LABOURITES AND DOUGLAS.

Waikato Times, Volume 113, Issue 18944, 15 May 1933, Page 9

LABOURITES AND DOUGLAS.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —My John Sykes tells me I was wholly mistaken in my inference of a certain line of reasoning on his part in his writing of the letter appearing under the heading of "Monkhouse in Russia." Th e n possibly I was mistaken. However, it seems a puzzle why Mr Sykes should have been prompted to take up the oudgels on behalf of Russia's Communist plan to the extent of quoting at considerable length from the views of Mr Monkhouse, an engineer, and Mr Gibson Jarvie, a capitalist banker, on the success of Russia's Industrial and otherwise developmental undertakings, adding thereto his own enthusiastic comments. It might, of course, be suggested that Mr Sykes was moved purely by a sense of fairness and the impersonal desire to see justice done. I have myself, in the past, written on matters closely touching India, with such motive, but what I then wrote, however true, I would not now regard'as “practical beoause I see a deeper cause, worlu-wide in its ramifications —what is known as "sound finance" —behind / India’s misery and unrest; and I realise that the thing to do is to set India a good example, if possible, by working for the replacement of “sound flnanoe" with Douglas Social Credit in our own insufferably oppressed country. But, referring again to Mr Sykes’ letter on Russia, I cannot yet see why, in the absence of the "line of reasoning" I suggested, he should have written it if it had to him "no application to anything that may be considered practical politics," especially in view of the following statement In his last letter: “I will not discuss or argue about Communism or Douglas Social Credit, because neither seem to me within the bounds of practical politics.” Incidentally, does not Mr Sykes' opinion that Douglas Soolal Credit is not within the bounds of “practical politics" reveal a remarkably poor opinion of the general significance of the movement? If not, then how comes it that he does not regard as an urgent oall the need to disprove the Douglas analysis and expose the fallacies (if any) of the social credit proposals? In this way, surely, Labour could best ensuro wholehearted support at the next election. Douglasism, far from being a class movement, attracts equally from all ranks because its fundamental appeal is to sound sense ancl reason and to the latent spirit of communal unity and brotherhoo.d. So that the Douglas movement of Now Zealand cannot afford to allow itself to be loosely identified in the eyes of the genera] public with any political movement or party which manifests, or, worse still, trades upon, class consciousness. It would appear to ho its representation of class consciousness which the Labour Party, in common with opposition parties, relies upon, and has relied upon, for the securing of a majority vote at the polls, and which would account for its reticence as regards the official adoption of a Douglas Social Credit platform, which, while admittedly not as yet popular everywhere, would certainly bridge over all class’ antagonisms, because every olass (except credit monopolists, few in number) would stand to gain, in a most desirable way,.and no class would stand to lose. As I interpret it, there Is no desire on the part of Douglasites to attack Labour, but rather to direct upon it the searchlight of scrutiny so that each movement may know precisely where It stands in relation to the other.

Probably more Douglasites 'look to Labour for nation-saving political action than to all other politicial factions collectively. Therefore, in this respect Labourites ’ may regard the uncomfortable scrutiny and analysis to which they are being subjected as a tentative encouragement and a compliment. There is another point, too: By preserving detachment between our movement and Labour we are in a better position to see just to what extent they are in sympathy with our objective and methods, and If they prove susceptible we can the better educate Labourites in the science or sound economics. We should be able to do that because, essentially, Douglasites are economists, whereas Labourites are politicians, subject to all the dlstraotions of vote-catohing. It seems to have become a special plea of Labour that something must be done very speedily to save the situation in New’ Zealand, and that, therefore, the Douglas people should give unconditionally of their united support to enable Labour to carry out its policy as It stands, forgetting or sinking in the meantime their differences. For Douglas advocates to succumb to such a plea would be fatal, as It would mean putting asido their own better judgment. Have we not been trying long enough to build on rotten foundations in the name of “expediency" (and always with sadly mocking results) that we should once more yield to a spirit of stampede? I trust not. But, as a body of Douglas advocates, let us be ready to give Labour full support Just so soon as Labour manifests due appreciation of Douglas Social Credit, and is prepared to adopt Douglasism politically. If that does not come about we will probably he eventually obliged to put up our own political candidates. In the meantime it will surely be best for Labour to go its way—and geftd luck to it!—while wc press steadfastly forward on our way of reasoning penetration.—l am, etc., R. E. HANSEN. Orini, May 11, 1933.

[We have devoted, and in view of the Interest manifested are willing to continue to devote, considerable space to the discussion on Douglas Credit, but we must ask our correspondents to curtail their contributions to say, 500 words. Some letters extend to an inordinate length.—Ed. W.T.] (To the Editor.) Sir, 1 would suggest to Messrs Sykes, Magnet’ and Hansen that they lake Mr Allardycc's (Douglas Social Credit lecturer) advice and refrain from entering into antagonistic controversies in .the columns of the Press re Labour and Douglasism, and to hear in mind that their objective is the same— namely, to have the monetary svstem now in vogue altered. ‘ i would also remind every man and woman in this Dominion that it. is within their individual power to help to eject the enemy "Depression." which has now entered nearly every home

and business in this country, by associating themselves directly with tho Douglas Social Credit movement or any other organisation with the same objective.—l am, etc., UNITY. Hamilton, May 11, 1933.