The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1934-09-12
Third Installment)
1. eve ARE INSULTED"

1. eve ARE INsULTED"
MOST of the Social-Democratic Party leaders
IVA reject the proposals for united front on the
grounds that they feel themselves to have been
insulted by the Communists. We find this most
clearly expressed in the answer given by the Party
executive of the German Social Democratic Labor
Party in Czecho-Slovakia In this letter published
in the Prague Soziademokrat of July 10, 1880 we
read as follows:
I'VE astOunded that after all you have
done in long years of work to prevent common
actions of the whole prOletariat, you should ap-
proaeh with an offer like this We do not
understand how, after you have for years hurled
the epithet Of social fascist at u.s. you call
upon for common struggle against fascism. We
cannot grasp how you invite to joint COM
batting of the war danger when you have SIAN
dered fnstigatOrs of war and social-impe-
ralists. We thus unable to organize any
joint actions with you since it is impossible for
for us to join you in your policy of insncerty and
double dealing and since the most elementary
claims of seif-respect forbid to allow ourselves
to be simultaneously wooed and spat upon by
you"
If I were a Social Democratic worker, would
have told my leaders the following in this connec-
ton:
QUESTIONS TO SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC LEADERS
number of bourgeois politicians who in the past
have ruthlessly prosecuted the Social-Democratic
workers, This has been the case in every country
where Social-Democratic Party leaders sat or sit
together in one government with bourgeois poll
ticans. The fact that the bourgeois parties in
conjunction with which the Social-Democratic Party
leaders look after the business of the bourgeois
state have also prosecuted Social Democratic work
ers, did not prevent you from forming a coalition
IIith fOr
chairman of the Second International entered the
government, he most probably took his seat beside
bourgeois ministers who in his youth had heaped
abuse upon him as a Social Democrat, or even per-
secuted him.
When at the beginning of the imperiast war
it proclaimed that the nation was in danger
did you not "bury the Ratchet" with the leacers
OF bourgeois parties did you not join hands with
them? Now, however, it is a real danger which
is threatening our class the danger of fascsm,
the danger of the offensive of capital. How can l.
simple member of my party, understand how it
was that the proclamation of danger to the
try caused my leaders to become reconciled with the
class enemy, whereas the real danger menacing
our class cannot induce these same leaders to en-
ter into common action with my class comrades
from the Communist Party for the interests of my
class against the dangers with which the class
enemy is threatening us.
WHAT ARE THE REAL OBSTACLES?
ut is true that the Communists have called the
Socia-Democratic leaders socal-fascsts and social
imperialists did not agree with this despite the
fact that the Communists never treated me as
social-fascist a social-mperialist since I was
their work-mate and rank and-fie member of
my party. am glad that it has come to this
that the Communist Parties have declared in the
interests of the unity of action of the whole work
ing class that they will making attacks on
the Social-Democratic leaders during the period of
joint actions 1t is all the more incomprehensble
to me that my party leaders should want to treat
the hard words that have been said as a permanent
obstacle to the united action of the working class
whereas the Communist Parties, whose leaders and
members have been not only abused but also fired
upon by many al-Democratic leaders stretch
out their hand to us for struggle against the
mon class enemy.
I cannot understand why the Social-Democratic
leaders want to take hard words as a permanent
obstacle to unity of action at time when for
example the Communist Party OF Czeeho- Slovakia,