The Evening Star (February 22, 1946)
ON THE RECORD —
One world envisioned by Willkie not near
By Dorothy Thompson
The other night I attended a memorial dinner in honor of Wendell Willkie, arranged by Freedom House, and devoted to the Willkie theme of one world. There were a number of excellent speeches, as well as a dramatization of the theme, but I could not overcome an impression of emptiness caused by the general avoidance of the critical question: What kind of one world?
The assumption seemed, in general, to be that one world under one government was desirable in itself, as the only sure means of ending international war.
But we have nevertheless just fought the bitterest war of history to prevent the creation of one world, which might have realized the same objective. Hitler’s one world would have been that of tyranny, hierarchically constructed of racial castes, the lowest order of them slaves, the highest soldiers and administrators, organized in a planned and state-directed economy, and controlled against internal rebellion. Had the whole passion of man been for peace and for any sort of world government, and at any price that would have kept peace, Hitler’s new order should have been acceptable; whole races would have perished, and others been drastically reduced, but a total Fascist victory and a world police state could have prevented war. Yet the majority of mankind preferred war.
There is another concept of one world, far more powerful in its appeal to millions of oppressed races and insecure masses, and that is the concept of the world USSR. It is a world, theoretically at least, of racial and social equality. Theoretically, some time, some way, after whole classes have perished, whole cultures been overthrown, whole economies paralyzed by rebellions and then taken over by a single-minded party priesthood, a new order would emerge, like something out of the Book of Revelation. All the goats having been separated from the sheep, and the saving remnant of man redeemed through infinite terrors riding black, red, and pale horses, sweet peace and brotherhood would reign eternally, even without the instrumentality of a state, which would miraculously wither away.
There is, again, what was, I think, rather vaguely the Willkie concept of one world of manifold social and economic systems, organized for liberty under law, for which it was hoped a beginning might be made in UNO. In this concept no common social or economic theory need form the content of the many states; each would be respected, if it were not “Fascist” or “aggressive”; each would eschew “territorial or other aggrandizement”; colonial peoples, gradually obtaining self-government, would be admitted with equality, and an international police force would enforce the law. This is not one world in any totalitarian sense; it is one world in respect only of thou shalt nots.
But this one world has been knocked out by the speeches of Kalinin, Molotov and Stalin. They made it abundantly clear that Russia will never trust a world half capitalist and half communist; Comintern history throws doubt on whether it would ever trust a world half communist and half socialist.
The Western one world concept makes no allowance for social and political dynamism – those revolutionary forms of expansionism which involve no direct aggressions but are accomplished by the devices by which Hitler, for instance, took Austria: The capture of states from within.
The late Prof. Karl Becker wrote a book called “How New Will the New World Be?” in which he anticipated some more sober realities. The only one world concept that has visibly gained ground since the Germans laid down their arms is that of the Soviets, who believe in the power of the sword (even if it be not drawn), the dynamism of an idea and the fait accompli, and thus combine the politics of Mohammed. Machiavelli and Alexander – the zealot, the diplomat, the conqueror.
But our present peace actually rests on the balance of power – and of power that will cease to be in balance the moment the Russians control the Straits, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, for on that day they will control Europe and the Middle East, and thus the Eastern Hemisphere.
One world might be nearer by that process, but it would not be the one world envisioned by Wendell Willkie. For that is needed more than platitudes. For that is needed grandiose internal renovation and reform; recognition that the age of romantic individualism is past; rejection of every motive of greed and grab; wholehearted support to and co-operation with Britain for a dynamic, progressive colonial program of economic reconstruction and liberation; a modern program for Europe, including Germany; the capacity to face the fact that the 19th century capitalist age is finished; the will, not to fight the Soviet Union, but to compete with her for the allegiance of mankind, not to ourselves, nor for ourselves, but for all men and women of good will.
If we do not mobilize and quickly that will, we shall see out of moral and intellectual stagnation the disintegration of the West, and not by blows from without but by bitter disturbances within.