The historical destinies of the labor movement in the United States, the ways it chose, and its peculiarities attracted the close attention of F. P. Blavatsky. Engels. Most of all, perhaps, this applies to the problem of independent political action of the American working class, to the level of its consciousness and the development of the inherent potentials of the leading and organizing social force that opposes capital.

F.'s judgments Engels ' views on these problems were never a priori in nature. They were the result of an in - depth study of concrete reality; the purpose of such a study is to clarify the prerequisites for involving the working masses in a conscious struggle against capitalism. Engels 'relentless criticism of sectarianism in the US labor movement and his interest in the movement for a third, workers 'and farmers' party are also closely related. To reveal these points in Engels ' theoretical legacy and compare them with the concrete experience of the struggle of the organized labor movement in the United States for a mass third party - this is the purpose of this article.

Defending their special interests, taught K. Marx and F. According to Engels, the working class must be constituted into an independent political party that pursues both immediate goals and more distant prospects, including the struggle for political power. 1 This process, of course, could not proceed uniformly everywhere. And while the European labor movement, beginning in the middle of the nineteenth century, made comparatively great progress in the formation of mass workers ' parties, the proletariat of the United States clearly lagged behind in this respect. Why, then, has the American labor movement been unable for decades to overcome the fragmentation and divisions within its own milieu and move beyond its predominantly trade unionist activities? What is the reason for the conspicuous distance from the sphere of big politics of one of the most numerous detachments of the international labor movement, which at the same time gave vivid examples of a selfless and continuous struggle for its economic rights? These questions, which have long been raised by life itself, are becoming even more topical in modern conditions.

American bourgeois science (as "classics" - p. Ely, J. Commons, Z. Perlman, F. Taft, as well as representatives of the "new school" - G. Vilensky, J. Barbash, etc.) tries to answer them by resorting to speculative constructions, supplemented by edifying maxims about the original and insurmountable "lack of spirituality" of the American worker, whose entire historically formed system of behavior is supposedly he makes groundless attempts to judge it by using the Marxist categories of "class, "" class struggle,"and" class consciousness."

1 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. vol. 19, pp. 266-268; vol. 22, pp. 417.

page 18
On the contrary, K. Marx, F. Engels, and V. I. Lenin, considering the American labor movement and the prerequisites for its connection with advanced ideology, sought to unravel the zigzag, prolonged, and unstable rise of the American proletariat to spiritual maturity in real historical circumstances and in the specific features of the formation of the American nation, which were reflected in the ideology of the US working class. However, while recognizing the peculiarity of the socio-economic, political, and spiritual conditions in the United States and insisting on an unconventional approach to the problems of American society, they strongly opposed the theory of "American exclusivity", against the homegrown concepts of identity, already adopted by bourgeois science, which sought to create an idealized image of social relations that developed in the New World.

In 1852, Karl Marx wrote that the United States represented a" conservative form " of bourgeois society, where classes already existed "but not yet established" and where the rapid growth of material production combined with the absence of chronic overpopulation negatively affected the level of political consciousness of the lower classes .2 Time passed, but attempts to end the "old ghost world", as Marx put it, did not produce the result that in other countries was achievable within two or three decades. What prevented the "inevitable consequences of the capitalist system from appearing in all its glory in America"?3 and accelerate the process of polarizing class interests?

Among the main reasons for the slowness of the process of isolating the American proletariat from bourgeois democracy and the formation of its class consciousness, Engels pointed out the relative mobility of class divisions in the United States due to the peculiarity of the process of capitalist accumulation, which nourished illusory hopes in significant strata of the working people to "get out in the people", to become the owner of The "feverishly enterprising spirit"4 and the desire for individual success hovered over everything. By the beginning of the 1980s, the bulk of the American working population had not yet differentiated their goals and aspirations from the acquisitive ideals of the bourgeoisie. Engels noted that the" actual necessity "for the ideological self-determination of the working class began to emerge and be realized in the United States only by the mid-80s, when the core of the hereditary proletariat was formed and the process of fermentation was outlined, which previously"no sermons" could cause. However, even then this shift was not yet sufficiently consistent and did not lead to a fracture. The rise of the Knights of Labor was short-lived, and the desire of its leadership to oppose itself to trade unions and militant elements in local organizations of the order eventually drained the movement of political blood. Agrarian radicalism, represented by the People's Party (Populists) that emerged in 1892, made a serious bid to form an influential workers 'and farmers' bloc opposing big capital and its parties, but centrifugal tendencies prevailed, and by 1896 the anti-monopoly coalition collapsed. Populism as a political trend did not have a sufficiently solid foundation to survive, it reflected the typical behavior of those times.

2 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 8, p. 127.

3 K. Marx and F. Engels, Op. 21, p. 263.

4 See K. Marx and F. Engels. Son. Vol. 37, p. 74. "America," wrote Engels in 1890, " in social relations... It is the mainstay of what the philistine calls "individualism" (ibid., p. 373). In his notes "From Travel Impressions of America", Engels wrote that in the very manner of behavior of Americans, there was a persistent desire to adhere to "inherited petty-bourgeois habits" (vol. 21, p. 485).

page 19
for the "average American", the internal state in which, in Engels ' words, the consciousness of the industrial worker and the consciousness of the virgin-growing peasant alternately prevailed .5
The United States was still, in Engels 'words, the"promised land of capitalist production"6 . This was the most powerful factor in the growth of American workers ' class consciousness. Engels noted that "they are arch-conservative precisely because America is a purely bourgeois country, which does not even have a feudal past and is therefore proud of its purely bourgeois system - and therefore they will free themselves from the old rubbish of traditional prejudices only through practice." 7 The unheard-of rapid industrial development of the United States and the agricultural progress of the country, as Karl Marx wrote in 1879, 8 obscured and obscured the limitations of bourgeois progress and its contradictions. Engels repeatedly pointed out that the peculiarities of the US labor movement were also connected with the presence of pristine soil for the development of bourgeois Republicanism in this country9 .

All this, taken together, explains why Marx, Engels, and Lenin attached such importance to the slightest signs of a broad opposition movement opposing the two-party system in the traditional form of a national social protest movement, which could give an impetus to the general regrouping of political forces in the country10 .

