The Daily Worker Newspaper, November 24, 1928, Page 6

Page Six Central Organ of the Workers (Communist) Party <7, — THE DAILY WORKER, NEW YORK, 7% Published by National Daily Worker Publishing Ass’n., Inc., Daily, Except Sunday, at 26-28 Union Square, New York, N. Ya Telephone Stuyvesant 1696 Cable Address “Datork” ROBERT MINOR Editor WM. F. DUNNE Ausistant Editor SUBSCRIPTION RATES: By Mail (in New York only) $8 a year $4.50 six mos. $2.50 three mos. By Mail (outside of New York): $6 a year $3.50 six mos, $2.00 three mos. Address and mail all checks to The Daily Worker, 26-28 Union Square, New York, N. Y. Anglo-American Conflict — Phan- tom Or Reality So unmistakeably hostile has been the re- sponse of the official and semi-of cial 3ritish press to the intensified offensive of American imperialism against English im- perialism that the Wall Street press no longer attempts to conceal the antagonism between the two powers. During the years’ that the world-wid nomic conflict between the two imperialist has been raging, the American capi- ress wos blithely ignoring it while talking twaddle about the role of the two g aking nations as the safe- all mankind. The world struggle for oil was interpreted by the capitalist a fundamental im- perialist conflict, but as merely a fight be- tween two oil magnates. The rout of the British rubber monopoly by the department of commerce under Hoover, in spite of the direct intervention of the gov- ernment on behalf of the American rubber trust, was interpreted as an isolated struggle that had no bearing whatsoever on any other question. The antagonisms over reparations, the conflict of interests in the enforcement of the Dawes plan, the role of Latin-Ameri- can pawns of yankee imperialism within the League of Nations in order to thwart British policy and leadership and aid the United States in its drive to wrest leadership of European reaction from Britain, were all ignored. But. since the Armistice Day speech of Cool- idge, wherein he threw off all pretense of try- ing longer to conceal the Anglo-American rantagonisms, it has been impossible to ignore the real situation. After a few days of be- wilderment at the aggressiveness of the at- tack upon British naval policy, the London press began the counter blast and made no attempt to conceal its fury at the charges of Coolidge! The New Statesman in a sharp attack sa ish tan] of the peace o: not press I groups of “After years of sonorous silence only punc- tuated now and then by the utterance of some discreet inanity, he suddenly delivered a sort of dying kick with a viciousness of which few people on this side of the Atlantic would have supposed him capable,” Not merely did the London press react with feigned astonishment or real fury, but the English ruling class are busy mobilizing “opinion” from the farthest sections of its far-flung empire. From South Africa, the former Boer nationalist and present renegade and agent of British imperialism, Jan @@ris- tian Smuts, expresses the hope that “the United States will not spoil her record peace policy by enlarging her policy of naval con- struction.” Meanwhile the race for naval armaments is on. The gathering war clouds that have been perceptible to all careful political ob- servers for a long period of time are now so dark and so menacing that not even such a persistent advocate of Anglo-American re- sponsibility for the “peace of the world” as the New York World can ignore it. But, according to that organ of Wall Street rapa- city these antagonisms are only phantoms, not realities: | __ “Relations between Great Britain and the United States are at a point where unless "there is a decided turn for the better they ar almost certain to become much worse. There _ exists, as both the Prime Minister and the ‘president have recently admitted, a misunder- standing on both sides of the Atlantic. This misunderstanding is expressing itself not only as popular irritation and suspicion in the less responsible press. “The hope of an understanding rests upon the creation of a body of opinion in both coun- tries which is sufficiently clear-headed and resolute to focus the attention of both govern- ments and both nations upon their genuine common interests rather than upon those ap- parent interests which now divide them. For it may confidently be asserted that both gov- ernments are at this moment pursuing phan- toms.” Certainly it is not to be expected that the World, one of the most persistent propa- gandists of the “dawn of peace,” a newspaper that hailed every exhibition of imperialist chicanery, every maneuver of capitalist diplo- mats as indications of the beginning of a new era of world peace to suddenly admit that it was either a deliberate liar or a victim of dies. A newspaper that hailed the “peace” .of Versailles as the end of the epoch of wars and the dawn of a millenium, that called the league of nations an agency that would