Page Six

THE

ADVOCATE

May 10, 1940

THE ADVOCATE

Published Weekly by the Advocate Publishing Association, Room 20

163 West Hastings Street, Vancouver, B.C. Phone TRinity 2019 EDITOR - HAL GRIFFIN Qne Year $2.00 Three Months ___._____+___$ .60 Half Year $1.00 Single: Copy, ees 0b d Make All Cheques Payable to: The Advocate

VANCOUVER, B.C., FRIDAY, MAY 10, 1940

Capital’s ‘Fifth Column’ Within Labor’s Stronghold

G UT GO the Communists’ boasted the Vancouver Sun in

an editorial published last Tuesday just a few hours before those reactionary leaders of Vancouver Trades and Labor council it praised so highly unseated three democratically elected delegates, not because of their trade union work, with which no fault could be found, but because of their Communist convictions. And, of course, the Sun and the big business interests for which it speaks are glad to see the Communists thrown out of the trades and labor council. They know it will make easier their attempt to deprive organized labor of all independent initiative and render the trade unions subservient to their own interests.

It is not so long since the Vancouver Sun formed a company union in a successful effort to prevent the Newspaper Guild from organizing its own employes. Now, posing as the friend of the trade unions, it bestows its praises upon “labor execu- tives who have spent their lives in the labor cause.’

“These men know that Communism would wreck all the progress that labor has made in the last hundred years,” the Sun states. “Communism would break down their unions and all the ideals they stand for; it would wipe out their crafts and their benefits.”

Rank and file trade unionists will not be so easily beguiled by these bland statements for which the Sun cannot adduce a shred of proof, unless the ‘proof’ be from those poisoned sources upon which its editorial writers habitually draw. Rank and file trade unionists know that the Communists fought for unity within the Canadian organized labor movement even while certain reactionary leaders, carrying out the instructions of President William Green of the American Federation of Labor, were plotting with big business to oust the CIO. And for this statement we have already published the proof in the facsimile of the letter sent out by A. M. Whitelaw, secretary of London Trades and Labor council, noting a promise “‘to our indusirial friends” to expel the CIO.

The Sun stands truth on its head. The “Trojan horse’ within the organized labor movement is not represented by Communist trade unionists who at all times have advanced the interests of organized workers, but by those reactionary leaders who strive to carry out the desires of big business.

wt are the important tasks confronting the Canadian

trade union movement at this critical time? These tasks are the organization of the great number of unorganized work- ers, the safeguarding of labor’s democratic rights as threatened by the War Measures act, the protection of Canadian living standards by conducting of a struggle for higher wages to offset higher living costs. And, above all, the cementing of the rank and file unity of all trade unionists for these things, in

opposition to those reactionary leaders who are prepared to betray the workers.

Have Jamieson, Bengough, Showler and their ilk launched a campaign to organize the unorganized? Their only action has been to unseat the chairman of the trades and labor council’s organizing committee. Have they protested against the War Measures act? Have they called upon the workers to struggle for higher wages or have they accepted the ‘equality of sacri- fice’ principle, tongue-in-cheek? Rather, by splitting the trade unions at this time, by introducing dissention into the organized labor movement they are attempting to prevent organized labor from uniting to achieve its objectives. They are serving, not the interests of organized labor, but the interests of big busi- ness which is striving to place the burden of the war on the workers. They are exposing the unions to the menace of fascism—Canadian fascism—and to the smashing of organiza- tion and the confiscation of funds. Scant wonder that the Van- couver Sun extolls them.

Ce SUN admits the weakness of its case by introducing Germany and Russia into its argument the better to make confusion worse confounded. “How long would a banner against Stalin last in Moscow square?” it asks, commenting upon the banners carried in this year’s May Day parade and complaining of the fact that last year’s banners against Hitler- ism were replaced by slogans urging the people to fight Hitler- ism in Canada. “How long would its bearers live in Berlin?” It quite ignores the fact that nobody has need or wants to earry an anti-Stalin banner in Moscow, unless it be some of those individuals for whom the Sun lied so brazenly during the Soviet-Finnish conflict, and they are not citizens of the USSR. The proof of this lies in the fact that nobody does, whereas in Germany where the workers last year carried through an heroic underground struggle for the eight-hour day under Communist leadership — and won it — anti-Nazi pamphlets issued by workers at the risk of their lives are passed from hand to hand. In the Soviet Union, where the workers have achieved the true freedom of socialism, their May Day banners reflected the struggle against the imperialists without. In Vancouver, despite censorship, the workers’ ban- ners also reflected the struggle within.

