Thread: Why we celebrate mayday

The history of the world holiday on the 1st May - Mayday, held in commemoration of four anarchists executed for struggling for an 8-hour day.



Originally a pagan holiday, the roots of the modern Mayday bank holiday are in the fight for the eight-hour working day in Chicago in 1886, and the subsequent execution of innocent anarchist trade unionists.
In 1887, four Chicago anarchists were executed; a fifth cheated the hangman by killing himself in prison. Three more were to spend 6 years in prison until pardoned by Governor Altgeld who said the trial that convicted them was characterised by "hysteria, packed juries and a biased judge".

The state had, in the words of the prosecution put "Anarchy is on trial" and hoped their deaths would also be the death of the anarchist idea.
The anarchists were trade union organisers and May Day became an international workers day to remember their sacrifice. They were framed on false charges of throwing a bomb at police breaking up a demonstration in Chicago. This was part of a strike demanding an 8 hour day involving 400,000 workers in Chicago that started May 1st 1886 .
It began over a century ago when the American Federation of Labour adopted an historic resolution which asserted that "eight hours shall constitute a legal day's labour from and after May 1st, 1886".
In the months prior to this date workers in their thousands were drawn into the struggle for the shorter day. Skilled and unskilled, black and white, men and women, native and immigrant were all becoming involved.
Chicago
In Chicago alone 400,000 were out on strike. A newspaper of that city reported that "no smoke curled up from the tall chimneys of the factories and mills, and things had assumed a Sabbath-like appearance". This was the main centre of the agitation, and here the anarchists were in the forefront of the labour movement. It was to no small extent due to their activities that Chicago became an outstanding trade union centre and made the biggest contribution to the eight-hour movement.

The Chicago anarchist movement was also strong. In 1884, they produced the world’s first Anarchist daily newspaper, the Chicagoer Arbeiter-Zeitung, plus a weekly, Fackel, and a Sunday edition, Vorbote. By 1886, these newspapers had a circulation of over 26,000 - read by the large German immigrant working class community of the city. There were also newspapers for English, Bohemian and Scandinavian speakers. As well as this, Chicago anarchists were active in the unions and organised picnics, lectures, dances, libraries and other events for workers.

These helped forge strong bonds of class solidarity, which was worrying to the bosses who were keen to break the workers' organisations.
When on May 1st 1886, the eight hour strikes convulsed that city, one half of the workforce at the McCormick Harvester Co. came out. Two days later a mass meeting was held by 6,000 members of the 'lumber shovers' union who had also come out. The meeting was held only a block from the McCormick plant and was joined by some 500 of the strikers from there.

The workers listened to a speech by the anarchist August Spies, who has been asked to address the meeting by the Central Labour Union. While Spies was speaking, urging the workers to stand together and not give in to the bosses, the strikebreakers were beginning to leave the nearby McCormick plant.
The strikers, aided by the 'lumber shovers' marched down the street and forced the scabs back into the factory.

Suddenly a force of 200 police arrived and, without any warning, attacked the crowd with clubs and revolvers. They killed at least one striker, seriously wounded five or six others and injured an indeterminate number.
Outraged by the brutal assaults he had witnessed, Spies went to the office of the Arbeiter-Zeitung and composed a circular calling on the workers of Chicago to attend a protest meeting the following night.

The protest meeting took place in the Haymarket Square and was addressed by Spies and two other anarchists active in the trade union movement, Albert Parsons and Samuel Fielden.
The police attack
Throughout the speeches the crowd was orderly. Mayor Carter Harrison, who was present from the beginning of the meeting, concluded that "nothing looked likely to happen to require police interference". He advised police captain John Bonfield of this and suggested that the large force of police reservists waiting at the station house be sent home.

It was close to ten in the evening when Fielden was closing the meeting. It was raining heavily and only about 200 people remained in the square. Suddenly a police column of 180 men, headed by Bonfield, moved in and ordered the people to disperse immediately.
Fielden protested "we are peaceable".
Bomb
At this moment a bomb was thrown into the ranks of the police. It killed one, fatally wounded six more and injured about seventy others. The police opened fire on the spectators. How many were wounded or killed by the police bullets was never exactly ascertained.
A reign of terror swept over Chicago. The press and the pulpit called for revenge, insisting the bomb was the work of socialists and anarchists. Meeting halls, union offices, printing works and private homes were raided. All known socialists and anarchists were rounded up. Even many individuals ignorant of the meaning of socialism and anarchism were arrested and tortured. "Make the raids first and look up the law afterwards" was the public statement of Julius Grinnell, the state's attorney.
Trial
Eventually eight men stood trial for being "accessories to murder". They were Spies, Fielden, Parsons, and five other anarchists who were influential in the labour movement, Adolph Fischer, George Engel, Michael Schwab, Louis Lingg and Oscar Neebe.
The trial opened on June 21st 1886 in the criminal court of Cooke County. The candidates for the jury were not chosen in the usual manner of drawing names from a box. In this case a special bailiff, nominated by state's attorney Grinnell, was appointed by the court to select the candidates.