pre- vent war; that extolled the Locarno con- spiracy against the Soviet Union and the first attempt to create a bloc of European debtor nations against “Uncle Shylock” as the guar- antee of peace between the great powers, could not be expected to confess that it had been busy sowing pacifist illusions in behalf of war-mongers busy preparing for another world war. Although forced to admit that antagonisms exist, the World and similar papers still serve their masters by trying to create the illusion ieee J * i} that there really is no fundamental economic antagonisms that are irreconcilable and that lead directly to another world conflict. The ruling classes of the two imperialist powers are aware of the fact that the time is near at hand when the final word will have been spoken around the diplomatic tables and the struggle will be transferred to the field of mars, but their newspapers dare not yet admit it. . Let no one be deceived regarding the real world situation and the causes of the Anglo- American conflict. Wars do not arise because of phantoms that obsess diplomats and they cannot be avoided by insipid talk about ‘“mis- understandings” or by the creation of a “body of opinion,” as the World suggests. The only way to fight imperialist war to- day is to wage a struggle against imperialism and all its ramifications. Only the workers and farmers, those who bear the burdens of war can fight effectively against the war danger by directing their attack against their own ruling class. Let those in the United States who are now preparing the next blood bath for the oppressed of the world in order to decide which of the imperialist powers shall get more of the pelf of the world know that in the next imperialist war we will do everything in our power to bring about the defeat of our own ruling class in order to weaken them and make possible a situation in which the power of government can be wrested from them and in its place will arise a working class state that will enforce the will of the toilers instead of that of the para- site war-mongers. Davis Urges Greater Speed-Up It is quite in keeping with the treacherous role of the officialdom of the American Fede- ration of Labor that the New Orleans con- vention of that body could enthusiastically approve the remarks of James J. Davis, secretary of labor in the cabinet of the im- perialist government of the United States. Both the millionaire, Davis, and the flunkey of millionaire industrialists and imperialists, Bill Green, stand on the same platform as enemies of the working class. Both of them consider the ideal of “Americanism” to be a nation of subservient slaves. Both of them are opposed to strikes and advocates of the speed-up and all the other slavish require- ments of capitalist nationalization. The American Federation of Labor Bureaucracy, the most, vicious and re- actionary on the face of the earth, roared and shrjeked approval when the head of the labor department of the strike-breaking Mel- lon-Coolidge-Hoover government proclaimed the false economic doctrine that the more work and the better work labor does, the more the employers can afford to pay in wages. Before a convention of real representa- tives of the working class such an assertion would call forth the most devastating re- buke. A real labor gathering would have in- formed the secretary of labor in no uncertain terms that it most cetegorically rejects such a treacherous policy. It is an economic fact, known to every man or woman who works in any industry, that the more work that is turned out the sooner the market supply is filled, the sooner workers are out of employ- ment, and that when there are many people on the streets, anxious for work so they can exist, the bosses are better in a position to cut the wages of those who remain at work. Davis, like Green, also expressed the platonic opinion that the introduction of labor-saving machinery should enable the workers to shorten hours. But when the A. F. of L. follows the line of Davis and the rest of the millionaire cabinet members and urges adoption of an anti-strike policy it makes impossible a realization of shorter hours. Instead that also means more men out of work and a further reduction in wages of those who work. The only way to meet the problem of im- proved machinery and rationalization is the building up of the Workers (Communist) Party and strengthening its leadership and influence, and the organization of powerful labor organizations that will utilize the strike weapon to compel the employers to grant shorter hours and higher wages. To refuse to approve that kind of action is to play the game of the master class against the work- ing class—a game at which both Davis and Green are adepts. Editorial Correction An article which appeared on the first page of the Daily Worker of Friday, Noy- ember 23, by John L. Sherman under the title, “Plan to Insure Boss Prosperity,” does