THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount....

8
THE MILITANT Published Twice a Month by tbe Communist League of America (Opposition) Vol.III,No.30 NEW YORK, N. Y| September 15 1930 ___________ PRICE 5 CENTS Issues in the Elections Capitalist Parties Put Up Fake Issues to Conceal Jobless Sufferings In Stalin’s Exile RAKOVSKY IN DANGER! The silence of the leadership of our Party and the International continues to be profound. We w ill continue without cease our appeal to the workers for the Bolshevik Oppositionists deported by Stalin. Above all, comrade Christian Rakovsky must be saved! The workers must be informed, and to those responsible for the Party’s policy, we must constantly raise the question: What are you doing to the Left Opposition in the U..S.S.R.?' Why do you persecute it? Justify your repressive measures if you can! O n Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter) . . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a great work. His position does not differ one whit from our own (that of Trotsky); like ourselves, he is resisting the Party regime. Here are some extracts from one of his last cards: “A ll our warnings have been verified much more rajjidly aind fully than we might have imagined. Right now a re- treat is being beaten, and the positions are being abandoned, evidently by the usual zig-zags. The slogan of ‘generalized col- lectivization in three years’ still continues only for the purpose of frightening the middle peasant and increasing the retail price by its presssure. The middle peasant w ill be the axis around which the turn of 180 degrees in Centrist policy w ill revolve. “After Centrism, without resistance, ruined the economy of the middle peasant, it w ill again begin to make a fetich of him, with the ritual sacrifices, not on the backs of the bureaucracy—which everybody would have to approve-------but at the ex- pense of tihe poor peasants and the prolet- ariat” . . . Letter from Russia . . . By chance I received some in- formation on the solitary prison of N. One of our comrades confined there pre- viously developed the theory of the “fer- ment” that is, that we are ferment of the next revolutionary "rise, but today, in his letter, a change is to be felt. Everybody works to deepen and increase his theoretical knowledge, they study and strengthen their knowledge of foreign languages, with a marked preference for German. The dis- cussions go on without cease. The 'sub- jects: knowledge of the world, space, time, mechanics, the sorties of the Right wing, the "third period”,etc., etc. Nothing more qan be learned of the essence of the dis- cussions, since all abstract considerations are censored, or held back by the censor; even the situation with regard to food is part of the mystery of the solitary prisons. Hunger strikes are frequently carried on. The causes are the regime, and apparently, the food; after the first hunger strike, they forced the permission to receive twelve letters instead of four letters a month. The strike was long, there were many ser- iously ill. The second hunger strike was a protest against the basbonnades (beat- ing with sticks). As a result ,the prisoners were refused all communication with the outer world. The old social democrcy left the prisons and places of exile much more healthy than the Bolsheviks w ill leave the solitary prisons of Stalinism .... June, 1930. ■— N.N. Sufficient has occurred in the last few weeks to show on what) basis the twin capitalist parti es intend to conduct the election Campaign: Prohibition—ftfr anil against! The faithful servant of Tammanj Hail, Governor Roosevelt, hae issued a “courageous” statement for the repeal ol the 18th Amendment. The “wet” Republi- cans of New York are warning the Party high priests that unless they do the same, the parched Party sheep w ill flock to the flowing brooks of the "Democracy”. In Illinois, the Democratic senatorial nominee, J. Hamilton Lewis, has declared the great issue to be bringing the government back to “the principle of the fathers”, which, if he refers to the George, Washingtons, means cheap booze. Michigan has al- ready defeated two prominent dry Repub- lican Congressmen in the primaries. Ver- mont has given an unknown “wet” a nom- ination over a prominent “dry”. The same comedy is being enacted everywhere. M ilitarist "revolutions” in South Amer- ica are occurring with bewildering fre- quency and abruptness. First Bolivia, then Peru, now Argentina, and tomorrow, per- hap, Brazil. In virtually every one of these countries, the boiling over of conflicting elements results from the volcanic heat generated by the world capitalist crisis. Even more precisely, the “revolutions” in question mirrtor the unconcealed rivalry between Britain and the United States. In both these imperialist powers, their an- archistically organized industries and means of distribution are paralyzed, their home markets sluggish and contracted, their financial systems in disorder. Primarily for these two, it has become a matter of econ- omic existence to fight tooth and nail for a larger share of the world market, limited as it is. This struggle for markets, raw material, spheres of influence and the like, produces the mfi3t violent eruptions in every corner of the world, of which the recent events in South America are only Characteristic. The overthrow of the tyrannical but- cher of the Peruvian toiling masses, Leguia, the Wall Stfeet adjutant who was surround- ed by American financial and naval “ad- visors”, marked an offensive of Britain against the Yankee dollar—never very pop- ular with the Latin American masses— which has yet to say its (final word. With almost the precision of a m ilitary counter-offensive comes the engineered up - rising in Argentine with its removal of the notoriously pro-British Irigoyen adminis- tration and the establishment of the pro- American Uriburiu dictatorship. Both the American and ‘British im perialist p|f6fss treat the event with a frankness for which we can only be thankful: the former greets it with unfeigned glee, the latter with ap- prehension. The United States, with its hypocritical “policy” of not recognizirig Latin-American governments that have suc- ceeded to power by “violence”, is quite prepared to make an exception in the Ar- gentine case. In all these “revolutions", the native bourgeois demagogues have (skilfully util- ized the dissatisfaction of the masses with the economic crisis and tyrannical dictat- orship. They have used the workers and peasants for “troops of the popular revolu- The socalled prohibition issue is the best one that could be chosen—for the capitalist class. It conveniently cuts across party lines so that neither singly nor to- gether can they be made responsible for aythlng. It is an expedient gas gun for shooting clouds around fundamental and really burning issues. Is there mass unemployment, misery, starvation, suicide in the country? Elooze w ill solve that! Are wages being cut to the very marrow? Booze w ill make the workers forget that! Is a form of social insurance needed by the workers? No, it’s beer and light wines they need! Are the workers clubbed during strikes, bludgeoned at demonstrations of the jobless, evicted from their homes? Prohibition caused it all! Do the workers want bread? Give them beer and they won’t need bread! Is there a bleak winter ahead, a winter of deepened crisis of horrible suffering, of food riots perhaps and certainly of bitter strug- tion” and coolly driven them back to a position of quiescence and subjugation as soon as they have seized power. For the masses, in a word these “revolutions” Save no progressive significance, and often a more reactionary one. What is even more disturbing is the complete absence of the Communist move- ment in these affairs. They appear no- where as a political factor. They do not even appear to attempt to turn the guns of the masses aginst the m ilitarist puppets of the native bourgeoisie and imperialism. The truth is: They have been crushed and rendered impotent by the ravages of Sta- linism, which has virtually dissolved the oncq promising Communist movement in the Latin-American countries. The German Elections We go to press too soon to report the outcome of the elections in Germany, and must therefore leave iti to the next issue to contain a detailed analysis of the results. In this case, however, as in all capitalist (elections, the 'casting of ballots is fair from the decisive question. The fate of Germany and its working class w ill be decided in the open field of the class strug- gle. The problem for the bourgeoisie is its ability to unload the burden of the nrifcis upon techpico-lnldusltrialliy weaker countries and by intensified exploitation of the working class, in order to carry out the Young Plan. The answer dependsi largely upon the Communist Party and its ability to mobilize for struggle the workers still in retreat. The failure of the Com- munist Party can bring the same ruinous consequences to the proletariat as did the failure of the Brandler leadership of the C.P.G. in 1923. On the temper and mood of the proletariat, which w ill ibe partiality guaged by the elections this week, depends the question—in a political sense—of whe- ther the bourgeoisie w ill go forward with its "democratic” dictatorship supported by the servile collaboration of the social dem- ocrats, or prepare for an open Fascist) dictatorship. Unfortunately, the Communist Party under the misleadership of its Thael- manns, Remmeles and Neumanns offer too insufficient guarantee or hope of an intelli- gently revolutionary leadership of the mass- es for today and the coming day. gles to resist the offensive of the capitalist class? Give them a prohibition prizeifight to distract their minds from woe and stru- gle! The dislike and total Incapacity of the capitalist parties to face the real problems the masses are confronted with, are quite understandable. Republican or Democrat —they are the ramparts of the system that produces wars, unemployment, crises, mis- ery, child labor, exploitation, inequality and opflilession with am evcr-inbreaeing fre - quency and permanency. Their crimes and festering corruption are the crimes and corruption of capitalism, with which the whole country is reeking like a pestilence. For a worker to support them is to kiss the chains that enslave him and with gratitude the blows he receives. Reformist Aides to Capitalism Then ,should he support the Socialist party? No. It the Republican and Demo- cratic parties are the ramparts of capital- ism, the Socialist party is the ditch around the fortress that traps those who seek to storm it. The socialist party has removed every mention of the class struggle from its program, constitution and works. But it has not left the class struggle; it has only become an assistant to capitalism. It is the party of the petty bourgeoisie. It is the party of the respectable business men who faithfully manage the municipal affairs of Reading and Milwaukee for the capitalist class. It is the devoted workman who goes about his master’s house, with plaster and trowel, begging for permission to coyer up the more unsightly holes in the decay- ing structure. Does it offer promises to the workers? Certainly! More even than its masters offer. It offers a MacDonald regime in the United States, a regime which has so effect- ively “solved” unemployment in England that millions are still on a miserable dole; it has “solved” the oppression of imperial- ism in India by massacring tbe Indian people. Haven’t H illqult and Co. endorsed the British "Labor” government? Aren’t they in one and the same "socialist” inter- national? Are they not “comrades” of Zoergiebel, the butcher of Berl'n’s prolet- ariat, and Eoncour, the agent of the French, war mongers? Are they not in the party of the “socialist’ trade union racketeers who practise for power by beating up and expelling Left wing workers? They are the gay deceivers of the working class, typified by Mr. Heywood Broun and Mr. Norman Thomas, who keep the workers from iftghting their class enemy by telling them that their lot can be improved by voting against capitalist politicians. Yote Communist (The worker’s vote should go to the worker’s party—the Communist Party. A ll our differences with it, our criticisms of its interilal regime and its ruinous policies, does not change the fact that it is the only political party of the working class in the field which stands for a revolutionary struggle against capitalism and all power to the proletariat. The casting of a paper ballot does not and cannot decide the burn- ing problems of the workers. But support for the Communist campaign draws the workers more closely together, and enables them to transform the electoral farce into a genuine fight for the demands of the workers—not in futile polling booths, but in serious class struggle. Vote Communist! A Yankee Revolution in the Argentine

Transcript of THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount....

Page 1: THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a …

THE M IL IT A N TPublished Twice a Month by tbe Communist League of America (Opposition)

V ol.III,N o.30 NEW YO RK, N. Y| September 15 1930 ___________ PR IC E 5 CENTS

Issues in the ElectionsCapitalist Parties Put Up Fake Issues to Conceal Jobless Sufferings

In Stalin’s Exile

RAKOVSKY IN DANGER!

The silence o f the leadership of ou r P a rty and the In te rn a tio n a l continues to be profound. We w il l continue w ith o u t cease ou r appeal to the w orkers fo r the B o lshevik O pposition ists deported by S ta lin .

Above a ll, comrade C h ris tia n Rakovsky m ust be saved!

The w orkers m ust be in fo rm ed, and to those responsible fo r the P a rty ’s po licy, we m ust co ns tan tly ra ise the question : W ha t are you do ing to the L e ft O pposition in the U..S.S.R.?' W hy do you persecute it? J u s tify you r repressive measures i f you can!

O n Rakovsky(E x tra c t fro m a L e tte r)

. . . R akovsky is w r it in g an enormous amount. W hatever reaches us is read by a ll ; in th is sense C h ris tian G eorgevitch is doing a g rea t w o rk . H is pos ition does not d iffe r one w h it fro m ou r own ( th a t o f T ro ts k y ) ; lik e ourselves, he is res is ting the P a rty regime. Here are some extracts fro m one o f h is la s t cards:

“ A l l ou r w arn ings have been verified m uch m ore ra j j id ly aind fu l ly than we m ig h t have im agined. R ig h t now a re ­tre a t is being beaten, and the positions are being abandoned, ev iden tly by the usual zig-zags. The slogan of ‘genera lized co l­le c tiv iza tio n in three years ’ s t i l l continues o n ly fo r the purpose o f fr ig h te n in g the m idd le peasant and increas ing the re ta il p rice by its presssure. The m iddle peasant w i l l be the axis around w h ich the tu rn of 180 degrees in C en tris t p o licy w i l l revolve.

“ A fte r C en trism , w ith o u t resistance, ru ined the economy o f the m iddle peasant, i t w i l l again begin to make a fe tich o f h im , w ith the r itu a l sacrifices, n o t on the backs o f the bureaucracy— w hich everybody w ou ld have to approve-------bu t a t the ex­pense of tihe poor peasants and the p ro le t­a r ia t” . . .

Letter from Russia. . . By chance I received some in ­

fo rm a tion on the s o lita ry p rison o f N. One o f ou r comrades confined there pre ­v ious ly developed the theory of the “ fe r ­m ent” th a t is, th a t we are fe rm en t of the next revo lu tio n a ry "rise, bu t today, in his le tte r, a change is to be fe lt. Everybody w orks to deepen and increase h is theore tica l knowledge, they study and strengthen th e ir know ledge o f fo re ign languages, w ith a m arked preference fo r German. The dis­cussions go on w ith o u t cease. The 'sub­jec ts : know ledge o f the w orld , space, tim e, mechanics, the sorties o f the R ig h t w ing, the " th ird period” ,etc., etc. N o th ing m ore qan be learned o f the essence o f the d is­cussions, since a ll abstrac t considerations are censored, o r held back by the censor; even the s itu a tio n w ith regard to food is p a rt o f the m yste ry o f the s o lita ry prisons. H unger s trikes are freq u e n tly ca rrie d on. The causes are th e regime, and apparently, the food; a fte r the f irs t hunger s tr ike , they forced the perm ission to receive tw e lve le tte rs instead o f fo u r le tte rs a m onth. The s tr ik e was long, there were m any ser­io u s ly i l l . The second hunger s tr ike was a p ro tes t aga inst the basbonnades (beat­in g w ith s ticks ). As a re su lt ,the p risoners were refused a ll com m unication w ith the ou te r w orld . The old socia l democrcy le ft the prisons and places of exile m uch m ore hea lthy than the Bo lsheviks w i l l leave the s o lita ry prisons o f S ta lin ism . . . .

June, 1930. ■—N.N.

Suffic ient has occurred in the la s t few weeks to show on what) basis the tw in c a p ita lis t p a rt i es in tend to conduct the e lec tion Campaign: P ro h ib it io n — ftfr a n il aga inst! The fa ith fu l servant of Tam m anj H a il, G overnor Roosevelt, hae issued a “ courageous” statem ent fo r the repeal o l the 18th Am endment. The “ w e t” R epub li­cans o f New Y o rk are w a rn ing the P a rty h igh p ries ts th a t unless they do the same, the parched P a rty sheep w i l l f lo c k to the flo w in g brooks o f the "D em ocracy” . In I l l in o is , the D em ocratic senatoria l nominee, J. H a m ilto n Lew is, has declared th e g rea t issue to be b rin g in g the governm ent back to “ the p rin c ip le o f the fa the rs ” , w hich, i f he re fe rs to the George, W ashingtons, means cheap booze. M ich igan has a l­ready defeated tw o p rom inen t d ry Repub­lica n Congressmen in the p rim aries . V e r­m ont has g iven an unknow n “ w e t” a nom ­in a tio n over a p rom inen t “ d ry ” . The same comedy is being enacted everywhere.

M ilita r is t "re v o lu tio n s ” in South A m er­ica are o ccu rr in g w ith b e w ild e rin g fre ­quency and abruptness. F irs t B o liv ia , then Peru, now A rgen tina , and tom orrow , per- hap, B raz il. In v ir tu a lly every one o f these countries, the b o ilin g over o f con flic ting elements resu lts fro m the vo lcan ic heat generated by the w o rld ca p ita lis t c ris is . Even m ore precise ly, the “ revo lu tions” in question m irrto r the unconcealed r iv a lry between B r ita in and the U nited States. In both these im p e r ia lis t powers, th e ir an- a rc h is tic a lly organized indus tries and means o f d is tr ib u tio n are paralyzed, th e ir home m arkets s luggish and contracted, th e ir financ ia l systems in d isorder. P r im a r ily fo r these two, i t has become a m a tte r o f econ­omic existence to fig h t too th and n a il fo r a la rg e r share o f the w o rld m arke t, lim ite d as i t is. T h is s trugg le fo r m arkets, raw m ate ria l, spheres o f in fluence and the like , produces the m fi3 t v io le n t e rup tions in every corner o f the w orld , o f w h ich the recent events in South Am erica are on ly C haracteristic.

The ove rth row o f the ty ra n n ic a l bu t­cher o f the P eruv ian to il in g masses, Leguia, the W a ll S tfee t ad ju tan t who was su rround­ed by A m erican financ ia l and nava l “ ad­v iso rs ” , m arked an offensive o f B r ita in against the Yankee d o lla r— never ve ry pop­u la r w ith the L a t in A m erican masses— w h ich has ye t to say its (final word.

W ith a lm ost the p rec is ion of a m ilita ry counter-offensive comes the engineered up­r is in g in A rgen tine w ith its rem oval o f the no to rio u s ly p ro -B r it is h Ir igo ye n adm in is­tra tio n and the establishm ent o f the p ro - Am erican U riburiu d ic ta torsh ip . B o th the A m erican and ‘B r it is h im p e r ia lis t p|f6fss tre a t the event w ith a frankness fo r w h ich we can o n ly be th a n k fu l: the fo rm er greets i t w ith unfeigned glee, the la tte r w ith ap­prehension. The U n ited States, w ith its h y p o c rit ic a l “ p o lic y ” o f no t reco g n iz ir ig L a tin -A m erican governm ents th a t have suc­ceeded to power by “ v io lence” , is qu ite prepared to make an exception in the A r ­gentine case.

In a l l these “ revo lu tions", the native bourgeois demagogues have (s k ilfu lly u t i l ­ized the d issa tis fac tion o f the masses w ith the economic c ris is and ty ra n n ica l d ic ta t­orsh ip . They have used the w orkers and peasants fo r “ troops o f the popu la r revo lu -

The socalled p ro h ib itio n issue is the best one th a t could be chosen— fo r the c a p ita lis t class. I t conven ien tly cuts across p a rty lines so th a t ne ithe r s in g ly no r to ­gether can they be made responsib le fo r ayth lng. I t is an expedient gas gun fo r shooting clouds around fundam enta l and re a lly bu rn in g issues.

