The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 29, 1924, Page 4

Page Four THE DAILY WORKE R Monday, December 29, 1924 Discussion of Our Party’s Immediate Tasks. WHY IS THE MINORITY SILENT ON THE THIRD PARTY ALLIANCE? By EARL R. BROWDER. N the minority thesis there are two great gaps, two tremendous silenc- es, which speak louder than words. The minority does not say if our Judgment in July, that the farmer- labor movement had been swept into the LaFollette movement, was correct or incorrect. And the minority DOES NOT SAY WHETHER, THEY BE- LIEVE THAT C. I. WAS RIGHT OR WRONG IN ITS DECISION ON THE PROPOSED THIRD PARTY ALLI- ANCE. ‘When pressed to the wall on this point, spokesmen for the minority say “That is not an issue.” They mean, they wish it were not an issue. Comrade Zinoviev thought it an is- sue important enough for him to give it a special section in his report to the Fifth Congress. Following all good Communist practice, Zinoviev reviewed this important decision and rendered judgment as to whether it had proved a good or a bad decision. He said: “We must also combat some di- gressions to the right in the Amerl- can movement; these digressions made their appearance with the third party, the LaFollette party; the tendency to form a common election platform with this petty- bourgeois movement The executive committee decided to op- pose these tactics, and as events have shown we were quite right.” This, one of the most important de- cisions ever rendered for the Ameri- can movement, was opposed by both the minority and majority. Even after the decision had been rendered and carried into effect, members of both majority and minority expressed themselves as being convinced that the decision was wrong. But experi- ence proved that the decision was right. The majority, in writing its thesis, NEW YORK EXPERIENCES By CHARLES KRUMBEIN. District Organizer, District No. 2. N September, 1923, a conference was | called in the name of mostly mem- bers of unions (W. P. not mentioned on call) where F. F. L. P. was organiz- ed. Delegates from forty local un- thought it absolutely essential that the party must know what our final judgment on this decision was. And we came to the unanimous conclusion that the decision was right. We said so in the thesis. We admitted our previous error. But the minority is silent. It is neither hot nor cold. It neither ap- | proves nor disapproves. It says “this is not an issue.” But the Communist International thought it was an issue.. Comrade | Zinovievy thought it important enough for a special report. Our party thinks it important to know whether the “digressions to the right” in the American party, about which Com- rade Zinoviev spoke, are to be repeat- ed. The party has a right to know what the minority, which asks for |the leadership of the party, thinks about these “digressions to the |right.” But the minority is silent. The reason why the minority is si- lent is because the minority wants to lead the American party again into election alliances with the “third party”. movement. The minority thinks the C. I. decision was wrong. They want to go back to the C. I. and convince them of their mistake. And that is one of the big reasons why they cling so desperately to the “class farmer-labor party” slogan—it is their means of penetrating the LaFollette party. The silence of the minority thesis on the “third party alliance” convicts the minority of attempting to perpet- uate the right wing digressions of the past year. Their silence is the final proof that the party should not entrust its guidance to them. Under cover of phrases of Marxism and Len- inism, they want to continue to com- bat the political line of the C. I, and drag the American party again back into the muck of LaFolletteism from which the C. I. rescued us, state parties as I understood, was to strengthen F. F. L. P. for June 17 convention. In committee it was learned that Hopkins, representing N. Y. progressive party, who was there with three delegates would split if we affiliated N. Y. party with F. F. L. P. I was for affiliation, re- COMMUNISM VERSUS OPPORTUNISM By J. C., OBOLONSKY cient to be a revolutionary and a Com. UR party*is at the cross-road.