BourgeoisieCentrismCommunismCommunist PartyFascismLeninLiberalismMarxismPrivate PropertySocialismSocialist PartySovietStalinismTrotskyURSSWorkers PartyWorking Class

SOCIALIST APPEAL August 28, 1937 The Politics of Gus Tyler Genuine How the Centrist Leadership of the Clarity Group Reacts to the Crisis!
The liberal is the political pro wives tales, whispering cam By Max Shachtman cialists should be able to work they enforced it in the Wisconsin duct of the most hopeless and paigns, small time maneuvers, together.
organization, where it was so urhelpless class in modern society apparatus combinations and clev. backwardness of the workers. To be sure, Tyler expressed gently required? Just the con proved in the last floundering petty bourgeoisie. If gotten resolutions for the files. putting the Socialist party on opposition to the methods and trary. As only the two great social classes The crisis in the party is a pol the auction block. and a be the psychology of the Trotsky issue of the Appeal, the Clarity would behave with cultured res itical crisis. It is precipitatea trayal of socialism. Is not the ists, and pointed out the diff leadership capitulated shamefully traint and mutual consideration, by the clash of antagonistic pro next logical question to Tyler: culty of assimilating them; but to the Wisconsin right wing on he thinks, society could be pre grams and the groups that ad Can you be in the same party even this difficulty he then laid this question.
at the door of the rest of the What significance has the equalserved from explosive shocks. vocate them. The programs and as betrayers of socialism. For ou above all, the liberal could be the groups must be estimated unambiguous: We fight tooth point, however, is this: according the convention when Tyler NEC part, the answer is party. The important and decisive ly good Unemployed Resolution of preserved from mental discom politically.
forts and his inevitable fate. As The right wing solution of the and nail against the LaGuardia to his own words, Tyler (and has allowed the WAA, founded the inexorable class struggle crisis is at the same time its socialists. We have no intention presumably, the group for which and built by the SP, to become a sharpens, with the proletariat program. Two sentences sum it whatsoever of being in the same 1e speaks) has absolutely nothing watch charm on the chain of the assembling more definitely in up completely and accurately: It party as betrayers of socialism, in common politically with the Communist Party, only because it the cam of revolution and the aims to liquidate SP a much less of making a combina right wing (i. e, the liquidators did not dare take the indicated bourgeoisie in the camp of Fas reformist, anti revolutionary Fa tion of any kind with them. and betrayers. whereas with the vigorous measures against the cism, the liberal can think of no bian society, operating within a There is proof positive that left wing, he has a common po right wing protegee, the Stalinbetter counsel to give than to Labor party as an educational the Trotskyist wreckers want a litical platform on the basic st stooge, David Lasser?
instruct the Fascists in the emi force. It can do this only by split! Tyler will exclaim. Again, question of a revolutionary pro Who Picked the NEC nent superiority of the democra first expelling the biggest obsta there speaks the Party liberal. gram.
tic way of exploiting the masses cle to this course, the left wing. It is not at all a question of For a genuine revolunionist, and How Does It Act?
and preserving private property Since it does not have the sup wanting split. The revolu and not for a wordy Party liberal and to admonish the workers not port of the membership, it can tianist merely recognizes the who does not think or act politi caucus letters, Tyler gets pathetic to provoke Fascism by their achieve its ends only by bureau fact that a split in the is cally, such a judgement as made cally angry with the Trotskyist militancy and boldness. The uncratic and arbitrary action. For just as unavoidable today as it by Tyler would dictate controllable social forces that anyone who sees and thinks poli was over a year ago, and for the ing course: Even if, as a result Glen Trimble in particular for the make the two antagonistic camps tically, this means that the res same basic reason. At that time of some poorly digested texts of latter entirely apt description of irreconciliable, that make the com ponsibility for the split now tak no power in the party was able Lenin, must carry on my fight the Clarity NEC as a body plete victory of the one the ing place lies exclusively on the to prevent the separation of the on two fronts. it is nevertheless handpicked by Wisconsin. Yet, expense of the other, inescapable, shoulders of the right wing. All corrupt Old Guard from the rest plain that must make a solid for a person with a political eye, appear to the distorted eye of talk about discipline. viola of the membership, although the block with the Trotskyists, with that description fits like a glove.
