FROM WEEK TO WEEK

Grey River Argus, 31 March 1943, Page 3

FROM WEEK TO WEEK

(By

H. Winston Rhodes)

CHURCHILL’S..NEW ORDER: Once again Mr ChurchTll’s speech was received with immediate and unrestrained v enthusiasm. Once again as .the days , passed some of the enthusiasm wore off, doubts were expressed, questions were asked, and many commentators seemed to suggest that very little if anything had been added to the discussion • of post-war problems. Perhaps some of the critics had expected that Mr Churchill would be more precise and detailed, that he would publicly repudiate his political tradition and environment, that he would describe at least in outline a NEW social order, or even that he would deal with some of the concrete problems the delayed solution of which is not increasing the unity of the United Nations. Mr Churchill did none of these things. The two most important observations in his speech where contained in the remarks which suggested first that “it should not appear to the world that the people of Britain were diverting their attention to fruits of victory Which still "had to be won, while Russia was fighting for her life and decisive battles were being fought in Tunisia, and second that the problems of post-war reconstruction will not be solved without “the cordial agreement and direct participation of Britain, the United States and Russia.” He might have added China. The rdBt of his speceh was con- , fined to generalities which were (more open to criticism because their meaning was less clear. His omission of China in the statemen quoted Was unfortunate, and his reference to the Pacific and the possible demobilisation of a part of the armed forces after the defeat. o Hitler was not calculated to win an enthusiastic response from the Chinese people. . Although Mr Churchill had said it was to be hoped that the unity of the three leading victorious Powers would be worthy of their supreme responsibility and that they would think not only of their own welfare but that of the whole world, there w‘as no concrete allusion to the P™blems of the Asiatic peoples inc l ud ’ : and Chinese, which

would suggest that Madame Chiang Kai-shek’s prompt rejoinder was not unnecessary. 4 .v, ir , 0 . She replied: “It is an easier thing to court the approbation of ones country: it is a harder thing to speak according to the dictates of conscience. This is especially so when one’s consciouce tells one that to prevent future destruction and carnage one must think not only in terms of the good of one’s country, but in the terms of the good ot other peoples." .It is doubtful whether the four or five hundred million of Chinese, the three or 5 four hundred million Indians, or even the two hundred million Russians are to be counted nmong the of the orl which? according to Mr Churchill is coming increasingly to admne t e British parliamentary system and ideas, or among those who admit that "religion has been the rock in the life and character of the British people.” Nor is it clear fiom these statements that Mr Churchill is in complete disagreement with Ladv Astor who said; ”1 would like China and Russia to lie in the framework of a new society formed by America and the British Commonwealth, but they would have to get into the British way of thinking.

THE FOUR YEAR PLAN: Mr Churchill’s reference to a Four Year Plan was hailed by The Times as marking an epoch in the social policy of this country, but even The Times objected to Mr Churchill’s caution in his reference to the cost of social reform and to his suggestion that little could be done until the end of .the war What is more important to notice however is that the Four Year Plan is one which is based on the preservation of the old social classes described by Mr' Churchill as the ancient . aristocracy, the modern plutocracy and the ordinary public. It is based’ upon private and State enterprise, but no indication is given of the functions of each. Moreover it is suggested that progress will be made from a class to a national foundation in the politics and economics of our society and civilisation and stress is placed upon Britain's mission as the trustee of Colonial

possessions, . It is true of course that the Foul Year Plan deals vaguely with such matters as national insurance, • British agriculture (the vigorous revival of a healthy village life on the basis of higher wages and improved housing), health, education and the ro-establishment of British export trade, but all that it is possible to gain from an examination of Mr Churchill’s statements is that a programme of social reform is overdue and demanded lay" the people. It must be confessed that the Four Year Plan remains a phrase which at present offers no solution for the many problems of the post-wai world. It is a plan which completely ignores the NEW social order of which there has been so much discussion. The most that it promises is the development of society from a class to A national basis. Unfortunately or fortunately we have learnt 'to distrust talk about a national basis. Attempts have been made in the ptist to solve class problems and property problems on a national basis, but these have been attempts which led to fascism. The British Labour Movement and the Trade Union Movement have a tremendous responsibility at the present time to ensure that preparations for a Four Year Plan will include preparations for a plan to solve class, property and colonial problems not to conserve them and cover them with phrases. '