|unist in general, but it is necessa- Its membership has whither it is to go—right, or left; to decide}"Y to find at each moment that particular link in the chain which that is, whether it is to work for the|°M¢ Must seize with all his strength creation of a farmer-labor party, or in order to hold the whole chain and whether it is to get busy rooting the |‘° PREPARE A SURE TRANSITION Workers’ Party into the fertile soil)! THE FOLLOWING LINK.” What of class-struggle on the basis of the united front and the immediate burn- ing needs of the workers, Some “minorities” propose to work for the organization of the class-farmer-labor party. So said Comrade Ruthenberg in an article entitled “Is America ripe for a Labor Party” in the Mod- ern Quarterly: “At this (St. Paul— J. 0.) convention the foundation was laid (?!) for a class farmer-labor par- ty” and further, “The building of a class-(?!) political party is not a matter of a few months or even of a few years. It may be a matter of an- other five years before there is creat- ed in this country a mass political party representing the two producing groups in capitalist society, BUT SUCH A PARTY IS BOUND TO COME.” (caps mine J. O.). Where is the foundation laid at St.| Paul? If we drop the policy of bluff and face hard facts then we are bound to get a different picture of the St. Paul convention, in the words of Com- rade Foster: “The situation at St. Paul was this: The elections were approaching and it was absolutely necessary to crys- tallize the farmer-labor party in order to make or try to make, a cam- paign under its banner. The situation was difficult, WITH THE LAFOL- LETTE FORCES SUCKING THE LIFE OUT OF THE FARMER LA- BOR MOVEMENT. Consequently the ic: E. C. made extreme efforts to hang on to the disappearing masses. In some respects its policy verged into PPORTUNISM. THIS MUST BE ADMITTED.” In true Marxian-Lenin- ist light THIS is a correct analysis of what occured at St. Paul. Foresee- ing such a “foundation,” the Comin- tern was a thousand times correct, as against the minority of three on the C. E. C. when it instructed our weak party to drop the dead ballast AND GO ITS WAY. It takes courage to admit mistakes, but Lenin always had is that link that will keep the chain unbroken at this moment? The general flow of sentiment, which was the manifestation of a general movement for a labor party in 1922, has been the beginning of a process. The policy of the party then rightly, was as follows: “The party must not oppose the coming to life of this power.” Since then the process has been consummated; the movement has been completely directed into the channel of LaFolletteism. Never mind the building of boggies, conjuring up ghosts and shoving them to the fore- front by some of our comrades,—there is no mass movement seperate and apart from the LaFollette movement now in Dec. 1924. The boss of the “progressive forces” is now carefully laying the corner-stones in his founda- tion. His strategists have carefully studied the various tendencies that manifest themselves in the ranks of workers and dissatisfied farmers, who IS IT THE MEASLES? A DIAGNOSIS. By JOHN J. BALLAM, District Organizer, District No. 1. UR party is now about five years old. We are quite lusty, much given to chatter, as is most natural, and to playing of pranks which give the Communist International some concern lest we do ourselves some permanent injury. But, on the whole growing, running about, and gaining our education thru our own experiences and the examples of our older sister parties of other countries. ¢ In our early infancy, we developed a bad case of “left sickness” which was protracted by the fact that we were compelled to stay in-doors on account of the Palmer raids which de- prived us of the proper nourishment furnished by the crass struggle and contact with the masses which is the very breath of our nostrils. Any trained observer might now know that something is the matter with our young party. Of late we have become pale and lifeless. Our “united front food” does not seem to agree with us—we have a slight indigestion together with some hysteria. Dr. Foster has shoved his finger down our throats and made us throw up the farmer-labor party slogan be- in their political immaturity are BOUND FOR DISILLUSIONMENT but not by the minority medicine. An the delicate slogans of “class,” “mass,” “class mass,” “revolutionary,” “class revolutionary,” “class ‘mass revolutionary” ad infinitum, will fall on deaf ears; we will deliberately cajole ourselves into a position, where fiery leaflets to northwestern farmers will: be most eagerly and effectively distributed on Second Ave. and 8th St., New York City; a party with one of the above titles. will be formed of ourselves