| The Battle For The Peace

By TOM McEWEN (B. c Provincial Chairman, LPP)

Gear future there will

elsewhere, the people are
| government which will express ‘and adv
Bary victory over German and Japanese fascis
fied Nations at a tre-|-=

ost of life and human
he common people of

Litery Sistory must
be cancelled out in
‘erve the narrow sel-
Fests of reactionary
the breeder of fas-
+h now that the peace
“gain begins to snarl
Hits teeth against the

-olumbians have every
: justly proud of their
‘is to-‘victory—in the
“es and.on the produc-
| Chey have also: every
— e justly critical of the
diring to) become the
5s rchitects of postwar.
cumbia. So much is at
‘ory has been won at
price to permit poli-
_atans to trifle with

-jor-Progressive Party

i contest a minimum

ofive. constituencies in
ning election. The LPP

t before Jabor and the

ealistic and practical

: postwar development

“3truction;. a program

esses the insistent de-

she people of our prov-
= nomic, social and cul-

' nsion and security,

_>? will enter the pro-
2tions in B.C. for the

= as a full. -fledged par-

4 party, recognizing

= -he fullest coordination
liamentary field of the

- various stratas of the
ds a guarantee of win-
_ battle for the peace.
-y welcomed the unity
, of the BC¥Federation
Convention, which did
-2 unions of B.C. to the
- > party kite, but which

| itrary opened the door

| 20r participation in the

» a government, in which
fle unionists, farmers,
- and liberals who are

fF to secure a people’s

m the-issuance of a

~ar, can ainite in the bat-

2 peace.

-analysts” of the CCF
-alked up the unsatis-
-esults of CCF fortunes

| ederal elections as be-
te “the splitting and

7é tactics of the LPP.’

‘1 estimation may ap-

-ie opportunist chagrin

: SCF leadership, but it

i; convince the growing
_ werking class opinion

f or unity could have won

-ive representatnion in
' Parliament of Canada,
‘linistered a resounding

io the tory Brackenites

ir following in the lib-
1p, had the CCF leader-
aced the interests of

“ibove harrow partisan

ins.

Py failed to do, and there

; indication that the.CCF

aring to follow the same

a anti-unity policy in the

1 rovincial election. The

s *Camerons et al repeat

inotonous regularity that

tis “going to be the next
ment of B.C.” Since that
sore likely to materialize

Ic ADVOCATE — PAGE

ii

be a provincial election in British ‘Columbia.
vitally concérned in winning the peace, and in the elec-
ance their postwar aspirations and hopes.
t imperialism was won by the peoples |

In our prov-

than it did in the federal arena.
and for precisely the same reason.
it‘can be expected that the LPP
will be accorded the full blame
of the CCF anti-labor, anti-unity
debacle.
ILLUSIONS EXPLODED

In preparation for this vitally
important election in B.C. some
‘questions must be answered and
some illusions exploded. First
among these is the fallacy that

|it is inevitable and certain that

Canada must pass through a
*“social-democratic”’ phgse—that
qa CCF government must come to
power—in order to demonstrate
its, political bankruptcy, before
a genuine Socialist Canada can
emerge. Therefore let labor give
its. full support to the CCF in
order to. provide “a ehance” to
prove its social-democratic im-
potency to the needs of people.
Such “thinking’’ is neither scien-
tific nor sensible.

Our aim is not in the election
of a CCF government for B.C. to
perpetuate the illusions of utop-
ian socialism and parliamentary
opportunism. Our aim is not to
pander to the costly experiment
of giving social-democracy in
Canada (the CCF) “ a chance to
prove itself.” Such “chances”
have cost the people of Europe—
and the whole world — untold
misery, suffering and bloodshed.
We-do not propose in the coming
‘elections in B.C. to “‘withdraw”
‘in favor of the CCF, because of
the subjective moods of small
groups of people who concede
the CCF a “monopoly” in labor
parliamentary representation. In
spite of the increased vote of the
CCF in the federal election, the
shift away from CCF working-
class support to farmer and mid-
Gle class elements is already ap-
parent. And the reason is not hard
to seek. Unlike the British Labor
Party which is based upon the
trade unions and subject to the
pressure of the trade unions, the

EXPULSION

The Provincial Executive of
the LPP wishes to announce the
expulsion by the Hastings East
Branch of the following indivi-
duals: Fred McNeil, Mrs. F. Mc-
Kean, Jean Burt, Aubrey Foster,
I. Carlson and Fred Nyby.

