The United Front: The Struggle against Fascism and War (Georgi Dimitrov)

The United Front: The Struggle against Fascism and War
Author	Georgi Dimitrov
Publisher	Lawrence & Wishart
First published	1938 London
Source	https://archive.org/details/the-united-front-georgi-dimitrov/mode/1up

The Fascist Offensive and the Tasks of the Communist International

Fascism and the Working Class

Comrades, as early as its Sixth Congress,* the Communist In¬ ternational warned the world proletariat that a new fascist offensive was in preparation and called for a straggle against it. The Congress pointed out that “in a more or less developed form, fascist tenden¬ cies and the germs of a fascist movement are to be found almost everywhere.”

With the development of the present very deep economic crisis, with the general crisis of capitalism becoming sharply marked and the mass of working people becoming revolutionized, fascism has embarked upon a wide offensive. The ruling bourgeoisie more and more seeks salvation in fascism, with the object of taking excep¬ tional predatory measures against the toilers, preparing for an impe¬ rialist war of plunder, attacking the Soviet Union, enslaving and partitioning China, and by all these means preventing revolution.

Imperialist circles are trying to put the whole burden of the cri¬ sis on the backs of the toilers. That is why they need fascism.

They are trying to solve the problem of markets by enslaving the weak nations, by intensifying colonial oppression and repartitioning the world anew by means of war. That is why they need fascism.

They are striving to forestall the growth of the forces of revolu¬ tion by smashing the revolutionary movement of the workers and peasants and by undertaking a military attack against the Soviet Union - the bulwark of the world proletariat. That is why they need fascism.

In a number of countries, Germany in particular, these imperial¬ ist circles have succeeded, before the masses have decisively turned toward revolution, in inflicting defeat on the proletariat and estab¬ lishing a fascist dictatorship.

But it is characteristic of the victory of fascism that this victory, on the one hand, bears witness to the weakness of the proletariat, disorganized and paralyzed by the disruptive Social-Democratic policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie, and, on the other, expresses the weakness of the bourgeoisie itself, afraid of the reali¬ zation of a united straggle of the working class, afraid of revolution, and no longer in a position to maintain its dictatorship over the masses by the old methods of bourgeois democracy and parliamentarism.

The victory of fascism in Germany, Comrade Stalin said at the Seventeenth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union:

...must be regarded not only as a symptom of the weakness of the working class and as a result of the betray¬ al of the working class by Social-Democracy, which paved the way for fascism; it must also be regarded as a symptom of the weakness of the bourgeoisie, as a symptom of the fact that the bourgeoisie is already unable to rale by the old methods of parliamentarism and bourgeois democracy, and, as a consequence, is compelled in its home policy to resort to terroristic methods of administration - it must be taken as a symptom of the fact that it is no longer able to find a way out of the present situation on the basis of a peaceful foreign policy, as a consequence of which it is compelled to resort to a policy of war.'

The Class Character of Fascism

Comrades, fascism in power was correctly described by the Thir¬ teenth Plenum of the Executive Committee of the Communist Inter¬ national as the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of finance capital.

The most reactionary variety of fascism is the German type of fascism, ft has the effrontery to call itself National-Socialism, though it has nothing in common with socialism. Hitler fascism is not only bourgeois nationalism, it is bestial chauvinism, ft is a gov¬ ernment system of political gangsterism, a system of provocation and torture practiced upon the working class and the revolutionary elements of the peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie and the intelligent- sia. It is medieval barbarity and bestiality, it is unbridled aggression in relation to other nations and countries.

German fascism is acting as the spearhead of international counter-revolution, as the chief instigator of imperialist war, as the initiator of a crusade against the Soviet Union, the great fatherland of the toilers of the whole world.

Fascism is not a form of state power “standing above both clas¬ ses - the proletariat and the bourgeoisie,” as Otto Bauer, for in¬ stance, has asserted. It is not “the revolt of the petty bourgeoisie which has captured the machinery of the state,” as the British So¬ cialist Brailsford declares. No, fascism is not super-class govern¬ ment, nor government of the petty bourgeoisie or the lumpen- proletariat over finance capital. Fascism is the power of finance cap¬ ital itself. It is the organization of terrorist vengeance against the working class and the revolutionary section of the peasantry and intelligentsia. In foreign policy, fascism is jingoism in its crudest form, fomenting bestial hatred of other nations.

This, the true character of fascism, must be particularly stressed; because in a number of countries, under cover of social demagogy, fascism has managed to gain the following of the mass of the petty bourgeoisie that has been driven out of its course by the crisis, and even of certain sections of the most backward strata of the proletariat. These would never have supported fascism if they had understood its real class character and its true nature.

The development of fascism, and the fascist dictatorship itself, assume different forms in different countries, according to histori¬ cal, social and economic conditions and to the national peculiarities and the international position of the given country. In certain coun¬ tries, principally those in which fascism has no extensive mass basis and in which the struggle of the various groups within the camp of the fascist bourgeoisie itself is fairly acute, fascism does not imme¬ diately venture to abolish parliament, but allows the other bourgeois parties, as well as the Social-Democratic Parties, to retain a certain degree of legality. In other countries, where the mling bourgeoisie fears an early outbreak of revolution, fascism establishes its unre¬ stricted political monopoly, either immediately or by intensifying its reign of terror against and persecution of all competing parties and groups. This does not prevent fascism, when its position becomes particularly acute, from trying to extend its basis and, without alter- ing its class nature, trying to combine open terrorist dictatorship with a crude sham of parliamentarism.

The accession to power of fascism is not an ordinary succes¬ sion of one bourgeois government by another, but a substitution of one state form of class domination of the bourgeoisie — bourgeois democracy — by another form — open terrorist dictatorship. It would be a serious mistake to ignore this distinction, a mistake which would prevent the revolutionary proletariat from mobilizing the widest strata of the working people of town and country for the straggle against the menace of the seizure of power by the fascists, and from taking advantage of the contradictions which exist in the camp of the bourgeoisie itself. But it is a mistake, no less serious and dangerous, to underrate the importance, in establishing the fas¬ cist dictatorship, of the reactionary measures of the bourgeoisie which are at present increasingly developing in bourgeois- democratic countries - measures which suppress the democratic liberties of the working people, falsify and curtail the rights of par¬ liament and intensify the repression of the revolutionary movement.

Comrades, the accession to power of fascism must not be con¬ ceived of in so simplified and smooth a form, as though some com¬ mittee or other of finance capital decided on a certain date to set up a fascist dictatorship. In reality, fascism usually comes to power in the course of a mutual, and at times severe, straggle against the old bourgeois parties, or a definite section of these parties, in the course of a straggle even within the fascist camp itself - a straggle which at times leads to armed clashes, as we have witnessed in the case of Germany, Austria and other countries. All this, however, does not make less important the fact that, before the establishment of a fas¬ cist dictatorship, bourgeois governments usually pass through a number of preliminary stages and adopt a number of reactionary measures which directly facilitate the accession to power of fas¬ cism. Whoever does not fight the reactionary measures of the bour¬ geoisie and the growth of fascism at these preparatory stages is not in a position to prevent the victory of fascism, but, on the contrary, facilitates that victory.

The Social-Democratic leaders glossed over and concealed from the masses the true class nature of fascism, and did not call them to the straggle against the increasingly reactionary measures of the bourgeoisie. They bear great historical responsibility for the fact that, at the decisive moment of the fascist offensive, a large section of the working people of Germany and of a number of other fascist countries failed to recognize in fascism the most bloodthirsty monster of finance, their most vicious enemy, and that these masses were not prepared to resist it.

What is the source of the influence of fascism over the masses? Fascism is able to attract the masses because it demagogically ap¬ peals to their most urgent needs and demands. Fascism not only inflames prejudices that are deeply ingrained in the masses, but also plays on the better sentiments of the masses, on their sense of jus¬ tice, and sometimes even on their revolutionary traditions. Why do the German fascists, those lackeys of the big bourgeoisie and mortal enemies of socialism, represent themselves to the masses as “So¬ cialists,” and depict their accession to power as a “revolution”? Be¬ cause they try to exploit the faith in revolution and urge toward so¬ cialism that lives in the hearts of the mass of working people in Germany.

Fascism acts in the interests of the extreme imperialists, but it presents itself to the masses in the guise of champion of an ill- treated nation, and appeals to outraged national sentiments, as Ger¬ man fascism did, for instance, when it won the support of the mass¬ es by the slogan “Against the Versailles Treaty!”

Fascism aims at the most unbridled exploitation of the masses, but it approaches them with the most artful anti-capitalist dema¬ gogy, taking advantage of the deep hatred of the working people against the plundering bourgeoisie, the banks, trusts and financial magnates, and advancing those slogans which at the given moment are most alluring to the politically immature masses. In Germany - “The general welfare is higher than the welfare of the individual”; in Italy — “Our state is not a capitalist, but a corporate state; in Japan - “For Japan, without exploitation”; in the United States — “Share the wealth,” and so forth.

Fascism delivers up the people to be devoured by the most cor¬ rupt and venal elements, but comes before them with the demand for “an honest and incorruptible government.” Speculating on the profound disillusionment of the masses in bourgeois-democratic governments, fascism hypocritically denounces corruption (for in¬ stance, the Barmat and Sklarek affairs in Germany, the Stavisky affair in France, and numerous others).

It is in the interests of the most reactionary circles of the bour¬ geoisie that fascism intercepts the disappointed masses who desert the old bourgeois parties. But it impresses these masses by the se¬ verity of its attacks on the bourgeois governments and its irreconcil¬ able attitude to the old bourgeois parties.

Surpassing in its cynicism and hypocrisy all other varieties of bourgeois reaction, fascism adapts its demagogy to the national pe¬ culiarities of each country, and even to the peculiarities of the vari¬ ous social strata in one and the same country. And the mass of the petty-bourgeoisie and even a section of the workers, reduced to des¬ pair by want, unemployment and the insecurity of their existence, fall victim to the social and chauvinist demagogy of fascism.

Fascism comes to power as a party of attack on the revolution¬ ary movement of the proletariat, on the mass of the people who are in a state of unrest; yet it stages its accession to power as a “revolu¬ tionary” movement against the bourgeoisie on behalf of “the whole nation” and for the “salvation” of the nation. (One recalls Mussoli¬ ni’s “march” on Rome, Pilsudski’s “march” on Warsaw, Hitler’s National-Socialist “revolution” in Germany, and so forth.)

But whatever the masks which fascism adopts, whatever the forms in which it presents itself, whatever the ways by which it comes to power -

Fascism is a most ferocious attack by capital on the mass of the working people ;

Fascism is unbridled chauvinism and annexationist war ;

Fascism is rabid reaction and counter-revolution ;

Fascism is the most vicious enemy of the working class and of all working people!

What Are the Fruits of Victorious Fascism for the Masses?

Fascism promised the workers “a fair wage,” but actually it has brought them an even lower, a pauper standard of living. It prom¬ ised work for the unemployed, but actually it has brought them even more painful torments of starvation and forced servile labor. In practice it converts the workers and unemployed into pariahs of capitalist society stripped of rights; destroys their trade unions; de¬ prives them of the right to strike and to have their working class press, forces them into fascist organizations, plunders their social insurance funds and transforms the mills and factories into barracks where the unbridled arbitrary rule of the capitalist reigns.

Fascism promised the working youth a broad highway to a bril¬ liant future. But actually it has brought wholesale dismissals of young workers, labor camps and incessant military drilling for a war of conquest.

Fascism promised to guarantee office workers, petty officials and intellectuals security of existence, to destroy the omnipotence of the trusts and wipe out profiteering by bank capital. But actually it has brought them an ever greater degree of despair and uncertain¬ ty as to the morrow; it is subjecting them to a new bureaucracy made up of the most submissive of its followers, it is setting up an intolerable dictatorship of the trusts and spreading cormption and degeneration to an unprecedented extent.

Fascism promised the ruined and impoverished peasants to put an end to debt bondage, to abolish rent and even to expropriate the landed estates without compensation, in the interests of the landless and ruined peasants. But actually it is placing the toiling peasants in a state of unprecedented servitude to the trusts and the fascist state apparatus, and pushes to the utmost limit the exploitation of the great mass of the peasantry by the big landowners, the banks and the usurers.

“Germany will be a peasant country, or will not be at all,” Hit¬ ler solemnly declared. And what did the peasants of Germany get under Hitler? The moratorium, which has already been canceled? Or the law on the inheritance of peasant property, which leads to millions of sons and daughters of peasants being squeezed out of the villages and reduced to paupers? Farm laborers have been trans¬ formed into semi-serfs, deprived even of the elementary right of free movement. The working peasants have been deprived of the opportunity of selling the produce of their farms in the market.

And in Poland?

The Polish peasant — says the Polish newspaper Czas - employs methods and means which were used perhaps only in the Middle Ages; he nurses the fire in his stove and lends it to his neighbor; he splits matches into several parts; he lends dirty soap-water to others; he boils herring barrels in order to obtain salt water. This is not a fable, but the actual state of affairs in the countryside, of the truth of which an¬ ybody may convince himself.

And it is not Communists who write this, comrades, but a Polish reactionary newspaper!

But this is by no means all.

Every day, in the concentration camps of fascist Germany, in the cellars of the Gestapo (German secret police), in the torture chambers of Poland, in the cells of the Bulgarian and Finnish secret police, in the “Glavnyacha” in Belgrade, in the Rumanian “Siguranza” and on the Italian islands, some of the best sons of the working class, revolu¬ tionary peasants, fighters for the splendid future of mankind, are be¬ ing subjected to revolting tortures and indignities, before which pale the most abominable acts of the tsarist secret police. The blackguard¬ ly German fascists beat husbands to a bloody pulp in the presence of their wives, and send the ashes of murdered sons by parcel post to their mothers. Sterilization has been made a method of political war¬ fare. In the torture chambers, imprisoned anti-fascists are given injec¬ tions of poison, their arms are broken, their eyes gouged out; they are stmng up and have water pumped into them; the fascist swastika is carved in their living flesh.

I have before me a statistical summary drawn up by the Interna¬ tional Red Aid - the international organization for aid to revolution¬ ary fighters regarding the number of killed, wounded, arrested, maimed and tortured to death in Germany, Poland, Italy, Austria, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia. In Germany alone, since the National- Socialists came to power, over 4,200 anti-fascist workers, peasants, employees, intellectuals - Communists, Social-Democrats and members of opposition Christian organizations - have been mur¬ dered, 317,800 arrested, 218,600 injured and subjected to torture. In Austria, since the battles of February last year, the “Christian” fas¬ cist government has murdered 1,900 revolutionary workers, maimed and injured 10,000 and arrested 40,000. And this summary, com¬ rades, is far from complete.

Words fail me in describing the indignation which seizes us at the thought of the torments which the working people are now un¬ dergoing in a number of fascist countries. The facts and figures we quote do not reflect one-hundredth part of the true picture of the exploitation and tortures inflicted by the White terror and forming part of the daily life of the working class in many capitalist coun¬ tries. Volumes cannot give a just picture of the countless brutalities inflicted by fascism on the working people.

With feelings of profound emotion and hatred for the fascist butchers, we dip the banners of the Communist International before the unforgettable memory of John Scheer, Fiete Schulz and Luttgens in Germany, Koloman Wallisch and Munichreiter in Aus¬ tria, Sallai and Furst in Hungary, Kofardzhiev, Lutbrisky and Voikov in Bulgaria — before the memory of thousands and thou¬ sands of Communists, Social-Democrats and no-party workers, peasants and representatives of the progressive intelligentsia who have laid down their lives in the struggle against fascism.

From this platform we greet the leader of the German proletari¬ at and the honorary chairman of our Congress - Comrade Thaelmann. We greet Comrades Rakosi, Gramsci, Antikainen and Yonko Panov. We greet the leader of the Spanish Socialists, Cabal¬ lero, imprisoned by the counter-revolutionaries; Tom Mooney, who has been languishing in prison for eighteen years, and the thousands of other prisoners of capitalism and fascism and we say to them: “Brothers in the fight, brothers in arms, you are not forgotten. We are with you. We shall give every hour of our lives, every drop of our blood, for your liberation, and for the liberation of all toilers from the shameful regime of fascism.”

Comrades, it was Lenin who warned us that the bourgeoisie may succeed in overwhelming the toilers by savage terror, in check¬ ing the growing forces of revolution for brief periods of time, but that, nevertheless, this would not save it from its doom.

Life will assert itself - Lenin wrote — Let the bourgeoi¬ sie rave, work itself into a frenzy, overdo things, commit stupidities, take vengeance on the Bolsheviks in advance and endeavor to kill off (in India, Hungary, Germany, etc.) hundreds, thousands and hundreds of thousands more of yesterday’s and tomorrow’s Bolsheviks. Acting thus, the bourgeoisie acts as all classes doomed by history have act¬ ed. Communists should know that the future, at any rate, belongs to them; therefore, we can, and must, combine the most intense passion in the great revolutionary struggle with the coolest and most sober evaluation of the mad rav¬ ings of the bourgeoisie.

Aye, if we and the proletariat of the whole world firmly follow the path indicated by Lenin and Stalin, the bourgeoisie will perish in spite of everything.

Is the Victory of Fascism Inevitable?

Why was it that fascism could triumph, and how?

Fascism is the most vicious enemy of the working class and working people. Fascism is the enemy of nine-tenths of the German people, nine-tenths of the Austrian people, nine-tenths of the other people in fascist countries. How, in what way, could this vicious enemy triumph?

Fascism was able to come to power primarily because the working class, owing to the policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie pursued by the Social-Democratic leaders, proved to be split, politically and organizationally disarmed, in face of the on¬ slaught of the bourgeoisie. And the Communist Parties, on the other hand, apart from and in opposition to the Social-Democrats, were not strong enough to rouse the masses and to lead them in a decisive straggle against fascism.

And, indeed, let the millions of Social-Democratic workers, who together with their Communist brothers are now experiencing the horrors of fascist barbarism, seriously reflect on this. If, in 1918, when revolution broke out in Germany and Austria, the Austrian and German proletariat had not followed the Social-Democratic leader¬ ship of Otto Bauer, Friedrich Adler and Karl Renner in Austria and Ebert and Scheidemann in Germany, but had followed the road of the Russian Bolsheviks, the road of Lenin and Stalin, there would now be no fascism in Austria or Germany, in Italy or Hungary, in Poland or in the Balkans. Not the bourgeoisie, but the working class would long ago have been the master of the situation in Europe.

Take, for example, the Austrian Social-Democratic Party. The revolution of 1918 raised it to a tremendous height. It held the power in its hands, it held strong positions in the army and in the state appa¬ ratus. Relying on these positions, it could have nipped fascism in the bud. But it surrendered one position of the working class after another without resistance. It allowed the bourgeoisie to strengthen its power, annul the constitution, purge the state apparatus, army and police force of Social-Democratic functionaries and take the arsenals away from the workers. It allowed the fascist bandits to murder Social- Democratic workers with impunity and accepted the terms of the Huettenberg pact, which gave the fascist elements entry to the facto¬ ries. At the same time the Social-Democratic leaders fooled the work¬ ers with the Linz program, which contained the alternative possibility of using armed force against the bourgeoisie and establishing the pro¬ letarian dictatorship, assuring them that in the event of the ruling class using force against the working class, the Party would reply by a call for a general strike and for armed struggle. As though the whole poli¬ cy of preparation for a fascist attack on the working class were not one chain of acts of violence against the working class masked by constitutional forms! Even on the eve and in the course of the Febru¬ ary battles the Austrian Social-Democratic leaders left the heroically fighting Schutzbund isolated from the masses, and doomed the Aus¬ trian proletariat to defeat.

Was the victory of fascism inevitable in Germany? No, the German working class could have prevented it.

But in order to do so, it should have achieved a united anti¬ fascist proletarian front, and forced the Social-Democratic leaders to put a stop to their campaign against the Communists and to accept the repeated proposals of the Communist Party for united action against fascism.

When fascism was on the offensive and the bourgeois demo¬ cratic liberties were being progressively abolished by the bourgeoi¬ sie, it should not have contented itself with the verbal resolutions of the Social-Democrats, but should have replied by a genuine mass struggle, which would have made the fulfillment of the fascist plans of the German bourgeoisie more difficult.

It should not have allowed the prohibition of the League of Red Front Fighters by the government of Braun and Severing, and should have established fighting contact between the League and the Reichsbanner, with its nearly one million members, and have compelled Braun and Severing to arm both these organizations in order to resist and smash the fascist bands.

It should have compelled the Social-Democratic leaders who headed the Prussian government to adopt measures of defense against fascism, arrest the fascist leaders, close down their press, confiscate their material resources and the resources of the capital- ists who were financing the fascist movement, dissolve the fascist organizations, deprive them of their weapons and so forth.

Furthermore, it should have secured the re-establishment and extension of all forms of social assistance and the introduction of a moratorium and crisis benefits for the peasants — who were being mined under the influence of crises — by taxing the banks and the trusts, in this way securing for itself the support of the working peasants. It was the fault of the Social-Democrats of Germany that this was not done, and that is why fascism was able to triumph.

Was it inevitable that the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy should have triumphed in Spain, a country where the forces of proletarian revolt are so advantageously combined with a peasant war?

The Spanish Socialists were in the government from the first days of the revolution. Did they establish fighting contact between the working class organizations of every political opinion, including the Communists and the Anarchists, and did they weld the working class into a united trade union organization? Did they demand the confiscation of all lands of the landlords, the church and the monas¬ teries in favor of the peasants in order to win over the latter to the side of the revolution? Did they attempt to fight for national self- determination for the Catalonians and the Basques, and for the lib¬ eration of Morocco? Did they purge the army of monarchist and fascist elements and prepare it for passing over to the side of the workers and peasants? Did they dissolve the Civil Guard, so detest¬ ed by the people, the executioner of every movement of the people? Did they strike at the fascist party of Gil Robles and at the might of the Catholic church? No, they did none of these things. They reject¬ ed the frequent proposals of the Communists for united action against the offensive of the bourgeois-landlord reaction and fas¬ cism; they passed election laws which enabled the reactionaries to gain a majority in the Cortes (parliament), laws which penalized popular movements, laws under which the heroic miners of Asturias are now being tried. They had peasants who were fighting for land shot by the Civil Guard, and so on.

This is the way in which the Social-Democrats, by disorganiz¬ ing and splitting the ranks of the working class, cleared the path to power for fascism in Germany, Austria and Spain.

Comrades, fascism also triumphed for the reason that the prole¬ tariat found itself isolated from its natural allies. Fascism triumphed because it was able to win over large masses of the peasantry, ow- ing to the fact that the Social-Democrats, in the name of the work¬ ing class, pursued what was in fact an anti-peasant policy. The peasant saw in power a number of Social-Democratic governments, which in his eyes were an embodiment of the power of the working class, but not one of them put an end to peasant want, none of them gave land to the peasantry. In Germany, the Social-Democrats did not touch the landlords; they combated the strikes of the agricultural workers, with the result that long before Hitler came to power the agricultural workers of Germany were deserting the reformist trade unions and in the majority of cases were going over to the Stahlhelm and to the National-Socialists.

Fascism also triumphed for the reason that it was able to pene¬ trate the ranks of the youth , whereas the Social-Democrats diverted the working class youth from the class struggle, while the revolu¬ tionary proletariat did not develop the necessary educational work among the youth and did not pay enough attention to the straggle for its specific interests and demands. Fascism grasped the very acute need of the youth for militant activity, and enticed a consider¬ able section of the youth into its fighting detachments. The new generation of young men and women has not experienced the hor¬ rors of war. They have felt the full weight of the economic crisis, unemployment and the disintegration of bourgeois democracy. But, seeing no prospects for the future, large sections of the youth proved to be particularly receptive to fascist demagogy, which de¬ picted for them an alluring future should fascism succeed.

In this connection, we cannot avoid referring also to a number of mistakes committed by the Communist Parties, mistakes that hampered our straggle against fascism.

In our ranks there was an impermissible underestimation of the fascist danger, a tendency which to this day has not everywhere been overcome. Of this nature was the opinion formerly to be met with in our Parties to the effect that “Germany is not Italy,” mean¬ ing that fascism may have succeeded in Italy, but that its success in Germany was out of the question, because the latter is an industrial¬ ly and culturally highly developed country, with forty years of tradi¬ tions of the working class movement, in which fascism was impos¬ sible. Or the kind of opinion which is to be met with nowadays, to the effect that in countries of “classical” bourgeois democracy the soil for fascism does not exist. Such opinions have served and may serve to relax vigilance toward the fascist danger, and to render the mobilization of the proletariat in the struggle against fascism more difficult.

One might also cite not a few instances where Communists were taken unawares by the fascist coup. Remember Bulgaria, where the leadership of our Party took up a “neutral,” but in fact opportunist, position with regard to the coup d’etat of June 9,1923; Poland, where, in May, 1926, the leadership of the Communist Party, making a wrong estimate of the motive forces of the Polish revolution, did not realize the fascist nature of Pilsudski’s coup, and trailed in the rear of events; Finland, where our Party based itself on a false conception of slow and gradual fascization and overlooked the fascist coup which was being prepared by the leading group of the bourgeoisie and which took the Party and the working class unawares.

When National-Socialism had already become a menacing mass movement in Germany, there were comrades who regarded the Bruening government as already a government of fascist dictator¬ ship, and who boastfully declared: “If Hitler’s Third Reich ever comes about, it will be six feet underground, and above it will be the victorious power of the workers.”

Our comrades in Germany for a long time failed to reckon with the wounded national sentiments and the indignation of the masses against the Versailles Treaty; they treated as of little account the waverings of the peasantry and petty bourgeoisie; they were late in drawing up their program of social and national emancipation, and when they did put it forward they were unable to adapt it to the con¬ crete demands of the level of the masses. They were even unable to popularize it widely among the masses.

In a number of countries the necessary development of a mass fight against fascism was replaced by barren hair-splitting as to the nature of fascism “in general” and by a narrow sectarian attitude in formulating and solving the immediate political tasks of the Party.

Comrades, it is not simply because we want to dig up the past that we speak of the causes of the victory of fascism, that we point to the historical responsibility of the Social-Democrats for the de¬ feat of the working class, and that we also point out our own mis¬ takes in the fight against fascism. We are not historians divorced from living reality; we, active fighters of the working class, are obliged to answer the question that is tormenting millions of work¬ ers: Can the victory of fascism be prevented, and how? And we re- ply to these millions of workers: Yes, comrades, the road in the way of fascism can be blocked. It is quite possible. It depends on our¬ selves, on the workers, the peasants and all working people!

Whether the victory of fascism can be prevented depends first and foremost on the militant activity of the working class itself, on whether its forces are welded into a single militant army combating the offensive of capitalism and fascism. By establishing its fighting unity, the proletariat would paralyze the influence of fascism over the peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie of the towns, the youth and the intelligentsia, and would be able to neutralize one section of them and win over another section.

Second, it depends on the existence of a strong revolutionary party, correctly leading the straggle of the working people against fascism. A party which systematically calls on the workers to retreat in the face of fascism and permits the fascist bourgeoisie to strengthen its positions will inevitably lead the workers to defeat.

Third, it depends on a correct policy of the working class to¬ ward the peasantry and the petty-bourgeois masses of the towns. These masses must be taken as they are, and not as we should like to have them. It is only in the process of the straggle that they will overcome their doubts and waverings. It is only by a patient attitude toward their inevitable waverings, it is only by the political help of the proletariat, that they will be able to rise to a higher level of revo¬ lutionary consciousness and activity.

Fourth, it depends on the vigilance and timely action of the revolutionary proletariat. The latter must not allow fascism to take it unawares, it must not surrender the initiative to fascism, but must inflict decisive blows on it before it can gather its forces, it must not allow fascism to consolidate its position, it must repel fascism wherever and whenever it rears its head, it must not allow fascism to gain new positions. This is what the French proletariat is so suc¬ cessfully trying to do.

