UC-NRLF 
 
 B 2 ae? 52^ 
 
% 
 
 ^^^ 
 
 % y-' 
 
 ^'^t^' 
 
 k 
 
 1 
 
 
 HA- 
 
 "^.P 
 
 •4 
 
 ^'M 
 
 Y K I 
 
 ^M> t:i 
 
 
 ^■■-^r 
 
 .y<: 
 
 W 
 
 A 
 
 -'^. 
 
 .o. 
 
 <C,'i "r,^ U. 
 
ligitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2008 with funding from 
 ^ IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 rchive.org/details/dictatorshipofprOOkamerich 
 
The Dictatorship 
 of the Proletariat 
 
 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii^ 
 
 By L. KAMENEFF 
 
 Price 10 Cents 
 
 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii^ 
 
 PUBLISHED BY \'TUE TOILER'' 
 3207 CLARK AVENUE, CLEVELAND, OHIO 
 
LOAN STACK 
 
 GWl 
 
The Dictatorship of the Proletariat 
 
 By L. KAMENEFF 
 
 Conservatism in ideology, theories based on principles, 
 slowness in their adaptation to rapidly-changing life, their 
 constant lagging behind the constantly changing forms of 
 the struggle — have frequently^been noted by Marxists. In 
 our struggle for Communism, \ve constantly meet with 
 these facts, we constantly haveto remark how great is 
 the power of the old ideology even over the best men of 
 the present Labor movement — in so far as these men 
 have grown up in the atmosphere of pre-war Europe. 
 
 This mental conservatism is most strikingly observed 
 in their approach to the question of dictatorship. Six 
 years of war and revolution (1914-1920) it would seem 
 should have elucidated this finally, from all points of view, 
 by practice, by facts out of the everyday life of the masses ; 
 and yet, even among the comrades adhering to the Third 
 International, we are often confronted with the question: 
 
 "What is the dictatorship of the proletariat? Cannot 
 
 the Labor movement attain its object without a dictatorship? 
 
 Why is dictatorship inevitable?" I heard these 
 
 questions not only from the members of the British Trade 
 IJnion delegation, but even from some of the members of 
 the delegation of Italian Socialists. 
 
 When one hears such questions one thinks involuntarily 
 that the persons uttering them must have slept through a 
 whole historical period, and, first of all, through the world- 
 war of 1914-18. For these years constituted a model epoch 
 of dictatorship, and the method of carrying on the war 
 were models of the application of dictatorial methods of 
 ruling a country. 
 
 From the point of view of the government of a coun- 
 try, the imperialist war consisted in the assembling and 
 placing under a single command of millions of men, in 
 providing their equipment and transport, and compelling 
 these many millions of men to carry out certain tasks. 
 These tasks were foreign to these millions, and were 
 
 228 
 
accompanied for each of them, separately, and for all 
 together, with incredible sufferings, privations, and the 
 risk of death. How did the governments of Europe, Amer- 
 ica and Asia accomplish the task? By what methods did 
 they guarantee the assembling, equipment, transport and 
 command of these millions? By what methods did they 
 secure the adaptation of the whole administrative, economic 
 and social life of the state to carry out the tasks set by the 
 government? Was this achieved by means of democracy? 
 By the means of parliamentariasm ? By means of the real- 
 ization of the sovereignty of the "people"? 
 
 The sovereignty of the people, democracy, the State, par- 
 liamentarism, even from the point of view of their hypo- 
 critical bourgeois defenders, cannot but mean the discussion 
 and decision, if only of the most important questions, of the 
 state and social life by the citizens themselves, "free" and 
 "equal" in the eyes of the law. 
 
 However, at present, even the most unenlightened peasant, 
 in the most backward of all covmtries drawn into the war, 
 knows that the government of his country in 1914-1918 was, 
 as a whole and in every detail, a clear, simple, elementary 
 refutation of these regulations of bourgeois democracy. 
 Democracy, parliaments, elections, freedom of the press, 
 remained — in so far as they did remain — a mere screen ; in 
 reality all the countries drawn into the war — the whole 
 world— were governed by the methods of a dictatorship, 
 which utilized, when it happened to be convenient and prof- 
 itable, elections, parliaments and the press. 
 
