The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 2, 1927, Page 6

' Page Six THE DAILY WORKER, NEW YORK, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1927 THE DAILY WORKER Published by the DAILY WORKER PUBLISHING CO. Daily, Except Sunday 83 First Street, New York, N. Y. Phone, Orchard 1680 Cable Addr: a BA ii Shs Se gs Sere? SUBSCRIPTION RATES nad = By Mail (in New York only): By Mail (outside of New York): nonths } ar $4.50 six months three months. 36.00 per year 0 0 three mon $8.00 per $ s to 3 New York, N. mi ut ch R, 33 First Street, yay ..ROBERT MINOR WM. F. DU York, N ese! Editor ; Assistant Editor. Entered as second-class mail the act of ialism—The Soviet Union’s Proposals In Geneva The Soviet Union delegation to Geneva has taken the question of disarmament out of the realm of abstraction and made it a topic of discussion in a concrete form on the tongues of millions. | The proposals submitted by Litvinoff have crashed through the camouflage of “national necessity’ and “defensive arma- ment,” “protection of trade routes,” etc., and all the rest of the artifices resorted to by imperialism’s spokesmen to conceal from the exploited masses the fact that imperialist armaments are for | suppression of the working class and colonial peoples and out- | right conquest. chee Certainly no such detailed and far-reaching program of dis- armament has been put forward before in any important con- ference. It could be carried out IF the ruling class had no designs on each other and no desire to prevent the development of the consciousness and strength of the organizations of the workers and farmers—the majority of the world’s population— by force of arms. But this “if” is the most ridiculous impossi- bility. The working class diplomacy of the delegation of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics has exposed to the masses the fact that there is not, and cannot be, any possibility of disarma- ment in a capitalist world—that it is not possible for capitalist nations to be anything but plundering war-makers. If the rulers of the world wanted peace, there are the pro- posals of the Soviet Union delegation to consider. No world wi would be possible if these proposals were put into operation. But these proposals will not be put into operation. No capitalist power wants any peace which does not give it armed domination over the world. Capitalism is war—at times disguised, at other times open, but always war. When and where before in the history of the wor! largest nation in Europe proposed the scrapping of ALL arma- | ments, the systematic destruction of the war making machinery of the world? Let us dwell on this point a little longer. The Union of So- | cialist Soviet Republics is the largest nation in Europe. -It speaks, if we confine its leadership only to those within its geographical boundaries, for 150,000,000 people. If we exclude the colonies of Great Britain, France and the United States, the Soviet Union appears as the largest nation. We except China and India for the | reason that both are still held in bondage by imperialist nations. | But it is certain, and the loud outcries of British imperialism are | the best proof of this,*that the Soviet Union delegation has the | Disarming Impex support of the masses of both these countries. T Is it any wonder that the foreign offices are frantic? The) very nation which they have been trying to blame for the lack | of “security” comes forward with a proposal for disarmament | to which they have no answer except the time worn imperialist slogans. The imperialists themselves and their socialist allies have popularized the slogan of disarmament as a sure-fire method of preventing war. What are they to say now when forced to admit by the pre- sentation of a program for immediate disarmament, that they have no intention of disarming? Not the least valuable result of the strategy of the workers’ | and peasants’ government of the Soviet Union at Geneva is that | the mighty ones of the imperialist nations appear ridiculdus to the exact extent that they have been vicious in their attacks upon the Russian revolution and the working class movements of their} own countries.” | Their wonderful diplomacy, their boasted acumen, \ their) vaunted skill in debate, their ability, exalted to a virtue, to “use} Janguage to conceal their thoughts,”’ their sneering acceptance | of the presence of the Soviet Union spokesmen in a conference) of “respectable” nations-—all have been dissipated by a few hun- |? dred word program whith every worker and farmer in the world can understand and appreciate. To make rulers ridiculous is a step towards making them! unable to rule. «/ The masses do not fear or ticians they can laugh. The Soviet Union delegation are masters of Geneva. The force which backs this delegation cuts straight across national boundaries. Behind the words of Litvinoff is the might of the masses of the Soviet Union with state power in their hands, the) working class of the imperialist nations and the colonial peoples— the forces which will carve out of the future the World Union, of Socialist Soviet Republics. World imperialism will not disarm itself. The workers and_ farmers of the world must disarm imperialism. The spokesmen of world imperialism know very well that this is what the delegation of the Soviet Union at Geneva says to the world's toiling millions and this is why the spokesmen of world imperialism will-try to discredit by any and all means the proposals for a world agreement to destroy all war machinery— military, naval, mechanical, chemical and political. They will not. Imperialism must cast around for new slo- respect a class at whose best poli- gans. The Union of Socialist Soviet Republics has made the olag ., slogans useless. y The Peacefakers Exposed | The Paris correspondent of the New York Times, in a dis- patch dated Nov. 26, said among. other things: | “Russia, especially when represented by a man like | Maxim Litvinoff, is likely to do and say things ‘gentlemen’ do not do or say. In any conference, and especially in a con- | ference so delicate as that which concerns disarmament, cer- By Fred Ellis Maxim Litvinoff held up a model of the peace angel in the diplomatic trenches at Geneva. The test worked. They shot hell out of her. © Oil and the War Danger -_——@ By William F. Dunne athe Ps | Standard Oil and Royal Dutch Shell Write a New Chapter for Louis Fischer’s “Oil Imperialism.” British and American Imperialism Fight for the Oil Resources of the Soviet Union — The Struggle for the Oil Markets of Central. Europe—The “Friendship” Between Teagle and Deterding—The Relations of Royal Dutch and Standard Oil— International Polities—The Decreasing American Supply—The Sharpening of the Struggle—Oil Companies and State De- partments—Oil and the Jingoes—Imperialism’s Need (Continued from Last Issue.) ‘HIS is not the first time that Stan- dard Oil and its various subsidi- aries have been confronted with the question of trade relations with the Soviet Union and the consequent op- position of Sir Henri Deterding, Royal Dutch Shell and the British govern- ment. And here we come back to Loui er’s great bock, “Oil Im- perialism,” from which we quoted in beginning this article. It should be said here that no work- ing understanding of the world strug- gle for oil and its influence in shap- ing the policies of the imperialist na- tions can be had without either con- sulting the original sources to which Fischer had access or reading his book. We intend here to give a prac- tical illustration of what we mean. HE outburst of the head. of the Standard Oil of New Jersey, Teagle, | against the Soviet union and in op- position to the contract negotiations of two other Standard Oil concerns ed wide comment within the leadership of the ’s greatest trust. To some it appeared that the ap- parent similarity between the policy of Standard Oil of New Jersey — Te nd that of its chief compe- titor, Royal Dutch Shell—Deterding— indicated treason of a powerful sec- tion of Standard Oil, a desertion to the enemy by the Standard Oil of New Jersey. OTHING could be farther from the truth. Fischer clarifies the ques- tion considerably in a footnote on | Page 124 wherein he comments on the fact that in 1924 Standard Oil actually shared with Royal Shell shipments of oil bought from the Moscow Naptha Syndicate.—the Soviet government oil trust. ischer says: “This touches upon the ever-intrigu- ing and much-mooted question of the relations between the Standard Oil wnd the Royal Dutch combine. . . ont for the purchase | Duteh | for Oil—How the Dang‘ er Will Be Removed— Latest Developments. ¢The point is that generalizations are impossible upon this subject. The Standard Oil and Royal Dutch Shell ‘cooperate in separate fields of en- |deavor or on individual transactions | WHENEVER IT SUITS THEIR PUR- POSE TO DO SO. They may, for in- stance, agree on maintaining, a cer- tain level of prices in certain coun- tries. BUT OUTSIDE OF THESE LIMITS THEY REMAIN SHARP COMPETITORS. “This may be especially true in the United States and Mexico where, as the American supply decreases, the presence of the Royal Dutch Shell will be more and more resented by its most powerful rival.” 'O this latter reason must be added now, in the light of the sharpening of the conflict, the struggle for Sov- liet oil reserves. | But how explain the apparent fervor with which the head of the Standard | Oil of New Jersey joined with* the chief competitor of its parent com- pany in throwing a monkey wrench into negotiations which the Standard Oi! considered of paramount import- ance? In “Oil Imperialism” the reason is stated clearly. As a preliminary to the quotations we are about to make, we wish to remark that they show clearly that the exigencies of business put a severe strain even upon such wholehearted enemies of Communism as the heads of Standard Oil com- panies. Nor has Sir.Henri Deterding, now jone of the chief exponents of British imperialist anti-Soviet Union policy, been immune to the corrupting influ- ence of the rich Russian oil deposits. CCORDING to the very interesting documents which are reproduced by Fischer, (documents whose authen- ticity is beyond dispute) Sir Henri Deterding himself was the first to purchase Soviet oil after the revolu- | tion. The contract was concluded March 29, 1928, IN VIOLATION OF AN AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY = ing to the rules. which are alway sweeping appeals, not only to ures in support of his argume: Litvinoff is capable of stating principles, s embarrassing things, and of making wide, human sentiment, but to fig- nts. some of Litvinoff’s arguments are likely to prove very difficult to answer, and there is no little nervousness in Paris about their effect.” » (Emphasis ours.) The Times correspondent w: like a “gentleman.” He talked li of a revolutionary government. as right, Litvinoff did not talk ke a revolutionary representative The admissions by the correspondent which we have em- AMERICAN, BRITISH, FRENCH, BELGIAN, DUTCH AND RUSSIAN | COMPANIES. (Russian companies organized before the revolution and | declared illegal by the Soviet govern-| ment but which were still recognized by their fellow-capitalists.) ets combination of powerful capi- talist concerns, with full govern-| ment backing, had raised the slogan of “Blockade and Boycott.” The Sov- iet government was to be forced to restore ALL the oil properties to their former owners. Sir Henri Deterding, acting for Royal Dutch Shell, and consequently | with the sanction of the British gov- |ernment, broke this united front. Fischer quotes from the London “Petroleum Times” of May 26, 1928: “The affair of the purchase of 70,- (000 tons of Russian oil with an op- j tion for a further 100,000 tons, is still rankling, and some of our papers are making serious reflections upon the tactics of the Royal Dutch Shell Com- pany.” i ‘HE other members of the united front of oil capitalists were angry at the double-cross handed them by Sir Henri. They called an indignation meeting and with cold impudence the Royal Dutch Sheil offered to share its purchases of- Soviet Oil with the other members of the syndicate. The “Petroleum Times” goes on to state that: “This was refused, and the feeling that the Royal Dutch had acted dis- loyally towards the syndicate was not improved by the discovery later on that the agreement of purchase, SAID TO HAVE BEEN SIGNED ON MARCH 2, WAS REALLY ONLY SIGNED ON MARCH 29—THREE DAYS AFTER THE MEETING.” c is evident that Sir Henri Deterd- ing’s determination’ to mix “morals” with oil, to have nothing to do with “a government of robbers and mur- |derers,” is of comparatively recent | date. To be more precise it corresponds with the rapid rise of the infiuence of American imperialism and Standard Oil in world affairs and with the re- cent change in British imperialist pol- iey from one of recognition to open hostility toward the Soviet Union. THERE remains now only the nec- essity of clearing up the confusion created by the recent brief rap- proachement of Walter C. Teagle of | Standard Oil of New Jersey and Sir | Henri of Royal Dutch on the question of the morality of business dealings with the Soviet Union. The memories of most newspaper readers are short and few will recall what Fischer emphasizes in his book, \ie., that in 1923 and the forepart of 1924, Royal Dutch Shell was buying | liberally from the Soviet Union and that in the summer of 1924 an agree- ment was made in Paris between rep- |resentatives of Standard and Royal Dutch that the Standard should hence- forth do the buying on condition that it shared its Soviet oil shipments with the Shell if the latter wished. iis was not until the Standard, actu- ated by the rapid decrease of Amer- iean oil reserves, and also by the desire to forestall its chief competitor in the richest oil field in the world, proposed to the Soviet government that ‘it be granted the sole right to purchase the entire output of all Rus- sion oil-fields over a period of years, that the struggle between Standard and Royal Dutch sharpened again. These proposals were not accepted by the Soviet government altho ten- tative negotiations continued. As Fischer says: “Neither party, however, despaired of reaching an agreement. In Oc- tober, 1925, the Standard Oil again intimated that it was anxious to re- new pourparlers with the Soviet Nap- tha Syndicate. . .It soon appeared that the COUNCILS OF THE STAN- DARD OIL. . .WERE DIVIDED ON SOME OF THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS INVOLVED. The Vacuum Oil which does considerable business in Egypt and the Near East generally, was enthusiastically IN FAVOR OF BYING RUSSIAN OIL. The Stan- dared Oil Company of New York HAD NO OBJECTIONS TO, DOING #SO. BUT THE STANDARD OIL OF NEW JERSEY WAS RATHER COLD TO THE PROPOSITION. The explanation of these varying at- titudes is not far to seek. Vacuum Oil conducts a heavy business in the Mediterranean basin and bears much of the brunt of Soviet competition. Socony (Standard Oil of New York) is much interested in the Turkish and Bulgarian markets WHICH IT CAN- NOT HOLD LONG WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF SHIPMENTS FROM THE CAUCASUS.” (To Be Continued.) THE GOD-MAKER Man makes his gods. He takes a cringing fear, A hope, a hate, a superstition, and he blends Them all into a god great and austere— 4the balance. Company. . | tain rules must be observed. For instance, every nation wants to keep as big an army and navy as possible, while limiting the forces of every other nation. That is understood, and on that ‘gentlemen’s agreement,’ all can work, trying to outwit each other. “But Russia, it is masta will not play the game accord- 6 | phasized are by no means news to intelligent workers but the cynicism of the statements, at a time when there is a real crisis in European politics, is testimony both to the gravity of the whole situation and the extent to which the fictions of the imperialist diplomats have been exploded by the existence of the Soviet Union and mass protest against imperialist war