The Sun complains, too, that the “banners were protesting against the very tolerance that permitted their existence. The “olerance’ which enabled those banners to be carried was the strength of the labor movement, the virility of Canadian demo- cratic traditions, the inheritance of fifty years of the workers

struggles. :

It is this virility big business would sap by splitting the trade unions and ousting their militant representatives. Or- ganized labor must reply by building its unity of rank and file, by isolating and repudiating those reactionary leaders who would deflect it from its objectives, those ‘fifth columnists’ of

capital within the stronghold of labor.

AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY’S | WAR POLICIES q

Condensed from an Article by R. DIXON

qe ferment inside the Australian Labor party has increased since the outbreak of the war.

gap between the capitalists, who stand to gain, and the workers, who The Labor party leaders, who support the war, are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain

has widened the

The roots of the conflict with- in the Labor party are to be found in the’ bourgeois character of the organization. The Labor party is not a Socialist party, even in werds. Its policy is adapted to the capitalist system and coincides with the interests of the ruling class. Hence, with every crisis, when the clash be- tween the working class and capitalist class increases in Dbit- terness,.a crisis develops within the Labor party. The policy of the leadership conflicts with the interests of the workers who con- stitute the mass basis of the La- bor party. This is true of the whole of Labor party history.

With the spread of Socialist ideas amongst the working class, consequent upon the rise of the Communist party, a new situation has been created. Confronted with a consistently working-class policy in opposition to their own, the right wing leaders have been, more and more, forced out into the open, Much to their dismay, their influence over the working elass is waning. To maintain their domination in the Labor party they constantly limit in- ternal democracy and strengthen the bureaucracy. Of course, there is a limit to this, as J. T. Lang, (former New South Wales prem- ier) found out.

A further factor to be conisder- ed is the role being played by the Catholic hierarchy. In Victoria, Tasmania, Western Australia, and Queensland, it exerted a do- minating influence on the leader- ship of the Labor party. In New South Wales the Lang ‘inner group’ was a stronghold of Cath- olic Action. The advance of the Communist party has galvanized Catholic Action leaders into greater activity, and in every state disruption is being organ- ized in the trade unions, the La- bor party and other working’ class bodies. Many Catholic workers, to their own detriment and the detriment of the working class as a whole, support the re- actionary and disruptive policy of the Catholic hierarchy, These workers must be brought face to face with the truth and shown where Catholic Action is getting to.

In Queensland, Protestant re- actionaries have seized upon the association of Catholic Action with the burocracy of the Labor party to form a ‘Protestant Labor party.’ In cther states, there are @ther dangerous tendencies which must be resisted in the in- terests of working-class unity.

T THE present time the situa-

tion of the Labor party in the three eastern states is ap- proximately as follows:

In Queensland, the burocracy, closely associated with the Fal- jon-controlled AWU machine, and of course, the state government, is in a powerful position. Opposi- tion among the trade unions and the rank and file is strong, and some impatient elements are talk- ing of forming an Industrial La- bor party. The Protestant Labor party, which appears to be de- Clining, has been in existence for some years.

In New South Wales the Aug- ust* Unity conference displaced the Lang ‘inner group’ and re- stored unity within the Labor party. Since then Lang forces have carried on disruptive activ- ity against the new leadership, and are working to get control of

the Paster conference and through it, of the NSW Labor party.

(Lang was severely defeated when the Easter conference of the New South Wales Labor par- ty voted 195-88 against Australian participation in any war overseas or redirection of the present war against the Soviet Union. Shortly afterwards, Lang and nine Labor members of the NSW state parlia- ment broke away from the party because, they claimed, the party's federal executive had failed to expel Communists. Five NSW Labor members of the federal parliament at the same time re fused to sign a pre-election pledge of allegiance to the Labor party's state executive on the same ground.—Hd.).

In Victoria, the position of the burocracy is somewhat shaky. Charges of graft, against various executive members have not been completely cleared up. Discon- tent exists in the union and Labor party branches with the interfer- ence of the executive in the in- ternal democracy of the organiza- tion.

It is in the light of the above that the influence of the war on the situation in the Labor party must be considered.