Is there mass unem ploym ent, m isery, s ta rva tion , suicide in the coun try? Elooze w i l l solve th a t! A re wages being cu t to the ve ry m arrow ? Booze w i l l make the w orkers fo rg e t th a t! Is a fo rm of socia l insurance needed by the w orkers? No, i t ’s beer and lig h t w ines they need! A re the w orkers clubbed d u rin g s tr ikes , bludgeoned a t dem onstrations o f the jobless, evicted fro m th e ir homes? P ro h ib itio n caused i t a l l ! Do the w orkers w a n t bread? Give them beer and they w on’t need bread! Is there a b leak w in te r ahead, a w in te r of deepened c r is is o f h o rr ib le suffering, o f food r io ts perhaps and c e rta in ly o f b it te r s trug -

tio n ” and coo lly d riven them back to a pos ition o f quiescence and sub juga tion as soon as they have seized power. F o r the masses, in a w ord these “ revo lu tio n s ” Save no progressive significance, and often a m ore reac tiona ry one.

W ha t is even m ore d is tu rb in g is the complete absence o f the Com m unist move­m ent in these a ffa irs . They appear no­where as a p o lit ic a l fac to r. They do no t even appear to a ttem pt to tu rn the guns of the masses ag ins t the m il i ta r is t puppets o f the na tive bourgeoisie and im peria lism . The tru th is : They have been crushed and rendered im poten t by the ravages o f Sta­lin ism , w h ich has v ir tu a lly dissolved the oncq p rom is ing Com m unist m ovem ent in the L a tin -A m erican countries.

The German ElectionsWe go to press too soon to re p o rt the

outcome o f the elections in Germany, and m ust there fo re leave iti to the n ex t issue to con ta in a detailed analysis o f the resu lts. In th is case, however, as in a ll c a p ita lis t (elections, the 'casting o f b a llo ts is fair fro m the decisive question. The fate of Germ any and its w o rk in g class w i l l be decided in the open fie ld o f the class s tru g ­gle. The prob lem fo r the bourgeoisie is its a b ility to unload the burden o f the nrifcis upon techpico-ln ldusltria lliy weaker coun tries and by in tens ified e xp lo ita tion of the w o rk in g class, in o rde r to c a rry out the Young P lan. The answer dependsi la rg e ly upon the Com m unist P a rty and its a b il ity to m obilize fo r s trugg le the w orkers s t i l l in re trea t. The fa ilu re o f the Com­m un is t P a rty can b rin g the same ru inous consequences to the p ro le ta r ia t as d id the fa ilu re o f the B ra n d le r leadership o f the C.P.G. in 1923. On the tem per and mood of the p ro le ta r ia t, w h ich w i l l ibe pa rtia lity guaged by the elections th is week, depends the question— in a p o lit ic a l sense— of whe­th e r the bourgeoisie w i l l go fo rw a rd w ith its "dem ocra tic ” d ic ta to rsh ip supported by the se rv ile co llabo ra tion o f the social dem­ocrats, o r prepare fo r an open Fascist) d ic ta to rsh ip . U n fo rtuna te ly , the Com m unist P a rty under the m isleadership o f its Thael- manns, Remmeles and Neumanns o ffe r too insu ffic ien t guarantee o r hope of an in te l l i­g e n tly revo lu tio n a ry leadership o f the mass­es fo r today and the com ing day.

gles to res is t the offensive o f the c a p ita lis t class? Give them a p ro h ib itio n p riz e ifig h t to d is tra c t th e ir m inds fro m woe and s tru - g le !

The d is like and to ta l Incapacity o f the c a p ita lis t parties to face the rea l problem s the masses are confronted w ith , are qu ite understandable. R epublican o r Dem ocrat — they are the ram pa rts o f the system th a t produces w ars, unem ploym ent, crises, m is­ery, c h ild labor, exp lo ita tion , in e q u a lity and opflilession w ith am evcr-inb reae ing fre ­quency and permanency. T h e ir crim es and fes te rin g c o rru p tio n are the crim es and co rru p tio n o f cap ita lism , w ith w h ich the w hole co u n try is reek ing lik e a pestilence. F o r a w o rke r to support them is to kiss the chains th a t enslave h im and w ith g ra titu d e the b low s he receives.

Reformist Aides to CapitalismThen ,should he support the S oc ia lis t

party? No. I t the R epublican and Demo­c ra tic p a rties are the ram parts o f ca p ita l­ism , the S oc ia lis t p a rty is the d itch around the fo rtre ss th a t trap s those who seek to s to rm it . The soc ia lis t p a rty has removed every m ention o f the class s trugg le from its p rogram , con s titu tio n and w orks. B u t i t has n o t le f t the class s trug g le ; i t has o n ly become an assistant to cap ita lism . I t is the p a rty o f the pe tty bourgeoisie. I t is the p a rty o f the respectable business men who fa ith fu lly manage the m un ic ipa l a ffa irs o f Reading and M ilw aukee fo r the ca p ita lis t class. I t is the devoted w orkm an who goes about h is m aster’s house, w ith p las te r and trow e l, begging fo r perm ission to coyer up the m ore u n s ig h tly holes in the decay­in g s truc tu re .

Does i t o ffer prom ises to the w orkers? C e rta in ly ! M ore even than its m asters o ffer. I t offers a M acDonald regim e in the U n ited States, a regim e w h ich has so effect­iv e ly “ solved” unem ploym ent in Eng land th a t m illio n s are s t i l l on a m iserab le dole; i t has “ solved” the oppression o f im p e ria l­ism in In d ia by m assacring tbe In d ia n people. H aven’t H il lq u lt and Co. endorsed the B r it is h "L a b o r” governm ent? A ren ’t they in one and the same "so c ia lis t” in te r ­na tiona l? A re they no t “ comrades” of Zoergiebel, the bu tcher o f B e r l 'n ’s p ro le t­a ria t, and Eoncour, the agent of the French, w a r mongers? A re they n o t in the p a rty o f the “ soc ia lis t’ trade un ion racketeers who p ractise fo r pow er by beating up and expe lling L e ft w in g w orkers? They are the gay deceivers o f the w o rk in g class, typ ified by M r. Heywood B roun and M r. N orm an Thomas, who keep the w orkers fro m iftghting th e ir class enemy by te llin g them th a t th e ir lo t can be im proved by vo tin g aga inst c a p ita lis t p o litic ia n s .

Yote Com m unist

(The w o rk e r ’s vote should go to the w o rk e r’s pa rty— the Com m unist P arty . A l l ou r differences w ith it , ou r c ritic ism s o f its in te r ila l regim e and its ru inous policies, does n o t change the fa c t th a t i t is the o n ly p o lit ic a l p a rty of the w o rk in g class in the fie ld w hich stands fo r a revo lu tio n a ry s trugg le against cap ita lism and a ll power to the p ro le ta ria t. The casting o f a paper b a llo t does no t and cannot decide the bu rn ­in g problem s o f the w orkers. B u t support fo r the Com m unist campaign draws the w orkers m ore c losely together, and enables them to trans fo rm the e lecto ra l fa rce in to a genuine f ig h t fo r the demands o f the w orkers— not in fu t i le p o llin g booths, bu t in serious class struggle.

Vote Com m unist!

A Yankee Revolution in the Argentine

Page 2: THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a …

An Opportunist Campaign

The Communist Party in the ElectionsGeorge Saul Tours for Opposition

Comrade George J. Saul has begun a na tiona l speaking to u r fo r the Com m unist League o f Am erica (O pposition) opening up in Denver, Colorado, w ith a num ber ef- street meetings. F rom Denver, he w i l l proceed to Kansas C ity , w ith a possible m eeting in S te rlin g en. route. In Kansas C ity , tw o o r th ree m eetings are scheduled fo r h im . One o f them is a m eeting o f the Com m unist League branch, ano ther is a pub lic m eeting in Forum H a ll, 1218 East 12th Street, September 16th , 8 p.m., on “ Boss Persecutions in the South", and a s tree t m eeting m ay also be arranged. St. Lou is is also a rra n g in g a branch and pub­l ic m eeting fo r comrade Saul in the P ub lic L ib ra ry . F rom St. Lou is, i t is expected to con tinue the to u r th ro u g h Spring fie ld , C h i. cago, D e tro it, Cleveland, Youngstown, P it ts ­b u rg h and points in the v ic in ity .

Comrade Saul was one o f the active figures in the Colorado coal s tr ike o f a few years ago, and recen tly one o f the leaders o f the te x tile s trugg les in the South. He was sentenced to s ix m onths on the chain gang in the Carolinas fo r his ac tiv ities . Hiis recent agreem ent w ith the standpo in t o f the Com m unist League b rough t about h is ex­pu ls ion fro m the o ffic ia l Com m unist P arty . On th is to u r, comrade Saul is speaking on “ Boss Persecutions in the South” , “ P rob­lems o f the A m erican W o rk in g Class” , and tihe “ P rogram o f the Com m unist League” . F u rth e r deta ils on the to u r w i l l be pub lish ­ed in fo rthcom ing issues o f th e M ilita n t.

THE RESULTS O F THE

G E R M A N ELECTIONSw il l b * the subject o f the next open m eeting

o f the N.Y, B ranch o f the Com m unist

League of Am erica (O pposition)

M ax Shachtmanw il l be the speaker

Questions and D iscussion w i l l fo llo w

The m eeting w i l l be held in the

Stuyvesant Casino9 th St. and 2nd Ave. Koom 3,

Thursday, September 25, a t 8 p in , sharp

A ll In v ite d Adm ission Free

Comrade Andres Nin Expelled from RussiaComrade Andres N in, fo rm er member o f fro n tie r, w ith o u t a cent, w th o u t a document,

the P ro fin te rn secre ta ria t and leader of the w ith o u t h is fa m ily !Spanish Com m unist movement, was deprivedo f a ll w o rk and removed from his .post in He was sti11 held a few days by S ta lin 'sJ.928 a fte r his courageous speech a t the guards, and h is w ife , together w ith tw o fo u rth Congress o f the R .I.L .U . ch ild ren — one 7 years o ld and the o ther 2

years o ld— held w ith him .N in had d e fin ite ly sided w ith the L e ft

O pposition: he had excoria ted the oppor- Tbe bureaucracy o f S ta lin knows notu n is t trade un ion po licy o f the Anglo-R us- l im its. The revo lu tio n a ry w orkers m ust ask sian Committee, he had developed the in te r- the leaders -of the T.U.U.L. fo r an explana- na tiona l perspectives of the Opposition, and tio n o£ tlle case o£ N ln - o u r po in t o f v iew on the Chinese question. Upon th e ir re tu rn , the Am erican dele-

urn SiDCe ‘ t ! 11’ ^ WaS h6ld a p risoner in s a lts to the R .I.L .U . congress m ust be asked . aPPW' ^ b ls Presence ir r ita te d the fo r deta ils on the case of N in.

S ta lin is ts and they have ju s t accomplishedth e ir base aim s by expe lling h im under scan. N*n is a tested revo lu tio n is t. W ith him , dalous conditions. as w ith ou r non-R ussian comrades, as w ith

comrade S antin i who is now in Moscow, Sta- Smce hypocrisy and “ h igh p o lit ic s ” are iin and h is va le t Losovsky, do not dare to

a p a rt o f such a game, the F rench and Chin- employ the s o lita ry prison, exile, m- the r if le ese delegates to the recen tly concluded f if th s q u a d - th e y m ust l im it themselves w ith ex­congress were made to propose a reso lu tion pulsions. B u t these methods d ishonor the endorsing the expuls ion. re vo lu tio n a ry trade un ipn movement.

Comrade N in was expelled on A ugust The L e ft w in g m ilita n ts in th is coun try

l lZ T l Staam; l UlTTCr ditl0nS ' ArreSted by mUSt COnduCt a Perseve ring strugg le against ! , ? ° , : U ' he Was selzed as belng these methods w h ich not on ly p lay in to the

°„ u°“ n te r-re vo lu tio n a ry actions” by hands o f the R ig h t w ing and reaction, bu t v ir tu e o f a rtic le 58 o f the Soviet code, lik e destroy the prestige and effectiveness o f the qomrade T ro tsky, and conducted to the Com munist movement.

Two declara tions of the L e ft Oppo­s ition . in t im a te ly re lated to each other, are being confirm ed w ir.h g rea te r ra p id ity than m any expected. The f irs t is th a t C entrism has no independent o r consistent p o lit ic a l lin e of its own. The second, th a t the s to rm y u lt ra -L e ft zigzag o f C entrism is o n ly a prelude to a new rampage in the d irec tion of crass opportun ism , The con­ten tions are already being confirm ed in a ll the im p o rta n t parties o f the C om intern, in c lu d in g the Russian. In the U nited States, i t is m ost c rude ly m anifested ifn the present e lection cam paign o f the P arty .

Conditions fo r E lec tion W ork W hy and under w ha t cond itions do

Communists p a rtic ipa te in pa rliam en ta ry ac tiv ities? Am ong the m any conditions, these stand ou t: To u tiliz e the in terest aroused among the w orkers d u rin g e lection tim es fo r re vo lu tio n a ry ag ita tion and o r­gan ization o f the w orkers. To po in t out th a t the Com munists do no t seek seats in o rder to use the bourgeois state appara t­us as an in s tru m e n t of the w orkers, b u t to use i t as a fo ru m w here the decadent bourgeois pa rliam en ta rism is exposed and the illu s io n s o f the w orkers in i t shattered To u tiliz e e lection periods in p a rt ic u la r to m obilize the w orkers aga inst the s t if l in g fa rce o f the p o llin g booths and fo r tra n s ­fe rr in g th e ir demands and a tten tion ou t­s ide p a rliam e n ta ry boundaries and in to the open fie ld o f strugg les, (dem onstra­tions, s trikes, etc., etc.) To advocate such m in im um (im m ediate) demands as do not re fo rm cap ita lism ( th a t is the job of the social democrats) b u t as en tra in masses in s trugg le outside the b a llo t box decep­tion , and incessantly to combine the m in ­im um and m axim um program s o f the rev ­o lu tio n a ry p ro le ta r ia t, the im m ediate de­mands w ith , the fin a l aim o f the seizure of power. To po in t out to the w orkers th a t pa rliam en t and elections are a isham and a deception practised upon them by tl bourgeois ie anid th e ir re fo rm is t Lieuten­ants, th a t re fo rm s cannot im prove th e ir w retched lo t w h ich is produced by the sys­tem as a whole.

In the U nited States, w here so m any m illio n s of w brkers pa rtic ipa te in elections, where pa rliam e n ta ry illu s io n s are deep and strong, where re fo rm is t quackery has been so p reva len t and nefarious, and soc ia lis t re fo rm ism has assumed ( fo r decades) such a crude bourgeois character, the observance o f the above-mentioned conditons are im ­p e ra tive ly needed giurantees fo r a Com­m un is t movement aga inst a degeneration in to opportun ism . In the present elections

campaign, however, they have been honored m ore in the breach than in the observance and th a t w ith ca lam itous resu lts.

O ur ProposalsA few m onths ago, the L e ft Opposition,

th rough the M ilita n t, proposed a num ber o f concrete issues as a program of action fo r the Com m unist movement. Leading them was the need o f a campaign fo r socia l in ­surance th a t w ou ld set a broad class move­m ent go ing and invo lve masses in s trugg le . A t th a t tim e the proposal was no t on ly s tr ic t ly taboo in the columns o f the o ffic ia l P a rty press and a ll P a rty documents, bu t i t was looked a t w ith a g la r in g ly suspicious eye by the S ta lin is t m ann ik ins as som ething ak in to i f no t worse than “ social fascism ” .

We never conceived such a cam paign in the sense o f a v u lg a r pa rliam en ta ry comedy— th a t goes w ith o u t saying. We urged i t upon the P arty , w h ich f in a lly ac­cepted i t when w ord had come fijom Mos­cow th a t even in the “ th ird period” such a proposal was no t e n tire ly a bad one. I t was from then on th a t we were present­ed w ith an a lm ost incred ib le perform ance w h ich reaches new depths w ith the passage o f every day. F rom yesterday’s h a rd ly con­cealed contem pt fo r “ social fasc is t in s u r­ance” , the P a rty leaders swung around th e ir custom ary 180 degrees, and tu rned the issue — w hich can have a serious significance on ly as a demand fo r w h ich w orkers ac tua lly fig h t—in to a cheap e lecto ra l game.

To begin w ith , a “ social insurance b i l l ” was fo rm a lly d ra fted by the P arty , in the best m anner o f sk ille d parliam en ta rians. We are even ready to acknowledge th a t the b i l l is pe rfe c tly lega l and its language i r ­reproachable. Too legal and irreproachab le , in fact. I t te lls us th a t “ a na tio na l pub­l ic ( ! ) emergency now exists in the U nited States o f A m erica ” . A le a fle t o f the New Y o rk P a rty D is tr ic t in fo rm s us th a t the “ Communists o ffe r a rem edy” ( ! ) ; and the D a ily W o rke r adds: Society owes these categories o f w orkers a l iv in g .” In fact, the o n ly essential d ifference between the “ Com­m un is t B i l l ” and the S ocia lis t p a rty ’s pan­aceas is th a t the C.P. demands $25 a week per unemployed w orker, to be paid by the governm ent, w h ile the S.P. does no t de­mand so much. A ve ry cheaply purchased “ rad ica lism ” , indeed!

H ow the O pportun ists W rite o f T lie ir B i l lT h is ve ry p a rliam e n ta ry “ b i l l ” has be­

come the ve ry acme of the s trugg le fo r social insurance conducted by the P arty , the “ center of the e lection cam paign” as the D a ily W o rke r says. We re fra in from .quoting m uch fro m the D a ily W orker, bu t a few sentences m ust be cited here. They are b rea th -tak ing .

“ A vote fo r the candidate o f the Com­m un is t P a rty fe a vote fo r the enactm ent of the Unem ploym ent Insurance BH1” (8-29- 1930).

The P a rty ca lled together a “ mass un ­em ploym ent un ited f ro n t” fo r the purpose o f discussing . . . “ the enactm ent o f the W orke rs ’ Social Insurance E lill as proposed by the Com m unist P a rty ” (9-10-1930).

“ Th is b i l l m ust no t o n ly be b rought to the w orkers in the shops, trade unions, fo r th e ir endorsement, b u t the P a rty m ust also consider the u tiliz a tio n of the in it ia ­tive and referendum law s as a means of s trugg le fo r th is b i l l . ” (8-2-1930).

In w hat w ay does th is destroy the pa rliam en ta ry illu s io n s of the w orkers , o r d irec t th e ir a tten tion and e fforts to the e x tra -pa rliam en ta ry fie ld? The answer is :In no w ay! Instead o f te ll in g the w orkers b lu n t ly and honestly th a t even th e ir s im ­plest and m ost e lem entary demands can be a tta ined— not by “ b i l ls ” and b a llo t boxes— b u t by genuine mass dem onstrations and s tr ikes (we do no t mean the k in d the D a ily W o rke r organises a t its headline desks), by a rousing the mass organ izations o f the w orkers to f ig h t fo r these demands, the P a rty glues the eyes o f its fo llow e rs to a . . . b ill. W ha t has suddenly happened

to the “ th ird pe riod” , to the “ revo lu tio n a ry upsurge” , to the “ c ris is worse than 1914” , to the “ possession o f the stree ts” ? They have been dissolved in to a le g a lly perfect, irrep roachab ly worded “ b i l l ” to be present­ed fo r "enactm ent” to Congress.

