Hobson's Choice?

Can I presume that Mr. Winchester is not interested in key socialism? I think so. Then I am left with a choice between communism, the philosophy of materialism and that other sort of socialism, the politico-economic theory of state of ownership. Communism is a complete philosophy, a totalitarian philosophy which attempts to provide a complete framework for human activity. Socialism, except in the communist sense, does not go beyond state ownership and is therefore a compromise between politics and those other philosophies which may exist where that inherently dangerous idea may apply.

None of the facts in Mr. Winchester's prologue to his ambitious statement quoted above are conclusive evidence for the truth of either of his possible meanings. Persons who may sometimes take that attitude which is later regarded as frightfully right do not necessarily take that attitude because what they believe is wholly true. It may be true; their attitude lends weight to the suggestion, but Mr. Winchester were he on the other side could not be deceived into thinking that it proves anything although he may wish us to believe that it does.

Because a radical sees as an error the poor best of the sincere but misguided Chamberlain, and our fainthearted Press preferred to be fainthearted one cannot jnfer that those of the same mind as Mr. Winchester were wholly right or even alone in their wisdom and even further infer that the Winches trains were right in everything. Many people thought Chamberlain wrong, including Mr. Churchill, who would surely be anti-Winchester.

If George Bernard Shaw on each of seven days published his view on some subject—Indonesia, for example, or Czech democracy—would they not ring round the world? But if he was later proved correct, would Mr. Winchester immediately and without further investigation declare the truth of vegetarianism? I think not.