PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 126, Issue 21039, 15 February 1940, Page 9

PUBLIC OPINION

As expressed by correspondents whose letters are welcome, but for whose views we have no responsibility. Correspondents are requested to write in ink. It is essential that anonymous writers enclose their proper names as a guarantee of good faith. Unless thi3 rule is complied with, their letters will not appear. SHEEP FARMERS’ HIGH COSTS (To the Editor) Sir, —Looking through my returns for this season’s wool clip from my small flock of 660 sheep, I find the costs extremely high in comparison with the price paid for the wool. The flock is within five miles of the railway station, and the following figures may be of interest to some of your readers:—Woolpacks, £3 15s; shearing, £9; shed hands, £4 4s; freight and cartage, £9 6s 3d; insurance, 7s 8d; Government Retention Contingency Fund, £ll 8s 6d; wool levy. 7s 6d; binning and pooling 980 lbs wool, £2 0s lOd; total, £39 19s 9d. The amount realised for the 4846 lbs of wool was £228 9s sd. Taking the expenses £39 19s 9d from this figure leaves £IBB 9s Bd. I have just recently been trying to procure 30 cwt of barbed wire, and am told there is no chance of being able to do so, and the little that is available is in the vicinity of £SO a ton. I understand the reason for this shortage is on account of the Government import restriction imposed before the war began, the stocks being so low that the supply was soon exhausted. How can the farmer be expected to carry on under these adverse conditions?—l am, etc.. PARALYZED. Hamilton, February 14. SUPPRESSION AND AGGRESSION (To the Editor) Sir,—Hyde Park, London, is the safety valve of the British Empire. Opinions are expressed freely, and no attempt is made on the part of the Government to suppress any particular party or group. Here there is a sub-principle involved; it is termed the ‘‘frustration-aggression hypothesis,” or in other words, it simply amounts to this—suppression determines aggression. All dictators are aggressive, for the very obvious reason that they themselves are but a product of a series of past frustrations and suppressions. Hence the frustrated organism becomes aggressive toward the source of the frustration. Consequently, expression determines love, loyalty and self-sacrifice; suppression determines the opposite—hatred, violence and destruction. We now come to in-group "frustra-tion-aggression,” meaning strife I among the units which comprise the nation as a whole. Very briefly, “the frustration-aggression hypothesis simply amounts to this—many forms of aggression can be traced direct to its opposite, some form of frustration, which means, in other words, the thwarting of the individual. Let us be under no illusion that j frustration determines aggression. It follows, then, that the more intense the frustration the greater the aggression. Socialism and Communism frustrate individual effort and social adjustments between groups. Hence Socialism in the long run, is doomed to failure, because its frustrative tactics determine discord, conflict and aggression.—I am, etc., HARRY WOODRUFFE. Auckland, February 13. COMPULSORY SERVICE (To the Editor) Sir, —It is peculiar in these times of change and conflict how altered circumstances will cause a direct change of front in the minds of men who, on account of their intelligence and stability, have been elected to control the affairs of the masses. It is even more peculiar that, in a time of war, that stability which so strongly characterised these men during the peace years, should absolutely go by the board and leave the elected representatives giving voice to rather puerile opinions on matters of which they have little knowledge and which do not altogether concern them. The most notable examples of such a failing in recent weeks are found at the meetings of many local bodies where grey-bearded sages have taken it upon themselves to argue the pros and cons of the conscription issue, and, in many instances, to advocate the system of compulsory service. Here are these men, who formerly criticised the Government for any form of compulsion or restriction, switching directly round and asking for one of the strongest possible examples of compulsion. Surely their actions can be construed as little less than a form of hypocrisy and meddling born of a feeling of uncertainty for the future. Another aspect of the matter which forcibly strikes a young man is that many of these men who are in the forefront to urge us to fight for our country have never done so themselves. With the Boer War early in the present century and then the Great War a few years later they had two chances to serve the country for which they now (being well beyond military age) express such an ardent love. However, at that time many did not see fit to avail themselves of the opportunity. When tackled on these lines one elderly critic of the existing recruiting system stated that at the outbreak of the Boer War he had a wife and young family, and during the Great War he was above military age. When told that he still had the chance to serve his country, by living on a soldier’s pay and devoting the remainder of his income to war purposes, he exhibited a surprising lack of devotion to his country and its needs. It seems to be the same all along the line, and the best advice a young man can give to these local body Solomons is for them to attend to their roads, bridges, rates and taxes and other matters which come directly within their sphere of activity, and to leave war prosecution to men able to understand and handle it.—l am, etc., ELIGIBLE. Hamilton, February 13.