The Daily Worker Newspaper, April 12, 1924, Page 5

“The idea becomes power when it pene- trates the masses.” —Karl Marx. Special Magazine Supplement THE DAILY WORKER. June 17th and July Ath HE “New Majority,” organ of the Farmer-Lavor Party of the United States, has made a wonderful discovery—nothing more nor less than the fact that the Workers Party of America is opposed to a Third Party and for the formation of a class Farmer-Labor Party. — ‘lhe Farmer-Labor Party has just completed a circle in politics in re- lation to the formation of a mass Farmer:Labor Party in the United States. After the Cleveland conven- tion of the Conference for Progres- sive Political Action the Farmer- Labor Party withdrew from that or- ganization and John Fitzpatrick, one of the leaders of the party, de- nounced the Conference for Progres- sive Political Action as a “scab out- fit” and as “dual” to the Gompers machine. It then called the July 3rd Convention and when it found that the 600 representatives of labor un- ions and other workers’ organizations who assembled there were in earnest in their desire to create a mass Farm- er-Labor Party and formed the Fed- erated Farmer-Labor Party, it sphit away and proceeded on its own iso- lated path. Recently representatives of the old Farmer-Labor Party met with the organizations which called the June 17th Farmer-Labor Party convention, but when they found that they could not have their own way they split away om this group. And now. lo and behold! what has happened? The Farmer-Labor Party of Buck, and Brown, and Fitzpatrick has decided to go back to the “scab outfit” and “dual” organization of the Gompers machine—the Confer- ence for Progressive Political Action. Buck Seeing Things. The source of the discovery of the policy of the Workers Party in rela- tion to the Third Party by the New Majority is my article of Mareh 27th in the DAILY WORKER. The New Majority quotes the following from my article: “The immediate work before the farmer-labor group is a strong of- fensive against the Conference for Progressive Political Action. The Cleveland convention can have all the third party elements. It can have the representatives of the well-to-do farmers, the small busi- ness men and the broken-down old party politicians who are looking for new fields in which to conquer. It can even have the labor aristo- crats, the ten thousand-a-year la- bor leaders, who are petty bour- -geoisie in all their ways of living and thinking. “But the Conference for Prog- ressive Political Action Cleveland conference must not have a single exploited farmer or _ industrial worker without a fight. “From now on there will be a struggle between the two conven- tions for the support of the masses of exploited farmers and indus- trial workers. ...” This, writes the editor of The New Majority, shows the duplicity of the Workers Party, At the St. Paul con- ference which called the June 17th Convention, he writes, the Workers Party led those associated in that call to believe that it was for co-opera- tion with the July 4th Conventlon. Here, however, we have the real policy of the Workers Party stated, and that is a bitter struggle against the July 4th Conference. Where the Workers Party Stands. What is the truth of the matter? If the Workers Party has one policy at the St. Paul conference, has it now adopted a new attitude? Let us examine the matter, and if the editor of the New jority, who seems to read the DAILY WORKER assiduous- ly, will follow the argument, even he will gain some enlightenment on the subject. : The St. Paul Conference adopted the following resolution in relation to the July 4th Conference: “This Conference re-endorses the proposal adopted by it on No- vember 15th to hold a convention of all the farmer-labor groups on Twin Cities, g its decision to J 17th in the “in re-affirmin hold a convention on June 17th, the convention declares that the organizations participating will recommend to the Convention on June 17th such a course of action in nominating candidates and adonting a platform as will leave the way open for co-operation for support of the same candidates and platform with the Conference for Progressive Political Action or any other group, provided, of course, that group endorses independent Political action.” The Workers Party favored this resolution when it was adopted at St. Paul on March Sth. It still holds the same view. The confusion of the editor of the “New Majority” is due to the fact that he does not distinguish between a class Farmer-Labor Party and a Third Party. To him the Farmer- Labor Party and the Third Party are one and the same thing; jsince the Workers Party»states that it is going to fight against the Third Party getting any exploited farmers and industrial workers to join it, there- fore the editor of the “New Major- ity” infers that the Workers Party has some ‘sort of nefarious scheme for splitting the forces of the ex- |ploited farmers