The Daily Worker Newspaper, November 1, 1924, Page 9

cea ao poe re errr aes The Growth of International Po pabivity of the Soviet Union PS ie eee eM By |. STALIN Secretary of Russian Communst Party NB of the surest signs of the tn stability of the “pacifist demo- cratic regime,” one of the most unde- niable symptoms of the fact that this regime represents the froth on the surface of the deepest .zevolutionary processes taking place within the working class, is, the decisive victory of the revolutionary wing in the Com- munist parties of Germany. . France and Russia, the growth of the left wing activity im the British labor movement, and finally, the growth of the popularity of the - Soviet Union among the toiling masses of the West and of the Hast. The Communist parties of the West developed under peculiar conditions. First they are ‘not homogenous in their makeup, for they comprise former social democrats who had gone thru the old school, and of new mem- bers who have not sufficiently been hardened in the revolutionary fire. Second, their ranks are not purely Bolshevist, as the leading positions are held by former members of other parties, who have not yet completely broken with the social democratic traditions. Third, they are confronted with such an experiented enemy as the social democrats, who have gone thru fire and water, who still repre- sent a tremendous political force among labor. And finally, they are confronted also with such a power- ful enemy as the European bourgeoisie, with its tried state machinery and its omnipotent press. To think that such Communist parties can over- throw in a day the Buropean capitalist system is to be thoroly mistaken. Therefore our immediate task is to make the Communist parties of the West truly Bolsheyist bodies, to weld them into genuine revolutionary bat- talions, capable of rebuilding the en- tire party in the spirit of the revolu- tionary. education of the masses, in the spirit of revolutionary prepara- * tion. This was the situation within the Communist Parties of the West only a short while ago. But during the last half year things have been chang- ing defistitely for the better. The last half year is remarkable in the re- ‘spect that it has produced a radical ‘change in the Communist parties of ‘the West in the sense of their break- Se Z : - eieaitee ee SST Se NEE sare SPAS Parsee neeeaemen cratic traditions, in the sense of the ‘ Bolshevization of the party ranks, in the sense of ‘the isolation of the op- portunist ‘elements. What a great danger to the revolution the social democratic traditions in the Commun- ist parties may represent has been clearly demonstrated by the sad ex- perience of the labor government of Saxony, when the opportunist leaders attempted to change the meaning of the united front idea from revolu- tionary mobilization and organization of the masses into social democratic parliamentary combinations. This was the turning point which opened the eyes of the Party masses and aroused them against the opportunist leaders. The second question which undermined the authority of the right wing leaders and brot on the scene new revolutionary leaders was the so-called “Russian” question, i.e. the discussion im the Russian Communist Party. As is known, the Brandler group in Germany and the Souvarine group in France, resolutely supported the opportunist opposition in the Rus- sian Communist Party against the basic ranks of the R. C. P., against its I ing completely with the social demo- movement found a response in all the other Communist Parties of the West. If we add to this the complete isola. tion of the opportunist. tendency in the Russian Communist Party, then the picture becomes complete. The Fifth Congress of the Comintern only consolidated the victory of the revo- lutionary wing in the main section of the Comintern. No doubt the mistakes of the op- portunist leaders have played:a very important role in the acceleration of the Bolshevization of the Western Communist parties. But it is just as doubtless that other deeper reasons also operated here: the successful capitalist offensive of the last few years, the lowering of the workers’ standard of living, the presence of a huge army of unemployed, the gen- eral economic instability of capitalism, the growth of revolutionary unrest among the great working masses. The workers are moving towards the revo- lution and they want revolutionary leaders. Conclusion. The process of the final formation of genuinely Bolshe- vist parties in the West, to serve as a basis for the coming Revolution in Europe has begun. This is the sum- mary of the developments during the last half year. Even more difficult and peculiar are the conditions of the development of the western trade unions. Firstly, they are narrow in their “tried” craft practices and are hostile to socialism, for having arisen before the