Wednesday, November 25, 2020

The Oxymoron of a "Humane" Capitalism


In the Nordic countries, like Denmark, Sweden and Norway, this came to be known as "the Nordic welfare model". These societies are popularly presented by many radical reformers such as Bernie Sanders as a kind of “democratic socialist” alternative to capitalism, a so-called "third way". In fact, such a way cannot be found, and what has been developed in Scandinavia is in reality a form of “humane capitalism” which makes the operation of capitalism more smooth and efficient, with the added benefit of appeasing the working class of these countries with various social services as a means of preventing social unrest and perhaps revolution.

 The socialist revolution, a socialist society, involves of necessity the self-administration of production and of society by the citizens and the producers of their own behalf and not by any self-appointed clique claiming to rule in their place. Some early socialists declared that property is socialist because it is owned by a workers’ state, that is the organised working class in power. It led to the claim that the state is socialist simply because it owns the property. If that were so, the Catholic Church would be a socialist institution, the Incas and Pharaoh’s Egypt both socialist states. Socialism does not comes in varied brands packaged in different wrappings. To argue that under one brand of socialism the workers may rule and under another they may be enslaved is to deprive the word ‘socialism’ of all its meaning. 

Everywhere people are waking up and are understanding that exploitation is a daily fact of their lives. The lies of the ruling class about “prosperity” are being further exposed everyday. There is prosperity alright – but it is for a handful of rich capitalists – the conditions of the working people are getting worse and worse.  Wages stay the same, but profits continue to rise. The source of all these conditions and injustices is capitalism. This system of capitalism is set up with one thing in mind – to make the most profits possible for the handful of people who own the big banks and corporations. It is the system under which we, and our parents and grandparents before us, have done all the work. We mine the mines, build the buildings, manufacture all the products: and then get just enough to live on – if we fight hard enough for it!

 On the other hand, the small capitalist class builds up huge fortunes off of our labour and do no work themselves, except running all around the world spending the money that we made for them. Is there anything wrong with this idea? Are not the working people the vast majority of the population? Do they not create the vast wealth of the country? Are they not its most useful citizens? Then why must we go, hat in hand, to beg some political appointees of capital on some government board or other for a few cents so that our families will be adequately provided for? What we all require is a system of planned production for use,

The Socialist Party stands for the complete overthrow of the capitalist system. We maintain that the ills that beset the working class arise from the capitalist system of production for the profit of a few. It further maintains that it should be the aim of the workers’ movement to establish a system of planned production for use, which will guarantee plenty of the good things of life for all. We say that the fight for such a system of socialist production is primarily a political fight, for it requires that political power be lodged in the hands of the working people, who form the overwhelming majority of the population. Incorporated within our ideas is the basic belief that capital and labour have no interests in common; that since the beginning of modern industry there has been a constant struggle between the working class, seeking a better living, and the capitalist class, seeking greater profits.

Electoral struggle is one tactic among many. And not all of them are equal in importance and priority. It is quite true that we cannot yet spell out in detail a description of a socialist world.  But we do not believe this “vision” is the property of a few intellectuals. It is something that people will forge out of the concrete experiences of fighting oppression.  It is wrong to paint some Utopian vision of our own making. Marxism is a science but an inexact human science. It has its laws, principles boundaries and its universalities. What makes us different from other revolutionaries is what we stand for and how we fight. We offer a consistently revolutionary perspective.

Everything free for everybody


While the educational authorities debated making school dinners free for the duration of pandemic and as many hope, afterwards, Scotland is set to make period products free for all. Period poverty is when those on low incomes can't afford, or access, suitable period products. With average periods lasting about five days, it can cost up to £8 a month for tampons and pads, and some women struggle to afford the cost.

MSPs unanimously approved a legal duty on local authorities to ensure that free items such as tampons and sanitary pads are available to "anyone who needs them". It will be for the country's 32 councils to decide what practical arrangements are put in place, but they must give "anyone who needs them" access to different types of period products "reasonably easily" and with "reasonable dignity".

Thus in regard to this particular product fulfilling the Marxist aspiration of "to each according to need."

Now is the time to advocate free access as a basic right.

The harmony of humanity.



Our road-map for where we are finally headed should have socialism as its destination.  socialists can’t expect anyone to take them seriously without a fuller idea — not necessarily a detailed blueprint — but a vision of what kind of society we want. One general guideline is that instead of the ends justifying the means, we have to take seriously that the means determine the ends. 


