Marine Cooks and Stewards Union - Revision history

Ccarlsson at 05:57, 25 December 2024

2024-12-25T05:57:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:57, 24 December 2024
Line 85:		Line 85:
	[[Image:Jurisdictional-dispute-at-Pier-35-between-MCS-and-AFL-NMU-Dec-1953-SFPL-AAC-2372.jpg]]		[[Image:Jurisdictional-dispute-at-Pier-35-between-MCS-and-AFL-NMU-Dec-1953-SFPL-AAC-2372.jpg]]

	'''Jurisdictional dispute at Pier 35 in December 1953 between members of the Marine Cooks and Stewards and the AFL-affiliated National Maritime Union over who should staff the ''Aleutian'' steamship.'''		'''Jurisdictional dispute at Pier 39 in December 1953 between members of the Marine Cooks and Stewards and the AFL-affiliated National Maritime Union over who should staff the ''Aleutian'' steamship.'''

	''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library, AAC-2372''		''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library, AAC-2372''

Ccarlsson: added two photos of 1953 clash over the Aleutian

2024-12-25T05:56:25Z

added two photos of 1953 clash over the Aleutian

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:56, 24 December 2024
Line 82:		Line 82:

	''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library''		''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library''

			[[Image:Jurisdictional-dispute-at-Pier-35-between-MCS-and-AFL-NMU-Dec-1953-SFPL-AAC-2372.jpg]]

			'''Jurisdictional dispute at Pier 35 in December 1953 between members of the Marine Cooks and Stewards and the AFL-affiliated National Maritime Union over who should staff the ''Aleutian'' steamship.'''

			''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library, AAC-2372''

	[[Image:AFL-UN~1.JPG]]		[[Image:AFL-UN~1.JPG]]

Ccarlsson at 05:53, 25 December 2024

2024-12-25T05:53:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:53, 24 December 2024
Line 82:		Line 82:

	''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library''		''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library''

			[[Image:AFL-UN~1.JPG]]

			'''AFL unionists, in a long column, stand in the rain on the waterfront where police halted them in their march towards a picket line at Pier 39—A short time later there was a brief clash between the marchers and police—The ''Aleutian'', the contested ship, is in the background.'''

			''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library, AAC-2374''

	One direct outcome of this new stance was Taft-Hartley’s section 9(h). When the bill was introduced, President Truman--who had already mandated the Federal Employees Loyalty Program and “had proposed more drastic anti-union measures himself”--bowed to public pressure (especially that of labor leaders, with whom he sought to keep his dwindling standing) and actually vetoed the bill, saying that the noncommunist oath would “cause strikes and disruptions...which is exactly what the Communists desire.” His veto was overridden.		One direct outcome of this new stance was Taft-Hartley’s section 9(h). When the bill was introduced, President Truman--who had already mandated the Federal Employees Loyalty Program and “had proposed more drastic anti-union measures himself”--bowed to public pressure (especially that of labor leaders, with whom he sought to keep his dwindling standing) and actually vetoed the bill, saying that the noncommunist oath would “cause strikes and disruptions...which is exactly what the Communists desire.” His veto was overridden.

Ccarlsson at 23:36, 22 November 2024

2024-11-22T23:36:57Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:36, 22 November 2024
Line 311:		Line 311:


	[[Category:African-American]] [[category:~~LBGTQI~~]] [[Category:Labor]] [[category:ILWU]] [[Category:Racism]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]]		[[Category:African-American]] [[category:LGBTQI]] [[Category:Labor]] [[category:ILWU]] [[Category:Racism]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]]

Ccarlsson at 23:36, 22 November 2024

2024-11-22T23:36:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:36, 22 November 2024
Line 311:		Line 311:


	[[Category:African-American]] [[Category:Labor]] [[Category:Racism]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]]		[[Category:African-American]] [[category:LBGTQI]] [[Category:Labor]] [[category:ILWU]] [[Category:Racism]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]]

