Viewing page 28 of 56

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

-13-

of this coalition. We are also told that the workers are not ready for a breakaway from the two party system, and still work within the framework of the two party system, which always means the Democratic Party. Is there a suspicion here of advocating gradualism, a reform type approach? If it is necessary to build the third party, shouldn't we be speaking of this in the shops? If we wait for labor to move first, aren't we being followers instead of leaders? Isn't it possible to actively work for a third party and at the same time not be isolated from the workers? Certainly all of the "it is necessaries" are necessary, but it would be welcome to sink our teeth into concrete proposals which would make the "it is necessary" sweeping generalizations possible of achievement.

One feature of this document is the failure on any item to estimate the degree of success that will be achieved during this next period between conventions. If a peace movement led by workers must be built, to what extent will this be successful within the next two years? Simply posing this question should start a train of consideration or concrete program for ensuring the success of this goal. It further should sharpen the evaluation of the entire peace movement in order to be able to predict. But that is what a dialectical approach should attempt.

We desire an anti-monopoly coalition. Based on our understanding and analysis, where will we be in 1962? Still asking for an anti-monopoly coalition, or will we expect to see positive results like independent candidates willing on local levels, and to what extent? It is insufficient to simply express what is possible. We must sharpen and deepen our Marxist understanding and especially our Marxist application.

Perhaps the section on the Communist Party could best illustrate the above approach. The draft resolution states many things that our Party must strive to do. Wouldn't it be more pertinent to take, for instance, Party building? What is the estimate for our Party to gather one hundred thousand new recruits from the shops? Impossible? 1. The Party is attempting to establish a club in steel by working from outside the steel mills, but concentrating in a community heavily populated by steel workers. This is part of the open work of the Party, but geared to an industrial concentration approach. 2. Recruitment of shop workers by our workers is the shops, the degree of success of this goal is one useful measuring rod of our work in the shops. 3. Through our community clubs who through their organizational work, develop friends and contacts with whom we can speak on a more advanced level until they are ready to embrace the Communist Party. special emphasis is placed upon worker contacts within these communities.

You will notice that nothing was said about colonization. It is not correct to couple colonization and industrial concentration. But a consideration of Party building must orient itself around industrial concentration. If out National Committee gets this kind of information and local evaluations, this could be built up into an objective dissertation on this question on a national basis. From this could follow our objective for the next two years with a concrete program to support its attainment.

This is a challenge and could be inspirational. Our failure to follow this method has resulted in stilted, safe approaches. We can be wrong in our estimates, but we certainly can also learn to sharpen our wits and better our estimates by doing. Let us get on the Marxist dialectical road. 

Draft Resolution on the Negro Question in the U.S.

As stated earlier, this is a mature, positive document with a dialectical orientation. There does seem to be two serious omissions. The first is program. A draft resolution without program becomes simply didactic. With such an evaluation which was presented, it would seem that certain conclusions in the form of the program must be a necessary part.