These are the main conditions for preventing the growth of fas¬ cism and its accession to power.

Fascism—A Ferocious but Unstable Power

The fascist dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is a ferocious power, but an unstable one.

What are the chief causes of the instability of the fascist dictatorship?

Fascism undertakes to overcome the disharmonies and antago¬ nisms within the bourgeois camp, but it makes these antagonisms even more acute. Fascism tries to establish its political monopoly by violently destroying other political parties. But the existence of the capitalist system, the existence of various classes and the accentua¬ tion of class contradictions inevitably tend to undermine and ex¬ plode the political monopoly of fascism. This is not the case of a Soviet country, where the dictatorship of the proletariat is also real¬ ized by a party with a political monopoly, but where this political monopoly accords with the interests of millions of working people and is increasingly being based on the construction of a classless society. In a fascist country the party of the fascists cannot preserve its monopoly for long, because it cannot set itself the aim of abol¬ ishing classes and class contradictions. It puts an end to the legal existence of bourgeois parties. But a number of them continue to maintain an illegal existence, while the Communist Party even in conditions of illegality continues to make progress, becomes steeled and tempered and leads the straggle of the proletariat against the fascist dictatorship. Hence, under the blows of class contradictions, the political monopoly of fascism is bound to explode.

Another reason for the instability of the fascist dictatorship is that the contrast between the anti-capitalist demagogy of fascism and its policy of enriching the monopolist bourgeoisie in the most piratical fashion makes it easier to expose the class nature of fas¬ cism and tends to shake and narrow its mass basis.

Furthermore, the victory of fascism arouses the deep hatred and indignation of the masses, helps to revolutionize them, and provides a powerful stimulus for a united front of the proletariat against fascism.

By conducting a policy of economic nationalism (autarchy) and by seizing the greater part of the national income for the purpose of preparing for war, fascism undermines the whole economic life of the country and accentuates the economic war between the capitalist states. To the conflicts that arise among the bourgeoisie it lends the character of sharp and at times bloody collisions that undermine the stability of the fascist state power in the eyes of the people. A gov¬ ernment which murders its own followers, as happened in Germany on June 30 of last year, a fascist government against which another section of the fascist bourgeoisie is conducting an armed fight (the National-Socialist putsch in Austria and the violent attacks of indi¬ vidual fascist groups on the fascist governments in Poland, Bulgar- ia, Finland and other countries) - a government of this character cannot for long maintain its authority in the eyes of the broad mass of the petty bourgeoisie.

The working class must be able to take advantage of the antag¬ onisms and conflicts within the bourgeois camp, but it must not cherish the illusion that fascism will exhaust itself of its own ac¬ cord. Fascism will not collapse automatically. It is only the revolu¬ tionary activity of the working class which can help to take ad¬ vantage of the conflicts which inevitably arise within the bourgeois camp in order to undermine the fascist dictatorship and to over¬ throw it.

By destroying the relics of bourgeois democracy, by elevating open violence to a system of government, fascism shakes democrat¬ ic illusions and undermines the authority of the law in the eyes of the working people. This is particularly the case in countries such as Austria and Spain, where the workers have taken up arms against fascism. In Austria, the heroic struggle of the Schutzbund and the Communists, in spite of their defeat, shook the stability of the fas¬ cist dictatorship from the very outset. In Spain, the bourgeoisie did not succeed in putting the fascist muzzle on the working people. The armed struggles in Austria and Spain have resulted in ever wid¬ er masses of the working class coming to realize the necessity for a revolutionary class struggle.

Only such monstrous philistines, such lackeys of the bourgeoi¬ sie, as the superannuated theoretician of the Second International, Karl Kautsky, are capable of casting reproaches at the workers, to the effect that they should not have taken up arms in Austria and Spain. What would the working class movement in Austria and Spain look like today if the working class of these countries were guided by the treacherous counsels of the Kautskys? The working class would be experiencing profound demoralization in its ranks.

The school of civil war - Lenin says - does not leave the people unaffected. It is a harsh school, and its complete curriculum inevitably includes the victories of the counter¬ revolution, the debaucheries of enraged reactionaries, sav¬ age punishments meted out by the old governments to the rebels, etc. But only downright pedants and mentally de¬ crepit mummies can grieve over the fact that nations are en¬ tering this painful school; this school teaches the oppressed classes how to conduct civil war; it teaches how to bring about a victorious revolution; it concentrates in the masses of present-day slaves that hatred which is always harbored by the downtrodden, dull, ignorant slaves, and which leads those slaves who have become conscious of the shame of their slavery to the greatest historic exploits.

The triumph of fascism in Germany has, as we know, been fol¬ lowed by a new wave of the fascist offensive, which, in Austria, led to the provocation by Dollfuss, in Spain to the new onslaughts of the counter-revolutionaries on the revolutionary conquests of the masses, in Poland to the fascist reform of the constitution, while in France it spurred the armed detachments of the fascists to attempt a coup d’etat in February, 1934. But this victory, and the frenzy of the fascist dictatorship, called forth a counter-movement for a united proletarian front against fascism on an international scale.

The burning of the Reichstag, which served as a signal for the general attack of fascism on the working class, the seizure and spo¬ liation of the trade unions and the other working class organizations, the groans of the tortured anti-fascists rising from the vaults of the fascist barracks and concentration camps, are making it clear to the masses what has been the outcome of the reactionary, disruptive role played by the German Social-Democratic leaders, who rejected the proposal made by the Communists for a joint straggle against advancing fascism. These things are convincing the masses of the necessity of amalgamating all forces of the working class for the overthrow of fascism.

Hitler’s victory also provided a decisive stimulus for the crea¬ tion of a united front of the working class against fascism in France. Hitler’s victory not only aroused in the workers a fear of the fate that befell the German workers, not only kindled hatred for the exe¬ cutioners of their German class brothers, but also strengthened in them the determination never in any circumstances to allow in their country what happened to the working class in Germany.

The powerful urge toward the united front in all the capitalist countries shows that the lessons of defeat have not been in vain. The working class is beginning to act in a new way. The initiative shown by the Communist Party in the organization of the united front and the supreme self-sacrifice displayed by the Communists, by the rev¬ olutionary workers in the struggle against fascism, have resulted in an unprecedented increase in the prestige of the Communist Interna¬ tional. At the same time, a deep crisis is developing in the Second International, a crisis which is particularly noticeable and has par¬ ticularly accentuated since the bankruptcy of German Social- Democracy.

With ever greater ease are the Social-Democratic workers able to convince themselves that fascist Germany, with all its horrors and barbarities, is in the final analysis the result of the Social- Democratic policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie. The¬ se masses are coming ever more clearly to realize that the path along which the German Social-Democratic leaders led the proletar¬ iat must not be traversed again. Never has there been such ideologi¬ cal dissension in the camp of the Second International as at the pre¬ sent time. A process of differentiation is taking place in all the So¬ cial-Democratic Parties. Within their ranks two principal camps are forming: side by side with the existing camp of reactionary ele¬ ments, who are trying in every way to preserve the bloc between the Social-Democrats and the bourgeoisie, and who rabidly reject a united front with the Communists, there is beginning to form a camp of revolutionary elements who entertain doubts as to the cor¬ rectness of the policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie, who are in favor of the creation of a united front with the Com¬ munists, and who are increasingly coming to adopt the position of the revolutionary class struggle.

Thus fascism, which appeared as the result of the decline of the capitalist system, in the long mn acts as a factor of its further disin¬ tegration. Thus fascism, which has under taken to bury Marxism, the revolutionary movement of the working class, is, as a result of the dialectics of life and the class straggle, itself leading to the fur¬ ther development of the forces that are bound to serve as its grave¬ diggers, the grave-diggers of capitalism.

United Front of the Working Class against Fascism

Comrades, millions of workers and toilers of the capitalist countries ask the question: How can fascism be prevented from coming to power and how can fascism be overthrown after it has been victorious? To this the Communist International replies: The first thing that must be done, the thing with which to begin, is to form a united front, to establish unity of action of the workers in every factory, in every district, in every region, in every country, all over the world. Unity of action of the proletariat on a national and international scale is the mighty weapon which renders the working class capable not only of successful defense but also of successful counter-attack against fascism, against the class enemy.

Importance of the United Front

Is it not clear that joint action by the supporters of the parties and organizations of the two Internationals, the Communist and the Second International, would make it easier for the masses to repulse the fascist onslaught, and would heighten the political importance of the working class?

Joint action by the parties of both Internationals against fas¬ cism, however, would not be confined in its effects to influencing their present adherents, the Communists and Social-Democrats; it would also exert a powerful influence on the ranks of the Catholic, Anarchist and unorganized workers, even upon those who had tem¬ porarily become the victims of fascist demagogy.

Moreover, a powerful united front of the proletariat would exert tremendous influence on all other strata of the working people, on the peasantry, on the urban petty bourgeoisie, on the intelligentsia. A united front would inspire the wavering groups with faith in the strength of the working class.

But even this is not all. The proletariat of the imperialist coun¬ tries has possible allies not only in the toilers of its own countries but also in the oppressed nations of the colonies and semi-colonies. Inasmuch as the proletariat is split both nationally and international¬ ly, inasmuch as one of its parts supports the policy of collaboration with the bourgeoisie, in particular its system of oppression in the colonies and semi-colonies, a barrier is put between the working class and the oppressed peoples of the colonies and semi-colonies, and the world anti-imperialist front is weakened. Every step on the road to unity of action in the direction of supporting the struggle for the liberation of the colonial peoples by the proletariat of the impe¬ rialist countries means transforming the colonies and semi-colonies into one of the most important reserves of the world proletariat.

If, finally, we bear in mind that international unity of action by the proletariat relies on the steadily growing strength of the prole- tarian state, the land of socialism, the Soviet Union, we see what broad perspectives are revealed by the realization of proletarian uni¬ ty of action on a national and international scale.

The establishment of unity of action by all sections of the work¬ ing class, irrespective of the party or organization to which they belong, is necessary even before the majority of the working class is united in the struggle for the overthrow of capitalism and the victo¬ ry of the proletarian revolution.

Is it possible to realize this unity of action of the proletariat in the individual countries and throughout the whole world? Yes, it is. And it is possible at this very moment. The Communist International puts no conditions for unity of action except one, and that an elementary condition acceptable for all workers, viz., that the unity of action be directed against fascism, against the offensive of capital, against the threat of war, against the class enemy. This is our condition.

The Chief Arguments of the Opponents of the United Front

What objections can the opponents of the united front have and how do they voice their objections?

Some say: “To the Communists the slogan of the united front is merely a maneuver.” But if it is a maneuver, we reply, why don’t you expose the “Communist maneuver” by your honest participa¬ tion in the united front? We declare frankly: We want unity of ac¬ tion by the working class, so that the proletariat may grow strong in its struggle against the bourgeoisie, in order that while defending today its current interests against attacking capital, against fascism, the proletariat may reach a position tomorrow to create the prelimi¬ nary conditions for its final emancipation.

“The Communists attack us,” say others. But listen, we have repeatedly declared: We shall not attack anyone, whether persons, organizations or parties, standing for the united front of the working class against the class enemy. But at the same time it is our duty, in the interests of the proletariat and its cause, to criticize those per¬ sons, organizations and parties that hinder unity of action by the workers.

“We cannot form a united front with the Communists, since they have a different program,” says a third group. But you your¬ selves say that your program differs from the program of the bour- geois parties, and yet this did not and does not prevent you from entering into coalitions with these parties.

“The bourgeois-democratic parties are better allies against fas¬ cism than the Communists,” say the opponents of the united front and the advocates of coalition with the bourgeoisie. But what does Germany’s experience teach? Did not the Social-Democrats form a bloc with those “better” allies? And what were the results?

“If we establish a united front with the Communists, the petty bourgeoisie will take fright at the ‘Red danger’ and will desert to the fascists,” we hear it said quite frequently. But does the united front represent a threat to the peasants, small traders, artisans, work¬ ing intellectuals? No, the united front is a threat to the big bourgeoi¬ sie, the financial magnates, the Junkers and other exploiters, whose regime brings complete ruin to all these strata.

“Social-Democracy is for democracy, the Communists are for dictatorship; therefore we cannot form a united front with the Communists,” say some of the Social-Democratic leaders. But are we offering you now a united front for the purpose of proclaiming the dictatorship of the proletariat? We make no such proposal now.

“Let the Communists recognize democracy, let them come out in its defense, then we shall be ready for a united front.” To this we reply: We are adherents of Soviet democracy, the democracy of the toilers, the most consistent democracy in the world. But in the capi¬ talist countries we defend and shall continue to defend every inch of bourgeois-democratic liberties, which are being attacked by fascism and bourgeois reaction, because the interests of the class straggle of the proletariat so dictate.

“But the tiny Communist Parties do not add anything by partic¬ ipating in the united front brought about by the Labor Party,” say, for instance, the Labor leaders of Great Britain. Recall how the Aus¬ trian Social-Democratic leaders said the same things with reference to the small Austrian Communist Party. And what have events shown? It was not the Austrian Social-Democratic Party headed by Otto Bauer and Karl Renner that proved right, but the tiny Austrian Communist Party which at the right moment signaled the fascist danger in Austria and called upon the workers to straggle. The whole experience of the labor movement has shown that the Com¬ munists, with all their relative insignificance in numbers, are the motive power of the militant activity of the proletariat. Besides this, it must not be forgotten that the Communist Parties of Austria or Great Britain are not only the tens of thousands of workers who are adherents of the Party, but are parts of the world Communist movement, are Sections of the Communist International , the leading Party of which is the Party of a proletariat which has already achieved victory and rales over one-sixth of the globe.

“But the united front did not prevent fascism from being victo¬ rious in the Saar,” is another objection advanced by the opponents of the united front. Strange is the logic of these gentlemen! First they leave no stone unturned to ensure the victory of fascism and then they rejoice with malicious glee because the united front which they entered into only at the last moment did not lead to the victory of the workers.

“If we were to form a united front with the Communists, we should have to withdraw from the coalition, and reactionary and fascist parties would enter the government,” say the Social- Democratic leaders holding cabinet posts in various countries. Very well. Was not the German Social-Democratic Party in a coalition government? It was. Was not the Austrian Social-Democratic Party in office? It was. Were not the Spanish Socialists in the same gov¬ ernment as the bourgeoisie? They were, too. Did the participation of the Social-Democratic Parties in the bourgeois coalition govern¬ ments in these countries prevent fascism from attacking the prole¬ tariat? It did not. Consequently it is as clear as daylight that partici¬ pation of Social-Democratic ministers in bourgeois governments is not a barrier to fascism.

“The Communists act like dictators, they want to prescribe and dictate everything to us.” No. We prescribe nothing and dictate nothing. We only put forward our proposals, being convinced that if realized they will meet the interests of the working people. This is not only the right but the duty of all those acting in the name of the workers. You are afraid of the “dictatorship” of the Communists? Let us jointly submit all proposals to the workers, both yours and ours, jointly discuss them together with all the workers, and choose those proposals which are most useful to the cause of the working class.

Thus all these arguments against the united front will not stand the slightest criticism. They are rather the flimsy excuses of the re¬ actionary leaders of Social-Democracy, who prefer their united front with the bourgeoisie to the united front of the proletariat.

No. These excuses will not hold water. The international prole¬ tariat has experienced the suffering caused by the split in the work¬ ing class, and becomes more and more convinced that the united front, the unity of action of the proletariat on a national and inter¬ national scale, is at once necessary and perfectly possible.

Content and Forms of the United Front

What is and ought to be the basic content of the united front at the present stage? The defense of the immediate economic and po¬ litical interests of the working class, the defense of the working class against fascism, must form the starting point and main content of the united front in all capitalist countries.

We must not confine ourselves to bare appeals to struggle for the proletarian dictatorship. We must also find and advance those slogans and forms of straggle which arise from the vital needs of the masses, from the level of their fighting capacity at the present stage of development.

We must point out to the masses what they must do today to de¬ fend themselves against capitalist spoliation and fascist barbarity.

We must strive to establish the widest united front with the aid of joint action by workers’ organizations of different trends for the defense of the vital interests of the toiling masses. This means:

First, joint straggle really to shift the burden of the conse¬ quences of the crisis onto the shoulders of the ruling classes, the shoulders of the capitalists, landlords - in a word, to the shoulders of the rich.

Second, joint straggle against all forms of the fascist offensive, in defense of the gains and the rights of the toilers, against the de¬ struction of bourgeois-democratic liberties.

Third, joint straggle against the approaching danger of imperi¬ alist war, a straggle that will make the preparation of such a war more difficult.

We must tirelessly prepare the working class for a rapid change informs and methods of struggle when there is a change in the situ¬ ation. As the movement grows and the unity of the working class strengthens, we must go further, and prepare the transition from the defensive to the offensive against capital, steering toward the organ¬ ization of a mass political, strike. It must be an absolute condition of such a strike to draw into it the main trade unions of the countries concerned.

Communists, of course, cannot and must not for a moment abandon their own independent work of Communist education, or¬ ganization and mobilization of the masses. However, to ensure that the workers find the road of unity of action, it is necessary to strive at the same time both for short-term and for long-term agreements that provide for joint action with Social-Democratic Parties, re¬ formist trade unions and other organizations of the toilers against the class enemies of the proletariat. The chief stress in all this must be laid on developing mass action locally, to be carried out by the local organizations through local agreements.

While loyally carrying out the conditions of all agreements made with them, we shall mercilessly expose all sabotage of joint action on the part of persons and organizations participating in the united front. To any attempt to wreck the agreements — and such attempts may possibly be made - we shall reply by appealing to the masses while continuing untiringly to straggle for restoration of the broken unity of action.

It goes without saying that the practical realization of the united front will take various forms in various countries, depending upon the condition and character of the workers’ organizations and their political level, upon the situation in the particular country, upon the changes in progress in the international labor movement, etc.

These forms may include, for instance: coordinated joint action of the workers to be agreed upon from case to case on definite occa¬ sions, on individual demands or on the basis of a common platform; coordinated actions in individual enterprises or by whole industries ; coordinated actions on a local, regional, national or international scale ; coordinated actions for the organization of the economic straggle of the workers, carrying out of mass political actions, for the organization of joint self-defense against fascist attacks; coordinated action in rendering aid to political prisoners and their families, in the field of straggle against social reaction ; joint actions in the defense of the interests of the youth and women, in the field of the cooperative movement, cultural activity, sport, etc.

It would be insufficient to rest content with the conclusion of a pact providing for joint action and the formation of contact commit¬ tees from the parties and organizations participating in the united front, like those we have in France, for instance. That is only the first step. The pact is an auxiliary means for obtaining joint action, but by itself it does not constitute a united front. A contact commis- sion between the leaders of the Communist and Socialist Parties is necessary to facilitate the carrying out of joint action, but by itself it is far from adequate for a real development of the united front, for drawing the widest masses into the struggle against fascism.

The Communists and all revolutionary workers must strive for the formation of elected (and in the countries of fascist dictatorship — selected from the most authoritative participants in the united front movement) class bodies of the united front chosen irrespective of party, at the factories, among the unemployed, in the working class districts, among the small townsfolk and in the villages. Only such bodies will be able to include also in the united front move¬ ment the vast masses of unorganized toilers, and will be able to as¬ sist in developing mass initiative in the straggle against the capital¬ ist offensive of fascism and reaction, and on this basis create the necessary broad active rank and file of the united front and train hundreds and thousands of non-Party Bolsheviks in the capitalist countries.

Joint action of the organized workers is the beginning, the foundation. But we must not lose sight of the fact that the unor¬ ganized masses constitute the vast majority of workers. Thus, in France the number of organized workers - Communists, Socialists, trade union members of various trends - is altogether about one million, while the total number of workers is eleven million. In Great Britain there are approximately five million members of trade unions and parties of various trades. At the same time the total number of workers is fourteen million. In the United States of Amer¬ ica about five million workers are organized, while altogether there are thirty-eight million workers in that country. About the same ra¬ tio holds good for a number of other countries. In “normal” times this mass in the main does not participate in political life. But now this gigantic mass is getting into motion more and more, is being brought into political life, comes out in the political arena.

The creation of non-partisan class bodies is the best form for carrying out, extending and strengthening the united front among the rank and file of the masses. These bodies will likewise be the best bulwark against any attempt of the opponents of the united front to disrupt the established unity of action of the working class.

The Anti-Fascist People's Front

In mobilizing the mass of working people for the straggle against fascism, the formation of a wide, popular anti-fascist front on the basis of the proletarian united front is a particularly important task. The success of the whole straggle of the proletariat is closely bound up with establishing a fighting alliance between the proletariat on the one hand, and the toiling peasantry and basic mass of the urban petty bourgeoisie, who together form the majority of the population even in industrially developed countries, on the other.

In its agitation, fascism, desirous of winning these masses to its own side, tries to set the mass of working people in town and coun¬ tryside against the revolutionary proletariat, frightening the petty bourgeoisie with the bogey of the “Red peril.” We must turn this weapon against those who wield it and show the working peasants, artisans and intellectuals whence the real danger threatens. We must show concretely who it is that piles the burden of taxes and imposts on to the peasant and squeezes usurious interest out of him; who it is that, while owning the best land and every form of wealth, drives the peasant and his family from his plot of land and dooms him to unemployment and poverty. We must explain concretely, patiently and persistently who it is that rains the artisans and handicraftsmen with taxes, imposts, high rents and competition impossible for them to withstand; who it is that throws into the street and deprives of employment the wide masses of the working intelligentsia.

But this is not enough.

The fundamental, the most decisive thing in establishing the an¬ ti-fascist People’s Front is resolute action of the revolutionary pro¬ letariat in defense of the demands of these sections of the people, particularly the working peasantry — demands in line with the basic interests of the proletariat — and in the process of straggle combin¬ ing the demands of the working class with these demands.

In forming the anti-fascist People’s Front, a correct approach to those organizations and parties which have in them a considerable number of the working peasantry and the mass of the urban petty bourgeoisie is of great importance.

In the capitalist counties the majority of these parties and organ¬ izations, political as well as economic, are still under the influence of the bourgeoisie and follow it. The social composition of these parties and organizations is heterogeneous. They include big kulaks (rich peasants) side by side with landless peasants, big business men alongside of petty shopkeepers; but control is in the hands of the former, the agents of big capital. This obliges us to approach the different organizations in different ways, taking into consideration that not infrequently the bulk of the membership does not know anything about the real political character of its leadership. Under certain conditions, we can and must try to draw these parties and organizations or certain sections of them to the side of the anti¬ fascist People’s Front, despite their bourgeois leadership. Such, for instance, is today the situation in France with the Radical Party, in the United States with various farmers’ organizations, in Poland with the “Stronnictwo Ludowe,” in Yugoslavia with the Croatian Peasants’ Party, in Bulgaria with the Agrarian League, in Greece with the Agrarians, etc. But regardless of whether or not there is any chance of attracting these parties and organizations as a whole to the People’s Front, our tactics must under all circumstances be directed toward drawing the small peasants, artisans, handicraftsmen, etc., among their members into the anti-fascist People’s Front.

Hence, you see that in this field we must all along the line put an end to what frequently occurs in our practical work - neglect or contempt of the various organizations and parties of the peasants, artisans and the mass of petty bourgeoisie in the towns.

Key Questions of the United Front in Individual Countries

There are in every country certain key questions which at the present stage are agitating vast masses of the population and around which the struggle for the establishment of the united front must be developed. If these key points, or key questions, are properly grasped, it will ensure and accelerate the establishment of the united front.

The United States of America

Let us take, for example, so important a country in the capitalist world as the United States of America. There millions of people have been set into motion by the crisis. The program for the recov¬ ery of capitalism has collapsed. Vast masses are beginning to aban¬ don the bourgeois parties and are at present at the crossroads.

Embryo American fascism is trying to direct the disillusion¬ ment and discontent of these masses into reactionary fascist chan- nels. It is a peculiarity of the development of American fascism that at the present stage this fascism comes forward principally in the guise of an opposition to fascism, which it accuses of being an “un- American” tendency imported from abroad. In contradistinction to German fascism, which acts under anti-constitutional slogans, American fascism tries to portray itself as the custodian of the Con¬ stitution and “American democracy.” It does not yet represent a directly menacing force. But if it succeeds in penetrating to the wide masses who have become disillusioned with the old bourgeois par¬ ties it may become a serious menace in the very near future.

And what would the success of fascism in the United States in¬ volve? For the mass of working people it would, of course, involve the unrestrained strengthening of the regime of exploitation and the destruction of the working-class movement. And what would be the international significance of this success of fascism? As we know, the United States is not Hungary, or Finland, or Bulgaria, or Latvia. The success of fascism in the United States would vitally change the whole international situation.

Under these circumstances, can the American proletariat con¬ tent itself with organizing only its class-conscious vanguard, which is prepared to follow the revolutionary path? No.

It is perfectly obvious that the interests of the American prole¬ tariat demand that all its forces dissociate themselves from the capi¬ talist parties without delay. It must find in good time ways and suit¬ able forms to prevent fascism from winning over the wide mass of discontented working people. And here it must be said that under American conditions the creation of a mass party of working peo¬ ple, a “Workers’ and Farmers’ Party” might serve as such a suita¬ ble form. Such a party would be a specific form of the mass Peo¬ ple ’s Front in America and should be put in opposition to the parties of the trusts and the banks, and likewise to growing fascism. Such a party, of course, will be neither Socialist nor Communist. But it must be an anti-fascist party and must not be an anti-Communist Party. The program of this party must be directed against the banks, trusts and monopolies, against the principal enemies of the people, who are gambling on the woes of the latter. Such a party will corre¬ spond to its name only if it defends the urgent demands of the work¬ ing class, only if it fights for genuine social legislation, for unem¬ ployment insurance; only if it fights for land for the white and black sharecroppers and for their liberation from debt burdens; only if it tries to secure the cancellation of the farmers’ indebtedness; only if it fights for equal status for Negroes; only if it defends the demands of the war veterans and the interests of members of the liberal pro¬ fessions, small businessmen and artisans. And so on.

It goes without saying that such a party will fight for the elec¬ tion of its own candidates to local government, to the state legisla¬ tures, to the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Our comrades in the United States acted rightly in taking the in¬ itiative for the creation of such a party. But they still have to take effective measures in order to make the creation of such a party the cause of the masses themselves. The question of forming a “Work¬ ers’ and Farmers’ Party,” and its program, should be discussed at mass meetings of the people. We should develop the most wide¬ spread movement for the creation of such a party, and take the lead in it. In no case must the initiative of organizing the party be al¬ lowed to pass to elements desirous of utilizing the discontent of the millions who have become disillusioned in both the bourgeois par¬ ties, Democratic and Republican, in order to create a “third party” in the United States, as an anti-Communist party, a party directed against the revolutionary movement.

Great Britain

In Great Britain, as a result of the mass action of the British workers, Mosley’s fascist organization has for the time being been pushed into the background. But we must not close our eyes to the fact that the so-called “National Government” is passing a number of reactionary measures directed against the working class, as a re¬ sult of which conditions are being created in Great Britain, too, which will make it easier for the bourgeoisie, if necessary, to pass to a fascist regime. At the present stage, fighting the fascist danger in Great Britain means primarily fighting the “National Government” and its reactionary measures, fighting the offensive of capital, fighting for the demands of the unemployed, fighting against wage reductions and for the repeal of all those laws with the help of which the British bourgeoisie is lowering the standard of living of the masses.

