WHAT SHOULD WE FIGHT FOR ?
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
[Correspondents are requested to keep their letters as brief as is reasonably possible. The most suitable length is that of one of our " News of the Week" paragraphs. Signed letters are given a preference over those bearing a pseudonym, and the latter must be accompanied by the name and address of the author, which will be treated, as confidential. MI Tit HE SPECTATOR] [To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR] SIR,—Your three correspondents, Mr. Martin Lindsay (on the Reserve), Mr. W. W. Paine, and Mrs. or Miss (possibly, though not probably, Mr.) Gardner-Smith, give me very little to answer. Am I even expected to take them seriously ? For hardly a single point of substance emerges from their total endeavours.
You had set me a very difficult task, to deal in short space with so important a subject, where the answer (as Lord Eustace Percy similarly found) is of necessity a conditional one. I confess that I undertook the task with some trepidation, but to judge from your correspondents I think I must have stated what is a water-tight position, since there is not the beginning of a reply to it in their letters,—nor, alas, equally any evidence that they understand it. I can hardly think that it is I who am so stupid. Nevertheless, it would be impolite to ignore them.
For the benefit of Mr. Lindsay (who, he reminds us, is on the Reserve) : I sPecifically stated in my article that the forces of Fascism are a grave danger not only to Socialism, but .to 'any secure hope of peace. I should have thought that any tool could see that. Does he imagine that Fascism stands for peace, or that its victory is going to lead to peace ? If the greatest danger to peace comes from Fascism, then surely the most sensible thing is to work for its defeat. Not Socialists only would be very glad of the defeat of Fascism,—all friends --of peace must be, since it would be the greatest contribution that could be made to it. Or rather, there is one thing that would be an even greater contribution to peace—the victory of Socialism.
If, as we are convinced, the only hope of a secure foundation for peace is in the triumph of Socialism, it is our duty to defend it and to advance it. Is that not so ? Again, it is not likely that it is I who am so stupid, is it, Mr. Lindsay ? Nor is it inconsistent for the Labour Movement to be unwilling to rally to the support of the existing Government in ease of war. For it is a Government of proved incompetence, and one which has moreover forfeited public confidence by the fraudulence of its election last year. It is much more our duty, if the country is involved in the great crisis of a war, to see that it is at any rate conducted by the ablest Government that the country can produce for the purpose.
Not so Mr. Lindsay ! He is ready to rally to any Govern-
ment—" whatever Government happens to be in office "- presumably even if it is a Government not only of crocks and incompetents, but of crooks and lunatics ! Really, what a silly young man Mr. Lindsay must be : if he is so obtuse as this, I can hardly understand .why he is not already a member of the existing National Government : he seems to qualify for it.
To Mr.. W. W. Paine, with his long and gallant record of work on the anti-Socialist front, I have nothing to reply. He has been misunderstanding the position of Socialists for the past thirty years, and I can hardly complain if he misunderstands mine.
Mrs. (or perhaps Miss) Gardner-Smith is very concerned for the honour of England, the integrity (?) of the Empire, the safety of our trade-routes and even (delicious touch) of our homes, and apparently thinks that I am not. I can . only say that the lady is mistaken. I do not think that • the interests of this country and the interests of the over- whelming collective organisation to secure peace, which I spoke of, are incompatible—if she knows what I mean.
I think that in the existing situation they are the same.
• It is a matter of grief to me that not one of your corre- spondents displays any understanding of the position that is so fundamental in all this—that all hope of peace is bound up with Socialism and. the forces of the Left ; that no hope of peace, but only of continual war, can come from Fascism. It believes in it ; it inculcates it ; it indoctrinates nations and peoples with this most savage and primitive of doctrines. That is why it must at all costs be resisted ; that is why, if only your correspondents had ears to hear, or eyes to see. they might learn the lesson which all the contemporary world teaches, and realise with me that there is no hope of peace outside of Socialism. Why is it that they do not see that ? If they put the question to themselves, they may reflect that it is hardly likely that it is I who am so stupid. I suppose in the course of public activities one becomes inured to human foolery and stupidity in all its forms. For myself, I have already come to expect hardly anything else. I am so used to it. But it would be so pleasant. and I should be so grateful, to be disappointed for once.--Yours sincerely, A. L. RowsE. All Souls College, Oxford.
Previous page
