The Daily Worker Newspaper, January 9, 1925, Page 4

Page Four ed THE DAILY WORKER Friday, January 9, 1925 iscussion of Our Party’s Immediate Tasks THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE PARTY CONTROVERSY TO DATE By JAY LOVESTONE. N view of the fact that the Comin- tern has not yet spoken directly on the immediate party controversy and that the national convention has not yet been held, it may be cqnsi- dered by some a bit premature to talk of a balance sheet of the party dispute. Still, it is appropriate, on the eve of the second stage of the par- ty controversy, to list briefly the as- sets and liabilities of the contending sroups in the first round of the con-} test. Results of Meetings. In the capital cities of nine of our biggest districts, membership meet- ings have been held to discuss the party problems. Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Minneapo- lis and New Haven have had such meetings for discussion and voting on the thesis before the party. In this balloting the Foster-Lore theses received a net total of 1516 votes. The combined strength that the followers of extreme right wing of our party of~the Two-and-a-Half International tendency in our party, and the crystallizing opportunistic, non-Marxian Cannon-Foster leader- ship could muster has been register- ed at about fifteen hundred. At the same time, to use the ex- pression of the American commission of the executive committee of the not least, the Foster-Burman group actually stole the livery of Loreism in order to present some sort of a poli- tical face to the membership in the discussion, Foster-Lore Strength at Peak, No one can deny that the total vote polled by the Foster-Lore group repre- sents its maximum strength. Like- wise, no one can deny the fact that the C. E. C. minority strength was not fully mobilized. The C. E. C. ma- jority had at its disposal for winning over the membership and mobilizing its adherents of all stripes the com- plete state power—the party machin- ery. Its speakers had the tremendous advantage of speaking first and last in the debates. The Foster-Lore group had its articles placed in the best section of the space allotted to the discussion of party tasks. Cer- tain minority articles were held up in publication for sundry “strategic rea- sons.” Then Comrade Burman, against the protest of a) considerable portion of the rank and file, made outrageous use of the official machinery of the Finnish federation in misrepresenting the issues before the party. Certain organizers of the Young Workers’ League displayed their youthful en- ergy in working overtime for the C. E. C. majority while on tour building up the young Communist movement. Nor were the DAILY WORKER ma- chinery and other party agencies ne- Comintern, the Marxian group led by Comrade Ruthenberg, the group of “Communist consciousness” in our party, despite overwhelming odds, succeeded in polling 1286 votes. Thus, against a vicious attack, against a barrage of unparalleled slander, and vilification, against a united front ranging from the extremest right wing of Lore, Doctor Aronson of New York and “Moscow agent” fame, and Fahle Burman to certain extremely glected. In short, the C. E. C. ma- jority of today, unlike the majority of the C. E. C. of last year, more than utilized the party “state power” in its widest ramifications. In paran- thesis, the extraordinary energy of our “educational” department which was temporarily moved to New York might also be mentioned. The Role of State Power. Of course, we are not swearing vol- leys against the C. EB. C. majority for left sick comrades, the Marxian group of our party enlightened the mem- bership to such an extent as to be nosed out by only 230 votes thruout the country. Some Illuminating Sidelights. But the circumstances and condi- tions surrounding the contest are far more illuminating and significant for the party than the cold, dry figures at hand. First of all, the thesis indorsed by the Foster-Lore group was a jumble of false premises and empty promis- es calculated to appeal to every sec- tion of party opinion. To the left sick Communists in our ranks the Foster- Lore group of self-annointed “pure” revolutionists turned a face anti-farm- er-labor party in principle. To the extremest right, opportunist elements in our party, the C. E. C. majority held proudly aloft the Lore-Poyntz Burman coat of arms of “militant Communism.” To the comrades who still entertained doubts as to timeli- ness of dropping the united front far- mer-labor slogan, the Foster-Lore group yelled: “We are not opposed to the labor party in principle, but not just now, in the future.” The discussion waged in the ranks by the Foster-Lore adherents was pre- cisely along theses lines. The futili- tarian policies of this unholy alliance menacing the progress of the Work- ers (Communist) Party were agitat- ed for thru an appeal to the most backward and harmful sentiments in the party, Vicious whispering cam- paigns were organized on a country- wide basis against the C. «. C. mi- nority members and their associates in many districts. The real issues be- fore the party membership were not discussed by the C. E. C. majority or its satellites. Not a single article was written by any of the Foster-Lore scribes at- tempting to deal with the political and economic