The Daily Worker Newspaper, November 5, 1927, Page 5

Soviet Russia After Ten Years THE DAILY WORKER, NEW YORK, SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1927 Page Five | Report of the American Trade Union Delegation to USSR The following is the fourteenth instalment of the re- port of the first American Trade Union Delega- tion to Soviet Russia, in the words of the delega- tion. The report wiil be published in The DAILY WORKER in successive issues until completed. American Recognition E have tried heretofore to set forth dis- passionately the economic and political policies and problems of Russia, but we could not regard our work as complete were we to stop here and not discuss the most important issue at stake bétween the United States and Russia, namely, whether our government should grant diplomatic recognition to the government of Russia. From the inception of the United States to the world war it has been our traditional pol- icy to accord diplomatic recognition to any government which has established itself and carries on the functions of legislation and ad- ministration. |This policy was clearly stated by Jefferson when he was secretary of state in Washington’s cabinet, in the following words: “We certainly cannot deny to other nations} that principle whereon our own government is founded, that every nation has a right to govern itself internally under what form it pleases, and to change these forms at its own will, and externally to transact business with other nations through whatever organ it! chooses—the only thing essential is the will of the nation.” Acting upon this principle, the United States recognized not only the revolutionary government of France but all the revolution- ary governments in Central and South Amer-} ica which were successful in throwing off the control of Spain. Henry Clay, in advocating the recognition of the Republic of Texas in 1836, reaffirmed this policy of recognizing all de facto governments in the following words: “Tn cases where an old and established na- tion has thofight it proper to change the form of its government, the United States have not stopped to inquire whether the new govern- ment has been rightfully adopted or not. It has been sufficient for them that it is in fact the government of the country, in actual op- eration.” This policy, save for a slight deviation by Secretary Seward during the Civil War, was invariably followed until 1918. We imposed no other conditions upon the revolutionary Where the Workers Carry over. power. we made certain modifications in this policy, notably as regards the Huerta government of | Mexico and those of Central America seizing power by force. But whatever may be the, justification which our government may claim, under the Monroe Doctrine for such acts, we submit that they do not provide any valid precedents for denying recognition to Russia, since the Monroe Doctrine cannot apply to Europe. We are indeed already granting diplomatic recognition to-governments such as those of Chile, Spain, Portugal and Italy, which de-| pend primarily upon military force and not upon popular approval for their maintenance in power. We also recognize other govern- land and Hungary, where the real power of a disguised. The government of Russia rests upon a firmer foundation of popular support than those of these other countries. It can- not therefore consistently be refused recogni- tion because of its revolutionary origin so long as we have diplomatic intercourse with these other governments. The policy of recognizing de facto -govern- governments of Europe, China and Latin America than that they should be actually in ments is essentially wise, else each nation would claim the right to pass judgment on The Red Army is made up of armed workers and peasants. two in the Red Square at Moscow, as shown in the picture, gives other workers a chance to look them | Everybody knows that if the imperialist powers get half a chance, they will unite for an attack | on Soviet Russia, to take away the factories from the workers and the land from the peasants. It is true that during recent years, ments such as those of Greece, Bulgaria, Po-| military dictatorship is only slightly more} the Guns for Themselves An occasional review of a regiment or | the internal affairs of every other countrf, This would be provocative of almost endless confusion in a world where there are great | 'differences as to the proper forms of govern- iment and the proper economic policies to be pursued. The recognition of Russia by the United States would also serve to lessen the menace | of any foreign coalition against her, and by removing much of the fear of external ag- gression would lead to more democratic pro- cedure within Russia itself. As we have |pointed out, the execution of the 20 mon-| archists was largely due to the fear that England, Poland and Rumania were planning | to attack Russia. The dread possibility of war also weakened the attempt of the opposi- tion within the Communist Party to democra- |tize the party machinery. If the menace of war could be removed, the movement for more | democracy would inevitably gather’ greater strength. Freer discussion within at least the Party would, we believe, develop very quickly, and the decisions made by the central | bodies would be more subject to debate and | | the investors, but also to the American manu- |this