Salvemini Lashes UN Organization In Initial Forum

"There were not two conflicting systems at the recent Paris Peace Conference--the trouble was there was no system."

With this statement, Professor Gaetano Salvemini refuted Professor Karl Deutsch of M.I.T. and Raymond Dennett '36 after they seemed agreed in their respective opinions, aired before The Forum's first fall meeting at Emerson Hall last night, that the chief cause of strife in the Conference had been the struggle between the Eastern and Western systems.

As first speaker of the evening, Dennett said that there is no brave new world.' "The same actions of practical politics that can be found in Boston today, can be seen on every hand on a larger scale in international affairs," said Dennett who is director of the World Peace Foundation.

"Power Vacuums" Offer Real Problem

But he said the use of power politics should not hamper the development of a lasting world peace. The distribution of influence in the "power vacuums" left by the defeat of Germany and Japan is the only real problem facing the peace makers.

Professor Salvemini explained his dissatisfaction with the conference, saying, "We have abandoned the old method of secret agreements secretly arrived at, for one of open disagreements openly arrived at."

Cites Results of Conference

Citing the cession of unjust rights to Italy in South Tryol, which were based on the World War I mistake of Wilson, and the abortion of Italy's just claims in Trieste, Salvemini said that the results of the conference were the product of the more prevalent type of power politics, foolish power politics.

He said that Tryol should be returned to its rightful possessor, Austria, and Trieste should be a free state of an improved nature by taking advantage of the experience gained from Danzig.

Experience Gained Through Convention

With a warning that, "the more we get tough with foreign powers, the more we are likely to get tough at home," Deutsch said that the world had gained experience through having the Paris name-calling convention, but now is the time to accept the conclusion that three good liberals, Jan Smuts, Anthony Eden, and Henry Wallace have arrived at, and take a more generous attitude in the conference dealings.

Dennett expressed hope that the ministers of the nations could arrive at a work-able solution through their three point system which he outlined: 1. First spit in each others eyes. 2. Then question the paternity of the opposing faction. 3. Then settle down and settle.