E-D-I-T-O-R-I-A-L-S1. Death of the Ke R. A, «• Neither to Mourn, nor

to Praise.2. No Exaggerations in the Socialist Call.

IN THIS ISSUE

3. Stalin "Understands and Approves."

A-R-T-I-C-L-E-S1. The New York Old Guard answers the National

Executive Committee- - - - - -by Max Delson

2. Convention of Socialist Party of Illinoisclarifies issues- ~ - - by Rudolph C. Olson

3, The Significance of the struggle be-t^voen the Yipscls and the Old Guard of

New York- - - - - -by Ernest Erbcr

4. Harry Lang and criticismsof the Soviet Union- -by Albert Goldman

per copyif bymail.

nag.fr -n'll JT?

CIRLiST

Published every month by the APPEAL PUBLISHING ASSOCIASION4452 North Hermitage Avenue, Chicago, Illinois

Vol. 1June-July, 1935No. 4

NOTES OP THE MONTH

DEATH OF THE N. R. A,NEITHER TO MOURN NOR TO PRAISE

That most of the labor leaderswere shocked almost into insens-ibility by the decision of theSupreme Court, which put a qui-etus on an already expiringbird, is a clear indication ofhow great was the reliance ofthese leaders on the NationalIndustrial Recovery Act.Willing-ly and enthusiastically they de-luded themselves into believingthat section 7a settled thewhole problem of organizing theAmerican working class, Theythought they could point to thatsection and scare the boss intorecognizing a labor union,Alas, the bosses were not soeasily scared. They are made oftougher fibre than a great manylabor leaders.

Millions of workers actuallybelieved in the N R A to the ex-tent that they were willing togo out and struggle for a rightwhich they believed the govern-ment at last recognized.Undoubt-edly, advantage could have beentaken of the situation and weneed not at all admit that sec-tion 7a was passed for the bene-fit of the working class toassert that it created a favor-able psychological impetus fororganization.

But the labor leaders lookedupon section 7a not as an AID inthe struggle to organize theworkers but as a SUBSTITUTE forthat struggle. They permittedthemselves to be enmeshed in anet of boards and elections whichkilled the spirit of the workersand actually prevented organiza-tion. The golden opportunityfor organizing the basic indus-tries of steel, rubber and auto-mobiles was not taken advantageof and that failure left organ-ized labor with only slight gainsin membership. Instead of strug-gling at the point of productionthey pleaded hat in hand beforeRoosevelt and his boards. Whata miserable spectacle!

Upon What Will Labor Leaders

Rely Now?

Than came the bolt from tb.3venerable .Judges of the SupremeCourt who did not, it seems, con-sider the embarrassing positioninto which their decision wouldhurl the valiant leaders of Aoar-icafe labor. Whatever gains weramade in the past two yoars byorganized and unorganized laborare threatened with extinction.It is true that good-hearted em-ployers solemnly announced thatthey would do nothing to inter-fere with wages and conditions

-Tiis Socialist Appeal-

of labor set by the codes bit onemight as well believe hogs thatpromise not to eat if taken be-fore food. The American Federa-tion of Labor leaders are men ofsome wisdom and they really donot believe the captains of in-dustry when they promise not toout wages and these labor leadersare therefore disturbed not onlybecause the workers might sufferbut also because the organiza-tions of which they are the lead-ers will be affected.

To state that the decisionwhich invalidated all of the NRAcodes has created a crisis fortbr American labor movement doesnet at all mean to give a belatedendorsement to the NRA and. tosuggest that the workers muststruggle to have it reenacted.ltsimply means that under the cir-cumstances it must be recognizedthat to rely on some legislativeenactment as a substitute forthe NRA to defend the standardsof labor against attack is tomake the same blunder that wasmade when faith was placed inthe NRA.

There is no course left openfor organized labor other thanthe course of struggle. Not onlycan the gains thus far made bekept intact. More can be wonthan has already been won provid-ed there is no hesitation, nocringing, no reliance upon somesaving legislation.

Absurd Indeed would it be forus to expect that an obvious les-son should be taken to heart bylabor leaders who have beentrained to look to the governmentto organize the workers. And allindications point to the factthat the Wagner Labor DisputesBill is the next piece of legis-lation which the AP of L leaders

will look to as a substitute forstruggle.

The fears of the Communist par-ty and of some other radicalgroups that the Wagner Bill isdangerous because it providesfor compulsory arbitaation areexaggerated. It is true that inso far as it provides for media-tion and arbitration after bothsides have consented, it laysthe base for interminable delaysvhtch inevitably sap the strengthof the workers. It is also truethat once having given its con-ssnt to mediation a labor unioncannot withdraw that consent.Those are very serious dangers.Nevertheless the greatest dangerinvolved in the Wagner Bill isnot in its content- but in thefact that the A. F, of L leaderswill not use it as an aid forstruggle but as a stustitute forit.

NO EXAGGERATIONS IN THESOCIALIST CALLt

I£ there is any movement thatis and must be based on objectivetruth it is tha revolutionary so-cialist movement. No one shouldbe able to question the factswhich form the foundations oftha theory and practice of thatmovement. To be a socialist pro-pagandistj lecturer or writermeans to be so scrupulous aboutfactual matters that no listeneror reader would assume to raiseany doubt about them.

There is a prevailing assump-tion that the capitalist pressis not to be relied onj that itis full of bluff and exaggerationin the ordinary news of the day;that in dealing with labor mat-ters it distorts and falsifiesthe facts. That assumption is

•Tho Socialist Appeal-

largely a coirect one and social-ists have made great capital outof the fact that a groat numberof people are inclined to doubtthe veracity of the capitalistnewspapers.

Socialist newspapers must havea reputation for veracity whichis spotless. In the last analy-sis it is the only way to gainthe confidence of the great ma-jority of people. Especiallymust revolutionary socialist pa-pers be careful not to distorterto exaggerate.

The above remarks are inducedby the fact that a report ap-peared in the Socialist Cell giv-ing the number of those partici-pating in the May 1st demonstra-tion in Chicago as five thousandThe correct number could nothave been more than two thousandat the utmost and fifteen hundredwould have been the safest esti-mate. W© do not know who isresponsible for the exaggeratednumber nor the motive of the onewho is responsible. Wo know thatthose who were present and readthe report in the Call must haveshaken their heads and consciHs-ly or unconsciously begun todoubt all the reports and all thefigures given in the Call.A verydangerous and unhealthy situa-ation I

Should the Call continue thatway then it is inevitable thatthe number of those who fromtheir own experience know thatthe Call exaggerates M&L1 increaseto an extent where its effective-ness will be greatly diminishedif not destroyed. The responsi-ble parties must be warned andif that is not sufficient must"be eliminated.

laovBonent can be imagined tha::,the absurd idea that one has t2color the news in order to gener-ate enthusiasm; that one shouldnot report the exact truth be-cause our weakness would the"!become public. Our movement isweak it is true but that weaknesscannot be glossed over and con-cealed by exaggerations; it canbe eradicated only by correctpolicies and one of those correctpolicies is to cling closely tothe truth and not create illu-sions of strength.

It would seam that the attitudeof intelligent revolutionists tothe Stalinist press should detevany socialist reporter or editorfrom following the path of thocommunists. The confused and be-wildered communists actually ad-mit that the Daily Worker lies,but excuse the lies on the ridi-culous theory that it does noharm and one has to fool themasses. That tho communists haveraised exaggeration and bluff toa system is to be expected. Anymovement that is based on prin-ciples that cannot stand the testof critical examination is boundto rely on untruths.

A revolutionary socialist papersuch as the Call must championthe truth as no other paper. Itjoust be accepted as axiomaticthat every factual statement inthe Call can be relied on and ifsome mistake does creep in itwill be immediately corrected ifit is found out. Only in such away can the Gall gain the confi-dence of the membership of the?party and of the working classin general.

STALIN "UNDERSTANDS AND APPROVES"

Nothing more dangerous to ourPierre Laval, representing

•Tho Socialist Appeal-

French imperialism visited Mos-cow, there to have a friendlychat with Joseph Stalin, "firstdisciple of Lenin and the belov-ed leader of the world proletar-iat".

