OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 10 March 1943, Page 4

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

BRITAIN & RUSSIA (To the Editor) Sir, —Having read with interest Mrs Collie’s and Mr Daniell’s letters, alsa Mr Gibbs’s in your valued paper, it seems to me neither the British Empire nor the Brigade of Guards want any defending. The world (excepting Mr Atmore) know what they have done. But the Soviet Union? Mr Atmore has never told us what it was doing during the years 1939 to June, 1941. When Britain stood alone after the collapse of her ally, did Russia go to her aid sending munitions, etc., and did young Russians arise in their thousands to fight for the British Empire? Her airmen would have been of great value in the Battle of Britain, as were young American airmen who were determined to be in the fight for civilisation and democracy. The Soviet Union did not even cheer us on our way as did little Uruguay. Nor was a second front opened. What a help that would have been when Hitler said he would broadcast from London on August 18, 1940! Mr Atmore seems to have no knowledge either of what at school we. called “current affairs.” He seems to think nobody can rise in the British Empire. What about Mr David Lloyd George, Lord Nuffield and Lord Reading, who started life as a cabin boy or, as. he himself, something'not quite as high as a cabin boy? Field Marshal Sir William Robertson too, famous in the last war, enlisted when a young gardener, in the Lancers, subsequently becoming one of our most famous generals. Curiously enough, in the Russian Army as now composed, officers cannot rise from the ranks. They are trained from their earliest youth in special schools for officers alone.—Yours, etc., “HONOUR TO WHOM HONOUR IS DUE.” Wellington, March 5. RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA (To the Editor) Sir,—Kindly allow me space to reply to the statements which appeared in your journal last week over the signatures of “Ethel Collie” and “H. H. Daniell” respectively. These correspondents charge me with making slighting references to the Guards’ regiments in Britain, during my recent address in Masterton and in this they are entirely incorrect, for neither in your town or on any other platform have I had anything but praise for the British soldier and, as a student of our national history, I am fully aware of the tremendous part played by the Guards and other famous regiments of the British Army. Stalin and Timoshenko. —I made references to these great leaders, the first of whom has been described by Lord Beaverbrook as “the world’s greatest man.” I referred to Stalin, after eulogising his wonderful achievements, as the son of a boot repairer, and to Timoshenko as a former stable boy and son of a small farmer. I emphasised the fact that in Russia attempts were made to fill every position with the man or woman best fitted for the work, irrespective of all other considerations and I contrasted that practice with the patronage system still prevalent in'’Britain. I then asked the, audience what chance would Stalin and Timoshenko have had of obtaining a commission in a crack Guards’ regiment had they been Britishers of their former lowly origin. I added, “Yet the whole world is watching the marvellous tactics and strategy devised by these two great leaders, who on the plains of Russia are fighting the battle for Britain, for Australia, New Zealand, and indeed for the whole civilised world.” Those sentiments are endorsed by the gracious tributes paid the Russian leaders and nation by his Majesty the King, President Roosevelt, Mr Churchill and many other eminent personages. If your two correspondents doubt the existence of the class or patronage system in Britain, let them read the discussions in the House of Commons as published in British “Hansard” and newspapers. Many of your readers will recall the indictment made by Disraeli when, referring to the cleavage between rich and pool- in Britain, he said: “We are bringing up two nations in one people.” In September of last year, Professor Julian Huxley and Professor Soddy and eleven other eminent educationists and scientists, forwarded a petition to the British Government emphasising the necessity for democratising the nation’s system of education before there was any possibility of bringing in'any New Order, or of the “common man,” to quote Churchill, “being able to march into his true inheritance.” ?f ln support of the petition signed by Huxley, Soddy and others it was stated: “Britain is the only great industrial country where wealth systematically buys a different type of education for its offspring, where education sets a different aim for the wealthy than for those less well off. We thus preserve a system in striking contrast to those of Russia and the U.S.A. The system of public school education is undemocratic. It segregates those children who by inheritance, proceed to leading positions in industry, politics, the Civil Service, and the armed forces, and by its training strengthens their social privileges. It is socially injurious, since it divorces this section of our people from the rest, from the

main life of the main part of the community,” etc. This class system must go before Britain, the land from which 98 pei’ cent of we New Zealanders are proud to claim origin, can evolve into a true democracy and thus bring in the only New Order worth while —one based on those eternal principles which alone can exalt a nation.—l am, etc., HARRY ATMORE. Wellington, March 6.