SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY CONWAY HALL, RED LION SQUARE, LONDON, W.C.I.

(Chancery 8032)

THE

MONTHLY RECORDSEPTEMBER, 1 9 H

SUNDAY MORNINGS AT ELEVEN

September 14.—RT. HON. LORD SNELL, C.B.E.—Problems of Post - WarReconstruction

Pianoforte Solos: Spring Song 1Butterflies ) • ' ' •

MISS ELIA IVIMEY

mns : Nos. 43 and 45

September 21.—C. E. M. JOAD, M.A., Dlit. —What is at Stake : The LiberalTradition

Bass Solos : To NI usic . .. SchubertLinden Lea Vaughan Williams

MR G. C. DOWMAN

Hymns Nos. 28 (second tune) and 64

September 28.—PROEESSOR G. W. KEETON, M.A., LL.13.—The Originsof Western Civilization

Pianoforte Solos Two Intermezzi BrahmsMISS ELLA IVIMEY

Hymns Nos. 121 (tune 17) and 231

Pianist: MISS ELLA IVIMEY

ADMISSION FREEA collection is made at each Meeting to enable those present to contribute to the Society's expenses. OFFICIAL CAR PARK—Opposite Main Entrance.

There are PUBLIC AIR-RAID SHELTERS in Red Lion Square.

Grieg

SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London, W.C.1

(Chancery 8032)" THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY are the study and dissemination of

ethical principles and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment."—

Being in sympathy with the aims of this Society, I desire to become a*member.— — - I agree to pay per annum and enclose*Associate.remittance.

•Alternatively. I desire to subscribe to "The Monthly Record" andenclose 3/- for 12 copies.

Signature................... ............ ..... .......................

State if " Mr.", " Miss ", or " Mrs."

Address (in full) .

.. • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • ............... • .........

When filled up, to be cut out and sent to the Hon. Registrar of Members and

Associates, at Conway Hall. Red Lion Square, W.C.1. * Delete words wlach do not apply.

MEMBERSHIP

Any person in sympathy with the objects of the Society is cordially invited tobecome a Member. The minimum annual subscription is 10s., hut it is hoped that

Members will subscribe as generously as possible and so assist the Society to meetits heavy annual expenditure. Any person may join as an Associate, hut will notbe eligible to vote or hold office. Further particulars may be obtained before and

after the meetings, or on application to the Hon. Registrar, to whom all subscrip-tions should be paid.

E. BARRAI,ETMrS. I,. D. BATTERSHYJ. BRICEMrs. H. BROWN

A. BROUGHTOND. L. BufLocxL. CAMERMAN

OFFICERS

Hon. Registrar: Mrs. T. *LINDSAY

Hon. Treasurer‘: C. E. JASTER Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, W.C.1.

Secretary: S. G. GREEN—

The Monthly Record is posted free to Members and .Associates. The sub-

scription rate for non-mcmbers is 3s. per annum. Remittances and enquiries shouldbe addressed to the Secretary at Conway Hall, and matter for publication to theEditor, Mr. F. G. GOULD, 45 Traps Hill, Loughton, Essex.

The Society does not hold itself responsible for views expressed or reported

therein.

FUNERAL SERVICES can be arranged by the Society. MARRIAGES. Conway Hall is registered for marriages.

Applications should be addrressed to the Secretary.

GENERAL COMMITTEE

J. FAIRHALL

Mrs, II. GAMBLEJ. A. GasmaruMrs. F. M. ILWRONS

JAMESMRS. A. LISTERMrs. M. Omucce

DORIS PARTINGTONMiss F. J. SIMONSMiss C. TRESIDDERMiss D. WALTERSMrs. E. WASHIIROOKF. WASHBROOKA. WarsoN

TEACHING " RELIGION "

Many different meanings have been given in the past to the word"Christianity." Almost as many different meanings are still given to it.The Pope would probably be called a Christian by most people; and he, nodoubt, believes that the bones of dead saints are useful for the cure ofdisease. That is probably not the belief of the Archbishop of Canterbury,who would also be called a Christian. Ancient ceremonies are practised bythe Christian General Franco in Spain, but not by the members of theSociety of Friends. And, apart from philosophical beliefs or traditionalceremonies, there is a certain amount of difference with regard to moralstandards and moral practice among those who claim to be Christian. RomanCatholics probably still believe that the celibacy of clergy, monks and nuns,expresses a more " spiritual " way of life than marriage. But nobody elsewho calls himself a Christian believes that. Most people in Great Britain andthe United States, even among those who claim to be Christians, believe thatthey ought to think for themselves and not depend upon the clergy fordeciding what they ought to believe. Indeed, the majority of voters in theUnited States some years ago, were shocked to hear from a Roman Catholiccandidate at the Presidential election, who had been asked what he believed,that he would consult his priest. Some people find their guidance for faithand morals in the Bible, and others in the Vatican.

In these circumstances it is interesting to note that a group of bishopsand other clergymen, not including Roman Catholics, and also a group ofabout two hundred members of Parliament and Peers, have issued statementsthat religion ought to be taught in the schools. It is impossible to disagreewith a statement which may have many different meanings. It is moredifficult to understand the statement that the allies are fighting in the presentwar for Christianity or Christian civilization, especially since the latestaddition to the allies is a Government directed by professed atheists. But ifChristia.nity is taken to mean only the way of life implied in the statementsthat all men and women have an equal moral value, that service of othermen is better than domination, kindliness better than cruelty and good faithbetter than lying—then obviously we are fighting to preserve these principlesin public policy, and obviously it would be desirable to make these principleseffectual in the process of education. If these principles are referred to bythe words "Chrisianity " and " Religion." the teaching of religion in theChristian tradition ought to be promoted in the schools. The atheists ofRussia would not disagree with such teaching; nor would thousands ofthe followers of Mohammed who are fighting with us in Africa; nor wouldthe followers of Confucius in China.