conditions of the coun- try. Not even the slightest effort was made by the Foster-Lore group to analyze the LaFollette movement and its recent development. Not an ar- ticle was written by the Foster-Lore group to show that the industrial de- partment of the party has made any effort at all to utilize our participa- tion in the industrial and economic struggles for the purpose of increas- ing the political radicalization of the masses. Not a word was offered in refutation of the criticism made by the C. H.C. minority that the Foster. Lore group still maintains the “su- percilious attitude towards the inde. pendent unions” it was warned ‘against by the Profintern: Last but its use of the party state power in the controversy. We are charitable enough not even to condemn its re- peated flagrant misuse ot this state power. We do not deny that the C. E. C. majority—the Foster-Lore group —nosed out the Marxian group of Comrade Ruthenberg by 280 votes. We do not begrudge the Foster-Lore group this paltry majority of 230. It certainly was well-earned, consider- ing the efforts invested and the re- sources at the command of the Fos- ter-Lore group. In fact, we marvel at the fact that Foster-Lore majority was so slim after the eleventh hour change of rules disfranchising hun- dreds of comrades at these member- ship meetings and in view of the, lack of facilities at the command of the C. E. C. minority to mobilize its real, full strength in the party. A Redeeming Feature. It is plain that the party expression to date is nearly evenly divided. In every big city where the C. EB. C. ma- jority position was indorsed, it was jone so only thru an organic merger and complete unity of the Foster- Burman group with the Lore follow- ers. In New York, Boston, and Chi- cago, the solid block of Lore adher- ents alone gave the majority_of the membership meetings to the C. E. C. majority. Consequently, no matter what damage the party controversy might have brought, it at least has brought one inestimable gain to the party. We have in mind tae fact that this discussion has once and for all established in the eyes of the mem- bership the unity between the Foster- Burman group and the Lore Two-and- a-Half International group in our party. The growing awareness on the part of our membership of the menace to the party in such an alliance—an alliance in flagrant violation of the last C. I. decision on the American question—can only prove a source of greatest strength towards a speedy galvanizing and complete unification of our Communist ranks for intensi- fied struggles against the exploiters, their government, and the reactionary trade union bureaucracy. Considering all the obstacles, consi- dering the level of the discussion maintained by the Foster-Lore group, the Workers (Communist) Party should feel highly gratified at the splendid response given by the mem- bership to the Communist policies proposed by the Ruthenberg group. Our Workers (Communist) Party can well face the future, its rapidly grow- ‘ng. difficult future, with so firm, with so adamant a Communist backbone in its ranks. THE FARMER-LABOR PARTY POLICY IN THE UNIONS By BERT MILLER. AT and Mike, two bricklayers from the Emerald Isle, were working one day on the front of a building, when suddenly a portion of the scat- folding collapsed and Mike fell to the street. He lay there for a long time in a state of unconsciousness until a doctor was called. The doctor exam- ined Mike thoroly and pronounced him dead. At that moment, Mike woke up and said, “By God, I ain’t dead at all.” Whereupon his colleague, Pat, ex- claimed in a voice shaking with ex- asperation, “Shut up, ye fool, don’t ye tink de doctor knows wot he’s tawk in’ about?” And so the members of the Workers Party, as well as the working class in generaly, are asked tq meekly accept the verdict of Bittel- man, when he pronounces in tones of extreme unction and finality, that the labor party slogan is dead. Having, like Mike, experienced the advantages of life and real activity, the members of the Workers Party, as well as the workers in general, will be prone to question the solemn verdict of even so “sage” a counsellor as Bittelman. They will instead seriously examine the facis in the situation. The Development of Farmer-Labor Movement. In. 1920 the national farmer-labor party polled 265,411 votes in 19 states, At the conference of the C, P. P. held on Dec. 11, 1922, at which were represented 27 national unions, 8 state federations of labor and various agri- cultural and political organizations, a motion for “independent political ac- tion by the agricultural and industrial workers thru a party of their own” was defeated by a vote of only 52 to 64. According to figures published in the Labor Herald, almost twenty state federations of labor endorsed a labor party in 1923, in addition to hundreds of local and national unions. In 1924 the farmer-labor majority in the lower house of the legislature of North Dakota, was increased from one to eleven. (New Republic, Nov. 26, 1924), Ayres received over 18,000 votes for United States senator on a farmer-labor ticket, and Putnam re- ceived 20,876 for governor. Two years ago the vote for the farmer-labor can- didate for governor of Minnesota was 295,479 as compared with 309,758 for the republican candidate. In the re- cent election the