Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, WED., OCTOBER 28, 1925. COMMUNISM NO BOGEY.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LI, Issue 16871, 28 October 1925, Page 6

Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, WED., OCTOBER 28, 1925. COMMUNISM NO BOGEY.

Labor candidates arc repudiating Communism ami declaring that it lias no part in the Lahor movement. They scorn Ihe suggestion (hat they have any association with the Russian Reds, or any sympathy with Bolshevistic ideals. It was not always thus. People do not need to have very long memories to recall utterances in which the ■Soviet movement ol' Russia was landed' to (ho skies, as pointing the way to the regeneration of the world; when the dislatorslup of the. proletariat was spoken of with glee; when cheers were called for Lenin ami Trotsky; when ‘‘the capitalistic press” was scathingly abused for telling lies about the Russian “comrades” and their glorious revolution. Even .Mr. Harry Holland can be quoted (vide Hansard No. LS(i, page dll): “Russia has built up a state that to-dry stands as the vanguard of the world.” Nor can it be forgotten that even after years hail passed and full exposure been made of the tyrannies and barbarities of the .Soviet, regime, after sincere Labor leaders such as Mr. and Mrs. Snowden had reported that there was no liberty, no democracy, no real Socialism in Russia, and that the Communist experiment had been a gigantic failure, the National Executive of the New Zealand Labor party, so late as 1924, sent a message of regret to the Soviet at Moscow, the Communist Government of Russia, on the death of the leader of the Bolsheviks. Only one member prominently associated with the Labor party had the temerity to oppose this resolution, and that was Mr. McCombs, .who courageously said: “We cannot logically sympathise with the Russian people in the death of a leader who not only destroyed selfgovernment by a military coup, but has relentlessly crushed out freedom of speech and right of public assemblage.” It is all very well for political candidates, seeking the votes of the people, to declare that there is no Red menace, to endeavor fur the moment to whitewash the red flag and to water the .wine of Socialism, but there is too much evidenco in the policy that these misguided idealists are striving for, for intelligent electors to be deceived. The sane Labor leaders of Britain have realised the.peril ere it was too late. Thus Mr. Ramsay MacDonald: “If the Labor party toyed with revolution, it would rightly forfeit the confidence and respect of everyone in possession of a head to think with.” Or Mr. ,T. 11. Thomas: “ Whatever might bp said of Russian methods; lie would'tight to the death against, their introduction iiito Britain.” We fail 'to 'find any such explicit expressions of opinion ‘.amongst the utterances of the leaders of’ political Labor in New Zealand. While the British Labor leaders have the pluck to stand up and denounce strikes ami direct action, and ca’ canny methods, which are ruining the nation, whenever did we see tho men who' are standing for Parliament as Labor candidates in this Dominion try to stem the tide of Communism that is at the root of these evils. It is well known that the average worker iti this coiin-try-T-the great body of workers,'■ we may say —has no time for the windy sentiments and objectives of the extremists. He does not regard himself by any means as a “wage-slave.” but; as an independent, man,' living in a free democracy under conditions that are unequalled in any other part of tho world. He does not want any Soviet regime. His spirit would be revolted by tho narrow controls and harsh prohibitions which an industrial Parliament such as Mr. Holland suggests would bring/about. And yet, because lie does not bother much about, politics, the agitators, who are not always working men in the true sense, are allowed., to capture the political organisation, to preach class war, and to endeavor to bring about by insidious methods “the social revolution.” Whilst the great majority of Labor people are quiescent, the Communists, or Revolutionary Socialists, are, always busy. Wo have ample evidence of what they have accomplished, whito-anting into the unions in Australia; of what they have been able to do to the Labor Government in Queensland —and is -there any reason to suppose that if New Zealand put a Labor Government in power, be it ever so innocuous in its protestations, it would not soon be under tho sinister influence of the extremists? Let those who think that Communism is only a bogey and far too weak to accomplish a revolution, or become a menace to their wellbeing, remember that tho revolution in Russia was the effort of a comparatively few thousand Communists to impose their will on .1(50 millions. History has demonstrated a L thousand times that a well-organised minority can be stronger than a disorganised majority. In England the allies of Tom Mann and Saklatvala —tho latter having boasted that he it. “a determined, and implacable enemy of the Union .Tack”—are already powerful in trade union executives and arc aiming at full control. Although they were beaten at the recent Trade Union Congress, it .cannot; be overlooked that. 1:21,000 votes went for the admittance of this disruptive force into Labor’s ranks; that over 10 per cent, of the vote cast was pro-Ooniimmist. “The position at present is,” says tho Daily Telegraph, “that, while the moderate trade union leaders are saying litio, or eontenling thcinsolovos with platitudes about the need lor unity, the ‘Reds’ and their sympathisers are working their hardest. The Parliamentary party's cue is to belittle the Communists, and to suggest, that they would be helpless it itieir mischievous \nporings wore not reported in tho press. We cannot but remember that this was very much the attitude of JV|. Kerensky and his relatively moderate •Socialist eoolleagues in the Russian r< volutionary Government of 1017 to wards Lenin aiul flic' Bolshevik.ii Kerensky ridiculed Lenin and made no serious attempt to suppress him, until 1 lie day eamo when Lenin effectively suppressed Kerensky.” The fact is that the whole British nation has leaplieil a crisis iii its history. “The only dividing line in politics,” said Sir 'William. Joynkon Hicks tho other day, “is that between Socialism and Individualism, If wo failed in the combat against Communism, Socialism

and Bolshevism, then there could be nothing dor it but the descent of Great Britain into the great slough into which Russia had fallen to-day. Our aim in England had been to enable a man to live his own life in his own way. Tho Bolshevik position was a direct challenge to this organisation of society as we, had it, here and in the United States. The foundation principles of .Socialism in Great" Britain were exactly tho same as the foundation principles of Bolshevism .in Russia, for they were founded on the teaching of Karl Marx. The Russian Goyenipicrit was using the Communist International as tho working force, of its internal propaganda.” Mr. Stanley Bruce, Prime Minister of Australia, has realised the danger and thrown down the gage of battle, as Mr. Coates Las done in New Zealand. Issues have arisen, Mr. Bruce pointed out in Sydney last week, which go to the very basis of our national life. “There are those against, us,” he said, “who would challenge the supremacy of Parliament, and who have endeavored to subvert our democratic institutions, and undermine law and order. Unless, the efforts of those men are defeated the whole fabric of our national life will disappear.” It is not less true of New Zealand. The issue is whether this country is to be governed by the elected representatives of tho people tinder a free constitution, or by Soviet methods of an industrial Parliament, whatever that may be. It will be a happy day for New Zealand if between now and next: Wednesday the electors, do some thinking for themselves and losolve to free Nctv Zealand once and for all from the peril- of Revolutionary' Socialism.