T ha t is no t a ll. Combined w ith th is m is­erable campaign o f opportun ism , is s im ila r re fo rm is t nonsense, subsid ia ry in fo rm but no less ha rm fu l.

“ The funds necessary fo r such in s u r­ance,” w rites the D a ily W orke r, “ can be provided by 1. S topping arm am ents and o ther w a r prepara tions and assign ing the Ifutnds h ith e rto spent fo r these purposes to a social insurance fu n d .” (8-29-1930). No “ genuine” pac ifis t cou ld fa il to he de­ligh ted w ith such a proposal, w h ich is also advanced in the fo rm of a slogan: “ Not a cent fo r w a r.”

P e tty Bourgeois PacifismN ot once bu t a hundred tim es did Len in

excoria te the pe tty bourgeois pacifis ts in the ranks o f the soc ia lis t movem ent whb advanced these and s im ila r proposals and slogans. H is s tr ic tu re s rem ain ju s t as co rrec t today, even when they m ust be d i­rected aga inst the chameleons o f the “ th ird period” . Not so ve ry long ago, the whole P a rty was s tir re fl up against B itte lm an fo r his pe tty bourgeois slogan: “ No more cru is ­e rs !” Does the new pacifis t slogan of arm am ents and w a r d iffe r in any essential from B itte lm an 's? I t does not. L ike its predecessor, i t has no place in a Com­m un is t movement.

I t may be objected th a t these are “ is ­olated quo ta tions” . This ob jection is not va lid . The quotations are on ly typ ica l of w ha t can be read every day in the D a ily W o rke r and the res t of the P a rty press. The “ b i l l ” its e lf was d ra fted by the P arty leadersh ip— e v id e n tly w ith the prhctlsed a id o f some o f the present “ leaders” who no t so long ago studied how to be good parliam en ta rians under V ic to r Berger, A l­gernon Lee, L o u is W aldm an, M eyer London and M orris H illq u it . The ed ito ria ls cited are w r itte n by no less a fig u re than C.A. H athaw ay, graduate cum laude of the “ Len­in ” school, and now member of the a lm igh ty P a rty secre taria t. The tu rn from u ltra - L e ftism is quite offic ia l.

* * *

T h is is no t the f ir s t tim e th is has hap­pened. A fte r the F if th Congress o f the C om intern, w h ich fo llow ed the collapse of the R ig h t w in g leadership in Germ any (1923) and Czecho-Slovakia, the In te rn a tio n a l C en tris t regime also embarked on a sho rt­lived “ L e ft is t ’ zig-zag. I t was the period o f R u th F ischer and T re in t leaderships and policies, o f “ p lay ing a t so ld ie rs” as i t was la te r termed. B u t th is u lt ra -L e ft is t jag was on ly the pre lude to the w o rs t period of opportun ism in C om intern h is to ry : the ad­venture w ith Chiang Kai-Shek, w ith La- F o lle tte , w ith R ad itch and o ther “ peasant” leaders, w ith Messrs. P u rce ll and Co. The ind ica tions are tha t such a catastroph ic sw ing is to be repeated now.

Centrism has no consistent po licy of its own. I t t3 a parasite w h ich lives on the Xiieces i t b ites of from the L e ft and R ig h t a lte rna te ly , b u t i t a lways ends by s in k in g a fo o t deeper in to the swamp of opportunism . As in 1925-1927, i t is ca rry in g th rough a tu rn to the R ig h t w ith an accompanim ent of u ltra -L e ft trum pets.

A tu rn from the p re va ilin g u ltra -L e ftis t course, embodied in the spurious ph iloso­phy o f the “ th ird period” is essential fo r the P arty . B u t C entrism cannot execute such a tu rn w ith o u t sp ring ing back to its o ld R ig h t w in g positions. The vig ilance and com radely c r it ic is m o f the L e ft Op­position m ust assist the Com m unist w orkers in the ranks o f the P a rty to make the tu rn from the present lin e to the positions of M arx ism . — S— n

(The next issue o f the M ilita n t w i l l fu r th e r discuss concrete e lection problems. —Ed.)

sc rip tion ra te f^ .O ^ p e T y ^ a r^ fo re i6̂ ^ 5o° F ive c ^n t1̂ * ' ^ tw ice “ 0P th ly by tbe Communis t League o f Am erica (O pposition) at25 T h ird Avenue, New Y o rk , N. Y. Sub ice Spector A rne Swabeck Entered as so Vend Mas p r , Copy' Bundle rates 3 cents per copy. E d ito r ia l B oard: M a rtin Abern, James P. Cannon Max Shachtman, M aur

s e c to r , A rne Swabeck. Entered as se-cond class m a il m atte r, November 28 1928 a t the Post Office a t New Y ork. N. Y. under the act o f M arch 3, 1879 (T o ta l No. 55)

Page 3: THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a …

Our Reply to the Right Wing

Lovestone's «United Front» Maneuver(A t a recen t m eeting, the na tio na l

com m ittee o f .the C om m unist League o f A m erica (O pposition) considered the “ open le tte r” sent by the Lovestone group to our o rgan iza tion and to the o ffic ia l Com m unist P arty . The le tte r, ca llin g fo r a “ U nited F ro n t” , is published in fu l l in the cu rre n t issue o f R evo lu tionary Age, organ o f the R ig h t w ing , to w h ich in terested readers can re fe r fo r tihe fu l l te x t fro m w h ich quo­ta tions contained in the fo llo w in g docu)- m ent are taken. The le tte r w h ich fo llow s is the rep ly addressed p u b lic ly to th e R ig h t w in g by the na tiona l com m ittee o f the League.)

* » •

We have received yo u r le tte r o f J u ly 26, 1930 appealing fo r ou r “ cooperation in se tting up a un ited re vo lu tio n a ry fro n t” as w e ll as a copy o f the reso lu tion on “ T ro tsky ism ” adopted .a t the P lenum of you r group. B o th o f these documents are o f g rea t sign ificance fo r us. The reso lu tion is the re s u lt o f ou r incessant demand th a t the Lovestone group take a defin ite and fo rm a l pos ition on the p rin c ip le questions raised by the L e ft Opposition. T h is i t fa iled to do ever since its rem oval from the leadership o f tihe P arty , a po licy o f evasion w h ich ev iden tly cou ld no longer be m ainta ined even in the ranks o f th a t group itse lf. F urthe rm ore , the reso lu tion m arks a re tre a t to a ce rta in ex ten t from the pos ition m ainta ined by the Lovestone p rdup w h ile f t co n tro lle d the P a r ty r -a position now untenable fo r tihe Lovestone leadership a fte r the L e ft O pposition has had the opp o rtu n ity o f b reak ing th rough the consp iracy o f lies and m isrepresenta­tions w ith w hch tihe o ffic ia l Commufrii#t' apparatus, F oste r and Lovestone, su rround­ed the disputed points. T ha t th e resolu- tio n is permeated w ith opportun ism and continued fa ls ifica tio n is n o t the sub ject of th is le tte r, w h ich is- p r im a r ily concerned w ith the appeal fo r a un ited fro n t.

The United FrontThe tac tic o f the un ited fro n t is n e ith e r

a m aneuver n o r a t r ic k fo r us. We regard i t as a serious means o f m ob iliz in g the masses o f the w orkers n o t ye t Commun* is ts fo r a s trugg le , on the basis o f a m in ­im um program , aga inst the attacks o f cap­ita lis m and its agents in the w o rk in g class. Such a un ited fro n t we cannot re ject, a ll the more so since i t is we who have cons tan tly urged i t on the labo r movement! in general and its revo lu tio n a ry section in p a rticu la r.

But” a un ited fro n t o r bloc w ith the Lovestone group is noti the same to us as a un ited fro n t w ith a trade un ion or other labo r organ izations con ta in ing w o rk ­ers o f va ry ing shades o f op in ion w ith o u t a defin ite p o lit ic a l p rogram and theore tica l conception. P recise ly because the Love­stone group ca lls its e lf Com munist, the question o f a bloc w ith i t m ust be exam­ined mosti c lose ly and pre-cond itions o f a m uch h ighe r o rder m ust be required. Be­fo re establish ing these p re-cond itions, a few p re lim in a ry observations m ust be made.

The appeal reads: "The revo lu tio n a ry movem ent in th is co u n try finds its e lf weak, demoralized and divided . . . the cap ita lis ts and th e ir agents are e xp lo itin g th is d iv i­sion . . . a t no tim e w ou ld re fusa l to to cooperate in u n it in g the revo lu tio n a ry forces be m ore c r im in a l.”

B u t i t is prec ise ly the Lovestone group M>hich is ch ie fly responsible fo r th is d iv is ion , fo r its leadership in it ia te d the campaign of expulsions o f socalled “ T ro tsky is ts ” ; i'J is precisely th is leade ish ip which by its expulsion and assaults upon ou r group, its “ re fusa l to cooperate in u n it in g the revo lu ­tio n a ry forces” rendered its e lf c r im in a lly responsible. I t was th is leadersh ip th a t fa iled " to consider the broad in te rests of the revo lu tio n a ry and labo r m ovem ent” by expe lling our comrades, n o t o n ly fro m the P a rty b u t from every a u x ilia ry o rgan iza tion under its co n tro l— in c lu d in g trade unions. The fa ilu re to acknowledge honestly and openly the source and ' resp o n s ib ility fo r the movem ent’s d iv is io n and dem ora liza tion In the past and present, makes any im ­provem ent in the fu tu re im possible. One cannot wash one’s hands o f the past by a d ishonestly naive silence.

The appeal proposes the se tting up o f a jo in t com m ittee of the th ree groups in

the m ovem ent " to present the po in t of v iew o f Communism, the po in t o f v iew o f tihOse who stand by and defend the Soviet U n ion ” .

U n ity w ith “ C ounter-R evo lution is ts” ?B u t i t is the Lovestone group, together

w ith the S ta lin is t apparatus, w h ich has fo r years assailed us as “ coun te r-revo lu ­tio n is ts and the w o rs t enemies o f the So­v ie t U n ion ” , as the “ agents o f C ham berla in and Chiang K a i-S hek” . We have n o t ye t seen an acknowledgement! th a t these de­c la ra tions were in fam ous slanders w h ich constitu ted the reg u la r paym ent made by the Lovestone leadership to the Stalim - B ucha rin regim e fo r a llo w in g i t to run the A m erican P a rty . One m ay there fo re assume th a t the Lovestone leaders s t i l l re ­ta in these “ convic tions” concern ing us. How then is i t possible to appeal to coun te r- revo lu tio n is ts and enemies o f the Soviet U n ion to “ present the p o in t o f v iew o f those who stand by and defend the Soviet U n ion ” ? O r are we to believe th a t the Lovestone leaders are no t and have not been serious in denouncing us as coun te r- re vo lu tio n is ts . In th a t case, i t is necessary fo r them to ad m it p la in ly th a t they have fo r years been p ra c tis in g a d isgrace fu l de­ception upon the w o rke rs ’ m ovem ent.

I t is fu r th e r necessary fo r us to po in t ou t th a t the p rin c ip a l cause o f the present c ris is in the Com m unist movement, m an i­fested by d iv is ion and dem ora liza tion is, the theo re tica l s tandpo in t and p ra c tic a l ac tiv itie s o f the Lovestone group and its in te rn a tio n a l a llie s since 1923. I t is im ­possible to en ter a b loc w ith the Lovestone group w h ile i t re ta ins and defends these conceptions I t is im possible to t r y to solve the c r is is and overcome the d iv is io n in the C om m unist movem ent by a “ unitelfl f ro n t” w ith the elements th a t caused the c r is is .

M oreover a un ited fro n t w ith the Love­stone group— since the o ffic ia l P a rty bureau- crate can s t i l l p reven t the P a rty fro m jo in -

The Com m unist League o f Am erica (O pposition) has received a le tte r fro m B e rtram D. W olfe, head o f the W orkers School o f the Lovestone group, proposing a sym posium o f the three groups in the movement, the P arty , the Lovestone group, and ourselves. In rep ly , the fo llo w in g le t­te r was sent! to W olfe.

* * *

In you r le tte r o f A ugust 14, 1936, you declare:

“ The New W orkers School there fore inv ites the Com m unist P a rty o f the U.S.A., the Com m unist League o f Am erica, and the C om m unist P a rty (M a jo r ity G roup) to send one representa tive each to present th e ir respective v iew po in ts a t a sym posium d is­cussion under a cha irm an selected by the C iv il L ibe rties U nion where they w i l l be able free ly to voice th e ir op inions on the present c ris is in the Com m unist movement and the respective m e ritts o f the three groups proposals fo r rem edying the situ« ation.

Such an in v ita tio n can o n ly be welcomed by us, p a rt ic u la r ly since, fro m the very beg inning o f o u r s trugg le and expulsion fro m the Com m unist P a rty , we have ins is ­te n tly proposed a pub lic debate before the Com m unist and L e ft w in g w orkers, o f the groups. We issued a pub lic challenge, as tvou w i l l remember, a t the tim e B e rtram D. W olfe was le c tu rin g aga inst us im m ed ia te ly a fte r ou r expulsion. A t th a t tim e, the group you represent) was in co n tro l o f the P a rty and de libe ra te ly prevented such a discussion and debate n o t on ly by expe lling us fro m the P a rty ’s ranks, b u t by reso rting to the m ost d isgrace fu l methods o f slander falsehoods and even physica l violence. A fte r you r own expu ls ion fro m the P arty , we again proposed on a num ber o f occasions th a t you agree to debate ou r respective view poin ts. Up to now th is was refused. Such a debate, however, rem ains as neces­sary now as i t was in the past.

I t is qu ite c lear th a t the o ffic ia l Com­m un is t P a rty w i l l no t consent to p a rt ic i-

in g such a fro n t— w ould constitu te an un ­p rin c ip le d b loc aga inst the Center, i.al., aga inst the P a rty . I t w ou ld end in a m iserable fiasco (as d id the Lovestone “ un ited fro n t” in the te x tile in d u s try ), o r as a ra lly in g g round fo r a n ti-P a rty forces. We are a im ing, on the con tra ry , to restore the P a rty to a M a rx is t foundation , since itl is ou r P a rty from w h ich no c lique o f b u r­eaucrats can seperate us.

A un ited fro n t o f a ll Com m unist w o rk ­ers is esential. A determ ined effort! m ust be made to overcome the c ris is now rag ­in g in the movement!. We have advocated such a fro n t and we continue to propose i t now. Elut we do no t stand fo r an abstrac t u n ity , o r bloc, bu t fo r one th a t has a basis in p rinc ip le . W ith its present views on essential questions, and its evasion o r s i­lence on m any others, a b loc w ith the Lovestone group is ou t o f the question. Such a bloc demands ce rta in pre-cond itions w h ich we hereby pose to the Lovestone fac­tio n :

Questions to Lovestone1. One o f the reasons fo r the c ris is ,

the d iv is ion anR dem ora lM a tiion o f the movem ent over w h ich you express so much concern, has been the p reven tion o f open discussion. M eetings have been broken up, ra ids on p riva te homes conducted, com­rades p h ys ica lly assaulted. These methods are s t i l l used in the P a rty aga inst a l l Op­positions, on the basis o f the precedent o f gangsterism you established in the strugg le aga inst o u r group. There can be no issue fro m tihe present d ifficu ltie s , and no gen- n ine un ity , w ith o u t a condem nation o f these a troc ious methods, w h ich means in the first! place an open renunc ia tion o f you r own past crim es in th is respect. O therw ise no basis can be la id fo r a free and in te l l i ­gent discussionl o f the p rob lem s o f the movement.

2. One o f the m ain reasons fo r the c ris is and s p lit is the expu ls ion o f the L e ft O pposition fro m the P arty . T h is was ex)-

pate in the proposed sym posium . Since on ly tw o groups wotuld be represented, you r ow n and ours, we propose instead o f a "sym posium ” a debate. We have a lready selected ou r spokesman fo r such a debate. In add ition , we have chosen a com m ittee o f tw o to meet w ith a s im ila r comm ittee rep resen ting yo u r group, to decide on the t i t le o f the debate, the tim e, the place, the cha irm an, the auspices and a ll o ther details.

As soon as you sha ll have done the same, we are ready to m eet together and w o rk out a ll the necessary arrangem ents. Com m unist League o f Am erica (O pposition)

Socialist IndignationD u rin g the sessions o f the Second In ­

te rn a tio n a l a t Z u rich the Swiss governm ent refused perm ission to enter its borders to the inoffensive P ie tro Nenni, o f the I ta l ­ian S ocia lis t P a rty . T h is was the occasion fo r great in d igna tion among the leaders of the soc ia lis t in te rn a tio n a l who are accus­tomed to m uch m ore deference fro m bour­geois governm ents. W ith a|n academic solemn pen, they addressed a p ro test against the denia l o f “ h o sp ita lity ” by the Swiss gov­ernm ent to a proscribed p o litic ian .,

Now we know the social dem ocratic con­ception o f dem ocratic “ h o s p ita lity ” : I t con­sists o f patronage by the bourgeois govern­ments to social dem ocratic leaders. B u t i t is never to be extended to proscribed rev ­o lu tion is ts who ifight im p lacab ly against the c a p ita lis t order. Even when the social democrats themselves holjd the re ins o f bourgeois governm ent, they app ly th is hos­p ita lity exc lus ive ly to the bourgeoisie and its serv ito rs. Th is ru le was no t tra n s ­gressed by the MacDonalds and M ue lle rs in exc lud ing fro m th is dem ocratic "h o sp ita l­i t y ” the Com m unist Leon T ro tsky . B u t when the Swiss governm ent fa iled to m ain­ta in the laws reg u la tin g re la tions between the bourgeoisie and th e ir soc ia lis t footmen, the la tte r protested. T h e ir so rro w fu l and resigned ind igna tion is comprehensible.

ecuted p r im a r ily by yo u r a - ju p , a t th a t tim e in co n tro l o f the P arty . I t is neces­sary to know i f th is is s t i l l the o ffic ia l a ttitude o f you r group. E lse how can you appeal to un ite us in to a movem ent to pre­sent the p o in t o f v iew o f Communism w h ile expe lling us from the Com m unist P arty?

3. B u t ou r group is on ly the Am erican section of the in te rn a tio n a l L e ft Opposition. The expu ls ion o f these comrades, and pa r­t ic u la r ly o f the Russian B o lshev ik -Len in i- is ts , has been o f enorm ously destructive effect) to the movement, reflected in the A m erican P a rty as w e ll as elsewhere. Com rade T ro ts k y has been Reported to Turkey, and thousands o f the best B o l­sheviks exiled and im prisoned in the U.S.S.R. E lolshevik figh ters have even been assasin- ated by S ta lin . Up to now the Lovestone group has m ain ta ined a cow ard ly silence on these crim es. B u t w ithou t! the release fro m p rison and ex ile o f the O pposition ists, the re tu rn to the U.S.S.R. o f T ro tsky , and th e ir f u l l re ins ta tem en t in to the P a rty , no progress can be made in overcom ing the d iv is io n and dem ora liza tion in the move­m ent. Does the Lovestone group in tend to p re fe r a "d ip lo m a tic ” silence on th is bu rn ­in g question to a p ro tes t and demand?