not represent the point of view of the Daily Worker or of the Workers (Communist) Party, of which this paper is the central or- THE VIPER, SATURDAY, NOV. 24, 1928 Fred Ellis Stalin on Right Deviations (NOTE:—The following speech was delivered by Comrade Stalin, secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, at the Plenum jof the Moscow Committee and Mos- cow Control Commission of the C. P.S. U. held on Oct. 19, 1928. The \conclusion of his speech will be pub-} lished in the Daily Worker in a fol lowing issue.) BELIEVE, Comrades, that we} must in the first place set aside: all petty and personal considerations | Party. The personal question does| Party Congress, by denying the nec- if we are to be enabled to solve the! not settle the whole matter, although essity of an assault on the kulak ele- question before us, viz. that of the deviations tothe, Right. Are we |faced in the Party with a Right op- | portunist danger; are there objective circumstances which favor this dan. |ger; and how is this danger to be |met? Those are the questions be- |fore us. We shall, however, not be |able to solve these questions if we} do not first purge them of all petty elements which have been introduced | into them from without and which |hinder us from understanding the nature of the matter in hand. Comrade Zapolski is wrong if he |believes the question of the Right} | deviations to be a matter of chance. | | He declares that it is not a question | of deviations’ to the Right but of quarrels and personal intrigues. Let} us assume for a moment that quar-| rels and personal gnevances play a} part here as is the case in every} fight. But to explain everything as) the outcome of quarrels and to fail because of such quarrels to see the nature of the actual question, means | a deviation from the proper Mar<-| ian principles. It cannot be that such| |a great old united organization as | the organization of Moscow undoubt- edly is, should be brought into fer- ment from top ‘to bottom merely through the endeavors of certain| squealers and intriguers. No, Com: rades, such miracles do not happen. To say nothing of the fact that it would be impossible to underestimate the strength of the Moscow organi- zation so grossly. It is obvious that deep rooted reasons were here at work, reasons which had nothing to do with quarrels and intrigues. Not a Petty, Practical Question. Comrade Fruntoy, too, is wrong if, though recognizing the existence of # Right danger, he is vet of opinion | that it is not worthy of the attention |of serious people engaged in more important work. In his opinion the question of deviations to the Right is of interest only to squealers, but | not to people who are seriously occu- pied. I can very well understand Comrade Fruntov; he is so deeply |cngrossed in practical work that he has no time to think about the per- spectives of our development. This |does not mean, however, that the |of that army at Odessa. Secretary of Soviet Communist Party Speaks Before Moscow Plenum on Right Errors ir the persons but in the circum-| stances and conditions which entail) the Right danger. The persons may! be ‘removed, but that will not mean) that the roots of the Right move- ment have been eradicated from the) it is doubtless of interest. | In this connection I must call to mind an episode at Odessa at the close of 1919 and beginning of 1920,) when our troops were driving the| army of Denikin out of Ukraine and) caught up with the last stragglers| Some of the Red Guards sought furiously in) all Odessa for the Entente, being) convinced that if only they could | catch the Entente the whole war would be at'an end. (Laughter.) It is difficult to imagine that the Red| soldiers could have found any rep- resentatives of the Entente at Odessa, but if they had done so the trouble with the Entente would not have therefore been at an end, since the roots of the Entente are not to) be found at Odessa, although that city was the last foothold of the Denikin army and of the interna- tional capitalists in Russia. The) same thing may be said in regard| to some of our comrades, who nar- row down the question of the Right deviations to a mere question of per- sons representing the deviations in question, thus forgetting the condi- | tions which brought the said devia-) tions about. We must therefore in the first} lace clear up the question of the circumstances under which both the Right and the Left (Trotsky) devia- tions from the principles of Lenin first arose. Right Danger Under Capitalism. " Under capitalist rule, the Right deviations in the Communist Party consist in the tendency and inclina- |tion, albeit unexpressed and unde- veloped, on the part of some of the | Communists, to depart from the re- |volutionary directives of Marx in |the direction of the Social Demo- erats. If certain circles among the |Communists deny the practicability of the principle of “class against class” in