The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 15, 1924, Page 3

sthe petty bourgeois Monday, December 15, 1924 THE DAILY WORKER Page Three Discussion of Our Party’s Immediate Tasks HUNGARIAN CONVENTION CAPTURED * BY FARMER-LABOR PARTY IDEA By ALEXANDER BITTELMAN, (A Report to the Central Executive Committee of the Workers Party on the Convention of the Hungarian Section of the Party.) F there was any additional proof needed of the menacing nature of the minority the convention of the Hungerian section of the Workers Party supplied this proof. For nearly four hours the convention debated the thesis of the C, BE. C. and of the minority. Nearly every- one who spoke, with the excep- tion’ of one delegate, seemed to be dominated by one idea—namely, that if we drop the farmer-labor party slogan we thereby sign the death warrant of the Communist movement in America, It seemed as if-the farm- erlabor party idea had become an obsession with the comrades who cannot imagine the further develop- ment of our movement without this slogan. In one of the resolutions adopted by the Fifth Congress of the Comin- tern we find the following idea ex- pressed: That our struggle against pacifist illu- sions dominating at present the minds of large sections of labor thruout the world, is bound to be successful pro- vided the Communist parties them- selves. do not become contaminated with these very samd illusions, The impression forced upon me by the debate at the Hungarian convention was that at least some sections of our party are becoming contaminated with such illusions, That this is a menace to our party everyone will admit. Some Peculiar Arguments of the Minority, There is no need here for going into detail of the report of the cen- tral executive committee as well as of the report made in the name of the minority by Comrade Gitlow. It is necessary, however, to relate some of the features of the arguments used by Comrade Gitlow. Comrade Gitlow resentd very much the charge of opportunism directed by the central executive committe against the minor- ity for its policy of emasculating the Workers Party and of building a sub- stitute for it. In reply to this charge - Comrade Gitlow advised the Hungar- fan convention to examine the per- sonnel of the majority and minority of the central executive committee. , To assist the convention in this examination of personal records, Comrade Gitlow volunteered a bit of information. He said the minority is composed of comrades of long stand- ing in the labor movement, people who have sacrificed for the movement, have served prison terms for their ideas, and have thereby proven their fitness for leadership in the American Communist Party. I do not recall whether Comrade Gitlow volunteered any information on the record of the members of the majority, But the conclusion to be drawn from his state- ment was that the members of the majority of the central executive com- mittee do not possess the virtues at- tributed by him to the minority, at least not in the same measure, and therefore the contentions of the cen: tral executive committee must not be taken seriously. Another very peculiar argument used by Comrade Gitlow in the debate was the proposal of the minority to retain the slogan for a class farmer- labor party and carry on an intensive campaign for such a party also finds its justification from the experiences of the Russian Communist Party. He said, the Russian Communist Party initiated a movement for the organi- zation of Soviets. Why did the Rus- sian party'do it? Why did the Rus- sian party build non-Communist, non- partisan political bodies, such as Soviets? The answer is, because the Russian party knew that by means of these Soviets it will be able to mobil- ize large masses of workers and poor farmers, organize them around itself for revolutionary struggle against capitalism. The American party has the same duty to perform in the United States. It, therefore, must create non-partisan political bodies in ‘corder to achieve the above end. Con- “ sequently, * delegate who the Workers Party of America must carry on a campaign for a farmer-labor party, The above arguments were, of course, not the only ones used by rade Gitlow. There were many of the stock arguments that are ening the shelves of the minority ives. When, however, a represen- of the minority finds it neces- resort to such arguments as those rélated above it would prove that his cause is in a very bad way. And so it is. But the majority of the Hun- garian convention was so obses: with the farmer-labor idea and with many more fears and prejudices which I am going to touch upon later that it decided overwhelmingly to support the thesis of the minority. I might as well point out that there were at the convention quite a number of delegates (between 5 and 8) that ab- stained from voting altogether. The rest of the convention voted for the minority resolution except for on \ dared to raise his yoice in favor of the position of the central executive 1 wish to remark that 4t really re- quired some courage to do wo, Rarer committee, And in passing Resolution on Report of C, E, C, The resolution adopted by the con- vention is already, published in tne party press. The following is the resolution on the report of the central executive committee submitted to the Hungarian convention by the