by Jack London
CHAPTER XIII
THE GENERAL STRIKE
Of course Ernest was elected to Congress in the great socialistlandslide that took place in the fall of 1912. One great factor thathelped to swell the socialist vote was the destruction of Hearst.*This the Plutocracy found an easy task. It cost Hearst eighteen milliondollars a year to run his various papers, and this sum, and more, he gotback from the middle class in payment for advertising. The source of hisfinancial strength lay wholly in the middle class. The trusts did notadvertise.** To destroy Hearst, all that was necessary was to take awayfrom him his advertising.
* William Randolph Hearst--a young California millionaire who became the most powerful newspaper owner in the country. His newspapers were published in all the large cities, and they appealed to the perishing middle class and to the proletariat. So large was his following that he managed to take possession of the empty shell of the old Democratic Party. He occupied an anomalous position, preaching an emasculated socialism combined with a nondescript sort of petty bourgeois capitalism. It was oil and water, and there was no hope for him, though for a short period he was a source of serious apprehension to the Plutocrats.
** The cost of advertising was amazing in those helter- skelter times. Only the small capitalists competed, and therefore they did the advertising. There being no competition where there was a trust, there was no need for the trusts to advertise.
The whole middle class had not yet been exterminated. The sturdyskeleton of it remained; but it was without power. The smallmanufacturers and small business men who still survived were at thecomplete mercy of the Plutocracy. They had no economic nor politicalsouls of their own. When the fiat of the Plutocracy went forth, theywithdrew their advertisements from the Hearst papers.
Hearst made a gallant fight. He brought his papers out at a loss ofa million and a half each month. He continued to publish theadvertisements for which he no longer received pay. Again the fiat ofthe Plutocracy went forth, and the small business men and manufacturersswamped him with a flood of notices that he must discontinue runningtheir old advertisements. Hearst persisted. Injunctions were servedon him. Still he persisted. He received six months' imprisonment forcontempt of court in disobeying the injunctions, while he was bankruptedby countless damage suits. He had no chance. The Plutocracy had passedsentence on him. The courts were in the hands of the Plutocracy tocarry the sentence out. And with Hearst crashed also to destruction theDemocratic Party that he had so recently captured.
With the destruction of Hearst and the Democratic Party, there were onlytwo paths for his following to take. One was into the Socialist Party;the other was into the Republican Party. Then it was that we socialistsreaped the fruit of Hearst's pseudo-socialistic preaching; for the greatMajority of his followers came over to us.
The expropriation of the farmers that took place at this time would alsohave swelled our vote had it not been for the brief and futile rise ofthe Grange Party. Ernest and the socialist leaders fought fiercely tocapture the farmers; but the destruction of the socialist pressand publishing houses constituted too great a handicap, while themouth-to-mouth propaganda had not yet been perfected. So it was thatpoliticians like Mr. Calvin, who were themselves farmers long sinceexpropriated, captured the farmers and threw their political strengthaway in a vain campaign.
"The poor farmers," Ernest once laughed savagely; "the trusts have themboth coming and going."
And that was really the situation. The seven great trusts, workingtogether, had pooled their enormous surpluses and made a farm trust.The railroads, controlling rates, and the bankers and stock exchangegamesters, controlling prices, had long since bled the farmers intoindebtedness. The bankers, and all the trusts for that matter, hadlikewise long since loaned colossal amounts of money to the farmers. Thefarmers were in the net. All that remained to be done was the drawing inof the net. This the farm trust proceeded to do.
The hard times of 1912 had already caused a frightful slump in the farmmarkets. Prices were now deliberately pressed down to bankruptcy,while the railroads, with extortionate rates, broke the back of thefarmer-camel. Thus the farmers were compelled to borrow more and more,while they were prevented from paying back old loans. Then ensued thegreat foreclosing of mortgages and enforced collection of notes. Thefarmers simply surrendered the land to the farm trust. There was nothingelse for them to do. And having surrendered the land, the farmers nextwent to work for the farm trust, becoming managers, superintendents,foremen, and common laborers. They worked for wages. They becamevilleins, in short--serfs bound to the soil by a living wage. They couldnot leave their masters, for their masters composed the Plutocracy.They could not go to the cities, for there, also, the Plutocracy wasin control. They had but one alternative,--to leave the soil and becomevagrants, in brief, to starve. And even there they were frustrated, forstringent vagrancy laws were passed and rigidly enforced.
Of course, here and there, farmers, and even whole communities offarmers, escaped expropriation by virtue of exceptional conditions. Butthey were merely strays and did not count, and they were gathered inanyway during the following year.*
* The destruction of the Roman yeomanry proceeded far less rapidly than the destruction of the American farmers and small capitalists. There was momentum in the twentieth century, while there was practically none in ancient Rome.
Numbers of the farmers, impelled by an insane lust for the soil, and willing to show what beasts they could become, tried to escape expropriation by withdrawing from any and all market-dealing. They sold nothing. They bought nothing. Among themselves a primitive barter began to spring up. Their privation and hardships were terrible, but they persisted. It became quite a movement, in fact. The manner in which they were beaten was unique and logical and simple. The Plutocracy, by virtue of its possession of the government, raised their taxes. It was the weak joint in their armor. Neither buying nor selling, they had no money, and in the end their land was sold to pay the taxes.
