It should scarcely be necessary to say how conventionalized are the
passions that make nations fight one another. Like the personal-honor
code of the duelist is diplomacy’s schedule of the degrees of
possible offensiveness in the conduct of other nations and their
representatives, with a parallel column for appropriate ways of
resenting each sort of disagreeableness. And the extreme mode of
resentment, war, has a definite place in this code. Nations do not wait
to be hurtled into war by explosions of popular wrath. The matter is
much more in the control of reason than this. War-making is one of
the legally recognized functions of the state, and all the necessary
machinery--from secretaries of war to a supply of gas-masks--is kept
constantly on hand. How odd it is that the people as a rule think of
wars, even modern wars, as calamities that, like a tornado or a tidal
wave, just happen, or as a horror that “bad” nations thrust upon
“good” ones. Wars occur, just as fisticuffs or shootings occur among a
frontier populace, and just as measured words of resentment are spoken
where culture prevails, namely, as an expression of the recognized
system for dealing with situations of certain sorts. There is nothing
inevitable about any of them.
When an individual follows the social code of resentment from a
sense of duty rather than from hot passion, we find the situation
amusing. But when a people that does not desire to fight is governed
by officials that do, then occurs the most remarkable, as it is also
the most tragic, example of the actual relation between passion and
precedent. The populace must now be worked up into a mood that will
impel them to kill and to do it with a clear conscience. And how
is the war-passion, in fact, aroused? By bringing the proposed or
already-declared war under some appropriate precedent or precedents.
Farmers and grocers, say, have not kept up with international events
sufficiently to know what the friction is all about, or which side is
right if either side is, or what probability there is that war will set
things right; but they won’t submit to a foreign invader or oppressor,
they love their country and its traditions, and they hate the
ruthlessness that ravishes women, and starves and mutilates children
and wounded soldiers. So, it is
“Fight for your altars and your fires;
Fight for the green graves of your sires,
God and your native land!”
The whole scheme of war-propaganda consists in inducing people to
classify another country, or a foreign leader, or events under
appropriate headings. So precedent-ridden is the passion that has rent
the world asunder and now threatens to destroy it.
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