"The Parlor Socialists," by Ellis O. Jones [Oct. 1907] This is one of the most thoughtful and well-crafted essays of the Debsian period of the Socialist Party of America -- a defense of the so-called "parlor socialists," published in the pages of the International Socialist Review. Jones, a rank-and-file socialist from Columbus, Ohio, states that up until as few as 5 years previously socialism had received scant attention in America, dismissed as an idiosyncratic preoccupation of peculiar European immigrants. The Socialist Party, founded in 1901, had at last struck root in the ranks of the native American population, Jones indicates. "...The phenomenon which the paragrapher lightly dubs Parlor Socialism is nothing more or less than an unmistakable sign of the Americanization of Socialism, leading the paragrapher gently but powerfully and relentlessly past the point where he can define Socialism as the unintelligible ravings of a handful of unnatural and unnaturalized bomb-throwing aliens plotting against duly constituted authority," Jones declares. Unable to label and dismiss these eminently reasonable American socialists to the hackneyed stereotypes of the past, a new epithet was invented on the fly -- "parlor socialists." Jones sees a dichotomy among American socialists between the largely uneducated individuals of proletarian origin and vocation, and the new group of "intellectual" adherents to the socialist cause, young and often college educated individuals who (unlike most of their peers) takes time to "examine the general manner of money --making and weigh it in ethical scales, asking the question as to why he, young and inexperienced, should possess so much without effort while thousands whom he sees about him possess but little or nothing with the maximum of effort. He is led into investigating the sources of wealth and soon comes to the obvious conclusion that wealth is produced by labor and that therefore he is living on the labor of others." Ultimately, the so-called "parlor socialists" arrive at "the conclusion that true luxury is impossible so long as a large majority of his fellow beings live in squalor and destitution." Jones concludes that "Parlor Socialism as a characterization is ephemeral. It will disappear when the Socialist movement is thoroughly Americanized, that is, when the Parlor Socialists are sufficiently numerous to cease to invite individual comment and when, through the lapse of time, they have given unmistakable evidence that they are not merely victims of a passing fad or fancy."

 

"Circular Letter 'To All Members of the Socialist Party' from Executive Secretary Adolph Germer, Aug. 8, 1919." Reply of National Secretary Germer to the provisional National Executive Committee who were denied their seats on the NEC when the outgoing NEC abrogated the 1919 party elections. Self-proclaimed "Executive Secretary pro tem" Alfred Wagenknecht and his cohorts are charged with being "professional schemers" engaged in a "frame-up to wreck the party by trying to force action in an irregular way before the Special National Convention." As for Wagenknecht, he is said to have had "a professional training in stirring up party controversies. His reputation dates back to his scholarship under the famous Dr. [Hermon] Titus of Seattle, and there is nothing new or surprising in the part played by him now." Wagenknecht & Co. are charged with sabotaging the party by calling for a withholding of dues payments and convention assessments from the current National Office. Germer declares: "The convention will clear the decks. The membership will then learn who it is that is wrecking the party. Don't let professional troublemakers and political schemers capture you with appealing phrases that they hypocritically use... Never was there such an opportunity to carry on our revolutionary propaganda. The country is seething with unrest. Dissatisfaction with the present economic order is prevalent everywhere. Our opportunity in this crisis is thrown to the winds by political intriguers, who put their personal ambitions above the party's interest. Any one, or any group, that will split us into "wings" or factions, when hundreds of our comrades are in prison, hundreds more on the way, commits little short of treason to the Socialist Party and to the case of working class internationalism, and merit our scorn and contempt. They serve no one but the capitalists."

 

"Letter from Samuel F. Hankin in Chicago to Benjamin Gitlow in New York, Aug. 18, 1919." Communication from Chicago Left Wing leader Samuel Hankin to New York leader Ben Gitlow. Hankin assures Gitlow that the Chicago movement remains true to the previous strategy of continuing the struggle inside the Socialist Party, rather than throwing support over to the convention of the Communist Party of America. Hankin sarcastically notes that "We have been fortunate enough to have amongst us the 'brains' and 'big men' of the already officialled 'Communist' Party, and we know the kind of a revolutionary party they will organize." Hankin seeks information about the financial situation of the Left Wing Section and its organ, The Revolutionary Age, as well as details of the political dance between "the Lefts" and the "Communists." Hankin also notes the recent failure of Louis Fraina to speak in Chicago as scheduled: "One reason is because we did not allow a traitor to the Left Wing speak from a Left Wing platform, and the second reason is because when he heard that we would not allow him to speak, he sent in his declination as a speaker for the evening."