world of Urbanity, Love, Virtue, so much tawdry trimming for a the party. Today, a similar si fight mercilessly and at every was opposed to the Appeal group interlopers in what should be a cret letters and the like, is just not to be found in the ranks of politically, fundamentally to wrote Paul McCormick that he and above all, Peace.
plain reality which requires none. tuation arisen with the point against the liquidators and having any representation at all new Old Guard of Thomas traitors with whom have nothing in the incoming NEC, and that The Liberal and the The Left Wing and the Altman Lewis Wisconsin. At that in common. This is a course which the Thomas opinion prevailed? Is Sectarians Right are Irreconciliable time, the real problem was not my own written documents make it not true that when we proposed it Goldman for the NEC Albert Only and here is the rub! slate, Maynard Krueger declared. The left wing, like its right the reduction of the split to the not as much opposed to Fascism adversaries. realizes that the op smallest proportions and the in the same issue of Socialist to us, in the presence of Zam, as anybody else, he always has posing standpoints are consolidatoin of the party on a Clarity from which we have al. Delson, John Fisher and others, tens to assure the proletarian rev dlable. The best will in the revolutionary basis against the ready plucked such a perfect while they were waiting humbly olutionist. He as much oppos: world, on either side or both, right wing splitters.
And, pre. Tylerian flower, he had some for an audience in the anteroom ed to it as the next man.
But cannot reconcile liquidation with cisely because the Militants of thing just as perfect to say: of the Wisconsin Altman Lewis you must not be so aggressive, the struggle against it, reform that time (Altman Thomas Ty Many years ago, there developed delegations: Wisconsin will nehe who takes up the sword shall Up to a certain point, it is pos a big one and the party was not underwrite almost any sort of a demanded that we withdraw our. true that the Clarity leadership perish by the sword. And when sible for the two views to remain properly consolidated. By their document, consistently refused four NEC nominations from the the revolutionists ask the liberal under one roof, as proved by the vacillation, by their grovelling to make such basic principles a Chicago convention floor on the ever so politely! to step aside pre war Second International and before McLevy, the Militants guide for day by day action. Ay, ground that, unless we did, the quietly so that they may come to the SP since the Detroit conven: ended up with McLevy taking the there the rub! For Tyler was Wisconsin gang would not vote grips with reaction and smash it tion. But beyond that point, that whole Bridgeport organization. not only giving a terse and flaw for and carry the before it has grown too strong is, beyond the point where the By the same policy towards the less description of centrism in slate? Is it not true that Trager Clarity to be halted, the injured liberal views crystallize fully on burn Reading Old Guard, they ended that sentence, but an autobio was permitted on the NEC only throws up his hands and ex ing questions of the day and up with a crippled organization graphical characterization claims: Impossible sectarians! come into head on, unpostponof when Clarity gave Wisconsin asNot even their best friends can able collision, not au the wise in Pennsylvania. Is it so difficult himself and of the Clarity surances that he would not conwork with them! Almost a cen and good men in the world can to foresee that the same policy group.
tinue as Labor Secretary? Is it tury of experience of revolution keep the proponents of the anta Hoan Porter crew keeping the basic principles. and the do why the two theoretical leaders today will only result in the We already know Tyler not true that the only reason ists with petty bourgeois lib gonistic views together. It has eralism has more than earned the been tried before without suc and in Thomas and Altman hav write. Let us, however, look of the NEC today (Zam and whole Wisconsin organization cuments he is ready to under of Clarity are not even members latter the adjective rotten. cess. The fatal mistake of Gus In the Socialist Party today, Tyler is to try it again.
ing similarly unnecessary success briefly at his day by day ac Tyler. is that Wisconsin vetoed We have a genuine case of rottion The left wing has said that in New York and elsewhere?
it? What amount of corridor ten liberalism in the persons of those who give political support the question which we (and the resolution for the Chicago con simple facts. Now, what does Tyler reply to Tyler wrote a radical anti war muttering can cover up these specifically of its most active massacred the Catalonian work situation itself) have put him?