In taking this action the Hast-
ings East Branch of the LPP
acted to expose Fergus McKean’s
conspiracy. and to cleanse from
their ranks the disruptive ele-

‘|ments who, with McKean, sought

to create division and confusion
in labor’s ranks and the LPP.
The Hastings East Branch was
MeKKean’s own branch, and it was
here-that he sought to win over
converts and establish a base for
his attempt to undermine the
leadership of the LPP through
slanderous attacks aimed at dis-
rupting and destroying the Party.
The membership of the Hastings
East Branch have effectively an-
swered McKean by endorsing his
expulsion and acting to place his
handful of followers outside the
organization. The labor and pro-
gressive movement should heed
this example and close their

ranks against disruptionist ele-
ments.

3

_that here in Canada, or

Certainly,

CCF. leadership _assumes''no *re-’

sponsibility whatsoever for thes
unity and organization of the
trade unions.

The Millard-Park monopoly
of the political action commit-
tees of the Canadian Congress
of Labor showed all to clearly
that the CCF regarded the un-
ions merely as voting machines
and sources of financial aid,
and where the trade unions
could not be bent to this mon-
strous dictatorship, the trade
union experts of.the CCF were
ready to wreck the union by a
policy of “rule or ruin.”

We do not’aim to liquidate the

Labor-Progressive Party nor its

historic role as the party of Marx-
ism Leninism in Canada to suit
the whims of the . Coldwells,
Winches et al: Nor shall we per-
mit the renegades who desert
our party and find their rightful
place in the anarcho-trotskyite
sections of the CCF to liquidate
our Party, whether they try it
under the pretext of a discussion
on revisionism or directly under
the aegis of reaction.

We do not intend to asK mem-
bers of the LPP or ‘others to
“vote CCF”’- in those constitu-
encies where the LPP have no
candidates. In such constituen-
cies we will judge the case on its
merits; bring our program before
the people, and on the basis of
such judgment, support those can-
didates who support those meas-
ures required for postwar secur-
ity and progress. CCF “socialists”
who follow a partisan policy of
anti-unity, anti-labor, anti-Soviet
anti-LPP, anti-everything except
the distorted chimera of a CCF
utopia, have no claim on the sup-
port of intelligent Canadians.

The lessons to be drawn from
a whole number of historical de-
velopments now unfolding be-
fore our.eyes in Europe destroys
such a fallacy. Even the sweep-
ing victory of the British Labor
party in the recent elections...
totally different in its structure
and evolution from the CCF, does
not substantiate the false idea,
in B.C.,
the CCF should be supported to
power because of the inevitability
of social-democracy in Canada.
the LPP strives for
unity with the CCF ... unity with
CCF followers and supporters
around the issue of jobs, union
security, labor legislation, hous-
ing, reconversion, and all those
issues upon which must be pre-
dicated a just peoples’ peace;
unity in action to assure economic
and social security. The LPP
also strives for electoral agree-
ments in erder to avoid splitting
the progressive vote and allow-
ing a tory or liberal stooge of
big business to crawl in on a
minority vote, such as happened
in a great number of cases in the
federal elections, as a result of
the opportunist partisan ambi-
tions of the CCF parliamentar-
jians.

But the LPP does not adhere
to the theory of the “inevit-
ability” of social-democracy in
Canada, and does not concede
to the CCF any monopoly
whatsoever in the _ political
arena. The LPP exists precisely
because there is a party of so-

cial-democracy in Canada, and.
because in Canada as eilse-
where, socialism can only be
achieved under the guidance of
a Marxist-Leninist party —
which the CCF is definitely not-
“Recently a prominent
leader said that now that the
LPP “liberal-labor coalition has
been rejected, it is likely the LPP
will be crawling back to the CCF
with pleas of unity.” Have no
fear Messrs. Winch-Cameron and
Company. We will seek unity in
action with those followers of the
CCF, precisely because their In-
terests are bound up with the
common interests pf the people
of our province and that con-
trary to your “rejecting” theory,
the results of the federal election,
and the debacle of CCF opportun-
ism. proved the “liberal-labor
coalition” slogan correct.

The impact of the .war has
created rifts and a shifting of
forces and relations in the bour-
geois political parties, repres-
enting big capital. This continu-
ous shifting of forces is aggra-
vated rather than lessened by the
mighty problems of the peace,
and which further lead;,to the
disintegration of the | old-line
parties. The far-reaching decis-
ions of Teheran and Yalta, and
subsequent conferences and con-
ventions, which have culminated
in a world charter and organiza-
tion for peace and security—in

their positive aspects of domestic

and world relations in postwar
development, hasten this pro-
cess of disintegration in the bour-
geois camp. And’ Elmore Phil-
pott to the contrary, it is not in-
evitable that those who leave the
bourgeoisie camp throw their
political weight behind the CCF
to assure its climb to power, for
the attainment of a pseudo-social-
ism.

