The Times. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1938. Elections Would Be a Mockery

Manawatu Times, Volume 63, Issue 238, 8 October 1938, Page 4

The Times. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1938. Elections Would Be a Mockery

Could democracy survive Socialism? Were New Zealand to become a Socialised State, what would be the fate of our system of popular representative government? In this hour of crisis in the political history of the Dominion, these and other great questions must be faced —not glossed over with platitudes, but squarely answered.

Assuming that Labour was returned to power and that the party’s cardinal plank was implemented and so the whole economic life of the community was Socialised, would there be ever again a free election? An analysis of the projected position reveals that any election then held would be a mockery. There appears little, if any, hope of democracy surviving in a Socialised State.

Government supporters may here and now declare the subject to be out of order—in a belief that the Labour Parly has no intention of Socialising the whole State. Before proceeding with our thesis, let that objection be countered in advance. To declare that the Labour Party will not implement the “Socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange,” the first and most prominent clause in its constitution, is to brand the party as a collection of hypocrites. Surely supporters would not suggest such an alternative. The plank is either to be implemented or else it is meaningless. Bather than see the party branded with hypocracy, we believe its spokesmen to be “politicians,” endeavouring with soft words to allay public anxiety—not a very noble role, unfortunately.

In a belief that Socialism is no bogey, but a very tangible threat to the nation, let the possibilities of the future be examined. Were the Dominion’s economic life completely Socialised, every citizen would be dependent upon the State for his daily bread and for all the years of his existence. No man could ever achieve independence. No man could change his “boss,” for there would be only one “boss.” There could be no views published except with the consent of the party in power. That party would monopolise every means of expression and communication except the spoken word. But not even a meeting could be advertised without the State’s consent, for it would own every newspaper and every printing press. Under both Coalition and Labour Governments, a party decried by both has been able to publish a paper wherein to express its views. The reference is to the Communist Party. Would that paper, or the “National News,” be allowed publication in a Socialised State?

Picture an election in sueh a State. Prom where could candidates be found to oppose any Government then in power? Any man who stood in opposition would risk his station Having shown himself, he would forever be a “marked” man; he could expect no further advancement in his trade or profession and would risk the strong probability of being disrated. There would be only one employer in the country, and that a political body. The life prospect of every man would be either to bo a “yes-man,” a “good party man,” or else to be condemned all his working days to the humblest of positions.

Such a state of affairs provides a situation wherein tyranny is inevitable—a tyranny that would progressively deepen and become worse by far than that which ruled in pre-war Czarist Russia. Let any disbeliever work out in his own mind, in his own way, the future under complete Socialism. The convictions here expressed will be found irrefutable. Let New Zealand be Socialised and thereafter elections would be only a mockery of democracy. There could no longer be free expression of the public will. Every citizen would be but a tiny cog to a party machine.

Socialism deserves the utmost resistance of all true believers in democracy, whatever may be their position in our society.