Letters

>

vice Letters

A

No magic in capitalist solutions
whatever Soviet journalist's view

In your issue of Feb. 26 you carried a
most interesting article by Joe Slovo, leader
of the South African Communist Party
(“South Africa CP outlines critical view,”
Tribune Feb. 26). I am impressed by the fact
that while he supports the basic thrust of the
Gorbachev reforms, he is critical of those
Soviet writers who indulge in too much self
criticism and too little criticism of capital-
ism. I was reminded of this critical note
when I recently read a two-page spread in
the Soviet journal, New Times, entitled
“Should we fear a shift towards social
democracy?”

In my opinion, the writer, historian Boris
Orlov, sums up his position in his last para-
graph: “I have apprehension not about the
consequences of a shift towards social
democracy, but about the Soviet Union’s
ability to adopt it. For social democracy is a
sign of higher standards in the political and
economic spheres as well as in daily life.”

Orlov argues that in countries long gov-
erned by social democrats living standards
and social security provisions have been
improved. But that is also true of major
capitalist countries, such as West Germany,
the U.S., Japan, France, Italy, Switzerland
and Canada, where traditional capitalist
parties have been in office during most of
the time since World War II.

Sweden is probably the most successful
of the countries governed by social demo-
cratic parties, but to a great extent the eco-
nomic strength of Sweden today can be
traced to the fact that it was neutral in
World War II and traded with both sides.

However, the trend now in most capital-
ist countries is towards lower living stand-
ards and a rise in unemployment. The
recent political crisis in Sweden demon-
strates that it too is neither immune from
the economic contradictions of capitalism
or the pressures from neo-conservatism.

Exciting time
to read Tribune

As a member of another “fringe”
party (The Green Party of Canada),
this has been an exciting time to
read the Tribune, with the events in
Eastern Europe, and the Communist
Party’s own evaluation of its role,
purpose, and movement towards a
“new paradigm.”

I especially enjoyed your
examination of the provincial
federations of labour conferences
held last fall. The one from B.C. was
“almost Green” in its analysis of the
IWA and their stance on the forest
issue.

Also, you should mention the
Royal Commission on Electoral
Reform and Party Financing, which
is accepting briefs until March 9,

1990. This is our “democratic”
nation’s attempt at glasnost, and if a
form of proportional representation
is adopted, both the Communist and
Green parties may see the day when
representation for our perspectives is
a reality.

Hope to enjoy many more issues
of your thought-provoking paper.

Keith Morvick,
Saskatoon

iE

H
i

i
Nii

Orlov story from New Times, No. 6.

Unless we live ina dream world, we must
recognize that the economies of countries
governed by social democratic parties have
moved in the same general direction as
those of the major countries governed by
capitalist. parties. All capitalist. countries
have large internal debts and most have
major external debts. Only West Germany
and Japan (which are not governed by
social democratic parties) have no external
debts.

It is necessary to remind those Soviet
writers who, to use the expression of Joe
Slovo, tend to prettify capitalism, that there
is a large part of the world made up of
underdeveloped countries, embracing the
majority of the world population. Countries
from this part of the globe have provided
the West with:

e A large industrial reserve army.

©@ Cheap raw materials.

© Markets for the armaments industry.

@ Billions of dollars in the form of inter-
est on loans. (Brazil paid out $17 billion in
1989)

I can agree with the good doctor when he
writes that “in a country which lacks demo-
cracy, a total socialization leads to etatiza-
tion (state control) of the economy
automatically run by the party and the state
bureaucracy.” But I cannot accept his pres-
cription that the Soviet Union should opt
for a social democratic future. What is
required in the Soviet Union is more social-
ist democracy, a modernization of the
economy and a greater degree of socialist
pluralism.

This raises one question: What is social
democracy? Is it a scientific theory based on
the study and analysis of real life expe-
rience? Or is it a collection of ad hoc practi-
ces and theories designed to make
capitalism more liberal, humane and accep-
table? I would say the latter is the case.

