Wrapping up our look at U.S. imperialism in the countries of the Caribbean and Central America with what has always been the ‘prize’, rarely to be controlled by the U.S., the giant, immensely important country of Mexico. With among the most profound revolutionary traditions in the world, Mexican radicalism has played key role over the last century in radicalizing the U.S. left and workers’ movements. Here a representative of the Mexican Communist Party’s leadership gives a report to the U.S. Communist Party’s leadership on the situation there in 1930. Will be of interest to all students of the Mexican left.

‘The Revolutionary Movement in Mexico’ from The Communist. Vol. 10 Nos. 2 & 3. February & March, 1930.

Report of the Representative of the Central Committee of the Mexican Communist Party before the Plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the United States, November 24, 1930.

The presence of a delegate of the Communist Party of Mexico at the Plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the United States has great importance from the point of view of cooperation between the two Parties, and in general between the Communist Party of the United States and the Communist Parties of the Latin-American countries. The colonial theses of the Communist International impose upon the Communist Parties of the imperialist countries the duty of supporting the revolutionary movement of the colonies and semi-colonies, which is a most important part of the world proletarian revolution. This struggle, weakening the power of imperialism in its economic bases in the colonies, helps the struggle of the proletariat of the imperialist country against its own bourgeoisie. My presence at this Plenum indicates that both the Communist Party of the United States and the Communist Party of Mexico are beginning to correct the error made up to this time, in failing to maintain regular and close relations for effective cooperation.

COOPERATION BETWEEN THE PARTIES

The first acts of practical cooperation of the Communist Party of the United States with the Communist Parties of Latin-America were the demonstrations against Ortiz Rubio and in support of the revolutionary movements of Cuba and of Haiti. These demonstrations made the toilers of those countries understand that there exists in the United States a revolutionary movement and a Communist Party able to support the struggle of the workers and poor farmers of Latin America against Yankee imperialism. The first act of theoretical and political cooperation of the Communist Party of the United States with the Communist Parties of Latin America was the article published in the May number of the Communist, on “Problems of the Communist Party of Mexico.”

The theses of July, 1929, of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Mexico, which represent a great effort towards correcting the old opportunist errors of our Party, and towards the orientation of our Party on the line of the Communist International, unquestionably embody some of the old errors, specifically on one of the fundamental questions in Mexico: the role of the imperialists in relation to the social groups within the country. These July theses considered Yankee imperialism as absolute master of the situation in Mexico, and English imperialism as weakened in the extreme and no longer an important factor in the country’s politics. Consequently, the theses considered all the counter-revolutionary forces in Mexico as grouped in one solid bloc, under the direction of Yankee imperialism. This incorrect conception limited the outlook of the revolutionary movement in Mexico and led to pessimistic conclusions as to the opportunities and possibilities of action of our Party. The Central Committee of the Communist Party of the United States, by its article in the Communist, made us see this error in our theses, thus helping us to clarify and rectify our political line. Today, our Party has a clearer and more correct view of the situation in Mexico, and of the possibilities and perspectives of the revolutionary movement.

WAR PREPARATIONS

Aside from the general reasons expressed in the colonial theses of the C.I., there are special reasons—based on the concrete situation on the American continent—for making closer and more effective the cooperation between our Parties. The first reason is that Mexico is not only a market and a source of raw material for Yankee imperialism, but also an important strategical point, with means of communication, naval bases, bases of supply, for war when this breaks out. The whole policy of the United States in Mexico is a policy of preparation for war. The tourist propaganda, the construction of highways, and the opening up of air routes have as their object first and foremost the perfection of means of communication and transport, to make it easier for the Yankee government to mobilize its troops and war supplies, and to extract fuel and raw materials. The Pan-American road will permit the United States to move its forces rapidly across Mexico to Central America and the Panama Canal. That the government of Mexico is already an ally of Yankee imperialism for the next war is shown by the declaration of General Almazan, Secretary of Means of Communication and Public Works, that “in case of a war in which the United States takes part, Mexico, for its own interests, should place itself on the side of the powerful country of North America.”

