Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 29th., 1929. THE SOVIET’S FRIEND

Greymouth Evening Star, 29 November 1929, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 29th., 1929. THE SOVIET’S FRIEND

’J’HE loyalty of our morning contemporary to the Soviet is touching, indeed, and it is to be hoped that Moscow duly appreciates it. No matter how all parts of the world agree in condemning Soviet tactics/ there is one’ outside Russia which is ever the Soviet’s admirer and upholder. How this attitude can be reconciled with true Labour principles is not clear, but it would be churlish not to recognise our contemporary’s consistency. Its latest song of praise is in connection with the Red victory in Manchuria, where might is for the time being triumphant over right. Had British troops attempted a, tithe of what 1 the Russian forces have done, what a howl of

protest from our contemporary would have been forthcoming! Certainly, “the Soviet’s success in the Far East” is a famous victory. China, torn by internal revolts, one at least led by a General long associated with the Reds, was unable to pay serious attention to what was happening in the North. The comparatively few and ill-equipped Chinese troops in Manchuria for long kept back the Russian hordes, fitted with every modern method of warfare. Without assistance from the South, the Chinese could hold out no longer and were compelled to seek a truce. A Labour paper professing to uphold the rights of all nations to withstand invasion, can yet acclaim Soviet aggression and its result. Whilst urging disarmament and reliance on anti-war pacts to this country, our contemporary applauds Russia for dishonouring her signature to the Kellogg Pact, and for the use of brutal force. If this is “Labour” policy, let New Zealanders take warning in time. Of course, in our contemporary’s view, the Soviet can do no wrong, and why it takes the trouble so often to emphasise this partiality is difficult to understand. What readers it has must surely realise by this time its adoration of the Soviet and all its works. “SOLIDARITY” Next to Soviet, perhaps “solidarity” is the most blessed word to our contemporary. Whenever a labour dispute arises, the men are implored to uphold “solidarity,” which is claimed to be the basic foundation of the wholp Labour movement, and is used as a threat to bloated capitalists and those who fatten on the product by Labour, or words to that effect. Occasionally, the “foundation” appears to the impartial outsider to be a little shaken. For instance, where is the “solidarity” in the New South Wales coal dispute? The miners who have been workless .for months in the Northern fields are desirous of re-starting, even at a reduced wage, but are not to be permitted to do so by their Southern and Western colleagues, who are profiting considerably by the idleness of the others.

Then thought yre to understand this instance of “solidarity,” but it was too hard for us. Eagerly, we turned to our contemporary whose concern for the idle minors is so blatantly proclaimed. Alas, not a word was forthcoming! Admiration for the Soviet excluded any display of interest in a nearer New South Wales labour question, especially when this was awkward to answer. Is there not a suggestion of “profiteering” by the Western and Southern miners at the expense of their Northern mates? The ‘rapacious’ 4 coal-mine owners, in this instance, are supported by the new. Labour Federal Ministry, which called the conference to discuss the dispute, and also by the miners most concerned, yet because their “boom” earnings would be lessened, those who have worked throughout the dispute refused to surrender the advantage given to them by their mates * trouble. If this is “solidarity,” is’ it worth having ? Developments will be watched with interest, but it will be surprising if the selfish attitude of the Southern and Western miners does not result in the Northern mines rejecting “solidarity” in favour of common sense, by accepting work on terms that will keep alive the district industry on which they and their dependents rely for maintenance.