The Younger Point of View
" Seniors " and " Juniors " at Westminster , [This is another article giving expression to "The Younger Point Of View," "and- providing an opportunity for our younger readers .-to express their views, which are not necessarily. those of the Spec/a/01%—En. Spectator.] T DO not know how many Members of the House of -I- Commons are over, and how many are under, fifty years of age.- Certainly, however, the " Seniors " have an enormous majority. They lead all three of the parties; they Sit in serried ranks upon the back benches. Natur- ally, their weight and influence, their characteristic point of view, are felt in all the .proceedings of the House, no matter what party happens to be in power: Yet, scattered about those weary green benches there are, here. and there, a few whose hair is neither wholly grey nor wholly absent. They look uncomfortable; more especially do they seem disturbed when some reverend "Senior" froth their own 'front bench is weightily pro- nouncing their party's policy.. When the opposing "big euri' is in action they : seem happier again. They have no responsibility for What he may be saying; they are free to imply, and occasionally even to express, their extreme disagreement ; but when their o*n Leaders are speaking their discomfort is palpable Sometimes— or is it only imagination ?-one may -catch a glance of -Win-pithy and comprehension cast across the floor of the House between them. It iinot,.of course, that they would agree. They- -just as strong Conservatives, Liberals and Socialistsas their elders. It is rather that they would agree about what to disagree about. Their situation is certainly unfortunate. For' they have nO illusions as to their present power or influence. They-know quite well that the old men (a the " Juniors" iallthefo) Erë'fi ilylnthé saddle '.'" Not only have the old that possession of all the key places of power, which is nine-tenths a law-making as well as of the law. In addition, the "Seniors-" are naturally, and inevitably, more efficient politicians than the "Juniors." It is not- merely that they have much greater experience and' practice. It is, above all, that they have an absolutely settled and steady point of view on fundamentals. How- ever much Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Lloyd George, Mr. Snowden, Mr. Winston Churchill, and Mr. MacDonald may. dis, agree about particular measures, there is a large mass of common assumptions behind all their thinking and behind all their action—common assumptions which they have never questioned, and will never question. They differ, it has been well said, "only in opinion." In that larger, more important region of being, in their own unconscious selves, they are in broad agreement. The strength which this great body of settled, unconscious, and therefore, unshakable conviction gives to the " Seniors " cannot be exaggerated.
Logic is always on the side of what is. Nothing but the super-logical, creative intelligence ever made anything new ; but to be superlogical or, as it certainly seems to opponents, to be just plainly illogical, is to be very weak in. argument. And that is the position of the " Juniors," Nor must it be forgotten how junior the " Juniors " are. In all parties there is a painful lack of men in the 'forties. They are mostly dead, or shattered. The "Juniors" are essentially Post-War. That is to say, they came to Manhood either during or after the War. They escaped, therefore, the basic assumptions of the pre-War world. But as yet they have no new assumptions to put in their place, or rather, they have them, but they are not yet sufficiently strong. Above all, they are not suffi- ciently unconscious. They are still opinions rather than assumptions—things still in the doubtful, debatable region of opinion, not firm, rock-like certainties which can be built on. If it were not so, if the "Juniors" could achieve a common body of tacit assumption, they would probably even now. prevail. For, after all, this is the post-War world, and pre-War attitudes of mind, however strong, unquestioned, and, therefore, useable and efficient, simply do not fit the objective realities of to-day. The whole economic and political super-structure which our elder statesmen have reared on these pre-War funda- mental assumptions of theirs is continually clashing with the world as it is to-day.
From this whole situation arises the tragedy of our present position. Our elders, who alone have power, who alone are efficient for action because they know their own minds upon the fundamentals, are hopelessly out of touch with the present day, and can never .adjust them- selves to the new world which has come into being without their knowledge or consent. Hence, while they lead, the nation can do no more than flounder blindly, trusting to a luck, which is slow in coming. On the other hand, the " Juniors ' neither have the levers of power in their hands, nor, in all probability, could they is yet use them even if they had, since they lack, the basic unconscious certainties of mind which alone make effective action possible. Yet, they alone have any grasp of the real pro- blems which beset us lo-day, they alone are in any way attuned to twentieth century reality.
What is the solution ? There is none, except a gradual one. The " Juniors " must grow up ; that is all. The process is a hundred times more difficult than it was for our parents' generation. A hundred things which they could take on trust we must first question and deny, and then work out new principles in substitution. Above all, the nation lacks a bridging generation, who would be middle-aged to-day, who could interpret " Seniors " to "Juniors," and " Juniors " to " Seniors,"--2-who could lead the nation steadily forward by gradual modification to a form of society compatible with the world situation to-day. Lacking them, we must do the best we can. But the passage bids fair to be rough.
Jon -STRAOI.EIC
Previous page