It is in this connection that F. In the last years of his life, Engels especially carefully studied the question of creating an independent mass "real" party of American workers .11 In analyzing the causes and lessons of the short-term successes and frequent defeats of the third party movement in the United States, Engels taught us to avoid simplifications and hasty assessments. He warned against attributing the causes of these failures and difficulties solely to subjective factors (the inability of the leaders of the labor movement, their sectarian mistakes, etc.). In letters to F. A. Sorge dated October 24, 1891 and January 6, 1892, Engels pointed to the relatively high standard of living of Native American workers as the main source for spreading illusions social harmony and "equality of opportunity". He also attributed the fragility of the consolidating basis for the formation of the third party to the continuing high degree of social mobility in the United States. He was skeptical about the possibility of the petty bourgeoisie creating "ever... a strong party", because this stratum consisted of "too rapidly changing elements" and, moreover, was completely economically dependent on big capital. 12 Engels pinned his hopes on the process of internal cohesion of the working class, which developed as it grew richer in its own political experience.

The objective difficulties in the development of proletarian class consciousness were also rooted in something else noted by Fr. Engels ' view of an important circumstance, namely, in a very fertile ground for ideological and political disagreements within the main social classes of the United States due to the special convexity of opposites and conflicts: regional, religious, intergroup and national.

5 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 36, p. 407; vol. 39, p. 319.

6 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 37, p. 83.

7 Ibid., p. 297.

8 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Op. 34, p. 292.

9 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 36, p. 578, etc.

10 See K. Marx and F. Engels. Soch. Vol. 4, p. 339; vol. 36, p. 589; vol. 39, p. 319; V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 53, p. 28, 68-69.

11 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 37, p. 296; vol. 21, pp. 345-353.

12 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 38, pp. 214-215.

page 20
The presence of these internal divisions dulled the sense of class belonging and, on the contrary, strengthened the false belief in a certain class community. In a survey of the labor movement in the United States written in January 1887, Engels showed that the vast areas of America, local differences, and the interweaving of "personal and local opinions within the working class" make it difficult to consolidate on a single, defined platform with a coordinated plan of action geographically dispersed, mottled in color, and "isolated from each other by virtue of the fact that different starting points", but similar in their objective class nature and orientation of the currents of social protest 13 .

Bourgeois political parties, taking advantage of this natural differentiation within classes, have always proposed and still offer themselves as an ideal mechanism that adapts easily to changing circumstances, capable of uniting heterogeneous social groups for a short period of time on the basis of protecting the most common of all possible privileges, principles, and interests. They claim to be able to present these principles and interests not in the ideological categories of party doctrine, but in the form of a temporary platform of an electoral bloc that has no apparent connection with a particular political philosophy of a particular class. Propaganda in favor of a two-party system in the average American supports the belief that in such a "mixed", amorphous nature of traditional bourgeois parties and their political "universality" lies the salvation of the nation from the destructive work of centrifugal forces that can undermine its unity. 14 Creating the appearance of perfection and elasticity of the existing party system, the American bourgeoisie not only deftly uses all the advantages of its monopoly position in the political sphere, but also suggests the hopelessness and senselessness of any attempt to achieve a fundamentally different balance of power.

Engels clearly understood what it was that allowed the American bourgeoisie to impose its will on millions of voters. He was convinced that it would not be easy or easy to break this well-designed system of cheating and give the average American real freedom of choice. In 1892, he wrote:: "In America, it seems to me, there is still no place for a third party. In this vast territory, the difference in interests between individual groups, even within the same class, is so great that in each of the two large parties completely different groups and interests are represented, depending on the locality, and almost every separate stratum of the propertied class has representatives in each of both parties... This seemingly random, disorderly mix is precisely the perfect breeding ground for the corruption and exploitation of the state that flourishes so luxuriantly in America. " 15 A year later, Engels returns to this problem. On December 2, 1893, in a letter to Sorge, he noted that "the American conditions present very great and peculiar difficulties for the steady development of the workers' Party. First, a constitution based, as in England, on the principle of the ruling party, whereby every vote not cast for one of the parties is based on the principle of the ruling party.

13 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. vol. 21, pp. 350, 352; vol. 36, pp. 488. Thus, in 1886, Engels warned American socialists against overestimating the success of the workers ' political movement achieved within a single industrial center ("overestimate the significance for the whole country of the local New York movement with its local characteristics". See vol. 36, p. 496). He called for painstaking work, for patient overcoming of the difficulties that prevent the consolidation of the third, workers 'and farmers' party in the political life of the United States (ibid., pp. 488-489).

14 See C. Rossiter. Parties and Politics in America. Ithaca. 1960, p. 54.

15 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 38, p. 214.

page 21
the number of candidates fielded by both government parties is considered lost. And an American, like an Englishman, wants to influence his state and does not throw his voice to the wind. Then - and this is especially important-immigration, which divides workers into two groups - native and foreign, and these latter again into two groups.: 1) the Irish, 2) the Germans, 3) a lot of small groups-Czechs, Poles, Italians, Scandinavians, etc., who understand each other only within their own group. And then there are the Negroes. In order to create a single party out of all this, particularly powerful incentives are required. Sometimes a great upsurge comes suddenly, but the bourgeoisie has only to wait it out passively, and the working class is again divided into heterogeneous elements. Third, and finally, the system of protective duties and the ever-growing domestic market have placed workers in conditions of such prosperity as we have here in Europe... we haven't seen it for a long time. " 16
Thus, on the question of the mass party of workers in the United States, Engels took as his starting point the objective conditions in which the American labor movement developed. On the other hand, it also took into account the subjective factor, the role of managers, and their level of consciousness. While noting in a letter to Sorge dated November 10, 1894, that the masses were becoming increasingly aware of the need to create a "private" party "as opposed to both official parties," Engels simultaneously noted with regret the absence (both in England and in the United States) of "people capable of translating this instinct into conscious action in the future." nationwide", which is why "the movement is stuck for a long time in this preliminary stage of uncertainty, ideas and isolation of local actions"17 . And in this regard, the sectarianism of German-born American socialists, who tried to act without taking into account local conditions, was very harmful. Their desire to be mentors and commanders discouraged Native Americans from learning "even the best from them." 18 The true leaders of the proletariat, Engels pointed out, should not shut themselves off from the mainstream of the American labor movement for fear of being lost in a sea of petty concerns. They are obliged to meet it halfway, while at the same time "without sacrificing or concealing their own clearly expressed position and even preserving the organization...". The most important thing is to achieve the widest possible support for the idea of the Workers ' Party, to unite all forces and elements sympathetic to it, even if on a temporary and compromise platform. 19 . As Engels warned the American socialists, the illusory hopes that it would be possible to transform the consciousness of the American worker into a socialist consciousness in any other way than by working for a long time in the midst of the masses, in the trade unions, are fraught with defeat and the destruction of all ties with the real practical movement .20
Engels ' theoretical contribution to the development of the problem of creating a mass third party in the United States is important for understanding the history of the American labor movement in the twentieth century.

