BOOK REVIEW .

~ Ultra-nationalism: futile road

CAPITALISM AND THE NA-
TIONAL QUESTION IN CAN-
ADA, edited by Gary Teeple,
University of Toronto Press,
$3.95 paper.

This book must be seen as a
small landmark in the resur-
geance of  ultra-nationalism
among certain sections of the
Canadian left.

As is made clear in his intro-
duction, Teeple’s intent is to
present (and prove) the case for
the thesis that Canada is a co-
lony. The other major assertion
is that the first priority of the
Canadian working class in order
to gain its freedom from exploi-
tation is to form independent
Canadian unions through seces-
sion and breakaway from the
“imperialist” internationals. The
two go together of course — the
first being the theory, and the
second the strategic implication.
The line is consistent at least.

Of the three articles on Can-
adian unionism, only one deser-
ves mention. Because the debate
over Canadian unionism, the
road to it and the priority it
should be given, has today such
extreme practical urgency and
significance, it is a shame that
we are so ill served in this re-
gard. Unfortunately, that one
article, “Canadian Unionism” by
Charles Lipton, is dated, having

been written in 1966, and so
does not deal at all with the

_ practicalities of the 1970's and

Cominco, Kitimat, and Texpac.

If these three articles demon-
strate the strength of the argu-
ment for splitting, and we are
given no reason to believe other-
wise, then the position is in-
deed a weak one.

Regardless of any historical
arguments in favor of the view
that there never was in Canada
an important national bourgeoi-
sie (see the first article in the
book for this argument), the
“Canada is a colony” school has
always had to contend with the
existence of some very promi-
nent Canadian capitalists. Their
usual way of dealing with this
is by showing Canadian capital’s
links with American capital
through corporation  director-

ships, etc. Unfortunately, only if.

we define a national bourgeoisie
as one with no _ international
links at all, can we say that
Canada has no national bour-
geoisie. In the era of imperial-
ism, when capital is monopoly
capital and by its very nature
international, the definition is
too forced.

The book is not a coherent
whole, for which fact we may
rejoice. Otherwise, three diverse
articles, “Quebec: Concepts of
Class and Nation” by Stanley

Ryerson, ‘“Continentalism and
Canadian Agriculture” by H. E.
Bronson, and “The Development
of Class in Canada” by Leo
Johnson, which have no directly
discernible link with the main
point of the book, would not be
included. Indeed the Johnson
article contains information
which would tend to prove the
existence of an independent
bourgeoisie with its own inter-
ests in this country. Bronson
factually documents the conni-
vance of the federal government
with the U.S. food processors
to drive the independent farmer
off the land to ensure that Can-

-ada remain only a producer of

raw food, not a processor as
well. All three articles, especial-
ly Ryerson’s article, seem to
have little place in a book with
such intentions. And the only
apparent reason for the inclus-
ion of the two articles by Teeple
is that he is the editor of the
book.

In this short space very little
can be said in the way of criti-
cism of the articles presented in
this book. Nevertheless the posi-
tions are there, and the debate
with them should be taken up.

(A fuller review of this book
by Bruce Magnuson is publish-
ed in the January-February
Communist Viewpoint.)

—Andrew Stanley

Meet defends Vietnam rights

The World Conference on
Vietnam, organized by the Italy-
Vietnam Committee and_ the
Stockholm Conference on Viet-
nam, was held in Rome from
Feb. 22 to 24, 1973 with the
participation and support of
representatives from the coun-
tries and political, social and
religious forces of all contin-
ents.

The conference constitutes
an “extraordinary international
assembly at the historical mo-
ment, immediately after the
signing of the January 27 Agree-
ment on the ending of the war
and the re-establishment of
peace in Vietnam,” its Declara-
tion stresses.

“This Agreement,” it points
out, “establishes the political
and legal basis which guaran-
tees the fundamental rights of

the Vietnamese nation and peo- '

ple: independence, sovereignty,
territorial: and unity. The right
to self-determination and to the
democratic freedoms of the
South Vietnamese population is
clearly specified.”

Defeat for Aggression

The Rome conference ex-
pressed “great joy for the end
of the atrocious war which the
government of the United States
had waged against the Vietnam-
ese people with the most inhu-
man weapons of destruction.”

It hailed the “victory: achieved
by the Vietnamese people in the
course of dozens of years of
heroic struggle fought with the
unflinching determination to en-
sure its freedom and independ-
ence which arose the admiration
and gratitude of all mankind,”
and acknowledged the help of the
socialist, progressive and other
peace-loving countries and of
the peoples of the entire world
who fought shoulder to shoulder
with the people of Vietnam.

“The defeat of the policy of

Dr. A. M. and Kay Inglis at home in the study-office of the Cone:

dian Aid for Vietnam Civilians.

aggression of the American gov-
ernment is of great inter-
national significance,” said the
conference document. ‘‘This de-
feat favors the development of
the movement for independence
and peace in the world.” But,
“.. the implementation of
this Agreement depends to a
very high degree on the vigil-
ance and mobilization of world
public opinion. It underlines the
clearly evident will of the DRV
and the PRG of the Republic of
South Vietnam to implement
strictly the Paris Agreement.

Obstacles to Peace

“But the Nixon government
and the Thieu administration
multiply the obstacles with re-
gard to the implementation of
this Agreement. To quote just
some of the violations of the
letter and spirit of the text of
January 27: affirmation that the
Saigon regime is the only legit-
imate regime; refusal to dis-
mantle all military bases; send-
ing of thousands of American
“advisers” in civilian clothes;
military operations supported by
air force and heavy artillery;
obstacles put in the way of the
functioning of the envisaged
commissions; lack of all demo-

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, MARCH 9, 1973—PAGE 6

cratic freedoms; non-liberation
of political prisoners; continu-
ation of the repression. The
presence of U.S. troops and mili-
tary bases in the entire neigh-
boring region is a sign that the
U.S. government has not re-
nounced its policy of force in
that part of the world.

“The Conference urges inter-
national and national trade-
union, political, religious, cul-
tural, women’s and youth or-
ganizations to continue to step
and broaden their actions for
the implementation of the
Agreement and material and po-
litical support for the people of
Vietnam.”

The Conference states that
the implementation of the
Agreement and the establish-
ment of a lasting peace in Viet-
nam and the whole of Indochina
embody the hopes and wishes of
vast forces in the entire world,
greater even than those repre-
sented at this Conference.

“This great impetus cannot
and must not be disappointed.

“Tomorrow as yesterday, -the
cause of Vietnam remains the
cause of all mankind.”

FREDERICK ENGEL?

By NORMAN FREE?

N 1848 Marx and Engels. on
“Manifesto of the Communist gra
they were. commissioned 1 ‘
Second Congress of the Comm
The Communist Manifest?
the midst of the great boure’ ic)
in Europe. It came on the his af
the time when capitalism W4® ist)
force, coming to the fore on the deve”
society and opening up the rapi
the productive forces. oy”
It was the brilliant genius of (W°of?)
who had not yet reached the 48 ene
Marx and Friedrich Engels, whi¢ jist ,
to see at the very dawn of capi (y &
the working class which is dest? pd
struggle for its own emancipati?™ yor
so it would emancipate from ‘nol yt
ploitation and oppression the Ww
This is what they wrote 125 y: re
the working class was emerginb,
valid today as it was in their im

Of all the classes that stand. sf)
with the bourgeoisie today; clash
alone is a really revolutionary peat :

- classes decay and finally dis vist :
of modern industry; the proletat™ |
cial and essential product. rent
Marx and Engels evolved a = the)

determining the general laws ° | ih?
ment of nature, society and hum@ + @

the revolutionary transformatiO® 9!”

They were able to see 125 years Aa
duction would become social and os,
into conflict with the private own tty
means of production. They form™t ed
Manifesto as a contradiction D©™ jl
ductive forces and the productive oO
the productive forces to continu? gut
serve the interest of society the Pag) -
tions would have to be brought i cli
the productive forces—social pro ihe a
cial relations—socialism. This 15 8
materialist conception of history: (if)
that they drew the conclusion 4
mission of the working class.