.

Many Georgists feel that the Georgist movement is making satisfactory progress, but many feel it is not. Remembering that any progress made so far could be wiped out if extremes such as fascism or communism became, as they might, more acceptable, I must confess that I feel on the side of the "old school" -- which is, lamentably, the pessimistic school.

Obviously, it cannot be claimed that all veteran Georgists are pessimistic and that all new Georgists are optimistic -- but for want of better labels, I believe that "old" and "new" will help me make my point.

Some "old" Georgists are pessimistic because they believe that we should aim our propaganda at the masses and not, as the "new" Georgists do, at the leaders, politicians, professors, etc. And the reason why the "new" Georgists are optimistic is because leaders occasionally cast an eye towards LVT.

What the new Georgists forget, I believe, is that much of the interest they produce is very artificial. If the leaders were genuinely impressed with George's ideas , they would say so more often, as we do. They see our proposals as giving benefits rather than as a major reform.

'The Liberal Party in Britain is an example of this timidity. It advocates site value rating, but if it ever gained power, I am quite certain that the slightest breeze could wipe it and site value rating from people's minds. In Australia, so I gather, many people believe that site value rating is better than other taxes; but far fewer see that it is much more than a tax.

For these reasons, I find myself sympathetic to the old approach of appealing to the masses so that they can influence the loaders. I say, do what Henry George did, and get the masses to understand the importance of land. Make the masses realize that land is as essential as air. Use modern methods and slogans, by all means, but hammer the point home.

The old Georgists remember the days when the masses forced the politicians to take notice. Their pessimism is not due to senility, but is well founded. We owe it to them to be more vociferous.

I reject the cynical view that the masses are too indoctrinated or disinterested to be influenced now. We after all were convinced, and so it is vain to imagine that others cannot be impressed.

Mr. H.R. Lee, from whom I learned about Henry George, says that politicians are like wheelbarrows -- they want pushing. He also used to say that a stone thrown into a pond will cause many ripples. I believe Mr. Lee was right.

There have been some excellent suggestions for propaganda in the International Union Newsletter. We should follow these up, and leave the academic niceties for talk among ourselves.

Semi-socialism is the main reason why George was forgotten, but now -- especially in Britain -- semi-socialism is coming apart at the seams. If Georgists do not step in, some Hitler or Stalin will. We should not mind scorn; it could be our best ally. This is why film stars say, "Call me good or bad, but don't ignore me."

I am not suggesting entering politics. This, I realize, night not be wise, but we should try to attract more interest. Press and TV may ignore us, but they do not ignore the hippies and students. This does not mean that we have to beat up policemen or take drugs -- there must be other, more sensible ways of creating interest.

The "new" Georgists have had a good innings. I believe it is tine for the "old" to take the field once more. We have everything to gain, and nothing, as I see it, to lose.