Evening Post. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1936. IF WE LOST DEMOCRACY!

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 96, 20 October 1936, Page 8

Evening Post. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1936. IF WE LOST DEMOCRACY!

Violence and threats of violence have reached in the Old World such an intensity that a visitor from Mars might be inclined to think that the practical issue confronting European civilisation is: Which of the two extreme factions shall hold the other down by the throat? He would be in danger of overlooking the fact that in some countries there is still a middle way, whereby democracy keeps in check*both the Fascist faction and the Communist faction, and yet holds nobody by the throat, tfhis invaluable service rendered to civilisation by democracy—this insufficiently appreciated gift of government without violence —is too prosaic to come into the limelight. People cease to value blessings long, enjoyed; and democracy does not make a good fr&nt page feature. But Sir Oswald Mosley's Fascists can always be sure of the head-lines if they, can plan a demonstration that will arouse the Communists. Both Fascists and Communists have rediscovered the ancient art of making fire by friction; neither could succeed without the other, but together they can stage a conflagration which easily becomes the news of the day. Everybody is interested when extremes meet, in this very spectacular fashion, for a few hours on one or two days of the year. And the far greater miracle of a democracy which peacefully orders the movements of society all day and every day, year in and year out, tends to be forgotten. . Democracy is like home. "Home, according to one definition, "is the place where we are treated the best —and growl the worst." This definition fits. Democracy treats its citizens the best in that it consults them, and does its best to reflect their own selves. Who gives an extreme faction the liberty to be extreme? Democracy—and demo-, cracy alone. Do the Fascist extremists give Communists the extreme liberty provided by democracy? German concentration camps supply the answer. And anyone who believes that Communists are inferior in intolerance to Fascists forgets' the Moscow trials, repressions, and executions. Yet, if the visitor from Mars were to judge by the headlines alone he; might think that Europe's choice was Fascism or Communism; and that humble "democracy had dropped out, not being vocal. He would need to look under the surface in order to perceive that most of this sound and fury comes from empty vessels —and that the real work of the world is still being done by quiet, unaggressive diplomacy. While the extremist countries of Europe are shaping for war, to the democratic countries is left the reconstructive tasks on the international economic front—notably monetary stabilisation, a hopeful step towards peace and humanity. By the time the Martian had weighed up true values in Europe, he would see that democracy is still the greatest human fact. For the free, democracy is home. But just as people go from home to a picture show, and revel in the revolver work, so do imprudent democrats tolerate extremist proceedings, by masqueraders politically insane. The under-rating of democratic liberty by those who still have it, and the sufferings of those who have it not, make up a picture which excites Sir Samuel Hoare to exclaim: "Most of the world seems to have gone mad." The spectacle of a drunken man throwing his money about is a spectacle of sobriety compared with that of the democrat who scatters his liberties to the wind in imaginative flirtings with extremism. Not merely adventurers, but even men with 'peaceful homes, are seized with the j idea to go to Spain to fight on the supposition that Fascism v. Communism has there become a supreme clash of political faiths, and not, as Sir Samuel Hoare maintains, "a faction fight." If there is any religion in exalting Fascism against Communism, or Communism against Fascism, it is mere fustian compared with the human religion of defending tolerant democracy against either or both. Democracy, we repeat, means home and freedom. Dictatorship certainly will not give freedom, and, without freedom, can home be home? Even material advantages—though nowhere visible in dictatorship countries—would not compensate for lost liberty; and yet it is this very liberty of democracy — uniforms, street marches, etc. —that gives extremism its spectacular start. As Sir Samuel Hoare says, "there is no justification in Britain for dictatorships," and neither the Fascist minority nor the Communist minority—neither the black shirt nor the red—is of the British tradition.

Belgium not only is perturbed at the international dangers that may make her again "the cockpit of Europe." She« has an internal Fascist (Rexist) movement which causes a Belgian Minister to call on Belgium's "middle group to defend their liberties." This is a call which all democracies should heed, lest, in their default, minorities triumph by bravado. Growling in (and at) our homes may be taken, for granted, but shall ihe prevalent madneaa

spread till the last free home is sacrificed on the altar of the totalitarian State, whatever its colour? There is some surprise because of reports that the Spanish civil war has revived every barbaric practice except cannibalism. But this is the way of civil wars, and few things are more certain than that class warfare, if it blazes up in Western countries, will put in the shade, for fierceness and intensity, the struggle that took place in Russia or in any other revolutionary country where the middle class was weak or nonexistent. No middle class, where it is strong, fails to strike in the last instance. The danger is that democratic middle class people are apt to be apathetic in the first instance. At no time should they be tolerant of intolerance. "A plague on both your houses" sums up the attitude of any wise middle-of-the-road democrat towards violence on either flank, Left or Right. In a period when Continental Fascism seemed to have turned even British Labour into a war party, it is quite possible that political problems will be cut with a sword in more countries than Spain; and democrats will have to recognise that today's lawlessness may be tomorrow's killing. Mr. Wickham Steed writes:

1 hate all killing of political opponents. To me it seems the climax of intolerance, the forcible denial of mental and moral freedom, the negation of what I understand by civilisation, that is to say, respect for the human personality. Yet it is useless to ignore the uncomfortable truth that a great part of the world today is given over to militant intolerance and to forms of faction rule that make a mockery of mental and moral freedom.

Mr. Wickham Steed "wonders whether the conscience of mankind is not now blunted, and whether men have not lost ground morally almost as fast as they have gained it scientifically and technically." And he has reason for wondering.- On the plea that the world faces a problem not of production, but of distribution, disruptive forces are let loose that are far less likely to improve the distributive machine than to smash it altogether. This smashing can be done by extremism of either colour or even by administrative sabotage. Has not the time arrived for democrats who value freedom to look all these gift-horses in the mouth, and to take a stand for liberty?—not merely to stop at home and read tho news when this faction or that faction seeks by violence and fanfaronade to capture political power.