The Daily Worker Newspaper, June 27, 1924, Page 6

Page Six THE DAILY WORKER. Published by the DAILY WORKER PUBLISHING CO., 1113 W. Washington Blvd., Chicago, Ill. (Phone: Monroe 4712) SUBSCRIPTION RATES By mail: $6.00 per year $3.50....6 months $2.00...3 monthe By mail (in Chicago only): $8.00 per year $4.50,...6 months $2.50...3 montus Address all mail and make out checks to THE DAILY WORKER 1113 W. Washington Blvd. Chicago, Illinois Editors Business Manager J. LOUIS ENGDAHL WILLIAM F. DUNNE MORITZ J. LOEB Entered as second-class mail Sept. 21, 1923 at the Post- Office at Chicago, Ill, under the act of March 8, 1879. <> 250 The Order of the Double-Cross Warren 8. Stone, head of the Engineers’ union, is supposed to be an outstanding supporter of LaFollette. It will therefore be a surprise to the innocent ones who are not familiar with the un- derground politics of the “Order of the Double- Cross” to learn that Stone has sent an agent to the democratic convention, fully authorized to speak for him, with instructions to work for the nomina- tion of McAdoo to whom support is pledged. What a conglomeration of corruption and treachery will gather at Cleveland on July 4th at the C. P. P. A. meeting! Every man-jack of that aggregation who has enough power to swing, or claim to swing, a litte block of votes, is busy ped- dling them to the highest bidder. Not only that, they offer them indiscriminately to all and sundry, and sell them over and over again to opposing camps. Stone, boosting LaFollette and support- ing McAdoo under cover, is but a sample of the whole rotten crew. One and all, these bureaucrats are enemies of the Farmer-Labor party; they were united in the efforts to crush the St. Paul convention on June 17th; they are all against independent action by labor in the politics of the nation; they are op- posed to a workers’ and farmers’ government. The reason is obvious—their business is to sell the la- bor movement indiscriminately to either or both parties of capitalism. They belong to the “Order of the Double-Cross.” “A Political Move” The anti-trust suit, which Attorney General Stone of the Coolidge administration has filed against numerous Standard Oil subsidiaries, may impress the man on the street but it doesn’t alarm the fellows directly affected. Hear what John J. Mitchell, director of the Texas Oil company, and resident of the Illinois Merchants’ bank, says: ; eae | ne cag Tor the warket to Worry about. Prices climbed today in the face of the suit. The whole thing looks to me like a political move.” Colonel R. W. Stewart, chairman of the board of directors of the Standard Oil company of In- diana, has this to say: “We are glad to submit this issue to the courts and await the decision in this case with a full conviction that they (the gasoline monopoly) will be held proper and just in every respect.” Colonel Stewart does not fear the courts. He re- members the reversal of the $29,000,000 fine against the Standard Oil some years ago. He knows that judges’ benches are filled with corporation lawyers to protect corporation interests. Cal Coolidge’s little feather duster anti-trust suit is just a “political move,” calculated to coun- teract Teapot Dome revelations. But it does not fool the oil interests. Nor does it fool the work- ers and farmers organized under the banner of the class party formed at St. Paul. Advertising rates on application. Send in.that Subscription Today. Trot Out the Old Stuff The Sherman Anti-Trust Law has furnished much campaign material in the past. It serves alike for conservatives, progressives, ins and outs. Tf an election draws near, file a suit to bust up the Standard Oil corporation; that is always popu- lar, it draws the votes, and it doesn’t hurt Stand- ard Oil any. Cal Coolidge and his advisers have evidently decided to fall back upon this old reliable method of campaigning. So Attorney General Stone, ‘suc- cessor to the late Daugherty of odorous memory, has filed suit against fifty oil companies, headed by Standard Oil, charging combination to control the market. This is a wise move from every angle; Standard will doubtless make extra contributions to the Coolidge fund in return for the free adver- tising, while the boobery will cheer the great trust-buster. And so they continue to trot out the old stuff. There is a terrible staleness about everything done in this campaign by the Republican and Demo- cratic parties. They are in the days of their de- cay, and their imaginations have been the first to die. “Good fellows with bottles and lovely ladies with Al Smith badges,” says William Hard, are the big arguments in the democratic convention. Well, it must be admitted that such arguments are more interesting than the century-old oratory and bunk that is being tossed from the platform. Warren Stone says in public he is for Lalol- _ lette; privately he sends his agent, Herman Wills, to work for McAdoo, But all the