The Daily Worker Newspaper, October 6, 1926, Page 6

aes? Six THE DAILY*®WORKER THE DA Ly WORKER Published by the DAILY w ‘ORKER PUBLISHING, CO, 1113 W, Washington Blvd., Chicago, Ill. Phone Monroe 4712 ARTICLE STIX. By WILLIAM F, DUNNE, T is true that the trade union lead- ership rails at the company unions and “welfare” schemes of the capital- ists and that the official journals of th rade unions denounce them con- stantly, But neither in speeches or articles by these officials has an ap- peal ever been made to the class in- t ts of the workers or is it ever hinted that the trade union movement should be a combat unit of the work- ing class struggling ever for more absolute control of indus and gov- ernment or that it has any other func- tion than ‘that of securing concessions tor workers strictly within the frame- work of American capitalist society. HAVE mentioned the failure of the trade union leadership tomake clear to the masses the difference be- SUBSCRIPTION RATES By mail (in Chicago only): By mail (outside of Chicago): $8.00 per year $4.50 six months $6.00 per year $3.50 six months $2.50 three months } $2.00 three months . ‘Address all mail and make out checks to THE DAILY WORKER, 1113 W. Washington Blvd., Chicago, Ill, LOUIS ENGDA WIL AM F. I ORITZ J. LOE as sé€ coud-clas s mail September 21, cago, Ill., under the act o: { ... Editors Business Manager , at the post-office at Chi- 3, 1879. \ dvertising rates on application, The Merger Period “Ask is the slogan of the Coolidge ad-} ministration issued for the benefit of the great industrialists and and ye shall receive,” tween trade unions and company/{ bankers. ‘ unions. This is a fact in spite of the Merger after merger has not only been’ authorized but en-|‘eclarations relative to the outright company control of company unions at present. It follows that if workers ac- cept the theory that American indus- try—capitalist, executives and work- is composed of one big family that the question of worker control of unions becomes of minor importance to them and may even be considered contrary to the altruistic spiri€ with which company union—and for that matter official trade union—literature is saturated. ONTROL of the unions by the rank and file is a doctrine just as ob- {noxious to thg present trade union} leadership-as it is to the capitalists. couraged and the departments -of the government have been placed at the disposal of corporations to assist them in avoiding any legal complications. Copper, oil, electric light and power, and coal are a few of the industries in which huge new concentrations have taken place. The railroads, hitherto prevented from making rapid. steps towards amalgamating into still larger system. groups are now in motion. Their efforts are to be facilitated by the, Parker bill pre- pared by Alfred P. Thom, counsel for the Association of Railway Executives, which Thom has informed President Coolidge is favored by a majority of the roads and which, it is stated, President Coo- lidge will recommend for passage. They argue only for the UNION, never tor the CLASS of which it is com- posed, An example of this type of argument (it 1s even a little more determined in tone than the average) ts to be found jgn The Railroad Trainmen, official or- gan of the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, for October, It says: As rallways and thelr. employes go, there Is no present. danger of interrupted Interest or good will; they understand each other better than any other classes of employers and employes; théy have confidence In and respect for each other and even If they reachéd the place where they had to part company, they would still m in that respect. The employer cannot agree that he will not fight to hold onto his’ own; he will fight if he has to; that Is his right; we stand for the same thing, but most earnestly hope we will not have to exercise It. « We are facing a new proposition; many of the ‘social’ problems of the organizations have been partly | solved by the employers; there are organizations of ali’ kinds, insur- ance and welfare schemes that are advantageous as long as the man remains in the service; there are stock buying and bullding and loan ociations, cooperative buying sociations and in fact everything attractive is offered in some form or another, each requiring dues pay- ments, so many if fact that MANY OF THE EMPLOYES BELIEVE A LABOR ORGANIZATION IS ABOUT THE LAST THING NEC- | ESSARY. » Each welfare scheme Is a development of the militant la- bor union. IT MAKES THE UNION THAT MUCH \LESS NECESSARY IN THESE MATTERS, BUT THE EMPLOYE CANNOT AFFORD TO: FORGET THAT TO THE UNION ALONE HE OWES HIS WAGES AND WORKING RULES, (Em- phasis mine.) T will be seen from the above that the appeal is to the glories of the past without any statement as to the present and future struggles of the union, Nor should such utterances as the above be taken to indicate even a faint desire on the part of officialdom to stress the difference in interests between worker