Ccarlsson at 23:13, 22 November 2024

2024-11-22T23:13:16Z

Ccarlsson: added video and fixed typos in notes

2024-11-22T23:08:41Z

added video and fixed typos in notes

Show changes

Gjamin at 02:10, 16 October 2012

2012-10-16T02:10:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:10, 15 October 2012
Line 11:		Line 11:
	<font size=4>'''1934-1954: San Francisco General Strike to Cold War Demise'''</font>		<font size=4>'''1934-1954: San Francisco General Strike to Cold War Demise'''</font>

	A good deal has been written about the experiences of left-led unions in the United States at the outbreak of the Cold War, but much less has been written about the origins and mechanics of the radicalism for which individual unions were targeted during the accompanying red scare. In the case of the National Union of Marine Cooks and Stewards (MCS), one of eleven unions expelled from the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) for being “communist-dominated” in 1949-50, this absence is more striking when one considers its exceptional multiracial composition and concrete commitment to civil rights, to a degree that was even outstanding among other left unions. The militant stand of the MCS against racial discrimination, the practical nature of which was clearly expressed by the union’s high level of racial diversity (40-50 per cent black, 25 per cent Asian, 25 per cent white) is an added distinction to—and in fact is strongly tied to—its commitment to union democracy and its resistance to the tightening bureaucratization and government restraints that followed the wave of wildcat strike activity during World War Two. The history of ~~America~~ communism and “fellow travelers” is also interlaced with the history of MCS, in ways that point out the relationship between ideas and the people who use them.		A good deal has been written about the experiences of left-led unions in the United States at the outbreak of the Cold War, but much less has been written about the origins and mechanics of the radicalism for which individual unions were targeted during the accompanying red scare. In the case of the National Union of Marine Cooks and Stewards (MCS), one of eleven unions expelled from the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) for being “communist-dominated” in 1949-50, this absence is more striking when one considers its exceptional multiracial composition and concrete commitment to civil rights, to a degree that was even outstanding among other left unions. The militant stand of the MCS against racial discrimination, the practical nature of which was clearly expressed by the union’s high level of racial diversity (40-50 per cent black, 25 per cent Asian, 25 per cent white) is an added distinction to—and in fact is strongly tied to—its commitment to union democracy and its resistance to the tightening bureaucratization and government restraints that followed the wave of wildcat strike activity during World War Two. The history of American communism and “fellow travelers” is also interlaced with the history of MCS, in ways that point out the relationship between ideas and the people who use them.

	In shaping the character of the MCS, the role of communism—both as a body of ideas and through the practical interpretation of those ideas by the Communist Party (CP)—is far from incidental. The dynamics between “party line” Communists , independent radicals (who may or may not have been influenced by communism) and other non-revolutionary but equally devoted worker-activists for racial equality and participatory democracy were brought into sharp focus in the labor movement during the decades surrounding World War Two. At this time, the possibility of a radical kind of worker self-management, the urgency of anti-fascism, and the palpable weight of black American exclusion and oppression hung in the air together at numerous flashpoints of unrest in an American workplace that was slowly absorbing the black diaspora from the U.S. South and experiencing perhaps to an unprecedented degree the manipulation of a government-business alliance. In this context, the MCS—a labor organization led by communists and composed largely of blacks—can be seen as one of the most dynamic and interesting expressions of this unique nexus of energy in U.S. history.		In shaping the character of the MCS, the role of communism—both as a body of ideas and through the practical interpretation of those ideas by the Communist Party (CP)—is far from incidental. The dynamics between “party line” Communists , independent radicals (who may or may not have been influenced by communism) and other non-revolutionary but equally devoted worker-activists for racial equality and participatory democracy were brought into sharp focus in the labor movement during the decades surrounding World War Two. At this time, the possibility of a radical kind of worker self-management, the urgency of anti-fascism, and the palpable weight of black American exclusion and oppression hung in the air together at numerous flashpoints of unrest in an American workplace that was slowly absorbing the black diaspora from the U.S. South and experiencing perhaps to an unprecedented degree the manipulation of a government-business alliance. In this context, the MCS—a labor organization led by communists and composed largely of blacks—can be seen as one of the most dynamic and interesting expressions of this unique nexus of energy in U.S. history.