time he is against 5 See te party. At least he is consistent Partial Employment Reports from all over the country continue to emphasize the growing industrial depression. It is doubtful if production will for long continue above the crisis level of 1921. Each week the amount of wages paid to the working class is growing smaller. The army of unemployed swells in volume daily. The full force of the depression has not yet been felt by the workers. One of the reasons is that instead of immediate wholesale layoff of workers, a system of part-time employment is being ex- tensively applied. This is one of the recommen- dations worked out by the Harding unemploy- ment conference in 1921, and it is being carried out by the larger industries. The steel trust, the Pullman company, the great coal companies, par- ticularly, are operating upon a part-time basis for large numbers of workers, instead of full-time for a small number with complete unemployment for the rest. While the blow of unemployment has thus been softened by padding the hammer, it still has fallen just, the same upon the head of the working class. And if the capitalists class has gained a point in avoiding the demonstrations of protest, and the dramatization of unemployment, that has usually gone with a depression as severe as that now de- veloping, it has lost a point and the workers have gained insofar as the blow has been spread over a greater mass of workers; the discontent result- ing is not yet so intense as it would otherwise be, but it is far more fundamental and far-reaching. More millions of workers are learning that capi- talism is an enemy that brutally starves, slowly and relentlessly, those workers who have created all its wealth, whenever the incentive of immediate profit points in that direction. Farmer-Labor Campaign Opens Duncan McDonald, workers’ candidate for pres- ident of the United States, will open the election campaign in Chicago on July 2, at Wicker Park hall, 2040 North Ave. Nominated by the unani- mous voice of the workers and farmers gathered in St. Paul June 17, McDonald is throwing himself into the battle without hesitation. On July 2 he will deliver his first big wallop in the presidential fight. The struggle against capitalism began long ago, it continues every day whether elections occur or not, and it will end only with the downfall of the capitalist system. In this struggle the ballot box and legislative halls are not the decisive factors. But in the primitive state of development of the American working class this electoral struggle will be of great importance. It gives the oppor- tunity to arouse the workers to the class issue. It helps to mobilize them in struggle. It gives masses of workers otherwise unapproachable at this time. ‘ Every reader of The Daily Worker should get into the harness with the same enthusiasm, and the same promptness and energy, with which Dun- can McDonald launches the campaign which he has been selected to lead. Just as the worker candidate of the workers gets down to business, and without ceremony or hesitation begins the as+ sault upon the “oil parties” of the capitalist class, so must every class-conscious and revolutionary worker get into the battle and do his part to make this campaign a great education and mobil- ization of the working class against capitalism. Amalgamated Into Battle The Amalgamated Colthing Workers swung into battle in the New York market Tuesday, fifty thousand strong, to smash the wage-cutting cam- paign of the bosses in the men’s clothing industry. They responded to war measures of the employers by making war; with the result that the workers are exerting the full power of their organization in the midst of an industrial situation otherwise rather unfavorable. The solidarity of the A. C. W. membership will overcome all handicaps and maintain the standards in New York, the largest market in the industry. The whole labor move- ment should cheer on the fighters. It is unfortunate that workers in other sections of the clothing industry, which are facing equally hostile employers, have not equally militant or- ganizations to fight for their interests. The la- dies’ garment trades face a more intense crisis, but instead of action they find their “leaders” fritter- ing away the strength and enthusiasm of the membership in futile talk-fests, in commissions, in legalistic jugglery. By throwing their massed strength into battle, solidly and with enthusiasm, the workers in the men’s clothing industry in New York have taken the only steps that could possibly stop the “open shop” drive. Nothing will bring the bosses to terms but power; they have no respect for the justice of the workers’ claims, but they have re- spect for fighting determination. Fight on, mem- bers of the A. C. W., until victory is assured! You are fighting not alone your own battle, but also that of the whole working class! Trade union officials have much to lose besides their “chains,” and they have juicy political plums THE DAILY WORKER Friday, June 27, 1924 U. S. Socialists Standing at the Crossroads By J. LOUIS ENGDAHL, ‘WO alternatives now face the So- cialist Party: First:—It must either endorse the stand of the Farmer-Labor convention just held in St. Paul, or— Second:—Retiring into isolation it will face gradual extermination, fad- ing away in eblivion. 