COMMUNISM.

Hokitika Guardian, 5 July 1924, Page 4

COMMUNISM.

ITS ('OHItITTIOX OF LABOUR

EFFORTS FOR REYOLUTIOX

The modern l.ahonr movement i-

beeomtng one of most intolerant organisations. . . Wo are being PrussianIssetl by it."--.Mr C. 11. Roberts (late Labour .M.P.. in Britain). "Democracy and Labour" is the title of a valuable book, just published ill England, by Professor lloarnshaw, of King’s College, London, author of “Democracy at the Crossways." Professor Ilearnsliaw is no mere theorist, and, after his first hook came out in 1918, lie was its lie explains) invited to address assemblies of working men at till the chief industrial centres in England. "! found thc-se meetings intensely interesting and . . . a deep and widespread resentment at the control which Socialist societies had secured over trade-union executives and littuis." JJis working, men audiences wanted a cheap edition of "Democracy of the Crossways.” Professor llearnshaw has tried to serve the demand by writing a new and shorter work embodying its main conclusions with much fresh material. Hi- indictment «f Syndicalism, Communism, Bolshevism, all the names under which revolutionary propaganda stalks abroad in Britain, will find many an echo in Australia also. Professor llenriisliaw traces the rise of terrorism in Russia, and its transplantation to Britain and elsewhere, by revolutionary fanatics. Me shows how the extremists fastened upon the

trade unions ns instruments for their purpose; how leaders of the Labour party to-day-are anything lint lenders*, obeying, as they must, the tyranny which has collared the unions; ami lie expounds some principles of a sane democratie policy which Labour, in its thraldom, can hardly listen to without twinges of conscience. Me declares truly that the issue to-day in British domestic politics is Direct Action versus Democracy, and lie tries to arouse an easy-going people to see that all their liberties are involved. RTFS lAN TERRORISM.

Nefuro recapitulating the iiuthor’s indictment of present Labour policy, il ■nay I »o as well to lrace, with him, how Communists got their hold over Labour. He describes something of the Russian terrorism. Lenin, as lie was climbing to his position as dictator, said plainly, "We have never spoken of liberty. We exercise the dictatorship of the proletariat in the name of a minority." Trotsky (alias Bronstcin) shouted mockingly over the butchery ol ti people who thought the revolution meant making Russia sale ini' democracy—‘’Democracy is it Worthless and wretched imasrpierade. . . We repudiate democracy.” Bolshevism (says Ilearnshiiw) is "the most sanguinarv tyranny ever known, even in that unhappy country, since the days of Ivan the Terrible, inspired by hatred, Inst, (treed, ambition, and all the passions ol primitive savagery . . . Popular gov- ! ernment has been swept away; cooperative societies and trade unions have been crushed into subjection; labour is conscripted; strikes are forbidden ; the free Press is abolished ; opposition, and even criticism, are punisnod by death: commerce is ruined: industry is paralysed: religion is persecuted ; learning is suppressed; only ignorance, crime, disease, death, and -Marxian socialism flourish.” Some of the earlier British Bolsheviks might he excused for their enthusiasm on the plea that they did not know. The latter-day preachers of the

same revolution must lie denied xnat excuse. Hut even in 1920 some of them knew what it meant, preached blccdshecl and atrocities, and welcomed the Bolsheviks (known then by their deeds) as “our noble "Russian comrades.’’ In answer for a direct request for funds, the Russian comrades spent lavishly in Kngland out of the pillage of Russian property. “They soon had over I*2oo paid agents in Britain, and their grants in aid of revolution were estimated at .£'21,000 a month. They subsidised the “Daily Herald” with lavish prodigality,” and at the command of Lou in (alias Ulimiolf.i “somethirty wrangling and raging Communist coteries in Britain were amalgamated (August, 1920) to form the Communist party, the more economically to spend his money and the more effectively to do his work.” But even so they were only a few thousand. By themselves they were "impotent. They were ordered to act as germ-cells to infect the masses of British labour. A Cl FINER A\i STRIKK. From 1920 onwards Williams (of the Transport Workers), Tom Mann (of the Kngineers), Smillie (of the Miners), and Canshury—to mention only a few names—did their utmost to raise a. general strike, not for settlement of industrial grievances, hut to forward the Bolsheviks’ subsidised revolution. Marly in 1919 they tried to tamper with the navy, the army, and the police, and did actually bring on a police strike for a few days. Cater in the year the railway strike was heralded by the “Soviet President in Britain” (a Clydosidor named McLean) as “the class war in its first stage.” It failed because the people solidly supported the (jlovernment. Incidentally the railway unions wore financially nearly ruined. The railways were then still run under the Government,' and, ns Mr Hartley Withers pointed out, the strike “blew to hits the theory that workers would work contentedly and well for the community. “11l October, 1920. the coalminers’ strike was heralded by Mr Frank Hodges with these words: “Wo are going to create a first-class economic crisis which will reduce the nation to chaos.” The railway men and transport workers decided to join in, hut again the .strike was beaten by the Government with an emergency Powers Act. Six months later the miners tried again, with the cessation of Government control of the mines. The full Triple Alliance promised to support them. Professor Ileariishay says: “At last the country 1 was face to face with the supreme issue of Bolshevism versus Democracy. ! It was the turning point in the fate the nation.” The Couiinunists had proclaimed the importance of the battle. But at the eleventh hour the courage of the railwnyineii and the transport workers failed. They called oil" the strike just before it was due. ! The ( oinnmiiisis wept tears of rage. I “The victory for orderly government j over violent terrorism was won by the ’ courage of the community anil the

i ommon sense of the rank and file of tin- •'resit trades-unions.” The secretory of the Derbyshire miners ssi ill ill tern unis: "We are stony broke. Dven our olliees are in pawn.” AM, TAKE, .NO (11 Vl'i. Whose money was this—many millions Sicilian in all—that was wasted, and who wasted it ? There was a distinct reversion iw the unions 10 political action, lint Too Labour party lias never repudiated direct action—which means not simply "the right strike.” Inn revolution and war on the Stale. lat hour leaders are directed still to affirm that they are merely holding direct action in reserve, '['lie interests 1 of legitimate trades-unionism are subordinated to the monstrous schemes I of the ('onimtinists. .Mr Philip Snow- 1 den. Hie present Chancellor of the Exehcr|Ucr. has confessed in his hook. "If l.ahonr Rules,” that "it is not the trades-unions which make the programme and direct the policy of the l.ahonr party.” This is the fact, ft i- the e.vtirini-l who ride on the hack's nl I lie union.-. I'hese extremist'*' "are all take and no give. They arc devoid ot the sense of community. They lack all consideration for the opinions, the consciences, the wills of •heir opponents. They are alien from the spirit ol the great society of the nation. They are merely incarnated objection. Their violent activity makes the working of democracy difficult and ’ immeasurably lowers it- ellicieney.” I heir name "('nininunists” Inis nothing to do with what is generally known as "the community." l'’ollowing Karl .Marx whose real name was .Mordeeaif.i they substitute hate for love in lhe{ world, "cl as- for community, war for , peace, bloodshed for brotherhood.” They do not believe that the individual should serve the community, hut that the community should be subordinated to one or a few individuals.

The charge against the Labour party is that its leaders and executives have betrayed the unions into tin* hands of these outlaws, and that they are showing every tendency lo betray British democracy in the same way. Professor I learnsliaw shows this tendency in both domestic and world politics.