Charles Pigden’s lovely story about Peter Fraser
and Trevelyan reminded me of a touching anecdote that I surfaced while writing
a book about my grandfather, Barney Wolff and his long-time friend and comrade
Abe Shiplacoff. Barney and Abe together started the branch of the Socialist
party in Brooklyn New York in the early years of the point of the last century.
That was a time when almost no one went to college and many people, like my
grandfather, did not even complete elementary school. But the workers in the
socialist movement held study sessions and inform themselves about the world
and about Marx’s critique of capitalism. Nevertheless, many of them felt shamed
and inadequate by their lack of formal education. Here’s the story as I wrote
it:
“Abe Shiplacoff was two years older than
Barney. He was important enough to
warrant a lengthy obituary in the New York TIMES when he died in 1934, from
which we learn that he was born in Chernigov, Russia on December 13, 1877. “Mr. Shiplacoff came to this country with his
parents in 1891 [i.e., eleven years after Barney arrived]. For seven years he toiled over a sewing
machine in a sweatshop, working twelve hours a day and studying at night..” [NY
TIMES, February 8, 1934]
Shiplacoff was an indefatigable champion of
Socialism and the leading figure in the Brownsville branch of the Party. Elected to the New York State Assembly for
the first time in the 1915 election to which the story is devoted, he won
reelection the next year, and the year after.
In 1918, Shiplacoff ran for Congress from the 10th
Congressional District, but lost. This
loss, and the impact of the Red Scare triggered by the World War and the
Russian Revolution, led to perhaps the bitterest disappointment of Barney’s
political career, as we shall see a bit later.
If you read the Call for these years,
you meet Shiplacoff in almost every issue.
Naturally, his doings in the Assembly were fully reported by the Call,
but he was also constantly on the stump, making speeches, raising money, and
supporting the Party. When the Brooklyn
Labor Lyceum burned to the ground, he led the successful effort to raise money
for a new building in Brownsville. As
his obituary indicates, Shiplacoff was active as well in a number of New York
unions, serving as an officer of the United Hebrew Trades and the Amalgamated
Clothing Workers of America.
In September 1918, Abe Shiplacoff and the
communist newspaper reporter and author John Reed were indicted under the
Espionage Act, Shiplacoff for having spoken out against the war effort. The indictment was later quashed, and
subsequently, Shiplacoff ran for Brooklyn Borough president [in 1919.]
Shiplacoff was a little man with a pinched
face and a rather unimposing presence, very much in contrast with Barney, who
was a big, barrel-chested man with a booming voice. But more than any other single person, he can
be credited with creating the socialist movement in the Brownsville area of
Brooklyn, and leading it to its greatest electoral triumphs in 1917.
Looking for background material on Shiplacoff,
I stumbled on the following story in a review by John Patrick Diggins of
Bertram Wolfe’s autobiography, A Life in Two Centuries. Wolfe is a well-known expert on Soviet Russia
and twentieth century communist movements.
I include it here because it seems to me to capture perfectly both the
strengths and the weaknesses of the generation of socialist leaders to which
Abe Shiplacoff and Barney belonged.
The young Bertram Wolfe apparently debated
against Shiplacoff, at the Labor Lyceum, over the split in the party produced
by the Third International [of which more later.] The issue was whether
dictatorial tactics should replace the democratic procedures of the American
Socialist Party. After the debate, Diggins says, “the two adversaries resumed their
discussion in a local cafe.” There then
appears this passage quoted from Wolfe’s book:
“There was an embarrassed silence until Shiplacoff burst into
tears. ‘I have worked so hard all my
life,’ he said, ‘for our party and for the labor movement, that I have never
had the time to read all those books by Marx and Engels that you have
read.’ Then he wept on in silence. Suddenly, I felt sympathy for him, and more
than a little shame, for I had not read ‘all those books’ either. Moreover, for the first time I understood how
much men like Shiplacoff had given to building the party that my colleagues and
I, mostly youngsters, were now tearing apart.
I did not know what to say: we both left our cake and coffee unfinished,
but I never forgot the episode. I began
to feel more charitable toward the old-timers whose work we were helping to
destroy. Though I continued to use
quotations, I could no longer summon up the scorn with which I had read them to
that Brownsville Labor Lyceum meeting.”
I can only comment that I have read
‘all those books,’ and in them you will not find an adequate justification for
replacing democratic procedures with dictatorial tactics. Shiplacoff, Barney, and the other
‘old-timers’ understood Marx and Engels quite as well as necessary to devote
their lives to building a working-class movement. Would that Bertram Wolfe had done as much!”
1 comment:
I googled Bertrand Wolfe and discovered that after passing through the Communist Party and various small oppositional Marxist-Leninist groups, he ended up as full-fledged anti-communist cold warrior working for the Hoover Institute.
That path, which is not uncommon in the U.S. at least, always intrigues me.
In Chile, which had a large Communist Party (15% of the vote) and still has one worth noting (around 5% of the vote), that path is not common. In Chile we see lots of ex-Communists and ex-members of other revolutionary left movements drift towards the equivalent of mainstream Democrats in the U.S., but there seems to be a line that almost no one crosses from the left (which includes mainstream liberals) to the right.
In the U.S. there is the idea that one can reinvent oneself infinitely, in this case, a sort of political self-made man (or woman), that "freedom" involves being able to deny one's commitments, one's past, while in Chile people seem more in contact with their past, being on the left is a culture as well as a political position and leaving that culture completely, abandoning your ex-compañeros completely is not considered kosher in Chile.
Post a Comment