The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1925-05-23

ence exists. 1t consists in the politi-
cal party being much frmer organ
ization, which has definite program,
strict discipline, etc. Within one
party there cannot be three or four
other parties. That is possible in a
league, And there are such political
parties who to some extent have such
character; for instance, the British
labor party; but everyone understands
that the labor party is a peculiar
structure. 1t is a cross between a
league and political party in the
real sense Of the word. What is
specific in a peasant league is its
mixed character. For us it is better
to have, such an organization, if only
for the possibility of its great extent
In a political party only those may
enter who seriously accept the pro-
gram and do everything the party asks.
THERE is great deal of liberty Of
Il movement in the peasant league.
Our people can enter it, and in the
amorphous conditions of the peasant
ry, can create a situation in which
we can win more and more new fol-
lowers. What sort of slogan does
Dombal suggest. Not league, not a
party, but transitional form. In this
way we would merely create a differ
ent term, nothing else. The specific
character of the peasant league is its
loose organization form, the possibiI-
ity of uniting members of various par
ties and even non-party people into
organizations which have not so strict
discipline and which put forward
demands Of a mixed character. No
positive arguments were produced
against such conception. 1t was
merely stated that if the peasantry is
developing politically, the parties will
grow. can reply to that that the
peasant leagues viii also develop poll
ticany. That depends on the various
circumstances and on whether we
work well or badly in these organ
izations.
Comrade Dombal brought forward
two arguments. He says that the
theses state that we need a policy
which will separate the left organiza-
lions from the joint organizations. 1
That is quite clear: we must use them
for spreading our influence for the
purpose of winning over the majority
Of the toiling population. BY what
means? That is the question of our
policy, our political and organization
al methods, and of the method Of
drawing the masses into real action.
All that is fairly clear.
HOMRADE INSTRUMENTATION
~ made two observations on the
credit system. The theses also speak
Of this subject but perhaps this SEN
tence can be developed. AS far as
the second observation of Comrade
Meshtcheryakov is concerned, l be-
lieve that there is either a misunder-
standing or that he represents a false
standpoint. The theses state that we
need a separate organization of the
agricultural workers and it was add
ed that these organizations OF agri-
cultural workers cannot and must not
enter the organizations of the peas
ants. believe that is correct. Com
rades Meshtcheryakov says that the
Italian experiences have proved the
contrary, Comrade GRECO says that
the Italian experience shows that in
mixed meetings of peasants and agri-
cultural workers. chaos eLsued, but
ne says further that it was evident
at the same time that federated ALI.
ances Of the organizations, joint GEN.
trails, ETC., are possible. This the con-
crete form did not prove feasible in
Italy but generally speaking it was
proved that these organizational con.
nections are possible and desirable.
IL we want to win over the small
peasants, and on the other hand, al.
ready have won the agricultural pro,
letariat, the latter must somehow or
other influence the peasantry.