The Hawera Star. FRIDAY", DECEMBER 19, 1930. HISTORY REPEATING ITSELF.

Hawera Star, Volume L, 19 December 1930, Page 4

The Hawera Star.

FRIDAY", DECEMBER 19, 1930. HISTORY REPEATING ITSELF.

Delivered every evening by 5 o’clock in Hawera, Manaia, Kaupokonui, Otakeho, Oeo, Piliama, Opunake, Normanby, Okaiawa, Eltharn, Ngaere, Mangatoki, Kaponga, Awatuna, Te Kiri, Mahoe, Lowgarth, Manutahi, Kakaramea, Alton, Hurleyville, Patea, Whenuakura, Waverley, Mokoia, Whakamara, Ohangai, Meremerc, Fraser Road, and Ararata.

It is sometimes alleged by critics of the existing social order that the worldwide depression has demonstrated the breakdown of tlx© ca.pita.list system. Feudalism could not adapt itself to changing conditions, and disappeared. Capitalism, in its turn, stands condemned. It has “ collapsed of its own weight, and since it cannot keep the wheels of industry running smoothly it must go.” This theory appeals to the revolutionaries, but has two palpable flaws. Although the depression is world-wide, it is far more severe in some countries than in others, which it has affected but lightly. Y r et if the capitalist system were at fault, one would expect the results to be uniform. Again, capitalism has been banished from Russia, where Lenin and his successors have put the revolutionary doctrines into practice. So far from managing affairs better they have reduced Russia te a desperate plight economically and financially. Hence it would seem that the capitalistic system must be acquitted of the charge that it has failed. Indeed, by render ing possible the provision of credits for the more necessitous States, it has saved them from bankruptcy. The cause of the depression must be sought elsewhere, and while various factors have contributed, all can be traced ultimately to the war. The last decade has emphasised the truth that war does not pay. Cessions of territory and tributes of gold do not compensate even the victors for the wastage involved. What has happened to a greater or lesser degree in many belligerent nations may be illustrated by a summary of a retrospective survey by Sir Charles Oman, which has special reference to Britain, but applies, with appropriate modifications, to other countries. During the war there had been a boom. Many industries were fostered by the lavish outlay on the army and navy. The demand for iron and steel, cloth and cotton for military purposes had been insatiable. Wages rose and there was work for all. It was generally anticipated that the termination of the war would bring in a period of even greater expansion. “Peace and prosperity” have alawys been linked in men’s minds. Nevertheless the years that immediately followed the war were among the most unhappy and troublous in the domestic history of Britain. The war had been responsible for an enormous rise in prices, including those of agricultural products. These gradually fell, and the agricultural interests, which had calculated rents and expenditure on the l higher average, were hard hit. The manufacturing interests also suffered. The cessation of the war put an end to the unnatural growth of the industries which had profited by the expenditure on the services. The textile and tho heavy metal industries, in particular, languished when the immense purehases by the Government dwindled. The Continental countries were too poor to buy luxuries or even necessaries, and exports declined. Hence came insolvencies and the dismissal of hands. The labour market was glutted by the I disbanding of the forces. Many of tho demobilised men had enlisted when more lads, and had never learned a trade. So gloomy was the situation that pessimists feared that the stage I was set for a social revolution. Sir

Charles Oman's statement might be accepted as a fair description of postwar Britain as her contemporary situation will appear to future historians, and his remarks are, broadly speaking, true of other ex-belligerents. Actually, Sir Charlies is writing of Britain during the five years after "Waterloo. Like causes have like effects. The World War, though less protracted than the Napoleonic Wars, was on an infinitely great scale; hence its repercussions have been more extensive, and, inevitably, longer felt. Every phenomenon Sir Charles mentions can be discerned, in a magnified form, in the years that have passed since 1919. The Napoleonic Wars were fought by small professional armies. The lives of the majority of the contending nations were untouched, except in so far as they benefited by the boom. But the Great War absorbed the whole of the energies of the combatants on tasks of a purely destructive character. Many millions were engaged in an endeavour to kill each other; many millions in the manufacture of munitions which were shot into the air. Attempts have been made to compute the cost of the war, but they lead nowhere, because, while they can take into account loans and additions to taxation—on this basis it has been estimated the war consumed over onethird of Britain's national wealth—they cannot allow for the indirect loss arising from the withdrawal of so many from productive industry, the damage to property, and the unsettling influences of the war. For this folly the world has had to pay the price. Many have tried to postpone the payment, and to maintain artificial standards by artificial expedients. But the day of reckoning was bound to arrive. Facts refused to be ignored. The process of deflation is an unpleasant one, but it has to be faced as a prelude to recovery.