FACING REALITIES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22212, 15 March 1934, Page 15

FACING REALITIES

TO THE EDITOR

Sir, —Two correspondents have taken exception to our letter. "M. M'C. B.'s" letter really bears out our contention, for he says, " The reiteration of the cry wo alone have disarmed—now it is the turn of other nations —never has led to a reduction in armaments and never will." That is exactly our point. Thersfore we said that those who advocate complete disarmament as an example to other nations are not facing realities. His second point is that nationalisation does not always protect the individual—it often engenders fear, etc., and leads to war. That is our point also—therefore we said " pride in the nation exists and always has existed—it is a reality which must be taken into account." Thus " M. M'C. B." has shown, as did we, that these realities unfortunately do exist, so Ave l-epeat that it is wiser to take account of them and face them rather than behave as if they were non-existent. T. E. Williamson's letter also rather confirms than disproves what we said—except that he accuses us of cheap sneers at Pacifisists—an accusation which is not supported by one word in our letter. His letter confirms ours because, firstly, lie points out certain realities which exist, and which we argue must be faced; secondly, because he is a good example of the type (to whom we referred) who has no good word to say about his ov/n country and who seems to think "we are never right and the other chap always is." He also puts the case of A, B, and C on a desert island, the result of their transactions was that A knocks B on the head. Exactly so —it is the same-in the world to-day, so let us, face realities. He suggests that we blame Japan or someone else —we have blamed no one—but we have no time for the man who always runs down his own country. We cannot, however, refrain from suggesting- some inconsistency in his line of reasoning. He points to the condition of our unemployed, and yet he suggests that we cannot blame Japan for underselling us, but he blames Britain and New Zealand for banning her goods. Perhaps he will explain how we can ever hope to regain a better standard of living if we admit goods produced by workers for less than one-tenth of the wages recognised as a living wage in England, who is the chief customer for our produce.—We are, etc., N.Z. Welfare League. Wellington, March 9.

TO THE EDITOB. Sib, —Ab a lover of our (treat British Empire I cannot allow a letter by T. E. Williamson, which appeared in your issue of March 3, pass by without comment. Since when has our great Empire become on the wane? I B she not the one Power that is coming through the preseut crisis almost scathiess, whilst the rest of chaotic Europe is being torn asunder with deciet, corruption, and Godlessness? Would it not be better for those disgruntled residents in our Empire, instead of talking of its disintegration, to do something that will unite it more strongly than ever, and thus bring about the unification of the world? _ Not till then will our swords be beaten into pruning hooks. I was always a staunch supporter of Lord Roberts, who was a thorough Christian as well as a.soldier, and his slogan was always "'Be prepared," but to-day we are listening too much to the enemy within our gates who is always crying "Peace! Peace!" when there is no peace, and would have us disarm to the last rifle. In your London.

correspondent's report, published on the sth, we read how the authorities in Germany have disbanded the Boy Scouts' Movement only to replace it by military units, with the object in view of providing future well-trained soldiers. Yet we must disarm! Why, if we were of that jelly-fish nature your correspondent would have us to be, we would have been relegated to the Arctic regions he writes about long ago, or to that other place noted for its extreme heat. But Britishers are not built that way. We have a standing that is admired by many throughout the world, whilst others regard us with jealousy and bitter hatred. Were your correspondent living in Russia and advocated his policy there he would not enjoy the consequences. Anyone would imagine by the tone of his letter that Britain was responsible for the whole of the financial muddle throughout the world to-day. It is admitted she has made mistakes in the past, but when compared with the shortcomings of other nations she comes out miles ahead. It would be well if your correspondent read Stanley Baldwin's broadcast on dictatorships. It would perhaps help him to change his < outlook on life. There are many Americans and others, too, at the present time seeking to make their homes in England, to that they can rear their families in a purer political atmosphere than they can get in their own countries. Is that a sign of Britain being on the wane? In conclusion, I would just like to repeat what Archbishop Redwood said the other day: " Fear God and houour the King." This is the crux of the whole situation; no matter what our religion is, if we have that sentiment implanted within us, both individually and nationally, we will eventually overcome all difficulties. —I am? etc., Israel.