The entry of the capitalist world into the stage of imperialism, and then the advent of a new era characterized by the transition from capitalism to socialism on a global scale, confirmed with renewed force the conclusion of Marxism about the greatest transformative role of the proletariat and its political party. The new situation also made itself felt in

16 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 39, p. 149.

17 Ibid., p. 256.

18 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 38, p. 156.

19 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 36, pp. 489, 497, 505; vol. 21, pp. 352.

20 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 38, p. 13.

page 22
USA. First of all, the prerequisites for winning the majority of the American working class over to the idea of independent political action have changed significantly. Since the beginning of the twentieth century, there has been a definite tendency to level out the differences within the working class, and its composition has become more and more homogeneous. The opportunities for a worker to change his profession, become an "independent" commodity producer or own his own enterprise have sharply narrowed .21 The working class of the United States was enriched by the experience of fighting the bourgeoisie in numerous clashes with it, and the traditions of class solidarity were strengthened among them. With the development of forms of communication, the socio-cultural isolation of individual districts and language differences disappeared, although significant ethnic, religious, regional and, of course, racial features remained. Cultivated by capitalism, they still represent the most serious obstacle to achieving political unity among American workers .22 The peculiarity of American political development, which Engels noted, is fully preserved, due to the peculiarities of the constitutional system .23 The current majority electoral system continues to minimize the chances of representation of the party that does not get at least the minimum number of votes in the elections. In other words, as in the old days, "everything is organized with the expectation of only two (bourgeois ) parties; the third can at best give an advantage to one of them, until it is equal to them in strength." 24 In this situation, many opponents of bourgeois parties are forced to vote for the candidates of one of them .25
The birth of a militant but relatively small Marxist-Leninist party in the specific conditions of the United States did not eliminate the question of creating a mass third party, which would have the majority of the working class and the non-Proletarian strata adjacent to it. The Communists themselves in 1922 put forward the slogan of creating such a party .26 In the mid-1930s, the task of uniting all progressive forces around the struggle for a program of social transformation and against the threat of internal reaction once again showed with extraordinary clarity the need to create an anti-monopoly, anti-fascist party. 27 Stormy

21 D. D. Lescohier. Labor's Drive to Power, 1933 - 1937. "Harvard Business Review". 1937. Vol. XV, N 4, pp. 407 - 408; Ch. Walker. American City. A Rank-and-File History. N. Y. 1937; A. W. Jones. Life, Liberty and Property. N. Y. 1941; E. Chinoy. Automobile Workers and American Dream. Garden City. 1955.

22 The report of the leadership of the Communist Party of the United States to its 19th Congress (July 1969) states that "racism is the most serious and significant obstacle to class unity, proletarian consciousness, and a socialist worldview" (Political Affairs, 1969, No. 7, p. 7).

23 See B. S. Krylov for more details. USA: Federalism, States and Local Government, Moscow, 1968, pp. 76-212.

24 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 39, p. 299.

25 Claude Lightfoot, a member of the National Leadership of the Communist Party of the United States, wrote :" One of the factors that forces many to refrain from supporting the new party is the fear that it will not be able to win. A commitment to the status quo, coupled with electoral laws in most states, helps perpetuate these fears. In addition, many people believe that the minority parties will never seem to be able to take root, because one or the other of the two main parties is able to intercept the slogans of the advanced forces, at least for purely demagogic purposes. So it actually happened... However, the problems that the nation faces today are becoming so serious that a dozen demagoguery or half-hearted concessions can no longer satisfy anyone. A radical solution is required, and in the light of this, the need to create a party with a radical program will become increasingly obvious "(see C. Lightfoot. Path to Black Liberation under Capitalism. "Political Affairs", 1968, N 2, p. 25).

26 См. "Political Affairs", 1969, N 9 - 10, p. 33.

27 See G. Dimitrov. The Offensive of fascism and the Tasks of the Communist International in the struggle for the Unity of the Working Class against fascism, Moscow, 1935, pp. 41, 42.

page 23
the pre-war decade left a significant mark on the development of this movement. Unfortunately, everything that the new historical epoch in general and the 1930s in particular has produced in this sense has not yet become the object of a comprehensive Marxist study. 28 The accumulated experience requires generalization from the same point of view that was of decisive importance for Engels in his reflections on the problem of the third party in the United States, namely: what is the attitude of mass workers ' organizations to it, and how close it is to the working environment.

The economic crisis of 1929-1933 significantly affected the formation and growth of the class consciousness of the American proletariat. The concepts of "class, "" class interests, "and" class struggle " have acquired citizenship rights even in the rhetoric of conservative trade Unionist leaders. The workers ' protest intensified dramatically. Mass strikes, the rise of the unemployed movement, the entry of millions of semi - skilled and untrained workers into the trade union movement, and the split of the AFL-all of this signaled the beginning of a new stage in the US labor movement. The growing consciousness of the American proletariat gave a new impetus to the movement for independent political action, which was closely connected with the emergence of the new trade unionism and the formation of the CPP (1935-1938).29
There have always been active class-conscious elements in the American trade union movement who have been aware of the grave, even irreparable consequences for the working class that the strategy of political tailgating preached by the top trade unions and elevated to the rank of the official AFL doctrine can lead to. In the 1920s, however, their voice was almost lost among speeches that praised the practicality of the Gomperian formula "punish your enemies and reward your friends." 30 Years of crisis have broken this tradition. At first, the call to reconsider the doctrine of "neutrality" was made at the grassroots levels of the trade union movement31, but it was not heard at the top. However, already in 1933, the AFL Congress was forced to consider a resolution demanding a break with" traditional non-party politics "and the creation of a"genuine workers 'party". It was introduced by representatives of the United Association of Steelworkers 32 . Without much difficulty, the Congress leadership succeeded in rejecting this resolution. It turned out to be much more difficult to remove from the agenda of the trade union movement the very idea that seemed so unpopular yesterday.

