The Great Illusion: A Study of the Relation of Military Power to National AdvantageAngell, Norman
History
The Great Illusion: A Study of the Relation of Military Power to National Advantage
Angell, Norman
Commercial policy; Disarmament; Imperialism; War; War, Cost of
The war party is assuredly right in affirming that the martial
virtues, although originally gained by the race through war,
are absolute and permanent human goods. Patriotic pride and
ambition in their military form are, after all, only
specifications of a more universal and enduring competitive
passion.... Pacifism makes no converts from the military party.
The military party denies neither the bestiality, nor the
horror, nor the expense; it only says that these things tell
but half the story. It only says that war is worth these
things; that, taking human nature as a whole, war is its best
protection against its weaker and more cowardly self, and that
mankind cannot afford to adopt a peace economy.... Militarism
is the great preserver of our ideals of hardihood, and human
life without hardihood would be contemptible.... This natural
feeling forms, I think, the innermost soul of army writings.
Without any exception known to me, militarist authors take a
highly mystical view of their subject, and regard war as a
biological or sociological necessity.... Our ancestors have
bred pugnacity into our bone and marrow and thousands of years
of peace won't breed it out of us.[46]
Even famous English clergymen have voiced the same view. Charles
Kingsley, in his defence of the Crimean War as a "just war against
tyrants and oppressors," wrote: "For the Lord Jesus Christ is not only
the Prince of Peace, He is the Prince of War, too. He is the Lord of
Hosts, the God of armies, and whoever fights in a just war against
tyrants and oppressors is fighting on Christ's side, and Christ is
fighting on his side. Christ is his captain and his leader, and he can
be in no better service. Be sure of it, for the Bible tells you so."[47]
Canon Newbolt, Dean Farrar, and the Archbishop of Armagh, have all
written not dissimilarly.
The whole case may be summarized thus:
1. Nations fight for opposing conceptions of right: it is the moral
conflict of men.
2. They fight from non-rational causes of a lower kind: from vanity,
rivalry, pride of place, the desire to occupy a great situation in the
world, or from sheer hostility to dissimilar people--the blind strife of
mutually hating men.
3. These causes justify war, or render it inevitable. The first is
admirable in itself, the second is inevitable, in that the peoples
readiest to fight, and showing most energy in fighting, replace the more
peacefully inclined, and the warlike type tends thus permanently to
survive; "the warlike nations inherit the earth."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account