These preparations for war indicate not only the imminence of an armed conflict between the United States and England, but also the increased danger of imperialist aggression against the Soviet Union. Ortiz Rubio is today an instrument of Washington for anti-Soviet agitation and intrigue; it was Ortiz Rubio who received the orders of Hoover in Washington on breaking off relations with the Soviet Union; it was he who ordered the police attack on the Soviet legation; it was he who deported from the country Lulinsky, the representative of the Amtorg Corporation; and it is he who has placed himself at the service of the Fish Committee, in the capacity of Yankee police chief in Mexico. All this means that our Parties must establish an ever-closer and more regular cooperation for the struggle against the war preparations—and against the war itself, when the moment arrives—and for the defense of the Soviet Union.

THE MEXICAN CRISIS

Again, the economic crisis in the Latin-American countries, with the growing discontent of the masses of workers and poor peasants, serves as the basis for a series of armed movements which are at bottom not lacking in expressions of the struggle of the rival imperialisms for the economic and political control of these countries. The bourgeoisie, the petty bourgeoisie, and the feudal elements of these countries are grouped into factions which fight one another for their own class interests; but also, and above all, for the interests of the English and Yankee imperialisms. This is the case in Bolivia and Peru, where the capitalists of England subsidized the military movements against Siles and Leguia, the instruments of Yankee finance capital. This is the case in Argentina, where the interests of the United States counter-attacked the rival interests, ousting Irigoyen, the “friend” of England. This is likewise the case in Brazil, where both imperialisms are fighting up to the present day for control of the coffee plantations and the mines.

In these armed struggles for the interests of the national bourgeoisie and the imperialists, the workers and poor peasants were dragged into the bourgeois, petty-bourgeois, and feudal factions. This was possible through the lack of Communist Parties capable of organizing, mobilizing, and leading the workers and poor peasants in struggle as an independent force and for their class demands, against all the factions, against both imperialisms, for the national liberation of these countries and for the setting up of Workers’ and Peasants’ Governments. The most urgent task, then, is the organization of real Communist Parties in the Latin-American countries; and this task can be accomplished only with the cooperation and support of the Communist Party of the United States.

The economic crisis in Mexico is an aspect of the American continental crisis, which in turn is a part of the world crisis. All the Latin-American countries, whose economy is based on agriculture and on the production of raw materials, have been terribly hit by the world crisis. In Brazil the most important factor of the crisis is the fall in the price of coffee; in Argentina, the fall in the price of wheat and of meat; in Chile, of nitrate; in Bolivia, of tin; in Mexico, of silver. In Mexico the crisis has forced a reduction in the output of oil. The taxes on petroleum, in the years of greatest production, amounted to more than 30 per cent of the budget. The reduction in the oil output, therefore, damaged business severely, preparing the ground for the present crisis, which is unparalleled in the history of the country. The crisis is further heightened by decreased production in light industries, such as textiles and shoes, and in agriculture. But the most important factors heightening the crisis in Mexico are:

(a) Narrowing down of the market in the United States, which leads to a decrease in the exports from Mexico to the United States. (A large percentage of the foreign trade of Mexico is done with North America.)

(b) The Hawley-Smoot tariff, which limits Mexico’s exports to the United States to 50,000,000 pesos yearly.

(c) The Lamont-Montes de Oca financial agreement, which calls for the shipment of 30,000,000 pesos in gold coin yearly to Wall Street, as payment for the foreign debt, and on the basis of which 10,000,000 pesos have already been sent.

(d) Pressure of Yankee imperialism constantly to increase the exports from the United States to Mexico, converting that country into a market exclusively for Yankee industry and agriculture.

(e) Deportation from Yankee territory of Mexican workers by the tens of thousands, who will swell the army of the unemployed in Mexico.

As a result of this brutal policy—the policy of the House of Morgan, implanted in Mexico by Ambassador Morrow, in three years of “intelligent” diplomacy—in the first eight months of the year, the trade balance of Mexico showed a deficit of 42,000,000 pesos. Adding to this sum the 10,000,000 pesos sent to the Bankers’ Committee as first payment on the debt, we have 52,000,000 pesos taken from the gold resources of the country, which have not for many years exceeded 100,000,000 pesos. All this causes a depreciation of the silver money—the money current in Mexico—and as a result, a rise in the cost of living, and the heightening of the misery in which hundreds of thousands of workers and peasants and their families are struggling. All the efforts of the bourgeoisie and of the government of Ortiz Rubio to alleviate the crisis have been and will be futile. The government is powerless to stop the depreciation of silver money. The crisis will continue to deepen, above all as a result of the decrease in the exports on the basis of the Hawley-Smoot tariff, which was put into force in July and which for that reason will make its effects felt the more disastrously at the end of the year, and even more next year.