4. No b loc is conceivable fo r us w ith ­o u t a re vo lu tio n a ry p o licy in the trade unions. On th is point! we have had on ly vague am bigu ities fro m y o u r group. Re­cen tly , yo u r o ffic ia l organ, R evo lu tionary Age, has g iven its h ea rty endorsement to the action o f H a ls and Co. in Czecho-Slo- vak ia in su rrende ring the independent Red un ions under th e ir co n tro l to the A m ste r­dam In te rn a tio n a l. T h is piece o f liq u id a ­t io n was labe lled by you as a step in the “ u n ifica tio n ” o f the Czech w o rk in g class. Does th a t s ig n ify th a t in the U n ited States, w here the L e ft unions are re la tiv e ly even sm a lle r than the re fo rm is t trade unions, you fa vo r a s im ila r liq u id a tio n of, le t us say, the Needle Trades W orkers In d u s tr ia l U n ion in to the re fo rm is t In te rn a tio n a l L a ­dies G arm ent W orkers Union? The " lo g ic ” o f H a ls ’ action in Czecho-Slovakia w ould seem to app ly in the A m erican instance w ith even g rea te r force— from y o u r point) o f view . As you are aware, We condemn such actions unreservedly. C la rifica tion on the trade un ion question is a sine qua non fo r any so rt o f b loc on p rinc ip le grounds.

& A un ited fro n t o f Com m unist w o rk ­ers o r groups pre-supposes a ce rta in am ount o f m utua l confidence. The whole past) course o f you r goup does no t insp ire us w ith any. Y ou r spokesmen and you r press con tinue sys tem atica lly n o t on ly to " in te rp re t” ou r position, b u t to fa ls ify i t de libe ra te ly . The reso lu tio n on T ro tsky ism o f y o u r P lenum is a ty p ic a l instance. We find there a repe tition o f the hodge-podge o f know n falsehoods, h a lf-tru th s , conscious­ly forged quotations th a t were pressed in to service aga inst the L e ft O pposition since tihe opening o f the campaign aga inst i t in 1923. We find there a cheap fa ls ifica tion , u n w o rth y o f the d ig n ity o f a Communist, o f ou r position o r t.h( dange • c ’ Therm id o rian elements in the Soviet Union. Such methods are in to le rab le , even i f they are cha rac te ris tic o f the w hole strugg le aga inst a socalled T ro tsky ism . We demand an end o f these fa ls ifica tions and m isrep­resentations o f ou r v iew poin t.

Our re p ly is d icta ted so le ly by ou r insistence upon the maintenance o f a p r in ­c ip led p o in t o f v iew in the Com m unist movement. We are l i t t le concerned w ith the noises em anating from the em pty ba r­re ls in charge o f the o ffic ia l Partly today, to the effect t h a t . the “ Lovestoneities and T ro tsky is ts are now m erged” to fig h t t)he P arty . The avowal by the Lovestone group its e lf tha t its differences w ith the C entris ts are o f a m in o r character compared w ith its d ifferences w ith the L e ft O pposition w h ich are o f a p rin c ip le charater. speaks fo r its e lf and shows th a t in its w hole p h il­osophy the R ig h t w in g stands im m easur­ab ly c loser to C entrism than does the L e ft w ing. T h is c la r if ic a tio n o f the p rinc ip le position has a g rea t value.

Nor is ou r rep ly d ictated by any desire fo r u n ity as such- and on any basis. Our a im is the re-conquest and u n ifica tion of the re vo lu tio n a ry m ovement on the basis o f M hrx ism and the liv in g experiences of Communism in the la s t tw o decades.

N ationa l Committee

Com m unist League of Am erica (Opposition)

A n Answer and a Challenge to a Debate

Page 4: THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a …

STALIN A S A THEORETICIANThe Peasant’s Balance Sheet of the Democratic and Socialist Revolutions

“ . . . the appearance of com­rade S ta lin a t the conference of the M a rx is t agronom ists— was ep­ochal In the h is to ry o f the Com­m un is t Acadamey. As a conse­

quence o f w ha t S ta lin said, we had to rev iew a ll our plans and revise them in the d irec tion o f w ha t Sta­lin said. The appearance o f -.com­rade S ta lin gave a tremendous im petus to our w o rk .”— (Pokrovsky, a t the 16th Congress)

In h is p rogram m atic re p o rt to the con­ference o f the M a rx is t agronom ists (Decem­ber 27, 1929.), S ta lin spoke a t leng th about the “ T ro tsky-Z inov iev O pposition” consid­e ring “ th a t the October revo lu tion , as a m at­te r o f fac t, d id no t give anyth ing to the peasantry” . I t is probable th a t even to the respectfu l aud itors, th is inven tion seemed too crude. F o r the sake o f c la r ity , however, we should quote these w ords m ore fu l ly : “ I have in m ind ,” said S ta lin , “ the theory th a t the October revo lu tion gave the pea- sean try less (?) than the Februa ry revo lu ­tio n , th a t the October revo lu tion , as a m at­te r o f fact, , gave no th ing to the peasantry.” The inven tion of th is “ th e o ry ” is a ttrib u te d by S ta lin to one o f the Soviet s ta tis tica l economists, Groman, a know n fo rm er Menshevik, a fte r w h ich he adds: “ B u t th is theory was seized by the T ro tsky-Z inov iev O pposition and u tilize d against the P a rty .” G rom an’s theory rega rd ing the F ebrua ry and October revo lu tions is qu ite unknow n to ius. B u t Groman is o f no account here a ltogether. He is dragged in m ere ly to cover up the traces.

In w hat w ay could the F eb rua ry revo­lu tio n give the peasantry m ore than the October? W ha t did the F ebruaary revo lu tion give the peasant in general, w ith the ex­ception o f the superfic ia l and the re fo re ab­so lu te ly unce rta in liq u id a tio n o f the mon­archy? The bureaucratic apparatus rem ain­ed w h a t i t was. The land was no t given to the peasant by the F eb rua ry revo lu tion . B u t i t d id give h im a con tinua tion o f the w a r and the ce rta in ty of a continued g row th o f in fla tio n . Perhaps S ta lin knows of some o ther g ifts o f the F eb rua ry revo lu tio n to the peasant? To us, they are unknow n. The reason w hy the F ebrua ry revo lu tion had to give w ay to the October is because i t com­p le te ly deceived the peasant.

The alleged theory o f the O pposition on the advantages o f the F eb rua ry revo lu ­tion over the October is connected by S ta lin w ith the th e o ry “ rega rd ing the socalled pcissors” . B y th is he com ple te ly betrays the sources and aim s o f his ch icanery. Sta­lin polem icizes, as I w i l l soon show, against me. O nly fo r the convenience o f h is op­erations, fo r cam ouflag ing his c ruder d is ­to rtio n s , he hides behind Groman and the anonymous “ T ro tsky -Z in o v ie v O pposition” in general.

The rea l essence o f the question lies in the fo llo w in g . A t the 12t)h Congress of the P a rty ( in the sp ring o f 1923) I demon­s tra ted fo r the f ir s t tim e the th rea ten ing gap between/ in d u s tr ia l and a g ric u ltu ra l prices. In m y report, th is phenomenon was fo r the f ir s t tim e called the “ price scissors". I warned th a t the con tinua l lagg ing o f in d u s try w ou ld spread apart th is scissors and th a t they m ig h t sever the threads connecting the p ro le ta r ia t and the peasantry.

In F eb rua ry 1927, a t the P lenum o f the C entra l Committee, w h ile considering the question o f the po licy on prices, I a ttem pt­ed fo r the one thousand and f ir s t tim e to prove th a t genera l phrases lik e “ the fa c^ to the v illa g e ” m ere ly avoided the essence o f the m atte r, and th a t from the standpoin t o f the “ Sm ytchka” (a llia n ce ) w |th the peasant, the problem can be solved funda­m en ta lly by co rre la tin g the prices o f a g r i­c u ltu ra l and in d u s tr ia l p roducts. The tlrouble w ith the peasant is th a t i t is d iffi­c u lt fo r h im to see fa r ahead. B u t he sees ve ry w e ll w ha t is under h is feet, he d is t in c tly remembers the yesterdays, and he can d ra w the balance under his exchange o f products w ith the c ity , w h ich, a t any given moment, is the balance-sheet o f the revo lu tio n to him .

The exp rop ria tion o f the landowners,

erated the peasant fro m the paym ent of a sum am ounting to fro m five to six hundred m illio n rubles (about $275,000,000— E d .). T h is is a c lear and ir re fu ta b le ga in fo r the pea­sa n try th ro u g h the October— and n o t the F eb rua ry— revo lu tion .

B u t alongside o f th is tremendous plus, the peasant d is t in c tly discerns the m inus w h ich th is same October revo lu tio n has b rough t h im . Th is m inus consists o f the excessive rise in prices o f in d u s tr ia l p ro ­ducts as compared w ith those p re va iling before the w ar. I t is understood th a t i f in Russia cap ita lism had m ainta ined its e lf the p rice scissors w ou ld undoubted ly have ex­isted—th is is an in te rn a tio n a l phenomenon. B u t in the f irs t place, the peasant does no t know th is . And in the second, nowhere d id th is scissors spread to the extent th a t i t d id in the Soviet U nion. The great losses o f the peasantry due to prices are of a tem pora ry na ture , re fle c tin g the period of ‘“ p r im it iv e accum u la tion ” o f state indus­try . I t is as though the p ro le ta ria n state borrow s fro m the peasantry in o rde r to repay h im a hundrecl-fo ld la te r on.

B u t a ll th is re lates to the sphere of theoretifcal considera tions and h is to r ic a l p red ictions. The thoughts o f the peasant, however, are em p irica l and based on facts as they appear a t the moment. “ The Octo­ber revo lu tio n libe ra ted me from the pay­m ent o f h a lf a b ill io n rub les in land ren ts ,” re flec ts the peasant. “ I am th a n k fu l to the Bo lsheviks. B u t state in d u s try takes away fro m me much m ore than the cap ita lis ts took. Here is where tihere is som ething w rong w ith the Com munists.” In other words, the peasant draw s the balance sheet o f the October revo lu tio n th rough com bin­in g its tw o fundam enta l stages: the a g ra r­ian-dem ocra tic ( “ B o lshevik” ) and the in ­d u s tr ia l-so c ia lis t ("C om m unis t” ). A ccord­in g to the f irs t , a d is t in c t and incontestable p lus ; accord ing to the second, so fa r s t i l l a d is tin c t m inus, and to date a m inus con­s iderab ly g rea te r than the plus. The pas­sive balance o f the October revo lu tion , w h ich is the basid of a ll the m isunderstand­ings between the peasant and the Soviet power, is in tu rn m ost in tim a te ly bound up w ith the iso la ted pos ition o f the Soviet U n ion in w o r ld economy.

A lm ost th ree years a fte r the o ld d is­putes, S ta lin , to his m is fortune , re tu rn s to the question. Because he is fa ted to repeat w ha t others have le f t behind them , and at the same tim e to be anxious about h is own “ independence,” he is compelled to look back apprehensive ly a t the yesterday of the “ T ro ts k y is t O pposition” and . . . cover up the traces. A t the tim e the “ scissors” between the c ity and the v illa g e was f irs t spoken of, S ta lin com ple te ly fa iled to un ­derstand i t fo r five years (1923-28), he saw the danger in in d u s try go ing too fa r ahead instead o f lagg ing behind; in order to cover i t up somehow, he mum bles some­th in g incoheren t in h is rep o rt about “ bour­geois prejudices ( ! ! ! ) rega rd ing the socall- ed scissors” . W hy is th is a prejudice?' W herein is i t bourgeois? B u t S ta lin is u'hder no ob liga tion to answer these ques­tions, fo r there is nobody who w ould dare ask them.

I f the F eb rua ry revo lu tio n had given land to the peasantry, the October revo­lu tio n w ith its p rice scissors could n o t have m ain ta ined its e lf fo r tw o years. To p u t i t m ore c o rre c tly : the October revo lu tion could no t have taken place i f the Februa ry revlolultion hg /i been capable o f So lv ing the basic, agra rian -dem ocra tic problem s by liq u id a tin g p riva te ow nersh ip o f land.

We in d ire c tly reca lled above th a t in the f ir s t years a fte r the October the peasant obstina te ly endeavored to con tras t the Com­m un is t to the Bolsheviks. The la tte r he approved of— precise ly because they made the land revo lu tio n w ith a de te rm ina tion never before known. H u t the same peasant was d issatisfied w ith the Communists, who having taken in to th e ir own hands the fac­to ries and m ills , supplied com m odities a t h igh prices. In o the r words, the peasant ve ry reso lu te ly approved o f the ag ra ria n revo lu tion o f the Bolsheviks bu t m anifested a larm , doubt, and sometimes even open h o s tility tow ards the f irs t steps o f the so­c ia lis t revo lu tion . V e ry soon, however, the peasant had to understand th a t Bo lshevik

and Com m unist are one and the same P arty ,

In F ebrua ry 1927, .th is question was raised by me a t the P lenum o f the C entra l Com m ittee in the fo llo w in g m anner:

The liq u id a tio n of the landowners opened up la rge cred its fo r us w ith the peasants, p o lit ic a l as w e ll as economic. B u t these cred its are no t perm anent and are no t inexhaustib le . The question is de­cided by the co rre la tio n o f prices. Only the acce lera tion o f in d u s tr ia liza tio n on the one hand, and the co lle c tiv iza tio n o f pea­sant economy on the other, can produce a m ore favorab le co rre la tio n o f prices fo r the v illage . Should the co n tra ry be the case, the advantages o f the ag ra rian revo lu tion w i l l be e n tire ly concentrated in the hands o f the K u la k , and the scissors w i l l h u rt the peasant poor m ost p a in fu lly . The d if ­fe re n tia tio n in the m idd le peasantry w il l be accelerated. There can be b u t one re ­su lt. The c ru m b lin g o f the d ic ta to rsh ip of the p ro le ta r ia t. "T h is year,” I said, “ on ly e igh t b ill io n rub les w o rth o f comm odities ( in re ta il p rices) w i l l be released fo r the domestic m a rke t . . . the v illa g e w i l l pay fo r its sm a lle r h a lf o f the comm odities about fo u r b ill io n rub les. L e t us accept the re ta il in d u s tr ia l index as tw ice the p re ­w a r prices figure , as M ikoyan has reported . . . .The balance (o f the peasant): ‘The ag rarian-dem ocra tic revo lu tio n b rough t me aside fro m eve ry th ing else, five hundred m illio n rubles a year (the liq u id a tio n of ren ts and the lo w e rin g o f taxes). The so­c ia lis t revo lu tio n has m ore than covered th is p ro fit by a tw o b illio n rub le deficit. I t is c lea r th a t the balance is reduced to a de fic it o f one and a h a lf b ill io n .”

Nobody obected by as m uch as a w ord a t th is session, b u t Yakovlev, the present People’s Com missar o f A g ric u ltu re , though a t th a t tim e on ly a c le rk fo r special s ta tis t i­cal assignments, was g iven the job o f u p ­se tting m y ca lcu la tions a t a ll costs. Y a k ­ovlev did a ll he could. W ith a l l the le g it i­m ate and ille g itim a te corrections and qua l­ifica tions, Yakovelev was compelled! the fo l­lo w in g day to adm it that) the balance-sheet o f the October revo lu tio n fo r the v illage is, on the whole, s t i l l reduced to a m inus. L e t us once m ore produce an actual quo ta tion :

" . . . The gain fro m a reduction of d ire c t taxes compared w ith the p re -w ar days is equal to app rox im a te ly 630,000,000 rub les . . . In the la s t yea r the peasantry lost! around a b ill io n rubles as a conse­quence o f its purchase o f m anufactured com m odities no t accord ing to the index of the peasant income b u t accord ing to the re ta il index o f these commodities. The un ­favorab le balance is equal to about 400,- 000,000 rub les .”

I t is c lea r th a t Yakovlev's ca lcu la tions essen tia lly confirm ed m y op in ion : Thepeasant realized a b ig p ro f it th rough the dem ocratic revo lu tio n made by tihe Bolshe­v iks bu t so fa r he suffers a loss w h ich fa r exceeds the p ro fit. I estimated the passive balance a t a b ill io n and a ha lf. Y akovlev —a t less than a h a lf a b illio n . I s t i l l con­sider that) m y figure , w h ich made h o t pre ­tension to precis ion, was closer to re a lity than Y akov lev ’s. The difference between the tw o figures is in its e lf ve ry considerable B u t i t does not) change m y basic conclusion. The acuteness o f the g ra in co lle c tin g d iffi­cu lties was a con firm a tion o f m y ca lcu la ­tions as the more d isqu ie ting ones. I t is re a lly absurd to th in k th a t the g ra in s tr ike o f the upper layers o f the v illa g e was caused by p u re ly p o lit ic a l motives, th a t is, by the h o s t ility o f the K u la k tow ards the Soviet power. The K u la k is incapable of such “ idea lism ” . I f he d id no t fu rn is h the g ra in fo r sale, i t was because the exchange became disadvantageous as a re s u lt o f the price scissors. That) is w hy the K u la k succeeded in b rin g in g in to the o rb it o f his in fluence the m iddle peasant as w e ll.

These ca lcu la tions have a rough, so to speak inc lus ive , character. The component pa rts o f the balance sheet can and should be separated in re la tio n to the th ree basic sections o f the peasantry; the K u laks, the m iddle peasants and the poor peasants. However, in th a t period— the beg inning of 1927— the o ffic ia l s ta tis tics , insp ired by Yakovlev, ignored o r de libe ra te ly m in im ized the d iffe re n tia tio n in the v illage , and the po licy o f S ta lin -R ykov-B ucharin was d irec t­

ed tow ards p ro tec ting the “ p o w e rfu l” pea­sant and f ig h tin g aga inst the “ sh iftle ss” poor peasant. In th is way, the passive ba­lance was especia lly onerous upon the lo w ­er sections o f the peasantry m the v illage.

