| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: The Red Conspiracy
Author: Mereto, Joseph J.
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Red Conspiracy" ***
The Red Conspiracy
BY
JOSEPH J. MERETO
1920
THE NATIONAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY
37 West 39th Street, New York
This book proves the existence of the Red Peril. We publish it to warn
America. We ask the help of every loyal American, organization and
institution to put "The Red Conspiracy" in every home, school and
library in the land. Price, cloth bound, $2.15 postpaid; in paper, $1.10
postpaid.
Chapters of the book and parts of chapters can also be supplied in
pamphlet and leaflet form for wide distribution. Write us for
particulars.
The National Historical Society
37 West 39th Street, New York
_Copyright, 1920, by
The National Historical Society_
INTRODUCTION
As a mark of sincere gratitude for all that he owes to his Country from
birth, the author of "The Red Conspiracy" hereby dedicates his work to
his fellow-countrymen, trusting that it will prove a bulwark of defense
for our Star-Spangled Banner and constitutional form of government, now
so violently assailed by disloyal American citizens, as well as by
Marxian rebels from abroad who have deceived many of the uneducated or
trained them in ways of evil.
While "The Red Conspiracy" will appeal strongly to all who are seeking a
clear and comprehensive knowledge of Socialism, Bolshevism, Communism
and I. W. W.'ism, it will be of special value to the workingmen of
America, as it will enable them easily to understand the fallacies of
the Revolutionists and at the same time make them realize the serious
dangers that would result from the adoption of any of the various
radical programs.
Friendship, indeed, the "Knights of the Red Flag" profess for the
laboring man. Such friendship, however, once it is understood will be
spurned, for it is one which would plunge the sons of toil into a
terrible abyss of injustice, deprivation and suffering--wrongs far
greater than those endured from abuses of capitalism and partial
corruption of some government officials.
At the very beginning of this work, the author wishes to express his
heartfelt sympathy for poor men and women who are treated unjustly by
employers, as well as with all who receive too small a recompense for
their wearisome labors. It is, indeed, a source of deep regret to us
that in consequence of injustice and uncharitableness, there are to be
found in this rich republic numbers of our fellow-countrymen, not merely
men and women but even innocent little children, who can scarcely
relieve the pangs of their hunger by the coarsest kinds of food and have
naught but rags for clothes and huts for homes. Feeling deep concern for
these poor people, and for all who suffer either from employers or from
defects of government, we trust that "The Red Conspiracy" will not only
help toward remedying many of the evils that now weigh heavily upon the
working class, but help to avert the far more dreadful evils that would
result from the adoption of Socialism, Bolshevism, Communism, and I. W.
W.'ism.
For many years the author has made a careful study of radicalism, and
during that time has read not only many thousands of Socialist and I. W.
W. papers, leaflets, pamphlets and books, but also most of the leading
works against Socialism in the English language. We have sought to
gather an illuminating collection of quotations, not merely from
standard Marxian publications, but from the speeches of Socialists of
unquestioned authority in the international movement. These open
confessions of the Revolutionists cannot fail to interest the reader and
will certainly arouse the deep indignation of every fair-minded person
against a propaganda of deception which is working fast to wreck modern
civilization.
No doubt the readers of "The Red Conspiracy" will be interested to learn
that many of the revelations made in this book are brought to light
through purchase by the author himself of revolutionary papers and
pamphlets on sale in the spring and summer of 1919 at the National
Headquarters of the Socialist Party, the Chas. H. Kerr Socialist
Publishing Company, and the National Headquarters of the I. W. W., all
in Chicago, and also in leading Socialist bookstores of Chicago, New
York, and Philadelphia. The matter obtained in these centres of
underworld corruption and anarchy could not have been procured had the
author ransacked every public library in the United States.
Though loyalty and patriotism should always inspire us to defend our
country against its foes, we must concede to the Socialists that human
government, whether national, state or municipal, is by no means free
from serious defects; and we are bound to admit that representatives of
the American people, as well as men engaged in business and commerce,
have too often been guilty of dishonesty, injustice and cruelty to the
suffering poor.
Law-abiding citizens, while very much regretting that wrongs such as
these should exist, confidently hope to reduce them to a reasonable
minimum by methods of social reform still more effective than those that
have already brought to an end not a few of the evils prevalent in days
gone by. Prudence and charity suggest to true social reformers
reasonable constitutional and lawful methods by which to correct abuses
instead of adding to their number by adopting Socialism. We have already
seen too much of the work of the "Reds" in Europe and in parts of
Mexico, and we do not wish to behold our fellow-countrymen shedding more
blood and suffering graver evils, under Socialism, than they did during
the terrible World War.
Loyal and patriotic citizens of America, judging from the progress that
has been made in the past in matters of social reform, have every reason
for looking forward confidently to the success of their efforts--unless,
indeed, the Revolutionists, by greatly increasing their numbers, should
divide the workingmen of our country into two big parties, comprising,
respectively, the Socialists and the anti-Socialists, whose main purpose
it would then be to fight each other instead of joining forces against
social abuses. If the Revolutionists should gain very large numbers of
recruits, there would be, on the one hand, a great party consisting of
those whose object it would be to destroy our present form of
government, as well as the entire industrial system, and, on the other,
an opposition party, embracing good citizens and men of common sense and
intelligence, who, because of their realization of the blessings which
privately-owned industries and our constitutional form of government
have bestowed upon the people of America, would be determined to shed
the last drop of their blood in defense of them.
The Socialists, however, are not satisfied with social reform, but are
bent on the total destruction of our system of government and industry,
holding the system itself, rather than the faults and shortcomings of
men, to be by its very nature responsible for all the economic evils of
the day. "Down with the Stars and Stripes" is their cry. "Abolish
religion and the present form of marriage." "Atheism and free-love must
reign supreme." Then, trusting that workingmen will admire anything,
provided that it be adorned in sufficiently glowing colors, they paint
such fabulous pictures of Socialism as the following:
"Hundreds of thousands of former representatives of the state will
enter various professions, and by their intelligence and strength
will help to increase the wealth and comfort of society. Neither
political nor common crimes will be known in the future. Thieves
will have disappeared because private property will have
disappeared, and in the new society everybody will be able to
satisfy his wants easily and conveniently by work. Nor will there
be tramps and vagabonds, for they are the product of a society
founded on private property, and with the abolition of this
institution they will cease to exist. Murder? Why? No one can
enrich himself at the expense of others, and even murder for
hatred or revenge is directly or indirectly connected with the
social system. Perjury, false testimony, fraud, theft of
inheritance, fraudulent failures? There will be no private property
against which these crimes could be committed. Arson? Who should
find satisfaction in committing arson when society has removed all
cause for hatred? Counterfeiting? Money will be but a mere chimera,
it would be love's labor lost! Blasphemy? Nonsense! It will be left
to good Almighty God himself to punish whoever has offended him,
provided that the existence of God is still a matter of
controversy." ("Woman Under Socialism," by Bebel, page 436 of the
1910 edition in English.)
As an immense number of American citizens would not be led astray by
these foolish promises, or by others equally absurd--recalling how
political and common crimes, theft, murder, arson, perjury, worthless
currency, blasphemy and political corruption have ruined Socialist
Russia and made it a hell on earth--a dreadful revolution would be
necessary to compel our countrymen to surrender their cherished rights.
The Socialists, if victorious, after having set up a new form of
government, modeled on their own low ideas of morality, would not only
substitute a free-love regime for the present form of marriage, but,
going still further, would avail themselves of every opportunity for
destroying religion. The evils, however, would by no means end here, for
the new government, whose rapid decay would begin from the very day of
its birth, would in a short time collapse and fall, and then the
citizens of America would have neither a government to protect them from
the ravages of criminals, whose number would be legion, nor yet any
suitable system of organized industries for the employment of men and
the production of the necessaries of life. Consequently, trials and
sufferings incomparably greater than any of the present day would befall
the people in the reign of anarchy that would ensue.
It is to preserve our fellow-countrymen from ever having to endure such
calamities that we have undertaken this work, in which it is proven
conclusively that the "Reds," unless quickly thwarted, will overwhelm us
with unspeakable horrors of crime, rebellion, anarchy and destitution.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION iii
Scope of Book, iii; Value to Workingmen, iii; Sympathy for Labor,
iii; Quotations from Socialist Authorities, iv; Revolutionists Set
Back the Cause of Labor, v; Bebel's Fabulous Picture of Socialist
Possibilities, v; Socialism Means War, vi.
CHAPTER I
SOCIALISM IN OTHER LANDS 1
Modern Socialism Dates from "Communist Manifesto," 1848, 1; Karl
Marx, 1; Engels, 1; International Workingmen's Association, 1;
"Capital" by Marx, the Socialist Bible, 2; Socialism in Germany, 2;
in Bavaria, 4; in Russia, 4; Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, 5;
Socialism in Austria-Hungary, 5; in France, 5; in Great Britain, 8;
in Italy, 9; in Spain, 9; in Belgium, 10; in Holland, 10; in
Bohemia, 10; in Sweden, 11; in Norway, 11; in Argentina, 11; in
Canada, 12; in Bulgaria, 12; in Mexico, 12; in Other Foreign Lands,
12.
CHAPTER II
GROWTH OF SOCIALISM IN THE UNITED STATES 13
Introduced from Europe, 13; Workingmen's Party, 13; Socialist Labor
Party, 13; Socialist Democracy of America, 13; Socialist Party of
America, 13; Socialist Periodicals, 14; Socialist Party Strife and
Bossism, 14; The Internatonal, 16; The First International, 16; The
Second International, 16; International Socialist Bureau, 17;
American Socialists and the International, 17; The Berne
Conference, 18; The Third (Moscow) International, 18; Debs and
American Socialists Recognized by Lenine, 20; American Socialists'
Straddle Resolution on Berne and Moscow, 21.
CHAPTER III
THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF AMERICA DEVELOPS A LEFT WING 23
Revolution Camouflaged as Evolution, 23; "Yellows," "Reds,"
"Rights" and "Lefts," 23; Origin of the Left Wing, 24;
Revolutionary Principles of the Left Wing, 24; Sympathy with
Russian Bolshevism, 25; Industrial Unionism Advocated, 26; Mass
Action and Strikes the Prelude to Armed Rebellion, 26; "Moderate"
Socialism Rejected by American Revolutionists, 28; To Overthrow the
United States Government, 30; Text of Call to Moscow International,
31; American Socialist Party for "Industrial Unionism," 34.
CHAPTER IV
THE FREE-FOR-ALL FIGHT BETWEEN THE RIGHT AND LEFT WINGS 35
Rowdies at Socialist Meetings, 35; Revolution in America "at Hand,"
36; "Existence of the Party at Stake," 37; "The Steering
Committee," 38; Hillquit Says Left Wing is Not "Too Radical," 40;
"Friendly Separation," 41; The Left Wing Gets More "Dictatorship"
Than It Wants, 42; The Rights Expel and Suspend Tens of Thousands,
42; The Socialists' "Immortal" Executive Committee, 42; Manifesto
of the Third (Moscow) International, 45.
CHAPTER V
BIRTH OF THE COMMUNIST AND COMMUNIST LABOR PARTIES 52
Left Wing Conference, 52; Left Wingers Split, 52; Call for a
Communist Convention, 53; Too Many Would-Be Lenines and Trotzkys,
54; The "Firing Squad," 55; National Emergency Convention, 55; Who
Called the "Cops"? 57; A Convention on Each Floor, 57; The
Communist and Communist Labor Parties Organize, 57; Their
Principles, 58; "Reds" No Worse Than "Yellows," 58; Bolshevism of
the Socialist Party, 59; Utterances at the Emergency Conference,
60; Revolutionary Character of the Socialist Party, 65;
Trachtenberg on Affiliation with Moscow International, 68;
Glassberg Letter, 69; Victor L. Berger, 70; American Socialists
Join the Third International, 74; Hillquit Encourages the
Communists, 74; The Socialist Party's Revolutionary Manifesto,
71-75.
CHAPTER VI
SOCIALISM IN THEORY 79
Socialist Office-holding is Not Socialism, 77, 85; Collective
Ownership, 80; I. W. W. Point of View, 80; Socialism Explained
Diversely by Its Leaders, 80; Hillquit's Notion, 81; Debs' Demand,
81; American Socialists to "Capture the Government," 82; Analysis
of Collective Ownership, 82; All Women to Work, 84; Atheism and
Free-Love, 85; Poetry from the "Call," 86; Don't Judge Socialism by
Reform Planks in Platforms, 87; Socialists Attack Their Own Social
Reform Program, 89; Unpatriotic Attitude of Socialists in the War,
92.
CHAPTER VII
SOCIALISM IN PRACTICE 94
Herron's Socialist Day Dream, 94; Communist Experiments in Russia
and Hungary, 94; Socialism in Yucatan, 96; "Zapata, Great Socialist
Leader of Southern Mexico," 97; Act of the Second: "Zapata, a
Tyrant, Who Played a Huge Joke on 100,000 Confiding Workers Whom He
Exploited," 101; Socialist Experiment in Russia, 103.
CHAPTER VIII
THE I. W. W. 105
A "Dangerous" Organization, 105; Its Origin, 105; Industrial
Unionism Explained, 106; Organization by Industries, 107; I. W. W.
Preamble, 107; Revolutionary Aims, 108; Conceptions of Right and
Wrong, 108; Violent Tactics, 100; Revolution by Means of the
"General Strike," 109; "Government Will Disappear," 110;
Remuneration for Work and the "Man-Day," 111; Doctrine and Examples
of Sabotage, 111.
CHAPTER IX
INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD IN ACTION 114
I. W. W. Trials and Socialist Support, 114; Revolutionary Threats,
115; Plotting Against the United States, 116; I. W. W.
Publications, 116; Propaganda Among Foreigners, 117; The Paterson
Strike, 117; The I. W. W. Atheistic and Anti-Religious, 118;
Arousing the Negro, 119; Arousing the Chinese, 120; I. W. W. Songs,
120; Socialists Favor the I. W. W., 122; Pretended Anti-Sabotage
Policy of the Socialist Party, 124; Gene Debs in Love with Bill
Haywood, 126; I. W. W. Attitude Toward Bolshevism, 128; Drawing
Together of Radicals, 129; "Left Wing" Socialists and the I. W. W.,
131; I. W. W. Help in Establishing Russian Bolshevism, 133;
Socialist Drift Toward I. W. W.'ism, 135; Growth of Syndicalism
Throughout the World, 136.
CHAPTER X
BOLSHEVIST RULE IN RUSSIA 138
Rise of Russian Bolshevists, 138; Bolshevist Constitution, 139;
Land Confiscation in Socialist Russia, 140; Peasant Warfare, 141;
The Russian Soviets, 142; "Liberty" in Socialist Russia, 145;
Justice in Bolsheviki-land, 146; Bolshevist Atheism and Religious
Persecution, 146; Church and State "Separated," 147; Michigan Left
Wing "Lets the Cat Out of the Bag," 149; Education Under Lenine's
Government, 151.
CHAPTER XI
RUSSIA RED WITH BLOOD AND BLACK WITH CRIME 153
The Red Terror, 153-5; "Take Our Lives But Spare Our Children,"
156; 500 Butchered in a Night, 157; Horrors of Bolshevik Prisons,
158; Atrocities and Tortures, 159; Petrograd, "City of the Dead,"
160; 76 Uprisings, 161; "Criminal Element" in Office, 161; "A Lapse
Into Barbarity," 162; Nationalization of Women, 163; "The Bureau of
Free Love," 166; Forcible Abolition of Celibacy, 167; The "Call"
Lauds Bolshevism, 168; "S. O. S., An Appeal to Humanity," 169;
"Every Pore" of Russia's "Body Shedding Blood," 170; Lenine Working
for World-Wide Bolshevism,[1] 170; Official Bolshevist[2] Organ in
New York, 172; American Socialists Want Bolshevism, 173;
Bolshevism's Economic Failure Revealed by Lincoln Eyre, 173; After
Destroying "Capitalism" Lenine Seeks "Foreign Capital," 174;
Bolshevism Has Sacrificed "the Health of Future Generations," 175;
Trotzky Offers "Foreign Capitalists" a "Share of the Profits" from
Russian Conscript Labor, 175.
CHAPTER XII
EUROPEAN SPARTACIDES AND COMMUNISTS 177
Spartacides of Germany, 177; Origin of Name, 177; Violent
Principles, 177; Rowdies and Ruffians Approved by American
Socialists, 177; Spartacan Terrorism, 178; Communists of Bavaria,
178; Terrorism in Munich, 179; The Peasants Rise While the
Communists Plunder, 179; American Socialists Allied With the Scum
of Bavaria, 179; Communists of Hungary, 180; Free-Lovers, 180;
Churches Converted Into Music Halls, 180; Budapest Painted Red,
180; American Socialists Lined Up With European Thugs, 181.
CHAPTER XIII
THE BOLSHEVISM OF AMERICAN SOCIALISTS 182
Pink Booklet "About Russia," 182; Lenine Tells Why Bolshevism
Requires "A World Revolution," 183; American Socialists "Greet"
Bolshevist "Ambassador," 184; Poem on Liebknecht, 185; The "Call"
Endorses Communism, Bolshevism and Spartacism, 186; Hillquit Hails
Foreign Radicals, 188; American Socialist Papers Are Bolshevist,
188-93; Debs a "Bolshevik" and "Flaming Revolutionist," 194.
CHAPTER XIV
VIOLENCE, BLOODSHED AND ARMED REBELLION 196
Socialist Riots, 196; Trouble at Gary, 197; Haywood Says Socialists
are Conspirators Against U. S. Government, 199; Jack London on the
International "Fighting Organization," 200; Berger Says Socialists
"Must Shoot," 201; "Blow Open the Vaults of the Banks," 202;
Haywood and Bohn Say the Socialist "Does Not Hesitate to Break" the
Laws, 203; "I am Law Abiding Under Protest," Says Debs, "and Bide
My Time," 203; Scott Nearing "Wants War," 205.
CHAPTER XV
PATRIOTISM RIDICULED AND DESPISED 207
Socialists Against Patriotism, 207; American Flag Scouted, 207;
"Honor the Uniform? No, Spit on It," 208; The "Call" Derides Our
Soldiers Returning from France, 208; "I Spit Upon Your Flag! I
Loathe the Stars and Stripes! To Hell With Your Flag! Down With the
Stars and Stripes! Run Up the Red Flag!" 210; Debs Attacks the
American Flag, 210.
CHAPTER XVI
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST OUR COUNTRY 212
I. W. W. Conspirators, 213; "The Future of Socialism Lies in the
General Strike, Armed Insurrection and Forcible Overthrow of All
Existing Social Conditions," 213; Left Wing Socialists by Strikes
and Industrial Unions to Establish "the Dictatorship of the
Proletariat," 215; Government Raids, 215; Communist Parties for
Overthrow of Government, 215-219; Socialist Party More Dangerous
Than the Communists, 219-21; American Socialists Part of the
"Invisible Empire," 222-4; Secret Resignations in the Socialist
Party, 225-6; Socialist Party for "Mass Action," "General Strikes"
and "Industrial Unionism" to Seize "the Industries and Control of
the Government of the United States," 227-32; Winnipeg General
Strike, 230-1; The Socialist Party Joins the Third (Moscow)
International, 232-7; Imitates Moscow's Program and Methods,
237-40; Socialists Acclaim Debs, the Convict, 242-5; Hillquit
Threatens the New York Legislature with a General Strike, 245-6;
Socialists Disguise Their Principles at the New York Assembly
Trial, 246-51; Walling Rejects Socialist Peace Pretensions, 251;
The Russian Soviet Government Talks Peace While Its International
Plots War, 252-7; Wholesale Law-Breaking of American Socialists
Justified at the Assembly Trial, 257-62; Their Traitorous
Principles and Propaganda, 263-66; Socialists "Enter the
Government" to Destroy It, 266; Forewarned Is Forearmed, 266-7.
CHAPTER XVII
SOCIALISM A PERIL TO WORKINGMEN 268
Socialist Chaos and Anarchy, 268; Discontent in the Socialist
State, 269; Perils of Confiscation, 270-2; Liberty Bonds and
Insurance, 273; Unworkable Labor Schemes, 273-7; Forcing Women to
Work, 277; Political Corruption, 277; Quarrels Over Religion and
Free-Love, 278; Lincoln Eyre Reveals Socialism's Economic Failure
in Russia, 279-91; "Lenine and Trotzky More Absolute Than Any
Czar," 281; Starvation and Disease, 282-3; Military Confiscation of
Russian Labor, 283-8; Lenine and Trotzky Invite "Foreign Capital"
to Share the Profits from Exploiting the Wage-Slaves of
Bolsheviki-land, 288-9; Death for Russian Wage-Slaves Who Strike
Against Their Socialist Task-Masters, 290.
CHAPTER XVIII
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST RELIGION ABROAD 292
Ingersoll Argument Refuted, 293; Economic Determinism, 293; Atheism
of European Socialists, 294-5; "There Must Be War Between Socialism
and the Church," 296; Socialists "All more or Less Avowed
Atheists," 297; "No Man Can Be Consistently Both a Socialist and a
Christian," 298; Socialism Persecutes Religion in Yucatan, 298.
CHAPTER XIX
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST RELIGION IN AMERICA 301
Socialism Turns Ministers Into Atheists, 301-2; Spargo Says
Socialism Cannot Tolerate Religious Schools, 302; Anti-Religious
Poems in "Call," 303; The "Call" Has "No Use" for "Christ," 304;
"Religion Spells Death to Socialism," as Socialism "Does to
Religion," 305; "Socialism Logical Only When It Denies the
Existence of God," 306; "Christmas Is a Crime," 307; Blasphemous
Socialist Catechism for Children, 308; A Socialist Says "Socialism
Is Anti-Christ," 309; Hypocrisy of Hillquit, Berger and Other
Leaders in Concealing the Socialist Party's Irreligion to Get
Votes, 310-15; Hillquit Says "Ninety-Nine Per Cent of Us" Are
"Agnostic," 311.
CHAPTER XX
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE FAMILY 317
Socialist Books Advocate Free-Love, 317; Socialists Dodge the Truth
by Arguments About Prostitution, 318-19; The "Call's" Poem on "The
Harlot," 320; Socialist Advocates of Free-Love, 320-2; Victor
Berger's Milwaukee Company Sells Free-Love Literature, 322;
Free-Love Stuff Sold by Kerr and Company and the National Office of
the Socialist Party, 323-9.
CHAPTER XXI
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE RACE 330
The "Call," chief Organ of the Socialist Party in New York, An
Obscene Vehicle of Propaganda for Race-Suicide, Teaching "All
Within Its Polluting Reach to Violate One of the Laws of the State
of New York," 330-41.
CHAPTER XXII
SOCIALIST ORGANIZATION AND "BORING IN" 342
Organizing Activity of Socialists, 342; Dues-Paying Members, Locals
and Branches, 342; 400 Socialist Periodicals in the United States,
343; Use of Books and Leaflets, 344; Financial Support by Rich
Radicals, 345; Red Propaganda to Proselytize Labor and Promote
Strikes, 346; Effect on the American Federation of Labor, 347; I.
W. W.'s "Boring from Within," 348; William R. Foster, An I. W. W.,
Leads the A. F. of L. Steel Strike, 348-9.
CHAPTER XXIII
ENLISTING RECRUITS FOR THE CONSPIRACY 350
Socialist Sunday Schools, 350; "Catch Them Young," 351; Lesson 24
from the "Socialist Primer," 352; Socialist Propaganda Among School
Children by Townley's Non-Partisan League, 353; The Teachers' Union
of New York City, 354; The Inter-Collegiate Socialist Society, 355;
Radical College Professors, 356; The Rand School, 357; Socialist
Propaganda Among Immigrants, 358; Socialist Naturalization Bureau,
359; The Red Curse Among Women, 359; Among Soldiers and Sailors,
360; Socialist Cartoons and Movie Films, 360; Making Rebels of
Negroes, 361.
CHAPTER XXIV
EXPERTS IN THE ART OF DECEPTION 363
Must Socialism Be Good Because Something Else Is Bad? 363;
Socialist Party Platform Planks Unreliable, 365; Socialists
Disagree on Land Ownership, 365-8; Government Ownership of Public
Utilities Is Not Socialism, 369; Double-Faced Socialists, 370; The
Burden of Proof Rests on the Socialist, 371; The "Lunatic"
Sophistry, 372; Sophistry That Labor Earns All Wealth, 373;
Vote-Getting by Advocating Popular Schemes, 375; Latest Dodge of
Red Organizations to Hide from Prosecution by Changing Their Names,
375; The Socialist Party Not a Real Workingmen's Party, 376.
CHAPTER XXV
THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE REDS 377
High Time to Fight the Reds, 377; Read and Circulate Anti-Socialist
Literature, 378; Warn Our School Children, 379; Quiz the Soap-Box
Orators, 380; Expel Socialist School Teachers, 380; Tasks for the
National Government, 381; Oppose Socialism in a Nation-Wide
Campaign of Education, 382.
INDEX 383
APPENDIX 391
Convention of the Socialist Party of the United States, May 8-14,
1920.
CHAPTER I
SOCIALISM IN OTHER LANDS
Modern Socialism may be said to date from the year 1848 when Marx and
Engels published their "Communist Manifesto," a pamphlet that has since
been translated into almost all modern European languages and has to
this day remained the classical exposition of international Socialism.
Karl Marx, the chief founder of the movement, was born of Jewish parents
at Treves, Germany, May 5, 1818. After studying at Jena, Bonn, and
Berlin, he became a private professor in 1841, and about a year later
assumed the editorship of the "Rhenish Gazette," a democratic-liberal
organ of Cologne, that was soon suppressed for its radical utterances.
In 1843 he moved to Paris where he became greatly interested in the
study of political economy and of early Socialistic writings and where
he subsequently made the acquaintance of Frederick Engels, his
inseparable companion and life-long friend.
Engels was born at Barmen, Rhenish Prussia, in 1820. He remained in
Germany until he had completed his military service, and then moved to
Manchester, England, where he engaged in the cotton business with his
father. In 1884, while traveling, he met Karl Marx, and was banished
with him from France in 1847, and expelled from Belgium in 1848, the
very year that witnessed the appearance of the "Communist Manifesto."
Not long after this, Marx and Engels returned to Germany, and were
instrumental in fomenting a revolution in the Rhine Province in 1849.
The revolt having been suppressed in the same year, both men sought
refuge in England. Here Engels was the author of numerous German books
on Socialism and became best known by editing, after Marx's death, the
second and third volumes of the latter's works.
While in England Marx took up his abode in London where he became the
first president of the International Workingmen's Association, whose
influence was not limited to England, but extended to France, Germany,
Austria, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland,
Poland, and even the United States of America. The active career of this
association embraced a period of about eight years, from 1864 to 1872.
Its six conventions were largely devoted to the discussion of social and
labor problems and it produced a lasting effect upon the Socialist
Movement by impressing upon it a harmonious and world-wide character. By
1876 the International Workingmen's Association was ruined by the
quarrels that had taken place between the more moderate faction under
the leadership of Marx, and the anarchistic element under Bakunin. It
had, however, by this time contributed wonderfully towards the spread of
Socialism, for it had taught the working classes of Europe the
international nature both of their own grievances and of capitalism.
Closely rivaling the success of the International Workingmen's
Association in furthering the cause of Socialism was a book known as
"Capital," an economic work the first volume of which was published in
1867 by Karl Marx. The author never lived to edit the second and third
volumes, though after his death in London, March 14, 1883, they were
published from his notes by Frederick Engels. This work, to which the
Father of the Revolutionary Movement gave the German title "Das
Kapital," has long been known as the Bible of Socialism. Its
systematized philosophic and economic doctrines besides having supplied
the various national branches of the party with a common theory and
program, in the main still constitute the creed of the immense majority
of the Socialists the world over. Though "Capital" has suffered severely
from the criticism of economists of many schools, and though not a few
of its doctrines have been rejected by present-day Socialists, its
powerful influence still persists to a very marked degree.
Supplementing this short historical sketch of the origin of the modern
Socialist movement, short comments will be added concerning the
Revolutionary organization in the different countries of the world.
In Germany the Socialist movement first took shape in 1862 under the
influence of Ferdinand Lassalle. It made comparatively slow progress
until 1874 when the 450,000 Socialist voters returned ten members to the
Reichstag. An attempt on the part of the German Government to suppress
the movement failed, and henceforth the party under the leadership of
August Bebel, Karl Kautsky, George Von Vollmar, and Wilhelm Liebknecht
steadily continued to grow in strength. Shortly before the outbreak of
the World War the Socialists, besides occupying 110 seats in the
Reichstag out of a total of 397, polled about 4,252,000 votes and
published 158 papers, but a faction under the leadership of Bernstein
had made great progress in its endeavors to transform the Revolutionary
organization into an opportunist party.
Most of the German Socialists supported the war and the majority of
their members in the Reichstag voted for the war credits. Some, however,
like Karl Liebknecht, the son of Wilhelm Liebknecht, opposed the
imperial government and were imprisoned. Pressure, however, finally
forced the government to release Liebknecht, who then delivered
impassioned speeches throughout the country, stirring up the people
against Kaiserism and the war profiteers and urging the soldiers to turn
their weapons against the imperial government itself. While Liebknecht
was defying the authorities, the naval forces mutinied at Kiel. The
Socialists then called a general strike for November 11, 1918, as a
prelude to the revolution. Scheidemann and Ebert had been supporting the
government of Prince Max of Baden, the successor of Von Hertling, as
chancellor of the empire, and had deprecated the idea of a revolution.
But when Scheidemann saw that the revolution was certainly coming and
that he and his colleagues would probably be left stranded, he joined
the movement with his powerful organization, stepped in and grasped the
power. A national council of soldiers, sailors and workmen was formed at
Berlin, but the provisional government was shaped by Scheidemann, Ebert
and others of the majority Socialists by virtue of their excellent
political machinery. The Ebert-Scheidemann government fought many a
bitter struggle with growing radicalism. Their government represented
the most moderate group of the Socialists and received the support of
the Centerists and others because these were far more opposed to the
Socialists of the extreme left, such as the Spartacan Communists.
Several revolts engineered by the Spartacans were put down with
considerable bloodshed. In January, 1919, soon after the defeat of the
Spartacides in Berlin, Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, their
leaders, were put to death, and their minority party seemed to diminish
in strength. In the latter part of May, 1919, the majority Socialists of
the reactionary Ebert-Scheidemann group were at first opposed to the
signing of the Treaty of Paris, whereas the Spartacans, and also the
Independent Socialists under the leadership of Hugo Haase and Karl
Kautsky, tried to force their opponents to sign it, so that the people
of Germany might soon blame the "reactionaries" for the humiliation,
and rise in rebellion to overthrow them.
In Bavaria the anti-war sentiment spread rapidly, fostered by the
efforts of Kurt Eisner. King Ludwig abdicated the throne on November 16,
1918, and Eisner took up the reins of power, forming a Socialist
government. After a few weeks Eisner broke with the Ebert-Scheidemann
government of Berlin, and soon after was assassinated. Not long after
this the Bavarian communists imposed the Soviet form of government on
the country, much to the dislike of many of the inhabitants, especially
those living outside of Munich. The peasants of Bavaria rebelled against
the communist-soviet government of Munich, which finally fell, after the
Noske-Ebert-Scheidemann forces had marched against the city.
Very many years ago Socialists began to spread their doctrines as best
they could in the realms of the Czar. Many a Marxian was arrested for
attempting to undermine the Russian government and sent into exile in
Siberia. The World War having broken out, Russia suffered terribly, and
this suffering, especially of the masses, caused great discontentment
and made the people an easy prey to the revolutionary forces of
Socialism. The bureaucratic Czarist regime finally broke down in March,
1917, as soon as the revolution started. Three main contending parties
attempted to ride into power on the revolutionary tide; the Cadets, the
Moderate Socialists (i.e., the Mensheviki, and Social Revolutionists)
and the Bolsheviki or revolutionary Socialists. The Cadets were the
first to gain the upper hand, but were soon swept away, for they strove
to satisfy the soldiers, workers and peasants with abstract, political
ideals. The Mensheviki and Social Revolutionists succeeded the Cadets.
The demand for a Constitutent Assembly was one of the main aspirations
of the Russian Revolution. It was on the eve of its realization that
Bolsheviki, in November, 1917, by a _coup d'état_ seized the reins of
power. The elections for the assembly took place after the Bolsheviki
had gained the upper hand and the Bolsheviki were defeated. The
Constituent Assembly was actually convened in Petrograd in January,
1918, but the Bolsheviki dispersed the parliament at the point of the
bayonet. Russia was then ruled by Lenine, head of the soviet system of
government. The government was a "dictatorship of the proletariat,"
characterized by injustice, violence, oppression, and bloodshed, the
Soviets being little more than tribunals of punishment and execution,
instruments of terror in the hands of the Autocrat Lenine. The
Bolshevist government has met with continual opposition from the
opposing groups of Socialists in Russia and has been attacked by the
Allies, principally on the Archangel front and in the Gulf of Finland.
The Finns, Lithuanians, Poles, Czecho-Slovaks, Rumanians, Ukranians, and
especially Admiral Kolchak's Siberian forces waged a relentless warfare
against the Bolsheviki tyranny either for political reasons or to rescue
the countless millions of Russians who suffered so terribly from the
Lenine system of dictatorship. By the latter part of February, 1920, the
Lenine government seemed to be overcoming all military opposition.[A]
The Socialists in Austria-Hungary as far back as 1907 could count
1,121,948 votes and 58 newspapers. Shortly before the end of the World
War the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy fell. Austria and Hungary separated
from each other and each became a republic. Count Karolyi was head of
the new Hungarian government, socialistic in tendency. In the early
spring of 1919, when Hungary was being invaded by Czecho-Slovak troops,
Italians and Rumanians, and was threatened with an invasion from the
Allies Count Karolyi fled and the government fell into the hands of the
radical Socialist, Bela Kun, who soon established intimate relations
with the Bolshevist government at Moscow. One difficulty after another,
however, especially the attacks of the Rumanians, soon taxed the
strength of the crimson-red government; and in the summer of 1919 it
succumbed to pressure brought to bear on it by the Allies.
Notwithstanding the Bolshevist propaganda carried on in Vienna, the
Austrian government down to February, 1920, has resisted all inducements
to adapt Bolshevism.
Modern Socialism in France was rather inactive previous to the outbreak
of the Commune in 1871. Then, after the victory of the government forces
over the revolutionists, many leaders of the Commune declared for
Anarchism, but subsequently abandoned it as impracticable and devoted
themselves to the propaganda of Marxian Socialism. After Jules Guesde
and other communards were permitted to return to France, by the amnesty
of 1879, the party at first developed considerable strength, but soon
split up into several factions, with Guesde as the leader of the more
radical wing and Jaurés and Millerand at the head of the moderate
parliamentarian group. In the election of May, 1914, the United
Socialists under Jaurés polled 1,357,192 votes, while the Radical
Socialists and their allies in the Caillaux combination cast 2,227,176
votes. During the World War most of the Socialists, especially those in
parliament, supported the government.
After the War the Longuet faction of the Socialist Party became the
majority party, took over control of the great Paris Socialist daily
L'Humanité and chose Cashin as editor. On April 6, 1919, a great
demonstration took place in Paris in honor of Jaurés, the Socialist
leader of France, who had been assassinated at the beginning of the
World War. This and the decisions taken at the Socialist party congress
of the Federation of the Seine on March 13th, demonstrated the decided
turn to the left that the Socialist Party had taken since its previous
congress in October, 1918. In the demonstration, consisting, perhaps, of
50,000 Socialists, cries of "Revolution!" "Down with the War!" "Down
with Clemenceau!" "Long live the Soviet!" and "Long live Russia!" filled
the air for three hours.
"The Call," New York, May 19, 1919, thus comments:
"The Socialist papers for several days appeared uncensored, though
every line breathed revolution. Most startling of all, there were
as many soldiers as civilians marching.
"Seven days later the representatives of each Socialist local in
the Department of the Seine met in convention to decide upon which
of three resolutions they should recommend the coming national
congress of the Socialist Party to adopt. The discussion was hot,
and more or less revolved around the personalities of the three
leaders, Albert Thomas, Right Socialist, Jean Longuet, Left
Socialist, and F. Loriot, Communist or Bolshevist. Broadly
speaking, the Thomas resolution based its faith upon present
political action and future political power; the Longuet resolution
advocated a third International, without indorsing the third
International held in Moscow in March, and the Loriot resolution
indorsed the Zimmerwald resolutions (against all wars) and
recognized the existence of the Third International established by
the Russian Bolshevik party.
"Most of the discussion hinged upon affairs in Russia with hoots of
derision at every uncomplimentary mention of Bolshevism, until the
speaker either had to take his seat or qualify his criticism of the
Soviet republic.
"Both the Longuet and Loriot resolutions called the war the
consequence of imperialistic anarchy and bourgeois ambition, both
denounced the imposition upon Germany of an unjust, or Bismarckian,
peace, such as was imposed upon France in 1871, and both mourned
the assassination of Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, and Kurt
Eisner.
"The Longuet resolution was as strong in its declaration of
solidarity with the Soviet republic of Russia as the Loriot
resolution was in opposition to all annexation of the Sarre Valley
by France."
The National Congress of the Socialist parties of France was held from
April 19 until April 22, 1919. A motion by M. Kienthaliens demanding the
adhesion of French Socialists to the Internationale at Moscow, under the
leadership of Premier Lenin of the Bolshevist government polled only 270
votes. This resolution failed to pass probably because the Longuet
majority faction desired the union of all the French Socialist parties.
The Congress adopted by a majority of 894 votes, a resolution offered by
Jean Longuet to the effect that the French Socialists are willing to
continue to form a part of the Second Internationale, provided that all
those who are Socialists in name only shall be excluded.
On May Day, 1919, the Socialists manoeuvered a general strike of all
labor in Paris for twenty-four hours. The press dispatches informed us
that the shut-down was virtually complete. Not a wheel was turning on
any of the transportation systems and taxicabs and omnibuses kept off
the streets. All restaurants and cafés were closed and guests in the
hotels went hungry if they had not supplied themselves with food
beforehand. Even the drug stores closed.
Theatres, music halls, and other resorts did not open. No newspapers
were published and periodic stoppages occurred in the postal and wire
services throughout the day. Industry on all sides was in a state of
complete inactivity, work being suspended by every class of labor. There
was considerable disorder and very many policemen and civilians were
injured.
In the elections of November, 1919, the Socialist vote increased to
1,750,000, a gain of 40 per cent over that of 1914. On the 1914 basis of
representation this would have given them 160 seats in the Chamber of
Deputies; but their representation was actually reduced from 105 to 55,
due to a new basis of representation and a new formation of districts.
The French Syndicalists, of the Labor Confederation, had 600,000 members
before the war and now claim 1,500,000. They were quiescent during the
war, but their congresses of July, 1918, and September, 1919, showed a
"tendency to return to the traditional revolutionary policy of French
Syndicalism."
In Great Britain it was not until 1884, when the Social Democratic
Federation was organized by Henry M. Hyndman, that the Marxian movement
displayed any notable activity. Its progress at first was extremely
slow, but after the Independent Labor Party was formed in 1893 under the
leadership of J. Keir Hardie with a view to carrying Socialism into
politics, the revolutionary doctrines spread much more rapidly, "The
Clarion" and "Labor Advocate," the two organs of the Independent Labor
Party, helping wonderfully in the work. In 1883 the Fabian Society, an
organization Socialistic in name and tendencies, was founded by a group
of middle class students. It rejected the Marxian economies, and by
means of lectures, pamphlets, and books advocated practical measures of
social reform. Among the leading English Socialists of the more radical
type have been Hyndman, Aveling, Blatchford, Bax, Quelch, Leathan and
Morris; while Shaw, Pease and Webb were the leading members of the
moderate Fabian Society.
The vast majority of English Socialists supported the government in the
World War, but the Labor Party, mostly Socialistic, during that time
engineered great strikes of the coal miners, dock workers and railroad
men. A press despatch dated London, April 21, 1919, says:
"The first gun in the long advertised campaign of Bolshevism in
Britain was fired at Sheffield, where the British Socialists'
annual convention, at its opening session passed a resolution
urging the establishment of a British soviet government.
"The resolution expresses all admiration for the workings of the
soviet system in Hungary and Bavaria. It declares war on the
'capitalist' system in Britain, attacks the policy of the peace
conference toward Russia and favors the distribution of
revolutionary propaganda in the British army and navy."
During the summer and fall of 1919, Socialist and Bolshevist principles
continued to gain an ever-increasing and very serious hold on the people
of England and proved a serious menace to the government in the general
railway strike in October.
In Italy Socialism has been making steady progress for many years and
since the end of the World War has increased wonderfully in strength.
The party has greatly profited by the suffering and discontent due to
the war and especially by the failure of Italy to secure coveted
territory after all her sacrifices and the victory of the Allies. On
April 10, 1919, the Italian Socialists manoeuvered a very successful
general strike in Rome, but were prevented by the government forces from
marching through the streets in any considerable numbers. About the same
time disturbances were also engineered in many cities and towns of the
country, especially in Florence[3] and Milan. In the latter part of
April, 1919, the Executive Committee of the Socialist party of Italy
resolved to sever its connection with the International Socialist Bureau
and the Berne Conference, in which there were many reactionary
Socialists, and to affiliate with the newly established Moscow
International, consisting of the various National groups of Socialists
giving whole-hearted support to Lenine and the Bolsheviki.
On July 21, 1919, Italian Socialists conducted a general strike against
the Russian blockade. Industrial prostration resulted in whole provinces
stopping all traffic and communication while Soviets were set up in 240
towns and cities, including Genoa and Florence. In the November, 1919,
elections the Socialists secured 159 Deputies in the Chamber, having had
44 previously. They cast over one-third of all votes cast, about
3,000,000, as against 883,409 in 1913.
The membership of the Italian labor unions is now estimated at
1,000,000, an increase of about 300,000 since 1917. At a national
conference, in April, 1919, the labor unions demanded a change of the
national Parliament into a national Soviet.
In Spain, especially in the big cities and notably in Barcelona,
Socialism has made steady progress and the Marxians have taken part in
several upheavals. In the early part of 1919 the eleventh national
Congress, which met at Madrid, elected Pablo Iglesias president of the
Executive Committee and adopted aggressive measures for extending
Socialist propaganda, especially into the rural districts, and for
establishing Socialist day schools and women's evening schools. The
official organ of the party, "El Socialista," came in for a round of
criticism because of its espousal of the Allied cause to the detriment,
it was charged, of the International principles to which it should have
adhered.
In the latter part of April, 1913, the Belgian Socialists, under the
leadership of Emil Vandervelde attracted the attention of the world by
attempting to paralyze the entire industrial system of the country by a
general strike. Shortly before the outbreak of the World War, Belgium,
with its comparatively small population, had about half a million
Socialist voters, constituting approximately half of the electorate of
the country. During the war the Socialists supported the government and
since the war down to the early fall of 1919 have not caused any serious
trouble.
On November 16, 1919, the Socialist vote rose to 644,499, with election
of 70 Deputies and 20 Senators, an increase of 21 Deputies and 5
Senators.
In March, 1919, out of the 100 members of the Second Chamber of Holland,
there were four Communists or Socialists of the extreme left and 20 of
more moderate tendencies. The Communists published a newspaper called
"The Bolshevist" and maintained relations with the Russian Soviet
Government and the German Sparticides. David Wynkoop, the leader of the
Dutch Communists, is called "Holland's Little Liebknecht" and in a
parliamentary speech openly threatened a general strike. There was a
Bolshevist crisis in January, 1919. An assembly of international
communists met at the Hague and Spartacide success in Germany was the
only thing required to launch a revolutionary attempt, accompanied by a
general strike and terrorism. The government then adopted stern
measures. Civil guards were formed, and banks, newspaper offices and
police bureaus were occupied by the military with machine guns, the
banks and newspapers having been previously equipped with wireless
against the cutting of telephone wires.
Wynkoop, in the company of workingmen, visited soldiers in their
barracks asking them to join the movement, but the soldiers fired,
killing three and wounding several. Efforts to corrupt the cavalry and
the navy by similar means were not a success.
Shortly after the overthrow of the Austro-Hungarian Government, the
three Socialist parties of Czecho-Slovakia, which had been divided
principally over questions of nationality, got together and their
leaders of moderate tendencies were very sanguine over the outlook for a
general victory at the ballot box in the near future. It appears,
however, that the party was afterwards split into pro and anti
Bolshevist factions, with a consequent decrease in political strength.
In speeches made by several leaders at the Bohemian Socialist conference
at Prague in the early part of April, 1919, it was decided that the
alliance with the Entente should be maintained because reconciliation
with Berlin, Budapest and Moscow would mean danger for the Czecho-Slovak
republic.
Bolshevism was described as the suicide of the proletariat, and it was
urged that the working people of Bohemia should differentiate between
exaggeration and methodic reform.
In Prague, Pressburg and other cities troops clashed with the Communists
and Social Democrats. On March 7, 1919, at a mass meeting addressed by
three leading agitators from Prague, 40,000 workers, mostly miners,
cheered assertions that the revolution of October 28, 1918, had not
turned out well for the proletariat which was still being oppressed;
that the Government of Prague was as weak as under the old Austrian
regime.
Socialism, in recent years, has made considerable progress in Sweden.
The majority of the Marxians seems to be of the moderate group, though
the Left Socialist Party assisted the Lenine Government of Russia.
Hjalmar Branting, the leader of the Moderate Socialists, addressing the
French Socialist Congress in the Spring of 1919, bitterly assailed
Bolshevism and issued a warning against it. Branting's Social-Democratic
Labor Party has 86 seats in Parliament, while the radicals, who seceded
to form the Socialist Party in 1917, have 12 seats. In this convention,
in June, 1919, the Socialist Party voted to join the Third (Moscow)
International, declared for the principle of the dictatorship of the
proletariat, voted for "mass action" as the means of conquest and a
Soviet organization of the workers.
In the Socialist party of Norway the Bolshevist faction appears to be in
control. After the revolution in Germany in the latter part of 1918, the
Norwegian Socialists, in speeches and articles urged the laborers to
organize revolutionary organizations similar to those in soviet Russia,
provide themselves with arms and be ready for a revolutionary uprising
to overthrow the government. The party congress in 1919 joined the Third
(Moscow) International and adopted "mass action" as tactics and
preparation for a general strike.
The Socialists were very active in Argentina after the ending of the
World War and were the back-bone of the serious and prolonged
disturbances in Buenos Aires. In the latter part of April, 1919, the
Pan-American Socialist Conference was held in the Argentine capital. Its
purpose was to promote the amalgamation of all the Socialist and labor
organizations of the Western Hemisphere into one body. In South America
Socialism is best organized in Argentine, Chile and Peru, and weakest in
Brazil and Colombia.
In Canada, at least till the summer of 1919, the Marxian forces were
gaining in strength daily. This was especially true of the western part
of the Dominion, where the radical industrial union, generally called in
Canada the "One Big Union," has become very influential. Serious strikes
with Bolshevist tendencies took place throughout the Dominion,
especially in Winnipeg in the spring of 1919.
Bulgaria has two Socialist parties, the Moderates and the Communist
Party, the latter affiliated with the Third (Moscow) International. In
the August, 1919, election the Moderate Socialist members in the
"Sobranie" or Chamber of Deputies decreased from 46 to 39, while the
Communists increased their Deputies from 10 to 47.
Mexico, on our southern border, has added "industrial unionism" to her
Socialist movement. At the Socialist Party convention in the fall of
1919 a part of the organization seceded and reorganized as the Communist
Party.
Besides the many millions of Socialists in the countries already
referred to, the Marxians are well organized and are making rapid
strides in Serbia, Denmark, Greece, Switzerland, the Balkan States,
Australia, New Zealand and even in South Africa and far distant Japan
and China.
CHAPTER II
GROWTH OF SOCIALISM IN THE UNITED STATES
Socialism was introduced into the United States about the year 1850 by
immigrants who landed on our shores from Europe. The Marxians, who came
from Germany, were principally responsible for the foundation of the
Workingmen's Party in 1876, which in 1877 was called the Socialistic
Labor Party, and, a few years later, the Socialist Labor Party, which
was reorganized at Chicago in 1889, after having lost two sections by
secession. One of these, called the Cincinnati Socialist Labor Party, in
1897 united with the Social Democracy of America, a combination of
railroad men, followers of Eugene V. Debs, and of the populist followers
of Victor L. Berger. The other seceders from the Socialist Labor Party,
called the "kangaroos," united with the Social Democracy of Debs and
Berger in 1900, the new combination then calling itself the Socialist
Party of America. The minority of the old Socialist Labor Party, which
refused to be amalgamated with the Social Democracy of America, is still
known as the Socialist Labor Party; hence, since the year 1900, there
have been two distinct revolutionary parties, the Socialist Party and
the Socialist Labor Party.
The former, under the leadership of Eugene V. Debs, Victor L. Berger and
Morris Hillquit, with 109,586 dues-paying members in January, 1919, is
by far the more powerful and influential, having steadily increased its
vote to about 900,000 in the Presidential election of 1912, though in
the year 1916 the vote dropped to less than 600,000. The Socialist Labor
Party, under the guidance of Daniel De Leon until his death, in May,
1914, seems to be making little if any progress. Though both parties
claim to be genuinely Socialistic and Marxian, each has decried the
other as being a "fake" or "bogus" party. The Socialist Labor Party's
main complaint is that its rival the Socialist Party is sacrificing the
principles of Karl Marx in its endeavor to gain votes, while, on the
other hand, the latter party retorts by stigmatizing its opponent as
being a party of "scabs," the sole purpose of whose existence is to
antagonize the Socialist Party. In recent years unsuccessful attempts
have been made to unite the two.
The Socialist Party, besides publishing two important dailies in
English, "The Call," of New York City, and the "Milwaukee Leader,"
issues at least two in German, two in Bohemian, one in Polish and one in
Yiddish. "Forward," the Jewish paper published in New York City in
Yiddish, had a daily circulation[4] of over 150,000, according to a
report in "The Call" April 6, 1919. Foremost for many years among the
Socialist weeklies in English was the "Appeal to Reason," which was once
extremely bitter and unrelenting in its attacks on the United States
Government. Published at Girard, Kansas, its circulation reached nearly
1,000,000 copies a week during the fall of 1912, but since 1917 it has
fallen into great disfavor among most Socialists because of its pro-war
and moderate tendencies. In addition to the Socialist papers already
referred to, there are in our country hundreds of others in English,
German, Bohemian, Polish, Jewish, Slovac, Slavonic, Danish, Italian,
Finnish, French, Hungarian, Lettish, Norwegian, Croatian, Russian, and
Swedish. In a report to Congress in 1919, the Attorney-General of the
United States stated that there were 416 radical newspapers in America.
A strong impression that serious party strife and bossism prevail in the
Socialist organization is gained by those who read the Marxian papers
and magazines. William English Walling, for example, in the
"International Socialist Review," Chicago, April, 1913, showed his
sympathy with the so-called "reds," who then comprised the radical I. W.
W. wing of the party, and at the same time attacked the "yellows," the
advocates of political action.
"Ever since the Socialist Party was formed," he wrote, "the party
office-holders have been spending the larger part of their energies in
endeavoring to hold their jobs and to fight down every element in the
party that demanded any improvement or advance in any direction....
"A far greater danger is the new one, that has become serious only since
we entered upon the present period of political success two years ago,
namely the corruption of the party by those elected to public office....
"Only last year we had several mayors in the one state of Ohio either
being forced to resign or deserting the party because they could not use
it for their purpose....
"Next year we may elect a few congressmen and half a hundred
legislators--if the reactionaries in the party will cease their
underhand efforts to disrupt the organization and drive out the
revolutionists....
"If then these office-holders continue to show the tendency towards
bossism so common in the past, the Socialist Party will soon become an
office-holders' machine, little different in character from the machine
by which Gompers controls the Federation of Labor, or Murphy, Tammany
Hall....
"The only possible way to avoid a split so openly and shamelessly
advocated by some of the opportunist leaders of our party--Berger even
threatened it in the last National Convention--is to have the system of
proportional representation....
"Unless some such changes as these are made in the next four years, it
does not take a prophet to see that there would be nothing left of what
we now know as the Socialist Party. If we cannot control our own petty
autocrats, how can we ever hope to control the infinitely more powerful
and resourceful autocrats of the Capitalist system?"
"The Communist," formerly the Left Wing organ of the Chicago Socialists,
in its edition of April 1, 1919, bitterly assails Victor L. Berger of
the Right Wing:
"A vote for Berger is a vote of pitying contempt for our Bolsheviki
and Spartacan comrades. A vote for Berger is a vote approving his
repeated and uncalled-for condemnation of our class-war comrades of
the I. W. W.--condemnation persistently offered to prove Berger's
own eminent respectability. A vote for Berger is a vote of scoffery
against the St. Louis platform--a vote of apology for the platform,
dissipation of its meaning, and disavowal of its essential spirit.
A vote for Berger is a vote for the International of German
Majority Socialism. A vote for Berger is a vote for petty bourgeois
progressivism as the essence of Socialism; it is a vote against
identification of the Socialist Party with the revolutionary mass
aspirations. A vote for Berger is a betrayal of all the efforts,
sacrifices and dreams of those whose lives have gone into the
socialist movement as torch-bearers of proletarian triumph over
capitalist exploitation, from Marx to the humblest comrade fighting
today in the ranks of the revolutionary class struggle.
"As far as this election is concerned there is nothing to be
considered about Victor Berger, past and present, except the ideal
Socialism which has become unchangeably attached to his name. If
the American Socialist Party is to be a party of Berger-Socialism,
then indeed, the Socialist movement will not die in America. No, it
is the Socialist Party that will die."
As we shall see presently, these prophecies of disruption were soon
fulfilled.
The representatives of the Socialist organizations of the different
countries of the world have from the time of Karl Marx met together at
more or less regular intervals, being banded together in what is called
the "International."
The official organ of the National Office, Socialist Party, "The Eye
Opener," in its issue of February, 1919, gives a detailed explanation of
the "International":
"It is an organization of Socialist Parties and labor
organizations, meeting periodically in international conferences.
In order to be eligible for membership, an organisation must meet
the following test, adopted by the International Congress of Paris,
1900.
"Those admitted to the International Socialist Congresses are:
"1. All associations which adhere to the essential principles of
Socialism; namely, Socialization of the means of production and
exchange, international union, and action of the workers, conquest
of public power by the proletariat, organized as a class party.
"2. All the labor organizations which accept the principles of the
class struggle and recognize the necessity of political action,
legislative and parliamentary but do not participate directly in
the political movement.
"This definition includes every Socialist Party and propaganda
organization in the world and it further takes in those enlightened
unions that recognize the need for political action. It excludes
conservative unions that do not yet admit the soundness of the
principles of the class struggle."
The First International was thoroughly Marxian and revolutionary.
According to "The Revolutionary Age," April 12, 1919, it accepted the
revolutionary struggle against capitalism and waged that struggle with
all the means in its power. It considered its objective to be the
conquest of power by the revolutionary proletariat, the annihilation of
the bourgeois state, and the introduction of a new proletarian state,
functioning temporarily as a dictatorship of the proletariat. The First
International collapsed after the Franco-Prussian War.
The Second International was formed at Paris in the year 1889. Its
tendencies were much more moderate than those of its predecessor. "The
Revolutionary Age," April 12, 1919, criticises it for being
"conservative and petty bourgeois in spirit," and states that "it was
part and parcel of the national liberal movement, not at all
revolutionary, dominated by the conservative skilled elements of the
working class and the small bourgeoisie. It was hesitant and
compromising, expressing the demands of the 'petite bourgeoisie' for
government ownership, reforms, etc."
In 1900 an International Socialist Bureau was established at Brussels
for the purpose of solidifying and strengthening the work of the Second
International and for maintaining uninterrupted relations between the
various national organizations.
That the American Socialists were closely united with the Marxians the
world over during the Second International, which continued till the
World War, was especially evident from the fact that representatives
from the United States met abroad in the international congresses every
three years to discuss party policies. Far from denying the
international character of the whole movement, the Revolutionists of the
United States have ever rejoiced and gloried in it, trusting that it
would result in the rapid spread of their doctrines and the ultimate
victory of their cause. In confirmation of the intimate union existing
between American and foreign Socialists, during the time of the second
International, we have the declaration of the Socialist Party of the
United States in its national platform of 1904, pledging itself to the
principles of International Socialism, as embodied in the united thought
and action of the Socialists of all nations. Moreover, Morris Hillquit
informed us in "The Worker," March 23, 1907, that the International
Socialist Movement, with its thirty million adherents and its organized
parties in about twenty-five civilized countries in both hemispheres,
was everywhere based on the same Marxian program and followed
substantially the same methods of propaganda and action. Writing again,
in "Everybody's," October, 1913, Hillquit declared that the dominant
Socialist organizations of all countries were organically allied with
one another, that by means of an International Socialist Bureau,
supported at joint expense, the Socialist parties of the world
maintained uninterrupted relations with one another, and that every
three years they met in international conventions, whose conclusions
were accepted by all constituent[5] national organizations.
Commenting upon "The Collapse of the Second International," which is
held to have taken place at the beginning of the World War, "The
Revolutionary Age," March 22, 1919, says:
"Great demonstrations were held in every European country by
Socialists protesting against their government's declarations of
war, and mobilizations for war. And we know that these
demonstrations were rendered impotent by the complete surrender of
the Socialist parliamentary leaders and the official Socialist
press, with their 'justification' of 'defensive wars' and the
safeguarding of 'democracy.'
"Why the sudden change of front? Why did the Socialist leaders in
the parliaments of the belligerents vote the war credits? Why did
not Moderate Socialism carry out the policy of the Basle Manifesto,
namely; the converting of an imperialistic war into a civil
war--into a proletarian revolution? Why did it either openly favor
the war or adopt a policy of petty-bourgeois pacifism?"
At the conclusion of the World War Socialists and representatives of
labor from many countries met at Berne, Switzerland, in what was known
as the Berne Conference. This international Socialist conference was
comparatively moderate in tendencies, while another Socialist congress,
held shortly before it in Bolshevist Moscow, was far more radical.
J. Ramsay MacDonald, commenting upon the Berne Conference in "Glasgow
Forward," in the spring of 1919, said:
"It declined to condemn the Bolshevists and declined to say that
their revolution was Socialism....
"Moscow seems to be more thorough than Berne, though as a matter of
fact Berne was far more thorough than Moscow. There is a glamour
and a halo about Moscow; but there are substance and permanence
about Berne.
"That blessed word 'Soviet' has become a shibboleth. But Berne did
not say anything about it. It declared its continuing belief in
democracy and in representative institutions. I hope that the
Soviet is not contrary to democracy; I know that it is a
representative institution. But I know more. I know that beyond its
primary stage it is a system of indirect representation--the
representation of representatives--and that a few years ago there
was not a single Socialist in the country that would have accepted
such a form of representative government. For Socialists to pretend
to prefer that system to one of direct responsibility is a mere
pose.
"Therefore, two Internationals will be the worst thing that could
happen to the revolutions now going on and to the general
Socialist movement. The duty of every Socialist--especially of
those of us who are not in revolution--is to strive by might and by
main to get a union of the two. We may have to suffer a time of
internal trouble owing to the friction of conflicting conceptions
of Socialist reconstruction, but I am quite certain that no one has
yet said what is to be the last word on the subject, and to split
on such a controversy as this is to advertise to the world how
unready Socialism is to assume command."
The Berne Conference, which had at first been called to meet at
Lausanne, the Russian Bolshevik government of Lenine denounced in a
manifesto which the "Chicago Socialist" of February 8, 1919, republished
in part as follows:
"The Central Committee of the Russian Communist Bolshevik Party in
a manifesto on the proposal to call together an International
Conference at Lausanne, declares that the project cannot be
considered even as an attempt to revive the Second International.
The latter ceased to exist during the first days of August, 1914,
when the representatives of the majority of nearly all the
Socialist parties passed over into the ranks of their imperialist
governments.
"The attempts made to revive this International, for which
agitation has been carried on in all countries throughout the war,
emanated from elements standing mid-way, which, whilst not
recognizing openly Imperialist Socialism, nevertheless had no idea
of creating a third revolutionary International.
"The attempts made to go back to the pre-war situation regarding
the labor movement crashed against the Imperialist policy of the
official parties, which could not, at that time, admit the
appearance of an attempt to restore the International, fearing, as
they did, that this might tend to weaken the war policy of the
government and the working class working in unison.
"To counteract these attempts, the Imperialist Socialist parties
undertook to change the conditions of representation of the
national sections in the old International. The last so-called
inter-Allied conference in the Entente countries made it clear that
this change had been effected.
"Great Britain was represented by a motley organization in which
the Socialist parties could play no direct role. Italy was
represented by men whose party never before belonged to the
International and whose presence compelled the absence of the
official Italian Socialist Party. America was represented by
Gompers, representing associations which never had anything to do
with the Socialists....
"As against the International of traitors and
counter-revolutionaries, organizing themselves for the purpose of
forming leagues against the proletarian revolutions the world over,
the Communists of all countries must rapidly close their ranks
around the third revolutionary International--already, in fact,
existing.
"This Third International has nothing in common with the avowed
Socialist Imperialists, or with the pseudo-revolutionary
Socialists, who in reality support the former when they refuse to
break with them, and who do not recoil against participation in the
conferences of falsely called Socialists. The Russian Communist
Bolshevik Party refuses to take part in these conferences, which
abuse the name of Socialism. It invites all those who desire that
the Third Revolutionary International shall live to take the same
line; the task of this Third International being to hasten the
conquest of power by the working class.
"The Communist parties of Finland, Esthonia, Lithuania, of White
Russia, the Ukraine, Poland, and Holland are at one with the
Russian Communist Party.
"The latter also regards as its associates the Spartacus group in
Germany, the Communist Party of German Austria and other
revolutionary proletarian elements of the countries in the old
Austro-Hungarian Empire; the Left Social Democrats of Sweden, the
Revolutionary Social Democracy of Switzerland and Italy, the
followers of Maclean in England, of Debs in America, of Loriot in
France. In their persons the Third International, which is at the
head of the World Revolution, already exists.
"At the present moment when the Socialist Imperialists of the
Entente who formerly hurled the most violent accusations against
Scheidemann, are about to unite with him and to break the power of
Socialism in all countries, the Communist Party considers that
unity for the World Revolution is an indispensable condition for
its success.
"Its most dangerous enemy now is the Yellow International of the
Socialist traitors--thanks to whom capitalism still succeeds in
keeping a considerable portion of the working class under its
influence.
"For the conquest of power by the workers let us carry on an
implacable struggle against those who are deceiving them--against
the pseudo-Socialist traitors."
At the end of May, 1919, the National Executive Committee of the
Socialist Party of the United States, probably on account of pressure
brought to bear on it by the "Left Wing," stated that the party
repudiated the Berne Conference, but, at the same time, was _not yet_
affiliated with the Communist Conference of the Bolshevists at Moscow.
The phraseology of this ambiguous announcement is here given:
"It recognizes the necessity of reorganizing the Socialist
International along more harmonious and radical lines. The
Socialist Party of the United States is not committed to the Berne
Conference, which has shown itself retrograde on many vital points,
and totally devoid of creative force. On account of the isolation
of Russia, and the misunderstanding arising therefrom, it also is
not affiliated with the Communist Congress of Moscow."
This awkward straddle is explained by the fact that the American
Socialist Party, under the pro-German leadership of Morris Hillquit of
New York and Victor L. Berger of Milwaukee, had in its Congressional
platform for 1918 expressly endorsed the Inter-Allied Socialist and
Labor Conference, held at London that year. This is the conference which
the Lenine government scoffs at in the manifesto quoted just above,
styling it the "so-called inter-allied conference," in which "America
was represented by Gompers, representing associations which never had
anything to do with the Socialists." That the American Socialist Party
had been led into the endorsement of the conference by Berger and
Hillquit because the conference had recommended a meeting with German
workingmen seems evident from the wording of the endorsement, taken from
the official publication of the Socialist Party's 1918 Congressional
Platform, pages 3-4:
"In all that concerns the settlement of this war, the American
Socialist Party is in general accord with the announced aims of the
Inter-Allied Conference. We re-affirm the principles announced by
the Socialist Party in the United States in 1915; adopted by the
Socialist Republic of Russia in 1917; proclaimed by the
Inter-Allied Labor Conference in 1918 and endorsed by both the
majority and minority Socialists in the Central empires; no
forcible annexations, no punitive indemnities and the free
determination of all peoples.
"The Socialist Party believes that the foundations for
international understanding must be laid during the war, before the
professional diplomats begin to dictate the world's future as they
have in the past.
"It therefore supports the demand of the Inter-Allied Conference
for a meeting with the German workingmen, convinced that such a
meeting will promote the cause of democracy, and will encourage the
German people to throw off the military autocracy that now
oppresses them. We join our pledge to that of the Inter-Allied
Conference that, this done, as far as in our power, we shall not
permit the German people to be made the victims of imperialistic
designs."
The phrases in the above endorsement, "Inter-Allied Conference,"
"majority ... Socialists in the Central empires," and "promote the cause
of democracy," must have invoked the scorn of Lenine and Trotsky. Hence
the wording of their manifesto, in which they acknowledged as
"associates" the "followers ... of Debs in America," is an evident slap
at Berger and Hillquit and their "followers" in the American Socialist
Party. It was so understood by many in the party, and led to the rapid
sprouting of a "Left Wing" and the ultimate secession of about 72,000
dues-paying members, leaving only about 40,000 with Berger and Hillquit.
The story of this rupture will be found in the three chapters following,
where it also appears that Berger and Hillquit attempted to hide their
"Yellow" streak under a deeper daub of "Red."
CHAPTER III
THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF AMERICA DEVELOPS A LEFT WING
Some years ago, when the people of the United States were beginning to
suspect that the Socialists were plotting a revolution against our
Constitutional form of government the hypocritical followers of Eugene
V. Debs, fearing that their plot might be nipped in the bud, endeavored
to conceal their conspiracy, and succeeded quite well, by assuring the
American people that the word "revolution," so often used by them, was a
harmless term and was to be taken in a broad sense, without the "r,"
signifying nothing more than "evolution." "Do not be alarmed," they told
us, "we Socialists are striving to bring about reforms in the
government, but solely by constitutional means and the use of the
ballot."[B]
Many proofs could be given to show that, even in the early days of the
American Socialist Party, revolution, in the strictest sense of the
word, was foremost in the minds of many of the Marxian leaders. With the
advent of Bolshevism in Russia, and the successful overthrow of European
governments by revolutionary Socialists abroad, the "Reds" in our own
country became decidedly bolder, both in word and plot, against the
Government of our country. The more outspoken, daring and impatient
plotters in the Socialist Party of America lined up in a Left Wing
faction, whereas the more hypocritical, hesitant, cautious and prudent
revolutionists constituted the Right Wing. The former became known as
the "Reds," the latter as the "Yellows."
The "Reds" made a specialty of "direct action" or violence, had little
confidence in victory through the ballot, and campaigned for a
revolution at an early day. The "Yellows," of course, also rely on a
final victory through rebellion, but in the meantime, during the period
of revolutionary education and organization, insist on political action.
The leaders in control of the executive machinery of the Socialist
Party, wishing to retain their lucrative positions, and looking forward
to the advantage of political office during the years which might elapse
before the time would be ripe for rebellion, were nearly all Right
Wingers, and have waged a bitter and unscrupulous fight against the Left
Wing organization within the party.
The Left Wing of the Socialist Party of America had its origin,
probably, in the year 1916. According to the "International Socialist
Review," of December of that year, this ultra-revolutionary faction took
form in Boston. About the latter part of the year 1917 it began to
develop more rapidly, its progress being more or less proportional to
the spread of Bolshevism and the Socialist revolutions in Europe. Its
success, of course, was at the expense of the political leaders of the
Right.
The Left Wing has certainly been more honest than the Right. The "Reds"
comprising it favor direct action, that is, strikes and disturbances,
rather than the use of the ballot, hoping thus to bring our country into
such a critical condition that they may precipitate a rebellion, and
then, though in a minority, assume control of the government by a sudden
_coup d'état_, as the Bolsheviki did in Russia. The Left Wingers opposed
the "immediate demands" in the Socialist Party platform, preferring to
work for dictatorship rather than for social reforms. They despised the
politicians of the Right Wing, calling them yellow, reactionary,
hypocritical, capitalistic Socialists, and telling them that their place
was with the newly formed Labor Party, which had already praised the
Socialists and invited them to join its ranks. The Lefts expressed a
fear that the leaders of the Right would, if our Government were
overthrown, turn against them just as the Scheidemann-Ebert group turned
against the German Spartacides. The fight between the two factions
became severe about the beginning of the year 1919.
"The Revolutionary Age," Boston, February 15, 1919, speaking of the
disturbance in the Socialist Party, and explaining the fundamental
principles of the Left Wing said:
"The American Socialist Party is in a condition of feverish
theoretical activity. Pressing problems are being met in a spirit
of self-criticism. New forms of action in the social struggle are
being accepted. Old methods, old tactics, old ideas, which in the
test of war have proven incapable of furthering the revolutionary
struggle of the proletariat, are being seriously analyzed and
repudiated.
"The membership of the Socialist Party, the majority, is
instinctively class conscious and revolutionary. It was this
membership that compelled our officials to acquiesce in the
adoption of a radical declaration against war--which most of the
officials sabotaged or converted into an innocuous policy of
bourgeois pacificism. When the Bolsheviki conquered, the majority
of our officials were either hostile or silent; some weeks before,
the 'New York Call' had stigmatized the Bolsheviki as 'anarchists.'
But the membership responded; they forced the hands of the
officials, who became 'me too' Bolsheviki, but who did not draw the
revolutionary implications of the Bolshevik policy. These officials
and their machinery baffled the will of the membership; more, the
membership baffled itself because it did not clearly understand the
theory and the practice implied in its instinctive class
consciousness and revolutionary spirit.
"While our National Executive Committee accepts the Berne Congress
and refuses to call an emergency National Convention, locals of the
party are actively engaged in the great struggle, turning to the
left, to revolutionary Socialism. Groups within the party are
organizing and issuing proclamations, determined that the party
shall conquer the party for revolutionary Socialism. Two of these
proclamations were published in the last issue of 'The
Revolutionary Age.' They deserve serious consideration and
discussion.
"The manifesto of the Communist Propaganda League of Chicago is a
concise document. Its criticism of the party is summarized:
"'The Party proceeds on too narrow an understanding of political
action for a party of revolution, its programs and platforms have
been reformist and petty bourgeois in character, instead of being
definitely directed toward the goal of social revolution; the party
has failed to achieve unity with the revolutionary movement on the
industrial field.'
"Its proposals for democratizing the party--mass action in the
party--are excellent; it repudiates the old international and the
Berne Congress, and asks:
"'Identification of the Socialist Party with class conscious
industrial unionism, unity of all kinds of proletarian action and
protest forming part of the revolutionary class struggle; political
action to include political strikes and demonstrations, no
compromising with any groups not inherently committed to the
revolutionary class struggle, such as Labor parties, People's
Councils, Non-Partisan Leagues, Municipal Ownership Leagues and the
like.'"
In order clearly to understand the big fight that has disrupted the
Socialist Party, further explanations of the principles of the Left Wing
are necessary. "The Revolutionary Age," from which the above quotation
was taken, was first published in Boston, its editor being Louis C.
Fraina. In the summer of 1919 it combined with "The Communist," of New
York City, and, still maintaining its former name, became the national
organ of the Left Wing of the Socialist Party.
In the article just quoted reference was made to "mass action." This,
according to "The Revolutionary Age," is to be the main weapon used by
the rebels in precipitating rebellion. The July 12, 1919, issue of the
same paper explains mass action and shows how it is to be used. The
article, written by Louis C. Fraina, reads in part as follows:
"Socialism in its early activity as a general organized movement
was compelled to emphasize the action of politics because of the
immaturity of the proletariat....
"All propaganda, all electoral and parliamentary activity are
insufficient for the overthrow of Capitalism, impotent when the
ultimate test of the class struggle turns into a test of power. The
power for the social revolution issues out of the actual struggles
of the proletariat, out of its strikes, its industrial unions and
mass action."
Industrial unions of course means the union system of the I. W. W., and
not the craft unions of the American Federation of Labor.
The article continues:
"The peaceful parliamentary conquest of the state is either sheer
utopia or reaction....
"The revolution is an act of a minority, at first; of the most
class conscious section of the industrial proletariat, which in a
test of electoral strength, would be a minority, but which, being a
solid, industrially indispensable class, can disperse and defeat
all other classes through the annihilation of the fraudulent
democracy of the parliamentary system implied in the dictatorship
of the proletariat, imposed upon society by means of revolutionary
mass action....
"Mass action is not a form of action as much as it is a process and
synthesis of action. It is the unity of all forms of proletarian
action, a means of throwing the proletariat, organized and
unorganized, in a general struggle against Capitalism and the
capitalist state....
"The great expressions of mass action in recent years, the New
Zealand general strike, the Lawrence strike, the great strike of
the British miners under which capitalist society reeled on the
verge of collapse--all were mass actions organized and carried
through in spite of the passive and active hostility of the
dominant Socialist and labor organization. Under the impulse of
mass action, the industrial proletariat senses its own power and
acquires the force to act equally against capitalism and the
conservatism of organizations. Indeed, a vital feature of mass
action is precisely that it places in the hands of the proletariat
the power to overcome the fetters of these organizations, to act in
spite of their conservatism, and through proletarian mass action
emphasize antagonisms between workers and capitalists, and conquer
power. A determining phase of the proletarian revolution in Russia
was its acting against the dominant Socialist organizations,
sweeping these aside through its mass action before it could seize
social supremacy....
"Mass action is the proletariat itself in action, dispensing with
bureaucrats and intellectuals, acting through its own initiative;
and it is precisely this circumstance that horrifies the soul of
petty bourgeois Socialism. The masses are to act upon their own
initiative and the impulse of their own struggles....
"Mass action organizes and develops into the political strike and
demonstration, in which a general political issue is the source of
the action....
"The class power of the proletariat arises out of the intensity of
its struggles and revolutionary energy. It consists, moreover, of
undermining the bases of the morale of the capitalist state, a
process that requires extra parliamentary activity through mass
action. Capitalism trembles when it meets the impact of a strike in
a basic industry; Capitalism will more than tremble, it will
actually verge on a collapse, when it meets the impact of a general
mass action involving a number of correlated industries, and
developing into revolutionary mass action against the whole
capitalist regime. The value of this mass action is that it shows
the proletariat its power, weakens capitalism, and compels the
state largely to depend on the use of brute force in the struggle,
either the physical force of the military or the force of legal
terrorism; this emphasizes antagonisms between proletarian and
capitalist, widening the scope and deepening the intensity of the
proletarian struggle against capitalism....
"Mass action, being the proletariat itself in action, loosens its
energy, develops enthusiasm, and unifies the action of the workers
to its utmost measure....
"Moreover, mass action means the repudiation of bourgeois
democracy. Socialism will come not through the peaceful, democratic
parliamentary conquest of the state, but through the determined and
revolutionary mass action of a proletarian minority. The fetish of
democracy is a fetter upon the proletarian revolution; mass action
smashes the fetish, emphasizing that the proletarian recognizes no
limits to its action except the limits of its own power. The
proletariat will never conquer unless it proceeds to struggle after
struggle; its power is developed and its energy let loose only
through action. Parliamentarism, in and of itself, fetters
proletarian action; organizations are often equally fetters upon
action; the proletariat must act and always act; through action it
conquers....
"The great war has objectively brought Europe to the verge of
revolution. Capitalist society at any moment may be thrust into the
air by an upheaval of the proletariat--as in Russia. Whence will
the impulse for the revolutionary struggle come? Surely not from
the moderate Socialism and unionism, which are united solidly in
favor of an imperialistic war; surely not from futile parliamentary
rhetoric, even should it be revolutionary rhetoric. The impulse
will come out of the mass action of the proletariat....
"Mass action is equally a process of revolution and the revolution
itself in operation."
The March 22, 1919, issue of "The Revolutionary Age" published the
Manifesto of the Left Wing section of the Socialist Party of New York,
from which several important quotations are hereby taken:
"We are a very active and growing section of the Socialist Party
who are attempting to reach the rank and file with our urgent
message over the heads that be, who, through inertia or a lack of
vision, cannot see the necessity for a critical analysis of the
party's policies and tactics....
"In the latter part of the nineteenth century the
Social-Democracies of Europe set out to 'legislate capitalism out
of office.' The class struggle was to be won in the capitalist
legislatures. Step by step concessions were to be wrested from the
state; the working class and the Socialist parties were to be
strengthened by means of 'constructive' reform and social
legislation; each concession would act as a rung in the ladder of
Social Revolution, upon which the workers could climb step by step,
until finally, some bright sunny morning, the peoples would awaken
to find the Cooperative Commonwealth functioning without disorder,
confusion or hitch on the ruins of the capitalist state.
"And what happened? When a few legislative seats had been secured,
the thunderous denunciations of the Socialist legislators suddenly
ceased. No more were the parliaments used as platforms from which
the challenge of revolutionary Socialism was flung to all the
corners of Europe. Another era had set in, the era of
'constructive' social reform legislation. Dominant Moderate
Socialism accepted the bourgeois state as the basis of its action
and strengthened that state. All power to shape the policies and
tactics of the Socialist parties was entrusted to the parliamentary
leaders. And these lost sight of Socialism's original purpose;
their goal became 'constructive reforms' and cabinet
portfolios--the 'cooperation of classes,' the policy of openly or
tacitly declaring that the coming of Socialism was a concern 'of
all the classes,' instead of emphasizing the Marxian policy that
the construction of the Socialist system is the task of the
revolutionary proletariat alone....
"The 'Moderates' emphasized petty-bourgeois reformism in order to
attract tradesmen, shop-keepers and members of the professions,
and, of course, the latter flocked to the Socialist movement in
great numbers, seeking relief from the constant grinding between
corporate capital and awakening labor....
"Dominant 'Moderate Socialism' forgot the teachings of the founders
of scientific Socialism, forgot its function as a proletarian
movement--'the most resolute and advanced section of the working
class parties'--and permitted the bourgeois and self-seeking trade
union elements to shape its policies and tactics. This was the
condition in which the Social-Democracies of Europe found
themselves at the outbreak of the war in 1914. Demoralized and
confused by the cross-currents within their own parties,
vacillating and compromising with the bourgeois state, they fell a
prey to social-patriotism and nationalism.
"But revolutionary Socialism was not destined to lie inert for
long. In Germany, Karl Liebknecht, Franz Mehring, Rosa Luxemburg
and Otto Rhule organized the Spartacus group. But their voices were
drowned in the roar of cannon and the shriek of the dying and
maimed.
"Russia, however, was to be the first battle-ground where the
'moderate' and revolutionary Socialism should come to grips for the
mastery of the state. The break-down of the corrupt, bureaucratic
Czarist regime opened the floodgates of Revolution....
"'Moderate Socialism' was not prepared to seize the power for the
workers during a revolution. 'Moderate Socialism' had a rigid
formula--'constructive social reform legislation within the
capitalist state,' and to that formula it clung....
"Revolutionary Socialists hold, with the founders of Scientific
Socialism, that there are two dominant classes in society--the
bourgeoisie and the proletariat; that between these two classes a
struggle must go on, until the working class, through the seizure
of the instruments of production and distribution, the abolition of
the capitalist state, and the establishment of the dictatorship of
the proletariat, creates a Socialist system. Revolutionary
Socialists do not believe that they can be voted into power. They
struggle for the conquest of power by the revolutionary
proletariat....
"The 'moderate Socialist' proposes to use the bourgeois state with
its fraudulent democracy, its illusory theory of 'unity of all the
classes,' its standing army, police and bureaucracy oppressing and
baffling the masses; the revolutionary Socialist maintains that the
bourgeois state must be completely destroyed, and proposes the
organization of a new state--the state of the organized
producers--of the Federated Soviets--on the basis of which alone
can Socialism be introduced.
"Industrial Unionism, the organization of the proletariat in
accordance with the integration of industry and for the overthrow
of Capitalism, is a necessary phase of revolutionary Socialist
agitation. Potentially, industrial unionism constructs the basis
and develops the ideology of the industrial state of Socialism; but
industrial unionism alone cannot perform the revolutionary act of
seizure of the power of the state, since under the conditions of
Capitalism it is impossible to organize the whole working class,
or an overwhelming majority into industrial unionism.
"It is the task of a revolutionary Socialist party to direct the
struggles of the proletariat and provide a program for the
culminating crisis."
Julius Hammer, in a letter published in "The Call," April 4, 1919,
speaking of the Left Wing, says:
"Aside from the discussions as to the principles and tactics
identifying the 'Left Wing' there is a great deal of acrimonious
discussion and opposition to those in the 'Left Wing' organization.
They are called 'separatists,' 'secessionists,' 'splitters of the
party,' and this in spite of vehement denials that there is
intention or desire to split the party. 'It is unnecessary,'
say they, 'and superfluous; the party machinery is ample
for the purpose now; organization within organization is
injurious and wrong.' Some seem to go even further and fling
epithets of 'disrupters,' 'traitors,' 'direct actionists,'
'anti-politicalists,' 'anarchists,' etc. And there seems to be
quite a number who consider that the menace should be met with
stern measures--nothing less than expulsion."
In the Left Wing statements of principles and tactics the reader will
observe a constant emphasis upon "direct action," or violence, and in
favor of "industrial unionism" and the "identification of the Socialist
Party with class conscious industrial unionism." Chapters VIII and IX of
this work, which describe the principles and tactics of the I. W. W.,
will make the significance of the Left Wing movement perfectly apparent
as an effort to combine Socialist Partyism and I. W. W.'ism or to place
the latter under the political leadership of the former. In the Left
Wing we see an enthusiastic consecration of the major part of the
American Socialist Party to revolutionary violence--the direct
application of anarchistic tactics to the overthrow of the Government
and institutions of the United States. As we follow the Left Wing
movement we shall see the principles and tactics of the I. W. W., as
carried out in Russia, adopted as a program by the major part of the
American Socialist party, which also finally succeeded in committing the
minor part, the Right Wing, to the same principles.
Needless to say, this movement was helped on by the various
communications received from the Lenine dictatorship, and notably by the
call for an international communist congress to meet at Moscow in March,
1919. The text of this call began to appear in the American radical
publications in late March and April, and is here reproduced from "The
One Big Union Monthly" for the latter month:
"First Section
"AIMS AND TACTICS
"In our estimation, the acceptance of the following principles
shall serve as a working program for the International:
"1. The actual period is the period of the dissolution and collapse
of the whole capitalist system;
"2. The first task of the proletariat consists to-day of the
immediate seizure of government power by the proletariat;
"3. This new governmental apparatus must incorporate the
dictatorship of the working class, and in some places, also, that
of the poorer peasantry, together with hired farm labor, this
dictatorship constituting the instrument of the systematic
overthrow of the exploiting classes;
"4. The dictatorship of the proletariat shall complete the
immediate expropriation of Capitalism and the suppression of
private property in the means of production, which includes, under
Socialism, the suppression of private property and its transfer to
a proletarian state under the Socialist administration of the
working class, the abolition of capitalist agricultural production,
the nationalization of the great business firms and financial
trusts;
"5. In order to insure the Social Revolution, the disarming of the
bourgeoisie and its agents, and the general arming of the
proletariat, is a prime necessity.
"Second Section
"ATTITUDE REGARDING SOCIALIST PARTIES
"7. The fundamental condition of the struggle is the mass action of
the proletariat, developing into open armed attack on the
governmental powers of Capitalism;
"8. The old International has broken into three principal groups:
the avowed social-patriots, who, during the entire duration of the
imperialistic war between the years 1914 and 1918, have supported
their own bourgeoisie; the minority Socialists of the 'Center,'
represented by leaders of the type of Karl Kautsky, and who
constitute a group composed of ever-hesitating elements, unable to
settle on any determined direction and who up to date have always
acted as traitors; and the Revolutionary Left Wing.
"9. As far as the social-patriots are concerned, who stood up
everywhere in arms, in the most critical moments, against the
revolution, a merciless fight is the alternative; in regard to the
'Center,' the tactics consist in separating from it the
revolutionary elements, in criticizing pitilessly its leaders and
in dividing systematically among them the number of their
followers; these tactics are absolutely necessary when we reach a
certain degree of development;
"10. On the other hand it is necessary to proceed in a common
movement with the revolutionary elements of the working class who,
though hitherto not belonging to the party, yet adopt to-day in its
entirety, the point of view of dictatorship of the proletariat,
under the form of Soviet government, including the syndicalist
elements of the labor movements;
"11. It is also necessary to rally the groups and proletarian
organizations, who, though not in the wake as yet of the
revolutionary trend of the Left Wing, nevertheless have manifested
and developed a tendency leading in that direction;
"12. We propose that the representatives of parties and groups
following these tendencies shall take part in the Congress as
plenipotentiary members of the Workers' International and should
belong to the following parties:
"1. The Spartacus group (Germany); 2. The Bolsheviki or Communist
Party (Russia); 3. Other Communist groups of; 3. German-Austria; 4.
Hungary; 5. Finland; 6. Poland; 7. Esthonia; 8. Lettonia; 9.
Lithuania; 10. White Russia; 11. Ukraine; 12. The Revolutionary
elements of Czecho-Slovakia; 13. The Bulgarian Social-Democratic
Party; 14. The Roumanian Social-Democrats; 15. The Left Wing of the
Servian Social-Democracy; 16. The Left Wing of the Swedish
Social-Democratic Party; 17. The Norwegian Social-Democratic Party;
18. The Danish groups of the class struggle; 19. The Dutch
Communist Party; 20. The revolutionary elements of the Belgian
Labor Party; 21-22. The groups and organizations in the midst of
the French Socialist and syndicalist movements who are in
solidarity with our aims; 23. The Left Wing of the Swiss
Social-Democratic Party; 24. The Italian Socialist Party; 25. The
left elements of the Spanish Socialist Party; 26. The left elements
of the Portuguese Socialist Party; 27. The British Socialist Party
(those nearer to us are the elements represented by MacLean); 28.
I. S. P. R. (Great Britain); 29. S. L. P. (England); 30. I. W. W.
(Great Britain); 31. The revolutionary elements of Shop-Stewards
(Great Britain); 33. The S. L. P. (U. S. A.); 34. The elements of
the Left Wings of American Socialist Propaganda (tendency
represented by E. V. Debs and the Socialist Propaganda League); 35.
I. W. W. (Industrial Workers of the World), America; 36. The
Workers' International Industrial Union (U. S. A.); 37. I. W. W. of
Australia; 38. The Socialist groups of Tokio and Samon, represented
by Sen Katayama; 39. The Young Peoples' Socialist International
Leagues.
"Third Section
"THE ORGANIZATION AND NAME OF THE PARTY
"13. The Congress must be transformed into a common organ of combat
in view of the permanent struggle and systematic direction of the
movement, into a center of International Communism which will
subordinate the Interests of the Revolution from an international
point of view.
"The concrete forms of organization, representation, etc., will be
elaborated by the Congress."
The testimony of Morris Hillquit in the Socialist case before the
Assembly Judiciary Committee gave the preceding document an added
interest which the reader will better appreciate further on. As
will appear later in our narrative, on September 4, 1919, the
Socialist Party adopted a manifesto strongly favoring the
"industrial" unionizing of American labor for the purpose of
reinforcing the political "demands" of the Socialist Party with
"industrial action."
On the stand at Albany, on February 19, 1920, Hillquit acknowledged
the authorship of at least 90 per cent of the "industrial action"
manifesto of his party, but declared that he had never read the
Moscow manifesto when he wrote his, and so was not influenced by
the Moscow recommendation of industrial action to bring about a
revolution by violence. But the above "call" to the Moscow
Conference urged "a common movement" with "syndicalist elements,"
or "industrial union" revolutionaries, as much as the Moscow
manifesto did, and the reader will find at the end of our next
chapter evidence that Morris Hillquit was familiar with and
criticized the above Moscow "call" at least as early as July, 1919.
CHAPTER IV
THE FREE-FOR-ALL FIGHT BETWEEN THE RIGHT AND LEFT WINGS
Emanuel Blumstein, a member of the Right Wing, in a letter published in
"The Call," April 9, 1919, bitterly complained against the tactics of
the Left Wingers--in trying to wrest control of the Socialist Party from
the "Old Guard" of Berger and Hillquit, which had acquired the habit of
domination:
"The reason that the so-called Left Wingers are concentrating at
meetings, making motions to recall delegates, and carry their
motions through, is very simple. Anyone who attends the meetings
can easily understand it. They shout down every honest thinking
Socialist with slurs and abuse. They make it so intolerable that
the meeting hall appears to be, instead of a Socialist meeting, a
room frequented by rowdies of all types and descriptions. In this
way they drive the most active Comrades out of the meeting hall, as
these Comrades get disgusted with the tactics pursued and leave the
meeting. Then they drag the meeting on to all hours of the night
until those left, having no opposition, carry all their destructive
actions through, and this they call democratic decision for the
Comrades of the branch--deciding the policies for them."
Morris Zucker, a member of the Left Wing, defends his faction in a
letter that appeared in "The Call," New York, April 11, 1919:
"In regard to Lee's objection that the Left Wing may bring about a
premature revolt, the reply is that no real revolution, no social
revolution, is ever manufactured. It must be spontaneous. It must
be real. It must be an overwhelming, impulsive demonstration of the
popular will. Revolutions may be manipulated but not manufactured.
Trotzky shows in his 'From October to Brest-Litovsk' that the
Bolshevist Revolution was not manufactured.
"The problem is to manipulate the revolution, to guide it, to
counsel it. And herein lies the importance of proper Socialist
education, of knowledge and understanding, and from these of proper
Socialist tactics.
"The Left Wing believes it has the proper program. And it wants the
Socialist Party to adopt its program. The Left Wing not only
preaches revolutionary Socialism, it believes that the economic and
social forces that have made half Europe Socialist, and threaten
momentarily to engulf the other half are at work in America also.
It believes that a revolutionary outbreak in America is not a
matter of the far and distant future. And it desires to make that
revolution as easy and as successful as it can possibly be. For
that reason the Left Wing has evolved its manifesto and program,
and now calls upon the Socialist Party to discuss it, perfect it,
and adopt it."
In April, 1919, the New York State Committee of the Socialist Party, by
a vote of 24 against 17, resolved that it was "definitely opposed to the
organization calling itself the Left Wing section of the Socialist
Party, and to any group within the party organized for the same or
similar purpose;" and it instructed "its executive committee to revoke
the charter of any local affiliated with any such organization or that
permits its subdivision or members to be affiliated."
"The Call," April 23, 1919, publishes a long letter from F. Basky in
which he defends the principles of the Left Wing and attacks the New
York State Committee for the above resolutions. We quote a part:
"Aside of these arguments the Left Wing is not a
counter-organization to the Socialist Party. On the contrary, it is
the only active force to save the party from going into decay and
finally to the scrap heap as a tool not adapted to the task. If the
Left Wing is the party, then and only then can we answer the
criticism of the syndicalist that a political party is nothing else
but a vote-catching machinery for middle-class politicians. If the
principles enunciated in the manifesto will be the principles of
the party, then it will enjoy the confidence of those who, through
their bitter experience realized the fallacies of the Second
International, led and dominated by the social-patriots, reformists
of the German Social Democratic Party. If we follow the line of
uncompromising revolutionary activity indicated by the Left
Wingers, then we can rest assured that the party will be cleared of
the would-be Scheidemanns, Eberts, Kerenskys, Brantenburgs, and the
rest of the traitors of our principles and our class.
"They will be eliminated anyway. The fight is on. And I welcome the
attack of the state committee. We at least know some of those we
would have to face in the critical hour. Might as well fight it out
now; whether they or the Left Wing represents the party. Let us
find out right now who is with us and who is against us."
"The Call," April 30, 1919, published a resolution then recently passed
by the Socialist Party of Essex County, New Jersey, which had adopted
the Left Wing program. Part of the resolution is hereby quoted:
"While the need for new orientation is clearly apparent, there is
an element within the party which is either unwilling or unable to
adjust itself to the new world conditions and the new tactics
required by these conditions. Unfortunately, this element has
controlled the party national executive committee and the party
machinery, with the consequence that the national organization, in
place of furnishing the leadership and urging the locals forward to
take advantage of the present world crisis in building up the
proletariat movement, has conspicuously lagged behind."
By the early part of May, 1919, conditions in the Socialist Party became
so serious that the Executive Committee of Local New York, according to
"The Call," May 8, 1919, issued the following statement on the Left
Wing:
"To the Members of Local New York:
"Comrades.--A critical situation has arisen within Local New York.
Your executive committee is compelled to take unusual and vigorous
measures to combat the disruptive efforts of an internal faction
which seeks to dominate the party by undemocratic and unsocialistic
methods. The executive committee addresses itself to you, the
membership, to explain the gravity of the crisis and to urge your
support in saving the organization which has been built up with so
much sacrifice by thousands of Comrades.
"The very existence of the party is at stake--its existence as the
democratically self-governed party of the working class, laboring
to awaken and educate the proletarian masses and to express their
class interests on the political field....
"This organization, i.e., the Left Wing, is not open to all party
members, nor even to all who accept the ideas set forth in its
manifesto and program. Only such persons are admitted as can be
counted on to set the authority of the 'Left Wing Section' above
that of the party itself. Its meetings are held in secret, and
their business is that of a permanent closed caucus to lay plans
for controlling the action of the party branches and committees,
and of obstructing their activities when it cannot control them.
"Even within the 'Left Wing Section' itself democratic methods are
not used. The admission of members, the choice of delegates to Left
Wing conferences, and the framing of instructions to those
delegates are intrusted to committees composing an inner circle.
All members and adherents of the 'Left Wing Section' are called
upon in their action as party members and as members of party
committees, to give explicit obedience to orders issued by the
inner circle. A sufficient sample of this is the appointment of a
'steering committee' for the Left Wingers in the central committee
of the local, and the issuance of instructions to delegates
affiliated with that section as follows:
"'In all matters involving Left Wing tactics vote as a unit with
the steering committee. Do not make motions, ask for divisions,
further divisions, roll call, and appeals from the chair. The
steering committee will attend to that.'
"The Left Wing Section has not been able to command a majority in
the central committee, notwithstanding the drastic methods used in
their attempt to capture it. Unable to control they have practised
systematic obstruction, and have openly declared that they will not
permit the central committee to function so long as their group is
in the minority there. Under the direction of their steering
committee, the time is consumed with every species of parliamentary
delay, with the aim and effect of preventing the central committee
from transacting business and carrying on the normal work of the
party. These dilatory tactics are supplemented by personal abuse
directed against those who will not truckle to the 'Left Wing,' by
insults and provocatory threats, and when necessary, by the
creation of an uproar designed to attract the attention of the
police and to break up the sessions....
"The Executive Committee has heretofore decided not to have a
meeting of the central committee on May 13, and has appointed a
committee to reorganize Local New York. This committee will begin
with such branches as are affiliated with the 'Left Wing Section.'
No one will be excluded because of his opinions, but no one can
retain a double membership in the party and the so-called 'Left
Wing Section.'"
By about the middle of May, 1919, the Left Wing program had been adopted
by the Socialist Party in Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit,
Philadelphia, Kings and Queens Counties, N. Y., and Essex County, N. J.
In Hudson County, N. J., the county committee referred it favorably to
all the branches, and at the end of the month the New Jersey Convention
of the party adopted it. In Chicago, J. Louis Engdahl, sentenced[C] to
twenty years in Leavenworth prison, was reported to have been ousted
from the organization, having been considered too conservative by the
millionaire Socialist, William Bross Lloyd, and the latter's friends who
controlled the Communist Propaganda League, the Left Wing faction of the
local organization.
"The Call," May 8, 1919, publishes an interesting letter from one of its
correspondents:
"It is not so much a question as to Left or Right Wing domination
as it is a question of whether we are to have a united or divided
party.
