I found myself in the company of that genius Ivan Walker a few weeks ago; it was he who enlightened me on the existence of the living J . M. Nield. I knew Ivan in Pretoria some 30 years ago; he was then secretary I believe of the Typographical Union, later to be elevated to the position of Secretary for Labour of the Union of South Africa.

During World War No.2 he was further exalted as Controller of Man Power. As Secretary for Labour he put into operation the famous Walker Award, which, in addition to giving certain concessions to the employees, also put a limit on the profits of the em­ployers. This the Judges of the Courts decided was exceeding his jurisdiction, therefore they cut it out. To think he should dare to interfere with Capitalist profits-some scribe referred to him as Ivan the Terrible!" after another so named who was once Czar and con­troller of man power in Russia; though his tactics of control were quite different.

It has been said that the Russian "Ivan the Terrible" put out the eyes of the architect who designed the Kremlin, not because he was displeased with his work, but because he was so delighted with the design that he feared the architect might design another like it in some other land.

Post-war developments may give plenty of scope for Ivan Walker's attempt to regulate the control, and we may hope he will make more successful attempts at profit limitations, if not the total aboli­tion of the profit system. It was interesting to note that the former Minister of Labour, the Hon. W. B. Madeley, declared at the last Labour Party Conference, "that Socialism was their post-war pro­gramme." The English Labour Party Conference made similar ex­pressions. Many things look promising, but we have had a world of promises for ages, then reaction again intervenes.

We have supposed Socialist Ministers in Capitalist Governments who claim they can "run with the hare and hunt with the hounds." Bevin, when a Minister of the Tory Government, appeared to have discovered the paradox. He caused quite a flutter in the political dove-cotes by avowing his loyalty in post-war events to Labour prin­ciples and party. Since when, as I suppose he predicted, the Labour Party has swept England at the General Election. Walter B. Madeley slipped out of the War Cabinet of the Smuts Government for much the same reasons. What next? Well, both of those supposed stalwart Socialists have played back into their former Conservative associa­tions. We of the old school have seen so much of it and the so-called Socialist Governments-Noske and Scheidemann of Germany- MacDonald and Snowden of England-all avowed Socialists, with power to adopt a Socialist form of administration, yet they dropped back into the schools of reaction.

The Socialists of this wretched dictatorial century are not made of such revolutionary stuff as those who followed the Marxian creed in the last century. George Lansbury when, for pacifist reasons, he re­signed the leadership of the Labour Party, wrote and told me that Attlee had succeeded him as leader, as a sort of "stop gap" during the war. The extensive war years gave the opportunity for both Attlee and Bevin to establish a reputation in the War Cabinet. Those who shine in such capacities are generally bad administrators concerning the social life of the people.

There is something of a very revolutionary character now necessary to establish a system that will nullify all the tyranny the has taught the present administrators to impose-which will people forgetting and/or even despising the former administration. Attlee and Bevin, on the contrary, were and still are very much wrapped up in it. Their domestic and certainly their foreign, policy leaves much to be desired as a policy for what is called a "Socialist Government".

WHY THE WAR?

History has again repeated itself. Those mythical powers known as the "Big Four" are the old War Wolves. They make no attempt to disguise in sheep clothing. True to their traditional life, there will never be peace while they administer. Here is some glaring evidence from no less a naval authority than Admiral of the Fleet Lord Tovey, in the Cape Times of October 19th, 1946, where he expressed his personal views regarding the vital importance of Durban as a naval base in any future war. (The italics are mine.) Further, he states, "The next war would come suddenly, and the whole British Commonwealth must be prepared to play its part." Therefore, not only arc we retaining, improving and even multiplying more war machinery, hut allow statements by such authorities to be published in our daily press warning us to prepare ourselves for the next war, and not a word of protest from anybody.

"The next war!" Let us think what that means, or even what this war has meant to all of us. The recent atomic rehearsals have shown that we cannot even imagine the destructions of the next war. Are we rational beings? Or are we not the most brutal and ferocious of all the animal kingdom? Yet again the world is full of the most kindly people, whose sentiments are roused if the least injustice is done to even one of their fellow beings. Half the world is struggling to establish institutions, and devise ways and means to alleviate human suffering, while the other half are often unconsciously exploiting and robbing them of every right of their inheritance.

We are a world of paradoxes. The supposed cranks are our saviours, and the most pious and cultured are the most vicious and inhuman obstacles of progress. Such arc our varied conceptions. In those varieties we have equally intelligent and sincere people. Some tolerate each other, sonic abuse each other, even those who have the same purpose in view. For that reason it is difficult to show a united front to get rid of the Capitalist system. Yet why should it be so when its fallacies are so glaring? Why is all this so plain, and a remedy for it so clear, to a few people, and so incomprehensible to .so many more clever and sincere people? This can only be ex­plained by the apathy and indifference of most people concerning the best and most happy way of running our industrial and social life.

Therefore, my hope in this final word is that some force may eventuate that will give-if the last six years of war have not given-the world enough evidence to show the way out of the present system, and the way into a new social system that will emancipate them from all the tyrannies implied in the former.

Again we introduce Mr. Boydell, who, in a satirical way, shows us why we failed to establish a new social system following the last war, and offers some good advice to make it possible following this war.

We also publish Charlie Chaplin's concluding speech in "The Great Dictator." Every adult in the world to-day has laughed at his genius-we would all be happier if we took the advice in his speech.