The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 5, 1924, Page 3

ied cede resin oe December 5, 1924 THE WORKERS PARTY IS THE ONLY CLASS PARTY By WM. F. DUNNE. The minority thesis states that the minority raises the slogan of “For a ¢lass farmer-labor party.” The Central Executive Committee thesis (majority) raises the slogan of “Agninst the LaFollette or progressive party, the Workers Party.” The use 6f the term “ciass farmer- labor party” by the minority In its thesis {4 concrete evidence of the ut- ter confusion in its ideas, and of the genera! confusion that the farmerla- bor movement created in the ranks of our party—a confusion that the Communist International noted and correcta. What is @ class party? The only class party of the prole- tariat in the United States is the Workers (Conimunist) Parity, because it alone complies with the require- monts of a ¢iass party—it is compos- ed of class-conscious workers, it recog- and leads the class struggle, and a class program with which it opposes tho perties of all other social groups. There cannot be two working class parties in existence at one and the same time—the Communist program ig the only class program; all others, whether they make their appeal to workers and farmers or to the petty and big capitalists and thé, dupes and lackeys, are non-working class and therefore, opposed to the Com- munist program. What is, then, the real meaning of the term “class farmer-labor party” as used by the minority? Tn essence it means that the Work- ers (Communist) Party shall take the Jead in creating under this name a party that is not and cannot be a lass party, but which shall enter into competition with the Workers Party for the leadership of the masses. The manner in which this “class farmer-labor party” is to function is further proof that the minority has a hon-Coimmunist conception of the role of the Communist Party in the daily battles of the class struggle and also @ false conception of the manner in which the Communist Party attains Ss’ party of the social revolution, but that the masses necessary for victory shall be organized in a “elass farmer-labor party.” A united front with organizations of workers and poor farmers for mass resistanéé to the tyrannies of capital- iem and the capitalist state is one thing, but the creation of a reformist political party under the guise of a “class farmerlabor party” to do the work which a Communist Party must do if it is to become the party of the masses, is quite another, It is a con- ception of the united front tactic that is rejected by the Communist Inter- national and for which not one word of justification can be found in any of its theses or resolutions. On the contrary, the Comintern ex- pressly states that always and every- where the Communist Parties must appear as the leader in the daily strug- gles of the working class and that “only in this way can a mass Commu- fist Party be built.” It is one thing to take part in a tass movement of workers and poor farmers—of trade unions, of co-opera- tiver, of working class organs of strugele—but it 18 quite another thing to attempt to sift out of thesé organ- igations the Glass conscious workers and organize them in a “class farmer- labor party” which takes over the task of leading and inspiring the working Glass in ite everyday battles. Such a theory could spring only from discouragement and disappoint- ment with the Workers (Communist) Party of America, and is an obvious admission that the minority believes that there can be other class parties in the United States than the Work- ers (Communist) Party—believes that there must be and believes it so strongly that they wish to be the lead- ers in @ party whose sole function will bé to rally the Working class on the basis of dally demands and struggles gtowing out of these demands—a party that separates the Workers (Communist) Party from thé masses. and makés .its task of becoming a mass party more difficult—a “class farmer-labor party” that must inevit- This Is YOUR Paper---Fightin ably become a rival to the Workers (Communist) Party. This is a danger that cannot be min- imized by grahdiloquent phrases about Communist leadership of the “class farmer-labor patty’—a danger which the Cominterh foresaw when it order- ed the Workers Party to engage in the election campaign under its own name and with its own candidates and pro- gram. The Workers Party of America is the only ch labor party. Our task is to bring into its ranks, thru our activity in the daily struggles of tife workers and, Where necessary, thru united front struggles on specific de- mands, every class conscious worker in the United States—not to organize them outside of our own party. the leadership of the working class. ‘The minority very kindly leaves to the Workers Party the work of agi- tating for the dictatorship of the pro- letafiat, At least they have not as yet suggested thut their “class farmer- labor party” shall have this -in its program, But they do look upon the “glass farmer-labor party” as the par- ty that shall raise