If our objective is a society in which “the free development of each is a condition for the free development of all” as Marx says, this cannot be achieved by authoritarian methods. If self-emancipation is the goal, it must be the means as well. To paraphrase Eugene Debs, if a savior can lead you into the promised land, he can lead you back out again too. Ideas that tell people that they are unworthy, that this is ordained by God or some other authority as the right and best way — or as the only way — can keep them from trying to change things. 

One of the most tragic legacies of these dictatorial exploitative regimes that called themselves socialist is to have destroyed the very concept of socialism in the minds of millions of people. Defenders of capitalism are happy to endorse them as models of socialism. There is throughout the world a widespread popular perception that socialism is a coercive system, and the experiences of “Communist Parties in power have justified that perception. Generally speaking, while the world's peoples hate capitalism, they fear socialism. These issues are at the heart of socialism's crisis, and only as socialists develop a movement, a strategy, and a vision which are at once revolutionary and democratic will they turn the corner of that crisis.

Capitalism rests on the domination of the overwhelming majority by a small minority. In capitalism everything is based upon private property. Private property divides. Private property presumes a multitude of owners with distinct interests, property rights and liabilities. Therefore, the capitalist system of relations of production and exchange is simultaneously an endless chain of relationships between property owners, between capitalists and workers, industrial and commercial capitalists, capitalists and landowners etc. Socialism is unitary. It does not divide, but joins. There is no longer a multitude of owners except in the sense that everybody is an owner and so nobody is an owner - a society of no ownership.


 Part of our job in the Socialist Party is to help people see through the illusions of capitalism, to understand that we are faced with a stark choice of socialism or barbarism, and to encourage a vision of self-emancipation as both means and end of revolutionary socialist action. We argued that socialism is about self-emancipation, not doing things ‘on behalf of people. The agency for socialist change can only be the working peoples themselves and not the existing state apparatus however benevolent (indeed we argue that the workers must end the state apparatus). We that the end result of nationalisation – whether accompanied with or without the rhetoric of ‘socialism’ – would be state-capitalism not socialism.

The goal of the socialist revolution is the abolition of capitalist private property, the abolition of all exploitation of man by man, the social ownership of the means of production and their planned use for the benefit of the whole of society, leading to abundance and the harmony of humanity. We do not put forward this goal as a utopia, as a mere vision of what would ideally satisfy people’s needs and make them all happy, but as a practical aim of which is made necessary by the actual conditions of modern society. Only with a socialist economy can the problems of capitalist society be solved and the great modern technological forces of production be fully liberated. Socialism is not inevitable. What has been termed its ‘inevitability’ consists in this, that only through socialism can human progress continue. But there is not and cannot be any absolute deterministic inevitability in human affairs, since man makes his own history and chooses what to do.  Socialism does not tells us that socialism will come regardless, but that it explains to us where we stand, what course lies open to us, what is the road to life.


Not a stone will be left standing of this accursed capitalist system, with its wars, its famines, its vileness, its brutality and savagery. In the memory of people the times of capitalism will remain as a ghastly nightmare. Socialist teachings will live in the hearts and minds of emancipated humanity.

Tuesday, November 24, 2020

John Keracher - Fellow Traveller?


There are not many Scots who are aware of the Marxist John Keracher from Dundee.

 Keracher was not only an organiser and propagandist for socialism, he was a pamphleteer.  Keracher was the author of a number of easy-to-read basic pamphlets. They served the important function of introducing the reader to socialist thought and encouraging further study in the classics. His clarion call to the working class was to get rid of the bedlam of out-worn capitalism and to replace it with the sanity of socialism. His pamphlets attempt to disseminate socialist knowledge and understanding — essential ingredients of the socialist revolution. His "How the Gods were Made" has been re-published by the Socialist Party. As a human being, Keracher was full of lively wit and good nature; his calm manner went unruffled by obstreperous opponents, critics, and hecklers. To those seeking personal advice or enlightenment on socialism, he was like an oasis in the desert, a quenching the thirst for knowledge. He was uncompromising in his principles but refrained from ad hominem attacks, and confined himself to the issues as he saw them. He relied on the logic of his arguments to counter critics. Throughout his life Keracher always retained the same admirable qualities with ally and adversary alike. In addition, he was an outstanding organizer, lecturer, and writer; and one always willing to do his share of the menial tasks. His friendships transcended politics and parties. 

Keracher was born on January 16, 1880, in Dundee and died of a heart ailment in Los Angeles on January 11, 1958. He was 77 years old.

