Molotov

"Canada's National Newspaper"

Globe & Mail Editorial
Alexander Kerensky: The Man Who Lost The Great War?

Few individual figures in the recent history of the world can be described as being as controversial as Alexander Kerensky - the late President of Russia and leader of the Center Socialist Revolutionary Party. The response to his death can be described less as massed mourning and more as massed confusion and uncertainty, for with his assassination on New Year's Eve 1935, the single predictable and unifying figure of the Russian nation was removed with a bullet. No-one yet knows what course the Russian Republic will take, now that its stabilising figure has passed away with such suddenness.

For nearly seventeen years, he ruled the Russian Republic with less of an iron fist and more of a velvet glove, being nicknamed by some the 'Persuader-in-Chief' of Russia. It is, perhaps, arguable whether Kerensky was a weak man, or merely a man doing the best job possible he could manage under the circumstances to hold his country together. What is certainly undeniable is that he was responsible for some of the worst decisions made in recent years by a national leader, not only harming his own country but, through his actions, precipitating the loss of the Great War and, consequently, the spread of the Syndicalist menace.

While it is true that Kerensky did attempt to continue to prosecute Russia's war with Germany, and ordered major offensives in an effort to retake lands lost from the German offensives of the previous year, by alienating his own military commanders in favour of soldiers' councils, he fatally weakened the Russian Army's discipline and caused their collapse to the German counter-offensive the following month. Even more unwise still was his decision to free and arm the members of the 'Bolshevik' terrorist movement, for protection against what he feared might be a military coup against his rule by General Kornilov, whose forces approached Petrograd in an effort to pacify the Syndicalist uprisings that were fatally weakening the Russian state.

Most treasonably of all, his policy of "no enemies to the left" was designed to save his position from Syndicalist revolutionaries, but at the expense of both Russian pride and Russian civilisation. It did not even save him; for as soon as their power was secured through Kerensky's policy of seeking their support rather than suppressing them, he was ousted. With the Bolsheviks forcing the signing of the humiliating Treaty of Brest-Litovsk upon the Russian people, it was only the generalship of Admiral Kolchak that led to the defeat of the Syndicalist menace and the restoration of Kerensky to the Presidency.


What, then, is the legacy that Kerensky leaves behind? His primary reputation, surely, should be that of a survivor - of a man who managed to remain in and regain his seat at the head of the Russian table by whatever persuasive means he could manage, even at the cost of his own country's pride and prosperity, surviving Kolchak's attempted coup in 1924. For fifteen years, Kerensky ruled over a Russia divided, either unable or unwilling to take decisive actions and improve his country's situation, internally or externally. The best that Russia, and the world, can now hope for, is a new leader for the country that will be able to put his own country and people's needs first, one with the strength to maintain civilisation in the face of the Syndicalist menace, above his own ambitions.

Stanley Baldwin Resigns


Stanley Baldwin, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, after signing his letter of resignation for presentation to the King.

Following weeks of turmoil in the midst of the Parliament of Westminster, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Stanley Baldwin, recently announced his resignation as party leader and Prime Minister to the British House of Commons, in the face of consternation from the British Conservative Party benches and cheers from the British Labour Party. The de facto Prime Minister since 22nd March, 1925, Baldwin was the former Chancellor of the Exchequer until the death of his predecessor, the Lord Curzon, during the rebellion.

Initially holding an iron grip on power over the government of the Exiles, Baldwin, along with his close political ally King George, is credited with establishing the position of influence that the government-in-exile held over Canadian and Commonwealth affairs. While Baldwin enjoyed friendship with the deceased monarch, it seems that the same alliance was not patrilineally inherited. Rumours of disagreements between the new King Edward, Prime Minister King, and Prime Minister Baldwin have been rife for months, beginning with the new King's decision to have his weekly ministerial meetings with the Canadian Privy Council rather than the exiled government.


