CHAPTER II

W

GENERAL STATEMENT

ITHIN the last generation there has been a worldwide uneasiness and expectancy that has never been equalled in the past. The decade before the present war witnessed the greatest unrest the world had ever known. Statesmen and seers everywhere felt that something was going to happen, but no one knew just what. Now we have learned what was imminent. The recent revolution in Russia and the entrance of United States into this war will prove to be the greatest events of the World War period. It is but the continuation of the fight of the peoples of the earth for their liberties from oppression. It is another powerful link in the mighty chain of which the English revolutions of 1642 and 1688, the American Revolution and the French Revolution were the first links. And men will see, as never before, that the French Revolution of 1789, with the single exception of the present conflict, is the greatest, most tremendous event of modern times.

If there is one thing above all else that the study of hisstory teaches, it is that there is a unity or continuity, in human events and purposes and that man's true progress is through evolution. In this truth is found the explanation of the fundamental causes of war. The revolutions referred to above are a few of the many examples of this fact. It is equally true that revolutions of the people never go backward, ultimately; every one spells progress in the end. We should therefore in view of this fact, keep our faith in democratic Russia, for like France she will recover from her period of anarchy and severe trial-her deception and

spoilation by German perfidy—and will come out all right in the end, although it may be generations before she is fully recovered. The very means of oppression, such as absolute monarchies, the "armed peace," under which the nations have groaned, ambition of rulers and of governments, and often war itself-are but the means by which the people may rise. At a terrible cost, it is true; yet, progress is always costly, and in its truest sense the survival of the fittest holds even unto the last.

Whether recognizing this evolutionary principle or not, we know that there has been for years, and still is, among the most intelligent and best classes everywhere, a great cry and longing for world peace-not simply a cessation of military warfare, but an era of peace for weary mankind. This, however, is not to be confused with the present socialistic and pacifist movement, which is wholly abortive, and would be in the interest of the autocratic central powers, and not in the interest of democracy. Yet, despite all we have heard and been taught in recent years concerning peace and the end of warfare, we are learning, what the American people have been slow to learn hitherto, that there are times in the history of nations when, in order to enjoy peace, they must be prepared for war. It would be suicide for any great nation at the present time to act otherwise. One people, in its philanthropic enthusiasm, cannot bring peace to the world, much less any little group of peace advocates. Nor can it guarantee its own peace-it cannot adopt a policy of peace, and say it will have it, whether others will or no. We see this in our own experience now. Indeed, the realization of this fact is one of the reasons why the President and Congress plunged this peace-loving country and non-aggressive American people into the mighty world conflict that rages today. France has been confronted with such a situation in the past, and other examples are not wanting. It amounts to this-as, I have believed for years -that, instead of diminishing the chances of war, the anti

preparedness peace tendency may augment these chances, may invite conquest, or as in the case of the United States, because of the aggressions of others, may help to drag an unwilling people into war. There are several nations fighting today that not only did not want war, but did not expect it, and those least prepared have suffered most. War was thrust upon them; there was really no choice. The nations of the world are so close together and so interdependent in our day that one cannot have peace when others are determined upon oppressive war. The allied nations were unwillingly dragged into war, let me repeat, but thanks to the people's instinct for human liberty, they are in the war heart and soul now, and are in it to crush the inhuman and merciless beast of autocratic and bigoted oppression! Pity it is that many of us have not seen until now that autocracy has always been the arch-enemy of freedom and human rights, and never could be trusted. Its whole foundation, as history shows, has been laid in hypocritical presumption and class privilege and selfishness, playing upon the innocence and ignorance of its unfortunate and incapable victims.

The trouble with the peace advocates before the war (and all honor to them-God forbid that the teachers of the young should be aught else) it seems to me, has largely been this: they have observed particularly the effects of war, but have done little along the practical line of studying its causes and proposing effective remedies. Not until the present gigantic conflict has there been anything like concerted and serious action on the prevention of war; and still less is the understanding of its causes. Many people, indeed, declare useless any study of the causes of war. With this view, the writer cannot at all agree; it is but blind fatalism, dangerous and utterly helpless in the face of the world situation and of most wars. How are we to apply the remedy-How are we to have peace-if we do not understand the cause? As in the study of medicine and disease,

so in this field, the search for causes is no less indispensable than the search for remedies; and certainly, the scientific method of treatment requires that we find the causes before we apply the remedy. The failure to do this, I maintain, is just the reason why so much that has been said and attempted in the past has been fruitless and disappointing. Men have not made a careful and systematic search into the causes of war. It is remarkable how little space is given to the causes of war in our histories. Generally speaking, they have been examined most superficially -have been strangely neglected. With one breath history instructors are teaching that causes and results are more important than wars themselves, and in the next breath they are hurrying their classes on from the causes to the wars and their results. Better not know the names of battles and leaders than not understand, in some degree at least, why the armies are fighting.

It

Those who oppose an intensive study of the causes of war, because they think it would increase the warlike spirit from the mere thinking upon the subject, have, it seems to me, a most peculiar and illogical method of reasoning. is the people's not knowing the causes of wars that has often enabled their rulers to plunge them into conflicts and keep them there. This is true to some extent in the present war, as most of us know, particularly with the central powers. The search for the truth is dangerous only to its enemies. An acquaintance with the causes of war, even modern conflicts in civilized countries, can but lead the people to hate it more! When they see all the greed, the haughtiness, the selfishness, the blasphemous presumption of "divine right" monarchs and privileged classes, and sometimes the ignorance, misunderstandings and honest differences of peoples, that are back of war, they will certainly be greater lovers of peace, and more intelligent workers for it.

Moreover, it must be understood that there can be no real progress toward the peace we covet if we deny that

there is such a thing as a righteous war. The liberty of American democracy rests on that foundation stone. God has so willed it, and we cannot change it, although we believe it is God's will that some day wars shall cease from the earth. War has often rendered a great service in the past, and even today it must be seen that in the struggle for political and economic independence, as well as that for physical existence and comfort, the necessities and ambitions of the strong will be satisfied at the cost of the weak. We say this should not be. Christianity and our finer instincts are trying to lead us away from it. Nevertheless, it is the physical law of nature, has all our past history as a race back of it, and is the "survival of the fittest," one of the greatest of all biological laws; and, as Emerson says, the student of history may become more reconciled to this "copious bloodshed of ages past"-bloodshed often, too, in the name of the Prince of Peace when he reflects that it is a temporary and preparatory state-agelong though it be and has actively forwarded the culture of man. Nor is this any argument in favor of war as such, today; it is only a recognition of the service of war in the past. It is folly, it is a manifestation of ignorance of the history of mankind's development, to try to get away from or ignore the benefit of wars in the past. They are. the price man has paid for his civilization, whether they be against kings on their "divine right" thrones, autocratic governments, religious bigotry and intolerance, or what not. Civilization has been destroyed by these conflicts, it is true, and is being destroyed; yet, more still of civilization has been preserved and gained, else we could not have democracy and enlightenment today; for man's normal condition throughout the ages, almost up to the present, has been a state of warfare and strife. Through the countless ages of the past these wars have raged. From it all there has come an evolution into the present state; and our faith can but repeat, "as was said three thousand years ago, so still