WINDER SOCIALISM--

.” Greatest days o
ip a i : & a q
iBritain sti anda
ES By PETER ZINKIN
LONDON
f “The greatest days of Britain and its people are ahead’ under a real socialist
Svernment — this was the main theme at the British Communist. party's special

cu :
Tecent congress.
wi

ee Like the old labor pioneers, the Communists proudly declared their aim to be
pt the Planning of production for the people’s wellbeing and not for the private profit of

, }% a few. In a Socialist Britain there would be no more rent, interest and profit. There

», *actories and other indus-
@'tial plants and all means of
yet Producing and| distributing the
off 800ds would be owned by the
ra Working people.
pa Once the working people
®K power into their own
yas they could create a great
aa list country which, using
j aus resources for the peo-
)Pe’s benefit would make a
®at contribution to human-
} WY’s progress.

qn this confident note
forge Matthews, assistant
jeneral secretary, opened the
Pacis discussion on the
h Bue’ draft program “The
a sh Road to Socialism.”

WN movlegates meeting in Ham-
wtsmith Town Hall, warmly
fieg ended his statement re-

nine any idea that socialism

Witke be achieved in Britain
Kg out the Communist party.

Cialism has nowhere been
€ved without such a party,”
~ [clared,

a
2

ay

, the principal reason why
Ward’ China is socialist
lile ‘advanced’ Britain re-
"NS capitalist is that the
@m Unist Party of China be-
the © the leading force among
din People, while here in Brit-
Soi,, L© Srip of right-wing So-
Democracy has‘ not yet

broken.”

f' pose who had _ forecast
J} oy, © division in the congress
“he party executive’s posi-

Upholding measures used
? eh the counter-revolution

Ungary were disappointed
Wher delegates voted over-

Imin : Es
| Cough gly to endorse the ex

i ~ive’s stand,
: fig, Bilarty delegates
iqetional working — class
| ame arity by defeating an
Wes Ndment which would have
€ned this principle.
flegates did however, de-
°ne executive policy pro-
defining relations be-
Na socialist Britain and

& :
“Monwealth and colonial
* T1e@s.
ee executive proposal read
) #8 Socialist Britain would:

Ld
st

reaf-

ing €d the party’s principle of.

“€Cognise the complete in-
dence and rights of self-
unation of all countries
© colonial empire at the
f its coming to power;

ei! Would be an end to the exploitation of man by man.

and for this purpose withdraw
all armed forces from the
colonial and dependent terri-
tories or occupied spheres of
influence and hand _ over
sovereignty to governments
freely chosen by the peoples;

“Propose to all countries of
the Commonwealth and for-
mer empire voluntary partici-
pation in a close fraternal as-
sociation based on national in-
dependence, equal rights and
non - intervention in each
other’s internal affairs to pro-
mote their mutual economics,
political and cultural interests,
and for mutual defense against
any imperialist attempts to
undermine their independ-
ence.”

By majority vote, delegates
decided to delete the second
paragraph and substitute the

statement that a socialist
Britain would:
“Promote close fraternal

realtions for economic, politi-

eal and cultural cooperation of
mutual benefit on the basis of
national independence, equal
rights and non-interference in
internal affairs between Brit-
ain and the liberated colonial
countries and all countries of
the existing Commonwealth
willing to develop such rela-

tions.” \

The congress defeated all
proposals calculated to revise
the Communist party’s Marxist
principles and its temper was
indicated by the ovation given
to Andrew Rothstein for a
speech in which he declared:

“This congress will be mem-
orable because it has decided
firmly to reject revisionist
ideas.”

Some, he contnued, had ob-
jected to the term “revision-
ism” and some to the term
“TJabel,”

“In this congress we speak
of Socialism and Communism
and Marxism — why must we

&

% Return of the Gaza Strip to Egyptian civil administration

E38

was welcomed by the thousands of Arab refugees. Buf
the hardships and privations remain, typified by this picture
of two boys hauling water in a metal container.

be shy about mentioning their
opposites in the working class
movement, namely opportun-
ism together with its twin sis-
ter sectarianism, reformism
and revisionism?

“If we use these words it’s
not to label ideas but to remind
them that these ideas come
from the capitalist class, not
from the working class.”

