"As to the Labor Defense
Council," by Eugene V. Debs [March 1925] Although initially organized by
the Communist Party as a broad-based non-party legal defense
organization to aid the victims of the August 1922 raid on the
party's convention at Bridgman, Michigan, by 1925 the Legal Defense
Council had begun to take a more partisan cast. Lips began to
wag about the presence of Socialist Party National Chairman Eugene
V. Debs on the LDC's letterhead -- to the effect that Debs was,
in deeds if not in words, sympathetic to the Communist cause.
This prompted a reply by Debs in the official organ of the Socialist
Party to discount any such speculation. "was organized to
provide defense for Communists prosecuted under so-called criminal
syndicalism and other laws because of their activities in the
labor movement, the purpose of the defense being the preservation
of the right of free speech, free assemblage, and other civil
rights in the United States. I gladly accorded to this body the
use of my name in raising funds and consented to be named as
Vice President in its list of officers. I did this not so much
for Foster, Ruthenberg, Minor, and others as individuals, but
to back then up in the defense of their civil rights. That fight
is also my fight," Debs declares. He bitterly notes that
while the Communist Party "refused to lift a finger to help
me out of prison," he nevertheless stood ready to defend
the civil rights of Communists. Debs forcefully states that the
"surreptitious" reports of his support of the Communists
as against the Socialists are "on a par with some other
falsehoods published in Communist organs to which my attention
has been called." After this statement of his true allegiance,
Debs insists that "if hereafter any Communist whispers it
into your ear that I am with the Communists in anything except
their right to free speech and other civil rights, just answer
by turning your back upon him and leaving the vulgar falsifier
to himself."
"Speech on Bolshevization
of the American Party to the Organizational Conference of the
Communist International, Moscow, March 18, 1925," by William
Z. Foster Beginning March 15,
1925, a conference was held in Moscow, chaired by Osip Piatnitsky,
dedicated to the restructuring of Communist Parties around the
world on the basis of "factory nuclei" -- so-called
"Bolshevization." William Z. Foster, representative
of the Workers Party of America, was elected to the 10 member
Presidium of this gathering (the candidates nominated en bloc
by Piatnitsky and elected unanimously). On March 18, Foster addressed
the gathering on the reorganizational situation in the Workers
Party of America. Restructuring of the WPA on the basis of factory
nuclei was only initiated at the time of the 5th World Congress
of the Comintern in the summer of 1924, Foster said, noting that
the fragmented nature of the American Party -- split into 17
language federations -- hampered the ready adoption of this scheme.
Instead there was a general state of passive resistance, institutional
inertia for the preservation of the current system, in which
the center dealt with local organizations only through the intermediary
of the Central Bureaus of the various Language Federations. Foster
stated that of some 19,000 members of the WPA only 2200 were
members of English-language groups, although he added that about
half of the Federationists knew English well enough to engage
in party work.
"Recommendations to the American
Commission of the Executive Committee of the Communist International,"
Submited by William Z. Foster and James P. Cannon. [circa March
1925] This undated
document from the Comintern Archive was apparently submitted
by American delegates to the American Commission of the 5th Enlarged
Plenum of ECCI, held in Moscow from March 21 to April 6, 1925.
Foster and Cannon here attempt to instruct the American Commission
as to what concrete steps to take in order to liquidate the factional
dispute in the Workers Party of America. Foster and Cannon are
particularly adament in their opposition to the notion that the
Labor Party can or should be developed into a mass Communist
Party -- a situation which even if successful would create a
parallel organization with the WPA. Rather, the United Front
should be conceived of as a mass organization of workers, while
the WPA attempts to build itself into a mass Communist Party.
