MIGHTY MAJORITY

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 48, 25 August 1923, Page 10

MIGHTY MAJORITY

POLITICAL OBSESSION

The Welfare League writes:—"We aro witnessing in New Zealand to-day an insane : disregard of the fundamental principle of individual.rights, which, if persisted in, may land our country in very serious: trouble.

' "The Dairy Control Bill now before Parliament gives strong evidence of this. , c principle of this measure is to compel all those engaged in dairy production to hand over control of their produce to a board for marketing purposes whether, as individuals, they; wish to do so or not. As justification for this proposed compulsion, politicians, from the Prime Minister to members of the Labour Party, are all presenting the same stock argument that a majority are in favour of it. All these politicians have from time to time called themselves Liberal, yet here they arc fighting against the- first principle of Liberalism, that of recognising the right and liberty of all. "Majority rule at the best is but an expedient, and when carried to the length of making the majority almighty to the exolußion of all rights of the minority arid th« [individual, it becomes a. tyranny. Some are satisfied that compulsion is right because a majority of the dairy factories are in favour of it. Mr. Massw and others suggest a plebiscite of the dairy farmers; others say all the people of New Zealand are interested, and recommend a general referendum. This discuiision is all tainted with the political outlook of expediency. Politicians, as a olass, depend for their very existence on securing the support of majorities,- and, therefore, are in danger of thinking that mliw lty: rißhts mean everything. We have another instance of this worship of the majority in a Bill to amend the Conciliation and Arbitration Act promoted by the Labour Party. In this it is proposed that where a workers' union by majority vote, in an industry, oanoels its.registration no minority in such industry shall ba allowed to register another union. ; We expect to find Mr: Holland asking the supporters of majority rule, in the instance of the Dairy Con/ trol Bill, how they can consistently oppose it in the oaee of his party's Bill.' Thus, one wrong, will be used to buttress another. Mr! Massey, Mr. Ndsworthy, and all other advocates of compulsion by majority vote in trade and commerce would do well to review the matter ofwhere this ' procedure may land us. In our_ opinion,. the matters of dairy control, or'industrial- arbitration,- arc-not issues of majority rule. It is a'false, meohanical idea of democracy. To force compulsion upon the individual and'minority in con-

ducting their business; whether as farming producers or industrial workers, is wrong. The whole principle behind this compulsion is really undemocratic, as it undermines the liberty and Initiative of the individual.

"Democracy does not mean unlimited majority rule. The decision by majority should be confined to those affairs where there is general assent as the best expedient to be applied, otherwise it entails the destruction of personal liberty upon whioh foundation our social, order is based. Let the farmers organise voluntarily as much as they please, let the workers organise also, but we protest that neither, should be vested with a legal power of compulsion over those who dissent.

"That to have gone wrong somewhat already in curtailing individual freedom is no reason why we should go further in a wrong course-. The present is a time to pa-jse and seriously reflect upon the risks we are taking."