RISE OF FASCISM

The government of Ortiz Rubio is already a fascist government. After its agreement with Washington, the government tends to strengthen its alliance with the big capitalists in the country. The economic policy of the government is a policy of barefaced protection of capital, and above all of foreign capital and its national allies. This protection shows itself in reduction of and exemption from taxation for mining and other important industries; in the special laws for protection of industry, and, above all, in the systematic authorization of lockouts, readjustments and cutting of wages. Many thousands of miners, railroad, and textile workers have been thrown on the streets with the authorization of the government. Many thousands more are working short time, at starvation wages. The most recent event is the agreement with the bosses in the textile industry to reduce the working week—with corresponding wage cuts—to three or four days.

The government is cementing its alliance, first and foremost, with the big commercial importers of foreign goods—especially Yankee goods. This group, highly developed and notably rich in Mexico, finds itself tied up with Yankee finance capital through the branch of the National City Bank in Mexico. It counts upon the absolute support of Amaro, the Secretary of War, of Montes de Oca, Secretary of the Interior, and of President Ortiz Rubio, who head the faction charged with carrying out Wall Street’s program in Mexico. The big import trade holds in its hands the Tariff Commission—which is dependent on the executive—and uses it to keep in force tariffs favoring the importation of foreign products.

ATTACK ON AGRARIAN MOVEMENT

An important—perhaps the most important—aspect of the policy of Ortiz Rubio is the destruction of the agrarian movement. On November 7 Rubio declared publicly that the time has come to make an end of all workers’ and peasants’ agitation, and to protect private wealth, thus laying the bases for the financial prosperity of the country. The following day he sent to Congress a draft bill to amend the law on distribution and restitution of land, which is the first legal step toward leaving definitely landless 900,000 poor peasants and tenant farmers, and more than 1,000,000 agricultural workers. At the same time, Rubio proposes a law for agricultural credits which would require the poor peasant to buy shares in the Agricultural Bank as an indispensable condition for getting credit. Of course, this law has the object of strengthening the well-to-do peasants—the petty bourgeoisie of the countryside—and of completing the ruin of the great mass of poor peasants.

The results of the agrarian reform have been: 590,000 peasants deprived of land, many of whom have abandoned the land because they could not cultivate it, and have returned to work as peons or have gone to swell the army of unemployed; 2,000,000 agricultural workers and poor peasants altogether landless; 7,000,000 hectares which had been given to the poor peasants and 160,000,000 hectares in possession of foreign enterprises, big landlords, landowners, and ranchers. In Mexico, as in all other places where it has been carried through, the bourgeois agrarian reform has created merely a stratum of petty bourgeoisie, whose role consists of side-tracking the struggle of the poor peasants for land. The conclusion is, without question, that the central problem in Mexico is the land problem, the lever which moved the rural masses in the bourgeois revolution of 1910, and which will move them again in the coming workers’ and peasants’ revolution.

POLICY OF BRUTAL REPRESSION

In order to further its policy against the masses, the Rubio government is using ever more brutal methods of suppressing the revolutionary movement, as is shown by the assassination en masse of 20 workers and poor peasants in Matamoras, on June 29, and the torture recently inflicted in Torreon on a young Communist, whose fingernails were torn out to force him to speak. The prisons of the country are being filled with Communists and militant revolutionists. Strikes are smashed “legally” by boards of conciliation and arbitration, or by the military power of the army. The leaders are exiled to the penal islands. The Central Committee of the Communist Party and all its local organizations; the National Committee of the Unitary Trade Union Confederation; the National Committee of the Mexican section of the Red Aid and the majority of its local organizations, are working under the most complete illegality. The government counts upon the effective cooperation of the social-fascist organizations (the so-called autonomous unions, the railroad workers’ societies, the anarcho-fascists of the C.G.T., and also, in spite of their “opposition,” the labor-fascists of the CROM). These forces break strikes, hinder every struggle of the workers, and, especially the laborites, organize the hunting down of militant revolutionists by special bands of gunmen. The government counts also upon the fascists of the countryside, the former supporters of the agrarian policy, now become fascist and drawn into the army as reserves.