the slogans around which the wofkers and farmers shall be rallied in immediate struggles. This can mean but one thing—that they have lost faith in the ability of the Workers (Communist) Party to faise these slogans of the daily strug- gles and to rally the working class to itself. Put it another way, this means that the Workers Party shall remain the GOODBYE ‘CLASS’ FARMER-LABOR PARTY By JOSEPH MANLEY T this moment when some in our party are telling us that the slogan of a “class farmer-labor party” ‘will, by some magic process, give us a United front, will lead us out of isola- tion and finally make of us a “mass Communist party,” I must admit that I am filled with @ sense of sour and sickly humor. I can well testify to the alleged political charm of the slogan: “class farmer-labor party,” a8 IT have had the not-to-be-envied reputa- tion of being the exedutive secretary of one such political affiiction, and while serving in that capacity have made more speeches to masses of not-communists, especially appealing to them to organize a farmer- labor party,” that anyone else in our party. Under these ¢ireumstances, therefore, it may be well for ine to restate the conclusion we have from our experience and from the advice of the Comintern: That @ party such as we were trying to organize is not and . Cannot be either—class, farmer, or i It is a typical American mul- in of several classes. The decision of the Communist International on party. It will be remembered that even then at its convention held in Chicago in 1920, it negotiated with LaFollette to become its presidential candidate. LaFollette was not ready then to break with his capitalist republican allies and the negotiations fell thru. Even in these early stages the tovement showed its petty bourgeois, Lafollette, character. My conclusion, gained from many trips to the horthwest and southwest, the former the home of the farm erlabot movement, is that the s0- called farmerlabor movement is an agrarian petty bourgeois descendent of the people’s party of thé 90’s and the late non-partisan league of latter days. 1 found in the many labor conventions I attended the western states, that ment as “the people,” THE DAILY WORKER essence of their movement was petty bourgeois. Little appeal as the slogan “class farmer-labor party” had then, it has none now. Then thére was at least @ mass movement partly separate now there is not. The minority wants to make the moth-eaten farmer-labor slogan thé cetitral slogan of our par- ty’s politi¢al activities. If they sue: ceed in this, it will most seriously damage the Workers Party. What We Spent for LaFollette. Adl of us will admit that the Work- ers Party was the dynamic force with- in the so-called farmer-labor move- ment which gave it the appearance of being a real movement apart from the LaFollette movement. This mil- itant effort put forth by our party to build a farmer-labor party was made at great sacrifice and expense to the Workers Party itself. The federated farmer-labor party and the national farmer-labor party were nothing shott ot parasite organizations, which if al- lowed to live would have bled the Workers Party white, and given in return what in the light of the latest developments—the liquidation by La- Follette of the farmer-labor movement —may now be regarded as negligible results, That the farmer-labor party even in favorable pre-election days could only grow at the expense of the Workers Party can readily be seen from the following figures, which ate very conservative, covering the cost of our participation in it. The Work- ets Party paid for the following: Operating Federated Farmer- Labor Party, July 4th, 1923 to July 4th, 1924 .... November 1923, and March 1924, St. Paul Conferences 2,000.00 Publishing FarmerLabor Voice 8,000.00 Field Organizers se 5,000.00 District organizations spent on the farmer-labor movement _ approximately 10,000.00 July 3, 1923, and June 17, 1924, conventions, approximately 18,000.00 $7,000.00 Total... $50,000.00 The above figures give some small idea of the financial burden which participation in the farmer-labor movement cost the Workers Party. However these figures give little or no conception of the time and energy not alone of the entire party but espe- cially of some of its most valuable workers, whose efforts were devoted to the building of the farmer-labor party rather than of the Workers Party. It will of course be argued by the minority that the money was raised on the strength of the existent farm- er-labor mass movement and that the effort spent in building up the farmer- labor party increased the préstige of the Workers Party with the masses of workers and poor farmers in the farmer-labor movement. But this is sophistry. The same motiey could have been raised more easily for a direct campaign for the Workers Pafty, and the restlts would have been a8 good if not better. A careftil examination of not only the financial affairs of the federated farmer-labor party, but also of ‘its affiliations will show that: Not alone was the overwhelming bulk of the