diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63400-0.txt | 11468 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63400-0.zip | bin | 235259 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63400-h.zip | bin | 307946 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63400-h/63400-h.htm | 11945 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63400-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 24955 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63400-h/images/illus01.jpg | bin | 9198 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63400-h/images/illus02.jpg | bin | 20993 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63400-h/images/illus03.jpg | bin | 5755 -> 0 bytes |
11 files changed, 17 insertions, 23413 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f812945 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #63400 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/63400) diff --git a/old/63400-0.txt b/old/63400-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 9acb3a8..0000000 --- a/old/63400-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,11468 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook, These are the British, by Drew Middleton - - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - - - - -Title: These are the British - - -Author: Drew Middleton - - - -Release Date: October 7, 2020 [eBook #63400] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - - -***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THESE ARE THE BRITISH*** - - -E-text prepared by Tim Lindell, Graeme Mackreth, and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images -digitized by the Google Books Library Project (https://books.google.com) -and generously made available by HathiTrust Digital Library -(https://www.hathitrust.org/) - - - -Note: Images of the original pages are available through - HathiTrust Digital Library. See - https://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015065841051 - - - - - -THESE -are the British - - -[Illustration] - - -THESE -are the British - -by - -DREW MIDDLETON - - - - - - -New York: Alfred · A · Knopf: Mcmlvii - - -[Illustration] - - -[Illustration] -L.C. catalog card number: 57-11164 -© Drew Middleton, 1957 - - -[Illustration: THIS IS A BORZOI BOOK, PUBLISHED BY ALFRED A. KNOPF, -INC.] - - -Copyright 1957 by Drew Middleton. All rights reserved. No part of -this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing -from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages -in a review to be printed in a magazine or newspaper. Manufactured in -the United States of America. Published simultaneously in Canada by -McClelland & Stewart Limited. - - -FIRST EDITION - - - - - _This book is dedicated - to the memory - of_ - ALEX CLIFFORD, - EVELYN MONTAGUE, - _and_ - PHILIP JORDAN - - - - -_FOREWORD_ - - -It was in 1940 that the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom noted -that Britain and the United States would have to be "somewhat mixed up -together in some of their affairs for mutual and general advantage." -This situation has persisted until the present. Yet, despite the -closeness of co-operation in the intervening years, there is among -Americans a surprising lack of knowledge about modern Britain. - -This book is an effort to provide a picture of that country--"warts and -all." Such a book must perforce be uneven. There are areas of British -life--the attitude toward religion is one--that have not been touched. -I have tried to emphasize those aspects which are least well known in -the United States and to omit as far as possible consideration of those -which are superficial. Ascot, I agree, is spectacular. But as far as -modern Britain is concerned it doesn't matter a damn. I hope, however, -that the reader will find here some idea of what has been going on in -Britain since 1945 and what is going on there today. This is a modern, -mobile society, important to us as we are important to it. If we look -at this society realistically, we will discern physical and moral -strength that the fictions of Hollywood can never convey. - -For one whose roots are deep in his own country, the British are a -difficult people to understand. But they are worth understanding. -They are worth knowing. Long ago, at a somewhat more difficult period -of Anglo-American relations, Benjamin Franklin warned his colleagues -that if they did not all hang together, they would assuredly hang -separately. Good advice for Americans and Britons today. - - DREW MIDDLETON - - _Bessboro Farm - Westport, Essex County - New York - March 12, 1957_ - - - - -_CONTENTS_ - - - I. _Britain Today_ 3 - - II. _The Monarchy_ 13 - - III. _How the British Govern Themselves_ 34 - - IV. _The Conservatives_: A PARTY AND A WAY OF LIFE 50 - - V. _The Labor Party_: POLITICAL MACHINE OR - MORAL CRUSADE? 70 - - VI. _A Quiet Revolution by a Quiet People_ 90 - - VII. _A Society in Motion_: NEW CLASSES AND NEW - HORIZONS 112 - - VIII. _The British and the World_ 135 - - IX. _The Atlantic Alliance_: STRENGTHS AND - STRESSES 159 - - X. _The British Economy and Its Problems_ 187 - - XI. _The British Character and Some Influences_ 217 - - XII. _Britain and the Future_ 260 - - INDEX _follows page_ 290 - - - - - THESE - - _are the British_ - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -I. _Britain Today_ - - _They called thee Merry England in old time._ - - WILLIAM WORDSWORTH - - _It was never good times in England since the poor began to speculate - on their condition._ - - CHARLES LAMB - - -To begin: the British defy definition. Although they are spoken of as -"the British," they are not one people but four. And of these four, -three--the Scots, the Welsh, and the Irish--are fiercely jealous of -their national identity. The English are less concerned. They have been -a nation a very long time, and only on occasions like St. George's -Day do they remind themselves, a bit shamefacedly, that the English -are the central force of the British people. Of course, if there are -Scots, Welsh, or Irish in the company, the English keep this comforting -thought to themselves. - -The variety of the British does not end with nationalities. There are -Yorkshiremen and men from Somerset, Cornishmen and people of Durham -who differ as much as Texans and Vermonters did in the days before the -doubtful blessings of standardization overtook our society. - -Here we encounter the first of many paradoxes we shall meet in this -book. Homogeneity in political thought--basic political thought that -is not party allegiance--seems far greater in Britain than in France -or the United States. Yet, until the present, the resistance to -standardization has been much more stubborn. Institutions and customs -survive without undue prodding by Societies for the Preservation of -This and That, although there are plenty of the latter nesting in -British society. - -Early in 1954 I was in Inverasdale, roughly five hundred miles -north-west of London on the western coast of Scotland. Inverasdale is a -small village buffeted by the fierce winds that beat in from the North -Atlantic, and its people are independent and God-fearing. John Rollo, a -Scots industrialist, had started a small factory in Inverasdale to hold -the people in the Highlands, where the population has fallen steadily -for a century. - -Inside the factory John pointed to one of the workers. "That's the -bard," he said. "Won a prize at the annual competition this year." - -The bard, clad in rubber boots, old trousers, and a fisherman's jersey, -had little of the "Scots Wha Ha'e" about him. But he was the real -thing. He had journeyed to the competition on foot and there recited -in Gaelic his own composition, a description of his life in Germany -as a soldier in the British Army of the Rhine. "I sung of those queer -foreign sights and people," he said. - -I asked him if he had liked the Germans. - -"I did not," he said. He was not a particularly loquacious bard. But -he was intensely and unostentatiously devoted to customs and a culture -well established before there were white men in America. - -The bard was proud of his association with an old and famous race. But, -then, all over the British Isles there are groups rejoicing in the -same fierce local pride. In Devon you will be told that it was "Devon -men" who slashed the Armada to ruins in the Channel. That battle was -fought nearly four hundred years ago. In a future century the visitor -to London will be told, quite correctly, that it was the near-sighted, -snaggle-toothed, weak-chested youngsters from the back streets who -held the Germans at Calais until preparation could be made for the -evacuation at Dunkirk. - -The British often act and talk like an old people because they _are_ -an old people. Nearly nine hundred years have passed since the Norman -invasion, the last great influx of foreign blood. Before that, wide, -deep rivers and the absence of natural fortifications near the coast -had invited invasion. Celts, Romans, Saxons, and Danes had mingled -their blood with that of the ancient Britons. But major invasions ended -with 1066. - -Consequently, the British are unused to foreigners in large numbers. -They make a tremendous fuss over the forty thousand or so Jamaicans -and other West Indian Negroes who have settled in the country since -1952. The two hundred thousand Poles and other East European refugees, -many of whom fought valiantly beside the British in World War II, are -more acceptable. This is true, also, of the Hungarians driven from -their homeland by the savage Russian repression of the insurrection of -1956. But you will hear grumbling about "foreigners" in areas where -refugees have settled. In rural areas you will also hear someone from -a neighboring county, long settled in the village, referred to as a -"foreigner." - -The Republic of Ireland is the main source of immigrants at present. -No one knows the exact figures, for there is no official check, but it -is estimated in Dublin that perhaps fifty thousand young Irishmen and -Irishwomen have entered Britain in each recent year. - -This migration has raised some new economic, social, and religious -problems and revived some old ones. It is also beginning to affect, -although as yet very slightly, political balances in the western -Midlands, for this area is short of labor and its industries gobble up -willing young men from across the Irish Sea. - -These industrial recruits from a rural background become part of an -advanced industrial proletariat. By nature and by upbringing they are -foreign to the industrial society that uses them. Their political -outlook is far different from that of the loyal trade-unionists beside -whom they work. They are much less liable to be impressed by appeals -for union solidarity and Labor Party support. They accept the benefits -of the Welfare State, but they are not of it. The economic Marxism of -the orators in the constituency labor parties is beyond them; besides, -have they not been warned that Marx is of the devil? The incorporation -of this group into the Socialist proletariat poses a question for Labor -politicians of the future. - -Despite the lack of large-scale migration into Britain during nine -centuries, national strains remain virulent. Noisy and stubborn -Welsh and Scots nationalist movements give young men and women in -Cardiff and Edinburgh something to babble about. London boasts many -local associations formed of exiles from the north or west. Even the -provincial English manage to make themselves heard in the capital. -Few winter nights pass without the Loyal Sons of Loamshire meeting to -praise the glories of their home county and drink confusion to the -"foreigners," their neighbors. - -If the urbanization of the country has not broken these barriers -between Scot and Londoner or between Lancashire and Kent, it has -changed the face of England out of recognition. And for the worse. - -The empty crofters' cottages around Inverasdale and elsewhere in -the Highlands are exceptions, for Britain is crowded. The area of -the United Kingdom is 93,053 square miles--slightly less than that -of Oregon. But the population is just under 51,000,000, including -44,370,000 in England and Wales, 5,128,000 in Scotland, and 1,389,000 -in Northern Ireland. - -Since the end of the last century the population has been predominantly -urban and suburban. By 1900 about three quarters of the British people -were living within the boundaries of urban administrative areas, and -the large "conurbation" was already the dominant type of British -community. This ugly but useful noun describes those areas of urban -development where a number of separate towns, linked by a common -industrial or commercial interest, have grown into one another. - -For over a third of a century about forty per cent of the population -has lived in seven great conurbations. Greater London, with -a population of 8,348,000, is the largest of these. The other -conurbations and their centers are: southeast Lancashire: Manchester; -west Midlands: Birmingham; west Yorkshire: Leeds and Bradford; -Merseyside: Liverpool; Tyneside: Newcastle upon Tyne; and Clydeside: -Glasgow. Of these the west Midland area is growing most rapidly. -Southeast Lancashire has lost population--a reflection of the waning of -the textile industry. - -The growth of the conurbations, particularly London, has been -accompanied by the growth of the suburbs. Of course, many of the older -suburbs are now part of the conurbations. But the immediate pre-war and -post-war building developments have established urban outposts in the -serene green countryside. - -Today more than a million people travel into the city of London and six -central metropolitan boroughs to work each morning and return to their -homes each night. Another 240,000 come in from the surrounding areas to -work in other parts of greater London. - -The advance of suburbia and conurbia has imposed upon vast sections -of the United Kingdom a dreadful sameness. The traveler finds himself -driving for hours through an endless urban landscape. First he -encounters miles of suburban streets: television aerials, two-story -houses whose differences are discernible only to their inhabitants, -clusters of stores. Then a town center with its buses and bus center, -the grimy railroad station, a cluster of civic buildings, a traffic -jam, one or two seventeenth-century relics incongruous amid the jumble -of Victorian and Edwardian buildings. Then more suburbs, other town -centers, other traffic jams. Individuality is lost in the desert of -asphalt and the jungles of lamp posts, flashing signs, and rumbling -buses. - -On a wet winter day a journey through some of the poorer sections of -the western Midlands conurbation is a shocking experience. As your -car moves down street after street of drab brick houses, past dull, -smelly pubs and duller shopwindows, occasionally coming upon hideous, -lonely churches, you are oppressed. The air is heavy with smoke and the -warring smells of industry. Poverty itself is depressing, but here -it is not poverty of the pocket but poverty of the soul which shocks. -Remorseless conformity and unrestrained commercialism have imposed this -on the lively land of Shakespeare. Can great virtues or great vices -spring from this smug, stifling environment? - -Yet bright spirits are bred. One remembers people met over the years: -a sergeant from the Clyde quoting Blake one morning long ago at Arras; -Welsh miners singing in the evenings. Out of this can come new Miltons, -Newtons, and Blakes. A Nelson of the skies may be studying now at that -crumbling school on the corner. - -In September 1945 I was riding in from London airport in a bus crowded -with Quentin Reynolds (whose presence would crowd an empty Yankee -Stadium) and returning soldiers and airmen of the British Army and -the Royal Air Force. As we passed through the forlorn streets of -Hammersmith, Quentin, brooding on the recent election, said: "These are -the people who gave it to Mr. Churchill." - -A sergeant pilot behind us leaned forward. "That's all right, cock," he -said, "they gave it to Mr. Hitler too." - -To put Britain into a twentieth-century perspective, we must go beyond -the Britain many Americans know best: the Merrie England created by -literature, the stage, and the movies. This picturesque rural England -has not been a true picture of the country for over a century. But -the guidebooks and the British Travel Association still send tourists -to its shrines, novelists still write charmingly dated pictures of -its life, and on both sides of the Atlantic the movies and the stage -continue to present attractive but false pictures of "Olde Worlde" -England. - -The British of today know it is dead. They retain an unabashed yearning -for its tranquillity, but the young cynics are hacking at this false -front. One morning recently I was cheered to note the advent of a new -coffee bar, the "Hey, Calypso," in the self-consciously Elizabethan -streets of Stratford-on-Avon. I am sure this would have delighted the -Bard, himself never above borrowing a bit of foreign color. And the -garish sign corrected the phony ostentation of "Elizabethan" Stratford. - -Merrie England has its attractions--if you can find them. There is -nothing more salutary to the soul than an old, unspoiled village in the -cool of a summer evening. But the number of such villages decreases -yearly. The hunt, the landed aristocracy, the slumbering farms are -changing, if not passing entirely from the scene. - -But--and this is very important--the values of this England endure to a -reassuring degree. Indeed, it might be argued that they have revived in -the last ten years and that virtues thought dated in two post-war Brave -New Worlds have been triumphantly reasserted. However, physically, -Merrie England, the country Wordsworth tramped and Constable painted, -is dead. The schoolteacher from Gibbsville or Gopher Prairie will find -the remains nicely laid out. - -Despite the blight of suburbia, the countryside retains a compelling -charm for the visitor from the United States. There is that hour in a -winter evening when a blue light gathers in the shadows of the wood, -when the smoke rises straight from cottage chimneys, when you hear the -sound of distant church bells. I remember walking once in 1944 with Al -Paris, a young captain of the United States Air Force, through just -such a scene. "It's funny," he said, "I walk this way two, three times -a week, and I feel like I'm coming home. It's different from anything -at home. Yet I feel I know it." - -But the important Englands or, rather, Britains are very different. -There is the dynamic, bustling industrial Britain of the Midlands, the -Northeast, and the Lowlands of Scotland. There is the great commercial -Britain of London, Bristol, Glasgow, Southampton, Liverpool--the -Britain of traders, middlemen, agents, and bankers, the Britain whose -effect on the political development of the country and world has been -tremendous. - -Out of these Britains have come the machines and the men who have kept -the country in business and twice helped to smash the military power -of Germany. The steel plants of South Wales, the engineering factories -of Birmingham, the banks of London, the shipyards of the Clyde--these -are the real modern Britain. They are not so attractive as the old -villages sleeping in the afternoon sun. But from the standpoint of -Britain, and from that of the United States as well, they are much more -satisfying and reassuring than Merrie England. - -For this is the Great Britain that is not satisfied with the past or -the present, that dreams great and necessary dreams of the industrial -uses of atomic energy, that strives to expand the three great groups of -industry: metals and metal-using, textiles, and chemicals. It is the -combination of this Britain and the character of the old England that -provides a basis for faith. - -Is Britain's long and glorious story nearly done? Will the political, -technological, and social changes of the first half of the twentieth -century--changes in which Britain often pioneered--combine to eliminate -Britain as a world power? Is the country's future to be a gradual and -comfortable decline into the position of a satellite in an Atlantic -system dominated by the United States and Canada? Or will Britain -withdraw slowly, under force of circumstance, into the unambitious -neutrality of Sweden? - -These are questions that Britons who care about their country must ask -themselves. But because of the confidence that is still so strong in -British character, such questions are seldom debated openly. In the -spring of 1956, when the leaders of the government and of industry -were only too gloomily aware of the magnitude of the problems facing -the country in the Middle East, in competitive exporting, in gold -and dollar reserves, the British Broadcasting Corporation began a -television series, "We, the British," with an inquiry: "Are we in a -decline?" No one was greatly excited. - -This seeming obliviousness to harsh facts, this innate confidence, is -one of the most arresting features of the national character. We will -encounter it often in this book as we seek answers to the questions -about Britain's future. - -Consideration of Britain in the world today, and especially of her -relation to the United States and to the Soviet Union, must take into -account the historical fact that the country's present situation is not -altogether novel to Britons. - -For Americans it is unusual, and hence disturbing, to live in the same -world with a hostile state--the Soviet Union--that is larger and more -populous than their own country. Enmity has burst upon us suddenly in -the past. We have been told by generations of immigrants that the whole -world loved and admired us. It has taken Americans some time to make -the psychological adjustment to the position of world power. - -The British situation is different. The British have always been -inferior in strength of numbers to their great antagonists: the Spain -of Philip II, the France of Louis XIV and Napoleon, the Germany of -Wilhelm II and Hitler, and, today, the Soviet Union. British power has -rested not upon numbers but upon combinations of economic stability, -political maneuvering, and the exercise of sea, land, and, latterly, -air power. The world abroad has always appeared harsh to the Briton. -Except for the second half of the last century--a small period in a -thousand years of national existence--the British have always seen on -the horizon the threat of a larger, more powerful neighbor. The balance -has been restored in many a crisis by the ability first of the English -and then of the British to attain in war a unity of purpose and energy -which in the end has brought victory. - -Unity often has restored the balance between Britain and her enemies. -To many of us who were in Britain in 1940 the miracle of that memorable -year was not the evacuation of Dunkirk or victory in the Battle of -Britain or the defiance under bombing of the poor in London, Coventry, -and Birmingham, but the national unity of purpose which developed at -the moment when all the social upheavals of the thirties pointed to -division, faltering, and defeat. - -Ability to achieve a national unity remains a factor in Britain's -world position. And it is the lack of this unity which makes Britain's -position so perilous today. - -The country must make, and it must sell abroad. It must retain access -to the oil of the Middle East or it will have nothing to make or to -sell. It must be able to compete on even terms with the exports of -Germany and Japan. These are the ABC's of the British position. - -The leaders of the present Conservative government recognize the -country's situation; so do the Labor Party and the Trades Union -Congress, although each has its own interpretation of the causes. But -there is still an unwillingness or an inability on the part of the -general public to grasp the realities of the situation. - -Yet such a grasp is essential. The people of Britain must adjust -themselves to a condition of permanent economic pressure if they are -to meet the economic challenge of the times. Such an adjustment will -involve re-creation of the sort of national unity which produced the -miracles of 1940. Otherwise, John Bull, better paid, better housed, and -with more money (which has less value) than ever before, can follow the -road to inflation which led to disaster in Germany and France in the -thirties. - -This return to unity is a factor in answering the question of where the -British go from here. But it is only one of many factors. Before we can -arrive at an adequate answer we must know more about the British, about -their institutions and who runs them today, about what the people have -been doing since 1945, and about how they face and fail to face the -problems of the second half of the century. - -Repeatedly in the course of this inquiry we shall encounter a national -characteristic not easily measurable in commercial and industrial -values but deeply established and enormously important. This is the -ability of the British to adapt themselves to a changing world and -to rule themselves with a minimum of serious friction. Stability -and continuity are essential in politics if Britain is to meet and -answer the challenge of the times. The British enjoy these essentials -now. Their demonstrated ability to change with the times is the best -of omens for national success and survival as a great power in the -tumultuous years that lie ahead. - -[Illustration] - - - - -II. _The Monarchy_ - - _Kings are not born; they are made by universal hallucination._ - - GEORGE BERNARD SHAW - - _A land where kings may be beloved and monarchy can teach republics - how they may be free._ - - VILDA SAUVAGE OWENS - -[Illustration] - - -The monarchy is the crowning anachronism of British society. It -stands virtually unchallenged at the summit of that society. In this -most political of Western nations, one eternally bubbling with new -ideas on the ways and means by which men can govern themselves, the -thousand-year-old monarchy is admired, respected, or tolerated, but -is seldom attacked. A people who on occasion can be as ruthless and -cynical as any in the world preserve close to their hearts a mystic -symbol that asks and gets an almost childlike loyalty from millions. - -This tie between Crown and people is the basis for the monarchy's -existence. Yet, like so many other things in Britain, the tie is almost -indefinable. Its strength is everywhere and nowhere. History is one -of its foundations, and the sense of history--a reassuring sense that -worse has happened and that the nation and the people have survived--is -very strong in Britain. Yet the present institution of monarchy has -little in common with the monarchy of 1856 and still less with that of -1756. And the extreme popularity of the royal family has developed only -in the last eighty years. - -The reasons for the monarchy's popularity today are far different from -those of the past. It is regrettable but true that some of the most -popular monarchs earned their popularity as much by their vices as by -their virtues. - -By our American standards the British monarchy is very old, although -it does not compare with the same institution in Iran, for instance, -where kings reigned seven centuries before Christ. Certainly the age of -monarchy, linking modern Britain with the forested, lusty, legendary -England of the Dark Ages, contributes to its popularity. Age in an -institution or a person counts in Britain. - -Queen Elizabeth II is in direct descent from Egbert, King of Wessex and -all England, who ascended the throne in 827. The blood of all the royal -families of Europe flows in her veins. Among her ancestors are some of -the great names of history: Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Alfred -the Great, Rodrigo the Cid, the Emperor Barbarossa, and St. Louis, -King of France. This notable lineage is unknown to millions who adore -the Queen. The visible expressions of adoration and loyalty to the -royal family can be profoundly moving, but there is nothing to suggest -that the crowd's memory stretches back much further than George V, the -present Queen's grandfather. - -Is "profoundly moving" too strong? I doubt it. London was a gray and -somber city in November 1947 when Princess Elizabeth married the Duke -of Edinburgh. A long war with Germany and two years of austerity had -left their mark. The crowds, the buildings were shabby and tired. -Yet the Crown evoked in these circumstances a sincere and unselfish -affection such as few politicians can arouse. - -What did it? The pageantry of the Household Cavalry, restored to -their pre-war glory of cuirass, helmet, and plume, scarlet and blue -and white? The state coach with the smiling, excited, pretty girl -inside? The bands and the stirring familiar tunes? There is no single -convincing answer. Yet the affection was there: the sense of a living -and expanding connection between the people and the throne. - -But some aspects of the connection can be embarrassing, to Britons as -well as to Americans. The doings of the royal family are recounted by -popular British newspapers and periodicals in nauseating prose. Special -articles on the education of Prince Charles or on Princess Margaret's -religious views (which are deep, sincere, and, to any decent person's -mind, her own business) are written in a mixture of archness, flowery -adulation, and sugary winsomeness. - -The newspapers are full of straight reporting (the Queen, asked if she -would have a cup of tea, said: "Yes, thank you, it is rather cold") but -this does not suffice to meet the demand for "news" about the royal -family. Periodically the Sunday newspapers publish reminiscences of -life in the royal household. Former governesses, valets, and even the -man who did the shopping for the Palace write their "inside stories." -These are as uninformative as the special campaign biographies that -appear every four years in the United States, but the public loves -them. I have been told that a "royal" feature in a popular magazine -adds 25,000 or 30,000 in circulation for that issue. The _Sunday -Express_ is said to have picked up 300,000 circulation on the Duchess -of Windsor's memoirs. Like sex and crime, the royal family is always -news--and the news is not invariably favorable. - -The interest in royal doings is all the more baffling because the -Queen is generally held to be powerless politically. This view is -accepted in Britain and also in the United States, save among those -surviving primitives of Chicagoland who regard all British monarchs as -reincarnations of George III ready to order the Lobsterbacks to Boston -at an insult's notice. The accepted picture is of a monarch who is a -symbol with little or no influence on politics. - -Superficially the picture is accurate. But in the last century and in -this there have been occasions when the Crown exerted power beyond the -functions assigned it by the constitution. These functions include the -summoning, proroguing, and dissolution of Parliament, the dismissal -or appointment of a Prime Minister, the granting of pardons, and the -conferring of peerages and honors. To become the law of the land, a -bill passed by Parliament must receive the royal assent. - -All very impressive. But in practice these functions are restricted by -the principle that the monarch is responsible to the government of the -day even though it is styled "Her Majesty's Government." To take one -example, if the Queen wants to make Lord Tomnoddy a duke and the Prime -Minister says no, Lord Tomnoddy does not become a duke. The monarch -retains the right of conferring certain honors, such as the Order of -the Garter, without ministerial advice. But when Chancellor Adenauer of -Germany receives the insignia of the Grand Cross of the Order of St. -Michael and St. George the inspiration comes not from Buckingham Palace -but from Downing Street. - -The principle of responsibility to the government guides the conduct -of the monarch. In rare cases the sovereign can express disapproval -of a policy. In the present circumstances the idea of the young Queen -rejecting the advice of her Prime Minister is unthinkable. Without -being romantic, we can wonder if this will always be so. - -George V twice exercised his discretionary powers in choosing from -among alternative candidates the man he regarded as best suited to be -Prime Minister. Of course, in each case the candidate chosen had to -have the support of his party in the House of Commons. - -We need not go back that far. George VI, the father of the present -Queen, once made a decision that profoundly affected the history of the -world. - -When in May 1940 a tired, unpopular Neville Chamberlain resigned -as Prime Minister there were two candidates for the post: Winston -Churchill and Lord Halifax. The King knew that a large section of the -Conservative Party distrusted Churchill and admired Halifax. Its views -were conveyed to him in plain language. - -According to _The Gathering Storm_, the first volume of Sir Winston -Churchill's _The Second World War_, Lord Halifax told both Churchill -and Chamberlain that his position as a peer outside the House of -Commons would make it difficult for him to discharge the duties -of Prime Minister. Ultimately a National Government including -representatives of the Labor and Liberal parties was formed, but, -according to Churchill, the King made no stipulation "about the -Government being National in character." - -Lord Halifax certainly doubted his ability to discharge his duties -as Prime Minister. But apparently the question of whether he could -form a National Government did not arise. In any event, the King, -fully cognizant of the views of a considerable section of the -Conservative Party on the relative merits of the two men and aware -that it would have been possible to form a Conservative government -under Halifax, sent for Churchill instead of Halifax and asked him to -form a government. History may record this as a signal example of the -remaining powers of the Crown. - -Sir William Anson explained in _The Law and Custom in the Constitution_ -that the real power of the sovereign "is not to be estimated by his -legal or his actual powers as the executive of the State. - -"The King or Queen for the time being is not a mere piece of mechanism, -but a human being carefully trained under circumstances which afford -exceptional chances of learning the business of politics." - -The monarch is not isolated from great affairs. The Queen sees from the -inside the workings of government, knows the individuals concerned, -and often has a surer sense of what the people will or will not -accept than some politicians. So, Sir William reasoned, the sovereign -in the course of a long reign may through experience become a person -whose political opinions, even if not enforceable, will carry weight. -Continuity in office, wide experience in contact with successive -governments, and, finally, the influence that the monarchy exercises -through an ancient and well-established tie with the people can confer -upon the sovereign an influence far greater than is generally realized. - -Queen Elizabeth II has twice used the royal prerogative of choosing a -Prime Minister. On April 6, 1955, she chose Sir Anthony Eden to succeed -Sir Winston Churchill. On January 10, 1957, she chose Harold Macmillan -to succeed Sir Anthony. The second selection occasioned sharp political -outcry. The "shadow cabinet" or Parliamentary Committee of the Labor -Party, meeting in secrecy and dudgeon, reported that the Queen's choice -had raised serious questions of a constitutional nature. It argued that -the Conservative Party, by asking the sovereign to choose between Mr. -Macmillan and R.A. Butler, had involved the Queen in partisan politics. -The Tories, Labor said with a touch of self-righteousness, should -always have a leader and a deputy leader of the party ready to assume -the highest office when called. - -(This raised the contingency, pleasing to Tories at least, of James -Griffiths, the present deputy leader, as Prime Minister instead of -Aneurin Bevan in the event of some serious accident to Hugh Gaitskell.) - -The Socialists' argument that the Queen was forced to choose between -Mr. Macmillan and Mr. Butler reflected a certain ignorance of what -had been going on within the Conservative Party. It was apparent on -the night of Sir Anthony Eden's resignation that Mr. Butler did not -command the support of a majority of the Tory Members of the House of -Commons. It was also apparent, or should have been apparent, that the -Queen would be advised by the retiring Prime Minister, Sir Anthony -Eden, and the two foremost figures in the party, Sir Winston Churchill -and the Marquess of Salisbury. Anyone aware of the currents within the -Conservative leadership during the last three months of 1956 could -not possibly have thought that any one of these three would advise the -Queen to choose Mr. Butler. - -There was a good deal less to the high-minded Socialist protest than -met the eye. The shadow cabinet made the tactical mistake of coupling -the protest with a demand for a general election. One need not be -cynical to emphasize the connection. But the spectacle of Mr. Bevan and -his colleagues protesting like courtiers over the Queen's involvement -in politics and quoting an editorial in _The Times_ as though it were -Holy Writ added to the gaiety of the nation. - -The Queen may have opinions on national and international affairs which -differ from those of her ministers. To date there has been no reliable -report of such differences. But her grandfather, George V, was seldom -backward in expressing opinions contrary to those of his ministers. -He told them, for instance, that the conduct of the 1914-18 war must -be left to military "experts," which meant Haig and his staff, rather -than to politicians. He opposed the dissolution of Parliament in -1918. He refused outright to grant a convenient "political" peerage. -This opposition, it should be emphasized, was not directed at court -functionaries. On many occasions George V took issue with David Lloyd -George, a wartime Premier then at the height of his prestige and power, -and a brilliant and tenacious debater. - -The present royal family invites comparisons with that of a century -ago. Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, is, like Albert, the Prince Consort -of Victoria, an exceptional person. He is a man of industry and -intelligence. Like Albert, he understands both the broad outlines and -the nuances of a new industrial age into which Britain is moving. He -has a wider acquaintance with the world of science, so essential to -his country, than any other member of the royal family. The techniques -of industry and invention really interest him. He understands, perhaps -better than some of his wife's ministers, the importance to Britain of -such developments as the industrial use of nuclear energy. Finally, the -Duke of Edinburgh has one matchless qualification for his role. As a -young officer of the Royal Navy he became aware of the way the Queen's -subjects, as represented by the lower deck of the Navy, think and feel. -He has in fact what the admirers of the Duke of Windsor claimed for him -when he was Prince of Wales: an intimate knowledge of the people of -Britain. - -These qualities are not universally admired. A trade-union leader -told me he did not want "well-intentioned young men like Philip -mucking about with industrial relations." At the other side of the -political spectrum, the _Sunday Express_, Lord Beaverbrook's newspaper, -tut-tutted at the Duke's interest in this field. - -The reasoning behind both attitudes is obvious. Industrial relations -are politics. The union movement is the Fourth Estate of the realm, and -"royals" should leave them alone. - -There is an obvious parallel. The Prince Consort when he died had -established himself at the center of national affairs. But for his -death, Lytton Strachey wrote, "such a man, grown gray in the service -of the nation, virtuous, intelligent, and with the unexampled -experience of a whole lifetime of government," would have achieved "an -extraordinary prestige." - -Disraeli saw the situation in even more positive terms. "With Prince -Albert we have buried our sovereign. This German Prince has governed -England for twenty-one years with a wisdom and energy such as none -of our kings have ever shown.... If he had outlived some of our 'old -stagers' he would have given us the blessings of absolute government." - -The parallel may seem far-fetched. Of course present-day Britain is -not the Britain of 1856. It is hard to think of Sir Anthony Eden or -Hugh Gaitskell being moved politically, at the moment, by the views of -the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh as Lord Clarendon was, and as Lord -Palmerston was not, by Victoria and Albert. But, to borrow Napoleon -III's incisive phrase, in politics one should never say never. - -Not long ago a diplomat who had returned from a key post abroad -encountered the Queen at what should have been a perfunctory ceremony. -He expected a few minutes' conversation. What he got was forty minutes -of acute questioning about the situation in the country he had just -left. The Queen impressed him with the width of her knowledge, her -accurate memory, and the sharpness of her questions. He, a tough, -skeptical intellectual, departed with heightened respect for his -sovereign's intelligence. - -What will be the Queen's influence a quarter of a century hence? By -then some politician, now unknown, will be Prime Minister. How much -will the wisdom and experience of the Queen, gained as the repository -of the secrets of successive governments, affect the government of the -day? Monarchy, we Americans are taught, is an archaic symbol and an -obsolete form of government. History has moved away from constitutional -monarchies and, of course, from one-man rule. But has it? Will the -movement continue? - -By 1980 the British monarchy may be a memory. But let us suppose -that by that year the royal house is represented by an infinitely -experienced Queen and a consort who knows the country's problems as -well as most of her ministers. Prince Philip is a nephew of Earl -Mountbatten, one of the most striking Englishmen of today. What will -this infusion of determination, energy, and intelligence do for the -fortunes of the monarchy? - -The British are cautious in discussing any indications of the influence -of the Crown on the day-to-day conduct of government. But occasional -comments and indiscretions indicate that this influence is a factor in -decisions. For instance, early in 1956 I was talking to an important -civil servant about a government decision that was to be announced -in the next few days. The government was busy making certain, he -said, that "the Palace" wouldn't "make a row about it." I said I was -surprised that he should ascribe so much weight to the Palace's view on -a matter that involved the cabinet and the House of Commons. His answer -was that in a country such as Britain under a Conservative government, -influence is not exerted solely through the House or government -departments. "What people say to each other counts," he said. "And when -the Queen says it, it counts a great deal. Of course, she couldn't -change a decision. Nor would she ever attempt to. But it can be -awkward, you know." - -To guess at the future power of the monarchy we must examine it as it -is today. What lies behind its popularity and how is that popularity -maintained? What keeps strong this tie between a largely working-class -population, highly progressive politically, and an aristocratic -institution that has outlived its power if not its influence? - -To understand, we must watch monarchy operate within the limitations -imposed upon it by the constitution. The principal functions are the -public performances of the duties of the Crown--what the British press -calls "royal occasions." They range from a state opening of Parliament -to a visit to an orphanage. - -These take place in an atmosphere fusing formality and enthusiasm. -Protocol calls for dignity, friendliness, and a certain aloofness -on the part of the Queen. Those who make the arrangements for royal -occasions are mindful of Walter Bagehot's warning against allowing -too much light to fall on the institution of monarchy. But from the -standpoint of popular reaction, the Queen's appearances are most -successful when she stops to say a few words to someone in the crowd. -Written reports of such encounters usually endow the Queen with a -celestial condescension. The fact is that the Queen, though shy, is -friendly, and her awed subjects are likely to report that "she talked -about the baby just like she was from down the street." - -Of course, the Queen is not like someone just down the street. But the -essence of a successful display of the monarchy is a combination of -this friendliness with the serene dignity displayed on great occasions -of state. The men and women in the crowd want to believe that the Queen -is, or can be, like them. As long as they do, the monarchy, no matter -how rich its members and how expensive its trappings, is relatively -safe. - -To the people in the streets the Queen is paramount. The Duke of -Edinburgh is popular. So are the Queen Mother and Princess Margaret. -But it is the Queen who combines all those elements of tradition, -affection, and mysticism which contribute to the Crown's unique place -in public life. - -The crowd does not care much about other royalties. To the man in -the street there is little difference between, say, Prince Rainier -of Monaco and Aristotle Onassis. The British nurse at their hearts a -snobbish isolationism toward foreign crowns. Only their own Queen and -royal family really matter. - -One reason is that Britain's Queen and the monarchial institution -she heads are kept before the people to a far greater degree than is -customary in the monarchies of Holland or Sweden. Official political -and social appearances in London are augmented by visits to various -parts of the country. The Queen and the Duke are the chief attractions, -but other members of the family perform similar duties. - -Careful planning and split-second timing are the key to successful -royal visits. So familiar is the pattern that a skeptic might think -the effect negligible. When the Queen comes to Loamshire, however, she -is _there_ in Loamshire. Everything she does is familiar, but now she -is there directly before the crowd's very eyes, rendering a personal -service. - -The Queen and the Duke arrive in Loamshire for a three-day visit. -Their car is a huge, glittering Rolls-Royce flying the royal standard. -Thousands of people, most of them women and children, are on the -sidewalks and in the windows of the buildings around the town hall of -the county town of Loamshire. As the Queen gets out of the car there is -a wave of cheering, strong and unaffected. (It is well to balance this -enthusiasm against the inattention paid "God Save the Queen" when it is -played at the end of the program in a provincial movie theater.) - -The Mayor, sweating freely in his excitement, welcomes the Queen and -delivers an appropriate address. In a country divided almost evenly -between the Conservative and Labor parties, a large number of mayors -are Socialists. But, with rare exceptions, the Socialists and their -wives are as eager as the Tories to welcome royalty. - -The Queen and the Duke are introduced to the dignitaries of Loamshire, -with the Lord Lieutenant of the county in attendance. The Queen -inspects a guard of honor which may be drawn from the Royal Loamshire -Light Infantry or from the local Girl Guides. There is lunch, usually a -pretty bad lunch. Then the royal party is off to lay the cornerstone of -a new hospital or press a button to start a new power plant or unveil -a war memorial. At any such occasion the Queen reads a short speech of -blameless sentiments. - -Then on to the next town, to more cheering in the streets and waving of -flags, more loyal declarations and another mayor and council. This may -go on for two or three days. Every step the Queen takes, every action -is noted by newsreel and television cameras. Every word she utters is -taken down. Every person with whom she talks is interviewed afterward. - -Back in London there are more ceremonies. There are also ambassadors -to be received, state papers to be read, decorations to be awarded, -distinguished visitors to be met. - -It is often said that the Queen is just like anyone else of her age, -an idea much favored by the spun-sugar biographies in the popular -press. Of course it is nonsense. The Queen cannot, because of her -birth, upbringing, and station, be like anyone else. Certainly she has -a private life not unlike that of other wealthy young women, but her -private life is severely restricted. - -She and the Duke may like to eat their supper off trays and watch a -popular comedian on television, but they seldom get an opportunity -to do so. The Queen must be wary of what plays she sees and what -amusements she patronizes. As head of the Church she is an inviting -target for sorrowful criticism by the bluenoses. The Queen's love -of horse racing and the Duke's love of polo are often attacked by -puritanical elements. The League Against Cruel Sports periodically -reproves her for attending "the sporting butchery" of fox-hunting. - -What sort of woman is she? Forget the cloying descriptions of courtiers -and the indiscretions of "Crawfie" and her friends, and the portrait is -rather an appealing one. Elizabeth II in person is much prettier than -her photographs. Her coloring is excellent. Her mouth, a little too -wide, can break into a beguiling smile. She is slowly overcoming her -nervousness in public, but still becomes very angry when the newsreel -and television cameras focus on her for minutes at a time. Her voice, -high and girlish on her accession, is taking on a deeper, more musical -tone. Years of state duties, of meeting all kinds and classes of -people, have diminished her shyness. She was almost tongue-tied when -she came to Washington as Princess Elizabeth, but her host on that -occasion, President Harry S. Truman, was surprised by the poised and -friendly Queen he met in London in 1956. - -All her adult life the Queen has been accustomed to the company of the -great. Aided by a phenomenal memory and real interest, her acquaintance -with world politics is profound. She is intelligent but not an -intellectual. She does a great deal of official reading--so much, in -fact, that she reads little for pleasure. - -The Queen's pleasures and those of her immediate family are so typical -of the middle class that intellectuals are often offended. They would -prefer more attendance at cultural events such as the Edinburgh -Festival and less at race meetings. But the deep thinkers, worried -because the cultural tone of Buckingham Palace is pitched to the level -of Danny Kaye rather than T.S. Eliot, overlook the fact that attachment -to such frivolity strengthens the popularity of the royal house. -There is no evidence that the British admire or desire intellectual -attainments in a monarch. Nor does history indicate that such lusty -figures as Charles II and George IV were less popular than the pious -Victoria or the benign George V. Thus, when the Queen spends a week at -Ascot to watch the racing, as millions of her subjects would dearly -love to do, or attends a London revue, her subjects, aware of the -burden of her office, wish her a good time. And the descriptions of -such outings, with their invariable reports on what the Queen wore, -what she ate and drank, and what she was heard to say, are read avidly -by a large percentage of her people. - -The people are flattered when the Queen appears at a polo game in -sensible shoes and a print dress, accompanied by her children and her -dogs. They are equally flattered when they see her in tiara and evening -dress, regal and coldly handsome. When the newspapers printed pictures -of the Queen and her royal hosts at a state ball during her visit to -Sweden, the popular reaction was: "Doesn't she look lovely, a real -credit to the country." - -Racing is the Queen's favorite sport. When she was returning from -her world tour in 1953-4, one of the first messages the royal yacht -_Britannia_ transmitted as it neared British shores was an inquiry on -the result of a race held the day before. - -For Elizabeth, racing is more than a sport; it is an enthusiasm. She -knows blood lines and past performances, and her acute judgment of form -sometimes conflicts with her personal attachment for one of the royal -stable's entries. She likes to watch show jumping and polo, although -at polo games she is continually worried about the Duke of Edinburgh, -an enthusiastic player. But horse racing: the magic moment when the -barrier goes up, the bright silks on the back stretch, the lovely sight -of the field rounding the last turn into the stretch--that's her sport. -As it is also the sport of millions of her subjects, the sneers of the -puritans have little effect. - -She is a young woman of determination, having inherited some of her -grandfather's temper and his forthright outlook on events. In moments -of family crisis she is likely to take what the British call "a strong -line." During the row over the romance of Princess Margaret and Peter -Townsend, it was reported that the first communication from Buckingham -Palace on the situation had been written by the Queen. I find this -credible. The announcement certainly had all the faults of a communiqué -drafted in anger. - -Finally, Elizabeth is religious, very conscious of the importance -of her role in British society, and, as she grows older, somewhat -censorious of the gay young things enjoying a freedom she never knew. - -The monarchy is costly. The Queen is a very wealthy woman in her own -right, but, in addition, she receives £60,000 (about $168,000) a year -from the Civil List. This is granted to the sovereign by Parliament -on the recommendation of a Select Committee. The Civil List not only -"pays" the Queen but pays her expenses, which are high. For instance, -the salaries of the royal household, secretaries, equerries, servants, -and the like, total £185,000 or $418,000 a year, and the running -expenses come to £121,800 or $341,040. - -Payments charged to the Consolidated Fund maintain the other members of -the family. The Duke of Edinburgh's annuity is £40,000 or $112,000 a -year, and the Queen Mother's is £70,000 or $196,000. - -These payments are only one of many sources of income. The House of -Windsor is very rich, although its fortune is modest compared with the -holdings of the House of Ford or the House of Rockefeller. - -Queen Victoria died leaving the monarchy more firmly established than -ever before and her family richer by millions of pounds. During her -long reign the remarkable daughter of an unambitious Duke of Kent and -an improvident German princess amassed a fortune of about £5,000,000 -or, at the exchange rates of the day, about $25,000,000. The financial -dealings of the royal house are secret. But both Albert, Victoria's -Prince Consort, and his son Edward VII benefited from the advice of -financiers. Reputedly the family owns large blocks of American railroad -stock. The financial structure is complex, however. It is hard to say -just how much Elizabeth owns as Queen and how much as an individual. - -As one of the greatest landowners, the Queen derives an income of about -£94,600 or $265,000 a year from the Duchy of Lancaster. The royal -family also receives the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall, which -amount to about £90,000 or approximately $250,000 a year. This duchy, -comprising about 133,000 acres spread throughout the west of England, -includes farms, hotels, tin mines, even pubs. Seven palaces and -eight royal houses also are the property of Elizabeth as Queen. One, -Sandringham in Norfolk, an estate of 17,000 acres including fifteen -well-kept farms, is a family holding. The Balmoral estate in Scotland -comprises 80,000 acres. The family holds more than seventy-five choice -bits of London real estate. Both fortune and property are carefully -managed. Nothing is wasted. The game birds that fall to the guns of -shooting parties at Sandringham and Balmoral are sold on the commercial -market after the household's requirements have been met. - -The Crown is not only a prosperous and wealthy establishment. It is -also the center of a unique complex of commercial interests. The -manufacture of souvenirs connected with the royal family is big -business. These souvenirs range from hideous, cheap glass ash trays and -"silver" spoons stamped with a picture of Buckingham Palace or of the -Queen and the Duke to "coronation" wineglasses and dinner services sold -to wealthy tourists. A whole section of British publishing is devoted -to postcards, picture books, and other records of royal lives and royal -occasions. - -The Queen's world tour in 1953-4 produced a bumper crop of pictorial -and prose reports to fit every purse and the prevailing taste for -flowery adulation. These books were bought and read, or at least looked -at, after the British public already had been exposed to newspaper -accounts, magazine reports, radio bulletins, and television newsreels. -Once at a dinner party the wife of a famous writer remarked: "I'm -sick of this damned tour." The other guests broke into a flurry of -conversation that had nothing to do with the royal voyage. Yet I -learned that three of them felt "exactly as dear Betty does, but, my -dear, you don't say it." - -Some thoughtful students of the institution believe that the -newspapers, magazines, radio, and television have forgotten Bagehot's -injunction about letting too much light fall on the monarchy. But I -have seen no diminution of popular interest. The highbrows may be -bored, but the lowbrows and middlebrows love it. - -The extensive coverage given the royal family has propaganda uses. In -the years since the war there has been a quiet but intensive effort -to reinforce the position of the monarch as the titular head of the -Commonwealth. The rulers of Britain, Labor or Conservative, recognizing -how slender are the ties that bind the Commonwealth, have worked -steadily to strengthen the chief spiritual tie, the Crown, as political -and economic ties have become attenuated. - -The Queen is the Queen of Canada and Australia as well as of the United -Kingdom. Canada, in fact, is a monarchy. Royal tours of Commonwealth -countries emphasize the common tie of monarchy and are also intended -to reawaken interest in Britain and, as these are a commercial people, -British manufactures. - -The reports that have reached London show that, from the standpoint of -strengthening identity with the Commonwealth, the visit to Australia -and New Zealand during the world tour was an outstanding success. To -the exuberant, vigorous Australians, for instance, the Queen symbolized -their relationship with the island many of them still call home. -Criticism of the "pommies," the slang term for the British, was drowned -in the swell of cheers for the Queen of Australia. - -Nor should the effect of such tours on the younger members of the -Commonwealth be underestimated. The visit to Nigeria in 1956 flattered -its people and gave new meaning to the honors and titles that -successive governments have bestowed on worthy--which in this context -means loyal--natives of the country. Those in government who value the -Commonwealth and Empire see such visits as a method of impressing new -members of the Commonwealth with the permanence of a symbol that binds -all members. Perhaps only South Africa, in its present government's -mood of Boer republicanism, is proof against the loan of the Crown. - -Curiously, this extension of the monarchy is not generally appreciated -in Britain. There the supporters of the Crown are gratified, of course, -when the newspapers report an ovation for the Queen in Wellington. But -they are slow to accept the idea of the Queen as Queen of New Zealand. - -The process of identifying the Queen with various parts of the -Commonwealth may go further than visits to its members. Some officials -suggest that the Queen should live a part of each year in one or -another of the Commonwealth countries. From the constitutional -standpoint this is a revolutionary suggestion. And Britain prefers -evolution to revolution. But it is an indication of the progressive -viewpoint that some supporters of the Crown have adopted toward its -political uses in the modern world. - -No institution in Britain escapes attack, and so the institution of -monarchy is attacked. But such criticism is rarely coherent, popular, -or direct. On the whole, there is less criticism than there was a -century ago. Republicanism died as a political force in the 1870's. The -Chartists in their peak period, roughly between 1838 and 1849, included -in their demands the establishment of a republic. When Victoria -withdrew into her grief after the death of the Prince Consort, a -republican movement of some importance developed. New impetus was given -by the establishment of the Third Republic in France in 1871. Charles -Bradlaugh and George Odger, men of some importance, spoke eloquently in -support of a republic. But the last "Republican Conference" was held in -1873, and Sir Charles Dilke later ascribed his youthful republicanism -to "political infancy." - -The Labor Party, despite its strong infusion of Marxism, treats the -issue as a dead letter. Not since the party conference of 1923 has -there been a serious debate on the monarchy. At that conference a -motion that republicanism should be the policy of the party was -rejected by 3,694,000 votes to 386,000. - -Criticism of the monarchy in contemporary Britain is most telling when -it hits the cost of the institution. The great wealth of the royal -family and the heavy expenses of the monarchial institution invite -criticism in a period when Britain seems to live perennially on the rim -of economic disaster. - -Early in 1956 it was suggested that the Queen's Flight, her personal -transport planes, be re-equipped with one, possibly more, of the -big new Britannias, the nation's newest air liner. At the same time -a new dining-car was ordered for royal travel, and it became known -that the royal waiting-room at London airport was to be renovated at -considerable expense. These matters received extraordinarily detailed -coverage in the newspapers owned by Lord Beaverbrook. Letters -criticizing the added expenses found their way into the letter columns -of the _Daily Express_, the _Evening Standard_, and the _Sunday -Express_. Columnists inquired the reason for such expenditures when -the nation was being asked to tighten its belt, spend less, and defeat -inflation. - -Constant readers of these newspapers, which are among the most -sprightly and technically expert in Britain, have long noted their -oblique criticism of Duke of Edinburgh. Usually this deals with the -Duke's "interference" in the field of industrial relations. It is -believed to spring from Lord Beaverbrook's long-standing animus for -the Duke's uncle, Earl Mountbatten. The criticism of the proposed -expenditures for the Britannias, the dining-car, and the waiting-room -gave the newspapers a chance to hint that the young man was getting a -bit above himself. - -The _Sunday Express_ gave the widest possible publicity to its -serialization of the autobiography of the Duchess of Windsor, an opus -that, although interesting, cannot be considered an enthusiastic -recommendation for the institution of monarchy. - -The inevitable conclusion is that William Maxwell Aitken, first Baron -Beaverbrook, New Brunswick, and Cherkley, nurses crypto-republican -sentiments at heart. He has confessed to being a propagandist in his -newspapers, and he is so unpredictable that he might sometime direct -all his energies against the institution. I mentioned this to a cabinet -minister, who replied that the monarchy would welcome it. "Nothing -helps a politician more than the enmity of the Beaver," he commented. - -Although republicanism is no longer an issue in the Labor Party, the -party itself contains a strong element that is hostile to the monarchy. -Yet neither the _Daily Mirror_ nor the _Daily Herald_, the journalistic -pillars of the left, snipe quite so often or so accurately as the -Beaverbrook press. - -The _New Statesman and Nation_ does. Its indirect attacks on royalty -are based on establishing a link between royalty and the wealthy, -showy, and, of course, non-socialist world of London's fashionable -West End. The _New Statesman_'s complaint, delivered in the tones of -a touring schoolmarm who has been pinched by a lascivious Latin, is -that the Queen should use her influence to halt ostentatious spending -on debutante parties and the revels of the young. Its anonymous -editorial-writer was severe with young people who drink too much -(although abstinence has never been particularly popular on the left) -and generally whoop it up. The editorial ended with a hint that the -Queen would have to exercise some restraint when a Labor government -came to power. - -Despite such criticisms and warnings, the monarchy pursues its course -virtually unchallenged. One reason for the lack of a serious political -challenge may be that the monarchy is not now identified with a rich, -powerful, and coherent aristocracy, as it was a century ago, but with -the ordinary citizen. Then, too, there are many who look to the royal -family as an example. - -Long ago a compositor in a London newspaper, a good union man and a -Socialist, explained this attitude. "I'd rather have my two daughters -reading about the Queen and all that stuff than reading those magazines -about the flicks. Who'd you want your daughter to follow, Lana Turner -or the Queen?" - -So we return again to the indefinable and powerful tie that binds -people and Crown. - -Perhaps it is a sense of historical identity experienced as the Queen -rides past, carrying with her the atmosphere of other Englands. Here -before the eyes of her people is a reassurance of survival, an example -of continuity. This is one of those periods in history when the British -need reassuring. - -Perhaps as the monotony of life in a nation that is becoming one huge -industrial suburb spreads over Britain, the ceremony and glitter of -the Crown mean more than ever before. The great noblemen are prosaic -characters in business suits showing the crowds through empty palaces -and castles. But the Queen, amid the uniforms and palaces and castles, -remains the Queen. - -Perhaps as the storms buffet England in this second half of the -century, the position of the Queen as a personification of goodness -and justice becomes more important. Here is an enduring symbol, a -token of the past and a promise for the future. As the world and its -problems become more complex, the single, simple attraction of the -representative of an institution that has survived so many complexities -and problems will grow upon the confused and unhappy. - -The Crown stands as it has for a thousand years. Its power is less and -its influence is greater than many know. It is an integral part of a -flexible and progressive society. - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -III. _How the British Govern Themselves_ - - _Parliament can do anything but turn a boy into a girl._ - - ENGLISH PROVERB - - _Politics I conceive to be nothing more than the science of the - ordered progress of society along the lines of greatest usefulness and - convenience to itself._ - - WOODROW WILSON - -[Illustration] - - -The British are pre-eminently a political people, as Americans are, -and as Germans, Russians, and Italians are not. They regard politics -and government as serious, honorable, and, above all, interesting -occupations. To many Britons the techniques of government and politics -in Nigeria or Louisiana or Iceland are as fascinating as the newest jet -fighter is to an aviation enthusiast. They have been at it a long time, -and yet politics and government remain eternally fascinating. - -The comparative stability and prestige of government and politics -result in part from tradition and experience. The British govern -themselves by a system evolved over a thousand years from the times of -the Saxon kings, and they have given much of what is best and some of -what is worst in that system to nations and continents unknown when -first a Parliament sat in Westminster. Although it was dominated by -peers and bullied by the King, a Parliament met in Westminster when -France seethed under the absolute rule of His Most Christian Majesty. -Some of the greatest speeches made against the royal policy during the -American War of Independence were made in Parliament. - -The course of history has strengthened the position of parliamentary -government. Parliament and Britain have survived and triumphed, but -where is the Europe of Louis XIV, of Napoleon, of Wilhelm II, of -Hitler? Even in times of great stress the business of government must -go on. I remember my astonishment in June of 1940 when I returned from -a stricken, hopeless France to learn from a Member of Parliament that a -committee was considering plans for uniting the West Indian islands in -a single Commonwealth unit after the war. - -The idea that politics and government are essential to the well-being -of the nation fortifies tolerance in British public life. The political -and military disasters of 1940 were far more damaging and dangerous -to Britain than Pearl Harbor was to the United States. They invited -bitter recrimination. Yet Winston Churchill, himself bitterly attacked -in the locust years for predicting these very disasters, took Neville -Chamberlain into his cabinet and silenced recrimination with the -salient reminder that if the nation dwelt too much on the past it might -lose the future. - -For a century the British have avoided the dangers of an important -extremist political party comparable to the Communists in France and -Italy or the Nazis in Germany. The Communist Party exists in Britain, -of course, but only barely. Sir Oswald Mosley and his blackshirts made -some impression just before and just after the last war, but their -direct political influence is negligible. - -The British don't think extremism is good practical politics. They went -through their own period of extremism in the sixteenth, seventeenth, -and early eighteenth centuries when for a variety of reasons, -religious as well as political, they cut off one king's head, tried -a dictatorship, brought back a king, and finally found comparative -tranquillity in the development of a constitutional monarchy. - -The memory of these troubled times is not dead. At the height of -McCarthyism in the United States a British diplomat explained: "We're -very fortunate; we went through the same sort of period under the -Tudors and the Stuarts when treason and slander and libel were the -common coin of politics." - -With exceptions, the great political parties in the country have now -identified themselves with the national interest rather than with a -partisan one. Even the exceptions change. As the status of the working -class has changed for the better, the Labor Party has moved perceptibly -away from its early position as a one-class party. The heirs of Keir -Hardy--the Attlees, Morrisons, and Gaitskells--understand that Labor -must appeal now to the whole people. - -The national interest is something the whole people has always -understood and accepted in the past. For the British are guided -politically not by an ideology but by interest. This interest is a free -world, free from the economic as well as the political standpoint. One -factor in the decision to withdraw from India was the conviction that, -in the end, withdrawal would serve British commercial interests. I do -not suggest that this was the only factor. There were others, including -the belief of the leaders of the Labor government that India could not -and should not be kept within the Empire by force. - -Similarly, Britain is ready to give way on the independence of -other parts of the Empire when she thinks these areas are ready for -independence as democracies, and when she believes that their emergence -as independent democracies will benefit her own commercial interests. -This mixture of realism and idealism is difficult for outsiders to -grasp, especially when the British cling to a territory such as Cyprus -for reasons that are largely connected with their commercial interests -in that part of the world. - -Yet although the British have acquired, and are now in the process -of losing, a world-wide empire, they never suffered from a desire to -remake the world as did the French of 1789, or the Russians of 1917, or -the Germans of 1939. As a commercial people their basic interest was, -and is, peace. The British will go to almost any lengths to prevent a -war, as they did in 1938 and 1939. Once at war, however, they fight -with cold ruthlessness. - -The allegiance of the great political parties to the national interest -is one reason why British politics and politicians are flexible and -tolerant. Another is that politics are still touched by the shadowy -influence of the Crown. Here is a higher, if weaker, authority than -Prime Minister or cabinet. Does the presence of the sovereign at the -peak of government draw some of the exaggeration and extremism from -politics? - -Certainly no British Prime Minister, not even Churchill in 1940, has -ever been bathed in the sycophancy that deluged President Eisenhower -in his first term. Certainly no British Prime Minister, not even -Chamberlain in 1938 and 1939, has been reviled so relentlessly by -critics as were Presidents Roosevelt and Truman. Convictions are as -deeply held in London as in Washington. But anyone moving between the -two cities must be convinced that the political atmosphere in London is -calmer, less subject to emotional cloudbursts. - -The center of British politics is Parliament--the House of Commons and, -to a lesser degree, the House of Lords. - -Parliament represents all the countries of the United Kingdom. It -can legislate for the whole kingdom or for Great Britain itself or, -separately, for England and Wales. But, as this is Britain, the -country of contradictions, the Parliament at Westminster is not the -only parliament. Northern Ireland has its own. But it also sends MP's -to Westminster. The Tynewald sits in the Isle of Man, and the States -legislate for the Channel Islands. - -Opposition to the power of the central government, which means -Parliament, comes from the nationalist movements of Scotland and Wales. -Supported by minorities fiercely antagonistic toward the Sassenach (as -they call the English), these movements provide emotional stimuli for -the very young and the very old. At best they are gallant protests -against the accretion of power to a central government, a process that -goes on in Britain as it does in the United States and elsewhere. At -worst, considering the extent of Britain's real problems, the national -movements are a nuisance. - -But these are not rivals, and legally the Parliament in London can do -anything it desires. During the five-year life of a Parliament the -assembly can make or unmake any law, destroy the constitution, legalize -past illegalities and thus reverse court decisions. Parliament also has -the power to prolong its own life. - -Is Parliament therefore supreme and absolute? Legally, yes. But -legislative authority is delegated increasingly to ministers, and -specific powers to local authorities and to public corporations. Such -delegated powers can be withdrawn at any time, although the pressure of -work on Parliament is so great that this is unlikely. - -Finally, Britain has its own system of checks and balances. The -two-party system forbids arbitrary action, for the abuse of -parliamentary power by the party in power would invite repudiation by -the electors. - -Of the two houses, the House of Commons is infinitely the more -powerful. In this popularly elected assembly there are 630 members. Of -these, 511 sit for English constituencies, 36 for Welsh, 71 for Scotch, -and 12 for Northern Irish. Each constituency elects one member. The -composition of the present House of Commons, elected in May 1955, is: -Conservatives and their supporters, 346; Labor, 277; Liberal, 6; and -the Speaker, who does not vote, 1. - -What does Parliament do? It regulates the life of the community through -the laws it makes. It finances the needs of the people and appropriates -the funds necessary for the services of the State by legislative -action. It controls and criticizes the government. - -One reason for the supremacy of the House of Commons is that bills -dealing with finance or representation are always introduced in that -house. Moreover, the Lords avoids the introduction of controversial -bills. - -Almost all bills are presented by the government in power. They -reflect policy decisions taken in the cabinet at the instigation of -government departments that will be responsible for the administration -of the decisions when the bills become law. The principal exceptions -are Private Bills, which relate solely to some matter of individual, -corporate, or local interest, and Private Members' Bills, which are -introduced by individual MP's. - -The manner in which Parliament--generally the House of -Commons--controls the government in power emphasizes the difference -between the British system and our own. The ultimate control is the -power of the House of Commons to pass a resolution of "no confidence" -in the government or to reject a proposal which the government -considers so vital to its policy that it has made the proposal's -passage a "matter of confidence." If such a proposal is rejected, the -government is obliged to resign. - -In addition, there is that very British institution, Question Time. -Between 2:30 and 3:30 each afternoon from Monday through Thursday, -MP's may question any minister on the work of his department and the -Prime Minister on general national policy. The questions range from the -trivial to the significant. A query about the heating in a remote Army -barracks may be followed by one about progress on the hydrogen bomb. -The growth of Question Time as an institution has put a special premium -on those ministers or junior ministers best able to parry and riposte. -For the opposition can press the minister, and if his original reply -is unsatisfactory, the questioner will follow with a supplementary -question designed to reveal the minister as incapable and ignorant. - -The majority of questions are put by the opposition in the hope -of focusing public attention on the government's weaknesses. But -government Members also put questions dealing with affairs in their -constituencies. A number of them also can be counted upon to offer -ministers congratulatory queries along the lines "Is the Right -Honorable Gentleman aware that his reply will be welcomed by all -those -...?" - -Questions and answers are couched in the glistening phrases of polite -debate, but occasionally tempers rise and the Speaker intervenes. -Because of the variety of subject matter and the importance of some of -the questions, Question Time is an exciting period. It was never more -so than in the last administration of Sir Winston Churchill. - -That Prime Minister, armed with the political experience of fifty -years, was a joy to watch in action. One of his last memorable sallies -was at the expense of Woodrow Wyatt, an earnest young Labor MP. - -What plans had the government, Wyatt asked, for evacuating itself from -London in the event of atomic attack? - -Sir Winston regarded him owlishly. "Surely the Honorable Member does -not wish me to take the bread out of the mouths of the Soviet secret -service," he said. - -Even without these moments, Question Time would be useful as a sort -of national catharsis and as an example of democracy in action. The -spectacle of the House of Commons, representing a Britain beset by a -multitude of problems, pausing to discuss the affairs of a crippled -veteran in a remote Welsh village is a moving one. - -There is a slight similarity between Question Time and the Presidential -press conference as it has developed in Washington. Both give the -executive a chance to explain the workings of policy and government. -But in Britain the penalties for failure to answer are much greater -than in Washington. The President is answering reporters, and he is -under no compulsion to answer the questions put to him. The Prime -Minister, on the other hand, is confronted directly by his political -foes. If he fails to answer a question or offers an unsatisfactory -reply, he may provoke debate later on the matter at issue. - -Certainly the President is often roughly handled, but most of the -press-conference questions seem to lack the bite and sting of those -posed in the House of Commons. Perhaps this is inevitable under present -circumstances. President Eisenhower has answered the questions of -representatives of newspapers, magazines, and radio and television -systems that are overwhelmingly Republican. A British Prime Minister -and his ministers, on the other hand, must battle all the way. - -Finally, all the government departments are represented in the House -of Commons, and their representatives, as well as the Prime Minister, -can be subjected to prolonged and, at times, merciless questioning. -A comparison of Hansard's Parliamentary reports and the reports of -Presidential press conferences since 1952 will show, I think, that -there is greater pressure and a good deal more precise information in -Question Time than in a Presidential press conference. - -But Question Time is only one means by which the House of Commons -can criticize and control the government. The opposition can move -the adjournment of the House on a matter that the Speaker considers -definite, urgent, and the responsibility of the government. Or it can -use one of the days formerly devoted to consideration of the Estimates -in Committee of Supply for a debate on some part of government policy. - -The big debates on such issues as foreign affairs and economic policy -are the summit of parliamentary effort. Government and opposition put -forward their leading spokesmen on the issue under debate. But debates -also provide an opportunity for the back benchers of all parties. -The back benchers--Members who are not in the government or in the -opposition's shadow cabinet--rise to make their points on the issue, -and often remarkably good speeches, as well as bad ones, are delivered. - -But parliamentary business is concerned with much more than questions -and debates. Bills must be passed. This procedure is involved and -lengthy, paying due attention to the rights of the House and the people -it represents. - -The bill receives a formal First Reading on its introduction and is -then printed. After a period varying from one to several weeks, -depending on the bill's nature, it may be given a Second Reading as the -result of a debate on its general merits. Then the bill is referred to -one of the standing committees. - -During the committee stage, Members can amend the bill if a majority of -the House agrees. When this stage is finished, the bill is reported to -the House and a further debate takes place during which the Committee's -amendments may be altered, additional amendments may be suggested -and incorporated, and, if necessary, the bill may be recommitted to -committee. Finally, the bill is submitted for a Third Reading, and if -passed, it is sent on from the Commons to the House of Lords. There it -enters upon the same course. - -There, also, it may awaken the interest of Lord Cholmondeley, my -favorite peer. Lord Cholmondeley spoke in the House of Lords recently -for the first time in thirty-two years. What he had to say--about -rabbits and other small game--was brief and to the point. To many, Lord -Cholmondeley must symbolize the vague absurdities of the House of Lords. - -Yet this peculiar institution has its defenders, and these are not all -peers. There is something to be said, it is contended, for an upper -chamber that debates on terms other than partisan politics the great -issues of the day. The House of Lords, like the Crown, has influence -but, as money bills must be introduced in the House of Commons, little -direct power. From the standpoint of active politics its limited power -is of a negative nature. It can, for instance, delay the passage of -legislation by rejecting a bill previously passed by the House of -Commons. - -This occurred when the Lords rejected the bill to nationalize the steel -industry and the bill to abolish capital punishment. These delaying -actions demonstrated that, although the powers of the House of Lords -have been drastically curtailed, they can still have considerable -political importance. Inevitably, such action evokes dark mutterings -from the Labor Party about the ability of hereditary peers to flout the -will of the people. The Lords retort that the bill in question is not -the will of the people at all, but the will of some of the people's -representatives. - -Theoretically, the House of Lords is a good deal larger than the House -of Commons, consisting of 878 peers. Only about one tenth of them, -however, take an active part in the work of the House of Lords. The -peers include princes of the royal blood, who by custom take no part in -proceedings; 26 spiritual peers, the archbishops and senior bishops of -the Church of England; all hereditary peers of England, Great Britain, -and the United Kingdom; 16 hereditary peers of Scotland elected from -their own number for each Parliament; 5 representative peers of Ireland -elected for life; and the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary appointed to -perform the judicial duties of the House and holding their seats for -life. - -Such are the bare bones of the parliamentary system of Britain. Like -many other British institutions, it conceals beneath a façade of -ceremonial and tradition an efficient, flexible machine. The debates, -the great speeches, and the days of pomp when the Queen rides amid the -Household Cavalry to open Parliament are in spectacular contrast to -the long grind of unremitting and, by modern standards, financially -unrewarding work by Members of both Lords and Commons. - -When the visitor sits in the gallery high above the well of the Commons -and hears a minister patiently explaining some point connected with an -obscure aspect of British life, it is well to remember that this system -is one for which men fought and suffered, that this House is the cradle -of liberties and freedoms. - -The members of the government--"Her Majesty's Government in the United -Kingdom," as it is formally titled in Britain--are all Members of the -House of Commons or the House of Lords. The government and the cabinet -are separate entities, for the government includes the following -ministerial offices: the Prime Minister, who is the recognized head of -the government but who has no department; the Departmental Ministers, -seven of whom are Secretaries of State for Foreign Affairs, the Home -Department, Scotland, Commonwealth Relations, Colonies, War, and Air; -the Ministries, of which there are twelve, each headed by a Minister; -and some of the older posts with special titles such as the Chancellor -of the Exchequer, who is responsible for the Treasury, and the First -Lord of the Admiralty. - -The government also includes non-departmental ministers who hold -traditional offices, such as the Lord President of the Council, the -Lord Privy Seal, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. With the -flexibility that is so conspicuous a part of the British system, -successive governments have found major responsibilities for these -posts. - -The present Lord President of the Council, the Marquess of Salisbury, -is responsible to Parliament for two immensely important organizations: -the Atomic Energy Authority and the Department of Scientific and -Industrial Research. Yet Lord Salisbury, one of the most important -members of the present government, is not an elected representative of -the people but sits in the House of Lords as a peer. - -The Lord Chancellor and the Law Officers are also members of the -government. The Lord Chancellor is in fact a Minister of the Crown -who is also head of the judiciary in England and Wales. The four Law -Officers of the Crown are the Attorney General and the Solicitor -General for England and Wales and the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor -General for Scotland. - -Finally, there are Ministers of State--who are deputy ministers -in departments where there is a heavy load of work or where, as -in the case of the Foreign Office, the duties involve frequent -overseas travel--and junior Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries, or -Parliamentary Under Secretaries of State. - -The cabinet system, like so much else in British government, was not -the result of Olympian planning. It "just growed." The Tudors began -to appoint _ad hoc_ committees of the Privy Council. By the time of -Charles II the Privy Council numbered forty-seven. There then developed -an occasional arrangement in which a council of people in high office -was constituted to debate questions of domestic and foreign affairs. - -Such committees or cabinets persisted until the reign of Queen Anne. -Usually, but not always, they met in the presence of the sovereign. In -1717, George I, the first Hanoverian King, ceased to attend cabinet -meetings. Until recently the accepted historical reason for this was -the King's ignorance of English--a circumstance that might, one would -think, enable him to bear long debates with fortitude. However, J.H. -Plumb in his recent life of Sir Robert Walpole has suggested that -the King's absence from the cabinet was due to a quarrel between the -monarch and the Prince of Wales. - -At any rate, the cabinet system continued to flourish. Its members -consistently ignored the provision in the Act of Settlements (1725) -which forbade office-holders to sit in the Commons. The direct -influence of the sovereign was reduced, although his indirect -influence, as Lord North and "the King's Friends" demonstrated, was -great. - -Nowadays the members of the cabinet are selected from the government by -the Prime Minister. Usually it has fewer than twenty members. - -The cabinet determines the policy the government will submit to -Parliament, it controls the national executive in accordance with -policy approved by Parliament, and it co-ordinates and limits the -authority of the departments of the government. In its operations the -cabinet makes great use of the committee system, referring problems to -one of the standing committees or to a temporary committee composed of -the ministers chiefly concerned. - -A British cabinet operates under the rule of collective responsibility -and of individual responsibility. That is, ministers share collective -responsibility for the policy and actions of the government and -individual responsibility to Parliament for the functioning of -their departments. A cabinet minister in Britain must appear before -the legislature, of which he is a member, and submit to a lengthy -questioning upon the work of his department. He must defend his -department in debate. No such procedure affects American cabinet -members, although they can, of course, be questioned by Congressional -committees. - -The members of the cabinet in Britain are a good deal more than -advisers to the Prime Minister. Their relationship to ultimate policy -is closer and their responsibility greater. Hence it is unusual, almost -impossible, in Britain to find the Secretary of State for Foreign -Affairs saying one thing about foreign policy and the Prime Minister -another. Lord Melbourne said it did not matter what the members of his -government said as long as they all said the same thing. This principle -has been hallowed by time. - -Although members of the cabinet often disagree furiously in private, -there is an absence of open bickering. Moreover, the authority of the -cabinet and the House of Commons is supreme. There have been no British -General MacArthurs. Field Marshal Lord Montgomery is a wise, cogent, -and talkative man. Occasionally he has offered the country his views on -non-military matters. Invariably he has been told to leave government -matters to the elected representatives of the people. When the cabinet -requires the advice of the Chief of the Imperial General Staff or -the First Sea Lord (not to be confused with the First Lord of the -Admiralty) on military matters, the cabinet asks for it. - -The cabinet minister is bound to secrecy. If he resigns from the -cabinet because of a disputed issue, he must obtain through the Prime -Minister the permission of the sovereign before he can make any -statement involving a disclosure of cabinet discussions. - -Nor may a cabinet minister repudiate either in Parliament or in his -constituency policies that have been approved by the cabinet or propose -policies that have not been agreed on with other ministers. He must -be prepared to vote with the government on all issues and to speak in -support or defense of its policy. Inability to agree or compromise -with the view of the majority in the cabinet usually results in the -minister's resignation from the government. A minister who remained in -the cabinet under such circumstances would be held responsible for the -policy he opposed. - -Political conflict flourishes in Britain. Yet for many reasons -the government of the day and the opposition practice a basic -bipartisanship on basic issues. To a considerable degree this is -the result of the change in Britain's position over the last two -decades. There is an unspoken recognition by the leaders of the two -great parties that the present situation of the United Kingdom is too -precarious for prolonged and violent differences on essentials. There -are, of course, exceptions. Violent controversy does break out on -essentials between party and party and within a party. - -Consider two essentials of British policy: the Anglo-American alliance -and the decision to make the hydrogen bomb. - -The relations between the United States and Britain developed -their contemporary form in World War II. Since 1945 they have been -strengthened by the rise of an aggressive Soviet Union. There are other -contributing factors, some of which are not particularly attractive -to political or economic groups within each partner to the alliance. -Moreover, there has never been a time when there were not powerful -critics of various aspects of the alliance in both countries. - -Aneurin Bevan and his friends on the radical left of the Labor Party -have often lambasted the United States and Britain's dependence on -her. Similar criticisms could be heard in private from Tories. When -the United States voted with the Soviet Union against Britain in the -United Nations after the British and French had invaded Suez, the -Conservatives were moved to put their protest into the form of a motion -in the House of Commons. This was accompanied by much sharp criticism, -which had a therapeutic effect in encouraging some realistic thinking -about the alliance. - -A great deal of the anxiety about United States policy, of the jealousy -of United States power, of the anger at Mr. Dulles's self-righteous -sermons about colonialism was vented during this period. It did some -harm, certainly. But from the standpoint of the honest expression of -Conservative Party opinion and of American realism about the British -attitude, it also did some good. - -The alliance is an essential. Even when indignant Conservatives--and a -number of Socialists, too--were thinking up pet names for Mr. Dulles, -the leaders of the party were doing their best to mollify their -followers. They were themselves anxious and angry, but they never -suggested defection from the alliance. - -It may be suggested that the British had nowhere else to go. This may -be true, but even so it would be no bar to their departure. They are -happy when they are on their own, and many on this little island would -count the alliance well lost in exchange for a vigorous reassertion of -independence. - -In 1940 the cockney, the inevitable cockney, used to remark, for the -edification of American correspondents: "Cor, we're alone. What of it, -guv?" Now, I have always regarded this not as a piece of patriotic -rhetoric but as a natural response to events by a brave people. -Shakespeare, of course, said it better. - - Come the three corners of the world in arms, - And we shall shock them. Nought shall make us rue, - If England to itself do rest but true. - -The important word is "itself." If there comes a time of great outside -pressure when alliances and confederations are in danger, Americans -will be well advised to remember that word. - -The decision to make the hydrogen bomb, a project involving the -expenditure of great sums that Britain could ill afford, again was a -bipartisan matter. The Conservative government proposed it. The Labor -opposition (with Mr. Bevan dissenting in a burst of Welsh oratory) -agreed. There have been recurrent criticisms of how the work was being -done, of the cost, of the necessity for testing the weapon, and of the -arrangements for the tests. But there has been very little criticism of -the bomb's manufacture from the leaders of the Labor Party--excepting -always Mr. Bevan. - -Bipartisanship is assisted by consultation on issues of major national -importance between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. -But the achievement of bipartisan policies owes much more to a general -understanding in both parties in the House of Commons of the country's -present position. - -Socialist reform and experimentation in the years between 1945 and -1951 aroused Conservative fears as fierce as Labor Party hopes. The -enmity aroused in the largely Conservative middle class by the Labor -governments of those years certainly has not disappeared. But much -of it has been re-directed against the moderate policies of the -Conservative government, which has long claimed the allegiance of the -middle class. - -The leaders of the two great parties--Harold Macmillan, Lord Salisbury, -and R.A. Butler for the Conservatives, and Hugh Gaitskell, Harold -Wilson, Jim Griffiths for Labor--are moderates. On the periphery of -each party stand the radicals advocating extreme measures at home and -abroad. Should Britain's economic and international troubles persist, -the moderate approach to their solution may not satisfy either the -Conservative or Socialist voters. - -British politics in May of 1955 continued one of those rhythmic changes -of direction which feature political life in every democratic nation. -The Conservatives won a smashing victory in the general election and -became the first party in ninety years to be returned to office with an -increased majority. - -The victory gave the Tory government a majority of 61 in the House of -Commons. But this majority is not an exact reflection of the way the -electorate voted. The Conservatives and their supporters got 13,311,938 -votes and Labor won 12,405,146. The Liberals got 722,395 and the -Communists 33,144. - -This almost even division of the British electorate between the two -major parties must be kept in mind when we examine the right and the -left in British politics. Not since 1945, when the Labor Party swept -into office, has there been a difference of a million votes between the -two in general elections. - -Labor's sun was sinking in the election of 1950, which the party won -by a narrow margin. The Conservatives took over in 1951 and boosted -their majority in 1955. Has the pendulum's swing to the right ended? -The answer may lie in the policies and personalities of the two great -parties today. - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -IV. _The Conservatives_ - -A PARTY AND A WAY OF LIFE - - _The Conservative party have always said that, on the whole, their - policy meant that people had to fill up fewer forms than under the - policies of other parties._ - - SIR ALAN HERBERT - - _The man for whom the law exists--the man of forms, the Conservative, - is a tame man._ - - HENRY THOREAU - -[Illustration] - - -Although they have little in common otherwise, the Great American -Public and the radical wing of the British Labor Party share a strange -mental image of the British Conservative. They see him as a red-faced -stout old gentleman given to saying "Gad, sir," waving the Union Jack, -and kicking passing Irishmen, Indians, and Egyptians. He is choleric -about labor unions, and he stands for "no damned nonsense" from -foreigners. - -The picture was a false one even before World War II. No party could -have existed for a century, holding power for considerable periods, -without a basis of support in the British working class. Such support -would not be granted to the caricature of a Conservative described -above. Certainly the Conservative Party has now, and has had in the -past, its full share of reactionaries opposed to change. The inquiring -reporter will encounter more than a smattering of similar opposition to -change among the leaders of Britain's great unions. - -Britain's altered position in the world and the smashing Labor victory -of 1945 combined to whittle away the authority of the reactionaries -in the Conservative Party in the years between 1945 and 1951 when it -was out of office. Since then other influences, including the rise -within the party of young politicians whose education and experience -have little in common with those of the recognized Tory leadership, -has further altered the character of the party. It has come a long way -since 1945. - -A young Conservative minister recalls with horror the annual -Conservative conference of that year. The chairwoman, a billowy dowager -wielding a lorgnette, announced with simpering pride that she had a -surprise for the conference. It was, she said, "a real Conservative -trade-unionist." Had the Archbishop of Canterbury appeared on the -platform and danced the can-can, the surprise could not have been -greater. When a Negro student went to the platform a decade later to -discuss colonial affairs, no one turned a hair. - -In retrospect, the election of 1945 was one the Tories could not win. -Almost everything was against them: the pre-war Tory government's -appeasement of Germany, the military disasters of 1940, the distrust -of Churchill in time of peace, his own exaggerated campaign attacks on -Labor, the superb organization of the Labor Party machinery by Herbert -Morrison. Ten years later the Conservatives faced an election they -could not lose. Even when all other conditions are taken into account, -this was a singular example of the adaptability and mobility of the -Tories. - -The Tories saw that the nation had changed, and they changed with it. -Both the political philosophy of the party and the organization of -the party were altered--the latter change being more drastic, more -complete, and more rapid than the former. - -In the organizational change the reports of the Committee on Party -Organization in 1948 and 1949 were of paramount importance. The -committee was headed by Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, later Viscount Kilmuir -and Lord Chancellor. - -Before the party could win an election on its altered policy, a -reconstruction of its machinery was necessary. To reconstruct along -the lines advised by the experts, the Tories first brought in Lord -Woolton, who had been a successful Minister of Food during the war. It -was a sagacious appointment. As Chairman of the Party Organization, -Woolton created a young, enthusiastic body of workers whose propaganda -on behalf of the party began to impress the electorate--largely, I -suspect, because these workers were so unlike the popular idea of -Tories. - -While Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Harold Macmillan, R.A. Butler -led the parliamentary fight against the Labor government, a group -of young Tories built the party case for the leaders. Techniques of -research and propaganda were developed. Promising young men and women -from all classes were encouraged. - -These younger Conservative tacticians included many who are now -ministers. Iain MacLeod, who has been Minister of Health and Minister -of Labor, Reginald Maulding, who has been Minister of Supply and -Paymaster General, Selwyn Lloyd, the present Foreign Secretary, are -representative of the nucleus of talent which was built during those -years. They and a score of junior ministers are young, vigorous, and -ambitious. They know their own party, and, what is equally important, -they know the Labor Party and its leaders. - -Talking with the leaders of both the major parties, one is struck -by the breadth of the Tories' knowledge of the Labor leaders' -personalities, views on national issues, and aspirations. "Know your -enemy" is an axiom as wise in politics as in war. - -Yet I doubt that all the political intelligence and administrative -ability in the Tory ranks would have sufficed without Woolton. - -Frederick William Marquis, the first Viscount Woolton, is not, as one -might suppose from his imposing name and title, the son of a hundred -earls. He is very much a self-made man who fought his way to success in -commerce and finance. He is a Jim Farley, rather than a Mark Hanna. - -When Woolton took over the chairmanship of the Party Organization, the -party was defeated and discredited. He left it after the triumph of -May 1955 with Conservative fortunes at their post-war zenith. I have -mentioned Woolton's reorganization of the Central and Area offices, -but his influence on the party went beyond this. In the years when -the Socialists ruled in Whitehall, Woolton transferred to the beaten -Conservatives some of his own warmth and vigor. He is an urbane, -friendly man; the young Conservatives then emerging from the middle -class felt that they were directed not by an aristocratic genius but -by a fatherly, knowledgeable elder. Indeed, his nickname was "Uncle -Fred." The revived party began to talk like a democratic party and -even, occasionally, to act like one. Under Woolton the Central Office -in London changed from a remote, austere group controlling the party -into a Universal Aunt or Uncle, ready to help constituency parties -solve their problems. Yet the leader of the party and the chairman of -the Party Organization continued to direct and control. - -Conservative Party policy, as it has evolved in the past decade, has -moved to the left. This is not solely because, as the Labor Party often -charges, it wanted to steal or adopt parts of the Socialist platform. -A great many of the young men in the Tory party in 1945 sympathized -with many of the Socialists' policies. "I'd have voted Labor myself if -I hadn't been a Tory candidate," one of them reflected a decade later. -What offended the Tories' self-esteem was that great, revolutionary -changes were being made in British life by the Labor government and -they, who had always assumed a special right to rule Britain, were not -making the changes. - -A large part of Conservative political tactics in the late forties -consisted of negative criticism. The parlous state of the British -economy, the withdrawals from India and Burma, the decline of British -influence and power in the world offered great opportunities to a party -that traditionally combines business interests and experience with an -assumption of omniscience in the direction of international affairs. At -the same time, the work of the back-room boys in the Central Office on -the solution of Britain's economic difficulties, expressed in speeches -of party leaders, gave the impression that the Conservatives, whatever -their past faults, were moving to the left in their approach to the -economic problem. - -The present leadership of the Conservative Party--Harold Macmillan, -Lord Salisbury, R.A. Butler, and a number of the younger ministers--is -well to the left of the economic position assumed by the party in the -1945 election. Indeed, the complaint of the party's middle-class rank -and file that the Conservatives are carrying out a pseudo-socialist -program rather than a truly Tory one is an important factor in -estimating the party's ability to retain power. - -A word is needed here about "left" and "right" as applied to British -parties. Although the Conservative Party is frequently compared with -the Republican Party in the United States and has many similarities of -outlook, the Conservatives are, on the whole, well to the left of the -Republicans. Thinking in the Labor Party, moreover, is well to the left -of both Democratic and Republican parties in the United States. - -After the Conservative victory in the election of 1955 it was generally -expected that the party would move toward the right. Critics will seize -upon British intervention in Egypt as evidence of such a movement. But -it can be asked whether a policy designed to bring down a dictator--in -this case President Nasser of Egypt--when it was evident that the -United Nations was unable or unwilling to do so can be classified -as a right-wing, reactionary policy. Similarly, the movement of the -British government under the leadership of Sir Anthony Eden and Harold -Macmillan toward entry into the European common market can scarcely -be considered an example of right-wing extremism. The attacks on this -policy by the newspapers controlled by Lord Beaverbrook, the most -imperialist of the press lords, testify to the anger aroused by the -progressive internationalism of the Conservatives. - -No one can gainsay the existence of a strong nationalistic element -within the Conservative Party in the House of Commons and in the -country. This element rebelled against the Anglo-Egyptian treaty by -which Britain agreed to quit Egypt. It supported the decision to -intervene in Egypt. Parenthetically it should be noted that the moving -spirits in this decision were Sir Anthony Eden and Harold Macmillan, -men who, by conviction, belonged to the progressive wing of the party. -Finally, when the government agreed first to a cease-fire and then to a -withdrawal from Egypt, this group censured both the United Nations and -the United States for their part in bringing this about. - -Given the character of the Conservative Party's support in the country, -the presence of such a group within the party in Parliament is natural. -But do not discount the adaptability of the party. When Harold -Macmillan formed his government in January 1957 he found it possible, -with the approval of the party, to include in it both Sir Edward Boyle, -who had resigned from the government over the Egyptian invasion, and -Julian Amery, who had rebelled against the government because it -listened to the United States and the United Nations and halted the -invasion. - -The Conservatives' approach to Britain's economic and financial -problems is well to the left of the policies followed by their pre-war -predecessors. Britain's is a managed economy to an extent that would -shake the late Stanley Baldwin and the present Secretary of the -Treasury in Washington. Mr. Macmillan and his ministers are not secret -readers of _Pravda_. They are political realists who understand the -changes in power which have taken place in Britain, who understand that -the Council of the Trades Union Congress is as important today as the -Federation of British Industries. - -The Labor Party, it often seems, suffers from an inability to -understand the changes that have taken place in their opponents. It -may be, as Socialists contend, that the changes are only a façade -hiding the greedy, imperious capitalists beneath. But to an outsider -it seems that the Labor Party pays too much attention to the surviving -extremists of the Tory party and not enough to the venturesome, -progressive younger men who will inherit the party. Surely the appeal -of the Conservative Party to the electorate is based more upon the -personalities and policies of these rising stars than upon the -reactionaries of the right wing. - -The Conservative Party arouses and holds some strange allegiances. I -remember Michael Foot, the editor of the left-wing weekly _Tribune_, -saying that in his old constituency of Devonport there were solid -blocks of Conservative votes in the poorest areas. Foot could not -understand it. The rather contemptuous explanation offered by a -Conservative Party organizer was: "Why not? People who are poor aren't -necessarily foolish enough to buy this socialist clap-trap." - -The Conservatives have been making inroads into the new middle class -created by the boom of 1953-5. This group emerging from the industrial -working class was formerly strongly pro-Labor. There are indications -that the more prosperous are changing their political attitudes as -their incomes and social standing improve. - -The Conservatives concentrate on a national appeal. Labor by its -origins is a class party. In a country as homogeneous as Britain, the -Conservative boast that they stand for all the people rather than for -merely one class or one geographical area is effective. To this the -Tories add the claim that they are the party most suited by training -and experience to deal with the international problems faced by the -nation. - -This assumption of the right to rule is not so offensive to Britons -as it might be to Americans. There is little historical basis for it. -If an aristocrat, Winston Churchill, led Britain to victory in World -War II, a small-town Welsh lawyer, David Lloyd George, was the leader -in World War I. Nevertheless, there is a tendency--perhaps a survival -of feudalism--among some Britons to believe that their affairs are -better handled by a party with upper-class education and accents. And -of course the Conservatives look the part. Mr. Macmillan, the Prime -Minister, is a far more impressive figure than Hugh Gaitskell, who -probably would be Prime Minister in a Labor government. The accents, -the clothes, the backgrounds of the Tory leaders give the impression -of men born to conduct government. Brilliant journalists have argued -that the class they represent is unrepresentative, and that the Suez -crisis proved its inability to understand the modern world. Surely the -present Conservative leaders and their predecessors have been guilty -of quite as many errors as the Socialists and Liberals of the past. -However, they give the impression of competence. As any politician -knows, even in the most enlightened of democracies such impressions are -as important as the most brilliant intellects or the wisest programs. - -The Conservatives enjoy another important political advantage. Until -the present the leaders of the party generally have been drawn from -one class, the old upper middle class. They went to the same schools, -served in the same regiments. Families like the Cecils, the Churchills, -the Edens, the Macmillans intermarry. The closeness of the relationship -breeds coherence. Basically there is an instinctive co-operation when -a crisis arises. The manner in which the Tories closed ranks after Sir -Anthony Eden's resignation was an example. - -The upper ranks of the civil service, of the Church of England, and of -the armed services are drawn largely from the same class. Usually this -facilitates the work of government when the Tories are in power. But -recently there has been a change. In their drive to broaden the base of -the party, the Conservatives have introduced to the House of Commons -a number of young politicians who do not share the Eton-Oxford-Guards -background of their leaders. - -The environment and education of this group and their supporters in -the constituencies is much different. For Eton or Harrow, substitute -state schools or small, obscure public schools. Some did go to Oxford -and Cambridge, but they moved in less exalted circles than the Edens -or Cecils. They are usually businessmen who have made their way in the -world without the advantages of the traditional Tory background, and -they are highly critical of the tendency to reserve the party plums for -representatives of its more aristocratic wing. - -They seem to be further to the right in politics than such -"aristocrats" as Macmillan, Butler, Eden, or Lord Salisbury. They -have risen the hard way, and they are more interested in promoting -the interests of the business groups for which they speak than in -the traditional Tory concept of speaking for the whole nation. This -national responsibility on the part of the "aristocrats" was in many -ways a liberal attitude. Macmillan and Butler, for instance, appear -much more responsive and tolerant on the subject of trade unions than -most members of the new group. - -As the power of this group increases--and it will increase as the -Conservative Party continues to change--sharper disputes on policy, -especially economic policy, can be expected. This encourages some -Socialists, naturally sensitive on the point, to believe that their -opponents are headed for a period of fierce feuding within the party. -Their optimism may be misplaced. - -The Tories are adept at meeting rebellion and absorbing rebels. The -indignant "red brick" rebel of today may be the junior minister of -tomorrow whose boy is headed for Eton. Despite the advent of these -newcomers, the party does not appear so vulnerable to schism as does -the Labor Party with its assortment of extreme-left-wing intellectuals, -honest hearts and willing hands from the unions, and conscientious and -intelligent mavericks from the middle class. - -Finally, the power of what has been called the "Establishment" is -primarily a conservative power that wishes to conserve the governmental -and social structure of Britain against the majority of reformers. -On great national issues this usually places it upon the side of the -Conservative Party. If it can be defined, the Establishment represents -the upper levels of the Church of England, of Oxford and Cambridge, -_The Times_ of London, the chiefs of the civil service. The direct -power of this group may be less than has been described, but few would -deny its influence. - -The common background has served the Conservatives well in the past. -Open political quarrels within the party are rare. (The conflict over -the Suez policy was an exception.) "The Tories settle their differences -in the Carlton Club," Earl Attlee once said. "We fight ours out in -public. We're a democratic party that thrives on contention." Perhaps, -but the contention nearly wrecked the Labor Party between 1953 and 1955 -and had much to do with its defeat in 1955. - -Much of the comparative tranquillity of the Conservative Party is -due to the power of the party leader. Nominally, he is elected by -the Conservative Members of the House of Commons and the House of -Lords, all prospective Tory candidates for Commons, and the executive -Committee of the National Union. But, as Robert T. McKenzie has pointed -out in his _British Political Parties_, the leader is often selected -by the preceding leader of the party when it is in power. Thus, Sir -Winston Churchill made it clear that Sir Anthony Eden was his heir as -leader, and Sir Anthony was duly elected. - -A different situation arose when Sir Anthony resigned as Prime Minister -because of illness. In that instance the Prime Minister was selected -before he became leader of the party. It was widely believed outside -the inner circles of the party that there was a choice between Harold -Macmillan and R.A. Butler. Actually the leaders of the party, including -Sir Anthony, Sir Winston, and Lord Salisbury, and a substantial number -of ministers, junior ministers, and back-bench Members had made it -clear that their preference lay with Macmillan. - -The structure of the British government and of the Conservative -Party give the leader a good deal more authority over his party than -is enjoyed by a President of the United States as the head of the -Republican or Democratic Party. In power or in opposition the leader -has the sole ultimate responsibility for the formulation of policy and -the election program of his party. - -The annual party conference proposes, the leader disposes. Resolutions -passed at the conference do not bind him. The party secretariat (the -Central Office) is in many ways the personal machine of the leader. He -appoints its principal officers and controls its main organizations for -propaganda, finance, and research. Consequently, it is unlikely that a -Conservative politician would challenge the authority of the leader -as sharply and directly as Senator McCarthy challenged the authority -of President Eisenhower in the latter's first administration. The -conclusion is that, although Tory democracy is an attractive political -slogan, it has little connection with the almost autocratic authority -of the party leader. - -In the field of political tactics moderation is the guiding principle -of the new Conservatism. This became evident in the election of 1955, -which the Tories fought soberly and efficiently. Pointing to Britain's -evident prosperity--the stormclouds were already piling on the horizon, -but campaign orators seldom see that far--the Conservatives asked the -people if this combination of good times at home and easier relations -abroad (the summit conference at Geneva was in the offing) was not -better for the nation than revolutionary policies and hysterical -oratory. - -The party's appeal for votes seemed to reflect a surer grasp of popular -attitudes than the Labor Party's. In retrospect the Conservative -message was a consoling one. Everyone had work. Almost everyone had -more money than he had had three or four years before, although the -established middle class already was feeling the effect of rising -prices and continued heavy taxation on real income. The roads were -filling up with cars that should have been sold for export, running on -gasoline that was imported with an adverse effect on the balance of -trade. - -During six years of Socialist control the Labor politicians had -informed the British that a return to Conservative rule would mean a -revival of the bad old days of unemployment, dole and hunger marches, -strikes and lockouts. Yet here were Sir Anthony Eden patting the unions -on the head and Harold Macmillan talking warmly of the chances of a -successful conference with the Russians at Geneva. It was all a little -confusing and, from the Conservative standpoint, very successful. - -Traveling around Britain during the weeks prior to the 1955 election, -I was struck by the number of people of both parties prepared to -accept the Conservatives' contention that their party was, by some -mysterious dispensation, uniquely suited to the business of conducting -the nation's foreign policy. In some areas, notably in the North and -the Midlands, this seemed to spring from Eden's long and, on the whole, -successful record in international affairs. In others I encountered a -feeling that the withdrawals from India and Egypt and such blunders as -the loss of the Abadan oil refinery had lowered the prestige of the -country. Certainly the Tories were not guiltless. Nonetheless, there -was a persistent conviction that the Tories handled foreign affairs -best. Occasionally--this was at the nadir of Socialist fortunes--I met -Labor supporters who subscribed to this view. - -The first public reaction to British intervention in Egypt in 1956 was -a triumph for organized public opinion as directed by the Labor Party. -From the resolutions that flooded into London from factory and local -unions, one would have concluded that the whole of the British working -class was violently opposed to governmental policy. Actually, a number -of public-opinion polls showed that the country was pretty evenly -divided. My own experience, traveling around Britain in January and -February of 1957, convinced me that, on the whole, the working-class -support for the Suez adventure was slightly stronger than that of the -professional classes. Of course, as in most situations of this kind, -the supporters did not bother to send telegrams of support. - -The Labor Party in the House of Commons made a great offensive against -the Conservative position on Egypt. This played a part, but not the -dominant part, in the cabinet's decision to accept a cease-fire. The -paramount factor was the indication from Washington that unless Britain -agreed to a cease-fire, the administration would not help Britain with -oil supplies and would not act to support the pound sterling, whose -good health is the basis of Britain's position as an international -banker. - -The Socialists' attack did result in the emergence of Aneurin Bevan as -the party's principal spokesman, and a most effective one, on foreign -affairs. This is an area where the Labor Party has been weak in recent -years. Death removed Ernest Bevin, a great Foreign Secretary, and -Hector McNeil, the brightest of the party's younger experts on foreign -affairs. - -Moderation, a national rather than a class approach, the middle -way--all these sufficed for the Tories in 1955. Two years later -there are abundant signs that a sharper policy will be necessary to -meet international and internal situations vastly more difficult. -Drastic policies invite harsh argument in their formulation. Can the -Conservatives continue to settle their differences in the Carlton Club -or will these spill out onto the front pages of the newspapers? - -The primary political problem the Conservative government faced before -Suez was whether it could continue its policies, especially where they -related to defense and taxation, and retain the support of a large -and influential group of Conservative voters. This group is offended -and rebellious because, although the Conservatives have now been in -office for over five years, it still finds its real income shrinking, -its social standards reduced, and its future uncertain. It regards the -moderate Conservatives' economic policy and attitude toward social -changes as akin to those of the Labor Party. By the middle of 1956 its -resentment was being reflected by the reduction of the Conservative -vote in the elections. - -The group can be defined as the old middle class. During the last -century it has been one of the most important and often the most -dominant of classes in Britain. Its fight to maintain its position -against the challenge of the new middle class and the inexorable march -of social and economic changes is one of the most interesting and most -pathetic parts of Britain's modern revolution. - -The leaders of the old middle class represented a combination of -influence and wealth in the professions, medicine, the church, the -law, education, and the armed forces. The members of these professions -and their immediate lieutenants administered the great institutions -that had established Britain in the Victorian twilight as the world's -greatest power. They were responsible for the great public schools, the -Church of England, the Royal Navy, the banks, the largest industries, -the shipping lines, the universities. - -They were not the aristocracy. The decline of the aristocracy, with -its ancient titles, its huge estates, and its huge debts, began over -a century ago. The old middle class began life as the aristocracy's -executors and ended as its heirs. - -The pattern of life in the old middle class was shaken by World War -I, but it existed relatively unchanged in 1939. The class was the -butt of the bright young playwrights of the twenties and has received -the acid attentions of Mr. Somerset Maugham. It supported Munich and -Chamberlain, and it sent its sons away to die in 1939. - -As a group, the class was well educated. The majority of the men had -been to a public school and a university. Both men and women bought and -read books and responsible newspapers. They traveled abroad, they knew -something about the world. Some had inherited wealth. Others invested -their savings. - -Beneath this upper stratum of the old middle class was a lower middle -class that sought to rise into it. This was made up of shopkeepers, -small manufacturers, the more prosperous farmers, the black-coat -workers in business, and the industrial technicians. - -The future welfare of these two groups is the political problem that -the Conservative Party must face. Since the decline of the Liberal -Party, the Tories have counted upon the support of this class. There -were many defections in the election of 1945, but it is probable that -a more important reason for the Tory defeat that year was the party's -failure to win the support of a new middle class that was then arising -as a factor in British politics. - -The chief reason why the old middle class is defecting from the Tory -standard is that it believes that the Conservative governments since -1945 have not done enough to halt the drain on its incomes. Prices -have risen sharply in the years since Chamberlain went to Munich. One -estimate is that the 1938 income of £1,000 a year for a married man -with two children would have to be raised to £4,000 to provide the same -net income today. But in this class the number of men whose incomes -have quadrupled or even doubled since 1938 is small. - -What do the figures mean in terms of a family's life? They mean that -to send the children to a public school, which the majority of this -class regards as indispensable from a social and even occasionally -from an educational standpoint, the father and mother must do without -new clothes, books, the occasional visit to the theater. Instead of -two regular servants, the family must "make do" with a daily cleaning -woman. The family vacations in some quiet French or Italian seaside -resort must be abandoned. The father and mother are unable to save and -are increasingly worried about their future. They see a future decline -in the family's social standards and economic health. - -All this is aggravated in their minds by the appearance of a new middle -class arising from a different background and doing new and different -jobs. Its income, its expense accounts, its occasional lack of taste -stir the envy and anger of the old middle class. - -What the old middle class asks from the government--and, through the -government, from the big trade unions and the big industrialists--is an -end to the rise in the cost of living which it, subsisting chiefly on -incomes that have not risen sharply, cannot meet. Directly it asks the -government for an end to punishing taxation and to "coddling" of both -the unions and the manufacturers. - -The dilemma of the Conservative Party and its government is a serious -one. To lose the support of the old middle class will be dangerous, -even disastrous. For although the Tories have attracted thousands -of former Socialist votes in the last two elections, these do not -represent the solid electoral support that the old middle class has -offered. - -Perhaps in time the government may be able to reduce taxation. -Before this can be done, it must halt inflation, expand constructive -investment in industry, and increase the gold and dollar reserves. Each -of these depends to a great degree on economic factors with world-wide -ramifications. The old middle class understands this and is justifiably -suspicious of "pie in the sky" promises. - -Such suspicion is increased by the understanding of the other serious -long-term problems that British society faces. We need mention only -one in this context: how is Britain to maintain its present standards -of life and the present levels of government expenditure when it is -faced with the coming change in the age distribution of the population? - -The steady fall in death rates and the low birth rates of the years -between the two world wars are beginning to increase the proportion -of elderly people, and thus to reduce the proportion of the working -population to the total population. The size of the age groups reaching -retirement age increases yearly. It is predicted, on the basis of -present population trends, that over the next fifteen years the -population of the working-age group will remain about the same but that -the number of old people, persons over sixty-five, will rise over the -next thirty years by about three million. At the same time the number -of children of school age is expected to increase. - -Britain thus is faced with a steady increase in the number of the aged -who need pensions and medical care and the young who need medical care -and education. This charge will be added to the burdens already borne -by the working-age group. - -The country needs more hospitals and more schools. It needs new -highways. It has to continue slum-clearance and the building of homes. -Yet Britain has been spending $7,000,000,000 a year on social services -and $4,200,000,000 on defense. Under existing circumstances, and in -view of present Conservative policies, can the old middle class look -forward to an important reduction in taxation under any government? - -Reduction of taxation was one of the goals sought by Conservative -government when it planned a revision of Britain's defense program. -This revision, first planned by the ministry of Sir Anthony Eden and -given new impetus by the Macmillan government, has other objectives, -including the diversion of young men, capital, and productive capacity -from defense to industrial production for export. But an easing of -the defense burden would create conditions for tax relief in the -Conservative circles that need it most. - -The reduction of defense expenditures places any Conservative -government in a dilemma. The party expects the government to maintain -Britain's position as a nuclear power--that is, as a major power. -The political repercussions of the Suez crisis showed the depth of -nationalism within the party, and, indeed, within the country. Yet -it seems plainly impossible for the Tories to reduce taxation of the -middle class drastically without cutting the defense expenditure that -has maintained Britain, somewhat precariously, in the front rank of -world powers. - -Of course, tax relief will not fully answer the difficulties of the old -middle class. Its incomes, ranging from the pensions of ex-officers -to the profits of small businessmen, have lagged behind prices. -Stabilization of prices is essential if this class is to maintain its -standards. - -The rebellion of the old middle class against Tory policy and -leadership, if carried to the limit, might result in the creation of an -extreme right-wing party. Such a party would be brought into being more -easily if the sort of inflation which helped wreck the German democracy -after World War I were to appear in Britain. Would the political good -sense of the British enable them to reject the vendors of extreme -political panaceas who would appear at such a juncture? - -The old middle class contains today, as it has since 1945, persons -and organizations fanatically opposed to the unions and to labor in -general. Extremist organizations, some of them modeled on the Poujadist -movement in France, have appeared. In many cases the opposition to -labor policies and personalities has been expanded in these groups to -include the "traitors" at the head of the present Tory government, who -are considered betrayers of their party and their class. - -There is a reasonable expectation that Britain will continue to -encounter economic problems whose solution will involve economic -sacrifices by all classes in the future. The old middle class feels -that it has sacrificed more than any other group. There is thus a -potential of serious trouble within the Conservative party. The most -probable development, it seems to me, is an attempt by the right -wing of the party to win and hold power. But a rapid deterioration of -the economic situation under a moderate Tory government followed by -the return to power of a Labor government might well encourage the -transformation of the Tories into a radical right-wing party. - -At the moment the right wing of the Conservative Party wants too much. -It asks for an uncontrolled economy and is restless under the measures -imposed to defeat inflation. But it also wants a stabilization of -prices. It wants a "tough" foreign policy, but it opposes the taxation -necessary to make the arms on which such a policy must rest. It has an -almost reckless desire to curb the trade unions without reckoning the -effect on industrial relations. - -The moderates who fashioned the present Conservative Party and who now -lead its government appear to understand their country and its position -better than their critics on the right wing. In addition, their -programs have attracted the attention and support of young people to a -degree unknown on the right wing. - -In the late thirties, when I first was indoctrinated in British -politics, it was smart to be on the left. The young people before the -war were very certain of the stupidity of the Conservative government -policies, at home as well as abroad, and their political convictions -ranged from communism to the socialism of the Labor Party. "All the -young people are Bolshies," a manufacturer told me in 1939. "If we do -have a war, this country will go communist." - -A good proportion of young people still are on the left. But they do -not seem to hold their convictions as strongly as those I knew in the -pre-war years. On the other side of the fence there has been a movement -toward an intellectual adoption of conservative principles. In some -cases this verges on radicalism, in a few almost to nihilism: the -"nothing's any good in either party, let's get rid of them both" idea. - -There is always a danger to democracy in such attitudes. They are -encouraged in Britain by a tendency in some circles to adopt an -arrogant, patrician distaste for all democratic politics. This is -understandable. The revolution that began with the war has weakened -the economic and political power of a once dominant class. But that -does not excuse those who seek to destroy faith in democratic processes. - -The position of the Conservative Party is both stronger and weaker than -it appears. There are reasons for believing that by the next general -election, probably in 1959 or 1960, the policies of the government -will have relieved the more immediate problems such as inflation -and the need for increased exports. This success will not change -Britain's position as a comparatively small power competing militarily, -politically, and economically with the larger established powers, such -as the Soviet Union and the United States, and the reviving powers, -Germany and Japan. - -The dominant group in the Conservative Party and government has, -however, a considerable degree of competence and experience in -government. It has an effective parliamentary majority during the -present administration. Against these positive factors we must place -the probability that some of its policies will continue to alienate an -important group of its supporters; the result may be a rebellion within -the party or worse. - -The Tories are not politically dogmatic. Like the people, the whole -people, they claim to represent, they are flexible in their approach -to policies and programs. They change to suit economic conditions and -political attitudes. In Britain's present position, the appeal of a -party that contends it is working for the nation rather than a class or -a section should not be minimized. - -But it is precisely Britain's position in the modern world that -forces upon the Conservatives today, and would force upon Labor if it -came to power tomorrow, certain policies that are at odds with the -principles of each faction. The Tories, for instance, must manipulate -the economy. The idea of "getting government out of business" may be -attractive to some industrialists, but in the nation's situation it -is impractical and dangerous. Similarly, the Labor Party, despite its -anti-colonialism, must follow policies that will enable Britain to -keep her investments in Malaya's tin and rubber and in the oil of the -Middle East. - -We see the two great parties meeting on such common ground. Perhaps -because they are less restricted by dogma and can boast greater talents -at the moment, the Tories appear slightly more confident of their -ability to meet the challenges of Britain's position. - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -V. _The Labor Party_ - -POLITICAL MACHINE OR MORAL CRUSADE? - - _The idea of Socialism is grand and noble; and it is, I am convinced, - possible of realization; but such a state of society cannot be - manufactured--it must grow. Society is an organism, not a machine._ - - HENRY GEORGE - - _We are all Socialists nowadays._ - - EDWARD VII WHEN PRINCE OF WALES - -[Illustration] - - -"The Tories won the election because they understood the changes that -had taken place since 1945," said a Labor politician in 1955. "We -misunderstood them and we lost. Yet we call ourselves 'the party of the -people.'" - -This assessment, made on the morning of defeat, explains to some degree -the Labor Party's defeat in the general election of 1955. It raises -the question of whether the party, as now constituted, is in fact a -working-class party. The growth of the Labor Party, the emergence of -its saints and sinners, the triumph of 1945, the disaster of 1955 make -up one of the truly significant political stories of the century. - -For Americans it is especially important. The British Labor Party -is the strongest non-communist left-wing party in any of the great -democracies of the West. Granted the normal shifts in political -support, it will be back in power sometime within the next ten years. -The government and people of the United States must regard it as -a permanent part of British political life, and they will have to -understand it better than they have in the past if the alliance between -the United States and the United Kingdom is to prosper. - -The British Labor Party is the political arm of what the old-timers -like to call "the movement." And it is as well to remember that not -so very long ago--Winston Churchill was a young politician then and -Anthony Eden was at Eton--it was a "movement" with all the emotional -fervor the word implies. The men who made the Labor Party a power in -the land were not cool, reasoning intellectuals (although, inevitably, -these assisted) but hot-eyed radicals who combined a fierce intolerance -with a willingness to suffer for their beliefs. - -The movement includes the Labor Party itself; the Trades Union -Congress, known universally in Britain as the TUC; the Co-Operative -Societies; and some minor socialist groups. - -The Trades Union Congress is one of the centers of power in modern -Britain. We will encounter it often in this book. Here we are concerned -with its old position as the starting-point for British working-class -power. The first Labor Party representatives who went to the House of -Commons in 1906 were supported almost entirely by members of unions. -The Parliamentary Labor Party came into being as an association of the -Labor members of the House of Commons. Today it includes members of -the House of Lords. There was originally a much closer co-ordination -between the unions and the Labor MP's than exists now. - -Today the TUC, although it exerts great political power both directly -and indirectly, is important principally as the national focus of the -trade-union movement. All the unions of any size or importance except -the National Union of Teachers, the National Association of Local -Government Officers, and some civil-service staff associations, are -affiliated with it. - -Its membership is impressive. The unions have a total membership of -9,461,000, of which 8,088,000 are affiliated with the TUC--this in -a population of just over 50,000,000. The TUC's power is equally -impressive. It is recognized by the government as the principal channel -for consultation between the ministries and organized labor on matters -affecting the interests of employees generally. - -This power is not unchallenged. One of the disruptive situations in the -Labor movement today is the restlessness of a number of constituency -labor parties under the authority of the TUC. The constituency labor -parties are the local organizations in the parliamentary constituencies -or divisions. A number of them are and have been well to the left of -the official leadership of the party. In them Aneurin Bevan finds his -chief support for the rebellion he has waged intermittently against the -leadership during the last five years. - -Another source of anxiety to the TUC is the unwillingness of some -unions--mostly those infiltrated by the Communists--to follow its -instructions in industrial disputes. The TUC leaders with whom I have -talked regard the strike weapon as the hydrogen bomb in labor's armory. -They oppose its indiscriminate use. But in a large number of cases they -have been unable to prevent its use. - -The labor movement represents generally the industrial urban working -class in Britain. But it is no longer an industrial urban working-class -party. The modern movement relies on other sections of the population -for both leaders and votes. Just as there are working-class districts -that vote Tory in election after election, so are there middle-class -groups who vote Labor. - -Horny-handed sons of toil still rank among the party's leading -politicians, but the post-war years have seen a steady increase in -two other types. One is the union officer, whose acquaintance with -physical labor is often somewhat limited. The other is the product of -a middle-class home, a public-school education, and an important job -in the wartime civil service. Hugh Gaitskell, the present leader of the -Parliamentary Labor Party, is a notable example of this second group. - -The party still includes intellectuals treading circumspectly in -the footprints left by the sainted Sydney and Beatrice Webb. The -intellectuals, perhaps in search of protective coloring, often assume -a manner more rough-hewn than the latest recruit from the coal face. -Incidentally, it was my impression that the defeat of 1955 shook the -intellectuals a good deal more than the practical politicians. They -departed, as is their custom, into long, gloomy analyses of the reasons -for the defeat. They, too, may have been out of touch with the people. - -Of course the defeat of 1955 did not finish the Labor movement in -Britain any more than its victory in 1945 doomed the Conservative -Party. True, the Labor vote dropped from 13,949,000 in 1951 to -13,405,000 in 1955 and the party's strength in the House of Commons -fell from 295 to 277 seats. But the prophets of gloom overlooked the -movement's immense vitality, which comes in part from its connection -with certain emotions and ideals well established in modern Britain. - -Within the movement the accepted reason for the defeat was the -interparty feud among the Bevanites on the left and the moderate -and right-wing groups. The moderates, representing the TUC and the -moderate elements of the Parliamentary Labor Party, provided most of -the party leaders in the election campaign. But in the year before the -election the squabbling within the party in the House of Commons and -on the hustings created a poor impression. One leader went into the -campaign certain that the party had not convinced the electorate that, -if elected, it could provide a competent, united government. These -bickerings thus were a serious factor in the Socialist catastrophe. - -They were related to what seems to me to have been a much more -important element in the defeat. This was the party's lack of -understanding of the people, a defeat emphasized by the politician -quoted at the start of this chapter. There were times during the -campaign when Socialist speakers seemed to confuse their audiences -with those of 1945, 1935, or even 1925. This was understandable, for -the Labor Party owes much of its present importance to its position -in the twenties and thirties as the party of protest. There was -plenty to protest about. There was poverty--black, stinking poverty, -which wears a hideous mask in the bleak British climate. There was -unemployment--the miners stood dull-eyed and shivering in the streets -of the tidy towns of South Wales. There was the dole. There was, in -London and other big cities, startling inequality between rich and -poor, such inequality as the traveler of today associates with Italy or -France or West Germany's Ruhr. - -Memories of those times scarred a generation. The bitterness spilled -out of the areas worst hit and infected almost the entire working -class. During the 1955 election I talked with a group in Merther -Tydfil in Wales. They were working, and had been working for ten years -at increasingly higher wages. They were well dressed, they had money -to buy beer and to go to see the Rugby Football International. The -majority--young fellows--seemed satisfied with their lot. But one -elderly man kept reminding them: "Don't think it's all that good, mun. -Bad it's been in this valley, and it may be again." - -Just as the Democrats in 1952 harked back to the days of Hoover and -Coolidge, so the Labor orators in 1955 revived the iniquities of -Baldwin and Chamberlain. They saw behind the amiable features of R.A. -Butler and the imposing presence of Anthony Eden the cloven hoofs of -the Tory devils. They warned, with much prescience, that the economic -situation would deteriorate. They cajoled and pleaded. They waved and -sang "The Red Flag." It didn't work. - -One statistic is important in this connection: since 1945, millions -who had voted for Labor in that election had died. It is reasonable -to assume that a high proportion of them were people with memories -of the twenties and thirties who would have voted Labor under any -circumstances. - -Some died. Others changed. The spring of 1955 marked the zenith of -Britain's first post-war boom. A very high proportion of the population -felt that they had left the hard road they had traveled since 1940, and -had emerged from war and austerity into the sunny uplands of peace and -prosperity. They felt that to a great degree this change had been due -to their own efforts, which was true. They believed they had earned the -right to relax. It may be that a decade hence Britons will look back on -that period as a golden echo of the great days of the Empire. Perhaps -never again will Britain know a comparable period of prosperity and -peace. - -Given this primary circumstance, it was almost impossible for a party -of protest to win an election. The industrial urban working class to -whom the Socialists chiefly appealed were doing nicely. The workers had -houses and television sets (known in Britain as "the telly"); bicycles -and motorcycles were giving way to small family cars. There had been -a steady rise in the supply of food, household appliances, and other -items for mass consumption. - -A large group of Labor voters were consequently not so interested in -the election as they had been in the past. They voted, but in smaller -numbers. Some votes switched to the Conservatives, but I do not regard -this as a substantial element in the Tory victory. What did hurt Labor -and help the Tories was the apathy of many Labor voters. Repeatedly I -visited Labor election centers where a few elderly and tired people -were going through the motions. The Tory centers, on the other hand, -were organized, lively, and efficient. - -For decades the Labor Party had promised the industrial workers -full employment, higher wages, social security. Now there was full -employment, wages were higher, present medical needs and future -pensions were assured by national legislation. To a great degree these -things had been achieved by the Labor governments of 1945 and 1950. But -monarchies can be as ungrateful as republics, and the Tory boast that -its government had ended rationing and produced prosperity probably -counted as much as the benefits given the industrial working class by -the socialist revolution carried out in six years of Labor government. - -Another factor operated against the Labor campaign. There was then and -still is a perceptible drift from the industrial working class into a -new middle class. Later this drift must be examined in detail. It is -part of the pattern of constant change in British history, a change -that provides much of British society's strength. It is a change in -which new blood constantly flows upward into other classes, a change -in which the proletarian becomes lower middle class and the lower -middle class becomes upper middle class in respect to income and social -standing. - -Here we are concerned with the political change. In many cases -the industrial worker who becomes a foreman and then a production -chief moves politically as well. He may still vote Labor, but it is -increasingly difficult for him to identify himself with the proletariat -or with Marxist doctrines. He lives in a better home, away from his old -associates. His new friends may spring from the same class, but they -are no longer preoccupied with the political struggle; often they are -enjoying the fruits of its victories. - -Nor is he worried, politically. For the Tories' return to power in -Britain in 1951 did not produce a reactionary government. Sir Winston -Churchill, once regarded by the workers as a powerful and unrelenting -enemy, appeared in his last administration as a kindly old gentleman -under whose sunny smile and oratorical showers the nation prospered. -Why, he was even trying to arrange a talk with the Russian leaders! The -absence of openly reactionary elements in the Conservative government, -despite the presence of such elements in the party, and the promotion -of moderation by Conservative speakers encouraged a gradual movement -of the industrial working class away from the standards of pre-war -socialism. - -The changes in British society between 1945 and 1955, the people's -refusal to respond to the old slogans in their new prosperity, -the damaging split within the Parliamentary Labor Party all are -contributing to the evolution of a new Labor Party that seems to be a -better reflection of its electoral support than the one which went down -to defeat in 1955. This does not mean, of course, that it is better -fitted to rule Britain. - -Almost all the leaders of the Labor governments of the post-war years -have gone. Ernest Bevin and Sir Stafford Cripps are dead. Clement -Attlee has passed from the House of Commons into the Lords. Herbert -Morrison and Emanuel Shinwell are back benchers in the Commons, -exchanging grins with their political enemy and personal friend Sir -Winston Churchill. - -These men represented the old Labor Party. Bevin, Morrison, and -Shinwell were hard, shrewd politicians, products of the working class -they served. Cripps and Attlee were strays from the old upper middle -class who had been moved to adopt socialism by the spectacle of -appalling poverty among Britain's masses and what seemed to them the -startling incompetence of capitalist society to solve the nation's -economic and social problems. - -This group and its chief lieutenants were bound, however, by a -common fight. They could remember the days when there was no massive -organization, when they had stood on windy street corners and shouted -for social justice. They remembered the days when "decent people" -looked down their noses at Labor politicians as unnecessary and -possibly treasonable troublemakers. - -It was inevitable, I think, that this group would pass from the -leadership of the Labor party. When they did, however, the party lost -more than the force of their personalities. It lost an emotional drive, -a depth of feeling, that will be hard to replace. - -Fittingly, the new leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party, Hugh -Gaitskell, is an exemplary symbol of the new party. He is a man of -courage and compassion, intellectual power and that cold objectivity -which is so often found in successful politicians. He represents -the modern middle-class socialists just as Attlee two decades ago -represented the much smaller number of socialists from that class. - -Attlee, however, led a party in which the working-class politician -was dominant. Gaitskell is chief of a party in which the middle-class -intellectual element and the managerial group from the unions and the -Party Organization have become powerful if not dominant. - -Clement Attlee was leader of the party for more than twenty years. -Gaitskell has the opportunity to duplicate this feat. But he must first -heal the great schism that has opened in the movement in the last five -years, and to do so he must defeat or placate the left wing and its -leader, Aneurin Bevan. - -Although the split within the Labor movement distresses all good -socialists, it has added notably to the vigor and, indeed, to the -gaiety of British politics. Aneurin Bevan was moved to flights of -oratorical frenzy and waspish wit. Nor is it every day that one sees -Clement Attlee temporarily discard his air of detachment and descend -into the arena to entangle his party foes in the streamers of their own -verbosity. It was a great fight, and, fortunately for those who like -their politics well seasoned, it is not over yet. - -For the quarrel within the movement represents forces and emotions of -great depth and significance. In moments of excitement men and women -on both sides have described it as a battle for the soul of the party. -It may be more accurately described, I think, as a battle to determine -what type of political party is to represent the labor movement in -Britain. - -Since the center and the right wing of the movement today dominate the -making of policy and fill most, but not all, of the important party -posts, it is the left that is on the offensive. But the left itself is -not a united band of brothers. It has its backsliders and its apostates -who sometimes temper their criticisms when they think of minor -government posts under a Labor government headed by Hugh Gaitskell. -But, personalities aside, convictions are so strongly held that there -seems to be little likelihood of an end to the offensive. - -What, then, does the left represent? One definition is that it -represents those elements in the party who seek to complete the -revolution of 1945-51. They want the extension of nationalization to -all major industries and some minor ones. Aneurin Bevan, who enjoys -making flesh creep, once told a group of Americans that he wanted -to nationalize everything "including the barber shops." Extreme, of -course, and said in jest; but "Nye" Bevan is an extremist, and many a -true word is spoken in jest. - -The left wing would move, too, against the surviving citadels of -pre-war England such as public schools and other types of private -education, and the power of the Church of England. It would impose upon -Britain an egalitarianism unknown among the great powers of the West. -It would limit Britain's defense efforts--this was the issue on which -Bevan broke with the party leadership--to forces barely sufficient -for police operations. It would liquidate as quickly as possible the -remains of the Empire. Finally, it would turn Britain from what the -radicals consider her present slavish acceptance of United States -policy to a more independent foreign policy. This would mean that -Britain would quit her position at the right hand of the United States -in the long economic and political struggle with the great Communist -powers and adopt a more friendly attitude toward Russia and Communist -China. Bevan has descried, along with a great many other