The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1930-12-29
&4<<;~.4.

Bx Jorge

gee w lidC Sd1Cd LEU US!
Not to make the story too long, we start right
off by quoting a resolution adopted by the Poll
teal Bureau
I'm the Daily Worker of December IT, Jorge
wrote in Red Sparks in answer to Section Or
ganizer'S letter regarding attendance at unit
meetings and payment of dues in which wrong
approach is made to this question. One of the
healthiest signs in the Party today, is precisely
this, that the units of the Party are systematic
cally checking up on the activity of every mem
Der, and Tightening up on dues payments 1t is
the Sign OF more serious, more proletarian
Party. 1t is sign of bolshevization But Com
rade Jorge, under the pressure of his many
duties on the Daily, forgot this, and allowed him.
self to write in such a manner Claiming the sup
port of the Central Committee in this as to
hinder this development of the lower units of
the Party. The Central Committee in no way
supports any resistance to unit and section dis
cipline and Central Committee members and
staff are subject to it in exactly the same
measure as every other member of the Party
Insofar as special assignments of work prevent
attendance at unit meetings, this must be ex-
planned to the unit and in case the explanation
is not acceptable to the unit, then the matter
must be adjusted by the next higher committee
The right OF unit and section to call any mem
Der to account never be questioned What
The life of the Party units and sections must
become the first concern of every Party member
and also of the Daily Worker. The danger of
bureaucratic tendencies in the Party does not
arise from efforts of units and sections to con-
troll the activities of the members. The Central
Committee does not support the expressions of
Comrade Jorge in the Dec. II issue of the Daily
Worker"
And what have we got to say about this?
Firstly that we had it coming to us, and that
we agree completely with the line above given
AS in other cases where our foot slipped and
where we corrected ourselves, we meant to do
the same with this matter but since the Polit-
Bureau beat us to it, we welcome it. AS to show
ing that we mean it, we have attended the unit,
adjusted all matters amicaby, and in addition
reported on the recent Plenum Resolution tax
ing the opportunity to defend the Central Com
mittee against the wrong point of view expressed
by us on Dec IT.
Secondly, we did not intend our comment on
the Section OrgSecy's letter, to controvert the
unquestioned right of the unit to demand &C
countability and we admitted our shortcomings
as preliminary to correcting them and not to
boast about then-an astonishing interpreta-
ton to the Keeper of the Crocodiles. Where we
erred was on two points:
l. Merely because the letter of the Sec Org
Secy. was couched in uncaled for terms, we
made fuss over that. forgetting that the sub
stance of what was said was quite correct, and
hence our comment as the Polit-Bureau says,
hindered the development of the Party line ON
unit activity The campaign to tighten up on
this activity is certainly the important thing,
and our dwelling upon inconsequential points
was decidedly bad. To raise an objection to the
manner in which policy is presented justifies
suspicion that the objection is really directed
against the policy, which would put us in the
same position those comrades who claim that
they don't object the substance of Red Sparks
criticism, but merely object to its manner or
form or phraseology.
2. The matter of claiming Central Committee
authority was due to our submitting our writings
for alteration approval rejection, as in other
cases, to the comrade whose position as Secre-
tariat member and acting editor is supposed to
insure that the matter approved contains the
line of the G. C. But it was our hard luck that
the very villain was himself in worse fix than
ourselves as regards unit affairs and hence liable
to bias. But this comrade also, as result of
our case being aired is being checked up and
will soon be hung drawn and quartered So aIs
well that ends we'll
But there's another slight point we mention
here for any-and they are rather numerous
who may not understand what they read We
positively agree that the Central Committee
docs not support the expressions of Comrade
Jorge in the Dec. II issue of the Daily Worker"
But that dear comrades, does not mean that the
Central Committee is condemning what APP
peared before or after Dec. II. If we had our
wish in the matter it would, and thus we would
be relieved of the unpleasant and frequently per-
ilous job Keeper of the Crocodiles. We could
dedicate the ugly animal to the Bronx Zoo and
find more, time for the first duty of all Party
members attendance at unit meetings.