finances furnished by the Workers Party but the membership was also provided. The F. F-L. P. membership was secured thru the affiliation of organ- izations, néver thfu individual mem- bers. The approximate number at- filiated thru organizations was one hunderd thousand. Of this hundred thousand, most were on paper only. The sole organization which paid the nominal per capita tax was the Work: ‘ers Party. A bare 12% per cent paid per capita tax in a desultory fashion. The organizations affiliated other than the Workers Party were mostly fraternal in character and were hardly without exception under the influence of the Workers Party. They could just as readily have been affiliated to any united front committee set up by the Workers Party. An Impossible Slogan, As already pointed out, the farmer- labor movement was ideologically a LaFollette movement. All the north- west farmer-labor parties, tho accept- ing affiliations from organizations, are essentially parties based upon in- ment began with the attack by La- Follette upon the St. Paul convenh- vention, Its final liquidation by La- Folletté ocourred at the C. P. P. A. convetition on July 4, 1924, at Cleve: land, Ohio. Comrade Foster, Ruthenberg, and Myself were present at the 0. P. P. A. convention as spectators. Foster and I immediately agteed that the liquidation of the farmer-labor move- ment had taken place and we both sensed the danger to the Workers Party. Comrade Ruthenberg admit- ted the lquidation, but refused to draw the proper conélusion, which Was suggested by Foster, namely, that we withdraw out support from the hational farmer-labor party and put ip our owt candidates and have our party run under its own flag. Return- ing to Chicago, Foster presented the case to the ©. BE. C. for the Workers Party running its own campaign, and Was supported by me, Ruthenberg made a lengthy argument for con- tinuing with the farmer-labor party, but he eventually abandoned this po- sition and votdd to support the mo- tion made by Foster that the Workers Party conduct its own election cam- paign. Lovestone was then most mil- itant in his opposition to the Work- ers Party program. He never gave up that opposition and seems to have converted others of the present minot- ity to his views. I was at that time a member of Lovestone’s minority but split definitely and decisively on the issue of the Workers Party funning an independent campaign. I was to be the new secretary of the national farmer-labor party, having been elec- ted by the C. E. C., but I felt no am- bition to be secretary of a fake or- ganization living off the Workers Party, Thé fatmerlabor movement that we had thought Was the basis of a class party independent of La- Follette was at the Cleveland, July 4, meeting liquidated by and proven to be homogenous with the LaFollette movement. . Could the F. Fel. P. Have Been Built? It is argued by the mifiority that this liquidation was inevitable because of “neglect to organize the federated farmer-labor party.” Having been the secretary of that party and having had to go weeks without wages in spite of the fact that it eost the Work ers Patty approxitiately $7,000.00 to operate it for a year, 1 would like to inquire of the minority where ail the mGhey Was to come from with which to “organize the federated.” Perhaps some few more vague affiliations, stich a8 I have dealt with, could have beén séctited if the Workers Party had bled. itself furtlier and put up ad- ditional sums. But what of it? We would only have organized them for LaFollette anyway. Nothing could have saved the farmer-labor move- ment from liquidation into the La- Follette movement. The fatt is, some of those who are shouting loudest How about “wot having organized the federated,” blew right out of Chicago back to New York the same day after adjournment of the July 3 convention, when the national committee of the federated met and elected me secre- tary. For three weeks I was left to my Own resources. Nothing was done to take advantage of this post-con- vetition period, the most valuable time, as every organizer knows. At the end of the three weeks Foster and myself went to New York to a C. B. C. meeting and there he moved the three cardinal motions on tactics which were adopted unafimously and which served as a basis ftom which the Federated was operated until its dis- solution. Later, of course, the tac tional fight developed between Foster and Pepper. 