Within this United Front it would be unions and not political
organizations like the FFLP that best elicit the active participation
of the working class, Foster and Cannon argue. Indeed, the development
of the trade union movement was the prerequisite: "The Labor
Party can be formed only under conditions where it secures genuine
mass support from the trade unions," they state. The duo
call for an instruction that all members of the WPA are to join
and participate in unions and that the party is to expand its
membership by addition of members of the working class to counterbalance
an unhealthy reliance on the intelligentsia. "Bolshevization"
of the party is strongly urged, including increase centralization
(at the expense of language federation autonomy) and reconstruction
of the party on a shop nucleus basis. The "reckless and
irresponsible factional conduct of the Minority" is condemned,
and Foster and Cannon urge that "Caucuses and fractions
shall be dissolved and prohibited, and the practice of circulating
underground 'documents' in the Party shall be condemned."
"On Boshevization and a Labor
Party: Speech to the 5th Plenum of the Enlarged Executive Committee
of the Communist International, Moscow -- March 30, 1925,"
by James P. Cannon Speech
by Workers Party of America delegate to the 5th Enlarged Plenum
of the ECCI (March 21-April 6, 1925) during the period of discussion
about the political situation in the various countries and the
next tasks of the Comintern in the restructuring of the constitent
communist parties upon a basis of workplace party nuclei (so-called
"Bolshevization"). With regard to Bolshevization, Cannon
cites the lack of a tradition of revolutionary mass action by
the working class, weak trade union organizations and the associated
neglect of party work in the unions, and a fragmented party organization
of just 20,000 -- of whom only 2,000 were enrolled in English-speaking
organizations. "The Language Federation form of organization
is absolutely incompatible with a Bolshevist organization,"
Cannon emphatically states, adding that "We must have a
centralized form of organization or we will never have a Bolshevist
Party." With respect to establishment of a Labor Party in
America, Cannon states that "the organized American workers
are not yet class-conscious enough to develop a labor party on
a mass basis." The situation was entirely different in the
United States than in Great Britain, Cannon argued, citing the
strength of the British union movement and long historical standing
of the British Labour Party. In contrast, all attempts to create
a Labor Party in America in the preceeding two years had been
"disastrous failures." "It would be premature
to form a labor party now, and even dangerous, for we would quickly
become isolated from [the] growing mass labor movement,"
Cannon declares.
"Lenin and Trotsky: A Comment
on Max Eastman's Book Since Lenin Died," by N. Krupskaya.
[September 1925] This
article by the widow of V.I. Ul'ianov (Lenin) was written for
publication in the American Communist press in response to the
1925 publication of Since Lenin Died, by Max Eastman.
Krupskaya is harsh in her criticism of Eastman, characterizing
his book as a "collection of petty gossip" and noting
that Eastman "invents various fictions" by falsely
characterizing Lenin's letters to the XIII Party Congress as
a "testament" and further alleging these documents
were "concealed." Krupskaya also alleges her personal
correspondence with Trotsky was misrepresented in Eastman's book,
that Trotsky from Krupskaya's correspondence "could not
draw...the conclusion that Lenin regarded him as his successor,
or regarded him as understanding his views better than anybody
else," as Eastman alleged. Rather, Krupskaya says that Lenin
merely "considered Trotsky a talented worker faithful in
the interests of the revolution and to the working class"
-- among others. Krupskaya also notes that she had stood in opposition
to Trotsky in the current struggle in the Russian Communist Party
and written against his Lessons of October in the pages
of Pravda.
"From Propaganda Society
to Communist Party: Pages from Party History, 1919-1925"
by C.E. Ruthenberg.
This 1925 article
by the Executive Secretary of the Workers (Communist) Party reviews
the history of the American Communist Party from its origins.
This material first appeared in the pages of the party's theoretical
magazine, The Workers Monthly, in October of 1925 under
the title "From the Third Through the Fourth Convention
of the Workers (Communist) Party of America" and was subsequently
issued as a pamphlet by the same name.
"Stalin, 'The Voice of the
Party,' Breaks Trotsky: The Rubberstamp Secretary vs. The Fiery
Idealist: Sidelights on the Russian Revolution," by Anna
Louise Strong [circa Dec. 15, 1925] In this article from the English Left Wing press,
American Communist Anna Louise Strong explains the political
situation evolving in the Russian Communist Party. Whereas previous
to the death of the former, Lenin and Trotsky had dominated the
Russian scene, now it was Trotsky and Stalin who loomed large.