Nevertheless, where did S ta lin get his con tras ting o f the F eb rua ry and October revo lu tions, the reader w i l l ask. I t is a leg itim ate question. The con tras t I made between the agrarian-dem ocra tic and the in d u s tr ia l-s o c ia lis t revo lu tions, S ta lin , who is abso lu te ly incapable o f theore tica l, th a t is, o f abstrac t thought, vaguely understood in h is own fash ion : He s im p ly decided tha ( the dem ocra tic -revo lu tion— means (he Feb­ru a ry revo lu tion . Here we m ust pause, be­cause S ta lin and h is colleagues’ old, t ra ­d itio n a l fa ilu re to understand the m utua l re la tions between the dem ocratic and so­c ia lis t revo lu tions, w h ich lies a t the basis o f th e ir whole s trugg le aga inst the theory o f the perm anent revo lu tion , has a lready succeeded in doing g rea t damage, p a rt ic ­u la r ly in China and Ind ia , and rem ains a source o f fa ta l e rro rs to th is day. The F eb rua ry 1917 revo lu tion was greeted by S ta lin essentia lly as a L e ft democrat, and n o t as a revo lu tio n a ry p ro le ta ria n in te rn a - t iin a lis t. He showed th is v iv id ly by h is w hole conduct up to the tim e Len in arrived . The F ebrua ry revo lu tio n to S ta lin was and, as we see, s t i l l rem ains a "dem ocra tic ” revo lu tion par excellence. He stood fo r the support o f the f ir s t p rov is iona l governm ent w h ich was headed by the na tiona l lib e ra l landow ner, P rince Lvov, had as its w ar m in is te r the na tiona l conservative m anu­fa c tu re r, G utchkov, and the lib e ra l, M iliu ­kov, as m in is te r o f fo re ign a ffa irs . F o rm ­u la tin g the necessity of supporting the bourgeois landow n ing p rov is iona l govern­m ent, a t a P a rty conference, M arch 29, 1917, S ta lin declared: “ The power has been divided between tw o organs, no t one of w h ich has the complete m astery. The roles have been d ivided. The Soviet has ac tu a lly taken the in it ia t iv e in revo lu tio n a ry tran s ­fo rm a tions ; the Soviet— is the revo lu tio n a ry leader o f the rebe llious people, the organ w h ich bu ilds up the p rov is iona l govern­m ent. The p rov is iona l governm ent has ac­tu a lly taken the ro le of the conso lida to r of the conquests o f the revo lu tio n a ry people . . . In so fa r as the p rov is iona l governm ent consolidates the advances of the revo lu tion — to th a t extent we should support i t . ”

The “ F eb ru a ry ” bourgeois, landow ning and tho ro u g h ly coun te r-revo lu tiona ry gov­ernm ent was fo r S ta lin no t a class enemy b u t a co llabo ra to r w ith whom a d iv is ion of labo r had to be established. The^ w orkers and peasants w ould make the “ conquests” , the bourgeoisie w ould “ consolidate” them. A l l o f them together w ou ld make up the “ dem ocratic revo lu tio n ” . The fo rm u la of the Mensheviks, was a t the same tim e also the fo rm u la o f S ta lin . A l l th is was spoken o f by S ta lin a m onth a fte r the F eb rua ry revo lu tio n when the characte r o f the p ro ­v is iona l governm ent should have been clear even to a b lin d man, no longer on the basis o f M a rx is t fo re s ig h t bu t on the basis o f p o lit ic a l experience.

As the whole fu r th e r course o f events demonstrated, Len in in 1917 did no t re a lly convince S ta lin bu t elbowed h im aside. The w hole fu tu re s trugg le of S ta lin against th e 'p e rm a n e n t revo lu tion was constructed upon the m echanical separation o f d;he dem ocra tic revo lu tio n and soc ia lis t con­s truc tion . S ta lin has no t ye t understood th a t the October revo lu tio n was f ir s t a dem ocratic revo lu tion , and th a t on ly be­cause o f th is was i t able to realize the d ic ta to rsh ip o f the p ro le ta ria t. The balance between the dem ocratic and soc ia lis t cqn- quests o f the October revo lu tio n w h ich I d rew was s im p ly adapted by S ta lin to his ow n conception. A fte r th is , he puts the question: “ Is i t tru e th a t the peasantsd id no t get any th ing ou t o f the October revo lu tion? ” A nd a fte r saying th a t “ thanks to the October rtevolutlon the peasants were libe ra ted from the oppression o f the landow ners” (th is was never heard o f be­fore, you see!) S ta lin concludes th a t: “ H ow can i t be said a fte r th is th a t the October revo lu tio n d id no t g ive any th ing to the peasants?”

H ow can i t be said a fte r th is— we ask— th a t th is “ theo re tic ian ” has even a g ra in o f theore tica l conscience?

( To Be Continued )

By L. D. T R O T S K Y

Page 5: THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a …

N O T E S O F A JO U R N A L IS T By A L F Awords appear on the same day in the M insk Rabotchi?

We know w e ll enough how a ll the in ­fo rm a tio n about the Congress is edited. N ot a s ing le lin e leaves the boundaries of the Congress w ith o u t a v isa fro m the Press Commission. T h is means th a t tihe in fo rm ­a tion about the T ro tsky is t-dese rte rs could never have been invented in M insk. I t had to be sent fro m Moscow w ith the seal o f the Congress Press Commisksion. B u t then, once more, w hy were these lines om itted fro m Pravda? T ha t is the f ir s t question.

There Is also a second question. “ Tw o qua lified rec ru its w ent over to the enemy,” we are to ld by B luche r o r by somebody supplem enting h im . “ Both o f them turned out to be T ro tsky is ts .” These w ords are p rin ted in the M insk jo u rn a l in bold face type. N a tu ra lly ! B u t here is w ha t is incom prehensible. Between the F ifteen th and the S ixteenth Congresses, accord ing to the w ords o f B lucher, the a rm y was com­p le te ly purged of tihe rem nants o f T ro tsky ­ism . W hy wasn’t i t purged of these two also? E v id e n tly they were no t know n u n til the m om ent o f tiheir flig h t. H ow d id B lu - cher fin d out th a t they were "T ro ts k y is ts ” , a fte r they had fled? “ Both o f them tu rned ou t (?) to be T ro tsky is ts .” W ha t does he mean “ tu rned o u t” ? H ow sftid on w hat po in t? The w a te r is dark, so da rk th a t i t

looks lik e a stagnant • pool. A nd i t also looks as though someone had been splash­in g around in th a t pool.

A nd f in a lly there is a th ird question: W hy did the “ T ro tsky is tb ” have to flee to the camp o f the Chinese coun te r-revo lu ­tion? A t its head stands Chang Kai-Shek. He was never ou r a lly . He was the a lly of S ta lin . He came to S ta lin fo r negotia tions, A week p r io r tio the bloody coup d fE ta t of Chiang K a i Shek in A p r i l 1927, S ta lin in the H a ll o f the Colum ns vouched fo r the lo y a lty o f Chiang Kai-Shek. Chiang K a i- Shek’s p a rty belonged to the C om intern w ith a consu lta tive vote. The O pposition fough t aga inst th is in trans igean tly . S ta lin and R ykov exchanged photographs w ith Chiang K a i-S hek in A p r i l 1927, S ta lin in ceived a p ro tra it o f Chiang K a i-S hek from the office o f the Com intern w ith the request th a t he give h is own p o rtra it to Chiang Kai-)Shek in exchange. T ro ts k y re tu rned the p o rtra it and refused to give h is own. S ta lin taugh t th a t Chiang K a i-S hek ’s Kuo M in Tang is a subs titu te fo r Soviets. The Opposition revealed the a lliance between S ta lin and Chiang K a i-S hek as a be traya l o f the revo lu tion . W ha t grounds, then, could the “ T ro tsky is ts ” have had fo r flee ing to the camp o f Chiang Kai-Shek? And w ou ld i t no t be be tte r fo r you, m y good s irs , to rem a in s ile n t about th is?

We do no t know who fe ll in to th is f i t o f babb ling: B lucher, o r the ed ito r o f h is speech, o r botih o f them. B u t i t is c lea r th a t somebody here fe l l in to a f i t o f babbling exceeding the m ost exceptional norm s o f ve ris im ilitud e . T ha t is w hy Pravda re f used to p r in t these words. I t was decided there, and n o t w ith o u t cause, th a t th is is too stupid. B u t a t the same tim e the Press Commission o f the Congress was re luc ta n t to th ro w them out): maybe somebody w i l l f in d some use fo r them. A nd re a lly —such an a llu r in g m orse l: On the one hand, no t a s ingle deserter, w h ich is such an excel­le n t tes tim on ia l to the arm y. On the o ther hand, fu l ly tw o deserters, and both o f them “ T ro ts k y is ts ” ; and th is is s t i l l be tter, fo r i t reveals the d ire c t connection between the O pposition and Chiang Kai-Shek. A p ity to th ro w i t ou t: Perhaps i t w i l l come in handy in M insk.

In conclusion, there s t i l l rem ains to take a look a t the com position o f the Press Commission. I t includes the fo rm e r Social R evo lu tion is ts , B erdn ikov, who is prepared fo r any service; S ta lin ’s fo rm e r secretary, Nazaretian, who has qu ite a d is t in c t and w ell-earned re p u ta tio n ; the fo rm e r Men­shevik, Popov, who supplements B erdn ikov; the ch ie f cook o f the Bureau o f P a rty H is ­to ry , S av iliev ;and S ta lin ’s fo rm e r secretary, Tovstukha. T h is ought to be enough fo r anybody.

The Sermon on CockroachesIn h is conclud ing rem arks, S ta lin

spoke about how R ykov, B ucha rin and Tom - sky becames frigh tened as soon as “ a cock­roach s tirre d somewhere, before i t even craw led ou t o f its ho le ” . . . .The speech, ev iden tly re fe rred to the d issatifled K u la ks and m iddle peasants. F u rth e r on, however, the above-mentioned cockroach tu rn s out to be “ feeble' and m oribund” . T h is com pli­cates m atte rs somewhat. I t m ay be th a t a feeble cockroach can s tir , bu t so fa r as a m oribund cockroach is concerned— we w ou ld say fra n k ly th a t we have ou r doubts. We are quite in accord w ith the m ora l th a t even live cockroaches should no t be feared. B u t on the o ther hand we assume th a t under no circum stances should a cockroach be ca lled a ra is in , as an econom ical fa th e r once d id when a baked cockroach was d is­covered in h is bread. Nevertheless, some people— “ econom ists” i f no t “ econom ical” — believed and taught others, beg inning w ith 1924, th a t the K u la k is a m yth a ltogether, th a t socia lism can ve ry w e ll be reconciled w ith th a t “ pow erfu l m iddle peasant” — in a w ord, fo r fo u r years they a rd e n tly convert­ed the cockroach in to the ra is in o f na tiona l socia lism . T h is too should have been avoided.

A Self-Portrait of YaroslavskyThe irrep laeab le colleague, Yaroslav­

sky, in the in te rests o f se lf-c ritic ism , read a t the Congress a descrip tion o f a Commun­is t g iven by a ce rta in o rgan iza tion in a forsaken lo c a lity : "C onsistent, p o lit ic a lly lite ra te , has no firm convic tions o f h is own. A w a its w ha t o ther w i l l say.” The rep o rt records “ la u g h te r” . B u t i f one stops to th in k , i t is no t a t a ll a laugh ing m atter. I t is on ly too true . And maybe th is is p rec ise ly w hy i t is so Iudric ious. The p ro ­vince has h it the m ark, describ ing not a man bu t a type.

Yes, even i f we take th is same Yaro­slavsky. In 1923, he w ro te panegyrics to T ro tsky . In 1925, he w ro te agreeing w ith Z inov iev ’s “ L e n in ism ” , w h ich was d ire c tly e n tire ly aga inst S ta lin . In 1927, he w ro te th a t B ucharin has no deviations whatever and th a t he is educating the youth in the s p ir i t o f Len in ism .

B u t can i t be said th a t Yaroslavsky is inconsis tent? Nobody w il l say tha t. H e is qu ite consistent, even too consistent. P o lit ic a lly illite ra te ? No, o f course not. A t w o rs t— he is sem i-lite ra te . Has he h is own firm convictions? I t appears th a t he has not. B u t w hy should convictions be firm ? T hey are no t m eta llic . B u t how is i t th a t Yaroslavsky, w ith o u t f irm convic­tions, m ain ta ins h im se lf a t the top? V e ry simple. He “ aw aits w h a t others w i l l say” .

No, the Congress laughed fo r noth ing. The descrip tion f its perfectly .

A Reply To Comrade W eisbordThe speech o f comrade W eisbord a t the

p lenum o f the Lovestone fa c tio n is s ig n ifi­cant as an example o f a s trong trend in the Com m unist movem ent to consider again the fundam enta l p rinc ip le questions in dispute, and to d raw closer to the M arx is t standpoin t o f the L e ft Opposition. .The recent adher­ence to ou r group o f some o f the best m ilita n ts in the o ffic ia l P a rty , the w in n in g o f a section o f the you th comrades who fo r ­m e rly fo llow ed the Lovestone group, and the present a ttitu de o f comrade W eisbord, for. years a supporte r o f the Lovestone fac tion, —these are incontestable facts w h ich demon­stra te th a t the L e ft O pposition in the U nited Sates continues to be the ra l ly in g banner fo r ever-increasing num bers o f revo lu tion ­a ry Communists.

They are facts w h ich by themselves are su ffic ien t answer to the p it i fu l declara tions in the camp of the R ig h t w ing and the Cefi- t r is ts about ou r “ d is in te g ra tio n ” , repeated so le ly fo r the purpose o f re ta in in g dom ina. Mon over m ilita n ts whom the barrage o f a n ti- “ T ro tsky ism ” alone has prevented from endorsing o u r views.

In th is sense, the Com m unist League of Am erica (O pposition) welcomes tihe sta te­m ent o f comrade W eisbord. A t the same tiime, i t is im pera tive to ind icate some ex­trem e ly serious defects in it , also typ ica l o f a ce rta in confusion th a t exists in the ranks of m any m ilita n ts who are d raw ing closer to o u r po in t o f view . I t is no t a question here o f a num ber o f re la tiv e ly m in o r differences o f op in ion, w h ich are qu ite admissable w ith in the ranks o f the Opposition itse lf. N o r do we raise the ques­tio n o f c ritic ism s made by comrade W eisbord, w h ich, in any case, can be discussed and solved on tihe basis o f com radely argum ent and in te rn a l democracy. More fundam enta l questions are involved.

The Need fo r C la r ity

The Com m unist League is the L e ft w ing o f the Com m unist movement, a fa c tio n f ig h t­in g fo r the recon s titu tio n o f the Com m unist In te rn a tio n a l on the unshakable foundations o f M arx and Len in w h ich have been sys­te m a tica lly underm ined by S ta lin ism . As a faction, its base is necessarily n a rro w e r than th a t o f the o ffic ia l P a rty and its requ ire ­ments more s tringen t. W ith o u t w asting a r­guments on the p h ilis tin e contentions o f the R ig h t w in g concern ing o u r alleged “ sectar­ian ism ” (i. e., ou r insistence upon revo lu ­tio n a ry p rin c ip le ), we m ust establish a t a ll costs a thorough c la r ity in a ll fundam enta l problem s o f the movement, since w ith o u t th a t i t is im possible to po in t the co rrect road fo r the movem ent and help the revo lu ­tio n a ry w orkers in and around the Commun­is t P a rty tread th is road by un load ing tiheir a r t if ic ia l ly appointed “ leaders” and th e ir baggage o f pern ic ious theories. T h a t is why, p a rt ic u la r ly in the case of W eisbord, a com­

rade who has occupied p rom inen t posts in the w o rk o f A m erican Com munism and is no t in the same position as a new-com er o r ra n k and file w o rke r in the movement, a ll u n c la r ity and confusion m ust be energet­ic a lly opposed,

They ex is t in W eisbord ’s views on the problem s o f the In d ia n and Chinese revo lu ­tions and the re la tions o f the various groups in the movement. W ha t comrade W eisbord e n tire ly fa ils to see in connection w ith the g u e rilla w a rfa re in C hina is the character o f the period. I t is n o t a question of “ r ig h t” o r “ w rong ” in the Chinese g u e rilla w arfa re , b u t o f w ha t period we are experiencing in China. N e ither S ta lin ism no r the Lovestones recognize th a t th e ir M enshevik polic ies d u r­in g 1925-27 led to the ' v ic to ry o f counter­revo lu tion , tfie recession of the revo lu tio n ­a ry wave, and the v ir tu a l decapita tion of the Com m unist m ovement

Because they consider the defeat o f the Chinese revo lu tio n as a passing o r a lready passed “ episode” , the po licy o f putschism is sys tem atica lly advocated o r condoned by them. They fa il to see the need, p a rt ic u la r ly now in a period o f depression o f the w o rk ­ers, o f re-aw akening them, re -g roup ing them by means o f dem ocratic slogans, cen­te rin g around the demand fo r a C onstituent Assembly. A t the same tim e th is cheap “ L e ftism ” is supplemented by the o u tr ig h t M enshevik perspective o f the “ dem ocratic d ic ta to rsh ip o f the p ro le ta r ia t and peasant­r y ” , i.e., a new K uo M in Tang scandal, a new Kerenskyism .

I t is these questions o f s tra teg ica l and ta c tica l sign ificance th a t m ust be decided in the Chinese revo lu tion . O nly by estab­lis h in g a sound foundation on them can the present g u e rilla w a rfa re be estimated co rre c tly , in its p roper place, and not in the ambiguous m anner in to w h ich comrade W eisbord fa lls .

A n Am biguous P os ition on In d iaThe same am b igu itv exists in W eis­

bo rd ’s words on In d ia . Side by side w ith pe rfe c tly co rrec t fo rm u la tio n s are to be found pe rfe c tly confused ones, p a rt ic u la r ly on the re la tions of the p ro le ta r ia n move­m ent w ith the na tio na l bourgeoisie. The p rim a ry problem o f the In d ia n revo lu tion is no t one o f an a lliance w ith the na tiona l bourgeoisie, b u t o f how to sha tter every b it of. fa ith o f the masses in th a t leader­ship, how to make them re ly upon them ­selves exclus ive ly , to d rive the na tiona l bourgeoisie (Ghandism in a ll shades) re ­len tle ss ly out o f the movement. The na­tiv e bourgeoisie is the p rin c ip a l brake on the popular masses; i t is the la s t and most substan tia l prop o f B r it is h im peria lism in Ind ia .

The economic and p o lit ica l needs of

( Continued on Page 8 )

Two or Not Even One?(Blucher’s Enigmatic Speech)

One o f the f ir s t sessions of the S ix­teenth P a rty Congress was greeted by the commander of the F a r Easte rn a rm y, B lu - cher. Th is fa c t in its e lf h -s no p o lit ic a l sign ificance and w ou ld h a rd ly deserve men­tio n . N e ither has the fa c t a P a rty s ig n ifi­cance: I f , as a so ld ier, B lucher is fa rin fe r io r to Budenny fo r instance, then in a P a rty sense he is ve ry l i t t le superio r to h im . Besides B lu ch e r’s speech o f greetings was edited beforehand in tihe office o f V o rosch ilov and there fore ve ry bad ly ed it­ed. B u t the s p ir it o f the f lu n ke y who fa lls in lin e a t command was consis tent to the end. There were the enraptured accla im of S ta lin and the a rden t greetings to V oro­sch ilov, and several jabs aimed a t the R ig h t w in g before whom B lucher stood a t a tten­tio n on ly the day before. E ve ry th in g is in order. There is also an in te re s tin g ad­m ission: “ In the period between the F if ­teenth and S ixteenth Congresses, ou r P a rty and Com m unist Y ou th o rgan iza tion in the a rm y ca rried on a successful s trugg le aga inst coun te r-revo lu tiona ry T ro tsky ism .” The F ifte e n th Congress, as was said in its day, drew the fina l balance u n d e r the “ s trugg le agd inst T ro tsky ism ” and liq u id ­ated i t com plete ly. Now we hear from B lucher th a t “ a successful s trugg le against T ro tsky ism ” was ca rried on in the a rm y fo r the las t tw o and a h a lf years, between the F ifte e n th and S ixteenth Congresses. We m ust assume th a t a t the Seventeenth Con­gress we w i l l find out not a l i t t le o f in s tru c ­tive value concern ing the fu rth e r course o f th is s trugg le w h ich is no sooner ended than i t s ta rts anew. I f we live — we sha ll hear about it.