1 joined the Pepper caticus and consistently followed the leadership of Pepper until the C. P. P. A, at Cleveland on July 4, 1924. Bulld the Only Class Party. With regard to the present situa tio. ‘The fatmef-labor movement that was, is no more. Last year it existed in the northwest as the de- seendent of the long line of American agrarian political movements. In the east it didn’t exist at all as an or- ganized movement. Whatever excuse we may have had for participating in it then, we have none whatsoever now. The minority thesis mentions the farmer-labor party of North Dako- By MAX BEDACHT. Sophistries may help in seoring a point but they do mot aid much in finding the truth. The lawyer in court is out for “points.” His desire to score poifits grows gréater as his oon- fidence in his olient’s ifinocence de- creases. Judging by this weill-estab- lished maxim, Bittelman. and his as- sodiates have a bad case to defend, But for the party, there is tod much, at stake. It cannot permit anyone to gain a reputation as 4 successful lawyer for an obViously bad case. The party must judge the facts. There ate facts of a two-fold na- tufe, Gonnésted with the question wh- der diseussion: The ones pertaining directly to the point at issué—and the ohes pertaining to the groups lined up on either of the two sides of the is- sue. First as to the points at issue, The minority maintains that if we abandon the slogan “for a farmer-labor party” we abandon thé most éffective possibility for a politi¢al united front. “Ha, there you are!” says Bittel- man. “You seé these Communists! They claim that our united front ad- tion for the protection of the foreign- bot was no political united front ac- tion.” Permit ‘me, Comrade Bittelman, to call your attention to the fact that it was the present minority that initiat- éd and orgatiized this united front ac- tion fot the protection of the foréign- born. Permit me further to show that the necessity of the workers to defend themselves against this parti- cular attack was ised by out party to attain the greater purpose; to Awaken political consciousness among these workers; to show them that this de- tense of ofie immediate interest is ofily incidental to the necessity of & greater struggle=the class struggle as a whole. Therefore, again with your permission, Comrade. Bittelman, wé poirited out that the temporary battle thé “third party alliance,fortinately, folites I Kad to secure the brought some of us. up with a round turn, ved our party from @ ser- fous mistake, F.L. P. a LaFollette Movement. It is a basic error to imagine that the farmer-labor movement was or 18 now fundamentally separate and apart from or opposed to the petty bourge- movement headed by dress the conventions, and itg a Communist ériticism of the italist system, had to wind up by vising them to organize a “¢lass farm- er-labor party.” While many showed interest in this form of organisation, nothing 28E that interest was as 6 farmerlabor move- | Follette, industrial workers, and in it established connections of the northweat farmers remembered that this was overwhelmingly farmers. Gon: ment at present when no organiza: imations of poor farmers are in favor of it, would mean the setting up of non-Communist political organizations e D My mission was to popularize Com-| ers dividual membership. And it must be ta as having preserved its indepen- membership dence from LaFollette. This is no thing short of misrepresentation. Our Workers Party organizer, Comrade Knutson, and myself organized the fartner-labor party of North Dakota, Had not Comrade Knutson kept it going by pumping oxygen gas into it, it would have long since ceased to exist even in the florid imagination of the minofity. Today I challenge the ‘minority to prove it to be any more than a paper organization. The fact remains that nothing of the flimsy farmerlabor party struc- ture has withstood the assaults of pre omer and ine most useful » We must recognize this fact and devote our , Tt is sequently to promote such a move tions of labor and scarcely any organ- based upon individual membership. Party. : Fels Ps Liquidated Follette, The broskcup ofthe, ferment an independent bed formation of thé workers for the pro- tection of the foreign-born is not suf- ficient but that there must be @ more fundamental political battle fortiation of the workers—a political party of the workers. But here Comrade Bit- telman interrupts again: “Ha! There sued against striking waterfront work- ers; and to the workers in the New England states whom we united in temporary common action against the wage cuts of the textile mills; and to the workers in West Virginia whom We united in temporary common ac-| tion against the open shop offensive | of the mine operators, we suggest to | the workers in San Francisco, to thosé in the New England states, and to those in West Virginia that outside of their immediate local, problems there is still the great general prob- lem which must unite the workers | on the Pacific with those on the At-| lantie and those on the Gulf of Mex- ico; the problem of united indepen- dent political action of all the work- ers everywhere. he minority main tains that the slogan of the farmer-| labor party supplies the element which tends to unify the immediate loeal actions on a national scale and suggests preparation for future bat- tles. All the sophistries of Comfade Bit- telman Will not absolve him from the duty of answering the question: What igs your proposal for the solution of this problem? The minority maintains that the feed of independent political action of the América proletariat can be best established in the minds of these masses if We Communists wind up all propaganda and all action in the field of political united fronts with a mod- ern version of Caté’s famous slogan! “As fot the rest Carthage must be destroyed.”"