The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1928-02-21

EDITORS NOTE-This is con-
tinuation from yesterdays issue of
The DAILY WORKER of a dis
cussion of letter written by A.
Joffe before his suicide in Moscow
a few weeks ago. In yesterdays
issue the author of this COM
mentary. Comrade ]. Yaroslavsky,
quoted the report of a member of
the Medical Commission of the Cen
'ral Committee of the All Union
Communist Party showing that the
condition of Joffe was beyond all
possibility of cure.
Continued from, Last Issue.)
1t is very sad that the Party should
be obliged to answer such charges.
But what else can be done when the
'arty is accused of not even agree
ng to spend 1000 roubles on the
treatment of the sick comrade, where
as in reality, if we consider only the
treatment abroad during period of
hree years, $4,000 roubles were spent
On Comrade Joffe's health. Let the
proletariat judge whether this is a
case of stinginess or whether we were
not rather as generous as this coun-
Try can afford to be only in very ex-
ceptional cases.
Not Communist Attitude.
But physical suffering is one thing
and the complaint of having been de-
prived of fortune by the revolution
is another. Before the war, Joffe
really was rich man. But is it a
proletarian characteristic to complain
hat the revolution has deprived a
member Of the Party of his fortune ?
The proletariat takes part in the revo-
ution and knows that by the revolu-
ion 1t can but close it's chains and
gain the whole world" No, the COM
,laints of Joffe do not spring from
proletarian soil. They represent the
philosophy of the petty bourgeois
evolutionary, who before his death
asts up accounts in his notebook and
ceckons that he has spent so-and-so
nuch more on the Party than the Par
Y has spent on him. That is rotten
ort of philosophy" That is not a
Communist attitude towards the Par
y and the working class.
Just as inadequately founded is
hat the Party would not permit Joffe
% write memoirs to the order of the
Anglo-American bourgeoisie without
the least control, and that the Party
demanded the right of previously re-
vising all that might be published by
4 member of the Party holding a
diplomatic position. 1t is not only
The right but also the duty of the
Party, to demand such a revision by
he Political Bureau of the Central
Committee or by the Commissariat
for Foreign Affairs. And it is a di-
rect shame to have to read this COM
plant that in this way Joffe lost $780,
90, and it is still greater shame
that such considerations should serve
to conceal the fact that Joffe was in
-erested in reporting characteristics
IF the "real leaders of the revolu-
ion" And that at the order of An
american publishers! Such rot
ten philosophy must be eradicated
root and branch wherever its seed has
fallen. 1t must be destroyed as anti
proletarian.
"The Party has offended me-" He
complained that the Party, actuated
by the principle of mot giving the
members of the Opposition any work,
had not accorded him (Joffe) any
work, "either in the Party or the
Soviets, of such character and ex-
ent as would enable me to exploit
my abilities to their maximum de-
gree of utility"
Accusation Untrue.
We all know that this is not true.
The Party entrusted the Opposition
lists with resnonsihle positions ever