The New York Times Current History of the European War, Vol. 1, January 9, 1915: What Americans Say to EuropeVarious
Philosophy
The New York Times Current History of the European War, Vol. 1, January 9, 1915: What Americans Say to Europe
Various
World War, 1914-1918
Probably peace might come more quickly if neither side should be
absolutely victorious than otherwise. But for the moment I think that
the agreement among the Allies is a very portentous thing, as far as the
duration of the war is concerned.
"Do you think that any secret agreement may exist; that France even now
may have made an agreement with Germany?" Mr. Sloane was asked.
I cannot think so. I think it very evident there is no such secret
agreement. If one existed it would be much more likely to be between
Russia and Germany. You remember the development of Prussia, which is,
of course, the commanding State in the German Empire, occurred by its
careful conservation of the policy which was laid down in the political
will of Frederick the Great, that of keeping friends with Russia.
The fact of the matter is, Prussia was saved in the Napoleonic wars by
the act of Gen. Yorck at Tauroggen, when he suddenly abandoned the
French and went over to the Prussians, and while Russia has within half
a generation become intensely bitter against Germany, yet it is true
that the Baltic Provinces, in which the gentry and the burghers are
Germans, have furnished most important administrators to the Russian
Empire, a fact that causes much of the jealousy in Russia on the part of
the native-born Russians against the Germans of the Baltic Provinces.
Nevertheless, self-interest is a very important thing, and if Russia
thought for a moment that France was going to abandon her I think she
would turn to Germany right away.
As time has developed the nations of today, it has come to be understood
by hard-headed statesmen that those who conduct their respective affairs
can have no other guiding principle than the interest of their own
State, no other.
There is a persistent feeling throughout the world that there is an
analogy between the individual man and organized society. There are
books written to show that States must and do pass through the various
stages through which an individual passes, namely, infancy, childhood,
youth, middle age, old age, decay. By a perfectly natural parallel the
majority of men apply the same morality to the State which they apply to
the individual, and they insist upon it that a State must be moral in
every respect; that it must have a conscience; that it must have virtue;
that it must practice self-denial; that it must not lay its hands on
what does not belong to it. In short, that it must as a State or as a
nation be "good," in exactly the same sense in which a person is "good."
In other words, they personify the State.
I have never heard of any speaker or writer who would not approve of
that as an ideal, and who would not desire that the millennium should
come upon earth now, and that exactly the same virtues that are held up
for personal ideals should be held up for national ideals.
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