The Daily Worker Newspaper, August 30, 1924, Page 17

_—— By EARL R. BROWDER AMUEL Gompers and his rubber- stamp Executive Council of the A. F. of L. have joined with the rail- road unions in the Conference for Progressive Political Action and the Socialist Party, in endorsing the per- sonal campaign of Robert LaFollette for president of the United States. The Workers Party has nominated William Z. Foster, with the endorse- ment of the Farmer-Labor national committee elected at the St. Paul con- vention. So far as the trade unions are concerned, this will be the line of struggle in the presidential. cam- paign—Foster versus LaFollette. * * + % For more than 40 years the trade unions have been ruled by the Gom- pers policy of “rewarding friends and punishing enemies,” after they had been selected by the capitalist parties. The Socialist Party was the tradition- al minority advocate of independent working class action. The C. P. P, A. arose from among the labor bu- reaucrats who, while not differing es- sentially from Gompers, had been suppressed by him, and adopted a hybrid program of throwing labor in- fluence into the selection of the capi- talist candidates on the Gompers formula, rather than sifiply choosing between them after selection. Now, these three groups that influ- ence the unions have been united (more or less) under the leadership of the middle class LaFollette. But all three proclaim that their policies are unchanged. The truth is that all have changed, reflecting the rapidly changing world in which they oper- ate, but their minds have petrified. The unions face an entirely new sit- uation, and because all three groups under consideration are living in the past, they find themselves (without changing their minds) thrown into the same political bed together. La Follette, the representative of small capital, claims and secures their al- legiance as the logical leader of those who fear ‘the present and long for the good old days. The slogan “Back to 1776” is sufficient to unite LaFol- lette, Gompers, Spreckles, Rawleigh, Johnston, Stone, Hillquit, Berger, and Debs. . Is this the beginning of a new par- ty? Will a ‘third party” be formed, as the Socialists pray, after the elec- tion? While this cannot be answered categorically “yes” or “no,” all signs indicate that a new party will not be formed by those now in control unless and until the “LaFollette movement” has been thoroly purged of all “class elements” and has repudiated all thought of a basic change in the cap- italist system. This means that no new. party is possible out of this movement except a “liberal” capital- ist party, unless it comes thru an up- heaval in the unions resulting in a mass split away from the La¥ollette movement. This statement is borne out by in- numerable facts. The trade unions are relegated to the position of aux- iliary “supporting committees.” In- dividual leaders and groups are unit- ed behind LaFollette and at the same Trade Unions and the Elections et and many similar incidents). * * * The LaFollette campaign brings not the slightest expression to the rising class-consciousness within the trade unions. The organizations are, most of them, thru, their officials, pledged to support of LaFollette, but that fact is not going to abolish the class strug- gle. It is going to throw the class struggle, instead, right into the un- ion halls, That is what is going on A PROLETARIAN FAMILY By Rudolph Schlichter time in closest unity with “regulars” on the republican and democratic tickets who energetically support Coolidge and Davis (Wheeler support- ing Walsh in Montana, union lead- ers supporting Small in Illinois, etc.). The LaFollette movement is bitterly hostile to organized Farmer-Labor parties in the various states and even sabotages the strongest (Minnesota, where LaFollette appoints Sinclair, a banker, as campaign nranager and re- fuses to go on the Farmer-Labor tick- now in the local union’ meetings where the issue of Foster versus La Follette is being debated. The struggle of ideas within the un- ions, between the ideas of the middle class and those of the revolutionary workers,, for the possession of the minds of the membership, was jnevi- table. Foster versus LaFollette is only another side of the fundamental problem that, in the railroad shop un- ions, for example, is expressed in the struggle of amalgamation versus the B. & O. plan of collaboration with the management. The election is a part of and involves all the basic issues of the labor /movement, and is inti- mately connected to every trade and industrial question with which the un- ions are struggling. On wage ques- tions it is the struggle for higher wag- es as against arbitration. The gener- alized formula for the whole intra- union battle is class struggle versus class collaboration. = * Thus it should be clear to every Communist and to every revolution- ary worker who stands for the prin- ciple of the class struggle that the presidential campaign offers a won- derful opportunity. It is an opportun- ity to clarify the minds of the rank and file upon the deep issues that di- vide the whole labor movement. It shows up the reactionary officialdom as part and parcel of the corrupt po- litical machinery of the class enemies of the workers. It offers a forum be- ‘| fore masses of workers for the revolu- tionary position to be stated in terms which cannot be misunderstood. The very thing which the conscious and unconscious agents of the petty bour- geoisie look upon as their main strength— the united front from Hearst to Debs against the Commun- ists—acts as a powerful shock to the workers and forces them to think, to open the questions of policy and the class issue for consideration, and to listen to the revolutionaries. The duty of each _ revolutionary worker is as clear and as