The Place of Workers’ 
Education 

in the 

LABOR MOVEMENT 


Fifth Annual Conference 

of Teachers in Workers’ Education 


at BROOKWOOD 
February 24-26, 1928 


Edited by 

A COMMITTEE of LOCAL No. 189 

American Federation of Teachers 


BROOKWOOD 
KATONAH, N. Y. 
1928 










BROOKWOOD PUBLICATIONS 


CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS 

1924, Psychology and Educational Methods , 69 pp., 35 cts. 

post paid. 

1925, Mass Education for Workers. Out of print. 

1926, Promotion and Maintenance of Workers' Education , 

105 pp., 50 cts. postpaid. 

1927, Adult Education vs. Workers' Education, 95 pp., 50 cts. 

post paid. 

1928, The Place of Workers' Education in the Labor Move¬ 

ment , 50 cts. postpaid. 


Organization of Basic Industries , with special reference to the 
Textile Industry— A. J. Muste,. 32 pp., 12 cts. post¬ 
paid. 


The Worker Looks at Government —A. W. Calhoun. Cloth, 
176 pp., $1.70 postpaid. 

The Labor Approach to Psychology —A. W. Calhoun. (To be 
published in Fall, 1928). 


















The Place of Workers’ 
Education 

in the 

LABOR MOVEMENT 
Fifth Annual Conference 

of Teachers in Workers* Education 

at BROOKWOOD 
February 24-26, 1928 


Edited by 

A COMMITTEE of LOCAL No. 189 

American Federation of Teachers 


BROOK WOOD 

KATONAH, N. Y. 
1928 



* X 


* 1 


V'JK 

L<l 

KJ<f 
C £> £ 






Printed on Union-Made Paper and Cover Stock 


Up-to-Date Printing Co., Inc., 470 Broadway, N. Y 








PREFACE 

The theme of this year’s conference was dictated by the critical 
situation of Workers’ Education in relation to the official Labor Move¬ 
ment. How competent teachers are to grapple with such a problem 
may be judged from the following pages. 

As in previous years, the conference was under sanction of the 
American Federation of Teachers and was composed primarily of 
teachers, with the inclusion of certain others whose expert knowledge 
was required. The booklet reproduces substantially the course of the 
discussion, except that one or two papers are included that were not 
read at the sessions, and that there has been some little extension of 
the remarks in one case. 

The Editorial Committee, 
Brookwood, 

Katonah, N. Y. 

April 5, 1928. 






CONTENTS 


The Function of Workers’ Education, M. H. Hedges. 5 

Current Issues in Workers’ Education, A. J. Muste. 8 

Discussion . 18 

The Historic Role of Panaceas, A. W. Calhoun. 23 

Labor’s Historic Relation to the Public School System, A. Lefkowitz 23 

The History of Workers’ Education Since the War, A. Epstein... 26 

Discussion . 32 

Socialist Experiences in Workers’ Education, Algernon Lee. 38 

Discussion . 44 

Education in the Consumers’ Co-operative Movement, Cedric Long 45 

Bryn Mawr Summer School for Women Workers in Industry, 

Hilda Smith . 48 

Southern Summer School for Women Workers in Industry, 

Louise Leonard . 53 

The Problem of Effective Relations with the Labor Movement, 

Leonard Craig . 54 

Discussion . 57 

The Relation of Workers’ Education to the Labor Movement, 

John P. Frey . GO 

Study Groups Under Union Direction, A. D. Sheffield. 61 

The Relation of Workers’ Education to the Labor Movement, 

E. C. Lindeman . 63 

Discussion ... *.. 71 


















FIRST SESSION 
Friday, February 24, 8 P. M. 


I. THE FUNCTION OF WORKERS’ EDUCATION 
M. H. Hedges 

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 

Those of us who have had experience with the conventional chan¬ 
nels of education, have repeatedly heard the charge—and no doubt 
have made it ourselves—that education does not come to grips with 
life. This, it seems to me, unless we accept the philosophy of the 
absolute, reaches the dilemma in which the teacher finds himself. 
His function is to fit for life; he is to equip the student with tools 
to meet a given situation, while he himself is more or less remote 
from that situation. Unless we are willing to hold that there are 
“absolute truths” or “eternal principles” capable of verification and 
transmission, (I, of course, am not) then as teachers we must look for 
some other way to outwit this dilemma. I find the approach in what 
for want of a better name, I call the “functional”. The labor move¬ 
ment has certain functions to perform, and it is the function of work¬ 
ers’ education to develop, deepen and aid the performance of these 
functions. 

Now, these functions, in the main, are two: 

1. Egoistic, administrative, or business functions. 

2. Social, or reformative, or, as some would have it, revolu¬ 
tionary, functions. 

Sometimes these two functions are mutually exclusive. The Gen¬ 
eral Strike, for instance, may, with good abstract argument, be urged 
as an acceptable tool of reform; but, in the present stage of our devel¬ 
opment, if used, would likely place American unions in a position 
where they could not carry on their first function, the administra¬ 
tive. Sometimes these two functions are mutually helpful; as for in¬ 
stance, when labor urges high wages as a necessity, prompted by ego¬ 
istic motives, and forces industrial management to eliminate waste in 


5 








industry. Let me say at this point, that by the very exigency of the 
situation, labor is forced to consider the first set of functions as 
primary. Like Napoleon’s battalions, labor moves on its stomach. If 
this be materialism, then we have to make the best of it. Here labor 
follows the primal law that in the sweat of his brow man must earn 
his bread. And I do not think anything can be gained by ignoring 
this set-up. However displeased we may be at our social complex, 
however urgent we may feel is the need for reform, we as worker 
teachers must recognize the fact that the ongoing life of the union 
must be the first goal of the educator as well as of the active unionist. 

And when I see the scope of this field of workers’ education I 
am astounded at its untilled extent. 

Recognizing the time limit of this discussion, allow me quite ar¬ 
bitrarily to set down courses for which I believe there is an undeni¬ 
able need, in the daily life of the union. 

(1) Business management courses for business agents and union 
officials to fit them better to carry on their technical job as business 
representatives of the union. 

(2) Courses in the history of the union, and of the general 
labor movement, to be thrown against the greater history of world 
humanistic movements. 

(3) Courses in wage economics; in particular, the study of busi¬ 
ness trends as they inevitably affect the life of the union. 

(4) And, corollary to this, training in statistical reading; a study 
of the statistics of wages, living costs and the standard of living. 

(5) Courses in newspaper and magazine production. 

(6) Psychology of organization. 

(7) Courses in workers’ health, bodily and mental; and here 
would I place the arts as well as the science, the literature of the 
labor movement. 

Nor does the function of workers’ education end here. The trained 
worker in the labor movement has another function, best defined as 
creation of technique. F’or instance, we all agree that organization of 
the unorganized is desirable. But it is not enough to fall back upon 
the contention that “the way to organize is to organize.’’ We might 


6 





just as well say the way to eat one’s dinner is to eat one’s dinner. But 
the latter is not a civilized way of eating dinner. We no longer eat 
our meat raw. We no longer ignore hygienic laws. We no longer 
play snob to calories. We know that there is the science and the art 
of cooking. And we know that not even the savage merely eats his 
dinner. It is the function of the worker-teacher to discover and 
formulate practical ways of advancing other labor interests. 

Take another example. Union cooperative management is a prac¬ 
tical device to give labor a greater voice in the technical processes of 
the railroad industry. It may be true that it has not given the work¬ 
er a greater economic stake, yet it can not be denied that it has al¬ 
lowed him to participate in the more creative processes of industry, 
and as such is valuable. We need more discoveries of new technique, 
new avenues through which labor can fulfill itself, and I take it that 
these avenues must be opened by the trained minds of the movement. 

And it is my hope that if worker teachers do concentrate on these 
multitudinous practical problems, do deepen and strengthen the every¬ 
day functions of labor at every point, then a firm basis will be laid 
for greater and more conscious social service on the part of labor. 

One of the things that dismays me is the illusion, chiefly on the 
part of those-not-in-the-know, that the labor movement is a great, ma¬ 
jestic, powerful movement. It is powerful in its potentialities, and in 
its accomplishments, but in actual fact, it is only moderately strong. 
What it needs most, is not illusions of grandeur about its historic 
mission, but devoted, disinterested, technical service, on the part of 
thousands,—millions. 

It is my hope that if worker teachers concentrate on these mul¬ 
titudinous practical problems, that a unifying principle will also be 
found and introduced into the movement. 

I know what I have intimated as my conception of workers’ edu¬ 
cation will strike some friends as heresy. It will sound like the voice 
of black reaction. I contend that it is neither reactionary, conserva¬ 
tive nor radical. It is a discussion of a practice based on educational 
experience outside of and technical experience inside the movement. 
And if applied, it will not make so much difference whether it is ap¬ 
plied by autonomous groups, or groups within the movement. I give 
ground to no one in my desire for sweeping social and political re¬ 
forms in behalf of labor, but it seems our lot in the present hour is 


7 




to lay the ground for these reforms, by strengthening the movement 
all along the line. This is not so romantic a task but it is a neces¬ 
sary one. 

Let’s not make the mistake of the old schools: Let’s see the job 
we have to do and do it. 


II. CURRENT ISSUES IN WORKERS’ EDUCATION 


A. J Muste 
Brookwood. 


The main purpose of these remarks is to raise questions rather 
than to answer them. The important and interesting issues in the 
field of workers* education at the present time may be listed as 
follows: 


I. Spread of Workers' Education in the Recent Period. 

A rapid survey of the development of workers’ education enter¬ 
prises in the United States during the past couple of years reveals the 
following situation: 

In New York City the work of the Central Trades and Labor Coun¬ 
cil consisting of a couple of classes is carrying on about as usual. The 
work of the Women’s Trade Union League is more extensive and is 
at least holding its own. Some new educational work has been started 
in the Millinery Workers branch of the Cap Makers Union. There is 
a decided interest in education in the big Local No. 3 of the Electrical 
Workers. The work of the I. L. G. W. U., the pioneer international 
union in this field, is at the lowest ebb in years owing to internal con¬ 
ditions in the union and depression in the trade. 

The work in Newark, N. J. and vicinity which was organized as a 
labor college a couple of years ago seems to have disappeared en¬ 
tirely. 

Under the direction of Paul Fuller, working for the Workers Ed¬ 
ucation Bureau, a fairly successful educational work is under way in 
Passaic and Paterson. The total enrollment, however, in study classes 
is probably not much over two hundred. 


8 






The work of the Philadelphia Labor College continues to flourish 
and attract favorable attention. The work in Baltimore grows steadily 
and this year apparently has more vitality than at any time in 
the past. 

The Labor College in Washington, D. C., so far as is Known is not 
holding its own this year. 

The very important work carried on in the past in District 2 of 
the United Mine Workers of America under the presidency of John 
Brophy and the direction of Paul Fuller lias been entirely wiped out 
since Brophy’s retirement from the presidency. Largely through the 
efforts of Leonard Craig, first operating in a volunteer way and then 
as Educational Director of the Pennsylvania State Federation of Labor, 
the Union Labor College of Pittsburgh has been revived and has sev¬ 
eral classes in operation. Classes have been started in Shenandoah, 
Pa., in the anthracite region, and educational work is about to be 
launched in Wilkes Barre. 

The Boston Labor College, one of the first if not the first to be 
established under C. L. U. auspices is at the lowest point since its 
founding. The work in Salem, Mass., and vicinity under the direction 
of Charles L. Reed continues to hold its ground and to render im¬ 
portant service. 

Very little seems to be doing in Chicago, and the unique work 
carried on for several years by Tom Tippett in Sub-district 5 of the 
United Mine Workers in Illinois was completely dismantled as a re¬ 
sult of the unemployment and strike in that region. It is good news 
that local former members of the classes in that sub-district are now 
taking steps to revive this work. 

The Labor College in Denver, Colo., seems to be going along fairly 
well but the Wyoming and Colorado Federations no longer have a full 
time educational director in the field, although a number of local 
classes still are under way in these states. The Colorado Springs 
“labor” classes are now simply adult education extension courses of the 
local college. 

In Minnesota there seems to be a considerable revival under the 
stimulus of an active committee of the State Federation and of cer¬ 
tain members of the Teachers Union and other groups in the Twin 
Cities. 


9 




The Labor College of Seattle is undergoing a period of readjustment 
and it remains to be seen whether it can achieve substantial results 
under the reorganization. 

The Labor College at Portland, Ore., which did some very inter¬ 
esting pieces of work for a number of years, is in a very poor con¬ 
dition at present. 

Work in California under the joint direction of the labor move¬ 
ment and the State University appears to be about holding its own. 

In the South, not much in the line of workers’ education is being 
done and it would appear that the few classes under way are receiving 
their stimulus from the Industrial Department of the Y. W. C. A. and 
from young women workers who have attended Bryn Mawr or the 
Sweet Briar summer schools rather than from the local trade union 
movement. 

In the main the schools having a resident or semi-resident char¬ 
acter such as the Rand School and the Workers School of New York, 
and Brookwood seem to be firmly established and at the very least, 
holding their own. 

In other words, looked at from the point of view of the number of 
enterprises under way, and attendance, the movement reveals definite 
gains in a few places, is holding its own in a considerable number, but 
in a fairly large number of instances is suffering definite setbacks. 
It can hardly be said to be experiencing rapid or steady growth. 

II. Issues Concerning Type of Work and Educational Method. 

When we turn to the question of the type of work being done, 
and the methods that are being found successful, or at least are be¬ 
ing experimented with, we may note the following items that deserve 
some consideration. 

In the first place, Dr. E. C. Lindeman’s preliminary report to the 
Workers Education Bureau in the spring of 1927 seemed to indicate 
that there was a diminishing interest in classes in economics and la¬ 
bor problems and, on the other hand, an increase in classes in psy¬ 
chology and especially in English, public speaking, parliamentary law. 
I understand that the complete report which may be issued by the Bu¬ 
reau in the near future confirms these preliminary findings. Does this 
signify a diminishing interest in the content of economics and labor 


10 




problems courses, or does it mean a change of method and approach, 
economics and labor problems being taught through classes in English 
and public speaking? Does it or does it not indicate a tendency for 
workers’ classes to turn to more purely “cultural” subjects instead of 
concentrating on work that deals directly with the problems which 
the worker confronts in his shop and in the union? 

In the second place it may be of no special significance, but on 
the other hand may be a straw indicating which way the wind is 
blowing, that some difficulty seems to be experienced with the devel¬ 
opment of the pioneer class in shop economics in one of our eastern 
centers. It was the expectation some years ago when this type of 
class was launched that active members of unions, beginning with a 
study of conditions in their own shops and using the information thus 
obtained in negotiation for w r ages and conditions with their employers, 
would be naturally led on to broader interests. There is little indic¬ 
ation now that such a development is taking place and I understand 
that the head of the Philadelphia Labor College is now inclined to 
question whether any workers’ education that does not from the start 
and throughout, give students some general philosophy of the labor 
movement, some vision of wider goals, some ideology that carries 
over beyond the considerations in their own shop and craft and makes 
them feel themselves part of the world movement of workers, will 
have permanency and accomplish worthwhile results. 

In the third place, in Philadelphia an interesting experiment is 
under way in giving apprentices in the electrical trade training 
in the aims, methods and structure of the labor movement along with 
their technical training, which may prove a lead to be followed in 
other labor educational enterprises. 

Fourthly, there seems to be a fairly well defined tendency through¬ 
out the country to place somewhat less emphasis on class work and 
to do more with popular or semi-popular activities designed to reach 
large numbers with less intensive work. The experiments with giv¬ 
ing educational talks before trade union meetings, and the series of 
week-end conferences on unemployment, organizing methods, etc., being 
held in various centers with considerable success, illustrate this ten¬ 
dency. Are we to assume that this is a temporary or a more or less 
permanent trend? 

Fifthly, summer schools for workers are growing in numbers and 
seemingly in importance. Last summer, schools were in session at 


11 





Bryn Mawr, Barnard, University of Wisconsin, and at Sweet Briar 
College in the south, all of these for women workers, and summer 
schools or institutes were held both for men and women at Denver, 
Colorado Springs, Brookwood, etc. 

Finally, as indicated above, the various resident or semi-resident 
schools such as the Rand School, the Workers School, and Brookwood 
seem to be the most firmly established of our workers’ educational en¬ 
terprises and give every evidence of being here to stay and likely 
to grow or hold their own in attendance, and of increasing their in- 
liuence. Some consideration might profitably be given to the rea¬ 
sons for this seeming permanence and stability of residential work. 

111. Issues in the Field of Philosophy and Control. 

For one thing, there is a very definite tendency for workers’ edu¬ 
cation (or adult education?) to be taken up by the conventional 
educational institutions. The summer schools to which we have re¬ 
ferred are an illustration. Cooperative enterprises between labor 
groups and the state university continue in California, and there are 
indications that in other states the university authorities are becom¬ 
ing interested in the possibilities. 

