“FOOLISH PROPAGANDA.”

Evening Star, Issue 18667, 23 June 1924, Page 5

“FOOLISH PROPAGANDA.”

TO THE EDITOR. Sit, —■“ No argument, wo may suppose, can now bo needed against permitting a legislature or an executive not identified in interest with the people to prescribe opinions to them and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.” This truth was enunciated by John Stuart Mill more' than sixty-live years ago. 'There has never been any serious attempt to refute it, and in a supposedly more democratic and enlightened age it might well be' considered unassailable, let. licrc in New Zealand in the year 1921 wo have a Legislature which docs undertake to prescribe what opinions and what arguments the people shall be permitted to hear; which docs place a ban on freedom of discussion. 4nd this suppression is exorcised upon a subject which, above all others, should be open to full and free discussion,-for there is nothing that concerns people more closely than the nature and functions of government, and the social and economic conditions that govern their lives. What is the reason of this arbitrary interference with the freedom of pnblic discussion? Is it maintained that wo have reached thg limits of human knowledge in these matters, or do the authorities of a day chum infallibility of judgment that they dare to stifle opinions that happen to bo contrary to their own? If the prevailing opinions arc true they will Siam! out all the more clearly and bo better understood by comparison with those contained in what you describe as seditions and incendiary literature. If, on the contrary, the prevailing beliefs are false, or contain only a portion of the truth, the people are prevented from exchanging error for truth. And how is it possible to assert that an opinion is true or false while there arc people who are prepared to refute it or maintain it if permitted to do so, but who are not so permitted ?

Pioneers in thought rnvariablyfind themselves opposed to oHlkklox idols, and history teaches ns that this intolerance ol new troths has in all ages resulted in the martyrdom of those who have conferred the greatest benefits on mankind. Another important result of the suppression of new ideas is that it produces a general atmosphere of mental slavery, resulting in an inevitable lowering of the standard of intelligence. For how can men reach their full mental stature except by exercising and training their minds through the examination and comparison of varying opinions? Reasoning from the presumption th®l:. the powers of government are exorcised impartially in tho interests of tho whole people., there appears to bo neither justification nor incentive for this , restriction on discussion; but the hypothesis Unit those powers are controlled by a privileged class, dependent for its privileges upon the ignorance of the people, provides both incentive and justification—for that class.—l am, etc.,

A. B. Powmx. Juno 2L