Moving a minority report on
inner-party democracy which
was rejected by the congress,
Oxford historian Christopher
Hill said he agreed with most

USSR ready to make new efforts
for durable peace, Krushchev says

MOSCOW
Communism will never im-
pose its ideas by force of arms
on anyone; and the ideas of
Communism cannot be des-
troyed by ‘arms, even by
atomic weapons, Nikita Krush-
chev, secretary of the Soviet
Communist party, said at a re-
ception at the Albanian em-
bassy here.

He noted that. in interna-
tional affairs, “at present, pas-
sions have, if not completely,
then very noticeably cooled
down and life is returning to
normal,

“We must exert all efforts to
ease international tension,” he
said.

‘We want strong unity and
friendship to be maintained
between. the peoples: of the so-
cialist countries,” but not, he
added, “to the detriment of our
relations with capitalist coun-
tries,” either those which were
neighbors of the USSR, or
those which were not.

“Both the capitalist and so-
cialist countries are on one

plane and cannot get away
from it. This means that they
must co-exist and establish
peaceful relations.

‘We for our part will con-
tinue to exert every effort to
develop good relations be-
tween all countries so that
every nation can live as its
conscience wills, so that the
situation can be created where
there will be no NATO, no
SEATO, no Baghdad Pact and
no Warsaw Treaty.”

Krushchev’s remarks about
improving international rela-
tions were added to by Soviet
Premier Nikolai Bulganin, who
said:

“It is our main task to es-
tablish a lasting, a durable
peace. We are prepared to
make new efforts toward im-
proving our relations with
other countries.”

Krushchev had begun ‘by re-
ferring to difficulties in the re-
lations between Russia and
Albania on the one hand and
Yugoslavia on the other, but.
expressed a sincere wish for
these to be overcome and com-
plete understanding achieved.

“We have repeatedly declar-
ed, and reiterate now, that. we
are ready to disarm on a still
greater scale, but on’a reason-
able, reciprocal basis,” Krush-
chev said.

“We are consistently: coming
out for prohibition of atomic
and hydrogen weapons, for
discontinuation of their tests,
for implementation of all the
necessary measures for com-
plete disarmament.

“If the NATO advocates are
not ready to effect immediate-
ly extensive disarmament mea-
sures, let us proceed in this
direction step by step...

“We also know that there
are many honest people in, the
capitalist countries who sin-
cerely desire peaceful co-exis-
tence and the development of
good relations between all na-
tions.”

“In another reference to the
capitalist world, Krushchev
said: “That capitalists like their
capitalist way of life and we
reckon with this fact,” but he
asked them: “Stop hampering
our efforts to build socialism.”

of an earlier speech made by
Prof. Herman Levy, in whith
Levy claimed that the Com-
munist party was without in-
fluence, that large numbers of
its members were leaving it

and that many were shocked
and disillusioned in Soviet ac- _

tions — himself among them.

William Lauchlan, the
party’s national organiser, des-
cribed Prof. Levy’s speech as
“a cry of despair not dealing
with the facts facing this
party.”

Levy had said they were not
influencing the working class.

“If we have no influence,
why are attacks made on us by
the employers, the press and
press and television publicity,”
said Lauchlan.

“He wants to know why we
have lost.7,000 members. No
one can doubt that they were
influenced: by the Khrushchev
report and events im Hungary.
But were they correct to leave
the party? That is the issue
for everybody.”

Ivor Montagu, in a speech
delivered. with burning sin-
cerity which drew prolonged
applause, also answered Profr
Levy.

“In one sense we all share
a responsibility for every per-
son that Hitler slaughtered,
for every child who is going
to get cancer because of the
H-bomb and for the crimes
which took place in the Soviet
Union.

“But we must not project
this upon socialism. We must
not project it upon the Marxist
party. Least of all should we
project it on the Soviet Union
and its leadership, including
the_period of the leadership of
Statin.

“It ill behooves any Jewish
person to do so because it is
doubtful whether there would
be one Jew alive in Europe
had it not been for the Soviet
Union.”

MAY 3, 1957 — PACIFIC TRIBUNE—PAGE 8