"Workers Rally to Support of Victims of Michigan Raids." [Oct. 14, 1922]. This unsigned news report from the pages of The Worker demostrates the way the Law of Unintended Consequences came into play with regard to the August 1922 raid on the Bridgman Convention of the Communist Party of America. Going into the Bridgman convention the American Communist movement was shattered into three warring factions, membership had plummeted below the 5,000 mark, party finances teetered on the verge of bankruptcy, and the organization was cut of from contact and influence with the mainstream labor movement and the liberal intelligentsia. Far from delivering the knock-out punch which federal authorities intended, the Bridgman raid gave birth to a new and effective mass organization (the Labor Defense Council), garnered sympathy among many in the labor movement, and raised the Communist movement's profile in American society by a factor of three. To capitalize on the prevailing public mood Bridgman defendants William Z. Foster and C.E. Ruthenberg were sent on the road on behalf of the Labor Defense Council to raise consciousness and funds. This article details a series of well-attended meetings in Toledo, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Youngstown at which the Party's program of union amalgamation was advanced, new local chapters of the LDC were organized, and nearly $1,000 collected for the Bridgman legal defense.

 

"Objective Conditions and Shop Nuclei," by Harry Gannes [April 5, 1924]. The year 1924 saw a strong campaign for a restructuring of the structural model of the American Communist movement from one based on primary units established on a territorial basis and subdivided among branches speaking one common language to a model based on primary units in each workplace, without regard to language. These "shop nuclei" were adopted from form of organization used by the Bolshevik Party in pre-revolutionary Russia and were believed to be of fundamental importance in enabling the vanguard party to "reach" the masses of non-party workers with its message. Harry Gannes calls the current party model an "antiquated organizational structurethat has prevented it from reaching the very section of the working class that must be relied upon as the motive force of revolution." Capitaliism inevitably leads to large, concentrated production units, he argues, many of which are non-unionized, necessitating the formation of party nuclei as the main vehicle for reaching these workers. Gannes cites census statistics in an effort to prove that objective conditions in America are ripe for adoption of the shop nuclei model, that its industry is highly concentrated. He argues that language organization would retain its importance under the new system due to the natural accumulation of certain nationalities in specific trades.

 

"Internal Party Problems: Statement of the Central Executive Committee of Workers Party of America." [April 19, 1924]. A rather testy open letter from the CEC of the WPA to the party membership criticizing the "organized opposition" to the CEC which had purportedly manifested itself at recent membership meetings held in Philadelphia and New York. These meetings had been addressed by Executive Secretary C.E. Ruthenberg reporting on the CEC's policies and activities and attempting to rally the rank and file behind the forthcoming June 17 Convention of the Farmer-Labor Party. His appearance had been greeted by "resolutions of the same contents and practically the same wording were introduced at both of these meetings" instructing the CEC to "combat and stamp out the opportunistic tendencies manifesting themselves" in the party and to "take action against Comrade Lore for his alleged attack upon the Comintern." These resolutions (reflective of the perspective of the Pepper-Ruthenberg minority faction) were "of a sort which could have no other purpose than to sow doubt and suspicion in the party ranks against the CEC and thus, by indirection, to undermine its authority, crystallize opposition to its leadership, and generally demoralize the party organization," this CEC statement charged. Final action had already been taken on the subjects of these resolutions and "the CEC feels in duty bound to insist that once a matter has been settled by the proper party authorities, and a call for action issued, the party ranks must close, and every party members must render the CEC the utmost support and cooperation." Members were called upon to put aside their factional differences and work together for the success of the June 17 FLP Convention.

 

"The Bolshevization of the Party," by James P. Cannon [Oct. 5, 1924]. Speech by Jim Cannon to the Workers Party School in New York City headed by Juliet Poyntz, dealing with "Bolshevization" as the process of building theoretical homogeneity through party education as opposed to use of the phrase in terms of structural reorganization upon the shop nucleus basis. During the course of this speech Cannon makes frequent use of the newly coined term "Leninism," and he cites the Comintern definition of this as "Marxism in the period of imperialism and the epoch of the proletarian revolution." Cannon notes the 5th Congress of the Comintern [June-July 1924] had found every Communist Party save the Russian to be deficient in terms of lacking "the Bolshevik discipline, the iron hardness, the capacity for decisive action, the mobile form of organization, and the strong theoretical foundation which a party of Leninism must have" and had consequently launched the slogan "The Bolshevization of the Party!" The Workers School was an important component in this process for the American party, Cannon asserted, as it provided the WPA with "a fighting instrument against all deviations both to the right and to the left, and for the overrcoming of the confusion of the party members" and for hammering Marxism and Leninism into the consciousness of the party in accord with the thesis of the 5th Congress of the CI.

 

"Soviets Doom Plotters." [August 29, 1936]. Short unsigned news report from the front page of The Workers Age, weekly official organ of the Communist Party USA (Opposition), the political party headed by Jay Lovestone. The report uncritically notes "the chief defendants presented all the necessary evidence for conviction in their own testimony, wherein they vied in accusations of one another, and atempted to paint themselves as more involved, more guilty than their fellow-accused." The report notes that "the trial also brought out the connection of the terrorists with the Nazi Gestapo, who, according to the testimony, furnished false passports for the Trotskyists to enter Russia."

