The Dominion SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1924. BRITISH LABOUR AND THE SOVIET

Dominion, Volume 19, Issue 57, 29 November 1924, Page 6

The Dominion SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1924. BRITISH LABOUR AND THE SOVIET

It is reasonable to suppose that the wiser leaders of the British Labour Partv are keenly aware of the magnitude of the blunder into which they fell in allowing themselves to be driven by extreme members of their following into a policy of pandering to the Russian Soviet. A section of the party is, however, to an amazing degree unrepentant in this matter. One of yesterday’s cablegrams mentioned that a British trade union delegation to Russia was returning home satisfied that the Zinovieff letter was a forgery, and bringing with them also “an agreement to create an Anglo-Russian committee for world trade union unity.” From what standpoint and with what motives these people are acting they must be left to explain. It is particularly obvious from their attitude, however, that the last things they have in mind are to defend British interests or advance those of the British workers. It is by this time fairly clear that any attempt to demonstrate tliat the Zinovieff letter was a forgery is not at all likely, to succeed. The present British Government, after a careful investigation, has declared that the letter was authentic. Members of the late Labour Government, who had a favourable opportunity of examining the evidence on the subject, have not challenged this conclusion. Moreover, the notorious letter, with its incitements to revolutionary disorders in Britain, is exactly in keeping with recent public utterances by Zinovieff reported in the Soviet Press. In a speech made about the middle of October, according to the Pravda, he denounced “MacDonaldism” in his customary style, and said the results of the election could be viewed by the Soviets, with complete equanimity, as “whatever the issue, the ‘revolutionising’ of the, British workers would proceed none the less surely, even if slowly. As' president of the executive committee of the Third International, Zinovieff took an active part too in a congress of that body held in Moscow during last June and July-' On that occasion the International elaborated a plan for achieving the destruction of the British Empire by the following methods: — Sapping work by local organisations; the gradual splitting off of huge lumps of the British Empire by means of insurrections; the preparation, according to a definite plan, of simultaneous outbreak in all the colonies, the combination of all these methods. There is no lack of evidence that Zinovieff and other Soviet leader's were blatantly proclaiming their intention to violate the AngloRussian Treaty before that document was signed. What cannot be accounted for by any open and convincing . explanation is the readiness of ostensible representatives of the British workers to play the game of the Soviet. The motives animating these men are well worth inquiring into, not only in Britain, but here and in other parts of the Empire where at least left-handed approval is extended to the Soviet by extremist sections. . . . The vile record of the Soviet happily is' incapable of being concealed. It is a tyranny established by ruthless bloodshed and maintained by terrorism. It has trampled on every democratic right. Its name, in the international field, is a by-word for falsity and treachery. . . , <, To these things it is possible to add on unimpeachable authority that the Soviet has oppressed and degraded the Russian .workers to a degree that is probably unexampled in history. Foi instance, in a study of “Industrial Life in Soviet Russia,” the International Labour Office, Geneva, supplies, amongst others, the following items of information: —

The average wage paid in [Russian] State industry during the second half of 1923 was not more than 55 per cent, of the pre-war average, which itself was very low, yet these wages are still too heavy a burden on State industry, and the Government has taken steps to prevent further increases. . In spite of the considerable increases in rates fixed by collective. agreement and labour agreements, real wages are in practice .always subject to reductions, and there is no improvement in the general situation of the working classes owing to the continual depreciation of the rouble and financ.al cnsis. As to the actual wage of the workers, the London 'l imes, in summarising the document here quoted, states that it appeals, according to the Department of Labour statistics of the Soviet Government, to have risen among railway workers by the end of last year to something under 40s. a month, but this year it fell to some 26 s lhe actual value of present railway wages in Russia is set down at 41 pel cent, of the low pre-revolution wage. t c Housing conditions also are deplorable. The Commissariat of Transport can house only 27 per cent, of the men it employs. A very large proportion of the men are compelled to live in railway carriages and wagons. A similar story is told with regar to unemployment. An admittedly incomplete return relating to 70 capital towns of departments, including Moscow and. Petrograd,. indicated that over 800,000 workers were unemployed in the early Pa The Soviet has as bad a record in its. treatment of industrial conditions as in its international dealings and in its ruthless suppression of all democratic freedom. Why is this tyranny which has biought so much misery on the Russian people applauded or looked on with favour by extremist sections, not only in Britain, but here and in other Dominions ? There is the more need to probe the matter since the underlying reasons, whatever they may be, evidently will not bear the light of day.