The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1937-09-13
But
Says
BOake Carter
How to Remain Neutral
Avoid Economic Tangles
Keep Capital at Home


IF THE United States should be
L drawn into war in Europe or
the Orient, Mr.. Roosevelt's New
Deal will vanish in the smoke Of
bursting shells.
If the United States is to re-
main neutral, it'll have to be
something along the order of the
New Deals principles that will
accomplish it.
That may sound a little mad,
but consider these points: For
America to remain neutral to-
day we must adopt policy Of
economic nationalism. That Is
to say we cannot mouth piouS
platitudes about preference for
neutrality and then sneak out
the back door and sell all the
sinews of war to the guys max
ing war in some other part Of
the world.
We cannot hope to remain
neutral if we take surplus money
of our corporations and the
banks and invest it abroad in
foreign lands in utilities, rail-
roads, factories and other such
businesses.
WE CANNOT hope to remain
w neutral when we operate I'M
der the system of productivity
that We have now. The United
States wants no territory for
population expansion. But the
United States does have the
greatest mass production ma
chine the world has ever seen.
1t produces so much that it
looks abroad not only for mar
ketS in which to dispose Of a
perennial 7 to 8 per cent surplus
above and beyond what we don't
consume domestically, but it
also looks abroad to invest sur
plus money made from sales Of
products of this great produc-
ton machine.
Actually, we hate war-as
does every individual on earth
yet we can't pull out Of the
Orient, because to do so would
mess up our own domestic
economy, with all the millions
of Americans depending upon it
for employment.
WHEREFORE, honestly, and
l. in all reality, it is a little
absurd to chant 1--WE must
be neutral!" even as has this
column, when we are welded
to domestic production ma
chimes and a credit system
which drive together along a
road leading always to war and
more war.
What to do? The one great
question is: If it is competition
that drives us into war all the
time, how can we avoid the
competition? Again there seems
but one answer: Change the di-
rection of the system that pro-
duces the competition. And
here you run smack into the very
root Of the great argument that
has divided the United States
since Franklin Roosevelt came
into office in 1888.
For to change the direction
of the system which produces so
many goods and so much money
that we've got to go to war with
every one else to paradoxically
preserve our domestic economy,
yet at the same time smash it
down by dislocation Of war
booms and collapseS, means that
the Central Government Of the
United States must institute
modes and controls to affect
the change.
It would mean American pr.
vate capital would be forbidden
by law to invest in foreign lands,
so to remove one commercial
competitive itch.
The Government would have
to insist that surplus funds &C.
cumulated from the products Of
the machine would be reinvested
in America, into still higher
wages for labor, by limiting
profits and turning back the ex-
cess into more domestic up
building; into promoting greater
social uses within America.
E1ro rkliy Poocevnlt with HE