But if we agree that the teaching of religion in some vague sense ofthe word is desirable, it by no means follows that the bishops or the membersof Parliament know either what to teach or how to teach it. Certainly it isright to promote through education the maintenance and development of away of life. Any way of life implies the acceptance in practice of certainideals of conduct. But ideals of conduct expressed in the Bible and in thetraditional teaching of Christian bodies are neither clearly expressed norconsistent. If they were, there would not be so much disagreement aboutthem among those who call themselves Christian. And if we examine theteaching of those who have claimed to interpret the Scriptures, we find thatthey give entirely•different meanings to the same words . As Renan said:" You cannot enchain the mind of man; if you tie it to a text, it will escapein the commentary." St. Augustine advocated the persecution of everybodywho disagreed with him; and he " proved" that this was "Christian"because Christ had said, "Compel them to come in." But in the modernsense of the word "Christian, Seneca was a better Christian than St.Augustine. Seneca said: " Man is a sacred thing to man." Indeed it would

3

be difficult to show that Christianity has ever advocated toleration; buttoleration is the principle upon which modern democracy depends and uponwhich alone we can build a world at peace. When we teach religion in theschools, are we going to teach the men and women of the future to toleratethe honest opinions of Mohammedans and Buddhists, Confucians andAtheists? Are Roman Catholics going to be taught tolerance of the beliefsand praotices of Protestants?

Apart from difficulties about what to teach, how can anyone teachreligion? It may be assumed here that. " religious knowledge - cannotpossibly mean a knowledge of the legends ot the Old Testament, If Solomonhad 700 wives and 300 concubines, it is difficult to see how " religion " isimproved by a knowledge of such facts. Even the heroes of the Old Testa-ment, such as Joshua and Samson, are somewhat primitive in their character-istics. But in any case religion cannot be taught by giving information. Away of life is not established by the repetition of platitudes. Religion is nota subject like geography or arithmetic, which can be added to the curriculum;nor can a way of life be established by .devoting to it a few hours a week.If we are talking of moral standards which are opposed to the teaching andpractice of the Nazis, such moral standards must be expressed in the teachingof arithmetic or music or literature, or any other of the " subjects." Anattitude of mind, an intellectual and. emotional reaction of any person toother persons and to the world they inhabit, can be established only by anatmosphere or climate of opinion and conduct controlling the whole of theeducational system. This atmosphere or climate of opinion may be pre-served by extending appreciation of great men and women in the past, and

• by deepening the awareness of the work they have done. But the great menhere referred to do not include such ruffians as Alexander, Cwsar andNapoleon. Nor do they include such Christian saints as St. Simeon Stylites,who lived for thirty years on the top of a sixty:foot pillar.

In education we should be concerned primarily with ends or purposesand not merely with the means by which to attain .them. And those whoadvocate the teaching of religion in schools quite rightly criticize theestablished system because it devotes so much energy to promoting merelythe knowledge of a technique—how to manage either nature or man—without clearly indicating what kind of life it is worth while to live. Theend should be the life of all men and women in communities of equals, infreedom and in co-operation, one with the other.. But such an end or pur-pose, if it is •to be made more effectual than the ideals of barbarism whichat present dominate Germany, cannot be established or maintained by theteaching of doetrine or the preaching of sermons. It must be establishedby practice in the art of living well. In schools, a child should not beregarded as a defective man. Nor is education merely a preparation forwhat is to follow. To be good as a man it is necessary first to be good as achild: that is to say, when a child lives well as a child he is most likely tolive well as a man later on.

But children are brow-beaten by adults who think they know all aboutit. Indeed, we are all cursed by the pretensions of superior persons. Andteachers, as well as preachers, often forget that what they do not know

iis more mportant than what they know. Learning is more impontant thanteaching—even for teachers. And the only good teacher is the man orwoman who can learn more than the pupils. But Western civilization sincethe fourth century has been cursed by a professional class of teachers—theclergy. They have claimed to know all that is worth knowing about theideal way of life; and on this subject they have always been hopelesslyignorant. In the medieval Christianity which still survives the clergy reinforcetheir prestige by traditional rituals, and cover the remnants of primitivefetichism by exuding from the pulpits a mental fog. But there is no class orcaste which has any knowledge of a way of life, hidden from ordinary menand women. Pronouncements on public policy or personal problems such4

as marriage, depend for their authority entirely upon the knowledge andintelligence of those who make such pronouncements. The way of life,therefore, which is the ideal to be opposed to the teaching and practice ofbarbarism, is to be discovered in the practice of a community of equalsin which nobody claims divine authority for what he says, and all are equallysearchers after truth. The teaching of religion in schools, if it means theestablishment of an ideal way of life, depends, not upon ancient scripturesor infallible guides, but upon learning to live. Nobody is capable of teachingwhat has not yet been discovered.

SUMMARIES OF SUNDAY MORNING LECTURESDR. C. E. M. JOAD, M.A., on " THE RELIGIONS OF THE

WORLD—SOME COMMENTS," July 6, 1941Readings: (1) Introduction to " The Bibles of the World "—extracts from

eight of the world's great religious books.(2) " Religion and Science," by Bertrand Russelt—a passage on

Mysticism.The starting point of this lecture is the renewed interest which I, in

common with many others, and especially young people, find in the problemsof religion. Prior to the war, young people at Universities were concernedwith economic, social and political problems and with endeavouring to im-prove life and build Utopia on this earth, and they were not concerned withmetaphysical, supernatural or religious speculations. At that time I wasliving on my intellectual capital and, though I talked and wrote aboutreligious subjects, what I have said in the past twenty years has added nothingto the truth either for or against religion. I have remained a convincedagnostic of the T. H. Huxley type, believing not so much that there was noother world or no God, as that it was impossible to know whether there wasor not.

There are two main reasons, I think, for the renewed interest in religiousmatters. The first is marked and rapid political changes leading to a loss ofany general agreement as to the nature and purpose of individual existence, tothe exacerbation of political differences and the substitution of political forreligious creeds and dogmas; and the second is the apparent eternal incapacityof such political creeds to fill man's spiritual needs and the whole of hishorizon indefinitely.

