The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1934-02-26
Thomas DraeUs Counter.
Revolutionary Lessons


Of Fasosn. Writing with editorial calm in the latest
issue Of the New Leader, Socialist Party organ Thomas
derives the following lesson from the heroic struggles Of
the Austrian working class:
Heroic and inspiring as the Austrian struggle
was it shows once more at what disadvantage
workers against q government with plenty Of
munitions, whose troops remain loyal"
The lesson which Norman Thomas draws therefore,
is that the road Of the Austrian proletarat not
road which the working class should follow. The road
Of the Austrian proletariat Is heroic and inspiring
but not to be emuated be repeated by the work
ers In other countries.
It In this way that the socisl-Democrs&s ike
Piekhanov greeted the uprsngs Of the Russian prole
tariat in 1906 They should not have taken arms" he
said.
But it was not in this way that Marx or Lenin re-
ceved the OF the prolearian armed struggles Of
the Paris Commune in 1871 the armed struggles in
1905 and later in Czarist Russia
But did he rebuke the Paris workers for their nght
against odds? On the contrary he hailed them In
the memorable words, They Stormlng the heaxenS
Marx proceeded to treasure every incident of the
Paris Commune TO anayse and evaluate its revolu-
tionsry lessons that its mistakes would not be
peated in future struggles From the defeat Of the
Commune, Marx did not, as Norman Thomas does,
draw the conclusion that revolutionary armed struggle
for the overthrow Of capitalism is impossible On the
contrary he hailed the Paris uprising the torermner
Of even greater armed struggesl
In 1906 the Russian workers were defeated in their
uprising against Czasm Did Lenn therefore, derive
the lesson as PekhanoY ater to develop into an out
and out social-chauvinist support Of imperiast
did? On the contrary he hailed the armed uprising
Of the Russian workers the "dress rehearsal Of the
coming revolution" Who right, Lenin OK the So
cAl-patriot Plekhanov7
Norman Thomas states that the Austrian workers
we're at disadvantage" and that workers will always
be st disadvantage"
Certainly the working class is faced with great diff
culties in its struggle to overthrow capitalism But
from this circumstance It becomes the task Of revolt
tonary leaders to forty the workers against these
dincutes TO minimize these dif1cultieS much as
possible.
Instead, Norman Thomas, derives the lesson that
the difficulties Of the proIetaran revolution make the
revolution impossible! HIS words about the Austrian
uprising are in reality rebuke to these workers and
warning against any attempt to overthrow capitalism
by force He is in reality arguing against all working
class revolution and cppins all preparations FOR this
revolution.
what were the disadvantages" OF the Austrian
workers? They were nadequately armed, poorly pre-
pared and lacking in determined, unified leadership
directing the struggle toward definite objective.
But who was responsible for these disadvantages"
Il was the very Democratic leaders who are res
ponsble for theml The workers lacked proper arms
but was 1t not the Socialist leaders who disarmed
sole defense the Republican Armed Guards (schutz-
bund)P DID not the Socialist Mayor seitz OF Vienna
enforce the dissolution Of the working class Schultz
bund defence forces? Did he not break up the work
ers' ranks, while permitting the Fascist Heimwehr
troops to go unmoested? Did not Otto Bauer urge the
Austrian workers to submit patiently to search Tor
arms2"
Did not the Socialist leaders han the appointment
Of the Dollfuss generals to the posts Of Security
Commissioners" great achievement against the
Nazs? And did NOT these very same Dollfuss gen.
erals lead the troops against the Socialist workers?
II the Socialist leaders-f the Socialist Mayor for
example-had used their power to arm the workers
and disarm the Fascists would the Socialist workers
have been at such disadvantage"
Norman Thomas speaks about the loyal soldiers OF
the government What made these soldiers so loya7
Did the Socialist leaders seek to undermine this
loyalty by propagandizng the troops2 The Cars
army was also loyal for long time-and he had the
Cossacks most loyal OF mercenary troops against Cne
But the BolsheyikS under the leadership OF Lenn,
broke down this loyalty by working in the ranks Of the
army who as Lenin said, mainly workers and
peasants uniform The Cars army refused to shoot
at the workers after the Bolshevks made their in
fluence felt The Socialist leaders never consider 1t
vital task to propaganda in the army for the revolu-
ton The Socialist leaders take step toward
preparing the workers for armed struggle against capt.
taism but the contrary, strive with every possible
prevent this armed struggle against the capt.
talist dictatorship.
NORMAN THOMAS speaks about the reactionary role
Nof the Austrian peasantry. But who responsible
for isolating the Austrian proletarat from the OPP
pressed peasantry If not the Socialist leaders, Why
did not the Socialist leaders strive to unite the peas
antry with the proetariat against the capitalists and
big feudal landlords? Instead every step Of Socialist
policy directed toward driving wedge between the
Austrian peasants and the Austrian workers.
The Bolsheviks under Lenins leadership, succeeded
smashing Czarist capitalist oppression because they
aimed at and succeeded in building the alliance OF the
proletariat with the oppressed peasant masses With
out this they could not have 5
1t is the eternal glory OF the Austrian proletariat
that they took major step towards breaking the
parayzing influence OF the Socialist leaders, and be-
gan to talk in the language Bolsheyis the language
Of armed struggle for the overthrow Of the capitalist
dictatorship
Norman Thomas draws a coumter-revolutonary
lesson from the heroic struggles Of the Austrian workers