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British troops were being punctually withdrawn from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