The Daily Worker Newspaper, January 27, 1926, Page 6

j ap Page Six THE DAILY WORKER THE DAILY WORKER Published by the DAILY WORKER PUBLISHING CO. 1118 W. Washington Blvd., Chicago, In. Phone Monroe 4712 SUBSCRIPTION RATES } By mail (in Chicago only): By mail (outside of Chicago): $8.00 per year $4.50 six months $6.00 per year $3.60 six months $2.50 three monthe $2.00 three months | Address all mail and make out checks to | THE DAILY WORKER, 1113 W. Washington Bivd., Chicago, Ilinole | J. LOUIS ENGDAHL “‘Bdittors WILLIAM F, DUNNE | MORITZ J. LOEB. -Business Manager Entered ay second-class mail September 21, 1923, at the post-office at Chi: | cago, Itl., under the act of March 3, 1879. Advertising rates on application. | 2 SSS Chicago’s Lenin Demonstration The fact memorial meeting of the workers (Communist) Party last Sunday It would be ab- <> 290 that 8,000 workers of Chicago attended the Lenin | is interesting and instructive from several sides. surd for a Communist Party in a city the size of Chicago to be satis- fied with a mass meeting of 8,000 (even with paid admissions) as a test of its power to mobilize the working class. A party which must attain the capacity to mobilize the majority of the city’s working class does not set for itself such a low standard as that. We would rather choose the standard of ten times that many. 3ut relatively, neverthele this mass meeting shows a very substantial and significant increase in the vitality of the Workers (Communist) Party in this second biggest city of America. This demonstration was the largest that has ever yet responded to the invitation to assemble in a hall under Communist auspices in Chi cago. In comparison to the largest party mass meetings of 1924 | and 1925 in this city—which were also Lenin memorial meetings— | this demonstration shows that the Workers (Communist) Party is now reaching more Chicago workers than ever before, by several thousands. ° In class composition the demonstration was of the best quality. | Workers from the outlying industrial sections, such as the Pullman shops and steel mills, were heavily represented. In another respect the Lenin demonstration shows a very sig-| nificant gain—the large number of Negro workers and Chinese who turned out for this meeting to show their love for the great leader | who was, as one of the speakers said, as much an American, a Ger- | man, a Frenchman, an African, a Chinese, as he was a Ryssian. A party which could not reach and win the loyalty of the so-called | “inferior” races would not yet be a Communist Party. | At the Chicago demonstratien the Workers (Communist) Party showed that already it is possible not only to reach the Negro} workers and the Chinese student element, but has already begun to} make them understand that the Communist Party represents the interests of all the working class as a whole, as well as the emancipa- | tion of the foreign victims of imperialism. | Not the least significant reason for the success of the demonstra- | tion, of course, lies in the occasion for which the demonstration was | called. It shows that the name of Lenin commands the respect and | loyalty of many thousands of workers who have as yet learned to see | no more than that the great leader of Bolshevism somehow sym- bolizes the hopes of the working class. But the successful Chicago demonstration also tends to indicate another supremely significant phenomenon—that the spirit of the working class in the American big cities has passed the turning} point and is now on the upward curve. The working class is becom- | ing more responsive to mobilization. "When even eight thousand Chicago workers assemble to honor Lenin and Leninism with the enthusiasm that was shown last Sunday night, then the spirit of Chicago workers is on the up-grade. The assurance of this estimate is increased by the knowledge that it is distinctly true in regard to the membership of the more advanced American trade unions, and that it is true of the leading capitalistic countries of the world. The working class movement the world over has reached the turning point and is on the upward curve. The Communist parties everywhere are advancing in the internal sense of Bolshevization, thus becoming capable of taking the up-grade in leadership while the spirit of the working class as a whole moves upward. The Workers (Communist) Party of America may expect the year 1926 to be a year of great advances. The improving internal health of the party gives promise of its ability to take advantage | of the increasing opportunity. Horthy Openly Accused Six years of Horthy terror in Hungary is climaxed with the murderous dictator himself now being openly charged on the floor of parliament with complicity in one of the pettiest pieces of erim- inal practice ever indulged in by a so-called statesman. On the open- ing of parliament the president of,that body refused to permit in- terpellations from the opposition, but when Count Bethlen, one of the criminal clique back of Horthy, arose the walls shook with denunciatory assaults from the opposition. “Sit down, you are !” was the greeting to the count. shielding forgers! When the. clamor had subsided Bethlen declared that permis- sion of the French police to operate in Hungary would be restricted. it was the French police that uncovered the gigantic counterfeiting plot which involved the entire Horthy government. Instead of resigning from office after being caught the Horthy government