The Daily Worker Newspaper, July 2, 1927, Page 7

5, Are ‘We Getting Bribed by Prosperity? 5.5 j2coison «THE American workingclass is being bribed by prosperity!” This is a phrase that ‘is being bandied about today with a dangerous disregard for truth. Even supposedly well-informed workers are deceived by its defeatist ideology. Intriguing as the phrase is, how long does it stand under the scrutiny of facts? Let us see! In 1926, according to the National Bureau of Eco- nomic Research, the “current income of. the Amer- ican people” was over 89 billions of dollars. In 1921, the same bureau reports a national income of 62 billions. So the “American people” have made 27 billions more in 1926 than in 1921. “We” are getting richer—almost 3314 per cent richer! Do All Share Alike? But do we all share alike in this gain—in fact, do some of us share at all? Where, for instance, do the workers come in—the millions of semi-skilled and unskilled, the unorganized, the women, colored workers—even those within the American Federa- tion of Labor? How much are they “bribed’’? The economic bureau reports that 44,600,000 peo- ple were “gainfully employed” in 1926. Dividing the 89 billion dollar income by the 44% million employed, we find that if all shared proportionately To A Young Poet Worried About Aesthetes My child, the next time that you, Feeling the weight of the class struggle New upon your shoulders, Come face to face with some unimportant aesthete Taking his pleasure with his music, rhymes and cocktails, Don’t bother us with such things. We are not troubled by a beurgeois con- science; We're not afraid to enjoy music, books and art Whenever we have time. And meanwhile we don’t give a damn Whether your aesthete friend Knows anything about our strikes or not. Poems and Themes Dear N. S., I’m sorry if I bothered you with my juvenile dis- covery. You may not believe me, but I had no in- tention whatever of doing so. F As you very wisely point out in your second stanza I was bothering myself. That is, I was troubled by what you—a hardboiled “proletarian”—are pleased to call a bourgeois conscience. ’ That was a year ago. Since then I have attained proletarian serenity and remain untroubled by: aesthetes discussing Stravinsky over cocktails. You may very pertinently ask me why-I published the poem. The reason is this; Even tho the mood expressed in the poem is the product of a troubled bourgeois conscience and is no longer true of me, it’s a pretty good poem. But perhaps you disagree with that. Yours for the aesthetes, HARRY FREEMAN. EDITOR’S NOTE: If the internecine warfare be- tween our favorite poets continues we shall be obliged to lay down certain rules governing the con- ditions under which the belligerent rhymsters may be permitted to conduct their poetical polemics. We consider it unfair in civilized warfare for a powér well supplied with poison gas, mustard gas and laughing gas to use those lethal chemicals against a foe equipped only with low-powered fire crackers. We also consider it »»manly for Comrade Freeman to take advantage of >’s intimacy with the acting-editor of the New Magaz ne to hurl a deadly piece of prose at a defenseless ‘tostile poet. Had Freeman’s pros(e)aical retort b« — delivered by the mailman it might have never see the light of day, but what can you do with a fel!l..w who comes up to your desk with his concoction and’ while admit- ting his errors hands you something with which you agree? A reformed poet to us is the sweetest thing that blows into our editorial sanctum and when you run into a poet who really admits that his poetry is worthy of publication, such a rare find should not be allowed to blush unseen, Now boys, keep within the rules of free verse and don’t sock below the eyes. in the increase it would mean an average yearly income of approximately $2,000. How Many Get $2,000? How many workers get $2,000 a year? Do the farm laborers? Do the cotton pickers, shoe workers, textile operators, stecl workers, lumber jacks? Do the soft coal miners, the employes of packing houses, biscuit factories, knitting plants, laundries? Does the average worker get $2,000? According to the economic bureau, the earnings of the factory workers in the state-of New York for 1926 averaged $29 a week. This means $1,500 a year if the full 52 weeks were worked, which would be a very exceptional case. And this applies only to New York State, which pays higher wages than Illinois, Ohio, Georgia, Mississippi, Texas, Cali- fornia, Massachusetts or Pennsylvania. The iron foundries, stock yards and coal mines of Illinois are estimated to pay a weekly average of only $27. And the seasonal nature of this work, shut-downs and lay-offs cut into this wage disastrously. “Prosperity” Down South. In the South, the lowest level of annual income is reached, with a drop to $1,089 in Texas; in Missouri to $754 and in Georgia to the inhuman level of $671. With the expanding industrialization of the South, competition with the North is bound to result in an even lower standard of living for northern workers. Even now, however, the North feels the demoral- izing effects of this, due to the influx of Negro workers. Their use in the coal fields and steel mills of Pennsylvania has lowered the wage average there to $25.00, according to labor bureau statistics. In Massachusetts, the unorganized textile and shoe fac- tories