7 * Supports St. Paul in Principle. This is the only conclusion that can be drawn from the last week-end state convention of,the socialists in Wiscon- sin. The Wisconsin socialist convention voted in principle to support the St. Paul program—not to be inviegled in- to the LaFollette camp if the Wiscon- sin senator should choose to run as an “independent.” It rejected LaFol- lette as a candidate on any but a La- bor ticket. But the Wisconsin socialists did not go the whole route. Victor L. Berger, the practical leader of American so- cialism, who fought his comrades in an effort to secure recognition of La Follette’s hopes as an independent, confesses that the logical result of the Wisconsin stand should be affili- ation with the forces that united at St. Paul. But they have not yet gone far. The Wisconsin socialists say that it LaFollette is not the candidate of a labor party organized at Cleveland, then the socialist party should put up a national ticket of its own. This means that Wisconsin social- ists recognize that the labor party must be formed! But rather than ac- cept any leadership but their own, they are content to retire into obscuri- ty, or at least adopt that position temporarily. 7 * Not Sufficient Courage. The Wisconsin socialists, in spite of Berger, had the courage to declare for the class labor party. But they didn’t key up their courage to the point of demanding affiliation with the only class political expression in existence in the country—the organ- ization that came out of the St. Paul convention. There is some reason for this hesi- tation in the ranks of the socialist party in Wisconsin. In demanding that the socialist par- ty be allowed to go along with La Follette and his “independent candi- dacy,” Berger no doubt held to the hope that thfs was the only salvation for the national socialist party. It was good to be close to LaFollette and his temporal popularity. It was good to be close enough to feel the temporal strength of the great rail- &|powerful banks, a membership get- forum from which the message of the workers’|ting good wages on the eve of a new and farmers’ government can be delivered to er road brotherhoods—huge buildings, industrial crisis, albeit at the expense of the poorly paid shop craftsmen. Berger said that LaFollette is get- ting old and conservative; that there- fore no new ideas can be expected from him, Yet Berger might have looked into a mirror and studied him- self. Berger, as well as LaFollette, loves to bask close to respectable re- action, so close that he is absolutely useless in a working class movement. x & They Look in the Mirror. The Wisconsin socialists also took a good look into the mirror, saw Ber- ger and his Cleveland policies and de- clared they would have none of them. For, while Barger would safeguard his child, the national socialist party, the Wisconsin socialists have something to protect ‘at home, in their state— their own political jobs. This can only be done thru a strong Milwaukee and Wisconsin socialist organization. Among those who spoke against Berger's demand for approval of La Follette’s independent candidacy were Hoan, the socialist mayor; Quick, the socialist state senator; Strehlow, the socialist alderman, typical of other so- cialists who hold political office in Wisconsin. Approval of LaFollette’s candidacy would play havoc with the socialist vote in Milwaukee and thru- out Wisconsin. Leaving blank the place opposite LaFollette, as repub- lican candidate for U. S. senator, two years, hit the socialists heavily, in place of the opposite as they had hoped. The worker-farmer voters asked, “What then is the difference between the Berger socialists and the LaFollette republicans?” Thus the right wing of the Wisconsin socialist party is against Berger. The left wing also opposes Berger because it feels that the socialist par- ty is a dominant force able to go it alone. With a daily paper in Milwau- kee, altho lodged securely in Berger’s hands; with a mayor of the state’s metropolis, with numerous aldermen and state legislators, with the unions fairly “socialistic,” these left wingers are innocently content to go along, as they have been during the last quarter of a century, just “educating.” They made a solid united front with the right winger, Hoan, against Berger. *s 6 Aversion Is Found Elsewhere. This aversion on the part of the Wisconsin socialists to the Cleveland gathering of the Conference for Prog- ressive Political Action is shared by socialists in other