understanding did appear we had the pitiful sequel of the leaders apologizing to the politicians for this slight interference in their ruthless murder plans.
Unimportant as these one or two strikes were, however, they ought to have been enough to remind us of our power. The labor movement of this country has been composed of men who faithfully followed their leaders without question. They have fought many brave struggles, but they have also been led into many shameful failures, like that of the miners' strike, for which their leaders stand utterly condemned. Now, after cheering, year after year, the speeches made by their orators, dclaring that the workers of all lands were united, they have been persuaded by these same leaders to allow the rich of all lands to lead out the workers of all lands to fight each other.
Suppose instead of this labor movement being composed of men who are led by leaders, it was made up by those who, not being blind, needed no leaders. Suppose those who formed it had their common purpose, and that that purpose was to conquer the world for the workers. Their reply to the war minister's call to arms would then be clear, would it not?
We—for it would be we who should form this movement—should be able first of all to rely upon our friends of other nations, for always our movement must be international. We, like our foreign brothers, should tell our war lords that they might fight their own battle. The coal miners would politely suggest that they might dig their own coal, while the transport workers would invite them to carry their own troops to whatever part of the world they desired.
Surely this is the answer we ought to be preparing ourselves to make. It would create a revolutionary situation, and no government faced with such internal difficulties, even though the workers were not yet strong enough to make a revolution, would dare to go to war. This would be the surest way to prevent an invasion, for
