The United States After Thirty Years
II.—The Background
AMIRACLE of modern history is the way in which the Anglo-Saxon ethos, emanating mainly from New England, impressed itself upon the millions of alien immigrants into the United States throughout the nineteenth century. Of course, the Anglo-Saxon char- acter had extraordinarily powerful weapons for moral conquest, the chief of which was a language which had the institutions dear to Anglo-Saxons embedded in it, and which presupposed personal liberty and a growing democracy. One of the most binding and civilizing forces which the wit of man has ever devised is the English Common Law, and this too was at the disposal of Anglo-Saxondom. Finally, the customs of these Anglo-Saxons were Puritanical in derivation. Perhaps. the greatest wonder of all is that a PUritan standard of conduct should have been impressed upon a large portion of the congeries of people who were making the new American nation.
It could not he expected, however, that these influences would continue supreme. That they will remain and remain permanently I am convinced, but no one can mistake the signs that the forming influences of to-day are coming not exclusively from a small band but from many and various sources.
M. Andre Siegfried has predicted in his acute critical analysis of American conditions that the determining influences in the next generation will be found in the Middle West. There is much in what he says. The great producing cities south of the Lakes, with Chicago as their centre, have a constantly growing population and wealth, and they represent a part of the country which seems to be invulnerable against misfortune. All about these great cities are fertile agricultural plains which make the Middle West self-supporting. I know that it may be said that Chicago is no longer in the heart of the Middle West, but I am using the term "Middle West" in the sense in which it has for a long time been accepted. M. Siegfried seems to think, then, that the authentic voice of America will be heard for many years to come neither from the East nor from the West (though the progress of both West and South is prodigious), but from the Middle. Englishmen who have not visited the United States are apt to think of the man of the Middle West as a Babbitt, a figure of fun. Indeed, one American complained to me that " Babbitt " is being used in Britain as though it were a synonym for "American." But Babbitt is no more than he pretends to be, and no more than Mr. Sinclair Lewis says he is, a type indeed, but typical only of many of the small fry who swim in the great pond of business and industrial production in the Middle West. Everyone who has revered in the past the American spirit that was cultivated by Emerson, Hawthorne, J. R. Lowell, Washington Irving, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Walt Whitman, Adams, Lincoln, Hay, and so on up till almost yesterday, must feel some concern about the guidance of the next American 'generation. But though there may justly be a sentimental anxiety there is no reason whatever for political alarm. It is true that those States which are becoming of increasing importance are geographically remote from Eunine and hitherto have known little of our affairs and have cared about them less. Even distance,. however, is closing In. A few years more and the fact that the Middle West is a self-sufficing community, never in want. of markets .though it is far from any of the great sea-ports, Will be found to he irrelevant The speed of communication Will obliterate distance, and meanwhile, as though preparing for its . task, the Middle West spends an incredible pro- portion of its wealth on . education, on enlarging its Universities, on museums and the arts. .
When I was starting for my visit to America an Englishman who is not by any means ignorant of • Anierica said to Me : "I wish you would find out why the Americans hate us so just now. Of course, they are always a bit touchy. Anyhow, I advise you to avoid certain subjects altogether. For instance, no good can be done by talking in the present circumstances about naval affairs." My answer to my friend must be that in no city, nor on any journey by the way, did I come across a single instance of hostility or incivility. I found nothing but friendliness, warm-heartedness and a lavish-. ness of hospitality which is almost beyond belief. And this is in spite of my. disregard of my friend's advice to avoid naval affairs....
It happens that I am deeply interested in that subject and it would have been very irksome to me to avoid it.
So I took the risk and discovered that when a willingness to disagree amicably was frankly avowed there was everywhere a desire to discuss the matter as though it were an interesting topic of political dispute but contained nowhere any. danger of a rupture. This was my experience even among strangers in trains. I met several Americans who confessed that they were." Big Navy" men, but not one who did not say something of this . sort : "If we have a Navy we ought to have. one . adequate to our needs. Why shouldn't we.? We are a great nation and if we have a. Navy at we ought to have a mighty good one. But . as for thinking of. war with England-, why. that has never entered our heads ! " .
The main truth about our. dealing . with. the. Americana seems to me to be this ; that the manner in which you approach them counts in importance about 90 per cent. • while logic, accuracy in argument and so forth count only about 10 per cent. The Americans as a people are mistrustful of professional diplomacy though I cannot help saying that negotiations would be easier if they built up a regular diplomatic- technique. As it is they are attached to a• high- idealism which often expresses itself nebulously. They are sentimentalists often in politics but always in social affairs. They will empty their pockets for a cause, or a" drive," which has touched their hearts and their imaginations. The important thing, therefore, is for us to recognize a good intention when we see it and not to run the risk of estranging them by an instant professional precision in the use of words until we are sure that we have started in their company towards a particular objective. When the journey has begun they Will not .want to go back for silly or pedantic reasons. Then will be the time to say what we have to say out of what we think is the maturity of our wisdom. Then will be the time to argue about what is practical and what is not. .
The American Constitution, that sacred and almost unchangeable. instrument, is in itself . an illustration of what I mean. It combines a good deal of the political philosophy of revolutionary France With the hard sense, of the English Common Law, and the average _American does not always perceive that the one has less practical value than the other. He can be led by a phrase. _ That fact accounts for his "belief that his Republic is naturally. and necessarily more democratic than Britain, whose Hereditary President bears the title of ring. Not many but the scholars and historians remember that whereas the American revolutionaries fixed their con- ception Of democracy in a document a hundred and fifty years ago, British democracy has continually expanded so" that representative Government long since gave way to responsible Government 'and the Cabinet . was made: directly responsible to Parliament. While not a single veto is left in the British polity except in the 'handa of the people themselves, the President "of the United States has a degree of personal power that has not been borne by anybody here, for more than a hundred years, and the Senate with- its rule of a two-thirds majority in foreign affairs is able to veto almost any proposed Treaty. Unless one understands the preference of aims to methods in the United States it is almost impossible to see daylight shining through any negotiations we may have with Washington: I remember being startled one day -when I picked up an American newspaper and saw on the front page in three parallel columns items of news which seem to be flatly contradictory. One column contained a proposal by Mr. Kellogg for outlawing war without any reservation whatever. The next column contained news of the war in Nicaragua between the American Marines and Sandino and a speech by a member of the Government justifying the campaign. The third contained details of the large naval building programme which had not then been appreciably reduced by Congress: It is very much harder in the United States than it is in this country to say what public opinion is. It is inevitably concerned more with State events than with the outer World. Even some of the largest newspapers which are plentiful with news are scanty in comment. Some of the most thoughtful and illuminating articles I read in America were in weekly reviews which correspond to' such weekly reviews here as the Nation, The New State:than, and the Spectator, but I was told that these papers reach but a small public. I found it difficult to buy copies casually.
We and the'Americans certainly think differently, but we desire the same ends, and anyone who agrees with me that co-operation between America and Britain should be the cardinal point in our policy must be mad if he is willing to let any dismission break down because Americans begin by ansviering businesslike questions about the particular kind of brass tacks to be used with lofty aspirations. When all the causes of misundei-: standing have been ransacked it remains true that the Americans agree with us more easily than With any other' people on earth, and that even when our relations with them look— bad they are not nearly sO bad as " foreigners " are apt to think them. There are so many ways of thinking aad of acting ; as many as there are people! As Emerson says "Raphael paints wisdom, Handel sings it, Phidias carVes it, Shakespeare writes it, Wren builds it, Columbus sails it, Luther preaches it,' Washington arms it."
J. B. ATKINS.
Previous page
