Published Weekly at

ROOM 104, SHELLY BUILDING
119 West Pender Street
Vancouver, B.C.

= by the
TRIBUNE PUBLISHING CO.

MArine 5288

TOM McEWEN . ditor
IVAN BiIRCHARD - Manager
EDITORIAL BOARD :
Nigel Morgan Maurice Rush Minerva Cooper Al Parkin
Subscription Rates: 1 Year, $2.00; 6 Months, $1.00
Wancouver, B.C.

Printed By UNION PRINTERS, 2303 East Hastings Street — — — :
Authocized as second-class matl by the post-office depactment, Ottawa

Atomic backfire

A TOMIC diplomacy backfired in United States admin-
istration circles last week, churning up such a smoke
that the advocates of that policy in Washington, Ottawa,
London and Paris are still groggy. 5

Secretary of Commerce Henry A. Wallace delivered a
speech last Thursday in New York, the text of which was
previously approved by President Truman. Calling for a
frank recognition of Russian and American “spheres of
influence,” and denouncing the Anglo-American policy of
“get tough with Russia,” Wallace’s speech cut across what
has become accepted as U.S. foreign policy, as propounded
by Secretary of State James F. Byrnes. Equally critical of
British foreign policy, Wallace warned against the danger
of close collaboration with British imperialism, where con-
troversies involving the Soviet Union were concerned.

More recent disclosures arising from Wallace’s speech,
show that back in July the Secretary of Commerce had
sent a letter to President Truman, urging a sweeping over-
haul of U.S. foreign policy, and the scrapping of the
Baruch-Acheson atomic control plan, which is aimed at
giving the U.S. world control of atomic energy develop-
ment. This letter has now been made public in view of
the fact that it got into the hands of the notorious anti-
Soviet columnist, Drew Pearson.

‘ge U.S. diplomatic and government circles Wallace’s speech
has precipitated a mear crisis. I t

it brought forth wails of protest. Bevin’s office was “sur-

prised” at Wallace’s criticism of British imperialism,” at a

time when independence was being given to India and when

British troops were being punctually withdrawn from

Persia.”

Readers of the commercial press have had a difficult
time trying to follow the various editorial “explanations”
of Wallace’s speech, and especially of how Truman came
to give it his presidential approval, after having approved
Bymes’ speech at Stuttgart only a few day before. i

How the presidential okay came to be given is im-
portant of course, but it is not the all-important factor in
this fundamental division on foreign policy within the ad-
ministration. Henry Wallace is the only exponent of the
late President Roosevelt’s American-Soviet good-neighbor
policy left within Truman’s cabinet. The common people
of America are still pro-Roosevelt in their domestic and
world outlook. Wallace merely, and only partially, ex-
pressed in his New York speech what the American people
earnestly desire, what their late president had often ex-
pressed, “to live together in peace with one another as
good neighbors’”—and Roosevelt included the Soviet Union
whose people had made such tremendous sacrifices for
Allied victory, as among the most important of good
neighbors.

Ben backed by the most reactionary sections of Am-
erican imperialism, the financial royalists of Wall Street
who amassed billions of new wealth out of the war, has
taken the people of America away from this path blazed
by Roosevelt and led them onto the path of atomic provo-
cation and war against their former ally, the USSR. Hence
his “get tough with Russia” policy, which epitomizes
American imperialism on a world rampage.

Wallace expressed in part what the American people
desire. The meeting to which he made his speech met his
veiled slurs on the USSR with unfeigned opposition. But
the meeting recognized in his speech the first set-back for
the Byrnes-Vandenberg-Bevin clique of atomic warmong-
ers, the first breach in a foreign policy disastrous to the
U.S. and to the world. Now that the foodgates are opened
the Byrnes clique is in line for a “tamping-down.”

If Wallace aspires to speak for the American
people, he will continue to fight. And when President
Truman has heard from the American people he will learn
that his administration cannot follow two divergent paths,
one leading to war, the other to peace.

Peace is the ardent desire of the common people every-
where. This explains why they welcomed Wallace’s speech
and why, unlike the professional “explainers” in the com-
mercial press, they place more hope in what is implicit in
that speech than in President Truman’s alleged error.

FACIFIC TRIBUNE — PAGE 4

In Downing Street

RUCE HUTCHISON is one of

Canada’s top columnists. a lit-
erati of the genus ‘liberal’, which
in our country cuts a wide swath,
and contains among its select com-
pany such mental luminaries as
Wilson Woodside. B. K. Sandwell,
Nellie McClung and other such
giants. Hutchison is the literary
pharmicist of the bourgeoisie. He
tells them (for a price) what they
want to believe, through the me-
dium of syndicated columns: of
literary soothing syrup. On very
rare occasions he reels off some-
thing quite palatable—when he
happens to be dealing with a sub-

ject he knows something about.

Mis general run-of-the-mill con-
coctions are designed to calm the
nervous fears of the bourgeoisie,
who are daily haunted with the
“spectre of communism” in its
most modern form—yjobs, homes,
security, peace. .

