Wairarapa Times-Age MONDAY, JULY 24, 1939. WORLD CRISIS & MORAL REARMAMENT.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 24 July 1939, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age MONDAY, JULY 24, 1939. WORLD CRISIS & MORAL REARMAMENT.

A GOOD deal lias been heard for some time past of moral A rearmament, a movement of spiritual regeneration which challenges “men and women 01. all classes and all ages < endless vow in a war against the forces of chaos-ti e w u that starts with God-given victory over those forces that voik in ourselves.’’ The movement is gaming many adheienls various countries, amongst them Great Britain and othei Empire countries and the United States and has become in some measure a factor in world affairs. It has been-foiled within the. last day or two that delegates lom vei nations are attending the Moral Rearmament Wo rid Asse mb y which opened a few days ago at the IW w d Bow In California. Amongst others, a number of New Zealand Cabinet Ministers, their political opponents and other leading men ha\e joined in a “Call to the Nations for Moral Rearmament.

Nothino’ else can be desired by those who would like to see peace established on firm and true foundations than that the campaign for moral rearmament should make the greatef > impression that is possible on the life of our time and ol the time 1o come. It would be trifling with facts, however, not to recognise that the noble objectives of moral rearmament can never be attained while several great nations remain subject Io dictatorships which have excluded moral ideals and even Hie elements of morality from the scheme 01. things’ permitted.

No attempt need be made to suggest that some nations are patterns of perfect virtue and others ol complete Ni encss. In any enlightened outlook it is perceived that a great deal is left, to be desired in the internal and external practice even of those nations that have made the most promising progress along the path of liberal reform and are most sincerely intent on peace. It is at the same time not to be denied that those nations now classed as dangerous aggressors have some claims and grievances which undoubtedly would be entitled to (.on sideration in a peaceful and stable world.

The immediate and unsolved problem, however, is that of reaching some basis of understanding with nations which meantime are slavishly subservient to rulers who treat all moral concepts with derision and admit no other merit or utility than in brute force—rulers who agree with Hitler m declaring' that: “Success is the only earthly criterion of right and wrong” and in defining' success as the effects ol power “beneficent for a nation.” In Germany, Italy, -Japan, and some other countries that have followed their lead, immensely powerful organised forces are at present operating successfully to prevent, not only the expression, but the formation of opinion hostile to the bestial principles proclaimed by their governments. On this subject Konrad Ileiden has written: —

When democrats ask about the “real opinions” of the public in totalitarian States they unconsciously mean the opinions ol millions of individuals. But there is no political opinion without fellowship. We cannot discover what the individual- thinks, least of all by the manometer of compulsory voting; but the expression of ideas and the bringing together of the opposition opinions of a number of people, i.e., the step from individual ideas to political reality, can be prevented by an infinitely powerful and infinitely subtle police system. The actual achievement of this system is, therefore, not the suppression of opinion, but the prevention of the formation of opinion in the nation. The object is to make it impossible for the exchange of views and experiences between individuals to build up a political opinion independent or governmental influence.

Those who believe most firmly that the spiritual must ultimately conquer the material are yet bound to admit that the forces ol material reaction —operating in a true reversion to barbarism-— are dominant and unchallenged in Germany and other totalitarian Slates today. That being so. there would be no guarantee. indeed llmre would be no likelihood, of the establishment of world peace if the moral rearmament movement gained the support of I lie whole force of public opinion in all democratic and peace-seeking Slates. On the contrary, with lhe totalitarian dictatorships pursuing their present course, a refusal by tho peaceful nations to consider the possibility ol Avar would be the surest means of plunging the world into war. The essential effect would be to give the dictatorships an unimpeded opportunity of extending their policy of aggression and conquest, until'all free men were faced visibly and inexorably by the alternatives of war or •submission to tyranny in its vilest shape.