The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1933-11-21

ing class behind it. That, Of course
does not mean that the Social Demo-
cratic Party had not lost influence
among the working class. Despite
all tEat, the SociGl-Democrati Partya
succeeded in lliadcring the Commu-
n'st Fcr5y :o11 organizing effective
r2s-cta-acc e tho mom9n5 of Hitler's
snsrcnco to roge-. ~
When we sp2a.. of the treacherV
of the Social-Democratic leaders who
consciously and purposely sabotage all
the offers of the Communists to foam
a united front of struggle against
Fascism, against the capitalist often
sive, then we must not close our eyes
to the fact that the mass of the So
cial-Democrati workers have also
not accepted the offer Of the Com
munists regarding the formation OF
united front.
The Executive Committee Of the
Communist International and the
Communist Party of Germany ON
their part have carried on the
struggle against the identification OF
the Social-Democratic workers with
the traitorous leaders because In
number of countries. also in Ger
many, left phrases were widely dis
S2nipated which represented the,
Sccial-Democrati workers in the fac
tories. at the labor exchanges as small
''zoergiebels," as "f'ascists" This
tactic delayed the Social Democratic
workers from coming over to the
Communities and made the creation
of the united front of revolutionary
struggle more difficult. The C. P. G.
came out against these methods Of
a mass work. This tactic was cor
rect at that time and also remainsi
correct today Does that mean, how
ever, that we must ignore the new
factors that are characteristic for the
most recent events in Germany?
In every case where the Social
Democratic workers took up the
struggle, the Communists always
stepped into the front ranks of the
fighters and received the heaviest
blows of the class enemy. Do the.
Communists have to come out and
say what was. j. e., that they had
called upon the Social Democratic
workers to form a united front and
that the mass of the Social Demo-
cratic workers did not accept this Of
fer? They must say this by all
means! The mass of the Social
Democratic workers did not react to
the Communists offer Of united
front because they were fettered by
their leaders. because they still
blindly believed these leaders.
The main cause for the temporary
retreat of the G. P. G.. and the VIC
tory Of the counter-revolution fas-
+ IS lies in the fact that the Social
Democratic workers still rendered
obedience to their leaders who sup
ported the reactionary front Of the
bolr2eoisie and were against the &C.
ceptance OF the Communists offer to
form revolutionary united front
The C. P. G. could not organize a sue
cessful struggle against the fasciSts
because the Social-Democratic Party
which had split the working class,
was able to hold back its members
from establishing united front with
the Communists.
Who is directly TO blame for the
temporary victory Of the Fascists?
Naturally. the Social-Democrati
leaders who consciously betrayed the
struggle c. the workers in the inter-
ests Of the bourgeoisie Can it be
said, however, that the Social Demo-
cratic workers as a whole do not bear
any political responsibility for the
practical refusal to participate in q
united front against Fascism? No,
one cannot say that. If the Conmu-
nists want to intensity their agitation
among the SociaI-Democratic work.
crs, they must openly point out their
serious mistake which has had such
weighty consequences for the working
class. This should be done all the
mere as the Social-Democratic lead
ers still play at left" maneuvers and
can create illegal" organizations in
order to once again deceive the So
cial-Democratic workers and keep
them back from goingA over to the
Communist Party Of Germany.
Ito Be Continued)