and sympathizers. Our “pure” agitation for -the slogan will result in OUR taking out hot chesnuts of the fire of class strug- gle and delivering them to our bitter- est enemies, to the LaFollette move- ment. Meanwhile the LaFollette move- ment will slap us right and left and we'll (as in the past) neglect the most essential elementary work of building up our young, and very weak Com- munist Party, it and its high time that our young leadership become also in this sense Let us not go for another campaign of draining the life-blood of our infant ions, forty-seven branches Workmen’s Circle, eleven. branches Workmen’s Sick and Death Benefit Fund, and eighteen miscellaneous. Fraternal or- ganizations were present, represent- ing about 90,000 workers. A large representative council was decided upon by the conference. One meeting of this council was called, but only about fifteen showed up. Second meeting was never called. An execu- tive committee of about fifteen was elected—made up of almost all W. P. members. F. F. L. P. local New York entered campaign in fall of 1923, putting six assembly and four aldermanic candi- dates on ballot. (Here allowance must be made for shortness of time.) During campaign, four indoor meet- ings were held averaging 250 in at- tendance. Average seating capacity of halls was 900. Speakers were amongst others, Olgin, Gitlow, Lore and Poyntz. Open air meetings few in number. Two leaflets issued in English and Jewish, 50,000 all told. Badly distributed. $842.23 raised dur- ing campaign. Expenses about $1500, difference paid from W. P. Of the $842 contributed, $295.00 was from 22 organizations. Average vote for assembly candi- dates, 197—for aldermanic, 110. All this happened during administration of the F. F. L. P. enthusiast, Comrade Lifshitz. From above it appears that membership was not enthused about campaigns. This is an important fac- tor. Now between 1923 and 1924 cam- paigns. Lenin memorial meeting arranged on Feb. 4, 1924. The preliminary ar- rangements were made by Lifshitz. So lacking was the understanding of united front that he called the meet- ing in the name of one “Lenin Mem- orial Committee.” 60,000 leaflets, 1000 posters and 19,000 tickets were printed and well distributed on which the W. P. was not mentioned, meet- ing being under auspices of Lenin Memorial Committee. Publicity went out in same name to our own press until my arrival here, when it was im- mediately stopped and thereafter all publicity that went out was in the name of the W. P. This was called to attention of D. BE. C. During campaign for June 17 con- vention, we organized in New York and N, J. F. L. P.’s. This was done using F. F. L. P. Executive commit tee was called together twice a month with five to seven W. P. members of committee appearing. F. L. P. of New York kas organized with our- selves and close sympathizers; those that supported us in recent campaign. N. J. F. L. P. organized on moment's notice, thru instructions from C. EB. C. by mail, the result of the conference attended by W. P. branches and four or five outside organizations, none of which were unions. An incident during conference in Schenectady on May 18, 1924, where New York F. F. L. P. was organized. were instructed by ©. B. C. to “p,, Purpone af orguniing he ) Af organining Seamer gardless of split with Hopkins’ out- fit but stood alone in conference of leading comrades. Lifshitz, Lore, Weinstone, Poyntz, and others being against affiliating if it meant d split. Result no affiliation. Now for the recent W. P. campaign. My understanding of our objective in this campaign was to popularize the Workers (Communist) Party. This, as the facts will prove, we accomplished. First we put the national and state ticket on the ballot. This required 22,000 signatures with a minimum of 100 signatures in each of 62 coun- ties. This cost money, but we raised it. We had one Gitlow meeting, 2000 attendance; two Foster meetings; 6000 attendance; twelve Cannon meet- ings, average attendance 500; one Ol- gin meeting, attendance 800. Averag- ed 30 to 40 outdoor meetings a week during campaign. Six red nights where we concentrated our forces in six different sections of New York City, trucks, red lights, etc., holding six to twelve meetings on each red night. Many of these open air meet- ings were mass meetings of from 200 to 1200 in attendance. Indoor meet- ings, best political meetings ever held here. Nearly one million pieces of litera- ture distributed, included leaflets, pamphlets, posters, stickers and 85,- 000 DAILY WORKERS. Raised nearly $16,000 for the campaign. $2,322.00 of this was contributed by 25 local un- fons, 18 branches of Workmen's Circle, 49 branches of Workmen's Sick and Death Benefit Fund and 16 miscel- laneous, fraternal organizations. 