 

"The Russian Events." [unsigned editorial from Workers Age, Sept. 5, 1936]. A semi-official statement of the Communist Party USA (Opposition), published as an editorial in its offical organ. The recently completed trial and execution of Zinoviev, Kamenev, Smirnov, et al. is criticized not from the standpoint of its lack of veracity, but rather as politically inexpedient: "The investigation made by the Soviet Government immediately after the Kirov assassination revealed the hand of a foreign, a bourgeois government in all the plotting against the USSR. The further revelations made on the occasion of the last trial, which was an open public trail at which the defendants had every opportunity to express themselves as fully and as freely as they wanted, showed still more clearly and established beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Nazi government had aided and abetted some of the Trotskyist terrorist conspirators. To some people this sounds fantastic, but if one considers the present character of the Trotsky program in regard to the Soviet Union, there is nothing fantastic about it but only quite a natural and logical outcome of the entire evolution of Trotskyism." However, "while condemning sharply the terroristic activities and complete degeneration of the Trotskyites, we must state that we very seriously doubt the wisdom and tact of the Soviet authorities in inflicting the merited punishment of death on such personages as Zinoviev, Kamenev, Smirnov, etc. Other and sufficiently adequate punishment could have been meted out without resorting to executions, and thus granting some recognition to the inestimable services once rendered by these erstwhile powerful figures in the ranks of the Bolsheviks."

"The Moscow Trials: An Editorial Statement." [Feb. 20, 1937]. This unsigned editorial in Workers Age, official organ of the Communist Party (Opposition) -- the "Lovestoneites" -- attempts to make sense of the second of the three great Moscow Show Trials, the January 1937 trial of Piatakov, Radek, Sokolnikov et al. The argument advanced at the time of the first great Show Trial that the precise veracity of many of the specific charges was less important than the core allegation is repeated: "Discrepancies, contradictions, even sheer impossibilities in the charges and allegations of the two trials are not hard to find, but the impression seems to us inescapable - and it is shared by many observers not particularly friendly to Stalin - that, even after such material is discarded, there still remains a substantial bedrock of fact: that efforts at assassination and sabotage were indeed made by some of the followers and former followers of Trotsky and Zinoviev." Doubt has begun to creep in, however, and certain "grave questions" have begun to emerge: "Does not the very regime of hero cult, personal exaltation of the leader, qualification for office by syncophancy, elimination of collective leadership, abandonment of democratic discussion -- do not all these constitute a serious danger of more vital concern to every communist and real friend of the Soviet Union than even the deeds or the fate of the defendants on trial?" Further the running up of "revolutionary architects" on "the most atrocious crimes against the revolution" has dealt "a shattering blow to the moral foundations of Bolshevism" and raised the prospects of a dangerous period of bloodletting. "Only a complete overhauling of the whole system of political leadership and inner-party life in the communist movement, such as has long been advocated by the International Communist Opposition, holds out hope for the future," the editorial opines.

 

"The Moscow Trials and the CI Crisis," by M. Yomanowitz [May 8, 1937]. This article was printed in the official organ of the Communist Party (Opposition) as part of the pre-convention discussion in the run up to the 6th National Convention held in New York at the end of May. The author, identified only by his initials, is critical of previous analysis of the 1937 Moscow events in the party press: "The strategy of the Stalin regime as demonstrated at the trials and subsequent lynching and terror campaign is to pin the charge of Trotskyism to all forces not in agreement with its present policies. It is now abundantly clear to everybody that the suppression and physical extermination of the opposition forces is not limited to Trotskyites, for no one will honestly believe that Bukharin is a Trotskyite." Yomanowitz continues: "Our efforts and hopes of reforming the Communist International did not bring the desired results. Instead of reforming the CI, the more reformist it became. It is high time that we draw the necessary conclusion and speak frankly and act boldly. In the past we were correct in stating that the chief source of the mistakes of the Stalin regime lay in the transfer of tactics applicable inside the Soviet Union to the other sections of the Communist International. This analysis is no longer sufficient." Yomanowitz gives at least some credence to the charge that "the Stalin faction is fashioning the policies and tactics of the various sections of the CI to the needs of Soviet foreign policy... This position contains a lot of truth. This position does not invalidate our original view, but it rather supplements it." Clinging to the idea of reforming the Comintern is senseless, Yomanowitz argues, noting that "we must be ready to discard our previous position that a new center without the CPSU in it is both impermissible and impossible."

"The Meaning of the Soviet 'Purges,'" by Jay Lovestone [June 18, 1937]. A lengthy reassessment of the burgeoning purges in Soviet Russia by the head of the Independent Communist Labor League. "It is with the deepest regret that I must admit that there is an acute crisis in the regime, in the inner life of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union," Lovestone states. "If we cast a retrospective glance at Russian party developments, we will find that it was entirely natural and understandable -- especially under the circumstances of the stifling inner party regime headed by Stalin -- that the logic of the political positions of Trotsky or of Zinoviev, Radek, and Kamenev, should lead them to an out-and-out anti-Soviet course. However, it is obviously absurd to ask us to believe that suddenly, mysteriously, Yagoda, Tukhachevsky, Gamarnik, and Rudzutak became degenerates, became mortal foes of the Soviet Union, became agents of German and Japanese imperialism." Lovestone is chagrined at the situation: "I am face to face with a Hobson's choice. I pick only the lesser of two very serious evils. That Stalin is an expert of trumping up charges against opponents or potential opponents is not new to us. Nevertheless, here I must stress we deal with a more flagrant type of frame-up than has ever been perpetrated in factional struggle. To me the recent demotions, arrests, accusations, suicides, and executions mark the low point of the Stalin hero-cult."

 

New html File

History of the Lovestone Organization (1929-1940). The history of the various incarnations of the Lovestone organization (1929-1940) has been greatly improved. There were four names for the organization: Communist Party (Majority Group), Communist Party USA (Opposition), Independent Communist Labor League, and Independent Labor League of America. It appears that there were a total of 10 conferences and conventions of the organization -- 9 numbered and 1 without a numerical designation.

 

CLICK THE LOGO AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE TO GO TO THE EARLY AMERICAN MARXISM WEBSITE.