The Daily Worker Newspaper, June 20, 1925, Page 12

x HE German Foreign Minister, Stresemann, was right when he mentioned in his speech on foreign policy that the expression, “the ques- tion of security,” had very little to do with the things which were dis- cussed under this heading, As a matter of fact, it is not a ques- tion of the securing of peace or such like things, but on the contrary, of organizing the next war, of preparing the grouping of powers. RENCH imperialism —represented today by a “left” government—un- derstands by “security”: securing its hegemony in Europe, the recognition and consolidation of its military alli- ances, the creation of a self-sufficing economic, and before all heavy in- dustrial basis of its military power, and for this purpose to draw Ger- man economy into its sphere of pow- er, further, to bind English imperial- ism by a military alliance in order to prevent its increasing armaments against France. INGLISH imperialism understands by the same term of security, something quite different. Weakening of the political influence of France, its separation from its Eu- ropean allies (Poland, Czecho-Slo- vakia, etc.), its separation from Ger- many (expulsion from the Rhine and Rubr district, separation from the German coke and German chemical industry), the drawing of Germany, as a future factor in world politics, in the wake of English imperialism in a military combination against the Soviet Union, playing off of Germany (military and economically) against France and France’s allies, pressure upon France for the purpose of pre- venting its insane increase of arma- ments. MERICAN imperialism under- stands by security; guarding of its money lending busi- ness in Europe, securing of the Eu- the safe- ropean market for its goods and capi- tal, setting the European powers one against the other, in order to enable America to carry on its business in the east undisturbed, and the forma- tion of a united bloc for the war against the Soviet Union. If now each one of the great’ impe- rialist powers conceals such diverg- ent interests under the mask of “se- curity,” what could bourgeois Ger- many hope to achieve with its well- known offer of a guarantee pact? Van- quished bourgeois Germany is not an independent factor and is endeavor- ing to cling to the skirts of one or other of the imperialist powers and thus to carry on an imperialist policy. This is what it calls “national real- istic policy.” ie eae German government of heavy industrialists and junkers, in mak- ing the offer to the entente powers that the latter shall finally renounce the districts which are occupied in the west, to subject the frontiers drawn by the Versailles treaty in the east and the south to a future arbi- tration court, and upon this basis to enter the league of nations, is acting in the interests of English imperial-_ ism. For the discussion of this offer is calculated to arouse excitement among France’s European allies, to arouse in them a mistrust of France and thereby make the first step to- wards the isolation of France in Eu- rope (Czecho-Slovakia and Poland, and also other little states, only re- main true to France so long as they are convinced that they can obtain support from France), to indicate to the allies of France that it would be more advantageous for them to link their fate, not with French imperial- ism, but to orientate to England and America, to clear France out of the Rhine and Rubr district, in order to destroy the industrial foundation of French imperialism, and to attract Germany into the English grouping of Germany and the Guarantee Pact powers against the Soviet Union and at the same time to compel France to enter this grouping under Anglo- American. leadership. It follows from this that England and America are straightening every nerve to have this plan—which has been formally brought forward by Germany but in reality was worked out by them—publicly and thoroly dis- cussed in order to compel France openly to pronounce its attitude to- wards it. The most important means to this end are the pressure of Ameri- ca as the creditor of France, and the English offer of a partial military guar- antee of the French frontiers. RENCH imperialism on the other hand, for the reasons mentioned above, has, of course, every cause to reject this plan, that is to do every- thing in order not to commit itself. Thus French impreialism retreats to the platform of the so-called Geneva protocol, which contrary to the Anglo- German offer of a guarantee, is in- tended to solve the “question of se- curity” in the French sense, that is, by strengthening the French military alliances and the position of France in agreement with its continental al- lies. In the meantime, France wish- es to gain time in order to see wheth- er its position in Europe can yet be saved by bargaining with England io North Africa (Morocco war) and Asia (Syria, Mossul, Mesopotamia, Tur- key). French imperialism, in its di- lemma and very much against its will, is showing a more friendly countenance even to Soviet Russia in order to disturb the English group of powers directed against the Soviet Union. HE real purpose of the Anglo-Ger- man guarantee offer can be best seen from the secret document of the Foreign Minister Chamberlain, which was published in the American press. The main ideas of this memorandum are the following: The chief enemy By Georg (Berlin) of the capitalist world fs the Soviet Union. Against the latter every group of powers must be directed. In this group Germany can play a very im- portant role, thanks in the first place to its chemical industry (Rhineland). A military alliance with France, with the inclusion of Germany, would pro- mote the English war plans in the Baltic, but also weaken the disagree- able French rival by separating it from its European allies. For this purpose there is dangled before Ger many the bait of an eventual revision of the division of Upper Silesia, of the Polish corridor and of the prohi- bition of the inclusion of Austria in the German republic. By such means _ the bloc of the little entente and Po- land would be undermined and brot under English influence. if the French imperialist press ex- presses its fear of an approaching German-Austrian-Hungarian bloc, it really means the fear of an English bloc. If Germany maintains its offer accompanied by ambiguous expres- sions of friendship to the