The Daily Worker Newspaper, May 13, 1925, Page 6

i Page Six seroma THE DAILY WORKER THE DAILY WORKER. Published by the DAILY WORKER PUBLISHING OO. 1118 W. Washington Bivd., Chicago, M3. (Phone: Monroe 4712) SUBSCRIPTION RATES By mall: $3.50....6 months $2.00...8 months By mail (in Chicago only): : $4.50....6 months $2.50...8 month 86.00 per yoar 68.00 per year Adress atl mail and make out checks to THE DAILY WORKER 1112 W. Washington Bivd. * J. LOUIS ENGDAHL } WILLIAM F, DUNNE{ -Baitors MORITZ J. LOEB.......essenne-Business Manager at —_——$<—$ Entered as second-class mail Sept. 21, 1923, at the Post Office at Chicago, Ill, under the act of March 8, 1879, <> 290 Chicago, ililnele Advertising rates op app*cation Charlie Schwab’s Smile We have heard of the smiling Mona Li whose al, yampish orbs follow you with an intriguing mes- sage, which makes it a matter for public thanks giving that the coquettish optics are on canva not located in an animated piece of protopl: Domestic tranquility is thus saved an added strain. Charlie Schwab is in the field as a competitor y to the beaming Mona. If we are to believe John M. Glenn, secreta ry of the Illinois Manufacturers Association, Charlie’s smile is worth as much to the American capitalist class as Lisa’s twinkle is to the Parisian picture gallery where she hangs. merry But the department of justice is out to rob} Charlie of his dimples along with some of his dough. This is how it happened: During the war Charlie was one of those willing patriots who of- fered his services to the government for one dol | Jar a year when American soldiers were dodging | German bullets and French cooties for thrity dol lars a month. But Charlie’s steel company could not avoid} getting contracts, for making battleships for the | navy. And the government paid generously in| those days. In fact, while Charlie was only re- ceiving one dollar a year he was spending $250,000 a month. This news created quite a sensation at the time and it is a matter of history that Charlie shed tears over the thot that anybody would doubt his integrity or his patriotism. The tears won for the time being. But the de- partment of justice for some mysterious reason which only the gods can unravel is suing the Beth- lehem Shipbuilding corporation for $11,000,000, alleged to have been disbursed to that company by the government in overpayment. The soft-hearted editor of the Manufacturers News does not object to the government suing the company and recovering the money, but why hurt the feelings of such a tried and true patriot as Schwab? Isn’t he one of the greatest business men. of the world? And he did not commit a crime! At the worst he only robbed the govern- ment of $11,000,000. And sure everybody knows this is not a criminal case. He might have vio- lated the criminal syndicalism law of Idaho and be a real scoundrel, but stealing a trifle like eleven million dollars in the name of patriotism is the highest compliment that could be paid to his business genius. Fearing that rough usage may rob Charlie of his eleven million dollar smile which might prove invaluable in the coming war with-Japan, Glenn sobbs: “Take the money away from Mr. Schwab’s company if it has been overpaid, but leave his sinjie which will fade if his character is unjustly destroyed.” Here pause a moment to fish out a dry handkerchief. Pity Albert B. Fall, and other falien angels if the D. of J. does not listen to rea- son. A Mexican girl attempted to kill the president in order to wrest a catholic church from the hands of a body of Mexican catholics who do not rec- ognize the pope. She was inspired by god. The old fellow is just as bloodthirsty as he was in the biblical days. Defense Day Quite a lot of noise was made last year about the designation of November 11, the anniversary of the cessation of hostilities in the world war, as “defense day.” The pacifists were so vocal that the war department was obliged to soften their wrath by promising that it would not happen again; that it was merely a test to try out certain plans that the military leaders had made for de- fending the country in ease of attack. But our our militarists do not drop a good idea very quickly, The war department has now an- nounced that it intends to make “defense day” a regular annual event, The date will be Novem- ber 11. A good day to get the masses excited! It is now distant enough so that the war agonies have lost their sting and life under this monotonous cap- italist system is so sordid that even the job of dodging bullets will look more inviting than the prospect of spending a lifetime listening to the whirr of an automatic machine. The war department is planning to militarize this country to an extent never even dreamed of by | the German kaiser before the world war. And} this militarization is not directed against an out- side enemy but against the enemy within, which is, in the eyes of the capitalist class the labor move- ment. Every day get a “sub” for the DAILY WORKER and a member for the Workers Party, ; Ivory Headed Labor Leaders When the Barr state police bill was before the Illinois state legislature the DAILY WORKER declared that this bill, tho endorsed by the leaders of the Illinois Federation of Labor and .supported by Governor Small, was just as vicious as the Dunlap bill which was the first preference of the open shop manufacturers, The employers preferred the Dunlap bill, but it would appear that their opposition to the Barr substitute was only a sham one ealeulated to de- ceive the workers. The Chicago Tribune came out boldly for the Barr bill, holding that it estab- lis in the right direction. ed the principle of state police and was