the electioneering struggle (as is tne case in France) or oppose an independent candidature of the Communists Party (as in England), or prove unwilling to accentuate the fight against the “Left” Social | Democrats (as in Germany), this |means that within the Communist Party there are people who are anx- llimited practical sense of certain among our Party workers is to be- |come the dogma of our reconstruc- |tion. A healthy energy to work is a good thing but if it involves the forfeiture of our working perspec- tives and if the work in question is |not, subjected to the fundamental rrinciples of the Party, it turns into a deficiency. It is, however, not dif- | ficult to understand that the ques- tion of deviations to the Right ey fundamental question of our Par®, |the question as to whether the per- |down by the XV Party Congress are | right or wrong. | Nor are those comrades right who lin judging of the problem of devia- |to the individuals who represent the |said deviation. Show us the men of the Right, say these comrades, show | us the compromisers, so that we may settle with them. This is a mistaken way of putting the question. These individuals naturally play a certain |role. But the matter itself lies not spectives of our development, as laid) |tions to the Right limit the question) ious to adapt Communism to Social | Democracy. A victory of the Right |deviations in the Communist Parties of the capitalist countries would en- | tail the ideological breakdown of the | Social Democrats. And what is | meant by an enormous increase in ‘the strength of the Social Demo- crats? It is a strengthening and consolidation of capitalism, seeing |that the Social Democrats are the main prop of capitalism among the working classes. Consequently a |Right victory in the Communist Parties of the capitalist countries | would lead to the development of (conditions such as are requisite for the maintenance of capitalism. | Right Danger in USSR. | The Right deviations in Commun- lism under Soviet rule, in a country | where capitalism is already over- thrown but where the roots of capi- talism have not yet been wholly \extirpated, consist in a tendency and inclination, albeit unexpressed and |ism. Consequently a victory of the | Right deviations in our Party would |lead to the development of condi- undeveloped, on the part of some of the Communists, to depart: from the! principles of our Party in the direc- tion of bourgeois ideology. If cer- tain circles among the Contmunists desire to keep the Party back from realizing the resolutions of the XV ments in the rural districts, or else demand an arrest of our industrial development because they consider) the present rate of advance fatal to the country, or if again they con- sider the government subsidies for Soviet farms and collective farms to be impracticable and are of opinion that the money in question is being wasted in this way, or if they deny the advisability of a fight against! bureaucracy on the basis of self-| criticism, affirming that self-criti-| cism is liable to undermine our ap-| paratus, or if they demand the loos-| ening of dur foreign-trade monopoly and so on, this means that in the ranks of our Party there are such as are anxious, perhaps without knowing it themselves, to adapt the cause of our Socialist construction to the tastes and requirements of the Soviet bourgeoisie. A victory of the Right deviations within our Party would entail an enormous consolida- tion of the capitalist elements in our) country. And what would such a con-| solidation mean? It would mean a weakening of the proletarian dicta- torship and a strengthening of the chances of a restoration of capital-| tions which are requisite for the re- storation of capitalism in this coun- try. Bases for Restoring Capitalism. Are there conditions in this coun- try which might render possible the re-establishment of capitalism? There decidedly are. This may seem strange, but I can assure you, com- rades, that it is a fact. We have overthrown capitalism. We have set up the dictatorship of the proletar- iat, and we are rapidly developing our Socialist industry and connect- ing it with peasant economy. But we have not yet extirpated the roots of capitalism ‘Where are these roots to be found? They are to be found in the production of goods, in the small production of the towns and in particular in small peasant economy. ‘The’ power of capitalism lies, as Lenin points out: “in the strength of small. produc- tion, for such small production has unfortunately continued to ex- ist on a very large scale and daily and hourly to create the elements of capitalism and bourgeoisie.” It is obvious that inasmuch as small production is a mass-phenom- enon in this country and is even pre- dominant, and inasmuch as it pro- duces capitalism and bourgeoisie— quite particularly during the N. E. P. period—there are conditions in this country which render possible the