Max Aitken and Winston Churchill, the front-runners for the position of Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

With the prospect of Baldwin's resignation in the air for some time, the MPs for the British Conservative Party - remaining the majority party in the Westminster Parliament - have been positioning themselves for the upcoming leadership contest. The two leading contenders - interestingly, both political opponents of Baldwin - are the Anglo-Canadian publisher Max Aitken, previously Lord Beaverbrook, who renounced his lordship in order to be able to stand as a Member of the House of Commons, and Winston Churchill, the former First Lord of the Admiralty.

Churchill enjoys the clearer support of the Westminster Parliament and the British Conservative Party, largely due to his fiery rhetoric pushing for the liberation of Great Britain to be the priority and his greater political experience. In contrast, Aitken is widely seen as the more diplomatic choice, with his Canadian birth and greater popularity in the wider Commonwealth, due to his campaigning for greater free trade and economic integration among the Realms. Both candidates, however, are marred by controversy - Churchill for his role in the Gallipoli debacle, causing his unpopularity in Australasia, and Aitken due to suspicions that he may have helped to engineer the political crisis that forced Baldwin's resignation.

It is expected that a new Prime Minister of the United Kingdom will be elected by the end of the year - but at present, it is impossible to predict which of these two men will be chosen.


Social Credit: The Rise of Canada's Homegrown Far Left

While it is, perhaps, the ideology of Syndicalism that has benefited most from the global recent rise in far-left movements, the adoption of Syndicalism by the Far Left has not been universal. Different nations have experienced this rise in different ways, with the Anarchist Federation in Spain a prime example of a divergence. Canadian political discourse is already unusual compared to other democracies - for it is the Right which advocates for strong state control over industry, not the Left, in our nation. But quietly, and in a way uniquely Canadian, another movement has appeared in the last decade - the Social Credit Movement, also known as the Socreds.

Social Credit is a recent ideology, having been postulated only in 1924 by C.H. Douglas, a British engineer who, during his time as a manager in the Royal Aircraft Establishment, carried out a study which indicated that the wages paid out by the company were less than the total value of the goods the company produced. While the theory spreads across several books advocating for ‘democratic control of the financial system’, it can be boiled down to two primary objectives: firstly, that there should be a variable National Dividend paid to all citizens, in order to allow them to purchase goods, and secondly, that the government should set the prices for all goods produced in order to ensure that they are affordable to all - a ‘Just Price’.


Pamphlet encouraging citizens to join the Social Credit Party.

While Douglas campaigned for his new ideas to be implemented in Britain after the Revolution, he was driven out by the Trade Union Congress and became an exile, due to his strong Christian faith and the lack of adherence of his reformist ideas to Syndicalism. It was in Canada that his ideas took root, promoting Social Credit as a ‘third road’ between Capitalism and Syndicalism, bearing some similarities, indeed, with some of the policies of the American First movement. Slogans such as "they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid" and "what we really demand of existence is not that we shall be put into somebody else's Utopia, but we shall be put in a position to construct a Utopia of our own" bear a striking resemblance to some America First slogans, in meaning if not in words, and the path to success for the party has been similar after forming an alliance with the Religious Right. Under the leadership of the American-Canadian John Blackmore, who was able to stand for Parliament thanks to his Canadian citizenship, the Social Credit Party of Canada was founded in 1932, though Douglas himself remains a patriarchal figure, focusing his attentions on spreading Social Credit outside Canada.

As the Liberals, Conservatives, Progressives and even the Co-operative Commonwealth parties have all so frequently pointed out, there are several unanswered flaws in the Social Credit reasoning. It assumes an entirely closed internal national economy, without taking into account the worldwide nature of modern trade where goods can be purchased from or sold to other countries. It calls for democratic ownership of the banks and other financial instruments, so that they serve the interests of the people rather than wealthy financiers - a not unreasonable idea at its core - but provides no effective checks and balances other than the ‘wisdom of the commons’ to prevent the electorate simply voting to give themselves more ‘debt-free loans’ and causing hyperinflation. Similarly, while the idea that all goods should have a fair price and be affordable to all is laudable in theory, the ‘Just Price’ gives no details about how such a price is to be determined, nor, indeed, to whom the price should be fair to, nor what the incentive for producers should be if their goods will only be paid for at-cost of manufacture or procurement. In short, while some of the Social Credit theories are sound in their intention, the Globe and Mail believes that there are unanswered questions about how these policies are to be implemented.