Trade union federations in several states strongly supported the creation of a third, labor party; others did not oppose the initiative of city trade union councils, which tried to put into practice what was considered impermissible audacity, recklessness and threatened to bring immediate punishment from the AFL Executive Council .33 At the 10th Congress of the Union of Garment Workers (1934), the head of-

28 Of the latest works on this issue, see: E. F. Yazkov. The movement for Independent political Actions of the working people of the USA after the First World War and the position of farmers ' organizations (1918-1920). Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Series "History", 1968, N 2.

29 See P. Taft. Labor's Changing Political Line. "The Journal of Political Economy". 1937. Vol. XLX, N 5; H. A. Millis and R. E. Montgomery. The Economics of Labor. Vol. III. Organized Labor. N. Y. -L. 1945, pp. 232, 234.

30 As one of the delegates to the 52nd AFL Congress (1932) put it, the U.S. labor movement, with its enormous potentials, condemned itself to humbly beg at the door instead of going inside and demanding its legal rights in a full voice. Delegate Poll rightly likened the infant phase of the American labor movement to that of the American Federation of Labor (AFL). Proceedings, 1932, p. 374).

31 See AFL. Proceedings. 1931, p. 250; "Revolt", I.X.1932, p. 4.

32 AFL. Proceedings, 1933, p. 152.

33 См. Wisconsin State Federation of Labor. Proceedings, 1933, p. 93; 1934, p. 182; R.R.R. Brooks. When Labor Organizes. New Haven. 1937, p. 201.

page 24
It was only with great effort that the Government succeeded in preventing the adoption of a resolution in favour of the creation of a workers 'and farmers' party. The delegates agreed with the leaders 'opinion only after the head of the union, S. Hilman, assured them of his solidarity with those who advocate the principle of independent political action of the workers and will not miss the opportunity to throw all the influence of the union into the balance when the necessary prerequisites for the creation of a workers 'and farmers' party are available .34
The polemic on the question of the workers 'party within the united Garment Workers' Union continued. Two years later, at the next congress, Hillman again rejected proposals for its creation, this time citing the upcoming presidential elections and unwillingness to split the votes of the workers. However, he welcomed the creation of local workers ' parties. The Political Action Committee specially formed by the congress expressed a similar sentiment, emphasizing that the workers in the 1936 elections would vote for Roosevelt, and not for the Democratic Party, since that party itself does not inspire confidence. However, few of the delegates to the congress considered this decision optimal. A representative of the garment workers of Minnesota expressed the prevailing sentiment, saying that "our real goal is to create a workers 'and farmers' party." Hillman, who was the first person to vote in favor of the committee's proposal, had to admit that it was impossible to "abandon the dream of a workers 'party" and that it would be an unforgivable mistake to miss a favorable opportunity to participate in its formation in the future .35 In 1938, the trade union Congress reaffirmed the importance of independent political action by workers ' organizations in all major election campaigns in 1936-1938. However, the centrist elements managed to subdue the majority again, calling on the delegates not to undermine the foundations of the New deal democratic coalition.

In the mid-1930s, a number of large trade unions formed a bloc that advocated the principle of independent political action of workers .36 The arrival of new members in the trade union movement, represented by workers in the main branches of industry, strengthened the position of supporters of breaking with the bourgeois parties and creating their own political mechanism by the trade unions. It is no coincidence that the trade unions that have grown due to the influx of unskilled and semi-skilled workers have taken a more decisive position on this issue. As early as 1932, the United Union of Miners expressed its support for "a more definite political movement on the part of the workers organized in trade unions." In 1934, the congress of this union gave its representatives the full right to determine their own position on the slogan of creating a workers ' party. At the congresses of 1935 and 1936, more than 45 resolutions were proposed in support of the demand for the organization of a workers 'and farmers' party. 37 Labor party formation conferences were called by labor unions in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Michigan, New Jersey, Illinois, and other states38 . The movement for the creation of a workers ' party became increasingly a matter of real politics. Passions boiled around him, opinions were formed . Everything testified to the fact that the leadership elite

34 Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America (далее - ACWA). Proceedings 1934, p. 396.

35 ACWA. Proceedings, 1936, pp. 143, 386, 396, 403 - 404.

36 R.R.R. Brooks. Op. cit., p. 301.

37 "Communist", 1936, N 2, p. 21; J.O. Morris. Conflict Within the AFL Ithaca 1958, p. 273.

38 AFL. Proceedings, 1935, pp. 177, 773.

39 См. "Advance", 1934, September, p. 17; 1935, January, p. 3; 1935, August p. 14."Communist", 1936, February, p. 217; United Hatters, Cap and Millinery Workers International Union. Convention of the Men's Hat Department. Proceedings, January 13th - 26th, 1936.

page 25
The AFL will not be able to avoid a "substantive conversation" for long. So it actually happened. The AFL convention in Atlantic City in 1935 was the scene of a heated discussion about the creation of a labor party. As one of its participants later recalled, the clash of opinions on this point was not inferior in intensity to the conflict over the creation of industrial trade unions. For the first time in many years, the federation congress had to determine its attitude to the draft resolution demanding the rejection of the traditional "non-partisan" AFL policy, which "only splits the votes of the workers and thereby damages them, not allowing them to organize to fight back against entrepreneurs politically in the same way as they did in the economic field"40 . Apparently, the presidium of the congress was extremely unclear how most of the delegates would behave. In any case, the AFL president who came to the podium was U. Green, in prefixing the discussion on the question of the Workers ' Party, instead of anathematizing the opponents of Gompersianism in the spirit of former times, adopted a conciliatory tone this time. "In my opinion," he said, "the AFL will declare itself a supporter of independent political action in the form of an independent political party when the clearly defined opinion of the workers shows that they are convinced that their interests can be better served by political action than by pursuing a non - partisan policy." 41 This statement showed the confusion of Green, who had never before been able to speak without a shudder about the very idea of creating a workers ' party, and now he was forced to come up with a proposal to "wait" for the free expression of the will of ordinary participants in the labor movement and even promised to take their opinion into account. The AFL president had every reason to prepare "reserve positions". At the congress, trade union delegates totaling about 500,000 members introduced more than a dozen resolutions in defense of the workers 'or farmers' party. 42
The main opponent of the traditional line of the AFL Executive Council was the United Union of Textile Workers , one of the initiators of the establishment of the CPP. In its draft resolution, the Union expressed its will to create a political organization that actively and purposefully opposes the old parties. The Workers ' Party, said the representative of this union, should become not the tail end of the two-party system, but a political mechanism of the workers that denies it. Only then will there be no confusion about the" fundamental aims "of the Workers' Party .43 And although not all of its supporters were ready for such a decisive separation from the bourgeoisie-