 

"Call Off Steel Strike, Union Drive Goes On: National Committee Says Men Can Go Back to Mills While New Plans are Perfected," by Robert M. Buck [event of Jan. 8, 1920] Beginning Sept. 22, 1919, a enormous strike was conducted in the American steel and iron industry, led by the National Committee for Organizing Iron and Steel Workers headed by William Z. Foster. On January 8, 1920, with the strike effort under external pressure from courts, police, politicians, and press and collapsing internally the steel strike was terminated. This news report from The New Majority includes the full January 8 statements made by the National Committee for Organizing Iron and Steel Workers and resigned strike leader William Z. Foster. Foster states: "The overwhelming power of the steel corporations, the wholesale prostitution of the press to the service of the employers, the unparalleled hostility of the courts, the use of federal troops, the brutal suppression of our rights of free speech and free assembly, the clubbing, shooting, and jailing of thousands of our men, the use of city, country, and state political machinery and peace guardians as strikebreaking agencies - these and many more factors utilized on a scale and with an unscrupulousness unknown before in industrial conflicts, had served to break the ranks of the hastily organized steel workers to such an extent that the strike had lost the effectiveness necessary to have it lead to a settlement through negotiation. According to the judgment of practically all the organizers and officials in the field, to keep the strike on longer would have been merely to punish thousands of our own good men needlessly." With labor in short supply and large numbers of orders unfulfilled amidst strong industrial demand, future victories in issue of the duration of the working day are predicted despite the failure of the Great Steel Strike.

 

"Wild-Eyed Palmer Waves Red Flag: His Fake May Day 'Rebellion' Makes Him Laughing Stock of Nation," by Robert M. Buck [May 8, 1920] According to The New Majority, May Day 1920 was cynically used by Presidential aspirant Attorney General Mitchell Palmer as a means of launching his bandwagon. Instead of appearing as the nation's savior, however, Palmer came across as a laughing stock: "In spite of front page newspaper warnings by Palmer that the United States was to be plunged into a bloody revolution May 1 [1920] by the 'reds,' not a red revolted. No one expected them to, except Palmer and his press agents. He built a man of straw, stuffed his pockets full of bolsheviki literature, adorned him with false whiskers and a red flag -- then kicked him to pieces, and announced that the Department of Justice under his guidance had the 'reds' in control. The whole 'red' scare was a farce from beginning to end.... All the newspapers were agreed that the whole May Day 'red plot' was improvised to make political capital for Mr. Palmer and for no other reason. " In Chicago 600 people were rounded up by police as part of Palmer's anti-red campaign, most of whom were merely "homeless persons tramping the streets in search of a job or a place to live," according to Buck. In New York, May Day hysteria ran rampant as well, with armed troops and machine guns sent in to guard public buildings.

 

"Socialists Discuss Labor Party League: National Convention to Decide Whether Union of Forces May Become Possibility," by J.C. Laue [May 11, 1920] Report from the official organ of the Labor Party of the United States on the deliberations of the Socialist Party of America with respect to cooperation with non-socialist political organizations. Laue is optimistic, writing: "It is almost certain that the convention will recommend the party to continue its sympathetic attitude toward all organizations that have cut loose from the dominant political parties and that the way will be paved at this 1920 convention for a coalition of all radical groups in political life after the fashion of the British Labour Party in which each radical group will maintain its integrity but will 'go along' without internal war against a common enemy." The Left Wing Chicago delegation was opposed to this policy, the Right Wing Wisconsin delegation in favor, the New York delegation taking a center position, Laue believes, adding: "Practically every delegate west of the Mississippi River is in favor of the coalition and the outcome will be determined by the quality of the leadership in the convention."

