The Strike.

Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 10 December 1913, Page 3

The Strike.

TO THE EDITOR.

;; Sir,—ln your leader of 26th ult, just to hand, you say: "It is all very 'well to advocate " Our cause, right or wrong," as one strike leader does, but such action has rip moral principle by which it m^;, be justified," The truth of fHarrstateirient, Sir, is incontestable. To preach defence of wrong under any circumstances, knowing it to be wrong, admits of ncy" defence," and is a pernicious doctrine, the inculcation of which can claim, as you say, no moral justification. "Wrong is wrong ;'no fallacy can hide it, no subterfuge cover it."

But having said all this, Sir, may I ask why, if " Our Union, right or wrong " is wrong, by what parity of reasoning can " Our Country, right or wrong " be right ? And yet that is the pernicious doctrine, to the eternal shatne of its blatant expositors ? even in Christian communities, that is dinned with wearying iteration, into our ears to-day. .*' My Country, right or wrong ! ". Evidently what is wrong in the industrial leader, or. Striker, striking for, improved conditions of living and a greater share in the general prosperity for himself arid family, what is wrong, flagrantly wrong, in him, is right, patriotically and perfectly right in the political or National leader, who may even aspire to become, and in ay finally become a hero in the eyes of his admiring compatriots. Verily, it is a strange world, my masters, and if a certain section of it denounces " wrong" in the Striker and extols wrong in the hero : gives one gaol and' the other titles and monuments, I suppose, in the interests of " Law and Order," we mustn't complain. There are batons -about! I am, etc. - CLAUDE HOPPER, .■■••.. Mokai. '3-12-13, Whilst agreeing with our correspondent's contention that some people both preach and practice, " My country, right or wrong," we cannot see that this at all justifies' the extremist labor agitators in putting forth a policy 'of "Our cause, right or wrong," before the workers, knowing full well that/a, policy of. " wrong " must sooner or later lead to disaster for they who adopt it. Nor can we concede that the strike leader is on the ,same plane as the political or national leader. The former individual is simply representative of a section of the people, and very often his ideals are too far in advance of the people he endeavours to serve to be fully understood. He may receive his appointment from an executive entirely because of his peculiar views on certain subjects.: With . the political or national leader it is not so. His appointment comes direct from the community. If the actions of such representatives are disagreed with, or their ideals are adjudged by the people to be an advocacy, of "wrong." and not truly interpreting their ambitions or wishes, then such leader is only tolerated until the opportunity occurs for rectification, when, the people assert their power of veto and a transformation is effected (we need only refer to the{ last general elections). We.' believe in the worker getting a full measure for his labor, but the doctrine as propounded by the agitators, of seizing and controlling the entire mean? of production andthus re- j duce the days of labor from six to three a week, is " wrong " from its very germination, and has no place in our vision of the workers' Utopia. Neither can we see that the militant agitator betrays the slightest spirit of patriotism, whereas the political leader, though admittedly at times laboring under misdirected impulses, ' endeavours to serve the entire community in his advocacy of "my country," and not a section, only. ' But we do not wish to condone patriotic faults or wrongs, as we have above stated, the people set the matter right themselves eventually. In conclusion, however, we are reminded of the words of Lowell :—

Breathes there a man with soul so dead,

Who never to himself hath, said, This is ray own, my native land.