The Labor Advocate

III.

To the Editor of the Labor Advocate:

Is the Socialist Party about to abandon its time-tested policy of non-interference in the affairs of industrial organizations, a policy that has led us on to considerable success?

Shall we forget the experience of De Leon when organizing the S. T. & L. A. and with loud acclaim declared that he was going to use it to beat the "brains out of trades unionism;" he evidently forgot the old Bible saying that reads "They that take the sword shall perish by the sword:" this doughty champion of labor was quickly hoisted on his own petard and the Socialist Labor party was relegated to the limbo of the past; so much for the mistake of DeLeon.

No, comrades, no entangling alliances with other parties, and no entangling disputes with other labor organizations; "Hands Off" and "The Middle of the Road" has been our motto and the wisdom of experience will dictate a continuance of that safe and sane policy; a reversal of which would stop the growth of the party and paralyze its activities.

The only safe course to pursue, comrades, is to keep the middle of the road: on one side the ultra-conservative A. F. of L., on the other the ultra-radical I. W. W. and it will be the part of wisdom if the Socialist party keeps its hands clean of meddling with the program of either.

Suppose the I. W. W. does carry a chip on his shoulder, must we be led into an acceptance of the challenge and become a party to a disgraceful brawl? We have stood the sneers of the A. F. of L., can't we stand the same from the I. W. W., especially as we are now stronger and in a more secure position; or must we jeopardize what we have gained and our success in the future by listening to those comrades who go about with their pockets bulging with defamatory I. W. W. literature? If they call us dirty names does it follow that we must stoop to a lower level by bandying epithets?

Personally I believe syndicalism is a dream and sabotage a vicious principle to advocate: still I have believed that many things will be tested experimentally, and that there will be more than one road leading into the co-operative commonwealth.

The I. W. W. will learn that we will meet with less resistance on the political road, and that it will be well while suffering great injustice to cultivate a deal of patience and not run up against the policeman's club or the gun of the militiaman which he will surely do if he attempts to practice too much "direct action."

But ours is a political party not built to antagonize the church as did the Appeal (and lost prestige by so doing): neither is to fight the workers organized on the industrial field: we have one common enemy, the capitalist system, and the comrades who are trying to switch the fight to other issues will, I believe, find themselves in a hopeless minority.

J. W. H.