AFTER THE WAR
Sts,—I have been taking The Spectator for the last twelve months, as I found it had discarded, for the time being, the sentimental nonsense of " idealisms " and faced facts. Formerly it was a source of our 1930 decay. Now you are again on the " After the War " red-herring. Churchill surely is not such a fool as to posit the solution of "federal,' "economic " and " national problems " all over Europe. How little you appreciate facts is shown in your leading article " New Hope in India." Churchill's statement is mere matter-of-fact—things as they are and have been for years—and if you think Gandhi and Congress will welcome it as a " New Hope " you are mistaken.
Let us get to the facts in our own country if we want to indulge the wishful thinking of " solutions." What about the falling birth- rate—surely one cannot transgress the Regulations when pointing to that as the writing on the wall? What about democracy and the freedom to neglect children, shown up in the evacuees? What about Labour's opposition to child allowances? &c., &c. How are economic difficulties to be solved?
Not by Yankee wisecracks-ffom Sotith Africa about " commerce, economics and finance all freed from hampering obstructions." The fact of different social standards in labour costs must make different costings. We have preferred an army of unemployed to conscription, &c., and here we are with the " cheerful "! prognostications of your War " experts " to comfort us.
It is time the editors of England realised their responsibility for sane Presentation of actualities—instead of kicking at Duff Cooper.—Yours
St. John's-in-the-Vale, Keswick.
Previous page
