Grey River Argus FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1927. WHERE WE STAND.

Grey River Argus, 25 February 1927, Page 4

Grey River Argus FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1927. WHERE WE STAND.

In a flippant mood our evening contemporary yesterday pretends to an anxiety as to whether we take as seriously as it does itself what is chooses to enjl “family quarrels’ in the Labour Movement. The occasion of its query is a cable from Sydney stating the leader of the Labour Parly and Premier of the State. Air Lang, declared in the Assembly that the talk of a plot by a member of his Cabinet to gain control of the Movement for the Communists is a lie. We have repeatedly pointed out to the

“Star’’ the difference between its interest in the Labour Movement I and our own. While its idea is to magnify any difference, our desire is for complete unity, so that while it would foment, we would prevent any tendency to depart from the united front. We can give the “Star’’ an analogy that should satisfy it, and shall take itself as our illustration. Any antiLabour party is sure of the Star’s support. Any piWLabour party is sure of our support. Our contemporary, when this electorate was contested by Reform and Liberal candidates, used to devote its whole attention to opposing the Labour candidate. Well, we are not out to divide Labour, hut prefer to point out the reasons for working class unity, especially the fact that the exploiters of that class are always trying to conquer the workers by dividing them- The

“Star’’ is very funny at times. First it says: “To our intense disappointment, our contemporary, which professes to be a Labour organ, refuses to assist its own party, by denouncing Communists. On the contrary, it appears to support them.” Theis, it first of all judges us, and then puts its tongue in its cheek and says: “We await the reply with interest; and also with the expectation that we shall have to wait a long time before we get it, free from ambiguity.” Whatever we might say, it is thus obvious our contemporary will say it, knows better. We have often candidly stated the Labour Movement is wider than any party—it is a world-wide movement —and while there may be differences in its ranks as to means, there is a world-wide unanimity as to ends, which can be summed up in the formula that it strives for distributive justice. The

“Star” inferentially asserts that the Communists are outside the Labour Movement, but the Communists nowhere proclaim their objective, to be other than the emancipation of Labour. Therefore, who is to sit in judgment? Evidently our contemporary reckons il is itself the judge. We have, however, pointed’ out how it refuses to sil in judgment upon the anti-Labourites, while expecting us to follow a diametrically opposite course as to the Labourites. We are aware that to judge others is generally to judge oneself. There is only one judgment we are prepared to pass in

this matter. It is simply that the opinions of the “Star” upon Labour have no validity outside its own mentality. In fact, we fancy that its deeds speak louder than its words-