And of these two: "Stalin is undisputed 'boss' today. He
rules through his commanding position as General Secretary of
the dominant party, and from that post influences the appointment
chairmen of the Council of People's Commissars and the heads
of politics and industry. He sees practically no foreigners and
none of the high non-Communist administrative officers of Government:
his work is to keep the party machine organized and efficiently
functioning." The Opposition around Trotsky is characterized
as "small but able," composed largely of "the
men who were abroad in Europe during the Tsarist days of persecution
-- they learned Western languages, Western industrial technique,
Western revolutionary movements." Strong adds that these
"They comprise all the good orators of the Communist Party.
Meetings have become dull since the Opposition was suppressed."
Strong intriguingly observes that "Trotsky is a personality:
he inspires millions. Stalin is only a perfect Secretary. Yet
Stalin wins and Trotsky loses. Trotsky loses because his personality
is always in evidence; Stalin wins because he succeeds in making
himself forgotten. He is thought of not as a man but as the 'Voice
of the Party.' Personal allegiances are at a discount among the
Communists. Aside from their reverence for Lenin, who is no longer
a man but a symbol, they wish to follow, not any individual,
but the collective will of the organization. Stalin succeeds
by becoming identified with that collective will. A man who can
do that is, of course, a great politician."
"The Workers' (Communist)
Party: What It Is and Why Workers Should Join It," by C.E.
Ruthenberg. Text of a small propaganda pamphlet
encouraging wage-workers to join the Workers' (Communist) Party.
According to Ruthenberg, the W(C)PA comprised the political organization
necessary to "give leadership" to the workers' struggle
against capitalism and to "direct it along the road that
will carry the workers forward to the Workers' and Farmers' Government
and victory for the new social order." To advance this task,
the W(C)PA would support the daily struggles of the workers and
farmers for relief, work to amalgamate craft unions into industrial
unions, work to organized the unorganized industrial workers
into unions, work for the establishment of and affiliation with
a Labor Party, work for Negro organization and the struggle of
black Americans for "complete social equality," and
fight against American imperialism abroad.
"A Communist Trial in Pittsburgh,"
by A. Jakira [Feb. 1926] Eyewitness
account of the trial in Pittsburgh of Edward Horacek, a draftsman
and member of the Machinists Union who was arrested and tried
for his activities as a member of the Workers Party of America.
Horacek was taken as a part of the April 27 and 28, 1923 raids
by federal agents, state policemen, and county detectives on
the Pittsburgh headquarters of the Workers Party and was the
first of 9 defendants to go to trial. Jakira tells the familiar
tale of a zealous prosecution with its lying witnesses before
a stacked jury and a biased judge. The jury convicted Horacek
for having back in 1923 distributed the printed program of the
WPA (a registered political party in the state of Pennsylvania)
and for having been invoiced for 50 copies of The Liberator,
a WPA artistic-political magazine "sold on newsstands and
bookstores in practically every city of this country." No
articles from The Liberator had been introduced into evidence
during the trial to demonstrate that the publication was seditious,
nor was any over act by Horacek alleged -- Horacek was simply
found guilty of 2 of the 8 charges made against him for his membership
in the WPA and for distributing its literature. The conviction
meant a potential sentence of 20 years in prison, writes Jakira.
Includes a pen-and-ink caricature of Henry J. Lennon, chief of
the Pittsburgh anti-red unit, chief prosecution witness in the
trial who was accused by Jakira of having perjured himself on
the stand.
