summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/5399-h/5399-h.htm
blob: 93260be284e11bba2a2778b2b75cf0386692cb43 (plain) 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056
2057
2058
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109
2110
2111
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>

<!DOCTYPE html
   PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
   "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd" >

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en">
  <head>
    <title>
      An Essay on the American Contribution and The Democratic Idea, by Winston
      Churchill
    </title>
    <style type="text/css" xml:space="preserve">

    body { margin:5%; background:#faebd7; text-align:justify}
    P { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: .25em; margin-bottom: .25em; }
    H1,H2,H3,H4,H5,H6 { text-align: center; margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; }
    hr  { width: 50%; text-align: center;}
    .foot { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; text-indent: -3em; font-size: 90%; }
    blockquote {font-size: 97%; font-style: italic; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;}
    .mynote    {background-color: #DDE; color: #000; padding: .5em; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 95%;}
    .toc       { margin-left: 10%; margin-bottom: .75em;}
    .toc2      { margin-left: 20%;}
    div.fig { display:block; margin:0 auto; text-align:center; }
    .figleft   {float: left; margin-left: 0%; margin-right: 1%;}
    .figright  {float: right; margin-right: 0%; margin-left: 1%;}
    pre     { font-style: italic; font-size: 90%; margin-left: 10%;}

</style>
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>
      <br /><br />
    </p>
<pre xml:space="preserve">
The Project Gutenberg EBook of An Essay On The American Contribution And
The Democratic Idea, by Winston Churchill
[The Author is the American Winston Churchill not the British]

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org


Title: An Essay On The American Contribution And The Democratic Idea

Author: Winston Churchill

Release Date: October 6, 2006 [EBook #5399]
Last Updated: August 24, 2016

Language: English

Character set encoding: UTF-8

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AMERICAN CONTRIBUTION ***



Produced by David Widger




</pre>

    <h1>
      AN ESSAY ON THE AMERICAN CONTRIBUTION AND THE DEMOCRATIC IDEA
    </h1>
    <p>
      <br /><br />
    </p>
    <h2>
      By Winston Churchill
    </h2>
    <p>
      <br /> <br />
    </p>
    <hr />
    <p>
      <br /> <br />
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      <p class="toc">
        <big><b>CONTENTS</b></big>
      </p>
      <p>
        <br />
      </p>
      <p class="toc">
        <a href="#link2H_4_0001"> I. </a>
      </p>
      <p class="toc">
        <a href="#link2H_4_0002"> II. </a>
      </p>
      <p class="toc">
        <a href="#link2H_4_0003"> III. </a>
      </p>
      <p class="toc">
        <a href="#link2H_4_0004"> IV. </a>
      </p>
      <p class="toc">
        <a href="#link2H_4_0005"> V. </a>
      </p>
    </blockquote>
    <p>
      <br /> <br />
    </p>
    <hr />
    <p>
      <br /> <br /> <a name="link2H_4_0001" id="link2H_4_0001">
      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
    </p>
    <h2>
      I.
    </h2>
    <p>
      Failure to recognize that the American, is at heart an idealist is to lack
      understanding of our national character. Two of our greatest interpreters
      proclaimed it, Emerson and William James. In a recent address at the Paris
      Sorbonne on &ldquo;American Idealism,&rdquo; M. Firmin Roz observed that a people is
      rarely justly estimated by its contemporaries. The French, he says, have
      been celebrated chiefly for the skill of their chefs and their vaudeville
      actors, while in the disturbed &lsquo;speculum mundi&rsquo; Americans have appeared as
      a collection of money grabbers whose philosophy is the dollar. It remained
      for the war to reveal the true nature of both peoples. The American
      colonists, M. Roz continues, unlike other colonists, were animated not by
      material motives, but by the desire to safeguard and realize an ideal; our
      inherent characteristic today is a belief in the virtue and power of
      ideas, of a national, indeed, of a universal, mission. In the Eighteenth
      Century we proposed a Philosophy and adopted a Constitution far in advance
      of the political practice of the day, and set up a government of which
      Europe predicted the early downfall. Nevertheless, thanks partly to good
      fortune, and to the farseeing wisdom of our early statesmen who perceived
      that the success of our experiment depended upon the maintenance of an
      isolation from European affairs, we established democracy as a practical
      form of government.
