The Finnish Federation

The Finnish Federation

by Leo Leino

Published in TheHerald [Seattle], vol. 3, no. 143 (October 1, 1915), pg. 2
and vol. 3, no. 144 (October 8, 1915), pg. 2.

Editorial Note In order than our readers may
know something of the disturbing forces at work in the
most remarkable of all the branches of the Socialist Party
of this country theFinnish, the following statement, em-
bodying the report of the special committee appointed by
theFinnish convention held some months ago in Chicago
[Extraordinary 4th: N ovember 22-2x, 1914], is printed
in TheHerald by request. T he article is not published for
the sake of controversy but information. It will be con-
cluded in the next issue ofTheH erald.

T hedeplorablecontroversy and disruption in the
Finnish Socialist movement, which hassmouldered for
sometimeand which caused a split in theFinnish or-
ganization a little over a year ago, is of such interest
that it isworthwhileto theAmerican comrades to be-
comethoroughly acquainted with all the circumstances
and conditions involved and related thereto. In addi-
tion, owing to the fact that one-third of the party
membership in this state [Washington] is Finnish, it
can be readily seen that this disruption is no trivial
matter.

All over the country theAmerican comradeswho
are thoroughly conversant with the principles and
methods of the Socialist Party, and who have taken
the trouble to study theFinnish controversy have in-
variably lined up with the Finnish Socialist Federa-
tion, which is in entire accord with the respective po-
sitions of the national and international movements
in matters of principles and tactics.

But others — and there are many party mem-
bers who, because they do not understand the issues
involved and the tremendous consequences that would
ensue if the tactics of the disruptive faction were to
triumph, side with the aforesaid disruptive faction.

These comrades believe that this split was caused by
the alleged arbitrary, censorious Finnish Federation.
The chief points over which these comrades argue in
favor of the disruptive faction are as follows:

1. That the organization censored the reading
matter of the members.

2. Forbade its members the support of indus-
trial unionism.

3. The action of the Executive Committee of
December 5-6, 1914, which, itisalleged, preventsthe
foreign-born workers from mixing with the workers
in theAmerican movement.

4. T heaction of the ExecutiveC ommittee, which
declared language federation autonomy.

Let us analyze these important arguments more
closely.T heFinnish Federation never abridged thefree-
dom of its members by forbidding them to read what-
ever they wished to read, but it is true that it does
forbid the membership from supporting a paper
[Socialist'!] that has been established with the inten-
tion of destroying the means of education, the party
papers, and also the oldest and strongest language or-
ganization of theAmerican Socialist Party.

We know the attitude of many of theAmerican
comrades toward a party-owned press, but let it be
stated here, openly, that these comrades do not as yet
realize the importance of the party-owned and party-
controlled press... illegible line>... comrades seem to
be very negligent in the support of their party-owned
press. T hey regard the matter, so it seems, very much
in this light: "T he party press is all right, the party is
all right, but business is business, and we must not
abridge the rights of the individual to run a business
enterprise in the name of the party, regardless of
whether it injures the party or not."

La no: The Finnish Federation [October 1915]

We Finnish Socialists look at this matter in this
manner: we place the best interests of the party always
before and above the interests of any individual or
group, and whenever individuals in our organization
attem pt to place thei r interests i n the way of the party,
we deal with them in as stern and forbidding a man-
ner as the case may warrant. For instance, if the ma-
jority of the stock of The Herald is owned, and the
contents of the paper determined, by the majority of
the locals of the party in the county, then it is con-
trolled in somewhat the same manner as the Finnish
Socialist press in this country, and who shall say this is
not the best and most democratic method to pursue
intheestablishmentand maintenanceof a revolution-
ary press. It is exactly this kind of party-owned and
controlled pressthattheso-called "radicals" attempted
to destroy by their paper, SocialiSti. We would inquire
what action the county organization and The Herald
would take if, after determining that one English So-
cialist paper was all that the county could support, a
group of individuals started one and made a bid for
the support of the membership.

Would thecounty organization use thediscipline
of the party to prevent waste of the resources of the
movement and consequent disruption? We are quite
sure the county would take such action, and in doing
so it would thus find itself in the same identical posi-
tion in relation to its own insurgents that the Finnish
Federation finds itself in relative to the "radicals." We
believe that thecounty organization would be forced
to expel such elements of destruction, if they were not
amenableto party discipline, no matter how "red" they
might seem to be, and no matter how revolutionary
their phraseology.

