wus

THE NATION

By TIM BUCK

Canadians must stand with new China
but St. Laurent awaits U.S. orders

‘THE Chinese Pecple’s Liberation armies are still sweep-

ing southward, overrunning Chiang Kai-shek’s
vaunted Huai river defense line, and nearing Nanking
itsel!,

Even before their recent great gains, the People’s
Liberated areas of China covered an area of more than
one and a half million square miles inhabited by
170,000,000 people. These include the most industrialized
areas of China, 75 percent of all the country’s rail-
Ways, and the most productive sections of her population.

Throughout the liberated areas the long overdue
agrarian reforms have been carried through or are in
the process of being carried through. Democratic local
Self-government is being established. The land is be-
ing distributed among the peasants and agricultural
Workers, Taxation is placed in the control] of elected
representatives of the people, taxes are being collected
by the People’s authorities.

It is little wonder that the might of the People’s
Liberation armies grows by leaps and bounds, that the
great Communist Party of China has now a member-
Ship of more than three millions. Even the most
bellicose representatives of imperialism admit now that
the corrupt reactionary regime of Chiang Kai-shek is
doomed.

‘China, under a genuine People’s government, will
be a mighty vitalizing force for all of Asia—indeed
for all the world. A land area greater than that of
Canada and the United States, occupied by a fifth of
_ all mankind, cannot help but exert a powerful influence.
People’s victory in China will stimulate all the five
hundred million people in the other countries of Asia
to renewed efforts to achieve complete national freedom.

It is time for démocratic Canadians to raise the
Question of what Canada’s attitude to a People’s China
is to be. The big capitalist interests are already press-
ing the St. Laurent government to maintain a hostile
attitude.
The Financial Post, in its issue of December 11, ad-
Mitted: “.. It is felt that the Chiang government will
: ©ventually be replaced by a Popular Front government.’
‘ answer to its self-posed question: “Can or should a
Popular front government be ‘quarantined’?” the
. Post declared that, while the whole question
Would likely be studied by the Dominion cabinet during
© next few days, “any decision as to overall plans on
'€ many matters of concern for Canada in that direc-
on will almost certainly depend on what action the
‘S. may take, which way U.S. policy goes.”
" That. is one more Fie of the deliberate and
‘ynical attitude towards Canadian interests - which
‘Characterizes the monopolists and their political hench-
_ men, particularly in the Liberal and Tory parties, and
their press,
: Instead of asking what Canadian attitude towards
People's China will be best for Canada and for all
€mocratic mankind, the Post suggests, no doubt quite
truly, that the St. Laurent government is asking only:
is the attitude of Wall Street.” The desires and
the interests of the Canadian, no less than the Chinese,
People can go to pot so far as the St. Laurent govern-

t is concerned.

_ The attitude of Wall Street towards the people of
China has been expressed during the past few days oe
Paul Hoffman, the U.S. administrator of Marshall P
®xpenditures. In Shanghai for a hurried tour of ae
ion to estimate the chances of bolstering up the

Kuomintang dictatorship, Hoffman issued a ae
on Statement which was of the nature of a politica

tform again ina’s New Democracy.

Boitnen neni the supporters of U.S. een
1at the Truman administration will give material assist-

only to a government which preserves “freedom” —

* China. Hoffman didn’t mean freedom from wea eer
freed om to organize, or freedom from aang ae ae
4. Hoffman meant freedom for one man to exp

He mea eedom for great U-S. monopolies to go
nto China ee ose of that country’s Sel heny
* they have already secured control of pened s fp
Maintain a tight control of its key industries, to bey a3
cooperation with Chinese captialists, the oanee
Political life of the country, to create con ee
Which will enable them to place a Hitler, @ steed
_ Franco, or another Chiang Kai-shek aad
Suit their purpose at some future time.
The people are going to win in China. Roe ey
to win because, as Mao Tse-tung pointed ou

“manufacturers,

he announced the decision to launch the great offensive
to liberate all China: “. . . Our strategy and tactics
are based on the principles of the people’s war, and no
anti-popular army can use our strategy and tactics... .”

. The question that Canadian democrats have to
answer is: what should Canada do? The labor move-
ment should. make it clear that Canadian democracy
stands foursquare with a People’s China. Against St.
Laurent’s inclination to hitch Canada on to U.S. schemes

to maintain imperialist exploitation in China, every
Canadian democrat should demand that Canada help
a People’s China in its struggle for freedom. :

LONDON LETTER

Tax-free fortunes
made in Britain

By RONALD CHAMBERLAIN, MP

N recent week I have made a fairly close study of
the preseut position in relation to wages,. prices and
profits, and two striking and alarming factors stand out
with great clarity amid the tangle of facts and argu-
ments,

First, the tremendously high level of profits which
are being earned by concerns of all kinds; and, second,
the individual fortunes which are being acquired by
the use of a simple but ingenious pattern of share
transactions. :

This is going on daily, but the Chancellor, Sir Stafford
Cripps, and the treasury say nothing—perhaps because
the inland revenue department is almost entirely evaded
by the ramp, which is an evil and pernicious cause
of inflation, of high prices and of economic disequili-

* brium.

