An American looks at Capitalism and the British Labour Party (1939)

From the January 1939 issue of the Socialist Standard

A reader (I. R., Roxbury, Massachusetts) writes drawing attention to a book recently published in the United States called “Is Capitalism Doomed?” It is by Lawrence Dennis, a former member of the United States diplomatic service and of the well-known Wall Street firm of E. & W. Seligman. Our correspondent says that, in spite of the intellectual bankruptcy of Seligman’s solutions, the book is as intelligent a defence of capitalism as is possible. “Its great merit, however, is that he attempts to portray as objectively and as accurately as his class interests will permit him a picture of modern capitalism as distinct from the capitalism of yesterday.”

Dennis argues that, “in its old age, senile capitalism must be nurtured by the State . . . with an even diet of two per cent. gruel. Capitalism has run down for want of new worlds to conquer. . . . The State must supply the capitalist machine with markets which it is at present powerless to create for itself.”

He regards heavy taxation as a necessity, the important thing to him being the safeguarding of capitalism, even if this means cutting into the largest fortunes. He states (with approval) that “capitalism and nationalism are individualistic, competitive and non-co-operative, and therefore international co-operation is a misleading idea.” Consequently he regards plans for disarmament and international pacts as foredoomed to failure.

On page 300, Dennis complains that British Labour has been swayed for higher wages instead of for Socialism, and continues: —

“Socialism means work for everybody, even if it be creating things that capitalists do not approve of. The British Labour Party lacked the power to apply Socialism. English capitalism might have been saved from its present plight had the British Labour Party taken a few drastic measures against British capital just after the War.”

This last opinion is interesting, coming as it does from a man whose sole interest is to save capitalism from destruction.

Blogger's Note:

There's a strong chance that 'I. R.' of Roxbury, Massachusetts was Isaac Rab. It's worth checking out the wiki page for Lawrence Dennis. To say he was an interesting 'character' is to put it mildly.

Branch News (1964)

Party News from the July 1964 issue of the Socialist Standard

Lewisham Branch is continuing its propaganda activity in Bromley and the Branch has especially asked that as many comrades as possible would be welcome to support their Thursday evening meetings at the Market Place, Bromley (outside Dunn's). These meetings commence at 7.30 p.m.

Glasgow Branch held a Seven Days for Socialism (June 6th-June 14th). Comrade Gilmac went up for the week to assist the Branch and we will have a review of the events in next month's issue.

Three weeks in America. Comrade McClatchie (Gilmac) reports: “I recently spent three weeks in America, most of the time in Boston, but I spent three days in New York. In Boston some members occupy Monday nights at their Head Office doing the routine work—dealing with correspondence, sending out literature, attending to subscriptions, etc. On Friday evenings there is an economic class and on Sundays they hold their fortnightly Executive Committee meetings. In between times Rab, Morrison and Fenton (the latter is also General Secretary) are engaged in writing and going through articles for the “W.S.” As far as I remember, the meetings on Boston Common had not recommenced. They have had very bad weather.

I attended an N.A.C. meeting and the Economics Class the first week I was there. At the second meeting of the Economics Class I spoke on the Materialist Conception of History. There was no time for advertising this meeting but about 80 letters were sent out to possible attenders. As a result about 30 turned up, and there were a number of questions.

I noticed one welcome change from my previous visit. A number of young people are interested and some have joined the Party.

Whilst in Boston I stayed, very pleasantly, at the Rabs. One evening they had a party which enabled me to meet some of the young people who have joined, and some who are interested. I also spent some pleasant evenings in the homes of Comrades Morrison, Ellenborgen, Blake and Gloss. One lovely evening Com. Gloss took me to dinner at a restaurant by the sea. Although his bookshop was burnt down he is carrying on quite well. I stayed with Comrade Orner and met the New York comrades. One of these (Charley David) was mentioned in a paper on account of his weekly discussions in a Square there. Another (Jack Kilgore) I was told, drives over one hundred miles to attend their Branch meetings in New York! In New York I had some lengthy discussions with Comrades Davis and Coombs. Another Comrade was there part of the time. Sam Orner is as full of beans as ever and proposes attending our next Conference. Charley Davis expressed the same intention. Comrade Fenton of Boston also proposes making a visit and Rab has it in mind.

In conclusion, I must record my appreciation for the comradely welcome I received everywhere. In particular, the warm and friendly atmosphere in the two places where I stayed; the Rab’s home in Boston and the Orner’s home in New Jersey. They could not do too much for me and for my comfort. I must add that Comrade Rab took me for a delightful three day trip through the New England States, which, to me, had an advantage historically as well as the appreciation of beautiful scenery and houses, villages and towns containing shadows of time gone by."

West London Branch have planned a visit to Brighton on Sunday, July 5th. This visit has been arranged in conjunction with the Brighton Group. All are welcome—meeting place—West Pier, Brighton, noon, Sunday, July 5th.

Wood Green & Hornsey Branch will meet in future at 17, Dorset Road, N.22, on Fridays at 8.30, All enquiries and correspondence to E. L. McKone at that address.

Phyllis Howard

Labor: Dignity of Man (1979)

From the Spring/Summer 1979 issue of The Western Socialist

In the ITU Review, June 8, 1978, under the heading: “Labor: Dignity of Man” appears this quote: . . . it is part of the dignity of man to create for himself and his family a basis for living through work” (My emphasis.) Unfortunately, the implication of the quote is that there is a harmony of interests between capital and labor. Can it be ignored that the primary objective of unions is as a weapon in the interests of the workers that arise because of the conflicts between capital and labor?

Capital's primary concern is PROFITS, and profits alone. Labor’s primary interests are wages and shop conditions. By the very nature of the economic relationships it cannot be otherwise, despite the claims of capital to the contrary. And the lessons of experience have proven this.

The notion that working for wages “creates for himself and his family a basis for living through work” is an illusion! The products produced by the workers on the job do NOT belong to them but to capital. Wages are determined by the costs of living! This can be seen by the many escalator clauses in union contracts.

Need I emphasize that today has seen a tremendous stride in science and technology? It has been established by research that nobody starves today because of shortages despite the propaganda to the contrary. The times are now ripe for a world fit for human beings instead of today’s dog-eat-dog jungle. Today, food is produced primarily FOR SALE, not only to be eaten. That is why potatoes, corn, wheat, cattle, etc., etc., are destroyed. We all are aware of this.

What is needed today is a world where everyone gives according to their abilities and receives according to their needs based on a real system of the DIGNITY OF MAN, freed from exploitation. This is no utopia but a present NECESSITY!!!

Rab.

In Boston Typographical Bulletin

Obituary: Len Fenton (1917-2006)

Len Fenton and Ann Rab

Obituary from issue number 21 of the World Socialist Review

Last October 26th, the World Socialist Party lost one of its most energetic and committed spokesmen—a "stalwart" in the old sense—Comrade Len Fenton. Surviving the death of his wife Ann Rab by four years, he retired gradually from party functions till his last remaining activity was keeping a monthly log of postal mail received.

Fenton's first contact with the organization was in 1936, during a lunch break on Boston Common, where the party speakers frequently and forcefully argued the case for socialism. He was soon deeply impressed; he joined the party in December 1936 and became an official speaker himself in 1938, joining Comrades Rab and Gloss on the stand at outdoor meetings.

Developing his talent for public speaking of all kinds, Fenton was Boston Local's most effective speaker over a long span of years. From 1947 through the 1970s, he frequently represented the WSP at debates with other organizations and at various colleges and universities in the Boston/Cambridge area.

He recruited several other members of his family into the movement. He served on the Editorial Committee of The Western Socialist (the predecessor of the World Socialist Review) from 1939 until its last issue in 1980. [1]

Although Fenton's forte was as a speaker and debater rather than as a writer, he was very active on the Circulation Committee of the WS, and in 1955 he initiated a campaign to get the journal into libraries, which succeeded in boosting its circulation significantly over the next few years (a period in which many radical journals were losing readership). He was also active on the National Administrative Committee, occasionally serving as National Secretary or Treasurer.

Len combined a lucky gene with financial acumen to rise to the status of "cockroach capitalist," a term applied to members who went into business and did well. This phenomenon has sometimes caused critics to wonder how a party of the working class, committed to abolishing capital and wages, can harbor members of the capitalist class in its ranks. But just a little reflection will show that a socialist revolution aims to abolish the function of capital and the necessity of working for a living; the capitalists themselves only personify their capital.

