4.
this cry now talk legalism.
THE COMMUNIST comrades realize now what they mean by the Does this look as if the majority disagrees FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THEIR SAFETY.
excuse of time and money and party resources. with The Third International?
Shall the Communist Party send a delegate or As a matter of fact, the whole gigantic struggle Our enemies in the opprtunist camps (S. delcgates to Europe? Certainly, say the minor between the Centrist reconstructionist bloc and together with the liberals and radicals) make the charge that ity, but the time is premature. Some other time. which is attempting to join The Third InternaNow is too soon.
tional (see thesis from Amsterdam Bureau) and agent provocateurs wrote those planks in our Shall the Communist Party send a delegate or the Communist forces of The Third International, program which has prought the Department of Justice down upon the heads of thousands of delegates to Europe? Certainly, say the minor is exactly on this question of whether mere ity, but we must use our money for building acceptance of Communist principles is sufficient unsuspecting comrades. The minority echoes to elicct Communist unity! The Communist Inup the party which work is secretarial and ad.
by trying to prove that we aimed to words without establish a legal party. There seems to be ternational rejects unity based on ministrative purely. Some other time when we deeds.
have lots of money The a striking similarity between the opportunists nist International insists that Shall we send delegates to Europe? Certainly, there must be not only acceptable but revoluoutside of the party and the minority who the say tionary practice as minority. but, we have such few writers The minority statement then goes on o and organizers we really cannot spare them at It is the minority who play with words with this time. We We must wait until, etc.
Perhaps out understanding their meaning, who use Com.
say in characteristic fashion, that the foregoing when we have established the Dictatorship of munist phrases without being able to distinguish was the only way in which the question of Mass the Proletariat they Action came before the Central Executive Comdecide to send some may between the spirit and letter contained in them.
delegates over to Moscow to shake hands with mittee. The minority does not like the smok.
In their ignorance and opportunism, they would Lenine and give him a few pointers on Com. drag Communist principles and policies down ing out process and would like to go back munism and its application!
to a plane where the undesirable elements of the under cover. They are very uncomfortable disBut opposed on principle to the sending of Second International and politically iminature cussing principles and policies. They are more delegates to meetings of the Third International, workers can accept them and join the party, at home when they can confuse the issues. But NEVER! We agree on principle but certain thus destroying whatever effectiveness it may having been smoked out we ll keep them out practical considerations keep us back from send possess. That is at the bottom of the minority in the open discussing principles.
ing them now.
distortion of the reccomendations of The Third The fact is, that the first leaflet, entitled What That is the position of the minority on In International.
Communism Means precipitated the controversy on Mass Action, and the minority used the very ternational Relations.
Mass Action.
same arguments here presented in an effort to Or, take another incident on this question.
It is amusing to note that every question of KEEP OUT ALL REFERENCE TO MASS When Andrew presented another letter from principle is introduced by the minority with ACTION AND THE USE OF FORCE IN Comrade Rutgers and a letter from Chabrow mass of irrelevant matter which can have no THAT LEAFLET.
to the effect that a meeting of some kind would other purpose than to confuse the real issue. On be held in the near future and requesting us The minority state in boid type that they again to senci delegates, the minority passed this question of Mass Action, they bring in the are ready to put into the program of the party Michiganites and an unwarranted assertion that a motion in the Chicago Executive Council to a definite statement that Mass Action culminates the majority attempted to organize a legal the following effect: That no notification of a in open insurrection and armed conflict withi party at the convention.
meeting of the Communist International be conthe capitalist state.
The minority word jug.
The minority forget that the Michiganites sidered valid unless it comes from the Bureau gies are willing to put it into the program, but.
of The International. And since the Amsterwere answered in a masterly fashion at the Like the that would like to ally itseli with convention on the question of Mass Action. We dam Bureaut was not yet in existence, they could The Third International, BUT.
challenge the former Executive Secretary to proonly have referred to one Bureat the Moscow As we have had to point out in innumerable duce the records of the conventions on this point.
Bureau!
occasions, the minority subscribe to words but As to why the discussion was not more general Think of it! The ninority expected an en:are OPPOSED TO REVOLUTIONARY the answer is, that one of the minority (ComPRACTICE.
bossed credential from Moscow, with the scal rade Isaacs) made an unauthorized motion (whicit of the Third International and signed by Lenine, They themselves point out that there is a vital the convention discovered later) to proceed to Trotsky, Bucharin and Zinoviev, calling upon us difference as to when the idea of arming themthe election of party officials BEFORE THE officially to send delegates to a certain meeting, selves and armed revolt shall be projected to the DISCUSSION OF PROGRAMS. This motion at a certain time at a certain place!
masses of the workers.
prevented general discussion, which might have The former Executive Secretary is quoted in They are right. Here is the very crux of the benefited the ininority a great deal, as it now the minority statement as having voted for difference between the majority and the iniappears.
sending Fraina to Europe in November.
nority.
