The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1932-05-28

AT flrSC wilson Kept us out OF
war;, then he plunged us into war
not to make the world safe for de-
mocrscy, but to avoid "a panic for
Wall Street, a war to maintain
high profits for the house of Nor
gan. This before mentioned brief
sentence from Ambassador Pages
letter to Wilson tears to shreds the
tissue of pacifist lies prior to and
after Americas entry into the world
war.
Labor and Socialist brand of
pacifism is even more dangerous
than the official brand of pacifism
of the government. Here, too, it is
we'll to contrast few statements
made prior to and during the i'm
perialist war. Let us take the old
Gompers On May. 26, 1916, speak
ing before the League to Enforce
Peace, at Washington, D. c., he
made the following statement:
mo class has more to lose and
less to gain in the war than the
workers 49, Recognizing this,
workers the world over have
sworn undying opposition to the
forces that make for war"
A few months later as we were
getting closer to war, in october,
1916, Gompers came out in his true
colors when he said:
u am free to say that in our
international relations am an
ultra pacifist until the breaking
cut of this war"
The old servant of the bosses was
quite right. What he said is true
of all pacifists. They are ultra paci-
fists until the breaking out of war;
and then they shout the loudest
for war and give their blessing to it
by attaching high-sounding ideals.
Just as the japanese socialist de-
clared that the present war against
the Chinese people lis not a CAPT
talist war" so did Gompers in Feb
ruary, 1918, officially declared this
war is an honorable war -. 1t is
not a capitalist war"
The Socialist End International
has of late been very active in is
suing high-sounding manifestoes
against war The greater the trea-
cherry and open participation of the
socialists with their respective i'm
perialist governments, the more
pacifist and revolutionary phrases
are being used to cover up their
active preparation for and leader
ship in imperialist war.
Mr.. Thomas appeared before the
Congressional committee which was
discussing war policies, where he
made the following statements in
May, 1881:
'If understand my friend. Mr..
LaGuardia, correctly, he is for a
constitutional amendment which
would permit US to take over ev-
erything we need for war. If we
were On the verge Of war, should
probably be for it -. 1 had want
ed to congratulate the commits
sion and the country upon the
dawning, if somewhat muddle-
headed, conviction that, when it
comes to a real emergency like
war, the ever blessed profit sys-
tenn won't work without an i'm
mense degree of control. AS So
cialist L rejoice in this even as
1 rejoiced in the demonstration
given by the last war that plan
ned production is absolutely es-
sential."
SO here we have it, imperialist
war presented as a blessing in dis
guise. Mr.. Thomas tells us that it
will help to bring about planned
production and he rejoiceS at the
socialist" features of the conduct
of the last imperialist war Here
we see that under the guise of So
cialism Mr.. Thomas advises the i'm
periaIsts how to more effectively
carry on imperialist war and at the
same time he presents this pro-
gram to the workers as brand OF
socialism.
The socialism and the planned
production advocated by Thomas al
the Congressional hearing. does not
really differ in the slightest from
Hooyers ideas which were express.