pp. 27, 62 - 97; Minnesota State Federation of Labor. Proceedings, 1936. Speaking in June 1935 at a conference on the formation of a labor party in Connecticut, " prominent social activist Mary Van Cleek said: "Everywhere, as I was able to find out during my last trip on the East Coast - California route, proposals for the creation of a labor party are being discussed..." Connecticut State Federation of Labor. Committee for the Promotion of a Labor Party. For a Labor Party in Connecticut. Harford (Conn.), 1935, p. 12.An Independent Labor Party was formed in Philadelphia on the initiative of knitwear workers. When government spokesman E. McGrady tried to dissuade the workers from taking this step, he was booed. Loud laughter greeted his words: "The American worker does not want a class party... Today he is a worker, and tomorrow he is a boss" (see Labor History, 1963, Vol. 5, No. 1, p. 23).

40 AFL. Proceedings, 1935, p. 275.

41 Ibid., p. 8.

42 See R. R. R. Brooks. Op. cit., p. 301.

43 See AFL. Proceedings, 1935, pp. 252-253, 769. The Textile Workers 'Union has long maintained a leading role among trade unions in the movement for a" true labor party " in the United States. The Union's leadership strongly encouraged its local branches to support all initiatives in this direction (ACWA. Sidney Hillman Papers. Francis J. Gorman to Hillman. August 20, 1936).

page 26
Most of the resolutions and speeches contained criticism of Gompersist orthodoxy, which misrepresented the social and political mission of the labor movement in American society. The main points of this criticism can be summarized as follows. The labor movement, which represents the interests of the majority of the working population of the country, has very broad political goals and powers. It should not tie its hands in the struggle for demands that have a limited character of protecting the interests of a select stratum of industrial workers. The fate of the labor movement is inseparable from the fate of the nation, and the material and social status of the lower classes of the people is derived from the general situation prevailing in the country and abroad (trends in economic development, the nature of international relations, militarization, national relations, problems of peace and war, etc.). if they want to do it. The working-class movement, which is too large and vital a force, with a wide range of its social needs and political interests, cannot and should not entrust the solution of issues of concern to the working class to representatives of the bourgeoisie, who are not only not directly responsible to it, but are often directly hostile to its interests, although they call themselves "workers".friends of labor".

These provisions were developed in numerous speeches by some influential trade union leaders .44 They openly and categorically rejected the central principle of the AFL ideology, revealing the falsity of the arguments of supporters of political indifferentism. Their statements served to refute Gompersist truisms about the unwillingness of American workers to see themselves as class-separated from the middle strata, the hopelessness of trying to find solutions to social problems based on the concept of the polarity of labor and capital interests, and so on.

What, however, is the essence of the positive program that the Workers ' Party was called upon to implement, and what was its main political line and organizational structure conceived of? Numerous proposals for the creation of a party reflected different shades of opinion on this issue. The resolution of the United Union of Textile Workers, mentioned above, was relatively more complete. Its content was as follows: the Workers ' party should be anti-monopoly and anti-fascist; no discrimination on the basis of race, religion or political beliefs should be allowed in its ranks; it should rally around itself a broad democratic coalition of the working population and defend their economic and social demands to the extent that it is dictated by the moment; it recognized the expediency of the principle of collective membership like the English Labour Party. Offers to

44 Cm. New York Public Library (hereinafter: NYPL). "Trade Union Conference for a Labor Party". Minutes, N.Y. 1936, p. 2. (Unpublished transcript of the conference in the form of a typewritten recording, preserved in the New York Public Library); For a Labor Party in Connecticut, p. 3; United Automobile Workers of America. Proceedings, 1937, p. 134. Later, the views of many trade union leaders changed. Thus, Dubinsky, chairman of the ladies 'tailors' trade union, while at one time advocating the creation of a workers ' party, soon adopted openly reactionary positions. In fact, even in 1935, he expressed not so much his opinion as the sentiments prevailing in the union he headed (AFL. Proceedings, 1935, p.761). At the congress of this union in May 1937, a resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority (with one "against"), suggesting that the leadership of the union should do everything possible to create a national workers ' party. The Resolutions Committee also noted that the American Labor Movement is "on the verge of creating a new political party that represents the interests and aspirations of workers, farmers, and all those who have fallen victim to the private ownership system" (International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU). Proceedings, 1937, p. 321).

page 27
the platforms of the future party were reformist in nature, but at the same time they contained a certain anti-monopoly orientation, which provided a basis for rallying the progressive forces of the workers ' and general democratic movement. That is why tekstilshchikov's resolution found a lively response and support .45
The literature and documentation generated by the trade union movement for a workers ' party was also influenced by socialist ideas, although most of the resolutions on the creation of such a party, introduced at the AFL congress in 1935, actually avoided or at best presented the question of the elimination of the bourgeois system in a vague and infinitely distant perspective. Only in a number of documents and speeches was there an open demand to include in the program of the future workers ' party slogans of struggle for radical social and political transformations. The authors of these resolutions were not satisfied with putting forward general democratic demands and proclaimed the immediate goal of the movement to socialize the means of production in key sectors of the economy, as well as banks, railways, public utilities, etc. This trend was reflected in Resolution No. 39, introduced at the AFL convention in Atlantic City by a delegation from the United Federal Auto Workers ' Union, in proposals from the Federal Union of Technicians and Scientists in Chicago, and in the report of the Executive Secretary of the Oregon Federation of Labor to delegates to the annual convention in 1935. The Wisconsin Labor Federation, which initiated the creation of the Workers 'and Farmers' Progressive Federation of the state, the Connecticut labor unions46, and so on.

