FROM WEEK TO WEEK

Grey River Argus, 3 June 1943, Page 3

FROM WEEK TO WEEK

(By

H. Winston Rhodes)

THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL The proposed’ dissolution of the Comintern has come as a dramatic surprise to very many people. The newspapers are full of editorial comment, and on all sides, one hears discussions and varied interpretations of this new development. It is curious to notice that whenever something peculiarly straightforward happens there is often more excitement in certain quarters than when something tortuous and involved occurs. The obvious and simple explanation is expected to conceal subtle implications

The Comintern is being disbanded because to-day it is regarded as an obstacle to unity, because the Communist Parties of the world are far more interested’ in the struggle against fascism than they are in maintaining a central organisation, the existence of which can be regarded as advantageous to fascist propagandists. It may be noted that the only people who seem at all perturbed or upset are those who have not been eager for unity either in the international struggle against fascism or else in the national struggle for a broad front of all progressive forces.

ft had become apparent that the Comintern was being used more and more as an excuse for resisting the demand for the complete co-ordina-tion of the fighting forces of the United Nations, that it was being used more and more in order to throw doubts upon the sincerity of Russia’s intentions after the war. Moreover the main argument .against close relations between the Labour and Communist Parties in different countries has been that the latter are dominated by the well-organised Russian Communist section of the International. The time had clearly arrived when the interests of the workers in each country .and the interests of the workers of the whole world would be best served by the dissolution of the Comintern.

WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS?

Does this mean that Communist Parlies have gwen up their aim of establishing Communist societies in t'neir own countries ? Only one more than usually ignorant of Communists and Communism could draw this conclusion. But it does mean that Communists believe that the destruction of fascism is the first and most important task of ail people at the present time, that it is, if you like, the means to all progressive ends. Does the dissolution of the Comintern imply that Communists in the Soviet Union are becoming more tolerant of capitalism and that the Soviet Union may abandon the construction of a Communist society ? This is a conclusion which could be drawn only by’those completely unacquainted with the events of the last twentyfive years. ■ But it does mean that one more gesture has been made which stresses the fact that it is the responsibility of the people of any one nation to determine the type of political and economic structure of that nation.

Will it mean that Communists will cease to be internationalists and become exclusively national ? Such a conclusion is impossible. It is far more likely that the death of the Communist International will be followed by the resurrection of a workers’ international, which will join together the workers of all countries. At least it is certain that great efforts will be made to obtain unity between the trade union movements of the world, for the very simple reason that not only Communists but all those who are interested in the postwar world know that such unity is vitally necessary, that internationalism is the way of life and nationalism the way of death. WHAT HAS CHANGED ?

It may be well to draw the obvious conclusion however obvious it may be. The dissolution of the Commun-

ist International is due to changed conditions in the world. It has served its purpose. It has out-lived its usefulness. It has now become an obstacle to the creation of those conditions which must be present if the world is to go forward to new forms of society. Those who have recommended that it should be dissolved have done so not because they have changed their objective, but because the world situation has changed.

It is interesting to observe that many people seem to imagine that in order to be consistent it is necessary to cling to out-of-date policies, that however the world changes or the conditions of struggle change, the consistent man or party must never budge an inch. If the Russians had behaved in this way, it is quite certain that they would never have built a social structure which could have resisted the blows which it has received during the last two years.