The Daily Worker Newspaper, September 5, 1928, Page 3

- Bukharin’s § Bukharin’s speech in reply to the discussion on the THE DAILY WORKER, NEW YORK, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5 vage Three Sie international situation at the Sixth Congress of the Com- munist International began in Saturday's Daily Worker. Those sections already published are: “I. The Positive and Negatives Sides of the Discussion, “II. The Stabilization of Capitalism and the Controversy over the ‘Third Period,” “III, The’ War Question is “IV. The Baternal and Internal Contradictions of the Capi- talist System.” * * * | machine is so constructed that only | I now want to take up certain separate problems, which in my opinion are very important. Per- mit me first of all to say a few words about our trade union tactics | workers. and our trade union work, which was discussed here. The Executive | sible to capture the rank and file, of the C. I. constantly emphasizes in its resolutions, circulars, letters, and other documents, the necessity for persistent trade union work in connection with the united front tac- tics. Everybody knows this. The world situation, which I have an- alyzed and described here makes this problem more acute than ever and brings the task of winning over the masses more and more to the forefront. In the present situation winning over the masses is the con- dition precedent for our struggle against. the dangers of war, and against war as such. The masses cannot be won over unless we work inside the trade unions. From the point of view of our international relations we must repeat what we have already said, namely, that strenuous work in the trade unions is absolutely essential. We must not lose the initiative in the struggle for trade union unity. Inthe present situation we stand Farticularly in need of strongholds among the masses. That is why an intensification of trade union work in general, and an intensification of Profintern work in particular, is now one of the major tasks in the work of the Communist Parties. In the course of the discussion of the trade union question a number of tenden- cies were revealed. Some comrades snoke of the necessity to organize the unorganized, to create inde- pendent organizations in opposition to the reactionary unions, and, un- der. certain definite conditions, to link up with the Profintern unions | those trade union organizations which have been captured from the reformists. This is the policy which we advocated and which was gener- ally adopted »y the IV. Congress of the R. I. L. U. However, in the dis- cussion reference was made to ten- dencies to resist these decisions, to the absence of an independent Com- munist line in trade union work, to complete surrender to Reformism out of fear of expulsion from the trade unions. But another tendency was also revealed in the course of the discussion, namely, a tendency to deny the necessity for working in the reactionary unions, and at- tempts were even made to develop a.theory for the purpose of justify- ing this attitude. Sometimes this tendency is observed among the rank and file and arises from the difficulties which work in the reac- tionary trade union encounters. It is true that we are being expelled from the reactionary unions and for that reason greater firmness and a strong belief in our own policy is necessary to be able to work under such. difficult conditions. The ten- dency to leave the reactionary unions is fostered also by the fact that latge numbers of workers in many. countries are still unorgan- ized. This is the case in the United States and also in France, Com- rade -Thorez pointed out in his speech that only a negligible sec- tion of the French workers are or- ganized. It is absolutely clear that the task of organizing the unorgan- ized is one of the main tasks at the present time. But this is no reason why we should abandon our work in the reactionary trade unions, even in countries where dual unions ex- ist. Some comrades try to prove theoretically that it is impossible to capture the machinery of the re- formist labor organizations, trade unions, ete. They draw an analogy between the trade union and the gov- ernmental machinery. The slogan: capture the bourgeois state machine, they claim, must not be taken liter- ally. ‘They point out that Marx and Engels, and later Lenin in his “State and Revolution” explained that cap- turing the state means destruction of the state machine and its dis- placement by another; that this was the process of capturing the state. . The comrades apply this argument to the trade union question. There, too, there is a firmly organized bu- reaucratic machine similar to that of the bourgeois state machine. They say that it is impossible to capture that huge machine, it must be destroyed; but it is possible to destroy it only when the bourgeois state apparatus is destroyed. From this they conclude that it will be im- possible to capture the