WHO ARE THE COMMUNISTS?

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 2887, 23 May 1925, Page 4

WHO ARE THE COMMUNISTS?

DOES THE X.Z. LABOUR PARTY EXCLUDE THEM.

In flic daily press we have read reports which make it apepar that the X.Z. Labour Party has decided to exclude all communists from its ranks. One paper has the following:— “As the Labour Party's platform does not include the dictatorship of the proletariat and is in other respects inconsistent with the objective of the Communist Party, the effect of signing' the prescribed pledge would be 1 lie abandonment of the ideals of the Communist Party. This in our opinion shows a complete misunderstanding of the whole matter. The Communist ideal is socialism; the so called -Labour Party’s ideal is socialism. The objective of both parties is stated as “the socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange.’’ The Labour Party’s platform does not recite the words “the dictatorship of tin 1 proletariat’’ but i! is so designed as to bring about control by the industrial operatives under party direction and that is what is meant by “dictatorship of the proletariat." There is no difference between the aims and objects of these two Red parties, where they eonllict is in regard to the methods by which they respectively propose to bring their socialist objective in to operation. At the Xew Zealand* Labour Party’s conference held in Wellington at Easter, Mr. IT. E. Holland in referring to the relations of the communist party with his party said: “The dividing line was the method of physical force and insurrection by a minority laid down bv the Third International.”

So we learn between the two parties the division is not one of principle, objective or idea! but simply as to method. If may be pointed out here that Mr Holland’s line of division is at times a very “thin led line.” There are members of the X.Z. Communist Party who arc more paeifost in profession than Mr. Holland, and, on occasions, the members of his party are quite as ready as the Communists to engage in industrial insurrection. The outstanding fact is that socialism and communism so shade into each other that (he only safe line for the general public is to recognise them as two wings of the same insidious armv of' aggressive revolutionism. Experience teaches that their methods vary according to the time and circumstances with which they are dealing." It should be noted that Mr. Holland does not merely say “force and insurrection" but "force and insurrection by minority.” The Communist —Socialists of Russia met that point bv declaring themselves the Bolshevist (which means majority) party. When Mr Holland cars “Xo one could honestly subscribe to the policy of the X.Z. Labour Party" he is suggesting that the Third International’s policy is eonlined to methods of violence. In reality the policy of this International is the application of Marxian socialism. Mr Holland declares himself a Marxian Socialist but objects to the Third International's method of enforcement by a minority. COMM EXISTS NOT EXCLUDED. The Easier Conference of the “X.Z. Labour" before referred to, dealt with a report which contains this clause: (3) “That no member of any other political party shall lie admitted to branch membership in the “X.Z. Labour Party.” That has been taken to exclude members of the Communist Party; Imt does it,’ In submitting the report the movers said the party has no wish to exclude any individual merely because he held revolutionary or ('ommnnist views."

Later on in replying before the motion for adoption of the report was put, the mover said, “If Communists and others refused loyalty there place was clearly in some other party. Xo individual was excluded by the pledge because he was a revolutionary." The evidence then, is that no one is excluded because they arc communist or revolutionist. It, would indeed have been a comical situation if n party that is revolutionary in character had decided to exclude revolutionists. The revolutionist and communist are welcomed provided they are prepared lo uphold the constitution, principles amt derisions of the party.

Well there are Communists who can do that, without any compunction they are inside te.h" Xew Zealand Labour Party" imw The real Communists whom the public require io watch arc not the few visionaries who, being Communist, honestly call themselves such and form a distinct organisation to advance idealistic communism. There are also the socialists whose designs are towards effective communism and who call themselves “Labour,” or even on occasion "Liberal” —any moderate title to capture votes with —these are the Communists who constitute the actual danger Society.

The “X.Z. Labour Party” welcomes Communists so long as they are loyal to it. Were the Communist agents ol' Soviet Russia to express themselves on the question we have little doubt that their favour would go rather to the “X.Z. Labour Party,” as being a better instrument for the in purpose, than to the organisation which names itself the Communist Party. The Communists to he feared are uot those who use the name “Labour”

as a, cover to their revolutionary designs. (Contributed by the X.Z. Welfare League.)