and workers. The Facts of the Situation. What are the facts of the situa- tion? Is it just a happening due to the mulishness of certain individuals that there are two conventions called, one for St. Paul on June 17th and one for Cleveland on July 4th? A person ignorant of tconomic class divisions might argue that this is the ease. It is not so, however to people who have some knowledge of social science, for there must be other causes than the failings of human be- is at the same time. ‘In one of these i SECOND SECTION April 12th, 1924, This j magazine supplement will appear every Saturday in The Daily Worker. i >, mmm *¢ By G. K. KRUTHENBERG ings to explain the fact that two!from the old political parties of the such movements as the June 17th Convention and the July 4th Conven- | tion groups are developing side by side. What is happening in the United States is that two economic groups are splitting away from the old par- groups are the exploited farmers and the industrial workers of the city, and in the other are the small busi- ness men and broken-down old party politicians referred to in the quota- tion above. Both of these groups are discon- tented with the rule of the two old capitalist parties. Both are moving toward the crystallization of their political power thru the organization of a Party-—that much they have in common. There is a deep chasm of difference of economic interests which divides them. The things that the exploited farmers and industrial workers desire in order to improve | their economic position are not the things which the small business men, well-to-do farmers and broken-down old party politicians desire. Even if {the two groups united in forming one |varty, the time would come sooner jor later when that party would split into two groups representing con- flicting interests of the economic groups included in it. Party of Conflicting Interests. The policy of the Workers Party in this situation is to help build a Party which will represent the eco- nomic interests of the exploited farmers and industrial workers. It calls that party the class Farmer- Labor Party. At the same time the Workers Party welcomes the splitting away | Beard “Refutes” Marx HY DO even the most intelligent and honest of bourgeois histori- ans speak slightingly of the Marxian interpretation of history in view of their signal failure to disprove its soundness ? Charles A. Beard, author of many valuable works on the American con- stitution and political development, writing in “The American Mercury” for April, on “What is A Statesman” dismisses Carlyle’s “great man” theo- ry and the Marxian explanation of men as the product of historical forces as equally untenabie and dis- pleasing to what he terms the “re- quirements of the scientific spirit”. Intellectually Honest. Yet Professor Beard is intellectual- ly honest; despite his defense of the liberal ition and his endeavor to prove that the statesman is neither an arbitrary creation nor a product of economic, political, social and geo- graphical environment, he forgets his task long enough to say: If it is not the exit that makes the statesman, is it brains? Not brains alone. A man may be well equipped with powerful ‘engines of logic and controversy and well stocked with knowledge, and yet, if he runs against the current of long time, he passes away as grass be ‘ae nd again: s For every matfr that achieves fame there are a thousand cranks stoned to death by the mob and consi to oblivion. Finally, Professor Beard concludes that “above all, he (the successful statesman) must be justified by events, that is, by good fortune.” “Perhaps,” he says, “beyond reason and understanding both Carlyle and Marx may be reconciled, a little bit.” It is no reconciliation that Profes- sor Beard has b ht about but an unconscious vindication of the Marx- ian position. “Justified by events” means nothing more than -that the policies of the successful statesman must fit in with the needs of the his- torical epoch in which he lives: Changing Epoch. A Joseph Chamberlain could not nave come to power and based a Brit- ish colonial policy on the needs of 5 industry until after Birming- ham, a steel and iron city, had suc- ceeded Manchester, a textile town, a the economic bas’s of British colonial policies. A Thomas Jefferson could only have made effective his ideals of individual liberty in a nation where a pioneer culture based on free land had laid the economic basis for them. A Lenin, speaking in the name of the revolutionary workingclass as the leader of the party of the revolution- ary workers—the Communist Party— unites the largest nation in the world while in every other nation demorali- zation proceeds with astounding ra- pidity. There are no statesmen to- day except those who fight capital- ism; many of them will die unrecog- nized because the historical milieu is not yet ready for them but also un- recognized will go those defenders of able to see