{"id":1109,"date":"2013-07-13T01:32:36","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:32:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=1109"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:32:36","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:32:36","slug":"48-the-great-election-vol-02-karmayogin-volume-02","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/01-sabcl\/02-karmayogin-volume-02\/48-the-great-election-vol-02-karmayogin-volume-02","title":{"rendered":"-48_The Great Election.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n
\n

\nThe Great Election<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

I<\/font>t<\/font><\/span><\/b>
\n<\/font> <\/span>IS
\n<\/b><\/span>not often that we care to dwell at length on the incidents of English
\npolitics in which, as a rule, India is not concerned nor affected by the
\nresults. A Brodrick to a Hamilton, a Morley to a Brodrick succeeds, and the sublime continuity
\nof British policy, continuous in nothing else but this one determination to
\nmaintain absolutism in India, takes care that India shall have no reason to
\ninterest herself in Imperial affairs. The present crisis in England, however,
\nis so momentous and its results so incalculable that it is impossible to say
\nthat India will not be affected by its gigantic issues. The importance of the
\nelection turns not upon the issues of the Budget, though these are of no small
\nmagnitude, but upon the great constitutional question of the House of Lords and
\nits veto. The veto of the House of Lords is the drag on the Parliamentary
\nlocomotive. It is the one obstacle that stands between England and a peaceful
\nrevolution. It is true that this veto has been exercised very sparingly and
\nonly when the Liberals have introduced measures of a revolutionary character or
\ncontaining clauses which meant a too rapid subversion of ancient landmarks and
\nsafeguards; but this is precisely the use in
\nthe British Constitution of the otherwise useless, ineffective and somnolent
\nUpper House. It has used the veto if not
\nwith perfect wisdom, yet with a moderation and an eye to "its own safety that betokened at least a
\nperfect discretion. In spite of this reserve the obstruction offered by the Lords
\nto Liberal measures and their complacent acceptance of Conservative
\nlegislation has become more and more exasperating to the Liberal party and has
\noften threatened a collision which was averted either by the submission of the
\nLords or the support of its obstructive policy by the electors at the polls. So
\nlong as the social preponderance of the aristocracy and the possession of land
\nand wealth, on which that preponderance rested, was not touched, the Lords have
\nsubmitted to the gradual loss of political preponderance and the slow advance
\nof England from an<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 267<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\naristocratic to a middle-class rule and even
\nfrom a middle-class rule to a limited democracy, limited by the existence of
\nthe Lords themselves and the restriction of the franchise. A new force, a fatal
\nsolvent of established institutions, has entered European politics with the
\nsteady slow irresistible advance of Socialism, and England, long exempt from
\nthe working of this great tide of idealistic thought, is being more and more
\nswiftly undermined, its cherished ideals sapped, its administrative and social
\nstructure threatened by the wash of the advancing waters. The uneasiness
\nengendered in the more richly propertied classes by this advance of the
\ndestroyer has come to a head as a result of the provisions of the Budget by
\nwhich the land, emblem and guarantee of English Conservatism, of the
\ninviolability of private property and the survival
\nof the old world society in its most vital features, has been subjected to
\nsubstantial taxation. The innovation creates a probability of continual
\nnibbling until under the impulse of a growing Socialism, land is nationalised,
\nits proprietors bought out, and aristocracy destroyed. The Lords have either to
\nresist the process in its first step or make up their minds to gradual
\nextinction.<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The question for the Upper House is how they
\nwill resist. It is open to them either to reject the Budget altogether \u2014 a
\nmeasure of too drastic severity, \u2014 to throw out the Land clauses, \u2014 a device
\nwhich will expose the Peers to the charge of violating the unwritten
\nConstitution for the selfish purpose of saving their own pockets and throwing
\nthe burden of taxation on the middle class and the working men, \u2014 or to amend
\nthe Budget so as to lighten the land taxes and deprive them of their more
\ninoffensive features. The last device has the disadvantage of being no more
\nthan a palliative, while it amounts to as serious a breach of the financial
\nprivilege of the House of Commons as the others. The omens point to a rejection
\nof the bill by the Peers, but we doubt whether they will care to incur the
