Fiji Seamen’S Union Object

To Cartoon

Letter to the Editor THE cartoon, “In Sunny Fiji—and a Few Other Places,” in your issue of Feb ruary, is referred to. We believe that you are merely treating this subject in a spirit of banter; but even jokes can be misleading if all the facts are not known to the readers.

For example, Fijian seamen to-day do not dress in the manner you depict. They did dress in that way (but without the wrist watch) during the War, because the Government paid for the clothes whilst they were serving at sea in naval vessels.

We are not sure whether the reputable shipowners of Fiji will be pleased or otherwise by your depicting a shipowner in the accepted rig of a beachcomber.

Regarding wages, the principal ship owners welcomed the “Seamen’s Union Agreement,” as it protected them from unfair competition by the type of ship owner shown in the cartoon who. ap parently, is approved of by you.

Regarding the reference to rations and medicines: the regulations were made by the Marine Board, the membership of which includes the managers of the two largest shipping companies operating in the Pacific. The eight hundred odd sea men in Fiji are not represented on the Marine Board. Such regulations have existed in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand for half a century.

Regarding lavatories and space in crew’s quarters; perhaps, when voting in favour of these regulations, the ship owners’ representatives on the Marine Board not only knew of the existence of similar regulations elsewhere, but had also learned, during the recent anti-TB cam paign, something about the incidence of tuberculosis among Fijians and the causes contributing thereto. Furthermore, the regulations would hardly apply to the type and size of vessel you depict.

We assure you we can “take it,” and can appreciate the humour in the car toon. We hope that you in turn will “take it,” as follows: At various times you write laudatory articles regarding the exploits of Fijians and express approval in words of the prin ciple of giving attention to the welfare of Pacific Islands natives. We appreciate this. But we have observed, with regret, that when something tangible is done for the welfare of Island natives, you become a severe critic of such measures. We feel that we should advise you that such ac tion on your part is steadily building up among natives considerable illwill towards you and the journal you edit.

Finally, we earnestly request that in future you ascertain the facts before pub lishing matter damaging to us, and which in the end will be even more damaging to you. You would also then be spared the embarrassment of having to make the number of corrections you have been obliged to make of late.

This letter has been approved by the Committee of the Union, all of the fifteen members of which are native Fijians.

Kitione Ravulu,

Vice-president, Fiji Seamen’s Union.

Suva, 20/3/50.

Editorial Note

WE hold the qualities of certain Pacific Islands races —especially Fijians—in high regard; but that does not mean that we approve of all they do.

The introduction of trade-unionism among Pacific Islands people is an absurd and indefensible thing. The trade union may have some merit as a means of collective bargaining with employers— although that is arguable—but the main

objection to it is political. In all Western nations it already has paralysed, and is steadily destroying, the system of Western Democracy, evolved in a thousand years of sociological struggle.

The trade union, instead of limiting its activities to its original purpose, has become the unit of the Socialist Party’s political organisation. Through the trade unions, our Parliaments have been invaded and, in many cases, swamped by a peculiar class of uneducated, one-eyed and intensely class-conscious demagogues.

(Continued on Page 83)

They are incapable of thinking for them selves, and they surrender their judgment and their votes to an anti-Parliamentary machine, called a caucus, which takes all major decisions out of the hands of what is nominally the People’s Parliament. The end of the free Parliament means the end of individual freedom.

The trade unions created the Labour Party; the Labour Party, within two or three decades, went over completely to Socialism: and, in the ultimate analysis, there is no difference between logical Socialism and Communism —and Com munism means the end of everything that is decent and worthwhile in human con tacts and communal organisation.

Nothing now can stop the process—it has gone too far. To-day’s shrewdest thinkers believe that Western civilisa tion is headed for collapse, and humanity must go through the fire and horrors of another Dark Age, before it can cleanse itself spiritually and socially, and resume the long, painful climb to a better life.

We do not suppose that the Fiji Sea men’s Union will subscribe to all this — or even understand it. But that is why we don’t like to see trade-unionism in the Islands. It opens the door to cheap politicians and mischievous office-holders.