Outline for a History of the Communist Party in America. [Circa 1923] by Alexander Bittelman
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bittelman: Outline for a History of the Communist Party in America 1 Outline for a History of the Communist Party in America. [circa 1923] by Alexander Bittelman Published as “Hynes Exhibit No. 4” in Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Communist Activities. (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1930), pp. 435-448. I. The Importance of History. cisms of the other tendencies in the socialist move- ment. It had little positive to propose. (b) It was a There are two important reasons for study of reaction against Bergerism (the Wisconsin idea) on the the history of our movement: (a) You can not well one hand and DeLeonism on the other hand. (c) It understand the present of our movement without was strongly influenced by the left wing in the Second knowing its past. (b) A thorough understanding of our International, chiefly by the German and Dutch. It mistakes in the past is the best guarantee for the avoid- knew very little of the Bolshevik movement. ance of mistakes in the future. IV. An Analysis of the II. The Relative Value Left Wing of 1910-1912. of Historic Dates. The International Socialist Review is a good indi- Any number of dates could be fixed for the be- cator of the mind of the left wing. Its main problem ginning of our party, depending on the approach of was: The relation between the socialist movement and the subject. If we approach our party as part of the the trade union movement. It was a real problem of American labor movement as a whole, we would have how to make the Socialist Party the mass party of the to go back to the origin of the American proletariat American proletariat. It was (and is) the specific prob- and its first organized struggles. If we approach it as a lem of the American class struggle because of the domi- party of clear-cut and conscious class struggle, its be- nating position of the trade unions in the labor move- ginning would date back to the origin of a socialist ment. movement in the United States. If we approach it as a Three solutions of the problem: communist movement proper, we shall have to start (a) The Wisconsin idea: Two independent aims, from the origin and definite crystallization of a mod- economic and political. One must not interfere with ern left wing in the American socialist movement. We the other. The Socialist Party as the political aim, a shall start from the latter, because our party is clearly a purely parliamentary organization. The trade unions recent development of the modern left wing. as the economic arm, a purely craft and bread-and- butter organization. Quote Berger from International III. The Left Wing in Socialist Review, on a labor party, page 598. the Socialist Movement. (b) DeLeonism: Correct general idea that So- cialist Party must lead the trade unions in the class It assumed definite ideological form between the struggle. Wrong conception of how this leadership years 1910-1912. Its main characteristics were: (a) It should be won and exercised. The idea of socialist was chiefly negative. Its strongest points were its criti- unions. 1 2 Bittelman: Outline for a History of the Communist Party in America (c) The Left Wing idea: Revolutionary unions VII. Revival of Class Struggle and on the 1905 IWW style. Shop demands leading step Opportunism in the Socialist Party. by step to control of the shop. The party preaches and emphasizes the ideal. The party is an auxiliary to the The Left Wing of 1910-1912 was prompted into revolutionary union and a propaganda instrument of crystallization and action by two factors: The revival socialism. Quote Frank Bohn (former Socialist Labor of the class struggle as evidenced by the strike move- Party), International Socialist Review, page 1120. This ments of 1909-1910, involving interference of police is a position in between Bergerism and DeLeonism. and military, bloody street conflicts, etc. The election (d) The theory of the Left Wing idea: The in- of Berger to Congress in 1910 raised the prestige of dustrial state and the political state. The reformer be- the “Wisconsin idea” in the Socialist Party. Both these lieves in the supremacy of the political state, the revo- factors concentrated the attention of the Left Wing lutionist believes in the supremacy of the industrial on the industrial field. This explains in part the theory state. The correct idea: Political state is an auxiliary to of the Left Wing that the political party is an auxiliary industrial state; hence political party is auxiliary to to the industrial struggles of the workers. industrial organization. Quote William Bohn, “Re- former and Revolutionist,” International Socialist Re- VIII. The Socialist Party view, pages 206 and 211. Conventions of 1910 and 1912. V. A Criticism of the Left Wing Idea Platform of the Left Wing for 1910 