Comrades, bear this in mind, we Finnish So-
cialists have threebigdaily newspapers, four weeklies,
and monthlies in this country that have been estab-
lished with the proceeds of our sweat and blood for
the purpose of expanding the revolutionary propa-
ganda and education of the working class. We have
been trying to inculcate into the mindsof the Finnish
working people an understanding of their position,
together with all the rest of the workers in the world-
wide class struggle, and we have been successful be-
yond that of any other group in thiscountry. ur stron-
gest and most efficient weapon has always been our
party-owned and controlled press, which is not run

for the benefit of private i ndividuals at the expense of
the party. And we look upon all attempts that are
started within the movement, as business enterprises,
asinstrumentsto ham per and destroy the party-owned
papers. We hold that these ventures are misdemean-
ors, to be punished under the laws of our language
federation.

urattitudetoward the party and the party press
isas follows: T he best weapon of the workers isa strong
class-conscious press. The party papers must be edited
according to the party's principles and its program.
D ifferentopinionsof theworking class movement have
their place also in the columns of the party press, but
the party principles, the majority of the party, must
determine. ur press must not bea monkey to dance
to any music; on the contrary, it must express the
materialistic conception of the revolutionary class
struggle, based upon the experience, progress, victo-
ries, and defeats of the working class. This is the stand
of the majority of the Finnish Socialists, and we con-
tend it is a reasonable, consistent, and just stand.

The second argument made against us by the
"radicals" is that we are opposed to industrial union-
ism as a plan of labor organization. The absurdity of
this charge must be apparent to any American com-
rade who understands the Socialist philosophy, but
some of the comrades have swallowed the bait whole.
It is true we do not agree with the "radicals" in their
contention thatthelWW istheonly industrial union
that isworthy of working class consideration. Wecon-
tend that the AF of L is being modified by the process
of industrial evolution into an industrial union, and
that this change in the nature of the organization is
taking place just as fast as this new form of organiza-
tion becomes more beneficent to the workers than the
old form of trade unionism.

Our stand in regard to the industrial plan was
expressed very plainly at the last convention of the
Finnish Federation in C hicago last N ovember, and the
decision of the convention has been endorsed unani-
mously by the party membership through a referen-
dum vote, as follows:

The cause of the controversy is this: A certain
element within our organization, mainly the teachers
and pupils of the Work People's College, have
attempted to use our party press for syndicalist and

Lano: The Finnish Federation [October 1915]

other agitation. The burden of their method is to belittle
political action in opposition to the position of the
Socialist Party, as set forth in the national constitution.

Syndicalist agitation first appeared by openly
advocating sabotage and other syndicalist tactics.
After the general sentiment of the organization had
crushed the most brazen appearance of this
propaganda, and the general convention of the
Federation condemned it and had taken a firm stand
against it, the propaganda then confined itself mainly
to a relentless fight against all economic organizations
that do not embrace syndicalist principles. This
pernicious agitation, by introducing confusion into our
movement, has perceptibly retarded the movement
of the Finnish people into economic organizations.
There... illegible line> ...attitude toward constructive
political action, which has been a hindrance to our
political activity.

The disruptive element has gone so far in its
wrecking tactics as to advise our branches to withdraw
from the party (in case this or that person who may
be happen to be distasteful to the disrupters should
be elected to some position in the organization), and
they have also opposed voting for party candidates
on the same grounds.

Whenever this disruptive element has been
successful in controlling a branch, the branch has
degenerated and been disrupted, and such members
as have remained loyal have been held back from
activity; property belonging to the branch, and
consequently to the party, has been transferred to
individuals and groups in such a manner as to deprive
the party control over its own property.

One of the main objects of the disruptive faction
is to destroy the Finnish Federation by causing the
branches not to conform to the convention and
referendum decisions, by slandering and
blackguarding the party officials and organizing a dual
Finnish organization, thus breaking the rules of Article
1 4 of our party constitution.

The disruptionists systematically try to destroy the
Finnish Socialist organization press by spreading false
and vicious rumors about the financial condition of
our publishing houses, advising persons who have
loaned money to withdraw it, and establish a
competitive paper without the consent of the party
organization, and without any valid reason. They
slander and misrepresent the party papers, attempting
to get the readers to believe the papers are controlled
by a few party bosses, who arbitrarily prevent the
workers from expressing their opinions, and these
charges are made regardless of the fact that the
Finnish Socialist papers are run more democratically
than any of the rest of the American Socialist press,
for the branches own the majority of the stock, and
the number of shares owned by each branch

represents proportionately the number of members
in each branch. The managing editors are elected by
the stockholders' referendum, the yearly stockholders'
meetings are usually held in the same place and at
the same time as the district conventions, and are
always under the dictation of the conventions (both
meetings being made up of the same persons,
usually).

In no case have writings been denied publication,
all things being equal, except where these writings
advocated un-Socialist methods, or in any other way
represented a menace to party activity and the working
class movement in general.