B u t we have paused a t B lu ch e r’s speech no t beacuse o f th is admission, no r because o f its general tone, w h ich can be expressed in three w ords: A t you r service! In th is speech, o r at any ra te in the reports o f it , there is one po in t w h ich Is o f serious significance— not as a cha racte riza tion of_ B lucher bu t as a characte riza tion o f w hat fs now being done in the P a rty and what is w hat is now being done to the Party .

A cco rd ing to the rep o rt in Pravda of June 28, 1930, B lucher declared:

“ We, the figh ters in the Red A rm y, can p ro u d ly rep o rt to you th a t d u rin g these battles we d id not have a single defection, no t a s ingle deserter to the enemy. The a rm y showed a h igh p o lit ic a l and class devotion to soc ia lis t construc tion .”

E ve ry re v o lu tio n is t can o n ly welcome th is in fo rm a tion . U n fo rtuna te ly , however, we have a second vers ion o f th is po in t In B luche r’s speech w h ich underm ines a ll ou r confidence in the w hole report. In the jo u rn a l, R abote lil, w h ich Is the da ily organ of the C entra l Committee of the W h ite Rusis- ian Com m unist P arty , the quo ta tion from B luche r’s speech is reported as fo llo w s :

“ We can p ro u d ly re p o rt to you that) we had no defections n o r a s ingle deserter to the camp o f the enemy. W e have on ly tw o dark, sham eful s ta in s : tw o qua lified rec­ru its who were to serve fo r a pe riod of n ine m onths went over to the enemy. B o th of them tu rned o u t to be T ro tsky is ts .”

The woyds we underlined are com­p le te ly absen,t fro m the Prwvda report. W ere they spoken by B lucher o r not? I f we are to judge by the te x t we w ould have to conclude th a t these words were a rb itra r ­i ly and incong ruous ly inse rted in to the rep o rt a fte r i t was made, as a re su lt o f w h ich we have an Obvious, absurd ity . A t f irs t i t says th a t there was not) “ a single deserte r" and then i t is reported th a t there were tw o of them. Obviously, there is some­th in g fo u l here: I f there is no t a single one, then where d id the tw o come from ? And i f there re a lly were tw o deserters then how can one say “ no t a s ingle one” ? But) le t us assume th a t i t was n o t B lucher h im se lf who made the ends m eet: In the speech u n fo rtu n a te ly , there is; genera lly more a rdo r tihan sense. B u t then w hy did the Pravda rep o rt om it such tem pting in ­fo rm a tio n about tw o deserters? W hy did Pravdla conceal the countier-revo lu tionary betraya ls o f the “ T ro tsky is ts ” ? I f P ravda d id not conceal anyth ing, i f B lucher did no t even say th is , then how is i t th a t these

Page 6: THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a …

Problems of the Revolutionary Movement

A Statement of Views on Some Disputed Questions(Th is is the fin a l in s ta llm e n t o f the

speech made before the Lovestone group plenum by comrade W eisbord in w h ich he present h is views. The re p ly o f the Com­m u n is t League Is appended.)

* • •18. In d ia . The basic slbgans fo r the

C om m unists today in In d ia m ust be L e n in ’s “ Three P il la rs ” , th a t is , a basic slogan fo r the p ro le ta r ia t (say the e igh t hou r day) a basic slogan fo r the peasantry (confisca­t io n o f the land) and the slogan o f Dem ­ocra tic Republic. To these “ three p il la rs ” the slogan “ Freedom fo r In d ia ” m us t be added. O nly around a ll these slogans can the masses be e ffective ly m obilized. I t w ou ld be a gross e rro r fo r the Communists to stress the s logan o f Freedom fo r In d ia alone as does the n a tio n a lis t In d ia n bou r­geoisie. The slogan fo r “ C onstituen t A s­sem bly” by its e lf is no t in co rre c t b u t is incom ple te and m ay be dangerous fo r i t does n o t take in to consideration the fa c t th a t B r it is h Im pe ria lism can m aneuver so as to make the slogan o f C onstituen t As­sem bly a S U B S TITU TE fo r a dem ocratic repub lic . The slogan C onstituen t Assem bly can be need co rre c tly on ly in con junc tion w ith the slogan fo r a D em ocratic Republic.

The Slogan of SovietsThe slogan o f Soviets can be app ro p ri­

ate on ly when a su ffic ien tly acute revo lu ­tio n a ry s itu a tio n has been engendered a round the “ three p il la rs ” , when the class strugg le and c iv il w a r rages in the v illages and towns. In th is connection i t m ust be emphasized th a t Soviets can be b u ilt even w ith the slogan o f C onstituen t Assembly. The tw o slogans o f C onstituen t Assem bly and Soviets need no t be an tagon istic at a l l tim es. B u t w h a t m ust be stressed is the actual organ iza tion o f c iv il w a r in the v illa g e and tow n and the leadership o f the p ro le ta r ia t in th is c iv il w ar. O nly the d ic ­ta to rsh ip o f the p ro le ta r ia t in In d ia can m ake perm anent its revo lu tion .

The Com munists m ust make p la in to the masses the ro le o f the n a tio n a lis tic In d ia n bourgeoisie and the ro le o f Ghandi as an agent o f th is class. N ot o n ly the experiences o f 1921 m ust be gone o ve r,'b u t a l l the treacherous actions o f the present G handi cam paign (the salt) campaign, the anti-m ach ine movement, passive resistance, opposition tio w orkers , record a t the Na­t io n a lis t Congress, etc., etc., et.) m ust be elaborated. S im u ltaneously mass move­m ents in to w n and countryside aga inst na­t iv e usurer, gen try , ku lak , bourgeois, m ust be effected. B y no means m ust the Chiang K a i-S hek disaster be repeated. The c r im ­in a l negligence o f the C.I. in fa il in g to b u ild the Com m unist P a rty b u t in b u ild in g w orker-peasant pa rties ins tead m u s t be speedily liqu ida ted. I t is c lear i t is no t OUE business to organ ize peasant parties.

I t is c le a r th a t the m ain task o f the Com m unists m ust be the s tim u la tio n o f the masses around the “ three p i l la r ” and free ­dom slogans. These movements are d i­rected aga inst both native and fo re ig n r u l­ers a ifd bourgeoisie who may desire a na­t io n a lis t re fo lu tio n a ry m ovement under the sole s logan o f "Freedom o f In d ia ” fro m the B r it is h . Nevertheless, and th is is m ost im p o rta n t to understand, so long as a sec­tio n o f the nationalist) In d ia n bourgeoisie is fig h tin g B r it is h Im pe ria lism under the slogan o f Freedom o f In d ia fro m Im p e r ia l­is t ru le , so long as th is movem ent unleashes the energy o f the masses w h ich otherw ise cou ld not) be unleashed and so long as the masses have n o t been ac tive ly m obilized around th e co rre c t slogans and w h ile the exposure o f the na tive bourgeoisie is bu t in its inc ip iency, i t w ou ld be m an ifes tly in ­co rre c t fo r the Com munists no t to enter o r to s trugg le fo r a na tiona l revo lu tio n a ry f r o n t aga inst B r it is h Im p e ria lism even though th is na tiona l revo lu tio n a ry f ro n t w ou ld te m p o ra rily conta in sections o f the n a tio n a lis t revo lu tio n a ry bourgeoisie (whom the masses fo llo w ) even though the sole slogan were “ Freedom fo r In d ia ”1 fro m B r it is h Im p e ria lism and even though la te r the un ited f ro n t w ou ld have to be broken by the developm ent o f the class s trug g le in the v illages and towns o f Ind ia . The

By ALBERT WEISBORDcenter o f a ttack m ust be aga inst B r it is h Im p e ria lism and its conscious reactiona ry agents w ith in Ind ia .

The crim e o f the C.I. in C hina (and th is op in ion is n o t in co n tra d ic tio n w ith the basic opin ions o f comrade T ro tsky , i t seems) was NOT th a t the C.P. o f China jo ined a na tiona l revo lu tio n a ry fro n t, bu t th a t the C.I. S U B S TITU TE D the K uom in - tang fo r the C om m unist P a rty , succumbed to Sun Y a t Senism, in troduced class co llab ­o ra tion aga inst the class s trugg le , sacrific ­in g the class s trugg le to th is na tiona l rev ­o lu tio n a ry front) aga inst fo re ign im p e ria l­ism , fa il in g to ra ise the “ Three P il la r ” slogans and thus lead ing the c iv il w a r in v illa g e and to w n on concrete demands o f the masses aga inst the na tive exp lo ite rs as w e ll. The po licy today must! be: a na­tio n a l revo lu tio n a ry fro n t w h ich la te r w i l l be broken by the progress o f the class s trug ­gle in In d ia under the leadership o f the p ro le ta r ia t (th rough its Com m unist P a rty ) in a lliance w ith the peasantry on the road to the strugg le fo r the d ic ta to rsh ip o f the p ro le ta ria t.

The Problem in China14. Here too the slogan o f the Con­

s titu e n t Assem bly is s t i l l co rrec t, a lthough i t is apparen tly in co rre c t to state th a t the Chinese revo lu tio n is s t i l l on the wane. Here the m ob iliza tion o f w orkers and pea­sants on concrete issues can lead to such an acute revo lu tio n a ry s itu a tio n th a t So­v ie ts can be form ed.

I t is dubious to say, as do some mem­bers o f the In te rn a tio n a l L e ft Opposition, th a t the present g u e rilla w a rfa re go ing on in China today is w rong and n o t to be supported. Under the present conditions, i f the facts are th a t masses o f desperate peasants are ready to take up c iv il w a r in the coun trys ide , the Com m unists m ust s tim ula te , support, organize and lead such a movement. On the o ther hand, i t m ust be c lea r th a t no m a tte r how m uch the Im ­pe ria lis ts and na tive Chinese ru le rs m ay be weakened, armed peasant bands cannot take the place o f mass peasant upris ings, the peasant movem ent can n o t take the place of a p ro le ta ria n strugg le , and pea­sant “ Soviets” cannot replace the d ic ta to r­ship o f the p ro le ta ria t.

15. The co lo n ia l re vo lu tio n a ry s itu a ­tions in China and In d ia are of the greatest im portance to the res t o f t)he w o rld , and to the U n ited States especia lly. H ow can we foresee th a t the U nited States w i l l “ w eather tihe economic s to rm ” and “ reach new peaks” unless we foresee aleady the complete and sudden crush ing o f the revo lu tio n a ry wave in the F a r East. I t is the rankest oppor­tun ism to fa i l tio connect in the m ost in t i­mate w ay the revo lu tio n a ry s itua tions in the E ast w ith the im m ediate perspective of the U nited States. A l l o f the Com m unist groups su ffe r from th is opportun ism more o r less. Unless th is v iew is corrected i t w i l l be true th a t the revo lu tions w i l l be defeated, bu t i t w i l l be the Com munists who w i l l have aided unconsciously the hangmen both in the East and in the West.

16. The s logan Soviet U n ited States o f Europe today seems dubious. Len in was opposed to th is slogan. Today, i t m ay tend to a id reac tiona ry schemes lik e those of B riand . I t should be remembered thatl among the ca p ita lis t na tions the sharpest basic antagonism s are no longer between European nations buti between Europe and Am erica.

17. The s itu a tio n w ith in the Soviet U nion, ou r fa therland , m ust be of the u t­m ost concern fo r us. The d ifficu ltly and del­icacy o f the sub ject m ust n o t lead to less discussion bu t to more. There is no ques­tio n b u t tha t, on the whole, here comrade T ro ts k y was co rre c t both in stressing in ­d u s tria liza tio n and the necessity o f a “ p lan ” , and in proposing an in tes ifica tiqn o f the w a r on the ku lak . W hen there is’ reca lled B uch a rin ’s slogan to the peasant­ry “ E n rich yourse lves” and how there was so lem nly discussed in Russia the possib­i l i t y o f the “ ku la ks g row ing in to socia lism ” , when there is reca lled the argum ents th a t

any p lan o f in d u s tr ia liz a tio n was “ too pre ­m a tu re ” and w ou ld lead to te rr ib le catas­trophes and “ w ar in the v illa g e ” , when there is reca lled how backw ard the o rig in a l in d u s tr ia liz a tio n plans were and how fa r the masses ou tstripped the “ P a rty leaders” , then the conclusion is ripe th a t the a ttack on comrade T ro ts k y on th is question on ly h id the R ig h t opportun ism o f the S ta lin - B uch a rin regime.

The Five-Year PlanThe five year p lan, belated as i t was,

and its speedy execution, m ark a trem en­dous step fo rw a rd . The in d u s tria liza tio n o f the Soviet State m ust tend g re a tly to strengthen the revo lu tio n a ry m ovem ent and tend to hasten the end o f cap ita lism . B u t the economic progress o f the U.S.B.R. does no t BY IT S E L F NEC ESS AR ILY lead to an advance o f the w o r ld revo lu tion . I f w ith such an economic advance there should be fastened upon the Com m unist P arties s t i l l m ore the theory o f b u ild in g socialism in one coun try , i f th is should lead no t to an in te rn a tio n a l b u t a n a tio n a lis t view-4 po in t, i f th is should in tu rn lead the C.I. leadership to p lay ing w ith and a sacrifice of fo re ign sections of the C.I., i f th is should fasten the ho ld of the bureaucrats s t i l l more, i f th is should lead to T ro ts k y deportations and E llum kin m urders and vio lence to every Com m unist opposition movement, then in ­deed i t is possible to state th a t unless the Com munists th roughou t the w o rld (aided by the ve ry economic advance o f the Soviet U n ion) can guard aga inst th is degeneration fro m Len in ism i t is possible to have an economic advance o f the Soviet U n ion s i­m ultaneous ly w ith a setback to the w o rld p ro le ta ria n revo lu tion . T ro ts k y ’s exposure o f the elements .of T he rm ido r generating w ith in the Soviet U n ion is abso lu te ly cor­rect.

’(section D . 18..The C om intern today is in a p ro found c ris is . The n a rro w in g down and g rea t loss o f p restige o f the C.I. and the mass expulsions show how deeply op­po rtun ism was part) o f the Com m unist move­m ent. The fo rm a tio n of th ree d iffe re n t sep­a ra te ly organized in te rn a tio n a l Com m unist groups speaks of the d is in te g ra tio n o f tihe movement. B u t i t also m arks a step fo r ­w ard since such a s itu a tio n exposes the rottenness in a ll groups, hardens t(he rea l Len in is ts and prepares the w ay fo r new advances.

We owe i t p r im a r ily and above a ll to L .D .T ro tsky fo r exposing the s itu a tio n since L en in died, fo r b rin g in g to lig h t the Testam ent o f Len in w h ich the other leaders had de libe ra te ly hidden, fo r exposing the forgeries o f L e n in ’s w r it in g s attempted, and fo r b rin g in g to lig h t m any facts of P a rty h is to ry concealed by the bureaucrats fom the membership.

However it , seems th a t comrade T ro t­sky is in co rre c t in designating the strugg le between B ucha rin and S ta lin (and the na­tio n a l groups around them ) as one between “ R ig h t” and “ C e n tris t” tendencies in the Com m unist movement. I t is in re a lity a s trugg le between tw o fo rm s o f the “ R ig h t” . Both ph ilosoph ica lly and p o lit ic a lly the 'conception o f a “ C e n tris t” COMMUNIST w in g is w rong. C entrism can be used as designating Socia lists b u t n o t Communists. T h is was L e n in ’s usage o f tihe term . P rac­t ic a lly , i t gives the illu s io n th a t the “ Cen­t r is ts ” are m ore to the “ L e ft” than the “ Riighit” and th a t “ C en tris ts ” are m ore easily swayed and have no rea l p o licy of th e ir own.

19. In tihe U nited States, the d is in teg­ra tio n o f the Com m unist P a rty has ex­posed th ree groups w ith defin ite R ig h t w in g tendencies. The putschism o f the o ffic ia l Com m unist P a rty fac tiona lis ts is n o t the w rong estim ation o f those too im p a tie n t and too eager to s trugg le , bu t a deliberate make-believe to conceal th e ir u tte r R ig h t w in g bankrup tcy. The theory of b u ild in g socia lism in one coun try , th e ir a ttitu de on co lon ia l questions, th e ir de liberate iso la ­tio n from the masses, t l je ir conception tha t leaders of a Com m unist P a rty can be lia rs and fakers try in g to b lu ff both Moscow and the mem bership, and can reach leadership w ith o u t ever having been called to ca rry

ou t responsible mass w o rk in a Com m unist m anner before becoming leaders, th e ir v io ­lence against C om m unist groups, these are some o f the th ings th a t show on w hat road th is c lique marches.

The C om m unist “ M a jo r ity ” group (Lovestone) shows ju s t as bad tendencies. The fa ilu re to analyze in te rn a tio n a l ques­tions (China, Russia, etc.) and to l in k up these questions in the closest degree w ith 'questions of the I 'n i t eel States; the “ R ig h t” lin e when these questions are approached, the w rong estim ation both o f the whole present period of post-w ar cap ita lism and of the present s itu a tio n inside and outside the U nited States and the complete fa ilu re to understand the m any R ig h t w in g m istakes ( in c lu d ing the methods o f dea ling w ith the T ro ts k y opposition) th a t were com m itted by the leaders o f th is group as leaders o f the P arty . These are b u t p a rt o f the evi­dence to show how f irm ly rooted the R ig h t tendencies o f th is group have become.

The Com m unist League (O pposition) also has shown defin ite “ R ig h t” tendencies. B u t the R ig h t tendences have NOT flow ed fro m comrade T ro ts k y and the In te rn a tio n a l L e ft Opposition— now th a t the true position o f the “ T ro ts k y ” opposition ils know n— bu t are pecu lia r to its A m erican seetton. The M ay 1929 fac tio na l p la tfo rm , the pas­s iv ity and sectarian leanings, the absolute and complete la ck o f se lf-c r it ic ism and fa i l ­ure to see-that the Cannon fac tion w ith in the P a rty was as u n -L e n in is t as any o f the others, these defects flow ed fro m the fa c t th a t the Am erican section o f tihe L e ft In ­te rn a tio n a l O pposition was too close to bu t a reconstitu ted Cannon fa c tio n in the be­g in n in g of its fo rm a tion . However there m ust be adm itted the g rea t service such a fa c tio n did render in the pub lica tion and popu la riza tion of the p rinc ip les o f the L e ft In te rn a tio n a l Opposition.