6500 votes for our national and state tick- ets and in the six assembly districts where we averaged 197 votes for F. F. L. P. we averaged 225 votes for the W. P. In October we took 180 new mem- bers which is about 60 more than the average for the last 10 months. Re- sponse of the membership, as com- pared with 1923 campaign, financially, in the distribution of literature, etc., showed that the campaign helped to- wards building a mass C. P. They were enthused, $16,000.00 proves that, and the party acted as a unit as nev- er before. We reached the masses as never be- fore and I am eure better than we ever could thrua F, L. P. Many mem- bers stated they were glad they could make the fight out and out as against than a camouflage as our F. L. P. was known and called by all our ene- mies. An incident, in one of the large bakers’ unions here when the fight took place to endorse the W. P. candi- dates, it resolved itself into a fight to endorse the W. P. as such which was finally done, Whoever says we can’t go to the use a “false face” in face of the above facts has another guess coming. ig, ast. Ba, lin — fully Leninists. So much for St. Paul, party, let’s admit our past blunders Now as to the building of a “class”| (and if it were not for the. decision farmer-labor party; the logical infer-| of the Comintern in the last elections ence to be drawn from Comrade|there might have been MORE than Ruthenberg’s statement that a farmer-| three in the then minority), let’s learn labor party is bound to come, in other} trom our past mistakes how to realis- words—it is inevitable, and more than| tically build hereon. We must leave the that—in FIVE years or so. The in-| utopia of getting to the social revolu- ference is—get on the job and start) tion on a high white horse by quick organizing it. Five years is a very] route, but rather stick to our reliable small interval of time and if we don't] fundamentals that our road is hard, get busy at once it may be too late. windy, and full of obstacles and turns, This is another fundamental mis-| We must hold fast to our basic prin- conseption of the forces operating in) ciples and ALWAYS hold in the fore- the class-struggle in America. It is/front the banner of the only class pol- rather bold to assert at this time that|itical party of the proletariat—the a farmer-labor party will be created| Workers Party of America. in five years, as it is in general in-| 7, tage: correct to assert that the coming in- aa a frapderae eed ain to being of the labor party in America| time in block formations with other is inevitable. At least such utterances political groups, yet it is up to the min- need unmistakeable proof and such is ority to prove that it is correct Marx- oe forthcoming from the minority|ian and Leninist policy and tactics to quarters. CREATE AND BUILD non-Commun- As angry as we may be at that pet-/ist’ or semi-Communist parties as a ty-bourgeois Messiah LaFollette, yet it general principle, that it is permis- is only common sense and frankness| sah1e to sneer and scoff at the EXIST. to admit that the farmer-labor move- ment—whatever there was of it that Hees Prarie Bio ngpeny and counted—has been most effecti' deend The way of the minority is the and completely swallowed up by the LaFollette movement. SWAMPY way, the one which leads to opportunistic leanings and tenden- Most of the wild flights of the min ity abstract and pure theorists rotate/(@es- That road is impregnated with “chvostcism” and liquidation. about their inability to “root” their thinking in the objective conditions of|, S!osans must be effective to be use- our present activities as a Communist ay They must either be rallying cries Party. Simon pure stubbornness is dis.