Index

[An organization in political solidarity with the International Liaison Committee for a Workers' International (ILC) (Publisher of the -The Organizer- POB 40009.San Francisco,CA 94140 (415)626-1175)]

Committee for a Workers' International

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Ted Lewis for Global Exchange in San Francisco (800)497-1994 Global Exchange

bones.jpg (22183 bytes)

The Che Guevara Page

cpp-logo.gif (1964 bytes)

rodstar.gif (15632 bytes)

Berlin BerlinLib1.JPG (38787 bytes)

imcub19.jpg (42918 bytes)

kimchae3ax2.jpg (171317 bytes) (North) Korea

______________________________________________________________________________________

J. V. Stalin

TROTSKYISM OR LENINISM?

Speech Delivered at the Plenum of
the Communist Group in the A.U.C.C.T.U.,
November 19, 1924

Pravda, No. 269,
November 26, 1924

From J. V. Stalin, On the Opposition,
Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1974

pp. 105-38.

Based on J. V. Stalin, Works,
Foreign Languages Publishing House,
Moscow, 1953

Vol. 6, pp. 338-73.

Prepared © for the Internet by David J. Romagnolo, d...@cruzio.com
(June 1997)

PUBLISHER'S NOTE

The articles and speeches by J. V. Stalin contained in English edition of On the Opposition follow the order of the Russian edition put out by the State Publishing House of the Soviet Union in 1928. The English translation, including the notes at the end of the book, is taken from Stalin's Works, Vols. 5-10, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1953-54, with some technical changes.

References in Roman numerals to Lenin's Works mentioned in the text are to the third Russian edition. The English references are indicated by the publisher in footnotes.

TROTSKYISM OR LENINISM?			105
	I. II. III.	The Facts About the October Uprising The Party and the Preparation for October Trotskyism or Leninism?	105 112 128
NOTES

page 105

TROTSKYISM OR LENINISM?

Speech Delivered at the Plenum
of the Communist Group in the A.U.C.C.T.U.

November 19, 1924

Comrades, after Kamenev's comprehensive report there is little left for me to say. I shall therefore confine myself to exposing certain legends that are being spread by Trotsky and his supporters about the October uprising, about Trotsky's role in the uprising, about the Party and the preparation for October, and so forth. I shall also touch upon Trotskyism as a peculiar ideology that is incompatible with Leninism, and upon the Party's tasks in connection with Trotsky's latest literary pronouncements.

THE FACTS ABOUT THE OCTOBER UPRISING

First of all about the October uprising. Rumours are being vigorously spread among members of the Party that the Cen-

page 106

tral Committee as a whole was opposed to an uprising in October 1917. The usual story is that on October 10, when the Central Committee adopted the decision to organise the uprising, the majority of the Central Committee at first spoke against an uprising, but, so the story runs, at that moment a worker burst in on the meeting of the Central Committee and said: "You are deciding against an uprising, but I tell you that there will be an uprising all the same, in spite of everything." And so, after that threat, the story runs, the Central Committee, which is alleged to have become frightened, raised the question of an uprising afresh and adopted a decision to organise it.

This is not merely a rumour, comrades. It is related by the well-known John Reed in his book Ten Days. Reed was remote from our Party and, of course, could not know the history of our secret meeting on October 10, and, consequently, he was taken in by the gossip spread by people like Sukhanov. This story was later passed round and repeated in a number of pamphlets written by Trotskyites, including one of the latest pamphlets on October written by Syrkin. These rumours have been strongly supported in Trotsky's latest literary pronouncements.

It scarcely needs proof that all these and similar "Arabian Nights" fairy tales are not in accordance with the truth, that in fact nothing of the kind happened, nor could have happened, at the meeting of the Central Committee. Consequently, we could ignore these absurd rumours; after all, lots of rumours are fabricated in the office rooms of the oppositionists or those who are remote from the Party. Indeed, we have ignored them till now; for example, we paid no attention to John Reed's mistakes and did not take the trouble to rectify them. After Trotsky's latest pronouncements, however, it is no longer pos-

page 107

sible to ignore such legends, for attempts are being made now to bring up our young people on them and, unfortunately, some results have already been achieved in this respect. In view of this, I must counter these absurd rumours with the actual facts.

I take the minutes of the meeting of the Central Committee of our Party on October 10 (23), 1917. Present: Lenin, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Stalin, Trotsky, Sverdlov, Uritsky, Dzerzhinsky, Kollontai, Bubnov, Sokolnikov, Lomov. The question of the current situation and the uprising was discussed. After the discussion, Comrade Lenin's resolution on the uprising was put to the vote. The resolution was adopted by a majority of 10 against 2. Clear, one would think: by a majority of 10 against 2, the Central Committee decided to proceed with the immediate, practical work of organising the uprising. At this very same meeting the Central Committee elected a political centre to direct the uprising; this centre, called the Political Bureau, consisted of Lenin, Zinoviev, Stalin, Kamenev, Trotsky, Sokolnikov and Bubnov.

Such are the facts.

These minutes at one stroke destroy several legends. They destroy the legend that the majority on the Central Committee was opposed to an uprising. They also destroy the legend that on the question of the uprising the Central Committee was on the verge of a split. It is clear from the minutes that the opponents of an immediate uprising -- Kamenev and Zinoviev -- were elected to the body that was to exercise political direction of the uprising on a par with those who were in favour of an uprising. There was no question of a split, nor could there be.

Trotsky asserts that in October our Party had a Right wing in the persons of Kamenev and Zinoviev, who, he says, were almost Social-Democrats. What one cannot understand then

page 108

is how, under those circumstances, it could happen that the Party avoided a split; how it could happen that the disagreements with Kamenev and Zinoviev lasted only a few days; how it could happen that, in spite of those disagreements, the Party appointed these comrades to highly important posts, elected them to the political centre of the uprising, and so forth. Lenin's implacable attitude towards Social-Democrats is sufficiently well known in the Party; the Party knows that Lenin would not for a single moment have agreed to have Social-Democratically-minded comrades in the Party, let alone in highly important posts. How, then, are we to explain the fact that the Party avoided a split? The explanation is that in spite of the disagreements, these comrades were old Bolsheviks who stood on the common ground of Bolshevism. What was that common ground? Unity of views on the fundamental questions: the character of the Russian revolution, the driving forces of the revolution, the role of the peasantry, the principles of Party leadership, and so forth. Had there not been this common ground, a split would have been inevitable. There was no split, and the disagreements lasted only a few days, because, and only because, Kamenev and Zinoviev were Leninists, Bolsheviks.

Let us now pass to the legend about Trotsky's special role in the October uprising. The Trotskyites are vigorously spreading rumours that Trotsky inspired and was the sole leader of the October uprising. These rumours are being spread with exceptional zeal by the so-called editor of Trotsky's works, Lentsner. Trotsky himself, by consistently avoiding mention of the Party, the Central Committee and the Petrograd Committee of the Party, by saying nothing about the leading role of these organisations in the uprising and vigorously pushing himself forward as the central figure in the October uprising,

page 109

voluntarily or involuntarily helps to spread the rumours about the special role he is supposed to have played in the uprising. I am far from denying Trotsky's undoubtedly important role in the uprising. I must say, however, that Trotsky did not play any special role in the October uprising, nor could he do so; being chairman of the Petrograd Soviet, he merely carried out the will of the appropriate Party bodies, which directed every step that Trotsky took. To philistines like Sukhanov, all this may seem strange, but the facts, the true facts, wholly and fully confirm what I say.

Let us take the minutes of the next meeting of the Central Committee, the one held on October 16 (29),1917. Present: the members of the Central Committee, plus representatives of the Petrograd Committee, plus representatives of the military organisation, factory committees, trade unions and the railwaymen. Among those present, besides the members of the Central Committee, were: Krylenko, Shotman, Kalinin, Volodarsky, Shlyapnikov, Lacis, and others, twenty-five in all. The question of the uprising was discussed from the purely practical-organisational aspect. Lenin's resolution on the uprising was adopted by a majority of 20 against 2, three abstaining. A practical centre was elected for the organisational leadership of the uprising. Who was elected to this centre? The following five: Sverdlov, Stalin, Dzerzhinsky, Bubnov, Uritsky. The functions of the practical centre: to direct all the practical organs of the uprising in conformity with the directives of the Central Committee. Thus, as you see, something "terrible" happened at this meeting of the Central Committee, i.e., "strange to relate," the "inspirer," the "chief figure," the "sole leader" of the uprising, Trotsky, was not elected to the practical centre, which was called upon to direct the uprising. How is this to be reconciled with the

page 110

current opinion about Trotsky's special role? Is not all this somewhat "strange," as Sukhanov, or the Trotskyites, would say? And yet, strictly speaking, there is nothing strange about it, for neither in the Party, nor in the October uprising, did Trotsky play any special role, nor could he do so, for he was a relatively new man in our Party in the period of October. He, like all the responsible workers, merely carried out the will of the Central Committee and of its organs. Whoever is familiar with the mechanics of Bolshevik Party leadership will have no difficulty in understanding that it could not be otherwise: it would have been enough for Trotsky to have gone against the will of the Central Committee to have been deprived of influence on the course of events. This talk about Trotsky's special role is a legend that is being spread by obliging "Party" gossips.

This, of course, does not mean that the October uprising did not have its inspirer. It did have its inspirer and leader, but this was Lenin, and none other than Lenin, that same Lenin whose resolutions the Central Committee adopted when deciding the question of the uprising, that same Lenin who, in spite of what Trotsky says, was not prevented by being in hiding from being the actual inspirer of the uprising. It is foolish and ridiculous to attempt now, by gossip about Lenin having been in hiding, to obscure the indubitable fact that the inspirer of the uprising was the leader of the Party, V. I. Lenin.

Such are the facts.

Granted, we are told, but it cannot be denied that Trotsky fought well in the period of October. Yes, that is true, Trotsky did, indeed, fight well in October; but Trotsky was not the only one who fought well in the period of October. Even people like the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, who then stood

page 111

side by side with the Bolsheviks, also fought well. In general, I must say that in the period of a victorious uprising, when the enemy is isolated and the uprising is growing, it is not difficult to fight well. At such moments even backward people become heroes.

The proletarian struggle is not, however, an uninterrupted advance, an unbroken chain of victories. The proletarian struggle also has its trials, its defeats. The genuine revolutionary is not one who displays courage in the period of a victorious uprising, but one who, while fighting well during the victorious advance of the revolution, also displays courage when the revolution is in retreat, when the proletariat suffers defeat; who does not lose his head and does not funk when the revolution suffers reverses, when the enemy achieves success; who does not become panic-stricken or give way to despair when the revolution is in a period of retreat. The Left Socialist-Revolutionaries did not fight badly in the period of October, and they supported the Bolsheviks. But who does not know that those "brave" fighters became panic-stricken in the period of Brest, when the advance of German imperialism drove them to despair and hysteria? It is a very sad but indubitable fact that Trotsky, who fought well in the period of October, did not, in the period of Brest, in the period when the revolution suffered temporary reverses, possess the courage to display sufficient staunchness at that difficult moment and to refrain from following in the footsteps of the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries. Beyond question, that moment was a difficult one; one had to display exceptional courage and imperturbable coolness not to be dismayed, to retreat in good time, to accept peace in good time, to withdraw the proletarian army out of range of the blows of German imperialism, to preserve the

page 112

peasant reserves and, after obtaining a respite in this way, to strike at the enemy with renewed force. Unfortunately, Trotsky was found to lack this courage and revolutionary staunchness at that difficult moment.

In Trotsky's opinion, the principal lesson of the proletarian revolution is "not to funk" during October. That is wrong, for Trotsky's assertion contains only a particle of the truth about the lessons of the revolution. The whole truth about the lessons of the proletarian revolution is "not to funk" not only when the revolution is advancing, but also when it is in retreat, when the enemy is gaining the upper hand and the revolution is suffering reverses. The revolution did not end with October. October was only the beginning of the proletarian revolution. It is bad to funk when the tide of insurrection is rising; but it is worse to funk when the revolution is passing through severe trials after power has been captured. To retain power on the morrow of the revolution is no less important than to capture power. If Trotsky funked during the period of Brest, when our revolution was passing through severe trials, when it was almost a matter of "surrendering" power, he ought to know that the mistakes committed by Kamenev and Kinoviev in October are quite irrelevant here.

That is how matters stand with the legends about the October uprising.

THE PARTY AND THE PREPARATION
FOR OCTOBER

Let us now pass to the question of the preparation for October.

page 113

Listening to Trotsky, one might think that during the whole of the period of preparation, from March to October, the Bolshevik Party did nothing but mark time; that it was being corroded by internal contradictions and hindered Lenin in every way; that had it not been for Trotsky, nobody knows how the October Revolution would have ended. It is rather amusing to hear this strange talk about the Party from Trotsky, who declares in this same "preface" to Volume III that "the chief instrument of the proletarian revolution is the Party," that "without the Party, apart from the Party, by-passing the Party, with a substitute for the Party, the proletarian revolution cannot be victorious." Allah himself would not understand how our revolution could have succeeded if "its chief instrument" proved to be useless, while success was impossible, as it appears, "by-passing the Party." But this is not the first time that Trotsky treats us to oddities. It must be supposed that this amusing talk about our Party is one of Trotsky's usual oddities.

Let us briefly review the history of the preparation for October according to periods.

1) The period of the Party's new orientation (March-April ). The major facts of this period:

a) the overthrow of tsarism;

b) the formation of the Provisional Government (dictatorship of the bourgeoisie);

c) the appearance of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies (dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry);

d) dual power;

e) the April demonstration;

f) the first crisis of power.

page 114

The characteristic feature of this period is the fact that there existed together, side by side and simultaneously, both the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry; the latter trusts the former, believes that it is striving for peace, voluntarily surrenders power to the bourgeoisie and thereby becomes an appendage of the bourgeoisie. There are as yet no serious conflicts between the two dictatorships. On the other hand, there is the "Contact Committee."[20]

This was the greatest turning point in the history of Russia and an unprecedented turning point in the history of our Party. The old, pre-revolutionary platform of direct overthrow of the government was clear and definite, but it was no longer suitable for the new conditions of the struggle. It was now no longer possible to go straight out for the overthrow of the government, for the latter was connected with the Soviets, then under the influence of the defencists, and the Party would have had to wage war against both the government and the Soviets, a war that would have been beyond its strength. Nor was it possible to pursue a policy of supporting the Provisional Government, for it was the government of imperialism. Under the new conditions of the struggle the Party had to adopt a new orientation. The Party (its majority) groped its way towards this new orientation. It adopted the policy of pressure on the Provisional Government through the Soviets on the question of peace and did not venture to step forward at once from the old slogan of the dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry to the new slogan of power to the Soviets. The aim of this halfway policy was to enable the Soviets to discern the actual imperialist nature of the Provisional Government on the basis of the concrete questions of peace, and in this way to wrest the Soviets from the Provisional Government. But

page 115

this was a profoundly mistaken position, for it gave rise to pacifist illusions, brought grist to the mill of defencism and hindered the revolutionary education of the masses. At that time I shared this mistaken position with other Party comrades and fully abandoned it only in the middle of April, when I associated myself with Lenin's theses. A new orientation was needed. This new orientation was given to the Party by Lenin, in his celebrated April Theses.[21] I shall not deal with these theses, for they are known to everybody. Were there any disagreements between the Party and Lenin at that time? Yes, there were. How long did these disagreements last? Not more than two weeks. The City Conference of the Petrograd organisation[22] (in the latter half of April), which adopted Lenin's theses, marked a turning point in our Party's development. The All-Russian April Conference [23] (at the end of April) merely completed on an all-Russian scale the work of the Petrograd Conference, rallying nine-tenths of the Party around this united Party position.

Now, seven years later, Trotsky gloats maliciously over the past disagreements among the Bolsheviks and depicts them as a struggle waged as if there were almost two parties within Bolshevism. But, firstly, Trotsky disgracefully exaggerates and inflates the matter, for the Bolshevik Party lived through these disagreements without the slightest shock. Secondly, our Party would be a caste and not a revolutionary party if it did not permit different shades of opinion in its ranks. Moreover, it is well known that there were disagreements among us even before that, for example, in the period of the Third Duma, but they did not shake the unity of our Party. Thirdly, it will not be out of place to ask what was then the position of Trotsky himself, who is now gloating so eagerly over the past disagree-

page 116

ments among the Bolsheviks. Lentsner, the so-called editor of Trotsky's works, assures us that Trotsky's letters from America (March) "wholly anticipated" Lenin's Letters from Afar [24] (March), which served as the basis of Lenin's April Theses. That is what he says: "wholly anticipated." Trotsky does not object to this analogy; apparently, he accepts it with thanks. But, firstly, Trotsky's letters "do not in the least resemble" Lenin's letters either in spirit or in conclusions, for they wholly and entirely reflect Trotsky's anti-Bolshevik slogan of "no tsar, but a workers' government," a slogan which implies a revolution without the peasantry. It is enough to glance through these two series of letters to be convinced of this. Secondly, if what Lentsner says is true, how are we to explain the fact that Lenin on the very next day after his arrival from abroad considered it necessary to dissociate himself from Trotsky? Who does not know of Lenin's repeated statements that Trotsky's slogan of "no tsar, but a workers' government " was an attempt "to skip the still unexhausted peasant movement," that this slogan meant "playing at the seizure of power by a workers' government"?*

What can there be in common between Lenin's Bolshevik theses and Trotsky's anti-Bolshevik scheme with its "playing at the seizure of power"? And what prompts this passion that some people display for comparing a wretched hovel with Mont Blanc? For what purpose did Lentsner find it necessary to make this risky addition to the heap of old legends about our revolution of still another legend, about Trotsky's letters

* See Lenin's Letters on Tactics, First Letter, Assessment of the Present Situation (1917). See also the reports made at the Petrograd City Conference and at the All-Russian Conference of the R.S.D.L.P.(B.) (middle and end of April 1917).

page 117

from America "anticipating" Lenin's well-known Letters from Afar?[*]

No wonder it is said that an obliging fool is more dangerous than an enemy.

2) The period of the revolutionary mobilisation of the masses (May-August ). The major facts of this period:

a) the April demonstration in Petrograd and the formation of the coalition government with the participation of "Socialists";

b) the May Day demonstrations in the principal centres of Russia with the slogan of "a democratic peace";

c) the June demonstration in Petrograd with the principal slogan: "Down with the capitalist ministers!";

d) the June offensive at the front and the reverses of the Russian army;

e) the July armed demonstration in Petrograd; the Cadet ministers resign from the government;

f) counter-revolutionary troops are called in from the front; the editorial offices of Pravda are wrecked; the counter-revolution launches a struggle against the Soviets and a new coalition government is formed, headed by Kerensky;

* Among these legends must be included also the very widespread story that Trotsky was the "sole" or "chief organiser" of the victories on the fronts of the Civil War. I must declare, comrades, in the interest of truth, that this version is quite out of accord with the facts. I am far from denying that Trotsky played an important role in the Civil War. But I must emphatically declare that the high honour of being the organiser of our victories belongs not to individuals, but to the great collective body of advanced workers in our country, the Russian Communist Party. Perhaps it will not be out of place to quote a few examples. You know that Kolchak and Denikin were regarded as the principal enemies of the Soviet Republic. You know that our country breathed freely only after those enemies were defeated. Well, history shows that [cont. onto p. 118. -- DJR] both those enemies, i.e., Kolchak and Denikin, were routed by our troops in spite of Trotsky's plans.
Judge for yourselves.
1) Kolchak. This is in the summer of 1919. Our troops are advancing against Kolchak and are operating near Ufa. A meeting of the Central Committee is held. Trotsky proposes that the advance be halted along the line of the River Belaya (near Ufa), leaving the Urals in the hands of Kolchak, and that part of the troops be withdrawn from the Eastern Front and transferred to the Southern Front. A heated debate takes place. The Central Committee disagrees with Trotsky, being of the opinion that the Urals, with its factories and railway network, must not be left in the hands of Kolchak, for the latter could easily recuperate there, organise a strong force and reach the Volga again; Kolchak must first be driven beyond the Ural range into the Siberian steppes, and only after that has been done should forces be transferred to the South. The Central Committee rejects Trotsky's plan. Trotsky hands in his [cont. onto p. 119. -- DJR] resignation. The Central Committee refuses to accept it. Commander-in-Chief Vatsetis, who supported Trotsky's plan, resigns. His place is taken by a new Commander-in-Chief, Kamenev. From that moment Trotsky ceases to take a direct part in the affairs of the Eastern Front.
2) Denikin. This is in the autumn of 1919. The offensive against Denikin is not proceeding successfully. The "steel ring" around Mamontov (Mamontov's raid) is obviously collapsing. Denikin captures Kursk. Denikin is approaching Orel. Trotsky is summoned from the Southern Front to attend a meeting of the Central Committee. The Central Committee regards the situation as alarming and decides to send new military leaders to the Southern Front and to withdraw Trotsky. The new military leaders demand "no intervention" by Trotsky in the affairs of the Southern Front. Trotsky ceases to take a direct part in the affairs of the Southern Front. Operations on the Southern Front, right up to the capture of Rostov-on-Don and Odessa by our troops, proceed without Trotsky.
Let anybody try to refute these facts.

page 118

g) the Sixth Congress of our Party, which issues the slogan to prepare for an armed uprising;

h) the counter-revolutionary Conference of State and the general strike in Moscow;

i) Kornilov's unsuccessful march on Petrograd, the revitalising of the Soviets; the Cadets resign and a "Directory" is formed.

The characteristic feature of this period is the intensification of the crisis and the upsetting of the unstable equilibrium between the Soviets and the Provisional Government which, for good or evil, had existed in the preceding period. Dual power has become intolerable for both sides. The fragile ediface of the "Contact Committee" is tottering. "Crisis of power" and "ministerial re-shuffle" are the most fashionable catch-words of the day. The crisis at the front and the disruption in the rear are doing their work, strengthening the extreme flanks and squeezing the defencist compromisers from both sides. The revolution is mobilising, causing the mobilisation of the

page 119

counter-revolution. The counter-revolution, in its turn, is spurring on the revolution, stirring up new waves of the revolutionary tide. The question of transferring power to the new class becomes the immediate question of the day.

Were there disagreements in our Party then? Yes, there were. They were, however, of a purely practical character, despite the assertions of Trotsky, who is trying to discover a "Right" and a "Left" wing in the Party. That is to say, they were such disagreements as are inevitable where there is vigorous Party life and real Party activity.

Trotsky is wrong in asserting that the April demonstration in Petrograd gave rise to disagreements in the Central Committee. The Central Committee was absolutely united on this question and condemned the attempt of a group of comrades to arrest the Provisional Government at a time when the Bolsheviks were in a minority both in the Soviets and in the army. Had Trotsky written the "history" of October not according to Sukhanov, but according to authentic documents,

page 120

he would easily have convinced himself of the error of his assertion.

Trotsky is absolutely wrong in asserting that the attempt, "on Lenin's initiative," to arrange a demonstration on June 10 was described as "adventurism" by the "Right-wing" members of the Central Committee. Had Trotsky not written according to Sukhanov he would surely have known that the June 10 demonstration was postponed with the full agreement of Lenin, and that he urged the necessity of postponing it in a

big speech he delivered at the well-known meeting of the Petrograd Committee (see minutes of the Petrograd Committee[

Trotsky is absolutely wrong in speaking about "tragic" disagreements in the Central Committee in connection with the July armed demonstration. Trotsky is simply inventing in asserting that some members of the leading group in the Central Committee "could not but regard the July episode as a harmful adventure." Trotsky, who was then not yet a member of our Central Committee and was merely our Soviet parliamentary, might, of course, not have known that the Central Committee regarded the July demonstration only as a means of sounding the enemy, that the Central Committee (and Lenin) did not want to convert, did not even think of converting, the demonstration into an uprising at a time when the Soviets in the capitals still supported the defencists. It is quite possible that some Bolsheviks did whimper over the July defeat. I know, for example, that some of the Bolsheviks who were arrested at the time were even prepared to desert our ranks. But to draw inferences from this against certain supposed "Rights," supposed to be members of the Central Committee, is a shameful distortion of history.

page 121

Trotsky is wrong in declaring that during the Kornilov days a section of the Party leaders inclined towards the formation of a bloc with the defencists, towards supporting the Provisional Government. He, of course, is referring to those same alleged "Rights" who keep him awake at night. Trotsky is wrong, for there exist documents, such as the Central Organ of the Party of that time, which refute his statements. Trotsky refers to Lenin's letter to the Central Committee warning against supporting Kerensky; but Trotsky fails to understand Lenin's letters, their significance, their purpose. In his letters Lenin sometimes deliberately ran ahead, pushing into the forefront mistakes that might possibly be committed, and criticising them in advance with the object of warning the Party and of safeguarding it against mistakes. Sometimes he would even magnify a "trifle" and "make a mountain out of a molehill" for the same pedagogical purpose. The leader of the Party, especially if he is in hiding, cannot act otherwise, for he must see further than his comrades-in-arms, he must sound the alarm over every possible mistake, even over "trifles." But to infer from such letters of Lenin's (and he wrote quite a number of such letters) the existence of "tragic" disagreements and to trumpet them forth means not to understand Lenin's letters, means not to know Lenin. This, probably, explains why Trotsky sometimes is wide of the mark. In short: there were no disagreements in the Central Committee during the Kornilov revolt, absolutely none.