In the second place, the problem of whether workers’ education 
is education pure and undefiled or is propaganda, what is meant by 
education and propaganda anyway, and if there is to be any “tend¬ 
ency” in the teaching and discussion in workers’ classes, what that 
tendency is to be, continues to obtrude itself. For our present purpose, 
we may confine ourselves to citing an illustration from the proceed¬ 
ings of the latest A. F. of L. Convention. In addressing that con¬ 
vention, the Secretary of the Workers Education Bureau stated: 

“The Workers Education Bureau has from the start of its alli¬ 
ance with the A. F. of L. six years ago sharply defined the field in 
which it sought to operate. It has confined its efforts strictly to the 
field of education and research. It has never sought nor sanctioned 
any interference with the broad general field of trade union policy. 
That field it regards as the field for the exclusive decision by the 
trade unionists operating through their own trade unions and the 
American Federation of Labor. We have refused to pass on labor 
legislation or in any wise intrude on the domain of trade union policy. 
Nor have we on the other hand advocated any goal or program as 
the special goal for labor. We have not championed any “ism”. 


12 



We have not attempted to teach workers what to think, but how to 
think.” 

The plain implication of this statement is that education in work¬ 
ers classes is to be pure and undefiled, having no motives and “ten¬ 
dency” whatever. 

A couple of pages earlier, however, the Secretary of the Workers 
Education Bureau is quoted as saying the following: 

“A year ago the delegates to the Detroit convention heard an 
impassioned plea for the striking textile workers of Passaic. For 
eight months thousands of these workers under communistic leader¬ 
ship had been subjected to the indignities of police persecution on 
the one side and to the demoralizing counsel of irresponsible leaders on 
the other. They had faced starvation and continuing unemployment 
made less burdensome by the public response to their distress. And 
yet the thing which these workers sought was what their leaders 
were totally incapable of giving them—a responsible union capable of 
negotiating and carrying out an agreement with the employers. 
Their leaders had led them out in what they said would be a promised 
land; it proved to be a land of poverty and desolation. Having led 
them out the leaders could not lead them back. When the United 
Textile Workers went into Passaic they were called upon to liquidate 
the mistakes and blunders of the United Front Committee; they found 
demoralization and disintegration on all sides. It is a story so char¬ 
acteristic of communist endeavor. They lack both the program and 
the integrity to build an effective labor union. They preach solid¬ 
arity, but they practice disruption. There was an organization, but 
no union; there was control, but no direction. 

“When the United Textile Workers undertook the task of bring¬ 
ing into the union the 10,000 workers, many of them foreign born, 
some literate, but many illiterate even in their own language, they 
were confronted with a problem in organization that required skill, 
tact and resourcefulness to meet. They had heard the Macedonian cry 
but they found the Macedonians a varied group—a babel of many 
tongues. 

“So when the United Textile Workers took hold of the task they 
realized that it was in a large measure an educational job that re¬ 
quired educational methods. They turned to the Workers Education 
Bureau for assistance. A survey of the situation was suggested, 
made, and adopted by the United Textile Workers’ Union. 


13 



“Through the cooperation of the bureau an educational director 
was sent into the city of Passaic as local director of workers’ educa¬ 
tion. He began work quietly and laid his foundations on solid ground. 
At first his work was opposed by the old leadership who feared that 
their influence might effectively be undermined. They sensed what 
in fact did happen! But gradually the quiet effective work of our' 
director began to bear fruit. Study classes were started to teach 
the purpose and function of organized labor, in English and in 
civics. At the union meetings an education hour was set aside to 
present the history and aims of the Textile Workers’ Union and 
the A. F. of L. On Sunday a great public forum and mass meeting 
was held. 

“Gradually the attitude of the community, of the employers, and 
of responsible citizens began to change. They recognized a new lead¬ 
ership by labor and a new educational policy. They perceived of the 
trade union as a constructive agency to stabilize industry.” 

It seems difficult to reconcile these two quotations, one empha¬ 
sizing that workers’ education is purely education, does not try to 
tell workers what to think, does not concern itself with trade union 
policy, and does not advocate any “ism”, the other citing as a signifi¬ 
cant instance of the success of workers’ education, how by use of it 
workers were won away from communism to trade unionism, from a 
“destructive” type of labor policy to a “constructive”, from allegiance 
to one set of leaders to allegiance to another set. Regardless alto¬ 
gether of what our preferences may be in the way of philosophy, policy 
or leadership, the problem for workers’ education here suggested is 
a real one. The issue of propaganda versus education is hard to 
down. 

Thirdly, the Executive Committee of the American Federation of 
Labor made to the recent convention at Los Angeles the following 
suggestion with regard to the constitution of the Workers Education 
Bureau: 

“The cooperative relations between the Workers Education Bu¬ 
reau and the American Federation of Labor convince us that workers’ 
educational undertakings should increasingly become an integral 
part of union activity. We suggest, therefore, the advisability to pro¬ 
vide a more definitely responsible Executive Committee for the 
Workers Education Bureau by amending its constitution to limit 
membership in the Executive Committee to representatives of support- 


14 




ing national and international organizations and the American Fed¬ 
eration of Labor.” 

(The constitution of the Workers Education Bureau as it stands 
at present provides for three members appointed by the American 
Federation of Labor 'Executive Council; three elected by representa- 
tivs of international unions at the Workers Education Bureau con¬ 
vention; one by the representatives of state and city federations and 
local unions; and two by representatives of labor colleges and classes; 
the president and secretary being elected by the convention as a 
whole). 

Commenting upon this recommendation of the Executive Council, 
the Convention Committee on Education reported as follows: “The 
suggestion of the Executive Council that the Executive Committee of 
the Workers Education Bureau be so changed as to give more respon¬ 
sible direction to supporting national and international unions and 
the American Federation of Labor is a wise suggestion. . . . We 
recommend, therefore, to this convention, the adoption of this sugges¬ 
tion of the Executive Council.” 

The next convention of the Workers Education Bureau will there¬ 
fore be called upon to consider this recommendation for a radical 
change in its constitution and structure, eliminating representatives 
of state and city federations, district councils, local unions, and of 
labor colleges and classes from the Executive Committee of the 
Workers Education Bureau. 

. The writer believes that the proposal is a move in the wrong di¬ 
rection and ventures to make a provisional statement of his reasons 
therefor, even though a more thorough discussion may need to be 
postponed until we have more light as to the reasons why this change 
is recommended. 

1. In the first place, if one goes over the list of active Workers’ 
Education enterprises in this country which are affiliated with the 
Workers Education Bureau it soon becomes apparent that the over¬ 
whelming majority are being conducted by state federations, city cen¬ 
trals, district councils, and local unions. There are a couple of inter¬ 
nationals which as such carry on workers’ education enterprises—that 
is, labor colleges and classes. Since in our trade union practice, in¬ 
ternational unions have assumed responsibility primarily for economic 
activity, or bargaining with the employer, whereas political and edu- 


15 



cational activities have been entrusted largely to the state and city fed-* 
erations, this development of workers’ education primarily under the 
auspices of the latter would seem to be in line with our traditional 
way of doing things. 

The proposal now made is to give all real authority in the Work¬ 
ers Education Bureau to those trade union bodies which have not car¬ 
ried on workers’ education and which perhaps have their hands full 
of other important matters, and to deprive of representation on the 
Workers Education Bureau Executive precisely those trade union 
bodies which have developed workers’ education and have acquired con¬ 
crete experience in carrying it on. To deprive these bodies of any 
voice in a matter in which they are so deeply interested and for the 
actual carrying out of which they must continue to assume so much 
responsibility, and on the other hand, to deprive the Executive Com¬ 
mittee of the Bureau of the benefit of their counsel seems to me a 
highly questionable move on the face of it. 

2. The proposed change also deprives representatives of labor 
colleges and classes, that is the teachers and students most directly 
concerned in workers’ education, of representation on the Executive 
Committee of the Bureau. While it may be assumed that the colleges 
and classes will retain a certain measure of autonomy in the admin¬ 
istration of their local affairs, the national workers’ education move¬ 
ment will be governed, if this change goes into effect, on the outsider- 
board-of-trustees plan which, as applied to our conventional colleges and 
universities, is so widely criticized at the present time. On the board 
which directs an educational movement, those who are supposed to be 
in greater or less degree expert in educational matters are to have no 
representation at all; the whole power is to rest in persons who, save 
in accidental exceptional cases, will have no special competence in edu¬ 
cational matters. 

In this same connection it may be noted that there is a strong 
tendency in the educational world toward some representation of stu¬ 
dent bodies on boards of control. The proposed change in the Work¬ 
ers Education Bureau constitution deprives students of any represen¬ 
tation on the national body, direct or indirect. It appears to be in 
line with reactionary rather than progressive practice in the educa¬ 
tional field. 

3. When Labor and educators embark on a joint enterprise, as 
in the workers’ education movement, difficulties may emerge from op- 


16 





posite directions. On the one hand, educators cannot be muzzled. There 
must be free discussion, a real clash of opinion, if intelligence is to 
be developed. Real teachers and students, therefore, will not submit 
to dictation. On the other hand, there is some danger that the latter 
may occupy themselves too much with abstractions and theories, for¬ 
getful of practical considerations. A union engaged in a desperate 
battle may not want to assume “official responsibility" for pronounce¬ 
ments of teachers not subject to “official control" and it is quite pos¬ 
sible that free discussion of a controversial matter may tend to divide 
forces, to cool loyalties, at a time when unity (or uniformity?) is very 
much desired. What is to be done in face of such a dilemma? 

It would seem that a cooperative arrangement, such as obtains in 
the workers’ education movement in which Labor and educators 
(teachers and students) share on something like equal terms, might 
be almost an ideal way to meet the situation. Under this arrangement 
teachers are free, but they are in constant touch with leaders and ac¬ 
tive workers in the labor movement so that they may not be too ab¬ 
stract and theoretical, nor unnecessarily careless about the practical 
difficulties that a fighting organization such as a union may confront. 
Labor on its part has been able to make its influence felt in the edu¬ 
cational work which it was sponsoring, without assuming to “control" 
the educator and the student, without dictating what people should 
think. And since it did not presume to “control", it was not obliged 
to assume “responsibility" for everything that might be said or done 
in connection with the educational work. 

If now teachers and students are deprived of representation in the 
national body, the tendency will inevitably be, despite the best inten¬ 
tions in the world, seriously to limit freedom with respect to courses, 
text books, choice of teachers, class-room discussion and other vital 
matters. Be it emphasized that to say this is not to cast any asper¬ 
sions whatever upon anyone’s motive or intentions. It is simply to call 
attention to a phenomenon that has occurred so often in the history of 
human institutions that it may be called a law. 

If freedom is seriously limited, the best teachers will no longer 
be attracted to workers’ education. They will contend as some do 
now that there is more scope for the self-respecting seeker after truth 
in conventional educational institutions than in the labor movement. 
Also workers’ education will cease to be the outlet and the expres¬ 
sion of the idealism of some of the younger elements in the labor 
movement which at the present time it is. 


17 







Another at least equally serious result will be that the official 
labor movement, having assumed entire control of workers’ education, 
will also be responsible for everything that happens in this field. Un¬ 
less official propaganda only is to be put forth in workers’ education 
classes and labor colleges, may this not lead to very undesirable com¬ 
plications? The discussion, for example, of an untried and unpopular 
proposal under semi-independent auspices where there is no thought 
of direct influence on policy is one thing, a similar discussion under 
conditions where every utterance would be regarded as having the 
stamp of official approval and might influence policy very directly, 
would be a very different matter. 

4. Finally, to propose a vital change in the constitution of the 
Workers Education Bureau on the ground that it is desirable that it 
should have “a more definitely responsible executive” is to imply that 
the Executive Committee either in the past or at the present time 
or both, has been somewhat lacking in “responsibility”. What does 
this mean? What are the shortcomings and the transgressions of the 
movement in the past and today? Until the answer to this question 
is known, it is impossible to decide whether the remedy proposed is 
calculated to cure the evil. 

The foregoing and other considerations must have the attention 
of all those truly interested in the welfare of the workers’ education 
movement in order that we may arrive at a sound, helpful, and prac¬ 
tical solution of the problem before us. 


DISCUSSION 

Tom Tippett. —Workers’ Education in the future will be determ¬ 
ined pretty largely by the attitude of Brookwood students. Now the 
official group in Workers’ Education says it has not selected a goal 
and professes to refrain from participation in trade union politics. 
But education on that basis is a needless duplication of work that 
can be carried on better by universities. The dubious experience in 
Philadelphia with shop economics lacking an ideology points the issue. 
It would be all right to have the subject taught in workers’ classes, 
but something more is necessary. It is the business of Workers’ Edu¬ 
cation to butt into trade union politics. Moreover we have to recog¬ 
nize that there is a goal. Workers’ Education is a hard job and can’t 
be done without an ideology, a faith, a goal. I think maybe such con¬ 
siderations explain the dismal failure in Workers’ Education today. 


18 




Furthermore, the official movement gives its case away in what 
it says about its educational work in Passaic. I would not want to 
be an educational director that would go into a place like Passaic and 
undermine the work done by those that raised such wonderful en¬ 
thusiasm in the strike. On the contrary, the people that will succeed 
will have the guts to go ahead even if it is necessary to antagonize 
leaders. 

Ida Patigalia .—Even here we have students that come without 
belief in workers’ control! But that must be our aim. The American 
Federation of Labor with its present leadership will not change; but 
we can go back to our home towns and change the leadership of 
Workers’ Education projects. They are not taken so seriously that 
the opposition will be insurmountable. 

Hyman Barufkin .—Stagnation in Worker’s Education is partly 
due to the fact that most union leaders have not had much education 
themselves and are not very anxious that others should get any. It is 
natural that one should not educate others to take away what he has. 
Another factor is illustrated by the Passaic situation, where even the 
police are alleged to have become enthusiasts for Workers’ Educa¬ 
tion! If the work is conducted along such lines, no wonder it goes 
no further than it does. In so far, however, as the complaint is merely 
that Economics classes fall down while Public Speaking courses are in 
demand, the solution is simple: Use the Public Speaking class to 
teach Economics or whatever other basic subject is necessary. 

4. J. Muste .—Perhaps it would be misinterpreting the Passaic sit¬ 
uation a bit to overstress the participaion of police and responsible 
citizens in last summer’s Chautauqua. The important thing is what 
is being done in the workers’ classes. 

Beckie Friedman .—The American Federation of Labor wants to 
control Workers’ Education, but how competent is it even to union¬ 
ize industry? I am inclined to think that the official desire to control 
Workers’ Education is in order that the workers may understand a 
little less. The officialdom does not like the menace of Brookwood. 

Joe English .—One of the first things should be to make the Labor 
Movement move. When it moves intelligently, we should not worry 
about the direction. We might be able to hold the goals in the back 
of our minds, but to parade them might arouse unnecessary opposi¬ 
tion. In any case we need to show that the workers have a real in¬ 
terest in the problem of taking hold and of getting rid of the people 
that stand in the way. 


19 



William Seligman. —What would Brookwood be like if it corres¬ 
ponded to the A. F. L. formula? The A. F. L. did not do much to 
launch Workers’ Education, and now it wants to kill it. 

Jim Boyd. —The story is not all so one-sided as it sounds. The 
man that sent me here has not had Workers’ Education, but he was 
not afraid to send me. I’m convinced we can convert the A. F. L. 
to our point of view. 

Jasper Deeter. —If the Workers Education Bureau can teach any¬ 
body lxow to think nothing , I’ll have to start there. As for the ques¬ 
tion about Shop Economics at the Philadelphia Labor College, a clar¬ 
ity of program and a more honest statement—leaning toward the idea 
of Fire might help the College. 

Bomania Ferguson. —Workers’ Education opens a distant vision. 
It should fit into the job of organizing the unorganized. When they 
are organized, they will learn to go to political action. When the 
workers control the government, they can shape public education. 

Donald Burke. —The Brookwood prospectus says that “Brookwood 
is not a propaganda institution.’’ But it is! It is time for it to come 
out and say so. 

A. Lefkoivitz. —Is Labor Education growing or stationary abroad? 

H. Sanderson Furniss. —In Belgium it is growing. In England the 
Adult Education movement is on the up-grade. The Workers’ Educa¬ 
tion Association has grown enormously since the War. The trade 
unions are taking a greater interest in education than a few years 
ago. 

Franz Longville .—There is no resident Labor College in France 
and there are not many statistics about classes; but generally speak¬ 
ing the political education and economic education of workers is more 
advanced than in the United States. In Germany and Belgium, 
Workers’ Education is an integral part of the Labor Movement. In 
every country the Labor Movement has felt a reaction, but since 1926 
there is a revival. The German movement is to devote to a Labor 
College five million marks that it received by way of indemnity for 
the Ruhr occupation. 

