The Wanganui Chronicle. SATURDAY, JANUARY 19,1946. THESE OUR TIMES

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 90, Issue 16, 19 January 1946, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle. SATURDAY, JANUARY 19,1946. THESE OUR TIMES

J7VERY age has its period of crisis, and such crises are never the same. They cannot be, because the world is continually changing. It is, therefore, undesirable to draw unconsidered comparisons between men of a past era and the present time. As characters recede into the past some of them gather a stature not in evidence to the people of their own period. Julius Caesar was prominent in Roman civilisation, but the possibility is that among those who have troubled to inform themselves concerning that Emperor his stature has increased. For a time his importance was so magnified that it became over-large. Then Professor Ferrara, in his magnificent study of the man, reduced him to more human proportions. Caesar was a great general, but he was more of a showman than General MacArthur. Whether Caesar would have done better the task which confronted MacArthur, however, is not arguable, for there is no data to show how either of these men would have fared had he been cast for the other’s role. Oliver Cromwell met in a masterly manner the crisis in the national life of his own time. Had he been confronted with the international problem such as presented itself to Mr. Chamberlain in his dealings with Mussolini and Hitler he might have acted differently from the modern Prime Minister. But would he? It cannot be said for certain that he would have done so. Cromwell weighed well those factors that would aid and those which would hinder him, and was never the man to rush his fences. Cromwell could be as shrewd and calculating as Chamberlain and might have made the same mistakes as Chamberlain did.

After Waterloo the Duke of Wellington dominated the first Peace Conference of Versailles after he had succeeded in the battlefield. There was no personality which could stand equal with him on the world stage of that time. He had the strength and the foresight to see that it would be harmful for the future peace of the world if heavy reparations were to be imposed upon defeated France, and he had the power to impose his will upon the Conference. The strength of Wellington’s personality was great, but it may legitimately be doubted whether it would have been of sufficient avail to carry out the task which one hundred years later confronted Clemenceau. Clemenceau’s purpose as he presided over the last Versailles Conference was, however, far different from that which a Wellington would have kept steadily in view. Lloyd George did have the wider vision and the mqre generous aim. The degree to which he succeeded in modifying the harshness of the Peace Treaty was truly remarkable, and the man who was at his elbow was none other than John Maynard Keynes, now Lord Keynes, who negotiated the Anglo-American loan. It is, nevertheless, idle to speculate as to how Lloyd George would have succeeded at the forthcoming Peace Conference—if one is ever held.

To-day’s problems must be solved by the men of to-day, who are the only men available to do this work. More important, they are the only men suitable for the task. To look back to the great days and to the great personalities of the past may be inspiring, but it is not helpful to do this in order to belittle the men of to-day because they do not cut the same figure in our eyes as do the great personalities of the past. With personalities, as with views, distance often lends enchantment, and for the same reason in each case: distance dissolves or dims the details.

The men who are undertaking the tasks of this generation may be wrong in their approach, they may make many errors, they may be lacking in important personal qualities; but they are conditioned by the age in which they live. They accept its conditions; they are influenced by its outlook. Their mistakes are the mistakes of their own time, for the age conditions the man. To what extent can the chief actors be held responsible for the great decisions that will be made in the next few months? To what extent must everyone be held responsible, down to the least educated mind and meanest spirit in an out-of-the-way village of New Zealand? The corporate responsibility of us all needs to be strongly emphasised, because there is hardly a person nowadays who does not make some contribution to the atmosphere of our own times. Even the easy acceptance of an erroneous view is of great moment: for where one accepts a view others will do likewise. Possibily there is a greater individual consciousness of responsibility to-day than ever before. This is evidenced in several ways, but not the least by the conduct of the many who desire to blame those who strive to serve them best, the public men of the day. These public men are said to be making history. It is possibly nearer to the truth that by their public acts they are merely recording it. . It is not only the Unknown Soldier, but also the Unknown Citizen, who makes essential history. It is the millions of unknown citizens who pay, not for the blunders of their leaders, but for their own shortcomings.