SOCIAL IMPROVEMENT AND NATIONAL SERVICE.
[To TRH EDITOR OF Tax "SPECTATOR."]
Sits,—It is well that the apology for war, and for vast preparations for war, should be effectively and forcibly stated, as the Spectator has stated it in your issue of last week. But am I completely worsted in my argument for peace P I scarcely think so. You ask, as a test for Pacificists : "(1) Are you perfectly certain that no nation will ever say to you Do this' or 'Stop doing that,' and, if you reply I won't,' will not go on to say, Then I will make you' ? " The answer to this is : It is of course possible that such a situation may arise, but I do not think it ever will. The leading nations of the world are rapidly advancing in civilization, as we ourselves are striving to do. If we have the courage to act on our principles, to suppress pride, jealousy, and covetousness, to set the higher example, to rely on rectitude of purpose, on urgent appeal to a well-constituted Arbitration Court rather than on brute force, I believe that our confidence will not be misplaced and that we may feel strong and calm and safe.
You ask again " (2) Are you perfectly certain that you will never want to say to another nation Do this' or Stop doing that,' and if that nation replies I won't,' you will not go on to say, Then I will make you ' ? " The answer to this is : I am not perfectly certain that I should not in my haste make that answer, but I hope and believe that I should take a day to think over it, and that I should then have the courage to give a wiser answer than that which you suggest, and I believe that I should appeal successfully to the same spirit of reason as before. This is, of course, no argument for immediate and complete disarmament, except under well- considered conditions. It is merely a plea for a permanent improvement in international relations, such as I believe that the civilized nations of Europe and America are well-nigh prepared to reciprocate and accept. It may even be an argument for the formation of our proposed civilian force, with all its moral and social advantages.
It is true that universal peace may not bring all that we hope for it, but is that any reason why we should not earnestly ensue it ? It is only fools who are over-sanguine. The abolition of gambling and betting, of the white slave traffic, or any other patent evil, might disappoint us in its results and might possibly lead to the introduction of some new vice or crime, but will that adverse chance justify us in timorously staying our hand in endeavouring to suppress an obvious crime ? It is true that universal peace might possibly conduce to laziness and excess of luxury. I do not believe it would. Is it not more likely that the suppression of evil passions, of pride, ill-temper, covetousness, jealousy, megalomania, sometimes with their petty concomitant ill-mannerisms of bluster and swagger, which are so often the cause of war, would assist us towards further improvements of character and pursuits? One good act leads to another ; one evil passion, one outbreak of bad temper mastered, one bad habit abandoned, makes further amendment easier. It is hardly true to say that nations have no alternative but war for the settlement of disputes. The more civilized powers of the world have already made astonishingly rapid advances towards solution by arbitration. We are drawing nearer every year to its general acceptance. Shall we lead, or merely follow in what is surely coming ? Our motto should be Si via pacein, para pacem (not bellum, as an unwise paradox would
Previous page