|£0T the mobilization of large masses guised as virtue and desire is mis-|°f workers, or must have’ the attrac- taken for conditions, tive power to bring large masses into They swing in a truly pendulum| ction. style, They jump from extreme to ex-| The C. E. ©. (majority) thesis treme. The group that was so “left| Proposes that the party for the first sick” and paralyzed in 1920 that when| time in its history gets out of the it issued a leaflet to the Brooklyn car | clouds of speculation, puts it both feet strikers it issued to them a slogan|0n the class-struggle ground and in “to arms” now swung so far to the|true Marxian-Leninist way begin con- right that it makes a cut-and-dry di-| sidering ITS manifold pressing prob- vision between economic and political|lems on the economic and political activiti of the working-class | fields. identifies political activities of the] “There is only one party that fights working-class with the farmer. {always and everywhere for the inter- labor party ALONE, considers jests of the working-class, that has no the farmer-labor party the ONLY ex-|interests apart from those of the pression of the united frpnt tactic on| working-class, and that party is the the political arena and lets the Work-|party of Communism, the Workers ers Party appear as a bystander and |Party... The Workers Party under not as an active participant in the its own name, its own banner, its own struggle. program of political struggle, must The minority conception calls back |enter into every battle of the workers to life the feebleness developed in dur against their oppressors, calling for movement thru the necessity to work |and forming where possible all sorts underground (its negative phase and jof united fronts upon special issues, expression). Contact with workers|/and using every such struggle, whe- had to be established thru other or-|ther alone, or in a united front, as in- ganizations, indirectly, Well, we have |struments for directly recruiting the done away with the underground or-|workers into the Workers Party and ganization, but the lack of faith in the | building it into the mass Communist strength and power of attraction by|Party that will lead the proletarian the Workers (Communist) Party stili|revolution in America,” exists and assumes various forms, The “philosophy” of our underground days still lingers... a harmful vestige, a hangover and a hindrance ‘o the free development of the Com- munist Party and movement, a blind for some and cause for confusion others aid © cause Dr. Foster thinks the stuff is ‘ndigestible and will kill us if we are given any more of it. Our quack doctors on the central executive committee are shaking their heads ominously and are all for putting us to bed and closing the win- dows and keeping us indoors for a long time, or until we get strong en- ough to play with the farmer-labor party again. The chief rabbi claims that it all came about thru playing with the unclean gentile masses in the farmer-labor party and the medicine men of the central executive com- mittee majority say that if this con- tinues it will not only kill (liquidate) us but, “will spell death and destruc- tion to the Communist movement in America.” What a horrible prospect! When the Communist International specialists take our temperature and diagnose the case I am sure that they will find developing another incipient case of “left sickness” complicated by a little right wing sectarianism and syndicalistie idiosyncrasies. Let us examine the symptoms, ~ When I read the majority thesis T was struck with the similarity of its slogans and its arguments with those of the “leftists” of 1921. Those who were with me inthe fight against the L. P. P. (legal political party) will recognize many of our old arguments} in the majority thesis. We were not opposed to the L. P. P. “in principle.” We declared that nevertheless, the L. P. P. would “liquidate” our party (read faction). We branded everyone who favored the L. P. P. as liquid- ators, reformers, opportunists, cen- trists, social-democrats, etc. We raised the ery of “Save the Party.” We pro- posed “something just as good” in piace of the L. P. P.—The United Toilers of America (see Foster’s LA- BOR CONGRESS). We announced the “crushing policy” to “relentlessly com bat it and stamp it out.” But at least we were honest, we were not “horse traders"—we had a homogeneous group—we refused to trade or com- promise with any one who did not ac- cept our point of view. We main- tained discipline within our own ranks and because of this we were able to accept the discipline of the C. L. We recognized our mistakes and open- ly avowed them like the Leninists that we are. We are now totally immune from “left sickness.” We can no lon- ger be caught with the catch phrases of a bastard leftism—especially when these emnate from the mouths of our Bittelmans and Cannons, The majority thesis is so filled with inconsistancies—it