A. Lefkoicitz. —The A. F. L. has a definite philosophy grown out 
of American conditions that no longer exist. The philosophy of Work¬ 
ers’ Education, on the other hand, is built on the class struggle,—hence 


20 



a conflict with the mass of American Labor. To a large degree the 
class-conscious are not intelligent enough to present their ideas ef¬ 
fectively. The Workers’ Education movement is without funds or 
official support. The Workers’ Education Bureau was launched largely 
by people with a class-conscious philosophy. Naturally the A. F. L. 
tries to take the movement over. The issue has to be faced. I don’t 
think the parties are irreconcileable. The force of economic circum¬ 
stance will drive the A. F. L. to a new base or it will disappear. 
Where we’ve made a success of Workers’ Education, it’s where we’ve 
had it as a religion. People with a drive and an understanding of 
Labor will make the connection. The problem is how to work to¬ 
gether toward a common goal in spite of differing points of view. 
We must face the problem in an analytical way. 

Eva Shafran .—What is Brookwood going to do in the face of the 
new situation? 

Wm. Absolon .—If you’re going to use the approach of class-con¬ 
sciousness with groups that are not used to it, it won’t take very well. 

Feigel Kramer .—We must have a goal, but we must teach workers 
how to think before we can teach them what to think. 

Leonard Craig. —There’s a great deal of difference between talk¬ 
ing and action. Let the theorists come with me and I’ll give them a 
chance to put their theories into action. 

C. E. Warne .—There are too many generals and too few privates. 
The generals are very clear. I feel like changing the economic order, 
but how about our classes? Their interest is in Tariff, Unemploy¬ 
ment, Craft Unionism. We’re up against the problem of clearing away 
dead wood. Perhaps the first thing is to create discontent. Don’t 
give the whole thing away and scare people off. Implication is the 
best method of teaching. When you’ve created discontent with the 
system, then comes the question of the road out. Give every type of 
propaganda a hearing. To raise at this moment the banner of class- 
consciousness is to alienate the rank and file. 

A. J. Muste .—Any education that tries to deal with life as a 
whole is in some sense propagandist; but it makes some difference 
whether the standard is rote or whether it is thought. There is 
also an educational atmosphere that needs to be preserved in an edu¬ 
cational institution. Something of freedom of discussion is required. 
I don’t believe it is harmful to Workers’ Education. Admitted the ne- 


21 







eessity of a goal and a philosophy, there remains the problem of how 
to interpret it to people that haven’t it. Moreover here remains a 
distinction between a goal and a definition of it. We can afford a little 
quarreling about the definition if we have the goal. 

As to the proposed change in the W. E. B. constitution: The 
W. E. B. was an attempt to have control by unions, students, and 
teachers, with much local autonomy. It was perhaps an impossible 
attempt. It may be we can’t hold the Workers’ Education movement 
in the United States together. For the present we are well advised to 
insist that Workers’ Education should be what its founders intended— 
integrally connected with the Labor Movement, but not dominated by 
it. It is still worth while to fight for that kind of a W. E. B. The 
important thing is not what the conservatives or reactionaries are 
going to think or say or do. I’d not be so much concerned on that if 
I felt the progressives or radicals could agree. 


22 





SECOND SESSION 
Saturday, February 25, 10 A. M. 


IS WORKERS’ EDUCATION TO BE CLASSED WITH THE 
PANACEAS? 


I. WHAT LIGHT CAN WE GET FROM THE HISTORIC ROLE OF 
PANACEAS IN GENERAL? 


Arthur W. Calhoun 
Brookwood 

One of the observations most commonly made by historians of 
the American Labor Movement is that in “good times” it depends on 
trade union methods and in “bad times” resorts to “cure alls” such as 
independent political action, producers’ co-operation, consumers’ co¬ 
operation, etc., which gather enthusiasm for the moment and then 
evaporate. On this reading of history, the official family bases the 
conclusion that “pure and simple” trade unionism is the central sub¬ 
stance of the Labor Movement and that some, at least, of the alter¬ 
native methods are wills-o’-the-wisp , baneful and baleful to the cause 
of Labor. 

Workers’ Education has not, as yet, been black-balled as a de¬ 
lusive panacea, yet its rather mushrom growth during a period of sag 
in the union movement, together with its seeming eclipse in the 
recent past, ought to make us wonder whether Workers’ Education 
comes in the general class of phantom hopes. It is to this subject that 
we now direct our attention. 


II. WHAT LIGHT CAN WE GET FROM LABORS HISTORIC 
RELATION TO THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM? 


A. Lefkowitz 

New York Teachers’ Union 


From the dawn of history humanity has sought relief from its 
troubles in some panacea or cure all. From the dawn of history 
panaceas so eagerly pursued proved useful but new ills appeared 


23 









and then the panacea hunt was on again. American Labor like other 
groups, has had its career of panacea hunting only to find its panaceas 
become more like will-of-the-wisps. 

The War of 1812 cut off British manufactures and gave American 
industry its first great impetus. Men and women began to abandon 
life in the country towns for the mill towns which multiplied rapidly. 
With the massing of people in the towns came evils new to American 
industrial life—excessive child labor, unprotected machinery, un¬ 
sanitary housing, juvenile delinquency, etc. With mass production 
also came organization and agitation and the everlasting quest for 
a panacea for these ills. 

In this expectant labor atmosphere Robert Dale Owen, son of the 
English Utopian socialist, appeared and fired labor with his new 
panacea. “I believe in a National System of Equal, Republican, Pro¬ 
tective, Practical Education, the sole regenerator of a profligate age 
and the only redeemer of our suffering country from the equal curses 
of chilling poverty and corrupting riches, of gnawing want and 
destroying debauchery, of blind ignorance and of unprincipled in¬ 
trigue. By this, my creed, I will live. By my consistency with this 
my professed belief, I claim to be judged. By it I will stand or fall." 
His cry for universal education as a basis for equality and sound 
citizenship and as a panacea became a battle-cry of the workers every¬ 
where. Round this shibboleth rallied the organized workers and 
through their efforts universal public education in tax-supported 
schools was established. Well might Prof. Frank Tracy Carlton say: 
‘‘The organized workers of 1828 to 1836 dreamed that the general 
establishment of free public schools would quickly and surely evolve 
a social Utopia.” 


Despite the tremendous growth and expansion of public educa¬ 
tion, despite the fact that education is most diversified and com¬ 
pulsory up to fourteen and in many states, in part, up to 18, organ¬ 
ized Labor is as far from the solution of its economic, and political 
ills as ever. Its Utopia has solved no problems. Why? 

First, because while a panacea may throw light on a complex 
phenomenon, no complex and vital economic and political phenomena 
can be solved by any Utopia. Educational panaceas, properly co¬ 
ordinated with other solutions, may help achieve the long sought- 
after goal. 


24 




Second, modern mass production is slowly coming under the 
domination not of those industrial lords interested in mass produc¬ 
tion per se—as Henry Ford—but essentially, under the control of 
financial manipulators like the Morgans, Van Sweringens, Dillons, 
etc., interested primarily in dividends and the control upon which 
they rest. These economic overlords are interested in the perpetua¬ 
tion of the present economic order, and the control of public thought 
through agencies of information—press, pulpit, radio, the schools— 
whether direct or indirect—means the perpetuation of their eco¬ 
nomic, political, religious and educational ideals and ideas. As a 
result, the conformist is advanced, the non-conformist forced out. 
The educational ideal is the go-getter; the chief virtues for the masses 
are honesty, thrift, implicit obedience. Labor problems are generally 
ignored and if discussed, are presented in a hostile manner or with 
little understanding or appreciation of their social significance. Those 
courageous and enlightened souls who love truth and dare teach it. 
pay the penalty for their devotion by martyrdom. 

What light does Labor’s quest for a panacea in universal educa¬ 
tion throw upon the subject of workers’ education? First, while Labor 
education is an earnest and sincere effort to give the workers an 
honest background for intelligent thinking unhampered by the false 
teaching of educational satellites of the present economic overlords, 
it cannot become an effective panacea because Labor has neither 
the desire nor the financial ability to support a comprehensive scheme 
of Labor education to liberate the minds of the workers from the 
employer-psychology which dominates their thinking. 

Secondly, workers’ education can reach but few workers, who per 
se are powerless to make fundamental changes in the social order. 
Even if they could reach the majority of the workers, the solution 
of Labors’ ills lies with the future; that is, with the younger genera¬ 
tion. Hence the public schools furnish the key to the solution. Unfor¬ 
tunately, too often the members of the younger generation have their 
minds poisoned by the ignorance, bias, or open hostility of the teach¬ 
ers essentially conformist by nature. Hence Labor must get control 
of the public school and make public education labor education. 
How can this be done? 

First, Labor must control the boards of education and that means 
labor must embark upon a career of independent political action. 
Having secured control of boards of education and placed upon them 
enlightened teachers and workers instead of political heelers, Labor 


25 







politicians, or upholders of the dominant economic groups, teachers 
will be free to unionize and get a clearer social viewpoint by direct 
contact with the masses and their daily problems and their social 
aspirations. Then and then only will teachers be in a position to 
reorganize the courses of study with emphasis upon the social sciences 
labor problems and their true teachings; then and then only will 
creative education come into its own; then and then only will teachers 
be free and competent enough to present in an impartial and scientific 
and understanding manner, with a more humane outlook, the social, 
economic and political problems upon which the solution of our ills 
depend. 

This indispensable task of social reconstruction, Labor fails to 
recognize not only because it is itself the product of miseducation 
caused by the dominant economic control of our educational system 
but also because of its suspicion of and contempt for the intellectual— 
at times justified by their egoism, and Jehovah complex—also because 
of Labor leaders’ inferiority complex, because of the general dislike 
of many older men for the older type of teacher who secured discip¬ 
line by force. Unless labor appreciates the underlying significance 
of preventing the poisoning of the mind of the citizen of the future 
and seeks to prevent it by unionization the outlook for any effective 
panacea—educational or otherwise—is dark indeed. I am optimistic 
enough to believe American Labor will have an awakening—some 
leaders now have it,—and help vitalize the whole movement. 


III. WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THE HISTORY 
OF WORKERS’ EDUCATION SINCE THE WAR? 


A. Epstein 

American Association for Old Age Security 


In any attempt to evaluate the present movement of workers’ 
education, consideration of its historical aims and purposes is para¬ 
mount. It is only through this earlier perspective that we may pass 
judgment upon the present tendencies and prognosticate the future 
possibilities. What then were the aims and purposes of the early 
pioneers of this movement? The late Arthur Gleason, who unquestion¬ 
ably was one of the best exponents of the early aspirations of the 
Workers’ Education movement, clearly distinguished workers’ educa- 


26 








tion as “its own kind of adult education, and not to be confused with 
university extension, evening high schools, night schools, public lec¬ 
tures and forums, Chautauquas, Americanization, education by em¬ 
ployers, and Y. M. C. A. industrial courses. Labor education is inside 
the labor movement, and cannot be imposed from above or from 
without. It is a training in the science of reconstruction. It is a 
means to the liberation of the working class, individually and collec¬ 
tively. In pursuing that aim, it uses all aids that will enrich .the life 
of the group and of the worker in the group, and that will win allegi¬ 
ance of the worker to the group.” 

These aims and purposes were not only the motivating force of 
the intellectuals outside the labor movement but were also true of the 
labor leaders most actively and most energetically identified with this 
movement from its very inception. As redefined by James H. Maurer 
at the last conference in Boston: 

“Underlying the purpose of workers’ education is the desire for 
a better social order. It is this desire on the part of the workingman 
for a richer and fuller life individually and collectively that gave the 
movement its birth and at all times must remain its treasured inherit¬ 
ance. Labor education aims at the ultimate liberation of the working 
masses. 


“To Change the Social Order ” 

“The Workers Education Bureau was not organized for the pur¬ 
pose of duplicating the work done by the public schools, universities, 
correspondence schools, and so on. It is distinctly not to be confused 
with the numerous existing forms for adult education. They are 
designed for the most part, either to give a bit of culture to the 
student, or else to lift him out of his present job into a higher one. 
That is not the purpose of workers’ education. It is education that 
will stimulate the student to serve the labor movement in particular 
and society in general, and not education to be used for selfish personal 
advancement.” 

Even Mr. E. C. Lindeman, who is perhaps somewhat detached from 
the actual working class, agreed that “if it is truly workers’ education, 
it also seeks to change the social order. Workers’ education may be 
conceived as the germ of a new people’s movement. Its function is 
to inject a new principle, a new method, and a new spirit into the age¬ 
long struggle for justice.” 


27 







The above definitions and enunciation of principles are clear and' 
unmistakable. That workers’ education has a special social function 
is recognized by all. And these aims were not only the hopes and 
aspirations of the earlier pioneers of the movement but are apparently 
still considered essential requirement for a true workers’ education 
movement. In view of this it is, I think, entirely proper and propiti¬ 
ous to stop for a moment and to examine the extent to which these 
principles are still applicable to the present official movement of work¬ 
ers’ education. 

Now, of course, I am fully aware that no movement as significant 
and as vitalizing as workers’ education can be adequately appraised 
after a period of but 7 or 8 years. Its meaning and significance can 
hardly become crystalized in this short space of time. Its actual 
accomplishments may not mature for many years. Not unmindful of 
these criticisms, I still maintain that inasmuch as the official move¬ 
ment for workers’ education in the United States has during the past 
seven years taken definite shape and followed identical processes 
which throughout have been consistent and constant, even this short 
period of its existence warrants at least a hasty examination or ap¬ 
praisal of its accomplishments and an evaluation of its tendencies and 
future possibilities. What are some of these fact? 

A Rapid Development 

In the Spring of 1921, when the first conference on workers’ edu¬ 
cation was held, there was no organized national movement guiding 
and directing the scattered workers’ educational experiments through¬ 
out the country. There were altogether less than one hundred educa¬ 
tional classes of all sorts. Their methods and programs were as 
varied as the organizations which sponsored them. There was con¬ 
fusion both in content and policy. But underlying all of them there 
was a definite and concrete purpose which inspired and fused them 
all into one aspiration. Whether they were sponosred by trade 
unions, Socialist, Communist or independent intellectuals, each and 
every one had aimed at an educational process which would guide and 
inspire the labor movement to greater heights, profounder vision and 
ultimately toward the liberation of the working masses from their 
present social and economic positions. There was an unmistakable 
ideology pervading them. It was the cherished hope of expanding 
and consolidating these aims and ideals which made possible that re¬ 
markable gathering in the Spring of 1921. Within less than two 


28 



months from the issuing of the call and without any funds whatso¬ 
ever, about 200 men and women journeyed to New York City from 
many states in order to help launch a more consolidated and invigor¬ 
ating movement of workers’ education. 

While I am not familiar with the present developments of the 
Workers Education Bureau, I note from the reports to the Boston 
Conference and to the last Convention of the A. F. of L. that under 
the guidance of the W. E. B. educational committees had been insti¬ 
tuted in practically all of the states; that 270 local education commit¬ 
tees had been appointed by as many central labor unions; that, thanks 
to the generosity of the Carnegie Corporation a W. E. B. press has 
been incorporated; that the budget of the Bureau amounts to approx¬ 
imately $35,000 a year and that membership dues are paid by 52 na¬ 
tional and international unions, 32 State Federations of Labor, 68 
Central Labor Unions and 360 local unions. This, I submit, is quite a 
formidable list and a remarkable achievement. 

This steady growth and development it seems to me, warrants us 
even at this early^date to take stock of the meaning and significance 
of his expansion. While seven years may not be a sufficient period 
upon which to base definite conclusions, seven years of drifting and 
dangerous procedure without stock-taking is by far too long a time. 
Such an examination is imperative to the very examination of any 
movement even as it is to an ordinary corporation. In the final ana¬ 
lysis the only way to tell of the efficacy of a certain method is to 
look in the profit and loss column. If the balance is in red the stock 
holders must know that regardless of the wonderful theories of the 
superintendent or management the methods simply did not work profit¬ 
ably. Let us then very briefly take a look at the balance sheet of this 
great corporation, the American Labor movement. 

The Labor Movement Declines 

In 1920-21 when the Workers Education Bureau was initiated, the 
Amreican Labor movement was at its peak; its membership was the 
highest on record; it had a prestige hitherto never attained and its 
growing power made it the terror of the forces of darkness. The work¬ 
ers’ education movement was to give it increased power and more in¬ 
telligent guidance. But parallel with the growth of the W. E. B. and 
increasing population and industrialization, the membership of the 
A. F. of L. has declined to one of the lowest records in the past two 
decades. In 1927 it had a total membership of considerably less than 


29 



3,000,000 and many members were so only figuratively speaking. But 
what is even of greater significance than the decline in the member¬ 
ship is the vanishing leadership, the diminishing vitality and the al¬ 
most total absence of any profound philosophy capable of meeting 
present day emergencies—the very contributions workers’ education 
was to make. 

