The daily worker., 1924-12-13
BY WILLIAM z. FOSTER

ouvre of our party up to date. On the
whole, despite some decided disad-
vantages which will be touched upon
in this article, it was beneficial to our
party. 1t put the Workers Party at
the head of large masses of workers
in motion and gained for it much pres
tige as the fighting party of the work
ing class. 1t gave us an opportunity
to acquire much skill in the handling
of these masses and enabled us to
make them at least partly acquainted
with Communist principles and tao
tics. 1t gave our own party member
ship realization that the Workers
Party, altho small party, can become
a real factor in the class struggle by
following a militant policy.
But this farmer-labor party cam
paign was carried out under exceed
ingly difficult circumstances. The
sentiment for farmer-labor party of
industrial workers and poor farmers,
distinct from LaFollette third party,
was weak and vague, and almost the
entire trade union bureaucracy was
opposed sharply to the farmer-labor
party. The problem of driving a
wedge between the "class" farmer
labor movement and the LaFollette
movement proper. and Of organizing
a farmer-labor party in the teeth of
official trade union opposition, was a
great one. The burden of leadership
in the movement fell almost entirely
upon the membership Of the Work
ers Party. Naturally many mistakes
were made. Some of these were OF
an opportunistic character.
In their desperate efforts to breathe
the breath of life into their dead
"cIass" farmer-labor party slogan. the
farmer-labor Communists of the minor
ity, especially Comrades Ruthenberg
and Minor, have singled out some of
these incidents and, upon the strength
Of them, have denounced the Central
Executive Committee as opportunist.
They conveniently overlook far more
serious mistakes made by themselves
when they-were the c. E. C. 1t is the
purpose of this article to discuss the
various mistakes in our labor party
policy to place the blame for them
where it belongs, and to draw the les
sons from these mistakes for our
future work.
The Chicago July srd Convention
The w. P. policy in this convention,
mapped out by the present minority,
which was then the G. E. c., was
highly opportunistic. The basis of
the convention was q united front
from above, between the leaders of
the Workers Party and the farmer
labor party. At the last w. P. con-
vention comrades Pepper, Ruthenberg,
and Lovestone made the welkin ring
with complaints about the Chicago un-
tied front, but they themselves en-
gineered this phase Of it, the one sec
ton that was really open to serious
criticism.
Perhaps the biggest mistake made
at the convention was pressing to
ehC punt Vi q opilt inc qucSIiOu OL tue
immediate formation of farmer-labor
party. Experience later with the fl
my federated farmer-labor party,
which was formed at that time, show
ed that this mistake originated in an
opportunistic grasping for the masses.
The former C.. e. c., in their eager
ness literally to grab OF mass party,
over-reached themselves. For this they
were censured in the latest decision
of the Communist International on
our labor party policy. as follows:
"The Workers Party failed in devel-
oping sufficient pliability with regard
to so-called progressive elements and
did not devote, and does not yet, de-
vote, enough attention to the work
among the workers organized in the
labor unions" Former endorsement Of
l. Ill A..l 4. - n