[104-10174-10071.pdf — page 235]
-3-"At a cortain moment, the debates tock a very unfortunate turn. On one of the frequent occasions, when Koestler vas given the floor, ho read a paper wherein he attacked Socialism in general and the British Labor Government in particular. Considering 1) that about 70% of the delegates vere poople who professed socialist opinions; 2) that the purpose of the Congress required that a unity of all democratic intellectuals, both socialists and non-socialists in the struggle against totalitarianism be emphasized and 3) that the chairman of the Congrens das *Emet Reuter*, head of the social-democratic city government of Berlin - Koestler's attack vas absolutely out of place and should not have been made regardless of whether he was right or not. As a matter of fact, the paper in question proved that Koestler is mistaken in assuming that a brilliant Journalist and a successful rovelist is eo ipso qualified to play the role of a philosopher, historian and sociologist. In addition, mistaken statements by British Labor regarding the problem of Vuropean unity do not jpotify in my opinion the kind of vitriolic all-out attack against the British Labor Government which was made by Koestler who seems to have forgotten, that, regardless, what one may think of some of its policies, British Labor is today one of the principal pillars of the world democratic front."Evidently Koestler's attack provoked immediate reaction on the part of the Socialist Congress delegates, beginning with Reuter who was in the chair. In my opinion, this entire discussion was completely unnecessary. The British conservative N. P., Amery, showed much better judgrant than Koestler by studiedly avoiding in his pronounce-ments, any criticism of the Labor Government. If an attitudo similar to that of Koestler would have been adopted in the trade union field, the I.C.F.F.U. could not have been created. As in the labor movement, the organization of intellectuals for the defense of democracy cannot be successful unless it is understood that democratic socialiom is a powerful influence among the best intellectuals of Europe and Asia and that, therefore, everything should be done to secure cooperation of all democratic forces in spite of all ideological differences. I was rather astonished to find that Irving scened to like Koestler's discourse on socialiss. I spoke with quite a number of dolegates and found that they didn't like it at all."Instead of appointing on the first and second days of the Congress a resolution Committee which would have been able to work seriously on any draft resolutions, proposals and suggestions made by the delegates, a draft manifesto and draft resolution vere submitted to a plenary meeting which had to decide on them within a few hours. That meeting appointed some committees who had exactly one hour's time to amend the resolutions. Of course, no serious work of rewriting and completing the resolutions could be done under such circumstances. You will notice that the manifesto treats the question of cultural freedom principally from the point of view of the Journalist and less from that of the scholar and the artists. At least this is my opinion. A draft appeal to the intellectuals behind the Iron Curtain, which wan submitted by Skeggs, evoked an immediate sharp criticism on the part ofSECRET