Review

EDITORIAL PAGE

Our ‘responsibility’

n their long-sustained attacks

upon the economic and social
standards of the common people,
monopoly and its political hench-
men invariably indulge in windy
harrangues about “labour’s res-
ponsibility” to a vaguely defined
“public.”

Perhaps at the start of this
federal election campaign, the
most decisive in Canadian politi-
cal history, now is a good time to
spell out this “responsibility,”
which history, rather than monop-
oly demands of labor and the peo-
ple. :

In a few words, it boils down to

this; to leave nothing undone that
will advance the unity, solidarity
and broad common interests of
working people in factory, farm,
office and small business. Leave
nothing undone in the way of unit-
ed labor political action to provide
an alternative, by and through
which the monopoly domination of
Big Business in Parliament can
be broken.
_ For peace, independence, a sov-
ereign and prosperous Canada,
the NDP provides the only immed-
iate alternative to Tory, Liberal
and Socred maladministration and
betrayal. But this requires trans-
forming united workingclass _pol-
itical action into an all-embracing
reality, instead of a sectional
dream.

It won’t be easy, but there are
many fine examples in labor and
farm ranks to show that it can be
done, where the will is equal to the

Editorial C

etween Premier Bennett’s bud-
getary $20 Homeowner Grant
“increase” and Vancouver Mayor
Rathie’s rapid . calculations on
civic tax hoists, the truth of an
old domestic complaint was doub-
ly confirmed*—“It was spent be-
fore we ever got it’!

Of course there’s another $30
“promised” on the “grant” for the
years ahead, but there’s no assur-
ance — at least not in this year’s
budget, that the homeowner won’t
be caught in the same squeeze.

Such “increases” serve a triple
purpose; kid the taxpayer, holds
direct municipal “aid” down to a
minimum, and stimulates the idea
that WAC is a “philanthropist.”

Three standard ingredients in the -

Socred recipe for a “debt-free”
province? :

is Pp e fj ib =
- Pacific Tribune
Editor — TOM McEWEN
Associate Editor—MAURICE RUSE
Business Mgr.—OXANA BIGELOW
‘ Published weekly at: _
Room 6 — 426 Main Street
Vancouver 4, B.C.

Phone MUtual 5-5288
Subscription Rates:
Canadian and Commonwealth coun-
ijtries (except Australia): $4.00 one

year. Australia, United States and —

all other countries: $5.00 one yer.’
Authorized as second class mail by
- the Post Office Department, Ottawa.

and for payment of postage in cash.

eb. 15, 1963—PACIFIC. TRIBUNE—Page

There are negative sides, but
these are not the all-important
ones. An ill-considered statement
by an NDP leader or spokesman;
the exclusion of Communists or
alleged “communist-led” unions
from NDP political activity. NDP
leaders, in their dual capacity as
union leaders engaged in union
raiding and disruption, and in
other unions, a hang-over of Tory,
Liberal and Socred influences 1%
the top echelons, serving as an
obstruction to unity in support of
NDP policies. And last but by no
means least, the ancient Gomph-
erite dictum of “no politics in the
unions,” which in the final analy-
sis, is bosses’ politics. :

In the urgent and pressing need
for broad labor unity and action
in support of an NDP alternative
to the political henchmen of big
business, none of the above prob-
lems (or others unstated) are in-
surmountable. And least of all if
the supreme question of Canada’s
survival as a sovereign nation and
people is kept ever in mind?

The problem therefore is the
unity needed to create and assure
that alternative. To recognize its
tremendous potential in the pres-
ent political fabric of Canada. To
work unitedly for its realization

‘in the full knowledge that such

work will alsc be the best guardian
of policies designed for peace, in-
dependence and security.

That is the prime “responsibil-
ity facing labor and the people in
this election.

omment

x

Commen?

Our hidden censors

rR“ Leslie Morris ’ column on
page 11 of this edition. It re-
veals the depth to which sections
of the monopoly press will stoop in
their efforts to,twist and distort
the facts; to substitute lies for
truth in the production of liter-
ary pablum on which the coldwar
feeds.

The Morris episode with the
Tory Toronto Telegram is only
one facet of this foul art. In the
current general election campaign,
as in past elections, the monopoly
press lowers its “curtain of sil-
ence,” its “blackout” on the state-
ments and activities of the Com-
munist party and its candidates.
Only on rare occasions does the
kept press mention the fact that
Communist candidates are in the
field. Even after official nomina-
tions are posted, few would ever
know’ from this press that Com-
munist candidates are on the bal-
lot.

The “silent” technique seldom
varies. The bulk of its election
“news” coverage goes to its fav-
ourite Tory, Liberal or Socred
candidate, with a lesser screed
on the other “three” candidates.
But for the Communist candidate
it is either the “blackout” — or
the Morris treatment.