"I am not a Centrist, if that means to be in the center of the
party as it is today. We must move to the Left--that is understood
by all thinking, class-conscious Comrades, but we must move
together, not, perhaps, as far as some of the hot-heads would like
to have us--they fail to understand what an American Socialist
Party should be, for they seem to think of New York City as the
whole thing. If they could take a trip to Chicago and back they
might find themselves moving toward the Right.
"No one wants to be where the stick-in-the-mud Rights are,
either--that is, no one except them. The majority of us see the
need for revolutionizing the party. What we don't see is any
necessity of disrupting the party in the process. The master class
would like to see that; in fact, they have been egging us on to
fight among ourselves for the last two or three years, and we have
blindly done the very thing that they want most we should do. They
are laughing in their sleeves at us--poor boobs that we are."
On May 15, 1919, following the open fight against the Left Wing
inaugurated by the New York State Committee and its Executive Committee,
the Left Wing Locals of Boston, Cleveland and New York joined in a call
for a National Conference of the Left Wing to convene in New York on
June 21. This call opened with the following paragraph:
"The international situation and the crisis in the American
Socialist Party; the sabotage the party bureaucracy has practised
on the emergency national convention; the N. E. C. [National
Executive Committee] aligning our party with the social-patriots at
Berne, with the Congress of the Great Betrayal; the necessity of
reconstructing our policy in accord with revolutionary events--all
this and more, makes it necessary that the revolutionary forces in
the Socialist Party get together for counsel and action."
Apparently so many bitter letters were sent to "The Call" that it found
it expedient to publish the following notice in its edition of May 16,
1919:
"No letters dealing in personalities of any kind will be published
in this column. All views and all arguments set forth must be
confined strictly to the principles and tactics either defended or
attacked. This ruling is by the unanimous vote of the Board of
Managers of 'The Call.'"
Morris Hillquit, member of the National Executive Committee of the
Socialist Party till September, 1919, and one of the principle leaders
of the Right, published in his paper, "The Call," May 21, 1919, a long
article in large type, covering half of the editorial page, under the
caption, "The Socialist Task and Outlook." After speaking of the gloomy
conditions in the Socialist Party abroad, he thus comments on conditions
in the American branch of the international organization:
"All the more unfortunate is it that the energies of the Socialist
Party should at this time be dissipated in acrimonious and
fruitless controversies brought on by the self-styled Left Wing
movement. I am one of the last men in the party to ignore or
misunderstand the sound revolutionary impulse which animates the
rank and file of this new movement, but the specific form and
direction which it has assumed, its program and tactics, spell
disaster to our movement. I am opposed to it, not because it is too
radical, but because it is essentially reactionary and
non-Socialistic; not because it would lead us too far, but because
it would lead us nowhere. To prate about the dictatorship of the
proletariat and of workers' Soviets in the United States at this
time is to deflect the Socialist propaganda from its realistic
basis, and to advocate the abolition of all social reform planks in
the party platform means to abandon the concrete class struggle as
it presents itself from day to day.
"The Left Wing movement, as I see it, is a purely emotional reflex
of the situation in Russia. The cardinal vice of the movement is
that it started as a wing, i.e., as a schismatic and disintegrating
movement. Proceeding on the arbitrary assumption that they were the
Left, the ingenuous leaders of the movement had to discover a
Right, and since the European classification would not be fully
reproduced without a Center, they also were bound to locate a
center in the Socialist movement of America.[D] What matters it to
our imaginative Left Wing leaders that the Socialist Party of
America as a whole has stood in the forefront of Socialist
radicalism ever since the outbreak of the war, that many of its
officers and leaders have exposed their lives and liberties to
imminent peril in defense of the principles of international
Socialism, they are Right Wingers and Centrists because the
exigencies of the Left Wing require it. The Left Wing movement is a
sort of burlesque on the Russian revolution. Its leaders do not
want to convert their Comrades in the party. They must capture and
establish a sort of dictatorship of the proletariat(?) within the
party. Hence the creation of their dual organization as a kind of
Soviet, and their refusal to cooperate with the aforesaid stage
Centrists and Right Wingers.
"But the performance is too sad to be amusing. It seems perfectly
clear that, so long as this movement persists in the party, the
latter's activity will be wholly taken up by mutual quarrels and
recriminations. Neither wing will have any time for the propaganda
of Socialism. There is, as far as I can see, but one remedy. It
would be futile to preach reconciliation and union where antagonism
runs so high. Let the Comrades on both sides do the next best
thing. Let them separate, honestly, freely and without rancor. Let
each side organize and work in its own way, and make such
contribution to the Socialist movement in America as it can. Better
a hundred times to have two numerically small Socialist
organizations, each homogeneous and harmonious within itself, than
to have one big party torn by dissensions and squabbles, an
impotent colossus on feet of clay. The time for action is near.
Let us clear the decks."
By the end of May, 1919, the Left Wing fight had become so serious that
the National Executive Committee revoked the charter of the Socialist
Party in Michigan and suspended the Russian, Lithuanian, Ukranian,
Lettish, Polish, South Slavic and Hungarian branches, expelling or
suspending considerably over 25,000 members out of a total dues-paying
membership of about 100,000.
"The Ohio Socialist," the party organ of Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia
and New Mexico, in its issue of June 4, 1919, comments as follows on the
expulsions:
"Violating every principle of fair play and square dealing and
disregarding every constitutional provision, the National Executive
Committee at its session in Chicago, May 24 to 30, expelled without
a trial the state organization of the Socialist Party of Michigan,
constituting about 6,000 members, suspended the Russian,
Lithuanian, Lettish, Polish, Hungarian, Ukrainian and South Slavic
Federations of the party, constituting more than 30,000 members,
and worst of all--and let it be said to their everlasting
shame--are autocratically holding up the national membership
referendum for the election of a new National Executive Committee,
International Delegates, International Secretary, and the holding
of a national convention.
"Never before in the party's history have Socialist Party officials
been so lost to all sense of decency and square dealing. A wilful
group of seven members of the National Executive Committee usurped
power which the constitution does not grant them and which the
Socialist Party membership never intended any servants of the party
to have. This despotic group of seven did not act as the party's
servants, but as dictators and tyrants to defeat the expressed will
of the party membership and to perpetuate itself in office.
"Unbelievable as it may seem, seven officials of the party had the
monumental effrontery to assume the right to expel and suspend
40,000 members. Think of it. That such a dastardly deed should ever
be perpetrated upon the rank and file of our organization is almost
beyond comprehension. And yet it was done--it was done by those
whom you elected to serve you. Instead they are betraying you,
disrupting the organization....
"The intention of these autocrats is plain as daylight. Like a
tidal wave, the demand for a Socialism which stands true to the
working class at all times has swept the party. The thousands of
Comrades who are sincerely working to win the party to a more
revolutionary position are known to the Left Wing. This Left Wing
understands clearly that the Scheidemann brand of Socialism stands
for the betrayal and defeat of the working class and that only the
Socialism of Liebknecht and Lenine has within it the potentialities
of victory and success....
"There was no trial, no opportunity for defense offered to the
Michigan Comrades. A motion to allow Michigan a chance to interpret
their action was voted down. The right to appear at a trial was
denied....
"Expulsion meant throwing out over three thousand votes. On with
the expulsion of Michigan....
"But the expulsion of Michigan was apparently not sufficient to
decide the elections in favor of the reactionary moderates. At a
subsequent session, accordingly, it was decided to destroy the
whole election.
"The National Executive Committee instructed the secretary not to
tabulate the vote or make it public. They nullified the referendum
vote, destroyed the will of the membership in order to retain
control. Most of these National Executive Committee members are out
for re-election, are interested parties, knowing that the
referendum defeated them for re-election, are now, by this action,
perpetuating themselves in office....
"The National Executive Committee's action is equivalent to
stealing the elections. The party must act sternly to rebuke this
official chicanery.
"After this betrayal of the party the despotic seven seemed to fear
the results of the National Convention, which has been called for
August 30. A way had to be devised to control the convention. Happy
thought: Suspend the federations that have endorsed the Left Wing,
and we are safe. Another caucus held. Result: Suspension of the
Russian, Polish, Hungarian, Ukrainian, Lithuanian, Lettish and
South Slavic Federations from the Socialist Party--over thirty
thousand members. A plain attempt to assure the election of
reactionary delegates to the National Convention to approve the
abominable actions of the National Executive Committee majority....
"In spite of all these dirty tactics the little group of
reactionary autocrats did not feel themselves secure. They still
fear that they will not be able to control the coming National
Convention. So they formed a corporation, nearly all the directors
of which are of the same stamp as the wilful seven, and into the
hands of these directors is to be placed the entire property of the
Socialist Party, including the new headquarters building upon which
$10,000 has been paid. These directors cannot be recalled by the
party membership as long as they retain membership in the party,
and only four, a minority, can be removed in three years' time....
"They want the Left Wing to desert the party. They want us to leave
the party machinery in their hands. They will be disappointed in
this. We know their game. We shall not play into their hands. We
will not quit. Every Left Winger will work night and day for the
reinstatement of the nearly 40,000 members whom the reactionaries
are trying to sever from the party in violation of the party's
constitution. Every radical will work with might and main to get
new members and build, build the Left Wing and the party. Every
revolutionist will stick until victory is ours and the Socialist
Party is completely won for revolutionary Socialism."
Commenting on the referendum for a new National Executive Committee "The
Revolutionary Age" in its May 24, 1919, issue says:
"The moderates claim that the Left Wing represents only a small
clique in the party: why, then, not allow the membership to make
its decision through the referendum? Why disfranchise the
revolutionary Socialists? Why steal votes away from the Left Wing
candidates? These desperate tactics are understandable only on the
theory that the moderates feel that the revolutionary Socialists
are a majority, that they will meet defeat in the referendum votes
and revolutionary Socialism will conquer the party."
"The Revolutionary Age," July 12, 1919, informs us that the
Massachusetts Comrades were also expelled and that others in other
States were threatened:
"Another State gone. Massachusetts is expelled for adopting the
Left Wing program at its State Convention and for refusing to
recognize the National Executive Committee's act of suspending the
Federations. For this latter offense, Pennsylvania is now
threatened with excommunication, and very likely Ohio will meet the
same sad fate.
"It is a race against time. Will there be anything left for the
rump N. E. C. to expel by August 30th?"
Relative to the success of the Left Wing in electing its members to the
new National Executive Committee of fifteen, and to the meeting of this
new committee, "The Revolutionary Age," July 19, 1919, comments as
follows:
"The election of Comrades Fraina, Hourwich, Harwood, Prevey,
Ruthenberg, Lloyd, Keracher, Batt, Hogan, Millis, Nagle,
Katterfeld, Wicks and Herman appears now to be certain, while there
is still a question about the third choice in the First District,
Comrade Lindgren leading without the New York vote.
"There is no question, but that the final tally of the party
elections is available at the National Office, but according to the
action of the National Executive Committee this tally will not be
made known till August 30. Meanwhile the State secretaries have
published enough of the votes to leave no question of the outcome,
except as above indicated....
"According to the party law the new N. E. C. is entitled to control
beginning July 1st....
"There can be no legality by which a defunct Executive Committee
can keep the newly elected committee from taking office. By such
'constitutionality' the old body could perpetuate itself
indefinitely, let the members vote as they like. Stopping
referendums is the method chosen to make sure that the members
consent."
Accusations and recriminations, charges and counter-charges, continued
to fly back and forth between the two Wings, as the secretaries
proceeded with the work of expulsion or suspension, carrying out the
savage instructions of the Right Wing majority of the National Executive
Committee, where Victor L. Berger, Morris Hillquit and Seymour Stedman
were the dominating leaders. On the side of the Lefts little more could
be done than to set up a howl against the "dictatorship of the
proletariat" within the party which forced them to taste the medicine
they would have preferred to prescribe for the rest of the country.
During the summer the Left Wing movement was hastened on, dragging the
Right Wing after it, by the publication in the radical papers of America
of the manifesto issued in Moscow in March, 1919, by the Third or
Communistic International in session there. Max Eastman, a Left Wing
leader, in an article on "The New International" in "The Liberator,"
July, 1919, a Left Wing magazine, thus describes the Bolshevik
International:
"The Communist International, which met at Moscow on March 2d,
1919, comprised thirty-two _delegates with full power to act_,
representing parties or groups in Germany, Russia, Hungary,
Sweden, Norway, Bulgaria, Rumania, Finland, Ukrainia, Esthonia,
Armenia, delegates from the 'Union of Socialists of Eastern
Countries,' from the labor organizations of Germans in Russia, and
from the Balkan 'Union of Revolutionary Socialists.'
"There were also present _representatives with consultative powers_
from parties and groups in Switzerland, Holland, Bohemia,
Jugo-Slavia, France, Great Britain, Turkey, Turkestan, Persia,
Corea, China, and the United States (S. J. Rutgers, of the
Socialist Propaganda League, now merged with the Left Wing section
of the Socialist Party). A letter was read from Comrade Loriot, the
leader of the Left Wing section of the French Party, repudiating
the Berne Congress of the Second International.
"The Russian Communist Party was represented by Comrades Lenine,
Trotzky, Zinoviev, Kukharin and Stalin. This party contains many
millions of organized class-conscious Socialists, more, perhaps,
than are to be found in all the rest of the world."
The Communist Manifesto of 1919, issued by this Moscow International,
became the test of fellowship among the simon-pure "Reds" the world
over, and since the campaign of the Left Wing grew into an attempt to
force the Socialist Party of America to adopt this Bolshevik program, we
here quote the salient parts of the Moscow Manifesto from the article by
Eastman mentioned above:
"_To the proletariat of all countries!_
"Seventy-two years have gone by since the Communist Party of the
World proclaimed its program in the form of the Manifesto written
by the great teachers of the proletarian revolution, Karl Marx and
Frederick Engels....
"We Communists, representatives of the revolutionary proletariat of
the different countries of Europe, America and Asia, assembled in
Soviet Moscow, feel and consider ourselves followers and fulfillers
of the program proclaimed seventy-two years ago. It is our task now
to sum up the practical revolutionary experience of the working
class, to cleanse the movement of its admixtures of opportunism and
social patriotism, and to gather together the forces of all the
true revolutionary proletarian parties in order to further and
hasten the complete victory of the Communist revolution.
"The opportunists who, before the war, exhorted the workers, in the
name of the gradual transition into Socialism, to be temperate;
who, during the war, asked for submission in the name of 'civil
peace' and defense of the Fatherland, now again demand of the
workers self-abnegation to overcome the terrible consequences of
the war. If this preaching were listened to by the workers,
Capitalism would build out of the bones of several generations a
new and still more formidable structure, leading to a new and
inevitable world war. Fortunately for humanity, this is no longer
possible....
"Only the Proletarian Dictatorship, which recognizes neither
inherited privileges nor rights of property, but which arises from
the needs of the hungering masses, can shorten the period of the
present crisis; and for this purpose it mobilizes all materials and
forces, introduces the universal duty to labor, establish the
regime of industrial discipline, thus to heal in the course of a
few years the open wounds caused by the war and also to raise
humanity to new undreamed-of heights.
"The whole bourgeois world accuses the Communists of destroying
liberties and political democracy. This is not true. Having come
into power the proletariat only asserts the absolute impossibility
of applying the methods of bourgeois democracy, and it creates the
conditions and forms of a higher _working class democracy_....
"The peasant of Bavaria and Baden who does not look beyond his
church spire, the small French wine-grower who has been ruined by
the adulterations practiced by the big capitalists, the small
farmer of America plundered and betrayed by bankers and
legislators--all these social ranks which have been shoved aside
from the main road of development by Capitalism, are called on
paper by the regime of political democracy to the administration of
the State. In reality, however, the finance-oligarchy decides all
important questions which determine the destinies of nations behind
the back of parliamentary democracy....
"The proletarian State, like every State, is an organ of
suppression, but it arrays itself against the enemies of the
working class. It aims to break the opposition of the despoilers of
labor, who are using every means in a desperate effort to stifle
the revolution in blood, and to make impossible further opposition.
The dictatorship of the proletariat, which gives it the favored
position in the community, is only a provisional institution. As
the opposition of the Bourgeoisie is broken, as it is expropriated
and gradually absorbed into the working groups, the proletarian
dictatorship disappears, until finally the State dies and there are
no more class distinctions....
"In an empire of destruction where not only the means of production
and transportation, but also the institutions of political
democracy have become bloody ruins, the proletariat must create its
own forms, to serve above all as a bond of unity for the working
class and to enable it to accomplish a revolutionary intervention
in the further development of mankind. Such apparatus is
represented in the Workmen's Councils. The old parties, the old
unions, have proved incapable, in person of their leaders, to
understand, much less to carry out the task which the new epoch
presents to them. The proletariat has created a new institution
which embraces the entire working class without distinction of
vocation or political maturity, an elastic form of organization
capable of continually renewing itself, expanding, and of drawing
into itself ever new elements, ready to open its doors to the
working groups of city and village which are near to the
proletariat. This indispensable autonomous organization of the
working class in the present struggle and in the future conquests
of different lands, tests the proletariat and constitutes the
greatest inspiration and the mightiest weapon of the proletariat of
our time. Wherever the masses are awakened to consciousness,
Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Councils will be formed....
"The outcry of the bourgeois world against the civil war and the
red terror is the most colossal hypocrisy of which the history of
political struggles can boast. There would be no civil war if the
exploiters who have carried mankind to the very brink of ruin had
not prevented every forward step of the laboring masses, if they
had not instigated plots and murders and called to their aid armed
help from outside to maintain or restore their predatory
privileges. Civil war is _forced upon_ the laboring classes by
their arch-enemies. The working class must answer blow for blow, if
it will not renounce its own object and its own future which is, at
the same time, the future of all humanity.
"The Communist parties, far from conjuring up civil war
artificially, rather strive to shorten its duration as much as
possible--in case it has become an iron necessity--to minimize the
number of its victims, and, above all, to secure victory for the
proletariat. This makes necessary the disarming of the bourgeoisie
at the proper time, the arming of the laborer, and the formation of
a communist army as the protector of the rule of the proletariat
and the inviolability of the social structure. Such is the Red Army
of Soviet Russia which arose to protect the achievements of the
working class against every assault from within or without. The
Soviet Army is inseparable from the Soviet State.
"Seizure of political power by the proletariat means destruction of
the political power of the bourgeoisie. The organized power of the
bourgeoisie is in the civil State, with its capitalistic army under
control of bourgeoisie-junker officers, its police and gendarmes,
jailers and judges, its priests, government officials, etc.
Conquest of the political power means not merely a change in the
personnel of ministries, but annihilation of the enemy's apparatus
of government; disarmament of the bourgeoisie of the
counter-revolutionary officers, of the White Guard; arming of the
proletariat, the revolutionary soldiers, the Red Guard of
workingmen; displacement of all bourgeois judges and organization
of proletarian courts; elimination of control by reactionary
government officials and substitution of new organs of management
of the proletariat.... Not until the proletariat has achieved this
victory and broken the resistance of the bourgeoisie can the former
enemies of the new order be made useful, by bringing them under
control of the Communist system and gradually bringing them into
accord with its work....
"The Dictatorship of the Proletariat does not in any way call for
partition of the means of production and exchange; rather, on the
contrary, its aim is further to centralize the forces of production
and to subject all of production to a systematic plan. As the first
steps--socialization of the great banks which now control
production; the taking over by the power of the proletariat of all
government-controlled economic utilities; the transferring of all
communal enterprises; the socializing of the syndicated and
trustified units of production, as well as all other branches of
production in which the degree of concentration and centralization
of capital makes this technically practicable; the socializing of
agricultural estates and their conversion into co-operative
establishments....
"As far as smaller enterprises are concerned, the proletariat must
gradually unite them, according to the degree of their importance.
It must be particularly emphasized that small properties will in no
way be expropriated and that small property owners who are not
exploiters of labor will not be forcibly dispossessed....
"The task of the Proletarian Dictatorship in the economic field can
only be fulfilled to the extent that the proletariat is enabled to
create centralized organs of management and to institute workers'
control. To this end it must make use of its mass organizations
which are in closest relation to the process of production....
"As in the field of production, so also in the field of
distribution, all qualified technicians and specialists are to be
made use of, provided their political resistance is broken and they
are still capable of adapting themselves, not to the service of
capital, but to the new system of production.... Besides
expropriating the factories, mines, estates, etc., the proletariat
must also abolish the exploitation of the people by capitalistic
landlords, transfer the large mansions to the local workers'
councils, and move the working people into the bourgeois
dwellings....
"The capitalistic criminals asserted at the beginning of the World
War that it was only in defense of the common Fatherland. But soon
German Imperialism revealed its real brigand character by bloody
deeds in Russia, in the Ukraine and Finland. Now the Entente States
unmask themselves as world despoilers and murderers of the
proletariat....
"Indescribable is the White Terror of the bourgeois cannibals.
Incalculable are the sacrifices of the working class. Their
best--Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg--they have lost. Against this the
proletariat must defend itself, defend at any price. The Communist
International calls the whole world proletariat to this final
struggle.
"Down with the imperialistic conspiracy of capital!
"Long live the International Republic of the Proletarian Councils!"
As will be seen when we study the I. W. W., the above is the program of
the world-wide conspiracy of a single class, a minority of society, to
carry out the cynical purpose of I. W. W.'ism--to "take possession of
the earth and the machinery of production."
Morris Hillquit, a Right Wing leader of the Socialist Party of America,
declared that "The Communist Congress of Moscow made the mistake of
attempting a sort of dictatorship of the Russian proletariat in the
Socialist International and was conspicuously inept and unhappy in the
choice of certain allies and in the exclusion of others."[E]
Quoting this, Max Eastman, in the article from which we have taken so
much, makes the following reply:
"How can he expect them to be any more indefinite and generous in
their invitation than they were? In every country where there was a
doubt as to what groups had stood true to the revolutionary
principle and the principle of Internationalism, they so indicated
the alignment as to leave every Socialist free to consider himself
their ally who seriously and courageously desired to. This was what
they did in America. The S. L. P. (Socialist Labor Party), the
Socialist Propaganda League, the I. W. W. and in the Socialist
Party 'the followers of Debs!' Could they in a brief word open the
door wider to American Socialists, unless they wished to admit
prominent members of the Socialist Party who were known to have
repudiated them, as Berger did, declaring his solidarity with the
Mensheviks who were waging war on them?"
CHAPTER V
BIRTH OF THE COMMUNIST AND COMMUNIST-LABOR PARTIES
On June 24, 1919, the Left Wing Conference assembled in New York City.
The purpose of the Conference was for the first time to unite the forces
of the Left Wing throughout the country and to decide upon a common plan
of action against the Right. For some time there had been a growing
desire among the members of the Left for the formation of a new party to
be known as the Communist Party. The Michigan State organization and the
different Russian-speaking federations, which had either been expelled
or suspended, were particularly anxious for a new party. Then, too, many
members of the Left Wing throughout the country believed that, even
though they were more numerous than those of the Right, it would be
useless to try to control the National Emergency Convention of the
Socialist Party, called for August 30, 1919, in Chicago. They feared
that the credentials of the still unsuspended and unexpelled Left Wing
delegates would not be recognized by the party machine in the hands of
the Right Wing, and, moreover, that even if they were, these Left Wing
delegates would not be in the majority because so many other Left Wing
delegates had been expelled from the Party.
Almost at the beginning of the National Conference of the Left Wing the
Michigan State delegates and the delegates of the foreign-language
federations insisted on the immediate organization of a new party to be
known as the Communist Party. The majority of the delegates, however,
were opposed to immediate organization, claiming that it would be much
more prudent to wait till the meeting of the National Emergency
Convention, at the end of August, as many Left Wing Socialists would
refuse to leave the mother party until it became evident that the
Convention could not be captured by the Left Wing. The majority of the
delegates decided to call a Communist Party Convention on September 1,
1919. The Michigan State delegates and the Russian-speaking federation
delegates thereupon broke with the majority of the Left Wing, causing a
serious split, which continued till about the end of July, 1919.
In that month, however, most of the members of the National Council of
the Left Wing who had been leading the faction of the Left Wing which
had refused the call for the immediate formation of the Communist Party,
went over to the minority faction, which included the Michigan State
organization and the Russian-speaking federations. A compromise had been
reached whereby the aforesaid members of the National Council agreed not
to insist upon attendance at the National Emergency Convention of the
Socialist Party, while the Michigan organization, together with the
federations, were willing to wait till September 1, 1919, for the
convention of the Communist Party.
Even on these terms John Reed, Ben Gitlow and some other leading members
of the Left Wing refused to go over to the Communist Party, having
decided to fight for the rights of the Left Wingers in the National
Emergency Convention of the Socialist Party. This group of Left Wingers
later on, as will be seen, became the nucleus of a third party, the
Communist Labor Party. Several statements from the joint call for the
convention of the Communist Party, cited from "The Revolutionary Age,"
August 23, 1919, will interest the reader:
"The party will be founded upon the following principles:
"The present is the period of the dissolution and collapse of the
whole capitalist world system, which will mean the collapse of
world culture, if capitalism with its unsolvable contradictions is
not replaced by Communism.
"The problem of the proletariat consists in organizing and training
itself for the conquest of the powers of the state....
"This new proletarian state must embody the dictatorship of the
proletariat, both industrial and agricultural, this dictatorship
constituting the instrument for the taking over of property used
for exploiting the workers, and for the reorganization of society
on a Communist basis....
"The dictatorship of the proletariat shall carry out the abolition
of private property in the means of production and distribution, by
transfer to the proletarian state under Socialist administration of
the working class....
"The present world situation demands the closest relation between
the revolutionary proletariat of all countries....
"We favor international alliance of the Communist Party of the
United States only with the Communist groups of other countries,
such as the Bolsheviki of Russia, Spartacans of Germany, etc....
"The party shall propagandize class-conscious industrial unionism,
and shall carry on party activity in cooperation with industrial
disputes that take on a revolutionary character."
The national organ of the Communist Party was "The Communist" of
Chicago. In its issue of August 23, 1919, it thus criticises the
Socialist Party:
"The majority of the readers of 'The Communist' are familiar with
the form of organization of the old Socialist Party, with its state
autonomy and its bureaucratic officialdom. Every state is
practically organized as an Independent Socialist party. 'Official
socialism' of Milwaukee is entirely different from[6] 'official
socialism' in Ohio, both in regard to platforms and form of
organization. Every state has a 'Socialism' of its own brand, and
even dues are not uniform throughout the country. 'Official papers'
of the party are in most cases organs of independent associations,
not at all affiliated with the central party organizations. Such
important weapons in the struggle of the proletariat are left in
the hands of the petty bourgeois ideologists who, in reality,
prostitute the labor press. As examples, we have, for instance,
'The Milwaukee Leader,' the 'New York Call,' the Jewish 'Daily
Forward,' the 'Appeal to Reason,' and many others scattered
throughout the United States, and each contradicting not only the
others, but containing in each issue glaring contradictions that an
intelligent person who reads them becomes disgusted with the whole
muddled mess."
The fight among the revolutionists was a fight to the finish. The
leaders all wanted to become Trotzkys and Lenines, all wanted to be
bosses. It seems reasonable to conclude that if Bolshevism were ever
introduced into the United States, either by the mother Socialist Party
or by its offspring, the Communist Party or the Communist Labor Party,
the dictatorship of the proletariat, that wonderful piece of nonsense
which we hear so much about, would be grasped at by an amazing number of
competitors. In Russia Lenine and Trotzky seem to constitute the
Dictatorship of the Proletariat. In the Socialist Party of the United
States Berger and Hillquit, of the old National Executive Committee,
constituted a first-class dictatorship. In the Communist Party, Dennis
Batt, lately jailed, and Alexander Stoklitsky would surely give the
Communist rank and file plenty to do--everything of course being done
according to their wills. John Reed and Ben Gitlow would make an ideal
"dictatorship of the proletariat," if the Communist Labor Party ever
made Bolshevism the law of the land.
"Truth," one of the organs of the Communist Labor Party, published in
Duluth, Minn., in its issue of August 29, 1919, devotes nearly two of
its eight pages to bitter attacks on the Communist Party. Two short
quotations will suffice to show the spirit of envy that exists:
"'Tis said that distance lends enchantment, and perhaps that is the
reason why some of you in the East have responded to the
cuckoo-call of Michigan-Federations. Frankly, we see nothing
hopeful in the alignment presented by the Michigan-Federation
combine. We are fearful of the consequence of such leadership. The
so-called Communist Party, as it is now constituted and especially
with the accretion of a part of the National Council, presents the
prettiest bunch of 'eligibles' that man ever laid eyes upon. And as
I gaze upon this august array of talent, I wonder where the working
class is going to get off at. We of the left wing of Cook County
are reluctant to join with an organization under the guidance of a
few doctrinaires from Detroit and the would-be Lenine of the United
States.[F] We do not consider that the welfare of the revolutionary
movement would be zealously guarded in their hands."
From "Truth," of the same date, we also quote an open letter to Louis C.
Fraina, which reads in part as follows:
"Do you know how the Russian Federation is being ruled? Do you know
that a 'firing squad' is constantly on the job expelling members
and branches from the Federation who dare to disagree on anything
with the would-be bosses of the Russian Federation?...
"Do you know that a regular secret service system is being employed
by these 'bosses' to hunt down the undesirables?
"Do you know that a worse than military censorship is being
maintained in the domain of Stocklitzky (the Northwestern States),
where it is prohibited to the branches to communicate with each
other or to send out or receive any correspondence otherwise than
through the hands of the censors, the Executive Committee, and that
this censorship committee, like the imperialists in the world's
war, are holding up the mail of these branches and do not deliver
at all the 'undesirable' mail?"
August 30, 1919, the day for the assembling of the National Emergency
Convention of the Socialist Party, at last arrived. Delegates of the
Right Wing, and many of the Left, including John Reed, I. E. Ferguson
and Rose Pastor Stokes, were present. The Left Wing delegates, to the
number of about 84, arrived early at the place of meeting, Machinists'
Hall, 113 South Ashland Boulevard, Chicago. Trouble immediately began,
for the seats being occupied by the Left Wingers, the members of the
Right were crowded out.
Germer and Gerber of the Right seem to have lost their heads. "The
Chicago Herald and Examiner," of August 31, 1919, informs us that Adolph
Germer, National Secretary of the Socialist Party and one of the leading
members of the Right Wing, called in the police, who cleared the hall.
"The Chicago Tribune" of the same day tells us that everybody was
exchanging fisticuffs when the police arrived. Detective Sergeant
Lawrence McDonough, head of the anarchist squad, with the aid of a dozen
uniformed policemen, seems to have saved the day for the Right Wingers.
John Reed, of the Left Wing, was furious, and "The Call," New York,
August 31, 1919, tells us that he issued a statement which he addressed
to the delegates of the Emergency Convention:
"We address you to inform you of occurrences this morning which
every Revolutionary Socialist on the floor of this convention will
protest against.
"Delegates from Illinois, Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, Ohio,
Nebraska, California and other states entered the convention floor
and took their seats in readiness for the opening of the
convention.
"At nearly 10 o'clock Gerber of New York and Goebel of New Jersey,
who were at the door and attempted to refuse the above named
delegates admission, called the police and these delegations were
ejected from the hall by police power, many of them being roughly
handled."
Press reports inform us that after the belligerents had calmed down the
meeting was again convened, and that Victor Berger, in referring to the
Lefts, said: "They're just a lot of anarchists; we are the party."
Berger did not say whether or not by the word "we" he meant the old
National Executive Committee, which should have gone out of office in
July,[G] but seemed to have given itself a "mandate" to run the National
Emergency Convention.
On August 31, 1919, the hot-heads and sore-heads again assembled, and a
dispute arose as to who called the "cops." As a result the Left Wingers
next met by themselves downstairs, on the first floor of the hall, while
the Right Wingers remained higher up on the second floor. On the same
day the Minnesota group was seated by the Convention, but was denied a
vote.
On September 1st the high climbers of the Right Wing purged the party
still more by unseating the Washington State delegation and expelled
Katterfield "for the good of the party." The California delegates then
threw a bomb into the Right Wing Convention by announcing that they
would not take their seats until all of the contested delegations were
seated and the police were withdrawn from the hall. These delegates
finally went down to the first floor and joined ranks with the Left
Wingers there, this section henceforth being known as the Communist
Labor Party.
On the same day the Convention of the Communist Party assembled at
Smolny Institute, 1221 Blue Island Avenue, Chicago. Red flags were
displayed and Bolshevist songs were sung until the police of the
anarchist squad finally demanded the removal of the blood-colored
standards of revolt.
"The Call" informs us that on the next day, September 2nd, the Communist
Party, composed of the Michigan crowd, the Russian Federation and the
former Left Wing National Council, nearly split in two when, at a
concerted signal, there resigned from the emergency committee of the
convention, Louis C. Fraina, C. E. Ruthenberg, I. E. Ferguson,
Maximilian Cohen, S. Elbaum and A. Selakowich, and, from other offices,
A. Paul of Queens and Fannie Horowitz. It seems that these members were
anxious to have the Communist Party amalgamate with the Communist Labor
Party, but that the foreign federations, fearing that they would be
outnumbered by the English-speaking members, were very much opposed to
the union.
On this same day Dennis Batt, one of the principal leaders of the
Communist Party, was jailed.
Moreover, on the 2nd of September the Communist Labor Party--the group
that had first met with the Right Wing, and, later on, down stairs on
the first floor of the hall on South Ashland Boulevard--assembled at the
I. W. W. Hall at 119 Throop street. This party, heart and soul, is in
favor of the propagation of Bolshevism and I. W. W.'ism in the United
States, and if not completely broken up by the Government, seems
destined to become more numerous than either the rapidly disintegrating
Socialist Party or the Communist Party, which is principally made up of
foreigners who speak the various Russian languages. The principal
leaders of the Communist Labor Party are John Reed, William Bross Lloyd,
formerly known as the millionaire Socialist, and Benjamin Gitlow.[H] It
seemed likely, too, that Fraina, Ferguson, Ruthenberg and Cohen,
prominent "Reds," who resigned from the emergency committee of the
Communist Party, would soon be found among the leaders of the Communist
Labor Party. At the time of the convention no national organ of the
Communist Labor Party had yet begun publication, but "The Voice of
Labor," edited by Reed and Gitlow, and "Truth," formerly the Socialist
paper of Duluth, were local organs.
Both the Communist Party and the Communist Labor Party are strongly
Bolshevist. The Communist Labor Party is decidedly more in favor of the
I. W. W. than the Communist Party; but the main differences between
these two parties seems to be a matter of race, language, and especially
of personal jealousy and dislike among the leaders.
For years the Socialist Party and the Socialist Labor Party have
remained separated from each other, so that now, with the two new
parties, the Communist Party and the Communist Labor Party, there are
four parties of rebels, all plotting a revolution against our National
Government, while the great body of the American people sleep and dream.
Quite a number of educated people in the United States, including the
editors of some of our leading dailies, seem to think that the remnant
of the Socialist Party is not at all a Bolshevist organization and not
at all revolutionary in character. They are very much deceived, having
let the crafty, deceptive, hypocritical leaders of the Right Wing fool
them badly. The Left Wingers have indeed been much more open in
admitting their intentions to overthrow our government by force of arms.
They are dangerous, but perhaps not nearly so much so as the slippery
"Yellows," cunning weasels of the imported Russian Hillquit type, who,
though they do not talk as openly as the "Reds," are spreading their
subversive principles on every side, and especially among the less
educated classes of our people, into whose minds they instil the spirit
of hatred between employers and employees, while at the same time
encouraging strikes, wherever they can, with the hope of overthrowing
our Government when conditions become sufficiently critical. Both
parties of the Socialists and both parties of the Communists, along with
the I. W. W., are all revolutionary in the strictest sense, and the
sooner the American people wake up to the fact and take some intelligent
action to stamp them out, the better it will be. It is not yet too late,
but soon may be.
The Bolshevist Socialists of Russia and the two new parties of
Socialists that at Chicago in September, 1919, seceded from the mother
party, have all adopted the name, "Communist," which "The Call," New
York, July 24, 1919, informs us was used by Marx and Engels, the
founders of modern Socialism, adding that though the name is somewhat
confusing, inasmuch as the word has another and a distinct meaning in
English, still, "wherever it is used it means revolutionary Socialists
as distinguished from Social patriots and mere parliamentary
Socialists." Is this definition an alibi for Hillquit and Berger?
Many persons have hastily assumed that the main reason why the Left and
Right Wings of the Socialists fought each other like cats and dogs was
that the Right Wing members of the party are opposed to Bolshevism. This
is nonsense. The Socialist papers of the country, Right and Left, with
the possible exception of the once powerful "Appeal to Reason," which in
recent years has fallen into great discredit among Socialists because it
favored our entrance into the World War--have been and still are
advocating Bolshevism every day. If anyone has any doubt, let him read
any of the rebel sheets.
The Socialist Party of St. Louis, in its appeal for party unity,
published in "The Call," July 19, 1919, informs us that the Socialist
Party is whole-heartedly with the Russian Bolshevists and their cause:
"Promptly, and notwithstanding all obstacles and persecution, the
Socialist party hurried to the front in defense of the cause of our
Russian Comrades. Mass meetings were held, demonstrations in behalf
of Soviet Russia were arranged, our Socialist press gave all
possible support to counteract the sinister work of the American
capitalist press."
Eugene V. Debs, many times the presidential candidate of the Socialists
and the idol of "Reds" and "Yellows" alike, has all along been an ardent
Bolshevist. Listen to these words of his in his article, "The Day of the
People," published in many Socialist papers in the early part of 1919,
and taken by us from the March number of "Party News," the official
organ of the Socialist Party of Philadelphia:
"In Russia and Germany our valiant Comrades are leading the
proletarian revolution, which knows no race, no color, no sex and
no boundary lines. They are setting the heroic example for
world-wide emulation. Let us, like them, scorn and repudiate the
cowardly compromisers within our ranks, challenge and defy the
robber-class power, and fight it out on that line to victory or
death!
"From the crown of my head to the soles of my feet I am Bolshevik,
and am proud of it."
The report of the Right Wing majority of the old National Executive
Committee of the Socialist Party, made to the National Emergency
Convention, and here quoted from "The Call," September 3, 1919, contains
the following defense of their Bolshevism, against the aspersions of the
Left Wing leaders who had challenged the committee's attitude toward
Russia:
"Ever since the revolution in Russia, the party has hailed it as
the first great gift of the International. At every meeting of the
National Executive Committee held since the second revolution in
Russia [the revolution which put Lenine and Trotzky in power] the
committee has issued some ringing declaration in favor of the
workers' and peasants' government in Russia....
"Rarely has a meeting been held under party auspices that our
speakers have not taken advantage of it to present the claims and
achievements of the Russian revolution. The party's position may be
easily ascertained by consulting the party bulletins and the party
press."
The Executive Committeemen who signed this defense of the committee's
Bolshevist complexion were Victor L. Berger, Seymour Stedman, James
Oneal, A. Shiplacoff, Dan Hogan, John M. Work, Frederick Krafft and
George H. Goebel. These, with Morris Hillquit, were the men who had
violently expelled or suspended tens of thousands of members of the
party without warrant of the party Constitution and without granting a
trial or the right of self-defense to those thus dealt with; who had
maintained themselves in office after July 1, 1919, in express violation
of the party Constitution, having suppressed announcement of the result
of the referendum vote by the rank and file to elect executive
committeemen, by which vote Left Wing committeemen had been elected, as
the report to the National Emergency Convention of the Right Wing
committee appointed to investigate this referendum had to acknowledge;
and who, by these devices and a similar high-handedness committed by
themselves and friendly delegates had seized control of the National
Emergency Convention and organized it in their own interest.
In their report to the convention they further defended themselves
against the Left Wing charge that this majority of the Executive
Committee had allied itself with the Berne Conference. Under this head
the above-mentioned committeemen say:
"While no definite date may be set for the beginning of the present
party dissension, it is certain that they began to be generally
noticeable in January of this year [1919], when the National
Executive Committee elected delegates to the Berne Conference owing
to the fact that the delegates elected by referendum could not
serve, and the assembling of the Berne Conference in March made
necessary the election of delegates by the National Executive
Committee.
"The so-called Left Wing members of the National Executive
Committee participated in the election, nominating and voting for
candidates. None of their nominees were elected, and shortly after
the election an organized attack was made against the international
delegates by the Left Wing....
"The National Executive Committee, in session, decided that if our
delegates arrived at Berne in time and the conference failed to
take the position of the party on war and imperialism, we were to
withdraw with any other elements favoring a genuine working-class
International. It was agreed that we would not affiliate with any
International that excluded the Russian Comrades, who were fighting
world imperialism, or the Comrades opposed to the Ebert-Scheidemann
regime in Germany.
"Before our delegates could leave the country, the National
Executive Committee learned that the Berne Conference had failed to
respond to its opportunity.... Learning this, the National
Executive Committee decided to send one delegate abroad to impart
information to the Comrades in Europe, informing them of our
attitude on international questions."[I]....
"Yet, despite all this, a systematic campaign of falsehood has been
waged against the party by a faction within the party. This faction
has falsely claimed that the party is allied with the Berne
Conference.... They have denounced the party and its officials as
an organization of 'Scheidemanns' and 'Noskes,' asserting that if
the party were intrusted with public power it would murder our own
Comrades with machine guns and hand grenades....
"These slanders have been accompanied with a similar propaganda
regarding Russia. The party and its officials, especially the
members of the National Executive Committee, have been charged with
being 'Kolchaks' and 'counter-revolutionists,' the implication
being that the party has been committed to counter-revolution in
Russia, allied intervention, and support of Kolchak in Siberia.
"As in the case of Germany, so in the case of Russia, the National
Executive Committee and the party in general have opposed
intervention in Russia or support of Kolchak and have supported the
Russian Comrades at the head of the Soviet power against a campaign
of international lying.
"There has never been a single utterance of the National Executive
Committee quoted by the Left Wing to support these slanders. The
Comrades may rest assured that this faction would quote the
National Executive Committee if it could."
It is technically true that the Left Wing writers were not able to quote
the Executive Committee as such; but they could and did quote the
dominating leaders of the Right Wing majority of the Executive
Committee, Hillquit and Berger, through their organs, the "Call" and
"Leader"--"The Call" as characterizing the Bolsheviki as "anarchists"
and Berger as proclaiming his solidarity with the Mensheviki--and we
have nowhere seen any evidence that these leaders could purge the record
of these charges. That these leaders _were_ the Executive Committee, to
all intents and purposes, seems abundantly shown by their ruthless use
of it to smash the party, going so far as to cast out nearly two-thirds
of the entire party membership to get rid of their accusers, the Left
Wing leaders.
This scandal and disaster to a cause they pretended to serve are logical
outcomes of a double hypocrisy--an effort to fool the voting public and
our Government officials by a pretense of moderation in papers and
electioneering speeches, while at the same time fooling the dues-paying
rank and file of their party with expressions of loyalty to radicalism.
The significant facts in estimating the revolutionary character of the
American Socialist Party, as recruited and indoctrinated by its
double-faced leaders are two: the fact that as lately as September,
1919, some 70,000 of their pupils graduated into the open course of
revolutionary violence adopted by the Communist Party of America and the
Communist Labor Party, and the fact that the more manageable 40,000
remaining with these leaders were so much like their seceding Comrades
that their leaders were compelled to defend their own radicalism in the
fashion above shown, and were also compelled, as we shall soon see, to
take an open stand for revolution and I. W. W.'ism in order to keep even
the remnant of the party from deserting them.
Thus a serious mistake has been made by the many who fancy that the
"Yellow" Socialists--Hillquit's Right Wing which still constitutes the
Socialist Party of America--are not plotters who work for a revolution
to overthrow our Government. Of course they are, and any one who has
read the Socialist papers and publications, even to a very limited
degree, may easily see that these alleged "moderates" appear such only
in contrast with the more rabid "Red" rebels of the Left; and that the
one object of Right and Left alike is to stir up discontent and foment
hatred of class against class precisely in order that a rebellion may
some day break out.
True it is that the crafty leaders of the Right do not act as
imprudently as the hot-headed leaders of the Left, for they fear lest
rashness should precipitate them in a premature and unsuccessful
outbreak; yet they are sowing the seed of revolution as certainly as are
the Communists, and perhaps with much more success, because they proceed
more prudently. Once in a while, when they are off their guard, the "cat
escapes from the bag." As an example we quote from an article that
appeared in the May Day, 1919, issue of "The Call," the paper founded
and controlled by Hillquit, the foxy leader of the Rights:
"The world revolution, dreamed of as a thing of the distant future,
has become a live reality, rising from the graves of the murdered
millions and the misery and suffering of the surviving millions. It
has taken form, it strikes forward, borne on by the despair of the
masses and the shining example of the martyrs. Its spread is
irrepressible. The bridges are burnt behind the old capitalist
society and its path is forever cut off. Capitalist society is
bankrupt, and the only salvation of humanity lies in the uprising
of the masses, in the victory of the Socialist revolution, in the
revolutionary forces of Socialism.
"The World War, which is now about to be officially closed, has
slid into a condition neither war nor peace. However the war of
nations has been followed by the war of the classes. The class
struggle is no longer fought by resolutions and demonstrations.
Threateningly it marches through the streets of the great cities
for life or death."
Yet the Right Wing papers, on the whole, are much more reserved than
those of the Left. As an example of the openness with which the Left
Wing or Communist papers instigate rebellion, a quotation from "The
Communist," Chicago, April 1, 1919, will interest the reader:
"The Communist Propaganda League of Chicago came into existence on
November 7, 1918, first anniversary of the Russian Soviet Socialist
Republic, and the very day of the German Revolution.
"A group of Socialist Party officials and active party members came
together for consultation as to ways and means for giving the
American Socialist movement a revolutionary character in harmony
with all the significance of November 7th, the most glorious date
in all history. At the hour of that little meeting bedlam reigned
in the streets of Chicago by premature celebration of peace. The
calling of this meeting during the mass tumult of November 7th is
prophetic of the revolutionary vision which brought these Comrades
together. On that day the seething proletariat ruled Chicago by
sheer force of numbers. One thing alone was needed to give this
mass expression identity with the proletarian uprisings of
Europe--one thing: the revolutionary idea!
"The Communist Propaganda League is an organization for the
propagation of the revolutionary idea. The civilization of tomorrow
is with unorganized masses who greeted the news of peace and
revolution in Germany with what may be safely described as the
greatest spontaneous expression of mass sentiment ever witnessed in
America. To give direction and inspiration to the advancing and
irresistible army of the preletariat is the mission to which this
League is dedicated."
This League, with the millionaire Socialist, William Bross Lloyd, at its
head, became part of the Communist Labor Party.
The indications are that the Communist Labor Party, had it been left
undisturbed by our Government, would soon have surpassed in numbers the
remnant left in the old Socialist Party, whose dues-paying membership
dwindled from 109,589 in January, 1919, to 39,750 by July of the same
year. Evidently, when the Left Wing secession occurred, a few real
rebels came out of the Socialist Party, which used to boast in election
campaigns that it was merely a party of evolution, not of revolution.
Those who still remain in the old party are rebels, too, but the rank
and file is restrained by seasoned leaders, who are more prudent but
less honest than the hot-headed Communists.
The Socialists now have in the country four revolutionary organizations:
the Socialist Party, the Socialist Labor Party, the Communist Party and
the Communist Labor Party. The scum of the land, the wrecks and wreckers
of civilization, deluded ignoramuses, thus find ample opportunity for
selecting an organization of rebellion in which there is "no political
corruption." The members of these parties find fault with everything
under the Stars and Stripes, and yet hesitate to pass over to Russia and
live under the bloody standard of Lenine and Trotzky. If these four
rebel parties do not suffice for some of the rebels, there still remains
the I. W. W. All are pretty much the same, their principal differences
being the varying degrees of hypocrisy, boldness and lust for power of
their leaders.
The open and pronounced revolutionary character of the I. W. W.,
Communist Party and Communist Labor Party, evidenced in their
inflammatory utterances and tactics, had established their criminal
status with our National and State police and legal departments, while
startling wholesale arrests, deportations and indictments of these three
classes of law-breakers soon impressed a recognition of their criminal
status upon the public mind. It is important to establish the further
fact, if it be one, that the only difference between the rank and file
of these organizations and the rank and file of the remnant still
attached to the Socialist Party of America is the difference between
tweedledee and tweedledum.
The late inquiry into the qualifications of five suspended Socialists to
sit as law-makers in the New York Assembly created an astonishing
furore, disclosing amazing ignorance concerning American Socialism among
our most intelligent citizens. The confusion of the public mind was
still further increased by the Attorney-General of the United States,
whose convincing characterization of the two Communist parties, given
out on January 23, 1920, contained the following sentence:
"Certainly such an organization as the Communist Party of America
and also the Communist Labor Party cannot be construed to fall
within the same category as the Socialist Party of America, which
latter organization is pledged to the accomplishment of changes of
the Government by lawful and rightful means."
But can the facts so far brought out in this book "be construed" as
indicating any substantial difference between the 39,000 or 40,000
Socialists who have kept their old party name and the 70,000 or 72,000
who separated from them in September, 1919? Up to the moment of
separation were not all alike under the same "pledge" to use "lawful and
rightful means?" But if this public profession of lawfulness meant
nothing to 70,000 of them, why think it means more to the rest?
We have the further striking evidence, shown above, that the leaders who
had compromised their attitude toward Bolshevism felt compelled, in
order to hold any of the rank and file, to argue that "the National
Executive Committee and the party in general" had "supported the Russian
Comrades at the head of the Soviet power." Yet in spite of this defense
the old National Executive Committee of the Socialist Party was rebuked
and kicked out of office during the Emergency Convention, even by
delegates who were friendly to the compromised leaders. The "Call,"
September 5, 1919, gives some of the details:
"The rebuke of the National Executive Committee was in the form of
an amendment to the original motion to adopt its report. The
amendment carried by 63 to 39....
"Perhaps Frederick Haller expressed the general sentiment of the
convention when he said:
"'We must endorse this supplemental report of the National
Executive Committee, but we must go back to our constituents and
tell them that we gave the National Executive Committee hell.'"
These "constituents," the rank and file, determine the character of the
party, and not the thimble-rigging games of their political leaders, who
support themselves and have "made a good thing" out of Socialism by
carrying water on one shoulder for gullible voters, and on the other for
their credulous disciples. This is not the first time that self-serving,
hypocritical teachers, in compassing sea and land to make proselytes,
have made them twofold more the children of hell than themselves.
The National Emergency Convention of 1919 affords still other evidence
of the mind of the rank and file of the Socialist Party in the report of
the committee which investigated the referendum vote of 1919 which the
old National Executive Committee had suppressed. The "Call," September
1, 1919, says:
"The report states that on the face of the returns, referendum B
and D were carried by large majorities, and a National Executive
Committee, consisting of Louis Fraina of New York, Charles E.
Ruthenberg of Cleveland, Seymour Stedman of Chicago, Patrick S.
Nagle of Oklahoma and L. E. Katterfeld of Cleveland was elected.
The returns also showed on their face that John Reed and Louis
Fraina had been elected as the party's international delegates and
Kate Richards O'Hare its international secretary."
Thus the party was "Red" or Left-Wingish "by large majorities," and was
distinctly Bolshevist, as we learn from the "Call's" explanation of
"referendum B and D," which "were carried by large majorities."
"Referendum B put the question of holding a National Emergency
Convention up to the membership. Referendum D asked the membership
to decide whether the party should record itself as being opposed
to entering any other international Socialist alignment than that
of the Third National [International?] which held its first
conference at Moscow early in March.
"Its adoption means that the Socialist party will not take part in
any international conference from which the Bolsheviki of Russia
and the Spartacans of Germany are excluded, or in which they refuse
to participate."
Thus at the Emergency Convention of August-September, 1919, the
Socialist Party of America was tied to the will of the Russian
Bolshevists and the German Spartacides, who held the powers of approval
and veto in deciding what internationals the members of the Socialist
Party of America might associate with! A more anomalous product of the
double-faced generalship of Berger and Hillquit it would be hard to
imagine.
But this is not all. The Moscow Manifesto of March, 1919, was before the
Emergency Convention. This Russian Communistic Manifesto is addressed
"To the proletariat of all countries" (see Chapter IV) and reads: "We
Communists, representatives of the revolutionary proletariat of the
different countries of Europe, America and Asia, assembled in Soviet
Moscow." Would the Socialist Party of America accept its inclusion among
those in "America" thus designated, or refuse? The committee which
considered the matter split, bringing in majority and minority reports.
The majority report, favored by Berger, considered the Third
International as not yet constituted, thus hanging the Socialist Party
of America in the air, without fellowship with Moscow, Berne or any
other thing--a trapeze performance truly Bergeresque. The minority
report, voted for even by a third of the machine delegates in the
Emergency Convention, favored affiliation with the associates of the
Moscow Conference as constituting the Third International. It was
decided to submit both reports to a referendum vote of the party, which
should have been taken in January or February, 1920, if the requirements
of the party Constitution were followed.
The concern of the Socialist Party managers to keep the facts from the
general public, evidenced by their tactics in the case of the five
suspended Socialist Assemblymen at Albany, might have led to another
unconstitutional delay or manipulation of a referendum. But this was
immaterial in determining the mind of the rank and file, as we have
documentary evidence showing that the only opposition within the party
to a clear-cut Bolshevik committal sprang out of fear either of legal
prosecution or of the loss of votes through public condemnation. The
following illuminating discussion is extracted from a letter of
Alexander Trachtenberg, a conspicuous Socialist, as printed in the
"Call" of November 26, 1919:
"The members of the Socialist Party now have before them two
referenda--Referendum E, consisting of the various changes in the
party Constitution which were decided upon at the Chicago
Convention, and Referendum F, on international Socialist
relations....
"The question of international affiliation is at this moment
probably the most important before the Socialist Party. The two
reports which emanated from the convention, known as the majority
and minority reports, will no doubt receive very careful
consideration by the members....
"A close examination of the two reports reveals that the condition
laid down for the International, with which the Socialist party
cares to affiliate itself, are the same. Both reports agree that:
"a. The Second International is dead.
"b. The Berne International Conference hopelessly failed in its
indeavor to reconstitute the International.
"c. The New International must consist only of those parties:
"1. Which have remained true to the revolutionary International
Socialist movement during the war.
"2. Which refused to co-operate with bourgeois parties and are
opposed to all forms of coalition.
"In short, _both_ reports agree that the Socialist Party will go
only into such an International the component parties of which
_conduct their struggle on revolutionary class lines_. The
difference between the two reports is, that while the majority
report leaves the matter of the reconstruction of the International
hang in the air, the minority report has something tangible to
offer. It also more specifically outlines the Socialist policy on
the question of international affiliation, and gives several
reasons for joining the Third (Moscow) International....
"The Socialist Party of America cannot afford to remain amorphous
at the present stage of the building of the new International. It
has refused to go with those elements who have either betrayed or
were unwilling to remain true to their professions. It belongs
among those parties which have remained true to International
Socialism and who alone have the right to build the edifice of the
new International.
"By voting for the minority report the Comrades will give
expression to _what they have professed and believed in_ during the
past critical years in the life of the international Socialist
movement."
A letter on the same subject, by Benjamin Glassberg, appears in the
"Call" of December 4, 1919, from which we take extracts showing the
Bergeresque argument of Hoan, Berger's mayor of Milwaukee:
"The most important question before the members of the Socialist
Party just now is the referendum on the majority and minority
reports on international relations. Comrade Trachtenberg has argued
in the columns of 'The Call' in favor of the minority report, and
Hoan of Milwaukee for the majority, and Comrade Warshow has argued
against both.
"A careful examination of the position taken by both Hoan and
Warshow fails to reveal why the minority report should be voted
down. Comrade Hoan is naturally very much concerned at the
possibility that 'in the coming political battles the capitalistic
henchmen will flaunt in your face that the above is the program of
the Socialist Party' (referring to the statement in the governing
rules of the Communist International that the revolutionary era
compels the proletariat to make use of mass action).
"The important thing, according to Hoan, is not whether the
minority report is right or not, but rather what will the effect be
at the next election. In this respect he is typical of the pure and
simple political Socialist....
"In one breath Comrade Warshow calls for a new International to
which shall be admitted all Socialist parties of the world who
believe in the class struggle, and in the next he defends the
Socialists supporting a coalition government. How can one subscribe
to the doctrine of the class struggle and at the same time approve
of Socialists joining in a coalition government, which of necessity
will not be the agent of the workers but of the class with which
the workers are at all times at war?....
"In all our official declarations, including the Chicago manifesto,
we have voiced our support of the Bolsheviki. In our meetings and
in our literature we have taken our stand solidly with our Russian
Comrades, our friends, the Left Wingers to the contrary
notwithstanding.
"Why, then, hesitate to affiliate with them?"
Thus, whether or not Berger's policy of dissimulation prevailed--and his
wholesale slaughter of dues-payers with the ax of the Executive
Committee had shown all who opposed him what they might expect--it
remained true that identification with the Bolshevist principles and
tactics of Lenine and Trotzky was what the present members of the
Socialist Party in America "have professed and believed in during the
past critical years" and was in accord with "all" their "official
declarations," their "meetings" and their "literature."
The base ingratitude of Berger toward those who have followed and
supported him; the gross, incredible savagery of his egotism in turning
to rend those he had discipled into revolutionaries the moment their
allegiance to the principles he taught them stood in the way of his
cowardice and ambition; his butcher insensibilities in making his
party's Constitution a "scrap of paper" and the party a shambles for the
hewing down of two-thirds of his "Comrades;" his burlesque effrontery in
posing in the convention as a law-and-order man, railing at his own
victims as "anarchists"--these daubs of color paint the cubist portrait
of Wisconsin's mock hero, one of the meanest caricatures of human life
that ever swaggered on a political arena.
When the two Wings of the Convention raised the question, "Who called
the cops?" Berger's pale and innocent figure rose with the trembling
remark: "If they had not been here yesterday morning we would not be
here now. The two-fisted Reed and the other two-fisted Left Wingers
would be here." He took pains to have the delicate pathos of his
martyrdom sketched into the Executive Committee report he signed,
"Victor L. Berger, in addition to a sentence of 20 years, has four more
indictments pending against him, besides being refused his seat in
Congress. All the Socialist candidates for Congress in Wisconsin and the
State Secretary also are under indictment. No mail whatever is permitted
to be delivered to the 'Leader,' the party daily in Milwaukee," etc. On
the other hand, against the terrible "anarchs" who had so outraged his
own gentle spirit and sense of order, he even fulminated outside the
Convention Hall, as in the interview which we take from the "Call" of
September 4, 1919:
"Ever since the Socialist movement has existed there have been two
very distinct tendencies apparent--the Social Democratic tendency
and the Anarcho-Syndicalist tendency....
"But the revolution in Russia and Hungary, which had been predicted
by us, as well as in Germany, has had a peculiar psychological
effect on many of the rank and file of the party, especially upon
those who had come from Russia and Hungary. They really believe
this revolt can be repeated today in America.
"The revolution in Russia and the psychological effect of it
penetrated into the foreign federations affiliated with the
Socialist party of America and gave the Anarcho-Syndicalists, who
have joined us in great numbers in the last six months, a chance to
split up the Socialist party of America into three groups.
"First, the old Socialist Party, which will remain longer to aid
the old ideals of Social Democracy, even though there may be a
change in tactics required by changed conditions.
"Then there are the Communist Socialists, led by John Reed and a
few hysterical men and women, who try to bring about a Russian
revolution or God knows what other things, they themselves don't
know tomorrow morning.
"And, finally, there is the Communist Party, led by Louis Fraina,
which consists mainly of Russians, Ukrainians[7], Slovenic races
and other foreign federation members, who have been suspended for
stuffing ballot boxes in the last referendum, and who also want
revolution of some kind, the wherewith and howwith they haven't
been able to explain so far."
Do we exaggerate the humbuggery of leadership uncloaked in this
Emergency Convention of the Socialist Party of America? Let the reader
judge from the supreme example of it, the motive of which we present in
the words of the organ of one of the chief conspirators, Hillquit's
"Call." The issue of August 31, 1919, declared: "The convention will
adopt a stand, expressed in a manifesto that is expected to satisfy all
those in the Left Wing who are contending for what they believe to be
revolutionary principles." In the issue of September 3 we read:
"There will be a restatement of party principles which is expected
to cut the ground from under the feet of the former members and
organizations of the party who have read themselves out and will
remain suspended in mid-air between the newly formed and still more
newly revised Communist-Labor Party and the Communist Party."
In the "Call" of September 5, which published the manifesto, we also
have this comment on it by James Oneal: "The American movement can
congratulate itself on having produced such a splendid document. It will
tend to rally members who have been uncertain of the outcome of the
convention, and will eventually bring to us many who are sick of the
hypocrisies, the shams and the illusions that have held them in chains
for nearly three tragic years."
What hypocrisies, shams and illusions are referred to? Who were their
authors? In another column of the same issue we are told: "With every
delegate on his feet and cheering, the National Emergency Convention of
the Socialist Party unanimously adopted its manifesto this afternoon.
[September 4th.] It was the big moment of the convention. The document
is regarded as the most revolutionary the party has ever drawn up, and
one certain to bring back into the organization thousands of members
temporarily outside of it, either because their local organizations were
expelled or by reason of what Lenine has called 'the intoxication of the
revolutionary phrase.'"
Thus this manifesto was adopted by the wreckers of the Socialist Party
to hold the "revolutionary" rank and file still left them and to draw
back the revolutionary seceders--minus their leaders, of course.
Nevertheless the manifesto is truly revolutionary--"most
revolutionary"--the revolutionary creed of a revolutionary organization.
It is, of course, carefully worded, so as to deceive if possible that
public whose intelligence the cynical Socialists despise at the same
time that they appeal to it for votes, and this careful wording we can
understand from a comment in the "Call" of September 5, 1919: "Before
reading the manifesto, Block told the convention the manifesto was
largely based upon one suggested by Morris Hillquit, now ill at Saranac
Lake, N. Y."[J]
Seen through its mask of verbiage, however, the manifesto of the
Emergency Convention of the Socialist Party of America joins with the
famous Preamble of the I. W. W. and the manifestoes and programs of the
Communist and Communist Labor Parties in advocating the plundering of
mankind by proletarians, the elimination of the private ownership of
natural wealth and the machinery of production, and the _wresting_ of
"the industries and the control of the government of the United States"
out of their present ownership and control so as "to place industry and
government in the control of the workers."
This revolutionary document incites "American labor" to "break away"
from its present leadership, called "reactionary and futile," and "to
join in the great emancipating movement of the more advanced
revolutionary workers of the world"--the I. W. W.'s and Bolshevists. It
is "the supreme task" of "the Socialist party of America," its "great
task," to which its members "pledge all" their "energies and resources,"
to "win the American workers" from their "ineffective" leadership, "to
educate them to an enlightened understanding of their own class
interests, and to train and assist them to organize politically and
industrially on class lines, in order _to effect their emancipation_,"
namely, "to _wrest_ the industries and the control of the government of
the United States from the capitalists _and their retainers_" and "place
industry _and government_ in the control of the workers."
Furthermore, "to _insure_ the triumph of Socialism in the United States
the bulk of American workers must be strongly organized politically as
Socialists, in constant, clear-cut and _aggressive opposition to all
parties of the possessing class_" and "must be strongly organized in the
economic field on broad industrial lines, _as one powerful and
harmonious class organization_, co-operating with the Socialist Party,
and _ready in cases of emergency_ to _reinforce_ the _political_ demands
of the working class _by industrial action_." (See, a few pages further
on, the manifesto itself, from which we have quoted in the three last
paragraphs.)
Is this the thing which Berger and Hillquit have let loose--after
blocking a much less compromising resolution of long-distance
affiliation with Moscow? Does Berger think the people of Wisconsin such
blockheads that they will shy at a word like Bolshevism, but are unable
to understand the plain, bold English of a conspiracy to bring about
industrial organization "to wrest the industries and the control of the
government of the United States" out of the hands of the American people
and into the hands of a special class? Indeed, if the "workers" take
everything, what will become of the drones--the Socialist political
hacks?
While we reserve the details for Chapter XVI, we add here in passing
that on February 10, 1920, it was acknowledged in testimony at the trial
of the five Assemblymen at Albany that affiliation with the Third
(Moscow) International had been carried by referendum vote in the
Socialist Party of America with a large majority.
Before giving the reader the text of that part of the Emergency
Convention manifesto which we have been discussing we must call
attention to another piece of evidence--Morris Hillquit's letter in his
paper, the "New York Call," shortly after the Emergency Convention, in
which he says:
"The split in the ranks of American Socialism raises the question: What
shall be the attitude of the Socialist Party toward the newly formed
Communist organization?" His letter answering this important question
was read out of the "Call" into the record of the New York Assembly's
inquiry into the qualifications of the five suspended Socialists to act
as law-makers and will be found in the "New York Herald" of January 29,
1920, from which we take it:
"Any attempted solution of the problem must take into account the
following fundamental facts:
"First--The division was not created arbitrarily and deliberately
by the recent convention in Chicago. It had become an accomplished
fact months ago, and the Chicago gatherings did nothing more than
recognize the fact.
"Second--The division was not brought about by differences on vital
questions of principles. It arose over disputes on methods and
policy.
"Third--The separation of the Socialist Party into three
organizations need not necessarily mean a weakening of the
Socialists. They are wrong in their estimate of American
conditions, their theoretical conclusions and practical methods,
but they have not deserted to the enemy. The bulk of their
following is still good Socialist material. When the hour of the
real Socialist fight strikes in this country we may find them
again in our ranks.
"Our quarrel is a family quarrel, and has no room in the columns of
the capitalistic papers, where it can only give joy and comfort to
the common enemy. The unpardonable offense of the
Simons-Russell-Spargo crowd [which withdrew from the Socialist
Party of America on account of its unpatriotic and un-American
opposition to the people and Government of the United States at
war, as expressed in the Socialist Party's St. Louis Convention
utterances in April, 1917] was not so much their social-patriotic
stand during the war as the fact that they rushed into the
anti-Socialist press maliciously denouncing their former comrades
as pro-German and deliberately added fuel to the sinister flame of
mob violence and government persecution directed against the
Socialist movement.
"We have had our split. It was unfortunate but unavoidable, and now
we are through with it. Legitimate constructive work of the
Socialist movement is before us. Let us give it all of our time,
energies and resources. Let us center our whole fight upon
capitalism, and let us hope our Communist brethren will go and do
likewise."
Thus all three organizations, Socialist Party of America, Communist
Party of America and Communist Labor Party, have merely had "a family
quarrel" and are still one kin, one blood, one "family," without
"fundamental" "differences on vital questions of principles," so that
the Socialist Partyites and their "Communist brethren" can go on doing
"likewise" against our present Government and institutions until, "when
the hour of the _real_ Socialist fight"--the Great Rebellion--"strikes
_in this country_" the members of the Socialist Party "may find" the
members of the two Communist parties "again in" their "ranks." Thus by
Hillquit, at least, all three parties can only "be construed" to be in
one and the same "category."
We end this chapter by reproducing from the "New York Call" of September
5, 1919, a considerable part of the Socialist Party's Emergency
Convention manifesto. This offspring of Hillquit's brain declares
"solidarity with the revolutionary workers of Russia" and "radical"
Spartacides of Germany and Communists of Austria and Hungary. Let the
reader carefully weigh this document's meanings, comparing them with the
call for and manifesto of the Moscow Conference, the definition of
"industrial unionism" and "mass action" in the Left Wingers' writings,
the Communist and Communist Labor manifestoes and programs, and the
principles and tactics of I. W. W.'ism as set forth elsewhere in this
volume, and then ask himself if the latest official utterance of the
Socialist Party of America can in any way "be construed" as placing that
party in any "category" which does not also contain the Communist
organizations and the I. W. W. The salient parts of the manifesto
follow:
"The capitalist class is now making its last stand in its history.
It was intrusted with the government of the world. It is
responsible for the prevailing chaos. The events of recent years
have conclusively demonstrated that capitalism is bankrupt, and has
become a dangerous impediment to progress and human welfare. The
working class alone has the power to redeem and to save the
world....
"It now becomes more than ever the immediate task of international
Socialism to accelerate and organize the inevitable transfer of
political and industrial power from the capitalist class to the
workers. The workers must recognize the economic structure of human
society by eliminating the institution of the private ownership of
natural wealth and of the machinery of industry, the essence of the
war-breeding system of international commercial rivalry. The
workers of the world must recognize the economic structure of human
society by making the natural wealth and the machinery of industry
the collective property of all....
"The workers of Great Britain, France and Italy, the workers of the
newly created nations, and the workers of the countries which
remained neutral during the war, are all in a state of
unprecedented unrest. In different ways and by different methods,
either blindly impelled by the inexorable conditions which confront
them, or clearly recognizing their revolutionary aims, they are
abandoning their temporising programs of pre-war labor reform. They
are determined to control the industries, which means control of
the governments.
"In the United States capitalism has emerged from the war more
reactionary and aggressive, more insolent and oppressive than it
has ever been....
"But even in the United States the symptoms of a rebellious spirit
in the ranks of the working masses are rapidly multiplying.
Widespread and extensive strikes for better labor conditions, the
demand of the 2,000,000 railway workers to control their industry,
sporadic formation of labor parties, apparently, though not
fundamentally, in opposition to the political parties of the
possessing class, are promising indications of a definite tendency
on the part of American labor to break away from its reactionary
and futile leadership and to join in the great emancipating
movement of the more advanced revolutionary workers of the world.
"Recognizing this crucial situation at home and abroad, the
Socialist Party in the United States at its first national
convention after the war, squarely takes its position with the
uncompromising section of the international Socialist movement. We
unreservedly reject the policy of those Socialists who supported
their belligerent capitalist governments on the plea of 'national
defense,' and who entered into demoralizing compacts for so-called
civil peace with the exploiters of labor during the war and
continued a political alliance with them after the war.
"We, the organized Socialists of America, declare our solidarity
with the revolutionary workers of Russia in the support of the
government of their Soviets, with the radical Socialists of
Germany, Austria and Hungary in their efforts to establish working
class rule in their countries, and with those Socialist
organizations in England, France, Italy and other countries, who,
during the war as after the war, have remained true to the
principles of uncompromising international Socialism....
"The great purpose of the Socialist Party is to wrest the
industries and the control of the government of the United States
from the capitalists and their retainers. It is our purpose to
place industry and government in the control of the workers with
hand and brain, to be administered for the benefit of the whole
community.
"To insure the triumph of Socialism in the United States the bulk
of the American workers must be strongly organized politically as
Socialists, in constant, clear-cut and aggressive opposition to all
parties of the possessing class. They must be strongly organized in
the economic field on broad industrial lines, as one powerful and
harmonious class organization, cooperating with the Socialist
Party, and ready in cases of emergency to reinforce the political
demands of the working class by industrial action.
"To win the American workers from their ineffective and
demoralizing leadership, to educate them to an enlightened
understanding of their own class interests, and to train and assist
them to organize politically and industrially on class lines, in
order to effect their emancipation, that is the supreme task
confronting the Socialist Party of America.
"To this great task, without deviation or compromise, we pledge all
our energies and resources. For its accomplishment we call for the
support and co-operation of the workers of America and of all other
persons desirous of ending the insane rule of capitalism before it
has had the opportunity to precipitate humanity into another
cataclysm of blood and ruin.
"Long live the International Socialist Revolution, the only hope of
the suffering world!"
CHAPTER VI
SOCIALISM IN THEORY
Morris Hillquit, a ring-leader among Socialists of the United States,
writing in "Everybody's," October, 1913, page 487, informs us that the
term Socialism is used indiscriminately to designate a certain
philosophy, a scheme of social organization and an active political
movement.
Socialism, used to designate a certain philosophy, may better be
distinguished by being called Socialism in theory. Socialism as an
applied scheme of social organization may be termed Socialism in
practice, and means nothing other than a form of government according to
the principles of Socialist philosophy. Socialism, as an active
political movement, means the Socialist Party. Thus, when we say that
Socialism won several times in Milwaukee, we do not mean that the system
of Socialist philosophy was voted upon and accepted by the majority, for
most of the voters knew practically nothing about the philosophy of
Socialism; nor do we mean that the form of government in accordance with
the principles of Socialist philosophy was adopted at the polls, for, as
a matter of fact, we know that the government of Milwaukee has never
been in accordance with the Marxian principles; but we mean this, and
only this, that the active political movement of the Socialists, in
other words, the Socialist Party, elected its candidates. No doubt the
victorious candidates would have ruled Milwaukee according to the
philosophy of Socialism, applying the Marxian principles to their
government, if they could have done so, but the Constitution of the
United States as well as that of the State of Wisconsin would have stood
in the way, as will be seen when Socialism is explained more in detail.
The first form of Socialism to be explained in detail is Socialism in
theory. There seem to be about 57 hundred times 57 hundred varieties of
Socialists, owing to the conflicting views that members of the party
hold on different subjects which they wish to include in Socialism, and
also because of their different interpretations of the fundamental
principle of Socialism. There is, however, one underlying principle that
seems to be held quite generally by Marxians the world over. No matter
what other radical measures individual Socialists may favor or wish to
see included in the Socialist philosophy, and no matter how many
different interpretations are given to the principle of Socialism, the
basic principle that stands out above all others and is accepted
generally by Socialists the world over may be said to be the demand for
a government, democratic in form, under which all the citizens would
collectively own and manage the principal means of production,
transportation and communication.
The Industrial Workers of the World form one of the few classes of
Socialists who object to the generally accepted fundamental principle
just mentioned. "The One Big Union Monthly," March, 1919, prefers to
drop the words "democratic form of government," because the I. W. W.'s
are not sure that ownership by the people as a whole would succeed
better under a democratic form of government than under a dictatorship
of the proletariat.
"The Labour Leader," the organ of the Socialist Independent Labor Party,
Manchester, England, February 6, 1919, declares that Socialism is "the
complete ownership and control of the means of life by the people, and
the development of industry and the distribution of its fruits under a
genuine and absolute democracy." In explaining Socialism, it says that
"it means that the land shall become the property of the people, not of
private individuals. It means that the great industries shall become the
property of the people. It means that the railways and the canals shall
become the property of the people. It means that the shipping shall
become the property of the people. In short it means that everything
essential to the life of all shall become the property of all, and shall
be administered not for the profit of the few, but for the use of all.
And it demands intelligent control of public affairs by the people,
women as well as men."
Practically the same ideas are expressed in other words by Jaurés in
"Studies in Socialism," page 32 of 1906 edition, translated by Minturn.
This great leader of the French Socialists, who was assassinated at the
beginning of the World War, and in whose honor there was a tremendous
demonstration in Paris on April 6, 1919, prophesied that "the time is
not far off when no one will be able to speak to the public about the
preservation of private property without covering himself with ridicule
and putting himself voluntarily into an inferior rank. That which
reigns to-day under the name of private property is really class
property, and those who wish for the establishment of democracy in the
economic as well as the political world should give their best effort to
the abolition and not to the maintenance of this class property."
In "The Revolutionary Age," Boston, January 11, 1919, page 4, we read:
"What is Socialism? It is the public ownership of all the wealth,
the mills, the mines, the factories, the railroads and land. Things
that are used in common, must be owned in common, by the people and
for the people under democratic management by the people, instead
of the present system of private ownership for profits."
According to Morris Hillquit in "Everybody's," October, 1913, page 487:
"The Socialist program advocates a reorganization of the existing
industrial system on the basis of collective or national ownership
of the social tools. It demands that the control of the machinery
of wealth creation be taken from the individual capitalists and
placed in the hands of the nation, to be organized and operated for
the benefit of the whole people."
Hillquit, in his various articles, has, of course, like many other
Socialists, given his explanation of the detailed method of organization
and operation of industries under a Socialist form of government. It
reads very nicely and appears attractive, as his statements do till
truth's searchlight falls on them, but it does not seem worth while to
present his views, for very many of the leading Socialists of the world
not only differ with each other as regards the method of organization
and operation that they advocate for the Marxian state, but they are
also very much at variance with the plan of organization and operation
that Hillquit describes.
Eugene V. Debs, in his "Daily Message from Moundsville Prison,"
published in "The Call," New York, April 21, 1919, tells us what
Socialism is:
"The earth for all the people! That is the demand.
"The machinery of production and distribution for all the people!
That is the demand.
"The collective ownership and control of industry and its
democratic management in the interest of all the people! That is
the demand.
"The elimination of rent, interest and profit and the production of
wealth to satisfy the wants of all the people! That is the demand.
"Co-operative industry in which we all shall work together in
harmony as the basis of a new social order, a higher civilization,
a real republic! That is the demand.
"The end of class struggles and class rule, of master and slave, of
ignorance and vice, of poverty and shame, of cruelty and crime--the
birth of freedom, the dawn of brotherhood, the beginning of MAN!
That is the demand.
"This is Socialism!"
In the Preamble to the American Socialist Party Platform, adopted by
national referendum, July 24, 1917, we are told:
"The theory of a democratic government is the greatest good to the
greatest number. The working class far out-numbers the capitalist
class. Here is the natural advantage of the working class. By
uniting solidly in a political party of its own, it can capture the
government and all its powers and use them in its own interests.
"The Socialist Party aims to abolish this class war with all its
evils and to substitute for capitalism a new order of co-operation,
wherein the workers shall own and control all the economic factors
of life. It calls upon all workers to unite, to strike as they vote
and to vote as they strike, all against the master class.
"Only through this combination of our powers can we establish the
co-operative commonwealth, wherein the workers shall own their jobs
and receive the full social value of their product. The necessities
of life will then be produced, not for the profits of the few, but
for the comfort and happiness of all who labor. Instead of
privately owned industries with masters and slaves, there will be
the common ownership of the means of life, and all the
opportunities and resources of the world will be equal and free to
all."
The fundamental principle of Socialism, namely, a government, democratic
in form, in which all the citizens would collectively own and manage the
principal means of production, transportation and communication, will be
more clearly understood if the several component parts of the basic
principle are explained.
A government, _democratic in form_, would, of course, require the
overthrow of all limited monarchies as well as the annihilation of those
that are despotic. Even a republican form of government, like that of
the United States, is very far from being satisfactory to the
Revolutionists, for they demand that the citizens have as direct a voice
as possible, first in the election of all public officers, secondly in
the framing of the laws, and thirdly in the management of the many
industrial departments of the proposed government.
By the citizens' _collective owning_ of the different things enumerated
is meant that they would own them just as the citizens of the United
States, as a body, to-day own the post-offices, arsenals, navy and
public lands. Of course, collective ownership does not imply that, after
the state should have taken over the things referred to, each citizen
would be entitled to an equal share of them as his own private property,
to be used by him according to his desires.
_The management of the property_ of the Socialist state and the
remuneration[8] for labor would not be in the hands of private
individuals acting independently, but would be subject to the will of
the majority of the citizens.
By the _principal_ means of production, transportation and communication
is meant any instrument of production, transportation or communication
that would be used for purposes of exploitation, in other words, for
making profit through the employment of hired labor. To illustrate this,
several examples will be given. Mines, factories and mills of all kinds,
large business houses and stores, together with those farms whose owners
would employ hired labor for the production of goods to be sold at
profit, would all be looked upon as being among the _principal means of
production_. On the other hand, a sewing-machine used for family needs
would not be included in the list.
There are many Socialists who have held that their intended state would
allow the private ownership of very small farms, provided that the
products were raised without the employment of farm hands. But it seems
likely that such a plan of private ownership would not be tolerated
under a Socialist government, for, first of all, a very large number of
Socialists are opposed to such a plan, and, secondly, the political
actionists who have favored it either have sacrificed thereby the
principles of their party, or else by advocating the private ownership
of small farms, have done so with the intention of deceiving farmers and
small land owners in order to win their votes. More will be said about
this further on.
Railroads, street car lines, express and steamship service would be
among the _principal means of transportation_; while included in the
list of _principal means of communication_ there would be the public
telephone and telegraph systems. Automobiles, horses and carriages, if
used without the assistance of hired labor, would not be considered as
being principal means of transportation. So, too, under similar
conditions, a private telephone or telegraph line running to the house
of a friend would be excluded from the principal means of communication.
The state would, of course, own all the goods produced in its mines,
factories, shops, etc., until they were purchased with money or labor
certificates. The people would then retain these goods as their own
private property, and would not, according to the leading American
Socialists, be compelled to divide them up with their fellow countrymen.
The Socialist plan looks very nice on paper, allures many impoverished
workingmen of the present day, appeals strongly to the uneducated, and
offers great inducements to the "downs and outs" of society. It is,
however, a deadly poison, and this will be proven conclusively in the
chapter on "Socialism a Peril to Workingmen." There it will be shown not
only that a Socialist state cannot possibly be a success, but that it
would be a source of continued civil strife and discord, thoroughly
unsatisfactory to workingmen, whom it would overwhelm with all the evils
attendant on crime, strife, rebellion and chaos. In the Marxian state
the industrial establishments, land, and business enterprises would be
confiscated; neither interest, rent nor profit would be tolerated; the
wage system would be abolished; no satisfactory plan could be devised
for assigning so many millions of workingmen to the different positions,
while at the same time satisfying them with remuneration for their daily
toil; religions of all kinds would be the object of persecution;
free-love would be legalized; and political corruption would be much
more widespread than today. These are but several of the factors that
would make a successful Socialist state an impossibility.
It may interest the reader to know that Socialists of the highest
authority inform us that in the new state women would be called upon to
work. The late August Bebel, one of the foremost of German Socialists,
says that as soon as society is in possession of all the means of
production, "the duty to work, on the part of all able to work, without
distinction of sex, becomes the organic law of socialized society."
["Woman Under Socialism," by Bebel, page 275 of the 1904 edition in
English.] Frederick Engels, in his book, "Origin of the Family," teaches
that the emancipation of women is primarily dependent on the
reintroduction of the whole female sex into the public industries.
["Origin of the Family," by Engels, page 90 of Untermann's 1907
translation into English.] In "The Call," New York, February 27, 1910,
it is stated that "the man who professes himself to be a Socialist, and
then says that under Socialism men will provide for women, is wide of
the mark."
Keeping clearly before their minds the fundamental principle of
Socialism, the people of America must be careful to distinguish between
Socialists ruling under our present form of government, and Socialists
ruling in a Socialist state. Possible success in the first case would by
no means indicate success in the latter. If our citizens are cautious in
this respect, the enemies of our country will not dare to boast of the
so-called success of Socialism in those places in which the members of
their party, elected to public office, may have given a good
administration under our constitutional system of government.
Though Socialism, in the strictest sense of the word, is concerned
exclusively with economics, still this does not mean that those who
profess it do not advocate, as part of their program, many pet projects
not appertaining to economics. By a vast majority, the members of the
Socialist Party either advocate atheism and opposition to religion, or
at least do not oppose those Socialists who do. Most of them, too, in
their cravings for what is base and low, are by no means adverse to
seeing free-love reign supreme in their contemplated state. The word
_Socialism_ is, therefore, frequently used in a broader sense, and is
made to include not only the common doctrine advocating the democratic
form of government under which the citizens would collectively own and
manage the principal means of production, transportation and
communication, but also those other doctrines that are taught or
silently approved by the majority. It is in this broader sense, then,
that the opponents of the Marxians justly claim that Socialism is
atheistic, anti-religious, and immoral.
We are told by Hillquit in "Everybody's," October, 1913, page 486, that
"like all social theories and practical mass movements, Socialism
produces certain divergent schools, bastard offshoots clustering around
the main trunk of the tree, large in number and variety, but
insignificant in size and strength. Thus we hear of State Socialism,
Socialism of the Chair, Christian Socialism and even Catholic
Socialism."
Persons who call themselves Socialists may be divided into two classes,
in the first of which are those who are Socialists merely in name, for
they go no further than to vote the party ticket. It is in the second
class that we find the real Socialists, men who besides severing all
connections with the other political organizations and voting regularly
for the Socialist candidates, have taken out membership cards which
entitle them to vote on party policies by the payment of several dollars
a year into the treasury of the party. Many of the first class are, of
course, not guilty of propagating atheism, free-love, and other radical
doctrines. In fact, it often happens that they scarcely know that such
things are taught by Socialists, for the deceitful Revolutionary orators
and writers, having blinded them with vivid pictures of their
misfortunes, lead them to believe that the movement is morally upright,
and that the contemplated state of the future will bring them every
blessing under Heaven.
But unless those who are Socialists merely in name sever their
connection with the party of Karl Marx, it will not be long before many
of them will lose all sense of honor, decency and morality. Indeed they
often sink lower than the base character who composed the "poem" that
takes up half a page of "The Call" of May 10, 1914. Though "The Call"
seems to consider the "poem" an excellent specimen of literature, or
else uses the large type that it does in order to attract the attention
of its readers to the sublime virtues of the author, the quotation of
but a small part of the production will suffice to bring out its real
worth and at the same time show us the benign effects of Socialist
teachings:
"You who are exalted by pictures but not by people: you who
worship a book and a god rather than hearts and men and
women:
I'd rather have my world and its flesh and its devil than your
heaven and its spirit and its god:....
And while I don't blame man for being base or praise man for
being noble, I embrace man as my brother for being man:
And there you have the whole story, my man intoxication: I am
drunk with man: you see how it is:
You can have your bibles: I don't need your christs: your
creeds would be an insult to me: I have man: I am drunk
with man:
That's the secret of secrets: that's the confession of confessions:
that's the inside of the inside of me:
I don't expect you to take it in: drunk with man: no: that's
too much like mockery to you: you shudder at it:
To you man always comes last: man never comes first: gods,
mountains, laws--they come first: man can take his
chances:
That's the rule of precedence as you have fixed it: that's the up
and down and around of your cosmos:
But I say no: I who am drunk with man can't give up my faith
for your blasphemy: you who are sober with god."
The attention of the reader must now be drawn to something of vital
importance. There is no doubt that "Knights of the Red Flag" have
advocated many excellent social reforms, such as higher wages, shorter
working hours and greater safety for laborers, legislation against
trusts, and the prevention of child labor and political corruption.
Great credit would they deserve if their real object were not to gain
votes to secure the establishment of a Socialist form of government. It
is probable that before long, voting with true social reformers, they
will see the materialization of many of the immediate demands enumerated
in their platform. But it is to be remembered that no matter how many
beneficial reforms Socialists may help to procure under our present
constitutional system, they thus in no way prove the superiority of a
Socialistic government, democratic in form, in which the citizens would
collectively own and manage the principal means of production,
transportation, and communication. The reason is that our constitutional
government would still be in vogue, and the contradictory fundamental
principle of Socialism could not be applied by the ruling Marxians.
Persons who judge the Socialist movement solely by the immediate demands
of its political platform, or by social reforms instituted after a
political victory, understand very little either about Socialism or the
methods and purposes of the Marxians. Yet this was the short-sighted
manner in which the press persistently, and for a long time, viewed the
tactics of Socialist politicians. Only a revolutionary movement far
enough advanced to neglect gradual transformation by means of immediate
demands would be able to sweep away by force, at a single stroke, all
the old conditions of production, together with our present form of
government, and the existing order of society.
The so-called "Immediate Demands" of the Socialists may be termed
political campaign Socialism or vote-catching Socialism. They are the
sugar coating of the poisonous pill of Socialism itself. Their object is
to attract and interest the voter, and at the same time keep his mind
off of the fallacies of Socialism proper. They keep him from asking too
many unanswerable questions about the detailed method of organization
under a Socialist form of government--for instance, how the millions
upon millions of government employes would be assigned to positions that
would suit them, and at the same time receive satisfactory remuneration
for their labors.
These same immediate demands also give the voter a chance to find fault
with our present system of government and to criticise it, thereby
rendering it less able to withstand successive Socialist assaults. The
immediate demands are, of course, meant for the present day and even if
they should materialize, under our present system, they could not be
continued in a Socialist state, that would be necessarily weak,
poverty-stricken, strife-ridden, politically corrupt and chaotic. It is
one thing to make demands, quite another thing to be able to grant them.
A highway robber can demand a million dollars from the person whom he
attacks, but that doesn't make the one assaulted able to surrender the
sum; nor would it prove that the robber himself could afford to pay a
like amount if he should afterwards be held up for a million.
The immediate demands of the 1918 Congressional Platform of the
Socialist Party are entirely too many conveniently to enumerate. They
are classed under
A--International Reconstruction.
Peace Aims.
Federation of Peoples.
B--Internal Reconstruction.
Industrial Control.
Railroads and Express Service.
Steamships and Steamship Lines.
Telegraph and Telephone.
Large Power Scale Industry.
Democratic Management.
Demobilization.
The Structure of Government (i.e., of the present system of
government).
Civil Liberties.
Taxation.
Credit.
Agriculture.
Conservation of Natural Resources.
Labor Legislation.
Prisons.
The Negro.
The immediate demands are so numerous as to require a booklet of 24
pages, published by the National Office, Socialist Party, Chicago, Ill.
It is very hard to find a single reference to Socialism itself in the
entire 24 pages of the Congressional Platform.
In a letter of Moses Oppenheimer, published in "The Call," New York,
April 14, 1919, we are told that under the opportunist leadership of men
like Hillquit, Berger, Ghent, and Robert Hunter the struggle for reforms
has gradually overshadowed and supplanted the demand for the abolition
of wage slavery. The writer continues:
"More and more it has resulted in petty tactics for vote catching.
Berger's Old Age Pension bill was a glaring exhibit of opportunist
incapacity.
"Immediate demands are a tactical problem! Comrade Lee knows that
the tactics change with changed conditions. There was a time when
the opportunists expected to win the votes of the bulk of A. F. of
L. workers. Hence the sugar coating of the Socialist pill and three
years of Chester M. Wright in control of 'The Call.'
"That is now ancient history. Lee could not repeat that chapter if
he would. Nay, I believe he wouldn't if he could.
"The powerful impulse from the movement in Europe makes itself felt
over here. There is great need for reforming our front, for
recasting our tactics. The old roar of opportunism led us nowhere,
except to barren failure. If nothing else the experience with our
Ten in Albany and our Seven in the City Hall should open our eyes.
The time for picayune politics is irrevocably gone."
In an article published in "The Proletarian," Detroit, April, 1919, page
4, Oakley Johnson thus criticises the Socialist policy of reformism as
manifested in the immediate demands of the party platform:
"Socialists have been dazed time and again by the glitter of
reformism. In every country the question has been an ever-present
one, and, as a result, the rainbows of reform have found many
chasers in the ranks of the workers. The matter seemed, up to near
the end of the war, to involve more an academic dispute on tactics
than a principle of vital importance. There seemed too many good
reasons why immediate demands for slight concessions should not be
worked for, as a step in the direction of proletarian emancipation.
"When, however, the Bolshevik revolution in Russia showed the stand
taken by the reformist groups--a stand in defense of capitalism
when capitalism was about to fall--the uncompromisingly
revolutionary attitude of Marxian Socialists toward reform in the
past was amply justified. And when, in the course of a few months,
the reformistic Majority Socialists of Germany took exactly the
same stand as the Kerensky crowd had taken, there could no longer
be any doubt that the purpose of reform parties in capitalistic
society is to function as the last obstacle to the victory of the
proletariat....
"The fact is, there is a threefold objection to reformism as a
working-class policy. In the first place it is a waste of effort,
for the same zeal displayed by short-sighted reform-Socialists
would, if applied in the propagation of straight Socialism, treble
the strength of the movement in a few months' time. In the second
place reformism obscures the real end in view, develops
confusionists rather than revolutionists, gives capitalist
political parties a chance to steal a few 'Socialist' planks and
thus bid for the Socialist vote, and, worst of all, paves the way
to such tragedies as are now occurring in Germany, where Liebknecht
and Luxemberg have been murdered by their 'reform' comrades(?). And
finally, in the third place, even if reform be the sole object in
view, reformism is the poorest policy to follow to get it. A
proletariat organized for revolutionary ends has no difficulty in
securing reforms; it does not need to ask for them, for an awakened
and apprehensive bourgeoisie will shower reforms upon them like the
proverbial manna. If, indeed, workers want only reforms, why take
the longest way around?"
"The New Age," Buffalo, April 10, 1919, page 4, rejoices that the
reformists of the Socialist Party, whose policy it is to pay more
attention to the immediate demands than to the principles of Socialism,
have now a serious rival in the New Labor Party:
"Now that the New Labor Party is established (and in Chicago
recently they polled more votes than the Socialists), we wonder
what the old machine will do to combat this new octopus that
threatens the big vote that used to belong to 'US.' Answer: Teach
the working class real Socialism, the Socialism of Marx and
Engels."
The millionaire Socialist, William Bross Lloyd, of Chicago, has a very
interesting article on "Socialist Platforms" in "The Communist,"
Chicago, April 1, 1919:
"Confession is good for the soul. Let the Socialist Party of the
World now stand up and confess that it bears a close resemblance to
other political parties in that, like the others, its platforms are
mostly bunk.
"The difference between its platforms and others is that the others
mean nothing while its platforms mean anything. The difference
between Socialists and other politicians is that the Socialists
mean what they think their platforms mean while the others mean
only to get office.
"This follows from the state of affairs we have had in the world
since 1914, when Socialists became so diverse in words and deeds.
Most of those on both sides are honest. The trouble is the
vagueness of the words of the Socialist propaganda.
"Socialist thought should be so clearly stated in its platforms
that no one can doubt its meaning. This will eliminate from the
party the reformers and compromisers who are such a source of
weakness to the movement. It will also make clear to the workers
that the movement really means something.
"Take, for instance, the case of the party's attitude toward war.
Socialists are said to be opposed to all wars--then come the
exceptions: wars of 'defense,' 'invasion,' 'emancipation,'
'liberation,' and all the meaningless tribe. Confusion results. We
have the German Majority Socialists, i.e., so-called Socialists,
supporting their government in a war of 'defense' against
'invasion' and of the maintenance of their 'liberties'--God save
the mark--against Russian autocracy....
"Without knowing the precise intention of those who drafted the St.
Louis platform, I infer that it was partly written in the hope--if
not belief--that the American workers would rise against their
oppressors and the situation to which they have been subjected. It
was a ringing declaration--a 'mass movement' of the delegates to
the convention, later endorsed by the party membership. And as
these delegates separated hot-foot for home, they got cold feet as
they dispersed into the cold-footed isolation of the individual
Socialist scattered here and there throughout this land. The
platform contained no statement of individual duty, no individual
program of action Each Socialist began to ask as his feet got
colder and colder: 'Where are these "mass movements;" what are the
others going to do?' The situation was made worse by the action of
the National Executive Committee which told every Socialist to read
the St. Louis platform and then act as his conscience dictated.
Fine business for a revolutionary mass movement seeking to
establish the co-operative commonwealth. No anarchist could be more
individualistic.
"The party's attitude toward war should be cleared up. It should
definitely provide for mass action, and bind the individuals of the
party as units of the party mass. This war platform should be
followed by a Workers' Mobilization plan carefully worked out in
detail and laying down action in response to each step taken in
approach to war. For instance, on the introduction of the War
Declaration in Congress, a one-day general strike just to show the
rulers what was in store. On passage of the War Declaration a
general strike, refusal to serve in the military forces, and such
other measures as may be effective."
"The Appeal to Reason" some years ago was the leading Socialist paper of
the United States. In 1917 it came out in favor of war with the Central
Powers. Either because of this, or because it violently assailed
Bolshevism for a long while, it is now outlawed by the greater part of
the Socialist Party.
On the editorial page of "The Call," New York, April 24, 1919, we read:
"Instead of the 'Appeal to Reason' asking for a pardon for Debs, it
should ask a pardon from Debs."
In "The Bulletin," Chicago, March 24, 1919, there appears on page 12 a
bitter attack on "The Appeal" by no less a personage than Adolph Germer,
National Secretary of the Socialist Party. In this official paper,
issued by the National Office, Socialist Party, we read:
"An Open Letter to 'The Appeal.'
"_March_ 19, 1919.
"Editor Appeal to Reason,
"Girard, Kans.:
"Sir.--In the issue of the 'Appeal to Reason,' March 15, 1919, you
publish an appeal for $30,000 CASH, for an alleged 'Amnesty and
Construction Fight.'