socialist parties and developed without their aid, they have become used to flaunt- ing their “independence” to put their craft interests above class interests, and to recognize nothing but penny- raises. Secondly, they are conserva- tive in spirit and hostile to all revo- lutionary beginnings, for they are headed by an old, mercenary, bour- geois-fed trade union bureaucracy, always ready to put the trade unions at the service of im lism, And finally, they, the trade unions, being united around the Amsterday reform- ists, represent the very same million strong army of reformism upon which the present capitalist system leans. Of course besides the reactionary Amsterdam unions, there are also revolutionary unions affiliated to the R. I. L. U. But firstly a considerable part of the revolutionary unions, anx- fous to avoid splits:in the labor move- ment, remains within the Amsterdam Federation and submits to its discip- line; secondly, in the most imprtant European countries (England, Ger- many, France), the Amsterdamers still represent a majority of the work- ers. It should not be forgotten that Amsterdam has no less than 14 mil- lion organized workers. To_ think that the proletarian dictatorshi could be established in Europe against the will of these millions of workers is to be sadly mistaken, to move away from the ground of Lenin- ism, to doom oneself to inevitable de- feat. Therefore what we must do now is to win these millions over to the revolution and Communism, to free them from the influence of the reac- tionary trade union bureaucracy, or to get them at least to assume a posi- tion of benevolent neutrality towards Communism. This was the situation until very lately, However, the last years have seen a gradual change for the bet- ter, The home of fsolated reactionary trade unionism is England, which had once been the industrial Colossus of the world. The collapse of British monopoly was connected with the de- |velopment of financial capitalism, which has been marked by a struggle of the biggest countries for colonial monopoly. The imperialist phase of capitalism has brot with it an extens- of colonies. It should also be remem- bered that the war has greatly under mined European industry. As is known the present total of European produc tion does not exceed 70 per cent oi the pre-war level. Hence the limita- tion of production and the successful capitalist offensive against the work- ing class. Hence the reduction of wages, the actual abolition of the eight-hour day, and numerous unsuc- cessful defensive strikes, which again demonstrated the treachery of the la- bor bureaucracy to the working class. Hence the colossal unemployment and the growth of discontent of the work- ers with the reactionary trade unions. Hence the idea of the united front in the economic struggle of the working class and the project for the unifica- tion of the two labor internationals into a single international, capable of resisting capital. The reformist speeches at the Vienna congress of the Amsterdam International (June, 1924) about negotiations with the Russian unions and the appeal for unity of the British Trade Union Con- sress (September, 1924) are only a reflection of the growing pressure of the masses upon the reactionary trade union bureaucracy. The most remarkable thing about it was the fact that_it is precisely the British unions which have been the nest of conservatism, and the basic nucleus of Amsterdam, that have taken the in- itiative for the unification of the reac- tionary and revolutionary unions. The appearance of left elements in the British labor movement is the best proof of the fact that there, at Am- sterdam, “something is rotten.” Some think that the unity cam- paign is wanted precisely now, be- cause a left wing has developed in Amsterdam, and it must be supported by all.means and efforts. This is un- true, or to be more precise,»it is only partly true. The Communist parties of the West.are becoming mass. or- ganizations. They are becoming truly Bolshevist parties. They are growing and moving to power apace with the growth of the discontent of the great working masses; hence we are mov- ing towards the proletarian revolu- tion. But it is impossible to over- throw the bourgeoisie without first depriving it of its buttress in the face of reactionary Amsterdam; it is im- possible to establish the dictatorship without winning over this capitalist stronghold. However, this cannot be doné by one-sided work from without. This object can be achieved at pres- ent only by combinined activities within and without, along the line of establishing unity in the trade union movement. That is why the question of unity and of affiliation to the in- dustrial internationals has become a vital issue. Of course the lefts should be supported and pushed on. But, real support of the lefts will be ob- tained only if the