reactionary trade unions before the capture of political power. On these assump- tions it is easy to arrive at the con- clusion that it is not necessary to work in the trade unions now under a. Relformist leadership. However the argument that it is impossible to capture the reactionary unions cannot be proved, True, it is a very difficult task and it is prob- able that a final victory all along the front will be scored in many countries only in the process of the Social Revolution and after the cap- ture of power. We have had cases like that in Soviet Russia, but we ssvew ahandoned our work in the Menshevik trade unions. To say +Wet it is impossible to capture the union is to take too pessimistic a view of the situation. The bour- geois state apparatus does not con- ist of workers. But the trade union ” * the Central Question,” and its upper layer consists of the so- called bosses while the lower strata consists of the masses of organized If it is possible to “cap- ture” the entire machine, it is pos- the factory. committees and certain | separate parts of the machine. Hav- | ing broken through the front at one | point it will be possible to proceed further. With the help of the masses it will be possible to break through the trade union front at several points. Can this be called | breaking up the machine? In a cer- tain sense, yes. By removing a re- formist leader and placing our own | man in his place, we are reorgan- izing the apparatus. The capture of any part of the machine means the “cleansing”: and reorganizing of that machine. This is clear. To make a theoretical comparison be- tween the trade unions and the state is unsound, In his famous. pamphlet “Left Wing Communism—an Infantile Sickness” Lenin very bluntly raised the issue of the necessity for work- ing in the reactionary unions. The arguments he used are generally known. We must not go from one extreme to the other. We must combat the opposition to the de-| cisions of the IV. Congress of the Profintern. Abominable facts were related here of what occurred in the Germany Party on this point. But we must also fight against the slo- gans of workers’ control of indus- try and the like if they are advanced at a moment when there is no revo- Jutionary situation (such slogans are pregnant with most serious dan- |gers). Certainly we must combat these what are in fact right wing tendencies; but we must not fall into the other extreme and deny the very possibility of fruitful work in the reactionary unions. Work in the Mass Organizations. The proposition we advanced in the discussion on the Youth ques- tion fully applies aiso to trade union | work. We demanded from the) | Youth that they carry their mission |into all mass orgahizations where | workers are to be found even if these organizations are non-Commu- nist or non-revolutionary. In this epoch of intense struggle against | social democracy (we can make no | |headway without such a fierce struggle) and the prospects of war, our penetration into the masses of the proletariat is an absolutely necessary pre-requisite for success. Without creating this pre-requisite our existence as a Communist Party is gemerally impossible. To hope optimistically for the growth of our influence is not engdgh. We wel- come this growth bit the dispropor- tion between the influence of our Party and the organizational con- solidation of that influence is no- tortious. In order to remove this | disproportion we must carry en strenuous work in the trade unions and other mass organizations. Com- rade Willi Munzenberg quite cor- rectly said that we must devote serious attention to the mass organ- izations. The forms of these or- ganizations are multifarious buat nevertheless we must take our posi- tions in them. By the way, Com- rade Munzenberg unjustly rebuked me for under-estimating the signifi- cance of the Anti-Imperialist League. In my report I argued pre- cisely agzinst the liquidatory ten- dencies of some comrades in rela- tions to that League. Attempts are | being made to give a theoretical basis to these liquidatory tendencies. The followers of this tendency say that they are not purely Communist organizations, that they are not even proletarian organizations; they contain many intellectuals and many representatives of the national rev- olutionary movements who may be- tray us tomorrow, etc. The oppo- nents of participation in these or- ganizations fear that these amor- phous non-Communist organizations will “displace” the Communist Par- ties. These organizations include the Anti-Imperialist League, the Unity groups, the labor and other delegations to the U. S. S. R. with and without participation of intel- lectuals, ete. Some comrades are afraid that the Communist Parties will be crowded out by these organ- izations. Of ccurse to assign to these organizations a role by which they would displace the Communist Tarties would be a betrayal of Com- munism. This is a self-evident fact. But who