Life at Its Best

Waipa Post, Volume 44, Issue 3195, 25 June 1932, Page 1 (Supplement)

Life at Its Best

I MATERIAL THINGS ARE AT BEST ONLY j I CONTRIBUTORY I j CAN HAPPINESS BECOME UNIVERSAL ? j j i_ ! I AN IDEAL FOR ALL MODERN AND UNIFIED j ! ENDEAVOUR. j

Richness of life is not synonymous with, abundance of riches. That " a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth." is an affirmation capable of wide extension. Wealth and status may, of course, be made to contribute to life's fullness. The Prince of Wales, for instance, must have an incalculable store of recollections born of his experiences of travel and of people, memories of participation in spectacular events destined to become historic. Never before can it have been given to any mortal to touch life at so many points, each point at its highest and best. By contrast with such exhilaration the days of ordinary mortals seem drab, for life's impoverishment relates not merely to physical necessities. There may also be a lack of that mental enlightenment and spiritual uplift which can transform the most humdrum life into a thrilling adventure. Frequently in the course of history some noble souls have asked why life at its best should not be possible for everybody. A few of them have sought to show how it might be so, and have been laughed at as crazy; One at least was put to death on a cross. Doubtless there are many obstacles, but these are not always material; much more obstructive is the human factor. There is a familiar type of individual who loves to describe himself as shrewd and practical. He smiles at such phrases and assumes what he hopes will be taken for a hard-headed look. He has no time for the visionary; all he asks is that the idealist will keep out of the industrial arena and leave business matters to common-sense business men—like him.

The type is steadily diminishing, but although specimens are few they constitute a menace to the enlightened, honourable business community. Industrial history attests the growth of the social conscience. The ameliorative movement, associated with the name of Shaftesbury, on behalf of "the dumb victims of a blind industrialism,." was stubbornly opposed by persons who made no attempt to deny the truth 'of the earl's appalling revelations, but whose answer was that such things were no concern of his. Earl Shaftesbury insisted that they were, and present-day society has assumed a large share of his sense of concern. The two attitudes still survive; bjoth have been apparent in the course of the antisweating campaign still being maintained. Those who would fain secure further instalments of the best in life for those whose lot is hard have encountered resistance and indifference. Some quite good people doubt whether the sweating evil exists, and, if it does, the outcry they are certain Is exaggerated. They reason that people may not expect to be paid more than an industry can afford; victims of the system should reflect that their alternative might be no wages at all; individuals have assigned to them their lot in life, and with that lot they should be content: " God's in ffis heaven—All's right with the world," even that industrial world in which men, women, and children aa*e sweated and degraded for other people's profitThat is the kind of philosophy which would make life at its best for everybody a hopeless impossibility. As a nation we are in the grip of world forces that threaten to overwhelm us. Despite these things there is no slackening of the obligation resting on those who are fortunate to help those less favoured to attain to what is truly best in life. The invariable practice is to discuss the theme in terms of material things, and admittedly the material is basic. But, after all, only a comparatively small measure of it is needed as a jumping-off place to life's higher levels. In countless instances the poet and artist, preacher and philosopher have in their own careers demonstrated that the soul's vision may be broad although life's resources may be narrow. The immediate objective of those who seek to eradicate sweating and associated evils is to ensure economic justice and some degree of social decency. But the ultimate goal of it all is a better life, the best possible life for everybody. The humblest have a right to it. Even if some proved unworthy all are entitled to their opportunity; and the proportion of failures in the ranks of the obscure toilers would probably not be greater than might be found among those who secretly flatter themselves they are intellectually and spiritually superior. Life's best is certainly not material success. It is daily possible to see such success making men and women unconsciously gross. The best things pertain to the spirit and to the mind. Hosts of humble, obscure men and women are conscious of intense longings to learn of and to participate in the transcendental elements of life. To many of them the noblest forms of literature, music, art are hidden mysteries. Why should they be ? Once in a while it is desirable to survey our own lives and the lives of others apart from the ever-obtrusive

economic factor, i Sir George Paish, the eminent economist, observes that " the Creator has endowed the world with wealth immeasurable; there is plenty for everyone, yet two-thirds of the world's population live below the poverty line." Correspondingly anomalous conditions prevail in other spheres of the human experience. There is similar impoverishment of the mind, the emotions, and the higher aspirations in the presence of limitless satisfactions. Millions are not enjoying that life at its best which is available for them. The problem is not one to be solved by political or economic "isms"; the supreme need is the human touch, as the Prince of Wales pointed out in his "Appeal to Youth." Individual efforts to impart that touch are to be found in every community, and in the increase of such efforts lies the greatest hope of our social-economic safety and of a maximum area of human happiness. That the exercise of the spirit of considerateness cancels all prospect of success in business is a sordid maxim triumphantly discovered by the object lessons associated with the names of such large-scale employers as Cadbury, Lever, Rowntree, Ford, and Golden-Rule Nash. These and others equally wise have sought, as far as it is possible within an employer's scope, to make accessible to those who serve them some at least of the things which contribute to life at its best. Those to whom such privileges come are under obligation to make some reciprocal contribution. A persistent indictment of modern democracy is that, in many vital respects, it has failed to rise to the height of its opportunities. To try to make fife at its best possible for everybody is a fresh opportunity, a fresh challenge. Since all that is really and permanently best in life can be enjoyed by , each without consequent deprivation to any other, there would appear to be no reason why all sections and all classes should not agree to share that best together.