Indeed, one of the most startling revelations in this hasty stock¬ 
taking is that side by side with the obvious spread and growth of la¬ 
bor education, both labor statesmanship and vision have been con¬ 
spicuous by their total absence. Not only has labor lost its power and 
prestige; not only has its leadership dwindled to the lowest level, not 
only have company unions spread to an extent never dreamt of be¬ 
fore, but the American labor movement has never before faced its fate 
with more equanimity, with less resistance and with such utter com¬ 
placency as today. Even as sympathetic a student as Mr. Lindeman 
is forced to remark: “in fact, candor compels one to hesitate to speak 
of workers’ education and a labor movement in this country since a 
movement is presumed to move.’’ 

During the past seven years American industrialism let hardly 
a month slip by without the proclamation of some new theory and 
some new discovery of the blessings and virtues of capitalism. During 
the same time American labor, when it did not go in reverse, has 
either stood still or has drifted from one untenable position to an¬ 
other. At its best it has merely tried to imitate American industrial 
leadership along certain lines of business and financial activities. In 
the maze of new theories enunciated by representatives of American 
industry, I am not conscious of a single contribution which came from 
American labor. Industry in the United States has expanded beyond 
all expectations in the past decade; production has increased so 
enormously that thousands of workers are being displaced from their 
jobs by the increasing productivity of machinery. Has any construc¬ 
tive suggestion of meeting this most important problem been pro¬ 
posed by American labor? 

A Single Bright Spot 

It took industrial captains, such as Brookings and Henry Ford, 
to discover the theory that increased purchasing power on the part 
of the workers makes for greater and more steady prosperity. And 
American labor leaders have been religiously advocating it ever since. 
It took Henry Ford and a reporter of the New York Times to en- 


30 





lighten American labor leadership upon the advisability of the five 
day week. And they have been happy to fall in line. There is a grow¬ 
ing problem of unemployment in the United States. It took Governor 
Smith and the Democratic Party to stress this as a national issue. Let 
us hope American labor will also give consideration to this question 
now that it has become a public issue. There is the entire problem 
of social insurance and the insecurity of the American workmen 
against the hazards of modern industry. The nation is awakening to 
these problems, but the official American labor movement still takes 
its cue not from the workers’ educational movement but from the Na¬ 
tional Civic Federation and from the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. 
There is the problem of the mining industry. But American labor 
contents itself with appeals for relief. Oh yes, American labor has 
been busy fighting labor injunctions for the past quarter of a cen¬ 
tury and the number has grown by leaps and bounds. 

Indeed, in the whole realm of recent theories and industrial phil¬ 
osophies not one new thought is discernible on the part of American 
labor. All it aspires to now is to the National Civic Federation’s ideal 
of cooperation between the workers and employers. Instead of war 
or eternal vigilance, it seeks eternal harmony and profound peace and 
collaboration. All efforts are being exerted to convince the employer 
that it is to his benefit to recognize labor union because it will pay 
him to do so. Through this cooperation productivity will be in¬ 
creased, conflict eliminated and prosperity will prevail. In return the 
new labor leadership will see to it that the prosperity and happiness 
shall remain unmolested by the malcontents and the unmanageable 
Reds of whatever color they may be. 

In the entire field of workers’ education, I can detect only one 
bright star, only one speck in the desolate firmament which is gen¬ 
erally pointed to with pride and satisfaction in the reports of the 
W. E. B.—the Philadelphia Labor College. Only this school has lived 
up to the true aims of workers’ education, has sought a redefinition of 
values and a newer understanding of the more recent problems con¬ 
fronting American labor. It has sought guidance and understanding 
of the fundamental problems which have arisen in the past decade. 
Its conferences have been both original and fruitful and the very suc¬ 
cess of this experiment is a clear illustration of what real workers’ 
education could have meant. For its accomplishments have been def¬ 
initely a result of true workers’ education. It may as well be admit¬ 
ted that the Philadelphia Labor College is but Jack Lever and Israel 


31 




Mufson and these two are but Brookwood transplanted on Phila¬ 
delphia soil. By producing Lever and Mufson and a number of other 
active workers like them Brookwood has shown the real significance 
and purposes of workers’ education. 

What Accomplishments f 

Judging by these results, what light can we get from the history 
of workers’ education since the war? Simply that we still wait to see 
what workers’ education can really accomplish. According to Mr. 
Lindeman, a study of the contents of workers education classes re¬ 
veals that more students are interested in learning how to become 
public speakers and debaters than they are in understanding the eco¬ 
nomic and social order in which they live and labor. My own answer 
can only be that of my friend Benjamin Stollberg. “Five years ago 
Workers’ Education meant the education for working class leadership. 
Today, where in hell is the movement w r hich promised so well? By 
and large, when we are discussing workers’ education, we are discus¬ 
sing cultural opportunities for wage earners, not workers’ education.” 


DISCUSSION 

Cara Cook .—The beginning of the Workers’ Education movement 
in this country was permeated with an ideology and an idealism such 
as are associated with panaceas. Now aren’t panaceas a response to 
economic situations? What were the factors behind the rise of the 
Workers’ Education movement in 1920? Disillusionment? A recog¬ 
nition of the permanency of the working class? 

A. Lefkowitz .—In 1919 a few of us got together and thought it 
was time for a political party. The result was the Farmer-Labor 
Party. Several delegates at the conference were progressive teachers. 
We held an educational session and decided we ought to launch a 
movement for a central bureau for Workers’ Education. Thus Work¬ 
ers’ Education was definitely launched as an aid to independent polit¬ 
ical action for a new social order. Where education was carried on on 
a large scale it was done with such an outlook. Attempts were made 
for a central bureau or council in New York City, but failed because 
of job holders. Even idealists hold on to jobs! 

II. Sanderson Furniss .—There is no doubt that university education 
has two great defects: 1. It stands for the status quo; 2. It leaves 


32 





out much that is very important. In Workers’ Education wie must 
get away from these two shortcomings. In terms of our own project, 
that caution means that we must avoid making Workers’ Education 
mere propaganda and must make our curriculum as broad as possi¬ 
ble. Mere propaganda turns out people with one outlook, incapable 
of understanding the conservative point of view. Such persons are 
only half educated. They are not able to hold their own in an argu¬ 
ment with an employer. Education must be carried on in an educa¬ 
tional spirit; the method must be educational, not propagandist. It 
is not our business to teach the students what to think or even how 
to think, but to help them to think. The goal should be to turn out 
educated workers, able to think for themselves and support their case 
by reasoned arguments, and committed to active membership in the 
labor movement. We need to keep what is best in the old curriculum 
and to modernize it. 

The outlook for Workers’ Education is not too hopeful, but we 
have to take a long view. The Workers’ Education Association last 
year brought educational opportunity to 70,000 students,—more than 
the total number of university students in Great Britain. 

One significant thing is the way Workers’ Education affects the 
students’ attitude toward their children. They are determined on a 
better chance for the rising generation. In a generation or two the re¬ 
sults will be marked. 

We are also working to capture public education bodies and are 
gradually gaining ground. In several cases Labor has captured the 
councils. If only the workers would become more alive to such 
work, they could go a long way toward altering the whole educational 
system. 

As for panaceas, society is too complex for a single cure, but 
education could go a long way. A sound educational system is an ab¬ 
solutely necessary basis for a live Labor movement. 

D. J. Saj)Oss .—The ideal in education should be to develop a 
thinking person rather than a machine; but I wonder whether that, 
in the practical situation, is not another panacea. For how long have 
you any one in classes? How long does it take to devekp open-mind¬ 
edness, independent thinking? Our job is to be a corrective against a 
huge propaganda machine. What can we do in two years to adults 
already pretty well fixed? Isn’t the “broad-minded” eniihasis pre¬ 
mature? Isn’t it perhaps one reason why Workers’ Education in the 


33 



United States has fizzled. If we could get the children, we could pro¬ 
ceed by the ideal methods (as in Russia); but as it is we have to de¬ 
velop a point of view and hope the students will spread it. Of course 
that does not mean that we are to fill them with a lot of one-sided facts 
or untenable notions. 

The situation in this country simmers down to such anxiety of 
the trade unions to avoid panaceas that they confuse with the pursuit 
of panaceas the holding of ultimate ideals. Perhaps the important 
thing is to infuse idealism into the Labor movement. The lack of it 
throws light on the fact that the Labor movement has not been fighting 
shy of intellectuals as such but of a certain kind of intellectuals— 
those with ideals. 

A. Lefkowitz .—Only such have tried to get in. 

D. J. Saposs .—What about such persons as Chester Wright, Wal¬ 
ling, Beyer? 

A. Lefkowitz .—That is different. They are employees. 

Josephine Colby .—Maybe we are reduced to a choice between two 
evils, so that it is better to choose propaganda in the interest of la¬ 
bor. Chesterton questions whether vital literature grows out of any¬ 
thing but propaganda. A survey of world literature rather confirms 
that hypothesis. Aren’t we doing something fatal in trying to take 
out propaganda? We are blamed for trying to create a live situation 
such as they have in England. We don’t make education vital by de¬ 
vitalizing it. 

A. J. Muste .—In 1921-22 when the Workers’ Education movement 
got under way in this country, it was a movement of the progressive 
group, then with a good deal of power in a number of places. All 
kinds of experiments were being made in the direction of political ac¬ 
tion. It was a period of strikes. The progressive group was chief 
mover in the development of the W. E. B. and Brookwood. But the 
progressive groups have gone out of existence as groups leaving the 
field to extreme rights and extreme lefts, between whom they are 
stranded. 

The outlook for Workers’ Education is all bound up with the 
question of what is going to happen to the Labor movement. Workers’ 
Education not ashamed to be propaganda for Laborism has not a 
very rosy outlook. It is hard to tell whether the general economic sit¬ 
uation will shift soon enough to give a new orientation. 


34 





But in the long-run outlook, there is no particular ground for dis¬ 
couragement. Where Workers’ Education is functioning effectively, 
it is a movement with a Labor goal. There will have to be an ag¬ 
gressive Labor movement, industrial and political, and if we depend 
on it, it depends on Workers’ Education. There is a certain amount 
of opportunity for such a Workers’ Education movement. We have to 
face the question of reaching the great masses of the unorganized 
with such a movement. What happens to those in trade unions is be¬ 
coming less important. The masses must be educated away from cer¬ 
tain inhibitions, fears, illusions, and perhaps this is the most im¬ 
portant task that Workers’ Education has before it at the present 
time. There is surely enough of a challenge to offset discouragement 
from contemplation of our achievements. 

Cedric Long .—There is need of new educational method as well 
as control. I sympathize in part with our English visitor’s objection 
to propaganda. Children must be taught to think. 

The discussion has now come to the point—Why hasn’t Labor 
Education lived up to the hopes set for it? The answer is complex. 

(1) No movement ever does. In particular there was undue ideal¬ 
ization of the rank and file as stimulated by a passing interest. 

(2) The Labor movement itself has not held up. (3) There is the 
inevitable cycle. The Labor movement advances one wing at a time. 

A. J. Muste .—We may easily deceive ourselves by taking the pro¬ 
nouncements of a movement at their face value. Many of us a few 
years ago regarded the Labor movement as more revolutionary than 
it was, and now regard it as more defeatist than it really is. 

Cedric Long .—Absorption in warfare in the labor movement itself 
enlists enormous idealism that might go into Labor education. 

Mrs. Sanderson Furniss .—In Britain we’ve had a great wave for 
the education of married women. Every district of the W. E. A. has 
a women’s committee. Women’s sections of the Labor Party have 
regular classes. Women have carried the idea of Workers’ Education 
into their homes and to the children. I wonder whether there is any¬ 
thing of the kind in this country. 

A. J. Muste .—Several of our unions have women’s auxiliaries, 
which in the past were confined to ritual and social activities and 
strike relief. Now there is a movement in some of them for other ac¬ 
tivities, and one recourse is to educational work. Last summer an in- 


35 



stitute was held at Brookwood under the auspices of the Women’s 
Auxiliary of the Machinists and attended by members of several aux¬ 
iliaries. The Machinists’ Auxiliary is to hold two such institutes the 
coming summer. The Women’s Trade Union League has also done 
something toward reaching the women. 

A. Lefkowitz. —Workers’ Education hasn’t caught. How can it 
catch? Not by antagonism. The job is to reach the very men sup¬ 
posed to be devoid of ideals. We must convince them that we are not 
after their jobs, that we are not running a confidence game. We can 
go a long way toward getting at least a negative support, and on that 
basis the idealists can make their way. We must admit, however, that 
internal struggle has destroyed the power of the progressives. 

Leonard Craig .—Lefkowitz has covered to a good extent what I’ve 
had in mind all the while. There are plenty of ways of “putting it 
over.” The definition of Workers’ Education can be postponed. The 
first problem is how to get the workers together. You can dodge both 
groups if you make up your mind to do it. 

A. Epstein. —Lefkowitz’s talk is not new, but what’s the use of 
bunking ourselves? What have you, Lefkowitz, done in the C. L. U.? 
There is nothing to show. “Play with them.” Submerge yourselves 
and then they’ll play with you. The W. E. B. has alienated the men 
of vision. 

A. Lefkowitz .—We have accomplished something. In the field of 
education, the Central Trades and the State Federation against the 
wishes of their own leaders had to go on record against censorship of 
teachers and brought about the repeal of the Lusk Laws. 

A. Epstein .—How was the victory won? By compromise? 

A. Lefkowitz .—We fought all the way through; but one is to fight 
only when necessary. Furthermore we got Labor to fight attempts at 
“patriotic” legislation and to adopt a definite program to maintain 
the merit system in the public schools against the Tammany ma¬ 
chine. Moreover the State Federation adopted the most comprehen¬ 
sive educational program in this country. As to the lack of success on 
the political end, that is due to the stupidity and cowardice of the 
radicals. In the old Central Federated Trades we had a group of 
militant progressives. We got independent political action against 
the will of Gompers, but no support from the socialists and other rad¬ 
icals. The effort reached national proportions. With the assistance 


36 



of one hundred and fifteen gunmen the movement was broken up. We 
had ninety-three fighting men in the new body, but we were sold out 
by certain “radicals”. 

On the industrial field, indeed, nothing has been accomplished by 
the methods Epstein attacks. If the radicals with power hadn’t sold 
us out, however, we’d have a different movement. The radicals have 
used their energy fighting each other and discrediting all radicalism. 
The task of the man with vision is to reorganize the Labor move¬ 
ment. All the troubles of the American Labor movement are due to 
the fact that the Socialist Party, failing to capture, went out and built 
a movement on the outside. 

A. Epstein .—I make no defense for the Socialist and Communist 
groups; but I stress the fact that when Abe fought he won. 

A. Lefkowitz .—We must fight,—when necessary. 


37 



THIRD SESSION 
Saturday, February 25, 2:30 P. M. 


I—TRADE UNION ACTIVITY IN WORKERS’ EDUCATION 


Spencer Miller, Jr. 
Workers’ Education Bureau 
(Manuscript not furnished) 


II—SOCIALIST ACTIVITY IN WORKERS' EDUCATION 
Algernon Lee 

Rand School of Social Science 


The story of Socialist activity in the field of workers’ education 
in this country is a large and integral part of the story of American 
Socialism itself. Long before there was any thought of trade-union 
colleges or of educational departments in any of the unions, the So¬ 
cialist party and earlier still the Socialist Labor and Social Demo¬ 
cratic parties had been blazing the way. 

My personal knowledge of this work runs back a little more than 
thirty-two years, but what I observed when I joined the Socialist 
Labor party in Minneapolis in 1895 was then no new thing. Certainly 
I shall never forget my early experiences in the party, nor ever cease 
to be grateful for them. I had enjoyed much better opportunities in 
the way of formal schooling than any but two or three of the men 
with whom I now became associated. My reputation in college, if by 
no means a very high one judged by academic standards, was at any 
rate such as to give me a good opinion of my mental abilities and at¬ 
tainments. I considered myself quite a valuable acquisition to the 
Socialist movement. It did not take me long to discover that, if I 
had something to teach, I had a great deal more to learn. The ex¬ 
perience was not humiliating, for the comrades gave me full credit 
for whatever useful qualities I really possessed and put me to such 
work as I could do, while urging and helping me to make up for 
what I lacked. It did, however, give me a needed lesson in intellectual 
modesty. How far the effect of that lesson may have worn off by this 
time, I do not presume to say. 


38 









You will pardon me, I hope, for talking thus much about myself. 

