The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 1931. THE KEY OF THE NEW EUROPE.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIV, Issue 18823, 11 March 1931, Page 8

The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 1931. THE KEY OF THE NEW EUROPE.

Not very much has been said in Germany on the question of the pew naval agreement concluded between Britain, France and Italy, but this apparent unconcern may be explained by the fact that for the moment, the leading political parties in Berlin are more, interested in other international problems. Land armaments in relation to the Treaty of Peace, and the menacing strength of the French army concerns Germany more than all the naval problems of the world. Doubtless it is rather hard for foreigners to realise that for the past six _ years the spirit of “defeatism ’ has been gradually passing away in Germany. The country inherently virile, is described as seeking to reassert its national personality. There is a longing, if not for a “place in the sun” at least for a place above ground. Air Kenneth L. Macassev, writing in The Sunday Times made these interesting observations on the existing situation in Germany and the aspirations of the great mass of the people: "The process in inevitable, and was clearly visible in France after 1870.

"It is the desire of a nation to regain her normal level. It is a seeking after national self-respect, and patriotism need not be synonymous with jingoism.

"The greatest disservice that can be done to the cause of European peace is for foreigners to portray the whole of Germany as imbued with the spirit of 1914.

“In this connection foreign statesmen might well copy Bismarck himself, who made every effort to restore French self-respect after 1870, conscious as he was of the fact that nothing is more dangerous to the peace of Europe than a nation labouring under an inferiority complex.

"To these sentiments is due the great increase in the National-Socialist vote. Their criticisms of governmental incompetence stimulated the hope that they themselves might be able to do better.

“Their policy of ‘a revival of the German soul’ fitted in exactly with the prevailing mood in Germany. “The majority of the Hitler supporters do not, however, endorse his policy as a whole —if, indeed, a series of public tirades necessary to spoonfeed the small band of original German Fascists can in any sense be called a policy.

“The revived German soul will call not for a tin hat and a bayonet, but for lower taxation and competent administration.

termany’s attitude to tlie recent .egotiations between Britain, taly and France, ought to be, iewed in the liglit ot tiie ;enerally accepted verdict of Dr iduard Benes that “what lappens in Germany within the text few months will decide the ourse of European politics for •ears to come.” Dr Benes sees iermany, geographically in the entre of the continent, as the >olitical and economic hub of Europe. lie notes that in that :ountry seven million voters not 10 long ago tried to put into lower the Hitler movement, vhich promised to tear up the re a tics that are the basis of European settlement and the foundation of the League of Nations. It would be easy, of ;ourse, to exaggerate the seriousness of the situation in Germany, iut the fact remains that the iomestic events, in the new Republic are significant in that they represent the expression of general uneasiness in Europe. In almost every country, _ the economic stresses of the times which have embarrassed the various governments, have fortified the discontented elements, and it is because some of the movements may have a wider scope than the limits of a single country that the statesmen of other countries must watch them carefully to see that the stability of the general international settlement is not endangered. “Because no nation can live by itself,” declared The Saturday Revieiv recently. “The governments of every country must consider always "the reaction of their policy upon their neighbours. If they remember that, our present problems will be more easily solved.” Germany however, has reason to know that the nations do not remember that, and it is this knowledge borne of years of post-war experience, that makes 1931 the “Year of Revision” in Germany. Moreover, the campaign for drastic revision of the Treaty of Versailles and the other post-war settlements has made such an appeal to all sections of the community that political observers outside Germany are I very much perturbed. applying the yardstick OF PROMISES. During the emergency session of Parliament which commences today, a little welcome diversion might be introduced by attempting” a definite assessment of the performances of the United Party by applying the yardstick of promises. The other day, a Christchurch Liberal journal amused itself by recounting the catch cries and slogans that had been utilised by parties and organisations within recent years to attract public attention and ■favour. Strangely enough, no

mention was made of the hollow shams expressed in slogans and catch cries the United Party paraded at the last general election to attract votes. The sins of the United Party were all the more heinous because the leaders in the campaign of fooling the people know quite well that there was not the remotest chance of one-tenth of their long list of extravagant promises being translated into performance. It would be interesting, however, if the Hon. Robert Masters, who was campaign chairman of the United Party’s election operations, could be persuaded to recite for the edification and education of the Houses of Legislature and the disillusioned electors, some of the electioneering propaganda that he poured upon the constituencies during the general election campaign. It might be mentioned, too, that if the electors who were caught by the United Party bait, are feeling sorry for themselves, Mr Masters has at least the satisfactidn of realising that the United Party so fully recognised the success he made of the bluff campaign, that the chairman of the United Party’s political organisation was rewarded by being elevated to the Legislative Council 1 Many electors in the rural districts will remember how explicit and how fulsome were the promises to come to to their assistance which were broadcasted throughout the country by Mr Masters and his candidates. Explaining the main plank of the United Party’s policy Mr Masters said:

“The amount proposed to be raised namely £60,000,000, will be spread over eight to ten years, and Is for the purpose of lending out to farmers and workers.

“It is a policy that realises the immediate needs of the farmer of the Dominion, and the Party is prepared to give them relief and knows how to do it, without any cost direct or indirect to the community as taxpayers.

“With a clear and definite policy of providing £60,000,000 over the period stated, a farmer will be enabled to secure his finances on application, at 42 per cent, with 1 per cent, sinking fund for a term of 321 years.

“There is £400,000,000 a year fresh moneys in England seeking investment, and a loan on the conditions set out above is attractive to investors provided the confidence is there in the men handling the position.

And so on. Applying the acid test chosen by Mr Masters himself, it is only too clear that the confidence of the English investors in the “men handling the position” was so lacking that the great borrowing bubble of the United Party burst before the Party had been on the treasury benches many days! Air Masters pointed out in his most alluring vote-catching style that “we all know that the dread of the farmer to-day is not only the high rate of interest charges, but the fear of not being able to renew his mortgage when it becomes due.” The United Party, bubbling over with intense sympathy and overshadowing everyone else in finance wizardy, saw no difficulty whatever in chasing away such fears. Indeed, Mr Masters mentioned quite casually:

“That the £60,000,000 loaned to farmers will have the effect of releasing the £60,000,000 paid off the existing mortgages which will be on the market for development in any direction it may be required.” It was all so easy for Air Alasters and his fellow propagandists. All the world needed was to be told that the United Party was in office and millions upon millions would flow into the country. We do not know if any of the sorely-disappointed rural electors who voted so trustingly for the United Party, have noticed sixty idle millions floating round the country searching to be used in any direction it- may be desired, but we do know that Air Alasters easily caught votes by telling the electors that “the loan will provide that which is most urgently needed in the Dominion at the moment, namely, assured finance for farmers at a low scale of interest on the amortization principle.” And now we find the very Party that promised “cheap money for workers and farmers”; “low scales of interest,” with “no additional taxation direct or indirect,” actually competing on tliq local money market (and offering the high rate of 5£ per cent) with the farmer and everyone requiring money for developmental purposes; piling up taxation at every move! Is it any wonder, having regard to all the circumstances, that friends of the United Party are now advocating fusion, in the hopq of saving the Party of extravagant promises and ” threadbare performances, from the ignominy and humiliation of answering for its multitude of sins of omission and commission, at the judgment bar of a general election?