RUSSIA’S FIVE YEAR PLAN.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21198, 2 December 1930, Page 5

RUSSIA’S FIVE YEAR PLAN.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib, —A few days ago a correspondent signing himself “Curious," defends your leader on the above subject, claiming that you were only stating conditions as they are shaping. Very well, I shall not pursue this aspect further, but when I am. told; or it is suggested,' that I care for. no rule unless it is “ Red ” rule, I must demur. When I asked “What has our glorious Empire to boast about? " I was thinking at the time only of social conditions as they prevail in all parts of our Empire, including this little Dominion. And are they anything to boast about, considering we have the accumulated knowledge in the form of mechanical industry and agriculture, able to produce more than we need, and yet we have starvation in the midst of plenty? It is because this mechanised force is in short supply that, starvation is caused in Russia. If and when these instruments are in full supply then some of the near relations to Russia will have to “ sit up and take notice.” “Curious” seems to imagine, that, because a person defends the Soviets against what he believes and feels is misrepresentation, then such person must be againstthe country or Empire in which he lives. This surely is a narrow view to take. Here is a statement by Sir W. Joynson Hicks, in a speech delivered in the House of Commons: “We did not conquer India for the benefit of the Indians. I know it is said at missionary meetings that we conquered India to raise the level of the Indians. That is cant. We conquered India as the outlet for the goods of Great Britain. We conquered India by the sword, and by the sword we shall hold it." (“ Shame! ” said the Labour members.) "Call shame if you like. I am stating facts. lam interested in missionary work in India, and have done much work of that kind, but I am not such a hypocrite as to : say that we hold India for the Indians. We hold it as the finest outlet for British goods in general, and for Lancashire cotton goods m particular.” That is only one statement or many that could be quoted, but we hope to improve our methods, and this will • come about only when the workers assume control and have power. In Russia the workers have 'attained power, and because they use harsh methods to those who have been dispossessed, when they try to organise conn--ter-revolution, the governing forces in capitalist countries hold up their hands in horror, and roar themselves hoarse, and urge intervention; when the very same countries do the same to anyone who advocates that -certain methods should be put into operation to bring about what they hope to have established. It is right for a .capitalist - country to do this, but wrong, for a .workers’ state. Some day I may nave the pleasure of visiting Russia as_ “ Curious ’’ suggests, and if I heard this Dominion misrepresented, I certainly should feel strongly disposed to put her right in the eyes of the, Soviets. That is, I think, the only logical- attitude to take up. I hope if I have achieved anything along, this line and assisted someone to get a better grasp, of. the situation as it obtains in Russia, and if-I have created a desire in; someone to make a greater study of that vast country with her many millions of people, then my time has not been mis-spent. Even “ Curious ” might be induced to a fuller study of Russia, and ,uf dpes,_ then lie may not talk so glibly of shooting at sight!—l am, etc., November 30. P. Neilson.