His business allowed him the opportunity to travel abroad, and from 1965 on he and Ann made several trips to England, where they were hosted by comrades in the SPGB. Often they reciprocated the hospitality when some of these comrades would cross the Atlantic and stop in Boston. They formed lifelong friendships with SPGBers like Gilbert McClatchie (Gilmac), Cyril May, Jim D'Arcy and many others. In that bigger, less connected world, mutual contacts among socialists scattered widely across the globe had an intensity borne of a common sense of purpose.

Len Fenton never lost sight of the big picture. All through his long involvement in the world socialist movement, he maintained a contagious upbeat philosophy. Any success the party has in organizing for socialism will rest partly on the foundations he laid. In that sense, he is with us still. 

[1] In 1939 the Socialist Party of Canada, dodging the wartime censors, asked the WSP to take over its publication for the time being as a joint venture — a relationship that ended after 1968, when the SPC launched an independent journal.

John Keracher and the Michigan Marxists (1996)

From the Jul-Aug 1996 issue of the Discussion Bulletin

John Keracher was born in Scotland in 1880. In 1909, be emigrated to the United States, settled in Detroit and. some time later, became a shoe salesman. Early in 1910. he came into contact with the Socialist Party of America, founded in 1901. In April, he joined the Party.

Despite its name, the Socialist Party of America did not have as its objective—its sole objective—the establishment of socialism. It was a basically left-wing, social democratic, reformist Party with, at that time, hundreds of thousands of members and supporters. And prior to the First World War, almost every kind of radical and reformer could be found in its ranks. Of the Party, and the various publications which supported it. Keracher observed:

. . . I heard some of its members speaking about the Materialist Conception of History. 1 had never heard the term before and was curious to know just what it meant. 

Approaching those members, 1 asked for an explanation. Soon, I discovered, as it seemed to me then, that there was something mysterious about it. They told me that they believed in it and were sure that it was quite scientific . . . 

meanwhile, I had subscribed to a number of socialist papers and started to read socialist books and pamphlets. Soon I noticed that there was much contradiction existing on socialist theory. The authors and editors held different views, often quite opposite, on important questions of principle. This was explained to me as a permissible difference of opinion on the part of the writers’. I was assured that everything was all right, that in a democratic movement, such as ours, much allowance must be made for individual opinion'. (How The Gods Were Made)

Keracher was not satisfied with such answers. Directly opposite views could not both be correct Something must be wrong, he felt which permitted such a wide tinge of opinion on the principles of socialism. John Keracher decided to find out for himself.

Among the books which I had bought were some by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels . . . I turned my attention to their writings and after a time began to grasp what was meant by the Materialist Conception of History. The more I read of their writings the clearer it became to me. I began to overcome my former indefinite position on religion, and upon other questions, such as social reforms, the function of industrial organizations (i.e. the unions), the State, and other institutions. I came to the conclusion that if Marx and Engels were correct, a great many others calling themselves socialists, must be wrong. (How The Gods Were Made)

Soon after, Keracher initiated an ambitious education programme, throughout Michigan, based on the study of the writings of Marx and Engels. Out of this grew what was termed the proletarian University, in which Keracher was its most popular lecturer Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the Socialist Party of Great Britain had published, in 1910, a pamphlet titled Socialism and Religion, an analysis of religion based on the very Materialist Conception of History which had concerned John Keracher when he joined the Socialist Party of America. Copies of Socialism and Religion soon found their way to North America, and began to circulate within both the Socialist Party of Canada and sections of the SPA. such as Michigan and Detroit.

War and the Revolutionary Tea Drinkers

The First World War came is a great shock to the Socialist Party of America. At first. America was not involved, but many American workers had relatives in Europe. So, reluctantly, many took sides in what was their masters’ quarrel. Many Socialist Party members did likewise. Not so in Detroit, however.

In Britain, right from the start, the Socialist Party of Great Britain opposed the war. But, because of its opposition, and the harassment of many of its members, some went on the run or escaped abroad. This was to affect the already militant Michigan section of the SPA under the influence of Keracher and others such as Dennis Batt.

Detroit was the centre of the automobile industry, and the auto workers suffered intense exploitation which tended to make them more militant, and sympathetic towards socialist ideas, than elsewhere in the United States. Not surprisingly, therefore, the SPA in that city began to look towards anti-war Marxists in Europe in general, and Britain in particular. The Michigan section soon came under the influence of the SPGB.

In 1915, an active and charismatic member of the SPGB, Moses Baritz, arrived in Detroit, to be followed some time later by another member, Adolph Kohn. Baritz was soon holding lectures in Duffield Hall and elsewhere, and was joined by members of the Socialist Party of Canada. By 1916, Moses Baritz had moved on (and was later jailed for his anti-war activities when America became involved) but Adolph Kohn continued propagating socialist ideas. Meanwhile, a small group in Toronto, across the border to north-east in Canada, had organized themselves as the Socialist Party of North America, and had adopted the object and declaration of principles of the SPGB. A number of members of the SPA in Detroit felt that it was time that Marxist socialists in the United States should break away from the reformist Socialist Party, and form a new revolutionary Party, also basing itself on the object and principles of the Socialist Party of Great Britain.

John Keracher and Dennis Batt were themselves very sympathetic towards the 'revolutionary tea drinkers’, as the pro-SPGB group was called; but they thought that for the time being, Marxists should remain within the SPA, and try to influence it towards socialism, rather than organize a new, separate, political party

Workers and Proletarian Parties

Nevertheless, particularly at the urging of Adolph Kohn. a small group finally decided to organize a new Socialist Party. And on July 7 I916, the Socialist Party of the United States, adopting the Object and Declaration of principles of the Socialist Party of Great Britain, was formed in Detroit. About 20 members of the SPA resigned immediately, including a young socialist named I. Rab. But due to the fact that the organization was unable to make effective contact with socialists outside Michigan, and was without funds, they only began with 42 members Bill Davenport became the first secretary, Bill Gribble the first organizer and Lawrence Beardsley wrote the Party's manifesto The writer, Jack London just before his death, resigned from the SPA. and wrote the new party "I congratulate you and wish you well in your adventure." Meanwhile, the SPA in Detroit went from strength to strength, although the new Party's influence remained strong. Indeed, in August 1918, the SPA in Michigan, under John Keracher. founded a new journal, The Proletarian, and like the new Party adopted the Object and Declaration of Principles of the SPGB. The new Socialist Party of the United States, however, was informed that the SPA had copyrighted the name “Socialist Party” and so, for legal reasons, renamed their party the Workers' Socialist Party of the United States (WSP/US). (In 1947, it was renamed a second time as the World Socialist Party.)

John Keracher and the Michigan Socialist Party, which had become among the largest of the Socialist Party's state organizations, came more and more in conflict with the national leadership. In 1917, revolution broke out in Russia, followed by the Bolshevik coup d'etat. Although John Keracher was well aware that a socialist revolution had not occurred in Russia, he and most of the SPA members in Detroit, like many, workers and radicals elsewhere, became a vehement supporter of Bolshevism. Not only did this mean the parting of the ways between Keracher and the "revolutionary tea drinkers" of the WSP and the SPGB, but also, in May 1919, the expulsion of the Michigan section of the Socialist Party of America, ostensibly for the Michigan section's anti-religious stance, in violation of the Party's statutes.

At an emergency meeting of the expelled Michigan members in June 1919, a resolution was passed calling for a new revolutionary party, to be formed in Chicago on September 1; and on that date, Keracher, Dennis Batt and others from the expelled Michigan section of the SPA, took part in the founding of a Communist Party. (At two simultaneous conventions, in Chicago, two Communist parties were formed!); fundamental disagreements, however, soon made it impossible for Keracher and the Michigan group to remain in the newly-formed Communist Party. Almost alone (except for the WSP), Keracher, Batt and their comrades were the only "communists" who did not believe that a proletarian revolution as imminent in the United States. Keracher also opposed the Communist Party's clandestine and anti-electoral orientation, its dual unionism, its "federation of federations" and its reformism. So, within a few months, in January 1920, the so-called Communists first tried unsuccessfully to take over Keracher's Proletarian University by force and, then, charged him and the other Michigan members, with Menshevism, and expelled them.

Six months later, in June 1920, the expelled members and several others, founded the Proletarian Party.