The defence was not allowed to present evidence that the special bailiff had publicly claimed "I am managing this case and I know what I am about. These fellows are going to be hanged as certain as death".
Rigged jury
The eventual composition of the jury was farcical; being made up of businessmen, their clerks and a relative of one of the dead policemen. No proof was offered by the state that any of the eight men before the court had thrown the bomb, had been connected with its throwing, or had even approved of such acts. In fact, only three of the eight had been in Haymarket Square that evening.

No evidence was offered that any of the speakers had incited violence, indeed in his evidence at the trial Mayor Harrison described the speeches as "tame". No proof was offered that any violence had been contemplated. In fact, Parsons had brought his two small children to the meeting.

Sentenced
That the eight were on trial for their anarchist beliefs and trade union activities was made clear from the outset. The trial closed as it had opened, as was witnessed by the final words of Attorney Grinnell's summation speech to the jury. "Law is on trial. Anarchy is on trial. These men have been selected, picked out by the Grand Jury, and indicted because they were leaders. There are no more guilty than the thousands who follow them. Gentlemen of the jury; convict these men, make examples of them, hang them and you save our institutions, our society."

On August 19th seven of the defendants were sentenced to death, and Neebe to 15 years in prison. After a massive international campaign for their release, the state 'compromised' and commuted the sentences of Schwab and Fielden to life imprisonment. Lingg cheated the hangman by committing suicide in his cell the day before the executions. On November 11th 1887 Parsons, Engel, Spies and Fischer were hanged.
Pardoned
600,000 working people turned out for their funeral. The campaign to free Neebe, Schwab and Fielden continued.

On June 26th 1893 Governor Altgeld set them free. He made it clear he was not granting the pardon because he thought the men had suffered enough, but because they were innocent of the crime for which they had been tried. They and the hanged men had ben the victims of "hysteria, packed juries and a biased judge".


The authorities has believed at the time of the trial that such persecution would break the back of the eight-hour movement. Indeed, evidence later came to light that the bomb may have been thrown by a police agent working for Captain Bonfield, as part of a conspiracy involving certain steel bosses to discredit the labour movement.
When Spies addressed the court after he had been sentenced to die, he was confident that this conspiracy would not succeed:

"If you think that by hanging us you can stamp out the labour movement... the movement from which the downtrodden millions, the millions who toil in misery and want, expect salvation - if this is your opinion, then hang us! Here you will tread on a spark, but there and there, behind you - and in front of you, and everywhere, flames blaze up. It is a subterranean fire. You cannot put it out".

Blah, blah, blah, All those bloodthirsty Capatalistic savages, preying on the peaceful communist minorities.......

Let's see, who was it that put up a 13 foot wall with land mines, dog runs, and machine gun nests-all to keep their citizens from fleeing the communist paradise ? Oh yeah, the communists.

Why is it that dictator and communist are always synomonous ? I forget. Oh yeah, could have something to do with:

Lack of political parties
Lack of free elections
Lack of free travel
Lack of free trade
Lack of open dissent
Lack of a free press
Opression
Torture
Execution without due legal process

Yeah cos south Africa wasnt capitalist was it.

The capitalist USA which has caused the death of 7 million people though war alone since 1946

The british capitalist government that starved 30 million Indians.

These are the people who say communist society was so bad, have you ever actually been?

Well I have been to Cuba and seen the socialist "hellhole", and let me tell you something, despite decades of sanction blockade and invasion, it has an amazing healthcare system, better education system than us, free housing and was the only government to send troops to Africa to fight south African Aparthied regime.

Why dont you wise the hell up.

Edited by Baron: Reason given in PM

I've had major surgery three times in Belize and have been treated once for a massive stroke, all by doctors trained in Cuba. Belizeans needing eye surgery can fly to Cuba, have the surgery, and return, with everything paid for by the Cuban government. The first medical teams to respond to the earthquake in Haiti were Cuban.

Put political and economic theory and prejudice to one side for a moment and look at practical results.

Originally Posted by garza

I've had major surgery three times in Belize and have been treated once for a massive stroke, all by doctors trained in Cuba. Belizeans needing eye surgery can fly to Cuba, have the surgery, and return, with everything paid for by the Cuban government. The first medical teams to respond to the earthquake in Haiti were Cuban.

Put political and economic theory and prejudice to one side for a moment and look at practical results.

I don't think the following are theories:

Lack of political parties
Lack of free elections
Lack of free travel
Lack of free trade
Lack of open dissent
Lack of a free press
Opression
Torture
Execution without due legal process

When Cuba has:

more than one political party
a free and open press
free travel for it's citizens
Open court systems with due process
freedom to assemble (without being ordered to by Castro's thugs

We can talk about how wonderful things are in Cuba. You got free surgery. What about all the political prisoners who want for food, and due process ? What about the educated who would like to travel (but can't because Castro fears a "brain drain") ?

The US doesn't trade with Cuba, but the rest of the world can, so why do Cubans still drive cars that are over fifty years old ?

I can't fight the image you have of Cuba from reading the U.S. media.