transaction is that American credits to |Germany made possible this loan to Russia ing the military spirit which is always fatal to liberalism of any sort. Recognition would also be advantageous to American investors. The Russian government is eager to build new factories and to outfit existing plants with the most improved equip- ment. But this requires enormous amounts of capital. Capital is now being supplied from the profits of industry and from state sav- ings, but in order to develop Russia into an industrial nation, literally billions of foreign capital could be used, with profit not only to facturers of machinery and mechanical equip- ment, with whom most of such’ a loan would be spent. German banks have recently loaned $15,000,000 for five years to Russian indus- try for the purchase of German equipment. Sixty per cent of this was underwritten by the Deutsche Bank, but the prices charged were so high that handsome profit was made by the German firms. An ironical feature of and the consequent profits to German rather than to American business houses. It also served to employ German rather than Ameri- can labor. Constructive loans to Russia would be dif- ficult and perhaps impossible to make under | the present policy of our government. In the first place, it is not unfair to the State De- partment to say that it would in all prob- ability discourage such investments were they |submitted to it for approval, as they neces- rily would be. Secondly, if recognition were not granted, the American investors would |have no diplomatic channel through which to | make representations for the equitable settle- | ment of any misunderstanding but would have | to depend solely on the Russian courts for! the interpretation of these contracts. The Soviet authorities have thus far been scrupu- lously just in their dealings with all those foreigners with whom they had had business dealings. They have voluntarily altered the terms of the original Harriman and Krupp concessions in order to make them fairer and | more favorable to the investing interests. | Americans doing business in Russia have told | us of their completely satisfactory relations hence to revision. Those, therefore, who wish to see more democratic methods established if they oppose recognition, for by increasing | the isolation of that country, they are arous- | with the Soviet government. jtant to believe this fact, thus seriously im-| But while there} jis every expectation that this will continue in in Russia are directly defeating their purpose |the future, investors will naturally be reluc- peding any substantial loans. Thirdly, if loans on a considerable gcale were to be made, it would be necessary to float them on the open market and dispose of them to the investing public. It would doubtless be impossible to secure any consid- erable purchase of these securities unless the investors were given reassurance by the rec- ognition of Russia. Such solicitude for the profits of American capitalists may seem somewhat incongruous on the part of a delegation of American work- ers. We are not concerned about the gains of American capitalists. They are quite able to take care of themselves, and many of them openly favor the recognition of Russia as a direct benefit to their own economic interests, Yet American labor has even a greater inter est in this question than the capitalists, in- volving not profits for a few but employment for thousands. Every intelligent worker can see that a large loan to Russia to finance the purchase of American machinery would di- rectly result in giving a bigger pay envelope to American labor and would stimulate the prosperity of the primary industries of the nation. Finally, we believe that nearly all Amert- cans want, to live in friendship with the people of Russia. Such friendship is greatly ham pered by the present difficulties of travel and communication. Some time recognition must come, and with it the reeommencement of friendly relations. It is simply unthink- able that the two largest nations in the east- ern and western hemispheres should not live on terms of good will with each other. If all these considerations should impel us to recognize Russia, what factors in the past have prevented us from doing so, and what is their validity? The former contention that Russia could not be recogniezd because she had no stable government and did not provide security for life is no longer valid. The Rus- sian government has been in existence for ten years, and has repelled many attacks upon it, while life is more secure there than in some parts of our own country. If our traditional policy of recognizing de facto governments be correct, then surely the present govern- ment of Russia merits recognition. (To Be Continued.) (The full report of the 4 merican Trade Union Delegation to Soviet ‘Russi a, as pubs lished here by courtesy of International Publishers, can also be obtained in book form at all bookstores.) YOUNG COMRADE SECTION Traction Barons, Traction Workers’ and Labor Leaders OUT ALREADY! The special November issue of the Young Com- rade is out already! Just chock full of wonderful things: A picture of the splendid gift of the Amer- ican Pioneers to their Russian comrades on the oceasion of the Tenth Anniversary of the great Russian Revolution, A comparison of the lives and conditions of the Russian and American workers’ children. An awfully funny Johnny Red letter from Russia. And more—and more—and more. And it’s EIGHT pages! Do you want a copy? ‘ Send five cents for one copy or 50 cents for a whole year or 25 cents for six months. Send to Young Comrade, 43 East 125th St., New York City. Cur Letter Box What's What In China Dear Comrades: I had a teacher who is a very wealthy woman. Her daughter has six servants in China, and she has one in the United States. One day she said, “I’m afraid that the United States is going to have a war with China. That is — all on account of Russia. If it weren’t for Russia to. be in with China we wouldn’t have so much to worry about. The Russians said to China, ‘Drive the Americans and English out of here. What do they want here? They have territory of their own. If they want more land they should buy it. Don’t .. let them seize your land and make you have a gov- - ornment like theirs. Fight for your land and have a government like ours.’ And that’s why the Chi- nese are having suth a fight. I don’t think that the Russians have any right to butt in.” That’s what our teacher said. But I do—I think that they have a right to tell that to the poor workers and farmers of China, I think that the Russians have as much right to be in China as the Americans and the English have. My teacher said what she did was for her daugh- ter’s benefit, because if China has a government like Russia, her daughter won’t have six slaves. Your comrade, E. T. VITANOVA. Russia or America Dear Comrades: Every Friday afternoon we have a little program. One Friday we had to write some questions. My sister wrote a question to the teacher. It was, “Which has more freedom, Russia or Amer- ica?” She answered, “Of course it America.” ‘Which do you think, Russia or America? Comradely, JULIA SEMK. WAR By FRIEDA TRUHAR. Like a huge and bloody monster work, issued optimistic and defiant | Thursday, Nov. 8, speaking of the 5 hae Brooklyn Motor Motor Transit Com-| statements and announced that aj|meeting of the mayor, the union of- pany fires six workers who had|strike would take place. Hugh} ficials and the I. R. T. heads, says: By WILLIAM F. DUNNE Honored by Labor He comes stalking o’er the land In his eyes a light is gleaming And a sword is in his hand. Ruthlessly he sweeps before him O’er the land and o’er the sea, Many men of many nations What cares he who they might be. What cares he for wives and mothers, What cares he for swecthearts, friends, Onward he pursues his course Working for his masters’ ends. His masters who stay far from battle Safe from shrapnel and shell, And to grind out greedy profits, Send the workers on to hell. Onward he goes and strikes his blows, Down his victims drop And thus he will continue Till the workers make him stop. Till the workers of all nations, Really come to see That their common foe is capitalism, And then fight to be free. Answers to Last Week’s Puzzle 37 The answer to last week’s puzzle No. 87 is: BE A YOUNG COMRADE REPORTER. Comrade Esther Cohen of Chicago, Ill., has just answered puzzle No. 87 correctly. More Answers to Puzzle No. 35. ‘Liberto Vilarino, Inglewood, Cal.; Luz Vilarino, Inglewood, Cal. THIS WEEK’S PUZZLE No. 38 This week’s puzzle No. 38 is an addition and sub- traction puzzle. Let’s see you do it. LEADER+D—ADDER-+-NINE—E= # Send all answers to Daily Worker Young Comrade Corner, 88 First St., N. Y. C.> giving your name, age, address and number of puzzle. SUB BLANK 25 cents %-year—50 cents 1-year. Age....0. joined the Amalgamated Association of Street and Electric Railway Em- ployes. The Interborough Rapid Transit Company, the other part of the trac- tion trust which controls transporta- tion in New York City, and the sole owner and proprietor of one of the most vicious company unions in the United States, has challenged the whole labor movement. It has announced that on Novem- ber 11 it will apply for an injunction restraining the officials of the Amer- ican Federation of Labor, the affili ated unions and all members of affili- ated unions, from organizing or try- ing to organize the traction workers | i it employs at starvation wages’ and | on jong shifts. The issue created by the action of the I. R. T. and B. M. T. is much more than a local question, not only | because the A. F. of L. as a whole is involved but for two other reasons: First, because the organization of the traction workers in the largest city in the United States cannot be a matter of indifference to the labor movement; and, Second, because the threat of the I. R. T. obviously is a part of the wave of injunctions by which the bosses and their government are strangling the unions. There is a great scurrying in offi- cial labor circles and it is said that a conference of A. F. of L. officials will be held in New York to consider the issue raised by the I. R. T. an- nouncement. Last summer there was an organi- zation movement among I. workers, and traction workers in gen- eral, which gained considerable head- way. At one time it appeared that a strike for union recognition and better wages and working conditions was probable. The rank and file workers who were active in the strike’ of 1926 again gave their time and energy to organization work. Some results were secured. The Central Labor Union of New York City endorsed the organization drive. So did the A. F. of L. execu- tive council. Brothers Shea and Coleman of the Amalgamated Asso- R.. T.