The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-12-09

The COmintern and the Farmer-Labor Party


Paul convention, would have been a
major disaster for the Workers
Party. But Comrade Lovestone was
willing that it be done, and he has not
since changed his opinion. What mat
ter what happens to the Workers
Party so long as his beloved farmer
labor party is kept to the fore? II
is Comrade Lovestone's ideas, more
than anyone else's, that are incor-
porated in the minority thesis. He
and the rest Of the minority, follow
ing out their policy, which is the most
opportunistic in the history Of our
party, are Ior a farmer-labor party re-
gardless of the interests of the Work
ers Party. Let them deny this as
much as they please, nevertheless the
fact remains as stated.
In their thesis the minority get far
away from the premises as laid down
by the Comintern for our labor party
policy. They make the formation of
a farmer-labor party almost a mat
ter of fundamental Communist tao
tics. Their thesis, for example, makes
this astounding statement: THE slo-
gan for class farmer-labor party
remains our most effective means Of
agitation for political action on class
basis by the workers and poor farm
ers." We had thought that the Work
ers Party was the organization thru
which to get political action on a
class basis" But it seems that ac-
cording to the opportunistic minority
the farmer-labor party is just as
good, nay, even better. We learn
much as the farmer-labor Communists
put their ideas into print.
But, altho the minority seek to set
up the formation of a farmerslahor
party as a sort of sacred Communist
duty, nevertheless they cannot alto
gether ignore the necessity for try
ing to prove it mass movement.
And with what bizarre results: In
their thesis they actually have the
brass to tell us that the farmer-labor
parties of Washington, Montana, Colo
RADIO, South Dakota. and Minnesota,
altho they voted for LaFollette, are
not of the LaFollette movement. What
an absurdity! What desperate straits
the minority are in order to get mass
es for their celebrated class farmer
labor party. The fact is, as even the
veriest tyro knows. these parties are
among the highest developed sections
of the LaFollette movement. They
have broken from the old parties and
have definitely formed themselves in
to LaFollette third party movement,
regardless of what uames they may
call themselves. The only real diff
ference they have with LaFollette
is an organizational one. the question
of the immediate formation Of a third
party.
Have the minority adopted the S.
P. conception that the third party is
really class" farmer-labor party. ex-
cept for few trimmings? If not,
how can they by any stretch Of the
imagination list the foregoing parties,
especially the Minnesota party, as
farmer-labor parties? The minority in
their opportunistic hunt for masses to
muster behind the dead farmer-labof
party slogan, lugged into their serv.
ice the choicest collection of LaFol-
lette parties in the entire country.
In their thesis the minority also in
form us that the North Dakota farmer
labor party, and the washington coun.
ty farmer-labor party never entered
the LaFollette movement, but main
tanned their independence" AS for
the North Dakota party, it is simply
an organization on paper. And as for
the Washington county party-now II
would be important if it could be
shown that there is such a party in
at least one county out Of the many
many thousands of counties in the
United States. But, alas, the Wash
ington county party is also merely on
paper. The only reason it maintain.
ed its independence" was because il
did not venture to call a general par.
ty meeting. If it had. the LaFoIlette
rank and file would have formally re.
gistered by a majority vote the de-
lection which they made to LaFol-