a step Now we have the same opinion, tho somewhat stronger, expressed by the Manufacturers News, which is edited by John M. Glenn, notorious open shopper and secretary of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Associaiton. The editorial is quoted in full so that the rank and file of the labor unions in this state will see what a collection of sapheads their sagacious leaders, No doubt they will not feel_comfortable in the same boat with John M. Glenn, but there is where the trai Walker, Olander and Fitzpatrick are. tors belong. The editorial reads: “Tilinois is to be congratulated. After a number of years’ efforts—tacking, shifting sails—running aground and wallowing in the trough of the sea—we are going to have a state police law. It is the Barr bill which was passed by the senate last week by a vote of 34 to 9 It will be passed by the house also be- cause nearly everybody is in favor of it. “Wha in a name?’ It does not matter whether it is the Dunlap or Barr. bill so that we have a state police force that will effec- tively patrol Llinois highways that bad advertisement state. “As Manufacturers News sees it, there is not much dfference between the Barr bill and the Dunlap bill except that the Dunlap bill pro- vided for 450 men and the Barr bill has a limit of 750 men. Under both bills the police can be used to enforce law and order. They can op- pose crime wherever they see it. Their officers can send them wherever needed. They can be mobilized if necessary for any purpose. “Tt has been charged that the Barr bill will provide for a political police force. It will be no more political than the police force would have been under the Dunlap bill. Its use, its activities and its policies will be di- rected by public sentiment—the strongest force in the world. Governor Small, if he wants to, can make the Illinois state police the most efficient state police in the United States. It would be the most popular thing he could do. It would be playing the kind of politics that would make a hit with the public. We believe he will do it.” The official organ of the open shoppers has as much faith in Governor Small as the labor lead- ers have. Neither the labor leaders nor the em- ployers will be disappointed. /But the workers will have their eyes opened sooner or later and their heads perhaps by the clubs of the state cossacks. and stop crime has been a for the Every day get a “sub” for the DAILY WORKER and a member for the Workers Party. An Oily Investment John D. Rockefeller, Jr., gave a gift of $625,000 to the fund collected for the upkeep of five Amey ican colleges located in the oil areas of Asia Minor. A budget of $2,500,000 is being raised to keep those colleges going for five years. The ease with which this money is raised indicates the importance at tached by the American capitalists, interested in the exploitation of Asia Minor to the kind of edu cation their future slaves should have inside thei: domes. It is a safe bet that the professors hired with the money donated by John D. Rockefeller, Jr., will not tell the workers and peasants of Asia Minor, that the mineral resources of their country belong by right to the people of that country who apply their labor power to the task of creating use values of this raw wealth. On the contrary they will be told what blessings thé big trusts have brought to the people of America and how mucli happier the inhabitants of the Near East will be when they develop a crop of pious millionaire Sunday school teachers, So far the war between the rum runners and the American navy seems to be a draw.. Perhaps the noise that sounded like the discharge of guns was only the popping of champagne corks. The fight may not prove decisive, but it will be spirited. Curtailment of liberty is alright, provided the object in view is the prevention of the working class from throwing off the chains of slavery. But suppression of the license of a few exploiters to rob the majority is a horse of another color. The Chicago Tribune admits that liberty in Ttaly under Mossulini is somewhat emasewlated, but perhaps, says the Trib, the Italians dike their free- dom that way. Only Americans like it unadulter- ated, like their moonshine, Get a member for the Workers Party and a new subscription for the DAILY WORKER, uge ; By JANSEN. HE question of the driving forces of the Russian revolution loomed big at the last discussion within the ranks of the Russian Communist Party in connection! with the publica- tion of Trotsky’s Lessons of October, In connection with,,this discussion, some comrades in the Comintern ex- pressed the opinion that the differ- ence between Trotsky and Lenin is that Lenin contributed much more to the development of the Russian Revo- lution than Trotsky could have done on the basis of his theory of revolu- tion. This is a thoroly erroneous viewpoint, for it does not show any basic and essential difference between Lenin’s theory of reyolution and that of Trotsky. In his appreciation of the charac- ter and driving forces of the Russian revolution in 1905, Lenin pointed out to the mensheviks that they held er- roneous views of the peculiarities of the Russian bourgevis-democratic rev- olution. The judgment of the menshe- viks followed the usual conventlonai historical lines. Their idea was that if the revolution is a bourgeois revolu- tion its main driving force must be he bourgeoisie, Lenin on the other hand pointed out ‘that the Russian bourgeois-democratic: revolution was an agrarian-peasant revolution. Lenin had come to this''¢onclusion when studying the peasant movements in} 1902-03. The liberal’ bourgeoisie, far from supporting these peasant move- ments, resisted