West Coast left-winger and radical lawyer, Clarence Meily sees the divisions in the Socialist Party between ‘opportunists’ and ‘impossibilists’ reflecting a material division within the working class and urges a revolutionary, ‘middle course.’

‘Actual Divisions: Dangers to the Socialist Movement’ by Clarence Meily from Revolt (San Francisco). Vol. 2 No. 8. August 19, 1911.

All of us are familiar with the cleavage in the ranks of the capitalist class which divides it into two groups of large and small proprietors, the captains of industry on the one hand and the petty bourgeoisie on the other, and the bitter antagonism between the two which is manifested in the “reform” and “insurgency” movements in current politics. We are not so well acquainted with the fact that a similar cleavage exists in the ranks of the working class in the United States which likewise divides it into two groups between which there is a good deal of surly enmity. On the one hand is the better-placed workingman, the skilled laborer, owning some property, usually, at least, a home, having therefore a fixed place of residence and the residential qualifications necessary to enable him to vote, organized in some craft union affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, and still pretty thoroughly middle-class in his ideas, habit of mind and point of view. On the other hand is the unskilled worker, the “rough-neck.” propertyless, nomadic, without the right to vote, organized, as far as he is organized at all, in the Industrial Workers of the World, and strongly impregnated with a vague, aimless, smoldering anarchism.

As the Socialist party becomes more and more the actual, practical representative of the working class upon the political field, this factional division in the working class is reflected with ever-increasing clearness in the party organization. On the one hand are the “working-class opportunists” whose program of immediate demands, whose enthusiasm for measures of present relief, and whose thinly disguised indifference to the ultimate goal of capitalistic overthrow, correspond fairly well with the hopes and desires of the conservative craft-unionists. On the other hand are the “impossibilists” whose intense revolutionary radicalism and neglect of immediate practical concerns correspond equally well with the temper of the lower stratum of the proletariat. And it can not be denied that certain profound tendencies in modern industrial development, notably, the increasing impotence of the segregated craft unions in the intensifying struggle between capital and labor, and the constant improvement in machine methods of manufacture which render the skilled laborer superfluous, are steadily strengthening the position of the impossibilist wing of the party.

Each of these positions, both that of the opportunist and the impossibilist, has its peculiar danger. On the one hand, opportunism, pushed to an extreme. tends to degenerate into mere bourgeois reformism, to become involved in the questionable practices, the embarrassing compromises and dubious victories of old party politics, and to prove in the end a bitter, heart-breaking disappointment to the whole working class. On the other hand, impossibilism, pushed to a corresponding extreme, tends to fall into a quagmire of semi-violent. futile anarchism, to abandon political action and all persistent, organized, intelligent effort at close emancipation, and to prove equally disappointing and even more dangerous than a degenerate opportunism. It is but fair to say, however, that impossibilities are, as a rule, much more alive to their peculiar danger than are the opportunists to theirs.

As these two wings of the Socialist party, the opportunists and impossibilists, reflect an actual division in the working class, they must be regarded as normal, or, at all events, as likely to persist indefinitely. Theoretically, it seems easy to define an ideal middle course which all intelligent Socialists should take, in which the importance of immediate demands should be fully recognized while the revolutionary goal, the abolition of the wage system of industry, should be the inspiration and final aim of all our efforts, a middle course in which the warmest and closest relations should be maintained with the craft unions while the importance of industrial unionism should be insisted on and an equally friendly attitude shown toward the I.W.W. Practically, such a middle course is difficult to arrive at, owing largely to the antagonism and jealousies between the two factions of the working class itself. But there can be no question that such a course should be approximated as closely as possible, especially by Socialists who have, been intrusted with the responsibilities of office within the party. It is of the most crying importance that the Socialist party be made fully representative of all factions and divisions of the proletariat, as well as the effective voice of all the oppressed and exploited everywhere, whether on farm or in factory, and the haven of every rebellious spirit which has revolted against the iniquities and abominations of the capitalist regime. The Socialist party, if it is to fulfill its mission of social regeneration, must unite in a disciplined, intelligent, harmonious and sympathetic brotherhood not only the entire proletariat, but all others who can conscientiously undertake political action, on the basis of the class struggle and independent of all capitalist parties, for the destruction of the capitalist system of industry. It is as an instructor, harmonizer and unifier of the working class that the Socialist party can render that class its greatest service.

Revolt ‘The Voice Of The Militant Worker’ was a short-lived revolutionary weekly newspaper published by Left Wingers in the Socialist Party in 1911 and 1912 and closely associated with Tom Mooney. The legendary activists and political prisoner Thomas J. Mooney had recently left the I.W.W. and settled in the Bay. He would join with the SP Left in the Bay Area, like Austin Lewis, William McDevitt, Nathan Greist, and Cloudseley Johns to produce The Revolt. The paper ran around 1500 copies weekly, but financial problems ended its run after one year. Mooney was also embroiled in constant legal battles for his role in the Pacific Gas and Electric Strike of the time. The paper epitomizes the revolutionary Left of the SP before World War One with its mix of Marxist orthodoxy, industrial unionism, and counter-cultural attitude. To that it adds some of the best writers in the movement; it deserved a much longer run.

PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/revolt/v2n08-aug-19-1911-Revolt.pdf