 One must be a blind fool or a conscious deceiver of 
 the masses, not to see, or to conceal, this fundamental fact ; 
 at the most critical period of their history, at the moment 
 of their struggle for existence, the bourgeois States of 
 Europe, Asia and America defended themselves not by 
 means of democracy and parliamentarism, but by openly 
 passing over to the methods of dictatorship. 
 
 It was the dictatorship of the general staffs, of the offi- 
 cers' corps, and of large industry, to whom belonged, not 
 only actually, but also formally, all power both in the army 
 and in the country ; who commanded, not only lives, but also 
 the property of the whole country and of every citizen, not 
 only living at the time but yet to be born (the military debts 
 of Messrs. Romanoflf, HohenzoUern, Clemenceau and Lloyd 
 
George will cover the lives and work of future generations). 
 
 During several years, before the eyes of the whole human 
 race, a picture of the practice of dictatorship is unrolled — 
 a dictatorship ruling over the whole world, determining 
 everything, regulating everything, penetrating everything, 
 and confirming its existence by 20,000,000 corpses on the 
 fields of Europe and Asia. It is natural, therefore, that to 
 the question, "What is dictatorship ?" the Communists 
 should answer: "Open your eyes, and you will see before 
 you a splendidly elaborated system of bourgeois dictatorship, 
 which has achieved its object; for it has given that con- 
 centration of power into the hands of a small group of 
 world imperialists which allowed them to conduct their zvar 
 and attain their peace (of \'ersailles). Do not pretend 
 that dictatorship — as a system of government, as a form 
 of power — can frighten anyone except the old women of 
 bourgeois pacifism. The dictatorship of the proletariat sup- 
 presses, not 'equality,' 'liberty,' and 'democracy,' but only 
 the bourgeois dictatorship, which in 1914-18 showed itself 
 to be the most bloody, most tyrannical, most pitiless, cynical 
 and hypocritical of all forms of power that ever existed." 
 
 The theorist of Communism, beginning with Karl Marx, 
 proved, however, a long while ago, that the dictatorship of 
 the proletariat does not consist in replacing the bourgeoisie 
 by the proletariat at the same governmental machine. The 
 task of the dictatorship of the proletariat is to break up the 
 machinery of government created by the bourgeoisie, and 
 re replace it by a new one, created on a diflFerent basis and 
 reposing on a new co-relation of the classes. 
 
 The dictatorship of the proletariat appears in the pro- 
 grams of the Socialist parties, not later than the seventies of 
 the nineteenth century. However, during the whole period 
 of the Second International, it did not once, on any occa- 
 sion, become the practical duty of the day, and attracted 
 the attention neither of the practical workers nor of the 
 theoreticians of the Labor movement; and only when, in 
 1914-18, through the veil of democracy, parliamentarism, 
 and political liberty, the unmistakable features of the bour- 
 geois dictatorship became clearly discernible, did the idea of 
 the dictatorship of the proletariat become a real force. It 
 became a force because, as Marx says, it took possession 
 of the proletarian masses. 
 
In the 1903 program of the Russian Social Democratic 
 Party — a program which aspired to be only a precise and 
 improved statement of the programs of the Social Demo- 
 cratic parties already in existence, and which at the time, 
 in 1903, united both the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks — 
 the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat was expressed 
 as follows : 
 
 "The necessary condition for the social revolution is the 
 dictatorship of the proletariat, that is the conquest by the 
 proletariat of a political power that will allow it to crush 
 all resistance on the part of the exploiters." This definition 
 is embodied without alteration in the program of the Rus- 
 sian Communist Party. 
 
 The authors of the 1903 program could not foresee the 
 actual circumstances in which the proletariat of any country 
 would have to take the power into its hands. They cer- 
 tainly did not attempt at the time to define in what measure 
 the dictatorship of the proletariat would be connected with 
 the formation of a proletarian (Red) army, with the prac- 
 tice of Terror, with the limitation of political liberties. 
 They had to underline, and they did underline, not these 
 changeable elements — varying in the various countries — of 
 the proletarian dictatorship, but its fundamental and un- 
 changing feature, inevitable for any country and any his- 
 torical conditions under which the proletariat seizes power. 
 
 The proletariat not only seizes power ; in grasping it, the 
 proletariat gives to it such a character, such a degree of con- 
 centration, energy, determination, absoluteness, infinitude, 
 as according to the words of the program, "will allow it 
 to crush all resistance on the part of the exploiters." That 
 is the fundamental feature of the dictatorship of the pro- 
 letariat. 
 