that the forces unleashed by capitalism are clearing the stage for a new epoch. Of the capitalist rulers who now strut before the eyes of the world not one will be remembered a hund- red years hence and it is extremel doubtful if there will be any mental- ities of the type of Professor Beard to plead their case. Why They Hate Marxism. History makes men and no pro- phetic mitt is strong enough to save from oblivion the individual who, fail- ing to understand historical tenden- cies, sets himself against the current. Those who stand out on the pages of history credited with some nota- ble accomplishment—we do not speak now of the “drum and trumpet” heroes—were the products of mass movements that are easily explain- able in the light of the Marxian in- | gga of history in spite of the efforts of believers in providenti- al intervention to obscure the eco- noinic basis of all history, They be- little Marxism because it deals to con- ventional history and economics a blow that it cannot return. Marxism is the scientific basis of the revolu- tionary workingclass movement and it refites in toto the whole mass of lies and contradictions that the rul- ingelass and its apologists pass out as gospel. ae who are unwilling or un- Work Party is in complete agree- | well-to-do farmers, the small business ;men, the professional groups, and the | broken down politicians who go with them. It hopes that these elements jwill form a Third Party and carry ;on a struggle against the two old |perties, for the formation of such a | Third Party will weaken the central- ized capitalist power in this country jand create a more favorable situa- tion for the advancement of the ;movement of workers and exploited farmers. What our Party is opposed to and will fight against is to have both ex- ploited workers and farmers, and the well-to-do farmers, small business men, etc., unite in one party. Such a party containing conflicting eco- nomic groups could not be a perma- rent organization and would only hinder the development of the class movement of farmers and workers. Therefore the Workers Party will carry on an unrelenting struggle against the Conference for Progres- isive Political Action to. win away from it everv worker and exploited farmer. It does not wish to win away from the Conference for Prov- ressive Political Action the smal | business men and old party politi. cians and well-to-do farmers. - Does the fact that the Workers Party carries on such a struggle nul- lify the resolution adopted by the St. Paul conference, as the editor of the “New Majority” argues? Such an argument can only come from a confused mind. It is entirely com- patible, with separate organizations of the workers and exploited farm- ers, to at the same time have co- operation between the two organ- ized groups. i A Class Farmer-Labor Party. | In 4 statement by the Central Ex- jeeutive Committee of the Workers Party printed in the DAILY WORK- ER of March 22nd, was a re-affirma- tion of a similar statement adopted bv the National Convention of ‘the Workers Party, the following ap- reared: “While we carry on our cam- vaign for the organization of a class Farmer-Labor Party we must at the same time try to drive the Third Party forces to split away from the old capitalist parties. And if this split takes place and a Third Party is organized which is an ex- nression of revolt against Wall Street and which is not merely another cavitalist party, the Farm- er-Labor Perty must make dn elec- tion alliance with it against the old capitalist parties and the canitalist government. Such an election 31- liance shall not take the form of organizational unity between the class Farmer-Labor Party and the Third Party, but of a commor campaign against the capitalis. parties and against the government of the capitalists.” This statement of the policy of the ment with the resolution adopted at the St. Paul Conference. The differ- ence between the Workers Party and the decrepit old Farmer-Labor Party of Fitzpatrick and Buck and Brown, is that the Workers Party wants the workers and farmers to organize their own class party and then make an alliance with the Third Party for a common campaign in support of the same presidential candidate if all the circumstances are such as to make such an alliance desirable, and Buck and Brown and Fitzpatrick want to lead the unorganized workers and farmers into the Conference for Progressive Political Action and let them serve as the tail to the kite of the ambitious politicians, small busi- ness men, and well-to-do farmers. Ambition of Labor Fakers. The poliey of the Workers Party means that the industrial workers and exploited farmers will be able to stand on their own feet and fight their own volitical battles. not only in the election campaign of this nres- idential year, but after the presiden- tial campaign is over, thru the for- mation of a closely knit. well-organ- ‘vod clase Farmer-Labor Party. Ene ress ae ig,