"You give yourself credit for having 'won' the first skirmish in
the amnesty fight and on the basis of this unfounded claim, you
justify your appeal for $30,000 CASH. To make your appeal seem
legitimate, you use such names as Eugene V. Debs, Kate Richards
O'Hare, Rose Pastor Stokes and refer to 'many of our comrades.' I
happen to be one of those who is facing a prison sentence and if
you have included me in 'many of the comrades,' I want you to
strike my name from your list. I loathe to be a 'comrade' of yours.
You and your paper helped to create a hatred against the Socialist
Party and you wilfully and maliciously lied about the National
Executive Committee when it refused to follow a course that would
put more of our members in prison. In other words, you and your
paper must bear a part of the responsibility for the prosecution
and persecution of the Socialists and it is rank hypocrisy for you
to prate about your fight for amnesty.
"Others may speak for themselves, but I scorn any effort that you
make in my behalf. A thousand times would I rather spend the rest
of my life behind prison bars than to have one word from you whom I
hold responsible for the persecutions of which my colleagues and I
are victims.
"I look upon your appeal for $30,000 CASH, in the name of
'Amnesty,' as a sinister method of filling your own coffers.
"You have lied to us and about us and betrayed us in the past and I
resent your hypocritical prattle about amnesty.
"Yours without respect,
"Adolph Germer,
"_National Secretary, Socialist Party_."
Judging from the bitter attacks that Socialists are making upon each
other, it would seem that there might be a little harmony in the party
if their platforms were limited to the principles of Socialism and were
not concerned with "immediate demands" to the almost total exclusion of
Socialism itself.
CHAPTER VII
SOCIALISM IN PRACTICE
Now that considerable has been said about Socialism in theory, we shall
make the transition to Socialism in practice by quoting what may be
called George Herron's dream of Socialist perfection. On page 28 of his
booklet, "From Revolution to Revolution," we are told: "Perhaps we shall
learn in time, before accentuated capitalism has intensified the
universal misery of labor. Socialism is already on its way to the
conquest of Europe. And it may be that we shall yet behold that glorious
uprising of the universal peoples which is to begin man's real history,
and the world's real creation--that united affirmation of the world's
workers which Socialism foretells, knowing boundaries neither of nations
nor sects nor factions, speaking one voice and working together as one
man for one purpose, filling and cleansing the world with one glad
revolutionary cry. When the peoples thus come, divine and omnipotent
through co-operation, the raw materials of the world-life in their
creative hands, no longer begging favors or reforms, no longer awed by
the slave moralities or the slave religions that teach submission to
their masters, but risen and regnant in the consciousness of their
common inheritance and right in the earth and its fullness, of which
they are the makers and preservers, then will the antagonisms and
devastations of classes vanish forever, and the peace of good will
become the universal fact."
"Glorious," indeed, have been the uprisings of the Bolsheviki of Russia,
the Communists of Hungary and Bavaria, and the Spartacans of Germany,
all of whom are Socialists of the most pronounced type. These uprisings,
instead of being the "beginnings of the world's real creation," are
rather the beginnings of its destruction and ruination. The world's
workers have been "wonderfully united" in Russia, Hungary, Bavaria and
Germany since Socialism came into power--and no better proof need be
given than the way in which they have been shooting each other down and
trying to oust each other from office. Though the Socialists were not
supposed to know "the boundaries of nations, sects or factions," but
were to "speak one voice and work together as one man for one purpose,"
the Spartacans, it seems, would be better off if they had not only an
imaginary boundary to separate barbarians of their type from the rest of
civilization, but a barrier of mountains with heights towering in the
clouds to divide Germany into two parts, in one of which the Spartacans
could rest in peace, safe from the attacks of their beloved brethren of
the Ebert-Scheidemann group.
If the Communists of Bavaria had only built half a dozen Chinese walls
around Munich, they might still be holding out against the Socialist
army that besieged them and overcame them. Lenine's Government caused
such rivers of blood to flow in Russia that it could well dispense with
imaginary boundary lines to separate "Bolsheviki Land" from the domains
of Socialist Siberia. "One glad revolutionary cry" was to go up from
Socialists all over the world, but the cry is: "Workers in
anti-Socialist countries, save us from our false, hypocritical,
reactionary, murderous Marxian brethren!" Have the Socialist peoples the
world over become truly "divine" by their attacks on God and all
religions? Have they become "omnipotent" wherever they are in power--so
omnipotent that law, order and decency are no longer needed? The "raw
materials of the world were in their creative hands," and yet the
Russian people were starving by the millions, and the longer the period
since the world war, the worse things became in those vast domains once
so famous for their natural resources, wheat, cattle, wool, minerals,
oil and wood.
The Socialist dream was one of "no submission to masters;" but, strange
to say, the dictator, Lenine, rules "Bolsheviki-Land" just as he
pleases; Bela Kun so ruled Hungary; while the supposedly democratic
Soviets just issued decrees of murder or plunder, and no national
representative body of all the Russians or of all the Hungarians ever
seemed to meet. The Socialists of Russia, Hungary and Bavaria were
indeed "regnant in the consciousness of their common inheritance,"
provided, of course, that by inheritance, confiscated property is meant.
Yet although "antagonism and devastations of classes" were destined to
"vanish forever, and the peace of good will become the universal fact,"
somehow or other certain "scientific reformers" forgot that there were
such things as fools' paradises and overlooked the old saying that "all
that glitters is not gold."
In Chapters X and XI much more will be said about the Lenine-Trotzky
dictatorship of Socialist Russia, the Bela Kun administration of
Hungary, the criminal Socialist crew of Bavaria, and, of course, the
fiery Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxembourg group that at times in certain
localities replaced the Ebert-Scheidemann government of Germany.
In "The Call," New York, April 28, 1919, under the caption, "Socialist
Government of Yucatan Grapples With the Binder Trust," we read:
"We get vastly less news nowadays from our next-door neighbor,
Mexico, than from Europe and Asia, therefore a 'Call' reporter,
meeting a Comrade who has recently returned from the tropic
peninsula, fell upon him and demanded news of the Socialist, labor
and co-operative movements there.
"'We are facing a very much tangled-up situation down there,'
answered the man from Yucatan. He is W. Elkin Birch, a well-known
American Socialist and business man, who has lived in Mexico
several years. He came up to 'the States' on a business trip, and
is returning to Yucatan, where he is prominent in the Socialist and
co-operative movements.
"'The forces of capitalism in Mexico are so strong, and the
commercial system is so vicious,' he began, 'that I am not very
optimistic about the future of Socialism in Yucatan.'
"'But we thought that Alvarado had established almost a paradise
down there,' cried the reporter. 'A year ago we learned that you
had elected a complete Socialist administration in Yucatan; then, a
few months since, we heard that it had not put any part of the
Socialist program into effect. We wondered what was the reason, but
hardly any news comes through now.'
"'Alvarado did work a wonderful transformation, and much of the
good he did remains. It is true, we have an administration of
Socialists, but we find that that is a very different thing from a
Socialist administration. Yucatan is still in the grip of the
commercial interests, and the game is blocked at every move. As
fast as the radicals devise some means of stopping the robbery of
the people by special privilege, the privileged interests find a
way of circumventing the radicals by apparently yielding, but
really maintaining their domination.
"'Alvarado took over the Reguladora, through which the henequem,
Yucatan's principal product, is sold for export; he took over the
railroads, and the line of steamships running to the States....
"'The government still controls the Reguladora, but, as I said, it
is in a deadlock with the powers who control its market. We still
have government-owned railroads in Yucatan, but government
ownership merely takes the public utility out of the hands of
private capital and places it under the control of a political
organization. And private capital already has secured control of
that political organization, and graft and robbery are running
riot. Government ownership of railroads has increased the cost of
operation 100 per cent. The payrolls are packed with friends of
officials and friends of friends. If a man can control a few votes,
they reason, why shouldn't he have a job? What's the railroad for,
if not to provide jobs? The folks down there are very much like
people in other countries, you see.'....
"'But why doesn't the Socialist administration take control of
industry and commerce, and put the interests out of power?'
demanded the reporter, determined to uphold the faith in the face
of disappointing facts.
"'Well, of course, that sounds easy; but Socialists are just
people, after all, and when a Socialist gets into office he finds
it quite as hard as ordinary folks to resist the subtle influences
that surround officials. A man can't be sure that he is a real
Socialist until he is put to the test of being a part of the
government. The commercial interests offer him opportunities to
make money; they give him and his family social advantages. He
begins to see that capitalism has its good points, after all.' Mr.
Birch smiled half-satirically, half-tolerantly. 'Some members of
the Assembly have made fortunes during their year of office. One
member, who handles concessions, illegal and otherwise, has cleared
over a million pesos."
The February, 1918, issue of the "International Socialist Review,"
Chicago, was suppressed by the authorities of the United States
government, and, as a consequence, it is probable that not very many
copies are in circulation. The author of "The Red Conspiracy," however,
has in his possession a copy of this edition, in which there is a very
interesting article, beginning on page 414, entitled, "Your Dream Come
True."
"A Land of practical Socialism in active operation.
"Nearly 4,000,000 people without one cent of money in circulation;
and where no man owns a foot of land or the tools of
production--trades unionism, industrialism, single tax and
socialism all rolled into one.
"Ninety thousand square miles without a policeman; where gold rings
are placed in the public markets in large baskets, to be had for
the asking.
"A work day of two hours for the strong; of play for the young,
middle-aged and old. A land where there is plenty of candy for the
kiddies, playgrounds for all; and from which the spectre of want
has departed.
"Land of peon-slaves awakened from centuries of capitalist misrule
to the glories of co-operation, without master or landlord.
"This is no dream, but an actualized verity right here in
America--in southern Mexico. Shades of Thomas Moore, Edward Bellamy
and William Morris arise and rejoice, for your wildest visions have
become facts.
"Across the miles I stretch my hand in fellowship with Mexico's
great democrat--Zapata. Don't forget that name. The capitalist
press has not told much about him--for obvious reasons. He is
putting into practice the basic principles of co-operation. The
golden rule is being translated into action.
"General Zapata now absolutely controls 90,000 square miles,
comprising parts of Morelo, Jalisco, Chapas, Quintana Roo and
Tabasco. This land is well under cultivation. The population (on a
rough estimate, without the advantages of a scientific census) is
from three to four millions. The inhabitants are nearly all peons,
who for centuries had existed in a degrading state of slavery. More
than ninety-five per cent. can neither read nor write.
"Zapata's control began in 1910, but only in the three years past
has the co-operative system been placed on its present basis. The
greatest development has been made during the past two years.
"Methods of propaganda have been simple and effective. Direct
action is the keynote. The people awoke to a knowledge of their
slavery and the realization of their heritage--and took what
belonged to them. The only message sent to the people was somewhat
similar to the I. W. W. preamble, but much shorter than that
classic document.
"Having aroused the slaves to realize their status by saying in
substance: the rich unjustly possess the land; we want all that is
ours and are not willing that any man should possess that which is
not his--Zapata would lead his army into some rich valley and
simply dispossess the wealthy 'owners.' Then the peons on the land
would be given the use of the land. Not one man in the ninety
thousand square miles holds a title to one foot of land. After
getting the new territory, the land was cultivated and the district
organized.
"When strong enough the army--the propaganda branch of the
revolution--held another convention in some other fertile valley
and benevolently assimilated some other opulent set of
slave-driving usurpers of the land....
"Every citizen of each community is given a little brass
citizenship tag. It is necessary to show this only in strange
towns. It is his passport for whatever he needs for food, clothing
and shelter. Each person goes into the stores and gets what he
needs for the simple asking.
"We have heard endless discussions as to the nature of the future
medium of exchange. Many volumes have been written on the subject.
Zapata isn't worrying over these problems. He is leaving them where
they belong--to the philosophers. There isn't any medium of
exchange in Zapata's land. Why should there be on a free earth? If
a man wanted ten pairs of sandals or shoes he could have them, but
why would he want them? He can always go--in Zapata's country--to
any store and get a pair when he needs one. So with all other
provisions. In practice, in the few years the plan has been in
operation, the peons have not abused the privilege. They are
producers, and realize it. Why rob themselves? There is not one
idea of profit in all that 90,000 square miles, and human nature is
just as it was when Adam delved and Eve spun.
"Travelers are not being admitted freely just now, in these
unsettled times, because of the lying reports carried away by
spying emissaries of capitalism. But when one is given permission
to visit the country, his route is marked out and listed on the
passport given him. He pays the government and then is provided
freely on all the travels over the designated route.
"No women or children are to be found in any line of manual labor
in mill, field or factory.
"The young and middle aged men alone work. They work from one and
one-half to three hours a day. Some will work more steadily for a
week and then go away to some town for two or three weeks to enjoy
their country. For the first time in history the workers have a
country that is really theirs. Workers? Yes, for all are workers.
There are no landlords or 'bosses' and overseers to prod them into
exhausting toil. And these people are simple enough to believe that
man should enjoy life--that all people should find pleasure in
living.
"Of course there are foremen and superintendents in the
administration of industry. But they receive no wages, just what
they need to live on, and every man, woman and child gets that. The
men will work two hours and then go out to play hand-ball and other
games in the plaza or courts.
"When the fields need attention, men go from ranch to ranch
wherever help is needed. In like manner all industry is carried on.
"One example will show something of how matters are managed. One
big sugar refinery formerly employed 2,500 men, working them
fourteen hours a day. Employees now work two hours a day. The
refinery still is in operation fourteen hours daily. There are
seven shifts of workers. All told, there are 25,000 employees of
that refinery. All are happy and have all of the food, clothing and
shelter the land affords. The children have big sticks of candy as
large as they can carry--and there is no talk of conservation of
supplies anywhere.
"Access to the land and co-operation did it. There isn't any
regular freight and passenger service. The trains operate as
required. Production for profit has ceased on 90,000 square miles
of this planet and the mills and mines are run to manufacture
products for use only. When goods are needed anywhere, the trains
haul them. Occasionally a few hundred men, women and children will
be taken into the mountains by the trainload for a few days'
outing. It is all a part of living--no fares to pay....
"The churches are being used as schools, for lecture centers, as
play houses and for similar useful purposes. There is no liquor
sold. This is not the result of any decree or election. The people
had so little desire for booze that they quit its manufacture....
"It is not to be inferred that Zapata has solved all of the
problems of society. Everything can't be done at once, even by the
magic wand of his propaganda. Still, his achievements make the
genii of Alladin's lamp look pretty small and cheap. In three years
every worker has been united into one industrial union; all titles
to land and ownership of the tools of production swept away;
labor's hours shortened to the minimum; the entire population fed,
clothed and sheltered--all through cooperation on a free earth."
This is the kind of "stuff" that is served up to the "learned,"
"scientific Socialists," who place so much confidence in the leaders who
are supposed to be honest and worthy of leading them into the Marxian
Paradise. This is the way they spoke of "Socialism" in Mexico some years
ago, and today they are speaking of it in Russia in much the same way.
Act the Second
Scene--A large photo of Zapata--4 by 6 inches, in "The Call," the
Socialist paper of New York City, April 24, 1919.
Under the photo there is the following inscription:
"General Emiliano Zapata, Mexico's apostle of terrorism, and
recently officially reported to have been killed by Carranza's
troops, was a former plantation stirrup-boy, who, at the zenith of
his rebel power, gained temporary control of Mexico City. Twice
since 1910, when he began his revolt in Morelos, he and his Indian
followers took brief possession of the capital. For nine years he
ravaged southern Mexico, co-operating for a time in 1914 with
Villa. He was the most implacable enemy of peaceful reconstruction
through several regimes. Poor, uneducated, primitive but magnetic,
Zapata was the leader of Mexico's half-savage Indians, in whose
power he planned to place control of the country. Toward the last
he was little more than a hunted renegade, and is reported to have
been killed by strategy of troops operating under General Pablo
Gonzales in Morelos."
The wood-cut of Zapata appears in connection with an article by Jack
Neville, part of which is hereby quoted:
"Cuautla, Mexico, April 23.--The death of Emiliano Zapata removes
Mexico's most ruthless destructionist and implacable enemy of
peaceful regeneration.
"Now, on the wreckage of his empire, where the rebel chief laughed
at civilization and played his huge joke on 100,000 confiding
workers, General Pablo Gonzalez is placing firm underpinning for
freedom and progress.
"Here in the world's richest garden spot, where exploited humanity
has been kept poorest, and where Zapata 'gave' his half-savage
followers the land only to commandeer all crops--here the peon is
for the first time in centuries enjoying the fruits of his toil and
supporting instead of hating government."
The next day, April 25th, 1919. "The Call" published another article of
Neville's under the title, "Mexican Peons Rejoice in First Taste of
Freedom." Only a small part of the article will be quoted:
"I stepped into a pulque-reeking cantina. A group of former
Zapatistas invited me to join them--to have a glass. It was the
open sesame. They chattered like children. Presented me with
cornhusk cigarettes; told me tales of Zapata; his perfidy, his
ruthlessness.
"'Not more than 800 rebels were yet in arms when Zapata was
killed,' they said. These, they explained, had ousted Zapata from
leadership because he had refused to divide the loot with them.
They told me of Zapata's former army of 30,000, blood-letting
surianos and ayetes (unarmed men carrying ropes) who formed the
rear guard to carry away the loot....
"Alongside the old church, where the patriot Morelos had more than
a century ago made a successful stand against the Spaniards, a
train was disgorging families returning to their homes, now that
Zapata was gone.
"A little man stepped out--the bishop of Cuernavaca, coming back to
his diocese under the conciliatory program of Don Pablo after eight
years' exile.
"I rode into the country with Colonel Sanchez Neira and talked with
the workmen in the field. They crowded round to pose for pictures.
"They laughed and sang while they worked.
"We rode to the headquarters of one of the 2,000,000 acre
haciendas. The gigantic sugar mill, formerly worth more than
$1,000,000, was a shell filled with debris. We rode to another
mill. The same! Thirty-seven of them. All ruined, wrecked wantonly
under Zapata's rule.
"In the village of Youtopec I drank lemonade with Gen. Pilar
Sanchez, while Zapata's captured band serenaded us. We rode down
the Inter-Oceanic railway and viewed the right of way, strewn with
wrecked rolling stock. We saw utterly demolished villages, the work
of Zapata and communism.
"I saw a bridge where train after train was dynamited, where
Zapatistas had ruthlessly executed more than three thousand
peaceful men, women and children passengers."
From these articles published in "The Call," the great Socialist paper
of New York City, it seems that the poverty-stricken, perpetually
begging staff of Hillquit's paper does not relish the Chicago brand of
Socialism described so beautifully in the "International Socialist
Review." The more "talented" and "progressive" "evolutionists" near the
shore of Lake Michigan have many a year's hard work to perform before
they can sufficiently develop the brains of their backward chums and
brethren on the lower east side of New York City. It takes editors like
Kerr, Haywood, the Marcys and all the Bohns on the staff of the
"Review" to reveal the true glories of Socialism.
As recently as February, 1920, it could safely be said that the
principles of Socialism had never been put into full operation in any
country. The nearest approach to a truly Socialist state is Bolshevist
Russia, that strife-ridden land of crime and bloodshed. The penalty paid
for the foolish attempt has already been a dreadful one. How much
greater it will be, as time goes on, nobody knows. The Socialists of
America have hailed Russian Bolshevism as true Socialism; but, no doubt,
as the evil consequences of Lenine's Red rule become more widely known
and more universally feared, or if, even on the low ground of
materialistic economics, the attempt fails, the slippery Marxians will
try to prove that Bolshevism was not Socialism after all, since the
Russian government was a dictatorship, with the principles of Socialism
never fully applied.
We should add that even if the Russian dictatorship succeeds in
realizing the mere economic success which seems to be the height of its
ambition, this will not prove to be an argument in favor of Socialism,
but a terrible indictment of it. For the road the dictatorship is now
taking, which indeed offers it the only possible hope of even a passable
economic success, is the barren, heartless, unspiritual, materialistic
tyranny of machine-like "industrialism" which the I. W. W. represents.
In the two chapters immediately following, VIII and IX, the reader will
learn something of the loss of all moral standards and the cruel,
lawless violence to which the atheistic, anarchistic materialism of
I. W. W.'ism leads; and will also find that Bolshevism is already
committed to this system as the only economic solution of its bloody
experiment.
Is it worth while? In Chapters X and XI the reader will face some of the
appalling details of the blood, violence and despair which have been
tyrannically imposed upon Russia's groaning millions for the sake of an
experiment which leads to nothing but the pagan barbarism of I. W.
W.'ism. Is it worth while? Even if at last they are able to produce and
distribute enough to clothe and feed themselves, can human beings be
happy in such a state? Is this the dream of the dreamer come true?
Again, the hope of a bare economic solution of the question of bread and
butter is possible in Russia only through such an absolute and tyrannous
dictatorship as has been established, under which the reluctant and
disorganized proletariat can be forced back to work, whether they wish
or no, at the point of the bayonets of the Red Guard. Would the American
working-man think this worth while in America?
It has been said that the Lenine desperadoes are determined to win an
economic success even at the cost of forcing Russian labor to toil under
literal military conscription. If they do this, they may
succeed--economically merely. But does American labor think such an
experiment _here_ would be worth what it costs?
Furthermore, in the Russian land of Socialistic experiment the people,
left to themselves by the other nations, cannot find peace among
themselves. Why should there be peace as long as any manhood is left in
Russia to lift up its hand out of its despair against its Bolshevist
oppressors? Is civil war worth while--for such a barren result?
Finally, if the proletarian tyrants wear all Russia down until a spirit
of resistance is left in no breast, still will there be no peace; for,
as will be found quoted elsewhere in this book, Lenine declares that
Socialism cannot endure in a world half Socialistic and half
Capitalistic, so that his wretched Russian slaves seem likely to be
dragged into a war against the rest of the world to help out the crazy
experiment of domination by the proletariat. Is it worth while?
CHAPTER VIII
THE I. W. W.
The I. W. W., or the so-called "Industrial Workers of the World," whose
policy may be summed up in the words, "I Want to Wreck," and who in
derision are termed the "I Won't Works," the "Imported Weary Willies"
and the "Wobblies," enjoy the unenviable reputation of being classed
among the most insurrectionary, impious and infamous workers of the
world to-day. This industrial union, also known as the One Big Union, is
the bitter rival of the American Federation of Labor. Joseph J. Ettor,
in his I. W. W. pamphlet, "Industrial Unionism," page 5, speaking of the
fear that people have of the I. W. W. says:
"Yes, gentle reader, our ideas, our principles and object are
certainly dangerous and menacing, applied by a united working class
would shake society and certainly those who are now on top
sumptuously feeding upon the good things they have not produced
would feel the shock."
The I. W. W. was organized at a secret conference in Chicago, January 2,
1905, attended by 26 of the most radical Socialists in the country,
including Eugene V. Debs, William D. Haywood, William E. Trautman,
Thomas J. Haggerty, Daniel MacDonald, Charles H. Moyer, Charles O.
Sherman, Frank Bohn and A. M. Simons. Daniel De Leon was prominent at
the first convention, June 27, 1905, and for three years afterward, the
organization being founded on his theory that the Socialistic revolution
would not come by voting but by a violent seizure of the industries of
the country by Socialistic workmen industrially organized.
"The One Big Union Monthly," March 1, 1919, page 4, referring to the
hungry and desperate masses tells us:
"In some countries these revolting, desperate masses may come out
victorious, and establish a rule of their own, like the Russian
Bolsheviki, only to find that they will have to keep on running
society on private ownership basis, until industrial organization
of the workers is so far advanced that it can take over the
responsibility. There is no way in which the masses can escape
industrial unionism. What they do not want to do now at our
prompting, they will have to do later of their own initiative,
driven by economic necessity. Our new society is bound to come. It
will be firmly established in ten years if we are energetic. It
will take longer if we are indifferent. We cannot stand still
socially, because there is no footing before we reach the bottom.
We cannot go back, any more than the butterfly can again become a
larva. We must go forward to Industrial Democracy."
On page 23 of the same issue of "The One Big Union Monthly" we are
informed that Industrial Unionism is International:
"Industrial unionism arises out of and is modeled after modern
capitalism. Unlike trade unionism, it is not born of the capitalism
of fifty years ago. Industrial unionism recognizes that capitalism
is not only interindustrial, so to speak, but also international.
That just as it binds industries together by means of machine
processes and financial investments, so also does capitalism tend
to bind nations together. Industrial unionism follows the same
trend. It, too, is not only interindustrial but also international.
Industrial unionism seeks to organize the industrial workers of the
world just as capitalism seeks to exploit them. Industrial unionism
is spreading wherever international capitalism exists. Like
international capitalism, industrial unionism knows no boundaries,
color, race, creed or sex. As international capitalism knows only
profit, industrial unionism knows only the industrial exploitation
by which profit is possible. Industrial unionism organizes to make
industrial exploitation an impossibility. And capitalism is its
most valued assistant."
Ettor, in "Industrial Unionism," page 21, tells us, that the I. W. W.
does not organize by trades, but by industries: "All the workers in any
plant, factory, mine, mill or any given industry in a given locality
organize in one Local Industrial Union. All the Local Industrial Unions
of a given general industry are banded together in the National
Industrial Union. The National Industrial Unions are banded again
stronger in the Industrial Department and then all Departments, six in
all, are brought under one head, the General Administration of the I. W.
W. One Big Union of all workers, welded together in such a manner that,
imbued with the war cry: 'an injury to one is an injury to all,' all its
members can act together in fighting the common enemy."
Explaining organization by industries rather than by trades, "The One
Big Union Monthly," March 1, 1919, page 25, takes for instance the
stockyards:
"We do not know how many crafts there are in the stockyards, but
there are many. According to the old style, these crafts would be
organized each by itself, the carpenters belonging to the national
union of carpenters, the engineers to the national union of
engineers, the butchers to the national union of butchers, etc. It
also belongs to old style unionism to leave the unskilled workers
unorganized. Our method would be to organize all the workers in a
plant, as a branch of the Stockyard Workers' Industrial Union. This
would imply the cancelling of trade distinctions and craft lines.
As against the employer we would face him not as butchers,
laborers, carpenters or engineers, but as stockyard workers, no
matter whether we are office clerks or laborers, or carpenters, or
engineers. This is what we mean with industrial unionism. The
various branches would combine into district organizations if
necessary, and all of them together would form the Stockyard
Workers' Industrial Union as part of the Industrial Workers of the
World. By being thus organized we hope to be able to carry on the
fight locally, or by districts, or on a national scale with better
chance of success, than if we were split up in a great number of
unions in each plant, with little or no contact with one another.
The advantages of the one big union idea are so apparent that no
honest worker will, in earnest, contradict us."
The famous Preamble to the platform of the I. W. W. throws a startling
light upon this revolutionary industrial union, which has, within recent
years, been getting a very strong hold on immigrants from Europe:
"The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people, and the few who make up the
employing class have all the good things of life.
"Between these two classes a struggle must go on until the workers
of the world organize as a class, take possession of the earth and
the machinery of production and abolish the wage system.
"We find that the centering of the management of industries into
fewer hands makes the trade unions unable to cope with the
ever-growing power of the employing class.
"These conditions can be changed and the interests of the working
class upheld only by an organization formed in such a way that all
its members in any one industry, or in all industries if necessary,
cease work whenever a strike or lockout is on in any department
thereof, thus making an injury to one, an injury to all.
"Instead of the conservative motto, 'A fair day's wages for a fair
day's work,' we must inscribe on our banner the revolutionary
watchword, 'Abolition of the wage system.'
"It is the historic mission of the working class to do away with
capitalism. The army of production must be organized, not only for
the every-day struggle with the capitalists, but also to carry on
production when capitalism shall have been overthrown. By
organizing industrially we are forming a structure of the new
society within the shell of the old."
Giovannitti, editor of the New York City Italian Socialist publication,
"Il Proletario," one of the official Socialist organs enumerated in the
"Proceedings[9] of the 1910 National Congress of the Socialist Party,"
writing in the April 5, 1913, edition of his paper, says:
"The aim of the Socialists and of the Syndicalists is precisely
that of dispossessing the middle class by transferring property to
the working class.
"We shall take possession of the industries for three very simple
reasons: because we need them, because we desire them, and because
we have the power to take them.
"Whether it is just or unjust, moral or immoral, it is no concern
to us. We shall waste no time whatever in providing the validity of
our legal titles, yet, if it will be necessary, after the
dispossession will have been accomplished, we shall engage a couple
of lawyers and judges to adjust the contracts and to render the act
perfectly legal and respectable. So, too, if it will be necessary,
we shall find a couple of most learned bishops to sanctify it.
These matters can always be arranged--all that is strong and
powerful becomes in time just and moral--and for this reason, we
Syndicalists maintain that the social revolution is not a question
of necessity and justice, but of necessity and strength."
"The New Unionism," by Tridon, on page 112, informs us that Arturo
Giovannitti was, in turn, a minter, a bookkeeper, a theological student,
a mission preacher and a tramp. Ettor, in "Industrial Unionism," page
15, speaking of the I. W. W. principles of morality, says:
"New conceptions of Right and Wrong must generate and permeate the
workers. We must look on conduct and actions that advance the
social and economic position of the working class as Right,
ethically, legally, religiously, socially and by every other
measurement. That conduct and those actions which aid, help to
maintain and give comfort to the capitalist class, we must consider
as Wrong by every standard."
"The New Unionism," page 104, gives us Vincent St. John's statement of
the methods and tactics employed by the I. W. W., of which he has been a
prominent leader:
"As a revolutionary organization the Industrial Workers of the
World aims to use any and all tactics that will get the results
sought with the least expenditure of time and energy. The tactics
used are determined solely by the power of the organization to make
good in their use. The question of 'right' and 'wrong' does not
concern us. No terms made with an employer are final. All peace so
long as the wage system lasts is but an armed truce. At any
favorable opportunity the struggle for more control of industry is
renewed....
"The organization does not allow any part to enter into time
contracts with the employers. It aims where strikes are used, to
paralyze all branches of the industry involved, when the employers
can least afford a cessation of work--during the busy season and
when there are rush orders to be filled."
In the Socialist Labor Party paper, "Weekly People," New York, February
10, 1912, the following article by Arthur Giovannitti shows the part
that the I. W. W. is expected to take in bringing about the Marxian
rebellion through the instrumentality of a general strike:
"The future of Socialism lies only in the general strike, not
merely a quiet political strike, but one that once started should
go fatally to its end, i.e., armed insurrection, and the forcible
overthrow of all existing social conditions.... The task of
revolution is not to construct the new society, but to demolish the
old one, and, therefore, its first aim should be at the complete
destruction of the existing state, so as to render it absolutely
powerless to react and re-establish itself.... The I. W. W. must
develop itself as the new legislature and the new executive body of
the land, undermine the existing one, and gradually absorb the
functions of the state until it can entirely substantiate it
through the only means it has, the revolution."
On May 1, 1919, plans for a nation-wide strike on July 4th were
disclosed by I. W. W. orators at a mass meeting in the workingmen's
hall, 119 South Throop Street, Chicago. It was Simms, a colored man, who
gave the details of the strike plan:
"The workmen will lay down their tools on July 4th, and on the
morning of July 5th not one will take them up again....
"It will be the opening of the social revolution. Moreover, not one
workman will take up his tools again until every prisoner of the
workers now incarcerated in the capitalistic prisons is released."
"The One Big Union Monthly," March 1, 1919, page 22, declares:
"Socialism rears new institutions. It weaves a new fabric for our
social life. In Russia it is the Soviets; in America it is the One
Big Union. This fabric is proletarian only. Within its limits the
Socialist Revolutionist halts. This new organism--this One Big
Union--may, or may not seek Democracy. Democracy is merely a method
of governing. If that method leads to Socialist goals it will be
followed. Otherwise, we will seek further for our avenue. But the
great end is proletarianism. It is the social ownership of the
means of production. It is the creation of a society where all
classes will be melted into one, and where the class war will
soften into an all-race proletarianism."
Another I. W. W. publication, "The Evolution of Industrial Democracy,"
page 40, speaking of government after the "Wobblies" get into power,
goes still further:
"Government, as now understood will disappear--there being no
servile class to be held in subjection--but in its place will be an
administration of affairs."
Relative to property rights in the future, "The Evolution of Industrial
Democracy," page 39, informs us:
"Rights of inheritance would disappear with the right to hold
private property in the lands, tools and machinery of production.
Any accumulation by the individual that might be used for
exploitation would pass to the collectivity at the death of the
holder. Society would be the heir of the individual and, vice
versa, the individuals would be the heirs of society. The right to
freely function at the machines and enjoy the social value of his
toil would guarantee the worker a full competence."
As regards compensation for work in accordance with the I. W. W. plan,
we are told on page 39:
"Compensation in the industries would necessarily be upon the basis
of the 'man-day'--the average production of an average man in an
average day when working under average conditions--and in those
industries not of an actual productive nature, such as 'public
service,' etc., the man-day must prevail there also (being based
upon the average production of all the industries served) for the
reason that no man could be induced to serve for less than that
average--to do so being to confess himself an inferior being--and
to compel him to serve for less would be to set up a new slavery,
which the moral sense of the new community could not endure."
Giovannitti, in "Il Proletario," New York, April 5, 1913, gives a lesson
in sabotage to the Italian Socialists and members of the I. W. W.:
"We are not yet sufficiently strong to restore them [i.e., the
instruments of production] to ourselves, it is true, but it is also
true that we cannot allow any opportunity to escape of reaping any
advantage from them.
"Thus, if to-morrow we shall be justified in wrenching from
capitalism all the industries, why, when it is a question of life
or death for us to win or to lose a strike, is it not just to
remove a screw, derange a wheel, break a thread, or commit, in any
way whatever, an act of sabotage on a machine which otherwise would
become the very beginning of our defeat in the hands of the scabs?
"We cannot understand how it is still possible while we have a
right to all the produce of our work, we have not an entire right
to a part of it."
Other illustrations of sabotage may be of interest to the reader. The
following one is taken from the Chicago "Syndicalist," February 15,
1913:
"A few drops of sulphuric acid placed on top of a pile of woolen or
cotton goods never stops going down.
"Two decks of cards in a grain separator cover the screen and cause
the grain to vanish out of the blower.
"A piece of iron dropped in a crucible full of glass will eat
through it. Crucibles are made of graphite and cost $40.
"A handful of salt in paint will allow a good-looking job for a day
or two, but when dry will fall off in sheets.
"Maclay Hoyne, Chicago's district attorney, is analyzing a
spontaneous fire powder that allows the user to be miles away when
it breaks forth.
"Castor oil capsules dissolved in varnish destroy the ability of
the latter to dry. The job must be washed down and started all over
again.
"The suffragettes of England have significantly notified their
opponents that a fire in every shire was the way the word was
flashed in days gone by."
Pages 40 to 48 of "The New Unionism," by Tridon, furnish us with some
more barbarous examples of sabotage:
"We may distinguish three forms of sabotage:
"1. Active sabotage which consists in the damaging of goods or
machinery.
"2. Open-mouthed sabotage, beneficial to the ultimate consumer, and
which consists in exposing or defeating fraudulent commercial
practices.
"3. Obstructionism or passive sabotage, which consists in carrying
out orders literally, regardless of consequences.
"If you are an engineer you can, with two cents' worth of powdered
stone or a pinch of sand, stall your machine, cause a loss of time
or make expensive repairs necessary. If you are a joiner or
woodworker, what is simpler than to ruin furniture without your
boss noticing it, and thereby drive his customers away? A garment
worker can easily spoil a suit or a bolt of cloth; if you are
working in a department store, a few spots on a fabric cause it to
be sold for next to nothing; a grocery clerk, by packing up goods
carelessly, brings about a smashup; in the woolen or the
haberdashery trade a few drops of acid on the goods you are
wrapping will make a customer furious ... an agricultural laborer
may sow bad seed in wheat fields," etc.
"With two cents' worth of a certain stuff, used by one who knows, a
locomotive can be made absolutely useless."
"The first thing to do before going out on strike is to cripple all
the machinery. Then the contest is even between employer and
worker, for the cessation of work really stops all life in the
capitalists' camp. Are bakery workers planning to go on strike? Let
them pour in the ovens a few pints of petroleum or of any other
greasy or pungent matter. After that, soldiers or scabs may come
and bake bread. The smell will not come out of the tiles for three
months. Is a strike in sight in steel mills? Pour sand or emery
into the oil cups."
"The electrical industry is one of the most important industries,
as an interruption in the current means a lack of light and power
in factories; it also means a reduction in the means of
transportation and a stoppage of the telegraph and telephone
systems. How can the power be cut off? By the curtailing in the
mine the output of the coal necessary for feeding the machinery or
stopping the coal cars on their way to the electrical plants. If
the fuel reaches its destination what is simpler than to set the
pockets on fire and have the coal burn in the yards instead of the
furnaces? It is child's play to put out of work the elevators and
other automatic devices which carry coal to the fire room. To put
boilers out of order use explosives or silicates or a plain glass
bottle which thrown on the glowing coals hinders the combustion and
clogs up the smoke exhausts. You can also use acids to corrode
boiler tubes; acid fumes will ruin cylinders and piston rods. A
small quantity of some corrosive substance, a handful of emery will
be the end of oil cups. When it comes to dynamos or transformers,
short circuits and inversion of poles can be easily managed.
Underground cables can be destroyed by fire, water or explosives,"
etc.
"The New Unionism," the book from which the above quotations were taken
and which was purchased by the author of "The Red Conspiracy" at the I.
W. W. headquarters, 1001 West Madison Street, Chicago, in the latter
part of the spring of 1919, also informs us on page 123:
"As far as sabotage is concerned, all the I. W. W. speakers and the
I. W. W. press countenance it although they steadily warn the
workers against the indiscriminate and unsocial use of that weapon
of warfare."
CHAPTER IX
INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD IN ACTION
Members of the I. W. W. and Socialists who advocate sabotage or get into
trouble in one way or another, especially in strikes, are often put into
prison for their revolutionary talk or their violent methods. The One
Big Industrial Union and, of course, the Socialist Party then proclaim
their innocence, collect funds for their defense, and urge all the
working men of our country to strike in behalf of amnesty for "poor,
persecuted, noble protagonists of the cause of labor jailed because
freedom of speech and liberty of action are no longer tolerated by the
government." Thus on page 409 of the February, 1918, edition of the
"International Socialist Review," which was suppressed by the United
States Government, we read:
"Socialists Demand Fair Trial for Indicted I. W. W.--In a
declaration adopted by its National Executive Committee the
Socialist Party calls for a fair and unprejudiced trial for the
indicted members of the Industrial Workers of the World. The demand
says:
"'The Socialist Party repeats its declaration of support of all
economic organizations of the working class and declares the
lynching, deportation, prosecution and persecution of the
Industrial Workers of the World is an attack upon every toiler in
America, and we now call attention to the fact that the charges of
incendiarism, the burning of crops and forests and of vicious
destruction of property, made by the public press against the I. W.
W., have been proven pure fabrications when put to legal test. The
Socialist Party has always extended its aid, material and moral, to
organized labor wherever and whenever it has been attacked by the
capitalist class, and this without reference to form of
organization or special policies; therefore we pledge our support
to the Industrial Workers of the World now facing trial in Chicago
and elsewhere, and demand for them a fair and unprejudiced trial
and urge our members to use every effort to assist the Industrial
Workers of the World by familiarizing the public with the real
facts, to overcome the falsehoods and misinformation with which
the capitalist press has poisoned and prejudiced the public mind
and judgment against these workers, who are now singled out for
destruction, just as other labor organizations and leaders have
been singled out for destruction by the same capitalist forces in
the past."
The Socialist Party, in pledging its support to the Industrial Workers
of the World, pledges its support to a revolutionary organization like
itself. "The One Big Union Monthly," March 1, 1919, page 4, under the
caption, "The Red Tidal Wave," says:
"With great satisfaction we record the fact that the red
revolutionary wave is encircling the globe, sweeping away the last
remnants of feudal rubbish from the body social, and some of the
capitalistic. The world war acted like a vigorous laxative on the
stomach of the nations."
"The Rebel Worker," an I. W. W. paper of New York City, in its
issue of April 15, 1919, after printing the word, "Revolution" in
the heaviest type all the way across the paper, publishes an
article on the first page entitled "Terrible Days Ahead in the
United States."
"'The United States is in the grip of a bloody revolution!
Thousands of workers are slaughtered by machine guns in New York
City! Washington is on fire! Industry is at a standstill and
thousands of workers are starving! The government is using the most
brutal and repressive measures to put down the revolution!
Disorganization, crime, chaos, rape, murder and arson are the order
of the day--the inevitable results of social revolution!'
"The above is what we may expect to see on the front pages of what
few newspapers survive the upheaval. No one who has the interest of
the working class at heart wants to see such a revolution. But
whether those interested in the working class want to see such a
revolution or not, there are powerful forces in the United States
that are making for just such a catastrophe. The Industrial Workers
of the World has in the past and is now using all of its energies
to avert such a cataclysmic debacle. It is not yet too late to
avoid this terrible and sanguinary strife--provided that the I. W. W.
is allowed to carry out its program of organizing and educating the
workers for the purpose of taking control of, and operating
industry and giving to those who work the full social value of the
product of their labor."
"The New Solidarity," the Chicago organ of the I. W. W., in its
edition of April 19, 1919, publishes on the editorial page an
article entitled, "When We Are Ready," part of which is hereby
quoted:
"Frequently the question is asked how the proletariat is to know
when they are ready for the revolution, how it would be possible to
know a sufficient number were class conscious enough for the
revolutionary change. This question is asked with the idea that
there must be a periodical counting of noses, and that little or
nothing may be done except educate until an absolute majority has
been obtained....
"It matters not how many members of the working class do or do not
stand up to be counted for or against capitalism, just as soon as
the organized workers can overthrow that system of industry they
will do it and not wait to be counted....
"To wait for majorities at all times is to enervate and emasculate
the working class movement. To constantly attack, and attack for
the purpose of taking and administering industry for the workers by
action on the job and in the Union halls, is to strengthen and
encourage the workers in their task, and is the plan that must
ultimately win the age-long struggle against exploitation."
On September 5, 1917, the I. W. W. headquarters, 1001 West Madison
street, Chicago, and the Socialist headquarters were raided by the
United States authorities. On March 10, 1919, Solicitor General Lamar of
the Post Office Department submitted a memorandum to the Senate
propaganda committee stating that the I. W. W., anarchists, socialists
and others were "perfecting an amalgamation with one object--the
overthrow of the government of the United States by means of a bloody
revolution and the establishment of a Bolshevik Republic." Mr. Lamar
said his conclusion was based upon information contained in seized mail
matter. Accompanying the memorandum were several hundred excerpts from
the mail matter. The solicitor named the following organs, published in
the interest of the I. W. W. or Bolshevist movements: "The New
Solidarity," English, weekly, Chicago; "One Big Union," English,
monthly, Chicago; "Industrial Unionist," English, weekly, Seattle;
"California Defense Bulletin," English, weekly, San Francisco; "The
Rebel Worker," English, bi-monthly, New York; "La Neuva Solidaridad,"
Spanish, weekly, Chicago; "Golos Truzenta," Russian, weekly, Chicago;
"Il Nuovo Proletario," Italian, weekly, Chicago; "Nya Varlden,"
Swedish, weekly, Chicago; "Der Industrialer Arbiter," Jewish, weekly,
Chicago; "Probuda," Bulgarian, weekly, Chicago; "A. Fels Badulas,"
Hungarian, weekly, Chicago. After referring to the excerpts from the
seized mail matter, the solicitor general's memorandum said in part:
"This propaganda is being conducted with such regularity that its
magnitude can be measured by the bold and outspoken statements contained
in these publications and the efforts made therein to inaugurate a
nation-wide reign of terror and overthrow of the government.
"In classifying these statements, they are submitted in a major or
general class as follows: I. W. W., anarchistic,
radical-socialistic and socialist. It will be seen from these
excerpts and it is indeed significant that this is the first time
in the history of the so-called radical movement in the United
States that the radical elements have found a common cause
(Bolshevism) in which they can all unite. The I. W. W.,
anarchistic, socialists, radical and otherwise, in fact all
dissatisfied elements, particularly the foreign element, are
perfecting amalgamation with one object, and with one object in
view, namely, the overthrow of the government of the United States
by the means of a bloody revolution and the establishment of a
Bolshevik republic.
"The I. W. W. is perhaps most actively engaged in spreading this
propaganda and has at its command a large field force known as
recruiting agents, subscription agents, etc., who work unceasingly
in the furtherance of 'the cause!'
"This organization publishes at least five newspapers in the
English language and nine in foreign languages. This list comprises
only official papers of the organization and does not take into
account the large number of free lance papers published in the
interest of the above organization."
In the April 19, 1913, edition of "Solidarity," the eastern organ of the
I. W. W., we are informed that "among other diseases common to all
nations and particularly prevalent in the United States is respect for
law and order." The same edition of the paper extends greetings to "all
Rebels" from its new home in Cleveland.
During the 1913 Paterson strike, which was managed by the I. W. W.,
Quinlan, one of the leaders, declared on May 17th:
"Paterson is a dangerous place to live in just at this time, no
matter in what direction you are looking. The longer the strike
lasts, the stronger and more bitter and the madder the workers are
growing. Out of it all we want to build up an organization that
will be able to fight efficiently, and fight to win--to fight to
win, if necessary, by dying.
"And we are going to win this strike or Paterson will be wiped off
the map. If the strike is not won Paterson will be a howling
wilderness and a graveyard industrially, because the workers will
not stay there. We have had too long and bitter a fight to lay down
what we have gained so far. Heaven might fall and hell might break
loose, but the strike is going to be won."
Boyd, another speaker, is reported as saying on the same day:
"We are going to get what we want whether the courts want it or
not. We are going to call a general strike, if it is necessary, to
free our fellow-workers. We are going to cut off the lights in
Paterson, and tie up the street car system. We shall reduce the
city to a condition of absolute helplessness. We are going to
paralyze Paterson, and we are going to win in Paterson just as we
are going to win in New York City."
Robert Plunkett, said to be a former Cornell student, who was introduced
as a "fellow-worker," urged the strikers and their sympathizers to use
every means to free their leaders, even if Paterson had to "starve or go
naked." He said that the lights would be put out in Paterson, and that
the street cars would be tied up, so that Paterson would become a dead
city.
Mohl, who also made his appearance at the silk mills strike in Paterson,
declared on May 18, 1913:
"The American flag is pretty to look at. Its colors are
striking--red, white, and blue, with two or three twinkling stars
here and there, but it is not good to eat."
The I. W. W. is, of course, an atheistic and anti-religious
organization. In the March 1, 1919, issue of "The One Big Union
Monthly," page 40, we read under the caption, "Help Wanted, Male or
Female:"
"Priest or Minister to show the One Big Union family why our
Solidarity Dogma is not superior to the ethical teachings of Jesus,
Buddha or Mohammed, also to demonstrate the inside of the religious
business, and where it is interwoven with Wall street."
"The Call," New York, May 3, 1919, in an editorial on "The Bomb Plot,"
which had just aroused the whole nation, said:
"The bomb and torch have not the slightest relation to any branch
of the organized labor movement in this country, and the editors
know it. Those who print such unfounded and slanderous insinuations
place themselves in the same class as the would-be-assassin."
This editorial was published the day after the following special
dispatch was sent to "The New York Times:"
"Sioux City, Iowa, May 2.--'We will blow the whole town to hell if
you put Mayor Short out of office.' This was the threat on a
postcard addressed to E. J. Stanson, who is trying to secure the
recall of Mayor Short. The card was received today. It was signed
'I. W. W. Alliance for Short.' The police are rounding up all
suspicious characters, and those known to have a leaning toward the
Bolshevists of the I. W. W. Citizens are seeking to oust Short
because he welcomed delegates to a recent 'wobblies' convention
here."
In the latter part of the spring of 1919 the author of "The Red
Conspiracy" obtained at the I. W. W. headquarters in Chicago a leaflet
entitled, "To Colored Workingmen and Women!" Part of it is hereby
quoted:
"To the black race, who, but recently, with the assistance of the
white men of the northern states, broke their chains of bondage and
ended chattel slavery, a prospect of further freedom, of Real
Freedom, should be most appealing.
"For it is a fact that the negro worker is no better off under the
freedom he has gained than the slavery from which he has escaped.
As chattel slaves we were the property of our masters, and as a
piece of valuable property our masters were considerate of us and
careful of our health and welfare. Today, as wage-workers, the boss
may work us to death at the hardest and most hazardous labor, at
the longest hours, at the lowest pay; we may quietly starve when
out of work and the boss loses nothing by it and has no interest in
us. To him the worker is but a machine for producing profits, and
when you, as a slave who sells himself to the master on the
installment plan, become old, or broken in health or strength or
should you be killed while at work, the master merely gets another
wage slave on the same terms.
"We who have worked in the south know that conditions in lumber and
turpentine camps, in the fields of cane, cotton and tobacco, in the
mills and mines of Dixie, are such that the workers suffer a more
miserable existence than ever prevailed among the chattel slaves
before the great Civil War....
"The only problem, then, which the colored worker should consider,
as a worker, is the problem of organizing with other workingmen in
the labor organization that best expresses the interest of the
whole working class against the slavery and oppression of the whole
capitalist class. Such an organization is the I. W. W., the
Industrial Workers of the World."
"The One Big Union Monthly," March 1, 1919, page 6, publishes an article
entitled, "The Chinese and the I. W. W.":
"The Chinese workers in this country have discovered the I. W.
W....
"Long enough have workers been divided along colored lines. The
old, old misunderstanding created by our masters is fading away as
we mutually discover that we are all condemned to slavery if
divided, and that freedom is ours if we unite. The accessions of
Chinese workers to our ranks fills us with great joy. May they also
succeed in soon carrying the gospel of Working Class Solidarity and
Industrial Organization to their native country. That hope takes
the sadness out of the news of their possible deportation."
"I. W. W. Songs," a Red booklet published at the Chicago headquarters,
has already met with such popularity among the "Wobblies" that fourteen
editions have been published. Several songs, showing the spirit of the
Reds, are given here:
The Preacher and the Slave
By Joe Hill
(Tune: "Sweet Bye and Bye")
Long-haired preachers come out every night,
Try to tell you what's wrong and what's right;
But when asked how 'bout something to eat
They will answer with voices so sweet:
_Chorus_
You will eat, bye and bye,
In that glorious land above the sky;
Work and pray, live on hay,
You'll get pie in the sky when you die.
And the starvation army they play,
And they sing and they clap and they pray.
Till they get all your coin on the drum,
Then they'll tell you when you're on the bum:
Holy Rollers and jumpers come out,
And they holler, they jump and they shout.
"Give your money to Jesus," they say,
"He will cure all diseases to-day."
If you fight hard for children and wife--
Try to get something good in this life--
You're a sinner and bad man, they tell,
When you die you will sure go to hell.
Workingmen of all countries, unite,
Side by side we for freedom will fight;
When the world and its wealth we have gained
To the grafters we'll sing this refrain:
_Last Chorus_
You will eat, bye and bye,
When you've learned how to cook and to fry,
Chop some wood, 'twill do you good,
And you'll eat in the sweet bye and bye.
Tie 'Em Up!
(Words and music by G. G. Allen)
We have no fight with brothers of the old A. F. of L.,
But we ask you use your reason with the facts we have to tell.
Your craft is but protection for a form of property,
The skill that you are losing, don't you see.
Improvements on machinery take your tool and skill away,
And you'll be among the common slaves upon some fateful day.
Now the things of which we're talking we are mighty sure about.--
So what's the use to strike the way you can't win out?
_Chorus_
Tie 'em up! Tie 'em up! That's the way to win.
Don't notify the bosses till hostilities begin.
Don't furnish chance for gunmen, scabs and all their like;
What you need is One Big Union and the One Big Strike.
Why do you make agreements that divide you when you fight
And let the bosses bluff you with the contract's "sacred right?"
Why stay at work when other crafts are battling with the foe,
You all must stick together, don't you know.
The day when you begin to see the classes waging war
You can join the biggest tie-up that was ever known before.
When the strikes all o'er the country are united into one,
Then the workers' One Big Union all the wheels shall run.
Walking on the Grass
(Tune: "The Wearing of the Green")
In this blessed land of freedom where King Mammon wears the crown,
There are many ways illegal now to hold the people down.
When the dudes of state militia are slow to come to time,
The law upholding Pinkertons are gathered from the slime.
There are wisely framed injunctions that you must not leave your job,
And a peaceable assemblage is declared to be a mob,
And Congress passed a measure framed by some consummate ass,
So they are clubbing men and women just for walking on the grass.
In this year of slow starvation, when a fellow looks for work,
The chances are a cop will grab his collar with a jerk;
He will run him in for vagrancy, he is branded as a tramp,
And all the well-to-do will shout: "It serves him right, the scamp!"
So we let the ruling class maintain the dignity of law,
When the court decides against us we are filled with wholesome awe,
But we cannot stand the outrage without a little sauce
When they're clubbing men and women just for walking on the grass.
The papers said the union men were all but anarchist,
So the job trust promised work for all who wouldn't enlist;
But the next day when the hungry horde surrounded city hall,
He hedged and said he didn't promise anything at all.
So the powers that be are acting very queer to say the least--
They should go and read their Bible and all about Belshazzar's feast,
And when mene tekel at length shall come to pass,
They'll stop clubbing men and women just for walking on the grass.
Although the I. W. W. does not yet officially constitute a part of the
Socialist organization, still very many of its members are most active
Socialists. Indeed, it may be said that the I. W. W. is related to the
Socialist Party quite as closely as a child is to its mother, for not
only does the I. W. W. owe its origin to the followers of Karl Marx,
but they are its directors and leaders, and have assisted and encouraged
it in not a few of its principal strikes, notably at Lawrence, Mass.,
and Paterson, N. J.
Though we readily concede that quite a number of Socialists are
individually antagonistic to the I. W. W., still they are opposed to it
not because the I. W. W. differs in essential principles from the
Socialist Party or even because this unfriendly minority of Socialists
would oppose violent methods, if such were considered expedient, but
because the "Yellow" Socialists prefer political action which is made
light of by the I. W. W. direct actionists who are looked upon as
enemies, for they seem to be doing harm to the Socialist political
propaganda. In verification of this, an excellent proof is furnished by
no less an authority than John Spargo, then a Socialist, and a most
prolific writer, whose opposition to the Syndicalists and to the direct
actionists of the Socialist Party was a well established fact even
before the publication of his book, "Syndicalism, Industrial Unionism
and Socialism." On page 172 of this work he writes:
"If the class to which I belong could be set free from exploitation
by violation of laws made by the master class, by open rebellion,
by seizing the property of the rich, by setting the torch to a few
buildings, or by the summary execution of a few members of the
possessing class, I hope that the courage to share in the work
would be mine."
Spargo, in "Syndicalism, Industrial Unionism and Socialism," admits that
the Socialists have continually and consistently given aid to the
Industrial Workers of the World in their strikes. Yet notwithstanding
this active support, many persons have been led to believe that the
Socialists have repudiated the I. W. W. This incorrect opinion may be
due to the fact that the Socialist Party did not endorse the I. W. W. at
its 1912 National Convention, or else to the fact that William D.
Haywood was subsequently removed by a referendum from the National
Executive Committee of the Socialist Party. But the 1912 Indianapolis
Convention of the Socialist Party did not repudiate the Industrial
Workers of the World. The representatives of the party only declared for
a neutrality between this organization and the American Federation of
Labor, and would in all probability have endorsed the I. W. W. and
repudiated the American Federation of Labor if the Socialists had not
nursed a hope of getting control of the latter organization and turning
it into an industrial union similar to that of the Industrial Workers of
the World.
That the Socialist Party by no means repudiated the I. W. W., but on the
contrary was still on the most friendly terms with it after the 1912
Convention, is evident from several facts. "The Call," May 17, 1912,
affirms that the Convention decided for neutrality in affairs of unions.
In the "Appeal to Reason," May 25, 1912, we read: "So after long weeks
of discussion in the press, after days of apprehensions and fencing for
advantage, the labor organization committee brought forth a unanimous
report, which after a few speeches, all expressing the spirit of
solidarity, was adopted without a dissenting vote. It was a compromise
resolution. Each side declares itself completely satisfied with it. Each
declares that it expresses its sentiments."
William D. Haywood, who perhaps more than any other person had the
interests of the I. W. W. at heart, declared, according to "The Call,"
May 17, 1912, that with the adoption of this declaration concerning the
neutrality of the party towards the two rival labor unions he felt that
he could go to the 8,000,000 workers of the nation and carry to them the
message of Socialism. "This," he continues, "is the greatest step that
has yet been taken by the Socialist Party."
Although Haywood was for the time being removed from the National
Executive Committee of the party, charged with favoring direct action
rather than political action, he was never expelled from the
party--which yet boasted so much of the constitutional clause adopted at
the 1912 National Convention demanding that any member who opposes
political action, or advocates crime, sabotage, or other methods of
violence as a weapon of the working class, to aid in its emancipation,
shall be expelled from membership in the party.
"The New Unionism," page 119, points out some of the "merits" of the I.
W. W., in comparison made with the Socialist Party, against which it was
somewhat offended by the anti-sabotage and anti-direct action plank
adopted at the 1912 National Convention:
"There are vote-getters and politicians who waste their time coming
into a community where ninety per cent. of the men have no vote,
where the women are disfranchised 100 per cent., and where the boys
and girls under age, of course, are not enfranchised. Still they
will speak to these people about the power of the ballot, and they
never mention a thing about the power of the general strike. They
seem to lack the foresight, the penetration to interpret political
power. They seem to lack the understanding that the broadest
interpretation of political power comes through the industrial
organization; that the industrial organization is capable not only
of the general strike, but prevents the capitalists from
disfranchising the worker; it gives the vote to women, it
re-enfranchises the black man and places the ballot in the hands of
every boy and girl employed in a shop, makes them eligible to take
part in the general strike, makes them eligible to legislate for
themselves where they are most interested in changing conditions,
namely, in the place where they work."
Again we read, on page 122 of "The New Unionism":
"The politicians in the Socialist Party, who want offices in the
government, fight the I. W. W. because we have no place in our
ranks for them, and if our idea prevails, it will crowd them out
and destroy their influence as 'saviors of the working class.'
These politicians cater for votes to the middle class--to business
men, farm owners and other small labor skinners--while the I. W. W.
appeals only to wage-workers, and allows none but actual
wage-workers to join our ranks. The Socialists can never get a
majority of votes for a working class programme (if they had such a
programme) because the majority of voters are middle class, since
about ten million male wage-workers are disfranchised (being
foreigners or floaters without long enough residence in one place
to have votes). But the wage-workers are a big majority of the
whole people, and produce nearly all wealth, so when they organize
as the I. W. W. proposes, the working class will control the
country, and with similar organizations in other countries will
control the world. Foreigners, women, children and other non-voters
at elections, have equal rights in the union, and take part in its
activities, regardless of nationality, age, sex, or any other
consideration except that they are wage-workers with common
interests in opposition to those of the employers."
It may come as a surprise to the reader to hear that at the 1917 St.
Louis Convention of the Socialist Party the anti-sabotage and
anti-direct action plank of the Constitution was dropped. The
"International Socialist Review," May, 1917, page 669, commenting on the
removal of the clause, says:
"It has served its purpose, which was to guillotine and drive out
most of the revolutionary workers from the party. The Constitution
committee recommended that it be striken out by unanimous consent
without going on the minutes or records. Ruthenberg opposed. He
insisted that it be struck out and the minutes show the record of
the action. It was carried almost unanimously."
Further on we read in the same issue of "The International Socialist
Review":
"An industrial union plank to be inserted in the platform was defeated
by a vote of 63 to 61. Had it been offered as a resolution it would have
gone through by a big majority." Though most of the Convention favored
the I. W. W., evidently a small majority feared to put the Socialist
Party on record.
In 1918 and 1919 the Socialist Party grew more and more friendly to the
I. W. W. At present they seem to have fallen in love with each other.
The American Federation of Labor is held in greatest contempt by the
Socialist press, while the I. W. W. is lauded to the skies. Its meetings
are advertised, sympathy and aid are extended to its imprisoned
officials and everything is being done to help it along.
Eugene V. Debs has all along been the sincere friend of the I. W. W. In
the February, 1918, issue of the "International Socialist Review," page
395, he says:
"Every plutocrat, every profiteering pirate, every food vulture,
every exploiter of labor, every robber and oppressor of the poor,
every hog under a silk tile, every vampire in human form will tell
you that the A. F. of L. under Gompers is a great and patriotic
organization and that the I. W. W. under Haywood is a gang of
traitors in the pay of the bloody Kaiser.
"Which of these, think you, Mr. Wage-Slave, is your friend and the
friend of your class?....
"The war within the war and beyond the war in which the I. W. W. is
fighting--the war of the workers of all countries against the
exploiters of all countries--is our war, the war of humanity
against its oppressors and despoilers, the holiest war ever waged
since the race began."
"The Call," New York, April 19, 1919, published at the top of its
editorial page, "Debs' Daily Message from Moundsville Prison:"
"Though Jailed, He Speaketh.
"The clear voice of the awakened and dauntless few cannot be
silenced. The new unionism is being heard. In trumpet tones it
rings out its revolutionary shibboleth to all the workers of the
earth: 'Our interests are identical--let us combine industrially
and politically, assert our united power, achieve our freedom,
enjoy the fruit of our labor, rid society of parasitism, abolish
poverty and civilize the world!'....
"There can be no peace until the working class is triumphant in
this struggle and the wage system is forever wiped from the earth."
In the May Day issue of "The Call," May 1, 1919, there is a very long
article on Debs' Imprisonment by David Karsner, staff correspondent. He
tells us that on the afternoon of April 28 he sat talking with Debs in
his little room in the prison hospital at Moundsville, West Virginia,
and that the many-times presidential candidate of the Socialist Party
among other things said, when told of an intended visit by Karsner to
the Leavenworth Federal prison to see William D. Haywood and the other
93 I. W. W. prisoners:
"I want you to take my love to Bill Haywood and all the other boys
you see out there. We all stand shoulder to shoulder together."
The staff correspondent then goes on to say:
"The reference of Debs to Haywood and the I. W. W. brought vividly
to my mind the little scene enacted between 'Gene' and 'Big Bill'
in the corridor of Judge Landis' courtroom in Chicago last August
during the I. W. W. trial.
"'You and the boys are making a great and noble fight,' said Debs
to Haywood at that time, patting the cheek of Big Bill. 'You are a
born champion of the underdog.' Haywood clasped Debs' in his own
great palm and said affectionately, 'You are the champion of the
underdog, Gene, and you always will be.' There was something
thrilling and inspiring in witnessing this friendly and comradely
felicitation between two noble men, both of whom have never
retreated one jot from their ideas of emancipation of the working
class.
"I recalled as I saw him this afternoon that seven years ago, or at
the time of the Indianapolis Convention of the Socialist party,
Debs pleaded for unity of the movement. He refused to be stampeded
into any position that would compromise the noble work that
confronted himself and the Socialist Party. Debs has always been
for industrial unionism. His speeches and writings are filled with
the spirit of organization and solidarity on the industrial field
as well as on the political. But above everything else he has
warned his fellow Socialists and industrialists that the thing to
do is to keep united, to solidify their economic and political
strength to the end that when our day comes we shall be ready to
enjoy the fruits of our victory."
"The One Big Union Monthly," March 1, 1919, pages 14, 19 and 21, gives
us some very interesting information about the I. W. W. attitude toward
Bolshevism and the two extreme groups of the Socialists:
"We have long predicted the revolutionary cyclone that is now
sweeping over the world, even though few people cared to believe
us. We asked them to prepare for it by building up the framework of
the new society within the shell of the old, in other words to see
to it that we had the new house ready to move into, before we
dynamited the old one....
"Personally we are convinced that Russia will never again return to
the old order. The workers have control and they will not let go of
it. As the days go by, they will gradually organize production and
distribution on the lines of industrial unionism, as Lenine assures
us, and that will be their salvation.
"The plight of the Russian people is a warning to other peoples to
immediately start building the new society, by building industrial
unions right now, before the structure of the old society topples
over. Industrial unions are the only social apparatus that will
make abolishment of wage slavery possible....
"The Bolshevik Revolution has emphasized this sad fact. Socialism
in Russia, facing for the first time in Socialist history, the
problem of inaugurating a working class state, found itself
paralyzed by the existence of a parliamentary form of Democracy.
The Revolution was at stake. In order to destroy capitalism it was
necessary to destroy parliamentary Democracy, and Lenine destroyed
it. In its place he reared a new form of Democracy--the
Dictatorship of the Proletariat, which is Socialism.
"And yet, so misled is the thinking of our European Socialists that
in the very presence of a living, accomplished Socialist
commonwealth, they hastened to repudiate it because it was not
'Democratic.' Plekhanov betrayed it. Kautsky reviled it. Albert
Thomas called upon the capitalists of France to send their soldiers
there and crush it. Mr. Walling, Mr. Spargo and Mr. Russell
baptized themselves into a 'Socialist' crusade to destroy
Socialism. Could idiocy be more abject?
"The alternative is presented, to choose between Socialism or
Democracy. Or perhaps it would be better to put it--between
industrial Democracy and parliamentary Democracy. And our pitiable
Spargos, duped by a stale phrase, abandon their Socialism because
it is not 'Democratic.'
"In America, it is this same issue of Democracy which has long been
the dividing line between the Socialist Party and the I. W. W. Like
the Bolshevists of Russia, the I. W. W. have championed Democracy
but we have refused to allow the capitalist thinkers to define it
for us. We have practiced Democracy in our organization and we have
sublimated it into the most perfect of Democratic organizations.
But always, it has been a Democracy only of proletarians. We have
built the framework of a new society which says that those shall
not vote who do not work. And this, indeed, is Socialism.
"But the political Socialists have feared to draw this distinction.
They have not built themselves upon the proletarian rock. Into
their ranks they have admitted, not only the butcher, the baker and
the candle-stick maker, but also the lawyer, the doctor, the
merchant, the sky pilot, yes, and even the capitalists--known as
millionaire Socialists. Out of such a medley, a medley philosophy
was sprouted. Democracy, to the political Socialists, could not be
rigidly proletarian, because the political Socialists, themselves,
were not proletarians. And their ideals paled into evasion and
compromise.
"Again, the I. W. W. being proletarian, spurned a parliamentary
action which would have drawn it together with the exploiting
class. It realized, before Spargo took that fatal dodge, that, from
parliamentary Socialism to parliamentary Democracy it was but a
step. Hence we spurned politics and parliamentarism, and
substituted a Democracy, grouped around unions, and not around
parliaments.
"But the political Socialists, immersed in parliamentary hack work,
stifled the Socialist concept of Democracy by recognizing and
participating in the capitalist form of Democracy. Entering the
parliaments, they dreamed that they could transform these
parliaments into Socialist republics. Only too soon they discovered
that the parliaments had transformed them into 'Democratic'
apologists. Like a poisoning strain, parliamentarism spread out
over Socialism. And so, when Socialism came at last in Russia,
without the aid of the foolish parliaments, deluded Socialists
cried that Bolshevism was not Socialism."
The year 1919 witnessed a very marked drawing together, in the United
States and throughout the world, of I. W. W.'ism, or Syndicalism, and
all the bodies of radical, revolutionary Socialism. The Moscow
Bolshevists gave a great "boost" to the I. W. W. principle of industrial
unionism by endorsing it and declaring that Russia was being
reorganized economically along similar lines. Bolshevism in Russia, in
fact, has had the help and counsel of I. W. W. experts from the United
States, and I. W. W. leaders in America have naturally been elated. John
Sandgren wrote in "The New Solidarity," April 12, 1919:
"The immortal gains of Bolshevism for humanity lie on the political
field. When it comes to economic reconstruction, the Bolsheviks are
going to find that it cannot be made from the top through laws and
regulations. Any attempt to make the people the real owners of the
means of production and distribution must start with the industrial
organization of the workers themselves as outlined in the I. W. W.
program. In the meantime, let us hope that Bolshevism will sweep
victoriously over all such parts of the world where it still has a
mission to perform. After that, begins the I. W. W. period in human
history."
The April 1, 1919, issue of "The One Big Union Monthly," published the
Russian Communist Party call and invitation to the Moscow Conference
[see Chapter III for a copy of this document], remarking that "as to the
general demand for the overthrow of Capitalism, the dis-establishment of
private ownership and making the working-class the rulers of the world,
there is apt to be little if any dissension." However, noting that "the
I. W. W. of this and other countries" had been invited to the
conference, it declared that "we have no reason to get excited over the
invitation," since, "with the exception of the I. W. W., there is hardly
any of the thirty-nine invited bodies who seriously endorse industrial
unionism as the basis of a new society.... The proposed communist
conference would consequently be a congress of radical political
Socialists to consider the question of discontinuing the use of the
ballot and adopting the methods used by the Russian communists in the
past in overthrowing capitalist society." The I. W. W. world-scheme is
then outlined:
"The I. W. W. has given up all thought of using the machinery of
the present state for its purposes. It proposes to create an
entirely new machinery of administration in which not even a
particle of the old shall enter as a constituent part. We propose
to re-group all mankind on industrial lines in industrial
organizations which we hope will make superfluous and crowd out the
political groupings which constitute the state. We propose to make
the unit of industry, the place of work, the shop, the mill, the
field, the ship, the basis of our new social organization. These
units will combine in two different manners. From a purely
industrial standpoint, they will unite with other units into large
industrial unions, calculated to embrace the whole world, each and
every one of them. For the purpose of local administration, we
propose that the local industrial units shall form a district
industrial council or local administrative body to take care of
local affairs. As we propose to order all branches of human
activity along these lines and include them in a world scheme of
industrial co-operation, we must conclude that our program,
although fundamentally aiming at the same thing as the program of
the Communist Party, somewhat differs from the program proposed as
a basis of unity."
An editorial in the same issue on "Soviet Government in the U. S." says:
"The papers have informed us that the police and the secret service
have unearthed a gigantic plot among the Socialists of this country
to gather up all the radical elements with a view to establishing a
Soviet government in this country.... We do not deny that this
agitation is useful, for it stirs people to thought and excites
contradiction, ... but when that is said, we have said all the good
we can about it....
"The Russians made their revolution not because they had Soviets,
but because the people willed it.... The I. W. W. has at least on
paper an institution corresponding to the Soviet, namely, the
District Industrial Council, ... a local representative body of the
various industrial unions in each locality. So far, it lacks all
practical significance because we are not numerous enough, but
whenever there is to be a radical change in this country, the
change will have to be made through these councils locally. They
will take over the functions which were taken over by the Soviets
in Russia."
Another editorial in the same issue treats of the overtures of the Left
Wing Socialists:
"Of late we have noticed an ever-increasing tendency to hush us up
in the name of unity. We are being told not to show up political
Socialism; we are told not to attack Anarchism. We are asked to be
more lenient toward the A. F. of L. [American Federation of Labor.]
We mustn't touch on church and religion....
"It appears that political Socialists, anarchists and other labor
elements feel that the bottom has fallen out of their programs and
they want us to keep quiet about it, and as a reward we will secure
their friendly services. The I. W. W. is not willing to enter into
any such bargain."
Another editorial gives further light on the "boring in" process begun
by theoretical Socialists with an itch for revolution--paper soldiers
anxious to get a-straddle of the great strike-conducting war-horse of I.
W. W.'ism and ride into "the dictatorship of the proletariat." This is
thus dealt with:
"There is a large element in this country who want a radical change
if not a revolution. This element would like to see the change made
to suit them with the smallest possible cost to themselves.
"The most insistent agitators belong to the upper-class radicals,
and their object seems to be to stir the working masses into some
sort of revolutionary activity, not clearly defined. It seems they
built great hopes on the participation of the I. W. W. They know we
are a compact mass of industrial workers, able to manipulate such
great affairs as the general strikes in Seattle and Butte, the
strike of the silk workers, the strike on the Mesaba Range, and so
on, and we are just what they need for their purpose.
"For this reason we have met with an unusual amount of courtesy and
consideration of late, but we are sorry to say that we do not
consider it disinterested. If these revolutionists were sincere in
their friendship for us, they would throw everything aside and help
us build up industrial unionism, but that is exactly what they are
not doing to any considerable extent. Their activities are directed
on aims that are strange and foreign to us. Some of their adherents
in overalls are getting into our ranks because they work in the
industries we have organized or because our recruiting unions are
open to them, and their activity is frequently annoying to us, as
it has little or nothing to do with the industrial organization of
the workers."
The same issue contains an article by a Left Winger, I. E. Ferguson, a
"Little Corporal" ready to step to the front of I. W. W.'ism and lead it
to glory. He complains:
"The attempt to 'hog the market' of propagandizing the Russian
Revolution in the United States for the I. W. W. is leading to
excesses which ought to be checked right now, else these excesses
will accomplish injury to the American Socialist movement. This
does not mean to repudiate the claims of the I. W. W. to any
extent, but to controvert the negative proposition that all of the
American revolutionary socialist movement is and necessarily must
be within the folds of the I. W. W....
"The I. W. W. is the livest thing in the American Socialist
movement, therefore, truly, the Greatest Thing On Earth for the
American working class. But ... when the same organization carries
on the business of unionism and the business of revolution at the
same time, it is more than likely, when it becomes overburdened, to
throw overboard the more remote job in favor of the more immediate
one. Revolution is a political proposition, or, if you please,
anti-political. Its direct task is the overthrow of the capitalist
state, the bulwark of capitalist industrialism. There is no
question in the world but that the I. W. W. form of labor
organization is the most powerful possible weapon for the overthrow
of the capitalist state, because of its adaptability to great mass
protests and mass movements of the proletariat. But only an
organization with the sole aim of revolution can take the
responsibility for leadership in this fight."
Granting some truth in the above argument, it is not probable that a
great practical organization like the I. W. W., which _does_ things, and
very rough things, will invite theorists, non-working drones, to come in
and take charge of it. Nor is it willing to be borrowed, and diverted
into an engine to run toy revolutions. This is the substance of the
reply to Ferguson made by Harold Lord Varney in the same magazine. We
quote its pith:
"Like the Left Wingers of the Socialist Party; like the editors and
the writers of the Revolutionary Age and the Class Struggle; like
the Eastmans, the Nearings and the Frainas of our American
movement, my critic is obsessed with Russia. To him, the
Bolshevists and their mass action revolutions are like dazzling,
fiery suns which blind and obscure all rivals....
"As proletarians, I. W. W.'s rejoiced at the Lenine triumph. As
proletarians, we have unwaveringly supported the Bolshevist regime
in all our propaganda. Those of our members who happened to be in
Russia when the October Revolution came (and there were thousands
of them) were all found in the Bolshevist army. Bill Shatoff,
Volodarsky, Martoff, Kornuk and others who have been leaders in the
Bolshevist army were all old members of the I. W. W. In brief,
then, were we in Russia, all I. W. W.'s would be Bolsheviki. But
from this it does not necessarily follow that in America the I. W.
W. must turn Bolshevist also....
"Mr. Ferguson's proposition is that after all these years of
struggle we should now discard this One Big Union goal and unite
with political Socialists to create an American Bolsheviki. And in
that proposal he demonstrates the impractical artlessness of the
Left Winger. The I. W. W. is a Socialist who is a materialist. The
Left Winger is a Socialist who is an ideologist. The I. W. W. seeks
for verities and for concrete, ponderable power. The Left Winger
follows the intoxicating dreams of his own imagination....
"Of course, the I. W. W. wants unity. But we will have no unity
with any who are not willing to accept the proletarian conception
of Socialism. We will have no unity with any who do not belong to
our class. And we will have no unity with any who flinch at the
'radicalism' of our program....
"The I. W. W. is not anti-political. Its members are free to be
members of the Socialist Party and thousands of us, the writer
included, do carry Socialist cards....
"The social revolution is not a thing of theories. It is merely the
final act of working-class organization. It is the historic mission
of the working class to mount to supreme power. They do this, not
by debating nor by marching in the street; they do this by the slow
process of organization. In their union halls, the workers learn
class consciousness. In their union halls, the workers learn
self-government. In their union halls, the workers are disciplined
and solidified for the 'final conflict.' Every strike is a
revolution in miniature. Every gain which organized workers make,
by a conscious act of their own, weakens capitalism and is
revolutionary. In short, the union movement is the schoolhouse of
the new society....
"Mr. Ferguson is not correct in asserting that the I. W. W. does
not have 'the sole aim of revolution.' In our Preamble, he will
find the boldest revolutionary utterance which has ever been
penned.... Even were we silent in revolutionary words, our very
form of organization and mode of action stamp us as revolutionists.
We are organized against capital. We are an army that is ever
battling....
"The real I. W. W. is not to be read in books of the intellectuals.
It does not flash in phrases. It is written in the hearts of strong
silent men. It can be read in the ineffable tales of anguish which
ring from the prisons of the land. It can be read in the tragic
sacrifices of the Littles, the Joe Hills, the Barans, the Looneys,
the Jonsons, the Rabinowitzes, the Gerlots, the Jack Whytes whom
destiny has claimed from among us. Its chapters have been penned,
not with words, but with the living dramas of Spokane and San
Diego, Lawrence and Paterson, McKee's Rocks, Everett and Mesaba
Range."
This is indeed the spirit of the most dangerous organization of devoted
fanatics in the world today, and if our present order of society hopes
to survive its steady, unrelenting assault, it must take into its hands
the weapons of truth and justice.
We have given these quotations to show clearly both the difference and
the bond of union between the I. W. W.'s and the other brands of
Socialists. A Left Winger sums it up concisely ("The Communist," August
23, 1919): "The syndicalist and the Socialist have this in common: That
they both strive for the reduction of the state to zero and the
'building of a new society within the shell of the old.' The fundamental
difference between the two is that the syndicalist naively strives to
build the new society while the capitalist class controls the coercive
power, and the Socialist aims to destroy that power first and then begin
the 'building' process."
But I. W. W.'ism is the more logical, and, in conditions like those in
the United States, much the more dangerous, because it is _revolution
going on_ every day of the year, holding what it gets, be it much or
little. Moreover, since I. W. W.'ism will not give up its position,
Socialism in America has adopted the industrial unionism creed. This now
is the backbone of all the recent Socialist platforms, including that of
the Socialist Party of America. Even with the Left Winger's buoyant
faith in a speedy overturn of the United States, he now sees that the
One Big Union is the necessary steam-roller to accomplish it, and for
months he has been at work, "boring from within," to get the forces of
American labor industrially organized for revolutionary action. In
short, there has been a general following of the advice which "Truth,"
Left Wing organ in the Northwest, gave in its issue of May 23, 1919, as
its answer to the above-quoted challenge of Varney to Ferguson:
"The Left Wing represents the revolutionary portion of the
Socialist Party in opposition to the opportunism of the Right Wing.
Therefore we must, in order to make the Socialist Party a
revolutionary expression of the working class, join hands with the
Left Wing....
"The I. W. W. represents the revolutionary section of the working
class in opposition to the opportunism of Gompers et al. Therefore
we must, in order to make working class organizations
revolutionary, join hands with the I. W. W.
"The resolutions and the manifestoes of the Left Wing are
revolutionary expressions. But action counts for more than words.
If all Left Wingers are sincere they will join in the I. W. W. and
endeavor to make the I. W. W. the dominant working-class
organization throughout the country. The times demand that we must
make ready to enforce our demands. No pious resolutions will bring
us freedom. Only POWER through organization on the job will bring
us freedom. True it is that we have to resort to mass action. But
the basis of our mass action must be organization on the job. The
I. W. W. represents the highest form of industrial organization and
therefore merits our support. So we trust that ALL Left Wingers
will join with the I. W. W. This is not the time to indulge in
hair-splitting. If you are enraptured by what has taken place in
Russia, do your share here in America."
This appeared in May, 1919. Six months later we open the December, 1919,
"One Big Union Monthly" and read:
"We need hardly repeat the now well known facts that the workers of
western Canada and of Australia have in mass adopted our principles
in the course of this year. Close upon these significant events
came the news that the three fragments into which the Socialist
Party was split endorsed industrial unionism, while two of them
rather outspokenly favored the I. W. W.
"Later we were able to state that the increase in our own
membership in the course of the 12 months, September 1, 1918, to
September 1, 1919, was about 50,000. Now we are able to inform our
readers that the growth of the last three months has been
unprecedented. Lumber workers, miners, construction workers, marine
transport workers and many other unions report many thousands of
new members. We are getting a footing in fields that we have never
been able to touch before, such as the printing industry and
building construction. Carpenters and painters are joining us by
the thousand. On November 9th delegates of eight independent unions
in different industries, representing something like 250,000
workers, met in New York City and took the first steps for an
affiliation with the I. W. W.--in spite of jails and persecution.
And let us not forget that the Negro workers of the U. S. are
organizing on the basis of our program.
"But the influence of our principles is not limited to the
English-speaking people in America and Australia. Other races and
countries are enthusiastically taking up our program and proudly
announcing that they are with the I. W. W. Thus in Mexico our
movement has taken form and been laid out on a national basis. In
South America, where the labor movement always has been in
sympathy with us, the workers are going one step further and have
started organizing as an I. W. W. In Buenos Ayres there is already
an organization of 2,800 marine transport workers in such an
organization.
"Furthermore it is to be noted that practically all the old trade
unions on this continent prove to be honey-combed with friends of
the I. W. W.
"Over in Europe it is the same story. The rebuilding of production
and distribution in Russia is said to be largely based on our
principles. At last report there were about 3,500,000 industrial
workers organized in industrial unions for the carrying on of
production and distribution. The Russian people are taking
possession of the industries through their industrial unions.
"In Italy 'The Italian Syndicalist Union,' 300,000 strong, is
forging ahead along the same lines as the I. W. W. In Spain our
adherents are to be numbered by the hundreds of thousands. In
France the proposition has recently been made in the organ of the
Communist Party, 'L'Internationale Communiste,' to start
reorganizing the French working class on our program, in opposition
to the C. G. T. [Confédération Générale du Travail, or French
Confederation of Labor]. In England there is a separate
organization of the I. W. W. that is advancing rapidly, while the
influence on the old trade unions is very noticeable in their
changed attitude of late toward 'direct action.' ...
"But the biggest surprise of the year we received from Germany. At
least two separate calls have been issued by the German workers to
organize exactly as the I. W. W. The recently formed 'Freie
Arbeiter Union' is also a federation of industrial unions that
endorse our principles. And, finally, from distant, unknown Greece
we are receiving news that the One Big Union is the aim of all the
organized workers of that country."
Several very important facts have been proven in this and the preceding
chapter: first, that the Industrial Workers of the World is a
revolutionary organization in the strictest sense and has for its object
the overthrow of the United States Government; secondly, that, like the
Socialist Party, it is constantly seeking to stir up trouble whenever it
can do so; thirdly, that it respects neither morality nor the law and
appeals to the basest passions in man; and, finally, that all sections
of the Socialist Party are on the strictest terms of friendship with it
and are giving it full support.
CHAPTER X
BOLSHEVIST RULE IN RUSSIA
Shortly after the Lenine-Trotzky government came into power in Russia,
in the latter part of the year 1917, Bolshevism became very popular in
America among the radicals, especially the Socialists. Among those who
helped most to bring it into such high esteem was Albert Rhys Williams,
who had spent but one year of his life in Russia, hardly spoke the
Russian language, and while staying in that country was in the pay of
the Bolsheviki, as he testified before the Senate Committee.
The Bolsheviki came into power by violence and have sustained themselves
in power by violence and terrorism. Their main support, the so-called
Red Army, in which the Chinese and Letts have played a prominent part,
is an army of mercenaries who are well paid and well fed, while
thousands of civilians are dying from starvation in the cities and towns
of Russia.
The first success of the Bolsheviki was the dissolution by bayonets of
the Constituent Assembly, which for forty years had been the goal of all
Russians--even of the Bolsheviki up to the time when they found it
overwhelmingly against them. Then they invented a new double name for
their anti-democratic government: Soviets, or dictatorship of the
proletariat. Next they dissolved all the democratic Municipal Councils
and Zemstvos and proceeded to take away the various liberties won in the
revolution against the regime of the Czar.
The dictatorship of the proletariat led rapidly to an almost complete
stoppage of industry. Governmental expenditures increased by leaps and
bounds with the growing pauperization of the people; for the growing
staffs of Bolshevist officials were utterly incompetent, a large army of
mercenaries was required in order to keep down the ever-increasing
number of insurrections and the ceaseless attacks from many foreign
foes, enormous subsidies had to be paid to Bolshevist workingmen,
regardless of the fact that the factories were producing sometimes
little and sometimes nothing, and, finally, the Lenine government spent
great sums in revolutionary propaganda in the different countries of
the world. Political and economic slavery, moral corruption and the
starvation of millions of people, are a few of the "blessings" bestowed
upon Russia by Bolshevism.
Catherine Breshkovsky, the "Grandmother of the Russian Revolution,"
herself a Socialist, speaking of the Bolsheviki, said:
"In addition to the crimes in their foreign policy, which
culminated in the treacherous Brest-Litovsk 'peace' with German
militarists, the Bolsheviki have committed innumerable crimes in
their internal policy. They have destroyed all civil liberties in
Russia: freedom of speech, of the press, of assemblage and of
organization; they have filled prisons through the country with
their political adversaries, proclaiming 'enemies of the people'
not only the Liberals, the Constitutional-Democratic Party, but
also the party of the Socialists-Revolutionists and the
Social-Democrats Mensheviki, that is, the parties of the Russian
peasantry and proletariat. They have instituted a system of terror
unequaled in cruelty, and while hundreds of innocent hostages would
pay with their lives for the assassination or for the attempt to
assassinate a Bolshevist commissaire, they did not punish the Red
Guards who assassinated the two Ministers of the Provisional
Government, Kokoshkin and Shingariev, while the latter were under
Bolshevist arrest, lying sick in a hospital."
The January, 1919, issue of "The Eye Opener," the official organ of the
National Office, Socialist Party, publishes the full text of the Russian
Bolshevist Constitution under the caption, "Here's Constitution of
World's First Socialist Republic." Some quotations from the document
will no doubt prove interesting as well as instructive:
"For the purpose of realizing the socialization of land, all
private property in land is abolished, and the entire land is
declared to be national property and is to be apportioned among
husbandmen without any compensation to the former owners, in the
measure of each one's ability to till it.
"All forests, treasures of the earth, and waters of general public
utility, all implements whether animate or inanimate, model farms
and agricultural enterprises are declared to be national property.
"As a first step toward complete transfer of ownership to the
Soviet Republic of all factories, mills, mines, railways and other
means of production or transportation, the Soviet law, for the
control by workmen and the establishment of the Supreme Soviet of
National Economy is hereby confirmed, so as to assure the power of
the workers over their exploiters....
"Universal obligation to work is introduced for the purpose of
eliminating the parasitic strata of society and organizing the
economic life of the country.
"For the purpose of securing the working class in the possession of
the complete power, and in order to eliminate all possibility of
restoring the power of the exploiters, it is decreed that all
toilers be armed, and that a Socialist Red Army be organized and
the propertied class be disarmed....
"The Russian Republic is a free Socialist society of all the
working people of Russia. The entire power, within the boundaries
of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, belongs to all
the working people of Russia, united in urban and rural Soviets....
"The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic considers work the
duty of every citizen of the Republic, and proclaims as its motto:
'He shall not eat who does not work.'
"The following persons enjoy neither the right to vote nor the
right to be voted for, even though they belong to one of the
categories enumerated above, namely:
"Persons who employ hired labor in order to obtain from it an
increase in profits.
"Persons who have an income without doing any work, such as
interest from capital, receipts from property, etc.
"Private merchants, trade and commercial brokers.
"Monks and clergy of all denominations."
This Bolshevist Constitution shows that the Lenine government has
decreed the socialization of all the land, factories, mills, mines and
other means of production, as well as the railways and the various means
of transportation. This program has been carried out, though as yet
probably not completely. Conditions in Russia were deplorable under the
regime of the Czar, but the Socialist government has made them a
thousand times worse. Industry has been reduced to an almost negligible
minimum, property has been destroyed on every side and possession made a
crime. The country has been reduced to chaos, for no one cares to sow
where others will reap; and unemployment is widespread, for employers
are outlawed, and the government has not enough satisfactory positions
to offer. The right to hold property is one of the binding forces that
holds civilization together and supplies incentive to labor. Some of the
evil effects of the confiscation and socialization of property in Russia
are shown from the following articles, published by the
Socialists-Revolutionists, a faction of the Marxians opposed to the
Bolsheviki. Their paper, "Vlast Naroda," declares:
"The village has taken away the land from the landlords, farmers,
wealthy peasants and monasteries. It cannot, however, divide it
peacefully, as was to be expected.
"The more land there is, the greater the appetite for it; hence
more quarrels, misunderstandings and fights.
"In Oboyansk County, many villages refused to supply soldiers when
the Soviet authorities were mobilizing an army. In their refusal
they stated 'in the spring soldiers will be needed at home in the
villages,' not to cultivate the land, but to protect it with arms
against neighboring peasants.
"In the Provinces of Kaluga, Kursk and Voronezh peasant meetings
adopted the following resolution:
"'All grown members of the peasant community have to be home in the
spring. Whoever will then not return to the village or voluntarily
stay away will be forever expelled from the community.
"'These provisions are made for the purpose of having as great a
force as possible in the spring when it comes to dividing the
land.' ...
"Some villages in the Nieshnov district, in the Province of
Mohilev, have supplied themselves with machine guns. The village of
Little Nieshnov, for instance, has decided to order fifteen machine
guns and has organized a Red Army in order to be able better to
defend a piece of land taken away from the landlord and, as they
say, that 'the neighboring peasants should not come to cut our hay
right in front of our windows, like last year.' When the
neighboring peasants heard of the decision they also procured
machine guns. They have formed an army and intend to go to Little
Nieshnov to cut the hay on the meadows 'under the windows' of the
disputed owners....
"Stubborn fights for meadows and forests are always going on. They
often result in skirmishes and murder. There are similar happenings
in other counties of the Province, for instance, in Petrov,
Balashov and Arkhar.
"In the Province of Simbirsk there is war between the community
peasants and shopkeepers. The former have decided to do away with
'Stolypin heirs,' as they call the shopkeepers. The latter,
however, have organized and are ready for a stubborn resistance.
Combats have already taken place. The peasants demolish farms, and
farmers set fire to towns, villages, thrashing floors, etc."
Indeed, the results of confiscation and socialization were so bad from
the very beginning that no less a personage than Lenine himself, in "A
Letter to American Workingmen," published by the Socialist Publication
Society of Brooklyn, New York, on pages 12 and 13, says:
"Mistakes are being made by our peasants who, at one stroke, in the
night from October 25 to October 26 (Russian Calendar), 1917, did
away with all private ownership of land, and are now struggling,
from month to month, under the greatest difficulties, to correct
their own mistakes, trying to solve in practice the most difficult
problems of organizing a new social state, fighting, against
profiteers to secure the possession of the land, for the workers
instead of for the speculator, to carry on agricultural production
under a system of communist farming on a large scale.
"Mistakes are being made by our workmen in their revolutionary
activity, who, in a few short months, have placed practically all
the large factories and workers under state ownership, and are now
learning, from day to day, under the greatest difficulties, to
conduct the management of entire industries, to reorganize
industries already organized, to overcome the deadly resistance of
laziness and middle-class reaction and egotism."
The Socialists of the United States and other radical elements in our
country, after the World War, began to laud to the skies the Russian
Soviets as the most perfect form of government that the world had ever
seen. They were held to far surpass parliaments, congress and other
legislative bodies and to be the supreme accomplishments of a democratic
form of government. The deputies of the soviets, according to the
Bolshevist Constitution, were to be elected by the secret, direct and
equal vote of all the working masses. Theoretically the soviets were
very attractive, but in reality fall far short of the ideal. "Struggling
Russia," a well-known weekly magazine published in New York City by one
of the groups of Russian Socialists, has this to say about the Soviets
in its issue of April 5, 1919:
"In fact, there never was either a secret election in Soviet
Russia, or one based on equal suffrage. Elections are usually
conducted at a given factory or foundry at open meetings, by the
raising of hands and always under the knowing eye of the chairman.
The majority of the workers very frequently do not take part in
these elections at all. The rights of a minority are never
recognized, as proportional representation has been rejected.
"As regards direct elections, it is again a mere phrase. The
Central Executive Committee, which is supposed to embody the
supreme administrative organ of the country, was actually being
elected through a four-grade system. Local Soviets send their
representatives to the Provincial Congress, the Provincial Congress
is represented by delegates at the All-Russian Congress, and only
this last body elects the Central Executive Committee. Often the
delegates are not elected by the regular meetings of the Soviets at
all, but are sent by the Executive Committees, cleverly handpicked
by the Bolsheviki after the system of proportional representation
was rejected....
"The exclusion from the Soviets of all who think differently from
the Bolsheviki developed gradually. They 'cleansed' the Soviets in
Perm and Ekaterinburg, in January 1918; in Ufa, Saratov, Samara,
Kazan and Yaroslavl in December, 1917; in Moscow and Petrograd in
February, 1918. They were excluding all Socialists-Revolutionists
and the Mensheviki, to say nothing of the People's Socialists and
members of the Labor Group. Often, when workers demanded new
elections to the Soviet (as happened in Petrograd late in December
of 1917, and early in January, 1918), and such elections did take
place, the Bolsheviki would not permit the newly elected delegates
to enter the building of the Soviet and frequently arrested them.
Gradually only Bolsheviki and Socialists-Revolutionists of the Left
remained in the Soviets. Soon, however, after the assassination in
Moscow of Count Mirbach, the German Ambassador, and the attempt at
rebellion in Moscow early in June, 1918, by the
Socialists-Revolutionists of the Left, the Bolsheviki began to fill
up the prisons with the latter just as they did with the
Socialists-Revolutionists of the Right and the Menshiviki.
"So, practically, there remained only Bolsheviki in the Soviets.
And as there was no difference of opinion among them, regular
meetings were soon abandoned altogether and the ostensible 'rule of
the working masses' thus definitely disappeared. A few persons,
often appointed from above (the Bolsheviki often had recourse to
bayonets to support the fiction of Soviet rule: in Tumen the
Executive Committee of a non-existent Soviet was brought from
Ekaterinburg under a convoy of 800 Red Guards), would rule and lord
it over the people, tired and weary of the war and a sterile
revolution.
"Occasional outbursts of popular wrath serve as indications of the
depth of dissatisfaction which is engendered by the Soviets and
their offshoots, the Military-Revolutionary Committee. Thus, in the
Polevsky works, in Ekaterinburg County, a mob of peasants, armed
with axes, scythes and sticks, fell upon the Soviets and beast-like
tore into fragments fifty Bolsheviki. In the Neviansk works the
insurrection of the workers against the Red Army lasted for three
days, until reinforcements from Perm finally subdued this
'counter-revolutionary' revolt. In Okhansk County 2,000 peasants
were shot down for demanding the abolition of the Soviets and the
re-establishment of the rule of the people."
In the April 19, 1919, issue of "Struggling Russia" we are told that
"Vlast Naroda," in May, 1918, thus described the uprisings against the
Soviets:
"In Kleen, a crowd entered by force the building occupied by the
Soviets with the intention of bringing the deputies before their
own court of justice. The latter fled. The Financial Commisary
committed suicide by shooting himself, in order to escape the
infuriated crowd.
"In Oriekhovo-Zooyevo, the deputies work in their offices, guarded
by a most vigilant military force. Even on the streets they are
accompanied by guards armed with rifles and bayonets.
"In Penza, an attempt has been made on the lives of the Soviet
members. One of the presiding officers has been wounded. The Soviet
building is now surrounded with cannons and machine-guns.
"In Svicherka, where the Bolsheviki had ordered a Bartholomew
night, the deputies are hunted like wild animals....
"In Bielo, all members of the Soviets have been murdered.
"In Soligalich, two of the most prominent members of the Soviets
have literally been torn to pieces. Two others have been beaten
half-dead.
"In Atkarsk, several members of the Soviets have been killed."
"Struggling Russia," May 31, 1919, informs us that the Petrograd
Committee of the Socialists-Revolutionists of the Left, in the middle of
March, 1919, issued the following proclamation condemning the Petrograd
Soviet:
"Shame to the Bolshevist Violators, Liars and 'Agents
Provocateurs!'