In his early twenties, Keracher left Scotland for England, where he lived for a number of years and where he was exposed to the ideas of the Social Democratic Federation and likely coming under the influence of the “impossibilists”. He emigrated to the United States in 1909, settling in Detroit and followed in a family tradition by becoming a shoe-store owner. The back room of the Keracher's store after hours would soon provide a convenient rent-free location for study classes of Marx's Capital. Keracher became a member the Socialist Party of America.

 Detroit was a boom town from the years 1910 to 1918 and because of the growing automobile and other industries, it attracted hosts of workers seeking “good-paying” jobs.  An added stimulus was the advent of World War I, with its government contracts for military supplies. Among the influx of workers to Detroit were Canadian socialists from across the border, who had been active in carrying on socialist work. They were soon followed by Canadian and British "impossiblist" socialists avoiding conscription.  At this time  the Detroit local of the Socialist Party of America was involved in a bitter internal controversy between the large majority of “socialist” reformers  and the small minority of socialist revolutionists opposing the principles and policies of the Michigan Socialist Party. Most conspicuous in this dispute was Keracher on the side of the no-compromisers. Keracher and his colleagues managed to win adoption by Michigan organization of a “short program” devoid of such minimum demands at its 1914 state convention. The new radical program of the Michigan party proved no impediment to further growth, as the group's membership rolls continued to swell. Keracher was able to record another great factional triumph in the Socialist Party of Michigan when he was elected State Secretary in 1915. The state's 1914 “no reforms” platform was adopted one again at the 1916 state convention with minor modifications. Keracher's influence upon the party seemed sure.

 The revolutionary faction also drew encouragement from Kerr’s "International Socialist Review" as well as its Marxian classics and other pamphlets. They served a useful purpose in stimulating the reading of meaningful socialist literature. (Subsequently, when the Proletarian Party purchased the Kerr Company for the purpose of perpetuating the supply of socialist literature, Keracher made an excellent administrator and a valuable contributor). The combination of these circumstances led to the establishment of a Marxian study class in Duffield Hall.  Moses Baritz and Adolph Kohn of the Socialist Party of Great Britain were the instructors, with Keracher playing a leading role in this class by enlarging it to include debates and lectures. The class proved invaluable in spreading an understanding of Marxism and the principles of the SPGB. In July 1916, 43 members of the study class, including 19 members of Local Detroit, SPA, decided it was time to organize a genuine socialist party in the United States along the lines of the SPGB. The Workers’ Socialist Party of the United States resulted. The 50th anniversary of the American Party issue of the Western Socialist  explains how  leaders of the Michigan SPA such as John Keracher and Dennis Blatt were sympathetic to the 'revolutionary tea drinkers' as the Detroit comrades were called, but they thought that Marxists should remain in the SPA and trying to shift it toward socialism rather than organize separately. The formation of a new socialist party was premature, they claimed. Keracher apparently felt he could use his influence to move the SPA closer to the SPGB position by remaining within it as an active member. Keracher defended the members of the new party who were being heatedly criticized for resigning by members of the Detroit Local, SPA.

By this time, Keracher had become state secretary of the Socialist Party of Michigan. He was deeply involved in advocating that the next state convention of that party supplant reforms to patch up capitalism with a plank for revolutionary socialism. He also urged that the Party’s position on religion be changed from being considered as a private matter to one of social concern. He and his supporters were successful in changing the constitution of the Socialist Party of Michigan to conform with basic socialist objectives. At the time, this was a bombshell! Under these circumstances, it was understandable that he was unable to participate in the organization of The Workers Socialist Party. Whilst  recognizing the need for a new genuine socialist party, he was unable to join it. Instead, conditions being what they were, he, together with the socialists remaining in the SPA in Michigan, organized an educational group within the Party to disseminate socialist ideas.

Thus was born the Proletarian University, soon followed by its publication The Proletarian, which was in harmony with SPGB principles. The Proletarian University united and formed study circles in a number of towns around Michigan and in other cities throughout the country, including Buffalo, Rochester, Minneapolis, Chicago, and Los Angeles. The establishment and propagation of Marxist study circles of was the hallmark of John Keracher. The task of the revolutionary movement in the current period was deemed to be the training of the working class in the “science” of Marxism in preparation for the inevitable revolutionary overturn of capitalism and the establishment of the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat.”