    </p>
    <p>
      We have not always lived up to our beliefs in ideas. In our dealings with
      other nations, we yielded often to imperialistic ambitions and thus, to a
      certain extent, justified the cynicism of Europe. We took what we wanted&mdash;and
      more. From Spain we seized western Florida; the annexation of Texas and
      the subsequent war with Mexico are acts upon which we cannot look back
      with unmixed democratic pride; while more than once we professed a naive
      willingness to fight England in order to push our boundaries further
      north. We regarded the Monroe Doctrine as altruistic, while others smiled.
      But it suited England, and her sea power gave it force.
    </p>
    <p>
      Our war with Spain in 1898, however, was fought for an idea, and, despite
      the imperialistic impulse that followed it, marks a transition, an
      advance, in international ethics. Imperialistic cynics were not lacking to
      scoff at our protestation that we were fighting Spain in order to liberate
      Cuba; and yet this, for the American people at large, was undoubtedly the
      inspiration of the war. We kept our promise, we did not annex Cuba, we
      introduced into international affairs what is known as the Big Brother
      idea. Then came the Platt Amendment. Cuba was free, but she must not
      wallow near our shores in an unhygienic state, or borrow money without our
      consent. We acquired valuable naval bases. Moreover, the sudden and
      unexpected acquisition of Porto Rico and the Philippines made us
      imperialists in spite of ourselves.
    </p>
    <p>
      Nations as well as individuals, however, must be judged by their
      intentions. The sound public opinion of our people has undoubtedly
      remained in favour of ultimate self-government for the Philippines, and
      the greatest measure of self-determination for little Porto Rico; it has
      been unquestionably opposed to commercial exploitation of the islands,
      desirous of yielding to these peoples the fruits of their labour in
      developing the resources of their own lands. An intention, by the way,
      diametrically different from that of Germany. In regard to our
      protectorate in the island of San Domingo, our &ldquo;semi-protectorate&rdquo; in
      Nicaragua, the same argument of intention may fairly be urged. Germany,
      who desired them, would have exploited them. To a certain extent, no
      doubt, as a result of the momentum of commercial imperialism, we are still
      exploiting them. But the attitude of the majority of Americans toward more
      backward peoples is not cynical; hence there is hope that a democratic
      solution of the Caribbean and Central American problem may be found. And
      we are not ready, as yet, to accept without further experiment the dogma
      that tropical and sub-tropical people will not ultimately be able to
      govern themselves. If this eventually, prove to be the case at least some
      such experiment as the new British Labour Party has proposed for the
      Empire may be tried. Our general theory that the exploitation of foreign
      peoples reacts unfavourably on the exploiters is undoubtedly sound.
    </p>
    <p>
      Nor are the ethics of the manner of our acquisition of a part of Panama
      and the Canal wholly defensible from the point of view of international
      democracy. Yet it must be remembered that President Roosevelt was dealing
      with a corrupt, irresponsible, and hostile government, and that the Canal
      had become a necessity not only for our own development, but for that of
      the civilization of the world.
    </p>
    <p>
      The Spanish War, as has been said, marked a transition, a development of
      the American Idea. In obedience to a growing perception that dominion and
      exploitation are incompatible with and detrimental to our system of
      government, we fought in good faith to gain self-determination for an
      alien people. The only real peril confronting democracy is the arrest of
      growth. Its true conquests are in the realms of ideas, and hence it calls
      for a statesmanship which, while not breaking with the past, while taking
      into account the inherent nature of a people, is able to deal creatively
      with new situations&mdash;always under the guidance of current social
      science.
    </p>
    <p>
      Woodrow Wilson&rsquo;s Mexican policy, being a projection of the American Idea
      to foreign affairs, a step toward international democracy, marks the
      beginning of a new era. Though not wholly understood, though opposed by a
      powerful minority of our citizens, it stirred the consciousness of a
      national mission to which our people are invariably ready to respond.
      Since it was essentially experimental, and therefore not lacking in
      mistakes, there was ample opportunity for a criticism that seemed at times
      extremely plausible. The old and tried method of dealing with such anarchy
      as existed across our southern border was made to seem the safe one; while
      the new, because it was untried, was presented as disastrous. In reality,
      the reverse was the case.