‘ Despite shortages of steel, Viners Ltd., cutlery
estimate their 1947 prcfits at $460,000
compared with an average of less than $152,000 for the
11 years to 1938.

Despite shortages of carpets, Gray’s Carpets and
Textiles Ltd., made a profit of $3,576,000 in 1947, com-
pared with a loss of $92,000 in 1938.

Despite china and crockery shortages, Lawleys and
allied companies show a profit of $1,260,000 in the year
ended March, 1948, compared with $44,000 in 1939.

Meantime the workers are asked to refrain from
demanding a few more shillings to catch up with the
ever-increasing cost of living—brought about by the
colossal levei of profits and by the practices I am
referring to. —
©

Here in a few words is an outline of a typical case
of this company reconstruction process.

The company concerned, together with its sub-
sidiaries, made (in. round figures) $14,000 in 1939. This
past year they have made $344,000. The capital of the
old companies was $312,000, the capital of the new
holding company is $1,180,000.

The 11 shareholders sell portions of their newly-
created holdings for $580,000 which is, of course, tax-free.

The biggest share-holder gets $380,000. But he still

‘holds plenty of shares which are expected to bring him

$35,600 a year in dividends; on top of that he will

receive his fees as a director.

This alone illustrates what is going on, why the
rich manage to get richer, over the top of income tax,
super tax, profits tax and the other flimsy fences set
‘up by the Chancellor, ‘

This is why prices mount steadily, and why the
tide of inflation laps hungrily round the feet of King.
Stafford Canute. :

Perhaps even Sir Stafford and his treasury advisers
may one day perceive where all the water is coming
from.

@ This is the condensation of an article which Ronald
Chamberlain, Labor MP, had rejected by three
“Socialist” papers before submitting it to the Daily
Worker.

Merry Christmas
left off paycheck

By BRUCE MICKLEBURGH

- O doubt most of us will be having a Merry

Christmas this year. In spite of the war clouds
on the horizon Christmas can be merry for us be-
cause workers know how to love their families, their
brothers in the unions and their comrades in the com-
munist movement. :

And the people of China are giving the world a
wonderful Christmas present.

But if we do have a merry Christmas it’s not be-
cause we're getting enough to make both ends meet.
When you set out to do Christmas shopping you keenly
realize just how far your living standards have been
shoved down. Any dollar that most workers are spend-
ing on Christmas has been scraped from the bottom of
the barrel.

e

The point was well taken by the worker who
wrote to the Pacific Tribune to report that CCL secre-
tary Pat Conroy spoke in Nanaimo about prices, housing,
labor legislation, everything under the sun—except wage
increases. d

It was no oversight on Conroy’s part. Top CCL
bureaucrats now .openly oppose going after wage in-
creases. Witness the pressure that caused the recent
United Mine Workers district conference to decide by
a narrow margin not to seek wage boosts in 1949, —

CCL president A. R. Mosher this month told a
meeting of his Canadian Brotherhood of Railway Em-
ployees in Stratford that the CCL would not lead a
campaign for a fourth round of wage increases in 1949.
He admitted prices “are at an unusually hjgh level’
but said they were “balanced” by high wages.

How phoney this is we all know from the grim ex-,

“perience of being able to buy less and less from week

to week.

Wartime savings are almost shot (bow many Vic-

tory Bonds do you still hold?) and workers are going
in the red on instalment buying.

Monopoly price boosts are causing ill-health and

misery for working-class families,

But those families are looking for a way to fight —
back. Therefore a new round in
certain, Mosher or no Mosher.

The Workers’ Educational Association shows that

even the government’s weighted cost of living index rose
14 points from September 1947 to September 1948,
while wages in manufacturing rose only 11.2 percent.
(Woodworkers got 11 percent across the board on the
Coast, are still fighting for it in the Interior. Victoria
carpenters are on strike for 10.7 percent.)

The WEA also cites: a

tionists by tested labor leaders.
four needs $72.98 a week (Toronto pnces, which
are cheaper than Vancouver) to maintain “‘a moderately
satisfying standard of living.” a

in Canada are barely $41 a
on the food our children need,

Yet average w
week! When we reflect

‘on the labor-saving devices our wives need, on the

clothes and housing and security we all need—we can
agree we need $30 a week more.

That sounds a lot. But remember that during the
war, according to Tim Buck in Canada, the Communist
Viewpoint, Canada spent on destruction $1900 a year

(or $36.54 a week) for every head of a Canadian ©

family. Such is the productivity capacity of the Can-
adian worker, out of whose toil the boss (aided by the
Moshers and Conroys) reaps more than he does. ‘

There’s a big job in 1949 for the readers of this
column and all class conscious workers. That’s the job
of debunking in each industry the boss arguments of the
Moshers and Conroys. It’s the job of winning militant
unity for wage increases as substantial as can realistic-
ally be won in a situation marked by labor
and boss attack. That’s the best remedy for what's hit
our pocketbooks. It’s the best way to heal the Slits
in labor. It’s the best preparation against — looming
economic crisis and a strong barrier against war.

‘The workers are still stronger than the boss pene

_ they stand united.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — DECEMBER 24, 1948 — PAGE 9

the wage fight is

.

: figure that throws into
stark relief the need for replacing the class collabora-_
A working family of

pe x