The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1926-01-26

against these people instead Of against
the Leningrad comrades, then, many
differences of opinion would have
been saved. If you are convinced that
the depression which overestimates
the danger of the Kulaks is more
dangerous for the party than the d.
gression which underestimates them,
then say so openly, and say openly
that the decision of the fourteenth
party conference in this connection
must be revised. Is it not symphonic
tic enough that in Soviet Georgia
there were people who began to write
in the party press about a partial
denationalization of the land and who
had to be rejected by the Georgian
party committee? One must consider
that in the present period of drawn
out sterilization such dangerous opin-
ions will grow.
THE numericaI strength of the
Kulaks is insignificant. They re-
present approximately three to four
per cent Of the whole peasantry, the
absolute number is about 100000,
approximately the same as that of the
land workers, the economic strength
of the Kulaks, however, is by far
greater.
The Kulaks have their supplement
In the town in the new bourgeoisie
and in certain elements amongst the
specialists and employees who seek to
establish a political contact with the
Strengthening Kulaks.
Finally the Kulaks support them
selves upon the whole bourgeois sur
roundings of the Soviet Union. One
could accuse us of panic in face OF
the Kulak danger if we pointed only
to the danger and not to the means
for limiting the growth of the Kulaks
the measures for the economic sup
port of the village poor, and the firm
alliance with the village poor and the
middle peasantry for the isolation oil
the Kulaks.
That is, however, not the case fol
together with the party we point tt
these means. One should not idealizC
the middle peasants, one should no
deny that the middle peasant is a pet
ty bourgeois. One should not be in {
hurry to declare that petty bourgeois
capitalism no longer dominates in ou
country, one should not leave million!
of peasant economies and the ten mil
lizard rubles from peasant production
out Of consideration.
The new peasant policy of the part!
has caused aa certain confusion
amongst the village Communists, a,
this policy has been understood b,
them as a reversal of the policy baseC
upon the assistance for the villag,
poor 1t has gone so far that a state
ment appeared in a Communist peas
ants paper that one middle peasan
was worth more to the party than tel
poor peasants. Such mutilations 0
the Bolshevist peasant policy has no
thing in common with true Leninism.
lWTE are naturally opposed to thu
W commencement of civil war il
the village. The Soviet power is to
day strong enough not to have t,
..adopt the methods of war Commun
ism in struggling against the Kulal
danger But the poor peasantry mus
be shown that we shall not allow tn,
kulaks to plumber the poorer peas
antry economically. There is no ne
cessity to go back to war Commun
ism, we should remain upon the basi
of the decisions of the fourteenth
party conference, nevertheless in cal
rying out the economic measures 70
the development of the productive
forces Of the village, we must neve
overlook the political essense and tn
significance of the Kulaks. Naturally
we shall build up socialism thru tn
new economic policy, nevertheless W