1 Clark, Colin in Conditions of Economic Progress, 1940, p. 41Google Scholar, has calculated the average real income per head of population in “international units.” (The international unit is the amount of goods and services one dollar would purchase in the U.S.A. from 1925 to 1934.) U.S.A. had an average real income per capita of 1,381, Canada, 1,337, New Zealand 1,202, Great Britain, 1,069, Switzerland 1,018. Most western European countries have between 700 and 500 while the remainder of Europe has far fewer.

2 Cf. Rostas, Leo: “Industrial Production, Productivity and Distribution in Britain, Germany, and the United States, 1935–37,” Economic Journal Vol. LIII, 04 1943, p. 46Google Scholar. The discussion of Snow's, E. C. paper in The Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, CVII, pt. I, 1944Google Scholar (“The International Comparison of Industrial Output,” pp.1–30 [Discussion, pp. 30–54]) shows that Mr. Rostas figures represent reliable approximation.

3 The output per manshift in British coal mines is 1.148 statute tons, while in American bituminous mines it is 4.37 statute tons. From 1913 to 1938 British output per manshift rose by 13%, and American bituminous output by 36%. Ministry of Fuel and Power: Coal Mining, Report of the Technical Advisory Committee. LondonHMSO, 05, 1945. Cmd. 6610, p. 141Google Scholar.

4 Quoted from Tory Reform Committee: Tools for the Next Job: A Policy of Progress through Productivity (London, 1944), p. 15Google Scholar.

5 The less intense demand for a high standard of living of the Russians as compared to the British and the great national self-esteem engendered by the war and by deliberate propaganda both add to the Soviet advantage in the military sphere.

6 Crossman, R. H. S., “Some Elementary Principles of Socialist Foreign Policy” in Catlin, G. E. (ed.), New Trends in Socialism, (London, 1935), p. 21Google Scholar.

7 Brailsford, H. N. in Problems of a Socialist Government, (London, 1933)Google Scholar.

8 Even Dr. Hugh Dalton's statement in the House of Commons on August 21, 1945, as Chancellor of the Exchequer dealt only cursorily with the export problem, leaving it shortly after beginning his reply in order to turn to the less urgent problem of the nationalization of the Bank of England, which he treated at some length. Mr. Hugh Gaitskill's contribution to the discussion was outstanding and offers the promise that the new MP economists of the Labour Party will ultimately raise the level of the Labour Party's economic analysis.

9 As late as 1936, the New Fabian Research Bureau (International Section), which includes many of the Party's intellectuals in its membership published a pamphlet on Labour and War Resistance which called on the Labour Party to refuse, in event of war, to serve in the armed forces, or to perform work of national importance, or to pay taxes.

10 In 1939, the Labour Party Conference passed the anti-conscription resolution by 1,967,000 to 574,000 (Report of the 38th Conference of the Labour Party, (Southport, 1939.) London, p. 289Google Scholar). Even Mr. Herbert Morrison, who is one of the most realistic and patriotic Labour politicians and who understands better than most of his colleagues said that “a strong foreign policy depends on power and principle. It matters not who speaks for Britain if he speaks for a country that is losing her productive power if he speaks for her to other leaders who know that she is falling farther, farther behind themselves.…” (The Times, June 30, 1945, report of BBC broadcast June 29, 1945); but even he opposed conscription in 1939. (Report of 38th Annual Conf… P. 281).

11 Koestler's, Arthur “Birth of a Legend” in Horizon, 1943Google Scholar, depicts with great insight the growth-process of this attitude in Richard Hilary.

12 The discussion between Laski, Harold J. and Price, Don K. in Public Administration Review, vol. 3, pp. 347–334, vol. 4, pp. 347–363Google Scholar, provides a striking illustration of this transformation. Professor Laski whose criticisms of the class nature of British government are well-known in this country comes vehemently and cogently to the defense of the British Civil Service against Mr. Price's criticism. Interestingly enough Mr. Price suggests that it was from Professor Laski's writings that he learned the defects of the British Civil Service (vol. 4, p. 361).

13 Morrison, Herbert, Prospects and Policies,(Cambridge, 1943), pp. 34–35Google Scholar. Debates (Hansard) 413, House of Commons, Aug. 23, 1945; clmn. 364. “We, in this country, were credited at San Francisco … with standing midway between the two extremes of the economic system. If so, the greater our responsibility to find means by which they can work together.”