assigns to them such a role? We do we regard these or- ganizations as $ubstitutes for the Communist Party, but as a means for spreading our influence among the broad masses. Comrade Mun- zenberg said that Comrade Buk- harin, perhaps because he is insuf- ficiently informed, has failed to note the great actions of the League in Mexico. Comrades, it is true that I did not mention this point. But does Mexico atone for aM sins? For instance, I do not think the League has done sufficient positive work in connection with the Chinese ques- tion. In this connection it has done very little. Comrade Munzenberg knows better than anyone else the organizational weaknesses of the League. JT mention the shortcom- ings of the League not becouse T propose to deprive it of our sup- port, but because I want it to be all to blame. We gave very little assistance to the League, we did not supply the League with adequate forces. Our parties did not suffi- ciently co-operate with it. Such are sions. The problem of mass organiza- tions is one of the most important problems and the next Plenum will have to work out a series of prac- tical measures for its correct solu- tion. The line is clear, but our ex- perience is inadequate. We have al- ready adopted many resolutions on this question and have debated on it many times. We have resolutions to show but our deeds do not corre- spond with these paper resolutions. This is a fact. Unemployment. The unemployment problem was touched upon, and quite rightly. Sev- eral comrades spoke on the question and particularly Comrade Hanning- ton from Great Britain. This ques- tion must be elaborated in the theses and the most serious attention must be paid to it. The unemployment /problem was discussed here yesterday in connec- |tion with the special problems ap- pertaining to America. Comrade Lominadze raised several objections to’ the case presented by Comrade Varga. He said on the one hand that Varga revises the fundamental principles of Marx by speaking of a decline in the number of workers employed in industry. He thinks this is not the case nor can it be. On the other hand Comrade Lomin- adze says that he does not agree with me when I say that this is the first time anything of this kind has occurred, for Marx has given num- erous examples of such cases. I think one must choose one of these two propositions. Either something of the sort has existed and exists now or nothing of the kind can exist. (Lominadze: There is no law of development). Quite right. There is no law of development. (Lominadze: I said this against Varga). But you are arguing also against me. The second proposition excludes the first. But Comrade Lominadze wants to have it both ways. How does stand? Is a reduction in the num- possible or not? It is possible. “Capital.” Not a “certain” but a fairly well known French economist, Ganil to whom Comrade Lominadze referred, developed a whole theory on this subject as follows: as capi- talism develops, the number of work- ers employed declines, and the num- ber of capitalists increases. Hence, the workers become capitalists! Marx said that this was nonsense, that it was a ridiculous and worth- less theory. But is this the point involved in the “American” case? Did Varga express his agreement with Carver (and Ganil)? Did Var- ga say that the workers become cap- italists? God forbid! Varga said that they become unemployed. There is nothing in this to suggest Ganil’s theory. Hence, Ganil must be left to lie in peace. Further, Marx cites several cases of individual factories in which the number of workers em- ployed declined. Is it possible for the same thing to happen now (for the first timeN) in a whole country, at least for a certain period of time? I think it is possible. A certain \country may occupy an exceptional position in world economy, may be distinguished by certain specific fea- tures of development just as certain individual factories or districts of Great Britain were distinguished in the days of Marx. It would be im- prudent and wrong to advance a new “natural law” of capitalist develop- ment at the present time. Firstly we have too little empirical material with which to make such generaliza- tions, but it is quite permissible to speak of positive facts. There is a country that occupies an exceptional position in world economics and that country is the United States. It is quite reasonable to suppose that a country with such enormous eco- nomic resources and where technical progress has made such rapid strides should not develop along the general, average line but should de- velop in leaps. That is exactly what is happening in America. “ What does that mean? For our analysis as a whole it means the following: We see various process- es giving rise to growing unemploy- ment. These are—growing unem- ployment caused by depression and crisis; growing unemployment as a result of rationalization, and finally a spasmodic reduction in the abso- lute