The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 6, 1924, Page 7

The Discussion on Party Tasks VARIOUS FORMS OF THE UNITED FRONT By EARL R. BROWDER, have no slogans of “For a Farmer-La- vor Party” they have therefore “aban- doned the united front”? . What is the united front? Strange and weird ideas are finding expression on this subject, and they do not all] Our Own United Front Experience. come from the ignorant and uninform-| ut it is not necessary to go across ed. For example, consider this gem] the ocean to see various forms of the from the thesis offered to the party by | united front without a trace of farmer- labor party. Im our own experience we have them. Our great defense the: minority of the C. B. C.: “If we abandon the “united front policy politically by abandoning the |campaign after the Michigan raids was slogan ‘For’a Class Farmer-Labor|a very successful appli¢ation of the Party. - fae united front tactic, it was a political united frent, and it was not only suc- cessful in its immediate aims but it What does this mean? It means that our minority is revising the con- also brought great political advantages to our party.. Our campaign for relief ception of the Communist Internation- al on the united front. We always thought, and the Comintern said, that|of the Russian famine was another united front that mobilized great masses under our leadership, accom- the “farmer-labor party” slogan was one phase of,the united front tactic; plished specific aims, and brought un- measured political gains, with a suc- the minority says No!, the united front slogan is but a phase of the farmer-labor party. It would be easy | cess that was almost spectacular. Our to understand the statement if it said,| campaign for the protection of the “If we abandon the united front policy | foreign-born - workers was another then we must abandon the farmer-j very successful united front effort, labor slogan.” That is a truism. Butjadding greatly to the prestige of our to say that by dropping one passing| party, widening our contacts, and phase of the united front campaign | bringing new circles of workers under we thereby abandon the united front}our influence. In all of these, the idea itself, is to betray a fundamental | most successful of our efforts in the misconception of the , united front.|line of the united front, there was There is infinite variety in the appli-| nothing of.a farmer-labor party, yet cation of the united front; it is not,] all were political in nature. most certainly, confined in the} The -campaigns above mentioned straight-jacket of farmer-laborism. How is the United Front Applied Else- where? Perhaps we have something to learn about the united front from. other countries. What are the tactics of Communists in other countries? Do Communists everywhere stand for farmer-labor parties? Only to ask the question is to ex- pose the absurdity of it. Nowhere in the world do Communists make the}1924, we had been building for La- united front mean “labor party” and|?ollette and not for the class strug- nothing else. And only where the |gte. Communists are faced with establish-| Why should that particular appli- ed labor parties has the united front} >ation of the united front, the labor any connection at all with the term |» arty phase of it, which was the least of “labor party.” But the united front | successful in its practical and organ- tactic in Germany, in France, and in| ‘zational aspects, be taken by. the mi- Europe generally, seems to be quite |nority as the only form of the united effective without this “magic” slogan.|*ront on the political field? Why They do not seem to miss the “labor|1o they ignore and belittle our other party” in Germany. experiences in applying the political How is the united front tactic ap-| mited front? It is because their case plied? How is it crystallized into or-j's so weak, their effort to breathe life were successful. They achieved some measuré of practical success, and all the gains that came out of them were gains for the working class and for the Workers Party. Our farmer-labor campaign, however, altho we succeed- ed by great effort in drawing political ‘gains from it, was not such an un- qualified success. The farmer-labor parties that we were instrumental in building, so we soon found in July, our farmer-labor party tactic shows us that we initiated it only on the basis of the fact that there existed a mass movement among the workers and poor farmers, a movement in which it was our duty to participate, to drive constantly towards a clearer class position, to seek to establish leadership over it. We did not devel- op this tactic in the form of a principle that it is the fundamental task of a Communist Party to