14 Parliamentary Debates, (Hansard), 413, House of Commons, August 23, 1945, clmn. 340.

15 Speech at Labour Party Conference, May 23, 1945. Reported in The Times, May 24, 1945.

16 K. Zilliacus, a long-time member of the League of Nations Secretariat and now MP for Galeshead, is one of the most energetic proponents of this view of Britain's mission. For him, Labour's victory “means something different throughout the world. For this election, if you like, is our British version of the Russian Revolution, or better still, perhaps it bear: the same relation to the Russian Revolution and to its successor, as the Government and Parliament that brought in the Reform Bill of 1832 bore to the French Revolution, and just as the Whigs and Liberals of the 19th Century made no bones of their sympathy and support for the middle class revolutions that were engaged in cleaning up the remnants of feudalism and the powers of the landed aristocracy on the Continent, I hope that Labour in this country will send its sympathy and support and give its cooperation to the resistance movements which are working for a new social order in Europe.” Parliamentary Debates, (Hansard) 413 House of Commons, Aug., 23, 1945, clmn. 885. The International Authority Group of the Fabian International Bureau asserts that “inside Europe … Labour in power can be a focus of political leadership uniting the revolutionary movements.” (Labour and Europe: The Need for a Socialist Strategy, p. 10). It should be noted that one of the authors of this pamphlet is John Parker, present Parliamentary Undersecretary of State for the Dominions.

17 He said only that he “looked forward to meeting my good friend Mr. Lie, (Norwegian Foreign Minister) at an early date.” Debates, 413 H. C, clmn. 293.

18 Aneurin Bevan's Tribune, the organ of the anti-Communist Left Wing Labourites, put the argument for an association of Western Europe States as follows: “The need to support our comrades against the remnants of Fascism in the dark corners of the Continent; the need to integrate the progressive democracies into a coherent and homogeneous whole. These are some of the reasons why British Socialism in this hour of opportunity must have a European strategy. And the starting point of this strategy must be Western Europe—not because it is Britain's ‘sphere of influence’ but because it is the part of the world where similar solutions, where similar brother movements have arisen to form a parallel social structure.” (August 3, 1945).

19 A typical argument for the Western Association in the intellectual Labour Press: “What happens in France and Germany must be of greater concern to Britain than what goes on in Peru or Mongolia. Britain is in the first place, a part of Western Europe and the affairs of Western Europe are of supreme importance to the British people.” Labour Discussion Notes, no. 40, 06, 1943, p. 9Google Scholar.

The level of economic analysis in publications associated with the Labour Party is quite low. The Labour Discussion Notes, which were outstanding in their political and social-psychological analyses, never advanced very far in economic analysis. And now they have ceased to appear! The publications of the Fabian Society are about the best the Labour Party has to offer in economic matters. While some of its publications like Schumacher's Full Employment and Export Policy and Wootton's Full Employment are excellent, the special report of the Fabian International Bureau, Labour and Europe, proposed a socialist unification of Europe and discussed various planning agencies without giving any specific indications of the economic benefits which might flow from the unification of Europe. They were apparently all assumed to arise automatically from the invocation of the words “socialize” and “liberate.” The Tribune is even more inadequate in economic analysis—for months the crisis of the British coal mines has been treated in its pages but the technical inefficiency of British mining methods and organization has seldom been mentioned. No Labour publication has produced anything on the economic strategy, tactics, and benefits of an association of the European democracies approximating the quality of the five articles in The Economist,(June 2, 9, 23, 30, and July 1, 1945). The large group of able economists who give their allegiance to the Labour Party should enable this deficiency to be remedied.

20 Report of the 42nd Annual Conference of the Labour Party (London, 1943) p. 140Google Scholar.

21 The Tribune, Aug. 3, 1945.

22 A frequent type of compromise is the proposal that the regional association in the West be matched by an Eastern European Union around the Soviet Union and that these two cooperate for the “unification and reconstruction of Europe.” (Zilliacus: Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) 413, House of Commons, Aug. 23. 1945. clmn. 882; cf. also The Tribune, Aug. 3, 1945.