is such a hodge- podge—that I cannot believe that it was presented for any but factional purposes. It appears to me to be de- signed to befuddle and confuse the membership and to form a basis upon which to unite every divergent ele- ment in the party from Katterfeld tc Lore, and in order to maintain a fac- tional group in power. On the Horns of a Dilemma horns of a dilemma. It is interesting to note how they attempt to extricate themselves from it. The majority thesis says; “At the time when the farmer- labor movement was developing a abandoned. Why? Because, says the thesis; The central executive committee majority finds itself poised upon the ENTIRE ORGANIZED LABOR MOVEMENT, then the question of forming a labor party loses its bas- ic foundation and ceases to be a fighting issue for immediate prac- tical use.” This is a major premise of the majority. I shall prove later that it is not only untenable, but that it is not based upon facts. I shall prove that it is not true that almost the entire organized labor movement has thru its leaders entered into a per- manent alliance with the petty bourge- oisie for political action. The major- ity thesis says that, therefore; “The Workers Party cannot advan- tageously promulgate the slogan ofa ‘farmer-labor party’ AT THE PRES- ENT TIME. The further develop- ment of the class struggle may even- tually create a mass SENTIMENT for the formation of a labor party. In such case the Workers Party may find it advantageous AGAIN TO RAISE THE SLOGAN for such a party AND ACTIVELY PARTIC- IPATE in the movement for it.” ... “WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO A LABOR PARTY IN PRINCIPLE.” The majority thesis concludes by saying; “Therefore, every attempt by the Workers Party to set up middle-of- the-way bodies to take the place of the Workers Party in the eyes of the masses is in DIRECT VIOLATION OF COMMUNIST PRINCIPLES, and if carried to any length will spell the LIQUIDATION OF THE WORKERS PARTY... “This farmer-laborism opportunis- tic tendency within the Workers Party means DEATH and DES- TRUCTION to the Communist move- ment in America... This tendency must be relentlessly combatted and stamped. out.” (All emphasis ours. J. J. B) Here you have it. Reconcile these statements if you can. Let us reduce the arguments of the majority to a syllogism :— Major premise: Any middle-of-the- road: party set up by the Workers Par- ty will liquidate the Workers Party; Minor premise: The labor party is a middleof-the-road party. CONCLUSION: THE LABOR PAR- TY WILL LIQUIDATE THE WORK- ERS PARTY. Does the majority believe this? They are not opposed to a labor party IN PRINCIPLE. The party becomes INEVITABLE when the economic mass organizations of labor join hands for independent political action. .The majority will again raise the slogan of “a farmer-labor party” when the development of the class struggle creates a SENTIMENT for it and they vill ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE in the movement for it. But, they say, the advocacy and formation of a middle- of-the-road labor party by the Work- rs Party means the LIQUIDATION of the Workers Party and DEATH AND DESTRUCTION to the Commun- ist movement. Therefore, the Foster- Cannon-Bittelman group declare that they are ready to LIQUIDATE the Workers Party and to destroy the Communist movement whenever the LEADERS of mass economic organ- izations become ready to organize a middle-of-the-road labor party. Who are the liquidators? Could rank oppor- tunism go further? Could factional bitterness and personal hatreds lead sane men further astray? Could a graver misconception of the united front tactics be imagined? But this is not at all. THE CLASS STRUGGLE IS A _ POLITICAL STRUGGLE. Even syndicalists may come to recognize this Marxian fun- damental—“in principle.” While wait- ing for the masses themselves to join hands for independent political ac- tion, our precious majority is com- pelled to recognize the need for some substitute for the farmer-labor party slogan. The majority thesis states the problem thus:— “At present the MAIN OBJECT- IVE of our united front policy is to start a movement from below to compel the so-called labor wing of the LaFollette movement to break its alliance with the petty bourge- oisie and to win the masses to the class ‘struggle and to the leader- ship of the Workers Party.” “At present the MAIN STRENGTH of LaFolletteism and consequently the main danger to the class strug- gle comes