But the growing hatred of the working class for the “National Government” is uniting increasingly large numbers under the slogan of the formation of a new Labor government in Great Britain. Can the Communists ignore this frame of mind of the masses, who still retain faith in a Labor government? No, comrades. We must find a way of approaching these masses. We tell them openly, as did the Thirteenth Congress of the British Communist Party, that we Com¬ munists are in favor of a Soviet government as the only form of government capable of emancipating the workers from the yoke of capital. But you want a Labor government? Very well. We have been and are fighting hand in hand with you for the defeat of the “National Government.” We are prepared to support your fight for the formation of a new Labor government, in spite of the fact that both the previous Labor governments failed to fulfill the promises made to the working class by the Labor Party. We do not expect this government to carry out socialist measures. But we shall present it with the demand , in the name of millions of workers, that it defend the most essential economic and political interests of the working class and of all working people. Let us jointly discuss a common program of such demands, and let us achieve that unity of action which the proletariat requires in order to repel the reactionary offen¬ sive of the “National Government,” the attack of capital and fascism and the preparations for a new war. On this basis, the British com¬ rades are prepared at the forthcoming parliamentary elections to cooperate with branches of the Labor Party against the “National Government,” and also against Lloyd George, who is trying in his own way in the interests of the British bourgeoisie to lure the mass¬ es into following him against the cause of the working class.

This position of the British Communists is a correct one. It will help them to set up a militant united front with the millions of members of the British trade unions and Labor Party.

While always remaining in the front ranks of the fighting prole¬ tariat, and pointing out to the masses the only right path — the path of struggle for the revolutionary overthrow of the rule of the bour¬ geoisie and the establishment of a Soviet government — the Com¬ munists, in defining their immediate political aims, must not attempt to leap over those necessary stages of the mass movement in the course of which the working class by its own experience outlives its illusions and passes over to Communism.

France

France, as we know, is a country in which the working class is setting an example to the whole international proletariat of how to fight fascism. The French Communist Party is setting an example to all the sections of the Comintern of how the tactics of the united front should be applied; the Socialist workers are setting an example of what the Social-Democratic workers of other capitalist countries should now be doing in the fight against fascism. The significance of the anti-fascist demonstration attended by half a million people in Paris on July 14 of this year, and of the numerous demonstrations in other French cities, is tremendous. This is not merely a movement of a united working class front; it is the beginning of a wide general front of the people against fascism in France.

This united front movement enhances the confidence of the working class in its own forces; it strengthens its consciousness of the leading role it is playing in relation to the peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie of the towns and the intelligentsia; it extends the influ¬ ence of the Communist Party among the mass of the working class and therefore makes the proletariat stronger in the fight against fas¬ cism. It is arousing in good time the vigilance of the masses in re¬ gard to the fascist danger. And it will serve as an infectious example for the development of the anti-fascist straggle in other capitalist countries, and will exercise a heartening influence on the proletari¬ ans of Germany, pressed down by the fascist dictatorship.

The victory, needless to say, is a big one, but still it does not decide the issue of the anti-fascist straggle. The overwhelming ma¬ jority of the French people are undoubtedly opposed to fascism. But the bourgeoisie is able by armed force to violate the popular will. The fascist movement is continuing to develop absolutely freely, with the active support of monopoly capital, the state apparatus of the bourgeoisie, the general staff of the French army and the reac¬ tionary leaders of the Catholic church - that stronghold of all reac¬ tion. The most powerful fascist organization, the Croix de Feu, now commands 300,000 armed men, the backbone of which consists of 60,000 officers of the reserve. It holds strong positions in the police, the gendarmerie, the army, the air force and in all government offic¬ es. The recent municipal elections have shown that in France it is not only the revolutionary forces that are growing, but also the forc¬ es of fascism. If fascism succeeds in penetrating widely among the peasantry, and in securing the support of one section of the army, while the other section remains neutral, the masses of the French working people will not be able to prevent the fascists from coming to power. Comrades, do not forget the organizational weakness of the French labor movement, which makes easier the success of the fascist attack. The working class and all anti-fascists in France have no grounds for resting content with the results already achieved.

What are the tasks facing the working class in France?

First, to establish the united front not only in the political sphere, but also in the economic sphere in order to organize the struggle against the capitalist offensive, and by its pressure to smash the resistance offered to the united front by the leaders of the re¬ formist Confederation of Labor.

Second, to achieve trade union unity in France - united trade unions based on the class struggle.

Third, to enlist in the anti-fascist movement the wide mass of the peasants and petty bourgeoisie, devoting special attention in the program of the anti-fascist People’s Front to their urgent demands.

Fourth, to strengthen organizationally and extend further the anti-fascist movement which has already developed, by the wide¬ spread creation of elected bodies of the anti-fascist People’s Front, elected irrespective of parties and whose influence will extend to wider masses than those in the present parties and organizations of working people in France.

Fifth, to force the disbanding and disarming of the fascist or¬ ganizations, as being organizations of conspirators against the re¬ public and agents of Hitler in France.

Sixth, to secure that the state apparatus, army and police shall be purged of the conspirators who are preparing a fascist coup.

Seventh, to develop the struggle against the leaders of the reac¬ tionary cliques of the Catholic church, as one of the most important strongholds of French fascism.

Eighth, to link up the army with the anti-fascist movement by creating in its ranks committees for the defense of the republic and the constitution, directed against those who want to utilize the army for an anti-constitutional coup d’etat; not to allow the reactionary forces in France to wreck the Franco-Soviet pact, which defends the cause of peace against the aggression of German fascism.

And if in France the anti-fascist movement leads to the for¬ mation of a government which will carry on a real struggle against French fascism - not in words but in deeds - and which will carry out the program of demands of the anti-fascist People’s Front, the Communists, while remaining the irreconcilable foes of every bour¬ geois government and supporters of a Soviet government, will, nev- ertheless, in face of the growing fascist danger, be prepared to sup¬ port such a government.

The United Front and the Fascist Mass Organizations

Comrades, the fight for the establishment of the united front in countries where the fascists are in power is perhaps the most im¬ portant problem facing us. In such countries, of course, the fight is carried on under far more difficult conditions than in countries with legal labor movements. Nevertheless, all the conditions exist in fas¬ cist countries for the development of a real anti-fascist People’s Front in the struggle against the fascist dictatorship, since the So¬ cial-Democratic, Catholic and other workers, in Germany, for in¬ stance, are able to realize more directly the need for a joint struggle with the Communists against the fascist dictatorship. Wide strata of the petty bourgeoisie and peasantry, having already tasted the bitter fruits of fascist rale, are growing increasingly discontented and dis¬ illusioned, which makes it easier to enlist them in the anti-fascist People’s Front.

But the principal task in fascist countries, particularly in Ger¬ many and Italy, where fascism has managed to gain a mass basis and has forced the workers and other toilers into its organizations, consists in skillfully combining the fight against the fascist dictator¬ ship from without with its undermining from within, inside the fas¬ cist mass organizations and bodies. Special methods and means of approach, suited to the concrete conditions prevailing in these coun¬ tries must be learned, mastered and applied, so as to facilitate the rapid disintegration of the mass basis of fascism and to prepare the way for the overthrow of the fascist dictatorship. We must learn, master and apply this, and not only shout “Down with Hitler!” and “Down with Mussolini!” Yes, learn, master and apply.

This is a difficult and complex task. It is all the more difficult because our experience in successfully combating fascist dictatorship is extremely limited. Our Italian comrades, for instance, have already been fighting under the conditions of a fascist dictatorship for about thirteen years. Nevertheless, they have not yet succeeded in developing a real mass straggle against fascism, and therefore they have unfortunately been little able in this respect to help the Communist Parties in other fascist countries by their positive experience.

The German and Italian Communists, and the Communists in other fascist countries, as well as the Communist youth, have dis¬ played prodigious valor; they have made and are daily making tre¬ mendous sacrifices. We all bow our heads in honor of such heroism and sacrifices. But heroism alone is not enough. Heroism must be combined with day-to-day work among the masses, with concrete straggle against fascism, so as to achieve the most tangible results in this sphere. In our straggle against fascist dictatorship it is partic¬ ularly dangerous to confuse the wish with the fact. We must base ourselves on the facts, on the actual concrete situation.

What is now the actual situation in Germany, for instance?

The masses are becoming increasingly discontented and disillu¬ sioned with the policy of the fascist dictatorship, and this even as¬ sumes the form of partial strikes and other actions. In spite of all its efforts, fascism has failed to win over politically the basic masses of the workers; it is losing even its former supporters, and will lose them more and more in the future. Nevertheless, we must realize that the workers who are convinced of the possibility of overthrow¬ ing the fascist dictatorship, and who are already prepared to fight for it actively, are still in the minority - they consist of us, the Communists, and the revolutionary section of the Social- Democratic workers. But the majority of the toilers have not yet become aware of the real, concrete possibilities and methods of overthrowing this dictatorship and still have a waiting attitude. This we must bear in mind when we outline our tasks in the straggle against fascism in Germany, and when we seek, study and apply special methods of approach for the undermining and overthrow of the fascist dictatorship in Germany.

In order to be able to strike a telling blow at the fascist dictator¬ ship, we must first find out what is its most vulnerable point. What is the Achilles’ heel of the fascist dictatorship? Its social basis. The latter is extremely heterogeneous. It is made up of various classes and various strata of society. Fascism has proclaimed itself the sole representative of all classes and strata of the population: the manu¬ facturer and the worker, the millionaire and the unemployed, the Junker and the small peasant, the big capitalist and the artisan. It pretends to defend the interests of all these strata, the interests of the nation. But since it is a dictatorship of the big bourgeoisie, fascism must inevitably come into conflict with its mass social basis, all the more since, under the fascist dictatorship, the class contradictions between the pack of financial magnates and the overwhelming ma¬ jority of the people are brought out in greatest relief.

We can lead the masses to a decisive straggle for the over throw of the fascist dictatorship only by getting the workers who have been forced into the fascist organizations, or have joined them through ignorance, to take part in the most elementary movements for the defense of their economic, political and cultural interests. It is for this reason that the Communists must work in these organiza¬ tions, as the best champions of the day-to-day interests of the mass of members, bearing in mind that as the workers belonging to these organizations begin more and more frequently to demand their rights and defend their interests, they inevitably come into conflict with the fascist dictatorship.

In defending the urgent and, at first, the most elementary interests of the working people in town and countryside, it is comparatively easier to find a common language not only with the conscious anti¬ fascists, but also with those of the working people who are still sup¬ porters of fascism, but are disillusioned and dissatisfied with its poli¬ cy, and are grumbling and seeking an occasion for expressing their discontent. In general we must realize that all our tactics in countries with a fascist dictatorship must be of such a character as not to re¬ pulse the rank-and-file supporters of fascism, not to throw them once more into the arms of fascism, but to deepen the gulf between the fascist leaders and the mass of disillusioned rank-and-file followers of fascism drawn from the working sections of society.

We need not be dismayed, comrades, if the people mobilized around these day-to-day interests consider themselves either indif¬ ferent to politics or even followers of fascism. The important thing for us is to draw them into the movement, which, although it may not at first proceed openly under the slogans of the straggle against fascism, is already objectively an anti-fascist movement putting these masses into opposition to the fascist dictatorship.

Experience teaches us that the view that it is generally impossi¬ ble , in countries with a fascist dictatorship, to come out legally or semi-legally, is harmful and incorrect. To insist on this point of view means to fall into passivity, and to renounce real mass work altogether. True, under the conditions of a fascist dictatorship, to find forms and methods of legal or semi-legal action is a difficult and complex problem. But, as in many other questions, the path is indicated by life itself and by the initiative of the masses them- selves, which have already provided us with a number of examples that must be generalized and applied in an organized and effective manner.

We must very resolutely put an end to the tendency to underes¬ timate work in the fascist mass organizations. In Italy, in Germany and in a number of other fascist countries, our comrades concealed their passivity, and frequently even their direct refusal to work in the fascist mass organizations, by putting forward work in the facto¬ ries as against work in the fascist mass organizations. In reality, however, it was just this mechanical distinction which led to work being conducted very feebly, and sometimes not at all, both in the fascist mass organizations and in the factories.

Yet it is particularly important that Communists in the fascist countries should be wherever the masses are to be found. Fascism has deprived the workers of their own legal organizations. It has forced the fascist organizations upon them, and it is there that the masses are - by compulsion, or to some extent voluntarily. These mass fascist organizations can and must be made our legal or semi¬ legal field of action, where we can meet the masses. They can and must be made our legal or semi-legal starting point for the defense of the day-to-day interests of the masses. To utilize these possibili¬ ties, Communists must win elected positions in the fascist mass or¬ ganizations, for contact with the masses, and must rid themselves once and for all of the prejudice that such activity is unseemly and unworthy of a revolutionary worker.

In Germany, for instance, there is a system of so-called “shop delegates.” But where is it stated that we must leave the fascists a monopoly in these organizations? Cannot we try to unite the Com¬ munist, Social-Democratic, Catholic and other anti-fascist workers in the factories so that when the list of “shop delegates” is voted upon, the known agents of the employers may be struck off and oth¬ er candidates, enjoying the confidence of the workers, inserted in their stead? Practice has already shown that this is possible.

And does not practice also go to show that it is possible, jointly with the Social-Democratic and other discontented workers, to de¬ mand that the “shop delegates” really defend the interests of the workers?

Take the “Labor Front” in Germany, or the fascist trade unions in Italy. Is it not possible to demand that the functionaries of the “Labor Front” be elected, and not appointed; to insist that the lead- ing bodies of the local groups report to meetings of the members of the organizations; to address these demands, following a decision by the group, to the employer, to the “guardian of labor,” to higher bodies of the “Labor Front”? This is possible, provided the revolu¬ tionary workers actually work within the “Labor Front” and try to obtain posts in it.

Similar methods of work are possible and essential in other mass fascist organizations also — in the Hitler Youth Leagues, in the sports organizations, in the Kraft durch Freude organizations, in the Doppo Lavoro in Italy, in the cooperatives and so forth.

Comrades, you remember the ancient tale of the capture of Troy. Troy was inaccessible to the armies attacking her, thanks to her impregnable walls. And the attacking army, after suffering many sacrifices, was unable to achieve victory until with the aid of the famous Trojan horse it managed to penetrate to the very heart of the enemy’s camp.

We revolutionary workers, it appears to me, should not be shy about using the same tactics with regard to our fascist foe, who is defending himself against the people with the help of a living wall of his cutthroats.

He who fails to understand the necessity of using such tactics in the case of fascism, he who regards such an approach as “humiliat¬ ing,” may be a most excellent comrade, but if you will allow me to say so, he is a windbag and not a revolutionary, he will be unable to lead the masses to the overthrow of the fascist dictatorship.

The mass movement for a united front, starting with defense of the most elementary needs, and changing its forms and watchwords of the straggle as the latter extends and grows, is growing up out¬ side and inside the fascist organizations in Germany, Italy and the other countries in which fascism possesses a mass basis. It will be the battering ram which will shatter the fortress of the fascist dicta¬ torship that at present seems impregnable to many.

The United Front in the Countries Where the Social-Democrats Are in Office

The straggle for the establishment of the united front raises also another very important problem, the problem of the united front in countries where Social-Democratic governments, or coalition governments in which Socialists participate, are in power, as, for instance, in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Czechoslovakia and Belgium.

Our attitude of absolute opposition to Social-Democratic gov¬ ernments, which are governments of compromise with the bour¬ geoisie, is well known. But this notwithstanding, we do not regard the existence of a Social-Democratic government or a coalition government formed by a Social-Democratic party with bourgeois parties as an insurmountable obstacle for establishing a united front with the Social-Democrats on definite issues. We believe that in such a case too a united front for the defense of the vital interests of the toiling people and in the struggle against fascism is quite possi¬ ble and necessary. It stands to reason that in countries where repre¬ sentatives of Social-Democratic parties take part in the government, the Social-Democratic leadership offers the strongest resistance to the proletarian united front. This is quite comprehensible. After all, they want to show the bourgeoisie that they, better and more skill¬ fully than anyone else, can keep the discontented working masses under control and prevent them from falling under the influence of Communism. The fact, however, that Social-Democratic ministers are opposed to the proletarian united front can by no means justify a situation in which the Communists do nothing to establish a united front with the proletariat.

Our comrades in the Scandinavian countries often follow the line of least resistance, confining themselves to propaganda expos¬ ing the Social-Democratic governments. This is a mistake. In Den¬ mark, for example, the Social-Democratic leaders have been in the government for the past ten years, and for ten years day in and day out the Communists have been reiterating that it is a bourgeois capi¬ talist government. We have to assume that the Danish workers are acquainted with this propaganda. The fact that a considerable ma¬ jority nevertheless vote for the Social-Democratic government party only goes to show that the Communists’ exposure of the govern¬ ment by means of propaganda is insufficient. It does not prove, however, that these hundreds of thousands of workers are satisfied with all the government measures of the Social-Democratic minis¬ ters. No, they are not satisfied with the fact that by its so-called cri¬ sis “agreement” the Social-Democratic government assists the big capitalists and landlords and not the workers and poor peasants. They are not satisfied with the decree issued by the government in January, 1933, which deprived the workers of the right to strike.

They are not satisfied with the project of the Social-Democratic leadership for a dangerous anti-democratic electoral reform (which would considerably reduce the number of deputies). I shall hardly be in error, comrades, if I state that 99 per cent of the Danish work¬ ers do not approve of these political steps taken by the Social- Democratic leaders and ministers.

Is it not possible for the Communists to call upon the trade un¬ ions and Social-Democratic organizations of Denmark to discuss some of these burning issues, to express their opinions on them and jointly come out for a proletarian united front with the object of obtaining the workers’ demands? In October of last year, when our Danish comrades appealed to the trade unions to act against the re¬ duction of unemployment relief and for the democratic rights of the trade unions, about 100 local trade union organizations joined the united front.

In Sweden a Social-Democratic government is in power for the third time, but the Swedish Communists have for a long time refused to apply the united front tactics in practice. Why? Was it because they were opposed to the united front? Not, in principle, of course; they were for united front, for a united front in general, but they failed to understand in what circumstances, on what questions, in defense of what demands a proletarian united front could be successfully estab¬ lished, where and how to “hook on.” A few months before the for¬ mation of the Social-Democratic government, the Social-Democratic Party advanced during the elections a platform containing a number of demands which would have been the very thing to include in the platform of the proletarian united front. For example, the slogans, “Against customs duties ,” “Against militarization ,” “Put an end to the policy of delay in the question of unemployment insurance ,” “Grant adequate old age pensions ,” “Prohibit organizations like the ‘Munch ’ corps ” (a fascist organization), “Down with class legislation against the unions demanded by the bourgeois parties.”

Over a million of the working people of Sweden voted in 1932 for these demands advanced by the Social-Democrats, and wel¬ comed in 1933 the formation of a Social-Democratic government in the hope that now these demands would be realized. What could have been more natural in such a situation and what would have better suited the mass of the workers than an appeal of the Com¬ munist Party to all Social-Democratic and trade union organizations to take joint action to secure these demands advanced by the Social-Democratic Party?

If we had succeeded in really mobilizing wide masses and in welding the Social-Democratic and Communist workers’ organiza¬ tions into a united front to secure these demands of the Social- Democrats themselves, there is no doubt that the working class of Sweden would have gained thereby. The Social-Democratic minis¬ ters of Sweden, of course, would not have been very happy over it, for in that case the government would have been compelled to meet at least some of these demands. At any rate, what has happened now, when the government instead of abolishing has raised some of the duties, instead of restricting militarism has enlarged the military budget, and instead of rejecting any legislation directed against the trade unions has itself introduced such a bill in Parliament, would not have happened. True, on the last issue the Communist Party of Sweden carried through a good mass campaign in the spirit of the proletarian united front with the result that in the end even the So¬ cial-Democratic parliamentary fraction felt constrained to vote against the government bill, and for the time it has fallen through.

The Norwegian Communists were right in calling upon the or¬ ganizations of the Labor Party to organize joint May Day demon¬ strations and in putting forward a number of demands which in the main coincide with the demands contained in the election platform of the Norwegian Labor Party. Although this step in favor of a unit¬ ed front was poorly prepared and the leadership of the Norwegian Labor Party opposed it, united front demonstrations took place in thirty localities.

Formerly many Communists used to be afraid that it would be opportunism on their part if they did not counter every partial de¬ mand of the Social-Democrats by demands of their own which were twice as radical. That was a naive mistake. If Social-Democrats, for instance, demanded the dissolution of the fascist organizations, there was no reason why we should add: “and the disbanding of the state police” (a demand which would be expedient under different circumstances). We should rather tell the Social-Democratic work¬ ers: We are ready to accept these demands of your Party as demands of the proletarian united front and are ready to fight to the end for their realization. Let us join hands for the battle.

In Czechoslovakia also certain demands advanced by the Czech and German Social-Democrats, and by the reformist trade unions can and should be utilized for establishing a united front of the working class. When the Social-Democrats, for instance, demand work for the unemployed, or the abolition of the laws restricting municipal self-government, as they have done ever since 1927, the¬ se demands should be made concrete in each locality, in each dis¬ trict, and a fight should be carried on hand in hand with the Social- Democratic organizations for their actual realization. Or, when the Social-Democratic Parties thunder “in general terms” against the agents of fascism in the state apparatus, the proper thing to do is in each particular district to drag into the light of day the particular local fascist spokesmen, and together with the Social-Democratic workers demand their removal from government employ.

In Belgium the leaders of the Socialist Party, with Emile Vandervelde at their head, have entered a coalition government. This “success” they have achieved thanks to their lengthy and ex¬ tensive campaigns for two main demands: (1) the abolition of the emergency decree, and (2) the realization of the de Man plan. The first issue is very important. The preceding government issued 150 reactionary emergency decrees, which are an extremely heavy bur¬ den on the working people. It was proposed to repeal them at once. Such was the demand of the Socialist Party. But have many of these emergency decrees been repealed by the new government? It has not rescinded a single one. It has only mollified somewhat a few of the emergency decrees in order to make a sort of “token payment” in settlement of the generous promises of the Belgian Socialist lead¬ ers (like that “token dollar” which some European powers proffered the U.S.A. in payment of the millions due as war debts).

As regards the realization of the widely advertised de Man plan, the matter has taken a turn quite unexpected by the Social- Democratic masses. The Socialist ministers announced that the eco¬ nomic crisis must be overcome first, and only those provisions of the de Man plan should be carried into effect which improve the position of the industrial capitalists and the banks; only thereafter would it be possible to adopt measures to improve the conditions of the workers. But how long must the workers wait for their share in the “benefits” promised them in the de Man plan? The Belgian bankers have already had their veritable shower of gold. The Bel¬ gian franc has been devaluated 28 per cent; by this manipulation the bankers were able to pocket 4,500,000,000 francs as their spoils at the expense of the wage earners and the savings of the small deposi- tors. But how does this tally with the contents of the de Man plan? Why, if we are to believe the letter of the plan, it promises to “ pros¬ ecute monopolist abuses and speculative manipulations.”

On the basis of the de Man plan, the government has appointed a commission to supervise the banks. But the commission consists of bankers who can now gaily and light-heartedly supervise themselves.

The de Man plan also promises a number of other good things, such as a “ shortening of the working davf “standardization of wag¬ es ,” “a minimum wage,” “organization of an all-embracing system of social insurance,” “greater convenience in living conditions through new housing construction” and so forth. These are all demands which we Communists can support. We should go to the labor organizations of Belgium and say to them: The capitalists have already received enough and even too much. Let us demand that the Social- Democratic ministers now carry out the promises they made to the workers. Let us get together in a united front for the successful de¬ fense of our interests. Minister Vandervelde, we support the demands on behalf of the workers contained in your platform; but we tell you frankly that we take these demands seriously, that we want action and not empty words, and therefore are uniting hundreds of thousands of workers to struggle for these demands!

Thus, in countries having Social-Democratic governments, the Communists, by utilizing suitable individual demands taken from the platforms of the Social-Democratic Parties themselves and from the election promises of the Social-Democratic ministers as the starting point for achieving joint action with the Social-Democratic Parties and organizations, can afterwards more easily develop a campaign for the establishment of a united front on the basis of oth¬ er mass demands in the struggle against the capitalist offensive, against fascism and the threat of war.

It must further be borne in mind that in general joint action with the Social-Democratic Parties and organizations requires from Communists serious and substantiated criticism of Social- Democracy as the ideology and practice of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie, and untiring, comradely explanation for the Social- Democratic workers of the program and slogans of Communism. In countries having Social-Democratic governments this task is of par¬ ticular importance in the straggle for the united front.

The Struggle for Trade Union Unity

Comrades, a most important stage in the consolidation of the united front must be the establishment of national and international trade union unity.

As you know, the splitting tactics of the reformist leaders were applied most virulently in the trade unions. The reason for this is clear. Here their policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie found its practical culmination directly in the factories, to the detri¬ ment of the vital interests of the working class. This, of course, gave rise to sharp criticism and resistance on the part of the revolutionary workers under the leadership of the Communists. That is why the struggle between Communism and reformism raged most fiercely in the trade unions.

The more difficult and complicated the situation became for capitalism, the more reactionary was the policy of the leaders of the Amsterdam unions and the more aggressive their measures against all opposition elements within the trade unions. Even the establish¬ ment of the fascist dictatorship in Germany and the intensified capi¬ talist offensive in all capitalist countries failed to diminish this ag¬ gressiveness. Is it not a characteristic fact that in 1933 alone, most disgraceful circulars were issued in Great Britain, Holland, Belgium and Sweden, for the expulsion of Communists and revolutionary workers from the trade unions?

In Great Britain in 1933 a circular was issued prohibiting the local branches of the trade unions from joining the anti-war or other revolutionary organizations. That was a prelude to the notorious “Black Circular” of the Trade Union Congress General Council, which outlawed any Trades Council admitting delegates “directly or indirectly associated with Communist organizations.” What is there left to be said of the leadership of the German trade unions, which applied unprecedented repressive measures against the revolution¬ ary elements in the trade unions?

Yet we must base our tactics, not on the behavior of individual leaders of the Amsterdam unions, no matter what difficulties their behavior may cause the class struggle, but primarily on the question of where the masses of workers are to be found. And here we must openly declare that work in the trade unions is the weakest spot in the work of all Communist Parties. We must bring about a real change for the better in trade union work and make the question of straggle for trade union unity the central issue.

“What constitutes the strength of Social-Democracy in the West?” asked Comrade Stalin ten years ago. Answering this ques¬ tion, he said:

The fact that it has its support in the trade unions.

What constitutes the weakness of our Communist Par¬ ties in the West?

The fact that they are not yet linked with the trade un¬ ions, and that certain elements within the Communist Par¬ ties do not wish to be linked with them.

Hence, the main task of the Communist Parties of the West at the present time is to develop the campaign for uni¬ ty in the trade union movement and to bring it to its con¬ summation; to see to it that all Communists, without excep¬ tion, join the trade unions, there to work systematically and patiently to strengthen the solidarity of the working class in its fight against capital, and thus attain the conditions that will enable the Communist Parties to rely upon the trade unions.

Has this precept of Comrade Stalin’s been followed? No, com¬ rades, it has not.

Ignoring the urge of the workers to join the trade unions, and faced with the difficulties of working within the Amsterdam unions, many of our comrades decided to pass by this complicated task. They invariably spoke of an organizational crisis in the Amsterdam unions, of the workers deserting the unions, but failed to notice that after some decline at the beginning of the world economic crisis, these unions later began to grow again. The peculiarity of the trade union movement has been precisely the fact that the attacks of the bourgeoisie on trade union rights, the attempts in a number of coun¬ tries to unify the trade unions (Poland, Hungary, etc.), the curtail¬ ment of social insurance and the cutting of wages, forced the work- ers, notwithstanding the lack of resistance displayed by the reform¬ ist trade union leaders, to rally still more closely around these un¬ ions, because the workers wanted and still want to see in the trade unions the militant champions of their vital class interests. This ex¬ plains the fact that most of the Amsterdam unions in France, Czechoslovakia, Belgium, Flolland, Sweden, Switzerland, etc., have grown in membership during the last few years. The American Fed¬ eration of Labor has also considerably increased its membership in the past two years.

