The Daily Worker Newspaper, January 3, 1925, Page 9

he Discussion on Party Tasks A Marxian Book and Its Un-Marxian Critics | By: MAX BEDACHT. HE ideological and political bank- ruptcy ofthe majority of the cen- tral executive committee was crowned by, the “great sensation” it had pre- pared for the membership meetings. This C. EB. G. majority. was not satis- fled with its unmenviable record of poverty of ideas set up in the party discussion and poorly covered with threadbare slogans of iquidators, op- Portunists, et. Our C. H, 0. majority insisted to, get up another record—a record. of demagogy. I once watched a prosecutor in. a capitalist court walking up. and down before the jury trying.to incite the jury against us Communists, before the bar, by. waving a red fiag before their eyes, by throwing it-on.the floor. by jumping on it and-by.other such convincing arguments against the Communists, Expert Demagogues at Work. Our central executive committee majority seems to have gone to school to that gentleman. Comrade Foster pulled the same trick in the Chicago general membership last Sunday. But his performance was even surpassed by Cannon in New York. But then Cannon is unsurpassable when it comes to such “arguments.” A book made its appearance at these membership meetings. This book was denounced; it was flung around in well feigned disgust; it was condemned as menshevism incarnate. And all this comedy was enacted to get a verdict against the author of the book—not on the book itself, because hardly a line was read out of the book, but on the question now at issue be- fore the party. The book is “The Government— Strikebreaker” and its author is Jay Lovestone. If anything were needed to show that our majority does not give a damn about our party and is inter- ested solely and exclusively in the central executive committee majority this latest “sensation” would supply proof. A few facts about the book will suffice to show up the majority and to condemn it for what it is: a group of unprincipled demagogues or a group of totally un-Marxian Marxians. Foster-Lore Group Loses Its Head. The subject, plan and the very method of the book as well as the author were suggested by Comrade Brooks, the representative of the Comintern at the Bridgeman conven- tion of the Communist Party of America. The book was written at a time when the Workers Party. altho ) already a few months old, still had not overcome the handicap of the primo- geniture of its older brother, the C. P. of A. Only about six months later at the time when this book was publish ed, in May, 1923, the Workers Party began to function formally as the Communist Party and what is more important began. to function as a political party. What was the purpose of the book? Was it to be a history of the Workers Party? No. Wag it to be a history of the achievements of the Workers Party? No. Was it to be a propaganda book pure and simple for the Workers Party No. Great strikes had taken place in the years just past. The steel workers, the miners, the railroad workers, the textile workers had gone thru mass struggles against their exploiters. During the war compulsory arbitra- tion by government agency was estab- lished, ostensibly as a measure of war against Germany, But now, in the post-war struggles of the workers. this war measure, “against Germany,” was shown up in its true character as @ war measure against the workers. The official leadership of the organ- ized workers in most cases made itself ‘rather an instrument of this so-called government arbitration, instead of leading the workers into struggles against this fraud. Here was a chance for the revolu- ‘could write only four years ago, that tionists; to show up the character and role of the gevernment as an agency of capitalism and the capital- ists; to show the close connection. yea, even the identity of government and “big business”; to fight the con- tention of Gompersism of “our” gov- ernment as something above classes. This could be done only by a truly Marxian analysis of all the facts con- nected with the struggles of the past year. To give such an analysis on thé basis ‘of the facts was the task of the writer: The book represents the accomplishment of that task. What the C. |. Says of “The Govern- ment—Strikebreaker.” k Referring to this book and other publications of the Workers Party written, mainly. by Comrades Love- stone and Pepper, the executive com- mittee of the Communist International in its report to the Fifth Congress de- clares: “The party has aiso issued Marxist literature, not only on general Communist questions but also on