868 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



can Party was made possible as an aftermath of the war between the States. 

 Changing economic conditions has now made tariff protection just as essential 

 for the South as for any other section of the Nation. 



The fact of the matter is that regardless of parties, party names, or party 

 organizations, the thinking of the masses in this country is divided into two schools. 

 One of these schools of thought ca.n be summed up in the term "patriotic national- 

 ism." The other school of thought can be summed up in the term "international 

 nonpatriotism." 



There can be no international patriot. The very word "patriot" derived from 

 the Greek and Latin means a love of one's country. It means, literally, a father 

 to the country. 



Those who try to bring about internationalism and world rule are as great 

 traitors and saboteurs of American liberty and American rights as were those 

 saboteurs landed by a German submarine and who were justly executed. Those 

 individuals who are now trying to destroy the American National Government 

 and substitute international government should be dealt with in the same way. 



I do not know whether or not in the national election of 1952 there will be 

 any political party to carry the banner of "national patriotism," or whether it 

 will be like a neglected stepchild, left to its own resources to keep alive the spark 

 of patriotic Americanism through these dark times through which we are now 

 passing. The banner of internationalism and world empire will luidoubtedly be 

 carried by one or both of the old parties; 1952 will mark an epoch. Will we 

 develop oi fail to develop a party to carry the banner of "Americanism" and' 

 "national patriotism?" 



If this country continues to drift into unlimited internationalism as it is now 

 hsaded it will mark an epoch in world history. It will be as tragic as the carrying 

 awaj- of the children of Israel into Babylon 2,500 years ago. 



In past years it has been the Republican Party that has stood for the principle- 

 of "America for American people." The election of 1946 proved unmistakably 

 that the American people still have confidence that the Republican Party will 

 continue to stand for "America for the American people." The burden is on 

 the party now in power in Congress to give the people relief from these un-Ameri- 

 can trade treaties. 



These trade treaties were the brain child of Mr. Henry Agard Wallace and fellow- 

 traveling internationalists. The principle involved in these trade treaties is 

 consistent with Mr. Wallace's un-Republican utterances in Europe and America. 



The people who now urge trade treaties to import agricultural and raw products 

 were very much opposed to importing industrial products in exchange for American 

 cotton. 



This plan to flo )d the United States with cheap foreign agricultural and raw 

 products is not new. It does not have its inception in war conditions or war 

 policies. It is true that we have been told recently that these trade treaties are 

 intended to cement world peace, but all this is merely a matter of time serving. 



This plan to flood the United States with foreign agricultural and raw products 

 was initiated in 1933 by the passage of the Agricultural Adjustment Act and the 

 Special Trade Agreements Act. This plan has been persistently followed at every 

 phase. The determination of the administration to hold down the prices of 

 agricultural products is simply a part of this nefarious plan and purpose. 



When Congress passed the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 they provided 

 for parity in two ways. The act provided for a parity of price and also for a 

 parity of income. The act provides that the net per capita income of those on the 

 farm shall be maintained at the same ratio with net per capita income of those not 

 on the farm. 



Let's see what the Secretary of Agriculture has done about this. If you will 

 refer to any of the statements of the Department of Agriculture giving details 

 of farm income for the last few years, you will see that the gross return of the farm- 

 ers is treated as their net income. 



Now, Mr. Brannan is bound to know better than this, l)ut he does it in accord- 

 ance with the plan to hold down prices on and production of American farm 

 products. 



Mr. Brannan has also unlawfully held down the parity price of farm products. 

 The act requires that the farm produc: mus' have (he same purchasing pow(.'r in 

 terms of things which the farmer buys that it had in the base period. 



The main thing that many farmers buy is labor. ' Without labor there could 

 l)e no farm commodity. When Mr. Brannan refuses to include labor in his cal- 

 culation he is simply refusing to carry out the plain common sense mandate of 

 Congress in the insane determination to hold down the prices of agricultural 

 products as nearly in line with prices in foreign countries as possible. 