from the ideological hege- mony of LaFolletteism over the minds of LARGE SECTIONS of the WORKERS and POOR FARMERS. We must therefore concentrate our energy to expose and defeat the pet- ty bourgeois influence of LaFollett- ism in the labor movement,” How? By“... putting up against the LaFollette party the Workers Party.” And is this all? Only “opportunists” could ask for more. But the i g i pliles is 4 LEADERSHIP and DIRECTION and a GENERAL LABOR CONGRESS elected by the rank and file of labor in the trade unions and in the shops and amongst the unemployed will become the best means FOR THE UNIFICATION of the struggles of labor. .It is the duty of the Work- ers Party to IMMEDIATELY be gin to popularize the idea of such a LABOR *CONGRESS.” (emphasis mine J. J. B.) A unifying center for leadership and direction! We had thought that the Workers Party was such a unifying center and that nothing else could re- place. Is it possible that our majority “patriots” are losing faith in the Work- ers Party? Or—horrible thought—~ does Foster propose a dual union? an- other I. W. W.? Is Foster getting ready to liquidate the T. U. B. Ll. in fayor of a GENERAL LABOR CON. GRESS? Who will come to the GEN- ERAL LABOR CONGRESS called by the Workers Party? Will the big inter- national unions send delegates? Will we gather together more than we did at the F. F. L. P. convention? Will Foster launch his own LABOR PAR- TY in his GENERAL LABOR CON- GRESS? Come out with it, Comrade Foster, the whole party is breathless- ly awaiting more particulars about your LABOR CONGRESS. . And is this tenuous LABOR CON- GRESS the only substitute that the majority have to offer in place of the farmer-labor party slogan? Oh, no! Listen:— “As the class struggle developes and our campaign against LaFollet- teism progresses there will be found in a number of LOCALITIES organ- ized LABOR BODIES ready to break their alliances with the petty-bourge- oisie and to enter the election campaigns as LABOR ORGAN- IZATIONS. It will be the duty of the Workers Party to secure the suppport of these labor bodies for the Workers Party. Wherever this is IMPOSSIBLE because of the im- maturity of the masses, the Work- ers Party will propose UNITED LABOR FRONTS for election pur- poses. In proposing whethef such united fronts will be carried on un- der the auspices of LABOR CON- GRESSES, COUNCILS OF ACTION, LABOR PARTIES, etc, the Work- ers Party will be...” Try as our majority may they can not get away from the farmer-labor party slogan. They are like men spit- ting into the teeth of a gale—the wind drives the spit back into their faces, All their syndicalistic substitutes for a farmer-labor party amount to the same thing. They can't get away from it. The farmer-labor party slogan is with us because it is inherent in the present movement of the poorer farm- ers and workers in their attempts to break away from the republican-demo- cratic party of the big bourgeoisie and in their attempts to find a common basis for independent political ac- tion in their struggles against the cap- italist class as a whole. It maybe that the rapid development of the class struggle will forestall the actual estab- lishment of a farmer-labor party in America and that thru the operation and effects of the Dawes plan an in- tensive economic and political crisis may drive the workers into extensive revolutionary activity. In such per- iods the working class learns more in a few months than in years of ordin- ary struggle and in such a revolution- ary epoch the Workers Party will know how to raise the slogan of “ALL POWER TO THE WORKERS.” But we are writing our program for 1925 and there is no such deep-going cris- is on the immediate horizon, ¢ Therefore the slogan “for a farmers labor party” remains potent to ilize the workers for independent tical action and to break the emony of the petty-bourgeoisie be the poorer farmers and workers—to quicken them into class political ac- tion for their immediate demands and to draw them closer to the influence and leadership of the Workers Party. Our party will be the only party organization which can or will this slogan. The slogan “for a labor party” will become a CO! IST slogan since the socialists, Progressives, the petty bourgeois pg itician and their labor lieutenan’ maries of all stripes, pose and denounce it. U slogan we will be exp hopes, the sentiments, the by this means we will dr, ranks the most advanc developed and the mo elements, In this movement Aj