tries to. exclude from the country the French agents that exposed the thing. The counterfeiting of French franes has international polit- ical significance and it is not improbable that American agents had a hand in it, because it is at present to the interest of Wall Street | to beat down the frane in an effort to impose a Dawes plan upon France. The American ambassador, Judge Theodore Brentano, ought to be investigated in this connection. A certain gang of half-baked intelligentzia offers a five thousand dollar pr for an essay on how to cure unemployment and other | woes of society, but they bar socialism and Communism. Which | proves that these disappointed geniuses of the bourgeoisie have a faint inkling of the only solution.for unemployment, but they want their supporters to propose solutions within the capitalis system. | \/foscow Mey Mail‘ | discussion upon the political report of} {the central committee of the Russian} ———onencemes | Congress here, {storms of applause. }dinary significance of the fact that a | the line of the central committee with ‘no other policy. | the | the shops. Bucharin (International Press Correspondence) UL Be Soo... Dec. 21 — Comrade Nikolai} Bucharin was the first speaker in the Communist Party at the Fourteenth! He was received with Bucharin pointed out the extraor- member of the politbureau came for- ward with a second speech to the re- port of the central committee. The opposition had sed at all the pro- vincial conferences that they opposed This is contradicted of the second speech ampled in the history of the party. In the past struggles with various oppositional groups, second speech has never bene made. The speaker inquired what prac- by the fact which is unex a Foe rose ennenegteenptn ete mate cnt Ne Speaks at Russian Party Congress | PRAVDA URGES AGAINST DISCUSSION N, BUCHARIN, lutionary ally of the ‘working class. | At that time it was proved that the building up of socialism. ‘upon a mis- erable technical basis was slow but| nevertheless possible, | In a session of | the politbureau Kameney and Zino- | viev contended that on, account of! tical me: res the opposition pro- posed. What new proposals has the opposition for the assistance of the} village poor? None. The Fourteenth} party conference pointed to the ne-| ce y for the creation of funds and the formation of groups among the village poor. The opposition is not} able to propose any new measures and this proves their political impo- tence, The opposition made two proposa’ (1) In connection with the You Communist League, to organize dele-| gate meetings from the non-pafty| peasant youth. This was rejected by central committee with the great activity of the peasants these meetings would become parallel or- ganizations and threaten the loss of the proletarian leadership of the peas- ants. This would be a capitulation of} the proletariat before the petty bour-| geoisie, HE second proposal came from the Leningrad comrade Sarkis proposed that up to the Fourteenth party congress the composition of the membership should be formed so that 90 per cent represented workers from This would only be pos- sible if the party had 6,000,000 mem- bers. This proposal would mean a re- cruitment of 5,000,000 new members inside of a year. This has not an arithmetical but a political signific- ance. To follow this advice would be to draw in tremendous masses of peas- ant elements into proletarian party. The opposition accuses us of giving up our position under the pressure of the petty bourgeoisie. Both of the propositions of the opposition men- tioned prove on the contrary a capitu- lation of the opposition before petty bourgeois peasant tendencies. The proposals of the opposition will not bear criticism. The speaker de- clared that the present discussion must be regarded in the light of the two previous discussions against Trotsky. At present there are new economic relations, a new interna- tional situation. The party is fever- ishly searching for the corect position to be adopted in the peasant policy under the new circumstances. The first discussion flung up the question of internal party democracy, etc. and finally it was seen that it was the question of the peasants. N the second discussion the party already understood the essence of the struggle better. It is no accident that the questions of state capitalism, the possibility of the building up of socialism in a country, etc., now stand in the foreground. In the first two discussions the essence of the discus- sion was the relation between the working class and the peasants. The present discussion is a continuation of the first two. At present the party is taking part in the discussion more consciously, because the question has been put directly and not under some label or the other. The previous discussions concerned the peasant question as a whole, the present discussion concerns the ques- tion of the various strata of the peas- antry. The speaker is convinced that the party will come thru the present discussion ideologically strengthened and purified. The present discussion is proceeding on a socialogical basis which is characterized by three facts: (1) By the growth of bourgeois strata in the village and in the town. (2) By the raising of the activity of all classes, particularly in the village. (3) Thru the appearance of new strata in the proletariat, HE half-peasants and half-workers are coming from the village into the towns with the question: Will they be exploited or not, asking what is the difference between the new fac- tory and the old. On the other hand our policy has not yet had time enuf to carry out all the assistance due to the village poor, The village poor raise naturally a great number of questions, The party is the only po- litical organization which will and must solve these questions. The speaker pointed to the connection he- tween the questions under discussion and the practical policy, In the earlier discussions the ques- tion of the permanent revolution was raised because the standpoint of the | opposition concealed within it a doubt as to the possibility of the building | Up of socialism in our country. This meant the denial of the idea of the building up of soicalism together with who} technical backwardness socialism |could not be built upto the end, | contend that only,.the interna- tional socialist revaluation can of- fer a guarantee against <intervention, | against new wars andeagainst a res- toration with the assistance of capi- talist armies, nevertheless we passion- ately deny the contention that we must perish on account of technical backwardness, This fepresents an attempt to take us back to a period whith is already behind us. There is a at difference between the contentions that social- istic reconstruction im)ya country is impossible on account pf the lack of | guarantees for this reconstruction be- | cause of the danger of intervention and the contention of the impossibil- lity of overcoming the difficulties of} the reconstruction period on account of ‘technical and economic backward- |mess of an overwhelming majority of | the peasants. The speaker accused Zinovievy of having failed to deal with this differ- ence in his latest book. In his book Zinoviev contends that his mistake in 1917 consisted in the ‘fact that he persisted in Lenin’s standpoint upon compromises, a few days further. The | speaker considers this’ explanation ab- | surd. In October 1917 °Zfnoviev and | | Kameney did not shrink ‘back but they | had their own judgmewt: on the ques- | tion. The Kameney of April, 1917 con- | tended that the peasant “could not be- | come the ally of the proletariat, that | the socialist revolutioncould not as- | Sume the co-operation of the peasants with the proletariat. & Zinoviev fought agaifist this stand- point weakly and thefiiaeeepted it as | weakly. This is the standpoint of dis- belief in the forces @f'the working class. At that time thé} Said that the armed insurrection wauld come to | nothing, now they say®ithat we shall perish unless the interfiational revo- lution comes. This #8'%& repetition of the same mistakes in another formu-| lation, oO’ Mead speaker then €riticized Zino- viev's book upon thé“history of the Russian Communist Party and declared that Zinoviev in dealingwith the rela- tion of the classes in 1905 did not men- tion the peasants. In#the 1905 reyo- |lution, however, the péasant question formed the central problem. The speaker accuséd Zinoviev of | having neither admitted nor corrected his mistake and this was very damag- jing as the whole youth of the party |is being educated in this spirit, After dealing with the basic ques-| |tions of the building of socialism, the! 1 | speaker discussed the question of the N. EB. P. (New Economic Policy). Zinoviev declares war upon all those who identify the N. E. P. with social- ism. We support such a war with all our forces, Zinoviey declares war upon all those who confuse the N. B. P. with socialism, We support that completely, but the basic difference remains between us. Zinoviey deals with the N. E. P. almost exclusively as a retreat. Zinoviev’s formulation is as follows: The N. E, P, is the broadest retreat of Leninism. How did Lenin regard the N. BE. P.? Lenin said; The N. E. P. is the greatest strategical maneuver. It includes (1) an element of retreat, (2) a reforma- tion of forces, (3) an advance along the reformed front line. The Zino- viev formulation of the N. E. P. is connected with the disbelief in the | possibility of the building up of so- cialism under technically backward conditions, We have a slowing up of the world revolution. From this Com- rade Salutzky concludes that a possi- bility of degeneration exists (Laugh- ter). We deny definitely the conten- tion that the N. E. P. is only a re- treat and here we stand upon a good Leninist standpoint. idan question of state capitalism is closely connected with the qués- tion of N. E. P.. Some comrades want to smudge the correct treatment of the problem as it stands at present. Instead of answering the essential question of the present moment, the question of 1921 is raised. The Len- ingrad comrades declare that the ac- industry is a logical socialist type, is incorrect. They have therefore given up their earlier attitude and have ac- cepted the formulation that the state undertakings are of a logical social- istic type. Zinoviev also is now in fa- vor of this formulation. But in his this. trusts, in their labor system and even |in our co-operatives, thére are capi- talist elements present, One may not deceive the workers with well-sounding phrases that that is socialism, This is the chief point from Zinoviev's book. Without doubt we have everywhere elements of cap- |italism, but in dealing with the state industry, why does Zinoviev not men- tion the logical socialistic type of the undertakings. The speaker then made a polemic against the Zinovievist in- terpretation of