Ccarlsson: added caption and credit to woodblock image

2010-12-14T23:59:55Z

added caption and credit to woodblock image

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:59, 14 December 2010
Line 20:		Line 20:

	[[Image:MCS.strikers.jpg]]		[[Image:MCS.strikers.jpg]]

			'''This woodcut from the ''Voice of Action,'' a Seattle weekly published by the Communist Party, shows the anti-racist agenda of the CP in the early 1930s. It accompanied a Feb 12, 1935 article about the Todd bill that would have banned mix-race marriages in Washington State.'''

			''Artwork: Dick Correll''

	But, international geopolitics aside, the nature of black support for communist leaders and ideas in the U.S. at this time—however rigid the party line may have been within some left-led unions—is consistent with that of organized workers in general, a support based solidly on a home-grown embrace of class politics and grassroots democracy that had emerged during decades of worker-employer confrontations. Also, for many blacks, this support was won by an active and explicit commitment to civil rights on the part of many communists, such as those in the leadership of MCS, whose dedication to the rank and file in this regard appears to have motivated them more than their loyalty to the party.		But, international geopolitics aside, the nature of black support for communist leaders and ideas in the U.S. at this time—however rigid the party line may have been within some left-led unions—is consistent with that of organized workers in general, a support based solidly on a home-grown embrace of class politics and grassroots democracy that had emerged during decades of worker-employer confrontations. Also, for many blacks, this support was won by an active and explicit commitment to civil rights on the part of many communists, such as those in the leadership of MCS, whose dedication to the rank and file in this regard appears to have motivated them more than their loyalty to the party.

Ccarlsson: fixed a couple of links

2010-12-14T03:05:28Z

fixed a couple of links

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:05, 13 December 2010
Line 236:		Line 236:
	43 Lipsitz, p200-201		43 Lipsitz, p200-201

	44 Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). 1950. CIO Hearing Before the Committee to Investigate Charges Against the National Union of Marine Cooks and Stewards. 1 vol. May 22, 1950. Norman Leonard Collection, Sutro Library Labor Archives, San Francisco. p714-715		44 Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). 1950. CIO Hearing Before the Committee to Investigate Charges Against the National Union of Marine Cooks and Stewards. 1 vol. May 22, 1950. Norman Leonard Collection, Sutro Library Labor Archives, San Francisco. p714-715

	45 Stepan-Norris, p94		45 Stepan-Norris, p94
Line 244:		Line 244:
	47 Lipsitz, p178		47 Lipsitz, p178

	48 Spira, Henry. 1972. The Unambiguity of Labor History. In Hall, Burton H. (ed.) 1972. Autocracy and Insurgency in Organized Labor. New Brunswick: Transaction books. in Hall, p251		48 Spira, Henry. 1972. The Unambiguity of Labor History. In Hall, Burton H. (ed.) 1972. Autocracy and Insurgency in Organized Labor. New Brunswick: Transaction books. in Hall, p251

	49 Stepan-Norris, p4-7		49 Stepan-Norris, p4-7
Line 263:		Line 263:
	56 Record, Jane Cassels. 1956. The Rise and Fall of a Maritime Union. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 10(1) (October) p91		56 Record, Jane Cassels. 1956. The Rise and Fall of a Maritime Union. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 10(1) (October) p91

	57 NYU. 2003. ~~Guide to the John Pittman Papers. Tamiment Library/Robert F. Wagner Labor Archives.~~ http://dlib.nyu.edu:8083/tamwagead/servlet/SaxonServletsource=pittman.xml&style=saxon01t2002.xsl		57 NYU. 2003. [http://dlib.nyu.edu:8083/tamwagead/servlet/SaxonServletsource=pittman.xml&style=saxon01t2002.xsl Guide to the John Pittman Papers]. Tamiment Library/Robert F. Wagner Labor Archives.