At the same time that the white terror grows, the government begins to restrict the “labor” and “pro-peasant” demagogy which has been in use in Mexico since 1910 to win the masses. This does not mean that the government has put demagogy aside. It means only that it has ceased to be the chief method of the government in its relation with the masses, as it was during the provisional government of Portes Gil. Demagogy has been entrusted in the past months to the National Revolutionary Party, which, together with the Workers’ and Peasants’ University, the Missions for Social Action, the pushing of sports and the publication of “anti-imperialist” articles in its periodical, is trying to keep up the illusions of the working peasant classes about the government. The demagogic activity, official and semi-official, by means of organizations created or supported by the government, has been concentrated for some time on the question of the unemployed. As in the United States, the bourgeoisie in Mexico is striving to hinder the organization and mobilization of the unemployed under the leadership of our Party, creating and nourishing in them illusions about the solution of their problem by the government.

RUBIO GOVERNMENT UNSTABLE

The stability of the government of Ortiz Rubio is merely apparent. Hunger and misery are pushing the masses of workers and poor peasants into the fight for bread, for wages, for land, and for better living conditions. The 800,000 unemployed and the many thousands more of workers working short time; the ruined peasantry; the petty bourgeoisie smashed by the crisis, are factors for the break-up of the government. The workers are beginning to agitate and fight against the lock-outs, the “readjustments,” and reductions in wages. We have already had the strike of the miners at Nacozari, the agitation in Pachuca against the order authorizing a cut of 50 per cent in the working force in the mines (which was repealed by the government), and the plundering of the food stores in Concepcion del Oro, by the unemployed miners. In the countryside there is growing what the bourgeois papers call “banditry,” that is to say, parties of peasants who fight with arms against landlords, against the white guards, against hunger, against the federal forces which try to disarm them. In Mexico there are large numbers of peasants who have kept their arms since the movements of De la Huerta, Serrano-Gomez, and Aguirre-Manzo Escobar, in which they were dragged into the fight for the bourgeois factions. The petty bourgeoisie—traders, shop-keepers, farmers—who in Mexico represent an important and active factor, is breaking into demonstrations, like those of Puebla and Tlaxcala, against the high taxes. The native Indian tribes, such as the Yaquis of Sonora, the Coras and Huicholes of the states of Nayarit and Jalisco, important although not numerous, have decided to fight for the land from which they have been ousted.

The most acute recent aspect of the crisis in Mexico has been the fight of the bourgeois factions, in the very heart of the government and of the National Revolutionary Party, the official party. The policy of the government, which is the policy of Washington, sharpening the economic crisis, depreciating the silver money and increasing the cost of living, has smashed and submerged certain groups of the national bourgeoisie, the petty industrialists, traders in wheat products, and agriculturalists. The big commercial importer—allied to Yankee finance capital—is getting big profits from the importation of foreign goods, and is ruining the infant industries of the country—the shoe and clothing factories, the old textile factories which are working with antiquated machinery, and also a certain section of the plantations. The Tariff Commission favors the import of automobiles and confections, foot-wear, cotton goods, chemical and pharmaceutical products, corn and wheat. The political crisis in October, which nearly ended in an armed struggle, was due to the resistance of the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois groups prejudiced against the policy of the government. It is precisely these groups that make up the basis for the National Revolutionary Party, which controls the Congress, which brought Rubio to power, and which, since its inception, has been an instrument of Yankee capital. Hence the struggle, begun in the Congress, against the Tariff Commission and against the Lamont-Montes de Oca agreement. The petty bourgeois trend, the “leftist” trend, of the National Revolutionary Party, attempted to continue the demagogy of Portes Gil and to nourish the illusions about “national economy,” about the conciliation of the interests of imperialism with the interests of the Mexican bourgeoisie.