"The Aims and Methods of
Young Workers Education," by Oliver Carlson [August 1927]
Oliver Carlson
was a former National Secretary of the Young People's Socialist
League (1918-1919) who joined the Workers Party of America and
was an active leader of the Young Workers League. From 1925-1928
he was annually the Director of Communist Summer Schools sponsored
by the Workers (Communist) Party, including the very first of
these events (Waino, WI). This article was written by Carlson
for the 1927 YWL Winlock, Washington Camp Yearbook. Analytical
and pedagogical in tone, Carlson first addresses the possible
criticism that the curriculum at the Summer Schools are "biased":
"We were determined that a definite working class outlook
should permeate every subject studied. We openly admitted that
all education is of necessity biased, especially that which deals
with social, economic, and political problems. Ours was biased
in favor of the proletariat. For the benefit of those who demand
'pure truth,' let me point out that the working class view on
social sciences is far more correct than that "impartial"
view which is dished out to the unsuspecting in the public educational
institutions." After discussing the relative effectiveness
of various methods of instruction, Carlson advocates relatively
older rather than younger students in the schools: "The
boy or girl of 14, 15, or 16 years who is still in school has
not as yet been forced to shift for himself, to make his own
living, and to feel the pressure of the class struggle. To such
a one the class war and all other theories relating to it cannot
be duly appreciated." He also advocates a skewing of more
males than females for a similar reason, that more men than women
are wage workers, particularly in the "more basic industries
where the need for theoretical and practical leadership is the
greatest."
"Questions and Answers to
American Trade Unionists: Stalin's Interview with the First American
Trade Union Delegation to Soviet Russia," by I. Stalin;
Introduction by Jay Lovestone. [discussion of Sept. 9, 1927]
Full text of a
pamphlet published by the Communist Party, providing stenographic
quotations of a very extensive dialog between Iosif Stalin and
a number of American trade unionists and academics in the Soviet
Union on a fact-finding tour. Stalin answers a dozen questions
posed by the visiting delegates, sidestepping only a query about
his concrete differences with Trotsky, before turning the tables
and asking a series of questions of the Americans about conditions
in their own country. One passage by Stalin the perceived role
of the Comintern in the daily life of national parties is of
particular interest: "The assertion that the American Communists
work under 'orders from Moscow' is absolutely untrue. There are
no such Communists in the world who would agree to work 'under
orders' from outside against their own convictions and will and
contrary to the requirements of the situation. Even if there
were such Communists they would not be worth a cent. Communists
bravely fight against a host of enemies. The value of a Communist,
among other things, lies in that he is able to defend his convictions.
Therefore, it is strange to speak of American Communists as not
having their own convictions and capable only of working according
to 'orders' from outside. The only part of the labor leaders'
assertion that has any truth in it at all is that the American
Communists are affiliated to an international Communist organization
and from time to time consult with the Central body of this organization
on one question or another.... Some people believe that the members
of the Communist International in Moscow do nothing else but
sit and write instructions to all countries. As there are more
than 60 countries affiliated to the Comintern, one can imagine
the position of the members of the Comintern who never sleep
or eat, in fact do nothing but sit day and night and write instructions
to all countries."
"John Reed and the Real Thing,"
by Michael Gold [Nov. 1927] This article came from the issue of the Communist
Party's artistic and literary monthly commemorating the 10th
Anniversary of the Russian Revolution -- a tribute by Mike Gold
to his friend Jack Reed. The article is written against the views
of Walter Lippmann and other "pale, rootless intellectuals"
who smugly claimed that Jack Reed was a romantic, a playboy,
and a superficial adventurer. Gold replies "The Revolution
is the romance of tens of millions of men and women in the world
today. This is something many American intellectuals never understand
about Jack Reed. If he had remained romantic about the underworld,
or about meaningless adventure-wandering, or about women or poem-making,
they would have continued admiring him. But Jack Reed fell in
love with the Revolution, and gave it all his generous heart's
blood." Gold further sees Reed as pivotal in destroying
the historic prejudice against intellectuals held by the American
far left, noting that for the IWW "the word 'intellectual'
became a synonym for the word 'bastard,' and in the American
Communist movement there is some of this feeling." However
Reed "identified himself so completely with the working
class; he undertook every danger for the revolution; he forgot
his Harvard education, his genius, his popularity, his gifted
body and mind so completely that no one else remembered them
any more," thus proving for all time that the line between
intellectuals and workers was not impassable. Gold concludes
that the "war to end wars" supported by Lippmann and
his associates -- those who denigrate Reed and the Russian Revolution
-- was false, a mere "prelude to a more rapacious capitalist
imperialism and a greater imperialist war," but that John
Reed had given his life for the "real thing."
