CORRESPONDENCE

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVII, Issue 207, 2 August 1937, Page 12

CORRESPONDENCE

(To the EditoT.) Sir, —In your leading article in this evening’s “Standard” entitled “Premier’s Return” you refer to certain statements made by Mr Savage and continue by saying, “Not everyone will follow the reasoning that if the working man throughout the world is enabled to purchase (consume?) to the same extent as he produces a major possibility of international conflict will disappear. The evidence of dictator countries disproves that thesis; and can the Great War logically be traced to this origin. Now, sir, in the first place if the workers of the world consumed in proportion to their production there would be no surpluses and consequently no trouble in finding extra markets (spheres of operation). That removes one cause of war. Then again those people who benefit as a result of the destruction of wealth in war at the present time would have no surplus wealth to be destroyed. Let me illustrate that point by quoting Professor Soddy : “The results of war point to its cause. The wealth along with the cream of the manhood is destroyed in war. The men remain dead but the wealth takes on a state of immortality in tho shape of a national debt, becomes a perpetual source of income to the owners, and a lien in perpetuity on the industry of the people.” That surely removes another cause. But a third cause exists which is perhaps the result of the above mentioned two. That is national hatred engendered by Press propaganda, the Press representing the opinions of thoso classes who pay for the advertisements in the Press, and consequently supply the funds which pay the salaries and dividends, and thereby dictate its policy. The appeal to ignorance and prejudice, the using of formulas instead of reasoned argument. A few years ago it was the cry of Socialist. Now it is the cry of Communist. For instance, the policy of the League of Nations Union is to educate the masses against the principle of settling international disputes bv war, and supporting the principle of collective security through the League of Nations. Yet when the All-Australian Trades Union adopted that policy at its recent congress the Press stated that it had adopted the Communist policy. The idea behind that report was not to emphasise the fact that that was the Communist policy, but to damn the idea of collective security through the League of Nations. Now the point I want to make here is that if the workers of the world consumed in proportion to their production these particular classes I have mentioned would cease to exist because. they can only exist by tho expropriation of the fruits of the production of the worker. They would then become workers themselves and “consume in proportion to their own production,” not gamble with the fruits of everyone else’s. And the Press would then possibly devote its pages to the propagation of ideas which would tend to uplift humanity, instead of as at present merely act as propagandists for its economic masters. So once more a cause of war is removed. You state, “the evidence of dictator countries disproves this.” In what way? Do the workers in Germany consume what they produce? How then are there so many millionaires in Germany? Do the workers in Italy consume what they produce ? Where then does Mussolini get his war material to destroy? But even if they did Mr Savage said “working men throughout the world.’,’ I think, Mr Editor, that it is not that Mr Savage’s argument is illogical, but the policy of your paper.—l am, etc., V. A. CHRISTENSEN, 46 Heretaunga St., July 31, 1937.