vention. With that document, he But didn the NEC endorse journalistic apologist, Gus Tyler. Sers, are the defenders of the considered his revolutionary work the Trotsky Committee and conTyler has not found it difficult butchers and assassins of the How Does Tyler Answer nantly at us in his caucus cir Tyler in the editorship of the such a radical fellow as in the past to acquire at reason Spanish workers. Is that true, is able rates a superficial reputa it politically correct? Tyler does the Decisive Question? culars because we still refuse to call? True, true. But what did tion for a radicalism which mal not stop to ask this decisive politake his radicalism seriously. that mean in practice. Tyler icious tongues sometimes whis tical question, as a revolutionist We know the stinging words The Party liberal simply cannot himself reveals this when he peringly characterize as Trots would. It is true that at the with which Tyler describes the understand that, for revolution makes his abject apologies kyism. But in the three corner Philadelphia meeting he right wing. For serious revo ists, political documents cannot Altman and Co. in order to prove ed struggle that has developed in mumbled that Caballero and Co. lutionist, such characterizations remain on paper but are written that under his direction the call the party for more than year, had played the same role in Bar would preclude completely executed, particularly was not at all deservant of criTyler has demonstrated with in celona as Scheidemann and Noske possibility of collaborating with against those at whom they are ticism from the right. In order creasing clearness that under had played when they crushed such elements and most certain directed. Have Tyler and Co. lift to show that there is really no lying his radicalism is something the Spartacists in blood. But that ly not against the left wing. As ed a finger to put that resolu cause for complaint from Altman that vitiates it at every decisive was just a speech, a radical to the latter, Tyler, only five tion into effect in those circles and Wisconsin, Tyler bleats in his and crucial moment. He is at bot speech. and had no political. con months ago, gave the following where it was supposed to do the circular: tom Party liberal left wing, sequences for Tyler. In his cau political. estimate, again, in must good: the LID (as pacifistic Why are we not attacked for to be sure, friend of the Trots cus circular, he does not bother words: The Trotskyists, as op as ever. the Italian Stampa carryin, virtually nothing on all yists. of course, even their best with the detail about taking the posed to the various right wing Libera (completely Stalinized. the executions recently? Why are friend. but nevertheless a lib side either of Noske or Sparta and centrist tendencies in our the Milwaukee Leader (the same we not attacked for not mentioneral.
cus; he confines himself to the party, are essentially revolution today as yesterday. Meta Berger ing the new drive against the The last lingering doubt which indignation of the Party liberal aries. On the basic questions of and similars (still the American socialists in Russia except in the some may have foolishly enter who is outraged because the left a revolutionary program: the League against War and Fase one article which is attacked?
tained on this score has been dis wing calls a spade a spade: state, Popular Front, and the ism. No, not one finger, for Why are we not criticized for pelled by Tyler himself, in the. When one resorts to such char war question, they stand with that would have offended the making front page news out of form of his two recent caucus acterization, the next logical the revolutionaries against the right wing allies of the Clarity world shaking event the new circulars and the editorial in the question. Can you be in the right and centrist elements. The leadership.
reaction in Russia. Why are we August 21, 1937 issue of the same party as butchers and as Trotskyists, moreover, stand Together with Tyler, we adopt so violently criticized because we Clarity faction organ, the Call. sassins of the Spanish workers. with the other revolutionaries in ed at Chicago a fairly good trade dare to write a single article in Good. Let us ask in turn: Is it the party against liquidationism, union resolution. We meant it. fourteen weeks, which is critical, Political problems can only be not true that the Zam Delson against parliamentary socialism. And Tyler, Zam and Co. Have after long columns calling for analyzed and resolved politically. statement on the New York mu against pacifism, against popular they enforced it against Gross, the defense of the Soviet Union?
It is necessary to state this plati nicipal elections calls the Tho frontism, against national defen Baron and the other petty trade Why. Pitting questions that tade because so many leaders mas Altman position a hidden sism. Hence, on all the basic union bureaucrats in the party deserve a Atting reply. still think it can be done other and cowardly support of La revolutionary questions the Trots whom Tyler now calls the social Again: Another charge (2 out wise by means of gossip, old Guardia, a capitulation to the kytes and all revolutionary 80 base of the right wing? Have of charges) is that one of our to the to be