farmer-labor candi- date polled 365,000 votes as compared with 400,000 for the republican candi- date, As farmer-labor candidate for the U. S. senate, Magnus Johnson re- ceived about 375,000 votes against 385,000 for Schall, his opponent. True the Minnesota party is part of the LaFollette movement, which we must severely criticize as such and demand a real labor party, nevertheless the results indicate that the farmer-labor party slogan still retains its popu- larity. In Denver the farmer-labor vote for LaFollette was 4,951 in spite of the fact that there was a separate LaFol- lette-Wheeler ticket. In Montana an energetic campaign was waged by the farmer-labor party. These facts and figures show that the farmer-labor party movement is not a mere bubble, which has for some unexplicable reason appeared and suddenly disappeared from the political horizon, but rather that it is a movement which has years of thoro-going organization behind it and that its roots are sunk deep in the economic struggle of the industrial and agricultural workers. __ LaFollette Movement and F. L. P. It is true that the LaFollette wave has for the time being engulfed it. Can such a movement, however, be swallowed for long by the present nondescript shadow of an organization headed by LaFollette? Can this vague vacillating, purely temporary alliance of conflicting elements hold the work- ers who have unmistakably expressed their determination to have a real, independent political party? Are: eco- nomic conditions at this time for the crystallization of a third middle class party which can retain its hold on the workers who desire a class party? Unless we are blind to facts we must admit that the LaFollette hodge podge will not be able to hold the workers and farmers who, in the face Jof increasing exploitation and oppres- sion (a prospect admitted by the ma- jority), will be forced to defend them- selves thru the aid of their own politi- cal weapon, a labor party. Under these circumstances let us examine for a moment what will be the prob- able results if we as active trade unionists were to put the majority's Policy into effect, i. e. not to “pro- mulgate the slogan of a ‘farmer-labor party’ at the present time,” calling upon the workers instead to join the Workers Party. The value of a slogan can well be tested by its applicability in the trade unions, In Practice. Under this policy the members of the Workers Party will then have as their major political task in the labor movement (for politicale propaganda in the unions must be a prime activity there), to force the acceptance of the complete program of the Workers Party. In the most reactionary or- ganizations, where workers only yes- terday were blindly following LaFol- lette, Davis, yes, and even Coolidge, you will ask the workers to come out ‘or the dictatorship of the proletariat and to join the Workers Party. (See statement on C. P. P. A.) Those mili- ants who have been partially sympa- -hetic with your work in the union, but who are political still confused will be squarely confronted with the ssue to accept or reject the complete program of the Workers Party, There will be no other alternative. The re- sult of such a foolhardy policy can only be to prejudice the very elements whose support you can ultimately win and to make it easy for the reaction- aries to expel you without a murmur of protest from your fellow workers. It is a cardinal principle of strategy that you must not, expose your weak- ness to the enemy whom you are fight- ing. When the issue of supporting the Workers Party comes on the floor, will your sympathizers support you? Of course not. Only the Communists will (if they dare at this time) come out openly in support of the full pro- gram of the Workers Party, They will be completely isolated and ex- posed to the danger of being picked out and expelled by the officials, Expulsion on such an issue at this time would be comparatively easy. .The workers do not realize the im- portance and necessity of the exist- ence of the Workers Party. The re- actionaries will charge that you are in the union, not for the promotion of the interests of the workers, but pri- marily in the interests of the Workers + Immediately you rah ia aman placed upon the defensive, whereas Communists should as a rule be on the offensive. You would have on your hands a difficult job of showing even the most backward workers, even those who voted for Davis and Coolidge, first that they need a politi- cal party of their own class (which they have not yet learned) and second that the political party is the Workers Party. To this the majority would reply, “But see what the Workers Party is planning to do about unem- ployment, child labor, the foreign-born, etc.,” and the unsophisticated workers would ask, “What has the Workers Party done about these issues? Has the Workers Party any representa- tives in congress or the legislature to fight for our interests ” Of course, the Communists understand that these issues cannot be fought out in parlia- ments, but the masses of workers do not. A Confession in Bankruptcy. The majority would have us volun- tarily give over the political leader- ship of the workers to the farmer-la- borites and the socialists. During the coming struggle the workers will need a political weapon. The farmer-labor- ites and the