The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1934-01-29
MARxIsM DOES NOT MEAN EoUALITARIANIsM

WIFI. these pCOplt dppdIbIlGly Jul y
understand the deep chasm that lies
between enrich yourself and the
farmer "well-to-do" slo-
gans. Firstly, only some individuals
or groups can enrich themselves"
while the "well-to-do" slogan con-
Germs not mere individuals or groups,
but all Kolkhozniks. Secondly, in
diyidualS or groups become rich in
order to subordinate and exploit
ether people, while all collective
farmers "Well-to-Go' slogan under
socialized means Of production ex-
cludes the possibility Of exploitation
Of others. Thirdly, enrich yourself"
slogan, given during the Nep New
Economic Policy, initial period when
capitalism was partly restored. when
Kulaks we're strong, when individual
farming predominsted, While Kol-
khozes were in an embryonic state,
the Kolkhozniks "well-to-do'
slogan is given in Nep's last stage,
when capitalist elements in industry
have been destroyed, and Kulaks in
villages have been smashed, indi-
vidusl farmers pushed to a secondary
position, and KolkhozeS are the pre-
dominant agricultural forms.
don't mention that Kolkhoznik's
"well-to-do" slogan is issued not iso-
latedly, but is inseparably connected
with the make Kolkhozes- Bolshevik
organizations slogan. Isn't 1t clear
that the enrich yourself slogan
essentially meant a call to restore
capitalism, while Kolkhoznik well
to-do" slogan is a call to destroy the
last of cepitalisns remnants by eco
nomically strengthening the collec-
tive farms and making Kolkhozniks
well to do toilers?
Isn't it clear that these two slogans
have nothing in common? AS to the
argument that neither BolsheYik
work nor socialism Is conceivable
without the poor, 1t is embarrassing
TO speak Of such nonsense. Lenin-
lists seek poor peasant support when
capitalist and poor elements exist,
and the former exploits the latter.
But when capitalist elements are
smashed, and when poor peasants
are freed from exploitation, it's not
the Leninist's task to perpetuate and
preserve poverty and poor peasants,
the prerequisites for whose existence
have been destroyed, but to abolish
poverty and raise the poor to the
wen-to-do level 1t would be silly
to assume that socialism can be built
on the basis of poverty and priva-
ton, on basis of curtailed private
consumption and lowered living
standards to the level Of the poor,
vino resent being poor, who want
prosperity. Who needs such mock
cry on socialism? That's not social
ism, but a caricature.
Socialism can be built only on the
basis Of the stormy growth of soci-
ety's productive forces, on the basis
of plentiful products and goods, on
the basis of well-to-do toilers, on the
basis Of fast cultural growth, because
socialism, MARKHAM socialism, means
not curtailed private demands but ex-
panSion and poisoning, not self
denial but full satisfaction of all cul-
tured workers demands. There can
be no doubt that this confusion in
the minds of some party members
concerning poverty and prosperity re-
fleets views of muddleheaded left
lists" who idealize poor peasantry as
eternal, Bolshevism's support under
any and all circumstances, and regard
kolkhozes as an area Of fierce class
struggles.
Evidently that the theological rem
nantS of smashed anti-party groups
has not lost It; tally here was
clearly shown such muddleheaded
ideas triumphed, then the kolkhozes
would not have had the successes such
as they scored in the past two years
and they would soon crumble. Take
for instance the National question. It
should be mentioned that the capital
ist ideas in peoples minds are much
more vital in the National question
than on any other sphere. 1t is more
vital, because 1t is able TO don q ma
tioanl costume. What do these Ma
tionalist deYiations mean, regardless
of whether they are great Russian
Nationalism or local Nationansm?
The Nationalist deviation is an
adaptation of International working
class policy to Nationalist bourgeois
policy. The Nationalist deviation re-
fleets native" national" bourgeois
attempts to undermine the Soviet
order and to restore capitalism. In
both instances the deviations have a
common source, namely a departure
from feminist Internationahsm. If
you wish to fight both deviations
tight primarily their source, fight
departerS from internationalism re-
CARELESS whether they revert to local
or Great Russian Ma
tionahsm. STORMY applause.)
That deviation is the most danger
Gus against which the fight has
stopped and which is given an oppor-
tunity to become a big source OF
danger. prolonged applause.) Re-
Gently the Ukrainian Nationalist de-
Walton was not the main danger, but
when the fight against 1t ceased, and
it was given an opportunity to merge
with Interyentionists, it became the
main danger. The same is true of
Right and left" deviation. AS in
other spheres Of general policies, con-
fusion prevails here among some
Party members. While combating the
Right deviation, the fight is at times
weakened against LEFT" deviation,
that it is not dangerous or
is small danger. That is g serious
dangerous error. 1t is concession to
Left" deviation, and is objectionable
10 Party members, the more so since
LET'S have lately gone over COM
pletely TO and with the Rights and
no how differ from them.
We always commended "Lefts" con-
- n.