FIRST THINGS FIRST.

Waikato Times, Volume 118, Issue 19631, 18 July 1935, Page 9

FIRST THINGS FIRST.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —I am not greatly surprised that Mr McMillan should not feel disposed to continue further with this discussion. Ho wants all his thinking to be done within a certain measured and historical frame of reference. He has, I think, shown that he is not searching for truth beyond the oonflnes of the already accepted, but rather, having accepted a system and a philosophy derived from certain authorities and law-givers (chiefly of the past), in whom he has placed his faith, hd has no wish to make any discoveries of the intelligence which might cause the light of doubt to fall upon that system and philosophy. Now 1 am not saying this is a state of mind peculiar to LMr McMillan; rather is it almost universal, and none, I think, can claim to be entirely free from Hie limitations placed upon our intelligence through failure to freo ourselves from the past.

1 say that history in all its forms has only a very limited value, and that what is happening in the present cannot be correctly interpreted, understood, or acted upon in the light of the recorded past, whether that record he personal memory or something outside of it, but only by the true exercise of intelligence through detachment, awareness.

Mr McMillan Is to me very much like his opponents in his eagerness to set up authority and belief of the kind he endorses in the face of authority and belief to which he is opposed. If he sets himself to examine any new idea it is from the background of traditional acceptances, and if those acceptances do not supply him with any criterion of the now Idea, then it must he waved aside as a fantasy—perhaps a dangerous fantasy. Systematised thought is thought which labours towards the systematisation and organisation of human affairs as an end in Itself. That is to say, the man who is satisfied ’ that ho has a satisfactory philosophy, creed, faith or system of thought creates a static goal of his thought, towards which he labours and from which he will allow no new consideration to deviate him. Any concrete objective calls for organisation of men as well as materials, and if a social objective is final and inflexible In nature It demands human organisation of similar kind, which means a denial of the freedom of the organised Individual. Hence the ludicrous paradox arises of men trying to establish organisation for the supposed purpose of freeing mankind from tyranny. I speak of organisation In which the individual Is not a freo member, but who is constantly reminded of “loyalty to the organisation." It Is true that men willingly join suoli organisations, and when that is the case organiser and organised are alike misled by fixed ideals.

I think this particularly applies to much of the organising which has been done in the name of Douglasism. Organisation can only be a blessing when based on freedom of the coriiponont members, and organisation is only truly justified when It represents the voluntary co-operation of free individuals. The individual must start to free himself first, and the mind usually works away from freedom 1 When Mr McMillan speaks of utilising the spare resources of this country for the developing of the country for the next 100 years he reveals himself an idealist —a social idealist of the same class as the guiding bankers of the world belong to. The idea is to plan for the community in such a way that they will, out of economio neoessity, always be kept occupied, because “work is salutary.” Why not give men, women and children the opportunity, the freedom as far as possible, to find out for themselves what they really want to do? Does Mr McMillan —like Mr Sykes, it seems —think man is naturally inclined to and give out nothing, unless forced to work for rewards; or that many men are, even if lie himself Is not? And for this reason, must we all have the whip ol necessity behind our backs for the rest of our lives? Not that lam asking for an answer, which we have been told ,in advance not to look for. Yet the very fact that Mr McMillan should commit himself to silence in this way is perhaps a good Indication of the way he ties himself down arbitrarily in a more general sense.—l am, etc.,

R. E. HANSEN, Orlnl, July 16, 1935.