In the Daily Mail of Wednesday Mr. Philip Snowden explained
why Labour objects to National Service. He says that working men have an inherited tradition of individual freedom which is so strong that any political party that put compulsory military training in its programme would "suffer an electoral extinction without parallel." Next, the working man does not fear invasion because long immunity has given him a sense of security. He therefore will not have National Service, "whether there is any real danger or not." (Surely
this is a miserable argument, and we are certain that Mr. Snowden, as so often happens with Labour leaders, misrepre- sents working-class opinion.) Next there is the assertion that National Service would lead to militarism. (Why responsibility and the knowledge that they would have to risk their own skins should make men clamour for war is not explained, for the simple reason that the assertion is pure nonsense.) Next it is said that a large body of working men feel that they have nothing worth defending. Here Mr. Snowden does working men a very gross injustice indeed. We need not mention any more of Mr. Snowden's arguments. The article is chiefly interesting because it shows that the alleged dislike of National Service rests upon arguments of a contemptible intellectual quality.
Previous page