them with all its might. On the basis of an economic analysis of the tendencies of the de- velopment of econimic life in Russia, venin came to the conclusion that two types of evolution were possible for the Russian of those days. On the one hand, the American type—total abolition of servitude, latifundia, elim- ‘nation of medieval agrarian relations large scale development of an untram- melled capitalist system of agricul- iure. On the other hand the Prussian |type—slow evolutionary transforma- tion of large estates into capitalist concerns. From the viewpoint of ob- jective economic development both these types were possible and the task of the party of the;working class did not consist in meditating fatalistically on objective historical development, but impressing energetically on the scales of history and contributing to the development of Russia by means and methods most advantageous to the working class; Lenin never tired of exposing the erroneous interpreta- tion given by the mensheviks to the nature of the Russian bourgeois-demo- cratic revolution. . Lenin pointed out altho the Russian revolution had to be socially and economically a bourgeois- lemocratic revolution, its main driv- ing forces had to. be the working class and the peasani The mensheviks, as well as the author¢ of the well- known theory of.,permanent revolu- tion—Parvus and Trotsky, fail to un- derstand these main historical pecul- iarities of the Russian revolution. The mensheviks asserted that the Bol- shevik formula “revolutionary demo- cratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry” would inevitably lead the working class to socialist exagger- ations and illusiops, and will be the grave of the socialist ideal fér a long time to come. The advocates of “permanent revolution” said that the task of the working class consisted in initiating immediately the socialist revolution. Parvus and Trotsky’s FOREIGN TRADE OF RUSSIA IN BIG INCREASE (Special to The Daily Worker) WASHINGTON, D. C., May 11.— The growth of Soviet Russia's foreign rade,has made tremendous strides in ; the past year, it ig admitted even by the anti-Soviet secretary of commerce, Herbert Hoover. ~ . Character and Driving Forces of the main political slogan was: “Without teh czar, but a labor government.” On the other hand;Lenin considering the concrete international conditions under which the revolution of 1905 had developed, and the social class structure in Russia, said that Russia was not on the eve of a socialist revo- lution. alee FTER the defeat of the revolution of 1905 the mensheviks adopted a liquidator’s point of view. They con- sidered the bourgeois-democratic revo- lution accomplished. The menshe- viks supported the “Stolypin” “Prus- sian” form of government for Russia. During these years their dispute was not about the character of the revolu- tion, but about the possibility of revo- intion in general. The advocates of “permapent revolution” were at that time on the sideyof avowed menshe- viks. The agrarian program is so to speak the mirror which reflects the character of this or that fraction of Russian social-democracy. Supporters of the theory of perma- nent revolution. whilst retaining their revolutionary character in a general abstract form, accepted the menshe- vik agrarian program with its medie- val agrarian conditions. Strange revolutionaries indeed who proclaimed immediate straightforward socialist revolution and at the same time supported feudal agricultural re- lations. But this only showed that the advocates of “permanent revolu- tion,” as well. ashe menshevik: failed to understand that the main p culiarity of the Russian-bourgeo’ democratic revolution is that it is an agrarian revolution. The advocates of “permanent revolution” and the men- sheviks failed to understand that the main task of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia was the solution of the agrarian question. LL the errors of ‘Trotsky’s revolu- tionary theory as applied to Rus- sian conditions originate in his over- estimation of the elements of capital- ist development in the country. In his estimate of the significance of the peasantry for the pending Russian revolution, Trotsky wrote in 1915 “The experience of the Russian revo- lution and the reaction which followed it shows us that now, even less than in 1905 we can depend on the peas- antry playing an independent and de- cisive role in the development of revo- lutionary events, insofar as the peas- antry has remained in a state of teudal slavery, it remains in its ele- all the economic ideological insularity and political and cultural backward- ness and helplessness which paralyzes the social energy of every movement and compel it to stop short where real revolutionary action should begin. But, insofar as the peasantry has made during this epoch economic and cultural progress, this progress is in the form of bourgeois development and is therefore bound to contribute to the further development of class differences within the peasantry itself. This means that the industrial prole- tariat is confronted now much more than in 1905 with the question of drawing to its side the proletarian and semi-proletarian elements of the countryside, and not the peasantry as a class.” Y this statement, Comrade Trotsky shows that he failed to understand that the peasantry as a whole could rise against medieval agricultural con- ditions. History has shown us that this is possible. For the countryside the October revolution of 1917 began as a bourgeois-democratic revolution. The whole peasantry supported the Soviets in the struggle against the landowners’ medieval agrarian condi- tions. It was only in the