	58 Sun-Reporter 1951a, MC&S Union Nat’l Meeting in Fillmore. April 21, p3. and 1951b. Fillmorians Welcome Marine Union. April 28, p8.		58 Sun-Reporter 1951a, MC&S Union Nat’l Meeting in Fillmore. April 21, p3. and 1951b. Fillmorians Welcome Marine Union. April 28, p8.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:13, 22 November 2024
Line 99:		Line 99:
	MCS member Morris Pinsky perhaps best expressed this agency when he was asked during the expulsion hearings whether there were communists in the MCS. After responding that the union contained “every kind of a political belief that you can think of,” and that such identifications were a worker’s “own personal business,” he was asked by the investigating committee if there were any fascists in the union. He answered “yes” and then was asked whether that was allowed by the MCS constitution:		MCS member Morris Pinsky perhaps best expressed this agency when he was asked during the expulsion hearings whether there were communists in the MCS. After responding that the union contained “every kind of a political belief that you can think of,” and that such identifications were a worker’s “own personal business,” he was asked by the investigating committee if there were any fascists in the union. He answered “yes” and then was asked whether that was allowed by the MCS constitution:

	“The Fascist is such a minority that he has no following.”<br>		<blockquote>“The Fascist is such a minority that he has no following.”<br>
	“Do the Communists have a base?”<br>		“Do the Communists have a base?”<br>
	“I imagine so. I have heard Communists talk, you know. Yes, the membership listens to them.<br>		“I imagine so. I have heard Communists talk, you know. Yes, the membership listens to them.<br>
	“I see. The membership listens to them, and at various times carries out—<br>		“I see. The membership listens to them, and at various times carries out—<br>
	“Oh, sometimes, you know. You know, a worker is a peculiar person...He makes up his own mind. You can’t make up his mind for him.”<br>		“Oh, sometimes, you know. You know, a worker is a peculiar person...He makes up his own mind. You can’t make up his mind for him.”<br>
	“That’s all I have of this witness.” <br>		“That’s all I have of this witness.” <br></blockquote>

	'''Democracy'''		'''Democracy'''
Line 112:		Line 112:
	It is important to note here that actual domination by Communists—including overt policies against rank and file initiative—was far from unknown. Anticommunism, particularly useful in putting labor leaders sympathetic to corporate goals in power—especially in the automobile, electric and maritime trades, where Communists initially held a significant proportion of leadership positions—was not a potent tool against labor when Communist interests coincided with those of “patriotic” Americans. During most of World War II, communist-led unions—including MCS—vigorously enforced the no-strike pledge, and the Communist Party itself, obsessed with winning the war against Hitler after Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, was the only group within the labor movement in favor of a National Service Act to draft workers. Party factions within unions also pledged aid to the Coast Guard in “weeding out undesirable elements” among maritime workers, an offer taken up by the Coast Guard when an actual “screening” program began. The CP also helped finger unemployed maritime workers for the draft boards. Noting the many zealous compromises with business by “Communist dominated” unions, a ''Business Week'' article (March 18, 1944) observed that such unions had “moved to the extreme right wing position in the American labor movement.” In such a situation, perhaps it is obvious that not all “anticommunists” within labor were coming from the right. As Henry Spira has documented, for leftists attempting to defend union democracy against Stalinists, “fighting to smash the party machine was fighting to defend the membership’s right to control its own union.”		It is important to note here that actual domination by Communists—including overt policies against rank and file initiative—was far from unknown. Anticommunism, particularly useful in putting labor leaders sympathetic to corporate goals in power—especially in the automobile, electric and maritime trades, where Communists initially held a significant proportion of leadership positions—was not a potent tool against labor when Communist interests coincided with those of “patriotic” Americans. During most of World War II, communist-led unions—including MCS—vigorously enforced the no-strike pledge, and the Communist Party itself, obsessed with winning the war against Hitler after Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, was the only group within the labor movement in favor of a National Service Act to draft workers. Party factions within unions also pledged aid to the Coast Guard in “weeding out undesirable elements” among maritime workers, an offer taken up by the Coast Guard when an actual “screening” program began. The CP also helped finger unemployed maritime workers for the draft boards. Noting the many zealous compromises with business by “Communist dominated” unions, a ''Business Week'' article (March 18, 1944) observed that such unions had “moved to the extreme right wing position in the American labor movement.” In such a situation, perhaps it is obvious that not all “anticommunists” within labor were coming from the right. As Henry Spira has documented, for leftists attempting to defend union democracy against Stalinists, “fighting to smash the party machine was fighting to defend the membership’s right to control its own union.”

