THE NATION

Ag this time of the year the presidents and general
managers of Canada’s chartered banks give their con-
sidered advice to big business in their annual reports.
They sum up the results of the year past and estimate
the prospects for the year ahead, and, generally, try to
indicate the trend of capitalist development, particularly
as it affects Canadian economy. :

Two such reports have now been delivered this fall,
and it is remarkable how they bear out, in spite of efforts
to conceal it, what the Pacific Tribune has been warning:
its readers for several months past. The annual presiden-
tial addresses delivered so far are those of H. D. Burns,
president of the Bank of Nova Scotia, and W. G. More,
president of the Imperial Bank.

Each of them laid obvious emphasis upon the fact
that the dollar level of the nation’s business has been
greater during 1948 than it was in 1947 but, and this is
more significant, each adopted veiled language with
which to warn big business that the picnic is over.

Murmured Burns, “,. . there has been growing evi-
dence of a closer balance between demand and supply.”
More expressed the same fear, in the following similarly
guarded words: “The impact of the mounting cost of liv-
ing on consumers whose incomes are less responsive than
the average continues to be one of the most disturbing

bank presidents agree that the masses of the people are
losing out in the struggle to keep incomes abreast of
continually, advancing prices.
e
The two bank presidents differed in their emphasis
but each of them admitted, by his emphasis, that the
business boom had been maintained in Canada during
the past year by factors other than popular consumption.
Burns admitted bluntly, “Of the various demands on
our production during the year, the strongest have been
those for capital expansion and for housing.” More cagy,
or more interested in boosting the oil and mining indus-
tries, More used Leduc, Labrador, etce., as examples of the
capital expansion which he emphasized as an important
factor.
' The fact that a fairly large proportion of the leaders
of. capitalism do not understand, at least not thoroughly,

VANCOUVER ELECTIONS

Effie Jones was

{VIC election returns were only half in when Tom
Alsbury went on the air to concede victory to Charles
(Electric) Thompson, Then the CCF standard-bearer
rushed up to Non-Partisan headquarters to offer his con-
gratulations and pose with the mayor-elect. The resulting
Photo lacked only the caption: “Which one has the Toni?”
This post-election tableau neatly sums up the political
role played by Tom Alsbury during the campaign itself.
Not for nothing did Effie Jones label him “the NPA’s

second-string candidate.” i!

While Alsbury was lens-lousing at Thompson’s head-
quarters, Effie Jones was speaking to her supporters at
Pender Auditorium. : ;

“A News-Herald reporter has been urging me to visit
Thompson’s headquarters and congratulate him,” said

Effie, “but my answer was a definite no.,Honest labor
Candidates do not regard an election like a cricket game.
My fight against the Non-Partisans and the BCElectric
isa year-round battle against rotten politics at city hall.
It doesn’t end when the votes are counted. It goes on
365 days a year. Tomorrow I'll be out fighting harder
than ever.” ;

.

Contrast these fighting words with Alsbury’s asta
Statement, “Let’s all rally around the new mayor, and
you have the political essence of Vancouver's 1948 civic
election,

The Sasiei was a test of the political understanding
Of the left-wing labor and progressive movement on the
tole of right-wing social democracy in the fight for pro-'
Sress t 5

ane me that 6,000 citizens correctly analysed Als-
bury’s role and voted for Effie Jones shows a high nee
Sree of political maturity among a considerable section
of ; ion.

ee fact that 28,000 progressive voters were confused
by CCF window-dressing and voted for Tom Alsbury in

problems of the country.” In plain English, each of those |

LABOR FOCUS

The fight lies

within the unions

Bankers give warning to industry
that boom is nearing end

“the economic laws of motion” of their own system is
spotlighted by the fact that these bank presidents treat-
ed the abnormal increase in the relative weight of new
capital investment in the national economy as though
it were an unmitigated blessing—as though it were en-
tirely a sign of abounding economic health. They are
wrong, of course.

Marx showed eighty-four years ago that the continued
expansion of new capital investment and the capital goods
industries after big capital has reduced the purchasing
of the masses, in relation to the mass of goods being
produced, to a point at which surpluses develop, is a
characteristic feature of the end of a business cycle and
a certain warning of accumulating elements of economic
crisis, ‘

e

But the bankers hope that, perhaps, war or prepara-
tions for war may even save capitalism from a crisis.
Listen to the president of the Bank of Nova Scotia, speak-
ing to his fellow shareholders and to big business:
“. . + Defense preparations, through their influence on
business in the United States as well as in Canada are
likely to be an important sustaining factor in the Can-
adian picture.”

More of the Imperial Bank was concrete, chortling:
“A much more powerful upward influence is likely to be
exerted by expanded defence programs in North America,
Western Europe, and the United Kingdom, _ Already they
have brought fresh increases in the prices of non-ferrous
metals and steel.”

Those presidents were addressing shareholders’ meet-
ings. The developments upon which they are pinning
their hopes suggest rather that they were addressing a
convention of ghouls, The vita] throbbing life of the
people means nothing to them. War, or the prospect of
war will be a “sustaining” factor to help carry prices
and profits higher so they chortle in gleeful anticipation.

The labor movement must answer those gentlemen
by building a mighty anti-war movement which will be
able, also, to shift the emphasis in our national economy
from preparations for an attempt to destroy socialism

_ by war to emphasis upon economic cooperation with the

socialist countries for peace. !

‘By BERT WHYTE

only candidate

to carry fight to BCER

the mistaken belief that he was also fighting against the
Non-Partisans shows that there is still a great deal of
unclarity regarding the role of social-democracy.

