Dear Gilbert
Thank you very much for your letter of 23 April, which reached me safely.
I humbly acknowledge my error about quadruplicity! I agree with everything
you say in your letter, and particularly with what you say about the ‘Christian
tradition’; I have been feeling the attraction of conservatism myself. There are,
however, some things of importance to note. First: the tradition in question is
chie?y represented in this country by the Catholic Church, which, here, has
none of the culture one associates with that body historically. (On this,
Santayana writes convincingly.) The Church lost much at the Reformation,
more when intellectual France turned free-thinking; it has not now the
merits it had. Generally, a conservative institution ceases to be good as soon
as it is attacked.
I should regard Socialism in its milder forms as a natural development of
the Christian tradition. But Marx belongs with Nietzsche as an apostle of
disruption, and unfortunately Marxism won among socialists.
The Romantic Movement is one of the sources of evil; further back, Luther
and Henry VIII.
the autobiography of bertrand russell 472I don’t see much hope in the near future. There must ?rst be a World-State,
then an Augustan age, then slow undramatic decay. For a while, the yellow
races may put vigour into the Hellenic-Roman tradition; ultimately, some-
thing new may come from the negroes. (I should like to think St Augustine
was a negro.)
It seems to me that everything good in Christianity comes from either
Plato or the Stoics. The Jews contributed bad history; the Romans, Church
Government and Canon Law. I like the Church of England because it is
the most purely Platonic form of Christianity. Catholicism is too Roman,
Puritanism too Judaic.
Life here, with the job I have, would be very pleasant if there were no war.
The country is like inland Dorsetshire; our house is 200 years old, built by a
Welshman. My work is interesting, and moderate in amount. But it all seems
unreal. Fierceness surges round, and everybody seems doomed to grow ?erce
sooner or later. It is hard to feel that anything is worth while, except actual
resistance to Hitler, in which I have no chance to take a part. We have English
friends who are going back to England, and we envy them, because they are
going to something that feels important. I try to think it is worth while to
remain civilised, but it seems rather thin. I admire English resistance with all
my soul, but hate not to be part of it. Goodbye. Do write again.
Yours ever
Bertrand Russell
Little Datchet Farm
Malvern, R.D. 1
Pennsylvania
March 23rd 1942
My dear Gilbert
I have had a letter of yours on my desk for a shamefully long time, but I
have been appallingly busy. You wrote about physics and philosophy. I think
the e?ect of physics is to bolster up Berkeley; but every philosopher has his
own view on the subject. You wrote also about post-war reconstruction. I
think the irruption of Japan has changed things. Anglo–American benevolent
imperialism won’t work: ‘Asia for the Asiatics’ must be conceded. The only
question is whether India and China shall be free or under Japan. If free, they
will gravitate to Russia, which is Asiatic. There will be no cultural unity, and I
doubt whether Russia and ??? can agree about any form of international
government, or whether, if they nominally do, it will have any reality. I am
much less hopeful of the post-war world than before Japan’s successes.
In my survey of the history of culture – alternatively, ‘Sin, from Adam to
Hitler’ – I have reached Charlemagne. I ?nd the period 400–800 ?? very
important and too little known. People’s conscious thoughts were silly, but
america. 1938–1944 473their blind actions founded the institutions under which England still
lives – e.g. Oxford, and the Archbishops. There were many lonely men in
those days – Archbishop of Canterbury Theodore, educated at Athens, trying
to teach Greek to Anglo-Saxons; English St Boniface and Irish St Virgil disput-
ing, in the wilds of the German forests, as to whether there are other worlds
than ours; John the Scot, physically in the 9th century, mentally in the 5th or
even 4th. The loss of Roman centralisation was ultimately good. Perhaps we
need 400 years of anarchy to recover. In a centralised world, too few people
feel important.
Very interesting struggles are going on in this country. The Government is
compelled to control the capitalists, and they, in turn, are trying to get the
trade unions controlled. There is much more fear here than in England of
‘planned economy’, which is thought socialistic and said to lead to Fascism;
and yet the necessities of the war compel it. Everybody in Washington realises
that a great deal of planning will be necessary after the war, but the capitalists
hope then to get back to laissez-faire. There may be a good deal of di?culty
then. There is a great deal of rather fundamental change going on here,
which is worth studying. But I wish I could be at home.