parts of the coun- try: Thus we find an editorial in the Ar- beiter-Zeitung, the German socialist weekly in Chicago, that also clings closely to German elements in the Wisconsin socialist thovement, declar- ing: “From the viewpoint of middle-class politics, the conference (the Confer- ence of Progressive Political Action) may be justified, and a gathering of these liberal elements may perhaps be desirable. What we fail to under- stand about the matter is the fact that the national executive committee of the socialist party has also decided to send representatives to this con- ference. What can the socialist party hope to find there? Is this an admis- sion of its own weakness? Or what in heaven’s name is it that it wants to do there? “One would think that the past had shown, and shown most plainly, that nothing is to be gained for the work- ers from these conglomerate gather- ings. As long as no fundamental changes are made in existing condi- tions, these bourgeois liberals are in- clined, to a certain limited extent, to co-operate with us. Rut when it comes to actually putting into practise so radical a program as that of the so- cialists, these gentlemen run away from us, and not only leave us in the lurch, but fight against us whenever and wherever they find the opportun- ity. And what reliance can be placed on these elements in war-time? Was not that question answered plainly enough in 1917? Where did thése peo- ple stand then? They left us all in the lurch and fought us into the bar- gain, And has not Germany shown us conclusively how ruinous it is to trust these liberals? “Are we then to learn nothing from experience? The socialist party would be committing political suicide, were it to unite with these elements. If at this moment we are not so powerful in society, if our numerical strength is not so great, it will not always be thus. In any case, matters will not be improved by co-operation with bour- geois elements. For our problems, our ideals, are so basically different, so fundamentally opposed, that an al- liance with the Conference for Prog- ressive Political Action would be a downright impossibility.” ree Situation in New York City. This attitude no doubt refiects the feeling of the isolated socialist party members in other sections of the country, with the single exception of New York city. The metropolis has a situation all its own. Here there are no socialist office holders. All the al- dermen and state -legislators have been voted out. But thru usurpation of power the socialists have been able to maintain their dictatorship in some of the Jewish unions with internation- al headquarters in the East, notably the International Garment Workers’ Union, the Furriers, the Capmakers and Leather Workers. The policies of these unions are not dictated by the socialist party in New York City, al tho Morris Hillquit is usually thej- lawyer when they get into trouble, b by the anti-Communist Jewish Dai Forward. In other words the Ne): York socialists trail the Forward and these union officials into the Cleveland Conference, i: They did exactly that thing when. they met with the railroad brother- hood officials'and Tammany Hall po- liticians in Albany, New York, one year ago, only to be thrown into the street. If the New York socialists put. up any pretensions to maintaining their own party and autonomy at the Cleveland gathering, they will no doubt suffer the same fate. oe @ This Straw Didn't Materialize. Under these circumstances it is to be expected that the greatest note of hysteria in socialist circles should come from New York. Recently the slogan was put forth. “A labor party organized by the socialists.” This was tamed down in the last issue of, The ‘New Leader, the N. Y.. sociali organ, to “Unity of St. Paul with s cialists seen as alternative to failu. to organize’ a Labor party.” This is more than the wish of a headline | writer. It. was the grabbing ata straw, June 14th, that did not. mate- rialize on June 17th. The New York’ socialists laid awake nights hoping to get reports from St. Paul that the non- Communist farmer-laborites had split with the Communists, making it pos- sible for the. socialists to come into the St. Paul fold. But the split that the socialists hoped for and the capi- talists prayed for did not take place, -* © Split Inevitable at Cleveland. It is at Cleveland where the split will take place. That is the meaning of the action of the Wisconsin social- ist convention, that voted in principle for the St. Paul position. The Wisconsin socialists will have. 26 delegates at the national socialist convention in Cleveland, July 6, the day after the conference for Progres- sive Political Action adjourns. Those 26 votes have been instructed to re ject ay alliance with LaFollette on the basis of an independent candi- dacy. Those 26 delegates will no doubt dominate the socialist convention. ~ Since the socialists must split with LaFollette at Cleveland, even as the: Wisconsin socialists split with him at their recent state convention in Mil- waukee, they have but two roads to choose from: 2 ‘ l—Alliance with the Farmer-Labor forces organized at St. Paul. 2—The lonesome road to complete isolation. 