RUSSIA’S REGIME

Evening Star, Issue 23526, 15 March 1940, Page 9

RUSSIA’S REGIME

PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF COMMUNISM

SUPERIORITY OF DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES

CRITICAL SURVEY BY DR J. D. SALMOND

Comparisons between democracies and totalitarian States, together with an insight into the true meaning of Communism and what it stands for, were given during the course of an address to members of the Junior Chamber of Commerce in Lake’s Restaurant last night, by Dr J. D. Salmond. Dr Salmond, who was formerly a teacher at the Otago Boys’ High School, paid a visit to Russia not long before the outbreak of war, making a close study of general conditions. The function was in the nature of a tea given by members of the chamber in honour of the guest. I Mr I. M. Armour presided. At the outset, said Dr Salmond, he wished to make it clear that' he had no desire to spread subversive propaganda, and that all his opinions had been formed in the light of a background of British democracy. To understand Communism fully one had to study the history of the people, jiist as one had to study the history of the Polish.and Finnish people to rmderstand their particular questions in regard to the (Russians by whom, through the centuries, they had been persecuted brutally and cruelly. Expression of opinion without a knowledge of the backgrounds was not enough. So, first of all, to understand how Communism came into being, it was necessary to appreciate the conditions of oppression which prevailed under the Czarist system. Bolshevist leaders fostered the revolution, threw off the old yoke, and set to work to build up the Communist State, and to understand that one needed, to nnderstand the philosophies of Marxism. _ This doctrine involved the material interpretation ,of history as it applied to the individual, hut without considering the religious, spiritual, and mental factors. The individual’s value to the State counted first. The doctrine . also involved, the inevitability Of class war, which meant the _ overthrow-, of allpowerful capitalistic groups, and the establishment of a dictatorship of the proletariat. This, in the Marxian theory, must lead to world revolution, and the establishment of a world Communism on the lines of a State Communism. It was a logical philosophy, and it hung together. The Marxist understood his philosophy and its objective. There was in Dr Salmond’s party a young Communist—not a Russian.—who worked in his country’s Government offices. He boldly stated that his function was to throw as many spanners as possible into Government machinery with the ultimate objective of having that Government overthrown. Throughout the world, said Dr Salmond, groups of Communists got together with the selfsame purpose in view.

In every way endeavours were made to inculcate the meaning of Communism into the minds of the Russian people; In art galleries, museums, etc., it was not difficult to see the Communist philosophy coming through whatever was exhibited. One of the fundamentals of Communism was that no value was placed on the individual unless he was playing a major part in'society. Groups were the prime consideration. Opponents to the Communist theory must he liquidated ruthlessly, an intolerance democratic people , could not understand. The same remarks, said Dr Salmond, applied to Nazism, and in either doctrine individuals or groups were purged if they-did not pull with the party. PRACTICE AND THEORY IN TEACHING. ■ As.a former teacher. Dr .Salmond said he was naturally greatly interested in the* educational methods. Russian school training taught that the Western democracies’ ideas .of theory - and practice were at variance, but in Russia the two were taught in harmony. Industrial schools, for instance, were situated in industrial areas, farming schools in farming areas, and so on. Half of each day was spent in the classroom, and the other half in the factory or on the farm, thus the relationship between theory and practice was always there. Coming to school games, Dr Salmond said that children were not allowed to play games in which there was an individual winner. Teams games only were allowed, this instilling the necessary Communist spirit of co-operation so essential in real life. Playthings in kindergartens were regulated on the same co-operative basis. Children did not play with small bricks, but with large bricks which required two or three to handle. In every walk of life the individual was taught to lose his personality, that the group and not himself mattered. DEVELOPMENT UNDER COMMUNISM. Referring to industrial development, Dr Salmond said that ho formed the idea Russia was very backward befpre the revolution. It was a common thing to see posters bearing Stalin’s portrait and beneath the words, “ We must accomplish in 10 years what the Western democracies have done in 100 years.’’ As modern industrialism developed the standard of living had improved, hut Dr Salmond got the idea that this standard was still very low. Russian methods generally tended to go to extremes. They did not understand the British art of compromise. Dr Salmond expressed the belief that the international situation would not he in the state it was to-day if the nations of Europe did understand that art ■of compromise. In _ its extremes, however. Communism still showed the tremendous reaction that had followed the abolition of the Tsarist system.

THAT UNHOLY ALLIANCE. Dr Salnymd admitted he had received a surprise when be learned of the German-Soviet pact. Everything he had seen in Russia had led him to heliev© tlx© people were taugbt a violent hatred of Fascism and of Nazism, Ho had witnessed processions in which were carried hideous caricatures of Mussolini and other Fascist rulers, and also of the Pope (as religious head of a Fascist State) which were freely battered by workmen wielding huge hammers. Yet the speaker had to admit that in some principles Nazism and Communism were akin. Communism was supposed to be a dictatorship of the proletariat, but it was rather a dictatorship of a small party, just as was National Socialism in Germany. At the

sae time he could only believe that the alliance was an unholy one.

ATHEISM UPPERMOST. Touching upon religion as he was able to study it, .Dr Salmond said Russians either placed themselves against God or before God, but militant atheism was uppermost. This was probably because the old Orthodox Russian Church was largely ritualistic, lacking in vitality and prophecy, and offering nothing solid. Yet he thought the Russians were religious fundamentally, though they would never admit it. He had seen the people passing Lenin’s mausoleum where his body lay embalmed, and they had looked upon it with the same devotion with which _ they had looked upon the bodies of saints in the days of the Orthodox Church. That was only a form of worship. FEAR NEUROSIS APPARENT. There was a. great fear among the people, a fear cunningly fostered by Press and radio, that capitalistic powers would some day attack Russia and try to deprive the people of all that they had created. It was a strange “ fear neurosis,” becoming more and more pronounced. Dr Salmond < thought that this complex would in time give way to a rebirth of imperialistic action, and possibly the attacks upon Finland and Poland might be explained away through the desire to show the world that Russia could assert herself and not wait to he attacked. COMPARISONS ARE NOT ODIOUS. “ I do not think I can describe Communism as wholly black or wholly white,” Dr Salmond Went on. “I think I could best describe it, as alpaca, with good and bad elements.” The ruthless suppression ,of opponents, the dictatorship of a party, the persecutory attitude towards religion were all dangerous things. “Criticism is made against British democracy,’! said Dr Salmond, “ but we have ideals which we hold up as something better than totalitarian principles; I have no patience with those people who hold up Russia as an ‘ Angel of Light.’ Democratic principles such as we prize have taken 700 years to achieve, nothing better can be achieved in 20 years.” The democratic ideals stood for tolerance, a respect for the other person’s point of view and personality. Under democracy the individual had a personal responsibility for his- own form of Government. A dictatorship _ might be easier to achieve and maintain, but democracies would remain if its followers remained true to its ideas and ideals. A democracy to live demanded efficiency —self-discipline, and co-operation from citizens, and, too, it demanded intelligence and independence of moral character.

The speaker gave it as his absolute conviction that the fundamentals of British democracy were bound up with the fundamental’s of Christianty; the basic principles of that democracy were to be found in Christian teaching. British methods might he blundering, hilt under democratic principles they would achieve an end which would not be achieved under Nazism or Communism. A hearty vote of thanks was earned bv acclamation.