repre- sentative of the central executive committee: “The convention of the Hungarian section accepts the report of the cen- tral executive committee submitted to it by Comrade A. Bittelman and pledges its full support to the pregram of Bolshevizing the party as outlined in the program of the central execu- tive committee, particularly the sec- tion which calls for an ideological struggle against all opportunistic ten- dencies in the party. “The convention of the Hungarian section is in full agreement with the central executive committee on the necessity of concentrating the efforts of the party and every section of it upon the upbuilding of the strength of the party in the basic industries thru the reorganization of the party on the shop nuclei basis. “The convention is also in full agreement with the central executive committee on the necessity of each language section functioning in clos- est contact with and under the super- vision of the general party organiza- tion, “The convention recommends to the Hungarian branches of the party a thoro discussion of the theses of the central executive committee and of the minority in order to participate intelligently in the solution of the problems immediately confronting the party.” This resolution received only one vote at the convention, not because of its merits but because of the defi- nite line-up effected by the minority even before the convention came into session. One of the Hungarian com- rades remarked to me hours before the discussion on the report began that the central executive committee Position will be defeated overwhelm- ingly at the convention. Before proceeding to the other phases of the convention I wish to make one brief comment on one par- ticular section of the minority resolu- tion which was adopted by the con- vention. It is section 3, point c. It reads: “The complete reorganization of the industrial department of the party in order that it may carry out the tasks laid down for it by the R. IL, U. in its recent decision.” Now, as this thing stands, one would get the impression that the cotivention had before it a special re- port of the industrial department, that the convention discussed that report and found that there was something wrong with the department, and was, therefore, in favor of reorganizing it for more effective work As a matter of fact the convention hardly touched upon the industrial department of tne party. Very little if anything has been said about the industrial depart- ment. No proposals whatever Were submitted for making the department a more effective instrument in the hands of the party. In other words, the convention neither said nor did anything to justify the insertion oi such a paragraph in the resolution. And yet it is in there. And for no other reason, so it seems to me, than to insinuate something which no one had the courage openly to state. Such practices, whatever their intrinsic merits, will hardly contribute to make our party a better party. Comrade Amter Raises Issue of Pepper. Altho not officially delegated by the central executive committee, Comrade Amter appeared before the Hungarian convention and delivered a speech This rather irregular procedure is ex- plained by the “special invitation” extended to Comrade Amter by the convention. This however is not the main point. The important thing is what Comrade Amter told the conven tion. And what he told the conven- tion in so many words was that since Comrade Pepper was no longer in our midst the Workers Party has been steadily going to the dogs, and that he hopes and is convinced that Com- rade Pepper will some day again be in our ranks and will then lead us to the final victory over capitalism. There was, as the report goes, “Tre- mendous applause and great demon- stration.” The point that I wish to raise here is, on what ground will Comrade Amter and the minority jus- tify the raising of this issue in the party? By what arguments will they prove that such speeches as Comrade Amter’s are contributing to the wel- fare of the Workers Party? Faction- alism as a rule is most rampart in pre-convention periods, but it would seem that there must be a limit to it somewhere. Organization and Activities of Hungarian Section. The field of Communist propaganda and organization among the Hungar- jan speaking workers of the United States is very large. There are tens of thousands of Hungarian workers employed in the basic industries, such others) is still a very ey organt- zation. Its membership does not run sbove 600, The main strength of our Regulations for Mass Membership Meetings In accordance with the recent decision of the Central Executive Com- mittee, mass membership meetings will be held upon the indicated dates in the following cities for the purpose of ical theses of the Workers Party: CITY DATE New York Sunday, Dec, 28 Chicago Sunday, Dec, 28 Detroit .. “Sunday, Dec. 28 Cleveland .. .Sunday, Dec. 28 Minneapolis Sunday, Dec, 28 New Haven Boston ... Philadelphia Buffalo Pittsburgh... ‘Thursday, Jan. 1 Sunday, Jan. 4 Sunday, Jan, 4 Sunday, Jan. 4 Sunday, Jan. 4 James P, Cannon William Z. Foster Earl R. Browder Alex. Bittelman William F, Dunne James P. Cannon James P. Cannon Willlam Z. Foster Earl R. Browder Alex. Bittelman discussion of the proposed main polit- SPEAKERS c. EC. MINORITY Cc. E. Ruthenberg Max Bedacht J. Louls Engdahl