"The Petrograd Soviet does not express the will of the Workmen,
Sailors and 'Reds.'
"The Soviet was not elected. The elections were either pretenses or
held under threats of shooting or starvation. This terrorism
completely suffocated freedom of speech, the press and meetings of
the laboring classes.
"The Petrograd Soviet consists of self-appointed Bolsheviki. It is
a blind tool in the hands of the 'agents-provacateurs,' hangmen and
assassins of the Bolshevist regime....
"Where is the dictatorship of the proletariat and working
peasantry? It has been supplanted by the dictatorship of the
Central Committee of the Bolshevist Party, governing with the
assistance of a swarm of extraordinary commissions and punitive
detachments of imported soldiers."
Though the Russian Socialists overthrew the government of the Czar in
the hope of securing liberty, liberty, under the Bolshevist regime, is
farther off than it was before. The British High Commissioner, R. H.
Bruce-Lockhart, in a telegram sent to the British Foreign Office,
November 10, 1918, among other things said:
"The Bolsheviki have established a rule of force and oppression
unequaled in the history of any autocracy.
"Themselves the fiercest upholders of the right of free speech,
they have suppressed, since coming into power, every newspaper
which does not approve their policy.
"The right of holding public meetings has been abolished. The vote
has been taken away from everybody except the workmen in factories
and the poorer servants, and even amongst the workmen those who
dared to vote against the Bolsheviki are marked down by the
Bolshevist police as counter-revolutionaries, and are fortunate if
their worst fate is to be thrown into prison, of which in Russia
today it may truly be said, 'many go in but few come out.'"
V. M. Zenzinov, a member of the Central Committee of the
Socialists-Revolutionists, in an article published in "Struggling
Russia," April 12, 1919, speaking of absence of liberty under
Bolshevism, says:
"It was during my stay in Petrograd in April, 1918, that a
conference of factory and industrial plant employees of Petrograd
and vicinity was held, to which 100,000 Petrograd workingmen (out
of a total of 132,000) sent delegates. The conference adopted a
resolution sharply denouncing the Bolshevist regime. Following this
conference an attempt was made, in May, to call together an
All-Russian Congress of workmen's deputies in Moscow, but all the
delegates were arrested by the Bolsheviki, and to this day I am
ignorant of the fate that befell my comrades."
Justice, as well as liberty, is a dead letter in the land of Lenine, and
conscription is rigidly enforced by the Russian Socialist Government. R.
H. Bruce-Lockhart, to whom reference has been made, in his telegram to
the British Foreign Office, November 10, 1918, stated:
"The Bolsheviki have abolished even the most primitive forms of
justice. Thousands of men and women have been shot without even the
mockery of a trial, and thousands more are left to rot in the
prisons under conditions to find a parallel to which one must turn
to the darkest annals of Indian or Chinese history....
"The Bolsheviki who destroyed the Russian army, and who have always
been the avowed opponents of militarism, have forcibly mobilized
officers who do not share their political views, but whose
technical knowledge is indispensable, and by the threat of
immediate execution have forced them to fight against their
fellow-countrymen in a civil war of unparalleled horror."
Concerning religious conditions in Russia, the Rev. Dr. George S.
Simons, shortly after his return from that country, testified before the
Senatorial Committee, which, in February, 1919, was investigating the
nature of Russian Bolshevism:
"The Bolshevik is not only an atheist, but he also seeks to make
all religions impossible. They assert that all misery is due to the
superstition that there is a God. One of their officials told me:
"'We now propose to enlighten our children, and with this purpose
in view, we are issuing a catechism on atheism for use in all the
schools.'
"The man who told me this was the Commissionaire of Enlightenment
and Education."
On February 7, 1919, an appeal was sent to Pope Benedict XV, by the
Orthodox Greek clergy of that part of Russia which had not fallen a prey
to the Bolsheviki. It was signed by Sylvester, Archbishop of Omsk,
President of the Supreme Administration of the Orthodox Church, and by
other members of the same administration. This letter implored the Holy
Father to deign to take into consideration the conditions existing in
Russia. It exposed a list of crimes and outrages, cities sacked,
churches profaned and pillaged, more than twenty bishops and more than
one hundred priests assassinated, the victims being of every kind. Some
of them before they were put to death had their arms and legs cut off,
while others were buried alive. Nuns were violated; the socialization of
women was proclaimed; rein was given to unbridled passions; everywhere
there was nothing but famine, death and misery. The following message is
also noteworthy:
"With deep grief, Venerable Father, we expose to you the unhappy
conditions in which millions of Russians of true Russia are
reduced. Relying on that unity which makes all mankind one, and on
the strength of Christian fraternity, we hope, Venerable Father,
that we may count on your compassion as representing the Christian
Church, and trust that your flock will be informed of what is going
on, and that in common with you they will offer fervent prayers to
Him, in whose hands are both life and death, for those who in the
northeast of Europe are being made, because of their love of
Christ, Martyrs of the faith in the twentieth century."
"Dyelo Naroda," an organ of the Socialists-Revolutionists of Russia, in
April, 1918, stated that the situation of the church and clergy was
horrible. "Everything pertaining to them is being spit upon and
profaned. People, with rifles on their shoulders and their hats on,
often enter the church and right there question the clergymen and arrest
priests, at the same time mocking the religious feelings of the praying
crowd. Many churches have been closed as a result of the edict
concerning the separation of Church and State."
"The New York Times," April 11, 1919, published the following special
cable despatch concerning the religious persecution:
"London, April 10.--The Chronicle publishes an article by R.
Courtier Foster, a British Chaplain at Odessa and Russian ports of
the Black Sea, describing the religious persecution practised by
the Bolsheviki following upon their former capture of Odessa. He
says:
"'Committees were held on board the ships of the Black Sea Fleet,
among the dockers in the port, in the towns and villages on every
hand, which passed resolutions reading:
"'"We abolish God." In Odessa Cathedral, when the Archbishop of
Kherson was celebrating the Holy Mysteries, an uproar occurred with
cries of "Down with the priests!" "Down with the Church!" At a fête
in the town gardens one saw a soldier of the Red Army, amid the
guffaws of his fellows, spit on the Russian holy picture of the
face of Christ, then tear it into fragments and stamp it into the
dust.
"'The Bolshevist conception of religious toleration is considerably
more elastic and far-reaching than the ideas of any mediæval
inquisition. In this matter the Bolsheviki pride themselves on
being far in advance of our effete western thought. They have
murdered Vladimir, the Metropolitan of Kiev, twenty bishops, and
many hundreds of priests. Before killing them they cut off the
limbs of their victims, some of whom they buried alive in the
Kremlin. The Cathedrals in Moscow and those in the towns of
Yaroslav and Simferopol have been sacked. Many nuns were violated
and churches defiled.
"'The ancient and historical sacristies and famous libraries of
Moscow and Petrograd were pillaged and countless sanctuaries
profaned. In Cronstadt Cathedral the great figure of the Crucified
Christ was torn down and removed, and a monstrous and appalling
pagan form placed in its stead, symbolizing "Freedom of Mind."
"'It is not against any one particular form of religion that the
terrors of the new Freedom are hurled. Orthodox, Roman Catholics
and Lutherans alike have been tortured, mutilated, and done to
death under the aegis of the Holy Revolution which appeals to the
proletariat of the whole world to join its forces.
"'The Revolutionary Government is subjecting the Christian religion
to persecutions as great and brutal as anything the world saw
during the first three centuries of the Christian era. Moral
disintegration and ruin spread their tentacles on every side. Any
restraint on sinful impulse or covetous desire is laughed to scorn.
The Bolsheviki publicly encourage outrage and looting. The
propaganda for freedom of mind is essentially nihilistic. It is
based on negation and denial of the existence of God, denial of the
authority of any moral law, denial of all rights of conscience,
denial of all religious liberty, denial of all freedom of the
press, denial of any liberty of speech.
"'One officer remarked despairingly to me: "In Russia now there is
no God, no Czar, no law, no property, no money, no food--only
freedom." And in that travesty of liberty, which the whole
civilized world may well shudder at, all mercy, pity and toleration
are alike scorned. And it is this new and wonderful equality of man
which by means of torture, outrage and assassinations proclaims the
"freedom of mind and body" to the devastated Russian nation.'"
In an Associated Press despatch, from London, that appeared in "The New
York Times" on April 19, 1919, we are informed that of the 300 priests
in the Perm diocese, 46 have been killed; moreover, that two monasteries
were pillaged.
A very interesting and enlightening article on religion in Russia and
the attitude of the Bolsheviki towards it appears in "The Proletarian,"
Detroit, April, 1919. The author is Ernest Greenburg and we shall quote
the greater part of his article:
"The resolution adopted by the Socialist Party of Michigan at its
recent State Convention that, 'It shall be the duty of all
agitators and organizers upon all occasions to avail themselves of
the opportunity of explaining religion,' caused a storm of
indignation to arise among certain 'Socialists.' Clinging to the
old fallacy that religion should be left alone, they point to the
Russian Constitution and the works of the Bolshevik leaders who say
'Religion is a private matter.' But they fail to understand that
the interpretation of the term 'Religion is a private matter,' has
a different meaning here than it has in Russia.
"The slogan, 'Religion is a private matter,' is not of Russian
origin. It has been and is one of the battle cries of the
Revolutionary working class in all countries in which the Church
and the State are combined. Different conditions account for
different understandings of the terms 'Private Matter' here and in
Russia.
"Probably in no other country have religion and the church played
such an important role in the affairs of the state as in Russia up
to the very present time. Truly, it was not so much the force of
arms as that of ignorance which kept up the Czardom for hundreds of
years. The Feudal aristocracy realized the advantages to be derived
from keeping the minds of its slaves in darkness and superstition.
One of the most powerful weapons in the hands of aristocracy was
the Church, whose noble duty it was to sow and to propagate
ignorance. The Church was officially a part of the state. People
were forced to go to church; school children[10] were taught the
'Holy Law of God,' attacks against the church were punished as
attacks against the Czar.
"Religious ignorance of the masses was the greatest enemy of the
Socialists in their propaganda work; at every step they had to meet
and to combat the authority of God, in whose name the church
servants consecrated the yoke of the Czar and the landlords. It was
necessary to pull this poisonous tooth out of the jaws of the
state. Hence came the demand: 'Religion is a private
matter,'--private as opposed to state. It meant that the Church
should be separated from the state and be deprived from its
protection. It was a demand which, put to the Czarist government,
if granted would only facilitate the struggle against this very
religion.
"Similar demands have been put in the Socialist platforms of
Germany, Austria, and other countries which were confronted with
conditions like those in Russia. One of the immediate demands of
the French revolutionists of the nineteenth century was of this
nature.
"The November Revolution put the Russian workers in possession of
the machinery of the church. As a weapon of ignorance, it could not
be used against the exploiters; nor could it be destroyed by force.
Then the Russian workers declared religion a private matter,
thereby depriving it of State protection and forcing it under the
blows of scientific criticism, which will rapidly do away with the
reminders of the decrepit superstitions.
"In America religion always was 'a private matter.' It had never
been officially related to the state, but just the same it is now
being employed by the ruling class against the workers. If it is
not yet as influential here as it was in Russia during the reign of
the Czars--it is becoming so. Its destructive work cannot be
neglected any longer. It must be fought....
"German Socialists understand that by destroying the holy alliance
between the Church and the State their task would not be completed.
After that 'We must wage unrelenting war against the Church,' says
Bebel, 'because she foments civil war among the workers--because it
is the only reactionary force which has any strength and which
keeps us in voluntary slavery.'
"By separating the Church from the State and thereby enforcing
their demand, 'Religion is a private matter,' the French Socialists
were not yet satisfied. They went on fighting religion, and their
Belgian comrades worked in accord with them. Says E. Vandervelde,
'We are bound to admit that both in philosophy and in politics
there must be war between Socialism and the Church.'
"This attitude of the French and Belgian Socialists was approved by
the international Congress at Amsterdam, 1904.
"The position of the Russian Socialists is very clear. They fully
understand that 'Religion is a private matter' signifies only the
first stage in the war against mental slavery. 'Religion is a
private matter,' says N. Boucharin (The Church and the School),
'but it does not mean that we must not fight it by persuasion.'
Further on he emphasizes that it is a 'private matter' only as
much as forceful protection or forceful destruction is concerned.
Beyond the gates of the State's protection, religion is not
considered to be a private matter in Russia. It is fought there in
schools and educational institutions by 'Propaganda, explanation
and education.'
"In this question American Socialists must not be misled by the
seeming contradiction in terms."
In the April 19, 1919, number of "Struggling Russia," Dioneo gives some
interesting information relative to the destruction of education under
the Bolshevist regime:
"The lower and secondary schools are ruined. The villages have
their Soviets, their premises for meetings, but no lower schools.
As regards secondary schools, the Bolshevist reformers are of the
opinion that, in general, such institutions are not wanted and are
just as unnecessary as the intermediate stage between nascent
capitalism and the extreme form of communism.
"The Bolsheviki have only acknowledged the universities. At first,
the reformers made such experiments on the latter as, for instance,
the appointment of a porter to the post of inspector of the
Technological institute, or of a cook as head-mistress of the
Higher Courses for Girls. Then the Bolsheviki decided that no
certificates were necessary for matriculation at the university.
Any half-educated person might become a student of any faculty. The
professors were at a loss to know how to lecture on higher
mathematics to students ignorant of the multiplication table, or
how to explain spectral analysis to persons hardly able to read.
Then the Bolsheviki decided that there was no necessity for the
professor to have a diploma either. It was only necessary that he
should be a supporter of the Bolshevist platform. That is all! And
celebrated Professors were obliged to leave the universities which
they had made famous....
"National education--elementary, secondary, and higher--has been
completely ruined by the Bolsheviki. Lately, they have apparently
decided that Bolshevism ought to give the world a new type of
university, quite different from that of the bourgeoisie. And with
that in mind, the Municipal Council of Voronezh has thought of a
'Street University.' This is how the 'Izvestia' describes this
curious institution of higher education: 'Each of the principal
thoroughfares of Voronezh is now a faculty--of law, economics,
history, literature, science, etc. The walls of the houses are
placarded with posters, containing portraits and brief biographies
of men distinguished in one or another branch of knowledge and
brief items of information concerning the respective subject.'
Thus comments the organ of the Bolshevist Government: 'Every
citizen, instead of spending years at a university, can pick up a
general knowledge of the principal educational subjects as he goes
along.' ...
"Russia's school system is ruined. Education reforms exist only on
paper. And at the same time the Bolsheviki, wishing to show that
they value knowledge very highly, have announced that a
geographical university such as the world has 'never yet seen' is
going to be opened in Petrograd. It is interesting to know what
professors will lecture in this new university, and who will form
their audience?"
CHAPTER XI
RUSSIA RED WITH BLOOD AND BLACK WITH CRIME
Socialists have for many years boasted of the perfect peace and harmony
which would prevail when once they had established their state.
Bloodshed, civil discord and strife of every kind would cease when the
Marxian workers ruled the land, for, as they said, privately owned
property, and exploitation of workers are the source of wars and the
fundamental cause of the oppression of the people. Bolshevist Russia,
however, the first Socialist country, appears to be an exception.
Perhaps no nation has ever witnessed such scenes of violence, bloodshed,
murder and cruelty, perpetrated by a government, not against a foreign
foe, but against its own people, and this not after an existence of a
hundred or several hundred years, but constantly from its very birth. So
far only a few pages, comparatively speaking, of the history of the
terrible outrages are opened to us, but from these we can form some
slight idea of the dreadful condition of the land that is truly red, but
red principally from the rivers of blood that flow in abundance over
every section of the country.
The "Izvestia," an official Bolshevist publication, on October 19, 1918,
published the following news item under the heading, "The Conference of
the Extraordinary Commission:"
"Comrade Baky threw light on the work of the District Commission of
Petrograd after the departure of the All-Russian Extraordinary
Commission for Moscow. The total number of people arrested by the
Extraordinary Commission amounted to 6,220. Eight hundred people were
shot."
The "Northern Commune," another official Bolshevist publication, in its
issue of September 10, 1918, stated:
"In the whole of the Jaroslavl Government a strict registration of
the bourgeoisie and its partisans has been organized. Manifestly
anti-Soviet elements are being shot; suspected persons are being
interned in concentration camps; non-working sections of the
population are being subjected to compulsory labor."
The same edition of the "Northern Commune" publishes the following
despatch:
"Tver, Sept. 9.--The Extraordinary Commission has arrested and sent
to concentration camps over 130 hostages from among the
bourgeoisie. The prisoners include members of the Cadet Party,
Socialists-Revolutionists of the Right, former officers, well known
members of the propertied class and policemen."
From the September 18, 1918, edition of the "Northern Commune" we learn
that in Perm, in retaliation for the assassination of Uritzky and for
the attempt on Lenine, fifty hostages from among the bourgeois classes
and the White Guards were shot.
"Struggling Russia," March 22, 1919, supplies us with other details of
Bolshevist rifle rule:
"We know a great deal about the terror in Petrograd, and
considerably less about Moscow. The reason is plain. We find the
curtain dropped on the activities of the All-Russian Extraordinary
Commission which had its seat in Moscow. In a report of the meeting
of the Executive Committee of the Moscow Soviet, which took place
on October 16, we read:
"'The report of the work of the All-Russian Extraordinary
Commission was read at a secret session of the Executive Committee.
But the report and the discussion of it were held behind closed
doors and will not be published.' ['Izvestia,' October 17, 1918.]
"The kind of decisions adopted by the Moscow Bolsheviki behind
closed doors and the mass terror practised in Moscow and all over
Russia under the direction of the All-Russian Extraordinary
Commission are well illustrated by Eugene Trupp, a prominent
Socialist-Revolutionist and a member of the All-Russian Constituent
Assembly, who wrote the following in the Socialist-Revolutionary
daily, 'Zemlia i Volia' (Land and Freedom) of October 3, 1918:
"'After the murder of Uritzky in Petrograd, 1,500 people were
arrested; 512, including 10 Socialists-Revolutionists, were shot.
At the same time 800 people were arrested in Moscow. It is unknown,
however, how many of these were shot. In Nizhni-Novgorod, 41 were
shot; in Yaroslavl, 13; in Astrakhan, 12 Socialists-Revolutionists;
in Sarapool, a member of the Central Committee of the Party of
Socialists-Revolutionists, I. I. Teterkin; in Penza, about 40
officers; in Kooznetzk people are daily shot in masses; all this is
only a drop in the ocean. I have no exact information as to the
number of people shot in other cities.' ...
"'Despite all these and other outrages, a demonstration of Red
Guards took place in Moscow on September 6. Their main demands were
"deeds for words" and "relentless red terror in the fight against
the bourgeoisie." ...
"'The last days of my stay Moscow and Soviet-Russia in general were
filled with red terror. A gray, silent and dejected crowd, with
pale, terrified faces and eyes full of excitement, was moving along
the streets. "Such or such people have been arrested today." "This
or that number has been shot." "Do not sleep at home, they are
looking for you." "You are still alive?" "Why do you not go away
from here?" were expressions hastily exchanged.
"'No conversations were heard; only silent whispering in corners.
All were trembling. All were filled with horror of the wild terror.
Spies were all over. At the proper places you could see their
familiar figures.
"'These spies sneak about the stations, mingling with the crowds of
Red Guards, in the trains, and in all dirty, warm corners always
pushing forward. While traveling you feel that if your face or
perhaps your attire, or your opinion, carelessly uttered, will not
please them, you may be held up at any moment. You feel that every
passenger is hiding something in himself. Keep silent; we will
talk later when we have passed the spying cordons.'"
In the September 18, 1918, evening issue of the "Northern Commune,"
there is a report of a meeting of the Soviet of the First District of
Petrograd. After a report made by Kharitonoff, who emphasized the
necessity of suppressing the bourgeois press, and after speeches by
other members, the following resolution was passed:
"The meeting welcomes the fact that mass terror is being used
against the White Guards and higher bourgeois classes, and declares
that every attempt on the life of our leaders will be answered by
the proletariat by the shooting down not only of hundreds, as the
case is now, but of thousands of White Guards, bankers,
manufacturers, Cadets (Constitutional Democrats) and
Socialists-Revolutionists of the Right."
We are indebted to "Struggling Russia," March 29, 1919, for the
following information as regards the Red rule of Lenine and the shooting
of children:
"The following quotation from a speech of one of the most active
Bolshevist leaders, Zinoviev, printed in the 'Northern Commune' of
September 19, 1918, fully expresses the spirit of the Bolshevist
terrorism:
"'To overcome our enemies we must have our own Socialist
Militarism. We must win over to our side 90 millions out of the 100
millions of population of Russia under the Soviets. As for the
rest, we have nothing to say to them; they must be annihilated.'
"The program of annihilating ten million of the opponents of
Bolshevism in Russia (Mr. Zinoviev has considerably underestimated
their number) began to be executed by the Bolsheviki from the first
moment of their coming into power. In the beginning of March, 1918,
they held mass executions in Rostov-on-the-Don, killing, among
others, many youths. The Moscow 'Russkiya Viedomosti' (Russian
News) in its issue of March 23, 1918, reported that the president
of the Rostov Municipal Council and the Chairman of the Don
Committee of the Russian Social-Democratic Party, B. C. Vasiliev,
the mayor of the city, P. Petrenko, the former Chairman of the
Rostov-Nakhichevan Council of Workingmen's and Soldiers' Delegates,
P. Melnikov, and even M. Smirnov, at that time Chairman of the
Council, have handed in a petition to the Bolshevist
War-Revolutionary Council asking them to shoot them 'instead of the
innocent children who are executed without law and justice.' A
group of women, horrified by what was going on, also asked that
they be shot instead of the children. In their petition they wrote
as follows:
"'If, according to you, there is need of sacrifices in blood and
life in order to establish a Socialistic state and to create new
ways of life, take our lives, kill us, grown mothers and fathers,
but let our children live. They have not yet had a chance to live;
they are only growing and developing. Do not destroy young lives.
Take our lives and our blood as ransom....
"'We, mothers, have served the country by giving our sons, husbands
and brothers. Pray, take our last possession, our lives, but spare
our children. Call us, one after the other, for execution, when our
children are to be shot! Every one of us would gladly die in order
to save the life of her children or that of other children.
"'Citizens, members of the War Revolutionary Council, listen to the
cries of the mothers. We cannot be kept silent!'"
Charles Dumas, a French Socialist, on his return to France from Russia,
wrote a book in which he warns his fellow-comrades on the dangers of
Bolshevism, and among other things he says:
"Upon my arrival in Petrograd I wanted, first of all, to meet three
of my old Russian friends, but soon learned that my searches were
in vain. Two of the poor fellows had lost their minds and the third
had cut his own throat with a razor....
"The Sebastopol horrors of March, 1918, when the sailors of the
port, inflamed to a high pitch of bestiality by the Bolshevist
press decided to kill all the inhabitants of the principal streets,
not sparing even children above the age of five, are still so fresh
in your minds that I need not remind you of them....
"On March 18, 1918, the peasants of an adjoining village organized,
in collusion with the Bolsheviki, a veritable St. Bartholomew night
in the city of Kuklovo. About 500 bodies of the victims were found
afterwards, most of them 'intellectuals.' All residences and stores
were plundered and destroyed, the Jews being among the worst
sufferers. Entire families were wiped out, and for three days the
Bolsheviki would not permit the burial of the dead.
"In May, 1918, the city of Korocha was the scene of a horrible
massacre. Thirty officers, four priests, and 300 citizens were
killed. The Peoples' Commissaries and the Soviets have, upon more
than one occasion, made admissions that these horrors were part of
their program. At the Congress of the Soviets the chairman of the
Central Committee of the Soviets, Sverdlov, said: 'We invoke the
Soviets not to relent, but to fortify the Terror, no matter how
terrible it may be and what dimensions it may assume.'"
An Associated Press despatch, dated Omsk, April 5, 1919, stated that the
Bolsheviki had murdered 2,000 at or near Osa:
"Indisputable evidence of the massacre by the Bolsheviki of more
than 2,000 civilians in and near the town of Osa has been obtained
by Messrs. Simmonds and Emerson and Dr. Rudolph Teusler of the
American Red Cross, who have just returned from reoccupied Russian
territory. Approximately 500 persons were killed at Osa and 1,500
in the surrounding districts."
The same despatch shows the excessive cruelty of Lenine's gang of
blood-thirsty Reds:
"A blacksmith was shot because he could not pay 5,000 rubles. A man
was shot because he lived in a brick house. All attorneys and
jurists and doctors whose services were not required were killed. A
woman was compelled to fetch a lamp and gaze upon her murdered sons
for the amusement of the slayers.
"The Soviet called a meeting and prepared lists of those to die.
The houses prescribed were visited by squads, the doors were
smashed in, the victims dragged to the edge of the town and forced
to dig their own graves. A survivor testified that he had seen men
thrown into a pit and buried alive. Priests were hunted
unmercifully. The evidence showed that men were slain whose only
offense was that they worked as sextons or caretakers of churches.
In the Perm district everything of value was stolen from the
churches, the monastery was looted and several priests were
murdered."
According to two more Associated Press despatches, even women and
children were not excepted by the Bolsheviki who have been so much
extolled by our American Socialists and recognized as their brethren:
"Stockholm, April 17, 1919.--The Bolsheviki are carrying out a
rapid and systematic annihilation of all the bourgeois elements in
Riga, according to reports from Libau to 'Svenska Dagblast.' The
victims of the Bolsheviki terror are taken to the Island of Hasen,
in the Dvina river, and are said to number 70,000, including women
and children. No one is permitted to take food or money to the
island."
"London, April 17, 1919.--Eighteen hundred persons, including 400
women, were murdered by the Bolsheviki at Ufa, according to a
dispatch from Omsk, received in official quarters here."
The "Northern Commune" published the following report in which the
horrors of the Bolsheviki prisons were described by the Bolsheviki
themselves:
"The presiding officers of the Soviet of the Viborg district
decided to send a delegation to the prisons of that district when
they heard that terrible scenes were occurring there. The prisoners
were starving. Many of them who had been held eight months had not
yet been tried, for the Commission entrusted with the investigation
of their cases had not yet been in session.
"The delegation consisted of Dr. Petropavlovsky, the Military
Commissionary, Vasilyevsky, and the President of the Soviet,
Frilisser. The latter handed in the following report: 'Comrades,
what we saw and heard in visiting the prisons of the Viborg
district cannot be described....
"'The cells are repulsively dirty. There is neither clean linen nor
pillows. The prisoners are being punished for the least offence.
"'But what is most terrible is the scene we witnessed in the prison
hospital.
"'Comrades! We found there no people! We found there living ghosts
who had no strength to talk, for they were starving.
"'When somebody dies, the corpse remains for several hours with its
living neighbors, who say: "That is nothing. We shall all soon die
of hunger."'"
"Dyelo Naroda," in its issue of April 26, 1918, thus describes the
cruelties of the barbarous Bolshevists:
"In Kirensk County the people's tribunal ordered a woman found
guilty of extracting brandy, to be enclosed in a bag and repeatedly
knocked against the ground until dead.
"In the Province of Tver the people's tribunal had sentenced a
young fellow to freeze to death for theft. In a rigid frost he was
led out, clad only in a shirt, and water was poured on him until he
turned into a piece of ice. Out of pity somebody cut his tortures
short by shooting him."
The British High Commissioner, R. H. Bruce-Lockhart, in his telegram to
the British Foreign Office, November 10, 1918, thus describes one of the
methods of torture and the taking of hostages as practiced by the
followers of the "gentle" Lenine:
"The Bolsheviki have restored the barbarous methods of torture. The
examination of prisoners frequently takes place with a revolver at
the unfortunate prisoner's head.
"The Bolsheviki have established the odious practice of taking
hostages. Still worse, they have struck at their political
opponents through their woman folk. When recently a long list of
hostages was published in Petrograd, the Bolsheviki seized the
wives of those men whom they could not find and threw them into
prison until their husbands should give themselves up."
When the Bolsheviki were forced to evacuate Riga, in May, 1919, they
left behind them in the [**] prisons 1,600 hostages who were found to be
in a state of unspeakable misery and starvation.
An Associated Press despatch of March 22, 1919, states that "a Russian
girl of 19 years, who, in December, 1918, had been charged with
espionage, was tortured by being pierced thirteen times in the same
wound with a bayonet. She lived, however, and made an affidavit to these
details."
The same dispatch states that "an examination of dead bodies of persons
alleged to have been killed by the Bolsheviki in the Perm district,
shows a preponderance of bayonet wounds in the back, but in other
instances mouths were slit, fingers and hands cut off, and the heads of
the victims smashed."
"Struggling Russia," in its issue of April 5, 1919, informs us that
"officers have come out of Petrograd prisons with their nails torn off,
and that prisoners after having been fed on herrings were given nothing
to drink for two or three days."
A dispatch from Warsaw, dated April 10, 1919, stated that fugitives from
Russia were pouring into that city, each of them bringing fresh tales of
Bolsheviki horrors. The people in Russia, it was said, were being shot
on the least provocation. For instance, men who remained in bed during
the cold weather to keep warm because they had no fuel were accused of
"discontent" and dragged into the streets and shot. Dead bodies, it was
claimed, were left lying in the streets in heaps.
In order to maintain their popularity with the workingmen and with their
hired mercenaries, the Bolsheviki paid their supporters enormous wages
by means of an unchecked paper issue. In fact they have turned out so
many tons of paper money, without financial guarantees of any sort, that
today in Russia money has lost practically all its value.
"Struggling Russia," March 22, 1919, publishes an appeal issued in
Petrograd and signed by the following organizations: Committee for the
Defence of Freedom of the Press; Central Committee of the Russian Social
Democratic Labor Party; Central Committee of the Party of
Socialists-Revolutionists; Central Committee of the Councils of Peasant
Deputies and the Union of Workmen-Printers. Among other things the
appeal says:
"Civil war has inflamed the whole country. Cities are being
destroyed. The war of brother against brother is consuming the
strength of our revolutionary democracy. The cannons, secured to
guard the conquests of our revolution, shatter monuments, homes,
and shrines of art. The cities of Russia fall at the hands of her
own citizens....
"The nation is being driven towards ruin. The people are deprived
of all liberties won by the revolution."
The April 26, 1919, issue of "Struggling Russia," under the caption,
"City of the Dead," describes the deplorable condition of Petrograd as
follows:
"Vladimir Bourtzev published in his paper, 'Obscherye Dyelo,' (The
Common Cause), appearing in Paris, an interview with a well known
pedagogist and journalist, C. L. Avaliani, who recently arrived
from Petrograd. Mr. Avaliani lived in Petrograd during the bright,
early days of the revolution and has also witnessed the tragic
period of the Bolshevist rule:
"'That Petrograd that used to draw to itself the leading social and
scientific forces is no more. That living spring that sent upward a
spray of rainbow hues and colors has gradually died out and is now
finally extinct.
"'There is no scientific activity, no research work, no literary or
artistic life. All is leveled down and compressed under one
Bolshevist lid. The only burning question is the problem of food.
The only blessed object of Bolshevist providence is the remaining
bourgeois element, the only axis around which all their creative
experiments revolve. On the one hand, those who toil,--and on the
other the "parasites," and to the latter class all the members of
the liberal professions, all the literateurs, the lawyers and the
clergy were assigned. The sympathizers and upholders of the "rule
of the Soviets" get a food ticket; all the others are sentenced to
starvation.
"'It is a rule that rests solely on bayonets! There is no popular
confidence, no social support. It is all regarded as superfluous
and a "burgeois" prejudice. The sole means of enlightenment and
conviction are the bayonet and machine gun....
"'A real Kingdom of the Dead! Petrograd is empty. Many have been
summarily shot, but still more have died from exhaustion and
disease, and some have fled. From a population of three million
only 976,000 remain.'"
"Struggling Russia," on April 5, 1919, published a detailed list of 76
places or districts in which there were uprisings against the Bolsheviki
in the year 1918. In the year 1919 the revolutionary outbreaks seem to
have become far more numerous.
Evidence as to the criminal nature of Russian Bolshevism was supplied by
the Rev. Dr. George S. Simons, who, in February, 1919, testified before
the Senatorial Committee as to his personal knowledge of the matter:
"There is a large criminal element in the Bolshevist regime. The
fact that the criminal has a big part in the movement is proven by
the destruction in a public bonfire of court records, the
destruction of prisons and the liberation of all criminals who are
sympathetic with the cause. We know it to be a fact that some of
the worst criminal characters in all Russia hold positions under
the Bolshevist Government, while others are helping as agitators."
A press dispatch dated Warsaw, April 10, 1919, states that it has been
decided by the Bolsheviki regime that control of desire of impulse, even
when self-imposed, is against the freedom of man, that as a consequence
unbelievable orgies and indecencies take place, and that all restraint
is at an end. The despatch states, futhermore[11], that the aristocrats
remaining in Russia have lost all will and energy. They accept
degradation or death with complete fatalism and do not even try to save
their wives and daughters.
The deplorable condition of that part of Russia under Bolshevist rule
was described in the Declaration adopted by the Socialist groups in Omsk
on February 23, 1919. The Declaration says in part:
"The main prop of an agricultural country such as Russia
principally is, the peasant population, is pauperized, starving and
is being driven under the banners of the Red Armies by lash and
rifle. The numerically small class of intellectuals is being shot
down and exterminated. The cities have been handed over to the
pillage and rule of Red Army troops. The prisons are overcrowded.
The enemies of the people have carried out their destructive
program to the very end, and given the people, in place of bread,
peace and freedom--a new inter-Russian war, the complete exhaustion
of all the productive forces of the land, economic, industrial and
railroad desolation, unemployment, a terrorizing reign of disorder
and a lapse into barbarity."
The Council of the All-Siberian Co-operative Assemblies, in a
Declaration brought to this country by C. A. Kovalsky, a prominent
Russian writer and a member of the Party of Socialists-Revolutionists,
says:
"The All-Siberian Co-operative Movement--as the expression of the
unity of the creative democratic elements--strives for the
rehabilitation of the destroyed statehood of Russia....
"The immediate aims of our political activities must be--the
support of the existing Omsk Government, which has proclaimed
itself a democratic rule; the steering of its political course into
democratic channels; the struggle with anti-democratic influences
from the Right as well as with the destructive forces from the
left; the strengthening of the ties between the rear and the
fighting front, and the support of the army as the cultural force
which is reconquering the violated rights of the people to the
formation of a democratic state."
The Russian Co-operative Unions, having a membership of over 20,000,000,
and representing the strongest economic organization in Russia, reaching
every little town and village, announced through its representatives in
New York, on May 20, 1919, its opposition to the Lenine regime and its
support of the Provisional Russian Government at Omsk, Siberia, headed
by Admiral Kolchak:
"When Russia fell under the Bolshevist Soviet rule, the
representatives of the Co-operative Organizations, at the
All-Russian Co-operative Congress in Moscow, April 18 to 24, 1918,
rejected the principles and the methods of the Bolsheviki and
declared the Brest-Litovsk Treaty, concluded by the Soviet
authorities with the Austro-German, dishonorable and ruinous for
Russia. In these terrible and trying times of bloody rule that our
suffering and worn-out country is passing through, the Co-operative
Organizations of Siberia and North Russia serve as a unifying link
for all the honest, healthy and State-preserving elements of the
Russian democracy.
"The All-Siberian United Co-operatives are fully cognizant of the
abnormal conditions in which the territories liberated from the
Bolsheviki--the Ural, Siberia and the North Russian Provinces--find
themselves, where in pain and anguish a new Russian Statehood is
arising. Nevertheless, considering the unusual difficulties
connected with the work of rebuilding and re-establishing legality
and order in a land overburdened financially and economically,
ravaged by civil war and hunger, and with a popular psychology
corrupted by Bolshevism, the United Co-operatives recognize and
support, until the formation of a new, ultimate government through
the Constituent Assembly, the Provisional Russian Government formed
on Siberian territory and headed by Admiral Kolchak....
"We have, on our side, State wisdom, equity and justice. Our
adversaries oppose us with terror, violence and complete social and
economic ruin."
In the early part of the year 1919, the report reached America that the
Bolshevist authorities were nationalizing women. The Socialists of our
own country, who are far from being noted for their reliability and
truthfulness, have, of course, denied the charge, in order that the
Lenine regime, which they support and wish to see extended to our own
land, might not have its already terribly sullied name dishonored still
more. The Bolshevists are far from being saints, and a "few" of their
"shortcomings" have been pointed out in this chapter.
Certainly the Lenine Government is absolutely lax in matters
appertaining to sex relations. It has fully legalized free love, as we
learn from the No. 2 issue of the radical Los Angeles magazine, "More
Truth About Russia." This magazine, of course, defends the Bolshevists,
and on page 6 of the above-mentioned issue quotes several of the decrees
of the Lenine Government on the matter of marriage and divorce. Among
the decrees we read:
"Marriage is annulled by the petition of both parties or even one of
them." All that is necessary to annul a marriage is the expressed desire
of either party. The party is, of course, then free to marry again and
remain married till another partner is desired. Hence free love is
legalized. A government that legalizes free love may be expected to
nationalize those women who do not wish to marry or who are unable to
secure partners by the time they have reached a certain age.
"The Call," New York, April 2, 1919, on its editorial page reprinted an
apology of the English publication, "New Europe," which in a previous
issue had given as the authority for its charge of the nationalization
of women in Russia an article in the Soviet paper "Izvestija:"
"I have made particular inquiries among friends recently arrived from
Russia," says Dr. Harold Williams, "New Europe's" collaborator, "as to
the alleged nationalization of women, and they have all assured me
positively that they have never heard or read of such a decree."
Those "friends," whoever they were, were possibly Bolsheviki themselves,
and are not said to have denied that the women were nationalized, but
merely that they had never heard or read of the "decree." Lots of things
are enforced by authorities without decrees. The Bolshevist authorities
may have had no decrees for the murder of the many thousands of innocent
citizens whom they tortured and put to death.
Dr. Harold Williams states, moreover, that it is certain that "the
Central Bolshevist Government has issued no order of the kind" (i.e., of
nationalization), but he does not deny that in different places the
local Bolshevist authorities may have nationalized women.
Further on it is admitted that not the official national Soviet organ,
but the local Vladimir Soviet organ, "Izvestija," was the Bolshevist
paper which stated that the Bolshevists of Vladimir had nationalized
women.
The article in "New Europe," republished in "The Call," concludes with
these words:
"As this puts an entirely different complexion on the matter, and
as the Central Moscow Government cannot be held responsible for the
lucubrations of every local committee, we desire to withdraw
unreservedly the imputation and to express our regret for the
mistake."
This article in the March 13, 1919, issue of "New Europe," which thus
apologizes for the "mistake" that it claims it made in a previous issue,
has been quoted far and wide by American Socialists and other radicals
of our country. Yet witnesses who were questioned at the Senatorial
investigation at Washington, in February, 1919, attested to the
nationalization by the Bolshevists.
On February 7, 1919, the Orthodox Greek Archbishop of Omsk and other
clergy of the Russian Church sent a letter to Pope Benedict XV,
mentioning, with other crimes and abuses of the Bolshevists, the
socialization of women.
A press despatch dated Warsaw, April 10, 1919, stated the following
concerning the condition of women in Russia:
"The nationalization of women is becoming quite general. The
Bolsheviki have declared war on family life and consideration for
one another's mother or sister is forbidden. All must be treated
alike. The most terrible thing is that the women themselves have
accepted this nationalization and very little protest is made. This
applies to every class. In certain cases, however, a hitch has
occurred. Even Bolshevism cannot master human nature, and it has
been found that a masculine jealousy occasionally stands in a way.
Certain men have refused to nationalize a particular woman and as a
result Bolshevik has fought Bolshevik with considerable force."
An Associated Press despatch from London, April 15, 1919, gives lengthy
details regarding the nationalization of women, and even the opposition
offered to it:
"The law providing for the nationalization of women in Northeast
Russia has been suspended in one province as a result of popular
outcry, according to information reaching London today, from
Stockholm.
"The Commissary of Vladimir has, by decree, appointed a committee
of women, who are to inquire into operations of the law and make a
report with the least possible delay. His action has been approved
by the local Soviet.
"'The Krasnaya Gazeta' publishes an account of the results of
nationalization. The system provides that every girl on reaching
the age of eighteen must register her name in the Bureau of Free
Love, after which she is compelled to select a partner from among
men between the ages of 19 and 50 years old. The law led to
lamentable confusion, says the 'Gazeta,' in judicial notions as to
personal inviolability.
"A few days after the Soviet's decree, which women very generally
ignored, two men known to nobody, arrived in the town and seized
the two daughters of a well-known non-bourgeois comrade, declaring
they had chosen them as wives and that the girls without further
ceremony must submit, as they had not observed the registration
rule.
"Comrades Yablonovski and Guriakin, who sat as judges on the claim,
decided that the men were right, and the girls were carried off.
They have not been heard of since by the village folk.
"This, says the Gazeta, was done in the name of the nationalization
of women.
"Many other instances of the fantastic operation of the law, not to
speak of its inhumanities, are cited by the Gazeta. Enthusiasts for
nationalization, naturally all males, raid whole villages, seize
young girls, and demand proof that they are not over 18. As this
proof is difficult to give, many of the girls are carried off, and
there have been suicides and murders as a result.
"In the town of Kovrov, a campaign without parallel since the
Trojan war was waged between the vengeful relatives of an abducted
nationalized girl and her persecutors.
"In this town the 'register of nationalized women' was opened on
December 1, but up to February 1 last only two women, both over 40,
and neither of whom had ever been married, registered themselves as
willing to accept the first husband the state sent along.
"On the committee which is now to revise the nationalization decree
or to recommend its complete abrogation sits Mme. Vera Arkadieff, a
Bolshevist enthusiast, who commanded a detachment of women soldiers
during the recent operations against Admiral Kolchak's army at
Perm. She has been twice wounded."
"The Krasnaya Gazeta," translated, means the Red Gazette. It is a
Bolshevist newspaper published in Petrograd. The following "Special
Cable" to "The New York Times," dated Milan, April 24, 1919, published
April 26, 1919, gives a Bolshevist's explanation of the Russian sex
legislation:
"A Bolshevist statesman, from whom the 'Journal Epoca' obtained a
special interview respecting the Leninist legislation on the sex
problem, complains that a vast amount of grotesque
misrepresentation has appeared on the subject in the hostile or
unsympathetic press.
"'Abolition of celibacy has been adopted,' he stated, 'simply as a
means toward class equality. Every woman, on attaining her
eighteenth and every man on his twentieth year, is bound to
inscribe his or her name in a special register kept at the
Commissariat of Unions, and must then contract a union within the
period of six months. Should they fail to do so, they are served
with three warning notices at successive intervals of two months,
before any step is taken in the way of coercive measures. Every
bachelor and every spinster is bound to furnish a written
explanation of their irregular condition, and the only reasons
admitted as valid are serious ill-health or organic defects.
"'When two lovers wish to marry they present themselves to the
People's Commissary, who witnesses their marriage. The same course
is followed as regards separating, only that the Commissary, after
freeing the unhappy pair, inscribes the man afresh on the celibate
list and the woman on the register of marriageable persons,
notifying each of the obligation to find another partner within six
months. In case children have been born from their union, they are
either delivered to the custody of the particular parent desiring
them or else divided between them. The Commissariat of Unions aids
the youth of either sex in their quest of a mate by promoting all
healthy forms of social intercourse and facilitating introductions
among families of every type.'"
The above despatch was published in the April 26, 1919, issue of "The
New York Times."
On April 28, 1919, the following very apt comment was made on it and
appeared on the editorial page of the "New York Times":
"As explained by somebody whom a Milan paper calls a 'Bolshevist
statesman,' marriage as regulated by the great and good Lenine is
not at all the dreadful thing described recently by the mendacious
enemies of his Socialistic paradise. As pictured by his friends,
nothing worse has been done than to exert a gentle pressure on the
marriageable unmarried to the end that they may do their duty to
the Bolshevist State and provide it as soon as may be with new sons
and daughters to take the place of those recently 'removed' by a
benevolent terrorism.
"Bachelorhood and spinsterhood are to be regarded as
'irregular'--conditions that must be explained in writing to the
proper authorities. For the well disposed a simple civil marriage
ceremony is provided; also a simple divorce ceremony in case the
union proves wearisome. And that is all there is to the Bolshevist
marriage system, the statesman says.
"But one notices that he does not disclose what is done to those
who fail to find pleasing mates in the six months allowed after
notification for the making of a choice. Apparently it is then that
the so-called nationalization of women comes in, and the statesman
forgot to say a word about the only peculiarity of the system that
has evolved any serious criticism."
Commenting on Bolshevism, Mr. Eber Cole Byam, in the April 26, 1919,
issue of "America," very aptly says:
"As the Roman world was reduced to barbarism by the barbarians so
now the modern world is threatened with reduction to Bolshevism by
the Bolsheviki. Whatever the word Bolshevism may have meant
originally it has come to mean fiendish treatment of women, the
savage murder and mutilation of men and the wanton destruction of
the accumulated labors of generations. The Bolshevik is a
Socialist, not the armchair theorist dreaming fantastic fancies.
The Bolshevik is the real Socialist, the Socialist of practice."
The following encomium on Bolshevism appeared in "The Call," New York,
April 26, 1919, and shows what strange inclinations the Socialists have
towards barbarism:
"For the first time in Russia's history law has been established
based on the direct will of the population, established through the
most democratic franchise in the world. Under Czarism, law was
merely the promulgation of autocratic tyranny....
"For the first time in Russia's history, perfect freedom of
religion is guaranteed to Christian, Moslem and Jew alike. After
the American pattern, no church may control the state....
"For the first time, millions of Russian workers and peasants find
themselves with decent homes. For the first time, women have equal
social rights with men. For the first time, a real educational
system has been inaugurated for the children....
"The recent official American investigators sent to Russia found a
great change in the life of the cities from of old. They described
the life as puritanical. Russians explained the change to them by
the fact that vice and debauchery had been confined mostly to the
idle ruling class, the old aristocracy, and these things had passed
with the passing of that class."
Listen now to the words of the Russian Socialist author, Leonoid
Andréiev, who has seen quite enough of the "blessings" of Bolshevism.
They appear in the April 26, 1919, issue of "Struggling Russia," under
the caption, "S. O. S., An Appeal to Humanity":
"One must, indeed, be insane not to understand the palpable and
simple acts of Bolshevism! One must be sightless, stark-blind or
have eyes that see not, to fail to observe on the face of the great
mutilated Russia murder without end, ruins, miles of cemeteries,
dungeons and insane asylums; not to perceive what hunger and terror
have done to Petrograd, and, alas, to many other cities!
"One must be earless, stone-deaf, or have ears that hear not, to
remain callous to the sobs, the sighs and the wailing of women, the
heart-rending cries of the children, the death-rattle of strangled
men, the cracking of the assassins' rifles, the only music that has
filled the air of Russia for the last eighteen months!...
"As the wireless operator on a sinking vessel, in the thick
blackness of the night, sends out his last appeal, 'Help, quick, we
are sinking, save us!' so I, moved by my faith in the goodness of
man, am sending out into distance and darkness my prayer for my
people who are sinking.
"If you only knew how dark is the night around us, if my words
could only convey its density and depth! Whom am I calling? I know
not. Does the wireless operator know who may intercept his call?
For thousands of miles around the ocean may be deserted and not a
living soul may overhear his appeal.
"The night is dark. The sea is frightful. But the operator has not
lost his faith, and he calls persistently, to the very last minute,
until the last light is gone and his apparatus is silenced forever.
"What does he trust in? He trusts in humanity, and so do I. He
trusts in the law of human love and life. It is impossible that one
human being will deny help to another in his hour of perdition. It
is impossible that one human being will abandon another to perish
without attempting to help. It is impossible that such an appeal
for help will not receive any response!...
"Friend! I do not even attempt to tell you how frightful life is in
Russia at present, in our tormented Petrograd. Others have told
enough, and new words cannot be coined by the human tongue.
"It is frightful when children starve and perish, and assassins are
well-fed and Trotzky is pouring down his throat the last bottle of
milk. It is frightful when the cemeteries of Petrograd have no more
room for the dead, and the murderers have a free road not only to
the Princess Islands, but to all the ends of the world, and the
wealth they have stolen will enable them to live in balmy lands and
in the most attractive corners of our mercenary globe."
Catherine Breshkovsky, the Socialist "Grandmother of the Russian
Revolution," though now an aged woman, lived long enough to bewail the
fate of her country. Speaking of her native land, now reaping the
harvest from the Marxian seed first sown many years ago, she says in her
"Message to the American People":
"Flooded with tears and blood, Russia moans and cries out to the
world. She is a living body, and her tortures cannot be looked upon
cold-bloodedly as an extraordinary, never-before-witnessed
experiments in social evolution. She is alive and every pore of her
body is shedding blood."
Let the "scientific" American Socialists continue to take their
information from "The Call." They are far too learned to be deceived by
Russians such as Andréiev or the "Grandmother of the Russian
Revolution." "The capitalist press is lying about the conditions in
Russia." "The Call" alone speaks the truth, for it is a proletarian
sheet.
Not satisfied with ruining his own country, Lenine would have Bolshevism
spread to all other nations. He longs for their workingmen to rise in
revolt against their present systems of government. Listen to his words
in his "Letter to American Workingmen," published by the Socialist
Publication Society, 431 Pulaski street, Brooklyn, New York:
"We know that it may take a long time before help can come from
you, Comrades, American Workingmen, for the development of the
revolution in the different countries proceeds along various paths,
with various rapidity (how could it be otherwise!) We know full
well that the outbreak of the European proletarian revolution may
take many weeks to come, quickly as it is ripening in these days.
We are counting on the inevitability of the international
revolution. But that does not mean that we count on its coming at
some definite date. We have experienced two great revolutions in
our own country, that of 1905 and that of 1917, and we know that
revolutions cannot come either at word of command nor according to
prearranged plans. We know that circumstances alone have pushed us,
the proletariat of Russia, forward, that we have reached this new
stage in the social life of the world not because of our
superiority but because of the peculiarly reactionary character of
Russia. But until the outbreak of the international revolution,
revolutions in individual countries may still meet with a number of
setbacks and serious overthrows....
"We are in a beleaguered fortress, so long as no other
international Socialist revolution comes to our assistance with its
armies. But these armies exist, they are stronger than ours, they
grow, they strive, they become more invincible the longer
imperialism, with its brutalities, continues. Workingmen the world
over are breaking with their betrayers, with their Gompers and
their Scheidemanns. Inevitably labor is approaching communistic
Bolshevistic tactics, is preparing for the proletarian revolution
that alone is capable of preserving culture and humanity from
destruction. We are invincible, for invincible is the Proletarian
Revolution."
The above words of the dictator Lenine may throw some light on the
Socialists' demand for "justice" to Russia, and their campaign in behalf
of the recognition of the Soviet Government of that country.
The Socialist Publication Society of Brooklyn at the end of the World
War issued a large pamphlet entitled, "One Year of Revolution,"
celebrating the first anniversary of the founding of the Russian Soviet
Republic. On the cover page, under the caption, "The Spirit of
Revolutionary Russia," and the subtitle, "To the Oppressed of All
Countries," we read the summons to a Socialist world-wide revolution:
"And this life and death struggle with our own oppressors gives us
the right to appeal to you, proletarians of all countries, with a
strong voice, with the voice of those who look into the eyes of
death in the revolt against the exploiters.
"Break the chains, you who are oppressed! Rise in revolt!
"We have nothing to lose but our chains!
"We believe in the victory of the revolution, we are full of this
belief.
"We know that our Comrades in the Revolution will fulfill their
duty on the barricades to the bitter end.
"We know that decisive moments are coming.
"A gigantic struggle will set the world afire. On the horizon the
fires of the revolt of all oppressed peoples are already glowing
and taking definite shape.
"At the moment that the waters of the Baltic will become red with
the blood of our Comrades, will close forever over their bodies, at
this moment we call upon you.
"Already in the clutch of death, we send our warm greetings and
appeal to you.
"Proletarians of the world, all, unite!
"Rise in revolt, you who are oppressed.
"All hail, the International Revolution!
"Long live Socialism!"
In the spring of 1919 reports reached the United States that the
Bolsheviki had been inciting our troops in the Archangel District of
Russia to disloyalty against our government. An Associated Press
dispatch, dated Vienna, April 24, 1919, shows how the Bolshevists
carried on their campaign in the Ukraine:
"The Bolsheviki penetrated the country in four sections. First came
agitators and next marauding bands to strike terror. These were
followed by larger bodies of troops, made up of foreign elements.
Last came Soviet troops, headed by Bolshevist commissioners. Iron
discipline was maintained by Chinese assassins, who executed all
soldiers who revolted against orders."
On May 26, 1919, the "New York Times" announced that a Bolshevist weekly
paper would be issued in that city:
"Nicholai Lenine, the Premier, and Leon Trotzky, the Minister of
War, together with other officials of the Russian Bolshevist
Government, will begin next Monday the publication in this city of
a sixteen page weekly newspaper, the purpose of which will be to
spread propaganda favorable to the Bolsheviki. This announcement is
made in today's issue of the propaganda sheet issued weekly from
the headquarters of Ludwig C. A. K. Martens, the unrecognized
'Bolshevist Ambassador' to the United States. The paper is to be
known as 'Soviet Russia.'"
"'Every friend of Russia, as well as every person interested in
international affairs,' says the announcement, 'will subscribe to
this weekly.' 'Soviet Russia' will contain news items, editorials,
original articles, and unpublished documents."
The American Socialist Party acknowledges the Bolshevist regime of
murder and starvation to be a Socialist regime and states that it
upholds the lofty, international proletarian ideals. Debs and the
American Socialist press, at the present writing, acknowledge the
Bolsheviki to be real Socialists, not reactionaries or Socialists merely
in name, like the Ebert-Scheidemann group in Germany. They want
Bolshevism in America. They welcome it, laud it, love it. At least this
is the case just now. Will they presently be offering arguments to prove
that the Bolshevists were not Socialists at all, but traitors to the
whole Marxian movement? Meantime the American Socialists spread all
kinds of lies about the "wonders" of the Soviet Government while
claiming that "the press" is lying about the Lenine system to save the
capitalists from the demands of the laboring class.
Let us sincerely hope that no more Bolshevists from Russia will land on
our shores. We have enough rebellious, hypocritical Reds here already,
and need no more of them to teach us how to run our government. Congress
should pass strict laws allowing no immigrants to land here who are
Bolshevists.
It is to be hoped, too, that the leaders of the Illinois Labor Party who
secured the adoption in their platform of a pro-Soviet plank in the
spring of 1919 will take a few hours off and learn something about the
Russian system before trying to "work it off" on our country.
There has been a great deal of "pussy-footing" talk in the American
press about Bolshevism and Socialism, implying that there is no
connection between the two. Yet Bolshevism is nothing but a form of
Socialism. It is Socialism applied, though not yet as completely applied
as the teachings of Karl Marx require. If an incomplete application of
the principles of Socialism reduces a country to such an awful condition
as Russia reveals, what may be expected from the full dose of Socialism?
At the last moment, with this book in type, a cry from the Bolshevik
dictatorship comes out of Russia through interviews given by Lenine and
Trotzky to the "New York World's" European correspondent, Lincoln Eyre.
"I had an hour's talk with Lenine in the Kremlin at Moscow," Eyre writes
in a dispatch headed, "Riga (by courier to Berlin), Feb. 20, 1920," and
printed in the "World" of February 21, 1920. Lenine turned the interview
into an argument for the lifting of the Allied blockade of Russia, and
gave more than a hint that Russia's economic condition is desperate.
According to Mr. Eyre's cable to the "New York World" of February 21,
1920, Lenine said, speaking in English:
"Russia's present economic distress is simply a part of the world's
economic distress. Until the economic problem is faced from a world
standpoint and not merely from the standpoint of certain nations or
groups of nations, a solution is impossible.... Not only Russia but
all Europe is going to pieces, and the [Allied] Supreme Council
still indulges in tergiversation. Russia can be saved from utter
ruin and Europe, too, but it must be done soon and quickly."
By insinuating that "all Europe is going to pieces" with Russia, and
faces the same "utter ruin," Lenine covers his plea for Russia under an
appeal to the self-interest of other nations. Yet his confession that
Russia is "going to pieces" and trembles on the brink of "utter ruin" is
plain enough, making his whole argument a cry to the "capitalistic"
nations to help Socialistic Russia. Indeed, in other parts of the same
interview, as reported by Mr. Eyre in the "World" of February 21, 1920,
Lenine appeals to "foreign capital" and the "capitalistic countries" in
the baldest terms, as follows:
"We have reiterated and reiterated our desire for peace, our need
for peace and our readiness to give foreign capital the most
generous concessions and guarantees.... I know of no reason why a
Socialistic commonwealth like ours cannot do business indefinitely
with capitalistic countries. We don't mind taking their
capitalistic locomotives and farming machinery, so why should they
mind taking our Socialistic wheat, flax and platinum?"
Having waded through blood and violence to exterminate "capitalism" and
cancel all "concessions" and "guarantees" in Russia, has "the
dictatorship of the proletariat" emerged out of its nightmare of
destruction simply to coax "foreign capital" back into Socialistic
Russia by bribing offers of "the most generous concessions and
guarantees?" After two years of a reign of terror to make an earthly
paradise by destroying "capitalism" and the whole machinery of
"capitalistic countries," this hungry reaching out by Lenine after
"capital" and "capitalistic" things is almost too ludicrous for belief!
Eyre's interview with Trotzky, sent from "Riga (by courier to Berlin,
Feb. 23)" and printed in the "New York World" of February 25, 1920,
simply reenforces Lenine's appeal to "foreign capital" and the wicked
"capitalistic countries." According to Eyre in the "World" of February
25, Trotzky spoke of "Russia, bankrupt, bleeding and starved," and said
in part:
"Our military successes have not blinded us to our need of peace.
We require peace for the re-establishment of economic
stabilization.... We have had to sacrifice the welfare of our
people and the health of future generations to the desperate needs
of the hour."
And for what? Apparently only to substitute the autocracy of a new
proletarian aristocracy for the autocracy of the old regime, and the
czardom of Lenine and Trotzky for that of the Romanoffs. And the new
tyranny not only re-establishes the old partnership between "capital"
and labor, but puts the burden of militarism on labor more exclusively
than before. This seems to be the program of Trotzky, "the People's
Commissary for Military Affairs," according to Eyre's report of
Trotzky's words in the "New York World" of February 25, 1920. His words
are as follows:
"We recognize our need for outside aid in setting this country on
its feet industrially and economically. It is a tremendous
enterprise, one that will take two, five, perhaps ten years to
carry out, but through the indomitable spirit of our proletariat it
will be accomplished with a speed and competency that will amaze
our foemen.... And once again I say that the people who help us
gain peace will share in the profits, the very considerable
profits, resultant from the aid they will have extended to us....
"Foreign capitalists who invest their money in Russian enterprises
or who supply us with merchandise we require will receive material
guarantees of amply adequate character. They need have no fears on
that score.... It is obvious that we must look to the victorious
nations, to Great Britain or, still better, to America for
machinery, agricultural tools and other imports which Russia's
economic renaissance demands."
Thus the old partnership of capital and labor is to be resumed. But what
of the Russian workers? Having fought and toiled to put Lenine and
Trotzky on the proletarian throne they must keep up military training to
keep them there, and must toil hard to produce "the very considerable
profits" which Lenine and Trotzky are going to share with the "foreign
capitalists" who help them. But let Trotzky explain the destiny of the
Russian workers in his own words, as reported by Eyre in the "World" of
February 25, 1920:
"The workers and peasants will insist, once the revolution is no
longer in peril, on returning to their factories and farms and
making Russia a fit land to live in. Frontier guards will be
maintained, of course. The framework of our (military) organization
must also be preserved in order that with the experience they have
received in the past eighteen months our proletarian fighting men
can be remodelled in two or three months if the need arises. There
will also be some form of military training for the working class,
that it may always be ready to defend itself against the
bourgeoisie."
Will not this be "militarism?" Of course not; for, in Trotzky's words in
the same interview, "Militarism, striking as it does at the very roots
of Communism, cannot possibly exist in Soviet Russia, the only truly
pacific country in the world!" Thus facts disappear behind words.
Conscription was militaristic under the Czar, but it cannot be under a
Trotzky, for he has labeled his system a Soviet Republic and since
Soviets are never military their military arrangements, though
apparently more severe than the other kind, are really only a form of
pacifism! Thus the happy Russian workers must serve as "frontier
guards," keep up the framework of their military organization, and
submit to "some form of military training," but may whistle as they
groan, knowing that the yoke they bear "cannot exist."
Other contradictions in these interviews will be discussed later in this
book. For example, we shall find, in Chapter XVI, that the Soviet
Republic at Moscow can make peace with "capitalistic countries" and form
partnerships with "foreign capital" while at the same time the Third
International at Moscow carries on a world-wide conspiracy to destroy
"capitalism" and overthrow the governments and institutions of
"capitalistic countries."
CHAPTER XII
EUROPEAN SPARTACIDES AND COMMUNISTS
In Berlin, shortly after the Revolution against the Imperial Government,
Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg and their group of Socialists of the
extreme Left were raising a merry riot almost every day in the hope of
overcoming the ultra-conservative Socialist government and introducing
the radical Bolshevist program. The constant disorder occasioned by
these Spartacans or Spartacides of the Left provoked the opposition
parties very much, annoying them to such an extent that many Germans
wished to remove the capital of the country from Berlin to some more
orderly city.
The name "Spartacides" or "Spartacans" came from the fact that early in
the World War Karl Liebknecht, their leader, issued a number of anti-war
pamphlets bearing the pseudonym, "Spartacus."
The Spartacides are the reddest of the Reds, the real Socialists of
Germany. They differ very much from the Ebert-Scheidemann group, for the
Spartacans want the principles of Socialism applied immediately, whereas
Ebert and other members of his government warned their followers that
though they held Socialist theories, the application of Socialism must
be postponed to the distant future. The Ebert-Scheidemann Majority
Socialists are regarded by the others as Socialists only in name, being
really social reformers, or, at the most, weak-kneed Socialists who
sought power, but fully realized that the application of the Marxian
principles would be doomed to absolute failure. The Spartacans, however,
still have confidence in Socialism; they agree heart and soul with the
Russian Bolsheviki; they are the rowdies and ruffians of Germany, always
looking for trouble. Strikes, riots and civil discord are their weapons,
and the American Socialists are among their particular friends. Indeed,
the Socialist Party of Eugene V. Debs has no use whatever for the
Ebert-Scheidemann group, who are looked upon as reactionaries,
hypocrites, murderers and traitors to Socialism.
In the latter part of 1918, the Berlin correspondent of the "Kölnische
Zeitung" drew a graphic picture of the terrorism exercised in Berlin by
the Spartacan gangs:
"Dr. Liebknecht himself, whose imprisonment has obviously clouded
his formerly keen intelligence and probably turned his brain,
spends his time in visiting barracks in Berlin, Spandau and
elsewhere, and inciting the men to refuse to allow any distinctions
even of non-commissioned rank or to accept anything resembling
orders from officers or to admit them to the local councils. His
chief of staff, Dr. Levy, who before the war was his business
partner in his law office, is preaching fanaticism in Berlin to all
and sundry.
"The word Spartacus goes through the city like a bogy. Civilians,
soldiers, employees, capitalists, all feel themselves equally
threatened. A sitting of the Prussian Lower House had to be
adjourned because it was feared that the Spartacus gang was going
to seize the building.
"'The Lokal Anzeiger' has several times failed to appear, as the
result of repeated efforts of the Spartacus gang to seize it.
Careful burghers chain up the house doors, and it would be well if
the steadier elements of our workmen and soldiers would chain up
the door of their hearts against the murderous and suicidal ideas
of the Spartacus gang."
The Spartacides made a practice of terrorizing German newspapers into
supporting them. In the early part of 1919, they tried to prevent the
Constituent Assembly from coming together, and later on engineered many
a revolt in the various cities of Germany. Since their leaders, the
fiery Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, were assassinated, the orderly
elements of the German people have succeeded more and more in weakening
the power and influence of the Spartacans.
Kurt Eisner, of Bavaria, after the overthrow of the German Imperial
Government, sought to establish a federation of German republics under
the head of Bavaria. It was not very long before the first step was
taken, Bavaria declaring itself a republic independent of the Berlin
Government. After the assassination of Eisner, Bavaria, and especially
its capital, Munich, came more and more under the control of the extreme
radical group of Socialists known as the Communists. About the end of
March, 1919, Bela Kun, the Foreign Minister of the newly established
Communist Government of Hungary and one of the most active propagandists
of Russian Bolshevism, arrived at Munich to confer with the leaders of
the Bavarian Government. Shortly afterwards, in the early part of
April, a Soviet Republic was proclaimed at Munich.
The socialization of industry began. That part of the press that favored
the new regime was upheld by the Government, which suppressed unfriendly
organs. Members of the Christian Textile Workers' Association were
forced, on pain of being deprived of work, to join the Social-Democratic
Union. Various other measures of "freedom, equality, and justice" were
also bestowed upon the people, and the hope was expressed by the Red
Socialists of Munich that the proclamation of a Bavarian Soviet would
have its effect throughout Germany and result in a world revolution.
Towards the middle of April, 1919, press dispatches stated that the
Munich Communists had elected a council, consisting of five workmen and
five soldiers, with Herr Klatz, a bricklayer, as president; that the
police was disarmed; that eleven hostages were taken from the ranks of
the trade-union leaders; that revolutionary tribunals were established
at Munich, where twenty-eight judges continued, in relays of seven, to
pass sentences day and night, and, finally, that a decree was issued by
the Communist government confiscating all dwellings.
Shortly after these reports reached America, the peasants of Bavaria
rose up against the revolutionary government in Munich and declared an
effective ban on the shipment of food to that city. No attacks were made
upon Munich by the troops of the moderate Hoffman government of Bavaria
which had been ousted by the Communists, for it was feared that the
whole country might thus be plunged into civil war. The only strategic
movement of these troops was to cut off the supplies of food.
Discord soon sprang up among the Soviet leaders themselves, who engaged
in open street fights against each other. Before the end of April, 1919,
the Central Council had been dissolved and the Communist mob had turned
to plundering. Food ration cards were taken away from the bourgeoisie,
and barricades were erected around the city to defend it from Noske's
army, sent to attack it by the Ebert-Scheidemann moderate Socialist
Government of Berlin. In the early part of May, 1919, the Communist
rabble of the Bavarian capital was finally overcome by the artillery
fire of Noske's troops, and Hoffman was once more put in control.
The American Socialists look upon the ousted Communists of Bavaria as
the upholders of the Marxian doctrine, and consider them, along with
the Russian Bolsheviki and the Hungarian Communists, as Socialist
brethren worthy of their respect and imitation.
In Hungary the "100 per cent" Socialists, the Communists, under the
leadership of Bela Kun, came into power in the early part of the year
1919. Press despatches, at the end of March, stated that all villas,
industries and building had been declared the property of the state;
that each factory was controlled by a Council of Laborers; that
free-love was legalized as in Russia; that all clergymen and nuns were
removed from the hospitals, excepting those who acted in the capacity of
nurses, and the religious, tuition schools were abolished.
A press dispatch dated Buda-Pest, April 4, 1919, said that "in
Transylvania, following the practice in Moscow, the churches have been
converted into music halls, the best seats being reserved for the
proletariat. The government officials do not pay house rent and have
priority on foodstuffs and clothing."
The American Socialists boasted about the absence of bloodshed in
Hungary during the early part of Bela Kun's regime. Whether or not he
had been cautioned by Lenine not to wear out too many rifles in the
beginning, lest there be a dearth later on, we do not know. At any rate,
by the latter part of May, 1919, the Hungarian Communists also began to
manifest their true color. They were not satisfied with "painting
everything red" in Buda-Pest, but also wanted to see red blood flowing
in the gutters. In confirmation of this we have the following Associated
Press report, dated Vienna, May 20, but not appearing in the "New York
Times" till May 23:
"Many persons accused of being counter-revolutionists are being
executed by the Hungarian Communists, according to despatches
received here. The victims are usually shot in front of the
Hungarian Parliament House in the daytime or in the school-yard in
the Markostrasse at night.
"Among those who are said to have been executed are Herr Holan,
manager of the Kaschau-Oderberg Railway; Bishop Balthasar, a
hostage from Debreczen, and Colonel Dormany of the General Staff,
who was taken from a hospital. Several girls, who were accused of
making tri-color rosettes for the counter-revolutionists, also were
executed. The presiding Judge of the Revolutionary tribunal, which
orders the executions, it is said, is a former locksmith, 22 years
of age.
"Many bodies of men and women and girls of the better classes have
been found on the shores of islands in the Danube below the city.
It is reported that they were arrested in the residential quarter
of Buda and thrown into the Danube by guards who were taking them
to prisons in Pest."
In the summer of 1919 the Hungarian Communists lost control of the
country. Not only had internal dissensions broken out at home, but they
had been attacked for a long time by the Rumanians, who had caused them
endless trouble. If they had succeeded in remaining in power long
enough, they would, no doubt, in time have shown themselves proficient
in murdering their fellow-countrymen and as skilled in the use of the
rifle as the Bolsheviki in Russia, the Spartacides in Germany and the
Communists in Bavaria. These four groups of European Socialists of the
extreme Left--ruffians, brutes, murderous thugs, half barbarous savages,
slayers even of their own Socialist brethren--have long been in a
"position" to teach the "gentle art" of plunder and murder to their
admiring comrades on this side of the Atlantic, that "poor,"
"persecuted," "workingman," Eugene V. Debs, and his crowd of "honest,"
"scientific," "evolutionists."
With these European thugs Berger and Hillquit deliberately "lined up"
the Socialist Party of America in the words of their Chicago manifesto
of September 4, 1919:
"The Socialist Party of the United States at its first national
convention after the war, squarely takes its position with the
uncompromising section of the international Socialist Movement. We
unreservedly reject the policy of those Socialists who supported
their belligerent capitalist governments on the plea of 'national
defense,'" etc.
There is no breath of patriotism in these dogs.
The above "line up" was confirmed by the rank and file of the Socialist
Party of America in their referendum vote identifying their party with
the Revolutionary Third (Moscow) International. (See Chapters V and
XVI.)
CHAPTER XIII
THE BOLSHEVISM OF AMERICAN SOCIALISTS
To accuse American Socialists of conspiring against our fair land may at
first startle the reader. Brand as traitors to the common welfare men
who boast so loudly of being the only friends of the oppressed laborer!
Call the followers of Karl Marx the enemies of our country after they
have lavished so much precious time on exposures of those who defraud
American workingmen of an honest wage! Yet, as our investigation moves
along, telling evidence uncovers the existence of an alarmingly
widespread conspiracy.
Our Chapters VIII and IX have clearly revealed the I. W. W. as a purely
revolutionary organization, enrolling under its red flag discontented
workingmen, even negroes and Chinese, pledged to overthrow our
Government, while meanwhile, with anarchistic contempt for law and
morality, they do what damage they can through strikes and sabotage.
The same chapters proved that the Socialists are co-operating heart and
soul with the Industrial Workers of the World.
Chapters X, XI and XII gave the reader evidence of some of the terrible
results of Bolshevism in Russia, Communism in Hungary and Bavaria, and
Spartacism in Germany. Yet far from being dismayed by these horrors, the
Socialists of the United States proclaim themselves of the same breed as
the Bolshevists, Communists and Spartacans abroad, whose torch of
incendiarism they would apply to the United States.
The Socialist Party of Buffalo, New York, published a pink booklet
entitled, "The Truth About Russia," in which reference is made to the
Russian call to a world-wide Socialist revolution. On page 41, at the
conclusion of the articles of the Bolshevik Constitution concerning
rights and duties, we read:
"In proclaiming these rights and duties the Russian Socialist
Republic of the Soviets calls upon the working classes of the
entire world to accomplish their task to the very end, and in the
faith that the Socialist ideal will soon be achieved to write upon
their flags the old battle cry of the working people:
"'Proletarians of all lands, unite!
"'Long live the Socialistic world revolution!'"
The plan is for Socialists in countries outside of Russia to be helped
in their revolts against their governments by their Bolshevist comrades.
In the "Labor Scrap Book," published by Chas. H. Kerr and Co., there is
a long article by Nicholas Lenine, the Russian dictator. Several
quotations are here given:
"Russia's revolution is not a domestic revolution, but essentially
a world revolution....
"The Bolsheviki follow a consistent policy. They realized long ago
that the revolution, though primarily political, must become
economic and socialist. They know that economy and socialism have
nothing to do with racial or political boundaries and that the
future of our revolution must, therefore, be international. The
revolution must pass over all political and racial frontiers and
crush opposing economic ideas. They know that a state organized on
Socialist and pacifist lines cannot exist if hemmed in by
capitalistic and militarist states. Russia's revolution must follow
the law of all healthy organisms. It must increase. If it does not
increase it will decline....
"Russia will continue to propagandize unshrinkingly in all
countries.
"We may be left temporarily in peace to enjoy our revolutionary
social and economic system while the rest of Europe continues to
groan under a capitalism and monarchism which, perhaps, for the
time being, will be purged of a too dangerous imperialism.
"What will Russia do if this be so?
"Short-sighted men reply: 'Cherish your own revolution; thank
Heaven that you are better off than the rest of the world; and let
the rest of the world do what it likes.'
"But we Bolsheviki are against such a policy. Short of armed
pressure against any European country, we shall not shrink from
measures necessary for spreading our revolution in the world.
"The motives why every Bolshevik must approve of this policy are
overwhelming. The first is that a peace between the ideas of
revolutionary Russia and the ideas of non-revolutionary Europe
could at best be a truce....
"Each side would foster its ideas and prepare for a future
struggle, and since non-revolutionary Europe will always be better
armed than pacifist Russia, the European despots (as soon as they
have recovered from their present bitter lesson of the meaning of
war) undoubtedly would hurl themselves upon Russia in order to wipe
away the one revolutionary plague-spot.
"For that reason our revolution cannot rest until it has
established full revolution in all neighbor lands.
"The second reason why Russia must incite Europe to revolt is that
by its very nature, the revolution cannot live in isolation. Europe
must be organized, either on a capitalistic basis or a proletarian,
anti-capitalistic basis. The dual system is inconceivable. It is
impossible for Russia to exist without capitalistic banks and
industries, if she has to trade with countries which have
capitalistic banks and industries....
"In its own defense the revolution must propagandize and convert.
It must incite and urge on the masses against their present rulers
in all countries, and it must do this unshrinkingly, without fear
of consequences, or consideration for the feelings and interests of
the foreign affected parties."
The question may now be asked, What means is the Russian Bolshevist
government using to incite revolution in America? We have not, of
course, much definite information as yet; but we know that Lenine's
government has lots of money which it can use for foreign revolutionary
propaganda, and that a certain Ludwig C. A. K. Martens has been in our
country for some time claiming to represent the Soviet government and
boasting that he is able to deposit in our banks for commercial purposes
hundreds of millions of Russian gold. He is very active, has been
assisted by Morris Hillquit of "The Call," the Socialist daily of New
York City, goes about visiting different Socialist organizations, and in
return is entertained by them. During the months of April and May, 1919,
many notices of such receptions were published in "The Call." One
example will suffice. Under the caption, "Official Socialist News," in
the issue of March 31, 1919, we read:
"The central committee of Local New York, Socialist Party, greets
Comrade L. C. A. K. Martens, recently appointed the representative
of the Russian Soviet government in the United States and in his
name the victorious Russian proletariat.
"We sincerely hope that his work in behalf of the Socialist
government of Russia will be crowned with success. We pledge him
our aid, and promise that we shall not rest until the government of
the United States has ceased to be a party to the economic and
political isolation of Russia and the military occupation of
territory of the Soviet republic."
In the latter part of March, 1919, Martens shared offices with Santeri
Nuorteva, also a great friend of the American Socialists. Nuorteva was
head of the Bolshevist propaganda in this country and from his office
mailed the "Weekly Bulletin of the Bureau of Information on Soviet
Russia." Nuorteva denied that these large sheets, which are about the
same size as the propaganda sheets issued in the first months of the war
by the German Information Service, constitute propaganda. Like the
German Information Service sheets, each contains from six to ten
articles. All paint conditions in Russia under Trotzky and Lenine as
steadily improving and show those men and their aids as gentle,
kind-hearted individuals whose only sin is the betterment of mankind.
Among labor unions Bolshevism has made great headway. The New Labor
Party of Illinois in 1919 not only supported Soviet Russia but favored
the Soviet system in our own country. Sensible workingmen in the
American Federation of Labor and conservative members of the new Labor
Party had good reason for being alarmed and for suspecting that American
propagators of Bolshevism received Russian gold from some one, possibly
from Martens.
The Socialist papers of the United States approve of Bolshevism,
Spartacism and Communism, and would gladly welcome it to our country.
"The Call," New York, March 31, 1919, on its editorial page says: "The
red in the East is the dawning of a new day." On April 1, 1919, the same
paper contained a long article on the first page, entitled, "Forces of
Darkness Open Their Campaign to End Bolshevism." On April 11, 1919, in
an editorial on the impending capture of Odessa by the Bolsheviki, it
says:
"The evacuation of the Black Sea port of Odessa by foreign troops
that have been holding it for many months is news of great
significance....
"Like the German forces hurled against Soviet Russia by the mailed
fist of the Kaiser, the French, Greek and Rumanian soldiers go out
in a different mind and temper than they had going in. Wherever
they go, they will spread the ideas of human liberty and
co-operative development that they were sent to crush."
On April 13, 1919, "The Call" printed a poem on the assassinated
Spartacan leader, Karl Liebknecht:
"Liebknecht
"Liebknecht, your lonely, bitter course is run!
While we, with cautious feet, pursue the goal--
'Tis not in pity's name that we make moan--
Nay! 'tis in envy of your martyrdom!
The mirror of your flaming soul
Has caught our poverty and gloom,
In that fierce light our virtues shown
Petty, distorted, wan!
Then, hail! O martyr, in our day of doom!
Hail, fiery heart, receive the victor's crown!
Our heart a charnel house has grown
For our vast dead! Yet we make room
For freedom's slain. Shall not the tomb
Yield heavy harvest where such seed is sown?"
"The Call," April 15, 1919, published the following endorsement of
Hungarian Communism by the New York State Committee of the Socialist
Party:
"Whereas, the working class of Hungary have seized political power
and are using the same for the purpose of socializing industry and
as an instrument for the complete emancipation of labor, therefore
be it
"Resolved, that we, the State Committee of the Socialist Party of
the State of New York, in meeting assembled congratulate the
Socialist movement and the working class of Hungary on the success
of the revolution and on the position that the Hungarian Socialist
Republic has taken in defiance of the capitalist imperialists of
all lands."
In the April 24, 1919, edition of "The Call" we read:
"A new period in the evolution of the social and economic structure
of the world is at hand. A new day for those who toil. A new day
which will mean economic and political liberty based on justice for
those who toil. Some call it revolution. Well, if that be the word,
so be it. And woe be to those who in their blind folly throw
themselves in the way to stop its onward sweep throughout the
civilized world, for they shall be as grass before the sickle!
Hail, all hail, the new day!"
Again, in its issue of April 30, 1919, "The Call" favors the Hungarian
Communist regime of Bela Kun:
"'There is reason to believe,' says a dispatch from Budapest, 'that
the present Hungarian government has been unofficially approached
by the Entente with the suggestion that military invasion might be
arrested if the extremist members were replaced by more moderate
Socialists.' Making all allowance for the unreliability of the
dispatch, it is hard to say which cuts the more contemptible
figure, the Entente or the 'Moderate Socialists.'"
In its 1919 May Day edition, "The Call," under the caption, "All Attacks
on Russian Revolution Have Recoiled," shows its sympathy for Bolshevism
and Spartacism:
"Every attack of world reaction upon Soviet Russia, the center of
the world revolution, has remained fruitless. The internal strength
and the external power of the Russian Workers' and Peasants'
Republic is growing daily into a power that will successfully
withstand the onslaughts of capitalism. The possibilities of
subduing the Russian revolution by force from without decrease
constantly as the governments of the different countries are ever
more forcibly threatened by the fermentation among their own
peoples which they must combat.
"At present the second, the Socialist revolution, has come upon the
scene in Germany, which, driven to the edge of starvation, bleeding
and drained to the marrow by Kaiserism and militarism, is now being
held in the grip of Entente capitalism. There at this moment the
courageous and steadfast Socialists stand under the flag of
Spartacus, first on the barricades under the sign of the general
strike and street battles....
"The German Socialists of the Right have soiled the name of
Socialism by being inimical to the Russian revolution; by failing
to communicate with the radical English elements in the English
strike movements, which are also spontaneous expressions of
proletarian unrest; by acting as the lackeys of Kaiserism and
capitalism in opposing the November revolution to the last hour
before its outbreak; and, finally, by their unspeakable mass
murders of starving, demonstrating and striking proletarians.
"In this struggle between the revolution and the social-patriotic
bourgeois reaction which now enters into a decisive phase, two of
the noblest pioneers of the international, Dr. Karl Liebknecht and
Rosa Luxemburg, were murdered by the hate-filled bourgeois mob and
the degenerate Scheidemann-Noske henchmen. Another victim of the
treacherous reaction was Kurt Eisner, Socialist premier of Bavaria.
One need but be an honest, fearless Socialist to be in danger of
one's life under the hypocritical, false, brutal and murderous
regime of Ebert-Scheidemann-Noske. This regime revives the worst
methods of Kaiserism and holds its protecting hand over the
bourgeois and capitalists of Germany. But this blood and the blood
of our martyrs will only urge the masses to continuous
unconquerable struggle, till the criminal Ebert-Scheidemann-Noske
reaction, together with the criminals and conspirators of the old
empire, yield to the power of the revolutionary justice of the
masses."
In the May 1, 1919, issue of "The Call," the May Day Manifesto is made
public by Morris Hillquit, International Secretary of the Socialist
Party of the United States. Only part of it is hereby quoted:
"We send fraternal greetings and vows of whole-hearted sympathy to
the Socialist Soviet Republic of Russia, which is so valiantly
upholding the lofty international proletarian ideals in the face of
the combining military economic and political attacks of
reactionary powers, and in spite of the systematic campaign of
libelous misrepresentation on the part of the lying capitalist
press of the world. We send congratulations and fraternal good
wishes to the workers of Hungary on the establishment of a free
Communistic Workers' Republic, upon the ruins of the predatory
monarchy of their exploiting and land-monopolizing rulers. We
extend the hand of comradeship and solidarity to the revolutionary
Socialists of Germany and Russia, now engaged in a life-and-death
struggle to secure for the working masses of their countries the
full fruit of their victorious revolutions; to the workers of
England in their efforts to wrest the control of the industries
from the parasites in their country, and to the Socialists of
France, Italy and all other countries of Europe in their fights
against their revolutionary governments."
"The New Age," the Socialist paper of Buffalo, April 10, 1919, published
a "Greeting to the Soviet Republic of Hungary":
"The proletariat of Hungary has taken all power in its own hands.
Like a bolt from the blue the workers, soldiers and peasants of
'conquered' Hungary proclaim their intervention in the arena of
world politics--and the diplomats of capitalism are thrown into a
flurry of mingled rage and fear.
"While the wires were still hot with the news of the resignation of
Count Karolyi, president of the provisional government of Hungary,
as a protest against the peace terms of the Paris Conference, came
word of the complete triumph of revolutionary Socialism and the
establishment of the second Soviet Republic in the world.
"With little or no resistance, with no intervening period of
Socialist compromise, the Hungarian Soviet Republic rises to power
and in its initial proclamation ushers in the dictatorship of the
proletariat, decrees the socialization of the large estates, mines,
big industries, banks and lines of transportation, declares its
oneness of purpose with the revolutionary proletariat of Russia and
its readiness to form an armed alliance with the federated Soviet
Republic. All over the country Workmen's, Soldiers' and Peasants'
Councils are in action and take over the functions of government."
"The Revolutionary Age," then a Socialist paper of Boston, on March 29,
1919, showed its complete sympathy for the Bolshevists, Communists and
Spartacans:
"So the Hungarian workers set about their task and the eastern sky
is brightening.
"Already the two Soviet governments have issued an appeal to the
workers of all countries to sweep away the old system. The
bourgeois press tells of the spread of Bolshevism throughout
central Europe and the diplomats of Capitalism are turning this way
and that to avert fresh outbreaks. But they are powerless. Every
new move brings new complications, every award of territory here
brings discontent and adds to the 'menace' there.
"Next!
"The fear that weighs upon the world of Capitalism and the
diplomats in Paris is: Who next? The proclamation of a Soviet
Republic in Hungary is to them not a fact, but a symbol--a symbol
of the onward sweep of the proletarian revolution, which may break
loose in other nations.
"Through this symbol looms Soviet Russia--gigantic, mysterious and
implacable. Despised by the world of Capitalism, intrigued against
and vilified, isolated in the spaces of its own territory, attacked
by the soldiers of the Allies--Soviet Russia, through the flaming
energy of its proletariat and Socialism has conquered in spite of
all. The Allies, their Capitalism and Imperialism, are no longer a
menace to Soviet Russia; it is now Soviet Russia that menaces the
Allies through its own gigantic strength and the threat of the
international proletarian revolution....
"And this revolutionary army of Soviet Russia, massed at the
frontier, is prepared to march into Hungary or Poland or Germany to
co-operate with the revolutionary masses in any war that may be
necessary against international Imperialism and for the proletarian
revolution.
"The situation in Germany is critical and crucial. The conquest of
power by the revolutionary proletariat in Germany will assure the
world revolution. The recent butchery of the Spartacans by the
Government of 'Socialist' assassins has not crushed the
revolutionary masses; on the contrary, the masses have been
aroused, the Ebert-Scheidemann government depending more and more
upon the worst elements of the old regime; it is being isolated,
and the workers are rallying to the Soviets."
"The Ohio Socialist," published in Cleveland, and claiming to be the
"Official Organ of the Socialist Parties of Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia,
West Virginia and New Mexico," in the spring of 1919 gave its unlimited
support to Bolshevism. "The Proletarian," then a Socialist paper of
Detroit, was in thorough accord with Bolshevists, Spartacists and
Communists, of Russia, Germany and Hungary respectively. The following
quotations are taken from the April, 1919, edition:
"In order to be a good American, according to the view of the
powers that be, it is necessary to repeat and believe the stories
written in the capitalist press about the Bolsheviki. But we, who
know what is going on, and do not believe them, maintain that a
person can be truthful, and still be an American. That he can be a
good, pure, unadulterated American, and still lend his sympathies
to the Bolsheviki.
"In revolutionary Germany the struggle between the defenders of
capitalism and the champions of working class emanicipation--the
Spartacides and their adherents--continues almost unceasingly. The
'democratic' government has taken desperate steps to crush the
revolution; there have been wholesale executions and other
repressive acts....
"The final conflict is now on. 'Ruthless slaughter' is the
governmental decree with Gustav Noske, 'minister of defense,' in
charge of the butchering. And what is it that Noske and his
'Socialist' colleagues are defending? The interests of the German
capitalists. Sacred private property rights are in danger; the
stronghold of capitalism is being assailed. The expropriation of
the capitalists is the aim of the proletarian revolutionists....
"All the old friends of Kaiserism--Hoffman, Hindenberg and the
rest--are lined up against the Spartacans. Although these elements
of reaction have gained temporary victory, the workers are
undismayed."
"The Proletarian," in this same issue, referring to the Bela Kun
dictatorship of Hungary, says:
"On Sunday, March 23d, the news was flashed across America that
Hungary had swung into the ranks of the revolutionary proletarian
dictatorships....
"A note from the Paris Conference seems to have been the last straw
that 'broke the camel's back' of the middle course government,
causing President, Cabinet and all, to resign. This allowed the
political power to fall into the hands of those who are alone
capable of handling the situation--the revolutionary proletariat."
"The Chicago Socialist" is also pro-Bolshevist. In the April 1, 1919,
edition each of the three following lines extends across the top of the
front page of the paper:
"How Many Bolshevists in Chicago?
"The Vote Today Will Tell.
"Vote The Socialist Ticket."
At the bottom of the first page of this April election day issue of "The
Chicago Socialist," the following notice is given to voters:
"Vote for the great change, TODAY, by casting a Socialist ballot.
Stand up and be counted for a Soviet Republic, not only in Russia,
or in Hungary, not only in the United States or in some other land;
but stand up and be counted for the Soviet Republic of the world."
The Socialist paper of Duluth, like the other Marxian papers of the
United States, also favored Spartacism and Bolshevism, for in the March
7, 1919, issue of "The Truth" we read:
"We can honestly say that the position in Germany is very
promising. The Spartacides are now coming into their own and ere
long we shall see Bolshevism firmly established in Germany."
The pink booklet published by the Socialist Party, Buffalo, New York,
entitled, "The Truth About Russia," contains the text of the Bolshevik
Constitution, and on page 2 appears the following introduction:
"This little booklet is published by Local Buffalo, Socialist
Party, Erie County, with the object in view of giving information
to those who desire to grasp the true situation and understand the
struggle now going on in Eastern Europe between the reactionary
elements allied with German imperialism and other imperialists
against the Workers' Republic of Russia in their struggle for true
democracy."
On the back cover sheet of "The Crisis in the German Social Democracy,"
written by Karl Leibknecht, Rosa Luxemburg and Franz Mehring, and
published by the Socialist Publication Society of Brooklyn, New York,
there is an advertisement of "The Class Struggle," "a bi-monthly
magazine devoted to International Socialism." This bi-monthly "does not
exploit the ephemeral, but gives serious studies of the international
movement from the pens of comrades in all parts of the world. Among the
recent contributors are: Lenine, Trotzky, Lunacharsky, Franz Mehring,
Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, Friedrich Adler, Santeri Nuorteva" So the
advertisement reads.
"The Bulletin," issued March 24, 1919, by the National Office, Socialist
Party, page 11, volunteers information which shows one phase of
Bolshevist propaganda carried on by that Party in the United States:
"The striking effective leaflet, 'The Great and Growing Fear--No
Work,' is accomplishing a double purpose and is being snapped up
eagerly and distributed by the hundreds of thousands by state and
local organizations and by individual hustlers. Two hundred
thousand copies have been sold and it will shortly go to its third
printing. Orders indicate a million edition of this powerful
leaflet. The Russian Constitution, an article and
thought-compelling cartoons on unemployment, that this leaflet
carries, make it the Socialist literature triumph of the month.
Send for sample copy and order early.
"From the hustling 'Red' town of Hamilton, Ohio, comes an order for
8,000 'Great Fear' leaflets to put the truth about the Russian
Soviet Constitution in the homes of the workers of that community."
"The Eye Opener," the official national organ of the Socialist Party of
America, in its issue of January, 1919, shows its sympathy for the
Spartacans by the following article:
"'You Did Not Die In Vain!'
"American Socialist Party to
"_Liebknecht and Luxembourg_.
"The Socialist Party executive committee has adopted a resolution
on the death of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxembourg, Germany's two
most uncompromising foes of Kaiserism and imperialism. It is as
follows:
"'The National Executive Committee of the Socialist Party of the
United States of America, has learned of the deaths of our beloved
comrades, Dr. Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxembourg, who are reported
assassinated by the agents of the reactionary forces of Germany,
who are now conspiring to deprive the workers of that country of
the opportunity to establish a free government there.
"'These comrades, always true to the principles of revolutionary
Socialism, in the face of unqualified opposition before, during and
after the great war, commanded the love and admiration of all the
lovers of international liberty, and have, by their incomparable
devotion to this great cause, made their names immortal in the
history of working class liberation.'"
From the "New York Times," November 18, 1918, we learn that the Chicago
Socialists endorsed Bolshevism.
A despatch by the International News Service from Cleveland, Ohio, March
31, 1919, informs us that C.E. Ruthenberg, leading Socialist of that
city, after a meeting of the Cleveland Socialists on March 30, announced
that the members of the party had just voted in favor of the adoption of
the Bolshevik doctrine of Lenine and Trotzky for the further direction
of the Cleveland party and that the action of the members was
practically unanimous.
"The Call," New York, April 3, 1919, gave notice of a pro-Bolshevist
meeting to be held by the Socialists on the following Saturday afternoon
at Park Circle, New York City:
"This is the first of a series that the Socialist Party of Harlem
proposes to hold, inspired by the success of the Debs meeting two
weeks ago at the same place, when 15,000 people attended.
"The assemblage on Saturday, besides demanding that the United
States recognize Soviet Russia, will also give a welcome to the
Soviet Republic of Hungary."
In its issue of April 10, 1919, "The Call" recorded the approval by the
Queen's County, New York, Socialists of the Bolsheviki and Spartacans:
"We desire to clearly place ourselves on record for, and openly and
actively sign ourselves with the revolutionary proletariat the
world over, as at present expressed by the policies and tactics of
the Communist Party of Russia (Bolsheviki), the Communist Labor
Party in Germany (Spartacans) and other parties in harmony with
them."
On May 31, 1919, "The Call" published the declaration of the National
Executive Committee of the party in favor of Bolshevism, Communism and
Spartacism: The Socialist Party of the United States "supports
whole-heartedly the Soviet Republic of Russia and the Communist
government of Hungary.... In Germany, Austria and countries similarly
situated, its sympathies are with the more advanced Socialist groups."
In "The Call," May 17, 1919, Martens, the representative in the United
States of the Russian Soviet Government, is quoted as saying:
"Russian workers, whom I represent, acknowledge with gratitude the
sympathy toward the struggles of Soviet Russia evinced by the
Socialist Party of America, as well as by the Socialist Labor
Party, the I. W. W. and other organizations of the working class,
and they return the sympathy without discrimination."
"The Call," March 30, 1919, informs its readers that Cleveland
Socialists were organizing a Workers' and Soldiers' Soviet, and again,
on April 1, 1919, that soviets had been established in Seattle, Portland
and San Francisco. Eugene V. Debs, in an article written by him in "The
Class Struggle," said:
"From the crown of my head to the soles of my feet I am Bolshevik
and proud of it."
"The Call," April 14, 1919, published Debs' "Last Minute Message to All
New York Socialists":
"As I am about to enter the prison doors, I wish to send to the
Socialists of New York who have loyally stood by me since my first
arrest, this little message of love and cheer. These are pregnant
and promising days. We are all on the threshold of tremendous
changes. The workers of the world are awakening and bestirring
themselves as never before. All the forces that are playing upon
the modern world are making for the overthrow of despotism in all
its forms and for the emancipation of the masses of mankind. I
shall be in prison in the days to come, but my revolutionary spirit
will be abroad, and I shall not be inactive. Let us all, in the
supreme hour, measure up to our full stature and work together as
one for the great cause that means emancipation for us all. Love to
all my Comrades, and all hail to the Revolution.--Eugene Victor
Debs."
From the same issue of "The Call" we learn that Debs, on leaving
Wheeling, West Virginia, for the Moundsville prison, gave the following
statement to David Karsner, staff correspondent: "I enter the prison
doors a flaming revolutionist--my head erect, my spirit untamed, and my
soul unconquered."
A press despatch from Toledo, Ohio, March 31, 1919, describes the
serious socialist riot which took place that afternoon as a protest
against the then impending imprisonment of Debs, the self-styled
"flaming revolutionist":
"Toledo, Ohio, March 31.--When they were refused admission by city
officials to Memorial Hall, a city building where Eugene V. Debs
was scheduled to speak, 5,000 persons stormed the place, broke
windows and doors, and then paraded the streets crying, 'To hell
with the mayor.' ...
"Announcement that Debs would not be permitted to speak was made
late Saturday night, after the Socialists here had prepared to
handle an overflow crowd. The announcement appeared in the morning
papers, and was the first notice the Socialists had that their
meeting could not be held.
"When the hour for Debs to speak arrived there were at least 6,000
men and women congregated about the William McKinley monument in
Courthouse Park, across the street from Memorial hall.
"A man mounted the base of the monument. 'We'll use Memorial Hall
this afternoon if we have to wade through blood to do it!' he
shouted. A policeman grabbed him and he was thrown unceremoniously
into a patrol wagon. The man who essayed to speak next also was
arrested.