	The struggle between ~~noncommunist~~ union radicals and party-line leaders is in itself an important chapter of labor history, not only because it illustrates organizational tensions and the problems of hierarchy within unions, but also because it points to the larger historical problems concerning class formation, vanguardism and party politics that have emerged with the communist-guided revolutions of the twentieth century. It does not come much into play in the history of the highly democratic Marine Cooks and Stewards. But the reality of this power struggle is important to recognize because—as the CIO hearings illustrate—it gave ammunition to those who used anticommunism to bring unions down.		The struggle between non-communist union radicals and party-line leaders is in itself an important chapter of labor history, not only because it illustrates organizational tensions and the problems of hierarchy within unions, but also because it points to the larger historical problems concerning class formation, vanguardism and party politics that have emerged with the communist-guided revolutions of the twentieth century. It does not come much into play in the history of the highly democratic Marine Cooks and Stewards. But the reality of this power struggle is important to recognize because—as the CIO hearings illustrate—it gave ammunition to those who used anticommunism to bring unions down.

	The MCS, however, would not go down easily. Countering CIO accusations of being dominated by Communists, MCS “defendants” and rank-and-file witnesses make repeated reference to the level of democracy in their union, both embedded in their constitution and shown in their day to day practice. Secretary-Treasurer Eddie Tangen, who calls MCS “the most democratic union in America,” goes on to describe the ways in which democracy and participation are maintained in the union. Among other examples, he cites the direct election of committee chairman by the membership, member-run arbitration committees, easy recall votes (only one hundred signatures were required to remove the president), and rank-and-file oversight of auditing committees. MCS rank-and-file members affirm this, with one senior member calling MCS “the most democratic union I have ever met up with.” In terms of participation, MCS leaders state proudly how Bryson and Tangen had recently been reelected by a four to one majority, with ninety-nine per cent of members casting votes. And several statements to the committee point out the hypocrisy of CIO officials who would criticize the more integrated MCS leadership for being antidemocratic while failing to scrutinize the “lily white” composition of the officials of other CIO unions.		The MCS, however, would not go down easily. Countering CIO accusations of being dominated by Communists, MCS “defendants” and rank-and-file witnesses make repeated reference to the level of democracy in their union, both embedded in their constitution and shown in their day to day practice. Secretary-Treasurer Eddie Tangen, who calls MCS “the most democratic union in America,” goes on to describe the ways in which democracy and participation are maintained in the union. Among other examples, he cites the direct election of committee chairman by the membership, member-run arbitration committees, easy recall votes (only one hundred signatures were required to remove the president), and rank-and-file oversight of auditing committees. MCS rank-and-file members affirm this, with one senior member calling MCS “the most democratic union I have ever met up with.” In terms of participation, MCS leaders state proudly how Bryson and Tangen had recently been reelected by a four to one majority, with ninety-nine per cent of members casting votes. And several statements to the committee point out the hypocrisy of CIO officials who would criticize the more integrated MCS leadership for being antidemocratic while failing to scrutinize the “lily white” composition of the officials of other CIO unions.
Line 118:		Line 118:
	[[Image:Nov 1948 strike negotiations AAD-5595.jpg]]		[[Image:Nov 1948 strike negotiations AAD-5595.jpg]]