In a time of political stability like the nineteenth century, one finds apretty general agreement as to the nature and purpose of the individual and oflife itself, as to the kind of society likely to produce the desired end, and asto the way in which it should be run, so that political differences, in commonwith others, are about means, not ends. In the nineteenth century, the humanbeing was generally believed to be an immortal soul seeking salvation, whichwas to be achieved by observing in life on this earth the code of Christianethics laid down by Jesus Christ; the type of society likely to promote thedesired end was conceived to be democracy, but not socialist democracy.Now that instability has destroyed the unanimity as to the ends and purposeof human life, there has been an attempt to exalt the political creeds ofFascism and Communism to the place of lost religious dogmas, and tosurrender the mind unthinkingly to a person or body of persons supposed tobe the repository of Truth.

The flocking 'to the churches in Moscow on the threat of invasion is oneclear indication that political creeds have failed to provide the satisfactiondenied to men by the miseries of the world.

And here, pat to the occasion, we find the book published in Americaunder the title Bibles of the World. The extracts given have been chosenas central to the understanding of the religion from which they come, as beingtopical. and also of some literary merit.

C. DELISLE BURNS.

5

What help for our present difficulties do we find, and what impressiondoes the book make?

I had always believed that the central spiritual truths of all religions werethe same and that all the rest were trappings. These spiritual truths I con-ceived to be: that spirit is more real than matter which is a creature of thespirit; that man's true destiny is in some other existence outside time andspace; that an all-good, all-powerful and all-knowing God created the worldfor a definite purpose; and that the human soul or spirit is immortal and willsurvive the death of the body.

But what do we find?There is no general agreement that God was the beginning, for the

Hindu believes that the first event was a desire not of any one person or forany one thing; the Taoist believes that in the beginning there was nothing, andthe Buddhist makes no affirmation of God—which, as we begin with some-thing, would seem to be the most natural beginning.

Even if one premises God, it is not a matter of general belief that He isGod, as I was taught, for Zoroaster said that there was an evil as well as agood God, which seems to me a more plausible explanation of pain andsuffering than that advanced by Christianity.

Or evil may be the obstructive non-co-operation of the raw material inwhich God the artist attempted to work out his purpose. In which case, theremust have been something before there was God. So there is no generalagreement that there is one God and that he is Good. If we come to the basicaffirmation that there is an immortal soul, we find that the Buddhist teachesthat man is a degrading composite of temporary obstructive delusions.

, Thus the basic affirmations of all religions are not the same, and it, cannot, therefore, be said that religious truth is clear and obvious. Blake

wrote that "Truth can never be told so as to be understood and not believed."But it is equally true that some things are true, though no reasons can beasked or given; for example, 2 2-- 4, and the whole is greater than the part.But it seems fairly evident that religion does not fall into this self-evidentcategory and one may, therefore, ask for argument and evidence which isjust exactly what one does not get. There is nothing but rhapsodizing.

One must except from some of these strictures the Taoist religion. Itsteaching of humility, self-abnegation and pacifism; its wonderfully worked-outtheory of ignorance and stupidity as the best camouflage; its view of thefutility of human effort and advice to do nothing in order to save energy inorder to live, do not appeal to me, but whether it is true or not, it is logicaland consistent,, and it does attempt to indicate the true end of life withoutintroducing any theological or metaphysical premises.

To sum up, after reading the Bibles of the World, I am left in the samemood of agnosticism as that in which I started; for the only tenets commonto all religions seem to be that life has some other meaning than mereenjoyment, and that one leaves this life for another. And even for thesethere is no argument or evidence. D. P.

PROFESSOR G. W. KEETON, M.A., LL.D., on" THE BRITISH ARMY, PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE,"

July 13, 1941.Readings from: "Freedom is Our Weapon," by Tom Wintringluitn.

"Evening Standard": Leading Article, July 2, 1941.The British people have been too long in settling down to the present

war, and they have been lulled with the soothing slogan that we always winthe last battle. This is not true. In many wars, we have been slow to makenecessary changes without which victory was impossible. In the presentwar, we have most obviously lagged behind our opponent. So far, ourarmies have been heavily outnumbered, and their equipment has been farbehind that of our opponents. Moreover, serious tactical mistakes have been6

made. Bravery today is not enough, and campaigns are not won by evacua-tions. The time has therefore arrived for a reconsideration of the Britisharmy, its training, equipment, and tactics, in order to equip it for the longand bitter struggle which lies ahead. In the past, we have shown ourselvescapable of profiting by our mistakes, and this must happen again.

The most brilliant period of our military history is covered by the Warof the Spanish Succession. The Duke of Marlborough was exceptional amongour great generals. however, in that he combined outstanding brilliance. inContinental warfare -at that time dominated by French thought—with highpolitical and diplomatic ability, by which alone he was able to keep togethera miscellaneous group of allies, each thinking in terms of his own interests:and to this was added a clear grasp of the decisive importance of sea powerin a general European war.

The tactics evolved by Marlborough in these campaigns dominatedEnglish military thought for the next half century. so that what had originallybeen brilliantly successful now became an obstacle to modgrnization.On the

FContinent, where orthodoxy was unchallenged until the time of rederickthe Great, the effects of conservatism were not immeditaely apparent. but inthe New World, its incompetence was plainly evident. English generals wereunable to adapt themselves to strange conditions of warfare, and their incom-petence, and not the valour of the colonists. lost us the war. Washington,who led the victorious colonists, was still young rind adaptable at the timeof the war.

Similarly, the French revolutionary armies, under the leadership ofyouthful generals who knew little of text-book strategy and cared less, burstthrough the ring of hostile powers which encircled them. So long asBritish leaders clung to the old wass, they were defeated, but in Spain. wehad two outstanding generals in Sir John Moore and the Duke of Wellingtonwho modernized the. British army's organization, adapted themselves magnifi-cently to local conditions, and possessed considerable political insight. Bothwere comparatively young men. Moore was 47 when he died at Corunna,Wellington was 45 at Waterloo: and, in an earlier war Wolfe, an " unknown "when Chatham gave him command of an army was 33 when he died beforeQuebec, winning ri victory which sealed the fate of the French Empire inNorth America. Two years before. Clive at Plassy (not a professionalsoldier at all) had laid the foundations of British power in India at exactlythe same age. Marlborough was under 40 when he won his succession ofbrilliant victories on the Continent. History, indeed, is full of examples ofbrilliant youthful commanders. of whom Alexander the Great. Hannibal,Julius Cesar. Behsarius. Henry V. Frederick (lhe Great and Napoleon arconly a few. It is also full of the names of aged commanders whose incompe-tence and conservatism have involved nations and armies in disaster. Ofthese, the most recent examples are the French higher command in 1939-40.

