RIVAL SYSTEMS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 18 November 1939, Page 6

RIVAL SYSTEMS

THE STAND FOfe DEMOCRACY. The events since war started have strengthened the long gathering opinion that the adversaries are separated not by mere political disagreement, but by differences in their attitude toward life which practically amount to incompatible types of civilisation. writes a correspondent of “The Times.” Hostility of this sort must be. and obviously is, exceptionally intense and inveterate, and it produces a situation very different from the dyn- | astic and expansionary quarrels of I, most other wars. If the contest is of the kind suggested it is certain that the weaker must go to the wall and that no ultimate issue by way of compromise is likely to be possible. That some such view of the war has been reached by the intuitive judgment of the people is made probable by the unanimity—perhaps unique—with which they have accepted it. Now no sane community—particularly an old and experienced one —could enter upon a war recognised as internecine unless it were convinced that the system it. was to fight for was not only the better but also the stronger and more durable in all respects. No doubt this conviction is more or less vaguely present in most of us. It is. however, our plain duty to give it all the definition and emphasis we can. The democracies of this war.' then, must hold to the knowledge that the free play of mind, liberty of opinion, and honesty are not only morally good, but also sources of every kind of strength. They must also know with equal conviction that a selfish and exclusive nationalism and the patronage of cruelty, persecution and treachery are not only base, but in the long run ruinous, and bear within them the seeds of death. This strength is available to a democracy in all fields ami not least in that of war.