Bolshevism in Australia.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16428, 23 January 1919, Page 6

Bolshevism in Australia.

It lias remained for the Labour mem-

bers of the French Mission, . who reached Australia just as General Pau and his party left tho Commonwealth for New Zealand, to be the unwitting means of bringing to a head thq sympathy with tho Bolshevists that was apparently latent in a section of the Australian community. M. Thomson, whose position in tho Labour of France has already been explained in our columns, came out with his fellowdelegate, M. Hodee, as tho accredited representative of French Labour, charged with fraternal greetings from tho workers of France to those of Australia. In the course of his tour he addressed meetings in the Trades Halls at Newcastle and Sydney, and on both occasions was subjected to the grossest insults by his hearers, who for the time were his hosts, as he had been invited to address thein.. Neither of tho visitors favours Bolshevism. "We "know/' said M. Thomsen at Newcastle, in reply to a question by a youth as to France's attitude towards "that " grand and beautiful doctrine," "we "know tha + . the Bolshevists signed a "shameful peace and threw ah addi- " tional burden on the British and "on us. Tho workers of France will "never send soldiers to assist Bolshe"vists. Wo do not think they are "worth it. We will let them stew in "their own juice," "Personally, M. •Thomsen declared uncompromising opposition to Bolshevism. In tho wild disorder that followed these frank statements, tho speaker was charged with being a traitor, an "apostle of "capitalists," and "an Imperialistic " jingo," whilo France was accused of having participated in a "capitalistic "war," and of having,signed peace with Prussia in order to crush the French worker, an assertion which must havo left the visitors stupefied with amazement at the measureless depth of prejudiced ignorance that it displayed.

A few nights lator M. Thomsen experienced a repetition of the meanness of Australian Bolshevists at the Sydney Trades Hall. The delegates to the Trades and Labour Council who wero present are said to have been evidently willing to give him a fair hearing, but they were outnumbered by others of the extremist class who came prepared to show their animosity to M. Thomson on account of his condemnation of tlio Bolshevist regime in Russia Under the circumstances of almost incessant coarse interruption, M. Thomsen contented himself mainly with "a "few brief fraternal expressions," but it was with difficulty that the interpreter made himself heard above the disorder, jeers, and shouts of derision, and the meeting from the first to last was littlo more than a rowdy demonstration of sympathy with Bolshevism, and, one must assume, its methods. In view of those methods, which are mainly those of wholesale murder and robbory, and bestial lust, a resolution which was proposed as soon as M. Thomsen had conoluded his speech, has a painful interest, particularly as coming from a man of British birth and being endorsed by a large number of his British fellow citizens. It ran as follows: — "That this meeting of - organised, workers, having heard !M. Thomsen, send fraternal greetings to the workers of Franc© and of all otter countries;

and realising that the calumnies now being hurled at the Bolshevists—like the calumnies that were hurled at the French workers when they were struggling for justice in the Revolution of 1792, and in the Commune of 1871 — emanate from the enemies of the working class, expresses the hope that those now fighting for freedom will triumph over the foul monarchs and militarists and all those who support them." I The mover, who happens to be the 6ecrctary. of the "One Big Union" movement, declared that the opinion of tic meeting was that organised labour "stood solid behind the Russian " Bolshevist movement," that it conl considered the Soviet system of Government, "the finest in the world •' for tho workers of the world."' and that it desired the overthrow of the capitalists at the earliest possible moment. Fortunately neither the person who expressed these opinions nor the mob of hoodlums who insulted their visitor represented the whole body of Australian labour. Several secretaries of large labour organisations subsequently expressed their disgust at the treatment M. Thomson had received, their disapproval of the sentiments embodied in the resolution, and their hope that they might meet the French delegates before tho latter left Sydney, so that they should not go away with a wrong impression of fhe workers of the community. It would have been almost incredible if any considerable portion of organised Australian labour had approved of the Bolshevist regime, but the fact remains that a noisy and by no means negligible section of workers do support that baleful doc- i trine, and the sooner the main body j purges itself of its Bolshevist elements the letter it will be for its reputation and interests.