1814 and 1918
Does History Repeat Itself ? By R. F. McWilliams, K.C.
(J. Dent and Sons. 2a. 6d.)
PAST history is a series of problems with the solutions given. If we read them, we may be able to solve the problems of current history. By studying the cards which Destiny has laid on the table, we are in a better position to guess those which she is about to play. It is only in this general, and rather vague, sense that—to quote Jowett's Thucydides—a picture of the events which have happened will give us a picture of the events which may be expected to happen here- after in the order of human things, and not because history repeats itself (or will do so if we are not careful).
Yet it must be owned that Mr. McWilliams has succeeded, in this most suggestive little book, in collecting thirty-seven very curious parallels between the years 1814-1826 and 1918-1930. Nor has he stopped here. The danger, he seems to think, is that history may go on repeating itself, and, if it does, in 1952—corresponding to 1848—the whole world will be in revolution, and a period of great national wars will follow. But we need not share his apprehensions ; for, after all, the unrest of 1848, and the wars of the 'sixties, were the effect of that popular revolt against dynastic inter- nationalism, which began in the wars of liberation from Napoleon. At present the trend appears to be from nat- ionalism, which reached its apogee in 1919, to interna- tionalism, but a broader internationalism than that of the eighteenth century.
Politics are at present dominated by economics, and in this sphereMr. McWilliams does not make quite so much use of the analogies open to him. By imposing a ten per cent, import duty, Great Britain may, he thinks, induce other countries to loiver their tariff walls, and a resultant economic United States of Europe may bring the United States of America to do what is necessary to restore the prosperity of the world. The first step has now been taken, and the sequel remains to be seen. Meanwhile, to return to a hundred years ago, there is a great deal more to lie made 'Of the economic analogy. It would lie most interesting to know, for instance; what Mr. lifeWillianis would think of the following. Writing in 1819, Sismondi deplored the universal erection of tariff barriers, pointing out that the determination of every European country to become industrial had resulted in general cheapness, which had not benefited the consumer much, while producers and distributors had suffered severely by having to unload at a loss. This is astonishingly like the situation of to-day. Sismondi would probably not have agreed with the plan which Sir Herbert Samuel outlined on the fourth of this month, so for as it entailed State encouragement of mass production. Mr. McWilliams, who writes of the " over-rationalized industries " of Germany, would probably agree that wherever salvation is to be found, it is not in that blessed word " rationalization," rather than in that discovery of markets for existing industries which eventually brought us prosperity after the " Old War."
A. F. FREMANTLE.
Previous page
