The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1925-05-09

the peasants into conflict with the
bourgeois state. Taxation policy and
the Communist demands in connection
with it, that is the most important
bridge to bring over the peasants from
the standpoint of love for the bour-
geois state to the standpoint of hatred
of the bourgeois state.
THERE are comrades who hold the
4 view that by decreasing the bur
den of taxation for the peasantry we
are increasing it for the workers. This
is very bad argument. The contrary
is the case; it is because the poor
and middle class peasantry is as inter
ested in the lowering of the taxes as
the working class that we must march
together. The same applies to prices
for manufactured articles. One of the
most important causes of the problem
of the scissors is the policy of the
monopolist organs Of capitalism. The
solgan of struggle against monopolist
capitalism, against cartel profits in the
form of struggle for lower prices for
manufactured articles is we'll adapted
to bring together the forces Of the
peasants and the workers.
1t is the same with the struggle
against the war peril.
On the strength of this situation, we
witness now various movements with
in the peasantry, movements of vari-
Gus types, revolutionary agrarian
movements, movements based on the
agrarian crisis, etc. A specific form
was the farmer movement in the
U. S. A., where close on third of the
farmers were ruined. Then there are
movements based on bad harvests, as
for instance in some parts of Germany
An important chapter in the history
of movements are colonial movements
There are also various mixed kinds of
movements. But there is no doubt
whatever that the magnitude, the in
tensity, the social weight of these
movements has been on the ascendant
of late. Moreover, the differentiation
process within the peasant associa-
ton has been general feature. This
process takes place in all countries
where peasant organizations exist.
have already described the situa-
ton on this field. In all countries,
except in the colonies, the leadership
Of the peasant organizations was in
the hands of the big agrarians and
big peasants. Lately we witness
process Of differentiation and splitting
off of the organizations of the small
peasants, dwarf farmers, etc. In Bull
garia there is fairly big left wing
within the former Stambolisky union,
in Czecho-Slovakia there are the So
called independent small owners
(domoviny), and we see similar phe-
nomena in Germany, Poland, France,
etc.
This kind of differentiation in the
peasant organizations is an incon-
trovertible fact. Here we are con-
fronted with various questions of
propaganda, agitation and organiza-
ton.
In connection with peasant organ
izatlons we must take into considera-
ton various types and various posi-
bilities. Where organizations already
exist they probably exist in two diff
ferent forms, in the form of a political
party and in the form of the so-called
peasant federation. l think that our
tactics with respect to the already ex-
listing organizations, must generally
speaking, consist in supporting the
left wings Of these organizations or in
forming bloc with them. The form
ard methods depend on various cir
cumstances. In how far and when We
should split OF these left wings also
depends on specific circumstances.
The characteristic feature of all these
organizations is that they embrace a
variety OF social elements from the big
agrarians down to the agricultural la
borer. This is even noticeable in or
IrNnr as4ak -