Page:Solomon Abramovich Lozovsky - The World's Trade Union Movement (1924).pdf/105

 Rh and for connection between the labor organizations of the different countries before the beginning of any military action.

At the time of the past war the struggle of the revolutionary workers against it was difficult because Europe was divided by a line of flame into two parts, and it was very difficult to keep the workers of the two combatant countries informed about the actual situation. In this respect the bourgeois press played a tremendous role: It was in the full sense of the word the "Fourth Estate," as it perfectly performed its function of creating hatred between the working masses, and of smothering class consciousness. We should learn the lessons of this imperialist war and should organize to counteract the bourgeois press.

These are, in a general way, the problems which confronted us in the struggle against war. Of course we never reject such action as the general strike, but we consider it in a practical light. While the reformists at the Hague recited on the theme of declaring a strike in case of war, we said: It's a good idea, but, in order that this strike may be a success, it should be prepared beforehand. And for this purpose it is needful to conduct a struggle against all nationalist superstitions, it is needful to break all coalitions with the bourgeoisie.

It is quite clear that as long as labor organizations are connected with their bourgeoisie, the latter will use these connections in every way possible for the military mobilization of the working class. Thus, the problem of promulgating the general strike should logically be the result of the work of the revolutionary trade unions and the Communist Party, the work aimed at the overthrow of the bourgeoisie.

In connection with the question of anti-war propaganda, is the idea of disarmament. Stating the point of view of the Amsterdam International on disarmament, we have already mentioned our point of view on that question. We consider the abstract idea of disarmament as a very injurious one, anti-proletarian and anti-communist; because we are not for the disarming but the arming of the working class. In this respect it is interesting to note the stand of some pacifists.

When we had to conduct a struggle against the right wing of the French Communist Party, we had to pay attention to the fact that even it was infected with pacifist notions. Thus for instance, one of the former leaders of the party expressed his opinion that it would be easier to fight against war if there would be no standing armies—not even a revolutionary one. In this sentence is contained the crux of pacifism.

In reality what is this problem for the working class? Of course, it is not the simple blowing up of all guns, tanks, etc., but in seeing to it