important as his opportunity is great. In every local union, in all central labor coun- cils and district bodies, in every meet- ing where workers gather to consider their problems, the banner of the class struggle must be raised, the is- sues must be stated, the presidential campaign must be shown to the work- ers as the great ‘class struggle—the battle against the bourgeoisie, large and small, and all its agents within the labor movement. It must be con- nected up directly with the left wing program of amalgamation, organiza- tion of the unorganized, the building of a mass Labor Party, fight against the B. & O. plan and similar “com- pany uniofi” schemes, the struggle against wage cuts and lengthening of hours. Political issues and campaigns are merely the concentrated and general- ized issues arising from the indus- trial struggle, from the efforts of the proletariat to free itself from’ wage slavery and exploitation and the men- tal bondage of capitalism. In the United States from now until Novem- ber, the dominant issue*of the class struggle is symbolized and concen- trated upon the issue—Foster or La Follette! REVOLUTIONARY UNIONISM (Continued from page 5) Profintern, the minorities within the| reformist unions, and the red inde- pendent unions, among the broadest masses of the proletariat the world over, making them realize the neces- sity of unity and the revolutionary possibilities which it has to attain. The Profintern knows that once revo- lutionary unions are part of a general federation of unions, their influence will be much greater than when they stay out. ; The question of the fate of the Profintern agitated many a comrade, especially of the German délegation. The German comrades who now oc- cupy the extremest ideological posi- tion in the Comintern, gave their consent to the yaity program of the Profintern with no enthusiasm, know- ing that among their own ranks there are elements which would like a se- cession from the German reformist unions, They are anxious to retard the unity movements of the Profin- tern tho in principle they accept them. The German comrades warned em- Phatically against any attempt to li- quidate the Profintern. The position of the Profintern is this: If a World Unity Congress is called; if at that unity congress all unions of whatso- ever trend are represented in propor- tion to their numerical strength; if that congress creates a new World International of labor unions thereby liquidating the old internationals in- cluding Amsterdam; if Amsterdam agrees to disband in consequence of such decision, then the Profintern will also cease to exist. Until then, however, even should the Russian unions enter the Amsterdam Interna- tional (thereby, naturally, leaving the Profintern) the Profintern will remain on its post. If the demand for a World Unity Congress was the new word of the Profintern Congress in the realm of tactics, the formulation of the strike strategy was its new word in the realm of the theory and practice of actual class-struggle. It was for the first time in history that the labor movement took up the question of strike strategy simultaneously as a theoretical and a practical problem: theoretical, in that it requires a care- ful study of all experiences and forces of the working class on the one hand and of capitalist society on the other; practical, in that it must be reduced to a set of clear and comprehensible rules for the guidance of the strike leaders in their battles against the i employers. The Congress has only outlined the problem. It requires study. Material will be collected and further inquiries made. One thing, however, was evident from all the discussion: only a body of men, representing organizations that lead revolutionary struggles and know the inevitableness of a final revolutionary onrush of the working masses to overthrow capitalism, could take up the strike from such angle. Speaking generally, the problem is how to make the organization of the working class so perfect that every strike should turn into a _ revolutionary battle against the bourgeoisie, and every ac- tion—a new step towards the final goal,—overthrow of capitalism and establishment of proletarian dictator- ships. In this aspect the working class is an army of actual or potential fighters, the aim is the conquest of power, the strike strategy is the ways and means whereby the revolutionary army can storm the stronghold of the enemy. Nobody should fail to read the speech of Comrade Lozovsky on this problem,—a speech showing what a strike ought to be and can be when leaders and masses are ani- mated by a class revolutionary spirit. We, Americans, will be able to con- tribute to this discussion.the most valuable material to show what the strike strategy should not be. From revolutionary strike. strategy to the revolutionary prospects of the East, the distance is not far. Of course, the Amsterdam International is not interested in the working class of the East. Why should it if it is not interested in the working class of the European countries. When such gentlemen as MacDonald and his henchmen deal with thé colonial problem, it is only from the stand- point of keeping the colonial masses in subjugation. Meanwhile, the colon- ial and semi-colonial countries are charged with revolutionary electric- ity. Imperialism is crushing these large sections of the globe, and the spirit of rebellion is abroad. There is every prospect of revolutionary up- heavals in the East, and the working class there may be one of the great- est factors in the not far distant fu- ture. The fact that the first interna tional labor gathering of the East, the international transport workers’ cenference at Canton, was organized by the Profintern, shows that the Profintern is aware of those revolu- tionary prospects, Moscow, Aug. 1.