Union activists

The membership of the Proletarian Party was never more than 500 at the most; its stronghold remaining in the industrial midwest, especially in Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Flint and Rochester. It sent a delegate to the third congress of the Communist International, in Moscow, in June 1921, yet despite efforts by CI officials to get the "Proletarians" to re-enter the American Communist Party, the Proletarian Party stubbornly refused to, and pursued its own course while still supporting the Communist International globally. Indeed, not until the mid-1930s, when Keracher opposed the Popular Front, particularly during the Spanish Civil War, did the Proletarian Party actually challenge the authority of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union internationally.

Notwithstanding the Proletarian Party's support for Bolshevism internationally, the Proletarian Party remained a "Menshevik" organization, with a kind of Marxism that owed much to Engels, and little or nothing to Lenin. Its members were, like Keracher himself, deeply influenced by not only Marx and Engels, but also by Darwin, Lewis Henry Morgan and Joseph Dietzgen. And, in this very much like the WSP and SPGB, its activities consisted almost exclusively of study classes, forums, debates, lectures and outdoor "soapbox" meetings. Many of its members, however, were active Trade Unionists.

During the 1933 Briggs Auto Body strike in Detroit, Proletarian Party members were very active; and, later, they were involved in sit-downs in Flint and elsewhere. In the early days of the United Auto Workers, their speakers spoke to large crowds, and for a small organization, the Proletarian Party provided the UAW with a large number of its best organizers, such as Frank Marquart who was initially influenced by I. Rab and Emil Mazey. Many other members of the Proletarian Party became top officials of other unions, including Carl Berreitter of the International Typographical Union, Al Renner of the Restaurant Workers, and Sam Meyers of the Retail Clerks. And many others. Yet the Party suffered a large turnover of membership. By 1940, it had lost much of its membership. And by 1971, the Proletarian Party just faded away. Nevertheless, John Keracher left his mark, not only in Michigan but even as far away as Britain.

He wrote countless leaflets, as well as articles for the Proletarian News. And some of his pamphlets, such as Producers and Parasites (1935), Crime—its Causes and Consequences (1937) and particularly How The Gods Were Made (1929), all of which were published, not by the Proletarian Party, but by Charles H. Kerr and Company of Chicago, which Keracher had taken over from an ageing Charles Kerr in 1928, found their way to Britain, and into the hands of members of the Socialist Party of Great Britain including this writer.

John Keracher left Detroit for Chicago in the late 1920s and remained there until about 1950, when he retired to Los Angeles. He died in 1958.

The World Socialist Party

Following the entry of the United States into the First World War in 1917, and the subsequent persecutions of radicals, socialists and anti-war groups, the members of the WSP were forced to go underground, curtail their activities or to move away from Detroit, to other parts of the United States. And, like Keracher some members of the WSP supported the Bolsheviks, at least for a time. During the infamous Palmer Red Raids of 1919, thousands of workers, including socialists, were arrested.

Nevertheless, despite the difficulties, members of the WSP in Detroit carried on as the Detroit Socialist Educational Society between 1919 and 1922. In 1921, I. Rab moved from Detroit to Boston where he worked tireless for socialism, for many more decades. The Detroit Local of the WSP came and went over the years; and at one period, during the 1950s, it took over the functions of the WSP National Headquarters. At the moment of writing, there is no active local of the World Socialist Party in Detroit.

Peter E. Newell, 

Colchester, England

Sources:

The Monument, Robert Barltrop.

Jack London, Robert Barltrop.

Encyclopaedia of the American Left, edited by Mari Jo Buhle and others. 

The Western Socialist, No.4,1966.

Crime—Its Causes and Consequences, John Keracher.

Producers and Parasites, John Keracher.

How The Gods Were Made, John Keracher.

Letter from Ronald Elbert, 30 March 1996.

World Communism: A Handbook, edited by Witold S. Sworakowski.

Blogger's Note:

I thought this short historical article from Frank Girard's Discussion Bulletin would be of interest to readers of the blog. The author of the article, the late Peter E. Newell, was a member of the SPGB in the '50s and '60s, and rejoined the party in the 1990s after long period in-between involved in anarchist politics. Peter had a longstanding interest in the history of radical movements in the Americas, and as well as writing a biography of Zapata in the 1970s, he also wrote a history of Canadian impossibilism in 2008.

Frank Girard's reasons for originally publishing the article are worth reposting:

"The DB isn't a socialist history magazine, but Peter Newell's article on John Keracher and Revolutionary Perspective's article on the British SLP both relate to a key period, 1918-20, when Lenin and the Bolsheviks were using worldwide enthusiasm among workers for the Russian Revolution and the unlimited cash they came into when they grabbed power in Russia to establish their hegemony over the revolutionary wing of the international socialist movement. I never met Keracher, but I knew one of his admirers, Clarence Ford, in Grand Rapids in the early fifties. Like many working class revolutionaries he was shockingly—to me in those days—uninterested in the relative doctrinal purity of socialist organizations and had been a member of both the SLP and Keracher's Proletarian Party, and from reading Newell's article I gather that the refusal of Keracher and his party to become a part of the CP was based on principle and not just personal antagonisms as I had assumed."

Greetings from the U.S.A. (1954)

From the September 1954 issue of the Socialist Standard

Just as we are going to press we can record a visit by two comrades from the World Socialist Party of America, comrades Rab and Gloss. This visit has shown how closely associated in principles and policy our two parties are. They addressed a number of outdoor meetings in London and the Provinces and the policy they expressed was undistinquishable from that expressed by our own speakers.

This welcome illustration of the fundamental unity of our two parties, although thousands of miles away from each other, augurs well for the progress of the Socialist movement. They take back with them memories of the warmth of their reception, and we hope it is the beginning of an international exchange of delegates.

It is fitting that this should have happened when we are celebrating our fiftieth anniversary.

We hope the day is not far distant when we can also welcome delegates from the Socialist Party of Canada and the Socialist Party of Australia and of New Zealand.

A Man’s Eye View of Evolution (1960)

From the June 1960 issue of the Socialist Standard

Link to Part 1

The study of the cosmos is a study of physical-chemical relationships.

Astronomy, which arose out of material developments, eventually gave rise to the next smaller great generalization of existence, geology, the science and study of the earth.

Some billions of years ago a hot gaseous mass emerged from the sun. In all the conflicting speculations and educated guesses as to the specific details of the origin of the earth, there is no quarrel that the solar system consists of the various planets revolving around the sun in their respective orbits.

It took a few billion years before the gaseous mass became a vast sea and, later, came the emergence of the geological formations. Evolution in geology can be traced through the strata by the fossils found in them. The evolutionary stages of geology may be summarized as archeozoic (transition to and beginnings of life), proterozoic (earliest life), paleozoic (ancient life), mesozoic (middle life, reptiles) and cenozoic (recent life, mammals).

In the course of a very long time there appeared on earth pre-biological forms which later developed into living matter. Organic life is only a more complex organization of inorganic substances which have acquired the properties of growth and reproduction. In order for life to arise on earth, propitious conditions had to exist. The earth’s average mean temperature had to cool sufficiently to support life, which can only exist within relatively very small limits of temperature. There also had to exist an atmosphere, moisture and other favourable circumstances. [2].

As a rule, charts of the tree of life start with the single-celled animal, as though this were the simplest and earliest form of life. Of course, this is not true. The single-celled animal is already a very complex form of a living being.

Inorganic matter, more especially carbon, with other elements, became joined together into complex molecules which were the building blocks of ultra-microscopic life. Of special significance is it that proteins are inorganic, yet under certain specific conditions function as organic matter. The viruses may be called the first true life forms. The next higher stage is bacteria. Eventually appeared the single-celled plants.

The primary distinction between plants and animals is that plants can subsist on inorganic matter, i.e., they can transform the inorganic into organic substances whereas animals can only subsist on the organic. In order of evolution, single-celled plants preceded single-celled animals.

Starting with the single-celled plant, the evolution of plants were algae, mosses, ferns, non-flowering seed producers and, its highest development, the flowering seed producers.

The evolution of animals was from single-celled animals into spores, fishes, reptiles, mammals and, finally, man. In this man’s eye view of the evolution of existence, we are only considering the main trunk and ignoring the branches of the tree.

Again, we see that evolution is a continuing process. The appearance of homo sapiens on the scene gave rise to sociology. In a very real sense, sociology is but a division of biology; which, in turn, is a division of geology; in its turn, a division of astronomy; which is but a branch of the greatest generalization of all matter.

