When the Territorial exclaims that,
for his part, he would refuse to inhabit a planet
on which there was no hope of war, the peaceful listener
shudderingly charges the inventor of Territorials
with promoting a bloodthirsty mind. After all
the prayers for peace in our time prayers
in which even Territorials are expected to join
on church parade it appears an impious
folly to appraise war as a necessity for human happiness.
Or if indeed it be a blessing, however much in disguise,
why not boldly pray to have the full benefit of it
in our time, instead of passing it on, like unearned
increment, for the advantage of posterity? Such
a thing is unimaginable. A prayer for war would
make people jump; it would empty a church quicker than
the collection. Nevertheless, it is probable
that the great majority of every congregation does
in its heart share the Territorial’s opinion,
and, if there were no possibility of war ever again
anywhere in the world, they would find life upon this
planet a trifle flat.
The impulse to hostilities arises
not merely from the delight in scenes of blood enjoyed
at a distance, though that is the commonest form of
military ardour, and in many a bloody battle the finest
fruits of victory are reaped over newspapers and cigars
at the bar or in the back garden. There is no
such courage as glows in the citizen’s bosom
when he peruses the telegrams of slaughter, just as
there is no such ferocity as he imbibes from the details
of a dripping murder. “War! War!
Bloody war! North, South, East, or West!”
cries the soldier in one of Mr. Kipling’s pretty
tales; but in real life that cry arises rather from
the music-halls than from the soldier, and many a
high-souled patriot at home would think himself wronged
if perpetual peace deprived him of his one opportunity
of displaying valour to his friends, his readers, or
his family. All these imaginative people, whose
bravery may be none the less genuine for being vicarious,
must be reckoned as the natural supporters of war,
and, indeed, one can hardly conceive any form of distant
conflict for which they would not stand prepared.
But still, the widespread dislike
of peace is not entirely derived from their prowess;
nor does it spring entirely from the nursemaid’s
love of the red coat and martial gait, though this
is on a far nobler plane, and comes much nearer to
the heart of things. The gleam of uniforms in
a drab world, the upright bearing, the rattle of a
kettledrum, the boom of a salute, the murmur of the
“Dead March,” the goodnight of the “Last
Post” sounding over the home-faring traffic and
the quiet cradles one does not know by
what substitutes eternal peace could exactly replace
them. For they are symbols of a spiritual protest
against the degradation of security. They perpetually
re-assert the claim of a beauty and a passion that
have no concern with material advantages. They
sound defiance in the dull ears of comfort, and proclaim
woe unto them that are at ease in the city of life.
Dimly the nursemaid is aware of the protest; most
people are dimly aware of it; and the few who seriously
labour for an unending reign of peace must take it
into account.
It is useless to allure mankind by
promises of a pig’s paradise. Much has
been rightly written about the horrors of war.
Everyone knows them to be sudden, hideous, and overwhelming;
those who have seen them can speak also of the squalor,
the filthiness, the murderous swindling, and the inconceivable
absurdity of the whole monstrous performance.
But the horrors of peace, if not so obvious, come
nearer to our daily life, and we are naturally terrified
at its softness, its monotony, and its enfeebling
relaxation. Of all people in the world the wealthy
classes of England and America are probably the furthest
removed from danger, and no one admires them in the
least; no one in the least envies their treadmill
of successive pleasures. The most unwarlike of
men are haunted by the fear that perpetual peace would
induce a general degeneration of soul and body such
as they now behold amid the rich man’s sheltered
comforts. They dread the growth of a population
slack of nerve, soft of body, cruel through fear of
pain, and incapable of endurance or high endeavour.
They dread the entire disappearance of that clear
decisiveness, that disregard of pleasure, that quiet
devotion of self in the face of instant death, which
are to be found, now and again, in the course of every
war. Even peace, they say, may be bought too dear,
and what shall it profit a people if it gain a swill-tub
of comforts and lose its own soul?
The same argument is chosen by those
who would persuade the whole population to submit
to military training, whether it is needful for the
country’s defence or not. Under such training,
they suppose, the virtues that peace imperils would
be maintained; a sense of equality and comradeship
would pervade all classes, and for two or three years
of life the wealthy would enjoy the realities of labour
and discomfort. It is a tempting vision, and
if this were the only means of escape from such a
danger as is represented, the wealthy would surely
be the first to embrace it for their own salvation.
