NS i hey showed more respect and concern than did either “Say for the defense of capitalism—by war if neces- THE NATION By TIM BUCK Rg How Coldwell’s policies betray : CCF socialist principles A FEATURE of the election campaign which must ; a Oc have Shocked most members and supporters of the CF, was the way in which the dominant right-wing ets of the CCF discarded and in most cases repudi- and lL remaining pretenses of opposition to capitalism feng aligned the COF definitely in the camp of the de- a €rs Of the profit system against the ideal of social- * To accomplish . that they repudiated the very Stateme ed in fee of principles upon which the CCF was found- Selves, in ‘th They reneged on the pledges given by them- . € name of the CCF from time to time and biti, Tepudiated any pretense of democratic responsi- eq © the membership of the CCF. All they remain- true to was the “three-party unity” in which they m,..J°imed with the leaderships of the Liberal and Parties in support of the Atlantic war pact and ment Tshall plan. For the political basis of that agree- e Liberals or the Tories, F ep or example, certainly the most basic of the prin- ie to which the founders of the CCF committed that the “2 its Regina Manifesto, was the principle that cans AD Would never support a war for the defense ot tion ism. The leadership has now reversed that posi- Dlang As a result of its “three-party unity,” support of Reports from Ottawa state that rent controls of th (meaning if the U.S. starts one)—is now the basis e) ir policies, will be removed entirely by March 1950. ve corre i ith its “ e-party unity” on the Westion ate Se nee a Marshall tae the ex- abundantly clear that they had no quarrel with Mr. St. Poitation of Britain's difficulties by the United States, Laurent on decisive issues. The objective effect of all he trade policy by which the St. Laurent govern- changes made in the CCF program is that in the elec- 0 Prevents Canadian firms from selling goods to tion it was hard for the voters to find any essential : Re-thirg Of the people of the world. difference between the CCF and the Liberals, between Bein “ ie ‘issties it: was in< what St. Laurent promised and what Coldwell promised Vitable “SaaS seit ei pe should announce —the difference being that St. Laurent was likely to that i Be the.len elie iety rds Canada’s erow- have the power to live up to his promises if he wanted BE oi] Pern ce (SR SETS to. The result was all to the advantage of the Liberals. . ces. il is : “ me but once policy is decided upon, oil becomes The CCF right-wing is working to delude CCF fol- tally important, j lowers into thinking that not CCF “aims and principles ia ene CC Standard Oil, its Canadian sub- but capitalism has been changed. An example is ass feet > eet tn ae the other lesser partners in letter by a prominent CCF’er in the July 4 Toronto Star: Boy Steat oil monopoly, that provincia] or federal CCF “Sir: I take this opportunity of expressing my Wi *tnments will not nationalize, municipalize or other- wholehearted belief that the great welcome to the ities bring Oil welis, refineries, pipelines or storage facil- Liberal party to govern Canada is in effect one of the “Under public ownership. greatest triumphs our fag party the OOE acre his wa, n a public repudiation of the experienced ... The situation is very simple to TuPPosedly eRe acdc to ave the monopolies based of us CCF’ers and it is this—that the oral party Z to €xploitation of natural resources under public has very wisely realized that the CCF ideology, as wetship, Tt was, officially, part of the process of that of middle of the road socialism, is the nna ee the erating the CCF in the war camp. The pledge to resentative, and has accepted this ideology as ms “ i, bee mining corporations followed. These pledges had and intends to ally the middle of peas Saw bang oe of n Precedeq already by Official repudiation of the idea with free enterprise ... and thus ‘ormula _ntonalization of banking and credit facilities. and wider concept of capitalism.” ; Sas ete Was little cause to wonder when this political There is a naively frank declaration of ri epg so hi 'Sculation of the CCF “aims and principles” was aims of right-wing social democracy. It is ede ide iBhted by Coldwell's emphasis of the fact that the nique of right-wing social democrats - ein oa bis ® & of abolishing the Senate has also been discarded. . The technique has been to change the decla pee t the party to satisfy important circles of monopoly e Pe zs No wonder thousands of CCF members rebelled ital, eliminate those who insist on Hepans eee a bint Such actions. Their disgust and rebellion was’ and convince as many as possible that it is cap i tious service date factor in the heavy losses suffered by the CCF that has changed, not their party. »By cautiou me i f Teai,.sctchewan and British Columbia. What is not they, gain recognition as part oF ae te th Zeq Y many honest socialists, however, is the fact monopoly-capitalism in the struggle Pe Ce ae eit was all according to plan.” system. That is the path to which its lea P Spokesmen of the CCF, including Coldwell, made it now trying to steer the CCF. ae Profits explode argument against wage boosts [y the United States this week, the Chamber of Commerce Lis abe a an neice nies ai : i ada, bt is for : L to labor to forego wage increases and other demands. n Canada, “teri ee Gr higuip aeanenl No more wage increases, more production, perhaps even pay cuts—but urally, word about cutting profits. ‘ : é a fe SRols Bir is exploded by the following figures taken from the Financial Post, which show the Profits of Canada’s largest corporations and demonstrate their ability to pay wage increases: are naj Percentage Com 1947 1948 3 ms re . ioe: ‘of)-Canada: