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
$1.50 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.
Monday, November 10, 1947
No Food For Democracy
(The Denver Post)
MISGUIDED AMERICAN friends who might have
believed that Chiang Kai-Shek meant his talk to reform
had best lay down their briefs for the Kuomintang gov
ernment. For in outlawing the Democratic League, Chi
ang has struck another blow against the possibility of
truly representative government for China.
Chiang has excused his action by calling the league a
Communist front organization. Whenever the league
had disagreed sharply with the central government it
has been easy for the Kuomintang to hur charges of
“Communism.” Actually, however, the suppression of
the Democratic League would be comparable to banish
ment of the Henry Wallace group in this country.
Since the end of the war against Japan, the Democrat
ic League has avowedly worked for unity in China. It
has often adopted the policies of the Communists—such
as the “Quit China” campaign against U. S. interven
tion of 1946-47, in which many league members were
active. Nevertheless, in many instances it has appeared
to oppose the Communists just as heartily as it opposes
the central government.
The Democratic League has many adherents among
Chinese intellectuals. It has been impotent because its
plan for compromise between the Nationalists and Com
munists has been unacceptable to both sides. But the
league has been the force looked upon—wistfully, per
haps—as the possible savior of China. It has been the (
largest and most important party of the “loyal opposi-,
tion.”
In suppression of the Democratic League, and the vir
tual arrest of its leaders, Chiang’s government has of
fered no proof. There may be Communists in the
league’s ranks, but most certainly the entire party can
not truthfully be so branded. Thie league should be of
fered every opportunity to clear itself of these charges.
If it is not, Chiang latest move may be regarded as evi
dence that he has no intention of eliminating corruption, i
seeking compromise, or even brooking peaceful opposi
tion to the policies of the Kuomintang dictatorship.
_:_
The “Little Assembly”
(Rocky Mountain News)
SECRETARY OF STATE Marshall’s proposal for a
year-round “Little Assembly” of the United Nations is
getting rough treatment in committee.
Probably some, if not all, of its teeth will be pulled be
fore it is accepted by the general assembly.
Russian opposition, of ocurse, was expected. The chief
purpose of creating the new body is to permit the United
Nations to function despite Russia’s ability to paralyze
the Security Council through misuse of her veto power.
But objection is not limited to the Soviet bloc. Even
with Russia and her Czechoslovakia satellite boycotting
the subcommittee debating the question, a large major
ity already has indicated its fear of going too far.
Although some of this may be attributed to other rea
sons—especially apprehensioh over what a “Little As
sembly” might do to their own sacred cows—most of
the subcommittee members are frankly trying to ap
pease Russia. If they retain the form but remove the
substance they hope Stalin can be induced to go along
with the harmless things.
The so-called compromises are of two kinds. One
•would require a two-thirds vote, instead of a simple ma
jority, in the “Little Assembly” before a subject could
get on its agenda. The other would bar it from consider
ing all “disputes” and all subjects requiring “urgent
measures.”
With Britain joining the subcommittee majority for
a two-thirds rule, and only Australia so far supporting
“ dont irr? rir'.v, but—w
the United States, that form of compromise seems high
ly probable.
This would set a bad precedent for other UN subsid
iary bodies which act by simple majority vote, force
double debate on each subject (once to get it on the
agenda), and set aside the usual democratic voting pro
cedure. It would enable Russia to exercise almost as ef
fective a veto—thanks to her three seats plus her satel
lite bloc—as in the Socurity Council.
The other compromise is worse. If the new body can;
not discuss disputes there is little excuse for it. But:
France and Chiria, as well as some of the smaller na
tions, want it that way.
Fortunately Britain is insisting that the new bodyj
have substantially the same jurisdiction as the parent;
assembly of which it would be an interim standing com
mittee. So there is some chance of defeating that ap
peasement move.
Nothing before the assembly is more important than
this Marshall proposal. Brave talk and pious hopes will
not save the United Nations from Soviet strangulation.;
Unless some way is found for the assembly to move in
time of need, when Russia holds the Security Council
prostrate, the United Nations is not likely to guard
either peace or security.
