The Grey River Argus WEDNESDAY, November 18, 1942. FRUITS OF VICTORY.

Grey River Argus, 18 November 1942, Page 4

The Grey River Argus WEDNESDAY, November 18, 1942. FRUITS OF VICTORY.

With fighting in prospect as hard as any yet during the War, it may appear to many rather early to begin exploring post-war problems and possibilities. The latest successes of Allied arms, first in Africa and now in the

Southern Pacific are, nevertheless, calculated to direct attention to the probable final outcome of hostilities that are being waged almost throughout the world. In Britain, however, a post-war internal policy, agricultural as well as. industrial and social, Iras been for some time in course of formulation, the Hon. A. Greenwood in particular having been entrusted with, the study of rehabilitation. It is undoubtedly a prudent course to define as soon as possible, not only the course any particular country or geographical larea should follow when the question of peace is being settled, but also the terms on which the Allies will establish a post war relationship among themselves and towards the enemy countries. The las,t Avar has remained notorious in one respect. It failed in the proclaimed aim of ending Adar, and in little more than a generation Avas followed by a worse conflict. The famous fourteen points proved a. farce, and the defeated peoples were treated in such a way that their most truculent element was able to dragoon its truncated fellies into a yet greater military venture. It is not meantime a question of what might be imposed on a. vanquished enemy so mucir as one of the relationship of the United Nations. The Atlantic Charter proclaimed economic democracy, but there the matter has been left as much a matter of paper as Wilson’s points. The Indians, for instance, have quoted the Charter in the extremity in which that vast populace still remains, asking why it'should not at once be implemented in their regard. That is doubtless impracticable amidst war, but an approach to the ideal of the Charter has been suggested to the Indians. This question has seemed a livelier one in the United States than in British countries, giving rise recently to an American controversy on the subject of imperialism. Mr Wendell Willkie, who especially has studied of late the position of China, Russia, and India, and indeed other arejas which have been under dominion from without, has uoav questioned Mr. Church ill’s dictum that he was not “liquidating” the British Empire. Perhaps Mr. Churchill could have gone further and said that is beyond his power. An Australian

spokesman lias just remarked that the British once and for all ought now to drop the term “empire.” Mr. Willkie, however, is out less for verbal than material changes, saying that nothing will be done merely by the declarations of leaders to make available after the war materials 'of selfdevelopment for all nations. The operative term here appe'ars not to be so much materials as selfdevelopment. Access to raw materials was at Geneva years ago guaranteed any country by spokesmen for the British Empire, when Germany was complaining of economic encirclement, a fairer claim than her later one of political or military encirclement. Mr. Willkie now declares that freedom for all nations is not obtainable from political internationalism, but he demands economic internationalism. If he defines it as free trade, the British Commonwealth may not quite agree, as self-development means self-control ’over production land commerce to a reasonable extent. Mr. Willkie seems right, however, in saying that the war should no longer be fought in silence regarding _ its ulterior aims, but that these ’ should now be defined, lest the only thing won, at the behest of experts, should only be “blood and ashes.” Americans are spending blood and treasure themselves in a degree that entitles them to a say, and these Dominions will not forget whjit is owing to them now. It is obvious that when peace does come to b'e formulated, the United States will exert an influence compared with which that of Wilson after the last war will appear of little account. Thus it is desirable to learn American ideas at once. Tfiade will figure in these largely, but the Dominions also have their ideas, and self-development will figure as largely in them as in the ideas of any other country. Britain is discussing ,a reversion to agriculture, one investigator urging that self-sufficiency is dictlated by the Dominions rapid expansion in their own secondary industries. Naturally the force of. finance capital is hostile, but finance capital must adopt itself to a new order in which peoples will set more store by real wealth than by mere credit. Lease-lend technique has made familiar exchanges of real as distinct from token wealth. States make wartime deals that should be later adaptable for peace time needs. Free trhde has proven in practice a negation of self-development, and regulated trade must be one object of the peace. International regulation should be feasible to the extent of affording all the material their internal economy requires, but each is entitled to an ordered and secure internal economy, with stable prices, genuine quality, and adequate living standards. For genuine economic internationalism, guidance could best be obtained from no more universal movement, and none better fitted technically and historically to give a lead, th|an the Labour movement.