COMMUNISM DISCLOSES ITS INNER WEAKNESS

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25551, 20 July 1948, Page 4

COMMUNISM DISCLOSES ITS INNER WEAKNESS

REBUKE TO TITO

The following talk on Moscow’s quarrel with Jugoslavia was given over the American Broadcasting Company’s network by ERWIN D CANHAM as part of a regular series entitled The Christian ’ Science Monitor Views the News.

Instead ot bowing meekly to the rebukes which the Cominform have hurled at their dictator, Marshal Tito, the Jugoslavs are coming back with countercharges in an official statement. The Cominform’s accusations, say the Jugoslavs, were “plain slander” and ‘‘based on fabrication. The whole world is asking whether this is the big break the West has been awaiting—the big rift within the framework of the pro-Soviet states. It is far too soon to say yes or no. But Belgrade’s bellicose reply certainly shows that the break has not yet been papered over. One is tempted to ask whether this whole squabble isn’t phony. But then one remembers Soviet history. One remembers the Moscow purges of tne thirties, during which top leadership —military and economic—was liquidated. The ideological quarrels of the Communists are not phony. They go very deep, and they are not based on mere theory. The Moscow Communists are accusing the Belgrade Communists of treason in all its forms. It is hard to.see how Tito could be accepted back into the ranks of loyal Communists now, without a confessional and a penitence of monumental and unprecedented character. So it would appear to be either curtains for Tito or the withdrawal of Jugoslavia from the Moscow bl These two stark conclusions are almost unthinkable. Every bit of cautious observation would make us believe the thing could be patched up. But if the patch work is applied, the, cracks will still be there underneath. And the cause is not hard to seek: Communism by its very essence is totalitarian. It is monolithic. There cannot be one kind of Communism in Russia and another kind in Jugoslavia. The case made in the Cominiorm Note is inconsistent and unconvincing. It scolds Tito for not preparing the way for nationalisation, and then rebukes plans for collectivisation as adventurous and non-Marxist.” Moscow’s Annoyance Actually, Moscow was annoyed with Tito for a number of reasons—-some of them inconsistent with the terms of the Note. The underlying issue evidently, was the land question and the general issue of collectivisation. Tito knew well that the peasants of Jugoslavia are the most individualistic and sturdily independent peasants of Europe. They have not been serfs for centuries. They have fought and made untold sacrifices to hold on to their land. Tito knows that. And he appears to be more interested in his own power—perhaps in his own country than he is in the power and purposes of international Communism. Tito was guilty of believing that the peasants are the firmest basis of the Jugoslav State. What heresy! says the Note. And Tito was also accused of

flirting with the West, with the so called “imperialists.” If there has been a flirtation going on, it has not been very apparent on this side of the line. But apparently the Marshall Plan was more attractive even than had appeared. Apparently, our diplomacy had been more powerful than we calculated. Apparently. Jugoslavia was feeling the pull of the West. And for all these causes, Moscow now threatens with overthrow and disgrace the regime which helped end the war against Nazism and bring Jugoslavia to its present state, which is no worse and probably a good deal better than that of any of the other satellite nations. The humiliation of Tito—whether liquidation or penance—is a tremendous world event. It shows once more the inner weakness of Communism, nationally and internationally. It ought to dishearten and horrify—and fill with terror —those who have been collaborating with Moscow. Reactions in the Balkans The surprising fact is that the Jugoslav Communists are willing to ’fight back, and so vigorously. When news of their action sweeps through the Balkans, it will be like an earth tremor. The immediate results may not be apparent, but underneath Communism has shown once more that it has inner weaknesses. I am reminded again of the ancient aphorism of Marshal Talleyrand. Asked at fthe Congress of Vienna in 1815 if he were not alarmed at Russia’! aggressive intentions throughout the . continent of Europe, the wise old Frenchman replied: “You fear that the ' Russian tide will engulf Europe? Do not be alarmed. The Russian moon will suck it back again." We cannot base our calculations on the phases of the Russian moon. But when a great event comes, like the break with Tito, we can take advantage ot it. I expect the broadcast Voice of America is busy to-night But it will ■ not be half so effective as the Voice of Moscow—the Voice which says to Communists everywhere: Conform ... or . . . else. That is the voice which will ultimately destroy Communism, for it is a voice which denies the pos. sibility and the strength of diversity. We in the western world, for al! our weaknesses, have learned to. despise mere conformity. We have learned, that we grow—and we grow strongthrough the clash and competition of ideas and concepts. We have learned that there are various and diverse, ways of meeting many of our problems, and that we progress and go forward by permitting these various ways to operate, to compete, to strive. We take—or try to take—the best from all of them, and out of this healthy competition, which is never more indispensable than in the field of ideas, we go forward.