 The dictatorship of the proletariat is therefore an organ- 
 ization of the State and a form of administration of State 
 affairs which, in the transitional stage from capitalism to 
 Communism, will allow the proletariat, as the ruling class, 
 to crush all resistance on the part of the exploiters to the 
 work of Socialist reconstruction. 
 
 It is thus clear that the question itself of the necessity, 
 the inevitability of a proletarian dictatorship for every cap- 
 italist country is connected with the question as to whether 
 the resistance of the exploiters to their expropriation by 
 
Socialist society^HDr, more precisely, by society marching 
 towards Socialism — is inevitable. 
 
 In the same way, the question regarding the degree of 
 severity of the dictatorship, the extent and conditions of the 
 limitation of the political rights of the bourgeoisie and lim- 
 itation of political liberty in general, the application of 
 terrorist methods, etc., is indissolubly linked with the ques- 
 tion of the degree, forms, stubbornness and organization 
 of resistance by the exploiters. 
 
 Anyone who expresses a doubt as to the inevitability of 
 the dictatorship of the proletariat, as a necessary stage 
 towards Socialist society, thereby expresses a doubt of the 
 bourgeoisie showing any resistance to the proletariat at the 
 decisive hour of the expropriation of the exploiters. 
 
 Propaganda based on this may be dictated either by in- 
 dividual stupidity, or the interest of a group of persons in 
 concealing from the proletariat the circumstances of the 
 forthcoming struggle, and in preventing it from preparing 
 for the same. 
 
 When persons, calling themselves Socialists, declare that 
 the course of dictatorship, admissible and explicable for 
 Russia, is in no wise obligatory or inevitable for any other 
 capitalist country, they proclaim a thing directly contrary to 
 truth. The actual Russian bourgeoisie always was, and 
 up to the October Revolution remained, the least organized, 
 the least conscious in the sense of class, the least united 
 of all bourgeois classes in the countries of the old capitalist 
 order. The Russian peasantry had not time enough to de- 
 velop that class of strong and politically-united peasants, 
 which is the basis of a series of bourgeois parties in the 
 West. The Russian middle class of the towns, crushed and 
 politically unenlightened, never represented anything like 
 such groups of the population as, in the West, create and 
 support the parties of "Christian Socialism" and anti-Semi- 
 tism. 
 
 The first thunder claps of the proletarian revolution broke 
 over this politically backward, inactive and unorganized 
 class. "The resistance of the exploiters" to the blows of the 
 Russian proletariat must therefore be considered as com- 
 paratively weak — weak, naturally only in comparison with 
 the activity which the bourgeoisie of any other European 
 country will be able to develop. The actively resisting ele- 
 
8 
 
 ment, which dragged on the struggle for three years, were 
 not the unorganized forces of the Russian bourgeoisie, but, 
 first of all, foreign interventionists, and then the bourgeoisie 
 of the border countries (Finland, Lithuania, Poland, Uk- 
 raine), which, playing upon the century-old hatred against 
 Tsarist Russia, managed to unite under the flag of nation- 
 alism certain organized groups for resistance against the 
 Russian proletariat. If it were not for these external cir- 
 cumstances, the resistance of the Russian bourgeoisie would 
 have been broken, not in three years, but in three months, 
 and the proletarian apparatus of State power would nat- 
 urally have directed all its energy towards other ends. 
 
 In conformity with the nature of the resistance which wa? 
 to be expected from the Russian propertied classes and 
 their organizations, the dictatorship of the proletariat in 
 Russia had its period of "rosy illusions" and "sentimental 
 youth." 
 
 There can be nothing more mistaken than to assume that 
 the Russian proletariat, or even its leader, the Communist 
 Party, came into power with recipes, prepared in advance, 
 of practical measures for the realization of the dictatorship. 
 Only "Socialist" ignoramuses, or charlatans, could suggest 
 that the Russian Communists came into power with a pre- 
 pared plan for a standing army. Extraordinary Commissions, 
 and limitations of political liberty, to which the Russian 
 proletariat was obliged to recur for self-defense after bitter 
 experience. The cause of the proletariat was saved, because 
 it soon profited by its acquired experience and, with unfail- 
 ing energy, applied these methods of struggle when it be- 
 came convinced of their inevitability. 
 
