ee Recently Walter E.. Wiggins sent a letter to the Western Producer, in which he dealt with farm problems. He received an answer from its editor, part of which said: “For the past many years I have been using your letters in Open Forum, almost all you have ever sent me, without question or alteration. Your most recent letter won’t appear in Open Forum. The reason? I am getting thoroughly’ fed up with your - party’s vicious misinterpretation of the Task Force Report and the intent of the sincere and honest men who had to do with producing it.” Walter Wiggins replied to the Western Producer and said in part: “Personally, on the questions of agricultural policy in general and the LIFT (Lower Inventory For Tomorrow) program in par- ticular I would have been pre- pared to suffer all the slings and arrows of the outraged conser- vatives through the Open Forum and let future developments demonstrate who is right or wrong. Apparently that is not what the promoters of a new brand of Canadian Agriculture for the Seventies want. “My recollections of prairie farming go back to 1906 when I learned that some men with money were ‘opening up the west’ by securing options on tracts of land at a nominal figure and selling that same land, abso- lutely unimproved except for the corner stakes, to settlers at fan- tastic prices. That was ‘profit- able’ agriculture in those days— farming the farmers. Only the forms of this kind of gouging The Task Force Report Still farming the farmers have changed since then, not the essence. “Around the time when I ar- rived back in Saskatchewan after four years in active service in our armed forces the very air was full of ‘optimism’, even excitement, over the expected future of agriculture in Cana- da. In 1920 one lot of wheat was sold at $4.02 a bushel. Poli- ticians and editors, whose opi- nions I sought, seemed to think there was no limit to the oppor- tunities for a young man in farming. So I got me a farm. “Tt was not long before I be- came convinced that all those ‘sincere and honest’ leaders did not know what they were talk- ing. about. I lost my: first thou- sand dollars in that deal. And I read in a newspaper a little later that a certain Canadian million- aire company was found under investigation by a royal commis- sion to have been making as much as 98% profit on the origi- nal investments of its sharehold- ers during the war. I began to smell a rat—and to remember the cooties in my army under- wear. “You will perhaps recall that in the middle thirties the federal government and the _ govern- ments of the three prairie prov- inces combined their resources to publish a pamphlet the main theme of which was that low prices of farm products, espe- cially wheat, were due to over- production and specifically not underconsumption, That, after some seven years of under-par production at that. The near- total failure of the prairie crops in 1937 served to ease that situa- tion somewhat, with the farm- ers bearing the brunt of the “‘ad- justment”. Then the war served to postpone a little further the day of reckoning. “By: 1959 the idea of moving “inefficient” farmers off their farms — in spite of the very high rating of Canadian efficien- cy in agriculture among the na- tions — in order to make agri- culture “profitable” began to get publicity. For example, Dr. Phi- lip J. Thair of the University of Saskatchewan was quoted in the press as suggesting that ‘selec- tion of farmers may have to be made by commercial integrators in their letting of contracts or ‘by a government-supervised credit’ under which some farmers are granted credit but not all of them. Not much further was done about that at the time. “In the Sixties. huge sales of grain to Soviets Russia and China almost cleared away the bothersome surplus of wheat and continuing fair prices encour- aged farmers to invest more money and expand their produc- tion. A very large part of that ‘Moscow gold’ went almost dir- ectly into the coffers of farm machinery manufacturers in Central Canada, and prices of those machines rose according- ly in line with traditional market policy. “Thousands of fair sized and fairly efficient farmers went fur- ther into debt in the hope of eventually wiping off the debts they already owned. “Ten years after Dr. Thair’s observations were published, in which he warned, ‘This indicates some of the pressures farmers can expect to face in the next. decade or so,’ you published the report. of the meeting of the Agricultural Institute of Canada held in Saskatoon on August 27, 1969. I quoted from that report verbatim the remarks of some of the delegates to that meeting and tried to point out what Dr. Thair might have had in mind when he issued his earlier warn- ing. It seems to me that if my conclusions regarding the oy come of the plan in question a ” ‘stupid’ I am in fairly good Com, pany in that respect. No wonder the Union Farmer says ‘the ave age farmer is to be thrown © the wolves’ as your paper ports. 4 “You, Mr. Editor, and yoll) fellow apologists for the mé&® facing Canadian farmers in Hl) 1970’s face a gruelling task ! you hope to convince half-wa) intelligent people, farmers i otherwise, that they should 4l! farming in order to reducé the volume of food, etc., being i duced while some hundreds | millions of human beings ne? | know what it is to have the hunger satisfied througho their lives. You will only prev more fully than ever what # abominable society this 15 live in. fl “Time marches on. While vi and the great company of col | war fanatics who would rath?) see a third of the world’s poh! lation dead than Red are dole everything in your power to © | that — Canadian agricultil doesn’t go in the direction an Russian (Soviet, I suppose va mean) agriculture there — f always be a growing numbel if us ‘stupid’ guys trying to stg our people away from a cour that can only lead eventually ! a Canadian version of Mujikis® “The Task Force Report &% deavors to keep Canadian ag culture within the limits of i system which inevitably led the present nonsensical predlé ament. It cannot avoid puttifé the interests of impersonal ca! tal ahead of the interests of ™ people.” te Teaching BERLIN (ADN) — All schools in the German Democratic Re- public are to be provided as soon as possible with a full range of modern teaching aids. The gov- ernment has allotted huge sums for this purpose in the past years and more money is to be provided. Modern teaching aids are being developed by educat- ors and engineers under the guidance of the Central Paeda- gogical Institute which has its seat in the capital Berlin. 