Crude and already bloated, U.S. imperialism imposes its interests on Europe, with the assistance of its Social-Democrats, after the First World War. One in a series of articles by Trotsky published in Izvestia throughout 1924 looking at Europe ten years after the start of World War One. Republished concurrently in the Daily Worker, with additional material it was printed as a Comintern pamphlet, ‘Europe and America,’ in 1926.

‘American Imperialism and European Social-Democracy’ by Leon Trotsky from The Daily Workers Saturday Supplement. Vol. 2 No. 168. October 4, 1924.

Before we go any further into this very important question, let us see what rules has American capital assigned to the radicals and mensheviks, to the social-democracy of that same Europe which is to be put on rations. Social-democracy has been given the task–and I am making this statement not in the spirit of a debating trick–to prepare the ground, i.e., to help politically to deliver Europe to the mercies of an American ration. What are, after all, the social-democrats of Germany, France and the socialists of all of Europe doing now? Let us look and see. They are educating themselves and are trying to educate the laboring masses of Europe in the religion of Americanism. This does not mean that they have all turned presbyterian or quaker, but it means that they have made a new political religion out of Americanism, out of the role of American capital in Europe. They are teaching or trying to teach the laboring masses that without the “pacifying” role of American capital and without its loans, Europe will not be able to hold her own.

They are opposing their own bourgeoisie, as the social-patriots of Germany are doing, not from the point of view of the proletarian revolution, not even from the point or view of social reforms, but from the point of view of exposing the intolerance, greediness, chauvinism and unwillingness of the German bourgeoisie to come to terms with the humane, democratic pacifist capital of America. This is at present the main issue in the political life of Europe and especially of Germany! In other words we are witnessing the transformation of the European social-democracy into a political agency of American capital.

This transformation is not at all surprising. If we keep in mind the fact that social-democracy has become the agency of the bourgeoisie, it will be clear that social-democracy, by the very logic of its political degeneracy had to become the tool of the most powerful, mightiest bourgeoisie in the world, the arch-bourgeoisie, i.e., the bourgeoisie of the United States. Inasmuch as American capital is taking upon itself the task of unifying Europe, of teaching Europe how to settle her disputes about reparations, war indemnities, etc., and inasmuch as the money-bag is in the hands of the American bourgeoisie, it becomes necessary for the social-democracies of Germany and France, in order to continue their policy of serving the bourgeoisie, to gradually transfer their allegiance to the chief boss instead of obeying their own bourgeoisie. Yes, the big boss has come to Europe: American capital. Therefore, it is quite natural for the social-democracies of Europe to become politically dependent upon the master of their masters. This is the only clue to a proper understanding of the present position and policy of the Second International. He who does not make this fact clear to himself will fail to grasps the meaning of current events, will be merely skimming over the surface of things subsisting on vague, meaningless phraseology.

Moreover, favor courts favor. Social-democracy is paving the way for American capital; is running in front of its chariot announcing its saving mission and glorifying in the coming of the American, master. This work is not of little import. In former days imperialism would send missionaries as its advance guards. The priest would, as a rule, be shot by the savages in the colonies and sometimes, even devoured. The warrior would come next to avenge the death of the holy man, and following in the footsteps of the warrior would come the merchant and the administrator.

American capital, in order to colonize Europe and to turn her into an American dominion of the new type, has no need for missionaries. Right there, in the midst of Europe, American capital has found a political party whose sole function it is to proclaim to the people of the world the gospel of Wilson, the gospel of Coolidge, the bible of stock exchanges of New York and Chicago. Such is the present mission of European menshevism.

But I repeat again: This zeal of social-democracy does not remain unrewarded. The mensheviks are deriving quite some advantages from their mode of behavior. It was only recently, during the period of bitter civil strife that the social-democracy had to take upon itself the actual armed defense of the bourgeoisie against the working class, the same bourgeoisie which in fact was in alliance with the Fascisti. Noske is the living embodiment of this post-war policy of the German social-democracy. And how do things stand today? Today the social-democracy is playing a different role. The German social- democracy can afford now the luxury of maintaining an opposition to the bourgeoisie. The social-democrats can now criticise their own bourgeoisie thus differentiating themselves from the capitalist parties. But what is the nature of this opposition?

The German social-democracy thus speaks to its bourgeoisie: “You, the German bourgeoisie, are selfish, greedy, stupid and crafty, but there is on the other side of the Atlantic another bourgeoisie, one that is rich and powerful, but at the same time, noble, liberal and pacifist. This bourgeoisie has now come to us again and wishes to give us 800 million marks in hard cash to restore the value of our much- dilapidated mark (and promises of a stabilized gold mark sound good in Germany). What then are you kicking about: What is it that makes you feel so blue? You that had thrown the beloved fatherland headlong into the mire of poverty, how dare you resist the wishes of the American bourgeoisie? We shall mercilessly expose you before the masses of the German people!” Thus speaks the German social-democracy rising almost to the pathos of a revolutionary tribune in defense of the American bourgeoisie.

The same thing can be observed in France. But because of the political traditions of France and because of the more decent reputation of the French franc, the tactics of the French socialists are more subtle, things are done there under cover. In substance, however, it is the game of the German social-democracy. The party of Leon Blum, Renaudel and Jean Longuet, bears the full responsibility for the peace at Versailles and for the Ruhr occupation. There is not a shadow of a doubt now that the government of Herriot, supported by the socialists, does not want to evacuate the Ruhr.