    </p>
    <p>
      Mr. Wilson&rsquo;s opponents were, generally speaking, the commercial classes in
      the community, whose environment and training led them to demand a foreign
      policy similar to that of other great powers, a financial imperialism
      which is the logical counterpart in foreign affairs of the commercial
      exploitation of domestic national resources and domestic labour. These
      were the classes which combated the growth of democracy at home, in
      national and state politics. From their point of view&mdash;not that of
      the larger vision&mdash;they were consistent. On the other hand, the
      nation grasped the fact that to have one brand of democracy at home and
      another for dealing with foreign nations was not only illogical but, in
      the long run, would be suicidal to the Republic. And the people at large
      were committed to democratic progress at home. They were struggling for
      it.
    </p>
    <p>
      One of the most important issues of the American liberal movement early in
      this century had been that for the conservation of what remains of our
      natural resources of coal and metals and oil and timber and waterpower for
      the benefit of all the people, on the theory that these are the property
      of the people. But if the natural resources of this country belong to the
      people of the United States, those of Mexico belong to the people of
      Mexico. It makes no difference how &ldquo;lazy,&rdquo; ignorant, and indifferent to
      their own interests the Mexicans at present may be. And even more
      important in these liberal campaigns was the issue of the conservation of
      human resources&mdash;men and women and children who are forced by
      necessity to labour. These must be protected in health, given economic
      freedom and a just reward for their toil. The American democracy,
      committed to the principle of the conservation of domestic natural and
      human resources, could not without detriment to itself persist in a
      foreign policy that ignored them. For many years our own government had
      permitted the squandering of these resources by adventurous capitalists;
      and gradually, as we became a rich industrial nation, these capitalists
      sought profitable investments for their increasing surplus in foreign
      lands. Their manner of acquiring &ldquo;concessions&rdquo; in Mexico was quite similar
      to that by which they had seized because of the indifference and ignorance
      of our own people&mdash;our own mines and timber lands which our
      government held in trust. Sometimes these American &ldquo;concessions&rdquo; have been
      valid in law though the law itself violated a democratic principle; more
      often corrupt officials winked at violations of the law, enabling
      capitalists to absorb bogus claims.
    </p>
    <p>
      The various rulers of Mexico sold to American and other foreign
      capitalists the resources belonging to the people of their country, and
      pocketed, with their followers, the proceeds of the sale. Their control of
      the country rested upon force; the stability of the Diaz rule, for
      instance, depended upon the &ldquo;President&rsquo;s&rdquo; ability to maintain his
      dictatorship&mdash;a precarious guarantee to the titles he had given.
      Hence the premium on revolutions. There was always the incentive to the
      upstart political and military buccaneer to overthrow the dictator and
      gain possession of the spoils, to sell new doubtful concessions and levy
      new tribute on the capitalists holding claims from a former tyrant.
    </p>
    <p>
      The foreign capitalists appealed to their governments; commercial
      imperialism responded by dispatching military forces to protect the lives
      and &ldquo;property&rdquo; of its citizens, in some instances going so far as to take
      possession of the country. A classic case, as cited by Hobson, is
      Britain&rsquo;s South African War, in which the blood and treasure of the people
      of the United Kingdom were expended because British capitalists had found
      the Boers recalcitrant, bent on retaining their own country for
      themselves. To be sure, South Africa, like Mexico is rich in resources for
      which advancing civilization continually makes demands. And, in the case
      of Mexico, the products of the tropics, such as rubber, are increasingly
      necessary to the industrial powers of the temperate zone. On the other
      hand, if the exploiting nation aspire to self-government, the
      imperialistic method of obtaining these products by the selfish
      exploitation of the natural and human resources of the backward countries
      reacts so powerfully on the growth of democracy at home&mdash;and hence on
      the growth of democracy throughout the world&mdash;as to threaten the very
      future of civilization. The British Liberals, when they came into power,
      perceived this, and at once did their best to make amends to South Africa
      by granting her autonomy and virtual independence, linking her to Britain
      by the silken thread of Anglo-Saxon democratic culture. How strong this
      thread has proved is shown by the action of those of Dutch blood in the
      Dominion during the present war.