I do it only because my case was a fairly typical one. The Socialist 
movement, though composed mainly of unschooled workingmen, was 
able to command the respect of educated men who came into con¬ 
tact with it and often, if it really got hold of them, to save them 
from becoming dilettant adventurers. What is more important, it 
was able to give to its working-class members a breadth of view, a 
sense of intellectual achievement and also of social responsibility, 
which not only enriched their own lives, but gave them an influence 
in the industrial, political, and cultural life of the nation alto¬ 
gether out of proportion to their numbers. When I call to mind the 
hundreds of men and women whom I have personally known, who 
had but the most limited schooling, whose mental lives before they 
became Socialists were as narrow and empty as are those of most 
American workingmen ,and whom participation in the movement 
awakened, developed, and equipped to the point where they could 
hold their own in discussion or in conflict with persons who had 
enjoyed every cultural advantage that bourgeois society provides, I 
have no doubt as to the latent ability of the working class to eman¬ 
cipate itself and to remake the world. I am not much impressed by 
the statistics which some laboratory psychologists give us about the 
number of morons—forty per cent, is it? I’ve seen the breath of life 
breathed into too many lumps of clay to believe that any large pro¬ 
portion of mankind is hopelessly stupid. 

Our educational activities were twofold. In the first place, the ap¬ 
peal which we made to the public by the spoken and the printed word 
had, I think, as much of a genuinely educational character as the 
nature and circumstances of propaganda permit. There was a reason 
for this. We thought of our movement as a means to the most far- 
reaching and most beneficient social change in all history. We were 
confident of its success, but not in the fatalistic sense that is sometimes 
imputed to us. We did not think that Socialism would come, whether 
anyone worked for it or not; we did think it historically inevitable 
that the increasing numbers would desire it and work for it. We did 
not fancy that success was near at hand; the work to be done, we 
know, was too vast to be accomplished in a few years. We did not 
think of social conflict in terms of individual virtue or villainy, wis¬ 
dom or folly; we were dealing with conditions, forces, and tendencies, 
not with personal denunciation or approval. Finally, we were of the 
opinion that the social order of the future, and consequently the 
movement which was its forerunner, must be essentially democratic; 


39 




no superman, and no “resolute minority”, we held, could administer 
or even introduce the co-operative commonwealth; it must be estab¬ 
lished and maintained by the thoughtful, well informed, self-reliant, 
and self-disciplined effort of the masses. It followed that our chief 
task was to explain the workings of the capitalist system. The people, 
and most of all the working class, must be convinced, not merely 
persuaded. 

In the second place, we carried on a more intensive educational 
activity within our own ranks. Every party branch was a little school 
of social science, much more than it was a political club. Wherever 
possible, we had our systematic courses of lectures, attended by party 
members and by other persons who had become seriously interested. 
We had our reading circles and discussion meetings. The office of 
literature agent was often considered the most important and honor¬ 
able post in the organization. We judged our success as much by 
the number and quality of the books and pamphlets we sold as by 
the new T members we took in or the votes we cast; and our members 
were proud to exhibit to visitors in their homes the books they 
owned and had read. All this educational work within the movement 
was actuated partly by the pleasure we derived from studying a sub¬ 
ject so many-sided, so highly theoretical, and yet, as we thought, in 
the larger sense so very practical. But it was actuated in large 
part also by the desire to equip ourselves for the duties of propa¬ 
ganda and organization, to make ourselves fit to serve the movement 
as well as to understand it. 

No doubt we often seemed comically self-important to those who 
were “outside looking in.” We did take ourselves very seriously, and 
perhaps a somewhat keener sense of humor would have done us no 
harm. I suspect that we were more or less pedantic, and that is to 
be regretted. Yet it is better to take oneself too seriously than to 
take nothing seriously—better to be a pedant than to be a cynic. 

The subject-matter of our studies, and even of our street-corner 
speeches, w r as pretty heavy. I will not say that we paid too much at¬ 
tention to philosophy, world history, and theoretical economics; but 
I do admit that we might well have given more thought to specific 
and concrete problems of contemporary life. It is not an either-or 
question; “this ought we to have done, and not left the other undone.” 

If, however, we must err in one direction or the other—if we must 
either deal thoroughly with big theoretical questions and more or less 
neglect every-day applications, or else let theory go by the board and 


40 



immerse ourselves in petty detail—if we were really presented with 
those alternatives, then I think the choice we Socialists made was 
the least mistaken one. There seems to be just now a strong tend¬ 
ency in the other direction in the workers education movement, at 
least in so far as this is directly linked up with the unions. If I 
understood Mr. Miller correctly, a little while ago, he thinks the 
curriculum for workers’ classes should be confined to such topics as 
the technique of bargaining over wages and hours, the functioning of 
officers and committees under joint agreements, the solving of daily 
shop problems, with perhaps some attenton to parliamentary law and 
union bookkeeping—and with athletic events and amateur theatricals 
thrown in to compensate the workers for the dullness of such a pro¬ 
gram of study. 

I hope I am not doing him injustice. Or perhaps I ought rather 
to hope that I am stating his position incorrectly, and that I shall 
be set right. But if that really is his view, I must emphatically 
dissent. Judged solely by its usefulness to the unions, and with the 
narrowest conception of trade-union functions, such a program is not 
even practical. And surely it needs no Brookwood, no Workers Ed¬ 
ucation Bureau, no trade-union colleges, to do so little as this. If 
this is what we are to come down to, we should shut up shop and 
quit talking about a workers’ education movement. 

“A man’s reach should exceed his grasp”, and so should a move¬ 
ment’s. Ideals that are too far removed from daily interests may 
be relatively useless. But to narrow the gap by bringing the ideals 
down to the lowest level of empirical and hand-to-mouth routine is 
to destroy their value altogether, and without even bettering the rou¬ 
tine. If it is only a question of how to make as good a wage bargain 
as circumstances permit, a year’s experience as business agent will 
teach a man more than a year’s study in a so-called trade-union col¬ 
lege. But if it is a question how to change the circumstances, how 
to organize the unorganized, how to develop a spirit of solidarity and 
devotion and self-discipline in the rank and file, how to compel the 
respect of the employers and win the sympathy of the general pub¬ 
lic—if this is what we are aiming at, and even if we think of it only 
as a means to betterment of the workers’ material condition within 
the capitalist system—then we need such teaching, or such study, 
as will tend to inspire them with respect for themselves and enthu¬ 
siasm for their organizations. And if we think of the unions as being, 
at least potentially, something more than so many wage-bargaining 


41 



groups, then we need such educational activity as will lead the 
workers to think of themselves, not merely as bricklayers or cloak- 
makers or machinists, but also and above all as members of the work¬ 
ing class. 

It has been the glory of the Socialist movement, in its educational 
aspect, that it did these things. No union man was ever made 
less efficient or less diligent in relation to the daily routine of his 
union by listening to Socialist lectures and reading Socialist books. 
On the contrary, a better understanding of economics was likely to 
increase his practical efficiency, and his pride in “making good” as a 
Socialist was likely to incite him to more patient and painstakng ef¬ 
fort Routine efficiency and diligence, however, are not enough. The 
best pilot on the seas cannot steer a ship that has no headway. 
There must be steam in the boilers. And the mass-energy that makes 
a labor organization forge ahead is not supplied—at any rate, not 
steadily enough nor in large enough volume—by cold calculation on 
the members’ part that if they do their duty as union men they may 
“get a raise”. In addition to this at all times, and during bad times 
instead of this, there must be the driving force of moral enthusiasm 
and of intellectual convinction. Workingmen who think and feel 
as comrades in a class movement, a movement of whose ultimate 
triumph they are confident because they understand its nature and 
its genesis, a movement which holds before them an ideal bigger and 
finer than material gain for themselves, a movement which gives them 
the sense that they are playing a historic role—such workingmen 
know how to survive defeat and so to earn success. “The stars in 
their courses fought against Sisera”, was the burden of Deborah’s 
song. Those who know that they are co-operating with the forces of 
social evolution have within themselves a source of power that 
nothing else can supply. It is no wonder that at a time when such 
a conviction is most notably lacking in our American unions, these 
unions are steadily losing in numerical strength and in fighting ef¬ 
ficiency. Let us not add our sanction to so suicidal a tendency. 

Time does not permit me to say anything about the Rand School 
or other special institutions of an educational nature which have been 
created by the Socialist movement. Nor is it necessary, for they are 
fairly well known. 

Only one more thing I must say before I close. In describing the 
educational activities of the Socialist parly I have spoken in the past 
tense. I have not meant to imply that such activities are no longer 


42 



going on. That would be far from the truth. But it must be 
admitted that they have not been so much in evidence during the 
last ten or twelve years as in the period before the war. The causes 
of this change it would take too long to discuss with any thorough¬ 
ness. They are to be found, I believe, in the abnormal conditions— 
abnormal in both the economic and the psychological sense—which 
have characterized the whole of American society since our entry 
into the war, and even since the beginning of the struggle in Europe. 
These conditions will pass. The process which Mr. Harding described 
as “getting back to normalcy” is a slow process. But it is under way. 

The concentration of capitalist ownership and control, the exten¬ 
sion of great-capitalist forms of production and appropriation into 
fields hitherto occupied by small-capitalist or precapitalist forms, the 
progressive elimination or subjugation of middle-class elements, are 
all going on apace. That exceptional type of war-prosperity, in which 
it was possible for all classes to share, if it is not altogether a thing 
of the past, is clearly on the wane. Capitalist accumulation is again 
becoming dependent upon the intensive exploitation of labor, by means 
of speeding, disemployment, and wage-reductions. 

The social-psychological results naturally lag somewhat behind 
the economic causes. As the militancy of labor, generated by normal 
pre-war conditions, did not subside immediately on the advent of 
the war-prosperity, neither does it revive just as soon as that special 
condition disappears. But that the renewed sharpening of the an¬ 
tagonism between capitalist and proletarian interests will in due time 
bring about a renewal of conscious class-struggle, seems to me hardly 
open to doubt. Nor is it more doubtful that renewed class-struggle 
will again call forth an educational activity similar in its general 
features to that which the Socialists were conducting with such ex¬ 
ultant vigor and such marked effect, and which, though on a dim¬ 
inished scale and in a somewhat less jubilant spirit, they have kept 
up during the war, during the years of persecution, and during the yet 
more difficult period of cynicism and jazz. 


III. COMMUNIST ACTIVITY IN WORKERS’ EDUCATION 

Bertram Wolfe 

Workers’ School 
(Manuscript not furnished) 


43 







DISCUSSION 


Hilda Smith. —Have other groups than the Communists tried cir¬ 
cuit teachers and correspondence courses, and if so, with what re¬ 
sults? 

A. Epstein —When I was in charge of Workers’ Education for 
Pennsylvania, we had a string of seven towns. We succeeded in get¬ 
ting those towns to support the project. The experiment was very 
successful, although we had no financial support from the outside. 

A. J. Muste. —Tom Tippett’s work in Illinois was of the same 
character. 

Leonard Craig. —Wolfe said they are opposed to the use of univer¬ 
sity teachers. Shall we wait till enough are fired? 

Bertram Wolfe. —Not exactly. There is not much firing. We have 
to develop our own teachers. In the main they rise to the occasion 
or are soon eliminated. We train people while using them. Sometimes 
they have had a collegiate training and then gone over to the Labor 
Movement; but save in English for foreigners we usually do not have 
professional teachers. 

Leonard Craig. —I think we are finding some fit teachers in the 
universities. In Pittsburg, Warne is O. K. To be sure he is getting 
into hot water at the university. 

A voice. —Perhaps we can do our bit to get some fired! 


44 



FOURTH SESSION. 



Sunday, Feb. 26, 10:45 A. M. 


VARIED APPROACHES TO WORKERS’ EDUCATION. 


I. EDUCATION IN THE CONSUMERS’ COOPERATIVE 
MOVEMENT 


Cedric Long 

Co-operative League of the United States. 


We roughly divide cooperative education into two classes. The 
first and most important is the intensive instruction for officials, em¬ 
ployees or prospective employees, either by means of a full-time Train¬ 
ing School or through the correspondence courses. Approximately 15 
of these Training Schools have been held in various parts of the coun¬ 
try during the past ten years. The session usually lasts from six to 
eight weeks and except for one course in the History and Theory of 
Consumers’ Cooperation, the instruction is generally of a more or less 
technical nature. Bookkeeping is the heaviest course; and a course 
in Problems of Organization and Administration of Cooperative Busi¬ 
ness ranks second. There are occasional other courses covering such 
subjects as Commercial Arithmetic, Business English, Advertising 
Publicity and Education, etc., etc. So much for the work of our full¬ 
time resident Training Schools. 

The Cooperative League Correspondence School was organized a 
year ago by a committee appointed at the Fifth Cooperative Congress. 
The business details are handled from the New York office of The 
League but the correcting of papers is done by Prof. Colston E. Warne 
of the University of Pittsburgh, who bore the largest share of the 
burden of organizing these first courses and in some instances actu¬ 
ally writing all of the necessary material. At present there are only 
five courses in circulation. 


45 







The second and more general type of cooperative education is 
that planned for the rank and file of the membership and for the gen¬ 
eral purchasing public, which is the recruiting ground for new mem¬ 
bers. The question is occasionally put to us “How much education 
are you doing in the field of general culture and personal improve¬ 
ment?” We admit that we are doing exceedingly little. Such more 
advanced education must wait upon a strong cooperative movement to 
sustain it. Hence, our work today is designed first and foremost to 
the building of a strong economic organization which shall provide 
the foundation for the more advanced forms of education later. By 
this we mean that we are out to get membership and support for con¬ 
sumers’ cooperative societies. We do not even get members until we 
first get purchasers. Thus our educational work in its most elemen¬ 
tary form becomes a matter of winning trade for our stores, bakeries 
and restaurants. It means establishing the right contact with the man 
in the street and the woman in the home, regardless of who they may 
be. In nine cases out of ten, these people have absolutely no under¬ 
standing of advanced trade union, political or cooperative termin¬ 
ology. The amount of thinking in terms of social welfare which they 
have done amounts to almost zero. We go after the wife of the trol¬ 
ley car conductor; the brakeman who is gloating over his new ad¬ 
vance to the position of the conductor, the young fellows just out of 
Uncle Sam’s army, newly married, with a flat and a set of Grand 
Rapids furniture, with a job as assistant driver on an inter-urban ex¬ 
press line. These are the raw material for the cooperative as for the 
trade union movement. We must talk to them in terms of the price 
of sausage, short weight in Mr. A. & P.’s store, the quality of beans 
packed in the can which bears the label of the American Stores. To 
advanced educators or others who think in terms of radical phil¬ 
osophies, this line of talk looks pretty feeble stuff. It is petty bour¬ 
geois to the nth degree and yet the average American worker is also 
petty bourgeois to the nth degree, and we must talk in language 
which he understands before he can understand the language we want 
to talk. We have advanced our first step when we have enlisted his 
interest in a local cooperative store. We have carried him one step 
further when we have shown him that there are other cooperative 
stores in the city closely related to his own. We are promoting him 
into the advanced camp of activities when we present him with an 
understanding of the cooperative movement which he is building in 
America. He receives his cooperative doctor’s degree after he has at¬ 
tended some of our classes and become acquainted with the relation 
between the cooperative and other radical or progressive movements. 

46 






Thus the broad base of our educational work is almost purely a 
concern with objective materials. We steer away from the discus¬ 
sion of abstract theories and doctrinal hair-splittings. It is unfor¬ 
tunate that the labor and the cooperative movements in America have 
so often become engulfed in this thick fog of abstruse discussion that 
the average robust and healthy minded American no sooner ap¬ 
proaches these organizations than his spirits are dampened, the fog 
gets into his bones, and he is glad to escape into what looks to him 
like freedom of American individualism again. 

Parenthetically, I might say that we are interested even in our 
conferences and conventions, to avoid the discussion of controversial 
subjects which in most cases serve to disrupt more than to advance 
the movement. Discussion and controversy when it has educational 
value—by all means. Discussion and controversy when it leads to 
disunity and factionalism—by no means. It is quite conceivable that 
political parties and trade union organizations can engage in the 
most spirited controversies and carry these on for a long period of 
time without any permanent injury resulting. A cooperative society 
is engaged in a neck and neck race with many private business firms 
and any stopping midway down the course for the purpose of ar¬ 
guing out some highly debatable question of political or economic 
theory, means that the cooperative may win the debate but be a loser 
in the race. Any consumers* cooperative business is a highly in¬ 
tricate piece of mechanism, built for the particular job of running the 
workers’ business in competition with the most highly developed and 
efficient capitalist business machine that the world has ever known. 
To use that delicate mechanism for purposes other than the one for 
which it was built is to impair its usefulness. If the workers and 
farmers of America really want their cooperative technician to build 
an economic system which shall effectively compete with capitalism, 
they should turn over this one job to them and then see to it that 
these people are not continually harrassed and hindered by the end¬ 
less difficulties over political and philosophic issues which have so 
often befuddled and bemired most of the other political and economic 
organizations of the workers. You must remember that in the co¬ 
operative movement, we not only face all of the complications of di¬ 
verse racial, religious and nationality groups which you have in the 
trade union movement, but we also have to deal with the farmers’ co¬ 
operatives and the cooperatives of the middle classes. To maintain 
genuine cooperative unity here is a highly difficult and delicate job. 