people, -important economic and political changes within those countries, and he -pleads with the Labor movement for a more sensible approach to them. - -Naturally many members of the movement's center and right subscribe to -some of these ideas. The admission of Communist China to the United -Nations is an agreed objective of the Labor movement. It is even -favored "in due course" by plenty of Conservative politicians. The -explanation is a simple illustration of British bipartisanship. China -means trade, and Britain needs trade. There are other considerations -involving long-term strategic and political planning, including the -possibility of luring China away from the Russian alliance. But trade -is the starting-point. - -The left wing boasts that it speaks for the fundamentalists of -socialism, that it echoes the great dream of the founders of the party -who saw the future transformation of traditional Britain with its -economic and social inequalities into a greener, sweeter land. There is -and always has been a radical element in British politics, and, on the -left, the Bevanites represent it today. - -The term "Bevanites" is inexact. The left-wing Socialists include -many voters and politicians who dislike Aneurin Bevan and some of his -ideas. But the use of his name to describe the group is a tribute to -one of the most remarkable figures in world politics today. Aneurin -Bevan has been out of office since 1951. He has bitterly attacked all -the official leaders of his party, and he has come perilously close to -exile from the party. His following, as I have noted, is subject to -change. He often says preposterous things in public and rude things in -private. He has made and continues to make powerful enemies. - -"After all, Nye's his own worst enemy," someone once remarked to Ernie -Bevin. - -"Not while I'm alive, 'e ain't," said Ernie. - -Bevan is a man of intelligence, self-education, and charm. At ease he -is one of the best talkers I have ever met. He has read omnivorously -and indiscriminately. He will quote Mahan to an admiral and Keynes to -an economist. He has wit, and he knows the world. He likes to eat well -and drink well. - -Bevan, in his eager, questing examination of the world and its affairs, -sometimes reminds his listeners of Winston Churchill. Each man has -a sense of history, although the interpretation of a miner's son -naturally differs from that of the aristocratic grandson of a duke. -There is another similarity: each in his own way is a great orator. - -To watch Bevan address a meeting is to experience political oratory at -its fullest flower. He begins softly in his soft Welsh voice. There -are a few joking references to his differences with the leader of -the party, followed by a solemn reminder that such differences are -inescapable and, indeed, necessary in a democratic party. At this -point moderate Socialists are apt to groan. As Bevan moves on to his -criticisms of the official leadership of the movement and of the -Conservatives, it is clear that this is one orator who can use both -a rapier and a bludgeon. He is no respecter of personalities, and at -the top of his form he will snipe at Eisenhower, jeer at Churchill, -and scoff at Gaitskell. He is a master of the long, loaded rhetorical -question that brings a volley of "no, no" or "yes, yes" from the -audience. - -Much of the preaching of left-wing Socialism is outdated, in view of -the changes in the urban working class. But Bevan is the only radical -who is capable on the platform of exciting both the elderly party -stalwarts who hear in him the echoes of the great days and the younger -voters who, until they entered the hall, were reasonably satisfied with -their lot. This is a man of imagination and power, one of the most -forceful politicians in Britain. One secret is that he, and precious -few others, can re-create in Labor voters, if only momentarily, the -spell of the old crusading days when it was a movement and not a party. - -As Bevan typifies to many anti-Americanism in Britain, it should in -justice be said that he is not anti-American in the sense that he -dislikes the United States or its people. Nor could he be considered -an enemy of the United States in the sense that Joseph Stalin was -an enemy. Bevan believes as firmly as any Midwestern farmer in the -democratic traditions of freedom and justice under law. - -But in considering the outlook on international affairs of Aneurin -Bevan and others on the extreme left of British politics there are -several circumstances to keep in mind. The first is that, due to early -environment, study, or experience, they are bitterly anti-capitalist. -The United States, as the leading and most successful capitalist -nation in the world, is a refutation of their convictions. They may -have a high regard for individual Americans and for many aspects of -American life. But as people who are Marxists or strongly influenced by -Marxism they do not believe that a capitalist system is the best system -for a modern, industrial state--certainly not for one in Britain's -continually parlous economic condition. In power they would alter the -economic basis of British society, and possibly they would change the -government's outlook on trade with the Communist nations. This means a -friendlier approach to the Russian and Chinese Communist colossi and -a more independent policy toward the capitalist United States. The -attractions of such a position are not confined to Aneurin Bevan; one -will hear them voiced by members of ultra-conservative factions of the -Tory party. - -For a man who vigorously opposes all kinds of tyranny, Bevan has been -rather slow to criticize the tyranny of the secret police in the -Soviet Union or the ruthless methods of those Communists who have won -control of some British unions. There is in Bevan, as in all successful -politicians--Roosevelt and Churchill are the best-known examples in our -day--a streak of toughness verging on cruelty. This may explain his -apparent tolerance of some of the excesses of totalitarian nations. -Again, as some of his followers explain, Nye expects everyone to -realize that such tyrannies are culpable and to understand him well -enough to know that he would never give them the slightest support. Or, -they suggest, Bevan takes such a comprehensive view of world affairs -and has such a glittering vision of man's goals that he has no time to -concentrate on minor atrocities. Perhaps, but the excuse is not good -enough. The great leaders of Western democracy have been those who -never lost the capacity for anger and action against tyranny whether it -was exercised by a police sergeant or by a dictator. - -Bevan has made a career of leading the extreme left wing in British -politics since 1945. He is sixty this year. If he is to attain power, -he must do so soon. How great is his following? What forces does he -represent? - -The most vocal of the Bevanites are those in the constituency labor -parties. If you wish to taste the old evangelical flavor of socialism, -you will find it among them. Here are the angry young men in flannel -shirts, red ties, and tweed jackets, the stoutish young women whose -hair is never quite right and who wear heavy glasses. They are -eternally upset about something; they don't think any government, Labor -or Conservative, moves fast enough. They pronounce the word "comrades," -with which laborites start all their speeches to their own associates, -as though they meant it. - -The majority are strongly impressed by what has happened--or, rather, -by what they have been told has happened--in Russia. You can get -more misinformation about the Soviet Union in a half-hour of their -conversation than from a dozen Soviet propaganda publications. For in -their case the Russian propaganda has been adulterated with their own -wishes and dreams. - -Some of them have been members of the Communist Party in Britain. -Others have flirted with it. My own impression is that most of them -rejected the discipline of the Communists and that, although they do -not want to be Communists, they have no objection to working with the -Communist Party to attain their ends. They know very little about the -history of the Social Democrats in Eastern Europe who thought in 1945 -that they too could work with the Communists. - -The left-wing radicals are not confined to the constituency labor -parties, but these parties are their most successful vehicles for -propaganda. For the CLP's present resolutions to the annual conference -of the movement, and these resolutions are usually spectacular, -combining extreme demands with hot criticism of the dominant forces -within the movement. The resolutions endorsing the official policies of -the party leadership attract far less attention. - -The radicals of the CLP's are supported on the left by other dissident -elements within the movement. Some of these are union members who -oppose the authority of the Trades Union Congress within the movement, -considering it a reactionary brake on progressive or revolutionary -policies. - -There is also a considerable group of union members who make common -cause with the political opponents of the TUC but oppose it principally -on its position in the industrial world. They see it as too temperate -in its objectives for wages and hours, too timid in its use of the -strike weapon, too unwieldy in organization, and too old-fashioned in -its approach to modern developments in industry such as automation. - -In this opposition they are encouraged by the Communists. The Communist -Party is without direct political power in Britain. In the 1955 -election it polled only 33,144 votes and failed to elect a single -candidate. But it has attained considerable indirect power in some key -unions in the British economy, and as the present leadership of the -TUC is moderate and fairly democratic, the party wages unceasing war -against it. - -One method is to win control of unions. Where this is impossible the -Communists encourage opposition to the TUC--opposition that often -needs little encouragement. On both the political and the industrial -fronts the Communists support Bevanism and the extreme left wing -because these elements weaken the Labor movement, which up to now has -combatted Communist infiltration and sternly rejected invitations -to form a common front. Basically, the Communist Party in Britain -is just as strongly opposed to the Labor movement as it is to the -Conservative Party. This is true of the Communists all over Europe in -their relations with social democracy and conservatism. The difference -is that because of the common roots in Marxism, it is easier for the -Communists to infiltrate the unions and the socialist political parties. - -Bevan is not the only spokesman for the radical left wing. R.H.S. -Crossman, a highly intelligent but somewhat erratic back-bench MP is -another. Crossman's political views are often somewhat difficult to -follow, but in the House of Commons he is capable of cutting through -the verbosity of a government speaker and exposing the point. Mrs. -Barbara Castle, a lively redhead, is a brisk, incisive speaker. Konni -Zilliacus, elected in the Conservative landslide of 1955, was once -ousted from the Labor Party because he was too friendly toward the -Soviet Union. Zilliacus is often immoderate, especially when dealing -with the ogres in Washington, but he has a considerable knowledge of -international affairs. - -One of the most effective of the Bevanites in Commons until 1955 -was Michael Foot, next to Bevan the best speaker on the Labor left -wing. Defeated in 1955 by a narrow margin, he provides the left with -ideological leadership through the pages of _Tribune_, a weekly -newspaper. - -_Tribune_ is the only real Bevanite organ. The _New Statesman and -Nation_ is a forum for extreme left-wing views, but is more temperate -and stately. _Tribune_ is a battle cry flaying the Tories and the -official Labor leadership indiscriminately. Foot edits the paper and -writes in it under the name of John Marullus. Like Bevan, he was once -employed by Lord Beaverbrook. - -_Tribune_ does not confine its activities to news and editorial -comments. Each year at the annual Labor Party conference the newspaper -stages what is usually the liveliest meeting of the week. During the -rest of the year it sponsors "brain trust" meetings throughout the -country at which the Bevanite ideology is expounded and defended. - -The tabloid _Tribune_ is a good example of the old "hit him again, -he's still breathing" type of journalism. It does a wonderful job of -dissecting and deflating the stuffed shirts of the right and left. But -it is monotonously strident. The _New Statesman and Nation_, although -not so avowedly Bevanite as _Tribune_, may carry more weight with the -radical left. It is a weekly of great influence. - -This influence is exerted principally upon an important group of -intellectual orphans--the young men and women whose education surpassed -their capacities and who now find themselves in dull, poorly paid -jobs, living on a scale of comfort much lower than that of the more -prosperous members of the urban working class. They are dissatisfied -with the system and the government that has condemned them to dreary -days of teaching runny-nosed little boys or to routine civil-service -jobs. Not unnaturally, they welcome political plans and projects which -promise to install them in posts worthy of their abilities as they see -them. - -Politically they are on the extreme left. The _New Statesman_ -encourages their political beliefs and assures them that their present -lowly estate is due to the system and not to their own failings. The -members of this group are poor. They are occasionally futile and often -ridiculous. But they are not negligible. - -That wise man Sir Oliver Franks said once that the political outlook -of this group would have an important effect on Britain's political -situation ten or twenty years hence. My own conclusion is that this -group, like the Bevanites in the constituency labor parties, and the -dissidents in the unions, wants to remake the Labor Party in its own -image and then, when the party has come to power, remake Britain. - -The left-wing radicalism of Britain--what we call Bevanism--is thus a -good deal more important than the occasional rebellions of a few MP's -on the Labor side of the House of Commons. It represents in an acute -form the evangelism that is so strong a part of the nonconformist -tradition in Britain. It rebels against the present direction of the -Labor movement and the Parliamentary Labor Party. It wants, not a -Britain governed by the Labor Party, but a socialist Britain. - -Can it come to power? Movements of this kind usually win power -during or after some great national convulsion. A war or an economic -depression comparable to that of 1929-36 would give left-wing -radicalism its chance. But either might give right-wing radicalism and -nationalism a chance, too. To win, the Bevanites would have to defeat -the mature power of the great unions and the undoubted abilities of the -present leaders of the party. - -The great unions are the result of one hundred and fifty years of -crusading agitation. The labor movement began with them. They have -money and they have power. The "branch" or "lodge" is the basic unit of -organization within the union. Every union member must belong to it. -In an individual plant or factory, the workers of the various unions -are represented by a shop steward, who recruits new members, handles -grievances, and, as the intelligence officer for the workers, keeps in -touch with the management and its plans. - -There are regional, district, or area organizations on a higher level -for the larger unions. Finally, there is a national executive council -of elected officials which deals with the national needs of the unions. -At the top is the Trades Union Congress, a confederation of nearly all -the great unions. - -The unions have grown so large--the Amalgamated Engineering -Union, for instance, includes thirty-nine separate unions in its -organization--that it is sometimes difficult for the TUC or the -national executive of an individual union to control its members. -But the moderate political outlook--moderate, that is, by Bevanite -standards--still prevails at the top, and the system of card voting, -under which all the votes of a union are cast at the annual conference -according to the decision of its national executive, insures that -the moderate policies of the union leaders will be approved at the -conference. - -The imposing voting strength of the unions has been employed at -successive conferences to maintain the policies and leadership of men -like Attlee, Morrison, and Gaitskell. The steamroller in action is an -impressive and, to the Bevanites, an undemocratic sight. But it does -represent millions who advocate a conservative policy for the labor -movement and who, at the moment, are satisfied with evolutionary rather -than revolutionary progress. - -The left-wing constituency labor parties create a great deal of noise. -Those which support the moderate leadership are less enterprising in -their propaganda, and, because criticism is often more interesting -than support, they make fewer headlines. But, despite the agonized -pleas of the left wing, hundreds of CLP's are satisfied with the -general ideological policy of the movement and its leaders. This is a -manifestation of the innate conservatism of the British worker. Just -as the Conservatives of twenty years ago distrusted the brilliant -Churchill largely because he was brilliant, so thousands of Labor -voters today distrust the brilliant Bevan. - -This group puts its faith in the ebb and flow of the tides of political -opinion in a democracy. It was downcast after the 1955 election, but it -did not despair. "Give the Tories their chance, they'll make a muck of -it," said a union official. "We'll come back at the next election and -pick up where we left off in 1951." - -The moderate section of the labor movement enjoys the support of the -only two national newspapers that are unreservedly Labor: the tabloid -_Daily Mirror_ and the _Daily Herald_. The _Mirror_, with an enormous -circulation of 4,725,000, consistently supported Hugh Gaitskell for -leadership of the party. So did the _Herald_, but it is a quieter -paper than the brash tabloid, and its influence in trade-union circles, -once great, seems to be declining, although the TUC remains a large -shareholder. - -The election of Gaitskell as leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party on -Attlee's retirement was a severe blow to the Bevanites. But the tactics -employed by Gaitskell in his first months as Leader of the Opposition -were probably even more damaging to Bevan's hopes. - -Bevan came out of his parliamentary corner swinging at the new leader. -In the past this had provoked Herbert Morrison, then deputy leader, -and even Attlee to retaliatory measures. Gaitskell paid no attention -to Bevan, but went about his work of presiding over the reorganization -of the party machine and of leading the party in the House of Commons. -Bevan huffed and puffed about the country making speeches on Saturdays -and Sundays. But as his targets said little in reply, the speeches -became surprisingly repetitious. Moreover, with the establishment of -the new Labor front bench in the Commons, Bevan took one of the seats -and became the party's chief spokesman, first on colonial affairs and -then on foreign affairs. It is difficult to make criticisms of the -party leader stick at Saturday meetings if, from Monday through Friday, -the critic sits cheek by jowl in the House of Commons with the target -in an atmosphere of polite amiability. - -Bevan's bearing in the debate over the Suez policy increased his -stature in the party and in the country. Indeed, his approach to the -crisis impressed even his enemies as more statesmanlike and more -"national" than that of Gaitskell. Gaitskell, of course, labors under -the difficulty of being a member of the middle class from which so -many Conservative politicians spring. They naturally regard him as a -traitor, and criticisms by Gaitskell of Conservative foreign policy are -much more bitterly denounced than those of Bevan. To the Tories, Bevan -was speaking for the country, Gaitskell for the party. - -The schism in the party is not healed. Too much has been said, the -convictions are too firmly held for that. But Gaitskell has been -successful in creating a façade of co-operation which thus far has -been proof against Bevan's outbursts on the platform or in _Tribune_. -However, the reaction of the two leaders to the Eisenhower doctrine -for the Middle East demonstrated the width of their differences on -a fundamental problem. The future of this struggle has a direct and -decisive bearing on the future of the labor movement. If Labor is to -return to power in an election that is unaffected by a national crisis, -foreign or domestic, the schism must be healed. - -As a major political party, the labor movement has been molded by many -influences. Before the First World War, German Social Democracy and the -Fabians affected it. The party then acquired the tenets of national -ownership and ultimate egalitarianism in the most class-conscious of -nations which give it its socialist tone. But a party so large covers a -wide range of political belief. It is a socialist party to some. It is -a labor party to others. Above all, it is a means, like the Republican -and Democratic parties, of advancing the interests of a large number -of practical politicians whose interests in socialism are modified by -their interest in what will win votes. - -The moderate center of the Labor Party now dominates the movement just -as the moderate center of the Conservative Party dominates the Tory -organization. In each the leader represents the mood of the majority -within the parliamentary party. Macmillan is a little to the left of -center among Conservatives. Gaitskell is a little to the right of -center in the Labor Party. The identity of interest among the two -dominant groups is greater than might appear from the robust exchanges -in the House of Commons. - -The radical wings in both parties are handicapped at this point by -a seeming inability to understand that politics is the art of the -possible. Herbert Morrison, a great practical politician, summed up -this weakness of the radical left at a Labor conference. A resolution -demanding the immediate nationalization of remaining industry--at a -time when the country was prosperous and fully employed--was before the -conference. Do you think, he asked, that anyone will _vote_ for such a -program? - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -VI. _A Quiet Revolution by a Quiet People_ - - _Revolutions begin with infatuation and end with incredulity. In their - origin proud assurance is dominant; the ruling opinion disdains doubt - and will not endure contradiction. At their completion skepticism - takes the place of disdain and there is no longer any care for - individual convictions or any belief in truth._ - - F.P.G. GUIZOT - - _Revolutions are not made; they come. A revolution is as natural a - growth as an oak. It comes out of the past. Its foundations are laid - far back._ - - WENDELL PHILLIPS - -[Illustration] - - -The changes in Britain since 1939 have been revolutionary. Yet because -Britain is a nation with a highly developed political sense, the -revolution has been fought not at barricades but in ballot boxes. And, -seen on the broadest scale, what has happened to Britain and its people -at home is part of what has been happening all over the world since -1939. The year that saw the start of World War II saw the beginning of -a terrible acceleration of forces that for fifty years had been slowly, -sometimes almost imperceptibly weakening Britain's position. - -This book is concerned principally with Britain. But let us look -at what has happened to British interests abroad since 1939. The -Indian Empire is gone. The lifeline of what remains of the Empire is -unraveling in Ceylon, Singapore, Aden, and Cyprus. The rise of the -Soviet Union and the United States has dwarfed Britain as a world -power, and the imaginative conception of the Commonwealth is not yet, -and may never be, an adequate balance to these two vast conglomerations -of industrial and military power. Britain's ties with some of the -Commonwealth nations--notably South Africa--grow weaker year by year. -The remaining colonies are moving toward self-government, as the -British always planned, but it is doubtful whether after they leave -the Empire nest they will be any more loyal or responsive to British -leadership than Ceylon is today. - -We are living through one of the most important processes of recent -history, the liquidation of an empire that has lasted in various -forms for about two hundred and fifty years. It is a tribute to the -people who gave it life, to their courage, political flexibility, and -foresight, that, despite the changes and the retreats, they are still -reckoned a power in world affairs. - -History has its lessons. In 1785 Britain had lost her most important -overseas possessions, the American colonies, and the courts of Europe -rejoiced at the discomfiture of the island people and their armies -and navies. A third of a century later the British had organized the -coalition that ultimately defeated Napoleon, the supreme military -genius of his time, and were carving out a new empire in India, -Australia, and Africa. - -We need not drop back so far in history. When, shortly before the -Second World War, I went to England, it was fashionable and very -profitable to write about the decay of Britain. Some very good books -were written on the subject, and they were being seriously discussed -when this island people, alone, in a tremendous renaissance of -national energy, won the Battle of Britain and saved the Western world -from the danger of German domination. As generations of Spaniards, -French, and Germans have learned, it is unwise to count the British out. - -Yet an observer from Mars limiting his observations to the home islands -would find reason to do so today. For the Britain of today resembles -very little the Britain that, despite the long and, by the standards -of that day, costly war in South Africa, greeted the twentieth century -proudly confident. - -Britain's old position as "the workshop of the world" has vanished. -There are now two other Britains--two nations, that is, which depend -largely on the production and export of manufactured goods to live. -Both these nations, Germany and Japan, are the defeated enemies of -World War II, and both of them were bidding for and getting a share of -Britain's overseas trade before that war and, indeed, before World War -I. The decline in Britain's economic strength did not begin in 1939. - -The second world conflict, beginning only twenty-one years after -the close of the first, accelerated the decline. Into World War II -Britain poured both blood and treasure, just as she had in the earlier -conflict. But 1914-18 had left her less of both. British casualties in -World War II were smaller than in the first conflict, but the damage -done to Britain's position in the world was much greater. - -The differences between the Britain of 1939 and the Britain of 1945 -affected much more than the international position of the country. A -society had been grabbed, shaken, and nearly throttled by the giant -hand of war. After that bright Sunday morning in September when the -sirens sounded for the first time in earnest, things were never the -same again. - -I remember an evening in April 1939. It was sunny and warm, and the -men and women came out of their offices and relaxed in the sunlight. -The Germans were on the move in Europe, but along the Mall there -was nothing more disturbing than the honk of taxi horns. London lay -prosperous and sleek, assured and confident. - -Six years later I came back from Germany. I had been in London much of -the time during the war, but now I had been away for over a year, and -I found the contrast between that September evening and the far-off -evening in April impressive. It was not the bomb damage; there was -more of that in Germany. But London and Londoners had broken their -connection with the confident past. It was a shabbier, slower world, -face to face with new realities. - -The impact of the war on the average Briton was greater than on the -average American because for long periods the Briton lived with it on -terms of frighteningly personal intimacy. Americans went to war. The -war came to the British. In the process an ordered society was shaken -to its foundations, personal and national savings were swept away, the -physical industrial system of the country was subjected to prolonged -attack and then to a fierce national drive for increased industrial -production. For close to six years the country was a fortress and then -a staging area for military operations. By the end of the war and the -dawn of an austere peace the nation was prepared psychologically for -the other changes introduced by a radical change in political direction. - -Mobilization of military and economic forces during the war was more -complete in Britain than in any other combatant save possibly the -Soviet Union. The result of immediate peril and the prospect of defeat, -it began early in 1940. This mobilization was the start of the social -changes that have been going on in Britain ever since. - -The mingling of classes began. Diana, the rector's daughter, and Nigel, -the squire's son, found themselves serving in the ranks with Harriet -from Notting Hill and Joe from Islington. In the end, of course, Diana -was commissioned in the Wrens and Nigel was a captain in a county -regiment, largely but not entirely because of their superior education; -however, their contacts with Harriet and Joe gave them a glimpse of a -Britain they had not known about before. - -Things changed at home, too. The rectory was loud with the voices of -children evacuated from the slums of London or Coventry, and the -squire spent his days farming as he never had before and his nights -with the Home Guard. All over the country, men and women were giving up -those jobs which were unnecessary in war and venturing into new fields. -The assistant in the Mayfair dress shop found herself in a factory, the -greens-keeper was in a shipyard. - -The old, safe, quiet life of Britain ended. There were no more quiet -evenings in the garden, no more leisurely teas in the working-class -kitchen, no more visits to Wimbledon. People worked ten or twelve hours -a day, and when they ate they ate strange dishes made of potatoes and -carrots, and when they drank they drank weak beer and raw gin. These -conditions were not universal. There were the shirkers in the safe -hotels and the black markets. And, despite the bands playing "There'll -Always Be an England" (a proposition that seemed highly doubtful in -the summer of 1940) and despite the rolling oratory and defiance of -Mr. Churchill, there was plenty of grousing. It was, they said in the -ranks, "a hell of a way to run the bleedin' war"; or, as the suburban -housewife remarked in the queue, "I really think they could get us -some decent beef. How the children are to get along on this I cannot -imagine." - -They went on, though. They were bombed and strafed and shelled, they -were hungry and tired. The casualty lists came in from Norway, France, -the Middle East, Burma, Malaya. The machines in the factories were as -strained as the workers. Then, finally, it was over and they had won. -Only a minute number had ever thought they would be beaten. But they -were not the same people who had gone dutifully to war in 1939. Nor was -the world the same. - -"Well, it's time to go home and pick up the pieces," said a major in -Saxony in the summer of 1945. He, and thousands like him, found that -the pieces just were not there any more. The economic drain of the war -had made certain that Britons, far from enjoying the fruits of victory, -would undergo further years of unrelenting toil in a scarred and shabby -country. - -People were restless. They had been unsettled not only by the impact -of the war but by the glimpse of other societies. Not until the last -two and a half years of the war, when the American Army and Air Force -began to flood into Britain, did people become aware of the size, -power, and mechanical ingenuity and efficiency of the people who were -so inaccurately portrayed by Hollywood. Some saw in Russia's resistance -to the Germans and her final sweeping victories proof that the -Communist society could endure and triumph no less than those of the -Western democracies. Many who understood what had happened to British -power during the war were convinced that if the country was to retain -its position in the world, it would have to seek new, adventurous -methods in commerce and industry and new men and new policies in -politics. This conviction was held by hundreds of thousands who had -once voted Liberal or Conservative but who in the election of 1945 were -to cast their votes for the Labor Party. - -The political history of the immediate pre-war period offers a reason -for this change. The defeats of 1940 and 1941 were a tremendous shock -to Britons. During the war there was no time for lengthy official -post-mortems on the alarming inadequacy of British arms in France in -1940 or in the first reverses in the western desert of Libya a year -later. But the polemics of the left managed to convince a great many -people that the blame lay with the pre-war Conservative governments of -Neville Chamberlain and Stanley Baldwin. When in 1945 the chance came -to revenge themselves on the Tories, even though Winston Churchill, -who had opposed both Chamberlain and Baldwin, was the Conservatives' -leader, millions took the chance and voted Labor into office. - -The urge for change to meet changing conditions at home and new forces -abroad was not universal. The people of the middle class had not -yet fully understood what the war had done to Britain's economy and -especially to that section of it which supported them. There was very -strong opposition to the first post-war American loan in sections of -this class, largely from people whose confidence had not been shaken -by the cataclysm. The austerity imposed by Sir Stafford Cripps, the -Socialist Chancellor of the Exchequer, was neither understood nor -welcomed. The withdrawal from India was hotly opposed--and, it should -be remembered, not purely on imperialist grounds. For two hundred years -the middle class had provided the officers and civil servants who led -and administered the Indian Army and the government of British India. -As a class it knew a great deal more about India and the Indians than -the union leaders and earnest young intellectuals of Mr. Attlee's -government knew. The Socialist speakers and newspapers scoffed at "the -toffy-nosed old ex-colonels" who predicted bloody and prolonged rioting -between the Hindus and the Moslems once British power was withdrawn. -The rioting began, and before it was over the bloodshed was greater -than in all the British punitive actions from the Mutiny onward. - -None of this generally Conservative opposition could halt or even check -a Labor government that had been voted into power in 1945 with 393 -seats in the House of Commons as opposed to 216 for the Conservatives -and 12 for the Liberals. The Tories were out, the new day had dawned, -and the Labor Party, in full control of the government for the first -time in its history, set out to remake Britain. - -No one in Britain could plead ignorance of what the Labor Party -was about to do. Since 1918 it had been committed to extensive -nationalization of industry and redistribution of income. Moreover, it -came to power at a moment when the old patterns of industrial power and -political alignments had been ruptured by war and when voters other -than those who habitually voted Labor were acknowledging the need for -change. - -The 1945 policy statement of the Labor Party was called "Let Us Face -the Future." It dotted all the _i_'s and crossed all the _t_'s in -Labor's program. - -The statement began with a good word for freedom, always highly -esteemed by political parties seeking power. But it added an -interesting comment. "There are certain so-called freedoms that Labor -will not tolerate; freedom to exploit other people; freedom to pay poor -wages and to push up prices for selfish profits; freedom to deprive -the people of the means of living full, happy, healthy lives." - -The statement went on to promise full employment, to be achieved -through the nationalization of industry; the fullest use of national -resources; higher wages; social services and insurance; a new tax -policy; and planned investment. There was to be extensive replanning of -the national economic effort and a "firm constructive government hand -on our whole productive machinery." The Labor Party's ultimate purpose -at home was "the establishment of a Socialist Commonwealth of Great -Britain--free, democratic, efficient, progressive, public spirited, its -material resources organized in the services of the British people." - -In 1948 Harold Laski, the Labor Party's ideological mentor, said in -the course of the Fabian Society Lectures that the party was "trying -to transform a profoundly bourgeois society, mainly composed of what -Bagehot called 'deferential' citizens, allergic to theory because -long centuries of success have trained it to distrust of philosophic -speculation, and acquiescent in the empiricist's dogma that somehow -something is bound to turn up, a society, moreover, in which all -the major criteria of social values have been imposed by a long -indoctrination for whose aid all the power of church and school, of -press and cinema, have been very skillfully mobilized; we have got -to transform this bourgeois society into a socialist society, with -foundations not less secure than those it seeks to renovate." - -Doubtless these ominous words failed to penetrate into the clubs and -boardrooms that were the sanctums of the former ruling class. But -it was hardly necessary that they should. The businessmen and the -Conservative politicians understood Harold Laski's objectives. - -Nationalization of industry is the most widely advertised economic -result of Labor policies between 1945 and 1951. In assessing its effect -on the changes in Britain since 1939, we must remember that neither -was it so new nor is it so extensive as Americans believe. The British -Broadcasting Corporation was created as a public corporation as long -ago as 1927. Today most manufacturing in Britain remains in the control -of private enterprise. - -Between 1945 and 1951, however, the Labor government's policy of -nationalization created corporations that today operate or control -industries or services. In two industries, steel and road transport, -the trend toward nationalization has been reversed. But the following -list shows the extent of nationalization in Britain today. - -_Coal_: The Coal Industry Nationalization Act received the Royal Assent -in May of 1946, and on January 1, 1947, the assets of the industry were -vested in the National Coal Board appointed by the Minister of Fuel and -Power and responsible for the management of the industry. For a century -coal was king in Britain, and British coal dominated the world market -until 1910. Coal production is around 225,000,000 tons annually--the -peak was reached in 1913 with 287,000,000 tons--and the industry -employs just over 700,000 people. - -_Gas_: Under the Gas Act of 1948 the gas industry was brought under -public ownership and control on May 1, 1949. The national body is the -Gas Council, also appointed by the Minister of Fuel and Power. The -council consists of a full-time chairman and deputy chairman and the -twelve chairmen of the area boards. - -_Electricity_: The Central Electricity Authority in April 1948 took -over the assets of former municipal and private electricity supply -systems throughout Great Britain with the exception of the area -already served by the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board, another -public corporation. But the industry had long been moving toward -nationalization. As early as 1919 the Electricity Commissioners -were established to supervise the industry and promote voluntary -reorganization. The industry is a big one, employing approximately -200,000 people, and production in 1954 was over 72,800,000,000 -kilowatts. - -_Banking_: The Bank of England, Britain's central bank, was established -in 1694 by Act of Parliament. Its entire capital stock was acquired by -the government under the Bank of England Act of 1946. As the central -bank, the Bank of England is the banker to the government, its agent -in important financial operations, and the central note-issuing -authority. - -_Transport_: On January 1, 1948, under the Transport Act passed in -the preceding year, most of Britain's inland transport system came -under public ownership. Nationalization embraced the railways and -the hotels, road-transport interests, docks and steamships owned by -the railways, most of the canals, and London's passenger-transport -system. The public authority then established was the British Transport -Commission. Originally the Commission appointed six executive bodies -to run various parts of the system: the Railway Executive, the Road -Transport Executive, the Road Passenger Executive, the Hotel Executive, -the London Transport Executive, and the Docks and Inland Waterways -Executive. This generous proliferation of authority affected an -industry that employs nearly 2,000,000 workers. - -Transport was one of the nationalized industries whose organization -was altered by the Conservatives when they returned to power in 1951. -Believing that "competition gives a better service than monopoly," -the Tories passed the Transport Act of 1953. This returned highway -freight-haulage to private enterprise and aimed at greater efficiency -on the railroads through the encouragement of competition between the -various regions, such as the Southern Region or the Western Region, -into which the national system had been divided. The act also abolished -all the neat but rather inefficient executives except the Road -Passenger Executive, which had been abolished, unmourned save by a few -civil servants, in 1952, and the London Transport Executive, which was -retained. - -_Airways_: British governments since the twenties have been involved -in civil aviation. Imperial Airways received a government grant of -£1,000,000 as early as 1924. By 1939 the Conservative government -had established the British Overseas Airways Corporation by Act of -Parliament. In 1946 the Labor government, under the Civil Aviation Act, -set up two additional public corporations: British European Airways -and British South American Airways. The latter was merged with BOAC in -1949. - -_Communications_: The government took control of Cable and Wireless -Ltd., the principal overseas telegraph service, on January 1, 1947. -Thus, the Post Office now operates overseas telecommunications from the -United Kingdom and, of course, all internal telephonic and telegraphic -systems. - -These were the most important milestones on the Labor Party's -progress toward nationalization. Viewed dispassionately, they were -evolutionary rather than revolutionary. There had been a trend toward -nationalization in electricity for some years. Objective investigators -had suggested nationalization to aid the failing coal-mining industry, -and during the war (1942) the Coalition government had assumed full -control of the industry's operations although private ownership -retained control of the mines. - -We should avoid, too, the impression, popular among the uninformed in -the United States and even in Britain, that nationalization meant that -the workers took over management of the industries concerned. There -was no invasion of boardrooms by working-men in cloth caps. On the -contrary, employees protested that nationalization did not affect the -management of industries, and such protests were backed by facts. In -1951, after six years of Labor Party rule, trade-union representation -among the full-time members of the boards of the nationalized -industries was a little under 20 per cent, and among the part-time -members the percentage was just below 15 per cent. Five boards had no -trade-union representation. - -The nationalization program of the Labor government between 1945 and -1951 nevertheless marked an important change in the structure of -British society. The financial and economic control of some of the -nation's most important industries was transferred from private to -public hands. The capitalist system that had served Britain so well -found its horizons limited in important fields. - -There is now no important political movement in Britain to undo the -work of the Labor government in the fields mentioned above. But as long -as a generation survives which knew these industries under private -control, harsh and persistent criticism will persist. Some of it is -just. The standard of efficiency and comfort on British railroads, for -instance, has deterioriated since pre-war days. But in many instances -the critics are attacking aspects of the nationalized industries -which are the result not of nationalization itself but of the gradual -wearing out of much of the nation's industrial plant. Two wars, a -long depression, and a prolonged period of economic austerity during -which only the most important improvements and construction could be -financed have had their effect. Both British industry and the transport -system upon which it rests--railroads, ports, highways--need immediate -improvement and new construction. - -Nationalization, however, was only one means of altering the bases of -British society. The historian of the future may consider that the -tremendous extension of government responsibility for social welfare -was a more important factor in the evolution of Britain. The Welfare -State has been a target for critics on both sides of the Atlantic. -Its admitted cost, its supposed inefficiency are denounced. British -critics, however, avoid a cardinal point. The Welfare State is in -Britain to stay. No government relying on the electorate for office is -going to dismantle it. - -This is not a reference book, but we had better be sure of what we mean -by the British "Welfare State" as we consider its effect on the society -it serves. - -The system is much more extensive than most Americans realize. -The government is now responsible through either central or local -authorities for services that include subsistence for the needy, -education and health services for all, housing, employment insurance, -the care of the aged or the handicapped, the feeding of mothers and -infants, sickness, maternity, and industrial-injury benefits, widows' -and retirement pensions, and family allowances. - -The modern John Bull can be born, cared for as an infant, educated, -employed, hospitalized and treated, and pensioned at the expense of the -state and ultimately of himself through his contributions. This is the -extreme, and it arouses pious horror among those of conservative mind -in Britain as well as in the United States. - -Again, as in the case of the nationalization of industry, we find that -much of the legislation that established the Welfare State did not -spring from the bulging brows of Sir Stafford Cripps, Lord Beveridge, -or Aneurin Bevan, but is the latest step in an evolutionary process. -National Insurance is the logical outgrowth of the Poor Relief Act of -1601, before there were Englishmen in America, and the contributory -principle on which all later measures in this field have been based -first appeared in the National Health Insurance Scheme of 1912. - -The present system is big and it is expensive. The national and -local governments are spending about £2,267,000,000 a year (about -$6,347,600,000) on social services for the Welfare State, and the -expenditure by the Exchequer on social services amounts to over a -quarter of the total. - -Yet, as this is Britain where established custom dies hard, voluntary -social services supplement the state services. There are literally -hundreds of them, ranging from those providing general social service, -such as the National Council of Social Service, through specialized -organizations, such as Doctor Barnado's Homes for homeless children and -the National Association for Mental Health, to religious groups such as -the Church of England Children's Society and the Society of St. Vincent -de Paul. The existence and vigor of these voluntary organizations -testifies to the wrongness of the assumption that all social work in -Britain today is in the hands of soulless civil servants. - -Of all the actions taken to extend social services under the -Labor government, by far the most novel and controversial was the -establishment of the National Health Service, which came into being on -July 5, 1948. The object of the National Health Service Act was "to -promote the establishment in England and Wales [other acts for Scotland -and Northern Ireland came into force simultaneously] of a comprehensive -health service designed to secure improvement in the physical and -mental health of the people of England and Wales and the prevention, -diagnosis and treatment of illness, and for that purpose to provide or -secure the effective provision of services." - -Before we consider what the service does, let us think of those it -was designed to help. The British working class up to 1945 suffered -to a considerable degree from lack of proper medical and dental care. -Doctors and dentists were expensive, and in addition there was a -definite psychological resistance to placing oneself in their care. -Health and medicine were not popularized in Britain, as they were -in the United States; among the poor there was still a tendency to -consider discussion of these subjects as ill-mannered. - -There has been some change since the war, but not much. Britons of all -classes were surprised, and some of them a little disgusted, by the -clinical descriptions of President Eisenhower's illness in American -newspapers. But the National Health Service has done much to reduce -the old reluctance to visit the doctor or the dentist because of the -expense. - -Three subsequent acts in 1949, 1951, and 1952 have modified the scheme -slightly and have provided for charges for some services. But the -National Health Service is otherwise free and available according to -medical need. Its availability is not dependent on contribution to -National Insurance. - -What does the service do? The Ministry of Health is directly -responsible for all hospital and specialist services on a national -basis, the mental-health functions of the old Board of Control, -research work on the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of illness, -the public-health laboratory service, a blood-transfusion service. - -These broad general headings cover an enormous organization, the basis -of which is the General Practitioner Services, which covers the medical -attention given to individuals by doctors and dentists of their own -choice from among those enrolled in the service. About 24,000 or nearly -all of the general practitioners in Britain are part of the service. Of -approximately 10,000 dentists in England and Wales, about 9,500 are in -the service. - -Again, costs are high. For six years Labor and Conservative -administrations have sought to keep the net total annual cost of the -National Health Service to just over £400,000,000 or $1,120,000,000. To -limit the drain on the Exchequer it was found necessary to charge for -prescription forms, dentures, and spectacles. Like any welfare scheme, -the National Health Service invited malingerers and imaginary invalids -who cost the doctors--and the state--time and money. - -I asked a young doctor in the West Country what he thought of the -scheme. "Well, I don't know if it has contributed much to the health -of my bank statement," he said, "but it has contributed to the health -of the folk around here. People are healthier because they don't wait -until they're desperately ill to see a doctor. And the care of children -has improved tremendously. Perhaps this might have come naturally under -the old system. I don't know. But it's here now, and we're a healthier -lot." - -The opposition view was put by an elderly doctor in London who opined -that so great was the pressure on the ordinary general practitioner -from "humbugs" that he never got a chance to do a thorough job on the -seriously ill. The hospitals, he added, were crowded with people who -"don't belong there" and who occupied beds needed by the really sick. - -This controversy, like those over the nationalization of industry, will -continue. Again there seems little prospect that any government will -modify in any important way the basic provisions of the National Health -Service Act. - -In company with the National Insurance, which applies its sickness, -unemployment, maternity, and widows' benefits to everyone over -school-leaving age, and the National Assistance Board, with its -responsibility for the care of those unable to maintain themselves, the -National Health Service has established the Welfare State in Britain. -Another important function has been largely taken out of the hands of -private individuals and delivered to the state. - -What effect did the nationalization of industry and the establishment -of the Welfare State have on British society? Obviously, the first -removed from the control of the moneyed and propertied classes certain -powers over the economic functioning of Britain. The second, because -of its cost, made certain that the heavy tax rates introduced during -and just before World War II would continue. These taxes were paid -principally by the middle class, which, at the outset, refused in many -instances to use the National Health Service. - -The effect was a leveling one. The dominant class was stripped, on one -hand, of some of its power to control a large section of the national -economy, although, as we have seen, it managed to retain its direction -of the nationalized industries. At the same time this class found that -it must continue to pay year by year a high proportion of its earned -income for the state's care of its less prosperous fellows. The decline -in the influence, prosperity, and prestige of the old middle class was -definitely accelerated by these two bold advances toward socialism. - -From the standpoint of the prestige of this class in Britain and, -frankly, of the usefulness of many of its members to the state, -the withdrawal of British rule from India and Burma and the steps -elsewhere toward the liquidation of the Empire were blows as grievous -as the creation of the Welfare State and the nationalization of some -industries. - -Americans should realize that to Britons the Empire was not simply -a place to work and get rich. The people who did the Empire's work -usually retired with only their pensions and a conviction (which is not -much help when you need a new overcoat) that they had done their duty. - -The propaganda of India and Pakistan and of their well-wishers in the -United States has obscured for Americans the grand dimensions of the -British achievement in India. For a hundred and ninety years, between -Plassy in 1757 and the withdrawal in 1947, British rule brought peace -and justice to peoples hitherto sorely oppressed by irresponsible -tyrants, many of whom were corrupt and decadent. The British stamped -out thuggee and suttee, ended the interminable little wars, introduced -justice, and labored to build the highways, railroads, and canals that -form the skeletons of independent India and Pakistan. All this was -done by a handful of British officials and white troops in the midst of -the subcontinents millions. - -Parenthetically, it might be remembered that when the British Indian -army, which served with the British Army in India, existed, and when -the Royal Navy had the strength and facilities to take it where it was -needed, there was peace between Suez and Singapore. - -The British are proud rather than defensive about their record in -India. Even the anti-colonialists of the Labor Party note that free -India and Pakistan operate under British political and legal forms. -Most of them, even those who knew the country well, regarded withdrawal -as inevitable after World War II. But it will take more proof than Mr. -Nehru is prepared to offer to convince many Britons with roots in India -that the people are happier, that justice is universal, that corruption -is declining. - -This attitude galls the Indians and their friends, who never liked -the British much. But in the great days of empire the British didn't -care about being liked. This is a significant difference between the -American and British approaches to responsibility and leadership in -international affairs. The American visitor abroad worries about -whether he and his country are liked by the French or the Egyptians or -the Indonesians. The Briton, when the Empire's sun was at the zenith, -never gave a damn. What he wanted was respect, which he regarded as -about as much as a representative of a powerful nation could win from -the nationals of a less powerful nation under economic, political, or -military obligation. - -"We ran that district with three officials, some Indian civil servants, -the police, and their white officers, and we ran it damned well," an -official recalled. "There were some troops up the line, but we never -needed them. When we made a decision or gave a judgment, we adhered to -it. We made no distinction between Moslem and Hindu. There was justice -and peace. No, of course they weren't free. They weren't ready to -govern themselves. And d'you think they'd have traded those conditions -for freedom and communal rioting?" - -I asked the official the population of the district. - -"Three, three and a half million," he said. - -The loss of India and Burma under the first Socialist administration -and the consequent decline of British power thus constituted a severe -psychological shock to the middle class that had ruled Britain during -the last century of British administration in India. Later we shall see -the difference it made in Britain's international position vis-à-vis -the Soviet Union. Here we are concerned with the effect upon British -society at home. - -That society contains thousands of men and women who knew and -served the Empire and who bitterly resent its liquidation. Usually -inarticulate and no match for the bright young men of the _New -Statesmen_, they can be goaded into wrath. Gilbert Harding, a -television entertainer who has become a national celebrity, found this -out. Mr. Harding referred on television to the "chinless idiots" who -made that "evil thing," the British Empire. The reaction was immediate -and bitter. Mr. Harding was abused in the editorial and letter columns -of the newspapers in phrases as ugly as any he had used. There are, it -appeared, many who glory in the Empire and in the Commonwealth that has -evolved from the old colonies. - -Nationalization, the creation of the Welfare State, the withdrawal from -India--these were major events that changed the face and manner of -Britain. But the effect of the change in British life was evident, too, -in the way men lived. The austerity preached by Sir Stafford Cripps -may have been necessary if the nation was to overcome the effects of -the war. But continued rationing, the queues outside the shops, the -shortages of coal, the persistently high taxation all combined to -change the life of the middle class. Slowly they realized that the -sacrifices and dangers of the war years were not going to be repaid. -There was no brave new world. Instead, there was the old world looking -much more shabby than ever before. - -"You see," people would say, explaining some new restriction, some new -retreat before economic pressure, "we won the war." It was a bitter -jest in the long, drab period between 1945 and 1950. - -There was plenty of grumbling, some of it bitterly humorous. Lord -Wavell, surveying a glittering audience at a royal command performance -at Covent Garden Opera House, was told by a friend that the scene -reminded him of pre-war days. "The only difference," the great soldier -replied, "is that tomorrow we'll be doing our own washing up." - -There was, of course, a good deal of snobbery in the middle-class -attitude toward the Socialist government and what it was doing. The -Conservatives and the dwindling band of Liberals just could not believe -that the Socialists were equipped to carry out such vast changes in -British life. They noted with sardonic humor the failures in Socialist -policy. They found the Labor ministers ineffectual and diffident -compared to their own leaders. "We had X and his wife to dinner last -week," the wife of an industrialist told me in 1948. "What a pathetic -little man! And in such an important post, too. Really, I looked at him -sitting there and thought of Winston and Anthony, and Duff, and I felt -like crying." - -It was during this period that the Labor Party lost the support, -temporarily at least, of many of the Conservatives and Liberals who -had voted for it in 1945. The reasons for the shift are difficult to -ascertain. Certainly many people were affronted by nationalization, -especially when it directly affected their interests (though many of -them had voted for Labor expecting such changes). The continuation of -high taxation, which seemed permanent after the start of rearmament -in 1950, alienated others. The ineffectual way in which the Labor -government seemed to be handling many of its problems, particularly the -coal shortage, affected the political opinions of many. "Damn it, we -live on an island made of coal," said one civil servant who had voted -for Labor in 1945. "It's monstrous to have a coal crisis. What are they -playing at?" - -In one field the Labor government won the grudging respect of the -Tories: its approach to the problem presented to the West by the -aggression of Soviet Russia. Mr. Attlee's dry, precise refutations of -Soviet policy might be a weak substitute for Churchill's thundering -oratory, but the nation found a paladin in the squat, rolling figure of -Ernest Bevin. - -Bevin had spent much of his life fighting British communists for -the control of the unions. Entering the rarefied atmosphere of -international affairs at the top as Foreign Secretary, he brought to -his new task the blunt tongue and quick insight he had employed so -successfully in the old. Between 1945 and 1950, when the British Labor -Party was at the top of its power, Russian Communism was on the march -in Europe. It had no tougher opponent than this Englishman. - -The Russians recognized him as a prime enemy. In Moscow in 1946 and -1947 the Soviet press denounced and assailed Bevin as hotly as they -did any other Western figure. Indeed, the whole Labor government -was vilified almost daily. The reason for this savage onslaught on -the earnest and industrious Marxists of the British government was -obvious. Stalin and his lieutenants had been talking about socialism -for decades. Here was a regime that might make it work without throwing -hundreds of thousands into labor camps and allowing millions to starve. -The anxiety of the rulers of Russia can be compared to that of the -proprietors of a black market who learn that an honest shop is going -into business across the street. - -So this sturdy proletarian, Ernest Bevin, became one of the champions -of the West in the cold war and was praised by Conservatives and -Liberals. The left wing of his own Labor Party provided most of the -criticism. Still cherishing the illusion that the Russians could be -induced to drop their hostility to the West through "frank and open -exchanges," Bevin's comrades led by Aneurin Bevan attacked his policies -and especially his desire to maintain the Anglo-American alliance. - -Those who cheered loudest, the people of the upper middle class who -detested Russia, were the ones who, in the end, suffered most from -the cold war. Britain's rearmament, under the impact of the Communist -seizure of power in Czechoslovakia, the Berlin Blockade, and, finally, -the attack on South Korea, was a costly business. It began soon after -the great expansion of social services had created the Welfare State. -Taxes, already high, rose further. - -In thousands of middle-class homes the decline from the old pre-war -standards continued. The maidservant gave way to the "daily" who came -in once or twice a week to help with the cleaning. The savings for old -age were diverted to the rising costs of keeping the boys at school. -In a hundred pathetic ways, the middle class strove to maintain its -standards under the burden of taxation in a Britain it neither liked -nor understood. - -But to balance this gradual depression of one class there was the -expansion of another. The victory of the Labor Party in 1945 encouraged -the working class of the nation to seek a richer, fuller life. It -opened vistas of a new existence and greater opportunities. It created -confidence. - -Traveling to Cardiff in September 1945, I talked with a miner's wife, -a huge woman who spoke in the singsong accents of the mining valleys -of South Wales. She dandled a plump baby on her knee and talked of -what life would be like now. "My Dai's not going down the mine like -his dad," she told me. "Now that _we_ have _our_ government, he can be -anything he wants, do anything." - -British society, despite its fixed barriers between class and class, -has always enjoyed considerable mobility. In the past the country -gentry and the aristocracy had surrendered power to the merchants and -the industrialists. Now the urban working class that had served the -merchants and the industrialists believed it had wrested control from -its masters. Labor's election victory seemed to prove it. - -This breaking down of the old relationship between the classes was a -matter of deep concern to many, and their concern went deeper than -partisan political feeling. Repeatedly one was told that the worst -thing Labor had done was to create class feeling, to encourage class -antagonisms in a country that until then had never been affected by -them. This was only a half-truth. The class antagonism had been there, -all right, but the middle class now was belatedly the victim of the -bitterness that a hundred years of slum housing, poor food, and lack of -opportunity had created among some but not all of the working class. I -write "not all" because there were members of that class who were as -disturbed by the growth of class antagonism as any retired colonel -in his club. They felt instinctively that the unity of Britain was -being sapped by the emergence of a powerful and militant socialist -group whose object was change. Most of them had voted for change. But -the British are a conservative people. They accept change within the -framework of familiar institutions. Extensive reconstruction may go on -behind the façade, but the façade must remain untouched. - -The hope and confidence born of Labor's victory, however, had a -long-term effect upon British society. It encouraged those who had -dreamed, like the miner's wife, of a better life for their children. -Ambitious mothers aimed higher than a few years of school and a factory -job for their sons. Young men who had won commissions during the war -decided to remain in the Army or the Navy or the Air Force now that the -old barriers were falling and the right accent and the right private -income did not matter so much as it once had. - -By 1950 the economic and social forces that were to create the Britain -of today were in full motion. Paradoxically, the British electorate was -moving slightly to the right. - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -VII. _A Society in Motion_ - -NEW CLASSES AND NEW HORIZONS - - _There are but two families in the world--have-much and have-little._ - - CERVANTES - - _Society is constantly advancing in knowledge. The tail is now where - the head was some generations ago. But the head and the tail still - keep their distance._ - - THOMAS BABINGTON MACAULAY - -[Illustration] - - -Marie Lloyd, the darling of the music halls, sang a song that contained -the deathless line: "A little of what you fancy does you good." - -In addition to their evangelism, their occasional ruthlessness, the -British have a streak of self-indulgence. This trait was encouraged -by the peculiar circumstances of the country after the Conservative -victory in the general election of 1951. - -It was not a smashing victory. The Conservatives came back to power -with 326 seats in the House of Commons as opposed to 295 for Labor and -6 for the Liberals. Yet it is doubtful that even with double their -majority the Tories would have wished to undo all the work in the -fields of nationalization and social welfare accomplished by the Labor -administrations of 1945 and 1950. This was not politically feasible -and, with Britain still in the toils of economic difficulties, it would -have been unwise to convulse the industrial structure. There was no -restoration after the revolution. The Socialists obviously had not -attained the goals outlined by Professor Laski, but they had started -the nation in that direction. - -If economic conditions had deteriorated, the new administration of -Winston Churchill might have been short-lived. But the world demand -for British products, especially such raw materials as rubber and tin -from Malaya, strengthened the economy. So did the gradual rise in -British production and the economic improvement in Europe which created -a larger market for British exports. After some uneasy months the -indices of economic health began to move upward. After twelve years of -military, political, and economic strain and anxiety the British were -ready for a little of what they fancied. Life around them looked good, -and they wanted to take advantage of it. There was a steady return of -confidence. - -British exports were rising. You could actually go down to the -butcher's and buy all the meat you wanted. The Tories really were -building all those houses they had promised to build. It was easier now -to buy a new car and say good-by to Old Faithful that had served since -1938 or earlier. Taxes were as high as ever, but the government said -they would be reduced. And if you had a little money, there was plenty -in the shops to spend it on. - -During the struggle with austerity after the war the British had been -surprisingly sensitive to foreign criticism of their apparent inability -to fight their way back to prosperity. Now here was prosperity or a -reasonably accurate facsimile of it. Those foreigners had been wrong. - -Presiding over their recrudescence of national confidence was the -familiar figure of Mr. Churchill. The Prime Minister might lack the -acute economic penetration of Sir Stafford Cripps and Clement Attlee's -social consciousness, but he was a world figure in a way that neither -Socialist could claim to be. When in May 1953 the best-known voice in -the English-speaking world proposed a conference at the summit with the -new masters of the Soviet Union, the British felt that their leader had -enforced their country's claim to a share in the leadership of the West. - -Neither the economic nor the political developments of 1951-3 altered -the raw facts of Britain's existence: the importance of denial at home -to expand sales abroad, the rising competition of Germany and Japan in -international markets. But these facts, which had been presented to -the people with monotonous regularity under the pedagogical leadership -of the Socialists, slipped out of sight. There was money to spend -and there were things to buy. And reading about the Queen and the -preparations for her Coronation was much more interesting than worrying -about the dollar balance. - -The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II was one of the most impressive -and romantic spectacles of modern times. It is quite possible that -this combination of national pride, religious symbolism, and perfectly -performed ceremony will never be duplicated. It is also possible that -from the standpoint of national psychology the Coronation did the -British a good deal of harm by leading some of them into romantic -daydreams at a time when it was essential that they should keep their -heads and face the ugly realities of their position. - -The young Queen pledging herself to serve her people, the evocation -of a glorious past, the survivals of ancient custom, the splendid -ceremony in London, and the other smaller ceremonies around the country -all exalted values that, although real and important in their place, -are only a part, and not the most important part, of a society that -must fight to retain economic and political power. People should be -reminded occasionally of their place in the historical procession and -of the existence of values other than those of the market place. But -such reminders are useful only when the people return to their normal -jobs with a new vigor and enthusiasm. In Britain the festivities of the -Coronation year seemed to drag on interminably. - -In the case of the Coronation the monarchy might be said to have -overfulfilled its function of arousing national patriotism. Whipped on -by the national newspapers and the BBC, patriotic fervor went beyond -the bounds of reason and led to an overoptimistic estimate of Britain's -position in the world. _We can make this the new Elizabethan age!_ -chanted the newspapers. - -The idea that the subjects of Elizabeth II would emulate their -restless, adventurous, enterprising forebears of the reign of Elizabeth -I was a pleasing one. But it sounded odd in a nation of whose citizens -millions were devoted to security. In 1953, Coronation year, the age of -adventure and chivalry bowed resplendent and beautiful before a nation -in which the forces that had been working since 1940 were evoking -new classes and new ways of life. Neither had physical or mental -connections with the heroic past of aristocratic rural England or with -the old middle class. - -In preceding chapters we have encountered some of the forces that -changed British life: the leveling effect of the war, the Socialist -victory of 1945, the extension of nationalization of industry and of -the social services, the decline in the economic well-being of the old -middle class. Now in the mid-fifties, as a result of these forces and -two others--full employment and rising wages--a class new to modern -British history has emerged. - -Over the years between 1940 and 1955 there was very little unemployment -in Britain. The percentage of unemployment in 1940 was 6.4. Thereafter, -under the special circumstances of the war, the percentage fell until -in 1944 it was only 0.6. In the post-war years it rose slightly, but -the highest figure was 3 per cent in 1947. - -Simultaneously, wages rose. Using October 1938 for the base figure of -100, weekly average earnings in the principal industries rose to 176 in -1943, 229 in 1949, and 323 in 1954. - -The new class resulting from these changes and the earlier political -ones is composed mainly of the manual workers of British industry, -better housed, better paid, and more secure than ever before in their -history. - -Definition of the new class from either a geographic or an economic -point of view is difficult. In the 1930's there was an extensive -redistribution of the British working population. Industries, heavy and -light, began to spring up in places like Oxford and in the heart of -hitherto largely rural counties like Berkshire and Northamptonshire. -Tens of thousands of workers left their homes in slum areas or drab -working-class neighborhoods and moved to new jobs in new industries. In -the six years before the start of World War II more than 2,000,000 new -houses were built in Britain. This was important in the resettlement -of the industrial population. Equally important was the fact that over -500,000 of them were built and let by local government authorities who -in turn were helped by the central government. - -Subsidized housing had come to stay. In the decade since the war more -than 2,000,000 new houses have been built. Of these about 1,600,000 are -owned by local governments, which let them at low rents made possible -by government subsidies. - -Another development that benefited the new class was the advent of -the New Towns. These are self-contained communities outside the great -centers of population, complete with industries, schools, churches, -hospitals, and public services. They are intended to draw people from -the cities and conurbations, already too large, and establish them in -the countryside. - -The idea is old. Ebenezer Howard proposed it in 1898 and the proposal -was promptly attacked as the spawn of the devil and his socialist -friends. It was not until 1903 that Letchworth, the first of the New -Towns, was established. But World War II impressed on both Socialist -and Tory the wisdom of dispersing the industrial population, and in -1946 the House of Commons approved the New Towns Act. Today there are -fourteen New Towns in Britain, eleven of them in England. None is -complete, although workers are moving into them by the thousand. - -Harlow, which occupies ten square miles of Essex, is the most advanced -of the New Towns. Its present population is about 30,000. The target -is around 80,000. The cost of this vast resettlement scheme is high. -Thus far it has been about £112,000,000, approximately $313,600,000. -Estimates indicate that more than double that sum will be needed to -complete the New Towns. - -The New Towns are by all odds one of the most interesting and -imaginative developments in modern Britain. Their social and political -consequences are almost incalculable. For the New Towns will continue -to grow and to house a new class whose political and economic power -will be a dominant factor in British society. - -They will not be completed overnight. In most cases the rate of growth -depends on the willingness of industry to build in the New Towns. -Exceptions are towns like Newton Aycliffe and Peterlee in the North of -England which have been built to house miners and their families. On -the whole, however, industrial support has been encouraging. With the -establishment of a new industry in a New Town more houses are built and -schools, churches, shops, and parks constructed. - -In the process hundreds of thousands of people are leaving the -working-class sections of the Clyde or South Wales or London, trading -tiny, old-fashioned flats or houses for well-designed houses. The -children are going to schools that are new and not over-crowded. They -are playing in fields rather than city streets. - -But the New Towns are not the only factor in the emergence of the -new class. In addition, there has been a steady increase in the -construction of low-rent housing estates by local authorities. -Incidentally, the people of the New Towns are sharply critical of -ignoramuses who confuse them with the people of the housing estates. -The housing estates are most often built on the fringes of big cities; -the tall--for Britain--apartment houses rising in Wimbledon, outside -London, are an example. - -Each housing estate, when completed, siphons off some hundreds or -thousands of Britain's slum population. In some cases, notably in east -London south of the Thames, new housing estates have been built in the -wastes left by German bombing. - -As a consequence of these efforts by both Labor and Conservative -governments to resettle the working class, Britain's slums are slowly -disappearing. Of course many square miles of them remain, and any -newspaper can publish photographs showing conditions of appalling filth -and squalor. Yet a great deal has been done to destroy the slums. There -remain, of course, the miles and miles of old working-class districts, -shabby and dull, but these are part of the landscape of any industrial -nation and it is probably impossible for any government, British or -American or German, to eliminate them entirely. - -The people of the New Towns, of the housing estates, and of the working -class generally enjoy full employment and higher wages than they have -ever dreamed of in their lives. Admittedly, prices have risen steadily -since the war. But rents have not. In Norwich, for instance, there were -in 1956 eight thousand council houses that rented at seven shillings, -or ninety-eight cents, a week. The manual worker in British industry -often pays only a nominal rent. The Welfare State has relieved him of -the burden of saving for the education of his children or for medical -care. - -A skilled worker in industry may have a basic wage of £12 ($33.60) or -£13 ($36.40) a week. Overtime work may raise the total to an average of -£15 ($42.00) for a week's work. A worker at a similar job in a similar -industry before the war was extremely fortunate if he made £4 a week. - -Under these circumstances the buying spree on which the British people -embarked in 1953 was inevitable. The new class had no need to save. -The state took care of its welfare, and taxes were taken at the source -under PAYE (Pay As You Earn). Workers had been fully employed for more -than a decade. Now at last the shops were full, and the hucksters of -installment buying, known in Britain as "buying on the Never-Never," -were at every door. - -One investigation of life in the New Towns revealed a typical weekly -budget for necessities. The family spent £5 10 _s._, or about $15.40, -for food and household necessities. Rent and local taxes cost £2, or -$5.60. Lighting and heating cost 10 _s._, or $1.40, while the same -amount went to clothes and repairs. Cigarettes took a pound, or $2.80, -and the weekly installment on the television set was 15 _s._, or $2.10. - -Few things demonstrate more strikingly the change in the status of -the British manual worker than his insistence on a television set as -a "necessity." Cars, radios, and, earlier, gramophones were available -only to the middle class or wealthy in pre-war Britain. For the first -time they are within the range of the manual worker. - -Few families budget the considerable sum spent each week on beer, -the obligatory trips to the local movie theater, or gambling either -through football pools or bets on horse races. But it is not unusual in -these new circumstances to find men who spend £2 or £3 a week for such -purposes. "Why the bloody hell not?" a worker in Liverpool asked. "I've -got me job and I don't 'ave to worry." The permanence of his job and -of high wages had become an accepted part of his life. He was one of -those who had not been moved by the Labor Party's dire forebodings of -unemployment and the dole under Conservative rule. To him these were as -shadowy and distant as the Corn Laws and Peterloo. - -The new class has money, security, and leisure: this is the promised -land. According to theories of some reformers, the worker, freed from -the oppression of poverty, should be expanding intellectually, worrying -about the future of Nigeria rather than the football fortunes of -Arsenal. My opinion is that the opposite is true, that with the coming -of the good life the worker has gradually shed his responsibilities -(some of these, in fact, have been stripped from him) and has lost the -old desperate desire to improve his lot and make himself and his class -the paramount political power in the land. - -There is no need to save, for the state provides for all eventualities -the worker can foresee. There is no compulsion to ensure that the -children get an education that will enable them to rise above the -circumstances of their parents. For the circumstances are so good, so -unimaginably higher than those into which the fathers and mothers of -this class were born, that there seems to be nothing further to be -sought. Why should a boy be given a good education--"stuffing 'is head -with a lot of nonsense 'e'll never use" was the way one father put -it--when he can make £10 a week after a few years in a factory? The -schools are there, they are free, but when the time comes the boy can -leave the school and take up a man's work in the factory. - -There seems to be a conviction among working-class mothers that a girl -needs a little more schooling to fit her for an office job. But the -men of the class, proud of the money they are earning and the "rights" -their unions have won, see no virtue in an office job or the higher -education that fits one for it. - -For the manual worker has found security, and that is what he is -interested in, that is what he has sought through the long, bitter -history of industrial disputes in Britain. He is not interested in and -he does not share the standards of the old middle class or even of the -artisan class that preceded him. - -Charles Curran, in a brilliant article on "The New Estate in Great -Britain" in the _Spectator_, put it this way: "One word sums up the New -Estate: the word 'security.' It is security in working-class terms, -maintained and enforced by working-class methods. The traditional -values of the middle and professional classes form no part of it; among -wage-earners these values are meaningless. - -"To the middle-class citizen, economic security is a goal to be reached -primarily by personal effort. It is a matter of thrift, self-help, -self-improvement, competitive striving. But the manual worker sees -it differently. To him, any betterment in his conditions of life is -essentially a collective process--something to be achieved not by -himself as an individual but in company with his fellows. He will -organize for it, vote for it, strike for it, always with them. It is -'Us' not 'I.' Eugene Debs, the American Socialist leader, put this -attitude into one sentence when he said, 'I don't want to rise from the -ranks; I want to rise with them.'" - -In this psychological situation it is ludicrous to appeal for New -Elizabethans among the men and women of the new class. For they have -no great admiration for individual enterprise, for risk or sacrifice. -Among the many men I have talked to in the New Towns, I never met -one who was interested in saving enough money to buy his own small -business, to strike out for himself. The ideal seemed to be a community -of equals protected from economic dangers by full employment and high -wages, politically lethargic, unstirred by Socialist or Tory. Everyone -earned about the same amount of money, spent it on the same things, and -appeared to think and talk alike. - -Yet theirs is a nation that desperately needs the imaginative, -inventive mind if it is to overcome its economic difficulties. - -The paramount emphasis on security found among manual workers may -be regrettable. But in view of Britain's past it is natural and -understandable. These, after all, are the descendants of farm laborers -who worked twelve hours a day and lived in hovels. The grandfathers and -grandmothers of the young people in the New Towns knew the dank, dirty -poverty of the slums of London and Liverpool. There must be among the -miners at Peterlee men and women whose female ancestors dragged coal -carts through mine tunnels on their hands and knees. - -The new class begins with a strong bias in favor of the Labor Party. -It is never allowed to forget the inhumanities of the past or the long -struggle of the unions against entrenched capital. It is reminded at -every election that all it has today is a result of the efforts of -the Labor Party. This is not true, but we are talking about politics. -Finally, in every new housing development or New Town there must be an -aging group who remember with fierce-eyed resentment the long periods -of unemployment and the marginal existence that were the lot of many -working-class families a quarter of a century ago. - -The Welsh, in particular, have never forgotten. And hundreds of -thousands of bitter, talkative, excitable Welsh workers have left South -Wales in the last twenty years to work in other parts of Britain, -carrying with them their hatred of the Tories and their zeal for "the -movement." When Aneurin Bevan, that most Welsh of Welshmen, describes -the Tories as lower than vermin or genially compares them with the -Gadarene swine, he is expressing a sentiment strongly held by a -considerable percentage of his fellow countrymen. - -The geographical redistribution of the working class altered the -political map of Britain. Housing estates and New Towns introduced -solid blocs of Labor votes into traditionally Tory constituencies. This -was a factor in the Socialist victory of 1945 and it is still a factor -today. The constituency of Melton, for instance, was long considered a -safe Liberal seat. Then it became equally safe for the Conservatives. -But the advent of a housing development and several thousand new votes -made this rural constituency insecure. The influx of a new type of -voter is one of the main reasons why this must now be considered a -marginal constituency by the Tories. - -But the effect of the geographical redistribution is being matched and -balanced in many constituencies by the effect of their new economic -status upon the voters of the working class. They now have something -to conserve: jobs, good wages, pleasant homes. This does not mean an -immediate conversion to Conservatism. Among many, particularly the -older age groups, the memories of the past are still strong. But the -achievement of a new economic status has resulted in a lessening of the -fervor and energy for the Socialist cause. A class that puts security -above everything else is not likely to be won by a Labor platform that -endorses more nationalization and the ensuing upheaval in the British -economy. Its younger members, many of whom have never been jobless, are -unimpressed by dire prophecies of the return of the bad old days under -Tory rule because they themselves have never experienced such a period. - -Nor should we forget that in each general election the Conservative -Party wins a substantial share of the working-class vote. Even in -the catastrophe of 1945 the Conservatives estimate they won between -4,000,000 and 4,500,000 votes among manual workers. In 1951 about -6,000,000 electors of this group voted Tory. Of course the vote for -Labor rose too: it is estimated that in the general election of that -year 52 per cent of the working class voted for Labor. But Labor was -defeated by the coalition of middle-class and working-class votes for -the Tories. - -Nonetheless, the Tories continue to gain in the areas where the new -working class has reached a new economic status. In 1945 the Labor -Party won Chislehurst in Kent, normally a safe Conservative seat. The -influx of working-class voters was the principal cause. Ten years later -Chislehurst was safely back on the Conservative side. - -The Conservative Party is thus faced with a difficult question. Like -all major parties, it is a coalition of various economic and social -interests. In the last decade a new interest, that of the working -class, has become vital to the party. But the Conservative government's -efforts to meet the wishes of that group, particularly its insistence -on the continuation of the Welfare State, clashes directly with the -interests of the old middle class, which has suffered a loss of social -prestige, economic standing, and political influence at the hands of -the working class. - -The rebellion among Conservative voters of the middle class against -the government's policies, reflected in their refusal to vote in -by-elections, cannot go unchecked without damaging the Conservatives. -That this is fully realized by the party leaders was shown by the -warnings they gave the Tories against seduction by political groups of -the extreme right. - -What kind of people are the new working class? You will not find them -portrayed in the novels of Angela Thirkell or, indeed, any other -English novelist popular in America. But veterans of World War II may -recognize them as the slightly older brothers of the British soldier -they knew in Africa, Italy, and France. - -They are not at all reserved; reserve is the province of the -upper-middle-class Briton. They are friendly, incurious, and polite. -For the first time in history they are satisfied with themselves and -with their lot. - -I mention this as a curiosity. When I first went to England to work -before the war I was struck by the powerful interest shown in the -United States. An American in a working-class pub was bombarded by -queries about the organization of the unions, John L. Lewis, the -absence of a labor party in the United States politics, the techniques -of mass production in industry. The young men were eager to know and -anxious to improve. - -Today one encounters the same politeness but less interest. After the -preliminary and obligatory question about the "Yank corporal" named -Jackson who lives in Chicago and do you know him, the talk is likely to -trail off into inconsequentials. The English, as opposed to the Scots, -Welsh, and Irish, are a people notably difficult to arouse and, equally -important, difficult to quiet once they are aroused. But in recent -years the pubs have been quiet. The new working class has what it and -its predecessors wanted. It is not excited either by the prospect of -Tory rule or by the infiltration of the British Communists into the -union structure. - -It would be aroused, however, by any policy that appeared to endanger -its new position. That is certain. And consequently both major parties -will be circumspect in their approach to the new class. - -Socially, the new class is modern. Increasingly it is making use of -new techniques in living which were out of the economic range of its -fathers and mothers. The old family life built around the kitchen and -the pot of tea on the stove has been replaced by one built around the -television set. - -For the first time in their lives the young people of the New Towns -and the housing estates have enough room in their homes to plan and -build. The three-piece bedroom suite is as important as the television -set as an indication of economic status. The "do it yourself" craze -that swept the United States did not "catch on" among the working class -in Britain for the simple reason that its members had always done it -themselves. A great deal of the painting and decoration and some of the -furniture-making is done by the man of the house in his spare time. - -The class is not notably religious. The Catholics and the Methodists -support their churches, but the response to other faiths is not -ardent. The British are not "a pagan people," as some critics have -charged, but there certainly is little enthusiasm for conventional -religious forms. - -The working class is a definable class. Thus it takes its place in the -graduated ranks of British society. Within the class, however, there -is very little snobbery. I have mentioned one instance: the resentment -of the dwellers in the New Towns when they are classed with the people -of the housing estates. But in a community in which all the men work -in the same or similar factories and in which everyone knows almost to -the penny what everyone else makes, pretense of economic superiority is -difficult. - -Here is the new British workingman. He moved to a New Town or a housing -estate from a slum or near-slum. If he is in his late thirties or -forties, he fought in the war and his wife knows more about the effect -of high explosives, flying bombs, and rockets than most generals. He -is living in what is to him comparative luxury: a living room, a clean -and, by British standards, modern kitchen, a bedroom for the children, -a modern bath and toilet. He can walk or cycle to his work, and if the -weather is fine, he comes home for lunch. In the evening there is "the -telly" or the football-pool form to be filled out or the new desk he -is making for the children's room. Some two or three times a week he -drops in at the "local," the neighborhood pub or bar, for a few drinks -with friends from the factory. Even here his habits are changing. -The actually potent "mild and bitter" or "old and mild" that was his -father's tipple has been replaced by light ale--"nasty gassy stuff" the -old-fashioned barmaids report. - -It is a quiet life but to our subject a satisfactory one. He reads the -_Daily Mirror_ rather than the _Daily Herald_, which was his father's -Bible, but he is only occasionally aroused by international problems. -He did get excited about the idea of arming "those bloody Germans," but -when the leaders of both the Conservative and Labor parties accepted -the necessity he went along with German rearmament. But he was never -particularly happy about it. In general, however, he is not interested -in world affairs. There are one or two fellows at "the works," he -will tell you, who get excited about China or Suez or Cyprus. Here it -should be noted that he is more nationalist than internationalist. He -doesn't like it when British soldiers are killed by the bombs of Greek -Cypriotes, chiefly because the Army is no longer a professional force -but one composed largely of conscripts of National Service. Young Tom -from down the street, a nice lad, has gone out there with the Green -Howards. - -There he is: content, complete, complacent. His contacts with the rest -of the world, British or foreign, are limited, and this is especially -true of his contacts with the old middle class. - -The old middle class itself is intensely interested in this new kind -of working class. Partly this is true because the new class is blamed -for many of the reverses that have fallen upon the middle class. Partly -it is because of political spite. Partly it is jealousy. Whatever the -dominant reason, the feeling is there, and the middle class, harking -back to the first Socialist boasts in 1945 about remaking bourgeois -Britain, will tell you: "They started it." - -This class (here we are talking about the professional men, civil -servants, Army, Navy, and Air Force officers, the higher but not the -highest ranks of business and industry, the clergy of the Church of -England, and the retired pensioners of these groups) fights hard to -resist the uniformity that the last fifteen years have imposed upon it. -It finds itself unable to organize to win higher salaries, and it knows -that the taxation of the last decade has closed the gap between it and -the new class of industrial workers. Finally, its more intelligent -members are aware that it too is being challenged from within--that -there is arising in its ranks a new group which from the economic -standpoint can claim to be middle class but which has very little in -common now, socially or politically, with the old middle class. Yet, -as both groups claim a certain superiority over the class of manual -workers, it is safe to predict that the two groups will unite and -make common cause in defense of their standards. Interestingly, this -is already happening in the field of education, where the sons of the -physicists, engineers, and scientists who are among the leaders of the -new middle class are going to the public schools that were one of the -solid foundations of the old middle class. - -Such schools, incidentally, are one of the bones of contention between -the political leaders of the Labor Party, which represents the majority -of the working class, and the old middle class. This class has pressed -the Exchequer for a tax allowance for public schools--i.e., private -education. The Socialists replied that such an allowance would be a -private subsidy to a system that spreads inequality. To this the Tories -of the old middle class retorted that part of the British freedom was -the right of the parent to decide how and where his child was to be -educated. They added a reminder that if the new working class were to -save a bit on installment payments for television sets and the football -pools, it too could send its sons to public schools. The answer, of -course, is that the new working class cares little for schools, public -or national. - -The change in the composition of the middle class brought about -by the introduction of new members reflects a change in Britain's -industrial life and, to some extent, her position in the world. The -administrators, managers, and technicians of the new industries such -as plastics and electronics, the leaders in the newspaper, television, -radio, and movie industries are becoming as important as the lawyers, -judges, general officers, retired pro-consuls who once led the class. -Just below these leaders is a steadily increasing group of newcomers -to the class who have worked their way out of the working class since -the war. Industrial designers and chemists, buyers, advertising men, -production engineers--all these have come to the top. - -This group reflects modern Britain and her problems. The colonial -governor is less important to it than the expert on foreign markets. -The scientist is infinitely more necessary to the country's progress -than the soldier. - -There is an important difference in income between the new entries into -the middle class and the professional men who formed its backbone in -the past. On the whole, the incomes of the new group are a good deal -higher. It is engaged, for the most part, in industries, businesses, or -quasi-public organizations that are expanding. Moreover, many of its -members augment their incomes with expense accounts. - -But these differences in types of activity and in income are only the -beginning of the differences between the two segments of the middle -class. - -Many members of the new group have just arrived, pushed to the top by -the necessities of war or of Britain's long economic struggle. The -percentage of public-school graduates is lower than in the established -middle class. Attention to that class's recognized totems is much -less. The new group is less concerned with the Church of England, the -Army and the Navy--the Air Force and the production of new weapons -are, however, its special province--the Foreign Office and active -politics. These it has left largely to the established middle class, -and frequently the interests of the two groups clash. For example, the -conflict within government between the traditionalist view of the Navy -as vital to Britain's defense and the view that all that matters is the -big bomber today and the intercontinental ballistic missile tomorrow is -essentially a clash between two groups in the same class. - -The new group is not primarily managerial, although managers make up a -considerable percentage of its total. It includes a great many creative -workers, architects, scientists and engineers, and a surprisingly high -percentage of men who have risen without the aid of the Old School Tie. - -The group has had less education and less leisure than the old middle -class, and, consequently, its approach to culture is different. Its -interest in the arts is limited, its taste in literature tends toward -Nevil Shute rather than Thackeray. But it has a furious curiosity about -Britain and the world: it devours magazine articles and books. Like -the new working class, it has reached income levels that seemed out of -sight fifteen years ago, but, unlike the new working class, it is not -content to rest in its present position. For it knows enough of the -world and the country to doubt that the present security is enough. - -The middle class in Britain over the centuries has developed a -marvelous capacity for altering while maintaining roughly the same -façade. This process is going on now. The sons of the new group within -the middle class are going off to public schools and Oxford and -Cambridge rather than to state schools and the red brick provincial -universities that trained their fathers. But because this group has an -abiding interest in technical education, its members are anxious for -the spread of such education in the old classical schools. - -It should be noted that the trend toward the public schools and the -great universities is not due entirely to snobbery. As an industrial -engineer told me, "That's still the best education in the country, -and my son's going to have it." He himself was the product of a state -school and a provincial university. Obviously he enjoyed talking about -his boy's public school. - -Consequently, the two groups within the middle class are mixing slowly. -But the old middle class is on the defensive; its standards are not -those of the new group, and with the continued rise of the new group -this defensiveness probably will remain. As Britain's world political -and military responsibilities decline, the men and women charged -with overseeing her new position as an exporting nation--in which -salesmanship and industrial techniques are paramount--will find their -importance increasing. - -Once again we find a new group that, like the new kind of working -class, has very little to do with Merrie England. Its roots are less -deep. It is not intimately concerned with the institutions that the old -middle class served. In its outlook toward the world it is much more -realistic and modern. Yet it is gradually assuming the forms of the old -middle class--the schools, the regiments, the clubs. These institutions -inevitably will change as a result of the admission of the new group. -However, if the outward form remains unchanged, the British will be -content. - -Politically the new group within the middle class began its adult -life well to the left of center. In the ten years since the war it -has gradually shifted to the right. Young Conservative ministers like -Iain Macleod and Reginald Maudling represent the ideas of the group, -although they themselves are not of it. In general, the group admires -tidy planning and crisp execution in government. Its shift away from -Socialism probably began when many of its members realized that the -execution of Labor's economic plans left a good deal to be desired and -that some of the party's radicals were cheerfully advocating other -plans--the further extension of nationalization, for instance--that -might wreck an already delicately balanced economy. But the new -group's support of the Conservative Party is far removed from the -bred-in-the-bone, true-blue Conservatism of the old middle class. It -is on the right at the moment because the Tories offer the greatest -opportunity to the activities it represents. - -The old middle class, based mainly on the professions and government -service, is thus under pressure from the new middle class and from the -new working class. Its importance in British society is diminishing -because the former has a closer connection with what is immediately -important to Britain's survival and because the latter will no longer -accept leadership by the old middle class. It is important to note, -however, that the ties between the new middle class and the new -working class are more substantial. Many of the new middle class have -risen from the urban working class in a generation. In regard to the -technical aspects of industry, the two groups speak the same language. - -The influence retained by the old middle class should not be -underestimated, however. Especially in the countryside the lawyer, -the vicar, the retired officer who is the local Justice of the -Peace continue to wield considerable authority. And in clinging to -traditional forms through two wars and the long night of austerity, the -middle class has demonstrated its essential toughness. - -The old middle class still reads _The Times_ of London, that great -newspaper, although you are liable to be informed in country -drawing-rooms that _The Times_ is "a bit Bolshie nowadays." - -The forms and felicities of British life are encouraged and supported -by the old middle class. The Church of England, the local Conservative -Party fete, the gymkhana, the voluntary social services, the Old -Comrades Associations of regiments owe their continued life to -unstinting aid from the men and women of this class. It has had its -periods of blindness (Munich was one), but it has never doubted where -duty lay. When the war began in 1939--or, as its members would say, -"when the balloon went up"--it sent away its sons and daughters and -settled down to man the Home Guard and the civil-defense services. It -suffered bombing and austerity, but it made certain that when the boys -and girls came home there was a dance at the yacht club--some Polish -sailors lived there during the war, and everyone pitched in to put it -back in shape--and all the food the rationing would allow. - -The positive characteristics of this class are impressive: its -courage, its desire that each generation have a wider education and -a greater opportunity, its cool calmness in the face of danger, its -willingness to accept as a duty the responsibility for the lives of -untaught millions living in famine and poverty and to labor for their -welfare, its acceptance of the conviction of duty well done as the -suitable reward for a lifetime of work. To me these seem to outweigh -the pettiness, the snobbery, the overbearing self-confidence. No nation -can do without such positive characteristics, and it will be a sorry -day for Britain if the change in the middle class eliminates their -influence on the country. - -We Americans are fond of thinking of Britain as a settled, caste-ridden -society. But at least two groups, the new middle class and the -resettled working class, are on the move or have just moved into a new -status, politically, economically, and socially. Moreover, one large -class, the middle class, is in the process of changing. British society -is much more mobile than it appears from the outside because of the -Britons' desire to retain traditional forms while the substance changes. - -As these changes take place, the value of many old indications of class -change also. Accent remains one of the easiest methods for placing -a Briton, but it is no longer an infallible guide. The effect of the -BBC upon British speech has been considerable, and today the clerk in -an obscure provincial shop may talk, if not in the accents of Eton, -at least in a pleasant voice that reveals only a trace of provincial -accent. The disappearance of old robust provincial accents would be a -loss. And an acute ear in London can still, like Shaw's Professor Henry -Higgins, place a Londoner in Wimbledon or Barnes or Stepney. It is the -conviction of many Socialists that equality will never reign in Britain -until there is a universal accent. - -Clothes, too, are a much more accurate indication of class in Britain -than in the United States. The derby or bowler is the almost universal -headgear of the upper-class male in the city, with the cap for the -country. The workingman affects a soft hat, sometimes a Homburg and -often a cloth cap. The mass production of clothing came later in -Britain than in the United States, but today the miner can be as warmly -clothed as the banker. The difference lies in the styling given the -banker's clothes by his London tailor. Then, too, the banker may be -far more negligent in his dress than the miner: it is a mistake, if -not a crime, in Britain for a member of the upper class to be too well -dressed. - -Nancy Mitford and Professor Alan Ross have made Americans aware of the -infinite variations of U (upper-class) and Non-U (non-upper-class) -phraseology in Britain, but many of the distinctions so carefully -drawn are changing. A young lady of my acquaintance habitually uses -"serviette" instead of "napkin," a crime Miss Mitford ranks just -below arson and beating an old woman with a stick. As she goes to an -expensive and very U school, the young lady was queried about her -choice of words. No one, she reported, had ever heard of Miss Mitford -at her school, and what did it matter anyhow? - -There has been no mention of the aristocracy in this long chapter, -which will probably offend readers whose views on Britain have been -formed by the Merrie England school of writing. The fact is that the -aristocracy does not rate a great deal of space in a book dealing with -modern Britain. - -The real aristocracy of Britain was composed of the great landowning -families whose power began to decline with the rise, at the start -of the nineteenth century, of the great industrial and commercial -families. The remaining British servants of the old school--the best -judges extant of who is and who is not an aristocrat--are inclined -to look down their noses at the pretensions of Johnny-come-latelies -who earned their titles by services, usually financial, to political -parties, or by the proprietorship of chain stores. To them the people -who count are the old families and the old names--Derby, Norfolk, -Salisbury. - -Inheritance taxes, the import of foreign foodstuffs, reckless spending -all contributed to the reduction of the aristocracy's position. One -reason why the institution of monarchy is supported by most and -tolerated by some Socialists is that the Crown does not command the -immediate allegiance of a large, influential, and moneyed aristocracy. -There is no court party between the Crown and the people. The rulers -of Britain have become progressively more popular with the common man -as the influence of the real aristocracy declined. Of course, that -influence has been exerted in a different way. Two recent Conservative -Prime Ministers have been of aristocratic birth. Sir Winston Churchill -was born the grandson of a duke; he was offered a dukedom on his -retirement in 1955 and characteristically refused it. Sir Anthony Eden -comes of an aristocratic North Country family one of whose members was -a colonial governor in Maryland. They headed a Conservative Party that -was middle class rather than aristocratic. - -A few members of the old aristocracy strive to continue life as their -fathers and grandfathers knew it, but they fight a losing battle. The -opening of the great country houses to the public, the most desperate -expedients to cut down spending so that the heir can enter the Guards -and the daughter enjoy a proper introduction to London society cannot -compensate for the taxation and for the changes in the character of -British society and in the world. - -The aristocracy, the real aristocracy, makes its presence felt in -modern Britain only when such men as Lord Salisbury or Lord Mountbatten -leave the peaceful countryside and contend with the active body of -Britons. - -The moment of a significant decline in the aristocracy's position has -seen a gallant defense of it in literature. Both Miss Mitford and -Evelyn Waugh have expounded its virtues of courage and responsibility -in war. The "damn your eyes, follow me, I'm going to do what's right" -idea always appeals powerfully to those who reject thinking for -themselves. It is easy for an author to poke fun at the sober civil -servant or the earnest trade-unionist dropping his _h_'s, but in modern -Britain they are far more important than Lord Fortinbras. - -For, as we have seen, this is a society in the throes of change. New -groups are rising to the top just as, and frequently because, Britain's -survival demands new habits, new enterprises. Individual members of -the declining classes who adapt themselves to the changing times will -survive. Lord Salisbury, bearer of an ancient name, presides over -Britain's entry into the age of nuclear fission. But those who cannot -adapt will slowly disappear. - -In all this change there is strength. Britain's hope for the future -lies in her ability, proven in the past, to change to meet new -conditions. The nation that has emerged since 1945 is the product of -greater changes than Britain has ever known. There are weak spots--the -lack of individual enterprise on the part of the working class is -certainly one. But the changes so bitterly resented by many are the -best reason for optimism concerning Britain's destiny in this century's -struggle with totalitarian powers. - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -VIII. _The British and the World_ - - _The tumult and the shouting dies; - The Captains and the Kings depart._ - - RUDYARD KIPLING - - _We have no eternal allies and no perpetual enemies; our interests are - eternal, and those interests it is our duty to follow._ - - LORD PALMERSTON - -[Illustration] - - -More than any other Western European nation, Britain has been -involved in mankind. Geography placed these islands on one of the -main routes between the Old World and the New. Ambition, avarice, and -absent-mindedness combined to create the greatest of modern empires. -Knaves and heroes, sinners and saints, fools and wise men took the -blunt Saxon tongue across the snarling seas and into silent jungles. -Now the Empire nears its end. But the drain of two world wars and the -changes in the world make it more vital than ever to Britain that she -remain a leader of international intercourse--a trader, a diplomat, a -financial clearing-house for much of the world. - -In discussing Britain's relations and attitudes toward other peoples, -the whole field of international relations and diplomacy, we enter an -area in which the British feel they are experts. This is a view hotly -opposed by the piously patriotic operatives of the U.S. Department -of State, but perhaps there is something behind the complacent -British assumption. It is difficult otherwise to understand how this -comparatively small island people built a world empire and held it -despite the attempts of some of the greatest conquerors of modern times -to seize it. - -One of the most interesting contrasts in British life is that between -the nation's world-wide interests and responsibilities and the strong -strain of xenophobia in the national character. "Niggers begin at -Calais" is only one expression of the Englishman's dislike for all -foreigners, Froggies, Eyeties, Boches, and Russkis. I remember a slight -shock at hearing one of the most eminent of British statesmen ask -what "the Froggies" were up to. Similarly, the British working class, -supposedly friendly to its comrades in other lands, has been remarkably -cool toward inclusion of Polish or Hungarian refugees in its ranks. - -There is a strong strain of isolationism in Britain. Usually dormant, -it flowered late in 1956 after condemnation of the United Kingdom by -the United States and other members of the United Nations. In periods -of crisis the British have often been alone. In 1940 the surrender of -France left the British without a major European ally. Physically this -was a grievous blow. Psychologically it rallied the people. In the -past there has been considerable agitation in British politics against -imperialism. Overseas investment and new export markets in overseas -colonies made imperialism important. But the "Little Englanders" -persist. Their heir is the man who wants the British government to get -out of the United Nations, NATO, SEATO, and the rest, and concentrate -on Britain. - -Britain's relations with the rest of the world are most important to -us in the United States in six major areas: the Soviet Union and the -Communist satellites in Eastern Europe; Communist China; Western -Europe; the Middle East; and, lastly and most important, the United -States. - -Few aspects of Britain's position in the world are as little understood -in the United States as relations between the Commonwealth and the -mother country. This is a failing that irritates the British. "Do you -know what they asked me in Chicago?" a British author said. "They asked -me why we didn't stop taxing the Canadians to buy jewels for the Queen!" - -Ignorance is not confined to the United States. One British diplomat -who had dealt with Russian diplomats and officials for years reported -that it was not until the summit conference at Geneva in the summer of -1955 that the Russians showed any glimmering of understanding of what -the Commonwealth was and how it worked. - -The Commonwealth evolved from the Empire. Its original members were -the older colonies settled by Britons and Europeans: Australia, New -Zealand, Canada, and South Africa. Its newer members are Asian or -African peoples whose countries were parts of the Empire and are -now sovereign within the Commonwealth; these include India, Ceylon, -Pakistan, and Ghana. It is a matter of fact that in the years since -1945, while the supposedly anti-imperialist Russians have been -establishing the rule of the red star over 100,000,000 souls, the -British have created out of their Empire sovereign states with -populations of over 500,000,000. - -The Commonwealth is not "run" by anyone. But Britain, as the mother -country, as the source of political forms and constitutional ideas, -financial support and industrial exports, can claim to be the first -among equals. The ties that bind the members of the Commonwealth to -Britain vary in strength. And the ties between such Commonwealth -members as South Africa and India are virtually nonexistent. The common -purpose of preserving peace and the necessity of discussing common -problems bring the leaders of the Commonwealth together in London -periodically for conferences. - -Despite the absence of a central ruling power, the system works fairly -well. In Britain and among the older members of the Commonwealth there -is a strong loyalty, almost a reverence, for the idea. The political -orators who describe the Commonwealth as "a great force for peace and -civilization" are speaking to a responsive audience. Because there is -no central power, Americans are prone to doubt the strength of the ties -that connect the nations. But it may be that today the very absence of -such a power strengthens the Commonwealth. - -Strong economic links exist between the United Kingdom and the members -of the Commonwealth. As a basis there is the sterling area, in which -all the Commonwealth countries except Canada are joined with Burma, -Iceland, Iraq, the British Protected States in the Persian Gulf, the -Irish Republic, Jordan, and Libya. These countries contain one quarter -of the world's population and do one quarter of its trade. - -Membership in the sterling area or sterling bloc, as it is sometimes -called, means that the greater part of the overseas trade of member -countries is financed in sterling. The members maintain their foreign -reserves largely in the form of sterling and maintain a fixed -relationship between their own currencies and sterling. For the most -part, they sell their earnings in foreign currency to the United -Kingdom Exchange Equalization Account for sterling, and they can -purchase for sterling such foreign currency as they need. The members -also sell gold in the London market for sterling, and the United -Kingdom's purchases of gold are held in the Exchange Equalization -Account. The gold and dollars in this account constitute the central -gold and dollar reserves of the sterling area. - -The sterling area thus is an important means of maintaining Britain's -position as the banker of the Commonwealth and as the center of -financial transactions. It is also one of the chief markets for -British exports, taking roughly half of Britain's export total. Of -the Commonwealth countries, Australia is by far the biggest buyer. In -1955 Australia bought from Britain goods valued at £286,400,000, or -about $801,920,000--just under 10 per cent of Britain's total export -trade. Four of the five next biggest buyers of British goods were -also Commonwealth nations: South Africa, third; Canada, fourth; New -Zealand, fifth; India, sixth. The United States was the second-largest -purchaser, taking 6.6 per cent of Britain's total exports. - -Britain, of course, buys extensively within the Commonwealth. In -the same year she imported goods valued at £1,888,200,000, or about -$5,286,960,000, from the Commonwealth and the Irish Republic. This -amounted to over half of Britain's total imports. - -There are numerous irritations and imperfections in the conduct of this -great world trading concern. The Australians and New Zealanders, for -instance, complain often that British capital shies from investment in -their countries. - -The huge British investments for the development of countries overseas -were among the most damaging losses in two world wars. As the nation -slowly recovered its economic health in the post-war years, overseas -investment was encouraged by successive governments. Many Commonwealth -officials say that, although private borrowing for development has been -encouraged, much more could be done. - -The Capital Issues Committee, an independent group of seven men -experienced in finance, commerce, and industry, approved in 1953 to -applications for the investment of £40,000,000, or about $112,000,000, -for Commonwealth development. The next year the figure rose to -£48,000,000, or about $134,000,000. Compare this with the annual -net investment overseas of about $504,000,000 in the years 1951-3. -Evidently the Australians and New Zealanders have cause for complaint. - -In contrast to commercial ties that transform credit in London into new -factories in western Australia, there is the emotional tie mentioned -earlier. The Crown's mysterious power to draw peoples as dissimilar as -the Australian cattleman and the Brighton clerk into a community of -patriotic loyalty cannot be denied. Whether in the next decade or so -the same sort of connection can be established between the Crown and -such sensitive newer members of the Commonwealth as India and Ceylon is -one of the most delicate questions facing British statecraft. - -A host of other institutions--some official, others the work of private -individuals captured by the Commonwealth conception--strive to keep -the relations between Britain and the Commonwealth countries happy and -firm. In such dissimilar fields as the theater, literature, and sport -there is much more contact among the countries of the Commonwealth and -Empire than Americans realize. A British rugby football team tours -Australia or South Africa, a West Indian cricket team visits Britain. -British theatrical companies still make the long but financially -rewarding trip to play in Australia and New Zealand. British authors -tirelessly roam the provinces of Canada or India, discoursing at length -upon the merits of the mother tongue and its literature. - -Many young Conservative Members of Parliament are convinced that the -Commonwealth is the great twentieth-century instrument for maintaining -and extending British prestige. They see it expanded from its present -form to include the Scandinavian countries and others in a world -confederation that will be not _a_ third force in the world but _the_ -third force. They do not, however, discount the problems that plague -the Commonwealth now. - -An economic problem is the filtration of American capital into the -Commonwealth. The British recognize the enormous potential of American -overseas investment, and they wonder what would happen to their -position in a Commonwealth country where the United States invested -heavily and purchased products with a free hand. The knowledge that the -United States could, if it wished, literally buy out the Commonwealth -is a patriotic incentive for greater British investment. - -Two political problems are South Africa and Ceylon. - -The National Party in South Africa is moving toward the establishment -of a republic and the progressive weakening of political and economic -ties with Britain. Complete independence of the Crown and the -Commonwealth probably is the ultimate South African aim. This would be -a grievous blow to the strength, both economic and political, of the -Commonwealth. - -Ceylon has shown signs of moving in the same direction. One of the -first actions of the government of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, the leader of -the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, was to ask the British to leave the great -naval base at Trincomalee. This was a severe shock to the British and a -damaging blow to the position of the Western world in the Indian Ocean. -At the subsequent Commonwealth Conference an agreement that allowed the -British to remain temporarily was negotiated. But the restlessness of -Ceylon within the Commonwealth and the desire of many of its leading -politicians to divest themselves of all connections, cultural as well -as political, with the British are a bad omen for the future. - -The British attitude toward the Commonwealth and Empire is a curious -mixture of indifference and interest, snobbery and friendship, -ignorance and knowledge. But the general approach has improved greatly -since before the war. The British know they need their friends and -markets overseas, and the old brusque approach to Commonwealth and -Empire problems has changed. - -So has the social attitude. Not long before the war an elderly -and aristocratic lady told me she always "considered Americans as -colonials." She thought she had paid us a compliment. Today such a -remark would not be made. - -The idea of a world-wide Commonwealth is imaginative and attractive. -But the efforts to sell it to the people of Britain, with the exception -of the almost daily exhortations of Lord Beaverbrook's newspapers, are -depressingly feeble. The English Speaking Union and other organizations -are devoted to the cause of strengthening Commonwealth relations, but -such organizations usually preach to the converted. The great mass of -public opinion has yet to be stirred. The British of all classes are -much more likely to be moved by events in France than by events in -Canada or Nigeria. - -"They certainly have a different idea of dealing with the Russians -here," said the young wife of an American diplomat in 1954. "Why, they -have track meets with Russians running in them, and they talk about -how they're going to get the Russians to agree to this or that. Folks -at home think all the Russians have horns and tails." - -She was describing the British ability to live with a problem while -thoroughly understanding its dimensions and dangers. Since 1945 the -leaders of Britain, Socialist and Tory alike, have been fully aware of -the dangers to Western freedom of Russian Communist imperialism. This -statement may evoke criticism from some stout Republicans who regard -the British Labor Party as an offspring of the Communist Party. But the -facts are that it was a Labor government that sent troops to Korea, -that carried on a long and successful campaign against the Communists -in Malaya, that joined the Royal Air Force with the United States Air -Force to build the air bridge that broke the Berlin blockade, and that -passed what was then the largest peacetime armaments bill in British -history. All these measures were part of the general effort to bolster -the defenses of Western Europe against Soviet aggression. - -These exertions were a severe burden on a country whose economy was -already in difficulties and whose resources were strained. They were -undertaken because they matched the resolution of the leaders of the -Labor Party. They were heartily endorsed by the Conservative Party, -then in opposition, and were continued by that party when it came to -power in 1951. - -The point of difference between the British and Americans was that at -the height of the cold war the British never moved toward abandonment -of normal diplomatic intercourse and welcomed any move by either side -which promised closer contact and friendlier relations with the Soviet -Union. - -Socialist and Tory governments pursued this dichotomy in policy with -almost complete freedom from political interference. The British, an -island people dependent on international trade, strive in any crisis -to maintain communications with their enemies and thus retain a means -through which negotiations can be carried out. They will go to great, -often shaming lengths to avoid war. Once it comes, they wage it with -earnest intensity and fight it to the end. - -In periods of danger such as followed the influx of Soviet power in -Europe, British politicians usually assume a bipartisan attitude. This -does not mean that the opposition of the time refrains from criticism -of the government policy. It does mean that opposition speakers -use restraint. During the period of maximum strain with Russia, no -politician shrilled a warning against talking with the Russians -about Berlin or Korea, or predicted that the admission of Russian -high-jumpers to a track meet would undermine the nation. The British -never gave up on the situation; they did not like it, but they thought -that any means of finding a way out should be used. - -This was, as I have noted, a period of danger. The bipartisan approach -broke down completely over Suez. When Sir Anthony Eden ordered -intervention in Egypt the danger was real but indistinct. It was also -a long-term economic danger arising from threat to the country's oil -supplies rather than the immediate military danger represented by -the Soviet Union's military strength in East Germany and elsewhere -in Central Europe accompanied by Russian diplomacy and subversion. -Russian military power already had won its foothold in Egypt. But the -Labor Party refused to regard this power as an immediate threat and -consequently rejected it as a reason for the adoption of a bipartisan -approach. - -The British people have never been so violently anti-Russian as -the Americans. There is a distinction between anti-Russian and -anti-Communist. Communism has had few more bitter opponents than -Ernest Bevin or Herbert Morrison, two leaders in the post-war Labor -government. They represented elements of the movement which for decades -had been fighting in the unions and in the constituency parties to -prevent the Communists from winning control of the Trades Union -Congress and the Labor Party. But neither the leaders nor the led could -be called anti-Russian. - -The war alliance with the Soviet Union meant far more to Britons than -the military co-operation between the Soviet Union and the United -States during the same period meant to Americans. The British attitude -was rooted in the situation of June 1941 when the Germans turned east -and attacked the Soviet Union. - -The British had then been fighting the Germans and the Italians -single-handed for a year. Their cities had been bombed, their armies -and navies grievously punished in France, Norway, Libya, and Greece. -Each month the German submarines in the North Atlantic were bolder -and more numerous and the toll of shipping losses was higher. Most -Britons knew they had stout friends in the United States, but the wiser -also recognized the strength of isolationist sentiment. And, although -American industrial mobilization was gaining momentum, that would not -avert another Coventry tonight or another Dunkirk tomorrow. - -Suddenly all this altered. Russia, which had sided with Germany for two -years and had gobbled up parts of Finland, Poland, and Romania as her -reward, was invaded. Overnight the British became willing to overlook -the despicable role Russia had played in the first two years of the -war. Here, at last, was an ally. An ally, moreover, that fought, that -was undergoing the same punishment Britain had known. - -Naturally this warm admiration for the Russian war effort and this -sympathy for the Russian people offered an opportunity for the British -Communists, who exploited it to the utmost. Propaganda from the Soviet -Union portrayed life there in glowing terms. The British working class -was informed that this was a working-class war--a few months earlier -the Communists had been calling it a capitalist war--and that side by -side the British and Russian "brothers" would fight it to a successful -conclusion. - -The propaganda would not have made much headway, however, had it not -been for the basic strain of admiration and sympathy which existed. -The decade of cold war which included the rape of Czechoslovakia, the -Berlin blockade, and the Korean war obviously altered the British -working-class attitude toward Russia. But some of the old wartime -feeling remained. It is there yet in the minds of the working class, -tucked behind the football scores and the racing tips: the Russians -didn't let us down, they went on fighting, they must be like us, they -can't want another war. - -The changes in Soviet leadership and tactics since the death of Stalin -have affected the British approach to Russia and Communism. In Britain, -as elsewhere, the immediate danger has receded. The East is slowly -opening up. This means a great deal more to Britain than to the United -States. - -Trade is the answer. The British want to expand their trade with the -Soviet Union and with China. Again, as in their diplomatic relations, -this does not mean that they approve of Communism in either country. -But they live by trade, and they must take it wherever they find it. -To British industrialists and British ministers the Soviet Union -and Eastern Europe represent a market for industrial products and a -possible source of raw materials. However, they are wary of Russian -methods of business. The initial approach has been circumspect. The -British do not wish to throw everything onto one market; they would -infinitely prefer an expansion of trade with the United States. Nor -will they sell to the Soviet Union one or two models of each type which -the industrious Russians can then mass-produce for themselves. Finally, -although Britain and other European nations are restive under embargo -restrictions on the sale of certain strategic goods, the Conservative -government has no intention of breaking these restrictions under the -encouragement of Mr. Khrushchev's smile. - -The visits to Britain of a succession of delegations from the Soviet -government and of three top-ranking ministers--Nikita Khrushchev, First -Secretary of the Communist Party, Premier Nikolai Bulganin, and Deputy -Premier Georgi Malenkov--fanned British interest if not enthusiasm. - -Much has been written about the effect of these visits on the British -public. Indeed, the faint hearts in Congress seemed to think that they -would result in the immediate establishment of a Communist regime in -Britain. But it appeared to many who had frequent contacts with "Krush -and Bulge," as the British called them, that the greatest effect -of the visit was on the Russians themselves. Like Malenkov before -them, the Communist boss and the head of the government encountered a -prosperous, vigorous democracy. To anyone accustomed to the crudity and -ugliness that express Russia's raw strength, industrial Britain was a -revelation. Here were huge, new, clean factories set in the midst of -comfortable towns enclosed by green fields and parks. - -"We'll have all this one day in Russia," Khrushchev said to one of his -hosts. "But it takes time." - -The British poured out to see the visitors. But it was symptomatic -of the maturity of public opinion that in London and the other great -cities, the Communists failed to generate any wild enthusiasm for the -Soviet leaders. On the contrary, they were met in most cases with -stolid, disapproving silence interspersed by volleys of boos. - -Yet because the British were never so excited about the possibility -of war with the Soviet Union as were the Americans, there is and will -be in Britain greater willingness to accept the Russians at their own -valuation. Also, the British working class is far more interested in -the Soviet Union than American labor is. - -To the American workingman there is nothing especially novel in -the description of huge enterprises breaking new ground in virgin -territory. Americans have been doing that sort of thing for a century. -But to the Briton, accustomed to an economy severely circumscribed by -the geographical limitations of his island, these Soviet enterprises -have the fascination of the unknown. So he marvels over the pictures -and the text in the magazines issued by the Russian and satellite -governments. - -This propaganda is intended, naturally, to divert the reader's mind -from the innumerable cruelties that have accompanied the building -of the Soviet state by impressing him with a glowing account of the -results. Here, as elsewhere, the Russians underestimate their critics, -of whom the British workingman is one. People do not easily forget -cruelty, even if it has not been practiced on them. - -"Certainly, I'm a trades-union man _and_ a good socialist," a printer -said to me during the Khrushchev-Bulganin visit. "That's why I 'ate -these bleeders. What they've done to the unions in Russia wants talking -abaht, chum. Know what I 'ates most about them? It's them arsing around -our country with a lot of coppers with them, the bleeders. We don't -want none of that 'ere." - -Finally, we come to a factor of great importance in molding British -attitudes toward the Soviet Union. This is the large group of teachers, -writers, editors, movie-directors, and radio and television workers who -have been powerfully influenced either by Communism or by the results -of a Communist society in the Soviet Union. Proportionately, this group -is larger than its counterpart in the United States. It has never been -drastically reduced in numbers by the pressure of public opinion. -Outside of the "sensitive" departments of government, no great stigma -is attached to membership in the Communist Party in Britain. - -Politically, Britain is deeply and justly concerned with the liberties -of the subject. Consequently, any discrimination by the government -against Communists evokes the wrath of politicians and public bodies -unconnected with Communism. This is true even when the government seeks -to eliminate a known Communist from a "sensitive" department. The -question is not whether Communism threatens Britain. The British know -that it does, and they are prepared to fight it. But Britain's place -in world society, it is reasoned, would be threatened even more if the -liberties of the subject were endangered. The view that only a truly -free society is capable of defeating Communism transcends party lines -in Britain. - -It is important to remember that the powerful influence of Communism -on this heterogeneous group has affected it in two ways. Such people -as Malcolm Muggeridge, the editor of _Punch_, were once sympathetic to -Communism and are now among its best-informed and sharpest critics. In -Britain, as in the United States, there are apostates who have turned -from Communism and who now attack it. But their attacks, though often -brilliant, command less attention in Britain than in the United States. -This may be because the British never were so excited about the cold -war as we were in the United States (after all, they were grappling -with pressing economic problems). It may be because the British have -scant respect for those who betray causes and then make money out of it. - -On the whole, however, the group influenced by the Soviet Union exerts -its influence to create friendlier relations between Britain and the -Soviet Union. In its attitude toward the United States this group is -sensitive, critical, and quite often abysmally ignorant. - -The virtues and defects of the Soviet Union and the United States -thus are weighed in public by an influential group that has already -been tremendously impressed either by communism as a political creed -or by the industrial, military, or diplomatic achievements of the -Soviet state. They are receptive to news of Russia and, in many cases, -remarkably uncritical. Indeed, they are generally less skeptical and -critical in their approach to the Soviet Union than they are to the -problems of Germany or the United States. One of their favorite sayings -is "Let's try and keep an open mind about Russia." - -In the battle for men's minds, this is a serious situation. It means -that a considerable proportion of what Britons read, of what young -Britons learn, of what the whole nation sees or hears through mass -communication media is prepared by people whose attitude toward Russian -claims and policies is less skeptical than it should be. On the other -hand, the danger has been exaggerated by anxious Americans. - -Since 1950 these fields of endeavor have been invaded by a group of -young men and women much more favorably inclined to conservatism and -modern capitalism than the group influenced by Russia. Some of them -have been to the United States and are able to refute the anti-American -charges of the other group with first-hand knowledge. Most of them -developed intellectually in the period when the Russian danger -overshadowed Europe, and they are not prone to make excuses for the -Soviets. - -Moreover, they are strongly influenced by the marked recrudescence -of national feeling in Britain. Perhaps this is a revulsion from -the internationalism of the group influenced by Russia. Perhaps it -reflects a desire to do something about Britain's waning prestige in -the world. Sometimes it indicates a new and welcome preoccupation with -the political possibilities of an enlarged Commonwealth. Whatever the -cause, it adds to the vitality of British thought. And it is healthy -for the country that its young people should be interested in British -development of nuclear energy rather than in Magnetogorsk or TVA. - -The British attitude toward Communist China is unaffected by emotional -memories of a war alliance, as in the case of the Soviet Union, or the -sense of guilt regarding the conquest of China by the Communists which -affects some Americans. Chiang Kai-shek was never a public hero during -the war, as Tito and Stalin were. The London representatives of the -great Anglo-Chinese trading firms might portray Chiang as the hope of -the West in China, but the British people were not convinced. - -Although the British military effort in the Korean war was considerably -larger than Anglophobes would have Americans believe, the war's effect -on the British was a good deal less. There has never been any sustained -public outcry against Britain's recognition of the Chinese government. -The danger of a Communist invasion of Formosa did not stir the British. -When such an invasion seemed likely, the Conservative government faced -a difficult situation: would the British people, in the event of war -between China and the United States, have followed the Americans into -the conflict? - -The present British interest in Communist China is largely commercial. -No one entertains the happy belief that the Communist regime can -be overthrown--certainly not by Chiang and his aging forces. What -the British want from Comrade Mao is more trade. If they get it and -trade expands, the process will reflect not a national attraction to -Communism but a restatement of the familiar British position that -theirs is a trading nation which, in its present circumstances, must -find commerce where it can. - -There would be no great opposition to China's entry into the United -Nations. Again, this would not reflect admiration for communism. -For many reasons the British doubt the effectiveness of the United -Nations. One reason is that a nation of over 500,000,000 people has no -representation in the UN's councils. - -The relationship between the French and the British is a fascinating -one. For nearly a thousand years these two peoples have faced each -other across the channel. During that period, in Britain at least, -there has developed a curious love-hate relationship. By turns loving, -exasperated, and enraged, the British think of the French as a man -might think of an affectionate but wayward mistress. - -In June of 1940, when the world between the wars was being shaken to -bits, the fall of France shocked and saddened the British as did no -other event of those terrible days. I remember that while waiting -in the Foreign Office, the morning after my return from France, I -saw an elderly official, a man with a brittle, cynical mind, walk -down the corridor with tears streaming down his face. There was no -recrimination. All he could say was: "Those poor people--God, how they -must be suffering!" - -Few enemy actions during the war distressed the British as much as the -decision to attack the French fleet at Oran. Few post-war diplomatic -achievements gave them more pleasure than the re-establishment of the -old alliance with France. The rise and fall of French governments, the -convulsions of French politicians are watched in Britain sometimes with -anger and harsh words but never without an underlying sympathy. - -Perhaps because of the alliance in two world wars or perhaps because -France offers such a complete change from their own islands, the -British know France very well, far better than they know the United -States or some nations of the Commonwealth. This is true of all classes -of Britons. - -The elderly doctor or retired officer of the middle classes will spend -his holidays at an obscure resort on the coast of Brittany. Before the -war a Continental holiday was one of the indications of middle-class -status. Today the Continental holiday is within the financial reach of -the working class. The conductor on the bus I sometimes take to work -was full of his plans this spring for "me and the missus" to motorcycle -from Boulogne to the Riviera. Thousands like him tour France in buses -or spend vacations not in Blackpool but in a French seaside resort. - -The national attitude ranges from tolerance to affection. I do not -believe, however, that the British respect the French as they do the -Germans or the Russians. The mutiny in the French Army in 1917, the -catastrophe of 1940, the Anglophobia of the Vichy government ended, -probably permanently, popular British reliance on France as a powerful -ally in world affairs. When the Suez crisis arose in 1956 and the -governments of Sir Anthony Eden and Guy Mollet hastened to reinvigorate -the alliance, their efforts awoke little response in Britain. "Now that -we're in this thing, we have to go on and win it," a friend said. "But -think of being in it with the French, especially these French--Mollet, -Pineau, and Bouges-Manoury." He made a sound more customary in Ebbets -Field than in a London club. - -The British are amused by the French (the French, of course, are even -more amused by the British). Sometimes it seems that every Englishman -of a certain age and financial position has his own "secret" village -where the Hotel de la Poste provides a good dinner for five hundred -francs. Britons have great knowledge and affection for France born of -contact in two wars, but they do not rely on the French. - -For other reasons the British hesitate to rely on the Germans. Two -generations of Britons have learned that the Germans are a tough, -resolute, and courageous people, characteristics admired in Britain. -But the British groups devoted to furthering friendship between the -two peoples are fighting a losing battle. There is among all classes -in Britain an underlying distaste for the Germans. This feeling is not -often expressed, but it is there, as it is in most countries in Western -Europe. The attitude is a factor in the relationship between Western -Europe and the key question facing the continent as a whole: Germany's -ultimate reunification. - -The Germans, a singularly obtuse people in judging the reasons for -foreign attitudes toward Germany, are inclined to believe that British -mistrust is tied to the two world wars and the decline of British -power. This is inaccurate. British mistrust and dislike of Germany have -political rather than military roots. Both the Kaiser's imperialism of -1914 and Nazi imperialism in 1939 were seen not as overwhelming threats -to Britain alone but as dangers to the democratic system of the West -under which she had flourished. The horrors of the concentration camps, -the solemn lunacies of Hitler and his court, the death of personal and -political liberty--all these were factors more important than military -posturing. Finally, the British do not consider the Germans politically -stable, and they are suspicious--perhaps too much so--of German -ambitions and intentions. - -Repeatedly this has affected British politics. The great pre-war debate -in foreign affairs was waged between those who, like Churchill, were -not willing to trust the Germans and those who, like Chamberlain, -were. Since the end of World War II the international political issue -that generated the most heat in Britain was the debate over the -rearmament of Germany. One effect of this debate was the emergence -of the Bevanites in the Labor Party as a political force. Aneurin -Bevan believed that German rearmament would unite the pacifists, old -anti-fascists, and others as no other issue could. He was correct. The -leadership of Clement Attlee was gravely endangered for a time when the -party officially supported arms for the nation's former enemies. - -The State Department and other American officials have taken the -position that British opposition to German rearmament was the product -of wild-eyed agitators on the left and had no popular support. This was -an inaccurate, even a dangerous attitude. Field Marshal Lord Wavell -opposed it. So did Viscount Norwich, who as Alfred Duff Cooper had -allied himself with Churchill in the latter's long fight against the -appeasement policy of Chamberlain and Baldwin. - -For the time being, the issue is dead. Germany is being rearmed. But -the excitement the issue provoked testified to the abiding British -uneasiness about Germany. This concern centers upon the prospect that -West Germany will someday succumb to Russian enticement, be united with -East Germany, and leave NATO. A permanently divided Germany may be a -danger to peace, but few Britons outside the Foreign Office see it that -way. Two wars have come out of a united Germany. - -The attitude of the upper-class Englishman toward people of the same -class in Germany has altered since the war. Before World War I, and in -the long week-end between the wars, upper-class Germans and Britons -mingled a good deal. Ties of affection and respect were created. "I -can't stand this feller Hitler," you were told, "but I know old Von -Schlitz, and he's a first-rate chap. You can trust the Prussians." -But in the end Von Schlitz and his friends, with a few honorable -exceptions, threw in their lot with the Nazis. When the British see old -Von Schlitz nowadays they wonder what deceits, what cruelties, what -moral compromises he has countenanced to survive and prosper. - -Seen from this background, the British acceptance of a Western policy -that rebuilt German industry into Britain's leading competitor for -export markets and created a strong state in the Federal Republic of -West Germany was a remarkable victory of the head over the heart. The -policy was accepted because the British saw that the Soviet Union under -Stalin was the greater, more immediate threat. Any relaxation of that -threat is bound to affect the British attitude toward Germany and her -ambitions. - -The mutual affection of the British and the Italians was interrupted -but not broken by the second war. To a somewhat dour, unemotional -people the Italians and their land have an irresistible attraction. -Even when the war was at its worst the British regarded the Italians -with rueful perplexity: how could such an amusing, gracious people be -so deluded by Mussolini? Surely everything would be all right once -Mussolini was eliminated. - -Characteristically, when he was eliminated many British objected to -the summary nature of his execution. They would not blink an eye when -military necessity required the destruction of the German city of -Kassel. But they did not like the picture of their old enemy, who had -vilified them and attacked them when it hurt the most, strung up by his -heels outside a gas station. - -Now all is forgiven and almost forgotten. Each year the earnest -tourists pour southward to Rome, Florence, Venice. In the autumn they -come home to their fog-shrouded islands bringing with them memories of -long, sunny days. - -The British attitude toward Italy and the Italians is symbolized by -their view of Italian Communism. They are not oblivious to the dangers -of Communism in Italy or elsewhere. But they find it difficult to -regard the Italians, communist, fascist, or republican, as serious -factors in world affairs. As only a few Italians seem to desire such a -position, and as the British are too polite to discuss the matter, all -goes well. - -The traveling Briton has lost his old status in Europe. The British -tourist with his limited allowance of francs, marks, or lire is no -longer the "milord" of the nineteenth century. That role, with its -privilege of being the target for every taxi-driver's avarice, now -belongs to the Americans. - -During the peak years of the cold war between 1945 and 1953, Western -Europe was threatened by military attack from Russia. The power to -whom the Europeans looked primarily was not Britain but the United -States. It is a disheartening reflection that, despite this military -dependence, successive American administrations failed to create the -reservoir of trust which would induce the nations of Western Europe to -accept our policies and follow our lead once the Russians altered their -tactics. - -Despite their precarious economic situation, there has been a revival -of British prestige and influence in Western Europe. To some Americans -Britain may appear a small, almost insignificant power. But to a small -European nation Britain, with its bombers, its atomic and hydrogen -bombs, its thriving new industries, presents a different picture. -Another factor is the gradual movement of Britain toward some form of -union with the Continental nations, as evidenced in the Macmillan -government's approach to a common European market. Finally, there -are doubts about wisdom of United States policy, especially as it is -practiced and elucidated by John Foster Dulles. - -Western Europe was not impressed by the statesmanship of Mr. Dulles -at two serious crises: one arising from the possibility of Western -military intervention in Indochina, and the other emerging after the -collapse of the European Defense Community. Nor was Mr. Dulles's -attitude toward America's closest allies, the British, in the period -of British and French intervention in Egypt calculated to create the -impression that the United States, as an ally, would remain true in -good times and bad. - -Nowhere has British prestige and influence declined more rapidly as in -the Middle East. Yet nowhere are Britain's economic interests greater. - -Recent events have emphasized the economic connection between Britain -and the Middle East. But the ties that connect a group of islands set -in the cold waters of the northern ocean with the arid, sunny lands of -that area were established long before the discovery and exploitation -of oil reserves made the Middle East vital to Britain's economic life. -Sidney Smith, Abercromby, Nelson, Gordon, T.E. Lawrence--a whole -battalion of British heroes won fame in the area. The empty deserts -and clamorous cities have exercised a fascination on Britons for more -than two centuries, have called explorers and scientists, missionaries -and merchants eastward. Nor was the Middle East's strategic importance -to Britain born with oil. Nelson destroyed the French on the Nile, -Kitchener triumphed at Khartoum, and Montgomery fought at El Alamein -because the land bridge between Asia and Africa and later the Suez -Canal were considered vital to the existence of Britain as a world -power. - -Centuries of involvement in the Middle East resulted in a strong -British bias in favor of the Arabs. No such favoritism was extended to -the Egyptians as a people, although certainly the British were at first -as willing as the Americans to trust Colonel Abdel Nasser of Egypt. -This bias, amounting in some cases to a blind affection, played its -part in the formulation of British policy especially in the years when -the state of Israel was taking shape. One example is the fact that the -British consistently underrated Jewish military ability and overrated -that of the Arabs. - -Egypt's seizure of the Suez Canal on July 26, 1956, was a punctuation -point in the long history of Britain's involvement in the Middle East. -No British government could permit control of the canal to be vested in -a single country, especially a country so openly hostile, without going -to the utmost lengths to break that control. Given the shipping and -pipeline facilities of the summer of 1956, the passage of oil tankers -through the canal was essential to Britain's economic life. - -Even when the program for the industrial use of nuclear power has -been completed, oil will remain important to the British economy. -The British government of the day was angry with Colonel Nasser, it -was worried by Soviet infiltration in Egypt. But the primary cause -of Britain's intervention in Egypt was that she could see no other -way of securing freedom of passage through the canal. Reliance on oil -was an elemental fact of Britain's position as a world power; it is -extraordinary that the administration in Washington was so surprised -when Britain took steps to insure her oil supply. - -The influence of Britain in the Middle East at the time of intervention -in Egypt was extensive. Tiny states on the Persian Gulf and on the -south side of the Arabian peninsula behind the Aden protectorate were -managed, if not ruled, by a few scores of officials from London. Iraq, -Britain's firmest friend in the Middle East, benefited from British -technicians and advisers. In Egypt and Jordan and Syria, Britain's -prestige had fallen. But as late as January 1956, when I toured the -Middle East, there was an evident respect for Britons and for British -power, a respect which often was difficult to reconcile with the actual -dimensions of that power. - -In terms of oil, Britain took a great deal out of the Middle East. -From an altruistic standpoint, the return was small. But it is -important to remember that British power there did not take the same -form as in British colonies. The British could not order schools to be -built or irrigation works to be started; they could, and did, advise -such works. - -They were the first power--the United States will be the second--to -encounter the jarring fact that the improvements which a big oil -company brings to a nation promote nationalism. In the end, peoples are -not content with oil royalties, clean company towns, and new schools. -They want all the money, not merely royalties, and they want to build -the towns and schools themselves. - -The decline of British power in the Middle East coincided with -the entry into the area of a new power, Soviet Russia. One of the -oddest aspects of the relations between the United States and the -United Kingdom was the calm--almost the indifference--with which the -administration in Washington viewed the entry of Russia into the Middle -East. As late as November 1956, _after_ the British had destroyed large -numbers of Soviet aircraft and tanks in Egypt, the State Department was -undisturbed by intelligence reports that Russia had agreed to make good -the Egyptian losses with new arms shipments. - -Because of their economic involvement in the Middle East, the British -undoubtedly will persevere in their efforts to maintain influence in -the area. Early in 1957 all the cards were stacked against them. - -One advantage of a long and stormy experience in international affairs -is that it allows a nation to look with equanimity on reverses. After -the withdrawal from Egypt in December 1956, many Britons thought they -would make a comeback in the Middle East. No argument, neither Arab -enmity nor the advent of American and Russian power, could shake this -belief. They did not mean, of course, that they would come back along -the lines of nineteenth-century colonialism. The British recognize -that the days of British rule from the citadel in Cairo are as dead as -Thebes. But with that placid confidence which is one of their most -irritating characteristics, they predicted that in the future, as in -the past, they would play a major role in the area. - -When I protested that this was not the view in Washington or, probably, -in Moscow, a soldier-administrator laughed and said: "Oh _they_ thought -we were finished in 1940." But it is in the Middle East that British -hopes and ambitions conflict directly with those of the United States. -And relations with the United States are another story--or at least -another chapter. - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -IX. _The Atlantic Alliance_ - -STRENGTHS AND STRESSES - - _If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop - was landed in my country I never would lay down my arms--never! never! - never!