_8Way, 4
M nd now

~ dilit

WILLIAM KASHTAN

Sharp struggles ahead for
labor movement in 1952

HAT will the New Year bring
as the old year passes out of

_the picture? If 1951 is any crit-

erion the struggle will sharpen
immeasurably all down the line.

As it is the year closes with a
srowing army of unemployed, a
Strike in Algoma, and the threat
of strike action by Toronto street
Yailwaymen and workers in Con-
Sumers Gas. Recently the Ford
Workers closed down the huge
Ford plant in defense of 26 fel-
low-workers fired by the company.
To top it all, the Nova Scotia
Labor Board refused certification
to the newly-organized locals of
the Marine Workers and Boiler-

makers @nion in the Halifax ship-
yards.

These differing events of the
Past few weeks typify .develop-

' Ments this past year. They give

the lie to the editorial line of the
Toronto Globe and Mail that Can-
ada is “q country as nearly class-
less as any in the world.”(!) On
the contrary what they emphasize
are the two factors operating in
the Canadian scene today.

One is the Big Stick policy pur-
ay by big business, its purpose
eing to force the living standards
of the workers down by saddling
them with the costs of the war
armaments drive.

a pursuit of that policy big
Usiness and government have
mounted an offensive o ntrade

Union rights in order to make it ”

zi difficult for the workers to
i end their living standards. It
'S Not without significance that in
rovince after province these

shts are being slowly whittled
the Globe and
Bey is campgigning for the right
fee Ontario Labor Board to de-
bat Y unions involved in “wild-

&ctions.”

Unfortunately, major responsi-

es for this state of affairs rests
“sy © shoulders of the right-wing
[is Salyeg of the trade union
the ment. It is they who gave
i. Stan light to the government
aha Job on the Canadian Sea-
aa Union. Now some of them
Bnd Prepared to be government
the SM finger men, as was
% soe in Quebec recently where
be a wis eenizer_ volunteered to
Witness for Duplesis.

5 ot the other hand, what stands

deter

\

at hoax of “Soviet aggres-
sie Hew baiting to the extent
ce» > ing “equality of sacri-
Correct the contrary. Given

leadership they have
and gained substantial
ases. Moreover, where
Tship was not forthcom-
Was the case in many
Unions, the workers by

fought for

me
¢

fn leade

: » as
~ Nghtieg

rank-and-file action broke through
contracts and forced employers
to grant them interim wage in-
creases.

Thus, while the top right-wing
leadership have given their stamp
of approval to the war and arma-
ments drive, the workers have re-
acted in an entirely different man-
ner. They have in practice and in
action rejected the idea of sacri-
ficing for the war program; they
refuse to be browbeaten or cowed.
The fact is that 1951 was char-
acterized by an upswing of mili-
tancy. Moreover, the confusion
manifested during the early period
of the Korean war is giving way
to new moods. The ingredients
for a powerful peace upsurge are
shaping up.

Right-wing policy has reached,
a dead end, not in the sense that
they cannot manoeuvre any more,
but in the sense that their policies,
which ‘are capitalist policies, can
only be implemented at the ex-
pense of the working people. It is
inevitable therefore that the
workers will reject these policies.

The contest between the to
policies should reach a new stage
in 1952 and find reflection in: -

~e@A stronger and more determin-
ed fight to win the workers and
the unions for peace, for dis-
armament, trade and friend-
ship.

@ The development of the widest
unity to defend and advance
living standards against the
effects of the war economy.

@ Building unity to defend trade
union rights, above all the
right of the workers to belong
to a union of their own choice.

e Unity of employed and unem-
ployed, with the organized
workers giving full support to

* the unemployed while them-
selves fighting for a peacetime
economy, for a reduction in
hours of work with no reduc-
tion in take-home pay;

e A stepped-up drive to organize
the unorganized.

. lations.

ANTONIN GREGOR

Soviet Union has established
new relations between states

ANTONIN GREGOR, Czech-

oslovak minister of foreign
trade, in a recent article published
in Rude Pravo, dealt with the
unselfish assistance afforded by
the Soviet Union to the Czecho-
slovak people and the people in all
the People’s Democracies. This
assistance springs from the very

character of a socialist state; from -

the principles’ of proletarian inter-
nationalism and from the consis-
tent peace policy of the Soviet
Union. which has - always been
applied in all her international re-
Gregor wrote:

For the first tiree in the*his-
tory of mankind a_ mighty
power affords fraternal aid to
smaller and weaker countries.
For the first time in history
new relations between states
have been created, founded on
a basis of equality and on the
recognition of the rights of all
and also the right of even the
smallest nations to an indepen-
dent state and national exist-
ence.

Today such relations exist be-
tween the Soviet Union, the
countries of People’s Democ-
racy, People’s China and the
German Democratic Republic.

These new friendly relations
strengthen the mighty camp of
peace and are a thorn in the
eye of all our enemies. That
is why the American imperial-
ists slander furiously our ailli-
ance with the Soviet Union.
‘That is why they tell the world
the story of the “inequality” of
relations between the Soviet
Union and the countries of Peo-
ple’s Democracy.

In this way they wish to hide
the parlous position of Western
bourgeois states vis-a-vis the
United States; a position in
which the stronger misuses and
enslaves the weaker; which is
also the relation® between the
all-powerful master and those
subservient to him.

In this way they also wish to
hide their shameful attitude,
towards economic and trade
pacts and agreements made

- with the countries within the

camp of peace. The United
States, unilaterally and without
cause, is severing bilateral and
multilateral economic and trade
pacts and agreements with
countries in the camp of peace.

