The toiler. [volume] (Cleveland, Ohio) 1919-1922, 1920-06-25

clause was needed to discourage petty
nominations by local units of the party,
Raphailoff &c. L. P.) Caxton &C. p
Malcolm &c, L. P. and others pointed
out that TIE general proposition Of
parliamentary action was not involved
in this debk fthat to the extent we
were to any nominations at al
it was indispensable, under the Amer
lean system, to name the "head of the
ticket, the president, governor or
mayor; that this clause had been
written into the c.. P. program under
the misconcepntion that this was the
proper method of meeting the "mini.
sterial question:" the fact being that
the Socialist ministers in Europe had
all been elected as legislative can.
didates; that in this country the So
cialists whether elected to legislative
or executive offices had all behaved
equally badly; that, finally, it was no
occasion to worry about the actions
Of Communist presidet, because the
revolution would forestall this con-
tingency, and that minor executive
officers could serve just as well to be
thrown out of office as the Communists
elected to the legislatures.
BY a close vote the paragraph was
retained, but the limitation is Of no
immediate practical moment since the
convention further went on record
against all nominations during the
1920 campaigns,
On the third day occurred the longest
and most stubborn debate of the con-
vention that on idnustrial unionism.
This was another three cornered affair.
The G. P. convention had passed up
the question of the l. w. w. because
it was apparent that this question
could not be settled by agreement.
Perhaps two-thirds of the G. P. deleg.
ates favored a direct endorsement of
the I. W. W. and program of CO.
operation, reserving criticism of the
T. W. W. theorizing. The other G. P.
delegates considered the I. W. W. as
essentially no better than the A. f. of
L., citing the reactionary character
of the I. w. w. in some of the East
ern cities. All of the G. P. delegates
were agreed upon an absolute stand
against the A. F.of L. as an inherently
anti-revolutionary organization which
must be destroyed
On the other hand, there was a
strong current in the c. l.. T..
ranks for treatment of the subject
of industrial unionism from general
view point which would neither include
direct endorsement of the |. W. w.
nor absolute condemnation of the A.
F. Of L. The lead in this debate was
taken by Dawson who argued that
the A. +. of L. must be considered
from the angle of the local unions. not
from the side of the Gompers official
dom; that industrial unionism was
having development in many fields
aside from the ]. W. W.; that the
need was for a call to new general
the central theme Of the contrary
industrial union, a new One Big
Union.
On both sides ,thfre was not only q
close analysis Of fine proper function
of Communist party in connection
with the unions, but also wealth OF
illustrative material out Of actual shor
and union experience. Machinists, min
lers and ship-builders fpsed their prac
| tical understanding VITA the more alb
stract conceptions of those whose
vision was focused on the ultimate re-
volutionary clash. The cleavage was
not between intellectuals and crank
and file," but between workers in the
industries who had undergone con
trasting forms of experience.
The original Joint Committee pro
posal on this subject had been taken
over from a draft by the Chicago
District Committee. Dozens Of amend
ments and substitutes were brought be
fore the convention, but finally the
section as adopted as originally pre-
sented AS a result of the debate, how
ever, the Committee opened the sub
ject for reconsideration the next day
presenting two amendments which were