The Daily Worker

throughout Russia. They furthermore are remitted taxes,

and the rates they obtain for the education of their children

are at reduced costs, or entirely free; they pay less for their

accommodations, and less for their food while having the first

call on both. They enjoy cheaper travelling facilities, on

tram, train, bus or whatever local means of locomotion may

be available and in the big towns are supplied with open air

concerts and wireless apparatus on a scale and system far

ahead of anything we in Western Europe possess.

Not bad, at all, is it? The workers and peasants of the Soviet

Union are the government and privileged classes. Well, that's

exactly what is meant by the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Strict and Sound Financial System.

There was a good deal of talk recently about the soundness of

the financial system in the Soviet Union. Some anti-Soviet pa-

pers went even as far as "forecasting" a collapse of the Soviet cur-

rency.

Well, they couldn't forecast the collapse of the government

so they attempted to envisage a collapse of the currency. But that,

too, did not materialize. Read the report of Baldwin's delegates.

It says:

The present fiscal policy is sound, in fact it is almost

austere. A periodical balance of the trade budget is produced

in which the probable exports for the next few months are

forecast.

And again:

The 1926 budget calls for a revenue of $2,000,000,000,

and there is no doubt that the receipts will reach this figure.

The Soviet national debt is $254,000,000, or about one-half

of a month's normal revenue.

Compare this with the financial state of most of the European

countries. Everyone of them is running to the United States for

money. Everyone of them is getting it. And yet, how many of the

European powers are able to balance their budgets? How many of

them can keep their currencies at par? Not even the strong powers,

France least of all.

But the Soviet Union, without any assistance from the outside,

in fact despite all obstructions from the outside, is managing to

maintain a financial system which even British conservatives must

designate as sound and austere.

A Proper Pre-Election Idea.

Now, in the face of the approaching congressional elections, it is

hereby suggested that the workers and farmers of the United

States give a little thought to the report of the British conservatives.

It contains a vital and practical lesson, which is this: When you

live under a government which takes its dictates from the capitalists.

like in the United States, you have one situation. On the other

hand, when you live under a government which takes its dictates

from the workers and poor farmers, like in the Soviet Union, you

have an entirely different situation. One is good for the capitalists

and is maintained by them. The other is good for the overwhelm-

ing majority of the population and should be brought about by

them.

The road towards it is independent political action. Break with

the old capitalist parties. Form a party of your own. And wage

a systematic struggle for a workers' and farmers' government in the

United States.

MATTHEW WOLL, first vice-president of the American Feder-

ation of Labor, has made a statement the other day that the

workers of the United States must support the farmers. He said

in so many words that organized labor is going to support them.

This is a good statement as far as it goes. But it does not go far

enough to produce practical results either for the workers or the

farmers in the coming elections.

The Workers (Communist) Party is advocating an alliance

between the workers and poor farmers against the capitalist parties.

The proposal is that the workers organize politically, put forward

their own labor candidates and wage their own independent polit

ical battles. And, furthermore, that the farmer organizations also

put forward their own candidates against those of the capitalist par-

ties. And that in doing so the workers and poor farmers make an

alliance to fight jointly against their common enemy.

What does Matthew Woll say about this practical proposi-

tion?

Alex. Bittelman.