Social Credit advertisement for the mayoral race in Edmonton.

The party distances itself from Syndicalism, perhaps deliberately, with its strong focus on the Christian faith and socially conservative ideas of morality. Initially resisted by the established left, as its members were drawn largely from the existing Progressive and United Farmers parties, the party’s performance in the 1935 elections was surprising to all, with Social Credit becoming the provincial government of Alberta and becoming the third-largest party in the House of Commons thanks to their concentrated support - albeit taking less than five percent of the popular vote nationally. The similarities with the America First movement are certainly intriguing - both hold control over a specific regional government, and promoting policies which bear a mixture of far-left and far-right dogma. However, unlike the America First movement, there is some evidence that Social Credit may have been supported and funded by the Internationale, despite their ideological differences. All eyes are now on Alberta to see where the Social Credit government will take the province - and with their enthusiastic candidacy in the upcoming Edmonton and Toronto mayoral races, the Social Credit movement will be able to become a truly national force in Canadian politics if they succeed.

Provincial responses to Black Monday

With six months having passed since the events of Black Monday, the consequences of the German economic collapse are only just beginning to become clear. Across the world, governments, peoples and businesses have responded very differently to the circumstances, with the economic shock caused by reckless Mitteleuropa investments and German overspending being undeniably significant and unprecedented in their scale in economic history. Bank bailouts, public works, unemployment protections and even calls for violent revolution have all occurred, but Canada, our own country, has been a unique example.

Due to the constitution of our Confederation, a centrally-directed response has, so far, been impossible. At the national level, two visions have emerged: firstly, the policy supported by the Conservative Party and the Social Credit movement, of amending the constitution to give the Federal Government in Ottawa greater powers - albeit with entirely opposite intentions - and secondly, the policy supported by the Liberal government and the Progressive Party, of a decentralised provincial response to the crisis. With the Liberals in power since their landslide victory last year, it is the latter vision that has, thus far, won out, with the Victory Programme spearheaded by C.D. Howe.

Under this policy, the Federal Government provided large subsidies to each of the Provinces, providing a federally-subsidised, but not federally-directed, series of measures to combat the economic effects of Black Monday. While these effects were not so severe in the nations of the Entente as in Mitteleuropa, the collapse in the purchasing power and imports of the single largest economic bloc in the world inevitably had effects upon all free market economies.


Protests mount against the Conservative Party government of Northern Ontario.

In the Canadian case, the problems were exacerbated by the presence of the British Exile population, many of whom have struggled to fully integrate into Canadian life. The policy of R.B. Bennett’s previous Conservative government for dealing with this problem was that of the Unemployment Relief Camps. Under this policy, the federal government sanctioned the creation of a system of camps, where in exchange for room-and-board, unemployed men, many of them Exiles, carried out physically demanding labour as was deemed necessary by the government. Opposition to this policy, and its ending on a national level, was a key reason for the Liberal victory in last years’ elections, and some in the Progressive Party even suggested that the Conservatives wished to keep the Exiles in camps so as to encourage them to be more fervent in their desire to liberate Great Britain and improve their situation.

While the Conservatives have softened their stance on the matter of the camps, their response to the Black Monday crisis has been fairly one-note: the creation of provincial government-owned armaments industries to fulfil military tenders, hiring as many of the former relief-camp workers as possible, while focusing their other investments on encouraging the unemployed to enlist in the military or in the mining and forestry industries essential for war production.