} Frayne, A. F. of L. organizer, leaped into the fray. The I. R. T. opened a barracks and began to hire strike-breakers. Tam- many Hall’s police commissioner an- nounced that his department was ready to meet the emergency—pre- sumably as they had the year before, by raiding meetings of traction work- ers and clubbing as many as possible into insensibility. Always unpopular, it was obvious that the traction barons would get scant sympathy from the mass of New York subway, elevated and sur- face car riders, that the traction workers would be supported by what is known as “public sentiment.” Then came one of the most dis- graceful incidents in the history of the labor movement. Mayor Walker called in Shea and Coleman. What he told them is not known. It is probable that he threatened them with the full force of the city au- thority. In any event, these two) labor officials were brought into a meeting at which they were to meet | and confer with certain I. R. T. offi- | cials, Hedley, superintendent, and |Quackenbush, the company’s chief counsel. but they had no conference with the 1. R. T. officials. Quackenbush is said to have made a formal appearance at the mayor’s office but subsequent events have shown that he agreed to nothing. Nevertheless, Shea, Coleman and | Frayne announced that a settlement |had been made, that discharged men | would be reinstated and that there j would be no further discrimination | against the union. A mass meeting of traction work- their bit for Tammany Hall by prais- | ing the mayor and saying little about the settlement, the strike was called | off. The traction workers got nothing. It has sinée developed that they did not even get the usual currency- promises. The organization move- ment was killed and the union offi- cials joined with the mayor in con- gratulating the traction workers for the “public spirit” they had shown. ciation, who were in charge of the The New York Evening Post for The labor officials met the mayor | ers was held in Brooklyn where, after | a battery of union officials had done | “The terms of that agreement have never been explained. Frank Hedley, president of the Interborough, and James S. Quackenbush at first re- fused to attend the peace conference. Finally Quackenbush went. At its termination Mayor Walker said: “The strike is off.’ jubilant. “We can organize employes both companies without interference and all those discharged for being |members of the Amalgamated will be reinstated without prejudice under this agreement,’ the said. At almost the same time Mr. at the Interborough offices declaring changed.’” (Our emphasis.) What can we conclude from the above? | Simply that the Amalgamated offi- cials were intimidated by Mayor | Walker, that they got no agreement the police power of the city govern- | ment. | In addition there is also the fact) that by “doing the mayor a favor” |they thought to enhance their own} standing with the Tammany Hall ma- chine, . All interests—those of Tammany Hall, “the public,” the traction trust and the labor officials—except those of the ‘traction workers, were given consideration. The traction workers holding the sack. Last summer, when the organ ; tion movement developed, we s that the traction workers could he organized, provided the whole labor | movement gave them ungrudging sup- | port. left were |of organizatic | relief machinery into which the whole |labor movement would be drawn with | jall its energy. We pointed out at the‘time that the injunction could be smashed by mass violation of its provisions and called attention to the stimulating effect the break-up of the traction company unions would have on the American labor movement. The situation now is still more se- rious. The leadership of the labor The men were | of | labor leaders | Quackenbush was issuing a statement | that the company’s position was ‘un- | We advocated the setting up| , strike, publicity and | \ Geeayv77 One of the largest testimonial dinners ever tendered a labor leader will be held in honor of Timothy Healy, retiring international presi | | | | | | dent of the International Brother- hood of Stationary Firemen and Oik ers, in New York, on Dec, 1. He ig relinquishing his position after 23 years of service. | of any kind but quit cold when con- | | fronted by the threat of the use of | movement should not wait for the im | junction application of the I. R. TE. to be heard but should accept its lenge now. | Mobilization of labor’s forces | Should be started at once. The trage | tion barons should be made to undem® | stand that the labor movement is dé- |termined to organize the traction }workers and free them from the |company unions. | It is quite evident that the traction } trust elieves the labor movement | has its hands so f ue with the miners” | strike and other tions that if will be able to m no e tive re- sistance at this time to the traction is trust offensive. The labor must -launch counter: Att is. the best defe injunction drive of the bos: must be stopped some where or it will sweep over the whole labor movement, leaving only the | wreckage of former powerful unions lin its path. Organize the traction workers. | | Strike and tie up the traction sys-’ tem. é Make a stand in New York Gi against the union-smashing drive American capitalists and their ernment. The policy of surrender brought only a more vicious att: