|
Labor Fights All Injustice
By George Meany
It
was not merely by accident that from its earliest days the trade
union movement in this country became identified as a proponent
of civil rights and an opponent of racial and religious
discrimination.
The very nature of a trade union, in which
workers unite to fight for economic justice, conditions it for
voluntary enlistment in the war against all injustice.
Thus, the basic drive of the labor movement, from its
inception to this very day has been for all forms of human
justice and political justice, as well as economic justice.
And the continuing denial of equal civil rights to
million of our citizens, merely because of their race or color,
constitutes, in our opinion, wholesale injustice that stains the
honor of our country. It
is a blot that must be erased, with more than deliberate speed.
Among our adult population, reason and logic
have been powerless to cope with the more bitter manifestations
of racial hate and prejudice.
Therefore, I have always had a good deal of sympathy for
the view that the only effective way of overcoming such
prejudice was the slow but sure path of education from the
kindergarten up. However,
it was obvious that this process of education would be
completely futile as long as the well-springs of education—the
public schools themselves—were poisoned by segregation.
The historic decision of the Supreme Court
three years ago, declaring segregation in the public schools
unConstitutional, opened new vistas of hope that at last the way
would be cleared for the elimination of racial prejudice and
discrimination through the permanent and democratic process of
integrated education.
But let us face it—progress has been
painfully slow in the three-year period since the Supreme
Court’s decision was handed down.
It is not my purpose to criticize the Supreme
Court for modifying the speed of enforcement of its decision
with the word “deliberate.”
Taking all the facts into consideration, the Court had to
act realistically. But I do want to say a few words about elected public
officials, especially in the South and from the South, who have
violated their oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the
United States by willfully obstructing and flouting the Supreme
Court’s ruling.
In a free country like ours, it is the
privilege of any citizen to disagree—even with a Supreme Court
decision. But
obedience to the law in incumbent even upon dissenters.
Respect for and compliance with the law is the
responsibility of all citizens.
Certainly public officials, elected to uphold and
administer the law, are doubly bound to discharge that
responsibility. Yet
in the past three years, we have seen the unedifying spectacle
of Governors of States, Senators, Congressmen and lesser lights
in our political life conspiring together to defy the Supreme
Court, to circumvent its decision and to make a mockery of the
law.
In school we are taught that this is one
nation, indivisible. The
history of our country is marred by a great civil war which had
to be fought to prove that this is one nation, and that
secession and nullification are not permissible.
Surely, that truth should now prevail.
Without question, the great majority of the
people of the South, under wise leadership, would be willing to
go along with the law of the land as interpreted with finality,
by the Supreme Court of the United States.
Unfortunately, however, the South, for the
most part, lacks that kind of leadership.
Some of the Southern States have produced outstanding
public figures, Governors, Senators and Congressmen.
But, let us examine the lowest grade of
professional politician we encounter in the South.
He trades on ignorance.
He is tied in with a political machine that draws its
revenue from the contributions of vested interests.
This politician, in fact, is owned by the local utility,
or mill owner or bank or oil interests.
He makes emotional appeals to Southern pride and beats
the drums for the moth-eaten myth of white supremacy.
He is an accomplished spellbinder and an unprincipled
liar. His credo
calls for opposition to any progressive change that would
disturb the existing order of society and its economic control.
This is the type of unscrupulous politician
most active in the organization of White Citizens Councils in a
number of Southern States.
To say that the development of these extralegal
organizations is disturbing to the trade union movement is a
gross understatement. I
am convinced that they represent only a tiny minority of the
people of the South—but a loud and belligerent minority.
These councils seek to substitute the intimidation of mob
action for law and order. They
are aimed not only at Negro organizations, such as yours, but at
trade unions as well, and any other liberal group or individual
that dares to support and defend the Supreme Court decision.
We have done a little research into the
people back of these White Citizens Councils and we have
discovered an interesting and significant fact—they are the
same people who have fought the trade union movement most
viciously over the years. In
other words, the forces dominating this setup are against not
only equal right for Negroes, but equal rights for labor.
Under the circumstances, your organization
can be proud of the way the beleaguered Negroes of key Southern
communities have stood up to the test.
They have been law-abiding.
They have resisted the temptation to retaliate under
extreme provocation. They
have conducted themselves with dignity and restraint.
By their own civilized and commendable conduct, they have
shamed their traducers and created a strong- running tide of
sympathy for their plight among all the American people.