Orlov correctly notes that in the West,
trade unions, often in concert with social
democratic parties, have won many gains
for the workers. True. But it is also a fact
that the capitalists are always trying to claw
them back, by one means or another —
sometimes acting through social democratic
governments.

Orlov infers that exploitation of labour
no longer exists in the West because that
term has almost disappeared “from the

Hsizit

i
ae
il

ite
i
Hi
if

H
|

H
1H

i
7,
i
H

|
ii
H a3
HH
H
if

i

i
j
557

:

H
ff
7
5

fe

i
iy
ij
HH

H iH
i

Ki

AH

'
j
h

!
i

i
i

iy
|

Fy
iH
H
£

f
iH
HT

|
|

Hi
ra
hf

Pia

vocabulary of social democracy.” Alas for
the doctor, even mainstream, bourgeois
economists recognize that there is exploita-
tion.

Moving from the denial of exploitation,
Orlov writes about private ownership “that
does not hinder social justice.” But he does
not define social justice. Further, he credits
social democracy with “advocating tougher
laws regulating the mechanism of competi-
tion and hence impeding monopolization.”
After a hundred years of anti-trust legisla-
tion in the U.S., monopoly control of indus-
try is at an all-time high. Also, in Sweden the
economy is dominated by a handful of
powerful, privately-owned companies. These
are the hard facts of life under capitalism.

Further, the Orlov article makes no men-
tion of the internationalization of capi-
tal, through the development of multina-
tional corporations, which makes it very
difficult for individual capitalist countries to
control their own economies.

Slovo was right when he said that some
Soviet journalists (and not only journalists,
I must say) prettify capitalism “in the same
generalized and unscholarly way as it used
to be condemned, that is, without
researched statistics and with dogma taking
the place of information.”

In making these points against the good
doctor, I am not motivated by any sectarian
opposition to co-operation with social
democracy and its supporters. But neither
can I accept an uncritical and unscientific
evaluation of social democracy as a political
trend. Today, in the face of the revolution-
ary changes in the Soviet Union and East-
ern Europe, and with the pressures from
neo-conservatism in the capitalist world,
many communists, socialists and social
democrats in the West are reassessing their
perspectives for the future. That includes
the question of the relevance, in the long-
term, of social democracy as an alternative
to the domination of capitalism.

If I have used Dr. Orlov’s article to make
this small contribution to the ongoing
debate, it is because his article is just as

much about the significance of social demo-
cracy internationally as it is about the future
of Soviet society.
Jack Phillips,
Burnaby

TRIBUNE PHOTO — SEAN GRIFFIN

SAUL TERRY

‘Tory govt
attempting
to silence
Our voice’

The following letter was sent
March 7 to Indian Affairs Minister
Tom Siddon, with copies to the
media.

During question period yesterday,
I witnessed via televised transmis-
sion, a response you made to an
honourable members’ question that
the core funding of Indian organiza-
tions was preserved. You make the
statement knowing very well that
one of the senior legitimate organi-
zations in the province of British
Columbia, the Union of B.C. Indian
Chiefs’ core funding has been com-
pletely eliminated by your govern-
ment.

Furthermore, Kahtou, the media
voice of Indian Peoples in British
Columbia, has also been identified
for elimination. It is becoming
repugnantly apparent that your
government is out to undemocrati-
cally silence the critical political
voice of Indian Peoples under the
guise of budget restraint.

~ The world has recently witnessed
such termination of communications
and political muzzling by the state of
China. Surely your Canadian people
do not condone nor expect such cur-
tailment by your government of the
human right of freedom of com-
munication and political expression
by Indian Peoples.

Chief Saul Terry, President,

Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs

TRIBUNE PHOTO — DAN KEETON

TOM SIDDON

Pacific Tribune, March 12, 1990 « 5