A PACIFICIST'8 HOPE FOR THE FUTURE. [To THE EDITOR or
THE " SPECTATOR.'] Stan—You are apt to be hard on the Pacifieists, and yet I cannot help thinking that this extract from a letter written by one of them to a German lady of his acquaintance may meet with your approval
"As regards the possibility of impartiality in these days, I think people do not sufficiently distinguish between one's attitude as to the present war and one's hopes and intentions for after the war. Until the war is over the question as to the -immediate responsibility is paramount. The armed peace was all wrong, the si via pacem pars beflunt maxim is quite unsound, but the nations • would not agree to try another way, and so the penalty for causing a war could only be defeat. That is why the war must go on and why the Allies cannot compromise. They are convinced that the Austrian and German Governments broke the tacit agreement that neither group should begin a war, seeing that the excuse for the armaments and their perpetual increase was that they were to maintain peace. Hence we must go on till we win, whatever it costa us. Then all changes, and a new era has to commence in which all acknowledge a share in the general responsibility for the armed peace and si via period, and agree to atone for past mistakes by substituting good for had will, trust for suspicion, Free Trade for Protection, and art, science, agriculture, industry, commerce, literature, and sport for soldiers and warships. I fear `the war that is to end war' must be fought to a finish, so that Pacificista and cosmopolitans can only look on and endure, wish for the com- plete victory of the right side, and then do all they can to pour oil on the waves and persuade all the fighters to forgive and forget."
Florence.
[Excellently said, but can the writer really be called a Pacificiat? —En. Spectator.]
Previous page