A formidable harbinger of future changes for all those who preferred to remain in their old positions were practical steps to bring together all the germs of a new initiative in the trade union movement. The beginning was laid on February 11, 1936 in New York, when the Committee of Trade Unions for the Creation of a Labor Party was created at the conference of representatives of local AFL unions. It was headed by John Hogan and Elmer Brown, who represented local carpenters 'and printers' unions. The committee included 47 Communists . His work had an anti-fascist and anti-monopoly orientation. It was also striking that the slogan of creating a workers ' party was linked to the line of separation from bourgeois-liberal trends, and the opponents of this line were criticized. Francis Gorman (vice-president of the Textile Workers ' Union), speaking in May 1936 at a conference called by the committee, ridiculed those who urged the workers to limit themselves to supporting Roosevelt as a leader who represented a kind of superclass," non-partisan " idea of social justice, who allegedly managed to rise "above the Democratic party apparatus" and overcome the oppression of the forces that gave rise to himself 48 . Gorman was referring to very specific carriers of a particular trend. In early April 1936, S. Hillman, J. Lewis, D. Dubinsky, and George Berry (president of the Typesetters 'Union, which was part of the AFL) formed the Non - Partisan Workers' League, a political offshoot of the trade union movement, which officially set itself the task of seeking re - election to the Federal Government. Roosevelt for president

45 См. NYPL. "Trade Union Conference for a Labor Party". Main Resolution and Program, pp. 1 - 2.

46 See AFL. Proceedings, 1935, pp. 182, 254; Oregon State Federation of Labor. Proceedings, 1935, p. 21; Wisconsin State Federation of Labor. Proceedings, 1935, pp. 136- 137, 161 - 162, 187; 1936, pp. 215 - 219.

47 NYPL. "Trade Union Conference for a Labor Party"; ACWA. Sidney Hillman Papers. E. Brown to Hillman. July 6, 1936.

48 NYPL. "Trade Union Conference for a Labor Party", p. 2.

page 28
at the same time, it offers itself as an independent mechanism, independent of the democratic party and its apparatus. 49 At its first congress (August 1936), the Non-partisan League solemnly declared its independence from both bourgeois parties. In the states and major industrial centers, it has established local sections. In New York State, such a section was the American Workers 'Party (ARP), organized in July 1936 by the efforts of progressive organizations and three CPP unions: dressmakers, hatters, and ladies' tailors.

The nonpartisan League and the New York State ARP provided strong support to Roosevelt and his supporters in the 1936 election and subsequent political campaigns .50 ARP supported F.'s re-election. LaGuardia was mayor of New York, with 37% of New York City voters voting for her list. In New York's working-class borough of the Bronx, the ARP led 50% of the electorate .51 Nevertheless, both the Non-Party League and the ARP did not meet the conditions then imposed by the left wing of the working-class movement on a "model" or "genuine" workers ' party. Both of them gravitated to the Democratic party, although they swore allegiance only to its leader and solemnly promised to maintain their independence. Nevertheless, the creation of the Non-Partisan League and the ARP did contribute to the political self-determination of the workers ' movement.

Even the center-right leadership of the Socialist Party of the United States, which was generally negative about the third party movement, found it necessary to clarify its position in the light of new developments. 52 Of particular interest is the confidential information received from the local headquarters of the Socialists in New York at the special request of the leadership. These materials indicate that

49 ACWA. Report of the General Executive Board to the 12-th Biennial Convention of the ACWA. Atlantic-City. 1938, p. 64.

50 For more information, see P. Taft. Op. cit., pp. 639-650.

51 S. Uminski. The Progress of Labor in the United States. N. Y. 1939, p. 200. LaGuardia said in 1941 that New York had witnessed an" enormous increase " in the influence of the ARP. (New York City Archives (NYCA). Fiorello H. La Guardia Papers. Personal. Location 2702. La Guardia to M. Bloem. March 15, 1941).

52 The question of the attitude towards the Workers 'and Farmers' Party deepened the division among the Socialists. The left-wing opposition, represented by its young members, advocated active support for the movement; right-wing leaders and Trotskyists almost everywhere sabotaged it (see NYPL. N. Thomas Papers. Box 23. Roy C. Lancaster to National Executive Committee of Socialist Party. October 26, 1936; G. Trimble to N. Tomas. December 11, 1936). One Hawes, an ordinary member of the Socialist Party, wrote to C. Senior, a leading member of the party's Executive Committee in New York: "We are all forced to admit that the awakening of the political consciousness of the organized labor movement, especially noticeable among ordinary members, was extremely pronounced during the last elections... (we are talking about the presidential elections in November 1936. - V. M. ). We, as socialists, have been waiting for this awakening, and yet we have not been able to take advantage of it.. We were unable to create a workers ' party... The unions that have done this in New York and probably will do it everywhere are reformist, and they are more likely to create a reformist party. It would be right to express our support for the movement, and then criticize its philosophy in a constructive way as necessary. That's when they'll listen to us. Alas, so far we have been useless to them" (see NYPL. N. Thomas Papers. Box 23. Z. Haws to C. Senior. November 19, 1936). Having absorbed various pseudo-revolutionary elements, such as the Trotskyists, the Socialist Party was unable to develop a clear tactical line. In a memo to the Executive Committee, the head of one of its sections in Massachusetts wrote:: "The opinion of active members of our party was divided on the creation of a workers' party in our state. The former Trotskyists, of course, object with all their might to a positive decision, believing that the Workers 'party or the farmers' and Workers ' Party will prevent the "rapid radicalization of the masses" that they consider inevitable. Other party members are either inclined to support or enthusiastically support the idea of creating a workers 'party..." (see NYPL. N. Thomas Papers. Box 23. A. B. Lewis to C. Senior. November 13, 1936). The socialist leaders, having accepted the worst of the legacy of the American Socialist Workers 'Party, which emerged in 1876, could not comprehend what Engels called a "living theory of action" and the ability to work "together with the working class at all possible stages of its development..." (see K. Marx and F. Schultz). Engels, Soch. Vol. 38, p. 82).

page 29
There are very large differences in views on the issue of the third party and, at the same time, weak organizational support for efforts in this direction. In states such as Texas, Maryland, Utah, New Mexico, California, and Wyoming, and especially where there is not yet a strong union structure, the third party movement has not been able to move beyond the general conversation. The fate of the Labor Party movement was similar in Connecticut, where the AFL leadership almost managed to nullify the entire campaign. In other states (Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Illinois), this movement was supported by all labor unions. In many cases, this immediately brought tangible results in the form of victory of trade union candidates in local elections and partial implementation of the programs put forward by them. However, this fact was not a guarantee of success wherever trade unions had a strong position. If, for example, in New Bedford, Massachusetts, almost all unions supported the Workers 'and Farmers' Party, then, on the contrary, in nearby Springfield, although the United Workers ' Party was created, the unions did not actually participate in its activities .53 The diversity of the historical environment, the role of local conditions, the power of habit and traditions still made themselves felt.