Now there is nothing that iswrong for the revolutionary lead-er of a revolutionary country tomeet and discuss matters with arepresentative of a country thegovernment of which protects itscapitalist masters in their ex-ploitation of tens of millionsof colonial slaves and is everready to suppress with blood andIron any attempt of the workingclass to better its conditions.So long as there is only onecountry where the proletariat isthe ruling class so long willthere be the necessity for thatcountry to come to agreementswith capitalist countries.

Certainly, there is nothingwrong for the Soviet Union to ob-tain tfoe help of one imperialistoountr-y against another imperial1st power and thus utilize forIts benefit the antagonisms ex-Istiivg between various capitalistuaticms, Ijti doing so however therevolutionary working class ofthe world must not be confused-md. led to believe that an Im-perialist government has overni'ght become the friend and sup-porter of a working class gov-GTnment. Great care must be tak-3n lest it appear that the Sovi-et Union places its stamp of ap-proval upon the acts of anyImperialist government and thusweaken the struggle of the work-ing class against that govern-ment.

It may be necessary at times,for diplomatic purposes, for theone representing the Soviet Uni-on to leave many things unsaid

and even to say things which arcnothing but diplsmatic evasions.In suoh a case the revolutionaryparty or international must cotnoout with a statement of the wholetruth which would leave no doubt-as to the true nature of thesituation. If the CoOTunist la-ter national were £n truth a rev-olutionary international and nota pawn in the hands of S«vio-iforeign policy the difficultproblems which are a necessar-T-result of the existence of oneproletarian country lia a capita-l1st world could be solved inpractice.

Under no circumstances howeveris it necessary or permissiblefor one who assumes to be and isactually the leader of the SovietUnion and the Communist Interna-tional to issue a statement whichcan have but one interpretation,and that is that capitalistFrance is .justified in her "na-tional defense policy". Thatgoes way beyond what any diplo-matic representative of the Sov-iet Union has the right to say,let alone a representative of asupposedly revolutionary interna-tional. A statement of suoh anature can in the very least ore-ate tremendous confusion and atthe worst lay the foundation forsocial chauvinism and defense ofone's "fatherland".

It is Interesting to note thedifference in the texts of thestatement given out by Stalinand Laval as published in theNew York Times and In the DailyWorker. The former had the fol-lowing clause In the statement:"Above all the duty falls uponthem (Prance and Soviet Russia)In the interest and maintenanceof peace, not to allow the meansof their national defense toweaken in any sense. la this re-

-The Socialist Appeal-

gard, M» Stalin understands andfully approves the national de-fense policy of Prance in keepingher armed forces at a level re-quired for security". The DailyWorker had the following version;"it is precisely in the interestof the maintenance of peace thatthese states are bound in thefirst place in no way to weakentheir state of defense which inFrance is maintained by armedforces on a level correspondingwith her need of security." Eventhe latter version is bad enoughbut the fact that "Stalin under-stands and fully approves" isdiplomatically omitted is veryinteresting. Thus "consciencedoth make cowards of us all."

Only a simpleton would hesitateto choose the text given in theNew York Times as the correct one.

It would be absolutely wrongto jump to the conclusion that 9because of the statement issuedby Stalin, the French Comtaunistparty will immediately cease itsstruggle against the militariza-tion of French youth and againstFrench armaments. It may be thatin self-defense the French partyfir the time being will intensifyits struggle against the Lavalprogram of huge armaments. Anyattempt by the Communist partyof France to act in accordancewith Stalin's statement at thepresent moment and come out infavor of the program of theFrench capitalist class wouldmean the death of that party inshort order. Not even the con-fused and bewildered members ofthe party would tolerate such asudden betrayal.

At the present period Stalin-ism cannot afford openly to drawlogical conclusions from its the-ories and statements. The re-

sult is an apparent contradicticr.between what Stalin says ur iwhat the Communist parties o:..but this contradiction ca^rclast very long. Opportunism irtheory inevitably leads to *.>.•same in practice and we can pre-dict with assurance that in e.1".probability the Communist part;of France will find some way ata critical moment to justify,forthe sake of the "struggle againstHitler and for the defense ofthe Soviet Union", support ofthe French bourgeoisie. Mean-while confusion becomes worseconfounded.Revolutionary Socialists, not

tied to the mental apron-stringsof Stalinism, can think and seeclearly in the matter of the re-lationship of Soviet Russia tothe capitalist world. It is notin principle wrong fir the SovietUaion to enter the League of Na-tions or to make a military alli-ance with a capitalist country,but it must be recognized thatsuch an act is a result of theweakening of the natural ally ofthe Soviet Union,the revolution-ary proletariat, and the conse-quent weakening of the SovietUnion. Revolutionary Socialistswill under no circumstances ceasetheir struggle against their owncapitalist governments even thoit may happen that their govern-ment might be an ally of the So-viet Union in some war. The ac-tions of revolutionary Socialistswill be determined by their pro-found conviction that for tbsSoviet Union to lean upon agree-ments with capitalist countriesis to lean upon a broken reed a.u3that only the revolutionary pro-letariat can in the long runsave the Soviet Union*

Quite interesting is the factthat the right wing socialistsare praising Stalin for his "re-

•The Socialist Appeal-

allsm" in making an alliancewith Prance and blaming him onlyfor not entering into a similaralliance with them. They spoofat Trotsky's "revolutionary ro-manticism'' in insisting that onlythe forces of the world revolu-tion are the basic forces forsafeguarding the existence of the

Soviet Union. Interesting andinstructive. Making allianceswith bourgeois governments issomething that rightwing Socialists are adept at.

Stalin raay understand and ap-prove. Also the right wing so-cial democrats. But not therevolutionary Marxists,

THE NEW YORK OLD GUARD ANSWERS THE

NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

By Max Daison.

At the Buffalo meeting of theNational Executive Coismittee theleft wing ©f the New York partypresented a bill of grievancesagainst the New York State or-ganization and against Local NewYark. The charges were made andevidence was submitted to provethese charges to the effect thatthe State and Local organizationsviolated the national constitu-tion, made moves towards seces-sion from the national party andsuppressed democratic procedurein Local New York,

The New York State organiza-tion refused to rebut the proofsubmitted.

In spite of the defiant atti-tude of the New York State Or-ganization, the N.E.C* adopted acompromise resolution embodying_ilne points. These nine points\rere ably analyzed In the Mayissue of the "Socialist Appeal.*The N.E.C. required substantialcompliance within a six week per-iod, not merely a verbal reply.pur ing the s ix weeks per1od. theIf.Y« State commit tee did nothing

to carry out the directions ofthe N.E.C. At the end of the six'week period the State Committeesubmitted a written reply to th©N. E. C.

Does this answer indicate achange of heart on the part ofthe State Committee? Is thereany recognition in this replythat the See ialist Party In NewYork State and its most import-ant local have violated basicSocialist ethics? Clearly not.It is written in the spirit ofone who has been seriously ag-grieved and is still defiant. Inits reply the NY State Conaaitteefirst administers a spanking tothe N.E.C. It attempts to givethe N.E.C. a lesson in constitu-tional law,It accuses the N.E.C.of having perpetrated the follow-ing crimes•1. Creating distrust and dis-respect in the party.2. Violating the National andState Constitution,3. Characterizing the StateOesaaittee as a group.4* Encouraging guerflla warfareIn the party and building of a

-The Sc-oialist Appeal-

dual organization.6, Unfair treatment to NcwYorkState.6. Discourtesy to N. Y. State,7, Encouraging disunity in thoparty,

After having outlined its sev-en points against the N.E.C. thestate committee then proceeds toanswer the nine points,

The State committee promisesto comply' with point "l" callingfor "the adherence to resolutionsof the N.E.C. providing for theIneligibility of advocates ofcommunism and violence in thoparty,"

The N.E.C. has failed to de-fine communism. The State com-mittee has its own views on whatcommunism means. It has charac-terized the Declaration of Prin-ciples as a coiamunist do.cument.Those who support the Declarationof Principles are therefore com-munists . It follows that membersof tho S.P, who favor the Decla-ration are subject to expulsion.Those who seek to enter the par-ty because they believe in thoDeclaration of Principles are to-eligible « Is there any reasonwhy the State Committee shouldnot hasten to assure the N.E.C*that point one will be rigorous-ly adhered to by the N.Y. Stateorganization?