"Expulsion of Trotsky and
Zinoviev: Statement of the Central Executive Committee of the
Workers (Communist) Party of America." [Nov. 20, 1927] Two words that absolutely do not
exist in the literature of American Communism for the 1919-1923
period are "Leninism" and "Trotskyism." Both
of these terms are ideological constructs which emerged as a
byproduct of the faction fight that erupted after the death of
Lenin in January 1924, when a number of leading politicians in
the Russian Communist Party (Zinoviev, Stalin, Kamenev, Trotsky)
attempted to systematize Lenin's basic ideas as an "-ism,"
to portray themselves as the best and most consistent adherents
of this new "-ism," and to anathematize their leading
opponents as antithetical to this "-ism." That said,
this document is interesting as an example of how quickly the
Jay Lovestone-led Workers (Communist) Party of America issued
a public statement approving the expulsion from the Russian Communist
Party of Lev Trotsky and Grigorii Zinoviev following the debacle
of their Revolution Day public demonstration against the Central
Committee of the VKP(b), headed by Iosif Stalin and Nikolai Bukharin.
"The Trotsky-Zinoviev opposition has long ago overstepped
the bounds of the permissible in a Communist, Leninist Party.
The actions of the opposition have long ago reached the point
of actually encouraging the enemies of the working class. Now
the opposition has come to the stage where it is organizing a
new party, joining hands with non-working class elements, enemies
of the Soviet Union, becoming the rallying center for capitalist
opposition to the Soviet power generally," the resolution
declares. The resolution adds that "Trotskyism is not Leninism.
It is the negation of the Leninist revolutionary theory and practice,
which alone guided the toiling masses of Russia to success and
victory." Trotskyism is characterized by the CEC resolution
as "ultra-revolutionary phrases masking petty bourgeois
opportunist tendencies." The resolution proclaims that "the
Central Executive Committee of the Workers (Communist) Party
pledges itself to increase its efforts to educate its membership
and the American working class as to the line of Leninism and
the issues involved in the controversy in the Communist Party
of the Soviet Union." Without a bit of irony the ultra-factional
American CEC adds: "Hail the unity of the Communist Party
of the Soviet Union and the Communist International, leader of
the world's working class. Long live Leninism, the path to victory!"
"American Negro Problems,"
by John Pepper.
Full text of a pamphlet
published by Workers Library Publishers in 1928. The Hungarian
revolutionary Josef Pogany ["John Pepper'} outlines the
situation facing the Communist Party with regards to black liberation:
"The Communist Party cannot be a real Bolshevik Party without
being also the Party of the liberation of the Negro race from
all white oppression," he notes. Pepper states that class
differentiation has increased within the black population, with
a black bourgeoisie emerging at the same time the situation of
rural blacks was steadily worsening. The Communist Party would
advance the cause of "full racial, social, and political
equality for the Negro people," dealing with the farming
masses of the "Black Belt" as "the potential basis
for a national liberation movement of the Negroes and as the
basis for the realization of its right of self-determination
of a Negro state." Emphasis was to be placed on attracting
black workers and agricultural laborers to membership in the
Communist Party, says Pepper.
"Underground and Above: A
Memoir of American Communism in the 1920s," by Max Bedacht. A chapter from the unpublished memoir of Max Bedacht
(1883-1972), completed in 1967 from the manuscript at the Tamiment
Library at New York University -- published here through their
courtesy and with our thanks. Bedacht's account details the factional
struggle that swept the party from the unification of the UCP
with the old CPA in 1921 through the expulsion of Jay Lovestone
and his associates in 1929. Particularly valuable for its confirmation
that the ill-fated Bridgman, Michigan convention of 1922 was
held at the same exact site as the problem-free Joint Unity Convention
that founded the United Communist Party in 1920 -- and for recollections
about the factional struggle that took place at the 4th Congress
of the Comintern in Nov.-Dec. 1922, in which Bedacht carried
the banner of the "Liquidator" faction in opposition
to the adherents of the underground party, the "Geese."
Includes copious explanatory footnotes.
"Ruthenberg as Fighter and
Leader," by Jay Lovestone. This
hagiographic biography of the deceased Executive Secretary of
the Workers (Communist) Party of America was originally written
by his successor to introduce a collection of speeches published
by International Publishers. Although thoroughly uncritical,
this article nevertheless provides a useful summary of the political
career of Ruthenberg, including an impressive list of political
offices for which he was a candidate during the period 1910 to
1919 (Mayor, State Treasurer, Congressman, US Senator). Nary
a word is mentioned about Ruthenberg's social origins, education,
factional orientations over time, nor any hint given of any tactical
difficulties faced or political errors made by Ruthenberg over
the course of his political career. Instead, Ruthenberg, rendered
a faultless icon, is depicted as "The Founder of the Communist
Party" and lauded for "Leninist faith in the masses"
dating back to 1911.
"William D. Haywood -- Soldier
to the Last," by James P. Cannon [May 22, 1928] A lengthy and heartfelt obituary
of the IWW leader William "Big Bill" Haywood"
by a friend and comrade, James P. Cannon, a Communist Party leader
who was also a former member of the IWW. Haywood, who died May
18, 1928, in Moscow from a stroke, is remembered as a compelling
speaker "recognized far and wide as the authentic voice
of the proletarian militants of America," and a man of great
personal courage, and leader of the Left Wing in the Socialist
Party in the years before the World War. Haywood's unseemly breaking
of faith and discipline with his organization and his fellow
political prisoners when he jumped bail in 1919 is brushed aside.
Cannon rather writes that Haywood "emerged from Leavenworth
Penitentiary in 1919 in a receptive and studious mood. He was
already 50 years old but he conquered the mental rigidity which
afflicts so many at that age. He began, slowly and painfully,
to assimilate the new and universal lessons of the war and the
Russian Revolution. First taking his stand with that group in
the IWW which favored adherence to the Red International of Labor
Unions, he gradually developed his thought further and finally
came to the point where he proclaimed himself a Communist and
a disciple of Lenin. He became a member of the Communist Party
of America before his departure for Russia." Cannon also
states that Haywood was a man who possessed "warmth of personality
that drew men to him like a bonfire on a winter's day. His considerateness
and indulgence toward his friends and his generous impulsiveness
in human relations were just as much a part of Bill Haywood as
his iron will and intransigence in battle. 'Bill's Room' in the
Lux Hotel at Moscow was always the central gathering place for
the English speaking delegates. Bill was 'good company' in the
best sense of that old-fashioned term. He liked to have people
around him and visitors came to his room in a steady stream;
many went to pour out their troubles, certain of a sympathetic
hearing and a word of wise advice." "His life was a
credit and an honor to our class and to our movement," Cannon
maintains.
"Our Appeal Against Expulsion
from the Communist Party," by James P. Cannon. [Dec. 17,
1928] Text of a speech delivered Dec.
17, 1928 at a plenum of the Central Executive Committee of the
Workers (Communist) Party. James Cannon, Max Shachtman, and Martin
Abern were expelled from the party on Oct. 25, 1928 for "Trotskyism,"
but chose to avail themselves of their right of appeal to the
next meeting of the CEC. The nearly 200 in attendance heard a
three hour presentation of the case against Cannon, Shachtman,
and Abern, before Cannon was given the floor to present this
hour-long defense. Cannon admitted the trio's adherence to the
"views of the Russian Opposition" but promised "to
discontinue all extraordinary methods the moment our party rights
are restored and we are permitted to defend our views in the
party press and at party meetings." Cannon charged that
"the Pepper-Lovestone leadership" were embarked "on
the course of bureaucratic disruption." Cannon asserted
a trend, particularly strong in the New York district, towards
the dilution of the party with "all kinds of dubious, petty-bourgeois
careerists and half-baked intellectual elements" -- a trend
directly related to the "wholesale expulsion of proletarian
fighters,"
"The 'Achievements' of the
CC Plenum: Statement of the Communist Party-Majority Group."
