The Dominion SATURDAY’, FEBRUARY 18, 1933. WHITHER THE WORLD?

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 124, 18 February 1933, Page 10

The Dominion SATURDAY’, FEBRUARY 18, 1933. WHITHER THE WORLD?

Discussing in these columns yesterday the depressed state of the dairy produce market in England, which has added a ” ot P\ to olir crowing list of economic worries, we called attention to the danger of aggravating our difficulties by the application of what ilr ? M Keynfs calls “spurious remedies.” Of course we must do all in our power’but as already emphasised our ultunate vation depends upon international action. To some y a vague phrase. Its significance and its implications may be cleaily grasped if we stand back and survey the international situation as a W ° The world is still in a’ state of tension only differentiated from organised warfare by the fact that, outside certain areas there are no naval or military operations. Professor Zimmern points out th as the nations are economically interdependent the Great, War was really a world-wide Civil War, and all concerned are now suffering from the consequences. There have been peace treaties, Internationa, agreements, interminable discussions, but as yet no settlements upon which financial and economic conditions can be stabilised. It is thus clear that any 'single country attempting to put into operation plans for its recovery without reference to the general situation runs a serious risk of getting deeper into the quagmire. _ It is a situation unparalleled in the world s history. Ihe only possible method of dealing with it is by collective action. Previously it was thought that general recovery could be achieved by putting this nation or that on its feet, by scaling down or remitting war indebtedness, by relieving the nations of a substantial measuie of then expenditure upon armaments, and so on. These are all, in themselves, important factors, but they are piecemeal remedies prescribed without due consideration of the fact that the first essential is a general agreement to act in concert instead of in groups. The Lausanne Conference provides an illustration of the futility of group decisions and. the proposition could be demonstrated in various other ways. Each and every instance quoted or quotable, however, leads to the same conclusion, and strengthens the conviction that only through collective decisions, translated from the forum of speech-making to the arena of determined action, will the ultimate recovery of the countries of the world be made possible and secure. We still appear to be a long way from the point at which the need for collective action will be the subject of a general and unanimous resolution. Witness the squabbles over the War debts, the paralysis of diplomacy in the Far East, the distrust and suspicion at the Disarmament Conference, the intensification of economic nationalism. How unanimity is to be reached, if ever, is not yet clear. There is, however, a growing conviction that for its attainment there is required a spiritual impulse. Not long ago there was held in London a combined meeting representative of the Church and the business community, and The Times, commenting on the event, improved the occasion by pointing a moral which seems to supply the key to the situation: There can be no escape from our financial difficulties without a spiritual revival, without a renewal of faith, hope, and love. If some magical formula could instantly endow our nation with wealth, it would not provide a satisfying or permanent remedy for its disorders. Business men are increasingly aware of this truth. What they desire is the growth of an atmosphere at home and abroad in which the conduct of visible affairs is dominated by invisible ideals, in which what is right counts for more khan what appeals to self-interest.

There is undoubtedly a real need for a change of heart among the nations, a world-wide revelation comparable in its results to the transformation effected in an individual by a spiritual conversion profound, inspiring, and actively stimulating.