ECAUSE of the character of

the war, working class lead- ers have the duty of conducting a relentless struggle in the inter- ests of the Australian working class. No leader of the labor movement who stands true to

the principles of the working class can adopt any other atti- tude,

But is this the attitude of Gur- tin, of Forgan Smith, McKell or Lang?

These gentlemen, one and all, having forgotten their working- class principles, if they ever had any, declare that they are for war until victory has been achieved. “Labor is not half-hearted in its adherence to the cause of the Allies,” declares Curtin (leader of the federal Labor party).

Labor is opposed, however, to the sending of Australian troops Overseas. There is an apparent contradiction between whole- hearted “adherence to the cause of the Allies” and opposition to an Australian expeditionary force.

Let us examine this question more closely.

Labor’s war policy, whilst meet- ing with response from the work- ers, is, nevertheless, an anti-work- ing class policy. But it is also anti-British, or next door to be- ing so. If anything, Labor's pol- icy corresponds most nearly to the needs of Australian capital- ism.

During this last 25 years, in- dustrial expansion in Australia has been rapid. High tariffs, for which the Labor party is largely responsible, limited the import of manufactured goods, much to the disgust of British manufacturers, and gave a monopoly on the Aus- tralian market to local cap- italists. The growth of Aus- tralian capitalism has been away from British imperialism. And the more the ruling class of this country contemplate its future, the more it is convineed that Australia’s destiny is bound up With the East and the problems of the Pacific. There is a desire to get closer to the United States. This process is facilitated by the increasing investment of the al- mighty dollar in Australian in- dustry. «

By 1936-37 United States capital

investment in Australia had mounted to £36,250,000. The outbreak of war has

opened up new avenues for the expansion of industries in Aus- tralia for the supply of war ma- terials and other goods. Accord- ing to some sources, there is a plentiful supply of capital for new industries, and therefore, ex- pansion is limited only by the number of workers that are avail- able, especially skilled workers. If large contingents of soldiers are sent overseas the supply of labor power for industry will be restricted and Australian capital will be unable to exploit all the possibiilties of the war.

The party that most radically expresses the needs of Austral- jan capitalism in this connection is the Labor party which op- poses the despatch of troops over- seas. It believes that Australia’s war effort should consist of pro- ducing and selling war materials and other goods to the Allies.

J. T. Lang, who in 1931-32, was campaigning for repudiation of interest payments to British bondholders is, in his loud-mouth- ed way, appearing in a ‘left’ role. After severely criticising Curtin for his lack of a firm stand on the issue of troops for overseas service, Lang, in the ‘Century’ of Feb. 2, writes: “If it (the Labor party) believes in its policy, there is only one thing to do. That is to stump the country from end to end and prevent any further enlistments to make up this expe- ditionary force.”

Qn this, as in so many other issues, Lang is quite unscrupu- lous and unprincipled. His chief concern, at the moment, is to cap- ture the Easter conference of the New South Wales Labor party and restore ‘inner group’ control, and he believes that by adopting a seemingly ‘left’ policy in rela- tion to the despatch of troops overseas, he will accomplish this. But Lang is, at the same time, a staunch supporter of the war.

Such is the attitude of the La- bor party teday.

e@

UT another matter we must

consider is: What will be the attitude of the Labor party in the event of it becoming the Federal government, as is quite possible before this year is out. We know that in New Zealand not only is the Labor government actively organizing _foreces for services overseas; it is actually consider- ing the introduction of conscrip- tion.

On the subject of Labor’s pol- icy in the event Of it taking of- fice, Curtin has mot been very communicative. At the begin- ning of February he declared that he was not called upon to state the policy of the future Labor government to the war as it was impossible to say in what circum- stances Labor would take office. We have known all along that Gurtin was very shaky on his at- titude to sendimg Australian troops overseas and now he hints

SYDNEY. This was inevitable. : carry the burdens of the war. | their hold over the workers. |

that this policy may even be changed if Labor were to take of- fice, for that is the implication of his statement.

Curtin’s uncertainty arises from Labor's support for the war. If the Labor party opposed the war, Curtin would be able to declare, now, that Labor, in the event of it assuming office, would not only not despatch further forces over- Seas, it would take steps to with- draw those already there and de- Mand an end to the war.