After the July defeat disagreement did indeed arise between the Central Committee and Lenin on the question of the future of the Soviets. It is known that Lenin, wishing to concentrate the Party's attention on the task of preparing the uprising outside the Soviets, warned against any infatuation with the latter, for he was of the opinion that, having been

page 122

defiled by the defencists, they had become useless. The Central Committee and the Sixth Party Congress took a more cautious line and decided that there were no grounds for excluding the possibility that the Soviets would revive. The Kornilov revolt showed that this decision was correct. This disagreement, however, was of no great consequence for the Party. Later, Lenin admitted that the line taken by the Sixth Congress had been correct. It is interesting that Trotsky has not clutched at this disagreement and has not magnified it to "monstrous" proportions.

A united and solid party, the hub of the revolutionary mobilisation of the masses -- such was the picture presented by our Party in that period.

3) The period of organisation of the assault (September-October ). The major facts of this period:

a) the convocation of the Democratic Conference and the collapse of the idea of a bloc with the Cadets;

b) the Moscow and Petrograd Soviets go over to the side of the Bolsheviks;

c) the Congress of Soviets of the Northern Region;[

26] the Petrograd Soviet decides against the withdrawal of the troops;

d) the decision of the Central Committee on the uprising and the formation of the Revolutionary Military Committee of the Petrograd Soviet;

e) the Petrograd garrison decides to render the Petrograd Soviet armed support; a network of commissars of the Revolutionary Military Committee is organised;

f) the Bolshevik armed forces go into action; the members of the Provisional Government are arrested;

g) the Revolutionary Military Committee of the Petrograd Soviet takes power; the Second Congress of Soviets sets up the Council of People's Commissars.

page 123

The characteristic feature of this period is the rapid growth of the crisis, the utter consternation reigning among the ruling circles, the isolation of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, and the mass flight of the vacillating elements to the side of the Bolsheviks. A peculiar feature of the tactics of the revolution in this period must be noted, namely, that the revolution strove to take every, or nearly every, step in its attack in the guise of defence. Undoubtedly, the refusal to allow the troops to be withdrawn from Petrograd was an important step in the revolution's attack; nevertheless, this attack was carried out under the slogan of protecting Petrograd from possible attack by the external enemy. Undoubtedly, the formation of the Revolutionary Military Committee was a still more important step in the attack upon the Provisional Government; nevertheless, it was carried out under the slogan of organising Soviet control over the actions of the Headquarters of the Military Area. Undoubtedly, the open transition of the garrison to the side of the Revolutionary Military Committee and the organisation of a network of Soviet Commissars marked the beginning of the uprising; nevertheless, the revolution took these steps under the slogan of protecting the Petrograd Soviet from possible action by the counter-revolution. The revolution, as it were, masked its actions in attack under the cloak of defence in order the more easily to draw the irresolute, vacillating elements into its orbit. This, no doubt, explains the outwardly defensive character of the speeches, articles and slogans of that period, the inner content of which, none the less, was of a profoundly attacking nature.

Were there disagreements in the Central Committee in that period? Yes, there were, and fairly important ones at that. I have already spoken about the disagreements over the uprising. They are fully reflected in the minutes of the meetings

page 124

of the Central Committee of October 10 and 16. I shall, therefore, not repeat what I have already said. Three questions must now be dealt with: participation in the Pre-parliament, the role of the Soviets in the uprising, and the date of the uprising. This is all the more necessary because Trotsky, in his zeal to push himself into a prominent place, has "inadvertently" misrepresented the stand Lenin took on the last two questions.

Undoubtedly, the disagreements on the question of the Pre-parliament were of a serious nature. What was, so to speak, the aim of the Pre-parliament? It was: to help the bourgeoisie to push the Soviets into the background and to lay the foundations of bourgeois parliamentarism. Whether the Pre-parliament could have accomplished this task in the revolutionary situation that had arisen is another matter. Events showed that this aim could not be realised, and the Pre-parliament itself was a Kornilovite abortion. There can be no doubt, however, that it was precisely this aim that the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries pursued in setting up the Pre-parliament. What could the Bolsheviks' participation in the Pre-parliament mean under those circumstances? Nothing but deceiving the proletarian masses about the true nature of the Pre-parliament. This is the chief explanation for the passion with which Lenin, in his letters, scourged those who were in favour of taking part in the Pre-parliament. There can be no doubt that it was a grave mistake to have taken part in the Pre-parliament.

It would be a mistake, however, to think, as Trotsky does, that those who were in favour of taking part in the Pre-parliament went into it for the purpose of constructive work, for the purpose of "directing the working-class movement" "into the channel of Social-Democracy." That is not at all the case.

page 125

It is not true. Had that been the case, the Party would not have been able to rectify this mistake "in two ticks" by demonstratively walking out of the Pre-parliament. Incidentally, the swift rectification of this mistake was an expression of our Party's vitality and revolutionary might.

And now, permit me to correct a slight inaccuracy that has crept into the report of Lentsner, the "editor" of Trotsky's works, about the meeting of the Bolshevik group at which a decision on the question of the Pre-parliament was taken. Lentsner says that there were two reporters at this meeting, Kamenev and Trotsky. That is not true. Actually, there were four reporters: two in favour of boycotting the Pre-parliament (Trotsky and Stalin), and two in favour of participation (Kamenev and Nogin).

Trotsky is in a still worse position when dealing with the stand Lenin took on the question of the form of the uprising. According to Trotsky, it appears that Lenin's view was that the Party should take power in October "independently of and behind the back of the Soviet." Later on, criticising this nonsense, which he ascribes to Lenin, Trotsky "cuts capers" and finally delivers the following condescending utterance: "That would have been a mistake." Trotsky is here uttering a falsehood about Lenin, he is misrepresenting Lenin's views on the role of the Soviets in the uprising. A pile of documents can be cited, showing that Lenin proposed that power be taken through the Soviets, either the Petrograd or the Moscow Soviet, and not behind the back of the Soviets. Why did Trotsky have to invent this more than strange legend about Lenin?

Nor is Trotsky in a better position when he "analyses" the stand taken by the Central Committee and Lenin on the question of the date of the uprising. Reporting the famous meeting of the Central Committee of October 10, Trotsky asserts that

page 126

at that meeting "a resolution was carried to the effect that the uprising should take place not later than October 15." From this it appears that the Central Committee fixed October 15 as the date of the uprising and then itself violated that decision by postponing the date of the uprising to October 25. Is that true? No, it is not. During that period the Central Committee passed only two resolutions on the uprising -- one on October 10 and the other on October 16. Let us read these resolutions.

The Central Committee's resolution of October 10:

"The Central Committee recognises that the international position of the Russian revolution (the mutiny in the German navy, which is an extreme manifestation of the growth throughout Europe of the world socialist revolution, and the threat of peace[*] between the imperialists with the object of strangling the revolution in Russia) as well as the military situation (the indubitable decision of the Russian bourgeoisie and Kerensky and Co. to surrender Petrograd to the Germans), and the fact that the proletarian party has gained a majority in the Soviets -- all this, taken in conjunction with the peasant revolt and the swing of popular confidence towards our Party (the elections in Moscow), and, finally, the obvious preparations being made for a second Kornilov affair (the withdrawal of troops from Petrograd, the dispatch of Cossacks to Petrograd, the surrounding of Minsk by Cossacks. etc.) -- all this places an armed uprising on the order of the day.
"Considering, therefore, that an armed uprising is inevitable, and that the time for it is fully ripe, the Central Committee instructs all Party organisations to be guided accordingly, and to discuss and decide all practical questions (the Congress of Soviets of the Northern Region, the withdrawal of troops from Petrograd, the actions of the people in Moscow and Minsk, etc.) from this point of view."[27]

The resolution adopted by the conference of the Central Committee with responsible workers on October 16:

* Obviously, this should be "a separate peace." -- J. St.

page 127

"This meetjng fully welcomes and wholly supports the Central Committee's resolution, calls upon all organisations and all workers and soldiers to make thorough and most intense preparations for an armed uprising and for support of the centre set up by the Central Committee for this purpose,

and expresses complete confidence that the Central Committee and the Soviet will in good time indicate the favourable moment and the suitable means for launching the attack."[28]

You see that Trotsky's memory betrayed him about the date of the uprising and the Central Committee's resolution on the uprising.

Trotsky is absolutely wrong in asserting that Lenin underrated Soviet legality, that Lenin failed to appreciate the great importance of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets taking power on October 25, and that this was the reason why he insisted that power be taken before October 25. That is not true. Lenin proposed that power be taken before October 25 for two reasons. Firstly, because the counter-revolutionaries might have surrendered Petrograd at any moment, which would have drained the blood of the developing uprising, and so every day was precious. Secondly, because the mistake made by the Petrograd Soviet in openly fixing and announcing the day of the uprising (October 25) could not be rectified in any other way than by actually launching the uprising before the legal date set for it. The fact of the matter is that Lenin regarded insurrection as an art, and he could not help knowing that the enemy, informed about the date of the uprising (owing to the carelessness of the Petrograd Soviet) would certainly try to prepare for that day. Consequently, it was necessary to forestall the enemy, i.e., without fail to launch the uprising before the legal date. This is the chief explanation for the passion with which Lenin in his letters scourged those who made a fetish of the date -- October 25. Events showed that Lenin was absolutely right. It is well known that the uprising

page 128

was launched prior to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets. It is well known that power was actually taken before the opening of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, and it was taken not by the Congress of Soviets, but by the Petrograd Soviet, by the Revolutionary Military Committee. The Congress of Soviets merely took over power from the Petrograd Soviet. That is why Trotsky's lengthy arguments about the importance of Soviet legality are quite beside the point.

A virile and mighty party standing at the head of the revolutionary masses who were storming and overthrowing bourgeois rule -- such was the state of our Party in that period.

That is how matters stand with the legends about the preparation for October.

III

TROTSKYISM OR LENINISM?

We have dealt above with the legends directed against the Party and those about Lenin spread by Trotsky and his supporters in connection with October and the preparation for it. We have exposed and refuted these legends. But the question arises: For what purpose did Trotsky need all these legends about October and the preparation for October, about Lenin and the Party of Lenin? What is the purpose of Trotsky's new literary pronouncements against the Party? What is the sense, the purpose, the aim of these pronouncements now, when the Party does not want a discussion, when the Party is busy with a host of urgent tasks, when the Party needs united efforts to restore our economy and not a new struggle around old ques tions? For what purpose does Trotsky need to drag the Party back, to new discussions?

page 129

Trotsky asserts that all this is needed for the purpose of "studying" October. But is it not possible to study October without giving another kick at the Party and its leader Lenin? What sort of a "history" of October is it that begins and ends with attempts to discredit the chief leader of the October uprising, to discredit the Party, which organised and carried through the uprising? No, it is not a matter here of studying October. That is not the way to study October. That is not the way to write the history of October. Obviously, there is a different "design" here, and everything goes to show that this "design" is that Trotsky by his literary pronouncements is making another (yet another!) attempt to create the conditions for substituting Trotskyism for Leninism. Trotsky needs "desperately" to discredit the Party, and its cadres who carried through the uprising, in order, after discrediting the Party, to proceed to discredit Leninism. And it is necessary for him to discredit Leninism in order to drag in Trotskyism as the "sole" "proletarian" (don't laugh!) ideology. All this, of course (oh of course!) under the flag of Leninism, so that the dragging operation may be performed "as painlessly as possible."

That is the essence of Trotsky's latest literary pronouncements.

That is why those literary pronouncements of Trotsky's sharply raise the question of Trotskyism.

And so, what is Trotskyism?

Trotskyism possesses three specific features which bring it into irreconcilable contradiction with Leninism.

What are these features?

Firstly. Trotskyism is the theory of "permanent" (uninterrupted) revolution. But what is permanent revolution in its Trotskyist interpretation? It is revolution that fails to take the poor peasantry into account as a revolutionary force.

page 130

Trotsky's "permanent" revolution is, as Lenin said, "skipping" the peasant movement, "playing at the seizure of power." Why is it dangerous? Because such a revolution, if an attempt had been made to bring it about, would inevitably have ended in failure, for it would have divorced from the Russian proletariat its ally, the poor peasantry. This explains the struggle that Leninism has been waging against Trotskyism ever since 1905.

How does Trotsky appraise Leninism from the standpoint of this struggle? He regards it as a theory that possesses "anti-revolutionary features." What is this indignant opinion about Leninism based on? On the fact that at the proper time Leninism advocated and upheld the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry.

But Trotsky does not confine himself to this indignant opinion. He goes further and asserts: "The entire edifice of Leninism at the present time is built on lies and falsification and bears within itself the poisonous elements of its own decay" (see Trotsky's letter to Chkheidze, 1913). As you see, we have before us two opposite lines.

Secondly. Trotskyism is distrust of the Bolshevik Party principle, of the monolithic character of the Party, of its hostility towards opportunist elements. In the sphere of organisation, Trotskyism is the theory that revolutionaries and opportunists can co-exist and form groups and coteries within a single party. You are, no doubt, familiar with the history of Trotsky's August bloc, in which the Martovites and Otzovists, the Liquidators and Trotskyites, happily co-operated, pretending that they were a "real" party. It is well known that this patchwork "party" pursued the aim of destroying the Bolshevik Party. What was the nature of "our disagreements" at that time? It was that Leninism regarded the destruction of the

page 131

August bloc as a guarantee of the development of the proletarian party, whereas Trotskyism regarded that bloc as the basis for building a "real" party.

Again, as you see, we have two opposite lines.

Thirdly. Trotskyism is distrust of the leaders of Bolshevism, an attempt to discredit, to defame them. I do not know of a single trend in the Party that could compare with Trotskyism in the matter of discrediting the leaders of Leninism or the central institutions of the Party. For example, what should be said of Trotsky's "polite" opinion of Lenin, whom he described as "a professional exploiter of every kind of backwardness in the Russian working-class movement" (ibid.)? And this is far from being the most "polite" of the "polite" opinions Trotsky has expressed.

How could it happen that Trotsky, who carried such a nasty stock-in-trade on his back, found himself, after all, in the ranks of the Bolsheviks during the October movement? It happened because at that time Trotsky abandoned (actually did abandon) that stock-in-trade; he hid it in the cupboard. Had he not performed that "operation," real co-operation with him would have been impossible. The theory of the August bloc, i.e., the theory of unity with the Mensheviks, had already been shattered and thrown overboard by the revolution, for how could there be any talk about unity when an armed struggle was raging between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks? Trotsky had no alternative but to admit that this theory was useless.

The same misadventure "happened" to the theory of permanent revolution, for not a single Bolshevik contemplated the immediate seizure of power on the morrow of the February Revolution, and Trotsky could not help knowing that the Bolsheviks would not allow him, in the words of Lenin, "to play

page 132

at the seizure of power." Trotsky had no alternative but recognise the Bolsheviks' policy of fighting for influence in the Soviets, of fighting to win over the peasantry. As regards the third specific feature of Trotskyism (distrust of the Bolshevik leaders), it naturally had to retire into the background owing to the obvious failure of the first two features.

Under those circumstances, could Trotsky do anything else but hide his stock-in-trade in the cupboard and follow the Bolsheviks, considering that he had no group of his own of any significance, and that he came to the Bolsheviks as a political individual, without an army? Of course, he could not!

What is the lesson to be learnt from this? Only one: that prolonged collaboration between the Leninists and Trotsky is possible only if the latter completely abandons his old stock in-trade, only if he completely accepts Leninism. Trotsky writes about the lessons of October, but he forgets that, in addition to all the other lessons, there is one more lesson of October, the one I have just mentioned, which is of prime importance for Trotskyism. Trotskyism ought to learn that lesson of October too.

It is evident, however, that Trotskyism has not learnt that lesson. The fact of the matter is that the old stock-in-trade of Trotskyism that was hidden in the cupboard in the period of the October movement is now being dragged into the light again in the hope that a market will be found for it, seeing that the market in our country is expanding. Undoubtedly, Trotsky's new literary pronouncements are an attempt to revert to Trotskyism, to "overcome" Leninism, to drag in, implant, all the specific features of Trotskyism. The new Trotskyism is not a mere repetition of the old Trotskyism; its feathers have been plucked and it is rather bedraggled; it is incomparably milder in spirit and more moderate in form than the old Trots-

page 133

kyism; but, in essence, it undoubtedly retains all the specific features of the old Trotskyism. The new Trotskyism does not dare to come out as a militant force against Leninism; it prefers to operate under the common flag of Leninism, under the slogan of interpreting, improving Leninism. That is because it is weak. It cannot be regarded as an accident that the appearance of the new Trotskyism coincided with Lenin's departure. In Lenin's lifetime it would not have dared to take this risky step.

What are the characteristic features of the new Trotskyism?

1) On the question of "permanent" revolution. The new Trotskyism does not deem it necessary openly to uphold the theory of "permanent" revolution. It "simply" asserts that the October Revolution fully confirmed the idea of "permanent" revolution. From this it draws the following conclusion: the important and acceptable part of Leninism is the part that came after the war, in the period of the October Revolution; on the other hand, the part of Leninism that existed before the war, before the October Revolution, is wrong and unacceptable. Hence, the Trotskyites' theory of the division of Leninism into two parts: pre-war Leninism, the "old," "useless" Leninism with its idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry, and the new, post-war, October Leninism, which they count on adapting to the requirements of Trotskyism. Trotskyism needs this theory of the division of Leninism as a first, more or less "acceptable" step that is necessary to facilitate further steps in its struggle against Leninism.

But Leninism is not an eclectic theory stuck together out of diverse elements and capable of being cut into parts. Leninism is an integral theory, which arose in 1903, has passed the test of

page 134

three revolutions, and is now being carried forward as the battle-flag of the world proletariat.

"Bolshevism," Lenin said, "as a trend of political thought and as a political party, has existed since 1903. Only the history of Bolshevism during the whole period of its existence can satisfactorily explain why it was able to build up and to maintain under most difficult conditions the iron discipline needed for the victory of the proletariat" (see Vol. XXV, p. 174).[1]

Bolshevism and Leninism are one. They are two names for one and the same thing. Hence, the theory of the division of Leninism into two parts is a theory intended to destroy Leninism, to substitute Trotskyism for Leninism.

Needless to say, the Party cannot reconcile itself to this grotesque theory.

2) On the question of the Party principle. The old Trotskyism tried to undermine the Bolshevik Party principle by means of the theory (and practice) of unity with the Mensheviks. But that theory has suffered such disgrace that nobody now even wants to mention it. To undermine the Party principle, present-day Trotskyism has invented the new, less odious and almost "democratic" theory of contrasting the old cadres to the younger Party members. According to Trotskyism, our Party has not a single and integral history. Trotskyism divides the history of our Party into two parts of unequal importance: pre-October and post-October. The pre-October part of the history of our Party is, properly speaking, not history, but "pre-history," the unimportant or, at all events, not very important preparatory period of our Party. The post-October part of the history of our Party, however, is real, genuine history. In the former, there are the "old," "pre-

^[1] Lenin, "

Left-Wing" Communism, an Infantile Disorder. II. One of the Fundamental Conditions for the Bolsheviks' Success. (1920)

page 135

historic," unimportant cadres of our Party. In the latter there is the new, real, "historic" Party. It scarcely needs proof that this singular scheme of the history of the Party is a scheme to disrupt the unity between the old and the new cadres of our Party, a scheme to destroy the Bolshevik Party principle.

Needless to say, the Party cannot reconcile itself to this grotesque scheme.

3) On the question of the leaders of Bolshevism. The old Trotskyism tried to discredit Lenin more or less openly, with out fearing the consequences. The new Trotskyism is more cautious. It tries to achieve the purpose of the old Trotskyism by pretending to praise, to exalt Lenin. I think it is worth while quoting a few examples.

The Party knows that Lenin was a relentless revolutionary; but it knows also that he was cautious, that he disliked reckless people and often, with a firm hand, restrained those who were infatuated with terrorism, including Trotsky himself. Trotsky touches on this subject in his book On Lenin, but from his portrayal of Lenin one might think that all Lenin did was "at every opportunity to din into people's minds the idea that terrorism was inevitable." The impression is created that Lenin was the most bloodthirsty of all the bloodthirsty Bolsheviks.

For what purpose did Trotsky need this uncalled-for and totally unjustified exaggeration?

The Party knows that Lenin was an exemplary Party man, who did not like to settle questions alone, without the leading collective body, on the spur of the moment, without careful investigation and verification. Trotsky touches upon this aspect, too, in his book. But the portrait he paints is not that of Lenin, but of a sort of Chinese mandarin, who settles important questions in the quiet of his study, by intuition.

page 136

Do you want to know how our Party settled the question of dispersing the Constituent Assembly? Listen to Trotsky:

"'Of course, the Constituent Assembly will have to be dispersed,' said Lenin, 'but what about the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries?'

"But our apprehensions were greatly allayed by old Natanson. He came in to 'take counsel' with us, and after the first few words he said:

"'We shall probably have to disperse the Constituent Assembly by force.'

"'Bravo!' exclaimed Lenin. 'What is true is true! But will your people agree to it?'

"'Some of our people are wavering, but I think that in the end they will agree,' answered Natanson."

That is how history is written.

Do you want to know how the Party settled the question about the Supreme Military Council? Listen to Trotsky:

" 'Unless we have serious and experienced military experts we shall never extricate ourselves from this chaos,' I said to Vladimir Ilyich after every visit to the Staff.

"'That is evidently true, but they might betray us. . . .'

"'Let us attach a commissar to each of them.'

"'Two would be better,' exclaimed Lenin, 'and strong handed ones. There surely must be strong-handed Communists in our ranks.'

"That is how the structure of the Supreme Military Council arose."

That is how Trotsky writes history.

Why did Trotsky need these "Arabian Nights" stories derogatory to Lenin? Was it to exalt V. I. Lenin, the leader of the Party? It doesn't look like it.

page 137

The Party knows that Lenin was the greatest Marxist of our times, a profound theoretician and a most experienced revolutionary, to whom any trace of Blanquism was alien. Trotsky touches upon this aspect, too, in his book. But the portrait he paints is not that of the giant Lenin, but of a dwarf like Blanquist who, in the October days, advises the Party "to take power by its own hand, independently of and behind the back of the Soviet." I have already said, however, that there is not a scrap of truth in this description. Why did Trotsky need this flagrant . . . inaccuracy? Is this not an attempt to discredit Lenin "just a little"?

Such are the characteristic features of the new Trotskyism.

What is the danger of this new Trotskyism? It is that Trots kyism, owing to its entire inner content, stands every chance of becoming the centre and rallying point of the non-proletarian elements who are striving to weaken, to disintegrate the proletarian dictatorship.

You will ask: what is to be done now? What are the Party's immediate tasks in connection with Trotsky's new literary pronouncements?

Trotskyism is taking action now in order to discredit Bolshevism and to undermine its foundations. It is the duty of the Party to bury Trotskyism as an ideological trend.

There is talk about repressive measures against the opposition and about the possibility of a split. That is nonsense, comrades. Our Party is strong and mighty. It will not allow any splits. As regards repressive measures, I am emphatically opposed to them. What we need now is not repressive meas ures, but an extensive ideological struggle against renascent Trotskyism.

page 138

We did not want and did not strive for this literary discussion. Trotskyism is forcing it upon us by its anti-Leninist pronouncements. Well, we are ready, comrades.

Pravda, No. 269,
November 26, 1924

From Marx
to Mao

Stalin
Collection

Reading
Guide

Notes on
the Text
Below

page 900

NOTES

^[20] The "Contact Committee," consisting of Chkheidze, Steklov, Sukhanov, Filippovsky and Skobelev (and later Chernov and Tsereteli), was set up by the Menshevik and Socialist-Revolutionary Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies on March 7, 1917, for the purpose of establishing contact with the Provisional Government, of "influencing" it and "controlling" its activities. Actually, the "Contact Committee" helped to carry out the bourgeois policy of the Provisional Government and restrained the masses of the workers from waging an active revolutionary struggle to transfer all power to the Soviets. The "Contact Committee" existed until May 1917, when representatives of the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries entered the Provisional Government. [p.114]

^[21] See V. I. Lenin, Selected Works, F.L.P.H., Moscow, 1952, Vol. II, Part 1, pp. 13-19. [p.115]

^[22] The Petrograd City Conference of the R.S.D.L.P.(B.) took place from April 14-22 (April 27-May 5), 1917, with 57 delegates present. V. I. Lenin and J. V. Stalin took part in the proceedings. V. I. Lenin delivered a report on the current situation based on his April Theses.

page 901

J. V. Stalin was elected to the commission for drafting the resolution on V. I. Lenin's report. [p.115]

^[23] Concerning the Seventh (April) All-Russian Conference of the Bolshevik Party see the History of the C.P.S.U.(B.), Short Course, Moscow, 1952, pp. 291-96. [p.115]

^[24] See V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, International Publishers, New York, 1929, Vol. XX, Bk. I, pp. 27-63. [p.116]

^[25] See "Speech by V. I. Lenin at the Meeting of the Petrograd Committee of the R.S.D.L.P.(B.), June 24 (11), 1917, Concerning the Cancelling of the Demonstration." [p.120]

^[26] The Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies of the Northern Region took place in Petrograd on October 24-26 (11-13), 1917, under the direction of the Bolsheviks. Representatives were present from Petrograd, Moscow, Kronstadt, Novgorod, Reval, Helsingfors, Vyborg and other cities. In all there were 94 delegates, of whom 51 were Bolsheviks. The congress adopted a resolution on the need for immediate transference of all power to the Soviets, central and local. It called upon the peasants to support the struggle for the transference of power to the Soviets and urged the Soviets themselves to commence active operations and to set up Revolutionary Military Committees for organising the military defence of the revolution. The congress set up a Northern Regional Committee and instructed it to prepare for the convocation of the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets and to co-ordinate the activities of all the Regional Soviets. [p.122]

^[27] See Meeting of tbe Central Committee of the R.S.D.L.P., October 10 (23), 1917. [p.126]

^[28] See Meeting of the Central Committee of the R.S.D.L.P., October 16 (29), 1917. [p.127]

From Marx to Mao

Stalin Collection

Reading Guide

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SOCIALIST LABOR PARTY

"The laborer is the owner of his
labor power until he has done bar-
gaining for its sale with the capital-
ist, and he can sell no more than
what he has--i.e., his individual,
isolated labor power."
			-Karl Marx.

