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

4 THE PREDICAMENT OF AMERICAN “INTELLECTUALS” By EARL R. BROWDER MERIGA is the land of greatest factories, greatest fortunes, and greatest fools. But it iy not the land of the greatest “intellectuals,” those prize exhibits which recefve so much attention fm Europe; and the current efforts to establish “intellectuals” in contact with the labor movement in America become lamentable farces. These reflections are occasioned by reading an article by Benjamin Stol- berg on “The Predicament of Amer- ican Labor,” in the Nation, September 30th, This “intellectual’—for so he seems to class himselfi—sees every- thing thru very, very dark glasses, and yet he is at the same time op- timistic to the point of Pollyannaism. He is for everyone and every class, and against.them at the same time. He-is the intellectually tolerant super- man, above the battle, examining with a Jovian contempt the struggles of the insects down below in the labor movement, UT Stolberg’s superior attitude, amusing and entertaining as it may be, becomes hollow when we analyze what he has to say and trace his ideas to their source, For Stol- berg, the “intellectual,” has contri- buted nothiag to the ideas with which he deals. He has brought a miscel- laneous collection of them from the four corners, picking out the bright- est colored, the shiningest ones he could find, and furnished only a bask- et in which to take them to market. If he is satisfied with the role of mar- ket-boy, mo ome can complain, but it should be clearly understood. What are the ideas in which Stol- berg deals? There is the “new union- The Facts About Lenin’s “Testament” Set Out by His Widow. OU have, I see, found it neces- sary to give some attention to Max Eastman’s book, “Since Lenin Died.” As Mr. Eastman in his book attempts to depict me as a violent op- ponent of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party vainly endeavoring to protest against its ac- tions, I shall be obliged if you allow me to explain the situation to English readers of this book. Eastman throws no light on the work of the Russian Communist History has imposed upon this cult task. They have to build Com- munism in an economically backward country during a period when capi- talism in countries more advanced economically is temporarfly stabilized. Eastman’s book shows nothing of this. It is a collection of petty gos- tural awakening of the masses; noth- ing of the tremendous work on iaphig a secure foundation for the slogans of the November revolution. The author is only concerned to gather up and smack his oth over every scrap of gossip and with his petty-bourgeois Be thos leanings. : eo ¢8 The most monstrous thing in East- man’s book is his treatment of the “Lenin Enrollment.” When died hundreds of thousands of work- Hel sm” of labor banks, labor insurance, 3. & O, plan, ete. Stolberg tells us nothing new for or against or about it. What is his contribution then? It is contained in the phrase: “The new unionism is a road to freedom only to the degree to which it is militantly vigilant of the protective character of the labor movement.” What a profound idea! The so- called new unionism is a new tech- nique of surrendering the labor move- ment. Stolberg, a true “intellectual,” must gee all sides of the question; so he agrees that it is a “road to free- dom” with a qualification that this is true only to the extent that it is not a road to slavery. But do you really mean, Brother Stolberg, that it can be both? ; Such an idea is, of course, stretch- ing the “dialectical contradictions” beyond the breaking point. The re condite conception that the resist- ance to the “new unionism” will pro- duce an opposite movement is not Stolberg’s idea; he qualifies his en- dorsement of the “new unionism” only in order that he may get into his basket, alongside the gaudy marbles of class-collaboration, also a collection of brilliant fragments of Communist criticism, which he has ruthlessly chipped away from their setting to help make hig commodity. HUS Section I of Stolberg’s eca- pacious hamper is filled in by re servations: Labor banks are all to the good, only the engineers should net have invested so heavily im a cer- tain Eastern railroad; going into capi- talist production with union funds is laudable, only Warren Stone made a mistake in buying coal mines in a non-union field; the only thing wrong in “labor education,” as it exists, is the tendency of “merely contributing to the escape of their students from the labor movement;” schemes of technical collaboration with the em- ployers in the shops are praise- worthy, only they should avoid the raw surrender of the B. & O. plan, which rouses the workers to opposi- tion, etc., etc. And in this manner does Stolberg make it possible to fill his second section with miscellaneous baubles to amuse the tired readers of the Nation. Having shown that the “new union- ism” is a “road to freedom” which, somehow, leads simultaneously in the opposite direction, and that the labor movement is traveling in both direc- tioms at once, Stolberg proceeds to tell us “The Real Story.” He says: “The truth is that American labor has never been, relatively, so weak, so utterly deflated and yet restless Spiritually, so vitally endangered eco- nomically, so inarticulate and unrep- resented politically, so torn and bruised by factional bitterness and worse, since the early nineties, if then.” gad coal follows a detailed and gloomy picture of the near-wreckage that makes up the official labor movement of the U. S., with all its brutal and stupid, bureaucratic and blundering misrule. Stolberg evidently obtained his bill of particulars from the