"As the crowd sensed what was occurring the radicals began to hoot
and boo the officers. Clubs were drawn and the crowd was made to
move. Then came the parade through the streets and cries of 'Down
with the mayor!' 'Hang him!' 'To hell with the police!' and others
of a similar nature.
"It was after five o'clock before the police were able to disperse
the crowd. Fist fights by the dozens occurred on corners. Hotel
lobbies were invaded by the malcontents. Street cars were held up
and threats of serious outbreaks were to be heard on every hand....
"More than seventy-five men were arrested, including Thomas Devine,
Socialist member of the city council."
CHAPTER XIV
VIOLENCE, BLOODSHED AND ARMED REBELLION
Every year on May Day the Socialists are in the habit of publishing
articles and making speeches of a more than usual revolutionary
character. They are also fond of parading on that day to incite riot,
and of holding meetings to stir up discontent and to foment rebellion
among the laboring classes. May Day, 1919, was an especially serious one
in several cities of the United States and will long be remembered,
because the Socialist riots occurred while the whole country was excited
over the unsuccessful mailing of bombs to a score or so of eminent
citizens. The most serious Marxian riots took place in Cleveland, Ohio,
and were described in part in the "Chicago Tribune" as follows:
"Cleveland, Ohio, May 1.--An unidentified man was killed by a
detective's bullet, eleven policemen were shot or badly beaten, and
about 100 persons wounded, many seriously, in general rioting which
brought a dramatic finale this afternoon to a Socialist May Day
demonstration here.
"About thirty persons, seriously injured, are in hospitals
to-night, while scores of others, including women, were trampled by
rioters or clubbed by police.
"Socialist headquarters was totally wrecked by angry civilians bent
on putting an end to the demonstration....
"A mob of several hundred threatened police headquarters when C. E.
Ruthenberg, Socialist leader and former Socialist candidate for
mayor, was arrested and for more than an hour the entire downtown
section of the city was a warring mass of Socialists, police,
civilians and soldiers, the latter riding down the rioters in army
trucks and tanks.
"Dozens of shots were fired in Public square, where more than
20,000 Socialists and sympathizers assembled for a May Day rally
and to protest against the convictions of Eugene V. Debs and Thomas
J. Mooney.
"The trouble started in Superior Avenue, near East Ninth Street,
when the head of one of the five Socialist parades, scheduled to
meet in a mass meeting at Public square, was stopped, and Liberty
Loan workers and an army lieutenant tore a red flag from a man at
the head of the marchers, practically every one of whom were
carrying red flags.
"In less than ten minutes riots had developed at several other
points, mounted and foot policemen being switched from one location
to another to quell the fighting.
"The trouble in the public square started when Lieut. H. S. Bergen,
who served with the 80th Division overseas, demanded that several
soldiers among the Socialists on the platform remove their uniforms
or the red flags they wore on their breasts.
"The soldiers refused, and C. E. Ruthenberg, scheduled as the
principal Socialist speaker, interceded for the Socialists.
"Lieut. Bergen, followed by Lieut. John Hardy of Detroit, thereupon
mounted the platform and tore the red insignia from the khaki
uniforms. The act was the signal for a grand rush by thousands of
Socialist sympathizers."
On Sunday, May 4, 1919, serious trouble with the Socialist-Bolshevist
element of Gary, Indiana, was narrowly averted. The account, as
published in the "Chicago Tribune" on the next day, reads in part as
follows:
"There was no 'Red' parade in Gary yesterday....
"Fifty policemen, wearing revolvers on their belts and reinforced
by a special shotgun squad of sixteen, a company of state militia,
thirty deputy sheriffs, a group of secret service men from Chicago
and hundreds of citizen volunteers, prevented the parade after the
Russian Socialists flouted an order of Mayor W.H. Hodges
prohibiting the march and declared they would proceed despite the
authorities....
"Yesterday's demonstration was the result of a carefully planned
plot matured for nearly a month by the foreign radical element of
Lake County, Indiana. Its stated purpose was to protest against the
conviction of Eugene V. Debs and Kate Richards O'Hare. An
undercurrent of rumor among the radicals gave it a more significant
meaning, however.
"On Thursday secret service men obtained copies of pamphlets
printed in Russian, containing a formula for the manufacture of
explosives. More literature calling for the overthrow of the
government was circulated. A third series of pamphlets contained
the Constitution of the Russian Soviet Republic.
"Friday Morris Lieberman, head of the Socialists, called on Mayor
Hodges for a permit to parade. It was refused with the explanation
that riots such as caused two deaths in Cleveland were feared....
"Early yesterday morning radicals began to arrive in Gary. Cars
from Indiana Harbor, Whiting, Hammond, Crown Point, and trains from
Chicago brought them by the dozens.
"By noon several thousand had gathered in and near the Socialist
headquarters, a mile south of the business district of Gary. Under
portraits of Trotzky and Lenine they sang Russian songs and
gathered about in knots waiting for 'zero hour'--one o'clock.
"Lieberman, fearing bloodshed, decided to counsel his followers
against a parade. They howled him down, however, and hotter heads
took charge of the meeting. A dozen girls, with rolls of red
ribbon, pinned a scarlet strip on the lapel of each man's coat as
he entered the meeting hall. Red neckties were abundant. Red hat
bands made their appearance. Many wore scarlet carnations."
Judge Haas of the Municipal Court of Gary thus commented on those
arrested in the demonstration:
"All except Capolitto have failed to become citizens. All except
him and one other tried to evade war service in our army,
endeavoring to sneak out on the ground of not being citizens of
this country. All they seem to want is to come over here and make
trouble--out of twenty-one gun-toters who have been brought before
me, nineteen have been foreigners and not even citizens."
The leaders of the Marxian movement, both in the United States and
abroad, testify that to be a Socialist is to be a plotter against all
existing forms of government. Marx and Engels, for instance, confess the
truth of this in their celebrated "Communist Manifesto," which they
addressed to their followers over half a century ago, and which is
looked upon even today by the rank and file of the party as embodying
the fundamental principles of International Socialism. "The Communists,"
we are told, "everywhere support every revolutionary movement against
the existing social and political order of things" and "disdain to
conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be
obtained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social
conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a communistic
revolution."
We are indebted to the late August Bebel, the leader of the Socialists
of Germany, for the confession that "along with the state die out its
representatives--cabinet ministers, parliaments, standing armies, police
and constables, courts, attorneys, prison officials, tariff and tax
collectors, in short the whole political apparatus. Barracks and other
such military structures, palaces of law and of administration,
prisons--all will now await better use. Ten thousand laws, decrees and
regulations become so much rubbish; they have only historic value."
["Women Under Socialism," by Bebel, page 319, of the 1904 edition in
English.]
"The People," New York, May 13, 1900, in speaking of the relation of
Socialism to existing forms of government, including our own, affirms
that "while there is a very general idea that Socialism means an
extension of the powers and functions of government, still this is a
very natural and dangerous misconception, and one that ought to be
guarded against." "Socialism," it adds, "does not mean the extension of
government, but on the contrary it means the end, the elimination of
government."
The "International Socialist Review," Chicago, February, 1912, together
with many other magazines and papers current at the time, called
attention to the fact that William D. Haywood, who for a long time had
been before the eyes of the public on account of his revolutionary
utterances and writings, declared in a speech at Cooper Union, in New
York City, that the Socialists were conspirators against the United
States Government.
"The Call," April 1, 1919, in an editorial note says that "the whole
system of government in the United States, Federal, State and Municipal,
seems to be out of date."
Though the men who march behind the red flag, singing the Marseillaise
of the French Revolution, usually deny to the general public, for
reasons of political expediency, that the Socialist movement is a
violent and revolutionary one, it is evident to those who have read
their books, magazines, and papers, that the use of the ballot and
education are not the means on which they rely finally for the
establishment of their visionary commonwealth. Violence is advocated and
habitually practised by the Socialists who constitute the Industrial
Workers of the World, whose banner with the inscription, "No God, No
Master," has brought them into disrepute all over the country. Jack
London, a Socialist widely known in the United States and England as a
novelist, furnishes us with excellent reasons for believing that the
International Socialist Party approves of violence and assassination,
and thereby reaffirms its allegiance to the base principles of the
French Commune. Writing in the "International Socialist Review" of
August, 1909, Jack London made the following comment on the progress of
Socialism in Russia:
"Our comrades in Russia have formed what they call 'THE FIGHTING
ORGANIZATION.' This FIGHTING ORGANIZATION accused, tried, found
guilty and condemned to death one Sipiaguin, Minister of the
Interior. On April 2, he was shot and killed in the Maryinsky
Palace. Two years later the FIGHTING ORGANIZATION condemned to
death and executed another Minister of the Interior, Von Plehve.
Having done so it issued a document, dated July 29, 1904, setting
forth the counts of its indictment of Von Plehve and its
responsibility for the assassination. Now, and to the point, this
document was sent out to the Socialists of the world, and by them
was published everywhere in the magazines and newspapers. The point
is, not that the Socialists of the world were unafraid to do it,
but that they did it as a matter of routine, giving publication to
what might be called an official document of International
Revolutionary Movement."
August Bebel in "Unsere Ziele," page 44, expresses his sentiments on the
subject of violence quite as frankly as Jack London. "We must not
shudder," he tells us, "at the thought of the possible employment of
violence; we must not raise an alarm cry at the suppression of existing
rights, at violent expropriation, etc. History teaches that at all times
new ideas, as a rule, were realized by a violent conflict with the
defenders of the past, and that the combatants for new ideas struck
blows as deadly as possible at the defenders of antiquity. Not without
reason does Karl Marx, in his work on 'Capital' exclaim: 'Violence is
the obstetrician that waits on every ancient society which is about to
give birth to a new one; violence is in itself a social factor.'"
As reference has just been made to Karl Marx, it will be well to call
attention to the fact that the Father of modern Socialism, in "The Civil
War in France," page 78, claims that "the workingmen's Paris, with its
Commune, will forever be celebrated as the glorious harbinger of a new
society." The Commune, then, whose anniversary is celebrated on the 18th
of March, every year, by the Socialists all over the world, has been,
and still is considered the precursor of their contemplated state. The
reign of terror and rebellion in which tens of thousands of Frenchmen
met their death, while public buildings and priceless works of art were
being burned or destroyed and many beautiful churches pillaged, is the
boast of the Socialistic champions of universal peace. The Parisian mob
of criminals and revolutionists, which was finally subdued by 150,000
French troops, after men and women had run about the streets with
petroleum cans, firing public buildings and private houses and seizing
many victims whom they hurried off to death, is, therefore, considered
by the Socialists as one of the most illustrious gatherings of persons
recorded in history, and one worthy of special memory, honor and
respect.
Victor Berger of Wisconsin, speaking in the 1908 National Convention of
the Socialist Party in favor of an amendment to the party constitution,
proposed by Delegate Hazlett, to the effect that any person opposing
political action should be expelled from the party, shows how little
difference there is between the advocates of "political action," who are
supposed to favor the use of the ballot, and the "direct actionists,"
who admit their preference for violence.
"I have heard it pleaded," said Berger, "many a time right in our own
meetings by speakers that come to our meetings, that the only salvation
for the proletariat of America is direct action, that the ballot box is
simply a humbug. Now I don't know how this question is going to be
solved. I have no doubt that in the last analysis we must shoot, and
when it comes to shooting, Wisconsin will be there. We always make
good.... In order to be able to shoot even some day we must have the
powers of political government in our hands, at least to a great extent.
I want that understood. So everybody who is talking to you about direct
action and so on, and about political action being a humbug, is your
enemy today, because he keeps you from getting the powers of political
government." ["Proceedings of the 1908 National Convention of the
Socialist Party," page 241.]
On July 31, 1909, we find Victor Berger, who posed as the special
exponent of "political action," against the "anarchistic" element in his
party, writing as follows in the "Social Democratic Herald" of
Milwaukee:
"No one will claim that I am given to the reciting of revolutionary
phrases. On the contrary I am known to be a constructive Socialist.
However, in view of the plutocratic law making of the present day,
it is easy to predict that the safety and hope of this country will
finally lie in one direction only, that of a violent and bloody
revolution. Therefore, I say, each of the 500,000 Socialist voters
and of the 2,000,000 workingmen who instinctively incline our way,
should, besides doing much reading and still more thinking, also
have a good rifle and the necessary rounds of ammunition in his
home, and be prepared to back up his ballot with his bullets if
necessary. This may look like a startling statement. Yet I can see
nothing else for the American masses today."
In the "Social Democratic Herald," August 14, 1909, Victor Berger drops
a few more words on the same subject in an article entitled: "IF THIS BE
TREASON, MAKE THE BEST OF IT." "There are two ways," says he, "of
effecting great social changes in a republic--the ballot and the bullet.
If our people are not wise--if they are otherwise--then we may have use
for both of them."
Now, if Berger is a specimen of the extreme "political actionist," a
conservative, the enemy of "direct action," who can imagine the
treasonable intentions and bloody thoughts of the immense number of
"direct actionists" who throng the ranks of these national conspirators?
It is not flattering to the State of Wisconsin to realize that Berger
has several times been chosen to represent one of its Congressional
districts in the United States House of Representatives. Yet Berger has
apt pupils. On January 12, 1919, Mayor Hoan of Milwaukee presided at a
Milwaukee meeting of 8,000 "Reds" to protest against the conviction,
under the Espionage Law, of Victor L. Berger and four co-conspirators,
and prolonged cheering and waving of "Red" insignia answered the
following words spoken by William Bross Lloyd (_Testimony, Socialist
Trial, Albany, page 1623_):
"What we want is revolutionary preparedness. We want to
organize.... We want a mobilization plan and an organization for
the revolution. We want to get rifles, machine guns, field
artillery, and the ammunition for it. You want to get dynamite. You
want to tell off the men for the revolution when it starts here.
You want to tell off the men who are to take the dynamite to the
armory doors and blow them in and capture the guns and ammunition
there so that the capitalists won't have any. You want to tell off
the men to dynamite the doors of the banks to get the money to
finance the revolution."
William D. Haywood and Frank Bohn are the joint authors of a pamphlet
entitled, "Industrial Socialism," the revolutionary tenor of which may
be gathered from the following lines:
"When the worker, either through experience or a study of
Socialism, comes to know this truth [i.e., economic determinism],
he acts accordingly. He retains absolutely no respect for the
property rights of the profit takers. He will use any weapon which
will win his fight. He knows that the present laws of property are
made by and for the capitalists. Therefore he does not hesitate to
break them."
Since Haywood and Bohn evidently had no intention of using paper-cap
pistols and pop-guns as their weapons, and since they certainly did not
mean to shoot at stone walls and forest trees, it seems strange that the
Socialist Party, if it does not advocate such doctrines of violence,
should sell these pamphlets at $6 per 100, according to a price list of
its national office in Chicago.
To make matters still worse for the apologists of the Socialist Party of
America, no less a personage than Eugene V. Debs commented as follows,
in the "International Socialist Review," February, 1912, on the
doctrines of Haywood and Bohn just referred to:
"We have here a matter of tactics upon which a number of comrades
of ability and prominence have sharply disagreed. For my part, I
believe the paragraph to be entirely sound. Certainly all
Socialists knowing how and to what end capitalist property rights
are established, must hold such rights in contempt.... As a
revolutionist I can have no respect for capitalist property laws,
nor the least scruple about violating them. I hold all such laws to
have been enacted through chicanery, fraud and corruption, with the
sole end in view of dispossessing, robbing and enslaving the
working class. But this does not imply that I propose making an
individual law breaker of myself, and butting my head against the
stone wall of existing property laws. That might be called force,
but it would not be that. It would be mere weakness and folly. If I
had the force to overthrow these despotic laws, I would use it
without an instant's hesitation or delay, but I haven't got it, so
I am law abiding under protest--not from scruple--and bide my
time."
In the "Appeal to Reason," Girard, Kansas, September 2, 1911, there is
an excellent specimen of one of Debs' revolutionary articles, which
reads in part as follows:
"Let us arouse the working class and invoke their power to smite
the conspirators and set our brothers [the McNamaras] free. They
can be saved in no other way. The lawyers will plead for them to
deaf ears; organized labor will protest against their taking off in
vain. We are confronted by a heartless, soulless plutocracy. Let us
buckle on our armor and fight!... Let us marshal our forces and
develop our power for the revolt! Let us develop without delay all
the power we have, and prepare to strike in every way we know how.
With a general strike we can paralyze the plutocracy from coast to
coast. Hundreds of thousands will join eagerly and serve loyally in
the fight. We can stop the wheels, cut off the food supply, and
compel the plutocrats in sheer terror to sue for peace.... A few
men may be needed who are not afraid to die. Be ye also ready....
Let us swear that we will fight to the last ditch, that we will
strike blow for blow, that we will use every weapon at our command,
and that we will never surrender! Roll up a united Socialist vote
in California that will shake the Pacific Coast like an earthquake,
and back it up with a general strike that will paralyze the
continent.... Let the sturdy toilers of the Pacific Coast raise the
Red standard of revolt."
It was no other than this same Eugene V. Debs, the advocate of violence
and revolution, who on May 17, 1912, was nominated as the presidential
standard bearer of the Socialist Party. If ever elected, what a fine
president he would make, this "poor," "persecuted," self-styled
"flaming-revolutionist," now in jail! What an honorable party it must be
that nominated such a man for the fourth successive time to fill the
office of the presidency of our country! Indeed it was on the very same
day that the followers of Karl Marx chose Debs as their candidate to
rule the United States that they also declared, in the constitution of
their party, that any member who should advocate crime, sabotage or
other methods of violence, as a weapon of the working class to aid it in
its emancipation, should be expelled from membership in the party!
Never can political Socialists convince the American people of their
sincerity and honesty while they nominate for office men like Debs, send
to Congress representatives like Victor Berger, and choose as members of
their national executive committee persons of the stamp of William D.
Haywood. There was no better way for Socialists to convict themselves of
hypocrisy than by retaining in their constitution the clause against
sabotage, referred to above, while at the same time selling at their
National Office books like "Industrial Socialism" and publishing in
their papers and magazines articles advocating and approving "direct
action." By their deeds we judge them, and not by their hypocritical
words.
"The Call," on April 28, 1919, introduces with the following headlines
the long comment that it makes on the Hart-Nearing debate of April 27th
in New York City: "Revolution Is Only Solution of World-Wide Unrest,
Says Nearing." In the course of the article Scott Nearing's suggestion
of revolt is mentioned: "As against Professor Hart's proposal of a
League of Nations, I suggest revolution." The "New York Times," April
28, 1919, commented in part on the debate as follows:
"'Who wants war?' asked Professor Hart. 'Scott Nearing wants war
and the people who think as he does, want war. Revolution is
nothing but civil war and we see its result in the Russian
revolution. Russia passed through three revolutions and is that the
kind of result we want in order to overthrow what he calls this
robber nation?'
"A whirlwind of applause marked this and through the applause was
heard a chorus of voices shouting 'yes.' The meeting cheered
Nearing's frequent references to 'revolution,' to the Russian
Soviet Republic and applauded his radical utterances, although he
had requested that he be permitted to speak without interruption.
The theatre contained about 3,000 persons who filled all the seats,
the stage and stood in the aisles, after paying from 25 cents to
$1.50 admission.
"Judging from the manifestations of approval of Nearing's remarks,
the large audience appeared to be overwhelmingly composed of
revolutionary Socialists, and when the speaker declared he believed
in a League of Socialist Nations the crowd vigorously applauded in
a way that left no doubt of its sentiment."
"The Call" in its May Day issue, 1919, published an article on
present-day revolutionary tactics of the Socialists:
"The world revolution, dreamed of as a thing of the distant future,
has become a live reality, rising from the graves of the murdered
millions and the misery and suffering of the surviving millions. It
has taken form, it strikes forward, borne on by the despair of the
masses and the shining example of the martyrs. Its spread is
irrepressible. The bridges are burnt behind the old capitalist
society and its path is forever cut off. Capitalist society is
bankrupt and the only salvation of humanity lies in the uprising of
the masses, in the victory of the Socialist revolution, in the
renovating forces of Socialism.
"The world war which is now about to be officially closed has slid
into a condition neither war nor peace. However, the war of the
nations has been followed by the war of the classes. The class
struggle is no longer fought by resolutions and demonstrations.
Threateningly it marches through the streets of the great cities
for life or death."
CHAPTER XV
PATRIOTISM RIDICULED AND DESPISED
Though it is evident that there can be no patriotism in men who are
doing their utmost to overthrow our government by stirring up
class-hatred and inciting rebellion, still most of the citizens of our
country have never realized the extent to which Socialists ridicule and
despise patriotism and abhor its very name.
"The Call," September 25, 1912, in answering the charge that Socialism
undermines patriotism, says: "So it does, and is proud of it, if by
patriotism is meant that mawkish sentiment which causes a man, for the
sum of $15 a month, to go out and get himself killed in defense of a
country of which he owns not a single foot and can never hope to own
any. If a wage slave is paid only enough to live on, anyhow, what
difference to him does it make whether his boss is a Britisher or a
Chinaman?"
The Socialists often succeed in stirring up violence during strikes to
develop the spirit of revolt; then, when it becomes necessary for the
state to protect the lives and property of its citizens, the lovers of
rebellion and disorder do their utmost to incite hatred and contempt
against the soldiers who are sent to preserve order.
On February 10, 1912, there appeared in "The Call" an article which
reads as follows:
"The capitalist class, alarmed at the amazingly rapid growth of
anti-militarism in this country, is endeavoring, through church and
government, to combat this just sentiment, and by law and precept
to create an artificial respect and love for the soldiers' uniform
and the American flag.
"'Respect the uniform, honor the flag,' is their cry, and they are
foolish enough to believe that if they raise their voices loud
enough, we, the workers, will become infected by their fictitious
enthusiasm, and shout with them.
"'Honor the uniform!' Oh, surely! Honor the trappings and gold lace
with which they are dressing up their weak-minded scabs! Honor the
uniform which has the power to transform a decent but ignorant boy
of the working class into an unthinking savage, who would, if
ordered to do so by a superior in rank, shoot down his aged father
or kill his sister's unborn child with a bayonet thrust, should
they happen to be on strike and crying aloud for a little more
bread, warmer clothing and better shelter. Honor the uniform? No,
spit on it! Make it a shame and a reproach until a worker who wears
it will not dare to show his face among decent working people.
Honor the uniform! Honor that which gives a free license to kill,
if the victim happens to be a worker? Honor that which stands for
oppression, for the loafer against the worker, for the master
against the slave? Honor that which causes a worker to become a
traitor to his class, to forget his ties of blood, and for pay to
deliver himself over body and soul to his natural enemy, the
capitalist class? Honor the Judases, the Benedict Arnolds of the
working class? Our masters insult us by even asking such a thing.
"Shall we honor the Massachusetts militiamen who, without the
slightest provocation, murdered a young worker? Is that what you
want us to do, you capitalists, you cardinals and presidents? You
ask too late, for we already despise and loathe your decorated
hirelings, and are, as time passes, making it more difficult for
you to recruit our decent boys and transform them into loathsome
parasites."
On May 6, 1919, millions of New Yorkers enthusiastically welcomed the
77th Division of our soldier boys on their return home from the
battle-fields of Europe. Glowing descriptions of the celebration
appeared in nearly all the papers of the Metropolis. A contemptible
account, however, was published the next day in "The Call," showing the
scornful spirit of the Socialists toward the millions of American troops
who made so many sacrifices for their country in the late war. The
article in "The Call" runs as follows:
"Rows and Rows and Rows and Rows and Rows of 'Em March
"_Folks Cheered 77th Division which Finally Changed From Toys Into
Folks, Too._
"A row of mounted police rode up Fifth avenue yesterday.
"A man carrying a banner on which were the words and figures, '77th
Division,' marched up Fifth avenue yesterday.
"A band played all the way up Fifth avenue yesterday.
"A line of soldiers walked up Fifth avenue yesterday.
"A second line of soldiers walked up Fifth avenue yesterday.
"A third line of soldiers walked up Fifth avenue yesterday.
"A fourth line of soldiers walked up Fifth avenue yesterday.
* * * * *
"A soldier carrying a service flag walked up Fifth avenue
yesterday.
* * * * *
"One soldier wore khaki and carried a steel helmet on his shoulder.
"A second soldier wore khaki and carried a steel helmet on his
shoulder.
"A third soldier wore khaki and carried a steel helmet on his
shoulder.
"A fourth soldier wore khaki and carried a steel helmet on his
shoulder.
* * * * *
"They marched precisely.
"They marched steadily.
"They marched firmly.
"They marched in silence.
* * * * *
"The crowds cheered.
"The crowds waved flags.
"The crowds did not fill the stands.
"The crowds applauded.
* * * * *
"The police kept the waves of humanity back.
"The police did not have much trouble.
"The police permitted the crowd to cheer.
"The police permitted the crowds to wave flags.
* * * * *
"Soldiers of the 77th Division marched up Fifth avenue yesterday,
and when they had done marching they broke ranks and greeted their
friends and relatives who had not seen them since they went to war.
* * * * *
"A mother greeted her son with kisses and tears.
"A mother greeted her son with kisses and tears.
"A mother greeted her son with kisses and tears.
"Change the word 'mother' to sweetheart, brother, sister, and keep
on repeating until 'father' is reached and then change 'kisses and
tears' to 'smiles and cheers.'"
The hypocritical Socialists at one moment plead for universal peace, the
desire of nations, and at the next for class hatred. They are trying to
ruin our domestic peace and to expose us to the ravages of lawlessness
and crime. By fostering contempt for soldiers and other guardians of the
peace, they not only make it harder for them to fulfil their duties, but
prevent many from joining the army and navy for the defense of our
country against foreign and domestic foes.
Our country at present is well able to defend itself against foreign
attacks, but if our domestic enemies continue to sow the seeds of
discord and class hatred among our fellow citizens, it will surely fall,
for no nation that is divided against itself can stand.
From the very fact that "The Call" of February 10, 1912, dared to
publish the following article, showing the intense hatred of its author
for the Stars and Stripes, our national emblem, the reader can judge for
himself whether the thousands of unoffended subscribers have the
faintest spark of patriotism in their hearts:
"'At least honor the flag!' they cry in desperation. 'Honor the
flag which stands for freedom, equality and fraternity!'
"What flag? The American flag? The Stars and Stripes? The flag
which floats over every hellhole of mine and mill and prison? The
flag which floats over station house and barracks whence issue
police and soldiers to batter down and murder workers exercising
their constitutional rights of free speech and free assemblage?
Honor the flag which you, our masters, have changed from a flag of
liberty into a symbol of the cruelest exploitation and vilest
oppression of the new civilization?
"If I had been Samuel Gompers when he was reproached by the
capitalists for placing his foot on the American flag, I should
have answered: 'Yes, I trampled on it, and, more than that, I spit
upon your flag, not mine; I loathe the Stars and Stripes, once the
symbol of liberty for all, but now the stripes represent the bloody
stripes left by your lash on the back of the worker, and the stars,
the bullet and bayonet wounds in his breast. To hell with your
flag!...
"Down with the Stars and Stripes! Run up the red flag of humanity."
Not alone do the members of the rank and file of the Socialist Party
attack the Star Spangled Banner, but even its foremost leaders are
guilty of the same offense. "The Comrade," July, 1904, furnishes us
with an attack made upon our country's flag by no less a personage than
Eugene V. Debs:
"Have you a drop of blood in your veins? Has your manhood rotted into
cowardice? Wake up and take your place in the class struggle. For the
desecration of the flag your leader is in jail. What flag? The flag of
the capitalist class--the flag that floats over the bull pens of
Colorado. The wholesome truths he stamped upon its stripes are your
shame and your masters' crime. Rally to the red flag of international
Socialism, the symbol of the proletarian revolt."
CHAPTER XVI
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST OUR COUNTRY
This chapter is the center of our book, the hub where all the spokes of
evidence focus and unite, clearly revealing the unity, power and purpose
of the Wheel of Revolution which now is rolling through the minds and
wills of American radicals. To make this complex plot simple, it has
been analyzed into its parts in the other chapters of "The Red
Conspiracy," so that each element may be weighed by itself. In the
present chapter the results of this analysis are gathered up again, to
show how all the parts fit into one mechanism; and, with the whole thus
seen as one contrivance, the working of each part being understood, the
plan and purpose of the entire invention stands out as clear as day.
But if this chapter is the center of our explanation of "The Red
Conspiracy," the center of the thing itself lies elsewhere. The Great
Red Wheel of Proletarian Revolution is an International Wheel, and both
the hub which unites it and the turning power which moves it are
centered in the old Russian town of Moscow.
Frequently in preceding chapters the reader has been impressed by the
fact that the "Reds" are guilty of conspiracy against all governments,
including that of the United States of America. In the present chapter
we shall discuss this matter of conspiracy much more in detail and
assemble the proofs in such order and strength that no reasonable man
can deny the existence of the widespread plot now fast undermining the
pillars of our country.
The "Reds" under one name or another have in the long run proven to be
far more than evolutionists in the various countries of Europe. Actual
rebellions have shown them to be revolutionists by violence in the
strictest sense of the word in Russia, Germany, Bavaria, Hungary and
even on one of the islands of far distant Japan. Their activities in
England, France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Holland, Bulgaria and many
another foreign land bid fair to give us still further proofs in the
near future that the "Reds" do not intend to wait for success by the
ballot, but that, as soon as they consider themselves a sufficiently
strong and united minority, they will throw off their masks, use rifles
in place of hypocritical words, and work behind barricades instead of
behind closed meeting doors. The Italian Socialists were about to begin
their rebellion when, quite recently, the word came from the Moscow
headquarters of the International conspirators to wait for a more
opportune moment.
It seems quite incredible that the "Reds" of our own country, whether
they be I. W. W.'s, Communists, members of the Communist Labor Party, or
Socialists, should be merely evolutionists, harmless parliamentarians,
when their brethren abroad, with whom they so much sympathize, and upon
whom they look as the saviors of the world and the highest types of
advanced civilization, are either avowedly attempting to overthrow their
governments or else have already done so, and in not a single instance
by means of the ballot. There is an old saying to the effect that we are
known by the company we keep. Since the American "Reds" keep company
with foreign rebels, it is not to be presumed that the latter are demons
and the former saints.
Few specific proofs need be given in this chapter to show that the I. W.
W.'s are guilty of conspiracy against the United States Government, for
a great part of them, especially those most active, belong either to the
Communist, Communist Labor or the Socialist Party, and an abundance of
proofs will be given that these latter organizations are far from being
harmless and innocent political parties.
Moreover, the I. W. W.'s, in their revolutionary "Preamble" and by the
many utterances of their leaders, are openly committed to a conspiracy
of violence against our Government. Relative to the I. W. W. and its
underhand activities, the reader will remember the words of Arturo
Giovannitti, quoted in a previous chapter, from the Socialist Labor
Party paper, "Weekly People," New York, February 10, 1912. That writer,
with all his experience as a leader of the "Wobblies," certainly knew
their plans, and makes this astounding admission relative to the part
that the I. W. W. is expected to take in bringing about the Marxian
rebellion:
"The future of Socialism lies only in the general strike, not
merely a quiet political strike, but one that once started should
go fatally to its end, i.e., armed insurrection, and the forcible
overthrow of all existing social conditions.... The task of
revolution is not to construct the new society, but to demolish the
old one, therefore, its first aim should be at the complete
destruction of the existing state, so as to render it absolutely
powerless to react and re-establish itself.... The I. W. W. must
develop itself as the new legislature and the new executive body of
the land, undermine the existing one, and gradually absorb the
functions of the state until it can entirely substantiate it
through the only means it has, the revolution."
During the year 1919 a very excellent example of how the One Big Union
tried to develop a strike into a rebellion was given in Winnipeg,
Canada. Some time previously we had in our own country an example in the
great strike at Seattle, Washington.
Cases of sabotage, murder and arson are but minor activities of the I.
W. W., and mere circumstances to aid in bringing about the contemplated
rebellion.
Government raids in recent years, and the seizure of hundreds of tons of
inflammatory literature, from which extensive quotations were made in
the daily press, have furnished us with ample proofs that the I. W. W.'s
are national conspirators.
The reader will remember the vivid picture of the contemplated rebellion
in the mind of the "Wobbly" who wrote in "The Rebel Worker," April 15,
1919:
"The United States is in the grip of a bloody revolution! Thousands
of workers are slaughtered by machine guns in New York City!
Washington is on fire! Industry is at a standstill and thousands of
workers are starving! The government is using the most brutal and
repressive measures to put down the revolution! Disorganization,
crime, chaos, rape, murder and arson are the order of the day--the
inevitable results of social revolution!"
The I. W. W.'s are certainly conspirators, and seek the overthrow of our
Government by industrial violence, and we were told by "The Evolution of
Industrial Democracy," page 40, that "Government, as now understood,
will disappear--there being no servile class to be held in
subjection--but in its place will be an administration of affairs."
The spirit of armed rebellion against our Government was foremost in the
minds of the Left Wing members of the Socialist Party who afterwards
formed the Communist and the Communist Labor Parties. We shall recall
some of the words of Louis C. Fraina during the great struggle between
the Rights and Lefts:
"All propaganda, all electoral and parliamentary activity are
insufficient for the overthrow of Capitalism, impotent when the
ultimate test of the class struggle turns into a test of power. The
power for the social revolution issues out of the actual struggles
of the proletariat, out of its strikes, its industrial unions and
mass action."--"The Revolutionary Age," July 12, 1919.
"Socialism will come not through the peaceful, democratic
parliamentary conquest of the state, but through the determined and
revolutionary mass action of a proletarian minority."--"The
Revolutionary Age," July 12, 1919.
"Revolutionary Socialists hold, with the founders of Scientific
Socialism, that there are two dominant classes in society--the
bourgeoisie and the proletariat; that between these two classes a
struggle must go on until the working class, through the seizure of
the instruments of production and distribution, the abolition of
the capitalist state, and the establishment of the dictatorship of
the proletariat, creates a Socialistic system. Revolutionary
Socialists do not believe that they can be voted into power. They
struggle for the conquest of power by the revolutionary
proletariat."--"The Revolutionary Age," March 22, 1919.
"The Communist," of Chicago, April 1, 1919, it will be remembered, in
speaking of November 7, 1919, the day on which the armistice was signed,
said:
"On that day the seething proletariat ruled Chicago by sheer force
of numbers. One thing alone was needed to give this mass expression
identity with the proletarian uprisings in Europe--one thing, the
revolutionary idea."
After the formation of the Communist and Communist Labor parties, in
September, 1919, both made great progress in winning recruits to the
cause of armed rebellion. On January 2, 1920, government agents all over
the country suddenly descended upon the conspirators and took thousands
of them prisoners. Bombs, rifles and other weapons were captured by the
department agents. In Newark 25 rifles and a large number of bombs were
taken, many tons of violent literature were seized and innumerable
quotations from it appeared in the daily press, showing beyond the
shadow of a doubt the evil intentions of these "Reds" against the land
that we love.
The Communist Party of America and the Communist Labor Party have the
same purposes and aims as the Communist Party of Russia. They are joined
with the latter in advocating and supporting the manifesto of the Third
International, which openly urges an armed revolution to bring about the
overthrow of the Government of the United States.
Both parties have conducted effective propaganda work through
newspapers, books, pamphlets and other means. The Communist Party alone
had twenty-five newspapers printed in several languages, actively
supporting its cause. This number was being increased weekly, papers
which were formerly Socialist Party organs going over to its support.
The alien editors of most of these papers were taken by the Department
of Justice agents in the raids.
The Department of Justice naturally was most vitally interested in the
promises of violence against the United States Government contained in
the manifesto of the Communists of the Third International, which was
held at Moscow, March 2 to 6, 1919. Among the passages in the Moscow
manifesto which most interested the Department of Justice were the
following:
"Socialist criticism has sufficiently stigmatized the bourgeois
world order. The task of the International Communist Party is now
to overthrow this order and to erect in its place the structure of
the Socialist world order. We urge the workingmen and women of all
countries to unite under the Communist banner, the emblem under
which the first victories have already been won.
"Proletarians of all lands! In the war against imperialistic
barbarity, against monarchy, against the privileged classes,
against the bourgeois state and bourgeois property, against all
forms and varieties of social and national oppression--unite!
"Under the standard of the Workingmen's Councils under the banner
of the Third International, in the revolutionary struggle for power
and the dictatorship of the proletariat, proletarians of all
countries--unite!"
The manifesto is signed by Lenine, Trotzky and other revolutionaries.
Several references are made to the United States, indicating this
country as one of the objectives of the revolutionaries. Describing the
methods to be used, the manifesto says:
"Civil war is forced upon the laboring classes by their arch
enemies. The working class must answer blow for blow, if it will
not renounce its own object and its own future, which is at the
same time the future of all humanity.
"The Communist parties, far from conjuring up civil war,
artificially, rather strive to shorten its duration as much as
possible--in case it has become an iron necessity--to minimize the
number of its victims, and above all to secure victory for the
proletariat."
Under the caption, "The Way to Victory," the manifesto says:
"The revolutionary era compels the proletariat to make use of the
means of battle which will concentrate its entire energies, namely,
mass action, with its logical resultant, direct conflict with the
governmental machinery in open combat. All other methods, such as
revolutionary use of bourgeoisie parliamentarism, will be of only
secondary significance."
The principles of the American Communist Party set forth in their seized
records and made public by the Department of Justice, are:
"The Communist Party of America is the party of the working class.
The Communists of America propose to end capitalism and organize a
workers' industrial republic. The workers must control industry and
dispose of the products of industry.
"The Communist Party is a party realizing the limitations of all
existing workers' organizations and purposes to develop the
revolutionary movement necessary to free the workers from the
oppression of capitalism. The Communist Party insists that the
problems of the American worker are identical with the problems of
the workers of the world.
"The Communist Party is the conscious expression of the class
struggle of the workers against capitalism. Its aim is to direct
this struggle to the conquest of political power, the overthrow of
capitalism and the destruction of the bourgeois state.
"The Communist Party prepares itself for the revolution in the
measure that it develops a program of immediate action expressing
the mass struggles of the proletariat. These struggles must be
inspired with revolutionary spirit and purposes.
"The Communist Party is fundamentally a party of action. It brings
to the workers a consciousness of their oppression, of the
impossibility of improving their condition under capitalism. The
Communist Party directs the workers' struggle against capitalism,
developing fuller forms and purposes in this struggle, culminating
in the mass action of the revolution.
"The negro problem is a political and economic problem. The racial
oppression of the negro is simply the expression of his economic
bondage and oppression, each intensifying the other. This
complicates the negro problem, but does not alter its proletarian
character. The Communist Party will carry on agitation among the
negro workers to unite them with all class conscious workers."
Little need be added concerning the Communist Labor Party. As its
manifesto and program are practically identical with those of the
Communist Party of America, while all its members are likewise
affiliated with the Third or Moscow International, the foregoing
characterization of the Communist Party applies without essential
modification to the Communist Labor Party. The identical character of
these two parties was asserted by A. Mitchell Palmer, Attorney-General
of the United States, in a statement given out January 23, 1920, and
printed in the "New York Times" of the next day, as follows:
"These two organizations are identical in aim and tactics, the
cause for their separate existence being due to the desire of
certain individuals connected with the so-called Left Wing elements
of the Socialist Party to be leaders. For the sake of convenience I
shall refer to members of the Communist Party of America and the
Communist Labor Party as 'Communists.'"
Attorney-General Palmer then quotes from the manifesto of the Third
International, adopted March 6, 1919, at Moscow, to show, as he says,
"that their sole and intimate aim was to accomplish not only the
conquest but the destruction of the idea of the 'State,' as understood
by loyal American citizens," and that "this destruction was not to be
accomplished by parliamentary action, for it is specifically stated that
it is to be by armed conflict with governmental authority." The
Attorney-General's statement then continues:
"It is this manifesto which was adopted by the Communist parties in
the United States as their program of action....
"In the program of the Communists in the United States we find such
statements as the following:
"'Communism rejects the conception of the State; it rejects the
idea of class reconstruction and the parliamentary conquest of
capitalism....
"'The objective is the conquest by the proletariat of the power of
the State. Communism does not propose to capture the bourgeois
parliament of any State, but to conquer and destroy it.'
"We thus find stated in very clear and plain language the fact that
the aim of the Communists of America is for the destruction of the
government. This shows clearly that the organizations of Communists
in this country aim, not at the change of government of the United
States by parliamentary or political methods, but in the overthrow
and the destruction of the same by mass and direct action, by force
and violence.
"Another point of particular significance to which I feel I should
call your attention, is the fact that the organizations of
Communists in the United States are pledged to destroy the great
and loyal labor organization of America, namely, the American
Federation of Labor, which, according to the Communist Party of
America is considered to be reactionary and a bulwark of
capitalism. Another particularly significant pledge of the
Communists of America is to carry on agitation of the negro workers
of America."
The I. W. W.'s and the members of the Communist and Communist Labor
parties are all openly confessed conspirators against the United States
Government. The members of the Socialist Party are just as bad, and
worse, for they are hypocrites, besides being conspirators.
The Socialists, as we have seen in a former chapter, have for many years
given unlimited support to the I. W. W., knowing full well that it was
an organization pledged to revolution by violence.
The Socialists, moreover, are heart and soul in favor of the Bolsheviki
of Russia, who have issued the manifesto of their International
expressly to stir up revolutions by violence in all countries, including
our own. The Socialists of the United States call themselves Bolsheviki,
are spreading the doctrines of the Bolshevists of Russia and openly
admit that Bolshevism and Socialism are identical.
Until very recently the Socialist Party nursed within its bosom about
70,000 dues-paying members, out of 109,586, who went over to the
Communist and Communist Labor parties. Hence, at least till lately,
nearly two-thirds of its membership consisted of avowed rebels. Has it
changed since the break with the Communists? No, not at all. It is just
as bad as ever, only more hypocritical, more prudent and biding its time
so as not to start a premature revolt. After the wholesale arrests of
the members of the Communist and the Communist Labor parties on January
2, 1920, the Publicity Department of the Socialist Party, 220 South
Ashland Boulevard, Chicago, said: "The Socialist Party herewith raises
its voice in emphatic and solemn protest against these activities on the
part of the hot-headed and overzealous guardians of the safety of the
United States."
Now listen once more to the words of Morris Hillquit, who poses before
the public as in a different class from the American Communists and
Communist Laborites. In "The Call," May 21, 1919, in a long article in
large type covering half the editorial page, Morris Hillquit said of the
"Left Wing" movement: "I am one of the last men in the party to ignore
or misunderstand _the sound revolutionary impulse_ which animates the
rank and file of this new movement, but the specific form and direction
which it has assumed, its program and tactics, spell disaster to our
movement. I am opposed to it, _not because it is too radical_, but
because it is _essentially reactionary_ and non-Socialistic; _not
because it would lead us too far_, but because it would lead us nowhere.
To prate about the dictatorship of the proletariat and of workers'
Soviets in the United States _at this time_ is to deflect the
Socialistic propaganda from its realistic basis, and to advocate the
abolition of all social reform planks in the party platform means to
abandon _the concrete class struggle_ as it presents itself from day to
day." (Italics mine.)
The wisdom of this crafty, go-slow policy is now apparent, with the
"Left Wing" leaders in jail, and Hillquit's chameleons now posing as
angels of light, the saviors of "representative government" in America.
The fact that the Socialist Party of America "goes into politics" does
not make it less dangerous than the other revolutionary bodies, but more
dangerous, for it thus expects to have men in political positions to
seize the reins of government when the hour of blood and violence
arrives. That this is its definite policy, the meaning of its political
activity, was apparent as far back as its National Convention of 1908,
when, in opposing those who would dismiss the use of the ballot in favor
of "direct action"--violence--exclusively, Victor L. Berger said:
"I have no doubt that in the last analysis we must shoot, and when
it comes to shooting, Wisconsin will be there.... In order to be
able to shoot even some day we must have the powers of political
government in our hands, at least to a great extent. I want that
understood. So everybody who is talking to you about direct action
and so on, and about political action being a humbug, is your enemy
today, because he keeps you from getting the powers of political
government." ("Proceedings of the 1908 National Convention of the
Socialist Party," page 241.)
In the "Social Democratic Herald" of Milwaukee, July 31, 1909, Berger
wrote: "It is easy to predict that the safety and hope of this country
will finally lie in one direction only, that of a violent and bloody
revolution. Therefore, I say, each of the 500,000 Socialist voters and
of the 2,000,000 workingmen who instinctively incline our way, should,
besides doing much reading and still more thinking, also have a good
rifle and the necessary rounds of ammunition in his home, and be
prepared to back up his ballot with his bullets if necessary. This may
look like a startling statement. Yet I can see nothing else for the
American masses today." In the same paper, August 14, 1909, he wrote:
"We should be grateful if the social revolution, if the freeing of
75,000,000 whites, would not cost more blood than the freeing of
4,000,000 negroes in 1861."
Thus the Socialist Party of America, under the tutelage and control of
far-seeing and deep-witted leaders like Hillquit and Berger, is by far
the most dangerous band of conspirators in the United States. No
"revolutionary impulse" is too extreme for Hillquit, no movement is "too
radical;" but its "program and tactics" must be deep-laid, deceptive,
seizing every present political advantage so that the central power can
be grasped by astute leadership in one lurch when the hour of "shooting"
arrives.
The dramatic violence of Lenine and Trotzky passed through all the
radical bodies in America like an electric shock, and the enthusiasts
wished to start a ruction right away. But Morris Hillquit was not
carried off his feet. If the boys were so senseless as to try to seize
the reins of party government, Hillquit would dismiss them with a
friendly wave, as in his article, quoted above, in which he also says:
"There is, as far as I can see, but one remedy. It would be futile to
preach reconciliation and union where antagonism runs so high. Let the
Comrades on both sides do the next best thing. Let them separate,
honestly, freely, and without rancor. Let each side organize and work in
its own way, and make such contribution to the Socialist movement in
America as it can." If the "contribution" of the boys should really turn
out to be a successful general strike and overturn, who would be better
able to grasp the power than an astute leader like Hillquit?
This book was written before the Judiciary Committee of the New York
Assembly began its inquiry, in January, 1920, into the fitness of five
Socialist Assemblymen to act as law-makers, and since then has only
received the addition of some important facts and testimony. It is
remarkable, therefore, that all the evidence independently sifted in
that investigation overwhelmingly points to the same conclusions arrived
at in this volume.
On January 21, 1920, at the second day's hearing at Albany, as reported
in the "New York Times" of January 22, John B. Stanchfield and Martin W.
Littleton, of counsel for the Judiciary Committee, stated the
fundamental nature of the charges brought against the five suspended
Socialists--charges based, as is well known, on the results of raids and
investigations of radicalism by the New York State Legislative
Committee, Senator Lusk, Chairman. Said Mr. Stanchfield:
"When the Chairman read from the statement yesterday that the
charge against these men was disloyalty, and that they had
affiliated themselves with a party whose platform and program call
for an overthrow of this Government by violence, he added that we
will prove this beyond the shadow of a doubt.
"We are not upon this investigation engaged in a discussion of the
philosophy of Socialism or its economics. We are engaged in an
investigation of its tactics, its methods, its practical program,
and these tactics, these methods, and that program called for the
overturn of the power of this State and its annihilation, its utter
and complete annihilation."
Mr. Littleton said:
"The representation with reference to what these five men did and
what they profess and what they engaged to do stands out as plainly
as any thing can stand out--that they gave their allegiance wholly
and solely to an alien and invisible empire known as the
Internationale. It stands out that they are the citizens, not in
reality of the country which sustains and maintains them, but they
are citizens of this invisible empire which projects itself as a
revolutionary force into every country, menacing its institutions
and threatening its overthrow. Their allegiance before they ever
entered upon the threshold of this chamber was given to this
empire, which masquerades at one time with the softness of
parliamentary reform and which declares itself in favor of
revolution with force, according to the place and time where it may
so declare.
"It is that alien state, people of alien races--pledged to the
destruction of this Government and its institutions--that the
charges say that these men belong to and act with....
"Perhaps at a later day in this proceeding we will ascertain the
specific program to which they pledged themselves, the program of
Mr. Lenine and Mr. Trotzky, not to reform Russia--that is a
misconception and a misdirection; it is not that Lenine and Trotzky
are trying to reform Russia or change Russia, it is that Lenine and
Trotzky, acting through these agencies, are proposing the
installation of the same kind of government in constitutional
America that they have inaugurated in Russia, and these are the
agents and the instructors, according to the charge, to carry out
that program.
"It is quite a different thing from expressing your sympathy in a
convention for downtrodden Russia. It is a little different
program, Mr. Chairman, and the evidence in this case will disclose
that these members, in conjunction with that party, have tied
themselves irrevocably to the program.
"So that charge involves, I should say, a grave question as to
whether these men, pledged to an alien empire to carry out an alien
policy and to do it masquerading as a political party, shall be
members of that Assembly and can take the oath of office.
"Our ideals are the embodiment of the Constitution which these men
ought to have been able to take the oath to and support. No alien,
invisible empire, having one corner of it resting in the heart of
Soviet Russia, another corner of it resting upon the shoulders of
the Spartacides in Germany, and another resting somewhere else, you
swore allegiance to, but to this country and this standard and no
other country or standard--that is the ideal which we take the oath
for and undertake to support.
"Now, with that situation, here is an Assembly organized under the
ideals of that country and under its Constitution, and the question
here is, Can that Assembly inquire into whether or not five of its
members are disloyal to the country have foresworn themselves and
given their allegiance to an alien and an invisible empire, and
placed themselves in the hands of a master who can withdraw them
from this Assembly when he chooses? Can such a deliberative body as
this make that inquiry, and, finding the fact out, can it expel
that agency from this body before the poison has contaminated the
system?"
Mr. Littleton here took up the charge that the five Socialist
Assemblymen, before taking office, had placed their resignations in the
hands of their party leaders, or their local organizations, to be used
to withdraw them from office should they fail to carry out their party's
behest. He continued:
"What is the charge here? That these men, belonging to the
invisible empire of the Internationale, whose agents may be violent
or peaceable, according as the law allows, and according as they
may escape, are here acting as agents of Lenine and Trotzky, not to
establish a Soviet Republic under the rotten ruins of an infamous
democracy, but to establish a Soviet Republic on the ruins of a
Constitution to which every man is pledged by every ounce of his
blood and by that solemn vow which he registered in heaven when he
entered on the duties of his office.
"Mr. Chairman, before this investigation is over and before the
waves which have been stirred, the waves of public opinion, have
subsided, I make no threat, but I make a prediction, that this
country will understand that this so-called political party,
masquerading as a political party, is the agent and the
co-conspirator with the dark forces of this invisible empire whose
object is the forcible destruction of constitutional government in
America.
"I say this question, before it is over, will arouse this country.
It will not be a tempest in the teapot. It will be a question as to
whether they can hypocritically masquerade as a political party,
and strike hands with every agency of force and revolution, and
still make simple American people understand they are not sworn
enemies of their country and ready to overthrow it."
The power of the "invisible empire" established by Lenine and Trotzky
can be traced in the quotations in this book as a great dramatic energy
which has seized and dragged into its vortex one after another of the
radical organizations in the United States until none are now left out,
and some even of the comparatively conservative trades union bodies
appear to be trembling on the verge of peril. The evil fascination of
the blood-reign of Lenine and Trotzky has been most remarkably evident
in the Socialist Party of America, and precisely so because an element
in this organization developed a strong power of resistance--only to
succumb at last.
The story of this struggle is told in Chapters III to V of this work,
where we see the Moscow Magnet dragging one section so much more rapidly
than the rest moved that the Socialist Party at first stretched out into
two wings, the Left and the Right, and then exploded into three parts,
the Communist Labor Party, the Communist Party of America and that which
still calls itself the Socialist Party of America.
We cannot forget the significant statement by Morris Hillquit in the
"New York Call" after the Chicago Emergency Convention of September,
1919. This was put in evidence against the Socialist Party of America
during the trial before the New York Assembly's Judiciary Committee and
appeared in the "New York Herald" of January 29, 1920. Hillquit's letter
in the "Call" raised the question, "What shall be the attitude of the
Socialist Party toward the newly formed Communist organization?" In
answering this question Hillquit used the following remarkable
expressions:
"The division _was not brought about by differences on vital
questions of principles_. It arose over disputes on methods and
policy. The separation of the Socialist Party into three
organizations _need not necessarily mean a weakening of the
Socialists_.... Our quarrel is a _family_ quarrel, and has no room
in the columns of the capitalistic papers.... We have had our
split.... Now we are through with it. Legitimate constructive work
of the Socialist movement is before us. Let us give it all of our
time, energies and resources. Let us center our whole fight upon
capitalism, and let us hope _our Communist brethren_ will go and do
likewise." (Italics mine.)
The difference, then, is not at all one of "principles," but only one of
"methods and policy," that is, of cunning in putting on disguises; and
in this we concede that the Socialist Party of America is greatly
superior to its "Communist brethren."
Another evidence of this cunning, brought out at the trial of the
Socialist Assemblymen in January, 1920, bears directly upon the
conspiratory character of the Socialist Party's policy of "political
action." According to the "New York Evening Sun," January 22, 1920, the
following from the Socialist Party's New York State Constitution was put
in evidence:
"All candidates or appointees to public office selected by the
dues-paying membership of the Socialist Party of the State of New
York, or any of its subdivisions, shall sign the final resignation
blank before nomination is made official or appointment is made
final."
The form of resignation, also put in evidence, is here reproduced from
the same issue of the "Evening Sun":
"To the end that my official acts may at all times be under the
direction and control of the party membership, I hereby sign and
place in the hands of Local (........) my resignation to any office
to which I may be elected (or appointed), such resignation to
become effective whenever a majority of the local shall so vote. I
sign this resignation voluntarily as a condition of receiving said
nomination, and pledge my honor as a man and Socialist to abide by
it."
One of the by-laws of the New York County organization put in evidence
also reads:
"On accepting a nomination of the party for public office, the
candidate shall at once give to the executive committee a signed
resignation of the office for which he is nominated, and shall
assent in writing to its being filed with the proper authority, if,
in case of election, he proves disloyal to the party."
A protest had been made to the New York Assembly claiming that "the
fundamental principles of representative government" would be violated
in refusing to seat the five suspended Socialist Assemblymen. But it is
plain that men controlled in office by such a secret device would not
really represent their districts, nor those who voted for them, but only
the members of the dues-paying locals or the executive committee holding
their resignations; and in cases of some of the suspended Socialists it
was said that of the votes they received not one in ten nor even one in
twenty had been cast by a dues-paying Socialist. At the trial Morris
Hillquit, of counsel for the defense, tried to break the force of this
damaging evidence by getting in testimony "that this provision of the
State Constitution has been a dead letter since its inception." (New
York "Evening Sun," January 22, 1920.) But this hypocrisy was thoroughly
exposed by the testimony given on January 28, 1920, by George R. Lunn,
Democratic Mayor of Schenectady, who had been a candidate for that
office three times as a Socialist. The following summary of his
testimony is from the "New York Sun" of January 29, 1920:
"The outstanding features of Mayor's Lunn's testimony were his
statements that on the night before election in 1911, when he was
running for Mayor on the Socialist ticket, two members of the party
went to his home and presented a blank resignation for his
signature. This, he said, he signed in order to 'avoid a squabble,'
although he considered it 'child's play and illegal.' He refused,
he said, in 1913 to sign the required resignation before the
election. This time he was defeated. In 1915, he testified, he was
again nominated and elected, after repudiating that part of the
Socialist Constitution which bound him to follow the dictates of
his party leaders. The result, he said, was that the State
organization revoked the charter of the entire Schenectady local in
order to discipline him."
In a ninety-page brief, submitted to members of the New York Assembly on
February 12, 1920, by counsel of the Judiciary Committee, after five
weeks of investigating the qualifications of the suspended Socialist
Assemblymen, Attorney-General Charles D. Newton and the other signers
said that the five Socialists by "their promise ... to place their
resignations in the hands of the dues-paying members ... abdicated their
functions as Assemblymen and disqualified themselves from taking the
oath of office and rendered their oath false." ("New York Times,"
February 13, 1920.)
The same brief, according to the "Times" of above date, says:
"A decent regard for the Assembly as the popular representative
house of the State requires that these five Assemblymen be excluded
from their seats. They have taken a false oath to secure seats
which they cannot occupy as gentlemen, patriots, loyal citizens or
Assemblymen. They come here under the false pretense of being loyal
to their Government, when in fact they are really citizens of the
Internationale, and desire above all things the destruction of this
Government."
The Socialist Party of America is also denounced by the same brief on
three other counts, which the "New York Times" of February 13, 1920,
thus summarizes:
"The Socialist Party is a revolutionary party, having the single
purpose of destroying our institutions and Government, which they
abhor, and substituting the Russian Soviet Government or the
proletariat Government instead to be controlled by themselves. This
appears from their platforms and propaganda.
"The Socialist Party is not a national party, like the Democratic
Party or the Republican Party, whose aim is to conserve and
preserve the nation. The Socialist Party is an anti-national party
whose allegiance is given to the Internationale and not to the
United States, whose Government and institutions it would destroy.
"'Mass action' and the 'general strike' are advocated and urged by
the Socialist Party as a part of the plan to bring about conditions
favorable to revolution, and as instruments of revolution, and not
to remedy industrial evils. The revolutionary purpose and
non-political character of such acts make them treasonable, and,
whether criminal or not in the absence of such purpose, treasonable
with it."
This last point, the attitude of the Socialist Party of America toward
"mass action" and the "general strike," is of the utmost importance as
evidence that the Socialist Party stands for seizure of the Government
of the United States by revolutionary violence; for the reader will
recall abundant proof in this book that it is precisely by means of
"mass action" and the "general strike" that both of the Communist
parties in this country expect to destroy our existing Government, these
"instruments of revolution" being also the very ones recommended by the
Communist manifesto of the Third (Moscow) International, and the ones
employed by the I. W. W. in its industrial battles.
The Moscow Manifesto, as cited from the copy of it in the "New York
Call" of July 24, 1919, gives the Third International's plan of action
for world revolution in a nutshell:
"The revolutionary epoch demands that the proletariat should employ
such fighting methods as will concentrate its entire energy, viz.,
the method of mass action, and lead to its logical consequence--the
direct collision with the capitalist state machine in an open
combat. All other methods, e.g., revolutionary use of bourgeois
parliamentarism will in the revolution have only a subordinate
value."
It is very significant, therefore, that the Socialist Party of America
definitely committed itself to these tactics in the manifesto it adopted
at the Chicago Emergency Convention on September 4, 1919. As given in
the "Call" of September 5, 1919, the manifesto of the Socialist Party of
the United States says on this point:
"The great purpose of the Socialist Party is to wrest the
industries and the control of the Government of the United States
from the capitalists and their retainers. It is our purpose to
place industry and government in the control of the workers with
hand and brain, to be administered for the benefit of the whole
community.
"To insure the triumph of Socialism in the United States the bulk
of the American workers must be strongly organized politically as
Socialists, in constant, clear-cut and aggressive opposition to all
parties of the possessing class. They must be strongly organized in
the economic field on broad industrial lines, as one powerful and
harmonious class organization, co-operating with the Socialist
Party, and ready in cases of emergency to reinforce the political
demands of the working class by industrial action.
"To win the American workers from their ineffective and
demoralizing leadership, to educate them to an enlightened
understanding of their own class interests, and to train and assist
them to organize politically and industrially on class lines, in
order to effect their emancipation, that is the supreme task
confronting the Socialist Party in America.
"To this great task, without deviation or compromise, we pledge all
our energies and resources. For its accomplishment we call for the
support and co-operation of the workers of America and of all other
persons desirous of ending the insane rule of capitalism before it
has had the opportunity to precipitate humanity into another
cataclysm of blood and ruin.
"Long live the International Socialist Revolution, the only hope of
the suffering world!"
So culminates and ends this 1919 national convention manifesto of the
Socialist Party of America. This dedication of that party to the
"supreme task" of "strongly organizing" the "bulk of the American
workers" into "one powerful and harmonious class organization" in order
that "industrial action" may "reinforce the political demands of the
working class," adds greatly to the significance of some testimony by
leading Socialists in the inquiry of the New York Assembly's Judiciary
Committee at Albany. On January 30, 1920, Algernon Lee, educational
director of the Rand School and secretary of the New York County
Committee of the Socialist Party, was sworn and testified as follows,
according to the "New York Herald" of January 31, 1920:
"Mr. Lee ... described at length what Socialists mean by direct
mass action and the general strike. He said the general strike had
been used with some degree of success in Russia and Belgium....
'The general strike is often used to back up political action,' the
witness said. He justified combining economic strikes as a
political weapon....
"'Let us assume for the moment,' said Mr. Conboy, 'that these five
gentlemen whose seats are in question ... should present a
political program here in the shape of proposed legislation, and
they were reinforced by the combination in industrial action,
including within its weapons the general strike. It would be
possible for them, would it not, in the event that the Legislature
of this State refused to adopt the movement which they presented
for adoption by the Legislature, to cripple the industries of the
State and to starve the people thereof?'
"'I think you are assuming, I may almost say, an impossible
condition,' replied Mr. Lee, 'that the people should elect an
overwhelming majority upon one side and then be so overwhelmingly
organized as to be able to use industrial action on the other
side.'"
But here Mr. Lee simply concealed the truth behind hypocritical
camouflage by using the term, "the people," ambiguously. For our people
might go on as now, conducting constitutional government by
representatives in all their legislatures elected by "an overwhelming
majority upon one side," while at the same time the underground work
might go on of "strongly organizing" "the bulk of the American workers"
into "one powerful and harmonious class organization" ready for
"industrial action." In that case, a "general strike" would absolutely
paralyze the whole country, and "the people" and all their legislatures
alike would have to surrender absolutely to any demands made upon them,
or would have to engage instantly in such a civil war as the world has
not yet seen, carried on under conditions of indescribable chaos.
Moreover the underground work of revolutionary "industrial organization"
need be only partial, need, in fact, be carried on only a little beyond
conditions already actually existing, in order to establish a
"dictatorship of the proletariat," or else terrible civil war, in many
of our American cities by the simple process of calling general strikes.
The reader who questions this should learn the facts about the Winnipeg
general strike of May 1-June 15, 1919, "the culmination of the
development of the One Big Union movement in Canada" (page 333 of "The
American Labor Year Book, 1919-1920, edited by Alexander Trachtenberg,
Director, Department of Labor Research, Rand School of Social Science"),
which held a city of 200,000 terrorized for six weeks under the absolute
dictatorship of a Strike Committee elected by the strikers, while "many
cities, including Calgary, Edmonton and Toronto, meanwhile joined the
general strike in sympathy with Winnipeg." (Ibid., page 334.)
The strikers included the employees of the fire, water supply, health,
street cleaning, light and power, transportation, telegraph, telephone
and postal departments of the city, together with the janitors of
buildings, elevator men, wholesale and retail clerks and the carters and
deliverers of the stores, railways and express companies, thus cutting
off the city from the rest of the world and even from the supplies and
facilities within its own bounds except only as the Strike Committee
made concessions. "I could have a glass of milk or lunch if I had a
ticket from the Strike Committee. Otherwise I couldn't." This was the
testimony of Mr. Robert McKay, of Winnipeg, February 10, 1920, and
printed in the Albany "Knickerbocker Press" of February 11, 1920, from
which we take the facts. Even the Winnipeg newspapers failed to appear
after the first three days of the strike, while the city police also
voted to strike, but continued on duty under command of the Strike
Committee.
At length a Citizens' Committee was organized, 100 men at first, which
grew to 1,000, and even 10,000, Mr. McKay says. "The regular police was
replaced by 1,500 special police, assisted by mounted police and
militia," and "during the last two weeks there were two riots, in which
two persons were shot by the mounted police." (Account in Trachtenberg's
"Year Book," above quoted, page 334.) In other words, Winnipeg was only
delivered by means of rescue from outside and by incipient civil war,
the ringleaders of the dictatorship being arrested and indicted for
trial.
Yet are there some Americans still so blinded by foolish optimism as to
think we are in no danger--even at a time when all the "Reds" of
America, inflamed by the Third International, are uniting in feverish
haste to carry "industrial organization" to a sufficient state to make
it an instrument for holding up the whole American people? If the false
prophets of optimism pooh-pooh the peril and label intelligent warnings
as "hysteria," will it be the first time in history that this was done
by men of weight and influence in the very shadow of a great, impending
rebellion and down to the very hour of its outbreak?
Mr. Lee's testimony on January 30, 1920, as quoted above, was
voluntarily supplemented by a statement by Seymour Stedman, of counsel
for the five Socialist Assemblymen and a prominent Socialist himself,
one of the National Executive Committeemen who fought the Left Wing to
keep the control of the party in 1919. We quote from the report of the
trial in the "New York Times" of January 31, 1920:
"Mr. Lee was next asked to explain what was meant by the pledge of
the Socialist anti-war faction to support 'mass action' against
conscription. He answered that the general strike was included in
the term 'mass action,' but that the word contemplated other
methods as well.
"'Is it part of the Socialist Party plans to use the general strike
to back up political action?'
"'If the circumstances should exist which made that necessary, I
take it that it would be construed so,' said the witness.
"Mr. Conboy was unable to pin the witness down to a definition of
what circumstances would make the Socialists resort to direct
action. Mr. Stedman interrupted:
"'There was a bill to nationalize the railroads,' he said. 'The men
went on strike to reinforce their demands. I can see the miners and
the whole working class going on a strike protesting against the
Government paralyzing them rather than taking the mine owners by
the collar. That will be general. If the working class made such a
demand to reinforce a general political demand for the relaxation
of such an injunction, the Socialists would stand side by side with
them everywhere. Personally, I think the mining situation was an
instance where there should have been a general strike.'"
It is important to emphasize the proofs that the Socialist Party of
America has openly committed itself to the sanction and advocacy of
"industrial" violence in furtherance of its avowed intention "to wrest
industry and the control of the government of the United States" from
the whole American people and place them in the hands of a special
class. For since the wholesale arrests of "Reds" by the Department of
Justice were made, followed by the institution of the inquiry into the
qualifications of the five Socialist Assemblymen at Albany, a new,
general movement became discernible among the radicals, a movement to
disguise their real principles, camouflage their plan of action and
carry their propaganda "under ground."
Hillquit, Victor L. Berger and the other shrewd leaders of the Socialist
Party realized early in 1919 that the programs of violence against this
country, flaunted openly by the Left Wing leaders, would bring down the
hand of the Government upon the conspirators. As early as April 19,
1919, Julius Gerber, Executive Secretary of the New York Local of the
Socialist Party, in a private letter which we quote from the Left Wing
"New York Communist." May 1, 1919, stated that "the control of the party
by these irresponsible people will make the party an outlaw
organization, and break up the organization."
Yet the call for the Third (Moscow) International had cunningly
classified the Socialists of the world into three groups, a Right, a
Center and "the Revolutionary Left Wing." This last group included the
friends of Moscow, the elements of the Third International; and those
credited to it in America, who received invitations to the Moscow
Conference of March 2-6, were the Socialist Labor Party, the I. W. W.,
the Workers' International Industrial Union and "the elements of the
Left Wings of American Socialist Propaganda (tendency represented by E.
V. Debs and the Socialist Propaganda League)." The group of the Right,
the other extreme, was completely condemned by the Moscow call as
"avowed social-patriots who, during the entire duration of the
imperialistic war between the years 1914 and 1918 have supported their
own bourgeoisie."
But the "Center" was described as "represented by leaders of the type of
Karl Kautsky, and who constitute a group composed of ever-hesitating
elements, unable to settle on any determined direction and who up to
date have always acted as traitors." "In regard to the 'Center,'" the
call continues, "the tactics consist in separating from it the
revolutionary elements, in criticizing pitilessly its leaders and in
dividing systematically among them the number of their followers." The
Left Wing leaders in America, however, ignoring the recognition of a
"Center" in this country, lumped together and designated as the "Right"
all their Socialist opponents, the special followers of Hillquit, Victor
L. Berger and the other "bosses" of the Socialist Party; but they
certainly followed the tactics of "criticizing pitilessly its leaders."
(See the Moscow call in Chapter III and the details of the Left Wing
fight in Chapters III, IV and V.)
These facts explain the course pursued by Hillquit and his
fellow-leaders. In the first place they had to get rid of the Left Wing
leaders whose "control of the party" would make it "an outlaw
organization and break up the organization." This they accomplished by
wholesale expulsions and suspensions, as we have seen in earlier
chapters. But in the second place they had to prepare a sufficiently
strong public declaration of the real revolutionary principles of their
party and a sufficiently explicit identification of the party with the
Moscow International to satisfy both the rank and file of their
followers and Lenine and Trotzky in Russia, while yet not going far
enough to incriminate themselves with the awakening suspicions of our
National and State Governments. As a result we have the utterances of
the Emergency Convention of August-September, 1919, where every
compromising word was still only a hint of the principles and plan of
action carefully concealed behind it.
Even so, the leaders soon realized that they had revealed too much of
the truth for their safety; while the wholesale arrests, indictments and
deportations of radicals evidently convinced these cunning plotters that
the old-time disguises and hypocrisies of Hillquit, Victor Berger and
the other foxes of the party were the only safe tactics for
revolutionists in America. Thus Ludwig C. A. K. Martens, the Bolshevist
"ambassador," himself led the retreat in his smooth lies to the United
States Senate Foreign Sub-Committee, to the effect that the dictatorship
in Russia no longer regarded it as necessary to urge those affiliated
with it in other countries to overthrow the existing governments.
Undoubtedly he had made the American situation perfectly clear to Lenine
and Trotzky.
The reappearance of Morris Hillquit in the Assembly case at Albany, on
February 17, 1920, and his appearance on the witness-stand as "an expert
on Socialism," was a similar attempt to repair the breaches with
camouflage. It was his part with an amused smile to show that
"industrial organization," "industrial action," "mass action" and
"general strikes" really mean nothing in the Socialist Party's
manifestoes, platforms and programs, and that his party's affiliation
with the Third (Moscow) International was a mere meaningless, friendly
gesture. But these party utterances and acts meant all and even more
than they said to the party's rank and file and confederates.
It was brought out in the testimony at Albany on February 10, 1920, that
the minority report of the Emergency Convention, decreeing affiliation
with the Moscow International, had been adopted by a referendum vote of
the party's rank and file, 3,495 votes for to 1,449 against. The wording
of this report, here given in part from Trachtenberg's 1919-20 Labor
Year Book, page 411, is another of those brilliant attempts at
camouflage for which the "Yellow" Socialists are famous:
"Any International, to be effective in this crisis, must contain
only those elements who take their stand unreservedly upon the
basis of the class struggle, and their adherence to this principle
is not mere lip loyalty....
"The Socialist Party of the United States, in principle and in its
past history, has always stood with those elements of other
countries that remained true to their principles. The manifestoes
adopted in national convention at St. Louis (1917) and Chicago
(1919), as well as Referendum 'D,' 1919, unequivocally affirm this
stand.[K] These parties, the majority parties of Russia, Italy,
Switzerland, Norway, Bulgaria and Greece, and growing minorities in
every land, are uniting on the basis of the preliminary
convocation, at Moscow, of the Third International. As in the past,
so in this extreme crisis, we must take our stand with them.
"The Socialist Party of the United States, therefore, declares
itself in support of the Third (Moscow) International, not so much
because it supports the 'Moscow' programs and methods, but because:
"(a) 'Moscow' is doing something which is already challenging world
imperialism.
"(b) 'Moscow' is threatened by the combined capitalist forces of
the world simply because it is proletarian.
"(c) Under these circumstances, whatever we may have to say to
'Moscow' afterwards, it is the duty of Socialists to stand by it
now because its fall will mean the fall of Socialist republics in
Europe, and also the disappearance of Socialist hopes for many
years to come."
If Moscow's "programs and methods" are only the minor reason for
supporting Moscow, what is the major reason for this "support?" What is
the Third (Moscow) International "doing" which "is really challenging"
the "world," arraying the "forces of the world" against it and thus
making its own "fall" a serious possibility? We examine (see Chapters
III and IV and the present chapter) the Third (Moscow) International's
call to the March, 1919, Conference and the manifesto sent out from it,
and we see what it has done in challenge of the rest of the world. It
has declared war against the rest of the world and its existing
governments, the "Entente Powers," "The White Terror of the
bourgeoisie," as it calls them in the "Manifesto of the Moscow
International" published in the "New York Call" of July 24, 1919, from
which we here quote; and against these "Entente Powers," "The White
Terror," the manifesto continues, "Against this the proletariat must
defend itself--defend itself at all costs! The Communist International
calls the whole world-proletariat to this, the final struggle! Down with
the imperialist conspiracy of capital! Long live the International
Republic of Proletarian Soviet!" (Ibid.)
Thus complete identification with this proletarian declaration of war
against the "Entente Powers" was the major aim of the Socialist Party of
the United States in voting for affiliation with Moscow. This is the
principal ground on which it "declares itself in support of the Third
(Moscow) International" and proclaims it to be "the duty of Socialists
to stand by it now." Just as Hillquit differed from the Left Wingers,
now his "communist brethren," not "on vital questions of principles,"
but only "on methods and policy," opposing their "movement" "not
because" it was "too radical" or "would lead us too far," but simply
because its "specific form and direction, ... its program and tactics,"
would "spell disaster," so Hillquit's Party supported the Third (Moscow)
International "not so much because" of its "programs and methods" as
because what it was "doing," its war-declaration and marshaling of the
world's proletarian forces against the "Entente Powers," was "really
challenging world imperialism."
Is not one mind, one aim, one intent, one purpose and hatred
consistently evident in all these utterances? And thus we understand the
vehemence of the Chicago Manifesto of September 4, 1919, "largely based
upon one suggested by Morris Hillquit," as the "Call," New York, of
September 5, 1919, says. The following quotation from the Chicago
Manifesto, as printed in the "New York Call" of September 5, 1919, and
also in Trachtenberg's Labor Year Book, 1919-1920, pages 413-14, shows
that the Socialist Party of America completely repudiates the so-called
"Moderate" Socialists, and supports the Bolshevist and Communist violent
revolutionists:
"The Socialist Party of the United States at its first national
convention after the war, squarely takes its position with the
uncompromising section of the international Socialist movement. We
unreservedly reject the policy of those Socialists who supported their
belligerent capitalist governments on the plea of 'national defense,'
and who entered into demoralizing compacts for so-called civil peace
with the exploiters of labor during the war and continued a political
alliance with them after the war. We, the organized Socialists of
America, pledge our support to the revolutionary workers of Russia in
the maintenance of their Soviet Government, to the radical Socialists of
Germany, Austria and Hungary in their efforts to establish working-class
rule in their countries, and to those Socialist organizations in
England, Italy and other countries who during the war, as after the war,
have remained true to the principles of uncompromising international
Socialism."
Just as the Moscow Manifesto cries out, "Long live the International
Republic of Proletarian Soviet!" so does Hillquit's manifesto, adopted
September 4, 1919, by the Socialist Party, "hold out to the world the
ideal of a federation of free and equal Socialist nations." A common
zeal for the violent overthrow of the world's existing non-Socialist
governments, in order to set up a world-empire of Socialism, is the
major feature of the Socialist Party's unity with the Moscow plotters
and incendiaries.
But while Moscow's "programs and methods" are "not so much" the concern
of the American Socialist Party as the "federation of ... Socialist
nations," yet these Moscow "programs and methods" are themselves also
distinctly adopted and enthusiastically followed by the American
Socialists.
The Moscow Manifesto ("New York Call," July 24, 1919) lays down two
great principles of action, one of _method_, the other of _means_. Here
is the method: "The revolutionary epoch demands that the proletariat
should employ such fighting methods as will concentrate its entire
energy, viz., the method of mass action, and lead to its logical
consequence--the direct collision with the capitalist state machine in
an open combat. All other methods, e.g., revolutionary use of bourgeois
parliamentarism, will in the revolution have only a subordinate value."
Here is the means: "A coalition is necessary with those elements of the
revolutionary workers' movement who, though they did not previously
belong to the Socialist Party, now, on the whole, take up the standpoint
of the proletarian dictatorship in the form of the power of Soviets,
e.g., _some of the sections among the Syndicalists_." (Ibid.)
The American "Syndicalists" are the I. W. W.'s, and their methods are
those of "industrial action" by means of industrial unionism. In other
words, they are seeking to organize "One Big Union" in order, as the
"Preamble" to their Constitution asserts, to "take possession of the
earth and the machinery of production." These are the methods and means
recommended by the Moscow International to the rabid Socialists
affiliated with it all over the world.
These methods and means, urged by the Moscow Manifesto, were evidently
adopted in Hillquit's manifesto, which led, by the party's adoption of
it, to the American Socialist Party's strong commitment of itself at
Chicago to "strongly organize" on "industrial lines" the "bulk of the
American workers" into "one powerful and harmonious class organization"
ready for "industrial action." The preamble to the Constitution, also
adopted at the Emergency Convention of 1919, according to Trachtenberg's
Labor Year Book, 1919-1920, page 410, stresses the same thing:
"The Socialist Party seeks to organize the working-class for
independent _action_ on the political field, not merely for the
betterment of their conditions, _but also and above all with the
revolutionary aim_ of putting an end to exploitation and class
rule." And it adds: "To accomplish this aim, it is necessary that
the working-class be powerfully and solidly organized also on the
economic field _to struggle for the same revolutionary goal_."
Trachtenberg's 1919-1920 Year Book, page 409, tells us, too, that the
party at its Emergency Convention "adopted a series of resolutions,"
including two described as follows:
"_Co-operatives._--Favoring the establishment of co-operatives and
recommending that literature be distributed on the subject."
"_Economic Organization._--Favoring industrial unionism and
establishing a labor department in the party for the preparation of
literature and more active work among the labor unions."
We know what the last-mentioned resolution means; and the meaning of the
propaganda for "co-operatives" becomes plain when we read in
Trachtenberg's same Year Book, page 393, that this co-operative movement
has been defined as "The state within a state."
Indeed, these two resolutions, favoring propaganda for "co-operatives"
and "industrial unionism," seem to be explained in the "Preamble to the
Constitution of the Socialist Party," adopted at Chicago on September 6,
1919. A single sentence in this Preamble, which we quote from
Trachtenberg's Labor Year Book, 1919-1920, page 410, tells us what the
Socialist Party wants and the means by which it hopes to get it. Here is
the sentence: "The workers must wrest the control of the government from
the hands of the masters and use its powers in this upbuilding of the
new social order, the Co-operative Commonwealth."
Naturally "co-operatives" are favored as a step toward the "Co-operative
Commonwealth," which is what the Socialist dreamers want. But in order
to set up this new state, the Socialists want "the workers" to do a big
job for them, namely, to "wrest the control of" the present Government
of the United States and get it out of the way. Thus "the workers" are
the means, the tool, which the hair-brained Socialists hope to use,
while the proposed method of using these "workers" is to make Socialists
of them and line them up in one big "industrial union" ready for
"industrial action" when the Socialists crack the whip. We do not think
America's "workers" intend to burn their fingers in pulling Hillquit's
chestnuts out of the fire; but the lazy drones, the Socialist
"intellectuals," as the Hillquitites love to style themselves, certainly
hope to ride into power on the back of American labor just as the
Bolshevist "dictators," Lenine and Trotzky, rode into power and are
still riding on the galled back of the labor slaves of Russia.
It appears, then, that the Socialist Party of America is not merely
affiliated with Moscow's "programs and methods" by a referendum vote,
but has adopted a similar program and method for its own "supreme task."
The only difference is that the Bolsheviks have made their revolution,
while the American Socialists are forging the weapon for theirs. Debs'
motto is their motto: "I am law abiding under protest--not from
scruple--and bide my time."
Perceiving the peril of his party, Hillquit, on the witness stand in the
Judiciary Committee's inquiry at Albany, sought in every way to belittle
the significance of his and his party's Chicago Manifesto, the Moscow
Manifesto, and the evident connection between the two, belittling, also,
his party's affiliation with the Third (Moscow) International. How
unscrupulous and hypocritical his testimony seems in the light of all
the facts!
In his testimony at Albany on February 19, 1920, Hillquit acknowledged
the Chicago Manifesto, adopted September 4, 1919, as his own child. "At
least ninety per cent of it is my authorship," he proudly said. Having
himself imprudently led his party to make open confession, by manifesto,
of its plot "to wrest the industries and the control of the government
of the United States" out of their present keeping and so completely
into the hands of the Socialist Party that it would be able "to place"
them "in the control of" a special class, did Hillquit feel that he
would be justified on the witness stand in using any extreme of craft
which might help to bury the plot out of sight again?
In spite of the fact that the Party Manifesto Hillquit wrote sounds
astonishingly like the echo of the Moscow Manifesto, Hillquit, on
February 19, 1920, swore that he had never read the Moscow Manifesto
when he wrote his ninety per cent or more of the Chicago Manifesto. To
this he held even when reminded by Mr. Conboy that all of the Moscow
Manifesto but the preamble had appeared in the "New York Call" of July
24, 1919. And he still sought to convey the notion that the Moscow
Manifesto had not made any particular impression upon the members of
his party prior to the Emergency Convention of September, 1919, in spite
of the letter read to him by Mr. Conboy, of which the following is an
extract:
"SOCIALIST PARTY
"National Office
"Executive Secretary: Adolph Germer
"803 West Madison Street
"Chicago, Ill., 5/12/1919.
"Local Rochester, C. M. O'Brien,
"580 St. Paul St., Rochester, N. Y.:
"Dear Comrade.--I am pleased to announce the publication of two
vital documents in pamphlet form, namely, 'The Manifesto Communist
International,' issued 1919 by the Soviets of Russia at Moscow to
the toiling masses of the world. This is undoubtedly the greatest
declaration ever issued from any working class tribunal since the
Communist Manifesto of Marx and Engels ... the second is 'The
Constitution World's First Socialist Republic....
[Signed] "Edwin Firth,
"Literature Dept."
But Hillquit, the great "expert on Socialism," missed reading this
"vital" manifesto all the summer of 1919, when the Socialist papers were
full of it; and yet, by some wild chance, himself composed a close echo
of it!
The cowardly "Reds," as we have seen, want a violent revolution and
constantly preach it to the discontented as boldly and openly as they
dare. But they want America's workingmen to take all the risk and do all
the work, and they go on with their frantic agitation in the hope that
American labor will some day organize a great "general strike" and try
to turn it into a revolution to overthrow the United States Government.
Naturally, therefore, the Socialists get excited whenever any great
labor strike is on, and they stand as tempters whispering the word
"revolution" into the ears of the strikers. Sometimes they get their
suggestion that the strike be turned into a revolution before the
strikers' minds by a hypocritical pretense that they are afraid that
what they so much long for is likely to happen. Debs, the Socialist
Party's presidential standard-bearer, is a past master in this art of
suggestion through a pretense of feeling concern, and during the steel
strike of 1919 he even tried to "start something" of this kind from
behind the bars of his jail. Thus in the form of an interview, sent as
a "special to the 'New York Times,'" which published it September 24,
1919, he got off the following hypocritically inflammatory comment on
the steel strike from his place in the Atlanta Federal Prison:
"'I fear that much violence will result from the strike. Then we
have the potentiality of other unions to consider, for many of
them, including the miners, who have a crisis coming within a short
time themselves, as well as the railroad men of the country, who
have already made demands--these workers and others may be drawn
into the great steel struggle before it is over, and while I do not
believe that a prearranged general strike will be called, yet I
fear the results of great excitement over possible killings like
those we read about in the papers of today, and it is possible that
in the heat of passion men may lay down their work and be swept
into a revolution with cyclonic fury.
"'Anything is possible as an outcome of the present situation,'
continued the prisoner, 'and should a general strike or revolution
occur it would be the outcome of too great pressure being brought
to bear upon the men who, in a state of unrest and industrial
uncertainty, have reached a highly inflammable condition that might
burst out spontaneously.'"
"Honest" Bill Haywood, one of the foremost Socialists of the time,
admitted as far back as the early part of 1912, in a speech at Cooper
Union, New York City, that the Socialists were conspirators against the
United States Government.
The Socialist Party of America, ever since its birth, has been reviling
and attacking the Government of the United States with a view to
overthrowing and destroying it. Is it possible that such an organization
is not engaged in a conspiracy against our country?
The American Socialists have been thoroughly unpatriotic. "To hell with
the American flag!" "Down with the Stars and Stripes!" "I would spit
upon your flag!" These are a few of their expressions of contempt. The
United States uniform and the soldiers alike are scorned and ridiculed.
The article in "The Call," "Rows and Rows and Rows of 'em march," which
has been quoted in a previous chapter, shows the reader the real spirit
and intention of Debs' gang, who have been so zealous in stirring up
strikes with a view to the final ruin of our present form of government.
Debs, four times the standard-bearer of the Socialists in presidential
campaigns, has revealed himself, as we have shown, in such utterances as
these:
"As a revolutionist, I have no respect for capitalist property
laws, nor the least scruple about violating them.... I am law
abiding under protest--not from scruple--and bide my time."
"Let the sturdy toilers of the Pacific Coast raise the Red standard
of revolt."
"All hail to the revolution."
"I enter the prison doors a flaming revolutionist, my head erect,
my spirit untamed, and my soul unconquered."
"In Russia and Germany our valiant comrades are leading the
proletarian revolution.... They are setting the heroic example for
world-wide emulation. Let us, like them, scorn and repudiate the
cowardly compromisers within our ranks, challenge and defy the
robber-class power, and fight it out on that line to victory or
death."
This favorite leader of the radicals of America was convicted by jury of
violation of the Espionage Law on September 12, 1918, and two days later
sentenced to serve ten years in the penitentiary. The case was appealed
on the ground that the Espionage Act was an unconstitutional abridgment
of the right of free speech. The decision of the United States Supreme
Court was handed down on March 10, 1919. In the words of a Socialist
work, Trachtenberg's Labor Year Book, 1919-1920, page 102, "The Court
held that the law was not contrary to the Constitution and affirmed the
sentence imposed upon Debs by the lower court. The decision was
unanimous that the nature and intended effect of his speech was to
obstruct recruiting and enlistment in the army."
Yet this same Year Book, in its account of "The Emergency Convention of
the Socialist Party" at Chicago in August-September, 1919, says, page
409: "The Convention went on record offering the presidential nomination
of the party to Eugene V. Debs, the nomination to be ratified at the
1920 Convention."
On March 5, 1920, at Albany, in the final argument for the five
suspended Socialist Assemblymen, according to the "New York Times" of
March 6, 1920, Seymour Stedman said of Debs: "He represents in a sense
the Socialist movement. Perhaps he represents it more completely than
any other man in this country."
In order that the reader may understand the extreme way in which
lawbreakers like Debs and Victor L. Berger were justified by those
defending the five suspended Socialists at Albany, we give an extract
from the testimony of Morris Hillquit on February 19, 1920, as reported
in the "New York Times" of the next day:
"The testimony leading up to Mr. Hillquit's admissions was given
after Martin Conboy of counsel for the Judiciary Committee had read
into the record a speech and a signed article by Victor L. Berger.
In the speech, delivered at the Socialist National Convention in
1908, Mr. Berger said:
"'I have no doubt that in the last analysis we must shoot, and when
it comes to shooting, Wisconsin will be there.'
"In the signed article which appeared in a Socialist newspaper
published in Milwaukee the following year, he wrote:
"'Socialists and workingmen should ... have rifles and the
necessary rounds of ammunition ... and be prepared to back up their
ballots with their bullets.'"
In reply, according to the "New York Times" of February 20, 1920,
putting his own far-fetched construction on Victor L. Berger's words,
Morris Hillquit himself advanced the doctrine of "a little shooting" in
the following statement:
"'History ... has shown that when the privileged minority is about
to lose its privileges ... it tries to destroy reform or lawful
revolutionary movements by force, ... and in a case of this kind it
may come to shooting.
"'It is not at all impossible that, even in this country, when the
majority of the people will be ready to introduce substantial
reform and take away the privileges of the profiteering class by
constitutional, legal methods, these self-same profiteering
interests will take offense and try to play some trick upon the
people, and in that case it is possible--as a matter of prophecy,
not as a matter of program, so far as we are concerned--that the
people of this country will be compelled to supplement their
political action by a little shooting.'"
Testifying the same day, Hillquit endorsed Debs as follows, according to
the "New York Times" of February 20, 1920:
"When asked if Debs is a candidate of the Socialist Party for
President, Mr. Hillquit replied:
"'If any voice or influence of mine could accomplish anything, he
certainly will be nominated at the next convention.'
"'The Supreme Court has passed upon the conviction of Debs and
affirmed it,' said ex-Judge Sutherland, of counsel.
'Notwithstanding this judgment, you still declare that Mr. Debs
represents and personifies the attitude of the Socialist Party on
the subject of loyalty to the United States Government?'
"'I do not say that he represents the attitude of the Socialist
Party. I think I said that he represents the highest and noblest
sentiments of United States citizenship and American loyalty....
Debs was convicted only for saying things, not for doing things. I
do not for a moment doubt he said the things he is charged with
having said.' ...
"'Do you uphold and approve of, as a leader of the Socialist Party,
the words that Mr. Debs pronounced, and for which he was
convicted?'
"'I haven't got his complete speech before me. I do not want to
commit the Party in this general way to every statement. I will
say, as a whole, I read his speech at the time and my impression
was that it was a perfectly innocent, honest expression of
opposition to war for very good and patriotic motives.' ...
"'Have you any respect at all for the decision of the tribunal to
the contrary?'
"'I have respect to this effect: that I know that it is final and
binding and in practice will go. I do not have respect in the sense
of believing that it is just, impartial, and well-reasoned out.'
...
"'Mr. Hillquit, do you wish to be understood as saying that you
approve of the words spoken by Mr. Debs for which he was
convicted?'
"'Are you trying to get me a little conviction, also, Judge?' asked
the witness.
"'I am not in a position to indorse every word and every phrase
because I have not the speech before me,' he continued. 'As a rule,
I fully indorsed his statements on the subject of the war,
expressed, I suppose, in that speech and in other speeches.... I
share with all my comrades the greatest respect for Debs, and
cannot think any compliment too high for him.'
"'And you think it was that largeness of view, do you, that led Mr.
Debs to say the things which brought him into conflict with the law
of the United States?'
"'Absolutely, just in the same way as it once happened to one Jesus
of Nazareth.'"
"'And you say that notwithstanding the highest judicial authority
known under the Constitution has declared him guilty of doing
that, and in contempt of that authority, notwithstanding that
authority, you say that he is the man that should be placed in the
President's chair by the votes of the Socialist Party?'
"'I do.'
"'If Mr. Debs were elected in 1920, how would you proceed to
inaugurate[12] him, as he is serving a twenty-year sentence?' asked
Assemblyman Jenks.
"'The chances are that prior to the time he would be called upon to
occupy the chair the powers that be would sober up enough to know
that the present conviction is an improper and inhuman act and
liberate him.'"
On several occasions at the trial, in spite of Hillquit's studied effort
to cast an air of innocency over his party, menacing words escaped from
this crafty leader. He could not restrain them even at the end, on March
3, 1920, when summing up the case for the Socialist defendants at
Albany, according to the following account in the "Sun and New York
Herald" of March 4, 1920:
"Justifying the general strike as an emergency weapon, Mr. Hillquit
made this startling statement interpreted in some quarters as an
open threat:
"'The workers of this country have the right "to call a general
strike" and it is well that they should at least hold it in
abeyance as a possible instrument in some cases, in very
exceptional emergencies. I will say that the general strike has
been used abroad for the purpose of enforcing political action.'
"'A labor party is being formed,' Mr. Hillquit said, 'in some parts
of the country. Suppose it should elect representatives to the
Legislature and a capitalist in that Legislature should get up and
say "I don't approve of your programme; get out of my Legislature."
"'I say this would be eminently a case where the workers would be
justified in declaring a general strike until such time as their
constitutional rights are actually accorded to them.'"
To this "veiled threat" Martin Conboy, counsel for the Judiciary
Committee, replied the next day in summing up for the prosecution. We
quote his words from the "Sun and New York Herald" of March 5, 1920:
"'Under the veil of a simile a threat was employed that if you
gentlemen concluded that these five Socialist Assemblymen should
not sit in this chamber as members of this Assembly a general
strike might be called. In the whole history devoted to the
development of this idea there has been no more frank exposition of
the doctrine than that. It is proof, sufficient and satisfactory to
the point of a demonstration of the charge that has been made in
this case.
"'The threat carries itself further. You must not only admit them,
but you must take their legislative programme and exact it into
law; otherwise the general strike will again be employed.
"'No opportunity is lost by the leaders of the Socialist Party to
impress upon the rank and file that it is impossible to achieve
ultimate triumph by political action. For this reason the American
Federation of Labor is subjected to continuous attacks and
misrepresentation. For this reason Debs, originally an ardent trade
unionist, abandoned and repudiated his former associates after
joining the Socialist Party.'"
The hypocritical defense made by the Socialists at Albany, through which
the unchanged character of the unrepentant plotters has constantly
revealed itself, should put us on our guard. Brought into the light by
wholesale arrests and deportations, all branches of radicalism, in this
country and at Moscow, have adopted new tactics of deception. They
profess peace and a return to peaceful methods, claim the liberties
which belong only to the law-abiding, and hide behind the sympathies of
those who are easily taken in. Yet they justify all their misdeeds, and
withdraw none of their evil principles, but rather reaffirm them, with
subtlety. What does this mean? It means that the old conspirators, whose
overt acts have lately crowded our law-courts, hope to fool the American
people into letting them continue their propaganda unto lawlessness
under a thin mask of conformity to the very laws they seek to destroy.
Although the "Red" conspiracy, as a result of government prosecution,
has taken on disguises and gone under ground, it is not, thus, less
virulent and dangerous, but more so. Evidence of deceit appeared in the
"One Big Union Monthly" for February, 1920, to which lack of space
prevents more than a mere allusion. That issue contained articles
showing even the I. W. W. preparing an alibi and a disguise. They argued
that their organization was not "illegal," and that its famous Preamble
meant "evolution" and not "revolution." Another article urged the I. W.
W. to give up its name and amalgamate with other industrial unions in a
new organization to be known as The One Big Union.
Still more significant, the same magazine for February, 1920, published
a new incitement to revolution by Leon Trotzky, together with a "Call
for Proletarian International" signed by "The Bureau of the Central
All-Russian Council of Industrial Unions" and an "Appeal of the Russian
Industrial Unions to the Workers of the Allied Countries" signed by "The
Bureau of the All-Russian Council of Industrial Union." The "call"
reads:
"The Central All-Russian Council of Industrial Unions invites all
economic organizations based on the real and revolutionary class
struggle for the liberation of labor through the proletarian
dictatorship to solidify anew their ranks against the international
league of brigands, to break with the international of
conciliators, and to proceed in unison with the Central All-Russian
Council of Industrial Unions toward the organization of a truly
international conference of all Socialistic labor unions and
veritable revolutionary workers' syndicates.
"We beg all economic labor organizations that accept the program of
the revolutionary class struggle to respond to our call and enter
in a direct touch with us."
The accompanying I. W. W. comment was, "We are sure that our
organization will be there." Thus, if it be under ground, the mole still
works. Moscow still inflames, unifies and directs the great
world-conspiracy against the "Entente Powers" and all the nations that
have been looking toward peace. The "Appeal," accompanying the "call,"
says in part:
"Can it be true, that you, the workers of England, France, Italy
and the United States, will much longer support your governments
and permit your blood to quench the spreading conflagration of the
social revolution? Can it be that the international bandits of the
League of Nations and the thrice-branded Versailles shall be
allowed unhampered to weave their nets for the strangling of the
world proletarian revolution?...
"Down with the bandits of imperialism!
"Long live the World Proletarian Revolution!
"Long live the International Soviet Republic!"
Near the end of his article Trotzky says, according to "The One Big
Union Monthly," for February, 1920, page 21, "By thrusting the
bourgeoisie away from the helm of state, by taking power into its own
hands, the working class is preparing for the creation of Federation of
Soviet Republics of Europe and the whole world.... War was and will
remain a form of armed exploitation or armed struggle against
exploitation."