The men of the German higher command, on the other hand, are newerand younger men, thinking in terms of the new weapons, which were ignoredor minimized by their opponents. East tanks, dive-bombers, and parachutetroops have all been discussed in the military journals of England and France.but conservatism and prejudice prevented their adoption until after Dunkirk.Similarly, even the lessons of the Polish campaign were ignored. TheRussians are the first army to meet the Germans with their own tactics.

We are at the moment at one of those periods in the history of warfarewhen everything. favours offensive tactics, provided the attacker hasmechanical superiority. This reduces the power of small nations to resistan aggressor almost to zero, as the campaigns in Norway, the Low Countries,and the Balkans have shown. The implications of this, however, have onlyjust been realized, after the mismanagement of the defence of Crete. Prob-ably we are only at the threshold of the development of the tank. In thefuture we shall have to contemplate pitched battles between huge massedtanks over very wide areas. (This has already occurred in Russia.) The

7

problem of fuel supplies will probably be solved as the tanks increase in size.These changes in the art of warfare also necessitate changes in the

recruitment of officers. This has already taken place in the German army,which emphasizes the paramount importance of initiative and familiaritywith the modern machinery of war. Here, however, in the British armyconservatism and class-prejudice still reign, although they have been com-pletely scrapped in the R.A.F., which has so decisively established itssupremacy over the Luftwaffe wherever the two meet on anything likeequal terms. The qualities required for leadership in a modern army aredistributed throughout the community, but under modern conditions, thepublic schoolboy has the least adequate preparation. Recent contributionsto the Press, however, have shown that old school-tie influences are stillextremely strong in the British army.

There are two allied questions in the present war which are absolutelyfundamental. The first is that of making the Home Guard the most efficientforce for home defence that can be devised. The second is that of thetraining and equipment of a British army for the Continent. Such a forcewill have to face a numerically superior opponent, so that we shall have topossess such a weight of mechanized material that it can break up and thendisorganize the opposing forces, and then quickly organize enslaved popula-tions in revolt. For these operations,. the commanders must possess someof the diplomatic, political and administrative qualities of Marlborough.Clive, Moore. and Wellington, and the officers must have both initiative andpolitical insight.

If Hitler were to break Russian resistance this summer, we shallundoubtedly have a full-scale attempt to invade in September. Obviously,fighting at home we have certain advantages. On the other hand, there areserious disadvantages, and modern conditions of war favour the attackers.All invasion schemes therefore require to be taken very seriously.

Finally, these changes in the art of warfare have important consequencesfor the peace settlement. Battles may be fought to a depth of 200 milesor more. Only highly industrialized states can produce modern weapons insufficient quantities. Small states can no longer fight delaying actions againstgreat aggressors. That means that we must think out the problem of oursecurity in fresh terms. The world must be organized as a peace-maintainingunit or we shall have more wars similar to this. Today, comparatively smallforces of aeroplanes and tanks can subdue a whole country. Conversely,small forces can maintain order, if the great weapons of our age are deniedto individual states. These are the terms in which we must think of the peacesettlement—unless we wish to see a yet more destructive war in a couple ofdecades G. W. K.

MR. S. McCABE, on "GERMANY: AN INTERPRETATION," July 20, 1941

Readings from (I) "Ambassador Dodd's Diary."(2) Professor V. Gordon Childe's " Man Makes Himself."Some years ago I became, unwittingly, a Fifth Columnist. A publisher

invited me to break a lance with G. K. Chesterton, who, on the strengthof Hilaire Belloc's peculiar history, had written that Germans had neverdone anything for civilization! They had always hindered the efforts of theLatins and the Church to restore it. Everyone ought to know that everyeffort at recovery during the six centuries of the Dark Age was made byTeutonic peoples—by rthe Ostrogoths, Charlemagne, the Lombards, and theSaxons. The reply to Chesterton, who, after his conversion wrote a lot ofpernicious rubbish, was easy. but I withdrew promptly when I found that mypamphlet was made the first of a series of pro-Nazi publications. Manypeople today, however, wonder whether there is not some truth in his charge:whether the history of Prussia or Germany for the last 200 years does notsuggest that the race is tainted.8

We all know the German boast about their Nordic race. At least itwas Nordic until Italy had to be considered. Then it became Aryan; andwhat it is now that Japan has to be flattered is not clear. These racial boastsare historical rubbish. Some years ago I found in Crete the most remark-able modern features—perfect drainage, baths, and so on—in the ruins of apalace of 3,400 years ago, while in the Cretan capital of today there wasneither bath nor drain, no gas, telephones, trains, or buses. That fine ancientcivilization was destroyed by the Aryans, the early Greeks, just as the Aryanswho entered India dragged down a civilization that was already 2,000 yearsold. The Aryan race has a great record of vandalism. It is true that Tacituspraised the Teutonic Aryans, but if you want their real character read °user,who knew them. They gave their name later to ruthless destruction—vandalism.

But race-psychology is out of fashion. Many writers trace the degenera-tion of the German people to Frederic the Great. He was a sceptic, and itis so easy to throw responsibility upon a sceptic. The truth is that Frederichated Germanism. His father, though very religious. was a cruel and oftenbrutal man, and the other two German kings and their courts were incrediblylecherous. Frederic wanted to make Prussia cosmopolitan and especiallypro-French. He did try to make it respected by conquests, but that was theuniversal standard 200 years ago. The Germany of today was not madein the eighteenth century or even in the nineteenth, though a century agoevery great German historian was a Pan-German. A map of Europe con-quered by Germany, which circulated in that country ten years ago, createda sensation when a London paper recently published it. That map circulatedin Germany in 1869, but it does not explain Nazi Germany, and it is vitalto understand it. What an appalling prospect one would face if there reallywere tainted stocks or races with an incurable itch for aggression! If wemake the peace on that basis, when atheist Russia has saved our Christiancivilization for us, we shall do worse than Versailles.