47 



/ 


1 have tried to state briefly the philosophy actuating our educa¬ 
tional work as well as to indicate the nature of that work itself. The 
elementary contact work and preliminary education of the consuming 
public must of necessity be carried on by the local cooperative society 
and carried on in the manner best suited to local conditions. It is 
our job in The Cooperative League or in the subordinate district or¬ 
ganization of the League, merely to train the local leaders and the 
cooperative employees and to provide them with the books, pamphlets, 
periodicals and ideas which they in turn may pass on to the general 
membership and the public at large. 


II. A FREE LANCE VENTURE IN WORKERS’ EDUCATION 


Hilda W. Smith 

Bryn Mawr Summer School for Women Workers in Industry. 


Seven years ago, Bryn Mawr College planned a two months’ 
course for women workers in industry, one hundred students each 
year to be recruited from every section of the United States. First 
steps in organizing the School were taken by the College in coopera¬ 
tion with a group of women workers, leaders among women in the or¬ 
ganized labor movement. After the first summer this preliminary 
committee was reorganized to include with the college representatives 
an equal number of women workers, elected each year by the students 
of the Summer School. This joint control established since the first 
year, has been a foundation stone in the development of the School. 

What contacts has the School had with organized labor during 
the past seven years? What has been the value of such contacts for 
the School and its students? And in what way has such a free lance 
venture in education helped the Labor Movement? 

A resolution passed at the National Convention of the Womens’ 
Trade Union League in 1916, that the League was in favor of asking 
the womens’ colleges to open schools for industrial workers, had never 
brought results until in 1921 the Summer School opened at Bryn 
Mawr. League representatives and other women active in the Labor 
Movement have ever since given great assistance to the School or¬ 
ganization. Various State Federations and the American Federation 
of Labor have passed resolutions endorsing the School; and friendly 
letters have been received from Mr. Gompers and Mr. Green. The 
latter has visited the School, as the speaker at an opening meeting 


48 






Representatives of the Summer School have spoken in many union 
meetings, and each year fifty per cent of the students in the School 
are union members. Unions have often given contributions to travel¬ 
ling or incidental expenses for their own members to Bryn Mawr, or 
have helped with partial scholarships. 

From the view-point of the union members in the Summer School, 
they have a unique opportunity to know the rank and file workers 
from unorganized trades and communities, and to get a true picture 
of the industrial situation in every part of the country. They realize 
in the School the difficulties ahead of the Labor Movement in this 
country in organizing the unorganized. Statistics of the School show 
often as many as fifteen nationalities and twenty-five trades repre¬ 
sented in one summer among the one hundred students. The list for 
1927 is typical. 


TRADES 

Garment . 39 

Textile . 18 

Millinery . 9 

Electric and Telephone .... 7 

Printing and Paper . 7 

Tobacco . 4 

Laundry . 3 

Shoe . 2 

Waitress . 2 

Lampshades . 2 

Broommaker . 1 

Umbrellas . 1 

Foodstuffs . 1 

Hardware . 1 

Watches . 1 

Upholstery . 1 

Handkerchiefs . 1 

Flower and Feathers . 1 


NATIONALITIES 


American . 55 

Russian . 26 

Polish . 10 

Hungarian . 3 

Italian . 2 

Galician .'. 1 

German . 1 

Armenian . 1 

Lettish . 1 

English . 1 


Total 


19 Total 


10 


There are many opportunities, formal and informal, during the 
School term for the discussion of organization. At the “Trade 
Party” in the first week of the School the students in trade groups 
dramatize their own trades, showing processes, condition of work, 


49 
































/ 


and something of the history of their organizations. Such dramati¬ 
zation give the whole school some idea of the dependence of each 
industry on many others, and the common problems of the workers 
in all trades. Week-end conferences, with speakers of all shades of 
opinion, have been devoted to such question as “The Bargaining 
Power of Labor,” “Monotony in Industry,” “Organization and Leg¬ 
islation,” and ‘“Unemployment.” In every Economic course, re¬ 
quired for all students in the School, the history of the Labor Move¬ 
ment is discussed, and the unorganized workers for the first time 
come to have an understanding of what organization has gained for 
the worker. 

A few quotations from letters of former students in regard to 
what they have gained from these economic courses are of interest: 

One student writes: “Economics taught me to see how the 
whole Economic system was complicated, while I had thought it 
was only the lives of people and that there was no relation between 
the two. My studies at the School gave me the courage to keep on 
and a stimulant that I never had before. They were a tonic that 
started me growing faster.” 

A union member, the wife of a coal miner, writes: “Formerly I 
had become a student of economics, but after the course last sum¬ 
mer I am reading everything I can get on the subject and regard 
things as I believe an economist would. Education in clear think¬ 
ing such as we received at the Summer School is the sort that will 
make us stop and think and then come to the realization that the 
world is what me make it.” 

Fom a southern worker, unorganized: “I learned in my Econ¬ 
omics class the important part each worker played in the industrial 
world, and that in order to assert their rights they must have con¬ 
centrated action. I appreciated the Public Speaking course, too. I 
began to learn to get up before my classmates and speak concisely 
without fear and trembling.” 

Other unorganized workers write: “My courses gave me con¬ 
fidence in talking things over with the boss and sometimes I was 
able to gain a point for the girls in my shop. 

“Before I went to Bryn Mawr I was just an ordinary worker, a 
cog in the wheel. After studying Economics I understood more 
about the complex economic society of today, about the laws per- 


50 





tainlng to industrial legislation, and wliat the union has done for 
the industrial worker. Perhaps I appear to be the same worker but 
inside I am a different person with a broader vision.'’ 

“Now I have a desire to stay in industry. There are so many 
interesting angles to look out from.” 

“We are given a light at Bryn Mawr which we bring back into 
industry. We are often misunderstood when our ideas differ from 
those of our fellow workers but keeping the truth before us, we 
forge ahead.” 

“As experiences in industry are compared among the girls and 
a new interest in other races is established, one cannot help but 
feel the strings of industry tighten, and that which was only thought 
of with a great weariness now takes the form of something alive 
and important, making you glad you belong to this vast throng 
called ‘industrial workers.’ ” 


The Workers’ Education Movement often asks the question: do 
workers want education? The Summer School Admissions Com¬ 
mittee has found that usually two hundred or more applications 
come in every year for the one hundred places in the school. Talks 
to industrial groups in shops or evening classes show the greatest 
desire for education among the rank and file workers. From one 
neckwear shop in which a talk was given at noon the other day, six 
applications have come in from fifty women employed. The main 
difficulty of recruiting students at present is due to the serious un¬ 
employment. Former students of the Summer School are recruiting 
in every district, and raising money toward the scholarship fund. 
They are determined that the School shall go on. 

The study made of former students of the Summer School last 
year by Helen Hill, one of the tutors, has shown that these workers 
have averaged five evening classes apiece since leaving the School. 
Reports send in by 209 students show that they have attended 1320 
classes. There has been a decided increase in the number of Social 
Science classes attended, and 74 former students have been able to 
start educational work in new localities, where there were no exist¬ 
ing classes for workers.* There is no doubt that the School has 
stimulated the Workers’ Education Movement through many of its 
COO former students in all parts of the country. 


51 




Three other resident summer schools modelled somewhat on the 
plan of the Bryn Mawr have been started by other groups in the 
past four years; at the University of Wisconsin, in the South, and 
at Barnard College, New York City. This latter school is of a 
slightly different type, as it is non-resident, and draws students only 
from New York City. Twenty-six students attended last summer, 
mostly from the garment and millinery trades, and it is hoped that 
fifty may be enrolled this year. These workers went to the college 
for a day time program of classes, study hours, and recreation, re¬ 
turning home to sleep. The same sort of course in Economics, Eng¬ 
lish and science were given as at Bryn Mawr, and a number of for¬ 
mer Summer School instructors were on the staff. Students and 
faculty were enthusiastic about the School and thought that the non¬ 
resident feature made it especially well adapted to conditions in a 
large city, and for a group of workers who could not leave home for 
two months. Bryn Mawr and Barnard Summer School students are 
working in one district organization this winter in New York, go¬ 
ing to classes, and planning their activities together. 

In the field of educational method, the Summer School faculty 
have made a contribution to this whole movement. An analysis of 
curriculum and teaching methods is made every summer, as the 
basis for teaching during the following year Constructive work 
has been done on an effective system of tutoring; on a method of 
grouping students with the aid of certain simple tests; and in pro¬ 
viding text-book material for the use of elementary students. This 
year an experiment will be tried in a new plan of teaching. The 
School of one hundred students will be divided into units of about 
twenty, the grouping based largely on equal ability in reading. In 
each unit three instructors will offer cooordinate courses, in Econ¬ 
omics, English Composition and Literature, and a third subject, 
either history, science or psychology. Instructors will be asked to 
tutor their own students. By this plan it is hoped that less confu¬ 
sion of mind will result for the student, and further steps in neces¬ 
sary coordination of subject matter will be taken. 

To sum up the results of any educational venture is difficult. 
The Summer School has undoubtedly been effective in bringing to¬ 
gether women workers from all over the United States, organized 
and unorganized, for the discussion of their problems, and in pro¬ 
moting understanding between the two groups; it has also brought 
into contact women workers and college women, and pointed out 



. 

that thay have much in common, and are working to attain the 
same ends. An experimental method of teaching is having its ef¬ 
fect on college teaching and on college teachers. Above all, the 
School is giving to women workers a desire to go on with an edu¬ 
cational program; a method of study which will enable them to do 
this;and is deepening a sense of social responsibility in these work¬ 
ers for the solution of industrial problems. 


III. SOUTHERN SUMMER SCHOOL FOR WOMEN WORKERS 

IN INDUSTRY. 

Louise Leonard 
Executive Secretary 

The Southern School for Women Workers in Industry is spon¬ 
sored by a committee of Southern men and women workers and 
others interested in workers’ education. There were eleven mem¬ 
bers on the original committee, seven of whom were workers and 
five of whom were members of trade unions. 

The first session was held at Sweet Briar College in Virginia 
in the summer of 1927. The college, however, had nothing to do 
with the administration of the school. 

One-half of the money necessary for running the school the first 
year, came from the American Fund for Public Service and the 
other half from Southern communities in the form of scholarships 
for local girls who attended the school. In cities where organized 
labor has any strength, local communities depended upon central 
trades bodies and local unions as well as international trade union 
members for contributions and received a very generous response in 
such cities as Atlanta, Ga., Norfolk, Va., Danville, Va., and Lynch¬ 
burg. The Virginia State Federation of Labor gave one scholarship 
and the Georgia Federation made a generous gift. 

Twenty-five students from six states attended the school and 
they came from textile mills, tobacco factories and other typical in¬ 
dustries of the South. Seven of them belonged to trade unions and 
all but one of these were members of the United Garment Workers, 
most of the trades employing women, having, of course, no organiza¬ 
tions in the Southern states. 


53 











The subjects studied included Economics, English Composition, 
Public Speaking and Health Education but as far as possible all 
were correlated around Economics as the central emphasis. Lec¬ 
tures and discussions on Industrial History stressed the develop¬ 
ment of the labor movement in England and in America and every 
possible opportunity was given to the students to realize the value 
of collective action and to understand the problems of trade union¬ 
ism. The experience of seven trade unionists gave reality to class 
discussions of the problems of organized labor as did also the talks 
by visiting labor leaders from Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia, 
who presented different aspects of the* work of trade unions in the 
South. 

These visitors expressed their approval of the policy of the 
school and agreed that it should have a good effect upon the devel¬ 
opment of the labor movement in the Southern States, although not 
officially connected with it. 

In one Virginia city, students who attended the Southern Sum¬ 
mer School were instrumental in starting a workers’ class under 
the auspices of the C. L. U. made up of men and women who studied 
Mary Beard’s “History of the American Labor Movement." So it 
is hoped that other students will stimulate local interest in work¬ 
ers’ education. 

As the policy of the school becomes better known it will un¬ 
doubtedly have to depend more and more upon the interest and sup¬ 
port of the trade unionists of the South. 


IV. WORKERS’ EDUCATION IN PENNSYLVANIA. 


Leonard Craig 

Director of Educational Department, Pennylvania Federation 
of Labor. 


Worker’s Education in Pennsylvania is slowly being recognized 
as an essential part of the Labor Movement. The workers, however, 
are slow to see the necessity of study classes and fail to grasp the 
opportunity offered by the Department of Workers’ Education to bet¬ 
ter understand their own problems. Nevertheless, in the past four 
months a number of study classes have been organized, and at the 


54 














present time they are functioning very successfully and doing good 
work. 

The outstanding accomplishments of this department in the past 
four months is the organizing of three Labor Colleges in three dif¬ 
ferent cities in Pennsylvania. The first of these was organized in 
Pittsburgh on October 30th, 1927. On December 8th, 1927, two study 
classes were* launched which are going along nicely and have fifty 
students enrolled. 

The topics chosen by these two classes are Economics, Parliamen¬ 
tary Law and Public Speaking. The economics class is in charge of 
Prof. C. E. Warne, a teacher in the University of Pittsburgh. The 
Parliamentary Law and Public Speaking Class is in charge of Prof. 
Wm. L. Nunn, also a teacher in the University of Pittsburgh. These 
two classes meet every Tuesday and Wednesday evening and for two 
hours study their own problems. 

The second of these Labor Colleges was organized in Shenan¬ 
doah on January 29th, 1928. The first class was launched on Feb¬ 
ruary first with twenty students enrolled, which has now grown 
into two classes with an enrollment of sixty students. The topics 
chosen by these students are Parliamentary Law and Public Speak¬ 
ing. These classes are composed mostly of Anthracite miners, and 
the success or failure of this educational experiment in Shenandoah 
rests to a great extent in their hands. However, from the interest 
shown by the members of these classes it is obvious that these work¬ 
ers want to better undertaqd their social and economic problems, and 
that they realize that the way to get the necessary information is to 
form their own study. These classes also meet every Tuesday and 
Wednesday and are in charge of Prof. Robert E. Sheads of the local 
High School. 

The third of these Workers’ Colleges was organized in Wilkes- 
Barre on March 4th. The first class was launched on March 11th 
with twenty students enrolled, which has now increased to forty, and 
at the present rate of increase another class will have to be launched 
very shortly. This class is taking up Parliamentary Law and Public 
Speaking and the College has signified its intention of launching 
an economics class just as soon as possible. There is a pos¬ 
sibility of other classes being formed in the neighborhood of Wilkes- 
Barre soon, as J'Janticoke has already expressed a desire for one, and 


55 



I am sure this is the forerunner of other classes that will develop in 
that vicinity. 

The manifestations shown by the students of all of these study 
classes are quite convincing that the workers are very much in earnest 
about workers’ education, and I am sure that these little study groups 
will grow and be a great asset to the labor movement of Pennsylvania. 

Labor College of Philadelphia 

The Labor College of Philadelphia is an institution that we are 
quite proud of and in a class all by itself. Here we have the expres¬ 
sion of two Brookwood students, Jack Lever and Israel Mufson who 
have very successfully established workers’ education in Philadelphia. 
The Labor College in Philadelphia has an enrollment of approxima¬ 
tely 500 students, and I am sure you will agree with me when I say 
they will soon be the cream and power of the labor movement of that 
city. The Labor College of Philadelphia represents most of the local 
unions in that city, and has twelve study classes in operation, which 
are, Literature, Economics, Parliamentary Law, Public Speaking, 
Current Events, Labor Problems, Research, two classes of apprentices 
and two classes in Shop Economics. Two week-end conferences have 
been held this term and have received a great deal of praise from the 
American Federation of Labor and the Labor movement as a whole. 

A Basic Need for Workers' Education 

My experience in an effort to develop workers’ education indi¬ 
cates that the movement is greatly handicapped by the lack of a suf¬ 
ficient number of teachers who are qualified to take charge of work¬ 
ers’ study groups. Teachers as a rule have had little or no experi¬ 
ence in teaching workers’ study classes, therefore it is impossible 
for them to outline a course of lessons and a method of teaching, 
that will be an appeal sufficient to hold the workers’ attention. The 
average public school teacher knows very little about the labor move¬ 
ment, and is often placed in the position of knowing a great deal less 
than his students, in regard to what workers’ Education is all about. 
The average teacher has no conception of books or material that 
should be used and recommended for workers study classes. I sin¬ 
cerely hope that Brookwood will consider this very important ques¬ 
tion and develop some method of training teachers that will qual¬ 
ify to take charge of workers’ Study classes. 