create non-Com- munist Parties—and this must be clearly remembered. Now, however, the fact is obvious that the farmer-labor party Jonah has been swallowed up by the LaFollette whale, and the Workers Party can hardly afford to be swallowed up in the process of becoming an emetic. The existent farmer-labor parties, all of them more or less LaFolletteist in ideology in their best days, have now become part and parcel of the Wis- consin Messiah's baggage. They have followed the siren call of the bour- geois leadership which seems to be headed in the direction of a third “progressive” party. There is no mass demand at this time for a “class farmer-labor party”! But the comrades of the minority, who have committed the amazing mistake of elevating the tactic of the farmer- ‘abor party to a Communist principle, ind give everyone the impression that the united front manifests itself in America only in the form of the farm- er-labor party, maintain that whether or not there is a mass demand for it, we, the Workers (Communist) Party @ant one, we need one, we cannot do without one—and by God, we’re go- ing to form one even if there is no one in it but ourselves! This is no exaggeration, since a prominent mem- ber of the minority plainly stated in the national committee of the. Young Workers’ League, that he was in. fa- vor of forming a farmer-labor party even if it contained only 5,000 workers. And so this is what these comrades propose to do. We, the Communist Party, are to step out of our own garb, dress our sleeves with a red (or will it be a pink ?) bandana, call our- selves a mass-class-farmer-labor party, unite with each other, and shout to the world that we have achieved the united front. We will then be able to hang out our shingle, and invite the masses of workers into our new ballroom so that they gan get a danc- she is far more mild and innocuous than you think we are. We know that you think we cannot dance, that we want to lead you in new-fangled steps, but surely there is no danger in danc- ing with that harmless ‘mass farmer- labor party’ sitting there and looking at you so invitingly. Just walk over; she’s quite lonesome . . .” Talk about your improper political dancing! Why, we would be running a political brothel! These comrades are, if only objec- tively, disappointed. Communists, They have no faith in the charms of the Communist’ Party, to continue the analogy. They think we are too un- couth to attract the masses; that we, as a Communist Party, are unable to assume the leadership of the working masses without the medium of a half- way-house (to. mix the metaphor), a disguise, a piece of political mum mery. They are disappointed with the failure of the Workers Party to maintain its leadership over those beautiful—altho, unfortunately, nen- existent—600,000 workers who were supposed to haye been so cleverly maneuvered into the good old feder- ated. They bemoan the loss of the workers who were supposed to flock to St. Paul, but instead ran to Cleve- land. And they, who are so anxious to be- little the vote polled by our own can- didate, and perhaps secretly envy the juicy 4,000,000 polled by LaFollette, probably wonder if we can’t beat La- Follette at his own game. Instead of labelling capitalist politics “progres- sive politics, they want to label the Communist Party ‘the mass farmer- labor party’.” The writer has faith in the ability of the Communist Party of America, the Workers Party, to lead the mass- es of workers and poor farmers into struggles against the capitalist class on the basis of real, concrete, burn- ing issues that confront them every day. I have confidence in the cor- rectness of our program, in its ability to rally the masses to the banner of struggle at the call of the united front on the basis of daily demands. I be- lieve that the comrades of the Central Executive Committee majority—and in turf, the overwhelming majority of the party—do not propose to tie red bandanas around our sleeves and call ourselves another party that will appear prettier to the workers, that at the Frankfort conference called to resist the Ruhr irtfvasion, a_ confer- ence called by the German shop coun- cils under the inspiration and leader- ship of the Communists, and uniting the workers from below for struggle on a specific and burning issue. An- other example of an attempt of this nature, one which failed in its organ- izational phase but brought great gains of an educational nature, was the united front of the transport work- ers-against war, against Fascism, and against the white terror, at the Berlin conference of 1923, between the Rus- sian transport unions and the Amster- dam transport workers federation headed by Fimmen. Another applica- tion of the united