Fact of the matter is that the Non-Partisans were
scared by Effie Jones’ huge vote in 1947. Her fight
throughout the year increased their fears. They needed
to avoid a straight fight against her, which would have
been too dangerous. Hence the hunt for a stooge candi-
date,. someone who could syphon off anti-NPA-BCE feel-
ings into “safe” channels. Tom Alsbury’s candidacy
was the sugar-coated pill they used to fool 23,000 progress-
ive voters.

Labor unity is always correct and desirable, but it
must be unity around a correct program. The essence
of the struggle for unity is a fight for correct policy.

The Non-Partisans carried on a tremendous campaign

and succeeded in bringing out a huge reactionary vote. .

They spent thousands of dollars and showed considerable
skill in dividing the progressive vote. The whole cam-
paign took place in a setting of the fiercest anti-Commun-
ist drive in the press, trade unions and so on. The Non-
Partisans used Alsbury to carry red-baiting into the labor
movement; on the extension of the franchise they divided
the progressive vote by offering two alternatives to the
status quo, and won a minority vote victory for their
“no change” campaign.

But in this period of history “the world does so move.”
Victories on the side of reaction are impermanent and
insecure; defeat for the progressive forces Proves to be
only temporary. As Effie Jones said_to her supporters
on election night: _ :

“We need to go forward from this election anq in-
crease the tempo of our fight for civic reforms. We have
made thousands of friends during this campaign; we
must now unite them under our banner and march to-
gether in a mighty people’s crusade. We must fight back
against reaction on every front until final victory is ours.”

_ in the labor movement who take up the torch for

‘in the labor movement.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — DECEMBER 17, 1948 — PAGE 9

_ By J. B. SALSBERG ;

A FEW days ago a very sincere, thoughtful but
relatively young trade unionist came to me in a
rather despondent mood. “‘If the CIO could go the way
it did at its recent convention and if Philip Murray
could introduce Taft-Hartley methods in his own union,
then the outlook is very bleak indeed,” he said, and
added hesitantly, “‘Wouldn’t it be better to tell them all
to go to ---- and build rank-and-file unions beyond

their reach2”’

* I couldn’t, of course, agree. Certainly the present
CIO leadership turned its back on the glorious past of
that organization. Murray’s machine is working hard
to put the steel union into a strait-jacket. But this does
not warrant pessimistic conclusions. On the contrary,
latest developments in the CIO actually constitute a_
challenge for broad, energetic rank-and-file action on
the whole front. The outcome will be a victory for
those who fight for unity of labor, for democracy in
labor's ranks, and for peace, as against those who con-
sciously or unconsciously serve the enemies of labor by
undermining unity, destroying inner-union democracy and
who drag themselves behind the enemies of peace.

Run from the CIO or the steel union? Of course
not! That is what the enemies of labor desire. That
is what the bosses’ agents in the trade. unions work for.
The place of every progressive, militant worker is with
the masses of his co-workers. To do otherwise would
be to desert the working class.

Why am I so certain about the outcome of the
battle for the defense of the early CIO spirit? Be-
cause the present undemocratic, dangerous CIO policies
are contrary to the basic interests of trade unionism and
of the working class; they are offshoots of, and comple-
mentary to, the policies of big business. Let us take an
example or two to prove that. a

Philip Murray’s overall policy is anchored to the
Marshall Plan and the Truman Doctrine, which are
aimed against the best interests of the common people
everywhere, and depend for _ their implementation on
the most unprogressive sections of the population in each
country. I have no doubt about the eventual outcome
of the colossal struggle between the mass of people and _
the Marshall-Truman collaborators. Even now gaping
cracks are already alarming the reactionaries. ey ae

Developments in China may come as a shock and —

a surprise to those who are led to believe the Chiang —
Kai-shek clique is synonymous with China, or the fascist
cabal in Athens with Greece. In China a fourth of

mankind is achieving its liberation. The Greek people —
refuse to be shackled by the Marshall Plan. In the
Arabian world we haven’t seen the beginning of what —
will take place. As to the ‘Western democracies,” __
there is more screaming and hair-pulling behind the
scenes between those who welcome the Marshall Plan
and its Wall Street agents than reaches your ears. Those -
such
reactionary “‘plans’’ cannot but share in the reverses
which are in store for them. ce

Not so long ago those who advocated industrial =
unionism were expelled from their unions for that cine,
But industria! unionism triumphed and those who opposed
it were routed. When the dominant “philosophy” in-
the American union movement was one of collaboration
with industry to assure “permanent employment and
high wages,”” that “philosophy” reflected the thinking of _
Herbert Hoover and the Wall Street economists and
Pca like a house of cards when the crisis came
suddenly. : :

Countless such examples are available and the pres- _
ent line which the Murrays, Conroys and Frank Halls are
pursuing cannot but blow up in their faces, as happened
with their predecessors. SON Nee

But it would be a betrayal of the best interests
of labor and the people to withdraw or sit back and
wait. Those who see through the fog of deception must
struggle all the harder to save labor from disaster. Past
experiences are not erased from the minds of millions
of workers. World events than ©
ever before. It isn’t, as the parrots of St. James Street
would want you to believe, an issue between the Com-
hau c “the — ce Carpet an issue be-
tween the majority of mankind and | rapidly declining =
sphere of imperialism and those whom they influence

For the progressives and militants in the trade uni
there lies ahead a period of struggle—a struggle
we undertake with confidence because we defend
immediate and future interests of labor and the
and because we are in tune with history. a