In a recent column Hutchison
chose a popular subject which fits
in well with his special qualifi-
cations — slandering the Soviet
Union. He does the job with more
finesse than Wilson Woodside,
and with an equal disregard for
facts. He has heard that a num-
ber of Russian-Canadians are re-
turning with their families to
Russia. He selects one of these,
Victor Shpihun and his family,
as the leit motif of his anti-So-
viet diatribe. “It would be inter-
esting to know,” says this liter-
ary medicine man, “how much
information Mr. Shpihun and
some other Canadians of Russian
origin have about the social sys-
tem of Russia which makes them
think it is better than Canadas,”
and recommends as 2 cure for a
presumed lack of information, “a
book issued a few days ago by
the United States government
called “Communism in Action.”

According to this book, written
by “experts,” the standard of life
in Russia is very low, comparable
only with the zero level of the
great depression in America. De-
nied the “democratic” privilege
of having depressions, the Rus-
Sians might have difficulty in fol-
lowing the “experts” quoted by
our liberal medicine man on “how
low is low?” Their contribution to
the job of smashing the military
might of Hitler fascism would in-
dicate a different code of values
from that used -by the Washing-
ton “experts” and ~ecommendea

By Tom McEwen

by our literary quack doctor as a
fuage for measuring standards of
life. °

Adding to the ingredients of
his bourgeois soothing syrup,
Hutchison proceeds to mix a few
Statistics on national incomes—
in terms of Canadian dollars, and
arrives at the conclusion that the
average Russian receives less
than $20.00 per month. Commend-
ing the results of his substrac-
tion to the at- :
tention of Mr.
Shpihun and his
four healthy
children, . who,
for “the last six
years has work-
ed for $160.00
per month” the
emigrant is
warned that he
will have to get
along on seven

Tom McEwen

times less than that figure in
Russia. Have a care Mr. Shpihun,
have a care, even if you are now
unemployed, which is one of the
privileges of our “democratic way

of life,” you are “still so well
off” ...to be . “the envy of
nearly all Russians.” It might be
added that the trick of juggling
Russian roubles with dollars to
reach any misleading conclusion
desired, did not originate in the_
Huchison pestle. He merely fol-
lows the rules of the cult which
aims to confuse or distort the
nominal, and ignore the real
‘wages’ of labor in a Socialist
State.
Ci

ONTINUING his anti-Soviet

mixtures, which follows the
theme of the Taschereau-Kellock-
Gouzenko formula, ‘Doctor’ Hut-
chison lectures Mr. Shpihun on
the subject of social systems.
“Here, Mr. Shpihun can join a
trade union and protest against
the decisions of employers of the
government”; here Mr. Shpihun
can go on strike, but over there
“the Russian worker does not
strike, for he would disappear if
he did! Be careful, Mr. Shiphun,
damit, be careful. Strikers have
been known to disappear here
too, but we don’t talk about. it
in polite “democratic” circles.
Bill Davis of Nova Scotia ‘disap-
peared’; Ginger Goodwin ‘disap-
peared’; three Estevan miners
‘disappeared’; the lumber workers
Rossval and Voutilainen ‘disap-

oe

oviet dope peddlers

peared’; Sacco and Vanzetti ‘dis
appeared.’ Yes, the history of
American labor is replete with
the names of workers who have
‘disappeared.’ Even while the ‘ex-
perts’ at Washington work on
their ‘communism in . action,
Wegro workers and war veterans
‘disappear’ in the violence cf
lynch mobs. But let us get back
to the Russia of our literary voo-
dooist.

As a grand windup, Mr. Shpihur
can go to Russia and to hell with
him. “He is free, as far as Gan-
ada is concerned, to go . . .” But,
“if Mr. Shpihun were in Russia,
he could not come to Canada. He
could not ge outside the border
of Russia,’ ete. and so forth.
There, according to our literary
quack, only “a few trusted zov-
ernment officials can move a foot
out of the country’; the others
cannot even go a mile from home
“without a government permit.”

Like the other falsehoods con-
tained in Hutchison’s anti-Soviet
harrangue, this one also disre-
Sards entirely the fact that the
indexes of passenger travel per
population per mile within the
Soviet Union is the highest of any
country bar none, while annual
indexes of Soviet delegations
travelling abroad is higher than
most countries, and at least 80
percent higher than Canada. So-
viet students, technicians, trade
unionists, scientists, artists, cul-
tural organizations, journalists,
collective farmers, etc—in fact
every phase of Soviet life is rep-
resented in foreign travel to
study and exchange observations
With people of other lands and
climes on the intricate business
of living. That more Soviet dele
gations do not visit Canada may
have something to do with the
fact that our “social system” re-
quires the dubious services of
hack literary prostitutes toe keep
its ‘best people’ believing they live
in “a best of all possible world.”
The anti-Soviet soothing syrup
concocted by the Htutchisons for 2
consideration, helps them to hold
ento that belief, and the more
shaky its foundations become
under the impact of history, the
more potent the dose required
from the medicine men of the
“free press.”

(Continued on* Page 5)
See DOPE PEDDLERS

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER, 20, 1946