BROTHER JONATHAN

by Danel De Leon

Excerpts

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 1
WHAT CONSTITUTES CAPITAL TODAY?

UNCLE SAM--So long as the capitalist class rules, you need not look for 
	improvement; it won't come.
BROTHER JONATHAN--Bother "capitalist class"! there is no such thing as 
	"capitalist class." We are all capitalists.
U.S.--You among them?
B.J.--Yes, I among them.
U.S.--And what does your "capital" consist in?
B.J.--In what? (stretching out his arms) In these.
U.S.--Do you imagine that the spanish Admiral Montojo at Manila and his
      men had no arms?
B.J.--They certainly had arms.
U.S.--And are you aware that he had more men under him than Dewey had?
B.J.--Yes.
U.S.--And yet Dewey and the fewer men under him mopped up Manila Bay with
      Montojo?
B.J.--Guess they did.
U.S.--How did they manage that?
B.J.--They had infinitely superior guns, and all that.
U.S.--Superior war material?
B.J.--Yes.
U.S.--But I thought you said Montojo had more men with him, and, 
      accordingly, more arms and hands.
B.J.--But arms and hands are not war material.
U.S.--Accordingly, what would you think of me, if I said to you, "Bother
      war materials; there is no such thing as a man equipped with war
      materials; we are all so equipped; look at my arms and hands; these
      are my war materials"--what would you say to that?
B.J. looks at U.S. in blank amazement.
U.S.--Have you been struck with dumbness?
B.J.--How can you call arms and hands war materials?
U.S.--That is absurd, isn't it?
B.J.--I should think so!
U.S.--Just so absurd it is to call your arms and hands "capital."
B.J.--What then is "capital"?
U.S.--To be entitled to the term capital a thing must combine two
      qualities:

1. It must be a tool, or implement of labor; that quality alone excludes
   your arms and hands; your arms and hands are not the product of human 
   labor, implements of labor are;
2. It must powerful enough to disable those who do not own it from 
   competing with him who does.

From this last it follows that a thing may be capital at one time and not
capital at another; capital at one place and not capital at another place.

B.J.--Why, that becomes very mixed up.
U.S.--Only if you don't hold firmly to the definition. The loom that
      preceded the Northrop loom was capital in New England so long as
      the Northrop loom did not exist, because that predecessor was powerful
      enough exclude competition; but just as soon as the Northrop loom 
      shall be thoroughly introduced, the old loom ceases to be capital 
      because the Northrop loom is much more powerful.
      Likewise, If the old loom that ceased to be capital in New England 
      is shipped to some distant corner where the Northrop loom has not 
      been set up, it will there be capital, while in New England it would
      not be.
B.J.--I can see that.
U.S.--Then take this illustration, which reduces the matter to dollars and
      cents. thirty odd years ago $500 sufficed to set up a brewery in this
      city. Ehret, the brewer, did so. That $500 represented the value of 
      the implements of a brewery and was capital then; today $500,000 would
      be needed to set up a brewery with any chance as a competitor.
B.J.--I heard of that.
U.S.--But you did not digest its significance. Capital, especially today,
      is such large aggregate of wealth as can defy competition in 
      production. the class that holds that is the capitalist class;
      You had better not say "bother" about it, or you will get left as
      Montojo did in Manila.
				Transcribed by redflag 8/17/96

http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 2
DEFINITION OF CAPITAL

 	BROTHER JONATHAN steps up jauntily.
 	UNCLE SAM--Hey! Ho!
 	B.J.--Somebody gave me a nut for you to crack that will make
all your Socialist science look like thirty cents.
 	U.S.--Good!
 	B.J.--It shows that your Socialist science is nothing but a tissue
of contradictions.
 	U.S.--Better still!
 	B.J.--It shows that you Socialists do not know what you are
talking about--
 	U.S.--But you're mighty long about trotting out your wonderful
uncrackable nut.
 	B.J.--All in due time. The nut will prove by logic that, if that
which Socialists call "science" is really science, then labor, that is,
the workingman, must be the capitalist; that the "exploiter" of whom we
hear so much in Socialist harangues, must be some person outside of the
two classes, whom labor is silly enough to permit itself to be exploited
by. Sabe? That's what the nut will prove.
 	U.S.--Out with your "nut," man! Out with it!
 	B.J.--(Placing his arms akimbo)--Don't Socialists say that labor
produces all wealth?
 	U.S.--Yep!
 	B.J.--Don't socialists say that, seeing that labor produces all
wealth, labor is, therefore,  entitled to the whole wealth?
 	U.S.--Yep!
 	B.J.--Don't Socialists say that exploitation is the cause of the
struggle between capital and labor?
 	U.S.--Yep--provided that by "capital" you mean in that sentence
the capitalist class. The struggle is between the capitalist class and
the working class.
 	B.J.--That's what I mean.
 	U.S.--Then, yep, again.
 	B.J.--Now then, if labor produces all wealth and wealth is 
capital--
 	U.S.--Who said "wealth  is capital"?
 	B.J.--Let me finish my sentence.--If labor produces all wealth and
wealth is capital, then it follows logically that labor must be the
capitalist, and the exploiter some person outside the two classes. There
now. Crack that!
 	U.S.--Is your sentence now finished?
 	B.J.(Radiant with pride)--It is--crack that nut!
 	U.S. puts his hands to his hips, doubles up like a jack-knife and
burst out laughing.
 	B.J.(petulantly)--You can't bluff me with your roars!
 	U.S.--Now I'll ask again: Who said wealth is capital?
 	B.J.--Who?
 	U.S.--Yes.
 	B.J.--Don't Socialists say so?
 	U.S.--Indeed not! See here--your name is Jonathan and are you a man?
 	B.J.--Yes.
 	U.S.--All Jonathans are men, but are all men Jonathans?
 	B.J.--Guess not!
 	U.S.--So with "wealth" and "capital." All "capital" is "wealth,"
 but all "wealth" is not "capital."
 	B.J.--Oh!
 	U.S.--All things that are useful to man, and are the product of
labor, are wealth, and that takes in the plants of production. Only that
portion of wealth that is used for the production of more wealth, that is,
the plants of production, becomes "capital" in capitalist society, so that
all wealth is not "capital," although all capital is wealth.
 	B.J.--Oh!
 	U.S.--Your major premise being knocked out, what becomes of your
conclusion?
 	B.J.--Oh!
 	U.S.--Labor produces all wealth. A portion of that wealth becomes,
under capitalism, "capital". Capital is that portion of wealth which,
being privately owned in a society where proletarians abound, is used to
produce more wealth by a system that exploits the capital-less proletarians.
Hence, although labor is the producer, it is not a person outside of the
two classes. The exploiter is a person--
 	B.J.--Inside of the two classes!
 	U.S.--And who is that inside person?
 	B.J.--Why, the capitalist!
 	U.S.--Now, Jonathan, you go straight to the fellow who put that
nut into your head, and hold his head under the town pump.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 8/23/96.
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 3

THE BEST TOOL OF PRODUCTION.

	BROTHER JONATHAN--I listened the other day to a 
Socialist speaker and I chuckled
	UNCLE SAM--Weren't you convinced?
	B.J.--Nay, nay! I chuckled at the way the man con-
tradicted himself, and he did not even seem to know it.
	U.S.--How? What? In what way?
	B.J.--It was worth listening to him: he confirmed me
in the belief that Socialists talk through their hats.
	U.S.--Oh, ho!
	B.J.--(With a cocksure wink)--Yes, siree. Here is
what he said: "The solution of the social, or labor, pro-
em, is the ownership by labor of the land on and the tools
with which to work. Once master of the two, labor will be
master of all the wealth it produces."
	U.S.--That's, pretty sound doctrine, and it will take
more than any pot-bellied wiseacre like you to refute it,
	B.J.--(With increased cocksurcness)--Pot-belIied or
not, I'll refute it with his own words.
	U.S.--Let 'er rip!
	B.J.--In the course of his address, before and after
making that statement I just quoted, he referred to the
farmers.
	U.S.--The small farmers?
	B.J.--Small or big matters not.
	U.S.--Eh!
	B.J.--And he showed very accurately that the farmer
was being driven to the wall, and was growing poorer and
poorer despite his industry.
	U.S.--And that is perfectly true of the small farmer.
	U.J.--You drive me out of all patience by talking
"small fanner," "small farmer." What's the odds?
	U.S.--All the odds in the world-
	B.J.--Then you, too, contradict yourself.
	U.S.--You will have to be more explicit
	B.J.--I shall. The farmer, small or big, owns his
land and his tools of production  Now, then, if the owner-
ship of these assures to a man the property in the products
of his labor, then must the farmer, whether small or large,
he well off. We know he is not, That is the contradiction
in your theory, and there it goes.  (B.J. sinks his hands
deep into his trouser pockets, and puts on a now-ou-get-
out-of-that-if-you-can look.)
	U.S.--Was that it?
	B.J.--That was it.
	U S.--Now, Jonathan, the trouble lay with you, and
not with the Socialist speaker. You went to that meeting as
you go to your prayer-meeting, to take a snooze, and you
heard only one part of what he said.
	B.J.--Which part did I not hear?
	U.S.-You did not hear his explanation of the word
"capital"--the modern tool of prodution.
	B.J.--Are not all tools capital? Is not an old style
plow capital, as well as a steam plow?
	U.S.--No, sir. The value of Corn depends upon the
labor necessary to produce it, the same as all other goods.
	B.J.--Very well.
	U.S.--If you and I produce corn with an old style
plow, we must both put the same amount of labor into every
bushel of corn that we produce.
	B.J.---Very well.
	U.S.--Then you can't undersell me, and 'can't under-
sell you
	B.J.--That's so.
	U.S.--But now suppose that some farmer starts to
work with a steam plow and such other large means of
production  How are we affected?
	B.J.--How?
	U.S.--With the steam plow and steam harvester work
can be done quickly; larger tracts of land are necessary to
employ the machine on.  Without the machine you and I
can't cover large acres. With the machine, thousands of
acres can be covered with less labor than without it. The
production of corn becomes more plentiful, the amount of
labor that is then put into each bushel is less. You admit
that the value of the bushel depends upon the labor re-
quired in its production. Consequently, the farmer with the
steam appliances can undersell us.  If before we got $1
per bushel, we can now get only fifty cents. Am I right?
	B.J.--Hem!
	U.S.--Where are we then?
	B.J.'s brow puckers
	U.	S.~Now, gct back a moment. When you and I
plowed our land with old style plows upon the little patches
which we would cover with the old style tool, didn't we
have the bulge on somebody?
	B.J.--Not that I know 0f
	U.S.--You don't? What about our farm hands! the
fellows who had neither land nor plow?
	B.J.--Why, we hired them.
	U.S.--Yes, we "hired" them. Was their hire equal
to what they produced?
	B.J.--'Course not. The idea of giving a hired man as
much as he produces! Of what benefit would he be to us?
	U.S.--Right you are. No employer hires a man un-
less that man will produce more than he receives. Do you
imagine a man likes to produce two dollars' worth of corn,
and only receive in payment one dollar?
	B.J.--(Shaking his bead from  right to left)--Rekon
not.
	U.S.--Now, what is it that induced such a man to
take a position under which he was skinned? What gave
us the bulge on him?
	B.J. Contemplates a man on the other end of the
street who is whipping his horse.
	U.S.--What drove him to that?
	B.J.--Hunger, I guess.
	U.S.--The long and short of it is that the farm hand,
then as now, had not and has not the necessities of produc-
tion.
	B.J.--But land was cheap, he could get that.
	U.S.--Yes, but land alone, without the tools of pro-
duction, is valueless.
	B.J. (With a nod expressive of esperience)--True
enough.
	U, S-There is where we had the bulge on him. Now
just consider this: Our old style plows were much simpler
than the steam plow. A man might, if he could keep him-
self alive in the meantime, make an old style plow himself
In a few months Even in those olden days, when the tool
in general use was so much simpler, the man who didn't
have it had to hire himself to be plucked for the sake of
a living. That being the case, what chance have small fry
farmers, such as you and I, today, when we hare to com-
pete with the steam plow?
	B.J. Looks decidedly despondent.
	U.S.--The steam plow and other such appliances re-
duce the amount of labor that there is in each bushel, and
thereby reduce the amount of wealth we can get. Former-
ly even when the plow and harvester, etc., were so much
simpler, the man without them could not make them for
himself, and had to become a wage slave and put up with
wages less than what he produced. Today when the tool
is the stean plow, etc., which none of us can think of pro'
ducing in a lifetirne, where are we?
	B.J.--Busted!
	U.S.--Yes, there is where the large farmer got the
bulge on us. Do you now understand what 'capital" means?
That steam plow, that modern machinery of production, is
"capital" The simpler plow was "capital" in years gone
by only to the man who had no plow; now "capital"
has grown, and the modern plow, harvester, etc., is "capi-
tal" not only to the man who has none, but to us who
have the former "capital"--the old style plow.  "Capi-
tal" is originally that machinery of production which dis-
able those who have none at all from working for them-
selves; presently, "capital" the tool, becomes more power-
ful, and it not only disables more completely those who
have none from working for themselves--
	B.J.--(Taking sudden alarm)~By Jericho. It also
disables those who have smaller tools from competing with
it!
	U.S.--It breaks them--
	B.J.--Rips them wide open--
	U.S.--Throws them into bankruptcy-
	B.J.--Makes wage slaves out of them.
	U.S.--Yes, yes.  Of what use to us are such tools as
we farmers have?
	B.J.--They are not worth a tinker's dam!
	U.S.--Do you see he difrerence between the small
farmer and the big one?
	B.J.--Why, of course!
	U S-And don't you see that to talk of us as having
"capital" is empty mockery or stupidity?
	B.J.--So it is!
	U.S.--And that to say, as you said before, that "we
have tools" is folly?
	B.J.--Well, I must have been asleep
	U.S.--Indeed, you must have been, Our tools are no
longer "capital" they are not even "property" worth the
name. They are a delusion of "property" We are sink-
ing, together with the small industrialists! because we do
not possess *the* tool of production that is now capital.
Hence, the little wealth we produce shrivels in our hands.
If that little wealth shrivels in our hands, how much more
must not the wealth shrivel in the hands of the unfortunate
man who hires himself out because he has no tools what-
ever--the workingman?
	B.J.--The first time I meet that Socialist lecturer
again, I am gong to tender him my apologies. I see it all.
He was right. Without the tool of production man is not
master of the wealth he creates.
	U.S.--And the tool of production needed to secure
such masterhood--
	B.J.-Is *capital*--that is, the best tool in operation;
none other deserves consideration.
	U.S.-You've got it now. Don't let it go, and impart
the knowledge to others.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 3/14/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 4

EXCHANGE VALUE DEFINED.

	BROTHER JONATHAN--I have frequently heard you use
the term "exchange value." Now, I wish you would remem-
ber that I am no college professor, but a plain workingman.
What does that term mean In English?
	UNCLE SAM--And before going further I wish you to
remember that one need not be a "college professor" to
buckle down to the common sense proposition that, if he
wants to talk intelligently on a scientific question, he must
use and understand technical terms.
	B.J.--But can't you use some other and plainer word?
	U.S.--Could you not use some other word than
"shuttle" or "woof," when you speak of weaving?
	B.J.-Yes, I could, but it would be clumsy to do so,
and then one might be misunderstood. If you say "shuttle"
or "woof" you are understood without the peradventure of
a mistake.
	U.S.--And that is just why, when talking economics,
every sensible man, from the most poetic, like Lassalle, down
to the plainest, must use the term "exchange value" instead
of some roundabout phrase.
	B.J.--Well, let it be so. What does the thing mean?
	U.S.--If you took thirty yards of your cloth to market
and wished to have wheat, you would be willing to exchange
the cloth for wheat, would you not?
	B.J.--Yes.
	U.S.--Would you be willing to give all the thirty yards
for one bushel of wheat?
	B.J.--Are you crazy?
	U.S.--Not yet. Would you?
	B.J.--Not much, I wouldn't.
	U.S.--Why not?
	B.J.--Because my thirty yards of cloth are worth $21,
while a bushel of wheat is worth only 70 cents.
	U.S.--Now, then, the "exchange value" of one yard
of your cloth is one bushel of wheat; and the exchange value
of one bushel of wheat is one yard of your cloth.  "Ex-
change value" means that quantity of value that goods have,
and for which they may be exchanged.
	B.J. (Looking astonished)--Now, that beats all I ever
saw The thing is simple. I imagined it was some very pro-
found thing, that "exchange value."  I see, however, that
there is nothing particular about it. I wonder why you and
all Socialists talk so much about it.
	U.S.--Because thereby hang all the prophets and the
law, so to speak.
	B.J.--I can't imagine that.
	U.S.--I'll show you. Why are you willing to exchange
one yard of your cloth for one bushel of wheat, and thirty
yards of your cloth for thirty bushels of wheat?
	B.J.--Because they are worth the same thing.
	U.S.--And why are they worth the same thing?
	B.J.--Because...why...yes...because...why, don't you
know?
	U.S.--I do; but do you?
	B.J.--Well...yes...because...why, of course...
	U.S.--Don't flounder. Just because the quantity of la-
bor present society needs to produce a bushel of wheat is the
same as the quantity of labor present society needs to pro-
duce a yard of your cloth.
	B.J.--Very well. What of it?
	U.S.--A good deal. This is the pivot upon which the
whole social question revolves.
	B.J. (Astonished)--You don't mean to say so!
	U.S.--I do. Suppose someone starts a large farm and
applies improved machinery, and is able to turn out two
bushels of wheat in the time and with the labor with which
the farmer now turns out one bushel, would you be willing
to continue to exchange one yard of your cloth for one
bushel of wheat?
	B.J. (With indignation)--Indeed I would not!
	U.S.--You would want--
	B.J.--Every bit of two bushels.
	U.S.--Do you realize why?
	B.J.--Well, I guess on the principle you just mentioned
--the amount of labor society requires to produce one yard
of my cloth is equal to the quantity of labor required to pro-
duce two bushels of wheat.
	U.S.--Correct I The exchange value of one yard has
become equal to two bushels. And suppose the method of
producing wheat were further perfected, and ten bushels
were turned out in the same time that it formerly took to
turn out one?
	B.J. (Beating his hands with glee)--That would be
bully! I would then get ten bushels per yard of cloth. The
exchange value of my cloth would be equal to ten bushels.
	U.S.--And if one hundred bushels were turned out in
the time it now takes to turn out one?
	B.J.--Bullier yet! I would get one hundred bushels
per yard; that would be the exchange value of one yard of
my cloth.
	U.S.--You are joyful before season. Don't you see
whither that tends?
	B.J.--No.
	U.S.--Let us turn the tables around. Suppose someone
starts weaving with a better machine than yours and. turns
out two yards in the same time it takes you to turn out one,
do you imagine the farmer would let you have a whole
bushel of wheat for one yard of your cloth?
	B.J.'s face begins to fall.
	U.S.--Would he?
	B.J.--No.
	U.S.--How much will he let you have?
	B.J.--Guess only half a bushel.
	U.S.--Why?
	B.J.--Because that has become the exchange value of
his bushel of wheat.
	U.S.--And suppose the competing weaver turns out ten
yards with his machine while you are turning out only one,
what would then be the exchange value of the goods of you
and the farmer?
	B.J.--One yard of my cloth would be worth one-tenth
of a busheL
	U.S.--And if your competitor turned out one hundred
yards to your one?
	B.J. (With a decidedly sad look on him)--I would
starve.
	U.S.--Why?
	B.J.--Because one yard of my goods would be worth
only one-hundredth bushel, and I could not then produce
fast enough to keep me in food.
	U.S.--Do you now see whither all that tends?
	B.J.--I have an idea I do.
	U.S.--Whither ddes it tend?
	B.J.--It tends to my ruin.
	U.S.--Let us state the case more pointedly: The law of
exchange value demonstrates that the more perfect machinery
becomes--
	B.J.--The less labor is spent in the production of a
single thing--
	U.S.--And, consequently, that he who has not the
requisite capital or machinery to produce with--
	B.J.--Can't compete with him who has.
	U.S.--And the result is that he must be ruined. The
new Northrop loom, for instance, will throw you on your
back the same as perfected machinery has thrown every
small competitor on his back. Now, do you see all there is in
that simple law of "exchange value"?
	B.J. (Heaves a deep sigh)--Guess I do now.
	U.S.--The law of exchange value is a cardinal law of
economics. It should be carried before the eyes as the Jews
carry their phylacteries. It must never be lost sight of. If
you lose sight of it for a moment, your whole reasoning cap-
sizes.
	Labor, the quantity of labor society needs to produce
goods with, establishes the exchange value of these goods.
From that fact follows inevitably:
	1. That the less labor society needs for the production
of anything, all the less is its exchange value;
	2. That machinery, because it increases production and
the productive power of labor, causes the exchange value of
goods to decline;
	3. That, as a result of this, those who cannot produce
with machinery as perfect as the most perfect, are unable
long to compete with him who can, because the exchange
value of the goods produced by him is so much less that he
can undersell the others and drive them out of the market;
	4. That the small man is hopelessly lost, whether on
farm or in factory;
	5. That the price the 'vorker can get for his labor power
steadily declines-all the advantages of increased production
of wealth falling to the capitalists, i.e., to those who hold
possession of the perfected machine;
	6. That the masses, unable to earn their living, because
deprived of the instruments socially necessary to produce
wealth, are bound to become more and more dependent upon
the capitalists; and
	7. That nothing short of placing in the hands of the
workers the machinery and the land they need for produc-
tion wilt in the remotest way do them any good. Otherwise
they will decline steadily and inevitably.
	B.J. (Giving Uncle Sam his hand)--You were right.
Technical language is a necessity in dealing with such ques-
tions. I now see it all as on a map. The law of exchange
value settles the question.  We may flounder about as we
like for an escape from the increasingly tighter fix into which
we are getting, but no scheme will bring help. The law of
exchange value settles it. We must move on toward Social-
ism. That or death.
	U.S.--And now you realize the wisdom of the Social-
ists to hammer upon that point.
	B.J.--Fully.  Only by constant hammering will that
truth finally stick in our noodles. With it we will move on
and conquer; without it we shall flounder about as I did at
first.  Hammer, Uncle Sam, hammer away!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 3/18/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The laborer is the owner of hislabor power until he has done bar-
gaining for its sale with the capitalist, and he can sell no more 
than what he has--i.e., his individual, isolated labor power."
			                           --Karl Marx.

DIALOGUE 5

THE LABOR MARKET.

    BROTHER JONATHAN--You can't imagine what I heard
	a Socialist Labor Party organizer say the other night.
    UNCLE SAM--Something worth white listening to, I'll
	warrant.
    B.J.--Quite the contrary! He was trying to make
	his audience believe that under the present system we were
	all slaves--wage slaves I think he called us; that we were
	sold in the market like pork, beef and shoes, and a lot more
	such rot. Now, you don't believe all that stuff and non-
	sense, do you?
    U.S.--Why, certainly, I do. Every fact in economics
	bears it out.
    B.J.--Wbat, *you* believe that you are a slave; that
	you are bought and sold?
    U.S.--Yes, my man, let's be sensible and not allow
	our vanities to blind us to our own undoing. We are mer-
	chandise just as are pork and beef; we are sold in the mar-
	ket just as are shoes and stockings; we are enslaved. Look
	as you may into the works of our Revolutionary Fathers,
	never once will you come across the term "labor market."
	The workingrnan was not then merchandise. Opportunities
	--natural and social--were then open to all; each man
	could be, and was, the architect of his own fortune, or mis-
	fortune. In those days, had anyone used the term "labor
	market," he would have been understood as little as if he
	had used the word "monoplane"; neither of the two was
	yet in existence. Like the latter, so is the term "labor mar-
	ket" a subsequent development, and that development is
	indicated by the pregnant expression "labor market"--we
	are enslaved.
    B.J.--Then all that was gained by the Revolutionary
	and Civil Wars is lost again?
    U.S.--But not beyond recall. Our slavery a hundred
	and odd years ago arose from our political dependence
	upon a foreign power; accordingly, our freedom at that
	time had to be gained by our asserting our independence.
	Now, then, today our slavery arises from the circumstance
	of our being merchandise lying on the shelves of the mar-
	ket--along with beef and pork and potatoes; accordingly,
	our freedom from this new bondage must be gained by our
	stripping ourselves away from the economic companionship
	of pork and beef, and shoes and leather, and all other mer-
	chandise; we must dare to claim our rights and perform
	our duties as men, as human being's. To do that now, we
	must overthrow the present tyrant class--the capitalist
	class--and the present tyrant system--the capitalist or
	wage slavery system--and set up the Socialist Republic
	where the instruments of production shall be owned by all;
	and thus all who work may be free. Fall to, Jonathan.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 3/19/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 6

LABOR A MERCHANDISE.