5 The socialists in these United States are truly at the crossroads, Tasks of Russian Delegation at the Hague © (The splendid document appearing below was written by Vladimir Ilyitch Lenin on Dec. 4, 1922. It was intended as instructions for our delegation, sent to the Hague to the conference convened by the Second Internation- al for the discussion of war against war.—Gregory Zinoviev.) se ® By VLADIMIR ILYITCH LENIN. ITH reference to the question of combatting the danger of war, in relation to the Hague conference, I am of the opinion that the greatest difficulty consists in overcoming that prejudice which regards this question as if it were simple, plain and compar- atively easy. “We shall reply to war with strike or revolution”"—this is the phrase |customarily employed by all influen- |tial leaders among the reformists of the working class. And often enough the workers and peasants are satis- fied and quieted by the radical ap- pearance of such replies. The best method would perhaps be to begin with a most determined re- jection of such views. It should be ex- plained that particularly at the pres- ent time, since the last war, none but the completest fools and most hope- less liars could suppose that a reply of this description is of any value whatever towards the solution of the problem of war against war; it should be explained that it is impossible to “reply” to a war by a strike, just as it is impossible to reply to a war by a “revolution” in the plain and literal sense of the word. It must be definitely explained how great is the secrecy surrounding the birth of a war, and how helpless is an ordinary labor organization, in the face of a really impending war. It must be explained over and over again in a thoroughly concrete man- ner how the situation was during the last war, and as to the reasons why the situation could not be otherwise. Special attention must be called to the fact that the quéstion of “defense of native country” will inevitably be put, and that the overwhelming major- ity of the workers will inevitably solve this question in favor of their own bourgeoisie. Therefore the points to be placed in the foreground are: first, the dis- cussion of the question of “defense of to gain, That is why they are against the Farmer-|native country,” second, and in com- Labor party. ———$$— The workers and farmers cannot all get public bination with this, the discussion of the question of “defeatism,” and fin- ally, the discussion of the sole pos- sible means of combatting war, i. e. jobs; the old parties buy their leaders that way,|the maintenance or formation of an but they cannot buy the rank and file. Only by [illegal organization of all revolution- means of a party of their own can the working masses fight against capitalism. Send in that Subscription Today. * ¥ ists taking part in the war, for the purpose of on unceasing work against the war, is an imbecile The boycot® of phrase, are forced to] take part in every reactionary war. It would be an excellent thing to take a number of examples—from Ger- man pre-war literature, or as a spe- cial instance the Basle congress in 1912—for the purpose of demonstrat- ing in an effectively concrete manner that the theoretical recognition of the fact that war is a crime, that war is unallowable for socialists, etc., is all mere words, since these assertions have nothing concrete behind them. We give masses no actual living idea of how a war can break out. On the contrary, the dominating press hushes this question up to such an extent, and spreads such a daily veil of lies over it, that the weak socialist press is completely powerless in compari- son, the more in that it has always adopted a wrong viewpoint on the subject, even in peace times. Even the communist press is at fault in this respect in most countries. I believe that our delegates will have to divide the task among them at the international congress of the Co-operatives and Trade Unionists, and will have to expose down to the smallest detail, all those sophistries being employed at the present time in justification of war. Perhaps these sophistries form the chief medium for involving the masses in war, the chief weapons of the bour- geois press, and the most important circumstance in explanation of our powerlessness against war is the fact that we either fail to shatter these sophistries before it is too late, or we damage our own cause still further. by cheap, boastful, and entirely emp- ty phrases: we shall not permit any war, we realize the criminal nature of war, and so forth, in the spirit of the Basle manifesto of 1912, I believe that if we have a few speakers at the