the Editorial "I".

Maoriland Worker, Volume 2, Issue 19, 14 July 1911, Page 7

the Editorial "I".

Mr. Jordan's letter on page 13 opens tip a big issue—how far ought a workingclass paper to deal with religion? It is all a matter of opinion. Worker readers will be familiar with Blatchford's opinion, which happens to be my opinion. An editor of a different opinion might have been in this post. In rnther case, the editor could not avoid indicating his bias. Supposing Mr. Jordan were editor of this paper, 1 know ho would not be true to himselr were he silenced on the question he holds to bo vitalest and most urgent. Personally, I am not prepared to be

journalistic hireling for expressing payer's views just because paid. As to religion, I have no desire to hurt and annoy Christians; in considering them, I have frequontlv hurt and annoyed non-Christians. Ido not think nationalism is being paraded in these columns —somo have told mc the paper is the most Christian one in the country. At tho same time Rationalism is a great ami glorious gift to the workmgclass, and as a scientific Socialist I do not feel I can do my duty to Socialism without also standing tor Rationalism as far as necessity occasions. I know there are others—and some are close friends—who feel they cannot do tneir clutv to Socialism without also standing* for Christianity. Well and good, it is so: time will tell the truth.

It is not a matter of whether the workers of N.Z. "on any pretence can be claimed as Rationalists. Ihey may be or may not be Rationalists. Mr. Jordan would hardly himself admit tho inference of his argument—winch is that if the workers were capitalistic their editor should be capitalistic. Mr. Jordan will further see, I think, that no view nor interest, nor question is outside the domain of this paper, it view, interest, or question affects the workers. Few issues stand outside Industrial Unionism, Socialism and Politics." Socialism itself is a philosophy

touching all things. But supposing one agreed with Mr. Jordan that religion is outside politics, what then about tne Church whose every public act is an assertion of the rigxit or Ureed to do _ m_ mate and subdne politics? When the Church gets out of politics, it may be reasonable to ask that the press exclude the Church from its subjects. »•* * * * For myself I happen to hold that anything and everything are better discussed and debated than made sacrosanct. In .regard to religion and politics I happen to feel that if the former had done its political duty this our world wotdd have been free of its food less and homeless —and this is ray chief quarrel with religion. It is true that there is a sense in which religious belief is* a private matter, and thus 1 stand for tho equal right of Christian, Buddhist, Mormon, Atneist or Agnostic to be Socialist. I conceive Socialism to be the supreme question, and will work

gladly with the Christian Socialist so king as he does not insist that I too must be a Christian in order to be a Socialist. So far the "inflicting" of private religious views upon the workers has been all one-sided: in essence, I feel confident, Mr Jordan's grievance is that I am not on the side which has everlastingly preached at the workers and ever tried to enchain the workers— the religious side. lam not anxious for people to delude themselves, and there-

fore I will not deliberately try to convey a wroag impression through this paper as to where it is editorially if the choice has to be between religion or rationalism. Would not Mr. Jordan have .been perfectly satished with the editorial faith had it happened to be Christian faith? He will say, now, that I ought to confine myself to subjects which do not challenge hostile criticism. That is to say, if readers want conscription (as many do) don't hurt and annoy them with anti-conscription; if readers want Orangeism or Greanism (as many do) don't hurt and annoy them with anti-sectarianism ; if they want alcohol (as many do) don't hurt and annoy them with anathema upon the drink traffic ; if they want (as many do) industrial unionism and to hell with political action, don't hurt and annoy them with your emphasis upon oneness ; and so on, and so on. Be a mummy and a dummy. * * * » *

And this is engaging in the controversy I wished to avoid because T preferred doing other work, and, outside certain called-for observations, leaving religion alone as far as possible. __ This naper does not mind hostile criticism, £R>r controversy, nor debates—but it has not the space nor physique to carry on a dozen controversies at the same time. Just now, other matters are more pressing than religion v. rationalism. t» * * * * Mr. Aitken will be surprised to learn that this paper easily reconciles all its inconsistencies. It is not orepared to

set up a censorship of advertisements— felt wild last week when the "Evening Post" refused to insert its advt. relating to Singer's strike sequel. In this writer's "view, no ads., indecent ones excepted, should be rejected by a paper which is open for advts. until tho advertiser wants the policy as well as the ad. In the editor's view, further, Government ads. are preferable to many other ads. wo gladly accept. However, the par to which reference is made would not have appeared but for the rush and excitement of a first issue.

"Radical" will find most of his queries covered by Mr. O'Regan's explanation on another page. * * * * #

As I understand Jack Cooper's position towards arbitration it is the belief that arbitration helps in the organisation of men who otherwise would not bo made unionists. And so he wants arbitration in the interests of the Farm Laborers' Union, whoso conditions are wretched. Ho pleads for time to bring this big body of workers into the fold —when the workers are united and class-conscious "away with arbitration" may bo right enough.

Now, . I don't know why (though I will find out) but the farm workers have already been refused ono award, and if that hasn't made them set about bettering their conditions by their own solidarity I hardly think an award is likely to help unionism. Tho unionism enforced by tho Class State seems to mc like the religion enforced by the Class State—lacking in grit and truth, and opposed, in the long run, to the welfare of tho mass. The unionism which aids the workers in their class struggle is the unionism built up in antagonism to the Class State, and defiantly and courageously getting welded in fierce spontaneity, self-help and reliance upon itself with trxist in its bwn.

Waiving this point, however, those who say that arbitration helps unionism are thrown back upon asserting the claim that unionism under arbitration is numerically stronger than unionism without arbitration. And this isn't so. Under arbitration there are NOT more unionists proportionate to working population than elsewhere. Thus the common that arbitration aids organisation is proved to be false. It is & gigantic hoax. We have not a higher percentage of unionists in Australia and New Zealand than have England, America, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, and other countries.

As to the Farm Laborers' -Union; why can't it be built up as the A.W.U. was built up, as the United Laborers' Union of South Australia is being built up— by the enthusiasm for, of and .by unionism ? My conclusion is that the very leaning upon outsiders, upon the nefarious institution called Capitalist Law, is itself the evil thing—and that good unionists now seem helpless without ar-bitration-aid is not the least ominous sign of unionism emasculated and humiliated. Rest assured, only the unionism built on class-conscious lines will be class-conscious in the crisis. ■ You can't row thorns and reap grapes. You can't get unionists together upon jellyfish lines and expect them to be anything else but jellyfish when you need them to be lions. The Eve.

This is a likeness of Mr. Laracy, secretary of the N.Z. Shearers' and Woolshed Employees' Association. Like many another active fighters in the New Zealand Labor movement, "Mick" was schooled in that powerful body, the A.W.U. Profiting ay his Australian experiences, he has worked

hard to organise the country workers of this country— a stupendous task, but one he faces unflinchingly. Laracy's stand on behalf of the Shearers' Union when the Arbitration Judge endeavoured by insults and browbeating to beat down his defence is but recent history. Through the manner in which he fought that case his name became a household word in N.Z. Friend Laracy is re-

freshingly outspoken in his opinions, and does not stoop to curry favour with anyone We want a fey more Mick Laracvs ia this country. # • » • # At a meeting of the Westport Waterside Union on July 3, Mr. J. Dowgray addressed the meeting. Mr._ J. Steward presided. The meeting decided to join the N.Z. Federation of Labor at once. The Union recently withdrew from the Waterside Federation. • »■«■•» The regular army is an institution for making widows, orphans and pensions.