_ - - WILLIAM PITT, EARL OF CHATHAM - - _His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., - New-Hampshire, Massachusetts-Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence - Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, - Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina, South-Carolina, and - Georgia to be free, sovereign and independent states; that he treats - with them as such; and for himself, his heirs and successors, - relinquishes all claims to the government, property and territorial - rights of the same, and every part thereof._ - - TREATY OF PARIS, SEPTEMBER 3, 1783 - -[Illustration] - - -The alliance between the United States and the United Kingdom is a -paradox. This intimate association that has fought wars and carried out -the most delicate and intricate diplomatic tasks is not based on any -single treaty or agreement. It is a paradox because, although roundly -attacked from the outset by powerful groups in both countries, the -alliance has grown steadily in strength toward a position in which it -is almost invulnerable to political attack. - -This situation is a tribute to the hard-headed appreciation of facts -which lies beneath the political oratory and posturing on both sides -of the Atlantic. For the alliance is not the result of the intrigues -of Anglophiles along the eastern seaboard of the United States or of -the Machiavellian diplomacy of Britons eager for a handout; it is -the result of mutual self-interest. In the dangerous world of the -mid-twentieth century it is the best hope of survival for both nations. - -Americans, in the plenitude of power, often ask one another why they -need alliances, and why, in particular, there should exist any special -relationship with Britain. One way of answering the question is to -consider our situation if the United Kingdom were neutral in the world -struggle with the aggressive totalitarianism of the East. There would -then be no United States Air Force bomber bases in Britain. The British -naval bases with their facilities in Britain and the Mediterranean -would no longer be open to the United States. The United Kingdom would -not be a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The British -divisions that have helped hold Germany since 1945 would have been -withdrawn. British hydrogen bombs and atomic bombs and the long-range -bombers built to carry them would not be on our side. The position -assumed by the United States at diplomatic meetings would no longer -be supported by the leaders of a stable, experienced power still -possessing considerable influence in many parts of the world. - -Finally, the United States could not rely in times of crisis upon the -backing of fifty million people speaking the same language and adhering -to similar political beliefs--people who are resolute, ingenious, and -brave in war, progressive and industrious in peace. - -Certainly the alliance is not to everyone's taste. There are and there -always will be urgings in both countries to "go it alone." There are -politicians and statesmen who would place each nation's reliance on -other allies. But custom, usage, common interests have combined to -create the situation; the problem is to see that the alliance works and -to realize its potential in the world. - -No one would contend that the United Nations or NATO or the South -East Asia Treaty Organization or any one of half a dozen smaller -associations is not important. But examination shows that all these -rest on the basic union of American and British interests. If that -goes, everything goes. - -It follows, therefore, that the popular attitude in Britain toward -the United States and Britain's relationship in international affairs -to the United States is of the utmost importance to both countries. -Understanding it calls for a thorough appreciation of Britain's -position in the world, not as we Americans see it but as the British -themselves see it. - -To begin with, let us try to answer that familiar and inevitable -question: "Isn't there a good deal of anti-Americanism in Britain?" - -If the question refers to personal dislike of Americans as individuals, -the answer is no. Of course if an American in Britain is noisy and -impolite he will be told off. Britons should expect the same treatment -in the United States under similar circumstances. - -Americans as individuals are not disliked in Britain. But an American -must be prepared to encounter searching inquiry and often sharp -criticism about the policies and programs of the United States -government. He will learn that some institutions in the United States -of which we have a high opinion do not similarly impress the British. -Certain groups within British society view various aspects of life in -the United States with reactions ranging from hostility to hilarity. -This is natural. You cannot expect a socialist to be enthusiastic about -capitalism, especially when capitalism is so obviously successful. Nor -can you expect a British conservative to rejoice in the transfer of -world power westward across the Atlantic. - -So, inevitably, there are discussions and debates when Americans and -Britons meet. Long may it be so. For this freedom to argue problems -is the very essence of the alliance. It is a means of ironing out -the difficulties that arise. It also emphasizes the common ground on -which we stand, which, put at its simplest, is a mutual belief in the -principles of democratic freedom. - -In Germany I often encountered men of education and intellectual -probity who were convinced that a modern state should not have a -democratic form of government and that to encourage democracy was -inadvisable, even dangerous. In Britain or the United States one -often meets men and women who rail against the occasional inanities -of democratic government and deplore its weaknesses. But it is most -unusual to meet someone, save a member of the small band of communists -or fascists, who believes that the British or American people could or -should live under any other system. Differences must be worked out and -are worked out under the cover of this common acceptance of democracy. -This belief does not sound impressive until you talk about the same -subject with a middle-class Frenchman, a German professor, or a Soviet -diplomat. - -Although of course there are plenty of people in Britain, as there are -in the United States, who are profoundly uninterested in the alliance -or in any other aspect of international affairs, it can be a salutary -experience to talk about Anglo-American relations with Britons. Often -you encounter candor, honest curiosity, and, sometimes, shrewd judgment. - -Such conversations go a long way toward killing the old idea that -Britons--or, specifically, the English--are an aloof, chilly -lot. Aloofness was and, to some extent, still is a middle-class -characteristic. But, like so many other things in Britain, behavior in -public has changed in the last fifteen years. The time has not come -when Britons in a railway compartment will exchange telephone numbers -and photographs of their children, but the old social isolation is -breaking down. - -The questions and criticisms that the American encounters are a -good sign. They testify to the average Briton's understanding of -the interdependence of the two countries. As long as the alliance -flourishes there will be and should be such exchanges. They are a -source of satisfaction, not offense. - -Moreover, the questions are necessary. There is a dearth of serious -news about the United States in the popular British press, although the -remotest village will be informed of Miss Monroe's chest measurements. -_The Times_ of London, the _Manchester Guardian_, and the _Daily -Telegraph_ do an excellent job of reporting the United States within -the limitations imposed by the paper shortage. The popular press, -however, is something else. - -There are, I believe, three factors that contribute to British -questionings and criticisms about United States policies and -statesmanship. These are: - -(1) McCarthyism, by which the British mean the political attitude -in the United States which begins at a perceptible trend toward -ideological conformity and, at its worst, imitates totalitarian -measures; - -(2) the United States's leadership of the free world, which has been -transferred from Britain in the last fifteen years. Doubts on this -score are fed by statements of American leaders, often belligerent -and uninformed, which raise the question of whether the United States -administration understands either its enemies or its friends; - -(3) the trade competition between Britain and the United States and the -trade barriers to British imports raised by the United States. - -It is difficult to say which of these is the most important factor in -forming British attitudes toward the United States. For a variety of -reasons McCarthyism was certainly the most important in the first five -years of this decade. - -Not many Britons understand the emotional involvement of a large -proportion of Americans in the Far East and its problems. Nor was the -impact of the Korean War upon the United States fully appreciated in -the United Kingdom. Finally, the British, although they stoutly opposed -communism, were never so deeply concerned with communist infiltration -in government. Perhaps they should have been. The point here is that -for a number of reasons they were not. - -Consequently, neither those who report and edit the news in Britain -(with a few exceptions) nor their readers were prepared for -McCarthyism. A good many otherwise well-informed people were shocked -when at the height of the McCarthy period Professor D.W. Brogan, one -of the most stimulating and knowledgeable British authorities on -America, pointed out that there had in fact been a considerable amount -of subversion in the United States government and that there was ample -proof of Soviet espionage. - -The gradual reduction of the Senator's importance and power pleased -the British. This was not because he had been a good deal less than -friendly in his comments about them--they are not markedly sensitive to -foreign criticism. The reason was that many Britons saw in the methods -of Senator McCarthy and some of his associates a threat to the heritage -of individual liberty and equal justice under the law and, ultimately, -to the democratic government that is the common ground on which the -alliance is based. - -The scars McCarthyism left on British popular opinion are deep. Months -after the Senator's star had faded, many people were only too ready -to believe that terror still reigned in the United States and to -discount the presence of a large body of moderate opinion that strongly -disapproved of extremism either of the left or of the right. - -McCarthyism, of course, was a godsend to the British communists in -their efforts to turn the working class and the intellectuals against -the United States. They exploited his methods and his speeches to -frighten those who doubted the strength of American democracy. Their -propaganda was directed chiefly at the industrial workers, whose good -will the United States needs in Britain and, indeed, everywhere in -the world. This, said the Communists, is fascism. This, they said, -is what we warned you would happen in the United States. Look, they -said, here's an elderly general as President and McCarthy running the -country. Doesn't it remind you of Hindenburg and Hitler? they asked. -What freedom would you have, they inquired, in a country where McCarthy -considers socialists the same as communists? How long would your -trade-union organization last? - -This may sound absurd to Americans, but it was dreadfully important, -and it can become dreadfully important again. Senator McCarthy did the -good name of the United States more harm in Britain than anyone else in -this century. - -McCarthy did not have many friends in Britain. But it is symptomatic of -the importance attached to good relations between the two countries by -Britons that at the height of the anti-McCarthy uproar some Englishmen -attempted to point out that after all there were other forces in -the United States and that the wild pictures of fascism rampant in -Washington painted by left-wing journalists were, to put it mildly, -slightly exaggerated. - -Such assurances made little headway. Many Britons, as I have said, -discerned in the Senator a threat to the basic liberties of the -American people and hence to the health of the alliance. Many more -were profoundly ignorant of the real situation in the United States -largely because they are profoundly ignorant of the American system -of government and how it works. There was, finally, the extreme -sensitivity of the British working class to anything that its members -consider to be capitalist reactionary action. In Britain the memories -of the fight against an organized and powerful reactionary group for -the rights of labor are vivid. As we have seen, they are nourished by -the speeches of Labor propagandists and politicians. There is also a -strong flavor of internationalism within the Labor movement. Given -these factors, it was easy enough for many thousands of working-class -people to believe that McCarthy represented the same forces they had -seen arise in Italy, Germany, and Spain to impoverish labor and smash -the power of the unions. - -This group paid little attention to--if, indeed, it even heard--the -arguments of Americans and Britons that, while McCarthy was deplorable, -some measures had to be taken against Communist espionage in the -United States. Such arguments were drowned in the uproar raised by -the left wing in Britain over the plight of some poor devil of a -schoolteacher who had been a member of the Communist Party for a few -months fifteen years ago and who now was being put through the wringer -by Senator McCarthy and his fellow primitives. Finally, the British -public as a whole--and particularly the British working class--was not -so aroused emotionally by the cold war as Americans were, and there was -far less hatred and fear of the Soviet Union. - -American critics of Britain have suggested that if the United Kingdom -had been as deeply involved militarily in Korea as the United States -was, this attitude toward the Communist bloc would have hardened. I -doubt it. The British are accustomed to casualties from wars in far-off -places. They do get angry and excited about casualties among their -troops from terrorism. The hanging of two British noncommissioned -officers by Jewish terrorists in Palestine during the troubles there -produced more public bitterness and animosity than did the grievous -casualties suffered by the Gloucestershire Regiment in its long, -valiant stand against the Chinese in Korea. - -The attacks on British policies and British public figures by -Americans disturb those who are concerned with the future of the -alliance. I do not think that the effect of these upon the general -public is so great as is generally believed. Some newspapers feature -reports of these attacks and reply in editorials that are stately -or bad-tempered according to the character of the newspaper. The -attacks themselves, however, do not produce excessive anger among -ordinary people. To repeat, the British are not sensitive to foreign -criticism. One reason is that they retain a considerable measure of -confidence in the rightness, even the righteousness, of their own -position--a characteristic that has galled Americans and others for -years. (Incidentally, it is a characteristic they have passed on to -the Indians. Mr. Nehru in his high-minded inability to see any point -of view but his own is not unlike the late Neville Chamberlain.) A -second reason is that this generation of Britons has been insulted -by experts. Secretary of State Dulles, Senators McCarthy, Knowland, -and Dirksen can say some pretty harsh things. But, compared to what -the British have heard about themselves from the late Dr. Göbbels or -the various Vilification Editors of _Pravda_ or _Izvestia_, American -criticisms are as lemonade is to vodka. - -Mr. Dulles's unpopularity among the British results not from his -taste for inept phrases but from the belief widely held among leading -politicians and senior civil servants that on two occasions--the -formation of the South East Asia Treaty Organization and the -negotiations with Britain after Egypt had seized control of the Suez -Canal--he told them one thing and did another. Such beliefs strongly -held by responsible people trickle downward. - -This evaluation of Mr. Dulles's diplomacy is one cause for British -worry about the United States's leadership of the free world. The -idea that the British do not accept the transfer of power westward -across the Atlantic is superficial. They may not like it, but they do -accept it. Yet the idea has great vigor. An American editor of the -highest intelligence once said: "These people will never get used to -our being in the number-one position!" I think they _are_ used to it. -But acceptance has not ended their doubts and criticisms about how -we exercise the tremendous power that is ours, or their resentment -of United States suggestions that Britain is finished and no longer -counts in the councils of the West. The British do not mind when -Senator Knowland accuses them of feeding military matériel to the -Communist Chinese. They do mind when in an international crisis the -State Department treats Britain as though she were on the same level as -Greece. - -For, whatever the alliance means to Americans, to Britons it has meant -a special relationship between the two countries under which the United -Kingdom is entitled to more consideration than she often receives. -It was the realization that the United States did not recognize this -special relationship which touched off the wave of criticism and doubt -during the Suez crisis. - -From the welter of words loosed in that period--speeches, Parliamentary -resolutions, editorials, and arguments in pubs--a central theme -affecting relations between Britain and the United States emerged. The -decision of the United States administration to condemn British action -in Egypt and to vote with the Soviet Union against Britain in the -General Assembly of the United Nations smashed the conception of the -alliance held by millions of Britons. This sorry development is quite -unaffected by such considerations as whether the British government -should have ordered intervention or whether the United States -government should have been as surprised by intervention as it was. - -The British regarded the alliance as one in which each partner -was ready to help and sustain the other. They felt that the -administration's actions mocked a decade and a half of fine talk -about standing together. Traveling through Britain early in 1957, I -found "that United Nations vote" was a topic which arose in every -conversation and to which every conversation inevitably returned. -Some could understand the logic of the United States. But very few -understood how, in view of the past, we could bring ourselves to vote -against Britain. - -Whatever Washington may think, the British believe they deserve special -consideration because of their present exertions and past performances. -They point out, accurately, that the United Kingdom has put more men, -money, and matériel into NATO than has any other ally of the United -States. They assert that, although there have been differences between -the two powers, Britain has sustained United States policy in Europe -sometimes, as in the case of German rearmament, at the cost of great -political difficulty. An alliance, they say, should work both ways. - -Britons are thankful for American generosity after World War II. But -their gratitude is affected by a powerful psychological factor often -overlooked by Americans, one that strengthens the British belief that -their country merits a special position in America's foreign policies. -This factor is the British interpretation of the role played by their -country in two world wars. - -It is an article of popular faith in Britain that the nation twice went -to war in defense of smaller powers--Belgium in 1914 and Poland in -1939--and that the United States, whose real interests were as deeply -involved as Britain's, remained on the sidelines for thirty-three -months of the first war and for twenty-seven months of the second war. - -Americans find it tedious to be told by the more assertive Britons how -their beleaguered island stood alone against the world in 1940. The -American conviction that the war really began when the Japanese blew us -into it at Pearl Harbor is equally tedious to Britons. Nevertheless, -the British did stand defiantly alone. They whipped the _Luftwaffe_, -and they took heavy punishment from German bombs. They fought hard, -if often unsuccessfully, in the Western Desert, Greece, Crete, -Abyssinia, and Syria. All this went on while we across the Atlantic -began ponderously to arm and to argue at great length whether the Nazi -dictatorship really was a threat to freedom. - -These events affected those Britons who are now moving toward the -direction of the nation's destinies. The cabinet minister of today or -tomorrow may be the destroyer seaman, tank-commander, or coal-miner -of 1940. However deplorable the attitude may seem from our standpoint -and from the standpoint of some individual Britons, the British people -believe something is due them for their exertions. The wiser leaders, -speaking from both the left and the right, advise their countrymen to -forget the past and think of the future. - -How they will think of their international future is a different -matter. For the first time since 1940 there is now a strong sentiment -in Britain for going it alone. There is also a revulsion against all -forms of international association, starting with the United Nations -and extending to NATO and SEATO. To anyone who understands the pride -and toughness that lie at the center of the British character this is -understandable. They have never been afraid of being alone. - -In considering British dissatisfaction with the place accorded their -country in the American outlook, it should not be thought that this -reflects lack of liaison between the two nations on the lower echelons -of diplomacy. The co-operation between the United States Embassy -officials and the Foreign Office in London ordinarily is very close. So -is the co-operation between the British Embassy diplomats in Washington -and the State Department. To repeat, it is in situations like the -crises over Cyprus and Suez that the British feel they are treated by -the State Department and the administration not as the most powerful -and reliable of allies but as just another friendly nation. - -This concern over Britain's place within the alliance is sharpened by -doubts over the ability of the United States to exercise leadership -in a manner that will secure both the peace of the world and the -maintenance of the interests of the West. - -Such doubts arise generally from the wide differences between what -American policy really is and what various spokesmen for the United -States say it is. Let us consider two statements by John Foster Dulles, -a man who, when he became Secretary of State in 1953, was admired and -trusted by professional British diplomats and by politicians interested -in international affairs. - -At one point Mr. Dulles spoke of "massive retaliation" against any -enemies of the United States in the Far East. The remark made a great -splash in the headlines of the world, and in the view of the British -it was totally useless. The Russians and Communist Chinese leaders, -they argued, realized that the United States had nuclear weapons and -would be prepared to use them in the event of war. As both nations -are dictatorships and as the government controls all communications -media in each country, there was no prospect of Mr. Dulles's warning -being relayed effectively to the Russian and Chinese masses whom it -might conceivably impress. But it was relayed to all those people in -the world, especially in the Asian world, who in any case consider the -United States as a huge, powerful, and possibly aggressive nation. -The British were appalled by the effect of the statement on India. -There, as elsewhere, it was well ventilated by the Communists and other -enemies of the United States as an example of America's devotion to -belligerence. - -Earlier in his busy career as moral lecturer for the West, Mr. -Dulles had spoken of the possibility that the defeat of the European -Defense Community plan in the French National Assembly might provoke -an "agonizing reappraisal" of the United States policy toward Europe. -Again the result was quite different from that desired by the Secretary -of State. The National Assembly rejected EDC, just as everyone -interested in the matter, with the exception of the Secretary of State, -Dr. Adenauer, M. René Pleven, and M. Jean Monnet, knew it would. The -United States did not immediately begin any "agonizing reappraisal" of -its position in Europe because quite obviously it could not do so at -the time. It had to keep its troops in Europe, it had to rearm Germany, -it had to sustain the NATO alliance because these are the essentials of -a foreign policy that is partly the result of American initiative and -partly the outcome of our response to the challenges of the times. - -In both cases it slowly became plain that neither the Congress nor the -people of the United States were prepared for massive retaliation or -even agonizing reappraisal. The reappraisal did start in 1956, but it -was the result of very different factors: the rising costs of nuclear -weapons and the necessity in both Britain and the United States of -reducing armament expenditures and taxes, the change in the tactics -of Soviet foreign policy, the reassurance (largely illusory) given -the West by the summit conference at Geneva in the summer of 1955, -which convinced many that the need for heavy armament expenditure was -receding. This reappraisal may be agonizing, but it has nothing to do -with the one the Secretary of State was talking about. - -The crisis in European affairs caused by France's rejection of EDC -was solved largely by British initiative and diplomacy. Today most -Britons interested in international affairs feel that this feat has -received too little recognition in Washington. Sir Anthony Eden, then -Foreign Secretary, pulled the forgotten Brussels treaty out of his -pocket--or, more accurately, out of the soap dish, for he was bathing -when he thought of it--and hied off to Europe to sell the treaty -to the interested governments as an instrument under which Germany -could be rearmed. Sir Anthony was eminently successful in his sales -talks. Mr. Dulles remained aloof for the first few days, thinking dark -thoughts about the French. He had been advised by high State Department -officials that Eden didn't have a chance of selling the Brussels treaty -idea. When it became evident that Sir Anthony was selling it and was -being warmly applauded even by the Germans for his initiative and -diplomatic skill, Mr. Dulles flew to Europe. It looked very much to the -British as though he wanted to get in on the act. - -Many Britons felt that Mr. Dulles let Sir Anthony and the Foreign -Office do the donkey work in patching up European unity in the autumn -of 1954 and in negotiating a settlement in Indochina that spring. The -Secretary of State and the administration were ready to take a share of -the credit for success, but were only too eager to remain aloof from -failure. Only the patience, experience, and forthrightness of General -Walter Bedell Smith, then Under Secretary of State, enabled the United -States to cut any sort of figure at the conference on Southeast Asia. - -Such a policy of limited liability in great affairs is not in accord -with either the power of the United States or the principles preached -by Mr. Dulles and others. - -Another American phenomenon that annoys and occasionally frightens the -British (and, incidentally, many other allied and neutral states) is -the belligerent loquacity of our generals and admirals. The American -public is not particularly aroused when someone in the Pentagon -announces that we must be on our guard and must build enough heavy -bombers or atomic cannon or aircraft-carriers to blow the Kremlin -to Siberia or even farther. The public is pretty well sold, perhaps -oversold, on defense. Besides, the public is much brighter than the -generals or the admirals or their busy public-relations officers think -it is--bright enough to realize that behind these dire prophecies of -doom, these clarion calls for more weapons, the services may be having -some trouble in squeezing the treasury. The citizen reads the first -few paragraphs and turns to the sports pages to see what Mantle did -yesterday. - -The situation is far different in the United Kingdom or in France or -Italy or even Germany, to name only our allies. - -The British people live packed on a relatively small island, and it has -been estimated that six hydrogen bombs dropped in Britain would be the -knockout. Consequently, the people do not like loose talk about nuclear -bombing. They have a shrewd suspicion that they, and not the talkers, -will be the first target. - -Such apprehensions may be exaggerated. But there is sound thinking -behind British insistence that such announcements by our military -spokesmen damage the cause of the West and the good name of the -United States among our allies and, equally important, among the -growing number of states now neutral or near neutral in the struggle -between East and West. For many reasons, geographical, military, -political, even religious, these states abhor war and violence. -Russian propagandists recognized this attitude at the outset of the -cold war and have played upon it with great skill. And they have been -helped immeasurably every time Senator Blowhard or Admiral Sternseadog -suggests that we should blow hell out of the Russians or the Chinese. - -These manifestations of combativeness may be helpful in reminding the -Russians of United States power. But the Russians are not our primary -concern: we are their enemies, whatever the surface policy of the -Soviet government. Our primary concern in this new period when the cold -war is being continued by more complex and subtle means than blockades -and _coups d'états_ is the new nations we have helped bring into being. - -It is in relation to this approach, I believe, that the British -question our judgment. Particularly those officials and politicians -who deal with foreign affairs are not immediately concerned with the -prospect of Communist revolution in Italy or France. They estimate -that the leaders of the Soviet Union would avoid such upheavals in -the present state of world affairs because revolution would sound the -alarm bells in every Western capital and prevent the Soviet Union from -accomplishing a more important objective: the steady weakening of the -regional alliances--NATO, SEATO, the Baghdad Pact--which have been -laboriously constructed by the United States and the United Kingdom -to contain Communist aggression and to provide a safer, richer life -for the peoples of the allied states. Simultaneously, the Soviet -Union, through diplomatic, political, and cultural agencies, will make -every effort to pull the neutrals, great and small--India, Egypt, -Indonesia--onto their side. - -It is in this arena, one where diplomatic skill and economic assistance -are more important than military power, that Britain believes the West -must exert its strength. Both diplomats and politicians are convinced -that in the next five years there must be a thorough overhaul of the -political planning and military arrangements made by the West in the -period 1949-55. They question whether this can be done if the principal -emphasis in defense circles in the United States remains on the -prospect of an imminent war. - -A point arising from this discussion is that the British themselves are -unused to the spectacle of a soldier or sailor pronouncing on issues -of national policy. In Britain the warrior, retired or serving, is -kept in his place. If the government wants the advice of Field Marshal -Montgomery it asks for it and gets it in the privacy of the cabinet -rooms. - -In the field of foreign affairs the British maintain that the -tremendous physical power of the United States and our immense -resources do not automatically guarantee that in the exercise of our -power we will always be right. Leaders of both parties feel that the -United States government, particularly President Roosevelt and his -advisers, misread Soviet intentions lamentably in the period 1942-6, -and that consequently Allied strategy strove only for victory and not -for a stable peace after victory. The political tides that sweep the -United States every two years give American foreign policy an aspect of -impermanence, even instability, which weakens United States influence -in the world. There is a feeling that United States diplomacy would -benefit from fewer press conferences and more private negotiations. - -Naturally, these criticisms can be irritating, especially if they are -delivered in the Pecksniffian tones characteristic of many British -officials. But history will judge, I believe, that this transfer of -power westward across the Atlantic has been carried out with great good -sense and dignity. It may also hold up to scorn the present generation -of Americans if they fail to avail themselves not only of the physical -strength but also of the diplomatic experience and skill of a nation -wise in the ways of the world. This is not a time for Americans to be -too proud to listen. - -Such considerations belong to the stratosphere of Anglo-American -relations. An American living in Britain will soon be brought down to -earth in any conversation with British businessmen. - -Repeatedly he will be asked why the United States bars British imports -through high tariffs, why there is discrimination against British -bids for contracts in the United States, why Senators and Congressmen -belabor the British on one hand for trying to expand their trade with -the Soviet Union and on the other hand do all they can to block the -expansion of British trade with the United States. - -"Trade Not Aid" is the British goal in their economic relations with -the United States, which is Britain's second-best market. In 1954 we -bought goods valued at £198,800,000 ($556,640,000) from Britain. But -this represented only 6.6 per cent of the total United Kingdom exports, -and in 1938, long before the export drives, when Britain still counted -on her overseas investments to help finance her own imports, the -percentage was 5.4 per cent. - -So, although both nations recognize this trade's importance to -Britain--it is her principal source of dollar earnings--the increase in -the trade has been relatively small. - -The inability of British exporters to sell competitively in the United -States because of tariff protection provokes sharp criticism. The -Republican administration of 1952-6 was attacked in the editorial -columns of newspapers that are usually most friendly to the United -States, for, despite the reassuring speeches of President Eisenhower, -British industry still claimed it was being denied access to American -markets by the tariff restrictions. - -Certainly the tariff does bar many British imports. It may be, however, -that many of them, perhaps a majority, would not be able to compete -with similar American products. There is a great deal of ignorance -about the American market among British industrialists and some -reluctance to assume the long and complex job of analyzing a particular -market. I know of one manufacturer of women's handbags who has built up -an extremely profitable business in the United States largely through a -thorough study of the market on frequent visits to this country. I also -know of other larger firms that have failed to exploit their potential -American market because they would not change their methods or their -product to meet the market's demands. Beyond this, they could not -understand the importance of servicing their product and of maintaining -continuous relations with middlemen and buyers. - -We have seen that Aneurin Bevan and other politicians of the extreme -left are wedded to the idea that successive Labor and Conservative -governments have danced to Washington's tune. There are many who would -deny undue political or diplomatic influence by the United States on -Britain; indeed, many in America would say the shoe was on the other -foot. But no one could discount the growing influence of American -customs and ways of living upon the people of Britain. Part of this -is the direct result of the popularity of American movies and the -continued presence of American troops. Part comes from the fact that -British manufacturers are rather belatedly turning out the household -devices which have revolutionized living in the United States. This and -the ability of the new working class and the new middle class to buy in -abundance has led to a change in the living conditions of millions. - -Ignorance of the political system and international objectives of the -United States is still fairly widespread. In some important respects, -however, there is today among the people of England a greater knowledge -about the people of the United States than there ever was in the past. - -Before the entry of the United States into World War II, for instance, -there was a strong conviction in Britain that ethnically we were the -same people. The mass of Britons expected us to be as British in our -background and national outlook as the people of Australia or New -Zealand. The war corrected that impression. The army that came to -Britain was composed of men of diverse ethnic stocks, and the people -among whom they lived learned that Americans could have names like -Magliaro, Martinez, or Mannheim and still be good Americans. This -shocked both the Americanophobes who thought of us as "Anglo-Saxons" -unchanged since the administration of Thomas Jefferson and their -political representatives who envisaged us as openhearted and -openhanded former colonials only too eager to help out the "mother -country." But in the long run this clearer, more realistic view of -modern America has had a good effect on relations between the two -countries. - -Similarly, the presence among Britons of several million young men -representing the United States removed some illusions built up by -years of steady attendance at the local movie house. We were not all -rich, we were not all gangsters or cowboys, we did not all chew gum. -Americans worked just as hard, worried just as much, and had the same -hopes and dreams as Britons did. The period of the big buildup in 1943 -and 1944 before the Normandy invasion was marred by saloon brawls -between Americans and British and by friction on both sides. But this -is outweighed, I believe, by the fact that the same period contributed -greatly to the two peoples' knowledge of each other. - -When the United States Air Force sent forces to Britain at the peak of -the cold war, it was assumed by many that this process would continue. -But the present contingent is minute compared to the millions of -Americans who moved through Britain during World War II. Moreover, its -members are more professional. They do not have the opportunity or -the inclination for close contact with British homes. They want what -professional soldiers want the world over: a bellyful of beer and a -girl. They get both. - -The senior officers of the United States Air Force units in Britain and -well-intentioned Britons, zealous for the improvement of relations -between the countries, spend a great deal of time worrying about the -behavior of the airmen and their treatment by British civilians. The -time is ill spent. It is the nature of young men far from home, in or -out of uniform, to drink, to wench, and to fight. Here and there they -may encounter tradesmen eager to make an extra shilling out of the -foreigner. But such profiteering does not seem to be on the same scale -as that practiced by the good people of Florida or Texas or Kansas upon -their own countrymen in uniform during World War II. - -In many superficial respects Britain is more Americanized than before -the war. There are hamburger joints near Piccadilly Circus and -Leicester Square, and the American tourist can buy a Coke in most -big towns. A pedestrian in London sees windows full of "Hollywood -models" and "Broadway styles." In the years immediately after the war, -working-class youth copied the kaleidoscopic ties and broad-shouldered, -double-breasted plumage of the American male. Today, still following -styles set in America, he is adopting the more sober appearance of -the Ivy League, and the button-down shirt has made its appearance -in High Holborn. This is a curious example of styles traveling west -and then east across the Atlantic, for the Ivy League dresses as it -believes--or, rather, as its tailors believe--English gentlemen dress. -Now the working-class young man in Britain is imitating "new" American -styles that are themselves an imitation of the styles followed by his -own upper class. Whatever the fashion in the United States, this class -clings manfully to the dark suit, the starched collar, and the derby in -London, and to tweeds in the country. - -Obviously the movies made in America have had an enormous effect on -the British way of life. For a number of reasons the effect has not -been altogether good. Accuracy in portraying the American scene is not -one of Hollywood's strong points. A couple of generations of young -Britons matured nursing an idealistic view of the United States as a -wonderland where hippy stenographers lived in high-ceilinged houses, -wore luxurious clothes, drove big, powerful cars, and loved big, -powerful men. There was almost invariably a happy ending to the minor -difficulties that beset hero and heroine of an American film. - -Realism was restored to some extent by the advent of the American -soldier. Very few of the GI's resembled Mr. Robert Taylor, and their -backgrounds were quite different from those portrayed on the screen. -There were, of course, some fast talkers who could and did make a pig -farm in Secaucus sound like a ranch in California, but, on the whole, -the American soldiers came from civilian surroundings no more exciting -than Leeds or Bristol. The movie-going public now views pictures about -home life in America with a more skeptical eye. - -The series of American films about juvenile delinquency, drug -addiction, dipsomania, and other social evils created a problem for -those interested in presenting a balanced view of the United States -to Britons. Great efforts were made by the United States Information -Service to demonstrate that the ordinary American did not begin the -day with a shot of heroin or send his boy to a school that would make -Dotheboys Hall seem like a kindergarten. - -These efforts were inspired to some extent by the manner in which the -Communists exploited such films as genuine reflections of life in the -United States. Both the comrades and the USIS were wasting their time. -The British public can be agonizingly apathetic, but it is not stupid. -I never met anyone who thought these films represented the real America -or who believed the Communist contention that they did. The fact is -that the ability of the United States to make and show such pictures -testifies to the strength of America. When the Russians produce an -epic about the slave labor that built the White Sea-Baltic canal or an -exposé of the corruption that riddled Soviet industry in the war and -immediate post-war years, we can begin to worry. - -The theater since the war has exercised an important influence in -bringing America to Britain. Starting with _Oklahoma_, a series of -Broadway musical shows dominated the London stage for a decade. One -of the minor occupations of British critics is grumbling about the -shortage of "real" British musicals. But even the grumpiest have been -won over by the music of Richard Rodgers and Irving Berlin and the -lyrics of Oscar Hammerstein II. - -British taste is not always in accord with our own. _South Pacific_ was -not the critical success in London that it was in New York. The British -loved _Guys and Dolls_--they had lost their hearts to the late Damon -Runyon in the thirties--but they did not like _Pal Joey_, in which John -O'Hara gave a much more realistic picture of the seamy side of American -life. - -But the accent has been on musicals. Very few serious American plays -have successfully invaded London. In this field the traffic seems to be -the other way. - -The comics, invariably described in left-wing publications as "American -Horror Comics," have been another medium for the spread of American -culture in Britain. Like the movies, they have their critics, and, -like some movies, they are used by the Communists to demonstrate what -fearful people the Americans are. - -The reader will notice that British Communism, although of almost -negligible importance as a political party, is active in promoting -differences between the two nations. The Communists know very well that -the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is -the strongest link in the Western chain; if they can break it, the rest -will be easy. - -I have been at pains to point out the issues over which governments and -peoples on both sides of the alliance differ and those aspects of our -national behavior which occasionally worry and concern the British. -It should be emphasized that the areas of ignorance in the British -attitude toward the United States are of minor importance compared to -the ignorance of the average Frenchman or the average Indian. British -misconceptions about the United States can be corrected and Communist -attempts to exploit these misconceptions defeated because the British -public does know something about the United States. This knowledge may -be slight, but it is enough to build on. - -Over the years there has been a change in attitude on the part of -young people which I find disturbing. When I first came to England -in the late thirties I encountered a good deal of curiosity about the -political and social aspects of the American system. Young people -wanted to know about American opportunities for education, about -technical schools, about the absence of a class system. Today such -interest as is displayed centers mainly upon the material factors in -the United States. - -Perhaps what I encountered nearly twenty years ago was the lingering -afterglow of that period in our history when we stood as a promise and -a hope to the peoples of the world. Certainly many of the egalitarian -aspects of American society admired in pre-war Britain have been slowly -introduced into British society. A cynic might even suggest that they -know us better now. At any rate, I meet fewer young people who are sure -they would like to live in America and be Americans. - -Ignorance of the United States lies at the root of many of the -criticisms of our country one hears in Britain. This is being overcome -to some extent by the work of the USIS, but the task is a serious one. -Beyond such obvious difficulties as the shortage of newsprint which -limits the amount that responsible newspapers can print about the -United States, there is another important obstacle to better relations. -This is the fact, that although Americans travel to Britain each year -in tens of thousands, the prospect of the average Briton seeing our -country is remote. The British treasury doles out dollars with a sharp -eye on the gold and dollar reserves, and a large percentage of the -transatlantic travelers are businessmen selling British exports to the -United States. This is something, but it is not enough. - -The industrial working class is the most numerous and politically -important in Britain. It is also the least informed about the United -States. Scholarships for Oxford and Cambridge students at Harvard -or Princeton and visiting professorships for English dons do not, -as a rule, help this class. The ideal would be an exchange system -under which hundreds of working-class men and women from Bradford, -Manchester, Liverpool, and the back streets of London were given the -opportunity to see America plain. The English Speaking Union in the -United States and the United Kingdom is attempting to bring this about. - -Only through such contact, I believe, could the picture of the United -States built up by some Labor Party politicians be erased. There -remains a dangerous lack of understanding not only of our political -system but of what mass production and greater productivity in the -United States have done for the average workingman here. Newspaper -articles, television series, books help, but it is a thing that must be -felt as well as seen. It can be felt only in the United States. - -The attention paid to differences and difficulties should not obscure -the value that Britons place on their relationship with Americans. -Materially, Britain's interest in maintaining the relationship is much -the greater; undoubtedly they need us more than we need them. But here -we must remember the national character of Britain. The British have -been an independent people for a thousand years. Even when the fortunes -of the nation have been at their lowest ebb, the people have been -outspoken in defense of what they considered their rights. The earliest -Continentals who traveled to England lamented the blunt independence of -the yeomen and the absence of subservience among the noisy city crowds. - -Some sociologists have concluded that all this has changed and that -the industrial revolution and other social changes have transformed -the British from the rowdiest and most belligerent of nations into -law-abiding conformists. The national boiling-point, they report, is -high. - -Certainly a superficial view of the British working class in its high -noon of full employment, security, high wages, and new housing would -seem to confirm this conclusion. Personally, I doubt that the turbulent -passions which sent Britons out to singe the beard of the King of Spain -and to make rude noises when Hitler proposed peace in 1940 are spent. - -Phlegmatic, often apathetic, sentimental but not emotional, they are -a people capable of great outbursts of political action. They should -not therefore be considered a people prepared to follow docilely and -blindly where the United States leads. The failure to recognize the -presence in British character of this fundamental, unruly independence -even when it was flourished in their faces is one of the principal -reasons why President Eisenhower and his administration were surprised -by Britain's intervention in Egypt in the autumn of 1956. Granted that -the President was involved in the election campaign, it is mystifying -that a man of his experience in dealing with the British failed to see -the signs pointing toward independent action. - -As early as August of that year letters in _The Times_ urged an -independent course for Britain and France in the Middle East. One -letter signed by Julian Amery, then a Conservative back-bench Member -of Parliament, ended with the reflection that if the two countries -followed such a course and took action independently of the United -States, it would not be for the first time. That _The Times_ would -give space to letters of this sort was a sign that the Establishment -recognized the ideas they contained. In September, when the Chancellor -of the Exchequer visited Washington, he made it clear to the most -important of his hosts that Britain would not take the Egyptian seizure -of the Suez Canal lying down--that if this was to be a struggle for -Britain's existence, his country would prefer to go down with the guns -firing and the flags flying. During that same month Sir Anthony Eden -had written to President Eisenhower in terms which to anyone familiar -with British official phraseology said that if Britain did not get a -satisfactory settlement of its difficulties over the Canal through -the United Nations, other action would be necessary. In speech after -speech, especially at the Conservative Party Conference on October -13, the leaders of the government carefully stated that they did not -exclude the use of force as a means of settling the Suez problem. - -The British government badly miscalculated the Eisenhower -administration's reaction to intervention in Egypt. It expected -benevolent neutrality from a trusted ally. It got pressure and -criticism. But this miscalculation may have been natural under the -circumstances, for it can be argued that Britain did not expect the -United States administration to be surprised. It had, after all, given -abundant direct and indirect warnings that force might be used as a -last resort. How much of the administration's anger, one wonders, -was based in the realization that it had been told what was going to -happen--if only it had stopped to read again and think? - -British diversions from co-operation in policy over Suez or anywhere -else are, to a considerable extent, the result of the circumstances -governing the existence of the United Kingdom--circumstances that are -as different from our own as could be imagined. Here is an island -absolutely dependent on world trade. Westward lies the continental -United States, with a continent's natural resources at its disposal--an -almost completely self-sufficient power. The difference is inescapable -and permanent. We must expect the British to react sharply whenever a -vital part of their trade is endangered. In 1956 the harsh equation was -"Suez equals oil, oil equals British production, British production -equals the existence of the United Kingdom." Likewise, we must expect -the British to expand, within agreed limits of strategic restrictions, -their world trade. This is particularly true of trade with Communist -China. - -In this connection we might remember that, to the British, diplomatic -recognition is not a mark of approval, and that if there is a -possibility of dividing the Soviet Union and the Peiping regime, it -can be exploited only through diplomatic channels. Diplomatic attempts -to wean China away from Russia may fail. But they are worth trying. -Can they be tried successfully without the co-operation of both the -United States and the United Kingdom? I think not. In any case, the -task this generation faces of preserving Western freedom in defiance -of the Communist colossi is difficult enough without discarding this -diplomatic weapon. - -An alliance flourishes when it is based on realism. Realism involves -knowing your ally and understanding his motives. In war the strategic -reasons for an alliance are laid bare; the motives are there for all -to see. In peace, when international relations are infinitely more -complex, the task of maintaining an alliance is consequently more -difficult. In this chapter I have cited salient aspects of American -political life and government policy which have irritated and angered -the British. The differences over the Suez crisis were the last and -most important of these. That issue generated a great deal of anger, -and some harsh and brutal truths were spoken on both sides. I think -that from the standpoint of the future of the alliance this was a good -thing. It forced the British, I believe, to adopt a more realistic -attitude toward the United States and United States policy, and it will -lead them to take more, not less, diplomatic initiative in the future. - -There will be other differences in foreign policy between the two -countries, for differences are inevitable in the relationship between -two parliamentary democracies. Indeed, they are a strength. It is -because the British are an independent, outspoken, hard-headed people -that they are good allies. It is because British governments think for -themselves and enjoy the services of an experienced, incorruptible, -intelligent civil service that their support is welcome and necessary -in the contest with the East. - -And we know--at least, we should know--that if the worst comes the -British are stout fighters, ready, once every effort to preserve peace -has failed, to fight with all they have and are. - -I carry with me as a talisman the memory of a conversation at Supreme -Headquarters, Allied Powers Europe, during the darkest days of the -war in Korea. An American general officer, a man of the highest -professional qualifications, suggested to a small, intimate group -that, with more and more American power diverted to the Far East, the -Russians might jump in Europe. - -"It will be pretty tough for you people," he told a British lieutenant -colonel, an amiable, rather rakish character. "They'll offer you a -chance of getting out. If you don't take it, they'll tell you they'll -blow London and half a dozen other cities off the map. They'll probably -tell the French the same sort of thing. What do you think your people -will do?" - -"What do you think we'll do?" the lieutenant colonel answered. "We'll -tell them to go to hell." - -Beneath the political bickering, the unrelenting self-criticism, the -pessimism there exists now, as there did in 1940, a fiery spirit. The -British will never be vassals. Nor will they ever be easy allies. But -if this alliance fails, there is little left on which an enduring peace -can be built. - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -X. _The British Economy and Its Problems_ - - _Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen - six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure - twenty pound ought and six, result misery._ - - CHARLES DICKENS - - _It would be madness to let the purposes or the methods of private - enterprise set the habits of the age of atomic energy._ - - HAROLD LASKI - -[Illustration] - - -We must now take a closer look at the British economy as it is today. -This is a big subject, one well worth a long book. It is my purpose -in this informal estimate of our ally to sketch the fundamentals of -the present economic situation and to deal briefly with some of the -factors in it. Earlier we have encountered the Trades Union Congress -and the emergence of a new working class. We have seen that Britain is -changing behind the mask of tradition. In this chapter we will see that -the change in the national economy is progressing perhaps even more -rapidly than the change in the structure of society and politics. And, -of course, all three changes are closely related and interdependent. - -The British Empire, which half a century ago stood at the apex of its -economic power, was built on coal. Largely because of the extent of her -coal resources, Britain got a head start in the industrial revolution, -which originated in England. An organized coal-mining industry has -existed in Britain for over three hundred years, or three hundred years -longer than in any European country. Not only was there enough coal to -make Britain the world's workshop, but until about 1910 British exports -dominated the world export market. In the peak production year of 1913 -the industry produced 287,000,000 tons, exported 94,000,000 tons, and -employed 1,107,000 workers. Contrast these figures with those for 1955: -221,600,000 tons produced, 14,200,000 tons exported, 704,100 workers. - -Three centuries of mining means that the majority of the best seams -are worked out. Each year coal has to be mined from deeper and thinner -seams. Each year the struggle to raise productivity becomes harsher. -There are huge workable reserves; one estimate is 43,000,000,000 tons, -which, at the present rate of consumption, is more than enough to last -another two hundred years. But this coal will be increasingly difficult -to mine. Moreover, certain types, such as high-quality coking coal, -will be exhausted long before 2157. - -In the reign of King Coal all went well. Britain built up a position in -the nineteenth century which made her the world's leading manufacturer, -carrier, banker, investor, and merchant. By the turn of the century, -however, other nations, notably the United States and Germany, were -challenging this position. Nevertheless, Britain was able to withstand -competition up to the outbreak of World War I through her huge exports -of coal and cotton textiles and through her ability to take advantage -of the general increase in world trade. - -Coal and the industrial revolution, it should be remembered, gave -Britain something more than a head start in production: they enabled -her to train the first technical labor force in the world. The traveler -in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Asia will soon realize that -the British Empire and British influence of half a century ago were -built not on gunboats and redcoats but on the products of British -factories and on the bewhiskered expatriates, many of them Scots, who -tended locomotives in Burma and sawmills in South America. They, too, -as much as the booted and spurred heroes of Kipling, were builders of -empire. This advantage, at least, Britain has not lost. Today she still -possesses a large force of highly skilled labor. - -The economic problems that developed into a whirlwind in the forties of -this century first became serious in the years after the close of World -War I. British textiles had to compete in Asia with textile products -from India and Japan which were produced at a much lower cost because -of low wages. Oil and coal from new European mines challenged Britain's -lead in coal exports. At the same period there was a fall in the demand -for many of the heavy industrial products that British factories had -supplied to the rest of the world; locomotives, heavy machinery, cargo -ships. The politico-economic dogma of self-sufficiency developed -in nations that for long had been British customers. They began to -protect their own growing industries with tariffs, quotas, and other -restrictions. - -But the effect on the British economy of this decline in exports was -cushioned by income from investments overseas and by a substantial -improvement in the terms of trade. During the twenties and early -thirties British industry began to contract for the first time in -centuries. Unemployment averaged 14 per cent between 1921 and 1939. -By September 1939, however, the economy, stimulated by the armament -program, increased production, and greater industrial investment at -home, began to improve. Britain faced the Second World War on a secure -economic basis. Indeed, there were persuasive gentlemen in the London -of that Indian summer of peace who tried to persuade you that economic -strength alone could win the war. - -When Americans think of the effect of World War II on Britain we are -apt to think in terms of bomb damage and ships sunk. Certainly these -were important parts of a generally disastrous picture, but the whole -is much more impressive than the parts. - -The inability to continue industrial maintenance and make replacements -under the hammer of war, shipping losses, and bomb damage ran down -the British economy by about £3,000,000,000. At the present rate of -exchange this amounts to $8,400,000,000. The present cost of rebuilding -ships and houses and factories is, of course, infinitely higher due to -the upswing in labor costs and material prices since 1945. - -This loss was accompanied by a drastic change in Britain's world -trading position. To begin with, she lost almost all her overseas -assets--those investments which had cushioned the shock of the -falling export market and whose income had largely paid for imports. -The terrible appetite of war--a ship torpedoed, a division lost, a -factory bombed--devoured them. Over £1,000,000,000 worth of overseas -investments ($2,800,000,000 at the current rate of exchange) were -sold to pay for war supplies. Of this amount, £428,000,000 (about -$1,198,400,000) represented investments in the United States and Canada. - -Yet even this expenditure of the carefully husbanded investments, the -results of thrift and financial foresight, did not suffice to pay -for nearly six years of war. Britain also accumulated overseas debts -to the amount of £3,000,000,000, or, at current rates of exchange, -$8,400,000,000. When the money was borrowed, the pound sterling was -pegged at $4.03 and the dollar equivalent of the external debt was -closer to $12,000,000,000. - -The emphasis on armaments and the priority given arms-producing -industries, the arrears of industrial maintenance and replacement, the -concentration of manpower in the services and industries of national -importance for the winning of the war, and the shortage of shipping all -reduced Britain's export trade during the war years. By 1944 exports -had fallen to less than one third of their 1938 volume. - -This meant that, in some cases, nations whose economy had been less -strained by the war were replacing British sellers in these markets. -In other instances, nations long dependent on British exports began to -make their own products. When the British were prepared to return to -normal export trade, the markets were not so extensive as they had been -before the war. - -The war affected Britain's financial position in two other respects. At -its end the real value of the gold and dollar reserves of the nation -had been reduced to about one half of the pre-war level. But the -physical destruction of the war had increased Britain's dependence, and -that of other sterling-area nations and other countries, upon supplies -of all kinds from the United States. Yet the dollar earnings by these -countries were not enough to pay for their supplies. - -Finally, and perhaps most important from the standpoint of a country -that must live by trade, the terms of trade changed. The price of raw -materials imported into Britain rose sharply after the war. By 1948 -about 20 per cent more goods had to be exported than in 1938 to pay for -the same amount of imports. - -As a result of these changes in her position, Britain emerged from the -war as an empty-handed victor. The banker of the world was deeply in -debt. The market places of the world were crowded with other nations, -and her own goods were few in number and out of date. Shabby, tired, -undernourished, the island people, not for the first time, began the -long road back. - -The road chosen was longer and more arduous than it might have been -because the British, government and people, Socialist and Tory, did -not wish to abandon their position as a world leader. War might have -impoverished them, circumstances might have made them dismiss the maid -and do their own washing up, but to an incurious world they turned a -brisk and confident face. For years the world had recognized that the -British never knew when they were licked. Now, it seemed, they did not -know when they were broke. - -They knew, all right. On visits to London during the years I spent -chiefly in Russia and Germany I would meet friends in the services or -the ministries. "We're in a hell of a mess, old chap," they said, "but -we'll work out of it somehow." No one seemed to know just how; but no -one doubted it would be done. - -The first problem then--and it is the first problem today--was the -balance of payments. Exports had to be increased quickly, for the terms -of trade continued to be against the United Kingdom. It was in the -years 1946-51 that American aid counted most. Loans from the United -States and Canada, it is estimated, paid for about 20 per cent of the -imports of the United Kingdom between 1946 and 1950. - -Simultaneously, the drive to increase exports made headway. The -country, and especially the industrial worker, was, in the modern -jargon, made "export-conscious." - -"Export or die"--the slogan may have seemed exaggerated to some, but -it was, and is, an accurate statement of Britain's position. British -exports had recovered their pre-war volume by 1947, only two years -after the end of the war. Three years later they were two-thirds higher -than in 1947. Thereafter, as Germany and Japan began their remarkable -economic recovery, exports rose more slowly. But they did rise, and by -1954 they were 80 per cent higher than in 1938. - -The upswing in exports was accompanied by two other processes. -The pattern of industrial production for exports began to change. -Textiles were no longer a dominant export product. Instead, emphasis -shifted to the engineering industries: electric motors, factory -machinery, electronic equipment, precision instruments, chemicals, and -shipbuilding. At the same time, imports--including importation of some -raw materials essential to the export trades--were severely restricted, -and consumer rationing at home directed British production to foreign -markets. - -Five years after the war Britain had made great strides toward -recovery. There was in that year a surplus of £300,000,000, or -$840,000,000, on the balance of payments. But the Korean War, which -began in June 1950, was a serious setback for Britain's economy. The -country, resolved to play its part, began to rearm. At the same time -there was a world-wide rush to stock raw materials, and this forced -up the prices of the imports Britain needed for her export trade. -The satisfactory balance of payments in 1950 became a deficit of -£403,000,000 by 1951. - -Import prices began to fall after 1951, and in the next three years -there was a balance-of-payments surplus. This recovery was accompanied -by a steady rise both in industrial production and in the real national -product. - -The average rate of increase in industrial production from 1946 to -1954 was 5 per cent, while the real national product increased by 3 -per cent. The nation used this increased output, first, for exports; -second, to make good the capital losses of the war years by new -investment; and, finally, for rearmament. Those who wonder at the -rocketing German economic recovery after 1949 and the relative slowness -of British economic advance should ponder the fact that in 1950-3 -defense expenditure gobbled up _approximately half_ of the British -total output. - -The rationing and other restrictions held over from the war held -personal consumption at bay until 1954. Wages rose, but these were -offset by a sharp increase in prices, which by 1952 were about 50 per -cent above those of 1945. After that year, however, earnings rose more -rapidly than prices. With the end of wartime controls after 1952 the -standard of living, especially that of the industrial working class, -rose perhaps more rapidly than it had ever done before. - -The increase in production, the end of rationing, the rises in wages -and prices, and the boost in internal consumption all took place -against a background of full employment. In the United Kingdom -unemployment averaged less than 2 per cent of the working population in -1946-54. - -This, then, is the short story of British recovery since the war. -By the summer of 1956 the Central Statistical Office could announce -that from the beginning of 1946 through the end of 1955 the national -output of goods and services had increased in volume by one third. -Reckoned in monetary value, the increase was even greater: the figure -for 1946 was £8,843,000,000 ($24,480,400,000), while for 1956 it was -£16,639,000,000 ($46,589,200,000). The difference between the increase -in value and the increase in production is due to the continuous rise -in prices since 1946. - -These are impressive figures. But no one in authority in Britain -believes that the nation can rest on them. The double problem of -maintaining exports abroad and defeating inflation at home remains. - -The two are closely related. In 1950 Britain had grabbed 26 per cent of -the world market for manufactured goods. German, Japanese, and other -competition has now reduced the British share to about 20 per cent, the -pre-war figure. To maintain it, Britain must continue the export drive, -and this, in turn, involves the attack on inflation. - -Inflation began at the time when the British people were emerging from -years of war and post-war austerity. There was more money, and suddenly -there was plenty to buy as one by one the controls on raw materials, -building licenses, food, and clothing disappeared. By 1955 cars and -other products that should have gone for export were being sold in bulk -in Britain, and gasoline was being imported for them. Industries that -should have been almost totally devoted to export trades were producing -for a lucrative home market. - -The "squeeze" applied by the Conservative government early in 1956 -to halt the buying boom is not, as so many Britons hope, a temporary -affair. Until British industry can increase its production and adjust -itself to the demands of world-wide competition, the country will have -to restrain its home purchases in the interests of overseas sales. The -preservation of the present standard of living depends directly on -exports. If this hard fact is rejected by the British people, then the -economy will deteriorate rapidly. - -Those interested in the future of Britain, both Americans and British, -have been looking at the nation's industry for a decade and sadly -shaking their heads. It is too traditional, it is unenterprising, its -workers don't work as hard as the Germans or the Japanese, it is -restricted by the trade unions or the employers, monopolies and trade -rings stifle it. There is a little truth in each of these accusations. -But if all were true or even one completely true, how is the sharp -increase in volume of production and the general economic recovery to -be explained? - -Early in 1956, about eleven years after the last Allied bomber flew -over the Ruhr, German steel production outstripped British steel -production. This caused a good deal of "viewing with alarm" in Britain, -much of it by people who failed to realize that before the war Germany -yearly produced about five million more tons of steel than Britain. -The health of the British economy today does not rely primarily on its -output of basic products such as steel or coal but on the nation's -ability to sell its manufactured products. - -If the number of employees is taken as a criterion, the most important -of these manufacturing industries are: (1) engineering, shipbuilding, -and electrical goods, with 1,695,000 employees; (2) motor and other -vehicles, 934,000; (3) textiles, 898,000; (4) food, drink, and tobacco, -654,000; (5) precision instruments and other metal goods, 531,000; (6) -clothing, 524,000; (7) metal manufactures, 519,000; (8) manufacture -of wood and cork and miscellaneous manufacturing industries, 472,000; -(9) paper and printing, 445,000; (10) chemicals and allied industries, -402,000. - -All of these industries contribute to the export drive, including food, -drink, and tobacco. There has been no overwhelming demand for such -Northern delicacies as toad-in-the-hole or Lancashire hot pot from -British markets, but the demand for Scotch whisky seems to be holding -up reasonably well. - -These industries are the meat and potatoes of the British economy. -Since the war there has been a steady increase both in production -and productivity (output per man in industry) in these industries. -Fortunately for Britain, the greatest rises in over-all production have -taken place in the engineering-shipbuilding-electrical-goods group, the -vehicles group, and the chemicals group. - -Productivity was a more serious problem. Lack of maintenance and -capital investment during the war, antiquated machinery, the -understandable physical weariness of a labor force that had been -working at top speed since 1939 all contributed to a relatively low -rate of output per man year in industry compared with the United States. - -In 1948 the Labor government took an important step to meet the problem -when it formed the Anglo-American Productivity Council. Its goal was to -increase productivity in Britain through study of manufacturing methods -in the United States. Teams representing management, technicians, and -shop workers went to the United States to study American methods. They -returned to boost British productivity. - -The effort did not stop there. An independent body, the British -Productivity Council, was established in 1952 to continue the work. -Represented on it are the British Employers' Confederation, the -Federation of British Industries, the Trades Union Congress, the -Association of British Chambers of Commerce, the National Union of -Manufacturers, and the nationalized industries. Under the aegis of -the Council, Local Productivity Committees have been formed and the -exchange of information and visits between groups from industrial firms -have been encouraged. - -The Council is a good example of the British approach to a national -problem in modern times. The nation's difficulties have gradually, -but not entirely, eased the old enmities between some employers and -workers. Aware of the extreme seriousness of the situation, they are -working together to boost productivity, and they are making headway. -Employer-worker consultation is becoming the rule. When the rule is -broken by either side there is trouble. - -The increase in productivity has been steady. Taking 1948 as the base -year with a figure of 100, output per man year in industry rose to 105 -in 1949. Save for 1952, when there was a slight relapse, the figure has -improved steadily ever since. - -Production has shown a corresponding rise. The general index of -industrial production, using 1948 as the base year of 100, rose from -114 in 1952 to 121 in 1953 and then jumped to 136 for 1955. But -production leveled off in 1956. As that year ended, the expectation -was that 1957 would see a new rise in production as the capital -investment of the previous five years began to show results. - -These figures are one answer to questions often asked abroad: "Why -don't the British boost production? Why don't they work?" The answer is -that they have boosted production and they are working. Early in 1957 -the factory where Jaguar cars are made was almost entirely destroyed -by fire. Great efforts by both management and labor put the factory -back into production two weeks later. Production and productivity are -rising fastest, of course, in the new industries such as electronics. -But the economy is burdened by elderly industries such as coal-mining, -where extra effort by labor and management cannot, because of existing -equipment and conditions, produce dividends in production as they would -elsewhere. - -Britain's long predominance in both industry and commerce, especially -during the last half of the nineteenth century, fostered a lack of -enterprise and lethargy in management that is highly unsuitable to the -nation's present economic situation. This attitude lingered until the -period after the last war when the situation became plainly desperate. -Changes of styling and packaging abroad failed to impress British -business. "We make a much better product than some of this flashy -foreign stuff," one was told loftily. "Let them have their fancy -wrappings." - -Memories of the golden days of the last century also encouraged a -conservative attitude toward change in business methods or the routine -of production. Some of the larger industries, however, emerged from -the war intent on drastic changes, and others, less progressive, were -forced to change by the increased competition for export markets and by -the new necessity of using the restricted quantities of raw materials -to greatest advantage. - -Industrial engineering, including work study, work simplification, -plant layout, and planned maintenance, has become a primary concern of -industrial management. Many of the managers--the managerial class is -about half a million strong--are much more interested in new methods of -industry than are the workers. Any innovation that seems to disturb -the happy condition of full employment and high wages can provoke -discontent among the workers. The more progressive unions are doing -their best to explain and advocate change. It is in the middle ranks -of labor's officer class, the ranks most interested in the emotional -support of "the lads," that the strongest resistance to change is -located. - -Management in industry, therefore, is beginning to assume some of the -importance and standing that it attained long ago in the United States. -Facilities for training in management are increasing, although the -majority of today's managers never received any special training. Trade -unions, employers' associations, and individual concerns are pressing -forward with training schemes. - -There is a relationship between this development and the arrival -in British society of the new middle class. Many of the leaders of -this class are in management work in industry and commerce. As their -position is solidified by Britain's increasing reliance on the export -industries they serve, their social and economic importance is bound to -increase. In the past their social position has been well below that of -the lawyers, doctors, soldiers, and civil servants who were the elite -of the old middle class. That, too, is changing. - -Gross fixed capital formation recently has been at about 14 per cent of -gross national expenditure. By 1954 its volume was 17 per cent above -that of 1938 and about 30 per cent greater than in 1948. - -In 1951 and 1952 the government responded to the pressing needs of -defense and exports by taking measures to curtail certain kinds of -investment. In 1953 and 1954 the policy was reversed, and incentives -for investment were written into the Budget. But the wave of home -buying in 1955 made it necessary for the government again to impose -restraints on investment. In particular it sought moderation in -capital outlay for municipal and local building and improvements and a -deceleration of investment programs in private industry. - -These and other actions taken at that time were the result of the -Conservative government's preoccupation with the balance of payments, -the nation's gold and dollar reserves, the inflationary trend in the -national economy, and the need for investment and expansion in the -export industries. These objectives will dominate the economic approach -of any government, Socialist or Tory, that achieves power in Britain in -the foreseeable future. - -British industry has many problems of finance, of production and -productivity, of management. But to an outsider it appears that the -gravest problem of all is the indulgence by the two main partners in -industry, labor and management, in restrictive practices. By preventing -the most effective use of labor, technical ability, or materials, or -by reducing the incentive for such use, these practices gravely damage -the industrial efficiency of the country. Restrictive practices seem to -many competent observers a far greater danger to the British economy -than strikes. - -It is important to understand that such practices are almost as -prevalent among management as among labor. Each group has the same -basic motivation. They seek a reasonably stable economic life free from -the strains and stresses of competition. The psychological explanation -may be unspoken desire to return to the old easy days of Britain's -unquestioned economic supremacy. - -The employers' restrictive practices are less widely advertised than -those of the workers. Their classic form is the price-fixing agreement -which insures that even the least efficient manufacturing firms will -have a profit margin. To maintain the price-fixing system, employers -maintain private investigators and courts of inquiry; they can and do -discipline the maverick who breaks out of the herd. - -One expression of the employers' approach is the tender of contracts -identical to the last farthing. Britain in 1955 lost the contract -for the Snowy River hydroelectric plant in Australia largely because -the eight British firms among the twenty that submitted tenders all -submitted exactly the same amount. In New Zealand nineteen out of -twenty-six companies bidding for an electric-cable contract submitted -identical figures. - -The practice is embedded in British industry. Legislation to combat it -was introduced into the House of Commons in 1956, but objective experts -on the subject believed the legislation fell far short of the drastic -action necessary. - -Restrictive practices are only too evident in the larger field of -relations between the worker and the boss. The importance of problems -in this area of conflict is multiplied by their political implications -and by the fact that Britain, like other countries, is entering a new -period of industrial development. The industrial use of nuclear energy -for power and the advent of automation can produce a new industrial -revolution in the homeland of the first industrial revolution. But -this cannot improve the British economy--indeed, the revolution cannot -really get under way as a national effort--without greater co-operation -between organized labor and employers and managers. - -Throughout this book there have been references to organized labor and -to the Trades Union Congress. Now we encounter them in the special -field of industrial relations. - -Organized labor in Britain is big. There are 23,000,000 people in -civil employment, and of these over 9,000,000, nearly the whole of -the industrial labor force, are union members. They have an enormous -influence on the economic policy of any British government; they are, -according to Sir Winston Churchill, "the fourth arm of the Estate"; in -the view of Mr. Sam Watson, the tough, capable leader of the Durham -miners, they are "the largest single organism in our society." - -But organized labor is not a single force, an orderly coalition of -unions. It is an extraordinary mixture. Politically some of its leaders -are well to the right of the left-wing Tories although they vote -Labor. One important union and a number of smaller ones are dominated -by Communists. The Transport and General Workers Union has 1,300,000 -members; the National Amalgamated Association of Nut and Bolt Makers -has 30. Some unions are extremely democratic in composition. Others -are petty dictatorships. Many are not unions in name. If you are -civil-service clerk, for instance, or even a member in good standing -of the Leeds and District Warp Dressers, Twisters and Kindred Trades, -you join an association. - -The Trades Union Congress is the most powerful voice in British labor. -Only 186 of about 400 unions are affiliated with it, but as these -186 include almost all the larger ones, the TUC represents nearly -8,000,000, a majority of the country's union members. - -The outsider's idea of the typical trade-unionist is a horny-handed -individual in a cloth cap and a shabby "mac." But there are 1,500,000 -white-collar workers, including 500,000 civil servants, among the -unionists affiliated with the TUC. - -The tendency of the white-collar workers to affiliate with the TUC -probably will continue. In March of 1956 the London County Council -Staff Association decided to apply for affiliation. We can expect -that the clerical workers in this type of union will exert increasing -influence within the TUC and upon its Council. The TUC's claim to -represent the industrial working class thus is being watered down by -the admission of the white-collar workers' unions. As this class of -worker generally believes that the industrial workers' pay has risen -disproportionately and that inflation has hurt the office worker more -than it has the industrial worker, the new composition of the TUC may -produce sharp internal differences. At any rate, the old position of -the TUC as the spokesman only for the industrial worker is a thing of -the past. - -The TUC is a powerful voice. But it is only a voice. It has great -responsibilities and little formal power. It can, for instance, -attempt to moderate demands for higher wages and urge restraint, but -it cannot prevent any union from pressing such demands. The TUC can -advise and conciliate when a strike begins, but it cannot arbitrarily -halt one. When two member unions are in a dispute--and such disputes -can seriously damage both the national economy and labor's position in -British society--the TUC can intervene, but too often its intervention -is futile. Each union is self-governing. The TUC's influence, -nonetheless, is enormous. The restraint shown by the major unions -after the war and during the war on the question of wage increases -was largely due to the influence of the TUC. The general growth of -responsibility on the part of many unions can also be attributed, to a -great extent, to the missionary work of the TUC. - -In recent years the General Council of the TUC has moved toward -assuming a stronger position in the field of industrial strikes. It has -tried to show the workers that the strike is a two-edged sword that -wounds both worker and employer. The TUC maintains that the strike, -the workers' great weapon, should not be used indiscriminately because -of the damage a strike by one union can do to other unions and to the -national economy. - -At the 1955 TUC conference the General Council won acceptance of a -proposal that it intervene in any case of a threatened strike when -negotiations between the employers and the unions seem likely to break -down, throwing the members of other unions out of work or endangering -their wages, hours, and conditions. This is a significant step forward. -Formerly the TUC could move only after negotiations had broken down and -a deadlock had been reached. In other words, the TUC acted only at the -moment when both sides were firmly entrenched. - -But this advance does not improve organized labor's position in regard -to the problem of restrictive practices, a problem that is as serious -as strikes or threats of strikes. - -The _Daily Mirror_ of London, that brash, vigorous tabloid which is -the favorite newspaper of the industrial working class, published an -inquiry into the trade unions in 1956. Its authors, Sydney Jacobson and -William Connor, who conducts the column signed "Cassandra," traced the -origin of restrictive practices back to 1811, when bands of workers -known as the Luddites broke into lace and stocking factories and -smashed the machinery. "The suspicion toward new methods has never -entirely died out in this country," they wrote, "and although sabotage -of machinery is rare (but not unknown) the protests have taken a new -direction--the slowing down of output by the men themselves and the -development of a whole series of practices that cut down the production -of goods and services." - -Any reader of the British press can recall dozens of instances of -restrictive practices by labor. One famous one concerned the floating -grain elevator at Hull, an east-coast seaport. This elevator, which -cost £200,000 ($560,000), was kept idle for two months because the -Transport and General Workers Union insisted that it should be worked -by twice as many men as the Transport Commission thought necessary. The -Transport Commission, incidentally, represented a nationalized industry. - -And there was the union that fined a milkman £2 for delivering milk -before 7:30 a.m. - -The unions are quick and brutal in their punishment of those who break -their rules. Indeed, today, when there is full employment and the -unions generally enjoy a prosperity and power undreamed of by their -founders, they are more malicious than in the old days when they were -fighting for their rights. The principal weapon against an offending -worker is to "send him to Coventry." No one speaks to him; he eats -and walks home alone. Ronald Hewitt, a crane-driver, endured this for -a year. He had remained at work, obeying his union's rules, when his -fellow workers, who belonged to another union, went out on strike. -Hewitt was a person of unusual mental toughness. Another worker sent to -Coventry committed suicide. - -Many of these punishments are the outcome of situations in which -unofficial strikes send out the workers. Those who remain and who are -punished are accused of being "scabs" because they obey the union's -rules. - -All union leaders publicly acknowledge the great importance of -increased productivity in British industry. But the methods of -boosting productivity often seem to some union leaders to strike at -the principles for which they have fought so long. For instance, an -increase in output is regarded by the veterans solely as a traditional -means of increasing the profits of the employers. Moreover, increases -in productivity often involve the introduction of new machines and -layoffs for some workers. To the short-sighted, appeals for greater -productivity thus seem calls to smash the job security that is the -fetish of the industrial working class. This sort of union leader -just does not seem to grasp, or to want to grasp, the principle that -increased productivity is a general good benefiting workers, employers, -and unions. - -Efficiency is not the sole god of British industry, as is evident when -one studies the weird system known as "demarcation" in the shipbuilding -industry. To install a port light under this system requires the -labor of a shipwright to mark the position of the light, a caulker to -indicate and make the hole for the light, another driller to make the -surrounding holes, and another caulker to fix the bolts and chain. In -addition, a foreman for each of the trades supervises the operation. -Interunion disputes arising out of such unnecessarily complicated -operations frequently result in a stoppage of work and a delay in the -filling of export contracts. - -The most alarming example occurred at Cammell Laird's, a shipbuilding -company, in 1955 and lasted until well into 1956. New ships were being -built--for dollars--and the strike began over a difference between -woodworkers and sheet-metal workers. The new vessels were to have -aluminum facing in the insulation. Formerly the woodworkers had done -this sort of work, and they claimed rights over the new job. But the -sheet-metal workers said that, as aluminum was metal, the job was -theirs. The two groups and management finally reached an agreement. -Then the drillers of the Shipwrights' Union entered the affair and a -new strike developed. - -The construction of the ships was delayed for six months and more. The -ability of Cammell Laird's or other British shipyards to offer foreign -buyers a firm date for completion of ships became a matter of doubt. -About 400 workers were dismissed as redundant. About 200 strikers found -work elsewhere. Thousands of other jobs were jeopardized. There was not -the slightest indication that those who inspired the strike took much -account of its effects on their country's future. - -As a result of the application of the demarcation principle in -shipyards--you drill holes in wood, we drill holes in aluminum--wage -costs are often as much as 6 per cent higher than normal. - -The innate conservatism of union leaders and the rank and file in -shipyards, industrial plants, and factories has been proof against the -missionary work of critics extolling the far different approach of -American labor. The leaders are often unmoved by figures which show -that increased productivity by the American labor force has resulted -in a far greater national consumption. In many cases neither the union -leader nor the union member will accept the idea that new machines and -new methods mean more efficient production, lower costs, and higher -wages. - -British union leaders often counter that the American worker has no -memory of unemployment and depression. This is, of course, untrue. -Indeed, in many instances political and economic it seems that British -labor has made too much of its experiences, admittedly terrible, in the -depression of two decades ago. American labor, by eagerly accepting -new processes and machines, has attempted to insure itself against the -recurrence of a depression. British labor has not. - -Industrial disputes affect the British economy's ability to meet the -challenge of the new industrial revolution. Disputes between union -and union are especially important. In 1955 there were three national -strikes. All were complicated by interunion friction. - -Another complicating factor in industrial relations is the slow -disappearance, under the pressure of increased mechanization, of the -system of wage differentials in British industry. These differentials -represented a reasonable difference between the wages of skilled and -unskilled workers. With their disappearance, skilled workers in one -industry have found themselves earning less money than unskilled -workers in another. One cause is the ability of the big "general" -unions to win wage increases. Another is the practice of demanding wage -increases solely on the basis of the rising cost of living. - -Naturally the disappearance of differentials has led to hot disputes -among workers and unions. In this atmosphere it is difficult for either -the union leaders or the employers to urge increased productivity -and harder work. "Everyone is furious with everyone else," an -industrialist in the Midlands said. "They start with me, but they are -pretty mad at each other, too." - -In this interminable war between labor and management, the former -wields a weapon of enormous potency--the strike. Labor acknowledges -its disadvantages, but the right to strike is fiercely guarded. The -whispered suggestion that strikes might be made illegal unites the -labor movement as does nothing else. Labor needs the strike as its -ultimate weapon: the hydrogen bomb of British industrial relations. And -because of the peculiar economic conditions in Britain, the employer -finds himself almost weaponless. He can still dismiss an unsatisfactory -employee, if he has a good reason and can convince the employee's union -that it _is_ a good reason. But dismissal does not mean much in an era -of full employment. - -Right-wing critics on both sides of the Atlantic have contended for a -decade that British economic difficulties are rooted in strikes and -other industrial disturbances. There is something in this, but, as H.L. -Mencken would have said, not much. - -From 1946 through 1954 the days lost through strikes in Britain ranged -from a low of 1,389,000 in 1950 to a high of 2,457,000 in 1954. Due -to strikes in the newspaper and railroad industries and on the docks, -1955 was an exceptionally bad year: 3,794,000 working days were lost. -The figures look big, and of course it would have been much better -for Britain if they were half as large. But let's put them into -perspective. The figure for 1955, admittedly high, represents a loss of -less than one day's work per man in every five years' employment. The -loss to production through industrial accidents is eight times as high. - -Both sides know that a strike is a costly business: costly to labor, to -management, to the union, to the nation. In many cases the threat of a -strike has been enough to force the employers to give way. Inevitably, -the higher cost of production resulting from the new wage rates is -passed on to the consumer. The merry-go-round of rising prices, rising -wages, and rising costs spins dizzily onward. Overseas the buyer who is -choosing between a Jaguar or a Mercedes finds that the price of the -former has suddenly risen, so he buys the German car rather than the -British one. This is what the economists mean when they warn British -labor and industry about pricing themselves out of the export market. - -As we have seen, the industrial worker is doing pretty well in Britain, -even if the rise in prices is taken into consideration. The average -weekly earnings for all male adult workers, according to the records -kept by the Ministry of Labor, show a rise from £3 9_s._ 0_d._ in -1938 to £10 17_s._ 5_d._ in 1955--an increase of 215 per cent. The -coal-miners who were earning £3 2_s._ 10_d._ in 1938 are now earning a -weekly wage of £13 18_s._ 6_d._ The figure does not represent wealth -by American standards, for it amounts to approximately $38.99. But it -is high pay by British standards, and when the low cost of subsidized -housing and the comparatively low cost of food are taken into account -it will be seen that the British miner is living very well. - -The miner's view is that he does a dirty, dangerous job, that he has -never been well paid before, and that if a union does not exist to win -pay rises for its members, what good is it? The miners and the union -members in the engineering industry belong to strong unions able to -win wage increases by threats of a strike. Once these increases are -granted, other smaller unions clamor for their share of wage rises. The -merry-go-round takes another turn. - -Government attempts to urge restraint, through the TUC, upon the unions -customarily fall afoul of the snag that each union believes that it -is a special case and that although other unions can postpone their -demands for higher wages until next year, it cannot. So one union -makes a move and the whole business begins again. If the increase is -not granted, there is a strike or a threat of a strike. The national -economy suffers, class antagonism increases, and export production is -delayed. For such is the interdependence of the British industrial -machine and so great is the drive for exports that any industrial -dispute that reaches the strike stage inevitably affects exports. - -A modern strike is like a modern war. No one wins and everyone loses. -A classic case is the Rolls-Royce strike of 1955, which involved not -only employers and union labor but, eventually, the Roman Catholic -Church and the Communist Party. The cause of the strike was a conflict -between restrictive practices and a stubborn workman named Joseph -McLernon, who worked at the Rolls-Royce factory at Blantyre in Scotland -as a polisher of connecting rods. - -The workers in Joe's shop feared that, in view of reduced work, some of -their number might be let out. So they agreed to share their work by -limiting bonus earnings to 127 per cent of the basic rate. McLernon, -however, refused to limit his overtime. He polished as long and as -hard as ever and refused the assistance of another worker. For this, -McLernon was reprimanded by his union, the General Iron Fitter's -Association. - -Joe had been working for Rolls-Royce for twelve years. The firm is -considered a good employer. But its managers were men of conviction. -They objected to the union picking on Joe and said so. Three months -later the union expelled McLernon. - -Enter the Communists with many an agonizing cry about the solidarity -of labor. They demanded that Rolls-Royce fire McLernon on the grounds -that he no longer belonged to the union. The employers refused, and -immediately all the other polishers stopped work. Joe kept right on. By -the end of the day the entire factory labor force of 600 men was out on -strike. - -The Amalgamated Engineering Union's local branch then entered the -picture. After a few days another 7,500 workers at the Hillington and -East Kilbride factories had struck. - -Was it a strike? Certainly, said the General Iron Fitter's Association. -The Electrical Trades Union, dominated by Communists, recognized -the strike as official in accordance with its rule of recognizing -all strikes involving electricians as official until they are -declared otherwise. The Amalgamated Engineering Union, after much -soul-searching, decided to back the strike and approved strike pay -for its members. Negotiations between the Employers' Federation and a -committee representing the various unions got nowhere. - -The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Glasgow then issued a pastoral letter -warning the workers against Communism. McLernon is a Catholic. But so -were many of the workers who wanted him fired. - -The strike dragged on for seven weeks. The strikers lost over £700,000 -($1,960,000) in wages. By the time the strike was over, no one on -the strikers' side could disentangle the objectives of the various -groups that had called it. Rolls-Royce export contracts were delayed. -The Royal Air Force failed to get delivery on time of some important -machines. Other industries also involved in the export trade and in -national defense were slowed down. The unions had maintained solidarity -at a tremendous cost. But when the strike collapsed, Joe McLernon was -still at his job, polishing away. He alone could be termed a winner. -Rolls-Royce, the unions, industry, and the nations were losers. - -The Communist intervention in the Rolls-Royce strike symbolized its -current role in Britain. This is to win control of key positions in the -British unions so that the Communist Party will be able to paralyze -British industry in the event of an international crisis or a war. To -achieve this ultimate objective, the Communists obviously intend to -establish a stranglehold on the communications and defense industries. - -This is the real Communist danger in Britain. Active political -campaigning by the Communist Party has been fumbling, misdirected, -and notably unsuccessful. Neither the old colonel from Cheltenham -who classes the sprightly dons of the Labor Party with "those damned -Bolshies" nor the Bible Belt Congressman who confuses British Socialist -politicians with Russian Communists is on the right track. The danger -of Communism in Britain lies in the unions. So does the defense against -the danger. - -The pattern of Communist success is uneven. Communists lead the -Electrical Trades Union, ninth-largest in the country, with a -membership of about 215,000. Because electricity is everywhere in -modern industry the union's members are everywhere. And although -probably not more than one in every sixty members of the ETU is a -member of the Communist Party, the party completely runs the union. - -Here is a curious sidelight on Communist methods. The ETU is weak -financially, perhaps the poorest of the ten largest unions. But it -spends money freely on "education." The ETU has its own Training -College at Esher, where its more ambitious members can be trained to -further the interests of the Communist Party and to silence the voices -of critics and doubters. Although the non-Communist members of the ETU -consider the college as a valuable device for the advancement of the -worker, the institution plainly is a training school for Communists and -their creatures in their prolonged war against the British economy. - -One of the basic concepts of British Socialism is the solidarity of -the working class. Acceptance of this concept makes it difficult for -the industrial worker to think of the Communist, who comes from the -same town, speaks with the same accent, wears the same clothes, as an -enemy. There is a pathetic ingenuousness about workers who try to tell -the visitor that the Communists "are just the same sort of blokes as us -except they've got a different political idea." - -The _Daily Mirror_ team in its portrayal of the trade unions devoted a -chapter to "The Communist Challenge." Significantly, a large part of -the chapter provided an incisive and illuminating illustration of just -how the Communists move to gain control of a union. - -Where else are the Communists strong? They are in control in some areas -of the National Union of Mineworkers. Arthur Horner, the Secretary of -the Union, is a Communist. But they are being fought hard in the NUM by -men like Sam Watson, who heads its Durham region. - -The connection in the Communist mind between the control of the NUM and -the ETU is obvious. Control of these two unions would enable Communists -to halt the flow of coal and electric power to Britain's factories. Not -much more is needed to cripple a nation's economy. - -But the Communists press on. They establish cells in the aircraft -industry. They work industriously at fomenting trouble on the -docks, especially in the ports--such as London, Liverpool, and -Glasgow--through which most of the exports pass. Already the threat to -block coal and power can be augmented with a threat to halt defense -production and exports. It is improbable that the Communists are now -powerful enough to carry their program to a triumphant conclusion. But -they are on their way. - -How do they work? Very much as they do elsewhere in Europe. In Britain, -as in Germany or Italy or France, the Communists care very little -about better pay or better working conditions for union members. Their -objective is power, power that will enable them to push the interests -of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. And, to repeat, they have -learned that for them power in Britain is obtainable only through -control of the unions and not through Parliament. - -The Communists try to establish cells in every important factory in -Britain. These cells maintain contact with the district secretary of -the Communist Party, who knows from the cell exactly what sort of work -the factory is doing. Little wonder that Soviet visitors are incurious -about the details of British production when they are shown British -factories. The information obviously is safely filed in Moscow. - -When an industrial dispute develops in a factory, the Communists seek -to widen the area of dispute and to involve as many unions as possible. -They also do their best to bring the recognized non-Communist leaders -of organized labor into disrepute. One method is to organize support -for demands that the Communists know the management cannot accept. -When a strike organized on this basis fails, the Communists point out -to the union members that the leadership is weak and hint that a more -"dynamic"--i.e., Communist--direction would benefit the union. - -The Communist drive to break the power of the unions and thus to -spread industrial discontent is assisted by the character of some -union leaders. In many instances leaders are elected to hold their -jobs for life, and after years of power they become dictatorial. It -is a favorite Communist charge that the union bosses are "in" with the -employers, and that as long as their jobs are safe they will do nothing -to upset the present situation. - -In the trade unions, as elsewhere in British society, the war alliance -with the Soviet Union inspired sympathy with the people of Russia -and admiration for their resistance to the Nazis. These sentiments -altered under the impact of the cold war, and they altered faster at -the top levels of the labor movement than anywhere else. The Trades -Union Congress in 1948 attacked Communist activities in the unions in -a pamphlet called _Defend Democracy_ and followed this with another -pamphlet, _Tactics of Disruption_. In 1949 the TUC quitted the World -Federation of Trade Unions, which is dominated by the Communists, and -helped establish the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. -A year later the TUC barred Communists and fascists as delegates to the -annual conference of Trades Councils. - -Meanwhile, the leaders of the TUC strove to explain the true nature of -the Communist challenge to free unions, and to emphasize the refusal -of the Communists to accept democratic principles in the unions or -anywhere else. - -All this has had some effect, but not enough. The TUC has thus far -failed to shake the average industrial worker out of his lethargy. Safe -in the security arising from full employment and high wages, he does -not take the Communist challenge seriously. And now that many of the -basic objectives of the labor movement have been won, he does not work -so hard to protect them as he did to win them. - -In this atmosphere Communist successes are inevitable. For it is the -members of a Communist cell in a union or a factory who are prepared -to talk all night at a meeting, to vote solidly as a bloc in support -of one Communist candidate while the non-Communists divide their votes -among three or four candidates. In many cases the non-Communists will -not even turn out to vote--it is too much trouble, especially when they -can watch the "telly" or go to the dog races. - -The official leadership of the unions faces a formidable task. It -must first educate the rank and file on the true nature of Communism. -After that, it must organize anti-Communist action in the unions. Here -they encounter a real obstacle in the minds of the rank and file. In -the past, reaction in Britain and elsewhere has lumped Communists, -Socialists, and trade-unionists together. To many a unionist, -anti-Communism seems, at first inspection, to be an employers' trick to -break the solidarity of the working classes. Of course the Communists -do all they can to popularize and spread this erroneous idea. - -The Communists in Britain seem to have been moderately successful in -establishing themselves as a national rather than an international -force. When Frank Foulkes, the General President of the Electrical -Trades Union and a member of the Communist Party, asserted: "This -country means more to me than Russia and all the rest of the world put -together," few challenged this obvious insincerity. - -We must accept, then, that Communism within the trade unions is a -far more serious threat to the welfare of Britain than Communism as -a political party. It is on hand to exacerbate all the difficulties -in the field of industrial relations which have arisen and will arise -during a change from obsolete economic patterns to the new patterns by -which Britain must live. - -The introduction of automation--the use of machines to superintend the -work of other machines--and of nuclear energy for industrial power are -two of the principal adjustments that British industry must make. Each -will involve labor layoffs and shifts in working population. These are -important and difficult processes, and with the Communists on hand to -paint them in the darkest colors there will have to be common sense, -tolerance, and good will on the part of both management and labor. In -particular, the rank and file of British industry must be made aware -how important the changes are to the average worker and his family. -There is little use in publishing pamphlets, however admirable, if -the man for whom they are intended will not stir from in front of the -television set. - -A comparison of some of the long-range economic plans laid down by -successive governments, Socialist and Tory, with the general attitude -of the man in the street leads to the conclusion that, whereas -government has been "thinking big," the governed have, in the main, -been "thinking small." There is in Britain little recognition of or -admiration for the truly impressive program for industrial use of -nuclear energy. By 1965 Britain expects to have nineteen nuclear power -stations in operation. These will be capable of generating between -5,000 and 6,000 megawatts, or about a third of the annual requirement -for generating capacity. It is estimated that the operation of these -nineteen stations can save the country eighteen million tons of coal -each year. - -In addition to this basic program, the Atomic Energy Authority will -build six more reactors to produce plutonium for military purposes and -power for civil purposes. The total cost of the basic program alone -will be about £400,000,000 ($1,120,000,000) a year in the early 1960's. - -The leaders of both Conservative and Labor parties believe that the -program is vital to Britain. Indeed, the foresight, imagination, and -ambition of the men at the top on both sides is one of the reasons why -the British economy, despite all its present weaknesses and future -difficulties, is a good bet to pull through. What is lacking is the -ability of any leader or party to evoke from the country the energetic -response necessary to meet and defeat the weaknesses and difficulties. - -One instance of this lethargy on the part of either employers or -the industrial working class is their failure to respond to wider -educational advantages, especially in the field of technical knowledge. -Recognizing the necessity for greater technical education, the -government intends to spend £100,000,000 ($280,000,000) on technical -education from 1956 to 1961. Will the government and the people get -their money's worth in the present atmosphere? - -Industrial research is on a much smaller scale in Britain than in the -United States. For years British industries thought it was cheaper -to buy patents abroad than to do their own research. As a result, -British technicians were lured abroad. Even today many industries are -indifferent if not openly hostile to the idea of "expensive" industrial -research. - -The attitude of the new working class to education, technical or -otherwise, has been described earlier in this book. The boys, in the -eyes of their parents, need no more schooling than that given them -before they can leave school and go to work in the factory. The girls -need a little more if they are to graduate into the ranks of clerical -workers, but many girls, attracted by the independence offered by jobs -in mill or factory, leave school with their brothers. - -Let me sum up some conclusions about the British economy: - - _The drive for exports is not a passing economic phase but a permanent - condition. If wages and prices cannot be held down, Britain will be - priced out of her markets, and the standard of living of the working - class and of all other classes will fall._ - - _The ability of the country to meet the adjustments made necessary - by the revolution in the sources of industrial power and by the - introduction of new industrial techniques is gravely endangered by - the restrictive practices of both employers and labor, by interunion - bickering often arising from these practices, and by the prolonged and - vicious Communist attack on the trade-union structure._ - - _Neither among the middle class nor among the working class is there - sufficient awareness of the critical situation in which Britain finds - herself._ - -This is a somber picture. It is relieved, I think, by our knowledge -that the British are a surprising people. They are going through a -period of change in their society and of adjustment to their society's -place in the comity of nations. The very fact that they are changing -argues for them. The Britain of 1938 could not exist in the modern -world. The Britain of 1958 can be at the top. - -Granted the indifference of the working class to politics and its -fierce reaction against anything that seems to threaten its newly won -ease, granted the middle class's penchant for the past, its out-worn -ideas--these are still a great people, tough, energetic, at heart -politically mature. And they believe in themselves perhaps more than -they are willing to admit. Their character, more than coal or sea power -or fortuitous geographical circumstances, made them great in the past. -It can keep them great in the future. - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -XI. _The British Character and Some Influences_ - - _I am a great friend to public amusements, for they keep people from - vice._ - - SAMUEL JOHNSON - - _I have never been able to understand why pigeon-shooting at - Hurlingham should be refined and polite while a rat-catching match in - Whitechapel is low._ - - T.H. HUXLEY - -[Illustration] - - -Obviously there is great deal more to British society than political -and economic problems, although a casual visitor might not think so. -Visiting pundits find themselves immersed in the profundities of the -Foreign Office or following the ideological gymnastics of Socialist -intellectuals. Consequently, they depart firmly convinced that the -British are a sober, rather solemn people. These islanders, as a -matter of fact, are an exceptionally vigorous and boisterous lot and -have been for centuries. Their interest in diplomacy, politics, and -commerce is exceeded only by their devotion to cricket, beer, and -horse racing. Nor should we allow the deadening background to bemuse us -about the essential character of the British. The misty mournfulness -of the English countryside, the bleak inhospitality of a Midland city, -the eternal sameness of suburbia have failed to tame the incorrigible -robustness of the national character. - -To know the British today one must know not only their government -and politics, their industry and commerce, but other aspects of life -through which the national character is expressed. The press, the -schools, the military services, sports and amusements, pubs and clubs -all are part of the changing British world. Each has been affected -by changes in the class structure. Each, in its way, is important to -Americans and their understanding of Britain. Opinion about the United -States in Britain is based largely on what Britons read in their -newspapers. And, whether or not Americans admire the class distinctions -inherent in the public-school system, perhaps a majority of the leaders -with whom the United States will deal in the future will be products of -that system. - - -THE PRESS: - -THE THUNDERER AND THE TIN HORNS - -A graduate of Smith, home from a stay in London, asked: "How can you -read those London newspapers? Nothing but crime and sex--I couldn't -find any news." Years ago Webb Miller, the great United Press -correspondent, advised me: "Read _The Times_ every day, read all of it, -if you want to know what is going on in this country and the world." -Both Webb and the young lady from Smith were right: the British press -contains some of what is best and a great deal of what is worst in -daily journalism. - -Most Americans and many Britons, when they speak of the press, mean the -London daily and Sunday newspapers. The London papers concern us most -because they are national newspapers circulating throughout Britain and -influencing and reflecting opinion far beyond the boundaries of greater -London. One newspaper published in the provinces, the _Manchester -Guardian_, may be said to have national--indeed, world--standing. One -of the most influential, interesting, and well-written newspapers, it -can also assume on occasion a highly irritating unctuousness. - -There are a large number of provincial newspapers--about a hundred -morning and evening dailies and Sunday papers, and about eleven hundred -weeklies. Many of them are read far more thoroughly than the London -"national" paper that the provincial family also buys. - -Not long ago a British cabinet minister who represents a constituency -in the western Midlands told me his constituents "got their news -from the BBC, their entertainment from the London dailies, and their -political guidance from the principal newspaper in a near-by provincial -city." Other politicians have referred to the same pattern. - -Because most London daily and Sunday newspapers circulate all over the -British isles, circulation figures are high by American standards. The -_News of the World_, a Sunday newspaper that built its circulation on -straight court reporting of the gamier aspects of British life, had a -record circulation of about 8,000,000 copies. Recently its circulation -has dropped slightly, a development that puzzles Fleet Street, for -there is no lack of sex, crime, or sport--or interest in them--in -Britain. - -Of the London dailies, the largest in circulation is the _Daily -Mirror_, a tabloid whose circulation average between January and June -of 1955 was 4,725,122. The _Daily Express_, the bellwether of the -Beaverbrook newspapers, had a circulation of just over 4,000,000 during -the same period, and three other London dailies, the _Daily Mail_, the -_Daily Telegraph_, and the _News Chronicle_, all boasted circulations -of better than 1,000,000. - -For every 1,000 Britons, 611 copies of the daily newspapers are sold -each day. Compare this with the United States figure of 353 per 1,000. -Britain is a good newspaper country, and the London press is lusty, -uninhibited, and highly competitive. - -American newspapermen working in London customarily divide the press -between the popular newspapers, such as the _Daily Mirror_ and -the _Daily Mail_, and the small-circulation papers, such as _The -Times_ and the _Manchester Guardian_. The circulation of _The Times_ -for January-June 1955 was 211,972 and for the _Guardian_ 156,154. -Similarly, on Sundays there is a division between the _Sunday Times_ -(606,346) and the _Observer_ (564,307) and such mass-circulation -"Sundays" as the _Sunday Express_, the _Sunday Pictorial_, and the -_People_. - -The distinction is not based primarily on circulation. _The Times_ and -the _Manchester Guardian_ and the _Daily Telegraph_ on weekdays and -the _Sunday Times_ and the _Observer_ on Sundays print more news about -politics, diplomacy, and world events than do the mass-circulation -papers. They are responsible and they are well written. The _Daily -Telegraph_, which has a circulation of over 2,000,000, is the only one -in this group whose circulation is in the "popular" field. But it has -given few hostages to fortune: its news columns contain a considerable -number of solid foreign-news items as well as first-class domestic -reporting. - -The shortage of newsprint (the paper on which newspapers are printed) -has curtailed the size of British papers since 1939. Almost all -newsprint is imported, and with the balance of payments under pressure -the expenditure of dollars for it has been restricted. But the -situation has improved slowly and the London papers are fattening, -although they remain thin by New York standards. - -Considering this restriction, the responsible newspapers do a -splendid job. Day in and day out the foreign news of _The Times_ -maintains remarkably high standards of accuracy and insight. The -anonymous reporters--articles by _Times_ men are signed "From Our -Own Correspondent"--write lucidly and easily. _The Times_ has never -accepted the theory that involved and complicated issues can be boiled -down into a couple of hundred words with the nuances discarded. News is -knowledge, and no one has yet found a way to make it easy to acquire -knowledge. - -But _The Times_, often called "_The Times_ newspaper," is a good deal -more than a report on Britain and the world. It is an institution -reflecting all British life. By reading its front page entirely -devoted to classified advertising one can get a complete picture of -upper-class and upper-middle-class Britain. In the left-hand columns -are births, deaths, marriages, and memorial notices. If an American -wants to understand how unstintingly the British upper classes gave -their sons and brothers and fathers to the First World War, let him -look at the memorial notices on the anniversary of the Battle of the -Somme. If he wants to see how hard-pushed these same classes are today, -let him read the painful, often pathetic admissions in the columns -where jewelry, old diplomatic uniforms, and the other impedimenta of -the class are offered for sale. - -The editorials of _The Times_--the British call editorials "leaders" or -"leading articles"--are, of course, one of the most important features -in journalism. _The Times_ is independent politically, but it does its -best to explain and expound the policies of the government of the day. -Over the years since the war it has supported individual measures laid -down by Conservative and Labor governments and it has assailed the -policies of both the left and right when this has been conceived of as -the duty of _The Times_. The editorial writing in _The Times_ often -attains a peak of brilliance seldom achieved in any other newspaper. -For a time, especially in the period before World War II, "The -Thunderer," as it was once called, had become a whisperer. Recently -_The Times_ has spoken on national and international issues with its -old resonance and sharpness. - -The influence of _The Times_ among politicians, civil servants, and -diplomats is extraordinary. It is, I suppose, the one newspaper read -thoroughly by all the foreign diplomats in London. As recently as the -spring of 1956 an editorial in _The Times_ discussing a reconsideration -of Britain's defense needs sent the German Ambassador scurrying to the -Foreign Office to inquire whether the editorial reflected government -policy. It did. - -This influence is the result of _The Times_'s special position in -British journalism. The editorial-writers and some of the reporters -of _The Times_ often are told things that are hidden from other -reporters. Also, they are members in good standing of that important, -amorphous group, the Establishment, which exists at the center of -British society; they know and are known by the politicians, the key -civil servants, the ministers. Occasionally _The Times_ is used to test -foreign or domestic reaction to a measure under consideration by the -government. By discussing the measure in an editorial, _The Times_ will -provoke in its letter columns a wider discussion into which various -sections of public opinion, left, right, and center, will be drawn. - -No other newspaper in the free world has a letter column comparable -to that of _The Times_. The first letter may be a sharp analysis of -government policy in Persia and the last the report by a Prime Minister -that he has seen a rare bird on a walk through St. James's park. -Some of the letter column's discussions touch on matters of national -interest. Others deal with the Christian names given to children or the -last time British troops carried their colors into action. - -The _Manchester Guardian_, with a smaller circulation and a smaller -foreign staff, still manages to make its influence felt far beyond -Manchester. Its policies are those of the Liberal party and, as -the Liberal Party is now in eclipse, the _Guardian_ brings to the -discussion of national and international affairs a detached and -refreshing sharpness. Where _The Times_ occasionally adopts the tone -of a wise and indulgent father in its comments on the world, the -_Guardian_ speaks with the accents of a worldly-wise nanny. When the -_Guardian_ is aroused, its "leaders" can be corrosive and bitter. It -is less likely to support the foreign policy of the government of the -day than is _The Times_. Consequently, the _Guardian_ is liable to be -more critical than _The Times_ in dealings with the United States and -American foreign policy. (The Suez crisis was a notable exception.) But -it is well informed about the United States, and so are its readers. -In Alistair Cooke and Max Freedman the _Guardian_ has two of the -best correspondents now writing in the United States for the British -press. Their reports are long, detailed, and accurate, and Cooke, in -particular, never forgets that what a foreign people sees in its -theaters, reads in its magazines, and does on its vacations is also -news to the readers at home. - -Such great provincial newspapers as the _Yorkshire Post_ and the -_Scotsman_ follow the conservative approach to news adopted by _The -Times_, the _Manchester Guardian_, and the _Daily Telegraph_. With -the responsible London dailies they serve the upper middle class and -are its most outspoken mouthpieces in a period when, as we have seen, -that class is being pressed by high taxation, the rising cost of -living, and the simultaneous development of a new middle class and a -prosperous working class. The _Sunday Times_, for instance, has devoted -many columns to the plight of the professional man and his family, -and all of these papers have reported at length on the appearance -of associations and groups devoted to, or supposedly devoted to, -the interests of the middle class and opposition to the unions that -represent the new working class. - -The cult of anonymity has persisted longer in Britain's responsible -and reliable newspapers than in the United States. Although Fleet -Street knows the names of _The Times_'s reporters, the public does -not. Richard Scott, the Diplomatic Correspondent of the _Manchester -Guardian_, has no byline, nor has Hugh Massingham, the brilliant -Political Correspondent of the _Observer_. The influence wielded in -the United States by columnists still is reserved in Britain almost -entirely to the anonymous "leader"-writers of the responsible British -newspapers. Working with the editorial-writers are hundreds of -industrious, well-educated, experienced reporters. They are good men to -talk to and to drink with, and they are tough men to beat on a story. - -But they and the newspapers they represent are not a part of the -bubbling, uproarious, pyrotechnical world of the popular London -dailies. Here is a circus, a daily excitement for anyone who enjoys -newspapers. The _Daily Express_, the _Daily Mail_, the _News -Chronicle_, the _Daily Herald_, the _Mirror_, and the _Sketch_ compete -hotly for news and entertainment. Their headlines are brash, their -writing varies from wonderfully good to wonderfully bad, and their -editorials are written with a slam-bang exuberance that is stimulating -and occasionally a little frightening. This is the true, tempestuous -world of Fleet Street. - -In this world the great names are not confined to the writers and -editors. The publishers, called "proprietors" in Britain, tower over -all. Of these the most interesting, successful, and stimulating is -Lord Beaverbrook, who runs the _Daily Express_, the _Sunday Express_, -and the _Evening Standard_ with a gusto undiminished by seventy-eight -active years. - -"The Beaver" occupies a unique place in British journalism and -politics. No one has neutral feelings about him. Either you like him -or you hate him; there is no middle course. I suppose nothing gives -him more satisfaction than knowing that when he arrives in London, men -in Fleet Street pubs and West End clubs ask one another: "What do you -think the Beaver's up to now?" - -Is "what the Beaver is up to" really important? The enmity of the -_Express_, which is the enmity of Lord Beaverbrook, can make a -politician squirm. But does it really lower his standing with the -voters? I doubt it. Lord Beaverbrook is an incorrigible Don Quixote who -has tilted at and been tossed by many windmills. He is, incidentally, a -more powerful writer than most of his employees. Early in 1957 he was -prodding his newspapers to the attack against the government's plans -for closer economic association with Europe. The headlines were bold -and black, the indignation terrifying. Will the campaign itself alter -government policy? I doubt it. - -Lord Beaverbrook once remarked that he ran his papers to conduct -propaganda. Just before the retirement of Sir Winston Churchill, Lord -Beaverbrook was asked why his newspapers were so critical of Sir -Anthony Eden, the heir presumptive to the premiership. He replied -that Sir Anthony had never supported the policies of the Beaverbrook -newspapers. As no other leading politician had thrown his weight that -way, this seemed a rather weak reason for attacking the new leader -of the Conservative Party. The political affiliation of the _Daily -Express_ is Independent Conservative. - -But the Beaverbrook campaigns perform a real public service by -fixing public attention upon issues. I do not think the editorials -convince--I have yet to meet a _Daily Express_ reader who confused the -"leader" column with pronouncements from Sinai--but they encourage -that discussion of public issues which is essential in a democracy. Of -course the _Express_ newspapers' tactics annoy nice-minded people. But -the tradition of a free press includes not only such august journals -as _The Times_ but the rip-roaring, fire-eating crusaders as well. -There is not much chance that the popular press in Britain will model -itself on _The Times_, but if it did so, the result would be a loss to -journalism and to the nation. And as long as the Beaverbrook tradition -survives--as long, indeed, as Lord Beaverbrook himself is around to -draw on his inexhaustible fund of indignation--one section of the -popular press is bound to remain contentious and vigorous. - -The _Daily Express_, the morning paper of the Beaverbrook empire, is -technically one of the best newspapers in the world. Its layout is -admirable, and its headline-writers often show a touch of genius. In -its writing and its presentation of news it has been much affected by -such divergent American influences as _The New Yorker_ and _Time_. - -The _Express_ is brightly written (too much so at times), and its -tastes in policies and politicians are incalculable. Along with -a liberal helping of political, foreign, and crime reporting it -offers two of the best features in British journalism: Osbert -Lancaster's pocket cartoon on the front page and the humorous column -of "Beachcomber" on the editorial page. "Beachcomber" and Lancaster -are sharp and penetrating commentators on the daily scene. In many -instances their references to the occasional inanities of the British -society are more cogent than anything to be found in the editorial -columns of the _Express_. - -The _Express_ successfully caters to the new middle class that has -arisen since the war, especially that part of it which is involved -in the communications industry. The young advertising manager from -the provinces who has "arrived" in London may find _The Times_ too -verbose and the _Telegraph_ too stodgy. The _Express_, with its bright -features on the theater or London night life, attracts him. But, oddly, -three principal features of the _Express_ cater to very different -tastes. Osbert Lancaster's subject matter is drawn usually from the -upper middle class--his Maudie Littlehampton, after all, is a Lady. The -humor of "Beachcomber" appeals to tastes that reject the average in -British humor, and Sefton Delmer, the peripatetic foreign correspondent -of the _Express_, often writes stories on international issues which -are much more involved and adult than would seem suitable for the -majority of the newspaper's four million readers. - -This divided approach is not so obvious in the _Daily Mirror_, which -has the largest circulation of any of the London dailies. This is an -important newspaper in that it is the most accurate reflection I know -of the tastes and mores of the new working class in Britain. There are -many indications elsewhere that Cecil King, its proprietor, and his -chief lieutenants have pondered long and earnestly about Britain's -problems. The _Mirror_'s pamphlet on trade unions and an earlier -pamphlet on Anglo-American relations are solid contributions to the -literature on these subjects. But the _Daily Mirror_'s customary -approach to policies and issues is as robust and sharp as that of a -policeman to a drunk. It is belligerent rather than persuasive; it -loves big type. - -But the _Daily Mirror_'s handling of certain types of stories, -particularly those involving industrial disputes and crime, is -excellent. (British crime reporting in general, although circumscribed -by the libel laws, is of high caliber.) The _Mirror_'s editorials, with -their GET OUT or PASS THIS BILL approach to politicians and measures, -may alienate as many as they win, but the editorials are alive, dealing -often with problems--such as automation and wage differentials--that -are of the keenest interest to the industrial working class. - -The _Mirror_ is much closer to the thinking of this class than is the -_Daily Herald_, usually considered the official Labor newspaper. The -Trades Union Congress owns 49 per cent of the stock in the _Daily -Herald_, and Odhams Press Ltd. owns the remainder. Once powerful and -well informed on industrial and labor-movement happenings, the _Herald_ -no longer seems to represent either the movement or the industrial -working class that supports the movement. Its approach is stodgier -than that of the _Mirror_, less in keeping with the tastes of the new -working class. - -The _Mirror_'s most renowned features are "Cassandra" and "Jane." The -former, written by William Connor, is one of the hardest-hitting and -most provocative features in British journalism. Connor has evoked the -wrath of statesmen of both major parties. The Communists hate him. He -is a deflator of stuffed shirts, a pungent critic, and a stout defender -of the British worker. - -The _Mirror_'s other salient feature is a comic strip called "Jane." -Jane is a well-proportioned young lady whose adventures nearly always -end in near nudity. She is a favorite of British troops abroad and -their families at home. The information value of this daily striptease -is nonexistent, but a _Mirror_ employee once defended the strip on the -grounds that "the bloke that buys the paper to look at Jane may read -Bill Connor or the leader." - -The London press enjoys an advantage that does not exist in the United -States. This is the presence of a remarkably well-informed critical -opinion in the weekly reviews that are also printed in London. The -_Spectator_, the _New Statesman and Nation_, _Time and Tide_, and, -occasionally, the _Economist_ are careful, if sometimes pecksniffian, -critics of the national newspapers. Fleet Street is one big family -(it would be stretching things to call so tumultuous a community -"happy"), and the inner workings of the great dailies are laid bare -to the weeklies often through the agency of disgruntled reporters. -Consequently, "Pharos" in the _Spectator_ and Francis Williams in the -_New Statesman_ are authoritative and knowledgeable critics of the -newspapers and their proprietors. - -The weeklies themselves are a valuable supplement to the newspapers. -They have time to reflect and space to discuss. In many cases they are -often slightly ahead of public opinion, more so than the daily papers, -and they are not afraid to criticize tartly such sacred cows of British -journalism as the Crown. - -Since the end of the war the tendency among the popular newspapers has -been to entertain rather than to inform. This recognizes what I believe -to be one of the fundamental truths of the communications business in -Britain: the majority of the people get their news from the British -Broadcasting Corporation's radio and television services and from the -news services of the Independent Television Authority. - -Readers of the more responsible London and provincial newspapers listen -to the news on the BBC and then turn to their papers for expanded -stories and ample interpretative material. But the average reader does -not read _The Times_ or the _Manchester Guardian_ or the _Observer_. -When he turns off the radio in the morning and picks up his "popular" -newspaper, he is confronted with gossip columns, comic strips, newsless -but beguiling stories about the royal family, sports stories, and, in -some papers, a dash of pornography. - -The "popular" papers do print hard news. Correspondents like Sefton -Delmer of the _Daily Express_ and William Forrest of the _News -Chronicle_ send interesting, factual, and frequently important stories -from Germany or Russia. But such stories are increasingly rare. The -trend even in this sort of writing is toward entertainment. - -For example, not long ago a London popular daily, once renowned for -its foreign staff, sent a reporter to Communist China. This was -an opportunity for objective reporting. Instead the readers got a -rehash of the reporter's own political outlook plus a few flashes of -description of life in modern China. - -This tendency toward entertainment rather than information is deplored -by those who believe that a democracy can operate successfully only on -the foundation of well-informed public opinion. In Britain, however, -newspapers are customarily considered not as public trusts but as -business, big business. If entertainment pays, the newspapers, with -a few exceptions noted above, will entertain. Unfortunately, the BBC -cannot provide the time necessary to give the news that the newspapers -fail to print. Obviously the great mass of the British people will -become less well informed about the great issues at home and abroad if -the present trend continues. - -During the thirties the critics of the British press liked to repeat a -cruel little rhyme that ran: - - _You cannot hope to bribe nor twist, - Thank God, the British journalist, - But, seeing what the man will do - Unbribed, there's no occasion to._ - -Yet, from a knowledge of the type of man who writes for the popular -press and a thorough acquaintance with his product, I would say that -the blame rests not with the reporter but with the management. - -It is certainly within the power of the proprietors of the popular -newspapers to change the character of the papers. Some editors in Fleet -Street habitually sneer at American newspapers and their practices, -although these men are not above adopting some American techniques of -news presentation which they think will sell newspapers. But the amount -of factual information about national and foreign affairs in many -small-town American papers is far greater, proportionately, than that -provided by some great "national" newspapers in London. - -Those who are interested in the improvement of relations between the -United States and the United Kingdom must be concerned about the -reporting of American news in the popular press. More space is devoted -to news from the United States than formerly, and correspondents for -the London dailies travel more widely than they did in the past. Men -like the late Robert Waithman of the _News Chronicle_ did their best to -get out of Washington and New York and see the country. But too often -the correspondents devote time and space to the more frivolous aspects -of American life. From the standpoint of international relations, the -space devoted to the stream of stories about the royal family might be -better spent on a frank discussion of why the mass of Americans feel -as they do about the Communist government in Peiping. - -Some good judges of the national character believe that the great -mass of the British working class would not read such information -even if the newspapers provided it. They see this group as complacent -and politically lethargic, no longer willing to be stirred, as it was -a generation ago, by great events in the outside world. If this is -true, the future is dark indeed. For more than at any time since the -summer of 1940 the British people must take a realistic view of their -position in the world. They cannot do this if, beyond a few perfunctory -headlines, their newspapers provide only the details of the latest -murder or the bust measurements of Hollywood stars. To an observer from -abroad, it is only too evident that the great problems of our times are -not being brought to the people of Britain by their popular newspapers -in a serious manner. - - -THE OLD SCHOOL TIE - -Few institutions in Britain are more difficult for Americans to -understand than the public schools. Yet a knowledge of the system, -how it works, its influence upon British society, its traditions and -customs, even its sports is essential to a knowledge of modern Britain. -We are going to hear a great deal about the public schools in the -coming years, for one of the great battles between the egalitarian, -socialist Britain and the traditional, conservative Britain will be -waged over the future of these schools. - -The "public school" is in fact a private one. The public-school system -includes all the schools of this type in Britain. As an influence on -the national character it has been and still is extraordinarily potent. -This influence is social and political as well as educational. It is, -I think, fair to say that to hundreds of thousands in the upper and -middle classes, attendance at Eton is regarded as more important than -attendance at Oxford. - -There are about two hundred public schools in Britain. They range -from old established institutions like Eton, Harrow, Charter-house, -Winchester, Rugby, Haileybury, and Wellington to smaller schools whose -fame is local and whose plant, equipment, and teaching staff are little -better, and in some cases inferior, to those of the state schools. - -What keeps the public-school system alive in an era that has seen -the fall of so many bastions of class and privilege? To begin with, -the public schools represent a well-established, wealthy, and acute -force within British society. Such a force fights to maintain its -position against the public criticism and political maneuverings of -its enemies. The fight is led by men who are sincerely convinced that -the continuation of the public-school system is necessary to the -maintenance of Britain's position in the world, and they will devote -time, money, and effort to win the fight. One of the mistakes made -by the Socialist groups that attack the public-school system is to -underestimate the wit and energy of those who defend it. - -Yet the existence of a powerful institution is no guarantee of its -future life in a country that has changed and is changing so rapidly -as Britain. The public schools survive and even flourish because of -the conviction widely held throughout the upper and middle classes -that such schools provide the best type of education for their boys. -Indeed, the conviction goes even deeper in the class structure: it -is noteworthy that as new groups move up the economic scale into the -middle class, these too seek to send their boys to a public school. - -Elsewhere I have mentioned the sacrifices that the old middle class -makes to preserve its position in British society. Nowhere are these -sacrifices more evident than in the struggle to raise the money to -send the son or sons of the family to a public school. The Continental -holiday may be given up in favor of two weeks at an English seaside -resort. The car must be patched up and run for another year. Father -will go without a new overcoat, and mother will abandon her monthly -trip to "town" to see a play. But John will go to his father's old -school. Why? - -At the best public schools the formal education is excellent. But when -the middle-class Briton speaks of the education his son gets at a -public school he is referring only partially to what the boy learns -from books. Principally, he is thinking about the development of the -boy's character at the school, about the friends he will make there, -and about how these friends and attendance at this old school will help -the boy later in life. - -Critics of the Foreign Office have often charged that British diplomacy -is filled with the products of the public schools and that the -representatives of the great mass of the nation are excluded from the -Foreign Service because they have not attended public schools. Lord -Strang, a former Permanent Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs -and thus head of the Foreign Office, answered this criticism in his -book _The Foreign Office_. - -"The Foreign Office," he wrote, "can move no faster towards fully -democratic methods of selection than the State as a whole is moving in -its educational policies, though it has already moved far at the pace -set for it by these wider policies of political evolution. The fact is -that the Foreign Service always must and will recruit from the best, -in brains and character, that the prevailing educational system can -produce." - -Note that "character" is coupled with "brains" in this indirect -reference to the public schools. - -What does the middle-class Briton mean when he says that Eton or some -obscure public school in the Midlands will develop his son's character? -There is no complete answer. But I would say that he includes in -character such traits as willingness to take responsibility, loyalty -to the class conception of the nation's interests, readiness to lead -(which implies, of course, a belief that he is fit to lead and that -there are people willing to be led), truthfulness, self-discipline, -a love for vigorous outdoor sports. I have heard all these cited as -reasons why boys should go to public schools and why fathers will give -up smoking or limit their drinking to a small sherry before dinner to -provide the money for such schooling. - -In considering the development of character in the public schools it -should be remembered that these schools often represent the third phase -in the education of a British boy. The boy's first preceptor will be a -nanny or nursemaid, often chosen from the rural working class. At eight -or nine he goes away to a preparatory school. At twelve or thirteen he -is ready for his public school. Because of economic pressure only a -wealthy minority can follow this system today, but it was the system -that produced the majority of the leaders of the Conservative Party and -not a few prominent Labor Party leaders. - -Direct paternal influence is much less evident in the education of -Britons of the middle class than it is in the United States. One -argument for the system maintains that the boy learns self-reliance; -when in his twenties he is commanding a platoon or acting as Third -Secretary of Embassy in a foreign country he is not likely to be -wishing that Mom were there to advise him. This argument implies -acceptance of the proposition that people will consent to be led by the -public-school boy or that his education and character will fit him for -a diplomatic post abroad. - -Critics of the public schools charge that the concept of public-school -leadership was exploded by World War II. This does not jibe with my own -experiences with the British forces from 1939 to 1945. I found that -most of the young officers in all three services were products of the -public schools and that, on the whole, they provided a high standard of -leadership in the lower echelons. Their earlier training had enforced -upon them the idea that they were responsible for their men, not only -in battle but elsewhere. So they would tramp through the Icelandic -sleet to obscure posts to organize amateur theatricals or sweat through -an African afternoon playing soccer with their men because this was -part of the responsibility. They were told that they had to lead in -battle, and they accepted the obligation without doubts. - -A great many of them were killed all over the world while sociologists -and reformers were planning how to eliminate the public schools. Those -who were killed were no more intelligent, no more attractive in person, -no more energetic than those they led. But when the time came to lead, -they led. These remarks, no doubt, will annoy critics of the public -schools and public-school leadership. When I am informed how wars are -to be won or nations to be governed without leaders I will be properly -contrite. - -The public school's place in British society rests basically upon this -conviction that a public-school education provides character-training -that will equip a boy for leadership in business, in politics, in the -military services, and in society. But the system as it appears in -British society is composed of much more than formal education and -character-building. The public schools also mean a body of traditions -and customs often as involved and as unrelated to the modern world as -the taboos of primitive