Salient: An Organ of Student Opinion at Victoria College, Wellington, N.Z. Vol. 11, No. 10, August 18th, 1948

Socialists — Democracy Christians — Literati

Socialists — Democracy Christians — Literati

With Scotney, with the SCM, with the Lit. Soc—the College's left wing has been busy since our last issue. These reports show that the Soc. Club is no less voluble than it was when Victoria was full of Rampant Reds.

And Never the Twain Shall Meet

Democracy means basically the same thing all over the world. It means the fullest possible participation by the people in their own government. The difference between Democracy in Eastern Europe and Democracy in the Great West is chiefly that in the latter it remains a matter of theory. This was the core of a most provocative talk delivered by Bonk Scotney (M.A., Dip. Ed.) to over thirty members of the Socialist Club on Tuesday evening, 27th July.

There could be no effective democracy where money and power are concentrated in a few hands, where the news of the world is constantly distorted to suit private interests, and a reign of more or less open terror suppresses minorities and those who would challenge this setup. Yet this is the general picture in the United States today. Mr. Scotney quoted from Loomberg's book, "One Thousand Americans," and Seldes "America's Sixty Families," dwelling especially on the close tie-up between financial, industrial and newspaper concerns—the former dominating all. Such widely distributed periodicals as the "Readers' Digest" and "Life" were, he claimed, notoriously unreliable and patently subservient to the interests by which they were indirectly run. He quoted a remark that Colonel McCormack of the tractors, and the "Chicago Tribune" which has control of a vast section of opinion was "the greatest mind of the 14th century."

With this, Mr. Scotney contrasted the vital democracy that is being built up in Bulgaria. Here were secret elections, universal suffrage (not a catholic feature in the U.S.) and all the other concomitants of "democracy." But they lacked the private cartels and banks which were such an essential part of the Western way of life. This absence at once made possible a far more vitally democratic government and a far freer community life. He illustrated his picture of Bulgaria by constant references to articles written by a British Labour M.P. who had recently been investigating conditions there.

Soap-box and Pulpit

On Thursday, 5th August, the SCM and the Socialist Club "got together" under the chairmanship of the Rev. Martin Sullivan to discuss Socialism and Religion. Harry Evison spoke on the theme that Socialism contained the core of Christian ethics, and quoted Marx to the effect that "only under Socialism can the principles of Christianity be realised." He felt sure that Socialists and Christians could reach a synthesis [ unclear: on a] practical programme for the betterment of society. The Dean of Canterbury, Dr. Hewlett Johnson, was quoted as a serious student who had himself found such a synthesis. Improving the individual was a hopeless task without the improvement of the society.

Jim Battersby said he felt that while the material was important, too much emphasis should not be placed on it at the expense of the spiritual. This was after all, the core of Christianity. But still, to avoid the accusation of being an "opiate," Christianity should take a lead in material matters, and here no better programme was offering than one of practical social improvements. Here was common ground for Christians and Socialists. But for the Socialist this material betterment might tend to be an end in itself: for a Christian this was but a means to a spiritual end.

Discussion was diffuse, Mr. Brown apparently thought it a heresy to put such importance on things practical. The teachings of Christ were, he said, but an accretion of Christianity. The core of Christianity was the mystical union of believers in the person of Christ Himself. This is not a line of argument advised to convince Socialists.

The common ground for co-operation was stressed by many speakers from both SCM and Soc. Club. This was the main theme of remarks made by Messrs. Miller.' Robinson, Moore, McLeod and Piper. Christianity claimed to cover a wider ground than Socialism, but where the two claimed to cover the same ground, they should join hands.

The net result was, as Mr. McLeod said, and as Mr. Sullivan also said in summing up, "We should cease to distrust each other."

The Beds and the Literati

George Turner (M.A.), addressing a joint meeting of the Lit. Soc. and the Soc. Club on Tuesday, 11th August, was uncertain as to whether his aim should be "to convince the Literary Society that they needed some Socialism, or to beat some literature into the Socialists."

The materialist conception of history showed us that literature was like every aspect of history, ultimately determined by the socioeconomic" changes. Thus, although directly Socialist literature was still small in volume, nearly all current literature reflected the great political movements of our time. This gave the lie to the isolationist line of T. E. Hulme that the world of the mind was quite divorced from the world of life.

Mr. Turner referred to the pseudo-socialist intellectual poets of the 30's—Lewis, Spender. Auden and company. Not one of them was a Socialist's toe-nail; Socialism was then sufficiently remote for them to play round with it. Today its uncomfortable reality has exposed these "hollow men" by driving them openly into the camp of reaction.

A Socialist literature had to be in a language all the people could understand and appreciate. Many modern writers, he claimed, attempted to avoid the topic of man's social responsibilities.

Despite the small attendance, discussion was lively.