\nodium of so disturbing the finances of the country. In all probability they
\nwill amend and leave to the Ministry the responsibility of dissolving
\nParliament with no Budget sanctioned and the insecurity to the tax-payers
\nresulting from this unprecedented and anomalous situation. The burden of
\nchoice will then fall upon the Com-<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 268<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nmons <\/font><\/span>
\n who must either submit to the destruction of the first
\nand most essential safeguard of popular liberty in England, the popular control
\nof taxation and the Exchequer, or take up the challenge given by the Peers. The
\nfirst course is unthinkable. No Liberal Ministry especially, would care to go
\ndown to posterity as having betrayed the people of England and the future of
\ndemocracy by such a sacrifice of the
\npalladium of British liberty. Mr. Asquith
\nmay either dissolve as soon as the Lords refuse to withdraw their amendments or
\nhe may ask the King to create a number of Liberal Peers large enough to swamp
\nthe Conservative majority in the Lords, or he may at once bring in a bill for
\nthe limitation of the veto of the Upper House and dissolve upon it so as to
\nraise definitely the question of the veto as the one real issue before the
\nelectors. The first course has this great disadvantage, that the real issues
\nmay be covered over by the clamour of the Conservative party against the
\nsocialistic trend of the new taxation and by the cry of Tariff Reform. By dint
\nof repeated iteration the Conservatives have created an impression in many
\nminds that the present Ministry is deeply tinged with Socialism and the Budget
\na deliberate attack on property. The effect
\nthis cry is having on the mind of the wealthier classes is shown by the number
\nof defections in the Liberal ranks, \u2014 not so many, however, as might have been
\nexpected, \u2014 and the diminution of the Liberal vote at the bye-elections. The
\nBudget opens the door to Socialism, but is in none of its provisions
\nSocialistic, the only real novelty of importance being the land taxes which
\nhave their counterpart in countries the reverse of Socialistic. The Ministry is
\nitself a curious conglomeration of Moderates, Radicals, and extreme Radicals,
\nbut there is not a single Socialist in its ranks and many of its members are
\navowedly anti-Socialistic in their temper and opinions. Nevertheless, the cry
\nis having its effect on the susceptible British elector and, unless it is met,
\nwill imperil a great number of Liberal seats. The cry of Tariff Reform has its charm for a certain number of
\nworking men, but is not in itself so
\nformidable as the catchword of Property in Danger. To dissolve upon the
\nrejection of the Budget will have the effect of preventing a clear issue from
\nbeing raised and confusing the public mind by the entanglement of three
\nseparate questions. Socialism<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 269<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nand
\nthe Budget, Free Trade or Tariff Reform, and the veto of the House of Lords.
\nThe Ministry have everything to lose, the Opposition everything to gain by
\nthis confusion of issues.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nThe
\nsecond device is being urged upon the Prime Minister by some of his supporters
\nwho are rather short-sighted politicians than men with the outlook of the
\nstatesman. The temporary difficulty would no doubt be surmounted, but it is a
\nmatter of unfailing experience that Liberal Peers so created gravitate in a
\nvery short time to Conservatism. If these Peers had to be actually created, the
\nLiberal Ministry would very soon be face to face again with a similar situation,
\nand the drastic remedy of doubling the bulk of the House of Lords could not be
\nrepeated ad infinitum<\/i>. On the other
\nhand, if the Peers yielded in order to avoid so great an indignity to their
\nrank and order, they would do so under the most rigorous compulsion and be all
\nthe more eager to hamper and distress their victors in less vital matters. Mr. Asquith would avoid a particular difficulty, but
\nonly to perpetuate the great stumbling-block of all Liberal Ministries, a permanently
\nConservative Upper House. On the other hand he has a chance, if he boldly
\nseizes on this issue, of avoiding a fight on the weaker points of the Budget,
\nof forcing to the forefront a great constitutional issue in which everything
\nliberal or even truly conservative in England ought to be on his side, and
\ndestroying at one blow and forever this perpetual thorn in the side of Liberalism
\nand obstacle to radical legislation.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nThe
\ndrastic device of swamping the Lords with newly created Liberal Peers will be
\ntoo much needed shortly to be thrown away now. When in the new Parliament, the
\nbill for the limitation of the Peers’ veto has been carried through the
\nCommons, it will have to be carried through the Lords as well before it can
