THE CRUSADE AGAINST DEMOCRACY

Hokitika Guardian, 27 October 1928, Page 8

THE CRUSADE AGAINST DEMOCRACY

(Sydney Bulletin). Sydney Labour officials announced at an early stage of the waterfront strike that if any Government threw itself into the struggle to the extent of protecting men willing to work lot the. rates fixed by Beeby, <l.—in othei ■words,s if the (strikers were not allowed to hold up the sea-transport on. which this island depends for its commercial existence—-‘‘all the union* would join the watcrsiders in straight-out fight against the Arbitration Act.” .The outside world would he surprised to see Australian Labour striking against this Act, which first figured in Labour platforms, and against the decision of a .fudge who was a Labour M.L.A. lor years, were it not that equally insane situations have been arising all over Europe since the war. President Wilson defined democracy ten years ago as “the reign of Law based on the consent of the governed,” and that *is about the view of the average citizen with a sense o» justice and a desire for peace. 'Unfortunately for him, for peace, and for justice, the world is full of fluent officials who have no use for the reign of law. Familiarity with democracy has filled them with contempt for it. Their bright idea, whether they are Englishmen or Frenchmen, Australians or Italians, is to gain wealth and leisure for the members of a olass on lines which are thoroughly Undemocratic —that is, by disregarding the nation’s laws and the desires of the- majority. Sooner or later, in every .case, the response of the majority has been to take steps which have had the effect of bringing the democratic principle into contempt, and of making the economic position of the workers worse than it was before. That is what happened in England a couple of years ago, when the general strike collapsed before the Guv-erm nte n t ’>s - dem on st ra •£ ion, l o f strength. l Australia is still getting immigrants who would he in fairly well-paid billets at home now, if their political leaders had not set out to make them happy by means of a big law-defying strike. In Italy, Labour officials set out on similar truculent lines to defy the right of law in the name of democracy. The nation objected, and now Italian freedom, if not dead, is in a state of suspended animation. The poor are toiling long hours for little pay, and they do not even enjoy the democratic privilege of being allowed to complain'. They have lost, in addition to 1 freedom of speech, their misguided leaders, who are l for the most part, either in exile or, if a'c home, in gaol. The Labour officials of France, which ffias always had a far solidem Communist party than Italy or Britain, much less Australia (there is a “red belt” 360,000 strong round Paris alone) have made several bids for trouble oh the line's of Australia’s Waterside Workers Federation. They talked last April of “putting up- a straight-out fight” against the law of France in the form of a Paris transport strike. Prime Minister Poincare met this challenge on May Hay. The foreshadowed strike was forbidden, and also all public demonstrations in favour of it, and the military and police were instructed to. see that the Government’s orders were carried out. Nothing happened except further curtailments of the workers’ liberties, such as followed in Britain on the general strike. Spain, Greece and Hungary have all been afflicted since the war with Labour officials who decided to prove the sincerity of their democracy by defying it. All their ventures ended in the swift overthrow of democracy, and the appearance of dictatorships which, whatever, else they have done, have not lightened the lot of the workers.

There are certain truisms in this connection with which every potential striker ought to be acquainted,' and would be if be bad followed social history of recent times. The chief is that if strikes are only ambitious enough they are absolutely certain to fail and bring disaster on those who participate in them, and in a slightly less degree on the nation. An adroit Labour leader may get away Iwith a small strike, even in one of the numerous countries which have come to regard the strike weapon as something between confidence-trickery and blackmail. But transport strikes, general strikes, or any such campaigns against the community as a whole, can only end in one of two ways. Either they fail at once of their own futility, as England’s general strike did, or they look like succeeding for a time and throw the nation into such a panic-that it Submits eventually to a Dictator. No one wants a Dictator, and once in charge he is hard to •dislodge, as Spain and Italy are finding at the moment. But lie is anyhow preferable to the anarchy and national ruin which must-follow when Governments are weak enough to let themselves he bluffed by agitators who threaten to put- “straight-out fights” against the laws of the land.