56 











Another great need in the development of Workers’ Education 
h- a standard set of books and pamphlets and material for class work. 
These pamphlets should be simple in structure, on popular topics, in 
good readable type, and especially written for beginners. The books 
and pamphlets should not contain over 50 pages and should include a 
syllabus of the contents for immediate use of the student. A pamphlet 
of this kind will greatly simplify the work of establishing Workers’ 
Education, and will be the means of progress of the labor movement. 

The question of teachers and materials for workers’ study classes 
must be very earnestly considered by such institutions as Brook- 
wood and the Workers Education Bureau if Workers’ Education is 
to assume its proper place in the Labor Movement. 


DISCUSSION 

Helen Horton —I sympathize with Mr. Long’s difficulty in respect 
to talking to farmers in technical language. There is difficulty in in¬ 
troducing any appreciation of class consciousness: (1) There Is the 
viewpoint of the land owner; (2) There is the social problem of the 
poor whites vs. the negroes; (3) There is the feeling of the native 
born against the foreigners; (4) There is suspicion engendered by com¬ 
parison of the farmer’s total cash income with that of the wage- 
earner; (5) The Farm Bureaus maintained by the U. S. Department 
of Agriculture, the state Agricultural Colleges, and the farmers are 
an influence for the status quo. By their generous advice and prac¬ 
tical assistance they gain a considerable hold. For a time just after 
the War, Farm Bureaus dabbled in co-operative marketing. Then the 
government drew back. 

The Farmers’ Union has for the most part considerable enmity 
for the Farm Bureau as a rival. The feeling of the Grange for the 
F'arm Bureau is a little better. On the whole it is hard to get edu¬ 
cation for anything but the status quo. 

Bertram Wolfe .—I disagree with Long’s anti-red slant. To be 
sure, the co-operative movement should include all genuine co-opera¬ 
tors and the emphasis should be on concrete problems, but his view is 
too particularist. Lack of theory implies a theory. The trouble with 
a large section of the American co-operative movement is that it 
lacks a soul. Co-operators can’t live on beans alone. There is, in¬ 
deed, danger of excessive controversy; but danger also of grave-yard 
peace. “Co-operators are in a neck-and-neck struggle”; but so are par- 


57 




ties. Controversy hampers, but in the end clarifies. Next steps can 
not be taken unless the whole journey is in view. I’m afraid that 
“just business’’ is doomed to defeat in the co-operatives. The chain 
stores are too strong. You’ve got to supplement with a certain un¬ 
derstanding of what competition with the profit system involves. Some 
co-operators do this, and I don’t think they are the less healthy? 

I think Long has as much misapprehension of Marxism as the 
farmer has. There are farmers and farmers. I think the Northwest¬ 
ern farmers haven’t much fear of a farmer-labor alliance against fi¬ 
nancial control. I see farm papers that seem to me as satisfactory 
as my own articles on the farmers’ problems would be. I think the 
Northwestern farmer is readier to listen to a speech by me than, per¬ 
haps the Pittsburgh Central Labor Union. 

Cedric Long .—Many of our own people champion controversy for 
its educational value; but the co-operative movement is an economic 
movement, not a discussion movement. Discussion is incidental. As 
for the danger of going ahead without a road or a program,—the 
elimination of profit and the establishment of democratic control are 
pretty radical principles. Better be satisfied to agree on these. 

There is a difference in the movement between the class-conscious 
and the consumer-conscious. Whichever side wins by a resolution, 
the economic character of the movement is not changed. It is possi¬ 
ble to go along together till the road parts. It hasn’t parted yet. 
May he a split will be necessary some time; but it is doubtful 
whether the matter has to be settled now. Doctrinal correctness is 
less essential than economic organization. 

Lucy earner. — Did Mr. Craig see any method of relating un¬ 
organized workers to the local trade movement. 

Leonard Craig .—Applicants not members, are referred to the 
union of their craft, or if there is none such, if we can get enough 
individuals we can make a beginning of organization. 

A. J. Muste .—Brookwood has Jack Lever prospecting in New Eng¬ 
land at present, in unorganized territory, with just such considera¬ 
tions in view. In North Carolina, Alfred Hoffman has organized a 
council of representatives of unions in a number of towns, which de¬ 
votes its time largely to discussion of organization problems. The re¬ 
sult may be a more permanent venture in Workers’ Education or an 
organizing council or both. 


58 



A. Lefkowitz. —Our classes admit non-union students if there is 
room. We know we can unionize them. 

Nellie Seeds. —I want to ask whether an experimental school for 
the revaluation of elementary education is not important enough to 
be included along with parties, co-operatives, and free-lance ventures. 

A. J. Muste. —We have been dealing with the education of 
grown-ups. 

John Hader. —Craig raised an important point about materials. I 
taught a W. T. U. L. class this winter and felt the lack of adequate 
materials. There is need of small pamphlets,—a lesson for a session. 
Couldn’t such a series be formulated in the classes at Brookwood and 
distributed? 

Hilda Smith. —We’ve been experimenting. Miss Poliak has been 
putting together just such a pamphlet. 

Bertram Wolfe. —How about the role of the W. E. B.? 

A. Lefkowitz. —The old Socialist pamphlets were of service. The 
W. E. B. books are no good. They can’t be understood by the 
workers. 

A. W. Calhoun. —At some of the Brookwood summer institutes we 
have put out mimeographed summaries of some topics. Certain ones 
of these have been used with classes in the field. It is quite possible 
that we shall be able to offer additional specimens. 

Bertram Wolfe. —In the matter of English for foreign-born work¬ 
ers, we got sick of Americanism and dolls; so the teachers of the 
Workers’ School got out a book, published by the International Pub¬ 
lishers, with material based on the students’ experience and interests. 


50 





FIFTH SESSION 
Sunday, February 26, 2:30 p. m. 


WHAT RELATION SHOULD WORKERS’ EDUCATION ENTER¬ 
PRISES SUSTAIN TO THE LABOR MOVEMENT? 


(1) Subordination to strategy and tactics of union, party, co¬ 
operative? 

(2) Autonomous rank in the movement, on a co-ordinate foot¬ 
ing with union, party, co-perative? 

(3) Free-lance independence as auxiliaries to the Labor move¬ 
ment? 


I. THE VIEWPOINT OF A TRADE UNION OFFICIAL. 


John P. Frey 

Metal Trades Department, A. F. of L. 


I do not feel that workers’ education should be “subordinated to 
labor organization strategy and tactics.” I can see no connection be¬ 
tween true education—that is education which is free from propa¬ 
ganda motive—and trade union strategy. Neither can I see how educa¬ 
tion can be subordinated to any movement, for the moment education 
is subordinated it ceases to be true education. It is equally clear to 
my mind that workers’ education, to be truly successful must be car¬ 
ried on under the direction of trade union organizaations, for it is 
the American Federation of Labor and its affiliated bodies which 
more than anyone else, should understand those subjects in connec¬ 
tion with which it is most important that the worker should be ade¬ 
quately and accurately informed. 


60 








II. STUDY GROUPS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE UNDER UNION 
DIRECTION 


A. D. Sheffield 
Boston Trade Union College 


In debating the control of enterprises in Worker’s Education, we 
must reckon with the crews, as well as with the captains, of our lit¬ 
tle education bands. Our students are adults and volunteers, and if 
we set up controls that become uncongenial to them, the American 
Federation of Labor will find itself with an educational fleet with 
nothing but admirals on board. 

The course of any educational project in the labor movement 
seems dictated first by the motivations in the students which can be 
counted on for getting the course under way, and the distinctive 
emphasis in the work which warrants an overhead labor group in 
making the outlay of time and funds to carry it through. In an aver¬ 
age city labor body the students may be grouped by their attitudes 
towards study projects into four classes. One might call them—• 


(1) 

The 

“emancipated spirits.’ 

(2) 

The 

“self-improvers.” 

(3) 

The 

“social good-timers.” 

(4) 

The 

Union officers. 


The first group is composed of alert-minded men and women, 
with developed reading habits and independent outlook on social is¬ 
sues. Study projects are easily started with a nucleus of such per¬ 
sons, and they are apt to be most sensitive to anything like dictation 
as to their work or allegiance as a study group. The second group— 
the “self-improvers”—can be enlisted in classes with the more con¬ 
ventional type of study program. From a labor point of view the 
problem with them is to help them find their satisfacion in a self-im¬ 
provement which looks to something more than their personal cul¬ 
ture as individuals. We are assuming, I suppose, that the special 
warrant for an outlay by organized labor on study-projects lies in la¬ 
bor’s stake in an education that aims to realize for the student the 
fullest intellectual satisfactions and social worth of his role as a 
trade unionist. 


61 





The third group—the “social good-timers”—are the persons we 
usually have in mind when we talk of “mass education.” The fourth 
group—the Union officers—are usually the sponsors of our classes, 
but are apt to be too much absorbed in their own administrative 
jobs to give thought to the classes as resources for an educational 
re-direction of Union experience. 

This perfectly natural state of affairs in our Trade Union per¬ 
sonnel would seem to indicate that there is a place in the Workers’ 
Education movement for projects under a variety of auspices. The 
labor movement may be admirably served by educational groups of 
an auxiliary or free-lance character. Of course, we should be increas¬ 
ingly critical of our adult education projects—whatever their auspices 
—on the score of the soundness of their educational methods. Adult 
education has become a popular slogan, and many varieties of lec¬ 
ture- and reading-projects for grown-ups are calling themselves 
“Workers’ Education” on much the same warrant as that of Mo- 
liere’s hero, who discovered with delight that every time he talked, 
he was engaged in “prose composition.” 

While I hope, therefore, that we shall not see organized labor de¬ 
veloping an exclusive and offish attitude towards semi-independent 
study enterprises, I hope to see an increasing emphasis upon courses 
fully under the responsible control of Union executives. The imme¬ 
diate need in this field seems to me to be the developing of specific 
Union projects as ventures into social science. Such matters as 
methods of organizing, as the conduct of Union politics, as the con¬ 
flict between rights and lefts, as negotiation procedures with em¬ 
ployers, as business ventures with Union funds, all point to enter¬ 
prises around which Union officers and active members can be enlisted 
in cooperative studies,—using the practical enterprise as a laboratory 
for a learning experience. The importance of Union control here lies 
in our need to establish the idea of an educational technique for the 
Union program. 

An interesting project of this type is being tried out in Boston, 
wfliere the Upholsterers’ Union has undertaken a social study of 
its own membership. This study seems likely to yield important sug¬ 
gestions, both for the programs of Union meetings and for the tac¬ 
tics of active members in an organizing campaign. 

Of course, educational projects of this sort are likely to start 
study circles in which the members pursue further in reading and 


G2 



discussion some of the lines of thought they have thus opened up. It 
is where informal study passes over into organized classes that the 
question of control begins to arise. Personally, I feel that there is 
much needless fear of “official” control. Any disposition towards cen¬ 
sorship on the part of certain officials is sure to meet with opposi¬ 
tion from other officials. In several years’ experience on the Board 
of Control of the Boston Trade Union College, I have not known a 
single instance where educators were divided against labor leaders 
on an issue touching the freedom of a teacher or class. Of course, 
there always are certain officials with a parochial school point of 
view, who take the attitude that the labor classes are a flock whose 
tender intellects should not be exposed to anti-labor opinions unless 
these are promptly capped by the orthodox rejoinders from some A. F. 
of L. catechism. But the discussion of educational policy which is 
precipitated whenever such a point of control comes up is itself a 
liberalizing experience and should be welcomed as part of the Work¬ 
ers’ Education movement. Questions of control run through every 
phase of the labor movement, and we should not press our concern 
for the freedom of learning to the point of making our classes savor 
of secessionism. To do this is to put students under the dnnecessary 
onus of carrying on as progressives at some cost to their standing 
wiih their own official chiefs. And it is the effect of control upon 
the students, after all, which will determine the future growth of the 
Workers’ Education movement. 

III. THE RELATION OF WORKERS’ EDUCATION TO THE 
LABOR MOVEMENT 

E. C. Lindeman 
Workers Education Bureau 


For some peculiar reason, the problem of organizational rela¬ 
tionships has risen to the level of acute importance in Labor circles. 
The reason for this unusual concern for inter-relationships is proba¬ 
bly due to an inherent element of suspicion which is one of the 
heritages of labor organizations. For it is essential that we be re¬ 
minded frequently of the fact that there never has been a single, uni¬ 
fied labor movement. As an institutional and voluntary form, Labor has 
partaken of the same defects which characterize the Protestant 
Church: it has always consisted of numerous groups whose members 


03 







obviously all wanted to go to the same place but who never arrived 
because no single group could agree with any other group with re¬ 
spect to the road to be followed. Consequently, sects have always di¬ 
vided the general congregation of labor organizations—many dogmas 
all sprung from the fundamental generalization that those who do the 
useful work of the world should somehow decide ho vs the world is 
to be managed. This is all very confusing to the outsider, almost as 
confusing as the multifarious craft organizations of labor which per¬ 
sist long after they have lost their reality in industry. It has also 
its humorous side, as for example, in international labor organiza¬ 
tion when we hear of a first, second, third, and even a two-and-one 
half International. But to view these discriminations with humor is a 
great mistake; for nothing is more serious to those who control labor 
unions; he who has listened to jurisdictional disputes within trade 
unions will come away with the firm conviction that relationships 
constitute the alpha and omega of organized labor technique and 
philosophy. 

It seems obvious that no progressive solution for the problems 
of relationships will be discovered until trade unionism is regarded, 
not merely as an ideo logical force, but also as a functional-\ogica.\ 

one. Organized labor is, of course, representative of an idea but it 

« 

also symbolizes an accomplished fact, something done because it 
needed to be done. It is, in other words, a functional reality and 
whatever philosophy emerges to justify it in the realm of means, 
ends and values will be one which derives from functions, not dog¬ 
mas or ideas. 

One of the latest functions of trade unions has arisen from recog¬ 
nition of the fact that force and coercion are not satisfactory long¬ 
time tools—that the soundest argument is the one which rests its 
case finally upon reasonableness; this recognition has given rise to 
what is now known as workers’ or labor education. This audience 
does not need to be reminded of the historical sequence of this de¬ 
velopment, but one aspect calls for emphasis, namely, that in this 
move toward education, the trade unions were here and there so 
tardy that independent or private agencies proceeded to take the initi¬ 
ative. We thus have, not merely in this country but elsewhere, work¬ 
ers’ or labor education which is only nominally under the control of 
the dominant labor organizations. There are, moreover, other forms 
of workers’ education which seem to be organically related to the 
trade unions, but upon closer analysis, are found to be merely me- 


64 



chanical appendages. And just as there are varieties of labor belief 
and dogma, so varieties of educational enterprises have arisen, each 
based upon philosophical preconceptions regarding educational 
theory. In other words, the lines are blurred; there is no clear-cut 
conception of what workers’ education is supposed to do, how it is to 
do it, and who is to guide its doing. 

The promoters of this conference, realizing presumably how 
“quick bright things come to confusion” have asked us to do some 
thinking in this area of present and future friction, or comity. They 
propose a context of three choices, namely: 

a. Workers’ education which is thoroughly subordinate to the 
executive and administrative forces of a trade union, a labor 
party, or a co-operative society; from this point of view, edu¬ 
cation is conceived to be a tool, a subsidiary means employed 
by executives to further their ends. 

b. Workers’ education which sets up its own executive and ad¬ 
ministrative machinery parallel to trade union organization, 
a labor party, or a co-operative society and exists henceforth 
as an autonomous, self-determining part of the total labor 
movement; in this case, workers’ education is conceived to 
be not merely a tool to be used by labor organizations, but 
rather a new and separate function. A labor college, under 
this scheme, would enjoy the same ranking in a national 
representative body as does a trade union, a local federa¬ 
tion, or a district federation; it would, indeed, become co¬ 
ordinate with other forms of organized labor. 

c. Workers’ education which is wholly independent of the ex¬ 
ecutive, administrative, and representative control of or¬ 
ganized labor; in this case, workers’ education would be con¬ 
ceived as a supplementary or auxiliary agency, aiding the 
processes of labor but not in any sense subordinate or co¬ 
ordinate with any of its parts or with its whole. 

We are thus asked to discuss whether workers’ education is to 
be swallowed by the organism called Labor and thence become an 
assimilated part of its mass, whether it is to be regarded as a new 
organ or function to be correlated with older organs or functions, or 
whether it it to exist as a free and independent entity. Subordina¬ 
tion, coordination, or independence — these are the terms which de¬ 
scribe our choices. 