number of workers employed in industry due to the very rapid tech- nical development that is taking place in the United. States. T absolutely disagree with the ar- gument advanced here by many com- radés to the effect that the internal possibilities of American imperial- ism have been “exhausted.” They have not yet been exhausted and in general I am on principle opposed to this point of view. It is wrong both in theory and principle, it is the Luxemburg theory (Voice: This is what Varga said!). Yes, Varga said it but I disagree with Varga on this point. It is wrong, it is a re- iteration of Rosa Luxemburg’s the- is possible as were the various cases which Marx cited in volume I of the Commu mist Parttes supported. Willi Munzegberg alone ory. What is true is that under the! accept the suggestion. is not to be blamed for this; we are | present market conditions in a coun-| ments advanced in its favor are not |ous currents among us. I cannot jtry like the United States, consecu-| \tive investments of capital are not jas profitable as for instance in | South America. And this problem jis not as simple as some comrades |lows. There are now various causes of unemployment and these causes | must be analysed. There is the un-!| employment that arises in time of| depressions; there is unemployment | | called forth by the process of ration-| |alization, even in the period of the! | upward trend of development; there is a rapid growth of unemployment |at the time of a marked upward |trend of development accompanied) by extremely rapid technical prog- ress. Take for instance unemploy- ment in Great Britain and in Amer-| ica. These are two different types| |of unemployment. It goes without | saying that we as Communists re-| gard all the types of unemployment as a product of the development of the contradictions in capitalism. We utilize these contradictions with the} object of sharpening the class strug- gle. The Peasant Problem. Now a few words on the peasant problem. The critical remarks made on this question by Comrade Kola- rov, by the Italian, Balkan, South American, Persian and several other comrades I think are absolutely jus- tified. But in my turn I can hurl the reproach at all these comrades for not having said a word about the agricultural proletariat. As a | matter of fact this problem is one| of the most serious problems in the capitalistically developed European countries. How does the peasant problem) jas a whole stand at the present| |time? I think the formulation we| adopted in 1925 still holds good. With the beginning of partial cap-| italist stabilization, work among the} \peasantry in the hjghly-developed | West-European countries has become | objectively more difficult for us. | The broad“masses of the peasants | —not the pauperized peasants of | the Chinese, Russian or Roumanian | type, but the “middle” and “lower| middle” West European type (Ger-| | many, France, Czechoslovakia, etc.) the matter actually|—became restless when considerable disturbances took place in the entire ber of workers employed in industry| capitalist system. No analogy can ounibie ore Tek It| be drawn between the Chinese peas- ants and the German middle peas- ants. They represent totally differ- ent social categories, they are quite different types of peasants. spoke of this at the second congress, and strongly emphasized this dis- disturbances in Western Europe, under the present conditions of stabilization, work among the peas- ants in the large capitalist coun- tries will in my opinion be very dif- ficult. All the more reason therefore, why we must stress the significance |of our work among the agricultural \laborers. In a number of countries | at the present time an offensive on the agricultural proletariat is ob- served all along the line. At the same time in a number of countries | of a different type, the agrarian! problem is becoming accentuated—_| the events in the Balkan countries, and particularly in Roumania have | shown us that this problem is as- suming special significance and we must therefore regard it as the most important issue for us in these countries. The same thing applies to those colonial countries in which | an immediate revolutionary situation | may be expected in the near future. | For instance, the peasant problem in China is now an urgent and the central problem of the revolution: Special attention must be devoted to the peasant problem in the South- American countries. The structure | of the state in almost all South-| American countries is of a peculiar) type (big landowners and owners} of latifundia are at the helm). In some of these countries we find latifundia on which a mixed regime of capitalist exploitation and feudal relations exist. We find similar con- ditions in some colonies with their plantation systems, where extraor- dinary laws exist, for instance, | against the Negroes, etc. The peas- ant problem in Indonesia, India and South Africa (where the natives