When We're All Musteites By David Swanson
30 September 2014
We won't necessarily know what a Musteite is, but I'm inclined to think it would help if we did. I'm using the word to
mean "having a certain affinity for the politics of A.J. Muste."
I had people tell me I was a Musteite when I had at best the vaguest notion of who A.J. Muste had been. I could tell it
was a compliment, and from the context I took it to mean that I was someone who wanted to end war. I guess I sort of
brushed that off as not much of a compliment. Why should it be considered either particularly praiseworthy or
outlandishly radical to want to end war? When someone wants to utterly and completely end rape or child abuse or slavery
or some other evil, we don't call them extremist radicals or praise them as saints. Why is war different?
The possibility that war might not be different, that it might be wholly abolished, could very well be a thought that I
picked up third-hand from A.J. Muste, as so many of us have picked up so much from him, whether we know it or not. His
influence is all over our notions of labor and organizing and civil rights and peace activism. His new biography, American Gandhi: A.J. Muste and the History of Radicalism in the Twentieth Century by Leilah Danielson is well worth reading, and has given me a new affection for Muste despite the book's own rather
Martin Luther King Jr. told an earlier Muste biographer, Nat Hentoff, "The current emphasis on nonviolent direct action
in the race relations field is due more to A.J. than to anyone else in the country." It is also widely acknowledged that
without Muste there would not have been formed such a broad coalition against the war on Vietnam. Activists in India
have called him "the American Gandhi."
The American Gandhi was born in 1885 and immigrated with his family at age 6 from Holland to Michigan. He studied in
Holland, Michigan, the same town that we read about in the first few pages of Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, and at a college later heavily funded by the Prince Family, from which Blackwater sprang. The stories of both Muste
and Prince begin with Dutch Calvinism and end up as wildly apart as imaginable. At the risk of offending Christian
admirers of either man, I think neither story -- and neither life -- would have suffered had the religion been left out.
Muste would have disagreed with me, of course, as some form of religion was central to his thinking during much of his
life. By the time of World War I he was a preacher and a member of the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR). He opposed
war in 1916 when opposing war was acceptable. And when most of the rest of the country fell in line behind Woodrow
Wilson and obediently loved war in 1917, Muste didn't change. He opposed war and conscription. He supported the struggle
for civil liberties, always under attack during wars. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was formed by Muste's
FOR colleagues in 1917 to treat symptoms of war, just as it does today. Muste refused to preach in support of war and
was obliged to resigned from his church, stating in his resignation letter that the church should be focused on creating
"the spiritual conditions that should stop the war and render all wars unthinkable." Muste became a volunteer with the
ACLU advocating for conscientious objectors and others persecuted for war opposition in New England. He also became a
In 1919 Muste found himself the leader of a strike of 30,000 textile workers in Lawrence, Massachusetts, learning on the
job -- and on the picket line, where he was arrested and assaulted by police, but returned immediately to the line. By
the time the struggle was won, Muste was general secretary of the newly formed Amalgamated Textile Workers of America.
Two years later, he was directing Brookwood Labor College outside of Katonah, New York. By the mid-1920s, as Brookwood
succeeded, Muste had become a leader of the progressive labor movement nationwide. At the same time, he served on the
executive committee of the national FOR from 1926-1929 as well as on the national committee of the ACLU. Brookwood
struggled to bridge many divides until the American Federation of Labor destroyed it with attacks from the right, aided
a bit with attacks from the left by the Communists. Muste labored on for labor, forming the Conference for Progressive
Labor Action, and organizing in the South, but "if we are to have morale in the labor movement," he said, "we must have
a degree of unity, and, if we are to have that, it follows, for one thing, that we cannot spend all our time in
controversy and fighting with each other -- maybe 99 per cent of the time, but not quite 100 per cent."
Muste's biographer follows that same 99 percent formula for a number of chapters, covering the infighting of the
activists, the organizing of the unemployed, the forming of the American Workers Party in 1933, and in 1934 the
Auto-Lite strike in Toledo, Ohio, that led to the formation of the United Auto Workers. The unemployed, joining in the
strike on behalf of the workers, were critical to success, and their commitment to do so may have helped the workers
decide to strike in the first place. Muste was central to all of this and to progressive opposition to fascism during
these years. The sit-down strike at Goodyear in Akron was led by former students of Muste.
Muste sought to prioritize the struggle for racial justice and to apply Gandhian techniques, insisting on changes in
culture, not just government. "If we are to have a new world," he said, "we must have new men; if you want a revolution,
you must be revolutionized." In 1940, Muste became national secretary of FOR and launched a Gandhian campaign against
segregation, bringing on new staff including James Farmer and Bayard Rustin, and helping to found the Congress of Racial
Equality (CORE). The nonviolent actions that many associate with the 1950s and 1960s began in the 1940s. A Journey of
Reconciliation predated the Freedom Rides by 14 years.