Flad the German comrades better understood the problem of trade union work of which Comrade Thaelmann spoke on many occasions, there would undoubtedly have been a better situation in the trade unions than was the case at the time the fascist dictatorship was established. At the end of 1932 only about ten per cent of the Party members belonged to the free trade unions. This in spite of the fact that after the Sixth Congress of the Comintern the Communists took the lead in quite a number of strikes. Our comrades used to write in the press of the need to assign 90 per cent of our forces to work in the trade unions, but in reality activity was concentrated exclusively around the revolutionary trade union opposition which actually sought to replace the trade unions. And how about the peri¬ od after Hitler’s seizure of power? For two years many of our com¬ rades stubbornly and systematically opposed the correct slogan of fighting for the re-establishment of the free unions.

I could cite similar examples about almost every other capitalist country.

But we already have the first serious achievements to our credit in the struggle for trade union unity in European countries. I have in mind little Austria, where on the initiative of the Communist Party a basis has been created for an illegal trade union movement. After the February battles the Social-Democrats, with Otto Bauer at the head, threw out the watch word: “The free unions can be re¬ established only after the downfall of fascism.” The Communists applied themselves to the task of re-establishing the trade unions. Each phase of that work was a bit of the living united front of the Austrian proletariat. The successful re-establishment of the free trade unions in underground conditions was a serious blow to fas¬ cism. The Social-Democrats were at the parting of the ways. Some of them tried to negotiate with the government. Others, seeing our successes, created their own parallel illegal trade unions. But there could be only one road: either capitulation to fascism, or toward trade union unity through joint struggle against fascism. Under mass pressure, the wavering leadership of the parallel unions creat¬ ed by the former trade union leaders decided to agree to amalgama¬ tion. The basis of this amalgamation is irreconcilable straggle against the offensive of capitalism and fascism and the guarantee of trade union democracy. We welcome this fact of the amalgamation of the trade unions, which is the first of its kind since the formal split of the trade unions after the war and is therefore of interna¬ tional importance.

In France the united front has unquestionably served as a mighty impetus for achieving trade union unity. The leaders of the General Confederation of Labor have hampered and still hamper in every way the realization of unity, countering the main issue of the class policy of the trade unions by raising issues of a subordinate and secondary or formal character. An unquestionable success in the straggle for trade union unity has been the establishment of sin¬ gle unions on a local scale, embracing, in the case of the railroad workers, for instance, approximately three-quarters of the member¬ ship of both trade unions.

We are definitely for the re-establishment of trade union unity in each country and on an international scale. We are for one union in each industry.

We are for one federation of trade unions in each country. We are for one international federation of trade unions organized ac¬ cording to industries.

We stand for one international of trade unions based on the class struggle. We are for united class trade unions as one of the major bulwarks of the working class against the offensive of capital and fascism. Our only condition for uniting the trade unions is: Struggle against capital, against fascism and for internal trade un¬ ion democracy.

Time does not stand still. To us the question of trade union uni¬ ty on a national as well as international scale is a question of the great task of uniting our class in mighty, single trade union organi¬ zations against the class enemy.

We welcome the fact that on the eve of May First of this year the Red International of Labor Unions addressed the Amsterdam International with the proposal to consider jointly the question of the terms, methods and forms of uniting the world trade union movement. The leaders of the Amsterdam International rejected that proposal, using the outworn pretext that unity in the trade union movement is possible only within the Amsterdam International, which, by the way, includes almost none but trade unions in a num¬ ber of European countries.

But the Communists working in the trade unions must continue to straggle tirelessly for the unity of the trade union movement. The task of the Red trade unions and the R.I.L.U. is to do all in their power to hasten the achievement of a joint straggle of all trade un¬ ions against the offensive of capital and fascism, and to bring about unity in the trade union movement, despite the stubborn resistance of the reactionary leaders of the Amsterdam International. The Red trade unions and the R.I.L.U. must receive our unstinted support along this line.

In countries where small Red trade unions exist, we recommend working for their inclusion in the big reformist unions, but demand¬ ing the right to defend their views and the reinstatement of expelled members. But in countries where big Red trade unions exist parallel with big reformist trade unions, we must work for the convening of unity congresses on the basis of a platform of straggle against the capitalist offensive and the guarantee of trade union democracy.

It should be stated categorically that any Communist worker, any revolutionary worker who does not belong to the mass trade union of his industry, who does not fight to transform the reformist trade union into a real class trade union organization, who does not fight for trade union unity on the basis of the class straggle, such a Communist worker, such a revolutionary worker, does not dis¬ charge his elementary proletarian duty.

The United Front and the Youth

I have already pointed out the role which the drawing of the youth into the fascist organizations played in the victory of fascism. In speaking of the youth, we must state frankly that we have ne¬ glected our task of drawing the masses of the working youth into the straggle against the offensive of capital, against fascism and the danger of war; we have neglected this task in a number of countries. We have underestimated the enormous importance of the youth in the fight against fascism. We have not always taken into account the special economic, political and cultural interests of the youth. We have likewise not paid proper attention to revolutionary education of the youth.

All this has been utilized very cleverly by fascism, which in some countries, particularly in Germany, has inveigled large sec¬ tions of the youth onto the anti-proletarian road. It should be borne in mind that it is not only by the glamor of militarism that fascism entices the youth. It feeds and clothes some of them in its detach¬ ments, gives work to others, and even sets up so-called cultural in¬ stitutions for the youth, trying in this way to imbue them with the idea that it really can and wants to feed, clothe, teach and provide work for the mass of working youth.

In a number of capitalist countries, our Young Communist Leagues are still mainly sectarian organizations divorced from the masses. Their fundamental weakness is that they still try to copy the Communist Parties, to copy their forms and methods of work, for¬ getting that the Y.C.L. is not a Communist Party of the youth. They do not take sufficient account of the fact that it is an organization with its own special tasks. Its methods and forms of work, education and struggle, must be adapted to the actual level and needs of the youth.

Our Young Communists have shown memorable examples of heroism in the fight against fascist violence and bourgeois reaction. But they still lack the ability to win the masses of the youth away from hostile influences by dint of stubborn, concrete work, as is evident from the fact that they have not yet overcome their opposi¬ tion to work in the fascist mass organizations, and that their ap¬ proach to the Socialist youth and other non-Communist youth is not always correct.

A great part of the responsibility for all this must be borne, of course, by the Communist Parties as well, for they ought to lead and support the Y.C.L. in its work. For the problem of the youth is not only a Y.C.L. problem. It is a problem for the whole Communist movement. In the straggle for the youth, the Communist Parties and the Y.C.L. organizations must actually effect a decisive change. The main task of the Communist youth movement in capitalist countries is to advance boldly in the direction of bringing about the united front, along the path of organizing and uniting the young generation of working people. The tremendous influence that even the first steps taken in this direction exert on the revolutionary movement of the youth is shown by the examples of France and the United States during the recent past. It was sufficient in these countries to proceed to apply the united front for considerable successes to be immedi¬ ately achieved. In the sphere of the international united front, the successful initiative of the committee against war and fascism in Paris in bringing about the international cooperation of all non¬ fascist youth organizations is also worthy of note in this connection.

These recent successful steps in the united front movement of the youth also show that the forms which the united front of the youth should assume must not be stereotyped, nor necessarily be the same as those met with in the practice of the Communist Parties. The Young Communist Leagues must strive in every way to unite the forces of all non-fascist mass organizations of the youth, includ¬ ing the formation of various kinds of common organizations for the straggle against fascism, against the unprecedented manner in which the youth is being stripped of every right, against the milita¬ rization of the youth and for the economic and cultural rights of the young generation, in order to draw these young workers over to the side of the anti-fascist front, no matter where they may be - in the factories, the forced labor camps, the labor exchanges, the army barracks and the fleet, the schools or in the various sport, cultural or other organizations.

In developing and strengthening the Y.C.L., our Y.C.L. mem¬ bers must work for the formation of anti-fascist associations of the Communist and Socialist Youth Leagues on a platform of class straggle.

Women and the United Front

Nor has work among toiling women — among women workers, unemployed women, peasant women and housewives - been under¬ estimated any less than work among the youth. While fascism ex¬ acts most of all from youth, it enslaves women with particular rath- lessness and cynicism, playing on the most painful feelings of the mother, the housewife, the single working woman, uncertain of the morrow. Fascism, posing as a benefactor, throws the starving family a few beggarly scraps, trying in this way to stifle the bitterness aroused, particularly among the toiling women, by the unprecedent¬ ed slavery which fascism brings them. It drives working women out of industry, forcibly sends needy girls into the country, dooming them to the position of unpaid servants of rich farmers and land- lords. While promising women a happy home and family life, it drives women to prostitution more than any other capitalist regime.

Communists, above all our women Communists, must remem¬ ber that there cannot be a successful fight against fascism and war unless the wide masses of women are drawn into the struggle. Agi¬ tation alone will not accomplish this. Taking into account the con¬ crete situation in each instance, we must find a way of mobilizing the mass of women by work around their vital interests and de¬ mands — in a fight for their demands against high prices, for higher wages on the basis of the principle of equal pay for equal work, against mass dismissals, against every manifestation of inequality in the status of women and against fascist enslavement.

In endeavoring to draw women who work into the revolutionary movement, ue must not be afraid of forming separate women’s or¬ ganizations for this purpose, wherever necessary. The preconceived notion that the women’s organizations under Communist Party leadership in the capitalist countries must be liquidated, as part of the straggle against “women’s separatism” in the labor movement, has often done great harm.

It is necessary to seek out the simplest and most flexible forms, in order to establish contact and bring about cooperation in straggle between the revolutionary, Social-Democratic and progressive anti¬ war and anti-fascist women’s organizations. We must spare no pains to see that the women workers and toilers fight shoulder to shoulder with their class brothers in the ranks of the united working class front and the anti-fascist People’s Front.

The Anti-Imperialist United Front

The changed international and internal situation gives excep¬ tional importance to the question of the anti-imperialist united front in all colonial and semi-colonial countries.

In forming a wide anti-imperialist united front of straggle in the colonies and semi-colonies, it is necessary above all to recognize the variety of conditions in which the anti-imperialist straggle of the masses is proceeding, the varying degree of maturity of the national liberation movement, the role of the proletariat within it and the influence of the Communist Party over the masses.

In Brazil the problem differs from that in India, China, etc.

In Brazil the Communist Party, having laid a correct foundation for the development of the united anti-imperialist front by the estab- lishment of the National Liberation Alliance, has to make every effort to extend this front by drawing into it first and foremost the many millions of the peasantry, leading up to the formation of units of a people’s revolutionary army, completely devoted to the revolu¬ tion and to the establishment of the rale of the National Liberation Alliance.

In India the Communists have to support, extend and participate in all anti-imperialist mass activities, not excluding those which are under national reformist leadership. While maintaining their politi¬ cal and organizational independence, they must carry on active work inside the organizations which take part in the Indian National Congress, facilitating the process of crystallization of a national revolutionary wing among them, for the purpose of further develop¬ ing the national liberation movement of the Indian peoples against British imperialism.

In China, where the people’s movement has already led to the formation of Soviet districts over a considerable territory of the coun¬ try and to the organization of a powerful Red Army, the predatory attack of Japanese imperialism and the treason of the Nanking gov¬ ernment have brought into jeopardy the national existence of the great Chinese people. Only the Chinese Soviets can act as a unifying center in the straggle against the enslavement and partition of China by the imperialists, as a unifying center which will rally all anti-imperialist forces for the national defense of the Chinese people.

We therefore approve the initiative taken by our courageous brother Party of China in the creation of a most extensive anti¬ imperialist united front against Japanese imperialism and its Chi¬ nese agents, jointly with all those organized forces existing on the territory of China which are ready to wage a real straggle for the salvation of their country and their people. I am sure that I express the sentiments and thoughts of our entire Congress in saying that we send our warmest fraternal greetings, in the name of the revolution¬ ary proletariat of the whole world, to all the Soviets of China, to the Chinese revolutionary people. We send our ardent fraternal greet¬ ings to the heroic Red Army of China, tried in a thousand battles. And we assure the Chinese people of our firm resolve to support its straggle for its complete liberation from all imperialist robbers and their Chinese henchmen.

A United Front Government

Comrades, we have taken a bold, resolute course toward the united front of the working class, and are ready to carry it out with full consistency.

If we Communists are asked whether we advocate the united front only in the fight for partial demands, or whether we are pre¬ pared to share the responsibility even when it will be a question of forming a government on the basis of the united front, then we say with a full sense of our responsibility: Yes, we recognize that a situ¬ ation may arise in which the formation of a government of the pro¬ letarian united front, or of an anti-fascist People’s Front, will be¬ come not only possible but necessary in the interests of the proletar¬ iat. And in that case we shall declare for the formation of such a government without the slightest hesitation.

I am not speaking here of a government which may be formed after the victory of the proletarian revolution. It is not impossible, of course, that in some country, immediately after the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeoisie, there may be formed a Soviet gov¬ ernment on the basis of a government bloc of the Communist Party with a definite party (or its Left wing) participating in the revolu¬ tion. After the October Revolution the victorious Party of the Rus¬ sian Bolsheviks, as we know, included representatives of the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries in the Soviet government. This was a spe¬ cific feature of the first Soviet government after the victory of the October Revolution.

I am not speaking of such a case, but of the possible formation of a united front government on the eve of and before the victory of the Soviet revolution.

What kind of government is this? And in what situation could there be any question of such a government?

It is primarily a government of struggle against fascism and re¬ action. It must be a government arising as the result of the united front movement and in no way restricting the activity of the Com¬ munist Party and the mass organizations of the working class but, on the contrary, taking resolute measures against the counter¬ revolutionary financial magnates and their fascist agents.

At a suitable moment, relying on the growing united front movement, the Communist Party of a given country will declare for the formation of such a government on the basis of a definite anti-fascist platform.

Under what objective conditions will it be possible to form such a government? In the most general terms, one can reply to this ques¬ tion as follows: under conditions of political crisis, when the ruling classes are no longer able to cope with the powerful rise of the mass anti-fascist movement. But this is only a general perspective, without which it will scarcely be possible in practice to form a united front government. Only the existence of definite special prerequisites can put on the order of the day the question of forming such a government as a politically essential task. It seems to me that the following pre¬ requisites deserve the greatest attention in this connection:

First, the state apparatus of the bourgeoisie must already be suf¬ ficiently disorganized and paralyzed, so that the bourgeoisie cannot prevent the formation of a government of struggle against reaction and fascism;

Second, the widest masses of working people, particularly the mass trade unions, must be in a state of vehement revolt against fascism and reaction, though not ready to rise in insurrection so as to fight under Communist Party leadership for the achievement of Soviet power.

Third, the differentiation and Leftward movement in the ranks of Social-Democracy and other parties participating in the united front must already have reached the point where a considerable pro¬ portion of them demand ruthless measures against the fascists and other reactionaries, straggle together with the Communists against fascism, and openly come out against that reactionary section of their own party which is hostile to Communism.

When and in what countries a situation will actually arise in which these prerequisites will be present in a sufficient degree, it is impossible to state in advance. But as such a possibility is not to be ruled out in any of the capitalist countries we must reckon with it, and not only orientate and prepare ourselves but also orientate the working class accordingly.

The fact that we are bringing up this question for discussion at all today is, of course, connected with our estimate of the situation and immediate prospects, as well as with the actual growth of the united front movement in a number of countries during the recent past. For more than ten years the situation in the capitalist countries was such that it was not necessary for the Communist International to discuss a question of this kind.

You remember, comrades, that at our Fourth Congress, in 1922, and again at the Fifth Congress, in 1924, the question of the slogan of a workers or a workers ’ and peasants ’ government, was under discussion. Originally the issue turned essentially upon a question which was almost comparable to the one we are discussing today. The debates that took place at that time in the Communist Interna¬ tional around this question, and in particular the political errors which were committed in connection with it, have to this day re¬ tained their importance for sharpening our vigilance against the danger of deviations to the Right or “Left” from the Bolshevik line on this question. Therefore I shall briefly point to a few of these errors, in order to draw from them the lessons necessary for the pre¬ sent policy of our Parties.

The first series of mistakes arose from the fact that the question of a workers’ government was not clearly and firmly bound up with the existence of a political crisis. Owing to this the Right opportun¬ ists were able to interpret matters as though we should strive for the formation of a workers’ government, supported by the Communist Party, in any, so to speak, “normal” situation. The ultra-Lefts, on the other hand, recognized only a workers’ government formed by armed insurrection, after the overthrow of the bourgeoisie. Both views were wrong. In order, therefore, to avoid a repetition of such mistakes, we now lay great stress on the exact consideration of the specific, concrete circumstances of the political crisis and the up¬ surge of the mass movement, in which the formation of a united front government may prove possible and politically necessary.

The second series of errors arose from the fact that the question of a workers’ government was not bound up with the development of a militant mass united front movement of the proletariat. Thus the Right opportunists were able to distort the question, reducing it to the unprincipled tactics of forming blocs with Social-Democratic Parties on the basis of purely parliamentary arrangements. The ul¬ tra-Lefts, on the other hand, shouted: “No coalitions with the coun¬ ter-revolutionary Social-Democrats!”, regarding all Social- Democrats as counter-revolutionaries at bottom.

Both were wrong, and we now emphasize, on the one hand, that we are not in the least anxious for a “workers’ government” that would be nothing more or less than an enlarged Social-Democratic government. We even prefer not to use the term “workers’ govern¬ ments,” and speak of a united front government, which in political character is something absolutely different, different in principle, from all the Social-Democratic governments which usually call themselves “workers’ (or labor) governments.” While the Social- Democratic government is an instrument of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie in the interests of the preservation of the capitalist order, a united front government is an instrument of the collabora¬ tion of the revolutionary vanguard of the proletariat with other anti¬ fascist parties, in the interests of the entire toiling population, a gov¬ ernment of struggle against fascism and reaction. Obviously there is a radical difference between these two things.

On the other hand, we stress the need to see the difference be¬ tween the two different camps of Social-Democracy. As I have al¬ ready pointed out, there is a reactionary camp of Social-Democracy, but alongside of it there exists and is growing the camp of the Left Social-Democrats (without quotation marks), of workers who are becoming revolutionary. In practice the decisive difference between them consists in their attitude to the united front of the working class. The reactionary Social-Democrats are against the united front; they slander the united front movement, they sabotage and disintegrate it, as it undermines their policy of compromise with the bourgeoisie. The Left Social-Democrats are for the united front ; they defend, develop and strengthen the united front movement. Inasmuch as this united front movement is a militant movement against fascism and reaction, it will be a constant driving force, im¬ pelling the united front government to struggle against the reaction¬ ary bourgeoisie. The more powerful this mass movement develops, the greater the force which it can offer to the government to combat the reactionaries. And the better this mass movement will be orga¬ nized from below, the wider the network of non-partisan class or¬ gans of the united front in the factories, among the unemployed, in the workers ’ districts, among the small people of town and country, the greater will be the guarantee against a possible degeneration of the policy of the united front government.

The third series of mistaken views which same to light during our former debates touched precisely on the practical policy of the “ workers’ government.” The Right opportunists considered that a “workers’ government” ought to keep “within the framework of bourgeois democracy,” and consequently ought not to take any steps going beyond this framework. The ultra-Lefts, on the other hand, in practice refused to make any attempt to form a united front government.

In 1923 Saxony and Thuringia presented a clear picture of a Right opportunist “workers’ government” in action. The entry of the Communists into the government of Saxony jointly with the Left Social-Democrats (Zeigner group) was no mistake in itself; on the contrary, the revolutionary situation in Germany fully justified this step. But, in taking part in the government, the Communists should have used their positions primarily for the purpose of arming the proletariat. This they did not do. They did not even requisition a single apartment of the rich, although the housing shortage among the workers was so great that many of them with their wives and children were still without a roof over their heads. They also did nothing to organize the revolutionary mass movement of the work¬ ers. They behaved in general like ordinary’ parliamentary ministers “within the framework of bourgeois democracy.” As you know, this was the result of the opportunist policy of Brandler and his adher¬ ents. The result was such bankruptcy that to this day we have to refer to the government of Saxony as the classical example of how revolutionaries should not behave when in office.

Comrades, we demand an entirely different policy from any united front government. We demand that it should carry out defi¬ nite and fundamental revolutionary demands required by the situa¬ tion. For instance, control of production, control of the banks, dis¬ banding of the police and its replacement by an armed workers’ militia, etc.

Fifteen years ago Lenin called upon us to focus all our attention on “searching out forms of transition or approach to the proletarian revolution.” It may be that in a number of countries the united front government will prove to be one of the most important transitional forms. “Left” doctrinaires always avoided this precept of Lenin’s. Like the limited propagandists that they were, they spoke only of “aims,” without ever worrying about “forms of transition.” The Right opportunists, on the other hand, tried to establish a special “democratic intermediate stage” lying between the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the dictatorship of the proletariat, for the pur¬ pose of instilling into the workers the illusion of a peaceful parlia¬ mentary passage from the one dictatorship to the other. This ficti¬ tious “intermediate stage” they also called “transitional form,” and even quoted Lenin’s words! But this piece of swindling was not difficult to expose: for Lenin spoke of the form of transition and approach to the “ proletarian revolution ,” i.e., to the overthrow of the bourgeois dictatorship, and not of some transitional form be¬ tween the bourgeois and the proletarian dictatorship.

Why did Lenin attach such exceptionally great importance to the form of transition to the proletarian revolution? Because he had in mind “ the fundamental law of all great revolutions ,” the law that for the masses propaganda and agitation alone cannot take the place of their own political experience, when it is a question of attracting really wide masses of the working people to the side of the revolu¬ tionary vanguard, without which a victorious straggle for power is impossible. It is a common mistake of a Leftist character to imagine that as soon as a political (or revolutionary) crisis arises, it is enough for the Communist leaders to throw out the slogan of revo¬ lutionary insurrection, and the masses will follow them. No, even in such a crisis the masses are by no means always ready to do so. We saw this in the case of Spain. To help the millions to master as rap¬ idly as possible, through their own experience, what they have to do, where to find a radical solution, and what party is worthy of their confidence these among others are the purposes for which both transitional slogans and special “forms of transition or approach to the proletarian revolution” are necessary. Otherwise the great mass of the people, a prey to petty-bourgeois democratic illusions and traditions, may waver even when there is a revolutionary situation, may procrastinate and stray, without finding the road to revolution - and then come under the ax of the fascist executioners.

That is why we indicate the possibility of forming an anti¬ fascist united front government in the conditions of a political crisis. In so far as such a government will really prosecute the straggle against the enemies of the people, and give a free hand to the work¬ ing class and the Communist Party, we Communists shall accord it our unstinted support, and as soldiers of the revolution shall take our place in the first line offire. But we state frankly to the masses:

Final salvation this government cannot bring. It is not in a po¬ sition to overthrow the class rale of the exploiters, and for this rea¬ son cannot finally remove the danger of fascist counter-revolution. Consequently it is necessary to prepare for the socialist revolution! Soviet power and only Soviet power can bring salvation!

In estimating the present development of the world situation, we see that a political crisis is maturing in quite a number of coun¬ tries. This makes a firm decision by our Congress on the question of a united front government a matter of great urgency and importance.

If our parties are able to utilize in a Bolshevik fashion the op¬ portunity of forming a united front government and of waging the straggle for formation and maintenance in power of such a govern¬ ment, for the revolutionary training of the masses, this will be the best political justification of our policy in favor of the formation of united front governments.

The Ideological Struggle against Fascism

One of the weakest aspects of the anti-fascist straggle of our par¬ ties is that they react inadequately and too slowly to the demagogy of fascism, and to this day continue to neglect the problems of the strag¬ gle against fascist ideology. Many comrades did not believe that so reactionary a variety of bourgeois ideology as the ideology of fas¬ cism, which in its stupidity frequently reaches the point of lunacy, was capable of gaining a mass influence at all. This was a great mis¬ take. The putrefaction of capitalism penetrates to the innermost core of its ideology and culture, while the desperate situation of wide masses of the people renders certain sections of them susceptible to infection from the ideological refuse of this putrefaction.

Under no circumstances may we underrate fascism’s power of ideological infection. On the contrary, we for our part must develop an extensive ideological straggle based on clear, popular arguments and a correct, well thought out approach to the peculiarities of the national psychology of the masses of the people.

The fascists are rummaging through the entire history of every nation so as to be able to pose as the heirs and continuators of all that was exalted and heroic in its past, while all that was degrading or offensive to the national sentiments of the people they make use of as weapons against the enemies of fascism. Hundreds of books are being published in Germany with only one aim — to falsify the history of the German people and give it a fascist complexion.

The new-baked National-Socialist historians try to depict the history of Germany as if for the past two thousand years, by virtue of some historical law, a certain line of development had ran through it like a red thread, leading to the appearance on the histori¬ cal scene of a national “savior,” a “Messiah,” of the German people, a certain “Corporal” of Austrian extraction! In these books the greatest figures of the German people of the past are represented as having been fascists, while the great peasant movements are set down as the direct precursors of the fascist movement.

Mussolini makes every effort to make capital for himself out of the heroic figure of Garibaldi. The French fascists bring to the fore as their heroine Joan of Arc. The American fascists appeal to the traditions of the American War of Independence, the traditions of Washington and Lincoln. The Bulgarian fascists make use of the national liberation movement of the ‘seventies and its heroes be¬ loved of the people, Vassil Levsky, Stephen Karaj and others.

Communists who suppose that all this has nothing to do with the cause of the working class, who do nothing to enlighten the masses on the past of their people, in an historically correct fashion, in a genuinely Marxist, a Leninist-Marxist, a Leninist-Stalinist spir¬ it, who do nothing to link up the present struggle with the people’s revolutionary traditions and past - voluntarily hand over to the fas¬ cist falsifiers all that is valuable in the historical past of the nation, that the fascists may bamboozle the masses.

No, Comrades, we are concerned with every important ques¬ tion, not only of the present and the future, but also of the past of our own peoples. We Communists do not pursue a narrow policy based on the craft interests of the workers. We are not narrow¬ minded trade union functionaries, or leaders of medieval guilds of handicraftsmen and journeymen. We are the representatives of the class interests of the most important, the greatest class of modern society - the working class, to whose destiny it falls to free mankind from the sufferings of the capitalist system, the class which in one- sixth of the world has already cast off the yoke of capitalism and constitutes the ruling class. We defend the vital interests of all the exploited, toiling strata, i. e. , of the overwhelming majority in any capitalist country.

We Communists are the irreconcilable opponents, on principle, of bourgeois nationalism in all its forms. But we are not supporters of national nihilism, and should never act as such. The task of edu¬ cating the workers and all working people in the spirit of proletarian internationalism is one of the fundamental tasks of every Com¬ munist Party. But anyone who thinks that this permits him, or even compels him, to sneer at all the national sentiments of the wide masses of working people is far from being a genuine Bolshevik, and has understood nothing of the teaching of Lenin and Stalin on the national question.

Lenin, who always fought bourgeois nationalism resolutely and consistently, gave us an example of the correct approach to the problem of national sentiments, in his article “On the National Pride of the Great Russians,” written in 1914. He wrote:

Are we enlightened Great-Russian proletarians imper¬ vious to the feeling of national pride? Certainly not! We love our language and our motherland; we, more than any other group, are working to raise its laboring masses (i.e., nine-tenths of its population) to the level of intelligent democrats and socialists. We, more than anybody, are grieved to see and feel to what violence, oppression and mockery our beautiful motherland is being subjected by the tsarist hangmen, the nobles and the capitalists. We are proud of the fact that those acts of violence met with re¬ sistance in our midst, in the midst of the Great Russians; that we have given the world Radischev, the Decembrists, the declasse revolutionaries of the seventies; that in 1905 the Great Russian working class created a powerful revolu¬ tionary party of the masses.... We are filled with national pride because of the knowledge that the Great-Russian na¬ tion, too, has created a revolutionary class; that it, too, has proven capable of giving humanity great examples of straggle for freedom and for socialism; that its contribution is not confined solely to great pogroms, numerous scaf¬ folds, torture chambers, great famines and great servility before the priests, the tsars, the landowners and the capital¬ ists.

