The History of Trade Unionism: (Revised edition, extended to 1920)Webb, Sidney
History
The History of Trade Unionism: (Revised edition, extended to 1920)
Webb, Sidney
Labor unions -- Great Britain -- History
mantua-makers; and all the different manufacturers [_i.e._ operatives]
shall be arranged in a similar way; communications shall pass from the
various departments to the Grand National establishment in London.” In
fact, the Trade Unions were to be transformed into “national companies”
to carry on all the manufactures.[285] The Agricultural Union was
to take possession of the land, the Miners’ Union of the mines, the
Textile Unions of the factories. Each trade was to be carried on by its
particular Trade Union, centralised in one “Grand Lodge.”
Of all Owen’s attempts to reduce his Socialism to practice this was
certainly the very worst. For his short-lived communities there was at
least this excuse: that within their own area they were to be perfectly
homogeneous little Communist States. There were to be no conflicting
sections; and profit-making and competition were to be effectually
eliminated. But in “the Trades Union,” as he conceived it, the mere
combination of all the workmen in a trade as co-operative producers no
more abolished commercial competition than a combination of all the
employers in it as a Joint Stock Company. In effect his Grand Lodges
would have been simply the head offices of huge Joint Stock Companies
owning the entire means of production in their industry, and subject
to no control by the community as a whole. They would therefore have
been in a position at any moment to close their ranks and admit fresh
generations of workers only as employees at competitive wages instead
of as shareholders, thus creating at one stroke a new capitalist class
and a new proletariat. Further, the improvident shareholders would soon
have begun to sell their shares in order to spend their capital, and
thus to drop with their children into the new proletariat; whilst the
enterprising and capable shareholders would equally have sold their
shares to buy into other and momentarily more profitable trades. Thus
there would have been not only a capitalist class and proletariat, but
a speculative stock market. Finally there would have come a competitive
struggle between the Joint Stock Unions to supplant one another in
the various departments of industry. Thus the shipwrights, making
wooden ships, would have found the boilermakers competing for their
business by making iron ships, and would have had either to succumb
or to transform their wooden ship capital into iron ship capital and
enter into competition with the boilermakers as commercial rivals in
the same trade. This difficulty was staring Owen in the face when he
entered the Trade Union Movement; for the trades, then as now, were
in continual perplexity as to the exact boundaries between them; for
example, the minute-books of the newly formed Joiners’ Society in
Glasgow (whose secretary was a leading Owenite) show that its great
difficulty was the demarcation of its trade against the cabinetmaker
and the engineer-patternmaker, each of whom claimed certain technical
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account