Muste predicted the rise of the Military Industrial Complex and the militarized adventurism of the post-World War II
United States in 1941. Somewhere beyond the comprehension of most Americans, and even his biographer, Muste found the
wisdom to continue opposing war during a second world war, advocating instead for nonviolent defense and a peaceful,
cooperative, and generous foreign policy, defending the rights of Japanese Americans, and once again opposing a
widespread assault on civil liberties. "If I can't love Hitler, I can't love at all," said Muste, articulating the
widespread commonsense that one should love one's enemies, but doing so in the primary case in which virtually everyone
else, to this day, advocates for the goodness of all-out vicious violence and hatred.
Of course, those who had opposed World War I and the horrible settlement that concluded it, and the fueling of fascism
for years -- and who could see what the end of World War II would bring, and who saw the potential in Gandhian
techniques -- must have had a harder time than most in accepting that war was inevitable and World War II justified.
Muste, I am sure, took no satisfaction in watching the U.S. government create a cold war and a global empire in line
with his own prediction. Muste continued to push back against the entire institution of war, remarking that, "the very
means nations use to provide themselves with apparent or temporary 'defense' and 'security' constitute the greatest
obstacle to the attainment of genuine or permanent collective security. They want international machinery so that the
atomic armaments race may cease; but the atomic armaments race has to stop or the goal of the world order recedes beyond
It was in this period, 1948-1951 that MLK Jr. was attending Crozer Theological Seminary, attending speeches by, and
reading books by, Muste, who would later advise him in his own work, and who would play a key role in urging civil
rights leaders to oppose the war on Vietnam. Muste worked with the American Friends Service Committee, and many other
organizations, including the Committee to Stop the H-Bomb Tests, which would become the National Committee for a Sane
Nuclear Policy (SANE); and the World Peace Brigade.
Muste warned against a U.S. war on Vietnam in 1954. He led opposition to it in 1964. He struggled with great success to
broaden the anti-war coalition in 1965. At the same time, he struggled against the strategy of watering down war
opposition in an attempt to find broader appeal. He believed that "polarization" brought "contradictions and
differences" to the surface and allowed for the possibility of greater success. Muste chaired the November 8
Mobilization Committee (MOBE) in 1966, planning a massive action in April 1967. But upon returning from a trip to
Vietnam in February, giving talks about the trip, and staying up all night drafting the announcement of the April
demonstration, he began to complain of back pain and did not live much longer.
He did not see King's speech at Riverside Church on April 4. He did not see the mass mobilization or the numerous
funerals and memorials to himself. He did not see the war ended. He did not see the war machine and war planning
continue as if little had been learned. He did not see the retreat from economic fairness and progressive activism
during the decades to come. But A.J. Muste had been there before. He'd seen the upsurges of the 1920s and 1930s and
lived to help bring about the peace movement of the 1960s. When, in 2013, public pressure helped stop a missile attack
on Syria, but nothing positive took its place, and a missile attack was launched a year later against the opposite side
in the Syrian war, Muste would not have been shocked. His cause was not the prevention of a particular war but the
elimination of the institution of war, the cause also of the new campaign in 2014 World Beyond War
What can we learn from someone like Muste who persevered long enough to see some, but not all, of his radical ideas go
mainstream? He didn't bother with elections or even voting. He prioritized nonviolent direct action. He sought to form
the broadest possible coalition, including with people who disagreed with him and with each other on fundamental
questions but who agreed on the important matter at hand. Yet he sought to keep those coalitions uncompromising on
matters of the greatest importance. He sought to advance their goals as a moral cause and to win over opponents by
intellect and emotion, not force. He worked to change world views. He worked to build global movements, not just local
or national. And, of course, he sought to end war, not just to replace one war with a different one. That meant
struggling against a particular war, but doing so in the manner best aimed at reducing or abolishing the machinery
I'm not, after all, a very good Musteite. I agree with much, but not all. I reject his religious motivations. And of
course I'm not much like A.J. Muste, lacking his skills, interests, abilities, and accomplishments. But I do feel close
to him and appreciate more than ever being called a Musteite. And I appreciate that A.J. Muste and millions of people
who appreciated his work in one way or another passed it on to me. Muste's influence on people everyone knows, like
Martin Luther King, Jr., and people who influenced people everyone knows, like Bayard Rustin, was significant. He worked
with people still active in the peace movement like David McReynolds and Tom Hayden. He worked with James Rorty, father
of one of my college professors, Richard Rorty. He spent time at Union Theological Seminary, where my parents studied.
He lived on the same block, if not building, where I lived for a while at 103rd Street and West End Avenue in New York,
and Muste was apparently married to a wonderful woman named Anne who went by Anna, as am I. So, I like the guy. But what
gives me hope is the extent to which Musteism exists in our culture as a whole, and the possibility that someday we will
all be Musteites.