“Every Local should maintain at least one weekly study class,” The "Proletarian" said, encouraging its establishment around the selection, reading, and discussion of an elementary book, such as The Communist Manifesto.  Meetings were to be led by a “class director” selected based upon experience "The director calls on one of the students to stand and start reading. After a few paragraphs are read, the director, who by the way, should be a good reader, reads the passage over again carefully and calls on the student to explain what has been read, after which he asks for additional explanation from the class. If the students are a bit slow he should try to get it over to them by questioning before proceeding to cover the points missed.... If the student knows that he will be required not only himself to understand, but to analyze and explain what he has read he will be much more attentive and think harder and that is the prime object of working class education — to add thinking capacity to direct and objectify the workers' resentment toward capitalist society." Keracher continued to hammer home his belief that worker education stood as the fundamental task of the socialist movement: "In the past we have not lacked theoretical basis for our movement, but in the consistent application of theory to practice we have been weak. So weak that the majority of the membership is badly confused as to the purpose of the movement — not to speak of the great army of workers outside. There is only one hope for the situation. THE WORKERS MUST BE TAUGHT. By its ability to master this Socialist knowledge the working class proves its fitness to assume control of society. In the struggle for emancipation, Socialist theory is the guide to correct action. Without it the movement flounders about aimlessly, dissipating funds and energy in fruitless effort."

The "Proletarian's"  first issue hit the street dated May 1918. The debut issue of the new paper laid out the fundamental principles of Keracher's faction in a lead editorial: "We will leave reforms of all kinds to those who think the present social system worth reforming. For our part, the revolutionary watchword, “the abolition of the system,” will be the keynote.  The workers must gain political power in order to get possession of the government. It will then be possible for them to use the institution of the State for its final function — the abolition of all classes by the socialization of the means of wealth production, to the end that the toilers, both intellectual and manual, will reap the full reward of their social labors." In the columns of "The Proletarian" could be found articles by Kohn (signed John O’London) and one by this writer titled “Letter to a Wage Slave.” In addition "The Proletarian" published an official statement by the National Secretary of the Workers’ Socialist Party, Lawrence Beardsley, with its endorsement. At that time, the Workers’ Socialist Party was not in a position to have its own journal.

There were two Kerachers — the pre-Russian Revolution one and the post-Russian Revolution one. Beyond question, the pre-Russian Revolution Keracher was a Marxist. This cannot be said unqualifiedly of his post-Russian Revolution position. The post-Russian Revolution Keracher was a Leninist-Marxist, caught in the dilemma of two “socialisms” — Marxian socialism as a system of society, and Leninist “socialism” as a transitional dictatorship of the proletariat. Yet, when the chips were down, Keracher’s Marxist background interfered with any blind conformity to Soviet dogma. Unlike most of those who were joining the Communist Party at this time, Keracher did not believe in an imminent Communist Revolution in the United States. He also opposed the formation of radical "dual" labor unions and later emerged as an opponent of the Communist Party’s exclusive reliance upon “underground” activity.  Keracher and his group in Michigan (including those associated with the group who lived outside that state) were expelled from the Communist Party charged with “Menshevism,” although Keracher himself continued to strongly support the Bolsheviks in Russia. Keracher and the Proletarian Party never got over its infatuation with the Russian social system and Keracher was still publishing a pamphlet as late as 1946 denying that Russia was an exploitative, class society. Adolph Kohn quipped: “The trouble Keracher is that he tries so hard to be Marxist and Bolshevik at one and the same time.”

