17.

41. The demographics of Detroit's war population are reported in Keeran, Communist Party and the Auto Workers Union, p. 231. Communist leaders in the UAW, according to Levenstein, also traced their defeat to "wartime changes in the auto industry's work force, especially the influx of new workers from the South and Appalachia and the failure of many prewar militants to return to the industry after their mobilization" ( Communism, Anti-Communism, and the CIO, p. 204).

42. The 15 percent figure, representing the combined monthly totals for 1942, includes a small number of nonmilitary withdrawals from the labor force, which are reported as "miscellaneous separations" in Handbook of Labor Statistics 1947, p. 42.

43. "Local 13 Members in U.S. Army," dated November 9, 1942, Local 13 file, ILWU Papers.

44. ILWU Dispatcher, November 2, 1945, p. 7.

45. "Essential activities" are identified in "List of Essential Activities," 1944, Document 7, Class. no. 832.11, Manpower Requirements, p. 4, War Production Board Papers. The "Longshore Battalions" are covered in the Daily Commercial News, July 3, 1942, pp. 1, 6.

46. Handbook of Labor Statistics 1947, p. 42.

47. Mevert interview, June 2, 1982; Werner interview, December 14, 1981.

48. L. B. Thomas to Clarence R. Johnson, dated May 15, 1942, Local 13 file, Correspondence—General, 1936-1944 folder, ILWU Papers; Langley interview, February 4, 1982.

49. Werner interview, December 14, 1981; Longshoremen's Bulletin, May 25, 1944.

50. Waterfront Employers to Eliel et al., dated July 1, 1942, Pacific Coast Maritime Industry Board file, Manpower—General, ILWU Papers; "Increase in Membership of ILWU Longshore Locals Pacific Coast States—1943-1946," Membership Statistics file, ILWU Exhibit, Fact Finding Panel, April 1946, ILWU Papers; "Number of New Men Recruited Each Month in San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles—Long Beach and Tacoma, June 1943—August 1945, Incl.," Pacific Coast Maritime Industry Board file, Manpower—General, ILWU Papers.

51. Harer interview, May 25, 1982.

52. Ibid.

53. Odell Franklin, interview with author, Berkeley, California, January 23, 1984. For background on the "maverick" reputation of ILA locals in New Orleans and Houston, see Russell, Men Along the Shore, pp. 88, 134, 144; and Herbert R. Northrup, "The New Orleans Longshoremen," Political Science Quarterly 57 (December 1942): 539, 540.

54. L. B. Thomas to Clarence R. Johnson, dated May 15, 1942, Local 13 file, Correspondence—General, 1936-1944 folder, ILWU Papers; Bridges to Malcolm Ross, dated December 20, 1943, Local 8 file, Correspondence—General, 1937-1943 folder, ILWU Papers.

55. This combination of militancy on the job and ideological conservatism was characteristic of white "war babies" in other industries, especially auto; see Nelson Lichtenstein, "Auto Worker Militancy and the Structure of Factory Life, 1937-1955," Journal of American History 67 (September 1980): 335-353.

56. Personal correspondence from Gus Rystad, retired Seattle longshoreman, to author, dated February 26, 1984; Langley interview, February 4, 1982; Matt Meehan to Harry [Bridges], dated January 1, 1944, Local 8 file, Correspondence—General, 1937-1943 folder, ILWU Papers.

57. Karl Yoneda, interview with author, San Francisco, January 26, 1984. Yoneda's own case is illustrative of the ILWU's commitment to fighting racism. A known Communist and San Francisco longshoreman of Japanese descent, he was sheltered by his co-workers when government officials came to the docks early in the war to take him into custody for internment in a relocation center. The Communist Party suspended Yoneda during the war, and the shipowners opposed his registration in the industry. Only the ILWU came to his defense, as they did for other persecuted Japanese-Americans; see Harvey Schwartz, "A Union Combats Racism: The ILWU's Japanese-American 'Stockton Incident' of 1945," Southern California Quarterly 62. (Summer 1980): 161-176. Also see Lester Rubin, The Negro in the Longshore Industry (Philadelphia: Industrial Research Unit, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, 1974); and David E. Thompson, "The ILWU as a Force for Interracial Unity in Hawaii," Social Processes in Hawaii 15 (1951): 32-43.

