_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