But is there no other means? asked Professor William
James, and his answer to the question was that distinguished
psychologist’s last service. What we are
looking for, he rightly said, is a moral equivalent
for war, and he suddenly found it in a conscription,
not for fighting, but for work. After showing
that the life of many is nothing else but toil and
pain, while others “get no taste of this campaigning
life at all,” he continued:
“If now and this is my
idea there were, instead of military conscription,
a conscription of the whole youthful population to
form for a certain number of years a part of the army
enlisted against nature, the injustice would
tend to be evened out, and numerous other benefits
to the commonwealth would follow. The military
ideals of hardihood and discipline would be wrought
into the growing fibre of the people; no one would
remain blind, as the luxurious classes now are blind,
to man’s real relations to the globe he lives
on, and to the permanently solid and hard foundations
of his higher life. To coal and iron mines, to
freight trains, to fishing fleets in December, to dish-washing,
clothes-washing, and window-washing, to road-building
and tunnel-making, to foundries and stoke-holes,
and to the frames of skyscrapers, would our gilded
youths be drafted off, according to their choice,
to get the childishness knocked out of them, and to
come back into society with healthier sympathies and
soberer ideas.”
Here, indeed, is a vision more tempting
than ever conscription was. To be sure, it is
not new, for Ruskin had a glimpse of it, and that was
why he induced the Oxford undergraduates to vary their
comfortable Greek studies and games at ball with a
little honest work upon the Hinksey road. But
the vision is irresistible. There cannot be the
smallest doubt it will be realised, and when the young
dukes, landed proprietors, financiers, motorists,
officers in the Guards, barristers, and curates are
marched off in gangs to their apportioned labour in
the stoke-holes, coal-mines, and December fishing
fleets, how the workmen will laugh, how exult!
Nor let it be supposed that the conscription
would subject even the most luxurious conscripts to
any unendurable hardship. So hateful is idleness
to man that the toil of the poor is continually being
adopted by the rich as sport. To climb a mountain
was once the irksome duty of the shepherd and wandering
hawker; now it is the privilege of wealth to hang
by the finger-nails over an abyss. Once it was
the penalty of slaves to pull the galleys; now it
is only the well-to-do who labour day by day at the
purposeless oar, and rack their bodies with a toil
that brings home neither fish nor merchandise.
Once it fell to the thin bowman and despised butcher
to provide the table with flesh and fowl; now, at
enormous expense, the rich man plays the poulterer
for himself, and statesmen seek the strenuous life
in the slaughter of a scarcely edible rhinoceros.
Let the conscripts of comfort take heart. They
will run more risks in the galleries of the mines
than on the mountain precipice, and one night’s
trawl upon the Dogger Bank would provide more weight
of fish than if they whipped the Tay from spring to
winter.
Under this great conscription, a New
Model would, indeed, be initiated, as far superior
to the conscript armies as Cromwell’s Ironsides
were to the mercenaries of their time. The whole
nation from prince to beggar would by this means be
transformed, labour would cease to be despised or
riches to be worshipped, the reproach of effeminacy
would be removed, the horrors of peace mitigated,
and the moral equivalent of war discovered. For
the first time a true comradeship between class and
class would arise, for, as Goethe said, work makes
the comrade, and democracy might have a chance of
becoming a reality instead of a party phrase.
After three years’ service down the sewers or
at the smelting works, our men of leisure would no
longer raise their wail over national degeneracy or
the need of maintaining the standard of hardihood by
barrack-square drill. As things are now, it is
themselves who chiefly need the drill. “Those
who live at ease,” said Professor James, “are
an island on a stormy ocean.” In the summing
up of the nation they, in their security, would hardly
count, were they not so vocal; but the molten iron,
the flaming mine, the whirling machine, the engulfing
sea, and hunger always at the door take care that,
for all but a very few among the people, the discipline
of danger and perpetual effort shall not be wanting.
You do not find the pitman, the dustman, or the bargee
puling for bayonet exercise to make them hard, and
if our nervous gentlemen were all serving the State
in those capacities, they might even approach their
addition sums in “Dreadnoughts” without
a tremor. Besides, as Professor James added for
a final inducement, the women would value them more
highly.