DETROIT JEWISH CHRONICLE and The Legal Chronicle

Page Four

Friday, March 29, 194r

Detroit Jewish Chronicle

and THE LEGAL CHRONICLE

Personal Problems

Published Weekly by Jewish Chronicle eublishinq Co., Inc., 525 Woodward Ave., Detroit 26, Mich., Tel. CAdillac 1040

By W. A. GOLDBERG, Ph.D.

SUBSCRIPTION: 53.00 PER YEAR, SINGLE COPIES, 10c: FOREI'GN, $5.00 PER YEAR
trtered as Second-class matter March 3, 1916, it the Postctfice at Detroit, Mich., under the Act of March 3, 1879

Copyrighted, 1946, by W. A. Goldberg, Ph.D.

Ed itor-in-Chief, LOUIS W. ENFIELD

.

Vol. 48, No. 13

Publisher, CY AARON

Managing Editor, NATHAN J. KAUFMAN

FRIDAY, MARCH 29, 1946 (ADAR II, 26, 5706)

Detroit 26, Michigan

Did We Get Anything from This War.?

Again and again people ask this ques-
tion. Usually, they ask it rhetorically, to
support some claim Or argument. If we
can't make such and such an advance in
progress, they exclaim, tL.A why did we
fight the war?
Thinking has to be clear on this ques-
tion for there are two separate answers.
One is the conventional answer that one
is supposed to give and which is a really
true one. The other is a genuine answer,
one which calls for clear analysis and a
critical evaluation.
The conventional answer is the one we
have been sold on and for which we must
get our money's worth. We fought for the
preservation of our way of life, for the
cause of human freedom, to save democ-
racy. It is a good reason for fighting. And
we must try to make its meaning clear so
that "this war shall not have been fought
in vain."
We were going to make a new and
better world. But how? What were
we going to do? Why don't we have
a new and better world now that this
war is so many months past? Already
there is talk of a third war. But there
is little evidence of the new and bet-
ter world for which we supposedly
fought. We were told that a world
was to be created in which "all na-
tions were to live in security and free-
dom."
Was It In Vain?
We fought and won. Did we get what
we were fighting for? Was the war fought
in vain? What were we fighting for any-
way? Not in vague terms that mean one
thing to one person and another to an-
other. Specifically, what were our aims
and how many of them did we realize?
What did we want to get out of this war?
It quickly becomes apparent that there
is no single answer. It depends largely on
who that "we" is. It includes many coun-
tries and many groups within each coun-
try. These groups are not all agreed in
this country. The labor group thinks we
fought to give them social gains. The
manufacturers group thinks we fought to
preserve free enterprise. The farmer's
group thinks along its own lines. So does
the white collar group and the small busi-
ness man and the professional group.
Had-all the "freedom loving countries"
been united in what they wanted before
the war, they could easily have stopped
Germany, Italy and Japan in their tracks
long before those countries were strong
enough to fight a war of aggression.
We knew we were fighting what
Nazism stood for. This was the kind
of a government which used force
and fraud to suppress all political
freedom, all freedom of thought and
learning. Its official policy was to
quidate Jews, to glorify brutality, to
inculcate hatred of man against man
and group against group.
We were all against that somewhat in
the same way we are all against sin. We
watched the steady progress of Nazism
for years, doing nothing all the time. We
saw one country being swallowed up af-
ter another. We felt polite regrets. We
did nothing.
Knew What They Fought For
These other nations that were swallow-
ed up knew what they were fighting for.
They learned the hard way, from bitter
experience. They were fighting, of course,
for their national existence and their po-
litical freedom. But they were struggling
for something more fundamental than this.
They were struggling for the common
decencies of civilized living where men
might laugh and enjoy life and communi-
cate with each other and earn a livelihood
and worship and do the thousand and one
things that made fora worthwhile exist-
ence.
The people in Europe learned long be-
fore we did that the destruction of the
Nazi state was an absolute requisite for
any sort of political independence or ;

freedom of any sort in Europe and, were
Europe to fall, of any place in the world.
The countries that were invaded learned
this through bitter experience.

We learned this much more slowly.
In fact, we have not learned it thor-
oughly yet. We entered the war for-
mally when we were attacked by
Japan at Pearl Harbor. There was no
question then of united thinking or
agreement of policy. With one raid,
Japan unified the people of this coun-
try as nothing else could have unified
them. We were attacked. Our nation-
al interests were at stake. We were in
the war and must fight it to a finish.
The European nations who won the war
know what they want because they lost
what they had. They want freedom from
spies and secret police. They want the
opportunity to say what they feel about
the government without fear of reprisal.
They want their houses free from nightly
visits from Gestapo agents. They want to
live without fear of imprisonment and
torture.

We Always Had Them

We didn't want all these. We have al-
ways had them and who would want to
fight for the thing he always had and
hence doesn't value too highly? The peo-
ple in the European countries, therefore,
were fighting AGAINST something. And
they knew from bitter first-hand experi-
ence what they were fighting against.
And because they knew what they were
fighting against, they could more easily
determine what they were fighting FOR.
In short, they were fighting for the pre-
servation of the things they had before
the war.