Their political course is de-
termined by the unity, strength
and realism of organized labor.

In the fight to win the peace
on a program of postwar devel-
opment that squares with the
need of labor and the common
people, the LPP can win the sup-
port of great sections of the dis-
sidents who are leaving the camp
of the old line parties. Of course
we cannot do this if we adhere

te the stupid theorum that a
CCF government in B.C. is “‘in-
evitable.” To do so would be

revisionism of the worst kind.
That is the course of the Bruces,
McKeans, etc., who, capitulating
to difficulties, seek the distor-
tion of Marxism, and wind up in
the swamp of social democracy.

The political redivision of

~forces in our country and in every

province is in process—and in

B.C. constitutes the ‘Achilles
heel” of the Hart-Maitland coali-
tion.

This ‘‘coalition” is so united,

that the first mass united move-
ment of the people of B.C. for

postwar reconversion, higher
wage standards, veteran and
labor security, housing. ete.,

which endangered the profits
and vested privileges of the top
layers of the CMA would send
the coalition flying apart like
a piece of brittle coal.

In preparation for this impor-
tant election the Hart- Maitland
“coalition” has decided to hang
together and not oppose the can-
didates of either party on the
hustings. The prime factor which
motivated this decision of the
provincial Liberals and Tories te

CCF

seek a return to power as “coal-
itionists” is the fear of each at
the growth and influence of la-
bor and progressive forces in the
province, plus the insistence of

‘the powerful Canadian Manufac-

turers’ Association (CMA), that
they, and not the common’people,
will determine the “shape of
things to: come” in postwar Brit-
ish Columbia. There are other
factors of course; neither party
of the “coalition are sure. they
could win a clear working ma-
jority on straight partisan lines
—and certainly the Tories enter-
tain no such hopes, in spite of the
enhancement of their political
fortunes in the recent federal el-
ection, and for which they owe
thanks to Messrs. Coldwell, Lewis
and Co. Both parties are seeming -
ly happy at the division in the
ranks of labor, and both are ob-
sessed with the ever-present fear
that unity of all the forces of
lebor might be achieved, in which
case the “coalition” would face
sure defeat. Hence the prime rea-
son for the extension of the

“coalition” at this time, as a bul-

wark against the potential of la-
bor unity for postwar security
and progress. :

That the Hart government has

brought down progressive legis-~

lation during the 20th parliament
of B.C. cannot be gainsaid. Much
of it, such as amendments to the
ICA “Industrial and Conciliation
Act;” the Government’s power
program, highways, etec., corres-
pond to the desires of the over-
whelming mass of the people, and
represented progressive begin-
nings. It is also no secret that
much of the Hart government leg-
islation was bitterly opposed by
powerful lobbies, organized and
financed by the powerful CMA.

In general the Hart coalition
government was looked upon by
large sections of our people with
a great measure of benign bene-
volence. On more than one oc-
casion the Hart government
“jumped the gun” on CCF “so-
cialism” by cancelling out the
noisy CCE fulminations with
practical measures. However, the
Hart-Maitland “coalition” ‘were
it to be victorious at the polls in
the coming election, would not be
the same Hart-Maitland liberal
tory coalition as in the past.
Thanks to the CCF, toryism is in
the saddle in Canada’s two major
provinces, Ontario and Quebec—
and in the acendency in Ottawa.
Let no one assume that things re-
main static—that the peace will
not effect further changes, rifts
and reactionary consolidation in
the bourgeoisie parties. As the
pressure of the problems of peace
bear upon governments, the tre-
presentatives of big business and
monopoly capital will seek new
alignments to carry through their
reactionary policies.”

In-the “coalition” there are
those who will gravitate towards
reaction and those who. will, un-
der mass pressure, walk timidly
along the path of progress. In its
mental swoon of simon-pure “so-
cialism” the CCF completely dis-
promises either utopia if elected
regards these developments, and
to power—or gloom and chaos if
it falls short of that attainment.

Our aim in this coming elec-
tion in B.C. must be to smash
the coalition; to oust the Tories,
and to replace them with a coali-
tion of all progressive forces
pledged to win the peace for the
people.

SATURDAY, SEPT. i, 1945