socialists will come out for a labor party. Shall we sit idly by, shall we merely oppose the propo- sition and present no counter-proposal or shall we oppose and present as a counter-proposal, “Join the Workers Party?” In the first case we relin- quish our role as the vanguard and the leaders of the workers. In the secon we seem to be fault finding only with no constructive to offer. The third proposition is a futile mass ap- peal at this time, as I have already pointed out. ‘What a sorry figure we will cut before the workers, when we the most energetic exponents of the class farm- er-labor party idea, now keep silent or oppose it entirely. Will we not rightfully be branded as traitors and turncoats by the workers? Compare the predicament into which the application of the majority policy ‘places us, with our favorable position under the minority proposition. As soon as we actively and energetically come out for a class farmer-labor party, a national federation of work- ers’ and farmers’ organizations, both economic and political, the leaders are forced to take the defensive. Those elements which are not yet with us but who are in favor of class political action, must line up with us. The masses who are not yet amen- able to the complete program and principles of the Workers Party can easily understand and sympathize with the slogan for a real party repre- senting all the forces fighting in the struggle for the workers and farmers of the country. .We sink our roots more and more firmly in the masses and they learn to have confidence is us. We can, therefore, the more easily state who we are and what we stanc for. We do not place the backward masses in the position of taking or leaving the program of the Workers Party, for which they are not yet ready. However, we energetically ana systematically enlighten the more slass conscious workers as to our full program, and its real meaning. These elements we can win to our party by such a plan of education and activity, on on the basis of a real- istic poliey grounded on the objective conditions which the workers are fac- ing today. Contact With the Masses, Not Isolation By HENRY BLEECKER. ‘HE movement for a farmer-labor party which started a few years. ago was swallowed by the LaFollette movement. For this reason we must abandon the slogan, “For a farmer. labor party,” and start building the Workers Party according to the thesis of the majority of the central execu- tive committee. Instead of a farmer- labor party slogan they propose the slogan “For a labor congress.” Conditions Which Created the Farmer- Labor Party Movement. The movement for a farmer-labor party crystallize during the year of 1919-20. jovemen was characterized by: (a) unemployment; (b) reduction of wages; (c) strikes; (d) open shop drive; (e) injunctions. In 1921 we passed thru a period of economic depression, six million work- ers were unemployed as a result of this. Those who secured work were ‘orced to work for reduced wages. In the steel strike of 1919 and the miners’ strike of 1920 the government used all its forces to break these strikes: Federal troops, injunctions, ete. The realization of the workers that the government is protecting the interests of the bosses stimulated them teward independent political ac- tion, with the result of the formation of the Chicago labor party. But, this movement made little progress until 1922 when the shopmen and miners’ strike broke out. The.government again played the role of defender for the capitalists, The farmers were suffering from the same economic de- pression. Millions of farmers were driven into bankruptcy. The farms were deserted, and the oppressed farmers made way for the city in search of work. This fermentation among the workers and farmers brought the farmer-labor movement to the fore. Farmer-labor parties sprung 4p yin’ several states. International unions expressed themselves in favor of independent political action. The Workers Party and the United Front. The Workers Party was politically unknown t othe masses, Thru its participation in the movement for a farmer-labor’ party and by applying the United Front tactic in accordance with the instructions of the Comintern, the Workers Party became a factor in the political struggles of the exploited masses, The LaFollette Movement. Parallel to the farmer-labor move- ment, the small bourgeoisie who are also in conflict with the big capitalists began organizing politically, which ex- pressed itself in the formation of the progressive bloc in congress under the leadership of LaFollette. The call for the June 17 convention for the sake of organizing the workers and farmers into a political party was unsuccessful on account of the attacks of LaFolleite and the union bureau- crate of the A. F, of L, The workers. and farmers deserted the June 17 con- vention, and followed LaFollette be- cause they were under ‘the illusion that a farmer-labor party would be created by LaFollette after the elec tion, ) Who Voted for LaFollette. In the article, “Sound the Alarm,” written in the WORKHR of Nov. 15, Comrade Bittelman states that the petty bourgeoisie deserted LaFollettte in the last election because, of the terroristic, methods . by Wall Street to elect Cool Ta tis proe- ise of certain concession on bourgeoisie. He further proves that the 5,000,000 votes which