are} being divorced from the land) plays an enormous and even a decisive role. For our Parties in those coun- tries the peasant problem is the chief and principal problem. In Pol- and — I come now to European countries—this problem is also of! the utmost importance. However, the comrades who spoke on this question made almost no concrete proposals as to what is to be done. Of proposals that were made I will mention only one, which reduces itself to the suggestion that we should revise the point of view we adopted in 1925 in regard to the peasant parties. The comrade who made that suggestion believes that under the existing objective condi- tions (the extraordinarily import- ance of the peasant problem in sev- eral countries) we ought to organ- ize peasant parties. I do not agree with.that and I believe that there is no reason to these sections were also moved. But} These countries are now particula: convincing enough. We are told| that since we must devote more at-| tention to the peasant problem, par- | | ticularly in the various colonial and | semi-colonial countries, in the South | | the unembellished facts, on the basis |think. It is a very complicated one.| American countries, ete., it natur-| powerful peasant parties. Why? We have already discussed this question and| decided that it was necessary to or- | ganize peasant leagues, to gain in-| fluence in them and to control them | through our fractions. It seems to! | me that this position was absolutely | correct and that it holds good also| today. Why are separate peasant parties necessary? What does it mean to create a new party in the| light of the prospect of develop-| ment of bourgeois national revolu- tions in the colonies and their trans- | formation into social revolutions. It| means that we would set up parties to compete with the Communist Parties of the proletariat. We can- not say: up to a certain point we “favor” such parties, but after that we “eliminate” or liquidate them without ceremony. No, comrades, such parties would grow and even- tually would compete with the Com- | munist Parties. Of course, in cases | where peasant parties already exist we must seek to win them over and to bring them under our influence. But wherever the question of or- ganizing a peasant party is raised for the first time it seems to me that it would be much better for us to organize peasant leagues, because by doing so we shall be able to or- ganize broader sections of the peas- antry and create a surer means by which to lead the toiling. sections of the peasants. Such a form of peas- ant organization may attract a larger membership and will be much easier to bring under the influence of the proletarian Commpnist Party. | All these political considerations | argue against this proposal. We de- | cided this question in this spirit be- | fore and gave the same motives for this solution. There is no reason whatever why we should relinquish this position. The Importance of Work in South America. Allow me to deal with a few other questions. First of all I want to lay stress on the problem of the South Amer- ican countries. We have already mentioned the fact that this is the Lenin | first time that the South American Parties are so well represented at|less, pointed to the large invest- i jour Congress. Of course, this shows | ments of foreign capital to be ob- tinction. In times of war and great | that our movement has extended to the South American countries. ly important for us as they play a very important although peculiar role in world politics. We have al- ready pointed out the growing ag- gressiveness of North American capitalism in South America; we have also pointed already to the war of liberation Nicaragua is waging against the imperialist invasion of the U. S. We are all perfectly well aware of the great importance of Mexican resistance and we also know that such resistance and a powerful popular movement against North American imperialism is now developing in several countries in South America. We know perfectly well that this problem is interwined with certain internal problems in the respective countries, particular- ly with the agrarian problem and the struggle against fascism. On the question’ of tactics in the South KENOSHA LABOR SPY EXPELLED Continued from Page One built, and is at present employed at the Nash Motor Co. as an ‘inspec- tor,’ and secretly as a spy on his fellow-workers. He has a record of industrial espionage extending over a long period of years, having once been a member of the I. W. W. in Chicago, as well as a member of the Chicago union. He was em- ployed for a time by the Moody Water Pipe Co., where he was en- gaged in spying and reporting the activities of the militant workers to the company officials. “During the months ‘he was sec- retary of the Workers Party in Kenosha several members were mysteriously discharged from their jobs. Activities Discovered. “Bugna has a box in the Kenosha post office, No. 