Evening Post. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1938.

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 90, 13 October 1938, Page 8

Evening Post. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1938.

DICTATION THE VITAL ISSUE

"The difference between Fascism and Socialism," writes Mr. J. A, Lee in his much-quoted book, "is becoming one of ideals rather than of economics." The difference in methods is indeed becoming very slight; each is, in simple fact, a dictatorship. It is ,true that Socialism at times plans its approach through democracy, but—and let this be noted by the electors with some care—the democratic-Parliamentary machine is accepted by Socialists only on sufferance. Mr. Lee's candid logic places that fact beyond all doubt. "The issue," he writes, "is democratic Socialism or Socialism dictated." In other words, he tells the democratic voters in New Zealand that unless they vote for the Socialism which now parades under the Labour label, the democratic privilege will leave them, and a Socialist dictator will impose Socialism "from above." The words are his, but the italics are ours. It is unnecessary to italicise the word "dictated'," because the Socialist dictatorship idea, far from being a "bogy" or legend, has become a truism and a reality. Dictatorship is a Socialist as well as a Fascist weapon, and is to either of them an indispensable weapon. To say that Mr. Lee, who is the other voice at the Ministry of Finance, writes his book as an individual is beside the mark. On the flyleaf he records that he is "Parliamentary Under-Secretary to the Minister of Finance," and his further statement that the book is "one man's opinion" (like Karl Marx's book or anybody else's book) does not alter the fact that his clear-cut definitions of the Labour position arid the Labour policy have behind them the personal force of experience and authority in the party, and the intellectual power of compelling logic. The real question is "Whither Labour?''-—and Mr. Lee answers it in ringing tones: To Spcialisnt; and ify the dictatorship route if necessary. th this case, both the italics arid the words are ours, and they cannot be challenged by Mr. Lee, though some of his embarrassing apologists may attempt a mild denial. And if, in their vain attempt to divorce Labour from Socialism, they plead the time-factor —the time-lag between Nashism and Socialism—the answer is that Socialistic dictatorship is already here. Mr. Hamilton, both last night and on earlier occasions, has indicted Labour dictatorship in its 1935-38 inroads upon private enterprise; and with a sure instinct he declares that the supreme issue is not social security and guaranteed prices, but "private ownership or State ownership, individual freedom or dictation." Social so-called security and guaranteed prices are financial shots in the dark. The father principle is dictatorship Socialism. What is the evidence of dictatorship? In Labour housing, the individual must accept tenancy; the Nationalists would allow him to choose. Government house-building stifles private industry. The process of "Order in Council" is abused. In transport, the right of appeal to the law courts against resumption has been taken away. Compulsory trade unionism (which the Nationalists will repeal) dictates to workers a Labour-Socialist-pattern; and this, plus the public works scatter-cash policy, with one-big-unionism on public works, is building up a labour army which can become as political as the German dictator's labour army. The aims may be different but the dictatorship principle is the same. The New Zealand labour army stands peacefully by until Labour's amazing Parliamentary harvest reaches a halt; then, and not before, New Zealand will again become acquainted with direct action. Meanwhile, under the 1935-38 enactments^ the manufacturer is hampered and can be caught with "insulation" tape. As Mr. Hamilton has particularly emphasised, "all foodstuffs can be taken over at prices fixed by the Government" (a dictator's heaven!) and the extension of this power from the export market to the internal market brings distribution also under dictation. Other points in the Nationalist indictment are: Broadcasting: The Government's acquisition and control of all broadcasting facilities follows the usual method of dictators —that people must read and hear only what the Government decides is good for them.

Finance: The policy of the Government with regard to finance has been deliberately designed to tax private

enterprise, industry, and thrift right out of existence.

"Our primary task," says Mr. Hamilton, "is to turn away from dictatorship Socialism." The electors have to choose between the private employership that they know, and the yet untested state in which everybody will be a State employee, and where a dictatorship Government will masquerade in a; paternalism indistinguishable in pi-inciple from the dictatorships which have discarded or never adopted a mask. The "father of his people" in these modern days is either of the Moscow type, or of the Berlin-Rome type, the difference being, as Mr. Lee says, "one of ideals rather than of economics." Mr. Lee shows how New Zealand, under Labour's amendment of the Reserve Bank Act, raced away from Australia, a mere democracy. When Australian Premiers ask for low-interest loans, and the Commonwealth Bank Board replies that it cannot interfere with "the market rate for money," Mr. Lee laughs at Australian incompetence, and says, "In New Zealand the Minister can fix the rate." Also in New Zealand "the Board of Directors" of the Reserve Bank "can be removed or altered at will." This is a present (not future) state; is it dictatorship or is it not? Mr. Hamilton, in searching for the basic principle, correctly diagnoses that the root issue is dictatorship itself: (not only its present legislative symptoms, bad as they are) and that on Saturday the electors carry the responsibility of making a decision involving the fate of personal freedom not merely for three years but possibly for a decade ahead.