LaFollette received came mostly from the work- ers dnd poor farmers. The Economic Situation in the Near Future. In their analysis of the economic situation, the majority of the central executive committee state the follow- ing: (Paragraph 6, Economic Situa- tion, majority thesis) The overwhelm- ing weight of economic tendencies now operative, point to an intensifica- tion.of the class struggle, resulting in renewed efforts of thé empl>ying class to cut wagez, lengthen hou.s and to destroy the unions. We as Communists must draw the conclusion that this unrest among the workers and farmers will again be expressed in a demand for a farmer- labor party, and not to be isolated from this movement we must take an attive part in it. The Majority’s Slogan for a Labor Congress. The majority of the central execu- tive committee are against the farm- erlabor party slogan. Why? They claim there is no movement for it. I ask this question, is there a move- ment for the so-called labor congress which the majority urges us to work for? When we look thru the pages of history of the American working class political movements -we find that the idea for independent political action was never expressed in the form of a labor congress. The slogan for a labor congress will only hinder the movement for the formation of a farmer-labor party, which is not only in demand at presént but was histori- cally popular, among workers and farmers. “ Conclusion, We expect intensive crises in the immediate future. The workers and poor farmers will again start organiz- ing politically thru a farmer-abor partq. It is, therefore, the duty of’the Workers Party, if it expects to bel come a Communist mass party, to take an active part in this movement. As in the program of the profintern for the Trade Union Educational Leaguegin reference to the labor party. “The league shall take an active part in the building of the labor party. This movement not only teaches the workers their first Jesson in class pce action, but it also furnishes a favofable ground for the left wing to fight the trade union bureaucracy and to bring about trade union prog- ress generally, The league must take full advantage of the favorable situa- tion created by the labor party move- meng.” Comrades, the slogan of a farmer- labor party means contact with the masses. Without this slogan—tends to isolation. CHICAGO, ATTENTION! All friendly organizations, T. U. B, L. groups, party branches, language federations and Y, W. L, branches! Arrangements have been made for the following major city affairs. Do not arr conflicting affairs on thea days: Karl Liebknecht Celebration—Sun- day, January 11, Northwest “all, corner North and Western Aves auspices Y. W. L., Local Chicago. Lenin memorial meeting—Wednes day, Jan, 21, Ashland Auditcrium, Van Buren and Ashland, Workers Party, Local Chicago. The Red Revel—Saturday, Feb, 28, West Bnd Women's Club Hall, i “REVOLUTIONARY” PHRASE MONGERS By SIMON FELSHIN. ‘HE thesis of thé majority is not a thesis. It is fly-paper for catch- ing flies. There’ is something in it for everybody. This is a practice fol- lowed by the republican and demo- cratic parties just before elections, so that the majority is living up to the best Américan tradition in the con- struction of its thesis. For the leftist sectarians and romantic revolution- ists in the party the thesis states that the farmer-labor party tactic meays liquidation of the Workers Party and is opportunistic. For those who still favor a farmer-labor party it hints that the farmer-labor party idea is not rejected definitely but that only for the present the movement is dead. To the right wing opportunists it holds out the prospect of a passive, well- behaved, declamation and propagan- da club, which is just what suits them. The spokesmen of the majority are constantly talking about fake farmer- labor parties. I would retort by writ- ing all over the thesis of the major- ty in huge letters so that all may ee: Fake United Front. It ill-be- ,ooves the majority to speak of fake ‘armer-labor parties and to swear chat they will give us the true, revo- lutionary united front from below when they have been guilty in the past of forming fake united fronts with any one who came along. Only one instance is enough—the fake unit- ed front with John Fitzpatrick in Chicago. Conditions Analyzed. The conditions that gave rise to the farmer-labor party/ movement have not changed. It isa fact that 23 per cent of the farmers went bankrupt. The temporary boom barely enabled only a section of the exploited farm- ers to pay off some of the accumulat- ed debts, and their condition is hard- ly changed. Unemployment has not abated to any extent. How then have the conditions changed? The majority says that LaFollette has cap- tured the farmer-labor party move- ment. If that is so it is our duty to go out and save the workers from LaFollette. We must fight for the soul of the masses, and not capitulate before the enemy without a struggle. The attitude of the majority means that we extend a helping hand to La- Follette; that’s what it means inthe final analysis. A “Majority” Champion at Work. - A typical presentation of the ma- jority point of view is that of Joe Manley, their newly acquired cham- pion who presented his wares at a discussion meeting of the Harlem English branch in