The Labor party leaders are attempting to canalise the latent opposition to the war into anti-

- Conscription channels and opposi-

tion to overseas service, as, dur- ing the last war, the anti-war struggle of the workers was limit- ed by the Labor party and trade

union leaders to the fight against conscription.

This is going to be something more than a battle of words. Cur- tin wants to confine working class activity to mere talk. The working class, however, will not be successful unless it is prepared to struggle. ;

Objectively, the opposition of the Labor party to overseas ser- vice must arouse anti-war senti- ments among the people and the very rise of such sentiments cuts Tight across the intentions of the Labor leaders. It will bring the Masses in the Labor party into conflict with the right wing lead- ership. The Labor reformists are, involuntarily, developing a move- ment that will destroy them- Selves.

THE FORUM OF THE PEOPLE

READERS are invited to send in letters for publication

under this reading. Letters may be written on any sub- |

ject, but they must be concise because of space limitations. Views expressed are not necessarily those of the Advocate.

The Poor Grow Poorer

To the Editor: Through nine long years the common people of Canada have been faced with an economic crisis. Industry has thrown thousands of workers onto the scrap heap and put thousands on a malnutrition diet that is politely known as relief. But for the big corporations and bankers during these years profits rose 30 percent. All this time the poor have been growing poorer and the rich have been growing richer. Lenin was a thousand times right when he said capitalism had become

moribund capitalism. New Westminster, BC.

sisi

Disgusted With Union Leaders

To the Editor: I have travelled quite a little distance along the highway of life and in doing so I have at times belonged to the Street Railwaymen’s union in Vancouver, the Railway Express Men’s union at Edmonton, Alta., and I have also attended the Civil Servants’ union meetings, but could not join it as I was only a temporary employee. I was also present at the last May Day meeting at Lumberman’s Arch, in Stanley Park.

What puzzles me is why union men of Vancouver and district keep such men as Jamieson, Ben- gough and Showler as officials of the trade union movement in Vancouver. I think the workers of Vancouver and the outlying places should strike fast on all fronts and eliminate these gentry as soon as possible. Through their non-cooperation and sabotage of the labor movement in all pro- gressive ideas, they should have been ousted long ago. I believe one speaker stated at the May Day meeting that the Musicians’ union, of which Mr. Jamieson is an official, refused to supply a band, although payment was to be unpardonable. I am of the opinion that Jamieson, Ben- guaranteed at the trade union

rate. This sort of conduct seems §ough and Showler would make very excellent for some fascist union.

During my boyhood days in England I remember the South

Wales Miners’ union holding an -

indignant protest mass meeting and demanding that the govern- ment remove a particular judge because he was always bringing in verdicts against the miners and in fayor of the coal owners. It seems to me the removal of Showler, Bengough and Jamie- Son is in the hands of the union men themselves, and they do not have te consult the government. This matter requires immediate attention. OLD UNION MAN. Northlands, BC.

Comment On The Election To the Editor: Of the three major parties that took part in the

election on March 26, not one of them could succeed without |

the support of the workers.

By overwhelming numbers the common people have the power to elect or defeat any party, and, strange as it may seem, the great mass of the electorate did not exercise any privilege, or option, in the selecting and nominating of candidates for

whom they were asked to vote.

The present conflict is one glaring instance of where the common people did not declare war, and are not likely to be con- sulted as to when it will end, yet, they returned a party into office to prosecute a war that will be a burden on them.

This action alone shows the great necessity for organization and unity on the yital issues that

exist before and after every elec- tion,

It also reveals what a powerful factor the press is in molding Opinion, and where editors now use their power to influence the common people.

The function of the press is to educate and organize. That is why I subscribe to the Advocate.

Vancouver, BC. AGM.

WALL STREET’S PROFITS SOAR

ROFITS of the first 250 United States corporations to re- - port for the initial quarter of 1940 were 50 percent greater than the same period a year ago, figures recently issued reveal.

Net income of the group totalled $272,291,000, compared ©

with $181,375,000 in the first three months of 1939.

Nine railroad equipment companies reported earnings of | $4,365,000 compared with $906,000 in the first three months |

of 1939. .

Eight petroleum companies more than quadrupled last/; year’s results, showing a net income of $13,269,000 compared ;

with $3,356,000 in the first quarter last year.

Twenty-six steel companies rolled up profits of $25,134,000/ against $6,865,000 a year ago, despite a decline in operations}

since November.

charter members ~