 The transference of power to the Soviets, and the for- 
 mation of the new Workers' and Peasants' Government 
 took place on November 7th, 1917. The discomfiture and 
 disorganization of the bourgeoisie was so great that it was 
 unable to muster any serious forces against the workmen. 
 The resistance of the government of Kerensky was broken 
 after a few days. The elections to the Constituent Assem- 
 bly still continued. All the political parties — up to Miliu- 
 kofT's party— continued to exist openly. All the bourgeois 
 newspaper continued to circulate. Capital punishment was 
 abolished. The army was being demobilized. In the hands 
 of the government there were no other forces than the 
 
volunteer detachment of armed workmen. The Ministers 
 of Kerensky's government arrested, during the first days, 
 (the leaders of the Socialist Revolutionary Party, Avk- 
 sentieff, Gotz, Zenzinoff, the Generals Boldareff, Krasnoff 
 and others — later on, all of them, leaders of the armed 
 struggle against the Soviet power and members of the rebel 
 governments of Siberia, the Don and the South) were set 
 free. Generals Denikin, Markoff, Erdeli and others re- 
 mained in the hands of the Soviet power up to November 
 20th and left its limits alive. 
 
 Yes, that was the period of "rosy illusions." It continued 
 for a few months. 
 
 The conditions began to change by April-May, 1918. In 
 April, 1918, the decree regarding the formation of a stand- 
 ing Red Army was published. Only in April the Extra- 
 ordinary Commissions acquired the right to execute rob- 
 bers caught in the net and officers going off to Korniloff, ac- 
 cording to his secret mobilization. Only on June 18th did 
 the Revolutionary Court pass its first sentence of death on 
 the Admiral commanding the Baltic Fleet. Only in May 
 were measures taken to stop the publication of the bour- 
 geois papers (at the moment of this suppression there were 
 thirty papers against three of the Soviets in Moscow alone). 
 Only in June, 1918, were the Mensheviks driven out of the 
 Soviets. 
 
 Thus over six months (November, 1917 — April-May, 
 1918) passed from the moment of the formation of the 
 Soviet power to the practical application by the proletariat 
 of any harsh dictatorial measures. The increased severity 
 in the dictatorship was called forth by a series of very ele- 
 mentary facts. In April, the government of Skoropadsky 
 was organized in Kieff ; in May took place the rising of the 
 Czecho-Slovaks, their seizure of the railway system and the 
 formation of the Socialist-Revoluntionary government in the 
 East; in May, too, the Cossack counter-revolution on the 
 Don — the Russian Vendee — acquired increased importance 
 under the command of General Krasnoff. 
 
 Parallel with this, all the attention and energy of the 
 working class was concentrated on the tasks of the war, and 
 the Soviet state was transformed into a camp of armed pro- 
 letarians. 
 
10 
 
 Such was the experience of the Russian proletariat. We 
 have now before us the experience of the class struggle for 
 proletarian power in Finland, Hungary and Germany. The 
 fundamental difference between the experience of Hungary, 
 Finland and Germany and that of Russia consists in the 
 fact that the bourgeoisie of those countries proved, as was 
 to be expected, to be much more organized, united and 
 capable of fighting than the Russian bourgeoisie. Its period 
 of confusion was much shorter; it organized a counter-at- 
 tack against the proletariat much more rapidly and ener- 
 getically ; and by that very fact shortened the period of illu- 
 sions of the proletariat itself as to the nature of its dictator- 
 ship. 
 
 The experience of the workers of Russia, Finland, Hun- 
 gary and Germany allows us to establish an empiric law of 
 the development of proletarian dictatorship, which may be 
 expressed approximately in the following words. The fact 
 of the conquest of the central political power by the prole- 
 tariat in no wise completes the struggle for power, but only 
 marks the beginning of a new and more' determined period 
 of warfare between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. 
 
 After the first blow of the proletarian revolution and the 
 seizure of the central apparatus of power by the proletariat, 
 the bourgeoisie inevitably needs a certain time for mobiliza- 
 tion of its forces, the bringing up of reserves and their or- 
 ganization. Its passing to a counter attack opens up an 
 epoch of undisguised warfare, and armed clash of the forces 
 of both sides. 
 
