(4 of 8)
Nehru equates U.S. capitalism with imperialism. He wrote: "[The Americans] do not take the trouble to annex a country, as Britain annexed India; all they are interested in is profit, and so they take steps to control the wealth of the country ... A country may appear to be free and independent if you consult geography or an atlas. But if you will look behind the veil, you will find that it is in the grip of another country, or rather of its bankers and big businessmen . . ." When India got its independence, Nehru was braced to resist the onslaught of rapacious U.S. business. When it did not come, he was more chagrined than relieved. One of the reasons for his 1949 trip to the U.S. was to interest American capital in India.
The Korean war surprised Nehru into another paradoxical position. At first he approved, and applauded, U.N. (and U.S.) actions. Said he: "These young men of the U.S. who are fighting and dying in Korea certainly do not represent dollar imperialism." But once MacArthur's men were across the 38th parallel, Nehru became more & more neutral against the U.S.
Nehru has spoken admiringly of U.S. political democracy, but, as a Socialist, he considers "economic democracy" (i.e., a state-enforced minimum economic level) just as important. In Nehru's mind, the U.S. and Soviet Russia come out just about even: "All the evils of a purely political democracy are evident in the U.S.A.; the evils of the lack of political democracy are present in the U.S.S.R."
What About Communism? Nehru is no Communist, no fellow traveler. He has called Communism "unscrupulous" and condemned its violent methods. He has firmly, even ruthlessly suppressed Communism inside India. But he objects more to Communist methods than to Communist ideas. Said he: the Indian Communists were "lunatics or utter idiots if they thought that throwing a bomb here or burning a tramcar there could influence millions of people." He admits a strong emotional attraction toward Communism and the Soviet Union. More in sorrow than in anger, he has spoken of the "excessive use of violence in normal times" in Russia, but he also holds that Soviet Russia's "success or failure . . . does not affect the soundness of the theory of Communism."
Nehru disapproves of the Russian tendency to seize other countries, following the pattern of the Czars. Nevertheless, he professes to believe that China's Mao Tsetung and Indo-China's Ho Chi Minh are essentially national patriots; he denies that they are controlled by Moscow. When Chinese Communist forces invaded Tibet (TIME, Nov. 6), Nehru protested vigorously. But when Peking agreed to some Nehru proposals for a peaceful Tibetan settlement, he seemed to feel confirmed in his theory that the Chinese Communists will behave like gentlemen if treated right.