Soviet Un- ion, this is the result of the all too justified fear (as the plaything of the imperialists, abandoned by the Soviet Union and completely isolated) of falling heavily to the ground between the various stools. In spite of this, counter-revolutionary Germany has no possibility of conducting any other policy, its only means of escape, which consists in a firm alliance with the Soviet Union, is closed to it by its counter-revolutionary nature. HUS the “security negotiations” are calculated to expose and to in- crease the insecurity of the capitalist powers, of its war preparations against the Soviet Union and against each other. The opposite pole of all these combinations, the Soviet Union, ig the only power which is capable of manoeuvering in this chaos of in- trigues with self-confidence and to its own advantage. ‘The Jailor Gets Busy Again - — 2yTharter Lewis WORKER is thrown into jail. He may have been accused of crim- inal anarchy, espionage, sedition or he may have been framed-up by art- ists whose art consists of putting un- desirable proletarians out of the way. Whatever technical charge it is he is sitting in jail for he has committed a “crime.” His crime is organizing and agitating the workesg against the bosses, to the detriment of profit. That’s a capital crime. It is a crime that may as well be written out bold- ly in its own name across the stat- ute books. It is not, as we know. But it is written nevertheless in a myriad statutes that serve the same purpose. At times there is more jailing of workers than at others. When the of- fensive slackens, it means the machin- ery for turning out profits runs smoothly and their is little need for the statutes and the frame-up artists. The more alert workers are allowed to agitate and organize among the now complacent masses more or less at will, The machinery balks. Profits don’t come so easily and the masses are not so complacent. Or there fs a war. In both cases the more alert workers constitute a danger to capitalism that is met by statutes, if statutes serve the purpose of getting them out of the way, or by frame-up artists if they don’t, Sometimes quick and sudden action 1s needed, Then Frank Little, Wesley Everest, Ed Gregor and scores of miners, lumberjacks, rail- roaders and cotton-spinners pay quick- ly with their lives, the workers go to jail for committing the unpardonable crime, they have to be defended. If they werent deferded they would go in droves, All the aictt ones woul be picked off; there would be no workers’ movement. The business of defending workers involves money, protest and demon- stration, this in turn demanding or- ganization. It is to be assumed that, for the most part, the money must come from workers themselves. Oc- cassionally a liberal, or even a mil lionaire will contribute to workers’ defense. But this can’t be depended upon. Certainly the demonstration and protests must come from the workers. Workers’ defense in America so far has been a hit and miss affair. De fense committees have been built up around labor cases as they arise. When the cases die out so do the de- fense committees. This method has obvious weaknesses. The reason for it is that nobody thinks of defense until there is need for it. Until someone goes wo jail it is hard to arouse much en“usiasm for getting him out. (And if he stays in a long time, as Mooney and Billings, Ford and Suhr and Rangel and Cline have staid in a long, there is a ten- dency to forget about him.) The de- pressing feature is that after one case has been disposed of often as not a whole flock follow and all the defend- ants are handicapped by not having enough defense. The day of isolated cases seems to have long since passed. [Xe seme of the. bosses, central ization and concentration have be- come the watchwords. They don’t allow themselves to do things discon- nectedly any more. Thoroness is their motto, When the time is ripe for a wage cut or an open shop compaign or the breaking of a big strike, it is done on a large scale and with com- pleteness, Judge Anderson’s injunc- tion, for example, during the railway shopmen’s strike of 1922 was no local affair, It applied nationally and work- ers were arrested under it in all parta of the country. Remember the L. W. W, trial, when 166 indictments were handed down by one court for workers in every state, Remember the Palmer red raids when workers were dragged out of their homes in San Francisco and New York at the same time, Yes indeed, thé anipe-Bhooting stage is over. industrial meth- ods have been made to apply to the commerce of jailing workers. There is a wage-cut offensive in fall falo in 19 to “Lawrence” and know what the struggle means in the places where fabrics are made. The central com- petitive union coal field is at a stand- still. The miners are getting desper- ate. The wage agreement they signed doesn’t mean anything because the coal is being dug in the non-union fields. A bitter fight is picking up steam in the old battle ground, West Virginia. At this writing the news comes of two hundred workers arrest- ed under the usual injunction against picketing. One miner just got ten years under W. Virginia’s very handy Redmond act. dnd reactionary revival in Europe has made progress. In’ certain countries, especially the Balkans and the Baltic States, white terror against the workers has become endemic. The rest of the countries in Europe, par ticularly Italy, are treating their toil- ers none too tenderly. of necessity, acquired fhe habit of re- swing _in the spinning industry. Real struggle can be smelled in the air of New England and New Jersey. Those of our minds that remember flit back NYONE who thinks the United States supreme court is going to fail to find any criminal syndicalism laws constitutional ought to read Gus- tavus Meyers. Over a hundred work- ers are now held under those laws (35 states have them) and supreme court judges, or any other kind for that matter, don’t wear robes for the purpose of releasing workers. We can expect the Michigan and all other cases pending an appeal to this il- lustrious court to re-open for purposes of quick conviction as soon as Taft and his playmates get the high-sign to hand down the kind of decision they have always handed down. The New York state criminal an- archy law has only lately been upheld inal syndicalism hoax is sanctioned as a permanent institution. Ht bhe T eS e zie _