We are filled with national pride, and therefore we par¬ ticularly hate our slavish past ...and our slavish present, in which the same landowners, aided by the capitalists, lead us into war to stifle Poland and the Ukraine, to throttle the democratic movement in Persia and in China, to strengthen the gang of Romanovs, Dobrinskys, Purishkeviches that cover with shame our Great-Russian national dignity.”

This is what Lenin wrote on national pride.

I think, comrades, that when the fascists, at the Leipzig trial, at¬ tempted to slander the Bulgarians as a barbarian people, I was not wrong in taking up the defense of the national honor of the toiling masses of the Bulgarian people, who are struggling heroically against the fascist usurpers, the real barbarians and savages, nor was I wrong in declaring that I had no cause to be ashamed of being a Bulgarian, but that, on the contrary, I was proud of being a son of the heroic Bulgarian working class.

Comrades, proletarian internationalism must, so to speak, “ac¬ climatize itself’ in each country in order to sink deep roots in its native land. National forms of the proletarian class struggle and of the labor movement in the individual countries are in no contradic¬ tion to proletarian internationalism; on the contrary, it is precisely in these forms that the international interests of the proletariat can be successfully defended.

It goes without saying that it is necessary everywhere and on all occasions to expose before the masses and prove to them concretely that the fascist bourgeoisie, on the pretext of de fending general na¬ tional interests, is conducting its egotistical policy of oppressing and exploiting its own people, as well as robbing and enslaving other nations. But we must not confine ourselves to this. We must at the same time prove by the very struggle of the working class and the actions of the Communist Parties that the proletariat, in rising against every manner of bondage and national oppression, is the only true fighter for national freedom and the independence of the people.

The interests of the class struggle of the proletariat against its native exploiters and oppressors are not in contradiction to the in¬ terests of a free and happy future of the nation. On the contrary, the socialist revolution will signify the salvation of the nation and will open up to it the road to loftier heights. By the very fact of building at the present time its class organizations and consolidating its posi¬ tions, by the very fact of defending democratic rights and liberties against fascism, by the very fact of fighting for the overthrow of capitalism, the working class is fighting for the future of the nation.

The revolutionary proletariat is fighting to save the culture of the people, to liberate it from the shackles of decaying monopoly capitalism, from barbarous fascism, which is laying violent hands on it. Only the proletarian revolution can avert the destruction of culture and raise it to its highest flowering as a truly national culture national in form and socialist in content — which, under Stalin's leadership, is being realized in the Union of Soviet Socialist Repub¬ lics before our very eyes.

Proletarian internationalism not only is not in contradiction to this struggle of the working people of the individual countries for national, social and cultural freedom, but, thanks to international proletarian solidarity and fighting unity, assures the support that is necessary for victory in this straggle. The working class in the capi¬ talist countries can triumph only in closest alliance with the victori¬ ous proletariat of the great Soviet Union. Only by straggling hand in hand with the proletariat of the imperialist countries can the colonial peoples and oppressed national minorities achieve their freedom. The sole road to victory for the proletarian revolution in the imperi¬ alist countries lies through the revolutionary alliance of the working class of the imperialist countries with the national liberation move¬ ment in the colonies and dependent countries, because, as Marx taught us, “no nation can be free if it oppresses other nations.”

Communists belonging to an oppressed, dependent nation can¬ not combat chauvinism successfully among the people of their own nation if they do not at the same time show in practice, in the mass movement, that they actually straggle for the liberation of their na¬ tion from the alien yoke. And again, on the other hand, the Com¬ munists of an oppressing nation can not do what is necessary to ed¬ ucate the toiling masses of their nation in the spirit of international¬ ism without waging a resolute straggle against the oppressor policy of their “own” bourgeoisie, for the right of complete self- determination for the nations kept in bondage by it. If they do not do this, they likewise do not make it easier for the toilers of the op¬ pressed nation to overcome their nationalist prejudices.

If we act in this spirit, if in all our mass work we prove con¬ vincingly that we are free of both national nihilism and bourgeois nationalism, then and only then shall we be able to wage a really successful straggle against the jingo demagogy of the fascists.

That is the reason why a correct and practical application of the Leninist-Stalinist national policy is of such paramount importance. It is unquestionably an essential preliminary condition for a suc¬ cessful straggle against chauvinism - this main instrument of ideo¬ logical influence of the fascists upon the masses.

Consolidation of the Communist Parties and the Struggle for Political Unity of the Proletariat

Comrades, in the straggle to establish the united front the im¬ portance of the leading role of the Communist Party in creases ex¬ traordinarily. Only the Communist Party is at bottom the initiator, the organizer and the driving force of the united front of the work¬ ing class.

The Communist Parties can ensure the mobilization of the wid¬ est masses of working people for a united straggle against fascism and the offensive of capital only if they strengthen their own ranks in every respect, if they develop their initiative, pursue a Marxist- Leninist policy and apply correct, flexible tactics which take into account the actual situation and alignment of class forces.

Consolidation of the Communist Parties

In the period between the Sixth and Seventh Congresses, our Parties in the capitalist countries have undoubtedly grown in stature and have been considerably steeled. But it would be a most danger¬ ous mistake to rest content with this achievement. The more the united front of the working class extends, the more will new, com¬ plex problems rise before us and the more will it be necessary for us to work on the political and organizational consolidation of our Par¬ ties. The united front of the proletariat brings to the fore an army of workers who will be able to carry out their mission if this army is headed by a leading force which will point out its aims and paths. This leading force can only be a strong proletarian, revolutionary party.

If we Communists exert every effort to establish a united front, we do this not for the narrow purpose of recruiting new members for the Communist Parties. But we must strengthen the Communist Parties in every way and increase their membership for the very reason that we seriously want to strengthen the united front. The strengthening of the Communist Parties is not a narrow Party con¬ cern but the concern of the entire working class.

The unity, revolutionary solidarity and fighting preparedness of the Communist Parties constitute most valuable capital which be¬ longs not only to us but to the whole working class. We have com¬ bined and shall continue to combine our readiness to march jointly with the Social-Democratic Parties and organizations to the straggle against fascism with an irreconcilable struggle against Social-Democracy as the ideology and practice of compromise with the bourgeoisie, and consequently also against any penetration of this ideology into our own ranks.

In boldly and resolutely carrying out the policy of the united front, we meet in our own ranks with obstacles which we must re¬ move at all costs in the shortest possible time.

After the Sixth Congress of the Comintern, a successful strug¬ gle was waged in all Communist Parties of the capitalist countries against any tendency toward an opportunist adaptation to the con¬ ditions of capitalist stabilization and against any infection with re¬ formist and legalist illusions. Our Parties purged their ranks of vari¬ ous kinds of Right opportunists, thus strengthening their Bolshevik unity and fighting capacity. Less successful, and frequently entirely lacking, was the fight against sectarianism. Sectarianism manifested itself no longer in primitive, open forms, as in the first years of the existence of the Communist International, but, under cover of a formal recognition of the Bolshevik theses, hindered the develop¬ ment of a Bolshevik mass policy. In our day this is often no longer an “infantile disorder ,” as Lenin wrote, but a deeply rooted vice, which must be shaken off or it will be impossible to solve the prob¬ lem of establishing the united front of the proletariat and of leading the masses from the positions of reformism to the side of revolution.

In the present situation sectarianism, self-satisfied sectarianism, as we designate it in the draft resolution, more than anything else impedes our straggle for the realization of the united front: sectari¬ anism, satisfied with its doctrinaire narrowness, its divorce from the real life of the masses; satisfied with its simplified methods of solving the most complex problems of the working class movement on the basis of stereotyped schemes; sectarianism, which professes to know all and considers it superfluous to learn from the masses, from the lessons of the labor movement. In short, sectarianism, to which, as they say, mountains are mere stepping-stones.

Self-satisfied sectarianism will not and cannot understand that the leadership of the working class by the Communist Party does not come of itself. The leading role of the Communist Party in the straggles of the working class must be won. For this purpose it is necessary, not to rant about the leading role of the Communists, but to merit and win the confidence of the working masses by everyday mass work and correct policy. This will be possible only if in our political work we Communists seriously take into account the actual level of the class consciousness of the masses, the degree to which they have become revolutionized, if we soberly appraise the actual situation, not on the basis of our wishes but on the basis of the actu¬ al state of affairs. Patiently, step by step, we must make it easier for the broad masses to come over to the Communist position. We ought never to forget the words of Lenin, who warns us as strongly as possible:

...this is the whole point - we must not regard that

which is obsolete for us as obsolete for the class, as obso¬ lete for the masses.

Is it not a fact, comrades, that there are still not a few such doc¬ trinaire elements left in our ranks who at all times and places sense nothing but danger in the policy of the united front? For such com¬ rades the whole united front is one unrelieved peril. But this sectari¬ an “stickling for principle” is nothing but political helplessness in face of the difficulties of directly leading the straggle of the masses.

Sectarianism finds expression particularly in overestimating the revolutionization of the masses, in overestimating the speed at which they are abandoning the positions of reformism, and in at¬ tempting to leap over difficult stages and the complicated tasks of the movement. In practice, methods of leading the masses have fre¬ quently been replaced by the methods of leading a narrow party group. The strength of the traditional connection between the mass¬ es and their organizations and leaders was underestimated, and when the masses did not break off these connections immediately, the attitude taken toward them was just as harsh as that adopted to¬ ward their reactionary leaders. Tactics and slogans have tended to become stereotyped for all countries, the special features of the ac¬ tual situation in each individual country being left out of account. The necessity of stubborn straggle in the very midst of the masses themselves to win their confidence has been ignored, the straggle for the partial demands of the workers and work in the reformist trade unions and fascist mass organizations have been neglected.

The policy of the united front has frequently been replaced by bare appeals and abstract propaganda.

In no less a degree have sectarian views hindered the correct se¬ lection of people, the training and developing of cadres connected with the masses, enjoying the confidence of the masses, cadres whose revolutionary mettle have been tried and tested in class bat¬ tles, cadres capable of combining the practical experience of mass work with the staunchness ofprinciple of a Bolshevik.

Thus sectarianism has to a considerable extent retarded the growth of the Communist Parties, made it difficult to carry out a real mass policy, prevented our taking advantage of the difficulties of the class enemy to strengthen the positions of the revolutionary movement, and hindered the winning over of the wide mass of the proletariat to the side of the Communist Parties.

While fighting most resolutely to overcome and exterminate the last remnants of self-satisfied sectarianism, we must increase in eve¬ ry way our vigilance toward Right opportunism and the struggle against it and against every one of its concrete manifestations, bear¬ ing in mind that the danger of Right opportunism will increase in proportion as the wide united front develops. Already there are tendencies to reduce the role of the Communist Party in the ranks of the united front and to effect a reconciliation with Social- Democratic ideology. Nor must the fact be lost sight of that the tac¬ tics of the united front are a method of clearly convincing the So¬ cial-Democratic workers of the correctness of the Communist poli¬ cy and the incorrectness of the reformist policy, and that they are not a reconciliation with Social-Democratic ideology and practice. A successful straggle to establish the united front imperatively de¬ mands constant straggle in our ranks against tendencies to depreci¬ ate the role of the Party, against legalist illusions, against reliance on spontaneity and automatism, both in liquidating fascism and in conducting the united front against the slightest vacillation at the moment of decisive action.

It is necessary - Stalin teaches us - that the Party be able to combine in its work the greatest adhesion to princi¬ ple (not to be confused with sectarianism!) with a maxi¬ mum of contacts and connections with the masses (not to be confused with “tailism”!), without which it is not only impossible for the Party to teach the masses but also to learn from them, not only to lead the masses and raise them to the level of the Party, but to listen to the voice of the masses and divine their sorest needs. (Joseph Stalin, “The Perspective of the Communist Party of Germany and Bol- shevization,” Pravda, No. 27, February 3, 1926.)

Political Unity of the Working Class

Comrades, the development of the united front of joint struggle of the Communist and Social-Democratic workers against fascism and the offensive of capital likewise brings to the fore the question of political unity, of a single political mass party of the working class. The Social-Democratic workers are becoming more and more convinced by experience that the straggle against the class enemy demands unity of political leadership, inasmuch as duality in lead¬ ership impedes the further development and reinforcement of the joint straggle of the working class.

The interests of the class straggle of the proletariat and the suc¬ cess of the proletarian revolution make it imperative that there be a single party of the proletariat in each country. Of course, it is not so easy or simple to achieve this. It requires stubborn work and strag¬ gle and will of necessity be a more or less lengthy process. The Communist Parties, basing themselves on the growing urge of the workers for a unification of the Social-Democratic Parties or of in¬ dividual organizations with the Communist Parties, must firmly and confidently take the initiative in this unification. The cause of amal¬ gamating the forces of the working class in a single revolutionary proletarian party, at the time when the international labor movement is entering the period of closing the split in its ranks, is our cause, is the cause of the Communist International.

But while it is sufficient for the establishment of the united front of the Communist and Social-Democratic Parties to have an agreement to straggle against fascism, the offensive of capital and war, the achievement of political unity is possible only on the basis of a number of definite conditions involving principles.

This unification is possible only:

First, on condition of complete independence from the bour¬ geoisie and complete rupture of the bloc of Social-Democracy with the bourgeoisie ;

Second, on condition that unity of action be first brought about; Third, on condition that the necessity of the revolutionary over¬ throw of the rule of the bourgeoisie and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat in the form of Soviets be recognized;

Fourth, on condition that support of one’s own bourgeoisie in imperialist war be rejected;

Fifth, on condition that the party be constructed on the basis of democratic centralism, which ensures unity of will and action, and which has been tested by the experience of the Russian Bolsheviks.

We must explain to the Social-Democratic workers, patiently and in comradely fashion, why political unity of the working class is impossible without these conditions. We must discuss together with them the sense and significance of these conditions.

Why is it necessary for the realization of the political unity of the proletariat that there be complete independence of the bourgeoisie and a rupture of the bloc of Social-Democrats with the bourgeoisie?

Because the whole experience of the labor movement, particu¬ larly the experience of the fifteen years of coalition policy in Ger¬ many, has shown that the policy of class collaboration, the policy of dependence on the bourgeoisie, leads to the defeat of the working class and to the victory of fascism. And only the road of irreconcil¬ able class struggle against the bourgeoisie, the road of the Bolshe¬ viks, is the true road to victory.

Why must unity of action be first established as a preliminary condition of political unity?

Because unity of action to repel the offensive of capital and of fascism is possible and necessary even before the majority of the workers are united on a common political platform for the over¬ throw of capitalism, while the working out of unity of views on the main lines and aims of the struggle of the proletariat, without which a unification of the parties is impossible, requires a more or less extended period of time. And unity of views is worked out best of all in joint struggle against the class enemy even today. To propose to unite at once instead of forming a united front means to place the cart before the horse and to imagine that the cart will then move ahead. Precisely for the reason that for us the question of political unity is not a maneuver, as it is for many Social-Democratic leaders, we insist on the realization of unity of action as one of the most im¬ portant stages in the struggle for political unity.

Why is it necessary to recognize the necessity of the revolution¬ ary overthrow of the bourgeoisie and the establishment of the dicta¬ torship of the proletariat in the form of Soviet power?

Because the experience of the victory of the great October Rev¬ olution on the one hand, and, on the other, the bitter lessons learned in Germany, Austria and Spain during the entire post-war period, have confirmed once more that the victory of the proletariat is pos¬ sible only by means of the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeoi¬ sie, and that the bourgeoisie would rather drown the labor move¬ ment in a sea of blood than allow the proletariat to establish social¬ ism by peaceful means. The experience of the October Revolution has demonstrated patently that the basic content of the proletarian revolution is the question of the proletarian dictatorship, which is called upon to crush the resistance of the overthrown exploiters, to arm the revolution for the struggle against imperialism and to lead the revolution to the complete victory of socialism. To achieve the dictatorship of the proletariat as the dictatorship of the vast majority over an insignificant minority, over the exploiters — and only as such can it be brought about - for this Soviets are needed embracing all sections of the working class, the basic masses of the peasantry and the rest of the toilers, without whose awakening, without whose inclusion in the front of the revolutionary struggle, the victory of the proletariat cannot be consolidated.

Why is the refusal of support to the bourgeoisie in an imperial¬ ist war a condition of political unity?

Because the bourgeoisie wages imperialist war for its predatory purposes, against the interests of the vast majority of the peoples, under whatever guise this war may be waged. Because all imperial¬ ists combine their feverish preparations for war with extremely in¬ tensified exploitation and oppression of the working people in their own country. Support of the bourgeoisie in such a war means trea¬ son to the country and the international working class.

Why, finally, is the building of the party on the basis of demo¬ cratic centralism a condition of unity?

Because only a party built on the basis of democratic centralism can ensure unity of will and action, can lead the proletariat to victo¬ ry over the bourgeoisie, which has at its disposal so powerful a weapon as the centralized state apparatus. The application of the principle of democratic centralism has stood the splendid historical test of the experience of the Russian Bolshevik Party, the Party of Lenin and Stalin.

Yes, we are for a single mass political party of the working class. But this party must be, in the words of Comrade Stalin,

“...a militant party, a revolutionary party, bold enough to lead the proletarians to the straggle for power, with suf¬ ficient experience to be able to orientate itself in the com¬ plicated problems that arise in a revolutionary situation, and sufficiently flexible to steer clear of any submerged rocks on the way to its goal.”

This explains why it is necessary to strive for political unity on the basis of the conditions indicated.

We are for the political unity of the working class. Therefore we are ready to collaborate most closely with all Social-Democrats who are for the united front and sincerely support unity on the above-mentioned principles. But precisely because we are for unity, we shall straggle resolutely against all “Left” demagogues who try to make use of the disillusionment of the Social-Democratic work¬ ers to create new Socialist Parties or Internationals directed against the Communist movement, and thus keep deepening the split in the working class.

We welcome the growing efforts among Social-Democratic workers for a united front with the Communists. In this fact we see a growth of their revolutionary consciousness and a beginning of the healing of the split in the working class. Being of the opinion that unity of action is a pressing necessity and the truest road to the establishment of the political unity of the proletariat as well, we declare that the Communist International and its sections are ready to enter into negotiations with the Second International and its sec¬ tions for the establishment of the unity of the working class in the straggle against the offensive of capital, against fascism and the menace of imperialist war.

Conclusion

Comrades, I am concluding my report. As you see, taking into account the change in the situation since the Sixth Congress and the lessons of our straggle, and relying on the degree of consolidation in our ranks already achieved, we are raising a number of questions today in a new way, primarily the question of the united front and of the approach to Social-Democracy, the reformist trade unions and other mass organizations.

There are wiseacres who will sense in all this a digression from our basic positions, some sort of turn to the Right of the straight line of Bolshevism. Well, in my country, Bulgaria, they say that a hun¬ gry chicken always dreams of millet. Let those political chickens think so.

This interests us little. For us it is important that our own Par¬ ties and the wide masses throughout the world should correctly un¬ derstand what we are striving for.

We would not be revolutionary Marxists, Leninists, worthy pu¬ pils of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, if we did not suitably recon¬ struct our policies and tactics in accordance with the changing situa¬ tion and the changes occurring in the world labor movement.

We would not be real revolutionaries if we did not learn from our own experience and the experience of the masses.

We want our Parties - in the capitalist countries to come out and act as real political parties of the working class, to become in actual fact a political factor in the life of their countries, to pursue at all times an active Bolshevik mass policy and not confine them¬ selves to propaganda and criticism, and bare appeals to struggle for proletarian dictatorship.

We are enemies of all cut-and-dried schemes. We want to take into account the concrete situation at each moment, in each place, and not act according to a fixed, stereotyped form anywhere and everywhere; not to forget that in varying circumstances the position of the Communists cannot be identical.

We want soberly to take into account all stages in the develop¬ ment of the class struggle and in the growth of the class- consciousness of the masses themselves, to be able to locate and solve at each stage the concrete problems of the revolutionary movement corresponding to this stage.

We want to find a common language with the broadest masses for the purpose of straggling against the class enemy, to find ways of finally overcoming the isolation of the revolutionary vanguard from the masses of the proletariat and all other toilers, as well as of over¬ coming the fatal isolation of the working class itself from its natural allies in the straggle against the bourgeoisie, against fascism.

We want to draw increasingly wide masses into the revolution¬ ary class straggle and lead them to the proletarian revolution, pro- ceeding from their vital interests and needs as the starting point, and their own experience as the basis.

Following the example of our glorious Russian Bolsheviks, the example of the leading Party of the Communist International, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, we want to combine the rev¬ olutionary heroism of the German, the Spanish, the Austrian and other Communists with genuine revolutionary realism, and put an end to the last remnants of scholastic tinkering with serious political questions.

We want to equip our Parties from every angle for the solution of the highly complex political problems confronting them. For this purpose we want to raise ever higher their theoretical level, to train them in the spirit of living Marxism-Leninism and not dead doctrinarism.

We want to eradicate from our ranks all self-satisfied sectarian¬ ism, which above all blocks our road to the masses and impedes the carrying out of a truly Bolshevik mass policy. We want to intensify in every way the straggle against all concrete manifestations of Right opportunism, realizing that the danger from this side will in¬ crease precisely in the practice of carrying out our mass policy and straggle.

We want the Communists of each country promptly to draw and apply all the lessons that can be drawn from their own experi¬ ence as the revolutionary vanguard of the proletariat. We want them as quickly as possible to learn how to sail on the turbulent waters of the class struggle, and not to remain on the shore as observers and registrars of the surging waves in the expectation of fine weather.

This is what we want!

And we want all this because only in this way will the working class at the head of all the toilers, welded into a million strong revolutionary army, led by the Communist International and pos¬ sessed of so great and wise a pilot as our leader Comrade Stalin, be able to fulfill its historical mission with certainty — to sweep fascism off the face of the earth and, together with it, capitalism!

(At the close of the report all delegates joined in a lengthy ova¬ tion, cheering enthusiastically and singing the revolutionary songs of their countries.)

Unity of the Working Class against Fascism

Comrades, the very full discussion on my report bears witness to the immense interest taken by the Congress in the fundamental tactical problems and tasks of the struggle of the working class against the offensive of capital and fascism, and against the threat of imperialist war.

Summing up the eight-day discussion, we can state that all the principal propositions contained in the report have met with the unanimous approval of the Congress. None of the speakers objected to the tactical line we have proposed or to the resolution which has been submitted.

I venture to say that at none of the previous Congresses of the Communist International has such ideological and political solidari¬ ty been revealed as at the present Congress. The complete unanimi¬ ty displayed at the Congress indicates that the necessity of revising our policy and tactics in accordance with the changed conditions and on the basis of the extremely abundant and instructive experi¬ ence of the past few years, has come to be fully recognized in our ranks.

This unanimity may undoubtedly be regarded as one of the most important conditions for success in solving the paramount immediate problem of the international proletarian movement, namely, establishing unity of action of all sections of the working class in the struggle against fascism.

The successful solution of this problem requires, first, that Communists skillfully wield the weapon of Marxist-Leninist analy¬ sis, while carefully studying the actual situation and the alignment of class forces as these develop, and that they plan their activity and straggle accordingly. We must mercilessly root out the weakness, not infrequently observed in our comrades, for cut-and-dried schemes, lifeless formulas and ready-made patterns. We must put an end to the state of affairs in which Communists, when lacking the knowledge or ability for Marxist-Leninist analysis, substitute for it general phrases and slogans such as “the revolutionary way out of the crisis,” without making the slightest serious attempt to explain what must be the conditions, the relationship of class forces, the degree of revolutionary maturity of the proletariat and mass of working people, and the level of influence of the Communist Party for making possible such a revolutionary way out of the crisis. Without such an analysis all these catchwords be come “dud” shells, empty phrases which only obscure our tasks of the day.

Without a concrete Marxist-Leninist analysis we shall never be able correctly to present and solve the problem of fascism, the prob¬ lems of the proletarian front and the general People’s Front, the problem of our attitude toward bourgeois democracy, the problem of a united front government, the problem of the processes going on within the working class particularly among the Social-Democratic workers, or any of the numerous other new and complex problems with which life itself and the development of the class struggle con¬ fronts us now and will confront us in the future.

Second, we need live people - people who have grown up from the masses of the workers, have sprang from their every day strag¬ gle, people of militant action, whole-heartedly de voted to the cause of the proletariat, people whose brains and hands will give effect to the decisions of our Congress. Without Bolshevik, Leninist-Stalinist cadres we shall be unable to solve the enormous problems that con¬ front the toilers in the fight against fascism.

Third, we need people equipped with the compass of Marxist- Leninist theory, for people who are unable to make skillful use of this instrument slip into narrow, makeshift politics, are unable to look ahead, take decisions only from case to case, and lose the broad perspective of the straggle which shows the masses where we are going and whither we are leading the toilers.

Fourth, we need the organization of the masses in order to put our decisions into practice. Our ideological and political influence alone is not enough. We must put a stop to reliance on the hope that the movement will develop of its own accord, which is one of our fundamental weaknesses. We must remember that without persis¬ tent, prolonged, patient, and sometimes apparently thankless organ¬ izational work on our part, the masses will never make for the Communist shore. In order to be able to organize the masses we must acquire Lenin’s and Stalin’s art of making our decisions the property not only of the Communists but also of the widest masses of working people. We must learn to talk to the masses, not in the language of book formulas, but in the language of fighters for the cause of the masses, whose every word, whose every idea reflects the innermost thoughts and sentiments of millions.

It is primarily with these problems that I should like to deal in my closing speech.

Comrades, the Congress has welcomed the new tactical lines with great enthusiasm and unanimity. Enthusiasm and unanimity are excellent things of course; but it is still better when these are com¬ bined with a deeply considered and critical approach to the tasks that confront us, with a proper mastery of the decisions adopted and a real understanding of the means and methods by which these decisions are to be applied to the particular circumstances of each country.

After all, we have unanimously adopted good resolutions before now, but the trouble was that we not infrequently adopted these de¬ cisions in a formal manner and we at best made them the property of only the small vanguard of the working class. Our decisions did not become flesh and blood for the wide masses; they did not be¬ come a guide to the action of millions of people.

Can we assert that we have already finally abandoned this for¬ mal approach to adopted decisions? No. It must be said that even at this Congress the speeches of some of the comrades gave indication of remnants of formalism; a desire made itself felt at times to substi¬ tute for the concrete analysis of reality and living experience some sort of new scheme, some sort of new, over-simplified lifeless for¬ mula, to represent as actually existing what we desire, but does not yet exist.

The Struggle against Fascism Must Be Concrete

No general characterization of fascism, however correct in it¬ self, can relieve us of the need to study and take into account the special features of the development of fascism and the various forms of fascist dictatorship in the individual countries and at its various stages. It is necessary in each country to investigate, study and ascertain the national peculiarities, the specific national features of fascism and map out accordingly effective methods and forms of straggle against fascism.

Lenin persistently warned us against “stereotyped methods and mechanical leveling, against rendering tactical rales, rales of straggle, identical.” This warning is particularly to the point when it is a ques¬ tion of fighting an enemy who so subtly and Jesuitically exploits the national sentiments and prejudices of the masses and their anti¬ capitalist inclinations in the interests of big capital. Such an enemy must be known to perfection, from every angle. We must, without any delay whatever, react to his various maneuvers, discover his hidden moves, be prepared to repel him in any arena and at any moment. We must not hesitate even to learn from the enemy if that will help us more quickly and more effectively to wring his neck.

It would be a gross mistake to lay down any sort of universal scheme of the development of fascism, to cover all countries and all peoples. Such a scheme would not help but would hamper us in car¬ rying on a real struggle. Apart from everything else, such a mle would result in indiscriminately thrusting into the camp of fascism those sections of the population which, if properly approached, could, at a certain stage of development, be brought into the strag¬ gle against fascism, or could at least be neutralized.