	BROTHER JONATHAN-To me it is clear that the Social-
	      ists have no logic in them. How they do contradict them-
              selves! Any man of average intelligence could see that.
	UNCLE SAM--I wish you would aid me with your intelligence,
 	      because I don't see the contradictions you speak of.
	B.J.--Don't Socialists claim that the wages of the
	      workers represent the market price of labor?
	U.S.--Yes.
	B.J.--And don't they say that this cheapening of the
	      price of labor comes from the cheaper price of the things
              needed to produce labor power?
	U.S.--Yes. I see no contradiction in this.
	B.J.--Neither do I. That's all right. But I claim that
              it is illogical, after one has said all this, to claim that, 
              therefore, the workingman shall have all the wealth. I call
	      it illogical to say first that the price of labor is going
	      down and then claim that the reward of labor should go up.
	U.S.--The logic of that is all right, the trouble with
              you is that you don't understand all you say.
	B.J.--I don't?
	U.S.--No. The price of labor declines where labor is
              a merchandise. Under the capitalist system labor is not clad
              with the attributes of humanity; it is simply a merchandise.
              If your finger is in the fire What happens?
	B.J.--It burns.
	U.S.--And if you leave it there it will burn to nothing, eh?
	B.J.--Guess so.
	U.S.--Because your finger will burn to nothing in a flame, 
	      therefore is it illogical for you to want to keep your
              whole finger?
	B.J.--No; that would not be illogical.
	U.S.--No more is it illogical for the working class,
              who in the flame of capitalism will be consumed, to want to
              pull out and keep whole.
	B.J.--How?
	U.S.--When the Socialists say that just because the price of 
	      labor is bound to decline, therefore the worker must
              keep all he produces, it is just like saying that just
	      because under the capitalist system labor is a merchandise,
	      labor must pull out or destroy the capitalist system, cease
              to be a merchandise, and become human and enjoy all that man
 	      is entitled to.  Is that gun spiked?
	B.J.  remains silent.
	U.S.--Having ripped you on that side, I'll rip you up
              on another side.
	B.J.--But one side will do.
	U.S.--No; when a fellow knows he knows as little as
              you do on these things and yet he will impertinently shoot
              off his mouth, he must be thoroughly thrashed. So here goes.
              The worker does some kind of work-in fact, he does it all;
              so or not so?
	B.J.--'Tis so.
	U.S.--The capitalist class does no manner of work; so
              or not so?
	B.J.--'Tis so.
	U.S.--It follows that, even though actually the ser-
              vices of the working class were becoming less valuable, the
              working class is entitled to the whole of the wealth because
              it does the work, while the capitalist class now renders no
              services whatever, and consequently it is wholly a valueless
              class. Now, go to bed, Jonathan.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 3/31/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 7

THE COMMODITY LABOR POWER.

	UNCLE SAM--I hope, Jonathan, that this election you
	      will strike a blow for freedom and vote the Socialist Labor
	      Party ticket straight down.
	BROTHER JONATHAN--No, I won't.
	U.S.--You prefer to remain in wage slavery?
	B.J.--I can t remain in what I am not. I am not a
	      slave, "wage" or otherwise.
	U.S.--Oh, you innocent abroad!
	B.J.--See here, you Socialists would do a good deal
	      better if you did not exaggerate. This calling of people
	      "slaves" does you no good. No man here is a slave. No
	      one will believe you. Stick to reforms, and don't try to be
	      radical, especially where there is nothing to be radical 
	      about. We are free, not slaves.
	U.S.--Are you through with your assertions?
	B.J.--Quite through.
	U.S.--Now answer me a few questions.
	B.J.  (With a cocksure toss of the head)--As many
	      as you like.
	U.S.--What does that baker over there live by?
	B.J.--He lives by selling bread.
	U.S.--And that hatter across the way?
	B.J.--By selling hats.
	U.S.--And yonder woman at the fruit-stand?
	B.J.--By selling fruit.
	U.S.--And that motorman on the car that just went
	      by?
	B.J.  (Looking puzzled for a while)--He? Hem!
	      Why, he lives on his wages.
	U.S.--Do wages grow on him like apples on apple
	      trees?
	B.J.--How you talk! Wages don't "grow" on him, he
	      receives wages from his employer.
	U.S.--The same as the baker receives pay for his bread
	      from his customers?
	B.J.--Just the same.
	U.S.--And the same as the hatter receives pay for his
	      hat from his customers?
	B.J.--Yes.
	U.S.--And the same as that woman at the fruit-stand
	      receives pay for her fruit from her customers?
	B.J.--Just the same.
	U.S.--Accordingly that motorman has a customer, and
	      has a merchandise that he sells to the customer.
	B.J.--Yes, his customer is his employer.
	U.S.--And what is the merchandise he sells?
	B.J.--His labor.
	U.S.--Just so. The motorman's merchandise is labor power.
	      By selling the merchandise of their trade people
	      live. Not so?
	B.J.--Why, yes. Everybody knows that.
	U.S.--Now, let us look at these owners of merchandise
	      and their stock in trade a little closer. You see
	      that baker?
	B.J.--Yes.
	U.S.--If he were to die, would his merchandise bread
	      die with him?
	B.J. (Derisively)--No.
	U.S.--And if his merchandise bread were to be de-
	      stroyed, would that kill him?
	B.J.--Nonsense! It wouldn't.
	U.S.--And that hatter, say he died, would that kill his
	      hats?
	B.J.--Not a bit!
	U.S.--And if his hats were to burn up, would that burn
	      him up?
	B.J.--No, sir!
	U.S.--And what about that fruit woman. Would she
	      rot, if her fruit rotted?
	B.J.--Not necessarily.
	U.S.--Nor would her fruit turn into angels in heaven
	      if she cashed in her checks.
	B.J.--No, it wouldn't.
	U.S.--And now take up that motorman once more.
	      Say that he died, would that affect his merchandise
	      labor power?
	B.J.  (Begins to realize that something is up)--Affect
	      his labor power?  Why, of course it would affect it. His
	      labor power would be gone.
	U.S.--And say his merchandise labor power were de-
	      stroyed, what of him?
	B.J.  (Meditatively)--That would cook his goose!
	U.S.--Now, I guess, we have facts enough in court.
	      People live by selling their merchandise. The only mer-
	      chandise of the workingman is labor power. That merchan-
	      dise differs from all others. All other merchandise is out-
	      side of its seller. This merchandise is inside of the seller;
	      it is interwoven in all his tissues; it is part and parcel
	      of him. You have admitted all this. Now, sir, when the 
	      workingman sells his merchandise labor power, does he or
	      does he not SELL HIMSELF?
	B.J.  (With bulging eyes)--Right you are! He sells himself.
	U.S.--Is he slave or not?
	B.J.--I can't deny it.
	U.S.--Is there then a condition of slavery out of which
	      he should try to get?
	B.J.--There is!
	U.S.--From now on, till election day and down to the
	      moment that you cast your vote, just think of this proposi-
	      tion:
	      "Shall I vote for the Republicans or Democrats, when
	      both uphold the social system that condemns me to wage
	      slavery?  Or shall I vote the Socialist Labor Party ticket
	      and strike a blow for freedom?"
	      Think it out.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 4/7/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 8

WHEN THINGS ARE CHEAP,
LABOR IS CHEAP.

	BROTHER JONATHAN--As things look to me, rather
              than running down we are on the highway to unthinkable
              happiness. Just think of it, how cheap things are getting!
	UNCLE SAM--You are right or wrong, according as you
              mean the right or wrong thing by what you say. You are
              right that this general cheapness will urge on the crash that
              must precede the leap forward to happiness; but you are
              wrong if you mean that cheapness is in itself a good thing.
	B.J.  (Taking four twenty-five cent pieces out of his
	      pocket)--How impractical you Socialists are! Here I have
	      four quarters. When things were dear I needed all four to
              buy me a hat; now I can get a hat for only two of them; I
              am two quarters richer. If hats become still cheaper, I get
              me a hat for only one quarter, and then I am in three quar-
              ters. This goes right straight along; prices go down and I
              keep more and more money for myself. Isn't that prancing
              at the double-quick toward prosperity?
	U.S.--Your mathematics of political economy are all
   	      in a "pi." (Taking the four quarters out of B. J.'s hands
	      and spreading them in his left hand.) I have here four quar-
	      ters; hats are dear; they cost $1; I buy me one (throws the
	      four quarters into his right hand) have I any left?
	B.J.--No; I said so.
	U.S.  (Puts three out of the four quarters into his left
              hand)--I have three quarters; hats are cheaper; they cost
              only seventy-five cents; I buy me one (throws the three quar-
              ters back into his right hand) ; have I any left?
	B.J.--No.
	U.S.--I'm no better off than when hats cost $1.
	B.J.--Yes; but--
	U.S.--Shut up. (Puts one out of the four quarters into
              his left hand.) I have one quarter; hats are cheaper yet,
	      cost only twenty-five cents; I buy me one (throws the quarter
	      back into his right hand) ; have I any left?
	B.J.--No.
	U.S.--I'm no better off than when hats cost $1 or
              seventy-five cents.
	B.J.--Yes, but--
	U.S.--Shut up, I say. (Spreads all the four quarters
              again in his left hand.) I have four quarters, hats are dear,
              they cost $1; I buy me one (throws the quarters into his
              right hand) ; have I any left?
	B.J.--Why, no.
	U.S.  (Puts two quarters in his left hand)--I have two
	      quarters, hats are cheaper; they cost only seventy-five cents;
 	      I would like to buy one; can I buy with fifty cents a cheaper
              hat that costs seventy-five cents.
	B.J.--No, but--
	U.S.--No "buts." The moral of the story is here for
              Whig and Tory. For the wage earner, and you are a wage
              earner, to judge of his chances of prosperity it is not enough
              for him to consider the decline in the price of things he
              needs, he must also consider step by step the wages he re-
              ceives to buy things with. Cheap goods and cheap wages
              leave you with your nose to the grindstone; cheap goods
              and cheaper wages grind your nose worse.  And thereby
              hangs the important law of wages.
	B.J.--The "law of wages"! I have heard that mentioned. What is it?
	U.S.--In the capitalist system labor is a merchandise,
              just as hats. The price of hats depends upon the supply
              thereof and the demand therefor. If the supply of hats is
              larger than the demand, the price will go down. So with
              labor. The larger the supply and the lower the demand, the
              lower also is the price of labor, or the wages of the worker.
              Under the capitalist system, the relative demand for labor
              steadily goes down. Machinery displaces the workers, and
	      the concentration of capitalist concerns throws wage earners
	      out of work. Nor is this all. Middle class men, unable to
	      compete with larger capitalists, drop into the class of the
	      proletariat and by so much increase the supply of those who
	      seek work above the demand.  Consequently, the wages of
	      the working class steadily go down. That's the same as say-
	      ing that the money they receive, and with which they must
	      make their purchases, is steadily less. In view of this, it
	      matters not how cheap goods become. The workers cannot
	      profit thereby, because their wages keep pace and even out-
	      run other goods in cheapness. Goods are becoming cheaper
	      and cheaper because machinery produces them more plen-
	      tifully; but hand in hand with that, labor becomes still
	      cheaper and cheaper.
	B.J.  looks petrified.
	U.S.--The great cheapening of goods, so far from denoting 
	      that the workers "are prancing at the double-quick
              toward prosperity," denotes that we are galloping at the
              double-quick toward the social crash. Get from under!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 4/7/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 9

WAGES MUST FALL WITH PRICES
OF OTHER COMMODITIES.

	UNCLE SAM--Where are you going in such a hurry?
	BROTHER JONATHAN--I'm a picket; our shop is on
	     strike; I have to do picket duty.
	U.S.--And what is all the trouble about?
	B.J.--Our wages have been lowered.
	U.S.--Any ground given for that?
	B.J.--It is just the "ground given" that makes us hot
	      in the collar. What do you imagine that blasted employer
  	      has the cheek to give as the "ground" for the cut-down?
	U.S.--Well, what is that ground?
	B.J.--That there is now a larger supply of labor than
	      before, and he can get labor cheaper than what he pays us.
	U.S.--You don't suppose I love employers, do you?
	B.J.--I know you don't.
	U.S.--You don't suppose I am anxious to take their
 	      part, do you?
	B.J.--I know you are not; you have fought them too
	      long for that.
	U.S.--As you know me well enough for that, I shall be
	      all the freer to tell you that it is not your employer who
	      has "cheek," but YOU.
	B.J.--Do you mean to say that we should have our
	      wages reduced?
	U.S.--Indeed not!
	B.J.--Did you not always claim that the capitalist
	      robs us workers of three-quarters of what we produce?
	U.S.--That's just what I have always claimed and
	      proved.
	B.J.  (Very angry)--Then, how on earth can you say
	      we are "cheeky" for striking against a reduction?
	U.S.--I'll tell you. What was the price of wheat some
	      fourteen months ago?
	B.J.--Thirty cents a bushel, I think.
	U.S.--Yes. And what is it now?
	B.J.--Something like a dollar.
	U.S.--Correct.  When it was thirty cents a bushel,
	      could the farmer get a dollar for it?
	B.J.--No.
	U.S.--But he can now?
	B.J.--Yes.
	U.S.--Why now, and not then?
	B.J.--Why, you know.  A year ago the supply of
	      wheat was plentiful, it was 'way above the demand; since
	      then, owing to the failure of the crops on large foreign
	      fields, the supply has gone down and it is now 'way below
	      the demand.  That's the "why."
	U.S.--Now, suppose a bushel of wheat, at the time it
	      was thirty cents, to have "struck" against being sold so low.
              Suppose, when a purchaser offered thirty cents for it, it had
	      said: "You have a cheek to think you could get me so
	      cheap!"
	B.J.--The bushel would have been supremely ridiculous.
	U.S.--Why?
	B.J. (Sententiously)--It is a merchandise; and the
	     price of merchandise is governed by the relation there is 
	     between the supply of and the demand for it. The lower the
	     supply and the higher the demand, the higher the price; the
  	     higher the supply and the lower the demand, the lower the
	     price. That's the "why."
	U.S.--Jonathan, you are almost fit to be a professor
	      of political economy.
	B.J.--But we workingmen are not merchandise, see?
	U.S.--You now confirm my belief that you are fit for
              a professorship.  You have got hold of just enough truth,
	      and have not let go of such vast areas of nonsense, as to
	      qualify you for a seat in any of our capitalist universities.
	      The workingman IS a merchandise under this capitalist sys-
	      tem.  That is just one of the leading features of the sys-
	      tem. Our wages range like the price of any other merchan-
	      dise.  Machinery, owned as private property by the capital-
	      ist, who steals it from us, displaces labor; that renders the
	      supply of labor ever larger than the demand; and that low-
	      ers, must steadily lower, our wages.
	B.J.--Then we might as well commit suicide and be
	      done with.
	U.S.--That, certainly, would be much more sensible
	      than to go on as you do now. Now you vote with the Dem-
	      ocrats one year, with the Republicans another, which means
	      that you vote regularly every year for the capitalist system,
	      for the system that lowers you to the level of merchandise.
	      By upholding that system, you fetter yourself down to the
	      laws that govern the price of merchandise and that are
	      bound steadily to lower your price. When in one breath you
	      uphold capitalism, and in another you try to resist it, you
	      act like a simpleton.  Now, stop fooling; turn Socialist; 
	      vote the Socialist Labor Party ticket straight.[*] 
	      It demands the overthrow of the system that makes you a 
	      merchandise. Then, indeed, you would strike to a purpose.

[*],This was written in 1898, six years before the speech on the 
"Burning Question of Trades Unionism," and seven years before the 
Organization of the original I.W.W., with the organization of which 
De Leon completed his theory of Industrial Government, demonstrating 
that the real revolutionary power of the working class lay in the 
integral Industrial Union of the useful workers of the land.  Up to 
this time the only revolutionary method conceivable was to vote 
capitalism out of existence and then take a chance on whatever phys-
ical force would present itself at the revolutionary moment to enforce
the new law of the land--the law that would make private property in the
means of life illegal--and keep the quondam capitalists on their good 
behavior till they could be redeemed by being put to useful work.  
Nevertheless, it should be borne in mind that the idea of the revolu-
tionary industrial power of the workers was not a notion that came to 
De Leon out of a clear sky, nor as the direct result of the organization
of the I.W.W. Rather the organiaation of the I.W.W. was the fulfilment
of theories that had for some time been growing in tbe Socialist Labor
Party and were persistently propagated by It.  As early as 1896, in the
"Reform or Revolution" speech, De Leon laid down the principle that
economic and political organizations of the workers were equally impor-
tant and that to ignone either was to leave "a duck flying with one
wing."  In 1898, in "What Means This Strike?", De Leon emphasized
strongly the necessity of economic action by the workers. With the
organization of the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance in 1895, and its
endorsement by the Socialist Labor Party, the Party had committed itself
definitely to this policy.  From then on "pure and simple political
Socialism" appeared and became active, blossoming finally into the Social
Democracy, later the Socialist party, a definitely bourgeois reform
organization, like its sister organization, the Social Democracy of
Europe, developing in time into a "huge machine for lying about Socialism."
In the meantime the S.L.P. became more and more soundly revolutionary,
laying its revolutionary basis in the economic interest and power of the
working class--the eventual ownership, control and operation of the
means of production.  Long before the I.W.W., the S.L.P. agitator
used and popularized the phrases, "Organize the shop from top to bottom,"
"The worker alone runs industry," "Economic power, which lies in the means
of production, is the foundation of all power."

This, however, does not alter the soundness of the principle laid down in
this dialogue. The political party of Socialism, the Socialist Labor Party,
is still the instrument through which the revolutionary working class
must make its attack on the legal and social entrenchment of the capitalist
robber class. The economic power, the Industrial Union organization, is the
organized Might with which the Right, the fiat of the ballot box, must be
backed up.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 4/15/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 10

GRADUAL DECLINE OF THE VALUE
OF LABOR POWER.

	UNCLE SAM--Jonathan, what have you been up to?
	      What mean those black rings around your eyes? What
	      means that sad, dejected face you have on?
	BROTHER JONATHAN-It means a lot. Ever since the
              talk I had with you about wages and workingmen, I have
              felt unspeakably distressed. The more I have thought upon
              what you said, the deeper have I sunk into the dumps.
	U.S.--What I said!?
	B.J.--Yes. Don't you remember you explained to me
	      the law of wages?
	U.S.--I do. Does that throw you into the dumps? It
             should, on the contrary, give you hope and inspiration.
	B.J.--Hope and inspiration be hanged! I conclude
	      from that law of wages that there is no salvation for all the
              workingmen. That the best that can be done is to save some.
              And that the only way of saving these is to drown the others,
              as you do superfluous puppies.
	U.S.--Why, no, man. You're off. Cheer up!
	B.J.--Did you not say that labor is a merchandise like
              any other?
	U.S.--Yes; 'tis that under the capitalist system.
	B.J.--Did you not say that the price of merchandise
	      is determined by the supply of and the demand for it; the
	      larger the supply and the lower the demand, the lower 
	      being the price?
	U.S.--So I did.
	B.J.--And that the supply of the merchandise labor
              was outstripping the demand for it by reason of labor-
              displacing machines and the concentration of capital?
	U.S.--Exactly.
	B.J.--And that the price of the merchandise labor, to
              wit, the wages of the workingman, was getting and of 
	      necessity had to get lower and lower?
	U.S.--Just so.
	B.J.--"Just so"? And yet you snickersnack about
  	      "hope and inspiration"! If, as I cannot deny, the supply
              of labor is growing more and more in excess of the demand,
              those for whom there is still a demand won't be able to keep
              up their wages unless the superfluous ones are killed off,
              killed off as fast as they become superfluous.
	U.S.--I see, I see.
	B.J.--Am I right?
	U.S.--No, my boy. My presentation of the law of
              wages last week was correct as far as it went, though it was
              not complete.
	B.J.--Complete it quickly, if there is "hope and 
	      inspiration" in it!
	U.S.--The expression "supply and demand determines
              prices" is correct enough, but it is a superficial statement.
              Look here. If ten years ago you could turn out twenty pairs
              of shoes in one week, and today you can turn out with the
 	      machine forty pairs, has not the supply increased?
	B.J.--It has.
	U.S.--And is there not in these forty pairs as much
	      labor as in the twenty pairs of ten years ago?
	B.J.--Yes; they are both produced in equal time.
	U.S.--Does it not then follow that the value of forty
	      pairs is now equal to that of twenty pairs before?
	B.J.--Yes.
	U.S.--And, consequently, one pair today is equal to
	      half the value of one pair before?
	B.J.--Yes.
	U.S.--To condense all this in short sentences, we have
	      this law:
	      The value of merchandise depends upon the amount of
	      labor that, at a given time, society needs to produce it;
	      The larger the quantity of an article, the less is the labor
              needed to produce it;
	      Consequently, when the supply is large it is an evidence
              that the labor needed to produce the article is comparatively
              small;
	      Improved machinery renders work more fruitful; the
              more machinery is improved, the larger is production, and
              the smaller is the quantity of labor in each article;
	      Consequently, machinery lowers the value of merchandise;
	      The price of an article is the cash it fetches in the 
	      market; a number of causes may affect the price, sending 
	      it up above, or down below, its value; but in the long run 
	      "price"and "value" will equalize, and both tend downward 
	      by reason of the decreased quantity of labor that improved 
	      methods of production require in each article--
	B.J.--I'll be hanged if I can see what you are driving at.
	U.S.--Postpone the hanging; there is always time for
	      that. In the meantime, if you want to learn the important
	      law of wages, you will have to pay close attention. It 
	      requires closer attention than the reading of how Jim Sykes
	      just landed a "roaster" on Mike Dolan's "smeller"; and,
	      withal, it is of infinitely greater value that you do learn 
	      it; it may save your neck. Did you understand me as far as I
	      went?
	B.J.--Yes.
	U.S.--What did I say?
	B.J.--The substance and gist of it was that the value
	      and price of goods go down because their value depends
              upon the amount of labor required to produce them, and
              improved machinery steadily lowered that amount of labor,
              because such machinery increased the quantity of goods that
              can be produced in a given time.
	U.S. (Slapping B. J. heartily on the shoulder)--You
              are an apt pupil; I don't think that you will need to hang or
              drown.  Now, listen further:
	      Under capitalism, labor is a merchandise;
	      The fate of all merchandise is the fate of the merchandise 
	      labor;
	      Machinery lowers the value of all other goods;
	      The reason that it does so is that it requires less labor to
              produce the goods;
	      Labor, that is to say, the power to work, needs goods to
              keep it up; it needs food, clothing, etc.; to use a broad 
	      expression, goods, wares and merchandise are needed to 
	      produce labor power;
	      The cheaper the value of these goods, wares and merchandise 
              becomes, the cheaper must also become the value
              of the labor power which they produce;
	      Consequently, the merchandise labor power is bound to
              decline in value step by step with the decline of the value
	      of all other goods--
	B.J.--You are getting me mixed up; first you talked
              of "labor," and now you have switched off to "labor power."
	U.S. (Chucking B. j. under the chin) )--Keep up the
              character I gave you for an apt pupil, and don't shoot off
              your mouth.  I was coming to your question.  Listen 
	      carefully:
	      The capitalist is the holder and seller of all merchandise
              but one;
	      The exception is the merchandise "labor power"; he
              does not sell that, he only buys it;
	      The holder of the merchandise labor power, the power
              to work and produce, is the workingman;
	      But this merchandise differs from all other merchandise
              in many particulars;
	      One particular is this: All other merchandise is outside
              of the body of the holder, the capitalist; the merchandise
              labor power, on the contrary, is inside of the body of its
              holder, the workingman;
	      Accordingly, the merchandise labor power is part and
              parcel of its holder and seller, the workingman, while no
              other merchandise is part and parcel of its holder, the 
	      capitalist--
	B.J.'s eyes begin to swim.
	U.S.--The merchandise held by a capitalist may burn
              down and the capitalist need not burn with it; but if the
              merchandise held by the workingman, his labor power, is
              consumed, he perishes along with it;
	      And, conversely, a capitalist may die of overfeeding and
              yet his goods, wares and merchandise remain free from the
              affliction, they may fetch big prices and fulfil their mission
              undisturbed; but if a workingman dies of starvation, or is
              prostrated by overwork or otherwise, his merchandise labor
              power becomes useless, unavailable, unable to fulfil its 
	      functions;
	      For all practical and sociologic purposes labor and labor
              power are one, the workingman and his special merchandise
              are inseparable.
	B.J. (His eyes glistening)--I see that!
	U.S.--The fate of the owner of the merchandise labor
	      power is the fate of the merchandise itself; as the 
	      merchandise labor power is bound to decline in value step 
	      by step with the decline of the value of all other goods, 
	      so is the price, or wage, for which the workingman has to
              sell himself to the capitalist along with his labor power,
              bound to go down.
	      And now get ready for the final summing up:
	      _It follows from all this that even if there are no 
	      superfluous workingmen in the market, the price of labor 
	      power, that is to say, the wages of the employed workers, 
              will go down_. The presence of an excess of labor in the 
	      market over and above the demand simply aggravates the evil;
	      an over-supply of labor will and does push wages below even 
	      their declining value. But the oversupply is not the original 
	      cause of the decline of wages; the original cause is the 
	      merchandise quality of labor. If you drown all the 
	      superfluous workers, as fast as they are displaced by 
	      machinery, you simply would be removing an aggravating 
	      incident; the original cause would continue and with it, the 
	      steady decline of the earnings of the worker, which is 
	      equivalent to the steady increase of his misery and 
	      dependence.
	B.J. (Shaking his fist at U. S.)--The devil take you!
              You call that giving "hope and inspiration"?  As I understood
              this hellish law of wages, there was some hope for
	      some of us, for the happy ones who got work; but as the case
              now stands there is no hope for any of us; we might as well
              all go down to the rivers and seashores and drown ourselves.
              There is no hope, none for the working class. (He glares
              furiously at U.S.) Speak! Speak! Do you hold this maxim?
	U.S.--Yes; I'll accept the maxim provided you accept
              an amendment by adding the words "under the capitalist sys-
              tem," so the maxim shall read: "There is no hope for the
              working class under the capitalist system."
	B.J.--What's the difference?
	U S.--This is the difference: The workers won't drown
	      themselves to please the capitalists. So long as they imagine
	      they can patch up some sort of living arrangement with the
	      capitalist class, they will uphold the capitalist system and 
	      continue slaves; but just as soon as the truth shall have 
	      broken its way through their skulls that there is no choice 
	      but between themselves dying or killing off the capitalist 
	      system, you will see them stand up as men; they will refuse 
	      to continue to be merchandise; they will overthrow the system 
	      that makes them such; they will socialize the instruments of
	      production and the land, and they will establish the Socialist
	      or Cooperative Commonwealth. That is the "hope and 
	      inspiration" which we Socialist workingmen gather from the 
	      law of wages coupled with the law of historic development.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 6/21/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 11
PROSPERITY--"EMPLOYMENT SEEKING LABOR."