\nreceive the King’s sanction and become law, and, since the Lords as they are
\nwill not consent to their own nullification, it is only by the swamping device
\nthat this great resolution can be effected. The only question is whether the
\nbill should be brought in before or postponed till after the election. To bring
\nin the bill before, pass it formally through the Commons without permitting
\nmuch debate and immediately dissolve for a mandate from the country, would be
\nthe boldest but also the best policy for Ministers. It<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 270<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nwould
\ndefinitely raise the question as the one issue of the election and, if confined
\nto the limitation and not the destruction of the veto, \u2014 so as to avoid the
\ncharge of destroying the constitution, \u2014 would rally the whole force of
\nLiberalism behind Mr. Asquith. We do not
\nknow whether the course has suggested itself to the tacticians of the party,
\nbut it seems to us that it gives the only chance of a really effective and
\nvictorious electioneering campaign.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nWith
\nall this, what are the chances of a Liberal victory ? Very small, unless the Labour-Socialist vote is conciliated. The great feature of the recent
\nbye-elections has been the repeated splitting of the democratic vote between
\nLabourite and Liberal, the substantiality of the Labour vote and the consequent
\ndefeat of the Ministerial candidate and return of the Conservative in spite of
\na democratic majority in the constituency. For the Socialist Party this is the
\nright policy, by their independent attitude on an occasion of such vital
\nimportance to convince the Liberals that they cannot hope to exist as a power
\nwithout coming to terms with the Socialist vote. But for the Liberals to accept
\na triangular contest would be sheer suicide. It would mean either a
\nConservative majority, not in the country \u2014  for the pendulum has not swung back
\nso far \u2014 but in the House, or a Conservative Ministry with the Irish
\nNationalists holding the balance of power. It would be well worth Mr. Asquith’s while to give the Socialist-Labour faction the
\n80 seats they hope to win, on condition of holding the other Liberal seats
\nsecure from competition. But an accommodation of this kind would mean an
\nalliance with Socialism, as well as with Ireland, and some very drastic
\nlegislation in the next Parliament. It is difficult to gauge the weight of the
\nModerate element in the Cabinet, and it may be strong enough to face defeat
\nrather than permit such an alliance.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nWe
\nhave dealt with this subject and its issues at length, partly in order to draw
\nthe attention of our readers to the issues and methods of a great and critical
\nelection in a democratic country. The introduction of democratic institutions
\nin India, more genuine than the present Reform Scheme, cannot be long delayed,
\nand it will be well for those of us who think to study their working in the
\nEuropean country which serves as a model to others. But beyond this aspect of
\nthe elections, there is a deeper<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 271<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ninterest
\nto us Indians in the great constitutional struggle now at hand. The abolition
\nor limitation of the Lords’ veto is a question of supreme importance to the
\nIndian politician. When the time comes, \u2014 and it is coming surely \u2014 that
\npopular assemblies have to be established in India, the veto of the Lords will
\nbe the one instrument that reaction will use to stay reform for a long season.
\nIt is that instrument which has baffled Irish Nationalism. If it continues to
\nexist, it will baffle Indian Nationalism also. Although, therefore, Liberal and Conservative are one in their
\nattitude towards India, every Indian patriot must watch with keen interest the
\nresult of the struggle and desire, not the success of the departing Ministry,
\nbut victory for the destroyers of the Lords’ veto.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 272<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n


\n\tHOME<\/font><\/span><\/a><\/b>
\n\t<\/font>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Great Election   It IS not often that we care to dwell at length on the incidents of English politics in which, as a…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1109","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-02-karmayogin-volume-02","wpcat-23-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1109","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1109"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1109\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1109"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1109"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1109"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}