To understand Germany divide the 20 years after the war into fourequal periods. For the first five years Germany suffered bitterly from thegreed and blunders of the French. It is not true that the French promisedto disarm. They promised it under conditions that were never fulfilled. Butthey applied the provisions of Versailles with intolerable harshness andarrogance, and when this policy culminated in the occupation of the Ruhr—an act of sheer and shameless greed—Hitler's little National Socialist Partygrew like a poisonous fungus. But the French Steel Trust had over-reacheditself, and Poincare was replaced by Briand and Herriot. If you want toknow the truth about Germany and about human nature study the nextfive years, 1925 to 1929. Under Stresemann and a Liberal-Socialist Adminis-tration, it was peaceful, prosperous, and friendly. Hitler's party sank againby 1929 to 180,000 members. It had never been an honest party with asincere ideology. It had copied two principles from Christian Socialism; avague Socialism, which it was ready to sell to the highest bidder, and a fiercehatred of the Jews. On this second principle, by which it attracted all thescum of Germany, it never wavered. Its chance came with the great depres-sion. England and America had forced upon Germany loans to the amountof £400,000,000. Dodd, a professor of high culture and great integrity, artideal witness, tells us that American bankers, who made enormous profits,dangled a reward. of 6 and 7 per cent before American investors, who lostevery dollar. So when the great depression settled on the world the streamsof foreign gold dried up. and the great industrialists like Thyssen pouredfinancial blood into Hitler's party and bought off its Socialism. The campaignof lying and corruption began. Germany was the slave of the foreigncapitalist, and the prosperous period, 1925-9, was heavily libelled. Thencame the corrupt bargain with the Papacy, the Nazi burning of the Reichstag,the grasping of power.

9

Germany is not corrupt but corrupted, and the work was mainly donein five years. Dodd was Ambassador from 1933 to 1938, and his book willprove an historic document. Day by day itdescribes the brazenly opengrowth of the aggressive plan and the incredible complacency with whichEngland, France, and America listened to lip-assurances of peace. At thecritical stage we replaced Sir Eric Phipps, who understood the country, withSir Nevile Henderson who, Dodd says, was pro-Nazi before he arrivedand did not resist the invasion of Austria : at a time when, a Nazi industrialisttold me, Germany had not petrol enough for a ten days' war! So the bribingof the German people, the promise of exploiting the world went on, andevery school, journal, theatre, bookseller's shop, and wireless were pressedinto the service of corruption. No wonder that Dodd as he sailed homepast the cliffs of Dover, wrote: " Poor rich, powerful England." But theswiftness with which the majority of the German people were corruptedhas another aspect. Man makes himself, and with modern scientific aidsmore easily than ever. Modern psychologists rarely recognize a " mind "or other such element in man. They study his " behaviour "

iandthe agenciesthat shape it. Eugenic Calvinism is over, and ethical education s even moreimportant than it was when Emerson wrote about the sovereignty of ethics.Thc post-war future does not depend on Germany. It depends on us.

J. M.

" AT HOMES " FOR REFUGEESOn July 23 Mrs. Nina Spiller spoke on the future of the League of

Nations. As a former member of its staff, she had had some personalexperience. She worked for fourteen years in Geneva and was privileged toMeet statesmen from all over thc world. She wished to make three points:(I) The reform of some of the faults of the League created more by Govern-ments than by machinery; (2) Federal Union; and (3) Police Force.

It was, she said, delightful to go to Geneva. It was once full ofenthusiasm and hope that the world had learned to co-operate. But there wasslow disintegration from 1931, due to failure of the Governments to keep theirpledges and to use the machinery they had themselves created. Before onecondemns the Covenant of the League, one must see whether it could havefulfilled its task. The nations who signed it knew quite well what they weredoing. While the League was working smoothly it was forgotten that therehad been a promise to resist aggression. We have had experience of the workof the League and it would be a pity to start a new scheme.

The main criticism levelled against the League was that Article 19, pro-viding for the review of treaties, was too vague,, but no attempt was made toapply it. The rule of unanimity has been criticized. Perhaps a two-thirdsmajority would be enough, but the idea of unanimity was fine. It avoidedcompulsion. It meant you had to wait a year or adapt your ideas to those ofother people. From the beginning the League suffered from the defection ofthe U.S.A., which would have brought in a more objective point of view.The League was only a human institution, and it could be improved. Twentyyears have proved its wbrth. Whenever the League succeeded there was noreason to make a big outcry. It was only when something went wrong thatthe newspapers took it up.

Federal Union has the same idea as the League—collaboration with aview to improve production, distribution and consumption of the world'sresources. We want a better standard of living, better wages, and economicsecurity for all classes. Security should be everywhere. Federal Unioniststhink their system is one which would be managed by peoples in oppositionto Governments. The League aimed at a Confederation which is differentfrom a Federation. A Confederation differs in that it retains the right to berepresented as a State and not as a People. A truly democratic governmentrepresents the people, and if some of its members are sent to Geneva youhave a representation of the people. But if you elect senators on the basis

10

of so many millions of population, the United Kingdom would be heavilyoutnumbered by Germany, U.S.A., Russia and China, and this would notmake for justice. It is much more reasonable to have one Government repre-senting the interests of the people who have elected it. Decisions could notbe reached satisfactorily under the federal system.

The alternative of European federation would mean German hegemonyand would not lead to more justice or peace. Mrs. SpiBer objected to thegeneral principle that there should be only one citizenship. You cannot, shesaid, be a citizen of five countries. Customs barriers could be suppressed just aswell under the League system. The nations considered by Federal Unionistsare really Confederations achieved by slow stages which took centuries tomature. We cannot wait centuries to federate Europe. The U.S.A. onlyarrived at its present degree of unity after bloody Civil War, although therewas a common language. Canada also had difficulties. But you have theBritish Commonwealth, which is not a federation, but is perhaps much more.You might have federations in Asia, Europe and America, but these might beopposed to one.another.