BOURGEOIS FACTIONS COMPROMISE

The quarreling factions succeeded in temporarily “settling” their difficulties in October, thanks to the intervention of North American diplomacy and with the aid of Calles. Calles is the founder of the National Revolutionary Party, the “chief of the revolution,” as he is called in Mexico. He is at the same time a leader of the industrial and agrarian bourgeoisie; but he is also allied to Yankee capital. The compromise achieved the elimination of Portes Gil as president of the National Revolutionary Party; of Puig Casauranc as head of the Department of the Federal District (an office as important as that of minister), and of Luis Leon, Secretary of Industry, Commerce, and Labor—the three demagogues, petty-bourgeois “leftists.” But the factional struggle continues. Big capital has strengthened its position in the government. Puig Casuaranc and Leon were replaced, respectively, by a leader of the Confederation of Chambers of Commerce and by a member of the industrial council of Monterey, the most important industrial center of the country. In the leadership of the National Revolutionary Party was placed a general of the army, who immediately began to restrain demagogy and as a result orientated the party towards a policy of support of the government. The present leadership of the National Revolutionary Party has capitulated on a question of tariff control—the result was favorable to importers and Yankee finance capital.

But the greater the pressure of the government and of imperialist capital, the greater the resistance of the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois groups prejudiced against it. The active opposition, without failing to show itself in Congress, now manifests itself above all in the states. In the Peasant Congress of Jalapa, October 3031, Tejeda, the governor of Vera Cruz, an extremely dangerous petty-bourgeois demagogue, and Andrew Almazan, the governor of Puebla, put forth a challenge to the federal government, demanding: (a) suspension of the payment of the foreign debt; (b) indefinite suspension of the payment of the agrarian debt and nullification of the farm mortgages in the hands of the speculators (that is to say, in the hands of the National City Bank, which got them for 5 centavos on the peso); (c) indefinite continuance of the agrarian reform, which the government has begun to abandon. On this last point a resolution was adopted threatening the government with armed struggle of the peasants for the land. Governor Almazan declared categorically that the “revolutionary family” is divided into two factions which are fighting each other and made it clearly understood that this struggle is leading to an armed clash.

YANKEE-ENGLISH RIVALRY SHARPENS

On this basis, there is sharpening in Mexico the rivalry of English and Yankee imperialisms. The latter is on the offensive. The diplomacy of Morrow captured excellent positions for Wall Street, such as the opening of the branch of the National City Bank, which has begun to control the finances; the investment of more than $100,000,000 by the General Electric Company toward a monopoly in electric power; the Lamont-Montes de Oca agreement, which puts in the hands of the House of Morgan the control of all the foreign debts of the government and which stipulates the reorganization of the National Railroad, strengthening Morgan’s control over this, the most important enterprise in the country. But it would be erroneous to think that English imperialism is retreating. The English retain one of the biggest railroad lines, the Mexican Railway; the Mexican Light and Power Company, which is a serious obstacle to the monopoly which the General Electric intends; and the powerful “El Aguila” oil company, which last year paid 50 per cent of all the taxes on oil and was valued at 17,000,000 pesos. English capital, moreover, has a strong hand in the Swedish enterprise of the Ericson telephones, which is engaged in a furious competition with the Mexican Telephone and Telegraph Company, of Yankee capital. Also, the British interests in the mining and other industries are considerable.

It is evident that English capital has not ceased to maneuver in Mexico. It is seeking revenge for the defeats suffered in 1923 (De la Huerta), in 1927 (Serrano-Gomez), and in 1929 (Escobar, Aguirre-Manzo). In the months preceding the July elections for deputies and senators, and in the days following the elections, the Labor Party and the CROM carried out a campaign against the National Revolutionary Party, and above all against Portes Gil, the traditional enemy of the laborites. But this campaign was, objectively, an aspect of the struggle of English capital against the regime established by the Yankee interests, and against the party which has since its inception been in the service of these interests. One of the leaders of the Labor Party, Lombardo Toledano, declared in a speech that “we must place in opposition to the penetration of Yankee capital, engulfing and dangerous, the investment of European capital—that is to say, English capital—more progressive and less dangerous.” Today we can see the alliance of Morones and his party, at least in Vera Cruz, with the petty-bourgeois “leftists,” whose notorious representative is Tejeda, and who are the very ones designated to lead the armed struggle against the group which serves Yankee interests. The demagogy of Tejeda in the Peasants’ Congress at Jalapa had for its object to fool the poor peasants of the state, to draw their discontent into another channel, to stop the spread of the influence of our Party, which had an important fraction at the Congress; but also, and above all, to assure to itself the support of the peasants and on this basis to prepare the armed struggle, which has merely been postponed and which must inevitably break out.