and, capitalist, Such an interpretation nrust be rejected | when we recall that the heads of every railway labor organization without exception aided in the passage of the Watson-Parker bil] based on the theory of identity of interests of rail- | way worker and railway capitalists. pa International Association of Machinists, formerly, at least, the |most advanced of the railway organ- | izations, is no clearer on the company junion question, so far as its official lorgan is concerned, than is The Rail- road Trainmen. Speaking of company junions, it says: | Just how to overcome this ob- | | { stacle to legitimate organization Is a problem yet to be solved . An appeal will, of course, be made to all mechanics employed on com- pany union roads to assert their Now comes the news of a new consolidation bringing. the Chesapeake and Ohio and Hocking Valley roads under one head and authorization for 63 miles of new connecting roadbed to be owned by the new combination. The days when railroads had to fight for concentrations of con- trol which gave them monopolies of the transportation field in their territories have passed. Bigger combinations is the keynote. But combinations of workers in unions large and powerful| enough to fight such huge combinations of capital effectively are out- lawed, if not by legislation as yet, at least by injunctions which are |“ as effective inasmuch as they abrogate the right of jury trial for workers accused of violating them. American capitalism is on the march toward a greater empire than the world has ever seen. Coolidge is its puppet for the present and it is his task to aid, not to hamper anything which increases the power of the ruling class. If Al Smith or McAdoo is elected by reason of a switch to the democrat party the process will continue. The machinery of government is the machinery of the strongest section of American capitalism and industrial and finance capital- ists, tho they may differ on such questions as the world court, are of one mind in desiring the most complete centralization possible of their power at home. (Continued from, previous issue) Why Does Medvedyev Write on The Peasantry Question? | By N, BUCHARIN. | T is foolish”— he writes,—"to end | | | { pose that the economic position of the small peasant can now be saved; it is inevitably doomed to de- cay and to complete extermination, It is mere petty, bourgeois Utopianism to believe that there can be any uplift in peasant economics.” | This is what we all said under the/ capitalist regime. But to speak like | this under the conditions furnished by the proletarian dictatorship is to ac- cept a standpoint widely differing from the Leninist. Comrade Medved- yev comes to the conclusion that there | is no use in troubling about the “dreary” village. For him the peas’) antry is represented by this pseu- The huge combinations of capital which haye taken place in|acnyin of the “dreary gillage.” Why! the last three years are only one indication that this is a government |should we, real proletfrians, trouble ourselves about the “dreary villages” @r with the “stupid rabble” in the Comintern)? Let us rather give our) industry tp the concession capitalist, in order that We may earn a few more pence. Such is the weak, flaccid; trade | unionist countenance which peers! forth’ from this platform. But when} the comrades of the new opposition | maintain that the differentiation in} the peasantry has made such strides} that the middle peasant comes scarce- | ly in question, or when Comrade Prepozarahensky fails to observe the | difference between private’capital and | peasant economics, then we have here an undoubted ideological relationship to Medvedyev, These two standpoints are not identical, but they are. ideo- jlogreally related, F our opposition throws, doubts on; the socialist character of our state/ |industry, and Comrade Medvedyev at- | taches so little importance to this so-/| cialist character of our industry that | |he is prepared to abandon this indus- try to the concession capitalists, this is the second bridge connecting the |{deology of the two groups. If Comrade Medvedyev does not be- Neve that we have a proletarian dic- | tatorship, and is of the opinion that’) it is the task of the proletarian or-| of, for and by capitalists. Mencken—American Capitalism’s Literary Clown In the old days, the feudal days, the fat barons of the land were amused by fools who combined malformed physical features with sharp, albeit perverted wit. These days of capitalism have seen the end of the court entertainer with cap.and bells—but in his place has come a species of clown, who, tho lacking the anatomical ab- normalities of his predecessor, has seemed to inherit the perverted wit necessary to amuse the barons of this day. ‘ Such a‘clown is H. L. Mencken, Pretending to be critical of the more superficial inconsistencies of capitalism, Mencken is one of its staunchest defenders. Only the most. stupid of exploiters is! unaware that Mencken fulfills the two-fold duty