front was the coun- cils of action in England, to prevent the threatened war against Russia. Still another application of the united front is now being extensively applied thruout Europe and Asia, in the “Hands Off China” movement. Will are so completely without concrete evidence of” actual conditions that justify their slogan of “For a Farmer- Labor Party,” ‘that they are forced to muster as their only weapons the gen- eral arguments and authority for the united front and then, arbitrarily, as- sert that every argument for the unit- ed front is an argument for the labor party. The minority is wrong. Their at- tempts to revise the theory of the united front are doomed to failure. The labor party movement as distinc‘ from both the W. P. on the one hand and the LaFollette movement on the other, is dead, but the united front tactic lives in all its multitude and variety of forms, all of them rich in political opportunity for the Commu- nists of America once we have welded our party into a firm, homogeneous, monolithic party, realistically apprais- ing the actual conditions of the class ing partner. “Come on in,” we will say, “and you will not have to dance with us. You can dance with that ‘mass farmer-labor party’ over.there. She is not so rough as we are; her step is gentler, her dancing program holds no difficulties in the way, and will- serve as a substitute for. the Workers Party, or as a medium for seducing them into our movement. And I do not think that the rank and file of our party is as yet com- - posed to tired radicals—or disappoint- ed Communists. LESSONS OF THE McDONALD MEETING By MARTIN ABERN. July 2nd! The farmer-labor party cam- paign is on! The first big gun after the June 17 convention in St. Paul nominated McDonald and Bouck is be- ing fired at the first mass meeting in Chicago. The hall is packed, many standing. There is cheering and shouting; horns blowing; whistles screaming. For what? Presumably in support of the farmer-labor campaign. Very good, so far as that goes. to listen to in the name of a move- ment for independent political action by the workers. Speeches by Work- ers Party members—hardly distin- guishable from the farmer-laborités. The real Communist guts.and spirit were not-.there. All thru the evening the thousands of Communists, as a matter of discipline, made great ap- plause—but there was no real en- thusiasm for the mockery of class political action by the workers. struggle, and participating in every battle of the workers on the basis of their immediate burning issues. ganized struggle? An example is seen } into a dead slogan is so hopeless, they ON DISAPPOINTED COMMUNISTS By MAX SHACHTMAN. When the wide west was still young, towns used to spring up i prag-od due ners.” Of course, the men still re- mained men, but the not-quite-satis- factory illusion was created by the unhandkerchiefed men that they were dancing with women. . “Today” (as Comrade Engdahl would say), we are confronted with a somewhat similar situation in our own party. In their anxiety to establish a g 2 H f s z | Hie i : : [ | Workers Party Members Compose Farmer-Labor Audience. But—the hall is packed with whom? By Workers Party members and a few close sympathizers. The meeting is held under the auspices of the farmer-labor campaign committee— but every member of the committee is also a member of the Workers Par- ty because no one else would serve. And this huge demonstration, staged very effectively like a good theatrical performance or a circus, by the Work- ets Party and supported only by the Workers Party and its close sym- pathiezrs—had the result of promot- ing, not Communist principles, but farmer-laborism. Speeches! Speeches by farmer-labor candidates and by members of the Workers Party. Speeches, most of them weak, flabby, jinane, filled with reformist-capitalist ideas; sickening stuff for Communists Covering the Lion with a Lamb’s ‘ Cloak. I am sure that every comrade in that meeting must have been appalled at the idea of continuing this stuff thru the period of a parliamentary campaign. It was not struggle and progress that was represented at this meeting; it was weakness. And this very first meeting was a concrete and singularly outstanding example, typ- ieal of the national situation, of what the movement for a farmer-labor par- ty had, in fact, become—the Workers Party in disguise, kidding itself that it was outside of its skin. Worse than that, it was itself falling into the slough of confusion of the farmer- labor movement. “We attempted to save a farmer-labor soul which didn’t exist and in the process we nearly lost our own Communist soul.” And meanwhile, where were the (Continued on next page.) A RR SORE EE EN eae TRIE ERA ELSIE Ra AEEA RO ere RR