Editorial

Socred de-federation

Premier Bill Vander Zalm’s and Finance Minister Mel Couvelier’s
comments last week that the Social Credit government would like to
review British Columbia’s relationship with Confederation demonstrates
once again that the real threat to Canadian unity comes not from
‘Quebec — as the media would have it — but from the national bigotry
and provincial secessionism that has become the stock-in- trade of the
western premiers.

Both ministers used the occasion of the continuing constitutional
debate to say that B.C. should review its fiscal and economic relationship
with Confederation. And both declined to rule out some form of
““sovereignty-association” with the rest of Canada or to rule out eventual
implementation of the Socreds’ draft 1987 legislation reviewing the pro-
vince’s role in Confederation.

Let’s be clear: for the Socreds, renegotiating the fiscal terms of Confed-
eration does not mean a better deal for B.C. It means putting narrow
provincial rights above everything, dismantling national health and edu-
cation programs and dumping such tnderals institutions as bilingualism
and the CBC.

But more than anything, it ——en the fragility of this country’s
unity under the combined pressure of the Free Trade Agreement and the
policies of integration with the U.S. promoted by such premiers as Vander
Zalm, Saskatchewan’s Grant Devine and Quebec’s Robert Bourassa.

Already, vital Canadian social programs such as unemployment insu- ,

rance and regional economic development are falling victim to U.S. trade
pressures. Canadians are losing the integrity of their economy as jobs flow
south and financial policies are dictated by the U.S.

For the Socred government to proceed to re-negotiate Confederation

would tear another chunk out of the East-West link and set up an

administrative framework for further integration with the U.S.

Often in the past, the future of the province depended on repudiating
Vander Zalm’s policies. Now the future of Canadian unity may depend
on it as well.

: TRIBONE

EDITOR
Sean Griffin

. ‘ASSOCIATE EDITOR

Dan Keeton

BUSINESS & CIRCULATION MANAGER
Mike Proniuk
GRAPHICS

Angela Kenyon

Published weekly at

2681 East Hastings Street
Vancouver, B.C., V5K 1Z5
Phone: (604) 251-1186
Fax: (604) 251-4232

Subscription rate:
Canada: @ $20 one year @ $35
two years @ Foreign $32 one year

Second class mail
registration number 1560

Finding democracy in the maze of changing politics

Judging by the Greek roots of the word
democracy it would appear to mean “rule
by the people.” But in practice, there is
little evidence that it is anywhere so
observed, although the people of Eastern
Europe apparently believe that to be the
case.

On account of the degeneration of
Soviet democracy into authoritarianism
(from Stalin’s to Brezhnev’s times), practi-
cally all the media in the West and even
many Soviet intellectuals have come to
identify democracy with capitalism. It is
useful therefore to remember that Nazi
Germany was thoroughly capitalistic, as
was fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain and a
host of ugly dictatorships around the
world that were implanted by the armed
forces of the United States in the name of
democracy. In particular, the replacement
of socialism with capitalism in Chile in
1973 was accompanied by the abolition of
democratic government in favour of fas-
cist dictatorship.

If it were true that capitalist democracy
means the rule of the people, why would
the people of the United States, who firmly
believe in peace and friendship, tolerate a
government which never gets through a
year without taking up arms against some
other nation? And how would rule by the
people fit the situation in Canada, where,
immediately after 55 per cent of the popu-
lation voted against the Free Trade
Agreement, the government went ahead
and signed it; where, in the certain knowl-
edge that 85 per cent of the population are
opposed to the Goods and Services Tax,
Parliament nevertheless proceeded to
enact it.

In reply to such questions we will be
told that the people have the right at each
election to throw out the government if
they are really opposed to its policies. But
apart from the fact that such action would

only lock the barn after the horse 1s gone,
their actual power is only to vote for the
candidates who are offered, guided by
such information as is provided to them.

To be elected president of the United
States one must have a war chest of at least
$50 million and the support of the media.
To be elected to the U.S. Senate requires
around $5 million. In a sense, the election
goes to the highest bidder. Where does a
candidate get that kind of money? From
the establishment, of course, and more
particularly the military-industrial com-
plex. Once elected, he is their faithful ser-
vant. In Canada, the sums required are
smaller, but the process is the same.

But, you say, we enjoy the freedoms of
speech, the press and assembly. Yes, we
have the undoubted right to buy a news-
paper for $50 million and therein expound
our views. Other than that, you and I have
the democratic right to publish whatever
the owners of the press see fit to let us say.
Still, it is worth something to be able to
publish our views in smaller outlets such as
the Pacific Tribune. And it is certainly
important to be able to march in a peace
parade, although the government pays lit-
tle attention.

In the workplace where most of us
spend the greater part of our lives, there is
little if any democracy. To the extent that
they are not hamstrung by repressive laws,
organized workers can influence their
hours, wages and working conditions
through collective bargaining but they still
work under the watchful eye of the boss.

In the socialist countries, it is unfortu-
nately true that, at least until Gorbachev

arrived on the scene, political democracy
was less in evidence there than here. But
industrial democracy including such
rights, nonexistent in capitalist countries,
as the right to a job, the right to housing,
the right to education and medical care,
will not likely be willingly surrendered by
the people of the East in return for the
fleshpots of the West.

If Western-style parliamentary institu-
tions lead to the negation of democracy, is
real political democracy possible? It
appears that the Soviet Union is striving in
the face of considerable obstacles to prove
that a genuinely democratic political order
is compatible with socialism, even if not
with capitalism.

If the electoral processes of the U. S. and
Canada lead only to governments repre-
sentative of the rich, the new parlimamen-
tary set-up of the USSR appear to
guarantee representation of every segment
of the population. Supreme power belongs
to the Congress of People’s Deputies,
from whose ranks it elects the full time
parliament and government, both of
which are accountable to it. The congress
is made up of three parts. One-third of the
deputies are elected by territorial consti-
tuencies as here. Another third are elected
by nationalities. The final third are elected
by interest groups such as the Academy of
Sciences, the trade unions, the farmers and
other organizations. Any such compre-
hensive representation in our parliament
or in the U.S. congress would be at best
accidental and highly unlikely. But with
events moving at their present extraordi-
nary pace, we can only wait to see whether,

in the long run, the new Soviet institutions
can overcome the bureaucracy which has
been so harmful in the past.

In the meantime, several of the East
European countries are in the anomalous
position of having anti-communist, pro-
capitalist governments trying to govern
and “reform” socialist states. In Czechos-
lovakia, for example, they are demonstrat-
ing their commitment to democracy by
seeking to outlaw the Communist Party.
In that endeavour, I don’t wish them luck.

Emil Bjarnason,
Vancouver

Boycott ‘still
the high road’

In spite of what Justice Frank Maczko
has ruled in relation to the Vancouver
Charter and Shell Canada, the Shell Oil
Company, because of its continuing
investments in apartheid South Africa,
persists in being both a poor corporate
world and Canadian citizen.

Consequently, compassionate and car-
ing Vancouver residents will continue the
high road of boycotting Shell Canada
products until the multinational with-
draws from South Africa or South Africa
renounces apartheid and embraces the
true universality of humankind.

A responsible city council would join
Vancouver residents in pursuing that con-
tinued boycott.

Shell Canada may well have won a hol-
low victory. In one sense, the legal judg-
ment of Justice Maczko is irrelevant. The
high road is the broad ethical and moral
one in terms of equality of all humankind.

John Church,
Vancouver

4 Pacific Tribune, June 4, 1990

Pde ee ee ae 2 whee ‘=