 

"Thumbs Down" is Socialists' Edict: Can't See Labor Party -- Caution Governs Deliberations at 8th Convention." (Unsigned news article from The New Majority) [May 22, 1920] Contrary to previous expectations, the Socialist Party did not liberalize its anti-fusionism rules at its 1920 national convention. "The Labor Party came in for a panning, and cooperation in this country with other political groups whose views are in accord with those contained in Socialist Party platforms was specifically turned down by the convention," the article indicates. The report indicates that a telegram signed by 30 delegates had been dispatched to James Maurer of Pennsylvania, urging him to accept nomination as Vice Presidential candidate on the Socialist Party ticket but that "Maurer declined, as he had decided to link his fortunes with the Labor Party of the United States."

 

"John Fitzpatrick Greets Delegates: Room for All Useful Citizens in the Labor Party of US, He Says." by Robert M. Buck [July 11, 1920] Keynote speech by Chicago Federation of Labor leader John Fitzpatrick to the 2nd Convention of the Labor Party of the United States. Fitzpatrick states that the old parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, had kept the working class hopelessly divided. Fitzpatrick declares that the Chicago Federation of Labor "after going up against this situation all of these years understood that thing then they knew that a new day in politics must be brought into the situation, if we intended to smash the old regime and to bring that new day that we hoped for to the people. So, the declaration was made that a labor party would be started, and we asked the rank and file of the membership of the organizations affiliated with the Chicago Federation of Labor what was their conclusions in this matter..." Fitzpatrick draws attention to the positive work done by the Bolshevik government of Russia and holds up that working class government as a sort of model for America: "But Russia has destroyed the situation, and has brought into being a government of the people, representing the people, and which takes into consideration the rights and activities of the people in the way that the Russian people want them taken care of. So, I am not worrying about Russia. Russia has done a tremendous job. Oh, that the day was only near when the workers in the United States would be able to concentrate their effort and do a job such as Russia has done." This assertion was met with "prolonged cheering and vociferous applause" from the assembled delegates, according to the stenographic report of Fitzpatrick's speech.

 

"On the Case of Comrade Benjamin Gitlow: Statement of the National Committee of the Communist Party of the USA (Opposition)." [Feb. 15, 1933] Official statement of the governing National Committee of the Communist Party (Opposition) (a.k.a. "Lovestone group") regarding the recent resignation of leading CP(O) member Benjamin Gitlow. The statement emphasizes a series of unanimous decisions of the National Council in 1931-32 support of the General Line of the CPSU in economic development, emphasizing the fact that Gitlow making this a fundamental issue is belated at best. "At about the time of our 2nd National Conference (September 1932), Comrade Gitlow and a few other comrades began to develop a different position, to the effect that not only was the general line of the CPSU in economic construction basically wrong, but that the 'Russian question is the paramount question' so that 'our position on the Russian question determines whether or not our group has a principled justification for existence.'" This attempt at revising party policy was repeatedly rejected by the CP(O), according to the statement, which noted "For our group to adopt the viewpoint of Comrade Gitlow on this question would mean to take the steep road to liquidation or else to our conversion into a phrasemongering sect on the model of the Trotskyites, without roots in our own conditions, with eyes always fixed in unhealthy speculation upon factional developments in the CPSU." As a result, Gitlow had left the ranks of the CP(O). Still: "In spite of his sharp differences on important questions, we declare that place is still open for Comrade Gitlow in our group," the statement of the National Committee declares.

 

"As to 'Red Terror,'"by Will Herberg [Dec. 15, 1934] Rather snotty editorial from the pages of the offical organ of the Communist Party (Opposition) attacking Norman Thomas and the Socialist Party for their protests against the mass repression which swept the Soviet Union in the aftermath of the assassination of Sergei Kirov. "To get aroused to white-heat over the instant meting out of full and irrevocable justice to the White Guard assassins and to the imperialist spies would mean to get aroused over the enemies of the Socialist Soviet Republic. That's why silence in the case of Kirov and raucous anger in the case of Soviet justice," the editorial declares. The "bogus democratic justice" of the "Social Democratic tear-shedders" is condemned and Soviet mass reprisals defended: "Thomas and his colleagues are to be condemned in the most unmistakable terms by all honest socialists for their attempt to cover up the trail of the imperialist right and its hired assassins banded against the Soviet regime. Every class-conscious worker can only hail the swift and complete justice accorded the culprits in the Soviet Union."

 

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