The Daily Worker Newspaper, January 10, 1925, Page 6

(Concluded from last Saturday) Relations Between Workers and Peasants. Here too we are not faced with the necessity of adopting new theses. That which is fundamental remains the same as it was drawn up by the hand of Lenin, but there is something new in the political and economic sit- uation that you, the leaders of the organized working class..of our country must consider first of all. Comrade Lenin taught our party and the comrades working in the trade union movement that he is not a Bolshevik who thinks of the workers only, but he is a Bolshevik who thinks of the entire country and feels himself to be the giant of the revolution, the leader, its basic force. Here at the congress we have to take a decision not on the tasks of the labor policy in general, but of the tasks of the labor policy in a peasant country. and you will have to map out your funda- mental policy not as merely as trade union policy but as the policy of the working class in a peasant country. Only then will the question be solved in a truly Bolshevist instead of lifeless manner. Our congress should map out the basic principles of this policy, remem- bering that we are effecting a dictator- ship in a country predominantly peasant. It would have been the worst kind of craft unionism, were our trade union workers to consider these ques tions from a purely “workers’” point of view. You would get a workers’ point of view in quotes, and since the working class governs the country, since it is holding the dictatorship in a peasant country, it must effect a wise dictatorship, it must effect such a dictatorship that would be accepted by the overwhelming majority of the peasants, it must act as the master of the entire country, and not think as a craft unionist defending his own craft. Therein lies the fundamental differ. ence between Leninism, Bolshevism and craft unionism. We are members of trade unions, i. e., of the organiza- tions of our trade. but we are not trade unionists in the sense that we stand for our craft only, we are not menusheviks in politics, we are mem- bers of trade unions. but we are Bol- sheviks, we feel ourselves a class holding supreme power, we must feel ourselves a class pursuing its policy in a peasant country, and here our congress finds itself in a situation that is new to some extent. “Jealousy” of the Workers. We observe a certain kind of jealousy of the workers on the part of the peasants, sumething that we did not observe before or that was observable in quite a different form. In some places we even have mutual jealousy on the part of some back- ward groups of workers towards the peasants. However, this feeling is particularly dangerous among _ the peasants, and it crops up sometimes, being based upon the class division in the village; it is displayed by the rich peasants who are interested in stirring up hatred for the workers among the peasants. We have in our country two classes, or perhaps two classes plus an ap- pendix, a fraction. This appendix consists of the remnants of the old bourgeoisie, of the embryonic new city bourgeoisie, of a part of the bour- geois intelligencia, who hate us organ- ically. Of course, this semi-class is discontented, it is jealous of the workers and of the Soviet power, but they are of no danger. We do not have to worry about them. They will wait as long as necessary. The difficulties do not lie here, but in the inter-relations of the two main classes, the working class and the peasantry. Here the least friction of one degree might give us a big deflec- tion, and here you must keep your eyes wide open. We must remember this sentiment of the peasantry. Trade Unionism and the Bolshevist Attitude Towards the Village. We must stop sbort every trade unionist who looks down upon the village, who thinks he is not con- zerned with the village. It is a narrow trade unionist who does not under- stand that we are located on the border between two classes and that we have decided upon a world his- toric task, both in our own country and on ‘a world scale. Therefore, comrades, we have no right to evade this question. There is, of course, something in the sentiment of a part of the peasantry which we cannot concede under any circumstances. No doubt there are peasants who think that the eight-hour day is a luxury; “I work 16 hours during harvest time —they think—why should the worker work only eight hours?” Can we make any concession on this question? Under no circumstances can we do so. There are questions in which we can not give in to the prejudices of the peasants, for they are only prejudices, and the peasantry must grow up and understand that the eight-hour day is the basis of the workers’ economy and promotes the welfare of the country, including also the peasants’ welfare. There are a number of questions on which the workers can not and should not. under any circum stances, give way to the prejudices of the backward peasantry and there can be no question of giving in on this matter. However, there is a group of ques- tions arousing the just discontent