SIR,—There is in Hitler's speech a point which deserves serious consideration, namely : " As soon as the responsible Governments impose upon themselves and their journalistic organs the necessary restraint and truthfulness . . . . the fear of war will disappear and the tranquillity we all desire will become possible."
If the Fuehrer would impose silence on his Minister of Propaganda this sick world would have a chance to recover from an acute attack of verborrhcea; a disease marked by an abnormal flow of words and a soaring temperature. With the cessation of propaganda that dangerous temperature-curve would instantly drop to normal, and the patient would emerge. sane, from the delirium which now threatens to destroy his reason. May we have a truce from words for a fixed period, with the sine qua non that during this period all external propaganda must cease?
Could Dr. Goebbels be persuaded to stop abusing all who stand in the way of his country's self-determination, selfpreservation, and what not; would it be too much to expect us on our side to refrain from writing and saying things equally unwise and provocative? Surely not!
In the multitude of words there is no wisdom; and passions are only exacerbated by what Herr Hitler calls " unbridled agitation as mendacious as It is base." He sees the danger. He has now the opportunity for a display of initiative which would stamp him as a really great leader. By closing dawn his Propaganda Bureau he would not only eliminate the chief cause of misunderstanding between Germany and England. He would set an example which would make us all eager and ready to fling open the door to at least the possibility of a just and lasting peace, free from all pride and prejudice, from malice and the passions engendered artificially. We are not, as a people, antagonistic to Germany. Why then should we be separated by bad words?
Doeorrir PoNsorese SENIOR. Hampstead.
SIR,—vv. J. Blyton, in his uncompromising onslaught on Anti-Comintern agreements in any shape or form. writes: " Imagine Britain applying for adherence! " (sic). That he should visualise such an eventuality as per se unthinkable only goes to show to what a degraded level the official policy of our so-called Christian nation has reduced our capacity to think. Had our politicians throughout been concerned to implement such loyalty as they are supposed—collectively—to profess to Christianity, they would long since have led the Anti-Comintern movement in Europe.
" Hungary, of course, was ' pressed' into it." True; but does Mr Biyton suppose their adherence was not mainly influenced by the ghastly memory of the Bela Kun regime? As for General Franco's endorsement, what is that but the obvious corollary to his own triumphant Anti-Comintern struggle? It was the more inevitable in that, while Spain is breathless from that dreadful fight the Lefts everywhere—not excepting England—are refusing to abide by the result of the ordeal by battle, and redoubling their campaign of slander in hopes of reversing it.
Note, by the way, that Japan, which has joined the Anti-Comintern pact, has just declared that, except against the Soviets, she will not be committed to any inter-European quarrels.
" Morals and education can cope with Communism: and have successfully coped with it in most lands." Not in our land, nor in the U.S.A., nor— definitely at least—in France. The measure of the " traditional Russian inefficiency, visionary inability," etc., is the widespread and rapidly growing infiltration of Red "ideology" [dreadful word!) in our midst.
In the case of such nations as Hungary and Spain at least, we cannot pretend the Antt-Comintern is " hypocritically named " — even " viewed through religious eyes." In fact, their hostility to the Comintern is about the only point in which we can agree with the Nazis. But first, like Franco, we must break Communism at home. F. M. KELLY. 37, Hollywood-road, S.W.10.