man. - -The Old School Tie is one. Almost all middle-class and some -working-class institutions in Britain have a tie striped with the -colors of the institution or ornamented with its crest. There are ties -for cricket clubs and associations of football fans, there are ties -for regiments and clubs. But the tie that generally means most is the -tie that stands for attendance at a public school. It is at once a -certificate of education and a badge of recognition. - -The phrase "Old School Tie" stands not only for the public schools but -for their place in middle-class society. The tie is not merely a strip -of silk but all the strange, sometimes incomprehensible customs and -traditions that surround the public schools. Slang phrases used at one -school for generations. Rugby football rather than soccer because there -is more bodily contact in rugby and hence it is a more "manly" game and -better suited to character-building. School courses which have very -little to do with the problems of the modern world but which supposedly -"discipline" the mind. - -British public schools, like American universities, have been -criticized for developing a type rather than individuals. There is a -resemblance among their graduates, and the old Etonian and the old -Wykehamist (Winchester) and even the graduate of some small school -in Yorkshire have a great deal in common. The public-school graduate -will be enthusiastic about sports, rather contemptuous and sometimes -shockingly ill-informed about the world outside Britain, well-mannered, -truthful, and amenable to discipline. In a crowd, whether it be an -officers' training unit in war or an industrial training school in -peace, he will seek out other members of the fraternity announced by -the tie. He is ready to serve and sometimes idealize the State. He -believes in, although he does not invariably personally support, church -attendance, _The Times_, the monarchy. - -Naturally, there are mavericks. Some of the greatest individualists -in recent British history--the influence of the public schools on the -nation really became apparent in the middle of the last century when -the new mercantile and industrial leaders began to send their sons to -them--have been public-school products. By a pleasing coincidence, Sir -Winston Churchill, Prime Minister Nehru of India, and Field Marshal -Earl Alexander of Tunis are old Harrovians. - -Politically, the public schools are conservative in thought, and -usually their graduates adhere to the Conservative Party. But there -are many exceptions. Hugh Gaitskell, the present leader of the -Parliamentary Labor Party, is an old Wykehamist. His predecessor, Earl -Attlee, went to Haileybury. Scattered through the ranks of the modern -Labor Party are dozens of Old Boys of the public schools. If the Labor -movement gradually sheds much of its old extremism, it is certain to -attract an increasing number of public-school graduates. - -The principal criticism of the public schools voiced by reformers at -home and critics abroad is that it perpetuates in Britain a class -system that divides society during a period when unity is essential to -survival. There is truth in this, so much that it cannot be answered, -as supporters of the system do answer it, with the assertion that -there were no class differences in Britain until the Labor Party -created them. Nor is the argument valid that the masses in Britain -like class distinction, like to live their lives within a precise -social classification. British society is changing today just as it -has changed in the past. It would not have changed without popular -pressure. The newly rich manufacturer of cheap cotton who decided to -send his boy to a public school a hundred years ago was just as much a -part of this change as the Labor Party politician who wants to abolish -the public schools even though he himself is a graduate of one. - -Another disadvantage of the perpetuation of the public-school system -in its present form is that it is unsuited in many ways to modern -conditions. It was admirable training for young men who were to rule -thousands of untutored natives or maintain the might, majesty, and -dominion of the British Empire with a handful of police or administer -without deviation the justice of the Crown in smelly courtrooms -half a world away. But today the young men are going out to sell -Austins or electronic products or to represent a weaker Britain among -peoples tipsy with the heady wine of nationalism. At home the old -stratifications are breaking up, new groups of technicians and managers -are shouldering the once unchallenged leaders of the professional -middle class, new industries requiring a high degree of technical -training are ousting the old. - -In these circumstances the road will be difficult for a man who has -been trained to regard himself as a leader, either born or educated -to leadership, who has been taught that his caste is automatically -superior to the industrialists of Pittsburgh or the scientist at -Harlow or the excitable politicians of New Delhi and Athens. Certain -traits encouraged by the public schools will always be important. But -self-discipline, truthfulness, physical courage must be accompanied in -the modern world by a broader outlook on that world and a more acute -realization of Britain's place in it. - -There is a strong movement in Britain for the expansion of technical -education. The public schools are not technical schools; their -object is the well-rounded product of a general education. While the -public schools maintain their social prestige, the new middle class -as well as the old will send its sons to them. But the leaders of -tomorrow's Britain will be the leaders of the new technology taught -in the technical schools. As these schools develop, they may offer a -real challenge to the public school's position as the trainer of the -governing or leading class. - -The indictment of the public schools is that they are educating boys to -meet conditions that no longer exist. Yet the public schools are trying -to change with the times even while maintaining that what is needed -to meet the challenge of modern conditions is not narrow technical -education but precisely the comprehensive schooling backed by sound -character-training that public schools are supposed to provide. - -We should not overlook the role the public schools are playing and will -play in the absorption into the middle class of the new groups that -have entered it from industry, science, communications, and management -in the last decade. Many men in these groups had no public-school -education. In fact, a decade ago many of them were among the severest -critics of the system. But a surprisingly large number today are -sending their sons to public schools. The desire to keep up with the -Joneses--the Joneses in this case being the old middle class that sent -its sons to public schools as a matter of course--is one reason for -this. Another is the recognition that the public schools endow their -graduates with certain social advantages. - -When change occurs in Britain it often takes place behind a façade -that appears unchanged. The battle over the public schools is certain -to take place, and, whichever group wins, the schools themselves will -be altered by it. It is inconceivable that they will be eliminated -from the British scene. It is equally inconceivable that they will not -change under the pressure of the times. - -In the spring of 1956 I lunched with a wartime friend who said he had -given up smoking in order to save money to send young Nigel through -Winchester. Someone else at the table muttered that "this public-school -business" was a lot of damned nonsense. My friend smiled. "Damn it," -he said, "you [the mutterer] are always talking about how well the -Russians do things. Well, I read in _The Times_ this morning that -Khrushchev says they're going to start schools to train leaders. What's -good enough for old Khrush ought to be good enough for you pinks down -at the London School of Economics!" - - -THE ARMY, THE NAVY, THE AIR FORCE - -"The Army, the Navy, and the Air Force, they always play the game." -So sang the girls and boys of careless, complacent Britain in the -thirties. The verse symbolizes the middle-class public-school -atmosphere of the services' place in British society. Prior to World -War II the three services enjoyed a more honored place in British -society than did the Army and the Navy in American society. - -The commanding officer of a battalion on home service thought himself -socially superior to the leading industrialist of the neighborhood, -and, in most cases, the industrialist agreed. The retired Navy -commander or Army major was a recognized figure in the life of the -village or town in which he lived--a figure of fun, perhaps, to the -bright young people down from Oxford or Cambridge, and an easy mark for -social caricaturists and cartoonists, but also a man of importance in -the affairs of the community. - -He was also, in many cases, a man of means. Pay in the pre-war Army -was ridiculously small, and an officer in a "good" regiment needed -a private income if he were to live comfortably. Again, the retired -officer and the serving officer knew a good deal about the world, a -circumstance forced upon him (for he was never especially cordial to -foreigners) by the necessity of garrisoning the Empire. He had lived -in India or China or Egypt and fought in South Africa or France or -Mesopotamia, and he had formed firm conclusions about these countries -and their people. These conclusions, often delivered with the certainty -of an order on the parade ground, raised the hackles of his juniors -and were derided as the reactionary ideas of relics from Poona, the -citadel of conservatism in India. There is an old service verse about -the "Poona attitude": - - _There's a regiment from Poona - That would infinitely sooner - Play single-handed polo, - A sort of solo polo, - Than play a single chukker - With a chap who isn't pukka._ - -After the Second World War had burst on Britain in all its fury and in -its aftermath, it occurred to many who had fumed while the ex-officers -talked that the Blimps had known what they were talking about. Earlier -I noted that the retired officers were right in their predictions about -what would happen in India once the British withdrew, and that the -politicians and publicists of the left were wrong. I do not suggest -that the British should or could have remained. But several hundred -thousand lives might have been saved if the withdrawal had been slower. - -The services and their officers thus had established themselves as -a much more important part of society in Britain than had their -counterparts in the United States. They were always in the public eye. -The Army and the Air Force fought campaigns on the north-west frontier -of India. The Navy chased gun-runners and showed the flag. - -Socially, the Army was the more important. The sons of the very -best families--which means the oldest and most respectable, not the -richest--went into the five regiments of the Brigade of Foot Guards -or into the Household Cavalry or into the old, fashionable, expensive -cavalry regiments like the 16th/5th Lancers or the Queen's Own Fourth -Hussars (which once, long ago, attracted a young subaltern named -Churchill). It was the fashion among the intellectuals of pre-war -England to laugh at the solemn ceremonials of the Foot Guards and -to snicker at the languid young men who protested when their horses -were taken away and replaced by armored cars and tanks. (It might be -remarked that when the time came there was nothing to laugh at and a -good deal to be proud of. The account for the parties at the night -clubs and the hunting, shootin', and fishin' of the careless days -was rendered and paid in blood. You could see them in France in May -and June of 1940 going out with machine guns and horribly antiquated -armored cars to take on the big German tanks.) - -If the Army was predominant socially, the Navy held military -pre-eminence. It was the Navy which was the nation's "sure shield," the -Navy which had been matchless and supreme since Trafalgar. It was the -Navy which time and again had interposed its ships and men between the -home islands and the fleets of Spain, France, and Germany. The naval -officer standing on his bridge in the North Sea or off some tropic port -was a watchman, a national symbol of security. - -As the two senior services were so firmly implanted in the public -consciousness, it is easy to see why the Royal Air Force, the youngest -of the three, lived on such short commons before the war. Socially it -did not count. "He's one of these flying chaps," a young Hussar said at -Lille one day in 1939, "but a very decent fellow." It did not attract -the young men who entered the Guards or the Cavalry, for the RAF dealt -with machines and grimy hangars smelling of grease and oil, and it -planned for the future without much hope of governmental financial -assistance or any real support from tradition. Whereas the Loamshire -Hussars had been fighting since Blenheim, the Secretary of State for -War was an ex-officer, and the port at the mess was beyond praise. - -Militarily, the RAF meant a great deal more. When the war began, it -became the savior of Britain--for a few years the one service through -which the country could strike directly and powerfully at Germany. The -rise of the RAF to pre-eminence among the fighting services in post-war -Britain began with its long, bitter, successful battle against the -_Luftwaffe_ in the summer of 1940. - -The ascent of the RAF to its present position is the first of the -changes that have overtaken the services in Britain, which is a martial -if not a militaristic nation. Of course, the development of air power -as the means of carrying the new nuclear weapons would have ensured an -improvement in its position in any case. But the expansion of the RAF -during the war, the post-war necessity for continued experimentation -in associated fields such as the development of guided missiles, and -the creation of a large, highly trained group of technical officers -provided an opportunity for the new middle class and the upper levels -of the industrial working class, the planners and technicians, to win -advancement in what is currently the most important of the services. - -The Battle of Britain was won by public-school boys. But the modern -RAF, although it has its share of public-school boys especially among -the combat units, is increasingly manned, officers as well as the -higher noncommissioned officers, by products of the state schools. The -RAF needs now and will need increasingly in the future the services of -the best technical brains Britain can offer. The main source of supply -will be not the officers' training units at the public schools or the -universities but the new technical colleges and training courses in -Britain. - -It follows, then, that in time the military defense of the realm will -rest primarily not upon the class who have always considered themselves -ordained by birth and education to carry out this task but upon a new -group springing from the new middle class and from the proletariat. -This is a social development of the first importance. - -The change in the character of the officer class is not confined to the -RAF, although it is most noticeable there. There has been a change, -too, in the composition of the commissioned ranks of the Army. - -When World War II ended, the "military families," which for generations -had sent sons into the local county regiments, found that the second -war, following the terrible blood-letting of the first, had almost -wiped them out. Perhaps one son in three or four survived. And he, -surveying the post-war Army and the post-war world, was disinclined -to follow tradition and devote the remainder of his working life to -the service. He might gladly have served another twenty years in the -"old" Army with its horses and hunting, its tours of duty in India, -its social importance. But now tanks and armored cars had replaced -the horses, India was gone, and a bunch of shirking Bolshies from the -Labor Party were running things. Above all, the two wars had swept away -many of the private fortunes with which young officers eked out their -miserable pay and allowances. So the survivor of the military family -became a personnel manager in a Midlands factory, and elderly men -said to elderly wives: "Do you know that for the first time since '91 -there's no Fenwick serving with the Loamshires?" - -But the Second World War also raised to officer rank thousands of -young men whose social and educational background would not have been -considered suitable for commissioned rank in peacetime. They came from -the state's secondary schools, from technical colleges, or from the -ranks, and they did remarkably well. Many of them are still serving as -officers. - -At the war's end many of them remained in the service. I was always -interested during the maneuvers of the British Army of the Rhine to -find how many of the young officers in the infantry and tank regiments -had served in the ranks or had come to the Army with a sound education -and a proletarian accent from one of the state schools. The technical -branches of the Army, such as the Royal Electrical and Mechanical -Engineers and the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, draw an increasing number -of their officers from the noncommissioned officers and from among the -graduates of technical schools. - -Nowhere is the middle class's ability to assimilate new groups and thus -perpetuate itself more striking than in the Army. The officers from -the ranks or from a state school assume the social coloration of the -established officer class. Manners, accent, turns of phrase, and dress -alter to conform with those of the old officer class. At present the -new group is in a minority. There naturally are many members of the old -officer class still serving. With the return of prosperity the upper -middle class has resumed the tradition of sending its sons into the -Army as a matter of course. - -The general officers of the old school, which in this case means the -old public school, vehemently defend the middle class as the only -proper breeding-ground for service officers. They assert that only -men from a certain class, by which they mean their own, and from a -certain background, by which they mean a public school, will accept the -responsibility and provide the leadership necessary in war. A general -told me: "It's really very simple. Men who drop their _h_'s won't -follow an officer who also drops his _h_'s. They don't think he'll take -care of them as well as some young pipsqueak six months out of Eton but -with the correct accent." - -This will strike Americans as ridiculous. Certainly it ignores the -high quality of leadership exercised by sergeant pilots of the RAF -Bomber Command. But the general cannot be dismissed as unrealistic. The -correct accent _does_ count in Britain. The public-school boy _has_ -been trained to look after others. The idea of an officer class may -offend us as contradictory to democratic equality. But it can and does -work. Nowhere in the world is the officer caste better treated than in -the proletarian society of Soviet Russia. - -The Army and the Navy will continue to assimilate into the commissioned -ranks of their services an increasing number of men of working-class -origin. Science's invasion of the military art, long established but -tremendously accelerated since 1945, makes it inevitable that the -sharp young technician, "without an _h_ to his name" as the middle -class says, will continue to rise to commissioned rank. It also seems -relatively certain that as he rises he will assume some of the social -patina of the middle class. - -The old conception of military leadership as a prerogative of the -aristocracy died hard. It took the blunders and casualties of the -Crimean War, the Boer War, and the First World War to kill it. -During World War II the British services produced a large number of -outstanding leaders: Alexander, Brooke, Dill, Montgomery, Slim, Wavell, -Leese, Horrocks in the Army, Cunningham, Fraser, Vian, Mountbatten in -the Navy, Portal, Harris, Tedder, Slessor, Bowhill in the RAF. With the -exception of Alexander and Mountbatten, all were products of the old -middle class. But in a changing Britain the authority of this class -in the field it made particularly its own is being undermined both by -new techniques of war and by the shifts in internal power which have -occurred in Britain since 1940. - -Those officers and ex-officers who recognize this are not greatly -concerned for the survival of their class leadership; most are -convinced that it will survive. They are concerned, however, lest -in this rapidly changing century the traditions that their class -perpetuated and, in some cases, changed into fetishes should perish. -Regimental traditions, some of which stretch back three centuries into -military history, will, they insist, be as important in the era of -guided missiles as they were in the days of the matchlock. - -It is argued that the sense of continuity, the conviction that men -before them have faced perils as great and have survived and won -is essential if Britain is to continue as a military power. The -composition of the Army, Navy, and Air Force officer groups may change. -But the new men will have to rely quite as much on the service and -regimental traditions as did the men who fought at Minden, Waterloo, or -Le Cateau. - - -WORKER'S PLAYTIME - -The leisure activities of the British people in the present decade -offer a revealing guide to the changes that have overtaken their -society. One can learn a great deal by comparing a rugby crowd at -Twickenham and a soccer crowd at Wembley. The rise in popularity of -some forms of entertainment, notably television, testifies to the new -prosperity of the working class. The slow decline of interest in some -sports and the shift from playing to watching illustrate other changes -in the make-up of Britain. - -Television is the greatest new influence on the British masses -since the education acts of the last century produced a proletariat -capable of reading the popular press, a situation capitalized by -Lord Northcliffe and others. And the mass attention to "what's -on television," like every other change in Britain, has social -connotations. Among many in the middle class and the upper middle class -it is close to class treason to admit regular watching of television. -"We have one for Nanny and the children," a London hostess said, "but -we never watch it. Fearfully tedious, most of it." - -Significantly, the middle class, when defending its right to send -its sons to public schools, emphasizes that the working class could -send its sons to the same schools if it were willing to abandon -its payments for television. This may reveal one reason for the -middle-class dislike for this form of entertainment. Television sets -are expensive, and possibly the cost cannot be squeezed into a budget -built around the necessity of sending the boy to school. - -The spread of television-viewing in Britain has had far-reaching -economic and social effects. A sharp blow has been dealt the corner -pub, by tradition the workingman's club. Since the rise of modern -Britain, it is to the pub that the worker has taken his sorrows, his -ambitions, and his occasional joys. There over a pint of bitters -he could think dark thoughts about his boss, voice his opinions on -statesmen from Peel to Churchill, and argue about racing with his -friends. "These days," a barmaid told me, "they come in right after -supper, buy some bottled ale--nasty gassy stuff it is, too--and rush -home to the telly. In the old days they came in around seven, regular -as clockwork it was, and didn't leave until I said 'Time, gentlemen, -please.'" - -Television also has affected attendance at movies and at sports events. -The British have never been a nation of night people, and nowadays -they seem to be turning within themselves, a nation whose physical -surroundings are bounded by the hearth, the television screen, and -quick trips to the kitchen to open another bottle of beer. My friends -on the BBC tell me this is not so; television, they say, has opened -new horizons for millions and is the great national educator of the -future. It is easy to forgive their enthusiasm. But how can a people -learn the realities of life if what it really wants on television is -sugary romances or the second-hand jokes and antics of comedians rather -than the admirable news and news-interpretation programs produced by -both the BBC and the Independent Television Authority? The new working -class seems to be irritated by attempts to bring it face to face with -the great problems of their country and of the world. Having attained -what it wants--steady employment, high wages, decent housing--it hopes -to hide before its television screens while this terrible, strident -century hammers on. - -The view that the British have become a nation of spectators has been -put forward with confidence by many observers, British as well as -foreign. It is valid, I believe, only if one takes the view that the -millions who watch soccer (which the British call football), rugby -football, field hockey, and other sports on a Saturday afternoon in -autumn are the only ones who count. But there are hundreds of thousands -who play these sports. Some few hundred are professionals playing -before thousands, but many thousands more are amateurs. Stand in a -London railroad station any Saturday at noon and count the hundreds of -young men and young women hurrying to trains that will take them to -some suburban field where they will use the hockey sticks, football -shoes, or cricket bats they are carrying. - -Neither soccer nor rugby football is so physically punishing as -American football, although both demand great stamina. So the British -play these games long after the American college tackle has hung up his -cleats and is boring his friends at the country club with the story -of how he blocked the kick against Dartmouth or Slippery Rock. An -ex-officer of my acquaintance played cricket, and pretty good cricket, -too, until he was well into his forties. On village cricket grounds -(the British call them "pitches") on a Sunday afternoon one can see -sedate vicars and husky butchers well past fifty flailing away at the -ball. - -If one adds to these the thousands who take a gun and shoot or a rod -and fish, and the tens of thousands more who cycle into the countryside -spring, summer, and fall, the picture reveals a nation which does not -rely solely on watching sports for its pleasure but which still gets -enormous fun out of playing them. - -Sports of all sorts, either spectator or participant, occupy an -important, even a venerated, place in British society. Kipling's -warning against the damage that "the flanneled fool at the wicket and -the muddied oaf at the goal" might do to the nation's martial capacity -was never taken very seriously. After all, Britons have been told -interminably and mistakenly that Waterloo was won on the playing-fields -of Eton. The Duke of Wellington, who commanded the British forces in -that notable victory, could recall no athletic triumphs of his own at -Eton save that he had once jumped a rather wide ditch as a boy. The -Duke's pastimes were riding to hounds and women, neither of which was -in the Eton curriculum at the time he matriculated. Nevertheless, the -tradition remains. - -When an American thinks of British sport, he automatically thinks of -cricket. But cricket is a game that can be played in Britain only -during the short and frequently stormy months of late spring and -summer. In point of attendance, number of players participating, and -national interest, _the_ game is soccer. Soccer, the late Hector McNeil -loved to emphasize, is "the game of the people." It is also the game of -millions who have never seen a game but who each week painfully fill -out their coupons on the football pools, hopeful that _this_ time they -will win the tens of thousands of pounds that go to the big winners. -The football pools are an example of a diversion that has moved upward -in the social scale. The British, almost all of them, love to gamble, -and the retired colonial servant at Bath finds as great a thrill in -winning on the pools or even trying to win as the steel worker at -Birmingham does. These days the steel worker has a little more money to -back his choices. - -To many Americans soccer is a game played by national groups in the big -cities and by high schools, prep schools, and colleges too small or -too poor to support football. Soccer, actually, is an extremely fast, -highly scientific game whose playing evokes from the crowds very much -the same passions that are evident at Busch Stadium or Ebbets Field. -There is no gentlemanly restraint about questioning an official's -decision in soccer as there is in cricket. The British version of "ya -bum, ya" rolls over the stadium on Saturday afternoons. Once I heard a -staid working-class housewife address a referee who had awarded a free -kick against Arsenal as "Oh, you bloody man!" The English can go no -further in vituperation. - -Although soccer is principally the game of Britain's working masses, -there are some among the middle class who find it entrancing. But the -great game of this class in the autumn and winter is rugby football. - -Here we encounter a social difference. Rugby was popularized at a -public school and is pre-eminently the public-school game. The "old -rugger blue" is as much a part of the rugby crowd as the ex-tackle from -Siwash in the American football crowd. The games, incidentally, have a -good deal in common and require similar skills. There is no blocking or -forward passing in rugby, but the great backs of rugby football would -hold their own in the American game. - -In the middle class it is good form to have played rugby or to watch -rugby. At the big games at Twickenham just outside London one will see -a higher percentage of women than at the major soccer matches. The -difference between the classes watching the two sports is emphasized -by the difference in clothing. Twickenham costumes are tweeds, duffel -coats, old school ties, and tweed caps. At Wembley there are the -inevitable raincoat (usually called a "mac"), the soft gray hat, and -the decent worsted suit of the industrial worker on his day off. - -Rugby crowds are as partisan as soccer crowds but less vociferous. A -bad decision will occasion some head-shaking and tut-tutting, but there -will be little shouted criticism--with one exception: the Welsh. - -The people of the Principality of Wales take their rugby as the -people of Brooklyn take their baseball. In the mining valleys and the -industrial cities rugby, not soccer, is the proletarian sport. The -players on an English team in an international match with Wales will -include university graduates, public-school teachers, and law students. -The Welsh side will boast colliery workers, policemen, and teachers -at state schools. More than a sport, rugby is a national religion. -Consequently, the invasion of Twickenham by a Welsh crowd for an -international match is very like the entry of a group of bartenders -and bookmakers into a WCTU convention. The Welsh feel emotionally -about rugby, and they do not keep their feelings to themselves. They -are a small people but terribly tough. My happiest memory of the 1956 -international at Twickenham is of a short, broad Welsh miner pummeling -a tall, thin Englishman who had suggested mildly that Wales had been -lucky to win. - -There is another break in the pattern of middle-class allegiance to -rugby. A game called Rugby League, somewhat different from the older -and more widely played Rugby Union, is played in the North of England. -It is definitely a working-class game and a professional one, whereas -Rugby Union is, by American standards, ferociously amateur. The English -feel badly when one of their players succumbs to the financial lure of -Rugby League and leaves the amateur game. The Welsh feel even worse, -not because the player is turning professional but because "Look, -dammit, man, we need Jones for the match with England." - -There are survivals of the old attitude toward professionals in sport -in the English (but not the Welsh) attitude toward rugby football. -Soccer football, like baseball in America, began as an amateur game and -at one time was widely played by the middle class. But middle-class -enthusiasm and support dwindled as the game became professionalized. -Of late there has been a revival of interest in the amateur side of -the sport, but basically the game is played by professionals for huge -crowds drawn from the industrial working class. However, thousands in -the crowds also play for club and school teams. - -Yet here we encounter another contradiction. Cricket, considered the -most English of games, is played nowadays mostly by professionals, -as far as the county teams (the equivalent of the major-league teams -in baseball) are concerned. But many English approach cricket with -something akin to the Welshman's attitude toward rugby. Professionalism -is no longer looked down upon, and the old distinctions between -Gentlemen and Players are slowly vanishing. - -John Lardner once mentioned how difficult it was to explain the -extraordinary ascendancy that baseball assumed over Americans in the -last half of the nineteenth century. It is equally difficult to explain -the hold that cricket exercises today on a large section of Britain. -More people watch soccer, but that game does not seem to generate the -dedicated, almost mystic attitude displayed by cricket enthusiasts. -Cricket is an extraordinarily involved, delicate, and, at times, -exciting game. But it cannot be merely the game itself which brings -old men doddering to Lord's and rouses whole families in the chill cold -of a winter morning to listen to the broadcast of a match played half a -world away in the bright sunshine of Melbourne. - -Part of the hold may be explained by cricket's ability to remind the -spectators of their youth and a richer, greener England. To that -nation, secure, prosperous, and powerful, many thousands of the middle -class return daily in their thoughts. Cricket--village cricket or -cricket at the Oval or Lord's, twin sanctums of the game--represents -that other England. For a time they can forget the taxes, forget the -unknown grave in France or Libya, forget the industrial wasteland -around them, and return to the village green and the day the Vicar -bowled (struck out) the policeman from the next village. - -It is a peaceful game to watch. The absence of the noise, the strident -criticisms and outbursts, of the baseball game has been noted by enough -Americans. In addition, there is a soporific atmosphere about cricket. -Men sit on the grass and watch the white figures of the players make -intricate, shifting patterns against the bright green of the grass. -Their outward show of enthusiasm is confined to an "Oh, well hit, -well hit indeed, sir" or applause when a player makes fifty runs or -is bowled. There is no need to hurry or to worry about anything more -important than saving the fellow who is on. The pipe is drawing nicely, -and later you can meet old So-and-so at the club, or the pub, for a -chat about the match. "I go out on a summer evening to watch them -play," a Londoner said. "Sort of rests me, it does." - -The influence of cricket on the middle class that follows the game has -been and is remarkable. Cricket terms have become part of the language -of this class. Such phrases as "hit them for six" and "batting on a -sticky wicket" pepper the speeches of politicians. As cricket was -played originally by amateurs who were presumed to be gentlemen, it -assumed an aristocratic tone. Anything that was "not cricket" was not -gentlemanly. - -Many Britons in World War II showed a tendency to think of the war in -terms of cricket. This was discouraged by the tougher-minded commanders -on the sensible grounds that war is not cricket. But no one could stop -Field Marshal Montgomery from promising his troops they were about to -"hit the Germans for six." This introduction of a sporting vocabulary -into a fight for survival is one of the reasons why many Continentals -regard the English as a frivolous race. I remember still the look, -compounded of awe and disgust, on the face of a Norwegian, lately -escaped from his homeland, when in the summer of 1940 he found that the -newspaper-sellers on the street corners were writing the results of -each day's fighting in the Battle of Britain in cricket terms. "Here -they are," he said, "fighting for their lives, and I see a sign reading -'England 112 Not Out.' I asked the man what it meant, and he said: -'We got 112 of the ----ers, cock, and we're still batting.' A strange -people." - -If soccer is primarily a working-class sport and cricket the central -sporting interest of the middle class, horse racing is the attraction -that transcends all class distinctions. In Britain, as in America, -great trouble is taken by those who administer the business to clothe -it with the attributes of a sport. But essentially horse racing is a -means of gambling, and the British, beneath their supposed stolidity, -are a nation of gamblers. I do not recall during my childhood buying -a ticket for a sweepstakes on the Kentucky Derby. But in Britain boys -and girls of ten and eleven customarily buy tickets in "sweeps" run by -their classmates, and the more precocious swap tips on horses. - -A tremendous amount is bet each day on racing in Britain, and it is -estimated that more money is bet on the Epsom Derby each June than on -any other single horse race in the world. - -Derby Day at Epsom is one of the best opportunities of seeing -contemporary British society, from the Queen at the top to the London -barrow boy at the bottom, en masse. Inside the track are the vans of -the gypsy fortune-tellers, the stands of the small-time bookmakers, -scores of bars and snack bars, carousels and other amusement-park -attractions. Across the track are the big stands filled with what -remains of the aristocracy and the upper middle class of Britain -carefully dressed in morning coats, gray top hats, and starched -collars. Its members may envy the great wads of bank-notes carried by -some of the prosperous farmers and North Country businessmen across -the track, but on Derby Day anything goes, and there are champagne and -lobster lunches, hilarious greetings to old friends, and reminiscences -of past Derbies. - -Queen Elizabeth II's love of racing endears her to her subjects. -An interest in racing has always been a passport to popularity for -monarchs or politicians. Sir Winston Churchill, who divined the wishes -and thoughts of his countrymen with uncanny ability during the years -of crisis between 1939 and 1945, had few interests in common with the -people he lectured and led. He cared little for soccer or cricket. But -when, after the war, he began to build up a racing stable, he acquired -a new popularity with the people. Naturally, this was the last thing in -Sir Winston's mind. He had made some money, he was out of office, and -racing attracted him. - -Racing is an upper-class sport in the sense that only the rich -can afford it. But the true upper-class sports that survive are -fox-hunting, shooting, and fishing, known in upper-class parlance as -"huntin', shootin', and fishin'." Shooting is bird-shooting--pheasant, -grouse, partridge. Fishing is for salmon or trout. As Britain's -sprawling industrialization has gobbled up land, the field sports -have become more and more the preserve of the rich or at least the -well-to-do. George Orwell once noted the dismay of British Communists -who learned that Lenin and other revolutionary leaders had enjoyed -shooting--shooting birds, that is--in Russia, a country teeming with -game. They thought it almost treasonable for the Little Father of -the masses to engage in a sport that in Britain was reserved for the -capitalists. - -Fox-hunting, chiefly because of its close connection with the cult -of the horse, takes social precedence over shooting and fishing. But -here again we encounter a change. Death duties, taxes on land, and -income taxes have impoverished a large number of rural aristocrats -who formerly supported local hunts. Their places have been taken by -well-to-do farmers and professional men and women from near-by towns. -Some of the better-established hunts, such as the Quorn and the -Pytchley, try to maintain the old standards of exclusiveness. - -The attention paid the cavalry regiments in the old Army, the -middle-class conviction that children must be taught to ride because it -is a social asset, the aristocratic atmosphere of fox-hunting and show -jumping are all expressions of the cult of the horse which flourishes -in one of the most heavily industrialized nations in the world. This, -too, may express an unconscious desire to return to the past and a -secure Britain. Here, too, we see the newly emerging middle class -sending its sons and daughters to riding schools where they will meet -the sons and daughters of the established middle class. - -Golf and tennis are two games that Britain spread around the world. -Golf is every man's game in Scotland and a middle-class game in -England. I well remember my first trip to St. Andrews in 1939 and my -delight at watching a railroad worker solemnly unbutton his collar, -take off his coat, and play around one of the formidable courses -there in 89. The incongruity was made more marked by the foursomes of -expensively outfitted English and Americans who allowed the Scot to -play through. - -Tennis in Britain, like tennis in America, retains aristocratic -overtones. But today it is a middle-class sport; membership at the -local tennis club is ranked below membership in the local yacht club or -the local hunt. - -In both games British representatives in international competitions -are at a disadvantage because there is not in Britain the urgent drive -to develop players of international ability which exists in the United -States and Australia. British cricket and rugby football teams, on the -other hand, have enjoyed a number of brilliant successes in competition -with Commonwealth teams since the war, and English soccer football, -after some lean years, has begun to climb back to the top of the -international heap. - -In this land of paradox which was the birthplace of the modern -"sporting" attitude, the original home of "the game for the game's -sake," we find that the most popular sport is soccer football played -for money mainly by professionals; that rugby football can be a -middle-class game in England and a working-class game one hundred miles -away in Wales; that cricket through the years has acquired the standing -not of a sport but of a religion among one important class in society; -and that shooting and fishing, two proletarian pastimes in both the -United States and the Soviet Union, are the domain of the wealthy, the -well-bred, and the middle class in Britain. - - -PUBS AND CLUBS - -Long ago one of my bosses advised me to spend less time listening -to people in pubs. Had I taken his advice, which fortunately I did -not, I would be richer by many pounds but poorer in both friends and -information. - -Although writers have contended otherwise, the public house is not a -unique British institution. Frenchmen gather in _estaminets_ to drink, -to argue, and to write interminable letters. Americans meet at bars and -taverns. The Spaniard patronizes his café. The unique aspect of the -British pub is its atmosphere. - -The pub is a place where you can take your time. In city or country -it is a refuge. A man may enter, drink three or four pints of beer in -moody silence, and depart refreshed. Or he can come in, drink the same -amount of beer, debate the state of the nation and the world with other -drinkers and the barmaid, and play darts. Dart-playing, of course, -is a national sport, and there are enthusiasts who claim it has more -devotees than tennis or golf. Dart leagues flourish throughout the -country, to the delight of the publicans, who reap a rich harvest from -each match. - -Pubs come in all shapes and sizes. Recently many of the old London pubs -have been modernized. Plastics and neon lights have taken the place -of huge glass walls engraved with advertisements for gin and beer and -old-fashioned glass-shaded electric lights. In their efforts to meet -the competition of television at home and milk bars or soda fountains -down the street, many pubs have adopted new and, to a purist, -disgusting attractions. The news that a pub in Cambridge intended to -sell ice cream convinced many serious thinkers that this _was_ the end -of the Empire. Similarly, a friend told me in shocked tones that when -he was served a pint of beer in a suburban pub the barmaid handed him -"a damned doily" to put under the glass. He informed her, he reported, -that he had given up spilling his drinks at the age of three and a half. - -Despite the inroads of the milk bars and the trend toward bottled beer -bought in the pub and drunk before the television set, draught beer -is still the mainstay of British drinking. "Beer and beef have made -us what we are," said the Prince Regent. (His friend, the Duke of -Wellington, somewhat surprisingly, thought the Church of England was -responsible.) - -English beer has a bad name in the United States. The GI invading the -country in 1942-5 found it weak, warm, and watery. During the war years -it was indeed both weak and watery. Today, however, it has regained its -old-time potency. - -In addition to the standard beers and ales, the British brew small -quantities of special ales that, as the old saying goes, would blow -a soft hat through a cement ceiling. The Antelope, in Chelsea, had -managed to hoard some bottles of this liquid as late as the autumn of -1940. After two bottles apiece, three Americans walked home through -one of the worst nights of bombing exclaiming happily over the pretty -lights in the sky. - -The merits of the brews in their respective countries are a favorite -topic for conversation between Britons and Americans. The tourist will -find that his host holds no high opinion of American beer, considering -it gassy, flavorless, and, as one drinker inelegantly described it, "as -weak as gnat's wee." The British are continually surprised by American -drinking habits. They consider that the GI who hastily swallows three -or four double whiskies is asking for trouble, and that the object of -a night's foray in the pub is not to get drunk but to drink enough to -encourage conversation and forget your troubles. Prohibition, gone -these many years, is still a black mark against Americans in the minds -of the pundits in the pubs. They regard it as a horrible aberration by -an otherwise intelligent people. - -It should not be assumed that the British drink only beer. When they -are in funds or when the occasion calls for something stronger, they -will drink almost anything from what my charwoman once described as "a -nourishing drop of gin" to champagne. During the war they drank some -strange and weird mixtures and distillations that, if they did not kill -the drinker as did some Prohibition drams, at least made him wish he -were dead the next morning. - -But the pub's importance, let me repeat, is due to its place as a -public forum as much as to its position as a public fountain. There -questions can be asked and answers given which the average Briton would -regard as impertinent if the conversation took place in his home or -his office. There interminable public arguments will probe the wisdom -of the government's policy on installment buying or Cyprus or, with -due gravity, will seek to establish the name of the winner of the -Cambridgeshire Handicap in 1931. - -The atmosphere of discussion and reflection of the English pub thus -far has been proof against the juke box, the pinball machine, and the -television set. But the fight is a hard one. These counterattractions -to the bar are making their appearance in an increasing number of -pubs each year. At the same time, publicans are giving more thought -to the catering side of their business. The bar, which was the heart -of the pub, has become merely an adjunct to the "attractions" and the -restaurant. - -The spread of restaurant eating is itself a novel change in British -habits. Until the Second World War the great majority of the working -class and the middle class ate their meals at home. Even today, in the -New Towns, the industrial worker prefers to return home for lunch. -But the shortage of servants, the difficulties of feeding a family on -the weekly rations, the need to get away from the drabness of chilly, -darkened homes during the war and immediate post-war years combined to -send millions of Britons out to eat. - -This has changed the character of a large number of pubs. It has also -improved restaurant cooking, especially in the provinces. British -cooking is a standard music-hall joke, but the comedians are somewhat -behind the times. It has improved steadily since the war, largely -because the British had to learn how to cook in order to make their -meager rations palatable. The squeeze on the established middle class -forced the housewives of that group to study cookery. Dinners in that -circle are shorter and less formal than before the war, but the cooking -is vastly improved. - -Décor in modern pubs varies from the overpoweringly new to the -self-consciously old. Tucked away in the back streets of the cities, -however, or nestling in the folds of the Cotswolds one can still see -the genuine article. There the political arguments flourish as they -have since Bonaparte was troubling the English. There on a Saturday -night you can still hear the real English songs--"Knees Up Mother -Brown" or "Uncle Tom Cobley and All." - -A sense of calm pervades the rural bars. The countryman is a -long-lived, tough person. At the Monkey and Drum or the Red Dragon or -the Malakof (named for a half-forgotten action in the Crimean War) the -beer is set out for wiry ancients in their seventies and eighties, -masters of country crafts long forgotten by the rest of the population. -The sun stays late in the sky on a summer evening. From the open door -you can see it touching the orderly fields, the neat houses. It is -difficult, almost impossible in such surroundings to doubt that there -will always be an England. Yet this is precisely the England that is -and has been in continuous retreat for a century and a half before the -devouring march of industrialization. - -The pub is the poor man's "club"--in the sense that it is a haven -for the tired worker and a center of discussion. The actual British -clubs are another singular institution. There are, of course, men's -and women's clubs throughout the West, but only in Britain have they -become an integral and important part of social life. Like the pubs, -they are changing with the times. But they still retain enough of their -distinctive flavor to mark them as a particularly British institution. - -London's clubs are the most famous. But throughout the islands there -are other clubs--county clubs in provincial capitals, workingmen's -clubs that compete with the pubs. There are women's clubs, too, but the -club is mainly a masculine institution in a nation whose society is -still ordered for the well-being of the male. - -"Do you mean to tell me that these Englishmen go to their clubs for a -drink after work and don't get home until dinnertime?" a young American -matron asked. She thought it was "scandalous." Her husband, poor devil, -came home from work promptly at six each night and sat down to an early -dinner with his wife and three small children. I suppose he enjoyed it. - -London's clubs cater to all tastes. There are political clubs such as -the Carlton, the Conservatives' inner sanctum. There are service clubs: -the Cavalry or the Army and Navy. On St. James's Street are a number of -the oldest and best: White's, Boodle's, Brooks's, the Devonshire. - -The same American matron asked me what a club offers. The answer is, -primarily, relaxation in a man's world. Like the pub, the club is a -place where a man can get away from his home, his job, his worries. If -he wishes, he can drink and eat while reading a newspaper. Or he can -stand at the bar exchanging gossip with other members. He can read, he -can play cards, he can play billiards. If he wants advice, there may -be an eminent Queen's Counsel, a Foreign Office official, a doctor, or -an editor across the luncheon table. There is the same atmosphere of -relaxed calm which marks the best pubs. - -Because for centuries the clubs have been the refuges of the wealthy -or the aristocratic or the dominant political class they have exerted -considerable political influence. Feuds that have shaken great -political parties have begun before club bars and, years later, been -settled with an amicable little dinner party at the club. In politics, -domestic and foreign, the British put great faith in the "quiet -get-together" where an issue can be thrashed out in private without -regard for popular opinion. - -During the worst days of the debate over the future of Trieste a -Foreign Office official remarked to me that "all these conferences" -complicated the situation. "There's nothing that couldn't be settled -in an hour's frank talk over a glass of sherry at White's," he said. -Foolish? Old-fashioned? Perhaps. But how much progress has been made -at full-dress international conferences where national leaders speak -not to one another but to popular opinion in their own and foreign -countries? - -The clubs are centers in which opinion takes form. As the opinion of -many who are leaders in Britain's political and economic life, it is -important opinion. For instance, it was obvious in the clubs, long -before the failure of the Norwegian campaign brought it into the open, -that there was widespread dissatisfaction in the middle class over -Neville Chamberlain's direction of the war. Similarly, stories of the -aging Churchill's unwillingness to deal with the pressing domestic -economic problems of his government were first heard in the clubs. - -The high cost of maintaining the standards of food, drink, and service -required by most members has hurt the clubs. There are in every such -institution a few staff mainstays whose remarks become part of club -lore. But the Wages and Catering Act has made it difficult to staff -clubs adequately. - -The food in clubs is man's food. Its emphasis on beef, lamb, fish, and -cheese would upset a Mamaroneck matron. But some of the chefs are as -good as any in Britain, and the food can be accompanied by some of the -finest wines in the world. - -Essentially, the club remains man's last refuge from the pressures of -his world. He can talk, he can listen, he can drink a second or even a -third cocktail without the slight sniff that betokens wifely censure. -The latest story about the Ruritanian Ambassadress or the government's -views on the situation in Upper Silesia will be retailed by members. -The taxes may be high, the world in a mess, the old order changing. -Here by the fire with his drink in his hand he is his own man. "Waiter, -two more of the same." - - - - -[Illustration] - - - - -XII. _Britain and the Future_ - - _I will not cease from mental fight, - Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand, - Till we have built Jerusalem - In England's green and pleasant land._ - - WILLIAM BLAKE - - _Those who compare the age in which their lot has fallen with a golden - age which exists only in imagination, may talk of degeneracy and - decay; but no man who is correctly informed as to the past, will be - disposed to take a morose or desponding view of the present._ - - THOMAS BABINGTON MACAULAY - -[Illustration] - - -Is the long story of British greatness nearly done? That is the -question we must ask ourselves as we survey the real Britain, the -changing Britain of today. - -The question is a vital one for Americans. Our generation faces a -challenge that dwarfs those offered by Germany in 1917 or by Germany, -Japan, and Italy in 1941. Communist dominion stretches from the Elbe -to the Pacific, from the arctic to the jungles of Indochina. Nearly a -thousand million people serve tyrannical systems of government. Behind -the barbed wire and the empty-faced guards at the frontiers we can -hear the explosions of devastating weapons of war, we can discern the -ceaseless effort to achieve the world triumph of Communism. - -To the leaders of all these millions, the United States is the enemy, -the people of America their principal obstacle in the march to world -power. As the most successful capitalist state, the United States is -now and will be in the future the principal target for the diplomatic -intrigues, the political subversion, and the economic competition of -the Communist bloc. The avenues of attack may be indirect, the means -may differ from place to place. But the enmity does not vary. America -is the enemy today, as it was yesterday, as it will be tomorrow. - -Living at the apex of power and prosperity, it is easy for Americans -to be complacent, it is natural for them to fasten on hints of Russian -friendship. But it is folly to believe that the world situation is -improving because Nikita Khrushchev jests with correspondents in Moscow -or because a delegation of visiting farmers from the Ukraine is made up -of hearty extroverts. For the Communist challenge, as it has developed -since the death of Stalin, is as real as that which produced the cold -war of 1945-53. But because it is expressed in terms superficially less -belligerent than blockades and riots, violent speeches and editorials, -and overt instant and implacable opposition to Western policies, -the current challenge is far more insidious. Concepts and policies -developed to meet a purely military challenge will not suffice to -defeat it. - -For a decade the United States has been busy "making" allies all over -the world. But you cannot "make" allies as you make Fords. You cannot -buy them as you buy bread at the baker's. Of course, in war, or at -war's approach, threatened nations will hurry for shelter under the -protecting wings of Uncle Sam. But we are facing a situation in which -every effort will be made to lure our friends away with protestations -of peaceful intent. Our real allies will be those who share common -interests and believe in the same principles of government and law. -Among these the British stand pre-eminent. - -There was a wise old general commanding the United States Army in -Germany at the height of the cold war. At this time, early in 1951, no -one was sure what the next Russian move would be. Some of the general's -young officers were playing that engaging game of adding divisions of -various nationalities to assess Western strength. In the unbuttoned -atmosphere of after-dinner drinks they conjured up Italian army corps -and Greek and Turkish armored divisions. After ten minutes of this, the -idea that the Soviet Union might even think of a war seemed downright -foolish. - -The general surveyed them with a wintry eye and then spoke. They were, -he said mildly, playing with shadows. If "it" came, the only people -to count on were the four divisions of British troops up on the left -flank. These are the only people on our side, he added, who think the -way we do and feel the way we do. These are the people who, in war or -in peace, in good times and bad, are going to stick. - -This identity of broad political outlook is essential in American -assessments of Britain. It is more important in the long run than -concern over the power of the Trades Union Congress or competition for -overseas markets. - -But, granting this identity of outlook and aims, we have the right to -ask ourselves if Britain remains a powerful and stable ally of the -United States in the leadership of the Western community. I believe -that the answer is in the affirmative, that with all her difficulties -and changes Britain will continue to play a leading role in the affairs -of the world, that she will not decline gradually into impotent -isolation. - -Let us be quite clear about the future outline of British power. The -Empire is gone or going. The British know that. But the endurance, the -resolution, the intelligence that transformed a small island off the -coast of Europe into the greatest of modern empires is still there. -Beneath the complacency, the seeming indifference, it remains. The -best evidence is the series of social, economic, and political changes -that has transformed British life. - -These changes, whatever individual Britons or Americans may think of -them, are not signs of complacency or indifference. They are rather -proofs that the society has not lost its dynamism, that its leaders -admit and understand their losses in political influence and economic -power and are determined to build a stronger society on the foundations -of the old. - -Admittedly, the British make it difficult for their friends or their -enemies to discern the extent of change. They cling to the old -established forms. This is a characteristic that is almost universal -in mankind. When the first automobiles appeared, they were built to -resemble horse-drawn carriages. Men cling to the familiar in the -material and the mental. Think of our own devotion, in a period when -the nation has developed into a continental and world power, to a -Constitution drafted to suit the needs of a few millions living along -the eastern fringe of our country. - -The changes in Britain have taken place behind a façade of what the -world expects from Britain. The Queen rides in her carriage at Royal -Ascot, the extremists of the Labor Party cry havoc and let slip the -dogs of political war, the Guards are on parade, and gentlemen with -derbies firm upon their heads walk down St. James's swinging their -rolled umbrellas. Literature, the stage, the movies, the appearance of -the visiting Englishman in every quarter of the globe has implanted a -false picture firmly in the popular mind. - -"Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the noonday sun." They also play -cricket and drink tea to the exclusion of other entertainments, live on -estates or in tiny thatched cottages, say "by Jove" or "cor blimey." -Their society is stratified, their workers are idle, their enterprise -is negligible. Britain itself is a land of placid country villages, one -large city (London), squires and lords, cockney humorists and rustics -in patched corduroy. - -This is Britain as many Americans think of it. It is also, as I have -mentioned earlier, the Britain to which many of its inhabitants return -in their daydreams. But it is not contemporary Britain. - -The real Britain is a hurrying, clamorous, purposeful industrial -nation. Its people, with a sense of reality any nation might envy, are -carrying out major changes in the structure of the national economy and -in the organization of society. The Welfare State may be considered -a blessing or a curse, according to political taste, but the nation -that first conceived and established it cannot be thought deficient in -imagination or averse to change. - -The human symbol of modern Britain is not John Bull with his -country-squire clothes or the languid, elegant young man of the -West End theater, but an energetic, quick-spoken man of thirty-five -or forty. He is "in" plastics or electronics or steel. He talks of -building bridges in India, selling trucks in Nigeria, or buying timber -in Russia. In the years since the war he has been forced to supplement -his education--he went to a small public school--with a great deal of -technical reading about his job. His home is neither an estate nor a -cottage but a small modern house. He wants a better house, a better -car in time. Indeed, he wants more of everything that is good in life. -He recognizes the need for change--and his own pre-eminence in the -economy of the nation is a sign of change. But by tradition he opposes -any change so rapid and revolutionary that it shakes the basis of his -society. Politically, he is on the left wing of the Conservative Party -or the right wing of the Labor Party. When in 1945 he left the Army -or the Navy or the Air Force his views were well to the left of their -present position. The thought that Britain's day is done has never -entered his head. - -The moderation of his political outlook expresses an important trend in -British politics. This is the movement within both major parties toward -the moderate center and a reaffirmation of the national rather than the -party point of view. The antics of the extreme left and the extreme -right in British politics are entertaining and occasionally worrying. -But under present conditions neither group represents a dominant -doctrine, although in London, as in Washington, governments must make -gestures in the direction of their more extreme supporters. - -This movement toward the center seems to express two deeply felt -national attitudes. One is that further experimentation in transforming -British society should be postponed until the changes that took -place in World War II and the decade that followed it have finished -their alteration of that society. There will be--indeed, there must -be--further alterations in the industrial economy, and these, of -course, will affect society. But I do not believe the British people -are now prepared for further sweeping, planned changes in their life -or would support such changes if they were to be proposed by either -political party. - -The second attitude is a growing determination to face up to the -national danger. Successive governments have attempted to drive home -the lesson that Britain's economic peril is very real and that it is -not a transient matter; that exports and dollar balances and internal -consumption will be matters of great importance for years to come. As -the memories of pre-war Britain fade, and as a new generation that has -never experienced the national economic security of imperial Britain -gains power, awareness of the nation's real problems should take hold. -And because the British are a sensible people bountifully endowed -with courage and resource, they should be able to meet and defeat the -problems. - -But at the moment the percentage of those who understand the national -position is too small. They must eternally contend against two -psychological factors in working-class opinion which we have already -encountered. One is the political lethargy of the new industrial -worker who, after centuries of shameful treatment, has emerged into -the sunlight of full employment, adequate housing, high wages, strong -industrial organization, political representation, amusements, clothes -and food that for decades have been out of the reach of Britain's -masses. This new working class has shown itself capable of great -self-sacrifice on behalf of its class interests and, let us never -forget, on behalf of its country in the last fifty years. But now, -having reached the home of its dreams, it has hung a "Do Not Disturb" -sign on the gate. Apparently it has done with sacrifice and realism. - -To a certain extent this attitude is encouraged by the big national -newspapers. The emphasis on sport, crime, the royal family, and the -trivia of international affairs leaves inadequate space for the grim -realities of the long politico-economic struggle with Russia, and the -new working class remains uninformed about its real problems. A Prime -Minister or a Chancellor of the Exchequer may expound the realities of -the national position in a speech, but if people are not interested -enough to listen or to read, what good does it do? - -Such a state of mind in an important section of the populace seriously -impedes national progress. When dollar contracts are lost because -of union squabbles there is something radically wrong with the -leadership exercised by the trade unions. Would the contracts be lost, -one wonders, if the union leaders had given their followers a clear -explanation of the importance of such contracts not only to one factory -in one industry but to the entire nation? - -Admittedly, there are plenty of others in Britain who do not understand -the importance of the economic situation or the changes that have taken -place. But the attitude of a retired colonel in Bedford or a stout -matron in Wimbledon is not so important to the nation's welfare as that -of the members of the working class. - -The second factor affecting the response of this class to the nation's -needs is the effect upon it of the economic depression of the years -between the two world wars. Again and again we have seen how the memory -of unemployment, of the dole, of endless empty days at labor exchanges, -of hungry children and women's stricken eyes has colored the thinking -of the working class. It is too ready to see the problems of the 1950's -in terms of its experiences of the 1930's. Consequently, it adopts -a partisan attitude toward political development and a reactionary -attitude toward industrial innovation. - -There are those who argue that these attitudes will change as the -working class becomes more accustomed to its new condition of life and -place in the national pattern. This may prove true. But can Britain -afford to wait until the union leaders understand that each new machine -or industrial technique is not part of a calculated plan by the bosses -to return the workers to the conditions prevailing in South Wales in -1936? - -This partisan approach to economic problems is as important a factor as -complacency and lethargy in obstructing adoption by the working class -of a national viewpoint toward the British economic predicament. The -British political system is a marvelously well-balanced one. But the -balance is disturbed now and has been for some years by the tendency of -organized labor to think almost exclusively in terms of its own rather -than national interests. Labor can with perfect justice retort that -when the middle class dominated British society it thought in terms of -its own interests, too. This is true, of course. The difference is that -the present national position is too precarious for blind partisanship. - -Much is made in public speeches of the educational side of trade-union -work. It would seem that the great opportunity for the unions now is -in this field. Someone or some organization that enjoys the respect of -the workers must educate them out of their lethargy and out of their -memories of the past. The popular newspapers will not or cannot do -it--and, naturally, as largely capitalist, they would be suspected by -many of those most in need of such education. But the job must be done -if Britain is to benefit fully from the enterprise and ingenuity of her -designers and engineers. - -Certainly the educational process would work both ways. A traveler in -Britain in the period 1953-6 would notice that in many cases there was -a difference between the TUC leaders' views about what the workers -thought and what the workers themselves thought. Many of the unions -have become too big. Contact between the leaders and the rank and file -is lost. The Communists take advantage of this. - -Can the working class awaken to the necessities of Britain's position -and sublimate its agonizing memories and fierce hatreds in a national -economic effort? This is the big "if" in Britain's ability to meet the -economic challenge of today. I do not doubt that the working class will -respond again, as it has in the past, to a national emergency that is -as real, if less spectacular, than the one which faced the nation in -1940. This response, I believe, will develop as firmly, albeit more -slowly, under a Conservative government as under a Labor government -because it will be a development of the trend, already clearly evident, -in the new middle class to take a national rather than a class outlook -on Britain's problems. But the response must come soon. - -We have seen how the present political alignment in Britain has -developed out of the political and economic circumstances of the years -since 1939. What of the future? - -The Conservative government since the end of 1955 has been engaged in -a gigantic political gamble. It has instituted a series of economic -measures to restrict home spending. These measures are highly unpopular -with the new working class from whom the party has obtained surprising -support in recent elections. At the same time the Tory cabinet has not -provided as much relief from taxation as the old middle class, its -strongest supporters, demanded and expected after the electoral triumph -of May 1955. These are calculated political risks. The calculation is -that by the next general election, in 1959 or even 1960, the drive -to expand British exports will have succeeded in establishing a new -prosperity more firmly based than that of the boom years 1954 and 1955. - -To attain this objective the Conservative government will have to -perform a feat of political tightrope-walking beyond the aspirations -of ordinary politics. The new prosperity can be achieved successfully, -from the political point of view, only if the measures taken to attain -it please the old middle class without offending Conservative voters in -the new middle class and the new industrial working class. This will -mean budgets in 1957 and 1958 that will relieve financial pressure -upon the first of these groups without alienating the other two, whose -interests are mutually antagonistic. It will mean that Britain's -defense commitments must be reduced and adjusted to the extent that the -savings will cut taxation of the old middle class but not to the extent -that the reduction of defense construction will affect the employment -of either the new middle class or the industrial working class. - -This book was completed before the government's course was run. If -its policy succeeds, then Harold Macmillan must be accorded a place -in history not far below that of the greatest workers of political -miracles. - -Had there been a general election in the winter of 1956-7, the Labor -Party would have won, although its majority would probably not have -been so large as its enthusiastic tacticians predicted. The party -should be able to appeal to the electorate at the next general election -with greater success than in 1955, providing certain conditions are met. - -The big "if" facing the Labor Party concerns not abstruse questions -of socialist dogma but the oldest question in politics: the conflict -between two men. The men are Hugh Gaitskell, the leader of the -Parliamentary Labor Party, and Aneurin Bevan. - -Nye Bevan remains a major force in British politics. He is the only -prominent politician who is a force in himself, a personality around -which lesser men assemble. Like the young Winston Churchill, he -inspires either love or hate. Untrammeled by the discipline of the -party, he can rally the left wing of the Labor movement. Simultaneously -he can alienate the moderates of the party, the undecided voters, -and the tepid conservatives who had thought it might be time to let -labor "have a go." If the next general-election campaign finds Bevan -clamoring for the extension of nationalization in British industry, -beckoning his countrymen down untrodden social paths, lambasting -Britain's allies, and scoffing at her progress, then the Labor Party -will be defeated. - -I have known Aneurin Bevan for many years. For the weal or woe of -Britain, he is a man born to storm and danger. A sudden war, a swift -and violent economic reverse would brighten his star. In a crisis his -confidence, whether that of a born leader or a born charlatan, would -attract the many. - -Barring such catastrophes, a reasonable stability in government is to -be expected. The Conservative majority in the House of Commons after -the 1955 election probably was a little larger than is customary in a -nation so evenly divided politically. Despite the rancor aroused by -the Suez crisis, there seem to be reasonable grounds for predicting the -gradual disappearance of Tories of the old type and of the belligerent -Labor leaders surviving from the twenties. The development of a -national outlook by both parties seems probable. - -Americans need not be concerned over the fission of the British -political system into a multi-party one capable of providing a -government but incapable of government. Stability means, of course, -that British governments will know their own minds. In the complex, -hair-trigger world of today this is an important factor. It is equally -important in charting the future course of Britain. Nations that know -where they want to go and how they want to go there are not verging on -political senility. - -This political stability is vital to Britain in the years of transition -that lie ahead. For it is in British industry that the greatest changes -will take place. - -Britain is moving in new directions, economically, politically, and -socially. The base of this movement is industrial--a revolution in -power. The world's most imaginative, extensive, and advanced program -for the production of electricity from nuclear power stations is under -way. This magnificent acceptance of the challenge of the nuclear age is -also an answer to one of the key questions of 1945: how could British -industry expand and British exports thrive if coal yearly became -scarcer and more expensive to mine? The answer is nuclear energy, 5,000 -to 6,000 megawatts of it by 1965. - -The program for constructing twenty nuclear power stations in Britain -and Northern Ireland is the most spectacular part of the power program. -As coal will be vital to the economy for years to come, more economic -and more efficient mining methods also are regarded as a matter of -national urgency. - -Throughout the nation's industrial structure there is an air of purpose -and enthusiasm. Five huge new steel plants will be started in 1957. An -ambitious program of modernizing the railroads and the shipbuilding -industry is well under way. The new industries that have developed -since 1945 and old industries now delivering for the export markets -are pushing British goods throughout the world: radar, radioactive -isotopes, electronic equipment, sleek new jet aircraft, diesel engines, -plastics, detergents, atomic power stations. All are part of Britain's -response to the challenge of change. - -To fulfill present hopes, production and productivity must rise, -management must grasp the changed position of Britain in the world. -From the courted, she has become the courter, competing for markets -with Germany, Japan, Sweden, and the United States. Such competition -existed in the past, but now, with the cushion of overseas investments -gone, such competition is a true national battle. There is plenty of -evidence that a portion at least of industrial management in Britain -fails to understand these conditions. Such complacency is as dangerous -to the export drive as the unwillingness or inability of the industrial -worker to grasp the export drive's importance to him, to his factory, -to his union, and to his country. - -Due emphasis should be given to such failings. But we must not forget -that the British are a great mercantile people, eager and ingenious -traders ready, once they accept its importance, to go to any length of -enterprise to win a market. It is also wise to remember that, although -circumstances have made the British share of the dollar market the -criterion of success, the British do extremely well in a number of -important non-dollar markets. - -The attitude of the industrial working class to wage increases is a -factor in the drive to boost the exports on which the nation lives. -The modernization of British industry to meet the requirements of -the nation's economic position, alterations in management and sales -practices, higher production and productivity will not suffice to win -export markets if the wage level in industry continues to rise. A -steady rise will price Britain out of her markets. Should this occur, -the question of whether organized labor is to take kindly to automation -will become academic. The country cannot live without those markets. - -Early in September of 1956 when the world was worrying over the Suez -Canal, _The New York Times_ carried a news item from Brighton, the -English seashore resort, that surely was as important to Britain as -anything Premier Nasser or Sir Anthony Eden or Mr. Dulles might say. - -The Trades Union Congress, the dispatch said, had rejected the -Conservative government's plea for restraint in pressing wage claims. -The final paragraphs of a resolution passed unanimously at the -eighty-eighth annual conference said that the TUC " ... asserts the -right of labor to bargain on equal terms with capital, and to use its -bargaining strength to protect the workers from the dislocations of an -unplanned economy. - -"It rejects proposals to recover control by wage restraint, and by -using the nationalized industries as a drag-anchor for the drifting -national economy." - -These phrases reveal the heart of the quarrel between the TUC and the -government. The Conservatives are belabored for not carrying out a -Socialist policy--i.e., a planned economy--but restraint on wages is -rejected. - -The resolution represented a serious check in progress toward a -national understanding of the country's economic position. It ensured, -I believe, another round of wage demands by the unions, protracted -industrial disputes, and, eventually, higher costs for industry and -higher prices for foreign buyers. - -The constant bickering between union and union, between unions and -employers, and between the TUC and the government should not divert -us from the qualities of the British industrial working class. It -is highly skilled, especially in the fields of electronics and the -other new industries now so important to the export trade. Its -gross production and productivity are rising. It is, once aroused, -intelligent and energetic. The nation is essentially homogeneous. There -is obviously a wide gap between worker and employer in Britain, but it -seems less wide when we compare it with the French worker's hostility -toward his boss. - -But of course the industrial worker is only one unit of the industrial -system. Working with him are hundreds of thousands of engineers, -technicians, planners, and managers--men of high quality, imaginative, -daring, and resourceful. Together these two groups operate industries -that are rapidly recovering from the effects of the war and the -frantic post-war period in which all machines had to run at top speed, -regardless of repairs, if Britain was to make enough to live. - -If Americans understand that in a smaller country industry will be -on a smaller scale than in the United States, they must concede that -the steel plants in Wales and the North, the hydroelectric power -system built in the fastnesses of the Scottish Highlands, the new -nuclear-energy power stations now nearing completion are impressive -industrial installations. British industry in the physical sense is not -a collection of obsolete or obsolescent factories and rundown mills; -new plants and factories are appearing with greater frequency every -year, and the emphasis is on the future. - -A journey through the busy Midlands provides the proof. Everywhere one -sees new construction for industrial production. The rawboned red brick -factories, relics of Victorian England, are silent and empty; many have -been pulled down. The main problem for Britain is not the modernity of -her industrial system but the lack of modernity in the outlook of her -industrial workers. - -The judgment may seem too harsh. It is manifestly unfair to place the -entire burden of progress toward a healthier economy on one element in -the economic situation. Certainly British capital in the past and to -some extent in the present has been singularly blind to the country's -new situation and unenterprising in seeking means of adjusting itself -to this situation. The price rings and monopolistic practices have -sustained inefficient factories and restricted industrial enterprise. - -Nevertheless, it is my conclusion that today the industrial owner and -manager understands the nation's situation and the union leader does -not. The TUC has attained great influence in the realm. The industrial -worker has won living standards undreamed of a generation ago. -Nonetheless, there is a dangerous lack of tolerance in labor's approach -to management. This carries over into labor's approach to government. -It is a highly unrealistic attitude in which organized labor clamors -for the adoption by a Conservative government of a system of economic -planning which that government was elected to end. - -As we have seen, thousands of the Tories' strongest supporters -are angry because they regard the government they elected as -pseudo-socialist. - -This contest between labor and capital is involved and sharply -partisan. Viewed from the outside, it may seem an insurmountable -obstacle to British progress. But to accept that view is to ignore the -most important, the most enduring of all the country's resources: the -character of the British people. - -From the time of Charles II on, visitors to Britain have been struck -by the way in which the character of the British people has allowed -them the widest latitude for internal differences, often carried to the -very edge of armed conflict, and has yet enabled them to maintain their -political stability. - -There is a lesson in recent history. Imposing forces within the kingdom -reached a pitch of fanatic fury over the Ulster question shortly before -World War I. Great political leaders took their positions. The Army -was shaken by rumors of disaffection. Officers were ready to resign -their commissions rather than lead their troops into action against the -turbulent Ulstermen. The Germans and others watching from the Continent -concluded that the heart of the world empire was sick. Yet what was the -outcome? Finally aware of the magnitude of the challenge presented by -German aggression in Belgium, the country united instantly. The leaders -composed their differences. The Army closed its ranks. The officers -went away to fight and die at Mons and Le Cateau. - -The lesson is that the British, because of their essential homogeneity, -can afford a higher pitch of internal argument than can other nations. -Indeed, the very fury of these arguments testifies to the vitality of -the nation. It means a country on the move, in contrast to the somber, -orderly, shabby dictatorship of Spain or the somnolent French Republic -where the great slogans of the past have been abandoned for the motto -"We couldn't care less." - -Those who admire the British accept British character as one of the -strongest arguments for their nation's survival as a great power. -But before we go too far in endorsing this view we must note that -there are bad characteristics as well as good ones. We know that the -British society is changing. Is it not possible that in the process -of change some of the characteristics which made the nation great are -disappearing? - -Mr. Geoffrey Gorer tells us that the British have become a law-abiding -nation dwelling in amity and honesty under British justice. In some -aspects of civil relationship this is true. Visitors to Britain -only a century ago were alarmed by the behavior of British mobs. -The cockneys of London pulled the mustaches of a visiting Hungarian -general and shouted rude remarks at their Queen and her Prince Consort. -From medieval times the British working classes have been long on -independence and short on respect. The uprising of the _Jacquerie_ in -French history is balanced in British annals by the dim, powerful, and -compelling figures of Wat Tyler and John Ball. - -Has all this changed so much? Have the turbulent, violent British -really become a nation of sober householders indifferent to their -rights or to those at home or abroad who threaten them? Superficially -the answer may be yes. Basically it is no. The present strife between -organized labor and the employers is only a contemporary version of -a struggle which has gone on throughout its history and which is -world-wide. It is when this struggle is submerged that it is dangerous. -Despite all the damage it is doing now to the British economy, -dissension in the House of Commons and in the boardrooms of industries -is preferable to wild plots laid in cellars. - -When we consider the heat with which these debates are conducted we -must also take notice of one sign of British stability: partisan -passions, either in industrial conflict or in political warfare, -never reach the point where the patriotism of the other party is -impugned. The Conservatives do not label the Socialists as the party of -treason. The patriotism of Hugh Gaitskell is not questioned by Harold -Macmillan. Ultimately we come round to the realization that, despite -the bitterness of debate, the central stability of the state remains. - -Much of this stability may result from the existence of the monarchy -at the summit of British affairs. All public evidence indicates that -the Crown is nearly powerless in modern Britain, yet it represents an -authority older and higher than any other element in the realm. It may -be the balance wheel, spinning brightly through the ages, that insures -stability. - -"At the heart to the British Empire there is one institution," -Winston Churchill wrote twenty years ago, "among the most ancient and -venerable, which, so far from falling into desuetude or decay, has -breasted the torrent of events, and even derived new vigor from the -stresses. Unshaken by the earthquakes, unweakened by the dissolvent -tides, though all be drifting the Royal and Imperial Monarchy of -Britain stands firm." - -It can be argued that the excessive interest of the British people -in the monarchy and the expense and labor involved in its upkeep are -characteristics ill suited to Britain in her present position. This -interest reflects the national tendency to dwell fondly on the past, -to revere institutions for their historical connections rather than -for their efficiency or usefulness under modern conditions. Serious -criticism of this well-defined trait comes not only from Americans but -from Australians, Canadians, and other inhabitants of newer nations. We -look forward, they say, and the British look back. - -There is some justice in the criticism, but perhaps the error is not -so grave as we may think. Obviously, it is impossible for a people -living in a country that has known some sort of civilization from -Roman times not to be impressed by their past. A tendency in the same -direction marks contemporary American society. Just as we are struck -by the Londoner's interest in Roman relics dug up in the heart of his -city, so European visitors note that an increasing number of Americans -are turning to their own past. All over the East the fortresses of the -French and Indian and Revolutionary wars are being reconstructed and -opened to tourists. National attention is given to attempts in the Far -West to re-create for a day or a week the atmosphere of a frontier that -passed less than a century ago. Half-forgotten battles and generals -of the Civil War are rescued for posterity by the careful labor of -scholarly biographers and military writers. This does not mean, -however, that the United States is looking back in the field of science -or invention. - -Similarly, British preservation of old castles or folkways is not a -sign that the nation has turned its back on the twentieth century. The -boldness with which the British accepted the challenge of the nuclear -era in industrial energy is a better guide to their temper than their -respect for the past. What is damaging is not reverence for the past of -Nelson or Gladstone, but the tendency of some of the middle class to -mourn the recent past, the dear dead days before the war when servants -were plentiful, taxes relatively low, and "a man could run his own -business." These mourners are temporarily important because their -resistance to needed change infects others. But the life whose end they -bewail has been disappearing in Britain for half a century, and the -generation now rising to power will not be plagued by these memories to -the same extent. To those who matured in war and post-war austerity, -modern Britain is a prosperous land. - -The trappings of British society are much older than our own. But -their interest in maintaining an unchanged façade should not mislead -Americans into believing the British are returning to the hand -loom. Reverence for the past is often advanced as one reason for -the lethargic attitude of Britons toward the present. Certainly an -awareness of history, its trials and triumphs, gives an individual -or a people a somewhat skeptical attitude about the importance of -current history. But in Britain those who know and care least about -the nation's great past are the ones most indifferent to the challenge -of the present. They are the industrial working class, and their -indifference results from other influences. - -Talking to the planners, technicians, factory bosses, communications -experts, salesmen, and senior civil servants, one finds less -complacency and more enterprise than in most European countries. In -fact, it sometimes seems to the outsider that British society is a -little too self-critical, too contentious. Obviously, it must change to -meet the altered world, but self-criticism pushed to the maximum can -ultimately crush ambition. - -If we turn to modern British writing, we find sociologists, economists, -anthropologists, and politicians pouring forth a steady stream of books -analyzing the nation's social, economic, and political problems. One -of the great men of the modern Labor Party, Herbert Morrison, thought -it well worth while to devote his time to the writing of _Government -and Parliament_. The intellectual leaders of Britain have turned -increasingly to a minute assessment of their nation and what is right -and wrong about it. - -This preoccupation with the state of the realm is healthy. The -complacency that was once the most disliked characteristic of the -traveling Briton is vanishing. The British are putting themselves under -the microscope. Nothing but good can come of it. - -We hear from the British themselves confessions of inadequacy to meet -the modern world and flaming criticisms of aspects of their society. As -a nation they are fond of feeling sorry for themselves; indeed, someone -has said that they are never happier than when they think all is lost. -Such British statements should not be taken as representing the whole -truth. The reforming element is very strong in the British character. -Without its presence, the social reforms of this century could not have -been accomplished. - -Anyone who frequents political, business, and journalistic circles in -Britain will hear more about mistakes and failures than about success. -(The most notable exception to this enjoyment of gloom is the popular -press, which since the war has made a specialty of boosting British -achievements.) Similarly, any discussion of British character with -Britons is sure to find them concentrating on negative rather than -positive traits. Perhaps this is because they are so sure of their -positive characteristics. In any case, the latter constitute a major -share of the national insurance against decline. - -Over the years the British trait that has impressed me most is -toughness of mind. This may surprise Americans who tend to regard -the British as overpolite or diffident or sentimental--aspects of -the national character which are evident at times and which hide the -essential toughness underneath. - -Although they bewail a decline in the standards of courtesy since the -war, the British are a polite race in the ordinary business of living. -From the "'kew" of the bus conductor or the salesgirl to the "And -now, sir, if you would kindly sign here" of the bank clerk they pad -social intercourse with small courtesies. However, when an Englishman, -especially an upper-class Englishman, desires to be rude he makes the -late Mr. Vishinsky sound like a curate. But it is an English axiom that -a gentleman is never unintentionally rude. - -With some notable exceptions, the British are seldom loudly assertive. -They will listen at great length to the opinions of others and, -seemingly, are reluctant to put forward their own. This does not mean -they agree, although foreigners in contact with British diplomats have -often assumed this mistakenly. The British are always willing to see -both sides of a question. But they are seldom ready to accept without -prolonged and often violent argument any point of view other than their -own. - -They are a sentimental people but not an emotional one. Failure to -distinguish this difference leads individuals and nations to misjudge -the British. - -Sentimentalists they are. Their eyes will glisten with tears as they -listen to some elderly soprano with a voice long rusted by gin sing the -music-hall songs of half a century ago. As Somerset Maugham has pointed -out, they revere age. The present Conservative government and the Labor -front bench are unusual in that they contain a large percentage of -"young men"--that is, men in their fifties. Sir Winston Churchill did -not truly win the affection of his countrymen until he was well into -his seventies, when the old fierce antagonism of the working class was -replaced with a grudging admiration for "the Old Man." - -On his eightieth birthday the leaders of all the political parties in -the House of Commons joined in a tribute that milked the tear ducts -of the nation. When, six months later, Sir Winston retired as Prime -Minister there was another outbreak of bathos. But when two months -after that a new House of Commons was sworn under the leadership of Sir -Anthony Eden, some of the young Conservative Members of Parliament who -owed their offices and, in a wider sense, their lives to Sir Winston -pushed ahead of him in the jostling throng making for the Speaker's -bench. It was left to Clement Attlee, his dry, thoughtful foe in so -many political battles, to lead Sir Winston up ahead of his eager -juniors. Sentiment, yes; emotion, no. - -For many reasons the British as a people are anxious to find formulas -that will guide them out of international crises, to avoid the final -arbitration of war. The appeasement of Neville Chamberlain and his -associates in the late thirties was in keeping with this historically -developed tendency. One has only to read what Pitt endured from -Napoleon to preserve peace, or the sound, sensible reasons that Charles -James Fox offered against the continuation of the war with the First -Empire, to understand that this island people goes to war only with the -utmost reluctance. - -One reason is that in 1800, in 1939, and in the middle of the twentieth -century the British have lived by trade. Wars, large or small, hurt -trade. Prolonged hostility toward a foreign nation--Franco's Spain, -Lenin's Russia, or Mao's China--reduces Britain's share in a market or -cuts off raw materials needed for production at home. In this respect -we cannot judge Britain by the continental standards of China or Russia -or the United States. This is an island power. - -Because they are polite, because they are easily moved to sentimental -tears--Sir Winston Churchill and Hugh Gaitskell, who otherwise have few -traits in common, both cry easily--because they are diffident, because -they will twist and turn in their efforts to avoid war (although at -times, for reasons of policy, they will present the impression of being -very ready for war), the British have given the outside world a false -idea of their character. Beneath all this is toughness of mind. - -I recall landing in England in April of 1939. It was then obvious -to almost everyone in Europe that war was on the way. On the way to -London I talked to a fellow passenger, a man in his late twenties -who had three small children and who lived in London. "The next time -Hitler goes for anyone, we'll go for him," he said casually, almost -apologetically. He conceded that the war would be long, that Britain -would take some hard knocks, that going into the Navy and leaving his -wife and children would be tedious. But he had made up his mind that -there was no other course. The thing had to be done. - -After the war--and, indeed, during it--many Americans ridiculed the -British reaction to the war. They found exaggerated the stories of the -cockney who said: "'arf a mo', Adolph" while he lit his pipe, the women -who shouted "God bless you" to Winston Churchill when he visited the -smoking ruins of their homes. This was a serious error. In those days, -the most critical that had ever come upon them, the British acted in a -manner which made one proud to be a member of the same species. - -But that was a decade and a half ago, and the circumstances were -extraordinary. Nations change--compare the heroic France of Verdun -with the indulgent, faithless France of 1940. Have war and sacrifice, -austerity and prolonged crisis weakened Britain's mental toughness? I -think not. - -The prolonged conflict between employers and employed and among -the great trade unions is the most serious friction within British -society. Its critical effect upon Britain's present and future has -been emphasized. I do not believe, however, that in the long run the -men on both sides who hold their opinions so stoutly will be unable to -compromise their difficulties in the face of the continuing national -emergency. In the twenties and thirties such great convulsions -in industrial relations as the General Strike were harmful but -not catastrophic. The British economy was buttressed by overseas -investments and by the possession of established export markets -throughout the world. That situation no longer exists. Anything -approaching the severity of a General Strike could break Britain. In -the end, I believe, the extremists of both sides will realize this -and will find in themselves the mental toughness--for it takes a hard -mind to accept an armistice short of final victory in exchange for -the promise of future benefits--to compose their differences and move -toward a national rather than a partisan solution. - -Of course, Britain's difficulties are not confined to the home front. -But I have consciously emphasized the importance of her internal -problems because they reflect the nation's present position in the -world and help to determine how Britain will act abroad. - -Just as the last decade has seen drastic changes in industrial -direction in Britain, so the coming decade will witness changes equally -great in the development of Britain's international position. Britain -cannot, and would not if she could, build a new empire. But it is -evident that the country intends to replace the monolithic concept of -power with a horizontal concept. We will see, I am confident, a steady -growth of Britain's ties with Europe and the establishment of Britain -as a link between the Commonwealth nations and Europe. - -The British have fertile political imaginations. They are adroit -in discussion and debate. After years of uncertainty a number of -politicians of great influence are moving toward closer association -with Europe. At the moment the Grand Design (a rather grandiose title -for the British to use) is endorsed by Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, -Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd, Defense Minister Duncan Sandys, -Chancellor of the Exchequer Peter Thorneycroft, and President of the -Board of Trade Sir David Eccles. Given a change in government, I think -we can assume that the idea would be supported, although enthusiasm -would be somewhat less great, by the leaders of the Labor Party. - -What is the Grand Design? It is the concept of a Europe cooperating -in fields of economy and politico-military strategy. It goes beyond -the Europe of Western European Union or the North Atlantic Treaty -Alliance and thinks in terms of a general confederation into which -the Scandinavian and Mediterranean nations would be drawn. Existing -organizations such as the Organization for European Economic -Co-operation would be expanded to include new members. At the top -would be a General Assembly elected by the parliaments of each member -nation. There would be a general pooling of military research and -development. - -The establishment of such an association of European states is at -least ten years in the future. The British do not think it should be -hurried. Careful, rather pragmatic, they advocate methodical progress -in which new international organizations could be tested against actual -conditions. Those that work will survive. Those that do not will -disappear. - -Is the Grand Design a new name for a third force to be interposed -between the Sino-Russian bloc in the East and the United States in -the West? The British say emphatically not. They see it as a method -of strengthening the Atlantic Alliance by uniting Europe. Naturally, -they believe their flair for diplomacy and politics, their industrial -strength, and, not least, Europe's distaste for German leadership will -give them an important role in the new Europe. Obviously, that role, as -spokesman for both a united Europe and a global Commonwealth, will be -more suitable and, above all, more practical in the world of 1960 than -the obsolete concept of Empire. - -The development of British action toward the accomplishment of the -Grand Design will be accompanied by the gradual transformation of -what is left of the Empire into the Commonwealth. Ghana, established -as an independent member of the Commonwealth in March 1957, will be -followed by Singapore, Malaya, Nigeria, Rhodesia, and many more. Since -1945 Britain has given self-government and independence to well over -500,000,000 souls (at the same time the Soviet Union was enslaving -100,000,000) and the process is not over. Certainly there have been -shortcomings and failures--Cyprus is one. But it seems to me that a -people prepared on one hand to abdicate power and turn that power over -to others and at the same time ready to conceive and develop a new plan -for Europe is showing an elasticity and toughness of mind the rest of -the world might envy. We are not attending the birth of a new British -Empire but watching the advent of a new position for Britain in the -world--one less spectacularly powerful than the old, but important -nonetheless. The speed of its development is inextricably connected -with an expanding and prosperous economy at home. - -Bravery is associated with tough-mindedness. But bravery is not the -exclusive possession of any nation. The British are a courageous -people, certainly. As certain classes are apt to combine courage with -the national habit of understatement, the bravery of the British has an -attraction not evident in the somewhat self-conscious heroism of the -Prussians. Of course, it can be argued that the apparent unwillingness -of the British to exploit the fact that Pilot Officer Z brought -his plane back from Berlin on one engine or that Sergeant Major Y -killed thirty Germans before his morning tea is a form of national -advertisement more subtle and sure than that obtained by battalions of -public-relations officers. - -Although they revere regimental traditions, the British seldom express -their reverence openly. In war they are able to maintain an attitude -of humorous objectivity. During the fighting on the retreat to Dunkirk -I encountered two Guards officers roaring with laughter. They had -learned, they said, that the popular newspapers in London had reported -that the nickname of the Commander in Chief, General the Viscount Gort, -was "Tiger." "My dear chap," said one, "in the Brigade [of Guards] -we've always called him 'Fat Boy.'" - -Coupled with tough-mindedness is another positive characteristic: -love of justice. This may be disputed by the Irish, the Indians, the -Cypriotes. But it is true that in all the great international crises in -which Britain has been involved, from the War of Independence onward, -there has been a strong, sometimes violent opposition to the course -that the government of the day pursued. Beginning with Burke, the -Americans, the Irish, the Indians, the Cypriotes have had defenders in -the House of Commons, on political platforms, and in the press. - -This is not the result of partisan politics, although naturally that -helps. Englishmen did not assail the Black and Tans in Ireland because -of love for Irishmen. Indian independence did not find a redoubtable -champion in Earl Mountbatten because of his particular fondness for -Indians. The impulse was the belief that justice or, to put it better, -right must be done. - -It is because a large section of the nation believes this implicitly -that the British over the years have been able to make those gestures -of conciliation and surrenders of power which will ever adorn her -history: the settlement with the Boers after the South African war, the -withdrawal from India, the treaty with Ireland. - -The British people suffered greatly during both world wars. Yet any -ferocious outbreak of hatred against "the Huns" was promptly answered -by leaders who even in the midst of war understood that the right they -were fighting to preserve must be preserved at home as well as abroad. - -It was this belief in justice, a justice that served all, incorruptible -and austere, which enabled a comparative handful of Britons to rule -the Indian subcontinent for so long. It was this belief in justice, -interpreted in terms of social evolution, which moved the reformers of -the present century in the direction of the Welfare State. The British -concept of justice is inseparably bound to the strong reformist element -within the British people. As long as that element flourishes, as it -does today, we can expect that British society will continue to change -and develop. - -Tough-mindedness, a quiet form of bravery, a love of justice; what else -is there? One characteristic I have noted earlier: a living belief in -the democratic process. The British know the world too well to believe -that this delicate and complex system of government can immediately -be imposed upon any people. They themselves, as they will admit, have -trouble making it work. But neither fascism nor communism has ever made -headway. Any political expert can provide long and involved reasons -for this. I prefer the obvious one: the British believe in democracy, -they believe in people. Long ago, as a young man entering politics, -Winston Churchill, grandson of a Duke of Marlborough, product of Harrow -and a fashionable Hussar regiment, adopted as his own a motto of his -father's. It was simply: "Trust the People." - -The actual practice of democracy over a long period of years can be -successful only if it is accompanied by a wide measure of tolerance. -Despite all their vicissitudes, this virtue the British preserve in -full measure. The British disliked Senator McCarthy because they -thought he was intolerant; they were themselves slightly intolerant, -or at least ill-informed, about the causes that inflated the Senator. -In their own nation the British tolerate almost any sort of political -behavior as long as it is conducted within the framework of the law. -Communists, fascists, isolationists, internationalists all may speak -their pieces and make as much noise as they wish. There will always be -a policeman on hand to quell a disturbance. - -Toleration of the public exposition of political beliefs that aim at -the overthrow of the established parliamentary government implies -a stout belief in the supremacy of democracy over other forms of -government. Even in their unbuttoned moments, British politicians will -seldom agree to the thesis, lately put about by many eminent men, that -complete suffrage prevents a government from acting with decision in an -emergency. - -Early in 1951 I talked late one night with a British diplomat about the -rearmament of Germany. He was a man of wide experience, aristocratic -bearing, and austere manner. During our conversation I suggested that -the British, who had suffered greatly at the hands of the Germans in -two world wars, would be most reluctant to agree to the rearmament of -their foes and that the ensuing political situation would be made to -order for the extremists of the Labor Party. - -"I don't think so," he replied. "Our people fumble and get lost at -times, but they come back on the right track. They'll argue it out in -their minds or in the pubs. They'll reject extreme measures. The Labor -Party and the great mass of its followers will be with the government. -The people, you know, are wiser than anyone thinks they are." - -Tolerance is coupled with kindness. British kindness is apt to be -abstract, impersonal. There is the gruff, unspoken kindness of the -members of the working class to one another in times of death. The -wealthy wearer of the Old School Tie will go to great lengths to succor -a friend fallen on evil days. He will also do his best to provide for -an old employee or to rehabilitate an old soldier, once under his -command, who is in trouble with the police. This is part of the sense -of responsibility inculcated by the public school. Even in the Welfare -State it persists. "I've got to drive out into Essex this afternoon," a -friend said, "and see what I can do for a sergeant that served with me. -Bloody fool can't hold onto a farthing and makes a pest of himself with -the local authorities. Damn good sergeant, though." - -I remembered another sergeant in Germany. He was a man who had felt -the war deeply, losing a brother, a wife, and a daughter to German -bombs. When it was all over and the British Army rested on its arms -in northern Germany he installed his men in the best billets the -neighboring village could provide. The Germans were left to shift for -themselves in the barns and outbuildings. Within a week, he told me, -the situation was reversed. The Germans were back in their homes. -The soldiers were sleeping in the barns. I told a German about it -afterward. "Yes," he said, "the British would do that. We wouldn't, not -after a long war. They are a decent people." - -It is upon such characteristics, a basic, stubborn toughness of mind, -bravery, tolerance, a belief in democracy, kindness, decency, that -British hopes for the future rest. - -Any objective study of Britain must accept that, although there has -been a decline in power at home and abroad, the national economy -has recovered remarkably and the physical basis of the economy has -improved. Far from being decadent, idle, and unambitious, the nation -as a whole is pulsing with life. The energy may be diffused into paths -that fail to contribute directly to the general betterment of the -nation. But it is there, and the possession of the important national -characteristics mentioned above promises that eventually this energy -will be directed to the national good. - -In the end we return to our starting-point. Although there is a -cleavage between the working class and the middle class, it is not deep -enough to smash the essential unity of the people. No great gulfs of -geography, race, or religion separate them. The differences between -employer and employed are serious. But there is no basic difference, -nurtured by the hatred of a century and a half, as there is between -revolutionary France and conservative France. The constant change in -the character of the classes, the steady movement of individuals and -groups up the economic and social ladders insures that this will never -develop. From the outside the society seems stratified. On the inside -one sees, hears, feels ceaseless movement of a flexible society. - -The long contest with Russia has induced Americans to follow Napoleon's -advice and think about big battalions. But national power and influence -should not be measured solely in terms of material strength. By that -standard the England of the first Elizabeth and the Dutch Republic of -the seventeenth century would have been blotted out by the might of -Spain just as our own struggling colonies would have been overcome by -the weight of England. The character of a people counts. - -So it is with Britain. The ability of the British people to survive -cannot be measured only in terms of steel production. The presence of -grave economic and social problems should not be accepted as proof -that they cannot be solved by people of imagination and ability. The -existence of external class differences should not blind observers to -the basic unity of political thought. - -It is natural that in their present position Britons are far more aware -of the ties that bind them to the United States, ties that include -a common language, much common history, dangers shared, and enemies -overcome, than the people of the United States are aware of the ties -that bind them to Britain. But Americans must guard against the easy -assumption that, because Britain is weaker than she was half a century -ago, because she has changed rapidly and will change further, Britain -and the British are "through." - -It is often said in Washington that the leading politicians of the -Republican and Democratic parties and the chief permanent officials of -the Treasury, State Department, and other departments did not recognize -the extent to which Britain had been weakened by World War II. It is -hard to understand why this should have been so. The sacrifice in blood -was written large on a hundred battlefields. The cost in treasure was -clearly outlined in the financial position of the United Kingdom in -1945. - -Americans should not fear political differences between the United -States and the United Kingdom on foreign policies. As long as -the British are worth their salt as allies they will think, and -occasionally act, independently. What would be dangerous to the future -of the alliance in a period of crisis would be the growth in Britain -of a belief that Britain's problems, internal or international, can be -blamed on the United States. A similar belief about Britain existed -in France in 1940. Verdun occupied the position in French minds that -the Battle of Britain does today in some British minds, that of a -great heroic national effort that exhausted the nation and left it -prey to the post-war appetite of its supposed friend and ally. If this -concept were to be accepted by any sizable proportion of the British -people, then the alliance would be in danger. The possibility that this -will happen is slight. The British retain confidence in themselves, -undaunted by the changes in the world. - -The United States can help sustain this confidence. It is difficult to -see why the political, industrial, and social accomplishments of the -British since 1945 are so casually ignored in the United States and why -Americans accept so readily the idea that Britain's day is done. - -Certainly many Americans criticized the establishment of the Welfare -State. Certainly ignorance led many to confuse socialism in Britain -with communism in the Soviet Union. Certainly the achievement of power -by the great trade unions has alienated those Americans who still decry -the powerful position of organized labor in the modern democratic state. - -But it is folly to expect that even our closest friends and truest -allies can develop economically and politically along paths similar -to those trod by the people of the United States. It is time that we -looked on the positive side of Britain's life since the end of World -War II. We must remember that this is a going concern. The new nuclear -power stations rising throughout Britain are part of the general -Western community which we lead. British advances in the sciences or -in any other field of human endeavor should not be thought of as the -activities of a rival but as the triumphs of an ally that has in the -past given incontrovertible proof of her steadfastness in adversity, -her willingness to do and dare at the side of the United States. - -There they are, fifty millions of them. Kindly, energetic, ambitious, -and, too often, happily complacent in peace; most resolute, courageous, -and tough-minded in the storms that have beaten about their islands -since the dawn of the Christian era. - -What is at stake in the relationship between the two nations is -something far greater than whether we approve of Aneurin Bevan or the -British approved of Senator McCarthy. The union of the English-speaking -peoples is the one tried and tested alliance in a shaky world. Three -times within living memory its sons have rallied to defeat or forestall -the ambitions of conquerors. To understand Britain, to share with her -the great tasks that lie before the Western community is much more than -a salute by Americans to common political thought, a common tongue, or -common memories. It is the easiest and most certain method by which we -in our time can preserve the freedom of man which has been building in -all the years since King and barons rode to Runnymede. - - - - -_INDEX_ - - - Air Force, 239-40 - - Albert, Prince Consort, 19-20, 27, 30 - - Alexander, Field Marshal Earl, 235 - - Amery, Julian, 55, 183 - - Anglo-American relations, 47-8, 109, 159-86; - tensions, 66, 163-76 - - Anne, Queen, 45 - - Anson, Sir William, 17, 18 - - armed forces, 84-6, 238-44; - Air Force, 239-40; - Army, 238-9; - Navy, 239 - - Army, 238-9 - - Atomic Energy Authority, 214 - - Attlee, Clement, 36, 58, 77, 78, 87, 88, 108, 113, 152, 235, 280 - - - Bagehot, Walter, 22, 28, 97-8 - - Baldwin, Stanley, 55, 74, 95, 152 - - Beaverbrook, Lord (William Maxwell Aitken), 20, 30, 31, 54, 85, 140; - influence of, 224-5 - - Bevan, Aneurin, 18, 19, 61, 84-9 _passim_, 121, 152; - anti-Americanism, 47, 81, 109, 176; - opposition to hydrogen bomb, 48; - leader of opposition within Labor Party, 72, 73, 78-80, 269; - supporters, 82-3 - - Bevin, Ernest, 62, 77, 80, 108, 143; - opposition to communism, 109 - - Boyle, Sir Edward, 55 - - Bradlaugh, Charles, 30 - - British Empire, 91, 107 - - British Productivity Council, 196 - - Brogan, D.W., 164 - - Butler, R.A., 18-19, 49, 52, 54, 58, 59, 74 - - - Cabinet, 43-6 - - Castle, Mrs. Barbara, 84 - - Chamberlain, Neville, 17, 35, 37, 63, 74, 95, 152, 166, 259, 280 - - Charles II, 25, 44 - - Charles, Prince, 15 - - China (Communist), 79, 184; - British attitude toward, 149-50 - - Churchill, Sir Winston, 17, 18, 37, 51, 52, 59, 76, 80, 82, 95, 113-14, - 133, 152, 200, 235, 239, 252, 259, 279, 285-6; - party peacemaker, 35; - skill in debate, 40; - on monarchy, 276 - - clubs, 257-9 - - Commons, House of, 38-43, 46 - - Commonwealth, 29, 91, 107, 137-41, 283 - - Communist Party in Britain, 35, 49, 142-4, 146, 147, 164, 179, 180; - in labor unions, 72, 82, 83-4, 109, 200, 208-15 - - Connor, William, 202, 227 - - Conservative Party, 50-69 - - conurbation, 6, 7 - - Cooke, Alistair, 222 - - Cripps, Sir Stafford, 77, 95, 107, 113 - - Crossman, R.H.S., 84 - - - Delmer, Sefton, 226, 228 - - Dilke, Sir Charles, 30 - - Dulles, John Foster, 170-1; - British attitude toward, 47, 48, 155, 167, 172 - - - Eccles, Sir David, 282 - - Eden, Sir Anthony, 18, 20, 52, 54, 55, 57, 59, 60, 61, 65, 133, 143, - 171-2, 183, 224, 280 - - Edward VII, 27 - - Egypt, 54, 55, 61, 66, 88, 143, 151, 155, 156, 168, 183, 184 - - Eisenhower, Dwight D., 37, 41, 60, 80, 183 - - Elizabeth II, 13-33, 114, 251, 252 - - Elizabeth, Queen Mother, 22, 27 - - European Defense Community, 171 - - - Foot, Michael, 56, 84-5 - - Forrest, William, 228 - - Foulkes, Frank, 213 - - France, British attitude toward, 150-1 - - Franks, Sir Oliver, 85 - - Freedman, Max, 222 - - Fyfe, Sir David Maxwell, 52 - - - Gaitskell, Hugh, 18, 20, 36, 49, 56, 73, 77-8, 80, 87, 89, 235, 280; - opposed by Bevan, 88, 269 - - George I, 45 - - George IV, 25 - - George V, 16, 19, 25 - - George VI, 16, 17 - - Germany, British attitude toward, 151-3 - - Gorer, Geoffrey, 275 - - Gort, General the Viscount, 284 - - Grand Design, The, 282-3 - - Griffiths, James, 18, 49 - - - Halifax, Earl of, 17 - - Harding, Gilbert, 107 - - Hardy, Keir, 36 - - Horner, Arthur, 210 - - Howard, Ebenezer, 116 - - - India, 36, 96, 105-7, 170 - - Italy, British attitude toward, 153-4 - - - Jacobson, Sydney, 202 - - - King, Cecil, 226 - - Korean war, economic influence of, 192-3 - - - labor unions, 200-13, 215, 266-7; - communist influence in, 208-13, 215 - - Lancaster, Osbert, 225, 226 - - Laski, Harold, 97, 113 - - Lloyd, Selwyn, 52, 282 - - Lloyd George, David, 19, 56 - - Lords, House of, 39, 42-3, 44 - - - MacLeod, Iain, 52, 130 - - Macmillan, Harold, 18, 49, 52, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60, 65, 89, - 155, 269, 282 - - Margaret, Princess, 15, 22, 26 - - Massingham, Hugh, 223 - - Maulding, Reginald, 52, 130 - - McCarthy, Joseph, 60, 164-6, 167, 286 - - McCarthyism, 36, 163-4 - - McKenzie, Robert T., 59 - - McNeil, Hector, 62 - - Middle East, 155; - British influence in, 156-7 - - Miller, Webb, 218 - - monarchy, 13-33, 133, 276; - power of, 16, 22; - influence of, 21, 37; - finances of, 26-8, 30-1 - - Montgomery, Field Marshal the Viscount, 46 - - Morrison, Herbert, 36, 51, 77, 87, 88, 89, 278; - opposition to communism, 143 - - Mosley, Sir Oswald, 35 - - Mountbatten, Earl, 21, 31, 134, 285 - - Muggeridge, Malcolm, 147 - - - Nasser, Abdel, 54, 155, 156 - - National Health Service Act, 102-5 - - nationalization, 97-101, 102, 104-5, 107 - - Navy, 239 - - Nehru, Shri Jawaharlal, 106, 166, 235 - - New Towns, 116-18, 121, 122, 124, 125 - - newspapers, 77-81, 218-30; - _Daily Express_, 31, 219, 225-6; - _Daily Herald_, 31, 87, 125; - _Daily Mirror_, 31, 87, 125, 202, 210, 219, 220, 226-7; - _Daily Telegraph_, 163, 219; - _Evening Standard_, 31; - _Manchester Guardian_, 163, 218-19, 220, 222-3; - _New Statesman and Nation_, 31-2, 84, 85; - _Sunday Express_, 15, 20, 31; - _Times_, 19, 130, 163, 183, 218, 220-2; - _Tribune_, 56, 84-5, 89 - - Norwich, Viscount (Alfred Duff Cooper), 152 - - - Odger, George, 30 - - Orwell, George, 252 - - - Parliament, 37-43, 45; - Commons, 38-43, 46; - Lords, 39, 42-3, 44 - - Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 19-20, 21-8 _passim_, 31 - - Plumb, J.H., 45 - - public schools, 81-4, 230-7 - - pubs, 254-7 - - - Reynolds, Quentin, 8 - - Roosevelt, Franklin D., 37, 82, 174 - - - Salisbury, Marquess of, 18, 44, 49, 54, 58, 59, 134 - - Sandys, Duncan, 282 - - Scott, Richard, 223 - - Shinwell, Emanuel, 77 - - Smith, Walter Bedell, 172 - - Soviet Union, British attitude toward, 143-8 - - sports, 87-9, 244-54 - - sterling area, 138 - - Strachey, Lytton, 20 - - Strang, Lord, 232 - - - Thorneycroft, Peter, 282 - - Townsend, Peter, 26 - - Trades Union Congress, 55, 73, 88, 143, 196; - power of, 71-2, 86-7, 200-2; - communist opposition, 83, 143, 212 - - Truman, Harry S., 25, 37 - - - Victoria, Queen, 20, 25, 27, 30 - - - Waithman, Robert, 229 - - Watson, Sam, 200, 210 - - Wavell, Field Marshal Earl, 108, 152 - - Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, 73 - - Welfare State, 101-2, 104, 105, 107, 118, 123, 264, 285, 289 - - Williams, Francis, 227 - - Wilson, Harold, 49 - - Windsor, Duchess of, 15, 31 - - Windsor, Duke of, 20 - - Woolton, Lord (Frederick William Marquis), 52, 53 - - - Zilliacus, Konni, 84 - - - - -A NOTE ON THE TYPE - - -_The text of this book was set on the Linotype in a face called_ TIMES -ROMAN, _designed by_ STANLEY MORISON _for_ The Times (_London_), _and -first introduced by that newspaper in the middle nineteen thirties_. - -_Among typographers and designers of the twentieth century, Stanley -Morison has been a strong forming influence, as typographical adviser -to the English Monotype Corporation, as a director of two distinguished -English publishing houses, and as a writer of sensibility, erudition, -and keen practical sense._ - -_In 1930 Morison wrote: "Type design moves at the pace of the most -conservative reader. The good type-designer therefore realises that, -for a new fount to be successful, it has to be so good that only very -few recognise its novelty. If readers do not notice the consummate -reticence and rare discipline of a new type, it is probably a good -letter." It is now generally recognized that in the creation of_ Times -Roman _Morison successfully met the qualifications of this theoretical -doctrine_. - -_Composed, printed, and bound by_ H. WOLFF, _New York. Paper -manufactured by_ S.D. WARREN CO., _Boston_. - -[Illustration] - - - - -A NOTE ABOUT THE AUTHOR - - -Drew Middleton _was born in New York City in 1913. After being -graduated from Syracuse University, he went into newspaper work, and in -1938 became a foreign correspondent. Since then he has been chief of_ -The New York Times _bureaus in England, Russia, and Germany. In 1940, -during the Battle of Britain, he was in London covering the operations -of the Royal Air Force, and he later sent his dispatches from Supreme -Headquarters of the AEF. In the decade since the war, Mr. Middleton's -reporting and interpreting of the Cold War struggle between East and -West have earned him a wide and respectful audience both here and -abroad. His earlier books include_ The Struggle for Germany (_1949_) -_and_ The Defense of Western Europe (_1952_). - - - -***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THESE ARE THE BRITISH*** - - -******* This file should be named 63400-0.txt or 63400-0.zip ******* - - -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: -http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/6/3/4/0/63400 - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - diff --git a/old/63400-0.zip b/old/63400-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c912456..0000000 --- a/old/63400-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/63400-h.zip b/old/63400-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4449291..0000000 --- a/old/63400-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/63400-h/63400-h.htm b/old/63400-h/63400-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 72a8395..0000000 --- a/old/63400-h/63400-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,11945 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> -<head> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /> -<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of These are the British, by Drew Middleton</title> - <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> - <style type="text/css"> - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - - h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 {font-weight: normal; - text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ - clear: both; -} - -p { - margin-top: .51em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .49em; -} - -.p2 {margin-top: 2em;} -.p4 {margin-top: 4em;} -.p6 {margin-top: 6em;} - -.ph1, .ph2, .ph3, .ph4 { text-align: center; text-indent: 0em; } -.ph1 { font-size: xx-large; margin: .67em auto; } -.ph2 { font-size: x-large; margin: .75em auto; } -.ph3 { font-size: large; margin: .83em auto; } -.ph4 { font-size: medium; margin: 1.12em auto; } -.ph5 { font-size: small; margin: 1.12em auto;text-align: center; } -.ph6 { font-size: x-small; margin: 1.12em auto;text-align: center; } - -hang { - text-indent: -2em; - padding-left: 2em} - -p.drop:first-letter { - font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif; - font-size: xx-large; - line-height: 70%} - -.uppercase { - font-size: small; - text-transform: uppercase} - - - - - -hr { - width: 33%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - margin-left: 33.5%; - margin-right: 33.5%; - clear: both; -} - -hr.tb {width: 45%; margin-left: 27.5%; margin-right: 27.5%;} -hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} -hr.full {width: 95%; margin-left: 2.5%; margin-right: 2.5%;} - -hr.r5 {width: 5%; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 47.5%; margin-right: 47.5%;} -hr.r65 {width: 65%; margin-top: 3em; margin-bottom: 3em; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} - -div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} -h2.nobreak {page-break-before: avoid;} - - - -table { - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; -} -table.autotable { border-collapse: collapse; } -table.autotable td, -table.autotable th { padding: 4px; } - -.tdl {text-align: left;} -.tdr {text-align: right; vertical-align: bottom;} -.tdc {text-align: center;} - -.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ - /* visibility: hidden; */ - position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; - font-style: normal; - font-weight: normal; - font-variant: normal; -} /* page numbers */ - - - -.blockquot { - margin-left: 5%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -.sidenote { - width: 20%; - padding-bottom: .5em; - padding-top: .5em; - padding-left: .5em; - padding-right: .5em; - margin-left: 1em; - float: right; - clear: right; - margin-top: 1em; - font-size: smaller; - color: black; - background: #eeeeee; - border: 1px dashed; -} - -.bb {border-bottom: 2px solid;} - -.bl {border-left: 2px solid;} - -.bt {border-top: 2px solid;} - -.br {border-right: 2px solid;} - -.bbox {border: 2px solid;} - -.center {text-align: center;} - -.right {text-align: right;} - -.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} - -.allsmcap {font-variant: small-caps; text-transform: lowercase;} - -.u {text-decoration: underline;} - -.caption {text-align: center;} - - -/* Footnotes */ -.footnotes {border: 1px dashed;} - -.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} - -.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: - none; -} - -/* Transcriber's notes */ -.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; - color: black; - font-size:smaller; - padding:0.5em; - margin-bottom:5em; - font-family:sans-serif, serif; } - - - h1.pgx { text-align: center; - clear: both; - font-weight: bold; - font-size: 190%; - margin-top: 0em; - margin-bottom: 1em; - word-spacing: 0em; - letter-spacing: 0em; - line-height: 1; } - h2.pgx { text-align: center; - clear: both; - font-weight: bold; - font-size: 135%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 1em; - word-spacing: 0em; - letter-spacing: 0em; - page-break-before: avoid; - line-height: 1; } - h3.pgx { text-align: center; - clear: both; - font-weight: bold; - font-size: 110%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 1em; - word-spacing: 0em; - letter-spacing: 0em; - line-height: 1; } - h4.pgx { text-align: center; - clear: both; - font-weight: bold; - font-size: 100%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 1em; - word-spacing: 0em; - letter-spacing: 0em; - line-height: 1; } - hr.pgx { width: 100%; - margin-top: 3em; - margin-bottom: 0em; - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; - height: 4px; - border-width: 4px 0 0 0; /* remove all borders except the top one */ - border-style: solid; - border-color: #000000; - clear: both; } - </style> -</head> -<body> -<h1 class="pgx" title="">The Project Gutenberg eBook, These are the British, by Drew Middleton</h1> -<p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States -and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no -restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it -under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this -eBook or online at <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you are not -located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this ebook.</p> -<p>Title: These are the British</p> -<p>Author: Drew Middleton</p> -<p>Release Date: October 7, 2020 [eBook #63400]</p> -<p>Language: English</p> -<p>Character set encoding: UTF-8</p> -<p>***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THESE ARE THE BRITISH***</p> -<p> </p> -<h4 class="pgx" title="">E-text prepared by<br /> - Tim Lindell, Graeme Mackreth,<br /> - and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team<br /> - (<a href="http://www.pgdp.net">http://www.pgdp.net</a>)<br /> - from page images digitized by<br /> - the Google Books Library Project<br /> - (<a href="https://books.google.com">https://books.google.com</a>)<br /> - and generously made available by<br /> - HathiTrust Digital Library<br /> - (<a href="https://www.hathitrust.org/">https://www.hathitrust.org/</a>)</h4> -<p> </p> -<table border="0" style="background-color: #ccccff;margin: 0 auto;" cellpadding="10"> - <tr> - <td valign="top"> - Note: - </td> - <td> - Images of the original pages are available through - HathiTrust Digital Library. See - <a href="https://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015065841051"> - https://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015065841051</a> - </td> - </tr> -</table> -<p> </p> -<hr class="pgx" /> -<p> </p> -<p> </p> -<p> </p> - -<p class="ph3">THESE</p> - -<p class="ph3"><i>are the British</i></p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus02.jpg" alt="pic" /> -<a id="illus02" ></a> -</p> - -<p class="ph1">THESE</p> - -<p class="ph2"><i>are the British</i></p> - -<p class="ph5">BY</p> -<p class="ph3">DREW MIDDLETON</p> - -<p class="ph5" style="margin-top: 5em;"><i>New York: Alfred · A · Knopf: Mcmlvii</i></p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p class="ph6"><i>L.C. catalog card number: 57-11164</i></p> -<p class="ph6">© <i>Drew Middleton, 1957</i></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus03.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Copyright 1957 by Drew Middleton. All rights reserved. No part of -this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing -from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages -in a review to be printed in a magazine or newspaper. Manufactured in -the United States of America. Published simultaneously in Canada by -McClelland & Stewart Limited.</i></p> - - -<p class="ph6">FIRST EDITION</p> - -<p class="ph4" style="margin-top: 5em;"> -<i>This book is dedicated</i><br /> -<i>to the memory</i><br /> -<i>of</i><br /> -ALEX CLIFFORD,<br /> -EVELYN MONTAGUE,<br /> -<i>and</i> -PHILIP JORDAN -</p> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" ><i>FOREWORD</i></h2> -</div> - - -<p><span class="smcap">It was</span> in 1940 that the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom noted -that Britain and the United States would have to be "somewhat mixed up -together in some of their affairs for mutual and general advantage." -This situation has persisted until the present. Yet, despite the -closeness of co-operation in the intervening years, there is among -Americans a surprising lack of knowledge about modern Britain.</p> - -<p>This book is an effort to provide a picture of that country—"warts and -all." Such a book must perforce be uneven. There are areas of British -life—the attitude toward religion is one—that have not been touched. -I have tried to emphasize those aspects which are least well known in -the United States and to omit as far as possible consideration of those -which are superficial. Ascot, I agree, is spectacular. But as far as -modern Britain is concerned it doesn't matter a damn. I hope, however, -that the reader will find here some idea of what has been going on in -Britain since 1945 and what is going on there today. This is a modern, -mobile society, important to us as we are important to it. If we look -at this society realistically, we will discern physical and moral -strength that the fictions of Hollywood can never convey.</p> - -<p>For one whose roots are deep in his own country, the British are a -difficult people to understand. But they are worth understanding. -They are worth knowing. Long ago, at a somewhat more difficult period -of Anglo-American relations, Benjamin Franklin warned his colleagues -that if they did not all hang together, they would assuredly hang -separately. Good advice for Americans and Britons today.</p> - -<p> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">DREW MIDDLETON</span><br /> -</p> - -<p> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Bessboro Farm</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Westport, Essex County</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>New York</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>March 12, 1957</i></span><br /> -</p> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" ><i>CONTENTS</i></h2> -</div> - - -<table summary="toc" width="65%"> -<tr><td align="right">I.</td> <td><a href="#I_Britain_Today"><i>Britain Today</i></a></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_3">3</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">II.</td> <td><a href="#II_The_Monarchy"><i>The Monarchy</i></a></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_13">13</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">III.</td> <td><a href="#III_How_the_British_Govern_Themselves"><i>How the British Govern Themselves</i></a></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_34">34</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">IV.</td> <td><a href="#IV_The_Conservatives"><i>The Conservatives</i></a>: <span class="smcap">A PARTY AND A WAY OF LIFE</span></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_50">50</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">V.</td> <td><a href="#V_The_Labor_Party"><i>The Labor Party</i></a>: <span class="smcap">POLITICAL MACHINE OR -MORAL CRUSADE?</span></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_70">70</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">VI.</td> <td><a href="#VI_A_Quiet_Revolution_by_a_Quiet_People"><i>A Quiet Revolution by a Quiet People</i></a></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_90">90</a></td> -</tr> -<tr><td>VII.</td> <td><a href="#VII_A_Society_in_Motion"><i>A Society in Motion</i></a>: <span class="smcap">NEW CLASSES AND NEW -HORIZONS</span></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_112">112</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">VIII.</td> <td><a href="#VIII_The_British_and_the_World"><i>The British and the World</i></a></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_135">135</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">IX.</td> <td><a href="#IX_The_Atlantic_Alliance"><i>The Atlantic Alliance</i></a>: <span class="smcap">STRENGTHS AND -STRESSES</span></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_159">159</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">X.</td> <td><a href="#X_The_British_Economy_and_Its_Problems"><i>The British Economy and Its Problems</i></a></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_187">187</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">XI.</td> <td><a href="#XI_The_British_Character_and_Some_Influences"><i>The British Character and Some Influences</i></a></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_217">217</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td align="right">XII.</td> <td><a href="#XII_Britain_and_the_Future"><i>Britain and the Future</i></a></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_260">260</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td></td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#INDEX">Index</a></span> <i>follows page</i></td> <td align="right"><a href="#Page_290">290</a></td></tr> -</table> - - - - -<p class="ph3"> -THESE<br /> -<br /> -<i>are the British</i><br /> -</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_3"></a>[Pg 3]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="I_Britain_Today">I. <i>Britain Today</i></h2> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"> -<p> -<i>They called thee Merry England in old time.</i><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">WILLIAM WORDSWORTH</span><br /> -</p> - - - -<p><i>It was never good times in England since the poor began to speculate -on their condition.</i></p> - -<p> -CHARLES LAMB<br /> -</p></div> - - -<p><span class="smcap">To begin</span>: the British defy definition. Although they are spoken of as -"the British," they are not one people but four. And of these four, -three—the Scots, the Welsh, and the Irish—are fiercely jealous of -their national identity. The English are less concerned. They have been -a nation a very long time, and only on occasions like St. George's -Day do they remind themselves, a bit shamefacedly, that the English -are the central force of the British people. Of course, if there are -Scots, Welsh, or Irish in the company, the English keep this comforting -thought to themselves.</p> - -<p>The variety of the British does not end with nationalities. There are -Yorkshiremen and men from Somerset, Cornishmen and people of Durham -who differ as much as Texans and Vermonters did in the days before the -doubtful blessings of standardization overtook our society.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_4"></a>[Pg 4]</span></p> - -<p>Here we encounter the first of many paradoxes we shall meet in this -book. Homogeneity in political thought—basic political thought that -is not party allegiance—seems far greater in Britain than in France -or the United States. Yet, until the present, the resistance to -standardization has been much more stubborn. Institutions and customs -survive without undue prodding by Societies for the Preservation of -This and That, although there are plenty of the latter nesting in -British society.</p> - -<p>Early in 1954 I was in Inverasdale, roughly five hundred miles -north-west of London on the western coast of Scotland. Inverasdale is a -small village buffeted by the fierce winds that beat in from the North -Atlantic, and its people are independent and God-fearing. John Rollo, a -Scots industrialist, had started a small factory in Inverasdale to hold -the people in the Highlands, where the population has fallen steadily -for a century.</p> - -<p>Inside the factory John pointed to one of the workers. "That's the -bard," he said. "Won a prize at the annual competition this year."</p> - -<p>The bard, clad in rubber boots, old trousers, and a fisherman's jersey, -had little of the "Scots Wha Ha'e" about him. But he was the real -thing. He had journeyed to the competition on foot and there recited -in Gaelic his own composition, a description of his life in Germany -as a soldier in the British Army of the Rhine. "I sung of those queer -foreign sights and people," he said.</p> - -<p>I asked him if he had liked the Germans.</p> - -<p>"I did not," he said. He was not a particularly loquacious bard. But -he was intensely and unostentatiously devoted to customs and a culture -well established before there were white men in America.</p> - -<p>The bard was proud of his association with an old and famous race. But, -then, all over the British Isles there are groups rejoicing in the -same fierce local pride. In Devon you will be told that it was "Devon -men" who slashed the Armada to ruins in the Channel. That battle was -fought nearly four hundred years ago. In a future century the visitor -to London will be told, quite correctly, that it was the near-sighted, -snaggle-toothed, weak-chested youngsters from<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_5"></a>[Pg 5]</span> the back streets who -held the Germans at Calais until preparation could be made for the -evacuation at Dunkirk.</p> - -<p>The British often act and talk like an old people because they <i>are</i> -an old people. Nearly nine hundred years have passed since the Norman -invasion, the last great influx of foreign blood. Before that, wide, -deep rivers and the absence of natural fortifications near the coast -had invited invasion. Celts, Romans, Saxons, and Danes had mingled -their blood with that of the ancient Britons. But major invasions ended -with 1066.</p> - -<p>Consequently, the British are unused to foreigners in large numbers. -They make a tremendous fuss over the forty thousand or so Jamaicans -and other West Indian Negroes who have settled in the country since -1952. The two hundred thousand Poles and other East European refugees, -many of whom fought valiantly beside the British in World War II, are -more acceptable. This is true, also, of the Hungarians driven from -their homeland by the savage Russian repression of the insurrection of -1956. But you will hear grumbling about "foreigners" in areas where -refugees have settled. In rural areas you will also hear someone from -a neighboring county, long settled in the village, referred to as a -"foreigner."</p> - -<p>The Republic of Ireland is the main source of immigrants at present. -No one knows the exact figures, for there is no official check, but it -is estimated in Dublin that perhaps fifty thousand young Irishmen and -Irishwomen have entered Britain in each recent year.</p> - -<p>This migration has raised some new economic, social, and religious -problems and revived some old ones. It is also beginning to affect, -although as yet very slightly, political balances in the western -Midlands, for this area is short of labor and its industries gobble up -willing young men from across the Irish Sea.</p> - -<p>These industrial recruits from a rural background become part of an -advanced industrial proletariat. By nature and by upbringing they are -foreign to the industrial society that uses them. Their political -outlook is far different from that of the loyal trade-unionists beside -whom they work. They are much less liable to be im<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_6"></a>[Pg 6]</span>pressed by appeals -for union solidarity and Labor Party support. They accept the benefits -of the Welfare State, but they are not of it. The economic Marxism of -the orators in the constituency labor parties is beyond them; besides, -have they not been warned that Marx is of the devil? The incorporation -of this group into the Socialist proletariat poses a question for Labor -politicians of the future.</p> - -<p>Despite the lack of large-scale migration into Britain during nine -centuries, national strains remain virulent. Noisy and stubborn -Welsh and Scots nationalist movements give young men and women in -Cardiff and Edinburgh something to babble about. London boasts many -local associations formed of exiles from the north or west. Even the -provincial English manage to make themselves heard in the capital. -Few winter nights pass without the Loyal Sons of Loamshire meeting to -praise the glories of their home county and drink confusion to the -"foreigners," their neighbors.</p> - -<p>If the urbanization of the country has not broken these barriers -between Scot and Londoner or between Lancashire and Kent, it has -changed the face of England out of recognition. And for the worse.</p> - -<p>The empty crofters' cottages around Inverasdale and elsewhere in -the Highlands are exceptions, for Britain is crowded. The area of -the United Kingdom is 93,053 square miles—slightly less than that -of Oregon. But the population is just under 51,000,000, including -44,370,000 in England and Wales, 5,128,000 in Scotland, and 1,389,000 -in Northern Ireland.</p> - -<p>Since the end of the last century the population has been predominantly -urban and suburban. By 1900 about three quarters of the British people -were living within the boundaries of urban administrative areas, and -the large "conurbation" was already the dominant type of British -community. This ugly but useful noun describes those areas of urban -development where a number of separate towns, linked by a common -industrial or commercial interest, have grown into one another.</p> - -<p>For over a third of a century about forty per cent of the population -has lived in seven great conurbations. Greater London,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_7"></a>[Pg 7]</span> with -a population of 8,348,000, is the largest of these. The other -conurbations and their centers are: southeast Lancashire: Manchester; -west Midlands: Birmingham; west Yorkshire: Leeds and Bradford; -Merseyside: Liverpool; Tyneside: Newcastle upon Tyne; and Clydeside: -Glasgow. Of these the west Midland area is growing most rapidly. -Southeast Lancashire has lost population—a reflection of the waning of -the textile industry.</p> - -<p>The growth of the conurbations, particularly London, has been -accompanied by the growth of the suburbs. Of course, many of the older -suburbs are now part of the conurbations. But the immediate pre-war and -post-war building developments have established urban outposts in the -serene green countryside.</p> - -<p>Today more than a million people travel into the city of London and six -central metropolitan boroughs to work each morning and return to their -homes each night. Another 240,000 come in from the surrounding areas to -work in other parts of greater London.</p> - -<p>The advance of suburbia and conurbia has imposed upon vast sections -of the United Kingdom a dreadful sameness. The traveler finds himself -driving for hours through an endless urban landscape. First he -encounters miles of suburban streets: television aerials, two-story -houses whose differences are discernible only to their inhabitants, -clusters of stores. Then a town center with its buses and bus center, -the grimy railroad station, a cluster of civic buildings, a traffic -jam, one or two seventeenth-century relics incongruous amid the jumble -of Victorian and Edwardian buildings. Then more suburbs, other town -centers, other traffic jams. Individuality is lost in the desert of -asphalt and the jungles of lamp posts, flashing signs, and rumbling -buses.</p> - -<p>On a wet winter day a journey through some of the poorer sections of -the western Midlands conurbation is a shocking experience. As your -car moves down street after street of drab brick houses, past dull, -smelly pubs and duller shopwindows, occasionally coming upon hideous, -lonely churches, you are oppressed. The air is heavy with smoke and the -warring smells of industry. Poverty<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_8"></a>[Pg 8]</span> itself is depressing, but here -it is not poverty of the pocket but poverty of the soul which shocks. -Remorseless conformity and unrestrained commercialism have imposed this -on the lively land of Shakespeare. Can great virtues or great vices -spring from this smug, stifling environment?</p> - -<p>Yet bright spirits are bred. One remembers people met over the years: -a sergeant from the Clyde quoting Blake one morning long ago at Arras; -Welsh miners singing in the evenings. Out of this can come new Miltons, -Newtons, and Blakes. A Nelson of the skies may be studying now at that -crumbling school on the corner.</p> - -<p>In September 1945 I was riding in from London airport in a bus crowded -with Quentin Reynolds (whose presence would crowd an empty Yankee -Stadium) and returning soldiers and airmen of the British Army and -the Royal Air Force. As we passed through the forlorn streets of -Hammersmith, Quentin, brooding on the recent election, said: "These are -the people who gave it to Mr. Churchill."</p> - -<p>A sergeant pilot behind us leaned forward. "That's all right, cock," he -said, "they gave it to Mr. Hitler too."</p> - -<p>To put Britain into a twentieth-century perspective, we must go beyond -the Britain many Americans know best: the Merrie England created by -literature, the stage, and the movies. This picturesque rural England -has not been a true picture of the country for over a century. But -the guidebooks and the British Travel Association still send tourists -to its shrines, novelists still write charmingly dated pictures of -its life, and on both sides of the Atlantic the movies and the stage -continue to present attractive but false pictures of "Olde Worlde" -England.</p> - -<p>The British of today know it is dead. They retain an unabashed yearning -for its tranquillity, but the young cynics are hacking at this false -front. One morning recently I was cheered to note the advent of a new -coffee bar, the "Hey, Calypso," in the self-consciously Elizabethan -streets of Stratford-on-Avon. I am sure this would have delighted the -Bard, himself never above borrowing<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_9"></a>[Pg 9]</span> a bit of foreign color. And the -garish sign corrected the phony ostentation of "Elizabethan" Stratford.</p> - -<p>Merrie England has its attractions—if you can find them. There is -nothing more salutary to the soul than an old, unspoiled village in the -cool of a summer evening. But the number of such villages decreases -yearly. The hunt, the landed aristocracy, the slumbering farms are -changing, if not passing entirely from the scene.</p> - -<p>But—and this is very important—the values of this England endure to a -reassuring degree. Indeed, it might be argued that they have revived in -the last ten years and that virtues thought dated in two post-war Brave -New Worlds have been triumphantly reasserted. However, physically, -Merrie England, the country Wordsworth tramped and Constable painted, -is dead. The schoolteacher from Gibbsville or Gopher Prairie will find -the remains nicely laid out.</p> - -<p>Despite the blight of suburbia, the countryside retains a compelling -charm for the visitor from the United States. There is that hour in a -winter evening when a blue light gathers in the shadows of the wood, -when the smoke rises straight from cottage chimneys, when you hear the -sound of distant church bells. I remember walking once in 1944 with Al -Paris, a young captain of the United States Air Force, through just -such a scene. "It's funny," he said, "I walk this way two, three times -a week, and I feel like I'm coming home. It's different from anything -at home. Yet I feel I know it."</p> - -<p>But the important Englands or, rather, Britains are very different. -There is the dynamic, bustling industrial Britain of the Midlands, the -Northeast, and the Lowlands of Scotland. There is the great commercial -Britain of London, Bristol, Glasgow, Southampton, Liverpool—the -Britain of traders, middlemen, agents, and bankers, the Britain whose -effect on the political development of the country and world has been -tremendous.</p> - -<p>Out of these Britains have come the machines and the men who have kept -the country in business and twice helped to smash<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_10"></a>[Pg 10]</span> the military power -of Germany. The steel plants of South Wales, the engineering factories -of Birmingham, the banks of London, the shipyards of the Clyde—these -are the real modern Britain. They are not so attractive as the old -villages sleeping in the afternoon sun. But from the standpoint of -Britain, and from that of the United States as well, they are much more -satisfying and reassuring than Merrie England.</p> - -<p>For this is the Great Britain that is not satisfied with the past or -the present, that dreams great and necessary dreams of the industrial -uses of atomic energy, that strives to expand the three great groups of -industry: metals and metal-using, textiles, and chemicals. It is the -combination of this Britain and the character of the old England that -provides a basis for faith.</p> - -<p>Is Britain's long and glorious story nearly done? Will the political, -technological, and social changes of the first half of the twentieth -century—changes in which Britain often pioneered—combine to eliminate -Britain as a world power? Is the country's future to be a gradual and -comfortable decline into the position of a satellite in an Atlantic -system dominated by the United States and Canada? Or will Britain -withdraw slowly, under force of circumstance, into the unambitious -neutrality of Sweden?