World-wide questions can only be solved by world-wide planning, butthe good of the whole community of nations should take precedence overthat of one community. Peace depends on the conception of internationalorder in which each nation is prepared to make a definite contribution oreven a sacrifice. Changes must take place in an orderly manner. There mustbe concerted action which might well be brought about by a new League ofNations.

A Police Force is much in the minds of people. There is talk of aninternational army, navy or air force, or a police force. The League neededa police force. You cannot keep a community in order unless you havesome force which applies the law. The police do not judge or punish; theysimply apply the law and then bring people who have broken it before atribunal. A police force could be organized in the international sphere. Thepolice do not wait until an act of aggression has been committed. If at thetime of the Manchurian affair we had had police who had seen the prepara-tions for the conquest of Manchuria which frightened this country and theU.S.A. and were the beginning of the failure of the League, if we had hadpeople reporting that. the armaments of Japan were getting out of control, itwould have been easier to prevent the consequences. It is to be hoped thatafter the war we shall be able to agree to a large measure of disarmament,coupled with police supervision over all the world. The problem of arma-ments could only be solved by close supervision.

It was as late. as 1829 that Sir Robert Peel managed to provide asatisfactory police torce, and it is now so good because it has won publicsupport. So it would be when it came to be recognized that an internationalpolice force only existed for the purpose of bringffig aggressors to a fair trial.This would help governments to abide by the agreements they had made.

F. G. G.Letter from Mr. S. K. Ratcliffe

The following letter has been received in reply to an offic.al communiCa-tion from the Secretary of our Society: —

116 EASY 36TH STREET, NEW YORK.

MY DEAR GREEN, June 26/41.Your letter of the 6th has just come. Not too bad, considering all things.

iThe Committee s generous as always. There would be no sense in keepingmy name on as a regular; of course 1 need not say that if it should be mygood fortune to return home, and while I am still able to do public speaking,I should be proud and glad to serve the Society. It is good to hear that I ammissed. I feel at times that there never was in my now longish day a momentcontaining more good S.P. subjects than the present.

11

One such I am doing, if all goes well, for a Sunday audience in NewYork City—The Latest Assault upon Liberalism and Ethics. This, I think, ismainly American; at least they seem to be more numerous and vocal here—Lewis Mumford, Reinhold Niebuhr, and others of less note.

By the way, Gerald Heard has published a small book of discourses onthe Lord's Prayer, delivered in a Congregational church in California!

During the past week I have supplied for Norman Angell at two colleges,summer conferences on international affairs—Chapel Hill, N. Carolina, andWellesley College, Mass. Angell had undertaken too much and had to breakoff in a series. As the conferences were organized by a Friends' committee,there were a good few talking about peace now. I stood upon the commonpurpose of Britain : no use whatever to think of ending the war; and in anycase, what body of opinion would tolerate the thought of a complete Nazipeace, which is what it would have to be?

At both conferences, too, there were some young men and women talk-ing about Federal Union, union now with Britain, which, I judge from theRecord, has supporters at Conway Hall. I have never come across anyonehere who can answer questions about the plan. or seems able to think of it inrelation to the British system. Streit's second book is a juvenile performance;he does not meet a single difficulty, so far as I can see. And he keeps onreferring to the Union of S. Africa as a federation! He knows very little, andhas not taken the trouble to inform himself about the elementary facts of theBritish Commonwealth and Empire. The Economist's smashing leaderagainst is reprinted in this week's New Republic. This will be ammunitionfor the opposition, but the Unionists will do their best to pass it by. Oneserious and continuous characteristic of the U.S.A. is the throwing up of

, subjects for debate which are remote from practical affairs and take theattention of large numbers of earnest people off the imperative crisis of thehour, whatever that may be. Before the American nation there is one over-powering issue now; Should the U.S.A. enter the war? The Fed.Unionists are an influence in keeping that issue out of the way. One can goto conference after conference and find that it is not being discussed. Don'tlet us think of it!

In July I am to spend a week at the summer assembly of LakeChautauqua, as last year. They work me very hard there; I shall have tospeak about 15 times. That is all right once in a while, and I like to find outwhether I can still do it.

Raymond Swing should be in London before you get this. No doubt hewill be broadcasting for the B.B.C. He has, I suppose, the first position nowamong American radio commentators on current events. He is on four nightsa week, for one of the big chains. The best American broadcaster in Londonis Edward Murrow of Columbia: " This is London! " almost every evening,right over the American continent.

Churchill's speech last Sunday, after the invasion of Russia, was broad-cast over 500 stations in North America. People were saying that he had neverbeen more powerful.

If Hitler had struck a month earlier, just after Crete. the effect in theU.S.A. would have been grave indeed for our cause. But he didn't, and nowthere would seem to be no material difference between the P.M.'s stand andRoosevelt's.

The summer in New York has not been trying so far, notwithstandingsome very sultry days. However, I hope to get away by the middle of July,probably to the North and perhaps into Quebec province.

Best regards to my friends.Always most sincerely,

S. K. RATCLIFFE.

12

NOTESReaders who have listened to the Sunday afternoon broadcasts of

answers to questions put to the " Brains Trust " may be excused some feelingof satisfaction that •the two obviously outstanding regular members are Dr.Julian Huxley and Dr. C. E. M. Joad. Whatever ground there may be forcriticizing the B.B.C. for the prominence it gives to the expression oforthodox religious opinions, it is something on the credit side that two suchstalwarts of rationalism should be invited to answer questions on all sorts ofsubjects. We do not know to what extent the selection of questions fromthe large number sent to the B.B.C. may be influenced by a desire to" protect " listeners from heterodoxy, and we have no doubt that some dis-cretion has to be exercised, but on the occasions when we have been able tolisten we have noticed that some of Dr. load's replies have embodied opinionscontained in lectures he has delivered to South Place Ethical Society.Actually, in one instance, we listened to a condensed version of his recentlecture on " Education in the New World." There is little doubt that Dr.Joad's increasing popularity is likely to enlarge the attendance at his lecturesto our Society. But popularity is apt to be dangerous to the cause of in-tellectual honesty.

