EDITORIAL PAGE

Keep John on beam

MONG the many and varied
reactions of Western_leaders
to the total disarmament proposals
made by Soviet Premier Nikita
Khrushchev to the United Nations
Assembly, probably that of Prime
Minister Diefenbaker ranks high-
est in objectiveness.

Mr. Diefenbaker urged that the
proposals of the Soviet premier
should not be dismissed as “prop-
aganda” (the usual U.S.-and-satel-
lite method of bypassing construc-
tive proposals for the attainment
of peace), and also expressed the
hope that Khrushchev’s proposals
would “be examined objectively.”

In these revolutionary proposals
made to the UN session to “abol-
ish all armies, navies, air forces”
and their military appendages over
a period of four years, the imme-
diate reaction of most Western
spokesmen and their kept press
hawks, was that of ridicule.

In lengthy comment and press
blurbs they described it as more
“Soviet propaganda,’ “nothing
new,” “the ghost of Litvinov in the
League of Nations,” etc., and so
forth.

We haven’t had too many oppor-
tunities to approve of policies ad-
vanced by John Diefenbaker and
his government, but in this we are
in full accord; that all who seek
and cherish peace should study the
Soviet premier’s proposals to the
UN objectively. If this course is
followed, the rule of peace is assur-
ed, and the billions of dollars now
being squandered in cold and hot
war perpetuation, can be used for
the promotion of a human society
dedicated to the creative labors of
peace and progress:

We. voice the sentiments of
countless thousands of Canadians
when we say we hope Prime Minis-
ter Diefenbaker will stick to his
“objectiveness” on this vital issue,
and make an early start to put it
into operation through greater
Canadian - Soviet co-operation for
peace, and an end to the policies
and machinery of war into which
Canada has become involved
through arregant U.S. insistence

Pacific Tribune

Phone MUtual 5-5288
Editor — TOM McEWEN
Managing Editor — BERT WHYTE
Published weekly at
Room § — 426 Main Street
Vancouver 4, B.C.
Printed in a Union Shop
Subscriztion Rates:
_ One Year: $4.00
Six Months: $2.25
Canadian and Commonwealth
_ countries (except Australia): $4.00
one year. Australia, United States and
all other countries: $5.00 one year.

— with Liberal and Tory conniv-
ance.

The Canadian people, through
their numerous organizations,
should exercise all the pressure
they can muster to keep Diefen-
baker’s “objectiveness” on a par
with Canada’s needs for peace.

‘Can-Can kultur’

Hollywood’s “cultural” presenta-
tion to visiting Premier Khrush-
chey was a low edition of the
Can-Can, which not even the gold-
rush lads of *98 would ask the girls
of Dawson City’s dance halls to
perform in public.

Some U.S. state officials de-
scribed the Hollywood show as
“not the kind of thing to show a
head of state,” while many news-
men, well seasoned in the atmo-
sphere of political smut, described
it as “vulgar” and “in bad taste.”
Mr. K. himself described it as “al-

most pornographic” and said “hu-
manity’s face is more beautiful
than its backside.”

America couid have cone beiier,

but the Can-Can was Hollywood’s -

choice of its “best.”

Decade of victory

HE TENTH anniversary of the
founding of the Peoples Re-
public of China, “Liberation Day,”

_ October 1, will be celebrated in

every corner of the vast land of
China by its 650 million people.

Nor will the significance of this
historic anniversary be confined to
the Chinese people alone. The im-
pact of their tremendous social and
economic “leap forward” in one
decade has already won the admir-
ation and sympathy of millions of
people fax beyond the borders of
People’s China.

What the Chinese people have
achieved in socialist construction,
economic, social, scientific and cul-
tural advances under the leader-
ship of their multi-party govern-
ment and their dynamic Commu-
nist party, is without parallel in
the annals of human history.

In ten short years the Chinese
people, with the aid of their “big
brother,” the Soviet Union (and
without strings) have built vast
new basic industries; “collectiviz-

ed” their far-reaching countryside |

into thousands of farm co-oper-
atives and communes; brought lit-
eracy to their multi-national peo-
ples in the remotest areas; devel-
oped their scientific researches
with their own trained scientists,

and probably most important, end-
ed the constant fear and threat of
famine, flood and disease, which
was the common lot of the people
in the years before 1949.

