CHAPTER VIII ETHICAL GAINS IN THE WAR The World War marks one of the greatest crises in the moral history of mankind. Future writers on the history of Ethics will be able to see more clearly and completely than we can the moral significance of the developments, national and international, which led up to the war, and of the mighty changes in the structure of society and in the spirit of government throughout the world which it has wrought. But there are certain outstanding facts in the situation whose ethical value we are bound over to consider if we would take our part intelligently and with a clear conscience in the great events of this great hour. In naming them and attempting a brief statement of their significance, we shall be compelled to survey in another form some of the arguments of the preceding chapters. 1. The first great moral advance has been made evident in the world-wide study of the causes of this war. Even the German Government is a witness to the necessity felt in our day for a moral justification of her part in the great event. The primary desire of the Government quite evidently was to justify the war before the German people themselves, which could be done only by asserting that it is for them a war of defence. It appears that straightforward lies were told in order to deceive the German people. Their Government told them that France had invaded Alsace, that French cavalry were seen in Belgium, that Belgium herself had broken neutrality, all of which assertions are proved to have been without foundation in fact. But they enabled the Kaiser to exercise his constitutional right of declaring war under the plea that it was a war of defence. A secondary and no less powerful desire gradually awoke in the mind of the German Government, namely, to justify herself before the judgment of the world, and especially of the neutral nations. The idea that what Germany does is right because Germany does it, was a strident utterance of her military Pan-German enthusiasts. It could convince no one outside, and only a section in Germany. It was too immoral and blatant an assertion to prevail over the natural dictates of the human conscience. Hence Germany was compelled to seek one way after another of proving that she was rather the victim and prey of ruthless neighbors than herself a beast of prey. The act of Belgium, France, and Russia needed no defence. It was justified absolutely by the unnecessary act of aggression upon their territories on the part of German armies. The act of Great Britain no doubt may now be described as an act of self-defence. It is clear to the whole world that the conquest of Belgium and France would have proved but a stepping-stone for the conquest of the British Empire. It will ever remain a strange fact that at the beginning of the war the British people were not unanimous, and even the Cabinet was divided as to whether it was the duty of the Government to declare war. So deep had become the passion for peace, so prevalent the belief that Germany might yet be won to a policy of neighborliness and peace in the development of her world relations! It was not until Belgium was actually invaded that the British sprang unanimously to arms. Then honor spoke, and only one voice, a voice of anguish and yet of supreme determination, answered from the heart of the Empire. Even Mr. Lloyd George, a lifelong pacifist, who had opposed the Boer War on principle and at the risk of his life, was convinced by this one act of treachery, this one base transgression against the laws of humanity and honor, and became the flaming leader of the Empire in the most tragic and the supreme effort of its history. As to the actions of America, we have already spoken in a recent page sufficiently. One more quotation from the President's address to Con |