Tho grievance committee andmembership coamittee will be keptworking overtime, while this her-esy-hunting proceeds at an ac-celerated rate.

The State committee sustainedthe Buffalo Revolutionary PolicyCommittee expulsions after thoN.JSJJ . j.'Uled that it was opp osed

" ol;I 'ye~di s c I pi 3. nary "mea-"

with the R »P . G .

Anything to rid the party c fmembers who are In disagreementwith th© Old Guard!

On point "2", retraction of itsropudi ation of the Declaration <tPrinciples,, the state commlttsogenorously concedes that thoDeclaration of Principles was le-gally adopted but insists on Itsright to point out that it con-stitutes a repudiation .of Soci-alist -ii'ingi

sures.merely for

On point "3" "that the local,State and National constitutionsbo rigidly enforced", here thoState committee registers right-eous and outraged indignation.The State Coiamittee definitelydenies that it Is violating theparty constitution. At the sametime it demands that the NEC com-ply with tho party constitution.Not a word about its violationsof tho National constitution inrespect te tho position the Statecommittee took on the DetroitDeclaration or on its refusal toa.drrdt members of the YPSLjno at-tempt to justify its flagrantdisregard of the State Constitu-tion with respect to a referend-um which it initiated to changethe state constitution! no ex-planation of the amendments whichwere submitted, which virtuallytakes control of the party outof the hands of the membershipof the party and places it inthe control of the enrolled so-cialist voters; no explanationof why local New York was notdisciplined for failing to calla membership meeting duly re-quested in accordance with thoby-laws of local New York! Allthese flagrant violations theState committee conveniently cov-ers with its righteous indigna -tion I

8 •The Socialist Appeal-

On point "4" the State commit-tee makes a tremendous concessionby offering to negotiate withthe N.E.C. It clearly does notcomply with this point which ex-pressly requires the State com-mittee to rescind the resolutionwhich forbids locals from accept-ing to membership members of theY P S L who are qualified withinthe National constitution andthe resolution of the N.E.C. TheState committee in a legalisticargument seeks to pervert theclear direction of the constitu-tion relating to the admissionof members of the YPSL Into theparty. And meanwhile the Statecommittee pretends to registerindignation at the suggestionthat it has wilfully and delib-erately violated the party con-stitution.

In reply to psint "5" the Statecommittee contends "the state ofNew Ysrk has always insisted thatproper party ethics be maintainedin discussion of party members,or on the criticism of party of-ficials, its committees »..,etc.The answer continues, "We hopethat in the future the N.E.G.will not perrait statements at-tacking the integrity of theparty to be made part of your of-ficial record." It oesaalutosthis point by stating that point"5" is too vague to be adopted.The State committee has coDjilete-ly ignored or forgotten the at-tacks made by its State Chairmanin the capitalist press on theparty and leading members of theparty. The New York Times andother capitalist papers are re-plete with Interviews and re-leases by Louis Waldman and otheradherents of the Old Guard. Thecommittee also makes no mentionof James Oneal's scurrilous pam-phlet "Pages from Party History"cr of Oneal's bitter and unfound-

ed slander about party comradesin Indiana, It should be notedthat one of the main reasons whythe capitalist press is resorted,to is because it is part of thobitter campaign to mobilize pub-lie sentiment against the party.The State committee goes merrilyon its way, continuing to vio-late not only its own decisions,but the decisions of the NECwhenever it suits its require-ments.

The State committee slides overpoint "6" which requires that theLocal and State committee of NawYork shall promptly dispose ofall questions of membership andorganization, etc., in dispute,in a democratic and constitution-al manner. In its reply it doesnot mention the fact that a billof particulars was submitted toNew York State Executive Commit-tee and the N Y State committeecovering the whole question ofLocal New York, The N. Y. Statecommittee does not function in avacuum. Most of the leading mem-bers of this committee have actu-ally participated in th© acts ofwhich we complain. The Statecommittee knows that this was arequest of the NEC that the il-legal and undemocratic acts per-petrated in Local N Y be recti-fied.

As to point "7"j One of themost outrageous acts ever com-mitted in the socialist movementwas the forcible ejection, with-out notice, of the YPSL in LocalN Y from, its headquarters in theRand School. The YPSL refusedto bo tools in the hands of theOld Guard,and insisted upon act-ing as comrades loyal to the So-cialist party of the U SA. Lo-cal NY in its blind resentmentdrove then out of their headquar-ters, Evon today local N Y is

-The Socialist Appeal-

seeking to starve the YPSL intosubmission by depriving them offunds. A dual organization,called the Young Socialist Alli-ance, has been set up by localN Y and is receiving funds whichrightfully belong to the YPSL.Here again in answering thispoint the hypocrisy of the Statecommittee's answer is obvious.Everybody knows that the YPSL ©J?ganization in New York has beenthe mainstay of the party organ-isation. It was in the forefrontof every, struggle and clearlywas the mdst disciplined sectionof the Socialist movement, yetfor purely factional purposes,the YPSL was thrown out. TheState committee in its reply iscondoning the outrageous actionof local New York.

As to point "8": The NEC di-rected the N©w Leader to restoreits former constitution said ceaseto be a factional organ. It iscommonplace knowledge that theNew Leader is a creature of theState committee and of Local N Yand it is of course the officialorgan of N Y State. In reply tothis point the state committeedenies that it has jurisdictionover the New Leader Association,This is of course absolutelyfalse even legalistically, sincethe committee could withdraw theofficial standing of the paperif it refused to abide by thocommittee's decisions. The realreason for the committee's atti-tude is made clear by its openapproval of the actions of theNew Loader association and theantiparty position taken by theNew Leader on matters now troub-ling the party. It has the ef-frontery to deny that the NewLeader is a factional organ. Itinsists that the policies of theLeader are those of the Social-ist party, accepting social demo-

cracy as its foundation. He;.".again, by implication,, it attackthe Declaration of Principles..

Point "9",requesting that botrlocal NY and the State committeeshall report such progress vr-.has been made in accompli shir,/the purposes thereof, etc., :• •'.•answered as follows: The StaUcommittee indicates that it hr*scomplied by serving its replvwithin the six week pwriod, butdenies that the NEC has any au-thority to request local N Y t,-.reply to the NEC committee ar.dinsists that all communi cat ions.be made through the State secre-tary. The State committee goeson to state that the left wir^in New York was responsible forthe failure of the harmony com-mittee" which was elected by theexecutive committee of Local NY,I was a member of this so-callec."harmony" coasaittee whose func-tion was to work ou*t a plan foi7reorganization and action far-local N Y. It was clearly .under-stood that theoretical questionswere not to be considered by thS scommittee. However the majorityof this harmony committee, con-sisting of old guard members, insisted on raising theoreticalquestions.Practically all of thetime of this committee, contraryto the expressed desire of JackAltman and myself, was consumedin the discussion of theoreticalquestions. The left wing noiaborsof this committee did not seek toimpose any of their views on thiscommittee or on local N Y. Thiscommittee failed because the oldguard deliberately Injected issuesrob within its purview,upon whichthey know agreement was ImpossibleIn order to prevent the likli-of harmony.

Not only is the reply of thoState committee inadequate but in

10 -The Socialist Appeal-

addition thereto it does not givetie slightest inkling that in thefuture it will act differentlythan it has in the past. Onceagain the whole controversy isthrown into the lap of the NEC.The issues herein involved trans-cend state lines, in spite ofLouis Waldman's desire to resur-rect the pre-civll war shibbolethof the theory of states' rights.If the S P is to survive it mustbe considered as an entity andnot as 48 separate parties.