58. Philip S. Foner, Organized Labor and the Black Worker, 1619-1973 (New York: International Publishers, 1974), p. 225; Philip S. Foner and Ronald L. Lewis, eds., The Black Worker: A Documentary History from Colonial Times to the Present (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1983), vol. 7, The Black Worker from the Founding of the CIO to the AFL-CIO Merger, 1936-1955, pp. 129, 130; Bulcke interview, September 4, 1981.

59. The number of men recruited in each port is from "Number of New Men Recruited," Pacific Coast Maritime Industry Board file, Manpower—General, ILWU Papers. Information on racial composition is based on Langley interview, February 4, 1982; Werner interview, December 14, 1981; and Cleophas Williams, interview with author, Oakland, California, January 25, 1984.

60. Williams interview, January 25, 1984.

61. Ibid.

62. Ibid.

63. Pacific American Shipowners, White Paper: West Coast Maritime Strike (San Francisco: Waterfront Employers' Association of California, 1948), p. 14; Randolph, "International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union," pp. 105, 106. The 1948 strike inaugurated the "new look" in maritime labor relations, ushering in an era of peaceful coexistence on the docks. For an analysis of the 1948 strike as a turning point in labor relations, see Bruce Dancis, "San Francisco Employers and Longshore Labor Relations, 1934-1949: A Reinterpretation" (Department of History, Stanford University, 1975, typescript); and Kerr and Fisher, "Conflict on the Waterfront."

64. Harer interview, May 25, 1982. The Cold War made strange bedfellows. In Local 10, for example, Trotskyists usually sided with their old nemesis, the pro-Soviet left, rather than allying with the anti-communist opposition.

65. Seldon Osborne, interview with author, San Francisco, September 11, 1981.

66. Franklin interview, January 23, 1984.

67. "Indestructible Bridges," New Republic 120 (April 18, 1949): 7. In his many Cold War skirmishes with the right, Bridges counted not only on the veteran longshoremen but also on the ILWU's warehouse division and the huge Hawaiian locals, where his support on certain issues was even stronger than on the docks; see Wayne Hield, "What Keeps Harry Bridges Going?" Labor and Nation (January-March 1952): 38-40, 55; Sanford Zalburg, A Spark Is Struck: Jack Hall and the ILWU in Hawaii (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1979).

68. Eliel, "Industrial Peace and Conflict," p. 497; Longshoremen's Bulletin, May 14, 1948, p. 1.

69. ILWU Dispatcher, July 20, 1951, p. 2, and August 17, 1951, p. 6. The waterfront screening program is discussed more extensively in David Caute, The Great Fear: The Anti-Communist Purge Under Truman and Eisenhower (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), chap. 21; and Peter Trimble, "Thought Control on the Waterfront," The Nation 173 (July 14, 1951): 27-29.

70. Randolph, "International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union," p. 219.

71. Levinson, "Left-Wing Labor," p. 1088; Franklin interview, January 23, 1984.

72. Ryan's support for the war effort is outlined in American Merchant Marine Conference, 1945 Proceedings (New York, 1945), P. 135. Sling load weights are reported in Business Week, October 20, 1945, p. 96.

73. Bill Hagen and Larry Sullivan, interview with author, New York, October 1981.

74. For a discussion of informal work groups, see Weir, Informal Workers' Control .

75. Wartime changes in hiring are covered in Bell, End of Ideology, p. 163.

76. United States Congress, Senate Subcommittee on War Mobilization of the Committee on Military Affairs, Mobilization of Shipping Resources, 78th Cong., 1st sess., October 7, 1943, S. Rept. 3, P. 13. Vernon H. Jensen has estimated that between 60 and 80 percent of New York's longshoremen were in regular gangs by the early 1950s ( Strife on the Waterfront, pp. 32, 33). Eugene V. Lyons, head of the New York Shipping Association, testified in 1953 that 90 percent of the men were in regular gangs; see New York, Record of the Public Hearings Held by Governor Thomas E. Dewey on the Recommendations of the New York State Crime Commission for Remedying Conditions on the Waterfront of the Port of New York, June 8, 9, 1953, pp. 219, 220. Regardless of the exact figure, it is clear that the use of steady gangs—which before the war was limited to the port's regularly employed longshoremen—increased markedly during the war.

