LABOUR AND CAPITAL

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 79, 28 December 1918, Page 7

LABOUR AND CAPITAL

ENGLISH RAILWAYMEN'S LEADER'S COMMON-SENSE ADVICE .

TEE BOLSHEVIK MENACE

In many public speeches inside and outsido Parliament, delivered over three years, 1 have expressed the opinion that Uhto is , no difference between Capital und Labour nowadays that ought to bo incapable of adjustment, wrote Mr. J. H. Thomas, M.1 , ., recently. But Hint desirable state of affairs obviously presupposes a recognition of both duties and obligations on the part of each side. Some of tho recent oLrike-3 have been d'ue to what I do not hesitate to call criminal blundering on the part of the Government. Witness tho recent policemen's dispute. Others lia,yo revealed an entire want of policy and method by the authorities. What has been the courso of events? Negotiations have taken place, then a rupture has occurred, a strike hiis followed, and immediately the workers hftvo obtained all they asked. : Either they were entitled to their demands before they struck, or tliey certainly were not entitled to them after thestrike. You cannot govern tho country unless you arc firm, and you have, no right to bs firm before you are just. These continuous capitulations to brute force have resulted in the workers feeling that tho only way to secure justice is to strike. Thw is fatal to tho policy of those- who. liko mvself. believe in differences being sottled across a table. Such methods destroy conciliation and play right into tho hands of the. people who believe in Bolshevism.

It would be a mistake to assume that there are no Bolsheviki in this country, as it would be equally a mistake to assert that they are very numerous. The danirer lies in the fact that they are not limited to any one indutsry or district. But. on the contrary, are spread over the membership of practically all the unions in the country. What from their point of view is more important, and fiom ours moro dangerous, is the fact that: they are invariably, the people who never miss an opportunity to attend the branch meetings of the union!', and nro over ready to teko part in all negotiations whenever a crisis ocelli's. The 'result is that they are able to wield an influence utterly disproportionate to their numerical strength. The tipathy and indifference of the large majority of working men are responsible for this state of affairs, which is so contrary to thnir best interests. It can only l>e altered by the overwhelming majority of trade unionists asserting their Tights instead of allowing a minority to predominate.

In talking of Bolsheviki and their policy, it is only fair that- they eliould Iμ distinguished from thoso who, whilst entirely opposed to what is called a capitalistic society, nevertheless recognise and believe in law and order.

The Bolsheviki, on the other hand, are prepared to use any and every lever to overthrow society, and Labour difficulties civo them tho most fruitful field for their, activities. Their .propaganda is invariably an appeal to the worst passions of the. people. In fact, it,is always an appeal to prejudice ns against intelligence and a sense of fair play. .This obviously creates a. feeling that, is foreign to tho best interests of any country.. You ciinnot build on passion and prejudice. The fact has been tragically proved in the case of Russia. Her revolution pulled down her ruling class, but pulled herself down also. And she lies still, inert, dismembered, unable to riso out of the .ilmost meanineless welter all about her. AVe can learn from her exaniole. This country being dependent, for its existence on products imported from abroad, any svslem such as Bolshevism, which would shake our credit throughout the world, would mean starvation in a very short timp. Those who glibly talk about the blessing of Bolshevism in noiver foiwr. Hint there is no nation which would suffer more than ourselves from any such disruption.

My chief ground, however, for opposing Bolshevism is thnt I believe; apart from the other objection T hove urged, in the growing nower ami influence of Labour. labour, in my judgment, is wing tr> rule this country before very lone. Our policy, therefore, as n Labour movement must deal with principles ond not persons, must be based upon the high moral stnmlard of equitr'and justice to P.lt. Indeed, our appeal must lie (wuetMn? move thnn a material consideration. Tt must be a moral consideration. AVe must recognise that the community ns a whole is greater I'van nny one section. Tt is because I believe that to be the onlv pound line upon ivhich Lab"!!! , can travel; Ix>caii?e T believe tint Bolshevism challenpes such n policy: because I believe it in be. a menu and lelfWi appeal, which, if it succeeded, could only result in iVvsislalion in - ! ruin In flie no'ion—that- T._ at Iwsr. it* not intend either to submit to it? methods. li.e.li> its nrnnnsantl.-i. ov do flnvthin? t'mt is calculated to give it n footing in this co'intrv. Bolshevism is not for the rountrv. It i>! for self; Tt "is not for Ti"hHo\i<:nes«, Tt is for i'liu'tice. Tt is, therefore, bad, and must be fought. :■