Man "is the only animal species that, from the very moment he came into existence, has been continuously changing and during a continuing process has become a different thing.” [3] Through the interrelations of his brain and thinking processes, his acquirements of speech and the development of tools man has become a social animal whose evolution can be traced through his social organizations. Only a Marxist, such as Anton Pannekoek in his invaluable “Anthropogenesis,” [3] could have filled in the gap between the primates and the origin of homo sapiens, i.e., tied Darwinism and Marxism into an interrelated whole.

Man, the social animal, evolved from the pre-cave man into primitive tribal society (savagery and barbarism) and, then, into chattel slavery, through feudalism into capitalism and is now on the very dawn of a new society.

This whole development of social evolution arose from changes taking place in the material conditions of existence under which mankind lived. In response to these changes, there evolved changes in his ideas and institutions. Man makes his own history, “not out of the whole cloth” but out of the conditions at hand. This is Marxism, in a nutshell.

Our tribute to Darwin is for emancipating man from biological superstitions by his revolutionary contribution revealing the material forces that brought about the evolution of the species in biology.

Our tribute to Marx is for furnishing the key that unlocked the mystery of mankind’s social evolution and for establishing the understanding that it is now possible and necessary for man to be master of his own form of social organization and, at the same time, the lord over nature.

Isaac Rab

(WSPUS)

(concluded)

[2] All the speculations about life on other planets in the cosmos, more especially our sister planets in the solar system—Mars and Venus, are predicated upon the existence on them of the conditions favourable for the support of life. Though there may be millions of planets in the cosmos (a relatively small number, actually), it is not reasonable to imagine that very many of them have life-forms.

[3] Published by North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, Holland

A Man’s Eye View of Evolution (1960)

From the May 1960 issue of the Socialist Standard

It is no longer a moot, question or a matter of opinion whether the theory of organic evolution (Darwinism) is valid or not. The science editor of Saturday Review, John Lear, in a special Darwin issue (14/11/59) says:

 . . . the irrefutable evidence (proves) that living things—from invisible microbes to man—slowly acquired their present dimensions, properties and functions (including consciousness) under such analyzable natural law as variations and natural selection.

This general acceptance of Darwin's epoch-making contribution underlies the widespread celebration of the 100th anniversary of the publication of the Origin of Species. There is hardly a popular journal that has not had a special issue devoted to Darwinism.

It is especially significant that Darwinism has uprooted religious superstitions. In spite of the appearances of religious growth and persistence, hardly any one is any longer religious in his own daily spheres of activities. Apologists usually qualify their defence of religion with statements that transform their “convictions" into statements of ethics and morals. A case in point is no less an authority than Samuel Miller, Dean of the Harvard Divinity School, who wrote in a featured article, devoted to Darwinism, in the Saturday Review (14/11/59);

  The whole imaginative structure of Christian truth, elaborated in myth and symbol, for the most part has crumbled under the impact of the last three centuries of revolutionary thought, scientific methods, and historical studies. The vision of reality articulated in this great Biblical formulary has evaporated and no longer serves as the frame of reference for elucidating the mysteries of being human . . . We have reached a new maturity of freedom from superstition and credulity.

And John Lear (referred to above) goes a step further:

  Our now misplaced supernaturalism. slightly mitigated, but persisting into the new Age of Science, has left our social and political leadership unprepared to define accurately our present problems. 

We find the key for the understanding of biological evolution in Darwinism, which deals with the evolution of biological organs in particular, the evolution of animal organs transmitted through heredity. Marxism may be summarized as the study of the social evolution of human tools (the deliberate planning and making of things to be used by man) as a substitute for animal organs. Progress of man may be seen in his ever-increasing mastery over nature, traced through the evolution of his material conditions of existence.

Both Darwinism and Marxism have the same purpose of explaining the processes enabling living beings to ensure their food and life.

Darwinism shows why those animals best adapted survive in the struggle for life and transplant their more suitable qualities on to their progeny. What is selected and transplanted is their equipment—their organs. These organs are part of the body and are subject to biological laws of heredity and variation.

Marxism, in its examination of man’s evolution, is the study of tools, outside the body. Man’s struggle for existence is carried on with tools. Its evolution is a social phenomenon and not a biological one. Man is not limited by biological restrictions as is the rest of the animal kingdom. Man is not limited to specific modes of life or natural environments. With the aid of tools he adapts himself to varying climates and changing conditions. Whilst his bodily equipment essentially has not changed for tens of thousands of years, his “artificial organs” (tools) have enabled him to adapt to constant and rapid changes. (It might be said that man, with his knowledge of biological laws, is bringing to a close the biological evolution of the previous billions of years. Truly, man is on the verge of becoming master over his own destiny.)

Materialism

The reason why the Marxists of 1859 were among the very first to hail Darwinism was the realization of a landmark in corroborating the validity of the materialist attitude that there are physical-material explanations for all phenomena and that everything is interrelated and in a constant process of motion and change. Modern science is becoming aware that there is neither dualism (the concept of the universe being two-fold, the spirit world and the material world) nor design in nature and that it is monist (the concept that all existence is an interrelated whole with no independent parts).

Coupled together, Darwinism and Marxism were powerful blows against superstition and led the way to the realization of the evolution of existence. Who would deny, today, that there was a time when there were no men or even living organism? Anyone aware of geological truths would not dispute that there was a time without the existence of the earth. Less understood is that there was a time without astronomy and without mass (matter in the form of particles). What more appropriate occasion to point out the spreading recognition of evolutionary processes in all phases of infinite existence than in these comments dealing with Darwinism and Marxism.

We next proceed to the ambitious task of correlating the multitude of scientific explorations and contributions into a unified outlook on science, as an interrelated whole, establishing the patterns of evolutionary processes that bring us up to the present.

Let us summarize a man’s eye view of the evolution of existence in light of today’s science. It is a summary of processes and not mechanisms. It is concerned with generalizations and not specific details. Both Darwinism and Marxism are on sound grounds in their generalizations of processes, yet history may and does reveal errors in their specific details and applications.

All existence may be classified into five major stages: Matter, Astronomy, Geology, Biology and Sociology.

By its very nature, existence is never at rest, it is in a constant process of motion resulting in a parade of changes. The further one goes back, the simpler, more widespread and longer-enduring are the stages. In the evolutionary process, each succeeding progression emerging out of its antecedents becomes more complex and less widespread. Each later stage is but a particular phase of the preceding larger general stage of evolution.

The all-encompassing generalization of all existence is matter, from which rose astronomy. Eventually, geology—the child of astronomy—appeared on the scene, one of its consequences being biology, from which sprang sociology.

The above description of motion and change also applies within the development of each of these great generalized stages of existence, as well.

In a word, we are tracing, here, the evolution of existence from its simpler and earlier form as energy to its latest and most complex form as capitalism.

All existence consists of matter. Matter is not confined to mass, however (things that are tangible and occupy space). Energy is also matter. The very strides in atomic physics are the visible demonstration that both energy and mass are forms of matter—are material. The famous Einstein formula (Energy equals mass times the square of the speed of light) speeded up the actual conversion by man of tangible mass into intangible energy (NOT the release of energy already stored up in mass, such as the heat energy in coal). Likewise, intangible energy can be converted to mass.

The earliest and most abundant phenomenon of existence that we are aware of is energy. [1]

Over countless eons of time, eventually, a single positively-charged proton became the nucleus around which a single, negatively-charged electron revolved. This object was both a form of energy and a form of mass. It is hydrogen, the simplest and the most plentiful (over 99 per cent.) of all the mass in existence.

Evolution can be visualized in the atomic scale which lists elements by the quantities of electrons in their atoms. Elements start with hydrogen (one electron), the first element, then helium (two electrons), all the way up to uranium and the man-made elements.

Eventually, elements combined into molecules. The earliest molecules were gasses, later liquids and the highest form of mass is solids; each form of mass is distinguished from the other by the speed and distance of their electrons in their orbits and also by their organisation within the molecule.

The evolution of matter is from its simplest form as energy to its most complex form as solids.

The embryo of astronomy was nurtured in the evolution of energy into mass. Not until the particle, hydrogen atom, appeared did space come into existence. Space is a relationship of mass, it has no meaning, otherwise.