23 Labour Discussion Notes, No. 45. 06. 1944. pp. 9–10Google Scholar.

24 Noel-Baker, : Report of the 39th Annual Conference of the Labour Party.(Bournemouth, 1940), p. 165Google Scholar. cf. also 72nd Annual Report, TUC (Southport, 1940), pp. 156–157Google Scholar.

25 Report of the 42nd Annual Conference of the Labour Parly. (London, 1943), p. 41Google Scholar.

26 The Times, May 24, 1945.

27 The Times, May 24, 1945.

28 The Times, Feb. 28, 1945.

29 76th Annual Report Trades Union Congress. 1944, pp. 120–121.

30 Strauss, George, Left News: 01 1945. p. 3052Google Scholar.

31 George Strauss, Ibid., p. 3051.

32 In the recent foreign policy debate in the House of Commons, only Foreign Secretary Bevin, whose strategic sense is more highly developed than that of any other important Labour personage, stressed the Middle East.

33 Cf. Report of the National Executive Committee, Report of the 43rd Annual Conference of the Labour Party, (London, 1943). p. 5Google Scholar. Cf. also the Party's election pamphlet, Let Us Face the Future, which gives prominence to the same theme.

34 Cf. for example, Sir Stafford Cripps at Wembley, June 3, 1945. The Times, June 4, 1945; Emmanuel Shinwell in the House of Commons, Feb. 28, 1945. The Times, March 1, 1945.

35 H. N. Brailsford, in a recent article in The New Statesman and Nation argued against a Western Federation on the grounds that the Soviet Union would look on it suspiciously. Sir Stafford Cripps in his Wembley speech on June 3, 1945, said Britain must uphold its own point of view but must avoid saying or doing rash or impetuous things which are hostile or appear hostile to the Soviet Union. The Times, 06 4, 1945Google Scholar.

36 Cf. Mr. Bevin's speech at the 1945 Labour Party Conference. The Times, May 24, 1945.

37 Laski, Harold in La Tribune Economique quoted by The Times, 08 18, 1945Google Scholar. This delegation has been agreed on for some time by the Labour Party Conference, cf., The Times, 05 21, 1945Google Scholar.

38 Crossman, R. H. S., The New Statesman and Nation, 05 12, 1945. p. 302Google Scholar. Cf. also SirCripps, Stafford' speech at Oxford, 06 25, 1945: “In order to be secure in our relations with Russia we must have a government that by sympathy and understanding believes in the objectives of the people of the Soviet Union.” The Times, June 26, 1945Google Scholar.

39 Pethick-Lawrence, L. in Labour Press Service, 09 6, 1944, p. 3Google Scholar.

40 Labour Discussion Notes, No. 45, 06, 1944, p. 10Google Scholar.

41 The Tribune, August 3, 1945.

42 Cf. for example, Zilliacus, : Left, No. 104. 06, 1945. p. 423Google Scholar.

43 Zilliacus, : “International Socialism and the Dumbarton Oaks Conference Proposals.” International Socialist Forum, 01, 1945. p. 3067Google Scholar.

44 Report of the Thirty-eighth Annual Conference of the Labour Party, (Southport, 1939), p. 244Google Scholar.

45 The chief Labour Ministers have thus far spoken very carefully. Prime Minister Attlee was extremely discreet when he announced the cessation of Lend-Lease. Mr. Bevin, whose survey of foreign policy occurred earlier, said about the United States: “I cannot close this statement without again paying tribute to the United States. It has been a marvelous partnership.… We shall have our differences and difficulties but in the interests of future generations, we must overcome them.” (Parliamentary Debates, (Hansard) 413 House of Commons, August, 1945, clmn 300. Mr. Herbert Morrison was less positive than the Foreign Secretary but he did make an explicit attempt to repudiate a claim made by Mr. Lyttleton that the United States would view with displeasure the socialistic development of the British economy. (The Times, August 22, 1945).

46 Observer, June 24, 1945.

47 At the 1945 Labour Parly Conference, he said that 60,000,000 Germans could not be left idle. (Labour Press Service, May 30, 1945.)

48 The Times, Feb. 28, 1945.

49 Parliamentary Debates, (Hansard), 413, House of Commons, clmn. 340.