	BROTHER JONATHAN (Angry)--I don't know what
              is the matter with you Socialists. You seem never satisfied
        UNCLE SAM-What is the mat--
	B.J. (Angrier)--The better off our people are, the
              more you Socialists howl; the happier we feel, the more you
              Socialists talk calamity; the--
	U.S.--Wait a--
	B.J. (Still angrier)--You are a set of impossibles;
              you are good for nothing (getting angrier and angrier);
              you ought to be hanged to keep the country in such a 
              turmoil--
	U.S.--But--
	B.J. (Beside himself with rage)--But-but-but. I
              suppose you all want palaces and silks and--
	U.S.--Yes--
	B.J.--And will never be satisfied--
	U.S.--Not until we have all that we produce--
	B.J.--We are getting that!
	U.S.--Oho!
	B.J.--Yes, and we are getting better off every day.
	U.S.--Now, Jonathan, something must have bitten
              you. What is it?
	B.J.--Nothing bit me; but I have just been reading a
              beautiful speech by McKinley delivered in the West.
	U.S.--And that has satisfied you?
	B.J.--Why shouldn't it? Here is what he said-
	U.S.--It must be wonderful, indeed. Let's have it.
	B.J. (Taking out of his pocket a metropolitan capitalist 
              paper and reading)--"McKinley in the West-Enthusiastic 
              Crowds of Workingmen Flock to Hear Him"; (running 
              his finger down the column through the speech) here is
              the speech; but the principal part I want to call your 
              attention to is this: Just look at this. (Reading) : 
	      "We have gone from labor seeking employment to employment
              seeking labor." Just think of that! Is not that prosperity?
              And yet you Socialists howl--[*]
	U.S.--Just let me take a squint at that paper, will you?
	B.J. (Passing the paper over to U. S.)--Gladly, convince yourself.
	U.S. (Turns to the columns of "Help Wanted")--Do you see this?
	B.J.--Yes; "Help Wanted." There you have it-
	      "employment seeking labor."
	U.S.--How many columns?
	B.J.--Not quite one.
	U.S. (Turns to the columns of "Situations Wanted")--Do you 
	      see this?
	B.J.--Yes; "Situations Wanted."
	U.S.--How many columns?
	B.J. (Counting)-One, two, three, four--
	U.S.--Say eight, and be done with it; don't you see
             they cover the whole page?
	B.J.--Yes, eight.
	U.S.--Is that all, do you think?
	B.J.--Are there any more?
	U.S. (Turning the page over)--Count on.
	B.J.--One, two--
	U.S.--Eight more?
	B.J.--Yes.
	U.S.--That makes sixteen (turning over to the next
	      page). How many more?
	B.J.--One, two-eight more.
	U.S.--That makes?
	B.J.--Twenty-four.
	U.S. turns to the fourth page.
	B.J. (Amazed)--Are there still more?
	U.S.--See for yourself.
	B.J.--One, two-why, eight more!
	U.S.--And that makes?
	B.J.--Thirty-two columns!
	U.S. turns to the fifth page.
	B.J.--Lord! Is it not yet done?
	U.S.--Stop your gab and count.
	B.J.--Why, that's eight more!
	U.S.--Making?
	B.J.--Forty columns of applicants!
	U.S. (Turns to the sixth page)--And how many more here?
	B.J.--One, two, three, four, five and almost six. Almost
              forty-six columns of applicants for work!
	U.S.--As against how many of "employment seeking labor"?
	B.J.--Not quite one!
	U.S.--Now look at this item.
	B.J. (Reading)--"Jeremiah Ingals, aged thirty-four,
              was found dead in his room last night. An empty bottle of
              laudanum and a letter, found on a chair near the bed, told
              the story. 'Out of work and can find none.'
	U.S.--"Employment seeking labor" must have missed
              this one, eh?
	B.J. remains silent.
	U.S.--Now read this item.
	B.J. (Reading)--"Susan Elger, followed by two children 
              and carrying one on her arm, applied yesterday at the
              8th precinct police station for shelter.  She stated that her
              husband, after having looked for work the whole summer,
              and finding none, left for Philadelphia two weeks ago, 
              thinking he could get work there, and has not been heard 
              from since. She had pawned most of her and his clothes, and 
              she and her children were starving."
	U.S.--It seems that "employment seeking labor" has
              a knack of missing this man, eh?
	B.J. remains silent.
	U.S. (Folding up the newspaper in the shape of a
             fool's cap and clapping it on B.J.'s head)--That much for
             us Socialists "howling without cause," and "never being 
	     satisfied." I tell you, we shall howl until there will be 
             precious few such fools as you left among the workingmen, who
	     can be stuffed with a capitalist-Republican or a 
             capitalist-Democratic lie like that; until our class 
	     will stand solid by the Socialist Labor Party, be part 
	     and parcel of it-and smash this Dem-Rep system of capitalist
	     iniquity.

[*]This was written during the 1898, William McKinley, Prosperity 
 and "Full Dinner Pail" campaign.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 6/22/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 12

WAGES AND BREAD AND BUTTER.

	UNCLE SAM--How is business with you?
	BROTHER JONATHAN  (With a corner-grocer, self-
	satisfied swagger)--I can't complain. Tell you the truth, to
	me it looks as if people are never satisfied.  They love to
	grumble.  Let a man attend to his business and he'll get
	along well enough.
	U.S.--Have you become a Socialist?
	B.J. (Startled)--Me! Not much! What makes you
	      ask the question?
	U.S.--Somehow, a thing you just said sounded like a
	      thing I heard a Socialist say on the soap-box.
	B.J.--What did I say?
	U.S.--You said: "Let the workingmen attend to their
              business."
	B.J. (Indignant)--That's not Socialism!
	U.S.--The Socialist I heard speak said: Let a man at-
	      tend to his business.  If he does he will see and feel soon
              enough that capitalism is taking the skin off him. The work-
              ingman who attends to his business, and does not fall asleep
              over it, will soon enough catch on to the "market price" of
              his labor power--
	B.J.--Bah!
	U.S.--He will find his market price is going down-
	B.J.--That's a lie!
	U.S.--He will not be humbugged with an "increase of
              wages" because he will know that wages are no higher than
              they will fetch bread and butter, and the wages, even when
              higher, are in fact lower because they fetch less and less--
	B.J.--Those Socialists are crazy.
	U.S.--And that's the proof that the market price of
	      their labor power is declining, and the lower the market
              price of labor power, all the higher is the heap of plunder
              that the capitalist carries off--
	B.J.--That fellow is a muckraker.
	U.S.--I was wondering for what party he spoke. Just
              as I was going to ask the question, he said the Socialist 
	      Labor Party showed the way out of the pickle. The capitalist
              system had to be overthrown, and that could be done only
              if the workers stop being fooled by the vote-catching par-
              ties, and organized themselves into the men-making S.L.P.
              and the classconscious Socialist Industrial Union.
	B.J.--Bosh! I say.
	U.S.--And so he went on and wound up with the admonition 
	      that the workingman should attend to his business,
	      which he rebuked him for not attending to.
	B.J. (With a cocksure merchant's satisfied mien)--
              I'll tell you; those Socialists make me tired. They talk as
	      though they knew it all, whereas they don't know anything.
	      They talk as though people care a tinker's dam for prin-
	      ciples, whereas people care only for what they can make.
 	      Now, I'll tell ye--
	U.S.--Yes, do.
	B.J.--I have a pretty good knowledge of human nature.
	      (With great positiveness.) I come in touch with all
	      sorts of men in my store.  Now, I'll tell ye--
	U.S.--Do, by all means.
	B.J.--I have a mighty good chance to size up people,
	      especially workingmen. They and their wives buy a good
	      deal from me.  Now, I'll tell ye--
	U.S.--It is about time--do tell me.
	B.J.--Now, I'll tell ye, if the wages of the workers
              were to be raised only $10 a week (looking very serious and
	      positive), if the wages of these Socialists went up only $10
              they would all cease to be Socialists. Take that from me.
              I know what I'm talking about.
	U.S.--You may think you have dropped a heavy chunk
	      of spick-and-span new wisdom.  Fact is I know that the So-
	      cialists say as much, and they add something else to that.
	B.J. (Surprised)--What do they add?
	U.S.--They add that fortunately for freedom not even
              that raise of wages can be given to the whole working class.
	      They add, quoting Shakespeare, that men would sooner put
	      up with evils that they know of, than fly to others that they
	      know not of. They add that the increasing number of pro-
	      letarians makes it impossible for the capitalist class to buy
	      them off with better conditions. And they add that, were it
	      not for that economic fact, the sociologic phenomenon of
              Socialism would not be seen today; but that, owing to this
              economic fact, lasting content in wage slavery is impossible,
              and Socialist triumph is assured.
	B.J. (Who has recovered from the stupor into which
	      U. S.'s words threw him)--And do you believe that--a sen-
              sible man like you?
	U.S.--I certainly do. And there is something else I
	      believe, or rather know; and that is that you merchants are
	      the shallowest of pans.  In your business you know no more
	      than your narrow horizon allows you.  If you succeed, you
	      think you are a hell of a clever lot. That's why, when eco-
	      nomic facts that you are too shallow to fathom break upon
	      you and you go into bankruptcy, you act like ducks in thun-
	      der.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 7/1/98
http://www.slp.org

SOCIALIST ECONOMICS IN DIALOGUE
BY
DANIEL DE LEON
From the 1935 hardback edition published by New York Labor News
Originally published in the Weekly People in 1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DIALOGUE 13
"MINIMUM WAGE."

	BROTHER JONATHAN--I heard last night one of those
	blankety-blank Socialist Labor Party men deliver the most
	blankety-blank talk it was ever my misfortune to hear.
	UNCLE SAM--I shrewdly suspect it was rather the case
	of a blankety-blank Brother Jonathan. What did the S.L.P.
	man say?
	B.J.--As near as I could make out he had no use for
	      the minimum wage.
	U.S.--Was that the offense?
	B.J.--It was.
	U.S.--What do you understand by the minimum wage?
	B.J.--By minimum wage I understand that a certain amount--
	U.S.--Of money?
	B.J.--Exactly. That a certain amount of money shall
	      be fixed below which wages shall not be allowed to go. Say
	      that the amount be fixed at $1 a day--
	U.S.--I would then go on strike against your minimum
	      wage, and remain on strike till hell froze over.
	B.J.--The amount does not matter. It is simply an
	      illustration. Make it $10 a day.
	U.S.--That suits me a deal better.
	B.J.--That would mean, the minimum of $10 a day
	      being established by law, that the workers may, if they can
	      in the course of the class struggle, raise their wage to $10 a
	      day, but the employers shall not be allowed to depress the
	      wage below $10. Do you catch on?
	U.S.--Let me see if I do. Suppose $10 is established
	      at a certain time. What does that mean?
	B.J.--Mean?
	U.S.--Yes; what does it mean as to the purchasing
	      power of that $10 minimum?
	B.J.--Oh, now I see what you mean. It means that
	      the amount of food, clothing, shelter, footwear--
	U.S.--Et cetera--
	B.J.--Which the worker needs will take $10 a day to
	      purchase. And it means that the wage shall not be reduced.
	U.S.--And why not?
	B.J.--Because if the wage is reduced to, say $5, then
	      the worker could purchase only one-half the food, clothing--
	U.S.--Et cetera--
	B.J.--He could purchase only one-half of what he needs.
	U.S.--And would starve?
	B.J.--Yes; would starve.
	U.S.--Does the purchasing power of the dollar always
	      remain the same?
	B.J.--No, indeed!
	U.S.--Does it decline, or does it increase?
	B.J.--The purchasing power of the dollar declines.
	U.S.--If prices rise, does the dollar fetch as much as before?
	B.J.--Of course not.
	U.S.--If the purchasing power of $10 fetches, at one
	      time, the minimum of what the worker needs and prices
	      jump up, say, to make the point clear, 100 per cent, can that
	      $10 fetch the same minimum amount of necessaries?
	B.J.--Of course it cannot!
	U.S.--The worker would have to rest satisfied with
	      one-half of his minimum needs?
	B.J.--Just about.
	U.S.--Accordingly, is a minimum wage, that is ex-
	      pressed in dollars and cents, a guarantee against a standard
	      of living that is below the standard that existed when the
	      minimum wage was established by law?
	B.J.--Hem! Hem! H-h-hem!
	U.S.--What, my illustrious Jonathan, becomes of your
	      blankety-blank minimum wage?
	B.J.--H-h-hem! Hem!
	U.S.--Would not such a law rather legalize the de-
	      pressing of the workers' standard of living, and deprive
	      them of the civic status to strike for conditions above the
	      statutorily established dollars-and-cents minimum?
	B.J. (Suddenly finding his voice)--Well, the principle
	      of the thing is not altered.  I admit that the fixing of the
	      minimum with dollars and cents won't work--
	U.S.--And there goes your blankety-blank minimum
              wage, flat on its nose.
	B.J.--Not at all! The minimum wage need not be
	      specified in dollars and cents--
	U.S.--In what then?
	B.J.--In food and clothing and shelter--
	U.S.--And shoes? And hats? And transportation?
	      And communication? And soap? And brushes? And to-
	      bacco? And pipes? And needles? And thread? And fuel?
	      And light? And--
	B.J.--Et cetera, man, et cetera!
	U.S.--AlI right, thank you-et cetera. You would
	      have the minimum wage defined in the quantities of this list
	      of necessaries--a list so long that you have no patience to
	      hear it to the end?
	B.J. remains silent.
	U.S. (Poking B. J. in the ribs)--Hello, there!
	B.J.--Well--the goods will have to be mentioned--
	      the list is very long, even though there be not much of any
	      one item on the list--it is a clumsy thing to do--but it will
	      have to be done.
	U.S.--And that never will be done. And I'll tell you why: 
	      Paid in the terms of money, the employer conceals or
	      blurs under wages the fact that the working class pays itself;
	      that what it receives is but a portion of the goods that it
	      produces; finally, that the capitalist class keeps the lion's
	      share of the fruit of labor's toil. A goodly portion of "the
	      cat would be uncovered to the workers' eyes if the mini-
	      mum wage were to specify the minimum amount of goods
	      that the worker shall receive.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
				--Transcribed by redflag on 7/1/98
http://www.slp.org

KAPITALIST BIOLOGICAL WARFARE

Subject: Aids/Ebola BIOwar 1/4 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 17:28:20 -0700 Resent-From: iww-...@iww.org Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 20:26:22 -0400 From: "Dave" Reply-To: To: "davehart@POP. NET" part one/4 Dave Hartley Still-Point Healing Services Web Page: http://www.ioa.com/home/davehart ------------------------------------------------------

Chapter by Chapter Summary of Dr. Horowitz's new book:

"EMERGING VIRUSES: AIDS & EBOLA--NATURE, ACCIDENT OR INTENTIONAL?"

(Tetrahedron Press, 1996; 592 pp.; hardcover) ______________________________________________________________________ http://www.tetrahedron.org Chapter 1. "The World Health Organization Theory" of AIDS-- During the past decade, at least six internationally known authorities advanced theories that the AIDS virus (HIV) was developed by biological weapons researchers and either accidentally or intentionally transmitted with the help of the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) and the World Health Organization (WHO). A document like that obtained by one investigator, through the Freedom of Information Act, is shown here--a DOD appropriations request for $10 million for the development of AIDS-like viruses. "Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease." Chapter 2. WHO Plays in the Big Leagues-- Begins Dr. Horowitz's search for the origin of AIDS. Archival WHO documents are explored along with links to American health agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and National Cancer Institute (NCI). These institutions played leading roles in the WHO's early viral research network. During the 1960s and early 1970s the WHO served as the omnipotent supplier of the world's pharmaceutical, bacteriological, and viral test reagents. Investigations revealed the NCI, a branch of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), functioned as the WHO's chief distributor of viruses and viral testing reagents during the late 1960s. By 1968, the WHO had provided technical advisors and supplies of "prototype virus strains" for more than "120 laboratories in 35 different countries." By 1969, this number increased to "592 virus laboratories." In this one year, four of the most active centers, including the NCI and CDC, distributed 2,514 strains of viruses, 1888 ampoules of experimental vaccines, and about 100 samples of cell cultures throughout the network. 70,000 virus isolations were reported by 1970. Chapter 3. Cold War, Biological Weapons and World Health-- The international scientific community's efforts to stop biological warfare and biological weapons (BW) research and development are reviewed here. The chapter reveals how, why, and to what extent U. S. biological weapons research continued despite staunch foreign and domestic opposition. President Nixon's false claims that BW research and development ceased after signing the Geneva Accord in 1969 are documented, as are the WHO's objections to safeguarding genetic engineering of mutant viruses for biological warfare and cancer research. In March of 1970, WHO consultants noted that it was "possible that biological agents may be used . . . to achieve the simultaneous infection of key groups of people, and the military consequences might well be of major importance. . . ." They noted the "calculated risk that a virulent mutant might appear and spread rapidly to produce an uncontrollable epidemic on a large scale. In addition, if mutants are deliberately produced in the laboratory," they wrote, "there is the ever-present risk of an accidental escape." The consultants also predicted that as a consequence of a biological attack, "mass illnesses, deaths, and epidemics" would require the WHO to furnish supplies and personnel to deal with the medical emergencies. These contingencies and more are documented and discussed. Chapter 4. The Road to Fort Detrick Runs Through Bethesda-- The first viruses and retroviruses used for biological weapons research passed through the NCI. This chapter reviews the massive chemical and biological war research campaign centered in Frederick (Fort Detrick), Maryland, and chronicles the viral research that was ongoing here and in surrounding labs. A premier lab, specifically researching, developing, and testing immune system destroying viruses, was the Cell Tumor Biology Laboratory at the NCI. This was headed by Dr. Robert Gallo--the co-discoverer of the AIDS virus. The chapter ends by asking, "When did Gallo discover HIV? In 1984, as reported, or in 1970?" Chapter 5. The Emperor's New Virus-- Provides an expose on the suspicious behavior of Dr. Robert Gallo as chronicled by bestselling author Randy Shilts and others. The chapter also begins a critical evaluation of the information, discrepancies, and apparent disinformation in Shilts's book And the Band Played On. The French/American AIDS fracas is reconsidered. Discussions also focus on how and why Gallo and his NCI colleagues attempted to block others from discovering the AIDS virus. The stage is set for the next chapter which reviews Gallo's research from 1967-1974. Readers learn that every step needed to create and test the AIDS virus was conducted in Gallo's lab by 1971. Chapter 6. Gallo's Research Anthology: The AIDS Buck and Virus Stops Here-- Gallo's early publications document his intimate association with Litton Bionetics--a subsidiary of the leading military contracting firm, Litton Industries. Through Litton Bionetics, a major biological weapons contractor, Gallo engineered simian (monkey) viruses to cause a variety of cancers; especially leukemias, sarcomas, and wasting diseases in humans. This chapter documents the incredible fact that Gallo's team extracted the nucleic acids from humanly benign simian viruses, and then infused the empty monkey virus shells with cat leukemia RNA and chicken leukemia-sarcoma RNA to produce mutants that could produce the laundry list of diseases seen in AIDS patients. Then, to enable the virus to infect humans, Gallo and company cultured these germs in human white blood cells so they could "jump species." Most astonishing, this chapter documents that Gallo presented this research, and the protocol for developing AIDS-like viruses, to NATO's military scientists in Mol, Belgium in 1970. Chapter 7. An Interview with Dr. Robert Strecker--One of the half dozen physician/researchers throughout the world who alleged the military's involvement in the creation of AIDS, Strecker explains his theory on: * How and why the AIDS virus was synthetically manufactured; * Why the "green monkey theory" and the "patient zero theory" is nonsensical; and * What AIDS experts have said about his thesis that AIDS was a military development designed for use as a biological weapon for population control. Chapter 8. HIV-1, HIV-2, and the "Big Bang"-- The scientific literature is reviewed here in an effort to critically evaluate the man-made theory of HIV-1, HIV-2, and allegations that HIV had been found in tissues of people who had died during the 1950s and 1960s. The analysis identifies both inconsistencies in these conclusions, along with little known evidence that HIV emerged during the early 1970s. The association of early cancer virus network associates of Dr. Gallo, including Drs. Luc Montagnier (Institute Pasteur), Donald Francis (CDC), Peter Duesberg (U. of C.), and Max Essex (Harvard), and their activities, is examined in contrast to circulating disinformation. HIV-2, discovered by Max Essex, is examined as both the purported "missing link" to HIV-1, and the monkey virus laboratory contaminant it was ultimately determined to be. Clearly, molecular genetics shows that something major happened in the early 1970s to convert HIV-2 or similar simian immunodeficiency viruses into HIV-1. The discussion focuses on how HIV-2, a known monkey virus laboratory contaminant, not found in monkeys in the wild, could be circulating, in the wild, primarily in African women? Vaccines, tainted by monkey virus mutants produced accidentally or intentially, appear to be the only plausible explanation. Most astonishing, chimpanzees--carriers of SIVcpz, the closest primate relative to HIV-1--were used to develop the earliest hepatitis B vaccines tested in New York City and Central Africa in 1973-1974. The chapter then advances a new, more rational, and scientific, theory on the iatrogenic (man-made) origin of AIDS. Clearly, viruses such as these emerged from the laboratory, but the question of accidental versus genocidal transmission remained to be explored. continued ........ "Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola--Nature, Accident or Intentional?" (Tetrahedron Press, 1996; $29.95) May be ordered through bookstores throughout North America, and by calling toll-free 800-336-9266. The book may also be ordered through the internet at http://www.tetrahedron.org in the catalog section of the web site. ***** "Messages sent on the IWW-news mailing list are the opinions of the individual senders; they do not necessarily represent the views of the IWW. IWW-news is for posting information which is relevant to the struggle of the working class against our bosses. Visit http://www.iww.org/ for more information." To subscribe/unsubscribe from the IWW-news mailing list please send e-mail to iww-news...@iww.org with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" as the subject of the message.

Subject: Aids/Ebola BIOwar 2/4 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 17:33:29 -0700 Resent-From: iww-...@iww.org Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 20:31:17 -0400 From: "Dave" Reply-To: To: "davehart@POP. NET" part 2/4 Dave Hartley Still-Point Healing Services Web Page: http://www.ioa.com/home/davehart

Chapter 9. Early Targeting of Minority America

--The targeting of gay rights leaders and groups at home and abroad by the FBI and CIA during and after the McCarthy era is documented and discussed. The gay rights movement was seen by most conservative lawmakers and public officials as communist inspired. The chapter also reviews the targeting of civil rights groups by the CIA from the late 1960s through the 1980s in their efforts to: 1) Prevent the coalition of militant black nationalist groups and the beginning of a "true black revolution;" and 2) Prevent the rise of a black "messiah." The chapter also discusses the development of 360 disruptive American intelligence operations under the COINTELPRO Black Nationalist Hate Group's umbrella, including "Operation Chaos" which ran from 1966 until 1974. The pivotal role of National Security Advisor, Dr. Henry Kissinger, who during the Nixon era personally oversaw major CIA and FBI intelligence operations and directed the military chiefs of staff, is considered. Chapter 10. African Foreign Policy and Population Control-- Only days after the DOD requisitioned $10 million from Congress to fund the development of AIDS-like viruses, on July 29, 1969, the House Republican committee, chaired by the Honorable GEORGE BUSH of Texas, cited the urgent need for POPULATION CONTROL activities to fend off "a growing Third World crisis." This chapter documents and discusses "American displeasure with Black African culture," and "the roots of Third World foreign policy." Intriguing revelations here include: * Nixon's special presentation before the Population Conference in which he appealed for urgent action; * Economic, military, and "humanitarian" policies and projects implemented under Nixon and Carter; * Subsequent World Bank, NASA, and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) activities in Africa; * Henry Kissinger's leading role in establishing and directing African foreign policy and "diplomatic" affairs; * USAID and WHO sponsored immunization programs in central Africa; and * American intelligence connections to USAID and African health care initiatives. Chapter 11. Henry Kissinger's "New World Order"-- This fascinating chapter tracks Henry Kissinger's rise to prominence in America's intelligence community. Details about Kissinger's relationships with the Rockefellers, Richard Nixon, Alexander Haig, and other Nixon White House officials are examined, along with Kissinger's leading role in the development of nuclear and biological weapons. The philosophy and purpose of the "New World Order," as articulated by President Bush, and advanced in Kissinger's 1955 Harvard Ph.D. thesis "The Meaning of History," is reviewed. Kissinger argued that there will never be peace on earth. Instead, he called for a stable economic order of nations which could be maintained by creating ongoing "small wars," with financial advantages for weapons developers. This chapter also documents: * Kissinger's appointment by Nelson Rockefeller to head the nuclear weapons study group of the nongovernmental Council on Foreign Relations. * Kissinger's appointment as National Security Advisor--the most influential position in the Nixon White House--instead of Roy Ash, the President of Litton Industries. * Litton military contracts, during the first Nixon administration, exceeding $5 billion; $10 million of which went to Litton Bionetics, the BW contractor with whom Robert Gallo worked to develop AIDS-like viruses at that time. * Kissinger's "Great Power Grab" as director of national security, and his ordering of Alexander Haig and J. Edgar Hoover to wiretap Nixon and others to produce the infamous "White House tapes." * Kissinger's control over The Defense Program Review Committee, which considered the funding requests for biological weapons; and The 40 Committee which authorized covert actions by the CIA in Central Africa in the vicinity where AIDS and Ebola first broke out. continued.... "Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola--Nature, Accident or Intentional?" (Tetrahedron Press, 1996; $29.95) May be ordered through bookstores throughout North America, and by calling toll-free 800-336-9266. The book may also be ordered through the internet at http://www.tetrahedron.org in the catalog section of the web site. ***** "Messages sent on the IWW-news mailing list are the opinions of the individual senders; they do not necessarily represent the views of the IWW. IWW-news is for posting information which is relevant to the struggle of the working class against our bosses. Visit http://www.iww.org/ for more information." To subscribe/unsubscribe from the IWW-news mailing list please send e-mail to iww-news...@iww.org with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" as the subject of the message.