Thus it was that in the fall of 1912 the socialist leaders, with theexception of Ernest, decided that the end of capitalism had come. Whatof the hard times and the consequent vast army of the unemployed; whatof the destruction of the farmers and the middle class; and what of thedecisive defeat administered all along the line to the labor unions; thesocialists were really justified in believing that the end of capitalismhad come and in themselves throwing down the gauntlet to the Plutocracy.
Alas, how we underestimated the strength of the enemy! Everywhere thesocialists proclaimed their coming victory at the ballot-box, while, inunmistakable terms, they stated the situation. The Plutocracy acceptedthe challenge. It was the Plutocracy, weighing and balancing, thatdefeated us by dividing our strength. It was the Plutocracy, through itssecret agents, that raised the cry that socialism was sacrilegiousand atheistic; it was the Plutocracy that whipped the churches, andespecially the Catholic Church, into line, and robbed us of a portion ofthe labor vote. And it was the Plutocracy, through its secret agentsof course, that encouraged the Grange Party and even spread it to thecities into the ranks of the dying middle class.
Nevertheless the socialist landslide occurred. But, instead of asweeping victory with chief executive officers and majorities in alllegislative bodies, we found ourselves in the minority. It is true, weelected fifty Congressmen; but when they took their seats in the springof 1913, they found themselves without power of any sort. Yet theywere more fortunate than the Grangers, who captured a dozen stategovernments, and who, in the spring, were not permitted to takepossession of the captured offices. The incumbents refused to retire,and the courts were in the hands of the Oligarchy. But this is too farin advance of events. I have yet to tell of the stirring times of thewinter of 1912.
The hard times at home had caused an immense decrease in consumption.Labor, out of work, had no wages with which to buy. The result was t
hatthe Plutocracy found a greater surplus than ever on its hands. Thissurplus it was compelled to dispose of abroad, and, what of its colossalplans, it needed money. Because of its strenuous efforts to dispose ofthe surplus in the world market, the Plutocracy clashed with Germany.Economic clashes were usually succeeded by wars, and this particularclash was no exception. The great German war-lord prepared, and so didthe United States prepare.
The war-cloud hovered dark and ominous. The stage was set for aworld-catastrophe, for in all the world were hard times, labor troubles,perishing middle classes, armies of unemployed, clashes of economicinterests in the world-market, and mutterings and rumblings of thesocialist revolution.*
* For a long time these mutterings and rumblings had been heard. As far back as 1906 A.D., Lord Avebury, an Englishman, uttered the following in the House of Lords: "The unrest in Europe, the spread of socialism, and the ominous rise of Anarchism, are warnings to the governments and the ruling classes that the condition of the working classes in Europe is becoming intolerable, and that if a revolution is to be avoided some steps must be taken to increase wages, reduce the hours of labor, and lower the prices of the necessaries of life." The Wall Street Journal, a stock gamesters' publication, in commenting upon Lord Avebury's speech, said: "These words were spoken by an aristocrat and a member of the most conservative body in all Europe. That gives them all the more significance. They contain more valuable political economy than is to be found in most of the books. They sound a note of warning. Take heed, gentlemen of the war and navy departments!"
At the same time, Sydney Brooks, writing in America, in Harper's Weekly, said: "You will not hear the socialists mentioned in Washington. Why should you? The politicians are always the last people in this country to see what is going on under their noses. They will jeer at me when I prophesy, and prophesy with the utmost confidence, that at the next presidential election the socialists will poll over a million votes."
The Oligarchy wanted the war with Germany. And it wanted the war for adozen reasons. In the juggling of events such a war would cause, in thereshuffling of the international cards and the making of new treatiesand alliances, the Oligarchy had much to gain. And, furthermore, the warwould consume many national surpluses, reduce the armies of unemployedthat menaced all countries, and give the Oligarchy a breathing spacein which to perfect its plans and carry them out. Such a war wouldvirtually put the Oligarchy in possession of the world-market. Also,such a war would create a large standing army that need never bedisbanded, while in the minds of the people would be substitutedthe issue, "America versus Germany," in place of "Socialism versusOligarchy."
And truly the war would have done all these things had it not been forthe socialists. A secret meeting of the Western leaders was held in ourfour tiny rooms in Pell Street. Here was first considered the stand thesocialists were to take. It was not the first time we had put our footdown upon war,* but it was the first time we had done so in the UnitedStates. After our secret meeting we got in touch with the nationalorganization, and soon our code cables were passing back and forthacross the Atlantic between us and the International Bureau.
* It was at the very beginning of the twentieth century A.D., that the international organization of the socialists finally formulated their long-maturing policy on war. Epitomized their doctrine was: "Why should the workingmen of one country fight with the workingmen of another country for the benefit of their capitalist masters?"
On May 21, 1905 A.D., when war threatened between Austria and Italy, the socialists of Italy, Austria, and Hungary held a conference at Trieste, and threatened a general strike of the workingmen of both countries in case war was declared. This was repeated the following year, when the "Morocco Affair" threatened to involve France, Germany, and England.