These persons, with well defined anarchistic
principles, being in the minority, believe that they, the
"enlightened minority," have a right to relentlessly wage
war against the fulfillment of the decisions of the party.
They will cause disruption in any working class
movement. They resort to secret plotting in their
attempts to get control of the organization, regardless
of their minority.They have a boundless disregard for
the truth and they are entirely lacking in the spirit of
comradeship. They will demoralize any working class
movement they happen to be in, and force the majority
to unrelaxing vigilance and extraordinary means to
prevent the success of their secret plots against the
organization. This disturbs our activity and through
us the whole Socialist Party, and large sums of money
needed for waging the class war are diverted into the
fight to prevent our organization from being wrecked.
During the last two years we have been forced to
spend at least $30,000 in holding various special
conventions, and to make up for financial losses
incurred as a result of the machinations of our
enemies.

The majority of our members have always
opposed the tactics of the disruptive element;
whenever persons belonging to this element have
been unwittingly been elected to party positions, they
have been recalled as soon as the members
discovered their methods. In some instances they have
been compelled by general discontent to resign their
offices. This proves conclusively the general opposition
of our members to anarchistic elements within the
Socialist Party.

The branches that, for some reason or other still
uphold the doings of the wrecking element, do not
represent, estimating generously, more than two
thousand members. Against them are 10,000 loyal
members. Of the said 2,000 only a small part, probably
a few hundred people, really know what the principles
and objects of the leaders are. The majority of the
disruptionists, being in rebellion against the regular
organization simply because they believe
unquestioningly the lies that their unscrupulous
adventuresome leaders spread, based upon false

La no: The Finnish Federation [October 1915]

stories of "boss rule" and other sentimental reasons.
The leaders have bolstered up their position by
spreading the ridiculous story that their actions have
received the sanction of the National Executive
Committee.

In the face of these facts we believe the majority
of the members trailing after the disruptionist leaders
are sincere but misguided comrades. We believe they
should have the opportunity to rejoin the party through
our organization as soon as they sever their relations
with disruptionists. We believe they will eventually
desert, and unmask the persons whom, they have
blindly followed, and we extend to them a comradely
invitation to return to their movement, and resume their
activity in harmony with the policy of the international
movement. The party can never countenance the
damaging tactics which these persons have
unknowingly supported. At the same time we insist
that there can be no consideration of any compromise
with the avowed disruptionists, who refuse to obey
the will of the majority, who actively oppose our
organization and tactics, as set forth in the constitution
and party decisions. These persons have been
insisting, and they are still insisting, that there can be
no settlement with them unless the majority bows
down to the whims of the minority.

All over the country there have occurred cases
where State Committees, on account of language
difficulties, have not been able to acquaint themselves
with the controversies raging in the Finnish Federation.
This has had the effect of furthering the plans of the
disruptionists by enabling them to wield the power of
the committees over the Finnish branches.

Without in any way wanting to change the present
system, whereby every branch is an inseparable part
of the state organization, and subject to the rules, the
convention is of the opinion that without changing this
situation, the constitution should be amended so as
to give the language federations exclusive jurisdiction
within their federations to carry on Socialist
propaganda in their own language, and recognize the
right of a language organization to expel any branch
or member for cause. The State Committee should
not have the power to overrule in such matters. To
this end the convention advises the branches to make
motions in conformity with the usages made, and
provided in the law of the party for the purpose of
bringing this matter before the membership. These
motions should embody the ideas expressed by this
convention and by the National Committee in their
statement regarding the judicial power of language
federations.

Based on the aforesaid, the convention expresses
it stern condemnation of the disruptionists, who strive
and plot to destroy the movement.The convention also
endorsed the means and methods which were

inevitable in order to prevent the success of disruption.
The convention further advises the loyal branches to
vigilantly watch new attempts, and frustrate them, to
the end that our important work, which is to further
the cause of the American Socialist movement, and
the whole revolutionary working class movement, may
go on.

The convention hopes that our organization may
vigorously renew its activity after being hampered by
internal dissensions. The convention is of the opinion
that the methods destructive to the American labor
movement, against which we have been compelled
to fight energetically, are largely based upon the fact
that the Finnish Socialist movement thus far has not
closely followed the American working class
movement, and for this reason misconceptions and
false criticism have taken root in our organization and
led to wrong methods. The convention wants the
members and our party officers to bear in mind that
the present economic situation in this country, as in
other countries, and the rise of the masses in
consequence, depressive unemployment, great
strikes, their support, making use of the lessons they
teach, relieving and explaining unemployment,
together with the ever growing political power of the
Socialist Party, gives the party press, officers, our
spoken agitation, and all our activities generally, ample
opportunity to support the rise of the masses, and to
lead their power into the channels of the international
Socialist movement. The result of which will be the
final triumph of the international proletariat, and this
kind of rational and carefully thought-out activity,
carried out in conformity with Socialist principles, is
the best method against all internal controversies.

Committee Elected by the
Convention to Explain the Controversy,

Leo Leino,

F.V. Tukhanen,

Arvid Nelson,

S. Nuorteva,

V. Annala.

This statement of the committee was unani-
mously adopted by the convention.

