The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 5, 1925, Page 9

e a) es) By a RUSSIAN AUTHORITY. S to the numbers of armed forces at the disposition of the various states we are in possession of statis- tics which are based on both our own and on foreign statistical publications. In comparing these figures with the numbers of armed forces of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, we ob- tain a clear and completely objective proof of where we may seek the real culprits of milarism. Let us consider these facts and fi- gures. : You know that in 1914, just before the commencement of the imperialist war, the bourgeois press of the Enten- te countries, in inflaming the patriot- ic sentiments of their populations, as serted that it was only necessary to smash German imperialism and that the burden of. militarism would then disappear, What do we see in reality? In 1913 when prewar militarism was in full bloom, there were 5,759,000 men under arms in the most import- ant countries. In 1925 there are 5, 232,000 men under arms without count ing a number of states which have newly sprang up (for example, Irak Syria, Arabia proper, Northern Mor occo, and others). and not counting one million soldiers (at a minimum, which are kept under arms at the dis position of the various tuchuns of th Chinese provinces which do not ac knowledge the authority of the cen- tral Peking government. If we reckon that this prewar figure 5,759,000 included firstly, the 1,129,000 soldiers which belonged to the states vanquished in the imperialist war (Germany, Austro-Hungary and Bul- garia who now have 198,000, that is, 931,000 less than before the war) and secondly, the 1,350,000 soldiers of the former czarist Russia instead of the 562,000 army of the Soviet Union, we will see that the victorious and neu- tral countries have increased their «armies .by, 1,192,000 men in view of the new discord which is developing. If we examine the military budget of the most important states for the same period, we see exactly the same picture. In 1912 the military budgets of the most important countries (in- cluding czarist Russia) amounted to 4,744,000,000 rubles. The expenditure of the same countries in 1924-25 (Continued from page 2) or any similar or kindred organiza- tion, ° “| further agree that | waive the right, benefit, or privilege of ever representing a local union of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America im any way, shape or manner as an officer, del- egate, or committeeman during my membership in such organization. “In suscribing to the above | do so of my own free will and accord and agree that if | should violate said agreement or pledge, it is understood that my membership in the United Brotherhood of Carpen- ters and Joiners of America be for- feited without complaint by me.” In such cases we must bear in mind the advice of Lenin and Zinoviev and sign a dozen such statements if ne- cessary to our maintaining member- ship in the unions. This does not mean however that we must adopt a policy of indiscrimately denying mem- bership and of signing such state- ments. On the contrary, each case must be separately considered, In those unions where we are strong the bureaucrats can never enforce such reactionary measures. At all times we must function in the unions, and we must fight for the right to do this frankly and openly. Only where we are actually confronted with expuls: shall we adopt the expedient of nying membership as a weapon defense of our right aa workers belong tothe trade unions, The program of exptision is a of desperation, It cannot Brutal suppression of the left sees li i “Red Imperialism”. - THE DRIVE AGAINST THE LEFT WING IN TRADE UNIONS amounts to 56,300,000,000 rubles, that is, an increase of 656,000,000 rubles. If here also we reckon the consid- erable decrease in the war budgets of Germany and the Soviet Republics, we see that the expenditure of the re- maining states has increased by 1,- 442,000. These two pieces of informa- tion are sufficient to prove how false the speeches of bourgeois pacifists ring when they talk about decreasing the burden of militarism in bourgeois countries artef the defeat of Germany. Let us consider naval expenditure separately. In 1913 the naval budgets of the seven big naval powers amount- ed to 100,500,000 pounds sterling (1,- 005,000,000 rublés). In 1925 it equal- led 230,600,000 pounds sterling (2,306,- 000,000 rubles). This a fairly striking ditference. During the same period ; the naval budget. of the Union of So- cialist Soviet Republics- was reduced to %,400,000 *pounds sterling (34,000,- 000 rubles) as against a 26,000,000 pound (260,000,000 ruble) naval bud- set of czarist Russia in 1913. The shipbuilding programs of the most important bourgeois states are in full concordance with this. state | of affairs. Despite the agreement for | he limitation of naval armaments at | Washington in 1922, in reality the | very same, if not a. greater ship-build- ing fever is proceeding, the only dif- ference from the former being that mnstead of the large battleships, which 4 are now prohibited, ships of smalier tonnage are being constructed (cruis- ers, destroyers, submarines, etc.) and also naval air fleets. One may judge as to the extent of such armaments from the following: URING the present year the five strongest sea powers (Great Eng- ain, United States, France, Japan and Italy) are building 87 ships of differ- ent kinds and 181 further ships are projected, making a total 268. As far as the Union of Socialist Soviet Re- publics is concerned, unfortunately we have not constructed and are not constructing: one single ship, and,aip, to the "present! have! 