 It is just during this period that the rule of the proletariat 
 acquires the harsh features of a dictatorship: a Red Army, 
 a terrorist suppression of the exploiters and their allies, the 
 limitation of political liberty, becomes inevitable if the pro- 
 letariat does not wish to give up without a fight the power 
 it has won. 
 
 The dictatorship of the proletariat is consequently a form 
 of government of the state which is most adapted to the 
 carrying on of a war with the bourgeoisie, and to guarantee 
 most rapidly the victory of the proletariat in such war. 
 
 Are there any grounds for presuming that such a war in 
 Europe will be carried on in less acute forms? That the 
 European bourgeoisie will submit with a lighter heart to 
 the expropriation of its riches by the proletariat? Can any 
 
11 
 
 reasonable person build his tactics on the supposition that 
 the European bourgeoisie will not show all the resistance 
 of which it is capable against the proletariat which has 
 seized power ? Can one presume that, entering into the fight 
 against the proletariat in power, the European bourgeoisie 
 will prove to be less armed, less capable of fighting, less 
 united and less prudent than the bourgeoisie of Russia, 
 Finland or Hungary? Can one imagine that it will stop at 
 any means, beginning with a far-reaching union with the 
 betrayers of Socialism from the camp of the Second Inter- 
 national and ending with the bombardment of the work- 
 men's quarters and the application of the latest technical 
 methods for the suffocation of the enemy in war? 
 
 What under these conditions can be the meaning of a 
 doubt in the inevitability of the methods of proletarian dic- 
 tatorship, or a refusal to work, day in and day out, for the 
 preparation of the proletariat to utilize all the methods of 
 dictatorship in the coming struggle? 
 
 To move towards a seizure of power, not hoping to hold 
 it, and not preparing the conditions for holding it, is simply 
 f oolhardiness ; to recognize the necessity for the proletariat 
 conquering power, and to doubt the necessity of a dictator- 
 ship of the proletariat, to refuse to instruct the workers in 
 this direction — means consciously to prepare the betrayal of 
 the cause of Socialism. Whoever does not recognize the 
 necessity for fhe severest proletarian dictatorship during the 
 transitional period from capitalism to Socialism; does not 
 prepare the necessary conditions for the proletariat, on 
 acquiring the central apparatus of power, at once directing 
 it to the suppression of the resistance of the exploiters; 
 whoever does not explain to the proletariat, as a necessary 
 condition here and now, of its victory, the inevitability of an 
 armed struggle and harsh measures against treason and hesi- 
 tation, and does not arm the proletariat with the suitable 
 weapons — that person is preparing the ruin of the prole- 
 tariat and the victory of the bourgeoisie. 
 
 But if the dictatorship of the proletariat is an organiza- 
 tion of power, which is best adapted to the carrying on of 
 the war against the bourgeoisie and the suppression of its 
 resistance, then we have an answer also to the question 
 which is generally put to the Communists by the syndicalists 
 of various schools of thought. The latter while admitting 
 
12 
 
 the dictatorship of the proletariat, cannot divest themselves 
 of their old prejudices against a political party of the pro- 
 letariat. The question, consequently, is : what organization 
 is capable of achieving a solution of the problems of dic- 
 tatorship ? 
 
 There can be no doubt that, at the moment of a decisive 
 class war, the power of command and compulsion must 
 lie in the hands of a definite organization, capable of bearing 
 the responsibility for each step it takes and of guaranteeing 
 the logical sequence of these steps. 
 
 The army of the proletariat, moving in battle order, 
 must have its general staff. When leading its regiments 
 to the attack, that general staff must be capable of "sur- 
 veying the sum total of the international, political and 
 economic conditions of the struggle. It must possess equal 
 authority over all kinds of arms at the disposition of the 
 working class. It must be in a position to carry out its 
 decisions through the trade unions, and the workmen's co- 
 operatives, through the factory committees, and through 
 the leagues of young workers, by means of written propa- 
 ganda, and through the fighting militia of armed workers. 
 
 At the moment when the old power is overthrown and 
 the apparatus of government is seized by the revolting pro- 
 letariat, that general staff has new tasks to perform. The 
 victory of the proletariat signifies the disorganization of 
 the old social system. The formation of a new army, the 
 feeding of the country, the building up of industry on new 
 principles, the organization of law courts, the establishment 
 of relations with the peasants, the diplomatic relations with 
 other countries — all these matters become at once the im- 
 mediate tasks of the general staff of the victorious prole- 
 tarian army. Any delay in the accomplishment of one of 
 these tasks, or any hesitation in the decision, is capable of 
 bringing greatest harm to the further victorious develop- 
 ment of the proletarian revolution. 
 