All good wishes,
Yours ever
Bertrand Russell
Little Datchet Farm
Malvern, R.D. 1
Pennsylvania
9 April 1943
My dear Gilbert
Thank you for your letter of March 13, which arrived this morning; also
for your earlier letter about Barnes. He is a man who likes quarrels; for no
reason that I can fathom, he suddenly broke his contract with me. In the end,
probably, I shall get damages out of him; but the law’s delays are as great as in
Shakespeare’s time. Various things I have undertaken to do will keep me here
till the end of October; then (D.V.) I shall return to England – Peter & Conrad
too, if the danger from submarines is not too great. We can’t bear being away
from home any longer. In England I shall have to ?nd some means of earning
a livelihood. I should be quite willing to do Government propaganda, as my
views on this war are quite orthodox. I wish I could ?nd a way of making my
knowledge of America useful; I ?nd that English people, when they try to
please American opinion, are very apt to make mistakes. But I would accept
any honest work that would bring in a bare subsistence for 3 people.
It is not growing fanaticism, but growing democracy, that causes my
troubles. Did you ever read the life of Averroes? He was protected by kings,
the autobiography of bertrand russell 474but hated by the mob, which was fanatical. In the end, the mob won. Free
thought has always been a perquisite of aristocracy. So is the intellectual
development of women. I am sorry to hear Mary has to do the housework.
My Peter’s whole time is absorbed in housework, cooking, & looking after
Conrad; she hardly ever has time to read. The eighteenth & nineteenth centur-
ies were a brief interlude in the normal savagery of man; now the world has
reverted to its usual condition. For us, who imagined ourselves democrats,
but were in fact the pampered products of aristocracy, it is unpleasant.
I am very sorry to hear about Lucy Silcox13
; if you see her, please give her
my love & sympathy.
Our reason for coming home is that we don’t want to send Conrad to an
American school. Not only is the teaching bad, but the intense nationalism is
likely to cause in his mind a harmful con?ict between home & school. We
think submarines, bombs, & poor diet a smaller danger. But all this is still
somewhat undecided.
I shall ?nish my big History of Philosophy during the summer – you won’t
like it, because I don’t admire Aristotle.
My John is in England, training for the navy. Kate is still at College, at
Radcli?e. She wants, after the war, to get into something like Quaker Relief
work – She specialises in German, & is unable to feel prescribed hatreds.
Give my love to Mary – It would be a real happiness to see you again – old
friends grow fewer.
Yours ever
Bertrand Russell
From Sir Ralph Wedgwood, the brother of Col. Josiah [Jos] Wedgwood who
was later Lord Wedgwood of Barlaston.
Aston House
Stone, Sta?ordshire
29.7.41
Dear Russell
Jos has now returned safely to this country, and the ?rst thing he did was
to tell me that he had seen you, and send me your letter to him as corrobora-
tive evidence. It set me thinking of Cambridge days of long ago, – a thing that
I ?nd myself rather apt to do now that I have passed the limit of 65 which I
had always hoped would be the term of my active life. This was to be the
really good time of life, when one’s conscience being satis?ed, and work
done, one could pick up old tastes, and perhaps ?nd old friends. Besides, I
have been reading your last book of essays, and that alone made me want to
write to you to tell you what a delight they are. Many of them are new to me,
and I cannot decide whether I like the new or the old best – only I am sure
they are most enjoyable of all when read together.
america. 1938–1944 475I should like to meet you again, and to make the acquaintance of your wife.
Are you ever likely to be in England again! Not until after the war I suppose in
any event. Nor shall I be in America before that (speaking wishfully) happy
event. So many of our friends have gone – and some have become altogether
too reactionary! George Moore is the only one who goes on unchanged, and I
expect you have seen him in America. He too seems likely to stay there for the
duration, but he is a great loss to Cambridge. I stayed a night last month with
the new Master of Trinity at the Lodge – not so formidable as it sounds. He is a
dear, but one has to avoid so many subjects like the plague. However we
discussed old days, and listened to the nightingales, – and so escaped ship-
wreck. Desmond McCarthy I used to see from time to time, but war-time puts
an end to all such social meetings – everybody is left to work or chafe in his
own compartment. If you can ?nd time, do write and tell me about yourself. I
shall ask Jos all about his visit to you when I see him: he was rather ominously
silent in his letter about his visit to ??? as a whole. I am afraid the Wheeler
episode has rather embittered it all for him. Goodbye, and best wishes.
