EAST AND WEST

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 145, 23 June 1930, Page 11

EAST AND WEST

DIVIDING" LINES

UNIVERSITY DEBATE

At the iutcr-fuculty debate, Ucld by tho V.U.C. Debating Club on Saturdaynight, Messrs. Hurley, Bannister, and Crosslcy, representing the Faculty of Law, proposed the motion, "That East is 'East and West is West and Never the Twain Shall Meet." .The motion was opposed by the .Faculty of Arts, represented by Mr. Mountjoy, Miss Fordo, and Mr. Cowan. Mr. Hurley, in opening for the affirmative, stressed the necessity of taking the motion out of its framework of poetry and of defining the terms involved. There, was 'no definite geographical lino betwcen^East andWe'st, and there was no real religious distinction, for the- great Eastern religions had forced their-way into.other countries of the world. Neither was there a common racial type which-we could take as representative of cither tho East or.'the-West.; -In addition, it was impossible lo debate concerning the word "never"'in the motion, as , t ,that was a purely conjectural subject, and it was necessary to limit "oneself to a consideration of the projablo results of the tendencies of to-day. To find the roots of these it" was necessary to go back into history;;and therefore he proposed to deal primarily with, the historical aspect of the' motion; Th« difference between 'the respective civilisations lay in that ideal of progress., which was always present in European history. ■ The Eastern races, on the other hand, regarded the Golden' Age as lying in the past. It might be said that tho East endeavoured%to obtain perfection by decreasing the denominator, the West by. increasing the numerator. Progress 'was the object of the West, but stagnation that' of tho East. Tho time would come when the East would 'riso' in protest against the interference of the West. and.after the downfall of Western' civilisation would return to its former stagnation:. Mr. Mountjoy, for -the - negative, joined issue with Mr. Hurley-over-his definition of the word "meet"- as moaning some eventual'blending-" of the civilisations." Rather -if- ihejmt to meet in mutual. co-operation"and understanding. , Seldom throughout-' history had men fought through- any. f sense of racial' difference. , Bacial'^ antipathy was a thing of comparatively recent growth. Marco Polo,-for instance had been received with amity among the Chinese in 'the fourteenth century. Ethnologically speaking, . there was more racial difference, between many Eastern races than there", was between Easteru\and Western races.,Tho East, and the West were already beginning to meet, as witness tho. largo number of Eastern students who went every year to America.-. '■ -To speak of tho stagnation of the ' East ''in view' of these Chinese studenCs ill, America, of thc-modernisation of Japan, of'the industrial progress, in India was.ridiculous. In reality the "chief difference between tho Ea.st and West "was an economic one, a difference, of .'standard of living, and with tiic coming of industrialism in tho East'the two civilisations would reach the same standard. . The second' speaker- for ,the motion, was Mr. Bannister, who 'stressed two aspects—the -religions'"differences and the social differences, between the two civilisations. The Christian" Church proselytised unceasingly in'its policy of. peaceful penetration, but, the prophets of Islam wcro proselytising even more. Why wore they doing it? To join the West ultimately?' . No,'they were aiming at, a .unity :which^ might result in the do'wnf all of Western .civilisation- not twoj generations . hence. The conditions of. living in the. East and the West, were essentially, different and had been so ' for a thousand years. The idea of a. union between East and West always brought, with it the problem of intermarriage—all the prominent authorities were agreed -that t the East and West : could not inter-' marry without producing ..an inferior stock. - ' , i ..*•.- Miss Forde,. in replying to, Mr. Bannister,, said that thero was no real biological evidence to .prove. thatjhybrid " racos should be inferior. -. ' .The- segregation of the East and West, was being broken down by the increased methods of transport and' communication.' - In future this world would ..become; an organic entity in which- a conflicting1 East and West would' bo, impossible. We had come to the end of white man's domination and to the-beginning of the combined control of 'white, and coloured races. Eastern' civilisation had hand labour. as ■a. basis, the Western had machinery. What we had to' teacli the Eastern Powers -was not our methods of law and government, but science. ■ ' ■ Messrs. Crossley and Cowan,- who spoke third for their respective, sides, discussed mainly the problems of inter- ■ marriage and'the possibility-of-educa-ting one race* to understand the .other. Tho motion was1 then'put tt> the meeting arid carried -by forty-six votes to twenty-six. ' ,*-'-:, ,-,■■-• The judges, PrOfessors.Huuter, Kirk, and Gould, however, awarded -..the -victory in debating to. the Arts' Faculty for the negative. .They were., unanimous, in placing * Mr." Mountjoy first among the six speakers of the-evening, and Mr. Hurley second. s . -■