International: Pilgrim’s Progress

The atom was not Clement Attlee’s sole concern. He also wanted to get on better terms with Harry Truman and convince the capitalist U.S. that socialist Britain could be a good and useful friend —especially if Communist Russia turned out to be no friend at all. In both endeavors, he made some progress.

Two Men. At Potsdam, Truman had not been overly impressed by cautious Clement Attlee. In Washington they saw much more of each other, got on very pleasantly. Future meetings might go still better. But there was no sign of the gusty, personal intimacy which had grown up between Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt. Churchill used to speak expansively to U.S. audiences of “the President and I.” Attlee said “your President” and “President Truman.” Significantly, Attlee left not one good anecdote behind.

Apologia for the Left. For laying the specter of Socialism, Attlee shrewdly chose the one spectacular event of his visit: his speech to Congress. He seized the chance to give the U.S. a somewhat oversimple, understandable account of the Labor Party and its purposes:

“I think that some people over here imagine that Socialists are out to destroy freedom. We in the Labor Party … are in line with those who fought for Magna Carta and . . . the Declaration of Independence. … In the ranks of our party in the House of Commons are at least 40 practicing journalists. There are several clergymen, many local preachers, plenty of Protestants, some Catholics and some Jews. We are not likely, therefore, to attack freedom of religion or freedom of the press. . . . Our party today is drawn from all classes.

“We seek to raise the standard of life of our people. We can only do so by trading with the rest of the world, and as good traders we wish to have prosperous customers. . . . We, like you, believe in an expansive economy. … You will see us embarking on projects of nationalization. . . . You, it may be, will continue in your more individualistic methods. It is more important that we should understand each other and other nations whose institutions differ from our own.”

A New Balance? Congress was not thereby converted to socialism. Its view was somewhat like that of London’s cartoonist David Low, who sardonically depicted Attlee and two of his adjutants calling the tune for Public Ownership’s dance with Private Enterprise (see cut). But Congress recognized Attlee’s good will, applauded him generously. A truer test would come when Congress voted on the projected U.S. loan to Britain.

Clement Attlee had not attained his objective—the British-American Big Two which Winston Churchill and Ernest Bevin suggested last fortnight. But Britain’s Socialist Prime Minister might yet fulfill the aim of his 19th-Century predecessor, Canning, who “called in the New World to redress the balance of the old.”