of the peasants, over which we must do some thinking. The first question is that of prices. Now, frequently. sepa rate groups of peasants say: “We give bread to the workers at pre-war prices; tell us, when will you give us city products at pre-war prices?” To. day only separate groups of peasants are saying these things, tomorrow the entire peasantry may be saying them. This is a question which cannot and should not be evaded by the Sixth Trade Union Congress, it is a question that stood in the center of the atten- tion at the plenary meeting of the central committee of our. party the other day, and which should engage the attention of such an important congress as is yours. You cannot Sixth All-Russian Trade Union Congress Comrade Zinoviev’s Speech Delivered at the Sixth All-Russian Trade Union Congress. party and the Soviet institutions. In the city the apparatus has been put more or less into order, and that only more or less. In the village we have not even accomplished this. Recall, for instance, the Demovko trial. Malinovsky was. killed near Nicolaev, only 50 versts from the big labor center, The incident may appear to be only of a local nature, but it reflected a very sad fact. We cannot pass by it with an easy heart. Re- member. comrades, we are still lack- ing a safe transmission belt, an inexpensive, sober, honest Soviet ma- chinery in the villages. Can the Trade Union Congress help this? Very much so, just as during the first trade union congresses, along with the current work, along with the trade union work there stood such serious questions as the organization of the civil “war, just so must we here, together with the ques- tions of current trade union interests, remember the fundamental question which is of general political import- ance; how to help the village to set up an honest, sober, cultural inex- pensive Soviet apparatus for which one would not have to blush. The Trade Unions In the Village Must Strengthen Their Work. We spoke about this at the Thir- teenth Congress of our party. We were all surprised to hear that we have more than a million trade un- fonists in the village, and I even think that this will be just as new to you as it was to us at the Thirteenth Con- gress. The educational workers have 211,000 workers in the village, the land and forest workers 196,000, the sugar workers, 177,000; the miners, 100,000, etc., ete., altogether, in excess of 2 million trade union members in the village. Comrades, let us confess, co these village trade unionists work as they should? Have you thought seriously about thts, as party and trade union members. No, we have not. But this was in the past. Now with the new development in the vil- lage, this million trade union mem- bers should move frem the realm of shadows, papers and diagrams into the realm ef realities. Most serfons attention to this ques- back out of it. This one is not a}ien! The Thirteenth Congress adopt- prejudice of the peasants Of course we must explain to the peasant why the question of prices is not se easily solved, why the war and the blockade ruined the city economy more than the village (all this can and should be said by us) but it must be remembered that this question is knocking at the door, and we cannot disregard it. It will return to us in its varied form. The peasant will put this question before us, and I think that it will be useless for us to hide our heads, we must clearly see that which is new in our political and eco- nomic fields, and remember that not much time is allowed us in this ques- tion. Already at the Eleventh Con- gress of our party Vladimir Mitch told us about it. It is necessary to use all the forces of the workers and of the party. of the trade unions and of the managing boards to push this question ahead to find a satisfactory answer to it, to show the peasants that we really want to meet their demands. Of course, the solution of this ques- tion will require a certain amount time. * The question of land improvement in the village also requires much time. However, there are questions that can be solved much quicker, and this depends entirely upon us. What Sort.of a Soviet Apparatus Does the Village Need? ‘We must set up in the village a real Soviet power, an honest cultural sober Soviet power without graft, without moonshine, a power such as we now nave in the principal centers of the labor movement. We did not have an easy time even in establishing it in these principal centers. You re- member how, two or three years ago. we had to stop our meetings by apologizing to the workers for the fact that all sorts of outcasts and adven- turers’.wormed themselves into our ne nt RR 2 RRR RRR NE te ate ie ene en nana ed a well thought out decision on this matter. We must consider it as a problem, such as it is—it is the key to every position. The Baldwins im themselves do not worry us very much. When we speak of the phase of world reaction, we know that the U. S. 5. R. is not direct- ly threatened by this world reaction; that it ‘ sreatens the workers in those county where it is beginning to reign. The world reaction