Therefore, the conventional answer at
the beginning is the correct answer. We
did fight to preserve the American way
of life which was threatened. We fought
to preserve our representative govern-
ment and our civil rights. We fought to
preserve all the freedoms we have had is
this country for so long, freedom of the
press, freedom of speech, freedom of
worship, freedom to choose one's own oc-
cupation and to be secure in it.

Freedom Not Perfect

These freedoms are all far from per-
fect. We do have economic royalists. We
do have lynchings in the South. We do
have religious bigots who use press and
radio to spew out a gospel of hate. But
we also have the best standard of living
that exists in the world. Ask in any coun-
try over the face of the globe. Who is
there who would not gladly come to
America to live and bring up his children?

The war brought tremendous forward
strides in the field of medicine. But we
did not fight the war for these. There
were great technological improvements.
But it was not for these. New inventions
will make the coming age a remarkable
one. But no war was necessary for that.

For the preservation of our liberty, the
had to be fought. And having won
the war, we must see to it that our liberty
remains the kind that is worth preserving,
that the four freedoms come first to our
own land and then spread all over the
world. We must realize that if the whole
world is not free, we will not stay free.

war

Jews Must Think Clearly

Patticularly for the Jew is it neces-
sary that these things are clear. Eter-
nal vigilance is the price of this lib-
erty. The Jew must always remain on
the watch for inroads that threaten.
For he will be the first victim if in-
roads are allowed. In this the Jew
here must be an American. America
was the decisive factor in the winning
of this war. It is up to America to see
that there will never be another.

Director, Counselling Service

All rights reserved

Your questions in personal problems will be answered
by mail as far as possible or m these columns. Send
your question and a stamped, self-addressed envel-
ope to Dr. W. A. Goldberg, 1314 Eaton Tower, De-
troit 26, Mich. or to the Detroit Jewish Chron-
icle, 525 Woodward Avenue, Detroit 26, Mich.

Supporting Aged Parents

"My parents are very old and cannot work. They have been in
failing health for many years. Since my marriage I have support-
ed them and will keep on doing so. Ilowever, I have already passed
thirty years of age and have been delaying my own family because
there isn't enough money for my folks and my own family. I won-
der, at times, if my sacrifices are really necessary or whetherk
should be more selfish and consider my own interests first."

—Mrs. 1). A.

Your decision is one faced by many people. Actually you are ask-
ing help in this problem: "How will the folks live if I don't support
them? Should I continue putting off my own family until perhaps it
is too . late?" Back in your mind is perhaps the question, "Am I a
heartless person if I consider myself before my parents?"

As with many other questions, there can be no clear-cut answer.
The longer you delay having the family, the smaller your family. Or
you may have no children of your own. In the latter case, you will
blame your parents, even unconsiously, for this incompleteness of
your own life.

How clearly did you think about this question when you took on
the job of supporting your parents? Did you set a time limit? If you
did, can you stop now or soon? Perhaps there are other children who
can take over the burden. Often it is the lot of one child to lavish his
entire attention on parents or brothers and sisters, to the neglect of
his own life. In too many cases, one child is "it" and every other mem-
ber of the family expects him to suppress himself in family duties.
The child who does so is often considered a sucker. 'De other children
think they are smart.

Possible Action on Your Part

Part of your difficulty seems to be that you resent being "it"
among your brothers and sisters. In that case, you have one answer.
Tell them firmly that you will no longer assume the entire responsi-
bility. Tell them definitely that it is time they acted—as children of
the same parents, rather than strangers. If necessary, you might have
a solution in making one brother or sister totally responsible for all
support and care of your parents for one or more months at a time.

If, on the other hand, you are an only child, you have another
situation. Your choice was limited when you assumed responsibility.
It has not changed much since then. The job is yours to meet.

Why not visit the home for the aged of your group in your city or
wherever it is? How does it impress you? Would your parents br
happy there? Would they get medical care when needed? If your par-
ents are aged, they will need more and more medical attention. In a
home for the aged they will find such care usually. They will be in
the company of others of their age and generation and with whom
they may enjoy their remaining years. That will rest your mind as to
their care, as well as any attention they may need. You may wish to
contribute something toward their care and thus ease your financial
burden and your mind.

If your parents are quite independent sort of folks, they may meet
the requirements of old age assistance. Again you n.ay wish to send
your portion of the expense. You may continue to help by buying
clothing and like matters.

In either of these ways, you will begin to reach a solution. You
will no longer be torn between your own marriage and your duty
toward your parents. You may also wish to follow this suggestion.
What is your estimate of how much longer your folks will need your
help? This is not crude nor is it calculating. Can you share your funds
for two more years? Five years? You may wish to continue as now if
the time is short. If it is longer, the above two suggestions may re-
solve your difficulty.

In any event, take no action without discussing it with your par-
ents. Get their reaction on how you might meet the question. Ask their
advice. They may more readily accept an adverse decision in which
they had a share than if you do not consult them. I am surd they will
be able to see your side and will bear you no ill will.

Stop Thief!

1 ).