    </p>
    <p>
      Eventually, if democracy is not to perish from the face of the earth, some
      other than the crude imperialistic method of dealing with backward
      peoples, of obtaining for civilization the needed resources of their
      lands, must be inaugurated&mdash;a democratic method. And this is perhaps
      the supreme problem of democracy today. It demands for its solution a
      complete reversal of the established policy of imperialism, a new theory
      of international relationships, a mutual helpfulness and partnership
      between nations, even as democracy implies cooperation between individual
      citizens. Therefore President Wilson laid down the doctrine that American
      citizens enter Mexico at their own risk; that they must not expect that
      American blood will be shed or the nation&rsquo;s money be expended to protect
      their lives or the &ldquo;property&rdquo; they have acquired from Mexican dictators.
      This applies also to the small capitalists, the owners of the coffee
      plantations, as well as to those Americans in Mexico who are not
      capitalists but wage earners. The people of Mexico are entitled to try the
      experiment of self-determination. It is an experiment, we frankly
      acknowledge that fact, a democratic experiment dependent on physical
      science, social science, and scientific education. The other horn of the
      dilemma, our persistence in imperialism, is even worse&mdash;since by such
      persistence we destroy ourselves.
    </p>
    <p>
      A subjective judgment, in accordance with our own democratic standards, by
      the American Government as to the methods employed by a Huerta, for
      instance, is indeed demanded; not on the ground, however, that such
      methods are &ldquo;good&rdquo; or &ldquo;bad&rdquo;; but whether they are detrimental to Mexican
      self-determination, and hence to the progress of our own democracy.
    </p>
    <p>
      <a name="link2H_4_0002" id="link2H_4_0002">
      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
    </p>
    <div style="height: 4em;">
      <br /><br /><br /><br />
    </div>
    <h2>
      II.
    </h2>
    <p>
      If America had started to prepare when Belgium was invaded, had entered
      the war when the Lusitania was sunk, Germany might by now have been
      defeated, hundreds of thousands of lives might have been spared. All this
      may be admitted. Yet, looking backward, it is easy to read the reason for
      our hesitancy in our national character and traditions. We were pacifists,
      yes, but pacifists of a peculiar kind. One of our greatest American
      prophets, William James, knew that there was an issue for which we were
      ready to fight, for which we were willing to make the extreme sacrifice,&mdash;and
      that issue he defined as &ldquo;war against war.&rdquo; It remained for America to
      make the issue.
    </p>
    <p>
      Peoples do not rush to arms unless their national existence is threatened.
      It is what may be called the environmental cause that drives nations
      quickly into war. It drove the Entente nations into war, though
      incidentally they were struggling for certain democratic institutions, for
      international justice. But in the case of America, the environmental cause
      was absent. Whether or not our national existence was or is actually
      threatened, the average American does not believe that it is. He was
      called upon to abandon his tradition, to mingle in a European conflict, to
      fight for an idea alone. Ideas require time to develop, to seize the
      imagination of masses. And it must be remembered that in 1914 the great
      issue had not been defined. Curiously enough, now that it is defined, it
      proves to be an American issue&mdash;a logical and positive projection of
      our Washingtonian tradition and Monroe doctrine. These had for their
      object the preservation and development of democracy, the banishment from
      the Western Hemisphere of European imperialistic conflict and war. We are
      now, with the help of our allies, striving to banish these things from the
      face of the earth. It is undoubtedly the greatest idea for which man has
      been summoned to make the supreme sacrifice.
    </p>
    <p>
      Its evolution has been traced. Democracy was the issue in the Spanish War,
      when we fought a weak nation. We have followed its broader application to
      Mexico, when we were willing to ignore the taunts and insults of another
      weak nation, even the loss of &ldquo;prestige,&rdquo; for the sake of the larger good.
      And we have now the clue to the President&rsquo;s interpretation of the nation&rsquo;s
      mind during the first three years of the present war. We were willing to
      bear the taunts and insults of Germany so long as it appeared that a
      future world peace night best be brought about by the preservation of
      neutrality, by turning the weight of the impartial public opinion of our
      democracy and that of other neutrals against militarism and imperialism.
      Our national aim was ever consistent with the ideal of William James, to
      advance democracy and put an end to the evil of war.
    </p>
    <p>
      The only sufficient reason for the abandonment of the Washingtonian policy
      is the furtherance of the object for which it was inaugurated, the advance
      of democracy. And we had established the precedent, with Spain and Mexico,
      that the Republic shall engage in no war of imperialistic conquest. We war
      only in behalf of, or in defence of, democracy.
