University of Houston, 4333 University Drive, Houston TX 77204-2000, (713) 743-1050.
© 2013 University of Houston. All rights reserved.
| Title | Party ownership of the press |
| Alternative Title | Party ownership of the press: historic documents relating to the establishing of the principles involved |
| Contributor (LCNAF) |
|
| Publisher | New York Labor News Company |
| Place of Creation (TGN) |
|
| Date | 1931 |
| Description | Articles by De Leon reprinted from The People (later the Weekly people)--and the Daily people, voicing the interests of the working class and the Socialist Labor Party. |
| Subject.Topical (LCSH) |
|
| Subject.Name (LCNAF) |
|
| Subject.Geographic (TGN) |
|
| Genre (AAT) |
|
| Language | English |
| Type (DCMI) |
|
| Original Item Extent | 32 pages: portrait; 24 cm |
| Original Item Location | JK2391.S7N4 1931 |
| Original Item URL | http://library.uh.edu/record=b8304494~S5 |
| Original Collection | Socialist and Communist Pamphlets |
| Digital Collection | Socialist and Communist Pamphlets |
| Digital Collection URL | http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/scpamp |
| Repository | Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries |
| Repository URL | http://libraries.uh.edu/branches/special-collections |
| Use and Reproduction | In Copyright: This item is protected by copyright. Copyright to this resource is held by the creator or current rights holder, and the resource is provided here for educational purposes. It may not be reproduced or distributed in any format without permission of the copyright owner. Users assume full responsibility for any infringement of copyright or related rights. |
| File Name | index.cpd |
| Title | Image 24 |
| Format (IMT) |
|
| File Name | uhlib_11131832_023.jpg |
| Transcript | Agricultural Department, etc., etc. These are no accidents. A movement such as ours can be truly at the heart of those to whom, whether born here or not, America is their home; it can be truly at the heart of those only who look for no favors from the foe. To all others the movement can only be a sport or pastime. To such the aggressive, uncompromising spirit of the Party is either a "nuisance" or a hindrance to their schemes. None such can have any faith in the S. L. P., all such are bound eventually to run up against those who DO have faith in the S. L. P. and an "unpatchable- up" conflict is inevitable. When such a conflict does finally break out, it breaks out with force, and must be fought out to a definite settlement. The element that HAS faith in the Party is not of a temper to allow itself to be hamstrung, nor is it in the movement for the fun of the thing. In this connection, the "violence of The People's attack" has been complained about. How silly! The People is not a monthly magazine for abstract philosophy, it is a weapon for concrete warfare. Whatever interferes with the sweep of the sword only adds to its vehemence. Let me initiate you into a bit of my experience: It was in '94. The People's party of this city was trying to harmonize the "reform forces," and Section New York was invited to a conference. At the conference were, besides, the Pops, free-traders, single- taxers, prohibitionists, and D.A. 49 of the then K. of L. I don't know how it came about but Section New York elected a delegation, Jonas and myself among them. As soon as the conference met, the discussion broke out upon the platform to be adopted; harmony was evidently impossible among such incongruous elements. Then rose Jonas and, to my surprise, proposed that the Pops and we agree upon a common ticket for the approaching campaign. I felt a chill run down my back. Had Jo- nas's proposition prevailed it would have been the death of the S.L.P.; the Party could not have survived the spectacle of its candidates standing on the Populist ballot, and Populist candidates on ours; with the inevitable downfall of Populism, the S. L. P. would have been dragged down too, it would have been the pitiable thing that it was after a similar experience by the Jonas element with the Greenback party; the work would have had to be started all over anew. Jonas's proposition failed, and the conference finally broke up for good. But the injury done to the Party by Jonas's proposition, THAT did not pass off so quickly. We Socialists were at the time struggling in D.A. 49 for the supremacy that we finally won, and Jonas's proposition acted there like a stick thrown between our legs. It matters not how violently a non- Socialist adversary may oppose a Socialist, provided he knows that he is opposing Socialism; if, however, he imagines that what the Socialist speaks for is not Socialism, then our work of agitation becomes infinitely harder. Jonas's proposition did that. In D.A. 49 workingmen stood up— our new esteemed Comrade Kinneal- ly, here present, among them—who pointed the finger at me declaring: "Socialism is not against fusion; Jonas is for fusion, and he is a Socialist of old standing; your opposition 22 |