LABOUR POLITICS

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 8, Issue 477, 27 May 1919, Page 2

LABOUR POLITICS

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —Mankind are divided into two groat classes —"the shearers and the shorn." The truth of that statement is becoming very clear today, although when Tallyrand made it possible it may have taken as acute an intellect as his to discern it. The shearers are the capitalists, now mostly shareholders in large companies or trusts, who produce no wealth, but draw large dividends and live in idleness upon profits made by reason of their ownership of the means of production, transport or exchange. The shareholders in our coalmines, steamship companies, insurance companies and banks and in the companies which handle our produce in the markets in Kngland, and in the American Meat Trust which is invading our country, may serve for examples. The shorn are the toilers who have to do the actual work of producing, transporting, or exchanging our produce, thereby creating the weaith out of which the •hearers draw their dividends. How does it happen that the shorn allow such a state of affairs to prevail r Bimply because they allow themselves to be divided upon issues of comparatively no importance, and do not realise the truth of saying—which has been repeated in different forms by innumerable eminent thinkers. Your leader of 13th inst. is a good example of the propaganda used by the shearer class to keep the shorn class divided, on the principle of " divide and conquer. You say *' Labour " which you do not define) holds that land must all be nationalized and not owned privately. From the context you can mean by " Labour " only the New Zealand Libour Party. To the best of my belief there is no other political organisation or party using the word Labour as part of its name. Now, that Party has a printed platform, and I challenge you to point out what words in that platform can possibly form any justification for your statement. The N.Z, Labour Party has been guilty of no such folly as contemplating a policy of land nationalization. However, it does propose to nationalize many of the other services I have mentioned, which *t present provide such rich dividends for the shearer class. It is definitely on the side of the shorn, as against the shearers, and it is the only political party on that side. The shorn, whether farmer, clerk, professional worker, skilled or unskilled industrial worker, is rapidly learning where his class interests lie. Anything that you or I can say will not affect the ultimate result, although we may perhaps slightly retard or accelerate the result. The exploitation of the last few years, and the practical demonstration the two older parties have given that there is no essential difference between thom, have done (and will do) more than years of propaganda or tons of literature to open the eyes of and consolidate the shorn. The farmer, at least, is becoming most painfully aware to which class he belongs. You follow a well-beaten track when you endeavour to prevent town and country toilers from uniting. Not only in this country, _ but throughout the world, the capitalist class uses this same plan. But the toilers are painfully learning the simple lesson unite. They are beginning to see clearly that until the town and country toilers unite the capitalist will continue to pick the pockets of both. Yours, etc, H. G. R. MASON. Pukekohe, May 20th, 1019.

; Having no party politics of any description, we do not mind publishing the above letter, but we may as well make it plain now that we do not wish to be fieoded with correspondence on politics, or any other subject: we nave more matter to deai with than we can set type for. By way of reply, we may state that, being non-partisan, we are not in any way averse to the unity of town and country toilers. By all means, let the workers seo " where their class interests he," but we do not consider that farmers owning (or intending to own) their farms can be legitimately classed as being among Organised Labour, in either the political or the industrial sense. We have perused a copy of the platform of the New Zealand Labour Party, but we can find no mention there of farmers; but what we do see is that Labour wants proportional representation, which we advocated in our leader. We also find that the Labour Party stands for the " localization of the means of production, distribution, and exchange." This is the old, settled policy of Labour, and was advo cated throughout the Dominion by " Professor" Mills (author of "The Struggle for Existence"), who was employed by the United Labour Party, some years ago. The platform further stipulates that all existing Crown lands be added to the National Endowment. Establishment of State farms for the purpose of producing " the people's foodstuffs." Now, in Webster's dictionary, the word "means " is defined as " resources or income," a '' resource," as ' any source of aid or support." In other words, the " nationalization of all the means of production," postulates land nationalization. Our correspondent is a man of some educational attainments, therefore we suppose that either Webster's or the Oxford Universities' dictionary will be accepted as a sufficient authority for the moaning of simple English words ; but, in case he may think the literal meaning is not intended by the Labour party, we will quote from other sources, which are many. For example, 11 The Maoriland Worker," which claims to be the of Organized Labour, publishes, in its issue of May 14th, 1919, a letter from

correspondent, who writes: can readily see that "8.5." is a land nationalizer or a single-taier. As a Socialist, I welcome either method, preferably the former, but I have no objection to experimenting with the latter." In a footnote to this letter, the editor of the "Worker" commences. "Mr 's statement entirely agrees with our views. The " Times" could quote similar statements, which, like the goods and chattels at an auction, are " too numerous to mention." However, we have said enough to substantiate our statement that Labour is, openly or covertly, out for land nationalization. Whether or not the farmers think fit to form an alliance with an organisation holding these tenets is their business, not ours. In any case, as our correspondent implies, evolution will pursue its inevitable path, and nothing that he or we may say will alter the ultimate results; but we fancy the trend of these immutable laws is net in the direction our correspondent thinks it is. We are content to leave it at that.—En.;