The daily worker., 1926-08-01
The Reply Of the Communists

about character and nature of the
proletarian revolution we do agree
that the Criminal Syndicalist law is
a menace to the workers; that in
functions and anti-picketing laws are
capitalist weapons in. the hands of
the State power against organized Ia
bor; that military training of the
working class youth is nothing but a
preparation to use. the sons of the
workers in uniforms against their
fathers in overalls when the latter
dare to revolt against upbearable con
ditions in mines, mills, factories or on
the land. We propose the united front
not to forget differences but to unite
the forces of Labor on questions
where no differences exist, thus in
creasing the fighting strength of La
Dor and the chances for victory.
With this clarihcation of our pro-
posal, which your reply makes neces-
sary, we can consider the objections
which you raise to the holding of a
united front conference,
Your first objection is based upon
the special interests OF the Socialist
Party. You fear that the Socialist
Party will lose its legal standing as a
political party by joining in such a
united front conference. We do not
believe that the interests of the So
cialist Party should be placed above
uniting all of labors forces in a united
front campaign in the interests of the
workers and farmers Of the state.
However, since this point is of such
great Importance to you, we point out
that this question could easily be
solved by the Socialist Party leaving
on its state tickets one Of the minor
candidates for state office and thru
the vote polled for such candidate
1t would preserve its legal standing,
while at the same time it could join
in the united front conference and
support a united labor ticket NOM
mated by such a conference for the re-
naming state offices and congression-
al candidates thruout the state The
candidates of the united labor con-
ference could be placed on the ballot
as independent candidates but the
campaign would be carried for these
candidates as the united labor ticket.
Petitions for Independent candi-
dates would be circulated according
to the law from August 20, to Sep
tember 20. AS to your objection to
the placing of the labor party on the
ballot at this time, we did not raise
this issue.
While necessarily we could not
pledge the united conference to such
action, as the decision would have to
be made not by the Workers (Com-
munisD Party or the Socialist Party,
but by all the delegates in the confer
ence, at the same time we point out
that the technical objections you
raise could be met thru the proceed
ure outlined above.
The other objections raised in your
letter are of a more serious nature.
We have already pointed out, in the
opening of this letter, that our pro-
posal does not requirs OF the Social
ist Party that It sacrifice any pro-
gram which 1t stands for. All we ask
Of the Socialist Party Is that it unite
with other organizations in support Of
certain definite program. We must
declare just as emphatically, as we
concede the right OF the Socialist
Party to maintain it's identity and
program, we also viii insist upon the
right OF the Workers (Communist)
Party 70 maintain It's identity and
program while joining in the united
front struggle for the immediate in.
terests Of the workers.
Since you have raised. the issue OF
the principles Of tho Workers (Com.
munist) Party we are compelled 10
answer upon these points and to state
clearly the principles which the Work.
ers (Communist) Party supports as
against the distortions contained in
your letter.