Evolution in astronomy is traced by densities; the earlier stages being less dense and the higher stages being relatively dense. The most rarified aspect of astronomy is intergalactic space. The space between galaxies constitutes over 99 per cent. of all astronomical existence and illustrates how relatively insignificant is the amount of mass in the cosmos. The density of intergalactic space is estimated to be one hydrogen atom per cubic meter. Man has been unable to even come close to this sort of a vacuum in the laboratory. The next higher stage in astronomy is interstellar space, which consists of one hydrogen atom per cubic centimeter. Then arose planetary nebulae with thousands of hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter and which is quite a vacuum on its own merits. The next higher development in astronomy is stellar atmosphere with its millions of hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter. Finally, came the stars and, in particular, our own star, the sun.

Our vast solar system, with its fantastic distances, is like a small pebble near the outer edge of the Milky Way, our own galaxy. Our sun is but one of billions of suns in the Milky Way. All these stars, put together, are dwarfed into a tiny fragment of the area of our galaxy. Then, there are groups of galaxies forming an astronomical system known as a cluster. Sometimes, these clusters are called universes (the term, “universe” is also used to refer to both a galaxy and the cosmos). There are billions of clusters each with billions of galaxies. And all, clusters and galaxies, revolve around a centre and have orbits. The term, cosmos, usually refers to the entirety of astronomical phenomena.

Isaac Rab

(WSPUS)

(To be concluded next month)

[1] We have no information about evolution within energy but we do know that the properties of energy are related to their frequencies.

Conference Discusses Reforms (1971)

Party News from the May 1971 issue of the Socialist Standard

The 67th Annual Conference was held in London over Easter. Among the items discussed was the Party’s attitude to reforms. Comrade D’Arcy (Camden) said that all reforms had to be paid for out of profits. Those who argued that the workers should struggle for reforms as well as for higher wages implied that what the workers had failed to get through the front door (wage bargaining on the industrial front) they could get through the back door (reforms on the political front). But capitalists did not bring in reforms under political pressure from the working class; they introduced them only when the reforms the workers wanted coincided with capitalist interests. In other cases, they stated that the economic situation did not allow them to introduce the reform and were able to persuade workers to accept this since the workers were themselves capitalist-minded.

Comrade Zucconi (Lewisham) stated that the mark of a genuine Socialist movement was that it did not advocate reforms. The Labour Party and the ILP had at one time professed Socialism as an aim, but were swamped by non-socialists because they concentrated on advocating reforms. There was a real difference between the struggle for reforms and the struggle for higher wages. The wages struggle, as Marx had pointed out, was one the workers had to take part in if they were ever to be fit to conduct the political struggle for Socialism. It was an industrial, not a political, struggle. Reformist action, on the other hand, was necessarily political and involved trying to gain political power in order to introduce reforms. As such it conflicted with the struggle to win political power for Socialism.

Comrade Hardy (Camden) said the Party had never been opposed to reforms as such; we were neither for nor against them. Measures which reduced the workers cost of living, as most reforms aimed to do, did not benefit the working class because their effect was to reduce wages, as Engels had pointed out when he described them as “so-called social reforms”. Such measures also tended to divide the working class, as happened over Rent Control when politicians were able to exploit the feelings of jealousy against controlled tenants amongst workers in uncontrolled houses.

Comrade Steele (Birmingham) said that the Party’s view was not that a Socialist party should not say it supported reforms, but that it should not seek support on the basis of reforms. The German Social Democratic Party had Socialism as an aim, but it went reformist because it admitted reformists to membership rather than because it supported reforms. The traditional industrial/political distinction was breaking down with the emergence of new kinds of working class pressure groups like tenants’ associations and with trade union actions more and more harming other sections of the working class. An increase in the rent was just as much a cut in living standards as a wage cut, and it was inconsistent to say that the only kind of non-socialist working class action Socialists should support was wage-bargaining. In any event, the most we can now do about reforms is to analyse them and show what their overall effect, favourable or unfavourable, might be on the working class.

Comrade Rab (Fraternal Delegate from the World Socialist Party of the United States) said that with the growing role of the State in the economy the unions had increasingly to negotiate with the State. But such negotiations over industrial matters were political only in form; in essence they were still part of the class struggle.

The Conference carried Resolutions re-affirming previous policy statements on reforms (that the Socialist Party of Great Britain does not advocate reforms, but is not opposed to reforms as such and supports the industrial struggle).

Visit to America (1966)

Party News from the December 1966 issue of the Socialist Standard

As I was fortunate enough to be able to visit America and Canada, I was asked by our Executive Committee to be a fraternal delegate to the World Socialist Party of America Conference being held in Boston in September.

I was happy to be able to visit comrades in New York, New Jersey, Long Island, Boston and Toronto, and to meet at the conference comrades from Montreal also.

Members in Boston had arranged for an interview on the Boston Radio network followed by telephone (live) discussions and questions from listeners of the programme. Socialism and other matters concerning workers were discussed—the whole programme lasting nearly two hours. In addition, during the programme we were able to give information about the forthcoming conference, the address of the Headquarters, details of literature and also to mention all the other companion parties.

The conference was held in Boston. As a fraternal delegate I addressed the conference and gave news of the work of the Party in Britain. I also look the chair during one session. Gladys Catt from Toronto was the minute secretary throughout the 3 day conference. Three theoretical discussions were on the Agenda which gave much scope for exchange of views. Two lively and interesting socials were held, one at Headquarters and the other in the home of our comrades Rab and Fenton.

From Boston—a journey to Toronto with the Toronto delegates. I. Rab joined us in Toronto, where members had been hard at work to get publicity and arrange two outdoor meetings. One in the New City Hall Square and the other the following day at Allen Gardens. Newspaper offices were visited and a reporter at one office listened to our case and we spent much time with him. He attended our meeting in Allen Gardens on the Sunday and stayed for two hours taking notes and photographs. A picture and report on the Party were published in the paper.

Both meetings were stimulating and well attended. Several members speaking from the platform including Rab from Boston and myself. There were good literature sales and donations and a great interest was shown, people asking for details of the Party and meetings.

In Boston and New York most of the members have worked for the Party for many years and they are still very active and enthusiastic. In Toronto the members are mostly quite young and it is certain that their energy and enthusiasm will considerably help to propagate the Socialist case.

In all, it was a wonderful experience to join our comrades in America and Canada in their work and their tremendous hospitality left nothing to be desired! There is no doubt that if members from either side of the Atlantic can more frequently visit one another it will give us all a boost to work even harder together to bring Socialism nearer.

Phyllis Howard

How Workers are exploited (1967)

Click on picture to enlarge.

From the September 1967 issue of the Socialist Standard

The Law of Value holds that the values of commodities are determined by the quantities of socially necessary labour time congealed in them and that commodities, in the long run, sell at their values.

This Marxian analysis has stood the test of time. All other theories have been found wanting because they are, primarily, subjective rather than scientific. Two examples will suffice: marginal utility and supply and demand. There are no methods for measuring usefulness in any meaningful sense. Not all persons find fishing rods useful and the values of fishing rods are not governed by personal considerations. As for supply and demand, there still remains a value when supply and demand balance each other out, even though some economists maintain that there is a “natural price” when supply and demand equilibrate. Similar limitations apply to the "scholarly, profound” economic text books so popular today.

The evidence of experience has amply demonstrated that there is a correlation between the socially necessary labour time required by society as a whole for the production of commodities and the values of commodities. Both are not only measurable but labour, applied to natural resources, is the only source of wealth. (And this was recognised long before Marx’s time.)

Let us examine the unit of capitalist society: a commodity—an item of wealth for sale in the market. What distinguishes capitalism from all previous social systems is that buying and selling (the dollar bill) permeates every facet of life whether it be a rare art treasure or a loaf of bread; bibles or whiskey.

In the chart above, note the centre block. It represents the commodity. All items to the left of the block indicate hours (units) of socially necessary labour time. All items to the right of the block indicate units of value expressed in dollars.

For purposes of illustration, let us assume we are analyzing a $16 raincoat that took 16 hours socially necessary labour time to produce. Each hourly unit of labour time added $1 in value.

The manufacturer had purchased raw materials and machinery for the production of raincoats. The raw material that went into this coat cost $7 and the depreciation of the machine allocated to the coat was $1. It required 8 hours socially necessary labour time to produce the portion of the raw materials and machinery used up in making the coat. This $8 value was transferred to the value of the coat. It was a mere transfer because 8 hours socially necessary labour time was stored up in it before its use in the raincoat factory.