Jay Lovestone Benjamin Gitlow C. E. Ruthenberg c. E. Ruthenberg Benjamin Gitlow Max Bedacht Jay Lovestone These meetings shall be held directly under the auspices of the Central Executive Committee and organized by the respective Committees. Organizer of the Workers Party. District Executive In each city the chairman of the meeting shall be the District In opening the meetings, the District organizers shall read these regulations. In New York, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Minneapolis, Boston, Phila- delphia, Buffalo, Pittsburgh and New Haven, the meetings shall begin at 2:00 o'clock in the afternoon. They shall be opened by the representative of the Central Executive Committee with an by an hour’s speech by the designated representative of the minority. the debate shall be opened to the membership. hour’s speech . This shall be followed Then A recess shall be taken from 5:30 to 7:00 p. m., when the debate will be resumed. At not later than 10:00 p. m the representative of the minority shall make his summing up speech, not to exceed 30 minutes In length The C. E. C. representative shall then close the debate with a 30 minute speech. After this, without delay, a vote of the membership shall be taken upon the theses before the meetings. In the debates every effort shall the fullest opportunity for expression. be exerted to give the rank and file Speeches from the fioor shall not ex- ceed 10 minutes in length unless extension of time is granted by the meeting. Speakers shall be alternated. No two speakers representing one point of view shall speak consequently so long there are speakers representing other points of view demanding the floor. In organizing the meetings care shall be taken that no one be admitted except good standing members of the Workers Party and the Young Workers League. the Workers Party shall be admitted mitted to vote. Members of the Young Workers League who are not members of to the meetings but shall not be per- At all the scheduled membership meetings there shall be a collection taken up to defray the expenses of the meetings, including speakers’ rail- road fare, hall rent, etc. A letter shall be sent to all the branches of the Workers Party inform- ing them of these regulations for the party discussion mass membership meetings. CENTRAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, William Z. Foster, Chairman, . CG. E. Ruthenberg, Executive Secretary. in the basic industries of the country. The need for the reorganization on the shop nuclei basis as well as the conditions for the success of such re- organization are very strong in the Hungarian section. There were present at the conven- tion 24 delegates representing Hun- garian-speaking branches of the party. 2 delegates from the National Hun- garian Propaganda Committee of the Young Workers League, and 7 fra- ternal delegates representing the Hungarian Bureau and various benev- olent and fraternal organizations among the Hungarian workers. From the report of the bureau it could be seen that the Hungarian sec- tion participated in every political campaign of the party and in some places quite effectively. But the major activities of the section on the ueld of Hungarian work were the activi- ties of the section among the benevo- lent and fraternal organizations among the Hungarian-speaking work- ors. In one of these organizations having a very large membership our Hungarian comrades were able to win the practical leadership which was of tremendous importance to the activities of our Hungarian section. The convention devoted a large por- tion of its time to outlining political and organizational means for the ex- ‘tension of the influence of the mun- garian section among other fraternal organizations, particularly among those which are dominated by petty bourgeois leadership. , The convention adopted an exten- sive plan of education designed to Bolshevize the Hungarian section. It is a good program so far as programs go. From the debate it was apparent that this was not the first program of the kind adopted by the Hungarian section, only it was not as yet put into effect. There is no reason why the incoming bureau should not be able to develop this program of edu- cation on a really large and effective seale, particularly since it has for its service a daily newspaper, the New Blore, This Hungarian organ of the party enjoys a good repntation among large sections of Hungarian speaking workers. By proper organization measures the New Blore should prove an excellent means not only for gain- ing influence among the masses but also for Bolshevizing the Hungarian section itself. Of the other problems discussed by the convention I must mention the problem of Communist work among working class women and among the working class youth. Programs have been adopted for each of these phases of our activity. We must, however, impress the Hungarian comrades as well as the other sections of the party that our work among working class women must be concentrated mainly on the women employed in shops. The usual practice is to devote most of the attention to housewives, which should not be the case. And inas- much as Communist work is carried on among housewives it should be linked up with our Communist activi- ties among the women employed in shops and factories. The convention elected a bureau