Is War Inevitable?

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 33, 2 November 1933, Page 13

Is War Inevitable?

Sir,—Your correspondent Aubrey Gualter, under the beading “Is War Inevitable?” says: “Therefore upon philosophy lies the dreadful onus of modern war.’’ This seems to me rather an unfair statement, as no particular system of philosophy is mentioned. Only about one per cent, of the people make any attempt to study philosophy, and the most liberal of psychologists allow that only ten per cent, of the people are reasonable and logical thinkers. . . War is an emotional storm which brings out all the primitive instincts, and when these are aroused, reason has no place. Racial hatreds are a social inheritance in the older countries, and these are played upon by those who hope to profit bv war. If your correspondent can tell us how to do away with racial hatred, greed, love of conquest, and arrogant domination, and how to enthrone reason in their place, the problem of war will be solved.—l am, etc., AV. AV. MARKLAND. Lower Hutt, October 81.

Sir.—“ Communication is civilisation. The Roman Empire had roada; the “barbarians” let the roads go out of repair. European civilisation (such as it is) must became conscious of itself and take a pride in keeping its roads, railways, and air services always open for passengers. Australia and New Zealand are fortunate in not having any land frontiers, and they must find it difficult to realise the problems) of such frontiers. Incidentally, Bismarck was by no means the most warlike person in history. Had he been in charge of Germany in 1914, it is almost certain that . war would have been avoided. —I am, etc.. R. H. FITZ-HERBERT. Havelock North, October 30. ■ Sir, —I have a deep affection for Mr. G. F. Moore, of Bushy Park, and I am sorry that be is caught upon the horns of a dilemma and gives way to pessimism and defeatism, It is a hard fight, my masters. Mr. Moore quotes the Bible, but apparently does, not realise that the Bible is a history of the evolution of standards of good under the symbolised leadership of God, and that Christ was crucified as a revolutionary because His teachings were in conflict with the then existing ideas or standards of right and wrong, good -and evil. What distinguishes man from any other animal is hie -power to reason —to observe facts and deduce other facts from them, to note what conduct is followed by good results, and what conduct produces evil, to observe what law produces order, and what law produces disorder, and to make his judgments and guide his conduct accordingly. Inasmuch as-ani-,male have no standards of fitness with which to measure survival mine, they use brute strength, wile, camouflage, or speed to attain their desires or resist their dangers. If humanity continues to persist in following the animal precept, it will remain an animal, and will' retain -animal survival values—the profiteers will survive and the Christian- will, be crucified, The Animal will die the death, but the Spirit of Christ lives for ever—T Jim, etc..

" ‘ • P. B. FITZHERBERT. Wellington, November 1.