Moscow Rules? 'Red' Unionism and 'Class Against Class' in Britain, Canada, and the United States, 1928-1935
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the still vibrant debate between traditionalist and revisionist historians of international Communism, the former tend to argue that the key to understanding the Communist experience in any country is recognition of the fundamental subordination of each national party to the will of Moscow, exercised both directly and through the Communist Internationa! (Comintern), while the latter, though rarely denying the salience of the Moscow connection, suggest that national parties enjoyed a significant degree of autonomy in resisting or adapting Moscow's demands. American revisionists in particular have emphasized the CPUSA's creative engagement with American political culture, seeing this phenomenon even in the period most traditionalists see as the point at which national parties incontrovertibly capitulated to Stalinism — the (1928-35) of Class Against Class, ultra-leftism, Social Fascism, and political catastrophe in Germany. Using the surprisingly under-used tool of comparative analysis to evaluate the conception, implementation, evolution, and of the Third Period in the United States, Britain, and Canada, this article offers some succour to the revisionists, but rather more to the traditionalists. Resume Dans le debat toujours passionne entre les historiens « traditionalistes » et «revisionnistes » du communisme international, les premiers se montrent enclins aargumenter que la cle de comprehension de l'experience communiste dans n'importe quel pays est la reconnaissance de la subordination fondamentale de chaque parti national a la volonte de « Moscou », exercee directement ou par l'intermediaire de l'Internationale communiste (Komintern), alors que les seconds, bien qu'ils nient rarement l'influence determinante des rapports avec Moscou, pretendent que les partis nationaux jouissent d'un degre remarquable d'autonomie dans la resistance ou l'adaptation des demandes du Moscou. Les revisionnistes americains en particulier ont mis l'accent sur l'engagement createur de CPUSA vis-a-vis de la culture politique americaine, en percevant ce phenomene meme dans la periode que la plupart des traditionalistes regardent comme la capitulation des partis nationaux au stalinisme - la «Troisieme Periode » (1928-35) de « lutte des classes », ultra-gauchisme, « fascisme social », et la catastrophe politique en Allemagne. En utilisant l'outil etonnamment sous-utilise de l'analyse comparative pour evaluer la conception, la mise en œuvre, revolution, et la « liquidation » de la Troisieme Periode aux Etats Unis, en Bretagne et au Canada, cet article offre un certain secours aux revisionnistes, mais beaucoup plus aux traditionalistes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".