Yours fraternally
Ralph Wedgwood
To Ely Culbertson, the Bridge expert
January 12 1942
Dear Culbertson
After a great deal of thought, I have come to more or less de?nite opinions
about international government and about your scheme.
As regards international government, I think it far and away the most
important question at present before the world. I am prepared to support any
scheme which seems to me likely to put a large preponderance of armed
force on the side of international law; some would please me more than
others, but I should support whichever had a good chance of being adopted.
The matter will ultimately be decided by Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill (or
his successor); or perhaps without Stalin. Roosevelt and Churchill will be
much in?uenced by public opinion in their own countries, but also by their
o?cials. They are almost certain to modify any scheme they adopt.
I feel, in these circumstances, that my job is to advocate the principle of
international government, not this or that special scheme. Special schemes
are very useful, in order that the thing can be done, but I should not wish to
get into controversy as between one scheme and another.
You are, as you must know, extraordinarily persuasive, and I thought I could
throw in my lot publicly with you, but re?ection has led me, very regretfully,
to the conclusion that my points of disagreement are too important for this.
The most important are the following.
(1) Your plan of regional federations with leader States has di?culties. You
the autobiography of bertrand russell 476yourself make France and Italy equal in the Latin Federation; South Americans
would resent acknowledged inferiority of status to that of the ??; Germany
ought not to be put above the smaller Teutonic countries, which are much
more civilised, and much more favourable to a World Federation.
(2) I cannot agree to your suggestion as regards India. I have been for
many years an advocate of Indian freedom, and cannot abandon this just
when it has a good chance of realisation.
(3) I don’t like your ?xing the quotas of military power ‘for ever’, or even
for 50 years; 25 years is the utmost that would seem to me wise. This is part
of a wider objection, that you have not, to my mind, a su?cient mechanism
for legal change, yet this is essential if violence is to be made unattractive.
You may say that the points I do not like in your scheme make it more
likely to be adopted. I do not think so. It seems to me that the nucleus of any
practicable plan will be Anglo-American cooperation, and that a number of
small countries will quickly join themselves on as satellites. One might hope
the same of China and of a resurrected France. I expect therefore, at ?rst, a
Federation from which ex-enemy countries will be excluded, and from
which Russia will probably hold aloof. As for the ex-enemy countries, there
should be no di?culty about Italy, which is not deeply Fascist. Japan, I think,
will disintegrate, and need armies of occupation to keep order; behind these
armies, a new civilisation could be introduced. Germany, no doubt, will take
a considerable time, but could, I think, be brought in within 20 years. As for
Russia, one must wait and see.
The upshot is that I don’t think we can get everything in the Peace Treaty.
Better a nucleus of Powers in genuine agreement, and then a gradual growth,
always assuming that the nucleus, at the time of the peace, has overwhelming
military superiority, and the means of keeping it for some time.
As I said before, I favour any plan of international government that is not
too like Hitler’s, and I should be very glad if yours were adopted, though I
still prefer the one I outlined in the American Mercury. I should still be very glad,
if you desire it, to go over any work of yours, with a view to criticisms from
your point of view. There might be details that could advantageously be modi?ed.
I should also, as soon as your scheme is public, speak of it as having very great
merits, whenever I had occasion to talk or write on international govern-
ment. But I cannot be paid by you for any public appearance, as I ?nd this
would involve too much sacri?ce of intellectual independence.
I am very sorry about this, both because I found the prospect of working
with you very attractive, and because it will diminish my opportunities for
advocating international government. For both these reasons I was anxious
to throw in my lot with you, and thought I could; but I am not good at
sub-ordinating my judgment to anybody else, and if I tried to do so I feel that
it wouldn’t answer.
america. 1938–1944 477The above applies in particular to a possible lecture at Columbia Teachers’
Training College about which I wrote.
I should be very sorry indeed if anything I have said in this letter impaired
our personal relations. Our talks have been a great intellectual stimulus to me,
and I should like to hope that, by bringing up objections, I might be of some
reciprocal use to you. Apart from all that, I should like to feel that there is a
real friendship between us.
Yours sincerely
Bertrand Russell
My wife asks me to send her regards.