</p> - -<p>These are questions that Britons who care about their country must ask -themselves. But because of the confidence that is still so strong in -British character, such questions are seldom debated openly. In the -spring of 1956, when the leaders of the government and of industry -were only too gloomily aware of the magnitude of the problems facing -the country in the Middle East, in competitive exporting, in gold -and dollar reserves, the British Broadcasting Corporation began a -television series, "We, the British," with an inquiry: "Are we in a -decline?" No one was greatly excited.</p> - -<p>This seeming obliviousness to harsh facts, this innate confidence, is -one of the most arresting features of the national character. We will -encounter it often in this book as we seek answers to the questions -about Britain's future.</p> - -<p>Consideration of Britain in the world today, and especially of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_11"></a>[Pg 11]</span> her -relation to the United States and to the Soviet Union, must take into -account the historical fact that the country's present situation is not -altogether novel to Britons.</p> - -<p>For Americans it is unusual, and hence disturbing, to live in the same -world with a hostile state—the Soviet Union—that is larger and more -populous than their own country. Enmity has burst upon us suddenly in -the past. We have been told by generations of immigrants that the whole -world loved and admired us. It has taken Americans some time to make -the psychological adjustment to the position of world power.</p> - -<p>The British situation is different. The British have always been -inferior in strength of numbers to their great antagonists: the Spain -of Philip II, the France of Louis XIV and Napoleon, the Germany of -Wilhelm II and Hitler, and, today, the Soviet Union. British power has -rested not upon numbers but upon combinations of economic stability, -political maneuvering, and the exercise of sea, land, and, latterly, -air power. The world abroad has always appeared harsh to the Briton. -Except for the second half of the last century—a small period in a -thousand years of national existence—the British have always seen on -the horizon the threat of a larger, more powerful neighbor. The balance -has been restored in many a crisis by the ability first of the English -and then of the British to attain in war a unity of purpose and energy -which in the end has brought victory.</p> - -<p>Unity often has restored the balance between Britain and her enemies. -To many of us who were in Britain in 1940 the miracle of that memorable -year was not the evacuation of Dunkirk or victory in the Battle of -Britain or the defiance under bombing of the poor in London, Coventry, -and Birmingham, but the national unity of purpose which developed at -the moment when all the social upheavals of the thirties pointed to -division, faltering, and defeat.</p> - -<p>Ability to achieve a national unity remains a factor in Britain's -world position. And it is the lack of this unity which makes Britain's -position so perilous today.</p> - -<p>The country must make, and it must sell abroad. It must re<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_12"></a>[Pg 12]</span>tain access -to the oil of the Middle East or it will have nothing to make or to -sell. It must be able to compete on even terms with the exports of -Germany and Japan. These are the ABC's of the British position.</p> - -<p>The leaders of the present Conservative government recognize the -country's situation; so do the Labor Party and the Trades Union -Congress, although each has its own interpretation of the causes. But -there is still an unwillingness or an inability on the part of the -general public to grasp the realities of the situation.</p> - -<p>Yet such a grasp is essential. The people of Britain must adjust -themselves to a condition of permanent economic pressure if they are -to meet the economic challenge of the times. Such an adjustment will -involve re-creation of the sort of national unity which produced the -miracles of 1940. Otherwise, John Bull, better paid, better housed, and -with more money (which has less value) than ever before, can follow the -road to inflation which led to disaster in Germany and France in the -thirties.</p> - -<p>This return to unity is a factor in answering the question of where the -British go from here. But it is only one of many factors. Before we can -arrive at an adequate answer we must know more about the British, about -their institutions and who runs them today, about what the people have -been doing since 1945, and about how they face and fail to face the -problems of the second half of the century.</p> - -<p>Repeatedly in the course of this inquiry we shall encounter a national -characteristic not easily measurable in commercial and industrial -values but deeply established and enormously important. This is the -ability of the British to adapt themselves to a changing world and -to rule themselves with a minimum of serious friction. Stability -and continuity are essential in politics if Britain is to meet and -answer the challenge of the times. The British enjoy these essentials -now. Their demonstrated ability to change with the times is the best -of omens for national success and survival as a great power in the -tumultuous years that lie ahead.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_13"></a>[Pg 13]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="II_The_Monarchy">II. <i>The Monarchy</i></h2> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Kings are not born; they are made by universal hallucination.</i></p> - -<p> -GEORGE BERNARD SHAW<br /> -</p></div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>A land where kings may be beloved and monarchy can teach republics -how they may be free.</i></p> - -<p> -VILDA SAUVAGE OWENS<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">The monarchy</span> is the crowning anachronism of British society. It -stands virtually unchallenged at the summit of that society. In this -most political of Western nations, one eternally bubbling with new -ideas on the ways and means by which men can govern themselves, the -thousand-year-old monarchy is admired, respected, or tolerated, but -is seldom attacked. A people who on occasion can be as ruthless and -cynical as any in the world preserve close to their hearts a mystic -symbol that asks and gets an almost childlike loyalty from millions.</p> - -<p>This tie between Crown and people is the basis for the monarchy's -existence. Yet, like so many other things in Britain, the tie is almost -indefinable. Its strength is everywhere and nowhere.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_14"></a>[Pg 14]</span> History is one -of its foundations, and the sense of history—a reassuring sense that -worse has happened and that the nation and the people have survived—is -very strong in Britain. Yet the present institution of monarchy has -little in common with the monarchy of 1856 and still less with that of -1756. And the extreme popularity of the royal family has developed only -in the last eighty years.</p> - -<p>The reasons for the monarchy's popularity today are far different from -those of the past. It is regrettable but true that some of the most -popular monarchs earned their popularity as much by their vices as by -their virtues.</p> - -<p>By our American standards the British monarchy is very old, although -it does not compare with the same institution in Iran, for instance, -where kings reigned seven centuries before Christ. Certainly the age of -monarchy, linking modern Britain with the forested, lusty, legendary -England of the Dark Ages, contributes to its popularity. Age in an -institution or a person counts in Britain.</p> - -<p>Queen Elizabeth II is in direct descent from Egbert, King of Wessex and -all England, who ascended the throne in 827. The blood of all the royal -families of Europe flows in her veins. Among her ancestors are some of -the great names of history: Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Alfred -the Great, Rodrigo the Cid, the Emperor Barbarossa, and St. Louis, -King of France. This notable lineage is unknown to millions who adore -the Queen. The visible expressions of adoration and loyalty to the -royal family can be profoundly moving, but there is nothing to suggest -that the crowd's memory stretches back much further than George V, the -present Queen's grandfather.</p> - -<p>Is "profoundly moving" too strong? I doubt it. London was a gray and -somber city in November 1947 when Princess Elizabeth married the Duke -of Edinburgh. A long war with Germany and two years of austerity had -left their mark. The crowds, the buildings were shabby and tired. -Yet the Crown evoked in these<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_15"></a>[Pg 15]</span> circumstances a sincere and unselfish -affection such as few politicians can arouse.</p> - -<p>What did it? The pageantry of the Household Cavalry, restored to -their pre-war glory of cuirass, helmet, and plume, scarlet and blue -and white? The state coach with the smiling, excited, pretty girl -inside? The bands and the stirring familiar tunes? There is no single -convincing answer. Yet the affection was there: the sense of a living -and expanding connection between the people and the throne.</p> - -<p>But some aspects of the connection can be embarrassing, to Britons as -well as to Americans. The doings of the royal family are recounted by -popular British newspapers and periodicals in nauseating prose. Special -articles on the education of Prince Charles or on Princess Margaret's -religious views (which are deep, sincere, and, to any decent person's -mind, her own business) are written in a mixture of archness, flowery -adulation, and sugary winsomeness.</p> - -<p>The newspapers are full of straight reporting (the Queen, asked if she -would have a cup of tea, said: "Yes, thank you, it is rather cold") but -this does not suffice to meet the demand for "news" about the royal -family. Periodically the Sunday newspapers publish reminiscences of -life in the royal household. Former governesses, valets, and even the -man who did the shopping for the Palace write their "inside stories." -These are as uninformative as the special campaign biographies that -appear every four years in the United States, but the public loves -them. I have been told that a "royal" feature in a popular magazine -adds 25,000 or 30,000 in circulation for that issue. The <i>Sunday -Express</i> is said to have picked up 300,000 circulation on the Duchess -of Windsor's memoirs. Like sex and crime, the royal family is always -news—and the news is not invariably favorable.</p> - -<p>The interest in royal doings is all the more baffling because the -Queen is generally held to be powerless politically. This view is -accepted in Britain and also in the United States, save among<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_16"></a>[Pg 16]</span> those -surviving primitives of Chicagoland who regard all British monarchs as -reincarnations of George III ready to order the Lobsterbacks to Boston -at an insult's notice. The accepted picture is of a monarch who is a -symbol with little or no influence on politics.</p> - -<p>Superficially the picture is accurate. But in the last century and in -this there have been occasions when the Crown exerted power beyond the -functions assigned it by the constitution. These functions include the -summoning, proroguing, and dissolution of Parliament, the dismissal -or appointment of a Prime Minister, the granting of pardons, and the -conferring of peerages and honors. To become the law of the land, a -bill passed by Parliament must receive the royal assent.</p> - -<p>All very impressive. But in practice these functions are restricted by -the principle that the monarch is responsible to the government of the -day even though it is styled "Her Majesty's Government." To take one -example, if the Queen wants to make Lord Tomnoddy a duke and the Prime -Minister says no, Lord Tomnoddy does not become a duke. The monarch -retains the right of conferring certain honors, such as the Order of -the Garter, without ministerial advice. But when Chancellor Adenauer of -Germany receives the insignia of the Grand Cross of the Order of St. -Michael and St. George the inspiration comes not from Buckingham Palace -but from Downing Street.</p> - -<p>The principle of responsibility to the government guides the conduct -of the monarch. In rare cases the sovereign can express disapproval -of a policy. In the present circumstances the idea of the young Queen -rejecting the advice of her Prime Minister is unthinkable. Without -being romantic, we can wonder if this will always be so.</p> - -<p>George V twice exercised his discretionary powers in choosing from -among alternative candidates the man he regarded as best suited to be -Prime Minister. Of course, in each case the candidate chosen had to -have the support of his party in the House of Commons.</p> - -<p>We need not go back that far. George VI, the father of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_17"></a>[Pg 17]</span> present -Queen, once made a decision that profoundly affected the history of the -world.</p> - -<p>When in May 1940 a tired, unpopular Neville Chamberlain resigned -as Prime Minister there were two candidates for the post: Winston -Churchill and Lord Halifax. The King knew that a large section of the -Conservative Party distrusted Churchill and admired Halifax. Its views -were conveyed to him in plain language.</p> - -<p>According to <i>The Gathering Storm</i>, the first volume of Sir Winston -Churchill's <i>The Second World War</i>, Lord Halifax told both Churchill -and Chamberlain that his position as a peer outside the House of -Commons would make it difficult for him to discharge the duties -of Prime Minister. Ultimately a National Government including -representatives of the Labor and Liberal parties was formed, but, -according to Churchill, the King made no stipulation "about the -Government being National in character."</p> - -<p>Lord Halifax certainly doubted his ability to discharge his duties -as Prime Minister. But apparently the question of whether he could -form a National Government did not arise. In any event, the King, -fully cognizant of the views of a considerable section of the -Conservative Party on the relative merits of the two men and aware -that it would have been possible to form a Conservative government -under Halifax, sent for Churchill instead of Halifax and asked him to -form a government. History may record this as a signal example of the -remaining powers of the Crown.</p> - -<p>Sir William Anson explained in <i>The Law and Custom in the Constitution</i> -that the real power of the sovereign "is not to be estimated by his -legal or his actual powers as the executive of the State.</p> - -<p>"The King or Queen for the time being is not a mere piece of mechanism, -but a human being carefully trained under circumstances which afford -exceptional chances of learning the business of politics."</p> - -<p>The monarch is not isolated from great affairs. The Queen sees from the -inside the workings of government, knows the individuals concerned, -and often has a surer sense of what the people<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_18"></a>[Pg 18]</span> will or will not -accept than some politicians. So, Sir William reasoned, the sovereign -in the course of a long reign may through experience become a person -whose political opinions, even if not enforceable, will carry weight. -Continuity in office, wide experience in contact with successive -governments, and, finally, the influence that the monarchy exercises -through an ancient and well-established tie with the people can confer -upon the sovereign an influence far greater than is generally realized.</p> - -<p>Queen Elizabeth II has twice used the royal prerogative of choosing a -Prime Minister. On April 6, 1955, she chose Sir Anthony Eden to succeed -Sir Winston Churchill. On January 10, 1957, she chose Harold Macmillan -to succeed Sir Anthony. The second selection occasioned sharp political -outcry. The "shadow cabinet" or Parliamentary Committee of the Labor -Party, meeting in secrecy and dudgeon, reported that the Queen's choice -had raised serious questions of a constitutional nature. It argued that -the Conservative Party, by asking the sovereign to choose between Mr. -Macmillan and R.A. Butler, had involved the Queen in partisan politics. -The Tories, Labor said with a touch of self-righteousness, should -always have a leader and a deputy leader of the party ready to assume -the highest office when called.</p> - -<p>(This raised the contingency, pleasing to Tories at least, of James -Griffiths, the present deputy leader, as Prime Minister instead of -Aneurin Bevan in the event of some serious accident to Hugh Gaitskell.)</p> - -<p>The Socialists' argument that the Queen was forced to choose between -Mr. Macmillan and Mr. Butler reflected a certain ignorance of what -had been going on within the Conservative Party. It was apparent on -the night of Sir Anthony Eden's resignation that Mr. Butler did not -command the support of a majority of the Tory Members of the House of -Commons. It was also apparent, or should have been apparent, that the -Queen would be advised by the retiring Prime Minister, Sir Anthony -Eden, and the two foremost figures in the party, Sir Winston Churchill -and the Marquess of Salisbury. Anyone aware of the currents within the -Conserva<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_19"></a>[Pg 19]</span>tive leadership during the last three months of 1956 could -not possibly have thought that any one of these three would advise the -Queen to choose Mr. Butler.</p> - -<p>There was a good deal less to the high-minded Socialist protest than -met the eye. The shadow cabinet made the tactical mistake of coupling -the protest with a demand for a general election. One need not be -cynical to emphasize the connection. But the spectacle of Mr. Bevan and -his colleagues protesting like courtiers over the Queen's involvement -in politics and quoting an editorial in <i>The Times</i> as though it were -Holy Writ added to the gaiety of the nation.</p> - -<p>The Queen may have opinions on national and international affairs which -differ from those of her ministers. To date there has been no reliable -report of such differences. But her grandfather, George V, was seldom -backward in expressing opinions contrary to those of his ministers. -He told them, for instance, that the conduct of the 1914-18 war must -be left to military "experts," which meant Haig and his staff, rather -than to politicians. He opposed the dissolution of Parliament in -1918. He refused outright to grant a convenient "political" peerage. -This opposition, it should be emphasized, was not directed at court -functionaries. On many occasions George V took issue with David Lloyd -George, a wartime Premier then at the height of his prestige and power, -and a brilliant and tenacious debater.</p> - -<p>The present royal family invites comparisons with that of a century -ago. Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, is, like Albert, the Prince Consort -of Victoria, an exceptional person. He is a man of industry and -intelligence. Like Albert, he understands both the broad outlines and -the nuances of a new industrial age into which Britain is moving. He -has a wider acquaintance with the world of science, so essential to -his country, than any other member of the royal family. The techniques -of industry and invention really interest him. He understands, perhaps -better than some of his wife's ministers, the importance to Britain of -such developments as the industrial use of nuclear energy. Finally, the -Duke of Edinburgh has one match<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_20"></a>[Pg 20]</span>less qualification for his role. As a -young officer of the Royal Navy he became aware of the way the Queen's -subjects, as represented by the lower deck of the Navy, think and feel. -He has in fact what the admirers of the Duke of Windsor claimed for him -when he was Prince of Wales: an intimate knowledge of the people of -Britain.</p> - -<p>These qualities are not universally admired. A trade-union leader -told me he did not want "well-intentioned young men like Philip -mucking about with industrial relations." At the other side of the -political spectrum, the <i>Sunday Express</i>, Lord Beaverbrook's newspaper, -tut-tutted at the Duke's interest in this field.</p> - -<p>The reasoning behind both attitudes is obvious. Industrial relations -are politics. The union movement is the Fourth Estate of the realm, and -"royals" should leave them alone.</p> - -<p>There is an obvious parallel. The Prince Consort when he died had -established himself at the center of national affairs. But for his -death, Lytton Strachey wrote, "such a man, grown gray in the service -of the nation, virtuous, intelligent, and with the unexampled -experience of a whole lifetime of government," would have achieved "an -extraordinary prestige."</p> - -<p>Disraeli saw the situation in even more positive terms. "With Prince -Albert we have buried our sovereign. This German Prince has governed -England for twenty-one years with a wisdom and energy such as none -of our kings have ever shown.... If he had outlived some of our 'old -stagers' he would have given us the blessings of absolute government."</p> - -<p>The parallel may seem far-fetched. Of course present-day Britain is -not the Britain of 1856. It is hard to think of Sir Anthony Eden or -Hugh Gaitskell being moved politically, at the moment, by the views of -the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh as Lord Clarendon was, and as Lord -Palmerston was not, by Victoria and Albert. But, to borrow Napoleon -III's incisive phrase, in politics one should never say never.</p> - -<p>Not long ago a diplomat who had returned from a key post abroad -encountered the Queen at what should have been a perfunctory ceremony. -He expected a few minutes' conversation. What<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_21"></a>[Pg 21]</span> he got was forty minutes -of acute questioning about the situation in the country he had just -left. The Queen impressed him with the width of her knowledge, her -accurate memory, and the sharpness of her questions. He, a tough, -skeptical intellectual, departed with heightened respect for his -sovereign's intelligence.</p> - -<p>What will be the Queen's influence a quarter of a century hence? By -then some politician, now unknown, will be Prime Minister. How much -will the wisdom and experience of the Queen, gained as the repository -of the secrets of successive governments, affect the government of the -day? Monarchy, we Americans are taught, is an archaic symbol and an -obsolete form of government. History has moved away from constitutional -monarchies and, of course, from one-man rule. But has it? Will the -movement continue?</p> - -<p>By 1980 the British monarchy may be a memory. But let us suppose -that by that year the royal house is represented by an infinitely -experienced Queen and a consort who knows the country's problems as -well as most of her ministers. Prince Philip is a nephew of Earl -Mountbatten, one of the most striking Englishmen of today. What will -this infusion of determination, energy, and intelligence do for the -fortunes of the monarchy?</p> - -<p>The British are cautious in discussing any indications of the influence -of the Crown on the day-to-day conduct of government. But occasional -comments and indiscretions indicate that this influence is a factor in -decisions. For instance, early in 1956 I was talking to an important -civil servant about a government decision that was to be announced -in the next few days. The government was busy making certain, he -said, that "the Palace" wouldn't "make a row about it." I said I was -surprised that he should ascribe so much weight to the Palace's view on -a matter that involved the cabinet and the House of Commons. His answer -was that in a country such as Britain under a Conservative government, -influence is not exerted solely through the House or government -departments. "What people say to each other counts," he said. "And when -the Queen says it, it counts a great deal. Of course, she couldn't -change<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_22"></a>[Pg 22]</span> a decision. Nor would she ever attempt to. But it can be -awkward, you know."</p> - -<p>To guess at the future power of the monarchy we must examine it as it -is today. What lies behind its popularity and how is that popularity -maintained? What keeps strong this tie between a largely working-class -population, highly progressive politically, and an aristocratic -institution that has outlived its power if not its influence?</p> - -<p>To understand, we must watch monarchy operate within the limitations -imposed upon it by the constitution. The principal functions are the -public performances of the duties of the Crown—what the British press -calls "royal occasions." They range from a state opening of Parliament -to a visit to an orphanage.</p> - -<p>These take place in an atmosphere fusing formality and enthusiasm. -Protocol calls for dignity, friendliness, and a certain aloofness -on the part of the Queen. Those who make the arrangements for royal -occasions are mindful of Walter Bagehot's warning against allowing -too much light to fall on the institution of monarchy. But from the -standpoint of popular reaction, the Queen's appearances are most -successful when she stops to say a few words to someone in the crowd. -Written reports of such encounters usually endow the Queen with a -celestial condescension. The fact is that the Queen, though shy, is -friendly, and her awed subjects are likely to report that "she talked -about the baby just like she was from down the street."</p> - -<p>Of course, the Queen is not like someone just down the street. But the -essence of a successful display of the monarchy is a combination of -this friendliness with the serene dignity displayed on great occasions -of state. The men and women in the crowd want to believe that the Queen -is, or can be, like them. As long as they do, the monarchy, no matter -how rich its members and how expensive its trappings, is relatively -safe.</p> - -<p>To the people in the streets the Queen is paramount. The Duke of -Edinburgh is popular. So are the Queen Mother and Princess Margaret. -But it is the Queen who combines all those elements<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_23"></a>[Pg 23]</span> of tradition, -affection, and mysticism which contribute to the Crown's unique place -in public life.</p> - -<p>The crowd does not care much about other royalties. To the man in -the street there is little difference between, say, Prince Rainier -of Monaco and Aristotle Onassis. The British nurse at their hearts a -snobbish isolationism toward foreign crowns. Only their own Queen and -royal family really matter.</p> - -<p>One reason is that Britain's Queen and the monarchial institution -she heads are kept before the people to a far greater degree than is -customary in the monarchies of Holland or Sweden. Official political -and social appearances in London are augmented by visits to various -parts of the country. The Queen and the Duke are the chief attractions, -but other members of the family perform similar duties.</p> - -<p>Careful planning and split-second timing are the key to successful -royal visits. So familiar is the pattern that a skeptic might think -the effect negligible. When the Queen comes to Loamshire, however, she -is <i>there</i> in Loamshire. Everything she does is familiar, but now she -is there directly before the crowd's very eyes, rendering a personal -service.</p> - -<p>The Queen and the Duke arrive in Loamshire for a three-day visit. -Their car is a huge, glittering Rolls-Royce flying the royal standard. -Thousands of people, most of them women and children, are on the -sidewalks and in the windows of the buildings around the town hall of -the county town of Loamshire. As the Queen gets out of the car there is -a wave of cheering, strong and unaffected. (It is well to balance this -enthusiasm against the inattention paid "God Save the Queen" when it is -played at the end of the program in a provincial movie theater.)</p> - -<p>The Mayor, sweating freely in his excitement, welcomes the Queen and -delivers an appropriate address. In a country divided almost evenly -between the Conservative and Labor parties, a large number of mayors -are Socialists. But, with rare exceptions, the Socialists and their -wives are as eager as the Tories to welcome royalty.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_24"></a>[Pg 24]</span></p> - -<p>The Queen and the Duke are introduced to the dignitaries of Loamshire, -with the Lord Lieutenant of the county in attendance. The Queen -inspects a guard of honor which may be drawn from the Royal Loamshire -Light Infantry or from the local Girl Guides. There is lunch, usually a -pretty bad lunch. Then the royal party is off to lay the cornerstone of -a new hospital or press a button to start a new power plant or unveil -a war memorial. At any such occasion the Queen reads a short speech of -blameless sentiments.</p> - -<p>Then on to the next town, to more cheering in the streets and waving of -flags, more loyal declarations and another mayor and council. This may -go on for two or three days. Every step the Queen takes, every action -is noted by newsreel and television cameras. Every word she utters is -taken down. Every person with whom she talks is interviewed afterward.</p> - -<p>Back in London there are more ceremonies. There are also ambassadors -to be received, state papers to be read, decorations to be awarded, -distinguished visitors to be met.</p> - -<p>It is often said that the Queen is just like anyone else of her age, -an idea much favored by the spun-sugar biographies in the popular -press. Of course it is nonsense. The Queen cannot, because of her -birth, upbringing, and station, be like anyone else. Certainly she has -a private life not unlike that of other wealthy young women, but her -private life is severely restricted.</p> - -<p>She and the Duke may like to eat their supper off trays and watch a -popular comedian on television, but they seldom get an opportunity -to do so. The Queen must be wary of what plays she sees and what -amusements she patronizes. As head of the Church she is an inviting -target for sorrowful criticism by the bluenoses. The Queen's love -of horse racing and the Duke's love of polo are often attacked by -puritanical elements. The League Against Cruel Sports periodically -reproves her for attending "the sporting butchery" of fox-hunting.</p> - -<p>What sort of woman is she? Forget the cloying descriptions of courtiers -and the indiscretions of "Crawfie" and her friends, and the portrait is -rather an appealing one. Elizabeth II in person is much<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_25"></a>[Pg 25]</span> prettier than -her photographs. Her coloring is excellent. Her mouth, a little too -wide, can break into a beguiling smile. She is slowly overcoming her -nervousness in public, but still becomes very angry when the newsreel -and television cameras focus on her for minutes at a time. Her voice, -high and girlish on her accession, is taking on a deeper, more musical -tone. Years of state duties, of meeting all kinds and classes of -people, have diminished her shyness. She was almost tongue-tied when -she came to Washington as Princess Elizabeth, but her host on that -occasion, President Harry S. Truman, was surprised by the poised and -friendly Queen he met in London in 1956.</p> - -<p>All her adult life the Queen has been accustomed to the company of the -great. Aided by a phenomenal memory and real interest, her acquaintance -with world politics is profound. She is intelligent but not an -intellectual. She does a great deal of official reading—so much, in -fact, that she reads little for pleasure.</p> - -<p>The Queen's pleasures and those of her immediate family are so typical -of the middle class that intellectuals are often offended. They would -prefer more attendance at cultural events such as the Edinburgh -Festival and less at race meetings. But the deep thinkers, worried -because the cultural tone of Buckingham Palace is pitched to the level -of Danny Kaye rather than T.S. Eliot, overlook the fact that attachment -to such frivolity strengthens the popularity of the royal house. -There is no evidence that the British admire or desire intellectual -attainments in a monarch. Nor does history indicate that such lusty -figures as Charles II and George IV were less popular than the pious -Victoria or the benign George V. Thus, when the Queen spends a week at -Ascot to watch the racing, as millions of her subjects would dearly -love to do, or attends a London revue, her subjects, aware of the -burden of her office, wish her a good time. And the descriptions of -such outings, with their invariable reports on what the Queen wore, -what she ate and drank, and what she was heard to say, are read avidly -by a large percentage of her people.</p> - -<p>The people are flattered when the Queen appears at a polo<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_26"></a>[Pg 26]</span> game in -sensible shoes and a print dress, accompanied by her children and her -dogs. They are equally flattered when they see her in tiara and evening -dress, regal and coldly handsome. When the newspapers printed pictures -of the Queen and her royal hosts at a state ball during her visit to -Sweden, the popular reaction was: "Doesn't she look lovely, a real -credit to the country."</p> - -<p>Racing is the Queen's favorite sport. When she was returning from -her world tour in 1953-4, one of the first messages the royal yacht -<i>Britannia</i> transmitted as it neared British shores was an inquiry on -the result of a race held the day before.</p> - -<p>For Elizabeth, racing is more than a sport; it is an enthusiasm. She -knows blood lines and past performances, and her acute judgment of form -sometimes conflicts with her personal attachment for one of the royal -stable's entries. She likes to watch show jumping and polo, although -at polo games she is continually worried about the Duke of Edinburgh, -an enthusiastic player. But horse racing: the magic moment when the -barrier goes up, the bright silks on the back stretch, the lovely sight -of the field rounding the last turn into the stretch—that's her sport. -As it is also the sport of millions of her subjects, the sneers of the -puritans have little effect.</p> - -<p>She is a young woman of determination, having inherited some of her -grandfather's temper and his forthright outlook on events. In moments -of family crisis she is likely to take what the British call "a strong -line." During the row over the romance of Princess Margaret and Peter -Townsend, it was reported that the first communication from Buckingham -Palace on the situation had been written by the Queen. I find this -credible. The announcement certainly had all the faults of a communiqué -drafted in anger.</p> - -<p>Finally, Elizabeth is religious, very conscious of the importance -of her role in British society, and, as she grows older, somewhat -censorious of the gay young things enjoying a freedom she never knew.</p> - -<p>The monarchy is costly. The Queen is a very wealthy woman in her own -right, but, in addition, she receives £60,000 (about $168,000) a year -from the Civil List. This is granted to the sov<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_27"></a>[Pg 27]</span>ereign by Parliament -on the recommendation of a Select Committee. The Civil List not only -"pays" the Queen but pays her expenses, which are high. For instance, -the salaries of the royal household, secretaries, equerries, servants, -and the like, total £185,000 or $418,000 a year, and the running -expenses come to £121,800 or $341,040.</p> - -<p>Payments charged to the Consolidated Fund maintain the other members of -the family. The Duke of Edinburgh's annuity is £40,000 or $112,000 a -year, and the Queen Mother's is £70,000 or $196,000.</p> - -<p>These payments are only one of many sources of income. The House of -Windsor is very rich, although its fortune is modest compared with the -holdings of the House of Ford or the House of Rockefeller.</p> - -<p>Queen Victoria died leaving the monarchy more firmly established than -ever before and her family richer by millions of pounds. During her -long reign the remarkable daughter of an unambitious Duke of Kent and -an improvident German princess amassed a fortune of about £5,000,000 -or, at the exchange rates of the day, about $25,000,000. The financial -dealings of the royal house are secret. But both Albert, Victoria's -Prince Consort, and his son Edward VII benefited from the advice of -financiers. Reputedly the family owns large blocks of American railroad -stock. The financial structure is complex, however. It is hard to say -just how much Elizabeth owns as Queen and how much as an individual.</p> - -<p>As one of the greatest landowners, the Queen derives an income of about -£94,600 or $265,000 a year from the Duchy of Lancaster. The royal -family also receives the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall, which -amount to about £90,000 or approximately $250,000 a year. This duchy, -comprising about 133,000 acres spread throughout the west of England, -includes farms, hotels, tin mines, even pubs. Seven palaces and -eight royal houses also are the property of Elizabeth as Queen. One, -Sandringham in Norfolk, an estate of 17,000 acres including fifteen -well-kept farms, is a family holding. The Balmoral estate in Scotland -comprises 80,000 acres.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_28"></a>[Pg 28]</span> The family holds more than seventy-five choice -bits of London real estate. Both fortune and property are carefully -managed. Nothing is wasted. The game birds that fall to the guns of -shooting parties at Sandringham and Balmoral are sold on the commercial -market after the household's requirements have been met.</p> - -<p>The Crown is not only a prosperous and wealthy establishment. It is -also the center of a unique complex of commercial interests. The -manufacture of souvenirs connected with the royal family is big -business. These souvenirs range from hideous, cheap glass ash trays and -"silver" spoons stamped with a picture of Buckingham Palace or of the -Queen and the Duke to "coronation" wineglasses and dinner services sold -to wealthy tourists. A whole section of British publishing is devoted -to postcards, picture books, and other records of royal lives and royal -occasions.</p> - -<p>The Queen's world tour in 1953-4 produced a bumper crop of pictorial -and prose reports to fit every purse and the prevailing taste for -flowery adulation. These books were bought and read, or at least looked -at, after the British public already had been exposed to newspaper -accounts, magazine reports, radio bulletins, and television newsreels. -Once at a dinner party the wife of a famous writer remarked: "I'm -sick of this damned tour." The other guests broke into a flurry of -conversation that had nothing to do with the royal voyage. Yet I -learned that three of them felt "exactly as dear Betty does, but, my -dear, you don't say it."</p> - -<p>Some thoughtful students of the institution believe that the -newspapers, magazines, radio, and television have forgotten Bagehot's -injunction about letting too much light fall on the monarchy. But I -have seen no diminution of popular interest. The highbrows may be -bored, but the lowbrows and middlebrows love it.</p> - -<p>The extensive coverage given the royal family has propaganda uses. In -the years since the war there has been a quiet but intensive effort -to reinforce the position of the monarch as the titular head of the -Commonwealth. The rulers of Britain, Labor or Conservative, recognizing -how slender are the ties that bind the Commonwealth,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_29"></a>[Pg 29]</span> have worked -steadily to strengthen the chief spiritual tie, the Crown, as political -and economic ties have become attenuated.</p> - -<p>The Queen is the Queen of Canada and Australia as well as of the United -Kingdom. Canada, in fact, is a monarchy. Royal tours of Commonwealth -countries emphasize the common tie of monarchy and are also intended -to reawaken interest in Britain and, as these are a commercial people, -British manufactures.</p> - -<p>The reports that have reached London show that, from the standpoint of -strengthening identity with the Commonwealth, the visit to Australia -and New Zealand during the world tour was an outstanding success. To -the exuberant, vigorous Australians, for instance, the Queen symbolized -their relationship with the island many of them still call home. -Criticism of the "pommies," the slang term for the British, was drowned -in the swell of cheers for the Queen of Australia.</p> - -<p>Nor should the effect of such tours on the younger members of the -Commonwealth be underestimated. The visit to Nigeria in 1956 flattered -its people and gave new meaning to the honors and titles that -successive governments have bestowed on worthy—which in this context -means loyal—natives of the country. Those in government who value the -Commonwealth and Empire see such visits as a method of impressing new -members of the Commonwealth with the permanence of a symbol that binds -all members. Perhaps only South Africa, in its present government's -mood of Boer republicanism, is proof against the loan of the Crown.</p> - -<p>Curiously, this extension of the monarchy is not generally appreciated -in Britain. There the supporters of the Crown are gratified, of course, -when the newspapers report an ovation for the Queen in Wellington. But -they are slow to accept the idea of the Queen as Queen of New Zealand.</p> - -<p>The process of identifying the Queen with various parts of the -Commonwealth may go further than visits to its members. Some officials -suggest that the Queen should live a part of each year in one or -another of the Commonwealth countries. From the constitu<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_30"></a>[Pg 30]</span>tional -standpoint this is a revolutionary suggestion. And Britain prefers -evolution to revolution. But it is an indication of the progressive -viewpoint that some supporters of the Crown have adopted toward its -political uses in the modern world.</p> - -<p>No institution in Britain escapes attack, and so the institution of -monarchy is attacked. But such criticism is rarely coherent, popular, -or direct. On the whole, there is less criticism than there was a -century ago. Republicanism died as a political force in the 1870's. The -Chartists in their peak period, roughly between 1838 and 1849, included -in their demands the establishment of a republic. When Victoria -withdrew into her grief after the death of the Prince Consort, a -republican movement of some importance developed. New impetus was given -by the establishment of the Third Republic in France in 1871. Charles -Bradlaugh and George Odger, men of some importance, spoke eloquently in -support of a republic. But the last "Republican Conference" was held in -1873, and Sir Charles Dilke later ascribed his youthful republicanism -to "political infancy."</p> - -<p>The Labor Party, despite its strong infusion of Marxism, treats the -issue as a dead letter. Not since the party conference of 1923 has -there been a serious debate on the monarchy. At that conference a -motion that republicanism should be the policy of the party was -rejected by 3,694,000 votes to 386,000.</p> - -<p>Criticism of the monarchy in contemporary Britain is most telling when -it hits the cost of the institution. The great wealth of the royal -family and the heavy expenses of the monarchial institution invite -criticism in a period when Britain seems to live perennially on the rim -of economic disaster.</p> - -<p>Early in 1956 it was suggested that the Queen's Flight, her personal -transport planes, be re-equipped with one, possibly more, of the -big new Britannias, the nation's newest air liner. At the same time -a new dining-car was ordered for royal travel, and it became known -that the royal waiting-room at London airport was to be renovated at -considerable expense. These matters received extraordinarily detailed -coverage in the newspapers owned by Lord Bea<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_31"></a>[Pg 31]</span>verbrook. Letters -criticizing the added expenses found their way into the letter columns -of the <i>Daily Express</i>, the <i>Evening Standard</i>, and the <i>Sunday -Express</i>. Columnists inquired the reason for such expenditures when -the nation was being asked to tighten its belt, spend less, and defeat -inflation.</p> - -<p>Constant readers of these newspapers, which are among the most -sprightly and technically expert in Britain, have long noted their -oblique criticism of Duke of Edinburgh. Usually this deals with the -Duke's "interference" in the field of industrial relations. It is -believed to spring from Lord Beaverbrook's long-standing animus for -the Duke's uncle, Earl Mountbatten. The criticism of the proposed -expenditures for the Britannias, the dining-car, and the waiting-room -gave the newspapers a chance to hint that the young man was getting a -bit above himself.</p> - -<p>The <i>Sunday Express</i> gave the widest possible publicity to its -serialization of the autobiography of the Duchess of Windsor, an opus -that, although interesting, cannot be considered an enthusiastic -recommendation for the institution of monarchy.</p> - -<p>The inevitable conclusion is that William Maxwell Aitken, first Baron -Beaverbrook, New Brunswick, and Cherkley, nurses crypto-republican -sentiments at heart. He has confessed to being a propagandist in his -newspapers, and he is so unpredictable that he might sometime direct -all his energies against the institution. I mentioned this to a cabinet -minister, who replied that the monarchy would welcome it. "Nothing -helps a politician more than the enmity of the Beaver," he commented.</p> - -<p>Although republicanism is no longer an issue in the Labor Party, the -party itself contains a strong element that is hostile to the monarchy. -Yet neither the <i>Daily Mirror</i> nor the <i>Daily Herald</i>, the journalistic -pillars of the left, snipe quite so often or so accurately as the -Beaverbrook press.</p> - -<p>The <i>New Statesman and Nation</i> does. Its indirect attacks on royalty -are based on establishing a link between royalty and the wealthy, -showy, and, of course, non-socialist world of London's fashionable -West End. The <i>New Statesman</i>'s complaint, delivered<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_32"></a>[Pg 32]</span> in the tones of -a touring schoolmarm who has been pinched by a lascivious Latin, is -that the Queen should use her influence to halt ostentatious spending -on debutante parties and the revels of the young. Its anonymous -editorial-writer was severe with young people who drink too much -(although abstinence has never been particularly popular on the left) -and generally whoop it up. The editorial ended with a hint that the -Queen would have to exercise some restraint when a Labor government -came to power.</p> - -<p>Despite such criticisms and warnings, the monarchy pursues its course -virtually unchallenged. One reason for the lack of a serious political -challenge may be that the monarchy is not now identified with a rich, -powerful, and coherent aristocracy, as it was a century ago, but with -the ordinary citizen. Then, too, there are many who look to the royal -family as an example.</p> - -<p>Long ago a compositor in a London newspaper, a good union man and a -Socialist, explained this attitude. "I'd rather have my two daughters -reading about the Queen and all that stuff than reading those magazines -about the flicks. Who'd you want your daughter to follow, Lana Turner -or the Queen?"</p> - -<p>So we return again to the indefinable and powerful tie that binds -people and Crown.</p> - -<p>Perhaps it is a sense of historical identity experienced as the Queen -rides past, carrying with her the atmosphere of other Englands. Here -before the eyes of her people is a reassurance of survival, an example -of continuity. This is one of those periods in history when the British -need reassuring.</p> - -<p>Perhaps as the monotony of life in a nation that is becoming one huge -industrial suburb spreads over Britain, the ceremony and glitter of -the Crown mean more than ever before. The great noblemen are prosaic -characters in business suits showing the crowds through empty palaces -and castles. But the Queen, amid the uniforms and palaces and castles, -remains the Queen.</p> - -<p>Perhaps as the storms buffet England in this second half of the -century, the position of the Queen as a personification of goodness -and justice becomes more important. Here is an enduring<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_33"></a>[Pg 33]</span> symbol, a -token of the past and a promise for the future. As the world and its -problems become more complex, the single, simple attraction of the -representative of an institution that has survived so many complexities -and problems will grow upon the confused and unhappy.</p> - -<p>The Crown stands as it has for a thousand years. Its power is less and -its influence is greater than many know. It is an integral part of a -flexible and progressive society.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_34"></a>[Pg 34]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="III_How_the_British_Govern_Themselves">III. <i>How the British Govern Themselves</i></h2> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Parliament can do anything but turn a boy into a girl.</i></p> - -<p> -ENGLISH PROVERB<br /> -</p> - -<p><i>Politics I conceive to be nothing more than the science of the -ordered progress of society along the lines of greatest usefulness and -convenience to itself.</i></p> - -<p> -WOODROW WILSON<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">The British</span> are pre-eminently a political people, as Americans are, -and as Germans, Russians, and Italians are not. They regard politics -and government as serious, honorable, and, above all, interesting -occupations. To many Britons the techniques of government and politics -in Nigeria or Louisiana or Iceland are as fascinating as the newest jet -fighter is to an aviation enthusiast. They have been at it a long time, -and yet politics and government remain eternally fascinating.</p> - -<p>The comparative stability and prestige of government and politics -result in part from tradition and experience. The British govern<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_35"></a>[Pg 35]</span> -themselves by a system evolved over a thousand years from the times of -the Saxon kings, and they have given much of what is best and some of -what is worst in that system to nations and continents unknown when -first a Parliament sat in Westminster. Although it was dominated by -peers and bullied by the King, a Parliament met in Westminster when -France seethed under the absolute rule of His Most Christian Majesty. -Some of the greatest speeches made against the royal policy during the -American War of Independence were made in Parliament.</p> - -<p>The course of history has strengthened the position of parliamentary -government. Parliament and Britain have survived and triumphed, but -where is the Europe of Louis XIV, of Napoleon, of Wilhelm II, of -Hitler? Even in times of great stress the business of government must -go on. I remember my astonishment in June of 1940 when I returned from -a stricken, hopeless France to learn from a Member of Parliament that a -committee was considering plans for uniting the West Indian islands in -a single Commonwealth unit after the war.</p> - -<p>The idea that politics and government are essential to the well-being -of the nation fortifies tolerance in British public life. The political -and military disasters of 1940 were far more damaging and dangerous -to Britain than Pearl Harbor was to the United States. They invited -bitter recrimination. Yet Winston Churchill, himself bitterly attacked -in the locust years for predicting these very disasters, took Neville -Chamberlain into his cabinet and silenced recrimination with the -salient reminder that if the nation dwelt too much on the past it might -lose the future.</p> - -<p>For a century the British have avoided the dangers of an important -extremist political party comparable to the Communists in France and -Italy or the Nazis in Germany. The Communist Party exists in Britain, -of course, but only barely. Sir Oswald Mosley and his blackshirts made -some impression just before and just after the last war, but their -direct political influence is negligible.</p> - -<p>The British don't think extremism is good practical politics. They went -through their own period of extremism in the sixteenth,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_36"></a>[Pg 36]</span> seventeenth, -and early eighteenth centuries when for a variety of reasons, -religious as well as political, they cut off one king's head, tried -a dictatorship, brought back a king, and finally found comparative -tranquillity in the development of a constitutional monarchy.</p> - -<p>The memory of these troubled times is not dead. At the height of -McCarthyism in the United States a British diplomat explained: "We're -very fortunate; we went through the same sort of period under the -Tudors and the Stuarts when treason and slander and libel were the -common coin of politics."</p> - -<p>With exceptions, the great political parties in the country have now -identified themselves with the national interest rather than with a -partisan one. Even the exceptions change. As the status of the working -class has changed for the better, the Labor Party has moved perceptibly -away from its early position as a one-class party. The heirs of Keir -Hardy—the Attlees, Morrisons, and Gaitskells—understand that Labor -must appeal now to the whole people.</p> - -<p>The national interest is something the whole people has always -understood and accepted in the past. For the British are guided -politically not by an ideology but by interest. This interest is a free -world, free from the economic as well as the political standpoint. One -factor in the decision to withdraw from India was the conviction that, -in the end, withdrawal would serve British commercial interests. I do -not suggest that this was the only factor. There were others, including -the belief of the leaders of the Labor government that India could not -and should not be kept within the Empire by force.</p> - -<p>Similarly, Britain is ready to give way on the independence of -other parts of the Empire when she thinks these areas are ready for -independence as democracies, and when she believes that their emergence -as independent democracies will benefit her own commercial interests. -This mixture of realism and idealism is difficult for outsiders to -grasp, especially when the British cling to a terri<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_37"></a>[Pg 37]</span>tory such as Cyprus -for reasons that are largely connected with their commercial interests -in that part of the world.</p> - -<p>Yet although the British have acquired, and are now in the process -of losing, a world-wide empire, they never suffered from a desire to -remake the world as did the French of 1789, or the Russians of 1917, or -the Germans of 1939. As a commercial people their basic interest was, -and is, peace. The British will go to almost any lengths to prevent a -war, as they did in 1938 and 1939. Once at war, however, they fight -with cold ruthlessness.</p> - -<p>The allegiance of the great political parties to the national interest -is one reason why British politics and politicians are flexible and -tolerant. Another is that politics are still touched by the shadowy -influence of the Crown. Here is a higher, if weaker, authority than -Prime Minister or cabinet. Does the presence of the sovereign at the -peak of government draw some of the exaggeration and extremism from -politics?</p> - -<p>Certainly no British Prime Minister, not even Churchill in 1940, has -ever been bathed in the sycophancy that deluged President Eisenhower -in his first term. Certainly no British Prime Minister, not even -Chamberlain in 1938 and 1939, has been reviled so relentlessly by -critics as were Presidents Roosevelt and Truman. Convictions are as -deeply held in London as in Washington. But anyone moving between the -two cities must be convinced that the political atmosphere in London is -calmer, less subject to emotional cloudbursts.</p> - -<p>The center of British politics is Parliament—the House of Commons and, -to a lesser degree, the House of Lords.</p> - -<p>Parliament represents all the countries of the United Kingdom. It -can legislate for the whole kingdom or for Great Britain itself or, -separately, for England and Wales. But, as this is Britain, the -country of contradictions, the Parliament at Westminster is not the -only parliament. Northern Ireland has its own. But it also sends MP's -to Westminster. The Tynewald sits in the Isle of Man, and the States -legislate for the Channel Islands.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_38"></a>[Pg 38]</span></p> - -<p>Opposition to the power of the central government, which means -Parliament, comes from the nationalist movements of Scotland and Wales. -Supported by minorities fiercely antagonistic toward the Sassenach (as -they call the English), these movements provide emotional stimuli for -the very young and the very old. At best they are gallant protests -against the accretion of power to a central government, a process that -goes on in Britain as it does in the United States and elsewhere. At -worst, considering the extent of Britain's real problems, the national -movements are a nuisance.</p> - -<p>But these are not rivals, and legally the Parliament in London can do -anything it desires. During the five-year life of a Parliament the -assembly can make or unmake any law, destroy the constitution, legalize -past illegalities and thus reverse court decisions. Parliament also has -the power to prolong its own life.</p> - -<p>Is Parliament therefore supreme and absolute? Legally, yes. But -legislative authority is delegated increasingly to ministers, and -specific powers to local authorities and to public corporations. Such -delegated powers can be withdrawn at any time, although the pressure of -work on Parliament is so great that this is unlikely.</p> - -<p>Finally, Britain has its own system of checks and balances. The -two-party system forbids arbitrary action, for the abuse of -parliamentary power by the party in power would invite repudiation by -the electors.</p> - -<p>Of the two houses, the House of Commons is infinitely the more -powerful. In this popularly elected assembly there are 630 members. Of -these, 511 sit for English constituencies, 36 for Welsh, 71 for Scotch, -and 12 for Northern Irish. Each constituency elects one member. The -composition of the present House of Commons, elected in May 1955, is: -Conservatives and their supporters, 346; Labor, 277; Liberal, 6; and -the Speaker, who does not vote, 1.</p> - -<p>What does Parliament do? It regulates the life of the community through -the laws it makes. It finances the needs of the people and appropriates -the funds necessary for the services of the State by legislative -action. It controls and criticizes the government.</p> - -<p>One reason for the supremacy of the House of Commons is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_39"></a>[Pg 39]</span> that bills -dealing with finance or representation are always introduced in that -house. Moreover, the Lords avoids the introduction of controversial -bills.</p> - -<p>Almost all bills are presented by the government in power. They -reflect policy decisions taken in the cabinet at the instigation of -government departments that will be responsible for the administration -of the decisions when the bills become law. The principal exceptions -are Private Bills, which relate solely to some matter of individual, -corporate, or local interest, and Private Members' Bills, which are -introduced by individual MP's.</p> - -<p>The manner in which Parliament—generally the House of -Commons—controls the government in power emphasizes the difference -between the British system and our own. The ultimate control is the -power of the House of Commons to pass a resolution of "no confidence" -in the government or to reject a proposal which the government -considers so vital to its policy that it has made the proposal's -passage a "matter of confidence." If such a proposal is rejected, the -government is obliged to resign.</p> - -<p>In addition, there is that very British institution, Question Time. -Between 2:30 and 3:30 each afternoon from Monday through Thursday, -MP's may question any minister on the work of his department and the -Prime Minister on general national policy. The questions range from the -trivial to the significant. A query about the heating in a remote Army -barracks may be followed by one about progress on the hydrogen bomb. -The growth of Question Time as an institution has put a special premium -on those ministers or junior ministers best able to parry and riposte. -For the opposition can press the minister, and if his original reply -is unsatisfactory, the questioner will follow with a supplementary -question designed to reveal the minister as incapable and ignorant.</p> - -<p>The majority of questions are put by the opposition in the hope -of focusing public attention on the government's weaknesses. But -government Members also put questions dealing with affairs in their -constituencies. A number of them also can be counted upon to offer -ministers congratulatory queries along the lines "Is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_40"></a>[Pg 40]</span> the Right -Honorable Gentleman aware that his reply will be welcomed by all those -...?"</p> - -<p>Questions and answers are couched in the glistening phrases of polite -debate, but occasionally tempers rise and the Speaker intervenes. -Because of the variety of subject matter and the importance of some of -the questions, Question Time is an exciting period. It was never more -so than in the last administration of Sir Winston Churchill.</p> - -<p>That Prime Minister, armed with the political experience of fifty -years, was a joy to watch in action. One of his last memorable sallies -was at the expense of Woodrow Wyatt, an earnest young Labor MP.</p> - -<p>What plans had the government, Wyatt asked, for evacuating itself from -London in the event of atomic attack?</p> - -<p>Sir Winston regarded him owlishly. "Surely the Honorable Member does -not wish me to take the bread out of the mouths of the Soviet secret -service," he said.</p> - -<p>Even without these moments, Question Time would be useful as a sort -of national catharsis and as an example of democracy in action. The -spectacle of the House of Commons, representing a Britain beset by a -multitude of problems, pausing to discuss the affairs of a crippled -veteran in a remote Welsh village is a moving one.</p> - -<p>There is a slight similarity between Question Time and the Presidential -press conference as it has developed in Washington. Both give the -executive a chance to explain the workings of policy and government. -But in Britain the penalties for failure to answer are much greater -than in Washington. The President is answering reporters, and he is -under no compulsion to answer the questions put to him. The Prime -Minister, on the other hand, is confronted directly by his political -foes. If he fails to answer a question or offers an unsatisfactory -reply, he may provoke debate later on the matter at issue.</p> - -<p>Certainly the President is often roughly handled, but most of the -press-conference questions seem to lack the bite and sting of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_41"></a>[Pg 41]</span> those -posed in the House of Commons. Perhaps this is inevitable under present -circumstances. President Eisenhower has answered the questions of -representatives of newspapers, magazines, and radio and television -systems that are overwhelmingly Republican. A British Prime Minister -and his ministers, on the other hand, must battle all the way.</p> - -<p>Finally, all the government departments are represented in the House -of Commons, and their representatives, as well as the Prime Minister, -can be subjected to prolonged and, at times, merciless questioning. -A comparison of Hansard's Parliamentary reports and the reports of -Presidential press conferences since 1952 will show, I think, that -there is greater pressure and a good deal more precise information in -Question Time than in a Presidential press conference.</p> - -<p>But Question Time is only one means by which the House of Commons -can criticize and control the government. The opposition can move -the adjournment of the House on a matter that the Speaker considers -definite, urgent, and the responsibility of the government. Or it can -use one of the days formerly devoted to consideration of the Estimates -in Committee of Supply for a debate on some part of government policy.</p> - -<p>The big debates on such issues as foreign affairs and economic policy -are the summit of parliamentary effort. Government and opposition put -forward their leading spokesmen on the issue under debate. But debates -also provide an opportunity for the back benchers of all parties. -The back benchers—Members who are not in the government or in the -opposition's shadow cabinet—rise to make their points on the issue, -and often remarkably good speeches, as well as bad ones, are delivered.</p> - -<p>But parliamentary business is concerned with much more than questions -and debates. Bills must be passed. This procedure is involved and -lengthy, paying due attention to the rights of the House and the people -it represents.</p> - -<p>The bill receives a formal First Reading on its introduction and is -then printed. After a period varying from one to several<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_42"></a>[Pg 42]</span> weeks, -depending on the bill's nature, it may be given a Second Reading as the -result of a debate on its general merits. Then the bill is referred to -one of the standing committees.</p> - -<p>During the committee stage, Members can amend the bill if a majority of -the House agrees. When this stage is finished, the bill is reported to -the House and a further debate takes place during which the Committee's -amendments may be altered, additional amendments may be suggested -and incorporated, and, if necessary, the bill may be recommitted to -committee. Finally, the bill is submitted for a Third Reading, and if -passed, it is sent on from the Commons to the House of Lords. There it -enters upon the same course.</p> - -<p>There, also, it may awaken the interest of Lord Cholmondeley, my -favorite peer. Lord Cholmondeley spoke in the House of Lords recently -for the first time in thirty-two years. What he had to say—about -rabbits and other small game—was brief and to the point. To many, Lord -Cholmondeley must symbolize the vague absurdities of the House of Lords.</p> - -<p>Yet this peculiar institution has its defenders, and these are not all -peers. There is something to be said, it is contended, for an upper -chamber that debates on terms other than partisan politics the great -issues of the day. The House of Lords, like the Crown, has influence -but, as money bills must be introduced in the House of Commons, little -direct power. From the standpoint of active politics its limited power -is of a negative nature. It can, for instance, delay the passage of -legislation by rejecting a bill previously passed by the House of -Commons.</p> - -<p>This occurred when the Lords rejected the bill to nationalize the steel -industry and the bill to abolish capital punishment. These delaying -actions demonstrated that, although the powers of the House of Lords -have been drastically curtailed, they can still have considerable -political importance. Inevitably, such action evokes dark mutterings -from the Labor Party about the ability of hereditary peers to flout the -will of the people. The Lords retort that the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_43"></a>[Pg 43]</span> bill in question is not -the will of the people at all, but the will of some of the people's -representatives.</p> - -<p>Theoretically, the House of Lords is a good deal larger than the House -of Commons, consisting of 878 peers. Only about one tenth of them, -however, take an active part in the work of the House of Lords. The -peers include princes of the royal blood, who by custom take no part in -proceedings; 26 spiritual peers, the archbishops and senior bishops of -the Church of England; all hereditary peers of England, Great Britain, -and the United Kingdom; 16 hereditary peers of Scotland elected from -their own number for each Parliament; 5 representative peers of Ireland -elected for life; and the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary appointed to -perform the judicial duties of the House and holding their seats for -life.</p> - -<p>Such are the bare bones of the parliamentary system of Britain. Like -many other British institutions, it conceals beneath a façade of -ceremonial and tradition an efficient, flexible machine. The debates, -the great speeches, and the days of pomp when the Queen rides amid the -Household Cavalry to open Parliament are in spectacular contrast to -the long grind of unremitting and, by modern standards, financially -unrewarding work by Members of both Lords and Commons.</p> - -<p>When the visitor sits in the gallery high above the well of the Commons -and hears a minister patiently explaining some point connected with an -obscure aspect of British life, it is well to remember that this system -is one for which men fought and suffered, that this House is the cradle -of liberties and freedoms.</p> - -<p>The members of the government—"Her Majesty's Government in the United -Kingdom," as it is formally titled in Britain—are all Members of the -House of Commons or the House of Lords. The government and the cabinet -are separate entities, for the government includes the following -ministerial offices: the Prime Minister, who is the recognized head of -the government but who has no department; the Departmental Ministers, -seven of whom are Secretaries of State for Foreign Affairs, the Home -Department, Scot<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_44"></a>[Pg 44]</span>land, Commonwealth Relations, Colonies, War, and Air; -the Ministries, of which there are twelve, each headed by a Minister; -and some of the older posts with special titles such as the Chancellor -of the Exchequer, who is responsible for the Treasury, and the First -Lord of the Admiralty.</p> - -<p>The government also includes non-departmental ministers who hold -traditional offices, such as the Lord President of the Council, the -Lord Privy Seal, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. With the -flexibility that is so conspicuous a part of the British system, -successive governments have found major responsibilities for these -posts.</p> - -<p>The present Lord President of the Council, the Marquess of Salisbury, -is responsible to Parliament for two immensely important organizations: -the Atomic Energy Authority and the Department of Scientific and -Industrial Research. Yet Lord Salisbury, one of the most important -members of the present government, is not an elected representative of -the people but sits in the House of Lords as a peer.</p> - -<p>The Lord Chancellor and the Law Officers are also members of the -government. The Lord Chancellor is in fact a Minister of the Crown -who is also head of the judiciary in England and Wales. The four Law -Officers of the Crown are the Attorney General and the Solicitor -General for England and Wales and the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor -General for Scotland.</p> - -<p>Finally, there are Ministers of State—who are deputy ministers -in departments where there is a heavy load of work or where, as -in the case of the Foreign Office, the duties involve frequent -overseas travel—and junior Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries, or -Parliamentary Under Secretaries of State.</p> - -<p>The cabinet system, like so much else in British government, was not -the result of Olympian planning. It "just growed." The Tudors began -to appoint <i>ad hoc</i> committees of the Privy Council. By the time of -Charles II the Privy Council numbered forty-seven. There then developed -an occasional arrangement in which a coun<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_45"></a>[Pg 45]</span>cil of people in high office -was constituted to debate questions of domestic and foreign affairs.</p> - -<p>Such committees or cabinets persisted until the reign of Queen Anne. -Usually, but not always, they met in the presence of the sovereign. In -1717, George I, the first Hanoverian King, ceased to attend cabinet -meetings. Until recently the accepted historical reason for this was -the King's ignorance of English—a circumstance that might, one would -think, enable him to bear long debates with fortitude. However, J.H. -Plumb in his recent life of Sir Robert Walpole has suggested that -the King's absence from the cabinet was due to a quarrel between the -monarch and the Prince of Wales.</p> - -<p>At any rate, the cabinet system continued to flourish. Its members -consistently ignored the provision in the Act of Settlements (1725) -which forbade office-holders to sit in the Commons. The direct -influence of the sovereign was reduced, although his indirect -influence, as Lord North and "the King's Friends" demonstrated, was -great.</p> - -<p>Nowadays the members of the cabinet are selected from the government by -the Prime Minister. Usually it has fewer than twenty members.</p> - -<p>The cabinet determines the policy the government will submit to -Parliament, it controls the national executive in accordance with -policy approved by Parliament, and it co-ordinates and limits the -authority of the departments of the government. In its operations the -cabinet makes great use of the committee system, referring problems to -one of the standing committees or to a temporary committee composed of -the ministers chiefly concerned.</p> - -<p>A British cabinet operates under the rule of collective responsibility -and of individual responsibility. That is, ministers share collective -responsibility for the policy and actions of the government and -individual responsibility to Parliament for the functioning of -their departments. A cabinet minister in Britain must appear before -the legislature, of which he is a member, and submit to a lengthy -questioning upon the work of his department. He must defend his<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_46"></a>[Pg 46]</span> -department in debate. No such procedure affects American cabinet -members, although they can, of course, be questioned by Congressional -committees.</p> - -<p>The members of the cabinet in Britain are a good deal more than -advisers to the Prime Minister. Their relationship to ultimate policy -is closer and their responsibility greater. Hence it is unusual, almost -impossible, in Britain to find the Secretary of State for Foreign -Affairs saying one thing about foreign policy and the Prime Minister -another. Lord Melbourne said it did not matter what the members of his -government said as long as they all said the same thing. This principle -has been hallowed by time.</p> - -<p>Although members of the cabinet often disagree furiously in private, -there is an absence of open bickering. Moreover, the authority of the -cabinet and the House of Commons is supreme. There have been no British -General MacArthurs. Field Marshal Lord Montgomery is a wise, cogent, -and talkative man. Occasionally he has offered the country his views on -non-military matters. Invariably he has been told to leave government -matters to the elected representatives of the people. When the cabinet -requires the advice of the Chief of the Imperial General Staff or -the First Sea Lord (not to be confused with the First Lord of the -Admiralty) on military matters, the cabinet asks for it.</p> - -<p>The cabinet minister is bound to secrecy. If he resigns from the -cabinet because of a disputed issue, he must obtain through the Prime -Minister the permission of the sovereign before he can make any -statement involving a disclosure of cabinet discussions.</p> - -<p>Nor may a cabinet minister repudiate either in Parliament or in his -constituency policies that have been approved by the cabinet or propose -policies that have not been agreed on with other ministers. He must -be prepared to vote with the government on all issues and to speak in -support or defense of its policy. Inability to agree or compromise -with the view of the majority in the cabinet usually results in the -minister's resignation from the government. A minister who remained in -the cabinet under such circumstances would be held responsible for the -policy he opposed.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_47"></a>[Pg 47]</span></p> - -<p>Political conflict flourishes in Britain. Yet for many reasons -the government of the day and the opposition practice a basic -bipartisanship on basic issues. To a considerable degree this is -the result of the change in Britain's position over the last two -decades. There is an unspoken recognition by the leaders of the two -great parties that the present situation of the United Kingdom is too -precarious for prolonged and violent differences on essentials. There -are, of course, exceptions. Violent controversy does break out on -essentials between party and party and within a party.</p> - -<p>Consider two essentials of British policy: the Anglo-American alliance -and the decision to make the hydrogen bomb.</p> - -<p>The relations between the United States and Britain developed -their contemporary form in World War II. Since 1945 they have been -strengthened by the rise of an aggressive Soviet Union. There are other -contributing factors, some of which are not particularly attractive -to political or economic groups within each partner to the alliance. -Moreover, there has never been a time when there were not powerful -critics of various aspects of the alliance in both countries.</p> - -<p>Aneurin Bevan and his friends on the radical left of the Labor Party -have often lambasted the United States and Britain's dependence on -her. Similar criticisms could be heard in private from Tories. When -the United States voted with the Soviet Union against Britain in the -United Nations after the British and French had invaded Suez, the -Conservatives were moved to put their protest into the form of a motion -in the House of Commons. This was accompanied by much sharp criticism, -which had a therapeutic effect in encouraging some realistic thinking -about the alliance.</p> - -<p>A great deal of the anxiety about United States policy, of the jealousy -of United States power, of the anger at Mr. Dulles's self-righteous -sermons about colonialism was vented during this period. It did some -harm, certainly. But from the standpoint of the honest expression of -Conservative Party opinion and of American realism about the British -attitude, it also did some good.</p> - -<p>The alliance is an essential. Even when indignant Conserva<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_48"></a>[Pg 48]</span>tives—and a -number of Socialists, too—were thinking up pet names for Mr. Dulles, -the leaders of the party were doing their best to mollify their -followers. They were themselves anxious and angry, but they never -suggested defection from the alliance.</p> - -<p>It may be suggested that the British had nowhere else to go. This may -be true, but even so it would be no bar to their departure. They are -happy when they are on their own, and many on this little island would -count the alliance well lost in exchange for a vigorous reassertion of -independence.</p> - -<p>In 1940 the cockney, the inevitable cockney, used to remark, for the -edification of American correspondents: "Cor, we're alone. What of it, -guv?" Now, I have always regarded this not as a piece of patriotic -rhetoric but as a natural response to events by a brave people. -Shakespeare, of course, said it better.</p> - -<p style="margin-left: 25%;"> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Come the three corners of the world in arms,</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">And we shall shock them. Nought shall make us rue,</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">If England to itself do rest but true.</span><br /> -</p> - -<p>The important word is "itself." If there comes a time of great outside -pressure when alliances and confederations are in danger, Americans -will be well advised to remember that word.</p> - -<p>The decision to make the hydrogen bomb, a project involving the -expenditure of great sums that Britain could ill afford, again was a -bipartisan matter. The Conservative government proposed it. The Labor -opposition (with Mr. Bevan dissenting in a burst of Welsh oratory) -agreed. There have been recurrent criticisms of how the work was being -done, of the cost, of the necessity for testing the weapon, and of the -arrangements for the tests. But there has been very little criticism of -the bomb's manufacture from the leaders of the Labor Party—excepting -always Mr. Bevan.</p> - -<p>Bipartisanship is assisted by consultation on issues of major national -importance between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. -But the achievement of bipartisan policies owes much more to a general -understanding in both parties in the House of Commons of the country's -present position.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_49"></a>[Pg 49]</span></p> - -<p>Socialist reform and experimentation in the years between 1945 and -1951 aroused Conservative fears as fierce as Labor Party hopes. The -enmity aroused in the largely Conservative middle class by the Labor -governments of those years certainly has not disappeared. But much -of it has been re-directed against the moderate policies of the -Conservative government, which has long claimed the allegiance of the -middle class.</p> - -<p>The leaders of the two great parties—Harold Macmillan, Lord Salisbury, -and R.A. Butler for the Conservatives, and Hugh Gaitskell, Harold -Wilson, Jim Griffiths for Labor—are moderates. On the periphery of -each party stand the radicals advocating extreme measures at home and -abroad. Should Britain's economic and international troubles persist, -the moderate approach to their solution may not satisfy either the -Conservative or Socialist voters.</p> - -<p>British politics in May of 1955 continued one of those rhythmic changes -of direction which feature political life in every democratic nation. -The Conservatives won a smashing victory in the general election and -became the first party in ninety years to be returned to office with an -increased majority.</p> - -<p>The victory gave the Tory government a majority of 61 in the House of -Commons. But this majority is not an exact reflection of the way the -electorate voted. The Conservatives and their supporters got 13,311,938 -votes and Labor won 12,405,146. The Liberals got 722,395 and the -Communists 33,144.</p> - -<p>This almost even division of the British electorate between the two -major parties must be kept in mind when we examine the right and the -left in British politics. Not since 1945, when the Labor Party swept -into office, has there been a difference of a million votes between the -two in general elections.</p> - -<p>Labor's sun was sinking in the election of 1950, which the party won -by a narrow margin. The Conservatives took over in 1951 and boosted -their majority in 1955. Has the pendulum's swing to the right ended? -The answer may lie in the policies and personalities of the two great -parties today.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_50"></a>[Pg 50]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="IV_The_Conservatives">IV. <i>The Conservatives</i></h2> -</div> - -<p class="center">A PARTY AND A WAY OF LIFE</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>The Conservative party have always said that, on the whole, their -policy meant that people had to fill up fewer forms than under the -policies of other parties.</i></p> - -<p> -SIR ALAN HERBERT<br /> -</p> - -<p><i>The man for whom the law exists—the man of forms, the Conservative, -is a tame man.</i></p> - -<p> -HENRY THOREAU<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">Although</span> they have little in common otherwise, the Great American -Public and the radical wing of the British Labor Party share a strange -mental image of the British Conservative. They see him as a red-faced -stout old gentleman given to saying "Gad, sir," waving the Union Jack, -and kicking passing Irishmen, Indians, and Egyptians. He is choleric -about labor unions, and he stands for "no damned nonsense" from -foreigners.</p> - -<p>The picture was a false one even before World War II. No party could -have existed for a century, holding power for considerable periods, -without a basis of support in the British working class.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_51"></a>[Pg 51]</span> Such support -would not be granted to the caricature of a Conservative described -above. Certainly the Conservative Party has now, and has had in the -past, its full share of reactionaries opposed to change. The inquiring -reporter will encounter more than a smattering of similar opposition to -change among the leaders of Britain's great unions.</p> - -<p>Britain's altered position in the world and the smashing Labor victory -of 1945 combined to whittle away the authority of the reactionaries -in the Conservative Party in the years between 1945 and 1951 when it -was out of office. Since then other influences, including the rise -within the party of young politicians whose education and experience -have little in common with those of the recognized Tory leadership, -has further altered the character of the party. It has come a long way -since 1945.</p> - -<p>A young Conservative minister recalls with horror the annual -Conservative conference of that year. The chairwoman, a billowy dowager -wielding a lorgnette, announced with simpering pride that she had a -surprise for the conference. It was, she said, "a real Conservative -trade-unionist." Had the Archbishop of Canterbury appeared on the -platform and danced the can-can, the surprise could not have been -greater. When a Negro student went to the platform a decade later to -discuss colonial affairs, no one turned a hair.</p> - -<p>In retrospect, the election of 1945 was one the Tories could not win. -Almost everything was against them: the pre-war Tory government's -appeasement of Germany, the military disasters of 1940, the distrust -of Churchill in time of peace, his own exaggerated campaign attacks on -Labor, the superb organization of the Labor Party machinery by Herbert -Morrison. Ten years later the Conservatives faced an election they -could not lose. Even when all other conditions are taken into account, -this was a singular example of the adaptability and mobility of the -Tories.</p> - -<p>The Tories saw that the nation had changed, and they changed with it. -Both the political philosophy of the party and the organization of -the party were altered—the latter change being more drastic, more -complete, and more rapid than the former.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_52"></a>[Pg 52]</span></p> - -<p>In the organizational change the reports of the Committee on Party -Organization in 1948 and 1949 were of paramount importance. The -committee was headed by Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, later Viscount Kilmuir -and Lord Chancellor.</p> - -<p>Before the party could win an election on its altered policy, a -reconstruction of its machinery was necessary. To reconstruct along -the lines advised by the experts, the Tories first brought in Lord -Woolton, who had been a successful Minister of Food during the war. It -was a sagacious appointment. As Chairman of the Party Organization, -Woolton created a young, enthusiastic body of workers whose propaganda -on behalf of the party began to impress the electorate—largely, I -suspect, because these workers were so unlike the popular idea of -Tories.</p> - -<p>While Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Harold Macmillan, R.A. Butler -led the parliamentary fight against the Labor government, a group -of young Tories built the party case for the leaders. Techniques of -research and propaganda were developed. Promising young men and women -from all classes were encouraged.</p> - -<p>These younger Conservative tacticians included many who are now -ministers. Iain MacLeod, who has been Minister of Health and Minister -of Labor, Reginald Maulding, who has been Minister of Supply and -Paymaster General, Selwyn Lloyd, the present Foreign Secretary, are -representative of the nucleus of talent which was built during those -years. They and a score of junior ministers are young, vigorous, and -ambitious. They know their own party, and, what is equally important, -they know the Labor Party and its leaders.</p> - -<p>Talking with the leaders of both the major parties, one is struck -by the breadth of the Tories' knowledge of the Labor leaders' -personalities, views on national issues, and aspirations. "Know your -enemy" is an axiom as wise in politics as in war.</p> - -<p>Yet I doubt that all the political intelligence and administrative -ability in the Tory ranks would have sufficed without Woolton.</p> - -<p>Frederick William Marquis, the first Viscount Woolton, is not, as one -might suppose from his imposing name and title, the son of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_53"></a>[Pg 53]</span> a hundred -earls. He is very much a self-made man who fought his way to success in -commerce and finance. He is a Jim Farley, rather than a Mark Hanna.</p> - -<p>When Woolton took over the chairmanship of the Party Organization, the -party was defeated and discredited. He left it after the triumph of -May 1955 with Conservative fortunes at their post-war zenith. I have -mentioned Woolton's reorganization of the Central and Area offices, -but his influence on the party went beyond this. In the years when -the Socialists ruled in Whitehall, Woolton transferred to the beaten -Conservatives some of his own warmth and vigor. He is an urbane, -friendly man; the young Conservatives then emerging from the middle -class felt that they were directed not by an aristocratic genius but -by a fatherly, knowledgeable elder. Indeed, his nickname was "Uncle -Fred." The revived party began to talk like a democratic party and -even, occasionally, to act like one. Under Woolton the Central Office -in London changed from a remote, austere group controlling the party -into a Universal Aunt or Uncle, ready to help constituency parties -solve their problems. Yet the leader of the party and the chairman of -the Party Organization continued to direct and control.</p> - -<p>Conservative Party policy, as it has evolved in the past decade, has -moved to the left. This is not solely because, as the Labor Party often -charges, it wanted to steal or adopt parts of the Socialist platform. -A great many of the young men in the Tory party in 1945 sympathized -with many of the Socialists' policies. "I'd have voted Labor myself if -I hadn't been a Tory candidate," one of them reflected a decade later. -What offended the Tories' self-esteem was that great, revolutionary -changes were being made in British life by the Labor government and -they, who had always assumed a special right to rule Britain, were not -making the changes.</p> - -<p>A large part of Conservative political tactics in the late forties -consisted of negative criticism. The parlous state of the British -economy, the withdrawals from India and Burma, the decline of British -influence and power in the world offered great opportunities to a party -that traditionally combines business interests and experi<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_54"></a>[Pg 54]</span>ence with an -assumption of omniscience in the direction of international affairs. At -the same time, the work of the back-room boys in the Central Office on -the solution of Britain's economic difficulties, expressed in speeches -of party leaders, gave the impression that the Conservatives, whatever -their past faults, were moving to the left in their approach to the -economic problem.</p> - -<p>The present leadership of the Conservative Party—Harold Macmillan, -Lord Salisbury, R.A. Butler, and a number of the younger ministers—is -well to the left of the economic position assumed by the party in the -1945 election. Indeed, the complaint of the party's middle-class rank -and file that the Conservatives are carrying out a pseudo-socialist -program rather than a truly Tory one is an important factor in -estimating the party's ability to retain power.</p> - -<p>A word is needed here about "left" and "right" as applied to British -parties. Although the Conservative Party is frequently compared with -the Republican Party in the United States and has many similarities of -outlook, the Conservatives are, on the whole, well to the left of the -Republicans. Thinking in the Labor Party, moreover, is well to the left -of both Democratic and Republican parties in the United States.</p> - -<p>After the Conservative victory in the election of 1955 it was generally -expected that the party would move toward the right. Critics will seize -upon British intervention in Egypt as evidence of such a movement. But -it can be asked whether a policy designed to bring down a dictator—in -this case President Nasser of Egypt—when it was evident that the -United Nations was unable or unwilling to do so can be classified -as a right-wing, reactionary policy. Similarly, the movement of the -British government under the leadership of Sir Anthony Eden and Harold -Macmillan toward entry into the European common market can scarcely -be considered an example of right-wing extremism. The attacks on this -policy by the newspapers controlled by Lord Beaverbrook, the most -imperialist of the press lords, testify to the anger aroused by the -progressive internationalism of the Conservatives.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_55"></a>[Pg 55]</span></p> - -<p>No one can gainsay the existence of a strong nationalistic element -within the Conservative Party in the House of Commons and in the -country. This element rebelled against the Anglo-Egyptian treaty by -which Britain agreed to quit Egypt. It supported the decision to -intervene in Egypt. Parenthetically it should be noted that the moving -spirits in this decision were Sir Anthony Eden and Harold Macmillan, -men who, by conviction, belonged to the progressive wing of the party. -Finally, when the government agreed first to a cease-fire and then to a -withdrawal from Egypt, this group censured both the United Nations and -the United States for their part in bringing this about.</p> - -<p>Given the character of the Conservative Party's support in the country, -the presence of such a group within the party in Parliament is natural. -But do not discount the adaptability of the party. When Harold -Macmillan formed his government in January 1957 he found it possible, -with the approval of the party, to include in it both Sir Edward Boyle, -who had resigned from the government over the Egyptian invasion, and -Julian Amery, who had rebelled against the government because it -listened to the United States and the United Nations and halted the -invasion.</p> - -<p>The Conservatives' approach to Britain's economic and financial -problems is well to the left of the policies followed by their pre-war -predecessors. Britain's is a managed economy to an extent that would -shake the late Stanley Baldwin and the present Secretary of the -Treasury in Washington. Mr. Macmillan and his ministers are not secret -readers of <i>Pravda</i>. They are political realists who understand the -changes in power which have taken place in Britain, who understand that -the Council of the Trades Union Congress is as important today as the -Federation of British Industries.</p> - -<p>The Labor Party, it often seems, suffers from an inability to -understand the changes that have taken place in their opponents. It -may be, as Socialists contend, that the changes are only a façade -hiding the greedy, imperious capitalists beneath. But to an outsider -it seems that the Labor Party pays too much attention to the surviving -extremists of the Tory party and not enough to the venturesome,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_56"></a>[Pg 56]</span> -progressive younger men who will inherit the party. Surely the appeal -of the Conservative Party to the electorate is based more upon the -personalities and policies of these rising stars than upon the -reactionaries of the right wing.</p> - -<p>The Conservative Party arouses and holds some strange allegiances. I -remember Michael Foot, the editor of the left-wing weekly <i>Tribune</i>, -saying that in his old constituency of Devonport there were solid -blocks of Conservative votes in the poorest areas. Foot could not -understand it. The rather contemptuous explanation offered by a -Conservative Party organizer was: "Why not? People who are poor aren't -necessarily foolish enough to buy this socialist clap-trap."</p> - -<p>The Conservatives have been making inroads into the new middle class -created by the boom of 1953-5. This group emerging from the industrial -working class was formerly strongly pro-Labor. There are indications -that the more prosperous are changing their political attitudes as -their incomes and social standing improve.</p> - -<p>The Conservatives concentrate on a national appeal. Labor by its -origins is a class party. In a country as homogeneous as Britain, the -Conservative boast that they stand for all the people rather than for -merely one class or one geographical area is effective. To this the -Tories add the claim that they are the party most suited by training -and experience to deal with the international problems faced by the -nation.</p> - -<p>This assumption of the right to rule is not so offensive to Britons -as it might be to Americans. There is little historical basis for it. -If an aristocrat, Winston Churchill, led Britain to victory in World -War II, a small-town Welsh lawyer, David Lloyd George, was the leader -in World War I. Nevertheless, there is a tendency—perhaps a survival -of feudalism—among some Britons to believe that their affairs are -better handled by a party with upper-class education and accents. And -of course the Conservatives look the part. Mr. Macmillan, the Prime -Minister, is a far more impressive figure than Hugh Gaitskell, who -probably would be Prime Minister in a Labor government. The accents, -the clothes, the backgrounds of the Tory<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_57"></a>[Pg 57]</span> leaders give the impression -of men born to conduct government. Brilliant journalists have argued -that the class they represent is unrepresentative, and that the Suez -crisis proved its inability to understand the modern world. Surely the -present Conservative leaders and their predecessors have been guilty -of quite as many errors as the Socialists and Liberals of the past. -However, they give the impression of competence. As any politician -knows, even in the most enlightened of democracies such impressions are -as important as the most brilliant intellects or the wisest programs.</p> - -<p>The Conservatives enjoy another important political advantage. Until -the present the leaders of the party generally have been drawn from -one class, the old upper middle class. They went to the same schools, -served in the same regiments. Families like the Cecils, the Churchills, -the Edens, the Macmillans intermarry. The closeness of the relationship -breeds coherence. Basically there is an instinctive co-operation when -a crisis arises. The manner in which the Tories closed ranks after Sir -Anthony Eden's resignation was an example.</p> - -<p>The upper ranks of the civil service, of the Church of England, and of -the armed services are drawn largely from the same class. Usually this -facilitates the work of government when the Tories are in power. But -recently there has been a change. In their drive to broaden the base of -the party, the Conservatives have introduced to the House of Commons -a number of young politicians who do not share the Eton-Oxford-Guards -background of their leaders.</p> - -<p>The environment and education of this group and their supporters in -the constituencies is much different. For Eton or Harrow, substitute -state schools or small, obscure public schools. Some did go to Oxford -and Cambridge, but they moved in less exalted circles than the Edens -or Cecils. They are usually businessmen who have made their way in the -world without the advantages of the traditional Tory background, and -they are highly critical of the tendency to reserve the party plums for -representatives of its more aristocratic wing.</p> - -<p>They seem to be further to the right in politics than such -"aris<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_58"></a>[Pg 58]</span>tocrats" as Macmillan, Butler, Eden, or Lord Salisbury. They -have risen the hard way, and they are more interested in promoting -the interests of the business groups for which they speak than in -the traditional Tory concept of speaking for the whole nation. This -national responsibility on the part of the "aristocrats" was in many -ways a liberal attitude. Macmillan and Butler, for instance, appear -much more responsive and tolerant on the subject of trade unions than -most members of the new group.</p> - -<p>As the power of this group increases—and it will increase as the -Conservative Party continues to change—sharper disputes on policy, -especially economic policy, can be expected. This encourages some -Socialists, naturally sensitive on the point, to believe that their -opponents are headed for a period of fierce feuding within the party. -Their optimism may be misplaced.</p> - -<p>The Tories are adept at meeting rebellion and absorbing rebels. The -indignant "red brick" rebel of today may be the junior minister of -tomorrow whose boy is headed for Eton. Despite the advent of these -newcomers, the party does not appear so vulnerable to schism as does -the Labor Party with its assortment of extreme-left-wing intellectuals, -honest hearts and willing hands from the unions, and conscientious and -intelligent mavericks from the middle class.</p> - -<p>Finally, the power of what has been called the "Establishment" is -primarily a conservative power that wishes to conserve the governmental -and social structure of Britain against the majority of reformers. -On great national issues this usually places it upon the side of the -Conservative Party. If it can be defined, the Establishment represents -the upper levels of the Church of England, of Oxford and Cambridge, -<i>The Times</i> of London, the chiefs of the civil service. The direct -power of this group may be less than has been described, but few would -deny its influence.</p> - -<p>The common background has served the Conservatives well in the past. -Open political quarrels within the party are rare. (The conflict over -the Suez policy was an exception.) "The Tories settle their differences -in the Carlton Club," Earl Attlee once said. "We<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_59"></a>[Pg 59]</span> fight ours out in -public. We're a democratic party that thrives on contention." Perhaps, -but the contention nearly wrecked the Labor Party between 1953 and 1955 -and had much to do with its defeat in 1955.</p> - -<p>Much of the comparative tranquillity of the Conservative Party is -due to the power of the party leader. Nominally, he is elected by -the Conservative Members of the House of Commons and the House of -Lords, all prospective Tory candidates for Commons, and the executive -Committee of the National Union. But, as Robert T. McKenzie has pointed -out in his <i>British Political Parties</i>, the leader is often selected -by the preceding leader of the party when it is in power. Thus, Sir -Winston Churchill made it clear that Sir Anthony Eden was his heir as -leader, and Sir Anthony was duly elected.</p> - -<p>A different situation arose when Sir Anthony resigned as Prime Minister -because of illness. In that instance the Prime Minister was selected -before he became leader of the party. It was widely believed outside -the inner circles of the party that there was a choice between Harold -Macmillan and R.A. Butler. Actually the leaders of the party, including -Sir Anthony, Sir Winston, and Lord Salisbury, and a substantial number -of ministers, junior ministers, and back-bench Members had made it -clear that their preference lay with Macmillan.</p> - -<p>The structure of the British government and of the Conservative -Party give the leader a good deal more authority over his party than -is enjoyed by a President of the United States as the head of the -Republican or Democratic Party. In power or in opposition the leader -has the sole ultimate responsibility for the formulation of policy and -the election program of his party.</p> - -<p>The annual party conference proposes, the leader disposes. Resolutions -passed at the conference do not bind him. The party secretariat (the -Central Office) is in many ways the personal machine of the leader. He -appoints its principal officers and controls its main organizations for -propaganda, finance, and research. Consequently, it is unlikely that a -Conservative politician would chal<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_60"></a>[Pg 60]</span>lenge the authority of the leader -as sharply and directly as Senator McCarthy challenged the authority -of President Eisenhower in the latter's first administration. The -conclusion is that, although Tory democracy is an attractive political -slogan, it has little connection with the almost autocratic authority -of the party leader.</p> - -<p>In the field of political tactics moderation is the guiding principle -of the new Conservatism. This became evident in the election of 1955, -which the Tories fought soberly and efficiently. Pointing to Britain's -evident prosperity—the stormclouds were already piling on the horizon, -but campaign orators seldom see that far—the Conservatives asked the -people if this combination of good times at home and easier relations -abroad (the summit conference at Geneva was in the offing) was not -better for the nation than revolutionary policies and hysterical -oratory.</p> - -<p>The party's appeal for votes seemed to reflect a surer grasp of popular -attitudes than the Labor Party's. In retrospect the Conservative -message was a consoling one. Everyone had work. Almost everyone had -more money than he had had three or four years before, although the -established middle class already was feeling the effect of rising -prices and continued heavy taxation on real income. The roads were -filling up with cars that should have been sold for export, running on -gasoline that was imported with an adverse effect on the balance of -trade.</p> - -<p>During six years of Socialist control the Labor politicians had -informed the British that a return to Conservative rule would mean a -revival of the bad old days of unemployment, dole and hunger marches, -strikes and lockouts. Yet here were Sir Anthony Eden patting the unions -on the head and Harold Macmillan talking warmly of the chances of a -successful conference with the Russians at Geneva. It was all a little -confusing and, from the Conservative standpoint, very successful.</p> - -<p>Traveling around Britain during the weeks prior to the 1955 election, -I was struck by the number of people of both parties prepared to -accept the Conservatives' contention that their party was,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_61"></a>[Pg 61]</span> by some -mysterious dispensation, uniquely suited to the business of conducting -the nation's foreign policy. In some areas, notably in the North and -the Midlands, this seemed to spring from Eden's long and, on the whole, -successful record in international affairs. In others I encountered a -feeling that the withdrawals from India and Egypt and such blunders as -the loss of the Abadan oil refinery had lowered the prestige of the -country. Certainly the Tories were not guiltless. Nonetheless, there -was a persistent conviction that the Tories handled foreign affairs -best. Occasionally—this was at the nadir of Socialist fortunes—I met -Labor supporters who subscribed to this view.</p> - -<p>The first public reaction to British intervention in Egypt in 1956 was -a triumph for organized public opinion as directed by the Labor Party. -From the resolutions that flooded into London from factory and local -unions, one would have concluded that the whole of the British working -class was violently opposed to governmental policy. Actually, a number -of public-opinion polls showed that the country was pretty evenly -divided. My own experience, traveling around Britain in January and -February of 1957, convinced me that, on the whole, the working-class -support for the Suez adventure was slightly stronger than that of the -professional classes. Of course, as in most situations of this kind, -the supporters did not bother to send telegrams of support.</p> - -<p>The Labor Party in the House of Commons made a great offensive against -the Conservative position on Egypt. This played a part, but not the -dominant part, in the cabinet's decision to accept a cease-fire. The -paramount factor was the indication from Washington that unless Britain -agreed to a cease-fire, the administration would not help Britain with -oil supplies and would not act to support the pound sterling, whose -good health is the basis of Britain's position as an international -banker.</p> - -<p>The Socialists' attack did result in the emergence of Aneurin Bevan as -the party's principal spokesman, and a most effective one, on foreign -affairs. This is an area where the Labor Party has been<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_62"></a>[Pg 62]</span> weak in recent -years. Death removed Ernest Bevin, a great Foreign Secretary, and -Hector McNeil, the brightest of the party's younger experts on foreign -affairs.</p> - -<p>Moderation, a national rather than a class approach, the middle -way—all these sufficed for the Tories in 1955. Two years later -there are abundant signs that a sharper policy will be necessary to -meet international and internal situations vastly more difficult. -Drastic policies invite harsh argument in their formulation. Can the -Conservatives continue to settle their differences in the Carlton Club -or will these spill out onto the front pages of the newspapers?</p> - -<p>The primary political problem the Conservative government faced before -Suez was whether it could continue its policies, especially where they -related to defense and taxation, and retain the support of a large -and influential group of Conservative voters. This group is offended -and rebellious because, although the Conservatives have now been in -office for over five years, it still finds its real income shrinking, -its social standards reduced, and its future uncertain. It regards the -moderate Conservatives' economic policy and attitude toward social -changes as akin to those of the Labor Party. By the middle of 1956 its -resentment was being reflected by the reduction of the Conservative -vote in the elections.</p> - -<p>The group can be defined as the old middle class. During the last -century it has been one of the most important and often the most -dominant of classes in Britain. Its fight to maintain its position -against the challenge of the new middle class and the inexorable march -of social and economic changes is one of the most interesting and most -pathetic parts of Britain's modern revolution.</p> - -<p>The leaders of the old middle class represented a combination of -influence and wealth in the professions, medicine, the church, the -law, education, and the armed forces. The members of these professions -and their immediate lieutenants administered the great institutions -that had established Britain in the Victorian twilight as the world's -greatest power. They were responsible for the great public schools, the -Church of England, the Royal Navy, the banks, the largest industries, -the shipping lines, the universities.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_63"></a>[Pg 63]</span></p> - -<p>They were not the aristocracy. The decline of the aristocracy, with -its ancient titles, its huge estates, and its huge debts, began over -a century ago. The old middle class began life as the aristocracy's -executors and ended as its heirs.</p> - -<p>The pattern of life in the old middle class was shaken by World War -I, but it existed relatively unchanged in 1939. The class was the -butt of the bright young playwrights of the twenties and has received -the acid attentions of Mr. Somerset Maugham. It supported Munich and -Chamberlain, and it sent its sons away to die in 1939.</p> - -<p>As a group, the class was well educated. The majority of the men had -been to a public school and a university. Both men and women bought and -read books and responsible newspapers. They traveled abroad, they knew -something about the world. Some had inherited wealth. Others invested -their savings.</p> - -<p>Beneath this upper stratum of the old middle class was a lower middle -class that sought to rise into it. This was made up of shopkeepers, -small manufacturers, the more prosperous farmers, the black-coat -workers in business, and the industrial technicians.</p> - -<p>The future welfare of these two groups is the political problem that -the Conservative Party must face. Since the decline of the Liberal -Party, the Tories have counted upon the support of this class. There -were many defections in the election of 1945, but it is probable that -a more important reason for the Tory defeat that year was the party's -failure to win the support of a new middle class that was then arising -as a factor in British politics.</p> - -<p>The chief reason why the old middle class is defecting from the Tory -standard is that it believes that the Conservative governments since -1945 have not done enough to halt the drain on its incomes. Prices -have risen sharply in the years since Chamberlain went to Munich. One -estimate is that the 1938 income of £1,000 a year for a married man -with two children would have to be raised to £4,000 to provide the same -net income today. But in this class the number of men whose incomes -have quadrupled or even doubled since 1938 is small.</p> - -<p>What do the figures mean in terms of a family's life? They<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_64"></a>[Pg 64]</span> mean that -to send the children to a public school, which the majority of this -class regards as indispensable from a social and even occasionally -from an educational standpoint, the father and mother must do without -new clothes, books, the occasional visit to the theater. Instead of -two regular servants, the family must "make do" with a daily cleaning -woman. The family vacations in some quiet French or Italian seaside -resort must be abandoned. The father and mother are unable to save and -are increasingly worried about their future. They see a future decline -in the family's social standards and economic health.</p> - -<p>All this is aggravated in their minds by the appearance of a new middle -class arising from a different background and doing new and different -jobs. Its income, its expense accounts, its occasional lack of taste -stir the envy and anger of the old middle class.</p> - -<p>What the old middle class asks from the government—and, through the -government, from the big trade unions and the big industrialists—is an -end to the rise in the cost of living which it, subsisting chiefly on -incomes that have not risen sharply, cannot meet. Directly it asks the -government for an end to punishing taxation and to "coddling" of both -the unions and the manufacturers.</p> - -<p>The dilemma of the Conservative Party and its government is a serious -one. To lose the support of the old middle class will be dangerous, -even disastrous. For although the Tories have attracted thousands -of former Socialist votes in the last two elections, these do not -represent the solid electoral support that the old middle class has -offered.</p> - -<p>Perhaps in time the government may be able to reduce taxation. -Before this can be done, it must halt inflation, expand constructive -investment in industry, and increase the gold and dollar reserves. Each -of these depends to a great degree on economic factors with world-wide -ramifications. The old middle class understands this and is justifiably -suspicious of "pie in the sky" promises.</p> - -<p>Such suspicion is increased by the understanding of the other serious -long-term problems that British society faces. We need men<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_65"></a>[Pg 65]</span>tion only -one in this context: how is Britain to maintain its present standards -of life and the present levels of government expenditure when it is -faced with the coming change in the age distribution of the population?</p> - -<p>The steady fall in death rates and the low birth rates of the years -between the two world wars are beginning to increase the proportion -of elderly people, and thus to reduce the proportion of the working -population to the total population. The size of the age groups reaching -retirement age increases yearly. It is predicted, on the basis of -present population trends, that over the next fifteen years the -population of the working-age group will remain about the same but that -the number of old people, persons over sixty-five, will rise over the -next thirty years by about three million. At the same time the number -of children of school age is expected to increase.</p> - -<p>Britain thus is faced with a steady increase in the number of the aged -who need pensions and medical care and the young who need medical care -and education. This charge will be added to the burdens already borne -by the working-age group.</p> - -<p>The country needs more hospitals and more schools. It needs new -highways. It has to continue slum-clearance and the building of homes. -Yet Britain has been spending $7,000,000,000 a year on social services -and $4,200,000,000 on defense. Under existing circumstances, and in -view of present Conservative policies, can the old middle class look -forward to an important reduction in taxation under any government?</p> - -<p>Reduction of taxation was one of the goals sought by Conservative -government when it planned a revision of Britain's defense program. -This revision, first planned by the ministry of Sir Anthony Eden and -given new impetus by the Macmillan government, has other objectives, -including the diversion of young men, capital, and productive capacity -from defense to industrial production for export. But an easing of -the defense burden would create conditions for tax relief in the -Conservative circles that need it most.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_66"></a>[Pg 66]</span></p> - -<p>The reduction of defense expenditures places any Conservative -government in a dilemma. The party expects the government to maintain -Britain's position as a nuclear power—that is, as a major power. -The political repercussions of the Suez crisis showed the depth of -nationalism within the party, and, indeed, within the country. Yet -it seems plainly impossible for the Tories to reduce taxation of the -middle class drastically without cutting the defense expenditure that -has maintained Britain, somewhat precariously, in the front rank of -world powers.</p> - -<p>Of course, tax relief will not fully answer the difficulties of the old -middle class. Its incomes, ranging from the pensions of ex-officers -to the profits of small businessmen, have lagged behind prices. -Stabilization of prices is essential if this class is to maintain its -standards.</p> - -<p>The rebellion of the old middle class against Tory policy and -leadership, if carried to the limit, might result in the creation of an -extreme right-wing party. Such a party would be brought into being more -easily if the sort of inflation which helped wreck the German democracy -after World War I were to appear in Britain. Would the political good -sense of the British enable them to reject the vendors of extreme -political panaceas who would appear at such a juncture?</p> - -<p>The old middle class contains today, as it has since 1945, persons -and organizations fanatically opposed to the unions and to labor in -general. Extremist organizations, some of them modeled on the Poujadist -movement in France, have appeared. In many cases the opposition to -labor policies and personalities has been expanded in these groups to -include the "traitors" at the head of the present Tory government, who -are considered betrayers of their party and their class.</p> - -<p>There is a reasonable expectation that Britain will continue to -encounter economic problems whose solution will involve economic -sacrifices by all classes in the future. The old middle class feels -that it has sacrificed more than any other group. There is thus a -potential of serious trouble within the Conservative party. The most -prob<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_67"></a>[Pg 67]</span>able development, it seems to me, is an attempt by the right -wing of the party to win and hold power. But a rapid deterioration of -the economic situation under a moderate Tory government followed by -the return to power of a Labor government might well encourage the -transformation of the Tories into a radical right-wing party.</p> - -<p>At the moment the right wing of the Conservative Party wants too much. -It asks for an uncontrolled economy and is restless under the measures -imposed to defeat inflation. But it also wants a stabilization of -prices. It wants a "tough" foreign policy, but it opposes the taxation -necessary to make the arms on which such a policy must rest. It has an -almost reckless desire to curb the trade unions without reckoning the -effect on industrial relations.</p> - -<p>The moderates who fashioned the present Conservative Party and who now -lead its government appear to understand their country and its position -better than their critics on the right wing. In addition, their -programs have attracted the attention and support of young people to a -degree unknown on the right wing.</p> - -<p>In the late thirties, when I first was indoctrinated in British -politics, it was smart to be on the left. The young people before the -war were very certain of the stupidity of the Conservative government -policies, at home as well as abroad, and their political convictions -ranged from communism to the socialism of the Labor Party. "All the -young people are Bolshies," a manufacturer told me in 1939. "If we do -have a war, this country will go communist."</p> - -<p>A good proportion of young people still are on the left. But they do -not seem to hold their convictions as strongly as those I knew in the -pre-war years. On the other side of the fence there has been a movement -toward an intellectual adoption of conservative principles. In some -cases this verges on radicalism, in a few almost to nihilism: the -"nothing's any good in either party, let's get rid of them both" idea.</p> - -<p>There is always a danger to democracy in such attitudes. They are -encouraged in Britain by a tendency in some circles to adopt an -arrogant, patrician distaste for all democratic politics. This is -under<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_68"></a>[Pg 68]</span>standable. The revolution that began with the war has weakened -the economic and political power of a once dominant class. But that -does not excuse those who seek to destroy faith in democratic processes.</p> - -<p>The position of the Conservative Party is both stronger and weaker than -it appears. There are reasons for believing that by the next general -election, probably in 1959 or 1960, the policies of the government -will have relieved the more immediate problems such as inflation -and the need for increased exports. This success will not change -Britain's position as a comparatively small power competing militarily, -politically, and economically with the larger established powers, such -as the Soviet Union and the United States, and the reviving powers, -Germany and Japan.</p> - -<p>The dominant group in the Conservative Party and government has, -however, a considerable degree of competence and experience in -government. It has an effective parliamentary majority during the -present administration. Against these positive factors we must place -the probability that some of its policies will continue to alienate an -important group of its supporters; the result may be a rebellion within -the party or worse.</p> - -<p>The Tories are not politically dogmatic. Like the people, the whole -people, they claim to represent, they are flexible in their approach -to policies and programs. They change to suit economic conditions and -political attitudes. In Britain's present position, the appeal of a -party that contends it is working for the nation rather than a class or -a section should not be minimized.</p> - -<p>But it is precisely Britain's position in the modern world that -forces upon the Conservatives today, and would force upon Labor if it -came to power tomorrow, certain policies that are at odds with the -principles of each faction. The Tories, for instance, must manipulate -the economy. The idea of "getting government out of business" may be -attractive to some industrialists, but in the nation's situation it -is impractical and dangerous. Similarly, the Labor Party, despite its -anti-colonialism, must follow policies that will enable<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_69"></a>[Pg 69]</span> Britain to -keep her investments in Malaya's tin and rubber and in the oil of the -Middle East.</p> - -<p>We see the two great parties meeting on such common ground. Perhaps -because they are less restricted by dogma and can boast greater talents -at the moment, the Tories appear slightly more confident of their -ability to meet the challenges of Britain's position.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_70"></a>[Pg 70]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="V_The_Labor_Party">V. <i>The Labor Party</i></h2> -</div> - -<p class="center">POLITICAL MACHINE OR MORAL CRUSADE?</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>The idea of Socialism is grand and noble; and it is, I am convinced, -possible of realization; but such a state of society cannot be -manufactured—it must grow. Society is an organism, not a machine.</i></p> - -<p> -HENRY GEORGE<br /> -</p></div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>We are all Socialists nowadays.</i></p> - -<p> -EDWARD VII WHEN PRINCE OF WALES<br /> -</p></div> - - - -<p>"<span class="smcap">The Tories</span> won the election because they understood the changes that -had taken place since 1945," said a Labor politician in 1955. "We -misunderstood them and we lost. Yet we call ourselves 'the party of the -people.'"</p> - -<p>This assessment, made on the morning of defeat, explains to some degree -the Labor Party's defeat in the general election of 1955. It raises -the question of whether the party, as now constituted, is in fact a -working-class party. The growth of the Labor Party, the emergence of -its saints and sinners, the triumph of 1945,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_71"></a>[Pg 71]</span> the disaster of 1955 make -up one of the truly significant political stories of the century.</p> - -<p>For Americans it is especially important. The British Labor Party -is the strongest non-communist left-wing party in any of the great -democracies of the West. Granted the normal shifts in political -support, it will be back in power sometime within the next ten years. -The government and people of the United States must regard it as -a permanent part of British political life, and they will have to -understand it better than they have in the past if the alliance between -the United States and the United Kingdom is to prosper.</p> - -<p>The British Labor Party is the political arm of what the old-timers -like to call "the movement." And it is as well to remember that not -so very long ago—Winston Churchill was a young politician then and -Anthony Eden was at Eton—it was a "movement" with all the emotional -fervor the word implies. The men who made the Labor Party a power in -the land were not cool, reasoning intellectuals (although, inevitably, -these assisted) but hot-eyed radicals who combined a fierce intolerance -with a willingness to suffer for their beliefs.</p> - -<p>The movement includes the Labor Party itself; the Trades Union -Congress, known universally in Britain as the TUC; the Co-Operative -Societies; and some minor socialist groups.</p> - -<p>The Trades Union Congress is one of the centers of power in modern -Britain. We will encounter it often in this book. Here we are concerned -with its old position as the starting-point for British working-class -power. The first Labor Party representatives who went to the House of -Commons in 1906 were supported almost entirely by members of unions. -The Parliamentary Labor Party came into being as an association of the -Labor members of the House of Commons. Today it includes members of -the House of Lords. There was originally a much closer co-ordination -between the unions and the Labor MP's than exists now.</p> - -<p>Today the TUC, although it exerts great political power both directly -and indirectly, is important principally as the national focus of the -trade-union movement. All the unions of any size or impor<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_72"></a>[Pg 72]</span>tance except -the National Union of Teachers, the National Association of Local -Government Officers, and some civil-service staff associations, are -affiliated with it.</p> - -<p>Its membership is impressive. The unions have a total membership of -9,461,000, of which 8,088,000 are affiliated with the TUC—this in -a population of just over 50,000,000. The TUC's power is equally -impressive. It is recognized by the government as the principal channel -for consultation between the ministries and organized labor on matters -affecting the interests of employees generally.</p> - -<p>This power is not unchallenged. One of the disruptive situations in the -Labor movement today is the restlessness of a number of constituency -labor parties under the authority of the TUC. The constituency labor -parties are the local organizations in the parliamentary constituencies -or divisions. A number of them are and have been well to the left of -the official leadership of the party. In them Aneurin Bevan finds his -chief support for the rebellion he has waged intermittently against the -leadership during the last five years.</p> - -<p>Another source of anxiety to the TUC is the unwillingness of some -unions—mostly those infiltrated by the Communists—to follow its -instructions in industrial disputes. The TUC leaders with whom I have -talked regard the strike weapon as the hydrogen bomb in labor's armory. -They oppose its indiscriminate use. But in a large number of cases they -have been unable to prevent its use.</p> - -<p>The labor movement represents generally the industrial urban working -class in Britain. But it is no longer an industrial urban working-class -party. The modern movement relies on other sections of the population -for both leaders and votes. Just as there are working-class districts -that vote Tory in election after election, so are there middle-class -groups who vote Labor.</p> - -<p>Horny-handed sons of toil still rank among the party's leading -politicians, but the post-war years have seen a steady increase in -two other types. One is the union officer, whose acquaintance with -physical labor is often somewhat limited. The other is the product of -a middle-class home, a public-school education, and an impor<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_73"></a>[Pg 73]</span>tant job -in the wartime civil service. Hugh Gaitskell, the present leader of the -Parliamentary Labor Party, is a notable example of this second group.</p> - -<p>The party still includes intellectuals treading circumspectly in -the footprints left by the sainted Sydney and Beatrice Webb. The -intellectuals, perhaps in search of protective coloring, often assume -a manner more rough-hewn than the latest recruit from the coal face. -Incidentally, it was my impression that the defeat of 1955 shook the -intellectuals a good deal more than the practical politicians. They -departed, as is their custom, into long, gloomy analyses of the reasons -for the defeat. They, too, may have been out of touch with the people.</p> - -<p>Of course the defeat of 1955 did not finish the Labor movement in -Britain any more than its victory in 1945 doomed the Conservative -Party. True, the Labor vote dropped from 13,949,000 in 1951 to -13,405,000 in 1955 and the party's strength in the House of Commons -fell from 295 to 277 seats. But the prophets of gloom overlooked the -movement's immense vitality, which comes in part from its connection -with certain emotions and ideals well established in modern Britain.</p> - -<p>Within the movement the accepted reason for the defeat was the -interparty feud among the Bevanites on the left and the moderate -and right-wing groups. The moderates, representing the TUC and the -moderate elements of the Parliamentary Labor Party, provided most of -the party leaders in the election campaign. But in the year before the -election the squabbling within the party in the House of Commons and -on the hustings created a poor impression. One leader went into the -campaign certain that the party had not convinced the electorate that, -if elected, it could provide a competent, united government. These -bickerings thus were a serious factor in the Socialist catastrophe.</p> - -<p>They were related to what seems to me to have been a much more -important element in the defeat. This was the party's lack of -understanding of the people, a defeat emphasized by the politician -quoted at the start of this chapter. There were times during the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_74"></a>[Pg 74]</span> -campaign when Socialist speakers seemed to confuse their audiences -with those of 1945, 1935, or even 1925. This was understandable, for -the Labor Party owes much of its present importance to its position -in the twenties and thirties as the party of protest. There was -plenty to protest about. There was poverty—black, stinking poverty, -which wears a hideous mask in the bleak British climate. There was -unemployment—the miners stood dull-eyed and shivering in the streets -of the tidy towns of South Wales. There was the dole. There was, in -London and other big cities, startling inequality between rich and -poor, such inequality as the traveler of today associates with Italy or -France or West Germany's Ruhr.</p> - -<p>Memories of those times scarred a generation. The bitterness spilled -out of the areas worst hit and infected almost the entire working -class. During the 1955 election I talked with a group in Merther -Tydfil in Wales. They were working, and had been working for ten years -at increasingly higher wages. They were well dressed, they had money -to buy beer and to go to see the Rugby Football International. The -majority—young fellows—seemed satisfied with their lot. But one -elderly man kept reminding them: "Don't think it's all that good, mun. -Bad it's been in this valley, and it may be again."</p> - -<p>Just as the Democrats in 1952 harked back to the days of Hoover and -Coolidge, so the Labor orators in 1955 revived the iniquities of -Baldwin and Chamberlain. They saw behind the amiable features of R.A. -Butler and the imposing presence of Anthony Eden the cloven hoofs of -the Tory devils. They warned, with much prescience, that the economic -situation would deteriorate. They cajoled and pleaded. They waved and -sang "The Red Flag." It didn't work.</p> - -<p>One statistic is important in this connection: since 1945, millions -who had voted for Labor in that election had died. It is reasonable -to assume that a high proportion of them were people with memories -of the twenties and thirties who would have voted Labor under any -circumstances.</p> - -<p>Some died. Others changed. The spring of 1955 marked the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_75"></a>[Pg 75]</span> zenith of -Britain's first post-war boom. A very high proportion of the population -felt that they had left the hard road they had traveled since 1940, and -had emerged from war and austerity into the sunny uplands of peace and -prosperity. They felt that to a great degree this change had been due -to their own efforts, which was true. They believed they had earned the -right to relax. It may be that a decade hence Britons will look back on -that period as a golden echo of the great days of the Empire. Perhaps -never again will Britain know a comparable period of prosperity and -peace.</p> - -<p>Given this primary circumstance, it was almost impossible for a party -of protest to win an election. The industrial urban working class to -whom the Socialists chiefly appealed were doing nicely. The workers had -houses and television sets (known in Britain as "the telly"); bicycles -and motorcycles were giving way to small family cars. There had been -a steady rise in the supply of food, household appliances, and other -items for mass consumption.</p> - -<p>A large group of Labor voters were consequently not so interested in -the election as they had been in the past. They voted, but in smaller -numbers. Some votes switched to the Conservatives, but I do not regard -this as a substantial element in the Tory victory. What did hurt Labor -and help the Tories was the apathy of many Labor voters. Repeatedly I -visited Labor election centers where a few elderly and tired people -were going through the motions. The Tory centers, on the other hand, -were organized, lively, and efficient.</p> - -<p>For decades the Labor Party had promised the industrial workers -full employment, higher wages, social security. Now there was full -employment, wages were higher, present medical needs and future -pensions were assured by national legislation. To a great degree these -things had been achieved by the Labor governments of 1945 and 1950. But -monarchies can be as ungrateful as republics, and the Tory boast that -its government had ended rationing and produced prosperity probably -counted as much as the benefits given the industrial working class by -the socialist revolution carried out in six years of Labor government.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_76"></a>[Pg 76]</span></p> - -<p>Another factor operated against the Labor campaign. There was then and -still is a perceptible drift from the industrial working class into a -new middle class. Later this drift must be examined in detail. It is -part of the pattern of constant change in British history, a change -that provides much of British society's strength. It is a change in -which new blood constantly flows upward into other classes, a change -in which the proletarian becomes lower middle class and the lower -middle class becomes upper middle class in respect to income and social -standing.</p> - -<p>Here we are concerned with the political change. In many cases -the industrial worker who becomes a foreman and then a production -chief moves politically as well. He may still vote Labor, but it is -increasingly difficult for him to identify himself with the proletariat -or with Marxist doctrines. He lives in a better home, away from his old -associates. His new friends may spring from the same class, but they -are no longer preoccupied with the political struggle; often they are -enjoying the fruits of its victories.</p> - -<p>Nor is he worried, politically. For the Tories' return to power in -Britain in 1951 did not produce a reactionary government. Sir Winston -Churchill, once regarded by the workers as a powerful and unrelenting -enemy, appeared in his last administration as a kindly old gentleman -under whose sunny smile and oratorical showers the nation prospered. -Why, he was even trying to arrange a talk with the Russian leaders! The -absence of openly reactionary elements in the Conservative government, -despite the presence of such elements in the party, and the promotion -of moderation by Conservative speakers encouraged a gradual movement -of the industrial working class away from the standards of pre-war -socialism.</p> - -<p>The changes in British society between 1945 and 1955, the people's -refusal to respond to the old slogans in their new prosperity, -the damaging split within the Parliamentary Labor Party all are -contributing to the evolution of a new Labor Party that seems to be a -better reflection of its electoral support than the one which went down -to defeat in 1955. This does not mean, of course, that it is better -fitted to rule Britain.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_77"></a>[Pg 77]</span></p> - -<p>Almost all the leaders of the Labor governments of the post-war years -have gone. Ernest Bevin and Sir Stafford Cripps are dead. Clement -Attlee has passed from the House of Commons into the Lords. Herbert -Morrison and Emanuel Shinwell are back benchers in the Commons, -exchanging grins with their political enemy and personal friend Sir -Winston Churchill.</p> - -<p>These men represented the old Labor Party. Bevin, Morrison, and -Shinwell were hard, shrewd politicians, products of the working class -they served. Cripps and Attlee were strays from the old upper middle -class who had been moved to adopt socialism by the spectacle of -appalling poverty among Britain's masses and what seemed to them the -startling incompetence of capitalist society to solve the nation's -economic and social problems.</p> - -<p>This group and its chief lieutenants were bound, however, by a -common fight. They could remember the days when there was no massive -organization, when they had stood on windy street corners and shouted -for social justice. They remembered the days when "decent people" -looked down their noses at Labor politicians as unnecessary and -possibly treasonable troublemakers.</p> - -<p>It was inevitable, I think, that this group would pass from the -leadership of the Labor party. When they did, however, the party lost -more than the force of their personalities. It lost an emotional drive, -a depth of feeling, that will be hard to replace.</p> - -<p>Fittingly, the new leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party, Hugh -Gaitskell, is an exemplary symbol of the new party. He is a man of -courage and compassion, intellectual power and that cold objectivity -which is so often found in successful politicians. He represents -the modern middle-class socialists just as Attlee two decades ago -represented the much smaller number of socialists from that class.</p> - -<p>Attlee, however, led a party in which the working-class politician -was dominant. Gaitskell is chief of a party in which the middle-class -intellectual element and the managerial group from the unions and the -Party Organization have become powerful if not dominant.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_78"></a>[Pg 78]</span></p> - -<p>Clement Attlee was leader of the party for more than twenty years. -Gaitskell has the opportunity to duplicate this feat. But he must first -heal the great schism that has opened in the movement in the last five -years, and to do so he must defeat or placate the left wing and its -leader, Aneurin Bevan.</p> - -<p>Although the split within the Labor movement distresses all good -socialists, it has added notably to the vigor and, indeed, to the -gaiety of British politics. Aneurin Bevan was moved to flights of -oratorical frenzy and waspish wit. Nor is it every day that one sees -Clement Attlee temporarily discard his air of detachment and descend -into the arena to entangle his party foes in the streamers of their own -verbosity. It was a great fight, and, fortunately for those who like -their politics well seasoned, it is not over yet.</p> - -<p>For the quarrel within the movement represents forces and emotions of -great depth and significance. In moments of excitement men and women -on both sides have described it as a battle for the soul of the party. -It may be more accurately described, I think, as a battle to determine -what type of political party is to represent the labor movement in -Britain.</p> - -<p>Since the center and the right wing of the movement today dominate the -making of policy and fill most, but not all, of the important party -posts, it is the left that is on the offensive. But the left itself is -not a united band of brothers. It has its backsliders and its apostates -who sometimes temper their criticisms when they think of minor -government posts under a Labor government headed by Hugh Gaitskell. -But, personalities aside, convictions are so strongly held that there -seems to be little likelihood of an end to the offensive.</p> - -<p>What, then, does the left represent? One definition is that it -represents those elements in the party who seek to complete the -revolution of 1945-51. They want the extension of nationalization to -all major industries and some minor ones. Aneurin Bevan, who enjoys -making flesh creep, once told a group of Americans that he wanted -to nationalize everything "including the barber shops." Extreme, of -course, and said in jest; but "Nye" Bevan is an extremist, and many a -true word is spoken in jest.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_79"></a>[Pg 79]</span></p> - -<p>The left wing would move, too, against the surviving citadels of -pre-war England such as public schools and other types of private -education, and the power of the Church of England. It would impose upon -Britain an egalitarianism unknown among the great powers of the West. -It would limit Britain's defense efforts—this was the issue on which -Bevan broke with the party leadership—to forces barely sufficient -for police operations. It would liquidate as quickly as possible the -remains of the Empire. Finally, it would turn Britain from what the -radicals consider her present slavish acceptance of United States -policy to a more independent foreign policy. This would mean that -Britain would quit her position at the right hand of the United States -in the long economic and political struggle with the great Communist -powers and adopt a more friendly attitude toward Russia and Communist -China. Bevan has descried, along with a great many other people, -important economic and political changes within those countries, and he -pleads with the Labor movement for a more sensible approach to them.</p> - -<p>Naturally many members of the movement's center and right subscribe to -some of these ideas. The admission of Communist China to the United -Nations is an agreed objective of the Labor movement. It is even -favored "in due course" by plenty of Conservative politicians. The -explanation is a simple illustration of British bipartisanship. China -means trade, and Britain needs trade. There are other considerations -involving long-term strategic and political planning, including the -possibility of luring China away from the Russian alliance. But trade -is the starting-point.</p> - -<p>The left wing boasts that it speaks for the fundamentalists of -socialism, that it echoes the great dream of the founders of the party -who saw the future transformation of traditional Britain with its -economic and social inequalities into a greener, sweeter land. There is -and always has been a radical element in British politics, and, on the -left, the Bevanites represent it today.</p> - -<p>The term "Bevanites" is inexact. The left-wing Socialists include -many voters and politicians who dislike Aneurin Bevan and some of his -ideas. But the use of his name to describe the group is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_80"></a>[Pg 80]</span> a tribute to -one of the most remarkable figures in world politics today. Aneurin -Bevan has been out of office since 1951. He has bitterly attacked all -the official leaders of his party, and he has come perilously close to -exile from the party. His following, as I have noted, is subject to -change. He often says preposterous things in public and rude things in -private. He has made and continues to make powerful enemies.</p> - -<p>"After all, Nye's his own worst enemy," someone once remarked to Ernie -Bevin.</p> - -<p>"Not while I'm alive, 'e ain't," said Ernie.</p> - -<p>Bevan is a man of intelligence, self-education, and charm. At ease he -is one of the best talkers I have ever met. He has read omnivorously -and indiscriminately. He will quote Mahan to an admiral and Keynes to -an economist. He has wit, and he knows the world. He likes to eat well -and drink well.</p> - -<p>Bevan, in his eager, questing examination of the world and its affairs, -sometimes reminds his listeners of Winston Churchill. Each man has -a sense of history, although the interpretation of a miner's son -naturally differs from that of the aristocratic grandson of a duke. -There is another similarity: each in his own way is a great orator.</p> - -<p>To watch Bevan address a meeting is to experience political oratory at -its fullest flower. He begins softly in his soft Welsh voice. There -are a few joking references to his differences with the leader of -the party, followed by a solemn reminder that such differences are -inescapable and, indeed, necessary in a democratic party. At this -point moderate Socialists are apt to groan. As Bevan moves on to his -criticisms of the official leadership of the movement and of the -Conservatives, it is clear that this is one orator who can use both -a rapier and a bludgeon. He is no respecter of personalities, and at -the top of his form he will snipe at Eisenhower, jeer at Churchill, -and scoff at Gaitskell. He is a master of the long, loaded rhetorical -question that brings a volley of "no, no" or "yes, yes" from the -audience.</p> - -<p>Much of the preaching of left-wing Socialism is outdated, in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_81"></a>[Pg 81]</span> view of -the changes in the urban working class. But Bevan is the only radical -who is capable on the platform of exciting both the elderly party -stalwarts who hear in him the echoes of the great days and the younger -voters who, until they entered the hall, were reasonably satisfied with -their lot. This is a man of imagination and power, one of the most -forceful politicians in Britain. One secret is that he, and precious -few others, can re-create in Labor voters, if only momentarily, the -spell of the old crusading days when it was a movement and not a party.</p> - -<p>As Bevan typifies to many anti-Americanism in Britain, it should in -justice be said that he is not anti-American in the sense that he -dislikes the United States or its people. Nor could he be considered -an enemy of the United States in the sense that Joseph Stalin was -an enemy. Bevan believes as firmly as any Midwestern farmer in the -democratic traditions of freedom and justice under law.</p> - -<p>But in considering the outlook on international affairs of Aneurin -Bevan and others on the extreme left of British politics there are -several circumstances to keep in mind. The first is that, due to early -environment, study, or experience, they are bitterly anti-capitalist. -The United States, as the leading and most successful capitalist -nation in the world, is a refutation of their convictions. They may -have a high regard for individual Americans and for many aspects of -American life. But as people who are Marxists or strongly influenced by -Marxism they do not believe that a capitalist system is the best system -for a modern, industrial state—certainly not for one in Britain's -continually parlous economic condition. In power they would alter the -economic basis of British society, and possibly they would change the -government's outlook on trade with the Communist nations. This means a -friendlier approach to the Russian and Chinese Communist colossi and -a more independent policy toward the capitalist United States. The -attractions of such a position are not confined to Aneurin Bevan; one -will hear them voiced by members of ultra-conservative factions of the -Tory party.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_82"></a>[Pg 82]</span></p> - -<p>For a man who vigorously opposes all kinds of tyranny, Bevan has been -rather slow to criticize the tyranny of the secret police in the -Soviet Union or the ruthless methods of those Communists who have won -control of some British unions. There is in Bevan, as in all successful -politicians—Roosevelt and Churchill are the best-known examples in our -day—a streak of toughness verging on cruelty. This may explain his -apparent tolerance of some of the excesses of totalitarian nations. -Again, as some of his followers explain, Nye expects everyone to -realize that such tyrannies are culpable and to understand him well -enough to know that he would never give them the slightest support. Or, -they suggest, Bevan takes such a comprehensive view of world affairs -and has such a glittering vision of man's goals that he has no time to -concentrate on minor atrocities. Perhaps, but the excuse is not good -enough. The great leaders of Western democracy have been those who -never lost the capacity for anger and action against tyranny whether it -was exercised by a police sergeant or by a dictator.</p> - -<p>Bevan has made a career of leading the extreme left wing in British -politics since 1945. He is sixty this year. If he is to attain power, -he must do so soon. How great is his following? What forces does he -represent?</p> - -<p>The most vocal of the Bevanites are those in the constituency labor -parties. If you wish to taste the old evangelical flavor of socialism, -you will find it among them. Here are the angry young men in flannel -shirts, red ties, and tweed jackets, the stoutish young women whose -hair is never quite right and who wear heavy glasses. They are -eternally upset about something; they don't think any government, Labor -or Conservative, moves fast enough. They pronounce the word "comrades," -with which laborites start all their speeches to their own associates, -as though they meant it.</p> - -<p>The majority are strongly impressed by what has happened—or, rather, -by what they have been told has happened—in Russia. You can get -more misinformation about the Soviet Union in a half-hour of their -conversation than from a dozen Soviet propaganda<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_83"></a>[Pg 83]</span> publications. For in -their case the Russian propaganda has been adulterated with their own -wishes and dreams.</p> - -<p>Some of them have been members of the Communist Party in Britain. -Others have flirted with it. My own impression is that most of them -rejected the discipline of the Communists and that, although they do -not want to be Communists, they have no objection to working with the -Communist Party to attain their ends. They know very little about the -history of the Social Democrats in Eastern Europe who thought in 1945 -that they too could work with the Communists.</p> - -<p>The left-wing radicals are not confined to the constituency labor -parties, but these parties are their most successful vehicles for -propaganda. For the CLP's present resolutions to the annual conference -of the movement, and these resolutions are usually spectacular, -combining extreme demands with hot criticism of the dominant forces -within the movement. The resolutions endorsing the official policies of -the party leadership attract far less attention.</p> - -<p>The radicals of the CLP's are supported on the left by other dissident -elements within the movement. Some of these are union members who -oppose the authority of the Trades Union Congress within the movement, -considering it a reactionary brake on progressive or revolutionary -policies.</p> - -<p>There is also a considerable group of union members who make common -cause with the political opponents of the TUC but oppose it principally -on its position in the industrial world. They see it as too temperate -in its objectives for wages and hours, too timid in its use of the -strike weapon, too unwieldy in organization, and too old-fashioned in -its approach to modern developments in industry such as automation.</p> - -<p>In this opposition they are encouraged by the Communists. The Communist -Party is without direct political power in Britain. In the 1955 -election it polled only 33,144 votes and failed to elect a single -candidate. But it has attained considerable indirect power in some key -unions in the British economy, and as the present lead<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_84"></a>[Pg 84]</span>ership of the -TUC is moderate and fairly democratic, the party wages unceasing war -against it.</p> - -<p>One method is to win control of unions. Where this is impossible the -Communists encourage opposition to the TUC—opposition that often -needs little encouragement. On both the political and the industrial -fronts the Communists support Bevanism and the extreme left wing -because these elements weaken the Labor movement, which up to now has -combatted Communist infiltration and sternly rejected invitations -to form a common front. Basically, the Communist Party in Britain -is just as strongly opposed to the Labor movement as it is to the -Conservative Party. This is true of the Communists all over Europe in -their relations with social democracy and conservatism. The difference -is that because of the common roots in Marxism, it is easier for the -Communists to infiltrate the unions and the socialist political parties.</p> - -<p>Bevan is not the only spokesman for the radical left wing. R.H.S. -Crossman, a highly intelligent but somewhat erratic back-bench MP is -another. Crossman's political views are often somewhat difficult to -follow, but in the House of Commons he is capable of cutting through -the verbosity of a government speaker and exposing the point. Mrs. -Barbara Castle, a lively redhead, is a brisk, incisive speaker. Konni -Zilliacus, elected in the Conservative landslide of 1955, was once -ousted from the Labor Party because he was too friendly toward the -Soviet Union. Zilliacus is often immoderate, especially when dealing -with the ogres in Washington, but he has a considerable knowledge of -international affairs.</p> - -<p>One of the most effective of the Bevanites in Commons until 1955 -was Michael Foot, next to Bevan the best speaker on the Labor left -wing. Defeated in 1955 by a narrow margin, he provides the left with -ideological leadership through the pages of <i>Tribune</i>, a weekly -newspaper.