N.Z. WELFARE LEAGUE

Southland Times, Issue 18840, 5 June 1920, Page 10

N.Z. WELFARE LEAGUE

THE IMPORTANCE OF CURRENT EVENTS. CRITICS AND CRITICISM. (Contributed by the N.Z. Welfare League.) Mr Sydney Smith, the famous English wit once said: ‘lt was a mistake to read a book before you reviewed it, as you were apt to become prejudiced.” This is somewhat like the attitude of the N.Z. Labour Party politicians, with reference to Samoa. They first of all denounced the indentured labour system, and then sent their representatives to investigate. We venture to think that Messrs .Holland, Howard and the others dare not express any view but the one stated by the party before the book was read. It may be a right view, but it was certainly not arrived at by the exercise of ftee judgment. The open mind of an individual is abhorrent to the Red Dictatorship. INTOLERANCE.

What is the most striking feature of the Red Revolutionaries of the Labour movement ? Why! Intolerance! .Sheer, stark staring mad, bigoted intolerance. In exactly the same temper as the most insane theological bigots the Reds thunder forth theiraffirmations. There is no God but Socialism : he who believeth shall be saved, and he who believeth not shall be damned. Society to them is simply the good and the had, namely, the socialists and the non socialists. Speak to them of the complexity of modern society and they raise their voices and shout : “there are only two classes, the Capitalists and the Workers, these have nothing in common. It is the historic mission of the workers to destroy the Capitalists,” Try to reason with them as to what is meant by socialism and they treat you as an infidel and an unbeliever. It is what they say it is, and one will pronounce it “collectivism,” another “syndicalism,” another “anarchism,” and the main body of them talk of harmony, comradeship, brotherhood, love, and sympathy, which you shall believe in though you practise it not. and affirm, though you murder the capitalists in cold blood. That any who are not of their belief should have a right idea on any subject is to them unthinkable. They have fathomed the heights and the depths of all truth, and wop to any who dares to contradict them, or call their opinions in question. for such the lake of fire and brimstone is but a resting place on the way to the greater damnation of their high displeasure. If is no marvel that this class made spirit of intolerance finds its outlet in the formula of dictatorship, since it is the very antithesis of reasoned government, and true democracy. Dictatorship of the proletariat, and dictatorship over the proletariat, and beyond all the dictatorship of passion, lust for unbridled power and ultimate tyranny of the strongest. This is what it is leading to. and where it must end.

A certain Socialist Labour paper, pub fisher! in Wellington, is much concerned because the Welfare league will not argue with it.. In order to show t.he league the wisrirm of reasoning things out, it politely informs its readers, that the members of the League are “Scribes and Pharisees”; no. it does not say “hypocrites,” it keeps that to itself. In another instance, in order to reason with tiie League it makes a violent and abusive attack upon Mr C. P. Skerrett, and because that gentleman has dared to express views which it does not agree with it suggests that “such conduct is both dishonest and immoral" ; further to exhibit its skill in the subtleties of vile abuse it asks: "Can it be that civilisation is rotten? That the law is unjust, Mr Skerrett is a parasite and a hypocrite, and in even.' way a bad citizen? Wanning to its work this refined journal asserts that, “if the social contract were observed Mr Skerrett. as he is to-day, would be a criminal.” In its last issue the paper complains that the league “avoids coming to grips with this journal." The only person we know of who could argue with this journal is Mr Robert Semple when in his most ferocious mood. He would then tell it. as he did once before, that its journalism was in gutter language. Beniamin Franklin once said : “There is a certain type of journalist that one can only argue with if in the possession of a good stout cudgel.” Bring composed of peaceful, lawabiding citizens, the League cannot in (his instance argue with, or further consider, the journal above referred to. It was of this paper Mr Robert Blatchford wrote: “I detuned the paper, its contents, and the writer of those articles. Even was I tempted to damn the Government of Mew Zealand for permitting the issue and circulation of such opinions at such a lime as the present. Never again do I wish to set ryes on t.he Mrorilend Worker please.” FREEDOM AND LICENCE. The Welfare League has consistently supported the rights of free judgment, free speech and free expression of opinions. Its publicity campaign is an affirmation of that right and it justly concedes to others what it claims for itself. In the minds of all fail-minded people, however, a clear distinction is drawn between freedom and licence. No one has the right,* nor should have it, to pour out abuses into the public mind. That is not an exercise of Ireedom but an exhibition of hcence, which if continued in has the effect of destroying the right of soc ; al liberty. The sneering insulting references that have been put forth by certain semi-bolsheviks in New Zealand against the Prince of Wales, cannot be taken as criticism, or where it is published as journalism. It is definitely blackguarding, nothing more or less. The use of language which if directed against a person in a public place would be likely to result in a breach of the peace, is just as much an assault as it would be to strike a person with your fist. It makes the matter not one whit the less an assault because the person who does it is an editor and pleads that it is done in the interest of Labour. Blackguarding is the indulgence in blackguarding. no matter who does it, or when, or where. Let any fair-minded person, whether labourite,, socialist, capitalist or of any persuasion whatsoever say, where liberty and right would stand if every person cho.-.e to direct language against others, such as the Maoriiand Worker directs against persons whom it differs with. We welcome all honest thought and criticism. Let the expression of opinion be free and untrammeled. It is well to remember this, however, that in order to preserve liberty the exercise ni unbridled licence has to he suppressed. Where attack and abuse become the order of the day the dictator and the charlatan has liberty, but nobody else has it. Fj>ecial liberty dies in the atmosphere of licence and personal abuse. It would be well if those calling themselves socialists would but realise this fact.