In order to convert the raw materials and machinery into a finished product, the manufacturer must hire labour power. Machines and raw materials, by themselves, are incapable of producing raincoats. It required 8 hours living labour to make this conversion. Living labour added $8 NEW value to the coat.

The total value of the coat is $16 produced in 16 hours socially necessary labour time.

In order to produce commodities, factory owners must buy such other commodities as raw materials, machinery and labour power (the muscles and brains of workers).

Labour power is a commodity owned by workers, who sell it in the market to capitalists. The value of labour power is determined in the same way as all other commodities: the socially necessary labour it takes to produce it, in other words the socially necessary labour time it takes to produce what a worker needs in terms of food, clothing, shelter, raising a family, training, minor luxuries, etc. This value is expressed in wages.

In the chart, the value of the commodity labour power is represented as being $4. At the end of 4 hours, the worker has created $4 worth of new value (replaced the value of his labour power). Everything should be even-steven. He had fulfilled his obligations and he should be through for the day.

But, lest we forget, labour power and labour time are not synonymous terms. Labour power is a commodity that the worker sells to the capitalist. Actually, labour power is really the only commodity that is exclusively his. However, once he sells it, it becomes the property of the capitalist to use as he sees fit. At the end of 4 hours, the raincoat is only half finished. The capitalist can only sell completed raincoats, which require 8 hours living labour to make.

Here comes the great discovery of Marx: How profits are made by selling commodities at their value and how the workers are exploited at the point of production.

The cost of production was $12 ($7 for raw materials, $1 for wear and tear of machines and $4 for labour power). The value of the commodity is $16. The 4 hours labour time the capitalist did not have to pay for are essential for profiting commodities and constitute the surplus value which belongs to the capitalist class. There is a doggerel called Surplus Value that goes:

The merchant calls it profits
  And he winks the other eye;
The banker calls it interest
  And heaves a cheerful sigh.
The landlord calls it rent,
  As he tucks it in his bag,
But the honest old burglar,
  He simply calls it swag.

Within capitalism, wealth assumes three basic forms: 1. Wealth, as such—things that satisfy human needs and social wants, part and parcel of that social animal, man. 2. In capitalism, wealth takes on the form of commodities — goods for sale in the market. 3. Likewise, wealth, within capitalism, also takes on the form of capital—wealth used to create more wealth with a view to profit. 

What is produced in capitalism is not primarily wealth to satisfy needs and wants (use values); it is surplus value for the capitalist class. It can be said that the capitalist class is a consuming class; it consumes the chief product of capitalism—profits. The workers, like the machines and the cattle, merely consume the necessities to keep them in good working order.

The ownership of the means of producing wealth (capital) rests in the hands of the capitalist class. By virtue of this ownership they are enabled to extract surplus value out of the sweat and blood of the working class.

The mechanism for accomplishing this objective is variable capital—the self-expanding capacity of labour power to create a value greater than itself. As noted above, the raw materials and machinery merely transfer their own value to the finished commodity. That is why they are described as constant capital. 

This chart serves a useful function in the movement for Socialism. It gives a visual picture of basic Marxian economics and presents a panorama of the Marxian Law of Value. For over thirty-five years it has been very effective for use in economic classes. It has been instrumental in encouraging further reading of the Marxian classics and paved the way for a clearer grasp of their contents.

Isaac Rab

(WSPUS)

The Life and Letters of Isaac Rab (2011)

Book Review from issue 22 of the World Socialist Review

Role Modeling Socialist Behavior: The Life and Letters of Isaac Rab by Karla Doris Rab,  504 pages. Lulu Press. $23.16.

For most of the twentieth century, Isaac Rab (1893 – 1986) was well known in the Boston area as a socialist soap-box orator, lecturer, and teacher. He was a founding member of the World Socialist Party of the United States and a central figure in the Boston Local for many years.

In this book, our comrade Karla Rab, who is the granddaughter of Isaac Rab, tells the story of his life and presents a large selection of his surviving correspondence as well as many photographs. She draws on her own reminiscences and on those of many others who knew her grandfather.

Isaac Rab was born into an immigrant socialist family on December 22, 1893. He devoted his whole life to the cause until his death on New Year’s Eve 1986. In 1916 he helped form the WSP from the left wing of the Michigan Socialist Party in Detroit. Later he settled in Boston, where he organized the Boston Local of the WSPUS in 1932. He also taught classes on Marxian economics for other organizations, including the Communist Party, the Proletarian Party, and various Trotskyist groupings.

Karla Rab’s book is, of course, about much more than her grandfather as an individual. It is the first history of the World Socialist Movement in the United States. Its importance is great but subtle. It is often said that history is written by the winners. Even the obscure history of North American left politics has its hierarchy. Credibility is given only to “winners” such as the Industrial Workers of the World, the Communist Party, and the Congress of Industrial Organizations – even though many of the problems that plague the workers' movement are the logical outcomes of their policies.



Social democrats and Leninists like to portray smaller groups like the WSPUS as “isolated sects.” And as the history of the working class movement has been written mainly by them, who is to challenge what they say? However, with the collapse of the left in the United States there has been a reassessment of what various political organizations actually accomplished. For example, in their study of the Auto Workers Union [1] the 1930s era Trotskyists Genora and Sol Dollinger conclude that the Communist “leaders” of the Flint sit-down strikes only succeeded thanks to assistance from the Proletarian Party, which has usually been derided as an isolated sect.

The book under review proves that the WSPUS, while small, was hardly isolated. Rab’s letters demonstrate involvement in the United Auto Workers and the Typographers' Union (a model of democratic unionism) as well as discussions and debates among a wide range of left groups. Among the members of the WSPUS there were highly experienced class warriors. William Pritchard and Jack McDonald had helped lead the Western Labour Rebellion in Canada. Sam Orner had been an IWW organizer in the hard metal mines of the American Rockies as well as the leader of a famous strike of New York City taxi cab drivers in 1934. (He was the model for the character Lefty in Clifford Odet’s famous play, Waiting for Lefty.) The Detroit Local of the WSPUS had members who had helped form the United Auto Workers and played roles in the educational services of the most militant UAW locals (Irving Canter, Joe Brown, David Davenport, Frank Marquart). [2]

Another important thing about Karla Rab’s book is that it shows how Rab organized his political activity. His letters are a lesson of lasting value in how to approach the personal as well as the intellectual and educational aspects of building a movement for socialism. I have forty years of experience in organizing community groups and labor unions as well as political groups. I have found this book a first-class resource and have dipped into it repeatedly since first reading it in draft form.

FN Brill 

Notes

[1] Soll Dollinger and Genora Johnson Dollinger, Not Automatic: Women and the Left in the Forging of the Auto Workers Union (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2000).

[2] See: Frank Marquart, An Auto Worker’s Journal: The UAW from Crusade to One-Party Union (Pennsylvania State University Press, 1976).

A Visit to the U.S.A. (1959)

Party News from the November 1959 issue of the Socialist Standard

Boston

After an all night plane journey I arrived in Boston early on Saturday morning, the 5th September.

The Confcrence commenced at 3 p.m. with Comrade Fenning in the Chair. Telegrams were read from the associated parties and members in different parts of the world. There were about 25 delegates present representing Boston, Rhode Island, New York, Detroit and Los Angeles. I was the only companion party representative present.

The report of the National Secretary, Comrade Gloss, was read, which stated that the Party had not only held its own, but had made some progress. The ''Western Socialist" had been issued regularly and also 100,000 leaflets. Finance had greatly improved. Not many outdoor propaganda meetings had been held, but there were plans for an improvement. Unfortunately the Party did not appear to be attracting sufficient young people. There had been a considerable growth in correspondence with companion-parties and sympathisers from all over the world.

Reports from various locals (branches) were given which showed uneven results. Los Angeles, in particular, had been extremely active with outdoor meetings, attending other groups to take part in discussions and distributing a considerable quantity of literature. Comrades Evans and Miller were addressing meetings regularly in the Los Angeles Area.

The circulation of the “Western Socialist" had increased.

A resolution was passed that there be a monthly issue of the “Western Socialist," commencing with the January issue. A resolution was passed to reconsider a previous resolution that had opposed the acceptance of articles from non-members. Both these resolutions were the subject of considerable debate.