Convention from the Point of View of Lenin. — its most characteristic features: (a) Putting into the platform demands which are The fallacy of the conception of the industrial actual fighting issues in the immediate class struggle, state is a result of a nondialectical, non-Marxian con- thus marking a departure from the opportunist con- ception of society. The relation between the economic ception of immediate demands. structure of society and its political structure. What is (b) Public ownership plank does not contain the modern state? “Politics are concentrated econom- provision for workers’ control (point 4). ics.” (Lenin.) The party as the center and leader of the (c) Belief in the possibility of capturing the state class struggle. The communist conception of the rela- machinery “combining at the ballot box.” (See con- tion between party and unions. cluding paragraph of platform.) Immigration and farm- ers on the platform of 1910. Left Wing makes a mis- VI. The Economic Background take in considering immigration a minor issue. Left of the Left Wing of 1910-1912. Wing makes another mistake in opposing a program for the poor and middle farmers. The Convention of Wage cuts and “open shop” in the steel industry. 1910 failed to promote the further crystallization of Great strikes in 1909 (July to September) in Western the Left Wing — main reason: Absence of conscious Pennsylvania, McKees Rocks, Butler, and New Castle purpose and clear differentiation in a positive way from steel industry. Effective interference in these steel strikes the Right Wing (Berger) and Center (Hillquit). of IWW. General strike in November 1909 of 40,000 Convention of 1912. Right Wing is militant, as shirtwaist makers in New York City. Homestake lock- seen by speech of Berger. Center is terrorized by Right out and strike in November 1909. Homestake Min- Wing as seen by speech of Hillquit. Left Wing is weak ing Co. at Lead, South Dakota, declares war against and confused. It fails to make Section 6 an issue of the Western Federation of Miners. The strike of the revolutionary versus opportunistic political action. streetcar men in Philadelphia in January 1910, and Read speeches of Prevey, Ohio; Menick, Pa.; Besse- the subsequent general strike (the first of its kind in mer, Ohio. In proceedings of convention, pages 127, America) in Philadelphia in February 1910. 122, and 132. Left wing failed completely to establish its point of view on the relation of the party to the trade unions when it accepted the report of the Con- Bittelman: Outline for a History of the Communist Party in America 3 vention Committee. Speech of Haywood on the sub- strengthened the ideological influence of Berger and ject shows great confusion of the Left Wing on this Hillquit. The beginning of the war shook the compla- matter. (See proceedings, page 100 for Haywood’s cency of the Socialist Party membership. There began speech, and page 195 for committee report.) at first a mild struggle within the party between its Left Wing made serious blunder by failing to pro-German wing and pro-Allies wing. The voice of challenge the Right Wing on the platform adopted by revolutionary opposition to imperialist wars was hardly the convention. Examine platform. (Page 196.) Typi- audible. The beginning of 1915 sees a change. The cal petty bourgeois platform. Only Washington del- Left Wing is making itself felt. The New Review re- egation voted against it upon instructions from its or- flects the revival of the Left Wing. ganization to vote against immediate demands. On report of committee on agrarian program, Left Wing XI. Left Wing Ideology (Ohsol and Ruthenberg) made ineffective fight for During 1915-1917. amendments to incorporate principle of collective ownership of land — agrarian views of Left Wing con- Left Wing takes clear position against socialists fused and inconsistent. (See speech and amendments supporting imperialist wars. It shows its revolutionary of Ohsol in proceedings of convention, page 68, and immaturity by failing to raise the slogan of civil war amendment by Ruthenberg, page 82.) against the imperialist war. (See article of Louis C. Fraina, “The Future of Socialism,” New Review, Janu- IX. Results of 1912 Convention. ary 1915, page 20.) It realizes the collapse of the Sec- ond International, only dimly perceiving the reasons The Left Wing came out of the convention seri- and demands the organization of a new International ously broken and demoralized. The adoption of Sec- under the slogan: Drive Nationalism Out of the So- tion 6 led to an exodus of large masses from the So- cialist Movement. (Same article, pages 16 and 17.) It cialist Party, which then passed definitely under the raises the question of colonial oppression and more control of the Right Wing and Center. The nomina- centralization in the new International, but gives half- tion of Debs for President by a vote of 165 as against way solutions for these problems.