From Pearl Buck, author of The Good R.D. 3
Earth and other books Perkasie,
Pennsylvania
October 23, 1942
My dear Mr Russell
I was so impressed with your attitude the other Sunday that I have been
thinking of whether I might not write you.
Then Wednesday Lin Yutang spoke of your letter in PM, which he thought
very ?ne indeed. I have not yet seen it myself – I shall try to get a copy – but
he told me enough about it to make me feel that indeed I must write you.
I have for a long time – for many months, in fact – been deeply perturbed
because of the feeling toward England in the minds of many Americans. I
knew it was certain to rise over the India situation. I think I knew that years
ago when I was in India, and saw for myself what would be inevitable if war
came, and even then war seemed pretty clearly ahead.
You may ask why I have taken my share in discussions about India, if I
deplored any lack of warmth between our two countries. I have done so in
spite of my devotion to England, because as an American it has seemed to me
my duty to do all I could, ?rst, to see if something could not be devised to
bring India wholeheartedly into the war e?ort, and second, because I knew
there must be some sort of strong reassurance to China that we were not
all thinking along the same old lines. For the latter reason I have welcomed
the excellent stand that the English have taken in regard to American color
segregation in our armed forces in England.
Now I feel that what has been done in India is done and the question ahead
is no longer to discuss who was right and who was wrong there but to plan
together, all of us, how to cope with the disaster ahead. I hope that you will
read, if you have not already done so, Edgar Snow’s article in the current
Saturday Evening Post, entitled ‘Must We Beat Japan First?’ It is so grave that all of
us must take thought together.
the autobiography of bertrand russell 478This alienation between Americans and English, it seems to me, must not
be allowed to continue. I don’t think we will get over India, especially as our
losses of men in the Far East grow more severe, as they must, since India will
not be mobilised to help us. I fear both the professional anti-English persons
and those who have been alienated by the failure to bring India wholeheart-
edly into the war. I fear even more those who will grow angry when they see
what the loss of India will cost us.
I don’t think that Americans are particularly pro-Indian – if at all – I know I
am not. But there is just something in the average American that heartily
dislikes the sort of thing that has been going on in India, and this in spite of
our equally wrong behaviour to our own colored folk. We are, of course, full
of contradictions, but there it is. What can be done to mend the situation
between our two countries?
I think of one thing which ought not to be too di?cult. Granting that
Churchill cannot and will not change, it would help a great deal if we could
see another kind of Englishman and see him in some numbers and hear him
speak. As you know, the liberal English opinion has been fairly rigidly cen-
sored. Here in America we have not been allowed to hear dissenting voices in
England and the sort of o?cial Englishman we have here, and all his propa-
ganda, does little or nothing to mend the rift in the common man.
What can we do, English and Americans together, who know the necessity
of human equality, to make known our unity of thought and purpose?
The time has come for us to ?nd each other and to stand together for the
same sort of world. We cannot yield to each other’s faults and prides, but we
can speak together against them, and together determine a better way and so
rea?rm before our enemies and before our doubting allies everywhere the
essential unity of our two peoples.
Very sincerely yours
Pearl S. Buck
My views at that time on India were that it would be necessary to persuade the British Government
to renew negotiations with India. It was di?cult, however, to see how this could be done while
Churchill remained in power. Also, Indian leaders should be persuaded to end the civil disobedience
movement and cooperate in negotiations. Possibly the latter could be done through Nehru. I took for
granted that India should be free of all foreign domination, whether British or other.
From and to Mrs Sidney Webb Pass?eld Corner
Liphook, Hants.
December 17th 1942
My dear Bertrand
I was so glad to see in that remarkable book – I meet America – by W. J. Brown
?? that you were not only intent on winning the war but wished to
america. 1938–1944 479reconstruct the world after the war. We were also very much interested that
you had decided to remain in the ??? and to encourage your son to make his
career there rather than in Great Britain. If you were not a peer of the realm
and your son a possible great statesman like his great grandfather I should
think it was a wise decision but we want you both back in Great Britain since
you are part and parcel of the parliamentary government of our democracy.
Also I should think teachers who were also British Peers were at some slight
disadvantage in the ??? so far as a public career is concerned as they would
attract snobs and o?end the labour movement? But of course I may be wrong.