middle of 1918 when the “committees of poor peasants” were organized that the class struggle began to permeate the villages and that the upper stratum of the peasantry dissociated itself from he revolution. The slogan of the ruggle for land played a very im- portant role in the organization and mobilization of large peasant masses. [tewas a great advantage to the Rus- sian revolution that the proletarian ‘evolution coincided with the “peas- ant war” against the landowners. What Trotsky’s revolutionary theory failed to take into account is that the Russian revolution of 1917, which be- gan as an agrarian peasant reyolu- tion, will develop into a socialist revo- lution, \ by his book The Proletarian nevota-| tion and the Renegade Kautsky, Lenin wrote on this subject as fol- lows: “It has happened just as we said. The trend of the revolution is a confirmation of the corectness of four reasoning. At first together with the peasantry against the monarchy, against landowners and medievalism (and to this extent the revolution re- mains a bourgeois-democratic revolu- tion..And then together with the | poorest peasantry, the semi-proletar- [a opposition to the old regime In the nine months ending in March 1924, the portion of Soviet Russia in Europe imported $4,121,167 worth of products according to Hoover's fig- ures. Imports in the nine months end- ing in 1925 to Soviet Russia in Eu- rope amounted to $6,135,094, accord- — ing to these figures. In the month of March, 1925, the imports were $1,259,806, a jump from $680,499 worth of! imports in March, 1924, i Exports also soated during the last year, the department of commerce fig- ures show. The Value of exports in nine months ending March 1, 1925, was $33,373,474, compared to $7,456, 292:in the corresponding nine months of 1924. The value of the exports in- creased four times in one year. In March, 1925, $7,353,265 worth of products were exported and in March, 1924, $2,999,940, None of these figures included trade carried on by thé portion of Soviet Russia outside of Europe. Wood on Murder Mission. MANILA, P. ti May 11,—General Leonard Wood, :military dictator in the Philippines “on behalf of Wall Street imperialismpis now enroute to Lanao to lead the fight of his con- stabulary to exterminate the Moro na- tives who have taken refuge in a mountain fort near that point, D GIVE ONEL GET A suB ECO a year § 250-6 months 6200 3 months And Here’s the Brick FRPATES Russian Revolutio iat and all exploited against capital- ism, including the village’ rich, the kulaks and speculators and in this respect the revolution becomes. a socialist’ revolution. To endeavor to erect an artificial Chinese wall be- tween the former and the latter, to” separate them for each other by any thing else but the degree of the pre- paredness of the proletariat and the degree of its unification with the vil- lage poor, is a flagrant misinterpreta- tion and degradation of Marxism, tantamount to substituting it by lb- eralism. . . In the meantime, the reason why the Soviets are a much higher form and type of democratic- ism is that by uniting and drawing into politics large sections of workers and peasants they provide in close proximity to the ‘people’ (in the sense of Marx's statement in 1871 on a real people’s revolution) a very sensitive barometer of the development’ and growth of the political and class ma- turity of the masses.” Lenin being a brilliant . dialectician, fully . under- stood the development of the bour- geois-democratic -revolution into the socialist revolution. Therefore we say that those comrades ‘whom we mentioned in the beginning of*our ar- ticle and who are of the opinion that the Russian revolution could “have - been begun on the Trotsky theory but could not have reached such an ad- vanced state of development on the strength of that theory, are wrong. or Trotsky wanted to skip over the link of the agrarian-peasant revolu- tion, which had to be taken hold of in order to develop the fight for social ism. “If the Bolshevik proletariat,” said Lenin, “without waiting for the class struggle to get hold of the villages and without preparing it and making use of it, had tried to ‘decree’ civil war or the ‘introduction of socialism’ in the country, if it had attempted to do without a temporary bloc with the peasantry as a whole and without a nuniber of concessions to the middle peasantry, etc.—this would have been a Blanquist perversion of Marxism, an attempt of the minority to force its will ‘on the majority, a theoretic absurdity, a failure to understand that a general peasant revolution is still a bourgeois revolution and that it is im- possible in a backward country to make it a socialist revolution without a series of transitions ‘ard transi- tional phases.” (Continued in next issue.) You Can Do You can make a real contribution to the revolutionary movement in this country by a simple deed—by getting a subscription from another worker—or giving him one. That will give him information on the events in the world of labor— on the progress of the Communist movement in every country—and brief, clear, articles daily on the principles of Communism. If you are looking for a way to “Make Another Communist’’—what better and what simpler way is there? You can do this! You know the worker in your shop or in your local union— : Lie th1eM0 “Saoe a year F450 6 montis § 250, Fmontis THE NEW SUBSCRIPTION TO BUILD THE DAILY WORKER NAME STREET. i CITY. If You Make the Sub for One Year— You will receive without charge a six month sub to the WORKERS MONTHLY or a loose« leaf leather folder containing a full descriptive catalog of all Communist sure to specify your choice. publications. “Be