There was also considerable discussion on opening up new areas to propaganda, and it was agreed that Comrades Rab and Orner start the ball rolling by a visit to Chicago in the Spring, and other places be included as circumstances permitted. 

Many other matters were discussed at length, but there is not space to include them. At the end of the Conference there was a discussion under the title “Good and Welfare.” This ranged over many matters and, to me, was the most interesting part of the Conference, as well as the most enthusing. At 2 a.m., on the morning after the Conference, I heard the tape of part of this discussion. It was remarkable how clearly the voices came through, although the speakers were speaking from different parts of the hall. Altogether, I thought it was a very good Conference and much useful work was done.

On the first evening there was a dinner and a social gathering—many more members, and sympathisers coming along for the purpose—making it a very jolly evening. On the third day there was a picnic in the morning in a park just outside of Boston, and in the afternoon a meeting on Boston Common—where the heat was stifling. Comrades Morrison, Miller, Gloss and Orner spoke, but it was hard work under the circumstances.

Through the herculean efforts of Comrade Gloss, who fixed the times with clock-like accuracy, a speaking tour had been arranged for me, which included Los Angeles, Vancouver, Victoria, Winnipeg, New York and, finally, Boston. 1 was met on time at every point.

Los Angeles

On Tuesday, the 8th September, I left for Los Angeles by jet plane. It took only 5½ hours to do the journey. In Los Angeles Comrade Evans had fixed up six meetings and a TV appearance.

On September 9th I spoke to an audience of about 70 at Long Beach Open Forum, which is by the sea. I spoke for half-an-hour and then answered questions for half-an-hour—it was quite lively. The same evening I went to the house of an old member of the S.P.G.B. —Bob Housley—and answered questions until late at night to a group gathered there.

On the 11th September I went to Long Beach Open Forum again to answer criticisms of my previous talk and answer further questions. Again, it was a lively meeting, although only about 75 present. The size of audience was affected by the heat. Many found it too hot to sit out in the open at a meeting. All the time I was in Los Angeles the temperature was around the 100° mark—and smog added to the discomfort.

On the evening of the 11th I addressed a gathering of about 60 people, aged between 20 and 40, under the strangest circumstances I have ever spoken. It was a gathering of the Unitarian Laymen's League, and we had been invited to a steak dinner beforehand. It turned out to be a Barbecue, held in a large and pleasant garden where the steaks were grilled over three fires. When the dinner was over—at 8 p.m.—the group gathered around me in a semi-circle in the gloom. 1 spoke from beside one of the fires and the audience were just shapes in the darkness. They kept me on my feet for over two hours—speaking and answering questions. They were a mixed group of lawyers, doctors mechanics, teachers, and so on, and the questions were good and interesting—generally covering conditions in England. It was again a very hot night--96° in the house, I was told.

On the 12th there was a meeting in Comrade Evans garden—it was too hot to hold it in the house. He expected about 50 to 60 to come along, but only 20 showed up. A certain Max Shactman was speaking in Los Angeles, and, as Evans place was twelve miles out of town, the majority stayed in town to attend that meeting. However, though the meeting was small it went off alright.

On Sunday, the 13th, 1 addressed a meeting at Santa Monica in the morning—that was about 30 miles from Comrade Evans house, where 1 was staying. It was still very hot and only 40 or so turned up, but there were good questions and some opposition.

On TV

In the evening I was in Hollywood on TV for half-an-hour. It was on Dan Lundberg's Channel 13 at 9 o'clock, I saw Lundberg at his office two hours beforehand and, at his request, gave him a brief history of the Socialist movement. His questions on TV were all concerned with the Socialist attitude to various problems, such as War, Russia, Imperialism, reforms, and so on. A tape recording was taken of the interview and a selection from it will appear in the next issue of the Western Socialist.

Vancouver

On the 14th I travelled north to Vancouver, stopping at San Francisco to meet Comrade Macdonald, with whom I spent a very interesting two hours. When I reached Vancouver I found that Comrade Roddy had done the best piece of one-man advertising I had seen. Wherever I went I saw in shop windows bills advertising the forthcoming meeting. He also chased reporters and radio people so successfully that the two principal papers there printed reports of the meeting; I had ten minutes on the radio and my comments were included in a radio news broadcast. Comrade Sid Earp took care of excellent accommodation for me in a hotel, and Comrades Roddy and Ahrens took care of the arrangements for the only meeting I had in Vancouver. The meeting was held on the 18th. It was a very wet night, which affected the attendance. Seventy turned up; there were plenty of questions and a little opposition—mainly from the C.C.F. (a similar body to the Labour Party here). The collection at the meeting was 25 dollars, five subscriptions were taken, and some literature was sold.

I had discussions with members and sympathisers and spent a considerable time with Comrades Johnny and Margaret Ahrens, who were exceedingly hospitable to me. It appears to me that Vancouver is a very favourable place for the Socialist Party of Canada to concentrate upon. Comrade Ahrens and Roddy are two knowledgeable and dependable comrades and there should soon be a good centre of activity there.

Victoria

Whilst at Vancouver I spent two days visiting Victoria. Here again I witnessed an excellent piece of one-man advertising by Comrade Jenkins, very similar to Comrade Roddy's efforts in Vancouver. Comrade Luff, who is getting on in years, had been active in Victoria for many years and has spread the Socialist message there very thoroughly. Comrade Jenkins arranged an interview with the local paper which gave me considerable space on the front page.

Comrades Luff and Jenkins arranged the meeting, which appeared to me to be about the best one 1 had during the tour. There were 70 present in a small hall. The meeting lasted two hours and forty minutes, and there were numerous good questions. One sub. was taken at the meeting, 10s. 6d. worth of literature sold, and a collection of £7 10s.— about the same as. at Vancouver. Subsequently, four of those who attended the meeting (young fellows) have formed a class at Comrade Luff's house. A complete tape recording of the meeting was taken which I have borrowed and taken home with me. In Los Angeles, Vancouver and Victoria, I met many very old members of the Socialist Party of Canada.

Winnipeg

On the 22nd I left Vancouver for Winnipeg, where I received the same warm and hospitable reception as I had done on my visit two years ago.

All the members and sympathisers combined to make my visit as enjoyable as possible.

Unfortunately they have difficulty in attracting young people and the attendance at the two meetings I addressed was small but interested. It seems, somehow, that Winnipeg is now out of the hub of political activity. However, they are holding regular meetings and distributing large numbers of leaflets, a selection of which have already been printed in the Socialist Standard. 

New York

On the 30th September I left Winnipeg for New York, where I stayed with Comrade Sam Orner. On the next evening I went with him to Union Square, where he spoke for well over two hours to a good audience who plied him with plenty of questions. Union Square is somewhat like the meetings and discussions at Marble Arch in London, and is the best meeting place I came across in the tour. It should be an excellent propaganda spot for the New York comrades. Comrade Davis did yeoman service, distributing leaflets advertising the indoor meeting the following night.

The indoor meeting was held in a room on the 14th floor of a building at the corner of Union Square. It seemed to me that the inaccessibility of the meeting place detracted from the attendance—which was not large. However, it was lively, with good questions and discussion.

On the 2nd October I returned to Boston where I addressed one meeting composed of members and sympathisers and spoke for a quarter of an hour on Boston Common. The rest of the time I recuperated at the home of Comrade Rab, where my stay was made as comfortable and pleasant as it could possibly be. On the 6th October I regretfully returned to London.

One matter I have overlooked. Comrade Smith of Los Angeles took an excellent recording of the TV interview and followed me by bus to Vancouver to present me with the tape. For this I am much beholden to him. It was played over at Vancouver, Victoria and Winnipeg and heard by a large number of members and sympathisers.

In conclusion, I would like to thank all the American and Canadian members and sympathisers for the warm way they received me. and the manner in which they went out of their way to make my visit as successful and pleasant as possible. I have only mentioned a few of the names of the many who helped me.

Gilmac

Obituary: Karla Rab, 1940-2017 (2018)

Obituary from the March 2018 issue of the Socialist Standard

Karla Rab died on September 15th at age 77 in her Somerville, Massachusetts home.

A fifth-generation socialist, she learned ‘by osmosis’ that the most worthwhile cause to struggle for is to wake up the working class to its enlightened self-interest — the immediate abolition of capital’s anachronistic employment system.