DAILY WORKER or the Freiheit, glaring and obvious facts showing the dege- neration of labor’s officialdom, which the Communists have made public and which Stolberg uses. Yet, after using our criticism, he speaks of “the Com- munists who are irresponsibly disrup- tive im their attack on the present leadership.” This is an exhibit of the typical irresponsibility of the American “intellectual.” The gem of Stolberg’s collection AND TROTSK Lenin’s dearest wish was realized. The Russian Communist Party be- came, not only in its ideology, but in its composition, overwhelmingly pro letarian. * * Eastman knows nothing of this. In his eyes the workers are merely pawns, understanding nothing; wait- ing to be led by any leader. To him the “intelligentsia” is the salt of the earth. We Bolsheviks understand the workers quite otherwise—to us the more workers in the party the better. And these workers know that the Central Committee consists of com- rades who during years worked with Lenin, deliberated with him every step, and with him built up the party. In gaol and in exile his work was theirs and theirs his. The working masses know their leaders better than any passing writer forming con- clusions from the outside. These old Bolsheviks have since Lenin’s death felt a double weight of bureaucrats but.a supreme party oc- casion upyn which. every ‘member must express himself with the utmost trankness regardless of personal con- siderations. It was thus that Lenin thought about them. He knew that the party would understand the mo- tives that dictated his letters—and that they would be read and consi dered only by those about whom there could be no doubt that the interests of the revolution stood above every- thing, If in these letters there is criticism of certain comrades and an indication of their faults, there is also, and to a far larger degree, praise of them. Of this praise Eastman says nothing. The letters were intended, and under- stood as, helps to organization—to the allocation of tasks. To call them “testaments” is folly. The real testament of Lenin is con- tained in the last articles he wrote and relate to fundamental! questions ot party and Soviet work. All these articles have been published. But Eastman finds nothing of interest in them. He is too busy helping the ee They Admit Russia’s Strength. To the DAILY WORKER: The the American wheat farmers against Bolshevism... The Russian Soviet government is beginnimg to export wheat whieh the American capitalist government interprets as a wilful means of causing a new discontent among the wheat farmers because of comes in Section III. The cause of the bankruptcy (terms as well as ideas dre borrowed from Foster and the munist press, so far as crt- tici es) of the labor officialdom lie rding to Stolberg, not in ar the larger policies, but in their subordination of the “intellectuals.” The “intelligent minority” of the de- funct socialist party, he says, “would not joint the children’s crusade of the American Bolsheviks. And so they, as well as most of the other radieal imtellectuals, ran under the pretecting wings of the labor oli- garehy.” With what result? The labor move- ment is today more boss-ridden than ever before. The protecting wings were not so hospitable as expected by the “intellectuals.” And here we find the kernel of “class interest” which we expect to locate in all writings on the labor mevement. Stolberg is arguing the ease of petty-bourgeois intellectuals, who have been crowded out every- where, amd who are loudly knocking at the door of the labor bureaucrats, offering their brains for sale as in- struments of warfare against the ris- ing Communist movement. This is the root of their “arguments”, and the solution of their contradictions. . j The predicament of the American | intellectuals is this: The revolution- ary labor movement they either do not understand, or they shrink from the sacrifiees that it demands. The reactionary bureaucracy, whom they wish to serve, is as yet blind to their value as allies against the Commun- * ists. And so they must need steal small arms from the Communist ar- senal, wherewith to force their way into at least the outer sanctums of the official labor movement. By N. Krupskaya omemies of the Russian Communist Party to calumniate and. discredit the Central Committee by alleging that — the “testament” (meaning the letters above-mentioned) have been ‘“con- cealed.” Finally, the part of Eastman’s book which deals with Trotsky himself seems to me extremely insulting to Trotsky. It is needless for me to unravel the network of lies Eastman has woven around the question of our party differences with Trotsky. Others nave done that. Suffice to say that the whole question took an acute iorm solely because the whole party telt keenly the need, after Lenin's leath, for ideological unity. Person- ily Iwas not in agreement with Trotsky and spoke ~ accordingly. on several occasions..I also criticiged his | “Lessons of October” in detail. in Pravda. I was thruout in agreement with the views of the Central Committee. Eastman perverts the truth on this point as he does all thru his book. N. Krupskaya. Scandinavian Stage Fall Festival. A fall festival and dance arranged under the auspices of the Scandinavi- an Lakeview (Communist) Club No. 9, will be given at Workers’ Lyceum, 2733 Hirsch Bivd., Saturday, Oct. 3, at 8 p.m. The music will be supplied by Jensen’s orchestra for the dancing and Comrade Ellis Peterson will say a few words about Soviet Russia. All comrades and members of the Young Workers’ League are invited. Tick- ets are 50 cents. Refreshments will be served. The Walden Book Shop 307 Plymouth Court (Between State and Dearborn Just South of Jackson)