But now the French socialists can say to their ally Herriot: “The Americans demand that you evacuate the Ruhr on certain conditions. This you have got to do, because now we, too, demand that.” The French socialists are putting out this demand not in the name of the French proletariat, but only because they want to subordinate the French bourgeoisie to the will of the American bourgeoisie. In this connection we must not forget the French bourgeoisie owes the American bourgeoisie 3,700 million dollars. This means something! America can at any moment shatter the French franc. Of course, the American bourgeoisie will not attempt to do that. No. She has come to Europe to introduce order and not to cause bankruptcies. Yes, she will not attempt to, but she could, if she wanted to. It is all in her power. In view of this colossal debt of almost four billions the arguments of Renaudel and Blum sound quite convincing to the French bourgeoisie. At the same time the social-democrats in Germany France and other countries are able to pursue the policy of an opposition to their own bourgeoisie on specific issues, thus stealing their way back into the confidence of certain sections of the working class.

Moreover, this present situation opens up for the menshevist parties of various parts of Europe certain possibilities for united “action.” Even now the social-democracy of Europe appears to be quite a harmonious body.

This fact is in a way new. For the past ten years, since the beginning of the imperialist war, there was not a single case of coordinated, action on the part of the European social- democracy. Now, such an opportunity has presented itself, and the mensheviks are now all, in one coordinated chorus singing a hymn to American imperialism supporting its program, its international function and its great mission. And here we find the causes for the  partial revival of this half-dead invalid, the Second International. For it is true that the Second, as well as the Amsterdam Internationals are again coming to life. Of course, they will not recover their pre-war vigor. Their former prestige is gone forever. The Communist International cannot be stricken out of existence, nor can this be done with the imperialist war which has seriously injured the spine of the Second International in many places at once. This is irreparable. And yet, with their spines broken, the Second and Amsterdam Internationals are making new efforts to rise up and straighten out their broken backs with the aid of American crutches.

The significance of this fact must be fully realized. During the imperialist war the German social-democracy” was the most intimate ally of its bourgeoisie, was openly co-operating with the junkers. The same is true of the French socialists. How could an international function when its component parts were madly killing each other, accusing and abusing each other? Not even a mask or shadow of internationalism was left. All was broken to pieces. During the period of peace negotiations the same conditions prevailed. The peace of Versailles was only a ratification of the results of the imperialist war by the signatures of diplomats. Not a bit of international solidarity was in evidence! Essentially the same situation prevailed during the Ruhr occupation.

But now the great “crush ’em all”–American capital–is coming to Europe and says: “Here is your reparation plan and here is your program, gentlemen of the menshevist parties!” And social-democracy accepts this program as the basis for its activity. This new program has united the social-democracy of France, Germany, England, Holland and Switzerland. For every Swiss trader now hopes that Switzerland will increase her trade in watches after peace and order has been restored in Europe by the enterprising Americans. And the petty bourgeoisie, which most nearly finds its expression in the social-democracy, is now united spiritually upon the program of Americanism. In other words, the Second International has now a unifying program, the program which General Dawes has brought over from Washington.

The situation is, indeed, paradoxical. At a time when American capital is starting out on its most thievish exploit, it has the opportunity of masquerading as a savior and peace restorer, as the personification, of historic justice, incidentally mapping out “international” policies for social-democracy which the latter accepts and recognizes as even more expedient than its former nationalistic policies. The expediency lies in this, that while your own bourgeoisie is right here at home and all its misdeeds can be immediately seen, American capital is remote and its transactions cannot be so easily observed. That is why American capital can come to Europe and play there the role of a pacifier. And then its power! This colossal, fabulous, unheard of wealth which so appeals to the vanity of the petty bourgeoisie, to the vanity of the social-democrat.

And here I might tell you, by the way, something of my own experiences with representatives of American capital. During the last year, due to my official position, I had the occasion to talk to some American senators, republican and democratic. Their appearance and manner betrays appalling provincialism. I am not even certain whether or not they are well acquainted with the geography of Europe. Out of politeness let us assume that they are. But when they discuss politics, they talk like this: “I told Poincare,” “I remarked to Curzon,” “I explained to Mussolini.” They feel themselves in Europe as leaders and bosses. Thus we can find some newly-hatched millionaire, some manufacturer of condensed milk or of other canned products speaking with an air of condescension to the most responsible bourgeois political leaders of Europe. And it is because of this fact that some maneuvers of the British bourgeoisie calculated to preserve her leadership in Europe, may prove to be faulty. But on this subject of Great Britain I shall speak in my next article.

The Saturday Supplement, later changed to a Sunday Supplement, of the Daily Worker was a place for longer articles with debate, international focus, literature, and documents presented. The Daily Worker began in 1924 and was published in New York City by the Communist Party US and its predecessor organizations. Among the most long-lasting and important left publications in US history, it had a circulation of 35,000 at its peak. The Daily Worker came from The Ohio Socialist, published by the Left Wing-dominated Socialist Party of Ohio in Cleveland from 1917 to November 1919, when it became became The Toiler, paper of the Communist Labor Party. In December 1921 the above-ground Workers Party of America merged the Toiler with the paper Workers Council to found The Worker, which became The Daily Worker beginning January 13, 1924.

PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/dailyworker/1924/v02a-n168-supplement-oct-04-1924-DW-LOC.pdf