65 




A proper analysis of this situation would lead one to weigh ad¬ 
vantages and disadvantages for each of the three terms of our equa¬ 
tion, but this would consume time out of all proportion to the ap¬ 
propriate limits of an essay. We may, however, assume that a logical 
procedure of this sort would reveal certain plus and minus quali¬ 
ties for each choice; we should then need to weigh these qualities 
and finally strike a balance. This would, obviously, be an artificial 
and highly intellectualized method which, if followed judiciously, 
would probably leave us precisely where we were at the beginning. 
On the other hand, if we, the participants in the discussion, are to 
receive some education through confronting this situation, we shall 
need to follow a course which will reveal new meaning for older 
concepts, new insights into the nature of the issues involved, and 
new interpretations of functions. 

We might, by way of illustration, begin our discussions by ask¬ 
ing several questions of the Labor Movement itself: In what sense 
may it be designated a social movement? In what direction is it 
moving? Are we satisfied that this is the proper direction? Is educa¬ 
tion one of the appropriate means for arriving at this end? If so, 
what kind of education will constitute the most effective means? Con¬ 
ceived as a movement, organized labor utilizes certain tactics, strate¬ 
gies to achieve its goal; are these tactics reconciliable with education? 
In what sense are they denials of the reasonable, educational way? 

If, for example, the labor movement were a folk fermentation, it 
would naturally bring forth new values and new cultural ends; these 
would, of themselves, give rise to the need for new knowledge and 
new educational experiments. The idea of free public education for 
all children arose out of the folk-movement of democracy which had 
its beginning in central Europe and in America during the first half 
of the Nineteenth Century. The movement itself called forth now 
cultural patterns and fresh intellectual stirrings. The proponents of 
democracy asked something of life which was denied by their op¬ 
ponents. Just what is it that Labor asks of life? And how do the 
values which Labor sponsers differ from those sanctioned by bour¬ 
geois society? If we could answer these queries positively, we should 
be in possession of the knowledge needful for our problem. If Labor 
wants only what the middle and upper classes want, then its educa¬ 
tional problem is simple: it needs only to bring about quantitative 
extensions of existing educational facilities and methods. If, on the 
contrary, Labor postulates entirely new values and standards for life, 


6G 



then its educational problem involves qualitative factors and at once 
becomes infinitely complex. 

If one looks about calmly at the Labor world as represented by 
its dominant organizations in this country, several paradoxes ap 
parently stand in the way of reason. Considered from educational 
points of view, organized labor seems at once too militant and 
not militant enough. It is too militant to allow for proper intel¬ 
lectual functions In the sense that it forever keeps its lines taut for an 
impending external conflict. When such a conflict is not in the offing, 
trade union interest and activity lags. The most important aspect of 
trade unionism as a form of social organization is what happens be¬ 
tween strikes. The strike is a mode which occurs when reason and 
education have failed, and it will probably be always necessary even 
if retained merely as a potential weapon. But, the member who joins 
a union with this fight-symbol at his side will make poor material 
for education. He will get his exciting experience, not by learning 
through his new collective opportunities, but by exercising his heroic 
fighting impulses at certain intervals. On the other hand, organized 
labor is not sufficiently militant in the sense that it fails to put 
forth new standards and values which differ sufficiently from the old 
to generate new ideas and new learnings. Education which trains for 
efficiency is easily formulated, but education which is intended to 
change behavior fundamentally, to revamp cultural values, and to 
bring into being a new society is not readily found. We are conse¬ 
quently baffled about what kind of educational machinery appropriate 
to the needs of organized labor is to be initiated and fostered because 
we do not know clearly where labor wants to go and what it aims to 
do when it gets there. If Labor merely wants more of the same 
things which the privileged now have, it could obviously pattern its 
education after that of existing society. If it wants something dif¬ 
ferent, something so qualitatively different that its achievement would 
change the whole of social process, it will reach out for new educa¬ 
tional forms and methods suitable to its ends. 

Viewed in the context of our present confusion, it seems to me 
that every form of labor education represented above, and perhaps 
some others in addition, should be fostered. We shall be sadly deluded 
if we attempt to set up an educational unity which has no counterpart 
in the labor movement itself. It seems to me thoroughly justifiable 
to maintain some form of workers’ education which is wholly under 
the control of the administrative forces of dominant labor organiza- 


G7 





tions. The learning which such organizations promote will undoubtedly 
be stereotyped, conservative, and distasteful to all who belong to 
minorities. .But if those minorities should by some lucky accident 
become the majority, would they not make the same claims for con 
trol, and would they not in the end become equally stereotyped, con¬ 
servative, and distasteful to the new minority? I should add but 
one proviso to this conclusion, namely, that if labor organizations are 
to control educational enterprises, they should also furnish the fi¬ 
nances; they cannot at one and the same time exercise control and 
then force these enterprises to secure funds from other sources. In¬ 
sofar as they shrink from financial responsibility they must be 
willing to accept the consequences of disaffection. No organization 
can permanently maintain its power and its integrity if its financial 
resources come from without. Workers’ education which is subor¬ 
dinated to the executive elements in the labor movement becomes 
honest when it is fully supported intellectually and financially by 
those who exercise the power. 

Coordination is, apparently, a problem of hierarchies. When 
workers’ education reaches certain standards of effectiveness, such 
as full-time study over a definite period of time, teachers adequately 
prepared, et cetera, there will emerge certain institutionalized forms 
which must have a life of their own if they are to be truly educative. 
They must, that is, attain a kind of freedom and independence which 
is compatible with truth-seeking. If such institutions are subordin¬ 
ated to executive minds, they will be denied the opportunity of in¬ 
fluencing the labor movement qualitatively. A labor college like 
Brookwood, for example, which sets its standards at a high level, 
cannot remain a lively center of intelligence and creative activity if 
its policies are dictated by those who hold the power in trade unions. 
An institution which reaches such levels should, obviously, become 
integral to the labor movement as a whole — should have such rep¬ 
resentative privileges as will enable it to affect the deliberations of 
labor conferences and policy-making bodies. But this is a problem 
which can be decided only when we have agreed upon the standards 
for various types of workers’ education. At present, many labor 
colleges and classes with fascinating courses printed on attractive 
circulars are often heard of; they exist in people’s minds and on pa¬ 
per but not in reality. Obviously, it would be impracticable to give 
coordinate representation to these mushroom educational enterprises 
which may have once existed but which now reside only in imagina¬ 
tion. But it would not be difficult to arrive at certain criteria which 


C8 





would enable the teachers and students to bring their contribution to 
labor policy without double representation and without dealing in un¬ 
realities. (Mr. Hader has, in fact, constructed a scale or hierarchy 
of workers’ educational enterprises which points in this direction; 
to be published in a forthcoming research monograph of the W. B. B. 
The four types include: (a) residential, (b) summer courses, (c) 
courses which meet one evening a week, and (d) mass education, such 
as chautauquas, et cetera.) 

•a 

The third type, or independent workers’ education, is in some 
respects the most important of all from a long-time point of view. 
Workers’ education which is subordinate to or coordinate with ex¬ 
ecutive trade union functions can never achieve real freedom; its' 
promoters will always be in the position of politicians who feel that 
they must remain within the party in order to be effective. Or they 
will be like the presidents of state universities who are obliged to 
keep their intellectual wool shorn to suit the passing winds of state 
politics. So, in labor circles, the educational enterprise which aims 
to serve organized trade unions and takes its funds from trade union 
sources will sooner or later be obliged to keep its teachings within 
the limits of accepted trade union doctrine. But this stifles educa¬ 
tion and sets boundaries to freedom, and nothing can save a large 
institutionalized movement from such intellectual bondage save a 
critical, challeging educational movement at work on its margins. 
Consequently, I believe ardently in those freelance, independent 
educational experiments w r hich are auxiliary to the labor movement 
but which can never be wholly absorbed by the larger organism. 
On behalf of its own health, the labor movement could afford to en¬ 
courage such enterprises, educational experiments which might serve 
as advocati diaboli to all of that other labor education which had 
already become subordinate to or coordinate with trade union organiza¬ 
tion. These independent movements would be alive, experimental, 
and challenging so long as they remained small; and when they became 
large enough to develop power-groups of their own, new and freer 
groups would need to arise to keep going some form of intellectual 
agitation. 

And still another form of independent education on the margins 
of organized labor seems to me to be both possible and desirable, 
namely, education which foresees Labor’s opportunities and responsi¬ 
bilities in the political life of the nation. I should be happy if 
there were now in existence a number of groups made up of people 


69 



/ 


who were members of trade unions, members of farm organizations, 
and intellectual workers, all examining the intellectual bases for 
political action. Our two dominant political parties no longer possess 
principles or methods for expressing the aims of labor, and it becomes 
increasingly evident that the European patterns of . socialist and 
communist political organization are not likely to become a part of 
our politico-cultural structure. The time for a people’s party is prob¬ 
ably nearer than many now think, but that time will come and pass 
and its opportunities be lost if in the meantime no intellectual or edu¬ 
cational preparation is made. I am not now thinking of a labor party 
or a farmer-labor party which could be brought into existence hur¬ 
riedly and on the basis of some acute resentment but rather of the 
slow growth of a new political principle through educational proced¬ 
ures. Obviously groups of this kind would need to be free from the 
control of existing labor organizations. 

My conclusion then is that there should be at least four types 
of workers’ education, each with its peculiar relation to the organized 
and executive forces of trade unions, namely: 

a. Educational enterprises conducted under the auspices of or¬ 
ganized labor, financed by trade union funds and used to carry 
out the programs of those who control and support the labor 
movement. 

b. Educational enterprises possessing a higher standard of ex¬ 
cellence and a broader freedom organized within the labor 
movement but exercising equal control in its councils with 
other organized branches. This type would, presumably, con¬ 
sist almost solely of labor colleges. 

c. Educational enterprises which do not in any sense presume to 
represent existing labor principle and policy but which main¬ 
tain an independent status for the main purpose of criticism, 
challenge, and experimentation. 

d. Educational enterprises which include representatives from 
organized labor, from organized agriculture, and from in¬ 
tellectual groups promoting a type of education designed to 
create and experiment with those values and principles which 
need to be realized if the workers are to influence and guide 
those economic processes which have their setting in gov¬ 
ernment and the law; in other words, education for future 
political action. 


70 





If we could become sufficiently catholic to tolerate all of these 
varieties of educational enterprises and their relationships, we might 
find ourselves to be a part of a labor movement which actually moved, 
resolutely and intelligently toward a changing social order in which 
enlightened workers and learners could find new meanings and new 
motivations for their values. And if we could conceive of such a goal 
and work for it with all our various approaches, we might discover 
that*the problems of inter-relationships would gradually be absorbed 
by our enthusiasms. 

The meaning of adult education, it seems to me, is attenuated, 
dissipated, when its leaders become predominantly involved in dis¬ 
cussions pertaining to its organization and control. Education is as 
varied as life itself, as pliable as the stuff of experience. Learning 
is an expanding, explorative enterprise. The spirit of the learner is 
one with the spirit of the adventurer, the discoverer, and has little in 
common with the ways of the executive. Education, once its light 
begins to shine, illuminates all of life’s values; those who would re¬ 
duce its ministrations to a single interest or value will in the end 
succeed only in reducing education to stereotyped training or prop¬ 
aganda. True education is forever the companion of freedom, not 
of confinement. Again and again we need to appreciate that “learn¬ 
ing is ever in the freshness of its youth, even for the old.’ 


DISCUSSION 

A. Lefkowitz . — I don’t think either paper meets the point we have 
to face. The W. E. B. is supposed to be a clearing house. Shall it 
impose its policy or expel heretics? At present the W. E. B. is a pe¬ 
culiar combination of a clearing-house supported by the unions and a 
set of locally autonomous classes. What is to become of the whole 
field of Labor education co-ordinated in this clearing-house? 

Tom Tippett. — We’ll probably have all the four kinds that Linde- 
man mentioned. If things go along as now, all right; but if the 
W. E. B. decides that it has the jurisdiction in Workers’ Education 
and maintains that no one else may butt in, we'll run into a difficulty. 
I don’t think the W. E. B. does serve as a clearing-house, tho it at¬ 
tempts a definite contribution by publishing and by taking credit for 
the Workers’ Education that is being carried on. 

Craig told us about a need for teachers. There is danger in 
starting the educational process unless you have surveyed the ground. 


71 






The thing won’t work without teacher, text-book, money. You can 
go anywhere and organize a Labor College if there is nothing to it but 
a speech to make and a paper to sign; but on such a basis it will 
come to nothing when you leave. A class left to itself may develop 
into a political scrap or a mere talk fest. There must be a leader. 
Textbooks are also important and no suitable ones exist. Polly Colby’s 
B L E S lessons did the business for us, whereas the W. E. B. service 
was of no use. If you have Workers’ Education extended in the 
field there must be a center for material and a clearing house. I 
think Brookwod is a place from which the service can come. It 
ought to serve the people in the field that are able to carry on with 
such help. 

Bertram Wolfe . — There is a real field for such an organization as 
the W. E. B. originally purported to be; but the W. E. B. has been 
developing in the wrong direction. As a clearing-house it doesn’t 
clear. As a stimulator it doesn’t stimulate. It is more of a damper 
than a draft. It has come directly under control of he A. F. L. at a 
time when the leadership is especially unfavorable to unorthodox 
movements. 

As for the place of the Workers’ Party, we are definitely propa¬ 
ganda but definitely educational. If one is going to give only the 
method of acquiring knowledge and transmit no definite content, — it 
can’t be done. Every arousal of interest is “propaganda”. The Work¬ 
ers’ School, however, is not narrowly limited. By “propaganda” we 
mean what you call “education”. What you call “propaganda” we call 
“agitation”. 

Who should be in such a federation as the W. E. B. should have 
been? All sorts, clear across the spectrum. There is value in an ab¬ 
solutely free clearing-house. Unfortunately the present situation of 
the A. F. L. bureaucracy makes such a thing impossible. When, how¬ 
ever, the official bureaucracy gets beyond its present decay, the whole 
Labor Movement can have such a bureau. For the present we have 
to have two bureaus — one official, another inclusive, like what is 
growing out of these annual conferences. 

John Hader . — We ought to define Workers’ Education more closely 
than we have been doing. In the first type of Workers’ Education 
(union controlled and dealing with technical union problems) there 
is no place for propaganda. On the other hand, in field work, mass 


72 


education, there is plenty of room for propaganda. In between, the 
gamut varies. The function is directly relative to the situation. 

A. J Muste. —Lindeman, as far as he went, said about everything 
there is to be said and his analysis is important. But within each 
field he outlined, the same problem is likely to break out again. How 
ever indirect the control, every organization is supported by some 
group with ends in view. There is danger that educational freedom 
won’t be altogether in accord with the desires of the group that is 
inspiring the thing. This clash has to be faced. It may be resolved 
from time to time, but the time may come for a break. This is as 
true of free-lance enterprises as of officially controlled enterprises. 
A good deal will depend on the state of vitality of the controlling 
group. You can’t answer in advance the problems we are facing. 

So far as the W. E. B. is concerned, we had from the beginning the 
problem we are facing this afternoon. Probably the best makeshift 
was arrived at in the concept of a co-operative enterprise. The gov¬ 
ernment of the Bureau expressed this idea. Given the present state 
of the trade union movement, that relation would be the most work¬ 
able thing if it could be maintained. But the recommendation of 
the A. F. of L. for the elimination of representation of state federations, 
city centrals, labor colleges is an unfortunate move. The Bureau 
would become the educational department of the A. F. of L. We ought 
to struggle to maintain the present pragmatic solution. 

John Hader .—Structurally the A. F. L. influence becomes too big 
to serve the others. There is need of a new unit to include the 
W. E. B. 

A. J. Muste .—The W. E. B. would remain outside. If the arrange¬ 
ment were entirely informal, as an occasional conference such as 
this, it might be feasible; but the W. E. B. would not enter a formal 
arrangement. 

Leonard Craig .—I asked Miller how far the W. E. B. would go 
with me in furnishing material. The question hasn’t been answered. 
We’re going to take the matter up tomorrow. 

Cedric Long .—I have heard mutterings of discontent about 
W. E. B. control, and also the assertion that it exercises no control! 

A. Lefkowitz .—It exercises no control or supervision. What will 
happen if A. F. L. control over the W. E. B. is established? 


*3 






Josephine Colby . — These conferences arose in response to a de¬ 
sire that the American Federation of Teachers should be definitely 
interested in Workers’ Education. The local asks you to promote the 
realization of the wish, — extend the teachers’ union movement, and 
extend the interest of the teachers’ union in Workers’ Education. We 
hope this may continue to be a free conference. 


74 






BROOKWOOD 

LABOR’S OWN RESIDENT COLLEGE 

Located at 

KATONAH, N. Y. 


Regular Two Year and One Year Courses from 
October to June, Extension Department, 
Special Brief Conferences and Institutes 
During Summer and School Year. 

Studies include Trade Union Organization 
Methods, Labor Journalism, Economics, 
History, Psychology, English, Public Speak¬ 
ing, Parliamentary Law. 

Aims to develop intelligent and effective 
active workers for American Labor Movement.