The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-08-30

tie too elementary. 1t may even ap-
pear as re-statement of some of the
A B c of Communism. But, then, why
not? The elements of Communism
are it's fundamentals, its basic prin-
ciples and final aims. And if there is
ever time when Communists must
have their eyes fixed steadily ON their
final aims. it is the time when they
are engaged in immediate, so-called
practical activities.
One might lay down (Lenin did that
number of times) the following tao
teal directive: The more immediate
and practical our tasks the more ur-
gent is the need for keeping before
our eyes the final aim of Communism.
Why? Because our immediate activi-
ties, our struggles for partial demands
of the workers, assume revolution
airy character only inasmuch as they
are conducted with a view to our final
aims. In other words, policy is cor
rect only if it prepares the workers
and our own party for the last strug-
angle that l am going to discuss po-
litical action and the present presi-
Dental campaign.
Do We Accept Capitalist Democracy?
By participating in an election cam
paign, do we or do we not recognize
and accept capitalist democracy?
Such questions are still being asked
and they have got to be answered
The people that ask such questions
are, as a rule, workingmen, former
members of political parties, who
have become disillusioned and even
disgusted with political parties and
politics as a whole.
They say: Politics is the game of
the bourgeoisie. The latter thru its
press, pulpit, schools, theaters, movies,
etc, is assidiously cultivating in the
minds of the masses the belief in
politics as the only legitimate means
for the adjustment of social griev-
ances." But the rules of the political
game have been made by the bour-
geoisie and no matter how well the
workers may play this game, they are
always bound to lose.
Thus runs the argument against
politics and political action. 1t can
all be reduced to the single idea that
by participating in politics one &C
cepts the existing political order of
the bourgeoisie.
Is it really so?
Well, there are all kinds of politics.
that is, there are many ways in which
the American workers of today parti-
cipate in politics. There are working.
men and women who take part in
politics thru the Republican and Demo
cratic parties. This is one kind of
politics about which there cannot be
the least doubt that it is a game
played in the interests Of the capital
lists and against the workers. This
sort of politics is no good and the
sooner the workers break with it the+
better.
Then there are workers that par
ticipate in politics as union men, as
members of labor organizations This
is already a better sort of politics,
better, that is, than participating in
politics thru the political parties of
the capitalists. However, it all de.
ponds upon how the thing is being
done.
Here, for instance, is Gompers. He
stands for the idea that organized la
Dor must participate in politics for the
purpose of furnishing its friends and
rewarding its enemies. Which sounds
pretty nice. 1t looks almost as il
Gompers favors the participation of
labor in politics for the purpose of
promoting the interests of labor.
But it isn't so. Gompers has no con-
Germ with labor as a class. Gompers
rejects the class-struggle. He opposes
the formation of a political party of
labor or any other action that would
lead to struggle between capital and