42 years ago... By LESLIE MORRIS At the end of 1920 the’Soviet Republic, which had been es- tablished fairly peacefully, defeated foreign military invasions and the counter-revolution and set out on the long, hard road to meacefully construct socialism, The ruined economy had to be rebuilt before socialism could be established. "To strengthen Soviet Russia and make her unconquerable is the main thing,” said Lenin. He argued that is was quite permissible to give concessions to foreign capitalists in order to help build the economy, pro- vided that this form of state capitalism was regulated and controlled by the working- class political power. It would help not only economically. Lenin pointed out that concessions would be mainly of “political interest” for they would strengthen peace and make it more difficult ‘for the capitalist powers ‘which have agreed to deal with us to undertake military steps against us.” * * * ‘Recently some of Lenin’s anwsers to anxious questions about concessions to foreign capitalists were published for the first time. He spoke on Dec. 21, 1920, to the Communist delegates to the 8thAll-Russian Congress of Soviets. Lenin’s answers are brilliant examples of his flexibility, and political realism. While the capitalists rejected the concessions, thinking, mistakenly, that this would destroy the Soviet Republic, Len- in’s remarks show that he stood as firmly on the principle of the peaceful coexistence of states with opposing social systems as the USSR does today. This principle has still to be fought for, not only in rela- tions between socialist and capitalist countries, but by Com- munists themselves. < * * * Here are one or two examples of Lenin’s way of dealing with the matter. Question: “What will the position of Soviet power be if the international bourgeoisie discovers its tactics on the con- cessions? Won’t that be damaging to us? Answer: “On the contrary, everyone in Europe knew about the concessions and the clamor raised there proves that the bourgeoisie is worried. There are signs that it is afraid of being late. The capitalists who do not want to risk their relations with Russia already felt that they are behind, while the more enterprising are successful. And we make use of the contradictions among the capitalists.” In the autumn of 1920, Washington B. Vanderlip went to Soviet Russia as a representative of American industrialists with a proposal for an agreement on concessions in Kamchatka and Eastern Siberia. Several questions were put to Lenin, among them this one: Question: “What does the preliminary draft agreement with American imperialists on the Kamchatka concession pro- vide for?” Answer: “I have said that the duration of the conression Will be 50-60 years. We shall receive a share of the products and they will have the right to build a military and naval base on the inlet near the one which has an oil deposit.” Question: “Is it not to be feared that in view of the expect- ed war between America and Japan the latter may seriously attack our Soviet Russia? What shall we do then? Shall we _ defend ourselves against Japan in alliance with imperialist Am- erica, making use of its aid as a real force?” Answer: “Of course we shall, and we have said again and again that when it comes to consolidating the socialist republic, alliance with one imperialism against another is in principle Permissible. Japan’s offensive against Soviet FUUSsiA is now a much more difficult thing than it was a year ago.” * * ¥ Elsewhere, in replying to a question about Turkey, Lenin said “we shall not allow the slightest carelessness that may Mveigle us in war.” Socialist foreign policy—then, and now. ‘Lift tax Cont'd. from Pg. 6 ‘wrought and harrassed tax- payers. The old saying goes that there is nothing more certain Once again strike at those best 4,34 geath and taxes. To that Able to afford higher taxes. _ The above steps accompan- leq by federal assumption of the full costs of elementary education to be paid for out of a fifty percent cutback in arms spending and greater Provincial assistance could aS some lasting solution ‘0 the problems of over- might be added that the kind of solution offered above, which is both necessary and possible, will never come about except by massive pres- sure by the people and in the first instance the organized labor and trade union move- ment and the ratepayers movement. Approaching union merger is a positive step forward By JOHN SMITH Kamloops will be the site of an important conventicn on June 14, 15 and 16. The B.C. Division of the National Union of Public Employ- ees (NUPE) will hold their an- jnual conference. High on the vagenda will be the upcoming merger between NUPE and the Nation Union of Public Service Employees (NUPSE). The B.C. Division has more than 7,000 members, in some 70 locals. These members are em- ployed by municipal authorities. The B.C. Hespital Employees Un- ion, a provincial