As we do not adhere to the impossiblistic atti-
tude toward economic organizations imported from
Canada, nor to the French syndicalism disguised un-
der the name of the I W W, or any other name, we ad-
vise our members not to support any attempts that
may be made to destroy existing working class organi-
zations that may be undergoing a change to the indus-
trial plan, as we believe theAF of L to be. To sum up,
these are the reasons we are branded as reactionary

Lano: The Finnish Federation [October 1915]

"conservatives" and opponents of industrial union-
ism. We, who are class-conscious political action-
ists, are branded as being merely craft-conscious
on the economic battlefield. We have the consola-
tion, however, of knowing that those of the Ameri-
can comrades who understand the issues involved,
do not agree in their estimate of us with the so-
called "radicals."

The third argument made against us is that we
want to keep our members from getting into closer
touch with the American Socialist party by demand-
ing certain rights for our languageorganization, namely
language federation autonomy. The "radicals" are us-
ing thisas an argument, whatever itsdubious value to
them as an argument. They seem to be having some
success with the Americans, of whom some do not
understand our attitude toward the American labor
movement, especially among the so-called national-
ists.

The fact of the matter is, our attitude toward
theAmerican Socialist and labor movement is just the
opposite of that which the "radicals" contend. Ween-
deavor to make the Finnish workers understand that
in thiscountrywedo not countvery much asFinnsin
the labor movement, therefore we must thoroughly
acquaint ourselves with it and becomeapartof it and
take it as it is.

We know that always when there has been an
attempt to lead theAmerican labor movement into
foreign channels it has been disastrous. W hat else is
the reason to be found for the many controversies,
splits, competing organizations, and thegeneral weak-
ness of the political and economic organizations ex-
cept in the peculiar situation under which the work-
ing class movement of this country developed, and its
different traditions from the old countries?

But the reason most apparent is that the work-
ing class "leaders" that came from the older countries
have proceeded to mold the working class movement
according to their own model. T hat is the real reason
for splits and the weakness of the movement. And we
areopposed to theintroduction of thesemodelsto the
American movement, as we see in these nothing but
the breeding of competing organizations, who invari-
ably adopt the motto: "Let us destroy the rotten class
movement." Those who would have the American
comrades believe that this is our doctrine are preach-

ing this very thing.

It is true that a very large percentage of our mem-
bers do not know the English language, and for this
reason weare trying to connect up our movement with
the Americans so that we may have class unity. Our
language difficulties prevent us from mixing socially
with our A merican comrades, but we are one of them
in the class struggle, as our activities in the past abun-
dantly prove, and if our record means disgracing the
American movement and tearing away from it we
would liketo have someone come forward and prove
it.

ur language isolation makes it necessary for us
to have language federations. No organization can ex-
ist without discipline, because in organization the in-
dividual must be subordinate to the interests of the
organization if it is to live. Human nature being what
it is, cases must arise in the course of events where
individuals ignore or deliberately conspire against the
welfareof theorganization; then thewill of the major-
ity must be imposed through the machinery of disci-
pline. How can the Americans who do not know our
language discipline our recalcitrant members? How
shall weconserveand advanceour movement if we do
not have autonomy within our own sphere?

Weare certain that if the Americans had under-
stood all thecircumstances of this Finnish controversy
— and they were prevented by the difference in lan-
guage— they would not have permitted the damage
that has been doneto the Finnish Federation, and con-
sequently to the entire A merican Socialist movement.
The "radicals" have always been very anxious to get
the ear of theAmerican membership, advertise their
cause, and misrepresent ours. Wetrusted to thesanity
and the loyalty of theAmerican comrades, and we do
not blame them for what has happened. We are posi-
tive that if all of the matter pertaining to the contro-
versy had been translated by an impartial board of
translators, and then spread over the pages of the
American Socialist press, theoutcomewould have been
very different. This, however, would have cost many
thousands of dollars, a greater cost than the Finnish
Federation could bear.

1 n conclusion, let it be stated that webear no ill-
feeling toward theAmerican comrades. W hat they did
they no doubt did for what they believed to be the
party's good, although they have not always been right.

La no: The Finnish Federation [October 1915]

T hat they have made mistakes does not prove that they
are not Socialists. They did not have adequate infor-
mation from which to base their attitude. This mis-
understanding had theeffect of demoralizing themove-
ment in M innesota, M ichigan, and to a large extent
in Washington and other states. But the lesson that
these experiences teach — no matter what the cost —
gives us the hope that the other nationalities besides
those that speak the English language know whatisin
the best interest of the party and what is not.

Edited by Tim D avenport

Published by 1000 Flowers Publishing, Corvallis, OR, 2010. * Non-commercial reproduction permitted.

http://www.marxisthistory.org