Contrary to the theory that ''oligarchy'' in labor unions is an ''imma
nent necessity'' of ''organization,'' we argue that oligarchy is no mo
re immanent or necessary than democracy. Rather, both are alternative
possible paths of union development. Which path a union takes is deter
mined by relatively contingent political struggles among workers' ''pa
rties,'' and by both the resultant pattern of internal political relat
ions and the political consciousness, radical or conservative, of thei
r leadership. Analysis of data on CIO international unions reveals tha
t the strategy and practices involved in organizing them, infernal fac
tionalism, and their ''political camp'' - left right or center - had s
ubstantial independent effects in determining the odds that, as of the
late 1940s, they were democratic or oligarchical.