banners of the revo- lutionary unions continue to fly, of the reactionary Amsterdam leaders con- tinue to be seorned.and denounced for their treachery and splitting activi- ties, if the left leaders are criticized for their half heartedness and indecis- iveness in the struggle against the reactionaries. Only by such a policy can real trade union unity be pbrot about. Otherwise we may get a pic- ture similar to that in Germany last October, when Levi's left group was successfully used by the reactionary right wing of the social democrats to envelop the German revolutionists. Finally, as regards the growth of the popularity of the Soviet Union among the masses of the capitalist countries. Perhaps the best indicator of the instability of the “pacifist demo- cratic regime” is the undeniable fact that the influence and prestige of the Soviet Urfion among the toiling masses of the West and East, far from weakening, continues to grow from year to year and from month to month. It is not the “recognitions” given to the Soviet Union by the dif- ferent bourgeois states that we refer. to. Of course these “recog- nitions” represent nothing special in themselves; for they are dictated firstly by the competition of the capi- talist states, anxious to find a place on the Soviet market and secondly by the program of pacifism which de- mands the establishment of “normal relations” with the Soviet Republics the signing at least of some agree- ment with the Soviet Union. The point is that the present “democrats” and “pacifists” defeated their bour- geois competitors in the parliamen- tary elections, thanks to the Soviet recognition plank, that the MacDon- alds and Herriots came to power and can remain in power, thanks to their lip service and “friendship” to Rus- gia, that the prestige of these demo- crats and pacifists is a reflection of the prestige of the Soviet power among the great masses. It is char- acteristic that even such a well known “democrat” as Mussolini considers it necessary to display at times, before the workers, his “friendship” for the Soviets. It is no less characteristic that such well known grabbers of other people’s property as the pres- ent rulers of Japan cannot get along without “friendship” for the Soviet Union. We do not spaak of the im- mense popularity of the Soviet power among the masses of Turkey, Persia, China and India. How are we to explain this unusual prestige and this unusual popularity among the masses of other states of such a dictatorial and revolutionary power as is the Soviet power? Firstly, by the hatred of the work- ing class for capitalism and by its anx- iety to free itself from it. The work- ers of the capitalist countries sympa- thize with the Soviet power primarily because .it is a power that has over- thrown capitalism. The president of the British railway men, the not un- known Bromley, recently said at the Trade Union Congress: “The capital- ists know that the eyes of the workers of the entire world are turned upon Russia, and that if the Russian revolu- tion wins, then the conscious workers of the other countries will ask them- selves ‘why cannot we too alse de stroy capitalism?’” Bromley, of course is not a Bolshevik. But what he said was an expression of the thots and longings of the European workers. For, why indeed, not overthrow Eu- ropean capitalism if the Russians have now been getting along for seven years without capitalists? Herein lies the source of the vast popularity of the Soviet power among the broad working masses, Therefore the growth of the international popularity of the Soviet Union- signifies the growth of the hatred for capitalism on the part of the workers of all coun- tries. Secondly, by the hatred of \ the masses for war and by their anxiety to thwart the military schemes of the bourgeoisie. The masses know that the Soviet power was the first to open an attack against imperialist war, and y opening the attack has under- mined war. The masses see in ‘the Soviet Union the only country strug- gling against the recurrence of wars. They sympathize with the Soviet power because it is the standard bearer of peace among nations and a true bulwark against war. Therefore the growth of the international popu- larity of the Soviet power testifies to the growth of the hatred of the msses of the entire world for imperialist war and its sponsors. Thirdly, by the hatred of the op pressed masses of the dependent countries and colonies for the yoke of imperialism, by their anxiety to break that yoke the Soviet power is the only power which has broken the chains of “native” imperialism. The Soviet Union is the only country build- ing its life upon the principles of equality and cooperation of the na- tions». The Soviet government is the only government in the world champ- ioning the complete unity and inde- pendence, freedom and sovereignty of (Continued on page 7.)