con- crete conditions of America, and thus they made good that which the social- democrats of the Second International neglected to do for decades.” The book is a Marxian one. It breathes Marxism in its analytical method as well as in its revolutionary conclusions, To be sure—our central executive ‘ommittee does not know that. It does not and cannot recognize Marx- an methods.. As “true” believers they can only worship before the shrine of unmistakable phrases. If Marxism does not present itself to them in these phrases then our central execu- tive committee majority finds itself compelled to disown it. And why should it not? Samples of Foster’s Communism. Comrade Foster, the leader of the majority, wrote only two years before * The Government—Strikebreaker” was published: “Apparently it is thru the old unions that the workers will eventually achieve industrial free. dom.” To this gem of “Marxism” we could add an indefinite number of others out of the same book, “The Great Steel Strike and Its Lessons.” For instance, on page 260: “In what I have called the left wing of the movement there are large and ever- ‘increasing numbers of workers and ‘sympathizers who refuse to face the prospect of a society forever based upon the wage system. They demand an organization that is making for its abolition and the substitution there- fore of a system of industrial justice. IF THEY WERE TO LOOK SHARP- LY THEY WOULD SEE THAT THE TRADE UNION MOVEMENT IS TRAVELING FASTER THAN ANY OTHER BODY TOWARD THE END THEY WISH TO REACH.” (Our em- phasis.) Yes, the chief arbiter of pure Com- munism of 1924 was so much a stranger to Marxism, to Communism in 1920 that he seems entitled to a pardon for not recognizing Marx ex- cept in his beard. The comraae who “the big question is whether or not they (the trade unions) will be able to develop enough power to stop this exploitation altogether. As for me, I am convinced that they will,” should be a little more careful in his judg- ment about the Marxian qualities of other writers. His. “Marxism,” rank industrialism, can be traced in his writings down to this very day. Why then should a comrade who displayed such misconceptions of the character of the proletarian revolution, nearly three years after the Bolshevik revo- lution in Russia, be able today to find any trace of Marxism in the “Goy- ernment—Strikebreaker?” , Foster Refutes Foster. © But our arbiters of pure Commun- ism have detected the shortcomings of “The Government—Strikebreaker” only since the toga of the saviors of the Workers Party fell upon their shoulders. Before this critical mo- ment arrived they appreciated “The Government — Strikebreaker.” COM- RADE FOSTER WROTE IN THE IS- SUE OF THE LABOR HERALD OF JULY 1923: “HERE IS A BOOK WHICH FILLS A GAP IN THE LIT- ERATURE OF THE LABOR MOVE- MENT. DEALING ENTIRELY WITH THE AMERICAN QUESTION, IT TAKES UP. PHASE AFTER PHASE, THE ROLE OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE WORKERS AND THEIR EXPLOIT- ERS. THE TOO FAMILIAR STYLE OF PAMPHLETEERING. CONSIST- ING OF GENERALIZATIONS AND SENTIMENTALITIES IS ENTIRELY ABSENT IN LOVESTONE’S WORK. CONCISELY, AND STEP BY STEP, HE HAS BUILT UP HIS ARGUMENT AND EXPOSITION FROM OFFICIAL DOCUMENT AND AUTHORITATIVE STATEMENTS. NO POINT IS LEFT UNSUPPORTED BY CITATION TO ORIGINAL SOURCES, AND’ THE WHOLE IS BROUGHT TOGETHER INTO THE MOST COMPLETE PIC- TURE YET DRAWN OF THE GOV- ERNMENT IN ITS CLASSIC ROLE OF STRIKEBREAKER. LOVESTONE HAS MADE A PERMANENT CON- TRIBUTION TO THE LIBRARY OF THE STUDENT OF THE TRADE UNION MOVEMENT.” Dunne and Olgin Answer Cannon. Comrade Dunne, another one of the present day guardians of Marxism against the danger of opportunism, wrote about the book: “I am very much pleased with ‘The Government —Strikebreaker,’ and consider it a distinctive , contribution to American labor literature.” And Comrade Olgin, a late addition to the army of fighters of pure Com- munism against right wing deviations,- wrote about the book: “It is a review of the class struggle of the American proletariat for the last three years. It is a cross cut thru the class com- position of American society and ex- Position of the government’s role in the momentous social conflicts. . . The book, as a whole, may serve for the workers as an excellent weapon and this is the main thing. It is a reliable book. It is an American book. It is a book astir with the problems of today, AND IT IS A COMMUNIST BOOK IN THE BEST SENSE OF THE WORD. THERE HAVE BEEN NO SUCH BOOKS IN THE WORKING CLASS LITERATURE IN THIS COUNTRY. LOVESTONE OUGHT TO BE COMMENDED £OR WRITING AND THE WORKERS PARTY FOR PUBLISHING ‘THE GOVERNMENT —STRIKEBREAKER.’ No English reading worker should fail to acquire the book and study it thoroly.” A Marxian Book. The book deals with the great post- war struggles of labor in the United States. In many of its portions it deals with events of periods in which the Workers Party had no physical A MAJOR QUESTION By SAMUEL SKLAROFF ie present majority have up-to date furnished no _ convincing proof that the movement for indepen- dent political action is dead. Their idea of proof is constant repetition of a few steeotyped phrases which, when analyzed in the light of actuaT condi- tions are revealed as total absurdities. The idea that LaFollette has swal- lowed the farmer-labor movement be- longs to the same class of pseudo-his- tory exemplified by the story of the whale swallowing Jonah. Just as there are many people credulous enough to swallow both Jonah and the whale, ‘so, unfortunately, there are many com- majority pseudo-history. A Burning Issue Before The Workers If the LaFollette crowd have swal- lowed the farmer-labor movement, neither the swallowers nor the swal- lowed, at the present writing, appear to know it. existence as yet. In the whole period treated in the book the Workers Party had no political existence, while the Communist Party led an undergrcand existence, The book opens to the proletarian reader’ an understanding of the con- nections between the boss he is strik- ing against and the policeman who prevents him from picketing. But, say our arbiters of Marxism, where is Marx, M-A-R-X? The book ‘opens to the proletarian ° reader the revolutionary perspectives of the class struggle But, say our guardians of pure Com- munism, where is Communism, C-o-m- m-u-n-i-s-m? The book instills _the proletarian reader with a.clear concept of the op- pressive ‘functions of the capitalist state and of the necessity of organiz- ing and fighting against. the state. But, say our “Bolshevized”.majority, where is Bolshevism, 3B-o-ls-h-e- v--s-m? Profintern Translates Lovestone Book. The Red International of Labor Unions in Moscow translated the book for publication in Soviet Russia. But, say our new converts to revo- lutionary political action, what does the Profintern know about Conmun- ism? Just think of it. the poor and misled Profintern even asked the chief arbiter of pure Communism in Amer- ica, Comrade Foster, to write a pre face to the Russian edition Judging by Comrade Foster’s willingness to comply with instructions from higher units of our international party we presume that he complied with this request. and wrote a Communist pre- face to the Russian edition of Love- stone’s “non-Communist book.” Cannon’s Sudden Conversion to Communism. Eighteen months have passed since the Workers Party has published this book, Only praise was heard from the members of the central executive *|}committee majority about the book. The Communist International read the book. The Profintern read it and or. dered its translation into Russian. The book was reviewed favorably in numerous publications of the Com- munist International. No fundamental criticism was made anywhere. Only now since our present central execu- tive committee majority was con- demned by fate to “save” Communism and incidentally to save it own hide has this majority discovered its revo- lutionary Marxian soul, Only in this moment of desperation has it mustered enough courage. to throw all caution to the winds and reveal itself as a group of pseudo- Marxians charlatans, trying to retain control of the party by the cheapest demagogy that has ever disgraced the activities of any group within any Communist Party anywhere in the world, OF COMMUNIST STRATEGY—A MENACE OF DEFEATISM Even Morris Hilquit, the leader of the defunct S. P., seems to know bet- ter than that. In an aritcle on “Let Us Use Our Opportunity,” in the New Leader of Dec. 20, he writes the fol- lowing:—“The LaFollette campaign was a sort of partnership between the Cc. P. P. A, and the National LaFol- lette Club, This later group served as a cloak for many elements, who, for various reasons were for LaFol- ’ lette for president, “Now that partnership is all off. The coming convention will be held under the rules of representation as provid- ed in the constitution of the GC, P. P, A” Under these rules all the unions in the country will soon be invited to send delegates to the convention to be held in Chicago on Feb. 25, 1925, for the purpose of establishing a third party. National, state and local cen- tral bodies will be entitled to repre sentation. y (Continued on page 6) ce em oe Rc re el cen nn a Al ee wt