72-year-old Professor Hortz- schansky from the Institute has played a major part in devising audio-visual teaching aids. He is a member of the International Association of Scientific Films. Professor Hortzschansky says that in the GDR only such teach- ing aids are being developed which enable rational methods of guidance and instruction plus intensive methods of teaching and learning. ome ms hy Me aids in GD V aia ia All modern appliances are provided free of charge to the schools including modern audio- visual means such as films, slide series with and without sound tracks, disc and tape recordings and television. They are espe- cially suited. to explain to the pupils complicated abstract and theoretical subjects. As a rule GDR schools are now receiving the audio-visual aids to keep and utilize as re- quired. The Plylux light-pen projector has now been newly introduced to take the place of black- boards in certain lessons. All these audio-visual aids help the teacher, by facilitating his work and helping him to util- ize every minute of each, lesson as usefully as possible. Teach- ers’ training colleges and paeda- gogical faculties at universities acquaint tomorrow’s_ teachers with the most up-to-date teach- ing aids... . cssatsetel ee PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1970-—-PAGE 8 + == = =Gonstructiom ~ ==*=* Socialist countries a outpace capitalism — industrial development of mem- ber countries of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance in the first six months once again confirm the advantage of the socialist mode of production. Economicheskaya Gazeta writes. The industrial production in CMEA member-countries, taken together increased 8.7% (in :de- veloped capitalist countries it in- . cleased 3%) in comparison with: the corresponding period of 1969. Noteworthy is the fact that the increment in all the CMEA countries was obtained mostly through the increase of labor productivity. which in Czecho- slovakia was 100%, testifying to the further stabilization of that country’s economic development. Industrial production in CMEA member-countries grew in the six-month period not only quan- titatively but continued to change qualitatively. Such prog- ressive industries as. machine building, chemistry, and electro- nics were developing at an acce- lerated pace. In most socialist countries there was rather unfavorable spring weather — in ‘these con- ditions the positive importance of the measures taken in recent years with a view to stepping up the development of agricul- tural production proved valuable and timely . One of the characteristic trends of economic development of socialist countries the steady rise in living standards and wellbeing of working people — finds reflection in the growth of real incomes of population, growth of retail trade, expansion of the service sphere, and in- crease in the volume of housing 68 ew eS success in the development of economic, scientific and techno- logical cooperation between’ CMEA countries, and the expan- sion and deepening of their in- ter-state relations in all spheres of economic activity. The 24th session of the Council for Mu- tual Economic Assistance sum- med up the results of the first stage of work in drafting a com- The Lebanese Communist Party has won legality for the first time in its history. The decision taken by the In- terior Ministry on August 13, 1970 is hailed by the party’s general secretary, Nicholas Shawi, as “an important gain, not only for our party but also for the progressive Lebanese movement as well as for the whole Arab and _ international Communist movement.” In a letter to the Communist _Party of Canada, Shawi says: “This recognition is the fruit of the continuous struggle of our party since its foundation—45 ‘years ago—during which it stood in the forefront of the ranks of fighters for national indepen- dence and its consolidation, for the rights of the working masses, for the common cause of the na- tional liberation of the Arab peoples against colonialism, im- perialism, Zionism and reaction, for the right 6f the Palestinian t ‘ stage in the development of further development of socialist economic integration, Work ® coordinate new five year econ | mic plans of CMEA member-D4 tions is being completed. Part! cularly high demands are nov made on the coordination of ec” nomic development plans of 5” cialist countries because of a ne™ | international division of labor- Arab people to self-determina” tion, for peace, democracy 4” socialism ... t “This gain is due to the [a¢ that our party, under all circum stances, has been guided by the great aims of the World Com | munist movement and its vey guard, the Soviet Communls party, committed to Marxist Leninist principles and proleta®™ ian internationalism . . . “This victory realized by out party and the progressive Leba™ ese movement had evoked by th® instigation from U.S. quarters, feverish campaign against | ' launched by the imperiallS’ | circles and all the reactionaly and anti-democratic forces Gf Lebanon. But this campaign wil be doomed to failure before th? determination of the progre™ sive Lebanese forces to preserve their achievements and_befo! the Arab and international so!” darity with the struggle of oul people and _ their progressiv® “forces.”