    </p>
    <p>
      Before the entrance of America, however, the issues of the European War
      were by no means clear cut along democratic lines. What kind of democracy
      were the allies fighting for? Nowhere and at no time had it been defined
      by any of their statesmen. On the contrary, the various allied governments
      had entered into compacts for the transference of territory in the event
      of victory; and had even, by the offer of rewards, sought to play one
      small nation against another. This secret diplomacy of bargains, of
      course, was a European heritage, the result of an imperialistic
      environment which the American did not understand, and from which he was
      happily free. Its effect on France is peculiarly enlightening. The
      hostility of European governments, due to their fear of her republican
      institutions, retarded her democratic growth, and her history during the
      reign of Napoleon III is one of intrigue for aggrandizement differing from
      Bismarck&rsquo;s only in the fact that it was unsuccessful. Britain, because she
      was separated from the continent and protected by her fleet, virtually
      withdrew from European affairs in the latter part of the nineteenth
      century, and, as a result, made great strides in democracy. The
      aggressions of Germany forced Britain in self-defence into coalitions.
      Because of her power and wealth she became the Entente leader, yet her
      liberal government was compelled to enter into secret agreements with
      certain allied governments in order to satisfy what they deemed to be
      their needs and just ambitions. She had honestly sought, before the war,
      to come to terms with Germany, and had even proposed gradual disarmament.
      But, despite the best intentions, circumstances and environment, as well
      as the precarious situation of her empire, prevented her from liberalizing
      her foreign relations to conform with the growth of democracy within the
      United Kingdom and the Dominions. Americans felt a profound pity for
      Belgium. But she was not, as Cuba had been, our affair. The great majority
      of our citizens sympathized with the Entente, regarded with amazement and
      disgust the sudden disclosure of the true character of the German
      militaristic government. Yet for the average American the war wore the
      complexion of other European conflicts, was one involving a Balance of
      Power, mysterious and inexplicable. To him the underlying issue was not
      democratic, but imperialistic; and this was partly because he was unable
      to make a mental connection between a European war and the brand of
      democracy he recognized. Preaching and propaganda fail unless it can be
      brought home to a people that something dear to their innermost nature is
      at stake, that the fate of the thing they most desire, and are willing to
      make sacrifices for, hangs in the balance.
    </p>
    <p>
      During a decade the old political parties, between which there was now
      little more than an artificial alignment, had been breaking up. Americans
      were absorbed in the great liberal movement begun under the leadership of
      President Roosevelt, the result of which was to transform democracy from a
      static to a pragmatic and evolutionary conception,&mdash;in order to meet
      and correct new and unforeseen evils. Political freedom was seen to be of
      little worth unless also accompanied by the economic freedom the nation
      had enjoyed before the advent of industrialism. Clerks and farmers,
      professional men and shopkeepers and artisans were ready to follow the
      liberal leaders in states and nation; intellectual elements from colleges
      and universities were enlisted. Paralleling the movement, at times
      mingling with it, was the revolt of labour, manifested not only in
      political action, but in strikes and violence. Readily accessible books
      and magazines together with club and forum lectures in cities, towns, and
      villages were rapidly educating the population in social science, and the
      result was a growing independent vote to make politicians despair.
    </p>
    <p>
      Here was an instance of a democratic culture growing in isolation,
      resentful of all external interference. To millions of Americans&mdash;especially
      in our middle western and western states&mdash;bent upon social reforms,
      the European War appeared as an arresting influence. American
      participation meant the triumph of the forces of reaction. Colour was lent
      to this belief because the conservative element which had opposed social
      reforms was loudest in its demand for intervention. The wealthy and
      travelled classes organized preparedness parades and distributed
      propaganda. In short, those who had apparently done their utmost to oppose
      democracy at home were most insistent that we should embark upon a war for
      democracy across the seas. Again, what kind of democracy? Obviously a
      status quo, commercially imperialistic democracy, which the awakening
      liberal was bent upon abolishing.