She imbibed the influence of a socialist family upbringing from her earliest years, and went on to make it her vocation on joining the World Socialist Party founded in 1916 by her grandfather Isaac Rab and others. She was a practical visionary who took an active organizing role in party activities; after some re-organization c. 2000, she performed her role as Postal Corresponding Secretary with gusto. In 2010, fulfilling a promise she had given Rab to 'do something' with his voluminous correspondence, she published Role-Modeling Socialist Behavior: The Life and Letters of Isaac Rab, a multi-faceted undertaking at once a biography, a history and a memoir. Her natural editorial talents were appreciated by all her collaborators.

Everything of any value, she knew, starts with the human imagination, independently of reality, as long as you plug it back into the real world. Karla grew up immersed in a culture of optimism. She knew she really could make the world a better place, not just in a moral sense but as an actual historical reality.

And there was a way to achieve this goal. All you had to do was get everyone to understand that the world humans have evolved, the terrible mess we have made of human society, has a tangible and specific cause. While we have improved some aspects of our existence, we have done so at the expense of our better nature, and the 'progress' we imagine is inherent in our civilization is a process of tying society in knots. Humans have gotten themselves into a progressively knottier condition, and the end results are beginning to look pretty grim.

Karla learned as a child that the way to cut the Gordian knot is to re-imagine a society that once again returned to a need-oriented model of human nature in which people everywhere understand the stake they have in each other’s well-being. This is something we all know how to do, but which ever since agriculture was introduced we have been educating each other to forget. But it takes only a little self-enlightenment to break this momentum.

Since there can be no limits to how this reawakening takes place, our destiny as humans is to do this re-thinking of ourselves on a global scale. We all have it in us to retrace our steps and 'get back to the garden.' It is emotionally and intuitively easy, if you just listen to yourself and keep the courage of your convictions.

Like her grandfather, she was an incurable optimist who believed humanity still has a future. Pessimism is merely the long shadow of ignorance. The choice is clear.

R. E.

A Socialist Tour (1954)

From the December 1954 issue of the Socialist Standard

The following brief account of the visit to this country of two American colleagues is reproduced from the September-October Western Socialist as [it's] likely to be of interest to our readers—Ed. Com.)

Fulfilling the ambition of many years, two American comrades took a two-week trip to Britain to meet the members of the Socialist Party of Great Britain and participate in their activities.

Never to them did life in the Socialist movement seem more momentous and meaningful than those two weeks.

Here are a few of the highlights.

While flying across the ocean, the comrades engaged a fellow plane passenger in an intensive (12-hour) explanation of Socialism. When the plane landed at Shannon, Eire, he gave them a dollar for a Western Socialist subscription; a few hours later, when the plane landed at London, he decided to join company with them for the day, meet the SPGB comrades, and attend the outdoor meeting at Hyde Park. 

From the time they landed at London airport, and were met by two wonderfully patient comrades with motorcar and motorcycle and driven to an inviting home for a most refreshing reception, until they left Prestwick airport two weeks later with friendly farewells from Glasgow comrades, they were simply overwhelmed by the sheer warmth and cordiality of the comrades. Everywhere they went they received a grand welcome, and the hospitality in the homes was genuinely gracious. A welcoming social was held at the Head Office, London, at which about 150 comrades exuberantly expressed themselves in group dancing, singing and discussing—for a most enjoyable evening.

The afternoon of their arrival, the comrades headed for their first outstanding destination—Hyde Park. There they met a goodly number of comrades and saw some SPGB speakers in action. They had little time to listen for, in response to persistent requests, they took the stand to speak to large and attentive audiences. The crowds at this and other outdoor meetings at which the comrades spoke, looked and acted much like those on Boston Common and asked similar questions. However, at every meeting, they asked about conditions in U.S., the possibility of Socialist expression, the influence of “McCarthyism.” Opposition came mainly from a few vociferous Communists; heckling was far less than anticipated, and there was usually a round of applause for Socialism.

Starting with the meeting at Hyde Park, the comrades were almost completely absorbed in Socialist activities. In the fifteen days in Britain they spoke at eight outdoor meetings (Hyde Park 2, Lincoln's Inn Field 3, East End Market 1, Portsmouth 1, Glasgow 1), ten SPGB Branch meetings, one Executive Committee meeting, and a lecture at Workers' Open Forum, Glasgow. Besides these organized meetings, there were numerous group discussions with comrades until the wee hours of most mornings. It was inspiring and instructive to listen to and participate in the critical and interesting discussions on various aspects of Socialist theories and analyses. At every branch meeting the need was stressed for closer co-operation, correspondence between the overseas comrades, articles for the WS. Emphasized was the fact that WE ARE AS ONE and WE ARE NOT ALONE.

While in London an extremely encouraging message was received from a Glasgow comrade stating that a 17-year-old member had just appeared before a Tribunal and had been exempted from military service. “Part of my defense on behalf of the comrade was the production of a copy of the January, 1945 Western Socialist (in which appeared a most effective article dealing with a Socialist analysis of war by the young defendant's mother). All the Glasgow members present at the Tribunal agreed the WS was a very powerful card to play."

A meeting with two members of the Editorial Committee, both of whom had helped edit the Socialist Standard for more than 30 years, proved very valuable. There was an exchange of information, helpful suggestions were offered, and closer cooperation in the future was assured. Most important was the fact that surplus articles would be made available for The Western Socialist thus enhancing the possibility of its monthly issuance.

To reciprocate in a small way for the splendid cooperation by the SPGB with the WSP throughout its existence, the American comrades made a donation toward launching a fund to employ a full-time paid organizer. This project, which was presented to the Executive Committee for consideration, received a very favourable response wherever the comrades travelled. Incidentally, while in Glasgow, a comrade made a generous donation to the WSP.

A fascinating trip through the heart of England was made possible by the splendid cooperation of a Lancashire comrade who drove 215 miles to London in his “jalopy" and then travelled back with the comrades through Oxford, Warwick, Stratford on Avon, Litchfield, Kenilworth, and the Midlands to Burnley where wonderful hospitality awaited them. While plenty of the countryside was beautiful, a perpetual poll of blackness and misery seemed to hang over the entire industrial area. Much seemed to remain just as Engels described it in 1844. The stone barrack-line slums were everywhere; the smoke seemed to darken everything.

The trip to Burnley made possible a hasty visit to Manchester where, within a few hours, a meeting at the home of a comrade was arranged. About 25, among them a charter member of the SPGB, met for a stimulating discussion of Socialist problems.

One of the most inspiring incidents of the visit took place at a comrade's home. There, in a kitchen, a group of comrades from England, Ireland, Scotland and United States discussed their common problems, spoke the same Socialist language, adhered to the same principles. Before leaving for the Workers’ Open Forum meeting, they stood around a table, firmly grasped hands in a symbol of international solidarity, and expressed the hope for the speedy realization of an international Socialist conference.

Climaxing the trip (only a few hours before plane time) was a meeting at the Workers' Open Forum, Glasgow, addressed by the two comrades. The hall was jampacked by more than 450 workers who, except for some heated opposition in question and discussion by a small group of Communists and Anti-Pariiamentarians, enthusiastically received and loudly applauded the Socialist case.

After the meeting the comrades were surrounded by well-wishers, and more than a hundred lined the side-walk to cheer them on their way. En route to the airport, a fifteen-minute stop was made at a comrade’s home, where a goodly group of Glasgow members, who had been present at the meeting, expressed great enthusiasm, sang comradely songs, and further cheered the comrades on their way. Awaiting them at the airport, 30 miles away, was another group of Glasgow comrades who stayed with them for a grand confabulation until enplaning time, almost 3 a.m.

In a letter recently received from a comrade at Burnley, Lancashire, the Mowing estimate of the trip is expressed:

   “That your visit to England and Scotland aroused tremendous interest is beyond doubt. In London and Manchester (and over the 'phone to Glasgow) we learned from many comrades something of the great enthusiasm which is but one of the results of your tireless endeavours to visit as many branches and meetings as was possible during your all too brief stay. . . .  Our Comrades in America will feel tremendously encouraged when they realise the full import of your visit to Britain. I feel sure that I am merely expressing what hundreds here are already thinking and saying, that your momentous visit must and will be the forerunner of many more involving many comrades. And equally important, it must be two way traffic, and who knows?—maybe it won't be very long before delegates from all the Companion Parties will be converging on some city in Europe or America for the first Socialist International Conference."

George Gloss