Are the issues involved in thiscontroversy local in character?•"irtalnly not i While the New York^tate committee urges the theory)f states' rights, it is busily.t workmaking alliances with oth«

(3r local and state organizations.3y those very actions they ha otaken this contraversy outside of'.'.sew York State.

What is Involved here is notmerely a factional struggle be-tween two opposing groups in NewYork. The problem is more funda-mental.

At the Detroit convention theOld Guard lost the ideologicaland organizational control of theparty. I am convinced that theyare more concerned with the lossof the organization than theirthooretical leadership. BeforeDetroit this group dominated thepartyjsinc© Detroit Its prestigeinfluence and power have waned.The leaders of the Old Guardhave important economic stakes,directly or indirectly, in th©socialist movement. Most of themre on th© payroll of party In-stitutions ©r have positions inffiliated fraternal organiza-ions and the trade union move-.ent. After Detroit they areleft with only one stronghold,New York. Loss of the New York

state organization and of local*N Y would have been the crushingblow to them. Only with this ii.mind can we understand the braz-enly dictatorial and antisocial-1st methods and tactics whichthey have employed in order tomaintain power in New York.Char-ters of left wing branches havebeen revoked, members of theYPSL have not bean admitted Intothe party, factional brancheshave been set up,and many appli-cants have been denied admissioninto the S P - all in the nameof fighting "ccramunism" -but allwith the real aim of retainingpower.

TJu> thooretical problems raisedby th@ Old Guard in relation tothe Declaration of Principles,and the cry of oommuni.sm, arefalse issues injected into thiscontroversy fe1 the prime purposeof otesoisring the real" pm» pose ofthe Old Guard to recapture organ-izational control of the S P andto maintain their present stran-gle hold on party institutions.

Julius Gerber is one of the OldGuard leadei-s. He is consideredon© of ths ir most Importantstrategists. Some time ago, hecharacterized the struggle nowgoing on in the S. P, as war andstated that any tactics are fairin war. Th©y are using just suchtactics.

Is there any, possibility ofreconciling .the differences thatnow exist in the party? la itpossible to isolate some extrem-ists such as Louis Waltoan fromthe rest of the leadership ofthe Old Guard? The Old Guard isitself answering these questionsin the negative. Louis Waldmanis their accepted leader. Not asingle one of his actions orwords has ever been repudiated

•The Socialist Appeal-

by the Old Guard and all his oth-er utterances are featured inthe New Leader.

James Oneal in a recent issueof the Leader definitely statedthat a split in the party is in-evitable and that if it does nottake place now, it will occur atthe 1936 convention.

A split in 1936 will be disas-trous. The Old Guard are pre-paring for just such an eventual-ity. Either they will regaincontrol of the organization orthey will smash or split the par-ty. If they regain control ofthe organization they will pro-ceed to wholesale expulsion ofthose who are opposed to theirpolicies, A continuation of thepresent policy ©f inaction onthe part of the NEC between nowand the next convention willspell disaster and disintegrationof the S. P. A split can be a-verted but only if the .NEC exer-

cises its athority. TJaa act?, c'"commission of tho Old Guard; 54. oflagrant disregard of party rc^lations and party principles aiu.its resort to unsoaialist con-duct must be remedied by the NFCThis can be accomplished in on];/one way - the revocation of theNow York State charter.

Although some members r*»-rleave, they will be in a verysmall minority and will afforo.us an opportunity of buildinga real socialist party in thi..country. It will also clear th'-party of deadening influence o-Tpeople who refuse to do social-ist work, but at the same timeprevent others from building aparty. There are tremendousopportunities before us, W© mustutilize them in the fight forsocialism* The N E C is chargedwith a grave responsibility. Ifthe NEC fails to act now, the OldGuard may destroy itself, but inso doing they will also destroythe Socialist party.

CONVENTION OP SOCIALIST PARTY OP

ILLINOIS CLARIFIES ISSUES

By Rudolph C, Olson.

Neither the number of delegatesnor the number of branches rep-resented by the delegates at theconvention of th© S. P. of theState of Illinois, held in Deca-tur,would justify any feeling ofgreat exultation as to thestrength and activity of fclieparty in this state. The partyof Illinois, in the same way asthe party all over the country,and the revolutionary movementin general is not making the pro-

gress that it should and that wewould liko to have it make,, T&edelegates present did not foolthemselves into thinking thatsatisfactory progress had beenmade in the last year but wereanxious to lay plans to stimulatethe growth and influence of theparty in the coming year.

Meeting at a time when severalhundred members of the Interna-tional Ladies Garment Workers

12 •The Socialist Appeal-

were waging a bitter struggle forthe recognition of their unionagainst a wealthy and obstinateemployer of Decatur who had thefull support of the city andstate government, the necessityof strengthening our party bymaking it a party of revolution-ary workers participating in andguiding the struggles of theworking class was clearly evi-dent to a majority of the dele-gates. When one delegate whosepresence in the Socialist partyis on© of the mysteries cf exist-once insisted that the party payspecial attention to work in thechurches, comrade John Fisher, aminer of Glllespie, effectivelyridiculed the whole idea and thedelegates passed a resolution toconcentrate on the trade unions.

That a majority of the dele-gates had their ®yes turned tothe left and were anxious tor.ake of the Socialist party arevolutionary Instrument to leadthe working masses in victoriousstruggle against the capitalistsystem was evident from the fightthat was waged on the floor in-volving the resolution on partypress and the resolution dealingwith unity and discipline.

The latter resolution mentionedno names but it was clearly un-derstood by everybody that it re-ferred to the situation in NewYork State where the old Guardfeels that it can defy the N.E.Cand the whole party, TJaose whospoke for or Against the resolu-tion correctly assumed that Itwas aimed at the New York OldGuard. The resolution statedthat the constitution and Declar-ation of Principles, having beendopted by a referendum of the>arty membership after a thor-ough discussion, are not doou-uents that can be scorned at

will, She resolution went on tosay that it was the duty of theNational Executive Coiumittee toenforce discipline and deploredthe hesitation and Indecision ofthe N.E.C. in its duty to compelobedience to the constitutionand Declaration of PrinoiplQS.ltwas clear from the temper of themajority of the delegates thatthey insisted that the N.E.C.take Eiore definite and drasticaction to clear up the New Yorksituation. The delegates werevery well aware of the fact thatthe actions of the New York OldGuard were hampering the activi-ties of the party throughout thecountry and that either disci-pline would be enforced or theparty would be paralyzed.

When the press committee brotin a rasolution making the Wis-consin Leader the official organ®f Illinois a substitute reselu-tion making both the Leader andthe Socialist Call official or-gans was Introduced and passed.Because the new Socialist CaXlwas the only left wing weekly inthe country, the majority of thedelegates would not permit it tobo ignored.Another resolution which indi-

cated the leftward tendency ofthe convention aad which Indirect-ly hit the reactionary attitud©of the New York Old Guard wasthe one approving the action ofthe N.E.C.in welcoming unattach-ed radicals and members of smallrevolutionary groups into theSocialist party. The Illinoisparty is open to all who sincere-ly want to build the party andespecially welcomes those who be-cause of their independent revo-lutionary attitude find no placein the Communist party.

One of the most important res-olutions that was passed and one

•The Socialist Appeal-

which will undoubtedly anger thatstaunch "Marxist", Oneal, is theone dealing with inner party de-mocracy. The N.E.C. of the partyat its last session in Buffalopassed a resolution dealing withmembers of the Revolutionary Itol-icy Publishing Association,whichintentionally cr not was so word-ed as to subject any member whobelieved in the necessity of theviolent overthrow of the capital-ist class to expulsion from theparty. On the strength of thewording of that unfortunate reso-lution the Old Guard of Naw Yorkfelt that they could expel everymember of the party who did notbelieve that socialism could beintroduced by worshiping at theshrine of bourgeois democracy.The delegates at the convention,while declaring their oppositionto those who would endanger thelegal existence of the party byinserting advocacy of violencein an official program or docu-ment forcefully insisted uponthe right of every party memberto propagate his views withinthe party. The resolution clear-ly stated;

"la order to keep the member-ship of the party and the work-ers in general acquainted withall sides of the controversy &in order to guard the right ofevery member of the Socialistparty to freedom of expressionon such a vital problem we de-clare that there should be no1 limitation on tha vlgfct of aparty member to discuss in thesocialist press and at partymeetings the question of theroad to power which includesthe question of the violentoverthrow of the capitalistsystem."