The c ry in g need o f tihe hou r today is absolute ideo log ica l in transigeance, p lus the w o rk in g together o f a l l Com m uni t groups. One o f the crassest fo rm s o f opportun ism was the fac tio na l u n ity attem pted in the P a rty in 1928 ( and before) and w h ich was o n ly the obverse side o f the unp rinc ip led fac tiona lism th a t had existed before m ere ly in another fo rm . The co rrec t so lu tion of the momentous questions o f the day on the basis o f Len in ism stand above a ll questions o f fo rm a l d isc ip line .

A t the same tim e a ll Com m unist groups m ust w o rk • together on the basis o f the recogn ition o f the Com m unist characte r o f each group. The Com m unist “ M a jo r ity ” op­position group and the Com m unist League group by w o rk in g together can help to re­establish mass w o rk and to res is t the v io ­le n t tiactics o f the P a rty offic ia ldom . They can help to separate the Com m unist move­m ent as a whole from the M ensheviks and can deal a death b low to the theory o f "fasc ism ” and “ socia l-fascism ” thus w in ­n ing the advanced w orkers to a L e n in is t conception o f p a rty democracy. O nly such a w o rk in g together o f Com m unist groups can raise those fundam enta l p rinc ip les of L e n in is t o rgan iza tion th a t can reconstitu te an In te rn a tio n a l o f Lenin.

(SEE PAGE F IV E )

Number 1 4BULLETIN OF THE RUSSIAN OPPOSITION

(E ntirely In Russian)

P a rtia l ContentsW ho W il l Pevail?— N.M.: "N ew s” in the P a rty j—The P o lit ic a l B iography o f S ta lin . —A L F A :N o te s o f a Jo u rn a lis t— A .T .: Col­le c tiv iza tio n as I t R ea lly Is (L e tte r fro m the Russian coun trys ide ).— N .M A R K IN : The Persecution o f the Bo lshevik-Lenin istis as the P rin c ip a l E lem ent in P repa ring the 16th P a rty Congres.— LE T TE R S FROM THEU.S.S .R .r L e tte r from Moscow; A le t­te r fro m ex ile ; On Rakovgky; etc., etc.— L .D .T ro tsky : S ta lin as a T heo rtic ian—L.D. T ro tisky: On the “ Defenders” o f the October R evo lu tion— And numerous o ther features.

25cents a copy 18 cents in bundles

O rder from

G. C larke, 25 T h ird Ave., Rm. 4, N.Y.C.

Page 7: THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a …

S H A N G H A I—The year 1982-29 m ay he described as

a period o f a ce rta in economic re v iva l o f the Chinese bourgeoisie. Three conditions aided the bourgeoise to restore its econ­om y: a prosperous gain in a g ric u ltu ra l h a r­vest in the second h a lf o f 1927 and Hhe f ir s t h a lf o f 1928;. the ebb tide of the s tr ike movem ent as a resu lt o f the p ro le ta r ia t’s defeat; tihe tem pora ry cessation o f the c i­v i l w a r and the res to ra tion o f in la n d com­m un ica tion . The Chinese bourgeoisie, ta k ­ing advantage o f th is good s itua tion, re ­stored its economic power. Up to 1930, tihe bourgeoisie had w h o lly recovered in the facto ries destroyed by the w ar. The gen­e ra l p ro fit o f the p rin c ip a l in d u s try— te x tile — had surpassed the record a fte r the w ar, w h ile the im p o rt and export o f m erchant ships had increased by 20 percent h ighe r than before, and domestic and fo re ign trade had increased p roportiona te ly . Elut the rise came to an end w ith the c iv il w a r and ag­ra r ia n fam ine a t the beg inn ing o f 1930.

In 1929, the w a r between Chiang K a i- Shek and the K w angs i c lique broke out. In 1930i, the Chiang-Yen Slh-Shan w a r broke out. In the considera tion o f the la t­te r, there are tw o d iffe re n t op in ions: the one of Lee L i-san , the present leader of the Chinese Com m unist P arty , the o ther is th a t o f the L e n in is t Opposition.

A ccord ing Oo Lee L i-san , th is is a w ar of the classes, th a t is, the revo lu tiona ry h igh wave, because, accord ing to h is “ ana l­ys is ” , the pa rtic ipan ts in the c iv il w a r rep ­resent d iffe ren t classes: Feng Y u-H siang represents tihe pe tty bourgeoise; K w angsi, the land lo rds ; and Chiang the na tiona l bourgeoisie.

The N ationa l A c tion Committee o f the Chinese B o lshev ik-Len in is ts (O pposition) has a lready declared th a t such w ars are un ­avoidable resu lts a fte r the fa l l o f the p ro le t­a ria n forces. The im p e ria lis ts in China and th e ir agents, the Chinese bourgeoisie are in tox ica ted w ith the desire to s p lit up China s t i l l fu r th e r because the loca l governm ents established by these sp lits are the on ly safe guarantee fo r the exceptional power and in te rests o f the im p e ria lis ts and the governm ent o f Chiang K ai-Shek is the “ p rov is iona l governm ent” supported u nan i­m ously by the im p e ria lis ts and the loca l bourgeoisie as w e ll in o rder to suppress the revo lu tio n a ry forces a fte r the exhaustion o f the p ro le ta r ia t and the forces under its leadersh ip ; bu t the fu l l a tten tion o f the im p e ria lis ts and tihe w hole loca l bourgeoi­sie is concentrated on the s p lit t in g up p ro ­cess: the c iv il w a r is on ly a means fo r the purpose o f spliti.

Since the “ p rov is iona l governm ent” (N ank ing ) has succeeded in its ro le and task o f suppressing the re vo lu tio n a ry forces, then its pow er m ust be weakened by c iv il wars to the leve l o f the fo rm e r Peking governm ent, w h ile tihe loca l powers m ust also be reduced to the “ T uchun ” period before 1925. A l l these are n a tu ra l phenom­ena under the regim e o f d iffe ren t im per­ia lis ts . The tem pora ry (and on ly tem por­a ry ) res tra in in g o f the m ilita r is ts fro m c iv il w ars is possible o n ly qnder the most reac tiona ry regim e w h ich suppressess the w orkers and peasants com pletely. B u t th is is a tem pora ry re s tra in t w h ich on ly means the p repara tion o f new and more v io le n t wars. The complete e lim in a tion o f c iv il wars among the m ilita r is ts is conceivable on ly th rough the seizure o f pow er by the p ro le ta r ia t In the com ing, th ird re v o lu tio n ­a ry up ris ing .

U nder the cond ition o f perm anent c iv il w ar the masses are im pelled to recognize the rea l p o lit ic a l countenance of the Com­m un is t P a rty and to tu rn tow ards the Le ft.

I t is inev itab le th a t d u rin g th is period the bourgeois groups in opposition to the one in power, w i l l h ide themselves more cu n n in g ly behind the “ L e f t ” m ask in order to be tray the masses. Here one may as­sume tw o a lte rna tives fo r the near fu tu re : The “ reorgan iza tionsts” and the “ W est H i l l Conference g roup” w i l l pu t aside th e ir own re fo rm is t p la tfo rm s in o rde r to un ite w ith Yen Sih-Shan, Feng Yu-H siang, K w angs i w ar lords, and organize a governm ent whose

p o licy w i l l become m ore reac tiona ry than Chiang K a i-S hek ’s. The C entris ts of the Kuo M in Tang like the socalled board of “ New L ife ” * w i l l su re ly stand in opposition to th is bourgeois governm ent under the m ask of a “ L e ft” tu rn . Or some o f them w il l s p lit fro m tjie ranks o f the “ re - o rgan iza tion is ts ” to oppose the p o licy of W ang Chin W ei and Co. T h is is the f irs t possible a lte rna tive .

The o th e r one w ou ld be more danger­ous to the p ro le ta r ia t. The L e ft bourgeoisie w ith its ex is ting o rgan izations and under the m ask o f an “ u ltra -L e ft” tu rn w i l l con-

. ................................................. .Th is le tte r represent the p o in t o f view

o f the “ O pr W ord ” group o f the L e ft Op­pos ition in China. The M ilita n t disagrees se rious ly w ith a num ber o f statements and opin ions expressed by comrade Peter in es tim a tin g the present s itu a tio n in the coun try , w ith p a rt ic u la r regard to the g u e rilla w a rfa re , on w h ich we have a lready w r it te n and w i l l continue to w r ite in fu ­tu re issues. Nevertheless, the firs t-hand account o f the s itu a tio n in China w h ich th is le tte r offers makes i t pub lica tion in the M ilita n t of g rea t in te re s t and value.

sent to the bourgeois dem ocratic revo lu ­t io n and to the “ democratic d ic ta to rsh ip of the w orkers and peasants” , to the slogan “ U n ite w ith the Soviet U n ion ” o n ly under the cond ition th a t the p rop e rty o f the C hin­ese bourgeoisie is no t confiscated. Then, under th is maisk, the “ u lt ra -L e ft ” bou r­geoise w i l l again be able to be tray the p ro le ta r ia t and get m a te ria l support from the Soviet* Union.

"Can i t be considered th a t the revo lu ­t io n o f 1925-1927 has a t least p a rt ly sa t­isfied the basic in te rests o f Chinese c a p ita l­ism ?” said comrade T ro ts k y in his c r i t i ­cism o f the C om in te rn program . “ No. China is now ju s t as fa r fro m na tiona l u n ity and fro m customs independence as i t was p r io r to 1925. B u t as a m a tte r o f fac t the creation o f one home m arke t and its p ro tection fro m cheaper fo re ig n goods is fo r the Chinese bourgeoisie a question o f life and death. I t is a question o n ly second in im portance to th a t o f m a in ta in in g the basis o f its class dom ina tion over the p ro ­le ta ria t! and the ru ra l poor. B u t also fo r the Japanese and fo r the B r it is h bourge­oisie, the m aintenance of China in its co­lo n ia l state is a question o f no less im p o r­tance than the question o f economic in ­dependence is fo r the Chinese bourgeoisie. T ha t is w hy the Chinese bourgeoisie w i l l s t i l l d isp lay m any zig-zag moves tow ards the L e ft In its fu tu re po licy. F o r those w ho lik e un ited fro n ts there w i l l s t i l l be m any chances in the fu tu re .”

The present task o f the Chinese Op­position is to avoid the tw o dangers men­tioned above by a ll means. So th a t the m ost im p o rta n t w o rk to be ca rried out is the slogan o f a' na tiona l (Constituent!) As­sembly th rough w h ich we m ay sha rp ly d is ­close a ll the deceivers o f the “ opposition ” bourgeoisie. On the o ther hand, w ith the aid o f th is slogan, we m ust t r y ou r best to c a rry on a propaganda fo r the d ic ta to r­ship o f the p ro le ta r ia t and na tiona liza tion o f the means o f production , establish ing f irm ly tihe rea l program o f the p ro le ta r ia t w h ich w i l l be co n tra ry to the o b je u fe “ bourgeois dem ocra tic” p la tfo rm o f the S ta lin is ts .

In the PartyIn recent months, the o ffic ia l Commun­

is t P a rty , w ith the opportun is t program adopted by its s ix th congress under the leadership o f the U ltra -R ig h t w inge r Lee L i-san , came to an agreement w ith the re- o rgan iza tion is ts , com prom ising the s trugg le between the poor peasantry and the K u lak. B u t under the “ L o f t ” tu rn o f S ta lin , th is u ltra -R ig h t po licy was w iped out by d ip lo ­m atic decree of the C om intern. Chi Chiu-

* Theore tica l organ of the Kuo M in Tang C entrists, whose task is to expla in th e ir theories by a "m a te r ia lis m ” and “ M arx ism ” o f th e ir own.

B a i and M if, a fte r th e ir a rr iv a l in China, fo rm a lly c rtic ize d the fo rm e r p o licy o f ag­reem ent between Lee L i-san and the reo r- gan iza tion is ts . Nevertheless such a “ L e ft” a ttem pt does no t co rrec t the fundam enta l p rin c ip le e rro r o f the P a rty line , since w ith a course based on the “ bourgeois charac­te r ” o f the revo lu tion , “ te m po ra ry ” agree­m ents w ith the lib e ra l bourgeoisie are a n a tu ra l conclusion.

A t present, the P a rty regim e is s t i l l under the in fluence o f the Lee L i-sans. T ha t the pow e rfu l Lee agrees to pub lish the c r it ic is m o f Chi C h iu -B a i and M if in the o ffic ia l P a rty organ is on ly a fa lse dem onstration to the C om intern. B u t i t does show thati the u ltra -R ig h t s p ir i t o f Lee L i-san has p reva iled s tron g ly in the w hole P arty . F o r instance, the serious s trugg le between Tchu-Deh and Mu Tse- tong in the Red A rm y. Comrade Mu Tse- Tong is more to the Lefti and m ay stand on the side o f the P a rty masses against Tchu-Deh. B u t the C entra l P a rty regim e o f the u ltra -R ig h t w in g has decided Ho replace comrade M u Tse-Tong w ith the fo llo w e r o f Lee L i-san , Y un T a i- in .

The h is to ry o f the Russian revo lu tion teaches us th a t in tihe ranks of Menshevism there were m any differences, especia lly on the question o f re la tions w ith the cons titu ­tiona lis ts . The M ensheviks were divided in to cooperators and opponents. B u t on the fundam enta l problem s o f the revo lu ­tio n they unanim ously opposed the B o l­sheviks. So does Chinese Menshevism. The reo rgan iza tion is ts are c le a rly no o the r than the Chinese C onstftu tliona lis ts , the m ost dangerous enemy o f the p ro le ta ria t. There­fo re on the question o f re la tions w ith the Chinese C onstitu tiona lis ts , w hatever d iffe r­ences ex is t among the Chinese M ensheviks lik e Chi C h iu -B a i and Lee L i-san the B o l­shevik O pposition can never come to agree­m ent w ith them. They are fo r the road o f the “ bourgeois cha rac te r” o f tihe revo lu ­tio n and the “ dem ocratic d ic ta to rsh ip ” , w h ile we are fo r the p ro le ta r ia n d ic ta to r­sh ip and na tio na liza tio n o f the means of p roduction.

The Red Arm yThe Red A rm y in China is an ever

disputed question. In the ranks o f dis­guised O pposition ists in China, the a ttitude tow ards the Red a rm y has been fa ls ified by saying' th a t i t is s im p ly “ an unorganized d isturbance o f bandits, vagabonds and v i l ­la in s ” (Tchen Du-S iu and L iu rze groups). The S ta lin is ts are o f the opin ion th a t the Soviets o f tihe occupied provinces are the p ro le ta ria n power, and the Red A rm y the 100 percent m ilita ry force o f the la tte r.

As a m a tte r o f fact, the present Chinese Soviets are no t established on the basis o f the class s trugg le between land lo rds and peasantry, not to speak o f the leader­ship of the p ro le ta ria t. The present Soviets are on ly the jobless grouped in the v illage in order to obta in a liv in g . T h e ir a ttitude tow ards the peasants a t w o rk takes the fo rm o f a conqueror, so th a t the Soviets are no t considered by the peasant as his own organ ization. The Soviets can make agreements w ith the upper classes in the v illa g e because o f th e ir separation from the sym pathetic support o f the peasant mass­es. In m ost o f the Soviet d is tr ic ts , the leadership does no t accom plish the d iv is ion o f the land, confiscation o f the m erchant shops, but, on the con tra ry , ca rries out the slogan o f “ P ro tect the m erchant shops and m oney-lenders” . The leaders, fu r th e r , more, do no t d isarm the bandits in order to arm the poor peasantry, b u t perm its them to rob free ly .

B u t a lthough the Soviets under the leadership of the S ta lin is ts are n o t the pow er o f the w orkers and peasantry, they are peasant w a r groups, depending upon the a c tiv itie s o f th e ir leaders, lik e the group under Hong Siu-Chuan, the Taip ings leader. Such groups are able to ex is t even in the period o f the greatest consolidation o f the reactiona ry reg im e; m il i ta r is t c iv il w a r makes th e ir fu r th e r g row th possible.

In these peasant w ar groups, the p ro ­

le ta r ia t m ust by a ll means acquire the lead­in g position. B u t the leadership can easily be captured by “ popu lis t” parses, w h ich seek to make the peasants independent fro m the w orkers. The S ta lin is ts are he lp ­in g the [development o f such “ p o p u lis t” parties. F irs t, they a ttem pt to organize p u re ly peasant Soviets under the slogan of the “ dem ocratic d ic ta to rsh ip o f the p ro le t­a ria t and peasantry” . Secondly, they do not te ll the peasants th a t the revo lu tio n a ry s itu a tio n has weakened, b u t p lay up to the na rrow -m inded and p ride fu l thoughts o f the peasantry th a t the w orkers in China are m uch more backw ard than the peasants. T h ird , they do n o t develop the independent s p ir it o f the p ro le ta ria n strugg le , b u t spread exaggerated news about the Red A rm y in th e ir organ w ith the la rgest type as i f its v ic to ry were the road ou t fo r the w orkers . In a, word, a ll the propaganda o f the S ta lin ­is ts obective ly inc ites the “ pop u lis t” ideas o f th e peasant’s independence fro m the w orkers. F rom our po in t o f view , the Sta­lin is ts in China are undergo ing a process o f “ Social R evo lu tiona riza tion ” .

To w an t to e lim ina te such peasant So­viets and th e ir s trugg le in no w ay co in ­cides w ith the standpo in t o f the Opposition. Despite the fa c t th a t they are no t w o rke rs ’ and peasants’ Soviets under the leadership o f the p ro le ta ria t. they are fa r be tte r fo r us than the pow er o f the land lords. In the fu tu re revo lu tio n a ry r is in g wave, such -pea­sants’ Soviets w i l l be ve ry easily tu rned in to a w o rke rs ’ and peasants’ Soviet pow ­er, p reparing fo r the p ro le ta ria n d ic ta to r­ship. I t is w ith o u t doubt th a t du ring the reac tiona ry period, the o rgan iza tion d£ w o rke rs ’ and peasants’ Soviets is imposs­ib le ; bu t the existence of iso lated peasant w a r groups in so widespread a co u n try as China is qu ite possible. I t is the rem ain ­in g sp u rt o f the v illage revo lu tion o f 1925-27. The duties o f tihe present leadership are to ag ita te fo r the more extensive develop­m ent o f the c ity labo r movement, to lead i t and to p ro long itis existence before i t is com ple te ly exhausted and destroyed by re ­actionaries.