Garza, as I just said in another thread, things aren't that bad in Cuba -- there isn't the sort of abject poverty or crime you see in other countries in the region. They do get an education and good free healthcare. But by all accounts, even though no one is starving, most people are on the edge. Maybe you see that as acceptable, despite the lack of personal freedoms, censorship etc.

But tell me what Dudester has listed that isn't true -- at least to some degree? And yes, I've read plenty about Cuba from outside the U.S. media, and have Canadian relatives who have been there.

Cuba really isn't that bad from a visitor's perspective but the tourist always has a limited view.

The discussion on communism/socialism, at the level we've seen in recent debates on this board, is about fifty years out of date. The history of the last fifty years has exposed the reality of communism when people attempt to apply it.

The most disturbing elements of these debates are those posts revealing an attitude which would easily allow something like the McCarthy witch hunts to happen again.

I knew garza had certain sympathies when he had a wobblie in his avatar. I did a short report on the wobblies some years back in my History of Capitalism and Labor class. My professor for that class was a Ph.D. in economics that was a union activist/leader and a Jewish socialist I believe. Good man. I asked him one day in class if he'd be disappointed in me if I became a corporate lawyer.

People don't live like pimps in Havana but they wear furs in London. Guess which town I'm heading to?

Originally Posted by Baron

Cuba really isn't that bad from a visitor's perspective but the tourist always has a limited view.

If you're referring to my post, I'm sort of damning with faint praise here. No one is starving or dying due to lack of adequate healthcare. Of course, in post Soviet Union Cuba, it's taken tourist dollars and free-market reforms to maintain that.

Originally Posted by JosephB

If you're referring to my post, I'm sort of damning with faint praise here. No one is starving or dying due to lack of adequate healthcare. Of course, in post Soviet Union Cuba, it's taken tourist dollars and free-market reforms to maintain that.

I was referring to personal experience, Joe.

That's fine -- I'd just said in the previous post that things weren't that bad -- so I don't think it was a big stretch to think you might have been referring to my comments.

All of what he says is true to some extent.

Consider this. When Fidel Castro began his final march on Havana, he had an 'army' of about 18 followers. With those he defeated the Cuban military and overthrew a government that had the full backing of the U.S. At that time he did not have the support of the Soviet Union - he was hoping he could be friends with the U.S, and that hope only died when President Eisenhower refused to see him after the revolution. The refusal reportedly was on the advice of brothers John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State 1953-1959, and Allen Dulles, Director of Central Intelligence 1953-1969. If you have an interest in an authentic telling of the story of the revolution, you need to read 'The Man Who Invented Fidel,' by Anthony DePalma.

The question was raised at the time, by me among others, whether Castro, although a Marxist-Leninist, could have had the same relationship with the U.S. as Marshall Tito of Yugoslavia. In both cases, Castro and Tito, the motivating ideology was nationalism more than communism.

Now it's been more than 50 years. Opposition parties in Cuba have had many more than 18 members. So where are the masses? Batista held a gun at the heads of Cubans, and yet they revolted and followed Fidel. If the opposition in Cuba were really strong, if it had broad-based popular support, is it not logical to assume that at sometime during this half century, and especially in the days following the collapse of the Soviet Union, a successful counter-revolution could have been launched? When you talk about democracy, what do you mean? Is democracy defined only by having more than one political party, or is democracy defined as having a society that a majority of people approve?

Both Fidel and Raul have said recently that mistakes have been made in shaping the Cuban revolution, which they think of as continuing. Changes are being made, and will continue to be made.

When you say, 'most people are on the edge', where are the figures? If that were true, no, I would not find it acceptable. Many Belizeans travel to Cuba as students, for medical treatment, as tourists, and they come back with stories of people who generally are not rich, but who are a long way from being 'on the edge'.

Many Cubans travel to Belize. Doctors, teachers, technicians, consultants, come, spend time here, and go home. One that I knew personally spent two years here teaching organic gardening. One effect the U.S. trade embargo has had is to force Cuban farmers and gardeners to learn how to produce high yields without the use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides. What they have learned is being shared with developing countries around the world. That's the sort of activity that probably does not get reported on in the U.S. media. It's the sort of activity, in fact, that Monsanto, Dow, and ADM would rather not be talked about at all.

Cuba is not all good, not all bad. Socialism, communism, capitalism, all claim to be democratic systems, each defines democracy in its own way, and none has proven to be a perfect system. Nonetheless, come Labour Day, the first of May, I'll sing a song about Joe Hill and drink a toast to the workers who build our world.


'We carry on the battle, for roses and bread.'

Here's an idea for an instant boost to the Cuban economy. As has been pointed out, Cuba is filled with old cars. There are collectors, especiall in the Netherlands and the UK, who pay fortunes for old iron, then spend themselves broke on restoration.

Now here's the deal. Dealers and private collectors buy up all that pre-revolutionary rolling stock. The price - £1,000 per car plus a new economical vehicle such as a small sedan or pickup truck, Diesel powered. Old cars have considerable value, and these would have the added attraction of begin genuine Cuban survivors. I can see Coys, Bonhams, and Retro Classics having a field day buying, selling, trading, auctioning all those great cars with a certificate of authenticity signed by the Minister of Transport in Havana.

Socialism good! Capitalism bad!