743, where he re- ceives mail from an_ individual named Harte, who is employed by the Corporations Auxiliary Co, Bugna was in the habit of paying regular visits to Harte, who lives in South Milwaukee, Wis. For his spy activities he received $1.80 per report. Bugna has been expelled from the Workers (Communist) Party, and all units of the Party are asked to beware of this individual, in the event of his attempting to join the Party elsewhere.” dea! now with all the controversial points. I would like, however, to emphasize the point that from the viewpoint of the development of powerful national revolutions and agrarian revolutions,— of which we must draw our conclu-|Our general deductions are as fol-| ally follows that we must organize| which most likely will reveal the tendency to become transformed into social revolutions, the whole gamut | of South American problems is as- suming increasing significance from day to day. The Negro Problem. I want to stress the importance of the Negro problem. The Comin- tern has already passed a number of resolutions on this question. Never- theless, it is a fact that the Parties concerned have not yet paid the nec- essary attention to this issue. Al- most all Negro comrades say in ad- dition, that the survivals of race prejudice are still to be observed in some parties. I do not deny this fact. If on minor national issues, there is friction within the Commu- nist Parties, for instance in West- ern Europe, what reasons have we to believe that great cultural and radical distinctions leave no traces upon the Communist Parties? Even | on the Commissions of the Comin- tern a wrong note is detected when questions concerning the Negro problem are discussed. I myself no-| ticed this during a discussion on the South African question. We must put an end to this once and for all. In our theses we must declare in| the name of the Comintern that it| is the duty of all our comrades to| adopt a correct policy on this ques- tion and fight mercilessly against the slightest manifestations of race prejudice. The Negro problem must not be studied merely from the point of view of the situation in North America, but also from the view- point of the situation in South Af- rica, etc. The Situation in India. A few words on India. Some In- dian comrades raised some points against me and I must reply. For Jinstance, Comrade Rasur objected to my description of the present economic situation in India. He re- \gretted that I did not say some- thing about the industrialization of India. I must state here that in elaborating their theory of the “de- colonization” comrades sought support in a state- while I made no reference to the de-colonization of India, I neverthe- served in India. | Is it true that I made no refer-| ence to the industrialization of In- dia in my report? I may not have employed the term industrialization. But I spoke of big capital invest- ments during the war and post-war periods; is that no industrializa- tion? However, this is not a de- cisive factor in analyzing the pres- ent situation in India. A decisive element is the following: Has the policy of British imperialism changed in regard to India or not?) in the economic policy of British | imperialism? I think the ished of late. We no longer ob- serve the feverish investments of | capital; there is no longer an up-| ward curve of large investments as | we saw before. That is why the) surging process of economic devel- opment that was observed some time BRITISH ‘LEADERS’ OKAY MOND PLAN Continued from Page One lice who surrounded the meeting the demonstrators held in the fields. | Everyone seeking admission to the| congress today was closely scrutin-| ized in order to prevent the entrance | of miners and other militant ele- ments. The congress has definitely refused to receive a deputation of miners. In spite of Ben Turner’s address of pacifism in which he declared} pensioning all those engaged on naval and military work “until the time comes when they could be mak- ing ploughshares” would be better “than to continue the unholy prepa-| rations for war,” the most serious topic before the congress, after dis- cussion of the Mond plan, was the| decline in trade union membership during the past year. It is believed that figures reveal- ing a decline of 280,000 by no means) tells the whole story of the decay in British unionism under the existing leadership. A resolution making unemploy- ment a national and not a local charge was passed by the congress following discussion in which the) officials advanced the opinion that, the miners are solving their unem- ployment suffering by marching | afoot to the cities where they swell) the large populations of unemployed of India the Indian) ment I made in the course of which, | Is there any change to be observed |}) flow of |} capital to India has greatly dimin- |) ago is not observed now. Hence, the | open} |impoverishment and pauperization | now in progress which is converting the peasants not into urban workers on all sides, but semi-beggars on the land, robbed and enslaved on all sides. This retards the development of the home market and therefore the development of industry which has to contend against bitter compe- tition, which is made all the more severe by the “preferences” Britain The argu-| American countries there are vari-!