77. Bell, End of Ideology, pp. 163, 164.

78. New York Times, March 24, 1942, p. 19. Several of the larger wartime wildcats were reported in the media; see New York Times, February 25, 1943, P. 23, and July 1, 1943, p. 11; ILWU Dispatcher, August 13, 1943, P. 3.

79. Correspondence from Roy [Hudson] to Browder, dated May 28, 1943, C.P. Intensive Post-War Efforts—General file, Box 3, Daniel Bell Papers.

80. Ibid.

81. Longhi interview, May 7, 1986; Mitchell Berenson, interview with author, Chappaqua, New York, May 8, 1986.

82. Tom Connolly, interview with author, New York, October 18, 1981.

83. The insurgent leader is quoted in Maurice Rosenblatt, ''The Scandal of the Waterfront," The Nation 161 (November 17, 1945): 518. See Rank and File Committee (New York ILA), This Is Our Story (New York, 1945), for the strikers' demands.

84. Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall, pp. 27, 28.

85. United States Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Hearings Before the Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration of the Internal Security Act and Other Internal Security Laws, Scope of Soviet Activity in the United States, Communism on the Waterfront, 84th Cong., 2d sess., June 21 and July 12, 1956, pt. 30, pp. 1627, 1628; Jensen, Strife on the Waterfront, p. 52. The party's involvement in the strike is chronicled by Hal Simon, "The Rank and File Strike of the New York Longshoremen," Political Affairs 24 (December 1945): 1088-1096.

86. Rosenblatt, "Scandal of the Waterfront," p. 518. Work stoppages are reported in Russell, Men Along the Shore, p. 154.

87. Larrowe, Shape-Up and Hiring Hall, p. 46.

88. Newspaper clippings and leaflets concerning the ILA's anticommunist boycott are collected in the Waterfront file, Xavier Institute of Industrial Relations Papers, Xavier Institute of Industrial Relations, New York; longshoreman quoted in Schulberg, "Joe Docks," p. 30.

89. While dockworkers in New York were boycotting the Soviet Union for its invasion of Afghanistan and threatening to also boycott Poland for clamping down on Solidarity, West Coast dockworkers were refusing to handle cargo bound for the right-wing governments of South Africa and El Salvador; see Washington Post, January 10, 1980, p. 1; Los Angeles Times, December 23, 1980, p. 1, January 31, 1982, p. 14, and November 11, 1984, p. 2.

90. Bridges is quoted in "To All Longshore, Shipclerks and Bosses Locals," dated September 19, 1950, p. 2, World War II file, ILWU Papers.

1. Carey is quoted in Foner, Organized Labor and the Black Worker, p. 283.

2. Caute, The Great Fear, p. 352. The consequences of the expulsion are discussed in Emspak, "Breakup of the CIO," pp. 129-133; and Cochran, Labor and Communism, chap. 12.

3. Starobin, American Communism in Crisis, p. 109; John H.M. Laslett, "Why Is There Not More of a Socialist Movement in the United States?" Reviews in American History 5 (June 1977): 265. For a less sanguine assessment of labor's political capabilities after the war, see Robert H. Zieger, American Workers, American Unions, 1920-1985 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986), pp. 114-123.

4. Max Weber, The Methodology of the Social Sciences (New York: Free Press, 1949), pp. 182-183.

5. Maurice Zeitlin, "On Classes, Class Conflict, and the State: An Introductory Note," in Classes, Class Conflict, and the State: Empirical Studies in Class Analysis, ed. Maurice Zeitlin (Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop, 1980), p. 3. Also see Adam Przeworski's provocative essay "Proletariat into a Class: The Process of Class Formation from Karl Kautsky's The Class Struggle to Recent Controversies," Politics & Society 7, no. 4 (1977): 343-401.