    </p>
    <p>
      There is undoubtedly in such an office as the American presidency some
      virtue which, in times of crisis, inspires in capable men an intellectual
      and moral growth proportional to developing events. Lincoln, our most
      striking example, grew more between 1861 and 1865 than during all the
      earlier years of his life. Nor is the growth of democratic leaders, when
      seen through the distorted passions of their day, apparently a consistent
      thing. Greatness, near at hand, is startlingly like inconsistency; it
      seems at moments to vacillate, to turn back upon and deny itself, and thus
      lays itself open to seemingly plausible criticism by politicians and time
      servers and all who cry out for precedent. Yet it is an interesting and
      encouraging fact that the faith of democratic peoples goes out, and goes
      out alone, to leaders who&mdash;whatever their minor faults and failings&mdash;do
      not fear to reverse themselves when occasion demands; to enunciate new
      doctrines, seemingly in contradiction to former assertions, to meet new
      crises. When a democratic leader who has given evidence of greatness
      ceases to develop new ideas, he loses the public confidence. He flops back
      into the ranks of the conservative he formerly opposed, who catch up with
      him only when he ceases to grow.
    </p>
    <p>
      In 1916 the majority of the American people elected Mr. Wilson in the
      belief that he would keep them out of war. In 1917 he entered the war with
      the nation behind him. A recalcitrant Middle West was the first to fill
      its quota of volunteers, and we witnessed the extraordinary spectacle of
      the endorsement of conscription: What had happened? A very simple, but a
      very great thing Mr. Wilson had made the issue of the war a democratic
      issue, an American issue, in harmony with our national hopes and
      traditions. But why could not this issue have been announced in 1914 or
      1915? The answer seems to be that peoples, as well as their leaders and
      interpreters, must grow to meet critical situations. In 1861 the moral
      idea of the Civil War was obscured and hidden by economic and material
      interests. The Abraham Lincoln who entered the White House in 1861 was
      indeed the same man who signed the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863; and
      yet, in a sense, he was not the same man; events and responsibilities had
      effected a profound but logical growth in his personality. And the people
      of the Union were not ready to endorse Emancipation in 1861. In 1863, in
      the darkest hour of the war, the spirit of the North responded to the
      call, and, despite the vilification of the President, was true to him to
      victory. More significant still, in view of the events of today, is what
      then occurred in England. The British Government was unfriendly; the
      British people as a whole had looked upon our Civil War very much in the
      same light as the American people regarded the present war at its
      inception&mdash;which is to say that the economic and materialistic issue
      seemed to overshadow the moral one. When Abraham Lincoln proclaimed it to
      be a war for human freedom, the sentiment of the British people changed&mdash;of
      the British people as distinct from the governing classes; and the textile
      workers of the northern counties, whose mills could not get cotton on
      account of the blockade, declared their willingness to suffer and starve
      if the slaves in America might be freed.
    </p>
    <p>
      Abraham Lincoln at that time represented the American people as the
      British Government did not represent the British people. We are concerned
      today with peoples rather than governments.
    </p>
    <p>
      It remained for an American President to announce the moral issue of the
      present war, and thus to solidify behind him, not only the liberal mind of
      America, but the liberal elements within the nations of Europe. He became
      the democratic leader of the world. The issue, simply stated, is the
      advancement of democracy and peace. They are inseparable. Democracy, for
      progress, demands peace. It had reached a stage, when, in a contracting
      world, it could no longer advance through isolation: its very existence in
      every country was threatened, not only by the partisans of reaction from
      within, but by the menace from without of a militaristic and imperialistic
      nation determined to crush it, restore superimposed authority, and
      dominate the globe. Democracy, divided against itself, cannot stand. A
      league of democratic nations, of democratic peoples, has become
      imperative. Hereafter, if democracy wins, self-determination, and not
      imperialistic exploitation, is to be the universal rule. It is the
      extension, on a world scale, of Mr. Wilson&rsquo;s Mexican policy, the
      application of democratic principles to international relationships, and
      marks the inauguration of a new era. We resort to force against force, not
      for dominion, but to make the world safe for the idea on which we believe
      the future of civilization depends, the sacred right of self-government.
      We stand prepared to treat with the German people when they are ready to
      cast off autocracy and militarism. Our attitude toward them is precisely
      our attitude toward the Mexican People. We believe, and with good reason,
      that the German system of education is authoritative and false, and was
      more or less deliberately conceived in order to warp the nature and
      produce complexes in the mind of the German people for the end of
      preserving and perpetuating the power of the Junkers. We have no quarrel
      with the duped and oppressed, but we war against the agents of oppression.