	'''"Representatives of both sides in the 1948 dock strike place their signatures to the Roth formula, clearing way for reopening of peace negotiations. Seated around table, from left to right, are Eddy Tangen, CIO Marine Cooks & Stewards Union; Hugh Bryson, president of the same union; [[Harry Bridges\|Harry Bridges]], ILWU president; Lou Goldblatt, ILWU secretary-treasurer; Frank P. Foisie, Waterfront Employers Association president; J. B. Bryan, president of the Pacific American Shipowners Association; Almon Roth, president of the San Francisco Employers Council; Allan S. Haywood, CIO vice president and director of reorganization, and R. J. Thomas, CIO assistant director." ~~'''~~		'''"Representatives of both sides in the 1948 dock strike place their signatures to the Roth formula, clearing way for reopening of peace negotiations.''' Seated around table, from left to right, are Eddy Tangen, CIO Marine Cooks & Stewards Union; Hugh Bryson, president of the same union; [[Harry Bridges\|Harry Bridges]], ILWU president; Lou Goldblatt, ILWU secretary-treasurer; Frank P. Foisie, Waterfront Employers Association president; J. B. Bryan, president of the Pacific American Shipowners Association; Almon Roth, president of the San Francisco Employers Council; Allan S. Haywood, CIO vice president and director of reorganization, and R. J. Thomas, CIO assistant director."

	''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library''		''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library''

	The consistent backing of MCS leadership by their rank-and-file members seems also to be a result of the real gains in wages and benefits won by the union during these years. Whether or not an officer was communist, in this regard, mattered little. The MCS ''Voice'', naturally, often contained articles celebrating the high levels of wages and benefits enjoyed by MCS members—but these claims are consistently backed up by statistics comparing favorably the conditions and wages of MCS with those of other maritime unions. This point of pride also comes up in the hearings, and must largely account for the strong loyalty to their leaders—communist or not—that seems to characterize MCS membership. As Don Watson, an MCS member in the early 1950s, stated, “I thought communists were good trade unionists and I felt like I’d like to be working along with them.” As Jane Record states, “the mere fact that [union members’] officers had been adjudged party-line followers was not, for them, a sufficiently compelling reason to overturn the leaders, especially if the latter were ‘delivering’ for them in other respects.” As the next section shows, this sentiment was particularly resonant with black workers, when part of what unions were “delivering” was an active stance against Jim Crow.		The consistent backing of MCS leadership by their rank-and-file members seems also to be a result of the real gains in wages and benefits won by the union during these years. Whether or not an officer was communist, in this regard, mattered little. The MCS ''Voice'', naturally, often contained articles celebrating the high levels of wages and benefits enjoyed by MCS members—but these claims are consistently backed up by statistics comparing favorably the conditions and wages of MCS with those of other maritime unions. This point of pride also comes up in the hearings, and must largely account for the strong loyalty to their leaders—communist or not—that seems to characterize MCS membership. As Don Watson, an MCS member in the early 1950s, stated, “I thought communists were good trade unionists and I felt like I’d like to be working along with them.” As Jane Record states, “the mere fact that [union members’] officers had been adjudged party-line followers was not, for them, a sufficiently compelling reason to overturn the leaders, especially if the latter were ‘delivering’ for them in other respects.” As the next section shows, this sentiment was particularly resonant with black workers, when part of what unions were “delivering” was an active stance against Jim Crow.

	~~'''MCS AND THE BAY AREA BLACK COMMUNITY'''~~

	[[Image:Robeson-et-al-MCS-conf P1010936.jpg]]		[[Image:Robeson-et-al-MCS-conf P1010936.jpg]]
Line 131:		Line 129:

	''Photo: Stewart Bryant collection; copy at Labor Archives and Resource Center, SFSU.''		''Photo: Stewart Bryant collection; copy at Labor Archives and Resource Center, SFSU.''