The N.E.C. was urged to clari-fy the resolution passed at its

meeting held at Buffalo so tlv:.'there could be no misinterpre* '••tion.

No question was more realiststaUy dealt with than the quest:? cof a Labor party. In a shot:and clear-cut resolution the fur,damental propositions were lai-rdown that a Labor party must b';based upon organized labor anithat it is the duty of the Socialist party to carry on a system-atic campaign in favor of th*.-formation of such a party becaus.:a Labor party would be a step i.~the direction of mobilizing tb',*workers for the abolition of cap-italism. Th® resolution was ad-opted unanimously.

The inevitable united fror>question was disposed of Inshort order. A representative ofthe Couanunist party was giver,the floor for ten minutes andnaturally made so many misstate-ments that it became difficultfor those who were in favor ofconsidering the Communist partyproposals for a united front toInsist upon such consideration.The whole matter was tabled butit can be correctly stated thatuhe majority of the delegatesVoted to table not because theywere opposed to the united frontwith the coiqmunists on principlebut because they felt that at thepresent time a united front onvague general issues would dothe revolutionary movement nogreat good. The delegates whoread the Daily Worker must havehad an astounded look on theirfaces when they read that theCommunist party representativewas given a "tremendous ovation"after he completed his speech.Communism and truth are not ex-actly bedfellows.

As good as were the resolutions

14 •The Socialist Appeal-

that were passed the delegatesrealized that a revolutionaryparty cannot tee built on resolu-tions only but that on the basis

of those resolutions the partyraust be stirred into activity sothat it will become a vital faotor in the labor movement.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE YIPSELS

AND THE OLD GUARD IN NEW YORK

(A Letter to th© New York Yipsels)

Dear Comrades;

The New York comrades are no.doubt anxious to know how th©rest of the country reacts tothe fight they are carrying on.Wide-spread approavl or disap-proval in the country at largewill greatly effect their outlookand also their spirit, I do notknow how many other midwest Yip-sals' opinions I am voicing, butI imagine that a considerablenumber of the comrades who knowwhat the issues at stake are,will probably agree with my view*Particularly, will those agreewho are politically developed tothe degree of seeing the connec-tion between the present fightand the future development ofthe party and consequently thewhole future complexion of th©American labor movement.

I was prompted to write thisletter because of the attitudeof a minority on the YPSL Nsfcion-al Executive Committee and itsdifferences with the majority onthe inner party situation, whichthrew into bold relief a schoolof thought in the party that wellnerits examination. The factthat a number of NEC jaemberswanted to sit as judges in th©

affair between the Old Guard CityExecutive Committee and the NYCYPSL suid decide on the technical-ities of the case, as to who hada greater amount of right ontheir side,greatly surprised theNsw York Yipsels who had lookedto their NEC for full and unre-served support.

Yet the position of McDowelland the rest of the minority hasa deeper basis than a mere at-tempt to b© above factions anddecide only on the evidence andthe law without regard for theconsequences,I believe the basicconception which divides McDow-ell and the New York Yipsels isthe difference of opinion on thequestion of whether a split withthe Old Guard is Inevitable ornot.

If one accepts the positionthat a split is inevitable, on©adopts such tactics as will puton® in a favorable position fora split. One fights uncompromis-ingly, knowing that compromisecan only be temporary and mighthave a demoralizing effect onone's forces. One attempts tomaneuver one's enemy into a posi-tion where he will have to taketh© overt step in the direction

•The Socialist Appeal-1

of a split (and consequently,thoblame) or will have to retreatthus weakening his prestige andfollowing. Whether the Now YorkYipsels have consciously heldthis conception, I do not know.They have done a creditablepiece of work in carrying it outin practice.

If one believes that a splitis.not inevitable, one then actsin a manner to avoid it almostat any cost. Tho most outstand-ing tactic is then compromise,Oae scolds both sides and enumer-ates the violations of ethicsand law by both camps. One seeksout every unwise move to showthat both sides are equally ir-responsible,

The compromisers make a greatfetish of technicalities. Theywrite bewildering theses to showthe logic of their position,bal-ancing the authority of the N YSEC against that of the YPSL NEC,the meaning of the simple Englishword "support" against the pos-sible meanings the S P NEC siighthave had, and the authority oftheir logic against each and allwho base their reasoning on afactional position instead oflaw.

Those who accept the inevita-bility of a split do not, norshould they,base their argumentson the simple fact that they con-sider the political position forwhich their side stands as beingcorrect. Their arguments mustbe based on overy ruling andprecedent in their favor. Theydo not, however, deceive them-selves by thinking that theirposition is the .result of a studyof all the legal and ethicalquestions involved. Rather theyunderstand that all their legaland ethical arguments are used

to support a position already ar-rived at by the logic of the f £.? <tional fight.

One cannot justify the posi-tion that a split is inevitabl.on a short-sighted view of theday-by-day developments only,For this, one must look backward"and forwards also. It is there•fore necessary to review verybriefly the past of the contend-ing groups. On the surface th.most obvious feature In the figlris tho (difference between th ,average ag© of the Militants ar,.:'.the Old Guard, This line-rap c:.?tho basis of age (realizing, o.fcourse, the many exceptions onboth sides) cannot be explainedsimply by the rashness of youthand the conservatism of age. Itrather bespeaks a peculiar his-torical development of th© Soci-alist party.

Whan the split of 1919 resultedin about 80$ of the membershipof the party going ©ver to thoCommunist party or dropping outbecause of the inner-party fighfcthe Palmer raids,and the attrac-tions of high wages, it left theSocialist party strength concen-trated in a few spots like Mil-waukee, Reading, and New YorkCity, due in the first two oasesto Socialist influence in muni-cipal politics,and due to influ-ence in the local trade unionmovement and the Daily Forwardin the latter. The Communistsplit had carried off most of theyounger party members and almostthe whole youth movement, Thaparty control was left in thehands of men already set intheir opinions and constitutinga right wing theoretically. Theyears that followed saw the In-fluence of th© party narrow evenmore to lust the above-mentionedcenters (and,of course, the more

16 -The Socialist Appeal-

or less s-cable foreign federa-tions). These years of capital-ist prosperity and general work-ingclass aloofness from radical-ism made the Old Guard feel morecorrect than ever for having re-sisted the Coranunists when theywere prophesying the Social Rev-olution in 1919.

With the crisis lowering liv-ing standards and bringing onunemployment,the Socialist partyentered a new period of develop-ment »Ta the Old Guard the crisisueant a justification in theirfaith that capitalism would breakdown. NQW was the time to buildup the Socialist party they hadnursed during the Coolidge boomdays, into a strong politicalmass movement t© capture politi-cal power. Theoretically, theiroutlook remained the same.* Theirnumbers were reinforced all overthe country by other Old Guard-ists who had dropped out andwere now coming back into theparty. The party experienced arevival. And for the first timein years, large numbers of youngpeople forced into action by thedepression came into the party.Well I remember the first branchmeeting I attended in 1932, Outof some 40 present, hardly morethan 3 were under 30 years ofage;the rest averaged around 50.Due to the youth being carriedoff by th© Communist aplit andthe years of inactivity, therehad developed a situation wherea whole generation was missingin the party.

The younger people joining from1929 on, were seeking a way outof an economic calamity. Theywanted action and more action.The Old Guard, still moving bythe inertia of the years before1929, looked upon them as nov-ices who lacked both knowledge

and experience* Almost all ofthe first differences bet-wesnthe Old Guard and the Militantswere on questions of practicalactivity. Here in Chicago, tfcoOld Guard was not charged withbeing reformist, but rather withbeing inefficient in administer-ing the County office. Oa theo-retical questions there was lit-tle occasion for difference ofopinion until the Detroit Decla-ration of Principles.