of nine workers to carry on the work of the organisation. It might be well to point out in this connection that there was a strong sentiment at the conven- tion to bar paid officials of the organi- zation from being elected members of the bureau. This sentiment, what- ever it basic reasons, is not a very healthy sign. The representative of the central executive committee ex- plained to the delegates that to be a paid employe of the party in itself is no crime to be punished, but that if some paid officials do not deserve to be elected on the bureau they cer- tainly are not fit to hold any respon- sible position in the organization. The convention accepted the point of view of the central executive com- mittee as expressed in a special resolution. However, the leading comrades in the Hungarian section would do well to examine and remove the causes producing such a senti- ment. The Hungarian section ofthe party has before it a great field for work. By paying more attention to the basic industries, by assisting the party in the process of reorganization on the shop nuclei basis, by Bolshevizing the minds of its own membership, and by living in closer contact with the life ‘of the general party organization, the next convention of the Hungarian sec- tion will undoubtedly register greater achievements for the Communist movement in America, THREE INTERESTING ARTICLES. By T. J, O'FLAHERTY. (E Derember issue of the Work- ers Monthly can be read from gover to cover with benefit by the members of our party as well as by non-members, but there are three ar- ticles in this number that should prove of unusual interest during the period of intense party discussion. ‘The articles referred to are by Com- rades Foster, Ruthenberg and Bittel-|title man, and discuss the policies of the|to Workers Party. Foster and berg appears to be still hugging a political fantasy. Foster and Bittel- man figuratively scan the horizon for @ glimpse of farmer-labor party senti- ment and cannot even see a chin whisker, while according to Ruthen- berg, embatteld farmers “dirt” and otherwise form @ black cloud on the landscape. ‘ ec @ Enough could be written about the of Comrade Ruthenberg’s article fill several columns of space on an|the DAILY WORKER: “Is the move- z |dcuar" Pais tite class political action inthe mind of a “What is the Work- ers Party if not a class par- ty?” Precisely! What have we been cuddling to our bosoms for so many years? The theme of Comrade Ruthenberg’s article is that there is only one form of working class polit- ical action and that is thru a so-called farmer-labor united front in election campaigns, The minority can squirm the question Communist, j;and try to evade this indictment, but not even so clever a journalistic painter of images as Comrade Robert Minor can succeed in hiding this is- sue behind a fog bank of phrases. 0. ee Comrade Foster’s article is entitled: “The significance of the elections.” It ‘explains the absorption of the td¥mer-labor party movement by the progressive movement or the LaFol- lette movement asit is popularly known, LaFollette being its princlpal standard bearer and ideological leader. It is pretty bourgeois minded and quite happy plugging along toward the swamp of illusions behind the petty bourgeois “Indian guide,” LaFollette. Foster tells how the central executive committee decided to drop the dead farmer-labor party and the just as dead farmer-labor party slogan. He »%es on to give a brief and lucid his- tory of the reason why our party adopted the slogan of “For a mass- farmer-labor party” in 1922, When this slogan aroused the enthusiasm of the workers, when it was a fighting slogan, that enabled the Communists to make contact with large masses of workers and secure leadership over them it was a Communist slogan. When that slogan no longer arouses the interests of the workers, when “it leaves them cold,” so to speak, it has no value for the Communist Party, so 6 You will gather from Foster's ar- ticle that slogans in themselves are not sacred things to be worshipped as an ignorant Russian peasant would worship an ikon, or an Irish catholic would prostrate himself before the statute of a saint. They are means to an end, not merely ends in them- selves. Foster does not believe in set- ting up a cordon sanitaire of alleged progressives around the Workers Par- ty in order to inveigle the workers into our red parlor as the clever spider would seduce the fly. While it is true that you can catch more fles with molasses than with vinegar, it is also true that the Workers Par- ty is not in the fiy-catching business. It is in the business of perfecting a political party for the overthrow of capitalist rule. To accomplish that purpose revolutionary workers and not human fifes are needed. Our lead- ers must not be spiders. They must show their Communist faces to the working class. Another article, which goes more completely into our whole labor party policy than any of the others, is one entitled, “In retospect” by Alexander Bittelman. Comrades Bittelman and Foster take the same position, in the present controversy in the party. They agree that the farmer-labor party is dead and no longer serves the pur- pose of helping us to build up the Workers (Communist) Party, Bittel- man, in brief, points out that we had @ farmer-labor party policy when there was a farmer-labor