THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. Box 618
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER Editors
SI.50 PER MONTH $16.00 A YEAR
■■ .-. . ■ - —■ - -%
Entered as second class matter October 14. 1943. at the postoffice
at Nome, Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Friday, October 31, 1947
DeGaulle's Victory
mi
(Rocky Mountain News)
GENERAL DE GAULLE appears to have won a
striking victory in the French elections.
Latest returns indicate he gained upward of 40 per
cent of the votes. Since the Communists polled as large,
if not larger, percentage of votes than they did in the
November and April elections, it would seem De
Gaulle’s trength came from the moderate whom he
swung to the right.
Nevertheless, Americans cannot view such results
with too much complacency.
General De Gaulle often has been charged with being
a potential dictator. While his patriotism is above ques
tion, his inability to work with other patriots without
having his own way is a matter of record.
Not only was he unable to co-operate with his Amer
ican and British Allies during the war, he could not get
along with the political party he founded—the MRP—
and which he is now destroying.
De Gaulle’s avowed purpose was to lick the Commun
ists, whom he now despises—though when he was in
power he tried to balance Russia against Britain and the
United States.
Even now his victory weakens Bidault’s moderate
Catholic Party and the moderate Socialist Party, which
the Communists correctly rate as their most effective
enemies. But the Communists quickly indicated their
fear of De Gaulle by appealing to the Socialist Party to
merge with them to help stop his anti-Communist
Union of the French people.
Three-fourths of the Communist vote polled in France
comes from outside the party. Both in the political and
economic fields the Reds have to depend on non-Com
munists. That is at once the hope and danger of France.
It is the hope of France if De Gaulle is willing to co
operate with moderate parties in a democratic united
front against chaos and Communism.
It is the danger of France if De Gaulle seeks one-man
rule and if American aid for French self-help is long de
layed. That is the road to more chaos and more violence,
which leads to dictatorship.
America Cannot Aid Tyranny
(The Denver Post)
IN A REPORT published by Life magazine recently,
William C. Bullitt foresees a gloomy future for China,
and for America, unless the United States government
goes immediately to the aid of Chiang Kai-Shek’s re
gime.
Bullitt, who was first American ambassador to the
Soviet Union in 1933 and was sent on a special mission
to China in 1934, now believes the Soviet Union is
fighting for control of China and, if it succeeds, all Asia
will fall into Soviet hands. Then*, he added, the man
power and resources of Asia will be mobilized against
the United States. “The independence of the U. S. will
not live a generation longer than the independence of
China,” he predicted.
His plan for circumventing these consequences is to
go all out in helping Chiang Kai-Shek—to the tune of a
three-year plan costing 450 million dollars per year.
This would take care of the esential items, and would
provide for a Chiang-controled China.
It would, that is, except for one little hitch, pointed
out by Bullitt himself.
“But all this aid will be ineffective unless the Chinese
can revitalize their political life, arouse a new spirit in
the country and raise the morale of the army.”
America is supposed to help in this by offering sug
gestions.
As a sidelight, the former ambassador has quoted an
ANOTHER MYSTERY
r m KNOW
■ wnodunit : 1
Wf WANT TO 1
KNOW WMV IT I
WASN'T DONf /
WTTf ft 9 JL
w
CQH&e
eighteen-point program of reform, that patriotic but
dissenting Chinese would like to see begun. This in
cludes eimination of corruption, elimination of dupli
cate government offices and elimination of duplication,
tax reform, equal application of laws to all classes.
This should be no sidelight. If those reforms were
' carried out, the Chinese Communist movement would
lose thousands of its followers and sympathizers over
night. The continued, unabated corruption of the Chiang
i regime has driven many to the arms of the Commun
ists, and despite Bullitt’s sympathetic view, Chiang has
done little or nothing, even since the war, to clean up
his government.
Let there be no mistake about the Communist men
ace in China. It is real; the Chinese Communists are
real—and there is no doubt but what they want to join
hands with Moscow. But in fighting Chinese Commun
i ism, or any other brand of international Communism,
i the United States cannot lend full support to a despotic
regime that is every bit as bad.