ROLE OF THE PARTY

The economic and political situation of Mexico raises before us an extremely important question—the role of our Party when the armed struggle of the bourgeois factions breaks out. The Central Committee of our Party held an enlarged plenum in October and adopted a resolution laying down the line; independent armed struggle, against both factions, for the smashing of the bourgeois-imperialist regime and for the setting up of a Workers’ and Peasants’ Government. The perspective for independent armed struggle is linked up, of course, with the struggle for the immediate demands of the workers and poor peasants; against lockouts, against wage cuts, against the rising cost of living, for unemployment insurance, for land for the poor peasants, against their being disarmed. But the only perspective in the case of an armed struggle of the bourgeois factions is independent armed struggle of the workers and poor peasants under the leadership of the Party.

Just before I left Mexico, we received information about the Latin-American Conference of the Comintern, held in Moscow after the Congress of the R.I.L.U. At this conference Comrade Manuilsky showed the error of a single perspective of “independent armed struggle,” explaining that the weakness of our Latin-American parties may hinder the realization of this slogan in practice, and that, on the other hand, our parties can and should take advantage of the armed struggle of the bourgeois factions to push forward and develop the revolutionary movement, with other forms of independent struggle, such as strikes, mass demonstrations, and arming of the workers and poor peasants for the defense of their organizations, all based on concrete demands of the workers and peasants. My opinion is that Comrade Manuilsky is correct, and I believe that our Central Committee will revise this weak point in our October resolution when it receives the complete material from the Latin-American Conference.

TASKS BEFORE THE PARTY

But the important thing is to determine the tasks of the Party and to examine the forces with which we have to carry them out.

The October resolution, which I have already mentioned, recognizes that the Party finds itself, both from the point of view of organization and from the political point of view, not up to its tasks. The resolution concludes that the only way of preventing the Party from dragging at the tail of events is to redouble its activity in mass work, to develop its local organizations, to penetrate and strike roots in the basic industries and the agricultural centers, to create within itself the leading cadres which it lacks, and, in a word, to transform its weakness into strength and to make itself capable of organizing and directing the great mass struggles which are approaching in Mexico.

The weakness of our Party, of the Young Communist League, and of the revolutionary unions is, before all else, a reflection of the weakness, youth, and lack of experience of the Mexican proletariat. But it is likewise a result of the old opportunist errors which we committed in 10 years of failure to understand the economic and political events of the country, the true character of the so-called “revolutionary” governments, which were considered to be “anti-imperialist to a certain extent,” and, as a result, a failure to understand the role of our Party. The Party finds itself much weakened, also, by the fascist repression and by the struggle against the so-called “opposition,” which has been a petty-bourgeois attempt to continue the old line of collaboration with the government and which has tried to justify itself theoretically, rallying around the point of view of the international right-wing groups. But this organizational weakness (many desertions and expulsions), and this political weakness (decrease in the leading cadres) is actually a basis for strengthening and developing the Party, now freed from the elements hindering the application of the correct line.

SHARP CHANGE NECESSARY

Aside from some special problems, peculiar to the semi-colonial country in which it is functioning, our Party has to confront all the problems and all the difficulties which face the Communist Party of the United States and which are being discussed at this Plenum. The most important question, there as here, is that of the complete change in the methods of work and of the very form of focusing on mass work and of approaching the masses. There, as here, there has been an excess of revolutionary phrases, of general questions, of high politics, and little attention to immediate demands, to concrete problems, to the economic struggles of the workers and poor peasants. We have been incapable of penetrating to the center of the work and of tying ourselves up closely with the life and the struggles of the toilers, in order to take up our role of organizers and leaders, not only of the workers’ and peasants’ revolution, but also of the struggle for better living conditions of the workers and poor peasants within the capitalist system.