New York. One of the most remarkable transformations is that-of Comrade Joe Manley. How can we take a comrade seriously who undergoes such a complete, such a sudden change? I must say that it took my breath away to hear his brazen tirade. He worked himself‘ up blue in the face, just as he used to do over the very opposite position only a short time ago. He seems to have forgotten completely his recent protestations of faith. The whole performance looked to me like a neat bit of salesmanship. A salesman can take any kind of goods and speak of it with just as much conviction, en- thusiasm and sincerity as of any other kind ef goods. It's a way sales- men have. But what is this we Com- munists are doing? Are we selling wares? Comrade Manley says that all the farmer-labor parties that were formed in the past were fake parties. But how about all those articles he wrote telling the very contrary? Why didn’t he speak up then? Was he lying then or is he lying now? Stand By the C. I. Comrades should stand by the in- structions of the Communist Interna- tional which were issued only recent- ly and not only in 1922 as stated by Comrade Manley. These instructions. say explicitly and in such clear lan- guage that every dog in the street can understand: “The first task of the Workers Party is to become a mass Communist Party of workers. It can fulfill this task only by most actively participating in the establishment of a labor party which will embrace all elements of the working class willing \~ A LOS ANGELES INVITATION. : You are cordially invited to the First Birthday Party of America’s only Revolutionary Working Class Paper THE DAIEY WORKER which will be held Tuesday Evening, January 13, at 8 P. M. Brooklyn Hall. : CORNER SOTO AND BROOKLYN Daily Worker Committee, EngWsh Br., W. to conduct a fight for a policy indepen- dent of the capitalist class and by es- tablishing a bond with -the farmers who are at present in a state of strong fermentation.” Business “Communism” in New York, A deal has been made in New York. One week Lore’s followers spoke in favor of retaining the farmer-labor party slogan. The very next week they lined up solidly with the major> ity. This is a deal between the ma-. jority and Lore. Lore, the Two-and-a- Half Internationalist was to stay out of the fight until the last minute in order not to inconvenience the ma- jority by openly attaching himself to it. At the same time he immediately released his followers so that they might line up with the majority and thus present a solid front to the Com- munist minority. The reward to Lore perhaps will be that in case of vic- tory for the majority, he and another Two-and-a-Half Communist will be on the new central executive committee, If such a deal has been made, it is nothing but a dirty trick and the New York comrades should not be taken in by it. A “Pure” Communist Protests Too Much. Comrade Juliet Stuart Poyntz be- clouds the issue by constantly reviy- ing the third party alliance (that’s their game), failing to mention that her allies past and present were the staunchest supporters of this posi- tion. Comrade Poyntz is now the sec- ond Sylvia Pankhurst. She will have nothing to do with the farmér-labor party because that is compromise, op- portunism, menshevigm, socialism, she says. She wants to be pure, chaste; she does not want to lose her Communist virginity. Sylvia Pank- hurst, the renegade, in her day spoke the very same kind of language, as for instance, when she wrote the fol- lowing: “A Communist Party must keep its doctrine pure, and its inde- pendence of reformism inviolate; its mission is to lead the way, without stopping or turning, by the direct road to the Communist revolution.” And Comrade Lenin handled her as she deserved in his pamphlet, “Left Communism — And Infantile Sick- uess.” Comrades would do well to read this pamphlet of Lenin, particu- larly now when our party is threaten- ed by this same sickness, this left wing sectarianism whith is only ‘the counterpart to right wing opportun- ism. Membership Will Not be Fooled Comrades should not be misled by ultra revolutionary phrases which are only a cloak for passivity, lack of revolutionary conviction, skepticism, the rankest kind of opportunism. Let the revolutionary phrase mongers continue to play at being ultra-revolu- tionary—their shamming will be un- covered in the end. And as for those of the rank and file who are deluded by this phraseology, they will soon come to their senses. Comrades, we must fight against the defeatism which is threatening to engulf of our party. We must fight against the forces that are trying to turn our party into a propaganda club, a sect. We must combat the one-sid- ed ideology of trade unionism, the pseudo syndicalism in the party which does not understand the true role of a Communist Party. We must Bolshe- vize.our party with the methods and in the spirit of Leninism. Next Sunday Night and Every Sun. day Night, the Open Forum, RUSSIAN-UKRAINIAN CONCERT AND DANCE SUNDAY, JANUARY 11 The concert and dance which was announced by the Russian and Uk- rainian branches of the Workers Party for Dec. 28, was postponed on account of the party membership meeting, to SUNDAY, JAN. 11, at the same hall, Schoenhoffen Hall, take cars to Milwaukee and Ashland Aves. Tickets sold for Dec. 28 will be accepted on Jan. 11,