</p> - -<p><i>Tribune</i> is the only real Bevanite organ. The <i>New Statesman and -Nation</i> is a forum for extreme left-wing views, but is more temperate -and stately. <i>Tribune</i> is a battle cry flaying the Tories and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_85"></a>[Pg 85]</span> the -official Labor leadership indiscriminately. Foot edits the paper and -writes in it under the name of John Marullus. Like Bevan, he was once -employed by Lord Beaverbrook.</p> - -<p><i>Tribune</i> does not confine its activities to news and editorial -comments. Each year at the annual Labor Party conference the newspaper -stages what is usually the liveliest meeting of the week. During the -rest of the year it sponsors "brain trust" meetings throughout the -country at which the Bevanite ideology is expounded and defended.</p> - -<p>The tabloid <i>Tribune</i> is a good example of the old "hit him again, -he's still breathing" type of journalism. It does a wonderful job of -dissecting and deflating the stuffed shirts of the right and left. But -it is monotonously strident. The <i>New Statesman and Nation</i>, although -not so avowedly Bevanite as <i>Tribune</i>, may carry more weight with the -radical left. It is a weekly of great influence.</p> - -<p>This influence is exerted principally upon an important group of -intellectual orphans—the young men and women whose education surpassed -their capacities and who now find themselves in dull, poorly paid -jobs, living on a scale of comfort much lower than that of the more -prosperous members of the urban working class. They are dissatisfied -with the system and the government that has condemned them to dreary -days of teaching runny-nosed little boys or to routine civil-service -jobs. Not unnaturally, they welcome political plans and projects which -promise to install them in posts worthy of their abilities as they see -them.</p> - -<p>Politically they are on the extreme left. The <i>New Statesman</i> -encourages their political beliefs and assures them that their present -lowly estate is due to the system and not to their own failings. The -members of this group are poor. They are occasionally futile and often -ridiculous. But they are not negligible.</p> - -<p>That wise man Sir Oliver Franks said once that the political outlook -of this group would have an important effect on Britain's political -situation ten or twenty years hence. My own conclusion is that this -group, like the Bevanites in the constituency labor parties,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_86"></a>[Pg 86]</span> and the -dissidents in the unions, wants to remake the Labor Party in its own -image and then, when the party has come to power, remake Britain.</p> - -<p>The left-wing radicalism of Britain—what we call Bevanism—is thus a -good deal more important than the occasional rebellions of a few MP's -on the Labor side of the House of Commons. It represents in an acute -form the evangelism that is so strong a part of the nonconformist -tradition in Britain. It rebels against the present direction of the -Labor movement and the Parliamentary Labor Party. It wants, not a -Britain governed by the Labor Party, but a socialist Britain.</p> - -<p>Can it come to power? Movements of this kind usually win power -during or after some great national convulsion. A war or an economic -depression comparable to that of 1929-36 would give left-wing -radicalism its chance. But either might give right-wing radicalism and -nationalism a chance, too. To win, the Bevanites would have to defeat -the mature power of the great unions and the undoubted abilities of the -present leaders of the party.</p> - -<p>The great unions are the result of one hundred and fifty years of -crusading agitation. The labor movement began with them. They have -money and they have power. The "branch" or "lodge" is the basic unit of -organization within the union. Every union member must belong to it. -In an individual plant or factory, the workers of the various unions -are represented by a shop steward, who recruits new members, handles -grievances, and, as the intelligence officer for the workers, keeps in -touch with the management and its plans.</p> - -<p>There are regional, district, or area organizations on a higher level -for the larger unions. Finally, there is a national executive council -of elected officials which deals with the national needs of the unions. -At the top is the Trades Union Congress, a confederation of nearly all -the great unions.</p> - -<p>The unions have grown so large—the Amalgamated Engineering -Union, for instance, includes thirty-nine separate unions in its -organization—that it is sometimes difficult for the TUC or the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_87"></a>[Pg 87]</span> -national executive of an individual union to control its members. -But the moderate political outlook—moderate, that is, by Bevanite -standards—still prevails at the top, and the system of card voting, -under which all the votes of a union are cast at the annual conference -according to the decision of its national executive, insures that -the moderate policies of the union leaders will be approved at the -conference.</p> - -<p>The imposing voting strength of the unions has been employed at -successive conferences to maintain the policies and leadership of men -like Attlee, Morrison, and Gaitskell. The steamroller in action is an -impressive and, to the Bevanites, an undemocratic sight. But it does -represent millions who advocate a conservative policy for the labor -movement and who, at the moment, are satisfied with evolutionary rather -than revolutionary progress.</p> - -<p>The left-wing constituency labor parties create a great deal of noise. -Those which support the moderate leadership are less enterprising in -their propaganda, and, because criticism is often more interesting -than support, they make fewer headlines. But, despite the agonized -pleas of the left wing, hundreds of CLP's are satisfied with the -general ideological policy of the movement and its leaders. This is a -manifestation of the innate conservatism of the British worker. Just -as the Conservatives of twenty years ago distrusted the brilliant -Churchill largely because he was brilliant, so thousands of Labor -voters today distrust the brilliant Bevan.</p> - -<p>This group puts its faith in the ebb and flow of the tides of political -opinion in a democracy. It was downcast after the 1955 election, but it -did not despair. "Give the Tories their chance, they'll make a muck of -it," said a union official. "We'll come back at the next election and -pick up where we left off in 1951."</p> - -<p>The moderate section of the labor movement enjoys the support of the -only two national newspapers that are unreservedly Labor: the tabloid -<i>Daily Mirror</i> and the <i>Daily Herald</i>. The <i>Mirror</i>, with an enormous -circulation of 4,725,000, consistently supported Hugh Gaitskell for -leadership of the party. So did the <i>Herald</i>, but<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_88"></a>[Pg 88]</span> it is a quieter -paper than the brash tabloid, and its influence in trade-union circles, -once great, seems to be declining, although the TUC remains a large -shareholder.</p> - -<p>The election of Gaitskell as leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party on -Attlee's retirement was a severe blow to the Bevanites. But the tactics -employed by Gaitskell in his first months as Leader of the Opposition -were probably even more damaging to Bevan's hopes.</p> - -<p>Bevan came out of his parliamentary corner swinging at the new leader. -In the past this had provoked Herbert Morrison, then deputy leader, -and even Attlee to retaliatory measures. Gaitskell paid no attention -to Bevan, but went about his work of presiding over the reorganization -of the party machine and of leading the party in the House of Commons. -Bevan huffed and puffed about the country making speeches on Saturdays -and Sundays. But as his targets said little in reply, the speeches -became surprisingly repetitious. Moreover, with the establishment of -the new Labor front bench in the Commons, Bevan took one of the seats -and became the party's chief spokesman, first on colonial affairs and -then on foreign affairs. It is difficult to make criticisms of the -party leader stick at Saturday meetings if, from Monday through Friday, -the critic sits cheek by jowl in the House of Commons with the target -in an atmosphere of polite amiability.</p> - -<p>Bevan's bearing in the debate over the Suez policy increased his -stature in the party and in the country. Indeed, his approach to the -crisis impressed even his enemies as more statesmanlike and more -"national" than that of Gaitskell. Gaitskell, of course, labors under -the difficulty of being a member of the middle class from which so -many Conservative politicians spring. They naturally regard him as a -traitor, and criticisms by Gaitskell of Conservative foreign policy are -much more bitterly denounced than those of Bevan. To the Tories, Bevan -was speaking for the country, Gaitskell for the party.</p> - -<p>The schism in the party is not healed. Too much has been said, the -convictions are too firmly held for that. But Gaitskell has been<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_89"></a>[Pg 89]</span> -successful in creating a façade of co-operation which thus far has -been proof against Bevan's outbursts on the platform or in <i>Tribune</i>. -However, the reaction of the two leaders to the Eisenhower doctrine -for the Middle East demonstrated the width of their differences on -a fundamental problem. The future of this struggle has a direct and -decisive bearing on the future of the labor movement. If Labor is to -return to power in an election that is unaffected by a national crisis, -foreign or domestic, the schism must be healed.</p> - -<p>As a major political party, the labor movement has been molded by many -influences. Before the First World War, German Social Democracy and the -Fabians affected it. The party then acquired the tenets of national -ownership and ultimate egalitarianism in the most class-conscious of -nations which give it its socialist tone. But a party so large covers a -wide range of political belief. It is a socialist party to some. It is -a labor party to others. Above all, it is a means, like the Republican -and Democratic parties, of advancing the interests of a large number -of practical politicians whose interests in socialism are modified by -their interest in what will win votes.</p> - -<p>The moderate center of the Labor Party now dominates the movement just -as the moderate center of the Conservative Party dominates the Tory -organization. In each the leader represents the mood of the majority -within the parliamentary party. Macmillan is a little to the left of -center among Conservatives. Gaitskell is a little to the right of -center in the Labor Party. The identity of interest among the two -dominant groups is greater than might appear from the robust exchanges -in the House of Commons.</p> - -<p>The radical wings in both parties are handicapped at this point by -a seeming inability to understand that politics is the art of the -possible. Herbert Morrison, a great practical politician, summed up -this weakness of the radical left at a Labor conference. A resolution -demanding the immediate nationalization of remaining industry—at a -time when the country was prosperous and fully employed—was before the -conference. Do you think, he asked, that anyone will <i>vote</i> for such a -program?</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_90"></a>[Pg 90]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="VI_A_Quiet_Revolution_by_a_Quiet_People">VI. <i>A Quiet Revolution by a Quiet People</i></h2> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Revolutions begin with infatuation and end with incredulity. In their -origin proud assurance is dominant; the ruling opinion disdains doubt -and will not endure contradiction. At their completion skepticism -takes the place of disdain and there is no longer any care for -individual convictions or any belief in truth.</i></p> - -<p> -F.P.G. GUIZOT<br /> -</p> - -<p><i>Revolutions are not made; they come. A revolution is as natural a -growth as an oak. It comes out of the past. Its foundations are laid -far back.</i></p> - -<p> -WENDELL PHILLIPS<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">The changes</span> in Britain since 1939 have been revolutionary. Yet because -Britain is a nation with a highly developed political sense, the -revolution has been fought not at barricades but in ballot boxes. And, -seen on the broadest scale, what has happened to Britain and its people -at home is part of what has been happening all over the world since -1939. The year that saw the start of World<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_91"></a>[Pg 91]</span> War II saw the beginning of -a terrible acceleration of forces that for fifty years had been slowly, -sometimes almost imperceptibly weakening Britain's position.</p> - -<p>This book is concerned principally with Britain. But let us look -at what has happened to British interests abroad since 1939. The -Indian Empire is gone. The lifeline of what remains of the Empire is -unraveling in Ceylon, Singapore, Aden, and Cyprus. The rise of the -Soviet Union and the United States has dwarfed Britain as a world -power, and the imaginative conception of the Commonwealth is not yet, -and may never be, an adequate balance to these two vast conglomerations -of industrial and military power. Britain's ties with some of the -Commonwealth nations—notably South Africa—grow weaker year by year. -The remaining colonies are moving toward self-government, as the -British always planned, but it is doubtful whether after they leave -the Empire nest they will be any more loyal or responsive to British -leadership than Ceylon is today.</p> - -<p>We are living through one of the most important processes of recent -history, the liquidation of an empire that has lasted in various -forms for about two hundred and fifty years. It is a tribute to the -people who gave it life, to their courage, political flexibility, and -foresight, that, despite the changes and the retreats, they are still -reckoned a power in world affairs.</p> - -<p>History has its lessons. In 1785 Britain had lost her most important -overseas possessions, the American colonies, and the courts of Europe -rejoiced at the discomfiture of the island people and their armies -and navies. A third of a century later the British had organized the -coalition that ultimately defeated Napoleon, the supreme military -genius of his time, and were carving out a new empire in India, -Australia, and Africa.</p> - -<p>We need not drop back so far in history. When, shortly before the -Second World War, I went to England, it was fashionable and very -profitable to write about the decay of Britain. Some very good books -were written on the subject, and they were being seriously discussed -when this island people, alone, in a tremendous renais<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_92"></a>[Pg 92]</span>sance of -national energy, won the Battle of Britain and saved the Western world -from the danger of German domination. As generations of Spaniards, -French, and Germans have learned, it is unwise to count the British out.</p> - -<p>Yet an observer from Mars limiting his observations to the home islands -would find reason to do so today. For the Britain of today resembles -very little the Britain that, despite the long and, by the standards -of that day, costly war in South Africa, greeted the twentieth century -proudly confident.</p> - -<p>Britain's old position as "the workshop of the world" has vanished. -There are now two other Britains—two nations, that is, which depend -largely on the production and export of manufactured goods to live. -Both these nations, Germany and Japan, are the defeated enemies of -World War II, and both of them were bidding for and getting a share of -Britain's overseas trade before that war and, indeed, before World War -I. The decline in Britain's economic strength did not begin in 1939.</p> - -<p>The second world conflict, beginning only twenty-one years after -the close of the first, accelerated the decline. Into World War II -Britain poured both blood and treasure, just as she had in the earlier -conflict. But 1914-18 had left her less of both. British casualties in -World War II were smaller than in the first conflict, but the damage -done to Britain's position in the world was much greater.</p> - -<p>The differences between the Britain of 1939 and the Britain of 1945 -affected much more than the international position of the country. A -society had been grabbed, shaken, and nearly throttled by the giant -hand of war. After that bright Sunday morning in September when the -sirens sounded for the first time in earnest, things were never the -same again.</p> - -<p>I remember an evening in April 1939. It was sunny and warm, and the -men and women came out of their offices and relaxed in the sunlight. -The Germans were on the move in Europe, but along the Mall there -was nothing more disturbing than the honk of taxi horns. London lay -prosperous and sleek, assured and confident.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_93"></a>[Pg 93]</span></p> - -<p>Six years later I came back from Germany. I had been in London much of -the time during the war, but now I had been away for over a year, and -I found the contrast between that September evening and the far-off -evening in April impressive. It was not the bomb damage; there was -more of that in Germany. But London and Londoners had broken their -connection with the confident past. It was a shabbier, slower world, -face to face with new realities.</p> - -<p>The impact of the war on the average Briton was greater than on the -average American because for long periods the Briton lived with it on -terms of frighteningly personal intimacy. Americans went to war. The -war came to the British. In the process an ordered society was shaken -to its foundations, personal and national savings were swept away, the -physical industrial system of the country was subjected to prolonged -attack and then to a fierce national drive for increased industrial -production. For close to six years the country was a fortress and then -a staging area for military operations. By the end of the war and the -dawn of an austere peace the nation was prepared psychologically for -the other changes introduced by a radical change in political direction.</p> - -<p>Mobilization of military and economic forces during the war was more -complete in Britain than in any other combatant save possibly the -Soviet Union. The result of immediate peril and the prospect of defeat, -it began early in 1940. This mobilization was the start of the social -changes that have been going on in Britain ever since.</p> - -<p>The mingling of classes began. Diana, the rector's daughter, and Nigel, -the squire's son, found themselves serving in the ranks with Harriet -from Notting Hill and Joe from Islington. In the end, of course, Diana -was commissioned in the Wrens and Nigel was a captain in a county -regiment, largely but not entirely because of their superior education; -however, their contacts with Harriet and Joe gave them a glimpse of a -Britain they had not known about before.</p> - -<p>Things changed at home, too. The rectory was loud with the voices of -children evacuated from the slums of London or Coven<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_94"></a>[Pg 94]</span>try, and the -squire spent his days farming as he never had before and his nights -with the Home Guard. All over the country, men and women were giving up -those jobs which were unnecessary in war and venturing into new fields. -The assistant in the Mayfair dress shop found herself in a factory, the -greens-keeper was in a shipyard.</p> - -<p>The old, safe, quiet life of Britain ended. There were no more quiet -evenings in the garden, no more leisurely teas in the working-class -kitchen, no more visits to Wimbledon. People worked ten or twelve hours -a day, and when they ate they ate strange dishes made of potatoes and -carrots, and when they drank they drank weak beer and raw gin. These -conditions were not universal. There were the shirkers in the safe -hotels and the black markets. And, despite the bands playing "There'll -Always Be an England" (a proposition that seemed highly doubtful in -the summer of 1940) and despite the rolling oratory and defiance of -Mr. Churchill, there was plenty of grousing. It was, they said in the -ranks, "a hell of a way to run the bleedin' war"; or, as the suburban -housewife remarked in the queue, "I really think they could get us -some decent beef. How the children are to get along on this I cannot -imagine."</p> - -<p>They went on, though. They were bombed and strafed and shelled, they -were hungry and tired. The casualty lists came in from Norway, France, -the Middle East, Burma, Malaya. The machines in the factories were as -strained as the workers. Then, finally, it was over and they had won. -Only a minute number had ever thought they would be beaten. But they -were not the same people who had gone dutifully to war in 1939. Nor was -the world the same.</p> - -<p>"Well, it's time to go home and pick up the pieces," said a major in -Saxony in the summer of 1945. He, and thousands like him, found that -the pieces just were not there any more. The economic drain of the war -had made certain that Britons, far from enjoying the fruits of victory, -would undergo further years of unrelenting toil in a scarred and shabby -country.</p> - -<p>People were restless. They had been unsettled not only by the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_95"></a>[Pg 95]</span> impact -of the war but by the glimpse of other societies. Not until the last -two and a half years of the war, when the American Army and Air Force -began to flood into Britain, did people become aware of the size, -power, and mechanical ingenuity and efficiency of the people who were -so inaccurately portrayed by Hollywood. Some saw in Russia's resistance -to the Germans and her final sweeping victories proof that the -Communist society could endure and triumph no less than those of the -Western democracies. Many who understood what had happened to British -power during the war were convinced that if the country was to retain -its position in the world, it would have to seek new, adventurous -methods in commerce and industry and new men and new policies in -politics. This conviction was held by hundreds of thousands who had -once voted Liberal or Conservative but who in the election of 1945 were -to cast their votes for the Labor Party.</p> - -<p>The political history of the immediate pre-war period offers a reason -for this change. The defeats of 1940 and 1941 were a tremendous shock -to Britons. During the war there was no time for lengthy official -post-mortems on the alarming inadequacy of British arms in France in -1940 or in the first reverses in the western desert of Libya a year -later. But the polemics of the left managed to convince a great many -people that the blame lay with the pre-war Conservative governments of -Neville Chamberlain and Stanley Baldwin. When in 1945 the chance came -to revenge themselves on the Tories, even though Winston Churchill, -who had opposed both Chamberlain and Baldwin, was the Conservatives' -leader, millions took the chance and voted Labor into office.</p> - -<p>The urge for change to meet changing conditions at home and new forces -abroad was not universal. The people of the middle class had not -yet fully understood what the war had done to Britain's economy and -especially to that section of it which supported them. There was very -strong opposition to the first post-war American loan in sections of -this class, largely from people whose confidence had not been shaken -by the cataclysm. The austerity imposed by Sir Stafford Cripps, the -Socialist Chancellor of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_96"></a>[Pg 96]</span> Exchequer, was neither understood nor -welcomed. The withdrawal from India was hotly opposed—and, it should -be remembered, not purely on imperialist grounds. For two hundred years -the middle class had provided the officers and civil servants who led -and administered the Indian Army and the government of British India. -As a class it knew a great deal more about India and the Indians than -the union leaders and earnest young intellectuals of Mr. Attlee's -government knew. The Socialist speakers and newspapers scoffed at "the -toffy-nosed old ex-colonels" who predicted bloody and prolonged rioting -between the Hindus and the Moslems once British power was withdrawn. -The rioting began, and before it was over the bloodshed was greater -than in all the British punitive actions from the Mutiny onward.</p> - -<p>None of this generally Conservative opposition could halt or even check -a Labor government that had been voted into power in 1945 with 393 -seats in the House of Commons as opposed to 216 for the Conservatives -and 12 for the Liberals. The Tories were out, the new day had dawned, -and the Labor Party, in full control of the government for the first -time in its history, set out to remake Britain.</p> - -<p>No one in Britain could plead ignorance of what the Labor Party -was about to do. Since 1918 it had been committed to extensive -nationalization of industry and redistribution of income. Moreover, it -came to power at a moment when the old patterns of industrial power and -political alignments had been ruptured by war and when voters other -than those who habitually voted Labor were acknowledging the need for -change.</p> - -<p>The 1945 policy statement of the Labor Party was called "Let Us Face -the Future." It dotted all the <i>i</i>'s and crossed all the <i>t</i>'s in -Labor's program.</p> - -<p>The statement began with a good word for freedom, always highly -esteemed by political parties seeking power. But it added an -interesting comment. "There are certain so-called freedoms that Labor -will not tolerate; freedom to exploit other people; freedom to pay poor -wages and to push up prices for selfish profits; freedom<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_97"></a>[Pg 97]</span> to deprive -the people of the means of living full, happy, healthy lives."</p> - -<p>The statement went on to promise full employment, to be achieved -through the nationalization of industry; the fullest use of national -resources; higher wages; social services and insurance; a new tax -policy; and planned investment. There was to be extensive replanning of -the national economic effort and a "firm constructive government hand -on our whole productive machinery." The Labor Party's ultimate purpose -at home was "the establishment of a Socialist Commonwealth of Great -Britain—free, democratic, efficient, progressive, public spirited, its -material resources organized in the services of the British people."</p> - -<p>In 1948 Harold Laski, the Labor Party's ideological mentor, said in -the course of the Fabian Society Lectures that the party was "trying -to transform a profoundly bourgeois society, mainly composed of what -Bagehot called 'deferential' citizens, allergic to theory because -long centuries of success have trained it to distrust of philosophic -speculation, and acquiescent in the empiricist's dogma that somehow -something is bound to turn up, a society, moreover, in which all -the major criteria of social values have been imposed by a long -indoctrination for whose aid all the power of church and school, of -press and cinema, have been very skillfully mobilized; we have got -to transform this bourgeois society into a socialist society, with -foundations not less secure than those it seeks to renovate."</p> - -<p>Doubtless these ominous words failed to penetrate into the clubs and -boardrooms that were the sanctums of the former ruling class. But -it was hardly necessary that they should. The businessmen and the -Conservative politicians understood Harold Laski's objectives.</p> - -<p>Nationalization of industry is the most widely advertised economic -result of Labor policies between 1945 and 1951. In assessing its effect -on the changes in Britain since 1939, we must remember that neither -was it so new nor is it so extensive as Americans believe. The British -Broadcasting Corporation was created as<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_98"></a>[Pg 98]</span> a public corporation as long -ago as 1927. Today most manufacturing in Britain remains in the control -of private enterprise.</p> - -<p>Between 1945 and 1951, however, the Labor government's policy of -nationalization created corporations that today operate or control -industries or services. In two industries, steel and road transport, -the trend toward nationalization has been reversed. But the following -list shows the extent of nationalization in Britain today.</p> - -<p><i>Coal</i>: The Coal Industry Nationalization Act received the Royal Assent -in May of 1946, and on January 1, 1947, the assets of the industry were -vested in the National Coal Board appointed by the Minister of Fuel and -Power and responsible for the management of the industry. For a century -coal was king in Britain, and British coal dominated the world market -until 1910. Coal production is around 225,000,000 tons annually—the -peak was reached in 1913 with 287,000,000 tons—and the industry -employs just over 700,000 people.</p> - -<p><i>Gas</i>: Under the Gas Act of 1948 the gas industry was brought under -public ownership and control on May 1, 1949. The national body is the -Gas Council, also appointed by the Minister of Fuel and Power. The -council consists of a full-time chairman and deputy chairman and the -twelve chairmen of the area boards.</p> - -<p><i>Electricity</i>: The Central Electricity Authority in April 1948 took -over the assets of former municipal and private electricity supply -systems throughout Great Britain with the exception of the area -already served by the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board, another -public corporation. But the industry had long been moving toward -nationalization. As early as 1919 the Electricity Commissioners -were established to supervise the industry and promote voluntary -reorganization. The industry is a big one, employing approximately -200,000 people, and production in 1954 was over 72,800,000,000 -kilowatts.</p> - -<p><i>Banking</i>: The Bank of England, Britain's central bank, was established -in 1694 by Act of Parliament. Its entire capital stock was acquired by -the government under the Bank of England Act of 1946. As the central -bank, the Bank of England is the banker to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_99"></a>[Pg 99]</span> the government, its agent -in important financial operations, and the central note-issuing -authority.</p> - -<p><i>Transport</i>: On January 1, 1948, under the Transport Act passed in -the preceding year, most of Britain's inland transport system came -under public ownership. Nationalization embraced the railways and -the hotels, road-transport interests, docks and steamships owned by -the railways, most of the canals, and London's passenger-transport -system. The public authority then established was the British Transport -Commission. Originally the Commission appointed six executive bodies -to run various parts of the system: the Railway Executive, the Road -Transport Executive, the Road Passenger Executive, the Hotel Executive, -the London Transport Executive, and the Docks and Inland Waterways -Executive. This generous proliferation of authority affected an -industry that employs nearly 2,000,000 workers.</p> - -<p>Transport was one of the nationalized industries whose organization -was altered by the Conservatives when they returned to power in 1951. -Believing that "competition gives a better service than monopoly," -the Tories passed the Transport Act of 1953. This returned highway -freight-haulage to private enterprise and aimed at greater efficiency -on the railroads through the encouragement of competition between the -various regions, such as the Southern Region or the Western Region, -into which the national system had been divided. The act also abolished -all the neat but rather inefficient executives except the Road -Passenger Executive, which had been abolished, unmourned save by a few -civil servants, in 1952, and the London Transport Executive, which was -retained.</p> - -<p><i>Airways</i>: British governments since the twenties have been involved -in civil aviation. Imperial Airways received a government grant of -£1,000,000 as early as 1924. By 1939 the Conservative government -had established the British Overseas Airways Corporation by Act of -Parliament. In 1946 the Labor government, under the Civil Aviation Act, -set up two additional public corporations: British European Airways -and British South American Airways. The latter was merged with BOAC in -1949.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_100"></a>[Pg 100]</span></p> - -<p><i>Communications</i>: The government took control of Cable and Wireless -Ltd., the principal overseas telegraph service, on January 1, 1947. -Thus, the Post Office now operates overseas telecommunications from the -United Kingdom and, of course, all internal telephonic and telegraphic -systems.</p> - -<p>These were the most important milestones on the Labor Party's -progress toward nationalization. Viewed dispassionately, they were -evolutionary rather than revolutionary. There had been a trend toward -nationalization in electricity for some years. Objective investigators -had suggested nationalization to aid the failing coal-mining industry, -and during the war (1942) the Coalition government had assumed full -control of the industry's operations although private ownership -retained control of the mines.</p> - -<p>We should avoid, too, the impression, popular among the uninformed in -the United States and even in Britain, that nationalization meant that -the workers took over management of the industries concerned. There -was no invasion of boardrooms by working-men in cloth caps. On the -contrary, employees protested that nationalization did not affect the -management of industries, and such protests were backed by facts. In -1951, after six years of Labor Party rule, trade-union representation -among the full-time members of the boards of the nationalized -industries was a little under 20 per cent, and among the part-time -members the percentage was just below 15 per cent. Five boards had no -trade-union representation.</p> - -<p>The nationalization program of the Labor government between 1945 and -1951 nevertheless marked an important change in the structure of -British society. The financial and economic control of some of the -nation's most important industries was transferred from private to -public hands. The capitalist system that had served Britain so well -found its horizons limited in important fields.</p> - -<p>There is now no important political movement in Britain to undo the -work of the Labor government in the fields mentioned above. But as long -as a generation survives which knew these industries under private -control, harsh and persistent criticism will per<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_101"></a>[Pg 101]</span>sist. Some of it is -just. The standard of efficiency and comfort on British railroads, for -instance, has deterioriated since pre-war days. But in many instances -the critics are attacking aspects of the nationalized industries -which are the result not of nationalization itself but of the gradual -wearing out of much of the nation's industrial plant. Two wars, a -long depression, and a prolonged period of economic austerity during -which only the most important improvements and construction could be -financed have had their effect. Both British industry and the transport -system upon which it rests—railroads, ports, highways—need immediate -improvement and new construction.</p> - -<p>Nationalization, however, was only one means of altering the bases of -British society. The historian of the future may consider that the -tremendous extension of government responsibility for social welfare -was a more important factor in the evolution of Britain. The Welfare -State has been a target for critics on both sides of the Atlantic. -Its admitted cost, its supposed inefficiency are denounced. British -critics, however, avoid a cardinal point. The Welfare State is in -Britain to stay. No government relying on the electorate for office is -going to dismantle it.</p> - -<p>This is not a reference book, but we had better be sure of what we mean -by the British "Welfare State" as we consider its effect on the society -it serves.</p> - -<p>The system is much more extensive than most Americans realize. -The government is now responsible through either central or local -authorities for services that include subsistence for the needy, -education and health services for all, housing, employment insurance, -the care of the aged or the handicapped, the feeding of mothers and -infants, sickness, maternity, and industrial-injury benefits, widows' -and retirement pensions, and family allowances.</p> - -<p>The modern John Bull can be born, cared for as an infant, educated, -employed, hospitalized and treated, and pensioned at the expense of the -state and ultimately of himself through his contributions. This is the -extreme, and it arouses pious horror among those of conservative mind -in Britain as well as in the United States.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_102"></a>[Pg 102]</span></p> - -<p>Again, as in the case of the nationalization of industry, we find that -much of the legislation that established the Welfare State did not -spring from the bulging brows of Sir Stafford Cripps, Lord Beveridge, -or Aneurin Bevan, but is the latest step in an evolutionary process. -National Insurance is the logical outgrowth of the Poor Relief Act of -1601, before there were Englishmen in America, and the contributory -principle on which all later measures in this field have been based -first appeared in the National Health Insurance Scheme of 1912.</p> - -<p>The present system is big and it is expensive. The national and -local governments are spending about £2,267,000,000 a year (about -$6,347,600,000) on social services for the Welfare State, and the -expenditure by the Exchequer on social services amounts to over a -quarter of the total.</p> - -<p>Yet, as this is Britain where established custom dies hard, voluntary -social services supplement the state services. There are literally -hundreds of them, ranging from those providing general social service, -such as the National Council of Social Service, through specialized -organizations, such as Doctor Barnado's Homes for homeless children and -the National Association for Mental Health, to religious groups such as -the Church of England Children's Society and the Society of St. Vincent -de Paul. The existence and vigor of these voluntary organizations -testifies to the wrongness of the assumption that all social work in -Britain today is in the hands of soulless civil servants.</p> - -<p>Of all the actions taken to extend social services under the -Labor government, by far the most novel and controversial was the -establishment of the National Health Service, which came into being on -July 5, 1948. The object of the National Health Service Act was "to -promote the establishment in England and Wales [other acts for Scotland -and Northern Ireland came into force simultaneously] of a comprehensive -health service designed to secure improvement in the physical and -mental health of the people of England and Wales and the prevention, -diagnosis and treatment of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_103"></a>[Pg 103]</span> illness, and for that purpose to provide or -secure the effective provision of services."</p> - -<p>Before we consider what the service does, let us think of those it -was designed to help. The British working class up to 1945 suffered -to a considerable degree from lack of proper medical and dental care. -Doctors and dentists were expensive, and in addition there was a -definite psychological resistance to placing oneself in their care. -Health and medicine were not popularized in Britain, as they were -in the United States; among the poor there was still a tendency to -consider discussion of these subjects as ill-mannered.</p> - -<p>There has been some change since the war, but not much. Britons of all -classes were surprised, and some of them a little disgusted, by the -clinical descriptions of President Eisenhower's illness in American -newspapers. But the National Health Service has done much to reduce -the old reluctance to visit the doctor or the dentist because of the -expense.</p> - -<p>Three subsequent acts in 1949, 1951, and 1952 have modified the scheme -slightly and have provided for charges for some services. But the -National Health Service is otherwise free and available according to -medical need. Its availability is not dependent on contribution to -National Insurance.</p> - -<p>What does the service do? The Ministry of Health is directly -responsible for all hospital and specialist services on a national -basis, the mental-health functions of the old Board of Control, -research work on the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of illness, -the public-health laboratory service, a blood-transfusion service.</p> - -<p>These broad general headings cover an enormous organization, the basis -of which is the General Practitioner Services, which covers the medical -attention given to individuals by doctors and dentists of their own -choice from among those enrolled in the service. About 24,000 or nearly -all of the general practitioners in Britain are part of the service. Of -approximately 10,000 dentists in England and Wales, about 9,500 are in -the service.</p> - -<p>Again, costs are high. For six years Labor and Conservative<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_104"></a>[Pg 104]</span> -administrations have sought to keep the net total annual cost of the -National Health Service to just over £400,000,000 or $1,120,000,000. To -limit the drain on the Exchequer it was found necessary to charge for -prescription forms, dentures, and spectacles. Like any welfare scheme, -the National Health Service invited malingerers and imaginary invalids -who cost the doctors—and the state—time and money.</p> - -<p>I asked a young doctor in the West Country what he thought of the -scheme. "Well, I don't know if it has contributed much to the health -of my bank statement," he said, "but it has contributed to the health -of the folk around here. People are healthier because they don't wait -until they're desperately ill to see a doctor. And the care of children -has improved tremendously. Perhaps this might have come naturally under -the old system. I don't know. But it's here now, and we're a healthier -lot."</p> - -<p>The opposition view was put by an elderly doctor in London who opined -that so great was the pressure on the ordinary general practitioner -from "humbugs" that he never got a chance to do a thorough job on the -seriously ill. The hospitals, he added, were crowded with people who -"don't belong there" and who occupied beds needed by the really sick.</p> - -<p>This controversy, like those over the nationalization of industry, will -continue. Again there seems little prospect that any government will -modify in any important way the basic provisions of the National Health -Service Act.</p> - -<p>In company with the National Insurance, which applies its sickness, -unemployment, maternity, and widows' benefits to everyone over -school-leaving age, and the National Assistance Board, with its -responsibility for the care of those unable to maintain themselves, the -National Health Service has established the Welfare State in Britain. -Another important function has been largely taken out of the hands of -private individuals and delivered to the state.</p> - -<p>What effect did the nationalization of industry and the establishment -of the Welfare State have on British society? Obviously, the first -removed from the control of the moneyed and propertied<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_105"></a>[Pg 105]</span> classes certain -powers over the economic functioning of Britain. The second, because -of its cost, made certain that the heavy tax rates introduced during -and just before World War II would continue. These taxes were paid -principally by the middle class, which, at the outset, refused in many -instances to use the National Health Service.</p> - -<p>The effect was a leveling one. The dominant class was stripped, on one -hand, of some of its power to control a large section of the national -economy, although, as we have seen, it managed to retain its direction -of the nationalized industries. At the same time this class found that -it must continue to pay year by year a high proportion of its earned -income for the state's care of its less prosperous fellows. The decline -in the influence, prosperity, and prestige of the old middle class was -definitely accelerated by these two bold advances toward socialism.</p> - -<p>From the standpoint of the prestige of this class in Britain and, -frankly, of the usefulness of many of its members to the state, -the withdrawal of British rule from India and Burma and the steps -elsewhere toward the liquidation of the Empire were blows as grievous -as the creation of the Welfare State and the nationalization of some -industries.</p> - -<p>Americans should realize that to Britons the Empire was not simply -a place to work and get rich. The people who did the Empire's work -usually retired with only their pensions and a conviction (which is not -much help when you need a new overcoat) that they had done their duty.</p> - -<p>The propaganda of India and Pakistan and of their well-wishers in the -United States has obscured for Americans the grand dimensions of the -British achievement in India. For a hundred and ninety years, between -Plassy in 1757 and the withdrawal in 1947, British rule brought peace -and justice to peoples hitherto sorely oppressed by irresponsible -tyrants, many of whom were corrupt and decadent. The British stamped -out thuggee and suttee, ended the interminable little wars, introduced -justice, and labored to build the highways, railroads, and canals that -form the skeletons of inde<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_106"></a>[Pg 106]</span>pendent India and Pakistan. All this was -done by a handful of British officials and white troops in the midst of -the subcontinents millions.</p> - -<p>Parenthetically, it might be remembered that when the British Indian -army, which served with the British Army in India, existed, and when -the Royal Navy had the strength and facilities to take it where it was -needed, there was peace between Suez and Singapore.</p> - -<p>The British are proud rather than defensive about their record in -India. Even the anti-colonialists of the Labor Party note that free -India and Pakistan operate under British political and legal forms. -Most of them, even those who knew the country well, regarded withdrawal -as inevitable after World War II. But it will take more proof than Mr. -Nehru is prepared to offer to convince many Britons with roots in India -that the people are happier, that justice is universal, that corruption -is declining.</p> - -<p>This attitude galls the Indians and their friends, who never liked -the British much. But in the great days of empire the British didn't -care about being liked. This is a significant difference between the -American and British approaches to responsibility and leadership in -international affairs. The American visitor abroad worries about -whether he and his country are liked by the French or the Egyptians or -the Indonesians. The Briton, when the Empire's sun was at the zenith, -never gave a damn. What he wanted was respect, which he regarded as -about as much as a representative of a powerful nation could win from -the nationals of a less powerful nation under economic, political, or -military obligation.</p> - -<p>"We ran that district with three officials, some Indian civil servants, -the police, and their white officers, and we ran it damned well," an -official recalled. "There were some troops up the line, but we never -needed them. When we made a decision or gave a judgment, we adhered to -it. We made no distinction between Moslem and Hindu. There was justice -and peace. No, of course they weren't free. They weren't ready to -govern themselves. And d'you think they'd have traded those conditions -for freedom and communal rioting?"</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_107"></a>[Pg 107]</span></p> - -<p>I asked the official the population of the district.</p> - -<p>"Three, three and a half million," he said.</p> - -<p>The loss of India and Burma under the first Socialist administration -and the consequent decline of British power thus constituted a severe -psychological shock to the middle class that had ruled Britain during -the last century of British administration in India. Later we shall see -the difference it made in Britain's international position vis-à-vis -the Soviet Union. Here we are concerned with the effect upon British -society at home.</p> - -<p>That society contains thousands of men and women who knew and -served the Empire and who bitterly resent its liquidation. Usually -inarticulate and no match for the bright young men of the <i>New -Statesmen</i>, they can be goaded into wrath. Gilbert Harding, a -television entertainer who has become a national celebrity, found this -out. Mr. Harding referred on television to the "chinless idiots" who -made that "evil thing," the British Empire. The reaction was immediate -and bitter. Mr. Harding was abused in the editorial and letter columns -of the newspapers in phrases as ugly as any he had used. There are, it -appeared, many who glory in the Empire and in the Commonwealth that has -evolved from the old colonies.</p> - -<p>Nationalization, the creation of the Welfare State, the withdrawal from -India—these were major events that changed the face and manner of -Britain. But the effect of the change in British life was evident, too, -in the way men lived. The austerity preached by Sir Stafford Cripps -may have been necessary if the nation was to overcome the effects of -the war. But continued rationing, the queues outside the shops, the -shortages of coal, the persistently high taxation all combined to -change the life of the middle class. Slowly they realized that the -sacrifices and dangers of the war years were not going to be repaid. -There was no brave new world. Instead, there was the old world looking -much more shabby than ever before.</p> - -<p>"You see," people would say, explaining some new restriction, some new -retreat before economic pressure, "we won the war." It was a bitter -jest in the long, drab period between 1945 and 1950.</p> - -<p>There was plenty of grumbling, some of it bitterly humorous.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_108"></a>[Pg 108]</span> Lord -Wavell, surveying a glittering audience at a royal command performance -at Covent Garden Opera House, was told by a friend that the scene -reminded him of pre-war days. "The only difference," the great soldier -replied, "is that tomorrow we'll be doing our own washing up."</p> - -<p>There was, of course, a good deal of snobbery in the middle-class -attitude toward the Socialist government and what it was doing. The -Conservatives and the dwindling band of Liberals just could not believe -that the Socialists were equipped to carry out such vast changes in -British life. They noted with sardonic humor the failures in Socialist -policy. They found the Labor ministers ineffectual and diffident -compared to their own leaders. "We had X and his wife to dinner last -week," the wife of an industrialist told me in 1948. "What a pathetic -little man! And in such an important post, too. Really, I looked at him -sitting there and thought of Winston and Anthony, and Duff, and I felt -like crying."</p> - -<p>It was during this period that the Labor Party lost the support, -temporarily at least, of many of the Conservatives and Liberals who -had voted for it in 1945. The reasons for the shift are difficult to -ascertain. Certainly many people were affronted by nationalization, -especially when it directly affected their interests (though many of -them had voted for Labor expecting such changes). The continuation of -high taxation, which seemed permanent after the start of rearmament -in 1950, alienated others. The ineffectual way in which the Labor -government seemed to be handling many of its problems, particularly the -coal shortage, affected the political opinions of many. "Damn it, we -live on an island made of coal," said one civil servant who had voted -for Labor in 1945. "It's monstrous to have a coal crisis. What are they -playing at?"</p> - -<p>In one field the Labor government won the grudging respect of the -Tories: its approach to the problem presented to the West by the -aggression of Soviet Russia. Mr. Attlee's dry, precise refutations of -Soviet policy might be a weak substitute for Churchill's thundering -oratory, but the nation found a paladin in the squat, rolling figure of -Ernest Bevin.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_109"></a>[Pg 109]</span></p> - -<p>Bevin had spent much of his life fighting British communists for -the control of the unions. Entering the rarefied atmosphere of -international affairs at the top as Foreign Secretary, he brought to -his new task the blunt tongue and quick insight he had employed so -successfully in the old. Between 1945 and 1950, when the British Labor -Party was at the top of its power, Russian Communism was on the march -in Europe. It had no tougher opponent than this Englishman.</p> - -<p>The Russians recognized him as a prime enemy. In Moscow in 1946 and -1947 the Soviet press denounced and assailed Bevin as hotly as they -did any other Western figure. Indeed, the whole Labor government -was vilified almost daily. The reason for this savage onslaught on -the earnest and industrious Marxists of the British government was -obvious. Stalin and his lieutenants had been talking about socialism -for decades. Here was a regime that might make it work without throwing -hundreds of thousands into labor camps and allowing millions to starve. -The anxiety of the rulers of Russia can be compared to that of the -proprietors of a black market who learn that an honest shop is going -into business across the street.</p> - -<p>So this sturdy proletarian, Ernest Bevin, became one of the champions -of the West in the cold war and was praised by Conservatives and -Liberals. The left wing of his own Labor Party provided most of the -criticism. Still cherishing the illusion that the Russians could be -induced to drop their hostility to the West through "frank and open -exchanges," Bevin's comrades led by Aneurin Bevan attacked his policies -and especially his desire to maintain the Anglo-American alliance.</p> - -<p>Those who cheered loudest, the people of the upper middle class who -detested Russia, were the ones who, in the end, suffered most from -the cold war. Britain's rearmament, under the impact of the Communist -seizure of power in Czechoslovakia, the Berlin Blockade, and, finally, -the attack on South Korea, was a costly business. It began soon after -the great expansion of social services had created the Welfare State. -Taxes, already high, rose further.</p> - -<p>In thousands of middle-class homes the decline from the old<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_110"></a>[Pg 110]</span> pre-war -standards continued. The maidservant gave way to the "daily" who came -in once or twice a week to help with the cleaning. The savings for old -age were diverted to the rising costs of keeping the boys at school. -In a hundred pathetic ways, the middle class strove to maintain its -standards under the burden of taxation in a Britain it neither liked -nor understood.</p> - -<p>But to balance this gradual depression of one class there was the -expansion of another. The victory of the Labor Party in 1945 encouraged -the working class of the nation to seek a richer, fuller life. It -opened vistas of a new existence and greater opportunities. It created -confidence.</p> - -<p>Traveling to Cardiff in September 1945, I talked with a miner's wife, -a huge woman who spoke in the singsong accents of the mining valleys -of South Wales. She dandled a plump baby on her knee and talked of -what life would be like now. "My Dai's not going down the mine like -his dad," she told me. "Now that <i>we</i> have <i>our</i> government, he can be -anything he wants, do anything."</p> - -<p>British society, despite its fixed barriers between class and class, -has always enjoyed considerable mobility. In the past the country -gentry and the aristocracy had surrendered power to the merchants and -the industrialists. Now the urban working class that had served the -merchants and the industrialists believed it had wrested control from -its masters. Labor's election victory seemed to prove it.</p> - -<p>This breaking down of the old relationship between the classes was a -matter of deep concern to many, and their concern went deeper than -partisan political feeling. Repeatedly one was told that the worst -thing Labor had done was to create class feeling, to encourage class -antagonisms in a country that until then had never been affected by -them. This was only a half-truth. The class antagonism had been there, -all right, but the middle class now was belatedly the victim of the -bitterness that a hundred years of slum housing, poor food, and lack of -opportunity had created among some but not all of the working class. I -write "not all" because there were members of that class who were as -disturbed by the growth of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_111"></a>[Pg 111]</span> class antagonism as any retired colonel -in his club. They felt instinctively that the unity of Britain was -being sapped by the emergence of a powerful and militant socialist -group whose object was change. Most of them had voted for change. But -the British are a conservative people. They accept change within the -framework of familiar institutions. Extensive reconstruction may go on -behind the façade, but the façade must remain untouched.</p> - -<p>The hope and confidence born of Labor's victory, however, had a -long-term effect upon British society. It encouraged those who had -dreamed, like the miner's wife, of a better life for their children. -Ambitious mothers aimed higher than a few years of school and a factory -job for their sons. Young men who had won commissions during the war -decided to remain in the Army or the Navy or the Air Force now that the -old barriers were falling and the right accent and the right private -income did not matter so much as it once had.</p> - -<p>By 1950 the economic and social forces that were to create the Britain -of today were in full motion. Paradoxically, the British electorate was -moving slightly to the right.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_112"></a>[Pg 112]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="VII_A_Society_in_Motion">VII. <i>A Society in Motion</i></h2> -</div> - -<p>NEW CLASSES AND NEW HORIZONS</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>There are but two families in the world—have-much and have-little.</i></p> - -<p> -CERVANTES<br /> -</p></div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Society is constantly advancing in knowledge. The tail is now where -the head was some generations ago. But the head and the tail still -keep their distance.</i></p> - -<p> -THOMAS BABINGTON MACAULAY<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">Marie Lloyd</span>, the darling of the music halls, sang a song that contained -the deathless line: "A little of what you fancy does you good."</p> - -<p>In addition to their evangelism, their occasional ruthlessness, the -British have a streak of self-indulgence. This trait was encouraged -by the peculiar circumstances of the country after the Conservative -victory in the general election of 1951.</p> - -<p>It was not a smashing victory. The Conservatives came back to power -with 326 seats in the House of Commons as opposed to 295 for Labor and -6 for the Liberals. Yet it is doubtful that even<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_113"></a>[Pg 113]</span> with double their -majority the Tories would have wished to undo all the work in the -fields of nationalization and social welfare accomplished by the Labor -administrations of 1945 and 1950. This was not politically feasible -and, with Britain still in the toils of economic difficulties, it would -have been unwise to convulse the industrial structure. There was no -restoration after the revolution. The Socialists obviously had not -attained the goals outlined by Professor Laski, but they had started -the nation in that direction.</p> - -<p>If economic conditions had deteriorated, the new administration of -Winston Churchill might have been short-lived. But the world demand -for British products, especially such raw materials as rubber and tin -from Malaya, strengthened the economy. So did the gradual rise in -British production and the economic improvement in Europe which created -a larger market for British exports. After some uneasy months the -indices of economic health began to move upward. After twelve years of -military, political, and economic strain and anxiety the British were -ready for a little of what they fancied. Life around them looked good, -and they wanted to take advantage of it. There was a steady return of -confidence.</p> - -<p>British exports were rising. You could actually go down to the -butcher's and buy all the meat you wanted. The Tories really were -building all those houses they had promised to build. It was easier now -to buy a new car and say good-by to Old Faithful that had served since -1938 or earlier. Taxes were as high as ever, but the government said -they would be reduced. And if you had a little money, there was plenty -in the shops to spend it on.</p> - -<p>During the struggle with austerity after the war the British had been -surprisingly sensitive to foreign criticism of their apparent inability -to fight their way back to prosperity. Now here was prosperity or a -reasonably accurate facsimile of it. Those foreigners had been wrong.</p> - -<p>Presiding over their recrudescence of national confidence was the -familiar figure of Mr. Churchill. The Prime Minister might lack the -acute economic penetration of Sir Stafford Cripps and Clement Attlee's -social consciousness, but he was a world figure in a way<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_114"></a>[Pg 114]</span> that neither -Socialist could claim to be. When in May 1953 the best-known voice in -the English-speaking world proposed a conference at the summit with the -new masters of the Soviet Union, the British felt that their leader had -enforced their country's claim to a share in the leadership of the West.</p> - -<p>Neither the economic nor the political developments of 1951-3 altered -the raw facts of Britain's existence: the importance of denial at home -to expand sales abroad, the rising competition of Germany and Japan in -international markets. But these facts, which had been presented to -the people with monotonous regularity under the pedagogical leadership -of the Socialists, slipped out of sight. There was money to spend -and there were things to buy. And reading about the Queen and the -preparations for her Coronation was much more interesting than worrying -about the dollar balance.</p> - -<p>The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II was one of the most impressive -and romantic spectacles of modern times. It is quite possible that -this combination of national pride, religious symbolism, and perfectly -performed ceremony will never be duplicated. It is also possible that -from the standpoint of national psychology the Coronation did the -British a good deal of harm by leading some of them into romantic -daydreams at a time when it was essential that they should keep their -heads and face the ugly realities of their position.</p> - -<p>The young Queen pledging herself to serve her people, the evocation -of a glorious past, the survivals of ancient custom, the splendid -ceremony in London, and the other smaller ceremonies around the country -all exalted values that, although real and important in their place, -are only a part, and not the most important part, of a society that -must fight to retain economic and political power. People should be -reminded occasionally of their place in the historical procession and -of the existence of values other than those of the market place. But -such reminders are useful only when the people return to their normal -jobs with a new vigor and enthusiasm. In Britain the festivities of the -Coronation year seemed to drag on interminably.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_115"></a>[Pg 115]</span></p> - -<p>In the case of the Coronation the monarchy might be said to have -overfulfilled its function of arousing national patriotism. Whipped on -by the national newspapers and the BBC, patriotic fervor went beyond -the bounds of reason and led to an overoptimistic estimate of Britain's -position in the world. <i>We can make this the new Elizabethan age!</i> -chanted the newspapers.</p> - -<p>The idea that the subjects of Elizabeth II would emulate their -restless, adventurous, enterprising forebears of the reign of Elizabeth -I was a pleasing one. But it sounded odd in a nation of whose citizens -millions were devoted to security. In 1953, Coronation year, the age of -adventure and chivalry bowed resplendent and beautiful before a nation -in which the forces that had been working since 1940 were evoking -new classes and new ways of life. Neither had physical or mental -connections with the heroic past of aristocratic rural England or with -the old middle class.</p> - -<p>In preceding chapters we have encountered some of the forces that -changed British life: the leveling effect of the war, the Socialist -victory of 1945, the extension of nationalization of industry and of -the social services, the decline in the economic well-being of the old -middle class. Now in the mid-fifties, as a result of these forces and -two others—full employment and rising wages—a class new to modern -British history has emerged.</p> - -<p>Over the years between 1940 and 1955 there was very little unemployment -in Britain. The percentage of unemployment in 1940 was 6.4. Thereafter, -under the special circumstances of the war, the percentage fell until -in 1944 it was only 0.6. In the post-war years it rose slightly, but -the highest figure was 3 per cent in 1947.</p> - -<p>Simultaneously, wages rose. Using October 1938 for the base figure of -100, weekly average earnings in the principal industries rose to 176 in -1943, 229 in 1949, and 323 in 1954.</p> - -<p>The new class resulting from these changes and the earlier political -ones is composed mainly of the manual workers of British industry, -better housed, better paid, and more secure than ever before in their -history.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_116"></a>[Pg 116]</span></p> - -<p>Definition of the new class from either a geographic or an economic -point of view is difficult. In the 1930's there was an extensive -redistribution of the British working population. Industries, heavy and -light, began to spring up in places like Oxford and in the heart of -hitherto largely rural counties like Berkshire and Northamptonshire. -Tens of thousands of workers left their homes in slum areas or drab -working-class neighborhoods and moved to new jobs in new industries. In -the six years before the start of World War II more than 2,000,000 new -houses were built in Britain. This was important in the resettlement -of the industrial population. Equally important was the fact that over -500,000 of them were built and let by local government authorities who -in turn were helped by the central government.</p> - -<p>Subsidized housing had come to stay. In the decade since the war more -than 2,000,000 new houses have been built. Of these about 1,600,000 are -owned by local governments, which let them at low rents made possible -by government subsidies.</p> - -<p>Another development that benefited the new class was the advent of -the New Towns. These are self-contained communities outside the great -centers of population, complete with industries, schools, churches, -hospitals, and public services. They are intended to draw people from -the cities and conurbations, already too large, and establish them in -the countryside.</p> - -<p>The idea is old. Ebenezer Howard proposed it in 1898 and the proposal -was promptly attacked as the spawn of the devil and his socialist -friends. It was not until 1903 that Letchworth, the first of the New -Towns, was established. But World War II impressed on both Socialist -and Tory the wisdom of dispersing the industrial population, and in -1946 the House of Commons approved the New Towns Act. Today there are -fourteen New Towns in Britain, eleven of them in England. None is -complete, although workers are moving into them by the thousand.</p> - -<p>Harlow, which occupies ten square miles of Essex, is the most advanced -of the New Towns. Its present population is about 30,000. The target -is around 80,000. The cost of this vast resettle<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_117"></a>[Pg 117]</span>ment scheme is high. -Thus far it has been about £112,000,000, approximately $313,600,000. -Estimates indicate that more than double that sum will be needed to -complete the New Towns.</p> - -<p>The New Towns are by all odds one of the most interesting and -imaginative developments in modern Britain. Their social and political -consequences are almost incalculable. For the New Towns will continue -to grow and to house a new class whose political and economic power -will be a dominant factor in British society.</p> - -<p>They will not be completed overnight. In most cases the rate of growth -depends on the willingness of industry to build in the New Towns. -Exceptions are towns like Newton Aycliffe and Peterlee in the North of -England which have been built to house miners and their families. On -the whole, however, industrial support has been encouraging. With the -establishment of a new industry in a New Town more houses are built and -schools, churches, shops, and parks constructed.</p> - -<p>In the process hundreds of thousands of people are leaving the -working-class sections of the Clyde or South Wales or London, trading -tiny, old-fashioned flats or houses for well-designed houses. The -children are going to schools that are new and not over-crowded. They -are playing in fields rather than city streets.</p> - -<p>But the New Towns are not the only factor in the emergence of the -new class. In addition, there has been a steady increase in the -construction of low-rent housing estates by local authorities. -Incidentally, the people of the New Towns are sharply critical of -ignoramuses who confuse them with the people of the housing estates. -The housing estates are most often built on the fringes of big cities; -the tall—for Britain—apartment houses rising in Wimbledon, outside -London, are an example.</p> - -<p>Each housing estate, when completed, siphons off some hundreds or -thousands of Britain's slum population. In some cases, notably in east -London south of the Thames, new housing estates have been built in the -wastes left by German bombing.</p> - -<p>As a consequence of these efforts by both Labor and Conservative -governments to resettle the working class, Britain's slums<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_118"></a>[Pg 118]</span> are slowly -disappearing. Of course many square miles of them remain, and any -newspaper can publish photographs showing conditions of appalling filth -and squalor. Yet a great deal has been done to destroy the slums. There -remain, of course, the miles and miles of old working-class districts, -shabby and dull, but these are part of the landscape of any industrial -nation and it is probably impossible for any government, British or -American or German, to eliminate them entirely.</p> - -<p>The people of the New Towns, of the housing estates, and of the working -class generally enjoy full employment and higher wages than they have -ever dreamed of in their lives. Admittedly, prices have risen steadily -since the war. But rents have not. In Norwich, for instance, there were -in 1956 eight thousand council houses that rented at seven shillings, -or ninety-eight cents, a week. The manual worker in British industry -often pays only a nominal rent. The Welfare State has relieved him of -the burden of saving for the education of his children or for medical -care.</p> - -<p>A skilled worker in industry may have a basic wage of £12 ($33.60) or -£13 ($36.40) a week. Overtime work may raise the total to an average of -£15 ($42.00) for a week's work. A worker at a similar job in a similar -industry before the war was extremely fortunate if he made £4 a week.</p> - -<p>Under these circumstances the buying spree on which the British people -embarked in 1953 was inevitable. The new class had no need to save. -The state took care of its welfare, and taxes were taken at the source -under PAYE (Pay As You Earn). Workers had been fully employed for more -than a decade. Now at last the shops were full, and the hucksters of -installment buying, known in Britain as "buying on the Never-Never," -were at every door.</p> - -<p>One investigation of life in the New Towns revealed a typical weekly -budget for necessities. The family spent £5 10 <i>s.</i>, or about $15.40, -for food and household necessities. Rent and local taxes cost £2, or -$5.60. Lighting and heating cost 10 <i>s.</i>, or $1.40, while the same -amount went to clothes and repairs. Cigarettes took a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_119"></a>[Pg 119]</span> pound, or $2.80, -and the weekly installment on the television set was 15 <i>s.</i>, or $2.10.</p> - -<p>Few things demonstrate more strikingly the change in the status of -the British manual worker than his insistence on a television set as -a "necessity." Cars, radios, and, earlier, gramophones were available -only to the middle class or wealthy in pre-war Britain. For the first -time they are within the range of the manual worker.</p> - -<p>Few families budget the considerable sum spent each week on beer, -the obligatory trips to the local movie theater, or gambling either -through football pools or bets on horse races. But it is not unusual in -these new circumstances to find men who spend £2 or £3 a week for such -purposes. "Why the bloody hell not?" a worker in Liverpool asked. "I've -got me job and I don't 'ave to worry." The permanence of his job and -of high wages had become an accepted part of his life. He was one of -those who had not been moved by the Labor Party's dire forebodings of -unemployment and the dole under Conservative rule. To him these were as -shadowy and distant as the Corn Laws and Peterloo.</p> - -<p>The new class has money, security, and leisure: this is the promised -land. According to theories of some reformers, the worker, freed from -the oppression of poverty, should be expanding intellectually, worrying -about the future of Nigeria rather than the football fortunes of -Arsenal. My opinion is that the opposite is true, that with the coming -of the good life the worker has gradually shed his responsibilities -(some of these, in fact, have been stripped from him) and has lost the -old desperate desire to improve his lot and make himself and his class -the paramount political power in the land.</p> - -<p>There is no need to save, for the state provides for all eventualities -the worker can foresee. There is no compulsion to ensure that the -children get an education that will enable them to rise above the -circumstances of their parents. For the circumstances are so good, so -unimaginably higher than those into which the fathers<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_120"></a>[Pg 120]</span> and mothers of -this class were born, that there seems to be nothing further to be -sought. Why should a boy be given a good education—"stuffing 'is head -with a lot of nonsense 'e'll never use" was the way one father put -it—when he can make £10 a week after a few years in a factory? The -schools are there, they are free, but when the time comes the boy can -leave the school and take up a man's work in the factory.</p> - -<p>There seems to be a conviction among working-class mothers that a girl -needs a little more schooling to fit her for an office job. But the -men of the class, proud of the money they are earning and the "rights" -their unions have won, see no virtue in an office job or the higher -education that fits one for it.</p> - -<p>For the manual worker has found security, and that is what he is -interested in, that is what he has sought through the long, bitter -history of industrial disputes in Britain. He is not interested in and -he does not share the standards of the old middle class or even of the -artisan class that preceded him.</p> - -<p>Charles Curran, in a brilliant article on "The New Estate in Great -Britain" in the <i>Spectator</i>, put it this way: "One word sums up the New -Estate: the word 'security.' It is security in working-class terms, -maintained and enforced by working-class methods. The traditional -values of the middle and professional classes form no part of it; among -wage-earners these values are meaningless.</p> - -<p>"To the middle-class citizen, economic security is a goal to be reached -primarily by personal effort. It is a matter of thrift, self-help, -self-improvement, competitive striving. But the manual worker sees -it differently. To him, any betterment in his conditions of life is -essentially a collective process—something to be achieved not by -himself as an individual but in company with his fellows. He will -organize for it, vote for it, strike for it, always with them. It is -'Us' not 'I.' Eugene Debs, the American Socialist leader, put this -attitude into one sentence when he said, 'I don't want to rise from the -ranks; I want to rise with them.'"</p> - -<p>In this psychological situation it is ludicrous to appeal for New -Elizabethans among the men and women of the new class. For<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_121"></a>[Pg 121]</span> they have -no great admiration for individual enterprise, for risk or sacrifice. -Among the many men I have talked to in the New Towns, I never met -one who was interested in saving enough money to buy his own small -business, to strike out for himself. The ideal seemed to be a community -of equals protected from economic dangers by full employment and high -wages, politically lethargic, unstirred by Socialist or Tory. Everyone -earned about the same amount of money, spent it on the same things, and -appeared to think and talk alike.</p> - -<p>Yet theirs is a nation that desperately needs the imaginative, -inventive mind if it is to overcome its economic difficulties.</p> - -<p>The paramount emphasis on security found among manual workers may -be regrettable. But in view of Britain's past it is natural and -understandable. These, after all, are the descendants of farm laborers -who worked twelve hours a day and lived in hovels. The grandfathers and -grandmothers of the young people in the New Towns knew the dank, dirty -poverty of the slums of London and Liverpool. There must be among the -miners at Peterlee men and women whose female ancestors dragged coal -carts through mine tunnels on their hands and knees.</p> - -<p>The new class begins with a strong bias in favor of the Labor Party. -It is never allowed to forget the inhumanities of the past or the long -struggle of the unions against entrenched capital. It is reminded at -every election that all it has today is a result of the efforts of -the Labor Party. This is not true, but we are talking about politics. -Finally, in every new housing development or New Town there must be an -aging group who remember with fierce-eyed resentment the long periods -of unemployment and the marginal existence that were the lot of many -working-class families a quarter of a century ago.</p> - -<p>The Welsh, in particular, have never forgotten. And hundreds of -thousands of bitter, talkative, excitable Welsh workers have left South -Wales in the last twenty years to work in other parts of Britain, -carrying with them their hatred of the Tories and their zeal for "the -movement." When Aneurin Bevan, that most Welsh<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_122"></a>[Pg 122]</span> of Welshmen, describes -the Tories as lower than vermin or genially compares them with the -Gadarene swine, he is expressing a sentiment strongly held by a -considerable percentage of his fellow countrymen.</p> - -<p>The geographical redistribution of the working class altered the -political map of Britain. Housing estates and New Towns introduced -solid blocs of Labor votes into traditionally Tory constituencies. This -was a factor in the Socialist victory of 1945 and it is still a factor -today. The constituency of Melton, for instance, was long considered a -safe Liberal seat. Then it became equally safe for the Conservatives. -But the advent of a housing development and several thousand new votes -made this rural constituency insecure. The influx of a new type of -voter is one of the main reasons why this must now be considered a -marginal constituency by the Tories.</p> - -<p>But the effect of the geographical redistribution is being matched and -balanced in many constituencies by the effect of their new economic -status upon the voters of the working class. They now have something -to conserve: jobs, good wages, pleasant homes. This does not mean an -immediate conversion to Conservatism. Among many, particularly the -older age groups, the memories of the past are still strong. But the -achievement of a new economic status has resulted in a lessening of the -fervor and energy for the Socialist cause. A class that puts security -above everything else is not likely to be won by a Labor platform that -endorses more nationalization and the ensuing upheaval in the British -economy. Its younger members, many of whom have never been jobless, are -unimpressed by dire prophecies of the return of the bad old days under -Tory rule because they themselves have never experienced such a period.</p> - -<p>Nor should we forget that in each general election the Conservative -Party wins a substantial share of the working-class vote. Even in -the catastrophe of 1945 the Conservatives estimate they won between -4,000,000 and 4,500,000 votes among manual workers. In 1951 about -6,000,000 electors of this group voted Tory.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_123"></a>[Pg 123]</span> Of course the vote for -Labor rose too: it is estimated that in the general election of that -year 52 per cent of the working class voted for Labor. But Labor was -defeated by the coalition of middle-class and working-class votes for -the Tories.</p> - -<p>Nonetheless, the Tories continue to gain in the areas where the new -working class has reached a new economic status. In 1945 the Labor -Party won Chislehurst in Kent, normally a safe Conservative seat. The -influx of working-class voters was the principal cause. Ten years later -Chislehurst was safely back on the Conservative side.</p> - -<p>The Conservative Party is thus faced with a difficult question. Like -all major parties, it is a coalition of various economic and social -interests. In the last decade a new interest, that of the working -class, has become vital to the party. But the Conservative government's -efforts to meet the wishes of that group, particularly its insistence -on the continuation of the Welfare State, clashes directly with the -interests of the old middle class, which has suffered a loss of social -prestige, economic standing, and political influence at the hands of -the working class.</p> - -<p>The rebellion among Conservative voters of the middle class against -the government's policies, reflected in their refusal to vote in -by-elections, cannot go unchecked without damaging the Conservatives. -That this is fully realized by the party leaders was shown by the -warnings they gave the Tories against seduction by political groups of -the extreme right.</p> - -<p>What kind of people are the new working class? You will not find them -portrayed in the novels of Angela Thirkell or, indeed, any other -English novelist popular in America. But veterans of World War II may -recognize them as the slightly older brothers of the British soldier -they knew in Africa, Italy, and France.</p> - -<p>They are not at all reserved; reserve is the province of the -upper-middle-class Briton. They are friendly, incurious, and polite. -For the first time in history they are satisfied with themselves and -with their lot.</p> - -<p>I mention this as a curiosity. When I first went to England to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_124"></a>[Pg 124]</span> work -before the war I was struck by the powerful interest shown in the -United States. An American in a working-class pub was bombarded by -queries about the organization of the unions, John L. Lewis, the -absence of a labor party in the United States politics, the techniques -of mass production in industry. The young men were eager to know and -anxious to improve.</p> - -<p>Today one encounters the same politeness but less interest. After the -preliminary and obligatory question about the "Yank corporal" named -Jackson who lives in Chicago and do you know him, the talk is likely to -trail off into inconsequentials. The English, as opposed to the Scots, -Welsh, and Irish, are a people notably difficult to arouse and, equally -important, difficult to quiet once they are aroused. But in recent -years the pubs have been quiet. The new working class has what it and -its predecessors wanted. It is not excited either by the prospect of -Tory rule or by the infiltration of the British Communists into the -union structure.</p> - -<p>It would be aroused, however, by any policy that appeared to endanger -its new position. That is certain. And consequently both major parties -will be circumspect in their approach to the new class.</p> - -<p>Socially, the new class is modern. Increasingly it is making use of -new techniques in living which were out of the economic range of its -fathers and mothers. The old family life built around the kitchen and -the pot of tea on the stove has been replaced by one built around the -television set.</p> - -<p>For the first time in their lives the young people of the New Towns -and the housing estates have enough room in their homes to plan and -build. The three-piece bedroom suite is as important as the television -set as an indication of economic status. The "do it yourself" craze -that swept the United States did not "catch on" among the working class -in Britain for the simple reason that its members had always done it -themselves. A great deal of the painting and decoration and some of the -furniture-making is done by the man of the house in his spare time.</p> - -<p>The class is not notably religious. The Catholics and the Methodists -support their churches, but the response to other faiths<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_125"></a>[Pg 125]</span> is not -ardent. The British are not "a pagan people," as some critics have -charged, but there certainly is little enthusiasm for conventional -religious forms.</p> - -<p>The working class is a definable class. Thus it takes its place in the -graduated ranks of British society. Within the class, however, there -is very little snobbery. I have mentioned one instance: the resentment -of the dwellers in the New Towns when they are classed with the people -of the housing estates. But in a community in which all the men work -in the same or similar factories and in which everyone knows almost to -the penny what everyone else makes, pretense of economic superiority is -difficult.</p> - -<p>Here is the new British workingman. He moved to a New Town or a housing -estate from a slum or near-slum. If he is in his late thirties or -forties, he fought in the war and his wife knows more about the effect -of high explosives, flying bombs, and rockets than most generals. He -is living in what is to him comparative luxury: a living room, a clean -and, by British standards, modern kitchen, a bedroom for the children, -a modern bath and toilet. He can walk or cycle to his work, and if the -weather is fine, he comes home for lunch. In the evening there is "the -telly" or the football-pool form to be filled out or the new desk he -is making for the children's room. Some two or three times a week he -drops in at the "local," the neighborhood pub or bar, for a few drinks -with friends from the factory. Even here his habits are changing. -The actually potent "mild and bitter" or "old and mild" that was his -father's tipple has been replaced by light ale—"nasty gassy stuff" the -old-fashioned barmaids report.</p> - -<p>It is a quiet life but to our subject a satisfactory one. He reads the -<i>Daily Mirror</i> rather than the <i>Daily Herald</i>, which was his father's -Bible, but he is only occasionally aroused by international problems. -He did get excited about the idea of arming "those bloody Germans," but -when the leaders of both the Conservative and Labor parties accepted -the necessity he went along with German rearmament. But he was never -particularly happy about it. In general, however, he is not interested -in world affairs. There are<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_126"></a>[Pg 126]</span> one or two fellows at "the works," he -will tell you, who get excited about China or Suez or Cyprus. Here it -should be noted that he is more nationalist than internationalist. He -doesn't like it when British soldiers are killed by the bombs of Greek -Cypriotes, chiefly because the Army is no longer a professional force -but one composed largely of conscripts of National Service. Young Tom -from down the street, a nice lad, has gone out there with the Green -Howards.</p> - -<p>There he is: content, complete, complacent. His contacts with the rest -of the world, British or foreign, are limited, and this is especially -true of his contacts with the old middle class.</p> - -<p>The old middle class itself is intensely interested in this new kind -of working class. Partly this is true because the new class is blamed -for many of the reverses that have fallen upon the middle class. Partly -it is because of political spite. Partly it is jealousy. Whatever the -dominant reason, the feeling is there, and the middle class, harking -back to the first Socialist boasts in 1945 about remaking bourgeois -Britain, will tell you: "They started it."</p> - -<p>This class (here we are talking about the professional men, civil -servants, Army, Navy, and Air Force officers, the higher but not the -highest ranks of business and industry, the clergy of the Church of -England, and the retired pensioners of these groups) fights hard to -resist the uniformity that the last fifteen years have imposed upon it. -It finds itself unable to organize to win higher salaries, and it knows -that the taxation of the last decade has closed the gap between it and -the new class of industrial workers. Finally, its more intelligent -members are aware that it too is being challenged from within—that -there is arising in its ranks a new group which from the economic -standpoint can claim to be middle class but which has very little in -common now, socially or politically, with the old middle class. Yet, -as both groups claim a certain superiority over the class of manual -workers, it is safe to predict that the two groups will unite and -make common cause in defense of their standards. Interestingly, this -is already happening in the field of education, where the sons of the -physicists, engineers, and sci<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_127"></a>[Pg 127]</span>entists who are among the leaders of the -new middle class are going to the public schools that were one of the -solid foundations of the old middle class.</p> - -<p>Such schools, incidentally, are one of the bones of contention between -the political leaders of the Labor Party, which represents the majority -of the working class, and the old middle class. This class has pressed -the Exchequer for a tax allowance for public schools—i.e., private -education. The Socialists replied that such an allowance would be a -private subsidy to a system that spreads inequality. To this the Tories -of the old middle class retorted that part of the British freedom was -the right of the parent to decide how and where his child was to be -educated. They added a reminder that if the new working class were to -save a bit on installment payments for television sets and the football -pools, it too could send its sons to public schools. The answer, of -course, is that the new working class cares little for schools, public -or national.</p> - -<p>The change in the composition of the middle class brought about -by the introduction of new members reflects a change in Britain's -industrial life and, to some extent, her position in the world. The -administrators, managers, and technicians of the new industries such -as plastics and electronics, the leaders in the newspaper, television, -radio, and movie industries are becoming as important as the lawyers, -judges, general officers, retired pro-consuls who once led the class. -Just below these leaders is a steadily increasing group of newcomers -to the class who have worked their way out of the working class since -the war. Industrial designers and chemists, buyers, advertising men, -production engineers—all these have come to the top.</p> - -<p>This group reflects modern Britain and her problems. The colonial -governor is less important to it than the expert on foreign markets. -The scientist is infinitely more necessary to the country's progress -than the soldier.</p> - -<p>There is an important difference in income between the new entries into -the middle class and the professional men who formed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_128"></a>[Pg 128]</span> its backbone in -the past. On the whole, the incomes of the new group are a good deal -higher. It is engaged, for the most part, in industries, businesses, or -quasi-public organizations that are expanding. Moreover, many of its -members augment their incomes with expense accounts.</p> - -<p>But these differences in types of activity and in income are only the -beginning of the differences between the two segments of the middle -class.</p> - -<p>Many members of the new group have just arrived, pushed to the top by -the necessities of war or of Britain's long economic struggle. The -percentage of public-school graduates is lower than in the established -middle class. Attention to that class's recognized totems is much -less. The new group is less concerned with the Church of England, the -Army and the Navy—the Air Force and the production of new weapons -are, however, its special province—the Foreign Office and active -politics. These it has left largely to the established middle class, -and frequently the interests of the two groups clash. For example, the -conflict within government between the traditionalist view of the Navy -as vital to Britain's defense and the view that all that matters is the -big bomber today and the intercontinental ballistic missile tomorrow is -essentially a clash between two groups in the same class.</p> - -<p>The new group is not primarily managerial, although managers make up a -considerable percentage of its total. It includes a great many creative -workers, architects, scientists and engineers, and a surprisingly high -percentage of men who have risen without the aid of the Old School Tie.</p> - -<p>The group has had less education and less leisure than the old middle -class, and, consequently, its approach to culture is different. Its -interest in the arts is limited, its taste in literature tends toward -Nevil Shute rather than Thackeray. But it has a furious curiosity about -Britain and the world: it devours magazine articles and books. Like -the new working class, it has reached income levels that seemed out of -sight fifteen years ago, but, unlike the new working class, it is not -content to rest in its present position. For<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_129"></a>[Pg 129]</span> it knows enough of the -world and the country to doubt that the present security is enough.</p> - -<p>The middle class in Britain over the centuries has developed a -marvelous capacity for altering while maintaining roughly the same -façade. This process is going on now. The sons of the new group within -the middle class are going off to public schools and Oxford and -Cambridge rather than to state schools and the red brick provincial -universities that trained their fathers. But because this group has an -abiding interest in technical education, its members are anxious for -the spread of such education in the old classical schools.</p> - -<p>It should be noted that the trend toward the public schools and the -great universities is not due entirely to snobbery. As an industrial -engineer told me, "That's still the best education in the country, -and my son's going to have it." He himself was the product of a state -school and a provincial university. Obviously he enjoyed talking about -his boy's public school.</p> - -<p>Consequently, the two groups within the middle class are mixing slowly. -But the old middle class is on the defensive; its standards are not -those of the new group, and with the continued rise of the new group -this defensiveness probably will remain. As Britain's world political -and military responsibilities decline, the men and women charged -with overseeing her new position as an exporting nation—in which -salesmanship and industrial techniques are paramount—will find their -importance increasing.</p> - -<p>Once again we find a new group that, like the new kind of working -class, has very little to do with Merrie England. Its roots are less -deep. It is not intimately concerned with the institutions that the old -middle class served. In its outlook toward the world it is much more -realistic and modern. Yet it is gradually assuming the forms of the old -middle class—the schools, the regiments, the clubs. These institutions -inevitably will change as a result of the admission of the new group. -However, if the outward form remains unchanged, the British will be -content.</p> - -<p>Politically the new group within the middle class began its<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_130"></a>[Pg 130]</span> adult -life well to the left of center. In the ten years since the war it -has gradually shifted to the right. Young Conservative ministers like -Iain Macleod and Reginald Maudling represent the ideas of the group, -although they themselves are not of it. In general, the group admires -tidy planning and crisp execution in government. Its shift away from -Socialism probably began when many of its members realized that the -execution of Labor's economic plans left a good deal to be desired and -that some of the party's radicals were cheerfully advocating other -plans—the further extension of nationalization, for instance—that -might wreck an already delicately balanced economy. But the new -group's support of the Conservative Party is far removed from the -bred-in-the-bone, true-blue Conservatism of the old middle class. It -is on the right at the moment because the Tories offer the greatest -opportunity to the activities it represents.</p> - -<p>The old middle class, based mainly on the professions and government -service, is thus under pressure from the new middle class and from the -new working class. Its importance in British society is diminishing -because the former has a closer connection with what is immediately -important to Britain's survival and because the latter will no longer -accept leadership by the old middle class. It is important to note, -however, that the ties between the new middle class and the new -working class are more substantial. Many of the new middle class have -risen from the urban working class in a generation. In regard to the -technical aspects of industry, the two groups speak the same language.</p> - -<p>The influence retained by the old middle class should not be -underestimated, however. Especially in the countryside the lawyer, -the vicar, the retired officer who is the local Justice of the -Peace continue to wield considerable authority. And in clinging to -traditional forms through two wars and the long night of austerity, the -middle class has demonstrated its essential toughness.</p> - -<p>The old middle class still reads <i>The Times</i> of London, that great -newspaper, although you are liable to be informed in country -drawing-rooms that <i>The Times</i> is "a bit Bolshie nowadays."</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_131"></a>[Pg 131]</span></p> - -<p>The forms and felicities of British life are encouraged and supported -by the old middle class. The Church of England, the local Conservative -Party fete, the gymkhana, the voluntary social services, the Old -Comrades Associations of regiments owe their continued life to -unstinting aid from the men and women of this class. It has had its -periods of blindness (Munich was one), but it has never doubted where -duty lay. When the war began in 1939—or, as its members would say, -"when the balloon went up"—it sent away its sons and daughters and -settled down to man the Home Guard and the civil-defense services. It -suffered bombing and austerity, but it made certain that when the boys -and girls came home there was a dance at the yacht club—some Polish -sailors lived there during the war, and everyone pitched in to put it -back in shape—and all the food the rationing would allow.</p> - -<p>The positive characteristics of this class are impressive: its -courage, its desire that each generation have a wider education and -a greater opportunity, its cool calmness in the face of danger, its -willingness to accept as a duty the responsibility for the lives of -untaught millions living in famine and poverty and to labor for their -welfare, its acceptance of the conviction of duty well done as the -suitable reward for a lifetime of work. To me these seem to outweigh -the pettiness, the snobbery, the overbearing self-confidence. No nation -can do without such positive characteristics, and it will be a sorry -day for Britain if the change in the middle class eliminates their -influence on the country.</p> - -<p>We Americans are fond of thinking of Britain as a settled, caste-ridden -society. But at least two groups, the new middle class and the -resettled working class, are on the move or have just moved into a new -status, politically, economically, and socially. Moreover, one large -class, the middle class, is in the process of changing. British society -is much more mobile than it appears from the outside because of the -Britons' desire to retain traditional forms while the substance changes.</p> - -<p>As these changes take place, the value of many old indications of class -change also. Accent remains one of the easiest meth<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_132"></a>[Pg 132]</span>ods for placing -a Briton, but it is no longer an infallible guide. The effect of the -BBC upon British speech has been considerable, and today the clerk in -an obscure provincial shop may talk, if not in the accents of Eton, -at least in a pleasant voice that reveals only a trace of provincial -accent. The disappearance of old robust provincial accents would be a -loss. And an acute ear in London can still, like Shaw's Professor Henry -Higgins, place a Londoner in Wimbledon or Barnes or Stepney. It is the -conviction of many Socialists that equality will never reign in Britain -until there is a universal accent.</p> - -<p>Clothes, too, are a much more accurate indication of class in Britain -than in the United States. The derby or bowler is the almost universal -headgear of the upper-class male in the city, with the cap for the -country. The workingman affects a soft hat, sometimes a Homburg and -often a cloth cap. The mass production of clothing came later in -Britain than in the United States, but today the miner can be as warmly -clothed as the banker. The difference lies in the styling given the -banker's clothes by his London tailor. Then, too, the banker may be -far more negligent in his dress than the miner: it is a mistake, if -not a crime, in Britain for a member of the upper class to be too well -dressed.</p> - -<p>Nancy Mitford and Professor Alan Ross have made Americans aware of the -infinite variations of U (upper-class) and Non-U (non-upper-class) -phraseology in Britain, but many of the distinctions so carefully -drawn are changing. A young lady of my acquaintance habitually uses -"serviette" instead of "napkin," a crime Miss Mitford ranks just -below arson and beating an old woman with a stick. As she goes to an -expensive and very U school, the young lady was queried about her -choice of words. No one, she reported, had ever heard of Miss Mitford -at her school, and what did it matter anyhow?</p> - -<p>There has been no mention of the aristocracy in this long chapter, -which will probably offend readers whose views on Britain have been -formed by the Merrie England school of writing. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_133"></a>[Pg 133]</span> fact is that the -aristocracy does not rate a great deal of space in a book dealing with -modern Britain.</p> - -<p>The real aristocracy of Britain was composed of the great landowning -families whose power began to decline with the rise, at the start -of the nineteenth century, of the great industrial and commercial -families. The remaining British servants of the old school—the best -judges extant of who is and who is not an aristocrat—are inclined -to look down their noses at the pretensions of Johnny-come-latelies -who earned their titles by services, usually financial, to political -parties, or by the proprietorship of chain stores. To them the people -who count are the old families and the old names—Derby, Norfolk, -Salisbury.</p> - -<p>Inheritance taxes, the import of foreign foodstuffs, reckless spending -all contributed to the reduction of the aristocracy's position. One -reason why the institution of monarchy is supported by most and -tolerated by some Socialists is that the Crown does not command the -immediate allegiance of a large, influential, and moneyed aristocracy. -There is no court party between the Crown and the people. The rulers -of Britain have become progressively more popular with the common man -as the influence of the real aristocracy declined. Of course, that -influence has been exerted in a different way. Two recent Conservative -Prime Ministers have been of aristocratic birth. Sir Winston Churchill -was born the grandson of a duke; he was offered a dukedom on his -retirement in 1955 and characteristically refused it. Sir Anthony Eden -comes of an aristocratic North Country family one of whose members was -a colonial governor in Maryland. They headed a Conservative Party that -was middle class rather than aristocratic.</p> - -<p>A few members of the old aristocracy strive to continue life as their -fathers and grandfathers knew it, but they fight a losing battle. The -opening of the great country houses to the public, the most desperate -expedients to cut down spending so that the heir can enter the Guards -and the daughter enjoy a proper introduction to London society cannot -compensate for the taxation and for the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_134"></a>[Pg 134]</span> changes in the character of -British society and in the world.</p> - -<p>The aristocracy, the real aristocracy, makes its presence felt in -modern Britain only when such men as Lord Salisbury or Lord Mountbatten -leave the peaceful countryside and contend with the active body of -Britons.</p> - -<p>The moment of a significant decline in the aristocracy's position has -seen a gallant defense of it in literature. Both Miss Mitford and -Evelyn Waugh have expounded its virtues of courage and responsibility -in war. The "damn your eyes, follow me, I'm going to do what's right" -idea always appeals powerfully to those who reject thinking for -themselves. It is easy for an author to poke fun at the sober civil -servant or the earnest trade-unionist dropping his <i>h</i>'s, but in modern -Britain they are far more important than Lord Fortinbras.</p> - -<p>For, as we have seen, this is a society in the throes of change. New -groups are rising to the top just as, and frequently because, Britain's -survival demands new habits, new enterprises. Individual members of -the declining classes who adapt themselves to the changing times will -survive. Lord Salisbury, bearer of an ancient name, presides over -Britain's entry into the age of nuclear fission. But those who cannot -adapt will slowly disappear.</p> - -<p>In all this change there is strength. Britain's hope for the future -lies in her ability, proven in the past, to change to meet new -conditions. The nation that has emerged since 1945 is the product of -greater changes than Britain has ever known. There are weak spots—the -lack of individual enterprise on the part of the working class is -certainly one. But the changes so bitterly resented by many are the -best reason for optimism concerning Britain's destiny in this century's -struggle with totalitarian powers.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_135"></a>[Pg 135]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="VIII_The_British_and_the_World">VIII. <i>The British and the World</i></h2> -</div> -<div class="blockquot"> -<p> -<i>The tumult and the shouting dies;</i><br /> -<i>The Captains and the Kings depart.</i> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">RUDYARD KIPLING</span><br /> -</p> - - - -<p><i>We have no eternal allies and no perpetual enemies; our interests are -eternal, and those interests it is our duty to follow.</i></p> - -<p> -LORD PALMERSTON<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">More than</span> any other Western European nation, Britain has been -involved in mankind. Geography placed these islands on one of the -main routes between the Old World and the New. Ambition, avarice, and -absent-mindedness combined to create the greatest of modern empires. -Knaves and heroes, sinners and saints, fools and wise men took the -blunt Saxon tongue across the snarling seas and into silent jungles. -Now the Empire nears its end. But the drain of two world wars and the -changes in the world make it more vital than ever to Britain that she -remain a leader of international intercourse—a trader, a diplomat, a -financial clearing-house for much of the world.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_136"></a>[Pg 136]</span></p> - -<p>In discussing Britain's relations and attitudes toward other peoples, -the whole field of international relations and diplomacy, we enter an -area in which the British feel they are experts. This is a view hotly -opposed by the piously patriotic operatives of the U.S. Department -of State, but perhaps there is something behind the complacent -British assumption. It is difficult otherwise to understand how this -comparatively small island people built a world empire and held it -despite the attempts of some of the greatest conquerors of modern times -to seize it.</p> - -<p>One of the most interesting contrasts in British life is that between -the nation's world-wide interests and responsibilities and the strong -strain of xenophobia in the national character. "Niggers begin at -Calais" is only one expression of the Englishman's dislike for all -foreigners, Froggies, Eyeties, Boches, and Russkis. I remember a slight -shock at hearing one of the most eminent of British statesmen ask -what "the Froggies" were up to. Similarly, the British working class, -supposedly friendly to its comrades in other lands, has been remarkably -cool toward inclusion of Polish or Hungarian refugees in its ranks.</p> - -<p>There is a strong strain of isolationism in Britain. Usually dormant, -it flowered late in 1956 after condemnation of the United Kingdom by -the United States and other members of the United Nations. In periods -of crisis the British have often been alone. In 1940 the surrender of -France left the British without a major European ally. Physically this -was a grievous blow. Psychologically it rallied the people. In the -past there has been considerable agitation in British politics against -imperialism. Overseas investment and new export markets in overseas -colonies made imperialism important. But the "Little Englanders" -persist. Their heir is the man who wants the British government to get -out of the United Nations, NATO, SEATO, and the rest, and concentrate -on Britain.</p> - -<p>Britain's relations with the rest of the world are most important to -us in the United States in six major areas: the Soviet Union and the -Communist satellites in Eastern Europe; Communist China;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_137"></a>[Pg 137]</span> Western -Europe; the Middle East; and, lastly and most important, the United -States.</p> - -<p>Few aspects of Britain's position in the world are as little understood -in the United States as relations between the Commonwealth and the -mother country. This is a failing that irritates the British. "Do you -know what they asked me in Chicago?" a British author said. "They asked -me why we didn't stop taxing the Canadians to buy jewels for the Queen!"</p> - -<p>Ignorance is not confined to the United States. One British diplomat -who had dealt with Russian diplomats and officials for years reported -that it was not until the summit conference at Geneva in the summer of -1955 that the Russians showed any glimmering of understanding of what -the Commonwealth was and how it worked.</p> - -<p>The Commonwealth evolved from the Empire. Its original members were -the older colonies settled by Britons and Europeans: Australia, New -Zealand, Canada, and South Africa. Its newer members are Asian or -African peoples whose countries were parts of the Empire and are -now sovereign within the Commonwealth; these include India, Ceylon, -Pakistan, and Ghana. It is a matter of fact that in the years since -1945, while the supposedly anti-imperialist Russians have been -establishing the rule of the red star over 100,000,000 souls, the -British have created out of their Empire sovereign states with -populations of over 500,000,000.</p> - -<p>The Commonwealth is not "run" by anyone. But Britain, as the mother -country, as the source of political forms and constitutional ideas, -financial support and industrial exports, can claim to be the first -among equals. The ties that bind the members of the Commonwealth to -Britain vary in strength. And the ties between such Commonwealth -members as South Africa and India are virtually nonexistent. The common -purpose of preserving peace and the necessity of discussing common -problems bring the leaders of the Commonwealth together in London -periodically for conferences.</p> - -<p>Despite the absence of a central ruling power, the system<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_138"></a>[Pg 138]</span> works fairly -well. In Britain and among the older members of the Commonwealth there -is a strong loyalty, almost a reverence, for the idea. The political -orators who describe the Commonwealth as "a great force for peace and -civilization" are speaking to a responsive audience. Because there is -no central power, Americans are prone to doubt the strength of the ties -that connect the nations. But it may be that today the very absence of -such a power strengthens the Commonwealth.</p> - -<p>Strong economic links exist between the United Kingdom and the members -of the Commonwealth. As a basis there is the sterling area, in which -all the Commonwealth countries except Canada are joined with Burma, -Iceland, Iraq, the British Protected States in the Persian Gulf, the -Irish Republic, Jordan, and Libya. These countries contain one quarter -of the world's population and do one quarter of its trade.</p> - -<p>Membership in the sterling area or sterling bloc, as it is sometimes -called, means that the greater part of the overseas trade of member -countries is financed in sterling. The members maintain their foreign -reserves largely in the form of sterling and maintain a fixed -relationship between their own currencies and sterling. For the most -part, they sell their earnings in foreign currency to the United -Kingdom Exchange Equalization Account for sterling, and they can -purchase for sterling such foreign currency as they need. The members -also sell gold in the London market for sterling, and the United -Kingdom's purchases of gold are held in the Exchange Equalization -Account. The gold and dollars in this account constitute the central -gold and dollar reserves of the sterling area.</p> - -<p>The sterling area thus is an important means of maintaining Britain's -position as the banker of the Commonwealth and as the center of -financial transactions. It is also one of the chief markets for -British exports, taking roughly half of Britain's export total. Of -the Commonwealth countries, Australia is by far the biggest buyer. In -1955 Australia bought from Britain goods valued at £286,400,000, or -about $801,920,000—just under 10 per cent of Britain's<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_139"></a>[Pg 139]</span> total export -trade. Four of the five next biggest buyers of British goods were -also Commonwealth nations: South Africa, third; Canada, fourth; New -Zealand, fifth; India, sixth. The United States was the second-largest -purchaser, taking 6.6 per cent of Britain's total exports.</p> - -<p>Britain, of course, buys extensively within the Commonwealth. In -the same year she imported goods valued at £1,888,200,000, or about -$5,286,960,000, from the Commonwealth and the Irish Republic. This -amounted to over half of Britain's total imports.</p> - -<p>There are numerous irritations and imperfections in the conduct of this -great world trading concern. The Australians and New Zealanders, for -instance, complain often that British capital shies from investment in -their countries.</p> - -<p>The huge British investments for the development of countries overseas -were among the most damaging losses in two world wars. As the nation -slowly recovered its economic health in the post-war years, overseas -investment was encouraged by successive governments. Many Commonwealth -officials say that, although private borrowing for development has been -encouraged, much more could be done.</p> - -<p>The Capital Issues Committee, an independent group of seven men -experienced in finance, commerce, and industry, approved in 1953 to -applications for the investment of £40,000,000, or about $112,000,000, -for Commonwealth development. The next year the figure rose to -£48,000,000, or about $134,000,000. Compare this with the annual -net investment overseas of about $504,000,000 in the years 1951-3. -Evidently the Australians and New Zealanders have cause for complaint.</p> - -<p>In contrast to commercial ties that transform credit in London into new -factories in western Australia, there is the emotional tie mentioned -earlier. The Crown's mysterious power to draw peoples as dissimilar as -the Australian cattleman and the Brighton clerk into a community of -patriotic loyalty cannot be denied. Whether in the next decade or so -the same sort of connection can be established<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_140"></a>[Pg 140]</span> between the Crown and -such sensitive newer members of the Commonwealth as India and Ceylon is -one of the most delicate questions facing British statecraft.</p> - -<p>A host of other institutions—some official, others the work of private -individuals captured by the Commonwealth conception—strive to keep -the relations between Britain and the Commonwealth countries happy and -firm. In such dissimilar fields as the theater, literature, and sport -there is much more contact among the countries of the Commonwealth and -Empire than Americans realize. A British rugby football team tours -Australia or South Africa, a West Indian cricket team visits Britain. -British theatrical companies still make the long but financially -rewarding trip to play in Australia and New Zealand. British authors -tirelessly roam the provinces of Canada or India, discoursing at length -upon the merits of the mother tongue and its literature.</p> - -<p>Many young Conservative Members of Parliament are convinced that the -Commonwealth is the great twentieth-century instrument for maintaining -and extending British prestige. They see it expanded from its present -form to include the Scandinavian countries and others in a world -confederation that will be not <i>a</i> third force in the world but <i>the</i> -third force. They do not, however, discount the problems that plague -the Commonwealth now.</p> - -<p>An economic problem is the filtration of American capital into the -Commonwealth. The British recognize the enormous potential of American -overseas investment, and they wonder what would happen to their -position in a Commonwealth country where the United States invested -heavily and purchased products with a free hand. The knowledge that the -United States could, if it wished, literally buy out the Commonwealth -is a patriotic incentive for greater British investment.</p> - -<p>Two political problems are South Africa and Ceylon.</p> - -<p>The National Party in South Africa is moving toward the establishment -of a republic and the progressive weakening of political and economic -ties with Britain. Complete independence of the Crown and the -Commonwealth probably is the ultimate South<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_141"></a>[Pg 141]</span> African aim. This would be -a grievous blow to the strength, both economic and political, of the -Commonwealth.</p> - -<p>Ceylon has shown signs of moving in the same direction. One of the -first actions of the government of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, the leader of -the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, was to ask the British to leave the great -naval base at Trincomalee. This was a severe shock to the British and a -damaging blow to the position of the Western world in the Indian Ocean. -At the subsequent Commonwealth Conference an agreement that allowed the -British to remain temporarily was negotiated. But the restlessness of -Ceylon within the Commonwealth and the desire of many of its leading -politicians to divest themselves of all connections, cultural as well -as political, with the British are a bad omen for the future.</p> - -<p>The British attitude toward the Commonwealth and Empire is a curious -mixture of indifference and interest, snobbery and friendship, -ignorance and knowledge. But the general approach has improved greatly -since before the war. The British know they need their friends and -markets overseas, and the old brusque approach to Commonwealth and -Empire problems has changed.</p> - -<p>So has the social attitude. Not long before the war an elderly -and aristocratic lady told me she always "considered Americans as -colonials." She thought she had paid us a compliment. Today such a -remark would not be made.</p> - -<p>The idea of a world-wide Commonwealth is imaginative and attractive. -But the efforts to sell it to the people of Britain, with the exception -of the almost daily exhortations of Lord Beaverbrook's newspapers, are -depressingly feeble. The English Speaking Union and other organizations -are devoted to the cause of strengthening Commonwealth relations, but -such organizations usually preach to the converted. The great mass of -public opinion has yet to be stirred. The British of all classes are -much more likely to be moved by events in France than by events in -Canada or Nigeria.</p> - -<p>"They certainly have a different idea of dealing with the Russians -here," said the young wife of an American diplomat in 1954. "Why, they -have track meets with Russians running in them, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_142"></a>[Pg 142]</span> they talk about -how they're going to get the Russians to agree to this or that. Folks -at home think all the Russians have horns and tails."</p> - -<p>She was describing the British ability to live with a problem while -thoroughly understanding its dimensions and dangers. Since 1945 the -leaders of Britain, Socialist and Tory alike, have been fully aware of -the dangers to Western freedom of Russian Communist imperialism. This -statement may evoke criticism from some stout Republicans who regard -the British Labor Party as an offspring of the Communist Party. But the -facts are that it was a Labor government that sent troops to Korea, -that carried on a long and successful campaign against the Communists -in Malaya, that joined the Royal Air Force with the United States Air -Force to build the air bridge that broke the Berlin blockade, and that -passed what was then the largest peacetime armaments bill in British -history. All these measures were part of the general effort to bolster -the defenses of Western Europe against Soviet aggression.</p> - -<p>These exertions were a severe burden on a country whose economy was -already in difficulties and whose resources were strained. They were -undertaken because they matched the resolution of the leaders of the -Labor Party. They were heartily endorsed by the Conservative Party, -then in opposition, and were continued by that party when it came to -power in 1951.</p> - -<p>The point of difference between the British and Americans was that at -the height of the cold war the British never moved toward abandonment -of normal diplomatic intercourse and welcomed any move by either side -which promised closer contact and friendlier relations with the Soviet -Union.</p> - -<p>Socialist and Tory governments pursued this dichotomy in policy with -almost complete freedom from political interference. The British, an -island people dependent on international trade, strive in any crisis -to maintain communications with their enemies and thus retain a means -through which negotiations can be carried out. They will go to great, -often shaming lengths to avoid war. Once<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_143"></a>[Pg 143]</span> it comes, they wage it with -earnest intensity and fight it to the end.</p> - -<p>In periods of danger such as followed the influx of Soviet power in -Europe, British politicians usually assume a bipartisan attitude. This -does not mean that the opposition of the time refrains from criticism -of the government policy. It does mean that opposition speakers -use restraint. During the period of maximum strain with Russia, no -politician shrilled a warning against talking with the Russians -about Berlin or Korea, or predicted that the admission of Russian -high-jumpers to a track meet would undermine the nation. The British -never gave up on the situation; they did not like it, but they thought -that any means of finding a way out should be used.</p> - -<p>This was, as I have noted, a period of danger. The bipartisan approach -broke down completely over Suez. When Sir Anthony Eden ordered -intervention in Egypt the danger was real but indistinct. It was also -a long-term economic danger arising from threat to the country's oil -supplies rather than the immediate military danger represented by -the Soviet Union's military strength in East Germany and elsewhere -in Central Europe accompanied by Russian diplomacy and subversion. -Russian military power already had won its foothold in Egypt. But the -Labor Party refused to regard this power as an immediate threat and -consequently rejected it as a reason for the adoption of a bipartisan -approach.</p> - -<p>The British people have never been so violently anti-Russian as -the Americans. There is a distinction between anti-Russian and -anti-Communist. Communism has had few more bitter opponents than -Ernest Bevin or Herbert Morrison, two leaders in the post-war Labor -government. They represented elements of the movement which for decades -had been fighting in the unions and in the constituency parties to -prevent the Communists from winning control of the Trades Union -Congress and the Labor Party. But neither the leaders nor the led could -be called anti-Russian.</p> - -<p>The war alliance with the Soviet Union meant far more to Britons than -the military co-operation between the Soviet Union and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_144"></a>[Pg 144]</span> the United -States during the same period meant to Americans. The British attitude -was rooted in the situation of June 1941 when the Germans turned east -and attacked the Soviet Union.</p> - -<p>The British had then been fighting the Germans and the Italians -single-handed for a year. Their cities had been bombed, their armies -and navies grievously punished in France, Norway, Libya, and Greece. -Each month the German submarines in the North Atlantic were bolder -and more numerous and the toll of shipping losses was higher. Most -Britons knew they had stout friends in the United States, but the wiser -also recognized the strength of isolationist sentiment. And, although -American industrial mobilization was gaining momentum, that would not -avert another Coventry tonight or another Dunkirk tomorrow.</p> - -<p>Suddenly all this altered. Russia, which had sided with Germany for two -years and had gobbled up parts of Finland, Poland, and Romania as her -reward, was invaded. Overnight the British became willing to overlook -the despicable role Russia had played in the first two years of the -war. Here, at last, was an ally. An ally, moreover, that fought, that -was undergoing the same punishment Britain had known.</p> - -<p>Naturally this warm admiration for the Russian war effort and this -sympathy for the Russian people offered an opportunity for the British -Communists, who exploited it to the utmost. Propaganda from the Soviet -Union portrayed life there in glowing terms. The British working class -was informed that this was a working-class war—a few months earlier -the Communists had been calling it a capitalist war—and that side by -side the British and Russian "brothers" would fight it to a successful -conclusion.</p> - -<p>The propaganda would not have made much headway, however, had it not -been for the basic strain of admiration and sympathy which existed. -The decade of cold war which included the rape of Czechoslovakia, the -Berlin blockade, and the Korean war obviously altered the British -working-class attitude toward Russia. But some of the old wartime -feeling remained. It is there yet in the minds of the working class, -tucked behind the football scores and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_145"></a>[Pg 145]</span> the racing tips: the Russians -didn't let us down, they went on fighting, they must be like us, they -can't want another war.</p> - -<p>The changes in Soviet leadership and tactics since the death of Stalin -have affected the British approach to Russia and Communism. In Britain, -as elsewhere, the immediate danger has receded. The East is slowly -opening up. This means a great deal more to Britain than to the United -States.</p> - -<p>Trade is the answer. The British want to expand their trade with the -Soviet Union and with China. Again, as in their diplomatic relations, -this does not mean that they approve of Communism in either country. -But they live by trade, and they must take it wherever they find it. -To British industrialists and British ministers the Soviet Union -and Eastern Europe represent a market for industrial products and a -possible source of raw materials. However, they are wary of Russian -methods of business. The initial approach has been circumspect. The -British do not wish to throw everything onto one market; they would -infinitely prefer an expansion of trade with the United States. Nor -will they sell to the Soviet Union one or two models of each type which -the industrious Russians can then mass-produce for themselves. Finally, -although Britain and other European nations are restive under embargo -restrictions on the sale of certain strategic goods, the Conservative -government has no intention of breaking these restrictions under the -encouragement of Mr. Khrushchev's smile.</p> - -<p>The visits to Britain of a succession of delegations from the Soviet -government and of three top-ranking ministers—Nikita Khrushchev, First -Secretary of the Communist Party, Premier Nikolai Bulganin, and Deputy -Premier Georgi Malenkov—fanned British interest if not enthusiasm.</p> - -<p>Much has been written about the effect of these visits on the British -public. Indeed, the faint hearts in Congress seemed to think that they -would result in the immediate establishment of a Communist regime in -Britain. But it appeared to many who had frequent contacts with "Krush -and Bulge," as the British called them, that the greatest effect -of the visit was on the Russians themselves. Like<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_146"></a>[Pg 146]</span> Malenkov before -them, the Communist boss and the head of the government encountered a -prosperous, vigorous democracy. To anyone accustomed to the crudity and -ugliness that express Russia's raw strength, industrial Britain was a -revelation. Here were huge, new, clean factories set in the midst of -comfortable towns enclosed by green fields and parks.</p> - -<p>"We'll have all this one day in Russia," Khrushchev said to one of his -hosts. "But it takes time."</p> - -<p>The British poured out to see the visitors. But it was symptomatic -of the maturity of public opinion that in London and the other great -cities, the Communists failed to generate any wild enthusiasm for the -Soviet leaders. On the contrary, they were met in most cases with -stolid, disapproving silence interspersed by volleys of boos.</p> - -<p>Yet because the British were never so excited about the possibility -of war with the Soviet Union as were the Americans, there is and will -be in Britain greater willingness to accept the Russians at their own -valuation. Also, the British working class is far more interested in -the Soviet Union than American labor is.</p> - -<p>To the American workingman there is nothing especially novel in -the description of huge enterprises breaking new ground in virgin -territory. Americans have been doing that sort of thing for a century. -But to the Briton, accustomed to an economy severely circumscribed by -the geographical limitations of his island, these Soviet enterprises -have the fascination of the unknown. So he marvels over the pictures -and the text in the magazines issued by the Russian and satellite -governments.</p> - -<p>This propaganda is intended, naturally, to divert the reader's mind -from the innumerable cruelties that have accompanied the building -of the Soviet state by impressing him with a glowing account of the -results. Here, as elsewhere, the Russians underestimate their critics, -of whom the British workingman is one. People do not easily forget -cruelty, even if it has not been practiced on them.</p> - -<p>"Certainly, I'm a trades-union man <i>and</i> a good socialist," a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_147"></a>[Pg 147]</span> printer -said to me during the Khrushchev-Bulganin visit. "That's why I 'ate -these bleeders. What they've done to the unions in Russia wants talking -abaht, chum. Know what I 'ates most about them? It's them arsing around -our country with a lot of coppers with them, the bleeders. We don't -want none of that 'ere."</p> - -<p>Finally, we come to a factor of great importance in molding British -attitudes toward the Soviet Union. This is the large group of teachers, -writers, editors, movie-directors, and radio and television workers who -have been powerfully influenced either by Communism or by the results -of a Communist society in the Soviet Union. Proportionately, this group -is larger than its counterpart in the United States. It has never been -drastically reduced in numbers by the pressure of public opinion. -Outside of the "sensitive" departments of government, no great stigma -is attached to membership in the Communist Party in Britain.</p> - -<p>Politically, Britain is deeply and justly concerned with the liberties -of the subject. Consequently, any discrimination by the government -against Communists evokes the wrath of politicians and public bodies -unconnected with Communism. This is true even when the government seeks -to eliminate a known Communist from a "sensitive" department. The -question is not whether Communism threatens Britain. The British know -that it does, and they are prepared to fight it. But Britain's place -in world society, it is reasoned, would be threatened even more if the -liberties of the subject were endangered. The view that only a truly -free society is capable of defeating Communism transcends party lines -in Britain.</p> - -<p>It is important to remember that the powerful influence of Communism -on this heterogeneous group has affected it in two ways. Such people -as Malcolm Muggeridge, the editor of <i>Punch</i>, were once sympathetic to -Communism and are now among its best-informed and sharpest critics. In -Britain, as in the United States, there are apostates who have turned -from Communism and who now attack it. But their attacks, though often -brilliant, command less attention in Britain than in the United States. -This may be because the British never were so excited about the cold -war as we<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_148"></a>[Pg 148]</span> were in the United States (after all, they were grappling -with pressing economic problems). It may be because the British have -scant respect for those who betray causes and then make money out of it.</p> - -<p>On the whole, however, the group influenced by the Soviet Union exerts -its influence to create friendlier relations between Britain and the -Soviet Union. In its attitude toward the United States this group is -sensitive, critical, and quite often abysmally ignorant.</p> - -<p>The virtues and defects of the Soviet Union and the United States -thus are weighed in public by an influential group that has already -been tremendously impressed either by communism as a political creed -or by the industrial, military, or diplomatic achievements of the -Soviet state. They are receptive to news of Russia and, in many cases, -remarkably uncritical. Indeed, they are generally less skeptical and -critical in their approach to the Soviet Union than they are to the -problems of Germany or the United States. One of their favorite sayings -is "Let's try and keep an open mind about Russia."</p> - -<p>In the battle for men's minds, this is a serious situation. It means -that a considerable proportion of what Britons read, of what young -Britons learn, of what the whole nation sees or hears through mass -communication media is prepared by people whose attitude toward Russian -claims and policies is less skeptical than it should be. On the other -hand, the danger has been exaggerated by anxious Americans.</p> - -<p>Since 1950 these fields of endeavor have been invaded by a group of -young men and women much more favorably inclined to conservatism and -modern capitalism than the group influenced by Russia. Some of them -have been to the United States and are able to refute the anti-American -charges of the other group with first-hand knowledge. Most of them -developed intellectually in the period when the Russian danger -overshadowed Europe, and they are not prone to make excuses for the -Soviets.</p> - -<p>Moreover, they are strongly influenced by the marked recrudescence -of national feeling in Britain. Perhaps this is a revul<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_149"></a>[Pg 149]</span>sion from -the internationalism of the group influenced by Russia. Perhaps it -reflects a desire to do something about Britain's waning prestige in -the world. Sometimes it indicates a new and welcome preoccupation with -the political possibilities of an enlarged Commonwealth. Whatever the -cause, it adds to the vitality of British thought. And it is healthy -for the country that its young people should be interested in British -development of nuclear energy rather than in Magnetogorsk or TVA.</p> - -<p>The British attitude toward Communist China is unaffected by emotional -memories of a war alliance, as in the case of the Soviet Union, or the -sense of guilt regarding the conquest of China by the Communists which -affects some Americans. Chiang Kai-shek was never a public hero during -the war, as Tito and Stalin were. The London representatives of the -great Anglo-Chinese trading firms might portray Chiang as the hope of -the West in China, but the British people were not convinced.</p> - -<p>Although the British military effort in the Korean war was considerably -larger than Anglophobes would have Americans believe, the war's effect -on the British was a good deal less. There has never been any sustained -public outcry against Britain's recognition of the Chinese government. -The danger of a Communist invasion of Formosa did not stir the British. -When such an invasion seemed likely, the Conservative government faced -a difficult situation: would the British people, in the event of war -between China and the United States, have followed the Americans into -the conflict?</p> - -<p>The present British interest in Communist China is largely commercial. -No one entertains the happy belief that the Communist regime can -be overthrown—certainly not by Chiang and his aging forces. What -the British want from Comrade Mao is more trade. If they get it and -trade expands, the process will reflect not a national attraction to -Communism but a restatement of the familiar British position that -theirs is a trading nation which, in its present circumstances, must -find commerce where it can.</p> - -<p>There would be no great opposition to China's entry into the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_150"></a>[Pg 150]</span> United -Nations. Again, this would not reflect admiration for communism. -For many reasons the British doubt the effectiveness of the United -Nations. One reason is that a nation of over 500,000,000 people has no -representation in the UN's councils.</p> - -<p>The relationship between the French and the British is a fascinating -one. For nearly a thousand years these two peoples have faced each -other across the channel. During that period, in Britain at least, -there has developed a curious love-hate relationship. By turns loving, -exasperated, and enraged, the British think of the French as a man -might think of an affectionate but wayward mistress.</p> - -<p>In June of 1940, when the world between the wars was being shaken to -bits, the fall of France shocked and saddened the British as did no -other event of those terrible days. I remember that while waiting -in the Foreign Office, the morning after my return from France, I -saw an elderly official, a man with a brittle, cynical mind, walk -down the corridor with tears streaming down his face. There was no -recrimination. All he could say was: "Those poor people—God, how they -must be suffering!"</p> - -<p>Few enemy actions during the war distressed the British as much as the -decision to attack the French fleet at Oran. Few post-war diplomatic -achievements gave them more pleasure than the re-establishment of the -old alliance with France. The rise and fall of French governments, the -convulsions of French politicians are watched in Britain sometimes with -anger and harsh words but never without an underlying sympathy.</p> - -<p>Perhaps because of the alliance in two world wars or perhaps because -France offers such a complete change from their own islands, the -British know France very well, far better than they know the United -States or some nations of the Commonwealth. This is true of all classes -of Britons.</p> - -<p>The elderly doctor or retired officer of the middle classes will spend -his holidays at an obscure resort on the coast of Brittany. Before the -war a Continental holiday was one of the indications of middle-class -status. Today the Continental holiday is within the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_151"></a>[Pg 151]</span> financial reach of -the working class. The conductor on the bus I sometimes take to work -was full of his plans this spring for "me and the missus" to motorcycle -from Boulogne to the Riviera. Thousands like him tour France in buses -or spend vacations not in Blackpool but in a French seaside resort.</p> - -<p>The national attitude ranges from tolerance to affection. I do not -believe, however, that the British respect the French as they do the -Germans or the Russians. The mutiny in the French Army in 1917, the -catastrophe of 1940, the Anglophobia of the Vichy government ended, -probably permanently, popular British reliance on France as a powerful -ally in world affairs. When the Suez crisis arose in 1956 and the -governments of Sir Anthony Eden and Guy Mollet hastened to reinvigorate -the alliance, their efforts awoke little response in Britain. "Now that -we're in this thing, we have to go on and win it," a friend said. "But -think of being in it with the French, especially these French—Mollet, -Pineau, and Bouges-Manoury." He made a sound more customary in Ebbets -Field than in a London club.</p> - -<p>The British are amused by the French (the French, of course, are even -more amused by the British). Sometimes it seems that every Englishman -of a certain age and financial position has his own "secret" village -where the Hotel de la Poste provides a good dinner for five hundred -francs. Britons have great knowledge and affection for France born of -contact in two wars, but they do not rely on the French.</p> - -<p>For other reasons the British hesitate to rely on the Germans. Two -generations of Britons have learned that the Germans are a tough, -resolute, and courageous people, characteristics admired in Britain. -But the British groups devoted to furthering friendship between the -two peoples are fighting a losing battle. There is among all classes -in Britain an underlying distaste for the Germans. This feeling is not -often expressed, but it is there, as it is in most countries in Western -Europe. The attitude is a factor in the relationship between Western -Europe and the key question facing the continent as a whole: Germany's -ultimate reunification.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_152"></a>[Pg 152]</span></p> - -<p>The Germans, a singularly obtuse people in judging the reasons for -foreign attitudes toward Germany, are inclined to believe that British -mistrust is tied to the two world wars and the decline of British -power. This is inaccurate. British mistrust and dislike of Germany have -political rather than military roots. Both the Kaiser's imperialism of -1914 and Nazi imperialism in 1939 were seen not as overwhelming threats -to Britain alone but as dangers to the democratic system of the West -under which she had flourished. The horrors of the concentration camps, -the solemn lunacies of Hitler and his court, the death of personal and -political liberty—all these were factors more important than military -posturing. Finally, the British do not consider the Germans politically -stable, and they are suspicious—perhaps too much so—of German -ambitions and intentions.</p> - -<p>Repeatedly this has affected British politics. The great pre-war debate -in foreign affairs was waged between those who, like Churchill, were -not willing to trust the Germans and those who, like Chamberlain, -were. Since the end of World War II the international political issue -that generated the most heat in Britain was the debate over the -rearmament of Germany. One effect of this debate was the emergence -of the Bevanites in the Labor Party as a political force. Aneurin -Bevan believed that German rearmament would unite the pacifists, old -anti-fascists, and others as no other issue could. He was correct. The -leadership of Clement Attlee was gravely endangered for a time when the -party officially supported arms for the nation's former enemies.</p> - -<p>The State Department and other American officials have taken the -position that British opposition to German rearmament was the product -of wild-eyed agitators on the left and had no popular support. This was -an inaccurate, even a dangerous attitude. Field Marshal Lord Wavell -opposed it. So did Viscount Norwich, who as Alfred Duff Cooper had -allied himself with Churchill in the latter's long fight against the -appeasement policy of Chamberlain and Baldwin.</p> - -<p>For the time being, the issue is dead. Germany is being re<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_153"></a>[Pg 153]</span>armed. But -the excitement the issue provoked testified to the abiding British -uneasiness about Germany. This concern centers upon the prospect that -West Germany will someday succumb to Russian enticement, be united with -East Germany, and leave NATO. A permanently divided Germany may be a -danger to peace, but few Britons outside the Foreign Office see it that -way. Two wars have come out of a united Germany.</p> - -<p>The attitude of the upper-class Englishman toward people of the same -class in Germany has altered since the war. Before World War I, and in -the long week-end between the wars, upper-class Germans and Britons -mingled a good deal. Ties of affection and respect were created. "I -can't stand this feller Hitler," you were told, "but I know old Von -Schlitz, and he's a first-rate chap. You can trust the Prussians." -But in the end Von Schlitz and his friends, with a few honorable -exceptions, threw in their lot with the Nazis. When the British see old -Von Schlitz nowadays they wonder what deceits, what cruelties, what -moral compromises he has countenanced to survive and prosper.</p> - -<p>Seen from this background, the British acceptance of a Western policy -that rebuilt German industry into Britain's leading competitor for -export markets and created a strong state in the Federal Republic of -West Germany was a remarkable victory of the head over the heart. The -policy was accepted because the British saw that the Soviet Union under -Stalin was the greater, more immediate threat. Any relaxation of that -threat is bound to affect the British attitude toward Germany and her -ambitions.</p> - -<p>The mutual affection of the British and the Italians was interrupted -but not broken by the second war. To a somewhat dour, unemotional -people the Italians and their land have an irresistible attraction. -Even when the war was at its worst the British regarded the Italians -with rueful perplexity: how could such an amusing, gracious people be -so deluded by Mussolini? Surely everything would be all right once -Mussolini was eliminated.</p> - -<p>Characteristically, when he was eliminated many British objected to -the summary nature of his execution. They would not<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_154"></a>[Pg 154]</span> blink an eye when -military necessity required the destruction of the German city of -Kassel. But they did not like the picture of their old enemy, who had -vilified them and attacked them when it hurt the most, strung up by his -heels outside a gas station.</p> - -<p>Now all is forgiven and almost forgotten. Each year the earnest -tourists pour southward to Rome, Florence, Venice. In the autumn they -come home to their fog-shrouded islands bringing with them memories of -long, sunny days.</p> - -<p>The British attitude toward Italy and the Italians is symbolized by -their view of Italian Communism. They are not oblivious to the dangers -of Communism in Italy or elsewhere. But they find it difficult to -regard the Italians, communist, fascist, or republican, as serious -factors in world affairs. As only a few Italians seem to desire such a -position, and as the British are too polite to discuss the matter, all -goes well.</p> - -<p>The traveling Briton has lost his old status in Europe. The British -tourist with his limited allowance of francs, marks, or lire is no -longer the "milord" of the nineteenth century. That role, with its -privilege of being the target for every taxi-driver's avarice, now -belongs to the Americans.</p> - -<p>During the peak years of the cold war between 1945 and 1953, Western -Europe was threatened by military attack from Russia. The power to -whom the Europeans looked primarily was not Britain but the United -States. It is a disheartening reflection that, despite this military -dependence, successive American administrations failed to create the -reservoir of trust which would induce the nations of Western Europe to -accept our policies and follow our lead once the Russians altered their -tactics.</p> - -<p>Despite their precarious economic situation, there has been a revival -of British prestige and influence in Western Europe. To some Americans -Britain may appear a small, almost insignificant power. But to a small -European nation Britain, with its bombers, its atomic and hydrogen -bombs, its thriving new industries, presents a different picture. -Another factor is the gradual movement of Britain toward some form of -union with the Continental nations,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_155"></a>[Pg 155]</span> as evidenced in the Macmillan -government's approach to a common European market. Finally, there -are doubts about wisdom of United States policy, especially as it is -practiced and elucidated by John Foster Dulles.</p> - -<p>Western Europe was not impressed by the statesmanship of Mr. Dulles -at two serious crises: one arising from the possibility of Western -military intervention in Indochina, and the other emerging after the -collapse of the European Defense Community. Nor was Mr. Dulles's -attitude toward America's closest allies, the British, in the period -of British and French intervention in Egypt calculated to create the -impression that the United States, as an ally, would remain true in -good times and bad.</p> - -<p>Nowhere has British prestige and influence declined more rapidly as in -the Middle East. Yet nowhere are Britain's economic interests greater.</p> - -<p>Recent events have emphasized the economic connection between Britain -and the Middle East. But the ties that connect a group of islands set -in the cold waters of the northern ocean with the arid, sunny lands of -that area were established long before the discovery and exploitation -of oil reserves made the Middle East vital to Britain's economic life. -Sidney Smith, Abercromby, Nelson, Gordon, T.E. Lawrence—a whole -battalion of British heroes won fame in the area. The empty deserts -and clamorous cities have exercised a fascination on Britons for more -than two centuries, have called explorers and scientists, missionaries -and merchants eastward. Nor was the Middle East's strategic importance -to Britain born with oil. Nelson destroyed the French on the Nile, -Kitchener triumphed at Khartoum, and Montgomery fought at El Alamein -because the land bridge between Asia and Africa and later the Suez -Canal were considered vital to the existence of Britain as a world -power.</p> - -<p>Centuries of involvement in the Middle East resulted in a strong -British bias in favor of the Arabs. No such favoritism was extended to -the Egyptians as a people, although certainly the British were at first -as willing as the Americans to trust Colonel Abdel Nasser of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_156"></a>[Pg 156]</span> Egypt. -This bias, amounting in some cases to a blind affection, played its -part in the formulation of British policy especially in the years when -the state of Israel was taking shape. One example is the fact that the -British consistently underrated Jewish military ability and overrated -that of the Arabs.</p> - -<p>Egypt's seizure of the Suez Canal on July 26, 1956, was a punctuation -point in the long history of Britain's involvement in the Middle East. -No British government could permit control of the canal to be vested in -a single country, especially a country so openly hostile, without going -to the utmost lengths to break that control. Given the shipping and -pipeline facilities of the summer of 1956, the passage of oil tankers -through the canal was essential to Britain's economic life.</p> - -<p>Even when the program for the industrial use of nuclear power has -been completed, oil will remain important to the British economy. -The British government of the day was angry with Colonel Nasser, it -was worried by Soviet infiltration in Egypt. But the primary cause -of Britain's intervention in Egypt was that she could see no other -way of securing freedom of passage through the canal. Reliance on oil -was an elemental fact of Britain's position as a world power; it is -extraordinary that the administration in Washington was so surprised -when Britain took steps to insure her oil supply.</p> - -<p>The influence of Britain in the Middle East at the time of intervention -in Egypt was extensive. Tiny states on the Persian Gulf and on the -south side of the Arabian peninsula behind the Aden protectorate were -managed, if not ruled, by a few scores of officials from London. Iraq, -Britain's firmest friend in the Middle East, benefited from British -technicians and advisers. In Egypt and Jordan and Syria, Britain's -prestige had fallen. But as late as January 1956, when I toured the -Middle East, there was an evident respect for Britons and for British -power, a respect which often was difficult to reconcile with the actual -dimensions of that power.</p> - -<p>In terms of oil, Britain took a great deal out of the Middle<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_157"></a>[Pg 157]</span> East. -From an altruistic standpoint, the return was small. But it is -important to remember that British power there did not take the same -form as in British colonies. The British could not order schools to be -built or irrigation works to be started; they could, and did, advise -such works.</p> - -<p>They were the first power—the United States will be the second—to -encounter the jarring fact that the improvements which a big oil -company brings to a nation promote nationalism. In the end, peoples are -not content with oil royalties, clean company towns, and new schools. -They want all the money, not merely royalties, and they want to build -the towns and schools themselves.</p> - -<p>The decline of British power in the Middle East coincided with -the entry into the area of a new power, Soviet Russia. One of the -oddest aspects of the relations between the United States and the -United Kingdom was the calm—almost the indifference—with which the -administration in Washington viewed the entry of Russia into the Middle -East. As late as November 1956, <i>after</i> the British had destroyed large -numbers of Soviet aircraft and tanks in Egypt, the State Department was -undisturbed by intelligence reports that Russia had agreed to make good -the Egyptian losses with new arms shipments.