The chief defect of our Party, from the point of view of organization, is the lack of nuclei in the factories, shops, mines, and plantations. The progress made in the reorganization of the Party on the basis of production is as yet very small. The majority of our factory nuclei are vegetating or dying for lack of political content and nourishment; the nuclei are organized in a mechanical way, without being imbued with life and activity as the basic bodies of the Party. On this point, fundamental for both Parties, there must be an interchange of experiences. The discussion at the Plenum on the organizational report has shown that the situation in the Communist Party of America, as far as the factory nuclei are concerned, is no better than that of our Party in Mexico.

THE TRADE UNION MOVEMENT

The revolutionary trade union movement—the Unitary Trade Union Confederation of Mexico—faces the same problem as the T.U.U.L. in the United States, sharpened by the low political level of the Mexican workers and by the fascist repression. Our trade union movement has remnants of reformism and anarcho-syndicalism, a natural thing in a country where reformism and anarcho-syndicalism have controlled the labor movement from its birth. The struggle against reformism, anarcho-syndicalism, and opportunism in the Unitary Trade Union Confederation of Mexico, was impossible with the presence of the right-wing elements in the Party. With the cleaning of the Party, there has begun the cleaning of the Unitary Trade Union Confederation of Mexico and the correction of its line, of its methods of work and struggle.

A central question at the present time in Mexico is the question of the relations between the Party and the Unitary Confederation, the work of the fractions in the trade unions, the creation of leading cadres, and the working out and application of a trade union line for the Unitary Confederation. Then come the question of the factory committees as a base of organization, the question of the united front from below, of the leadership of strikes. In the matter of organization, the most important thing for us now is the work among the agricultural laborers, who in Mexico are in a majority and who will be the basis for our Party in the countryside and a decisive force in the workers’ and peasants’ revolution. This work has been begun, some progress has been made in the banana region of Vera Cruz and Oaxaca, where the United Fruit Company has its hold. But there remain hundreds of thousands of peons, on the cotton and hemp fields, on the sugar cane plantations, on the corn and wheat farms, who must be organized in the unions of the Unitary Confederation. One of the most important defects of our work is the lack of attention given to the organization of the 800,000 peons, employed and unemployed workers in the country, and the serious errors committed in the few attempts made up to now—errors which greatly resemble those of the American Communist Party and which we are fighting to correct.

ORGANIZING THE PEASANTS

A question of extreme importance in Mexico is the organization of the poor peasants. There was formerly a great deal of confusion in our Party on this point. Today, our line is clear: the agricultural workers have nothing to do with the peasant organizations, but must be organized into revolutionary unions, in the sections of the Unitary Confederation. The poor peasants, properly so-called, the peasants attached to the communes (which have received land that is insufficient and poor, and who lack machinery to work with), the poor tenants, the middle peasants and the share-croppers, exploited by the land-owners and bankers, must form their regional organizations, linked up with the revolutionary unions by solidarity agreements and under the control of the Party through Communist nuclei in the countryside. In this connection, we have the question of the native tribes, which constitute a special problem, and which our Party has for the first time begun to take up seriously. The native tribes—the few who remain in their primitive communities—show certain characteristics of national minorities. These characteristics must be taken into account by our Central Committee in discussing this question, which is very important because of the fact that the native tribes have always been a fighting force—intelligently used by the petty-bourgeois leaders in Mexico in their armed struggles.

SOME DEFECTS

Our October resolution also points out the defects of our work in the non-Party mass organizations: the Anti-Imperialist League, the Red Aid, the anti-clerical and atheist organizations, and the necessity of developing them as instruments for mobilizing the non-Party workers and poor peasants, and also other elements capable of aiding the revolutionary movement. It emphasizes particularly the complete lack of work among women, who in Mexico represent a very important factor in production, and the complete lack of attention to sport work (a special task of the Youth League), all the more important because sport is one of the weapons of the government for the fascization of the working class youth. It emphasizes also the necessity of building a Pioneer organization and of combating among the children the fascist propaganda of the government, which has today gone to the point of forming children’s police corps. The resolution mentions also the anti-militarist work, which has been begun (above all by the Youth League) with a certain amount of success, and which must be continued, fighting to crystallize in the barracks the sympathy already existing there among the soldiers. Lastly, it points out to the Party the need for organizing the “Workers’ and Peasants’ Defense,” for the defense of the revolutionary organizations, of their demonstrations and meetings, of their strikes, of their speakers and leaders, against the bands of fascist gunmen and the state forces.

PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS

I want to end by making some practical suggestions which, I hope, will be considered. Besides the general program of “adoption” of the Latin-American Parties by districts of the Communist Party of the United States, I suggest the following:

(a) That there be begun seriously the work of organizing the Latin-American workers living in the United States, doing away with the tendency—which is visible within the Communist Party of America—to turn this task over exclusively to the Spanish-speaking militants. My opinion is that the Party should consider this work as one of its most important tasks and devote to it the American comrades who are studying Spanish and the problems of the Latin-American workers.

(b) That special attention be given to the organization of the workers of the South and West, all along the border, to establish connections and make possible joint action of both Parties on the frontier. In this connection, the Communist Party of the United States, basing itself on its organizations in Upper California, should help the Communist Party of Mexico to create Communist groups and revolutionary unions in Lower California.

(c) That, in accordance with the decisions of the Seventh Convention of the American Party on “adoption,” every district create a committee charged with formulating and applying a concrete plan of assistance to the particular Latin-American Party which it has adopted.

(d) That every district, as a part of this plan, support a student of the respective Latin-American country in the American Party School. In this way comrades can be trained who are connected with the masses of their respective countries, and who can go back to work in these countries at the end of their studies in the school.

(e) That the Colonial Department of the Central Committee of the C.P.U.S.A. help the Communist Parties with literature in Spanish. The problem of literature is one of the most difficult for our Parties.

(f) That the C.P.U.S.A. and the Y.C.L. make an effort to send some comrades to these countries to help our militants in the building of the Communist Parties. We must wipe out the stain of Wolfe, Weisbord, and Blackwell, and send good comrades to help us and straighten out what these others bungled.

(g) That at all the national meetings of the C.P.U.S.A. and of the Trade Union Unity League (plenums, conferences, conventions), an invitation be extended to the Parties and trade union organizations of the Caribbean countries—at least to the most important of them, such as Mexico, Cuba, Panama, Salvador.

(h) That effective cooperation be established between the Unitary Trade Union Confederation of Mexico and the revolutionary trade union organizations of the Caribbean, on concrete points, with specific forms of joint work and cooperation, which can be laid down by the National Committees of these organizations, on motion of the fractions, and the carrying out of which must be carefully supervised by the Central Committees of the Parties.

Comrades, it is my desire that the close cooperation of our Parties, that the assistance of the Communist Party of the United States to the Communist Parties of Latin-America, already begun, be in the future more effective and more regular; that all the resolutions adopted on this question be translated into action, and that at the next national convention of the Communist Party of the United States, it will be possible to show practical results.

Translated by MARGARET NEAL

There are a number of journals with this name in the history of the movement. This ‘Communist’ was the main theoretical journal of the Communist Party from 1927 until 1944. Its origins lie with the folding of The Liberator, Soviet Russia Pictorial, and Labor Herald together into Workers Monthly as the new unified Communist Party’s official cultural and discussion magazine in November, 1924. Workers Monthly became The Communist in March, 1927 and was also published monthly. The Communist contains the most thorough archive of the Communist Party’s positions and thinking during its run. The New Masses became the main cultural vehicle for the CP and the Communist, though it began with with more vibrancy and discussion, became increasingly an organ of Comintern and CP program. Over its run the tagline went from “A Theoretical Magazine for the Discussion of Revolutionary Problems” to “A Magazine of the Theory and Practice of Marxism-Leninism” to “A Marxist Magazine Devoted to Advancement of Democratic Thought and Action.” The aesthetic of the journal also changed dramatically over its years. Editors included Earl Browder, Alex Bittelman, Max Bedacht, and Bertram D. Wolfe.

PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/communist/v10n02-feb-1931-communist.pdf

PDF of issue 2: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/communist/v10n03-mar-1931-communist.pdf