Let us take, for example, the development of fascism in France and in Germany. Some comrades believe that, generally speaking, fascism cannot develop as easily in France as in Germany. What is true and what is false in this contention? It is true that there were no such deep-seated democratic traditions in Germany as there are in France, which went through several revolutions in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It is true that France is a country which won the war and imposed the Versailles system on other countries, that the national sentiments of the French people have not been hurt as they have been in Germany where this factor played such a great part. It is true that in France the basic masses of the peasantry are pro-republic and anti-fascist, especially in the south, in contrast with Germany, where even before fascism came to power a considerable section of the peasantry was under the influence of reactionary parties.

But, comrades, notwithstanding the existing differences in the development of the fascist movement in France and in Germany, notwithstanding the factors which impede the onslaught of fascism in France, it would be shortsighted not to notice the uninterrupted growth there of the fascist peril or to underestimate the possibility of a fascist coup d’etat. Moreover, a number of factors in France favor the development of fascism. One must not forget that the eco¬ nomic crisis, which began later in France than in other capitalist countries, continues to become deeper and more acute and this greatly encourages the orgy of fascist demagogy. French fascism holds strong positions in the army, among the officers, such as the Nationalist-Socialists did not have in the Reichswehr before their advent to power. Furthermore, in no other country, perhaps, has the parliamentary regime been corrupted to such an enormous extent and caused such indignation among the masses as in France. Nor must it be forgotten that the development of fascism is furthered by the French bourgeoisie’s keen fear of losing its political and mili¬ tary hegemony in Europe.

Hence it follows that the successes scored by the anti-fascist movement in France, of which Comrades Thorez and Cachin have spoken here and over which we so heartily rejoice, are still far from indicating that the toiling masses have definitely succeeded in blocking the road to fascism. I must emphatically stress once more the full importance of the tasks of the French working class in the straggle against fascism, of which I already spoke in my report.

It would likewise be dangerous to cherish illusions regarding the weakness of fascism in other countries where it does not have a broad mass base. We have the example of such countries as Bulgar¬ ia, Yugoslavia and Finland, where fascism, although it had no broad base, came to power, relying on the armed forces of the state, and then sought to broaden its base by making use of the state apparatus.

Comrade Dutt was right in his contention that there was a ten¬ dency among us to contemplate fascism in general, without taking into account the specific features of the fascist movement in the various countries, erroneously classifying all reactionary measures of the bourgeoisie as fascism and going as far as calling the entire non-Communist camp fascist. The straggle against fascism was not strengthened but rather weakened in consequence.

Even now we still have survivals of a stereotyped approach to the question of fascism. When some comrades assert that Roose¬ velt’s “New Deal” represents an even clearer and more pronounced form of the development of the bourgeoisie toward fascism than the “National Government” in Great Britain, for example, is this not a manifestation of such a stereotyped approach to the question? One must be very partial to hackneyed schemes not to see that the most reactionary circles of American finance capital, which are attacking Roosevelt, are above all the very force which is stimulating and organizing the fascist movement in the United States. Not to see the beginnings of real fascism in the United States behind the hypocriti¬ cal outpourings of these circles “in defense of the democratic rights of the American citizen” is tantamount to misleading the working class in the straggle against its worst enemy.

In the colonial and semi-colonial countries also, as was men¬ tioned in the discussion, certain fascist groups are developing but, of course, there can be no question of the kind of fascism that we are accustomed to see in Germany, Italy and other capitalist coun¬ tries. Here we must study and take into account the quite special economic, political and historical conditions, in accordance with which fascism is assuming, and will continue to assume, peculiar forms of its own.

Unable to approach the phenomena of real life concretely, some comrades who suffer from mental laziness substitute general, non¬ committal formulas for a careful and concrete study of the actual situation and the relationship of class forces. They remind us, not of sharpshooters who shoot with unerring aim, but of those “crack” riflemen who regularly and unfailingly miss the target, shooting either too high or too low, too near or too far. But we, comrades, as Communists, active in the labor movement, as the revolutionary vanguard of the working class, want to be sharpshooters who unfail¬ ingly hit the target.

The United Proletarian Front and the Anti-Fascist People's Front

Some comrades are quite needlessly racking their brains over the problem of what to begin with — the united proletarian front or the anti-fascist People’s Front.

Some say that we cannot start forming the anti-fascist People’s Front until we have organized a solid united front of the proletariat.

Others argue that, since the establishment of the united proletar¬ ian front meets in a number of countries with the resistance of the reactionary part of Social-Democracy, it is better to start at once with building up the People’s Front, and then develop the united working class front on this basis.

Evidently both groups fail to understand that the united prole¬ tarian front and the anti-fascist People’s Front are connected by the living dialectics of struggle ; that they are interwoven, the one pass¬ ing into the other in the process of the practical straggle against fas¬ cism, and that there is certainly no Chinese wall to keep them apart.

For it cannot be seriously supposed that it is possible to estab¬ lish a genuine anti-fascist People’s Front without securing the unity of action of the working class itself, the guiding force of this anti¬ fascist People’s Front. At the same time, the further development of the united proletarian front depends, to a considerable degree, upon its transformation into a People’s Front against fascism.

Comrades ! Just picture to yourselves a devotee of cut-and- dried theories of this kind, gazing upon our resolution and contriv¬ ing his pet scheme with the zeal of a true pedant:

First, local united proletarian front from below;

Then, regional united front from below;

Thereafter, united front from above, passing through the same stages;

Then, unity in the trade union movement;

After that, the enlistment of other anti-fascist parties;

This to be followed by the extended People’s Front, from above and from below;

After which the movement must be raised to a higher level, po¬ liticalized, revolutionized, and so on and so forth.

You will say, comrades, that this is sheer nonsense. I agree with you. But the unfortunate thing is that in some form or other this kind of sectarian nonsense is still to be found quite frequently in our ranks.

Flow does the matter really stand? Of course, we must strive everywhere for a wide People’s Front of struggle against fascism. But in a number of countries we shall not get beyond general talk about the People’s Front unless we succeed in mobilizing the mass of the workers for the purpose of breaking down the resistance of the reactionary section of Social-Democracy to the proletarian unit¬ ed front of struggle. Above all, this is how the matter stands in Great Britain, where the working class comprises the majority of the population and where the bulk of the working class follows the lead of the trade unions and the Labor Party. That is how matters stand in Belgium and in the Scandinavian countries, where the numerical¬ ly small Communist Parties must face strong mass trade unions and numerically large Social-Democratic Parties.

In these countries the Communists would commit a very serious political mistake if they shirked the struggle to establish a united pro¬ letarian front, under cover of general talk about the People’s Front, which cannot be formed without the participation of the mass work¬ ing class organizations. In order to bring about a genuine People’s Front in these countries, the Communists must carry out an enormous amount of political and organizational work among the mass of the workers. They must overcome the preconceived ideas of these masses who regard their mass reformist organizations as already the embod¬ iment of proletarian unity. They must convince these masses &t the establishment of a united front with the Communists mean a shift on the part of those masses to the position of the class struggle, and that this shift alone will guarantee success in the struggle against the of¬ fensive of capital and fascism. We shah not overcome our difficulties by setting ourselves much wider tasks here. On the contrary, in fighting to remove these difficulties we shah, in fact and not in words alone, prepare the ground for the creation of a genuine People’s Front of battle against fascism, against the capitalist offensive and against the threat of imperialist war.

The problem is different in countries like Poland, where a strong peasant movement is developing alongside the labor move¬ ment, where the peasant masses have their own organizations which are becoming radicalized as a result of the agrarian crisis, and where national oppression evokes indignation among the national minori¬ ties. Flere the development of the general People’s Front of struggle will proceed parallel with the development of the united proletarian front, and at times in this type of country the movement for a gen¬ eral People’s Front may even outstrip the movement for a working class front.

Take a country like Spain, which is in the process of a bour¬ geois-democratic revolution. Can it be said that, because the prole¬ tariat is split up into numerous small organizations, complete fighting unity of the working class must first be established here before a workers’ and peasants’ front against Lerroux and Gil Ro¬ bles is created? By tackling the question in this way we would iso¬ late the proletariat from the peasantry, we would in effect be with¬ drawing the slogan of the agrarian revolution, and we would make it easier for the enemies of the people to disunite the proletariat and the peasantry and set the peasantry in opposition to the working class. Yet this, comrades, as is well known, was one of the main reasons why the working class was defeated in the October events of 1934.

However, one thing must not be forgotten: in ah countries where the proletariat is comparatively small in numbers, where the peasantry and the urban petty-bourgeois strata predominate, it is all the more necessary to make every effort to set up a firm united front of the working class itself, so that it may be able to take its place as the leading factor in relation to all the toilers.

Thus, comrades, in attacking the problem of the proletarian front and the People’s Front, there can be no general panacea suita- ble for all cases, all countries, all peoples. In this matter universal- ism, the application of one and the same recipe to all countries, is equivalent, if you will allow me to say so, to ignorance; and igno¬ rance should be flogged, even when it stalks about, nay, particularly when it stalks about, in the cloak of universal cut-and-dried schemes.

The Role of Social-Democracy and Its Attitude toward the United Front of the Proletariat

Comrades, in view of the tactical problems confronting us, it is very important to give a correct reply to the question of whether Social-Democracy at the present time is still the principal bulwark of the bourgeoisie, and if so, where?

Some of the comrades who participated in the discussion (Com¬ rades Florin, Dutt) touched upon this question, but in view of its importance a fuller reply must be given to it, for it is a question which workers of all trends, particularly Social-Democratic work¬ ers, are asking and cannot help asking.

It must be borne in mind that in a number of countries the posi¬ tion of Social-Democracy in the bourgeois state, and its attitude toward the bourgeoisie, have been undergoing a change.

In the first place, the crisis has severely shaken the position of even the most secure sections of the working class, the so-called aristocracy of labor, which, as we know, is the main support of So¬ cial-Democracy. These sections, too, are beginning more and more to revise their views as to the expediency of the policy of class col¬ laboration with the bourgeoisie.

Second, as I pointed out in my report, the bourgeoisie in a number of countries is itself compelled to abandon bourgeois de¬ mocracy and resort to the terroristic form of dictatorship, depriving Social-Democracy not only of its previous position in the state sys¬ tem of finance capital, but also, under certain conditions, of its legal status, persecuting and even suppressing it.

Third, under the influence of the lessons learned from the defeat of the workers in Germany, Austria and Spain, a defeat which was largely the result of the Social-Democratic policy of class collabora¬ tion with the bourgeoisie, and, on the other hand, under the influ¬ ence of the victory of socialism in the Soviet Union as a result of Bolshevik policy and the application of revolutionary Marxism, the Social Democratic workers are becoming revolutionized and are beginning to turn to the class struggle against the bourgeoisie.

The combined effect of all these things has been to make it in¬ creasingly difficult, and in some countries actually impossible, for Social-Democracy to preserve its former role of bulwark of the bourgeoisie.

Failure to understand this is particularly harmful in those coun¬ tries in which the fascist dictatorship has deprived Social- Democracy of its legal status. From this point of view the self- criticism of those German comrades, who in their speeches men¬ tioned the necessity of ceasing to cling to the letter of obsolete for¬ mulas and decisions concerning Social-Democracy, of ceasing to ignore the changes that have taken place in its position, was correct. It is clear that if we ignore these changes, it will lead to a distortion of our policy for bringing about the unity of the working class, and will make it easier for the reactionary elements of the Social- Democratic Parties to sabotage the united front.

The process of revolutionization in the ranks of the Social- Democratic Parties, now going on in all countries, is developing unevenly. It must not be imagined that the Social-Democratic work¬ ers who are becoming revolutionized will at once and on a mass scale pass over to the position of consistent class struggle, and will straightway unite with the Communists without any intermediate stages. In a number of countries this will be a more or less difficult, complicated and prolonged process, essentially dependent, at any rate, on the correctness of our policy and tactics. We must even reckon with the possibility that, in passing from the position of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie to the position of class straggle against the bourgeoisie, some Social-Democratic Parties and organ¬ izations will continue to exist for a time as independent organiza¬ tions or parties. In such event there can, of course, be no thought of such Social-Democratic organizations or parties being regarded as a bulwark of the bourgeoisie.

It cannot be expected that those Social-Democratic workers who are under the influence of the ideology of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie, which has been instilled in them for decades, will break with this ideology of their own accord, by the action of objective causes alone. No. It is our business, the business of Com¬ munists, to help them free themselves from the hold of reformist ideology. The work of explaining the principles and program of Communism must be carried on patiently, in a comradely fashion, and must be adapted to the degree of development of the individual Social-Democratic workers. Our criticism of Social-Democracy must become more concrete and systematic, and must be based on the experience of the Social-Democratic masses themselves.

It must be borne in mind that primarily by utilizing their experi¬ ence in the joint straggle with the Communists against the class en¬ emy will it be possible and necessary to facilitate and accelerate the revolutionary development of the Social-Democratic workers. There is no more effective way for the Social-Democratic workers to out¬ live their doubts and hesitations than by participating in the prole¬ tarian united front.

We shall do all in our power to make it easier, not only for the Social-Democratic workers, but also for those leading members of the Social-Democratic Parties and organizations who sincerely desire to adopt the revolutionary class position, to work and fight with us against the class enemy. At the same time we declare that any Social- Democratic functionary, lower official or worker who continues to uphold the disruptive tactics of the reactionary Social-Democratic leaders, who comes out against the united front and thus directly or indirectly aids the class enemy, will thereby incur at least equal guilt before the working class as those who are historically responsible for having supported the Social-Democratic policy of class collaboration, the policy which in a number of European countries doomed the revolution in 1918 and cleared the way for fascism.

The attitude to the united front marks the dividing line between the reactionary sections of Social-Democracy and the sections that are becoming revolutionary. Our assistance to the latter will be the more effective the more we intensify our fight against the reaction¬ ary camp of Social-Democracy that takes part in a bloc with the bourgeoisie. And within the Left camp the self-determination of its various elements will take place the sooner, the more determinedly the Communists fight for a united front with the Social-Democratic Parties. The experience of the class straggle and the participation of the Social-Democrats in the united front movement will show who in that camp will prove to be “Left” in words and who is really Left.

The United Front Government

While the attitude of Social-Democracy toward the practical re¬ alization of the proletarian united front is, generally speaking, the chief sign in every country of whether the previous role in the bour¬ geois state of the Social-Democratic Party or of its individual parts has changed, and if so, to what extent, - the attitude of the Social- Democrats on the issue of a united front government will be a par¬ ticularly clear test.

When a situation arises in which the question of creating a unit¬ ed front government becomes an immediate practical problem, this issue will become a decisive test of the policy of Social-Democracy in the given country: either jointly with the bourgeoisie, that is mov¬ ing toward fascism, against the working class; or jointly with the revolutionary proletariat against fascism and reaction, not merely in words but in deeds. That is how the question will inevitably present itself at the time the united front government is formed as well as while it is in power.

With regard to the character and conditions of formation of the united front government or anti-fascist People’s Front government, I think that my report gave what was necessary for general tactical direction. To expect us over and above this to indicate all possible forms and all conditions under which such governments may be formed would mean to lose oneself in barren conjecture.

I would like to utter a note of warning against oversimplification or the application of cut-and-dried schemes in this question. Life is more complex than any scheme. For example, it would be wrong to imagine that the united front government is an indispensable stage on the road to the establishment of proletarian dictatorship. That is just as wrong as the former assertion that there will be no intermediary stages in the fascist countries and that fascist dictatorship is certain to be immediately superseded by proletarian dictatorship.

The whole question boils down to this: Will the proletariat itself be prepared at the decisive moment for the direct overthrow of the bourgeoisie and the establishment of its own power, and will it be able in that event to ensure the support of its allies? Or, will the movement of the united proletarian front and the anti-fascist Peo¬ ple’s Front at the particular stage be in a position only to suppress or overthrow fascism, without directly proceeding to abolish the dicta¬ torship of the bourgeoisie? In the latter case it would be an intolera¬ ble piece of political short-sightedness, and not serious revolution¬ ary politics, on this ground alone to refuse to create and support a united front or a People’s Front government.

It is likewise not difficult to understand that the establishment of a united front government in countries where fascism is not yet in power is something different from the creation of such a govern¬ ment in countries where the fascist dictatorship holds sway. In the latter countries a united front government can be created only in the process of overthrowing fascist rule. In countries where the bour¬ geois-democratic revolution is developing, a People’s Front gov¬ ernment may become the government of the democratic dictatorship of the working class and the peasantry.

As I have already pointed out in my report, the Communists will do all in their power to support a united front government to the extent that the latter will really fight against the enemies of the peo¬ ple and grant freedom of action to the Communist Party and to the working class. The question of whether Communists will take part in the government will be determined entirely by the actual situation prevailing at the time. Such questions will be settled as they arise. No ready-made recipes can be prescribed in advance.

Attitude toward Bourgeois Democracy

Here it was shown that “while mobilizing the masses to repel the onslaught of fascism against the rights of the toilers, the Polish Party at the same time had its misgivings about formulating positive democratic demands in order not to create democratic illusions among the masses.” The Polish Party is, of course, not the only one in which such fear of formulating positive democratic demands ex¬ ists in one way or another.

Where does that fear come from, comrades? It comes from an incorrect, non-dialectical conception of our attitude toward bour¬ geois democracy. We Communists are unswerving upholders of Soviet democracy, the great example of which is the proletarian dictatorship in the Soviet Union, where the introduction of equal suffrage, and the direct and secret ballot has been proclaimed by resolution of the Seventh Congress of Soviets, at the very time that the last relics of bourgeois democracy are being wiped out in the capitalist countries. This Soviet democracy presupposes the victory of the proletarian revolution, the conversion of private property in the means of production into public property, the adoption by the overwhelming majority of the people of the road to socialism. This democracy does not represent a final form; it develops and will con¬ tinue to develop in proportion as further progress is made in social- ist construction, in the creation of classless society and in the over¬ coming of the survivals of capitalism in economic life and in the minds of the people.

But today the millions of toilers living under capitalism are faced with the necessity of deciding their attitude to those forms in which the rule of the bourgeoisie is clad in the various countries. We are not Anarchists and it is not at all a matter of indifference to us what kind of political regime exists in any given country: wheth¬ er a bourgeois dictatorship in the form of bourgeois democracy, even with democratic rights and liberties greatly curtailed, or a bourgeois dictatorship in its open, fascist form. While being up¬ holders of Soviet democracy, we shall defend every inch of the democratic gains which the working class has wrested in the course of years of stubborn struggle, and shall resolutely fight to extend these gains.

How great were the sacrifices of the British working class be¬ fore it secured the right to strike, a legal status for its trade unions, the right of assembly and freedom of the press, extension of the franchise, and other rights! How many tens of thousands of workers gave their lives in the revolutionary battles fought in France in the nineteenth century to obtain the elementary rights and the lawful opportunity of organizing their forces for the struggle against the exploiters! The proletariat of all countries has shed much of its blood to win bourgeois democratic liberties, and will naturally fight with all its strength to retain them.

Our attitude to bourgeois democracy is not the same under all conditions. For instance, at the time of the October Revolution, the Russian Bolsheviks engaged in a life-and-death struggle against all political parties which, under the slogan of the defense of bourgeois democracy, opposed the establishment of the proletarian dictator¬ ship. The Bolsheviks fought these parties because the banner of bourgeois democracy had at that time become the standard around which all counter-revolutionary forces mobilized to challenge the victory of the proletariat. The situation is quite different in the capi¬ talist countries at present. Now the fascist counter-revolution is at¬ tacking bourgeois democracy in an effort to establish the most bar¬ baric regime of exploitation and suppression of the toiling masses. Now the toiling masses in a number of capitalist countries are faced with the necessity of making a definite choice, and of making it to- day, not between proletarian dictatorship and bourgeois democracy, but between bourgeois democracy and fascism.

Besides, we have now a situation which differs from that which existed, for example, in the epoch of capitalist stabilization. At that time the fascist danger was not as acute as it is today. At that time it was bourgeois dictatorship in the form of bourgeois democracy that the revolutionary workers were facing in a number of countries and it was against bourgeois democracy that they were concentrating their fire. In Germany, they fought against the Weimar Republic, not because it was a republic, but because it was a bourgeois repub¬ lic that was engaged in crashing the revolutionary movement of the proletariat, especially in 1918-20 and in 1925.

But could the Communists retain the same position also when the fascist movement began to raise its head, when, for instance, in 1932, the fascists in Germany were organizing and arming hundreds of thousands of storm troopers against the working class? Of course not. It was the mistake of the Communists in a number of countries, particularly in Germany, that they failed to take account of the changes that had taken place, but continued to repeat the slogans and maintain the tactical positions that had been correct a few years before, especially when the straggle for the proletarian dictatorship was an immediate issue, and when the entire German counter¬ revolution was rallying under the banner of the Weimar Republic, as it did in 1918-20.

And the circumstance that even today we must still make refer¬ ence to fear, in our ranks, of launching positive democratic slogans indicates how little our comrades have mastered the Marxist- Leninist method of approaching such important problems of our tactics. Some say that the straggle for democratic rights may divert the workers from the straggle for the proletarian dictatorship. It may not be amiss to recall what Lenin said on this question:

It would be a fundamental mistake to suppose that the straggle for democracy can divert the proletariat from the socialist revolu¬ tion, or obscure, or overshadow it, etc. On the contrary, just as so¬ cialism can not be victorious unless it introduces complete democ¬ racy, so the proletariat will be unable to prepare for victory over the bourgeoisie unless it wages a many-sided, consistent and revolu¬ tionary struggle for democracy.

These words should be firmly fixed in the memories of all our comrades, bearing in mind that in history great revolutions have grown out of small movements for the defense of the elementary rights of the working class. But in order to be able to link up the straggle for democratic rights with the straggle of the working class for socialism, it is necessary first and foremost to discard any cut-and- dried approach to the question of defense of bourgeois democracy.

A Correct Line Alone Is Not Enough

Comrades, it is clear, of course, that for the Communist Interna¬ tional and each of its sections, the fundamental thing is to work out a correct line. But a correct line alone is not enough for concrete leadership in the class straggle.

For that, a number of conditions must be fulfilled, above all the following:

First, organizational guarantees that adopted decisions will be carried out in practice and that all obstacles in the way will be reso¬ lutely overcome. What Comrade Stalin said at the Seventeenth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union about the conditions necessary to carry out the line of the Party can and should be applied also, in its entirety, to the decisions which our Congress adopts. Comrade Stalin said:

Some people think that it is sufficient to draw up a correct Party line, proclaim it from the housetops, enunciate it in the form of gen¬ eral theses and resolutions and carry them unanimously in order to make victory come of itself, automatically, so to speak. This, of course, is wrong. Those who think like that are greatly mistaken. Only incorrigible bureaucrats and office rats can think that. As a matter of fact, these successes and victories were obtained, not au¬ tomatically, but as a result of a fierce straggle to carry out the Party line. Victory never comes by itself — it has to be dragged by the hand. Good resolutions and declarations in favor of the general line of the Party are only a beginning; they merely express the desire to win, but it is not victory. After the correct line has been given, after a correct solution of the problem has been found, success depends on the manner in which the work is organized, on the organization of the struggle for the application of the line of the Party, on the proper selection of workers, on supervising the fulfillment of the decisions of the leading organs. Without this the correct line of the Party and the correct solutions are in danger of being severely dam¬ aged. More than that, after the correct political line has been given, the organizational work decides everything, including the fate of the political line itself, i. e. , whether it is fulfilled or not.

It is hardly necessary to add anything to these striking words of Comrade Stalin, which must become a guiding principle in all the work of our Parties.

Another condition is the ability to convert decisions of the Communist International and its sections into decisions of the wid¬ est masses themselves. This is all the more necessary now, when we are faced with the task of organizing a united front of the proletariat and drawing very wide masses of the people into an anti-fascist People’s Front. The political and tactical genius of Lenin and Stalin stands out most clearly and vividly in their masterly ability to get the masses to understand the correct line and the slogans of the Par¬ ty through their own experience. If we trace the history of Bolshe¬ vism, that greatest of treasure houses of the political strategy and tactics of the revolutionary labor movement, we can see for our¬ selves that the Bolsheviks never substituted methods of leading the Party for methods of leading the masses.

Comrade Stalin pointed out that one of the peculiarities of the tactics of the Russian Bolsheviks in the period of preparation for the October Revolution consisted in their ability correctly to determine the path and the turns which naturally lead the masses to the slogans of the Party, to the very “threshold of the revolution,” helping them to sense, to test and to realize from their own experience the cor¬ rectness of these slogans. They did not confuse leadership of the Party with leadership of the masses, but clearly saw the difference between leadership of the first kind and leadership of the second kind. In this way they worked out tactics as the science not only of Party leadership, but also of the leadership of the millions of toilers.

Furthermore, it must be borne in mind that the masses cannot assimilate our decisions unless we learn to speak the language which the masses understand. We do not always know how to speak simply, concretely, in images which are familiar and intelligible to the masses. We are still unable to refrain from abstract formulas which we have leamt by rote. As a matter of fact, if you look through our leaflets, newspapers, resolutions and theses, you will find that they are often written in a language and style so heavy that they are difficult for even our Party functionaries to understand, let alone the rank-and-file workers.

If we reflect, comrades, that workers, especially in fascist coun¬ tries, who distribute or only read these leaflets risk their very lives by doing so, we shall realize still more clearly the need of writing for the masses in a language which they understand, so that the sac¬ rifices made shall not have been in vain.

The same applies in no less degree to our oral agitation and propaganda. We must admit quite frankly that in this respect the fascists have often proven more dexterous and flexible than many of our comrades.

I recall, for example, a meeting of unemployed in Berlin before Hitler’s accession to power. It was at the time of the trial of those notorious swindlers and speculators, the Sklarek brothers, which dragged on for several months. A National-Socialist speaker in addressing the meeting made demagogic use of that trial to further his own ends. He referred to the swindles, the bribery and other crimes committed by the Sklarek brothers, emphasized that the trial had been dragging for months and figured out how many hundreds of thousands of marks it had already cost the German people. To the accompaniment of loud applause the speaker declared that such bandits as the Sklarek brothers should have been shot without any ado, and the money wasted on the trial should have gone to the unemployed.

A Communist rose and asked for the floor. The chairman at first refused but under the pressure of the audience which wanted to hear a Communist he had to let him speak. When the Communist got up on the platform, everybody awaited with tense expectation what the Communist speaker would have to say. Well, what did he say?

“Comrades,” he began in a loud and strong voice, “the Plenum of the Communist International has just closed. It showed the way to the salvation of the working class. The chief task it puts before you, comrades, is ‘to win the majority of the working classes .’ ...The Plenum pointed out that the unemployed movement must be ‘politi- calized.’ The Plenum calls on us to raise it to a higher level.” He went on in the same strain, evidently under the impression that he was “explaining” authentic decisions of the Plenum.

Could such a speech appeal to the unemployed? Could they find any satisfaction in the fact that first we intended to politicalize, then revolutionize, and finally mobilize them in order to raise their movement to a higher level?

Sitting in a comer of the hall, I observed with chagrin how the unemployed, who had been so eager to hear a Communist in order to find out from him what to do concretely, began to yawn and dis¬ play unmistakable signs of disappointment. And I was not at all surprised when toward the end the chairman rudely cut our speaker short without any protest from the meeting.

This, unfortunately, is not the only case of its kind in our agitational work. Nor were such cases confined to Germany. To agitate in such fashion means to agitate against one’s own cause. It is high time to put an end once and for all to these, to say the least, childish methods of agitation.

During my report, the chairman, Comrade Kuusinen, received a characteristic letter from the floor of the Congress addressed to me. Let me read it:

In your speech at the Congress, please take up the following question, namely, that all resolutions and decisions adopted in the future by the Communist International be written so that not only trained Communists can get the meaning, but that any working man reading the material of the Comintern might without any preliminary training be able to see at once what the Communists want, and of what service Communism is to mankind. Some Party leaders forget this. They must be reminded of it and very strongly, too. Also that agitation for Communism be conducted in understandable language.