organization with 3,500 members, is also a NUPE affiliate, but it does not belong to the B.C. division. * * * NUPE is affiliated to the Can- adian Labor Congress nationally and with’ its large membership in B.C. it could be a potent force in provincial labor affairs. How- ever, the bulk of the division’s membership is not affiliated to a labor council or the B.C. Fed- eration of Labor. As far as most delegates are concerned, the main item of bus- iness scheduled to come before the convention is the proposed merger. There has been consid- erable debate on this matter since the draft Constitution and the Merger Agreement were sent to all locals. In the main, the smaller locals outside of Greater Vancouver are in favor of the merger without reservation. As they see it, they will get more service, in return for an increase of monthly per capita from 60 to 85 cents. On the other hand, a number of the larger locals are opposed to the increase in per capita on the basis that they do their own servicing, through full time or part time staff. * * * A number of B.C. locals have recently published articles in their joufnals which are critical of the take-it-or-leave-it attitude of the top leadership of NUPE and NUPSE. The merger agree- ment lays down that the draft constitution cannot be amended, but must be accepted or rejected as it is, at the merger convention to be held in Winnipeg on Sept. 24, 25, and 26. Judging from what has trans- pired to date there will be strong pressure for a review of three aspects of the merger: the per capita rates, those undemocratic sections of the proposed constitu- tion that could be utilized to de- stroy the provincial and local autonomy enjoyed by NUPE and, thirdly, the attempt to take away from the merger convention the sovereign right of the delegates to debate and amend the pro- posed constitution. * * co Here in B.C. NUPSE has no locals. Therefore, the question of merger does not entail a pro- vincial merging of two structures. This has he!ped to fan the idea of secession in certain NUPE circles, although the national sentiment is overwhelmingly in “Personally, I welcome nuclear tests!” favor of unity. Some of those who are consid- ering the idea of secession are impatient progressives who want to make instant history, or else go it alone in disgust. Others are cautious conservatives who see the issue as a straight dollars and cents question. ; What is missed by the impatient progressive and the cautious con- servative is the fact that we are moving into a period when all public employees will need a powerful, national union fighting for constructive trade union poli- cies. Such a union cannot be created over night, by merger alone. The act of merger will consti- tute no more than a_ beginning. From that day on, it will be the responsibility of every provincial body, every local and every mem- ber to make the national union an effective instrument, on be- half of its members and labor as a whole. * * * A national union embracing all public employees in Canada would be a force that no government could ignore. By its very strength and its potential power to influ- ence millions of people, it could >». do much to improve the salaries, benefits and working conditions of its members. It could also win many legislative gains for its members, and organized labor as a whole. Such a union would in- spire mergers in other jurisdic- tions and further the principle of one industry—one union. It is obvious that despite the many grounds for criticism, in- cluding a constitution with un- democratic sections, the merger is a positive development and should be endorsed. Such endors- ation should not detract in any way from the demand for a free and open debate on the con- stitution and merger agreement at the Winnipeg convention in September. Press Drive Quotas GREATER VANCOUVER Ciub Advance Bill Bennett $ Broadway Dry Dock Frank Rogers Georgia Kingsway Niilo Makeis Cigin Point Grey Vanc. East South Vane. Victory Square West End -North Burnaby Edmonds Quota Club Correspon Tom McEwen’s Col. 625 $389.50 350 163.00 770 663.50 250 103.00 35G 180.00 150 —-71.00 660 471.69 15G 46.00 456 293.00 339 187.00 1430 1,036.18 600 .407.43 Alberni Cumberiand Cowichan Nanaimo Parksville Victoria Saanich 374.50 247.75 593.85 440 185.65 825 54677 1,350 668.75 1,230 440 300 800 Mission Kamloops Notch Hill Vernon $11,500 6,628.57 PROVINCE GENERAL Fernie-Michel Nelson Poweil River Prince Rupert Sointula Steveston Trail-Rossland Ft. Langley Ladner Campbell River Heney-Map Rg. Quota In 300 173.00 10@ 63.00 VANCOUVER ISLAND $ 350 121.50 150 46.50 200 30.00 325 195.00 400 402.60 75 54.25 400 200.59 250 115.75 DEWDNEY $ 325 125.00 150 97.00 OKANAGAN 40.15 300 157.25 New West. South Surrey Surrey Prov. Unpledged Prov. Totals City Totals Grand Totals $ 6,500 3,391.20 $11,500 6,628.57 $18,000 10,559.77 : 963—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page to