preparations, - > And bends the knee and all of mankind bends. Man makes his gods, and breaks them at a whim, _And moulds again to his own heart's desire. New gods to ever please and humor him, New gods to make—and cast into the fire! _ HENRY REICH, JR. | Red Rays | YESTERDAY I had the pleasure of meeting Samuel Schneider who | plays the part of one of the two de- lightful rogues’ Dwi and Chono in |“The Centuries” at the New Play- wrights Theatre. His side-kick is Eduard Franz and their work is ex- cellent. When writing the review, I |did not know their names, so I take this opportunity to take off my hat to them. And while on the subject |I want to pay tribute to the acting {of Jane Barry, who played the role | of Flossie, the gangster’s sweetheart. * * * NE of the most mirth-provoking incidents that I have seen in any |play for a long time is the scene in the synagogue, where those two merry fellows intone their love affairs within {the hearing of the rabbi. Of course, |if you are a rabbi you may not enjoy it, but those of you that are not— and there are such among us—will yet your money’s worth of fun. * Gone correspondents of some | American capitalist newspapers |are trying laboriously and futilely to make it appear that Litvinoff’s well- directed blast against the militarism of the imperialist powers turned out to be a dud, because of the clever diplomacy of the capitalist represent- atives. The fact is that the proposals for complete and immediate disarma- ment presented by Litvinoff exposed the powers in their true light as thorogoing frauds with no more in- tention to disarm than they have to quit exploiting the workers:and the colonial peoples. * | * % HE disarmament program of the government of the Soviet Union will be read with interest by the masses thruout the world. On the shoulders of the workers and pea- sants of all lands falls the burden 07 the militarist machines that are buil: by the imperialists to hold the masses in subjection. Following on the heels of the resolution to put the seven- hour day in effect thruout the Soviet Union the bold way in which Litvinoff challenged the imperialists at Geneva and flayed the capitalist system of- fers further proof of the fidelity of the Soviet Union- to the social revo- lution and to the interests of the ex- ploited masses all over the world. * eee ee AP OTHER victory of the Soviet Union and particularly in the struggle with British imperialism is the signing, of a contract with the Spanish government to supply Spain with 50 per cent of her oil require- ments. , The British and American oil magnates are oy, squabbling over * * Hae American government refuses to recognize the Soviet Union, but American business men have no ob- jection to making profits out of trade with the U. S. S. R. Recognition must come sooner or later and the action of a group of Wall Street bankers in agreeing to advance $40,- 000,000 for the development of the metallurgical industry is $40,000,000 worth of propaganda for recognition. Incidentally it is $40,000,000 worth of bitter pills for the stomach of British imperialism. * * * REONG those who are doing their best to bring The DAILY WORKER to the attention of a wider public is Rev. Dr. John Roach Straton, |the fundamentalist everybody knows \and almost everybody laughs at. The |Dr. must be on the mailing list of | Fred Marvin, the gentleman who lives on the radical movement by being op- | pésed to it. John writes in his church bulletin that there are 275 “subversive societies. and organizations actively working for the destruction of chris- tianity, civilization and government in America,” with 1,500 publications including The DAILY WORKER. Thanks, Roach, old top. * #2 & NGELO SKILANOS of Chieago, does not wear his hair long, does not appear on the streets hatless and does not refer to himself in the third person. Yet he is a poet. Sikilanos became notorious, and automatically famous, when it was learned that his / wife has not spent twenty cents, for’ clothes in twenty years which proves that her husband has not been a sue cess at the business because of /the weaknesses enumerated above. / | * * * jf JT IS quite evident that Sikilanos is |* inflicted with a microscopic ego which detests publicity on its menu. Should the poet follow the example of William Hale Thompson and other politicians who think well of them- selves, and get into the habit of say- jing: “I believe that ‘Ode to a Caters ‘pillar’ by Angelo Sikilanos is the best | poem of the year” or “Angelo Siki- \lanos’ portrait of a hot meal is ag good as Eddie Guest’s latest bedtime poem,” his wife would soon be wear- ing creations from Paris. Unless an artist has a ‘guid’ conceit of himself he should hire a loyal press agent or if he cannot afford that luxury, he should go to work. * * * ‘HEE day is gone when a fellow with a quarter in his pocket was in danger of getting bumped off in his city by a fellow-citizen wHo needed the money. Murders are on a higher financial plane than formerly and nowadays there are few murders com- | mitted in an “art for art sake” spirit. Snyder was sashweighted for $90,- ,000 worth of insurance and the latest contribution to high-finance homicide is the drowning of a fello’ by the name of Goldstein by his part ner who had him insured for gy because he thot so mich of him. ay ee gods protect us from thi ( affection, —T. J. ; t k \% | f