The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-08-12

C~AbOAbg 4AAOnS dllO pal
ties-especially in the German Social
Democratic Party--a relapse into the
old Hegelism, which we must desig-
nate as pre-Marxist and an idealistic
viewpoint. This is particularly no
ticeable in the social democrat Cuno,
especially in his works on the State
the role and functions of this state
This is linked up with certain re-
lapse into Lassale-ism. I cannot Of
course, deal here very fully with these
questions, merely want to emphasize
the fact Of those relapses in the ranks
of the social democracy. Unfortunate
ly, Communist Parties are not i'm
mune from such relapses into the old
Hegelism, certainly in less promi-
nent form than in social democratic
ranks, but which nevertheless reveal
the same potentially harmful teRden-
cies.
The italian Party.
The second phenomenon is parti-
cularly noticeable in the Italian par
ty, altho probably it is not conscious
of it. This theological deviation from
revolutionary Marxism. could be desig-
mated as idealistic voluntarism, which
is substituted for Marxist activism.'
We find the same deviations in the
Russian Party, but in a different form,
namely in the form of agnostic posi-
tivism in lieu of Marxist materialism.
Some comrades base their attitude on
the teachings of revolutionary
school Of thot, the so-called reflex
ology, and go back to activism. All
this may be plausible enough, but it
is not revolutionary Marxism. The
point is that in all this, Marxist ma
terialism is treated, avowedly or tacit-
ly as an obsolete viewpoint This is
a great danger, especially because
bourgeois science and bourgeois phi
losophy and theology are at present
in process Of dissolution. This bour-
geois theology is tainted with mysti-
cism, and therefore in a period of
general disintegration and chaos can
to a certain extent permeate prole-
tartan circles. That is why philoso-
ply must be given a place in the pro-
gram. 1t must be precisely and con-
cisely formulated. We must say that
we are materialists; our viewpoint is
the viewpoint Of revolutionary materi-
alist Marxism. This is a rather elias
tic formula but we cannot do with
out it if we want to proclaim our re-
evolutionary Marxism openly and meet
the perils which l described to you.
Shows Certain Dangers.
AS to the second group-the eco
nomic questions, must say that if
the influence Of bourgeois theology is
noticeable on the philosophical field,
it is also present in our economic doc
trines. l should like to propose to
the congress here to discuss Comrade
Boris article in die Internationale"
Not because l attach much import
ance to Comrade Boris arguments,
but because his article shows us in a
crude form the dangers which are
ahead. 1t is not a question of Boris,
but a question Of symptomatic phe-
nomena. For it cannot be ascribed to
mere chance when scientific organ
conducted by educated people print
such foolish things and such social
democratic rot. Such a phenomenon
shows rather that there is a certain
psychological basis for such discus
sions. This article is palpable proof
that the bourgeoisie and the social
democratic theorists have gained
footing in our camp. The article is
very outspoken. Certain compliments
are paid to us in it. For instance,
am described as a petty bourgeois
gone mad. This is very outspoken
expression, and as | said before, the
article is very outspoken indeed.
Comrade Boris would like to send the
entire bourgeoisie and also the petty
bourgeoisie to the devil. He has no
wish to make common cause with any
revolutionary parties in the colonies
whatever, on the plea that they are
bourgeois parties. He also taboos par
tial specialization. He says: to the
devil with any kind of specialization
which is not complete specialization!
He wants to socialize everything, in
GLIDING the waste-paper basket of
ode Internationale." He justifies his
article by saying that political econo-
my is the be-all and the end-all. Thus,
we must socialize everything, or moth
ing. He is much more radical than
the most radical elements represent
ed here. But under this radical cloak,
we have literally a purely social de-
mocratic theory, and l fail to see how
It was possible for the editors of die
Internationale" not to notice it. This
is ludicrous, and at the same time
dangerous. Comrades, I will read YOU
an extract from Comrade Boris ar
ticle TO give you an idea what we
have really to contend with. One Of
the most important differences be-
tween the Second and Third Interna-
tionals is the conception Of imperial
ism, the conception that a few great
powers exploit the colonies. receive
super-profits from these colonies and
by means of them corrupt some work