Nevertheless, the overall trend was becoming clearer. The trade unions, leading the bulk of the organized workers, were drawn into the political struggle. This happened slowly and inconsistently, but only in this way, to use Engels 'words, could one free oneself from the" narrow-minded trade unionist point of view. " 54 Naturally, much depended on the position of both trade union centers - the AFL and the CPP. The evidence shows that their response was not the same.

We have already seen that the large and influential trade unions that founded the CPP either openly supported the idea of creating a workers ' party, or were very close to it. These sentiments were reflected in an interview with D. Lewis at the end of December 1935, that is, immediately after the AFL congress in Atlantic City, at which Lewis announced the possibility of forming an independent labor party in the future. The AFL Executive Committee reacted nervously and with hostility to these "reflections aloud"55 . And yet, if we keep in mind the "high spheres" of the trade union movement, then here ideological differences in themselves were not irremediable. Both Hillman and Lewis have repeatedly made it clear that they are opposed to further radicalizing the checkpoint and making it the base of an anti-capitalist and fundamentally revolutionary movement. 56 However, where the general current that captured them might have taken them, no one could have predicted at the time. "The faster the CCP progresses," Hillman said, "the more it is drawn into politics by the very course of things." 57 But couldn't those true words apply to him as well? After all, the creation of the Non-Partisan Workers ' League and the ARP contained an alternative: either the transformation of these organizations into a simple appendage of the democratic party, or the development of a movement towards political independence based on the proletarian class platform and the creative activity of the masses.

53 NYPL. N. Thomas Papers. Box 23. A. B. Lewis to C. Senior. November 13, 1936; National Executive Committee Meeting. December 10 - 12, 1937. Report, p. 7.

54 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 38, p. 13.

55 Wisconsin State Historical Society Library (далее - WSHS Library). AFL Papers, File C, Box I. W. Green Papers, 1934 - 1936. Correspondence, Historical File. "John L. Lewis Tells of Plans in First Interview Since AFL Resignation", Interview with E. Rodman. December 20, 1935.

56 See M. Josephson. Sidney Hillman, Statesman of American Labor. Garden City. 1952, p. 398; B. Radosh. The Corporate Ideology of American Labor Leaders from Gompers to Hillman. "Studies on the Left", 1966. Vol. 6, N 6, p. 82.

57 M. Josephson. Op. cit., p. 398.

page 30
Many saw the second path as a logical continuation of the previous stage of the struggle .58 The basis for such forecasts was the evolution of ARP. Starting in 1936 with the support of F. After the death of J. Roosevelt and G. Lehman (a leader of the Democratic Party, governor of New York State), she later began to give preference to the principle of nominating candidates directly related to the working environment and trade unions. The program of the ARP, although originally drawn up in the spirit of moderate demands of municipal socialism, went in a number of points beyond what bourgeois politicians of a liberal persuasion could agree with. Observers noted that among the rank-and-file members of the party, the desire for independent political action was higher than in the leadership circles, and concluded that sooner or later the latter would "go wild"59 .

The desire to escape from the influence of bourgeois political cliques and the opposite tendency to preserve the status quo for some time accompanied each other. Even in the late 1930s, after the impressive victories of the New Deal and the rise of the Democrats, it was difficult to decide definitively which of them would eventually prevail, although Roosevelt's rapid rise in popularity and belief in the saving power of his reform program deprived the idea of a labor party of many potential supporters. It is significant that the AFL leaders were also not sure of the outcome of this conflict, anxiously waiting for each new step of the CHECKPOINT. "I have already noted," wrote W. Green in June 1937 , " that the real goal of these people (the leaders of the KPP. - V. M.) is to create a political party. They hope that in this way they will be able to control political events or even possibly dictate their will to the Government. " 60 "Not so long ago, Lewis," AFL vice President J. P. Morgan said. Frey, in a letter dated August 16, 1937, disapproved of agitation for the labor Party, saying that the Roosevelt government had done enough for the workers to refuse to support it. But what Lewis thinks now that he's faced with the government's cold shoulder, we don't know. If the CPT turns to political action in the near future, it will most likely do so in the form of campaigning for Workers ' Party lists. The leaders of this party will probably try to prevent Communists from joining it, but their efforts in this regard will be as unsuccessful as their attempts to expel the latter from the checkpoint."61
Proceeding from this, and fearing a decisive turn in the political line of the CPT, the AFL leaders took measures to somehow neutralize the growth of sympathy for this line within the AFL. In September 1937, W. Green issued a special circular demanding that local AFL branches withdraw their support for the Non-Partisan Workers ' League, calling it the "political machine of the CPP." Not all trade unions agreed to this, and at the Federation congress in 1938, their representatives even tried to get the AFL leadership to be censured for opposing the political efforts of the progressive wing of the labor movement.

58 At the conventions of major American labor unions, this was described as an event of the near future (see United Automobile Workers of America. Proceedings, 1937, pp. 65, 91). Even bourgeois analysts regarded the formation of the Workers ' Party as a phenomenon conditioned by the entire course of previous development and almost inevitable. The consolidation of the power of the working class in politics, wrote L. MacDonald, can deprive capitalism of confidence in its future (L. MacDonald. Labor Problems and the American Scene. N. Y. 1938, p. 578; см. также R.R.R. Brooks. Op cit., p. 302; P. Taft. Op. cit., pp. 645, 646).

59 NYPL. N. Thomas Papers. Box 26. "American Labor Party" (September 22, 1937); P. Taft. Op. cit., pp. 645, 646.

60 WSHS Library. AFL Papers. Box 3. Office of the President. File C. W. Green Papers, 1936 - 1942. Green to F. Saltus, June 3, 1937.

