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


opponents of liquidation" as Bittel-
man, Browder and Cannon voted
against while the naughty liquidators
Engdahl, Lovestone and Bedacht vot-
ed for. Liquidation. indeed; but by
whom?
But such activities Of the "anti-li-
quidators" are by no means inconsist
ant with their general policy and con-
ception. These sole defenders of the
Workers (Communist)s Party never
considered the advantages accruing
for the party out of the campaign for
labor party. They entered the cam
paign for labor party for the sole
and exclusive purpose to create la
Dor party. No, not a, but the labor
party, the petty bourgeois labor par
ty, patterned after the English labor
party, the allinclusive labor party, if
need be exclusive of the Workers
(Communist) Party, but at least with
the Workers Communist Party in it's
rightful place of hopeless minority
That last part of the sentence is not
my Interpretation, but the exact words
Of Comrade Foster
Liquidation, indeed; but by whom?
The position of the majority as prov
en- not only by words, but by all its
actions, is that the formation of la
Dor party, an all-inclusiye labor party
must be the goal of any labor party
movement. If such movement exists
among the workers, it is the duty of
he Communists to assist it, but al
Ways with a view of helping to ac-
,omplish the task of the formation of
he labor party. If there is no move
nent for the formation Of such par
", the Communists have no business
10 bother about it.
The minority, on the other hand,
maintains, that the American working
class, still completely under the dom
nation of bourgeois theology and lead
ership, must develop the idea of sep
arate political interests of their class.
Until the workers have developed this
idea there can be no question of Com
munist leadership over these work
ers. The slogan: For a farmer-labor
party" best expresses this need of
political independence of the workers
from the capitalists. 1t is not the
desire of the minority to establish a
labor party irrespective Of situations
and possibilities. 1t is, however, the
endeavor of the minority to gain lead
ership over the working masses dur
ing the very process of their breaking
away from capitalist theology and
leadership by guiding and Fastening
this process.
Liquidation, indeed; but by whom?
Opportunist tendencies, indeed; but
by whom?
Lack of Communist understanding,
indeed; but by whom?
Resolutions and programs settle all
The problems of the Communist" and
anti-liquidationist' majority of the
c. E. c. Judging by past Performance
es they will even settle the revolution
itself by a resolution or program Of
action-without action.
The other day, the majority decid-
ed in the D. E. C. of Chicago, that
the party shall not enter the coming
municipal campaign because it is a
non-partisan election. When the ma
jority found what a Communist" de-
cision this was, it called a special
meeting of the D. e. C. and changed
the decision, but 1t did not change its
Communism" Just think Of it. The
recent struggles of striking workers
of Chicago. against the activities of
the police department; the activities,
or lack of activities of the board of al
dermen in the struggle of the work
ers against the police department and
teachers against the autocratic tool
of big business in the chair of super
intendent of schools of Chicago;
offer great possibilities for united
front actions during the campaign,
the possibility for labor party cam
paign on a large, tho local scale and
under the direct initiative and guild
ance of the Workers (Communist)
Party But the majority said: The
only advantage we can get out of a
campaign is the printing of the name
of our party on the ballot. Since that
is impossible, because of the non-par-
tisan character Of the campaign, what
is the use?
The change was made by a special
meeting of the ID. r. c. not because
of change Of heart, and not because
the majority wanted a campaign OF
the party, but because 1t became
aware Of the dangers of its position
for its campaign within the prrty.
Lack Of Communist understanding,
indeed; but by whom?
Liquidation, indeed. but nv whom ?