FREE SPEECH MEANS "CHAOS OF VIEWS," SAYS READER

Radio Record, Volume XII, Issue 37, 24 February 1939, Page 22

FREE SPEECH MEANS "CHAOS OF VIEWS," SAYS READER

HE ‘‘Record’’ recently has had a lot to say about ‘‘History Behind the Headlines,"’ from 1ZB. This ties wp with Mr. H. G. Wells’s comments on censorship in Australia, writes "Mair Deal," of Havelock North. Now imagine a country that indulges in the delectable privilege of free speech. Where anyone can say anything at any time to everybody. What a country for a goyernment to run! Who on earth could take a fead as Prime Minister from such a chaos of views? Surely there are noisy prattlers enough in the world to-day. Where would a clear policy of national and international affairs be found? — We are all aware that most of Us speak and argue the way that suits us best. From "captain to cabin-boy," that is the major trouble in the world to-day. The dictators shout loudest from behind the ramparts of censorship. But a bedlam of mixed, unchecked opinions, from street corner te Parliament, would be even more dangerous. We must stick, if possible, to wisdom and authority, and jealously guard our democratic right of leaving matters delicate and provocative in the hands of those best fitted to the task of dealing with them, Mis-statements PERSONALLY, I grieve to think how indiscriminately radio programmes allow, very often, people who have never been to Europe to study conditions first-hand to voice freely mis-statements of fact and mere imaginative opinion,

Now recently I heard a radio talk on "Czechoslovakia’s Sacrifice." . i ask, when or how was that? This State, formed by treaty agreement, and by all Powers interested, took pieces of territory from neighpouring States to make up _ its boundaries. Result — minorities created. The union of Czechs and Slovaks was augmented by numbers of cther nationalities who were "sacrficed" to make a political State. By the Munich Pact, the minorities under dispute were restored to their former governments. The point is, what would you call "Czechoslovakia’s Sacrifice"? The term is clearly misleading and thousands of people who seldom bother to think or study history would draw the conclusion that Chamberlain was wrong. "Czechoslovakia’s Dilemma" or even "Problem" would have been a better title. Expansion NO one lost by the Munich Treaty, ' Thousands in Czechoslovakia were already sympathetically disposed to Germany. In time of war, the country would have been yiddled with active agents on behalf of Nazism and Germany. The German expansion programme was planned years ago, ‘and nearly every East Europe country has its pro-German population. The world was saved a civi-lisation-smashing war; all were saved that, even though only for a time. But the guarantee of boundaries decisively and irrevocably places Germany "on the spot" with regard to that region. "free" speech, indeed! Would any of its advocates allow me to say what I like about them? Not even within reason, if it was inconvenient!