An editorial note on the same page, immediately below the article of
Trotzky, says: "The above article and the APPEAL OF THE RUSSIAN
INDUSTRIAL UNIONS TO THE WORKERS OF THE ALLIED COUNTRIES are taken from
documents on Russia of the working class, written by members of the
Soviet Government.... These materials were sent to Fellow Worker Wm. D.
Haywood by Comrade Leon Trotzky, the valiant Commissary for War of the
victorious Workers' Commonwealth. We are happy to announce that the I.
W. W. will be the first to publish these latest documents on peasant and
industrial life in Bolshevikland."
Did Martens and Hillquit advise Lenine and Trotzky to disguise their
American propaganda by using the Industrial Unions of Russia as their
cat's-paw? We ask this because Hillquit has long been "Councillor" in
America to the Russian Soviet Republic,[L] while the above method of
inflaming American labor unions has been the secret method of the
Socialist Party's Rand School of Science for some years--since 1916, at
least. These are facts established by documents obtained in the summer
of 1919 by raids of the Rand School, put in evidence before the New York
State Legislative Committee, Senator Clayton R. Lusk, Chairman, and
referred to in the July 30, 1919, issue of "The National Civic
Federation Review," from which we quote the following:
"One David P. Berenberg is director of the correspondence
department of the Rand School. From the letter-files seized there,
evidence was produced showing the kind of propaganda conducted
through Berenberg's department. In a carbon copy of a letter to
Harry L. Perkins, of San Diego, Cal., dated June 7, 1916, the
statement was made:
"'When we read of 'preparedness' that is in full force in the camps
of the capitalists, we realize that unless we organize and fit
ourselves to resist, and to take over the government, we will one
day find ourselves where our French and German brothers are today,
dead or maimed in the fray.'
"'In other words,' commented Chairman Lusk, 'for over two years
this Rand School has been advocating armed preparedness to take
over the government.'
"A letter--obviously after a form letter sent to correspondents
generally--dated October 3, 1916, addressed to M. E. Rabb, Xenia,
Ohio, offered as evidence, contained the following:
"'What are you doing when the State robs you and your union and so
makes you helpless to strike? There is only one thing to do: take
over the State.
"'Are the members of your local prepared to take over and conduct
wisely and well the affairs of your town and county? Are you
prepared to meet the militia when the powers of the State and
courts are against you? Are you arming yourself with the knowledge
of the foundations of our society so that when these crises come to
you, you will have an organization strong enough to have foreseen
and forestalled them? Are you training your members in scientific
Socialism?'
"This same adroitly phrased incitement was found in other
correspondence."
This pest-house of treason and lawlessness, the Rand School, Hillquit's
pet university of Socialism, ought to be dug up by the roots. And what
shall we say of such evidence? Why should the Socialist Party of America
hesitate to affiliate with the Third (Moscow) International and approve
its "programs and methods" when Hillquit's illegitimate offspring, the
Rand School, was teaching such "methods" a year before the Bolsheviki
seized Petrograd and the dictatorship? Is Hillquit Lenine's pupil or
Lenine's teacher? Is Hillquit, backer of the Rand School propaganda, the
same gentle Morris Hillquit who as an "expert on Socialism" testified
before the Assembly Judiciary Committee on February 17, 1920:
"The word 'revolution' does not have for us the romantic
significance of barricade fights or other acts of violence that it
has for most of our newspaper writers and school boys." ("Sun and
New York Herald," February 18, 1920.)
Can this be the same Hillquit who earlier in the trial broke out in the
angry threat: "What we say to you, gentlemen: the contemplated act of
this Assembly, if consummated, _will ... loosen the violent
revolution_." ("New York Evening Sun," January 21, 1920.) Did he allude
to some pink tea party?
And perhaps the "school boys" Hillquit referred to are those by his pet
institution poisoned and turned into degenerates in the bud of manhood,
like poor Oscar Edelman, whose valedictory speech on graduating from a
course in the Rand School of Social Science ran thus:
"For us as students, Socialists and Labor Unionists, our work is
laid out. We must help educate the workers of America so that their
slogan, 'a fair day's wage for a fair day's work' be replaced by
the revolutionary slogan, 'abolition of the wage system.' ... In
the great world-struggle which is taking place today, we must take
active part.... The ideals which today inspire Debs and Lenine are
the ideals which inspire us." (Lusk Committee evidence, quoted from
"The National Civic Federation Review," July 30, 1919.)
But of all the sublime performances of Hillquit, that which lays the
brightest crown on his veracity was the answer he gave at Albany on
February 17, 1920, to the long hypothetical question concerning the
attitude of the Socialists should their friends of the Third
International, the Bolsheviki, invade the United States.
At this question the redoubtable Mr. Hillquit, according to the "New
York Times" of February 18, 1920, "settled back in his chair and smiled"
and said: "I should say that the Socialists of the United States would
have no hesitancy whatsoever in joining forces with the rest of their
countrymen to repel the Bolsheviki who would try to invade our country
_and force a form of government upon our people which our people were
not ready for and did not desire_." (Italics mine.)
Had Hillquit stopped where the italics began he would have stretched our
credulity to the utmost. But if "our people" meant to him American
Socialists, we readily believe that invading Bolsheviki, coming to wrest
the American dictatorship from our native talent, would find themselves
and their undesirable "form of government" pitched into the sea by
Hillquit and his crowd. Majority Socialist against Spartacide and
Bolshevik against Menshivik--we have seen how one Socialist group repels
the "form of government" forced by another.
When we think of the heroic exploits of Hillquit in repelling foreign
invaders from America about 1917-18, can we not imagine him hurling one
of his deadly manifestoes at his Bolsheviki friends? No doubt when
Comrade Martens, the vanguard of the invading Bolsheviki, stormed
Hillquit's castle on Riverside Drive with a fee and a commission as
"Councillor," the outraged patriot crashed a receipt in full against the
invader's outstretched paw.
As we think of Hillquit's love for peaceful "political action"--on the
witness stand--those words from his foundling, the "New York Call" of
May 1, 1919, return to our minds:
"The world revolution, dreamed of as a thing of the distant future,
has become a live reality, rising from the graves of the murdered
millions and the misery and suffering of the surviving millions. It
has taken form, it strikes forward, borne on by the despair of the
masses and the shining example of the martyrs: its spread is
irrepressible....
"The war of the nations has been followed by the war of the
classes. The class struggle is no longer fought by resolutions and
demonstrations. Threateningly it marches through the streets of the
great cities for life or death."
Mr. William English Walling, in an article published in the "New York
Times," January 20, 1920, asks a pertinent question about the
revolutionary activities of the American Socialist Party:
"The 'American Socialist Party,' finds itself compelled, precisely
like Lenine, to pretend to be a peace-loving organization, loyally
accepting constitutional democracy and opposed to violence. Are we
to take it at its own word? Is it possible that a few pious phrases
offered on occasion can deceive the American people as to the
nature of a propaganda organization that is shouting from the
housetops in every corner of the country and every day of the year?
"The only imaginable reason why the public has paid any attention
is that there are two or three organizations more wholly given over
to violence, whereas the Socialist organization gives a share of
its attention to party politics. It was said until recently, 'Oh,
the anarchists are for violence, but the Socialists are for law and
order.' Last August it was found that a large part of the
Socialists were for immediate revolution. Then it was said that the
Communists are revolutionary, but the Socialists are for law and
order. The reasoning was that if the Left Wing was for immediate
revolution, then the Right Wing must be for law and order!"
Mr. Walling expresses an expert opinion, having been a prominent member
of Hillquit's party until this organization, at St. Louis in 1917,
began the openly lawless course which led to the conviction of a large
number of its leaders under the Espionage Law. Moreover, since January,
1920, when Mr. Walling recorded the above opinion, evidence has come to
light which shows he was exactly right in saying that the American
Socialist Party acted "precisely like Lenine" in pretending "to be a
peace-loving organization" because it found "itself compelled" to do so.
The tactics of Lenine, Trotzky and Zinovieff, the Bolshevist
"triumvirate" of Russia, and of Ludwig C. A. K. Martens and Morris
Hillquit in America, are so similar that the evidence brought by Lincoln
Eyre out of Russia perfectly interprets the "weasel words" of Martens
and Hillquit on the witness stand at Washington and Albany,
respectively. Hillquit, the connecting link, according to his testimony
at Albany, February 19, 1920, was born at Riga, Russia; came to America
a boy, like so many Russian immigrants; attended New York's public
schools; and under the protection of the Stars and Stripes, which he
would drag down, has made himself so emphatically one of the
"capitalists," whom he hates, that he resides on New York's famous
"Riverside Drive," and was able to testify with a smirk, "I flatter
myself that I am not a failure." (See printed "Testimony" of the trial
of the five Assemblymen for the details.)
A moral failure, without extenuation, most Americans will regard Morris
Hillquit. For out of thirty-five years, spent by him on our hospitable
shores in getting rich under the protection of our Government,
institutions and people, he has used at least twenty in trying to
destroy the benefactor that nursed him. See the "New York Evening
Telegram" of February 17, 1920, as follows: "Mr. Hillquit was called to
the stand as the first witness for the five Assemblymen. He gave his
residence as No. 214 Riverside Drive, New York City. Mr. Hillquit said
he had lived in this country thirty-five years, and had been a Socialist
since the party was organized, in 1900."
This is the man who in 1917 and 1918 backed his organization, so far as
he dared, to cripple the people of the United States while they were
engaged in a desperate war; and who since has been Lenine's brain in
America in trying to set fire to the house of government in which the
American people live. Notice his intelligence in the hypocritical
Bolshevist refinement of separating the Moscow Soviet Government from
the Moscow International, so that one of these may offer our people
peace while the other continues to plot our destruction. This
distinction was made, with its significance concealed, in Hillquit's
testimony at Albany on February 18, 1920, which the Albany
"Knickerbocker Press" of the next day, February 19, thus summarized:
"Mr. Hillquit testified at length concerning Soviet Russia.... Mr.
Hillquit also testified that there were differences between Soviet
Government, Bolshevists and the Moscow International. _The latter_,
he said, _did not represent Soviet Russia_, and the Bolshevists, he
said, were merely a national party of Russia." (Italics mine.)
In a cabled account of an interview with Zinovieff, sent by Lincoln Eyre
from Russia to the "World," headed, "Riga (by courier via Berlin), Feb.
24," and printed in the "New York World" of February 26, 1920, we have a
flood of light showing that the central plot of the Socialist
international conspiracy hinges precisely on the distinction which
Hillquit had made at Albany a few days before, namely, that the Moscow
International does "not represent Soviet Russia." Through the courtesy
of the "New York World" we quote from its issue of February 26, 1920,
the essential parts of Eyre's statement as follows:
"Bolshevik propaganda abroad, though still as active and insidious
as it has ever been has undergone a radical change of late. That
conclusion was arrived at by a close study of the subject, which I
pursued in Moscow and Petrograd, reinforced by an interview with C.
S. Zinovieff, ruler of the latter city, also President of the
Executive Committee of the Third Internationale and firebrand of
the revolution.
"The Russian Communist Party, which is the Bolsheviki's official
political title, no longer exports agitators chosen from among
members to kindle the flames of revolt in foreign lands. They are
too wise for that antiquated process nowadays. What they do in
these scientific times is to import from the country of his birth
the crudely fashioned product of his own domestic Bolshevism,
subject him to certain finishing processes (including perhaps a
gold lining) and ship him back home again complete in every detail,
smooth running and highly inflammable. That is one of the reasons
why the Soviet Government is prepared to promise and to keep its
promise to refrain from sending forth agents charged with spreading
the gospel of capitalistic annihilation....
"Another reason for the Soviet's willingness to quit propagandizing
abroad is that it has already turned over to the Third
Internationale all business of that kind.... Now, the Third
Internationale has no official connection with the Soviet
Government. It is supposed to be a separate institution. Yet all
its leaders hold office under the Soviets and its funds, which are
considerable, must be derived from Soviet sources. Nevertheless it
is technically, indeed legally, non-governmental, wherefore the
Moscow Cabinet is justified in pledging itself to leave propaganda
to 'friendly' foreign states alone.
"The moving spirit of the Third Internationale is Zinovieff, who,
with Lenine and Trotzky, forms the triumvirate on which Bolshevism
today rests, although he is by no means as big a man as the other
two. Zinovieff is not a member of the Council of Peoples'
Commissaries (the Cabinet), but merely of the All-Russian Central
Executive Committee, from which the former body derives its powers,
and which itself is subordinate to the supreme executive
legislative judicial organ, the All-Russian Convention of Soviets.
Thus, while the role allotted to him on the administrative stage is
really as prominent as that of any of his fellows, short of Lenine
and Trotzky, Zinovieff can legitimately claim to be without voice
in the actual administration of the Soviet Republic....
"The first point that Zinovieff made clear to me in our talk was
that the Third Internationale is not comparable to the League of
Nations.... The Overlord of Petrograd affirmed, ... 'The Third
Internationale ... is a purely political group. It is a
confederation of the world's Communists, an international coalition
of the Communist Parties already existing in their respective
countries.... The Third Internationale is a going concern, with
some 8,000,000 members.' ...
"'But,' I asked, 'how is your aim of a European world republic of
Soviets to be realized unless there is some international
governmental machine?'
"'There will be some such machine,' Zinovieff replied, 'but
probably it will take the form of a new organization along Soviet
lines. In my view, the revolution will follow the same general
channels it has taken in Russia, with alterations of detail, of
course. Should France overthrow capitalism, for instance, she will
at first establish Sovietism, and subsequently combine with us. To
foresee the mechanical angles of such combination, however, is too
early.'
"'And your propaganda programme,' I ventured, 'is as strong and
far-reaching as ever?'
"The prompt reply was: 'The Third Internationale is primarily an
instrument of revolution. It reunites at Moscow the intelligence
and energy of all the Communist groups the world over. Delegates
from the various national organizations come to us and give and
take knowledge about the cause and return to their respective home
countries refreshed and invigorated. This work will be continued,
no matter what happens, legally or illegally. The Soviet Government
may pledge itself to refrain from propaganda abroad, but the Third
Internationale--never!'"
Let us ponder this description of the Third International by its manager
and greatest living expert: its scope, a confederation of the world's
Communists, a coalition of the Communist parties of all countries; its
size, 8,000,000 members, perhaps greatly exaggerated; its nature, "an
instrument of revolution;" and its determination, to carry on
propaganda, for the violent seizure of every land by a dictatorship, "no
matter what happens, legally or illegally." Let us reflect that it is
with this Third International, and not the Russian Soviet Government,
that Hillquit's Party in America is affiliated, according to the
testimony of the Socialists themselves at Albany. Finally, with these
facts for a plummet, let us try to find the bottom of Hillquit's
hypocrisy in pretending at Albany that he and his disciples do not
believe in "revolution" but only in "evolution."
Before passing from Lincoln Eyre's testimony, we further quote from his
cable in the "World" of February 26, 1920, what we may call his
description of "the Third International at work," as follows:
"Zinovieff ... is that combination of idealistic Hotspur and
practical executive which is characteristic of many Bolshevist
leaders. Despite his long years in exile with Lenine, to whose
Doctor Johnson he played Boswell ably and loyally, this
shock-haired enthusiastic young Jew--he is to-day scarcely
forty--was able to run Petrograd.... Petrograd is still underfed,
underheated, dirty and desolate, but it continues to live.... For
this Zinovieff, as all-mighty controller of the city's destinies,
... deserves credit....
"Besides having a hand in everything that concerns local
administration, and most things which have to do with national
government, he personally edits and writes many pages of the Third
Internationale's organ, 'The Internationale Communist,' a monthly
magazine of some 250 pages printed simultaneously in Russian,
English, French and German. Moreover, he passes upon all important
printed matter emanating from the Internationale's press. Every
foreign Communist coming to Moscow or Petrograd sees Zinovieff and
gets pointers from him how to propagate Bolshevism.
"In the seven weeks I spent in Moscow, three delegates arrived from
the United States and literally scores from Germany, Hungary,
Austria, Switzerland, Scandinavia, Roumania, Bulgaria, Italy,
China, Japan, Corea, India, Afghanistan and Asia Minor countries.
The only important states from which few Communistic envoys come
are Britain and France. Practically all these missionaries are
obliged to travel illegally, that is, with false passports or
without any. They slip across the fighting fronts that encircle the
Soviet Republic in astonishing ways, risking death and all forms of
hardship to reach Moscow. The one-time seat of Moscow's Emperors
has become to Communists the world over what Mecca is to the
Mohammedan pilgrims.
"A youthful emissary of the I. W. W. said to me: 'We come here to
drink of the fountain of revolutionary youth.' I asked him what he
thought would happen when Russia's frontiers were opened. 'We shall
come as we come now, but in greater numbers and with greater ease,'
he replied.
"'But won't the Third Internationale send its Russian agitators
abroad then, thus making it unnecessary for you to come here?'
'What for?' he retorted. 'There is no use sending Russians to talk
to American workmen. Americans will close their ears to a foreigner
where they will open them wide to one of their own countrymen. The
Third Internationale is a realistic organization. It has learned
long ago that racial and national prejudices, however misguided
they may be, are deep seated and cannot be overcome in a day. It
aims to get results, and so it lets Americans talk to Americans.'
...
"The Bolsheviki are as eager to precipitate a world revolution as
ever. But at the moment they are even more eager to establish
relations with the markets of the world, so that Russia may be
saved from economic catastrophe.... The Kremlin realizes full well
that it cannot hope to spread Bolshevism by means of its own
people. And with the Third Internationale headed by Zinovieff,
operating in close contact with the National Communist groups, it
knows it does not have to."
Thus the overtures of peace and promises of good behavior made by the
Russian Soviet Government to the other Powers are pure humbug; and
equally false are the professions of peace in America which Hillquit's
branch of the Third International has made to lull the fears of the
American people. To get the full force of this parallelism we have only
to place the law-breaking Socialist Party of America since 1917 in juxta
position with the hypocritical Socialist professions and principles
brought out in 1920 during the trial of the Assemblymen at Albany.
As the long record of jury convictions of officials and members of the
Socialist Party of America is the real foundation of the case against
the five New York Assemblymen, exposing the character of the
organization they serve, we quote for the reader's information a press
summary of the facts, submitted by a citizens' "Committee on Publicity,"
March 2, 1920, "for the approval of the People of the State of New
York." According to the Albany "Knickerbocker[13] Press" of March 3,
1920, this Committee's statement, after referring to "the procedure of
the New York Assembly in January, 1920," in "temporarily suspending the
five Socialist Assemblymen while instituting a judicial inquiry into
their qualifications to serve as law-makers," continues as follows:
"We believe the Assembly was misjudged in the minds of many who
reasoned: 'Socialists elected to previous Assemblies were seated
without objection, why then suspend the five Socialist Assemblymen
this year and investigate them?'
"We offer what we believe to be a complete answer to the question.
We believe the Assembly had a compelling warrant for its procedure
in serious facts and charges not known to previous Legislatures.
These include:
"First--Court records showing that most of the principal leaders of
the Socialist 'Party' were convicted lawbreakers.
"Second--the revelations of the Lusk Committee.
"Under the first head may be mentioned the conviction and
twenty-year sentence, on January 8, 1919, of Victor L. Berger,
National Executive Committeeman of the so-called Socialist Party;
the conviction of Eugene V. Debs, four times Presidential candidate
of the party, whose ten-year sentence was affirmed by the United
States Supreme Court March 10, 1919; and other convictions in 1919,
including, Adolph Germer, National Executive Secretary; J. Louis
Engdahl, editor of the Socialist Party's official publications;
Irwin St. John Tucker, head of its literature department, and
William F. Kruse, Secretary of the Young People's Socialist
organization. In addition, twenty of the Socialist Party's lesser
leaders and scores of its rank and file had been convicted of
disloyal acts and utterances, while nineteen of the chief Socialist
organs had their second-class mail privileges canceled for
disloyalty.
"Under the second head may be mentioned the fact that the
investigations of the Lusk Committee showed that the Socialist
incitement to lawlessness prevalent throughout the country was
largely due to the propaganda of the Rand School of Socialism, a
New York Corporation of which two of the Socialist Assemblymen were
members. Furthermore, the American Socialist Society, the
corporation that owns and conducts the Rand School, had been
convicted under the Espionage Act before the United States District
Court and heavily fined by Judge Julius M. Mayer.
"These were some of the facts and charges which were matters of
public record and public knowledge when the Assembly of 1920
convened. We submit, therefore, that if the Assembly had not taken
action as it did, it would have been derelict in its duty.
"We therefore recommend:
"1. That all loyal organizations pass, publish and file with this
Committee resolutions in acknowledgment of the service rendered by
the New York Assembly and in encouragement of similar action by the
Legislatures of other states.
"2. That individuals affirm this judgment in suitable ways, and
particularly by letters to the press in their localities.
"3. That all loyal individuals and organizations co-operate to give
the whole American people the exact facts concerning the conspiracy
of radicals against our Government and institutions.
"To this end we propose to continue the work of education by
permanent organization under the name of 'Publicity Committee
Against Socialism.'"[M]
The above list of Socialist convictions for lawbreaking will be found
completely confirmed, on Socialist authority, in Trachtenberg's Labor
Year Book, 1919-1920, pages 92-103.
Was this record questioned by the Socialist defense at Albany? In no
wise; it could not be. Was the record faced, the guilt of the
lawbreakers confessed, and their transgressions deplored as acts of
disloyalty which the Socialist Party now condemns and repudiates? Not at
all. These acts were freshly confirmed, and taken anew upon the
Socialist Party, by brazen justification of them at Albany and
condemnation of the laws, juries and courts of the American people.
We have seen how Hillquit on the witness stand justified the disloyal
and violently revolutionary utterances of two of the chief offenders,
Debs and Victor L. Berger, identifying himself with their sentiments and
proclaiming Debs as the highest type of American citizen, the man most
fit for President of the United States. We have also seen that the whole
Socialist Party was in 1919 committed to the nomination of Debs as its
Presidential candidate in 1920; while it is a well known fact that when
Congress excluded Victor L. Berger from that body because of his
conviction as a lawbreaker, the lawless Socialist Party at once
re-elected him to show its contempt for law and order under our
institutions.
The testimony piled up by the prosecution at Albany showed that, instead
of judging the wholesale lawbreaking by its leaders and members in 1917
and 1918, the Socialist Party had in 1919 and 1920 involved itself in a
still deeper guilt, adding treason to disloyalty by affiliating itself
with the open enemies of our Government in Russia and other foreign
lands. Was this denied by the Socialist defense at Albany? No, the fact
of affiliation with the Third (Moscow) Internationale was admitted,
reducing the defense to the false principle that the five Socialist
Assemblymen should not be excluded on account of their signed pledge of
obedience to a lawless organization, no matter how lawless it might be.
Thus in summing up for the defense, on March 3, 1920, Morris Hillquit,
according to the "New York Times" of March 4, 1920, made the following
excellent summary of the evidence against his party:
"First--That the Socialist Party is a revolutionary organization.
"Second--That it seeks to attain its ends by means of violence.
"Third--That it does not sincerely believe in political action, and
that its politics is only a blind or camouflage.
"Fourth--That it is unpatriotic and disloyal.
"Fifth--That it is unduly controlled--or that it unduly controls
public officials elected on its ticket.
"Sixth--That it owes allegiance to a foreign power known as the
Internationale.
"Seventh--That it approves of the Soviet Government of Russia, and
seeks to introduce a similar regime in the United States; and,
finally,
"Eighth--That the Assemblymen personally opposed prosecution of the
war and gave aid and comfort to the enemy.
"'All of these charges,' Mr. Hillquit said, 'are distinctly charges
against the Socialist Party as such. In other words, it is the
Socialist Party of the United States that is on trial before you.'
...
"'I think, perhaps, the most telling point is the charge that the
Socialist Party is unpatriotic and disloyal--at least it has been
emphasized more than any other,' said the lawyer. 'We opposed the
war.... If similar conditions again arise I am sure we will take
the same position.'"
Similarly, Seymour Stedman, summing up for the Socialists on March 5,
1920, not being able to deny the many convictions of leaders and members
of the Socialist Party under the Espionage Law, openly attacked the law
itself, according to the following account in the "New York Evening Sun"
of March 5, 1920:
"Albany, March 5.--A bitter attack on the Espionage Act was made by
Seymour Stedman in his final summing up for the five suspended
Socialists before the Judiciary Committee of the Assembly today.
"'Because of that act, you don't know the truth about this war; you
cannot know the truth about this war until the Espionage Act is
dead,' he asserted....
"Mr. Stedman admitted that the St. Louis war platform of the
Socialist Party was drawn 'in lurid language to meet a situation in
high flame,' but said no meeting could be called to consider
amending it because those who favored it might have been convicted
under the Espionage Act....
"Mr. Stedman contended that, of course, the Socialists took their
oath to uphold the Constitution of New York State and the United
States with the idea that they could interpret for themselves what
the Constitution means.
"'Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution
swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it
is understood by others.'"
According to the "New York World" of March 6, 1920, Stedman, in his
speech of the preceding day, justified Eugene V. Debs' lawbreaking with
the disgusting remark, "He had no conception of Jesus with a dagger in
his teeth;" and justified the lawbreaking for which Rose Pastor Stokes
was convicted with the sentence, "She had a right to disagree with the
war aims." She, of course, was not convicted for "disagreement" but for
wilfully interfering with the "recruiting service" of the United States
Government.
The "New York World" of March 6, 1920, also gives the following specimen
of Stedman's reasoning:
"Answering the charge that Socialists generally were guilty of law
violations, he exclaimed: 'Go down to the penitentiaries and get
the histories of the birds there and you won't find any Socialists.
"'We are quite willing to say that if 2,000 Socialists had been
arrested during the war, we are guilty.'"
It is difficult to follow this logic. After telling us that we wouldn't
"find any Socialists" in the penitentiaries, did Stedman suddenly
bethink himself of the scores convicted, and then, on the spur of the
moment, fix 2,000 as the number of "arrests" necessary to wring from
Socialists the confession, "We are guilty"? From a Socialist work,
Trachtenberg's Labor Year Book, 1919-1920, page 92, we quote the
following figures for Stedman's edification:
"The total number of prosecutions for violation of the Espionage
Act from June 15, 1917, to July 1, 1918, were 988. Of these, 197
pleaded guilty and were sent to prison, 166 others were convicted
(a large number appealing), and 497 cases were pending for trial
July 1st, while 128 had been acquitted or dismissed up to that
time. The act has been enforced _with increasing vigor since that
date_, but no official figures subsequent thereto are available."
According to Trachtenberg, pages 93 and 94, the above cases do not
include about 450 cases of "conspiracy to obstruct draft" under the
Penal Code and Draft Act, 30 prosecutions for threats against the
President, others under the treason statutes, and prosecutions under
state statutes and city ordinances, in "number," says Trachtenberg,
"doubtless _greatly in excess_ of the federal prosecutions," including
"in New York City alone scores of cases." A flock of 27 Socialists was
convicted at Sioux Falls, S.D. (Trachtenberg, page 92), and at Chicago a
herd of 166 I. W. W.'s, first cousins to the Socialists; while these
first cousins were also indicted in various places in batches of 47, 38,
27, 28, etc. (Ibid.) Nor do any of the foregoing figures include the
"arrests" of _two or three thousand "Communists" who were members of
Stedman's party prior to September, 1919_.
In short, even accepting Stedman's extraordinary dictum that "2,000
Socialists ... arrested" is the minimum necessary to force Socialists to
confess themselves "guilty," that test is more than met by the arrests
already known.
Martin Conboy, in summing up for the State in the proceedings before the
New York Assembly Judiciary Committee, on March 4, 1920, according to
the "New York Times" of March 5, 1920, accused the Socialist counsel and
witnesses of "evasive and hypocritical sentiments, expressed on the
witness stand, to throw the dust of political, parliamentary and
inoffensive acts into the eyes of this Committee and the correspondents
of the newspapers." On the other hand, he said, "the leaders of the
Socialist Party" lost "no opportunity" to "impress upon the rank and
file of that organization that it is impossible to achieve the ultimate
triumph of their cause by political action," in support of which he
cited the testimony in evidence as follows:
"Every manifesto, every platform, almost every utterance of the
Socialist orator carries with it the party mandate that the workers
of America should be organized industrially so as to be submissive
to the command of a revolutionary leadership.
"In adopting a programme of industrial action, involving the use of
the general strike, the Socialist Party has stripped itself of the
mask of political action and stands revealed as a radical
revolutionary propaganda organization.'"
Another part of Mr. Conboy's address we cite from the "Sun and New York
Herald" of March 5, 1920:
"The danger of revolution is more real than the nation realizes,
Mr. Conboy charged, saying that the Socialist Party seeks to set up
its rule here by the following 'unlawful methods':
"'Obstruction of the Federal and State governments in all measures
relating to defense, thereby rendering the nation defenseless
against the attack of enemies from without and within.
"'Destruction of government by mass action and insisting in all
teachings that political action must be backed by force.
"'By making its members and those elected to office responsible
only to its dues-paying members, thereby relieving its agents of
obligation to established government.
"'We are confronted with the necessity of determining how we shall
treat this group of persons who are in the United States but not
of it; who, while accepting the benefits of our laws and
constitutions and the sacrifices of blood and treasure given to
support them, refuse their support to them; who take all they can
get but will not give a life or a dollar to preserve, defend and
perpetuate the Government that is their sole and only guaranty of
life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness,' said Mr.
Conboy.
"'It is the first time since the rebellion of 1861 that notice has
been plainly and explicitly served upon the Government of the
United States by a group of men residing within its borders that
they will not support or defend it, but that they will by all means
obstruct and resist its effort to maintain in time of stress its
national honor and existence.
"'The Socialist Party of America is not a loyal organization
disgraced occasionally by the traitorous act of a member, but a
disloyal party composed of perpetual traitors.'"
Again, in a part of his address reported in the "New York Evening Sun"
of March 4, 1920, Mr. Conboy mentioned the fact that "at the National
Convention of the Socialist Party of America held in St. Louis," in
April, 1917, "its members were directed to deny and repudiate allegiance
to this Government," and added:
"The explanation of the anti-American attitude of the Socialist
Party of America during the war lies in the anti-national and
pro-international character of its programme. Its members are not
occasional but perpetual traitors, in constant conflict not merely
with the purposes of any temporary administration of the affairs of
this Government, but with the very institutions and fundamental
laws. They are citizens not of the United States, but subjects of
the Internationale, whose pronouncements are to be given their
moral support, a support which they not only withhold from but deny
to the Government of the United States.
"The principal exponent of this party, who appears here in the dual
capacity of witness in chief and counsel in chief, is the
international secretary for America of the International Socialist
Bureau."
To complete our information concerning the Moscow International, we add
here some details concerning its Executive Committee, and the right of
representation on it enjoyed by the affiliated "Parties" in other lands
than Russia, including, no doubt, the Socialist Party of America.
Trachtenberg's Labor Year Book, 1919-1920, in its article, "The Moscow
International Communist Conference" (held at Moscow, March 2-6, 1919),
says, page 312:
"The Conference ... perfected the organization of the new
International and entrusted the direction of the work to an
Executive Committee consisting of one representative from the
Communist parties of the more important countries. The parties in
Russia, Germany, German-Austria, Hungary, Switzerland, Sweden and
the Balkan Federation, were directed to send members to the
Executive Committee. Parties which have declared their adherence to
the new International will be given seats in the Executive
Committee, pending the arrival of delegates from other countries.
The members of the Committee from the country in which the
Executive Committee has its seat [Russia] were empowered to plan
the work of the new organization. The Executive Committee was
authorized to elect a bureau consisting of five members to do the
actual work of the Committee."
Has the Socialist Party of America contributed its Executive
Committeeman to this revolutionary machine? Even so, the orders, or
"suggestions," evidently come from the Bolshevist Bureau of Five who "do
the actual work of the Committee." Are these the Russian power that,
according to correspondence found in a raid of the Lusk Committee, has
already appointed Eugene V. Debs to reign over us "as 'Proletarian
Dictator' of the United States" as soon as the plotted revolution is
pulled off in this country? (See "The National Civic Federation Review"
for July 30, 1919.) Are these the power, too, according to report, that
induced the Italian Socialists and Syndicalists to postpone their
proposed revolution to a more convenient season? And was this to give
Soviet Russia a chance to put through a temporary peace or truce with
Europe to stave off "economic catastrophe?" If so, the twitching
revolutionaries in other lands must evidently train their toes to dance
at Moscow's convenience.
Meanwhile, under the International, the diabolical work of getting the
immoral elements ready for violence goes on in every land, including the
United States.
Let Hillquit excuse, extenuate, deny and palaver as he may, it remains
true that the Socialist Party of America teaches the same treasonable
doctrines of violence and insurrection as the Russian Bolshevists, but
in a more covert way. We have a sample in the pamphlet, "The
Dictatorship of the Proletariat," put in evidence on January 27, 1920,
in the inquiry of the Judiciary Committee at Albany. It is published by
the Jewish Socialist Federation of America, New York City, a part of the
Socialist Party of America. It says in part:
"Socialism does not believe in the State, wants to annihilate it
entirely. It holds that the task of the State has always been to
oppress the country in the interests of one class. So long as there
are classes in society which seek supremacy, the mastery, there
must be a State. But as soon as classes are eliminated the State
will have no justification for existence, and it will disappear of
itself.
"The Socialist movement rouses the workingmen to revolution. It
preaches to them the class struggle, awakens within them
class-consciousness, makes all necessary preparations for
Socialistic order. When society is ready for the overturn, when the
Socialistic organization feels that the moment has come, it will
make the revolution.
"The dictatorship will be employed for the one thing, to eliminate
capitalism by force, take away by force the capital from private
owners and transfer it to the ownership of the community. The
industries will be managed by the workingmen through their soviets.
"Let the true Socialists stand as sentinels; let them see that the
Socialist programs strike with hot, revolutionary blood. The great
task of the Socialist movement is to create an army in this country
which should be ready to make the Socialist revolution when the
suitable moment arrives. This army must know its aims and the
method of attaining these aims, must be an intelligent army. Every
soldier in it must himself know the way, the plans, the strategy."
In the "Outline of the Evidence Taken Before the Judiciary Committee to
and Including February 5, 1920," issued by counsel for the State, they
quote from the Yiddish book, cited above, referring to the printed
"Testimony," pages 199, 204 and 207, in proof that the Jewish Socialist
Federation, which published the book, is "part of the Socialist Party,"
and introducing their citations from the book with the very significant
remark, "Published in Yiddish the principles of Socialism were not
camouflaged as they frequently are in English." Bearing this in mind,
let us note how this plain-spoken book, which we cite from the State
counsel's "Outline," pages 31-34, gives the lie to Hillquit's camouflage
about "revolution" being "evolution." The book says:
"History teaches us that through evolution, through natural
developments alone, no ruling class in society has ever been
deposed from its power.... Workingmen cannot depend on '_peaceful_
evolution'; they must prepare for a revolution, and
class-dictatorship....
"To the Socialist at present, the meaning of class struggle,
Internationale and Dictatorship of the Proletariat, must be clear.
He must understand that Socialism is not a reform movement. He must
know that Socialism is a Revolutionary world-perspective, and that
the Socialist movement is a Revolutionary movement.... He must
cease to be a moral preacher and become a fighter. He must know
that the Socialist movement is a red movement, a movement with
blood in the veins, which knows that nothing in life can be won
without a struggle."
This is the real stuff, hid in a foreign tongue, with which Hillquit's
gang poisons the East Side of New York City, while the gang's leaders
lie to the American people.
Yet if the real plan is not to give us Socialism by "peaceful evolution"
but to impose it on us by "a revolution, and class-dictatorship," what
is the real object of the "political action" carried on meantime by
these hypocrites? Again the Yiddish book gives us the real thing:
"So long as the State is ... a tool in the hands of the bourgeoisie
in the fight against the proletariat, ... why do the Socialists
seek to send their representatives there? Where do Socialists fit
into the State? What can they do there?
"Socialists seek to enter into the government for two reasons,
first, to be nearer to the doors of the chambers, where
dictatorship sits, and second to hinder the dictatorial work in any
way possible. The first reason is the most important. Sitting in
Parliament or in Congress, being inside of the government ranks,
affords Socialists an opportunity to find out the plans, the
strategy of the State. And knowing this, they can carry out the
propaganda the better."
If this is not treason--wickedness using "political party" methods both
as a mask and a blackjack to destroy the State--what is it?
To be forewarned is to be forearmed. Ample proof has been given in this
chapter to show that there is a nation-wide conspiracy to destroy our
government and institutions and replace the Stars and Stripes by the red
flag. I. W. W.'s, Communists, Communist Laborites, Socialists and
Socialist Laborites have united under the leadership of the Bolshevist
Government of Russia. Their agents are everywhere, everywhere
hypocritically protesting that in our land freedom, of speech and
freedom of assemblage are no longer tolerated. Unless our loyal citizens
promptly rally to the defense of America, disorder, strife and rebellion
will be seething everywhere, the foundations of the glorious nation that
sprang from the blood of the brave soldiers of '76 will be completely
undermined, our country will be afflicted with evils far more grave than
those averted by the heroes who fought and died in 1812, and the land
that we love will fall a prey to the terrible ravages of crime,
lawlessness and anarchy.
We must save our country, and save it now. Now is the time to act--now,
before it is too late; and we must act so effectively and so vigorously
that the Socialists and all their allied, criminal, revolutionary crews
will wish that they never had seen a red flag or left their homes
abroad. They are conspiring enemies of our country. They are traitors to
the flag under which Washington and his soldiers fought for the
independence of America; traitors to the flag to whose defense the brave
men of 1812 rallied; traitors to the flag for which a million soldiers
suffered or died in our great Civil War. They are traitors to the flag
that symbolizes the union of countless happy homes under a democratic
government held in honor, respect and veneration. Traitors they are to
the flag that stands for freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom
of the press, and for the protection of individual as well as of family
rights. They are traitors to the flag of a much slandered and
calumniated government, which, though imperfect, like all things on this
earth, extends its blessings to all, not even excepting ungrateful
Socialists and other radicals.
Fellow citizens and fellow countrymen, rally to the defense of the flag
that you love! Denounce, to the north, south, east and west, the evil
teachings and deceptions of the Red conspirators; for there is nothing
that will more quickly ruin the parties of Reds than to reveal to the
world their professed and secret teachings.
"Immortal patriots, rise once more!
Defend your rights, defend your shore!
Let no rude foe with impious hand,
Invade the shrine where sacred lies
Of toil and blood the well earned prize.
While off'ring peace, sincere and just,
In heav'n we place a manly trust,
That truth and justice shall prevail,
And every scheme of bondage fail."
CHAPTER XVII
SOCIALISM A PERIL TO WORKINGMEN
In glowing colors the imaginations of Socialists have beautifully
pictured their utopian state for the benefit of the credulous and
oppressed. Unfortunately, however, for the followers of Karl Marx, a
little reasoning and common sense show that their visionary state,
instead of being a heavenly paradise, would in reality be a descent into
chaos and anarchy. Domestic peace would be a blessing of the past.
Discontent, wrangles, fights, riots, civil discord and sabotage would be
the order of the day till irrepressible rebellion had sounded the
death-knell of Socialism.
There is every indication that the Revolutionists would not destroy our
present system of government without having recourse to arms. Besides
the many convincing proofs given in the preceding chapter, we learn from
"The Call," New York, January 28, 1912, that the celebrated Socialist
novelist, Jack London, scouted the idea that the social revolution would
be realized without force. Then, again, Victor Berger--who was Socialist
Congressman from Wisconsin, and who, like Debs, was one of the
"innocents" whom the "poor," "persecuted" Reds have been trying to save
from a long imprisonment by a nationwide agitation for amnesty--writing
in the "Social Democratic Herald" of Milwaukee, on August 14, 1909,
said: "We should be grateful if the social revolution, if the freeing of
75,000,000 whites would not cost more blood than the freeing of
4,000,000 negroes in 1861."
Roland Sawyer, the Socialist candidate for governor of Massachusetts in
1912, writing in "The Call," New York, October 1, 1911, dares to confess
that "the conceptions of modern Socialism are all found in a cruder form
on the streets of Paris during the Revolution." Finally, as we have
seen, Eugene V. Debs, who on four different occasions was the Socialist
candidate for the presidency of the United States, in the "Appeal to
Reason," Girard, Kansas, September 2, 1911, said: "Let us marshal our
forces and develop our power for the revolt.... A few men may be needed
who are not afraid to die. Be ye also ready.... Let us swear that we
will fight to the last ditch, that we will strike blow for blow, that we
will use every weapon at our command, that we will never surrender."
It is evident that if, after a bloody rebellion, the Socialists should
overthrow the United States Government, the many millions of defeated
patriotic Americans would continue to be the enemies of the new regime.
But even if no rebellion took place, and the present system of
government were overthrown merely by the ballot, the new state would
begin life with millions of enemies, those, namely, who for one reason
or another had been radically opposed to Socialism.
When the Marxians come into power, several large factions of them
usually rebel against the government of the Socialists, as in Russia,
Germany and Bavaria.
The Socialists, in most cases, gain control of a country after a foreign
war, at a time when it is most difficult for even the wisest and most
experienced statesmen to solve the serious problems of the hour. Great
discontent should, therefore, be expected from the failure of
inexperienced agitators after coming into power, because of their
inability to solve an almost endless number of serious difficulties.
Foremost among these would probably be food difficulties, which, as in
Russia, Germany, and Hungary, have resulted in widespread opposition to
the newly established regimes.
The Socialists have never yet made known to the people of America the
detailed working plan of their proposed state. They have, of course,
made lots of very general statements, which do not stand the test of
accurate criticism, but they have utterly failed to offer solutions of
the grave difficulties that they know would confront them. They prefer
to let the future work out the solution, and, in the meantime, invite us
to ruin our present form of government and industry, imagining that we
Americans are a lot of ignorant children who will entrust our destinies
to a pack of wild theorists with nothing but a vague hope of a
propitious future.
Think of the discontent which would result if our people tore down the
old structure, to find no structure whatever into which to move. They
would be in the same predicament as the people of San Francisco in the
days after the earthquake and fire, when they had to camp out in the
open with an insufficient food supply, exposed to the inclemency of the
weather. In fact, they would be far worse off. A big-hearted world
rushed supplies to the San Franciscans and soon helped them to surmount
their difficulties. But the new Socialist state would be attacked from
within and without, by citizens hoping to destroy the hated form of
government, and by foreign nations dreading the spread of anarchy, just
as the United States, England and France blockaded Socialist Russia,
causing untold trouble to the Bolshevist government.
In the midst of embarrassments like these the inexperienced Marxian
agitators must attempt to solve ten thousand times ten thousand problems
which require skill in the extreme and years of careful thought. Would
not this result in widespread discontent? Or would the citizens of the
United States, who just before the dawn of Socialism had been taught by
Debs and his crew to find fault with everything under the sun, suddenly
learn patience and remain as meek as lambs merely because the Socialists
had raised the Red flag in place of the Star Spangled Banner?
No sooner would the all-perfect Socialists take control at Washington
than the endeavors of the new state to settle the serious difficulties
confronting it would occasion so much discontent and strife as seriously
to threaten, if not actually bring to an end, the very existence of the
new government. For, first of all, the people would have to determine
whether the immense number of property owners, whose goods must be taken
over by the state, should receive full payment, partial payment, or no
payment at all.
The famous Belgian Socialist, Vandervelde, informs us that we may group
into three categories the plans of socialization proposed by different
schools, according to their aiming at the expropriation of the means of
production without indemnity, with complete indemnity, or with limited
indemnity. ["Collectivism and Industrial Evolution," by Vandervelde,
page 152 of the 1904 translation into English.--Chas. H. Kerr and
Company.]
If full compensation were granted, millions of Socialists would become
exceedingly disgusted and discontented, for not only would the new state
from the very beginning of its existence be burdened with a tremendous
debt through having to borrow many billions of dollars, if such a thing
were possible, in order to make the purchases, but--which would make
matters much worse--many of the property owners, who even now are hated
and detested by the Socialists, could, after receiving payment, either
sit down for the rest of their lives and watch the Revolutionists labor
and toil, or else, while doing some work themselves, could use their
wealth in bribing the Socialist officials to bestow on them all kinds of
privileges and favors.
If no compensation whatever were granted, then, in addition to the
hatred and disgust for the new system, which would prevail among the
millions who would be dispossessed of their property, after long years
of work and careful saving in order to purchase it, there would also be
boundless dissatisfaction on the part of persons who, still respecting
God's Commandments and the sense of right in natural conscience, would
want to see justice and honesty reign throughout America.
Finally, if partial payment were made, both those opposed to full
compensation and those in favor of it would be displeased because of the
reasons given, which would still influence them very decidedly. If the
indemnity paid were very small, the former property owners and all
honest citizens would be those especially offended. If the amount paid
were large, dishonest Socialists would take offense. Therefore, no
matter which plan of expropriation were adopted, the state would make a
great number of new enemies.
Though we learn from page 186 of the "Proceedings of the 1908 National
Convention of the Socialist Party" that the delegates to the convention,
after a factional dispute on party principles, declared by a vote of 102
to 33 for the collective ownership of _all_ the land, and thus
determined that the state should take over all the farms of the country,
still it cannot be denied that a great number of Revolutionists have
claimed, especially of late years, that the government should not
dispossess the small farmers of their properties. On account of the
rival theories of the two contending factions, the Socialist state might
have to pass through a serious ordeal before either plan was adopted.
Should the new government finally determine to take possession of such
property, millions of farmers and their families would become
exceedingly hostile to the government. Should the state allow former
owners to cultivate the fields about their old homesteads, the
discontent would be but partially lessened, for strict obedience to the
commands of government bosses would replace the freedom of action once
enjoyed by the farmer's family.
Pages 167 to 190 of the "Proceedings of the 1908 National Convention of
the Socialist Party," and pages 220 to 235 of the "Proceedings of the
1910 National Congress of the Socialist Party," convinced us that very
many of the Revolutionists who oppose government ownership of _all_
land do so in order to gain votes. It seems highly probable, therefore,
that if Socialism became the law of America many of the apparently
moderate Revolutionists would throw off their masks and unhesitatingly
declare for the most radical plan of government ownership.
Yet even if the contemplated state should permit the private ownership
of small farms, their owners would be displeased because they would no
longer be allowed to hire laborers for working the fields. Some
conservative Socialists, indeed, profess willingness to tolerate the
employment of one or two farm hands. But not alone do the 1908 National
Platform and the amendment adopted by party referendum on September 7,
1909, oppose exploitation, or the employment of hired labor in the
production of goods, but innumerable articles in Socialist papers, books
and reviews denounce exploitation most emphatically. Hence, if the
Socialist state allowed farmers in good standing with the government to
own little farms, they could not hire labor to operate them. If the
farmer should fall sick, his crops would go to ruin. Advantage could not
be taken of some of the great inventions helpful to agriculture, nor
scientific methods of work and management. The individual farmer, thus
handicapped, might feed himself, his wife, his children, his horse, his
cow, his pig, but very little more.
In the Socialist state great discontent would arise from either the
toleration or prohibition of small business enterprises. If permitted,
without power to hire labor, they must compete with the government. If
forbidden, large numbers of persons would be obliged to work for the
government, after losing little stores or shops in which for years they
had been interested.
In its issue of March 30, 1912, the "Appeal to Reason," then the leading
Socialist weekly of the United States, declared that under Socialism
John D. Rockefeller would be allowed to retain his money and decide what
to do with it. Were this the case, and every person of wealth allowed to
retain his money, it is difficult to see how Socialists who hate and
detest the rich could endure such a condition, any more than they could
tolerate the granting of full or partial indemnity to property owners.
The attempt to leave the rich in possession of their wealth would
probably incite Socialists to rise in arms against the state they had
founded.
On the other hand, if wealth were confiscated, the wealthy and the
honest poor alike would be discontented with a dishonest government.
Moreover, where would the Socialists draw the line of lawful possession?
At $1,000,000, $10,000, $1,000, or $100? Would the decision be reached
peaceably? Would the use and possession of government bonds be allowed?
As the desire to acquire is one of the strongest passions, bitter hatred
would assail the Socialist state, which, Debs tells us, would prohibit
business profits, rent and interest. ["Socialism and Unionism," by
Eugene V. Debs.] How could insurance companies, in which the American
people have invested so much, and which depend on interest, exist under
Socialism? Socialism having ruined the insurance companies, would the
millions of policyholders just sit down and have a good, hearty laugh
over their losses?
The real crux of Socialism is the inability of the Marxians to determine
upon a system of employment and a scale of wages or remuneration
satisfactory both to the government and the working classes.
Remuneration must either be in the form of money, or of goods or labor
certificates entitling the holder to receive goods from the government
stores. As labor certificates would be like money, we shall class them
as "money" when speaking of wages.
Different schemes of employment have been proposed by Socialists. One of
the oldest allows each individual to select the occupation he desires,
provided he can do the work. All citizens, under this system, receive
equal pay or equal supplies for their services.
Such a system is absurd. The more repugnant occupations, no matter how
important for the welfare of the nation, would be neglected. All would
want easy, clean jobs. Bootblacks might prefer to become artistic
decorators; street-cleaners would ask to be put in charge of big
factories; night-workers would prefer day-work. The result would be
endless discontent, jealousy and disorder. As everybody would receive
equal recompense, the system would set a premium on sloth and
inefficiency, and entail state bankruptcy. One of the most serious
objections would be the discontent among skilled workingmen, who would
want skill to be a determining factor in the wage scale. Yet should
their system of equal remuneration not prevail, unskilled laborers, led
by agitators to believe that equal wages would be paid to all, would
become the sworn enemies of the government. A second system, favored by
many Socialists would permit all citizens to choose their occupations
and allow each individual to draw upon the national storehouses
_according to his needs_. [Gotha Programme of the Socialists of
Germany.]
This scheme, like the first, is absolutely absurd. It would permit all
to demand more than they needed, would encourage sloth, would bankrupt
the state, and would occasion discontent among skilled workingmen. Under
this system, too, the entire population would neglect the more
distasteful occupations, and ill-feeling and jealousy would arise in the
hearts of those failing to obtain congenial positions.
As diligence should be a determining factor in the arrangement of the
wage scale, in considering the remaining systems we shall assume that
the wages are those for men whose diligence may be termed first class.
Many Socialists, foreseeing the evils of a mad rush to obtain the
attractive positions, yet realizing how intolerable it would be for the
state to drive its citizens into uncongenial occupations, have
endeavored to find a way out. Several solutions have been proposed,
among which is the one we shall call the third system.
In the third system, occupations may be chosen by those qualified to do
the work. The recompense would be the same for all, but with the hours
of toil lessened in proportion to the disagreeableness of the work.
["Looking Backward," by Bellamy, Chapter 7, Social Democratic Publishing
Company of Milwaukee.] But such a system would give more reason than
ever for jealousy and discontent on the part of skilled workingmen, who
would be terribly incensed at seeing street cleaners and garbage
collectors for example receive salaries equal to their own and at the
same time enjoy shorter hours. This system would put a premium on such
occupations as sewer-cleaning and dish-washing, and would discourage
persons from pursuing occupations of the highest importance to the
country.
Morris Hillquit, writing in "Everybody's," December, 1913, page 826,
tells us that "the national government might well own and operate all
means of interstate transportations and communication, such as railroad
systems, telegraph and telephone lines; all sources of general and
national wealth, such as mines, forests, oil-wells; and all monopolized
or trustified industries already organized on a basis of national
operation.
"Similarly the state government might assume the few industries confined
within state limits; while the municipal government would logically
undertake the management of the much wider range of peculiarly local
business, such as street transportation and the supply of water, light,
heat and power.
"Still other local industries, too insignificant or unorganized even for
municipal operation, might be left to voluntary co-operative
enterprises."
On page 829 of the same issue of "Everybody's," Hillquit adds that
"under a system of Socialism each worker will be a partner in the
industrial enterprise in which he will be employed, sharing in its
prosperity and losses alike."
At first sight this fourth plan seems attractive, but upon examination
we notice that nothing is said as to how the millions of persons to be
employed by the national, state or municipal governments will be
assigned to the different enterprises. Will the people be forced to
labor at repugnant tasks? That will make endless turmoil and trouble in
the Marxian state. But if all persons enjoy equal rights under the
Socialist government there would be a grand rush for the most congenial
occupations, and especially for the most lucrative. The result would be
an immense amount of discontent and jealousy in those who failed to
secure the positions they desired. True, these objections might not hold
for well-to-do persons like Hillquit, founder of the "New York Call,"
for he and other Socialist politicians who have become wealthy by always
remaining leaders of their dues-paying comrades might, perhaps, invest
their money in co-operative enterprises. But such persons constitute
only a small part of the population of the country.
The many objections brought against these four systems could not be
obviated by the adoption of a fifth, in which all would be free to
choose their occupations, and would for the same number of hours of work
receive as recompense an amount determined by all the factors which
should be taken into consideration, such as skill, the physical
difficulty of the labor, danger, disagreeableness of the work and the
increased value added to the raw material.
In trying to arrange the details of such a system, innumerable
difficulties would arise. Unskilled laborers would want physical labor
rather than skill or talent made the principal factor in determining the
scale; for they would recall the promises of Socialist orators that in
the new state all should enjoy equal rights, and they would consider it
a grave injustice to work as hard or even harder than skilled laborers
and yet receive lower wages through want of skill and talent due to no
fault of theirs. Should the plea of these millions of unskilled
laborers go unheeded, the new state could count them among its most
bitter enemies.
On the other hand, skilled laborers would want skill and talent to be
the main factors in determining wages, arguing that they had worked hard
to become proficient and that their talent and skill made the work more
valuable to the state. They would protest that they should not suffer
simply because unskilled laborers lacked their skill and talent. Should
the skilled workingmen not be heard, the new state would have another
throng of enemies.
Compromises might be attempted by different adjustments of talent and
skill to physical labor in determining the wage schedule; but in each
case the new regime would only be at the beginning of troubles. What
bitter disputes among the skilled workingmen in different trades! There
would be conflicting views of every sort regarding the exact amount of
skill and of physical labor required in the different trades, and
regarding the difficulties, disagreeableness of work, dangers to health
and life, and increased value added to the raw material in each line.
But what would happen even if the ship of state under the red flag and
its mast could weather the wage-storm and come safely into port with
some working system?
The people, we are told, would enjoy equal rights. The government could
not refuse to grant work to any qualified person applying for it.
Suppose the members of some trade, the carpenters, for example,
displeased with the wages they were getting, should apply for other work
and stick to it until the government was forced to grant their demands.
Other craftsmen, seeing how easily the carpenters had won their strike,
would imitate their example. Thus would occur derangements of the
intricate wage scale--which had occupied the attention of the country
for so long a time and been adopted only after the greatest
difficulty--causing great discontent and jealousy, while the economic
losses through successful strikes would raise the prices of commodities,
bringing on a general fever of discontent.
A further source of trouble would be the problem of determining what
wages should be paid to shirkers and those incapable of working with
efficiency. Would wage courts decide the value of their services? If so,
how many thousands of such courts would be required? If not, would state
officials or politicians decide the cases? The wages of such persons,
no matter how determined, would cause discontent.
It would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to determine justly
and accurately the wages of eminent specialists, physicians and persons
whose important services the state could not afford to lose. If very
high wages were awarded them, the poorer classes would take offence at
the prospect of a rich class once more rising with power to suppress
them, as many do at the present time. If low wages were paid to eminent
specialists, they would neglect important pursuits and vocations to the
detriment of the nation's welfare. Even if they received moderately high
wages, other persons of the same profession would become offended at the
government's refusal to grant them like salaries and would line up with
the enemies of the Socialist state.
Even under the most favorable circumstances, the fifth wage-system would
produce two classes, the comparatively rich, and the comparatively poor,
a condition repugnant to Socialists.
The forcing of women to work, in accordance with Socialistic doctrines,
would arouse opposition to the new government. The husbands, fathers and
sons of the women would be displeased with the wretched way in which
their homes would be kept and their meals prepared.
A further source of tremendous discontent in the Socialist state would
be the prevalence[14] of political corruption to a far greater extent
than under the present system. For there would be a far greater throng
of state employes than now, and there would be an immense number of
people trying to get permissions, privileges and exemptions of every
description. With human nature unchanged, but with the opportunities for
deals and bribery greatly multiplied, political corruption would greatly
increase.
Another important cause would be in operation. Socialism is spreading
anti-religious and atheistic doctrines, loosing men and women from their
moral restraints. With dishonesty thus increasing, acceptors of bribes
would not only be more common in the Marxian state, but the average
number of their offences would increase; for since opportunities of
collecting large single sums would be rarer than at present, owing to
abolition of the capitalist system and the small amount of wealth
possessed by individuals, dishonest politicians would naturally endeavor
to enrich themselves by granting corrupt favors to a larger number of
people. The reader himself can picture the condition of affairs in the
Socialist state when large numbers of its citizens were its declared
enemies because of a vast and hopeless system of political corruption.
The Socialist state would contain many persons who by soapbox orators
and revolutionary authors were led to believe that police, soldiers and
courts would disappear. These persons would be greatly discontented when
the Socialist government still hedged them in by retaining the old
system for the preservation of law and order, or, as in Russia, greatly
increased the restraint on their liberty by means of immense numbers of
Red Guards, heavily armed and noted for cruelty. Or if these were taken
away, the state would feel the enmity of all its better citizens who
realized the need for guardians, police, soldiers and courts, to protect
them from the crimes of the lawless.
Under the Socialist regime there would be atheists, fighting as in
Russia, Mexico, France, Italy and Portugal for the propagation of their
doctrines, while in opposition to them would be millions of believers,
defending themselves from the attacks of the enemies of God. Any
concession granted by the state to one of these parties would arouse the
enmity of the other.
So, too, there would be a rapidly growing faction in favor of free-love,
as well as one opposed to it, and as each party would be extremely
powerful, and use every effort to defeat its opponents, there would be
great strife and discontent.
The Socialists in power in Europe, whether "moderate" or extremely
radical, have made millions of enemies by imprisonments, executions,
suppression of free speech, the gagging of the press, the withholding
food, etc. Would these things happen in our country if the Reds gained
control?
There is every reason to believe that the Socialist Government would
become exceedingly unpopular here as in Russia, owing to a great
increase in crime; for to say nothing of the criminal offences
occasioned by the prevalent discontent of the citizens, the atheistical
and anti-religious doctrines of the Revolutionists, by continuing to
undermine the faith of the people in the existence of God and by leading
them to disbelieve in the rewards of heaven and the punishments of hell,
would very seriously interfere with the beneficent effects of several of
the most excellent preventives of crime.
With discontent, jealousy and crime reigning supreme in the state from
its very birth, many who had hoped for the success of Socialism would
become utterly disgusted with its absolute failure and would long for
the re-establishment of the old order. As the leaders of the Marxian
movement now make the most extravagant promises concerning perfections
of their prospective state, their government, should it come, would
suffer the hatred of all who discovered that they had been cruelly
deceived.
We must remember, too, that the very persons who would discover that
they had been deceived by their Socialist teachers would be the very
same people who are now taught by the same teachers to find fault with
everything under the sun. It would, therefore, be a terrible day for the
new state when the embittered rank and file of the Revolutionary Party
fully realized the total failure of Socialism. The Socialist state would
then have millions of enemies, recruited from the Socialist Party
itself, as well as from the ranks of those who had always opposed
Socialism.
Not alone would these enemies be far more numerous than those who oppose
our present form of government, but their wrath and anger, wrought to
fever heat by the many causes we have enumerated, as well as by the
mistakes of the Marxian rulers, would urge them to commit deeds of
violence that have never yet been conceived even by the "bomb squad" of
the revolutionary I. W. W. Rebellion against the new government would be
the order of the day, and the Socialist state would not long endure. It
would crumble to pieces, and the poor workingman, in the midst of
anarchy and the total destruction of industry, would deeply regret
having listened to the crazed imaginations of silver-tongued fanatics.
* * * * *
Lincoln Eyre's cables from Russia, received by the "New York World" when
this book was in type, more than corroborate the picture drawn in this
chapter of the "perils to workingmen" from any attempt to put the
economic fallacies of Socialism into practice. In the first place,
according to Eyre's cable of February 26, 1920, printed in the "World"
of February 28, 1920, all the blood and violence inflicted on Russia
have failed to establish real Communism there. Through courtesy of the
"World" we give, in part, Eyre's statement as to this, from the cable
just mentioned:
"In wartime France, England or Germany no man could obtain for love
or money more than a specified maximum of food, fuel or the
household requirements. In wartime revolutionary Russia, ruled by a
communist dictatorship, any man with enough thousand ruble notes
can buy all the food and warmth he desires. Throughout the war
dwellers in London, Paris or Berlin affected by war conditions
(and that meant practically everybody) were freed of paying rent by
a moratorium. Residents of Moscow and Petrograd are still obliged
to pay rent and at a higher figure than in pre-war days. These two
incontrovertible facts are evidence that an all-powerful Bolshevik
in the Communist Government has in two years installed a lesser
measure of Communism in actual practice than existed in the
belligerent European countries during the war years. To my mind
this is one of the severest, albeit the most rarely mentioned,
indictments of the Bolsheviks' vast communistic programme, since it
reveals their impotency to attain their initial aim--the abolition
of classes."
In the second place, not alone has there been failure to destroy
capitalism and equalize possessions, but new class distinctions and "new
aristocracies" have arisen. We quote Eyre on this point from the same
issue of the "World," February 28, 1920:
"While capitalism in the larger sense of the term has been
destroyed, together with private ownership on a large scale,
capital continues to be accumulated and to make its influence felt.
One man may still possess more than another in worldly goods and
receive higher pay for his work. Equality of material possessions
is as non-existent in the Russian social republic as it is in the
American 'bourgeois' republic. Hence there are coming into
existence new groupings of Russian population, new lines of
economic demarcation, new forms of social standing and of wealth.
The beginning of two new aristocracies are detectable. One is found
in the governmental hierarchy, the other in the ever-increasing
speculator class.... The Soviets ... cannot do without the
speculators (which means all persons engaged in private trading)."
Thirdly, "Communist" Russia already has her "ruling class," as
privileged and as distinctly marked off from the ordinary day-laborer as
in any "bourgeois" republic. We quote Eyre as to this from the same
article:
"Governmental aristocracy has its boots imbedded in the Kremlin,
that ancient Moscow citadel.... In Soviet Russia today one speaks
of the Kremlin as one spoke of Versailles in the magnificent days
of Louis XIV.... Only the most eminent commissaries of the people
and a few other Soviet stars of the first magnitude are domiciled
there in the grandiose palaces that once housed the most famous
figures of Muscovite history.
"Protected behind numerous barriers of bayonets and machine guns,
the Bolshevik chieftains have made this barbarically gorgeous
nesting place of Oriental autocracy the throbbing nerve centre of
world revolution.... And from its frowning gates they sally forth
in their high power limousines on affairs of state even as the
Czars in their day went forth to superintend the administration of
their colossal heritage.
"Bolshevism's upper ten are in the Kremlin. The lesser lights of
the Bolshevik aristocracy must content themselves with quarters in
the 'Soviet houses,' which were the city's leading hotels, and are
now nationalized habitations reserved for prominent Soviet
officials. These buildings, like the Kremlin, are better heated and
generally cared for than most other domiciles and the food served
in them is slightly more abundant. Sentries guard the doors to
prevent unauthorized visitors from gaining admission....
"The fact that some individuals ride to the opera in limousines
while the rest walk is necessarily productive of class division.
Already there is a slang term for the former--the proletarian
bourgeoisie, they are called."
The observant reader will also have gathered from the extract just given
that, fourthly, the "ruling class" of Communist Russia is much more
distrustful of the "common people" than any class in the United States,
Great Britain or France would think of being. Thus the lords and
lordlings of the "proletarian dictatorship" barricade themselves in
"citadels," behind "barriers of bayonets and machine guns," while
"sentries guard the doors" to keep out "visitors." What would we poor
"bourgeois" Americans think if our wealthier inhabitants and public
officials kept "common citizens" out of range by such a display of
infantry and artillery?
Fifthly, despite all the gush about a "workingmen's" republic in Russia,
that country is now absolutely helpless under the yoke of the most
absolute autocracy the world has seen in a long while. As to this we
quote Lincoln Eyre's cable, dated February 25, 1920, and published in
the "New York World" of February 27, 1920. Eyre says:
"Lenine ... and Trotzky ... wield a more absolute power than any
Czar.... They are the only really strong men detectable among the
Bolsheviki or anywhere else in Russia. That their strength is
greater than ever is demonstrated by the amazing program for the
militarization of labor that they have just entered upon; a
programme which when first proposed aroused the Communist Party's
instant antagonism, but which in a few days the dictators easily
persuaded their disciples to support."
We shall return to this astounding conscription of labor a little
further on. It is referred to here merely to show who actually does the
"ruling" in the widely advertised "labor" government of Russia. Eyre
continues:
"There is iron law and order all over Russia, neither anarchy nor
chaos being visible.... With the recent abolition of the death
penalty the Red terror, long since bleached to pale pink, came to a
definite end. Such is the omnipotence of the Soviets that it is no
longer necessary for them to terrorize their opponents into
obedience."
Thus horrible butcheries are no longer necessary because no one longer
dares to resist. All liberty, all self-government, all self-initiative
have been crushed in the iron vise of dictated policy. This is the case,
as Eyre says, "twenty-seven months after the social revolution gripped
the nation in a clutch of steel that never has been relaxed since." Is
not such mental, moral and spiritual death a greater calamity than
physical death?
Sixthly, the common people, crushed under this experimental Socialist
Juggernaut, are starving to death. In the article last cited, in the
"World" of February 27, 1920, Eyre says:
"The food problem is hideously acute, yet not quite so critical as
at the outset of the winter. In Moscow, Petrograd and other
industrial centres some 8,000,000 human beings, of whom only a tiny
fraction are Bolsheviki, are slowly but surely starving to death.
There are abundant food stocks in the south and east, but they
cannot be carried in sufficient quantity over the semi-paralyzed
railroads....
"Trotzky himself defined the industrial situation as a race between
economic reconstruction and reversion to savagery."
Seventhly, craving for food is one of the things which make it
impossible to shut out the food speculator, whose extortion at least
helps to prolong life. As Eyre says:
"City and country food speculation, which the dictatorship thus far
confesses its inability to suppress or even control, is fast
developing a new capitalist class right under the Communists'
noses. One of the most painful sights in Russia is some pale, thin,
tottering old woman paying out more than she earns in a week for a
few lumps of sugar bought from a well-fed trader from the country
in the Sukfarevka, Moscow's open air market place."
Eighthly, the common people are nearly as cold as they are hungry. In
the cable printed in the "World" of February 27, 1920, Eyre says:
"Fuel is slightly less scarce than it was two months ago. The lack
of heat, however, is helping the food shortage to increase the
mortality rate, which is likely to attain 30 per cent in Moscow
before spring."
In the ninth place, disease stalks through the land, hand in hand with
cold and famine. The article just cited contains the following by Eyre:
"Disease is rampant, and the typhus epidemic in Siberia, where
Kolchak left many tens of thousands of victims behind him in his
retreat, is spreading swiftly westward. Owing to the absence of
medical supplies, the epidemic can be combated only by quarantine."
In the tenth place, "labor" in Russia, the real "working class," is
conscripted, enslaved under military discipline, and "exploited" under
an incredible system of military court martial--a degradation of
workingmen by the Socialist tyrants of Russia which no form of modern
"capitalism" has dreamed of since human slavery was abolished. On this
subject Eyre says, in the "World" of February 27, 1920:
"Four of Trotzky's sixteen armies have been turned into 'labor
armies,' which means that soldiers fresh from victories on military
fronts are being obliged to work, still under military command and
discipline, on the 'economic front.' They are used chiefly for
building up the transport system and assuring shipment of food and
fuel from the country to the city....
"Labor generally is being militarized to an amazing extent.
Discipline is being imposed upon factory workers by the
establishment of special tribunals with powers of courts martial.
Communist commissaries, no longer required at the front, are being
detached from their regiments and sent to stimulate production
endeavor in industries and railroads."
Is this the kind of thing which Hillquit's Socialist gang of would-be
labor "exploiters" would lure America's liberty-loving workingmen into
by calling them "slaves" in their present dignified situation as
self-governed and self-reliant freemen? On December 13, 1919, the
presidents and secretaries of the 113 national and international unions
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor met at Washington, D.
C., with the heads of the four railway brotherhoods and several
farmers' organizations, and are to be congratulated for having passed
the following resolution, which the late information from Russia
overwhelmingly vindicates:
"Whereas, the American Federation of Labor is an American
institution, believing in American principles and ideas, and
"Whereas, an attempt is being made to inject the spirit of
Bolshevism and I. W. W.'ism into the affairs of the American
Federation of Labor, and
"Whereas, the American Federation of Labor is opposed to
Bolshevism, I. W. W.'ism and the irresponsible leadership which
encouraged such a policy, therefore be it
"Resolved, that the conference of representatives of trades unions
affiliated with the A. F. of L., and other organizations associated
in this conference, repudiate and condemn the policy of Bolshevism
and I. W. W.'ism as being destructive of American ideals and
impracticable in application; be it further
"Resolved, that this conference reiterate the action of the
conventions of the American Federation of Labor, and the advocacy
of the principles of conciliation and voluntary arbitration and
collective bargaining."
We cite this here to put the freedom of self-determination, practiced by
the great progressive body of American labor, in vivid contrast with the
abject slavery which the Socialists of Russia are now imposing upon the
labor of that country. Lincoln Eyre's statement of the labor situation
in Russia is confirmed by Trotzky himself, as we learn from the "New
York World" of February 28, 1920, as follows:
"London, February 27.--Leon Trotzky, Minister of War of Soviet
Russia, addressing the third Russian Congress, held in Moscow
January 25 last, outlined the Bolshevist plan for converting the
Red Army into an army of labor. According to reports of his speech
reaching here he said:
"'There is still one way open to the reorganization of national
economy--the way of uniting the army and labor and changing the
military detachments of the army into detachments of a labor army.
"'Many in the army have already accomplished their military task
but they cannot be demobilized as yet. Now that they have been
released from their military duties, they must fight against
economic ruin and against hunger; they must work to obtain fuel,
peat and other heat-producing products; they must take part in
building, in clearing the lines of snow, in repairing roads,
building sheds, grinding flour, etc.
"'We have already organized several of these armies and they have
been allotted their tasks. One army must obtain foodstuffs for the
workmen of the districts in which it was formerly stationed and it
also will cut wood, cart it to the railways and repair engines.
Another army will help in the laying down of railway lines for the
transport of crude oil. A third labor army will be used in
repairing agricultural implements and machines, and, in the spring,
will take part in the working of the land....
"'Trade unions must register qualified workmen in the villages.
Only in those localities where trade union methods are inadequate
other methods must be introduced, in particular that of compulsion,
because labor conscription gives the state the right to tell the
qualified workmen who is employed on some unimportant work in his
village, "You are obliged to leave your present employment and go
to Sormovo or Kolomna, because there your work is required."
"'Labor conscription means that the qualified workmen who leave the
army must proceed to places where they are required, where their
presence is necessary to the economic system of the country. We
must feed these workmen and guarantee them the minimum food
ration.'"
No doubt these "qualified workmen" are what we call "skilled workmen."
Here we have, in its naked reality, the "deliverance" from
"wage-slavery" which the crazy Socialists of all schools have so long
been preaching to the laboring freemen of America. How would the
millions of labor's noblemen in the American Federation of Labor like to
see Debs, Hillquit and Victor L. Berger cracking the whip over them
after the fashion of Lenine, Trotzky and Zinovieff in Russia?
Notice the "capitalistic" language of Trotzky: "_We_"--the tyrannical,
exploiting drones in the Kremlin--"must feed these workmen and guarantee
them the _minimum_ food ration." Do not the "workmen" produce the food?
Then why do they not take it and cut the throats of these drones? Is not
this the Socialist doctrine we are taught by our American theorists, who
froth at the mouth over the alleged "wage-slavery" of American workmen
who rear intelligent families in comfortable homes and maintain the
independence and self-initiative of American freemen?
In the eleventh place, we notice that the workmen of Russia, as a reward
for complete slavery under military conscription and courts martial
tribunals, are guaranteed nothing but this "minimum food ration" and a
possibility of being able to buy enough additional food out of their
wages to postpone starvation. The last-mentioned possibility is
described for us by Lincoln Eyre in his cable in the "New York World" of
February 27, 1920, where, it must be remembered, he is speaking of the
most-favored workmen, in the big cities. He says:
"Nobody in Russia relying wholly upon 'Sovietsky' food--food handed out
through official agencies--gets enough to eat except soldiers, a small
percentage of heavy workers and high Soviet officials. Ordinary factory
workers seldom receive as much as 60 per cent of their alimentary
requirements through the Government. The remainder they must buy at
fantastically high prices from speculators. And though they themselves,
in collaboration with central dictatorship, fix their own wages, they
never earn enough to cover the swift-climbing cost of living. If this is
the plight of the workers, that is, of the ruling class, the ghastliness
of the situation confronting the less favored elements of the population
may well be imagined."
Is it in irony that Eyre speaks of these "workers" as "the ruling
class"? What are the real workmen in Russia but victims of this cruel
experiment of tyrannizing Socialist "intellectuals"?
We remark next, in the twelfth place, that the Soviet system of food
distribution, wholly unequal and thus anti-communistic, has resulted in
dividing the Russians into eight classes, each category having a special
card defining its special ration. The account of this is given by
Lincoln Eyre in a cable dated March 9, 1920, and published in the "New
York World" of March 10, 1920, from which we take two sentences:
"The commissariat of food control has gradually built up no less
than eight distinct classes.... Special cards also are provided for
children from one, two to five and from five to sixteen. It will be
seen that this totals eight distinct varieties of card."
The affect of these distinctions may be gathered from the following
instance given in the article just cited:
"In the month of November there was distributed by the Petrograd
Soviet altogether 13,631,480 pounds of bread.... Had all the bread
been divided evenly among the whole population, each person would
have had about one-half a pound a a day, whereas, in fact, one
category got much less than that amount daily and the third
category none at all."
In the thirteenth place, we note that the Russian Socialist tyrants give
the workmen, in exchange for their labor, pieces of paper run off from
printing presses which seem almost to have solved the problem of
perpetual motion. The workmen are wise if they spend this fiat money
daily for whatever it will bring in food, for its value will collapse
utterly when the dictatorship bursts, leaving the country financially
prostrate, without credit or means of exchange. This is one of the
greatest bunco games ever practiced upon workingmen. Eyre describes it
in a cable dated March 3, 1920, and published in the "New York World" of
March 4, 1920, from which we quote:
"In 'the Socialist Federative Republic of Soviets of Russia,' to
give the Bolshevik land its official title, no mention has been
made of finance. The reason for this is simple. There is no
finance, in the European or American sense of the word, in present
Russia. The Soviet Government pays its own people what it has to
pay in paper money, of which it prints unlimited quantities. Being
determined eventually to abolish money altogether in favor of
Communistic exchange of products, it is not worried about
depreciation in the value of its currency. It possesses about
1,000,000,000 rubles--the exact amount is kept very secret--in
gold, with which it intends to pay for goods purchased abroad until
it can establish a system of barter with foreign commercial
interests. From the capitalistic viewpoint its budgetary
expenditures are chaotic, but in Communistic eyes they are both
sane and logical."
Only to minds financially insane or criminally degenerate could such a
system seem "sane and logical." Their carefully kept store of gold shows
that the Bolshevist dictators are not insane but criminal. They
understand their game, which is that of bunco-steering to "exploit"
labor on the largest scale the world has ever seen. Honest paper money
is a promise to pay, for value received, in gold, silver or good
merchandise. If this form is used by these frauds, it is with the
deliberate intention of repudiation, the possibility of payment being
also destroyed by the floods of the stuff turned out. If the paper given
is not a promise to pay, it is circulated simply through the tyranny of
men who by threat of punishment or starvation force workingmen to
exchange a day's labor for a bit of food and a piece of paper. In either
case the labor exploiters in the Kremlin exact from Russia's workingmen,
in exchange for a little food and a wad of paper, a genuine value, the
product of hard labor, which these get-rich-quick Wallingfords can turn
into gold, or exchange with the world for anything they want. All that
Russian workingmen get is semi-starvation and the temporary delusion,
conveyed to them in fine speeches, that they are "in the game," whereas
they are only its dupes.
The worthless character of the paper money, which the workmen
nevertheless have to take and spend to keep soul and body together, is
shown by the fact that the peasants refuse it. In his cable printed in
the "New York World" of February 27, 1920, Eyre says that "the peasant
twenty miles outside of Moscow ... has more food than he can eat, more
clothes than he can wear," yet "refuses to sell his products for money
except that proportion of them that he is compelled to turn over to the
Soviets at a fixed price. In private trading," Eyre continues, "he will
take in exchange for his foodstuffs only manufactured articles, clothing
and other things he needs." Thus the peasant is fortunate in that he
lives on land where he can at least raise enough to eat; whereas the
"proletarian," in whose behalf the Socialists pretend to have made the
Russian revolution, is most of all victimized by it.
The reason why the Bolshevist dictators are now conscripting Russian
labor seems evident. These pick-pockets have finished exploiting the
Russian aristocracy and "bourgeoisie," squeezed them dry, and squandered
what they stole. The only game left to them now is to exploit labor to
the limit and appropriate the profits.
Two other features of this thimble-rigging arrangement complete the
exposure of the most inhuman scheme to exploit labor which the world has
seen for centuries. One of these shows us, in the fourteenth place, that
the rascals Lenine and Trotzky, are actually inviting "foreign capital"
to form a partnership with them in their exploitation of Russian labor,
under promise to turn over to this outside "capital" a good share of the
"profits" to be wrung by labor conscription out of the sweat of Russia's
brow.
The invitation to "foreign capital" to join hands with the Bolshevist
dictatorship, under promise of good profits and guarantees of security
was made by both Lenine and Trotzky through interviews granted to
Lincoln Eyre. Through courtesy of the "New York World" we have quoted
the propositions of these "friends" of Russian labor near the close of
Chapter XV of this book, as the reader doubtless remembers, and we
merely recall the facts here to put them in line with the other features
of Bolshevist labor oppression which we have just been considering. Who
could have imagined that within a little more than two years after
beginning their barbarous Socialist experiment with Russian industries
the brazen dictatorship would be urging "foreign capital" to join in a
scheme to squeeze both a domestic and a foreign profit out of the toil
of Russian workingmen conscripted by Socialist task-masters and held in
wage-slavery under fear of death by court martial?
In the fifteenth place, we have the dreadful fact that Russian labor is
enslaved by a Socialist autocracy not for the sake of promoting peace
but for the sake of promoting war. In our last chapter we quoted the
statements of Zinovieff to Lincoln Eyre that the Third Internationale
would never give up its purpose to make the whole world Bolshevist. Eyre
also found the belief general in Russia that so long as the Socialists
retain power, any peace made by them with the outside world will only be
a short truce in which to prepare for another war. He says, in his cable
printed in the "New York World" of February 27, 1920:
"All, Bolsheviki included, feel that as long as the Soviets remain
in power in Russia and Bolshevism does not spread to other lands,
peace cannot be more than a truce in the international class
warfare."
Again, in his cable printed in the "New York World" of March 4, 1920,
Lincoln Eyre says:
"The Red Army's victories against Kolchak, Yudenitch and Denikine
are in themselves paradoxical, in that they serve to increase the
Russian need for peace.... Every advance recorded in Siberia or the
Crimea brings the front line further from the base and complicates
the task of supplying munitions, food and equipment. Thus it
becomes increasingly evident to all Russians, whatever their
political leanings may be, that Russia must have peace in order to
survive economically. And yet--another paradox--all feel that any
peace established now between Soviet authority and Governments of
the bourgeois and democratics cannot be more than a brief truce
because Socialism and capitalism cannot abide side by side, and
because neither can be suppressed without warfare. The Bolshevik
faith in the ultimate appearance of a world revolution has not
waned, but their hope of its speedy coming has lessened
considerably."
Who but the long-suffering Russians would endure the hopeless fate
imposed by Socialism on Russian labor? The workingmen were conscripted
by Trotzky's armies. They won victories, but these have not freed them.
Returning from the front they are conscripted for labor armies, to work
as they fought, under military discipline, subject to court martial and
death if they rebel. Yet this military toil will not free them. They
slave under the pistols of the commissaries only to get themselves
economically equipped for a new war against their "capitalistic"
neighbors, and in this war the workingman, if he can still walk, will be
conscripted to go to the front again. Should he survive this, must he
begin the same round over again?
But why not strike against this slavery? Russian labor does not dare to
strike. Tender-hearted Socialism has made the labor strike a crime in
Russia. Says Lincoln Eyre, in a cable dated March 11, 1920, and printed
in the "New York World" of March 13, 1920:
"The unions, of course, lost their former principal weapon--the
strike. Today any body of workers that would venture out on strike
would be considered, to quote President Melnitchansky of the Moscow
unions, as traitors to their Socialist fatherland and as such would
doubtless be shot."
With this utter collapse of Socialist theories and professions in
Bolshevikiland, we need not wonder that, according to a cable in the
"New York Times" of March 2, 1920, the French National Socialist
Congress adjourned at Strasbourg, March 1, 1920, "after voting down by
more than 2 to 1 a motion to ally the Socialists of France with Lenine
and Trotzky." According to the same cable, "The pleaders for the Third
Internationale, formed at Moscow, were answered by the reply that the
beautiful doctrines enunciated there had been thrown aside by Lenine and
Trotzky and that any one who believed in real Socialism would be a fool
to get behind the leaders of Soviet Russia."
Is it now in order for our American Bolshevists, Gene Debs, Morris
Hillquit (_alias_ Hilkovitz) and Vic Berger, solemnly to inform us that
Russian Bolshevism never was Socialism, nor anything like it, but only a
base counterfeit? And will they also inform us that Lenine and Trotzky
are unprincipled adventurers and cold-blooded blackguards who have
hidden behind the mask of Socialism to blackjack a great people and
filch a wealth they never did a day's work to accumulate?
When our American wavers of the Red Flag try to hide their shipwrecked
theories behind a repudiation of Bolshevikiland, we shall have to remind
them of their many, many utterances jubilantly assuring us that
"Bolshevism is Socialism in practice." A specimen will do, taken from
one of the books published by the Jewish Socialist Federation of
America, a "part of the Socialist Party" of the United States piloted by
Debs, Hilkovitz and Berger, which we quote as cited on page 34 of the
"Outline of the Evidence Taken Before the Judiciary Committee" of the
New York Assembly:
"Bolshevism is not a new Socialist theory, but the practical
carrying out in life of the old Socialist theory.
"Bolshevism especially is not a theory. Bolshevism is a method of
how to establish Socialism in life.
"Bolshevism is practical Socialism, the Socialism of today, and not
of the remote future day."
CHAPTER XVIII
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST RELIGION ABROAD
It is but proper to begin this chapter by conceding that there are many
church-going members among those who vote the Marxian ticket--not as an
indorsement of the teachings of international Socialism, but merely as a
protest against political corruption and the abuses of capitalism.
Justice, moreover, demands that we acknowledge the existence of a small
minority of dues-paying members of the Socialist Party who neither
attack religion nor tacitly approve of the atheistic propaganda carried
on in the official Marxian press, as well as in the books, pamphlets and
magazines on sale not only in the leading Socialist book-stores of
America, but even at the National Office of the party in Chicago.
In most countries of Europe, where the war against religion is much more
open and widespread than in America, the Socialists are frank in
confessing that their movement is atheistic and anti-religious.
In our own country some of the more violent Socialistic enemies of the
church admit both in their speeches and in their writings that they
would be extremely happy to see the very idea of God become a matter of
ancient history. Christian Socialists of the old Carr faction, who
constitute a minority of far less than one per cent of the Socialist
Party of the United States, have not only conceded the existence of an
atheistic propaganda within the ranks, but have attacked it and utterly
failed to suppress it.
Apart from these two classes of American Socialists, who admit the
existence of a campaign in favor of atheism, most Socialists in our
country, because they fear that votes will be lost if our people are
convinced of the anti-religious character of the party, steadfastly deny
that they are conspiring against religion. Indeed they are quite cunning
and crafty in their effort to beguile the unwary. If the person
hesitates joining the party, owing to his conviction that nearly all the
Socialist leaders have been the enemies of religion, he is informed that
it would be just as foolish for him not to be a Revolutionist for this
reason, as it would be for one not to become a Republican because Robert
Ingersoll did not believe in God and even propagated atheism.
As the conspirators against religion have, by this plausible argument,
involving the name of Ingersoll, removed the prejudices that many
persons formerly had against Socialism on account of the atheistic
teachings of its leaders, it seems but fitting to give a short
refutation of the deceptive argument and to point out the absurdity of
the comparison just mentioned.
In the first place, although Robert Ingersoll was an atheist, he never
stated that Republicanism was anti-religious. On the other hand, very
many of the highest authorities in the Marxian Party, whose extensive
knowledge of Socialism justifies our belief that they know but too well
the policy of the revolutionary movement, admit that Socialism
postulates atheism and war against religious beliefs. Ingersoll,
moreover, never attacked religion nor taught atheism with a view to
furthering the cause of Republicanism. But a very large number of the
Socialists, whether Europeans or Americans, in their endeavor to promote
what they consider to be the best interests of their party, have in
their books, magazines, pamphlets and papers been waging a relentless
war against religion. The atheistical works of Robert Ingersoll were not
purchased by the rank and file of the Republican Party for purposes of
party propaganda, but the rank and file of the Revolutionary Party spend
large sums of money on publications in which their avowed leaders teach
atheism as part of the Socialist program. Not content even with this,
the members do their utmost to increase the circulation of
anti-religious Socialist books, magazines, pamphlets and papers.
Before producing the evidence that will convict the Socialist leaders
and the rank and file of the party of openly advocating atheism and
hostility to religion, or at least of tacitly approving of such a
propaganda, a few words must be said relative to the materialistic
conception of history, or of economic determinism, as it is often
called. According to this doctrine, which is one of the fundamental
teachings of the Socialists, the whole history of mankind, including its
political, intellectual and religious development, is nothing more than
a process of evolution, the guiding principle of which is the prevailing
economic conditions and their resultant class struggles. Consequently,
the Socialists who believe this doctrine deny the intervention of God in
the development and spread of the Christian religion; for economic
determinism teaches that the development of the church is not the work
of Divine Providence, but of the economic conditions and class struggles
of society.
W. D. P. Bliss, the Socialist editor of the "New Encyclopedia of Social
Reform," in an article on page 1135 of his work, admits that it is
perfectly true that the large majority of avowed Socialists are divorced
from recognized religion and the church, and that this leads many of
them to extreme radicalism on all questions of ethics, money and the
family.
Frederick Engels, one of the renowned founders of modern Socialism,
taught that "nowadays in our evolutionary conception of the universe,
there is absolutely no room for either a Creator or a ruler."
("Socialism, Utopian and Scientific," by Frederick Engels, page 17 of
the Introduction to the 1901 edition in English--New York Labor News
Co.)
Wilhelm Liebknecht, who until shortly before his death in 1900 was one
of the foremost leaders of the Socialist Party in Germany, addressing
the Halle Convention, said: "As regards my own self, I had done with
religion at an early age.... I am an atheist, I do not believe in
God.... We may peacefully take our stand upon the ground of Socialism,
and thus conquer the stupidity of the masses in so far as stupidity
reveals itself in religious forms and dogmas." The same German Socialist
and atheist taught in his book, "Materialist Basis of History":
"It is our duty as Socialists to root out the faith in God with all
our zeal, nor is anyone worthy the name, who does not consecrate
himself to the spread of atheism."
August Bebel, who before his death in August, 1913, was the leader of
the Socialists of Germany, gave many proofs of the intimate relation
existing between Socialism and atheism. On September 16, 1878, he
declared in the Reichstag:
"Gentlemen, you attack our views on religion because they are
atheistic and materialistic. I acknowledge the correctness of the
impeachment. I am firmly convinced that Socialism finally leads to
atheism."
In the Reichstag, on December 31, 1881, he made the following profession
of faith:
"In politics we profess Republicanism, in economics Socialism, in
religion atheism."
According to the 1903 platform of the German Socialists, adopted at
Dresden, "No religious instructions of any kind shall be given to
children under the age of sixteen; after that they can select their own
religious tenets and teachings, as they please. Superstitious religious
notions that are current among the less educated classes are to be
eradicated through proper instructions."
"The Comrade," September, 1904, confesses that the satirical weekly
"L'Asino," published by the Socialists of Italy, and known throughout
the world for its attacks on religion, carries on a bitter fight against
the Catholic Church. In the early part of 1913, "L'Asino," speaking of
the coming Italian election, boasted that the Socialists would proclaim
their anti-clericalism and atheism in the public meetings.
The Austrian Socialists in convention at Linz, May 30, 1898, passed a
resolution proposed by Pernerstorfer to the effect that "Socialism is
directly contradictory to Roman clericalism, which is enslaved to
unyielding authority, immutable dogmas, and absolute intellectual
thralldom. We doubt all authority, we know of no immutable dogma, we are
the champions of right, liberty and conscience." [Reported in
"Vorwärts," 1898, no. 126, suppl.]
The bitter persecution that has for years been waged against the church
in France is too well known to require much comment. The representatives
of the French Socialist Party at Tours in March, 1903, voted upon a
program from which several clauses will be cited:
"The Socialist Party needs to organize a new world, free minds
emancipated from superstition and prejudices. It asks for and
guarantees every human being, every individual, absolute freedom of
thinking, and writing and affirming their beliefs. Over against all
religious dogmas and churches as well as over against the class
conceptions of the bourgeoisie, it sets the unlimited right of free
thought, the scientific conception of the universe, and a system of
public education based exclusively on science and reason. Thus
accustomed to free thought and reflection, citizens will be
protected against the sophistries of the capitalistic and clerical
reaction." The program also declares for the "abolition of the
congregations, nationalization of property in mortmain of every
kind belonging to them, and appropriation of it for works of social
insurance and solidarity."
In the Tours program, therefore, we have the open confession of the
Socialist Party of France that it is anti-religious and that it favors
the disgraceful robbery of the church that has for many years been going
on in that country.
The Belgian Socialists are quite as violent as the French in their
hatred of the church, for in addition to the large number of vile
anti-religious pamphlets distributed during the campaign that preceded
the elections of 1912, we have the testimony of no less an authority
than the Socialist leader, Emile Vandervelde, in the "Social Democrat,"
England, January, 1903:
"In the end the question to be solved is: what is the essential aim
of Socialism? There is not a Socialist who would hesitate to say
that it is the emancipation of the workers, the freedom of the
proletariat--and by this freedom we mean its complete freedom, the
abolition of all slavery in the spiritual sphere as well as in the
material sphere.... Can a sincere believer follow the church's
teachings and yet be a Socialist? We are bound to admit that both
in philosophy and in politics there must be war between Socialism
and the Church."
In England, too, the Socialists are the avowed enemies of religion.
Blatchford, who is well known to his comrades for his extreme work in
propagating Socialism by the pen, wrote in the "Clarion," October 4,
1907:
"Believing that the Christian religion was untrue, and believing
that all supernatural religions were inimical to human progress,
and foreseeing that a conflict between Socialism and religion was
inevitable, I attacked the Christian religion. I am working for
Socialism when I attack religion which is hindering it."
Again in his book, "God and My Neighbor," Blatchford utters the
following blasphemies:
"I am an easiful old pagan, and I am not angry with you at all--you
funny little champion of the Most High....
"This is the God of Heaven? This is the Father of Christ? This is
the Creator of the Milky Way? No! He will not do. He is not big
enough. He is not good enough. He is not clean enough. He is a
spiritual nightmare, a bad dream born in the savage minds of terror
and ignorance and a tigerish lust for blood....
"Is this unspeakable monster the Father of Christ? Is he the God
who inspireth Buddha and Shakespeare and Beethoven and Darwin and
Plato? No, not he. But in warfare and massacre, in rapine and rape,
in black revenge and in deadly malice, in slavery and polygamy, and
the debasement of women, and in the pomps, vanities and greeds of
royalty, of clericalism, and of usury and barter--we may easily
discern the influence of his ferocious and abominable personality."
This book, which teaches atheism from cover to cover, could be bought
for a dollar a copy in 1912 at the National Office of the Socialist
Party in Chicago, Ill. In the May, 1917, issue of the "International
Socialist Review," "God and My Neighbor," by Blatchford, is thus
advertised:
"Is the Bible true? This is the chief subject of debate today
between Christians and Scientists the world over. Robert Blatchford
says: 'Is the Bible a holy and inspired book and the Word of God to
man, or is it an incongruous and contradictory collection of tribal
tradition and ancient fables, written by men of genius and
imaginations? Mr. Blatchford believes religions are not revealed,
they are evolved.
"'We cannot accept as the God of Creation,' he writes, 'this savage
idol, Jehovah, of an obscure tribe, and we have renounced him and
are ashamed of him, not because of any later divine revelation, but
because mankind have become too enlightened to tolerate Jehovah.'"
Ernest Bax, an Englishman, one of the greatest authorities in the world
on Socialism, an author who, even in America, has been styled "the most
accomplished writer on behalf of Socialism in this and perhaps in any
country," in his book, "Religion of Socialism," thus testifies to the
relation existing between Socialism and religion:
"In what sense Socialism is not religious will now be clear. It
utterly despises the other world with all its stage
properties--that is, the present objects of religion." ["Religion
of Socialism," by Ernest Belfort Bax, page 52 of 1891 edition.]
Who could imagine any more convincing testimony of the atheistic and
anti-religious nature of the Socialist movement than the following words
of the English Socialist, James Leathan, in "Socialism and Character":
"At the present moment I cannot remember a single instance of a
person who is at one and the same time a really earnest and
intelligent Socialist and an orthodox Christian. Those who do not
openly attack the church and the fabric of Christianity, show but
scant respect to either the one or the other in private.... And
while all of us are thus indifferent to the church, many of us are
frankly hostile to her. Marx, Lassalle and Engels among earlier
Socialists; Morris, Bax, Hyndman, Guesde and Bebel among
present-day Socialists--are all more or less avowed atheists; and
what is true of the more notable men of the party is almost equally
true of the rank and file the world over."
In 1910 a pamphlet entitled "Socialism and Religion" was issued by the
Revolutionists of Great Britain. One quotation from it will amply
suffice to show the utter contempt of the English[15] Socialist for
religion:
"If a man supports the church, or in any respect allows religious
ideas to stand in the way of principles of Socialism, or activity
of the party, he proves thereby that he does not accept Socialism
as fundamentally true and of the first importance, and his place is
outside. No man can be consistently both a Socialist and a
Christian. It must either be the Socialist or the religious
principle that is supreme, for the attempt to couple them equally
together betrays charlatanism or lack of thought. There is,
therefore, no need for a specifically anti-religious test. So
surely does the acceptance of Socialism lead to the exclusion of
the supernatural, that the Socialist has little need for such terms
as atheist, freethinker or even materialist, for the word
Socialist, rightly understood, implies one who (on all such
questions) takes his stand on positive science, explaining all
things by purely natural causation--Socialism being not merely a
politico-economic creed, but an integral part of a consistent world
philosophy."
"The Western Clarion," a publication of the Canadian Socialists,
declared in its issue of May 23, 1914, that the Socialist Party of
Canada would have "no compromise with advocates of Christianity."
Alvarado, the governor of Yucatan, and his criminal sustainers several
years ago drove the clergy from the country, turned the churches into I.
W. W. meeting houses, and turned some, as in the case of the Cathedral
of Merida, even into warehouses. Religion was outlawed and an atheist
tyranny established. Alvarado is an ardent I. W. W. Socialist of the
most violent sort. His advent into Yucatan from the lawless northern
part of Mexico was marked by wholesale confiscation of property, by
robbery and outrage. His vile subordinates, of like origin with himself,
committed loathsome crimes, unspeakable and without number, and no
opportunity was overlooked to persecute the unhappy people whose
accumulations by thrift and industry and whose steadfast adherence to
their religion marked them as certain victims of robbery, murder and
outrage.
