Neutrality -- United States; United States -- Defenses; World War, 1914-1918 -- Causes; World War, 1914-1918 -- United States
The answer seems to me quite clear. They were entirely natural, but not
quite reasonable. We could not help feeling them; but it was not at all
likely that the average American voter should feel as we did. How should
he? One need not speak of the six million Germans, and the innumerable
other aliens in the United States; nor yet of the traditional
anti-British feeling in the political "mob." The plain fact is that
nations do not go to war for remote philanthropic objects. They get near
it sometimes, as we got near it with Turkey in 1895, over the Armenian
massacres. But they do not go over the edge, except where the
philanthropic indignation is reinforced by other motives or causes of
quarrel. And even there, time is needed to awake a whole nation. Mental
preparation is needed; the culprit must have a bad character already;
the proof of the crime committed must be exceedingly clear. None of
these conditions was present in 1914. The Germans were greatly respected
in the United States. There had been a powerful and assiduous court paid
to American opinion. Every single crime committed by Germany was
accompanied by a cloud of dust and counter-accusation. It was the
Russians who insisted on war; it was France which invaded Belgium; it
was the Belgian women and children who committed atrocities on the
German soldiers; it was the English who used explosive bullets and
poisonous gas; I forget whether it was the _Lusitania_ which tried to
sink the poor submarine, or if that was only the _Arabic_; but at every
single point at which the national indignation of America might have
exploded the issue was confused and befogged. We should remember the
immortal words of the Pope, when confronted by the twentieth or
thirtieth demonstration of the bestialities done by the Germans in
Belgium: "_But you know, they say they didn't._" The same answer was
always open not only to Colonel Bryan (why should that eminent pacifist
be denied his full claim to military glory?), but to men of much less
nebulous judgment than he.
No; it was not reasonable to expect the United States to plunge into war
for motives of philanthropy. And if one begins to put the question on
other grounds, then clearly it is not for us foreigners to decide what
course best suits the interest or dignity of the United States. They
know their own case, _pro_ and _con_, far better than we can, and we
certainly need not complain of either the skill or the fervour with
which our friends in that great, strange country have stated our case.
But the matter is decided. America will not join in this war. Both
political parties are united on that point; and only a few voices of
independent thinkers, voices sometimes of great weight and eloquence,
are lifted in protest. I do not, of course, say that there might not
arise some new and unexpected issue which would compel her to change her
policy; but, as far as the issues are now known, the Americans have made
up their minds to have no war.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account