 Distinct from the earlier Kerensky Revolution, the Bolsheviks and Lenin spoke the language of Marxism. It issued proclamations, the most stirring being the appeal to socialists in Germany and elsewhere: “We have seized power in our country, take power in yours and come to our aid.” It aroused emotional fervor and inspired the hope for international solidarity for the socialist revolution! Had a genuine socialist movement been predominant in Europe, there might have been a different story to tell. In the absence of a socialist majority, a socialist revolution was impossible, both in Russia and the rest of the world. Certainly the material conditions in Russia were not ripe for socialism in 1917. John Keracher, still the State Secretary of the SPA, also watched what was happening in Russia. As a Marxist, he was aware that circumstances in Russia were not really ripe for Socialism. But what if it could muster support from workers all over the world? Wasn’t there a role that the SPA could play to help? The Proletarian University became enthused with the Leninist doctrine of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat and joined in the efforts to organize a communist party in the United States in support of the Bolshevik regime.
Shortly after the Third International was organized, a referendum was initiated in the Socialist Party of America by the supporters of Soviet Russia calling for quitting the Second International and joining the Third International. This referendum was sponsored by three groups: the Left-Wing group, the Foreign Language Federation, and the Michigan group. The referendum was carried by a majority of ten to one. However, the Executive Committee of the SPA vetoed the referendum on the grounds that the result was “fraudulent.” After the veto of the referendum a call was issued for a national conference of t he three groups to formulate a national declaration of principles and to conquer the Socialist Party of America for "revolutionary socialism.” The charter of the SPA–Michigan was the first to be revoked on the grounds that it had amended its constitution to repudiate legislative reforms. The anti-reformist repudiation of "immediate demands." and anti-religious stand of the Michigan SPA inspired by the SPGB caused the charter of the SPA–Michigan to be revoked on the grounds that it had amended its constitution to repudiate legislative reforms and led to them being expelled by the SPA in early 1919. Keracher had indeed persuaded the Michigan SP to change the first clause in its Constitution so that the Party would no longer support reforms of capitalism; and he had also rewritten Clause II, regarding the role of religion in capitalist society,  amending their State constitution as follows: 'Any member, Local, or Branch of a Local, advocating such reforms or support organisations formed for the purpose of advocating such reforms, shall be expelled from the Socialist Party. The State Executive Committee is authorised to revoke the charter of any Local that does not conform to this amendment'. An attitude upon religion identical with that of the SPGB had also been adopted and enforced by the constitution of the following clause: "It shall be the duty of all agitators and organisers, upon all occasions, to avail themselves of the opportunity of explaining religion on the basis of the materialist conception of history as a social phenomenon."

Then in short order, both the Foreign Language Federation and the Left-Wing were expelled. In the ensuing meetings of the three groups, differences between them made it difficult to organize a communist party to represent America in the Third International. The delegates of the Michigan Socialists themselves were in a hopeless minority. Michigan's platform and policy drawn up specially for presentation as the basis of the  new party was superior to that of the Russians, which was adopted. If  the Michigan delegates had kept to their former and fairly clear position long since associated with the 'Proletarian' the chances for a new party here would be brighter. The Michigan group could not fit in with any other group but was tolerated on a technicality. To its credit, it had refused to accept any office or to affirm any responsibility for the programs that were adopted. It was finally settled by orders from the Third International in Moscow, to the exclusion of these factions as groups, who should constitute the Communist Party in the United States. In 1920, the central committee of the Communist Party ordered that the Proletarian University become a party institution under its supervision. The Michigan group refused to accept this decision and chose to leave the Communist Party for good. In June 1920, the Proletarian Party was organized by Keracher and his comrades. Draper describes it as a “small, self-satisfied sect.” Obviously he was no sympathizer. On March 29, 1923, the Executive Committee of the Communist International requested that the PPA liquidate itself and that its members join the WPA. The Proletarian Party answered aggressively in the negative, declaring that it could see no reason for renouncing "sound, constructive, and honorable revolutionary action" in order to be absorbed into the "fetid swamp of sentimentalism" known as the Workers Party. The group similarly declined to participate in the Trade Union Educational League, due to dissatisfaction with the tactics of TUEL which "makes cooperation practically impossible."

As the Proletarian Party grew, local branches emerged in at least 38 U.S. cities. Keracher moved from Detroit to Chicago in the early 1920s, the city where the Proletarian Party was thereafter based. "The Proletarian" was  an anti-Communist Party journal, but supported the Russian Dictatorship of the Proletariat. The Proletarian Party was “more communist than the Communists,” believing that the soviet were the transitional form of the proletarian state! ("The Proletarian", Jan. 1926).  A soviet, though, is merely a council. Applicable to the historic circumstances of developing Russian capitalism though it may be, no evidence is forthcoming that, in highly developed countries like England, U.S. and Germany, such special machinery will be needed to accomplish the proletarian revolution. The Proletarian Party, too, called for "the unfaltering support of the class-conscious workers everywhere” to “the movement of Anti-Imperialism among the backward nations,” because they “fight … the Imperial Capitalist Class.” A travesty on Marxism. The class conscious workers, everywhere, have nothing in common with the nationalistic struggles of backward nations. What lies behind the developing national consciousness of China, India, Nicaragua, Arabia? — the economic interests of different sections of the bourgeoisie. Countries like China, India and the rest, blossomed into capitalist countries. No longer are they merely sources of raw materials and markets for the disposal of commodities. The newly rising bourgeoisie in such backward countries find the ideologic expression of their economic and political needs in movements of nationalism. They are anti-imperialist only whilst being choked by the capitalist imperialism of England, the U.S., and the rest of the great powers. They aim at monopolizing for themselves the natural resources and the opportunities for profit by exploiting the workers of their respective countries.