of amuser to the | bourgeoisie and confuser of the exploited. V. F. Calverton, the| editor of the Modern Quarterly, put it mildly when he said Mencken is a vandevillian. He is more than that. Despite his smart gestures | of criticism directed at methodists, babbits, Cal Coolidge and the | United States senate, H. L. Mencken ig one of the starkest reaction- aries writing in the English language. He is all the more so be- cause, at first glance, he gives the impression of being otherwise. All these remarks are apropos of a syndicated article appearing THE present controversy wi —of a retreat of the re clear indication of its v over the solution of these pro with @ report inade by Comr nist Party. The report speaks elucidation. It is clear and about the retreat of the Russia pressure of various. forms of econom- |its, ete. (Here we must recollect | what has already been said above on ithe representation. of capitalist ele- ments). Consequently it must re- nounce its role as leader of the Com- |munist International, ET us think this thought to its log- ical conclusion: If the C. P. 8. U. does not renounce “fits role, this | means that in no case will # lead the Comintern further on the path of rev- olution. This means that its “degen- eration” will involve the degeneration jot the Comintern. The ultra-left in |Germany are already saying this to- |day. Their conclusion is the neces- |sity of creating a IV. International. | What will our opposition say when it maintains that our party has fallen | away from the line of revolution, and |yet it still remains the leader of the }Comintern? In this case the opposi- tion will begin to declare loudly that the Comintern has fallen away from the proletarian path with the Russian party. the views of the opposition will then be along the Ine of a false, neglected jand declinatory attitude towards the | Comintern, ri) REPEAT: We shall be the first to thank destiny if this does not come to pass. We shall be the. first to he pleased. But if it is not to happen, ;then the opposition ‘must leave the path of destruction which it is now treading. It must pause and think whither its ideology is leading it, the Soviet Union is neither @ sign—nor will it be the cause lution. ‘orious onward march. To give a clear understanding as well of the present prob- lems of the Russian Revolution as also of the controversy aries’ meeting of the Leningrad organization of the Commu- The further, development of | ithin the Communist Party of Quite the contrary. It ie blems, we are publishing here- ade Bucharin at the function- for itself and needs no further ‘onvineing and answers the lies n Revolution, The Opposition at an Intermediate Station—on the Platform of Trotskyism, HAT the is the ideological current | thus developing in the*opposition? ‘The current is tending in the direc- tion of Shlyapnikoy and Medvedyev, it is becoming a completely liquida- tory tendency on the basis of disbelief in the building up of socialism in ‘our country. At the present moment, the opposition is resting at an intermedi- ary station, called Trotskyism. The official ddeology of the whole oppost- tion in its totality—including Com- rades Zinoviev, Kamenev, Krupskaya, etc.—is obviously that of open Trot- skyism. At the time when we prophesied that the matter would end in Trotskyism, we were not belleved by many comrades, members of the op- position. They said: That will never be the case. You will remember how Zinoviey rose up against Trotsky, what thunders he. called down upon |him, both at home and in the foreign party press. How many pamphlets were written by Zinoviev, Salutzky,} Ssfarov, Kanatchikov, and a large number of other comrades, many of them somewhat evil-smelling pam- FROM PORTLAND TO DETROIT manhood, and exercise their right to agaln become members of bona inions. Whether or not peal will bear frult re- seen. It Is not going to be an easy matter to accomplish our purpose on company union roads, but’an attempt must be made to arousé members of company untons to a realization of the fact that only thru united action, and collective effort on thelr part... can they hope to make any progress toward Increasing wages, adjusting grievances and Improving working conditions, EDS speak much louder than words and vague phrases such as “united acton” and “collective ef- fort” cannot wipe out the cold fact that the Watson-Parker bill assumes that this united action and collective effort are to be exerted by what such trade union efficiency experts as Otto Beyer refer to as “all the factors in the industry,” i. e., capitalists, “man- agement,” the “public’and the rail- road workers to establish peace and harmony in the industry. It seems not to have occurred to, the trade union officials that unless | the trade unions are something rk than bread and butter organizations | in the present period that the enor-| mously wealthy American capitalist class can and will approximate thru their company unions and “welfare” schemes the conditions which the union@ demand. ale ot necessary for the capitalists to give all conditions demanded by the unions for the simple reason that leader of this Phole oppositional group, whilst —_ Comrade Zino- viev nor Comrade Kamenev has a single independent idea. They come forward with common declarations, with common standpoint, with com- mon signatures; and the main point is that all the ideas contained in these utterances are the ideas of Comrade Trotsky. HIS is in accordance with the facts. I have already described these ideas. Whose opinion is. the present opinion held. by the opposition in the peasantry question? It is Comrade Trotsky’s opinion. I have detailed our differences in questions of economic policy; I have described Comrade Preobrashensky’s standpoint. Whose standpoint is this? It 4s” Troteky’s standpoint, which has borne away the victory in the opposition, whilst Zino- viey and Kameney have capitulated before It, AS in the question of organization, in the question of granting the freedom to form groups ahd fractions —whose are the views defended here by the opposition? It need not be said that these are Troteky’s views, for he has stood for them for decades: These are views which Trotsky ex- pounded in 1923-4, at the same time as his demand for freedom of groups and fractions. “i Comrade Zinoviev, at a Moscow functionaries’ meeting, held on Dec. 11, 1924, spoke as. follows: “We therefore beg you, the Mos- cow organization, to give us a clear and unequivocal answer (the sub- Ject dealt with was the discussion with Trotsky). If you belleve the time to have come for legalizing the fractions and- groups, say 80 plainly, (Thus spoke Comrade Zino- viev in. 1923 and 1924.) We do not believe that this. time has come yet, phliets, which aggravated the ques- tion to a point which it should never have ben brought. But now Comrade Trotsky has become the {deological Where Thousands Have Been Roped in by Aimee’s Game or that it will come at all during the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat. It cannot come, for this is a question bound up with the the American. trade, union movement under its present leadership and with its. present policy of narrow craft restriction. and lack of political con- sciousness offers no attraction to work- ers who are not driven to desperation by wage cuts and open. oppression such as prevails in the textile indus- try for instance. The freedom of action which the trade union should give to workers hag been ‘destroyed by union burean- craeies whose treatment of the rank and file and hatred for new ideas is comparable only to that of the most tyrannical bosses. Tha complete ab- rogation of the right of free discus- sion and the holding of anti-capitalist Political opinions make it difficult in- deed for workers to see any difference between the trade unions and the company unions. HE deadly dullness of the official trade union press, the systematic exclusion of everything which canndt bear the test of boy scout American- ism, the deliberate policy of quoting allegedly sympathetic utterances of lawyers, politicians and employers who are in reality enemies of the la- bor movement, the groveling deference to American institutions as something far finer than anything other national capitalisms can boast of—these things explain at least partially why Ameri- can trade unionism is in the dumps. There is no limit yet set for rap- pro¢éhment to the capitalists. From local trade umon papers to the state- ments of the A, F. of L. executives the yellow thread of worker-employer co- operation runs. The C. P. &. U. and the Opposition Block treedom of the press and the polft- ical rights of the whole of the non- proletarian strata of the population, etc. Those who do not grasp this do not understand anything what- ever of the whole situation. It is our attitude towards the peasantry which is involved, We cannot per- mit a schism in the party, for we should thereby permit a split inthe state. The elightest disorder in the party. takes immediate effect upon the whole apparatus of state... This ig being discussed by both the spe- cialists and the other categories of employes: Schism in the party i~ evitably engenders schism in the whole state apparatus. Thus the question of fractions is a question of “life and death” to the party.” Comrate Zinoviey spoka' against Trotsky. But today it is ho who is contending for fractions and said so recently, on Dec, 1, 1924, as empty chatter. “Trotekyism is afd remains at bottom to a great extent a left nuance In the European, that Is, op- portunist pseudo-Marxist ant+Com- } munistic spirit.” This is what Comrade Ztnoviev wrote on Trotskyism. In another ‘place he writes: “It has often been said that all the misfortunes of the party started from the Tenth Party Congress.” Why, this? It was precigely the X” Party Congress which declared such a discussion within the party to be sunerdyons, ie policy of the Tenth Party Congress Is the policy’ of Leninism. The attack made by Comrade Trot- sky against the