The German socialists were ready to act with us. There were over fivemillion of them, many of them in the standing army, and, in addition,they were on friendly terms with the labor unions. In both countries thesocialists came out in bold declaration against the war and threatenedthe general strike. And in the meantime they made preparation for thegeneral strike. Furthermore, the revolutionary parties in all countriesgave public utterance to the socialist principle of international peacethat must be preserved at all hazards, even to the extent of revolt andrevolution at home.
The general strike was the one great victory we American socialistswon. On the 4th of December the American minister was withdrawn fromthe German capital. That night a German fleet made a dash on Honolulu,sinking three American cruisers and a revenue cutter, and bombardingthe city. Next day both Germany and the United States declared war,and within an hour the socialists called the general strike in bothcountries.
For the first time the German war-lord faced the men of his empirewho made his empire go. Without them he could not run his empire. Thenovelty of the situation lay in that their revolt was passive. Theydid not fight. They did nothing. And by doing nothing they tied theirwar-lord's hands. He would have asked for nothing better than anopportunity to loose his war-dogs on his rebellious proletariat. Butthis was denied him. He could not loose his war-dogs. Neither couldhe mobilize his army to go forth to war, nor could he punish hisrecalcitrant subjects. Not a wheel moved in his empire. Not a train ran,not a telegraphic message went over the wires, for the telegraphers andrailroad men had ceased work along with the rest of the population.
And as it was in Germany, so it was in the United States. At lastorganized labor had learned its lesson. Beaten decisively on its ownchosen field, it had abandoned that field and come over to the politicalfield of the socialists; for the general strike was a political strike.Besides, organized labor had been so badly beaten that it did not care.It joined in the general strike out of sheer desperation. The workersthrew down their tools and left their tasks by the millions. Especiallynotable were the machinists. Their heads were bloody, their organizationhad apparently been destroyed, yet out they came, along with theirallies in the metal-working trades.
Even the common laborers and all unorganized labor ceased work. Thestrike had tied everything up so that nobody could work. Besides, thewomen proved to be the strongest promoters of the strike. They set theirfaces against the war. They did not want their men to go forth todie. Then, also, the idea of the general strike caught the mood of thepeople. It struck their sense of humor. The idea was infectious. Thechildren struck in all the schools, and such teachers as came, went homeagain from deserted class rooms. The general strike took the form ofa great national picnic. And the idea of the solidarity of labor, soevidenced, appealed to the imagination of all. And, finally, there wasno danger to be incurred by the colossal frolic. When everybody wasguilty, how was anybody to be punished?
The United States was paralyzed. No one knew what was happening. Therewere no newspapers, no letters, no despatches. Every community was ascompletely isolated as though ten thousand miles of primeval wildernessstretched between it and the rest of the world. For that matter, theworld had ceased to exist. And for a week this state of affairs wasmaintained.
In San Francisco we did not know what was happening even across the bayin Oakland or Berkeley. The effect on one's sensibilities was weird,depressing. It seemed as though some great cosmic thing lay dead. Thepulse of the land had ceased to beat. Of a truth the nation had died.There were no wagons rumbling on the streets, no factory whistles, nohum of electricity in the air, no passing of street cars, no criesof news-boys--nothing but persons who at rare intervals went by likefurtive ghosts, themselves oppressed and made unreal by the silence.
And during that week of silence the Oligarchy was taught its lesson. Andwell it learned the lesson. The general strike was a warning. It shouldnever occur again. The Oligarchy would see to that.
At the end of the week, as had been prearranged, the telegraphers ofGermany and the United States returned to thei
r posts. Through them thesocialist leaders of both countries presented their ultimatum to therulers. The war should be called off, or the general strike wouldcontinue. It did not take long to come to an understanding. The war wasdeclared off, and the populations of both countries returned to theirtasks.
It was this renewal of peace that brought about the alliance betweenGermany and the United States. In reality, this was an alliance betweenthe Emperor and the Oligarchy, for the purpose of meeting their commonfoe, the revolutionary proletariat of both countries. And it was thisalliance that the Oligarchy afterward so treacherously broke when theGerman socialists rose and drove the war-lord from his throne. It wasthe very thing the Oligarchy had played for--the destruction of itsgreat rival in the world-market. With the German Emperor out of the way,Germany would have no surplus to sell abroad. By the very nature ofthe socialist state, the German population would consume all that itproduced. Of course, it would trade abroad certain things it producedfor things it did not produce; but this would be quite different from anunconsumable surplus.
"I'll wager the Oligarchy finds justification," Ernest said, when itstreachery to the German Emperor became known. "As usual, the Oligarchywill believe it has done right."
And sure enough. The Oligarchy's public defence for the act was that ithad done it for the sake of the American people whose interests it waslooking out for. It had flung its hated rival out of the world-marketand enabled us to dispose of our surplus in that market.
"And the howling folly of it is that we are so helpless that such idiotsreally are managing our interests," was Ernest's comment. "They haveenabled us to sell more abroad, which means that we'll be compelled toconsume less at home."