The Proletarian Party retained its pro-Bolshevik stance while at the same time, maintaining its general stand against reformism as this 1928 quote from Keracher indicates "The Socialist Party [of America] and the Workers Party [Communist Party] are both parties of social reformism. Their election platforms are made up of capitalistic reforms, calculated to catch the votes of the petty bourgeoisie and the capitalistic- minded workers. Although they both claim to have for their object the ultimate establishment of a new social order, their immediate aim is the reforming of the present social system. Their appeals are mainly made to the small property owners and to those workers who desire to improve their lot within the confines of the capitalist system...The Proletarian Party is not a reform party. Its avowed purpose is the abolition of the present social order, the ending of the exploitation of labor by an idle parasitic class. It makes its direct appeal for the support of the workers as propertyless wage-slaves, not as “tax-paying” citizens, nor as charity chasers, seeking  a handout, or dole, from the capitalist state..."
Nor was Keracher a proponent of industrial unionism and explained that "The framework of the new social order requires no building within the old. It is already built — in the form of highly organized, socialized production, which by the way is in no way connected with industrial unionism. The task that presents itself is to abolish the present class ownership. Let us not fritter away our time dreaming about how affairs will be administered in the future social order. Let us rather take up the work of clarifying out movement; let us cast out the dross of legislative reform, and carry to the working class an uncompromising message, rallying them for the first step — the conquest of political power."
The Proletarian Party formally disbanded in 1971.


The American secret police apparatus maintained a substantial network of professional agents and undercover spies observing and reporting upon a range of left wing and labour organizations in the early 1920s. This is the report on Keracher.

Warren W. Grimes, Special Assistant to the Attorney General.
DoJ/FBI Investigative Files, July 20, 1921

In 1916 two of the active leaders of the Left Wing movement at Detroit were DENNIS E. BATT and JOHN KERACHER. They considered even the Left Wing too conservative and decided to establish a new organization — which first took the name “Proletarian Club,” later becoming the “Proletarian University,” and after developing taking the name “The Proletarian Party.”By 1920 the Cleveland organization was 250 members. Buffalo was and continues to be one of the most active centers.

John Keracher.
Alias John “Kerr.” Alien (British subject) with first papers here. Born Dundee, Scotland, January 16, 1881. Arrived at New York in 1908 or 1909. Unmarried. First papers about 1915. Fed from Scotland, using the name John Kerr, to avoid payment of debts. (Apelman 8/18/
Operates the “Reliance Shoe House,” 612 Dix Avenue, Detroit, Michigan. Admits being an alien and an active member of the Communist Party. (Apelman 1/9/20).
Arrested on immigrant warrant January 2, 1920 and proceedings cancelled on June 7, 1920. Record of hearing before immigrant inspector on file. Close friend of Isaac Ferguson. [ ]
Delegate to first convention of the Communist Party of America (though he claims now he disapproved some of its actions and left the convention before its conclusion) and secretary of the Detroit local of the Party. (Kahn 10/31/19).
Secretary of the “Proletarian University” at Detroit and associate editor of The Proletarian — official organ of subject party. Keracher writes most of the articles in the organ.
When examined by the immigrant inspector, Keracher denied not only his membership in the Communist Party but also his belief in the objectionable features of the program. However, the evidence conclusively shows Keracher to have been a member of the national organization
committee, who, with Batt and others, including Alexander Stoklitsky, signed the call for the convention.
Keracher denies even his signature to this call, and the Department of Labor — contrary to the recommendation of its own inspector and in the face of a mass of conclusive evidence — believed Keracher.
Keracher has spoken in many cities on behalf of both the Communist Party (at first) and the Proletarian (later). He says his speeches are on “Socialism.”
His testimony shows him in a brazen disregard for the truth, to have entered the United States without proper inspection, and to have committed fraud upon the immigrant authorities at the time of entry."

Keracher was arrested during the so-called Palmer Raids conducted nationwide on the night of January 2/3, 1920. Although many in the Justice Department continued to believe Keracher was deportable as a resident alien holding political views which ultimately advocated "force and violence," deportation proceedings against Keracher were terminated by the Bureau of Immigration of the Department of Labor in June 1920.

Formation  of the Proletarian Party of America 
Role-modelling Socialist Behaviour, biography of Isaac Rab,  by Karla Doris Rab
The Head-Fixing Industry
Why Unemployment? 
Lenin article by Keracher
The Socialist Party's contemporary critique  of Keracher's anti-parliamentarianism:
Parliament or Soviet reply