Risks of Exploiting Political Advantage
(By Palmer Hoyt)
PRESIDENT TRUMAN no doubt was well advised
to include the domestic cost-of-living crisis in his call
for a special session of Congress. In doing so he made
note of the plain fact that the American public is grow
ingly concerned at the unchecked strain upon family j
budgets.
It was the part of statesmanship to recognize that this
inflationary stress—and national effort to remedy it—
may be closely connected with the willingness of the
public to respond to the needs of Europe.
Nonetheless, it is difficult to overlook the political
dangers which may lie in this move. The nation has at
this point a truly bipartisan foreign policy; but now it
appears that an issue with the obvious hazard of parti
san disagreement has been injected. It will call for
broad-gauged statesmanship if the president is not to
permit the cost-of-living question to split the common
front on foreign policy.
In coupling the domestic crisis with the European aid
program, the President has acted with admirable bold
ness. But it remains to be seen whether he will yield to
the political temptation to exploit internal problems at
the risk of destroying unity on foreign policy.
The President has at this point a strong tactical ad
vantage. He has seized the initiative with a call for ac
tion on a question affecting every American household.
The wisdom of his statesmanship, however, will be
tested-by the manner in which he follows through in
laying his anti-inflation program before the special ses
sion of Congress, next week.
So far there has been little but conjecture on the rem
edies which he has promised to
submit. The President himself has
offered no tangible clues.
The danger is this: That Mr.
Truman will offer a domestic pro
gram which the Republican-ruled
Congress cannot accept and which
he knows they will not. In that
case, the President with eyes on
the '48 elections would be simply
baiting the opposition for political
effect. We hope this will not come
about.
The anti-inflation program must
be sincere—not a mere angling for
political advantage. It must be
planned with the best knowledge
that the President and his econo
mic advisers can bring to bear.
Equally important, it must be de
signed with an understanding of
political feasibility. A program
foredoomed by an opposition Con
gress will benefit neither the in
flation-hounded American public
nor the people abroad who wait
for our aid.
Thei'e is no minimizing the dif
ficulty of drafting such a pro
gram. Indeed, it is doubtful that
any sure and effective panacea
may be devised. Probably the most
to be expected ai*e steps to head
off further strains. It is, then, to
be l'ecommended that the Presi
dent recognize the limits of pos
sible remedy. To ask anything
further would be a hazardous po
litical game.
That’s That
By BRUCE GUSTIN
Russian methods of “winning
friends and influencing people”
are not working in South Amer
ica. Brazil has severed diplomatic
relations withe Soviet Union be
cause of insults to President Dutra
in the Soviet press. Chile has
broken with Yugoslavia, and Rus
sia because she blames Commun
ists for stirring up strike trouble.
There is about as much accord in
the international family of nations
as in a pen of strange bull-dogs.
What is the real motive behind
Russian policy? Why has the Sov
iet government taken such an ag
gressive line, revived the Comin
tern and called upon Communists
in Europe to defeat the Marshall
plan? Winston Churchill, who, as
wartime prime minister of Great
Britain, should have a clear insight
into the Russian mind, says he
cannot believe the present Soviet
line is a prelude to war.
“These fourteen men in the
Kremlin who rule with despotic
power the vast populations and
territories of which the are the
masters are very capable and well
informed,” Churchill reasons, “If
their minds were set on war, I
f
cannot believe they would not lull
the easy going democracies into a
false sense of security. Hitler was
a master of this, and always be
fore or during some act of aggres
sion he uttered soothing words or
made non-aggression pacts; there
fore, while I cannot exclude the
danger of war, I do not think the
violent abuse which the Soviet
government and their Communist
adherents all over the world lav
ish on all existing forms of civil
ization is necessarily a sign of
danger, or if imminent danger. It
is more likely being used for in
ternal purposes.” In other words,
it seems to be Churchill’s idea
that Soviet Russia, in the role of
a “barking dog,” does not intend
to bite.
What President Truman will
recommend to the special session
of Congress naturally is a subject
of widespread speculation. He can
not very well urge re-establish
• ment of consumer food rationing
and price controls. He already has