Hague conference who are capable of delivering a speech in this or that language against war, their most important task will be to refute the idea that those present at the conference are opponents of war, that they have any idea as to how war can and must break out when they least expect it, or that they have found even a fraction of the means required for combatting war, or that they have the faintest notion of adopt- ing any rational line of action cal- culated to be. efficient in the war against war. In connection with the latest ex- periences of the war, we must show what a great number of theoretical and practical questions we have to face on the very day following the de- claration of war—questions which will rob the overwhelming majority of those called to the colors of the pos- sibility of taking up a position to them with clear heads and conscien- tious objectivity. 1 believe that this question will have 4 to be discussed with the utmost de- tail, and along two lines: In the first place by the repetition and analysis of everything which im- mediately preceded the war, showing clearly to all present that they do not know, or pretend that they do not know, whilst in reality they do not want to admit it, the crux of the whole question, the essential point which has to be recognized ‘before there is any thought of combatting war. I am of the opinion that the full discussion of this point implies an analysis of all judgments and all opinions held at that time with re- gard to the war by the Russian so- cialists. It is necessary to point out that these judgments were not formed accidentally, but arose out of the na- ture of all modern wars. It must be pointed out that without an analysis of these views, apd without an ex- planation of how they were inevitably bound to be formed and of how they are of decisive significance for the question of combatting war—without such analysis it is impossible to speak of any preparation for the event of war, or even of a conscious attitude towards war, In the second place every present- day conflict, even the most trifling, must be adduced as an example of how a war may break out any day with no further cause than a quarrel between ‘England and France with re- gard to some detail of their agree- ment with Turkey, or between Amer- ica and Japan over some unimportant difference referring to a question of The Poor Fish Says: | may be a poor fish, but | want it distinctly un- derstood that | /@ no connections with the poor fish wallowing around in the national democratic conven- tion in Madison Square Garden, New York City. | am not that kind of a sucker, Movie Stars Sip With King. CHRISTIANIA, Norway, June 26,— The King and Queen entertained Mary Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks here today at a tea. the Pacific ocean, or between any of the other great powers with regard to disagreements about colonies, tat or general commercial politics. I am of the opinion that, should there be the slightest doubt about our, being able to say all we have to say against war, at the Hague conference we must find out a number of astute devices enabling us to say at the most important things, and wl we have not been permitted to say we must issue in the form of a pamphlet. We must not shrink from incurring the possibility that the chairman will break off the conference. 1 believe that we would further promote our object by including in the delegation, not only those speakers capable of delivering complete speeches, and commissioned to do this,—that is, develop the main lines of argument and to state the neces- sary conditions for the combatting of war. Our delegation should also in- clude persons with a knowledge of all three leading ft languages, who would then conversation with the d ‘ould be able to judge in how. fer the main argu- ments are com le, and what extent the necessity exists dducing " argument, or ate dae It may be that.in some questions the sole effective will be to adduce actual les f the late war. In other qi the greatest impression may be made by the discussion of the present conflicts between the various states, and the at- tendant possibility of recourse to arms. With reference to the war against war, it occurs to me that de- clarations have been made with re- gard to this subject by our Commu" ist delegates, in their speeches | inside and outside of Par! which have contained entirely, and frivolous assertions about/ war against war, I believe that si de clarations, especially may be done with the/utmost con sideration when necessary, | } single case of this ki be passed in silence, for the adoption of a frivolous attitude to; ce, 2 Pier Pages seni. sherk lec! without delay, and every arate partial question, every “ae vision of a partial question, th whole of the “strategy,” must be dis cussed in detail at the congress, tn such a question not only an ror on our part could not be tol but ev jack