THE MOVEMENT AGAINST WAR

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21377, 21 January 1935, Page 11

THE MOVEMENT AGAINST WAR

TO TBI aoITOI OF THB PK»SS. Sir,—Your correspondent "Clear Them Out," in your issue of January 16, takes up an extraordinary attitude in his proposed method of dealing with those to whom he is opposed. First he asserts that the no more war advocates must be very few in number because of the frequency with which the same names appear in print, and later desires the Government to charter "a few 40,000 ton Cunarders" in which to deport these 'Mew" persons to other shores. May I in all kindness suggest that your correspondent should, before again airing his views in print, take a course in logic for beginners? It were surely "wasteful and ridiculous excess" to engage a fleet of leviathan ships to transport such a handful of persons who tread on his corns occasionally. And may not this policy of deporting one's opponents be making a rod for his own back ultimately? "Clear Them Out" then asks a question, which he evidently considers a pcrer, as to what anti-war advocates would do in the event of an enemy visiting their homes for the purpose of robbery with violence. -His own penname suggests the answer; we would "clear them out" as expeditiously as possible, first ringing up the police for assistance, just as your correspondent would do in similar circumstances.

There is, however, no analogy between such a happening and international warfare, which we seek to make impossible by the force of public opinion, expressed through world-wide organisation. Since the Turks were stopped in their onward march in the fifteenth century, there has been no Asiatic attempts at world-conquest, and from that period until the present day Europe has been the world's great storm centre, in which wars of aggression and wars to preserve "the balance of power" have been of frequent occurrence, with the most deplorable consequences to humanity. The present movement against war being established on a world-wide basis, cannot provide the opportunity which "Clear Them Out" apparently fears, namely, that one or more unarmed nations may become the helpless victims of some other power armed ~0 the teeth. That position may have existed hitherto, but if all the larger world powers are prevented from indulging in mass murder enterprises, fe need have no fear of aggression from any other quarter. It may be asked what hope or guarantee we have that the nations of Europe will do their part in building up this world movement, to which we reply that for generations all the warring nations (with the exception of Great Britain up to the period of the World War) had adopted forced military service, known as conscription. This practice met with widespread and bitter opposition from millions, who were the helpless victims of despotic governments. The present anti-war movement seeks by mass resistance to break down this system and abolish compulsion in arms, and we may rest assured that this movement will be gladly acclaimed by multitudes who have, a tradition of suffering the horrors of war for generations. "Clear Them Out" says that "No one in this world asks for war," so according to him war just happens, like a hurricane or an earthquake. This is a common fallacy. Wars are . not natural calamities, nor the "act of God," but are man-made and can therefore be man-prevented. Hitherto the common people have never yet used their collective strength to secure their own vital needs, except in rare and isolated instances. This movement aims at a huge collective effort to use that strength for a purpose which no one can reasonably oppose, an objective which is so clear and simple as to be understood by the humblest intelligence. We even hope some day to secure the approval and help of "Clear Them Out."—Yours, etc ARTHUR RAE (Senator). Greymouth, January 18, 1935.

TO TH» IDITOB OF THE PR18». Sir, —I read your report upon "Resistance to War," also the correspondence which followed it. War is ghastly, and no sane person wants it. But it is only through the League of Nations that war can be averted. If war is thrust upon Britain, those of her subjects who refuse service in any capacity, I consider, should be dealt with as "Clear Them Out" suggests. Your other correspondents are unpractical humbugs. One suggests feeding Japan to keep her from our shores. He has not got serfse enough to know that charity should begin at home. Another correspondent thinks we do not shelter under the British flag so much as we uphold it. How can he upheld the flag if he is not willing to fight for it?— Yours, etc., BE LOYAL. January 19, 1935.