SOCIALISM AND CAPITALISM.

Northern Advocate, 3 May 1933, Page 8

SOCIALISM AND CAPITALISM.

(To the Editor.)

'Sir, —In his contribution to the ‘ * Advocate” on April 29th, A, Hornet deals with Socialism and other absurdities. In a shbject of this kind, a thing might be an absurdity or a sincere conviction; a great deal depends on one’s point of view* However, it is not my intention to .uphold Socialism, but I would like to say a word or two about '‘Capitalism and its Absurdities.” The laws of a nation give a pretty fair indication of national honour and integrity, but as there never has been such a thing as a perfect nation there never has been a system, of national law that might be considered perfect. Fortunately for humanity, the Creator introduced a system of law that not only leads to perfect justice but compels' perfect justice. If it were, not for economic pressure, civilisation would have been destroyed time after time by selfishness. The very foundation of economic law; is that all things must serve humanity. This applies to everything about us, from a most trifling possession to a gigantic business enterprise. If the prosperity of the age, duo to improved methods of production, is allowed to reach humanity, capitalism will be wiped clean out of existence. If A. Hornet can prove that this statenifent is incorrect I invite him to do so. Every Government in the Englishspeaking world, as well as other nations, are exerting themselves to the utmost, not to serve humanity, but to

abstract prosperity and uphold exploitation. Will A. Hornet explain the difference between the existing Government of New Zealand and the Chicago* .gangster? Of course, there is one nutstandling difference: the gangster is. riot protected by law. The irresistible force of God’s perfect justice moves very very slowly, so slowly that it sometimes appears never to move at all—b ut it never falters. Capitalism, which is the acknowledged Lord of Lordbs and King of Kings, the greatest mon/arch tins world has ever known, andl the greatest tyrant, can offer just abo’ut as much resistance as a windblown cobweb. It is already feeling bh*; strain of that unrelenting pressure ’and, as time goes on, it will be torn to -shreds and left behind. A. Hornet criticises Shaw a little more freely than he might if the old man were here to reply. I wonder if he will debate this -question through the press. I notioe that he writes with the free stylei of an experienced, journalist, and 7l am conscious of the fact that I am just as far out of his class as he might be behind Shaw. contention, is