Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 7 August 1925, Page 2

In a previous issue some comment was passed on the Bed menace at Home. The Home Secretary, whom we quoted at length, went on to say that the Communists realised that Great Britain was the centre of individualism throughout the world, and that they knew that unless they could capture the British trade unions Communism and Bolshevism were hound to do

within :i few years. Jn what Sir A\ il--1 inm said there is, aeeordng to an English writer, a deal of wisdom. Britain owes its position in the world, he says, primarily to the character of its population, and the character ol its population is great primary because it is individualistic. If we are going to lose ground as a nation, and as an Empire, it will l»e mainly because our individualism is being undermined by the infiltration of alien ideas. The dole, wlitli teaches people to look to the Government for help. Communism, which teaches people to regard themselves a.s machines—these are the influences which are such a deadly peril to the individualism of the Englishman. For lot us make no mistake about it; if we allow our national character to he corrupted, the collapse of the British Empire must inevitably follow as a natural sequence. And that is precisely what the subversive elements in England, and abroad hope will happen. They are bent upon ruining the Em- j pile, and they think that that can best he achieved hv changing tlie character of the English, on v.hose initiative, individuality, and patriotism the Empire was built up. England can win through all her difficulties—how often lias she not done so in the past!—if Englishmen retain their finest asset, which i.s their character. The prestige of tlie English throughout the world is based largely upon the particular kind of individualism which has always hitherto been the typical English trait. We have not always boon liked nationally by any means, we have been accused of all sorts of things, hut we have won a grudging respect. Foreigners have recognised that the Englishman has character, and their very criticisms have often been a sort of unwilling compliment. But we only have to look about us to perceive the national character with its sturdy individualism. is in danger of being ruined by the softness and unrest of this age. The enemies of England long for the collapse of the British Empire; they will long in vain provided we do not listen to their lying, siren voices.

The Americans appear bent on invading all parts of the British Empire. A mighty armada from the United

States has just completed a sojourn in Australian waters, and next week will be in the four chief ports of New Zealand. Date in .June there arrived in England 12-3 “living witnesses’’ from the United States who were to preach to Britain the benefits of being “dry.’’ Xo doubt Xew Zealanders will be keen to derive all the first-hand information from the “living witnesses” who will arrive with the Elect, so that it eau be said important points of the Empire are to lx- well informed on the subject of prohibition. We do not know that the sailor men will assume the same right as the delegation to Britain to display their righteousness! Probably if the picture were reversed and a British delegation went to the States to wage a wordy war against prohibition, the British meddlers would he told to mind their own business. However. Britain has been even free to the faddist, and the cranks invariably have a free hand in whatever walk of life they set up to dictate to a peace loving and not to say long-suf-fering people. An English paper commenting on the visit takes a somewhat similar view for it remarks that the world seems to be full of people aho are not content to live their own lives and leave other people in peace. Why should cranky Americans come over here to “convert’’ England ? Are they so sure «f their own perfection that they imagine they are now called upon to go on a crusade, or is not such

an action m iti-xui a sign ot ignorance and egotism f The ordinary Englishman would very much object if a hand of Englishmen set out. to persuade America that her laws were all wrong, anti, equally sensible Auierii ans dislike the attitude of moral superiority adopted by their proselytising fellow-countrymen. It is not our affair if America choosT'.s to go “dr.v,” and it is not America’s affair if we choose to remain “wet”. These are questions of national psychology, and outsiders ought not to interfere. For such interference, however well meant it may he. is liable to he resented and to do more harm than good. And, after all, who are these 123 Americans to take iiiion themselves the responsibility of telling millions upon millions of people in this country that they are in the right and the millions in the wrong:- It seems to me, says the writer, a colossal piece of cheek, apart from everything else. If people would only learn to attend to their own affairs a great deal of had feeling and recrimination would he spared mankind. If other nations persist in errors - or wlnit we believe to ho errors—is not that their own look-olit. Ami

arc we so wise that we are justified in dictating? Is not that a form of self-complacency which it would he better to a\oid?