"The Call," New York, April 9, 1919, informs us that the workers in
Yucatan have elected a succession of Socialist governors, and in its
issue of April 14, 1919, under the caption, "Up to the Minute Official
Socialist News," we read the following:
"Felipe Carrillo, president of the Socialist Party of Yucatan,
Mexico, spoke on conditions in Yucatan. Among other things he said:
'The Socialist Party of America should do everything possible
against intervention in Mexico.... All the public officials, from
the highest to the lowest, are members of the Socialist party....
There is no middle class in Yucatan.... The Socialist Party of
Yucatan has been in power three years.'
"A rising vote was taken, expressing our fraternal greetings to
Felipe Carrillo and the Comrades of Yucatan."
The April 9, 1919, issue of "The Call" informs us that Alvardo in 1915
organized the Socialist Party of Yucatan, 62,700 members of which belong
to the League of Resistance, an organization which, we are told, is
purely economic in its activities.
What a strange name for an economic league, especially in Mexico, where
economics have for some years been taught by the torch, bomb, dagger!
The March, 1919, edition of "The Eye Opener," the official organ of the
Socialist Party of the United States, throws a little light on this
economic league of "the knights of the red flag." On page 4 of that
issue we are told that among the principles of the League of Resistance
are the following:
"The Land is Mother, and Labor is the Father of Humanity.
Attack no one without motive, but never present the other cheek to
any who has struck one.
Fly from the religions, principally the Catholic religion, as from
the plagues."
The article on the economic League of Resistance ends with the call of
Yucatan to the rest of the continent: "Workers of the world, unite."
Carillo is then quoted as saying:
"Never will labor conquer until it understands solidarity. Political
action, economic action, perhaps military action--todos metodos
necesitamos. En todas las epocas del mundo, rifley dynamita sean
necesarios; pero siempre y sobre todo, solidaridad." The words, "rifley
dynamita" mean nothing and are evidently a misprint for "rifle y
dynamita." There was good reason for letting the words remain in the
Spanish in the official organ of the Socialist Party of the United
States, for if "rifle y dynamita" were the Spanish words meant, their
translation would be:
"We need all means. In all periods of the world's history, the
rifle and dynamite may be necessary, but always and above all
solidarity."
So much for the _economic_ League of Resistance of the Socialists of
Yucatan, which has been destroying both religion and civilization alike!
Carrillo, its president, has been greeted throughout our country by the
Socialists, who have been extending their fraternal greetings also to
the rest of their "Comrades in Yucatan."
CHAPTER XIX
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST RELIGION IN AMERICA
Much more testimony than has already been given could easily be
furnished for proving that the Socialist movement in foreign lands is
atheistic and anti-religious, but as sufficient has been given, let us
dwell more on the anti-religious activities of the Revolutionists in our
own country.
In answer to a possible objection, namely, that the American Socialists
should in no way be held responsible for the anti-religious and
atheistic teachings of their comrades abroad, the attention of the
reader is called to the fact that the Socialist movement is an
international one, and that nearly all the Marxian leaders in Europe are
considered by the American Socialists as first class authorities on
Socialism. Moreover the books and writings of these foreign protagonists
form a very considerable part of the Socialistic literature of the
United States and are considered as standard works on the subject.
But in addition to the fact that the American Socialists thus share the
responsibility of their European comrades, the Revolutionists of our own
country will now come forward with more than enough testimony to prove
that they are just as guilty as their foreign comrades of propagating
atheistic and anti-religious doctrines.
Rev. William T. Brown, formerly the pastor of Plymouth Church,
Rochester, New York, after becoming a Socialist, wrote the following in
the May, 1902, number of "Wilshire's Magazine":
"For myself, I do not recognize any existing church or state as
complete in itself or founded by God. There is absolutely nothing
in church or state that cannot be traced to a perfectly natural
origin.... Instead of the religious idea that God breathed into
clay the breath of life, and so man came into existence in the
image of God, we know beyond question that man's ancestors were
animals, and he is the image of his animal parentage.... Singing
hymns, saying prayers, learning catechism, attending the services
of a place miscalled a sanctuary will do nothing whatever to effect
the ends for which men are striving.... The church will attract its
own, and the Socialist cause will draw those who belong to it.
People who are interested in fossils and relics and curios will
find a congenial place in the church as will also the ignorant and
deluded masses."
George D. Herron, who, like William T. Brown, had once been a minister,
on becoming a Socialist expressed his atheistic sentiments by writing in
the "International Socialist Review," Chicago, August, 1901:
"When the gods are dead to rise no more, man will begin to live.
After the end of the gods, when there is nothing else to which we
may turn, nothing left outside of ourselves, we shall turn to one
another for fellowship, and behold! the heart of all worship is
exposed and we have omnipotence in our hands....
"There will be no more priests, no rulers, no judges, when
fellowship comes and the gods are gone. And when there are neither
priests, nor rulers, nor judges, there will be no evil on earth,
nor none called good, to stand over against others called evil."
John Spargo, a former Socialist of considerable renown in the United
States, and until recently very popular with the party, speaking of
education in "Socialism, A Summary and Interpretation of Socialist
Principles," touches upon the question of parochial schools in the
Marxian commonwealth:
"Whether the Socialist regime could tolerate the existence of
elementary schools other than its own, such as privately conducted
kindergartens and schools, religious schools, and so on, is
questionable. Probably not. It would probably not content itself
with refusing to permit religious doctrines or ideas to be taught
in its schools, but would go farther, and as the natural protector
of the child, guard its independence of thought in later life as
far as possible by forbidding religious teaching of any kind in
schools for children up to a certain age....
"This restriction of religious education to the years of judgment
and discretion implies no hostility to religion on the part of the
state, but neutrality[16]." ["Socialism, A Summary and
Interpretaion[17] of Socialist Principles," by John Spargo, page
238 of 1906 edition.]
"The Call" does not fail to publish among its many poems those that are
violently anti-religious. In confirmation of this we shall transcribe
several, all of which furnish excellent proofs of the existence of the
conspiracy against religion. The first poem that will be quoted appeared
in the November 19, 1911, edition, and reads as follows:
"When all the choric peal shall end;
That through the fanes hath rung;
When the long lauds no more ascend
From man's adoring tongue;
When overwhelmed are altar, priest and creed;
When all the faiths have passed;
Perhaps from darkening incense freed,
God may emerge at last."
The following poem, entitled, "To the Religionist," appeared on the same
day:
"You bid us spare your vision;
Put faith in a life after death,
Strive on toward some realm Elysian
And heed all that one Book saith.
"You will pray to a power celestial,
To direct us in all our ways,
Lest we fall to a region bestial
And lose ourselves in its maze.
"You speak of the Crucifixion
Of one on Calvary
As if his benediction
Was a rank monopoly.
"Shall we pray to a power not human
For guidance miraculous
When the nearest man or woman
Will give help, and without that fuss?
"When the glorious future people
Have realized our dream,
Then the cross upon the steeple
No longer shall blaspheme.
"The godhood of the lowly
Their sacrifice unknown;
Of the temple once held holy
There shall not last one stone."
Only two stanzas of a poem which appeared in "The Call," March 17, 1912,
are hereby given:
"The Gods are dead;
Dead lies their Heaven, their Hell.
The Gods are dead,
With all their terrors! Well!
"Man now unmakes them,
Who made them in his youth;
He boldly breakes them
With shattering blows of truth."
Editorials and articles attacking religion are of very common occurrence
in "The Call." Several illustrations will suffice. In the May 1, 1912,
edition we read:
"In our combat with the natural forces we have been taught by
science to seek the cause and effect not in anything supernatural;
we have gotten rid of superstition[18] and fear of revengeful
gods."
The following short article appeared on November 19, 1911, in the same
paper:
"Our exploiters might as well understand now that we have no use
for the distorted and mystical figure that they present as Christ,
a conservative member of the Property Defence League, a thing
neither man nor woman, but a third sex--not understood of us except
as a rightful object of suspicion; we have no use for this rant,
cant and fustian of his holiness and immaculate qualities. That
presentation has always been repellent to us and always will be, no
matter how much he may be proclaimed as the friend of the
workingman.... Christ, the democrat, the agitator, the
revolutionary, the rebel, the bearer of the red flag, yes we can
understand that figure."
Under the caption, "The Old Year and The New," an editorial, part of
which is here given, was published in "The Call," January 1, 1912:
"Interesting is it to see these clerical reactionists trying to
kindle into flame the dying embers and ashes of the religious
enthusiasm of past ages, now on the point of flickering out, and
marshalling the remnants of fear and ignorance against the
inexorable march of humanity and social progress.
"We have no verbal answer to expend upon them. They are not worth
it. Well do we know that their show of attack is but a defensive
movement. The only answer they need expect from us will be given
in the steady continuance of our work. For we can put a thousand
workers into the field for their one, and despite all they may do,
we will take from them thousands and hundreds of thousands of those
who now follow them, and in whose ignorance alone lies their
defensive strength. Economic conditions fight on our side. Their
capitalist Christ cannot feed the multitude. We can teach the
multitude how to feed themselves."
"The Proletarian," the Socialist paper of Detroit, in its April, 1919,
edition tells us that "Socialism is not a religion, it explains the
causes and fallacies underlying all religions."
In the "International Socialist Review," August, 1908, a notable
confession is made relative to religion:
"Religion spells death to Socialism, just as Socialism to religion.
The moment Socialism turns into a religion it loses all its
progressiveness, it ossifies and turns into a superstition of
fanatics, who never forget and never learn anything. Socialism is
essentially, although not apparently, a free-thought movement. The
thinking Socialists are all free-thinkers."
In the "International Socialist Review" not only are there many articles
and editorials attacking religion, but also many advertisements of
atheistical and anti-religious books. For instance, in the February,
1912, edition, among the many works advertised on page 512 the following
are listed under the heading, "Free-Thought Pamphlets":
"Holy Smoke in Holy Land.
Myth of the Great Deluge.
Revelation Under the Microscope of Evolution.
Chas. Darwin, What He Accomplished.
Jehovah Interviewed.
Church and State--by Jefferson.
Mistakes of Moses--by Ingersoll.
Ingersolia: Gems from R. G. Ingersoll.
Age of Reason--by Thos. Paine.
Ingersoll--44 Lectures.
Ingersoll's Famous Speeches."
In the April, 1912, edition of the "International Socialist Review" the
subsequent additions are made to the advertisements already mentioned:
"Voltaire.
Confessions of a Nun.
Merry Tales of the Monks.
Secrets of Black Nunnery."
Surely such books as these would not be extensively advertised in the
"Review" and in the Socialist papers, nor would money be spent in this
way by their publishers, unless the atheistic and anti-religious works
found many purchasers among those who inserted a plank in their party
platform stating that the Socialist movement was primarily an economic
one and was not concerned with matters of religious belief.
The following is part of an editorial taken from the "Comrade," New
York, January, 1904, on the death of Herbert Spencer:
"Dying at 84 years of age, Herbert Spencer leaves behind him an
enduring monument such as few men have been able to build for
themselves. He helped to rid the world of superstition and to
destroy priestcraft; he put the idea of a God-direction of the
world, and its counterpart, the eternal subjection and the
dependence of man, into the waste paper basket of history. He
cleared the way for the feet of the army of progress."
In the propagation of atheism, the German Socialist papers of the United
States are worthy imitators of those that are published in English. The
"New Yorker Volkszeitung," October 9, 1901, thus acknowledges the
atheistic and anti-religious attitude of the revolutionary movement:
"Socialism and belief in the Divinity as taught by Christianity and
its representatives do not agree, cannot agree, are diametrically
opposed to one another. Socialism is logical only when it denies
the existence of God, when it maintains that we do not need the
so-called assistance of God, since we are able to help ourselves.
Only he who has no faith begins to feel that he can accomplish
something. The laborer who places confidence in God, and who, with
Christian resignation, thinks that all is done by God is well
done--how can that laborer develop revolutionary forces for the
overthrow of authority and social order, both of which, according
to his faith, are instituted by God? As long as he clings to this
belief he will not be able to acquire a genuinely revolutionary
spirit."
In the May 10, 1902, edition of "Vorwärts," a weekly supplement of the
"New Yorker Volkeszeitung," we read:
"New York, May 6.--Archbishop Corrigan died last night after a
protracted illness. Preparations are going on for a grand funeral
with the usual paraphernalia. The soul of the prelate whizzed out
of his mortal remains straight up into the seventh heaven, and now
the bishop is staying there with lovely little angels and other
beautiful beings hovering about him. Let him who is fool enough,
believe it."
We are informed by "The Call," April 5, 1911, that at Utica, New York,
on April 4, 1911, churches of all denominations were placed under the
ban of the Italian Socialist Federation of the United States at the
closing session of its National Congress, which had been in session for
the last three days in that city and that strongly worded resolutions
charging all churches with being against the emancipation of the working
class and for the protection and perpetuation of capitalism and moral
and economic slavery were unanimously adopted amid vociferous applause;
finally that by the adoption of these resolutions, all members of the
federation must sever their affiliations with any and all existing
churches and religious organizations and refrain from all religious
practices and rites.
Some information regarding the atheistic teachings of the New York "Il
Proletario," the official organ of the Italian Socialist Federation of
the United States, will be of interest to the reader. In the edition of
December 23, 1910, there are several attacks on Christianity. One of
these entitled "Christmas Is Here" is translated as follows:
"Christmas is a fib, Christmas is a fraud, Christmas is a crime
wanted and continued by the powerful to delude their servants and
to make them believe that there is really happiness, justice and
love on this earth.... There is no everlasting joy. How long, O
poor and exhausted workingmen of the world, will the shameful
comedy continue? When will you finally perceive that not from a
false and unexisting God, not from a mystical and epileptic
crucified man, who died without rebellion and without protest, will
come your redemption? When will you open your eyes to the truth of
Socialism, and realize that finally upon you alone depends your
salvation?"
In the same edition of "Il Proletario" there is a detailed list of 170
books and pamphlets that are advertised as being on sale at the
book-store of the Italian Socialist Federation. The first part of the
list, under the heading "Anti-religious Pamphlets," includes 22 works,
whose prices range from 5 cents to 30 cents. Among them are to be found:
"The Religious Pest--5 cents.
The Crimes of God--5 cents.
The Sins of My Lady Penitents--8 cents.
The Last Religious Lie--5 cents.
Neither God Nor Soul--15 cents."
Near the end of the detailed list 22 more works are advertised as
anti-clerical novels.
On May 1, 1912, while its editor, Arturo M. Giovannitti, was in prison
at Lawrence, Massachusetts, "Il Proletario" published an article under
the caption, "The Priest":
"Now at last the nations have understood that God is a monstrous
fable, and that hell, heaven, immortality, and all the other
devilish things are states created by rascals to despoil and
oppress the people."
We are very much indebted to the Social Reform Press for favoring us
with the translation of "The Little Catechism," edited by Bartos
Bittner, whose dead and corrupt body was found by neighbors in his
lodging in Chicago. This blasphemous Catechism, from which quotations
are to be given, was published for the use of the children of the
Bohemian-American Socialists:
"Question. What is God?
Answer. God is a word used to designate an imaginary being which
people of themselves have devised.
Q. Is it true that God has never been revealed?
A. As there is no God, He could not reveal himself.
Q. What is heaven?
A. Heaven is an imaginary place which churches have devised as a
charm to entice their believers.
Q. How did man originate?
A. Just as did animals; by evolution from their lower kinds.
Q. Has man an immortal soul as Christianity teaches?
A. Man has no soul; it is only an imagination.
Q. Who is Jesus Christ?
A. Jesus Christ is the son of a Jewish girl called Mary.
Q. Is he the son of God?
A. There is no God, therefore there can be no God's son.
Q. Did Christ rise from the dead as Christianity teaches?
A. The report about Christ rising from the dead is a fable.
Q. Is it true that after Christ's death the Apostles received the
Holy Ghost?
A. It is not; the Apostles had imbibed too freely of wine and their
dizzy heads imagined all sorts of queer things.
Q. Did Christ ascend into heaven?
A. He did not; what the church teaches is a nonsensical fable,
because there is no heaven, and there was no place to ascend to.
Q. Will Christ come to this earth?
A. He will not because no dead person can come back.
Q. Will Christ return on judgment day?
A. There will be no judgment day; that is all a fable so that
preachers could scare people and hold them in their grasp. Man has
no soul, neither had Christ a soul. All these things have been
invented by the church.
Q. What is the Holy Spirit?
A. The Holy Spirit is an imagination existing only in the minds of
crazy religious people.
Q. Is Christianity desirable?
A. Christianity is not advantageous to us, but is harmful, because
it makes us spiritual cripples. By its teachings of bliss after
death it deceives the people. Christianity is the greatest obstacle
to the progress of mankind, therefore it is the duty of every
citizen to help wipe out Christianity. All churches are impudent
humbugs.
Q. Is there communion of saints?
A. No, because there is no God, no saints, no soul, and therefore
our prayers are wholly useless, and only a waste of time, which
should be spent in more useful things.
Q. What is our duty when we have learned that there is no God?
A. We should teach this knowledge to others.
Q. Should we take the name of God in vain?
A. Yes, because the name of God has no meaning."
Isador Ladoff, a Socialist of Cleveland, Ohio, and a candidate for
office in 1911, speaks very frankly about religion on page 11 of his
pamphlet, "Socialism, The Anti-Christ":
"The church knows that Socialism in spite of the declaration of
neutrality of the latter in religious matters, undermines the very
foundation of the former. The church realizes that Socialism is
anti-Christ. For the church it is a question of life and death, a
struggle for existence. Why, then, should the Socialists not engage
in an open aggressive campaign against the church? Would not an
honest war between Christ and anti-Christ be more dignified, more
wise and more effective, than a false pretence of neutrality and a
defensive attitude toward the attacks of the church? Let us have
the courage of our convictions, not only in matters of social and
economic significance, but in all things affecting the interests of
the toiling masses of humanity, including religious institutions."
Rev. E. E. Carr, writing in the "Christian Socialist," Chicago, May 15,
1907, informs us that, "The Christian Socialists do not ask or desire
that the party declare for religion. Strictly speaking, Socialism is a
purely economic proposition.... We demand absolute freedom of religious
opinion in the party, and that officials of the party cease teaching
anti-religious dogma as an essential part of Socialist philosophy."
Dishonest Socialists, when arguing that their party does not advocate
atheism as the "religion" of their contemplated state, frequently appeal
to the religious plank of their 1908 National Platform, which declares
that the Socialist Party is not concerned with matters of religious
belief.
Though this deceitful appeal of the "Knights of the Red Flag" has been
exposed time and again, still it seems expedient that the underhand
methods of the party which boasts of being the only one sufficiently
honest and upright to fight for the rights of poor and oppressed
workingmen, be better known to the American people, and that the more
important parts of the indoor convention speeches be presented in
greater detail.
Pages 191 to 205 of the "Proceedings of the 1908 National Convention of
the Socialist Party," edited by John M. Work, published by the Socialist
Party[19], and sold at 50 cents a copy at the National Office of the
party, Chicago, Illinois, bear the following ample testimony to the
hypocrisy of the Revolutionists.
When Delegate Simons had finished reading the proposal of the platform
committee "that religion be treated as a private matter--a question of
individual conscience," Arthur M. Lewis, a delegate from Illinois rose
and moved its rejection, saying:
"I am among those who sincerely hoped the question of religion
would not be raised at this convention. I am willing to concede so
far that we shall let sleeping dogs lie. I know that the Socialist
position in philosophy on the question of religion does not make a
good campaign subject. It is not useful in the propaganda of a
presidential campaign, and therefore I am willing that we should be
silent about it. But if we must speak, I propose that we shall go
before this country with the truth and not with a lie.... Now I do
not propose to state in this platform the truth about religion from
the point of view of the Socialist philosophy as it is stated in
almost every book of Standard Socialist literature; but if we do
not do that, let us at least have the good grace to be silent about
it, and not make hypocrites of ourselves.... I say, let us either
tell the truth or have the good grace and the common sense and the
stamina and the manhood and the self-respect to keep our mouths
shut about it. Therefore I move this be stricken from the
platform."
Delegate Hillquit of New York urged the following amendment as a
substitute for the one the ratification of which Lewis had tried to
prevent: "The Socialist movement is primarily an economic and political
movement. It is not concerned with the institutions of marriage or
religion." Hillquit then went on to say:
"The fact that Comrade Lewis as a scholar, as a student of
psychology, of history, of ethics and of everything else, has in
the domain of religion come to the position of an agnostic, and
that ninety-nine per cent of us have landed in the same spot, does
not make Socialism agnostic, nor is Socialism Christian, nor is
Socialism Jewish, Socialism hasn't anything to do with that side of
our existence at all. I say to you, Comrades, if we are to follow
Comrade Lewis's advise, and to say in our platform and declaration
of principles what is true, let us not be afraid to insert in it
the things we are advocating day after day and on all occasions."
Delegate Unterman of Idaho, speaking in favor of the adoption of the
religious plank as originally proposed by the platform committee and
read by Simons, added:
"Comrades, no one will accuse me with any sympathy with
Christianity, either as a church or as a religion. I am known in
the United States as a materialist of the most uncompromising
order. But I want it clearly understood that my materialist
philosophy does not permit me to strike this plank out of the
platform. I want it understood that my materialist dialectics do
not permit me to forget the exigencies of the moment for our ideals
in the far future.... Would you expect to go out among the people
of this country, people of different churches, of many different
religious factions, and tell them that they must become atheists
before they can become Socialists? That would be nonsense. We must
first get these men convinced of the rationality of our economic
and political program, and then after we have made Socialists of
them and members of the Socialist Party, we can talk to them inside
of our ranks, talk of the higher philosophy and of the logical
consequences of our explanation of society and nature.... We should
not go out in our propaganda among people that are as yet
unconvinced and are still groping in ignorance and obscurity, and
tell them that they first must become materialists before they can
become members of the Socialist Party. No. This declaration that
religion is a private matter does not mean that it is not a social
matter or class matter at the same time. It merely means that we
shall bide our good time and wait till the individual is ready,
through his own individual evolution, to accept our philosophy. It
means that we shall give him plenty of time to grow gradually to
the things that are necessary to him, and those material things
that affect his material welfare, the economic and political
question of Socialism. After he has grown into them, it will be so
much easier to approach him with the full consequences of the
Socialist philosophy. Therefore I ask you to retain this plank in
our platform."
Delegate Stirton gave the following reason for his opposition to the
adoption of any religious plank in the party platform:
"If this statement is true that religion is no concern of our
movement, as stated in the amendment, or in the original
recommendation that it is a private matter--if that is a true
statement, then we don't need it. If it is a lie, then we don't
want it."
It will be remembered that Delegate Lewis at an earlier session of the
convention had said: "Let us either tell the truth or have the good
grace and the common sense and stamina and the manhood to keep our
mouths shut about it" (i.e., religion from the viewpoint of Socialist
philosophy).
To show the insincerity of Lewis, we shall now quote parts of a second
speech made by him in the evening of the same day on which he had spoken
so eloquently in behalf of asserting the truth and not telling a lie:
"I have gone into conference," he says, "between the afternoon
session and the evening session with most of the members of the
platform committee, and I have reached an agreement with them which
I am sure the convention would be glad to hear, and it will dispose
of this question, I think, amicably to all concerned.... I consider
myself and every other delegate on this floor as being present at
this convention for the sole purpose of promoting the best
interests of the Socialist Party. I am willing to waive any
personal views of mine, and I believe the members of the platform
committee are in the same position, to promote those interests....
While it may not harmonize with my personal opinion to have this
plank remain in the platform, I am willing to sink those personal
opinions rather than put the Socialist movement in America in a
false position and lay it open to the attacks of our enemies."
Victor Berger of Wisconsin mentioned expediency as his reason for
favoring the adoption of a religious plank and argued:
"In the first place, a plank of this kind you will find in every
platform or program of every other civilized nation in the world.
Yet in no country do they have as much reason for it as in this
country. There is not a race in the world that is as thoroughly
religious as the Anglo-Saxon race. If you want a party made up of
free-thinkers only, then I can tell you right now how many you are
going to have. If you want to wait with our co-operative
commonwealth, until you have made a majority of the people into
free-thinkers, I am afraid we will have to wait a long while. I say
this, although I am known, not only in Milwaukee, but wherever our
papers are read, as a pronounced agnostic.... You can hardly find a
paper in which we are not denounced as men who want to abolish all
religion and abolish God. Something must be done in order to enable
us to show that Socialism, being an economic theory--or rather the
name for an epoch of civilization--has nothing to do with religion
either way, neither pro nor con."
What reader, who elsewhere in this book has followed the evidence
linking together the cunning craft of Morris Hillquit and Victor L.
Berger in committing their party and followers to deceit and hypocrisy
to obtain votes under false pretenses, will be surprised to find them
thus also in the 1908 convention uniting the tongues of two old foxes to
put through Hillquit's hypocrisy-plank on marriage and religion? These
are the two whose deceit and violence have now reduced the Socialist
Party of America to little more than a hollow echo of two lying hearts.
Delegate Vander Porten opposed the adoption of the plank as originally
read by Simons and urged the adoption of Morris Hillquit's amendment:
"Nobody regrets more than I do that this question has arisen in
this convention, but as long as it occupies the position that it
does, I believe that there is to be an expression upon it, that
expression should be the truth and not a lie.... When we talk of
educating mankind and when we talk of raising mankind above the
level in which he is, then we have got to throw from his arms those
crutches that bind him to his slavery, and religion is one of them.
Let it be understood that the moment the Socialist Party's whole
aim and object is to get votes, we can get them more quickly by
trying to please the religionists and those whose only ambition is
to pray God and crush mankind.... Let us say nothing or say the
truth. To spread forth to the world that religion is the
individual's affair, and that religion has no part in the
subjection of the human race, we lie when we say it."
After several other delegates had spoken, the "Proceedings of the 1908
National Convention" inform us that the chairman put the question on the
acceptance of the substitute offered by Delegate Hillquit, and the
result being in doubt, a show of hands was called for, and the vote
resulted in 79 for the substitute, and 78 against it.
Those who honestly voted against the plank admitted thereby that the
Socialist Party was very much concerned with matters of religious belief
and that the Revolutionists were then, just as they are today, the
bitter enemies of religion.
The 79 who voted for the plank did so, not because they had any love for
religion, for this is evident from their speeches and from their method
of procedure, but because they considered that a great deal of prejudice
against Socialism would be removed by the adoption of a plank stating
that the Socialist Party is primarily an economic and political
movement, and that it is not concerned with matters of religious belief.
On one single plank therefore there were 79 liars in the Socialist
National Convention out of a possible 157. Quite an unenviable record
for the party which is so fond of accusing its opponents of lies and
falsehoods!
When speeches against religion, such as the ones quoted, can be
delivered at the national convention of a political party, without
arousing anything like serious opposition among the delegates present,
or among the rank and file of the party who afterwards read them, the
only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that the vast majority of the
members of the party either advocate atheism or else are in sympathy
with those who do.
For four long years the Socialists all over the country appealed to the
religious plank of their 1908 platform to prove that their party was not
opposed to religion; and although they were aware that the plank was a
lie, they were not sufficiently honest to have it removed by referendum,
as could have been done at any time. The plank was finally dropped by
the National Convention of 1912 and has not since then been readopted.
This, however, was not because the Socialists as a body had become more
upright through their adherence to atheism, but because their lies
concerning religion had become pretty well known all over the United
States.
No doubt the reader will be interested in the following quotation taken
from "The Communist," the Left Wing Socialist paper of Chicago. In the
April, 1919, edition there is an article by John R. Ball, entitled,
"Challenge of the S. P. [i.e., the Socialist Party] of Michigan":
"When the delegates to a State Socialist Convention gathered in
Grand Rapids, Michigan, February 24, 1919, to nominate candidates
for the coming State Elections, they were determined to do much
more than to go through the mere formalities of complying with
State Election Laws....
"There were many striking features about the personnel of the
delegates: not only were the preachers entirely absent, but their
following also. A Christian Socialist would have felt lonesome
indeed, with no one to act as a listener for him....
"Fearless and unashamed, in true Bolshevik fashion, the delegation
paid no heed to the prejudice of some, but adopted, with one
opposing vote, an additional constitutional amendment, guided
solely by historic facts and scientific data. A Socialist who
understands the Materialistic Conception of History cannot have
faith in superstitions of any kind. In other words, a 'religious'
or 'Christian' Socialist is a contradiction of terms, and the
statement that 'religion is a private matter' is a lie. The belief
in a supreme being or beings is a social phenomenon which can be
explained on the materialistic basis, just as all economic
phenomena can be explained. With persistent adherence to honesty,
the convention adopted a resolution and a constitutional amendment
declaring religion to be a social phenomenon and instructing all
organizers and speakers to explain religion upon its materialistic
basis.
"Here again, the Socialist Party of Michigan issued a direct
challenge to the National Organization. This time it is not a
challenge in regard to tactics, but we challenge the honesty of the
National Organization in declaring that 'religion is a private
matter.'"
Now listen to the words of Eugene V. Debs, published on the editorial
page of "The Call," New York, July 21, 1919, and see what a fraud and
hypocrite the leader of the Socialists of the United States is:
"If you have not already done so, read the platform of the
Socialist Party, and then let us know what you find in it to
warrant the lying charge of the sleek and fat leeches and parasites
and their degenerates, tools and hirelings that Socialism is
atheism and free-love(?) and that it will tear up the family by the
roots, smash up the home and turn society into a raging bedlam."
Sufficient evidence has now been given to prove that the Socialists are
the declared enemies of the church. They are conspiring to destroy an
institution which, apart from the supernatural blessings that it has
conferred upon mankind, has done wonders to promote the happiness of
nations. To the church many countries owe their civilization and their
conversion from heathenism. She has preserved for us the priceless
treasures of art and learning that would otherwise have fallen a prey to
the ravages of the barbarians. For centuries she has trained untold
millions to observe the Commandments of God, and has thus been
instrumental in the prevention of innumerable crimes and sins from which
the human race would have suffered. Not only has she taught the people
the virtues of charity, justice, temperance, humility, liberality,
purity, meekness and forgiveness of enemies, and been a source of
immense consolation to the poor and oppressed, the sick and the injured,
but she has comforted millions of the dying, who, when they realized
that no earthly joys remained, took hope and delight at the thought of
an eternal reward in heaven.
It is this glorious institution, then, founded by Almighty God Himself,
that the Socialists hate with all their hearts, and would destroy
forever, because it prevents the spread of their revolutionary doctrines
by teaching respect for law, order and authority, and by exposing to all
the world the deceptions, frauds and empty promises of the conspirators
against religion.
CHAPTER XX
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE FAMILY
Most of the Marxians in America, when confronted with the charge that
they advocate free-love, deny the truth of the accusation, claiming that
it is a base calumny. False and calumnious, indeed, would the charge be,
if it were directed against each individual among the Revolutionists, or
if from its universality exceptions were not made for many, who, not
having as yet accepted the full consequences of International Socialism,
go no further than to cast their votes for the party candidates. For
would it be fair to except no others from condemnation, for among the
dues-paying members of the party are many who are extremely averse to
the system of loose morals that their comrades propose to substitute for
the monogamous form of marriage now in vogue.
Books advocating free-love are advertised in the Socialist press and
receive favorable notice in editorial columns. They have long been on
sale at the leading Socialist book-stores of the country and even at the
National Office of the Socialist Party in Chicago. Finally, the
Revolutionary clubs and locals all over the United States have in their
libraries books on free-love that are standard works on Socialism.
The Marxians, in their endeavors to offset the charge that a free-love
propaganda exists within their party, frequently argue that
prostitution, now so prevalent throughout the world, will under
Socialism no longer remain the dreadful menace to society that it is
today. They attribute the prevalence of this vice principally to
poverty, and argue that in the new state, all persons will be abundantly
supplied with the goods of this world, and consequently no one will be
obliged to indulge in this sin for obtaining a livelihood.
The Reds, therefore, try to dodge the question at issue by leading their
opponents off on a tangent. The real question, free-love, will, however,
by no means be forgotten by us until the Socialists have been shown up
thoroughly. Since the conspirators against family life are so fond of
harping on the matter of prostitution, with a view to drawing critics
away from attacking their doctrine of free-love, the reader will be
shown that even prostitution, instead of decreasing in the Socialist
state, would, together with immorality of every sort, become far more
prevalent under Marxian rule than it is today.
Prostitution and impurities of every sort may, of course, be due to many
different causes. First, let us consider prostitution in connection with
poverty and destitution. The Socialists claim that there will be far
less prostitution in their state since the people, as a whole, will be
supplied more abundantly with the needs of life. This talk about greater
supplies for all in the Socialist state is mere assertion. The Marxians
have never proven that such would actually be the case. If so, where is
their proof? Can they give any convincing argument? Can they name any
country, state or city, where they have ever ruled, in which the people,
as a whole, were better supplied with the needs of life under the red
flag than they were before the Socialist rule began?
The fact is just the contrary. Look at any part of Europe over which the
Socialists have ruled and you will see far greater destitution under
Socialism than there was before. As for places that have never yet tried
Socialism, enough arguments were given in the chapter, "Socialism a
Peril to Workingmen," to show that there would be so many upheavals, so
much turmoil, discontent and strife in a Socialist state, that
production would be at a minimum and entirely insufficient to supply the
needs of the people.
We concede that poverty often leads to prostitution, and this is one
reason out of many for sincerely wishing that our poor people were
better supplied than they now are with the necessities of life. Still it
must not be forgotten that poverty and want are often greater factors in
preventing prostitution than in helping it. Think of the millions of
poor people whose very poverty indirectly makes prostitution and vice in
general less likely by keeping them from immoral theatres, movies,
dances and cabarets and association with bad companions of greater means
who would be attracted by better clothes and greater wealth if these
poor people had them.
Do the Socialists claim that the average poor woman is less moral than
the average rich one? Do not the Marxians know that poverty, rather than
wealth, fosters religion and piety, the greatest of all factors in
keeping persons pure? Do the Reds deny that millions and millions of the
very poorest are chaste? If these souls can remain pure, notwithstanding
their poverty, so, too, can others; and when these others do not remain
pure, usually something other than poverty is the cause, _e.g._,
irreligion, lawlessness or disregard of authority, all of which the
Socialists are advocating, day after day, in their books, pamphlets,
papers and speeches.
Again, Debs and his followers, by having a separate party for
workingmen, are dividing the laboring class against itself, knowing full
well that millions upon millions of decent, honest workingmen will never
join them. And since Socialists are making unjust and impossible
demands, and injecting into labor organizations radical leaders who
cause general distrust and fear, labor cannot succeed in its battles
against the abuses of capitalism nearly as well as it would if all were
united. Hence, because of the existence of the Socialist Party, low
wages still prevail in many cases, with extreme poverty which often
leads to prostitution.
If the Socialists ever gain control of our country they will probably do
so through a revolution. Or they will come into power gradually, by an
increased vote at each election. In the meantime, as victory came near,
there would be business failures by the thousands, owing to the
impending destruction of the existing system of industry and government.
In either case there would be terrible destitution and a great dearth of
the necessities of life. This, according to the Socialists' own
argument, would mean a great increase in prostitution.
It has been proven theoretically in the chapter entitled, "Socialism, a
Peril to Workingmen," and actually by events in Europe, that a Socialist
state, even should it endure, cannot be a success. Hence, were the
Marxian argument about prostitution as strong as the Socialists claim,
picture the immorality among the people where a Socialist government
plunges the industries and sources of production and distribution into
total chaos.
With this refutation of the claim that prostitution would become a very
rare thing under Socialism, the national conspirators must confess that
the same argument they have for years been using to further the
interests of their cause, can with telling effect be turned against
them.
Not alone are the Socialists defeated in their argument that
prostitution would be less prevalent in the Marxian state, but they are
hypocrites in using the argument they do. "The Call," for instance,
which frequently uses the argument which has been refuted, in the
magazine section of its issue of June 8, 1919, published a poem
entitled, "The Harlot," to satisfy its lustful patrons:
"I do not understand you--
I cannot see
How you can lie passive in my arms
When such a passion swells in me....
You lie in my arms--
Your face is close to mine.
I look into your eyes,
Revelation!
And you
Look into mine
Unmoved."
We now return to the question of free-love--we have not forgotten it,
though no doubt the Reds wish we had. Socialists who deny that an active
free-love propaganda exists within their ranks must either confess their
ignorance of what is going on, or plead guilty to the base charge of
deceiving the American people.
The "New Encyclopedia of Social Reform," edited by the Socialist, W. D.
P. Bliss, on page 484 contains an article on the family which reads in
part as follows:
"We then come to the third form of free-love, the free-love theory
par excellence, which is held today by many Socialists, and an
increasing number of radical men and women of various schools of
thought. According to these neither the state nor organized
religion should have aught to do with the control of the family or
of the sexual relation. They would make free-love supreme. They
would have it unfettered by any tie whatsoever. They argue that
compulsory love is not love; that all marriage save from love is
sin; that when love ends, marriage ends."
In another article, on page 1135, under the caption, "Socialism," Bliss
informs us that it is perfectly true that Deville, a French Socialist,
said that "marriage is a regulation of property.... When marriage is
transformed, and only after that transformation marriage will lose its
reason for existence, and boys and girls may then freely and without
fear of censure listen to the wants and promptings of their nature....
The support of the children will no longer depend on the chance of
birth. Like their instruction it will become a charge of society. There
will be no room for prostitution or for marriage, which is in sum
nothing more than prostitution before the mayor."
On page 897 of the old 1897 edition of the "Encyclopedia of Social
Reform," an earlier work edited by W. D. P. Bliss, we are informed that
Socialism would allow all to live in permanent monogamy, but would not
force people to remain married if they were unwilling to do so. "The
Communist Manifesto," the work that made Marx and Engels famous among
Socialists the world over, thus answers the charge made against the
Revolutionists regarding their opposition to monogamy:
"What the communists might possibly be reproached with is that they
desire to introduce, in substitution for a hypocritically
concealed, an openly legalized community of women."
Jules Guesde, a French Socialist, affirms in "Le Catéchisme Socialiste"
that "the family is now only an odious form of property and must be
transformed or abolished."
The French Socialist leader, Jaurés, in a parliamentary speech said that
"They [_i.e._, married men and women] were free to make the marriage and
should in the same way be free to unmake it. In fact, just as the will
of one of the parties could have prevented the marriage, so the will of
one should be able to end it. The power to annul should, of course, be
all the stronger when both parties desire it." It need scarcely be added
that free-love would in most cases begin with the voluntary dissolution
of the marriage ties.
While the program of the French Socialist Party, adopted at Tours in
1902, does not explicitly advocate free-love, still it calls for "the
most liberal legislation on divorce." Ernest Belfort Bax, a prominent
English Socialist, in "Outlooks From a New Standpoint," affirms that "a
man may justly reject the dominant sexual morality; he may condemn the
monogamic marriage system which obtains today; he may claim the right of
free union between men and women; he may contend he is perfectly at
liberty to join himself, either temporarily or permanently with a woman;
and that the mere legal form of marriage has no binding force with him."
["Outlooks From a New Standpoint," by Ernest Belfort Bax, page 114 of
the 1891 edition.]
"Prostitution for private gain is morally repellent. But the same
outward act done for a cause transcending individual interest loses its
character of prostitution." [Ibid., page 123.]
"There are few points on which advanced radicals and Socialists are more
completely in accord than their hostility to the modern legal monogamic
marriage." [Ibid., page 151.]
"There are excellent men and women, possibly the majority, born with
dispositions for whom a permanent union is doubtless just the right
thing; there are other excellent men and women born with lively
imaginations and Bohemian temperaments for whom it is not precisely the
right thing." [Ibid., page 157.]
"Herein we have an instance of the distinction between bourgeois
morality and Socialist morality. To the first it is immoral to live in a
marital relation without having previously subscribed to certain legal
formalities.... To the second ... to live in a state of unlegalized
marriage defileth not a man, nor woman." [Ibid., page 158.]
"Socialism will strike at the root at once of compulsory monogamy."
[Ibid., page 159.]
Quotations from this base free-love book will end with the following:
"If it be asked 'is marriage a failure?' the answer of any impartial
person must be 'monogamic marriage is a failure'--the rest is silence.
We know not what the new form of the family, the society of the future
in which men and women will be alike economically free, may involve, and
which may be generally adopted therein. Meanwhile we ought to combat by
every means within our power the metaphysical dogma of the inherent
sanctity of the monogamic principle." ["Outlooks From a New Standpoint,"
by Ernest Belfort Bax, page 160 of the 1891 edition.]
"Outlooks From a New Standpoint," from which these quotations have been
taken, was advertised in the price list of the Social Democratic
Publishing Company of Milwaukee; and though it was sold for a dollar a
copy at Victor Berger's establishment, it has never been used by the
Socialists of America to prove to the world that they do not advocate
free-love.
In view of the fact that "Outlooks From a New Standpoint" was sold at
Berger's own publishing company, it is somewhat surprising to see him,
in the August 10, 1912, edition of his paper, the Milwaukee "Social
Democratic Herald," attacking, in a party squabble, "the men in control
of the 'International Socialist Review,' ... who publish books in
defense of what our enemies call free-love." Further on in the factional
quarrel he writes: "I shall leave out the Christian Socialists entirely.
Many of them are honest in this fight. But these Christian
Socialists--who are only a handful--are being used by cowardly assassins
and practical free-lovers as a cat's paw." Perhaps the Socialist
publishers would be a little more free with their love for each other,
if there was less competition for the silver dollar.
Ernest Belfort Bax in another book, "Religion of Socialism," thus
denounces the present form of family life: "We defy any human being to
point to a single reality, good or bad, in the composition of the
bourgeois family. It has the merit of being the most perfect specimen of
complete sham that history has presented to the world." ["Religion of
Socialism," by Ernest Belfort Bax, page 141 of the 1891 edition.]
"Socialism, Its Growth and Outcome," edited by Ernest Belfort Bax and
William Morris, also advocates free-love, for its authors tell us that
under Socialism "property in children would cease to exist, and every
infant that came into the world would be born into full citizenship, and
would enjoy all its advantages, whatever the conduct of its parents
might be. Thus a new development of the family would take place, on the
basis, not of a predetermined life-long business arrangement, to be
formally and nominally held to irrespective of circumstances, but on
mutual inclination and affection, an association terminable at the will
of either party.... There would be no vestige of reprobation weighing on
the dissolution of one tie and the formation of another." ["Socialism,
Its Growth and Outcome," by Ernest Belfort Bax and William Morris, pages
299 and 300 of the 1893 edition.]
The "International Socialist Review," December, 1908, states that
"Socialism, Its Growth and Outcome," by William Morris and Ernest
Belfort Bax, is "a standard historical work long recognized as being of
the utmost value to Socialists." According to the price list sent out
from the National Office of the Socialist Party this work on free-love
was on sale there for fifty cents a copy. Chas H. Kerr and Company, the
Socialist publishing company of Chicago, in their catalogue advertised
the same book as being one of the most important works in the whole
literature of Socialism, by the two strongest Socialist writers of
England. From these facts the reader may judge for himself whether or
not the Revolutionists of America tell the truth when they claim that
they are not the enemies of the family.
In a speech delivered on November 12, 1907, Henry Quelch, editor of the
Socialist paper, "London Justice," made the following statement: "I do
want to abolish marriage. I do want to see the whole system of society,
as at present constituted, swept away. We want no marriage bonds. We
want no bonds at all. We want free-love."
Edward Carpenter in his book, "Love's Coming of Age," tells us that
"marriage relations are raised to a much higher plane by a continual
change of partners until a permanent mate and equal is found."
That this work on free-love might find a ready market among Socialists,
Chas. H. Kerr and Company advertised it as follows in the "International
Socialist Review," Chicago, December, 1902:
"He [i.e., Carpenter] faces bravely the questions that prudes of
both sexes shrink from, and he offers a solution that deserves the
attention of the ablest leaders of popular thought, while his
charmingly simple style makes the book easy reading matter for any
one who is looking for new light on the present and future of men
and women in their relations to each other."
In a 1912 catalogue the same publishing company volunteered the
information that "'Love's Coming of Age' is one of the best Socialist
books yet written on the relations of the sexes." In a 1917 booklet it
was advertised by the company as being "by far the most satisfactory
book on the relations of the sexes in the coming social order."
Carpenter's work was sold for a dollar a copy at the National Office of
the Socialist Party in Chicago, and yet the Revolutionists persist in
telling us that they do not advocate free-love.
August Bebel, the late leader of the German Socialists, was the author
of a book entitled, "Woman Under Socialism." This work, however, is
better known by the simple appellation, "Woman." A simple quotation will
suffice to show that Bebel, like many other excellent Socialist
authorities, advocates free-love:
"If incompatibility, disenchantment or repulsion set in between two
persons that have come together, morality commands that the
unnatural and therefore immoral bond be dissolved." ["Woman Under
Socialism," by Bebel, page 344 of the 1904 edition in English.]
Bebel's book has had an immense circulation. Over thirty editions have
been issued, and translations have been made into nearly all the
European languages. Before his death in August, 1913, he was the
admiration of millions of the Revolutionists the world over. His book is
considered everywhere as a standard work on International Socialism and
is, of course, on sale with the other free-love publications at the
National Office of the Socialist Party. Chas H. Kerr and Company in 1917
advertised Bebel's work as being one of the greatest Socialist books
ever written.
Frederick Engel's "Origin of the Family," a work that has made its
author famous among Socialists on both sides of the Atlantic, contains
the following statement relative to free-love:
"These peculiarities that were stamped upon the face of monogamy by
its rise through property relations will decidedly vanish, namely
the supremacy of men and the indissolubility of marriage.... If
marriage founded on love is alone moral, then it follows that
marriage is moral only as long as love lasts. The duration of an
attack of individual sex love varies considerably according to
individual disposition, especially in men. A positive cessation of
fondness or its replacement by a new passionate love makes a
separation a blessing for both parties and for society. But
humanity will be spared the useless wading through the mire of a
divorce case." ["The Origin of the Family," by Fredrick Engels,
page 99 of the 1907 translation into English by Untermann.]
"The Comrade," New York, November, 1902, thus commends Engel's book:
"One of the most important issues of that excellent Standard Socialist
Series published by Chas. H. Kerr and Company is 'The Origin of the
Family,' by Fredrick Engels, now for the first time translated into
English by Ernest Untermann. This book, first published in 1884, has
been translated into almost every European language and has long been
regarded as one of the classics of Socialist philosophical literature."
"The Call," New York, February 27, 1910, deems "The Origin of the
Family" worthy of editorial comment: "The one book that contains in
small compass what every woman ought to know is Fredrick Engel's 'The
Origin of the Family.' Every Socialist woman should become a book agent
to sell this book."
"The International Socialist Review," October, 1902, expressed its
admiration of Engel's work by stating that "this book has long been
known as one of the great Socialist classics and has been translated
into almost every other language than English.... The book is really one
of the two or three great Socialist classics; and now that it is in
English, it must find a place in the library of everyone who hopes to
master the real fundamental philosophy underlying Socialism."
"The Origin of the Family," notwithstanding[20] the fact that it
contains matter too foul to comment on, for example a certain comparison
that is made on page 39, was listed with the books sold at the National
Office of the Socialist Party, and at Chas. H. Kerr and Company, the
largest Socialist publishing company in the United States.
Ernest Untermann, the American Socialist who translated Engel's work
into English, writes on page 7 of the preface of the 1907 edition: "The
monogamic family, so far from being a divinely instituted union of
souls, is seen to be the product of a series of material, and in the
last analysis, of the most sordid motives."
Rives La Monte, in "Socialism Positive and Negative," tells his readers
that "from the point of view of this Socialist materialism, the
monogamous family, the present economic unit of society, ceases to be a
divine institution, and becomes the historical product of certain
definite economic conditions. In the judgment of such Socialists as
Fredrick Engels and August Bebel, we shall probably remain monogamous,
but monogamy will cease to be compulsorily permanent." ["Socialism,
Positive and Negative," by Rives La Monte, page 98 of the 1907 edition.]
In the "International Socialist Review," February, 1909, there appears
on page 628 a notice which reads as follows:
"The 'Review' lately returned to a contributor a clever and
readable article in which he emphasized certain absurdities and
miseries of the present marriage system. His letter in the reply to
us raises some interesting questions, and we are glad to publish
it: ... 'It is disappointing to be advised to frankly discuss
subjects of such importance as religion and marriage only in hushed
whispers behind closed doors. In the fear of offending conservative
prejudice on these topics, some Socialists become more conservative
than the bourgeois themselves.... Of course, the main stream and
most important phase of Socialism is the political-economic
agitation, but at the same time the Socialist movement inevitably
brings into being, at least for a great part of its adherents, a
new culture, a new literature, a new art, a new attitude toward sex
relations and religion and individual freedom, a new conception of
life as a whole. In face of this fact it is sickening to see
individuals, whom one knows to be atheists, defending Socialism as
the will of God and the fulfilment of Christianity; and other
individuals, whom one knows to be free-lovers, going out of their
way to defend the home and family against the inroads of
capitalism. Nevertheless such things are seen.... There are
thousands of women who are worn out with the bearing of unwelcome
children on account of ignorance of proper ways of preventing
conception.... If sex life, the personal heart life, of
revolutionists were more free and joyous, if they breathed an
atmosphere of liberty and spontaneity, free from religious and
moral superstitions, if they became now as much like the free
people of the future as possible, would they not be that much more
ardent and joyous and unceasing workers of the Great Revolution?
And if former non-Socialists, especially women who had suffered
grievously from the evils of the marriage system, or been
intellectually blindfolded by religious teaching, were first led
into the light of more emancipated ideas by some of us Socialists,
would not they serve and glorify Socialism forever?... If the
Christian Socialists have a right to their God, and monogamists to
their eternal marriage, then surely in a revolutionary movement
like ours, the complete revolutionists have, to say the least, an
equal right to their agnosticism and their free union."
Clarence M. Meily, before speaking explicitly of free-love, praises lust
and sensuality in the highest terms on page 129 of his book,
"Puritanism": "Freed from the privation of millenniums of unrequited
toil, with the wealth and wonders of the world at its command, it is
fairly certain that the emancipated working class, still wan from its
centuries of service and sacrifice, will take great joy in repudiating,
finally and forever, the fallacies and aberration of asceticism.... Not
the denial of life, but the laudation and triumph of life, will be the
keynote of the new ethics. The lusts of the flesh, the lusts of the eye,
the pride of life, will become new formulas, holy and pure in the light
of the perfect development of the whole man, and of all men, to which
the race will dedicate itself."
Meily then approaches the marriage question and says: "The question of
the status of marriage in the new society is one of extreme importance,
since it is here that reactionaries of all sorts center their opposition
to social reconstruction. It is both idle and disingenuous to assert
that marriage as a legal and civil institution is not likely to undergo
profound modification.... The artificial perpetuation of the marriage
tie, in the face of the disinclination of the parties involved to
continue the relation, will cease to be a matter of public concern, or
the occasion of state interference. The dissolution of the marriage
relation will become as purely a personal and private affair as is the
assumption of the relation now. Some sort of registration may be
required for the purpose of vital statistics."
In July 2, 1901, "The Haverhill Social Democrat," apparently without
fear of offending its subscribers, asked: "What is there sacred in the
modern home? Can anything be sacred which is based on a lie or on
impurity, or on ignorance? The marriage system today is based on
impurity, on ignorance and on a big lie."
"The Call," New York, December 4, 1910, tells its readers to "give all
women the vote, and they will strike off the rusty chains that hold them
still in marriage as the property of the man."
That the same paper is very lax as regards the divorce evil, so closely
allied to free-love, is evidenced from the following quotation taken
from the edition of March 30, 1913: "Among the many encouraging signs of
woman's growing strength--of her determination to be at last the captain
of her soul and the master of her faith--are recent divorce
statistics....
"Far from being a sign of moral decadence, the large number of
divorces granted to women is one of the healthiest portents of the
regeneration of the body social....
"The divorced woman is today the connecting link between the
non-resisting, ignorant victim of the past and the self-reliant,
enlightened, eugenically minded woman of the future. The divorce
statistics of the present are perfectly logical and the divorced
woman is a cheering omen, as she fulfils her historic mission."
"The Little Catechism" for the use of the children of Bohemian
Socialists, a book from which we have already had occasion to quote in
the previous chapter, shows us the exceedingly low standard of morality
that is taught to the youthful Revolutionists; for in answer to the
question, "Is adultery a sin?" we are astounded by the boldness of the
reply, "It is not a sin."
We shall finally corroborate our charge that the Revolutionists advocate
free-love by quoting the words of no less an authority than Morris
Hillquit, who concedes in "Everybody's," February, 1914, page 233, that
"Most Socialists stand for dissolubility of the marriage ties at the
pleasure of the contracting parties."
As many Socialist books on free-love have attained a high circulation,
and as they have not been repudiated by the party, but have been praised
and advertised in its newspapers, and, moreover, since these very books
have been sold as standard works both at the National Office of the
party and at the leading Socialist book-stores of America, the only
reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that the number of party members
who openly advocate free-love, or at least tacitly approve of its
propaganda, must be in the majority, for otherwise the party would never
tolerate such a condition of affairs within its ranks.
Once the Socialists gain control of a country, as in the case of Russia,
laws legalizing free-love are very soon passed. In the No. 2 edition of
the Los Angeles magazine, "More Truth About Russia," its radical editor
mentions many of the Bolshevist laws on marriage, divorce, etc., in
vogue in Russia. Among them is one fully legalizing free-love, making it
possible for married parties to change partners whenever they wish and
for no other reason than their mutual or individual desire to do so:
"1. Marriage is annulled by the petition of both parties or even
one of them.
"2. The petition is submitted, according to the rules of local
jurisdiction, to the local court.
"Note: A declaration of annulment of marriage by mutual consent may
be filed directly with the department of registration of marriages
in which a record of that marriage is kept, which department makes
an entry of the annulment of the marriage in the record and issues
a certificate.
"3. On the day appointed for the examination of the petition for
the annulment of marriage, the local judge summons both parties or
their solicitors.
"4. Having convinced himself that the petition for the annulment of
the marriage really comes from both parties or from one of them,
the judge personally and singly renders the decision of the
annulment of the marriage and issues a certificate thereof to the
parties."
This chapter shows that free-love filth, to corrupt and demoralize our
people, is being propagated by the Socialist Party of America through
its National Headquarters in Chicago, Berger's publication company in
Milwaukee, Hillquit's "New York Call," and other publishing houses and
papers affiliated with the party. Yet, because the question of the
qualifications of five representatives of this system of abomination to
make laws for the State of New York was so much as raised by a judicial
inquiry in the New York Assembly, that body of legislators has been
assailed and falsely charged with undermining the fundamental principles
of representative government. The ignorance concerning the true
character of the Socialist Party of America is startling.
Is it not time for the American people to awake? Should not every decent
American petition all our legislative bodies, state and national, to
outlaw the Socialist Party of America and curb its iniquitous
propaganda?
CHAPTER XXI
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE RACE
To most persons it will certainly be a surprise to hear that race
suicide has been openly advocated in the columns of leading Socialist
publications. True it is that the number of individuals endeavoring to
spread this practice by their writings is comparatively[21] small;
still, as the articles have continued to appear for years at more or
less regular intervals, without exciting anything like serious
opposition, we are forced to conclude that advocacy of race suicide is
looked upon by a very large number of the Revolutionists as one of their
characteristic virtues.
Though many vile articles advocating race suicide were published in the
1910 and the 1911 editions of "The New York Call," we shall pass them
over, and discuss those of a more recent date.
In the Sunday editions of "The Call," Anita C. Block has for years been
editing a page called "Woman's Sphere." This section of the paper on the
24th of March, 1912, contained an editorial comment under the caption
"Enforced Motherhood and the Law," in which the practice of base and
criminal race suicide is encouraged:
"Within a space covering not much more than a month, six letters have
been received by us, containing in substance about what is contained in
the following letter:
"'Mrs. A. C. Block, New York City:
"'Dear Comrade Block.--I have been a reader of "The Call" since
December 1, 1911. I do not know whether you can give me any
information as to what I wish to know....
"'I have three children, 3½ years, 2¼ years, and a baby 9 months.
Now, you cannot blame me if I do not care for more for some time to
come....
"'Could you give any information? Dr.... in "..." [We suppress the
author's name and the title of his work.] and "..." by ... contain
the sentence, "Every woman should know prevention of conception." I
should be thankful for any advice.
"'Yours for the Co-operative Commonwealth.'"
The editorial comment then goes on to say:
"Four of these letters we answered personally, stating the
impossibility of imparting this information under our present laws.
But when letters continued to come, we felt that any subject that
indeed meant everything in the world to the wives of the working
class, was entitled to publicity in these columns.
"These women ought to know exactly what the laws are that make the
giving of this terribly needed information--A Felony. And so we
print below the Federal or United States law on this subject."
The law is then given in all its details, after which the New York State
law on the same subject is also quoted.
We are then told that "such are some of the laws on this grave subject,
and, of course, no sane person would endeavor to violate them, openly at
any rate. But as Dr.... states elsewhere in this page, we cannot be
prevented from agitating for their repeal. Nor can we be prevented from
educating the people wherever possible to an understanding that a
knowledge of the means of preventing conception is a knowledge of one of
the means of regenerating the race.
"Moreover even under Socialism, where economic conditions will be
such that every woman can support a dozen children in comfort if
she wants to, the volitional limitation of offspring will be
completely justifiable. For even parents in the most comfortable
circumstances should have the right to determine how many children
they want. Of all things in the world this is a matter for the
individual and not for society to determine."
Dr...., to whom reference was made in the above editorial comment, is
also the author of another work advertised as follows in "Woman's
Sphere" of "The Call," March 24, 1912:
"The three most important measures for the improvement of the human
race from a eugenic standpoint. What are they? I suppose everybody
who has given the subject any thought has his remedies. I have
studied the subject for years and my answer is:
"1. Teaching the people the proper means of the prevention of
conception so that the people may have only as many children as
they can afford to have, and to have them when they want to have
them.
"2.....
"3.....
"Of the three measures the first one is the most important and
still it will be the last one to come, because our prudes think it
would lead to immorality. And nevertheless I will repeat what I
said several times before, that there is no single measure that
would so positively, so immediately contribute toward the happiness
and progress of the human race as teaching the people the proper
means of regulating reproduction. This has been my sincerest and
deepest conviction since I have learned to think rationally. It is
the conviction of thousands of others, but they are too careful of
their standing to express it in public. I am happy, however, to be
able to state that my teachings have converted thousands; many of
our readers who were at first shocked by our plain talk on this
important subject are now expressing their full agreement with our
ideas. And Congress may pass draconian laws, the discussion of this
subject cannot, must not, be stopped."
On April 13, 1913, another article on the subject of race suicide, by
Clara G. Stillman, appeared in "Woman's Sphere" of "The Call" under the
caption, "The Right to Prevent Conception." Only part of the foul
composition is here given:
"Those who are convinced that the voluntary prevention of
conception is a most important weapon in the modern fight with
poverty, disease and racial deterioration, will find their position
only strengthened by survey of their opponents' objections. These
objections are mainly of three kinds--and might be classed as the
pseudo-religious, the pseudo-moral and the pseudo-scientific,
because all are based on conceptions which our present state of
knowledge and social development have enabled us to outgrow....
"Prevention of conception is already an accepted principle among
the educated classes of every civilized country. According as the
opposition of the law and public opinion are more or less
stringent, it is practised with more or less secrecy; but secret or
open, the practice is here to stay, and it is spreading. The fear
of most of its opponents is, therefore, not nearly so much that the
human race will become extinct as that its best elements will
gradually be replaced by the worst. At first this may seem
plausible. Granting our opponents' premise temporarily, the
conclusion is logically unavoidable that in order to restore a
normal relation between the so-called more and less intelligent or
desirable classes of society, we must put into the hands of all the
methods of restricting their increase, now utilized only by the
few."
On June 1, 1913, "Woman's Sphere" of "The Call" contained a four-column
article on race suicide, entitled, "Musings of a Socialist Woman." The
author, Antoinette F. Konikow, who was a delegate to the Socialist
National Conventions of 1908 and 1912, thus expresses her views:
"I consider the question of the prevention of conception to be of
greater value to women than even the knowledge of sexual
diseases....
"After meeting hundreds of women and girls in heart to heart talks,
I came to the sincere conviction that lectures on sex hygiene which
do not give a thorough understanding of conception in its definite
bearings on practical life and also of its possibilities of
prevention--that such lectures miss their main aim in bringing help
to distressed humanity....
"Instead of meeting every need and demand of the worker, we are so
hampered by the fear of getting a bad reputation among our enemies
that we express our support to a new tendency only after it has
acquired a certain respectability in society....
"Do the daring words of Comrade Clara G. Stillman or Dr....'s
article not hurt the feelings of some of our Comrades? No doubt
some readers felt dissatisfied but not more so than others who had
to read the conservative statement of Comrade Carey in 'The
Leader,' that he considers Bebel's conception of the family
un-Socialistic and anti-Socialistic....
"Do our morals stand on a higher plane, thanks to the careful
guardianship of our laws?...
"It is high time then to serve notice upon all our benevolent
censors and upholders of such laws, and declare ourselves fit to
get along without their superior guidance. It is time to open a
crusade against this hypocritical suppression of knowledge, which
leads to endless and needless suffering. It is time to emphatically
declare the right of the mother to control the functions of her own
body for her own good and the welfare of her offspring."
The disastrous consequences of such a crusade to further the cause of
race suicide are very forcibly brought home to us by an article which
appeared in "The Call," May 10, 1914, on "The Conscious Limitation of
Offspring in Holland":
"Our headquarters at The Hague and our subdivisions in all our
greater towns are spreading theoretical leaflets and pamphlets; but
the special pamphlet giving practical information in the prevention
of conception, is only given to married people when asked. We are
lecturing everywhere. But the essential missionary work is done
privately and modestly, often unconsciously by showing the happy
results in their own families, by the nearly 5,000 members of our
league spread over the whole country, among whom are physicians,
clergymen and teachers, etc. Every day information is asked by
letters and still more by our printed postcards; all information is
given cost-free and post-free. Almost all younger doctors and
midwives are giving information, and are helping mothers in the
cases when it is wanted on account of pathological indications.
Moreover special nurses are instructed in helping poor women.
Harmless preventive means are more and more taking the place of
dangerous abortion. So, merely by our freedom of giving
information, we have reached the desirable results proved most
brilliantly by the statistical figures of our country."
On May 21, 1914, "Woman's Sphere" of "The Call" devoted two more of its
columns to the race suicide propaganda in the form of an article by
Sonia Ureles under the caption, "Hats Off, Gentlemen, The Law!" Since
many parts of the production are too foul to permit our quoting them, we
shall give but a few short passages:
"But the doctors only scowled, and the nurse told her gently that
the law did not permit poor people to regulate the birth of their
offspring....
"To the thought of a private practitioner she gave no heed; it was
to her a luxury undreamed of....
"The nurse, a well-meaning honest creature, writhed uncomfortably
under her gaze. 'It's--it's against the law to give out such
information,' she stammered.
"'I don't care about the law,' came the stubborn reply. 'You
promised. Now tell me.' Nevertheless she left the hospital without
the information....
"She applied to the women of her neighborhood for information. They
told her things they thought they knew, and things they thought
they ought to know. And her health was the price she paid....
"They who knew, but would not tell, left her one alternative. She
chose it. And so,
"'Hats off, gentlemen--the law!'"
In this same issue of "The Call," May 24, 1914, there is an editorial
comment that promised the base devotees of race suicide an abundance of
filthy reading matter for the future:
"If unwelcome motherhood is not in accordance with a constructive
eugenic program, then the free imparting of information concerning
the prevention of involuntary motherhood must be. But as has been
pointed out in these columns again and again, to make this part of
a constructive eugenic program is to run up against vicious and
barbarous state and federal laws which make the giving of necessary
information a crime, punishable by imprisonment.
"In connection with this entire subject we call the attention of
our readers to the grim sketch by Sonia Ureles, appearing elsewhere
on this page today.
"This is the first of a series of stories on the same subject which
Miss Ureles is writing for 'Woman's Sphere.' All who know the vivid
reality of this writer's work will look forward to them with keen
anticipation."
Let it not be thought for a moment that "The Call" has yet given up its
propaganda of race suicide. As recently as May 25, 1919, there appeared
in the magazine section of that vile Socialist daily of New York City an
article on the subject entitled, "Birth Control and the War," the
article being no less than twelve columns long. Several quotations are
hereby given:
"Everywhere the feudal-minded ones act upon substantially the same
impulse. Everywhere they impel and, to a large extent, though by
indirection, they compel, prolific breeding among the less
intelligent persons. These latter are also the victims of the
prevailing religious, political, economic and industrial systems
and superstitions. The feudalistic ones proclaim fecundity as a
religious duty to God and a moral duty to the state. By psychologic
tricks a vanity of the unfortunate classes is encouraged so as to
make even the fools believe, or, at least, feel that they, too,
have a place in the sun....
"By the uniform activities and lingering dominance of the feudal
mind we have remained in a state of development in which we
compete, like the stock-raiser, for an international and
intercredal supremacy in and through breeding....
"As yet we have had no very urgent need for territorial expansion.
Our turn is coming and is coming soon, if only we will heed our own
feudal-minded ones, and will breed fast enough. But, without being
aggressors in this sense, we are yet unavoidably drawn into the
vortex of a world war inaugurated by the feudal-minded of other
nations and unconsciously promoted to a small degree by our own
feudal-minded ones by education for feudal-mindedness and for
prolific breeding in our people....
"The next world war may possibly be one in which the disadvantaged
of all nations will fight the feudal-minded of all nations.
Something quite near to such an invitation already has come from
Russia. Shall we hasten such a conflict by continuing to preach the
sacredness of fecundity and of war? Or shall intelligent restraint
of the feudalistic compulsion help us toward a more perfect and
peaceful adjustment with the processes that make for the
democratization of welfare, with and by intelligent family
limitation as one means?"
"The Call" is one of the official papers recognized by the Socialists of
America. In 1914, while the race suicide propaganda was being carried on
in its columns, lectures to be delivered for its benefit by Eugene V.
Debs in many of the cities of New Jersey were advertised in its columns.
It is most likely, therefore, that such a splendidly informed leader of
the Revolutionists as Debs, like many thousands of members of the rank
and file of the party, read some of the articles favoring race suicide.
As we have never yet heard of Debs or a single Socialist complaining
against the race suicide propaganda so long carried on in the columns of
"The Call," we shall, unless the Marxians repudiate this form of
immorality of their paper, be forced to conclude that their leader as
well as a very large number of his followers intend legalizing this vice
if they ever gain control of our country.
In April, 1919, a vile, crimson pamphlet was on sale in the radical
book-stores of the middle west. We shall not give the title, for it is
too foul and indecent. On page 4 it warns its readers "not to forget
this fact, celibacy, absolute continence from want of desire congenial
or acquired, monkish asceticism are pathological states, diseased states
of mind or body." Further on, we read, on page 10:
"Do not be a suffering Jesus. Do not take him as an example. Do not
whine or snuffle, but get ahead in the world while you can. Get
lands, property and independence somehow....
"The teachings of Christianity were designed for the castration of
the human soul. Christ would make you, not a free man, a hero, and
a warrior, but a hireling, a submissive beast of burden, a helot, a
nobody. Christianity is cowardice institutionalized and
peace-on-earth is the philosophy of the tax gatherer, the usurer,
and the international exploiter." On the inner side of the back
cover of the foul pamphlet a book is advertised by the
"International Socialist Control Association of Chicago," which
seems also to publish the crimson pamphlet from which the above
quotation was taken. The advertisement of the book is hereby given
in part:
"MOTHERS AND FATHERS, ATTENTION.
"The welfare of the world depends upon the bringing up of children.
"Everything depends upon the right start, hence it is your highest
duty to see that your children are started right.
"Foremost men say and statistics show the stupendous peril of our
political, religious, and educational system. The root of education
is not merely knowing how to read and write, but knowing men
analytically and scientifically.
"Anything is possible to the man who knows how and why. We develop
and plan out your life according to your adaptions and
inclinations--no guess work but cold, hard, mathematical facts. We
show you how to control, manage, and handle humanity and make it
your business to shape men's minds as easily as clay.
"Misery, superstition and poverty must go."
On the back cover sheet of the pamphlet it is stated that the
International Socialist Control Association of Chicago is "An
organization that teaches the suppressed and downtrodden truth, long
controlled by the political and religious machine. The only organization
that places health, happiness and marriage upon solid, scientific
principles."
In the summer of 1919, "The Call" of New York City, Morris Hillquit's
vile publication, became more bold than ever in favoring race suicide.
On June 29, 1919, for instance, there appeared a three-column article in
the magazine section of the paper, entitled, "The ... League." Parts of
the article are hereby quoted:
"Many readers of 'Woman's Sphere' have expressed themselves as
eager to know the raison d'etre of The ... League, which is the
latest development in the birth control movement.
"The answer is that this new league is started to speed up the
birth control movement. Its first aim is to take the question
straight to Congress and repeal the Federal statute which prohibits
the circulation of contraceptive knowledge. All the restrictive
state laws are modeled on this Federal obscenity statute. If that
is repealed, the state laws can easily be made to follow suit....
"The repeal of this obnoxious out-of-date legislation is the
longest single step toward that end.
"The next step is to get the subject taught in the medical schools,
and to have the best possible scientific information wisely and
well distributed. Every health agency in the country should have it
for the benefit of all who are in need. It should be available at
hospitals, clinics, dispensaries, maternity centers, charity
organizations and, most of all, through the Federal Health Service
and the National Children's Bureau....
"Most Socialists are already convinced of the rightness of birth
regulation, but not all of them see the need for working now to
free the information. Some say, 'Oh, just work to achieve Socialism
and when we have that, things like birth control will come without
effort.' ...
"Birth control is a necessary tool for the struggle after social
justice. Therefore, Socialists should insist upon it right now, and
not be content to wait for the Co-operative Commonwealth to bring
it to them, also they should not hesitate to co-operate with
non-Socialists to get it. Birth control is a blessing to humanity
as a whole. Everybody needs it."
On July 13, 1919, "The Call" published an editorial on Dr. Abraham
Jacobi who had recently died. In the course of the editorial the
following statement is made:
"Many honors have been showered upon Dr. Jacobi, but probably none
will be more brilliant than the fact that he was one of the first
to fearlessly discuss the question of birth control."
On July 15, 1919, there appeared in "The Call" the letter of the
director of the birth control league similarly praising the late Dr.
Jacobi:
"...He did not wait till the baby was born, nor did he limit
himself to what is ordinarily known as the prenatal care. He again
and again proved his sincere belief that the only way to give
babies a fair chance in this world is for the parents to know how
to regulate the family birth rate."
"The Call" on July 14, 1919, advertised seven birth control meetings to
be held during the week in New York City. Two days later, on July 16, it
advertised an open air birth control rally.
In "Woman's Sphere" of the magazine section of "The Call," July 27,
1919, there appears another three-column article favoring race suicide,
entitled, "How Shall We Change the Law?" We shall quote briefly:
"Once it is no longer on the statute books that it is unlawful to
impart information on the prevention of conception, then people may
freely help each other to attain the precious information so
urgently needed. The 'limited' bill would give this right only to
doctors and possibly to nurses and midwives....
"And while we would not be so unscientific as to deny for a moment
that it would be better for every woman to get her advice and
instruction concerning the use of contraceptive directly from a
doctor, nevertheless it is impossible to overestimate the help men
and women could give each other were the free exchange of
information on methods of birth control legal instead of
illegal....
"We feel quite sure that women will get infinitely more sympathetic
help and advice from each other than they will ever get from any
free clinic doctors."
"The Call" on July 26, 1919, announced that Anita C. Block, editress of
"Woman's Sphere" of the paper, had accepted nomination as a delegate to
the August 30, 1919, convention of the Socialist Party in Chicago.
The September 2, 1919, issue of "The Call" states that it received the
congratulations of the National Convention of the party then assembled
at Chicago. There is, however, no record of any Socialist complaint
against its continued race suicide propaganda. We can, therefore, draw
our conclusions as to whether the Socialists approve of propagating race
suicide.
Away down in Mexico there lives a certain Linn A. E. Gale, a young
Socialist who fled to that country from the United States to escape
conscription. He is a "brave" fellow, for not only did he shirk his
duties as a soldier and flee from his native land to escape jail, but he
publishes a Socialist magazine in Mexico City in which he seeks to
deprive of life those who have as much right to it as he himself has; in
other words he is carrying on a campaign for race suicide. We quote from
the August, 1919, issue of his Socialist publication, known as "Gale's
Magazine":
"Mr. Felix F. Palavinci,
"Manager of El Universal,
"Mexico City, D. F. Mexico:
"Sir.--It is generally believed that you inspired the recent act of
the health department of this city in having confiscated copies of
a Spanish translation of ...'s famous book on how to practise birth
control, and in sentencing me to the penitentiary when I refused to
pay a $500 fine for publishing the said translation, which
outrageous and malicious penalty was revoked by order of Mexico's
Secretary of State, Manuel Aguirre Berlanga.
"It is hard to believe that a man of your intelligence and supposed
progressive ideas would be guilty of such a contemptible act. Yet
facts are facts and the facts leave little room for doubt that you
were to a large extent, if not almost entirely, responsible. The
persistent series of bitter and abusive articles published by your
newspaper, El Universal, against birth control and against me
personally, constitute convincing proof of your interest in
preventing contraceptive information from being diffused among the
Mexican people...."
In the same issue of Gale's Mexican Socialist magazine there appears an
article entitled, "First Congress of the National Socialist Party of
Mexico." Speaking of the party platform to be adopted, Gale says in
part:
"Another clause should put the party squarely on record as opposing
the recent tyrannical and illegal effort of the Mexico City health
department to prevent the dissemination of scientific birth control
information among the poorer classes."
Hysterical critics of the New York Assembly have accused the Judiciary
Committee of that body of accepting as evidence against the five
suspended Socialist Assemblymen every conceivable reproach against the
Socialist Party of America which could be scraped together out of its
entire history. An inquiry to ascertain the qualifications of Socialists
to make the laws of the land assuredly would be justified in searching
every possible source of information. But, as a matter of fact, the
Judiciary Committee confined its investigation to evidence bearing
directly upon the political and governmental aspects of the case.
Had the Judiciary Committee wished to bring out what would most surely
and deeply shock the moral sense of the American people--the organized
propagation of immorality with which the five suspended Assemblymen were
linked--the facts given in this and the preceding chapter show that no
difficulty would have been found in digging up overwhelming evidence.
The preceding chapter shows the propagation of free-love doctrines
through all the publicity departments of the Socialist Party of America.
The present chapter shows that the "New York Call," the chief political
organ of the New York State branch of the Socialist Party of America,
with which the five suspended Assemblymen were most intimately linked,
has for years carried on an unclean and indecent propaganda to teach all
within its polluting reach to violate one of the laws of the State of
New York.
CHAPTER XXII
SOCIALIST ORGANIZATION AND "BORING IN"
The avowed enemies of our constitutional government have within recent
years met with stupendous success in persuading the credulous to rely on
their extravagant promises and to look forward to the golden era of
Socialism with the same bright hopes that little children do to the
candies and toys in kidnappers' homes.
If it be asked why the conspirators against our country, religion,
family and everything dear to us are so successful in their efforts to
undermine the foundations of a grand and glorious nation like our own,
the answer is that their astounding progress is due, first, to an
exceptional zeal in the propagation of their doctrines, and, secondly,
to the deceptive and specious arguments used for gaining recruits.
The extraordinary activity that has secured for the Socialists of the
United States by far the greater part of a million votes in several
presidential elections, and the acceptance of their revolutionary
doctrines by a much larger number of radicals, who for one reason or
another do not vote the Marxian ticket, is manifested under many
different aspects.
The Socialist Party of the United States in the early part of 1919
contained a little more than 100,000 dues-paying members, enrolled in
approximately 7,000 locals and branches. The members of these locals and
branches frequently meet to devise means for spreading the doctrines of
Karl Marx and for overthrowing the government of our country. It is
almost needless to add that their zeal would do great credit to men
engaged in a truly noble cause. The American people would be astounded
at their activity, should they carefully read, from the first to the
last page, a single copy of one of the foremost Socialist papers such as
the "New York Call." Socialists are working by the tens of thousands
every day, from January 1st to December 31st, endeavoring to undermine
our government. They have been doing this for years, and only recently
have the American people begun to wake up. Waking up, however, will not
suffice. We must act, act quickly and vigorously, before it is too late
and before the forces of destruction become too numerous to control.
Supplementing the indoor work of the locals and branches, one cannot but
notice the so-called soap-box orators, found on the street corners of
nearly every city of importance in the country. The specialty of these
men is to preach class hatred and arouse dissatisfaction in their
audiences with the present system of government and industry, and after
this to assert, but never to prove, that Socialism is the sole remedy
for the evils of our time.
It will be well to remember that the revolutionary Socialist Party, even
as far back as 1913, published in the United States some 200 or more
papers and periodicals in English, German, Bohemian, Polish, Jewish,
Slovac, Slavonic, Danish, Italian, Finnish, French, Hungarian, Lettish,
Norwegian, Croatian, Russian and Swedish. Attorney General Palmer made
the number over 400 in 1919. Among the papers are two important dailies
in English, "The Call" of New York City and the "Milwaukee Leader," two
dailies[22] in German, two in Bohemian, one in Polish, and one in
Yiddish, the "Forward," which in the spring of 1919 had a circulation of
about 150,000. The "Appeal to Reason" was once the greatest Socialist
weekly in the country having had, in the fall of 1912, a circulation of
nearly a million copies. About the latter part of 1917 it became
lukewarm in upholding Socialist anti-war principles. As a consequence it
lost most of its circulation, and in March, 1920, was still looked upon
contemptuously by most members of the Socialist Party.
By the vivid pictures which the revolutionary papers and periodicals
draw of the abuses, corruptions and wrongs of our age, they succeed in
blinding many American citizens to such an extent that the latter do not
realize that they have been caught in the snares of a deceitful and
dangerous enemy. Like the soap-box orators, these publications, besides
criticising real present-day abuses, frequently lie and exaggerate, and
either assert that in the Marxian state man would enjoy the choicest
blessings under heaven, or else arrive at this same conclusion by
arguing from false and unproven assertions as premises. The Socialist
papers and periodicals, notwithstanding their beautifully painted
pictures of the visionary state, should in no way incline us towards
enlisting under the red flag. For to say nothing of their lies and
exaggerations, neither their criticisms of actual present-day wrongs,
their unproven assertions of the benefits of Socialism, nor their
conclusions drawn from false and unfounded premises, show in any wise
that the Marxian state would remedy existing evils and be a source of
blessings to our people. Indeed, it would be just as foolish for us to
trust in these revolutionary publications as it would be to confide in
quacks who should ask us to purchase their so-called remedies merely
because they had pointed out the harmful effects of a few drugs sold by
a certain apothecary, or because they had claimed excellent healing
properties for their own potions.
Not only do the Marxians exert great influence through the papers which
they publish, but they help their cause to a great extent by articles
published in non-Socialist papers and magazines of the United States.
Another way in which they have distinguished themselves for their
activity is by the immense number of books, novels and pamphlets they
have written, large numbers of which are in circulation throughout our
country and are rapidly undermining the very foundations of our National
Government. As these works are found in abundance and are available to
all classes of persons in public libraries, our country's library system
is supplying its enemies with well-stocked arsenals wherein weapons are
kept for the use of those who will one day join the ranks of these
national conspirators.
The leaflet campaign of the Socialists has long since reached alarming
proportions. To show what progress has been made by the arch enemies of
our country, two quotations are hereby presented to the reader. The
first is a letter which appeared in "The Call," New York, March 31,
1919, and reads as follows:
"Editor of 'The Call':
"We are living in the days of big events. The revolution in Russia
has taught us some things that we ought to follow. One of them is
the distribution of literature. In the past we have been climbing
up four or five flights of stairs, standing on the street corners
handing out leaflets, wearing out our strength and patience. I took
a leaf out of the way the thing is done in Germany at present. All
over the city there are any number of large window sills, at the
top or very near the exits of the subway and elevated stations, the
window sills of large stores. These window sills will hold a large
amount of literature. Comrades going to work in the morning could
very easily place the leaflets on them; it would take only a few
seconds, the workers coming after them will pick them up. There is
also, in the downtown districts, quite a few empty newsstands that
are not used in the morning. These newsstands are generally at the
very mouth of the subway stations. Then there are a number of
benches in and on the stations that can be used. Our overcoat
pockets will easily hold 100 or 200 pieces of literature. The time
it takes to transfer the literature from our pockets to the window
sills, newsstand or bench is about two seconds. I have been on the
job for the last three weeks and the results have been astonishing.
What are not picked up by the workers are in a few hours read by a
large number of those out of work. We have got to come to it in the
very near future. The halls are closed to us; let's get busy.
"Very cold, windy and rainy mornings are not very good ones. The
one big drawback is to get some Comrade to write the leaflets. The
leaflet I have used is one taken from 'The Call,' issued by local
Kings, entitled 'Hell in Russia.' The way the workers grab it does
your heart good.
"Yours for the education of the workers,
"Andrew B. DeMilt.
"P. S.--The above-named places are also good for that 'Call' you
have laying around the house."
In the April 24, 1919, edition of "The Call," under the caption,
"Official Socialist News," and the subheading, "Queens" (County, New
York), we read:
"100 Socialists Wanted
"One hundred are required tonight to aid in distributing Socialist
literature throughout the Ridgewood section. Those who are able and
willing to help should call this evening at the Queens County Labor
Lyceum, Myrtle and Cypress Avenues."
The number of revolutionary books, pamphlets and papers on the market is
really astounding, and all out of proportion to the number of
Socialists, Communists and I. W. W.'s who could possibly support them.
Money for their publication must be forthcoming from other interested
parties of considerable means. In fact, Deputy State Attorney General
Samuel A. Berger, in a statement published in the "New York Times" on
October 18, 1919, declared that rich radicals of the metropolis were the
means of support for all but two of the forty or fifty extremely radical
publications which reach 3,000,000 readers from New York City as a
center. The same public official added that he did not have the
authority to make known the names of the well-to-do men and women
engaged thus in financing the plot to overthrow our National
Government.
Not only are the Reds rapidly undermining our institutions by means of
literature, but also through the forces of organized labor. Enough has
already been said in a previous chapter relative to the I. W. W. itself;
but it will not be out of place to comment on the revolutionary
influence which the I. W. W. and many Socialist labor leaders as, for
example, Maurer of Pennsylvania, are bringing to bear upon the American
Federation of Labor.
The members of the I. W. W., as well as the Socialists and Communists
throughout the country, have all along made every endeavor to fan the
flames of class hatred between rich and poor, the employer and employee.
They have, moreover, left nothing undone to promote discontent and
strikes on as large a scale as possible with a view to finally ruining
our present system of industry and the Government itself. Read any of
the radical papers and you will be convinced that the "Red" rebels now
place the greatest hopes for their rise to power in the strikes they are
fomenting wherever and whenever an opportunity is offered.
The Marxian leaders realize that the high cost of living is constantly
gaining recruits for their cause, and that the greater the number of
strikes and the greater the number of persons involved, the longer it
will take to reduce the cost of the necessaries of life. They know that
if the working class secures a six-hour day, a five-day week and, in
addition, an immense increase in wages, production will fall far short
of the demand, the cost of living will go up by leaps and bounds, and
business men will be ruined. Workingmen will then lose their positions
and discontent will be far more prevalent than ever. Again, if laboring
men can only be made to break their wage contracts soon after every
victorious strike, the industries of the whole country will soon be
"topsy-turvy."
What will bring on strikes more readily than to teach rebellion against
all conservative labor leaders who would oppose uncalled-for walk-outs?
It is much easier to get men to strike by having labor agitators
harangue and deceive them, than it would be to have the workingmen
quietly discuss both sides of the question honestly and fairly and then
vote pro or con.
Sympathetic strikes are well calculated to bring on a general strike,
which might easily lead to the rebellion that the Reds so much desire.
Strikes very often induce the action of courts against the workers
involved and frequently demand the use of police and the calling out of
troops, and thus the rebel "Reds" obtain other arguments, sound or
otherwise, to win more of the working-class to their diabolical cause.
If the Socialist strike leaders are imprisoned, justly or not,
Socialists do not fail to start nation-wide agitations for amnesty.
Strikes, therefore, excessive demands, the breaking of wage contracts,
revolts against conservative labor leaders, and impassioned
class-conscious strike agitators are among the leading assets of the
Marxian rebels for starting a bloody rebellion.
Many of the laboring class, especially newly arrived immigrants, cannot
see the ultimate aim of the radical leaders and never dream of the
terrible times that will soon overwhelm them if the cost of living
continues to rise, business is ruined, and a terrible rebellion drenches
our fair land with rivers of blood, leaving in its trail anarchy, crime
and evils without end. Of what use are higher wages won by strikes, if
the cost of living ascends still more rapidly? Of what use are higher
wages for a short time if all industries and our Government with them
are to be ruined through continual strikes and unreasonable demands
suggested and agitated by men who have never yet given a single proof
that their Socialistic scheme would not fall a prey to anarchy and war?
The Reds, no matter of what type they are, have never proven that their
state would be a success, or that it would not have a million times as
many defects as our present system. Their empty assertions prove nothing
but the empty-mindedness and ignorance of their illogical rank and file.
Yes, Socialist, Communist and I. W. W. influence is making itself felt
even in the American Federation of Labor. During 1919 many an
unauthorized strike took place against the will of the lawful labor
leaders. The printers' strike and longshoremen's strikes in New York
City are examples. "Red" labor leaders and revolutionary propaganda
ruined the cause of the steel strikers.
The American Federation of Labor cannot afford to harbor Socialists and
members of the I. W. W. It is doomed to shipwreck if it does not rid
itself of Marxian agitators. The vast majority of the American people
will not tolerate a revolutionary American Federation of Labor any more
than they will tolerate a revolutionary I. W. W. If the principles of
the American Federation of Labor become radical like those of the I. W.
W., the Socialists, Communists and the Bolsheviki, the name "American"
and past conservatism will never save our greatest labor organization
from ruin. The greater part of the country is rapidly lining up against
unreasonable demands made in the name of organized labor, millions of
farmers taking the lead. Extreme advantages to city workingmen would
spell ruin to the farmers. Millions of others of the middle class in our
cities will also soon unite with the farmers, for they are getting tired
of the endless and costly series of unreasonable strikes.
The Socialists and agents of the I. W. W. have for years been "boring
from within" the A. F. of L. In other words, these Marxians, though
members of the A. F. of L., are undermining its conservatism,
discrediting and seeking to displace its less radical leaders, changing
its policy of co-operation between capital and labor into one of class
hatred between employee and employer, and attempting to reorganize it
along industrial lines, rather than along those of the various craft
divisions of each industry, with a view to making strikes more
widespread and dangerous for our Government. In a word, they are seeking
to turn the A. F. of L. into a second I. W. W., destined to join forces
with Haywood's discredited industrial union of rebels.
William Z. Foster, national leader of the steel strikers in the fall of
1919, affords us an example of an I. W. W. agent "boring from within"
the A. F. of L.
Mr. Carl W. Ackerman informs us in the "Boston Evening Transcript,"
September 24, 1919, that the first appearance of Foster as a radical was
in 1910, when, as a reporter for the "Seattle Call," a Socialist paper
at that time, he was sent along the Pacific Coast to report a number of
so-called free speech fights. "From this," continues Mr. Ackerman, "he
appears to have developed into a general agitator. As a result of his
tour of the west he joined the I. W. W. and in this capacity he began to
advocate sabotage....
"In 1911, while a member of the I. W. W., Foster went to Europe and
visited France, Germany and Hungary as a correspondent of
'Solidarity,' the official organ of the I. W. W. in America, at
that time published at New Castle, Pa. He wrote many articles for
this publication, some of them signed, 'Yours for the I. W. W., W.
Z. Foster,' and others, 'Yours for the revolution, W. Z. Foster.'"
In a letter written by Foster in 1911 and on file in the office of the
United States District Attorney in Chicago, Foster said:
"I am satisfied from my observation that the only way for an I. W.
W. to have the workers adopt and practice the principles of
revolutionary unionism, which I take it is its mission, is to give
up the attempt to create a new labor movement, turn itself into a
propaganda league, get into the organized labor movement, and by
building up better fighting machinery within the old unions than
these possessed by our reactionary enemies, revolutionize these
unions, even as our French syndicalist fellow-workers have so
successfully done."
This letter, showing Foster's plan of "boring from within" the A. F. of
L., was signed, "Yours for the revolution."
As late as 1915 Foster brought out a book entitled, "Trade Unionism, the
Road to Freedom." Several excerpts taken from the sixth chapter show the
true frame of mind of this leader, who has recently gained such a
following in the A. F. of L.:
"Under the new order as pictured above, government, such as we know
it, would gradually disappear. In an era of science and justice
this makeshift institution, having lost its usefulness, would
shrivel and die....
"Criminal courts, police, jails and the like would go also. Crime
is due almost wholly to poverty. In a reign of plenty for all, it
would practically disappear.... People would no longer have to
wrangle over property rights. The industries now in the hands of
national, state and municipal governments would be given over
completely into the care of the workers engaged in them.... With
war, crime, class antagonisms and property squabbles obliterated,
and the management of industry taken from its care, little or no
excuse would exist for government."
The November 8, 1919, report of the Senate Committee on Education and
Labor, in its investigation of the nation-wide steel strike, commented
as follows on Foster:
"Such men are dangerous to the country and they are dangerous to
the cause of union labor. It is unfair to men who may be struggling
for their rights to be represented by such leaders. It prevents
them from securing proper hearing for their cause. If Mr. Foster
has the real interest of the laboring man at heart he should remove
himself from any leadership. His leadership injures instead of
helping. If he will not remove himself from leadership the American
Federation of Labor should purge itself of such leadership in order
to sustain the confidence which the country has had in it under the
leadership of Mr. Gompers."
CHAPTER XXIII
ENLISTING RECRUITS FOR THE CONSPIRACY
The success or failure of the Marxian movement will, to a great extent,
depend upon the ability of the revolutionists to gain control of the
schools, colleges and universities of the United States. That they have
been long active in spreading their pernicious doctrines among the young
is evident to all who are closely in touch with Socialist activities.
In our country there exist what are known as Socialist Sunday schools.
The revolutionists themselves tell us that the aim and purpose of these
schools is the destructive work of tearing down old superstitious ideas
of territorial patriotism, and that such schools should be founded in as
many places as possible, to counteract the influences of churches,
synagogues and public schools.
Page 68 of the "Proceedings of the 1910 National Congress of the
Socialist Party," clearly indicates the exceptional importance which
Marxians attach to their training of the young:
"Among the special fields of Socialistic propaganda the education
of our boys and girls to an understanding of the Socialist
philosophy is one of the most important. The ultimate battles of
Socialism will largely be fought by the growing generation, and we
must begin early to train the latter for its part. The Socialists
of Europe have long appreciated the importance of the task, and in
almost every country they have built up a strong organization of
young people. The Socialists of America are just beginning to turn
their attention to the problem....
"The teaching of infants is a task which requires a good deal of
professional training, and no Socialist 'Sunday schools' for very
young children should be established where we do not have
experienced and reliable teachers to conduct them....
"It is quite otherwise with children of the maturer age of, say,
fourteen years and upward. Young people of that age normally
possess sufficient strength of mind to grasp the main philosophy
and aims of our movement intelligently, and their training into the
Socialist mode of thought and action cannot be conducted with too
much zeal and energy. Young people's clubs, societies for the
study of Socialism should be formed all over the country as regular
adjuncts to our party organization, and very serious consideration
should be given to them by the adult Socialists. But they should
remain primarily study clubs, and should not be encouraged to
engage in practical political activity, which can do but little
good to our movement, and may tend to arrest the intelligent growth
of the youthful enthusiasts. When they will reach a maturer age
they will be better and more efficient workers in the movement for
having made a more thorough study of its theory and methods."
"The Call," New York, March 30, 1913, commenting on teaching Socialism
to the young, adds: "Up to the present time only men vote in most of the
states, and they do not use the ballot until they are 21 years of age.
It stands to reason that for the intelligent use of the ballot there
must be proper preparation and education. We cannot expect people to
vote right unless they are trained right....
"If you want or expect men and women to be good and intelligent
voters at the age of 21, then something most vital must be done
with them before they reach that age. From 5 to 21, that's a long
road. That's the impressionable period. That's the time at which
the people are prepared to become good Socialists or good opponents
of Socialism. And the latter quite as readily as the former....
"Catch them young! That's it. But how? In lots of ways. Get them
coming our way. Let them lose their fear of us. Have them come to a
dance and find out that we are human. It surprises them sometimes.
When they realize that, they are partly won.
"Educating the young to Socialism is a matter of 'indirect' action
rather than 'direct' action. It would be the height of folly to try
to cram Karl Marx down these new young throats. That will come in
time. Start them on something easier, something less drastic. Sugar
coat your bitter pills a little."
It is possible, in conformity with this last suggestion, that after the
parade of Socialist children of New York City, on May Day, 1913, they
were to be treated, as we are informed in "The Call" on the same day, to
a feast of ice cream and cake and a series of thrilling moving pictures
of the struggles between the police and the strikers at Lawrence and
Little Falls.
With this short diversion, we shall return to the article in "The Call"
of March 30, 1913, which goes on to say that "the young people should
be gradually educated to rebellion and revolution. Songs will help.
Plays will help. Casual talk here and there will aid. It must soak in.
You can't flood them with stuff in two days. Rebels that are made in two
days may stick in a crisis, but I don't believe they will."
It certainly is interesting to read "Lesson 24," taken from the
"Socialist Primer," a little book which a man named Klein has prepared
for the use of children attending the Socialist Sunday schools:
"Here is a man with a gun; he is in the troop. You see he has a
nice suit on. Does he work? No, the man with the gun does no work.
His work is to shoot men who do work. Is it nice to shoot men?
Would you like to shoot a man? This man eats, drinks, wears
clothes, but does no work. Do you think that is nice? Yes, this is
nice for the fat man, but bad for the thin; so he owns the man with
the gun. When the thin man will have the law on his side, there
will be no more men with guns. Who makes the gun? The man who
works. Who makes the nice suit? The man who works. Who gets shot
with the gun? The man who works. Who gets the bad clothes? The man
who works. Is this right? No, this is wrong!"
In "The Call," New York, April 17, 1919, there appeared the following
advertisement of a coming entertainment to be given by a Socialist
Sunday school of the Brownsville section of Brooklyn:
"Sunday School Gives Concert in Brownsville
"The annual entertainment and concert of the Brownsville Socialist
Sunday school will take place tomorrow evening at the Brownsville
Labor Lyceum. The capitalist press has lately discovered that there
are Socialist Sunday schools in the city. They even send their
reporters to discover what awful things Socialist children are
taught there. The American Defence Society has just undertaken a
vigorous nation-wide fight against Bolshevism in general and
Socialist Sunday schools in particular. All school children and the
parochial schools are to be enlisted in this glorious work. The
Protestant churches, not to be outdone, are also organizing to save
the children from Socialism. The growth of the Socialist schools is
throwing fear into the hearts of the capitalists. Brownsville
parents can do no better than to help make this school, now one of
the largest in the country, even better and stronger than it is. A
splendid musical program has been arranged and, in addition, the
children will sing, dance and recite. Tickets may be bought at the
Lyceum."
Every parent will understand the subtle, insidious poison of rebellion
against parental authority and guidance instilled into young minds by
such items as the following, from the "New York Call" of July 16, 1919:
"Independence is one of the finest qualities of youth. In an
inspiring postal card to her mother (copies of which might well be
put into the hands of young children everywhere), Hilda Stydocker,
14, of 3 Washington Avenue, West Orange, states that she is going
to 'earn her own living and take care of herself.' Previously
gossip had been circulated to the effect that Hilda had been
kidnapped."
