There are two well-defined beliefs about the practical working out of
the pact as a pact. Let us take the objections first. They find
expression in a strong body of opinion that the whole procedure is both
unhuman and uneconomic--a campaign document, as it were, conceived in
the heat and passion of a great war, projected for political effect in
cementing the allied lines. In short, it is what business men would call
a glorified and stimulated "selling talk," framed to sell good will
between the nations that now propose to carry war to shop and mill and
mine.
"But," as a celebrated British economist said to me in London, "while
all this talk of Economic Alliance sounds well and is serving its
purpose, the fact must not be overlooked that, though war ends, business
keeps right on. Self-interest will dictate the policy that pays the
best." This is a typical comment.
Now we get to the meat of the matter: By the terms of the pact half a
dozen important nations--to say nothing of the smaller fry--are bound to
a hard-and-fast trade agreement. Business, in brief, is projected in
terms of nations.
Go behind this new battle front and you will find that it conflicts with
an uncompromising commercial rule. Why? Simply because, so far as
business is concerned, nations may propose, but human beings dispose.
Individuals, not countries, do business! Being human, these individuals
are apt to follow the line of least resistance.
Pages:
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27