The Grey River Argus FRIDAY, September 3, 1948. NEITHER ONE NOR THE OTHER

Grey River Argus, 3 September 1948, Page 4

The Grey River Argus FRIDAY, September 3, 1948. NEITHER ONE NOR THE OTHER

it may not be the specific function of churchmen to define political, social and industrial systems, it is not outside their compass to define defects of any particular system. For that reason, the latest pronouncement of the World Congress of Churches on both Communism and Capitalism is to be regarded as ’important, and, if not constructive, at least as instructive. Its effect is that Capitalism, while aiming at political freedom, denies ecojustice, whilst Communism, while claiming to bring justice, denies liberty. The current dialectical contest, world-wide almost, in range, is dominated by a prescription that there are no alternatives but the pair which the Churchmen’s Congress rules out alike. In New Zealand, indeed, the conservative contention still presumes, without any pretense at explanation, ’that because it remains, largely in possession of the field, Capitalism is sacrosanct, and that any alternative is to be, dismissed as Communistic. The eeoonomic concept of justice is ignored. The emphasis is all upon production, rather than distribution, and the defence of personal property in means of production is as weak as water. It is that so long as such means largely or mainly remain in private possesion, it matters not at, all how, it may be distributed or monopolised. It would be well to bear in mind that the Communists base their case for confiscation more upon the fact (hHnonopolies, than any attempt to show that human freedom docs not entail persona] property of a productive character. It is good capitalistic ethics that every possible means, unless specifically outlawed, is employable to enrich the individual, without limit. The essential capitalist’s idea of vocation, therefore, is simply a continual acquisition of wealth, not merely for its own sake, but for the sake of adding to it. On the contrary, the individual, under Communism, is, even in theory, subsidiary to the process of wealth production which is held to determine his nature, morally, intellectually and socially- In either case material wealth is the object of worship, and human personality is in the discard. The just price was jettisoned along with the worker’s status, and competition produced inferior goods, exploitation of labour and monopoly. The Communistic ideal of a classless society has proven a pure chimera. . Dominant factions in countries where it prevails, by the common consent of shrewd observers, have' their aristocracy arising from the ruling element. The regime bequeaths power within its own ranks as jealously as capitalists bequeath wealth within their ranks

As a matter of experience, people begin to discern a wide open gap between the extremes of Capitalism and Communism. The alternative to both is cooperation, not only in the distributing, but in the producing of wealth. Co-operation, indeed, was far more characteristic of pre-capitalistid than of capitalistic society. Whatever adaptations may be entailed,'the principle of co-operation in ownership and in work, is destined steadily to gain ground.