Of great importance 3s the factthat the philosophy of the OldGuard has not changed since theHlllquit group broke away fromth® Socialist Labor party morathan 35 years ago. If anything,they have shifted to the right.Th@y ar@ firmly convinced thatthey were correct in every majorquestion in th© past and are ccs?krect now. They built the partyand their policies preserved theparty. Any newcomer is not worthrefuting, he is only to be toldhis place.

The Militants joined the partylooking to it as th© best meansto find a way out for depression-ridden America. They rebelledagainst Old Guard control be-cause of lack of activity. How-ever, they sooner or later devel-oped politically to the degreewhere they saw the Old Guerd'sattitude on activity linked upwith the Old Guard's conception©f th© road to power. Consequent-ly, the point of emphasis In thefight, particularly in Now Y«rk,where the Militants have notdisplaced the Old Guard and muststill fight them ideologically,shifted ever more to th© deeperpolitical questions involved. laChicago, where the Militant vic-tory in 1932 was a oemparativelyeasy one, the Militants are cor-respondingly less developed

•Tile Socialist Appeal-

theoretically.

If the situation were as inthe years from the split of 1919to around 1924, it would bo muchsimpler. Young people going; tothe left during this period,wentto the communists dither directlyor after a short stay in theSocialist party* The extremedifference of political question^the one party composed of elder-ly men pre'aching a theory ofgrowing into socialism, the oth-er party with much youthful ener-gy preaching revolution and hav-ing all the attendant romanticglamor, presented an easy choiceand youth usually chose the lat-ter.

Todayt However, the situationis different* Tho tactics of theCcaaaunists, the falsehoods intheir press more than anythingelse, repulsed large numbers ofintelligent youth^The depressiondrove them to tine left. Th© C»ia-munist tactics drove them away,Wharo were they to go? Th« Soci-alist party was not acceptedbecause they agreed with it, butas a political necessity. Notonly did they join the S P, butthey stayed, despite, or perhapsbecause of, the bellowing of theC P. The essential fact is thatthese young people were drivenin the direction of a revolution-ary party by the objective fact-ors but entered a party ofreformism as the leaser of twoevils,

Such elements in the midst ofa party of reformism had not theopportunity for a rapid educa-tion in revolutionary Marxism,They groped about 3n unbelievableconfusion in looking for theor-ies to stand on that were neith-er those of the Old Guard nor ofthe C. P* Due to their sectarian

isolation,the minority communistgroups never even reached then'.The effect of the MacDonald be-trayal was great, only to "feepushed aside by the greater les-sons of the German catastrophe.The great inspiration and lessonsof the Austrian Civil War shockthem to their depths. Here werspractical answers to theoreticalquestions they were ponderingover. The political education ofthe Militants has begun. It canend only with an understandingof Revolutionary Marxism,

These ©vents did not stir theOld Guard, with the exception ofthe sentimental feelings arousedby the Austrian events, Wkyshould it stir them? Th»y hadalways &®en correct. Theseevents are occurring in Europe.America is different. Nor willfuttLrs events in Europe movethem. And events in Amorica willmove them as it did their Germancounterparts,in the direction ofdefeat.

Th& fact of the Militants mod rigto the left continually and thoOld Guard remaining stable isthe cause of the irreconcilabil-ity of the conflict. As the Mil-itants develop arid Understandmore clearly the necessity for arevolutionary Socialist party,understand it because the studyof theory and daily practicajlesaons t-each it as both teachthe Bankruptcy of the C, P.* th~chasm between them and the 01 c.Guard widens. The iiupendir;:/class wars in Prance, if the./occur in the near future,are go--ing to have a tremendous effecton this tendency.

The conflict between the twogroups is decisive. Tho progressof the struggle can only deepenand widen the gap. Once one un-

18 -The Socialist Appeal-

derstands this, as 1 believe theNew York Yips-els do, one lookswith grave distrust at any at-tempt to compromise. McDowelldoes not believe a split inevit-able.' He thinks a compromisepossible, e He cannot support theOld Guard. To support the Mili-tants makes a split more prob-able. Therefore an attitude of"A plague on both your houses I"

I can r-ea'dily see how the New,York Yipsels who were expectingsupport from their N E C without"ifs", "ands " and "buts", lookedupon th« attitude of scoldingboth sides -and trying to build a"logical"' position in the middleon the basis- of technicalities.

Should the -NYC YPSL be canon-ized? If this is accomplishedby declaring that they acted inaccord with "socialist law andethics", then yes. But let usnot canonize them because theyacted in accordance with "sooial-ist law and ethics". Let us can-onize them because upon the suc-cess of the fight against the OldGuard hinges the future of theparty. Is this factionalism?Yes 1 Just as every decision- ofthe S P NEC is made with its ef-fect on the factional fight inmind. As every decision of theN Y SEC and NYC CEC is made withits effect on the factionalfight in mind. Just 'as the ac-tions of the N Y C YPSL EC woremade with their effect on thefactional fight in mind.

If a split is inevxuable,. J,,(\o:?---can be no retreat,, A r<=> L;rs<-"•brings on demoralization, .3cauje of this the esttiblisiirasn .of the Socialist Call marks udistinct Militant victory. I•was decidedly an offensive move,Militant forces can rally aroundit and its growth will buoy-uptheir courage.

Since the Militants find itnecessary to keep the Call anon-factional publication, there isa distincc need for a left-wingtheoretical publication. The es-tablishment of the Socialist Ap-peal in Chicago was to meet thisneed. Nation-wide support mustbe mobilized to make it a print-ed magazine or to establish someother in its place. It is obvi-ous that the ASQ cannot fillthis need. The establishment ofsuch an organ will have as heal-thy an effect (if not a healthierone) as the appearance of theCall.

Beyond this a national leftwingcaucus or conference must becalled to determine a program andcourse of action. Such a confer-ence will solidify the Militantforces and carry the offensivefurther. An offensive that willstop only when the Socialist par-ty has become the revolutionaryparty of the American workingclass.

With Socialist Greetings,Ernest

HARRY LANG AND CRITICISM. OP THE SOVIET UNION

By Albert Goldman.

The almost unanimous reactionof members of the Socialist par-

ty against Harry Lang's articlesIn the Hearst press dealing with

*The Socialist Appeal-

conditions in the Soviet Unionis conclusive proof that tto par-ty will take a. correct attitudein defending that country when-ever it will be attacked by itsenemies. Tha baiting which thoSocialist parties the world overhave been subjected to by theStalinist Burocracy, thru theComraunist parties of the variouscountries, has not succeeded inpushing the vast majority of themembership of those parties intotho camp of tho enemies of thoRussian workers. Tho theories ofsocial-fascism and the unitedfront from below, tho inconceiv-able slanders hurled at bothleaders and rank and filers oftho Socialist parties, the dis-ruptive and destructive tacticsof the Stalinists would ordinar-ily tend to alienate the workingclass masses, not under the in-fluence of the Communists, fromSoviet Russia; but fortunatelyfor the revolutionary movementand for the country of the Rus-sian workers, the members of theSocialist parties have almost, in-stinctively, if not theoretical-ly, made the necessary and cor-rect distinction between thecountry of the Russian proletari-at and the Stalinist burocracykeeping the Russian workers un-der its heel.

At present, we need not worrythat the militant members of anySocialist party will refuse tcdefend 'sia against the attacksof any imperialist country. Thesympathy of all conscious workersfor the Soviet Union is threaten-ing to go to such an extreme thatthey will forget to make the dis-tinction between the Soviet Un-ion and the Stalin clique in con-trol and refrain from criticiz-ing the harmful and dangerousactions of Stalin and his serv-ile followers for fear of harm-

ing the Soviet Union. That kin-:of an attitude carries as mur,'danger as the attitude of bit^e.hostility to the Soviet Uuicrbecause of the insane tactics oithe Stalinists.