party movement that is none of our business as Com- munists to create something out of nothing, to create two parties where one exists now, in other words to build a party dual to and in competition with the Workers Party. Aside from the financial drain on our party mem- bership of maintaining a useless po- litical vermiform appendix, the effects on their morale would lead to dis- aster. ee (6 Bittelman quotes from the various theses and C. E. C. statements writ- ten on the subject since 1922. He analyzes our united front with Fitz- patrick and our orientation towards Mahoney, from Chicago to St. Paul, then towards reality and the waging of an election campaign under the banner of Communism. The last paragraph in Bittelman’s article is herewith quoted to relieve the fears of those who believe with Comrade Ruth. enberg and his minority faction that the central executive committee hag dropped the united front tactic be- cause it has spurned the illusion that an entente with Sidney Hillman, Mahoney, or Morris Hillquit is the kind of a united front that the Com- munist International has ';4d down as the basic tactic of its various sec- tions. Bittelman finishes his article with this paragraph: “We shall now have no labor policy because there is no farmer-labor party movement. We shall have no labor party slogan, be- cause such a slogan will now have no dynamic appeal and will offer no basis of struggle to the mi of workers and poor farmers. But we will have united front campaigns on the political field (not only in elec tions) as well as on the economic field, on the basis of the immediate struggles of the working masses. Thus we shall butid our our Workers Party into a powerful mass Com- munist Party.” tah seh, Of course, it is impossible to give Ce ete saves Sen Ramee Mee eee ame, of ents front move- the contents of the December issue of the Workers Monthly in a brief re- view. To do justice to anyone of the articles would require at least two columns. The three articles referred to are selected because of the tremen- dous value to the party of the present discussion on the farmer-labor issue. This question is followed with keen interest by radical workers not yet in our party. Both sides are entitled to and are given unlimited freedom and opportunity for discussion with- in party bounds of discipline by the C. BE. C. Ruthenberg’s article should be read carefully and so should the articles of Comrades Foster and Bit- telman. Our members will thus be able to form their own opinions as to which policy is the better for the Workers Party to adopt. The writer has not doubt but the overwhelming bulk of our membership will repudiate farmer-laborism, pe rat a a -_ oe No Disagreement Here! We diacuss the future tasks of the party preiiminary to a decision. After a decision is rendered we march forward unitedly to carry It into effect. In all this the DAILY WORK- ER lends a BIG hand, Today it constitutes our forum for dis- cussion. Tomorrow it will help to carry the decision made into life. We can not get along with- out our daily. And if you are sincere in your desire to keep it, yout! HELP INSURE IT FOR 1925. INSURANCE POLI- CIES ARE ISSUED. Denomina- tion: $10, $5 and $1. Make it your policy to BUY A POLICY, THE WORKERS PARTY? William 2. Foster, Chairman Cc. E. Ruthenberg, Executive Secretary WILL THE MINORITY EVER LEARN? By JOSEPH R. BOOTH. 'HE minority thesis is quite aston- ishing, judging it in the light of evidence staring at the face of our gross, expensive, experimental failure in the past, by wasting most of the party's energy in building the “farmer- labor party,” which was inflicted body and soul with LaFolletteism. What brand of a farmer-labor party is now possible? Without the LaFol lettes and Gomperses it becomes num. reically insignificant, and with them it forms a rotten, petite-bourgeois dump to dump the discontent of farmer-la- bor, and it is bad enough to contend with such an evil when it exists, with- out trying to create it, especially now when the working masses don’t hit this trail. It is, then, not in the least a natural process, but only a mechani cal absurdity. Yes! It is high time to sober up and to state the exact truth that while our party is still weak our influence is not enough to bring about a farmer-labor party. On the other hand when we get powerful we may not need such a party. Furthermore, to ripen the working masses politically does not require to play with the tragic-comical role of leading them step by step, first into a farmer-labor party, then into the 8, P., S. L. P., proletarian party and fin- ally the Workers Party ... 60 long as we possess @ real effective method of bringing them under our leadership, by firmly participating in their everyday bitter political and eco- nomic struggles, In political election campaign, we must come out with our own full pro- gram, under our own name; to do otherwise means misrepresentation to the workers, the losing of our iden- tity, and bringing chaos in our own ranks, All we have to do is to observe the supreme lessons in a comparison of our last splendid political campaign, carried on under our own revolution- ary banner, and that of the farmemis- bor party reformistic agitational bunk. Of our young party, a good many members had to be expelled forgoing wrong, over our experienced political policy, and many others got princi- pally loose and demoralized. 