We have before us the Thirty-fourth Annual Report of the SecularEducation League for 1940. Their President is Professor H. J. Laski, and theExecutive Committee include two clergymen, Mr. Chapman Cohen (Presidentof the National Secular Society), Lord Snell, some prominent members of theRationalist Press Association and the Ethical Union, and Professor LancelotHogben. Miss N. Freeman is the Hon. Secretary. She deals with thecorrespondence of the League at Room 58, Chandos House, PalmerStreet, S.W.1.

In this report the Committee show concern with the dangerous effortswhich are being made by prominent ecclesiastics, with the support of TheTimes, to introduce State control of religious teaching into the people'sschools. They fear that the proposals now being made would involvereligious tests for teachers which have always been strongly resented by theteaching profession. The report gives much of the evidence and also refersto the opposition which is being aroused among teachers and certain leadersof non-conformist bodies. Those who are interested in this subject can obtainfurther information from Miss Freeman.

Although it has been necessary to suspend during August the Wednesdayafternoon " At Homes " for Refugees, arrangements have been made to re-sume them on September 3. There is reason for thinking that the temporary lossof this amenity has been felt by many of our friends. For some time it hasbeen possible to meet the expense of carrying on these meetings out of fundsspecially contributed by members and friends of the Society. We are askedto mention the receipt of the following sums: —

From Messrs. H. L. Bullock, E. F. Errington and D. M. Mitchell, 20s.;Messrs. A. E. Appelbe, Cohn, E. Daniels, E. J. Harrington, Mrs. Lister andDoris Partington, 10s.; Mrs. Brown, Mr. .1. C. Coates, Mrs. Coupland, Mrs.Hicks, Miss Lindsay, Mr. W. Mansford, Streatham Congregational Church,5s.; Dr. Martin Meyer, 3s.; Mr. W. Cranston, Mr. Gundry, Mr. Somrner, MissTresidder, 2s. 6d..

There have also been several smaller donations, by way of the bowl onthe Secretary's table, by members and friends who have given much ap-preciated personal assistance.

Further contributions will be acknowledged with much pleasure by theHon. Treasurer, Mr. A. Blackmore, 10 Glenhurst Avenue, N.W.5.

13

CORRESPONDENCESul.—May I make a few remarks about Dr. Delisle Burns' article headed

"To get and to give," published in your July issue.I always admired J. A. Hobson, who is quoted with approval by Dr.

Burns.I agree with Mr. Hobson that the normal man or woman likes working,

but was Mr. Hobson right when he said that the evil of unemployment laynot in the fact that the unemployed could get no money but in the fact thatthey could get no work?

No money in the sense that one depends on charity (private or public) isan evil. Having money so that there is a choice of work, or no need to work,is not usually considered an evil and is a position desired by nearly all of us.

Should we not therefore concentrate on the provision of money for all,rather than on the provision of work for all. Work or employment is a duty(as well as a pleasure) rather than a right. Normal men and women areanxious to do their duty. There is no need for the economic lash.

This question may be at the root of the world's troubles, but time andspace forbid further discussion in this letter.

Rodenhurst, Oxted. R. A. PRICE.

Dr. Delisle Burns writes:"I did not mean to imply that ' income ' was unimportant. Of course,

everyone should have some ' income.' I meant only to lay stress upon theidea that a man or woman derived satisfaction from what each does for thecommon.good and not only from what each gets as a share of the common.` wealth.' "

EDITOR, M.R.• BOOK REVIEWS

AN OPEN LETTER TO A YOUNG STUDENT OF SOCIOLOGY THE FLIGHT FROM REALITY. By Hector Hawton. Watts. 209 pp. 8s. 6d.

DEAR SIR,—E'very thoughtful youth to whom the vast complex of socialconditions appeals, and who seeks to avoid that " wishful thinking " whichMr. Hawton terms The Flight from Reality, reaches some clay the crosswayswhence radiate paths severally signposted: "Constitutional Monarchy,"" Republicanism." "Communism," and the rest. Each must be explored inturn before the problem of the best route can be envisaged as a whole. You—as I chance to know—are standing now at this parting of the ways; andI wish therefore to recommend to you Mr. Hawton's book as a sketch-mapof that section 'of the Communist road which Marxists call " HistoricalMaterialism."

The Flight from Reality is a vigorous and competent attempt to establishhistorically the Marxian central doctrine that our beliefs and philosophiesare based on economic and social conditions, as opposed to the converseview that ideas and religious impulsions have moulded and changed thoseconditions. Marx believed he had discovered the laws that govern historicaldevelopment, and that the first of these is: Men acted before they thought.Their deeds cieated conditions for which they afterwards evolved a mythicalor religious justification. "Ideas are conditioned by environment." HenceMarxism contradicts the Socialist view that the national ideology can beconsciously altered—as by propaganda and education--before the socialstructure is changed; it holds instead that a fundamental change of environ-ment must precede any widespread change of outlook or belief.

This may seem to you (as I confess it seems to me) a strange inversionof cause and effect. Hardly less startling is Marx's contention that "thelaws of historical development are laws of aggregates of human beings inwhich the vagaries of individuals could be safely ignored. "Buddha, Christ,Mohamet, Napoleon, Hitler, seem to contradict this view, unless each is tobe regarded as typical of his age. Mr. Hawton, however, finds no difficulty

14

in assimilating such doctrines. In the course of his book, which is an appealto early records and to savage practices of today for proofs of the accuracyof Historical Materialism, he commits himself cheerfully to surprisingcomments, e.g., " Primitive man did not invent clothes to keep himselfwarm. . . . Clothes originated either as a device to stimulate the sexualappetites or as a magical protection for the genital organs."

