War, Peace and Profits
The casualties of war mount with the scale of military operations, but outnumbering even the victims of the battlefield are the legions who succumb to the fearful heritage of war—hunger and pestilence. That was the experience after the last world-war, as we are reminded in a book just published by the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
“Medical Relief in Europe,” by Dr. Melville D. Mackenzie, is described in “The Londoner’s Diary” (“Evening Standard,” 24/7/42) as being the “grimmest, most fascinating book I have read recently.” Its grimness cannot be questioned, for it tells the author’s experiences in Eastern Europe after the last war, where he worked with Nansen in an endeavour to relieve the plight caused by starvation and disease. Despite their efforts, “more people were killed by famine and disease in the three years after the war than by guns during the war.” We do not know whether the author’s work took him to Central Europe, where the devastation wrought by these “Horsemen of the Apocalypse” was equally fearful. Amid such parlous conditions the democratic republic of Weimar was born — puny and rickety, like many of its children. No wonder it did not survive.
In Hungary, the revolt led by Bela Kun was crushed, according to the Communists, not so much by superior force, but by the American shipments of wheat placed into the hands of Hungary’s old ruling class, the reactionary landowning aristocracy. Whilst bombs are raining on cities and millions of men are blowing each other to pieces, the horrors and problems of the present crowd speculations as to the future into the background. Only our rulers permit themselves occasional, highly rhetorical, glimpses.
Mr. Anthony Eden, perhaps second in popularity only to Mr. Churchill, and a strong tip for future premiership, in a speech at Nottingham on July 23rd, delivered himself of the following : —
“Industry has reached a stage in which there is no necessity for anyone in the world to go short of food, or to lack the means to build themselves a better life. The problem is to organise a full production and an equitable distribution for all.” (“News-Chronicle,” July 24th, 1942.)
A problem indeed. For Mr. Eden and his class, none of whom conceive or admit the need for Socialism, it is insoluble. But there is no harm in trying, at any rate, on the public platform.
Bearing in mind the disappointment which awaited the workers in the years of slump and unemployment that followed the last war, Mr. Eden added a word of caution :
“We must have no illusion about the future even after the war is won. To win the peace will be as hard a task as to win the war. We shall need the same national unity at home. We shall need true friendship between the nations who have fought as Allies.” (Ibid.)
We shall need something far more drastic, the abolition of the capitalist social order. But Mr. Eden would not be able to help in that direction. He can only hold out hopes for a continuation of some form of “National Government” and agreement on international policy among the victors. We are not told what contribution an alliance of political parties, all of whom have had their chance of dealing with the problems of poverty, unemployment and other evils, but failed, can make to the future happiness of mankind. In the sphere of international relations there are already signs of rifts in the lute. Mr. Cordell Hull, United States Secretary for Foreign Affairs, declared in a speech of the same date as that of Mr. Eden, that the welfare of the post-war world demands “the removal of trade barriers.” Whilst Free Trade may suit the interests of American capitalists, it is not so clear that it would be welcome to ruling class interests in Britain and elsewhere. Wherever we turn, the interests of capitalist ownership of the means of life nationally and internationally effectively prevent any substantial amelioration of human suffering. It is idle for Mr. Eden to avow in the same speech that “Never again must we tolerate the chronic unemployment, the extremes of wealth and poverty, and slums, and lack of opportunity for so many, which have disfigured our national life in the past.”
And may we add, continue to disfigure it in the present. In a written statement by Captain Crookshank, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, it is seen that—
“The number of big incomes shows no reduction. A hundred people still receive over £100,000 a year, but whereas in 1939 they paid 12J millions in tax, they now pay 17.3 millions.” (“Evening Standard,” July 24th, 1942.)
We are not told whether their combined incomes have risen since 1939, though that may well be the case.
At the other end of the social line-up, 5,700,000 taxpayers are in the £125—£250 per year class. With the cost of living at its present rate, it is not necessary to be a student of economics to appreciate the hardships suffered by those wage earners and their dependents.
Nowhere have the ruling class relaxed their grip on the economic and political life of the country. Rather have they strengthened it. Squeezing out the smaller capitalist fry will give greater power and security to the monopolies, just as it will lower the social status of a working class having to contend with powerful combines, whose representatives personally occupy the pivotal positions within the machinery of State. These are the realities of the present and they count for more than the chimera of platform speeches.
They also reveal the future trends of capitalist society. In other countries, too, this centralisation of control and ownership has been put into effect or else discussed; the motive is not a new one; it is the same that has actuated capitalist production from the beginning—profits and the greater security in obtaining them.
Bearing in mind what has been said at the beginning of this article, the following item of news is of special interest : —
Under the heading, “A European Plan for Farming,” the “News-Chronicle” which reported the speech of Mr. Eden also brings news of a conference in London between representatives of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Greece, Hungary, Rumania and Bulgaria.
“These representatives,” the report goes on to say, “have prepared a peasant programme aimed at opening new post-war markets for their countries in Western Europe—the only way to free them from economic and political domination by Germany.”
“Their programme insists on peasant ownership, with peasant institutions, democratically organised; ample facilities for credit, including a Central Agricultural Bank; and regulated prices.”
Can the futility of capitalism be demonstrated more convincingly ? There are prospects of mass starvation for some time after the war in these very countries, and landowning interests there are looking to Western Europe for a “market” !
Unless the workers of the world awaken to the urgency of Socialism, the epitaph of all human civilisation may well be :
“They wanted work and they gave them munitions factories and war; they wanted bread and they gave them a Central Agricultural Bank and regulated prices.”
S. R.