[Nov. 15, 1929] From
Nov. 6-8, 1929, the Communist Party USA held the first plenum
of its Central Committee in nearly 11 months. This is the critique
of the changes and policies of the CPUSA established at this
CC plenum by the Communist Party-Majority Group, headed by former
CP Executive Secretary Jay Lovestone. The plenum approved a "new
line" thesis, which the CPMG characterizes as "the
most shameful document in the history of our Party," including
erroneous views of the international situation and the domestic
economic situation, as well as a vague program which utterly
underestimated the Negro question and the agricultural situation.
Furthermore, the CC added 12 new members to replace those expelled
in the recent party controversy, resulting in 9 of 15 places
on the Political Committee for the "bankrupt, discredited
Foster Group."
"Lovestone, Wolfe & Co.
Stand Naked in the Marketplace: Unsigned Editorial in The
Daily Worker, Nov. 30, 1929." A heated and rather nasty front page editorial
from the pages of the CPUSA's daily. Bukharin's capitulation
and admission of having made "dangerous errors" in
the USSR "has left the latest recruits to the ranks of the
enemies of the working class and of the Communist Party of the
United States -- Lovestone, Wolfe & Co. -- stark naked with
their renegade sores exposed in the marketplace where capitalism
purchases its servants," the Editorial declares. The "counterrevolutionary
hope" of a split in the CPSU around Bukharin is said to
have "gone glimmering. That the actions of Comrade Bukharin,
with the opportunist, pessimist platform upon which he then stood,
could bring a split in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
was never more than a desperate wish on the part of the enemies
of Communism and the working class who found temporary refuge
in the ranks of our world Party." The editorial quotes Lovestone's
charges that the present leaders of the Comintern were "political
ignoramuses" marked by "unprincipledness" and
responds in kind with specific charges: "Lovestone speaking
of 'unprincipledness!' This is surely a sight for gods and men!
The young gentleman who began his career as a police probation
officer, who, true to his training in this broad field of anti-working
class activity, added fresh laurels by appearing as a state's
witness against a comrade in 1920, who found his way into our
Party by methods best known to himself but of which others are
not entirely ignorant -- the petty bourgeois careerist who systematically
corrupted the younger and weaker elements of our Party and who
only 8 months ago called Salome-like for the head of Bukharin
in the vain belief that he could thereby save his own."
Lovestone and his political associates Bert Wolfe and Ben Gitlow
are called "petty bourgeois gentlemen" and "counterrevolutionists."
"Fortunately for the American working class our Party was
strong enough to expose and drive these treacherous elements
from its ranks," the editorial trumpets.
"Lovestone Ends His 'Isolation,'"
by Earl Browder [Dec. 23. 1929] Article from the Communist Party's daily press
attempting to denigrate expelled party leader Jay Lovestone as
a participant in an international alliance of Right Wing elements.
Browder makes much of a $100 donation received by Lovestone from
"Mexican comrades" as "blood-money" from
"a choice collection of scoundrels" and renegades who
were ultimately "supported and financed by Wall Street."
All this serves as precursor to the main event, Browder's dusting
off of the 1920 Winitsky Trial affair, in which Lovestone testified
under subpeona from the prosecution, only to be accused of party
treason. Browder asserts that Lovestone "received immunity
from prosecution by agreeing to testify; his testimony was referred
to by the judge in charging the jury as the basis for a verdict
of guilt against Winitsky. About that time there were several
splits in the underground party, and in the confusion Lovestone
escaped from having to answer to the Party for his conduct."
Browder notes that the affair was, years later, brought before
the International Control Committee of the Comintern, which "after
reviewing the case, declared that Lovestone had been guilty of
conduct impermissible in a Communist" -- but which closed
the case without sanctions, in light of so much time having passed
and Lovestone having been accepted into the top leadership. "Under
normal circumstances the case would have been closed even now.
But Lovestone has shown by his present renegacy, by his slanderous
attacks upon the Party and Comintern, and by his open collaboration
with the enemies of the revolutionary working class, that his
testimony for the state in 1920 was not an accident," Browder
states.
