The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-12-18


cizing Magnus johnson and Henrik
Shipstead.
HypnotIzInn the Masses.
8. And examining the opposition to
Comrade Cannon and his group to the
Communist utilization Of the slogan
for a farmer-labor united front be-
cause the masses are not forcing rs
to do so thru a mass demand for the
immediate organization OF a class
farmer-labor party, reminds one Of the
following motion made by Comrade
Cannon in behalf OF Comrade Lore in
the central executive committee ses-
sions of March IS, 1924: "That IN
view Of the explanation by comrade
Lore that the lecture was before an
open forum as part Of an effort to
attract non-party members and the
subject was psycho-therapy and hyp-
notism, the apprehensions of the ex-
ecutive council were unfounded.v
This was the motion made to defeat
Comrade Peppers effort to uproot the
non-Communist working class educa-
ton prevailing certain sections Of our
party. Evidently comrade Cannon
believes that hypnotism Is a good
Communist slogan because it attracts
masses.
6. And one has no difficulty in re.
calling that it was Comrade Cannon
who first prevented Comrade Pepper
from writing an article in the Liber
ator indorsing the Old Guard Boil.
| sheviks against Trotsky in the con,
troversy in the Russian Communist
Party. Nor does one forget that at the
March G. q. c. meeting Comrade Can
non voted for the Foster substitute to
prevent the Workers Party from then
taking a stand on the fundamental
question agitating the Russian Com
munist Party, as Foster then main
tanned, question not foreign to the
welfare Of our party. but one vitality
affecting every section of the Comm
tern.
Hiding Our Communist Face.
z. And on May 81, 1924, when the
writer proposed that the comrades in
California fight for the seating OF the
Workers Party delegates as Commun-
list delegates to the state convention
Of the farmer-labor party, II was Com
rade Cannon who headed the opposi-
ton to this policy of showing our
Communist face openly and aggres-
sively before the masses.
8. Nor should one overlook that il
was Comrade Cannon who, for weeks.
held up the adoption Of the Rutheu-
berg motion to reject the application
of Gruss, an expelled Salutzky fol
lower, to rejoin the Workers (Com.
munist) Party.
The United Front on Ton,
3. And now that Mr.. Sidney FIN.
man is openly announcing that he win
no longer tolerate the Trade Union
educational League and the organiza-
ton Of a militant left wing in the
Amalgamated Clothing Workers. il is
very interesting to recall how Com
rade Cannon voted for the Rrowder
proposal to congratulate the officials
of the A. c. W., on the eve Of the con-
vention, for their non-expulson policy
towards the left elements. The writer
well recalls how this policy was
adopted by the C. E. C. on April 2s.
1924, despite the opposition of those
comrades whom the Foster-Cannon
group, IN order to hide its own char
acter, now calls opportunist.
opportunism and the Defeat Of
4
1t is a meeting of the political con.
mittee Of the C. E. C. The outlook for
sweeping LaFollette victory In the
election campaign was still bright Wa
are considering the policy of the left
wing, of the Communists, at the A. r.
OF L. convention to be held at HI
Paso. A proposal is made by Com.
rade Ruthenberg that a fight be mads
at the American Federation Of Labor
convention for the organization Of n
class farmer-labor party The Foster
majority defeats this proposal on the
ground that the LaFollette movement
Is such success that the working
masses now consider Il the farmer
labor party; and that hence the
farmer-labor united front of this aort
is no longer an issue.
1t is a meeting of the political com.
mittee day or so after election. The
howling LaFollette success that the
roster group talked so much about
at the above meeting did not materi-
alize. LaFolletteism received a sevara
drubbing and setback. The question
before the committee is an election
statement by the party. The LaFol-
lette success" argument against the
iarmer-labor united front slogan could
no longer be used. In despair. the
Foster majority turned to the very
opposite argument and reason" IN
order to show, to their own satissac-
ton, that the farmer-labor united front
campaign was useless to the Worlrers
PARTY. Now IL VINE H. ett