      To the conservative mind such an aspiration appears chimerical. But
      America, youngest of the nations, was born when modern science was
      gathering the momentum which since has enabled it to overcome, with a
      bewildering rapidity, many evils previously held by superstition to be
      ineradicable. As a corollary to our democratic creed, we accepted the
      dictum that to human intelligence all things are possible. The virtue of
      this dictum lies not in dogma, but in an indomitable attitude of mind to
      which the world owes its every advance in civilization; quixotic, perhaps,
      but necessary to great accomplishment. In searching for a present-day
      protagonist, no happier example could be found than Mr. Henry Ford, who
      exhibits the characteristic American mixture of the practical and the
      ideal. He introduces into industry humanitarian practices that even tend
      to increase the vast fortune which by his own efforts he has accumulated.
      He sees that democratic peoples do not desire to go to war, he does not
      believe that war is necessary and inevitable, he lays himself open to
      ridicule by financing a Peace Mission. Circumstances force him to abandon
      his project, but he is not for one moment discouraged. His intention
      remains. He throws all his energy and wealth into a war to end war, and
      the value of his contribution is inestimable.
    </p>
    <p>
      A study of Mr. Ford&rsquo;s mental processes and acts illustrates the true mind
      of America. In the autumn of 1916 Mr. Wilson declared that &ldquo;the people of
      the United States want to be sure what they are fighting about, and they
      want to be sure that they are fighting for the things that will bring the
      world justice and peace. Define the elements; let us know that we are not
      fighting for the prevalence of this nation over that, for the ambitions of
      this group of nations as compared with the ambitions of that group of
      nations, let us once be convinced that we are called in to a great
      combination for the rights of mankind, and America will unite her force
      and spill her blood for the great things she has always believed in and
      followed.&rdquo;
     </p>
    <p>
      &ldquo;America is always ready to fight for the things which are American.&rdquo; Even
      in these sombre days that mark the anniversary of our entrance into the
      war. But let it be remembered that it was in the darkest days of the Civil
      War Abraham Lincoln boldly proclaimed the democratic, idealistic issue of
      that struggle. The Russian Revolution, which we must seek to understand
      and not condemn, the Allied defeats that are its consequences, can only
      make our purpose the firmer to put forth all our strength for the building
      up of a better world. The President&rsquo;s masterly series of state papers,
      distributed in all parts of the globe, have indeed been so many
      Proclamations of Emancipation for the world&rsquo;s oppressed. Not only powerful
      nations shall cease to exploit little nations, but powerful individuals
      shall cease to exploit their fellow men. Henceforth no wars for dominion
      shall be waged, and to this end secret treaties shall be abolished.
      Peoples through their representatives shall make their own treaties. And
      just as democracy insures to the individual the greatest amount of
      self-determination, nations also shall have self-determination, in order
      that each shall be free to make its world contribution. All citizens have
      duties to perform toward their fellow citizens; all democratic nations
      must be interdependent.
    </p>
    <p>
      With this purpose America has entered the war. But it implies that our own
      household must be swept and cleaned. The injustices and inequalities
      existing in our own country, the false standards of worth, the
      materialism, the luxury and waste must be purged from our midst.
    </p>
    <p>
      <a name="link2H_4_0003" id="link2H_4_0003">
      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
    </p>
    <div style="height: 4em;">
      <br /><br /><br /><br />
    </div>
    <h2>
      III.
    </h2>
    <p>
      In fighting Germany we are indeed fighting an evil Will&mdash;evil because
      it seeks to crush the growth of individual and national freedom. Its
      object is to put the world back under the thrall of self-constituted
      authority. So long as this Will can compel the bodies of soldiers to do
      its bidding, these bodies must be destroyed. Until the Will behind them is
      broken, the world cannot be free. Junkerism is the final expression of
      reaction, organized to the highest efficiency. The war against the Junkers
      marks the consummation of a long struggle for human liberty in all lands,
      symbolizes the real cleavage dividing the world. As in the French
      Revolution and the wars that followed it, the true significance of this
      war is social. But today the Russian Revolution sounds the keynote.
      Revolutions tend to express the extremes of the philosophies of their
      times&mdash;human desires, discontents, and passions that cannot be
      organized. The French Revolution was a struggle for political freedom; the
      underlying issue of the present war is economic freedom&mdash;without
      which political freedom is of no account. It will not, therefore, suffice
      merely to crush the Junkers, and with them militarism and autocracy.
