The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1931-11-04
What Is Progress?

One lone-and utterly mistaken-objector was
heard from concerning our comment on Edison
which said nothing against Edison but lit into
the capitalist system which prevents the cevel-
opment of countless other Edisons and which
retards the use of what Edison invented.
With even the far-from-complete spread of
technical education among Soviet workers, these
workers are creating regular storm OF i1ven-
tions and the most modern of modern machinery
is welcomed for instance something advanced
America still don't use, the electric plow, is be-
ing introduced in the Soviet Union) while every
effort is made to INCREASE production.
Meanwhile we see such an outstanding spokes-
man for capitalism as Silas H. Strawn, president
of the u S. Chamber of Commerce, advocating
in a speech over the radio on Sept g. that:
"The great problem that now confronts the
world is to gear down the productive machin-
ery so that it will synchronize with the con-
sumptive capacity
This reactionary proposal was hailed as
great idea. eve must mention here that what
he says is "consumptive capacity is the buy
ing capacity" which is quite differently. But
even when such a reactionary proposal is put
forward as something fine Tor the workers, IL Is
still reactionary proposal
We caution workers not TO be deluoeQ liiVo
thinking that the word "reactionary" Is limited
to lynchers trike-breakers and fascist violence
against the working class. Here, for example IN
the N Y Times of Oct 81, we find the follow
ing quotation from an article praising the KEEL
lopp Food Products Co., OF Battle Greek, Mich:
"a few weeks ago when the development was
announced of a new machine which would have
displaced 100 workers and effect a considerable
saving In operating costs, Mr. Kellogg refused 10
have 1t installed This is no time TO o1spiace
workers., he said"
In spite OF the charitable" excuse, this Is re-
dictionary. and we will bet that 1t Is hypocritcai
IN boot. Because capitalists aren't built that
wav. and what Is doubtless the case is that Dy
shedding I'D the workers at low rates the pniian-
throp,c Mr. kellogg finds that he can make more
proft than by going to the expense OF puyi,e
the machine.
And that. too is reactonary OBSTRUCTION o.
nropress lust as in China where one may sec
IN men-and women--pulling great ioau =.
lumber where motor or even nofseS' h'N
do It,
But even giving credit for a doubtful senti-
want oY consideration for the 100 workers who
might be thrown out OF work by the machine,
still it is reactionary not to instaH 1t. because
ultimate progress, and even the narrower in1ef-
est of these 100 workers. require TINS machine w
be used and the workers to tight 70 sociah1e ~
Progress demands that the machine be useo'
the workers freed from the labor BUT benefit
from, the social ownership Of the machine. Yet
the boss is good" He makes the workers siaVf
for his own profit and poses as ''pnliantnrop-
ist."
They are not SECURE even in the socially
unnecessary work they might be doing by pre-
venting the installation OF the machine. The
Job is not theirs, but the company's, and by re-
tardng mechanical progress they are laying the
basis for real shortage In production through
a reversal OF progress--a retrogression that can
not possibly benefit the workers.
II this is not SO, then it is perfectly sensible
and progressive to abolish railroads and go in
for the ox-cart, to destroy the steam shovel and
use teaspoons, ETC., ETC. Capitalism Is become
openly reactionary Ut wasn't once). and the only
progressive thing now to do is 10 overthrow It's
rule. ------