DICTATOR FOR BRITAIN

Evening Star, Issue 19196, 12 March 1926, Page 4

DICTATOR FOR BRITAIN

GREAT MEN WANTED EVILS SF GLASS WAR The weakness of democracy is dissen* sion, clue to a multiplicity of opinions and aspirations in the multitude (writes “Scrutator,” in tlio ‘ Liver pool Weekly Post ’). The Romans first divided th*af opponents, and then conquered th«a piecemeal. That is how tyrants liar® managed to secure power; that is why pure democracy lias never been atLained on a large, permanent scale in the world’s history. A few can unite and keep true to one single objective, but more often than not the result of a multitude of counsellors is not safety, but disunion and disaster. The few govern and dictate to the many because the few are of one mini and the many are at variance, it would lie a tremendous mistake to imagine that our democratic liberties are safe because we have manhood suffrage. Tlio price of liberty, it has been said, is eternal vigilance; but vigilance is not enough. To it we must add as large a measure of unity as possible, and the way to unity is through moderation, compromise, and a willingness to progress slowly. If it be dangerous to trample wholesale on popular liberties it is also dangerous to seek to advance ruthlessly and by forced marches. A whole nation cannot attempt to advance at tfe® trot without fatal disorganisation. ONE-MAN HULK. I am led to these reflections becanta a political friend of mine suggested to me tlie other day that what Britain needs is a dictator—a great man of clear vision and resolute will—to put us all right, politically and economically; a Cromwell without his intolerance or a Gladstone without, his baffling rhetoric. “ Look around,” lie said, “and see what has happened—Russia being reorganised by a non-eleetivc Soviet; Italy being hammered into a condition of disciplined industriousness by Mussolini; Spain being cleansed and roused to action by a general who has usurped the power* of King and Parliament; Turkey being Europeanised by Komai Pasha and a handful of Young Turks; and now France, by the failures of its parliamentary system, ripening for a twentieth century Napoleon of finance. After France it will be Britain s turn,” hr added, “ a.nd if we do not mend our ways our business will bo not to discuss policies, but just to obey orders.” None will deny that these post-war developments are as extraordinary as they were unexpected. President VUlson dreamt of a world made safe for democracy hv the defeat of Germany. What do* we* sec to-day? Four great nations being drilled by self-appointed sergeant-majors, of the super-man type, ostensibly at any rate for their good. Democracy is here back at school again. Why? Because it had tailed to learn tho lesson of unity. DANGER OF EXTREMISM.

And what about Britain and its old Mother of Parliaments? Is our representative system in any danger from any quarter? Not at present, I think. Blit what of the not far distant future? Direct action, the Minority movement, the general strike—what do these portend? The danger is that, as a protest, not .so much, really, against the do-nothings and the reactionaries as against the hard facts of existence, a minority may attempt a coup d’etat from below, and that such % a move may lie taken as an excuse for a suspension of the constitution by the “Constitutionalists” themselves, resulting in the establishment of an oligarchy, or.a Government by a few, acting in the name of the Crown, and without the authority of Parliament. Most people will say at once that the nation.would not stand such a thing, hut, on the other hand, wo know that evc.n the British people arc liable to panic, and one never knows what a stampeded people will consent to. A dictatorship would be bettor than chaos, and I can imagine that oven Liberals, as, indeed, the last General Election showed, would prefer to be protected in person or property by a tyrant than be left to tho mercy of a lawless mob. I am not an alarmist: 1 merely wish to point out tho possibilities of extreme folly. Extremism always begets extremism. If violence is resorted to, wo may be sure that the ruling classes would not shirk the issue; but we are not sure how far or for bow long tho clock would thereby bo set back. FUTILITY OF CLASS WARFARE. I am all for progress, for social equity, for a fairer division of tho nation’s income, for the rigid elimination of parasites, for the .suppression of profiteering, for easier conditions of life for the workers. But with all my soul, T am against the class war; I am against fratricide—the murder of brother by brother-—and T am against the domination of one-half the nation by tlio other half. Preachers of the elais war are enemies of the human race. The war 1 would wage is war against evil, and I know that evil is not a monopoly of any one class. Dishonesty, laziness, gambling, impurity, excessive drinking, and the like are the real enemies of progress, and unfortunately these are to be found in all classes, rich and poor, employers and employed, dukes and paupers, so that if one class totally destroyed the other these evils would still remain. There is no real progress except progress against evil, and evil rannot bo cast out by evil. As against class war I would preach brotherhood; against compulsion and violence 1 would rely on the religious and moral education of all classes; against dictatorship I would enthrone an equal partnership and the sweet reasonableness of an enlightened conscience. WHERE IS THE MAN? But, of course, we need human agent! and ways and means. We need statesmen pt understanding, courage, and vision. And wo need them very badly. It is nobody’s fault that 1 know of that we do not to-day, in our country’s dire need, possess a leader with a massive, penetrating intellect, a great, compassionate heart, and an unselfish, incorruptible character—in short, a great political personality whom the nation can trust to know and to do the right things. Wo seem to be waiting lor such a man—a leader, not a dictator. Our problems are accumulating unsolved, and all that wo have been able to do is to keep the Socialists out and to wait to see what Providence will semi us/ So far, it is true, we have maintained our essential unity. We have not, like the French, split up into warring grpups, and so made effective administration impossible. We have onr differences, but we are still a cohesive nation, and if onr Cabinet knew’ the right things to do they could do them. Let us strive for tho preserva*tion of this unity at nil costs, as our sheet anchor in a storm; so that when the great navigator comes, as assuredly he will, he will have under him, at any rate, a sound ship, and around him a loyal, dependable crew. A house divided against itself cannot stand.