—As forthe rest, you need a political party of labor which will unite your West Virginian’s struggle with that of the San Franciscoatis and whieh will turn the fight against open shop mine operators into a struggle against the open shop government of the United States. If Bittelman says that the minority claims that the American workers can 6xercise independent political ac- tion only thru a labor party, he mere- ly ¢onstfucts a straw man. And when he knocks it down, he knocks down if not his own image, at least his own creation. Now, a few words about facts per- Page Three iscussion of Our Party’s Immediate Tasks CRITICISING OUR CRITICS. the labor party slogan: “Look here,” says Bittelman, “we have a program for the unemployed,” So wé have to be sure. But Com- rade Bittelman, there is a history at- tached to that program, a history that may throw some light on the real is- sue in the present controversy. It was the minority that pressed again and again the need of action on the problem of unemployment. To silence the persistent hammering of the minority, the majority finally adopted @ program on unemployment. And that settled—not the unemploy- ment, but the majority action on the question. Inquiries made by the Com- munist International as well as de- mands made by the minority were al- ways answered with attempts to prove that there is no problem of unemploy- ment at present. The whole issue therefore, is not so much the question of a labor party but the question of action as against mere propaganda. The minority desires to develop ac- tion out of all its slogans. The ma- jority on the other hand, solves its problems with programs. We have programs 6m a thousafid afd ote things from unemployment to the or- ganization of the ufiorganised—pro- grams and nothing but programs. But it is action that a Communist Party is organized for. And itis ac tion alofie thru which the ofganiza- tion of the revolutionists, the Commu- nists and also the revolution itself can be accomplished. READ THE DAILY WORKER. NEW BRITAIN, GONN., HANDED COMMUNISTS 85 VOTES FOR FOSTER (Spécial to The Daily Worker) NEW BRITAIN, Conn, Dec. 4— The votes for the candidates of the Workers Party in the town of New Britain were as follows:—For presi- dent, 85; for governor, 48, lieutenant governor, 47; state secretary, 46; state treasurer, 46; and comprolier, 46.—Signed, V. J. VALLEY, Party taining to the group lined up against Secretary. liquidation. whe Workers (Communist) Party?” I might as well let Comrade Bittel- man and his friends into a little sé eret of the minority. The minority has studied the literature of the Com- munist International on the United Front and with the Communist Inter- national it is of the opinion that the Communist Party is the best érganiza- tion for the miobilization of convinced revolutionists, Communists, who ac- cept the direct leadership of the Com- intern; whilé the united front on the other hand is ofie form or another of a battle line, which unites Commu- nists and non-Commutist workers in common action. That is our secret. And there is still more to it. These united front forms and slogans are not proposed by the Communit Inter- national because it has no confidence in the direct leadership of the Com- munists in those strugglés. Oh, no! But its confidence in the ability of the Communist Parties to lead does not blind it to the fact that the mass- es yet lack that confidence. The united front maneuver is a method to establish such confidence. While the tacties of the majority either presup- pose this conuuence or abandon ac- tion for mere propaganda, The first is an un-Marxian illusion; the second @ non-Communist tendency. “But,” says Comrade Bittelman, “why should we not confine ourselves to this kind of political actin such as the protection of foreign-born, ete,?” Yes, why? May I whisper another secret of the minority into your ear, Comrade Bittelman? Here it is: The minority holds with the Communist Interna- tional that all our activities in the Class struggle are not an end in them- selves, but are means to achieve cer- tain ends. One of these ends is: to be instrumental in helping the work- ers to assimilate easier the experi ences of the class struggle, It is these experiences that will revolu- tionize the struggle of the proletarian masses. The final experience out of all these partial struggles here and there teaches the masses the neces- sity of class action on ‘the political battlefield. : To get this idea dtiven home to the workers in San Francisco whom we succeeded to unite in temporary com- mon action to fight an injunction is- the “class patty,” which masses of workers aré becoming dimly cori- scious of. All our money aud energy spent on a dead farmerlabor slogan for a dead farmer-labor party, will never arouse the masses like our own party's participation directly in the everyday struggles of the worker: and poor