6. Herb Mills, interview with author, San Francisco, California, September 4, 1981.

7. "Comparative Absolute Figures of Basic Industry," on microfilm, reel 3, series 2-47, p. 3, Earl Browder Papers; Brown interview, September 12, 1981.

8. Bridges's comments about the IWW are taken from Larrowe, Harry Bridges, pp. 6, 7.

9. Starobin, American Communism in Crisis, p. 286.

10. Repression was not just ineffective—it backfired, uniting the entire membership behind Bridges and making him "almost sacrosanct ... within the ILWU"; see Jacobs, State of the Unions, p. 99.

11. John R. Commons, "American Shoemakers, 1648-1895: A Sketch of Industrial Evolution," Quarterly Journal of Economics 24 (November 1909): 39-84; Mancur Olson, Jr., The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965). In the contest between the AFL and the socialists, Perlman avers that the former flourished because its economism better "fitted" the "scarcity consciousness" of American workers. Adopting Perlman's reasoning, a number of authors have tied the fortunes of the Communists to their performance at the bargaining table. Thus, David Brody ("Labor and the Great Depression: The Interpretative Prospects," Labor History 13 [Spring 1972]: 241) argues that Communist leaders were thrown out of office when they subordinated economics to politics, while Bernstein ( Turbulent Years, p. 783) attributes their isolated successes to delivering the goods. A similar form of economism figures prominently in the burgeoning literature on the determinants of union growth. Reviewing this research, Herbert G. Heneman III and Marcus H. Sandver ("Predicting the Outcome of Union Certification Elections: A Review of the Literature," Industrial and Labor Relations Review 36 [July 1983]: 553) argue for a "stronger theoretical framework," one that incorporates such noneconomic variables as the social backgrounds of employees, their history of contact with unions, belief in the desirability of change, and peer group pressure.

12. See Laslett, "Socialism and the American Labor Movement."

13. The economic appeal of unionism is hardly a peculiarity of American labor. Among Europe's more "radical" workers, it seems, union loyalty is still based overwhelmingly on job-related issues; see William H. Form, "Job Unionism Versus Industrial Unionism in Four Countries," in The American Working Class: Prospects for the 1980s, ed. Irving Louis Horowitz, John C. Leggett, and Martin Oppenheimer (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1979), PP. 214-230.

14. Saposs, Communism in American Unions, p. 185. The consensus on the economic effectiveness of Communist trade unionism is fairly remarkable, spanning the Communist Party's critics from left to right; see Prickett, "Communists and the Communist Issue"; and Ozanne, "Effects of Communist Leadership."

15. This interpretation runs counter to the contentions of many writers, especially leftists, that red-baiting was largely ineffective; see James R. Prickett, "Communism and Factionalism in the United Automobile Workers, 1939-1947," Science & Society 32 (Summer 1968): 271; Michael Harrington, "Catholics in the Labor Movement: A Case History," Labor History 1 (Fall 1960): 260. By itself, red-baiting seems to have been ineffective. But when combined with aggressive bargaining and militant rhetoric it gave anti-communist insurgents added, and often critical, leverage in their efforts to dislodge the left.

16. Franklin J. Anderson, "Behind the Matles Mask," Plain Talk (September 1947): 23-24. Aronowitz attributes the machinists' extraordinary loyalty to Matles's "close relationship with local leaders over the years" ( False Promises, pp. 347, 348).

17. The worker from the Marine Cooks is quoted in Jane Cassels Record, "The Rise and Fall of a Maritime Union," Industrial and Labor Relations Review 10 (October 1956): 92. The black miner is quoted in Prickett, "Communists and the Communist Issue," p. 417. The Communists' responsiveness to racism was partly a product of ideology, but it varied somewhat depending on the racial composition of the unions they headed; see Donald T. Critchlow, "Communist Unions and Racism: A Comparative Study of the Responses of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers and the National Maritime Union to the Black Question During World War II," Labor History 17 (Spring 1976): 230-244.