The Daily Worker Newspaper, August 16, 1924, Page 8

MacDonald Signs a Treaty By ALEXANDER BITTELMAN. At last, after nearly five months of bargaining in the interests of British Imperialism, MacDonald signed a treaty with the government of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republic (U. S. S. R.) We imagine he got as good a bargain as was possible under the circumstances. But that’s what it was, that’s what he was driving after—a bargain for his masters, the capitalists of Great Britain. Why Do We Kick? One might ask us a question. One fnight approach us saying: Look here, isn’t that what you wanted? Didn’t you say you wanted MacDonald to recognize Soviet Russia and begin commercial relations with her, and . now that MacDonald has done it you again criticize and attack him. To this we reply. It is not the treaty that we are particularly kick- ing about. Nor do we mind very much the fact that British Imperialism has been trying to get the best of the Sov- iet Government. This is as it should be. What else could we expect of one of the most powerful and most dangerous class enemies of the Inter- national working class? No, we are perfectly well satisfied that British Imperialism understands its interests and knows how to fight for them. of the most profitable markets of Brit- ish Capitalism. The “City” warfts the Russian mar- ket for export and investment. It has been trying to get it for the last seven years. First, by military intervention designed to over throw the Soviet Government and to put in its place some puppet capitalist proposition which would willingly sell out Russia to the capitalist masters of Great Britain. , In this the “City” failed. The work- ers and peasants of Russia, led by the Communist Party, and supported by the revolutionary workers all over the world stood their ground and com- pelled the retreat of British Imperial- ism. Then they tried to compel submis- sion of the Soviet Government by means of an economic boycott. Re- member the infamous “cordon sani- taire,” the iron wall around the Sov- iet State, which for months and months has been strangling and chok- ing to death the economic life of the first Workers and Peasants Republic. But with no avail. The working men of Russia starved and died but didn’t surrender to the bloodhounds of imperialism. Thus MacDonald’s masters had to retreat again. They retreated slowly and gradually. They talked peace and waged war, bitter, HIS MAJESTY’S SOCIALISTS THOMAS GRIFFFITH Treasurer | | ALLEN PARKINSON Comptroller Of the King’s Household c—0—c“[“——RRkRewo Www —_———__—— The object of our hatred, opposition and attack is MacDonald, the Labor Premier, serving the interests of Brit- ish Imperialism. And remember: not the person, MacDonald, not the individual. With him we have very little concern, but MacDonald, the head of a Labor Gov- ernment betraying the class whom he is supposed to represent and fighting in the interests of the class enemies of the workers—this is the thing we are concerned with and are fighting against. at we demand of MacDonald and his government is loyalty to the work- ing class, devotion to its interests and readiness to fight in the cause of la- bor as against the cause of capital. That is, we demand of him to do things which are the exact opposite of the things he is doing now, or else, abdicate and let true servants and leaders of the workers take his place. The Voice of the “City.” Thru MacDonald always speaks the voice of the “City,” the Wall Street of Great Britain. The “City’sis badly in need of new markets. It has been in this position for quite some time, in fact, since its victory over German Imperialism which marked the break- up of the Central-European economic system and the disappearance of one merciless, economic warfare against the Soviet State. Until they realized that nothing do- ing: They will have to come to terms with the Soviet government. So they “granted” Russia recognition and started negotiations. MacDonald Did It! i Here we can sense the coming of an argument, “Well, but it was MacDonald that did it, not Curzon and Baldwin!” Yes, yes, it was MacDonald, of course, not Curzon. We know the reasons for it, too. Here they are: MacDonald did it because British Im- perialism wanted it. The day Mac- Donald announced the recognition of Russia the “City” registered its ap- proval by a general rise in prices of bonds, shares and stocks. The “City” said in effect: “Alright, Mac, go to it. Fine. You made a good start. Now don’t spoil it by letting the Russians fool you with all kinds of bunk about proletarian solidarity, ‘Internationalism, Revolu- tion, etc. Be on your guard. Remem- ber, it is a business proposition. We want markets, profits and power. If you know how to get it for us and drive hard towards it, we'll let you stay in office and manage our affairs. We wouldn’t even mind your speak- ing in terms of socialism. It is a good word. Give ’em a little more of it. But remember, it’s a business pro- position.” And MacDonald is doing it, even as well as Curzon would have done it, and perhaps a little better. Curzon has served the same masters as Mac- Donald is, bu®with other means. Cur- zon has been making war for British Imperialfsm. .MacDonald is making peace for British Imperialism. Both are working substantially toward the same end. What We Could Expect. England’s present government is a “Labor” government, isn’t it? It is supposed to represent the interests and aspirations of the working class of Great Britain. It is supposed to promote those interests. This being so, what should MacDonald have done in the matter of Soviet Russia? Russia possesses enormous mate- rial riches, inexhaustible natural re- sources. Also an immense amount of man-power. But these resources are dormant. To make them serve the well-being of the masses these re- sources have got to be developed. For MR. GANDHI’S SWAN SONG this capital is needed, not capitalism, but capital; means of production. England possesses that. It has the coal, iron, steel, and chemicals ready at hand to be used in production. It also has the trained technical man- power. It has the organization. But all this lies dormant, or, almost so, for lack of markets. Russia and England need each oth- er. Russia is ruled by its working class. England is ruled ostensibly by Labor, practically by the capitalists. Now, why shouldn’t the workers of England and Russia strike up an al- liance, pull together the resources of both countries and shoulder to shoul- der proceed to the building up of So- cialism in their respective countries? We know why. Because the Labor Government of England is labor only in name. Because MacDonald and his Government are serving the interests of ‘capitalism and not those of the workers. In short, because the pres- ent government of England does not express the aspirations of the. English working class. The real Labor Government of Eng- land is yet to come. By EVELYN ROY. That the leadership of the Indian nationalist movement has passed de- finitely out of the hands of Mr. Gan- dhi and the orthodox school of Non- Co-operation, was proven by the ses- sion just concluded of the All-Indian Congress Committee at Ahmedabad. This is the first official deliberation in which Mr. Gandhi has participated, since his release from prison in Janu- ary of this year, when he was operat- ed upon for appendicitis, and has since been undergoing a slow conva- lescence. The two years which have intervened between, his arrest and conviction to six years’ rigorous im- prisonment, have brought. many changes in the program and tactics of the Indian National Congress. The Swaraj Party, headed by Mr. C. R. Das, of Bengal, succeeded in having an amendment passed to the Non-Co- operation Program, permitting those who desired to take part in the elec- tions to the Legislative Councils, for the purpose of carrying on obstruc- tion to the government. The elections of 1923 were contested by the Swaraj Party, which succeeded in capturing about half the seats in the provincial and All-India Legislatures. By an agreement arrived at with the Inde- pendent Nationalists, whose demands are not so extreme as the Swarajists but who occupy a centre position be- tween the Liberals or Moderates and the Non-Co-operators, the Swarajists were able to command a small majori- ty of votes in the Central Legislatures and several of the provinces, and to defeat practically all the government measures brought before those bodies for approval. Thus, the center of gravity of the national struggle has shifted, during the past six months, from the orthodox Gandhists to the Swarajists, who still claim to be a part of the Indian National Congress, formerly entirely controlled by Mr. Gandhi and his followers. The release of the’ Mahatma from prison, by an act of grace of the La- bor Government soon after the latter assumed office, was regarded as the dawn of a new era in Indian political life. The lost leader had returned to his followers; the Non-co-operation movement which had fallen into stag- nation since his arrest, would be re- vived and become once more a power- ful revolutionary force, which would sweep the Swaraj Party into the back- ground of the struggle. Six months passed without any change in the sit- uation, due to the feeble health of the Mahatma, and his desire to acquaint himself with the details of the situa- tion, with which he had lost touch for two years. Private conversations with the various leaders of the Na- tional Congress, representing differ- ent schools of thought, were held at Juhu, the little seaside resort where Mr. Gandhi was convalescing, but strict secrecy was observed as to the 4 (eR A AR RN NR nee ae nature of these discussions. Thus the first official pronouncement of the Ma- hatma was*made just a few weeks previous to the Ahmedabad session of the All-India Congress Committee —the supreme executive body of the Indian National Congress. This official pronouncement took the form of a simultaneous statement of policy on the part of Mr. Gandhi, for the orthodox Non-Co-operators, known as the “No-Changers,”’ and of the two chief leaders of the Swaraj faction, or “Pro-Changers,” Messrs. C. R. Das and Moti Lal Nehru. This statement, which followed a series of prolonged conversations between the rival factions within the National Congress, aroused a great sensation thruout India. In it, for the first time, a frank difference of opinion was ex- pressed on the tactics and progmam of the national struggle, and an in- ability to arrive at any agreement be- tween the two schools of thought. Mr. Gandhi reiterated his faith in the “Constructive Program” which he had laid down at Bardoli in February of 1922, and which limited the activi- ties of the National Congress to the, Charka (spinning wheel), Khaddar, (the wearing of homespun cloth), and social reform activities, such as the removal of “untouchability” of the lower castes, the campaign against the drink-evil, and village-education. The absolute boycott of government schools, law courts and legislative councils was insisted upon, as well - as the boycott of foreign cloth. To this program, the Swarajists op- posed their own, which was to enter the Legislative Councils with the ob- ject of carrying on obstruction to gov- ernment measures, until their demand for Swaraj (self-government) should be granted. They agreed to carry on the constructive program of Gan- dhism outside the councils, and to en- force the boycott of merely British, as opposed to all foreign cloth. To these modifications in his program, Mr. Gandhi could not agree, and the statement of difference was issued ‘to the country as a means of testing public opinion before the session of the All-India Congress Committee in June, which would have ‘to decide be- tween the two factions. It was the first time that Mr. Gan- dhi’s word had been challenged upon an issue of national importance. The gauntlet had been thrown down; the leadership of the Indian National movement hung in the balance. Mr, Gandhi had declared that if his pro- gram were rejected, he would retire from politics and devote himself to social reform. The choice therefore, was clear and uncompromising. He further announced that he would sub- mit a resolution, declaring that all persons who did not spin for half an hour a day, and whoedid not ob- serve the five-fold boycott of Legisla- tive Councils, Law-Courts, Govern- (Continued on page 5.)