|is able to secure for herself by the privileged position she occupies in the country. Such are the peculiar features of India today. Comrade Rasur said that Britain is trying to bribe the upper strata of the peas- antry. This is true. But it seems to me that Comrade Rasur somewhat exaggerates this process. In reality we see the process of further pau- perization and this is a basis for the coming revolutionary battles. This is also a basis for bourgeois man- euvers against British imperialism In regard to the tactics that must be applied in India, I have dealt with them already. The Vienna Insurrection and “Left” Social Democracy. the In dealing with the smaller Par- ties I think a few words must be said regarding the Austrian ques- tion. Some cothnrades asked me whether the fact that I did not men- tion the July insurrection in Vienna is to be taken as indicating a change in our opinion on this question. As you all know we discussed trian question some time expressed ourselves very strongly against the position of the Austrian Party. In the resolution we adopted it is pointed out that the Vienna uprising was a powerful revolution- ary mass movement and that our Party should Live advanced the slogan of Soviets and should have led the insurrection under this slog- an. No doubt all of you are familiar with that resolution. It seems to me that there is no reason why we should depart from the opinions we expressed at that time, It is another ago and the Aus-| peech in Reply to Discussion on the International Situation V. Problems Connected With the Work of question as to whether that move- ment was not isolated somewhat at the stage which it had reached. The masses of the German and Czecho- Slovakian proletariat could not be called out for a general strike and no decisive mass action could be ef- fected then. From this point of view the Vienna uprising was to a certain extent isolated. However, with the..further development of events we might have attained a dif- ferent situation. That was quite possible. Who can say that if the events had developed further we would not have had great ferment in Germany and Czechoslovakia? Such a possibility was not entirely out of the question. The argument that the rising was isolated, or rather, relatively isolated cannot be brought in as an argument against our revolutionary tactics in Austria. | Did the Austrian Party at that time have the opportunity to develop the movement? I think it did. The Party made a mistake in not helping to create mass organizations in the form of Soviets. It had the oppor- tunity for doing that, but it com- mitted a grave mistake in not act- ing in the right way in the right time. I think the resolution of the Plenum of the E.C.C.I. was abso- lutely correct. It is another matter as to how far similar events are possible in the existing situation. I do not consider such a prospect very likely. But this is an entirely differ- ent matter. The Austrian events emphasized with particular force the correctness of the thesis on the role of the “left” social democrats when it says that they are the most dangerous enemies of the revolutionary proletariat, =m ee Bukharin’s speech will be continued in tomorrow's Daily Worker when the sizth section, “VI. Tactical and Inner Party Problems,” will be published. PACKAGE of | Campaign Notice | will be sent you FREE OF CHARGE by the National Election Campaign Com- H mittee. Just send in your name and address | | on a post card or letter. | advertising campaign, and the Committee | is not seeking a profit on the sale of cam- paign leaflets. 500,000 leaflets will be given away. If you like the idea, you can keep it | going by sending as much as you can con- | tribute to the Free Campaign Leaflet Fund | to enable the Committee to renew the offer. Mail this coupon NOW to the National Election Campaign Committee 43 East 125th St. New York City. oe one hundred leaflets This is not an Comrades: Send me a package of one hundred Com- munist Campaign leaflets. that there is no obligation on my part ex- cept to distribute these leaflets. It is understood | | | Order a Bundle! Let The DAILY WORKER help you in your Election . Campaign Work. Order a bundle to distribute and sell at your open air meetings, in front of factories and at union Meetings. ee Special price on Daily Worker bundles during election campaign, $8.00 per thousand (regular price $10.00 per thousand). Enclosed find §..........for........Daily Workers Name Street persons. City w.eee Seem meee en etee eee e eee eeeeeereteeeeeee eee eee CeCe eee Creer ere eee er