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 cla.s.s 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 circ.u.mstances, 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 princ.i.p.al 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-cla.s.s 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 ma.s.s 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 Const.i.tution a.s.serts, 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 cla.s.s organization"
ready for "industrial action." The preamble to the Const.i.tution, 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-cla.s.s 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 cla.s.s rule." And it adds: "To accomplish this aim, it is necessary that the working-cla.s.s 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 Const.i.tution 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 Hillquit.i.tes 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 cla.s.s, 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 Manifes...o...b..t 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 doc.u.ments in pamphlet form, namely, "The Manifesto Communist International," issued 1919 by the Soviets of Russia at Moscow to the toiling ma.s.ses of the world. This is undoubtedly the greatest declaration ever issued from any working cla.s.s tribunal since the Communist Manifesto of Marx and Engels ... the second is "The Const.i.tution 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 pa.s.sion 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 h.e.l.l 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."