WORLD’S HELPER IS U.S. POLICY, SAYS REPUBLICAN

Grey River Argus, 24 May 1947, Page 5

WORLD’S HELPER IS U.S. POLICY, SAYS REPUBLICAN

NEW YORK, May 21

Addressing the American Legion at Jefferson, loha, Mr Harold Stassen, who seeks Republican nomination as presidential candidate, said that the United States should devote 10 percent of the total national production of goods and food for the next 10 pears “to building for world-wide peace, plenty, and freedom.” Mr Stassen expressed the opinion that such a plan “should not be a sharpster lending policy or a lightheaded give-away programme, but should be a practical, sound, longvisioned and business-like approach to the situation that exists in the world to-day and to what we can forsee in the years ahead.” The United States should consult the views of the United Nations Sbcial and Economic Council, but “we must ourselves actually administer the programme to safeguard against inflationary effects at home oi- diversion from our purposes abroad. Each participating Government should be required to give unwavering suppoprt to the United Nations, and distribution should not be dispersed as hand-outs to those who cry ‘Wolf’ or ‘Communist’ the loudest.” Mr Stassen continued: “We should not expect repayment in dollars or in manufactured goods, because the rest of the world cannot repay in either. We should expect repayments of the kinds and types that the rest of the world is capable of giving and that we need. We should expedite long-term agreements for fair access to raw materials in other parts of the world so that we do not further dissipate our own natural resources in this tremendous productive effort.”

Mr Stassen said he believed that America could find a strong, wise and humanitarian world policy between the two extremes advocated by Mr Henry Wallace and Colonel McCormick, of the Chicago “Tribune.” He expressed the opinion that the Wallace doctrine would make America a nation of fellow-travellers down the wrong road, placing America hand in hand with those elements in Europe who would recrease economic freedom and subsequently dim other liberties. On the other hand, the McCormick doctrine would “make America a nation of cold-hearted misers passing by on the other side. It, too, would lead to tragic results for our country. It would make us hated round the globe. It would lead us to a defensive war.”