"Socialism at the Gate”

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 185, 4 May 1936, Page 13

"Socialism at the Gate”

Sir,—Your leader of Wednesday inevitably recalls the remurk of Str Win. Harcourt, maue a generation ago, that tte are all boeiuusis now. let it would iff as fiard at present, as it was men, to loruiuiatea definition oi socialism except in terms ot individual prejuuice. it is tins tendency to give words an emouve couteut that is so contusing to thought in all .times ot crisis and sweeping change. ■ Calling tne i’rnnary Frounce -uarketiir' Bill Socialism will appeal omy to tuose individuals who preier labelling to thinking, in »t<» administrative provisions, tne BUI Uof Hie type of the ueeuslaud and New Souiu it ales Maine tin. Acts, tne Australian Dried il ruits Acts, aud the British Agricultural Marketing Acts, which have ueen in force up to ten years and more, so that it seems uureatjoU’ able to attack the New Zealand propose s merely because they extend tne spheie oit is the part of the measure which deals with price insurance that will leave room for real difference of opinion, it tbe seasonal price is to be based purc>y upon market data, then much danger will be avoided. But even here a difficult statistical problem will have to be solved, it should be remembered that, in the years before 1929, dairy produce prices remained relatively high as compared with other agricultural products, and lor this and other reasons, it looks as though the puce to be paid from August 1 next will be determined largely by guesswork. * , theless, the guess may be worth hazaid iu ,r for a system of price insurance has much to commend it, if that is al the parties are aiming at. However, it appears that, in the future, the price ot pioduce is in some degree to be determined by reference to the cost of production, and here the trouble begins, for cost ot production depends to no small extent upon the value placed upon laud and the rate of interest charged against that value. Hence it appears that the system of price insurance will tend to be twisted into one of subsidising land values at the expense of the community at large, as has been done in recent years. —I am, etc., W. M. SMITH, Vh.D. (Econ.). Palmerston North, April 29.

Sir —It was with interest that I read your editorial ,iu this morning’s paper, “Socialism at the Gate.” In the first place, might I inquire as to your own particular definition of Socialism: ihe only country in the world to-day to which that term can be applied is Russia, and 1 cun assure you that Comrade btaliu would not for one moment consider any of the legislation of the present Government as socialistic. Tbe Government may, of course, have some remote idea of bow this ideal ami desirous state may be brought about, but to gain that desired end under a system of political, financial and industrial reform is impossible under the capitalist system. There are only two classes—tbe exploited and the exploiters. One lives on tbe other, aud it is impassible to barmonise thet'e conflicting interests (more to the workers —less profits to the capitalists). In Russia they abolished capitalism and instituted a system for usenet profit. Stalin and Co. work as hard as any other comrades and the standard of living is the same for each and all—that is Socialism.—l am^c^ LToN Petonc, April 29.