</p> - -<p>Because of their economic involvement in the Middle East, the British -undoubtedly will persevere in their efforts to maintain influence in -the area. Early in 1957 all the cards were stacked against them.</p> - -<p>One advantage of a long and stormy experience in international affairs -is that it allows a nation to look with equanimity on reverses. After -the withdrawal from Egypt in December 1956, many Britons thought they -would make a comeback in the Middle East. No argument, neither Arab -enmity nor the advent of American and Russian power, could shake this -belief. They did not mean, of course, that they would come back along -the lines of nineteenth-century colonialism. The British recognize -that the days of British rule from the citadel in Cairo are as dead as -Thebes. But with that placid<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_158"></a>[Pg 158]</span> confidence which is one of their most -irritating characteristics, they predicted that in the future, as in -the past, they would play a major role in the area.</p> - -<p>When I protested that this was not the view in Washington or, probably, -in Moscow, a soldier-administrator laughed and said: "Oh <i>they</i> thought -we were finished in 1940." But it is in the Middle East that British -hopes and ambitions conflict directly with those of the United States. -And relations with the United States are another story—or at least -another chapter.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_159"></a>[Pg 159]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="IX_The_Atlantic_Alliance">IX. <i>The Atlantic Alliance</i></h2> -</div> - -<p class="center">STRENGTHS AND STRESSES</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop -was landed in my country I never would lay down my arms—never! never! -never!</i></p> - -<p> -WILLIAM PITT, EARL OF CHATHAM<br /> -</p> - -<p><i>His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., -New-Hampshire, Massachusetts-Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence -Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, -Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina, South-Carolina, and -Georgia to be free, sovereign and independent states; that he treats -with them as such; and for himself, his heirs and successors, -relinquishes all claims to the government, property and territorial -rights of the same, and every part thereof.</i></p> - -<p> -TREATY OF PARIS, SEPTEMBER 3, 1783<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">The alliance</span> between the United States and the United Kingdom is a -paradox. This intimate association that has fought wars and carried out -the most delicate and intricate diplomatic tasks is not based on any -single treaty or agreement. It is a paradox because, although roundly -attacked from the outset by powerful<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_160"></a>[Pg 160]</span> groups in both countries, the -alliance has grown steadily in strength toward a position in which it -is almost invulnerable to political attack.</p> - -<p>This situation is a tribute to the hard-headed appreciation of facts -which lies beneath the political oratory and posturing on both sides -of the Atlantic. For the alliance is not the result of the intrigues -of Anglophiles along the eastern seaboard of the United States or of -the Machiavellian diplomacy of Britons eager for a handout; it is -the result of mutual self-interest. In the dangerous world of the -mid-twentieth century it is the best hope of survival for both nations.</p> - -<p>Americans, in the plenitude of power, often ask one another why they -need alliances, and why, in particular, there should exist any special -relationship with Britain. One way of answering the question is to -consider our situation if the United Kingdom were neutral in the world -struggle with the aggressive totalitarianism of the East. There would -then be no United States Air Force bomber bases in Britain. The British -naval bases with their facilities in Britain and the Mediterranean -would no longer be open to the United States. The United Kingdom would -not be a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The British -divisions that have helped hold Germany since 1945 would have been -withdrawn. British hydrogen bombs and atomic bombs and the long-range -bombers built to carry them would not be on our side. The position -assumed by the United States at diplomatic meetings would no longer -be supported by the leaders of a stable, experienced power still -possessing considerable influence in many parts of the world.</p> - -<p>Finally, the United States could not rely in times of crisis upon the -backing of fifty million people speaking the same language and adhering -to similar political beliefs—people who are resolute, ingenious, and -brave in war, progressive and industrious in peace.</p> - -<p>Certainly the alliance is not to everyone's taste. There are and there -always will be urgings in both countries to "go it alone." There<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_161"></a>[Pg 161]</span> are -politicians and statesmen who would place each nation's reliance on -other allies. But custom, usage, common interests have combined to -create the situation; the problem is to see that the alliance works and -to realize its potential in the world.</p> - -<p>No one would contend that the United Nations or NATO or the South -East Asia Treaty Organization or any one of half a dozen smaller -associations is not important. But examination shows that all these -rest on the basic union of American and British interests. If that -goes, everything goes.</p> - -<p>It follows, therefore, that the popular attitude in Britain toward -the United States and Britain's relationship in international affairs -to the United States is of the utmost importance to both countries. -Understanding it calls for a thorough appreciation of Britain's -position in the world, not as we Americans see it but as the British -themselves see it.</p> - -<p>To begin with, let us try to answer that familiar and inevitable -question: "Isn't there a good deal of anti-Americanism in Britain?"</p> - -<p>If the question refers to personal dislike of Americans as individuals, -the answer is no. Of course if an American in Britain is noisy and -impolite he will be told off. Britons should expect the same treatment -in the United States under similar circumstances.</p> - -<p>Americans as individuals are not disliked in Britain. But an American -must be prepared to encounter searching inquiry and often sharp -criticism about the policies and programs of the United States -government. He will learn that some institutions in the United States -of which we have a high opinion do not similarly impress the British. -Certain groups within British society view various aspects of life in -the United States with reactions ranging from hostility to hilarity. -This is natural. You cannot expect a socialist to be enthusiastic about -capitalism, especially when capitalism is so obviously successful. Nor -can you expect a British conservative to rejoice in the transfer of -world power westward across the Atlantic.</p> - -<p>So, inevitably, there are discussions and debates when Amer<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_162"></a>[Pg 162]</span>icans and -Britons meet. Long may it be so. For this freedom to argue problems -is the very essence of the alliance. It is a means of ironing out -the difficulties that arise. It also emphasizes the common ground on -which we stand, which, put at its simplest, is a mutual belief in the -principles of democratic freedom.</p> - -<p>In Germany I often encountered men of education and intellectual -probity who were convinced that a modern state should not have a -democratic form of government and that to encourage democracy was -inadvisable, even dangerous. In Britain or the United States one -often meets men and women who rail against the occasional inanities -of democratic government and deplore its weaknesses. But it is most -unusual to meet someone, save a member of the small band of communists -or fascists, who believes that the British or American people could or -should live under any other system. Differences must be worked out and -are worked out under the cover of this common acceptance of democracy. -This belief does not sound impressive until you talk about the same -subject with a middle-class Frenchman, a German professor, or a Soviet -diplomat.</p> - -<p>Although of course there are plenty of people in Britain, as there are -in the United States, who are profoundly uninterested in the alliance -or in any other aspect of international affairs, it can be a salutary -experience to talk about Anglo-American relations with Britons. Often -you encounter candor, honest curiosity, and, sometimes, shrewd judgment.</p> - -<p>Such conversations go a long way toward killing the old idea that -Britons—or, specifically, the English—are an aloof, chilly -lot. Aloofness was and, to some extent, still is a middle-class -characteristic. But, like so many other things in Britain, behavior in -public has changed in the last fifteen years. The time has not come -when Britons in a railway compartment will exchange telephone numbers -and photographs of their children, but the old social isolation is -breaking down.</p> - -<p>The questions and criticisms that the American encounters are a -good sign. They testify to the average Briton's understanding<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_163"></a>[Pg 163]</span> of -the interdependence of the two countries. As long as the alliance -flourishes there will be and should be such exchanges. They are a -source of satisfaction, not offense.</p> - -<p>Moreover, the questions are necessary. There is a dearth of serious -news about the United States in the popular British press, although the -remotest village will be informed of Miss Monroe's chest measurements. -<i>The Times</i> of London, the <i>Manchester Guardian</i>, and the <i>Daily -Telegraph</i> do an excellent job of reporting the United States within -the limitations imposed by the paper shortage. The popular press, -however, is something else.</p> - -<p>There are, I believe, three factors that contribute to British -questionings and criticisms about United States policies and -statesmanship. These are:</p> - -<p>(1) McCarthyism, by which the British mean the political attitude -in the United States which begins at a perceptible trend toward -ideological conformity and, at its worst, imitates totalitarian -measures;</p> - -<p>(2) the United States's leadership of the free world, which has been -transferred from Britain in the last fifteen years. Doubts on this -score are fed by statements of American leaders, often belligerent -and uninformed, which raise the question of whether the United States -administration understands either its enemies or its friends;</p> - -<p>(3) the trade competition between Britain and the United States and the -trade barriers to British imports raised by the United States.</p> - -<p>It is difficult to say which of these is the most important factor in -forming British attitudes toward the United States. For a variety of -reasons McCarthyism was certainly the most important in the first five -years of this decade.</p> - -<p>Not many Britons understand the emotional involvement of a large -proportion of Americans in the Far East and its problems. Nor was the -impact of the Korean War upon the United States fully appreciated in -the United Kingdom. Finally, the British, although they stoutly opposed -communism, were never so deeply<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_164"></a>[Pg 164]</span> concerned with communist infiltration -in government. Perhaps they should have been. The point here is that -for a number of reasons they were not.</p> - -<p>Consequently, neither those who report and edit the news in Britain -(with a few exceptions) nor their readers were prepared for -McCarthyism. A good many otherwise well-informed people were shocked -when at the height of the McCarthy period Professor D.W. Brogan, one -of the most stimulating and knowledgeable British authorities on -America, pointed out that there had in fact been a considerable amount -of subversion in the United States government and that there was ample -proof of Soviet espionage.</p> - -<p>The gradual reduction of the Senator's importance and power pleased -the British. This was not because he had been a good deal less than -friendly in his comments about them—they are not markedly sensitive to -foreign criticism. The reason was that many Britons saw in the methods -of Senator McCarthy and some of his associates a threat to the heritage -of individual liberty and equal justice under the law and, ultimately, -to the democratic government that is the common ground on which the -alliance is based.</p> - -<p>The scars McCarthyism left on British popular opinion are deep. Months -after the Senator's star had faded, many people were only too ready -to believe that terror still reigned in the United States and to -discount the presence of a large body of moderate opinion that strongly -disapproved of extremism either of the left or of the right.</p> - -<p>McCarthyism, of course, was a godsend to the British communists in -their efforts to turn the working class and the intellectuals against -the United States. They exploited his methods and his speeches to -frighten those who doubted the strength of American democracy. Their -propaganda was directed chiefly at the industrial workers, whose good -will the United States needs in Britain and, indeed, everywhere in -the world. This, said the Communists, is fascism. This, they said, -is what we warned you would happen in the United States. Look, they -said, here's an elderly general as President and McCarthy running the -country. Doesn't it remind<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_165"></a>[Pg 165]</span> you of Hindenburg and Hitler? they asked. -What freedom would you have, they inquired, in a country where McCarthy -considers socialists the same as communists? How long would your -trade-union organization last?</p> - -<p>This may sound absurd to Americans, but it was dreadfully important, -and it can become dreadfully important again. Senator McCarthy did the -good name of the United States more harm in Britain than anyone else in -this century.</p> - -<p>McCarthy did not have many friends in Britain. But it is symptomatic of -the importance attached to good relations between the two countries by -Britons that at the height of the anti-McCarthy uproar some Englishmen -attempted to point out that after all there were other forces in -the United States and that the wild pictures of fascism rampant in -Washington painted by left-wing journalists were, to put it mildly, -slightly exaggerated.</p> - -<p>Such assurances made little headway. Many Britons, as I have said, -discerned in the Senator a threat to the basic liberties of the -American people and hence to the health of the alliance. Many more -were profoundly ignorant of the real situation in the United States -largely because they are profoundly ignorant of the American system -of government and how it works. There was, finally, the extreme -sensitivity of the British working class to anything that its members -consider to be capitalist reactionary action. In Britain the memories -of the fight against an organized and powerful reactionary group for -the rights of labor are vivid. As we have seen, they are nourished by -the speeches of Labor propagandists and politicians. There is also a -strong flavor of internationalism within the Labor movement. Given -these factors, it was easy enough for many thousands of working-class -people to believe that McCarthy represented the same forces they had -seen arise in Italy, Germany, and Spain to impoverish labor and smash -the power of the unions.</p> - -<p>This group paid little attention to—if, indeed, it even heard—the -arguments of Americans and Britons that, while McCarthy was deplorable, -some measures had to be taken against Communist<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_166"></a>[Pg 166]</span> espionage in the -United States. Such arguments were drowned in the uproar raised by -the left wing in Britain over the plight of some poor devil of a -schoolteacher who had been a member of the Communist Party for a few -months fifteen years ago and who now was being put through the wringer -by Senator McCarthy and his fellow primitives. Finally, the British -public as a whole—and particularly the British working class—was not -so aroused emotionally by the cold war as Americans were, and there was -far less hatred and fear of the Soviet Union.</p> - -<p>American critics of Britain have suggested that if the United Kingdom -had been as deeply involved militarily in Korea as the United States -was, this attitude toward the Communist bloc would have hardened. I -doubt it. The British are accustomed to casualties from wars in far-off -places. They do get angry and excited about casualties among their -troops from terrorism. The hanging of two British noncommissioned -officers by Jewish terrorists in Palestine during the troubles there -produced more public bitterness and animosity than did the grievous -casualties suffered by the Gloucestershire Regiment in its long, -valiant stand against the Chinese in Korea.</p> - -<p>The attacks on British policies and British public figures by -Americans disturb those who are concerned with the future of the -alliance. I do not think that the effect of these upon the general -public is so great as is generally believed. Some newspapers feature -reports of these attacks and reply in editorials that are stately -or bad-tempered according to the character of the newspaper. The -attacks themselves, however, do not produce excessive anger among -ordinary people. To repeat, the British are not sensitive to foreign -criticism. One reason is that they retain a considerable measure of -confidence in the rightness, even the righteousness, of their own -position—a characteristic that has galled Americans and others for -years. (Incidentally, it is a characteristic they have passed on to -the Indians. Mr. Nehru in his high-minded inability to see any point -of view but his own is not unlike the late Neville Chamberlain.) A -second reason is that this generation of Britons has been<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_167"></a>[Pg 167]</span> insulted -by experts. Secretary of State Dulles, Senators McCarthy, Knowland, -and Dirksen can say some pretty harsh things. But, compared to what -the British have heard about themselves from the late Dr. Göbbels or -the various Vilification Editors of <i>Pravda</i> or <i>Izvestia</i>, American -criticisms are as lemonade is to vodka.</p> - -<p>Mr. Dulles's unpopularity among the British results not from his -taste for inept phrases but from the belief widely held among leading -politicians and senior civil servants that on two occasions—the -formation of the South East Asia Treaty Organization and the -negotiations with Britain after Egypt had seized control of the Suez -Canal—he told them one thing and did another. Such beliefs strongly -held by responsible people trickle downward.</p> - -<p>This evaluation of Mr. Dulles's diplomacy is one cause for British -worry about the United States's leadership of the free world. The -idea that the British do not accept the transfer of power westward -across the Atlantic is superficial. They may not like it, but they do -accept it. Yet the idea has great vigor. An American editor of the -highest intelligence once said: "These people will never get used to -our being in the number-one position!" I think they <i>are</i> used to it. -But acceptance has not ended their doubts and criticisms about how -we exercise the tremendous power that is ours, or their resentment -of United States suggestions that Britain is finished and no longer -counts in the councils of the West. The British do not mind when -Senator Knowland accuses them of feeding military matériel to the -Communist Chinese. They do mind when in an international crisis the -State Department treats Britain as though she were on the same level as -Greece.</p> - -<p>For, whatever the alliance means to Americans, to Britons it has meant -a special relationship between the two countries under which the United -Kingdom is entitled to more consideration than she often receives. -It was the realization that the United States did not recognize this -special relationship which touched off the wave of criticism and doubt -during the Suez crisis.</p> - -<p>From the welter of words loosed in that period—speeches, Parliamentary -resolutions, editorials, and arguments in pubs—a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_168"></a>[Pg 168]</span> central theme -affecting relations between Britain and the United States emerged. The -decision of the United States administration to condemn British action -in Egypt and to vote with the Soviet Union against Britain in the -General Assembly of the United Nations smashed the conception of the -alliance held by millions of Britons. This sorry development is quite -unaffected by such considerations as whether the British government -should have ordered intervention or whether the United States -government should have been as surprised by intervention as it was.</p> - -<p>The British regarded the alliance as one in which each partner -was ready to help and sustain the other. They felt that the -administration's actions mocked a decade and a half of fine talk -about standing together. Traveling through Britain early in 1957, I -found "that United Nations vote" was a topic which arose in every -conversation and to which every conversation inevitably returned. -Some could understand the logic of the United States. But very few -understood how, in view of the past, we could bring ourselves to vote -against Britain.</p> - -<p>Whatever Washington may think, the British believe they deserve special -consideration because of their present exertions and past performances. -They point out, accurately, that the United Kingdom has put more men, -money, and matériel into NATO than has any other ally of the United -States. They assert that, although there have been differences between -the two powers, Britain has sustained United States policy in Europe -sometimes, as in the case of German rearmament, at the cost of great -political difficulty. An alliance, they say, should work both ways.</p> - -<p>Britons are thankful for American generosity after World War II. But -their gratitude is affected by a powerful psychological factor often -overlooked by Americans, one that strengthens the British belief that -their country merits a special position in America's foreign policies. -This factor is the British interpretation of the role played by their -country in two world wars.</p> - -<p>It is an article of popular faith in Britain that the nation twice went -to war in defense of smaller powers—Belgium in 1914 and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_169"></a>[Pg 169]</span> Poland in -1939—and that the United States, whose real interests were as deeply -involved as Britain's, remained on the sidelines for thirty-three -months of the first war and for twenty-seven months of the second war.</p> - -<p>Americans find it tedious to be told by the more assertive Britons how -their beleaguered island stood alone against the world in 1940. The -American conviction that the war really began when the Japanese blew us -into it at Pearl Harbor is equally tedious to Britons. Nevertheless, -the British did stand defiantly alone. They whipped the <i>Luftwaffe</i>, -and they took heavy punishment from German bombs. They fought hard, -if often unsuccessfully, in the Western Desert, Greece, Crete, -Abyssinia, and Syria. All this went on while we across the Atlantic -began ponderously to arm and to argue at great length whether the Nazi -dictatorship really was a threat to freedom.</p> - -<p>These events affected those Britons who are now moving toward the -direction of the nation's destinies. The cabinet minister of today or -tomorrow may be the destroyer seaman, tank-commander, or coal-miner -of 1940. However deplorable the attitude may seem from our standpoint -and from the standpoint of some individual Britons, the British people -believe something is due them for their exertions. The wiser leaders, -speaking from both the left and the right, advise their countrymen to -forget the past and think of the future.</p> - -<p>How they will think of their international future is a different -matter. For the first time since 1940 there is now a strong sentiment -in Britain for going it alone. There is also a revulsion against all -forms of international association, starting with the United Nations -and extending to NATO and SEATO. To anyone who understands the pride -and toughness that lie at the center of the British character this is -understandable. They have never been afraid of being alone.</p> - -<p>In considering British dissatisfaction with the place accorded their -country in the American outlook, it should not be thought that this -reflects lack of liaison between the two nations on the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_170"></a>[Pg 170]</span> lower echelons -of diplomacy. The co-operation between the United States Embassy -officials and the Foreign Office in London ordinarily is very close. So -is the co-operation between the British Embassy diplomats in Washington -and the State Department. To repeat, it is in situations like the -crises over Cyprus and Suez that the British feel they are treated by -the State Department and the administration not as the most powerful -and reliable of allies but as just another friendly nation.</p> - -<p>This concern over Britain's place within the alliance is sharpened by -doubts over the ability of the United States to exercise leadership -in a manner that will secure both the peace of the world and the -maintenance of the interests of the West.</p> - -<p>Such doubts arise generally from the wide differences between what -American policy really is and what various spokesmen for the United -States say it is. Let us consider two statements by John Foster Dulles, -a man who, when he became Secretary of State in 1953, was admired and -trusted by professional British diplomats and by politicians interested -in international affairs.</p> - -<p>At one point Mr. Dulles spoke of "massive retaliation" against any -enemies of the United States in the Far East. The remark made a great -splash in the headlines of the world, and in the view of the British -it was totally useless. The Russians and Communist Chinese leaders, -they argued, realized that the United States had nuclear weapons and -would be prepared to use them in the event of war. As both nations -are dictatorships and as the government controls all communications -media in each country, there was no prospect of Mr. Dulles's warning -being relayed effectively to the Russian and Chinese masses whom it -might conceivably impress. But it was relayed to all those people in -the world, especially in the Asian world, who in any case consider the -United States as a huge, powerful, and possibly aggressive nation. -The British were appalled by the effect of the statement on India. -There, as elsewhere, it was well ventilated by the Communists and other -enemies of the United States as an example of America's devotion to -belligerence.</p> - -<p>Earlier in his busy career as moral lecturer for the West,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_171"></a>[Pg 171]</span> Mr. -Dulles had spoken of the possibility that the defeat of the European -Defense Community plan in the French National Assembly might provoke -an "agonizing reappraisal" of the United States policy toward Europe. -Again the result was quite different from that desired by the Secretary -of State. The National Assembly rejected EDC, just as everyone -interested in the matter, with the exception of the Secretary of State, -Dr. Adenauer, M. René Pleven, and M. Jean Monnet, knew it would. The -United States did not immediately begin any "agonizing reappraisal" of -its position in Europe because quite obviously it could not do so at -the time. It had to keep its troops in Europe, it had to rearm Germany, -it had to sustain the NATO alliance because these are the essentials of -a foreign policy that is partly the result of American initiative and -partly the outcome of our response to the challenges of the times.</p> - -<p>In both cases it slowly became plain that neither the Congress nor the -people of the United States were prepared for massive retaliation or -even agonizing reappraisal. The reappraisal did start in 1956, but it -was the result of very different factors: the rising costs of nuclear -weapons and the necessity in both Britain and the United States of -reducing armament expenditures and taxes, the change in the tactics -of Soviet foreign policy, the reassurance (largely illusory) given -the West by the summit conference at Geneva in the summer of 1955, -which convinced many that the need for heavy armament expenditure was -receding. This reappraisal may be agonizing, but it has nothing to do -with the one the Secretary of State was talking about.</p> - -<p>The crisis in European affairs caused by France's rejection of EDC -was solved largely by British initiative and diplomacy. Today most -Britons interested in international affairs feel that this feat has -received too little recognition in Washington. Sir Anthony Eden, then -Foreign Secretary, pulled the forgotten Brussels treaty out of his -pocket—or, more accurately, out of the soap dish, for he was bathing -when he thought of it—and hied off to Europe to sell the treaty -to the interested governments as an instrument under which Germany -could be rearmed. Sir Anthony was eminently successful<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_172"></a>[Pg 172]</span> in his sales -talks. Mr. Dulles remained aloof for the first few days, thinking dark -thoughts about the French. He had been advised by high State Department -officials that Eden didn't have a chance of selling the Brussels treaty -idea. When it became evident that Sir Anthony was selling it and was -being warmly applauded even by the Germans for his initiative and -diplomatic skill, Mr. Dulles flew to Europe. It looked very much to the -British as though he wanted to get in on the act.</p> - -<p>Many Britons felt that Mr. Dulles let Sir Anthony and the Foreign -Office do the donkey work in patching up European unity in the autumn -of 1954 and in negotiating a settlement in Indochina that spring. The -Secretary of State and the administration were ready to take a share of -the credit for success, but were only too eager to remain aloof from -failure. Only the patience, experience, and forthrightness of General -Walter Bedell Smith, then Under Secretary of State, enabled the United -States to cut any sort of figure at the conference on Southeast Asia.</p> - -<p>Such a policy of limited liability in great affairs is not in accord -with either the power of the United States or the principles preached -by Mr. Dulles and others.</p> - -<p>Another American phenomenon that annoys and occasionally frightens the -British (and, incidentally, many other allied and neutral states) is -the belligerent loquacity of our generals and admirals. The American -public is not particularly aroused when someone in the Pentagon -announces that we must be on our guard and must build enough heavy -bombers or atomic cannon or aircraft-carriers to blow the Kremlin -to Siberia or even farther. The public is pretty well sold, perhaps -oversold, on defense. Besides, the public is much brighter than the -generals or the admirals or their busy public-relations officers think -it is—bright enough to realize that behind these dire prophecies of -doom, these clarion calls for more weapons, the services may be having -some trouble in squeezing the treasury. The citizen reads the first -few paragraphs and turns to the sports pages to see what Mantle did -yesterday.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_173"></a>[Pg 173]</span></p> - -<p>The situation is far different in the United Kingdom or in France or -Italy or even Germany, to name only our allies.</p> - -<p>The British people live packed on a relatively small island, and it has -been estimated that six hydrogen bombs dropped in Britain would be the -knockout. Consequently, the people do not like loose talk about nuclear -bombing. They have a shrewd suspicion that they, and not the talkers, -will be the first target.</p> - -<p>Such apprehensions may be exaggerated. But there is sound thinking -behind British insistence that such announcements by our military -spokesmen damage the cause of the West and the good name of the -United States among our allies and, equally important, among the -growing number of states now neutral or near neutral in the struggle -between East and West. For many reasons, geographical, military, -political, even religious, these states abhor war and violence. -Russian propagandists recognized this attitude at the outset of the -cold war and have played upon it with great skill. And they have been -helped immeasurably every time Senator Blowhard or Admiral Sternseadog -suggests that we should blow hell out of the Russians or the Chinese.</p> - -<p>These manifestations of combativeness may be helpful in reminding the -Russians of United States power. But the Russians are not our primary -concern: we are their enemies, whatever the surface policy of the -Soviet government. Our primary concern in this new period when the cold -war is being continued by more complex and subtle means than blockades -and <i>coups d'états</i> is the new nations we have helped bring into being.</p> - -<p>It is in relation to this approach, I believe, that the British -question our judgment. Particularly those officials and politicians -who deal with foreign affairs are not immediately concerned with the -prospect of Communist revolution in Italy or France. They estimate -that the leaders of the Soviet Union would avoid such upheavals in -the present state of world affairs because revolution would sound the -alarm bells in every Western capital and prevent the Soviet Union from -accomplishing a more important objective:<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_174"></a>[Pg 174]</span> the steady weakening of the -regional alliances—NATO, SEATO, the Baghdad Pact—which have been -laboriously constructed by the United States and the United Kingdom -to contain Communist aggression and to provide a safer, richer life -for the peoples of the allied states. Simultaneously, the Soviet -Union, through diplomatic, political, and cultural agencies, will make -every effort to pull the neutrals, great and small—India, Egypt, -Indonesia—onto their side.</p> - -<p>It is in this arena, one where diplomatic skill and economic assistance -are more important than military power, that Britain believes the West -must exert its strength. Both diplomats and politicians are convinced -that in the next five years there must be a thorough overhaul of the -political planning and military arrangements made by the West in the -period 1949-55. They question whether this can be done if the principal -emphasis in defense circles in the United States remains on the -prospect of an imminent war.</p> - -<p>A point arising from this discussion is that the British themselves are -unused to the spectacle of a soldier or sailor pronouncing on issues -of national policy. In Britain the warrior, retired or serving, is -kept in his place. If the government wants the advice of Field Marshal -Montgomery it asks for it and gets it in the privacy of the cabinet -rooms.</p> - -<p>In the field of foreign affairs the British maintain that the -tremendous physical power of the United States and our immense -resources do not automatically guarantee that in the exercise of our -power we will always be right. Leaders of both parties feel that the -United States government, particularly President Roosevelt and his -advisers, misread Soviet intentions lamentably in the period 1942-6, -and that consequently Allied strategy strove only for victory and not -for a stable peace after victory. The political tides that sweep the -United States every two years give American foreign policy an aspect of -impermanence, even instability, which weakens United States influence -in the world. There is a feeling that United States diplomacy would -benefit from fewer press conferences and more private negotiations.</p> - -<p>Naturally, these criticisms can be irritating, especially if they<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_175"></a>[Pg 175]</span> are -delivered in the Pecksniffian tones characteristic of many British -officials. But history will judge, I believe, that this transfer of -power westward across the Atlantic has been carried out with great good -sense and dignity. It may also hold up to scorn the present generation -of Americans if they fail to avail themselves not only of the physical -strength but also of the diplomatic experience and skill of a nation -wise in the ways of the world. This is not a time for Americans to be -too proud to listen.</p> - -<p>Such considerations belong to the stratosphere of Anglo-American -relations. An American living in Britain will soon be brought down to -earth in any conversation with British businessmen.</p> - -<p>Repeatedly he will be asked why the United States bars British imports -through high tariffs, why there is discrimination against British -bids for contracts in the United States, why Senators and Congressmen -belabor the British on one hand for trying to expand their trade with -the Soviet Union and on the other hand do all they can to block the -expansion of British trade with the United States.</p> - -<p>"Trade Not Aid" is the British goal in their economic relations with -the United States, which is Britain's second-best market. In 1954 we -bought goods valued at £198,800,000 ($556,640,000) from Britain. But -this represented only 6.6 per cent of the total United Kingdom exports, -and in 1938, long before the export drives, when Britain still counted -on her overseas investments to help finance her own imports, the -percentage was 5.4 per cent.</p> - -<p>So, although both nations recognize this trade's importance to -Britain—it is her principal source of dollar earnings—the increase in -the trade has been relatively small.</p> - -<p>The inability of British exporters to sell competitively in the United -States because of tariff protection provokes sharp criticism. The -Republican administration of 1952-6 was attacked in the editorial -columns of newspapers that are usually most friendly to the United -States, for, despite the reassuring speeches of President Eisenhower, -British industry still claimed it was being denied access to American -markets by the tariff restrictions.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_176"></a>[Pg 176]</span></p> - -<p>Certainly the tariff does bar many British imports. It may be, however, -that many of them, perhaps a majority, would not be able to compete -with similar American products. There is a great deal of ignorance -about the American market among British industrialists and some -reluctance to assume the long and complex job of analyzing a particular -market. I know of one manufacturer of women's handbags who has built up -an extremely profitable business in the United States largely through a -thorough study of the market on frequent visits to this country. I also -know of other larger firms that have failed to exploit their potential -American market because they would not change their methods or their -product to meet the market's demands. Beyond this, they could not -understand the importance of servicing their product and of maintaining -continuous relations with middlemen and buyers.</p> - -<p>We have seen that Aneurin Bevan and other politicians of the extreme -left are wedded to the idea that successive Labor and Conservative -governments have danced to Washington's tune. There are many who would -deny undue political or diplomatic influence by the United States on -Britain; indeed, many in America would say the shoe was on the other -foot. But no one could discount the growing influence of American -customs and ways of living upon the people of Britain. Part of this -is the direct result of the popularity of American movies and the -continued presence of American troops. Part comes from the fact that -British manufacturers are rather belatedly turning out the household -devices which have revolutionized living in the United States. This and -the ability of the new working class and the new middle class to buy in -abundance has led to a change in the living conditions of millions.</p> - -<p>Ignorance of the political system and international objectives of the -United States is still fairly widespread. In some important respects, -however, there is today among the people of England a greater knowledge -about the people of the United States than there ever was in the past.</p> - -<p>Before the entry of the United States into World War II, for<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_177"></a>[Pg 177]</span> instance, -there was a strong conviction in Britain that ethnically we were the -same people. The mass of Britons expected us to be as British in our -background and national outlook as the people of Australia or New -Zealand. The war corrected that impression. The army that came to -Britain was composed of men of diverse ethnic stocks, and the people -among whom they lived learned that Americans could have names like -Magliaro, Martinez, or Mannheim and still be good Americans. This -shocked both the Americanophobes who thought of us as "Anglo-Saxons" -unchanged since the administration of Thomas Jefferson and their -political representatives who envisaged us as openhearted and -openhanded former colonials only too eager to help out the "mother -country." But in the long run this clearer, more realistic view of -modern America has had a good effect on relations between the two -countries.</p> - -<p>Similarly, the presence among Britons of several million young men -representing the United States removed some illusions built up by -years of steady attendance at the local movie house. We were not all -rich, we were not all gangsters or cowboys, we did not all chew gum. -Americans worked just as hard, worried just as much, and had the same -hopes and dreams as Britons did. The period of the big buildup in 1943 -and 1944 before the Normandy invasion was marred by saloon brawls -between Americans and British and by friction on both sides. But this -is outweighed, I believe, by the fact that the same period contributed -greatly to the two peoples' knowledge of each other.</p> - -<p>When the United States Air Force sent forces to Britain at the peak of -the cold war, it was assumed by many that this process would continue. -But the present contingent is minute compared to the millions of -Americans who moved through Britain during World War II. Moreover, its -members are more professional. They do not have the opportunity or -the inclination for close contact with British homes. They want what -professional soldiers want the world over: a bellyful of beer and a -girl. They get both.</p> - -<p>The senior officers of the United States Air Force units in Britain and -well-intentioned Britons, zealous for the improvement<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_178"></a>[Pg 178]</span> of relations -between the countries, spend a great deal of time worrying about the -behavior of the airmen and their treatment by British civilians. The -time is ill spent. It is the nature of young men far from home, in or -out of uniform, to drink, to wench, and to fight. Here and there they -may encounter tradesmen eager to make an extra shilling out of the -foreigner. But such profiteering does not seem to be on the same scale -as that practiced by the good people of Florida or Texas or Kansas upon -their own countrymen in uniform during World War II.</p> - -<p>In many superficial respects Britain is more Americanized than before -the war. There are hamburger joints near Piccadilly Circus and -Leicester Square, and the American tourist can buy a Coke in most -big towns. A pedestrian in London sees windows full of "Hollywood -models" and "Broadway styles." In the years immediately after the war, -working-class youth copied the kaleidoscopic ties and broad-shouldered, -double-breasted plumage of the American male. Today, still following -styles set in America, he is adopting the more sober appearance of -the Ivy League, and the button-down shirt has made its appearance -in High Holborn. This is a curious example of styles traveling west -and then east across the Atlantic, for the Ivy League dresses as it -believes—or, rather, as its tailors believe—English gentlemen dress. -Now the working-class young man in Britain is imitating "new" American -styles that are themselves an imitation of the styles followed by his -own upper class. Whatever the fashion in the United States, this class -clings manfully to the dark suit, the starched collar, and the derby in -London, and to tweeds in the country.</p> - -<p>Obviously the movies made in America have had an enormous effect on -the British way of life. For a number of reasons the effect has not -been altogether good. Accuracy in portraying the American scene is not -one of Hollywood's strong points. A couple of generations of young -Britons matured nursing an idealistic view of the United States as a -wonderland where hippy stenographers lived in high-ceilinged houses, -wore luxurious clothes, drove big, powerful cars, and loved big, -powerful men. There was almost invariably<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_179"></a>[Pg 179]</span> a happy ending to the minor -difficulties that beset hero and heroine of an American film.</p> - -<p>Realism was restored to some extent by the advent of the American -soldier. Very few of the GI's resembled Mr. Robert Taylor, and their -backgrounds were quite different from those portrayed on the screen. -There were, of course, some fast talkers who could and did make a pig -farm in Secaucus sound like a ranch in California, but, on the whole, -the American soldiers came from civilian surroundings no more exciting -than Leeds or Bristol. The movie-going public now views pictures about -home life in America with a more skeptical eye.</p> - -<p>The series of American films about juvenile delinquency, drug -addiction, dipsomania, and other social evils created a problem for -those interested in presenting a balanced view of the United States -to Britons. Great efforts were made by the United States Information -Service to demonstrate that the ordinary American did not begin the -day with a shot of heroin or send his boy to a school that would make -Dotheboys Hall seem like a kindergarten.</p> - -<p>These efforts were inspired to some extent by the manner in which the -Communists exploited such films as genuine reflections of life in the -United States. Both the comrades and the USIS were wasting their time. -The British public can be agonizingly apathetic, but it is not stupid. -I never met anyone who thought these films represented the real America -or who believed the Communist contention that they did. The fact is -that the ability of the United States to make and show such pictures -testifies to the strength of America. When the Russians produce an -epic about the slave labor that built the White Sea-Baltic canal or an -exposé of the corruption that riddled Soviet industry in the war and -immediate post-war years, we can begin to worry.</p> - -<p>The theater since the war has exercised an important influence in -bringing America to Britain. Starting with <i>Oklahoma</i>, a series of -Broadway musical shows dominated the London stage for a decade. One -of the minor occupations of British critics is grumbling about the -shortage of "real" British musicals. But even the grumpiest<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_180"></a>[Pg 180]</span> have been -won over by the music of Richard Rodgers and Irving Berlin and the -lyrics of Oscar Hammerstein II.</p> - -<p>British taste is not always in accord with our own. <i>South Pacific</i> was -not the critical success in London that it was in New York. The British -loved <i>Guys and Dolls</i>—they had lost their hearts to the late Damon -Runyon in the thirties—but they did not like <i>Pal Joey</i>, in which John -O'Hara gave a much more realistic picture of the seamy side of American -life.</p> - -<p>But the accent has been on musicals. Very few serious American plays -have successfully invaded London. In this field the traffic seems to be -the other way.</p> - -<p>The comics, invariably described in left-wing publications as "American -Horror Comics," have been another medium for the spread of American -culture in Britain. Like the movies, they have their critics, and, -like some movies, they are used by the Communists to demonstrate what -fearful people the Americans are.</p> - -<p>The reader will notice that British Communism, although of almost -negligible importance as a political party, is active in promoting -differences between the two nations. The Communists know very well that -the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is -the strongest link in the Western chain; if they can break it, the rest -will be easy.</p> - -<p>I have been at pains to point out the issues over which governments and -peoples on both sides of the alliance differ and those aspects of our -national behavior which occasionally worry and concern the British. -It should be emphasized that the areas of ignorance in the British -attitude toward the United States are of minor importance compared to -the ignorance of the average Frenchman or the average Indian. British -misconceptions about the United States can be corrected and Communist -attempts to exploit these misconceptions defeated because the British -public does know something about the United States. This knowledge may -be slight, but it is enough to build on.</p> - -<p>Over the years there has been a change in attitude on the part of -young people which I find disturbing. When I first came to Eng<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_181"></a>[Pg 181]</span>land -in the late thirties I encountered a good deal of curiosity about the -political and social aspects of the American system. Young people -wanted to know about American opportunities for education, about -technical schools, about the absence of a class system. Today such -interest as is displayed centers mainly upon the material factors in -the United States.</p> - -<p>Perhaps what I encountered nearly twenty years ago was the lingering -afterglow of that period in our history when we stood as a promise and -a hope to the peoples of the world. Certainly many of the egalitarian -aspects of American society admired in pre-war Britain have been slowly -introduced into British society. A cynic might even suggest that they -know us better now. At any rate, I meet fewer young people who are sure -they would like to live in America and be Americans.</p> - -<p>Ignorance of the United States lies at the root of many of the -criticisms of our country one hears in Britain. This is being overcome -to some extent by the work of the USIS, but the task is a serious one. -Beyond such obvious difficulties as the shortage of newsprint which -limits the amount that responsible newspapers can print about the -United States, there is another important obstacle to better relations. -This is the fact, that although Americans travel to Britain each year -in tens of thousands, the prospect of the average Briton seeing our -country is remote. The British treasury doles out dollars with a sharp -eye on the gold and dollar reserves, and a large percentage of the -transatlantic travelers are businessmen selling British exports to the -United States. This is something, but it is not enough.</p> - -<p>The industrial working class is the most numerous and politically -important in Britain. It is also the least informed about the United -States. Scholarships for Oxford and Cambridge students at Harvard -or Princeton and visiting professorships for English dons do not, -as a rule, help this class. The ideal would be an exchange system -under which hundreds of working-class men and women from Bradford, -Manchester, Liverpool, and the back streets of London were given the -opportunity to see America plain. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_182"></a>[Pg 182]</span> English Speaking Union in the -United States and the United Kingdom is attempting to bring this about.</p> - -<p>Only through such contact, I believe, could the picture of the United -States built up by some Labor Party politicians be erased. There -remains a dangerous lack of understanding not only of our political -system but of what mass production and greater productivity in the -United States have done for the average workingman here. Newspaper -articles, television series, books help, but it is a thing that must be -felt as well as seen. It can be felt only in the United States.</p> - -<p>The attention paid to differences and difficulties should not obscure -the value that Britons place on their relationship with Americans. -Materially, Britain's interest in maintaining the relationship is much -the greater; undoubtedly they need us more than we need them. But here -we must remember the national character of Britain. The British have -been an independent people for a thousand years. Even when the fortunes -of the nation have been at their lowest ebb, the people have been -outspoken in defense of what they considered their rights. The earliest -Continentals who traveled to England lamented the blunt independence of -the yeomen and the absence of subservience among the noisy city crowds.</p> - -<p>Some sociologists have concluded that all this has changed and that -the industrial revolution and other social changes have transformed -the British from the rowdiest and most belligerent of nations into -law-abiding conformists. The national boiling-point, they report, is -high.</p> - -<p>Certainly a superficial view of the British working class in its high -noon of full employment, security, high wages, and new housing would -seem to confirm this conclusion. Personally, I doubt that the turbulent -passions which sent Britons out to singe the beard of the King of Spain -and to make rude noises when Hitler proposed peace in 1940 are spent.</p> - -<p>Phlegmatic, often apathetic, sentimental but not emotional, they are -a people capable of great outbursts of political action. They should -not therefore be considered a people prepared to follow<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_183"></a>[Pg 183]</span> docilely and -blindly where the United States leads. The failure to recognize the -presence in British character of this fundamental, unruly independence -even when it was flourished in their faces is one of the principal -reasons why President Eisenhower and his administration were surprised -by Britain's intervention in Egypt in the autumn of 1956. Granted that -the President was involved in the election campaign, it is mystifying -that a man of his experience in dealing with the British failed to see -the signs pointing toward independent action.</p> - -<p>As early as August of that year letters in <i>The Times</i> urged an -independent course for Britain and France in the Middle East. One -letter signed by Julian Amery, then a Conservative back-bench Member -of Parliament, ended with the reflection that if the two countries -followed such a course and took action independently of the United -States, it would not be for the first time. That <i>The Times</i> would -give space to letters of this sort was a sign that the Establishment -recognized the ideas they contained. In September, when the Chancellor -of the Exchequer visited Washington, he made it clear to the most -important of his hosts that Britain would not take the Egyptian seizure -of the Suez Canal lying down—that if this was to be a struggle for -Britain's existence, his country would prefer to go down with the guns -firing and the flags flying. During that same month Sir Anthony Eden -had written to President Eisenhower in terms which to anyone familiar -with British official phraseology said that if Britain did not get a -satisfactory settlement of its difficulties over the Canal through -the United Nations, other action would be necessary. In speech after -speech, especially at the Conservative Party Conference on October -13, the leaders of the government carefully stated that they did not -exclude the use of force as a means of settling the Suez problem.</p> - -<p>The British government badly miscalculated the Eisenhower -administration's reaction to intervention in Egypt. It expected -benevolent neutrality from a trusted ally. It got pressure and -criticism. But this miscalculation may have been natural under the -circumstances, for it can be argued that Britain did not expect the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_184"></a>[Pg 184]</span> -United States administration to be surprised. It had, after all, given -abundant direct and indirect warnings that force might be used as a -last resort. How much of the administration's anger, one wonders, -was based in the realization that it had been told what was going to -happen—if only it had stopped to read again and think?</p> - -<p>British diversions from co-operation in policy over Suez or anywhere -else are, to a considerable extent, the result of the circumstances -governing the existence of the United Kingdom—circumstances that are -as different from our own as could be imagined. Here is an island -absolutely dependent on world trade. Westward lies the continental -United States, with a continent's natural resources at its disposal—an -almost completely self-sufficient power. The difference is inescapable -and permanent. We must expect the British to react sharply whenever a -vital part of their trade is endangered. In 1956 the harsh equation was -"Suez equals oil, oil equals British production, British production -equals the existence of the United Kingdom." Likewise, we must expect -the British to expand, within agreed limits of strategic restrictions, -their world trade. This is particularly true of trade with Communist -China.</p> - -<p>In this connection we might remember that, to the British, diplomatic -recognition is not a mark of approval, and that if there is a -possibility of dividing the Soviet Union and the Peiping regime, it -can be exploited only through diplomatic channels. Diplomatic attempts -to wean China away from Russia may fail. But they are worth trying. -Can they be tried successfully without the co-operation of both the -United States and the United Kingdom? I think not. In any case, the -task this generation faces of preserving Western freedom in defiance -of the Communist colossi is difficult enough without discarding this -diplomatic weapon.</p> - -<p>An alliance flourishes when it is based on realism. Realism involves -knowing your ally and understanding his motives. In war the strategic -reasons for an alliance are laid bare; the motives are there for all -to see. In peace, when international relations are infinitely more -complex, the task of maintaining an alliance is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_185"></a>[Pg 185]</span> consequently more -difficult. In this chapter I have cited salient aspects of American -political life and government policy which have irritated and angered -the British. The differences over the Suez crisis were the last and -most important of these. That issue generated a great deal of anger, -and some harsh and brutal truths were spoken on both sides. I think -that from the standpoint of the future of the alliance this was a good -thing. It forced the British, I believe, to adopt a more realistic -attitude toward the United States and United States policy, and it will -lead them to take more, not less, diplomatic initiative in the future.</p> - -<p>There will be other differences in foreign policy between the two -countries, for differences are inevitable in the relationship between -two parliamentary democracies. Indeed, they are a strength. It is -because the British are an independent, outspoken, hard-headed people -that they are good allies. It is because British governments think for -themselves and enjoy the services of an experienced, incorruptible, -intelligent civil service that their support is welcome and necessary -in the contest with the East.</p> - -<p>And we know—at least, we should know—that if the worst comes the -British are stout fighters, ready, once every effort to preserve peace -has failed, to fight with all they have and are.</p> - -<p>I carry with me as a talisman the memory of a conversation at Supreme -Headquarters, Allied Powers Europe, during the darkest days of the -war in Korea. An American general officer, a man of the highest -professional qualifications, suggested to a small, intimate group -that, with more and more American power diverted to the Far East, the -Russians might jump in Europe.</p> - -<p>"It will be pretty tough for you people," he told a British lieutenant -colonel, an amiable, rather rakish character. "They'll offer you a -chance of getting out. If you don't take it, they'll tell you they'll -blow London and half a dozen other cities off the map. They'll probably -tell the French the same sort of thing. What do you think your people -will do?"</p> - -<p>"What do you think we'll do?" the lieutenant colonel answered. "We'll -tell them to go to hell."</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_186"></a>[Pg 186]</span></p> - -<p>Beneath the political bickering, the unrelenting self-criticism, the -pessimism there exists now, as there did in 1940, a fiery spirit. The -British will never be vassals. Nor will they ever be easy allies. But -if this alliance fails, there is little left on which an enduring peace -can be built.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_187"></a>[Pg 187]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="X_The_British_Economy_and_Its_Problems">X. <i>The British Economy and Its Problems</i></h2> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen -six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure -twenty pound ought and six, result misery.</i></p> - -<p> -CHARLES DICKENS<br /> -</p> - -<p><i>It would be madness to let the purposes or the methods of private -enterprise set the habits of the age of atomic energy.</i></p> - -<p> -HAROLD LASKI<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">We must</span> now take a closer look at the British economy as it is today. -This is a big subject, one well worth a long book. It is my purpose -in this informal estimate of our ally to sketch the fundamentals of -the present economic situation and to deal briefly with some of the -factors in it. Earlier we have encountered the Trades Union Congress -and the emergence of a new working class. We have seen that Britain is -changing behind the mask of tradition. In this chapter we will see that -the change in the national economy is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_188"></a>[Pg 188]</span> progressing perhaps even more -rapidly than the change in the structure of society and politics. And, -of course, all three changes are closely related and interdependent.</p> - -<p>The British Empire, which half a century ago stood at the apex of its -economic power, was built on coal. Largely because of the extent of her -coal resources, Britain got a head start in the industrial revolution, -which originated in England. An organized coal-mining industry has -existed in Britain for over three hundred years, or three hundred years -longer than in any European country. Not only was there enough coal to -make Britain the world's workshop, but until about 1910 British exports -dominated the world export market. In the peak production year of 1913 -the industry produced 287,000,000 tons, exported 94,000,000 tons, and -employed 1,107,000 workers. Contrast these figures with those for 1955: -221,600,000 tons produced, 14,200,000 tons exported, 704,100 workers.</p> - -<p>Three centuries of mining means that the majority of the best seams -are worked out. Each year coal has to be mined from deeper and thinner -seams. Each year the struggle to raise productivity becomes harsher. -There are huge workable reserves; one estimate is 43,000,000,000 tons, -which, at the present rate of consumption, is more than enough to last -another two hundred years. But this coal will be increasingly difficult -to mine. Moreover, certain types, such as high-quality coking coal, -will be exhausted long before 2157.</p> - -<p>In the reign of King Coal all went well. Britain built up a position in -the nineteenth century which made her the world's leading manufacturer, -carrier, banker, investor, and merchant. By the turn of the century, -however, other nations, notably the United States and Germany, were -challenging this position. Nevertheless, Britain was able to withstand -competition up to the outbreak of World War I through her huge exports -of coal and cotton textiles and through her ability to take advantage -of the general increase in world trade.</p> - -<p>Coal and the industrial revolution, it should be remembered, gave -Britain something more than a head start in production: they<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_189"></a>[Pg 189]</span> enabled -her to train the first technical labor force in the world. The traveler -in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Asia will soon realize that -the British Empire and British influence of half a century ago were -built not on gunboats and redcoats but on the products of British -factories and on the bewhiskered expatriates, many of them Scots, who -tended locomotives in Burma and sawmills in South America. They, too, -as much as the booted and spurred heroes of Kipling, were builders of -empire. This advantage, at least, Britain has not lost. Today she still -possesses a large force of highly skilled labor.</p> - -<p>The economic problems that developed into a whirlwind in the forties of -this century first became serious in the years after the close of World -War I. British textiles had to compete in Asia with textile products -from India and Japan which were produced at a much lower cost because -of low wages. Oil and coal from new European mines challenged Britain's -lead in coal exports. At the same period there was a fall in the demand -for many of the heavy industrial products that British factories had -supplied to the rest of the world; locomotives, heavy machinery, cargo -ships. The politico-economic dogma of self-sufficiency developed -in nations that for long had been British customers. They began to -protect their own growing industries with tariffs, quotas, and other -restrictions.</p> - -<p>But the effect on the British economy of this decline in exports was -cushioned by income from investments overseas and by a substantial -improvement in the terms of trade. During the twenties and early -thirties British industry began to contract for the first time in -centuries. Unemployment averaged 14 per cent between 1921 and 1939. -By September 1939, however, the economy, stimulated by the armament -program, increased production, and greater industrial investment at -home, began to improve. Britain faced the Second World War on a secure -economic basis. Indeed, there were persuasive gentlemen in the London -of that Indian summer of peace who tried to persuade you that economic -strength alone could win the war.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_190"></a>[Pg 190]</span></p> - -<p>When Americans think of the effect of World War II on Britain we are -apt to think in terms of bomb damage and ships sunk. Certainly these -were important parts of a generally disastrous picture, but the whole -is much more impressive than the parts.</p> - -<p>The inability to continue industrial maintenance and make replacements -under the hammer of war, shipping losses, and bomb damage ran down -the British economy by about £3,000,000,000. At the present rate of -exchange this amounts to $8,400,000,000. The present cost of rebuilding -ships and houses and factories is, of course, infinitely higher due to -the upswing in labor costs and material prices since 1945.</p> - -<p>This loss was accompanied by a drastic change in Britain's world -trading position. To begin with, she lost almost all her overseas -assets—those investments which had cushioned the shock of the -falling export market and whose income had largely paid for imports. -The terrible appetite of war—a ship torpedoed, a division lost, a -factory bombed—devoured them. Over £1,000,000,000 worth of overseas -investments ($2,800,000,000 at the current rate of exchange) were -sold to pay for war supplies. Of this amount, £428,000,000 (about -$1,198,400,000) represented investments in the United States and Canada.</p> - -<p>Yet even this expenditure of the carefully husbanded investments, the -results of thrift and financial foresight, did not suffice to pay -for nearly six years of war. Britain also accumulated overseas debts -to the amount of £3,000,000,000, or, at current rates of exchange, -$8,400,000,000. When the money was borrowed, the pound sterling was -pegged at $4.03 and the dollar equivalent of the external debt was -closer to $12,000,000,000.</p> - -<p>The emphasis on armaments and the priority given arms-producing -industries, the arrears of industrial maintenance and replacement, the -concentration of manpower in the services and industries of national -importance for the winning of the war, and the shortage of shipping all -reduced Britain's export trade during the war years. By 1944 exports -had fallen to less than one third of their 1938 volume.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_191"></a>[Pg 191]</span></p> - -<p>This meant that, in some cases, nations whose economy had been less -strained by the war were replacing British sellers in these markets. -In other instances, nations long dependent on British exports began to -make their own products. When the British were prepared to return to -normal export trade, the markets were not so extensive as they had been -before the war.</p> - -<p>The war affected Britain's financial position in two other respects. At -its end the real value of the gold and dollar reserves of the nation -had been reduced to about one half of the pre-war level. But the -physical destruction of the war had increased Britain's dependence, and -that of other sterling-area nations and other countries, upon supplies -of all kinds from the United States. Yet the dollar earnings by these -countries were not enough to pay for their supplies.</p> - -<p>Finally, and perhaps most important from the standpoint of a country -that must live by trade, the terms of trade changed. The price of raw -materials imported into Britain rose sharply after the war. By 1948 -about 20 per cent more goods had to be exported than in 1938 to pay for -the same amount of imports.</p> - -<p>As a result of these changes in her position, Britain emerged from the -war as an empty-handed victor. The banker of the world was deeply in -debt. The market places of the world were crowded with other nations, -and her own goods were few in number and out of date. Shabby, tired, -undernourished, the island people, not for the first time, began the -long road back.</p> - -<p>The road chosen was longer and more arduous than it might have been -because the British, government and people, Socialist and Tory, did -not wish to abandon their position as a world leader. War might have -impoverished them, circumstances might have made them dismiss the maid -and do their own washing up, but to an incurious world they turned a -brisk and confident face. For years the world had recognized that the -British never knew when they were licked. Now, it seemed, they did not -know when they were broke.</p> - -<p>They knew, all right. On visits to London during the years I<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_192"></a>[Pg 192]</span> spent -chiefly in Russia and Germany I would meet friends in the services or -the ministries. "We're in a hell of a mess, old chap," they said, "but -we'll work out of it somehow." No one seemed to know just how; but no -one doubted it would be done.</p> - -<p>The first problem then—and it is the first problem today—was the -balance of payments. Exports had to be increased quickly, for the terms -of trade continued to be against the United Kingdom. It was in the -years 1946-51 that American aid counted most. Loans from the United -States and Canada, it is estimated, paid for about 20 per cent of the -imports of the United Kingdom between 1946 and 1950.</p> - -<p>Simultaneously, the drive to increase exports made headway. The -country, and especially the industrial worker, was, in the modern -jargon, made "export-conscious."</p> - -<p>"Export or die"—the slogan may have seemed exaggerated to some, but -it was, and is, an accurate statement of Britain's position. British -exports had recovered their pre-war volume by 1947, only two years -after the end of the war. Three years later they were two-thirds higher -than in 1947. Thereafter, as Germany and Japan began their remarkable -economic recovery, exports rose more slowly. But they did rise, and by -1954 they were 80 per cent higher than in 1938.</p> - -<p>The upswing in exports was accompanied by two other processes. -The pattern of industrial production for exports began to change. -Textiles were no longer a dominant export product. Instead, emphasis -shifted to the engineering industries: electric motors, factory -machinery, electronic equipment, precision instruments, chemicals, and -shipbuilding. At the same time, imports—including importation of some -raw materials essential to the export trades—were severely restricted, -and consumer rationing at home directed British production to foreign -markets.</p> - -<p>Five years after the war Britain had made great strides toward -recovery. There was in that year a surplus of £300,000,000, or -$840,000,000, on the balance of payments. But the Korean War, which -began in June 1950, was a serious setback for Britain's<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_193"></a>[Pg 193]</span> economy. The -country, resolved to play its part, began to rearm. At the same time -there was a world-wide rush to stock raw materials, and this forced -up the prices of the imports Britain needed for her export trade. -The satisfactory balance of payments in 1950 became a deficit of -£403,000,000 by 1951.</p> - -<p>Import prices began to fall after 1951, and in the next three years -there was a balance-of-payments surplus. This recovery was accompanied -by a steady rise both in industrial production and in the real national -product.</p> - -<p>The average rate of increase in industrial production from 1946 to -1954 was 5 per cent, while the real national product increased by 3 -per cent. The nation used this increased output, first, for exports; -second, to make good the capital losses of the war years by new -investment; and, finally, for rearmament. Those who wonder at the -rocketing German economic recovery after 1949 and the relative slowness -of British economic advance should ponder the fact that in 1950-3 -defense expenditure gobbled up <i>approximately half</i> of the British -total output.</p> - -<p>The rationing and other restrictions held over from the war held -personal consumption at bay until 1954. Wages rose, but these were -offset by a sharp increase in prices, which by 1952 were about 50 per -cent above those of 1945. After that year, however, earnings rose more -rapidly than prices. With the end of wartime controls after 1952 the -standard of living, especially that of the industrial working class, -rose perhaps more rapidly than it had ever done before.</p> - -<p>The increase in production, the end of rationing, the rises in wages -and prices, and the boost in internal consumption all took place -against a background of full employment. In the United Kingdom -unemployment averaged less than 2 per cent of the working population in -1946-54.</p> - -<p>This, then, is the short story of British recovery since the war. -By the summer of 1956 the Central Statistical Office could announce -that from the beginning of 1946 through the end of 1955 the national -output of goods and services had increased in volume<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_194"></a>[Pg 194]</span> by one third. -Reckoned in monetary value, the increase was even greater: the figure -for 1946 was £8,843,000,000 ($24,480,400,000), while for 1956 it was -£16,639,000,000 ($46,589,200,000). The difference between the increase -in value and the increase in production is due to the continuous rise -in prices since 1946.</p> - -<p>These are impressive figures. But no one in authority in Britain -believes that the nation can rest on them. The double problem of -maintaining exports abroad and defeating inflation at home remains.</p> - -<p>The two are closely related. In 1950 Britain had grabbed 26 per cent of -the world market for manufactured goods. German, Japanese, and other -competition has now reduced the British share to about 20 per cent, the -pre-war figure. To maintain it, Britain must continue the export drive, -and this, in turn, involves the attack on inflation.</p> - -<p>Inflation began at the time when the British people were emerging from -years of war and post-war austerity. There was more money, and suddenly -there was plenty to buy as one by one the controls on raw materials, -building licenses, food, and clothing disappeared. By 1955 cars and -other products that should have gone for export were being sold in bulk -in Britain, and gasoline was being imported for them. Industries that -should have been almost totally devoted to export trades were producing -for a lucrative home market.</p> - -<p>The "squeeze" applied by the Conservative government early in 1956 -to halt the buying boom is not, as so many Britons hope, a temporary -affair. Until British industry can increase its production and adjust -itself to the demands of world-wide competition, the country will have -to restrain its home purchases in the interests of overseas sales. The -preservation of the present standard of living depends directly on -exports. If this hard fact is rejected by the British people, then the -economy will deteriorate rapidly.</p> - -<p>Those interested in the future of Britain, both Americans and British, -have been looking at the nation's industry for a decade and sadly -shaking their heads. It is too traditional, it is unenterprising, its -workers don't work as hard as the Germans or the Japanese, it is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_195"></a>[Pg 195]</span> -restricted by the trade unions or the employers, monopolies and trade -rings stifle it. There is a little truth in each of these accusations. -But if all were true or even one completely true, how is the sharp -increase in volume of production and the general economic recovery to -be explained?</p> - -<p>Early in 1956, about eleven years after the last Allied bomber flew -over the Ruhr, German steel production outstripped British steel -production. This caused a good deal of "viewing with alarm" in Britain, -much of it by people who failed to realize that before the war Germany -yearly produced about five million more tons of steel than Britain. -The health of the British economy today does not rely primarily on its -output of basic products such as steel or coal but on the nation's -ability to sell its manufactured products.</p> - -<p>If the number of employees is taken as a criterion, the most important -of these manufacturing industries are: (1) engineering, shipbuilding, -and electrical goods, with 1,695,000 employees; (2) motor and other -vehicles, 934,000; (3) textiles, 898,000; (4) food, drink, and tobacco, -654,000; (5) precision instruments and other metal goods, 531,000; (6) -clothing, 524,000; (7) metal manufactures, 519,000; (8) manufacture -of wood and cork and miscellaneous manufacturing industries, 472,000; -(9) paper and printing, 445,000; (10) chemicals and allied industries, -402,000.</p> - -<p>All of these industries contribute to the export drive, including food, -drink, and tobacco. There has been no overwhelming demand for such -Northern delicacies as toad-in-the-hole or Lancashire hot pot from -British markets, but the demand for Scotch whisky seems to be holding -up reasonably well.</p> - -<p>These industries are the meat and potatoes of the British economy. -Since the war there has been a steady increase both in production -and productivity (output per man in industry) in these industries. -Fortunately for Britain, the greatest rises in over-all production have -taken place in the engineering-shipbuilding-electrical-goods group, the -vehicles group, and the chemicals group.</p> - -<p>Productivity was a more serious problem. Lack of maintenance and -capital investment during the war, antiquated machinery, the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_196"></a>[Pg 196]</span> -understandable physical weariness of a labor force that had been -working at top speed since 1939 all contributed to a relatively low -rate of output per man year in industry compared with the United States.</p> - -<p>In 1948 the Labor government took an important step to meet the problem -when it formed the Anglo-American Productivity Council. Its goal was to -increase productivity in Britain through study of manufacturing methods -in the United States. Teams representing management, technicians, and -shop workers went to the United States to study American methods. They -returned to boost British productivity.</p> - -<p>The effort did not stop there. An independent body, the British -Productivity Council, was established in 1952 to continue the work. -Represented on it are the British Employers' Confederation, the -Federation of British Industries, the Trades Union Congress, the -Association of British Chambers of Commerce, the National Union of -Manufacturers, and the nationalized industries. Under the aegis of -the Council, Local Productivity Committees have been formed and the -exchange of information and visits between groups from industrial firms -have been encouraged.</p> - -<p>The Council is a good example of the British approach to a national -problem in modern times. The nation's difficulties have gradually, -but not entirely, eased the old enmities between some employers and -workers. Aware of the extreme seriousness of the situation, they are -working together to boost productivity, and they are making headway. -Employer-worker consultation is becoming the rule. When the rule is -broken by either side there is trouble.</p> - -<p>The increase in productivity has been steady. Taking 1948 as the base -year with a figure of 100, output per man year in industry rose to 105 -in 1949. Save for 1952, when there was a slight relapse, the figure has -improved steadily ever since.</p> - -<p>Production has shown a corresponding rise. The general index of -industrial production, using 1948 as the base year of 100, rose from -114 in 1952 to 121 in 1953 and then jumped to 136 for 1955. But -production leveled off in 1956. As that year ended, the expec<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_197"></a>[Pg 197]</span>tation -was that 1957 would see a new rise in production as the capital -investment of the previous five years began to show results.</p> - -<p>These figures are one answer to questions often asked abroad: "Why -don't the British boost production? Why don't they work?" The answer is -that they have boosted production and they are working. Early in 1957 -the factory where Jaguar cars are made was almost entirely destroyed -by fire. Great efforts by both management and labor put the factory -back into production two weeks later. Production and productivity are -rising fastest, of course, in the new industries such as electronics. -But the economy is burdened by elderly industries such as coal-mining, -where extra effort by labor and management cannot, because of existing -equipment and conditions, produce dividends in production as they would -elsewhere.</p> - -<p>Britain's long predominance in both industry and commerce, especially -during the last half of the nineteenth century, fostered a lack of -enterprise and lethargy in management that is highly unsuitable to the -nation's present economic situation. This attitude lingered until the -period after the last war when the situation became plainly desperate. -Changes of styling and packaging abroad failed to impress British -business. "We make a much better product than some of this flashy -foreign stuff," one was told loftily. "Let them have their fancy -wrappings."</p> - -<p>Memories of the golden days of the last century also encouraged a -conservative attitude toward change in business methods or the routine -of production. Some of the larger industries, however, emerged from -the war intent on drastic changes, and others, less progressive, were -forced to change by the increased competition for export markets and by -the new necessity of using the restricted quantities of raw materials -to greatest advantage.</p> - -<p>Industrial engineering, including work study, work simplification, -plant layout, and planned maintenance, has become a primary concern of -industrial management. Many of the managers—the managerial class is -about half a million strong—are much more interested in new methods of -industry than are the workers. Any<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_198"></a>[Pg 198]</span> innovation that seems to disturb -the happy condition of full employment and high wages can provoke -discontent among the workers. The more progressive unions are doing -their best to explain and advocate change. It is in the middle ranks -of labor's officer class, the ranks most interested in the emotional -support of "the lads," that the strongest resistance to change is -located.</p> - -<p>Management in industry, therefore, is beginning to assume some of the -importance and standing that it attained long ago in the United States. -Facilities for training in management are increasing, although the -majority of today's managers never received any special training. Trade -unions, employers' associations, and individual concerns are pressing -forward with training schemes.</p> - -<p>There is a relationship between this development and the arrival -in British society of the new middle class. Many of the leaders of -this class are in management work in industry and commerce. As their -position is solidified by Britain's increasing reliance on the export -industries they serve, their social and economic importance is bound to -increase. In the past their social position has been well below that of -the lawyers, doctors, soldiers, and civil servants who were the elite -of the old middle class. That, too, is changing.</p> - -<p>Gross fixed capital formation recently has been at about 14 per cent of -gross national expenditure. By 1954 its volume was 17 per cent above -that of 1938 and about 30 per cent greater than in 1948.</p> - -<p>In 1951 and 1952 the government responded to the pressing needs of -defense and exports by taking measures to curtail certain kinds of -investment. In 1953 and 1954 the policy was reversed, and incentives -for investment were written into the Budget. But the wave of home -buying in 1955 made it necessary for the government again to impose -restraints on investment. In particular it sought moderation in -capital outlay for municipal and local building and improvements and a -deceleration of investment programs in private industry.</p> - -<p>These and other actions taken at that time were the result of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_199"></a>[Pg 199]</span> the -Conservative government's preoccupation with the balance of payments, -the nation's gold and dollar reserves, the inflationary trend in the -national economy, and the need for investment and expansion in the -export industries. These objectives will dominate the economic approach -of any government, Socialist or Tory, that achieves power in Britain in -the foreseeable future.</p> - -<p>British industry has many problems of finance, of production and -productivity, of management. But to an outsider it appears that the -gravest problem of all is the indulgence by the two main partners in -industry, labor and management, in restrictive practices. By preventing -the most effective use of labor, technical ability, or materials, or -by reducing the incentive for such use, these practices gravely damage -the industrial efficiency of the country. Restrictive practices seem to -many competent observers a far greater danger to the British economy -than strikes.</p> - -<p>It is important to understand that such practices are almost as -prevalent among management as among labor. Each group has the same -basic motivation. They seek a reasonably stable economic life free from -the strains and stresses of competition. The psychological explanation -may be unspoken desire to return to the old easy days of Britain's -unquestioned economic supremacy.</p> - -<p>The employers' restrictive practices are less widely advertised than -those of the workers. Their classic form is the price-fixing agreement -which insures that even the least efficient manufacturing firms will -have a profit margin. To maintain the price-fixing system, employers -maintain private investigators and courts of inquiry; they can and do -discipline the maverick who breaks out of the herd.</p> - -<p>One expression of the employers' approach is the tender of contracts -identical to the last farthing. Britain in 1955 lost the contract -for the Snowy River hydroelectric plant in Australia largely because -the eight British firms among the twenty that submitted tenders all -submitted exactly the same amount. In New Zealand nineteen out of -twenty-six companies bidding for an electric-cable contract submitted -identical figures.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_200"></a>[Pg 200]</span></p> - -<p>The practice is embedded in British industry. Legislation to combat it -was introduced into the House of Commons in 1956, but objective experts -on the subject believed the legislation fell far short of the drastic -action necessary.</p> - -<p>Restrictive practices are only too evident in the larger field of -relations between the worker and the boss. The importance of problems -in this area of conflict is multiplied by their political implications -and by the fact that Britain, like other countries, is entering a new -period of industrial development. The industrial use of nuclear energy -for power and the advent of automation can produce a new industrial -revolution in the homeland of the first industrial revolution. But -this cannot improve the British economy—indeed, the revolution cannot -really get under way as a national effort—without greater co-operation -between organized labor and employers and managers.</p> - -<p>Throughout this book there have been references to organized labor and -to the Trades Union Congress. Now we encounter them in the special -field of industrial relations.</p> - -<p>Organized labor in Britain is big. There are 23,000,000 people in -civil employment, and of these over 9,000,000, nearly the whole of -the industrial labor force, are union members. They have an enormous -influence on the economic policy of any British government; they are, -according to Sir Winston Churchill, "the fourth arm of the Estate"; in -the view of Mr. Sam Watson, the tough, capable leader of the Durham -miners, they are "the largest single organism in our society."</p> - -<p>But organized labor is not a single force, an orderly coalition of -unions. It is an extraordinary mixture. Politically some of its leaders -are well to the right of the left-wing Tories although they vote -Labor. One important union and a number of smaller ones are dominated -by Communists. The Transport and General Workers Union has 1,300,000 -members; the National Amalgamated Association of Nut and Bolt Makers -has 30. Some unions are extremely democratic in composition. Others -are petty dictatorships. Many are not unions in name. If you are -civil-service clerk, for instance,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_201"></a>[Pg 201]</span> or even a member in good standing -of the Leeds and District Warp Dressers, Twisters and Kindred Trades, -you join an association.</p> - -<p>The Trades Union Congress is the most powerful voice in British labor. -Only 186 of about 400 unions are affiliated with it, but as these -186 include almost all the larger ones, the TUC represents nearly -8,000,000, a majority of the country's union members.</p> - -<p>The outsider's idea of the typical trade-unionist is a horny-handed -individual in a cloth cap and a shabby "mac." But there are 1,500,000 -white-collar workers, including 500,000 civil servants, among the -unionists affiliated with the TUC.</p> - -<p>The tendency of the white-collar workers to affiliate with the TUC -probably will continue. In March of 1956 the London County Council -Staff Association decided to apply for affiliation. We can expect -that the clerical workers in this type of union will exert increasing -influence within the TUC and upon its Council. The TUC's claim to -represent the industrial working class thus is being watered down by -the admission of the white-collar workers' unions. As this class of -worker generally believes that the industrial workers' pay has risen -disproportionately and that inflation has hurt the office worker more -than it has the industrial worker, the new composition of the TUC may -produce sharp internal differences. At any rate, the old position of -the TUC as the spokesman only for the industrial worker is a thing of -the past.</p> - -<p>The TUC is a powerful voice. But it is only a voice. It has great -responsibilities and little formal power. It can, for instance, -attempt to moderate demands for higher wages and urge restraint, but -it cannot prevent any union from pressing such demands. The TUC can -advise and conciliate when a strike begins, but it cannot arbitrarily -halt one. When two member unions are in a dispute—and such disputes -can seriously damage both the national economy and labor's position in -British society—the TUC can intervene, but too often its intervention -is futile. Each union is self-governing. The TUC's influence, -nonetheless, is enormous. The restraint shown by the major unions -after the war and during the war on the question of wage increases -was largely due to the influence of the TUC.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_202"></a>[Pg 202]</span> The general growth of -responsibility on the part of many unions can also be attributed, to a -great extent, to the missionary work of the TUC.</p> - -<p>In recent years the General Council of the TUC has moved toward -assuming a stronger position in the field of industrial strikes. It has -tried to show the workers that the strike is a two-edged sword that -wounds both worker and employer. The TUC maintains that the strike, -the workers' great weapon, should not be used indiscriminately because -of the damage a strike by one union can do to other unions and to the -national economy.</p> - -<p>At the 1955 TUC conference the General Council won acceptance of a -proposal that it intervene in any case of a threatened strike when -negotiations between the employers and the unions seem likely to break -down, throwing the members of other unions out of work or endangering -their wages, hours, and conditions. This is a significant step forward. -Formerly the TUC could move only after negotiations had broken down and -a deadlock had been reached. In other words, the TUC acted only at the -moment when both sides were firmly entrenched.</p> - -<p>But this advance does not improve organized labor's position in regard -to the problem of restrictive practices, a problem that is as serious -as strikes or threats of strikes.</p> - -<p>The <i>Daily Mirror</i> of London, that brash, vigorous tabloid which is -the favorite newspaper of the industrial working class, published an -inquiry into the trade unions in 1956. Its authors, Sydney Jacobson and -William Connor, who conducts the column signed "Cassandra," traced the -origin of restrictive practices back to 1811, when bands of workers -known as the Luddites broke into lace and stocking factories and -smashed the machinery. "The suspicion toward new methods has never -entirely died out in this country," they wrote, "and although sabotage -of machinery is rare (but not unknown) the protests have taken a new -direction—the slowing down of output by the men themselves and the -development of a whole series of practices that cut down the production -of goods and services."</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_203"></a>[Pg 203]</span></p> - -<p>Any reader of the British press can recall dozens of instances of -restrictive practices by labor. One famous one concerned the floating -grain elevator at Hull, an east-coast seaport. This elevator, which -cost £200,000 ($560,000), was kept idle for two months because the -Transport and General Workers Union insisted that it should be worked -by twice as many men as the Transport Commission thought necessary. The -Transport Commission, incidentally, represented a nationalized industry.</p> - -<p>And there was the union that fined a milkman £2 for delivering milk -before 7:30 a.m.</p> - -<p>The unions are quick and brutal in their punishment of those who break -their rules. Indeed, today, when there is full employment and the -unions generally enjoy a prosperity and power undreamed of by their -founders, they are more malicious than in the old days when they were -fighting for their rights. The principal weapon against an offending -worker is to "send him to Coventry." No one speaks to him; he eats -and walks home alone. Ronald Hewitt, a crane-driver, endured this for -a year. He had remained at work, obeying his union's rules, when his -fellow workers, who belonged to another union, went out on strike. -Hewitt was a person of unusual mental toughness. Another worker sent to -Coventry committed suicide.</p> - -<p>Many of these punishments are the outcome of situations in which -unofficial strikes send out the workers. Those who remain and who are -punished are accused of being "scabs" because they obey the union's -rules.</p> - -<p>All union leaders publicly acknowledge the great importance of -increased productivity in British industry. But the methods of -boosting productivity often seem to some union leaders to strike at -the principles for which they have fought so long. For instance, an -increase in output is regarded by the veterans solely as a traditional -means of increasing the profits of the employers. Moreover, increases -in productivity often involve the introduction of new machines and -layoffs for some workers. To the short-sighted, appeals for greater -productivity thus seem calls to smash the job<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_204"></a>[Pg 204]</span> security that is the -fetish of the industrial working class. This sort of union leader -just does not seem to grasp, or to want to grasp, the principle that -increased productivity is a general good benefiting workers, employers, -and unions.</p> - -<p>Efficiency is not the sole god of British industry, as is evident when -one studies the weird system known as "demarcation" in the shipbuilding -industry. To install a port light under this system requires the -labor of a shipwright to mark the position of the light, a caulker to -indicate and make the hole for the light, another driller to make the -surrounding holes, and another caulker to fix the bolts and chain. In -addition, a foreman for each of the trades supervises the operation. -Interunion disputes arising out of such unnecessarily complicated -operations frequently result in a stoppage of work and a delay in the -filling of export contracts.</p> - -<p>The most alarming example occurred at Cammell Laird's, a shipbuilding -company, in 1955 and lasted until well into 1956. New ships were being -built—for dollars—and the strike began over a difference between -woodworkers and sheet-metal workers. The new vessels were to have -aluminum facing in the insulation. Formerly the woodworkers had done -this sort of work, and they claimed rights over the new job. But the -sheet-metal workers said that, as aluminum was metal, the job was -theirs. The two groups and management finally reached an agreement. -Then the drillers of the Shipwrights' Union entered the affair and a -new strike developed.</p> - -<p>The construction of the ships was delayed for six months and more. The -ability of Cammell Laird's or other British shipyards to offer foreign -buyers a firm date for completion of ships became a matter of doubt. -About 400 workers were dismissed as redundant. About 200 strikers found -work elsewhere. Thousands of other jobs were jeopardized. There was not -the slightest indication that those who inspired the strike took much -account of its effects on their country's future.</p> - -<p>As a result of the application of the demarcation principle in -shipyards—you drill holes in wood, we drill holes in aluminum—wage -costs are often as much as 6 per cent higher than normal.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_205"></a>[Pg 205]</span></p> - -<p>The innate conservatism of union leaders and the rank and file in -shipyards, industrial plants, and factories has been proof against the -missionary work of critics extolling the far different approach of -American labor. The leaders are often unmoved by figures which show -that increased productivity by the American labor force has resulted -in a far greater national consumption. In many cases neither the union -leader nor the union member will accept the idea that new machines and -new methods mean more efficient production, lower costs, and higher -wages.</p> - -<p>British union leaders often counter that the American worker has no -memory of unemployment and depression. This is, of course, untrue. -Indeed, in many instances political and economic it seems that British -labor has made too much of its experiences, admittedly terrible, in the -depression of two decades ago. American labor, by eagerly accepting -new processes and machines, has attempted to insure itself against the -recurrence of a depression. British labor has not.</p> - -<p>Industrial disputes affect the British economy's ability to meet the -challenge of the new industrial revolution. Disputes between union -and union are especially important. In 1955 there were three national -strikes. All were complicated by interunion friction.</p> - -<p>Another complicating factor in industrial relations is the slow -disappearance, under the pressure of increased mechanization, of the -system of wage differentials in British industry. These differentials -represented a reasonable difference between the wages of skilled and -unskilled workers. With their disappearance, skilled workers in one -industry have found themselves earning less money than unskilled -workers in another. One cause is the ability of the big "general" -unions to win wage increases. Another is the practice of demanding wage -increases solely on the basis of the rising cost of living.</p> - -<p>Naturally the disappearance of differentials has led to hot disputes -among workers and unions. In this atmosphere it is difficult for either -the union leaders or the employers to urge increased productivity -and harder work. "Everyone is furious with everyone<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_206"></a>[Pg 206]</span> else," an -industrialist in the Midlands said. "They start with me, but they are -pretty mad at each other, too."</p> - -<p>In this interminable war between labor and management, the former -wields a weapon of enormous potency—the strike. Labor acknowledges -its disadvantages, but the right to strike is fiercely guarded. The -whispered suggestion that strikes might be made illegal unites the -labor movement as does nothing else. Labor needs the strike as its -ultimate weapon: the hydrogen bomb of British industrial relations. And -because of the peculiar economic conditions in Britain, the employer -finds himself almost weaponless. He can still dismiss an unsatisfactory -employee, if he has a good reason and can convince the employee's union -that it <i>is</i> a good reason. But dismissal does not mean much in an era -of full employment.</p> - -<p>Right-wing critics on both sides of the Atlantic have contended for a -decade that British economic difficulties are rooted in strikes and -other industrial disturbances. There is something in this, but, as H.L. -Mencken would have said, not much.</p> - -<p>From 1946 through 1954 the days lost through strikes in Britain ranged -from a low of 1,389,000 in 1950 to a high of 2,457,000 in 1954. Due -to strikes in the newspaper and railroad industries and on the docks, -1955 was an exceptionally bad year: 3,794,000 working days were lost. -The figures look big, and of course it would have been much better -for Britain if they were half as large. But let's put them into -perspective. The figure for 1955, admittedly high, represents a loss of -less than one day's work per man in every five years' employment. The -loss to production through industrial accidents is eight times as high.</p> - -<p>Both sides know that a strike is a costly business: costly to labor, to -management, to the union, to the nation. In many cases the threat of a -strike has been enough to force the employers to give way. Inevitably, -the higher cost of production resulting from the new wage rates is -passed on to the consumer. The merry-go-round of rising prices, rising -wages, and rising costs spins dizzily onward. Overseas the buyer who is -choosing between a Jaguar or a Mercedes<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_207"></a>[Pg 207]</span> finds that the price of the -former has suddenly risen, so he buys the German car rather than the -British one. This is what the economists mean when they warn British -labor and industry about pricing themselves out of the export market.</p> - -<p>As we have seen, the industrial worker is doing pretty well in Britain, -even if the rise in prices is taken into consideration. The average -weekly earnings for all male adult workers, according to the records -kept by the Ministry of Labor, show a rise from £3 9<i>s.</i> 0<i>d.</i> in -1938 to £10 17<i>s.</i> 5<i>d.</i> in 1955—an increase of 215 per cent. The -coal-miners who were earning £3 2<i>s.</i> 10<i>d.</i> in 1938 are now earning a -weekly wage of £13 18<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> The figure does not represent wealth -by American standards, for it amounts to approximately $38.99. But it -is high pay by British standards, and when the low cost of subsidized -housing and the comparatively low cost of food are taken into account -it will be seen that the British miner is living very well.</p> - -<p>The miner's view is that he does a dirty, dangerous job, that he has -never been well paid before, and that if a union does not exist to win -pay rises for its members, what good is it? The miners and the union -members in the engineering industry belong to strong unions able to -win wage increases by threats of a strike. Once these increases are -granted, other smaller unions clamor for their share of wage rises. The -merry-go-round takes another turn.</p> - -<p>Government attempts to urge restraint, through the TUC, upon the unions -customarily fall afoul of the snag that each union believes that it -is a special case and that although other unions can postpone their -demands for higher wages until next year, it cannot. So one union -makes a move and the whole business begins again. If the increase is -not granted, there is a strike or a threat of a strike. The national -economy suffers, class antagonism increases, and export production is -delayed. For such is the interdependence of the British industrial -machine and so great is the drive for exports that any industrial -dispute that reaches the strike stage inevitably affects exports.</p> - -<p>A modern strike is like a modern war. No one wins and every<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_208"></a>[Pg 208]</span>one loses. -A classic case is the Rolls-Royce strike of 1955, which involved not -only employers and union labor but, eventually, the Roman Catholic -Church and the Communist Party. The cause of the strike was a conflict -between restrictive practices and a stubborn workman named Joseph -McLernon, who worked at the Rolls-Royce factory at Blantyre in Scotland -as a polisher of connecting rods.</p> - -<p>The workers in Joe's shop feared that, in view of reduced work, some of -their number might be let out. So they agreed to share their work by -limiting bonus earnings to 127 per cent of the basic rate. McLernon, -however, refused to limit his overtime. He polished as long and as -hard as ever and refused the assistance of another worker. For this, -McLernon was reprimanded by his union, the General Iron Fitter's -Association.</p> - -<p>Joe had been working for Rolls-Royce for twelve years. The firm is -considered a good employer. But its managers were men of conviction. -They objected to the union picking on Joe and said so. Three months -later the union expelled McLernon.</p> - -<p>Enter the Communists with many an agonizing cry about the solidarity -of labor. They demanded that Rolls-Royce fire McLernon on the grounds -that he no longer belonged to the union. The employers refused, and -immediately all the other polishers stopped work. Joe kept right on. By -the end of the day the entire factory labor force of 600 men was out on -strike.</p> - -<p>The Amalgamated Engineering Union's local branch then entered the -picture. After a few days another 7,500 workers at the Hillington and -East Kilbride factories had struck.</p> - -<p>Was it a strike? Certainly, said the General Iron Fitter's Association. -The Electrical Trades Union, dominated by Communists, recognized -the strike as official in accordance with its rule of recognizing -all strikes involving electricians as official until they are -declared otherwise. The Amalgamated Engineering Union, after much -soul-searching, decided to back the strike and approved strike pay -for its members. Negotiations between the Employers' Federation and a -committee representing the various unions got nowhere.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_209"></a>[Pg 209]</span></p> - -<p>The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Glasgow then issued a pastoral letter -warning the workers against Communism. McLernon is a Catholic. But so -were many of the workers who wanted him fired.</p> - -<p>The strike dragged on for seven weeks. The strikers lost over £700,000 -($1,960,000) in wages. By the time the strike was over, no one on -the strikers' side could disentangle the objectives of the various -groups that had called it. Rolls-Royce export contracts were delayed. -The Royal Air Force failed to get delivery on time of some important -machines. Other industries also involved in the export trade and in -national defense were slowed down. The unions had maintained solidarity -at a tremendous cost. But when the strike collapsed, Joe McLernon was -still at his job, polishing away. He alone could be termed a winner. -Rolls-Royce, the unions, industry, and the nations were losers.</p> - -<p>The Communist intervention in the Rolls-Royce strike symbolized its -current role in Britain. This is to win control of key positions in the -British unions so that the Communist Party will be able to paralyze -British industry in the event of an international crisis or a war. To -achieve this ultimate objective, the Communists obviously intend to -establish a stranglehold on the communications and defense industries.</p> - -<p>This is the real Communist danger in Britain. Active political -campaigning by the Communist Party has been fumbling, misdirected, -and notably unsuccessful. Neither the old colonel from Cheltenham -who classes the sprightly dons of the Labor Party with "those damned -Bolshies" nor the Bible Belt Congressman who confuses British Socialist -politicians with Russian Communists is on the right track. The danger -of Communism in Britain lies in the unions. So does the defense against -the danger.</p> - -<p>The pattern of Communist success is uneven. Communists lead the -Electrical Trades Union, ninth-largest in the country, with a -membership of about 215,000. Because electricity is everywhere in -modern industry the union's members are everywhere. And although -probably not more than one in every sixty members of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_210"></a>[Pg 210]</span> ETU is a -member of the Communist Party, the party completely runs the union.</p> - -<p>Here is a curious sidelight on Communist methods. The ETU is weak -financially, perhaps the poorest of the ten largest unions. But it -spends money freely on "education." The ETU has its own Training -College at Esher, where its more ambitious members can be trained to -further the interests of the Communist Party and to silence the voices -of critics and doubters. Although the non-Communist members of the ETU -consider the college as a valuable device for the advancement of the -worker, the institution plainly is a training school for Communists and -their creatures in their prolonged war against the British economy.</p> - -<p>One of the basic concepts of British Socialism is the solidarity of -the working class. Acceptance of this concept makes it difficult for -the industrial worker to think of the Communist, who comes from the -same town, speaks with the same accent, wears the same clothes, as an -enemy. There is a pathetic ingenuousness about workers who try to tell -the visitor that the Communists "are just the same sort of blokes as us -except they've got a different political idea."</p> - -<p>The <i>Daily Mirror</i> team in its portrayal of the trade unions devoted a -chapter to "The Communist Challenge." Significantly, a large part of -the chapter provided an incisive and illuminating illustration of just -how the Communists move to gain control of a union.</p> - -<p>Where else are the Communists strong? They are in control in some areas -of the National Union of Mineworkers. Arthur Horner, the Secretary of -the Union, is a Communist. But they are being fought hard in the NUM by -men like Sam Watson, who heads its Durham region.</p> - -<p>The connection in the Communist mind between the control of the NUM and -the ETU is obvious. Control of these two unions would enable Communists -to halt the flow of coal and electric power to Britain's factories. Not -much more is needed to cripple a nation's economy.</p> - -<p>But the Communists press on. They establish cells in the air<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_211"></a>[Pg 211]</span>craft -industry. They work industriously at fomenting trouble on the -docks, especially in the ports—such as London, Liverpool, and -Glasgow—through which most of the exports pass. Already the threat to -block coal and power can be augmented with a threat to halt defense -production and exports. It is improbable that the Communists are now -powerful enough to carry their program to a triumphant conclusion. But -they are on their way.</p> - -<p>How do they work? Very much as they do elsewhere in Europe. In Britain, -as in Germany or Italy or France, the Communists care very little -about better pay or better working conditions for union members. Their -objective is power, power that will enable them to push the interests -of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. And, to repeat, they have -learned that for them power in Britain is obtainable only through -control of the unions and not through Parliament.</p> - -<p>The Communists try to establish cells in every important factory in -Britain. These cells maintain contact with the district secretary of -the Communist Party, who knows from the cell exactly what sort of work -the factory is doing. Little wonder that Soviet visitors are incurious -about the details of British production when they are shown British -factories. The information obviously is safely filed in Moscow.</p> - -<p>When an industrial dispute develops in a factory, the Communists seek -to widen the area of dispute and to involve as many unions as possible. -They also do their best to bring the recognized non-Communist leaders -of organized labor into disrepute. One method is to organize support -for demands that the Communists know the management cannot accept. -When a strike organized on this basis fails, the Communists point out -to the union members that the leadership is weak and hint that a more -"dynamic"—i.e., Communist—direction would benefit the union.</p> - -<p>The Communist drive to break the power of the unions and thus to -spread industrial discontent is assisted by the character of some -union leaders. In many instances leaders are elected to hold their -jobs for life, and after years of power they become dictatorial.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_212"></a>[Pg 212]</span> It -is a favorite Communist charge that the union bosses are "in" with the -employers, and that as long as their jobs are safe they will do nothing -to upset the present situation.</p> - -<p>In the trade unions, as elsewhere in British society, the war alliance -with the Soviet Union inspired sympathy with the people of Russia -and admiration for their resistance to the Nazis. These sentiments -altered under the impact of the cold war, and they altered faster at -the top levels of the labor movement than anywhere else. The Trades -Union Congress in 1948 attacked Communist activities in the unions in -a pamphlet called <i>Defend Democracy</i> and followed this with another -pamphlet, <i>Tactics of Disruption</i>. In 1949 the TUC quitted the World -Federation of Trade Unions, which is dominated by the Communists, and -helped establish the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. -A year later the TUC barred Communists and fascists as delegates to the -annual conference of Trades Councils.</p> - -<p>Meanwhile, the leaders of the TUC strove to explain the true nature of -the Communist challenge to free unions, and to emphasize the refusal -of the Communists to accept democratic principles in the unions or -anywhere else.</p> - -<p>All this has had some effect, but not enough. The TUC has thus far -failed to shake the average industrial worker out of his lethargy. Safe -in the security arising from full employment and high wages, he does -not take the Communist challenge seriously. And now that many of the -basic objectives of the labor movement have been won, he does not work -so hard to protect them as he did to win them.</p> - -<p>In this atmosphere Communist successes are inevitable. For it is the -members of a Communist cell in a union or a factory who are prepared -to talk all night at a meeting, to vote solidly as a bloc in support -of one Communist candidate while the non-Communists divide their votes -among three or four candidates. In many cases the non-Communists will -not even turn out to vote—it is too much trouble, especially when they -can watch the "telly" or go to the dog races.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_213"></a>[Pg 213]</span></p> - -<p>The official leadership of the unions faces a formidable task. It -must first educate the rank and file on the true nature of Communism. -After that, it must organize anti-Communist action in the unions. Here -they encounter a real obstacle in the minds of the rank and file. In -the past, reaction in Britain and elsewhere has lumped Communists, -Socialists, and trade-unionists together. To many a unionist, -anti-Communism seems, at first inspection, to be an employers' trick to -break the solidarity of the working classes. Of course the Communists -do all they can to popularize and spread this erroneous idea.</p> - -<p>The Communists in Britain seem to have been moderately successful in -establishing themselves as a national rather than an international -force. When Frank Foulkes, the General President of the Electrical -Trades Union and a member of the Communist Party, asserted: "This -country means more to me than Russia and all the rest of the world put -together," few challenged this obvious insincerity.</p> - -<p>We must accept, then, that Communism within the trade unions is a -far more serious threat to the welfare of Britain than Communism as -a political party. It is on hand to exacerbate all the difficulties -in the field of industrial relations which have arisen and will arise -during a change from obsolete economic patterns to the new patterns by -which Britain must live.</p> - -<p>The introduction of automation—the use of machines to superintend the -work of other machines—and of nuclear energy for industrial power are -two of the principal adjustments that British industry must make. Each -will involve labor layoffs and shifts in working population. These are -important and difficult processes, and with the Communists on hand to -paint them in the darkest colors there will have to be common sense, -tolerance, and good will on the part of both management and labor. In -particular, the rank and file of British industry must be made aware -how important the changes are to the average worker and his family. -There is little use in publishing pamphlets, however admirable, if -the man for whom they are intended will not stir from in front of the -television set.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_214"></a>[Pg 214]</span></p> - -<p>A comparison of some of the long-range economic plans laid down by -successive governments, Socialist and Tory, with the general attitude -of the man in the street leads to the conclusion that, whereas -government has been "thinking big," the governed have, in the main, -been "thinking small." There is in Britain little recognition of or -admiration for the truly impressive program for industrial use of -nuclear energy. By 1965 Britain expects to have nineteen nuclear power -stations in operation. These will be capable of generating between -5,000 and 6,000 megawatts, or about a third of the annual requirement -for generating capacity. It is estimated that the operation of these -nineteen stations can save the country eighteen million tons of coal -each year.</p> - -<p>In addition to this basic program, the Atomic Energy Authority will -build six more reactors to produce plutonium for military purposes and -power for civil purposes. The total cost of the basic program alone -will be about £400,000,000 ($1,120,000,000) a year in the early 1960's.</p> - -<p>The leaders of both Conservative and Labor parties believe that the -program is vital to Britain. Indeed, the foresight, imagination, and -ambition of the men at the top on both sides is one of the reasons why -the British economy, despite all its present weaknesses and future -difficulties, is a good bet to pull through. What is lacking is the -ability of any leader or party to evoke from the country the energetic -response necessary to meet and defeat the weaknesses and difficulties.</p> - -<p>One instance of this lethargy on the part of either employers or -the industrial working class is their failure to respond to wider -educational advantages, especially in the field of technical knowledge. -Recognizing the necessity for greater technical education, the -government intends to spend £100,000,000 ($280,000,000) on technical -education from 1956 to 1961. Will the government and the people get -their money's worth in the present atmosphere?</p> - -<p>Industrial research is on a much smaller scale in Britain than in the -United States. For years British industries thought it was cheaper -to buy patents abroad than to do their own research. As a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_215"></a>[Pg 215]</span> result, -British technicians were lured abroad. Even today many industries are -indifferent if not openly hostile to the idea of "expensive" industrial -research.</p> - -<p>The attitude of the new working class to education, technical or -otherwise, has been described earlier in this book. The boys, in the -eyes of their parents, need no more schooling than that given them -before they can leave school and go to work in the factory. The girls -need a little more if they are to graduate into the ranks of clerical -workers, but many girls, attracted by the independence offered by jobs -in mill or factory, leave school with their brothers.</p> - -<p>Let me sum up some conclusions about the British economy:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>The drive for exports is not a passing economic phase but a permanent -condition. If wages and prices cannot be held down, Britain will be -priced out of her markets, and the standard of living of the working -class and of all other classes will fall.</i></p> - -<p><i>The ability of the country to meet the adjustments made necessary -by the revolution in the sources of industrial power and by the -introduction of new industrial techniques is gravely endangered by -the restrictive practices of both employers and labor, by interunion -bickering often arising from these practices, and by the prolonged and -vicious Communist attack on the trade-union structure.</i></p> - -<p><i>Neither among the middle class nor among the working class is there -sufficient awareness of the critical situation in which Britain finds -herself.</i></p></div> - -<p>This is a somber picture. It is relieved, I think, by our knowledge -that the British are a surprising people. They are going through a -period of change in their society and of adjustment to their society's -place in the comity of nations. The very fact that they are changing -argues for them. The Britain of 1938 could not exist in the modern -world. The Britain of 1958 can be at the top.</p> - -<p>Granted the indifference of the working class to politics and its -fierce reaction against anything that seems to threaten its newly won -ease, granted the middle class's penchant for the past, its out-<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_216"></a>[Pg 216]</span>worn -ideas—these are still a great people, tough, energetic, at heart -politically mature. And they believe in themselves perhaps more than -they are willing to admit. Their character, more than coal or sea power -or fortuitous geographical circumstances, made them great in the past. -It can keep them great in the future.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_217"></a>[Pg 217]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="XI_The_British_Character_and_Some_Influences">XI. <i>The British Character and Some Influences</i></h2> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>I am a great friend to public amusements, for they keep people from -vice.</i></p> - -<p> -SAMUEL JOHNSON<br /> -</p> - -<p><i>I have never been able to understand why pigeon-shooting at -Hurlingham should be refined and polite while a rat-catching match in -Whitechapel is low.</i></p> - -<p> -T.H. HUXLEY<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">Obviously</span> there is great deal more to British society than political -and economic problems, although a casual visitor might not think so. -Visiting pundits find themselves immersed in the profundities of the -Foreign Office or following the ideological gymnastics of Socialist -intellectuals. Consequently, they depart firmly convinced that the -British are a sober, rather solemn people. These islanders, as a -matter of fact, are an exceptionally vigorous and boisterous lot and -have been for centuries. Their interest in diplomacy, politics, and -commerce is exceeded only by their devotion to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_218"></a>[Pg 218]</span> cricket, beer, and -horse racing. Nor should we allow the deadening background to bemuse us -about the essential character of the British. The misty mournfulness -of the English countryside, the bleak inhospitality of a Midland city, -the eternal sameness of suburbia have failed to tame the incorrigible -robustness of the national character.</p> - -<p>To know the British today one must know not only their government -and politics, their industry and commerce, but other aspects of life -through which the national character is expressed. The press, the -schools, the military services, sports and amusements, pubs and clubs -all are part of the changing British world. Each has been affected -by changes in the class structure. Each, in its way, is important to -Americans and their understanding of Britain. Opinion about the United -States in Britain is based largely on what Britons read in their -newspapers. And, whether or not Americans admire the class distinctions -inherent in the public-school system, perhaps a majority of the leaders -with whom the United States will deal in the future will be products of -that system.</p> - - -<p class="center">THE PRESS:</p> - -<p class="center">THE THUNDERER AND THE TIN HORNS</p> - -<p>A graduate of Smith, home from a stay in London, asked: "How can you -read those London newspapers? Nothing but crime and sex—I couldn't -find any news." Years ago Webb Miller, the great United Press -correspondent, advised me: "Read <i>The Times</i> every day, read all of it, -if you want to know what is going on in this country and the world." -Both Webb and the young lady from Smith were right: the British press -contains some of what is best and a great deal of what is worst in -daily journalism.</p> - -<p>Most Americans and many Britons, when they speak of the press, mean the -London daily and Sunday newspapers. The London papers concern us most -because they are national newspapers circulating throughout Britain and -influencing and reflecting opinion far beyond the boundaries of greater -London. One newspaper published in the provinces, the <i>Manchester -Guardian</i>, may be said to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_219"></a>[Pg 219]</span> have national—indeed, world—standing. One -of the most influential, interesting, and well-written newspapers, it -can also assume on occasion a highly irritating unctuousness.</p> - -<p>There are a large number of provincial newspapers—about a hundred -morning and evening dailies and Sunday papers, and about eleven hundred -weeklies. Many of them are read far more thoroughly than the London -"national" paper that the provincial family also buys.</p> - -<p>Not long ago a British cabinet minister who represents a constituency -in the western Midlands told me his constituents "got their news -from the BBC, their entertainment from the London dailies, and their -political guidance from the principal newspaper in a near-by provincial -city." Other politicians have referred to the same pattern.</p> - -<p>Because most London daily and Sunday newspapers circulate all over the -British isles, circulation figures are high by American standards. The -<i>News of the World</i>, a Sunday newspaper that built its circulation on -straight court reporting of the gamier aspects of British life, had a -record circulation of about 8,000,000 copies. Recently its circulation -has dropped slightly, a development that puzzles Fleet Street, for -there is no lack of sex, crime, or sport—or interest in them—in -Britain.</p> - -<p>Of the London dailies, the largest in circulation is the <i>Daily -Mirror</i>, a tabloid whose circulation average between January and June -of 1955 was 4,725,122. The <i>Daily Express</i>, the bellwether of the -Beaverbrook newspapers, had a circulation of just over 4,000,000 during -the same period, and three other London dailies, the <i>Daily Mail</i>, the -<i>Daily Telegraph</i>, and the <i>News Chronicle</i>, all boasted circulations -of better than 1,000,000.</p> - -<p>For every 1,000 Britons, 611 copies of the daily newspapers are sold -each day. Compare this with the United States figure of 353 per 1,000. -Britain is a good newspaper country, and the London press is lusty, -uninhibited, and highly competitive.</p> - -<p>American newspapermen working in London customarily divide the press -between the popular newspapers, such as the <i>Daily<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_220"></a>[Pg 220]</span> Mirror</i> and -the <i>Daily Mail</i>, and the small-circulation papers, such as <i>The -Times</i> and the <i>Manchester Guardian</i>. The circulation of <i>The Times</i> -for January-June 1955 was 211,972 and for the <i>Guardian</i> 156,154. -Similarly, on Sundays there is a division between the <i>Sunday Times</i> -(606,346) and the <i>Observer</i> (564,307) and such mass-circulation -"Sundays" as the <i>Sunday Express</i>, the <i>Sunday Pictorial</i>, and the -<i>People</i>.</p> - -<p>The distinction is not based primarily on circulation. <i>The Times</i> and -the <i>Manchester Guardian</i> and the <i>Daily Telegraph</i> on weekdays and -the <i>Sunday Times</i> and the <i>Observer</i> on Sundays print more news about -politics, diplomacy, and world events than do the mass-circulation -papers. They are responsible and they are well written. The <i>Daily -Telegraph</i>, which has a circulation of over 2,000,000, is the only one -in this group whose circulation is in the "popular" field. But it has -given few hostages to fortune: its news columns contain a considerable -number of solid foreign-news items as well as first-class domestic -reporting.</p> - -<p>The shortage of newsprint (the paper on which newspapers are printed) -has curtailed the size of British papers since 1939. Almost all -newsprint is imported, and with the balance of payments under pressure -the expenditure of dollars for it has been restricted. But the -situation has improved slowly and the London papers are fattening, -although they remain thin by New York standards.</p> - -<p>Considering this restriction, the responsible newspapers do a -splendid job. Day in and day out the foreign news of <i>The Times</i> -maintains remarkably high standards of accuracy and insight. The -anonymous reporters—articles by <i>Times</i> men are signed "From Our -Own Correspondent"—write lucidly and easily. <i>The Times</i> has never -accepted the theory that involved and complicated issues can be boiled -down into a couple of hundred words with the nuances discarded. News is -knowledge, and no one has yet found a way to make it easy to acquire -knowledge.</p> - -<p>But <i>The Times</i>, often called "<i>The Times</i> newspaper," is a good deal -more than a report on Britain and the world. It is an institution -reflecting all British life. By reading its front page en<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_221"></a>[Pg 221]</span>tirely -devoted to classified advertising one can get a complete picture of -upper-class and upper-middle-class Britain. In the left-hand columns -are births, deaths, marriages, and memorial notices. If an American -wants to understand how unstintingly the British upper classes gave -their sons and brothers and fathers to the First World War, let him -look at the memorial notices on the anniversary of the Battle of the -Somme. If he wants to see how hard-pushed these same classes are today, -let him read the painful, often pathetic admissions in the columns -where jewelry, old diplomatic uniforms, and the other impedimenta of -the class are offered for sale.</p> - -<p>The editorials of <i>The Times</i>—the British call editorials "leaders" or -"leading articles"—are, of course, one of the most important features -in journalism. <i>The Times</i> is independent politically, but it does its -best to explain and expound the policies of the government of the day. -Over the years since the war it has supported individual measures laid -down by Conservative and Labor governments and it has assailed the -policies of both the left and right when this has been conceived of as -the duty of <i>The Times</i>. The editorial writing in <i>The Times</i> often -attains a peak of brilliance seldom achieved in any other newspaper. -For a time, especially in the period before World War II, "The -Thunderer," as it was once called, had become a whisperer. Recently -<i>The Times</i> has spoken on national and international issues with its -old resonance and sharpness.</p> - -<p>The influence of <i>The Times</i> among politicians, civil servants, and -diplomats is extraordinary. It is, I suppose, the one newspaper read -thoroughly by all the foreign diplomats in London. As recently as the -spring of 1956 an editorial in <i>The Times</i> discussing a reconsideration -of Britain's defense needs sent the German Ambassador scurrying to the -Foreign Office to inquire whether the editorial reflected government -policy. It did.</p> - -<p>This influence is the result of <i>The Times</i>'s special position in -British journalism. The editorial-writers and some of the reporters -of <i>The Times</i> often are told things that are hidden from other -re<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_222"></a>[Pg 222]</span>porters. Also, they are members in good standing of that important, -amorphous group, the Establishment, which exists at the center of -British society; they know and are known by the politicians, the key -civil servants, the ministers. Occasionally <i>The Times</i> is used to test -foreign or domestic reaction to a measure under consideration by the -government. By discussing the measure in an editorial, <i>The Times</i> will -provoke in its letter columns a wider discussion into which various -sections of public opinion, left, right, and center, will be drawn.</p> - -<p>No other newspaper in the free world has a letter column comparable -to that of <i>The Times</i>. The first letter may be a sharp analysis of -government policy in Persia and the last the report by a Prime Minister -that he has seen a rare bird on a walk through St. James's park. -Some of the letter column's discussions touch on matters of national -interest. Others deal with the Christian names given to children or the -last time British troops carried their colors into action.</p> - -<p>The <i>Manchester Guardian</i>, with a smaller circulation and a smaller -foreign staff, still manages to make its influence felt far beyond -Manchester. Its policies are those of the Liberal party and, as -the Liberal Party is now in eclipse, the <i>Guardian</i> brings to the -discussion of national and international affairs a detached and -refreshing sharpness. Where <i>The Times</i> occasionally adopts the tone -of a wise and indulgent father in its comments on the world, the -<i>Guardian</i> speaks with the accents of a worldly-wise nanny. When the -<i>Guardian</i> is aroused, its "leaders" can be corrosive and bitter. It -is less likely to support the foreign policy of the government of the -day than is <i>The Times</i>. Consequently, the <i>Guardian</i> is liable to be -more critical than <i>The Times</i> in dealings with the United States and -American foreign policy. (The Suez crisis was a notable exception.) But -it is well informed about the United States, and so are its readers. -In Alistair Cooke and Max Freedman the <i>Guardian</i> has two of the -best correspondents now writing in the United States for the British -press. Their reports are long, detailed, and accurate, and Cooke, in -particular, never forgets that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_223"></a>[Pg 223]</span> what a foreign people sees in its -theaters, reads in its magazines, and does on its vacations is also -news to the readers at home.</p> - -<p>Such great provincial newspapers as the <i>Yorkshire Post</i> and the -<i>Scotsman</i> follow the conservative approach to news adopted by <i>The -Times</i>, the <i>Manchester Guardian</i>, and the <i>Daily Telegraph</i>. With -the responsible London dailies they serve the upper middle class and -are its most outspoken mouthpieces in a period when, as we have seen, -that class is being pressed by high taxation, the rising cost of -living, and the simultaneous development of a new middle class and a -prosperous working class. The <i>Sunday Times</i>, for instance, has devoted -many columns to the plight of the professional man and his family, -and all of these papers have reported at length on the appearance -of associations and groups devoted to, or supposedly devoted to, -the interests of the middle class and opposition to the unions that -represent the new working class.</p> - -<p>The cult of anonymity has persisted longer in Britain's responsible -and reliable newspapers than in the United States. Although Fleet -Street knows the names of <i>The Times</i>'s reporters, the public does -not. Richard Scott, the Diplomatic Correspondent of the <i>Manchester -Guardian</i>, has no byline, nor has Hugh Massingham, the brilliant -Political Correspondent of the <i>Observer</i>. The influence wielded in -the United States by columnists still is reserved in Britain almost -entirely to the anonymous "leader"-writers of the responsible British -newspapers. Working with the editorial-writers are hundreds of -industrious, well-educated, experienced reporters. They are good men to -talk to and to drink with, and they are tough men to beat on a story.</p> - -<p>But they and the newspapers they represent are not a part of the -bubbling, uproarious, pyrotechnical world of the popular London -dailies. Here is a circus, a daily excitement for anyone who enjoys -newspapers. The <i>Daily Express</i>, the <i>Daily Mail</i>, the <i>News -Chronicle</i>, the <i>Daily Herald</i>, the <i>Mirror</i>, and the <i>Sketch</i> compete -hotly for news and entertainment. Their headlines are brash, their -writing varies from wonderfully good to wonderfully bad, and their -editorials are written with a slam-bang exuberance that is stimu<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_224"></a>[Pg 224]</span>lating -and occasionally a little frightening. This is the true, tempestuous -world of Fleet Street.</p> - -<p>In this world the great names are not confined to the writers and -editors. The publishers, called "proprietors" in Britain, tower over -all. Of these the most interesting, successful, and stimulating is -Lord Beaverbrook, who runs the <i>Daily Express</i>, the <i>Sunday Express</i>, -and the <i>Evening Standard</i> with a gusto undiminished by seventy-eight -active years.</p> - -<p>"The Beaver" occupies a unique place in British journalism and -politics. No one has neutral feelings about him. Either you like him -or you hate him; there is no middle course. I suppose nothing gives -him more satisfaction than knowing that when he arrives in London, men -in Fleet Street pubs and West End clubs ask one another: "What do you -think the Beaver's up to now?"</p> - -<p>Is "what the Beaver is up to" really important? The enmity of the -<i>Express</i>, which is the enmity of Lord Beaverbrook, can make a -politician squirm. But does it really lower his standing with the -voters? I doubt it. Lord Beaverbrook is an incorrigible Don Quixote who -has tilted at and been tossed by many windmills. He is, incidentally, a -more powerful writer than most of his employees. Early in 1957 he was -prodding his newspapers to the attack against the government's plans -for closer economic association with Europe. The headlines were bold -and black, the indignation terrifying. Will the campaign itself alter -government policy? I doubt it.</p> - -<p>Lord Beaverbrook once remarked that he ran his papers to conduct -propaganda. Just before the retirement of Sir Winston Churchill, Lord -Beaverbrook was asked why his newspapers were so critical of Sir -Anthony Eden, the heir presumptive to the premiership. He replied -that Sir Anthony had never supported the policies of the Beaverbrook -newspapers. As no other leading politician had thrown his weight that -way, this seemed a rather weak reason for attacking the new leader -of the Conservative Party. The political affiliation of the <i>Daily -Express</i> is Independent Conservative.</p> - -<p>But the Beaverbrook campaigns perform a real public service<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_225"></a>[Pg 225]</span> by -fixing public attention upon issues. I do not think the editorials -convince—I have yet to meet a <i>Daily Express</i> reader who confused the -"leader" column with pronouncements from Sinai—but they encourage -that discussion of public issues which is essential in a democracy. Of -course the <i>Express</i> newspapers' tactics annoy nice-minded people. But -the tradition of a free press includes not only such august journals -as <i>The Times</i> but the rip-roaring, fire-eating crusaders as well. -There is not much chance that the popular press in Britain will model -itself on <i>The Times</i>, but if it did so, the result would be a loss to -journalism and to the nation. And as long as the Beaverbrook tradition -survives—as long, indeed, as Lord Beaverbrook himself is around to -draw on his inexhaustible fund of indignation—one section of the -popular press is bound to remain contentious and vigorous.</p> - -<p>The <i>Daily Express</i>, the morning paper of the Beaverbrook empire, is -technically one of the best newspapers in the world. Its layout is -admirable, and its headline-writers often show a touch of genius. In -its writing and its presentation of news it has been much affected by -such divergent American influences as <i>The New Yorker</i> and <i>Time</i>.</p> - -<p>The <i>Express</i> is brightly written (too much so at times), and its -tastes in policies and politicians are incalculable. Along with -a liberal helping of political, foreign, and crime reporting it -offers two of the best features in British journalism: Osbert -Lancaster's pocket cartoon on the front page and the humorous column -of "Beachcomber" on the editorial page. "Beachcomber" and Lancaster -are sharp and penetrating commentators on the daily scene. In many -instances their references to the occasional inanities of the British -society are more cogent than anything to be found in the editorial -columns of the <i>Express</i>.</p> - -<p>The <i>Express</i> successfully caters to the new middle class that has -arisen since the war, especially that part of it which is involved -in the communications industry. The young advertising manager from -the provinces who has "arrived" in London may find <i>The Times</i> too -verbose and the <i>Telegraph</i> too stodgy. The <i>Express</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_226"></a>[Pg 226]</span> with its bright -features on the theater or London night life, attracts him. But, oddly, -three principal features of the <i>Express</i> cater to very different -tastes. Osbert Lancaster's subject matter is drawn usually from the -upper middle class—his Maudie Littlehampton, after all, is a Lady. The -humor of "Beachcomber" appeals to tastes that reject the average in -British humor, and Sefton Delmer, the peripatetic foreign correspondent -of the <i>Express</i>, often writes stories on international issues which -are much more involved and adult than would seem suitable for the -majority of the newspaper's four million readers.</p> - -<p>This divided approach is not so obvious in the <i>Daily Mirror</i>, which -has the largest circulation of any of the London dailies. This is an -important newspaper in that it is the most accurate reflection I know -of the tastes and mores of the new working class in Britain. There are -many indications elsewhere that Cecil King, its proprietor, and his -chief lieutenants have pondered long and earnestly about Britain's -problems. The <i>Mirror</i>'s pamphlet on trade unions and an earlier -pamphlet on Anglo-American relations are solid contributions to the -literature on these subjects. But the <i>Daily Mirror</i>'s customary -approach to policies and issues is as robust and sharp as that of a -policeman to a drunk. It is belligerent rather than persuasive; it -loves big type.</p> - -<p>But the <i>Daily Mirror</i>'s handling of certain types of stories, -particularly those involving industrial disputes and crime, is -excellent. (British crime reporting in general, although circumscribed -by the libel laws, is of high caliber.) The <i>Mirror</i>'s editorials, -with their <span class="allsmcap">GET OUT</span> or <span class="allsmcap">PASS THIS BILL</span> approach to -politicians and measures, may alienate as many as they win, but the -editorials are alive, dealing often with problems—such as automation -and wage differentials—that are of the keenest interest to the -industrial working class.</p> - -<p>The <i>Mirror</i> is much closer to the thinking of this class than is the -<i>Daily Herald</i>, usually considered the official Labor newspaper. The -Trades Union Congress owns 49 per cent of the stock in the <i>Daily -Herald</i>, and Odhams Press Ltd. owns the remainder. Once<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_227"></a>[Pg 227]</span> powerful and -well informed on industrial and labor-movement happenings, the <i>Herald</i> -no longer seems to represent either the movement or the industrial -working class that supports the movement. Its approach is stodgier -than that of the <i>Mirror</i>, less in keeping with the tastes of the new -working class.</p> - -<p>The <i>Mirror</i>'s most renowned features are "Cassandra" and "Jane." The -former, written by William Connor, is one of the hardest-hitting and -most provocative features in British journalism. Connor has evoked the -wrath of statesmen of both major parties. The Communists hate him. He -is a deflator of stuffed shirts, a pungent critic, and a stout defender -of the British worker.</p> - -<p>The <i>Mirror</i>'s other salient feature is a comic strip called "Jane." -Jane is a well-proportioned young lady whose adventures nearly always -end in near nudity. She is a favorite of British troops abroad and -their families at home. The information value of this daily striptease -is nonexistent, but a <i>Mirror</i> employee once defended the strip on the -grounds that "the bloke that buys the paper to look at Jane may read -Bill Connor or the leader."</p> - -<p>The London press enjoys an advantage that does not exist in the United -States. This is the presence of a remarkably well-informed critical -opinion in the weekly reviews that are also printed in London. The -<i>Spectator</i>, the <i>New Statesman and Nation</i>, <i>Time and Tide</i>, and, -occasionally, the <i>Economist</i> are careful, if sometimes pecksniffian, -critics of the national newspapers. Fleet Street is one big family -(it would be stretching things to call so tumultuous a community -"happy"), and the inner workings of the great dailies are laid bare -to the weeklies often through the agency of disgruntled reporters. -Consequently, "Pharos" in the <i>Spectator</i> and Francis Williams in the -<i>New Statesman</i> are authoritative and knowledgeable critics of the -newspapers and their proprietors.</p> - -<p>The weeklies themselves are a valuable supplement to the newspapers. -They have time to reflect and space to discuss. In many cases they are -often slightly ahead of public opinion, more so than the daily papers, -and they are not afraid to criticize tartly such sacred cows of British -journalism as the Crown.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_228"></a>[Pg 228]</span></p> - -<p>Since the end of the war the tendency among the popular newspapers has -been to entertain rather than to inform. This recognizes what I believe -to be one of the fundamental truths of the communications business in -Britain: the majority of the people get their news from the British -Broadcasting Corporation's radio and television services and from the -news services of the Independent Television Authority.</p> - -<p>Readers of the more responsible London and provincial newspapers listen -to the news on the BBC and then turn to their papers for expanded -stories and ample interpretative material. But the average reader does -not read <i>The Times</i> or the <i>Manchester Guardian</i> or the <i>Observer</i>. -When he turns off the radio in the morning and picks up his "popular" -newspaper, he is confronted with gossip columns, comic strips, newsless -but beguiling stories about the royal family, sports stories, and, in -some papers, a dash of pornography.</p> - -<p>The "popular" papers do print hard news. Correspondents like Sefton -Delmer of the <i>Daily Express</i> and William Forrest of the <i>News -Chronicle</i> send interesting, factual, and frequently important stories -from Germany or Russia. But such stories are increasingly rare. The -trend even in this sort of writing is toward entertainment.</p> - -<p>For example, not long ago a London popular daily, once renowned for -its foreign staff, sent a reporter to Communist China. This was -an opportunity for objective reporting. Instead the readers got a -rehash of the reporter's own political outlook plus a few flashes of -description of life in modern China.</p> - -<p>This tendency toward entertainment rather than information is deplored -by those who believe that a democracy can operate successfully only on -the foundation of well-informed public opinion. In Britain, however, -newspapers are customarily considered not as public trusts but as -business, big business. If entertainment pays, the newspapers, with -a few exceptions noted above, will entertain. Unfortunately, the BBC -cannot provide the time necessary to give the news that the newspapers -fail to print. Obviously the great mass<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_229"></a>[Pg 229]</span> of the British people will -become less well informed about the great issues at home and abroad if -the present trend continues.</p> - -<p>During the thirties the critics of the British press liked to repeat a -cruel little rhyme that ran:</p> - -<p style="margin-left: 25%;"> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>You cannot hope to bribe nor twist,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Thank God, the British journalist,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>But, seeing what the man will do</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Unbribed, there's no occasion to.</i></span><br /> -</p> - -<p>Yet, from a knowledge of the type of man who writes for the popular -press and a thorough acquaintance with his product, I would say that -the blame rests not with the reporter but with the management.</p> - -<p>It is certainly within the power of the proprietors of the popular -newspapers to change the character of the papers. Some editors in Fleet -Street habitually sneer at American newspapers and their practices, -although these men are not above adopting some American techniques of -news presentation which they think will sell newspapers. But the amount -of factual information about national and foreign affairs in many -small-town American papers is far greater, proportionately, than that -provided by some great "national" newspapers in London.</p> - -<p>Those who are interested in the improvement of relations between the -United States and the United Kingdom must be concerned about the -reporting of American news in the popular press. More space is devoted -to news from the United States than formerly, and correspondents for -the London dailies travel more widely than they did in the past. Men -like the late Robert Waithman of the <i>News Chronicle</i> did their best to -get out of Washington and New York and see the country. But too often -the correspondents devote time and space to the more frivolous aspects -of American life. From the standpoint of international relations, the -space devoted to the stream of stories about the royal family might be -better spent<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_230"></a>[Pg 230]</span> on a frank discussion of why the mass of Americans feel -as they do about the Communist government in Peiping.</p> - -<p>Some good judges of the national character believe that the great -mass of the British working class would not read such information -even if the newspapers provided it. They see this group as complacent -and politically lethargic, no longer willing to be stirred, as it was -a generation ago, by great events in the outside world. If this is -true, the future is dark indeed. For more than at any time since the -summer of 1940 the British people must take a realistic view of their -position in the world. They cannot do this if, beyond a few perfunctory -headlines, their newspapers provide only the details of the latest -murder or the bust measurements of Hollywood stars. To an observer from -abroad, it is only too evident that the great problems of our times are -not being brought to the people of Britain by their popular newspapers -in a serious manner.</p> - - -<p class="center">THE OLD SCHOOL TIE</p> - -<p>Few institutions in Britain are more difficult for Americans to -understand than the public schools. Yet a knowledge of the system, -how it works, its influence upon British society, its traditions and -customs, even its sports is essential to a knowledge of modern Britain. -We are going to hear a great deal about the public schools in the -coming years, for one of the great battles between the egalitarian, -socialist Britain and the traditional, conservative Britain will be -waged over the future of these schools.</p> - -<p>The "public school" is in fact a private one. The public-school system -includes all the schools of this type in Britain. As an influence on -the national character it has been and still is extraordinarily potent. -This influence is social and political as well as educational. It is, -I think, fair to say that to hundreds of thousands in the upper and -middle classes, attendance at Eton is regarded as more important than -attendance at Oxford.</p> - -<p>There are about two hundred public schools in Britain. They range -from old established institutions like Eton, Harrow, Charter-<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_231"></a>[Pg 231]</span>house, -Winchester, Rugby, Haileybury, and Wellington to smaller schools whose -fame is local and whose plant, equipment, and teaching staff are little -better, and in some cases inferior, to those of the state schools.</p> - -<p>What keeps the public-school system alive in an era that has seen -the fall of so many bastions of class and privilege? To begin with, -the public schools represent a well-established, wealthy, and acute -force within British society. Such a force fights to maintain its -position against the public criticism and political maneuverings of -its enemies. The fight is led by men who are sincerely convinced that -the continuation of the public-school system is necessary to the -maintenance of Britain's position in the world, and they will devote -time, money, and effort to win the fight. One of the mistakes made -by the Socialist groups that attack the public-school system is to -underestimate the wit and energy of those who defend it.</p> - -<p>Yet the existence of a powerful institution is no guarantee of its -future life in a country that has changed and is changing so rapidly -as Britain. The public schools survive and even flourish because of -the conviction widely held throughout the upper and middle classes -that such schools provide the best type of education for their boys. -Indeed, the conviction goes even deeper in the class structure: it -is noteworthy that as new groups move up the economic scale into the -middle class, these too seek to send their boys to a public school.