Evening star., 1936-03-29

Roosevelt asked. And Mr.. Roosevelt
there can be no doubt of this-really
believed in N. r. A., was infatuated
with 1t, had said on one occasion
that the new order which N. r. A.
expressed was "for all time" The Su-
preme Court saved Mr.. Roosevelt from
himself. He was not grateful at the
time. His quarter criti-
ciSm of the decision to a newspaper
conference was ample proof that he
felt strongly about NJ r. A. and deeply
deplored the courts extinction of it.
About the triple A am less certain.
That is. I am less certain about its
unpopularity. Thoughtful persons
knew that triple A was an even more
direct mechanism of collectivism than
N r. A. Triple A. by the operation Of
forces within itself,without additional
legislation, would have expanded,
would have taken in more and more
areas of business. industry and So
ciety, until America would have been
collectivist state, entailing funda-
mentally changed form of government.
This was always recognized by many
of the thoughtful. BY now. or by the
time of the election, it might have
been recognized generally. If triple A
were still in existence, collectiviSm
would have been an acute issue in the
campaign.
Boosted Living Costs.
Moreover, if triple A were still in
existence it would be seen as a cause
of high cost Of living. The East and
other consuming centers and commu-
mites paying the processing tax would
be crying out against it. Mr.. Roose-
welt would be obliged to defend it. 1t
is quite possible that if triple A were
still functioning, 1t, apart from other
causes, would cost Mr.. Roosevelt all
the Eastern States in the election.
So the Supreme Court, by invalidat-
ing triple A as we'll as NJ R. A., has
done Mr.. Roosevelt a service. Disap-
pearance of triple A and N. r. A has
contributed to the present feeling that
Mr.. Roosevelt may win in November,
in the sense that 1t has relieved him
of liability.
In yet another way, quite indirect.
the Supreme Court did a service to
Mr.. Roosevelt-contribute to the
present feeling that his reelection
will be more easy. When the court
unanimously decided NJ R. A. unconsti-
tutional. and when Mr.. Roosevelt made
the decision more conspicuous by de-
ploring it, the country felt it had in
the court bulwark which would pro-
tect against collectivist concentra-
ton of society. Almost at that mo-
ment the latter part of last May, be-
gan business revival which has con-
tinued, practically without Interrupt
tion, to the present day. 1t was not
merely that the courts invalidation of
N. r. A. removed Strangling impedi-
ment to recovery. The larger reason
was the feeling of assurance from the
mere existence of the court.
The business recovery Is partly re-
sponSible for the present political
equanimity of the country. The old
rule seems to be working that good
times" increase the chances of an ad-
ministration remaining in power. 1t
is not only that people tend to give
an administration creditor in the
opposite case. blame-for the state of
the times. Business recovery causes
men to become cheerfully absorbed in
their personal affairs, causes them to
pay less attention to politics. Rising
figures on the indexes. substitution of
black ink for red makes it harder for
the "outs" of politics to stir up COM
motion against the "ins"
Conflict Still Apparent.
Notwithstanding Americas present
feeling of optimism, it would be
mistake to infer too much from it. In
the short-range view, it would be a
mistake to assume that April op-
timism means November victory for
the party in power. There will be re-
currences Of the feeling that the New
Deal will be ousted And in the long
range view, it would be a tragic mis-
take to assume that the fundamental
issue is settled, to assume that the
American system of society and gov
eminent has come safely through its
period Of danger. The conflict be-
tween collectivism and democracy is
worldwide. Its roots existed before
the New Deal. The outcome in Amer
lea will not necessarily be determined
either by defeat for Mr.. Roosevelt or
victory for him. The conflict is world
wide and any candid view must ad-
init that collectivism is gaining, democ-
racy losing ground.
Looking at the conflict in terms of
decades, we can say 1t began in 1917.
In that year there were two forms OF
society and government in the world.
One form consisted of democracies:
the other Of monarchies with varying
limitations. The tendency, UP to 1917,
was for monarchy to lose ground,
democracy to gain. Ever since Amer
lea adopted the first great experiment
in democracy, every change OF govern
that had taken place anywhere in the
world had consisted Of an abandon
ment or limitation of monarchy, an
adoption OF democratic form. The
competition was wholly between mon
archy and democracy, with democracy
winning rapidly.
Then, in 1917, there came into the
world wholly new competitor, Com
munism, as adopted in Russia. Five
years later, in 1922, came another
negation Of democracy, Fascism In
Italy. Ten years later, in 1882, came
yet another, most formidable denial
OF democracy, Nazi-ism in Germany.
Here we have a wholly different pic
ture, a competition between democracy
and new model. The countries that
have adopted one form or another of
the new model continue to hold to it
there Is little sign of any return to
democracy by either Italy, Germany
or Russia. Temptation to initiate the
new flows out through the world; in
cipient movements toward Fascism or
Communism have got foothold in
many countries. One small South
American country, Paraguay, seems
lately to have adopted Fascism.
n this condition hour .ar 49,