As the Conservatives only hold sway in the province of Ontario, the national effects of this policy have been limited. However, for the whole of Canada, they favour the nationalisation of existing industries across the country to support a war effort. This warlike policy has even led to some defections from the Conservative Party itself; with Henry Stevens MP having broken away to lead a new split from the Conservatives, the Reconstruction Party. The new party supports nationalisation and federal public works projects, but supports isolationism and the full integration of the Exiles into Canadian life rather than seeking to return them to Britain.

The provinces governed by the Liberal Party, for their response, have seen the establishment of provincial unemployment and health insurance, subsidies towards private industry hiring new workers, and cash grants to farmers and other producers to prevent their bankruptcy with the lower value of their goods. This has been joined, however, with the establishment of provincial progressive income taxation, working hours limitations, and minimum-wage laws, to match with the Liberal policy of ‘reasonable work for reasonable wages’. Notably, this seems to have encouraged several American car manufacturers to move their operations from the striking regions of the United States across the border into Canada.

The policies parties that do not control any provinces are effectively not being seen in practice, as the Victory Programme funding to provincial governments has only allowed those in power to try their ideas. These unrepresented parties and their unrealised plans for dealing with Black Monday include the Co-operative Commonwealth Party - the traditional socialist party in Canadian politics, though one that has distanced itself from Syndicalism - and the agrarian United Farmers Party, as well as the Progressives, who serve in local governments as secondary figures, in uneasy alliances with the dominant Liberals, Conservatives, and Socreds.



Most radical has been the policies of the Social Credit Government of Alberta. In an effort to put their ideology into action without the use of the federal central bank, the Alberta provincial government has begun printing ‘Prosperity Certificates’ and issuing them to the populace, in an effort to create a provincial version of their National Dividend policy. The redemption of these certificates is backed by the federal Victory Programme funds provided to Alberta. The experiment sees every adult citizen in the province paid a basic income of $25 per month in these certificates - which decrease in value the longer they are held. Supporters of other parties have derided these as ‘funny money’, and it remains an open question whether they will be accepted as a medium of exchange by the general population.

The other major use of the federal funding by the province of Alberta has been the creation of its own provincial government-owned bank, in order to sidestep federal legislation that prevents provincial governments seizing private property. These new banks, the Alberta Treasury Branches, aim to be immune to global finance and serve their customers rather than financiers, having been set up with the capital provided by the taxpayer. This has been marred, however, as the Alberta Treasury managers have been on-the-record with anti-Semitic comments, claiming that a ‘Zionist cabal’ of Jewish financiers are responsible for the global economic situation and for any opposition to the Social Credit movement.

Finally, the provincial government has made efforts to improve the lives of its citizens by proposing several moralistic laws. The foremost, and most controversial, of these laws is the ‘Accurate News and Information Act’, which would require newspapers to print ‘clarifications’ of stories that a committee of Social Credit legislators deemed inaccurate, and to reveal their sources on demand. This law has been derided by many as an effort to clamp down on free speech, and seems likely to be struck down by the Supreme Court.

There is more background to this than the purely political, however. The provincial leader of the Social Credit party, William Aberhart, has had a running feud in particular with the Calgary Herald newspaper, leading to a boycott by his supporters. The editor of the Herald responded, "Is everyone opposed to the political opinions and plans of Mr. Aberhart to be boycotted? He has invoked a most dangerous precedent and has given the people of this province a foretaste of the totalism which will prevail if he ever secures absolute control of the provincial administration."

Less controversially, though perhaps even more unpopularly, the Social Credit government has introduced strict laws on the sale and service of alcohol, bordering on absolute prohibition, as well as bans or strong limitations on other ‘vices’ such as tobacco, the cinema and dancing halls. Ultimately, the Globe & Mail’s opinion is that it is these limitations upon the pleasures and freedoms of the citizens of Alberta, not the economic policies of the Social Credit movement, that will eventually spell doom for their party’s governance of the province.