8o for the sake of Communism let's stop the rainbow chasing for political side- kickers and instead, centralize all party activities into fruitful channels, that will raise the prestige of our cause, and in the meantime strength- en our own Workers Party! “PROGRAMS” FOR ACTION— WORDS FOR DEEDS! By MAX BEDACHT. COMRADE CANNON in one of his recent contributions to the party discussion, digs down deep into mud to get epithets to hurl at the minority. All the veneer of gentleness he wears as a rule falls off him and instead of the Communist, discussing with other Communists, there stands re- vealed the bullying brawler. There is little to be said about such “convinc- ing” arguments. They answer them- selves. If the minority were convinced that their opponents are crooks it would meet them as accusers, not in a party dt jon, but in a party trial. But 8 our opinion of the majority is that they are totally unfit for leader- ship over our party, we meet them in discussion before the membership and call upon the latter to judge not their political honesty but the politi- cal service of the majority. The issue in the present discussion is action versus propaganda, cam- paigns versus “programs.” The issue is whether the party shall continue to be a political party, or whether it should become an educational league. Labor Party Welcome as Long as We Only Talk About it. The labor party issue was welcome as a basis for a campaign by all ac long as this campaign confined itself to the introduction of resolutions in trades unions demanding the endorse- ment of the idea of a labor party. But when this educational campaign was to be turned into one of action, when the party was called upon to take lead not only in talking about the labor party but in actually form- ing it, then the trouble began. The majority is at present engaged in proving that the labor party as such is a bad, a dangerous, a damn- able thing. But in his report to the Profintern, made by Comrade Foster in May of this year, thought so much about the idea of a labor party that he even robbed the Work- ers (Communist) Party of the credit of having initiated a movement for it, He thought so much of it at that time, that he took full credit for the Trade Union Educational League for having initiated the labor party idea. Foster even takes credit for the July confer- ence in Chicago in 1923 and main- tains in that report that the T. U, E. L, succeeded in getting represen- tatives of 700,000 workers to assemble on that memorable occasion, But the achievements of the T, U. BH. L. in Moscow turn into crimes of the minority in the U. 8. Why so? Be cause up to the conference tho present majority could subscribe to all of the actions of the party. The present majority carried out these actions in ment in Chicago, in which our party and its members took the initiative for all the measures propagated by our party, in the trade unions. But the credit for these activities fell as a ripe fruit into the pockets of the reactionary leaders of the Chicago Federation of Labor, and earned for them the fame of extreme progres- sivism. Now, in this conference of July 8, 1923, the executive committee of the party demanded a change, It demanded that our party, the Work- ers, the Communist Party should take its rightful place as the leader of the movement. It demanded that the party come out from under its cover of Fitzpatrick’s progressivism and operate as the Workers, the Commun- ist Party. No one in the party closed his eyes the the fact that this step might lead to a confilct with Fite- patrick. The ones that dreaded this conflict most were the comrades that were responsible for the united front in Chicago, and that knew that they had “won” the Chicago Federation of Labor thru Fitzpatrick, but that they had made no attempt to hold Fitzpat- rick by winning the Chicago Federa- tion of Labor, the rank and file unions. Foster condemned that conflict with Fitzpatrick and preferred a confilct with the executive committee of the Workers (Communist) Party. From then on the present majority began its struggle for power in the party. And the outstanding reason for this struggle for power was, thet the Foster group wanted to be sure that in a similar situation like that of July, 1923, there would be no Com- munist executive committee of our party that would force Foster to break faith with some Fitzpatrick. Majority’s Activities Consist In Passing of Resolutions. As long as our Trade Union Edu- cational League confined itself to the introduction and the passing of reso lutions for this and that the league met comparatively little opposition. The outward acceptance of such reso- lutions even helped many an arch ree actionary labor leader to get crowned with a halo of progressivism. The trouble only started when the Work- ers (Communist) Party did its duty and initiated action in the place of mere propaganda. Our majority is go stuck on the idyllic days of old, when we introduced resolutious galore but lived in peace, that they insist on Kkill- ing the last remnant of any scale activity that the party has in- itiated in the past. 2 To achieve this end the majority must discredit the minority, This they cannot do without trying prove that the minority not only poses a wrong policy, but that (Continued on page 4)