fundamentals of Leninism, on the basis of the bal- ance drawn by the Tenth Party Congress with respect to the free- dom of fractions and groups, cannot be acknowledged as Fight” | And forth, ~ ‘US Comrade Zinovievy wrote at one time, And now all this has been thrown upon the dustheap. Now all this. is forgotten. It was spoken with the greatest enthusiasm, but is & 1 1) | | in the Sunday press entitled, “Remarks On Reds.” Mencken, in this varticle, is at his best. This means that, without knowing what he is talking about, he manages to write a thousand very interesting words. In addition to this he tells many lies and many more plati- tudes. In this article Mencken discloses as much ignorance of the so-called “reds” as the veriest babbit. This man has performed the astounding feat of writing of the revolutionary movement in this country without once mentioning the only revolutionary party in the country, the Workers (Communist) Party, His knowledge of the working class movement is encircled by a mild acquaintance with,“parlor socialists.” Henee, to Mencken the revolutionary move- ment is largely composed of this species. Mencken does not hesitate to echo the time-worn lies of the capitalist press about Russia and adds a few malignancies of his own.. He sings loudly the praises of capitalism and predicts its existence for another hundred years. His discussion of social changes hinges upon the individual. The trouble with capitalism is that there are some bad individuals in it, under socialism the same trouble would exist, is a sample. of Mencken’s sociology. All of these stupidities come from the pen of “America’s foremost critic.” none the less forgotten. Trotsky re- mains: as victor in the block estab-_ lished.on the basis of withdrawal to a distance from Lenin’s jdeologicel - %. principles, tho it was Zinoviev who designated Trotsky’s standpoint ag nothing more nor less than a variety of Menshevism, containing nuances fundamentally hostile to Bolshevism, ete., etc, « (To Be Continued.) ~ * * * Dinner Pail Epic By BILL LLOYD, Federated Press, T see two millions wuz the sum folke paid to see a husky bum licked to 4 frazzle by Gene Tunney—that strilees my mind as awful funny. Two millions aint no labor sate the labor press may gravitate to where their printing shoj must close, and we be left to fight our foos ont the help of able Ler who slings a lot of printer’s ink. Us guys must dig haw in our jeans and keep the editors in beans, if wo would have ‘om throw a hustle tohetp | us workers in our tussle, They aint ‘| supported by the guys who ) dough to advortise, And most of has darn hard sleddin to buy fried liver and sum beddin, The er writers in our should fi ind it easy to shake ns ie os earn our bread in mn to swat the-boss, you ganization to exercise pressure upon the state, and at the same time we find other comrades of the opposition letting slip such sentences as that on the “extremely non-proletarian char- acter” of our state, then we have here the third ideological bridge between the group of oppositional comrades! and the group around Comrade Med- vedyev, which latter group may be said to be leading the way as “van- guard” of the whole opposition block, 1 Medvedyev believes that our party is rotten, that it has run off, the rafls of proletarian policy, and Com- rade Kamenev asserts that our pol- icy deviates from the interests of the broad masses of the workers, again this ideological similarity forms a bridge, the fourth uniting these two groups with one another. All devia- tions begin in this manner and lead in their later development to entirely anti-Bolshevist conclusions. ‘This is where the collective opposition and ‘ | the Medvedyev group are ideologically } opin Fo Otel 2. - H shall be told that the most far SUBSCRIBE TO THE DAILY WORKER! | reaching, revolting, and evil-smell- |ing proposition made by Medvedyey is that for the liquidation of fie Comin- tern, whilst there is nothing similar to be found in either Zinoviev’s or Trotsky’s utterances. This ‘is true, for the present, We should be the first to thank destiny were it to re main true forever. But if the oppost- tion continues on its present path, it oth T. P. Barnum had nothing on Aimee Semple MoPherson, With a few capabilities aoa speaker “and several more as an actress, the lady has hooked twenty-five thousand suckers in Los Angeles to the tune of many thou- sande of dollare,, Above le shown the revival tomple ti et the faithful presented to their good-looking pastor. may still lead to such a crisis, O880Y-| Atmeo rigged up @pnew fangied gospel that she oalle ‘ ”" and hae the potit-bour * ; Be ; |ot, Oomrsde. ntotenseciae: auieae| (aUMnnna hook, fine and sinker, But, uni she didn't know where | gute ll sng! hinted at this sion, He writes| "PPeared In w bathing eult at @ beaoh and the: In the middie of the approximately as follows: Our party, | Wrletwatoh (h the dresser when sho departed), the C, eat rieink aay the least. Nedirtholgem, the eushare are etioking hy thelr Aimee, %