The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-08-09
A REPLY TO LOUIS 3. BoUDEN
By Alexander BhtelmGn

IS onfy part OF that Quilt, and
subordinate one at that
Blame the Communists Again.
Now that Boudin has found himself
in hole due to his venture in fore
casting the results of the ST. PauI
Convention, we have NO doubt that
this, too. he Will blame on the Com
munists.
He win say: well, # amt my
fault that the Communists failed to Of
fer LaFoIIette the cream According
to all available Information they cthe
Communists) were bound to do IN ST.
Paul as l said they will. Then they
went ahead and betrayed all their
commitments and promises. They
simply turned traitors to LaFolletts.
Am I to blame for it,"
Which takes us to the real heart of
the dispute What was # that ths
Workers Party actually stood for in
this matter of LaFoIletteI
First The Workers Party has
always considered LaFoIIette and La
FoIIetteism menace to the American
labor movement.
Read our party literature our doom
ments, statements and declarations
Go as far back as the early summer
Of 1923 and you win find this gen.
eral idea-the menace Of LaFoIIettH-
ism underlying al of the strategy and
tactics of the Workers Party.
We said: This petty-bourgeois
struggle of the liberals and progress
sives within the old capitalist parties
is gradually crystalizing into a move
ment toward a third party We said
further: This third party LRFollette
movement will attempt to utilize In
the interests of small capital the dis
content and political awakening of
the working masses of the country,
thereby disrupting the movement
toward an independent political party
of workers and exploited farmers.
On the basis of this analysis, which
events proved to be 100 percent COR
rect, we proposed the following pol
icy: Intensity the campaign for a
Farmer-Labor Party. Unity all the adj
herents. of Independent political ac-
ton and make them serve as a CEN
ter of resistance against the deadly
dissolution influences of LaFollette-
ism in the Labor movement. Our slo-
gan was: A United Farmer-Labor
ticket in the presidential elections of
1924 1t was on this theory that we
were working and preparing for the
June 18th Convention
Second: The Workers Party atti-
tude toward LaFolIette has always
been one of opposition and fight.
Which is merely the logical con-
cIusion Of our whole conception of the
LaFoIlette movement The Workers
Party has fought LaFolletteism in all
fits manifestations politically and Or
ganizationally. A notable instance
is our fight In the arrangements COM
mittee about the date Of the St Paul
Convention that took place in the
early spring of this year.
The LaFollettites under pressure
Of their chief wanted us to postpone
the holding of the st. Paul Convention
Originally set for May 30th) until
after the Convention OF the two capt
talist parties The purpose Of this
move was to prevent the crystalliza-
ton Of national Farmer-Labor CEN
ter thus leaving LaFoTlette a free
hand to manipulate the labor forces
in the interests Of the petty bourgeois.
To this we said: No. We fought
the attempt tooth and nail and finally
carried our point The original date
had been changed only to June 18th,
that is, to date sufficiently ahead OF
the conventions of the two old par
ties to enable us to crystalize ma
tional FarmerLabor center.
This is merely one Of the many In
Continued on page 81