Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "486289714",
    "label": "Perlman, Selig",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/486289714"
}

{
    "id": "486289714",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/486289714",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Perlman, Selig",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/486289714",
    "collections": [
        "Philip M. Kaiser Papers",
        "Correspondence Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-pmk/485327406/486289714/486289714-001.tif",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-pmk/485327406/486289714/486289714-001.tif",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-pmk/485327406/486289714/486289714-001.tif",
    "imageCount": 294,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/486289714",
    "naId": 486289714,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 76,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-pmk/485327406/486289714/486289714-076.tif",
    "mediaId": "96536882b225e044",
    "ocrText": "-11-\nation of Labor it becomes just such a job kingdom; it derives its right\nto exist from this overall job sovereignty, or job empire. Any other\nunion that steps in and tries to invade the job territory assigned to\nsuch a union by the job empire is therefore an illegitimate intruder.\nThere are many who find it very difficult to understand why there should\nbe SO much hatred of dual unionism in the American labor movement, why\ndual unionism should be so much the bete noire, SO much the outlaw in\nthe American labor movemtnt. Psychologically it goes back to the absence\nof class consciousness in American labor and to the precariousness of\nunionism under American conditions. It is very difficult under American\nconditions to get a union established and to have it stay put. It seems\nas though the whole community, all the factors in American life, were in\nconspiracy to destroy it. And when you have two unions which compete for\nthe same members, these two unions are invariably in conflict. They can\nnever agree to disagree. They are forever engaged in a civil war. So\nthat the only to keep peace in the family is to prevent such civil wars\nby outlawing dual unionism; that is, by stressing the concept of legit-\nimacy. Under this concept there can be only one legitimate union in each\nfield, only one legitimate job kingdom deriving its right to exist from\nthe job empire, and any other job kingdom that decides to come in without\nauthorization from the universal job empire is therefore an outlaw union\nand mist be suppressed, no matter what justification this particular union\nmay have,\nIn Britain too they are familiar with dual unions and they call them\n\"breakynn\" unions. They condemn them but they do not apply the drastic\npolicy of absolute fexcommunication to 2 dual union, even to a union that\ndoes not want to belong to the British Trades Union Congress.\nWhy are they SO much milder in their attitude towards dual unionism\nthan we are? I think, perhaps, because of the higher degree of class\nconsciousness that prevails there. The atmosphere of class consciousness\nmakes it possible for a British union to be a dual union and yet not be\nregarded as a conspiracy and excluded from the family of labor. In other\nwords, where you have a strong cementing influence, you can afford to\ntolerate differences and conflicts because you know that they will not\nlead to destruction. But in the absence of this comenting influence, this\nmoderating influence, a union is obliged to use mechanical means to sup-\npress the danger and SO here we have developed this attitude of absolute\nexcommunication for dual unions, which, in turn, transforms the American\nFederation of Labor into a kind of government.\nThe British Trades Union Congress is not like a government. It is an\nannual meeting where union delegates come together and put forth a pro-\ngram which is mainly a series of demands. upon the government. But it does\nnot operate like a government with drastic methods of control over its\nmembers. But with us we have developed the government aspect of trade\nunionism. Of course I realize fully that there is another principle at\nthe basis of the American labor movement, the principle of autonomy, the\nprinciple of self-government and self-direction of the chartered unions.\nBut there is also the principle of regularity, of legitimacy, so that our\nlabor movement has the aspect of a government. Again, I do not ignore\nSamuel Gompers' emphasis upon voluntarism, but underlying it there is the\nclassic assumption that there is only one legitimate labor movement, the\nAmerican Federation of Labor, which operates as 2 job empire and that the\ncharters it issues are certificates of legitimacy.\nI do not believe that deep down the American labor movement really be-"
}