Main LA Index | Main Newspaper Index

Encyclopedia of Trotskyism | Marxists’ Internet Archive


Labor Action, 26 June 1950

 

Daniel Welsh

CP Fronts

Stalinist Party Losing Out in Non-Party Sympathizers

 

From Labor Action, Vol. 14 No. 26, 26 June 1950, p. 2.
Transcribed & marked up by Einde O’Callaghan for ETOL.

 

In a previous article, we reviewed some figures on membership in the Communist Party, made public through its press. Another yardsink of organizational strength is the amount of money which the Stalinists were able to collect under direct party auspices.

While no figures are given as to total dues collected, the CP claims to have raised, in the course of three fund drives during 1949, the sum of $2,500,000, and in addition to have collected $1,000,000 in the course of ten days as a special bail fund for the twelve Stalinist leaders. It will be recognized that this is no mean achievement, even for a party of the CP’s reputed size, and it certainly, compares favorably with Stalinist fund-raising efforts of previous years. It would appear from these figures that the CP still retains the loyalty and financial support of a large part of its previous supporters.

Yet even if these figures can be trusted, the picture is not really as favorable for the CP as would appear at first glance. A great deal of the money raised through direct party sources had to be devoted to purposes which previously would have been taken care of through contributions from non-party members.

This is a consequence of the Stalinists’ growing isolation and estrangement from hoodwinked liberals who were formerly willing to contribute to the vast and elaborate network of Stalinist front organizations. The decline of such organizations as the “Friends of the Soviet Union” (in its various forms) and the “Independent Committee of the Arts, Sciences and Professions,” and the consequent decline in their financial status is not reflected by figures of the party itself.
 

Fronts Are Floundering

Yet these organizations operated as direct auxiliaries to the party apparatus and supplied immense amounts of money for maintenance of functionaries who were almost always Stalinist hacks. Today liberals are much more wary of contributing to organizations which are clearly Stalinist-dominated.

An example of how this tendency operates, aided by the typical bureaucratic intransigence that Stalinists always display toward opponents, is the fate of the New York Civil Rights Conference. Originally designed to found a broad defense movement behind the “Case of the Twelve,” this “united front coalition” floundered when many of the liberals refused to go along with the Stalinists in opposing civil rights for “Trotskyite fascists.” The Stalinists found it necessary to abandon this enterprise and set up a much more narrowly constituted “Non-Partisan Committee in Defense of the Twelve Communist Leaders.” Thereafter they were much more restricted in defense efforts.

Another interesting sidelight shows how the Stalinists are forced by bureaucratic-ideological considerations to disregard general political interests. When Anna Louise Strong sent the Non-Partisan Committee a check for $1,000, the money was returned with a curt rejection to the effect that “an anti-Soviet agent” could not buy her way info “progressive ranks.” The effects of the Tito split, given in financial terms, are seen in the failure of the Stalinist fund-drive among its Yugoslav periphery. While during the war it was capable of raising over $50,000 from this group alone, it is currently engaged in a similar effort and has been unable to raise even one fifth of that sum.

Thus while we are given a picture of general financial stability in the Communist Party itself, its growing isolation has resulted in a considerable diminution of total Stalinist financial strength.

Another criterion of organizational influence is the CP press circulation. Here again we see that insofar as it measures party strength directly, the Stalinists claim not to have been affected too greatly by the government witchhunt. Circulation of the weekly Worker stood at an average of 79,000 throughout 1949. Fluctuation was considerable, due to the importance of sub drives. These drives are a direct party function and give some measure of actual party strength in terms of active sub-getters, who would appear to be no fewer than in previous years.
 

Growing Isolation from Sympathizers

On the other hand, in circulation of the daily press, which gives a better picture of general popularity, a decline has certainly taken place. Daily Worker circulation is down to 18,000, a new low point in its history. Another interesting fact is that of its total circulation only 3,000 copies are distributed outside of New York City, so that if every copy were sold to a member, that would still mean that only one out of every eight claimed members read the party press.

Of course it is a well-known facf that on certain campuses people are discouraged from reading the Daily Workers because Stalinist student leaders themselves consider it so atrocious. Even greater declines have taken place in the circulation of some of the foreign-language papers, particularly the Yugoslav organ.

 
Top of page


Main LA Index | Main Newspaper Index

Encyclopedia of Trotskyism | Marxists’ Internet Archive

Last updated on 6 February 2024