In a previous issue of "The Call," April 4, 1919, part of a speech given
by H. B. Shaen, president of the Brooklyn Sunday School Union, is
quoted:
"It is a question of great moment," President Shaen said yesterday.
"It must be dealt with drastically, effectively and immediately.
Bolshevism is a greater menace than we like to believe. The
proposed establishment of 3,000 so-called Socialist schools in this
city will be a blow at religion, at government, at decency. It
might be a fatal error to underestimate the pernicious influence of
this organization that seeks to sow disquieting seeds by deceiving
young America with false beliefs."
Mr. Woodworth Clum, of the Greater Iowa Association, in volume 4, number
1, of "The Iowa Magazine," gives the following shocking account of
Socialistic propaganda among school children carried on in the northwest
by Townley's Non-Partisan League:
"The Non-Partisan League, under direction of Townley and Le Seur,
has taken possession of the schools of North Dakota--and may get
control of the schools of Minnesota.... Radical doctrines are
becoming part of the regular curricula. I have a statement from O.
B. Burtness, representative in the North Dakota Legislature from
Grand Forks. Here it is:
"'The board of administration has placed in charge of the state
library, to select the reading for our schools, C. E. Strangeland.
He is telling our school children what to read. I found in our
state library, the other day, a bundle of books, all ready to be
sent to one of our country schools--a circulating library. If the
farmers of North Dakota could have seen what I saw, they would
have come to Bismarck and cleaned out the whole Socialist gang.
Here are the titles of some of those books I saw:
"'"Socialism and Modern Science," Ferri.
"'"Evolution and Property," La Farge.
"'"Not Guilty," Blatchford.
"'"Love and Marriage," Ellen Key.
"'"Love and Ethics," Ellen Key.
"'"The Bolshevik and World Peace," Leon Trotzky.
"'"The History of the Supreme Court," Meyers.
"'"The Profits of Religion," Sinclair.
"'"Anarchism and Socialism," Harris.'
"Ellen Key is a pronounced advocate of free-love and the
dissolution of marriage."
In high schools, especially those of New York City, many teachers have
been using every opportunity for advocating Socialism and other radical
doctrines in the classroom and out of it. Students, in order to win
favor with some of these teachers, at times show zeal for Socialistic
tenets both in oral and written composition. Quite a number of the
teachers are Socialists themselves, have become known as such throughout
the schools and use their influence to win over others. Many books given
by these teachers for outside reading are by Socialist or radical
authors.
On the editorial page of "The New York Times," April 9, 1919, there is
an article against the "Teachers' Union," a Socialist and radical
organization of many of the teachers of New York City. Under the title,
"Forbidden to Preach Sedition," we read:
"There will be, presumably, much excited denunciation of the Board
of Education for closing the public schools to meetings of the
Teachers' Union. The familiar complaints about infringing the right
of free speech will be heard, and--well, the complaints will be as
ill-based as they usually are.
"In the first place, while speech is free in this country, it is
not, any more than it is or can be, anywhere, free to the extent
that anybody is free to say anything at any time and any place.
Restrictions of several kinds there are and must be, including
those by which decency and the safety of our institutions are
protected. On the other hand, the members of the Teachers' Union
have not been reduced--as yet--to silence. They have simply been
told that they cannot use the city's property in the campaign which
they have undertaken against an important branch of the City
Government. They are still privileged to hire as many halls as they
please in which to accuse the Board of Education of tyranny, and
to protest against the enforcement of discipline against teachers
with a leaning toward Bolshevism, and a tendency to mingle
Socialistic and pro-German propaganda with instruction in the three
R's.
"In this instance, as in so many others, the use of schoolhouses
for meetings of adults with opinions to express and doctrines to
preach has resulted unhappily. The adults who gather seem always,
or almost always, to be, not average, well-disposed citizens, but a
more or less incendiary minority who want to change things--and to
change them a lot and very quickly. That aspiration is not wholly
indefensible, for a good many things would be the better for
changing, but real light and leading have not often been found on
top at meetings in schoolhouses, and experience has proved that the
Teachers' Union has neither to offer."
The following is from the "New York World" of November 20, 1919:
"Fifteen teachers in city schools will appear before Deputy
Attorney General Berger tomorrow afternoon to be questioned to
determine if they are dangerous radicals. Examination of the
records of the Communist Party seized in recent raids has resulted
in evidence indicating that each of the teachers is a member of
that organization....
"Superintendent of Schools Ettinger revoked the license, yesterday,
of Sonia Ginsberg, a teacher in School No. 170 in Brooklyn, who
admitted she would like to see the United States Government
displaced by one similar to the Bolshevist regime in Russia. Miss
Ginsberg, born in Russia, was naturalized as a citizen last June."
For many years the Intercollegiate Socialist Society has been winning
college and university students to the doctrines of the Social
Revolution through the medium of the various branches that it
establishes in such institutions. The Intercollegiate Socialist Society
sometime ago had, in the different colleges and universities of our
country, between 60 and 70 chapters, or Socialist local societies, with
Socialist libraries, and lecturers in frequent attendance. Every year
chapter-delegates are sent to an intercollegiate convention from nearly
all the important American universities, including Harvard, Yale,
Princeton, Columbia, Barnard, Amherst, Brown, Pennsylvania, Michigan,
Wisconsin, Kansas, Missouri, and Chicago. Even Vassar, which had 86
members in the first year in which the Intercollegiate was organized, is
included in the long list. Harry W. Laidler, organizer of the Socialist
chapters and secretary of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, claims
that all the universities now throw open their large assembly rooms for
addresses by the visiting lecturers, give quarters in the college
buildings to the Socialist chapters, and permit the use of the college
publications in the dissemination of propagandist literature, if it is
written by bona fide students.
We shall reproduce a letter which shows what is going on in our colleges
and universities. The identification of the writer, person addressed,
and others mentioned in the letter, is made on the authority of Mr.
Woodworth Clum, of the Greater Iowa Association, Davenport, Iowa.
The letter was written July 29, 1919, by Arthur W. Calhoun, then
instructor in sociology and political economy at Ohio State University,
Columbus, Ohio. It was written to Professor Zeuch, then instructor at
the University of Minnesota, now an instructor at Cornell University.
"Gras," mentioned in the letter, is Professor N. S. B. Gras, a member of
the Faculty of the University of Minnesota. The letter also mentions E.
C. Hayes, who is professor of sociology at the University of Illinois,
President Grose of DePauw University, Greencastle, Indiana, and E. A.
Ross, professor of sociology at the University of Wisconsin and Advisory
Editor of the American Journal of Sociology. The "Beals" mentioned in
the letter, says Mr. Clum, "was formerly a university professor and old
friend of Calhoun's. He is now openly advocating Bolshevism." Toward the
end of the letter, Calhoun says: "Greencastle is too small to do much
with the co-op." This "co-op" is the Tri-State Co-operative Society of
Pittsburg, and, says Mr. Clum, "the society's business is the production
and distribution of vicious 'red' propaganda." Calhoun is or was one of
its directors.
The letter, copied from a fac-simile of the original in volume 4, number
1, of "The Iowa Magazine," Davenport, Iowa, is as follows:
"55 E. Norwich Av., Columbus, O., _July 29._
"Dear Zeuch:--
"I think I accept all you say about the condition of the
proletariat and the impossibility of the immediate revolution. But
I am less interested in the verbiage of the Left Wing than in the
idea of keeping ultimates everlastingly in the center of attention
to the exclusion of mere puttering reforms. One of the things that
will hasten the revolution is to spread the notion that it _can_
come soon. If the Left Wing adopts impossibilist methods of
campaign, I shall stand aloof, but if they push for Confiscation,
Equality of Economic Status, and the speedy elimination of class
privilege, and keep their heads, I shall go with them rather than
the yellows.
"If Gras is doing what he says and I am doing what he says, he is
right in saying that he is doing the better job. I wonder, however,
how many of his students draw the 'necessary' conclusions: and I
wonder whether I do all my students' thinking for them.
"Ellery is feeling at Columbus and also at Illinois. I had a letter
from Hayes about him.
"I have accepted the professorship of Sociology at De Pauw
University. The job pays $2200 this year with assurance of $2400 if
I stay a second year. The president has been here three times and
had long interviews with me. Besides we have written a lot. I told
him I belong to the radical Socialists. I expounded my general
principles on all important points. He knows also of the
circumstances of my leaving Clark and Kentucky. He says he is in
substantial agreement with most of what I have said and that he
sees no reason why I can not get along at De Pauw. He says he feels
confident it will be a permanency. Ross had some hand in the game.
Pres. Grose interviewed him at Madison last week and Ross wrote
encouraging me to take the place. I did not make any great effort.
Grose knew that I did not care much one way or the other. He took
the initiative almost from the start and I sat back and waited. I'm
afraid Greencastle is too small to do much with the co-op.
Population 4000, 30 miles north of Bloomington. 800 students,
mostly in college, a few in School of Music, a few graduate
students. Hudson is prof. of Ec. there.
"Beals was here last week. He is pushing the 'Nation.' Says the
circulation has quadrupled since they became Bolshevist.
"As ever,
"AWC"
The Rand School, in New York City, is known as the University of
Socialism and is said to have had 5,000 attending its lectures in the
year 1918. The purpose of the school, as originally conceived, and as
adhered to throughout, is twofold, first, to offer to the general public
facilities for the study of Socialism and related subjects. This is done
by its reference library and reading-room and by its large book store,
in which are sold not only Socialist books, but books on atheism as
well; not only the more conservative Socialist papers, but ultra
revolutionary papers such as "The Revolutionary Age," "The Proletarian,"
many Bolshevist publications, and "The Rebel Worker" and "The New
Solidarity," the latter two being I. W. W. papers.
The last time the author of "The Red Conspiracy" visited the Rand School
book store, there was on sale a pile of Birth Control Reviews several
feet high, "The One Big Union Monthly," the I. W. W. organ, and enough
foul and revolutionary matter to satisfy the filthiest or most
blood-thirsty wretch in the United States.
The second purpose of the Rand School is to offer to Socialists such
instruction and training as may make them more efficient workers for the
Socialist movement. This is done by means of lectures, some 5,000
students attending, on an average, 20 lectures each in the year 1918.
The school also directs extension classes in outlying parts of the city
and neighboring places and correspondence courses for study classes and
individual students in all parts of the country. It conducts a bureau to
provide lectures on Socialism for clubs, trade unions, forums and other
organizations not otherwise connected with the school. For years this
school, which was raided under the direction of the Lusk Committee, has
been sowing the seeds of class hatred and class discrimination, now
everywhere springing up round about us. The laws have been too tolerant,
and it has been permitted to go on without interference far too long. In
referring to documents seized in the raids in the summer of 1919, Deputy
Attorney General Conklin said that the papers "are so carefully and
cleverly phrased" that no single sentence can be picked out as in
violation of the law. "Yet," he adds, "taken as a whole, the documents
are seditious, in my opinion." They were made a matter of record,
awaiting the disposition of the District Attorney of New York.
These facts speak for themselves. It scarcely need be said that unless
this propaganda is checked, the power and strength of the Socialist
Party will soon assume tremendous proportions, imperilling the existence
of our nation.
Another field of work to which the enemies of our country have been
devoting special attention is the propagation of revolutionary doctrines
among the non-English speaking residents of the United States. Page 69
of the "Proceedings of the 1910 National Congress of the Socialist
Party" informs us that "the American people are, after all, a nation of
immigrants. We count our Americanism by a very few generations, and the
foreign population has always played an important part in the industrial
and political life of the country. At this time there are over ten
million foreign born persons in the United States. Most of them are
workers, and most of them still speak, write and read in their native
tongues.
"The powers of capital, through their political and so-called
educational agencies, and often with the aid of the churches, are
constantly at work prejudicing them against Socialism and arraying
them against organized labor.
"The Socialists must make energetic efforts to counteract these
baneful influences and to reach the foreign workers with their
propaganda.
"The Socialist Party has branch organizations among all, or almost
all, of these nationalities, and a few of these organizations have
reached a high degree of strength and a large measure of influence
among the people of their nationalities....
"These organizations work under conditions different from those of
the party as a whole. In each case they deal with a special type of
persons, of a psychology and of economic conditions peculiarly
their own, and they are the most competent judges of the methods of
propaganda best suitable to their own countrymen. The party should
allow such non-English speaking organizations the greatest freedom
of action, and should assist them in every way in their special
work of Socialist propaganda."
It may interest the reader to learn that the Socialist Party is so much
concerned with its propaganda among foreigners, that in its 1913 May Day
parade in New York City pink leaflets headed "WOMEN, BECOME CITIZENS,"
were distributed. They read:
"If you hope to be a voter, remember that you must be a citizen!
Don't delay! Come to the NATURALIZATION BUREAU of the SOCIALIST
PARTY next Tuesday evening, and let us help you to become
naturalized." It was, of course, an understood fact that the
Socialist Party would, besides helping such women to become
naturalized, also help them to become Revolutionists.
On May 18, 1912, May Wood-Simons reported to the National Convention of
the Socialist Party the recommendations of the Woman's National
Committee, urging the carrying of the propaganda of Socialism to the
housewife, the woman on the farm, to teachers, foreign speaking women
and women in industry. ("The Call," New York, May 19, 1912.)
Though the zeal of the national foe in its propaganda of revolutionary
principles is manifested in many other ways, only a few more
illustrations will be given. Many thousands of copies of the "Appeal to
Reason," when it was the foremost American Socialist paper, found their
way into the camps and upon the battleships of our country.
At the Socialist National Convention of 1912, held in Indianapolis,
Delegate Kate Sadler pointed out how Socialist locals had been organized
on various battleships in the navy and how she was accustomed to hold
meetings on Sunday afternoons on the men-of-war at the navy yard,
Bremerton, Washington. "We'll get the boys organized into the Socialist
Party," she declared, and the Socialist Convention voted to adopt the
resolution. ("The Call," New York, May 17, 1912.)
During recent years no one who has carefully read the public press could
have failed to notice that the Socialists have been carrying on an
active campaign of lies and deceptions in the form of letters which they
have sent to the editors of the daily papers, with the request that the
same be published for the enlightenment of the public regarding the
general excellency of the Socialist movement.
In "The Call," New York, March 23, 1913, it is said that "the man or
woman who can convey the message of Socialism through speaking is
fortunate, and when it can be done through speaking and writing, the
Comrade is doubly lucky. But Ryan Walker can do it through speaking and
writing and the cartoon that makes you laugh or makes you mad.... The
cartoons that Walker has been putting over in 'The Call,' 'The Coming
Nation' and the 'Appeal to Reason' have been copied in Socialist papers
all over the world, in England, Scotland, Germany, Australia, and they
are doing their work in these countries the same as they do it here. The
Socialist cartoonists have been accomplishing some of the biggest
propaganda work that is done by any one of our active members, and while
they are getting the laugh on capitalism, and getting the laugh on the
fool workingman, they are arousing the worker to cast aside his
foolishness, and at the same time cast aside the foolishness of the
capitalist. Getting the laugh on the capitalist, showing how ridiculous
and weak he is, is a great preliminary to getting rid of him."
The Socialists are inspired with such an ardent desire for the success
of their movement, that they have written theatrical plays and have even
had moving picture films made, so that by representing in a most vivid
manner the evils and abuses of our day, they may persuade the unwary
that Socialism would mean the absence of sufferings and wrongs of every
description.
We elsewhere have called attention to I. W. W. effort to organize the
negroes of America. The work of making rebels of the negroes is also
carried on assiduously by the Socialist Party of America. Says "The
National Civic Federation Review," July 30, 1919:
"Among the propaganda material found on sale by agents of the Lusk
Committee in the Rand School book store were copies of 'The
Messenger,' on the front page of which it is called, 'The Only
Radical Negro Magazine in America,' of which Chandler Owen and A.
Philip Randolph are editors....
"Both of the editors of this magazine, who are negroes, are
instructors at the Rand School of Social Science."
In "The Open Forum" of the September, 1919, issue of "The Messenger"
three letters are given as follows:
"Dear Comrade Owen:
"I enclose a check for $25.00 as a contribution to the organization
fund being raised by 'The Messenger.' I know of no more important
and vital work in the field of American Socialism and Labor today
than the effort of your group to incorporate the large masses of
Negro workers in the ranks of the advanced and class-conscious
white workers in the industrial and political fields.
"My heartiest wishes for the success of your movement.
"Sincerely and fraternally yours,
"Morris Hillquit."
"To the Editors of 'The Messenger':
"Dear Comrades.--The work which you are doing is vital. Your people
constitute more than a tenth of the total population of the United
States. We are all native born Americans. If there is to be
progress made, particularly in the great Southland, by the
Socialist Movement, it must be made by and through colored people.
Enclosed is my check for Five Dollars, for the first share of stock
in 'The Messenger.' With it goes my heart good wishes for the
success of your work.
"Yours truly,
"Scott Nearing."
"Dear Sir and Brother:
"Enclosed please find check for the amount of $100.00 in reply to
the appeal presented by you at the last meeting of our Board of
Directors for support to enable you to continue the noble work you
have undertaken to enlighten the colored worker in this country
upon his being exploited by the master class.
"We wish you success in the work you are conducting on this field
and you can rely upon the assurance of our organization for all
possible assistance in the future.
"Fraternally yours,
"P. Monat."
In view of the frightful character of the very active propaganda that is
being carried on by the enemies of our country, does it not behoove
every loyal and patriotic American to rise in his power and wipe out the
Red plague that is rapidly disseminating its destructive germs
throughout the United States?
CHAPTER XXIV
EXPERTS IN THE ART OF DECEPTION
It remains to be shown that the rapid spread of Socialism, besides being
due to the extraordinary zeal of the Revolutionists, is largely the
result of artful deception.
The Marxians, who are fond of being called "scientific" Socialists, may
very aptly be compared to little boys who might try to prove to their
teacher that the solution of a certain problem in mathematics was
correct, because that of another problem of an entirely different nature
was wrong. Or, better still, they may be likened to an egg dealer who
would attempt to prove to a customer that every egg in one crate was
good, because a few in another were unfit for use. The appropriateness
of comparing the "scientific" Socialists to the amusing youngsters, or
to the illogical egg dealer, will be evident to the reader when he
reflects that the revolutionists, north, south, east and west, from the
first day of January till the last of December, condemn the present
system of government and industry, endeavoring thereby to persuade the
people that Socialism is the only remedy for the evils from which they
are suffering.
Most of the speeches and writings of the "Knights of the Red Flag"
consist in severely criticising prevalent evils. By attacking the
present system of government and industry they hope to have the
workingmen conclude that the Socialist Party alone can save mankind from
complete ruin. This, then, is the way in which "scientific" Socialism
leads unreflecting laborers to believe that the contemplated state would
be the most perfect institution under heaven, replete with countless
blessings and free from every evil.
It often happens that the revolutionists dazzle the eyes of the weary
with the vivid pictures that they draw of intolerable civil and economic
conditions, whether these be true, false or imaginary. The result is
that the poor people frequently brood over the wrongs from which they
happen to be suffering. They become so thoroughly discontented and
blinded with class hatred that they are no longer able to see the
advantage of reforming the present system by constitutional and lawful
methods. Finally, when they have almost lost their reason and can no
longer realize that the drug offered them has never been proven capable
of remedying the evils that weigh heavily upon them, they accept and
swallow the poisonous dose of Socialism and become a thousand times more
wretched than they were before. The very potion they drink, with a view
to being cured, makes them most unhappy for the rest of their lives, and
in many cases for all eternity. If there is anything that non-Socialists
should be on their guard against it is this base form of tactics by
which the revolutionists have been eminently successful in gaining new
recruits.
If those whose party emblem is a flaming torch could even prove that
everything without exception in the present system of industry is worthy
of condemnation, and that the entire government is corrupt to its very
core, it would no more follow from this that Socialism was the remedy
than it would follow that the solution of one problem in mathematics
must be correct because another solution of an entirely different nature
was wrong, or that all the eggs in one crate must be good because there
were some in a second crate unfit for use.
It is very common for Socialists to assume that certain fundamental
principles have been proven to be true, whereas the fact is that these
very premises, from which they draw their conclusions, are often false
and without the slightest foundation. An excellent illustration of this
has already been given in preceding pages, where it was shown that the
Socialists incorrectly assumed that there would be no poverty in their
state, and argued from this that there would be very little
prostitution. It is evident, therefore, that unless those who listen to
the Marxians are on their guard and demand that the premises be proven
the Socialists may deduce from incorrect premises conclusions which will
make it appear that their intended state will bestow heaven's choicest
blessings upon mankind.
Though examples of deceit have already been given, the attention of the
reader will be called to the testimony of no less an authority than
Eugene V. Debs, who in the following article, published in the
"International Socialist Review," Chicago, January, 1911, will be seen
to substantiate our charge:
"The truth is that we have not a few members who regard vote
getting as a supreme importance, no matter by what methods the
votes may be secured, and this leads them to hold out inducements,
and make representations which are not at all compatible with the
stern and uncomprising principles of a revolutionary party. They
seek to make the Socialist propaganda so attractive--eliminating
whatever may give offence--to bourgeois sensibilities--that it
serves as a bait for votes, rather than as a means for education,
and votes thus secured do not properly belong to us."
It is not unfrequently that we hear Socialists appealing to this or that
plank of their party platform as proof sufficient that their
organization favors or opposes a certain policy. An argument of this
sort should have very little weight with careful thinking men, once
their attention has been called to the fact that the Socialists have
been proven guilty of a base lie by stating in their 1908 platform that
the party is not concerned with matters of religious belief. But even if
the revolutionists had never inserted in their platform a statement that
was untrue, nevertheless the following facts show that their platform
planks are very far from being reliable.
The delegates of the party assembled in national convention on May 15,
1908, by a vote of 102 to 33 passed a plank declaring for the
_collective ownership of all the land_. ("Proceedings of 1908 National
Convention of the Socialist Party," page 186.)
It was on September 7, 1909, less than a year and four months after the
adjournment of the convention of 1908, that the words declaring for the
_collective ownership of all the land_ were, by a referendum, _stricken
from the party platform_, while by another referendum it was decided to
insert among the principles of the platform that the party was _not
opposed to the occupation and possession of land by those using it in a
useful and bona fide manner without exploitation_. ("Proceedings of the
1910 National Congress of the Socialist Party," page 25.)
About eight months after the adoption of this substitute plank, a bitter
contest concerning the ownership of "all" the land took place in the
National Congress of the party, which was held in Chicago from May 15,
1910, till May 21, 1910. ("Proceedings of the 1910 National Congress of
the Socialist Party," pages 220 to 235.) Thus, during the 1910 Congress,
notwithstanding the fact that there existed at that time a plank in the
party platform guaranteeing the possession of land to persons who would
use it in a bona fide manner, _the representatives of the party in
national congress assembled, being unable to decide whether or not it
was to the best interests of the party to abide by this plank, referred
the matter to the next convention_. ("Proceedings of 1908 National
Convention of the Socialist Party," page 235.)
Then, when the 1912 Convention met, it made another change, and declared
for _the collective ownership of land wherever practicable_. ("The 1912
Platform of the Socialist Party"--Cf. "The Call," May 19, 1912.) In
addition to this, it stated that _occupancy and use shall be the sole
title to land_. ("The 1912 Platform of the Socialist Party"--Cf. "The
Call," May 19, 1912.)
It is noteworthy that the Convention of 1908 had previously voted down
this proposition to make occupancy and use the sole title to land, after
the proposition had been denounced as being anarchistic, unsocialistic,
nonsensical, foolish, and a dream ("Proceedings of 1908 National
Convention of the Socialist Party," pages 188, 189 and 191.) One of the
foremost opponents of the proposition was Delegate Morris Hillquit, who
asked:
"What does the amendment mean? Occupancy and use the basis of title
to land. How do we know whether the co-operative commonwealth will
infer and arrange it in that way? Aren't we taking a long excursion
into the domain of the future and into the domain of speculation?
It may be true that the dream of the dreamer may become a reality,
if this dream is the dream of the nation. But we have not come here
to dream dreams and leave it to the future to realize them or to
show them to be just mere pipe dreams.... The Socialist state may
just as well decide on an entirely different basis for the
distribution of land. It may not at all be bound to our resolution
here today that occupation forms a title." ("Proceedings of 1908
National Convention of the Socialist Party," page 189.)
When the Marxians are brought face to face with the charge of adopting a
program today, rejecting it tomorrow, hesitating about it on the next
day and compromising it on the fourth, as they did in respect to the
collective ownership of "all" the land, let them not argue that such
changes are to be expected in the evolution of Socialism. They should be
forced to confess that they acted in such a way solely to gain votes.
Confront them with the speeches delivered in their National Convention
of 1908 and in their National Congress of 1910, both by the delegates
who advocated the collective ownership of "all" the land and by those
who opposed it. For the convenience of the reader passages from some of
these speeches will now be given:
Delegate Cannon of Arizona: "I contend that the public ownership of
all machinery and land is one of the things for which the Socialist
Party is working. If some of the Comrades get up and tell us in
Germany they are not working for that, I move that we inform the
German Comrades that they are behind the times. The idea of not
including the land is nothing more or less than political
expediency." ("Proceedings of 1908 National Convention of the
Socialist Party," page 175.)
Delegate Payne of Texas: "I want to know if this convention of this
movement which we call the great revolutionary movement is going to
go down in history as catering to a small middle class of land
owners, or are you going to stand for the great proletarian farming
class?" ("Proceedings of 1908 National Convention on the Socialist
Party," page 181.)
Delegate Morrison of Arizona: "Is it possible that we have so far
forgotten ourselves, that we will attempt to curry favor with a few
capitalist farmers? Why is this resolution here? What is the object
of it? What is the purpose of it? Is it to secure votes? Do you
hope to deceive some one as to the actual, real program of
scientific Socialism? Or are you, in other words, going to lie to
the farmers of this country in order to secure their suffrage? Are
you going to present something to them that you know is not
contained in the Socialist program? Can you afford, as
representatives of this great revolutionary party, to do that which
in a few years you will be ashamed of? I say no." ("Proceedings of
1908 National Convention of the Socialist Party," page 184.)
Delegate Goaziou of Pennsylvania: "I know we have in this country a
growing movement among Socialists who are wanting votes no matter
how they will get them. They are willing to put in appeals to the
farmers, appeals to the middle class and appeals to everybody, so
that they can get votes." ("Proceedings of 1908 National Convention
of the Socialist Party," page 209.)
Delegate Thompson of Wisconsin: "We know that there is a very large
portion of votes of this country on the farm, under agricultural
conditions and environment, over forty per cent. Less than thirty
per cent of the votes of this country are under industrial
conditions. When we get to the point where we want to do something,
we must have some way or other of getting these two forces welded
together. We can never win out with thirty per cent of the vote. We
will have to have at least a substantial majority, and that we
cannot have without the farmers." ("Proceedings of 1908 National
Convention of the Socialist Party," page 185.)
Delegate Victor Berger of Wisconsin: "We cannot have Socialism in
this country, if we don't get the farmers in some way. If you try
to take away the farms of twelve millions of farmers of this
country, you will have a big job on your hands. You might as well
try to reach down the moon.... You remember how much effort and how
many men it cost England to conquer 30,000 farmers, Boers--Boers,
mind you--and now try to take the farms from these 12,000,000
American farmers and you will have about a million times harder
job. Besides, they don't need to fight. All they have to do is to
stop bringing food to Chicago for six weeks, and Comrade Morgan and
the rest of Chicago would be knocked out." ("Proceedings of the
1910 National Congress of the Socialist Party," page 230.)
Delegate Simmons of Illinois: "There is just one thing on earth
that I will toady to and that is a fact. And when I meet a fact so
big as the farmer question in America, a fact that has in it the
future of 12,000,000 of people of the producing classes, without
whom we stand no more chance of a Socialist victory in this country
than we do of changing the orbit of a comet, and when I face a fact
as big as that, I don't try to stand in front of it, and howl empty
phrases, in the hope that the fact will get out of the way."
("Proceedings of the 1910 National Congress of the Socialist
Party," page 231.)
Since the revolutionists, to win votes, frequently point to the reforms
they have proposed or in some cases accomplished, we should all be on
our guard lest, being allured by these reforms, we be led into the
Socialist camp, and later on suffer the dreadful evils that have been
shown would result from the adoption of the Marxian system of
government.
Those who vote the Socialist ticket insist on calling the attention of
non-Socialists to the immediate demands enumerated in their party
platform, many of which are excellent. Workingmen, however, should
remember, first, that many of them are only meant for the time our
present Government is still in power; moreover, that a crime-ridden,
anarchical and bankrupt state could not grant them, and, furthermore,
that there is no reason why our Government, in its present form, could
not grant all the Marxian demands that are really advantageous.
The Socialists often argue from some successful results in government
ownership of public utilities to the success of Socialism itself.
Though it cannot be denied that government ownership of public utilities
has in some instances been a success, still anti-Socialists can just as
well argue the failure of Socialism from failures in government
ownership, which are entirely too numerous to require comment. If in the
future it should become evident that great benefits would accrue from
the national, state, or municipal ownership of certain public utilities,
which are now privately owned, our present form of government, without
becoming Socialistic, could take them over, just as many of our cities
have already taken over water, gas and power plants. But the number
would have to be limited, for it has already been shown in Chapter XVII
what terrible consequences would follow from adopting the scheme of
Socialism, whereby the people would collectively own and manage all the
principle means of production, transportation and communication. Public
ownership on such a large scale, so as to conform with the plans of the
revolutionists, implies that the vast majority of workingmen would be
government employees. The result, as has been shown, would be a terrible
reign of discontent, strife, crime, revolution and chaos; whereas the
prudent purchase of a small number of public utilities, under the
present system of government, would entail none of these evils, since
most workingmen could refuse positions that they did not care for or
where the wages would not satisfy them, and do this without injuring the
government.
The Socialists, especially when they appeal to the less educated,
frequently argue that since their party platform says nothing concerning
the teaching of a certain doctrine, for instance free-love, it is
evident that the party does not advocate it. Such a method of reasoning
is, of course, absurd and utterly unworthy of men who style themselves
scientific; for by arguing in exactly the same way, it would follow that
their flag is not the red flag because there is no plank in their party
platform stating that it is.
Although many Socialists have written an abundance of anti-religious
literature, other members of the party have composed books, pamphlets
and articles that in no way attack the church. Some of the
revolutionists, in their endeavors to make their movement attractive to
Christians, go so far as to claim that even Christ was a Socialist.
Since, therefore, the enemies of our country have at their disposal
writings which attack religion, as well as those that are in no way
hostile to it, they are well able to supply with attractive reading
matter not only atheists who are opposed to all forms of religion, but
Christians, no matter to what denomination they may chance to belong.
In like manner there are to be found within the Socialist Party writers
who advocate free-love and others who are opposed to its propagation,
either through a personal repugnance to legalized sin, or else because
they think that by teaching loose morals the party would alienate many
prospective members. Hence, the Socialists can satisfy the depraved by
recommending to them the different works on free-love, and at the same
time they can give satisfaction to those who are opposed to the base
doctrine by referring them to books which not only do not advocate it
but even condemn it in the most emphatic way.
In this double-dealing party there is a very strong faction whose
members advocate direct action, in other words, violence, as a means for
bringing about the downfall of our Government and of the entire
industrial system. Opposed to these men, who are frequently termed the
"Reds," there is a rapidly disappearing faction of so-called "Yellows,"
who rely upon the use of the ballot, and decry direct action, either
through personal repugnance to violence, or, as seems most likely,
because they deem peaceful methods more prolific of votes, and
consequently of future political advantage to themselves. The direct
actionists by their inflammatory speeches and writings are especially
successful in gaining recruits from among the more disorderly elements
of society, whereas the political actionists appeal rather to those
persons who are opposed to the destruction of life and property.
It is by no means uncommon for the revolutionists to avoid as far as
possible the discussion of knotty problems relative to the working
details of their contemplated state. They often do this by telling us
that the people of the future will be the ones to solve the problem in
question. In illustration two examples will be given, the first of which
is taken from the "Appeal to Reason," January 6, 1912:
"Do Socialists think all men should be paid alike--the man with the
pick the same wages as the lawyer or doctor?"
"Socialists differ on this proposition. Whatever a majority of the
people may decide will prevail."
Again we read, in the April 6, 1912, edition of the same paper:
"Will producers get paid for the number of hours worked, or for the
amount of production?"
"No one knows just how the returns will be regulated, for the
reason that they are to be regulated according to the will of the
whole people and not according to the scheme of the 'Appeal to
Reason.' It is possible that both methods may be tried, and the
best prevail."
A subterfuge that often meets with success, and which for this very
reason is a favorite one among the revolutionists when they are on the
point of being defeated in an argument, consists in this, that they do
their best to dodge the question at issue by leading their opponents off
on some side topic, such as the evils and abuses of the present day.
Every anti-Socialist ought, therefore, to be on his guard, and as soon
as he notices the national enemy trying to draw him off on a tangent, he
should steadfastly refuse to take up the new line of argumentation, but
should compel the evader to stick to the question at issue.
It happens, too, and not unfrequently, that in the course of a dispute,
when a Socialist is being defeated, he will ask the non-Socialist to
prove that the present system is superior to that which is pictured in
such beautiful colors by the followers of Karl Marx. Now, in the first
place, the burden of proof rests with the Socialist, for if he wishes to
lead another into his camp, it is his task to prove to him that
everything there is congenial and attractive. The non-Socialist would
indeed act very imprudently if he should attempt to prove that the
present system offers more attractions than the Socialist Utopia whose
perfections exist only in the imaginations of the revolutionists. What
he might do, however, would be to show that the present system of
government and industry, even in its unreformed state, is far superior
to the condition of affairs that would actually exist if our
constitutional government should ever have to give way to the regime of
the revolutionists.
On reading Socialist literature or listening to the speeches of the
revolutionists one is impressed with all the wonderful benefits that the
party proposes to confer upon our citizens if it should ever rule the
land. Of course very many of the proposals are made solely on the
authority of the speaker or writer. But even if they have the approval
of the Party, we must not forget that it is one thing to propose to
grant a favor and quite another thing actually to grant it. There are
lots of things that men say they propose to do, without ever intending
to do them. And it frequently happens that after having had the best
intentions, they change their minds or else are utterly unable to carry
out their plans.
Karl Marx about half a century ago taught the absurd doctrine that as
all wealth is produced by labor, to the laborers all wealth is due. He
held, on the one hand, that all the profits arising from the sale of
goods should accrue to the workingmen in virtue of the labor required
for their production, and, on the other, that the capitalists who had
not performed any work should not be entitled to a share in the profits.
This old doctrine, unreasonable as it is, is still taught at the present
day not only by European Socialists but also by the revolutionists of
our own country. During the May Day parade in New York City on May 1,
1912, when some 50,000 men marched behind red flags, great numbers of
leaflets, entitled, "The Issue," were distributed among the spectators.
These leaflets had been published by the Socialist Party of New York
City and openly advocated the old doctrine of Karl Marx, the Father of
modern Socialism, for on the third page appeared "A Parable," from which
we quote the following:
"A man was once engaged in making bricks just outside the wall of a
lunatic asylum. Presently a lunatic looked over the fence and
asked:
"'What are you doing?'
"'Making bricks.'
"'What are the bricks for?'
"'I don't know. What does it matter to me?'
"'But why do you make them, if you don't intend to use them for
anything?'
"'Why? Well it's my work.'
"'But I don't see why you should work for no object. If you don't
use the bricks, who will?'
"'How should I know? It's nothing to do with me.'
"'Don't know what you are going to do with your own bricks?'
"'They are not my bricks. They belong to the boss.'
"'But didn't you make them?'
"'Yes.'
"'Then how comes it that the boss owns them?'
"'It's his brick kiln and his clay hole.'
"'Oh, didn't he make the kiln?'
"'No; the bricklayers built them.'
"'Did he dig the clay hole?'
"'No; those men over there dug it.'
"'Why do they dig clay holes?'
"'It's their work. The boss pays them to do it.'
"'Oh! does he pay you, too, to make these bricks?'
"'Yes.'
"'But where does he get the money to pay you with?'
"'He sells bricks.'
"'And you made those bricks he sold?'
"'Yes.'
"'Don't you think you'd better come inside?...
"'But I say, how much will the boss sell those bricks for?'
"'Oh! about $500.'
"'How long will it take you to make them?'
"'About ten weeks.'
"'How much does the boss pay you for working so hard?'
"'Two dollars and fifty cents a day.'
"'That will be $150 in ten weeks. Ha! ha! ha! aha! he! he! he!'
"'I don't see (wiping the sweat from his brow) the joke, you
confounded ass.'
"'You must come inside. He! he! he!!!'"
American Socialists, therefore, as well as the early German
revolutionists, teach that to the laborer all wealth is due.
Though the low wages that many workingmen receive is a disgrace to our
civilization and an abuse that cries to heaven for vengeance, still it
is absurd to hold that wages should be so much increased as to leave
nothing for the capitalists. For, in the first place, if the workingmen
should enjoy the entire profits of their firms or industries all the
owners would soon become bankrupt and fail, and, in the upheavals due to
unemployment and the impossibility of supplying the necessaries of life,
the present system of our Government would certainly fall a prey to
revolution, the Socialists would come into power and then would follow
the terrible disturbances shown in Chapter XVII, "Socialism, a Peril to
Workingmen."
We have no defence whatsoever to offer for dishonest capitalists, but
maintain that honest capitalists are entitled to a reasonable share in
the profits arising from their investments. For, in the first place, if
it were not for the capital in the possession of honest capitalists,
millions of workingmen would be terribly handicapped in earning a
living. If this fact is not immediately evident to the reader it will
become so when he reflects that many farm, mill and factory workers, and
the employes of many big business houses would have to seek other
positions if the capital required for the industries was not supplied by
the owners. The buildings, machinery, raw materials, etc., in most
cases are not and cannot be supplied by the laborers and workingmen, but
are furnished by the capitalists who, if they wished, could sell them
and spend the money obtained from the sale for their own personal
enjoyment. For this reason, and also because the capitalists referred to
are subject to many financial worries, assume great responsibilities,
run the risk of incurring serious losses of one kind or another,
including business failure and bankruptcy, it is only just that they
should receive a reasonable recompense for their share in the production
of the goods.
From what has been said regarding the falsity of the Marxian doctrine,
that to the laborer all wealth is due, it follows that the Socialists,
by teaching this false principle, have been misleading the laborers and
workingmen for over half a century.
Some of the best known American Socialists, when confronted with the
evident fallacy of the Marxian doctrine concede that Marx was mistaken
and that they do not approve of his teachings on this subject. Now, if
these leaders and their followers are in the majority, they should long
ago have compelled the minority in the party to stop deceiving the
uneducated. On the other hand, if they themselves constitute the
minority, their own personal opinions amount to little, since the
majority of the members of the Socialist Party would in that case be
guilty of advocating foolish and absurd doctrine.
The attractive and popular motto, "Workingmen of the world unite. You
have nothing to lose but your chains," has moved many a poor workingman
to enlist in the revolutionary cause. Very little reflection, however,
is needed to expose the absurdity that is found in the second part of
the motto. For no matter how badly off men may be financially, it has
been shown that they not only would not lose their chains by uniting
under the red flag of Karl Marx but would be completely crushed by the
much heavier ones of bloody revolution and a wretched form of government
which would bring with it a religious prosecution and widespread
lawlessness, crime and chaos.
Realizing that the police would do much to help the revolutionary
movement, if they could be made friendly to it, some Socialists have
been extremely anxious to win them over. To certify this statement we
shall quote part of an article which appeared in "The Call," New York,
April 25, 1911, urging Socialists to get control of the police force:
"A policeman's vote, like any other person's vote, counts one.
Policemen are wage-earners, who, like other wage-earners, are
eager to improve their circumstances. Policemen will vote the
Socialist ticket when they realize that the Socialists in office
will insist upon their receiving more pay, more leisure, more sick
and old age benefits, more privileges.... Adopt constructive
resolutions demanding that constables be paid higher wages, that
they be granted shorter hours, that they be given more days off
each week, that they be exempted from paying part of their wages
into the superannuation fund, that they be accorded the right of
combination, that a more generous system of sick benefits be drawn
up, that they have the right of appeal against dismissal and abuse
to a representative committee of citizens."
The revolutionists are leaving nothing undone in their extraordinary
efforts to gain recruits for the overthrow of our National Government.
This is evidenced by the appearance in their papers of articles like the
following, entitled, "The Pure Water Problem," which was published in
"The Call," April 30, 1912:
"As a political organization, the Socialist Party must address
itself to every question that interests the electorate. And in each
case it must offer the public a carefully thought out solution
instead of mere generalities and hackneyed phrases. Otherwise it
will not succeed in winning the confidence of the majority of
voters. Now almost every city in America is confronted with a pure
water and sewage disposal problem.... If the Socialist Party steps
into the arena with clear-cut proposals that deal in a radical,
constructive and common sense way with this problem, it will not
only help to secure pure drinking water for citizens, but it will
break down considerable prejudice against the Socialist movement,
and cause people to study the more revolutionary features of our
own official platform."
Information comes to us that on account of recent Government raids the
Red organizations are assuming a variety of aliases. The Communist Party
has taken the innocuous title of "The International Publishing Company,"
alias "The International League of Defense." The I. W. W. operates under
any local name which comes handy. Individual Reds often spread their
doctrines, and incite workingmen to take part in outlaw strikes, while
professing to be members of no radical organization.
The Young People's Socialist League, closely affiliated with the
Socialist Party, planned to use disguises, if necessary, after the
Socialist Party adopted its anti-war program in 1917. Thus in "Outlines
of the Evidence Taken Before the Judiciary Committee of the Assembly of
New York," pages 608-9, appears a letter of William F. Kruse, National
Secretary of the Young People's Socialist League, written to the
secretaries of its different branches, in which he urged them to have an
"unofficial emergency committee," have "several copies of your most
important records and especially your mailing list stowed away in
various safe and secluded places," and have "three trustworthy officers
broken in for each important job." "At least one of these officers
should be a girl," he continued, "so that if our boys are jailed for
refusal to serve, the girls can keep the League going." He added: "If
ever the Y. P. S. L. is suppressed you will immediately get together all
its members as quietly as possible under the name of some athletic club,
dance society or pleasure club. The name of this organization should
have nothing in common with Socialism."
In concluding this chapter the attention of the reader is called to the
fact that the Socialists are trying their best to make it appear that
the interests of the American workingmen in general are jeopardized when
a member of their party is put in jail or is on trial. This is rank
hypocrisy. Even if the Socialist Party was a real workingman's party,
this fact would not give it the right to set up its justly condemned
bomb throwers, its preachers of Bolshevist revolution, its teachers of
race suicide, etc., as working-class martyrs and protagonists of free
speech, which they claim is no longer allowed in our country.
There are millions of workingmen in the great Republican, Democratic,
and other American parties who don't need and don't want bomb-throwers,
imported Marxian revolutionists, race suiciders, free-lovers, atheists,
hypocrites, professional liars and deceivers to petition the Government
in their name for the release of imprisoned Socialists on the plea that
these are being prosecuted because they are leaders of the
working-class. First of all, Debs, Haywood and their crews are leaders
of blood-thirsty revolutionists, and not the leaders of the law-abiding
workingmen who maintain the Democratic and Republican parties. They are
the enemies of the latter, and the real object of the Socialists is to
stir up trouble in our country by endeavoring to procure amnesty for a
set of scoundrels who, after their release, would, by their subversive
and dangerous doctrines, try to plunge the country we love and all
honest labor into a much more terrible abyss than that into which the
Bolsheviki have plunged Socialist Russia.
CHAPTER XXV
THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE REDS
It has been shown in the preceding chapters that the base doctrines
propagated on every side by the revolutionists are among the gravest
evils threatening the welfare of our nation. No doubt the reader
perceives that unless this conspiracy against our country, religion and
family is checked, the Socialists will soon overwhelm us with a bloody
rebellion and establish a government that will mean nothing less than a
reign of terror and a widespread prevalence of discontent, strife and
crime, finally terminating in chaos or anarchy.
Provisions must, therefore, be made for averting the dire calamities
that would attend the unfurling of the red flag over Washington in place
of the Star-Spangled Banner. Measures of defense must quickly be taken
and an army of attack must immediately be set in motion. In this way
alone can we hope to prevent the success of the revolutionary propaganda
that is characterized by a marvelous activity and an ever-increasing
popularity among the unwary and uneducated. The country we love and the
Government which has bestowed upon us innumerable blessings,
notwithstanding abuses, call upon us for help in the hour of need. True
patriotism bids us take up suitable weapons and wage relentless war
against that which would destroy our present constitutional form of
government.
Who can turn a deaf ear to the call? In our heroic work we shall be
helped by millions of patriotic citizens whose devotion to their country
has already rallied them to the defense of the Stars and Stripes. All
that we need do, to fan into flame the fire of patriotism already
glowing in their hearts, is to arouse them to a full realization of the
dangers that threaten the very existence of our nation. Now is the time
to act, before we hear the cry "Too late!" The great weapon must be
education and the ones to be enlightened on the evils of Socialism are
not merely scholars, professors and teachers, but the great masses of
the people.
If we wish to bring home to the American people a clear realization of
the threatening calamity, we ourselves must not only be thoroughly
equipped with knowledge of the Socialistic teachings and their evil
consequences, but must also be able to refute the alluring and deceptive
arguments of the revolutionists. We must acquire a thorough knowledge of
Socialism. But to do this, it almost goes without saying that we should
carefully read and study the excellent and thoroughly up-to-date
anti-Socialistic works that can be had at a moderate price or readily
obtained in the public libraries.
Among the best anti-Socialistic books in the English language may be
mentioned "Socialism, the Nation of Fatherless Children," edited by
Goldstein and Avery. This book, whose authors were once Socialists,
contains hundreds of very strong and useful quotations and is of the
highest value to every student who is studying the evils and dangers of
the revolutionary movement. Published by T. J. Flynn & Co., 62 Essex
Street, Boston, Mass.
"Socialism," by Cathrein and Gettelman, a very scholarly and learned
work, admirably explains and refutes the various Marxian doctrines. It
is published by Benziger Bros., New York City.
A third book of recent publication, and of great value to the
anti-Socialist student is "The World Problem," by Rev. Joseph Husslein,
S. J., published by The America Press, 175 East 83rd Street, New York,
N. Y.
One who is truly interested in the fight against the national enemy
should not content himself with the reading of anti-Socialist
literature, but should pass the matter on to others who may become
interested in the battle against the enemies of our country.
Business men and persons of wealth should not only urge their friends to
read anti-Socialist works that have appealed to themselves, but should
show their patriotism and generosity by extensively purchasing
anti-Socialist literature, whether in the form of books, pamphlets or
leaflets, to be sent to public libraries, clubs, high schools, colleges
and universities, and reading-rooms, and placed within easy reach of
their employes and customers.
The workingmen of our country, to whom the Socialists are especially
appealing, often fall an easy prey to the deceptive arguments of the
"Reds." Many of them do not weigh matters carefully and do not realize
how far the acceptance of radical doctrines may lead them. The men who
started the Russian revolution did not know how far it would go. The
party of Lvoff and Miliukoff did not foresee Kerensky. The followers of
Kerensky did not foresee Lenine and Trotzky; and probably few of the
followers of Lenine and Trotzky dreamed of the abyss of barbarism into
which they in turn have plunged bleeding Russia. The Socialists of the
United States use pamphlets and leaflets, much more than books, in
appealing to workingmen. Books are more expensive and require more time
to read. Leaflets are attractive, short, to the point, easily remembered
and almost costless. Anti-Socialist leaflets, distributed by the
millions, would do untold good and would soon start a tremendous
opposition among laborers to the Red Flag movement.
Since the foreigners in our country, especially Russians, Italians and
Jews, take to Socialism very readily, something should be done to
protect them by native Americans who are especially able to do so.
Patriotic persons and organizations should have immense numbers of
anti-Socialist books, pamphlets and leaflets published in the different
languages and distributed free of charge to foreigners who are not yet
acquainted with English.
Socialism has made terrible inroads among the Jews. To give one example,
"The Forward," a Yiddish daily of New York City, has a circulation of
about 150,000 copies. This paper should be watched very carefully by the
government, for it has been doing some very dangerous work in the line
of revolutionary propaganda without English-speaking people being aware
of the doctrines it is advocating.
In order to counteract Socialist propaganda among girls and boys, a
simple and limited knowledge of the evil plottings of the "Reds" ought
to be imparted in all the grammar and high schools of our country. With
a view to this, text-books should be prepared. The boards of education
in the different cities should see to it that anti-Socialist instruction
be given to the children.
Editors who have a good understanding of the evil consequences of
Socialism have a fine field rapidly opening up to them. Since the
Marxian principles are spreading, there is a rapidly growing demand for
articles to refute and combat them; yet many on the editorial staffs
seem to have little definite knowledge concerning the teachings of the
revolutionists.
All patriotic citizens who understand Socialism and the tactics of the
"Knights of the Red Flag" should expose them, violently attacking them
in their conversations with others, so that it may no longer be said
that the revolutionaries are more zealous in trying to ruin our country
and overthrow out government than loyal Americans are to save them.
Attention should be paid to the men who are advocating Socialism in the
mills, factories, shops, stores, mines, etc. A thorough exposure of
their unsound doctrines will be prolific of much good. The ardor and
zeal of the anti-Socialist should go still further, and the illogical
revolutionary orators should be driven from their soap boxes, not by
violence nor by physical force--for this would only give them another
opportunity for complaining and enable them to win the support of
sympathizers--but by arguments with them so effective as to compel them
to step down and walk off in disgrace under the jeers of their
audiences. In arguing with the visionaries, proofs for the truth of
their statements should be demanded and the fact ought always to be
insisted upon that, even if they could show that the present system of
government and industry was corrupt and useless, it would in no way
follow from this that the Socialists' regime--however magnificently
pictured by an unbridled imagination--would provide a true remedy for
any of the evils and abuses of our day.
The letters that Socialists send to the daily papers for publication, to
further their cause, can, as a rule, easily be refuted. All that is
required, in most instances, after a brief introduction of the question
at issue, is to connect, by a few short sentences, several of the
damaging quotations that can be found, for example, in the present
volume.
Men who have talent for public speaking can make good use of their
eloquence in the warfare against our nation's foes by giving lectures
and delivering speeches. Good writers should devote their talents to the
preparation of books, pamphlets and leaflets against the revolutionists,
and should furnish suitable articles for the newspapers and magazines.
The follies of Socialism also afford an abundance of suggestions for
dramatists and cartoonists.
Socialist school teachers and principals, because of the revolutionary
doctrines that they gradually instill into the minds of the young,
should be eliminated from the school-room. Students of colleges and
universities, in which the Intercollegiate Socialist Society is
organized, could give a noble example of patriotism and loyalty to our
country by forming clubs to oppose the influence of the Socialist
chapters and offset the great harm they are doing.
Patriotic members of the American Federation of Labor should attend as
many of its meetings as possible in order to prevent the Marxians and
radicals from gaining the upper hand in the organization, endorsing the
Socialist Party, or adopting revolutionary principles of any kind.
As Socialist women are trying to destroy our Federal Government, the
women who are opposed to Socialism should give ample proofs of their
loyalty and devotion by taking an active part in the defense of their
country.
Anti-Socialist clubs should be formed throughout the country to study
Socialism and to devise means for combating the zealous propaganda
carried on by the thousands of Socialist locals and branches.
Influential members of the anti-Socialist clubs should see to it that
the public libraries were well stocked with anti-Socialist literature
and that Socialist publications are kept only for legitimate purposes of
reference.
Several very important works of defence remain to be undertaken by our
National Government, if the conspirators are to be prevented from
destroying it. Socialism has already struck deep roots into the soil of
America. Consequently, the Government of the United States, in leaving
to individuals the defence of the nation against the well organized
forces of the revolutionists, is running a risk almost as great as if it
were to entrust the suppression of an armed insurrection to individual
action. The Socialists availing themselves of every opportunity for
spreading their propaganda among foreigners, have already gained many
recruits from the immigrant class. With this serious condition of
affairs confronting it, the National Government should employ strenuous
measures to break the grip that Socialism already has on the nation, and
to prevent the immigrants who are landing on our shores from becoming a
menace.
A law should be passed by Congress forbidding the publication or
circulation of any paper, magazine or book which advocates the unlawful
destruction of our present form of government. The officers of the army
and navy should take precautions for preventing the spread of such
publications among soldiers and sailors.
So far we have spoken only of the negative measures that the United
States Government should adopt for its defence. It remains to add a few
words concerning a positive campaign against the conspirators. If the
Government neglects to stem the rising tide of Socialism it will not be
long before a disastrous insurrections[23] will be upon us. Millions of
dollars a day would then be spent in defraying the expenses of what
might turn out to be an unsuccessful campaign. Congress should now
appropriate the sums of money necessary to suppress the Marxian uprising
and entirely uproot Socialism out of the United States.
The American people as a body will never tolerate Socialism, once they
have been made to realize its full meaning and ruinous consequences.
This knowledge could be brought home to them most effectively by means
of anti-Socialist information issued periodically under the direction of
one of the departments of the Government and furnished to the press of
the country. Such material should also be distributed to all labor
organizations and every public library in the country, and to clubs,
societies, clergymen, legislators, judges, and men and women of
influence. If such a plan were adopted, the forces arrayed in the line
of battle against the Socialists would become tremendously strong and
the danger now seriously threatening our nation would presently
disappear. Surely the Government could afford to spend a few million
dollars a year against revolutionists who are already undermining its
very foundations and whose activities, if unopposed, will bring upon us
evils incomparably greater than those coming from a foreign foe.
Orators attacking Socialism could be recruited by the Government to
speak all over the country for five or ten minutes at a time, after the
fashion of the Four Minute Men.
Those who have read this book have seen that the principles of the
revolutionists are logically unsound and would deluge the land we love
with rivers of blood and plunge us into an abyss of discontent, strife,
crime and chaos. It has been shown that the Socialist Party is an
organization controlled by bosses and politicians with the avowed object
of gaining votes by the most unscrupulous methods. Notwithstanding their
pretentions to honesty and sincerity, evidence has been cited time and
again of the deceitfulness of their propaganda, and of their plottings
to overthrow our constitutional form of government, destroy religion and
ruin family life.
We, however, who sincerely love America, will never tear down the
Star-Spangled Banner and in its place fling to the breezes the
blood-stained flag of Karl Marx.
INDEX
A
Absolutism in Russia, 281-2, 286, 290.
Action, See Direct Action and Mass Action.
A. E. F. ridiculed by N. Y. "Call," 208-9.
Albany Trial, See N.Y. State Socialist Assemblymen.
Aliases of "Reds," 376.
Allaben, Frank, 258.
Alvarado, 96, 298-9.
American Federation of Labor, 381;
against Bolshevism and I. W. W.'ism, 283-4;
"Boring in," 346-9;
Opposed by Socialists, 126, 219.
American Flag, 118.
American Soldiers ridiculed, 207-9.
Amnesty, Agitations for, 347, 376.
Anarchy, Danger of, 279.
Andreiev's S. O. S., 168-9.
Anti-"Red" Campaign among foreign-born, 379.
Anti-Socialist authorities, 378;
Letters, 380;
Literature, 378-9;
Speeches, 380.
"Appeal to Reason," 343, 359.
Argentina, Socialism in, 11, 12.
Aristocracy in Bolshevist Russia, 280-1.
Assemblymen, Socialist, on trial,
See N. Y. State Socialist Assemblymen.
Atheism of Socialists, 293, 301-16;
in Austria, 295;
Belgium, 295-6;
Canada, 298;
England, 296-8;
France, 295;
Germany, 294;
Italy, 295;
Mexico, 298-9, 300;
United States, 292-3, 297.
Atheistic Catechism, 308-9;
Poems, 302-4;
Works on sale, 297, 305, 307.
Austria-Hungary, Socialism in, 5.
Aveling, 8.
B
Bavaria, Socialism in, 4, 178-9.
Basle Manifesto, 18.
Bax, Ernest Belfort, 297, 321-3.
Bebel, August, 2, 198, 200, 294, 324.
Bela Kun, 75, 178, 180, 190.
Belgium, Socialism in, 10.
Berger, Victor L., 13, 15, 51, 54, 56, 62, 67, 69, 70-1, 89, 201-2, 220-1, 232-3, 242-3, 290, 313, 322, 368;
"We must shoot," 201;
"rifles" and "bullets," 202.
Berne Conference, 9, 18-21, 25, 46, 61, 68.
Bernstein, 3.
Bible, attacked by Socialists, 297, 303.
Blasphemies of Socialists, 296-7, 303-5, 307-9.
Blatchford, 8, 296.
Bolsheviki, Russian, Advocacy of rebellion in other lands, 171-2;
Criticised by Catherine Breshkovsky, 139;
Disperse parliament, 4, 138;
Educational System, 151;
Freeing of criminals, 161;
Murder women, 158;
Opposed to liberty, 145;
Rise to power, 4, 138;
Shooting of children, 155-7;
Uprisings against, 161;
Victories, 5.
Bolshevism, Advocated by American Socialist Party, 59, 60-2, 68, 70, 72, 74-5, 77, 142, 168, 171-3, 184-5, 187-94, 198, 205, 234-6, 238, 248, 250, 255;
identical with Socialism, 291;
in America, 185;
in Russia, Against freedom of speech, of the press and of voting, 145, 155;
Against justice, 146, 154;
liberty, 145;
religion, 146-51;
An economic failure, 174-5;
Starvation under, 282-3, 286.
Bolshevist Constitution, 139-40;
propaganda, 256.
Bolshevist reign of terror, 141, 143, 145-8, 153, 154-63.
Bomb plot, 118-19.
Bonds, under Socialism, 273.
Books, anti-Socialist, 378.
"Boring in," 348-9.
Bossism in Socialist Party, 14, 15.
Bourgeoisie, 30.
Branting, Hjalmar, 11.
Breshkovsky, Catherine, 139, 170.
Bulgaria, Socialism in, 12.
Bureau, International Socialist, 17.
Business under Socialism, 83, 272-3.
C
Cadets of Russia, 4.
Calhoun, Arthur W., 356-7.
Call for Moscow International, 31-3.
Call for Proletarian International, 247.
Campaign against the Reds, 377-82.
Canada, Socialism in, 12.
Capital invited back by Socialist Russia, 288.
Capitalism, 76, 106, 174, 373.
Carillo, Felipe, 299.
Cartoons, Socialist, 360;
anti-Socialist, 380.
Children, anti-Socialist instruction for, 379;
Deprived of religious education under Socialism, 302;
shot in Bolshevist Russia, 155-7.
Chinese and the I. W. W., 120.
Christ ridiculed by Socialists, 303-5, 307-8.
Christian Socialists, 292, 310, 315, 322.
Christianity attacked by Socialists, 292-316.
Citizenship tags, 99.
Civil discord under Socialism, 269-79.
Class consciousness, 265.
Class hatred, 63, 107, 346, 348, 352, 363-4, 372-3.
Class struggle explained, 30, 107-8, 265.
Clubs, anti-Socialist, 381.
Committee against Socialism, Publicity, 257-8.
Compensation, I. W. W. plan, 111.
Commune, Paris, 200-1.
Communism, in Bavaria, 4, 178-9;
in Russia, See Bolshevism and Bolshevist reign of terror.
Communist, the name, 59.
Communist Labor Party of America, Chicago Convention, 55-8;
Conspiracy against U. S. Government, 214-19;
Origin, 52-3, 64;
Principles, 53-4, 58, 74, 218-19, 225;
Socialist Party's attitude toward, 74-5.
Communist Labor Party of Germany,
See Spartacans.
Communist Manifesto, 1, 46, 198, 321.
Communist Party of America,
Chicago Convention, 55-8;
Conspiracy against U. S. Government, 214-19;
Origin, 52-3;
Plan to organize Negroes, 217-18;
Principles, 53-4, 58, 74-5, 217-19, 224;
Socialist Party's attitude toward, 74-5, 225.
Communist Propaganda League, 25, 64.
Communists of Hungary, 180-91;
Favored by American Socialists, 180, 186, 188-93.
Conscription of labor in Socialist Russia, 281-5.
Conspiracy against our country, 212-67;
against the family, 317-29;
against the race, 330-41;
against religion, 292-316.
Constituent Assembly, Russia, 4.
Convention, Socialist Party, 75, 91-3.
Co-operative organizations, Russian and Siberian, 162-3.
Corruption, political, among Socialists, 97, 277-8.
Criminals freed in Bolshevist Russia, 161.
Czecho-Slovakia, Socialism in, 10-11.
D
Debs, Eugene V., 59, 81, 92, 105, 126-7, 194-7, 203-4, 210-11, 239-45, 264, 290, 315-16, 336.
De Leon, Daniel, 13, 105.
Demands of Socialist Platforms, Immediate, 368.
Determinism, Economic, 293.
Dictatorship of the Proletariat, 4, 47, 49-50, 53-4, 128, 145, 189, 220.
Direct action, 24, 31, 98, 124-5, 201, 370.
Discontent, Socialist apostles of, 343, 346-8.
Divorce in Bolshevist Russia, 164, 167, 329.
"Dope" of "Scientific Socialists," 96-102, 363-4.
"Down with the Stars and Stripes," 210.
"Drunk with man," a Socialist masterpiece, 87.
Dynamite, use advocated, 299-300.
E
Ebert, 3, 177, 179, 187-90.
Economic conditions in Bolshevist Russia, 174-5.
Economic determinism, 293.
Education in Bolshevist Russia, 151.
Eisner, Kurt, 4, 7, 178, 187.
Emergency Convention, Socialist Party, 242.
Employment schemes in Socialist state, 273.
Engels, Frederick, 1-2, 294, 325-6.
Ettor, Jos. J., 105-6.
Exploitation, 49-50, 83, 106, 110, 272, 365.
Expropriation, 49, 50, 53, 98-9, 108, 123, 143, 179-80, 189-90, 270-1.
Expulsion, Michigan organization, from Socialist Party, 42.
"Eye Opener, The," 192.
Eyre, Lincoln, interview with Lenine, 173-4;
with Trotzky, 174-6;
with Zinovieff, 253-5;
on Bolshevist Russia, 253-6, 279-84, 286-90.
F
Fabian Society, 8.
Failure of Socialism,
in Mexico, 101-2;
in Bolshevist Russia, 2, 279-90;
in Yucatan, 101-2.
Farming under Socialism, 32, 49, 83, 271-2.
Ferguson, I. E., 133-4.
Fighting the "Reds," 377-82.
Financial conditions in Socialist Russia, 287-8.
"Flag, to hell with the," 210.
Foreign language papers of Socialist Party, 343.
Foster, William Z., 348-9.
Fraina, Louis C., 26, 55, 214-15.
France, Socialism in, 5, 7-8.
Freedom of Speech, 114, 242, 354;
in Bolshevist Russia, 145.
Free love, advocated by Socialists, 317-29;
Hypocricy of Socialists regarding, 370;
in Socialist Russia, 164, 166, 329;
Socialist books on, 317, 321-26, 329.
G
Gale, Linn A. E., 339-340.
Germany, Socialism in, 2, 3.
Germer, Adolph, letter to "Appeal," 92-3.
Giovannitti, Arturo, 108-9, 111, 308.
Government ownership of public utilities, 368-9.
"Grandmother of the Russian Revolution,"
See Breshkovsky, Catherine.
Great Britain, Socialism in, 8-9.
Guesde, Jules, 6, 321.
H
Haase, Hugo, 3.
Hardie, J. Keir, 8.
Haywood, William D., 123-4, 127, 199, 241, 248.
Herron, George D., 302;
day dream of, 94, 95.
High Schools, Socialism taught in, 354.
Hillquit, Morris, 13, 17, 23, 34, 40-1, 50-1, 54, 62-3, 73-5, 79, 81, 85, 89, 184, 188, 220-1, 224-6, 232-4, 236-7, 239-40, 243-5, 248-53, 255, 259-60, 263-6, 274-5, 290, 311, 313-14, 328, 337, 361, 366.
Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 69, 202.
Holland, Socialism in, 10.
Hostages in Bolshevist Russia, 154, 159.
Hypocrisy of the I. W. W., 246.
Hypocrisy of Socialists, 204-5, 210, 219-21, 225, 233-6, 239-40, 246, 252-4, 266, 363-71, 375-6;
On religion, 292, 309-16, 326;
On free love, 317, 319-20, 322-4, 326.
Hyndman, Henry M., 8.
I
Iglesias, Pablo, 9.
Immediate demands of Socialist Party platforms, 24, 87, 91, 368.
Immorality under Socialism, 317-41.
Independent Labor Party of Great Britain, 8.
Ingersoll argument of Socialists, 293.
Inheritance, rights of, 110.
Industrial action, 77, 228-9, 234, 237-8.
Industrial Unionism, Endorsed by Communists and Communist Laborites of America, 54;
by Socialist Party, 238;
I. W. W., 107-8.
Insurance policies under Socialism, 273.
Inter-allied[24], Socialist and Labor Conference, 21-2.
Intercollegiate Socialist Society, 355-6, 380.
International, First, 16;
Second, 7, 16, 17-19, 32, 68;
Third, 6-7, 9, 11-12, 18, 20-1, 33, 45-50, 61, 67-9, 74-5, 216, 218, 228, 233-6, 239, 252-6.
International character of Socialism, 17.
International Congresses, 17.
International Socialist Bureau, 17.
International Workingmen's Association, 1, 2.
"Internationale Communist," organ of Moscow International, 255-6.
Irreligious poems of Socialists, 302-4.
Italian labor unions, 9.
Italy, Socialism in, 9.
I. W. W., Advocates rebellion, 109, 115-17;
Affiliated with Moscow Bolshevists, 247-8;
Atheistic and anti-religious, 118;
Bomb threat, 119;
Chinese to be organized, 120;
Encouraged by Socialist Party, 114-15;
Growth, 136;
Industrial unionism, 107-8;
In foreign lands, 136-7;
Method of organization, 106-7;
Negroes to be organized, 119;
Organized by Socialists, 105;
Paterson strike, 117-18;
Plans destruction of society, 109;
Preamble to platform, 107;
Principles, 105-13, 115, 125, 130-1;
Publications, 116-17;
Relations with Socialist Party, 105, 108, 114-15, 122-7, 129, 131-6;
Songs, 120-2;
Tactics, 109;
Terrorism, 118;
Views on Bolshevism, 128-33.
J
Jaurés, 6, 321.
K
Kautsky, Karl, 2, 233.
L
Labor certificates, 273.
Labor Conference, Inter-allied, 21.
Labor conscription in Socialist Russia, 281-5.
Labor Party of Illinois, 173.
Labor under Socialism, 273-7.
Land ownership under Bolshevism, 139;
under Socialism, 271-2, 365-8.
Lassalle, Ferdinand, 2.
Law and order in Socialist Russia, 282, 290.
Leaflet campaign of Socialists, 192, 344-5.
Leaflets, anti-Socialist, 378-9.
League of Resistance, 299, 300.
Leathan, 8.
Lectures, anti-Socialist, 380.
Left Wing, Conference, 52;
Criticises the Right, 25, 28-9, 36, 37;
Defined, 23;
Development, 24, 39, 45;
Directed by Russian Bolsheviki, 31-3;
Expulsions and suspensions, 42-5;
Merges into Communist and Communist Labor Parties, chapter 5;
Opposed by Socialist Party bosses, 36-7;
Origin, 24;
Principles, 24-31, 36;
Relations with I. W. W., 135-6;
Tactics at party meetings, 35, 37, 38.
Legion, Loyal, rediculed by Socialists, 208-9.
Lenine or Lenin, Nicolai, Autocrat of Russia, 5;
Letter to American workingmen, 142, 170, 174, 183-4, 216, 223-4.
Lesson 24, Socialist Primer, 352.
Liebknecht, Karl, 3, 7, 30, 177-8, 185-7, 191-3.
Liebknecht, Wilhelm, 2, 294.
Longuet, Jean, 6.
London, Jack, 199, 200, 268.
Looters, Socialist, 102.
Loriot, F., 6.
Love, See Free-love.
Lusk Committee evidence, 248-50, 264, 358, 361.
Luxemburg, Rosa, 3, 7, 30, 177-8, 187, 191-3.
M
MacDonald, J. Ramsay, 18-19.
Manifesto, See Communist Manifesto;
of Left Wing, 28;
of Moscow, See Moscow Manifesto;
of National Emergency Convention of Socialist Party, 72-8, 181, 228-9, 236-7, 239.
Marriage in Bolshevist Russia, 164.
Martens, Ludwig C. A. K., 172, 184-5, 194, 233-4, 248, 251.
Marx, Karl, 2, 198, 200, 372.
Mass Action, 11, 26-8, 32, 69, 92, 217, 227, 228-9, 231, 234, 237, 262.
Materialistic conception of history, 293, 315.
May Day riots, 196-7.
Mensheviki of Russia, 4.
Mexico, Socialism in, 12, 96.
Militarism in Bolshevist Russia, 176.
Millerand, 6.
Money situation in Bolshevist Russia, 287.
Money under Socialism, 272-3.
Morris, 8.
Moscow Conference, call to, 233.
Moscow International, See Third International.
Moscow Manifesto, 46-9, 67, 216-18, 228, 235, 237, 239-40.
Moscow propaganda methods, 253-4, 256.
Moving pictures, Socialist, 351.
N
National Emergency Convention, Socialist Party, 43, 55-7, 66-7, 69-72, 76-8;
Manifesto of, 72-8.
Nationalization of women, 163-8.
Nearing, Scott, 205, 361.
Negroes, organized by I. W. W., 119;
by Socialist Party, 361.
Newspapers in Bolshevist Russia, 145.
"New Unionism, The," 108.
New York State Socialist Assemblymen on trial at Albany, 34, 74-5, 221-7, 232, 234, 239, 242-6, 249-50, 252-3, 255, 257-65, 329, 340-1.
Norway, Socialism in, 11.
O
Oaths, Socialist, 260.
Old Age Pension, Berger's, 89.
One Big Union, See I. W. W.
"One Big Union Monthly," 105.
Origin of modern Socialism, 1.
Ownership, Government, 368-9.
P
Papers, Socialist, of the U. S., 14.
Parental authority undermined by Socialists, 353.
Paris Commune, 200-1.
Parochial schools under Socialism, 302.
Parties affiliated with the Third (Moscow) International, 33.
Paterson, N. J., strike of 1913, 117-18.
Petrograd under Bolshevist rule, 161.
Platform planks of Socialists utterly unreliable, 365-8.
Poems, anti-religious Socialist, 302-4.
Political action, 24, 26, 201.
Political corruption among Socialists, 97, 277-8.
Primer, Socialist, Lesson 24, 352.
Private business under Socialism, 83.
Private ownership of land in Socialist state, 271-2.
Private property, 32, 47, 53, 76, 80-3, 110, 365-8.
Private property under Bolshevist rule, 139.
Private schools under Socialism, 302.
Profit under Socialism, 82, 273.
Proletarian International, call for, 247.
Proletariat, 30.
Promises, golden, of Socialists, 342-4, 349, 371.
Propaganda, Socialist, 192, 342-61, 363-5, 368-76.
Prostitution under Socialism, 318-21.
Publications, of I. W. W., 116-17.
Publications of Socialist Party, 343-5.
Publicity Committee against Socialism, 257-8.
Q
Quelch, 8.
R
Race suicide, 326-7.
Raids, Government, on Communist and Communist Labor Parties, 215.
Raids on I. W. W., 116.
Rand School, 248-50, 357, 361.
Rebellion advocated by Socialists, 47-50, 63-4, 71-2, 75, 78, 109, 115-17, 123, 128, 131, 134, 170-2, 183-4, 186, 189, 197-9, 201-2, 204-5, 212-20, 222, 227-9, 234-5, 237, 240-1, 243, 247, 249, 251, 254, 255-6, 262, 265, 266, 269, 270, 351, 356.
"Reds" and "Yellows," 23, 24.
Reed, John, 55.
Refinery, sugar, 100, 102.
Religion, conspiracy against, 292-316.
Religion in Bolshevist Russia, 146-51, 168.
Remuneration for work under Socialism, 83, 273-7.
Rents under Socialism, 82, 273.
Resistance, League of, 299, 300.
Revolution without the "r," 23.
Right and Left Wings, 23.
Riots, Socialist, 194-5, 196-8.
"Rows and Rows of 'em march," 208-9.
"Russia going to pieces," 174.
Russia, Socialism in, 4;
See Bolsheviki, Bolshevism and Bolshevist.
Russian Industrial Unions appeal to workers in Allied countries, 247-8.
S
Sabotage, 111-13.
Scheidemann, 3, 177, 179, 187-8, 190.
Schools under Socialism, 302.
School teachers, Socialist, 380.
Seventy-seventh Division, A. E. F., 208.
Shaw, 8.
Soap box orators, 343, 363-5, 368-71, 380.
Social Democratic Federation of Great Britain, 8.
Social reforms hypocritically advocated by Socialists, 87-91, 368-9.
Socialism a peril, 268-84, 286-90, 347;
Explained, 76, 79-93, 198-9, 270-8, 349, 365-8, 372-3;
Fails in Yucatan, 101-2.
Socialist beggars, 92.
Socialist blasphemies, 296-7, 303-5, 307-9.
Socialist legislators, criticism of, 29.
Socialist oaths, 260.
Socialist papers of the U. S., 14.
Socialist school teachers, 380.
Socialists and the I. W. W., 105, 108, 114-15, 122-7, 129, 131-6.
Socialists, varieties of, See Varieties.
Soldiers and Sailors proselytized by Socialists, 359-60.
Soldiers of America ridiculed by Socialists, 207-9.
Songs, I. W. W., 120-2;
Socialist, 351.
Soviets of Russia, 18, 138, 142-3, 157-8;
Origin, 4;
Uprisings against, 143-5.
"Soviet Russia," magazine, 172.
Spain, Socialism in, 9, 10.
Spargo, John, 123, 303.
Spartacans, 3, 30, 53, 177-8, 190;
Favored by American Socialists, 177, 187-93.
Spartacides, See Spartacans.
Speculators in Socialist Russia, 282, 286.
"Stars and Stripes," down with, 210.
Starvation in Socialist Russia, 282-3, 286.
St. Louis platform of Socialists, 75, 91-2, 125.
Stokes, Rose Pastor, 55.
Strikes, Bring death in Socialist Russia, 290;
in Belgium, 10;
Paris, 7;
Prelude to armed rebellion, 26-8, 32, 109-10, 241, 346-8;
in Rome, 9;
Sympathetic, 108, 109, 346;
Under a Socialist form of government, 276;
Winnipeg, 125, 229-30, 245-6.
Struggle, See Class struggle.
"Struggling Russia," magazine, 142.
Students' warfare against Socialism, 380.
Sugar refinery in Yucatan, 100, 102.
Suicide, See Race suicide.
Sunday schools, Socialist, 350-3.
Sweden, Socialism in, 11.
T
Tactics of the Left Wing, 35.
Teachers of public schools, Communists, 355.
Teachers' Union of New York City, 354-5.
Terrorism of I. W. W., 118.
Theatrical plays, Socialist, 351, 360.
Thomas, Albert, 6.
Trial at Albany of Socialist Assemblymen, See New York State Socialist Assemblymen.
U
Underground, "Reds" working, 375-6.
"Uniform, spit on it," 208.
Union among Socialists of all nations, 17.
Unionism, Industrial, See Industrial Unionism.
United States, Socialism in, 13.
V
Vandervelde, Emil, 10, 270, 296.
Varieties of Socialists, 79.
Voting in Bolshevist Russia, 140, 145.
W
Wage courts under Socialism, 276-7.
Wage system, abolition of, 107, 108.
Wages under Socialism, 273-7.
Walling's criticism of Socialist Party, 251.
War, Socialist opposition to, 91-3.
Wings, Right and Left, 23.
Winnipeg general strike, 230-1.
Work, assignment to, under Socialism, 273-7.
Works, anti-Socialist, 378.
Workingmen, beware of the Reds, 375-6, 378-9, 382.
Women must work under Socialism, 84-5, 277.
Wreckage resulting from Socialism, 101-2.
Wynkoop, David, 10.
Y
"Yellow" Socialists, 63.
"Yellows" and "Reds," 23-4, 58, 66.
Young People's Socialist clubs, 350-1.
Young, Teaching Socialism to, 350-5.
Yucatan, Atheism of Socialists in, 298-9.
Yucatan, Socialism in, 96.
Z
Zapata, Emiliano, 98, 101-2.
Zeuch, letter to by Socialist professor, 356-7.
Zimmerwald resolutions, 6.
Zinovieff, 252-5.
APPENDIX
THE NATIONAL CONVENTION OF THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES, MAY
8-14, 1920
After "The Red Conspiracy" went to press, this Convention was held at
Finnish Hall, New York City. Of its 156 delegates, sixty were of foreign
birth. By some newspapers the Convention was incorrectly styled "mild"
and "conservative," so well were the avowed revolutionary designs of the
Socialists camouflaged behind seemingly harmless innocuous phrases for
the deception of the uninformed. "Vote-catching" was the key-note of the
proceedings. As this book shows, the Socialist Party in 1919 lost the
vast majority of its members to the Communists and the Communist
Laborites and had, therefore, to seek new members. These, however, could
be won only by concealing for the time being the true revolutionary
objects of the Socialist Party. This covering-up of its conspiracy
against the United States, and the resultant gathering into the
conspirators' net of the timid halfway Socialists as yet members of
other political Parties, could be accomplished only by the lure of a
Convention Platform so worded as to convince the unwary that the
Socialists as a Party had discarded their ultra radicalism and blatant
un-Americanism.
The Convention of May, 1920, therefore, was guided, under the adroit
management of Morris Hillquit and Victor L. Berger, toward a Platform
worded more mildly and conservatively than might have been expected. No
thinking person, however, Socialist or decent American, will be deceived
into believing that the beast of prey has changed its ugly spots because
a gauzy veil of lies has been thrown over them.
"The Red Conspiracy" has proven that the Socialists in the United States
have been, almost to a man, in thorough accord with the principles and
workings of the blackest Bolshevism. They have consistently and
completely supported the I. W. W. They are avowed foes of the American
Federation of Labor, though willing enough to use this organization by
sending traitors to join it and to bore their rat-holes of corruption
from within its respectable membership. One of the delegates to the
Socialist Convention of May, 1920, George Bauer, of New Jersey, said:
"We must remember that there are four or five million men in the A. F.
of L., and I don't believe we can establish a co-operative commonwealth
without them." The Convention, following this argument of expediency,
adopted a resolution stating that the Socialist Party did not intend to
interfere with the internal affairs of labor unions; but added a
statement that the Party favored the organization of workers along the
line of industrial unionism, acting as one organized working-class body.
The I. W. W. is, of course, the leading industrial union in America, and
the Convention's resolution set another seal to the sympathetic bond
between Socialism and I. W. W.'ism, with the added encouragement of the
Socialist Party's support of the less powerful industrial unions now
within the American Federation of Labor.
The Camouflagists at the Convention politely declared that the Socialist
Party did not seek to interfere with the institution of the family. But
Hilkovitz whitewash is not white enough to obscure the lurid red of the
free-love and race-suicide propaganda carried on in the Socialist press,
Hillquit's favorite sheet, "The New York Call," being one of the chief
offenders. A visit to the Rand School in New York City and examination
of the books for sale on its book-store shelves and the periodicals and
pamphlets there for sale will present appalling and convincing evidence
of the Socialist efforts to destroy elementary decency as well as the
institutions of marriage and the family.
Another declaration of the Camouflagists at the Socialist Convention of
May, 1920, stated that the Socialist Party "recognizes the right of
voluntary communities of citizens to maintain religious institutions and
to worship freely according to the dictates of their conscience." As
August Claessens warned the Convention: "Cry out against that which men
cherish as holy, and you rouse an antagonism which no argument can
defeat." This counsel of discretion is interesting side by side with
another Convention statement, made by William Karlin of New York: "If
the churches do stand for the old order, it will be a bad day for them
when the new order comes, because the churches will go down with the old
order." Mr. Karlin, however, accepting discretion as valor's better
part, admitted that "There are many people to whom we can appeal if we
don't arouse their religious prejudice;" while Delegate McIntyre, of the
District of Columbia, prudently advised the members of the Convention to
"get the voters first and talk religion out of them afterward." Again,
a visit to the book-shop of the Rand School is suggested if proof is
desired of the Socialist propaganda of atheism, sacrilege, and,
specifically, hatred of Christianity. The reader of "The Red Conspiracy"
will have noted enough of the Socialists' blasphemies to prevent the
Convention Camouflagists' hedging on this subject from having any effect
but added disgust at hypocrisy.
The Convention declared in favor of political action for the attainment
of the Socialists' ends. Exactly! Chapter XVI of this book, "The
Conspiracy Against Our Country," has shown for what purposes political
action and political power are to be used. Get traitors in office and
when the Revolution comes the forces to coerce the American people and
destroy the American Government will be in the traitors' control.
Camouflagists[25] and their opponents of the Convention united in the
nomination of Eugene V. Debs, convicted criminal, for President of the
United States. Let us hear the words of this man whom Morris Hillquit
stated resembles "the Nazarene," and who styles himself "a flaming
revolutionist." A press report, from Atlanta, Georgia, dated May 14,
1920, quotes him as saying:
"Personally I am a radical. I have always been one. My only fear
has always been that I might not be radical enough. In my own party
I always led the minority, but I hope to lead a united Socialist
Party to the polls this Fall. They are fighting within my own party
today. It is a good healthy sign. The radicals keep the
conservatives from giving away too much to popularize the movement.
That is what killed the Populist Party. The leaders sought to
popularize its political propaganda by pandering to more
conservative elements. They lost the radical support of their
party, which became the Socialist Party, and naturally the
conservatives had no further use for them. To begin to placate your
enemies is to invite decay."
The radical minority in the Socialist Party formerly comprised the Left
Wing members who later on became Communists and Communist Laborites. J.
Louis Engdahl of Chicago at present leads a new Left Wing radical
minority within the Party.
The American public may at times be gullible, but hardly sufficiently so
as to believe in the sincerity of Hillquit and Victor L. Berger, who
filled the air at the Convention with phrases of moderation and disclaim
of treason and revolution, following their gentle verbiage by nominating
Debs who scores those who "sought to popularize" "political propaganda
by pandering to more conservative elements." "Panderer" is not a pretty
thing to be called, but the pleasant Messrs. Hilkovitz and Berger
swallow it. That their conservative phraseology would fool no one was
recognized at the Convention by Irwin St. John Tucker, who said: "You
can disguise yourself by sprouting pink whiskers." Mr. Tucker, however,
would not join the Camouflagists, remarking: "It may be that the
American people are not yet ready to accept Socialist principles, but I
would rather lose an election than lose those principles."
Hillquit himself said in the Convention, on May 13, 1920, that the
nomination of Debs "proves that we have not receded from our position of
revolutionary Socialism and that we will be more effective and still
more revolutionary than ever before."
J. Louis Engdahl may be an enemy to the United States and to society in
general, but he is man enough to say boldly what he really thinks. At
the Convention he declared: "I say that it is time to inaugurate the
revolution immediately. The time to prepare for victory is now.... We
can't fool anybody here by decorating the walls with the flag of Wall
St."
Delegate Oneal, one of Hillquit's own faction of political actionists,
volunteered to furnish a reason why camouflage was a useful policy for
the Socialists to adopt until "The Day" arrived,--the black day when the
United States of America should be gasping in the throes of death-agony,
like wretched Russia. Oneal sapiently remarked at the Convention: "The
time and conditions which favored the Russian revolution must be studied
before we attempt to adopt them here."
But the Camouflagists of the Convention did not sever and did not wish
to sever the close bond of union between the Socialist Party of the
United States and the Third or Moscow International, the Convention, in
its majority report, stating that "The Moscow organization is virile and
aggressive, inspired as it is by the militant idealism of the Russian
revolution," the majority report further stating that the Socialist
Party of the United States, "retaining its adherence to the Third
International," "instructs its executive committee, its international
secretary and international delegates to be elected" "To participate in
movements looking to the union of all true Socialist forces in the world
into one International and to initiate and further such movements
whenever the opportunity is presented." The said majority report
follows, as reported in "The New York Call," May 15, 1920:
"The international organization of Socialism has been disrupted as
a result of the world war.
"The old Second International is represented principally by the
majority party of Germany, the Socialist parties of the countries
carved out from the former Austro-Hungarian empire, and of most of
the countries of Europe that remained neutral during the war.
"The parties affiliated with this organization have largely
abandoned the revolutionary character and the militant methods of
working class Socialism. As a rule, they co-operate with the middle
class reform parties of their countries.
"The Third or Moscow International was organized by the Communist
party of Russia with the co-operation of several other Communist
organizations recruited in the main from the countries split off
from the former Russian empire and some Scandinavian and Balkan
countries. The Third International also includes the Labor party of
Norway and the Communist Labor party of Poland. Of the other
important countries, the Socialist parties of Switzerland, Italy
and the United States, and the British Socialist party have
expressed their intention to affiliate with it.
"The Moscow organization is virile and aggressive, inspired as it
is by the militant idealism of the Russian revolution. It is,
however, at this time only a nucleus of a Socialist International,
and its progress is largely impeded by the attitude of its present
governing committee, which seems inclined to impose upon all
affiliated bodies the formula of the Russian revolution 'The
dictatorship of the proletariat in the form of Soviet power.'
"The Independent Socialist party of Germany, the Socialist party of
France and the Independent Labor party of Great Britain are
unaffiliated. They have initiated a movement to unite all truly
Socialist parties of the world, including those represented in the
Moscow organization, into one International.
"At no time was an active and effective organization of a Socialist
International more vitally necessary for the success of Socialism
than at this crucial period of the world's history. Socialism is in
complete control in the great country of Russia. It is represented
in the bourgeois governments of several important countries of
Europe. The Socialists constitute the leading opposition parties in
most of the remaining modern countries. It should be the task of
the Socialist International to aid our Comrades in Russia to
maintain and fortify their political control and to improve and
stabilize the economic and social conditions of their country by
forcing the great powers of Europe and America to abandon the
dastardly policy of intrigue, war and starvation blockade against
Soviet Russia. It should be its task to help the Socialists in
countries of divided political control to institute full and true
Socialist governments, and to support the struggles of the
Socialists in the capitalist-controlled countries, so that they may
more speedily secure victory for the workers in their countries.
"But above all a true Socialist International would at this time
fulfill the all-important function of serving as the framework of
the coming world parliament.
"To accomplish these great tasks the International of Socialism
must be truly international.
"It cannot be truly Socialist if it is not based upon the program
of complete socialization of the industries, and upon the
principles of class struggle and uncompromising working class
politics. It cannot be truly international unless it accords to its
affiliated bodies full freedom in matters of policy and forms of
struggle on the basis of such program and principles, so that the
Socialists of each country may work out their problems in the light
of their own peculiar economic, political and social conditions as
well as the historic traditions.
"In view of the above considerations the Socialist party of the
United States, while retaining its adherence to the Third
International, instructs its executive committee, its international
secretary and international delegates to be elected
"(a) To insist that no formula such as 'the dictatorship of the
proletariat in the form of soviets' or any other formula for the
attainment of the Socialist commonwealth be imposed or exacted as
condition of affiliation with the Third International.
"(b) To participate in movements looking to the union of all true
Socialist forces in the world into one International, and to
initiate and further such movements whenever the opportunity is
presented."
The brotherly sympathy between the Socialist Party of the United States
and the Red Vandals of Soviet Russia is exhibited by the following, also
from "The New York Call," May 15, 1920, reporting the proceedings of the
Socialist Convention in Finnish Hall:
"A mission of three members was provided for to carry fraternal
greetings to Soviet Russia and to investigate and report on
conditions in the first working class republic, and the
international delegates were further instructed to get into
communication with Socialist organizations in North and South
America for the purpose of creating Socialist Pan-American
congresses."
The majority reporters, or discreet Camouflagists, despite the prudent
efforts of careful Mr. Hillquit to separate the Socialist Party of the
United States from the Communists and other out-in-the-open enemies of
our Country, evidently believed it wise to throw out a beckoning hand to
all radicals in general, especially to the Red Left Wing Socialists who
left the Party to become Communists and Communist Laborites in the fall
of 1919. At the Convention of May, 1920, the following resolution was
adopted:
"Resolved, that we, the national convention of the Socialist party,
in order to carry into effect this desire for unity, make the
following proposals:
"That any individual, branch, local or state or language federation
that left the party last fall because of tactical differences and
now desires to re-enter on the basis of the Socialist party
platform and constitution, be welcomed to return.
"That where Socialist party locals and other groups of the labor
movement exist side by side in the same locality, we propose the
creation of joint campaign committees for the management of a
working class electoral campaign upon the basis of our platform.
"That after the campaign is over, whenever the situation promises
practical results, steps be taken to confer with representatives of
other factions of the movement with a view to establishing possible
basis for organization unity.
"That a national advisory council of all working class
organizations for the purpose of combatting the reactionary forces
be formed so that wherever possible there be voluntary united
action by all political and economic organizations who take their
stand on the basis of the class struggle."
There was a family fuss over a proposed clause, finally stricken out,
that "due stamps or other evidence of membership in the groups formed by
the split in the party shall be recognized as evidence of good standing"
in the Socialist Party. In this connection, William Kruse of Illinois,
who is far from a Camouflagist, said: "Debs believes that the Communist
and Communist Labor members are as good Socialists as any." The
authorities of our Nation have condemned membership in the Communist
organization as illegal and have proven Debs a criminal. The Socialists
welcome the Communists and Communist Laborites, "whenever the situation
promises practical results" (when the time for "shooting," for "bullets"
rather than "ballots," has arrived?), and the Socialists, Camouflagists
as enthusiastically as their opponents, acclaim Debs the criminal, Debs
the convicted enemy of the United States of America, and nominate this
criminal enemy for President of the United States of America!
The entire record of the May, 1920, Socialist Convention is a series of
insincere, futile, clever attempts to whitewash the blood-red of the
known and proved Socialist principles and aims, these attempts in turn
combated by the more honest delegates, and the net result being the
re-affirmation in tangible and important matters of these same menacing
principles and aims, though set forth in wilier and more guarded
language than has been heretofore the case.
The Red Conspiracy has been proven, and every new move of the Socialists
but confirms, in the minds of sane and loyal Americans, the extent and
peril of the conspiracy, and intensifies our will to combat this evil
thing in our midst until righteous combat has fought to glorious
victory. Down with the Red Flag of Socialism, Communism, Bolshevism, I.
W. W.'ism, and Anarchy! Victory and glory to the Stars and Stripes of
our beloved Country!
FOOTNOTES
[A] "The Bolsheviks--formerly a faction within the Social-Democratic
Labor Party--have recently changed their name to Communist party to
distinguish themselves from the other Social-Democratic groups.
"The term Bolsheviks and Mensheviks date back to 1903, when at a
congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party a difference arose
on a seemingly unimportant question (editorial supervision of the party
organ), when upon a vote which decided the question there naturally was
a majority and minority. Those who were with the majority were nicknamed
Bolsheviks and those with the minority Mensheviks, deriving their names
from the Russian words Bolshinstvo and Menshinstvo, meaning majority and
minority respectively." _"The Soviets at Work," by Nicolai Lenin,
published, with foreword and footnotes by Alexander Trachtenberg, by the
Rand School of Social Science._
[B] It is a notable fact that throughout his three days' testimony on
the witness stand at Albany, February 17, 18 and 19, 1920, in the case
of the five suspended Socialist Assemblymen before the Judiciary
Committee of the New York Assembly, Morris Hillquit, illustrious leader
of the Red Rebels' Whitewash Squad, tried to save the five suspended
Socialist Assemblymen and the damaged reputation of their organization,
the Socialist Party of the United States, by tremendous applications of
Debs' old recipe of quicklime and water, the special formula of which is
to spell revolution and rifles without the "r," pistols without the "p"
and bombs without the "b."
[C] Engdahl was indicted at Chicago, February 2, 1918, as Editor of the
Socialist Party's official publications, brought to trial before Judge
Landis, December 9, 1918, and convicted on January 8, 1919. The four
indicted, convicted and sentenced with him, each for twenty years, were
Victor L. Berger, member of the Socialist Party's National Executive
Committee; Adolph Germer, the Party's National Executive Secretary;
William F. Kruse, Secretary of the Young People's Socialist League, and
Irwin St. John Tucker, former head of the Party's Literature Department.
[D] This reference to Left, Right and Center bears every earmark of
familiarity with the use of these terms in the call to the Moscow
Conference.
[E] Thus Hillquit seems to have had his eye on the "call" to the Moscow
Conference, although he swore on the stand at Albany, in February, 1920,
that he had not read the Moscow manifesto when he wrote 90 per cent. or
more of his Party's Chicago manifesto of September, 1919.
[F] The reference is to Alexander Stoklitzky.
[G] Article 3, Section 3 (a), of the "National Convention and Platform
of the Socialist Party, 1917," as officially published, reads: "The call
for the regular election of members of the National Executive Committee
shall be issued on the first day of January, 1918, and on January first
of each odd numbered year thereafter. _Members elected in 1918 shall
retire July first, 1919._" But why should their own Constitution bother
plotters who wish to dynamite that of the United States?
[H] Gitlow was tried, convicted and sentenced in New York City early in
1920, for inciting to anarchy.
[I] The report brought back by this delegate, James Oneal, was the basis
of the straddle resolution then adopted by a majority of the Executive
Committee, the text of which we have given near the close of Chapter II.
[J] As we have seen, the testimony of Morris Hillquit, February 19,
1920, at the trial of the five Assemblymen at Albany, was, "At least
ninety per cent. of the manifesto is my authorship."
[K] See Chapter V of this book for an account of Referendum D, carried
by a large majority in the spring or summer of 1919, by which the rank
and file of the Socialist Party opposed its entrance into any
international Socialist alignment except that of the Third (Moscow)
International.
[L] In its article on "The Russian Soviet Government Bureau in the
United States" Trachtenberg's Labor Year Book, 1919-1920, pages 384-5,
says: "The Legal Department, under the supervision of Morris Hillquit,
advises the Bureau so that its actions may at all times conform to the
laws of the United States.... The raid upon the Soviet Bureau by local
authorities engaged the attention of the Legal Department."
Again, the "Albany Argus" of February 19, 1920, describing Hillquit's
testimony in the Socialist case on the preceding day, February 18, says:
"It was brought out in cross-examination that Mr. Hillquit had acted as
counsel for the Russian Soviet Bureau in this country.... The witness
testified that he had advised Ludwig C. A. K. Martens to file his
credentials with the Secretary of State; had aided him in the
preparation of his statement and advised him generally in the
organization of his office and in every effort undertaken by him for the
establishment of trade connection with the United States."
[M] Those willing to co-operate with the Committee should communicate
with its Chairman, Mr. Frank Allaben, President of The National
Historical Society, publishers of this book, 37 West 39th street, New
York City.
TRANSCRIBER NOTES
[1] Changed "Bolshevissm" to "Bolshevism".
[2] Changed "Bolhevist" to "Bolshevist".
[3] Changed "Forence" to "Florence".
[4] Changed "circulaton" to "circulation".
[5] Changed "constitutent" to "constituent".
[6] Changed "form" to "from".
[7] Changed "Ukrainains" to "Ukrainians".
[8] Changed "renumeration" to "remuneration".
[9] Changed "Procedings" to "Proceedings".
[10] Changed "chidren" to "children".
[11] Changed "futhermore" to "furthermore".
[12] Changed "inauguarate" to "inaugurate".
[13] Changed "Knickerobcker" to "Knickerbocker".
[14] Changed "prevalance" to "prevalence".
[15] Changed "Englisn" to "English".
[16] Changed "neutriality" to "neutrality".
[17] Changed "Interpretaion" to "Interpretation".
[18] Changed "superstitution" to "superstition".
[19] Changed "Pary" to "Party".
[20] Changed "nowithstanding" to "notwithstanding".
[21] Changed "camparatively" to "comparatively".
[22] Changed "dailes" to "dailies".
[23] Changed "insurrections" to "insurrection".
[24] Changed "alied" to "allied".
[25] Changed "Canouflagists" to "Camouflagists".
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Red Conspiracy" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.