Necessity for Criticism

Revolutionary Socialism wa:born out of a criticism of capi-talist conditions and capitalisitheories. It can live only b^virtue of constantly criticizir..itself and subjecting everythingincluding its own theories anOtactics to a critical analysis.Let revolutionary socialism ceaseto be critical and it becomes edogma incapable of fulfilling itshistoric task. To approve every-thing that is don© in the SovietUnion or even to keep quietabout those things which we donot approve for fear lest someharm corae to Russia because ofour criticism is an attitudewhich no revolutionary socialisecan accept. That attitude notonly does not help the Russianworkers but is dangerous to theircause and to the cause of therevolutionary movement all overthe world.

No more loyal and more revolu-tionary socialist ever livedthan Rosa Luxemburg and yet whileshe was in a Gorman prison shecriticized the Bolsheviks forsome of their tactics. It turnedout later that she was misinform-ed about what was going on, bu4-that does not alter the fact thra'she did criticize them at a tint,-of civil war and foreign inter-vention* It is only under Stalinthat the theory of the infalli-bility of the leadership of theSoviet Union came to prevail andcriticism of that leadership tobe considered as "counter-revol-utionary." To surrender the

20 •The Socialist Appeal'

right and obligation to criticisewhat any leadership does any-where is to surrender what should"be the most outstanding charac-teristic of all revolutionarysocialists, insistence on criti-cal analysis and intellectual in-tegrity.

There are some who are worriedlest the criticism which we levelat Stalin and his satellitesmight furnish ammunition to theenemy. Will not the capitalistpress pick up our attacks andusethem to confuse and antagonizelarge numbers of people? It ishighly questionable that a cor-rect criticism from a revolutt.cn-ary socialist can b© used by thereactionaries for their own pur-poses. Because a criticism froma revolutionary viewpoint drawsrevolutionary conclusions highlydangerous to the reactionaryforces.

But evon assuming that hereand there the capitalist presswill pick up and distort a crit-icism of conditions in the So-viet Union by a revolutionist,the harm that this might bringis infinitely less than the harmwhich is bound to result to therevolutionary movement if wekeep silent w ith reference tothose conditions which shouldnot exist and which are largelythe result of the burocratlc re~giiae in the Soviet Union.

Essential To DistinguishBetween Things Criticized

It is all a question of tlaopurpose of the criticism -andwhether or not it is intendedto discredit the proletarianrevolution or to aid it. Andfurthermore it is a question ofwhat is criticized, whether thethings attacked are the inevit-

able accompaniment of a prolet-arian revolution in a baakwarcountry under unfavorable con-ditions or whether the policiesof the burocratic regime areattacked, policies which are un-necessary and harmful to thecause of the Sussian and theworld revolution.

One thing is it to sympathizewith the Wailing of an old aris-tocrat who laments the loss ofhis privileged position and an-other thing altogether to decrythe suppression of all democracyfor the working class. To pointto the low standard of living a-mongst the Russian masses withoutan explanation that the cause ©fsuch a low standard is due to thebackwardness of the country andto the lack of aid from th© work-ing classes of the west is onething; to describe the unneces-sary hardships of the workingmasses in Russia and place re-sponsibility upon the Stalin re-gime for its adventurous policlaswith reference to th® tempt) ofindustrial development duringthe latter part of the first fiveyear plan is a criticism on adifferent plane. To mention thedifference in the standard ofliving between the officialdomof the party and of the G.P.TDUonthe one hand and the lower paidcategory of workers on the otheris a correct criticism, providedone explains that in a transitionperiod between capitalism andSocialism differences in stand-ards of living are bound to ex-ist, but that the differencesexisting In the standards betweendifferent sections of the popu-lation in Russia are out of pro-portion and reflect the irrespon-sible powers of the higher offi-cialdom.

One type of criticism is harm-

•The Socialist Appeal-

ful and the othor beaeficial tothe interests of the workingclass revolution.

Langfs Attacks Reactionary-

Measured by every conceivablestandard, the articles of HarryLang in the Hearst press arenothing short of a vil© attackon the Socialist movement of thewhole worll. Coming at a Tiimewhen thar@ is considerable darkerof an attack oy Germany againstRussia, at a time when Hoarst isin the midst of a wiici campaignto discredit the revolutionarymovement in this country andabove all the failure of Lang tomake distinctions and explana-tions, the articles if road byany workers would tend to createtremendous confusion and antag-onism not only towards Russiabut towards the whole socialistmovement. Hearst knew what hew&s about when he printed thearticles; Lang, we must presume,also knew what he was doing whenhe resurrected those articles,printed some time ago in tho For-ward, for Hearst. The reaction-ary Hearst, however, got what hewanted; Lang got more than hebargained for in the form of thehostile reaction of Socialists.

But here it Is necessary toclarify issues and make distinc-tions.

For a Socialist to write in thecapitalist press is perfectlylegitimate. Provided what hewrites furthers the interests ofthe revolutionary movement. Manygreat socialists, Marx himselffor that matter, wrote for thenon-socialist press.It would in-deed be a great thing if the cap-italist press were to print allarticles written by revolutionarysocialists. Only a fanatic would

object to writing revolutionaryarticles for the onemy p//ess. Il-ls not the place where the arti-cle appears but the content oithe article that is important.

Trotsky's Criticism Revol-utionary

The Stalinists point to thefact that the capitalist pressaccepts article-s from Leon Trot-sky as conclusive proof that heis the "spearhead of the counter-revolution", But anyone notblindad by factional hatred road-ing Trotsky's articles in thocapitalist press would readilyadmit that the revolutionarymovement is not harmed in theleast by those articles- that onto contrary many who are hostiloto the Soviet Union because theydo not understand what is goingon there beg.ln to understand andbecome friendly - not to Stalinit is true - but to the ideasrepresented t>y the October revo-lution.Why does th© capitalist press

accept articles from Trotsky iftho effect is favorable to therevolutionary idea? To look upor.the capitalist press simply as aninstrument of the ruling classto befuddle the minds of theworking masses is a mechanicalconception verging on the absurdOnly at a moment of great revo-lutionary upheaval does the rul •ing class press become so ©are-ful about its content that itceases, to pay attention to ciroulation^Under normal circumstancethe element of circulation is an.exceedingly important factor andif an article by a wellknoj.individual will add to the ciroi*latlon, it might be printed,regardless of the revolutionarycharacter of that article. Oaljrecently. McFadden's magazine"Liberty published an article

22 •The Socialist Appeal-

by Trotsky wherein the lattershowed that the difficulties ex-perienced by communism in Russiawould not exist after a workingclass revolution in this countryand that there would be no suchtyrannical burocracy in the Unit-ed States as there is in Russia.

No wonder that the publisherstook care to insert a boxed an-nouncement that James Davis,ex-secretary of labor, wouldwrite an ajxswor proving tshatTrotsky does not tell the truth.

If Lang's articles were of thesort that Hearst would be com-pelled to reply to, no one wouldcriticize him for writing in theHearst press. We must repeat:if we keep in mind the contentsof the article, the purpose ofits publication both of the writ-er and the publisher, and thoeffect the article has upon thereaders,we can decide whether itwas wrong to have such an articlepublished in the capitalist press.

Accurate Picture of Rus-sian Conditions Impossible

Without a Theory

Is Lang truthful in his de-scription of the incidents haclaims to have seen while inRussia? Does he give an accuratepicture of conditions in Russia?It must be stated categoricallythat it is impossible to give anaccurate picture of what is goingon in the Soviet Union withoutan understanding of the funda-mental forces that influence thedevelopment of the working classrevolution in the world in gen-eral and in the Soviet Union inparticular. Without a knowledgeof socialist theory and especial-ly 0f the theoretical controver-sies that have been raging be-tween Stalin and his opponents

with reference to the problemsconfronting the Soviet Union an1!the world revolution it is hopeleas to attempt to evaluate conditions in Russia and to have anycorrect idea of the general ten-dencies of development in thatc ountry.