61 Library of Congress. John P. Frey Papers. Box 6. Frey to B. C. Pullen, August 16. 1937.

page 31
Whether the CPP will remain on the left flank of the Democratic Party led by Roosevelt, which declared itself the party of progressive reforms, or will take the path of independent initiative in the field of big politics - this was the objective question 62 . It continued to be a burning topic in all trade union debates .63 In this connection, the words of the biographer D. Lewis S. Alinsky, who wrote that this leader of the CPP during these years "showed increasing interest in the problem of creating a third party", deserve attention .64 Alinsky was hardly exaggerating. Even assuming that this interest was motivated primarily by ambitious goals, it is still impossible to consider Lewis ' verbal demarches as a manifestation of mere addiction to verbal buffoonery. By the late 1930s, when there were signs of a certain disillusionment with Roosevelt's policies, and therefore with the Democrats ' ability to consistently and honestly represent the New Deal popular coalition, Lewis's statements were more like a probe of sentiment. In August 1940, at the congress of the Automobile Industry Workers ' Union, Lewis declared to the applause of the delegates:: "The time will come when the people of our country will lose all faith in the existing political parties and form their own party." 65 That is why, immediately after the 1940 presidential election, the decision of the Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was received with such satisfaction, suggesting that its Executive Committee "give serious consideration to this problem (the question of creating a third party-V. M.), providing for the development of a program of action that guarantees the organized labor movement participation in public life as an independent political force" 66 . By the time this decision was approved, Lewis had already resigned as president of the PPC.

Assessing the 1930s as an important period in the history of the labor movement in the United States, W. Foster wrote: "Although the American working class achieved many successes during the great offensive against reaction that unfolded in the thirties, it still failed to fulfill the long - overdue task of creating a great workers 'or farmers' party. The political activity of trade unions has increased dramatically, especially in the KPP, but has not reached the level at which a de facto break with bourgeois political organizations, and especially with the democratic party, would have been possible"67 . A definite step in this direction was taken at that time, and this once again confirmed the correctness of Engels ' scientific predictions.

Bourgeois historiography, sociology, and political science, while arguing that the American labor movement is incapable of becoming a vehicle for revolutionary change and pointing out the futility of past attempts to break free from the two-party system, continue to predict the inevitable collapse of such efforts in the future. They declare the Marxist doctrine of the significance of political activity, of the role of the party for the fate of the working-class movement, invalid and scholastic in its application to the American conditions .68 Sometimes recognizing the historical conditionality of the political and socialist tradition for the European working class, the American bourgeoisie-

62 See D. D. Lescohier. Op. cit., p. 416.

63 См. J. Schlossberg. Third Party or Labor Party? "Advance", August 1935, p. 14; ACWA. S. Hillman Papers. B. Bliven to Hillman, March 16, 1936.

64 S. Alinsky. John L. Lewis. N. Y. 1949, p. 170.

65 A. Preis. Labor's Giant Step. N. Y. 1964, p. 80.

66 W. Galenson. The CIO Challenge to the AFL: A History of the American Labor Movement, 1935 - 1941. Cambridge. 1960, pp. 607 - 608.

67 У. З. Фостер. Essays on the World Trade union movement, Moscow, 1956, pp. 412, 413.

68 The desire to "crack down" on Marxism in connection with the question of the third party permeates, for example, the article: L. B. Rosenberg. The "Failure" of the Socialist Party of America. "Review of Politics", 1969, July. pp. 331, 336, 344.

page 32
social science denies that there is a serious basis for its development in the United States69 . But it is enough to turn to the actual history of the emergence of European socialism to discover the inconsistency of such statements. And in Western Europe, the process of combining scientific socialism with the labor movement was far from smooth. A truly proletarian ideology, Engels wrote, first took hold of the masses "in the form of various sects and, to an even greater extent, in the form of individual views that contradict each other ..." 70
Marxism does not deny that the external conditions of the American worker's life, his mental makeup, thinking, and mode of action are different from those of the European worker. Due to the peculiarity of its genesis, bourgeois society in the United States still retains many specific features. Marx and Engels, fully taking into account these differences and peculiarities, at the same time stated the main thing: the fundamental commonality of the socio-economic life of the wage worker both in America and in European countries. Since, Engels wrote, " the same economic laws apply here and there, "then"the results, although not identical in all respects, must still be of the same order." 71
Having consciously chosen the concept of anti-monopoly struggle as the basis of their strategy 72, American communists consider the creation of a new political coalition of democratic forces, in which the working class should play a leading role, to be the modern form of its implementation. The process of radicalization of the masses in the specific conditions of the United States inevitably has to go through a number of stages. The creation and consolidation on the American political stage of a broad party of working people and all other strata of the population suffering from the oppression of monopolies is one of the key stages in the struggle for democracy and socialism in America. What Engels insistently reminded us of in the 1980s and 90s of the 19th century, and what was not achieved in the 1930s, is becoming an urgent need for the current phase of development of the political struggle in the United States. All this explains why in our time the Communist Party of the United States, taking into account the historical experience, political traditions of the country and relying on the theoretical analysis of the problem, the foundations of which were laid by Karl Marx and Philipp Schulz. Engels, puts forward the idea of creating a mass party of working people, capable of becoming the center of attraction for all classes and strata of American society oppressed by monopoly capital .73 In alliance with such a party, but without merging with it, the Communists will be able to attract the broad masses to the side of socialism. "Achieving this result will require time and patience. But the objective conditions of our time do not give us any reason to be pessimistic. " 74
Thus, an important but difficult step in the entire movement remains to be taken. Only then can the struggle against a strong and insidious enemy, such as the American bourgeoisie, finally achieve a "clear"vision not only for the advanced forces of the nation, but also for its majority.

69 See J. Seidemanetal. The Worker Views His Union. Chicago. 1958; p. 234; S. M. Lipset. The First New Nation. N. Y. 1965, pp. 194 - 196; J. Barbash. The Structure of Union Political Action: A Trial Analytic Framework. "Labor Law Journal". Vol. 16. 1965, August.

70 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. vol. 21, p. 8.

71 Ibid., pp. 262, 263, 347, 348.

72 G. Hall. The struggle against imperialism is the common task of the Communists and of all the revolutionary forces of our time. "Leninism and the World Revolutionary Labor Movement", Moscow, 1969, p. 129.

73 См. "Political Affairs", 1969, January, p. 8.

74 "Political Affairs", 1968, February, p. 25.

75 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 36, p. 578.

page 33

Permanent link to this publication: