MR SAVAGE ON DEFENCE

Waikato Times, Volume 124, Issue 20785, 21 April 1939, Page 9

MR SAVAGE ON DEFENCE

(To the Editor'* Slr^—lt Is a question what Mr M. i. | Savage could have had in mind when ! he said: “The task of strengthening I New Zealand's defence forces is not 1 a boy’s job but one in which we can all give assistance. ’’ Can our Prime Minister think it has not yet occurred to the people of this country generally what an immense effort must be required to build New Zealand defences up to a point that would have any substantial resistive power against the onslaught of a world war? There are many, no doubt, wbo are determined to make this effort at whatever cost, in preference to the possible substitution of one Power for another, even though it be between race cousins that the struggle for power be fought. But has It occurred to our rulers that there may be perhaps many others at that, who feeF they have no cause worth fighting for In such a struggle, and are definitely not moved to combat? The understanding back of this attitude of standing aloof, which grieves our rulers so, has been admirably defined from one very j>ertlnent angle by Mr R. G. Young In the two very thoughtful letters he has just had published in your columns. Not that I personally absolutely take my stand with Mr Young. Mr Young apparently still pursues an “objective” enemy,’the more elusive power of the credit monopoly, which still requires to be fought in defence of the right! of common man—a fight involving, at least in the initial stages, weapona of a different character, the subtle weapons of political strategy. In thia 1 do not now stand with Mr Young. My point is that the idea of an objective enemy which has to be feared, resisted and overcome by attack, la illusive in its every guise, and further, that it is this very concept of lift which is responsible for both suffering and the cause of suffering——exploitation. Fear of being trodden under goes hand in hand with tho opposite reaction, which is desire for supremacy, and vice versa. This philosophy is the philosophy of everlasting co’nfiict. Nevertheless 1 would like Mr Savage, and Mr Semple too, to deny It If they can), this philosophy of power politics Is the foundation of the State, of central government, of nationalism, patriotism and the war machine, and these monstrosities are in ruthless control over the individual because it is also ths philosophy of the individual. Anyway, for one reason or another it seems certain that there are Increasing numbers who see no sound cause lor participating in war measures. who wish neither to defend nor be defended in the arena of the warmongers, and these are no doubt prominently among those to whom Mr Savage and others representing powerful vested interests, whether political or monetary and economic, address themselves in laying down the law about defence duties. The emphati® assertion, “everyone should be prepared to serve," and such-like, simply smooth the way to an edict at a later date that everyone is to he forced to serve—make no mistake about that! Thus we find that already our rulers deny us the exercise of a free conscience. But there is. of course, no place for conscience in the ruthless expediency of power politics the world over. A man may he shot in wartime for refusing to commit the crime of killing mechanically in cold blood, whereas in a domestic dispute involving a killing in a spirit of selfprotection or self-righteousness the same man can he hanged. Absurd, ia it not? Mr Savage speaks of grave fears of overseas supplies being cut off from New Zealand. This dancer, in mg opinion, arises only because of New Zealand's intention to resist aggressors on behalf of Britain as well as herself. From the point of view of the "other side,” she must therefore be put out of action if possible. Assuredly from our own action® w« auffer I For my own part, I want to be friendly with all peoples—something which becomes impossible as soon as one makes the division, enemies on one side, sllies on the other. You are then equally afraid of both your enemy and your ally, because you know your ally will slay you if you cannot bring yourself to slay your ; enemy—or something pretty near to I that !—I am, etc., j R. E. HANSEN. Beeville. April 19.