farmers. Goodbye farme: labor party! Long Live the Workers ‘elapsed between Nov. 4 and 7, as to ‘Warrant “the change of mind” on the (Communist) Party, na ss Why don’t you uggest this permanent bat- le formation directly in the form of By NAT KAPLAN. N the last election campaign the Central Executive Committee of the Workers Party promised the workers and exploited farmers of this country, in the parfy platform, that: “The Workers Party declares its purpose to continue the struggle to mobilize the workers and exploited farmers for independent political action thru a mass farmer-labor party.” At the time a political leader of the present majority of the central execu- tive committee, Comrade Bittelman raises the question (Parties and Is- sues in the Election Campaign): “Shall the workers and poor farmers have a political party of their own, a farmerlabor party?” and then an- swers the question himself: “Yes, by all means. Without a party of their own, politics for the workers becomes a farce, It means helping other Classes—big, medium and small capi- tal—to fasten ever tighter their grip over the working masses. If the small capitalists and rich farmers want their own party, let them go to it. But the workers and poor farmers have no business in such a combina: tion. They have their own interests to defend, which are antagonistic to the interests of all capitalist groups, big, medium and little. Therefore, let us have a farmer-labor party.” The elections referred to above took place on Nov. 4, 1924. Three days later, Nov. 7, 1924, the same centra! executive committee declares (DAILY WORKER—The Results of the Elee tions): “Our chief task in the imme- diate future is not the building of such a farm strengthening and developing of the Workers Party itself as the practical leader of the masses and as the only party that represents the working class interests and fights for them.” The mrade Bittelman, who stated above: “Therefore, let us have @ farmer-labor party,” now declares: ‘We shall now have ho farmer-labor licy because there is no farmer- bor movement. We sh: Iso have no labor party slogan because such a slogan will have no dynamic appeal ad will offer no basis of struggie to the ma of workers and poor farmers. In reciting thése facts we do not in the least question the correctness of the formula: “That those who can- hot change their minds, have no What we are par- ticularly interested in at the moment is to determine whether the underly: ng causes which precipitated tho ssuance of the slog: ormerlabor party,” ‘Uterated during the three days that labor party but the |‘ g YOUR Fight FIGHT FOR POLITICAL LEADER. SHIP OF EXPLOITED MASSES! part of the majority of the central executive committee. Basis for Farmér-Labor United Front Remains. The outstanding facts which infin enced out party to adopt the slogan of “A Class Farmer-Labor Party” were as follows: (1) The necessity of applying the united front tactics of the Communist International to the existing conditions in we United States, (2) The fact that the work- ers in this country were stim sup- porting the bourgeoisie political parties and therefore, the necessity for independent political action. 48) The fact that the world war has has- tened the decline of capitalism, re- sulting in the intensification of the class struggle in the United states, thus developing the political con- sciousness of the workers and ex- ploited farmers and laying the basis for the movement for independent political action by the exploited masses. These three basic factors have not been obliterated. On the contrary they have become more acute. At its Fifth Congress, the Communist International reiterated the correct- ness of the united front tactic and mercilessly criticized deviations away froma the correct application of this tactic. In the last elections the work- efs and exploited farmers supported the bourgeoisie parties and the petty bourgeoisie “progressive” movement, Capitalism in the United States has not been revived, but on the contrary 8 suffering an acute agrarian and in- ‘ustrial crisis. This together with he clean sweep of reaction in the elections means the intensification of tuggle in this country, Policy, The very factors which our party formerly considered the incentive for the farmer-labor united front, is now utilized by the majority of the central executive committee, to prove the cor- tectness of their theses that the farmer-labor united front must be dis- Let us consider at least one facts. Our party said that a basic factor which neces- sitated the application of the farmer- labor united front was that the work- ers and exploited farmers of this country were still supporting the bourgeois political parties. The pres- ont majority of the central executive committee now deduct just the oppo- site from this fact and say that be cause the LaFollette movement i been able to absorb the former-labor party movement “by the going over of the C. P. P. A. and the Gompers ma chine into the LaFollette camp ¢ ing with them the great mass ganized worke fay