ISSUE IS: SOCIALISM OR DEMOCRACY?

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 54, 26 November 1937, Page 13

ISSUE IS: SOCIALISM OR DEMOCRACY?

Women's Point of View in Politics ADDRESS BY M.P.Y WIFE ! "Socialism or Demoeracy" was the |suhjeet of an address delivered by Mrs.; jW. A. Bodkin, wife of the member forj iCentral Otago, to a large gathering of women at the Odd Fellows' Hall, Feilding, on Friday afternoon. The meeting ■was held under the auspices of the Na.tional Political Party and the hall was filled to capacity. Mrs. J. Williamson,i of Taonui, occupied the chair and was1. supported by the Mayoress (Mrs. T.j iCollins). ' In briefly introducing the speaker,! Mrs. Williamson espressed her gra'tifica-| tion at the splendid attendance whichj demonstrated that women were pre-[. parod to organise and stand forth for; the preservation, of demoeracy. The, need was never more urgent for the1 organisa'tion of women and she express-, ed the hope that those present wouldj make every endeavour to strengthen. organisations pledged to prevent the submergence of tho individual to the State. Mrs. Bodkin ofltercd her congratulations to the Feilding organisation for the splendid attendance and proceeded •to c-ompare the Government of yesterday with that of to-day, stressing the .trend towards Socialism and State con* ,trol. The aims of tho Labour Party, the socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange, had been freely advertised. To make sure that the electors made no mistake and knew the issues involved, the National Party had instituted a campaign to form branches in all centres. No party could be called "national" unless it had women 's organisations, for women had the vote. Women could not now "vote as father does. " That had passed and it was due on the part of women, as individuals and responsible 'citizens, that they accept their du'ties as Well as their privileges. Speaking of the differences between socialistic and democratic government, Mrs. Bodkin said that demoeracy was the greates't gift, politically, that the British people had *given to humanity. It was peeuliarly fitted to our natures and had gone from strength to strength. Demoeracy. aimed at giving the greatest amount of freedoin to the individual for his or her development. It set the individual as the unit and tried to make that unit the more happy. Demoeracy was based on Christian ethics — that we must "love our brojther as oiirselves." That idea had com9 into the world with the foundations of Christianity. Christian ethics had brought into political philosophy the view that eaeh person was born into the world free and with God given attributes which were worthy of respect. The idea of the majesty of other human beings had been. very primitive then, but had grown. Where demoeracy was stated to have failed there was to be seen the imperfect realisation by the minds of men of those Christian ethics. We had a precious .heritage in the traditions of demoeracy, and it was worth fighting for. That heritage was the greatest asset brought to us by our forebears. Now a totally difEerent system was challenging us. So-, cialism^ Communism and Fascism were built up in a totally different manner and they said that the individual had to fit in with the, State. The State called the tune, as it were, and was the unit all-powerful, claiming the right of. ordering the people and their lives. That was a totally different ideology from demoeracy. In Germany there was a dictator, in Kussia a Soviet, or smali group, and those in power claimed the right to suppress other views by force. Minorities had no freedom of thought, conscienee or expression. The old idea of Divine right of the monarchy had been replaced by one of tho' Divine right of the State. That was the form of Government which was the aim of the present Government the socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange, Mrs. Bodkin added. The Government had made a start iu .taking over the dairy produce (production), in acquiring transport services (distribution) and gaining control of the Reserve Fn.nV and threatening to take control of the private banks (the -means of exchange). There was a plain issue, a choice beitween demoeracy or Socialism. The mistakes of domocracy had been pointed out; there were naturally mistakes in development, but we were steadily working toward a better demoeracy. In Russia, in the first 20 years of Communism, there was only a long story of political murder of the minorities. Confusion sometimes arose over Socialism and social lcgislatioh, said the speaker. Arguments had been advanced that without Socialism there could be no social legislation, but notbing was really further from tbe mark. New Zealand, in favourable times, had always made advances in social legislation and had been making steady progress. All the array of social services for the weaker and less fortunate sections of the community up to 1935 were the result of the democratic Governmcnts. Tho Soeialist Governmen't of the present was taking its advice from the British Government in regard to diealtk insurance, housing and. other maUers. Tho British Government was not Soeialist, it was nationally democratic. All the social legislation did not have to comC necessarily from the Soeialist Party. Further, the members of the National Party were just as alive to the needs of the community as were the members of the Labour Party. The members of the National Party were not men who bad been born with silver spoons in their mouths. They had made their way in life and could see just as Well as any trade union secretary what was required. Speakers had been heard saying almost with a sob in their voices, that w. had to iight against the Fascist State, Mrsl Bodkin continued. One fundaraest&l Jsrincipjs ®f demoeracy

Was the freedom of thought and speech and a second the freedom of the Law CdurtS, wiich had to be absolutely removed from political influence. The freedom bf speech was being assailed all the time and now it was known that the Government had discussed bringing down a Bill which would threaten the freedom of the Press. That freedom was the great avenue whereby people iwere "able to give expression of views and grievances. The correspondence column was the "safety valve," but if all letters had to be signed, where they dealt with political sub^cts, then those members of the Labour Party itself who were a little dissatisfied would be known and could be disciplined. An instance of that " discipline" was to be seen in the expulsion from the party only reeently of a man in Canterbury who had all his life worked for the party. His "crime" had been that he had written a letter in the Press criticising the holder of certain local body positions by a cotorie of older Labour members when younger members could do the job just as well. At the moment, the Bill waf being held back by some members of the Government whdse coats wero not quite so scarlet as those of the rest. Some time ago the speaker 's husband "had referred to such a threat from the Labour Party and Hon. . P. Fr&ser had replied, giving the impression that the Labour Party had no intention of interfering with the freedom of speech and the liberty of the Press. Quite possibly Mr. Fraser had the same views as those which had prompted his statement then, but he was, all the same, a member of the Labour Party machine. Mrs. Bodkin, after strongly criticising the State 's broadcasting policy, went on to refer to broken promises. When the listeners were being led down - the flowery lanes of promise agaxn they should just say to themselves: "Demoeracy — Socialism?" Then would the issue become plain. The speaker closed with an outline of the avenues whereby women could assist the National Party, and appealed to them to get behind their members of Parliament. Sh9 wished the branch every success and hoped that next year, when the elections came, the branch would be one of the most active in New ZeAland, and that their member would be. retnrned with an outstanding tnajoritjv