It has been said, correctly,that ninety-eight percent of thevisitors to Russia come backwith their presuppositions con-cerning conditions in that coun-try confirmed. The contrastsare so many and so great thatit is exceedingly easy to findthose conditions which one ex-pects. Tremendous constructionand production and inconceivablyEiad quality; living conditions,for important people, that aroas good as can be expected anddesired, and for millions ofworkers an abominably lew stan-dard of living. Workers who aretremendously enthusiastic andthose who are bitterly hostileto the regime. Peasants whotell you of the tremendous im-provement in their conditionsin comparison with the condi-tions existing under th« Tsar,and peasants who shak© theirheads sadly and express longingfor the days of old,

A deveut communist visitorchooses those aspects of lifein Russia which show the tre-mendous prepress achieved sincethe revolution; a Harry Lang anda Ripley BQQ only those condi-tions which seem to indicatethat the revolution was futileand brought only harm to the pao-ple. An impartial and accuratetraveler might report everythingin its true colors but without aknowledge of revolutionary theorywould be lost in a maze of con-tradictions. It is necessary todistinguish and explain and one

-The Socialist Appeal-

cannot do that on the Isasis ofaccepting the Stalinist mytholo-gy nor the vindictive distortionsof Lang and other enemies of theSoviet Union.

What Lang reports might be thetruth but if he does not mentionthat conditions have improvedtremendously since 1933 and ifhe does not mention the phenome-nal achievements in the develop-*ment of inoustry his reports areonly half-truths. Especially arehis reports absolutely worthlessif he does not distinguish be-tween gains made as a result ofthe seizure of power by the Rus-sian proletariat and the lossessuffered since that seizure dueto the burocratie Stalin r-egime.

Whom and What to BlameFor Certain Conditions

Can one deny the tremendoussuffering of the peasantry andthe working class of Russia inthe period when Stalin was in-sanely liquidating the Kulaks byadministrative measures thus a-rousing such furious hos-tilityamongst the peasants that theykilled most of the live stockand caused hunger throughout thecountry? But whom shall we blame?The Bolshevik revolution or theinitiator of the policy of forcedcollectivization* Stalin? Thosewho were most active in guidingthe revolution were the very oneswho objected to Stalin's policyof collectivizing one hundredpercent of the peasantry regard-less of the ripeness of condi-tions.

Recognizing the remarkable im-provement in Soviet -economyshould not blind us to the factthat great harm was done, to in-dustry and to the workers in in-dustry by the sudden change from

an exceedingly slow to atempo in industrial construe tier..And how can one understand f\,-whole problem of the industric-i--ization of Russia and whom totelrame for the errors committed ifone is ignorant of the controver-sies raging with reference tothat problem within the Commun-ist party? The answer to the ar-gument that Stalin recognizedhis mistakes and slowed down ttntempo of construction as wellc.''the speed of administrative collectivization is that there werethose who like Trotsky warned.about thes© blunders be for e ancnot after they were committed.

Events in Soviet UnionConcern All Socialists

Owing to the vicious attacksmade on the Soviet Union by tb3right wing Socialist's there i"the tendency on the part of man/well-meaning members of the So-cialist party to take an attitudeof "Hands off the Soviet Union",which in practice means endors-ing everything that is «Lone tvjthe Stalin regime. Both from th.point of view of theory and ofpractice that is an incorreciattitude.

The founders of the socialis4-,movement conceived of <lt as a.-?international movement. Not be-cause the proletariat of differ-ent countries were bound to heir-one another for some ethical o1"sentimental reason but becausocapitalism has created an international division of labor atj.;ithe economic interdependence o?the whole world* Theclass of every country Isaffected by the failure or suo-cess of the proletariat of anyone country. It follows there-fore that policies followed by aworking class party in any one

24- -The Socialist Appeal-

country should be of interest to,because they influence the ex-istence of, the working class ofevery other country* The inter-national character of the social-ist movement actually means thata member of the Socialist partyof Japan has a right and a dutyto follow and to criticize thetactics of the Socialist partyof Venezuela or any otheraountr/.

The proposition that what hap-pens to the working class or anycountry is of tremendous concernto the working class of everyother country should be ques-,tioned by no one after the Hit-ler victory which set into motiona wave of reaction throughout thewhole eapitalls-t world. It isclear or should be clear to ev-eryone following currect eventsthat the workers of Russia weremost affected by Hitler's victo-ry. Because of the fact thatRussia is a workers' country thefailures and successes of theRussian workers are of greaterimportance to the world prolet-ariat than the failures and suc'-cesses »f the working class ofany other country.

Even accepting the point ofview that it is possible tobuild a socialist island in aCapitalist world, that is, ac-cepting Stalin's theory of soci-alism in pne country, a criticalattitude to the policies of theSoviet loaders still remainsnecessary. A major premise ofthat theory,if not the only pre-mise, is that after socialism isbuilt in Russia the whole world,becoming aware of the existenceof a- terrestrial, paradise, wouldgravitate towards socialism withan irresistable force. Conse-quently the believers in thattheory should watch carefullylest any mistake b-e made in the

process of erecting the socialistedifice. But alas I that the or;;seems to have the effect of de-stroying all critical facultieswith reference to the problemsof revolutionary socialism anc)they who have uncritically accep-ted that theory have relievedthemselves both of the necessityof th.inlc.ing about Russia and ofthe necessity of struggling toachieve the social revolution IntjUeir own country.

Conditions in S U AffectSocialist Movement

Everywhere

To revolutionary Marxists whounderstand that to save the Rus-s uan Revolution It, must be ex-tended to the most importantcapitalist countries of the worldeverything that goes ai in Russiamust be followed closely andcritically . .. We need not accepttne official theory of socialismin one country to be convincedthat coriditionsin Russia furnishpowerful arguments for or againstthe socialist revolution in othercountries. What a handicap rev-olutionists in capitalist coun-tries are under when they areconstantly compelled to explainwhy there is no democracy forthe workers i,n Russia and whythere are so many and such greatdistinctions in the living con-ditions 6f the different sectionsof the population. It is not sodifficult to explain the lowstandard of living in the coun-try which was economically unde-velop.ed before the revolution,but it is exceedingly difficultto explain the existence of ter-ror and the suppression of free-dom of criticism seventeen yearsafter the revolution and especi-ally in view of the undoubtedeconomic progress.

— 25

The harm that the communistshave done iso the revolutionarymovement by exaggerating condi-tions in Russia is almost iricon-©eivable. Hundreds of non-Russ-ian workers during the first giveyear plan flocked to Russia af-ter listening to verbal picturespainted of conditions- in Russiaby delegates who were givenchicken for breakfast,dinner andsupper. Most of those non-Russ-ians workers either left Russiawith disillusionment if not hat-red in their hearts or remainedthere grumbling and sulking.Someno doubt became acclimated andwore satisfied. But the lattercannot undo the damage sufferedby the Soviet Union by virtue ofthe return of American and otherworkers disillusioned and dis-gusted. And it is not only theSoviet Union that is harmed; itis not only the communist move-ment that is harmed; the social-ist movement also must sufferbecaxise of the fancy exaggera-tions of the "friends" of theSoviet Union*

Criticism of the Stalinist re-gime from a revolutionary Marx-ist viewpoint cannot weaken theSoviet Union in the slightest.Its intention is to strengthenthat country and .its effect is

the same. In the last analysis,the policies pursued by the lead-ers of the Russian workers areresponsible for the strengtheningor weakening of Russia. Criticismof wrong policies and bad lead-ership never does and never willharm the revolutionary socialistmovement.

"Friends" of the Soviet Union,who give to every one of Stalin'splatitudes a profound revolution-ary significance and who justifyevery one of his zig-zags, willbe the very ones to run forcover when a serious attackagainst the Soviet Union will belaunched. Critics of the Stal-inist regime from a revolutionaryMarxist viewpoint, who are called"enemies" of the Soviet Union,will defend the workers' countrynot only against Lang, but alsoagainst the imperialists who arewatching for the opportune timeto destroy the Russia of the Oc-tober Revolution. No ono knowsbetter than revolutionary Marx-ists that the destruction of theSoviet Umion will set the clockof history back for many decadesif not generations. But theyalso know that the real defenseof the Soviet Union is the pro-letarian revolution in Europe andAmerica.