re-establishment of capitalism. Are there ways and means in this Soviet country of ours to destroy the possibility of a re-establishment of capitalism? There certainly are. It is just on this fact that Lenin based his thesis of the possibility of a complete Socialist form of so- ciety in the Soviet Union. For this purpose we need the consolidation of proletarian dictatorship, the strengthening of the alliance be- tween working class and peasantry, the development of our commanding positions from the standpoint of an lindustrialization of the country, a }rapid rate of development of indus- |try, the electrification of the coun- | try, the re-adjustment of the entire economy on a new technical. basis, |the co-operative development of great masses of peasants and the inerease of the- productivity of their undertakings, the gradual combina- tion of the individual peasant under- takings in the form of collective estates, the development of the Soviet undertakings, the ousting and suppression of the capitalist ele- ments in town and country, and so on. Lenin on Capitalism in U. S. S. R. Lenin speaks as follows on this point: “As long as we live in a petty- bourgecis covntry, capitalism has in Russia a stronger economic basis than Communism. We must bear this in mind. Every one who attentively observes life in the rural districts in comparison | with life in the cities, knows that we have not yet eradicated capi- talism altogether and that we have not yet deprived our internal enemies of their foundation, They still depend on the small peasant undertakings, and to remove this prop there is but one means, that of readjusting rural economy, in- cluding agriculture, on a new technical basis, that of the great industries of the present age. Such a basis is electricity. Com- munism means Soviet authority plus the electrification of the en- tire country. Otherwise the coun- try will remain a petty-peasant country and this must be fully recognized. We are weaker than the capitalists, not only in the world in general but also within our own country. That is known to all. We have recognized this fact and we shall succeed in turn- ing the economic basis of the country out of a petty-peasant in- to a great industrial basis. Only then,' when the country is elec- trified and when industry, agri- culture and transports are com- pletely on the basis of the great industries of the present age, only then shall we have gained a def- inite victory.” It follows, firstly, that as long as we live in a petty-peasant country, as long as we have not extirpated the roots of capitalism, the latter will continue to have a firmer econ- omic basis than Communism. There are cases in which a np has been felled but it has been onfitted to ex- terminate the roots. The available forces did not suffice. There fol- lows the possibility of a restoration of capitalism in our country. Victory of Socialism Possible. It follows, secondly, that besides the possibility of a re-establishment of capitalism there is also the pos- sibility of a victory of Socialism in this country, for we may succeed in destroying the possibility of a re- establishment of capitalism, we can exterminate the roots of capitalism and carry off the final victory over capitalism, if we develop a strenu- ous activity towards the electrifica- tion of the country and if we pro- cure for industry, agriculture, and transports, the technical basis of our up-to-date industries. Hence there follows the possibility of a victory of Socialism in this country. It follows, finally, that it is im- possible merely to develop Social- ism in industry and to leave agricul- ture to the arbitrary volition of an elementary development by starting from the assumption that the rural districts will approach the cities of their own accord. The existence of a Socialist industry in the towns is the main factor of the Socialist re- adjustment of the rural districts. That does not mean, however, that this factor alone suffices to enable gan, On the contrary the article is replete | with social-democratic illusions on the sub- | ject of the Hoover proposal of a $3,000,000 fund to “stabilize prosperity.” é \ a The Daily. | | Worker repudiates the article as sharply | opposed to the Communist view. The mat- ter will be dealt with more fully in a later’ issue. the Socialist towns to lead the pea- sant villages in their wake, it is necessary, as Lenin points out, “to place the economy of the rural dis- | tricts, including agriculture, on a Stalin on Deviations | to the Right new technical basis, that of the | great industries of the present age.” Does. not this quotation from |Lenin seem to contradict other of |Lenin’s dictums to the effect that “the N. E. P. completely guarantees us the possibility for a development of the basis of Socialist economy?” No, there is no contradiction at all. On the contrary, the two assertions completely concur. Lenin does not | assert that the N. E. P. can provide jus with a perfect state of Social- | ism. He only says that the N. E. |P. guarantees us the possibility of developing the foundations of So- |cialist economy. Between the pos- | sibility cf a development of Social- ism and its actual development there |is a material difference. We must not confound the possibility with the reality. For it is just for the pur- |pose of turning this possibility into |reality that Lenin suggests the | electrification of the country and the | Foadiusemen of the technical basis of industry, agriculture, and trans- | ports on the lines of our modern big lindustries as presumptions for the But in one or two years the pre- |sumptions for the fealization of | socialism cannot be attained. It is |not possible to industrialize the jcountry in a year or two, nor to |build up a powerful industry, to |combine millions of peasants in co- |operatives, to give agriculture a new technical basis, to unite the in- |dividual peasant, undertakings in big collective ones, to develop Sov- |iet farming, to oust and overcome the capitalist elements in town and |country. For such a task years and |years of strenuous construction of the proletarian dictatorship are requisite. As long as this is not done, and lit cannot be done all at once, we |must remain a petty-peasant coun- |try, in which small production is constantly creating capitalism and bourgeoisie and the danger of a re- establishment of capitalism con- tinues to exist. And as the prole- tariat is not living in a hermetically closed room but in reality and in actual life with all its variety, “the bourgeois elements created on the basis of small production envelop the proletariat on all sides with their petty-bourgeois anarchy, permeating and destroy- ing it thereby and constantly call- ing forth within the proletariat a reversion to petty-bourgeois lack of character, disharmony, indi- vidualism, and the alternation of exaggeration and depression.” In this way they cause certain vacil- lations in the proletariat and in its Party. | Such are the roots of all sorts of vacillations and deviations from the Leninist directives in our Party. Therefore the question of the Right and Left. deviations in our Party cannot» possibly be considered as a | trifling matter. What are the characteristics of the openly opportunist Right devia- tions in our Party? They consist in the fact that they underestimate the strength of our enemies, the capitalists, refuse to see the danger of a re-establishment of capitalism, fail to understand the dynamics of the class struggle under the condi- tions of proletarian dictatorship, and therefore easily agree to make concessions to capitalism, by de- manding the slowing-down of our rate of industrial development and facilities for the capitalist elements in town and country, thrust the question of collective and Soviet un- dertakings into the background, de- mand a restriction of the foreign trade monopoly, and so on. The vie- tory of a Right deviation in our Party would doubtless combine the forces of capitalism, shatter the revolutionary positions of the prole- tariat, and enhance the chances of a re-establishment of capitalism in our country. i Left, Trotskyist Deviation. And in what does the left, Trot- skyist, deviation in our country con- sist? It lies in the fact that the representatives of this deviation over-estimate ‘the forces of our ene- mies and the strength of capitalism, that they are blind to all save the possibility of a restoration of capi- talism, especially blind to the pos- sibility of socialist construction on its own merits, and prone to com- fort themselves with a lot of twad- dle about the Thermidor of our Par- ty. From Lenin’s statement that, “as long as we live in a petty- peasant country, there is in Rus- sia a firmer economic basis for capitalism than for Communism,” the Left deviators draw the mis- taken conclusion that in the Soviet Union in general it is impossible to construct socialism, that nothing can be attained from co-operation with the peasantry, that the idea of an alliance between working class and peasantry has been superceded, that if we receive no help from a victorious revolution in the West, the dictatorship of the proletariat, that, if the fantastic plan of over- industrialization, even if executed at the cost of a rupture with the peasantry, is not accepted, the cause of socialism in the Soviet Union must be Hence the adventurous character of the Left deviation and the tremen- dous leaps noticeable in its policy. There can be no doubt but that a victory of the Left deviation in our Party would have led to the isola- tion of the working class from its peasant basis, to a separation of the vanguard of the working class from the mass of workers, and to more favorable prospects for the restora- tion of capitalism. (To Be Continued) must necessarily come to grief, and ~ considered lost .