On the other hand; the Soviet
Union has’ not changed her
viewpoint that the existence of
full cooperation between coun-
tries possessing different eco-
nomic structures is possible and
enables overall development of
international cooperation.

Gregor then referred to Stalin's

statement that such cooperation

U.S. Business Outlook

J. A. LIVINGSTON WRITES:

‘Without Rearmament

-~A Full Recession

This headline—cynical because real security can only be assured
_ by disarmament and world trade, false because the distorted economy
resulting from war preparation is producing unemployment—appeared
‘in the Toronto Telegram on December /'7. ‘

does not depend on the same social -

system but that it is necessary to
respect the system with which the
people of the countries concerned
agree. Gregor ¢ontinued:

Of course the American mon-
opolists cannot understand such
cooperation. For them trade
and all economic activities are
only a means for ruling the
smaller and the weaker. Their
conception of so-called economic
cooperation is determined by
the percentage of profits they
can -obtain in one or another
country; by the possibility of
concessions; by greater exploit-
ation—in short, by the oppor-
tunities to exploit one or an-
other country. We had numer-
ous experiences of this in the
pre-Munich Republic.

What were the results of such
relations between Czechoslo-
vakia and-the other capitalist
countries, based on the above
principles? ‘Gigantic | super-
profits which came from the
blood and sweat of our work-
ers and peasants had not only
to fill the pockets of the bour-
geoisie at home but also flowed
broadly into the pockets of the
foreign parasites.

In this way they swallowed
the lion’s share of the national
income,of our country. The

_ Skoda concern alone paid to its
co-owner—the French military
concern, Schneider-Creuzot —
dividends to the extent of 17.2
percent. Foreign capital fet-
tered our national economy, and
the country not only lost its
economic but also lost its poli-
tical sovereignty. :

Our economic and trade rela-
tion with the Soviet Union are
built on entirely different foun-
dations, foundations which are
entirely foreign to capitalists.
These relations are based on
the principles of equal to equal;
on the principles of mutual ad-
vantage and of mutual aid.

Imports from the Soviet Un-
ion—thanks to the great under-
standing by and assistance from
that country — guarantee our
country such raw materials as
iron ore, copper, zinc, lead,
other non-ferrous metals, as
well as naptha, cotton and wool.
Without these hundred of thou-

~sands and millions of tons of
raw materials our factories
could not be run at full speed;
it goes without saying that no-
where else could we receive
such raw materials and under
such advantageous conditions.

. Similarly it is impossible to
imagine the preservation of
supplies for our people without
the importation of foodstuffs,
grain, meat, butter and raw ma-
terials for fats from the Soviet
Union.

Nor does this exhaust our
economic relations. Hundreds
and thousands of perfect ma-
chines come into our country;
such machines as only a coun-
try could produce when it has
reached and surpassed the most
highly industrialized countries
of the world. With the help
of these machines we are better
able to master our great tasks
of socialist construction.

For us, although we are‘a
country which is highly indus-
trialized and possessing skilled
workers, the assistance the So-
viet Union renders in the
technico-scientific field by mak-
ing available to us the results
of her experiences attained in

.

production and technique, and
given in a most unselfish way,
is of invaluable significance.
Such assistance means that
in a few years we shall be able
to advance in technical progress
by whole decades. If today we
belong to the ten most highly
industrialized countries of the
world then we shall also be
first among them so far as
technical progress is concerned.

Unavoidably this must reflect
itself in the speedy progress of
mechanization and automatiza-
tion of our production, so that
we shall be able to transfer
heavy and difficult work to
iron and steel machines.

The same results come to us
from Soviet experience in agri-
cultural production, in other
sciences and in that of culture.
Experiences gained in long
years of ardous work and re-
search and passed to us most
unselfishly and with under-
standing, means also that our
Unified Agricultural Coopera-
tives and our small and medium
peasants will bring about such
yields and exercise such a util-
ization of livestock as never
dreamed of before.

That which, in capitalist
countries, becomes the subject
of business and of even greater
exploitation of the workers,
now becomes—thanks to these
new economic relations created
by the Soviet Union—the sub-
ject of benefits to the people.
And this fact cannot be chang-
ed by the barking Western
broadcasts.

Quoting Molotov, Gregor add-_

There are two kinds of inter-
national cooperation. One rests
in the development of political
and economic relations between
equal states, the sovereignty of
nations unviolated by foreign
intervention. Such cooperation,
based on a democratic founda-
tion, brings the nations nearer
to each other and makes it
easier for them to render to
each other mutual aid.

The other kind of interna-
tional cooperation is based on
the dominant position of one of
several strong powers in its
relation towards other coun-
tries. which thus find them-
selves in a position of some
kind of’ vassal state, deprived
of independence.

The cooperation of the Soviet
Union with Czechoslovakia and
with other countries in the camp
of peace is an example and proof
which “if sincerely advanced and
guided by the interests of the peo-
ple,” as expressed by President
Gottwald, is such that ““coopera-
tion between state and nations is
possible and will bear the best
fruit,’ Gregor stated. '

Czechoslovakia’s ' cooperation
with the Soviet Union, Gregor
wrote in conclusion, as well as its —
cooperation with the other coun-
tries of the camp of peace, lean-
ing on the relations of a new type,
constitute a strong force and an
absolute essential condition for the
victory of the Czechoslovak people
in their fight for the building of
socialism. It is also a great con-
tribution to the common ‘need of
all progressive mankind—for the
safeguard of peace and the secur-
ity of nations.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — JANUARY 4, 1952 — PAGE 9