The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1926-07-28
ARTICLE v.
BY HARRISON GEORGE.


within the national economy Of the
Soviet Union, which consists OF va
rious economic forms, the Importance
of socialist industry, Of state and CO.
operative trade, Of nationalized cred
its and other positions of power of
the proletarian state, is rapidly in
creasing. In this manner there is to
be seen the economic advance of the
proletariat on the basis of the new
economic policy and the advance of
the economic system Of the Soviet
Union in the direction Of socialism"
ITTHAT are the proportions of this
w relationship of the rapidly in
creasing" socialist industry to the
other, capitalist, forms? Why, if the
I. w. w. believes the matter of i'm
portance, does its press not give cas-
lily ascertainable facts, such as the
latest available data given in Trotsky's
excellent book, WHITTIER Russia" as
taken from the cold, hard figures of
the state planning commission. Here
is what Trotsky says:
at is a falsehood to state that the
evolution of the productive forces is
proceeding in the direction of capital
ism. We have an industry whose fun
damental capital is socialized to the
extent of SO per cent, and this social
lied industry furnishes more than 70
per cent of the gross raw production
of industry. The IL per cent of non
socialized means Of production conse-
quently yields more than 20 per cent
of the gross production. The share
held by the state production is in
| creasing.
Railway and marine transportation
is 100 per cent in the states hands.
The commerce of the state and CO.
operatives today amounts to almost
three-quarters of the trade turnover.
Foreign trade is carried on IS per
cent by the state"
TROTSKY tells quite frankly of the
l. dangers in the fact that Of the
total capital in agriculture, only per
cent is socialized. And he tells how
this is being met, in detail too long
to recount here. But how well does
he point out that only the bourgeoisie
or their lackeys attack the Soviet eco
nomic arrangement. He says:
"In the first place, we are told that
we are running the country by our
work of socialist construction; in the
second place, we are told that our de-
velopment Of the productive forces is
in reality carrying us into capitalism.
Criticism of the first type is character
istic of the mode of thought of the
bourgeoisie. The second style of crit
icism is rather that of social-demOc-
racy, 1. e., bourgeois thought in So
cialist disguise. Frequently the two
modes of attack exchange their arse
nal of arguments in a neighborly man
ner, of which they are scarcely aware,
so intoxicated are they with the sa-
cred war against Communist barba-
rism."
THE last sentence seems especially
l. written to fit the anarchist writer
in the l. w. w. press. We repeat that
the anarchist workers who use the
I. w. w. press to poison the minds of
other workers injure the l. w. w. as
much if not more than they do Soviet
Russia. We do not believe that the
membership of the l. W. w. really de-
sire that sort of capitalist propaganda
to be spread upon the pages Of their
official journals.
But as long as they permit their Of
ficials to publish attacks on the Soviet
Union and to refuse to publish rea-
sonable replies by members who differ
with such policy they share in the re-
sponsibility before the judgment bar
Of working-class opinion. This is not
the way to attract workers into the
organization. 1t is an effective way
of letting the l. w. w. be turned into
an anarchist church, cut off from the
masses and without power or prestige.
| Ito be continued)