And the British Election

Contrary to their traditional contempt for European politics, many Americans may look somewhat wistfully at Thursday's election in England; British voters were given not a quavering echo of an overly idyllic past but a responsible alternative to the incumbent government. Since an extension of the thirteen year Tory rule might well have destroyed the Labor party, Labor's apparent victory over the Conservatives is welcome, if only because it preserves a strong two party government in England.

But the final results indicate that there can indeed be too much of a good thing. Labor's microscopic margin of victory will undoubtedly handicap attempts to exploit their greatest asset, the promise of innovation. In fact, Labor faces a most unpleasant dilemma; if it tries to use radical techniques to improve industrial efficiency and solve pressing problems of housing, poverty, transportation, and education it will face the danger of losing a necessarily close vote of confidence. But if Labor decides instead to avoid risk and float with slack sails it may be pulled under by the problems left by the Tories, especially the impending balance of trade crisis.

Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, Harold Wilson must maneuver with a delicate touch in the months ahead until he feels confident enough to ask the electorate for a larger majority. After thirteen years of Tory rule, it was certainly time for a change. But if British voters have chosen to replace the Conservative's perfunctory performance with Labor's potential, they have unfortunately failed to give the Laborites a sufficient mandate to realize their promise.