Subject: Aids/Ebola BIOwar 3/4 MKNAOMI Nazi/CIA Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 17:59:01 -0700 Resent-From: iww-...@iww.org Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 20:56:09 -0400 From: "Dave" Reply-To: To: "davehart@POP. NET" part three/4 Dave Hartley Still-Point Healing Services Web Page: http://www.ioa.com/home/davehart

Chapter 12. Silent Coup in American Intelligence

--Reviews increasing evidence that the CIA not only co-opted the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government while being directed by Dr. Henry Kissinger during the Nixon era, but apparently carried out efforts to replace J. Edgar Hoover. This, at the time Kissinger directed the CIA to continue escalating foreign and domestic espionage operations under COINTELPRO against black Africans and American homosexuals. Chapter 13. USAID and New York Blood-- Under Kissinger's national security council directives, USAID began focusing vast resources on controlling Third World populations. A computer search of "USAID," "Population Control," "Vaccines," and "World Health Organization" literature between 1970 and 1975 revealed 733 "USAID-Population Control" studies. The same search after 1975 found none. The entire field of "Population Control" had vanished from medlar! The subject heading had been terminated and replaced with the more comforting "maternal and child health." A review of Department of State Bulletins revealed that by 1976 Joseph Califano, who had advised Kissinger to appoint Alexander Haig as his White House assistant, took the lead in attacking "rapid population growth" in the Third World. His subsequent policies are discussed as are Califano's links to Merck, Sharp and Dohme (MSD)--the world's largest supplier of AIDS-related drugs. Had Califano authorized USAID funds for Merck related hepatitis B vaccine studies in central Africa during his stint as secretary of DHEW? Apparently so. Moreover, Chapter 13 examines a paper trail in the scientific literature linking MSD investigators with viral researchers who conducted hepatitis B vaccine studies on retarded children and gay volunteers in NYC. Through the New York City Blood Bank (NYCBB) and the biological weapons contractors at the New York University Medical Center (NYUMC), as early as 1969, that is, shortly after Kissinger became NSC director, the first humans were inoculated with experimental vaccines composed of live or attenuated viruses that had only been tested on monkeys. Moreover, the viruses had been grown in chimpanzees likely infected with a varity of other viruses with similarities to HIV. Most astonishing, the text documents that MSD researchers worked in cooperation Gallo's group at the NCI and Litton Bionetics, and that combined, they conducted similar studies in Central Africa under U. S. Army and USAID contracts. Moreover, the "Drug Development Branch" of the NCI served as a conduit of experimental viruses, vaccines, and drugs between Gallo and company and MSD. Thus, the alleged channel through which HIV tainted hepatitis B vaccines passed between the NCI and MSD was operating by 1970. Chapter 14. Central African Vaccine Trials--Documents the specific African vaccine studies and immunization campaigns waged by the suspected scientific network in an effort to investigate the accidental and intentional theories of AIDS. The text details the: * 20 country immunization program supported by USAID, the CDC, the WHO and MSD; * The NCI's method of turning taxpayer funded research dollars into private enterprise profits; * Obvious conflicts of interest and scientific misconduct demonstrated when CDC and MSD authorities attempted to rebut widespread allegations that the spread of AIDS followed Merck hepatitis vaccine study routes; * The support Gallo received from at least a third of the Army's top eighteen biological weapons contractors including Bionetics, Hazleton, and Dow Chemical; * Plans to prompt Congressional legislation freeing MSD and other vaccine producers from liability and costly litigation from personal injury claims; * Protocol for administering African "jet gun" immunization programs and documented propaganda campaigns; * The view of leading government scientists that race, class, and "national security" is the principle motive behind Third World immunization practices. Chapter 15. The CIA/Detrick Operation-- In 1975, following the storm of public outrage over the CIA's involvement in Watergate, the agency was investigated and chastised by the Rockefeller Commission and two Congressional committees. That year, word had leaked from the Army's Special (that is, secret) Operations Division at Fort Detrick, that the CIA was illegally stockpiling deadly bacteria, viruses, and other toxins. As a result, a Select Committee To Study Governmental Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities met to investigate. Senator Frank Church presided. The Church hearings exposed much about the illegal storage of BW by the CIA, and their intended use in covert operations. Unfortunately, the American news media failed to report the most incriminating testimonies. The testimonies implicated congressional investigators as Dr. Kissinger was shielded from indictments along with other chief decision makers. Chapter 16. The CIA's Top Secret PROJECT: MKNAOMI--Discusses the CIA's BW operation. CIA Director William Colby's admission that the agency's interest in BW was for offensive uses during covert operations at the time the CIA was operating at full force in Zaire, Angola, and Sudan--ground zero for the AIDS and Ebola outbreaks--is documented. Nathan Gordon, Chief of the chemistry branch of the Technical Services Division of the CIA gave additional testimony of the agency's possible use of extensive virus stockpiles to assistant intelligence agency scientists in their work on mass immunization projects, vaccine development, and cancer research--exactly the work conducted by scientists at the NCI, including Robert Gallo, in association with Litton Bionetics in Bethesda and their affiliates in Uganda, and in cooperation with MSD, CDC, and New York collaborators. Moreover, discussions focus on congressional testimony which documented that the CIA had, in fact, been receiving "deadly poison[s]" manufactured by the USPHS and delivered to Fort Detrick for use in human experiments and covert operations. Chapter 17. The CIA's Human Experiments--Reviews an extensive array of illegal, unethical, immoral, and racist CIA BW experiments conducted on unsuspecting human populations. Chapter 18. Nazi Roots of American Central Intelligence: The Biological Warfare Industry--This chapter delivers an eye-opening expose on the Nazi medical officers who escaped prosecution through their service to American intelligence under a top secret "Project Paperclip." The "excessive zeal" with which U. S. Army intelligence and later CIA personnel protected war criminals, including the infamous "Angel of Death" Joseph Mengele; his assistant, "the butcher of Lyon," Klaus Barbie; Walter Rauff, the SS mobile gas chambers supervisor; Friederich Schwend, another mass murderer, and others including Erich Traub, in charge of biological warfare for the Reich Research Institute, where his research specialty was viral diseases. Of the approximately 2,000 Nazis drafted into American military service by intelligence officers including Henry Kissinger under General Bolling--the "Godfather" of "Project Paperclip"--many went on to become the leaders of America's military-medical industrial complex (MMIC). This chapter discloses the ties between the CIA and the two powerful organizations which gave rise to Nazi intelligence and Hitler's SS--The Gehlen Organization and Merk Network. These links are discussed with regard to the initial development of the CIA under Truman, and the post-WWII boom of the MMIC. The CIA, initially established as a cover and oversight agency for the Gehlen Organization, was thus rooted in racism and white supremacist ideology. Further investigation revealed how the Gehlen Organization and CIA were able to launder approximately $300 million from the Third Reich's war chest through the Paris branch of Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan Bank. This money was ultimately used to fuel the Kissinger-Rockefeller directed MMIC and possibly MSD's pharmaceutical empire. Chapter 19. The CIA in Africa-- Between 1970 and 1975, American cold war efforts focused on Zaire and Angola. Following the withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam, Henry Kissinger ordered the CIA to begin a major covert military operation against MPLA (communist bloc backed) "rebels" in Angola. Indebted by over $4.5 billion to the International Monetary Fund, Zaire, headed by President Mobutu--paradoxically regarded as one of the world's richest men with "a personal fortune put at $2,939,200,000 [1984 estimate] banked in Switzerland,"--was wooed by NATO allies during the 1970s, to be a staging area for CIA backed, Portuguese, French, and South African mercenaries. American corporate investment, notably in copper and aluminum, doubled following a 1970 visit by Mobutu to the United States. Major investors included Rockefeller's Chase-Manhattan Bank. This chapter details how, in 1975, Mobutu turned against NATO allies, proclaimed his intention to nationalize foreign owned enterprises, expelled the American ambassador, and arrested most of the CIA's Zairian agents, placing some of them under death sentences. The following year, in October 1976, the Ebola virus broke-out in fifty five Zairian villages, first killing people who had received injections. Mobutu then ordered his army to seal off the Bumba Zone with roadblocks and shoot anyone trying to leave. By the end of 1976, the Zairian leader had reconciled his differences with American intelligence and, thereafter, continued to reap his western alliesO economic and "humanitarian" aid. This chapter details these events along with the CIA's covert operations in the region. continued ........ "Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola--Nature, Accident or Intentional?" (Tetrahedron Press, 1996; $29.95) May be ordered through bookstores throughout North America, and by calling toll-free 800-336-9266. The book may also be ordered through the internet at http://www.tetrahedron.org in the catalog section of the web site. ***** "Messages sent on the IWW-news mailing list are the opinions of the individual senders; they do not necessarily represent the views of the IWW. IWW-news is for posting information which is relevant to the struggle of the working class against our bosses. Visit http://www.iww.org/ for more information." To subscribe/unsubscribe from the IWW-news mailing list please send e-mail to iww-news...@iww.org with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" as the subject of the message.

Subject: Aids/Ebola BIOwar 4/4 (OTRAG, Nazi/CIA) Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 17:58:15 -0700 Resent-From: iww-...@iww.org Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 20:56:02 -0400 From: "Dave" Reply-To: To: "davehart@POP. NET" part 4/4 Dave Hartley Still-Point Healing Services Web Page: http://www.ioa.com/home/davehart

Chapter 20. OTRAG: Links to Nazis, NATO, NASA, the NCI and AIDS

This chapter provides astonishing information regarding a "secret agreement" between NATO and a Nazi-linked West German company--OTRAG (Orbital Transport-und Raketen-Aktiengesellschaft)--and Zaire's president Mobutu. This company leased 260,000 square kilometers of eastern Zaire for military/industrial purposes in 1975. The contract gave OTRAG sovereign rights to territories inhabited by 760,000 people, not far from what is now called "The AIDS Highway," and the region in which Ebola erupted. Said to be of military and intelligence gathering significance to NATO, OTRAG's principals included several Nazi scientists including Dr. Kurt H. Debus, who worked as director of the Cape Canaveral space program until 1975 before transferring to Zaire. Richard Gompertz, OTRAG's technical director, presided over NASA's Chrysler space division. Lutz Thilo Kayser, OTRAG's founder and manager, when young was quite close to the Nazi rocket industry, often called "Dadieu's young man," a reference to Armin Dadieu, his mentor, who served as prominent SS officer and as Goring's special representative for a research program on storing uranium. According to United States Army reports, the "outlandish claim" that the AIDS virus was developed as a biological weapon for the Pentagon was communist propaganda. Recently, however, a high ranking Soviet press official, Boris Belitskiy, offered an alternative account regarding the origin of the AIDS virus--Both OTRAG and the Pentagon were implicated by his revelations. In 1977, at the height of OTRAG's activity in Zaire, Litton Industries received $5 million for medical electronic equipment from its Hellige division, in Freiburg, West Germany. Much of Litton's NATO and West German sales during this period appear to have been earmarked for OTRAG. Concurrently, the chapter discusses cooperative ventures between NATO and the World Health Organization with regard to the international control of pharmaceuticals, and preparations for facing possible outbreaks from biological warfare. More revelations point to the fact that the recent outbreaks of the world's most feared and deadly viruses--Marburg, Ebola, Reston, and AIDS--share the dubious distinction of breaking out in or around areas of CIA/NATO operations. Chapter 21. Marburg, Ebola, and Chilling Propaganda in The Hot Zone--Discloses the scientific facts about the dreaded Ebola and Marburg viruses, in contrast to the New York Times bestselling "nonfiction" book The Hot Zone by Richard Preston. Critical examination in this chapter reveals Preston's book is undoubtedly counterintelligence propaganda seemingly intended to prepare the world for future epidemics and additional virus outbreaks. Chapter 22. The Special Virus Cancer Program-- Highly incriminating documents published in 1971 and 1972 by the NIH were serendipitously discovered by Dr. Horowitz. These NCI "Summary Reports," unavailable at most medical libraries including the NCI's library at Fort Detrick, describe the network's earliest efforts to find a cure for cancer by first creating thousands of mutant viruses capable of jumping from animals into humans. These "cancer models" were used by researchers who believed that viruses were responsible for most cancers. Thus, viruses were tracked, isolated, and genetically modifed to produce a variety of cancers in the hope of discovering a vaccine. This rationale was used by BW developers to defend their work, and the entire NCI program was administered by Litton Bionetics. This chapter reviews what was done to produce AIDS, Ebola, Marburg and Reston-like viruses, where and when the experiments took place, who was involved, and even how much they were paid. This chapter uncloaks the NCI's "special virus" research network and the horrifying experiments they conducted in the name of medical science. Chapter 23. The Man-Made Origin of Marburg and Ebola--Presents startling evidence that the Hazleton monkey house, site of the Reston virus outbreak, was intimately involved in creating cancer viruses similar to those produced by Robert Gallo and coworkers at Litton Bionetics. Moreover, scientific documents revealed the unreported source of Hazleton's Reston virus contaminated monkeys was apparently Litton Bionetics. Additional documents reveal a specific experiment conducted by Litton Bionetics chief Dr. John Landon as the most plausible source of the original Marburg virus outbreak in Europe. Most astonishing, in an obscure scientific report, Dr. Seymour Kalter, the NCI's chief simian virus expert in charged of classifying newly developed viruses that emerged during laboratory experiments, stated for the record that the Marburg hemorrhagic fever virus was man-made. Chapter 24. Ebola Kikwit and the Sloan/Hot Zone/Plague Connection--This concluding chapter critically examines the 1995 Ebola virus outbreak in Kikwit, Zaire. Apparently, contrary to popular belief and news coverage, the virus was too similar to the 1976 strain to have emerged naturally. A final serendipitous discovery identified The Hot Zone's Richard Preston, as the recipient of a $20,000 literary grant from the Sloan Foundation. Further investigation revealed the foundation: (1) supported black educational initiatives consistent with the COINTELPRO Black Nationalist Hate Group campaign; (2) administered "public management" research and mass-media-public-persuasion experiments completely consistent with the CIA's Project MKULTRA; (3) funded many of the earliest cancer research experiments involving the genetic engineering of mutant viruses; (4) funded population control studies by Planned Parenthood-World Population, New York, N.Y.; (5) funded the Community Blood Council of Greater New York, Inc., the "council of doctors" who established the infamous New York City Blood Bank; (6) maintained Laurance S. Rockefeller, the director of the Community Blood Council of Greater New York and the president of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, as chairman of the board of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, and a trustee for the Foundation; (7) gave in excess of $20,000 annually to the Council on Foreign Relations; and (8) maintained among its "marketable securities," 16,505 shares of Chase Manhattan Bank stock (in 1967) along with 24,400-53,000 shares issued by Merck & Co., Inc. (at least until 1973). In the end, Litton Bionetics and Hazleton Research Labs were sold to a subsidiary of Dow-Corning, whose president, Richard Hazleton, is currently seeking congressional approval for legislation aimed at freeing corporations from product liability claims, such as those caused by immune-system-ravaging silicon breast implants and Norplant_ for population control. In addition, it was also learned that Laurie Garrett, author of The Coming Plague, also received major financial support from The Sloan Foundation. Chapter 25. Smoking Guns and Conclusions--The book closes by questioning the covert operations of the military-medical-industrial complex and its effect on America's health and democracy, but not before revealing "a smoking gun." Maurice Hilleman, in charge of MSD's hepatitis B vaccine experiments in New York and Central Africa, admits to having been intimately involved importing AIDS infected monkeys into his labs at Merck, and thus beginning the North American AIDS epidemic, just as Dr. Horowitz concluded from the scientific evidence presented in chapter 13. Most troubling, hard evidence is presented that NCI and NIH insiders knew, as early as 1961, that MSD's polio (and later, hepatitis B) vaccines were laced with live simian lentiviruses that would likely produce human cancer epidemics for decades to come. Even more incredible, many monkey viruses are still being spread to humans by currently administered vaccines, while the FDA, by law, cannot do anything about it! For political and financial reasons, those who knew about such risks simply remained silent, or actively blocked efforts to alert the public. The result is--just about everyone is at greater risk today of developing cancer, and a host of other illnesses, or passing these cancer genes, or active viruses, on to their children for generations to come. Readers are encouraged to help make a difference by contacting their congressional representatives to urge an independent investigation of current live viral vaccine contaminants along with the FDA regarding their role in developing the hepatitis B vaccine and keeping the public misinformed. In addition, the tainted vaccine lots allegedly in safe keeping at the FDA should be evaluated and may hold the keys to discovering the whole true story of the origin of AIDS.

"Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola--Nature, Accident or Intentional?"

(Tetrahedron Press, 1996; $29.95)

May be ordered through bookstores throughout North America, and by calling toll-free 800-336-9266.

The book may also be ordered through the internet at http://www.tetrahedron.org in the catalog section of the web site. ***** "Messages sent on the IWW-news mailing list are the opinions of the individual senders; they do not necessarily represent the views of the IWW. IWW-news is for posting information which is relevant to the struggle of the working class against our bosses. Visit http://www.iww.org/ for more information." To subscribe/unsubscribe from the IWW-news mailing list please send e-mail to iww-news...@iww.org with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" as the subject of the message.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Australian Vaccination Protest March Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 17:28:10 -0700 Resent-From: iww-...@iww.org Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 20:26:19 -0400 From: "Dave" Reply-To: To: PROTEST MARCH AND VACCINATION FORUM

On Sunday April 6th, the Australian Vaccination Network and it's affiliated groups organised a march and rally in Sydney to publicise the fact that children are dying and being injured by vaccines and nobody in the government, either state or federal, is doing anything about it. There has still been no response from Dr. Wooldridge to the 200 reaction reports we delivered to him back in January and since that time, we have been contacted by more than 100 additional families who have reported a vaccine injury or death to us. Despite sending numerous press releases to publicise the march, the only publicity we received was from the Natural Health Society/Vegetarian Society magazine which ran an A5 sheet for us at no cost. The Australian Chiropractic Journal also ran a page, to advertise for us again at no cost. The homoeopaths wrote to their members to let them know about the march. There were also Sydney members putting up posters and fliers - we received numerous inquiries from the Nature Care College for example after a member put up signs there. For this help which proved to be invaluable, I would like to thank those involved. We had many successes that day. For one thing, there were 500 people marching down the streets of Sydney making their feelings known and informing all who watched us both in person and on TV (one station ran an excellent story about the march and Radio National also covered it). For another, the groups have all worked wonderfully together. There is now a great feeling of connection between all of our far-flung organisations and we are all very clear on where we are, where we want to go and how best to get there. We had some wonderful speakers at the rally in First Fleet Park which is where the march concluded. There was Dr. Viera Scheibner, Ian Sinclair, Susan Lindberg from VAIS and yours truly. We were also very lucky to have an unexpected guest speaker in Burnum Burnum. He discussed the devastating effects of vaccines on the Aboriginal population - an issue which is skirted often by the medical community but never really gone into. Why would the Aboriginal population have such a shockingly high rate of infant mortality when they also have such a high rate of vaccination? Is there a connection and what is being done by the government to find out? We will be repeating the march some time in 1998 and hope to make it an annual event as long as there are children dying and being injured by vaccines and as long as their parents are not being given a chance to make an informed choice. We have approached vaccination groups overseas and there is a strong interest in making next year's march international with parents and children from all over the world protesting the damage done by vaccines. Best is - this is an Australian initiative and all of you who are members of our group can be very proud that you have helped to bring it about! The day after the march, there was a forum called In the Best Interests of the Child: What Parents Want to Know about Vaccination which was held at Parliament House in Sydney. It was the brain child of the Hon. Alan Corbett, MLC, A Better Future For Out Children party. There were three pro-choice speakers representing your views - Maureen Hickman, President of the Australian Council For Immunisation Information; Dr. Mark Donohoe, Environmental Medicine and Nutrition; and Meryl Dorey, President the Australian Vaccination Network (that's me!). There were also three pro-vaccination speakers - Dr. Mark Ferson, Director, South Eastern Sydney Public Health Unit; Mark Harris, Professor of General Practice, University of NSW; and Dr. Alyson Kakakios, Senior Staff Specialist, Department of Immunology and Infectious Diseases, New Children's Hospital. She was filling in for Associate Professor Margaret Burgess was supposed to have participated in the forum but cancelled without explanation. This forum was supposed to consist of a panel with the 6 speakers all sitting together and answering questions which had been sent in by parents. Unfortunately (though not unexpectedly), the pro-vaccination speakers refused to speak on the same platform with us. They wanted us to speak in the morning while they spoke in the afternoon - that way, we could not respond to anything that they said. Not only that, but they changed the date at the last minute and would not enter into any discussion of how the day would be run. It never fails to amaze me that the medical community, which insists that vaccinations are safe and effective, is so reluctant to come out for a fair debate to try and prove their assertions. They seem quite willing to shove these things down our throats (or into our babies bodies), but won't try to defend what they are doing. The only explanation we ever seem to get is that there is no debate so be quiet and roll up your sleeve! Anyway, as I said before, the questions had been sent in by parents and others with an interest in vaccination and were presented to both morning (pro-choice) and afternoon (pro-vaccination) speakers. It's unfortunate that there wasn't time to address all of the questions, but there was quite a good cross-section asked. Maureen Hickman, as a law clerk, mostly handled legal questions while Mark Donohoe and myself answered the vaccine-related queries. It will probably not surprise any of you to hear that while the pro-choice side backed up everything that was said with published, medical references, the doctors showed a marked lack of citations and seemed to simply expect us to believe what they said because they were doctors. Many times, a member of the audience would ask the doctors to produce a reference for a certain point that they made. Almost without exception, the person involved would shuffle through the papers on their desk and say that they could give hundreds of citations - all the while never producing one. Their idea of health was also quite different to that of many members of the audience. For instance, one of the questioners asked about the report in the New Zealand Medical Journal in May 1996 which said that a 60% increase in diabetes was due to a hepatitis B vaccination program. Dr. Harris, responded by saying that a vaccine against diabetes was now being trialed! I think that he might have missed the point there? Jim Townley from the ACII asked why there were no studies being done to compare the overall health of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children and Dr. Kakakios responded in disbelief, saying that of course the vaccinated would be healthier because they didn't get diseases like measles and mumps. They just don't get it! Even though they are doctors, what really came across quite clearly to me was the fact that the medical professionals have no idea of what health really is. There is so much more to being healthy than not getting a childhood disease and when your definition is so far off base, of course you won't be able to perceive where you are going wrong. I really want to commend Dr. Mark Donohoe for (a) his courage in bucking the medical fraternity and the whole pharmaceutical machine and in daring to come public and say that vaccines may or may not be safe and effective but there are a lot of questions yet to answer; and (b) for the information he provided and the clear and concise way in which it was presented. I would like to refer to something that Dr. Donohoe said in reference to a question about polio because it is such an important point and really causes us to question whether the polio vaccine has, in fact, been responsible for the decline in paralytic disease or if it is just another coincidence. `How many people here had their tonsils out back in the 50s and 60s? (the majority of the audience held up their hands) How many have children now who have had their tonsils out? A couple. Do you ever wonder why the medical profession drops a procedure? Certainly not because they have paid their cars off. `There was a problem in that we were removing tonsils from people throughout the 40s and 50s. They were taken to be extra tissue not needed by humans, but only a source of trouble. Then, during the polio epidemics, it was found that people who had had their tonsils removed were three to five times more likely to develop paralysis. That does not mean that they got the polio virus more frequently, simply that without the protection of the lymphatic tissue in the throat, there appeared to be a quite strong association between getting the polio virus and developing an illness. There were many at that time who suggested that paralytic polio was an iatrogenic ( ed note -medically-caused) disease. The medical profession dropped tonsillectomy as if it were a hot potato, but I don't know that it told many about that. Certainly, it did not tell me, in my medical school, why tonsillectomies were becoming so much less popular. I had mine removed; virtually everybody in my community did. It is one of those forgotten truths in Australian medicine, and world-wide medicine, that we removed tonsils at our own risk. We thought there was no problem. The iatrogenic part of it was that we caused thousands of cases of paralysis. We did not cause the polio, but we converted people who would have recovered from a viral illness into people with a paralytic illness. To this day, I don't think the medical profession has owned up to that problem that it caused in the Australian health community. For anyone who would like to know what went on at the forum, Alan Corbett will provide you with a 73-page transcript of the day for $5.00 plus $2.00 shipping and handling. You may write to: The Hon. Alan Corbett MLC Legislative Council Parliament House Macquarie Street Sydney 2000 Or fax to (02) 9230-2612 I hope that many of you will also write him a letter of appreciation because what he has done takes courage and commitment. It is never easy to swim against the tide of popular opinion - and it must be especially difficult if you are a politician - even an independent. Mr. Corbett has started a process which will not be finished for quite some time - who knows where it will lead us? Let's try and support those who are supporting us. Article URL: http://www.ozemail.com.au/~shotinfo/page34.htm Australian Vaccination Network: http://www.ozemail.com.au/~shotinfo/ Dave Hartley Still-Point Healing Services Web Page: http://www.ioa.com/home/davehart ***** "Messages sent on the IWW-news mailing list are the opinions of the individual senders; they do not necessarily represent the views of the IWW. IWW-news is for posting information which is relevant to the struggle of the working class against our bosses. Visit http://www.iww.org/ for more information." To subscribe/unsubscribe from the IWW-news mailing list please send e-mail to iww-news...@iww.org with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" as the subject of the message.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

NSA mind control and psyops

The following was sent to me by Will Filer <Es...@aol.com> on July 27, 1999. It offers a new explanation for government mind control. Will has stated to me that he is a former consultant to the U.S. National Security Agency and asked me to post this information immediately. He also believes he is in immediate danger because of this information.