I do not know exactly who is the author of this letter, but I have no doubt that this comrade voiced in his letter the opinion and de¬ sire of millions of workers. Many of our comrades think that the more high-sounding words, and the more formulas and theses unin¬ telligible to the masses they use, the better their agitation and prop¬ aganda, forgetting that the greatest leaders and theoreticians of the working class of our epoch, Lenin and Stalin, have always spoken and written in highly popular language, readily understood by the masses.

Every one of us must make this a law, a Bolshevik law, an ele¬ mentary rule:

When writing or speaking always have in mind the rank and- file worker who must understand you, must believe in your appeal and be ready to follow you! You must have in mind those for whom you write, to whom you speak.

Cadres

Comrades, our best resolutions will remain scraps of paper if we lack the people who can put them into effect. Unfortunately, however, I must state that the problem of cadres, one of the most important questions facing us, received almost no attention at this Congress. The report of the Executive Committee of the Communist International was discussed for seven days, there were many speak¬ ers from various countries, but only a few, and they only in passing, discussed this question, so extremely vital for the Communist Par¬ ties and the labor movement. In their practical work our Parties have not yet realized by far that people, cadres, decide everything. They are unable to do what Comrade Stalin is teaching us to do, namely, to cultivate cadres “as a gardener cultivates his favorite fruit tree,” “to appreciate people, to appreciate cadres, to appreciate every worker who can be of use to our common cause.”

A negligent attitude to the problem of cadres is all the more im¬ permissible for the reason that we are constantly losing some of the most valuable of our cadres in the struggle. For we are not a learned society but a militant movement which is constantly in the firing line. Our most energetic, most courageous and most class-conscious elements are in the front ranks. It is precisely these front-line men that the enemy hunts down, murders, throws into jail, puts in the concentration camps and subjects to excruciating torture, particular¬ ly in fascist countries. This gives rise to the urgent necessity of con¬ stantly replenishing the ranks, cultivating and training new cadres as well as carefully preserving the existing cadres.

The problem of cadres is of particular urgency for the additional reason that under our influence the mass united front movement is gaining momentum and bringing forward many thousands of new working class militants. Moreover, it is not only young revolution¬ ary elements, not only workers just becoming revolutionary, who have never before participated in a political movement, that stream into our ranks. Very often former members and militants of the Social-Democratic Parties also join us. These new cadres require spe¬ cial attention, particularly in the illegal Communist Parties, the more so because in their practical work these cadres with their poor theoretical training frequently come up against very serious political problems which they have to solve for themselves.

The problem of what shall be the correct policy with regard to cadres is a very serious one for our Parties, as well as for the Young Communist Leagues and for all other mass organizations — for the entire revolutionary labor movement.

What does a correct policy with regard to cadres imply?

First, knowing one’s people. As a rale there is no systematic study of cadres in our Parties. Only recently have the Communist Parties of France and Poland and, in the East, the Communist Party of China, achieved certain successes in this direction. The Com¬ munist Party of Germany, before its underground period, had also undertaken a study of its cadres. The experience of these Parties has shown that as soon as they began to study their people, Party work¬ ers were discovered who had remained unnoticed before. On the other hand, the Parties began to be purged of alien elements who were ideologically and politically harmful. It is sufficient to point to the example of Celor and Barbe in France who, when put under the Bolshevik microscope, turned out to be agents of the class enemy and were thrown out of the Party. In Poland and in Hungary the verification of cadres made it easier to discover nests of provoca¬ teurs, agents of the enemy, who had sedulously concealed their identity.

Second, proper promotion of cadres. Promotion should not be something casual but one of the normal functions of the Party. It is bad when promotion is made exclusively and on the basis of narrow Party considerations, without regard to whether the Communist promoted has contact with the masses or not. Promotion should take place on the basis of the ability of the various Party workers to dis¬ charge particular functions, and of their popularity among the mass¬ es. We have examples in our Parties of promotions which have pro¬ duced excellent results. For instance, we have a Spanish woman Communist, sitting in the Presidium of this Congress, Comrade Dolores. Two years ago she was still a rank-and-file Party worker. But in the very first clashes with the class enemy she proved to be an excellent agitator and fighter. Subsequently promoted to the leading body of the Party she has proved herself a most worthy member of that body.

I could point to a number of similar cases in several other coun¬ tries, but in the majority of cases promotions are made in an unor¬ ganized and haphazard manner, and therefore are not always fortu¬ nate. Sometimes moralizers, phrasemongers and chatterboxes who actually harm the cause are promoted to leading positions.

Third, the ability to use people to best advantage. We must be able to ascertain and utilize the valuable qualities of every single active member. There are no ideal people; we must take them as they are and correct their weaknesses and shortcomings. We know of glaring examples in our Parties of the wrong utilization of good, honest Communists who might have been very useful had they been given work that they were better fit to do.

Fourth, proper distribution of cadres. First of all, we must see to it that the main links of the movement are in the charge of strong people who have contacts with the masses, have sprang from the very depths of the masses, who have initiative and are staunch. The more important districts should have an appropriate number of such militants. In capitalist countries it is not an easy matter to transfer cadres from one place to another. Such a task encounters a number of obstacles and difficulties, including lack of funds, family consid¬ erations, etc., difficulties which must be taken into account and properly overcome. But usually we neglect to do this altogether.

Fifth, systematic assistance to cadres. This assistance should take the form of careful instruction, comradely control, rectification of shortcomings and mistakes and concrete, everyday guidance.

Sixth, proper care for the preservation of cadres. We must learn promptly to withdraw Party workers to the rear when ever circumstances so require, and replace them by others. We must de¬ mand that the Party leadership, particularly in countries where the Parties are illegal, assume paramount responsibility for the preser¬ vation of cadres. The proper preservation of cadres also pre¬ supposes highly efficient organization of secrecy in the Party. In certain of our Parties many comrades think that the Parties are al¬ ready prepared for underground existence even though they have reorganized themselves only formally, according to readymade rales. We had to pay very dearly for having started the real work of reorganization only after the Party had gone underground, under the direct heavy blows of the enemy. Remember the severe losses the Communist Party of Germany suffered during its transition to un¬ derground conditions! Its experience should serve as a serious warn¬ ing to those of our Parties which today are still legal but may lose their legal status tomorrow.

Only a correct policy in regard to cadres will enable our Parties to develop and utilize all available forces to the utmost, and obtain from the enormous reservoir of the mass movement ever fresh rein¬ forcements of new and better active workers.

What should be our main criteria in selecting cadres?

First, absolute devotion to the cause of the working class, loyal¬ ty to the Party, tested in face of the enemy — in battle, in prison, in court.

Second, the closest possible contact with the masses. The com¬ rades concerned must be wholly absorbed in the interests of the masses, feel the life pulse of the masses, know their sentiments and requirements. The prestige of the leaders of our Party organization should be based, first of all, on the fact that the masses regard them as their leaders, and are convinced through their own experience of their ability as leaders, and of their determination and self-sacrifice in straggle.

Third, ability independently to find one's bearings and not to be afraid of assuming responsibility in making decisions. He who fears to take responsibility is not a leader. He who is unable to display initiative, who says: “I will do only what I am told,” is not a Bol¬ shevik. Only he is a real Bolshevik leader who does not lose his head at moments of defeat, who does not get a swelled head at mo¬ ments of success, who displays indomitable firmness in carrying out decisions. Cadres develop and grow best when they are placed in the position of having to solve concrete problems of the straggle independently, and are aware that they are fully responsible for their decisions.

Fourth, discipline and Bolshevik hardening in the straggle against the class enemy as well as in their irreconcilable opposition to all deviations from the Bolshevik line.

We must place all the more emphasis on these conditions which determine the correct selection of cadres, because in practice prefer¬ ence is very often given to a comrade who, for example, is able to write well and is a good speaker but is not a man or woman of action, and is not as suited for the straggle as some other comrade who per¬ haps may not be able to write or speak so well, but is a staunch com- rade, possessing initiative and contacts with the masses, and is capa¬ ble of going into battle and leading others into battle. Have there not been many cases of sectarians, doctrinaires or moralizers crowding out loyal mass workers, genuine working class leaders?

Our leading cadres should combine the knowledge of what they must do — with Bolshevik stamina, revolutionary strength of charac¬ ter and the will power to carry it through.

In connection with the question of cadres, permit me, comrades, to dwell also on the very great part which the International Labor Defense is called upon to play in relation to the cadres of the labor movement. The material and moral assistance which the I.L.D. or¬ ganizations render to our prisoners and their families, to political emigrants, to prosecuted revolutionaries and anti-fascists, has saved the lives and preserved the strength and fighting capacity of thou¬ sands upon thousands of most valuable fighters of the working class in many countries. Those of us who have been in jail have found out directly through our own experience the enormous significance of the activity of the I.L.D.

By its activity the I.L.D. has won the affection, devotion and deep gratitude of hundreds of thousands of proletarians and of revo¬ lutionary elements among the peasantry and intellectuals.

Under present conditions, when bourgeois reaction is growing, when fascism is raging and the class struggle is becoming more acute, the role of the I.L.D. is increasing immensely. The task now before the I.L.D. is to become a genuine mass organization of the toilers in all capitalist countries (particularly in fascist countries where it must adapt itself to the special conditions prevailing there). It must become, so to speak, a sort of “Red Cross” of the united front of the proletariat and the anti-fascist People’s Front, embrac¬ ing millions of working people the “Red Cross” of the army of the toiling classes embattled against fascism, fighting for peace and socialism. If the I.L.D. is to perform its part successfully, it must train thousands of its own active militants, a multitude of I.L.D. workers of its own, answering in their character and capacity the special purposes of this extremely important organization.

And here I must say as categorically and as sharply as possible that while a bureaucratic approach and a soulless attitude toward people is despicable in the labor movement taken in general, in the sphere of activity of the I.L.D. such an attitude is an evil bordering on the criminal. The fighters of the working class, the victims of reaction and fascism who are suffering agony in torture chambers and concentration camps, political emigrants and their families, should all meet with the most sympathetic care and solicitude on the part of the organizations and functionaries of the I.L.D.

The I.L.D. must still better appreciate and discharge its duty of assisting the fighters in the proletarian and anti-fascist movement, particularly in physically and morally preserving the cadres of the labor movement. The Communists and revolutionary workers who are active in the I.L.D. organizations must realize at every step the enormous responsibility they bear before the working class and the Communist International for the successful fulfillment of the role and tasks of the I.L.D.

Comrades, as you know, cadres receive their best training in the process of struggle, in surmounting difficulties and with standing tests, and also from favorable and unfavorable examples of conduct. We have hundreds of examples of splendid conduct in times of strikes, during demonstrations, in jail, in court. We have thousands of instances of heroism, but unfortunately also not a few cases of pigeon-heartedness, lack of firmness and even desertion. We often forget these examples, both good and bad. We do not teach people to benefit by these examples. We do not show them what should be emulated and what rejected. We must study the conduct of our com¬ rades and militant workers during class conflicts, under police inter¬ rogation, in the jails and concentration camps, in court, etc. The good examples should be brought to light and held up as models to be followed, and all that is rotten, non-Bolshevik and philistine should be cast aside.

Since the Leipzig trial we have had quite a number of our com¬ rades whose statements before bourgeois and fascist courts have shown that numerous cadres are growing up with an excellent un¬ derstanding of what really constitutes Bolshevik conduct in court.

But how many even of you delegates to the Congress know the details of the trial of the railwaymen in Rumania, know about the trial of Fiete Schulz who was subsequently beheaded by the fascists in Germany, the trial of our valiant Japanese comrade Itikawa, the trial of the Bulgarian revolutionary soldiers, and many other trials at which admirable examples of proletarian heroism were displayed?

Such worthy examples of proletarian heroism must be popular¬ ized, must be contrasted with the manifestations of faintheartedness, philistinism, and every kind of rottenness and frailty in our ranks and the ranks of the working class. These examples must be used most extensively in educating the cadres of the labor movement.

Comrades: Our Party leaders often complain that there are no people ; that they are short of people for agitational and propaganda work, for the newspapers, the trade unions, for work among the youth, among women. Not enough, not enough - that is the cry. We simply haven’t got the people. To this we could reply in the old yet eternally new words of Lenin:

There are no people — yet there are enormous numbers of peo¬ ple. There are enormous numbers of people, because the working class and the most diverse strata of society, year after year, advance from their ranks an increasing number of discontented people who desire to protest, who are ready to render all the assistance they can in the fight against absolutism, the intolerableness of which is not yet recognized by all, but is nevertheless more and more acutely sensed by increasing masses of the people. At the same time we have no people, because we have no leaders, no political leaders, we have no talented organizers capable of organizing extensive and at the same time uniform and harmonious work that would give em¬ ployment to all forces, even the most inconsiderable.

These words of Lenin must be thoroughly grasped by our Parties and applied by them as a guide in their everyday work. There are plenty of people. They need only be discovered in our own organiza¬ tions, during strikes and demonstrations, in various mass organiza¬ tions of the workers, in united front bodies. They must be helped to grow in the course of their work and straggle; they must be put in a situation where they can really be useful to the workers’ cause.

Comrades, we Communists are people of action. Ours is the problem of practical straggle against the offensive of capital, against fascism and the threat of imperialist war, the straggle for the overthrow of capitalism. It is precisely this practical task that oblig¬ es Communist cadres to equip themselves with revolutionary theo¬ ry. For, as Stalin, that greatest master of revolutionary action, has taught us, theory gives those engaged in practical work the power of orientation, clarity of vision, assurance in work, belief in the tri¬ umph of our cause.

But real revolutionary theory is irreconcilably hostile to all emasculated theorizing, all barren play with abstract definitions. Our theory is not a dogma, but a guide to action, Lenin used to say. It is such a theory that our cadres need, and they need it as badly as they need their daily bread, as they need air or water.

Whoever really wishes to rid our work of deadening, cut and- dried schemes, of pernicious scholasticism, must burn them out with a red-hot iron, both by practical, active stmggle waged together with and at the head of the masses, and by untiring effort to master the mighty, fertile, all-powerful teaching of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin.

In this connection I consider it particularly necessary to draw your attention to the work of our Party schools. It is not pedants, moralizers or adepts at quoting that our schools must train. No! It is practical front-rank fighters in the cause of the working class that must leave their walls - people who are front-rank fighters not only because of their boldness and readiness for self-sacrifice, but also because they see further than rank-and-file workers and know better than they the path that leads to the emancipation of the toilers. All sections of the Communist International must without any dilly¬ dallying seriously take up the question of the proper organization of Party schools, in order to turn them into smithies where these fighting cadres are forged.

The principal task of our Party schools, it seems to me, is to teach the Party and Young Communist League members there how to apply the Marxist-Leninist method to the concrete situation in particular countries, to definite conditions, not to the struggle against an enemy “in general” but against a particular, definite ene¬ my. This makes necessary a study of not merely the letter of Lenin¬ ism, but its living, revolutionary spirit.

There are two ways of training cadres in our Party schools:

First method: teaching people abstract theory, trying to give them the greatest possible dose of dry learning, coaching them how to write theses and resolutions in literary style, and only incidentally touching upon the problems of the particular country, of the particu¬ lar labor movement, its history and traditions, and the experience of the Communist Party in question. Only incidentally!

Second method: theoretical training in which mastering the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism is based on a practical study by the student of the key problems of the straggle of the pro- letariat in his own country. On returning to his practical work, the student will then be able to find his bearings independently, and become an independent practical organizer and leader capable of leading the masses in battle against the class enemy.

Not all graduates of our Party schools prove to be suitable. There is a great deal of phrases, abstractions, book knowledge and show of learning. But we need real, truly Bolshevik organizers and leaders of the masses. And we need them badly this very day. It does not matter if such students cannot write good theses (though we need that very much, too) but they must know how to organize and lead, undaunted by difficulties, capable of surmounting them.

Revolutionary theory is the generalized, summarized experience of the revolutionary movement. Communists must carefully utilize in their countries not only the experience of the past but also the experience of the present struggle of other detachments of the inter¬ national labor movement. However, correct utilization of experience does not by any means denote mechanical transposition of ready¬ made forms and methods of straggle from one set of conditions to another, from one country to another, as so often happens in our Parties.

Bare imitation, simple copying of methods and forms of work, even of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, in countries where capitalism is still supreme, may with the best of intentions result in harm rather than good, as has so often actually been the case. It is precisely from the experience of the Russian Bolsheviks that we must learn to apply effectually, to the specific conditions of life in each country, the single international line; in the straggle against capitalism we must learn pitilessly to cast aside, pillory and hold up to general ridicule all phrase-mongering, use of hackneyed formulas, pedantry and doctrinairism.

It is necessary to learn, comrades, to learn always, at every step, in the course of the straggle, at liberty and in jail. To learn and to fight, to fight and to learn. We must be able to combine the great teaching of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin with Stalinist firmness at work and in straggle, with Stalinist irreconcilability on matters of principle toward the class enemy and deviators from the Bolshevik line, with Stalinist fearlessness in face of difficulties, with Stalinist revolutionary realism.

Comrades! Never has any international congress of Com¬ munists aroused such keen interest on the part of world public opin- ion as we witness now in regard to our present Congress. We may say without fear of exaggeration that there is not a single serious newspaper, not a single political party, not a single more or less serious political or social leader that is not following the course of our Congress with the closest attention.

The eyes of millions of workers, peasants, small townspeople, office workers and intellectuals, of colonial peoples and oppressed nationalities are turned toward Moscow, the great capital of the first but not last state of the international proletariat. In this we see a confirmation of the enormous importance and urgency of the ques¬ tions discussed at the Congress and of its decisions. The frenzied howling of the fascists of all countries, particularly of German fas¬ cism, foaming at the mouth, only confirms us in our belief that our decisions have indeed hit the mark.

In the dark night of bourgeois reaction and fascism, in which the class enemy is endeavoring to keep the toiling masses of the capitalist countries, the Communist International, the international Party of the Bolsheviks, stands out like a beacon, showing all man¬ kind the one way to emancipation from the yoke of capitalism, from fascist barbarity and the horrors of imperialist war.

The establishment of unity of action of the working class is a decisive stage on that road. Yes, unity of action by the organizations of the working class of every trend, the consolidation of its forces in all spheres of its activity and at all sectors of the class struggle.

The working class must achieve the unity of its trade unions. In vain do some reformist trade union leaders attempt to frighten the workers with the specter of a trade union democracy destroyed by the interference of the Communist Parties in the affairs of the united trade unions, by the existence of Communist fractions within the trade unions.

To depict us Communists as opponents of trade union democra¬ cy is sheer nonsense. We advocate and consistently uphold the right of the trade unions to decide their problems for themselves. We are even prepared to forego the creation of Communist fractions in the trade union if that is necessary in the interests of trade union unity. We are prepared to come to an agreement about the independence of the united trade unions from all political parties. But we are de¬ cidedly opposed to any dependence of the trade unions on the bour¬ geoisie, and do not give up our basic point of view that it is imper- missible for trade unions to adopt a neutral position in regard to the class struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.

The working class must strive to secure the union of all forces of the working class youth and of all organizations of the anti¬ fascist youth, and win over that section of the working youth which has come under the demoralizing influence of fascism and other enemies of the people.

The working class must and will achieve unity of action in all fields of the labor movement. This will come about the sooner, the more firmly and resolutely we Communists and revolutionary workers of all capitalist countries apply in practice the new tactical line adopted by our Congress in relation to the most important ur¬ gent questions of the international labor movement.

We know that there are many difficulties ahead. Our path is not a smooth, asphalt road; our path is not strewn with roses. The work¬ ing class will have to overcome many an obstacle, including obsta¬ cles in its own midst; it faces the task above all of rendering com¬ pletely harmless the disruptive role of the reactionary elements of Social-Democracy. Many are the sacrifices that will be exacted un¬ der the hammer blows of bourgeois reaction and fascism. The revo¬ lutionary ship of the proletariat will have to navigate among a multi¬ tude of submerged rocks before reaching the haven of salvation.

But the working class in the capitalist countries is today no longer what it was in 1914, at the beginning of the imperialist war, nor what it was in 1918, at the end of the war. The working class has behind it twenty years of rich experience and revolutionary tri¬ als, bitter lessons of a number of defeats, especially in Germany, Austria and Spain.

The working class has before it the inspiring example of the Soviet Union, the country of socialism victorious, an example of how the class enemy can be defeated, how the working class can establish its own government and build socialist society.

The bourgeoisie no longer holds undivided dominion over the whole expanse of the world. Now the victorious working class rules over one-sixth of the globe, and Soviets control a vast stretch of territory in the great land of China.

The working class possesses a firm, well-knit revolutionary vanguard, the Communist International. It has a tried and recog¬ nized, a great and wise leader - Stalin.

The whole course of historical development, comrades, favors the cause of the working class. In vain are the efforts of the reac¬ tionaries, the fascists of every hue, the entire world bourgeoisie, to turn back the wheel of history. No, that wheel is turning forward and will continue to turn forward until a worldwide Union of Soviet Socialist Republics shall have been established, until the final victo¬ ry of socialism throughout the whole world.

There is but one thing that the working class of the capitalist countries still lacks — unity in its own ranks.

So let the clarion call of Marx and Engels, Lenin and Stalin, the battle cry of the Communist International, ring out all the more loudly from this platform to the whole world:

Workers of all countries, unite!

The Present Rulers of the Capitalist Countries Are but Temporary; The Real Master of the World Is the Proletariat

Comrades, the work of the Seventh Congress of the Communist International, the Congress of the Communists of all countries, of all continents of the world, is coming to a close.

What are the results of this Congress, what is its significance for our movement, for the working class of the world, for the work¬ ing people of every country?

It has been the Congress of the complete triumph of unity be¬ tween the proletariat of the country of victorious socialism, the So¬ viet Union and the proletariat of the capitalist countries which is still fighting for its liberation. The victory of socialism in the Soviet Union - a victory of world-historic significance — gives rise in all capitalist countries to a powerful movement toward socialism. This victory strengthens the cause of peace among peoples, enhancing as it does the international importance of the Soviet Union and its role as the mighty bulwark of the toilers in their struggle against capital, against reaction and fascism. It strengthens the Soviet Union as the base of the world proletarian revolution. It sets in motion through¬ out the whole world not only the workers, who are turning more and more to Communism, but also millions of peasants and farmers, of hard-working small townsfolk, a considerable proportion of the in¬ tellectuals and the enslaved peoples of the colonies. It inspires them to struggle, increases their devotion to the great fatherland of all the toilers and strengthens their determination to support and defend the proletarian state against all its enemies.

This victory of socialism increases the confidence of the inter¬ national proletariat in its own forces and in the real possibility of its own victory, a confidence which is itself becoming a tremendously effective force against the rule of the bourgeoisie.

The union of forces of the proletariat of the Soviet Union and of the militant proletariat and masses of working people in the capital¬ ist countries holds out the great perspective of the oncoming col¬ lapse of capitalism and the guarantee of the victory of socialism throughout the whole world.

Our Congress has laid the foundations for such a wide mobili¬ zation of the forces of all toilers against capitalism as has never before existed in the history of the working class struggle.

Our Congress has set before the international proletariat, as its most important immediate task, that of consolidating its forces po¬ litically and organizationally, of putting an end to the isolation to which it had been reduced by the Social-Democratic policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie, of rallying the working people around the working class in a wide People’s Front against the offen¬ sive of capital and reaction, against fascism and the threat of war in each individual country and in the international arena.

We have not invented this task. It has been prompted by the ex¬ perience of the world labor movement itself, above all, the experi¬ ence of the proletariat of France. The great merit of the French Communist Party is that it grasped the need of the ho?l,r, that it paid no heed to the sectarians who tried to hold back the Party and ham¬ per the realization of the united front of straggle against fascism, but acted boldly and in a Bolshevik fashion, and, by its pact with the Socialist Party providing for joint action, prepared the united front of the proletariat as the basis for the anti-fascist People’s Front now in the making. By this action, which accords with the vital interests of all the working people, the French workers, both Communists and Socialists, have once more advanced the French labor move¬ ment to first place, to a leading position in capitalist Europe, and have shown that they are worthy successors of the Communards, worthy inheritors of the glorious legacy of the Paris Commune.

It is the great service of the French Communist Party and the French proletariat that by their fighting against fascism in a united proletarian front they helped to prepare the decisions of our Con¬ gress, which are of such tremendous importance for the workers of all countries.

But what has been done in France constitutes only initial steps. Our Congress, in mapping out the tactical line for the years imme¬ diately ahead, could not confine itself to merely recording this expe¬ rience. It went further.

We Communists are a class party, a proletarian party. But as the vanguard of the proletariat we are ready to organize joint actions between the proletariat and the other sections of the working people interested in the fight against fascism. We Communists are a revolu¬ tionary party; but we are ready to undertake joint action with other parties fighting against fascism.

We Communists have other ultimate aims than these classes and parties, but in struggling for our aims we are ready to fight jointly for any immediate tasks which when realized will weaken the position of fascism and strengthen the position of the proletariat.

We Communists employ methods of straggle which differ from those of the other parties; but, while using our own methods in combating fascism, we Communists will also support the methods of straggle used by other parties, however inadequate they may seem, if these methods are really directed against fascism.

We are ready to do all this because, in countries of bourgeois democracy, we want to block the way of reaction and the offensive of capital and fascism, prevent the abolition of bourgeois- democratic liberties, forestall fascism’s terrorist vengeance upon the proletariat and the revolutionary section of the peasantry and intel¬ lectuals, and save the young generation from physical and spiritual degeneracy.

We are ready to do all this because in the fascist countries we want to prepare and hasten the overthrow of fascist dictatorship.

We are ready to do all this because we want to save the world from fascist barbarity and the horrors of imperialist war.

Ours is a Congress of struggle for the maintenance of peace, against the threat of imperialist war.

We are raising now the issue of this straggle in a new way. Our Congress is decidedly opposed to the fatalistic outlook on the question of imperialist war emanating from old Social-Democratic notions.

Here Comrade Weber, a delegate of the German Communist Party, mounted the platform and presented to Dimitrov an album with the following words: “Comrade Dimitrov, in the name of the German Communist Party delegation I deliver this book into your hands, a book of the heroic exploits of the revolutionary fighters of Germany. It was you who by your conduct at the Leipzig trial and your entire subse¬ quent activity served as an example for the German Communist Party, for the German anti-fascists, in their struggle. Accept the book, this song of the heroism of the proletarian fighters of Germany, to whom you have furnished an example to follow, who give up their freedom, their health, their lives in the cause of the revolution!” Dimitrov ac¬ cepted the album and warmly embraced Weber, amidst loud applause, shouts of “Hurrah!” and cheering.

It is true that imperialist wars are the product of capitalism, that only the overthrow of capitalism will put an end to all war; but it is likewise true that the masses of working people can hinder imperial¬ ist war by their militant action.

The world today is not what it was in 1914.

Today on one-sixth of the globe there exists a powerful prole¬ tarian state that relies on the material strength of victorious social¬ ism. Guided by Stalin’s wise peace policy, the Soviet Union has already more than once brought to naught the aggressive plans of the instigators of war.

Today the world proletariat, in its struggle against war, has at its disposal not only its weapon of mass action, as it did in 1914. Today the mass struggle of the international working class against war is coupled with the influence of the Soviet Union as a state, of its powerful Red Army, the most important guardian of the peace.

Today the working class is not under the exclusive influence of Social-Democracy participating in a bloc with the bourgeoisie, as was the case in 1914. Today there is the world Communist Party, the Communist International. Today the bulk of the Social- Democratic workers are turning to the Soviet Union, to its policy of peace, to a united front with the Communists. Today the peoples of the colonial and semi-colonial countries do not regard their libera¬ tion as a hopeless cause. On the contrary, they are passing on more and more to determined struggle against the imperialist enslavers. The best evidence of this is the Soviet revolution in China and the heroic exploits of the Red Army of the Chinese people.

