Bolshevism and Reaction be able to force labor to compromise with the Soviets. In the long run this alliance will help to make still more clear to the wage-earners the true character of Bolshevism. But its first result is to re-inforce the already formidable Bolshevist propaganda.
The miserable collapse of the revolution called by the Soviets in Germany in March, following upon their failure in January and February to capture the labor unions of Italy and France, would have spelled the end of the Bolshevist menace as far as labor is concerned. But then came the British-Soviet trade agreement, the laudatory speech of Lloyd George, and a renewed flood of pro-Soviet propaganda from capitalist and so-called "liberal" quarters. So that the Bolshevist propaganda menace, while in a new form, is more threatening than ever, and continues to strike at all the foundations of our democratic civilization—and, in particular at the principles that underlie the labor movement.
The American labor movement has lost no opportunity to prove its warm friendship for the Russian people and for the Russian Revolution. It has not hesitated to send its greetings and offer of support even to Socialists such as those associated with Kerensky—although American labor is not and never has been socialistic. Officials of American labor unions have not scrupled for this purpose to associate themselves with certain Socialists of this country who supported the war in a common address to the Kerensky government. American labor also, in its earnest wish to reach the Russian people after the Bolshevist revolution, went so far as to address a mes-