 Consequently, this general staff must be an organized 
 responsible, and centralized institution, prepared to deal 
 with, and decide all political, economic, social and diplo- 
 matic problems. An organization which would satisfy all 
 these conditions and solve all the problems incumbent upon 
 it may be called, of course, by any name whatsoever ; but in 
 reality — and if we do not play with words — such an organ- 
 
13 
 
 ization can only be the political party of the proletariat; 
 i. e., an organization of the most advanced, revolutionary 
 elements of the proletariat, united by their common politi- 
 cal program and an iron discipline. 
 
 Such an organization cannot be formed in a day or even 
 a week ; it is the result of a prolonged process of assembling 
 and selecting experienced leaders, who have proved, by their 
 daily work, to be capable of estimating rightly each phase 
 of the labor struggle, and the interests of each separate 
 group of the working class, from the higher point of view 
 of the general interests of the entire working class as a 
 whole. 
 
 The greatest misfortune which could befall the pro- 
 letarian army after seizing the strongholds of capitalism, 
 would be if the apparatus of leadership proved to be in 
 the hands of men, groups, or organizations whose previous 
 work had been carried out only in the sphere of the labor 
 movement. 
 
 The suppression of the resistance of the exploiters — 
 which is the fundamental task of the dictatorship — is not 
 only a military, or only a political, or only an economic task; 
 it is all of them — military, political, economic. The re- 
 sistance of the exploiters acquires only its most acute form 
 during an armed conflict; but the rich peasantry, which 
 will not give the bread for the famishing population; the 
 engineers who sabotage industry ; and the bankers who bring 
 confusion into the mutual account of the industrial enter- 
 prises by concealing their books — are not less important 
 factors in the resistance of the bourgeoisie. The suppres- 
 sion of all these various forms of resistance can be as little 
 the work of an organization created in the narrow sphere 
 of the trade union movement, as, say, of a workers' co-op- 
 erative organization. It can be successfully achieved only by 
 a general organization of all the workers, in the shape of 
 their Soviets, in which are represented all the forms of the 
 labor movement, and which are under the guidance of a pol- 
 tical party, concentrating in itself the whole experience of 
 the previous struggle of the working class. 
 
 In the epoch of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the 
 Communist Party is still more necessary for the working 
 class than in any other. It constitutes an essential condition 
 for victory. A refusal to work for its creation and strength- 
 
14 
 
 ening means a renunciation of the efficient carrying on of 
 the class war, i. e., a renunciation of dictatorship, of a 
 condition of the victory of Socialism, and may engender, 
 although unconsciously, the most cruel betrayal of the work- 
 ing class cause, by depriving the proletariat, at the most 
 critical moment, of its most important weapon. Anyone who 
 doubts the inevitability of the dictatorship of the proletariat, 
 as a necessary stage of its victory over the bourgeoisie, 
 facilitates the conditions for the victory of the latter; any- 
 one who doubts or renounces the political party of the 
 proletariat, is helping to weaken and disorganize the work- 
 ing class. 
 
 June, 1920. 
 
READ 
 
 "The Toiler" 
 
 Devoted to the Workers' Struggles 
 
 for Power in the Shops 
 
 and Factories. 
 
 News of the World-wide Proletar- 
 ian war against Capital. 
 
 The facts about strikes of Militant 
 Workers. 
 
 Special articles on new develop- 
 ments of Labor Unionism. 
 
 For All Power to the Workers. 
 
 For Industrial Unionism. 
 
 The best Cartoons. 
 
 $2.00 a year. 
 
 "The Toiler" 
 
 3207 Clark Ave. Cleveland, O. 
 
RETURN TO the circulation desk of any 
 University of California Library 
 or to the 
 NORTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 BIdg. 400, Richmond Field Station 
 University of California 
 Richmond, CA 94804-4698 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 2.month loans may be renewed by callmg 
 
 1-ySotS mS be recharged by bringing books 
 
 Renells'and recharges may be made 4 days 
 prior to due date 
 
 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 «»^rt988 
 
> v-^:^-