the resolution of Lenin upon the role and the tasks of the trade unions under the N. EB. P. adopt- ed at the eleventh congress of the Russian (Communist) Party. - Zinoviev contends that Lenin de- clared in this resolution the state un- dertakings to be state capitalism, In actuality the resolution contains no- thing of the sort. The speaker ¢tres- sed that Zinoviev had not represented logical socialistic undertakings, Zino- viev had also struggled against the draft theses of the speaker upon the youth for the fourteenth party con- gress because he, Zinoviev, considers our undertakings as state capitalist. The other Leningrad comrades also, for instance, Comrade Jevdokimoy have given no clear answer to the question as to what our state under- takings are. The party must give the answer because the whole proletariat demands it. HE speaker further dealt with the question of the character of state capitalism, He stressed the fact that COLOMBIA LABOR ITS VENEZUELA, TOOL OF AMERICA \Gomez Dictatorship Is second national labon: congress of Colombia has adoptedom resolution of Protest against the bloody dictator- ship of Juan VicenterrGomez in the neighboring republic. ;of Venezuela. The Venezuelan dictator, worthy suc- cessor of Cipriano Cagtro, enjoys the confidence and support of American imperialism, His ¢logg co-operation with American capitalist interests goes hand in hand with a policy of iron oppression of the, toiling masses of his country. No labor movement of ony kind is permitted fo exist and the workers labor under ‘the most intol- erable conditions, ecution of |liberal-minded studen imprisonment murder and deportations in mass, have made the name of Juun Vicente ve infamous thruout Latin-Amer- ca, Active Venezuelan vadic: liberals {and even honest nationalists are for- ced to live abroad, A group of these living in Havana is publishing a mag- jAzine called “Venezuela Libre,” and is taking steps to form a Venezuelan section of the All-America Anti-Im- perialist League, Owing to the condi- |ions prevailing in Venezuela no such organization can be formed openly in- side the territory of the country, . “The power of the working class is organization, Without organization of | Denounced in Congress | BOGOTA, Colombiay: Jan. 25,—The| cusation that they deny that the state! book “Leninism” in the chapter on| state industry, there is word about} On the contrary, Zinoviev de-| clares expressly that even in our state, | opinion were abolished in two respects in his book Lenin’s opinion upon the| capitalism, ism. elements of state capitalism, elements | of private capitalism and elements of entitled: (International Press Correspondence) MOSCOW, U. S. S. R., Dec, 22— (By Mail)—Today’s leading article’ in the Pravda, official organ of the Russian Communist Party, entitled, “Is it necessary to commence a dis- cussion?” says: “The course of the party congress proves that it is capable of solving its difficult tasks. The party con- gress analysed cooly and unanimous- ly all the burning questions of pre- sent policy. The attempts of a few individual comrades of the opposi- tion to lead the party congress from its practical work and to light the fires of a new internal party dis- cussiog have faited. It is absolute- ly without doubt that the new op- position ‘orking for the commen- cement df: aidiscussion. It is simi- larly without’ doubt that the party congress ‘and the whole party will reject this. The article’ appeals to the words of Lenin.upon the danger of a dis- cussion in)a party which stands in power,. The:smallest breach threat- ens to.deVelop into great groupings and fractions to undermine the authority of the party leadership, to weaken the party and with it the basis of the proletarian dictatorship. The opening of a discussion in the IN THE RUSSIAN COMMUNIST PARTY present period would be especially dangerous. It is only possible for the Leninists to lead the elements of growth in the wished for direction if a maximum of firmness exists in their own ranks. The Leninist uni- ty of the party must not be endan- gered, otherwise the economy of the Soviet Union would develop into a direction dangerous for us. After the Trotzky discussion the party does not want another discussion. It would be impossible to avoid a discussion if the basic contradictions in the party were so large, that to leave the contradiction) within the party organism would be a greater evil than the discussion. The op- positional comrades were, however, despite the efforts of many and des- pite the co-speech of Zinoviev not able to oppose thhe standpoint of the Central Committee with a real basic policy. The complete political characterlessness and lack of prin- ciple of the opposition is obvious. | For want of a real practical political platform, the new opposition can do nothing better than to distort the standpoint of the party leadership. The article ends with the declaration that the party does not want a dis- cussion and will not discuss. The party will call the hysterical com- rades to order. this question must be chiefly put from | aims. | Lenin’ also regarded this question! the standpoint of practical from: this point of view and said in his article “Upon Co-operation” that the practical aim of the N. EB. P. was the obtaining of concessions, This point of view is correct be- cause it answers the question of the difference of opinion which once exist- ed between the speaker and Lenin in this connection. ‘These