cannot. af- ford us very powerfully. And this question of which I spoke, the ques- tion of jealousy of the discontent of the peasants with the workers, is a serious matter which the trade union congress should consider precisely because we are not sectionalists. Here is a trade union congress of Bol- sheviks, of Comrade Lenin’s pupils, there are no narrow sectionalists here, but men who know how to fight effectively for the needs of the work- ing class, who know how to be revolu- tionary Bolsheviks, who are worthy members of the class ”enforcing the hegemony of the working class, thus far only one-sixth part of the globe, but let us hope that the borders will shortly extend. Productivity of Labor the Pivot of Our Poticy. The question of the relationship be- tween labor and the peasantry leads us to the question of labor productiv- ity. This is a most important prob- lem, with a political aspect. We con- sider a raise of the productivity of labor as a most important question of international, economic and intern- al significance. The workers can say without exaggeration that the pro- ductivity of labor in any particular branch of industry, Baku or the Don Basin is of international importance to us, and has a tremendous agitation- al significance to the workers of all other countries. It is not only a di- rect factor in increasing our wealth, but it is one of the bridges connect- ing us with the peasantry, and one 2 of the answers which we must give to their expressions of discontent, It is the only chance of giving the pea- sant goods at a reasonable price, and it is the only chance of raising the workers’. wages. It is time to put an end to the sit- uation when we had “the union be- tween the workers and the peasants” only on placards. This union should be effected in practice, concretely. This union cannot be only a cultural union, as we thought for some time, but it must be a cultural and econo- mic union, because the question of economy, of prices, is the fundamen- tal one. The Life and Sufferings of a Bolt. The campaign for higher productiv- ity of labor is at its hight, already some positive aspects of this cam- paign are noticable, but there are also some negative aspects. Among the negative aspects is the rigmarole and noise about labor productivity. The workers quite properly nicknamed this prattology. There was a lot of noise and buzzing without business- like advice and things were represent- ed in such a way as ifthe whole busi- ness depends upon the workers alone. This is untrue, the productivity of la- bor depends only partially upon the workers. One little document, a workers’ note - handed down at the non-party conference shows also an- other aspect. A certain non-party worker reported on productivity of la- bor as follows: I will write you—he said—a history of the life and. suffer- ings of one bolt. “A bolt dropped out of a machine, a bolt 1% or 2 inches long, its price is only 1% kopecks. In order-to re. ceive the production foreman must ‘write: At Roller No. so and so, please have a new bolt fixed, then you must go to the engineer to have this signed, then to the mechaniea) engineer who will send you to the repair shop. The order has been received, and you must now write out a request. The request is written in three busy man and has other seetions un- der bim, and in order to find him you must walk about the plant. Finally you find him, and he signs the paper. You must then go te the engineer and then to the storehouse, at the storehouse you find that there are no such bolts, but that there are 3-inch © bolts. You take the bolt, cut it short and fix it in its place. Sometime it happens this way: You come to the storehouse; you don’t find what you want, and you go to the ‘main ware- house,’ the rubbish heap near BEkat- erinin’s Park. -You’ll dig in there un- til you find something. This is hap- pening at Leningrad in the Triangle factory, which cannot be classed as among the worst.” Is it the workers’ — fault if he cannot raise his produc- tivity under such conditions? Of course not. This is only one example and their number could be greatly multiplied. The Administration and the Unions — Should Be Equally Interested and Responsible for Productivity of Labor: Productivity of labor cannot be created merely by personal intensity. Here 50 per cent depends upon the state, the management upon all of us. But the other 50 per cent de- pends upon the workers. This should be plainly told the workers that the — other 50 per cent depends upon them. Some time ago you and we demand- ed together the eight-hour day from the bourgeoisie, the czar and company. Now we havea workers’ government, and allofus ask you for an eight-hour day, a real honest, sober eight-hour day, which we do not yet have. In eee eee ee ee Thus, comrades, it is wrong to put the question of who is to raise pro- ductivity, the administration or the trade unions, “we” or “you.” such a situation we shall perish, for we shall never raise the productivity but merely intensify the conflict with the peasantry. We must all raise pro- (Continued on page 7) Under .