page 6

The View from the Left

The disarmament talks in Geneva continue their abortive way with proposal and counter-proposal effectively ensuring that no real progress will be made. Why should it?

To be a major power in the world political scene, a nation must have adequate manpower, an expanding and virile economy, and military strength. Take away any one of these three and a country rapidly becomes a second-rate power. This is amply demonstrated by the decline of the United Kingdom and France and the relative ineffectiveness of India in the world political scene. It would seem, therefore, that the disarmament talks in Geneva were doomed before they began; for obviously neither of the two major powers will risk a decline in their power position.

Altruism, it must be remembered, is a motive conspicuous by its absence in international dealings between power blocs. (Witness the recent American refusal to send wheat to China). The feeling that the talks are hopeless is reinforced when one sees the importance of the military and munitions manufacturers in American politics and the increasingly important role of Marshal Malinowsky in the Kremlin.

One glimmer of hope remains: that even these egocentric groups can come to the realisation that none will win an atomic war. Perhaps we are about to enter an era when international power conflict will take a new form—perhaps economic and war as a method of resolving international conflict will at last be abandoned. Anyway, here's hoping . . .

Incidentally, the action of the American Government in refusing to allow wheat to be sent to China is receiving deserved criticism. The U.S. refuses to grant permission for the sale of wheat until the Chinese Government, itself, requests it. Thus, the U.S. reasons, communism can be seen by all people to be a failure. Using this type of logic, one can argue that the reproductive system is a failure as some babies are born malformed.

* * *

Toby Hill, secretary of the New Zealand Waterside Workers' Union up until July, 1951, made a number of points which bear further consideration, in an interesting, if somewhat poorly integrated talk, to the combined Left clubs. Firstly, the government in abolishing compulsory unionism has a moral obligation to remove all the restrictive legislation associated with the I.C.&A. Act. As Mr Hill pointed out, New Zealand industrial unions are so hamstrung by these laws that it is almost impossible for them to carry out their historic role.

When a questioner asked Mr Hill whether or not the unions should more properly be concerning themselves with ensuring an improved standard of living for the mass of the peoples of Asia than attempting to increase their own already large share of the "cake", he received a most evasive reply. When the questioner then went on to suggest that the N.Z. worker should accept a drop in income to help the Asian, Mr Hill's reaction was what one imagines to be the Pope's upon discovering the malicious Presbyterian bathing in his favourite chalice! It seemed to reflect the parochial outlook that Mr Hill had been criticising in his fellow unionists.

Another questioner suggested that the Federation of Labour was acting irresponsibly in claiming a wage rise at the present time and was surprised to receive an emphatic denial. Surely the questioner must realise that, for a socialist, the present parlous state of the country's finances are of little concern. After all, if the country were socialist, then there would be no economic problems, and, secondly, if one can give a little underhand shove to the present teetering system, then well and good. Like it or not, there is a logic in the F.O.L.'s behaviour.

* * *

The intervention of the Army Heads in the Argentine to nullify the electoral successes of the Peronists has been condemned by most Western newspapers. The papers argue that the intervention of the army has destroyed democracy in the Argentine, when it was fighting to emerge from the shadowing period of Peron's dictatorship. The absurdity of this argument is clear when one realises that the Peronists were banned from participation in the previous elections. I am sorry to spell it out, but clearly democracy cannot exist when one political group is banned. It is not democracy that has been destroyed; the Army has merely acted to ensure that the privileges of the large landowners and capitalists will continue to be protected from the workers and peasants.

—Val. Maxwell