The Chinese B o lshev ik-Len in is ts (Op­pos ition ) recognizes th a t the sign ificance of the peasant w ar groups is qu ite d iffe ren t fro m th a t o f the w o rke rs ’ and peasants’ Soviets. Elut ou r sym pathy is w h o lly on the side o f such peasant wars. We in s is ­te n tly p ro test aga inst the shameless stories about them spread by the land lo rds and the bourgeoisie. We speak to the w o rk in g classes th a t these Soviets are peasant w a r groups, much m ore advanced than those o f land lo rds and th a t the w orkers should un ite w ith them. Bet we do no t be tray the w orkers lik e the S ta lin is ts do by saying th a t these are the ve ry Soviets o f the fu tu re p ro le ta ria n d ic ta torsh ip ,

The capture o f Changsha, cap ita l o f H unan province, by the Red A rm y has given a g rea t im petus to the dem onstration on Augusti 1st in Shanghai. We d is tribu ted ou r lea fle ts w ith an “ Appeal to the W o rk ­ers, Peasants and Soldiers o f the Red A rm y fo r the capture o f Changsha” . There we declared th a t the capture o f Changsha by the hero ic m ilita n ts in the peasant w a r de­serves the praise o f the w o r ld p ro le ta ria t. The hero ic Red A rm y should no t on ly make fu r th e r attacks on the bourgeois m ilita r is ts bu t should also c a rry outi the confiscation o f p roperty , Chinejse and fo re^n , d iv ide the land o f the K u la k and land lo rds among the poor peasants In spite o f the S ta lin is t opportun is t lin e etc., etc. We hope to send you a repo rt on the Changsha s itua tion, the present s tr ike movement, etc., w itih in the next few days.

— PETER

I f the num ber on you r w rapper is

55then you r subscrip tion to the M ilitant has

expired. Renew im m edia te ly in order to

avoid m issing any issues.

A Letter from Shanghai

W h a t Is Going O n In China?

Page 8: THE MILITANTOn Rakovsky (Extract from a Letter). . . Rakovsky is writing an enormous amount. Whatever reaches us is read by all; in this sense Christian Georgevitch is doing a …

Stalinist Party Folly in St. LouisIn the Party

W h y I Joined the Left Opposition

Comade Sylv ia Blebker, organ izer of Of the Needle Trades W orkers In d u s tr ia l U nion, and one o f the oldest members of o f the P arty , whose case we spoke o f in the M ilita n t, tw o Issues agoi, has been expelled fo r “ T ro tsky ism ” . She sends us the fo llo w in g dec la ra tion :

* * *The statem ent by the P a rty C entra l

C ontro l Commission on m y expu ls ion (D a lly W orker, 9-8-198#) need® fu r th e r ex­p lanation. I t was no t m ere ly a statement o f m y expulsion but a slander and m isrepre­sentation o f m y re la tio n to the s trugg le in general. And w h ile I am sure th a t every w o rke r o r member o f ou)r Union wh,o read i t fe lt repelled by such contem- tib le slander, I nevertheless w ish to make a few exp lanato ry rem arks.

Records Needs No ApologyM y record of w ork , ac tiv itie s and devo­

tio n to the Needle Trades W orkers Indus­t r ia l U n ion and the P a rty needs no apology. I t has been know n to the w orkers fo r a lm ost 10 years. A n y w o rk assigned to me was ca rried o u t fa ith fu lly and flaw less­ly . A nd were i t no t fo r m y agreement w ith the p la tfo rm o f the Com m unist League, the P a rty w ou ld s t i l l speak of m y loya lty .

M y adherence to the “ T ro tsky Oppo­s it io n in no w ay eradicates m y fo rm e r record. On the con tra ry , i t is a log ica l consequence o f m y serious and v ita l concern w ith the polic ies o f the C.I. and its A m e ri­can section.

Since when is one a good Com m unist who doesn’t th in k , question o r disagree? Since when has i t become bu r s logan : Obey and no t ask questions? The Com m unist P a rty is no t a re lig ious sect (and even th e ir h is to ry is fille d w ith “ periods o f ques­tio n in g ” ). The P a rty is the p o lit ic a l weapon o f the w orkers in the (fight aga inst the cap­i ta l is t system, and i t is tihe d u ty o f every Com m unist to use th is weapon to its m ax­im um effectiveness. We need the Commun­is t Partly to lead the w o rk in g class in a ll its strugg les ; we need i t to f ig h t and expose re fo rm is t in fluence among the w o rke rs ; we need i t to b u ild the ke rne l o f the p ro le ta r­ia n revo lu tion . No sooner do the polic ies o f the P a rty fa i l to live up to its h is to rica l ro le than every Com m unist m ust p o in t i t ou t, c r it ic iz e and i f compelled, organize a ta c tio n to co rrec t these policies.

Tha't is exactly w ha t comrade T ro tsky has been doing, and th a t is exactly w ha t the A m erican L e ft Opposition is doing at present. The c r it ic is m made by comrade T ro tsky fro m 1923 to now, w hether na tion ­a lly o r in te rn a tio n a lly , has been e n tire ly confirm ed by events, m uch m ore than any o f us expected. A nd i t is because o f the ve ry correctness o f h is prognoses th a t he doesn’t stand alone b u t has a movement of devoted class-conscious w orkers behind h im . E very day b rings new groups of adherents to the course o f Len in ism as aga inst th e po lic ies 0 f S ta lin ’s regim e, w h ich is lead ing the P a rty in to the abyss.

A Contemptble SlanderThe C.C.C. statem ent th a t I “ covered

m yse lf w ith the c loak o f T ro tsky ism to es­cape fro m the s trugg le ” is a despicable s lander. No serious w o rke r believes i t now and w i l l su re ly no t believe i t in the fu tu re . I rem a in in the ranks o f the class conscious w orkers and w i l l w o rk together w ith them regard less o f d ifficu ltie s . B u t true to m y p rinc ip les , I sha ll never agree w ith e ither the present o ffic ia l po lic ies o f 'th e P a rty w h ich are d isastrous, n o r w ith the bureau­c ra tiza tio n o f the P arty . The average member in ou r P a rty is becoming a mere cog and no t a sober, conscious figh te r. T h is is no t a fa u lt o f the Com m unist ideal but o f the present P a rty leadeship.

The frequen t changes and unce rta in ties In the P a rty and trade un ion polic ies, w ith ­o u t any broad discussion a t tihe un its , the P a rty frac tions , in troduce confusion, ap­a th y and general loss of fa ith by the ra n k and file . Reorganizations take place at such a tempo th a t i t is no longer possible to fo llo w tihem up. These constant reorgan­iza tions are resorted to as a substitu te fo r co rrec t polic ies, b u t they are abso lu te ly w rong and su ic id ica l. The fa c t is th a t the attendance a t P a rty fra c tio n m eetings has

been reduced to a fo u rth o f the mem ber­ship. The m echanical in tro d u c tio n o f po l­icies, th e ir m echanical execution, a bo lition and re - in trod u c tio n (as in the Am alga­m ated C lo th ing W orkers) are ruinous.

E lections in the P a rty are becoming a w ord o f the past. Secretaries and financ ia l secretaries can no longer be elected, on ly appointed by the bureau!

Can or should a rea l Com m unist over­look a ll th is? Is i t no t tim e to make an end to a ll these ru inous polic ies? Regard­less of w ha t the o ffica l apparatus does— expel, slander, te m p o ra rily iso late us, beat us up, break up meetings— i t is our tu rn to speak . A Com m unist who keeps quiet now when danger is fac ing ou r P a rty is a cow­ard and a slacked against the w o rk in g class. The differences in the Com intern can no longer be concealed. The p la tfo rm o f the L e n in is t Opposition can no longer be m isrepresented o r m isquoted. The facts are out in the day ligh t.

Communism Weakened by E xpuls ionsBy expe lling us fro m the P a rty ’s ranks,

o u r s treng th is o n ly weakened. By d r iv ­in g us o u t o f active w o rk in the trade '.unions and a u x ilia ry o rgan iza tions, the P a rty o ffic ia ls are de libe ra te ly h u rt in g the cause o f the w orkers. We w a n t to be in the P arty . We w an t to be in the trade unions. We w a n t to be in every class struggle. We are ready and w il l in g to sac­r ifice as we have proved in the past. V i­cious a ttacks and slander w i l l n o t solve the problem .

We ask fo r a broad and genuine d is­cussion o f the problem s we are now facing. We demand th a t a h a lt be ca lled to the unheard o f repression and persecution of th e O pposition comrades in the Soviet U nion. The bureaucrats cannot and w i l l no t tea r us away from the ranks o f Com­m unism and the w o rk in g class!

— S Y L V IA B LE E K E R

( Continued fo rm Page 5 ) the native bourgeoisie leads them in to a dispute w ith the B r it is h im p e ria lis ts w h ich “ unleashes the eneregy of the masses” . B u t so d id K erensky “ unleash the energy of the masses” . And lik e h im , the Ghandists a t the same tim e fe tte r the energy o f the masses. A genuine un leashing— and proper d irec tion— of the energies o f the masses can happen on ly by fig h tin g as m erc iless ly aga inst the na tiona l bourgeoisie and fo r the independence o f the p ro le ta r ia t (w h ich alone enables i t to lead behin/1 i t Ithe peasantry) as the Bolsheviks fough t against the K erensky and M enshevik compomisers in 1917. Th is m us t be repeated and re ­peated u n t i l i t penetrates every fibe r o f the In d ia n revo lu tion is ts .

I t is w ith comrade W eisbord ’s propos­als on the various groups in the movem ent th a t the L e ft O pposition has its sharpest disagreement. Advocacy o f such views by a leading comrades is con tra ry to a l l we stand fo r. “ A ll Communists groups m ust w o rk together on the basis o f the recogn i­t io n o f the Com m unist character o f each group. The Com m unist ‘M a jo r ity ’ group and the Com m unist League group by w o rk ­in g together can help re-estab lish mass w o rk . . . they can help to separate the Com m unist movem ent as a w hole fro m the M ensheviks” , etc., etc. Th is is fa lse from beg inning to end.

We recognize the Com m unist character of the R ig h t w in g on ly inso fa r as i t s t i l l groups a num ber o f good Com m unist w o rk ­ers whom the incom petent C en tris t bureau­cracy was unable to hold. We contend th a t the R ig h t w ing now occupies a pos ition m idw ay between social democracy (Men- shevism ) and Communism— not fo r long, i t is true , as is shown by the passage o f some o f its lead ing s tra ta d ire c tly in to the camp o f Am sterdam fend the in te rn a tio n a l ot A ugus t 1914. H ow can we, the M arx is t w in g o f the movement, u n ite w ith th is sem i-M enshevik w in g (a bloc w h ich under present cond itions w ould mean a movement d irected aga inst the o ffic ia l Oom m unist m ovem ent), in o rder to “ seperate” the Com­m un is t movem ent as a w hole fro m the M ensheviks” ? H ow can a bloc w ith the R ig h t w ing “ re-estab lish mass w o rk ” , when i t is the whole ph ilosophy o f the R ig h t w in g th a t has b ro u g h t the Com m unist m ovem ent 'in to such iso la tio n fro m the

ST. LO U IS—Since the expu ls ion o f the Opposition,

the C.P. has pra u ic a lly ceased to exist in th is te r r ito ry . W ith the loss o f its best members i t no longer has any contact w ith the trade unions. Jealous o f Opposition in fluence in the trade unions the P a rty f in a lly succeeded by underhanded methods in g e tting our members expelled from them. In consequence, a l l m ilita n t L e ft w in g ele­ments have been barred fro m p a rtic ip a tio n in the unions, leav ing the Held e n tire ly in the hands o f bureaucratiifc reactionaries!. W e ll know n m ilita n ts lik e M acM illan and Goldjberg have been expelleJd becaus of these m alic ious and* senseless P a rty tactics.

Opposition Organizes UnemployedThe Com m unist O pposition wes; tihe

f ir s t in th is te r r ito ry to organize an U n­employed C ouncil w h ich led a mass demon­s tra tio n o f 1,500 on January 3rd th rough the business section of St. Lou is. The P a rty was in v ite d to p a rtic ipa te butl refused on the grounds th a t they were no t the organ­izers.

Seeing ou r success and in o rde r n o t tlo be outdone, the P a rty f in a lly organized its ow n oounc il The Opposition, know ing th e ir counc il was in fa c t no th ing b u t a name, nevertheless, sent delegates asking fo r a un ited fro n t o f a ll w o rkers aga inst unem ploym ent. T h is the P a rty n o t on ly refused bu t th re w ou r delegates outt Be­cause o f th is action, the one o r tw o mem­bers whom the P a rty had succeeded in ga in ing, le ft and came over to ou r group.

Rem em bering ou r success in demon­s tra tin g , the loca l S ta lin is ts decided to a r­range a series o f dem onstrations o f tiheir own. These tu rned ou t complete fizzles, each being a b igger fa ilu re than its p re ­decessor. The P a rty speakers, instead of

masses (Chinese revo lu tion , B r it is h gener­al s tr ike , Ind ia , etc., etc.) in to opportun is t swamps from w h ich C entirsm is now try in g ineffective ly , to issue by means o f the U ltra - L e ft is t rope?

Road to R u in , N ot to V ic to ry

Such a po licy, combined as i t is w ith comrade W eisbord ’s e n tire ly fa lse estimate o f C entrism (his den ia l o f it , in fac t) is the shortest road to destruction fo r the L e ft Opposition and a disavowal o f its h is ­to r ic a l fu n c tion T h is is c lear from a ll the experiences o f the Opposition In Europe. Our road is n o t th a t o f U rbahns, P o llack and Paz who on ly d iscredited the Opposi­t io n and reduced w h a t they con tro lled to hopeless sects.

* * *

On the basis o f h is present views on a num ber o f v ita l questions, the na tiona l comm ittee has decided th a t i t cannot accept comrade W eisbord fo r m em bership in the League. A t the same tim e i t expressed

SINCE LENIN D IE D by Max Eastman,Labour P ub lish ing Company, London,1.925, 15S pages.

The fa c t th a t th is book earned the con­centra ted scorn o f the la tte r-d a y C om in te rn leadership, should im m ed ia te ly in te re s t a ll Communists su ffe ring under the deluge of “ an tl-T ro ts jky ifc t” verbiage d is tr ib u te d ife recen t years under the guise o f Lenin ism . A sp iran ts to leadership, in a l l E n g lish - speaking countries, fro m R othste in to B row der, fin d in g the th o rn y pa th o f f ig h t aga inst cap ita lism n o t so prom is ing, have tu rned w ith enthusiasm to s ling ing m ud at the Russian Opposition and its leader, com­rade T ro tsky . B u t the a u th o rity o f these slanderers o f the revo lu tion is sho rtlived . T h is book is one o f the na ils in th e ir po­l i t ic a l coffin.

Coming fresh fro m the T h irte e n th P a rty Congress o f the Russian P a rty (May, 1924) and the hys te rica l campaign lead ing up to T ro ts k y ’s res igna tion as president o f the R evo lu tionary M ilita ry Soviet in January, 1925, M ax Eastm an was the f irs t to pub lish the au then tic documents of the con troversy in E ng lish . He was in Russia d u rin g the whole developm ent o f the figh t, w itnessed the conso lida tion o f the, shady opponents

ta c k lin g the p rob lem o f unem ploym ent tu rn ­ed th e ir m eeting in to a n ti-T ro ts k y meet­ings, w h ich o f course m eant no th ing to the ra n k and file unemployed. The w orkers, d isgusted w ith such tactics, le f t and are now in ou r ranks.

A fte r tw o m onths of strenous e ffo rt the P arty , succeeded w ith the co-operation o f the Opposition, in m uste ring about 200 dem­onstra to rs fo r the Sacco-Vanzetti p ro test meeting. The S ta lin is ts , instead o f expos­in g the system w h ich burned Sacco and V anzetti, tu rned th is m eeting also in to an a n ti-T ro ts k y a ffa ir. They also decided to devote th e ir ta len ts to a strenuous a ttack on the one poor w ilte d Lovestoneite in the c ity c a llin g h im among o ther th ings a so­c ia l menace and a Sacco-Vanzetti lyncher, m uch to the amusement o f the spectators.

In sp ite o f P a rty persecution the Op­pos ition goes fo rw a rd . 'W ith the exception o f the offic ia ls, the ra n k and file members have been neutra lized. T h is has occured in sp ite o f the fa c t th a t members are ex­pelled when caught ta lk in g to O pposition sym path izers o r when found a ttend ing Op­pos ition meetings.

A case in p o in t is the recent expulsion of the secre tary o f the Y.C.L., F ra n k W a ll, one o f the m ost active o f the League mem­bers when caught by P a rty spies a ttend ing Shachtman’s lecture . He was sum m arily “ dismitesed” . I t seems th a t i t is no longer necessary to endorse the Opposition p la t­fo rm fo r expulsion, b u t expulsions are now in o rder fo r members d a ring to associate w ith “ T ro tsky is ts ” .

W h ile the P a rty goes onw ard in its path o f complete iso la tion , the Opposition grows in m em bership and in fluence among ra n k and file w orkers . The L e ft w in g m ilita n ts continue in th e ir task of c a rry in g fo rw a rd tru e Com m unist education, co-op­e ra tin g w ith a ll w orkers, and a id ing the sale o f the M ilita n t. The M ilita n t now has a la rg e r subscrip tion lis t in th is c ity than the D a lly W orke r. The sale o f K lo rk e it also is n o t sm a lle r than the sale o f the Jew ish M orn in g Fre iheiti. Consequently w ith the com ing o f the fa l l cool w eather we expect to make even b igger s trides and s t i l l m ore successes.

— H .L . GOLDBERG

the hope and desire th a t fu r th e r reflection and discussion w ou ld make i t possible fo r comrade W eisbord to find h is place as a fig h te r— and a va luab le one—in the ranks o f the Opposition. We have welcomed th is discussion and the c r it ic ism s made by comrade W eisbord, p a rt ic u la r ly because i t offered the o p p o rtu n ity fo r a recap itu la tio n o f ou r po in t o f view . A t the same tim e, the na tiona l com m ittee decided, in v iew o f W eisbord ’s closeness to the views o f the Opposition, to in v ite h is co llabo ra tion In fie lds o f w o rk con fo rm ing to h is position.

N ationa l CommitteeCom m unist League o f Am erica (O pposition)

o f Len in ism under tihe c ra fty leadership o f the "T r iu m v ira te ” . The book is va luable to us now because in i t are published the o rig in a l documents, theses, le tte rs and press a rtic les o f the period. These documents have a lready been supplemented, am plified and a thousand tim es verified in tihe w r i t ­ings o f comrade T ro ts k y and o ther leaders o f the Russian Opposition. A lso by the shamefaced confessions o f Z inoviev, K am ­enev, etc. when they were no longer o f use to S ta lin .

Eastm an w i l l be remembered fo r unsw erv­in g courage and de te rm ina tion in the face o f (Jhe so lid mass o f h o w lin g bureaucrats, to speak the tru th and prove it . He has the honor o f being one of the f ir s t to be expelled fro m the A m erican P a rty fo r sup­p o rtin g the Russian Opposition. He cer­ta in ly was the f irs t to b r in g the documents and p la tfo rm o f the Russian O pposition out o f the “ i l le g a lity ” imposed by S ta lin and in to the l ig h t o f day. — C AR L COWL

P rice : C loth, $1; paper, 50 cents. O rder th rough the M ilita n t.

OSubscribe to the M ilita n t and be sure

o f ge tting i t re g u la r ly th rough the mails.

A Reply to Comrade Weisbord