go below even this starvation pay, forcing their employes to put wives and children to work to eke out the men’s average wage of $23.00. Quite evidently it is none of these workers, either colored or white, who are being “bribed” by prosperity. Are Women Workers Bribed? And how about the women workers? Their con- ditions are even more deplorable than the men’s; and worse than that, area continual threat to the national standard of wages. In a pamphlet recently issued by the Women’s Bureau of the U. S. depart- ment of labor, the following facts are pointed out: In the 14 states investigated, only one state, and that in a peak year, was found to pay wages as high as $16. Even in that one state—Rhode Island— the average wage of all women investigated was only $16.85 a week. Medians in other states ranged from $8.60 in Mississippi to $14.95 in New Jersey, with the re- maining eleven as follows: Ohio, $13.80; Oklahoma, $13.00; Georgia, $12.95; Missouri, $12.65; Kansas, $11.95; Arkansas, $11.05; Qentucky, $10.75; South Carolina, $9.50 and Alabama, $8.80. Since these figures represent capitalism’s “brib- ery” of the great masses of unorganized, unskilled and semi-skilled workers, men and women—then capitalism can expect no returns for its “bribery” except bitter antagonism, wider spread discontent and more militant striving for the betterment of labor conditions. Such pittance wages in our basic industries, such debasing of the famous “American” standard of living does not breed class-collaboration; it makes the soil fertile for intensified class strug- gle. Can such an industrial situation turn the work- ers to the “right”? Surely it is a curious method prosperity has chosen to “bribe” the proletariat! Nevertheless, the question must be answered—Is any section of the American labor movement “going to the right”? Capitalism is sufficiently class-con- scious to understand the need for a rear-guard. It wants “peace” at home. Besides, certain industries such as the building and printing trades are not under the pressure of international competition as are, for instance, the coal, textile and steel indus- tries. It is in these more sheltered trades that we must look for “bribery.” The building and printing trades now play a predominant role im the American Fed- eration of Labor, and it is under their pressure, as well as pressure from the capitalists and the great pressure of capital invested in industry through la- bor banks, ete. that the A. F. of L. bureaucracy is corrupted. Of the 23,000,000 industrial workers in the United States (over half of the entire popula- tion listed by the census as “gainfully employed”), the A. F. of L. has scarcely. more than 2% million organized in its ranks. Twenty million work- ers, the great buik of the American workingclass, are completely unorganized and being forced to the left. But us even take those workers now organ- ized in the A. F. of L. It is well known that the coal miners, particularly in the bittiminous fields, have been anything but favored by prosperity, which facter accounts for the tremendous influence of the left wing in that industry. Today they are locked out in order to force a wage reduction upon them. let Neither can the organized needle workers, par- ticularly in the East, despite slight wage increases be said to have benefitted by prosperity, as their actual working seasons have been so shortened that their average income today ranges from $800 to $1400 a year. Then we have the machinists, and the railroad employes within the A. F. of L. and outside, and here too prosperity tglk becomes ridicu- lous. In addition there is the process of sectionaliz- ing work that is constantly going on, and the ef- ficiency schemes, ete. Indeed, the ranks of the so- called labor cristocracy are being rapidly narrowed down. Under these cirermstances to talk of bribery by prosperity, and of the labor movement moving to the right, means to have been doped by the bourgeois prosperity propaganda—a typical social-democratic reaction. It is true that the dwindling ranks of the labor aristocracy in a few trades, can be said to “he bribed” and te be moving to the right. But. the broad masses of the workingelass are being sub- jected to increasing, rather than decreasing exploi- tation. The A. F. of L. bureaucracy more and more tend to ignore these workers, and prove its accept- ance of American imperialism’s bribe by continuing to orientate itself on the surviving skilled mechanics. A be-paunched A. F. of L. leadership, is covered with the cloak of sanctity by erratic S. P.ites—a united front between the Iabor-fakers and the petit-bour- geoisie—lawyers, merchants, bootleggers, and ham politicians. It is this motley crew that is rushing its forces to the right, though not by any means in unbroken ranks. It is the retreat of a minority, even inside the A. F. of L.; and its guilty confusion will serve te stimulate the rank and file of the labor movement to realization ef the dangers confront- ing the labor movement, and to make them realize the need of ‘following the left wing leadership, and of drawing new strength into the unions by the organization of the tuillions outside the unions, for whom “prosperity” means only intensified exploita- tion. Porice were Bacco in tHE For Distrcr re Protect ano Kee Onpce CANEWSPAPER CAPTION) OH Justice! How |MPARTIAL Avo STATELY You Loox!