Chiang has consistently resented American attempts
to force revision and reform of his Kuomintang-con
trolled Nationalist government. Bullitt skips rapidly j
over this, and advocates immediate and bountiful aid. i
Such would be disastrous, for by aiding this corrupt
• government to fight the Communists, America would
completely alienate the Chinese people, whose sympa
: thies are divided, and the United States would be de
serting its role as a democratic power and enemy of to-|
tal government.
When and if Chiang gives indication that he will re
| form his government, is the time for aid. If given now,■
such aid would only prove that American talk of free
doms and human rights is only talk, would prove to
Chiang that the United States is more interested in
fighting Communism than preserving human dignity.
In China the Communist danger is great, but it is no
greater than the dangers America faces if it throws
aside all protestations of justice and lends full support
to the despotic Central government.
I
Some Findings
(Cincinnati Enquirer)
A PAMPHLET called “Economic Aspects of Immi-i
gration,” issued by the National Committee on Immi
gration Policy (in examining the question of whether
immigration to the United States is an asset or a liabil
ity), reaches the following conclusions:
(1) —Reasonable immigration is no liability to the;
nation, because fear of the “immigration threat’’ is |
based on fallacy rather than fact.
(2) —Immigrant workers, it is recognized, do fill jobs, i
but they are also consumers, thus increase the demand \
for goods and thereby stimulate industrial activity and j
create jobs for other workers.
(3) —According to statistics presented in the pam-i
phlet, the periods of heavy immigration into the coun
try have been periods of ilndustrial expansion. During
the last depression more immi
grants left the country than en
tered.
<4>—Immigrant entrepreneurs
are each shown to have created
jobs for seven Americans. The
majority of their undertaking are
non-competitive.
The study, to which we refer has
been reviewed by its research
committee composed of a d':st;n
guished group of scholars and so
ciologists. The material is clearly
gnd objectively presented, and
forms the first of a series on im
migration in the postwar period.
In view of present labor short
ages in certain categories of our
economy, we believe that these
findings on the side of immigra
tion should have some bearing on
the country’s future policy with
regard to it.
That’s That
By BRUCE GUSTIN
When Lewis quit the C. I. O.,
which he organized, and took his
miners'into the A. F. of L. there
was speculation that this move
might enable him to realize an
ambition he had cherished for
years of winning the presidency of
the A. F. of L. Any chance of that
went glimmering when the A. F.
of L. convention abolished the vice
presidency he held, and he lost his
temper and called A. F. of L. lead
«
ers “intellectually fat and stately
asses.”
A. F. of L. Secretary George
Meany fastened a tag on Lewis
that will gall him for a long time
to come. Lewis had declared he
is not a Communist. Meany didn’t
dispute that. But he labeled him a
“Comrade to a Comrade.” Remem
bering how Lewis used Commun
ists to organize the C. I. O.. Meany
charged that while Lewis used his
right hand to fight Communism
“with his left hand he made
friends with Harry Bridges, Julius
Emspack, Mike Quill, Lewis Mer
rill and all the other America
haters who love Moscow.”
Strikes and strike threats in
France certainly do not make it
easy for the United States to help
that country. Americans generally
sympathize with the French who
are hungry and in distress. But re
covery of all European countries •
depends upon increased produc
tion. And it is difficult for Ameri- ^
cans to enthuse over helping oeo
ple who won’t work and try to
help themselyes. Strike agitation
by French Communists seems de
signed to discourage American aid
for France.
Can t the United States use any
thing but wheat for feeding hun
gry Europeans? Of course that is
the cheapest food we could pro
vide. But when we lack the wheat
and have surpluses of other foods,
why shouldn’t those surpluses be
used? Potatoes have been bought
up by the government, and de
stroyed, to keep prices up. Ameri
can farmers have had difficulty in
marketing a lot of beans. A sur
plus of canned vegetables from
last year’s pack interfered with
the marketing of the 1947 crop.
According to department of ag
riculture figures, this country had
in storage on Oct. 1, 23 million
pounds of frozen poultry, 2,800,090
cases of shell eggs, 9,400,000 casos
of frozen and dried eggs. And v e
are having “poultryless Thurs
days” to save wheat to send to Eu
rope. It doesn’t make sense.
Henry Wallace seems to be
“cracked” on the subject of Wall
street. For weeks he has been cry
ing that “the Wall street crowd is
out for world domination.” Now
he accuses Defense Secretary For
restal, Commerce Secretary Har