			<big>'''MCS AND THE BAY AREA BLACK COMMUNITY'''</big>

	At this time of the ’34 strike, one of the most significant newspapers of the black community in the Bay Area was the San Francisco ''Spokesman'', a weekly founded and edited by the black communist John Pittman in 1931. The newspaper vigorously supported the strike, during which its editors lent their printing presses to the Communist Party newspaper, The ''Western Worker'', resulting in their destruction by vigilantes. The ''Spokesman'' went under in 1935, but black community support for its workers and for MCS, their most representative union in San Francisco, continued in the decades that followed. In 1943 another prominent black weekly was founded, the [[The Black Press\|''Sun-Reporter'']], whose writers and editors expressed this support consistently. Although not a communist newspaper, the ''Sun-Reporter'' attacked red-baiting and the pernicious alliance between anticommunism and white racism that showed itself to workers everywhere from the deep South to the San Francisco waterfront. The newspaper’s editors saw MCS practices as a model for the kind of participation and “democracy in action” that black people were seeking in the larger society, and celebrated MCS members who knew that “to achieve equal rights in their union alone is not enough, and for that reason...are constantly active on community and national issues.”		At this time of the ’34 strike, one of the most significant newspapers of the black community in the Bay Area was the San Francisco ''Spokesman'', a weekly founded and edited by the black communist John Pittman in 1931. The newspaper vigorously supported the strike, during which its editors lent their printing presses to the Communist Party newspaper, The ''Western Worker'', resulting in their destruction by vigilantes. The ''Spokesman'' went under in 1935, but black community support for its workers and for MCS, their most representative union in San Francisco, continued in the decades that followed. In 1943 another prominent black weekly was founded, the [[The Black Press\|''Sun-Reporter'']], whose writers and editors expressed this support consistently. Although not a communist newspaper, the ''Sun-Reporter'' attacked red-baiting and the pernicious alliance between anticommunism and white racism that showed itself to workers everywhere from the deep South to the San Francisco waterfront. The newspaper’s editors saw MCS practices as a model for the kind of participation and “democracy in action” that black people were seeking in the larger society, and celebrated MCS members who knew that “to achieve equal rights in their union alone is not enough, and for that reason...are constantly active on community and national issues.”
Line 142:		Line 143:
	But while the record of the MCS on these “pork chop” issues compares favorably with that of other maritime unions—as statistics on wages and working conditions in the union newspaper never fail to point out—it would be a mistake to assume that only material interests were considered in the black community’s support of MCS and its communists. As one black MCS worker in San Francisco stated: “Sure, the union leaders follow the party line. But I let white folks worry about Communism. Bryson has given us colored guys a fair shake. Why should we want to swap over to an outfit where we’ll be associating with unions that don’t even let Negroes belong?” Black workers did not forget that the “MCS was one of the very few organizations that accepted them fully when they migrated to the West Coast during the war.” In addition to the sense of justice fostered by the MCS emphasis on civil rights and participation, the union played a significant role in the successful resettlements of the black diaspora from the U.S. South—in the very creation of cohesive black communities on the West Coast—not only through employment but also through the development of friendships and solidarity. This dramatic testimony from a black MCS member in Seattle who had migrated from the South sums up a lot:		But while the record of the MCS on these “pork chop” issues compares favorably with that of other maritime unions—as statistics on wages and working conditions in the union newspaper never fail to point out—it would be a mistake to assume that only material interests were considered in the black community’s support of MCS and its communists. As one black MCS worker in San Francisco stated: “Sure, the union leaders follow the party line. But I let white folks worry about Communism. Bryson has given us colored guys a fair shake. Why should we want to swap over to an outfit where we’ll be associating with unions that don’t even let Negroes belong?” Black workers did not forget that the “MCS was one of the very few organizations that accepted them fully when they migrated to the West Coast during the war.” In addition to the sense of justice fostered by the MCS emphasis on civil rights and participation, the union played a significant role in the successful resettlements of the black diaspora from the U.S. South—in the very creation of cohesive black communities on the West Coast—not only through employment but also through the development of friendships and solidarity. This dramatic testimony from a black MCS member in Seattle who had migrated from the South sums up a lot: