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 ~