The Press. Thursday, January 2, ,1919. What of the Future ?

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16410, 2 January 1919, Page 6

The Press. Thursday, January 2, ,1919. What of the Future ?

The brightest feature in connexion with the British elections is the emphatic declaration of the country that it has no sympathy with the Pacifism which conceals disloyalty, or with Bolshevism in any shape or form. That is the verdict not merely of a section of the community but of the great majority of the electors, voting on the widest and most democratic franchise, and including women for the first time in the history of England. "We are told that no fewer than 9,308 5 000 went to the poll, and of these 5,028,000 voted for Coalition candidates. How many voted for the Liberals still faithful to Mr Asquith, who, be it rememDered. retained control of the party, funds, is not stated. From the balance must be deducted those who voted for the so-called Independent candidates, in other words "the "Wobblers"; the residuum of voters for the extreme Socialists and the Little En glanders was so small that nearly all their candidates were simply wiped out in the contest. The result is one which will cause little surprise to those who take the trouble to think out the facts of the situation. We have always said that the extremists in England, as well as in New Zealand, are really very insignificant in numbers, but they manage

to create among timid people an exaggerated idea of their importance by their noise and bluster. Even Bishop Julius, who dretv such a dismal picture the other day of a rising tide of Bolshevism destined to sweep over the world, will surely be able to take comfort and reassurance from the emphatic declaration of the English people that they renounce and abjure Bolshevism and all its works. The reason is plain. The mass of the British public are men and women of intelligence, possessing a fair share of common-sense. They see tho fruits of Bolshevism in Russia and Germany, and they would be mad indeetl were they to give any countenance to the idea that the best use to which w© could put our victory in the war would be to imitate the worst, follies and excesses of the onemias we defeated, and the Ally -who failed us. Nor are they likely, after fighting a life and death struggle for four and a haif years, and conquering in tho end. to bo impressed with the wisdom of those who held: back while the fight was on and who even when we were on the very threshold of victory still pleaded for "peace by " negotiation" with an enemy who had shown that for the good of the world ifc was necessary that he should be absolutely crushed and deprived of the power of further mischief. While, therefore, wo venture to suggest that the Bishop of Christchurch may sleep in his bed without fear of the British Empire falling a prey to Bolshevism, it does not follow that British statesmen can allow the country to slido back into tho old ruts, or that wo in New Zealand should treat Bolshevism as if it wero absolutely nonexistent. We agree with "Tho Times" that Mr Lloyd George should endeavour to include in his Cabinet some of tho ablest representatives of sane Labour. Having done that, he should devote his most earnest efforts immediately aftor the conclusion of peace to devise a sound policy of reconstruction —a policy which, while increasing production and enabling Britain to hold her own in the coming world-oompotition, would securc for workers a greater share in the fruits of their labours and above all a moro active and intelligent participation in the direction of their efforts. If this result can be attained Britain will rise to an oven more commanding position of prosperity and influence than before, and the war will not have been fought in vain. So far as New Zealand is concerned it is idle to deny that there is a Bolshevik element in our midst, or thvt,, although small, it i 9 very active and enterprising. It is present in our State coalmines —it is even more in evidence on the Wellington waterfront. It is very largely of foreign origin, it is steeped in ignorance, and is on that account the more dangerous when it is played upon by unscrupulous politicians and agitators. If the other parties in the State'stand by with folded hands, with .divided councils, with no organisation, and with only the most nebulous idea of a policy, then those who are working on the Bolshevik element will certainly make the best use of the opportunity thus obligingly placed in their way, and the danger will grow. Nothing definite can be done in the direction of a readjustment of party lines while the two leaders are away, but the best minds on both sides ought to give the matter their earnest attention, so that at the earliest possible moment the present most unsatisfactory situation may be brought to an end.