The peoples’ hatred of war is constantly gaining in depth and intensity. In pushing the toilers into the abyss of imperialist wars, the bourgeoisie is staking its head. Today not only the working class, the peasantry and other working people champion the cause of the preservation of peace, but also the oppressed nations and the weak peoples whose independence is menaced by new wars. Even some of the big capitalist states, afraid of losing in a new redivision of the world, are at the present stage interested in avoiding war.

This gives rise to the possibility of forming a very wide front of the working class, all working people and whole nations against the threat of imperialist war. Relying on the peace policy of the Soviet Union and the will for peace of millions upon millions of working people, our Congress has opened up the perspective of developing a wide anti-war front not only for the Communist vanguard but for the working class of the whole world, and for the peoples of every land. The extent to which this worldwide front is realized and comes into operation will determine whether the fascist and other imperialist instigators of war will be able in the near future to kindle a new imperialist war, or whether their fiendish hands will be hacked off by the ax of a powerful anti-war front.

Ours is the Congress of the unity of the working class, the Con¬ gress of struggle for a united proletarian front.

We entertain no illusions on the subject of the difficulties which the reactionary portion of the Social-Democratic leaders will place in the path of realizing a united proletarian front. But we do not fear these difficulties. For we reflect the will of millions of workers; for we serve the interests of the proletariat best by fighting for a united front; for the united front is the surest road to the overthrow of fas¬ cism and the capitalist order of society, to the prevention of imperi¬ alist war.

At this Congress we have raised on high the banner of trade un¬ ion unity. Communists do not insist on the independent existence of the Red trade unions at all costs. But Communists want trade union unity based on the class straggle and on putting an end, once and for all, to a situation in which the most consistent and determined advo¬ cates of trade union unity and of the class straggle are expelled from the trade unions of the Amsterdam International.

We know that not all those working in the trade unions affiliat¬ ed to the Red International of Labor Unions have understood and assimilated this line of the Congress. Among these workers there are still remnants of sectarian self-satisfaction which must be over¬ come if the line of the Congress is to be carried out firmly. But we shall carry out this line whatever the cost, and shall find a common language with our class brothers, our comrades in the straggle, the workers at present affiliated to the Amsterdam International.

At this Congress we have adopted a course for the formation of a single mass political party of the working class, for putting an end to the political split in the ranks of the proletariat, a split caused by the class collaboration policy of the Social-Democratic Parties. For us the political unity of the working class is not a maneuver but a question of the future fate of the entire labor movement. Should there be any people in our midst who approach the question of the political unity of the working class as a maneuver, we shall fight them as people bringing harm to the working class. Precisely because our attitude on this question is one of absolute seriousness and sincerity, dictated by the interests of the proletariat, we lay down definite fundamental con¬ ditions to serve as the basis for such unity. We have not invented the¬ se fundamental conditions. They are the result of the experience gained from the sufferings of the proletariat in the course of its strug¬ gle; they are also in accordance with the will of millions of Social- Democratic workers, a will engendered by the lessons of the defeats suffered. These fundamental conditions have been tested by the expe¬ rience of the entire revolutionary labor movement.

Since proletarian unity has been the keynote of our Congress, it has been not only a Congress of the Communist vanguard, but a Congress of the entire international working class thirsting for mili¬ tant trade union and political unity.

Though our Congress was not attended by delegates of the So¬ cial-Democratic workers nor by non-party delegates, and though the workers forced into the fascist organizations were not represented, the Congress has spoken not only for the Communists but also for these millions of workers. It has expressed the thoughts and feelings of the overwhelming majority of the working class. If the labor or¬ ganizations of various trends were to hold a really free discussion of our decisions among the workers of the whole world, there is no doubt in our minds but that they would support the decisions for which you, comrades, have voted with such unanimity.

So much the more is it our duty as Communists to make the de¬ cisions of our Congress in actual fact the property of the whole working class. To have voted for these decisions is not enough. Nor is it enough to popularize them among the members of the Com¬ munist Parties. We want the workers belonging to the parties of the Second International and the Amsterdam International Federation of Trade Unions as well as the workers belonging to organizations of other political trends to discuss these decisions jointly with us, to bring in their amendments and make practical proposals; we want them to deliberate jointly with us as to how decisions can best be carried into effect, how they, jointly with us, hand in hand, can best realize these decisions in practice.

Ours has been a Congress of a new tactical orientation for the Communist International.

Standing firmly on the impregnable position of Marxism- Leninism, which has been confirmed by the whole experience of the international labor movement, and above all by the victories of the great October Revolution, our Congress, acting in the spirit and guided by the method of living Marxism-Leninism, has reshaped the tactical lines of the Communist International to meet the changed world situation.

The Congress has taken a firm decision that the united front tac¬ tics must be applied in a new way. The Congress emphatically de¬ mands that Communists shall not content themselves with propagat¬ ing general slogans about proletarian dictatorship and Soviet power, but that they shall pursue a definite, active, Bolshevik policy on all internal and foreign political questions arising in their country, on all urgent problems that affect the vital interests of the working class, their own nation and the international labor movement. The Congress insists most emphatically that all tactical steps taken by the Communist Parties be based on a sober analysis of actual condi¬ tions, on a consideration of the relation of class forces, and of the political level of the widest masses. The Congress demands that every relic of sectarianism be abolished from the practice of the Communist movement, as this represents at present the greatest ob¬ stacle in the way of the Communist Parties carrying out a really mass, really Bolshevik policy.

While inspired by the determination to carry out this tactical line and by conviction that this road will lead our Parties to big successes, the Congress has at the same time taken into account the possibility that the carrying out of this Bolshevik line may not always be smooth sailing, may not always proceed without mistakes, without deviations here and there to the Right or to the “Left” — deviations either in the direction of adaptation and trailing behind events, or in the direction of sectarian self-isolation. Which of these constitutes, “speaking gen¬ erally,” the main danger is a dispute in which only scholastics can engage. The greater and worse danger is that which at any given mo¬ ment and in any given country represents the greater obstacle to the carrying out of the line of our Congress, to the development of the correct mass policy of the Communist Parties.

The cause of Communism demands, not abstract, but concrete struggle against deviations; prompt and determined rebuff to all harmful tendencies as they arise, and the timely rectification of mis¬ takes. To replace the necessary concrete straggle against deviations by a peculiar sport - hunting imaginary deviations or deviators — is an intolerably harmful distortion. In our Party practice every en¬ couragement must be given to develop initiative in formulating new questions. We must assist in having the questions concerning the activity of the Party discussed from every angle, and not hastily set down as some deviation every doubt or critical remark of a Party member concerning the practical problems of the movement. A comrade who has committed an error must be given an opportunity to correct it in practice, and only those who stubbornly persist in their mistakes and those who disorganize the Party are to be flayed without mercy.

Championing, as we do, working class unity, we shall with so much the more energy and irreconcilability fight for unity within our Parties. There can be no room in our Parties for factions, or for attempts at factionalism. Anyone who tries to break the iron unity of our ranks by any kind of factionalism will be made to feel what is meant by the Bolshevik discipline that Lenin and Stalin have always taught us. Let this be a warning to those few elements in individual Parties who think that they can take advantage of the difficulties of their Party, the wounds of defeat or the blows of the raging enemy, to carry out their factional plans, and to further their own group in¬ terests. The Party is above everything else! To guard the Bolshevik unity of the Party as the apple of one’s eye is the first and highest law of Bolshevism!

Ours is a Congress of Bolshevik self-criticism and of the strengthening of the leadership of the Communist International and its Sections.

We are not afraid of pointing out openly mistakes, weaknesses and shortcomings in our ranks, for we are a revolutionary Party which knows that it can develop, grow and accomplish its tasks on¬ ly if it discards everything hindering its development as a revolu¬ tionary Party.

And the work which the Congress has accomplished by its mer¬ ciless criticism of self-satisfied sectarianism, cut-and-dried schemes and stereotyped practices, laziness of thought, substitution of the methods of leading a Party for the methods of leading masses - all this work must be continued in an appropriate manner in all Parties, locally, in all links of our movement, as this is one of the most es¬ sential preconditions for correctly carrying into life the decisions of the Congress.

In its resolution on the report of the Executive Committee, the Congress resolved to concentrate the day-to-day leadership of our movement in the sections themselves. This makes it our duty to in- tensify in every way the work of forming and training cadres and of reinforcing the Communist Parties with genuine Bolshevik leaders, so that at abmpt turns of events the Parties can quickly and inde¬ pendently find correct solutions for the political and tactical prob¬ lems of the Communist movement, on the basis of the decisions of the Congresses of the Communist International and the Plenums of its Executive Committee. The Congress, when electing the leading bodies of the Communist International, strove to constitute its lead¬ ership of such people as accept the new lines and decisions of the Congress and are ready and able firmly to carry them into life, not from a sense of discipline, but out of deep conviction.

It is likewise necessary in each country to ensure the correct application of the decisions adopted by the Congress. This will de¬ pend primarily on appropriately testing, distributing and directing the cadres. We know that this is not an easy task. It must be borne in mind that some of our cadres did not go through the experience of Bolshevik mass policy, but were brought up largely along the lines of general propaganda. We must do everything to help our cadres reorganize, to be retrained in a new spirit, in the spirit of the deci¬ sions of this Congress. But where the old bottles prove unsuited for the new wine, the necessary conclusions must be drawn - not to spill the new wine or spoil it by pouring it into the old bottles, but to replace the old bottles by new ones.

We intentionally excluded from the reports as well as from the decisions of the Congress high-sounding phrases on the revolution¬ ary perspective. We did this not because we have any ground for appraising the tempo of revolutionary development less optimisti¬ cally than before, but because we want to rid our Parties of any in¬ clination to replace Bolshevik activity by revolutionary phrase mongering or barren disputes about the appraisal of the perspective. Waging a decisive struggle against any reliance on spontaneity, we take account of the process of development of the revolution not as passive observers, but as active participants in this process. As a Party of revolutionary action - fulfilling at every stage of the movement the tasks that are in the interest of the revolution, the tasks that correspond to the specific conditions of the given stage, and soberly taking into consideration the political level of the wide mass of working people we accelerate, more than in any other way, the creation of the subjective preconditions necessary for the victory of the proletarian revolution.

Marx said:

We must take things as we find them, that is, we must utilize revolutionary sentiments in a manner corresponding to the changed circumstances.

This is the gist of the matter. This we must never forget.

Comrades: The decisions of the World Congress must be brought home to the masses, must be explained to the masses, must be applied as a guide for the action of the masses, in short, must be made the flesh and blood of millions of toilers!

It is necessary to encourage everywhere as much as possible the initiative of the workers in their respective localities, the initiative displayed by the lower organizations of the Communist Parties and the labor movement in carrying out these decisions.

When leaving here, the representatives of the revolutionary pro¬ letariat must bring to their respective countries the firm conviction that we Communists bear responsibility for the fate of the working class, of the labor movement, responsibility for the fate of our own nation, for the fate of all toiling humanity.

To us, the workers, and not the social parasites and idlers, be¬ longs the world — a world built by the hands of the workers. The present rulers of the capitalist world are but temporary rulers.

The proletariat is the real master, tomorrow’s master of the world. And it must enter upon its historical rights, take into its hands the reins of government in every country all over the world.

We are disciples of Marx and Engels, Lenin and Stalin. We should be worthy of our great leaders.

With Stalin at their head the millions of our political army, overcoming all difficulties and courageously breaking through all barriers, must and will level to the ground the fortress of capitalism and achieve the victory of socialism throughout the whole world!

Long live the unity of the working class! Long live the Seventh Congress of the Communist International!

United Action of the Proletariat

Comrades, you have come from capitalist countries to the land of the proletarian dictatorship - the Soviet Union — which is the first but not the last state of the world proletariat.

You have the opportunity, and you will continue to have this opportunity, to see with your own eyes the tremendous difference between the conditions of the working class there, where capital and fascism rule, and here, where the working class, having overthrown the bourgeoisie, is now victoriously building socialism under the leadership of the glorious Bolshevik Party, at the head of which stands Comrade Stalin, the great leader of the world proletariat.

The Red Flag of the proletarian revolution waves victoriously over one-sixth of the earth. Over one-sixth of the globe workers and peasants, and not capitalists and landlords, are in power. Millions of Soviet men and women, workers and collective farmers of this great and immense Soviet fatherland are transforming the old, dark, backward tsarist-landlord Russia into a land of the latest technique, mechanization and industrialization, into a land of socialism.

You see with your own eyes what the working class has been able to achieve once it has taken power. You saw on the Red Square on May First the powerful armed forces of the Soviet Union our glorious Red Army - the strength of the working class, the strength of the land of the Soviets.

When you were with us on the Red Square and we watched the tanks filing past us, and the airplanes flying over us — we saw not only the armed power of the working class of the Soviet Union, but also the strength and power of the revolutionary proletariat through¬ out the world.

Comrades, the Soviet state is the state of the proletariat, and the Soviet state defends the interests of the workers, toilers and op¬ pressed peoples of the whole world. The interests of the Soviet state are the interests of the world proletariat.

When our Russian brothers and sisters build socialism through socialist emulation and shock-work, through persistent, creative work, they are working and creating not only for their own country, but also for the world proletariat.

When they strengthen the fighting power of the Red Army, they strengthen not only the power of the Soviet Union, but also the power of the world proletariat.

The Soviet Union and its Red Army are strongholds for peace among the peoples. The Soviet Union is the citadel of the world proletarian revolution.

When the reactionary Social-Democratic leaders say and write: “We do not want to enter into a united front with the Communists because we do not want to receive orders from Moscow,” they only prove that they are against the state of the proletariat. They prove thereby that they have connections with the bourgeoisie, that they support the policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie and that they are ready to aid the class enemy of the proletariat.

To every sincere worker in France or England, America or Aus¬ tralia, Germany or Spain, China or Japan, the Balkan countries or the Canary Islands - to every sincere worker, Moscow is his own Moscow. The Soviet Union is his own state. Our opponents very often set up a howl about “Orders from Moscow.” Moscow of course does not issue any orders. To receive “orders” from Mos¬ cow, i. e ., to follow the example of the great Lenin and the great Sta¬ lin means salvation to the world proletariat.

If you, while you are here in our great fatherland, take a look at the world working class movement as a whole, you will see two basic and outstanding directions or currents in this world working class movement.

On the one hand, there is the revolutionary section of the proletariat which has already been established in its own state — the Soviet Union. The Communists and the revolutionary workers of all countries feel themselves connected with the Soviet proletariat, with the Soviet state, by the ties of a united militant front throughout the world.

On the other hand, there is another direction, another current in the labor movement. This is the so-called reformist current, the direc¬ tion which is still dominant in the Second International. There is no proletarian state, no Soviet power, no Red Army, no fighting power of the world proletariat there. But there, for example, Vandervelde and other leaders who collaborate with the capitalists sit in the gov¬ ernments together with the bourgeois parties. They are connected with their national bourgeoisie and support the policy of “their” bour¬ geoisie. In this camp there is no unity, no international discipline.

In the revolutionary section of the world proletariat a common international discipline prevails. The actions of the Bolshevik Party of the Soviet Union correspond to the interests of the toilers of France, as well as of Germany, America and the other countries. And what the French, English, American, Japanese or Chinese Communists undertake to do is never in contradiction to the inter¬ ests of the Soviet Union.

Here, in the revolutionary section of the world proletariat, lead¬ ership is in the hands of the Communist International, which unites the millions of proletarians of the whole world who are linked to¬ gether by a powerful common idea, by a single will, by a common leadership, a common discipline.

There - you have a many-tongued babel of confusion.

But, comrades, a process of differentiation and revolutionization of the working masses is going on in the ranks of the Social-Democratic Parties. The number of those who are for a united front with the Communists is growing.

At the present time, when we are face to face with the menace of fascism and war, the basic task facing all toilers is to establish a united proletarian front, united action of the working class against their class enemy.

Comrades! Remember how for three months during the Leipzig trial frame-up a straggle was waged between Communism and fas¬ cism. A united front was created on a world-wide scale in connec¬ tion with the Leipzig trial, in defense of the innocent Communists, although formally no pact had been concluded. Communists, So¬ cial-Democrats, Anarchists and non-party toilers came out against German fascism. Millions and millions of working men and work¬ ing women followed the straggle at Leipzig day in and day out. Mil¬ lions and millions of the petty bourgeoisie, peasantry and intellectu¬ als were on the side of the united anti-fascist front. Even the bour¬ geois newspapers, conservative hostile newspapers, did not dare to write against us and our speeches at the trial. At this time German fascism was isolated. Hitler, Goering and Goebbels could not find moral support in Germany or in any other country.

The united front movement has made further progress since the Leipzig trial. We now have a formal agreement between the French Communist Party and the French Socialist Party for united action, an agreement between the Italian Communists and the Italian So¬ cialists, and agreements concluded by a number of Communist Par- ties with Socialist organizations, as well as with a number of anti¬ fascist organizations.

The united proletarian front is advancing, is gathering ever greater strength, but on its path it encounters tremendous difficulties and the resistance of its enemies. All who are connected with the bourgeoisie and do not want to give up these connections are ene¬ mies of the united front.

Comrades! As soon as the resistance of these reactionary So¬ cial-Democratic leaders has been broken, and the united front of the working class established, from that moment an indestructible barri¬ er will have been created against the capitalist offensive, against the offensive of reaction and fascism.

The working class will be able to display all its strength only if it brings about unity of action.

The economic, social, cultural and political interests of the workers of all the various political tendencies - be they Communist workers, Social-Democratic workers or Anarchist workers — are the same. On this basis, therefore, it is necessary and possible to estab¬ lish the united front.

Who is hindering this?

The united front of the proletariat is hindered by the reactionary leaders of Social-Democracy, by Social-Democratic ideology and the Social-Democratic policy of class-collaboration with the bour¬ geoisie. This stumbling block must be eliminated. We Communists know that this is a difficult task, that it is not so easy to do away with these obstacles. But we are convinced that by means of daily struggle and persistent work the united proletarian front, the unity of the class trade unions and the united revolutionary party of the pro¬ letariat will ultimately be created in all countries.

Comrades! When you, as the delegation of workers from capital¬ ist countries, have been convinced, by what you have seen with your own eyes, of the correctness of the Leninist-Stalinist path, of the path followed by the Communist International, you will not fail to tell your brothers and sisters in the capitalist countries the whole truth about the Soviet Union, and to struggle persistently and continuously in defense of the proletarian fatherland and for the final establishment of the united proletarian front. Convey to the toilers of your countries our warm revolutionary, Bolshevik greetings, and tell all the Social- Democratic workers that anyone who does not support the united front now, who does not struggle for united action by the working class, who tolerates a campaign against the Soviet Union, against the fatherland of the world proletariat, anyone who supports the policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie is an enemy of the interests of the working class, an accomplice of reaction and fascism and an assistant to the firebrands of imperialist war.

Let us all, Communists, Social-Democrats and all other work¬ ers, in full harmony, hand in hand, straggle together against fas¬ cism, and for the liberation of the thousands and thousands of pris¬ oners held by capital and fascism, for the liberation of Thaelmann, Rakosi, Tom Mooney and of all revolutionary anti-fascists who are languishing in prisons and concentration camps in the capitalist countries.

Let us straggle together against the enemies of united action by the working class!

Let us straggle together for the final victory of socialism throughout the world!

Long live united action by the working class in every country and on an international scale!

Long live the victory of the world proletarian revolution!

Youth against Fascism

Comrades, I am bringing you warm greetings from the Execu¬ tive Committee of the Communist International.

The remarkable words of the great leader and teacher of the proletariat and of all the oppressed of the world. Comrade Stalin, that “ internationalism is the fundamental idea that permeates the activity of the Young Communist League find their living embod¬ iment in you.

No dangers that beset your long and arduous road, no fascist or police cordons were able to prevent you from gathering in the Red proletarian capital for the purpose of discussing, in a friendly and amicable way, like the international family that you are, the tasks of uniting the forces of the young generation of toilers.

You are a congress of the revolutionary youth, a congress of strength and courage. How many of the best and most exemplary fighters in the cause of the working youth have assembled at your congress!

It is with pride and affection that I welcome, through you, in the name of the older revolutionary generation, the glorious young guard of the working people of the whole world.

Comrades, a month ago the Seventh World Congress of the Communist International completed its work in this hall where you are assembled today.

The Congress of the Comintern, led by the brilliant teaching of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, thoroughly discussed all the main problems of the international labor movement and mapped out the road that must be taken to overcome the split in this movement, and to weld together the forces of the toilers in the struggle against ex¬ ploiters and oppressors, against fascism and war. The Congress of the Communist International paid particular attention to the youth movement as one of the principal problems of the international rev¬ olutionary movement, understanding full well that the victory of the class struggle of the working people depends upon the correct and successful development of the youth movement, upon its assuming a sweeping mass character.

Fascism has wreaked bestial vengeance upon the best fighters of the revolutionary youth. At the same time it is making every ef- fort to adapt its putrid demagogy to the moods of the wide mass of the youth, and to take advantage of the growing militant activity of the youth for its own reactionary ends, in order to convert it into a prop of dying capitalism.

Depriving the young generation of working people of all rights, the fascist governments militarize the entire youth, and try to train from their ranks obedient slaves of finance capital in civil as well as imperialist war.

What can we place in opposition to fascism and the threat of imperialist war, which has become particularly acute in view of the preparations being made by Italian fascism to attack Ethiopia and the growing aggression of German fascism?

We can and must place in opposition to it the union of all anti¬ fascist forces and, first and foremost, the union of all the forces of the young generation of working people, at the same time enhancing a thousandfold the role and activity of the youth in the straggle of the working class for its own interests, for its own cause.

Let the entire activity of the Congress of the Young Communist International be devoted to the attainment of this immediate and principal goal.

On the basis of the experience you already have gained, and the decisions of the Seventh Congress of the Communist International, we expect you to be able to find the proper ways and means of ac¬ complishing the most important task of your movement, the task of uniting the forces of the entire non-fascist youth, and, first and foremost, of the working class youth, the task of achieving unity with the socialist youth.

This, however, cannot be achieved if the Young Communist Leagues keep on trying, as they have done hitherto, to construct their organizations as if they were Communist Parties of the youth; nor will this be possible if they are content, as heretofore, to lead the secluded life of sectarians, isolated from the masses.

The whole anti-fascist youth is interested in uniting and organiz¬ ing its forces. Therefore you, comrades, must find such ways, forms and methods of work as will assure the formation, in the capitalist countries, of a new type of mass youth organizations, to which no vital interest of the working youth will be alien, organizations which, without copying the Party, will fight for all the interests of the youth and will bring up the youth in the spirit of the class straggle and pro¬ letarian internationalism, in the spirit of Marxism-Leninism.

This requires that the Congress should very seriously check up and reappraise the work of the Young Communist Leagues, for the purpose of actually achieving their reorganization and the fearless removal of everything that obstructs the development of mass work and establishment of the united front and unity of the youth.

We expect the Young Communist International to build up its activity in such a manner as to weld and unite all trade union, cul¬ tural, educational and sports organizations of the working youth, all revolutionary, national-revolutionary, national-liberation and anti¬ fascist youth organizations, for the straggle against fascism and war, for the rights of the young generation.

We note with great pleasure that our young comrades in France and the United States have actively joined the mass movement for a united front of the youth which is so successfully developing, and have already achieved in this sphere successes which hold out great promises. All sections of the Young Communist International should profit by this experience of the French and American comrades.

In many countries the Communist and Socialist youth are com¬ ing closer and closer together. A striking example of this is the presence, at this Congress of the Young Communist International, of representatives of not only the Communist but also the Socialist youth of Spain.

Therefore, comrades, follow boldly the course of uniting with the Socialist youth and of forming joint and united organizations with it. Follow boldly the course of uniting all forces of the anti¬ fascist youth!

The Executive Committee of the Communist International will encourage and support in every way your initiative and activity in the fight for unity and for all the vital interests of the working youth.

The millions of young men and women for whom capitalist so¬ ciety has created impossible conditions of existence, who are either outside any organization at all or are in organizations led by the class enemy, are your brothers and sisters, whom you can and must win over to the side of socialism by your persistent work.

Don’t wait until unity between the Communist and Social- Democratic Parties and other organizations of the working class has been reached.

Be bold, independent and full of initiative!

You are the Congress of the most active, the most self- sacrificing section of the young generation of today. You cannot stand aside from the movement in favor of unity which is growing and strengthening in the ranks of the working class. You do not have to wait like the Socialist Youth International for permission “from above” before you can support the united front movement and the union of the toiling youth in one organization.

In the name of the Executive Committee of the Communist In¬ ternational I declare that the youth united in the ranks of the Young Communist International enjoys and will continue to enjoy every opportunity of independently developing its revolutionary move¬ ment and solving the problems of this movement.

Communists in youth organizations must be able to work in such a way as to influence the decisions of these organizations by convincing their members, and not by issuing orders in the name of the Party.

I call to mind the words of the great Lenin which form the basis for the relations between the Communist International and the youth and its organizations:

Frequently the middle-aged and the aged do not know how to approach the youth in the proper way, for, necessarily, the youth must come to socialism in a different way, by other paths, in other forms, in other circumstances then their fathers. Incidentally, this is why we must be decidedly in favor of the organisational independ¬ ence of the Youth League, not only because the opportunists fear this independence, but because of the very nature of the case; for unless they have complete independence, the youth will be unable either to train good Socialists from their midst or prepare them¬ selves to lead socialism forw’ard.

Comrades, you must study, study while you fight.

Combine your day-to-day practical activities with a profound study of the original sources of Marxism-Leninism, for without rev¬ olutionary theory there can be no revolutionary practice.

Be exemplary, staunch and valiant fighters against fascism, against capitalism.

Hold aloft the banner of the liberation of humanity from capi¬ talist slavery, the banner of the Communist International.

Rally the young generation of working people of the whole world around this banner. This emblem of stupendous victories al¬ ready waves over one-sixth part of the globe and it will conquer throughout the world! It is the flag of the great leader of the world proletariat, Comrade Stalin!

Reply to the Spanish Socialists

Comrade Husto Amutio,

Editor Adelanta- Verdad, Valencia.

Many thanks for your friendly letter. The fact that the Socialist youth and the entire fighting proletariat of Spain — as you say in your letter — followed the work of the Seventh Congress of the Comintern with extreme interest, and read the report on working class unity in the straggle against the bourgeoisie and fascism with tremendous satisfaction, is a new proof of the fact that in its decisions this historic Congress really expressed the common interests and common desires and longings of the working class of all countries.

I am extremely glad that you, advanced Spanish proletarians. Socialists and Communists, are seriously getting down to fulfill¬ ment of the great task of uniting the working class and all working people for the straggle against fascism, war and the capitalist offen¬ sive. I am sure that the toilers of Spain, who have, on more than one occasion, displayed brilliant examples of revolutionary heroism, will succeed in barring fascism’s path by establishing a firm united fighting front of the working class and the people.

The road to victory over fascism and over the forces of reaction and counter-revolution in Spain lies through the unity of the Social¬ ist and Communist youth, through the realization of unity of action of the Socialist and Communist Parties, through the liquidation of the split in the trade union movement, and the extension and consol¬ idation of workers’ and peasants’ alliances throughout the country.

Only a united straggle of Communists, Socialists and Anarcho- Syndicalist workers, marching shoulder to shoulder in the front ranks of all the toilers of town and countryside, will secure the vic¬ tory of the working class over the common class enemy. The suc¬ cesses of the movement for unity in Spain constitute a big step for¬ ward along the road toward the establishment of international unity of the proletariat.

I wish you success, dear comrades. Socialists, Communists and Anarcho-Syndicalist workers, in boldly, shoulder to shoulder, over¬ coming all obstacles to the establishment of unity raised by the splitters of the working class, whether conscious agents of the bour¬ geoisie or misled opponents of the united front.

I wish you every success in achieving this militant unity, so that the Spanish people will not have to experience the horrors which the German people are now undergoing under the yoke of the barbarian fascist regime, and so that, in the long run, the victory of socialism will be assured in Spain.

Fraternal Bolshevik greetings.