In this vein of confident interpretation our author passes in review thewhole course of our ancestors' evolving ideologies and beliefs, fromTotemism and mana to the Greek philosophies, seeking always to explainthem on Marxist lines. Private property, the tyranny of capital, the revoltof the proletariat, account for all—even for international warfare; and thecreeds current in each era were generally designed by the ruling class tosecure the permanence of existing conditions.

You may perhaps see in Mr. Hawton's pages many traces of honestspecial pleading. It may even occur to you that since environment conditionsideas, the philosophy of Historical Materialism, on his own showing, cannothave the objective reality of, say, a mathematical actuality. But to traversethe path, alert and aware, will be both educative and interesting. So I wishyou a good journey. Your well-wisher.

IDEALS AND ILLUSIONS. By L. Susan Stubbing. (Wan's.) 206pp, 8s. 6d.Professor Stebbing's latest work is a timely call to all free democrats. to

recognize the urgent need, here and now, of clear, definite and constructivethinking; to rid themselves of the disillusion and apathy resulting ,from thepresent grave menace to the world's civilization, to set plainly belore themthe positive ideals that must be realized in building a better dwelling-place forfree manhood and womanhood, and in particular to beware of the tyranny ofloose and vague abstractions that tend, by numbing the executive functionsof the mind, to replace vigorous action by pious hopes and wishful thinking.

Between the Totalitarian Powers and the Democracies there is, as theauthor points out, a violent conflict of ideals. Fascism, as Mussolini hasdeclared, " rejects universal concord," regards war as an ennobling influence,and ignores individuals; its only Absolute is the State. Nazi ideals of racialpurity and of German sway over lesser peoples are utterly opposed to thedemocratic spirit. Art, literature, science, flower only in the air of freedomwithin the law. While the struggle yet rages we must formulate in ourthoughts a constructive ideal to replace that •of despotism. " We cannot buildwithout any plan of the building. To seek to destroy the Nazi ideal is notenough; we must put something in its place."

This places upon us a heavy task; but democracy, as the Professor re-minds us, " demands a great deal of the citizen. It demands self-discipline,submission to laws democratically established . . . (and) willingness to serveothers." Its rewards are commensurate; but these, once gained, must bejealously guarded We are reminded " how precarious are the spiritual valuesof civilization; freedom, respect for other men issuing in tolerance andhumatut y, respect for truth and delight in knowledge, love of beauty. Theseare civilized excellences . acquired with difficulty and easily lost." Butwho will grudge the " eternal vigilance " extracted as the price of so greata boon?

We shall not find in Ideals and Illusions any formulary for our signatureand acceptance. Professor Stebbing's aim is not to frame a code or apolitical creed, but to stimulate and clarify thought.

In her last chaptershe discusses with patient care the illusory claim someChristians make that without immortality there can be no true morality. Herrefutation of this monstrous claim need not be followed here in detail; shehas no difficulty in establishing that although (as most logicians agree) " theconcept of moral obligation is not to be exhibited as a deduction from a

JUNIUS JUNIOR.

15

system of the universe," there is rational justification for morality apart fromthe bribe of Heaven and the threat of Hell.

Other facets of this gravely challenging work invite comment, but suchcomment is hardly needed: for the ituthor's purpose, as already explained, isless the development of a complete thesis than an appeal for clear vision andconstructive deduction in seeking a sound and enduring basis for the betterworld that must be wrought after this greatest of wars.

—We have also received from Messrs. Watts & Co. a noteworthy book by

Professor C. B. Fawcett, entitled The Bases of a World Commonwealth Ilprice 7s, 6d.i, which we hope to notice more fully in our next issue.

THE SOCIETY'S ACTIVITIES,Watter for insertion in the Odober issue of the RIXORD should reach the

Editor early in the month, turd in any case not later than Saturday,September 20.

ANNUAL REWNION.—This will take place on Sunday, September 28.from 3.3(1 to 6.30 p.m. The Committee of South Place Ethical Societycordially invites the members of all Ethical Societies, the Ethical Church.the Rationalist Press Association and other friends to attend.

Tea will be provided.Professor U. W. Keeton, M.A., LL.D., will bc the Guest of the

afternoon. The Chair will be taken by Mr. H. L. Bullock.- A short musical programme will be given by Miss Joyce Newton and

Miss Ella Ivimey.

" AT HOMES"—FOR REFUGEES will be resumed in the Library onWednesdays from 3 to 6 p.m. Most of the guests speak English and areanxious to have the opportunity of meeting sympathetic English people.Members are invited to attend. Discussions, short talks or music arearranged. Contributions to the Tea Fund will be welcomed by the Hon.Treasurer, Mr. A. Blackmore, 10 Glenhurst Avenue, N.W.5.

ln view of the present lack of opportunity for social intercourse, itis suggested that members of the Society may also care to meet oneanother in the Library on Wednesday afternoons.

Hon. See.: Mrs. L. D. BA FTERSBY, Greenfallow, Bury Rise,Bovingdon, Herts.

BOOKSTALL —Attention is called to the selection of books and pamOhletsof special interest to those who attend our Sunday morning meetings.The Bookstall is usually open on Sunday mornings. Orders for booksnot on sale may be left with the Hon. Sec.. Mr. 1). A. Broughton.

LIBRARY.—Open Sunday mornings and Wednesday afternoons. Free tomembers and associates. Non-members may borrow books on paymentof 5s. per annum. .The fee is waived in the case of Refugees attendingthe " At Homes." A slip must be filled in for each book borrowed.When Books are returned they must be handed to the Librarian, and notbe replaced on the shelves.

Special attention is called to failure to return books after a longperiod of borrowing.

Librarian: Mrs. T. LINDSAY, Conway Hall.

RAMBLES.—lt is regretted that owing to lack of support it has beennecessary to discontinue arrangements for further rambles at present.

Hon. See.: Mrs. ORREFT, 4 Cairn Avenue, W.5.

New MemberMiss J. M. HADFIELD, Wetheral, Neville Avenue, New Malden, Surrcy.

Farleigh Press Ltd. ('r.u.), Reed-mood Works, Reechwood Rise, Watford lams