Sidney, I am glad to say, is very well and happy though of course owing to
his stroke in 1938 he is no longer able to take part in public a?airs. I go on
writing, writing, writing for publication. But I am old and tired and su?er
from all sorts of ailments from swollen feet to sleepless nights.
I send you our last booklet which has had a great sale in Great Britain and
is being published by the New York Longman ?rm. Probably you will not
agree with it but I think you will be interested and Bernard Shaw’s Preface is
amusing. Like ourselves the Bernard Shaws are very old and though Shaw
goes on writing Charlotte is a hopeless invalid and rather an unhappy one.
Shaw is writing a book – What’s What to the Politicians. He has been writing it for
many months and would have gone on writing a longer and longer book if
he had not been pulled up by the shortness of paper.
Whether you stay in the ??? or not I do hope you and your two clever
young people will pay a visit to Great Britain and that we shall have the
pleasure of seeing you and your wife. Pray give her my greetings; I wonder
how she likes America.
Your a?ectionate friend
Beatrice Webb
(Mrs Sidney Webb)
P.S. I don’t think you know our nephew Sir Sta?ord Cripps – but he
represents a new movement growing up in Gt Britain, which combines
the Christian faith . . . [words missing] – which might interest you. He left
the Cabinet over India!
Little Datchet Farm
31 Jan 1943
My dear Beatrice
Thank you very much for your letter of Dec. 17. I was delighted to have
news of you and Sidney, and to know that he is well. I am sorry you su?er
from ‘ailments’. I suppose it is inevitable after a certain age – to which I shall
soon attain.
I don’t know what gave W. J. Brown the idea that I meant to settle in
the autobiography of bertrand russell 480America. I have never at any time thought of doing such a thing. At ?rst I
came for 8 months, then jobs came in my way. Then, with the war, I thought
it better for Conrad (now aged 5) to be here. But all these reasons are nearing
their end.
John (Amberley) is ?nished with Harvard, and returning to England in a
few days, to go into the Navy if he can, and, if not, the Army. My daughter
Kate is at Radcli?e; she always does as well as possible in everything she
studies. Her hope, after the war, is to get into some kind of relief work on the
Continent. I myself am kept here for the moment by various engagements,
but I may come home fairly soon, leaving Peter and Conrad here till the end
of the war.
I was much disappointed that India rejected Cripps’ o?er. People here are
ignorant about India, but have strong opinions. I have been speaking and
writing to try to overcome anti-English feeling as regards India, which in
some quarters is very strong.
Thank you very much for your most interesting booklet on Russia.
Whether one likes the régime or not, one can’t help immensely admiring
the Russian achievement in the war.
I do hope to see you again when I get back to England. Peter sends
greetings and thanks for your message.
Yours a?ectionately
Bertrand Russell
From Dr & Mrs A. N. Whitehead 1737 Cambridge St.
Cambridge, Mass.
Jan. 3. 1944
Dear Bertie
We have just read – in the minutes of the Trinity Council – that you
have been re-elected to a Fellowship and Lectureship. The minutes also
emphasised that the election was unanimous. Our warmest congratulations.
It is exactly what ought to have happened.
Yours ever
Alfred and Evelyn Whitehead
america. 1938–1944 4811944–1967PREFACE
This book is to be published while the great issues that now divide the world
remain undecided. As yet, and for some time to come, the world must be one
of doubt. It must as yet be suspended equally between hope and fear.
It is likely that I shall die before the issue is decided – I do not know
whether my last words should be:
The bright day is done
And we are for the dark,
or, as I sometimes allow myself to hope,
The world’s great age begins anew,
The golden years return....
Heaven smiles, and faiths and empires gleam,
Like wrecks of a dissolving dream.
I have done what I could to add my small weight in an attempt to tip the
balance on the side of hope, but it has been a puny e?ort against vast forces.
May others succeed where my generation failed.
During the year 1944, it became gradually clear that the war was ending,
and was ending in German defeat. This made it possible for us to return to
England and to bring our children with us without serious risk except for
John, who was liable for conscription whether he went home or stayed in
America. Fortunately, the end of the war came soon enough to spare him the
awkward choice which this would have entailed.My life in England, as before, was a mixture of public and private events,
but the private part became increasingly important. I have found that it is not
possible to relate in the same manner private and public events or happenings