If you have comments on this document, feel free to post them to the MINDCONTROL-L list.

- Wes Thomas, moderator, MINDCONTROL-L list

Subliminal Implanted Posthypnotic Suggestions and Scripts Using Acoustically Delivered and Phonetically Accelerated Posthypnotic Commands without Somnambulistic Preparation in the Subject for Intelligence and Counterintelligence Applications by the United States National Security Agency.

INTRODUCTION:

The following information is an overview of one area of NSA Intelligence Technology and Applications. A Technology Title, Applications, Technology Description, case history summaries and the NSA’s Behavioral Modification Procedure Outline documented for the non-technical person.

TECHNOLOGY TITLE:

Subliminal Implanted Posthypnotic Suggestions and Scripts Using Acoustically Delivered and Phonetically Accelerated Posthypnotic Commands without Somnambulistic Preparation in the Subject for Intelligence and Counterintelligence Applications by the United States National Security Agency. "Computer Simulated Subconscious Speech Language".

APPLICATIONS:

Intelligence:
1. Used on foreign and domestic diplomats, spies, and citizens to gather intelligence, steal advanced technology for US Defense applications. Surveys of citizen's opinions to government events and propaganda. Heavy survey use during times of war, economic strife and political elections. War against drugs. Used to identify investments that have high yield to support clandestine operations. Used to direct field agents without the agents having to carry communications hardware and encryption devices.
Counterintelligence:
1. Used on foreign and domestic diplomats, spies, and citizens to identify intelligence operations; scope, participants, communication methods, and weaknesses in individuals, systems, equipment, or signals that can be exploited. Additional applications include misinformation dissemination, confusing and confounding leaders during critical decision moments, distorting significance of various facts to sway decisions and actions in US favor, behavioral modification of foreign spies to betray their loyalties, self initiated executions (suicides).
Behavior Modification and Accelerated Resocialization:
1. This technology is used to develop and control spies, political candidates, and other public figures through psychological intimidation, fear and extortion.
2. The NSA uses this technology to resocialize (brainwash) the US civilian voting population into "Giving their lives to Christ" (giving up their personal will and civil rights to the NSA). Each subject is required to maintain a "Personal Relationship with Jesus Christ" (following the precepts of the Bible and doing what is ordered by the NSA). The technology is also used to monitor and optimize NSA employee performance and loyalty.

DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS:

Age Regression: The act of bringing back past memories in a subject though the use of hypnosis. The memories can be very vivid and real in the mind of the subject.
Hypnoamnesia: Temporary loss of memory due to a posthypnotic suggestion.
NSA: United States National Security Agency, Fort Mead, Maryland.
ODO: On-Duty Officer, or officer-on-duty.
Posthypnotic Command: Same as Posthypnotic Suggestion. This term "Command" is more commonly used when the hypnosis is forcibly given to the subject and when the subject’s will has been broken down though the use of REM Sleep Deprivation and Suggestibility Index increasing drugs like CNS and Cardiovascular Stimulants. The exposure to extreme REM deprivation and select chemical stimulants cause the subject to have no ability to resist the "Suggestion" any longer thereby making it a "Command".
Posthypnotic Suggestion: A subconscious suggestion or command resident and potentially active in the subject following a hypnotic trance or period of direct access to the subconscious mind.
Posthypnotic Suggestibility Index: An index or rating of a subject’s susceptibility and sensitivity to hypnosis.
REM DEP: Abbreviation for REM Sleep Deprivation or REM Deprivation. A subject deprived from REM Sleep has multiple symptoms i.e. reduced protein synthesis, black circles around eyes, loss of short term memory, confusion, impulsiveness, anger, frustration, diminished self-esteem, increased suggestibility, reduced productivity, apathy, and depression. Long term REM Deprivation results in death.
Script: A carefully constructed series of words arranged in the form of a posthypnotic suggestion. The script will generally consist of four separate parts; (1) an identifier (subject’s name, description, or other identifying factor), (2) trigger activation condition or conditions (when, what or how the suggestion will trigger), (3) the content (what the trigger will precipitate in the perception of the subject), (4) and a duration (when or under what conditions will it stop or finish). Additional reinforcing scripts are usually added to "strengthen" or reinforce the central posthypnotic command.
Somnambulatory State: An abnormal condition of sleep in which motor acts (like walking, running) are performed. This state is typically achieved and a prerequisite to traditional hypnosis.
Subliminal Implant: A posthypnotic suggestion successfully delivered to the subject’s subconscious mind.
Transceivers (NSA): Nearly microscopic electronic surveillance devices that collect and transmit encrypted audio, color video, and location coordinates collected at the subject site to NSA Satellites that in turn forward it to NSA central intelligence operations. The devices also receive encrypted audio scripts from NSA central intelligence operations through the satellites and deliver it to the subject’s site in the form of a subliminal posthypnotic suggestion. These devices are approximately the size of the head of a straight pin and can be concealed in houses, offices, automobiles, planes, and street corners.

TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW:

In addition to the ability to see and hear what is going on inside people's homes, vehicles, and businesses through the use of nearly microscopic digital surveillance technology, the NSA is able to interrogate and influence a person subconsciously without the knowledge or consent of the subject.
Thought Labels (Response Labels):
1. Have you ever watched a baseball game? Did you see the catcher and pitcher communicate using a series of itches, baseball cap rearrangement, and clothing tugs? An elaboration of this communication technique is used by the NSA to detect a fleeting thought in a subject or "read minds" so to speak.
2. Lets discuss how an itch, clothing tug or even an innocent sneeze can be used to label a thought. For simplicity, we will call itches, clothing tugs, sneezes, coughs, or involuntary muscle spasms that are performed during subconscious interrogation "thought labels".
Post-Hypnotic Delivery Method:
1. The NSA combines hypnosis and thought labels to interrogate people without the subject being aware of it. "How can hypnosis be used?" you might ask. The subconscious mind operates at a speed of about 1200 to 1400 words per minute. This is many times faster than the conscious mind that operates at 250 to 450 WPM (words per minute). The posthypnotic script can be spoken at fast conversational speed approximately 250 WPM and a recorder or a computer speeds up the message up to approximately 1200 to 1400 WPM. Remember what happens when you play a 33 rpm record at 78 rpm? The resulting voice sound like the old American cartoon characters the Chipmunks. This is only slightly past doubling (2X) the delivery speed. At speeds as high as 1400 WPM, the voices would sound like a high pitched chattering whine. Remember when the words "Drink Coca Cola" were written on one frame of a movie in a theatre back in the 1960s? The frame rate in movies is played at 30 frames/second. At 1/30^th of a second the conscious mind could not recognize the message but the subconscious mind could read it clearly. The audience increased their Coca-Cola consumption by 65% that night resulting in the Federal Government prohibiting subliminal advertising. The following probable reasons for not achieving a higher percentage of subliminal delivery effectiveness (> 65%) are described as follows. In that 1/30^th of a second some people were blinking, some people were looking around the theatre, looking at spouses, children, candy, popcorn, etc. or they had sufficiently poor eyesight that they could watch the movie but could not distinguish the small writing clearly.
2. In the early years of this technology, the NSA originally recorded a spoken posthypnotic suggestion message into a tape deck and sped it up by speeding up the tape. This process was labor intensive, required each officer to have excellent diction and mastery of the language and dialect required, and was of poor quality due to background noise and the delay in timing during recording and processing. It also required extensive training to assure that each officer spoke at the same rate of speed so that the resulting "sped-up" script was delivered at the correct speed. Now computers are used to append digitized samples of optimized, ideal phonemes together to form words and the words are sped-up to the correct delivery speed. Where dialects are present, a different set of base phonemes is used.
3. Currently, to optimize efficiency and accommodate the variety of languages on the planet, phonetic elements from each language and distinct dialect are sampled, digitally edited to optimize them, and appended during delivery to form words and words arranged to make sentences in the from of scripts that resemble hypnotic suggestions. The empty space between words is minimized and pitch rise is compressed and filtered. Repetitive sine waves are also removed from the phonetic element’s acoustic wave train thus reducing the actual number of sine waves making up a word by 50% or more. This reduces the actual length of the time it takes the phoneme to be delivered prior to accelerating (speeding-up) the delivery (like fast forward). This helps the message to be played at higher speeds and reduces the subject’s ability to recognize it as accelerated speech. The technique of using optimized digitally sampled and edited phonemes appended together to for words and then sentences structured as hypnotic suggestions can be termed "computer simulated subconscious speech language".
4. The subconscious mind is also very sensitive. It can hear things that the conscious mind ignores. If you have watched television, you have probably noticed that there are many "subliminal tapes" on the market to program your subconscious mind. These tapes have their "messages" recorded/hidden in the sounds of ocean waves, music, or other sounds but they are not sped-up to subconscious delivery speeds and are therefore not very effective. The subconscious mind can hear and discern the message even when there is background noise like waves, cars, planes, or even when someone else is speaking to you in normal conversation. Your conscious mind won't hear anything unless it is very quite in the house. If you are very attentive you may hear what sounds like a low-pitched tape on fast forward, and played at low volume. This is the sound of the NSA's high-speed audio subliminal message.
5. This modification of the phonetic elements, played at low volume, combined with the environmental background noise makes it very difficult for a subject to record the NSA message. Even if the subject were to effectively record the message, it is very difficult to filter (separate) the NSA's message from background noise. Then, reconstructing the missing sine waves from the acoustic wave train and slowing the message down to discern the actual content of the "posthypnotic" script with the conscious mind would be nearly impossible for the average citizen. To briefly summarize, the subject would have no chance in analyzing a NSA message without the following items:
  1. Professional state-of-the-art technology recording equipment.
  2. Digital acoustic wave editing equipment.
  3. Advanced engineering knowledge of acoustic wave science.
  4. Phonetics and linguistics expertise.
  5. Hypnosis theory and scripting.
  6. Ideal environmental conditions for recording.
  7. NSA ignorance of the subject's intent and ability to capture a message.
6. This technology is the perfect intelligence tool. It is nearly impossible to detect or measure, difficult to trace back to the NSA. The symptoms that the NSA can "program" or inflict into the subject can cause fear that they might be thought to be insane if they were to report the NSA activities. The subject does not know the source of the technology or the technology itself, the subject has no proof or evidence, only their perception, suffering, and isolation. Additionally, potential recourses that are available to the subject can be interrogated out and preventative actions taken by the NSA to further isolate or disable the subject.
Using the Post-Hypnotic Delivery Method with Thought Labels:
1. The NSA technique is simple; they transmit their human programming message through the audio-visual electronic surveillance equipment installed in your home, car, or office to you. The subliminal message delivered to you could be "Mr. Jones, imagine that the IRS were auditing your taxes. Think back to a time you have cheated on your taxes and that you are worried that the IRS might find out in an audit. If you have never cheated on your taxes and have nothing to fear you will feel an itch on your right-hand ear lobe that will go away when you scratch it. If you can be caught by an IRS audit, you will feel an itch in the left nostril of your nose that will disappear after you itch it twice." From your perspective, you have just had a fleeting thought about your past tax returns and had an innocent itch (thought label). To the NSA Officer On Duty (ODO), you have just communicated to him whether you have ever: 1) cheated on your taxes, and: 2) If the IRS could catch you in an audit.
2. This is a very oversimplified example of a typical NSA interrogation. Actual interrogation messages may consist of several hundred words and be very complex and sophisticated. Most messages consist of several dozen words. Yes indeed, the NSA has exceeded the wildest expectations of the book "1984". As you can imagine, the spy world has reached a new plateau that directly affects every person in the USA and abroad. This electronic surveillance system extends down through Mexico, Central America, and deep into populated regions of South America. It also has been installed in Australia, Africa, and the free-world countries in Europe.
3. The NSA's goal is to have the whole world under its electronic eye by the year 2000. They are almost there now, but are having difficulties with high-tech countries that have the counterintelligence resources to identify the high frequency bursts of microwave transmission from the transceivers. The system also has the ability to take a "voice print" from any person and place it on file. This file can be used to locate the subject later by comparing it to real-time surveillance audio samples received from the field as long as the subject is speaking in close proximity to a transceiver. If the person is aware that the NSA has this capability and remains silent, the NSA can transmit a periodic worldwide subliminal message that addresses the person by name and causes them to dream and talk in their sleep. After the person talks, the voiceprint would be eventually identified and the person's location can be identified nearly anywhere in the world. Yes, it is a small world, and getting smaller all the time.
4. This technology was originally conceived under CIA studies and fascination with the power of hypnosis in the late 1950’s and perfected by very early 1960s and implemented with unlimited resources to all areas of vital national security interest first. Originally, after noting the behavioral effects in visual subliminal effects like the highly publicized event where stating "Drink Coca Cola" on a single movie frame "delivered a higher rates of speed than normal movie viewing raised the obvious question, "Does the human hearing work as good as eyesight accepting subliminal messages?" Preliminary theory work was transferred to Fort Mead NSA who had expertise in characterizing language in analog domains where a sampled phoneme could be edited (shortened by removing excess sine waveforms from the "acoustic wavetrain") and electronically reconstructed back into shortened words of language. Some of the early experiments included "Remote Viewing at NSA where the Viewer would relax, open their mind and explain the clarity of images that were described by the NSA using this technology. These early experiments allowed the NSA to refine the specifications of the "Computer Simulated Subconscious Speech Language" and the scripting formats to maximize the ability to deliver an accurate "vision or picture" into the subject. Pictures already seen by the subject could simply be recalled using "Age regression" script variations.

OTHER REFERENCE MATERIAL:

Please refer to the book "Inside America's Most Secret Agency, The Puzzle Palace" by James Bamford, Published by Houghton Mifflin Company, 1982. This book contains extensive information and references on the NSA's history and the NSA's first surveillance system that originally only eavesdropped on telephones and is now expanded to audio-visual.

NSA CASE HISTORY EXAMPLE SUMMARIES:

NSA Self-Initiated Execution (Suicide):
1. Bamford's "The Puzzle Palace" references one of the NSA's first self-initiated execution (suicide) with this "Thought Control" technology they developed. The NSA employee reportedly ran off NSA property saying demons were in his mind and he killed himself.
NSA Initiated Execution to Cover-up in the News:
1. A University of California at Berkley student that went into a bar on or around November 27, 1990 took hostages and insisted to the police that the CIA Director talk with him so that he could get relief from the suffering. The young man had sent letters to the president and the CIA but the requests had fallen on deaf ears. After the young man panicked and shot a customer in the bar, a SWAT team fatally shot him, the San Jose police found copies of the letters written to the President referring to people that could "read minds" and that he had learned how they do it. The NSA had been unsuccessfully brainwashing him and had no alternative but to terminate him to assure their security. It is interesting that what was originally broadcast on the news "The gunman was demanding to talk with the Director of the CIA" etc. disappeared quickly (suppressed?) from later news accounts.
NSA Initiated Execution to Cover-up in Music:
1. Curt Cobain of the musical group "Nirvana" was another victim of NSA brainwashing and was terminated by NSA. Cobain had started writing clues to the NSA activities into his music to communicate it to his music followers. He referred in music to the NSA as the "Friends inside his head". Once the NSA puts on the highest level of brainwashing pain, the subject expires quickly. Cobain used heroin to numb and otherwise slow the effect of the brainwashing.
NSA Initiated Executions in Overseas Defense Project:
1. Some years back several employees of the United Kingdom's Government working on a top secret Radar Project committed suicide with no apparent penetration by a hostile government, drug abuse or any other commonality other than working in a secured government project. They were not "Staged" suicides (murders) because some of them happened behind doors that could not be opened from the outside. These men were subjected to the same technology and processes that the U.C. Berkley student, the NSA officer, Curt Cobain, and thousands of others have experienced.
Musical references of NSA Technology:
1. Talking Heads; a music group popular in the eighties, wrote a song explaining the scientific process of the NSA's brainwashing technology in a song called "Wild Wild Life". The song gave an example of what the audible transmission sounded like at the end of the song (like a tape on fast forward). They mentioned in the song that "They (NSA) talk so fast…" and that the musical group had spent "All their time and money…" unsuccessfully trying to find a place that the NSA would not be able to harass them. The Talking Heads exposed the technology, gave an example of what it sounds like, scenarios of how the NSA might select you for the brainwashing, and the scope of the electronic surveillance system.
NSA Counterintelligence Experiments:
1. Many experiments were performed by the NSA to determine the conditions and procedures that would be required to turn spies that were trusted by US enemies into assassins that we could invisibly manage. In early experiments, the resulting NSA experimental subjects would get extensive attention in the news because of the horror and unusual nature of the atrocity.
2. One example that comes to mind happened several years ago and created much news. A man became obsessed with his son, poured gasoline on him and ignited it. He had planned to do the same to himself but his desire for survival overpowered the NSA's behavioral conditioning. After he was imprisoned, he spoke about how all of a sudden his mind became clear and he couldn't figure out how he could do this crime. The hypnosis was simply removed and the subject was allowed to sleep so that experts studying the file would not find out anything if the subject would have been subjected to traditional hypnotherapy or other psychoanalytical techniques. Another successful counterintelligence experiment completed with no liability or traceability to the NSA.
3. Perhaps ten years ago I read of several elderly people died of sleep deprivation in Florida. The doctors tried everything they could do but could not stop the sleep deprivation that resulted in a 100% effective termination yield. The NSA had developed the right combination of delivered anxiety scripts combined with muscular tension and delivery schedules optimized according to decreasing post hypnotic durability over time as the subject's health degraded.
4. David Koresh of the Branch Davidians spent many hours talking with FBI negotiators about God and the Bible and finally waited for "God" to tell him what to do in the final hours of the siege. The compound probably had numbers of Personal Journals (required for subjects by the NSA during brainwashing) that could lead to questions about how this cult came to this level. Additionally, just like other loose ends the NSA had to secure, "God spoke to them and said to commit suicide" and they did securing another one of the NSA’s great experiments in mind control and social pathology.
5. A friend of mine, David Sautter and I worked at Singer, Kearfott Division, producing government weapons where we worked under a multi-tier security system; Company Security, FBI, DIA, and at the top of the ladder watching the watchers; the NSA. I discussed the NSA's technology with Dave and a few months later, I heard he had committed suicide inside of a locked room. This theme should familiar by now and the details of the case will be destroyed or rewritten by NSA influences to preserve national security.
The cases of NSA activities go on and on. With access to the FBI's Crime Information Center (CIC), we could find several thousand files having the characteristic patterns where the NSA had experimented on the individuals with their "Thought Control" technology.
Currently, the NSA has many subjects in the field (our society) that need only a series of "triggers" (carefully constructed posthypnotic scripts) to send them over the edge and on a mission to kill. The NSA calls them "Shooters on a Shelf". A recent example was Russell Eugene Weston, Jr. that went on a shooting spree at the Capitol around July 26, 1998. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia, had delusions that he had an affiliation with the CIA or FBI and thought a radio-tracking device was planted in his tooth. He was a product of NSA brainwashing. He did not have the ability to recognize the advanced technology even though he knew that "someone" (CIA, FBI, etc.) was communicating with him and that this communication ability spanned across the USA leading him to believe that he had a tracking device planted on him. Because of the real effects of the NSA hypnosis treatments, he therefore reasoned that the schizophrenia medication would not help and so he quit taking it. This was a man desperately trying to alleviate the suffering the NSA inflicted on him.
Through the years, I have met thousands of people that have been brainwashed into Christianity to a level where God tells them what to do in their minds (described as a gentle voice by victims) and they mindlessly obey. Yes, they have "Friends inside their heads" also. It appears the Biblical Anti-Christ in the Book of Revelations has arrived and is convincing many subjects that Jesus is back on earth and directing them.

NSA BEHAVIORAL MODIFICATION PROCEDURE:

The following procedural outline documents typical techniques, processes, explanations, and definitions of the National Security Agency’s Behavioral Modification Procedure using Subliminal Implanted Posthypnotic Suggestions through acoustically delivered phonetically edited language elements combined into scripts without somnambulistic preparation in the subject.
In simpler terms, the subject is unknowingly given hypnosis while the subject is completely awake and is tortured and punished with this hypnosis into a predetermined behavior by the National Security Agency. The behavior is usually extremely religious, is called "reborn" by the church, with the subject’s life-long goal of "a personal relationship with Jesus Christ".
1. ABSTRACT, Behavioral Modification:
  1. The NSA’s behavioral modification process starts with identification and qualification of the subject. The NSA used to choose subjects based on the subject’s net present value to the agency in public visibility, financial resources, political clout, or other intelligence and counter-intelligence reasons. Additional considerations are given to minimizing security risks of exposure, the subject’s posthypnotic suggestibility index, the subject’s intelligence and reasoning ability, moral and superstitious beliefs, and the subject’s social status and the weakness of the subject’s primary support groups (family). Now a recent report referenced in the March 26^th Business section of the Orange County Register from the National Sleep Foundation reports that 40% of Americans are experiencing sleeping problems. This news could indicate that the NSA is broadening its influence to the greater public. As explained below in this document, the NSA always starts its behavioral modification process with REM Deprivation.
  2. After selection, the subject is subjected to long periods of REM Sleep Deprivation and reinforced torturing posthypnotic suggestions that will breakdown the subject’s will, confidence, self-reliance, and moral values. Meanwhile, the subject is increasingly isolated from their familiar and trusted peer groups causing the subject to experience depression, apathy, and ultimately social and financial failure.
  3. Typical post-hypnotic induced delusions reported by subjects are tingling in various areas of the body, which are thought to be resulting from microwave beams. Hearing ticks thumps or cracks from walls, ceilings, clocks, lights, etc. Beliefs that the subject's neighbors are conspiring against them, or that the subject is being followed. Sometimes subjects believe that the various perceptions, feelings and experiences are the result of "Implants" in their body. It is important for the subjects to understand that the NSA controls this technology from nuclear hardened underground shelters and the neighbors next door have nothing to do with the subject's experiences. Nobody has the time or inclination to follow a subject around with a microwave gun to tickle various parts of the body. We are saturated with microwaves all the time from television stations, communication satellites, etc and yet we do not have any symptoms because microwaves do not have the ability to trigger localized synaptic responses in our brains. Furthermore, when the subject is in a room surrounded by several people, and the subject is the only one experiencing the "thoughts", tingling feelings, etc., then obviously a delivery method is being employed that affects only the subject; high-speed acoustic delivered hypnosis.
  4. After a while, the subject has an emotional breakdown and a new support group is built around the subject. The new support group is typically a church with doctrines centered in the Bible but the NSA also uses cults and other social groups. The NSA prefers Christian churches because the doctrines allow "God or Jesus to speak directly to the subject" and the negative reinforcement can be attributed with Satan and the positive rewards can be considered to be blessings from God thereby masking the NSA's technology and processes. When the NSA uses other relationships without in which the subject experiences a religious awakening and "Gives their Life to Christ" and the NSA achieves total control of the subject.
  5. The subject is slowly released from the damaging uncomfortable hypnosis and it is replaced with positive rewarding hypnosis as "God and Jesus works in their life". Soon, the subject has complete loyalty to Jesus (AKA: NSA) and will do anything on command from Jesus (NSA).
  6. The subject is required to give daily status reports in the form of prayers in the privacy of their home, office, or car where the NSA’s electronic surveillance system captures and sorts the prayers by "Keywords". The NSA then delivers additional hypnosis in the form of punishments or rewards or directs the subject accordingly to "God’s will". If the subject resist’s the NSA’s instructions, additional punishments are inflicted on the subject.
  7. The subject is institutionalized in this system where any nonconformances committed by the subject are watched, critiqued, and reported on through prayer by other "Christians" to the NSA. Thus, the new church peer group acts as a behavioral reinforcing mechanism that will bring any of the subject’s problems to the NSA as they have been trained themselves (this is similar to the Nazi Gestapo of World War 2 and other communist approaches).
  8. A subject that has successfully completed the NSA’s behavioral modification program lives out the rest of their mediocre life in service to Jesus (NSA) and never causes any waves in the church or news media for fear of reprisal from the NSA. The subject’s lives are relatively unproductive because their focus is on their "Life after death" and not what they accomplish while they are alive. They avoid "worldly activities", and usually are confused and disjointed in rational thoughts and concepts. For instance, they don’t believe in anything that is not in the Bible, i.e. dinosaurs, evolution, space travel, even though they ride on airplanes and watch television both of which are not referenced in the Bible.
BEHAVIORAL MODIFICATION PROCESS:

Triggering Techniques:
1. The NSA minimizes security risks by using multiple posthypnotic delivery techniques for applying negative reinforcement into the subject. The patterns fall into three major categories; real-time deliveries, prescheduled deliveries via a preprogrammed computer, and posthypnotic or "conditional" deliveries. The NSA does not use real-time transmitted posthypnotic commands exclusively because the subject might recognize when the NSA was not actively watching causing a security concern and it would be cost prohibitive to baby-sit the subject 24 hours a day.
2. Behavioral modification generally occurs fastest when using negative reinforcement continuously. It is not practical or economical to watch a subject continuously to apply real time deliveries. Additionally, using all three script delivery patterns confuses the subject, causes the subject to believe they are always being watched, and maximizes behavioral change over time though continuous pressure.
Real-Time Subconscious Implant Delivery:
1. Real-time means that the NSA ODO is transmitting the posthypnotic command script to the subject and observing the subject’s response. This technique is required for subliminal interrogations. All NSA standard posthypnotic command scripts can be delivered real-time. This form of delivery can precipitate the perception of a "voice" heard in the mind of a subject to give them information (true or false) or orders depending on the purpose of the NSA's activities.
Prescheduled Subconscious Implant Delivery:
1. The NSA central switching computer can transmit a script to a specified subject at a pre-specified time. The transmitted script’s transmission range can be limited to a single building, a city, or a large geographical area (i.e. North America or Europe). By having prescheduled scripts, the subject has seemingly randomly occurring thoughts and feelings that can't be associated with a commonly recurring situation like event-triggered scripts precipitate.
Event-Triggered (conditional) Implant Delivery:
1. Posthypnotic subconscious implants that are triggered (activated) with an event, thought, or code word (event-triggered or conditional) are strongly experienced by the subject and are powerful tools for reinforcing a predetermined desired behavior and inflicting delusions.
2. This type of posthypnotic commands are the ones most commonly used by hypnotherapists to help people quit smoking, study better, or in general, change behavior (behavioral modification). There is extensive information on the Internet and college libraries about this form of posthypnotic command delivery and how to "script" and use them.
3. The NSA can reinforce a predetermined desired behavior by associating a subconscious implant (negative or positive reinforcement) with an event. An example is that when the NSA want's to isolate the subject from the company of a specific person place or thing, the subject will be implanted with a feeling of increased anxiety, hostility, tension, simple discomfort, or a feeling of a lack of peace. When the subject leaves the person, place, or thing, another posthypnotic implant is triggered that rewards the subject's behavior with a feeling of relief from the anxiety, hostility, tension, discomfort, and peace is restored in the subject's mind. Example: This script will always cause a girl or boy not to sleep with the opposite sex: "You will feel very tense and not be able to relax if you kiss, sleep with, or stay long at your (boy or girl) friend’s house and you will feel a deep peace when you leave their house to go back home". These types of scripts left unmanaged and not removed can cause great harm as the subject develops and social conditions and behaviors change over time.
4. It should be noted that the NSA precisely tailors the type of negative and/or positive reinforcement, the degree of the reinforcement, the duration of the reinforcing effect and the conditions of the trigger. This posthypnotic event-triggered reinforcement can be initiated gradually and can remain so subtle that the subject believes that the discomfort is naturally occurring and that it is the subject's decision uninfluenced by anyone else that the subject should avoid the person, place or thing.
5. This subconscious implant can be combined with other implants like a posthypnotic-triggered thought to enhance the subject's decision toward the situation. For example the subject can be subconsciously implanted with a command to be very sensitive to the changes in their feelings and to feel great about making strong decisions to take charge of their lives. This can be reinforced with another posthypnotic suggestion to avoid all the situations that cause the subject discomfort and that each time the subject commits himself/herself to removing a situation of this kind in their lives, they will feel an increasing control over their lives. Note that as the subject perceives an increasing control over their lives they are actually losing control to the NSA proportionately. Numerous other examples exist and it is beyond the scope of this document to document every possibility.
Stage 1 (Prescreen Evaluation):
1. The subject’s Posthypnotic Suggestibility Index is determined by a series of simple tests. Hypnoamnesia is applied to the subject for the name of an object or individual and the subject’s speed is timed to determine how quickly they can overcome or not overcome the posthypnotic suggestion "You will not be able to remember the name of "____" no matter how hard you try. Other posthypnotic suggestions can be used to create fear or discomfort in the subject that can be remedied by flight or movement. The subject must overcome a posthypnotic suggestion that they cannot move no matter how hard they try. In summary, a posthypnotic suggestion is given to the subject and the subject’s ability to overcome it is evaluated.
2. A full study of the subject’s religious, superstitions, fears, and insecurities is made through standard subliminal interrogation techniques and behavioral observation.
3. Interrogation scenarios are presented to the subject using standard subliminal interrogation techniques and somnambulistic interrogation techniques. The standard two types of scenarios are "Open-ended Questions" (similar to multiple choice with response labels pre-assigned to each choice) or "Reject if Disagreeable" (negative response label if the subject disagrees). More advanced techniques of interrogation scenarios are used as required or as determined by the experience of the ODO.
4. Real-time observation, standard subliminal interrogation techniques and somnambulistic interrogation techniques are used to determine the subject’s overall social status, abilities, attitudes, and communication skills with primary support groups and friends.
5. Scientific understanding and practical applications experience in the fields of psychology, hypnosis, pharmacology, and problem analysis are considered risks in the subject that may complicate or inhibit subsequent behavioral modification processes. Once the subject identifies the technology used it is nearly impossible to contain the potential security breach without terminating the subject. Most NSA initiated executions (suicides) are the result of the subject identifying the technology used or carelessness on the part of the ODO managing the file.
6. The NSA technology affords powerful control over the subject, the subject’s environment, and the subject’s ability to plan and implement a disclosure to appropriate Government Agencies. When the subject finally does achieve a disclosure, the subject’s physical and mental condition is depleted. The subject’s ability to communicate concisely has been arrested, and the subject has already been set up and dishonored in the sight of local and federal law enforcement agencies to assure the subject’s testimony is questionable and unsubstantiated. Where the NSA feels that these steps cannot be achieved in medium risk subjects, the NSA will not recruit the subject into the behavioral modification process.
Stage 2 (Standard Process):
1. This stage is where most subjects are behaviorally modified to serve and follow "God" (AKA NSA management of the subject’s civil rights). If the subject accepts religion and direction at this stage the NSA reinforces the subject’s relationship with Jesus and closes the file. This shortened program receives the maximum return for the NSA for the least investment and minimizes the security risk. It also causes the least amount of damage and institutionalization in the subject.
2. Coincidence:
  1. Coincidence is used to create the perception in the subject that supernatural events are beginning in the subject's life. A combination of posthypnotic commands and pre-information awarded to the subject prior to an upcoming experience that the NSA intelligence system has discovered gives the subject a feeling that "God" or some other supernatural being is taken interest in their life.
  2. The following is one typical technique used by the NSA. NSA Intelligence gathers information regarding the topic of the sermon in the subject's church. This information is gathered through electronic surveillance equipment installed in the church. The NSA then implants a posthypnotic command that triggers the subject’s mind into concern and contemplation about the sermon’s topic prior to going to church. When the subject hears the sermon, the sermon seems to be speaking directly to the subject that adds to God's mysterious and unexplainable ability to address the innermost concerns of the subject, especially when the subject has not shared those concerns with any other human being.
  3. Another typical method used by NSA concerns tragic events occurring to loved ones. NSA Intelligence receives a local broadcast or preliminary information through electronic surveillance that a subject’s relative has been injured or killed. The subject is given a posthypnotic suggestion that a feeling of dread or loss is welling up inside them and they are directed to think of that particular loved one. When they are finally notified through official channels, the subject believes that they have special powers, insights, or communications from God, aliens, or other entities.
3. REM Sleep Deprivation:
  1. The Rapid Eye Movement (REM) stage of sleep is controlled and usually limited to one to two cycles per night resulting in micro-sleeps during the day. REM deprivation inhibits short-term memory, concentration, tactile abilities, verbal articulation, reasoning, and self will. Protein synthesis is inhibited and thereby reduces the subject’s ability to heal after physical damage or after periods of extensive exercise. The result is that the subject’s general health degrades as does social bonds and work/school performance.
  2. The NSA performs control of REM Sleep through various methods. Posthypnotic implants can be implanted that place a subject in a light sleep (posthypnotic trance) with various combinations of muscular tension and computer cycling implant deliveries (to be discussed later).
  3. Subjects typically complain of no sleep, restless sleep, waking up every hour on the hour, staying awake until the hour they have to get up, waking up an hour after they retire and not returning to sleep, and typically cannot recall any dreams. Additionally, they will complain of repeating torturing thoughts, racing thoughts, and facial itching and numbness. Daily fatigue, poor recall of names, and caffeine consumption is typical.
  4. Dark rings’ surrounding the eyes is evident and the darkened area around the eyes can be reported as sore or tender by the subject. The subtle perceptual impairing effects of REM deprivation make it more difficult for the subject to identify the REM Deprivation problem. When the REM depravation onslaught is gradual and accompanied by a posthypnotic command that the subject "will feel energetic and rested", the subject will not recognize the REM Deprivation. Additional posthypnotic commands can be implanted that will make it difficult for the subject to "see or perceive" the rings surrounding their eyes. I have seen many subjects with very dark eye rings and the subjects could not recognize them at all.
4. Shame Factor Enhancement:
  1. Various posthypnotic suggestions are implanted in the subject after a week or so long period of REM deprivation. The content of the posthypnotic scripts is constructed to cause the subject to perform embarrassing and otherwise shameful acts (usually sexual but always anti-social). These shameful behaviors are used by the NSA later to shame the person into a lower self esteem, reduced confidence in their own self discipline, a need for forgiveness from God. These embarrassments provide a means to Blackmail or discredit the subject if the NSA is detected and otherwise threatened by the subject.
  2. The NSA will always use another law enforcement agency to document the behavioral discrepancy to retain anonymity. The NSA has been known to help subjects avoid prosecution to gain loyalty or create an adversarial relationship between the acting agency and the subject (another intimidation factor) even though the NSA was responsible for creating the behavioral problem in the subject’s life.
5. Religious Relevance and Convictions:
  1. The NSA typically implants posthypnotic suggestions that are clearly referenced in the Bible. The subject may be punished (through negative reinforcement) by anything that is referenced in the Bible to substantiate the validity of the "Word of God". When the NSA does not follow the standard Biblical references, most subjects fail to recognize the contradictions out of ignorance or an inability to rationalize, or, they find other ways to justify the events to receive peace from God (NSA). This component of the NSA process is to provide the subject with an increased sense of fear and intimidation resulting from God’s presence and force. "Thou shall not disobey God".
6. Paranoia:
  1. Paranoia is a powerful tool used by the NSA. It provides a means to develop the subject’s distrust of other people including the subject’s primary group that could provide positive support during this time of distress in the subject's life. Paranoia is often recognized and discounted as a character fault by most peoples in American society and therefore discredits the subject’s testimony even further. Uninformed, but well wishing people including friends, may recommend to the subject to pursue counseling. This negative feedback can make the subject fear that people will believe the subject is crazy.
  2. When the subject seeks professional counseling, the result will be a misdiagnosis with an expensive, inappropriate and ineffective treatment. The observed symptoms result from simply hypnosis, not biological, chemical, or environmental stresses. A misdiagnosis strongly motivates the subject not to communicate their experiences to others to avoid social disgrace of a "schizophrenia" label and additional financial burden. This isolation of the subject and their reluctance to communicate their experience to others reduces NSA security risk. The NSA cannot allow the subject to share information with other subjects that have already experienced the program and thereby starting a pool of information that could be compiled and used to expose the NSA system.
  3. The subject is led to believe that the subject's neighbors, work associates and/or family are conspiring against the subject through a number of scripts delivered to the subject by the NSA. The NSA can further complicate the conspiracy delusion by using the same technology to have a work associate ask the subject a question or to make a comment that can be used by the NSA to confirm the subjects fears. This technique further isolates the subject from trusting their peer groups, causes additional emotional distress and hostility toward these people. The subject sometimes resorts to violent behavior, which is viewed by observers as irrational, unprovoked behavior that may be treated as criminal behavior by law enforcement personnel.
Stage 3 (Extreme Process):
1. This method is very severe and usually results in a two to five year program. Because of the severity of the suffering, the subject is usually permanently impaired for integration into normal mainstream life and is essentially institutionalized. The result is that the subject must reside in a less competitive environment like a church group. Subjects that receive this program tend to be highly superstitious, are agitated easily when objective evidence that contradicts their belief system is presented. They tend to believe in the spiritual world (demons, ghosts, god, spiritual entities, etc) and consider the spiritual world to be more powerful and important than the material or real world. This program basically follows the following steps; REM deprivation, breakdown of self esteem and confidence, intense suffering, exaggerated conscience, spiritual contact, reborn in Jesus Christ, Spiritual battle, release (saved by the Savior), and recovering (blessed by Jesus Christ). Whenever possible the NSA will skip or reduce these steps to minimize security risk and financial cost.
2. Increasing Dependence on Drugs and Alcohol:
  1. As the REM Deprivation increases the subject must depend on Central Nervous System (CNS) Stimulants to compensate for degradation of productivity at work, school, and in interpersonal relationships. This serves the NSA in several ways. Use of drugs (especially CNS stimulants) increases the subject's index of suggestibility. Or in other words, the post hypnotic commands are more effective and the subject has greater difficulty resisting the impulses generated by the commands. In addition, the increased stress of coping with the drugs in conjunction with the resisting the newly introduced posthypnotic commands serves to push the subject closer to an emotional breakdown. If the subject uses illegal drugs, the NSA tries to set the subject up for a conviction to get assure that the subject looses credibility. Who would believe a drug user that claimed that he/she was being harassed by a government agency that was tormenting them with hypnosis? It also serves the NSA in the program by documenting something that the subject will be ashamed of when the program reaches the exaggerated conscience stage.
  2. Alcohol, sleeping pills and other medications also inhibit REM Stage sleep and increase irritability over time thereby further degrading and isolating the subject.
  3. In summary, the NSA benefits from the subject responding to the REM Deprivation assault with self-medication. This response discredits the subject by labeling them in society as a drug user, it enhances the effect of the implanted posthypnotic commands and it gives the subject a reason for shame that will be used against the subject later to justify the punishment from "God". It should be noted that the subject is not really guilty of anything, except being a victim that was manipulated in a carefully controlled scientific behavior modification process.
3. Poor Nutrition:
  1. The poor nutrition reduces the energy the subject has and serves later as another justification of God's punishment. The subject will be taught later that "the body is the temple" and that to abuse it is to violate God's will.
4. Apathy:
  1. After the subject's self-esteem is broken down and continuing failure and persistent suffering start to dominate every day, the individual becomes apathetic as a defense mechanism. At this stage the subject has committed another sin of "not persevering through faith" which is later used on the subject later to increase a feeling of guilt.
5. Depression:
  1. Depression precipitates as a result of chronic REM Sleep Deprivation, social isolation and a feeling of helplessness in the subject. Commonly, when the subject seeks professional counseling, they are misdiagnosed and treated for depression with medications but the root cause of the problem (negative reinforcing posthypnotic suggestions inflicted over long periods of time) is not treated or corrected.
6. Insecurity:
  1. The subject starts to experience severe insecurity in this stage. The NSA uses this insecurity against the subject in several ways. Because of the impaired reasoning ability and emotional isolation, the subject is susceptible to the approaches of insincere people, which are used by the NSA to emotionally hurt the subject more. This allows the NSA to convince the subject that people can't be trusted and that only the NSA (Jesus) can be trusted. This serves to isolate the subject from supportive peer groups and makes the subject emotionally dependent on the NSA resulting in the NSA gaining more power in the subject's life.
7. Journals and Diaries:
  1. Most of the subjects are directed to keep a "Journal" or diary by the NSA so that the subject can record and review feelings, events, observations, and "God’s directions" that normally would be unavailable due to short term memory loss during extended periods of REM Deprivation. The NSA uses the Subject’s Journals in a variety of ways.
8. Degrading Spelling and Grammatical Performance:
  1. Subjects in these prolonged stages of REM deprivation, confusion, and emotional distress, have very poor grammar, spelling, and short attention spans.
9. Slowed Speech:
  1. Subjects experience slower speech and have a greater time articulating concise points as a result of the REM Deprivation and other performance degrading posthypnotic commands. Very slight alcohol consumption can exasperate the damage of REM Deprivation and precipitate slurred speech.
10. Confusion:
  1. Confusion results from three primary sources; REM Deprivation, specific posthypnotic commands to reinforce the confusion, and the emotional damage and stress that is being inflicted. The confusion allows the NSA to continuously inflict damage to the subject's life without real-time observation. A confused person generally is not as productive as an organized clear thinker is and has a greater potential to offend people by what they say or do and is less likely to recognize when they have made mistakes. All of these symptoms assist the NSA’s objectives in this stage and subsequent stages. In addition, the confusion restricts the individual from analyzing the source of their suffering and taking corrective actions, and therefore reduces the NSA's security risk.
11. Poor Concentration:
  1. Difficulty concentrating impairs the subject's productivity and restrains the subject from making self-improvements and corrections in behavior. It makes it very difficult for the subject to do any research or reading to evaluate his/her condition. This paves the way for the NSA to demonstrate that the subject cannot do anything on their own without "God", thereby increasing the frustration and anxiety of the subject (inducing emotional breakdown) and ultimately making the subject totally dependant on the will of God.
12. Loose Association and Personality Disorders:
  1. The subject experiences disjointed thought at this stage (Loose Association) that appears to observers as a strange sense of humor or inappropriate responses when engaging in conversations. Ongoing sarcasm and other negative attitudes and undesirable personality traits can be present.
13. Anger:
  1. The way that the subject experiences anger is of profound importance. If the subject allows the NSA to redirect the increasing anger and hostilities toward the NSA to another person in the form of violence (misplaced aggression), the NSA will reinforce the violent behavior with posthypnotic commands. The result is a person that can achieve national acclaim as a murderer that heard voices of Satan directing him/her. Typically, the Subject is encouraged to commit acts of violence with spouses, friends, or employers resulting in further social isolation and increased shame. Some examples of NSA directed victims of misplaced aggression include recent US Postal Workers whom work within the Postal Service. This is one of the vial "communication intercept" channels the NSA is directed to monitor. The routes of suspect mail and the postal worker processing it are continuously monitored by NSA. Sometimes the NSA ODO takes issue with a Postal Worker and harasses them or subjects the postal worker to behavioral modification.
14. Delusions:
  1. Delusions are used to discredit the witness and also provide an additional source for fear, intimidation and confusion. Delusions can be but are not limited to the Subject developing conspiracy theories of fellow employees and friends, beliefs that Angels or Demons are communicating or visiting them, tingling sensations from microwave guns or implants, beliefs in supernatural events, etc.
15. Audio Hallucinations:
  1. Subjects often report hearing walls clicking, footsteps in the house, the sound of someone trying to open the door, drilling at the door, etc.
  2. These audio hallucinations are also used to discredit the witness and also provide an additional source for paranoia, fear, and negative reinforcement.
16. Voices in the Subject's Mind:
  1. Noun Substitution Posthypnotic Implant:
    1. The subject can have a posthypnotic suggestion implanted that changes the form of pronouns in the subject's internal thinking. The result is the subject perceives that someone is telling him/her to do something with nearly every thought. An example is; the subject thinks, "I should go to church today". With the noun substitution posthypnotic suggestion the subject experiences the following internal thought, "You should go to church today!" Notice that by implanting the posthypnotic command into the subject's subconscious mind to think the pronoun "You" instead of "I" the subject will perceive that they are being directed by a voice even though the majority of the internal thought content is their own naturally occurring thought. This subconscious implant can be used in combination with other implants to increase the subject's perception of threat, fear, and therefore paranoia. It can be used with other posthypnotic suggestion implants that will give the subject the perception of either a "good" or "evil" voice or spirit is directing him/her. This implant is powerful because it gives the subject the perception that the spirit, angel, God or Holy Spirit knows and directs the subject's every thought. It provides a convincing proof that "God knows every thought of his children". Subjects that don't have a superstitious frame of reference and seek professional help are usually misdiagnosed as schizophrenic.
17. Tinnitus (Ear Ringing):
  1. Tinnitus is commonly reported by subjects harassed by the NSA and typically has no pharmacological or biochemical basis and is produced by a posthypnotic suggestion. It is often misdiagnosed as ringing caused by excessive aspirin use and is actually an audio hallucination triggered by hypnosis.
18. Complete Quiet Silence:
  1. Used by the NSA as a positive reinforcement for two general reasons; the subject has the tinnitus removed to indicate that the subject has "The Lord’s Peace Restored", and secondly, the subject has achieved a milestone toward being released by God (the NSA).
19. Quiet Wind:
  1. The audio hallucination of a quiet wind is used to convince the subject that the Holy Spirit is visiting him/her. An excellent example of this hallucination combined with the fear that accompanies it is contained in Phil Collin’s lyrics of a song that has the chorus "I can get so scared, Listen to the wind".
20. Visual Hallucinations:
  1. Visual hallucinations are usually implanted in the waking moments when a subject is coming out of sleep or is in a somnambulatory state (light sleep) preferably in a darkened room. The hallucinations are fleeting, usually lasting less than one minute and are not durable. Typical hallucinations reported by subjects are Angels, large spiders, and movement of various shadowy objects across the ceiling, bright spot of light ahead of the subject, etc.
  2. The television show "Sightings" has had numerous reports of people seeing "Aliens" at waking moments. These types of news accounts create confusion in US society and serve to keep people searching for the wrong phenomenon thus keeping the NSA's technology secure (disinformation).
21. Tactile, Olfactory hallucinations and Muscle Spasms:

This section is written in an attempt to provide interested individuals with some of the considerations and precautions when seeking to demonstrate the NSA’s civil rights abuses by demonstrating the effectiveness and concepts of subliminal access using Subliminal Implanted Posthypnotic Suggestions and Scripts Using Acoustically Delivered and Phonetically Accelerated Posthypnotic Commands without Somnambulistic Preparation in the Subject.

Reverse engineering of the NSA’s technology to prove it’s abuses against the American people is quite difficult. Consider the following.
If the scientists and technicians perform their research in a facility that the NSA has the standard transceivers installed, and therefore the NSA can influence the direction of research or the data by effecting perceptual effects in the researchers. These perceptual effects can be confusion, lack of attention to important details, oversights, bad assumptions, incorrect interpretation of the test data. These same misperceptions will also be incorporated into the research test subjects. The technology cannot be developed and optimized if the NSA has any access to the test subjects. The test scripts given to the test subject delivered from the researcher can be neutralized by the NSA delivering a canceling script immediately after the researcher’s script. The NSA’s test script can also include a hypnoamnesia script at the end to cancel any residual perception in the subject so that the test subject would report no effects and the researcher would conclude the test script had no effect.
The research must be carried out in a facility secured from all NSA electronic intrusion. All equipment in the facility must be TEMPEST protected and electrically isolated from the outside world. The research personnel and their subjects must never leave the secured area of the facility so that they cannot be subliminally interrogated by the NSA. The NSA would take this opportunity to deliver disinformation scripts to the subject or researcher. Foodstuffs and supplies would be the logical choice of NSA intrusion if all other security measures were effective against the NSA.
The NSA will exploit all opportunities to introduce microscopic transceivers into the facility of it’s surrounding grounds. The minimal requirements for the NSA to take control of the research are:
1. NSA audio delivery (a micro receiver with a micro speaker)
2. Visibility of the targets (researcher or test subject) to capture response labels during subliminal interrogations. This can be through normal illumination or infrared to see through window, or millimeter wave or other technologies that can see through barriers like walls and ceilings.
3. Audible response labels can be used if the NSA has a micro receiver with a micro speaker inside but cannot get a transmitter in and operating without detection. Sneezes, coughs, clearing of throat that can be picked up by laser microphones, audible amplification microphones, etc. can also be used as response labels.
The NSA currently has satellites with millimeter wave technology that will allow visible intrusion into most facilities. The test facilities should be deep underground, AKA 1000 feet with no adjacent access from other facilities, sewer lines, water lines or power conduits etc.
Any facilities existing will have to be debugged before habitation and research begins.
Subjects must be able to be subjected to traditional hypnosis after facility habitation as a test prior to research to assure that the NSA has minimal scripts already implanted.
This technology is the highest level of intelligence gathering for the USA. The abuses resulting from mismanagement of this area of the NSA’s intelligence system must force Congress to legislate additional laws to protect the citizens. The NSA must regulate this system better. The NSA will take all necessary steps without limit to assure that this technology is preserved and autonomously under their control.

Conclusion: America’s greatest and highest level intelligence asset is being mismanaged and the mismanagement must be corrected before all the Enemies of our great country acquire it. Imagine if China had this technology to use on their defenseless population?
May God help us all in protecting the American public and preserving and managing this vital technology’s vital potential to serve America’s NationalSecurity.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________