THE RED FLAG.

Hokitika Guardian, 7 June 1921, Page 3

THE RED FLAG.

(Sydney Morning Herald.)

Efforts have been made to justify the recent flaunting of the red flag in Sydney on the ground that it was but the display of the recognised emblem of industrial unionism aiid other forftis of labour organisation. There has been a suggestion, if not a positive declaration, that this flag, with all its up-to-date implications, is a feature inherent to such organisations—the symbol of a character without which the thing itself could not be. If such were the case, then the character of industrial organisation must be essentially revolutionary and irreconcilable with any existing form of national government—that of Russia perhaps excepted. Whatever may have been the original significance of the red flag, there is no doubt that now it has come to express to the popular mind of this land, an antagonism to nationalism which will lie satisfied with nothing less than the destruction of the British Empire and of its emblem, the Union Jack. Is it necessary that industrial unions or political labour* organisations should M®ve that character in order to W powerful and effective?- Were it so any general labour organisation would be deplorable, and resistance to its influence would be at all times the bounden duty of the loyal citizens.

Happily that is not the case. Industrial unions and political labour leagues are not necessarily anti-national. Some of the former, at least, are to-day admirable centres of assertive loyalty to the British flag and to British institutions. Up to a. certain period during the currency of the Great War, political Labour in Australia was aggressively British in word and deed, and it was probably never nfore powerful and eilieient for the discharge of its primary jinrpose than at the moment when its pro-national character was assailed. Th e assault pame partly from without partly from within. The occasion foulid men within who were quite ready to play the part of national traitors. The impulse toward the disruption of Labour’s loyalty to the Allied cause was neither social lior eeoiioinic. It was anti-Bri-tisii, wlieii the ted flag was flaunted in such a way as to suggest the passage of prohibitive legislation the motive was not to promote the social and economic doctrines for which industrial unionism and political Labour properly stand, hut to challenge the prestige and authority of the Union Jack. It ministered in part to the distaste of some men for any form of established law and - order, and in part to the hatred of others for England. Sonic of those amongst us to-day who are enrolled under its banner are, no doubt, sincere meii without ulterior ifiotifcs. Many others quite as indubitably are using it for purposes alien to the spirit of brotherhood which : s suppose® to animate its votaries.

In cither case there is iiot room for the red flag ill any place where law and order are desired—that is, for the red flap; in its popular significance which those who flaunt it obviously desire it to have. It is no longer the emblem of an organisation subsisting under the protection of, and in harmony with, British nationalism in the broad and not the restricted party sense—hut something which abuses the protection of the law in order to further a noisome and destructive propaganda. It is flown in contempt of, and challenge to, the Union Jack, and ndt «s Other emblems, in full acknowledgement of lh 0 supremacy of the Union Jack. Hie answer to the Acting Premier’s observations is that the display of the red flag in this country, when it implies repudiation of tile British flag, and revolt against constitutional law and authority—as obviously it was meant to do on May Day—is not lawful. It is moral, if not technical treason. That is the aspect of the matter which governed the promotion of the recent loyal demonstrations. And It may he observed that the obstinate refusal of the Town Hall authorities to fly the national flag on certain occasions— particularly when such refusal involves disrespect for Ins Majesty’s representative at a time of popular excitement over such matters is an act of omission not less disloyal, morally, than the flaunting of a rebel flag. The spirit, too, of the recent reply of Mr Nesbitt .Town Clerk of Sydney, to Petersham’s protest is precisely that of the extremist Labour Roction which the Ulrd May hr so faithfully Represents. That a man of Mr Nesbitt’s antecedents should identify himself with this spirit is bad enough—liis bombastic violence is an insult to every citizen of Sydney but tliat the principal Town Hall of New South Wales should he so closely asoeiated in the public mind with the bitterness and strife arising from the flaunting of the red flag in our midst is a thousand times worse. Only as unionists and Labour politicians are weakkneed in making concessions to passion and prejudice or are disaffected against British institutions, is the red flag to be identified with trades unionism and Labour politics. To that extent its association with,them is harmful because it is subversive of thengeneral and proper aims. As the events of the past few days have shown, the British temperament is not so phlegmatic that it can submit tamely to seeing the national flag challenged hv another piece of hunting which symbolises revolution. Many, of j the dearest things which the Union : Jack signifies' for the average Briton are being attacked and besmirched as the red flag is flown, and it is time that i an end was made to these insults.