going over the minutes of that meeting But we may ask in return, why did not the The minority attempt to harmonize their we find the following motion and votes on it. minority (who seem to have had some mental position with that of the Third International, which seems to disprove the former Executive reservations with respect to Mass Action) enter by quoting from its Manifesto a statement that the discussion? Why were they silent? Or, Secretary quite eiiectually: That the Communist bears no relation to the controversy and inParty send a representative or representatives did they prefer to keep silent until after the cidently are guilty of deliberate distortion of the convention, knowing full well that if they exposed to Europe to make contact with the movement term Mass Action into Mass Actions.
their position on Mass Action and other vital there and to attend the meeting of the CommuHowever, since the are so quick to quote even nist International.
principles and policies, THEY WOULD SURE Lenine in their behalf, we shall make them LY HAVE BEEN DEFEATED FOR ANY Voting yes. Bittelman, Cohen, Birba. Elbaum, swallow a very bitter pill from the pen of POSITION OF TRUST IN THE COMMUNHourwich, Kaross, Tywerowsky and Fraina.
Lenine, or just this question when the idea of IST PARTY?
Voting no Ferguson, Ruthenberg and Schwartz, projecting the USE OF FORCE to the workers As to the organization of a legal party, it So much for International Relations. The shall be undertaken, and see whose position aplooks as if that question was injected to give proxiates that of Lenine, the majority or minority has been smoked out on this issue some semblance of justification for their repudia the minority and stand in no favorable light before the tion of the idea of propagating Mass Action to membership In his State and Revolution, page 25, Lenine the workers systematically. They ask, if this says: The minority then go on to show that its policy was a good reason (organizing a legal party. is in harmony with the Third International We have already said above and shall show for silence at that time, can we now bind those and that the policy of the majority is not.
more fully at a later stage that the teaching of our members who have been arrested and We are called super Bolsheviks who look down oi Marx and Engels regarding the inevitability indicted for their activities during this period with contempt upon the policies of the Third Interof a violent revolution refers to the capitalist of legality not to take the same position?
national. How do they show this? By tearing State. It cannot be replaced by the proletarian But what is the truth in this case? First of a sentence in an editoriai, from its context, and State (the Dictatorship of the Proletariat) through all, the majority even suggested before the then triumphantly cxclaiming, See! They are mere mithering away, but, in acordance with convention opened, that the convention be held beopposed to the Third International!
the general rule, can only be brought about hind closed doors. The minority were opposed by a violent revolution.
Unable to distinguish between the spirit and The hymn of praise to this. Secondly, if the minority mean that the letter of the recommendations of the Third Intersung in its honor by Engels and fully correspondconvention adapted Communist principles to the ing to the repeated declarations of Marx (sec national, the minority quickly jump to the legal party existence, we emphatically deny the concluding passages of the Poverty of Philoconclusion that The Third International recom such a charge. The convention adopted the sophy and the Communist Manifesto, with its mends mere acceptance of Communist funda principles of the Manifesto of The Third Intermentals as the basis of Communist unity. This proud and open declaration of the inevitability national in its program which is sufficient reis another and crushing example of the Centrist of a violent revolution; also Marx Criticism futation in itself.
character of the minority.
of the Gotha Pprogram of 1875, in which thirty If we take their miserable apology at its face The Executive of the Amsterdam Bureau, in years after, he mercilessly castigates its opportunvalue. that they wish to save some of the arrestist character. this praise is by no means a mere its thesis published elsewhere in this issue state ed and indicted comrades. isn that in itself impulse, a mere declamation, or a more politthe following on unity: The only, real, living and efficaceous unity is the one which has for sufficient proof of their Centrist character? And ical saily. THE NECESSITY OF SYSTEMwhat kind of Comminism is it, that judges the its base not only the formal acceptance of the ATICALLY FOSTERING AMONG THE MAScorrectness or incorrectness of basic principles Communist principles and theory, but above all SES THIS AND ONLY THIS POINT OF from the point of view of saving a few indiVIEW ievolutionary practice aising out of this ABOUT VIOLENT REVOLUTION viduals from persecution by the capitalist state?
theory.
LIES AT THE ROOT OF THE WHOLE OF Indeed, if the vast majority of the arrested and MARX AND ENGELS TEACHING AND Does this look as if the majority disay oes indicted members could speak for themselves, with The Tilrd laternational?
IT IS JUST THE NEGLECT OF SUCH THEY WOULD INDIGNANTLY REPUDIPROPAGANDA AND AGITATION BOTH BY Or, let us quote from Fraina report, published ATE SUCH TEMPORIZING TACTICS EMTHE PRESENT PREDOMINANT SOCIALin the last issue of the Communist on ro st PLOYED IN THEIR NAME.
CHAUVINISTS AND THE unity: The Communist International rejects KAUTSKIAN As for the few who came in under false colors, the concept of Comunist unity in SCHOOLS THAT BRING THEIR BETRAYand have been arrested and indicted. we feel AL OF IT INTO PROMINENT RELIEF.
inging that unity must be based not upon formal sorry for them. BUT THE COMMUNIST aceptance of xenical principles but agreement Does this look as if the minority agree with PARTY CANNOT AND WILL NOT ADOPT pon fundamental action.
Lenine, whom they, in their blissful ignorance ITS POLITICIES AND PROPAGANDA so fondly quote, or, do they not rather belong