differences of by the practical events: 1. We have a tremendous forward move of state} industry; 2. We have no concessions | to the extent expected. At that time we had almost no industry and only plans for concessions, now we have) our own industry built up with our own forces. For this reason the whole question must be put concretely, prac- tically and topically. sequence capitalism. It is true that Lenin said: “Free commerce is cap- italism.” But this only means that capitalism is continually born from the basis of free commerce. Never- theless one may not regard capitalism and free commerce as identical. For instance, our state undertakings of a logical socialist type purchase from similar undertakings. That is a com- modity form and not a socialist dis- tributive form. But it is certainly not a, Only vulgary can one identify free commerce with capital- No one will deny that we have petty bourgeois economy. But the basis question is in the judgement of our state undertakings. OW to the question of the middle peasantry. The speaker asks and answers in the affirmative the ques- tion as to whether some comrades un- derestimate the middle peasantry. In the problematical article of Zinoviev, “The Philosophy of the Faithful Unto Death ture?” That means: Epoch,” we found originally no mid- dle peasants. They were put in only afterwards, Zinoviey also dealt with the decisions of the fourteenth party congress other than this was done by the party. These decisions repres- ented chiefly the policy of the eonsol- idation ofa firm alliance with the mid- dle peasants. Zinoviev writes in his book “Leninism”’—the speaker quot- ed—“We must make supplementary concessions exactly to those capital- ist elements in agriculture. What does that mean “Exactly to those capitalist elements in agricul- The N. EB. P. is a concession exattly to the large bour- geoisie. If we formulate the decisions of the fourteenth party conference exactly as a concession to the village usurers, no one will listen to us. The resolutions of the fourteenth party | congress were exactly for the purpose Still a re@mark upon Zinoviey’s con-| tention that because free commerce | exists, in so far exists also in con-| of a firm alliance with the middle peasantry. Zinoviev, however, con- siders this resolution as a concession to the village Kulaks. The speaker then declared expressly that he had written those sections of the resolu- tions of the fourteenth party con- gress and of the October plenum deal- ing with principles and that he had experienced je contradictions from any source. Ce the book of Zinoviev, “Leninism,” the speaker declared, that the treatment of the most import- ant question, of the alteration of the slogan of the civil war into the slo- gan of civil peace, was missing, Zino- viev writes no word about it. Also the words of Lenin upon the reformist methods in his article upon the sig- nificance of gold are missing. * Zinoviey quotes us how Lenin put ‘the question of the rich peasants, how Lenin characterized the rich peasants as bloodsuckers, wampires, etc. This comes, however, from the year 1918. Zinoviev adds that this language must not be repeated. Zinoviev’s book dealt with the topical questions, The topic- al party policy, however, consists of the destruction of the remains of war Communism. At present we struggle against the rich peasants with other methods, The speaker contended that the words of Zinoviey concealed the idea of the disorganization of the de- cisions of the fourteenth party con- ference. At present one must reckon with the growth of the differentiation in the peasantry, one must reckon that in the immediate future an im tensification of the class struggle will take place, Sige are many new dangers of an international character pres- ent, aS we are connected with the international market and there are many new dangers of an internal char- acter present, because a tremendous growth both of class activity and class differentiation is proceeding, The most important task is the drawing together of the working class, The pessimists do not understand that we are faced with the tremendous task of educating new’sections of the working class. The speaker demanded that the Leningrad delegation should confess its mistakes exactly as the one time secretary of the Leningrad organiza- tion, Salutzky, had confessed hig mis- takes in connection with state cap- italism, The speaker accused the Leningrad delegation sharply that it had not elected the tried and trusted fighter Kommarovy to the party congress, only because he is loyal to the central com- mittee, Unity, proletarian discipline, loyal- ty to the leading organs, are all inte- gral parts of Bolshevism, One may struggle, criticize, attack, but one may not make fractions, The iron disel- pline of the party must be maintained. (Applause), The speaker expressed his convic- tion that all the delegates would su- bordinate themselves to the decisions at of the party congress as one man and — ¢ the peasants under proletarian leader- + us f pigs Bereta: Re recognize these decisions as the |ship, a“deniat whieh rested upon the |'"0- Organized—it I Organiza q and only final inter j{dea that the peasants were an abso- | ton is unanimity of a unanimity J, Ramsay MacDonald, the former “labor pi land, weeping | Loninist party volicy land. a antagonistic, even. counter-revoy| of practical activities”. on the occasion of the death of the queen-mother of plaus¢” bt ok ‘ 4 ;