THE COMMUNIST-FASCIST MENACE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23202, 28 May 1937, Page 6

THE COMMUNIST-FASCIST MENACE

ro THE EDITOR

Sir,-—The readiness of Miss Gow to debate this matter is in marked contrast with the wary attitude of those among us who are notorious for their pro-Communist leanings. When it is a matter of condemning that Communist product, Fascism, these people are both vociferous and industrious, but justification of the fallacies inherent in the Socialist and Communist attack on capitalism as the root cause of the world's economic troubles do not similarly attract its professed believers. May I suggest at the outset that Miss Gow obtain an elementary text-book on social credit, and thus learn what it really is? Her version of it in her letter displays a lack of reliable information on the proposal she criticises. Did Marx at any time show that there was a fault in the accountancy methods of industry which, irrespective of ownership or profit, makes it impossible for a sufficient money to be distributed in industry to purchase the product thereof? No, Marx did nothing of the sort, otherwise his attack on capitalism would never have been made. It is only the Socialist or Communist-obsessed mind which can solemnly state that "' surplus' products are destroyed and production restricted in the interests of profit"! A little calm thinking will show that capitalists do not destroy the product for which they have paid Wages and costs, and that profit is to be made in greater abundance by selling it to the people. It is because the people cannot be given sufficient money to purchase their own manufactures that the so-called " surplus " value appears, and not because the owners of productions wilfully withhold it or because of profits being made. Such a contention was made some years ago by a wellknown Communist, now an ornament of the Reserve Bank, who seriously stated that the boss pocketed the surplus value after denying the worker a wage equal to the total price of the article! How the owner of industry can " pocket" it—that is. in money (as the physical wealth would be useless to him until it was turned into money)—is not disclosed. It was left to Major Douglas, of social credit fame to demonstrate where the fault lies, and he did so by proving absolutelv that, without regard to ownership or profit, the wages, salary, or dividends paid out in respect of any article cannot possibly, under the present accountancy methods, be equal to the price of the article. As long as this position arises there must arise a socalled " surplus" value, which the Communist falsely persists in claiming as the fault of the capitalist system.

This point is stressed because it is the crux of the whole matter. If the A plus B theorem of Major Douglas is correct, then the whole Socialist and Communist case collapses. With the collapse of the Communist case goes fhe therat against capitalism, and with the removal of the violent Communist threat the defensive violence of Fascism will cease to exist. We can only attack Fascism, in an intelligent manner, by showing that it is not capitalism which is at fault. This can only be done by use of the analysis of Major Douglas, wherein the real fault is disclosed and its remedy outlined There need be no violent interference with private properly or industrial

ownership. I trust Miss Gow will realise that it is this point which proves the matter one way or the other, and that concentration on it is essential. — I am, etc., E. W. Flint. May 26.

TO THE EDITOR Sir, —As your correspondent " W. H." does not seem to be intent on other than mud-slinging, I shall not take up space at this stage except to remind him that I have not said that I am not " fully conversant" with the Douglas proposals. What I did say in answer to Mr Begg was that I did not claim or pretend to " very great technical qualifications is expounding social credit"—an entirely different thing altogether. But to one whoso evident desire is to disparage rather than debate, a mere matter of misquotation or misrepresentation is neither here nor there. I still decline to claim " technical" ability in expounding social credit as I am more concerned with placing that proposal before the public in a strictly non-technical way. I am more concerned to write or speak in the language of the ordinary man in the street so that he may easily grasp what is meant. There are others who would be only too pleased if the proposals of Major Douglas were wrapped up always in a mass of technical terms. In that way it would be much harder to get the ordinary man interested. It seems to me poor policy to play the game of the avowed enemies of social credit by making that reform appear a very complicated matter. It is a great pity that "W. H.' did not manage to insert at least one sentence in his letter showing that the Socialist and Communist analysis of the economic troubles of the modern world and their attack on capitalism are in accordance with anything else than the emotionalism and half-truths which that school take as fact.—l am, etc., E. W. Flint. May 27.