~ Not the least of their achieve-
ments has been the wiping out of
the last vestiges of the evils of
vest-pocket Chiang Kai-shek wat-
lords, foreign imperialist exploita-
tion, landlords and leeches of every
sort who used to prey upon the
people ruthlessly.

All that has been achieved in ten
short years. The “great leap” for-
ward is not only a living reality,
but a mighty inspiration to-all
Asian and other peoples, still
struggling to free themselves from
the strangling grip of imperialist
and colonial rule.

Western imperialism under the
dollar-rule of Wali Street hasn’t as
yet got around to “recognizing”
Peoples China, preferring, as Nik-

ita Khrushchev told the UN As-

sembly, to hang onto the Chiang
Kai-shek corpse on Formosa on the
pretence that he “represents”
China!

This tenth anniversary of Peo-
ples China shatters that illusion,
and the coming decade of Socialist
construction by China’s devoted
millions will finally end it.

Tom
McEwen

that

HE monopoly press,
mighty organ of big business
and public misinformation periodi-
cally indulges itself and its readers
with questions of state etiquette.
The latest in this series of world-
shaking problems is posed; ‘‘should
the Mounties be forced to stoop?’’
(In this case it is the RCMP and
not the Vancouver Mounties which
prompts the question).

Since the answers may be many
and varied we’d like to get our
twobits-worth in. In general we
would say “no’’, the boys in scar-
let-and-gold should not be forced
to “stoop,’ but. in some special
cases we would take the affirma-
tive, hoping at the same time that
there was a good picket-line pro-
letarian boot some three feet in
the rear of the “stoop” to give it
solid political content. (We are sure
the Newfoundland loggers would
heartily approve of that specie of
“stoop”’). i

However the larger question
arising out of this ‘“‘to-stoop-or-not-
to-stoop”’ debate, is the unexplain-

ed- participation of Canada in a
“Miss America’ beauty queen
contest?

In this contest the lasses from
the several American states ably
displayed their talents and their
curves. The latter, as is known in
American ‘cultural’ circles takes
precedence over all else. But with
songs, music, dancing and deport-
ment all the beauty of American
femininity deported themselves
very well.

The lass chosen as “Miss Amer-
ica” from among 53 other beauties,
Miss Lynda Lee Mead of Missis-
sippi, judging from her reported
friendly ‘desire to meet Soviet
Premier Nikita Krushchev, seems
to possess the unique combination
of both brains and beauty, and we
wish her well in all she hopes and
does. :

Just how Canada got into this
U.S. show is anybody’s guess.
Probably as an added token of
complete subservience by our rul-
ing circles to U.S. suzerainty of
all things Canadian. A sort of
“S1st state” appendage!

Anyhow we sent a comely lass
from the bluenose country of New
Brunswick, Miss Rosemary Keenan
to star in the role of ‘‘Miss Can-
ada” in the U.S. contest, and with
‘her we sent two Mounties to pro-
vide the “atmosphere” and the’
“stoop” to Yankee domination.

Miss Keenan didn’t display any
extra-curricular talents to enhance

. don’t give a hoot whether the

her feminine beauty. As the Dior
experts would say, she ‘wears’
her clothes very well, but nothing
more. Miss Keenan simply walked
to the ‘mike’ accompanied by the
two alleged ‘‘stoops” and read a —
“speech.” And what a speech; a
real tory coldwar dithyramb about
our ‘“‘free-way-of-life,’ our “liber-
ties” and so forth; a spiel well gar-
nished with the best of Diefen-
baker tory froth.

Somewhere in this pitable ex-
hibition of Canada as the “5ist
state,” with a young Canadian lass
enticed to “star”? in the role of a
nation on its kness to the dictates
ef American coldwar imperialism,
our Mounties must have “stooped” «
in the act, hence the query “should
Mounties stoop?” :

Correctly put, the question
should have been “should Canada
be forced to stoop” to the ignom-
inous role, whether in beauty con-
tests or the larger issues of na-
tional independence and economic
survival, to the position of a “51st
state” appendage of Yankee im:
perialism? ° : =

Placed that way, Canadians who

Mounties ‘‘stoop” or don’t ‘‘stodp,”
but who see their independence,
their markets and their jobs being
bartered away by. Liberal, Tory
and Socred political hucksters to.
the monopoly empire of Wall —
Street, would give an unequivocal —
and decisive ‘‘No.”

September 25, 1959—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 4