Areas of Order
MINOS OR MINOTAUR? By John Bowle. (Cape, 15s.) Mos-r of the present advocates of a world order ruled by a world government fall into either of two classes. One set of writers, moved by hope, recommend it as the ascent into a heaven of perpetual peace and happiness; the other, moved by fear, recom- mend it as the only alternative to the hell which the hydrogen bomb has disclosed to us. Mr. Bowie seems to be inclined towards the second of, these views. But he is not disposed to accept just any sort of world government : he has no use for a world order (ruled from Moscow or elsewhere), which, though it might remove the threat of destruction, would lack the 'democratic' character he requires. What he urges upon us, as the alternative to destruc- tion, is a 'constitutional world order.' In short, he demands the best as the alternative to the worst. But he finds 'in the long perspective of history' an 'inevitable development of a world society' of this character. This gives him hope, which his belief that mankind is now _equipped technically to construct and manage such a society turns into confidence. It is true that, for the present, much of the energy of those he claims as allies in this project must go in devising expedients to avoid immediate catastrophe, but the larger enterprise should not merely be put by for another day.. First, we must set about creating 'areas of regional order,' and then we must establish 'a world authority, with revocable powers, ultimately responsible to all mankind.' it is an old dream, which Mr. ,Bowles struggles to turn into a rational, programme.
The starting point of his argument is the achievement of man- kind in establishing 'constitutional government' on a small scale. The fact that 'he does not always recognise how small a part of the world has ever experienced anything like what he calls 'constitutional government' and how precarious an achievement it is even on a small scale, makes his starting point appear firmer than it is; but, as far as it goes, it is sound. At least it is sounder than some earlier projects to abolish war, which turned out to be aimed at merely abolishing file current kind of war, dynastic war, for example. The project is to enlarge what we already enjoy; and the prospects of doing on a 'supra-national level and ultimately at, a world level, not by conquest but by consent,' what has been achieved in small areas seems to him encouraging. The Bath which 'mass opinion' and fear of destruction drive us to take has already been, pioneered: the Parliament of Man is believed to be intimated in the, democratic assemblies of modern Europe. We must have faith in a democratic world order and we Must set about 'extending, current international agencies: for ignorance is already being combated by UNESCO, and disease, poverty, famine and monetary embarrassment are being overcome by other energetic world organisations. All that is needed is for us to recognise the political sequel' of what is already afoot. Mr. Bowle's object is `tO provide an agenda from which further exploration can be made,' and he cannot be expected to answer all the questions of detail that are likely to crop up in the course of ,pursuing this enterprise. But it must be confessed that there are some more general questions on which the reader looks for guidance and finds very little. If Mr. Bowie were among those who have unlimited faith in power and believe that all that has hindered human happiness is an insufficient concentration of power to achieve it, his position would be more easily under- standable. But he is not. He knows that even small amounts of power are apt to corrupt those who wield them, and he under- stands. the main problem of politics as the problem of the control Of power. Consequently one wonders at his confidence that a single world political authority, without partner or competitor,
would be so easily capable of control. And his glib condition that its powers must be 'revocable' and that it should be 'responsible to mankind' exposes rather than fills a serious gap in his argument. There is, in fact, next to no analogy between such an authority and the authority of any known 'constitutional government.'
Moreover, if Mr. Bowle believed that the office of government is to be the referee of collisions of interest, the chances of operat- ing a world government would be greater than if he believed its office to be the substantive management of human activity by an elite of experts. But 'We are all Saint Simonians now,' he says; and that, in so far as it is true, transforms what might have been a rational programme back into a dream which most of us would recognise as a nightmare. A world authority, operating 'tin plan gendral de travaux' would be more than we at present know how to control. And the very moderation of Mr. Bowie's argument leaves its residue of puzzles. He understands well enough that there is much in our present situation—not only the bogey of national sovereignty, but our experience of 'mass democracy'— which must qualify our confidence in the possibility and in the beneficence of a world political authority, but he does not take account of difficulties which he makes a great show of recognising. His position constantly resolves itself into a not very convincing thesis that 'in spite of enormous obstacles' we are moving inevitably towards the development of a world political authority at once Saint Simonian and 'democratic' in character, and that
Previous page