'restrieted:,our- selves to repairing those that already exist. ' Air Forces. The statistics on aerial forces give the same picture. At the-present time the military air forces of the most im- portant states are as follows: France cannot serve as a substitute for the powerful organization and militant program imperatively demanded by the workers in their struggles against the employers. For a time however, in spite of the mustering of our forces and denials of membership, it will hinder us by resulting in the compara- tive isolation of many good comrades. But iz these expelled members follow the Comintern policy, by refusing to start rival unions and by waging a ‘militant fight for reinstatement, iden- tifying this fight with the burning needs and struggles of the unions, and cooperating with the organized left elements in the unions they can eventually break this isolation and force their way back into their organ- izations, ; To defeat the left wing by a policy of expulsion is impossible. The masses must build their unions and give them fighting policies. This can be done only under left wing leader- ship, and the organized masses are bound to accept such leadership de- spite all the efforts of the reactiona- ries to divorce them from it. Never was this more effectively demonstrat- ed than in the needle trades, Sigman and Kaufmann tried the expulsion policy and the reign of terror method against the left wing, with results that are now a matter of history. And as the expulsion policy failed in the needle industry so it will fail, sooner or later, in all the industries. The left wing cannot be destroyed by ex- pulsion, nor can its progress, be stopped by it. The left wing has the program which corresponds to the é F H fl ie Where Should We Seek the Real Militarists? GERMAN WORKER IN PRISON: “SO ‘WE’ HAVE SIGNED THE TREATY OF LOCARNO!” 6,114 aeroplanes, Great Britain 3,460, Italy 1,700, United States 3,800, Pol- and 498, Roumania 257. I will remain silent in respect to the numerical strength our our red airfleet, but I will say one thing, and that is that unfortunatgly there is not much difference between the strength of our air fleet and that of our im- mediate western neighbours. The numerical strength of the red armed forces, not counting the navy, pamount,.to..529,000, This is 183,000 les than France, and 17,000 less than our immediate western neighbors (Poland, Roumania and the Baltic states) taken together. There are still a few more figures which prove the “growth of red im- perialism.” For every 10,000 inhabitants the U. ‘S. S. R. has 41-soldiers, Roumania and Poland about 100, France without the colonies 200, and so forth. In other words the Western European states have from three to five times more men under arms than we. In relation to the territory, for every thousand square kilometers, there are 27 sol- diers in the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics; while there are 560 sol- diers per thousand square kilometers in Roumania, 700 in Poland, etc., that is to say, 25 times more than we have Finally, whereas the cost of main- taining the army works out at less than 3 rubles per inhabitant in the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, it reaches 7 rubles in the Baltic states, 11 rubles in Poland, and up to 14 ru- bles in France. The figures [I have cited should prove with convincing clearness that there can be no question of “red im- perialism.” Both absolutely and re- latively we are spending less on mil- itary needs than any of the large bourgeois states, and relatively we are spending much less than even the smallest bourgeois states. This is the truth of the matter as regards our “Red Soviet Imperialism.” Who Gets the Increase of Wealth in United States? A* analysis of the first 185 stock quotations on the New York stock exchange as of Nov. 28, 1925 as com- pared with the quotations of the same stocks a year ago brings out the as- tounding fact that their total value in- creased on the average more than 33 per cent. Being that the value of the shares of stock is not determined by the actual amount of money in- vested but the amount of divident paid per share the increase in value of stocks signifies therefore either 2m in- crease of exploitation of the workers or a proportional increase in the num- ber of people employed. As seen from the table submitted below the former proves to be the case: — 1925 Value of stocks 133 Employment 104 Pay rolls . 104 While employment and pay rolls in- creased only 4 per cent the returns on stocks increased. 33 per cent. In other words prosperity in the U. S. signifies higher return on capital and keener exploitation of the workers. It is a well known fact that the ex- ploiters on their own hook do not in- crease the wage-scale and that only the organized strength of the workers as expressed in their union organiza- tions can compel the bosses to dis- gorge some of their plunder. The question in costs is what does the Gompers bureaucracy which now has a stranglehold on the trade unions do for the American working class whom they are supposed to be representing? An analysis of the or- ganizational strength of the A. F. of L. shows that the leaders are falling down on the job. The total member- ; ship of the A. F. of L. for the year | 1925 shows an increase of 11,500 but being that the membership in the building trades increased by 24,400 the actual membership in the other trades decreased by almost 13,000. The stock quotations figures as well as those for employment’ and pay rolls given above pertain to industries outside the building industry; in other words while the exploitation increases the organizational strength of the A. F. of L. is falling down. The claim of the union bureaucrats that prosperity in the country brings with it increase in union membership and higher wages no longer holds true. With the continual concentration of wealth as shown by the income tax returns for 1924 on one hand and the class col- laboration policies of the union offici- aldom on. the other hand, the share of the American wage slaves in the to- tal wealth produced is clearly on th decrease, , That worker next door to you may not have anything to do to- night. Hand him this copy ofthe DAILY WORKER. 4