RECONSTRUCTION POLICY
nt,—I have hitherto regarded The Spectator as a strong advocate of die application of reason and common sense to the many difficulties we have to meet _Ind will have to meet after the war is over, but in the light ot your leading article on reconstruction policy and your reviewer's article on Professor Carr's book on Conditions of Peace, I feel compelled to alter my favourable opinion.
It seems to me most unreasonable and contrary to common sense to start planning for reconstruction after the war when we know nothing of a hundred and one relevant facts which will have to be taken into consideration when the war is over. No doubt in this country it will be necessary that there should be a general election after the war, and I am inclined to think that the majority of the people of this country will want above all things release from the innumerable restrictions of their liberty which, have been rendered necessary by the war, and that the majority of the voters of this country will vote for relief from the many interferences with their bberty which have been rendered necessary by the war, but which oil be quite inappropriate to conditions of peace. A nation consists not of an abstract idea called "the State," but of the individuals who make up the State. Further, we do not know yet how much taxable property, money and credit will be available for purposes of reconstruction in this country after the war is over. Again, we do not know which countries will hive the most effective views on reconstruction policy.
It seems to me that in all probability plans for reconstruction made now will only be fit for the waste-paper-basket after the war is over.— I am, Sir, your obedient servant, FAIRFIELD. Fairfield Rouse, Caldy, Cheshire.
Previous page
