The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1955-12-30


ability to abolish war or in general
to order his life. These with so little
hope, it seems to me, represent the
viewpoint which regards politics and
worldly affairs in general as irreve-
lent to faith in the Creator. At least
they accept the notion, so common in
the past, that since many natural
forces seemed uncomfortable it is
mans duty to humbly submit to
them.
INEvITABILITY OF WAR NOT
ACCEPTED BY THE MAJORITY
But this acceptance of war as in
evitable, this notion that man is pre-
destined to strife and warfare does
not represent the majority in either
the secular or clerical world. A much
larger percentage of all the people
take a more optimistic view. In the
secular field there is, in fact, a sort
of blind over optimism represented
by the phrase progress is inevitable"
A more sensible view, one held by a
large part of the clergy and the more
informed students of history and eco
nomics is that progress, meaning
progress towards happiness for all
people is indeed possible, but not in
evitable. 1t is question of how man
uses his skills, his knowledge and his
techniques. What really counts is the
effect these uses have on the man to
man relationships. The inclination to
use our skills and knowledge to pro-
mote war is as strong as to use them
for peace. This other view is to the
effect that war, at least modern war,
is man-made institution, one that
time and custom and new ideas can
end as effectively as happened 60
Feudalism or the Divine Right of |
Kings. 1t is viewpoint that credits |
man with enough of goodness and in
telligence to influence the shaping |
of his environment.
Man is regarded by this view as
unique slowly formed creature, one
that can break the bounds and also
transcend the limits of nature" that
we must come to terms, as never
before, with the creative faculties of
llldlle uldht says L OiO dG ILuO1Ct |
0co-operates in the worlds genesis"
Not only does this more optimistic
viewpoint acknowledge the powers of
man; it also denies the right of any
one to pretend neutrality on the great
moral world issues. There is, in fact,
no such a thing as neutrality; those
who claim to be are usually on the
side of status quo. 1T is hard for one
TO ride two horses at one and the
same time, one galloping towards war
and the other towards peace.
If we now accept the more general
y held view that man has the power
md the duty to cooperate in shaping
he world, that he is not installed
n a ready-made world, but for good
,r evil helps to shape it, how do we
explain mans failure to attain his
,rofessed goal
JOT ALL PEOPLE WANT PEACE {
In the first place, in spite of all ]
hat is said, not all people want peace. |
Jor do all show willingness to en- I
10y the means that lead to peace. I
Generally, the worlds people hope to c
ain peace through the medium of
democracy. But" says Moretain, '
the enemies of democracy have new !
r laid down their arms and their !
esentment and hatred of people" !
ave only increased. They see in this +
zay only chance to lose their posi- t
ion of advantage and power. q
Other reasons for the failure to |
ttain peace are that not enough peo- t
lie have learned just what peace is; t
ow it comes about and what changes v