Similarly on TV; CBC’s political
“free time” to Tories, Liberals,
Socred and NDP is denied the
Communists on one spacious pre-
text or other, and while this or
that old-line candidate is frequent-
ly picked up by TV stations to give

voice to some political drivel or
other, the Communist candidates
are studiously avoided.

Moreover, regardless of the |
generally prohibitive cost of TV
and radio time (that is, prohibi-
tive to Communists), there is a

marked reluctance on all but the |

smaller stations to “sell” time to —
the Communists. A_ reluctance
clothed with much the same hypo- —
critical excuses as the faculty of —
a Mississippi university uses in
attempting to exclude students
with black skins.

~ Thus we have a hidden but none- —
the-less rigorous censorship; a —
monopoly press and information
media that takes upon itself the
right to determine. what the pub-
lic shall, or shall not hear; that
exercises this “right” to distort
or blackout; that presents its pub-
lic with rabid anti-communists
as “authorities” on Communism,
the while posing as an “unbiased”
media of public information?

As the national leader of the
Communist Party puts it, “To win
fair press treatment is part of the
general political struggle’, and
very definitely a part of this fed-
eral election campaign. As a legal
entity in Canada, the Communist

Party and its candidates have 2

right to be heard, just as the Can-
adian people have the right te —
hear and approve or reject Com-
munist proposals for a non-nuc-
lear, independent Canada.

In this no self-appointed press,
TV or other censors are needed,

Tom
McEwen

rom now on in until election
day, April 8, Liberal, Tory
and Socred_ oratorical floodgates
will be open wide in an endless tor-
rent of wordy froth.

Between them they will prob-
ably spend several million dollars
in a grand campaign to confuse,
delude and befuddle the electorate,

Who will supply all this elec-
tioneering dough? Big Business of
course, who else? Fine ‘“moraliz-
ing” on the sources of Liberal,
Tory and Socred election slush
funds generally come after elec-
tions, never immediatly before or
during. .

This election slush fund in the
coffers of the old-line parties has
one great advantage (for them); it
enables them to avoid “meeting
the people’ by doing their elec-
tioneering through the media of
high-priced TV, radio and news-
paper advertising.

This arrangement, of course’
avoids the ‘embarassment’ of
having statements of other elec-
tion ballyhoo challenged by a
‘Jive’? audience, since such costly
media is largely prohibitive to

_ all but the fat slush fund partici-
pant.

Consequently, :workingclass_ po-

litical parties like the New Den»
ocratic Party and the Communist
Party are at a considerable disad-
vantage in the new techniques of
high-financed election campaign.
They at least have to depend en-
tirely upon the dimes and dollars
of working people to get their pol-
icies and programs ‘‘across’”. And
at one thousand dollars or more a
page for an advt. in the monopoly
press or a similar amount for a
few minutes on TV, an awful lot
of dimes are needed to counter tne
political malarky of big business
with positive policies.

Of course in these times of rapid
change (who knows?), the dimes
(and the votes) of working people
may yet upset the parliamentary
monopoly by the old-line partis-
ans of Big Business, which they
hold largely because elections are
“bought” rather than won. It has
happened — and is happening—
and with a real peoples’ unity be-
hind the NDP and the Commun-
ists, could hapen on April 8. But
it will take a much greater united
effort than ever before to make
it happen.

In this and subsequent editions
of the “PT” the key issues of this
decisive election campaign will be

kept well to the forefront, and
particularly the central issue of ©
No Nuclear Arms in Canada, to

which all else is secondary.

Hence, the big job at the mom-
ent is the winning of the widest
labor and people’s unity in sup-
port of the NDP; to provide that al-,
ternative — and the only alterna-
tive at this stage of Canadian his-

tory which can assure that the
Diefs’ Pearsons, Thompsons et all,
are given permanent parliament-
ary retirement — one of th~ rime
requirements for a truly independ-
ent, sovereign and _ prosperous
Canada. A unity which includes
all who strive for such a Canada.
Already in an attempt to play-
down election issues we hear Lib-

ecrals, Socreds and brainwashed
Tories ‘“deploring’ and warning
against “anti-Americanism” in the
election campaign.

‘PRISSIS HRS SAVIN fe GES NOt
speak too harshly of those who

burgled the house prepatory to
setting it on fire.” But if we have
control of our own resources and
keep nuclear arms out of Canada,
one must speak of ‘those who do
the burgling and politic for nuc-
lear destruction.

In this we could quole a great
American, Gus Hall, leader of the
Communist Party of the USA, in-
rvited to address the student body
of McGill University, but refused
entry into Canada by Canadian
immigration authorities on what .is
termed an “unacceptable persons”
ruling. Said Hall:—

“The Canadian
should be more vigilant against
Wall Street's grabbing Canada’s
wealth. That would be a service
to the people . y

That is sound down-to-earth ad-
vice and puts the spotlight on
which America the Canadian
people are “anti” about. It also
puts emphasis on the pressing need
of unity to win that “servi 2 to
the people.”

authorities

A:

ES. ees