Let me assure you that the trade union
movement is not going to run away from the challenge presented
by the White Citizens Councils.
There have been many attempts in the past to drive union
organizers out of the Southern communities by intimidation and
mob action. They
failed before. They
will fail again.
It is true that the emotional stresses of
this issue are so strong as to warp the good judgment even of
veteran trade unionists. I
have received letters from union members saying they regarded
themselves as Southerners first and trade unionists second.
I told them they had things a little twisted—that under
the philosophy of our movement a man first has to be a good
citizen before he can be a good union man and that the first
duty of a good citizen is to obey all the laws of the land.
The interest of the trade union movement in
the universal enjoyment of civil rights stems, as I said at the
outset, from our dedication to human justice.
At the turn of the century, a convention of the American
Federation of Labor enunciated our basic philosophy in one
simple sentence—“We call all men brothers.”
That spirit of brotherhood was built into the
Constitution of the merged AFL-CIO.
Among the objects and principles of the AFL-CIO, listed
in Article 2, are these:
|
To encourage all workers without
regard to race, creed, color, national origin of
ancestry to share equally in the full benefits of union
organization.
To protect and strengthen our
democratic institutions, to secure full recognition and
enjoyment of the rights and liberties to which we are
justly entitled.”
Again in Article 9, the Executive
Council is empowered to see to it that “all workers
whatever their race, color, creed or national origin are
entitled to share in the full benefits of trade union
organization.” |
And finally, in article 13, as an additional
empowering step, the Constitution calls for the creation of a
Committee on Civil Rights, “vested with the duty and
responsibility to assist the Executive Council to bring about at
the earliest possible date the effective implementation of the
principle stated in this Constitution of non-discrimination.
These provisions in the AFL-CIO Constitution
are not a dead-letter—they are an everyday working policy. Yet, a number of our 68,000 local unions still ignore or
violate that policy. Let
me assure you, we are working on them.
It is not our purpose to try to settle each
case that comes up on an ad hoc basis.
By direction of the AFL-CIO Executive Council I have
called a national conference of labor representatives in
Washington, D.C. At
that conference, our unions will be informed of measures we
expect them to take in order to make certain that all their
local unions comply fully with the basic AFL-CIO policy to
accord equality of economic opportunity to all workers,
regardless of race, color, or creed.
Aside from the problems of equality of
education and equality of economic opportunity—which, by the
way involves a great deal more employer cooperation than union
compliance—we are still stymied in our efforts to eliminate
discrimination by the failure thus far to overcome the hurdles
blocking enactment of civil rights legislation.
This legislation, as you know, seeks to
establish equal status before the law for minority groups.
Without such equality before the law, the American ideal
of freedom and democracy becomes a hollow mockery.
I am confident that this civil rights
legislation would be adopted by both Houses of Congress were it
not for the rule permitting endless filibusters in the Senate.
To date, all efforts to amend that rule so that the will
of the majority can prevail have been fruitless.
The cause of justice has been defeated time and again by
those elected to public office to administer justice.
The problem of coping with faithless and
hypocritical politicians, who thwart the will of the people, can
be solved in the same way we dealt with the faithless and
hypocritical Communists. They
must be exposed. The
voters must be aroused to the American ideal and betray it
ruthlessly at every turn. The
day of reckoning is coming.
Yes, it is coming soon.
To the impatient the progress achieved to date may appear
slow and disappointing. But
to anyone who studies the developments of the past decade, it
becomes apparent that a strong tide is running.
My confidence is based upon one all-important
factor. Aside from
our moral responsibility to accord equal justice to all
citizens, we are faced with a practical compulsion to do so in
order to survive. In
the court of world opinion, the great weakness in America’s
case—in the case of the free way of life against
totalitarianism—is our failure to eliminate racial
discrimination.
Unless we can rally world opinion to our
side, unless we can establish a solid front against the
philosophy of slave labor and human degradation for which Soviet
Russia stands, military power and atom bombs will not help us. Today, one of the most vulnerable flaws in our national
defense is discrimination.
In the clear realization of this truth, in
the full knowledge that racial discrimination and intolerance
have no rightful place in a free land, we must do our utmost to
end these evils as quickly as we can and thereby help to
strengthen and make secure the American way of life.
* * *
The president of the AFL-CIO gave
this address on receiving the 1957 Philip Murray
Award of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Source: Interracial Review
• June, 1957 * * *
* *
* *
* * *
updated 6 July 2008 |
