In a praiseworthy effort, no doubt, to avoid hampering the current negotiations between "the City" and the Reichsbank on the ticklish question of British loans to the Ostmark (nee Austria) no use whatsoever was made of the excellent Nordie expression "Public Enlightenment" at the Phoenix Club's recent conversazione on Censorship and Propaganda. This is a pity, for as the evening wore on a sad lack of precision in the English vocabulary caused the dissipation of much valuable energy and time.

Goebbels V. Galileo.

"Propaganda" is defined in the Oxford Dictionary (1909 edition) as any association, systematic scheme or concerted movement for the propagation of a doctrine or practice. For the purposes of his talk, however, Mr. J. R. Elliot, the principal speaker, used to be acquiring exclusively, in these last few years namely—the publication of deliberately distoryed facts compelling people to make a decision on a false or insufficient basis. To exemplify his view of the subject the speaker went on to regale his audience in a most entertaining fashion with a choice selection of atrocity (and other) stories, and since the morality of the Phoenix Club is reasonably high, no one felt inclined to contradict Mr. Elliott in his uncompromising condemnation of such malpractices. It looked like slow curtains and the National Anthem when a speaker from the floor, in true V.U.C. style, brought the discussion round to the time-honoured theme of social and political reform. The audience and political reform. The audience was invited, and readlly consented to sympathize with the fate of one Galileo, who was adopted for the evening as the proto-martyr of knowledge in its struggle with contemporary Toryism. The audience gave tacit acceptance to the general principal that reformers came into conflict, more or less deadly according to the nature of the reform proposed, with vested interests. To overcome this opposition there was proposed the method of extensive and vigorous dissemination of whatever happens to be the truth on which you base your reform, but in this connection such activity was characterized by the word counter-propaganda. Instead of staging an immediate philological show-down, the club continued in stormy session, with one or two members using the word propaganda in its innocent sense of dissemination, but with the majority understanding the term in the particular connotation which had been adopted for the meeting i.e., an offensive manner of dissemination. As Euclid or some other aviator once had the wit to observe: straight lines on parallel planes never meet. Hence a spot of bother. To ayold further mlsunderstanding we shall hereafter in this article use the expression "Public Enlightenment" to describe the Goebbels-Rothermere type of Propaganda, and Propagation with reference to the Galileo product.

Clean Up.

To the propagation of new ideas, no university student who has the ideals of democracy at heart can possibly object. In a true democracy there must be freedom of thought and speech, freedom for the expression of all shades of opinion; but we must not confuse an honest statement of opinion (however unpalatable it may be) with deliberate and unscrupulous misrepresentation. An objectionable doctrine If honestly expounded must necessarily meet with a sudden death (in all places outside the lunatic asylum) and such a doctrine becomes a menace to society only when its expossion is controlled by Public Enlightement experts. Public Enlightenment is an insult to human reason and personality, employed by people whose concelt in their cynical assumption of superiority over the "mob" is equalled only the their lack of principle. In a true democracy. Public Enlightenment is one of the few victims of merciless Censorship.

Yet to talk idly of true democracy is an futile and footling as to speculate, without ever having the intertion of taking a ticket, on what you will do when you win the Irish Sweep. We must face up to the fact that Public Enlightenment in varying degrees of insidiousness and virulence is firmly established among our present-day social and political institutions, from the War Office down to the editorial columns of the publications of all types of societies. We must take steps towards the annulment of this haleful influence. While it seems that the vigorous and extensive propagation of truth cannot fall to cause the downfall of Injustice yet, from the moment that skillful Public Enlightenment is used in defence of Injustice what price Truth? And what is to determine John Citizen in his choice between the two kinds of Truth set before him by genuine Thinkers and by vested interests or quack reformers, If the latter group call in the assistance of Public Enlighteners with all their refources? Obviously, the choice of John Citizen is determined by his intelligence and character, or lack of same. If we are ever to counteract Public Enlightenment we must be optimistle enough to pin our faith on the power of the individual, when assisted by sound mental and moral training, to see through and reject the machinations by which Public Enlighteners are trying to instil prejudices into his mind, and at the same time to appreciate and have the courage to support whatever elements of truth are contained in any plan, manifesto or policy with which he may be confronted (without being carried away by the label, "progressive" or "reactionary" which some local Solomon has stuck upon it), What should be the aim of education If not to produce this kind of citizen? Therefore the sooner our modern educationalists plan their curricula along these lines, and extend facilities for such education, the sooner will the danger from Public Enlightenment be counteracted and Public Enlighteners shown to be ridiculous knaves and blackguards.

—Q.E.D.