Organiser's Notes.

Maoriland Worker, Volume 2, Issue 72, 26 July 1912, Page 4

Organiser's Notes.

By E. R. HARTLEY

QUESTION BOX

11. Fisher sends five questions

(1) Any encyclopaedia will give' you full information about Oxford and Cambridge Universities. You will find most tit the moneys given by private donors was for the education of the poor man's child.

VL') "How do you propose to guard against corruption of representatives sent to advance the workers' interestr 1 "

Please note, first of all, Henry, that such a question assumes that workers representatives are corrupted now, in tthirh case, even if corrupted later, it would only be a case of "as yon were." Note further, at the present time it pays to betray Uie workers. When the democracy understands, it won't pay. When Socialism comes, it cannot pay. There are few men who arc scoundrels at heart, but a bad system which rewards the scoundrel with riches, and because of riches, with position and honor, brings bad men to the front. If the ordinary press is to be believed about its political opponents, most of the front-rank men of to-day are those who have betrayed the interests given into their hands. It won't pay when the workers understand, and the betrayer of the workers and the workers' cause will not dare to shew his face in public

Socialism will put an end to corruption because it won't pay under Socialism. We have plenty of corruption now, and it pays. (3) "What guarantee have yon that under public ownership a clique of clever speakers, backed by talented journalists, will not outwit and tyrannise over the ignorant and simple people?" I must again point out that this is exactly what is happening now, and the question is asked because the inquirer knows it happens in the system which he upholds, and to which Socialism is opposed.

Under Socialism, every child born would bo educated to the fulness of its capacity. Under Socialism, a clique of clever journalists controlling the press would he impossible. In every civilised country to-day the press is owned and controlled by the capitalist class, and used in the interests of that class.

Ask your questioner how many papers there are in New Zealand which are owned and controlled by the workingclass. There is only one newspaper in, the Dominion owned by the workers. There are only two in tho whole country on the side of the workers. Nearly every paper in the Dominion i.s avowedly on the side of its owners, the capitalist class.

Such a clique and such ownership would be impossible under Socialism, for when the workers are no longer exploited of Bd. in every Is. they produce they will be enabled to run more newspapers than any clique of rich and interested men, and thus dispel the ignorance of all the people.

(4) History teaches that deterioration and ultimately destruction invariably follow if a race cease to have internal and external wars. As Socialism promises peace, how do you know that the usual disastrous results will not follow?

History does not teach anything of the sort. History teaches that when comfort develops into luxury, and the growth of wealth in a few hands leads to slavery of the masses, there is bound to be war, which may be from an internal upheaval or from some outside nation not enervated by luxury. Such wars would be stopped by Socialism, but it does not follow at all that when all men arc educated, when all men have the opportunity to invent and develop new resources of life, they will be fewer than they are when such opportunities come to the few. The so-called warfare of cutting throats and blowing out brains is not the only warfare of life. The development of science and the war against the forces of Nature will et.il! go on when men have grown past the "art of murder."

Socialism will not be a crushing down of Individualism, but a means of developing individualism by giving to every individual tJie fullest ehaneo of development. It will, however, crush out individual ownership of the means whereby other individuals must live.

If interna] and external war must eontinus to preserve and bring out the bes* of the race, the teaching of the Prince of Peace is false. The churches

cannot continue lo pray: "Give peace in our time, 0 Lord, for there is none other that lighteth for as, but only Thou. 0 Lord," and also pray over bnttLccdiips and armaments. If there limine other than the Lord lighting for us, there is no need for armies and navies. If there is a need for armies and navies, God is no use. You cannot ha\o it- both ways, Harry. (. r >) If it were not for the three check;? — famine, pestilence and war, the human race would tend to increase so rapidly that the planet would soon be overcrowded. As Socialism would abolish these checks, would not the remedy Ik; worse than the disease? If 'the person who asks such a question were in earnest, and also logical, he would at once advocate more famine, pestilence and war, and if he were genuine would ask that they should be first applied to himself and friends. This is like the teaching about hell, Henry. It is always meant for someone else, never for home consumption. Hell is always for someone else, never for those who profess to believe in such a place, and so with these socalled checks. With larger and better opportunities the increase in the birth-rate falls and often ceases, and the classes' which have greater opportunities do not indulge in sex, as many of the pooler classes do, as almost their only means of pleasure. Sex is one of our animal attributes, but men differ from animals in the fact that, in addition to their appetites, they have also ideas

and ideals. As the ideals grow and have opportunities, the appetites will grow weaker.

A fuller recognition of the fact that sex is one of our animal appetites, proving perhaps more than anything else our animal origin—further that, while the highest physical act in life, it is a purely animal appetite, and that higher developments and greater opportunities on the idealic side will curb and restrain mere appetite by finding nobler pleasures—will prevent that terrible overcrowding which Malthus prophesied, but which is not likely to be realised.

So far in the history of the world, the greater the increase in the popular tion tho greater tho increase in $\e means of life, until to-day wo oftfen hear such foolish terms as over-produc-tion alongside the facts of extreme privation.

It is not likely that' ever the growth of population will exceed the means of life. Tho growth of knowledge, scientific and otherwise, will provide for that, but in any case, it is a poor argument that we must not end famine, pestilence and war for fear our brothers and sisters grow too many upon the earth. To all who profess the Christian belief who also say they believe this, we can only retort, "Oh, ye of 'little faith."'

Many thanks, Henry, for the questions asked you, and which you forward on, but not qnite so many next time, please.