</p> - -<p>Elsewhere I have mentioned the sacrifices that the old middle class -makes to preserve its position in British society. Nowhere are these -sacrifices more evident than in the struggle to raise the money to -send the son or sons of the family to a public school. The Continental -holiday may be given up in favor of two weeks at an English seaside -resort. The car must be patched up and run for another year. Father -will go without a new overcoat, and mother will abandon her monthly -trip to "town" to see a play. But John will go to his father's old -school. Why?</p> - -<p>At the best public schools the formal education is excellent. But when -the middle-class Briton speaks of the education his son<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_232"></a>[Pg 232]</span> gets at a -public school he is referring only partially to what the boy learns -from books. Principally, he is thinking about the development of the -boy's character at the school, about the friends he will make there, -and about how these friends and attendance at this old school will help -the boy later in life.</p> - -<p>Critics of the Foreign Office have often charged that British diplomacy -is filled with the products of the public schools and that the -representatives of the great mass of the nation are excluded from the -Foreign Service because they have not attended public schools. Lord -Strang, a former Permanent Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs -and thus head of the Foreign Office, answered this criticism in his -book <i>The Foreign Office</i>.</p> - -<p>"The Foreign Office," he wrote, "can move no faster towards fully -democratic methods of selection than the State as a whole is moving in -its educational policies, though it has already moved far at the pace -set for it by these wider policies of political evolution. The fact is -that the Foreign Service always must and will recruit from the best, -in brains and character, that the prevailing educational system can -produce."</p> - -<p>Note that "character" is coupled with "brains" in this indirect -reference to the public schools.</p> - -<p>What does the middle-class Briton mean when he says that Eton or some -obscure public school in the Midlands will develop his son's character? -There is no complete answer. But I would say that he includes in -character such traits as willingness to take responsibility, loyalty -to the class conception of the nation's interests, readiness to lead -(which implies, of course, a belief that he is fit to lead and that -there are people willing to be led), truthfulness, self-discipline, -a love for vigorous outdoor sports. I have heard all these cited as -reasons why boys should go to public schools and why fathers will give -up smoking or limit their drinking to a small sherry before dinner to -provide the money for such schooling.</p> - -<p>In considering the development of character in the public schools it -should be remembered that these schools often represent the third phase -in the education of a British boy. The boy's first<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_233"></a>[Pg 233]</span> preceptor will be a -nanny or nursemaid, often chosen from the rural working class. At eight -or nine he goes away to a preparatory school. At twelve or thirteen he -is ready for his public school. Because of economic pressure only a -wealthy minority can follow this system today, but it was the system -that produced the majority of the leaders of the Conservative Party and -not a few prominent Labor Party leaders.</p> - -<p>Direct paternal influence is much less evident in the education of -Britons of the middle class than it is in the United States. One -argument for the system maintains that the boy learns self-reliance; -when in his twenties he is commanding a platoon or acting as Third -Secretary of Embassy in a foreign country he is not likely to be -wishing that Mom were there to advise him. This argument implies -acceptance of the proposition that people will consent to be led by the -public-school boy or that his education and character will fit him for -a diplomatic post abroad.</p> - -<p>Critics of the public schools charge that the concept of public-school -leadership was exploded by World War II. This does not jibe with my own -experiences with the British forces from 1939 to 1945. I found that -most of the young officers in all three services were products of the -public schools and that, on the whole, they provided a high standard of -leadership in the lower echelons. Their earlier training had enforced -upon them the idea that they were responsible for their men, not only -in battle but elsewhere. So they would tramp through the Icelandic -sleet to obscure posts to organize amateur theatricals or sweat through -an African afternoon playing soccer with their men because this was -part of the responsibility. They were told that they had to lead in -battle, and they accepted the obligation without doubts.</p> - -<p>A great many of them were killed all over the world while sociologists -and reformers were planning how to eliminate the public schools. Those -who were killed were no more intelligent, no more attractive in person, -no more energetic than those they led. But when the time came to lead, -they led. These remarks, no doubt, will annoy critics of the public -schools and public-school<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_234"></a>[Pg 234]</span> leadership. When I am informed how wars are -to be won or nations to be governed without leaders I will be properly -contrite.</p> - -<p>The public school's place in British society rests basically upon this -conviction that a public-school education provides character-training -that will equip a boy for leadership in business, in politics, in the -military services, and in society. But the system as it appears in -British society is composed of much more than formal education and -character-building. The public schools also mean a body of traditions -and customs often as involved and as unrelated to the modern world as -the taboos of primitive man.</p> - -<p>The Old School Tie is one. Almost all middle-class and some -working-class institutions in Britain have a tie striped with the -colors of the institution or ornamented with its crest. There are ties -for cricket clubs and associations of football fans, there are ties -for regiments and clubs. But the tie that generally means most is the -tie that stands for attendance at a public school. It is at once a -certificate of education and a badge of recognition.</p> - -<p>The phrase "Old School Tie" stands not only for the public schools but -for their place in middle-class society. The tie is not merely a strip -of silk but all the strange, sometimes incomprehensible customs and -traditions that surround the public schools. Slang phrases used at one -school for generations. Rugby football rather than soccer because there -is more bodily contact in rugby and hence it is a more "manly" game and -better suited to character-building. School courses which have very -little to do with the problems of the modern world but which supposedly -"discipline" the mind.</p> - -<p>British public schools, like American universities, have been -criticized for developing a type rather than individuals. There is a -resemblance among their graduates, and the old Etonian and the old -Wykehamist (Winchester) and even the graduate of some small school -in Yorkshire have a great deal in common. The public-school graduate -will be enthusiastic about sports, rather contemptuous and sometimes -shockingly ill-informed about the world outside Britain, well-mannered, -truthful, and amenable to discipline. In a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_235"></a>[Pg 235]</span> crowd, whether it be an -officers' training unit in war or an industrial training school in -peace, he will seek out other members of the fraternity announced by -the tie. He is ready to serve and sometimes idealize the State. He -believes in, although he does not invariably personally support, church -attendance, <i>The Times</i>, the monarchy.</p> - -<p>Naturally, there are mavericks. Some of the greatest individualists -in recent British history—the influence of the public schools on the -nation really became apparent in the middle of the last century when -the new mercantile and industrial leaders began to send their sons to -them—have been public-school products. By a pleasing coincidence, Sir -Winston Churchill, Prime Minister Nehru of India, and Field Marshal -Earl Alexander of Tunis are old Harrovians.</p> - -<p>Politically, the public schools are conservative in thought, and -usually their graduates adhere to the Conservative Party. But there -are many exceptions. Hugh Gaitskell, the present leader of the -Parliamentary Labor Party, is an old Wykehamist. His predecessor, Earl -Attlee, went to Haileybury. Scattered through the ranks of the modern -Labor Party are dozens of Old Boys of the public schools. If the Labor -movement gradually sheds much of its old extremism, it is certain to -attract an increasing number of public-school graduates.</p> - -<p>The principal criticism of the public schools voiced by reformers at -home and critics abroad is that it perpetuates in Britain a class -system that divides society during a period when unity is essential to -survival. There is truth in this, so much that it cannot be answered, -as supporters of the system do answer it, with the assertion that -there were no class differences in Britain until the Labor Party -created them. Nor is the argument valid that the masses in Britain -like class distinction, like to live their lives within a precise -social classification. British society is changing today just as it -has changed in the past. It would not have changed without popular -pressure. The newly rich manufacturer of cheap cotton who decided to -send his boy to a public school a hundred years ago<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_236"></a>[Pg 236]</span> was just as much a -part of this change as the Labor Party politician who wants to abolish -the public schools even though he himself is a graduate of one.</p> - -<p>Another disadvantage of the perpetuation of the public-school system -in its present form is that it is unsuited in many ways to modern -conditions. It was admirable training for young men who were to rule -thousands of untutored natives or maintain the might, majesty, and -dominion of the British Empire with a handful of police or administer -without deviation the justice of the Crown in smelly courtrooms -half a world away. But today the young men are going out to sell -Austins or electronic products or to represent a weaker Britain among -peoples tipsy with the heady wine of nationalism. At home the old -stratifications are breaking up, new groups of technicians and managers -are shouldering the once unchallenged leaders of the professional -middle class, new industries requiring a high degree of technical -training are ousting the old.</p> - -<p>In these circumstances the road will be difficult for a man who has -been trained to regard himself as a leader, either born or educated -to leadership, who has been taught that his caste is automatically -superior to the industrialists of Pittsburgh or the scientist at -Harlow or the excitable politicians of New Delhi and Athens. Certain -traits encouraged by the public schools will always be important. But -self-discipline, truthfulness, physical courage must be accompanied in -the modern world by a broader outlook on that world and a more acute -realization of Britain's place in it.</p> - -<p>There is a strong movement in Britain for the expansion of technical -education. The public schools are not technical schools; their -object is the well-rounded product of a general education. While the -public schools maintain their social prestige, the new middle class -as well as the old will send its sons to them. But the leaders of -tomorrow's Britain will be the leaders of the new technology taught -in the technical schools. As these schools develop, they may offer a -real challenge to the public school's position as the trainer of the -governing or leading class.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_237"></a>[Pg 237]</span></p> - -<p>The indictment of the public schools is that they are educating boys to -meet conditions that no longer exist. Yet the public schools are trying -to change with the times even while maintaining that what is needed -to meet the challenge of modern conditions is not narrow technical -education but precisely the comprehensive schooling backed by sound -character-training that public schools are supposed to provide.</p> - -<p>We should not overlook the role the public schools are playing and will -play in the absorption into the middle class of the new groups that -have entered it from industry, science, communications, and management -in the last decade. Many men in these groups had no public-school -education. In fact, a decade ago many of them were among the severest -critics of the system. But a surprisingly large number today are -sending their sons to public schools. The desire to keep up with the -Joneses—the Joneses in this case being the old middle class that sent -its sons to public schools as a matter of course—is one reason for -this. Another is the recognition that the public schools endow their -graduates with certain social advantages.</p> - -<p>When change occurs in Britain it often takes place behind a façade -that appears unchanged. The battle over the public schools is certain -to take place, and, whichever group wins, the schools themselves will -be altered by it. It is inconceivable that they will be eliminated -from the British scene. It is equally inconceivable that they will not -change under the pressure of the times.</p> - -<p>In the spring of 1956 I lunched with a wartime friend who said he had -given up smoking in order to save money to send young Nigel through -Winchester. Someone else at the table muttered that "this public-school -business" was a lot of damned nonsense. My friend smiled. "Damn it," -he said, "you [the mutterer] are always talking about how well the -Russians do things. Well, I read in <i>The Times</i> this morning that -Khrushchev says they're going to start schools to train leaders. What's -good enough for old Khrush ought to be good enough for you pinks down -at the London School of Economics!"</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_238"></a>[Pg 238]</span></p> - - -<p class="center">THE ARMY, THE NAVY, THE AIR FORCE</p> - -<p>"The Army, the Navy, and the Air Force, they always play the game." -So sang the girls and boys of careless, complacent Britain in the -thirties. The verse symbolizes the middle-class public-school -atmosphere of the services' place in British society. Prior to World -War II the three services enjoyed a more honored place in British -society than did the Army and the Navy in American society.</p> - -<p>The commanding officer of a battalion on home service thought himself -socially superior to the leading industrialist of the neighborhood, -and, in most cases, the industrialist agreed. The retired Navy -commander or Army major was a recognized figure in the life of the -village or town in which he lived—a figure of fun, perhaps, to the -bright young people down from Oxford or Cambridge, and an easy mark for -social caricaturists and cartoonists, but also a man of importance in -the affairs of the community.</p> - -<p>He was also, in many cases, a man of means. Pay in the pre-war Army -was ridiculously small, and an officer in a "good" regiment needed -a private income if he were to live comfortably. Again, the retired -officer and the serving officer knew a good deal about the world, a -circumstance forced upon him (for he was never especially cordial to -foreigners) by the necessity of garrisoning the Empire. He had lived -in India or China or Egypt and fought in South Africa or France or -Mesopotamia, and he had formed firm conclusions about these countries -and their people. These conclusions, often delivered with the certainty -of an order on the parade ground, raised the hackles of his juniors -and were derided as the reactionary ideas of relics from Poona, the -citadel of conservatism in India. There is an old service verse about -the "Poona attitude":</p> - -<p style="margin-left: 25%;"> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>There's a regiment from Poona</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>That would infinitely sooner</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Play single-handed polo,</i></span><br /> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_239"></a>[Pg 239]</span><span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>A sort of solo polo,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Than play a single chukker</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>With a chap who isn't pukka.</i></span><br /> -</p> - -<p>After the Second World War had burst on Britain in all its fury and in -its aftermath, it occurred to many who had fumed while the ex-officers -talked that the Blimps had known what they were talking about. Earlier -I noted that the retired officers were right in their predictions about -what would happen in India once the British withdrew, and that the -politicians and publicists of the left were wrong. I do not suggest -that the British should or could have remained. But several hundred -thousand lives might have been saved if the withdrawal had been slower.</p> - -<p>The services and their officers thus had established themselves as -a much more important part of society in Britain than had their -counterparts in the United States. They were always in the public eye. -The Army and the Air Force fought campaigns on the north-west frontier -of India. The Navy chased gun-runners and showed the flag.</p> - -<p>Socially, the Army was the more important. The sons of the very -best families—which means the oldest and most respectable, not the -richest—went into the five regiments of the Brigade of Foot Guards -or into the Household Cavalry or into the old, fashionable, expensive -cavalry regiments like the 16th/5th Lancers or the Queen's Own Fourth -Hussars (which once, long ago, attracted a young subaltern named -Churchill). It was the fashion among the intellectuals of pre-war -England to laugh at the solemn ceremonials of the Foot Guards and -to snicker at the languid young men who protested when their horses -were taken away and replaced by armored cars and tanks. (It might be -remarked that when the time came there was nothing to laugh at and a -good deal to be proud of. The account for the parties at the night -clubs and the hunting, shootin', and fishin' of the careless days -was rendered and paid in blood. You could see them in France in May -and June of 1940 going out with machine guns and horribly antiquated -armored cars to take on the big German tanks.)</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_240"></a>[Pg 240]</span></p> - -<p>If the Army was predominant socially, the Navy held military -pre-eminence. It was the Navy which was the nation's "sure shield," the -Navy which had been matchless and supreme since Trafalgar. It was the -Navy which time and again had interposed its ships and men between the -home islands and the fleets of Spain, France, and Germany. The naval -officer standing on his bridge in the North Sea or off some tropic port -was a watchman, a national symbol of security.</p> - -<p>As the two senior services were so firmly implanted in the public -consciousness, it is easy to see why the Royal Air Force, the youngest -of the three, lived on such short commons before the war. Socially it -did not count. "He's one of these flying chaps," a young Hussar said at -Lille one day in 1939, "but a very decent fellow." It did not attract -the young men who entered the Guards or the Cavalry, for the RAF dealt -with machines and grimy hangars smelling of grease and oil, and it -planned for the future without much hope of governmental financial -assistance or any real support from tradition. Whereas the Loamshire -Hussars had been fighting since Blenheim, the Secretary of State for -War was an ex-officer, and the port at the mess was beyond praise.</p> - -<p>Militarily, the RAF meant a great deal more. When the war began, it -became the savior of Britain—for a few years the one service through -which the country could strike directly and powerfully at Germany. The -rise of the RAF to pre-eminence among the fighting services in post-war -Britain began with its long, bitter, successful battle against the -<i>Luftwaffe</i> in the summer of 1940.</p> - -<p>The ascent of the RAF to its present position is the first of the -changes that have overtaken the services in Britain, which is a martial -if not a militaristic nation. Of course, the development of air power -as the means of carrying the new nuclear weapons would have ensured an -improvement in its position in any case. But the expansion of the RAF -during the war, the post-war necessity for continued experimentation -in associated fields such as the development of guided missiles, and -the creation of a large, highly trained group of technical officers -provided an opportunity for the new<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_241"></a>[Pg 241]</span> middle class and the upper levels -of the industrial working class, the planners and technicians, to win -advancement in what is currently the most important of the services.</p> - -<p>The Battle of Britain was won by public-school boys. But the modern -RAF, although it has its share of public-school boys especially among -the combat units, is increasingly manned, officers as well as the -higher noncommissioned officers, by products of the state schools. The -RAF needs now and will need increasingly in the future the services of -the best technical brains Britain can offer. The main source of supply -will be not the officers' training units at the public schools or the -universities but the new technical colleges and training courses in -Britain.</p> - -<p>It follows, then, that in time the military defense of the realm will -rest primarily not upon the class who have always considered themselves -ordained by birth and education to carry out this task but upon a new -group springing from the new middle class and from the proletariat. -This is a social development of the first importance.</p> - -<p>The change in the character of the officer class is not confined to the -RAF, although it is most noticeable there. There has been a change, -too, in the composition of the commissioned ranks of the Army.</p> - -<p>When World War II ended, the "military families," which for generations -had sent sons into the local county regiments, found that the second -war, following the terrible blood-letting of the first, had almost -wiped them out. Perhaps one son in three or four survived. And he, -surveying the post-war Army and the post-war world, was disinclined -to follow tradition and devote the remainder of his working life to -the service. He might gladly have served another twenty years in the -"old" Army with its horses and hunting, its tours of duty in India, -its social importance. But now tanks and armored cars had replaced -the horses, India was gone, and a bunch of shirking Bolshies from the -Labor Party were running things. Above all, the two wars had swept away -many of the private fortunes with which young officers eked out their -miserable pay and allowances. So the survivor of the military family -became a person<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_242"></a>[Pg 242]</span>nel manager in a Midlands factory, and elderly men -said to elderly wives: "Do you know that for the first time since '91 -there's no Fenwick serving with the Loamshires?"</p> - -<p>But the Second World War also raised to officer rank thousands of -young men whose social and educational background would not have been -considered suitable for commissioned rank in peacetime. They came from -the state's secondary schools, from technical colleges, or from the -ranks, and they did remarkably well. Many of them are still serving as -officers.</p> - -<p>At the war's end many of them remained in the service. I was always -interested during the maneuvers of the British Army of the Rhine to -find how many of the young officers in the infantry and tank regiments -had served in the ranks or had come to the Army with a sound education -and a proletarian accent from one of the state schools. The technical -branches of the Army, such as the Royal Electrical and Mechanical -Engineers and the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, draw an increasing number -of their officers from the noncommissioned officers and from among the -graduates of technical schools.</p> - -<p>Nowhere is the middle class's ability to assimilate new groups and thus -perpetuate itself more striking than in the Army. The officers from -the ranks or from a state school assume the social coloration of the -established officer class. Manners, accent, turns of phrase, and dress -alter to conform with those of the old officer class. At present the -new group is in a minority. There naturally are many members of the old -officer class still serving. With the return of prosperity the upper -middle class has resumed the tradition of sending its sons into the -Army as a matter of course.</p> - -<p>The general officers of the old school, which in this case means the -old public school, vehemently defend the middle class as the only -proper breeding-ground for service officers. They assert that only -men from a certain class, by which they mean their own, and from a -certain background, by which they mean a public school, will accept the -responsibility and provide the leadership necessary in war. A general -told me: "It's really very simple. Men who drop<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_243"></a>[Pg 243]</span> their <i>h</i>'s won't -follow an officer who also drops his <i>h</i>'s. They don't think he'll take -care of them as well as some young pipsqueak six months out of Eton but -with the correct accent."</p> - -<p>This will strike Americans as ridiculous. Certainly it ignores the -high quality of leadership exercised by sergeant pilots of the RAF -Bomber Command. But the general cannot be dismissed as unrealistic. The -correct accent <i>does</i> count in Britain. The public-school boy <i>has</i> -been trained to look after others. The idea of an officer class may -offend us as contradictory to democratic equality. But it can and does -work. Nowhere in the world is the officer caste better treated than in -the proletarian society of Soviet Russia.</p> - -<p>The Army and the Navy will continue to assimilate into the commissioned -ranks of their services an increasing number of men of working-class -origin. Science's invasion of the military art, long established but -tremendously accelerated since 1945, makes it inevitable that the -sharp young technician, "without an <i>h</i> to his name" as the middle -class says, will continue to rise to commissioned rank. It also seems -relatively certain that as he rises he will assume some of the social -patina of the middle class.</p> - -<p>The old conception of military leadership as a prerogative of the -aristocracy died hard. It took the blunders and casualties of the -Crimean War, the Boer War, and the First World War to kill it. -During World War II the British services produced a large number of -outstanding leaders: Alexander, Brooke, Dill, Montgomery, Slim, Wavell, -Leese, Horrocks in the Army, Cunningham, Fraser, Vian, Mountbatten in -the Navy, Portal, Harris, Tedder, Slessor, Bowhill in the RAF. With the -exception of Alexander and Mountbatten, all were products of the old -middle class. But in a changing Britain the authority of this class -in the field it made particularly its own is being undermined both by -new techniques of war and by the shifts in internal power which have -occurred in Britain since 1940.</p> - -<p>Those officers and ex-officers who recognize this are not greatly -concerned for the survival of their class leadership; most are -convinced that it will survive. They are concerned, however, lest -in this<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_244"></a>[Pg 244]</span> rapidly changing century the traditions that their class -perpetuated and, in some cases, changed into fetishes should perish. -Regimental traditions, some of which stretch back three centuries into -military history, will, they insist, be as important in the era of -guided missiles as they were in the days of the matchlock.</p> - -<p>It is argued that the sense of continuity, the conviction that men -before them have faced perils as great and have survived and won -is essential if Britain is to continue as a military power. The -composition of the Army, Navy, and Air Force officer groups may change. -But the new men will have to rely quite as much on the service and -regimental traditions as did the men who fought at Minden, Waterloo, or -Le Cateau.</p> - - -<p class="center">WORKER'S PLAYTIME</p> - -<p>The leisure activities of the British people in the present decade -offer a revealing guide to the changes that have overtaken their -society. One can learn a great deal by comparing a rugby crowd at -Twickenham and a soccer crowd at Wembley. The rise in popularity of -some forms of entertainment, notably television, testifies to the new -prosperity of the working class. The slow decline of interest in some -sports and the shift from playing to watching illustrate other changes -in the make-up of Britain.</p> - -<p>Television is the greatest new influence on the British masses -since the education acts of the last century produced a proletariat -capable of reading the popular press, a situation capitalized by -Lord Northcliffe and others. And the mass attention to "what's -on television," like every other change in Britain, has social -connotations. Among many in the middle class and the upper middle class -it is close to class treason to admit regular watching of television. -"We have one for Nanny and the children," a London hostess said, "but -we never watch it. Fearfully tedious, most of it."</p> - -<p>Significantly, the middle class, when defending its right to send -its sons to public schools, emphasizes that the working class could -send its sons to the same schools if it were willing to abandon -its<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_245"></a>[Pg 245]</span> payments for television. This may reveal one reason for the -middle-class dislike for this form of entertainment. Television sets -are expensive, and possibly the cost cannot be squeezed into a budget -built around the necessity of sending the boy to school.</p> - -<p>The spread of television-viewing in Britain has had far-reaching -economic and social effects. A sharp blow has been dealt the corner -pub, by tradition the workingman's club. Since the rise of modern -Britain, it is to the pub that the worker has taken his sorrows, his -ambitions, and his occasional joys. There over a pint of bitters -he could think dark thoughts about his boss, voice his opinions on -statesmen from Peel to Churchill, and argue about racing with his -friends. "These days," a barmaid told me, "they come in right after -supper, buy some bottled ale—nasty gassy stuff it is, too—and rush -home to the telly. In the old days they came in around seven, regular -as clockwork it was, and didn't leave until I said 'Time, gentlemen, -please.'"</p> - -<p>Television also has affected attendance at movies and at sports events. -The British have never been a nation of night people, and nowadays -they seem to be turning within themselves, a nation whose physical -surroundings are bounded by the hearth, the television screen, and -quick trips to the kitchen to open another bottle of beer. My friends -on the BBC tell me this is not so; television, they say, has opened -new horizons for millions and is the great national educator of the -future. It is easy to forgive their enthusiasm. But how can a people -learn the realities of life if what it really wants on television is -sugary romances or the second-hand jokes and antics of comedians rather -than the admirable news and news-interpretation programs produced by -both the BBC and the Independent Television Authority? The new working -class seems to be irritated by attempts to bring it face to face with -the great problems of their country and of the world. Having attained -what it wants—steady employment, high wages, decent housing—it hopes -to hide before its television screens while this terrible, strident -century hammers on.</p> - -<p>The view that the British have become a nation of spectators has been -put forward with confidence by many observers, British<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_246"></a>[Pg 246]</span> as well as -foreign. It is valid, I believe, only if one takes the view that the -millions who watch soccer (which the British call football), rugby -football, field hockey, and other sports on a Saturday afternoon in -autumn are the only ones who count. But there are hundreds of thousands -who play these sports. Some few hundred are professionals playing -before thousands, but many thousands more are amateurs. Stand in a -London railroad station any Saturday at noon and count the hundreds of -young men and young women hurrying to trains that will take them to -some suburban field where they will use the hockey sticks, football -shoes, or cricket bats they are carrying.</p> - -<p>Neither soccer nor rugby football is so physically punishing as -American football, although both demand great stamina. So the British -play these games long after the American college tackle has hung up his -cleats and is boring his friends at the country club with the story -of how he blocked the kick against Dartmouth or Slippery Rock. An -ex-officer of my acquaintance played cricket, and pretty good cricket, -too, until he was well into his forties. On village cricket grounds -(the British call them "pitches") on a Sunday afternoon one can see -sedate vicars and husky butchers well past fifty flailing away at the -ball.</p> - -<p>If one adds to these the thousands who take a gun and shoot or a rod -and fish, and the tens of thousands more who cycle into the countryside -spring, summer, and fall, the picture reveals a nation which does not -rely solely on watching sports for its pleasure but which still gets -enormous fun out of playing them.</p> - -<p>Sports of all sorts, either spectator or participant, occupy an -important, even a venerated, place in British society. Kipling's -warning against the damage that "the flanneled fool at the wicket and -the muddied oaf at the goal" might do to the nation's martial capacity -was never taken very seriously. After all, Britons have been told -interminably and mistakenly that Waterloo was won on the playing-fields -of Eton. The Duke of Wellington, who commanded the British forces in -that notable victory, could recall no athletic triumphs of his own at -Eton save that he had once jumped<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_247"></a>[Pg 247]</span> a rather wide ditch as a boy. The -Duke's pastimes were riding to hounds and women, neither of which was -in the Eton curriculum at the time he matriculated. Nevertheless, the -tradition remains.</p> - -<p>When an American thinks of British sport, he automatically thinks of -cricket. But cricket is a game that can be played in Britain only -during the short and frequently stormy months of late spring and -summer. In point of attendance, number of players participating, and -national interest, <i>the</i> game is soccer. Soccer, the late Hector McNeil -loved to emphasize, is "the game of the people." It is also the game of -millions who have never seen a game but who each week painfully fill -out their coupons on the football pools, hopeful that <i>this</i> time they -will win the tens of thousands of pounds that go to the big winners. -The football pools are an example of a diversion that has moved upward -in the social scale. The British, almost all of them, love to gamble, -and the retired colonial servant at Bath finds as great a thrill in -winning on the pools or even trying to win as the steel worker at -Birmingham does. These days the steel worker has a little more money to -back his choices.</p> - -<p>To many Americans soccer is a game played by national groups in the big -cities and by high schools, prep schools, and colleges too small or -too poor to support football. Soccer, actually, is an extremely fast, -highly scientific game whose playing evokes from the crowds very much -the same passions that are evident at Busch Stadium or Ebbets Field. -There is no gentlemanly restraint about questioning an official's -decision in soccer as there is in cricket. The British version of "ya -bum, ya" rolls over the stadium on Saturday afternoons. Once I heard a -staid working-class housewife address a referee who had awarded a free -kick against Arsenal as "Oh, you bloody man!" The English can go no -further in vituperation.</p> - -<p>Although soccer is principally the game of Britain's working masses, -there are some among the middle class who find it entrancing. But the -great game of this class in the autumn and winter is rugby football.</p> - -<p>Here we encounter a social difference. Rugby was popularized at a -public school and is pre-eminently the public-school game. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_248"></a>[Pg 248]</span> "old -rugger blue" is as much a part of the rugby crowd as the ex-tackle from -Siwash in the American football crowd. The games, incidentally, have a -good deal in common and require similar skills. There is no blocking or -forward passing in rugby, but the great backs of rugby football would -hold their own in the American game.</p> - -<p>In the middle class it is good form to have played rugby or to watch -rugby. At the big games at Twickenham just outside London one will see -a higher percentage of women than at the major soccer matches. The -difference between the classes watching the two sports is emphasized -by the difference in clothing. Twickenham costumes are tweeds, duffel -coats, old school ties, and tweed caps. At Wembley there are the -inevitable raincoat (usually called a "mac"), the soft gray hat, and -the decent worsted suit of the industrial worker on his day off.</p> - -<p>Rugby crowds are as partisan as soccer crowds but less vociferous. A -bad decision will occasion some head-shaking and tut-tutting, but there -will be little shouted criticism—with one exception: the Welsh.</p> - -<p>The people of the Principality of Wales take their rugby as the -people of Brooklyn take their baseball. In the mining valleys and the -industrial cities rugby, not soccer, is the proletarian sport. The -players on an English team in an international match with Wales will -include university graduates, public-school teachers, and law students. -The Welsh side will boast colliery workers, policemen, and teachers -at state schools. More than a sport, rugby is a national religion. -Consequently, the invasion of Twickenham by a Welsh crowd for an -international match is very like the entry of a group of bartenders -and bookmakers into a WCTU convention. The Welsh feel emotionally -about rugby, and they do not keep their feelings to themselves. They -are a small people but terribly tough. My happiest memory of the 1956 -international at Twickenham is of a short, broad Welsh miner pummeling -a tall, thin Englishman who had suggested mildly that Wales had been -lucky to win.</p> - -<p>There is another break in the pattern of middle-class alle<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_249"></a>[Pg 249]</span>giance to -rugby. A game called Rugby League, somewhat different from the older -and more widely played Rugby Union, is played in the North of England. -It is definitely a working-class game and a professional one, whereas -Rugby Union is, by American standards, ferociously amateur. The English -feel badly when one of their players succumbs to the financial lure of -Rugby League and leaves the amateur game. The Welsh feel even worse, -not because the player is turning professional but because "Look, -dammit, man, we need Jones for the match with England."</p> - -<p>There are survivals of the old attitude toward professionals in sport -in the English (but not the Welsh) attitude toward rugby football. -Soccer football, like baseball in America, began as an amateur game and -at one time was widely played by the middle class. But middle-class -enthusiasm and support dwindled as the game became professionalized. -Of late there has been a revival of interest in the amateur side of -the sport, but basically the game is played by professionals for huge -crowds drawn from the industrial working class. However, thousands in -the crowds also play for club and school teams.</p> - -<p>Yet here we encounter another contradiction. Cricket, considered the -most English of games, is played nowadays mostly by professionals, -as far as the county teams (the equivalent of the major-league teams -in baseball) are concerned. But many English approach cricket with -something akin to the Welshman's attitude toward rugby. Professionalism -is no longer looked down upon, and the old distinctions between -Gentlemen and Players are slowly vanishing.</p> - -<p>John Lardner once mentioned how difficult it was to explain the -extraordinary ascendancy that baseball assumed over Americans in the -last half of the nineteenth century. It is equally difficult to explain -the hold that cricket exercises today on a large section of Britain. -More people watch soccer, but that game does not seem to generate the -dedicated, almost mystic attitude displayed by cricket enthusiasts. -Cricket is an extraordinarily involved, delicate, and, at times, -exciting game. But it cannot be merely the game itself<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_250"></a>[Pg 250]</span> which brings -old men doddering to Lord's and rouses whole families in the chill cold -of a winter morning to listen to the broadcast of a match played half a -world away in the bright sunshine of Melbourne.</p> - -<p>Part of the hold may be explained by cricket's ability to remind the -spectators of their youth and a richer, greener England. To that -nation, secure, prosperous, and powerful, many thousands of the middle -class return daily in their thoughts. Cricket—village cricket or -cricket at the Oval or Lord's, twin sanctums of the game—represents -that other England. For a time they can forget the taxes, forget the -unknown grave in France or Libya, forget the industrial wasteland -around them, and return to the village green and the day the Vicar -bowled (struck out) the policeman from the next village.</p> - -<p>It is a peaceful game to watch. The absence of the noise, the strident -criticisms and outbursts, of the baseball game has been noted by enough -Americans. In addition, there is a soporific atmosphere about cricket. -Men sit on the grass and watch the white figures of the players make -intricate, shifting patterns against the bright green of the grass. -Their outward show of enthusiasm is confined to an "Oh, well hit, -well hit indeed, sir" or applause when a player makes fifty runs or -is bowled. There is no need to hurry or to worry about anything more -important than saving the fellow who is on. The pipe is drawing nicely, -and later you can meet old So-and-so at the club, or the pub, for a -chat about the match. "I go out on a summer evening to watch them -play," a Londoner said. "Sort of rests me, it does."</p> - -<p>The influence of cricket on the middle class that follows the game has -been and is remarkable. Cricket terms have become part of the language -of this class. Such phrases as "hit them for six" and "batting on a -sticky wicket" pepper the speeches of politicians. As cricket was -played originally by amateurs who were presumed to be gentlemen, it -assumed an aristocratic tone. Anything that was "not cricket" was not -gentlemanly.</p> - -<p>Many Britons in World War II showed a tendency to think of the war in -terms of cricket. This was discouraged by the tougher-minded commanders -on the sensible grounds that war is not cricket.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_251"></a>[Pg 251]</span> But no one could stop -Field Marshal Montgomery from promising his troops they were about to -"hit the Germans for six." This introduction of a sporting vocabulary -into a fight for survival is one of the reasons why many Continentals -regard the English as a frivolous race. I remember still the look, -compounded of awe and disgust, on the face of a Norwegian, lately -escaped from his homeland, when in the summer of 1940 he found that the -newspaper-sellers on the street corners were writing the results of -each day's fighting in the Battle of Britain in cricket terms. "Here -they are," he said, "fighting for their lives, and I see a sign reading -'England 112 Not Out.' I asked the man what it meant, and he said: -'We got 112 of the ——ers, cock, and we're still batting.' A strange -people."</p> - -<p>If soccer is primarily a working-class sport and cricket the central -sporting interest of the middle class, horse racing is the attraction -that transcends all class distinctions. In Britain, as in America, -great trouble is taken by those who administer the business to clothe -it with the attributes of a sport. But essentially horse racing is a -means of gambling, and the British, beneath their supposed stolidity, -are a nation of gamblers. I do not recall during my childhood buying -a ticket for a sweepstakes on the Kentucky Derby. But in Britain boys -and girls of ten and eleven customarily buy tickets in "sweeps" run by -their classmates, and the more precocious swap tips on horses.</p> - -<p>A tremendous amount is bet each day on racing in Britain, and it is -estimated that more money is bet on the Epsom Derby each June than on -any other single horse race in the world.</p> - -<p>Derby Day at Epsom is one of the best opportunities of seeing -contemporary British society, from the Queen at the top to the London -barrow boy at the bottom, en masse. Inside the track are the vans of -the gypsy fortune-tellers, the stands of the small-time bookmakers, -scores of bars and snack bars, carousels and other amusement-park -attractions. Across the track are the big stands filled with what -remains of the aristocracy and the upper middle class of Britain -carefully dressed in morning coats, gray top hats, and starched -collars. Its members may envy the great wads of bank-<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_252"></a>[Pg 252]</span>notes carried by -some of the prosperous farmers and North Country businessmen across -the track, but on Derby Day anything goes, and there are champagne and -lobster lunches, hilarious greetings to old friends, and reminiscences -of past Derbies.</p> - -<p>Queen Elizabeth II's love of racing endears her to her subjects. -An interest in racing has always been a passport to popularity for -monarchs or politicians. Sir Winston Churchill, who divined the wishes -and thoughts of his countrymen with uncanny ability during the years -of crisis between 1939 and 1945, had few interests in common with the -people he lectured and led. He cared little for soccer or cricket. But -when, after the war, he began to build up a racing stable, he acquired -a new popularity with the people. Naturally, this was the last thing in -Sir Winston's mind. He had made some money, he was out of office, and -racing attracted him.</p> - -<p>Racing is an upper-class sport in the sense that only the rich -can afford it. But the true upper-class sports that survive are -fox-hunting, shooting, and fishing, known in upper-class parlance as -"huntin', shootin', and fishin'." Shooting is bird-shooting—pheasant, -grouse, partridge. Fishing is for salmon or trout. As Britain's -sprawling industrialization has gobbled up land, the field sports -have become more and more the preserve of the rich or at least the -well-to-do. George Orwell once noted the dismay of British Communists -who learned that Lenin and other revolutionary leaders had enjoyed -shooting—shooting birds, that is—in Russia, a country teeming with -game. They thought it almost treasonable for the Little Father of -the masses to engage in a sport that in Britain was reserved for the -capitalists.</p> - -<p>Fox-hunting, chiefly because of its close connection with the cult -of the horse, takes social precedence over shooting and fishing. But -here again we encounter a change. Death duties, taxes on land, and -income taxes have impoverished a large number of rural aristocrats -who formerly supported local hunts. Their places have been taken by -well-to-do farmers and professional men and women from near-by towns. -Some of the better-established hunts, such as the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_253"></a>[Pg 253]</span> Quorn and the -Pytchley, try to maintain the old standards of exclusiveness.</p> - -<p>The attention paid the cavalry regiments in the old Army, the -middle-class conviction that children must be taught to ride because it -is a social asset, the aristocratic atmosphere of fox-hunting and show -jumping are all expressions of the cult of the horse which flourishes -in one of the most heavily industrialized nations in the world. This, -too, may express an unconscious desire to return to the past and a -secure Britain. Here, too, we see the newly emerging middle class -sending its sons and daughters to riding schools where they will meet -the sons and daughters of the established middle class.</p> - -<p>Golf and tennis are two games that Britain spread around the world. -Golf is every man's game in Scotland and a middle-class game in -England. I well remember my first trip to St. Andrews in 1939 and my -delight at watching a railroad worker solemnly unbutton his collar, -take off his coat, and play around one of the formidable courses -there in 89. The incongruity was made more marked by the foursomes of -expensively outfitted English and Americans who allowed the Scot to -play through.</p> - -<p>Tennis in Britain, like tennis in America, retains aristocratic -overtones. But today it is a middle-class sport; membership at the -local tennis club is ranked below membership in the local yacht club or -the local hunt.</p> - -<p>In both games British representatives in international competitions -are at a disadvantage because there is not in Britain the urgent drive -to develop players of international ability which exists in the United -States and Australia. British cricket and rugby football teams, on the -other hand, have enjoyed a number of brilliant successes in competition -with Commonwealth teams since the war, and English soccer football, -after some lean years, has begun to climb back to the top of the -international heap.</p> - -<p>In this land of paradox which was the birthplace of the modern -"sporting" attitude, the original home of "the game for the game's -sake," we find that the most popular sport is soccer football played<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_254"></a>[Pg 254]</span> -for money mainly by professionals; that rugby football can be a -middle-class game in England and a working-class game one hundred miles -away in Wales; that cricket through the years has acquired the standing -not of a sport but of a religion among one important class in society; -and that shooting and fishing, two proletarian pastimes in both the -United States and the Soviet Union, are the domain of the wealthy, the -well-bred, and the middle class in Britain.</p> - - -<p class="center">PUBS AND CLUBS</p> - -<p>Long ago one of my bosses advised me to spend less time listening -to people in pubs. Had I taken his advice, which fortunately I did -not, I would be richer by many pounds but poorer in both friends and -information.</p> - -<p>Although writers have contended otherwise, the public house is not a -unique British institution. Frenchmen gather in <i>estaminets</i> to drink, -to argue, and to write interminable letters. Americans meet at bars and -taverns. The Spaniard patronizes his café. The unique aspect of the -British pub is its atmosphere.</p> - -<p>The pub is a place where you can take your time. In city or country -it is a refuge. A man may enter, drink three or four pints of beer in -moody silence, and depart refreshed. Or he can come in, drink the same -amount of beer, debate the state of the nation and the world with other -drinkers and the barmaid, and play darts. Dart-playing, of course, -is a national sport, and there are enthusiasts who claim it has more -devotees than tennis or golf. Dart leagues flourish throughout the -country, to the delight of the publicans, who reap a rich harvest from -each match.</p> - -<p>Pubs come in all shapes and sizes. Recently many of the old London pubs -have been modernized. Plastics and neon lights have taken the place -of huge glass walls engraved with advertisements for gin and beer and -old-fashioned glass-shaded electric lights. In their efforts to meet -the competition of television at home and milk bars or soda fountains -down the street, many pubs have adopted<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_255"></a>[Pg 255]</span> new and, to a purist, -disgusting attractions. The news that a pub in Cambridge intended to -sell ice cream convinced many serious thinkers that this <i>was</i> the end -of the Empire. Similarly, a friend told me in shocked tones that when -he was served a pint of beer in a suburban pub the barmaid handed him -"a damned doily" to put under the glass. He informed her, he reported, -that he had given up spilling his drinks at the age of three and a half.</p> - -<p>Despite the inroads of the milk bars and the trend toward bottled beer -bought in the pub and drunk before the television set, draught beer -is still the mainstay of British drinking. "Beer and beef have made -us what we are," said the Prince Regent. (His friend, the Duke of -Wellington, somewhat surprisingly, thought the Church of England was -responsible.)</p> - -<p>English beer has a bad name in the United States. The GI invading the -country in 1942-5 found it weak, warm, and watery. During the war years -it was indeed both weak and watery. Today, however, it has regained its -old-time potency.</p> - -<p>In addition to the standard beers and ales, the British brew small -quantities of special ales that, as the old saying goes, would blow -a soft hat through a cement ceiling. The Antelope, in Chelsea, had -managed to hoard some bottles of this liquid as late as the autumn of -1940. After two bottles apiece, three Americans walked home through -one of the worst nights of bombing exclaiming happily over the pretty -lights in the sky.</p> - -<p>The merits of the brews in their respective countries are a favorite -topic for conversation between Britons and Americans. The tourist will -find that his host holds no high opinion of American beer, considering -it gassy, flavorless, and, as one drinker inelegantly described it, "as -weak as gnat's wee." The British are continually surprised by American -drinking habits. They consider that the GI who hastily swallows three -or four double whiskies is asking for trouble, and that the object of -a night's foray in the pub is not to get drunk but to drink enough to -encourage conversation and forget your troubles. Prohibition, gone -these many years, is still a black mark against Americans in the minds -of the pundits in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_256"></a>[Pg 256]</span> pubs. They regard it as a horrible aberration by -an otherwise intelligent people.</p> - -<p>It should not be assumed that the British drink only beer. When they -are in funds or when the occasion calls for something stronger, they -will drink almost anything from what my charwoman once described as "a -nourishing drop of gin" to champagne. During the war they drank some -strange and weird mixtures and distillations that, if they did not kill -the drinker as did some Prohibition drams, at least made him wish he -were dead the next morning.</p> - -<p>But the pub's importance, let me repeat, is due to its place as a -public forum as much as to its position as a public fountain. There -questions can be asked and answers given which the average Briton would -regard as impertinent if the conversation took place in his home or -his office. There interminable public arguments will probe the wisdom -of the government's policy on installment buying or Cyprus or, with -due gravity, will seek to establish the name of the winner of the -Cambridgeshire Handicap in 1931.</p> - -<p>The atmosphere of discussion and reflection of the English pub thus -far has been proof against the juke box, the pinball machine, and the -television set. But the fight is a hard one. These counterattractions -to the bar are making their appearance in an increasing number of -pubs each year. At the same time, publicans are giving more thought -to the catering side of their business. The bar, which was the heart -of the pub, has become merely an adjunct to the "attractions" and the -restaurant.</p> - -<p>The spread of restaurant eating is itself a novel change in British -habits. Until the Second World War the great majority of the working -class and the middle class ate their meals at home. Even today, in the -New Towns, the industrial worker prefers to return home for lunch. -But the shortage of servants, the difficulties of feeding a family on -the weekly rations, the need to get away from the drabness of chilly, -darkened homes during the war and immediate post-war years combined to -send millions of Britons out to eat.</p> - -<p>This has changed the character of a large number of pubs. It has also -improved restaurant cooking, especially in the provinces.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_257"></a>[Pg 257]</span> British -cooking is a standard music-hall joke, but the comedians are somewhat -behind the times. It has improved steadily since the war, largely -because the British had to learn how to cook in order to make their -meager rations palatable. The squeeze on the established middle class -forced the housewives of that group to study cookery. Dinners in that -circle are shorter and less formal than before the war, but the cooking -is vastly improved.</p> - -<p>Décor in modern pubs varies from the overpoweringly new to the -self-consciously old. Tucked away in the back streets of the cities, -however, or nestling in the folds of the Cotswolds one can still see -the genuine article. There the political arguments flourish as they -have since Bonaparte was troubling the English. There on a Saturday -night you can still hear the real English songs—"Knees Up Mother -Brown" or "Uncle Tom Cobley and All."</p> - -<p>A sense of calm pervades the rural bars. The countryman is a -long-lived, tough person. At the Monkey and Drum or the Red Dragon or -the Malakof (named for a half-forgotten action in the Crimean War) the -beer is set out for wiry ancients in their seventies and eighties, -masters of country crafts long forgotten by the rest of the population. -The sun stays late in the sky on a summer evening. From the open door -you can see it touching the orderly fields, the neat houses. It is -difficult, almost impossible in such surroundings to doubt that there -will always be an England. Yet this is precisely the England that is -and has been in continuous retreat for a century and a half before the -devouring march of industrialization.</p> - -<p>The pub is the poor man's "club"—in the sense that it is a haven -for the tired worker and a center of discussion. The actual British -clubs are another singular institution. There are, of course, men's -and women's clubs throughout the West, but only in Britain have they -become an integral and important part of social life. Like the pubs, -they are changing with the times. But they still retain enough of their -distinctive flavor to mark them as a particularly British institution.</p> - -<p>London's clubs are the most famous. But throughout the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_258"></a>[Pg 258]</span> islands there -are other clubs—county clubs in provincial capitals, workingmen's -clubs that compete with the pubs. There are women's clubs, too, but the -club is mainly a masculine institution in a nation whose society is -still ordered for the well-being of the male.</p> - -<p>"Do you mean to tell me that these Englishmen go to their clubs for a -drink after work and don't get home until dinnertime?" a young American -matron asked. She thought it was "scandalous." Her husband, poor devil, -came home from work promptly at six each night and sat down to an early -dinner with his wife and three small children. I suppose he enjoyed it.</p> - -<p>London's clubs cater to all tastes. There are political clubs such as -the Carlton, the Conservatives' inner sanctum. There are service clubs: -the Cavalry or the Army and Navy. On St. James's Street are a number of -the oldest and best: White's, Boodle's, Brooks's, the Devonshire.</p> - -<p>The same American matron asked me what a club offers. The answer is, -primarily, relaxation in a man's world. Like the pub, the club is a -place where a man can get away from his home, his job, his worries. If -he wishes, he can drink and eat while reading a newspaper. Or he can -stand at the bar exchanging gossip with other members. He can read, he -can play cards, he can play billiards. If he wants advice, there may -be an eminent Queen's Counsel, a Foreign Office official, a doctor, or -an editor across the luncheon table. There is the same atmosphere of -relaxed calm which marks the best pubs.</p> - -<p>Because for centuries the clubs have been the refuges of the wealthy -or the aristocratic or the dominant political class they have exerted -considerable political influence. Feuds that have shaken great -political parties have begun before club bars and, years later, been -settled with an amicable little dinner party at the club. In politics, -domestic and foreign, the British put great faith in the "quiet -get-together" where an issue can be thrashed out in private without -regard for popular opinion.</p> - -<p>During the worst days of the debate over the future of Trieste a -Foreign Office official remarked to me that "all these conferences"<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_259"></a>[Pg 259]</span> -complicated the situation. "There's nothing that couldn't be settled -in an hour's frank talk over a glass of sherry at White's," he said. -Foolish? Old-fashioned? Perhaps. But how much progress has been made -at full-dress international conferences where national leaders speak -not to one another but to popular opinion in their own and foreign -countries?</p> - -<p>The clubs are centers in which opinion takes form. As the opinion of -many who are leaders in Britain's political and economic life, it is -important opinion. For instance, it was obvious in the clubs, long -before the failure of the Norwegian campaign brought it into the open, -that there was widespread dissatisfaction in the middle class over -Neville Chamberlain's direction of the war. Similarly, stories of the -aging Churchill's unwillingness to deal with the pressing domestic -economic problems of his government were first heard in the clubs.</p> - -<p>The high cost of maintaining the standards of food, drink, and service -required by most members has hurt the clubs. There are in every such -institution a few staff mainstays whose remarks become part of club -lore. But the Wages and Catering Act has made it difficult to staff -clubs adequately.</p> - -<p>The food in clubs is man's food. Its emphasis on beef, lamb, fish, and -cheese would upset a Mamaroneck matron. But some of the chefs are as -good as any in Britain, and the food can be accompanied by some of the -finest wines in the world.</p> - -<p>Essentially, the club remains man's last refuge from the pressures of -his world. He can talk, he can listen, he can drink a second or even a -third cocktail without the slight sniff that betokens wifely censure. -The latest story about the Ruritanian Ambassadress or the government's -views on the situation in Upper Silesia will be retailed by members. -The taxes may be high, the world in a mess, the old order changing. -Here by the fire with his drink in his hand he is his own man. "Waiter, -two more of the same."</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_260"></a>[Pg 260]</span></p> - -<p class="center"> -<img src="images/illus01.jpg" alt="pic" /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="XII_Britain_and_the_Future">XII. <i>Britain and the Future</i></h2> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p> - -<i>I will not cease from mental fight,<br /> -Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,<br /> -Till we have built Jerusalem<br /> -In England's green and pleasant land.</i><br /> -</p> - -<p> -WILLIAM BLAKE<br /> -</p></div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Those who compare the age in which their lot has fallen with a golden -age which exists only in imagination, may talk of degeneracy and -decay; but no man who is correctly informed as to the past, will be -disposed to take a morose or desponding view of the present.</i></p> - -<p> -THOMAS BABINGTON MACAULAY<br /> -</p></div> - - - - -<p><span class="smcap">Is the</span> long story of British greatness nearly done? That is the -question we must ask ourselves as we survey the real Britain, the -changing Britain of today.</p> - -<p>The question is a vital one for Americans. Our generation faces a -challenge that dwarfs those offered by Germany in 1917 or by Germany, -Japan, and Italy in 1941. Communist dominion stretches from the Elbe -to the Pacific, from the arctic to the jungles<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_261"></a>[Pg 261]</span> of Indochina. Nearly a -thousand million people serve tyrannical systems of government. Behind -the barbed wire and the empty-faced guards at the frontiers we can -hear the explosions of devastating weapons of war, we can discern the -ceaseless effort to achieve the world triumph of Communism.</p> - -<p>To the leaders of all these millions, the United States is the enemy, -the people of America their principal obstacle in the march to world -power. As the most successful capitalist state, the United States is -now and will be in the future the principal target for the diplomatic -intrigues, the political subversion, and the economic competition of -the Communist bloc. The avenues of attack may be indirect, the means -may differ from place to place. But the enmity does not vary. America -is the enemy today, as it was yesterday, as it will be tomorrow.</p> - -<p>Living at the apex of power and prosperity, it is easy for Americans -to be complacent, it is natural for them to fasten on hints of Russian -friendship. But it is folly to believe that the world situation is -improving because Nikita Khrushchev jests with correspondents in Moscow -or because a delegation of visiting farmers from the Ukraine is made up -of hearty extroverts. For the Communist challenge, as it has developed -since the death of Stalin, is as real as that which produced the cold -war of 1945-53. But because it is expressed in terms superficially less -belligerent than blockades and riots, violent speeches and editorials, -and overt instant and implacable opposition to Western policies, -the current challenge is far more insidious. Concepts and policies -developed to meet a purely military challenge will not suffice to -defeat it.</p> - -<p>For a decade the United States has been busy "making" allies all over -the world. But you cannot "make" allies as you make Fords. You cannot -buy them as you buy bread at the baker's. Of course, in war, or at -war's approach, threatened nations will hurry for shelter under the -protecting wings of Uncle Sam. But we are facing a situation in which -every effort will be made to lure our friends away with protestations -of peaceful intent. Our real allies<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_262"></a>[Pg 262]</span> will be those who share common -interests and believe in the same principles of government and law. -Among these the British stand pre-eminent.</p> - -<p>There was a wise old general commanding the United States Army in -Germany at the height of the cold war. At this time, early in 1951, no -one was sure what the next Russian move would be. Some of the general's -young officers were playing that engaging game of adding divisions of -various nationalities to assess Western strength. In the unbuttoned -atmosphere of after-dinner drinks they conjured up Italian army corps -and Greek and Turkish armored divisions. After ten minutes of this, the -idea that the Soviet Union might even think of a war seemed downright -foolish.</p> - -<p>The general surveyed them with a wintry eye and then spoke. They were, -he said mildly, playing with shadows. If "it" came, the only people -to count on were the four divisions of British troops up on the left -flank. These are the only people on our side, he added, who think the -way we do and feel the way we do. These are the people who, in war or -in peace, in good times and bad, are going to stick.</p> - -<p>This identity of broad political outlook is essential in American -assessments of Britain. It is more important in the long run than -concern over the power of the Trades Union Congress or competition for -overseas markets.</p> - -<p>But, granting this identity of outlook and aims, we have the right to -ask ourselves if Britain remains a powerful and stable ally of the -United States in the leadership of the Western community. I believe -that the answer is in the affirmative, that with all her difficulties -and changes Britain will continue to play a leading role in the affairs -of the world, that she will not decline gradually into impotent -isolation.</p> - -<p>Let us be quite clear about the future outline of British power. The -Empire is gone or going. The British know that. But the endurance, the -resolution, the intelligence that transformed a small island off the -coast of Europe into the greatest of modern empires is still there. -Beneath the complacency, the seeming indifference, it re<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_263"></a>[Pg 263]</span>mains. The -best evidence is the series of social, economic, and political changes -that has transformed British life.</p> - -<p>These changes, whatever individual Britons or Americans may think of -them, are not signs of complacency or indifference. They are rather -proofs that the society has not lost its dynamism, that its leaders -admit and understand their losses in political influence and economic -power and are determined to build a stronger society on the foundations -of the old.</p> - -<p>Admittedly, the British make it difficult for their friends or their -enemies to discern the extent of change. They cling to the old -established forms. This is a characteristic that is almost universal -in mankind. When the first automobiles appeared, they were built to -resemble horse-drawn carriages. Men cling to the familiar in the -material and the mental. Think of our own devotion, in a period when -the nation has developed into a continental and world power, to a -Constitution drafted to suit the needs of a few millions living along -the eastern fringe of our country.</p> - -<p>The changes in Britain have taken place behind a façade of what the -world expects from Britain. The Queen rides in her carriage at Royal -Ascot, the extremists of the Labor Party cry havoc and let slip the -dogs of political war, the Guards are on parade, and gentlemen with -derbies firm upon their heads walk down St. James's swinging their -rolled umbrellas. Literature, the stage, the movies, the appearance of -the visiting Englishman in every quarter of the globe has implanted a -false picture firmly in the popular mind.</p> - -<p>"Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the noonday sun." They also play -cricket and drink tea to the exclusion of other entertainments, live on -estates or in tiny thatched cottages, say "by Jove" or "cor blimey." -Their society is stratified, their workers are idle, their enterprise -is negligible. Britain itself is a land of placid country villages, one -large city (London), squires and lords, cockney humorists and rustics -in patched corduroy.</p> - -<p>This is Britain as many Americans think of it. It is also, as I have -mentioned earlier, the Britain to which many of its inhabitants return -in their daydreams. But it is not contemporary Britain.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_264"></a>[Pg 264]</span></p> - -<p>The real Britain is a hurrying, clamorous, purposeful industrial -nation. Its people, with a sense of reality any nation might envy, are -carrying out major changes in the structure of the national economy and -in the organization of society. The Welfare State may be considered -a blessing or a curse, according to political taste, but the nation -that first conceived and established it cannot be thought deficient in -imagination or averse to change.</p> - -<p>The human symbol of modern Britain is not John Bull with his -country-squire clothes or the languid, elegant young man of the -West End theater, but an energetic, quick-spoken man of thirty-five -or forty. He is "in" plastics or electronics or steel. He talks of -building bridges in India, selling trucks in Nigeria, or buying timber -in Russia. In the years since the war he has been forced to supplement -his education—he went to a small public school—with a great deal of -technical reading about his job. His home is neither an estate nor a -cottage but a small modern house. He wants a better house, a better -car in time. Indeed, he wants more of everything that is good in life. -He recognizes the need for change—and his own pre-eminence in the -economy of the nation is a sign of change. But by tradition he opposes -any change so rapid and revolutionary that it shakes the basis of his -society. Politically, he is on the left wing of the Conservative Party -or the right wing of the Labor Party. When in 1945 he left the Army -or the Navy or the Air Force his views were well to the left of their -present position. The thought that Britain's day is done has never -entered his head.</p> - -<p>The moderation of his political outlook expresses an important trend in -British politics. This is the movement within both major parties toward -the moderate center and a reaffirmation of the national rather than the -party point of view. The antics of the extreme left and the extreme -right in British politics are entertaining and occasionally worrying. -But under present conditions neither group represents a dominant -doctrine, although in London, as in Washington, governments must make -gestures in the direction of their more extreme supporters.</p> - -<p>This movement toward the center seems to express two deeply<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_265"></a>[Pg 265]</span> felt -national attitudes. One is that further experimentation in transforming -British society should be postponed until the changes that took -place in World War II and the decade that followed it have finished -their alteration of that society. There will be—indeed, there must -be—further alterations in the industrial economy, and these, of -course, will affect society. But I do not believe the British people -are now prepared for further sweeping, planned changes in their life -or would support such changes if they were to be proposed by either -political party.</p> - -<p>The second attitude is a growing determination to face up to the -national danger. Successive governments have attempted to drive home -the lesson that Britain's economic peril is very real and that it is -not a transient matter; that exports and dollar balances and internal -consumption will be matters of great importance for years to come. As -the memories of pre-war Britain fade, and as a new generation that has -never experienced the national economic security of imperial Britain -gains power, awareness of the nation's real problems should take hold. -And because the British are a sensible people bountifully endowed -with courage and resource, they should be able to meet and defeat the -problems.</p> - -<p>But at the moment the percentage of those who understand the national -position is too small. They must eternally contend against two -psychological factors in working-class opinion which we have already -encountered. One is the political lethargy of the new industrial -worker who, after centuries of shameful treatment, has emerged into -the sunlight of full employment, adequate housing, high wages, strong -industrial organization, political representation, amusements, clothes -and food that for decades have been out of the reach of Britain's -masses. This new working class has shown itself capable of great -self-sacrifice on behalf of its class interests and, let us never -forget, on behalf of its country in the last fifty years. But now, -having reached the home of its dreams, it has hung a "Do Not Disturb" -sign on the gate. Apparently it has done with sacrifice and realism.</p> - -<p>To a certain extent this attitude is encouraged by the big na<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_266"></a>[Pg 266]</span>tional -newspapers. The emphasis on sport, crime, the royal family, and the -trivia of international affairs leaves inadequate space for the grim -realities of the long politico-economic struggle with Russia, and the -new working class remains uninformed about its real problems. A Prime -Minister or a Chancellor of the Exchequer may expound the realities of -the national position in a speech, but if people are not interested -enough to listen or to read, what good does it do?</p> - -<p>Such a state of mind in an important section of the populace seriously -impedes national progress. When dollar contracts are lost because -of union squabbles there is something radically wrong with the -leadership exercised by the trade unions. Would the contracts be lost, -one wonders, if the union leaders had given their followers a clear -explanation of the importance of such contracts not only to one factory -in one industry but to the entire nation?</p> - -<p>Admittedly, there are plenty of others in Britain who do not understand -the importance of the economic situation or the changes that have taken -place. But the attitude of a retired colonel in Bedford or a stout -matron in Wimbledon is not so important to the nation's welfare as that -of the members of the working class.</p> - -<p>The second factor affecting the response of this class to the nation's -needs is the effect upon it of the economic depression of the years -between the two world wars. Again and again we have seen how the memory -of unemployment, of the dole, of endless empty days at labor exchanges, -of hungry children and women's stricken eyes has colored the thinking -of the working class. It is too ready to see the problems of the 1950's -in terms of its experiences of the 1930's. Consequently, it adopts -a partisan attitude toward political development and a reactionary -attitude toward industrial innovation.</p> - -<p>There are those who argue that these attitudes will change as the -working class becomes more accustomed to its new condition of life and -place in the national pattern. This may prove true. But can Britain -afford to wait until the union leaders understand that each new machine -or industrial technique is not part of a calcu<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_267"></a>[Pg 267]</span>lated plan by the bosses -to return the workers to the conditions prevailing in South Wales in -1936?</p> - -<p>This partisan approach to economic problems is as important a factor as -complacency and lethargy in obstructing adoption by the working class -of a national viewpoint toward the British economic predicament. The -British political system is a marvelously well-balanced one. But the -balance is disturbed now and has been for some years by the tendency of -organized labor to think almost exclusively in terms of its own rather -than national interests. Labor can with perfect justice retort that -when the middle class dominated British society it thought in terms of -its own interests, too. This is true, of course. The difference is that -the present national position is too precarious for blind partisanship.</p> - -<p>Much is made in public speeches of the educational side of trade-union -work. It would seem that the great opportunity for the unions now is -in this field. Someone or some organization that enjoys the respect of -the workers must educate them out of their lethargy and out of their -memories of the past. The popular newspapers will not or cannot do -it—and, naturally, as largely capitalist, they would be suspected by -many of those most in need of such education. But the job must be done -if Britain is to benefit fully from the enterprise and ingenuity of her -designers and engineers.</p> - -<p>Certainly the educational process would work both ways. A traveler in -Britain in the period 1953-6 would notice that in many cases there was -a difference between the TUC leaders' views about what the workers -thought and what the workers themselves thought. Many of the unions -have become too big. Contact between the leaders and the rank and file -is lost. The Communists take advantage of this.</p> - -<p>Can the working class awaken to the necessities of Britain's position -and sublimate its agonizing memories and fierce hatreds in a national -economic effort? This is the big "if" in Britain's ability to meet the -economic challenge of today. I do not doubt that the working class will -respond again, as it has in the past, to a national emergency that is -as real, if less spectacular, than the one which<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_268"></a>[Pg 268]</span> faced the nation in -1940. This response, I believe, will develop as firmly, albeit more -slowly, under a Conservative government as under a Labor government -because it will be a development of the trend, already clearly evident, -in the new middle class to take a national rather than a class outlook -on Britain's problems. But the response must come soon.</p> - -<p>We have seen how the present political alignment in Britain has -developed out of the political and economic circumstances of the years -since 1939. What of the future?</p> - -<p>The Conservative government since the end of 1955 has been engaged in -a gigantic political gamble. It has instituted a series of economic -measures to restrict home spending. These measures are highly unpopular -with the new working class from whom the party has obtained surprising -support in recent elections. At the same time the Tory cabinet has not -provided as much relief from taxation as the old middle class, its -strongest supporters, demanded and expected after the electoral triumph -of May 1955. These are calculated political risks. The calculation is -that by the next general election, in 1959 or even 1960, the drive -to expand British exports will have succeeded in establishing a new -prosperity more firmly based than that of the boom years 1954 and 1955.</p> - -<p>To attain this objective the Conservative government will have to -perform a feat of political tightrope-walking beyond the aspirations -of ordinary politics. The new prosperity can be achieved successfully, -from the political point of view, only if the measures taken to attain -it please the old middle class without offending Conservative voters in -the new middle class and the new industrial working class. This will -mean budgets in 1957 and 1958 that will relieve financial pressure -upon the first of these groups without alienating the other two, whose -interests are mutually antagonistic. It will mean that Britain's -defense commitments must be reduced and adjusted to the extent that the -savings will cut taxation of the old middle class but not to the extent -that the reduction of defense construction will affect the employment -of either the new middle class or the industrial working class.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_269"></a>[Pg 269]</span></p> - -<p>This book was completed before the government's course was run. If -its policy succeeds, then Harold Macmillan must be accorded a place -in history not far below that of the greatest workers of political -miracles.</p> - -<p>Had there been a general election in the winter of 1956-7, the Labor -Party would have won, although its majority would probably not have -been so large as its enthusiastic tacticians predicted. The party -should be able to appeal to the electorate at the next general election -with greater success than in 1955, providing certain conditions are met.</p> - -<p>The big "if" facing the Labor Party concerns not abstruse questions -of socialist dogma but the oldest question in politics: the conflict -between two men. The men are Hugh Gaitskell, the leader of the -Parliamentary Labor Party, and Aneurin Bevan.</p> - -<p>Nye Bevan remains a major force in British politics. He is the only -prominent politician who is a force in himself, a personality around -which lesser men assemble. Like the young Winston Churchill, he -inspires either love or hate. Untrammeled by the discipline of the -party, he can rally the left wing of the Labor movement. Simultaneously -he can alienate the moderates of the party, the undecided voters, -and the tepid conservatives who had thought it might be time to let -labor "have a go." If the next general-election campaign finds Bevan -clamoring for the extension of nationalization in British industry, -beckoning his countrymen down untrodden social paths, lambasting -Britain's allies, and scoffing at her progress, then the Labor Party -will be defeated.</p> - -<p>I have known Aneurin Bevan for many years. For the weal or woe of -Britain, he is a man born to storm and danger. A sudden war, a swift -and violent economic reverse would brighten his star. In a crisis his -confidence, whether that of a born leader or a born charlatan, would -attract the many.</p> - -<p>Barring such catastrophes, a reasonable stability in government is to -be expected. The Conservative majority in the House of Commons after -the 1955 election probably was a little larger than is customary in a -nation so evenly divided politically. Despite the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_270"></a>[Pg 270]</span> rancor aroused by -the Suez crisis, there seem to be reasonable grounds for predicting the -gradual disappearance of Tories of the old type and of the belligerent -Labor leaders surviving from the twenties. The development of a -national outlook by both parties seems probable.</p> - -<p>Americans need not be concerned over the fission of the British -political system into a multi-party one capable of providing a -government but incapable of government. Stability means, of course, -that British governments will know their own minds. In the complex, -hair-trigger world of today this is an important factor. It is equally -important in charting the future course of Britain. Nations that know -where they want to go and how they want to go there are not verging on -political senility.</p> - -<p>This political stability is vital to Britain in the years of transition -that lie ahead. For it is in British industry that the greatest changes -will take place.</p> - -<p>Britain is moving in new directions, economically, politically, and -socially. The base of this movement is industrial—a revolution in -power. The world's most imaginative, extensive, and advanced program -for the production of electricity from nuclear power stations is under -way. This magnificent acceptance of the challenge of the nuclear age is -also an answer to one of the key questions of 1945: how could British -industry expand and British exports thrive if coal yearly became -scarcer and more expensive to mine? The answer is nuclear energy, 5,000 -to 6,000 megawatts of it by 1965.</p> - -<p>The program for constructing twenty nuclear power stations in Britain -and Northern Ireland is the most spectacular part of the power program. -As coal will be vital to the economy for years to come, more economic -and more efficient mining methods also are regarded as a matter of -national urgency.</p> - -<p>Throughout the nation's industrial structure there is an air of purpose -and enthusiasm. Five huge new steel plants will be started in 1957. An -ambitious program of modernizing the railroads and the shipbuilding -industry is well under way. The new industries<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_271"></a>[Pg 271]</span> that have developed -since 1945 and old industries now delivering for the export markets -are pushing British goods throughout the world: radar, radioactive -isotopes, electronic equipment, sleek new jet aircraft, diesel engines, -plastics, detergents, atomic power stations. All are part of Britain's -response to the challenge of change.</p> - -<p>To fulfill present hopes, production and productivity must rise, -management must grasp the changed position of Britain in the world. -From the courted, she has become the courter, competing for markets -with Germany, Japan, Sweden, and the United States. Such competition -existed in the past, but now, with the cushion of overseas investments -gone, such competition is a true national battle. There is plenty of -evidence that a portion at least of industrial management in Britain -fails to understand these conditions. Such complacency is as dangerous -to the export drive as the unwillingness or inability of the industrial -worker to grasp the export drive's importance to him, to his factory, -to his union, and to his country.</p> - -<p>Due emphasis should be given to such failings. But we must not forget -that the British are a great mercantile people, eager and ingenious -traders ready, once they accept its importance, to go to any length of -enterprise to win a market. It is also wise to remember that, although -circumstances have made the British share of the dollar market the -criterion of success, the British do extremely well in a number of -important non-dollar markets.</p> - -<p>The attitude of the industrial working class to wage increases is a -factor in the drive to boost the exports on which the nation lives. -The modernization of British industry to meet the requirements of -the nation's economic position, alterations in management and sales -practices, higher production and productivity will not suffice to win -export markets if the wage level in industry continues to rise. A -steady rise will price Britain out of her markets. Should this occur, -the question of whether organized labor is to take kindly to automation -will become academic. The country cannot live without those markets.</p> - -<p>Early in September of 1956 when the world was worrying over<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_272"></a>[Pg 272]</span> the Suez -Canal, <i>The New York Times</i> carried a news item from Brighton, the -English seashore resort, that surely was as important to Britain as -anything Premier Nasser or Sir Anthony Eden or Mr. Dulles might say.</p> - -<p>The Trades Union Congress, the dispatch said, had rejected the -Conservative government's plea for restraint in pressing wage claims. -The final paragraphs of a resolution passed unanimously at the -eighty-eighth annual conference said that the TUC " ... asserts the -right of labor to bargain on equal terms with capital, and to use its -bargaining strength to protect the workers from the dislocations of an -unplanned economy.</p> - -<p>"It rejects proposals to recover control by wage restraint, and by -using the nationalized industries as a drag-anchor for the drifting -national economy."</p> - -<p>These phrases reveal the heart of the quarrel between the TUC and the -government. The Conservatives are belabored for not carrying out a -Socialist policy—i.e., a planned economy—but restraint on wages is -rejected.</p> - -<p>The resolution represented a serious check in progress toward a -national understanding of the country's economic position. It ensured, -I believe, another round of wage demands by the unions, protracted -industrial disputes, and, eventually, higher costs for industry and -higher prices for foreign buyers.</p> - -<p>The constant bickering between union and union, between unions and -employers, and between the TUC and the government should not divert -us from the qualities of the British industrial working class. It -is highly skilled, especially in the fields of electronics and the -other new industries now so important to the export trade. Its -gross production and productivity are rising. It is, once aroused, -intelligent and energetic. The nation is essentially homogeneous. There -is obviously a wide gap between worker and employer in Britain, but it -seems less wide when we compare it with the French worker's hostility -toward his boss.</p> - -<p>But of course the industrial worker is only one unit of the industrial -system. Working with him are hundreds of thousands of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_273"></a>[Pg 273]</span> engineers, -technicians, planners, and managers—men of high quality, imaginative, -daring, and resourceful. Together these two groups operate industries -that are rapidly recovering from the effects of the war and the -frantic post-war period in which all machines had to run at top speed, -regardless of repairs, if Britain was to make enough to live.</p> - -<p>If Americans understand that in a smaller country industry will be -on a smaller scale than in the United States, they must concede that -the steel plants in Wales and the North, the hydroelectric power -system built in the fastnesses of the Scottish Highlands, the new -nuclear-energy power stations now nearing completion are impressive -industrial installations. British industry in the physical sense is not -a collection of obsolete or obsolescent factories and rundown mills; -new plants and factories are appearing with greater frequency every -year, and the emphasis is on the future.</p> - -<p>A journey through the busy Midlands provides the proof. Everywhere one -sees new construction for industrial production. The rawboned red brick -factories, relics of Victorian England, are silent and empty; many have -been pulled down. The main problem for Britain is not the modernity of -her industrial system but the lack of modernity in the outlook of her -industrial workers.</p> - -<p>The judgment may seem too harsh. It is manifestly unfair to place the -entire burden of progress toward a healthier economy on one element in -the economic situation. Certainly British capital in the past and to -some extent in the present has been singularly blind to the country's -new situation and unenterprising in seeking means of adjusting itself -to this situation. The price rings and monopolistic practices have -sustained inefficient factories and restricted industrial enterprise.</p> - -<p>Nevertheless, it is my conclusion that today the industrial owner and -manager understands the nation's situation and the union leader does -not. The TUC has attained great influence in the realm. The industrial -worker has won living standards undreamed of a generation ago. -Nonetheless, there is a dangerous lack of tolerance in labor's approach -to management. This carries over into labor's<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_274"></a>[Pg 274]</span> approach to government. -It is a highly unrealistic attitude in which organized labor clamors -for the adoption by a Conservative government of a system of economic -planning which that government was elected to end.</p> - -<p>As we have seen, thousands of the Tories' strongest supporters -are angry because they regard the government they elected as -pseudo-socialist.</p> - -<p>This contest between labor and capital is involved and sharply -partisan. Viewed from the outside, it may seem an insurmountable -obstacle to British progress. But to accept that view is to ignore the -most important, the most enduring of all the country's resources: the -character of the British people.</p> - -<p>From the time of Charles II on, visitors to Britain have been struck -by the way in which the character of the British people has allowed -them the widest latitude for internal differences, often carried to the -very edge of armed conflict, and has yet enabled them to maintain their -political stability.</p> - -<p>There is a lesson in recent history. Imposing forces within the kingdom -reached a pitch of fanatic fury over the Ulster question shortly before -World War I. Great political leaders took their positions. The Army -was shaken by rumors of disaffection. Officers were ready to resign -their commissions rather than lead their troops into action against the -turbulent Ulstermen. The Germans and others watching from the Continent -concluded that the heart of the world empire was sick. Yet what was the -outcome? Finally aware of the magnitude of the challenge presented by -German aggression in Belgium, the country united instantly. The leaders -composed their differences. The Army closed its ranks. The officers -went away to fight and die at Mons and Le Cateau.</p> - -<p>The lesson is that the British, because of their essential homogeneity, -can afford a higher pitch of internal argument than can other nations. -Indeed, the very fury of these arguments testifies to the vitality of -the nation. It means a country on the move, in contrast to the somber, -orderly, shabby dictatorship of Spain or the somnolent French Republic -where the great slogans of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_275"></a>[Pg 275]</span> past have been abandoned for the motto -"We couldn't care less."</p> - -<p>Those who admire the British accept British character as one of the -strongest arguments for their nation's survival as a great power. -But before we go too far in endorsing this view we must note that -there are bad characteristics as well as good ones. We know that the -British society is changing. Is it not possible that in the process -of change some of the characteristics which made the nation great are -disappearing?</p> - -<p>Mr. Geoffrey Gorer tells us that the British have become a law-abiding -nation dwelling in amity and honesty under British justice. In some -aspects of civil relationship this is true. Visitors to Britain -only a century ago were alarmed by the behavior of British mobs. -The cockneys of London pulled the mustaches of a visiting Hungarian -general and shouted rude remarks at their Queen and her Prince Consort. -From medieval times the British working classes have been long on -independence and short on respect. The uprising of the <i>Jacquerie</i> in -French history is balanced in British annals by the dim, powerful, and -compelling figures of Wat Tyler and John Ball.</p> - -<p>Has all this changed so much? Have the turbulent, violent British -really become a nation of sober householders indifferent to their -rights or to those at home or abroad who threaten them? Superficially -the answer may be yes. Basically it is no. The present strife between -organized labor and the employers is only a contemporary version of -a struggle which has gone on throughout its history and which is -world-wide. It is when this struggle is submerged that it is dangerous. -Despite all the damage it is doing now to the British economy, -dissension in the House of Commons and in the boardrooms of industries -is preferable to wild plots laid in cellars.</p> - -<p>When we consider the heat with which these debates are conducted we -must also take notice of one sign of British stability: partisan -passions, either in industrial conflict or in political warfare, -never reach the point where the patriotism of the other party is -impugned. The Conservatives do not label the Socialists as the party of -treason. The patriotism of Hugh Gaitskell is not questioned by<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_276"></a>[Pg 276]</span> Harold -Macmillan. Ultimately we come round to the realization that, despite -the bitterness of debate, the central stability of the state remains.</p> - -<p>Much of this stability may result from the existence of the monarchy -at the summit of British affairs. All public evidence indicates that -the Crown is nearly powerless in modern Britain, yet it represents an -authority older and higher than any other element in the realm. It may -be the balance wheel, spinning brightly through the ages, that insures -stability.</p> - -<p>"At the heart to the British Empire there is one institution," -Winston Churchill wrote twenty years ago, "among the most ancient and -venerable, which, so far from falling into desuetude or decay, has -breasted the torrent of events, and even derived new vigor from the -stresses. Unshaken by the earthquakes, unweakened by the dissolvent -tides, though all be drifting the Royal and Imperial Monarchy of -Britain stands firm."</p> - -<p>It can be argued that the excessive interest of the British people -in the monarchy and the expense and labor involved in its upkeep are -characteristics ill suited to Britain in her present position. This -interest reflects the national tendency to dwell fondly on the past, -to revere institutions for their historical connections rather than -for their efficiency or usefulness under modern conditions. Serious -criticism of this well-defined trait comes not only from Americans but -from Australians, Canadians, and other inhabitants of newer nations. We -look forward, they say, and the British look back.</p> - -<p>There is some justice in the criticism, but perhaps the error is not -so grave as we may think. Obviously, it is impossible for a people -living in a country that has known some sort of civilization from -Roman times not to be impressed by their past. A tendency in the same -direction marks contemporary American society. Just as we are struck -by the Londoner's interest in Roman relics dug up in the heart of his -city, so European visitors note that an increasing number of Americans -are turning to their own past. All over the East the fortresses of the -French and Indian and Revolutionary<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_277"></a>[Pg 277]</span> wars are being reconstructed and -opened to tourists. National attention is given to attempts in the Far -West to re-create for a day or a week the atmosphere of a frontier that -passed less than a century ago. Half-forgotten battles and generals -of the Civil War are rescued for posterity by the careful labor of -scholarly biographers and military writers. This does not mean, -however, that the United States is looking back in the field of science -or invention.</p> - -<p>Similarly, British preservation of old castles or folkways is not a -sign that the nation has turned its back on the twentieth century. The -boldness with which the British accepted the challenge of the nuclear -era in industrial energy is a better guide to their temper than their -respect for the past. What is damaging is not reverence for the past of -Nelson or Gladstone, but the tendency of some of the middle class to -mourn the recent past, the dear dead days before the war when servants -were plentiful, taxes relatively low, and "a man could run his own -business." These mourners are temporarily important because their -resistance to needed change infects others. But the life whose end they -bewail has been disappearing in Britain for half a century, and the -generation now rising to power will not be plagued by these memories to -the same extent. To those who matured in war and post-war austerity, -modern Britain is a prosperous land.</p> - -<p>The trappings of British society are much older than our own. But -their interest in maintaining an unchanged façade should not mislead -Americans into believing the British are returning to the hand -loom. Reverence for the past is often advanced as one reason for -the lethargic attitude of Britons toward the present. Certainly an -awareness of history, its trials and triumphs, gives an individual -or a people a somewhat skeptical attitude about the importance of -current history. But in Britain those who know and care least about -the nation's great past are the ones most indifferent to the challenge -of the present. They are the industrial working class, and their -indifference results from other influences.</p> - -<p>Talking to the planners, technicians, factory bosses, communications -experts, salesmen, and senior civil servants, one finds less<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_278"></a>[Pg 278]</span> -complacency and more enterprise than in most European countries. In -fact, it sometimes seems to the outsider that British society is a -little too self-critical, too contentious. Obviously, it must change to -meet the altered world, but self-criticism pushed to the maximum can -ultimately crush ambition.</p> - -<p>If we turn to modern British writing, we find sociologists, economists, -anthropologists, and politicians pouring forth a steady stream of books -analyzing the nation's social, economic, and political problems. One -of the great men of the modern Labor Party, Herbert Morrison, thought -it well worth while to devote his time to the writing of <i>Government -and Parliament</i>. The intellectual leaders of Britain have turned -increasingly to a minute assessment of their nation and what is right -and wrong about it.</p> - -<p>This preoccupation with the state of the realm is healthy. The -complacency that was once the most disliked characteristic of the -traveling Briton is vanishing. The British are putting themselves under -the microscope. Nothing but good can come of it.</p> - -<p>We hear from the British themselves confessions of inadequacy to meet -the modern world and flaming criticisms of aspects of their society. As -a nation they are fond of feeling sorry for themselves; indeed, someone -has said that they are never happier than when they think all is lost. -Such British statements should not be taken as representing the whole -truth. The reforming element is very strong in the British character. -Without its presence, the social reforms of this century could not have -been accomplished.</p> - -<p>Anyone who frequents political, business, and journalistic circles in -Britain will hear more about mistakes and failures than about success. -(The most notable exception to this enjoyment of gloom is the popular -press, which since the war has made a specialty of boosting British -achievements.) Similarly, any discussion of British character with -Britons is sure to find them concentrating on negative rather than -positive traits. Perhaps this is because they are so sure of their -positive characteristics. In any case, the latter constitute a major -share of the national insurance against decline.</p> - -<p>Over the years the British trait that has impressed me most is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_279"></a>[Pg 279]</span> -toughness of mind. This may surprise Americans who tend to regard -the British as overpolite or diffident or sentimental—aspects of -the national character which are evident at times and which hide the -essential toughness underneath.</p> - -<p>Although they bewail a decline in the standards of courtesy since the -war, the British are a polite race in the ordinary business of living. -From the "'kew" of the bus conductor or the salesgirl to the "And -now, sir, if you would kindly sign here" of the bank clerk they pad -social intercourse with small courtesies. However, when an Englishman, -especially an upper-class Englishman, desires to be rude he makes the -late Mr. Vishinsky sound like a curate. But it is an English axiom that -a gentleman is never unintentionally rude.</p> - -<p>With some notable exceptions, the British are seldom loudly assertive. -They will listen at great length to the opinions of others and, -seemingly, are reluctant to put forward their own. This does not mean -they agree, although foreigners in contact with British diplomats have -often assumed this mistakenly. The British are always willing to see -both sides of a question. But they are seldom ready to accept without -prolonged and often violent argument any point of view other than their -own.</p> - -<p>They are a sentimental people but not an emotional one. Failure to -distinguish this difference leads individuals and nations to misjudge -the British.</p> - -<p>Sentimentalists they are. Their eyes will glisten with tears as they -listen to some elderly soprano with a voice long rusted by gin sing the -music-hall songs of half a century ago. As Somerset Maugham has pointed -out, they revere age. The present Conservative government and the Labor -front bench are unusual in that they contain a large percentage of -"young men"—that is, men in their fifties. Sir Winston Churchill did -not truly win the affection of his countrymen until he was well into -his seventies, when the old fierce antagonism of the working class was -replaced with a grudging admiration for "the Old Man."</p> - -<p>On his eightieth birthday the leaders of all the political parties in -the House of Commons joined in a tribute that milked the tear<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_280"></a>[Pg 280]</span> ducts -of the nation. When, six months later, Sir Winston retired as Prime -Minister there was another outbreak of bathos. But when two months -after that a new House of Commons was sworn under the leadership of Sir -Anthony Eden, some of the young Conservative Members of Parliament who -owed their offices and, in a wider sense, their lives to Sir Winston -pushed ahead of him in the jostling throng making for the Speaker's -bench. It was left to Clement Attlee, his dry, thoughtful foe in so -many political battles, to lead Sir Winston up ahead of his eager -juniors. Sentiment, yes; emotion, no.</p> - -<p>For many reasons the British as a people are anxious to find formulas -that will guide them out of international crises, to avoid the final -arbitration of war. The appeasement of Neville Chamberlain and his -associates in the late thirties was in keeping with this historically -developed tendency. One has only to read what Pitt endured from -Napoleon to preserve peace, or the sound, sensible reasons that Charles -James Fox offered against the continuation of the war with the First -Empire, to understand that this island people goes to war only with the -utmost reluctance.</p> - -<p>One reason is that in 1800, in 1939, and in the middle of the twentieth -century the British have lived by trade. Wars, large or small, hurt -trade. Prolonged hostility toward a foreign nation—Franco's Spain, -Lenin's Russia, or Mao's China—reduces Britain's share in a market or -cuts off raw materials needed for production at home. In this respect -we cannot judge Britain by the continental standards of China or Russia -or the United States. This is an island power.</p> - -<p>Because they are polite, because they are easily moved to sentimental -tears—Sir Winston Churchill and Hugh Gaitskell, who otherwise have few -traits in common, both cry easily—because they are diffident, because -they will twist and turn in their efforts to avoid war (although at -times, for reasons of policy, they will present the impression of being -very ready for war), the British have given the outside world a false -idea of their character. Beneath all this is toughness of mind.</p> - -<p>I recall landing in England in April of 1939. It was then<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_281"></a>[Pg 281]</span> obvious -to almost everyone in Europe that war was on the way. On the way to -London I talked to a fellow passenger, a man in his late twenties -who had three small children and who lived in London. "The next time -Hitler goes for anyone, we'll go for him," he said casually, almost -apologetically. He conceded that the war would be long, that Britain -would take some hard knocks, that going into the Navy and leaving his -wife and children would be tedious. But he had made up his mind that -there was no other course. The thing had to be done.</p> - -<p>After the war—and, indeed, during it—many Americans ridiculed the -British reaction to the war. They found exaggerated the stories of the -cockney who said: "'arf a mo', Adolph" while he lit his pipe, the women -who shouted "God bless you" to Winston Churchill when he visited the -smoking ruins of their homes. This was a serious error. In those days, -the most critical that had ever come upon them, the British acted in a -manner which made one proud to be a member of the same species.</p> - -<p>But that was a decade and a half ago, and the circumstances were -extraordinary. Nations change—compare the heroic France of Verdun -with the indulgent, faithless France of 1940. Have war and sacrifice, -austerity and prolonged crisis weakened Britain's mental toughness? I -think not.</p> - -<p>The prolonged conflict between employers and employed and among -the great trade unions is the most serious friction within British -society. Its critical effect upon Britain's present and future has -been emphasized. I do not believe, however, that in the long run the -men on both sides who hold their opinions so stoutly will be unable to -compromise their difficulties in the face of the continuing national -emergency. In the twenties and thirties such great convulsions -in industrial relations as the General Strike were harmful but -not catastrophic. The British economy was buttressed by overseas -investments and by the possession of established export markets -throughout the world. That situation no longer exists. Anything -approaching the severity of a General Strike could break Britain. In -the end, I believe, the extremists of both sides will realize this<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_282"></a>[Pg 282]</span> -and will find in themselves the mental toughness—for it takes a hard -mind to accept an armistice short of final victory in exchange for -the promise of future benefits—to compose their differences and move -toward a national rather than a partisan solution.</p> - -<p>Of course, Britain's difficulties are not confined to the home front. -But I have consciously emphasized the importance of her internal -problems because they reflect the nation's present position in the -world and help to determine how Britain will act abroad.</p> - -<p>Just as the last decade has seen drastic changes in industrial -direction in Britain, so the coming decade will witness changes equally -great in the development of Britain's international position. Britain -cannot, and would not if she could, build a new empire. But it is -evident that the country intends to replace the monolithic concept of -power with a horizontal concept. We will see, I am confident, a steady -growth of Britain's ties with Europe and the establishment of Britain -as a link between the Commonwealth nations and Europe.</p> - -<p>The British have fertile political imaginations. They are adroit -in discussion and debate. After years of uncertainty a number of -politicians of great influence are moving toward closer association -with Europe. At the moment the Grand Design (a rather grandiose title -for the British to use) is endorsed by Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, -Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd, Defense Minister Duncan Sandys, -Chancellor of the Exchequer Peter Thorneycroft, and President of the -Board of Trade Sir David Eccles. Given a change in government, I think -we can assume that the idea would be supported, although enthusiasm -would be somewhat less great, by the leaders of the Labor Party.</p> - -<p>What is the Grand Design? It is the concept of a Europe cooperating -in fields of economy and politico-military strategy. It goes beyond -the Europe of Western European Union or the North Atlantic Treaty -Alliance and thinks in terms of a general confederation into which -the Scandinavian and Mediterranean nations would be drawn. Existing -organizations such as the Organization for European Economic -Co-operation would be expanded to in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_283"></a>[Pg 283]</span>clude new members. At the top -would be a General Assembly elected by the parliaments of each member -nation. There would be a general pooling of military research and -development.</p> - -<p>The establishment of such an association of European states is at -least ten years in the future. The British do not think it should be -hurried. Careful, rather pragmatic, they advocate methodical progress -in which new international organizations could be tested against actual -conditions. Those that work will survive. Those that do not will -disappear.</p> - -<p>Is the Grand Design a new name for a third force to be interposed -between the Sino-Russian bloc in the East and the United States in -the West? The British say emphatically not. They see it as a method -of strengthening the Atlantic Alliance by uniting Europe. Naturally, -they believe their flair for diplomacy and politics, their industrial -strength, and, not least, Europe's distaste for German leadership will -give them an important role in the new Europe. Obviously, that role, as -spokesman for both a united Europe and a global Commonwealth, will be -more suitable and, above all, more practical in the world of 1960 than -the obsolete concept of Empire.</p> - -<p>The development of British action toward the accomplishment of the -Grand Design will be accompanied by the gradual transformation of -what is left of the Empire into the Commonwealth. Ghana, established -as an independent member of the Commonwealth in March 1957, will be -followed by Singapore, Malaya, Nigeria, Rhodesia, and many more. Since -1945 Britain has given self-government and independence to well over -500,000,000 souls (at the same time the Soviet Union was enslaving -100,000,000) and the process is not over. Certainly there have been -shortcomings and failures—Cyprus is one. But it seems to me that a -people prepared on one hand to abdicate power and turn that power over -to others and at the same time ready to conceive and develop a new plan -for Europe is showing an elasticity and toughness of mind the rest of -the world might envy. We are not attending the birth of a new British -Empire but watching the advent of a new position for<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_284"></a>[Pg 284]</span> Britain in the -world—one less spectacularly powerful than the old, but important -nonetheless. The speed of its development is inextricably connected -with an expanding and prosperous economy at home.</p> - -<p>Bravery is associated with tough-mindedness. But bravery is not the -exclusive possession of any nation. The British are a courageous -people, certainly. As certain classes are apt to combine courage with -the national habit of understatement, the bravery of the British has an -attraction not evident in the somewhat self-conscious heroism of the -Prussians. Of course, it can be argued that the apparent unwillingness -of the British to exploit the fact that Pilot Officer Z brought -his plane back from Berlin on one engine or that Sergeant Major Y -killed thirty Germans before his morning tea is a form of national -advertisement more subtle and sure than that obtained by battalions of -public-relations officers.</p> - -<p>Although they revere regimental traditions, the British seldom express -their reverence openly. In war they are able to maintain an attitude -of humorous objectivity. During the fighting on the retreat to Dunkirk -I encountered two Guards officers roaring with laughter. They had -learned, they said, that the popular newspapers in London had reported -that the nickname of the Commander in Chief, General the Viscount Gort, -was "Tiger." "My dear chap," said one, "in the Brigade [of Guards] -we've always called him 'Fat Boy.'"</p> - -<p>Coupled with tough-mindedness is another positive characteristic: -love of justice. This may be disputed by the Irish, the Indians, the -Cypriotes. But it is true that in all the great international crises in -which Britain has been involved, from the War of Independence onward, -there has been a strong, sometimes violent opposition to the course -that the government of the day pursued. Beginning with Burke, the -Americans, the Irish, the Indians, the Cypriotes have had defenders in -the House of Commons, on political platforms, and in the press.</p> - -<p>This is not the result of partisan politics, although naturally that -helps. Englishmen did not assail the Black and Tans in Ireland<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_285"></a>[Pg 285]</span> because -of love for Irishmen. Indian independence did not find a redoubtable -champion in Earl Mountbatten because of his particular fondness for -Indians. The impulse was the belief that justice or, to put it better, -right must be done.</p> - -<p>It is because a large section of the nation believes this implicitly -that the British over the years have been able to make those gestures -of conciliation and surrenders of power which will ever adorn her -history: the settlement with the Boers after the South African war, the -withdrawal from India, the treaty with Ireland.</p> - -<p>The British people suffered greatly during both world wars. Yet any -ferocious outbreak of hatred against "the Huns" was promptly answered -by leaders who even in the midst of war understood that the right they -were fighting to preserve must be preserved at home as well as abroad.</p> - -<p>It was this belief in justice, a justice that served all, incorruptible -and austere, which enabled a comparative handful of Britons to rule -the Indian subcontinent for so long. It was this belief in justice, -interpreted in terms of social evolution, which moved the reformers of -the present century in the direction of the Welfare State. The British -concept of justice is inseparably bound to the strong reformist element -within the British people. As long as that element flourishes, as it -does today, we can expect that British society will continue to change -and develop.</p> - -<p>Tough-mindedness, a quiet form of bravery, a love of justice; what else -is there? One characteristic I have noted earlier: a living belief in -the democratic process. The British know the world too well to believe -that this delicate and complex system of government can immediately -be imposed upon any people. They themselves, as they will admit, have -trouble making it work. But neither fascism nor communism has ever made -headway. Any political expert can provide long and involved reasons -for this. I prefer the obvious one: the British believe in democracy, -they believe in people. Long ago, as a young man entering politics, -Winston Churchill, grandson of a Duke of Marlborough, product of Harrow -and a fashionable<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_286"></a>[Pg 286]</span> Hussar regiment, adopted as his own a motto of his -father's. It was simply: "Trust the People."</p> - -<p>The actual practice of democracy over a long period of years can be -successful only if it is accompanied by a wide measure of tolerance. -Despite all their vicissitudes, this virtue the British preserve in -full measure. The British disliked Senator McCarthy because they -thought he was intolerant; they were themselves slightly intolerant, -or at least ill-informed, about the causes that inflated the Senator. -In their own nation the British tolerate almost any sort of political -behavior as long as it is conducted within the framework of the law. -Communists, fascists, isolationists, internationalists all may speak -their pieces and make as much noise as they wish. There will always be -a policeman on hand to quell a disturbance.</p> - -<p>Toleration of the public exposition of political beliefs that aim at -the overthrow of the established parliamentary government implies -a stout belief in the supremacy of democracy over other forms of -government. Even in their unbuttoned moments, British politicians will -seldom agree to the thesis, lately put about by many eminent men, that -complete suffrage prevents a government from acting with decision in an -emergency.</p> - -<p>Early in 1951 I talked late one night with a British diplomat about the -rearmament of Germany. He was a man of wide experience, aristocratic -bearing, and austere manner. During our conversation I suggested that -the British, who had suffered greatly at the hands of the Germans in -two world wars, would be most reluctant to agree to the rearmament of -their foes and that the ensuing political situation would be made to -order for the extremists of the Labor Party.</p> - -<p>"I don't think so," he replied. "Our people fumble and get lost at -times, but they come back on the right track. They'll argue it out in -their minds or in the pubs. They'll reject extreme measures. The Labor -Party and the great mass of its followers will be with the government. -The people, you know, are wiser than anyone thinks they are."</p> - -<p>Tolerance is coupled with kindness. British kindness is apt to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_287"></a>[Pg 287]</span> be -abstract, impersonal. There is the gruff, unspoken kindness of the -members of the working class to one another in times of death. The -wealthy wearer of the Old School Tie will go to great lengths to succor -a friend fallen on evil days. He will also do his best to provide for -an old employee or to rehabilitate an old soldier, once under his -command, who is in trouble with the police. This is part of the sense -of responsibility inculcated by the public school. Even in the Welfare -State it persists. "I've got to drive out into Essex this afternoon," a -friend said, "and see what I can do for a sergeant that served with me. -Bloody fool can't hold onto a farthing and makes a pest of himself with -the local authorities. Damn good sergeant, though."</p> - -<p>I remembered another sergeant in Germany. He was a man who had felt -the war deeply, losing a brother, a wife, and a daughter to German -bombs. When it was all over and the British Army rested on its arms -in northern Germany he installed his men in the best billets the -neighboring village could provide. The Germans were left to shift for -themselves in the barns and outbuildings. Within a week, he told me, -the situation was reversed. The Germans were back in their homes. -The soldiers were sleeping in the barns. I told a German about it -afterward. "Yes," he said, "the British would do that. We wouldn't, not -after a long war. They are a decent people."</p> - -<p>It is upon such characteristics, a basic, stubborn toughness of mind, -bravery, tolerance, a belief in democracy, kindness, decency, that -British hopes for the future rest.</p> - -<p>Any objective study of Britain must accept that, although there has -been a decline in power at home and abroad, the national economy -has recovered remarkably and the physical basis of the economy has -improved. Far from being decadent, idle, and unambitious, the nation -as a whole is pulsing with life. The energy may be diffused into paths -that fail to contribute directly to the general betterment of the -nation. But it is there, and the possession of the important national -characteristics mentioned above promises that eventually this energy -will be directed to the national good.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_288"></a>[Pg 288]</span></p> - -<p>In the end we return to our starting-point. Although there is a -cleavage between the working class and the middle class, it is not deep -enough to smash the essential unity of the people. No great gulfs of -geography, race, or religion separate them. The differences between -employer and employed are serious. But there is no basic difference, -nurtured by the hatred of a century and a half, as there is between -revolutionary France and conservative France. The constant change in -the character of the classes, the steady movement of individuals and -groups up the economic and social ladders insures that this will never -develop. From the outside the society seems stratified. On the inside -one sees, hears, feels ceaseless movement of a flexible society.</p> - -<p>The long contest with Russia has induced Americans to follow Napoleon's -advice and think about big battalions. But national power and influence -should not be measured solely in terms of material strength. By that -standard the England of the first Elizabeth and the Dutch Republic of -the seventeenth century would have been blotted out by the might of -Spain just as our own struggling colonies would have been overcome by -the weight of England. The character of a people counts.</p> - -<p>So it is with Britain. The ability of the British people to survive -cannot be measured only in terms of steel production. The presence of -grave economic and social problems should not be accepted as proof -that they cannot be solved by people of imagination and ability. The -existence of external class differences should not blind observers to -the basic unity of political thought.</p> - -<p>It is natural that in their present position Britons are far more aware -of the ties that bind them to the United States, ties that include -a common language, much common history, dangers shared, and enemies -overcome, than the people of the United States are aware of the ties -that bind them to Britain. But Americans must guard against the easy -assumption that, because Britain is weaker than she was half a century -ago, because she has changed rapidly and will change further, Britain -and the British are "through."</p> - -<p>It is often said in Washington that the leading politicians of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_289"></a>[Pg 289]</span> the -Republican and Democratic parties and the chief permanent officials of -the Treasury, State Department, and other departments did not recognize -the extent to which Britain had been weakened by World War II. It is -hard to understand why this should have been so. The sacrifice in blood -was written large on a hundred battlefields. The cost in treasure was -clearly outlined in the financial position of the United Kingdom in -1945.</p> - -<p>Americans should not fear political differences between the United -States and the United Kingdom on foreign policies. As long as -the British are worth their salt as allies they will think, and -occasionally act, independently. What would be dangerous to the future -of the alliance in a period of crisis would be the growth in Britain -of a belief that Britain's problems, internal or international, can be -blamed on the United States. A similar belief about Britain existed -in France in 1940. Verdun occupied the position in French minds that -the Battle of Britain does today in some British minds, that of a -great heroic national effort that exhausted the nation and left it -prey to the post-war appetite of its supposed friend and ally. If this -concept were to be accepted by any sizable proportion of the British -people, then the alliance would be in danger. The possibility that this -will happen is slight. The British retain confidence in themselves, -undaunted by the changes in the world.</p> - -<p>The United States can help sustain this confidence. It is difficult to -see why the political, industrial, and social accomplishments of the -British since 1945 are so casually ignored in the United States and why -Americans accept so readily the idea that Britain's day is done.</p> - -<p>Certainly many Americans criticized the establishment of the Welfare -State. Certainly ignorance led many to confuse socialism in Britain -with communism in the Soviet Union. Certainly the achievement of power -by the great trade unions has alienated those Americans who still decry -the powerful position of organized labor in the modern democratic state.</p> - -<p>But it is folly to expect that even our closest friends and truest -allies can develop economically and politically along paths similar<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_290"></a>[Pg 290]</span> -to those trod by the people of the United States. It is time that we -looked on the positive side of Britain's life since the end of World -War II. We must remember that this is a going concern. The new nuclear -power stations rising throughout Britain are part of the general -Western community which we lead. British advances in the sciences or -in any other field of human endeavor should not be thought of as the -activities of a rival but as the triumphs of an ally that has in the -past given incontrovertible proof of her steadfastness in adversity, -her willingness to do and dare at the side of the United States.</p> - -<p>There they are, fifty millions of them. Kindly, energetic, ambitious, -and, too often, happily complacent in peace; most resolute, courageous, -and tough-minded in the storms that have beaten about their islands -since the dawn of the Christian era.</p> - -<p>What is at stake in the relationship between the two nations is -something far greater than whether we approve of Aneurin Bevan or the -British approved of Senator McCarthy. The union of the English-speaking -peoples is the one tried and tested alliance in a shaky world. Three -times within living memory its sons have rallied to defeat or forestall -the ambitions of conquerors. To understand Britain, to share with her -the great tasks that lie before the Western community is much more than -a salute by Americans to common political thought, a common tongue, or -common memories. It is the easiest and most certain method by which we -in our time can preserve the freedom of man which has been building in -all the years since King and barons rode to Runnymede.</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_291"></a>[Pg 291]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="INDEX"><i>INDEX</i></h2> -</div> - - -<p> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Air Force, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>-40</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Albert, Prince Consort, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>-20, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Alexander, Field Marshal Earl, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Amery, Julian, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Anglo-American relations, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>-8, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>-86;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">tensions, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>-76</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Anne, Queen, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Anson, Sir William, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">armed forces, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>-6, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>-44;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">Air Force, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>-40;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">Army, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>-9;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">Navy, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Army, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>-9</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Atomic Energy Authority, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Attlee, Clement, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Bagehot, Walter, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>-8</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Baldwin, Stanley, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Beaverbrook, Lord (William Maxwell Aitken), <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">influence of, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>-5</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Bevan, Aneurin, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>-9 <i>passim</i>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">anti-Americanism, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">opposition to hydrogen bomb, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">leader of opposition within Labor Party, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>-80, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">supporters, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>-3</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Bevin, Ernest, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">opposition to communism, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></span><br /> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_292"></a>[Pg 292]</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Boyle, Sir Edward, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Bradlaugh, Charles, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">British Empire, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">British Productivity Council, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Brogan, D.W., <a href="#Page_164">164</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Butler, R.A., <a href="#Page_18">18</a>-19, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Cabinet, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>-6</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Castle, Mrs. Barbara, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Chamberlain, Neville, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Charles II, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Charles, Prince, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">China (Communist), <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">British attitude toward, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>-50</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Churchill, Sir Winston, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>-14, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>-6;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">party peacemaker, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">skill in debate, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">on monarchy, <a href="#Page_276">276</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">clubs, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>-9</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Commons, House of, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>-43, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Commonwealth, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>-41, <a href="#Page_283">283</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Communist Party in Britain, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>-4, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">in labor unions, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>-4, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>-15</span><br /> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_293"></a>[Pg 293]</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Connor, William, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Conservative Party, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>-69</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">conurbation, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Cooke, Alistair, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Cripps, Sir Stafford, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Crossman, R.H.S., <a href="#Page_84">84</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Delmer, Sefton, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Dilke, Sir Charles, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Dulles, John Foster, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>-1;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">British attitude toward, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Eccles, Sir David, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Eden, Sir Anthony, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>-2, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Edward VII, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Egypt, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Eisenhower, Dwight D., <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Elizabeth II, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>-33, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Elizabeth, Queen Mother, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">European Defense Community, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Foot, Michael, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>-5</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Forrest, William, <a href="#Page_228">228</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Foulkes, Frank, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">France, British attitude toward, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>-1</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Franks, Sir Oliver, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Freedman, Max, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Fyfe, Sir David Maxwell, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Gaitskell, Hugh, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>-8, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">opposed by Bevan, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">George I, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">George IV, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">George V, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">George VI, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Germany, British attitude toward, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>-3</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Gorer, Geoffrey, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Gort, General the Viscount, <a href="#Page_284">284</a></span><br /> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_294"></a>[Pg 294]</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Grand Design, The, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>-3</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Griffiths, James, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Halifax, Earl of, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Harding, Gilbert, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Hardy, Keir, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Horner, Arthur, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Howard, Ebenezer, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">India, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>-7, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Italy, British attitude toward, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>-4</span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Jacobson, Sydney, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">King, Cecil, <a href="#Page_226">226</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Korean war, economic influence of, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>-3</span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">labor unions, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>-13, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>-7;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">communist influence in, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>-13, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Lancaster, Osbert, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Laski, Harold, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Lloyd, Selwyn, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Lloyd George, David, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Lords, House of, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>-3, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">MacLeod, Iain, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Macmillan, Harold, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Margaret, Princess, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Massingham, Hugh, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Maulding, Reginald, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">McCarthy, Joseph, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>-6, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">McCarthyism, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>-4</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">McKenzie, Robert T., <a href="#Page_59">59</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">McNeil, Hector, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Middle East, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">British influence in, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>-7</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Miller, Webb, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">monarchy, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>-33, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">power of, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">influence of, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">finances of, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>-8, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>-1</span><br /> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_295"></a>[Pg 295]</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Montgomery, Field Marshal the Viscount, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Morrison, Herbert, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">opposition to communism, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Mosley, Sir Oswald, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Mountbatten, Earl, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Muggeridge, Malcolm, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Nasser, Abdel, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">National Health Service Act, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>-5</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">nationalization, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>-101, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>-5, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Navy, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Nehru, Shri Jawaharlal, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">New Towns, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>-18, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">newspapers, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>-81, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>-30;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Daily Express</i>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>-6;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Daily Herald</i>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Daily Mirror</i>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>-7;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Daily Telegraph</i>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Evening Standard</i>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Manchester Guardian</i>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>-<a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>-3;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>New Statesman and Nation</i>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>-2, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Sunday Express</i>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Times</i>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>-2;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Tribune</i>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>-5, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Norwich, Viscount (Alfred Duff Cooper), <a href="#Page_152">152</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Odger, George, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Orwell, George, <a href="#Page_252">252</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Parliament, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>-43, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">Commons, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>-43, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">Lords, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>-3, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>-20, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>-8 <i>passim</i>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Plumb, J.H., <a href="#Page_45">45</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">public schools, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>-4, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>-7</span><br /> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_296"></a>[Pg 296]</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">pubs, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>-7</span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Reynolds, Quentin, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Roosevelt, Franklin D., <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Salisbury, Marquess of, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Sandys, Duncan, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Scott, Richard, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Shinwell, Emanuel, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Smith, Walter Bedell, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Soviet Union, British attitude toward, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>-8</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">sports, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>-9, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>-54</span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">sterling area, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Strachey, Lytton, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Strang, Lord, <a href="#Page_232">232</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Thorneycroft, Peter, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Townsend, Peter, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Trades Union Congress, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">power of, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>-2, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>-7, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>-2;</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;">communist opposition, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Truman, Harry S., <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Victoria, Queen, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Waithman, Robert, <a href="#Page_229">229</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Watson, Sam, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Wavell, Field Marshal Earl, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Welfare State, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>-2, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Williams, Francis, <a href="#Page_227">227</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Wilson, Harold, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Windsor, Duchess of, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Windsor, Duke of, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Woolton, Lord (Frederick William Marquis), <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Zilliacus, Konni, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></span><br /> -</p> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_298"></a>[Pg 298]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" >A NOTE ON THE TYPE</h2> -</div> - - -<p><i>The text of this book was set on the Linotype in a face called</i> -<span class="allsmcap">TIMES ROMAN</span>, <i>designed by</i> <span class="allsmcap">STANLEY MORISON</span> <i>for</i> The -Times (<i>London</i>), <i>and first introduced by that newspaper in the middle -nineteen thirties</i>.</p> - -<p><i>Among typographers and designers of the twentieth century, Stanley -Morison has been a strong forming influence, as typographical adviser -to the English Monotype Corporation, as a director of two distinguished -English publishing houses, and as a writer of sensibility, erudition, -and keen practical sense.</i></p> - -<p><i>In 1930 Morison wrote: "Type design moves at the pace of the most -conservative reader. The good type-designer therefore realises that, -for a new fount to be successful, it has to be so good that only very -few recognise its novelty. If readers do not notice the consummate -reticence and rare discipline of a new type, it is probably a good -letter." It is now generally recognized that in the creation of</i> Times -Roman <i>Morison successfully met the qualifications of this theoretical -doctrine</i>.</p> - -<p><i>Composed, printed, and bound by</i> <span class="allsmcap">H. WOLFF</span>, <i>New York. Paper -manufactured by</i> <span class="allsmcap">S.D. WARREN CO.</span>, <i>Boston</i>.</p> - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_299"></a>[Pg 299]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak"> A NOTE ABOUT THE AUTHOR</h2> -</div> - - -<p><span class="smcap">Drew Middleton</span> <i>was born in New York City in 1913. After being -graduated from Syracuse University, he went into newspaper work, and in -1938 became a foreign correspondent. Since then he has been chief of</i> -The New York Times <i>bureaus in England, Russia, and Germany. In 1940, -during the Battle of Britain, he was in London covering the operations -of the Royal Air Force, and he later sent his dispatches from Supreme -Headquarters of the AEF. In the decade since the war, Mr. Middleton's -reporting and interpreting of the Cold War struggle between East and -West have earned him a wide and respectful audience both here and -abroad. His earlier books include</i> The Struggle for Germany (<i>1949</i>) -<i>and</i> The Defense of Western Europe (<i>1952</i>).</p> - -<p> </p> -<p> </p> -<hr class="pgx" /> -<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THESE ARE THE BRITISH***</p> -<p>******* This file should be named 63400-h.htm or 63400-h.zip *******</p> -<p>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:<br /> -<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/6/3/4/0/63400">http://www.gutenberg.org/6/3/4/0/63400</a></p> -<p> -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed.</p> - -<p>Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. -</p> - -<h2 class="pgx" title="Full Project Gutenberg License">START: FULL LICENSE<br /> -<br /> -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br /> -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</h2> - -<p>To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license.</p> - -<h3 class="pgx" title="Section 1. General Terms">Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works</h3> - -<p>1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8.</p> - -<p>1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.</p> - -<p>1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others.</p> - -<p>1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States.</p> - -<p>1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p> - -<p>1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed:</p> - -<blockquote><p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United - States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost - no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use - it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with - this eBook or online - at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this - ebook.</p></blockquote> - -<p>1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p> - -<p>1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work.</p> - -<p>1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.</p> - -<p>1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License.</p> - -<p>1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.</p> - -<p>1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p> - -<p>1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that</p> - -<ul> -<li>You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation."</li> - -<li>You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works.</li> - -<li>You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work.</li> - -<li>You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.</li> -</ul> - -<p>1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.</p> - -<p>1.F.</p> - -<p>1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment.</p> - -<p>1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE.</p> - -<p>1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem.</p> - -<p>1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p> - -<p>1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions.</p> - -<p>1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. </p> - -<h3 class="pgx" title="Section 2. The Mission of Project Gutenberg">Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm</h3> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life.</p> - -<p>Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org.</p> - -<h3 class="pgx" title="Section 3. The Project Gutenberg Literary">Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation</h3> - -<p>The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.</p> - -<p>The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact</p> - -<p>For additional contact information:</p> - -<p> Dr. Gregory B. Newby<br /> - Chief Executive and Director<br /> - gbnewby@pglaf.org</p> - -<h3 class="pgx" title="Section 4. Donations to PGLAF">Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation</h3> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS.</p> - -<p>The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/donate">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.</p> - -<p>While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate.</p> - -<p>International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.</p> - -<p>Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate</p> - -<h3 class="pgx" title="Section 5. Project Gutenberg Electronic Works">Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.</h3> - -<p>Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support.</p> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition.</p> - -<p>Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org</p> - -<p>This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.</p> - -</body> -</html> - diff --git a/old/63400-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/63400-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b2e7050..0000000 --- a/old/63400-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/63400-h/images/illus01.jpg b/old/63400-h/images/illus01.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 67d9c6d..0000000 --- a/old/63400-h/images/illus01.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/63400-h/images/illus02.jpg b/old/63400-h/images/illus02.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c7750c9..0000000 --- a/old/63400-h/images/illus02.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/63400-h/images/illus03.jpg b/old/63400-h/images/illus03.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index def2e5c..0000000 --- a/old/63400-h/images/illus03.jpg +++ /dev/null |