      Unless, as the fruit of this appalling bloodshed and suffering, the
      democracies achieve economic freedom, the war will have been fought in
      vain. More revolutions, wastage and bloodshed will follow, the world will
      be reduced to absolute chaos unless, in the more advanced democracies, an
      intelligent social order tending to remove the causes of injustice and
      discontent can be devised and ready for inauguration. This new social
      order depends, in turn, upon a world order of mutually helpful, free
      peoples, a league of Nations.&mdash;If the world is to be made safe for
      democracy, this democratic plan must be ready for the day when the German
      Junker is beaten and peace is declared.
    </p>
    <p>
      The real issue of our time is industrial democracy we must face that fact.
      And those in America and the Entente nations who continue to oppose it
      will do so at their peril. Fortunately, as will be shown, that element of
      our population which may be designated as domestic Junkers is capable of
      being influenced by contemporary currents of thought, is awakening to the
      realization of social conditions deplorable and dangerous. Prosperity and
      power had made them blind and arrogant. Their enthusiasm for the war was,
      however, genuine; the sacrifices they are making are changing and
      softening them; but as yet they can scarcely be expected, as a class, to
      rejoice over the revelation&mdash;just beginning to dawn upon their minds&mdash;that
      victory for the Allies spells the end of privilege. Their conception of
      democracy remains archaic, while wealth is inherently conservative. Those
      who possess it in America have as a rule received an education in terms of
      an obsolete economics, of the thought of an age gone by. It is only within
      the past few years that our colleges and universities have begun to teach
      modern economics, social science and psychology&mdash;and this in the face
      of opposition from trustees. Successful business men, as a rule, have had
      neither the time nor the inclination to read books which they regard as
      visionary, as subversive to an order by which they have profited. And that
      some Americans are fools, and have been dazzled in Europe by the glamour
      of a privilege not attainable at home, is a deplorable yet indubitable
      fact. These have little sympathy with democracy; they have even been heard
      to declare that we have no right to dictate to another nation, even an
      enemy nation, what form of government it shall assume. We have no right to
      demand, when peace comes, that the negotiations must be with the
      representatives of the German people. These are they who deplore the
      absence among us of a tradition of monarchy, since the American people
      &ldquo;should have something to look up to.&rdquo; But this state of mind, which needs
      no comment, is comparatively rare, and represents an extreme. We are not
      lacking, however, in the type of conservative who, innocent of a knowledge
      of psychology, insists that &ldquo;human nature cannot be changed,&rdquo; and that the
      &ldquo;survival of the fittest&rdquo; is the law of life, yet these would deny Darwin
      if he were a contemporary. They reject the idea that society can be
      organized by intelligence, and war ended by eliminating its causes from
      the social order. On the contrary they cling to the orthodox contention
      that war is a necessary and salutary thing, and proclaim that the American
      fibre was growing weak and flabby from luxury and peace, curiously
      ignoring the fact that their own economic class, the small percentage of
      our population owning sixty per cent. of the wealth of the country, and
      which therefore should be most debilitated by luxury, was most eager for
      war, and since war has been declared has most amply proved its courage and
      fighting quality. This, however, and other evidences of the patriotic
      sacrifices of those of our countrymen who possess wealth, prove that they
      are still Americans, and encourages the hope and belief that as Americans
      they ultimately will do their share toward a democratic solution of the
      problem of society. Many of them are capable of vision, and are beginning
      to see the light today.
    </p>
    <p>
      In America we succeeded in eliminating hereditary power, in obtaining a
      large measure of political liberty, only to see the rise of an economic
      power, and the consequent loss of economic liberty. The industrial
      development of the United States was of course a necessary and desirable
      thing, but the economic doctrine which formed the basis of American
      institutions proved to be unsuited to industrialism, and introduced
      unforeseen evils that were a serious menace to the Republic. An
      individualistic economic philosophy worked admirably while there was ample
      land for the pioneer, equality of opportunity to satisfy the individual
      initiative of the enterprising. But what is known as industrialism brought
      in its train fear and favour, privilege and poverty, slums, disease, and
      municipal vice, fostered a too rapid immigration, established in America a
      tenant system alien to our traditions. The conditions which existed before
      the advent of industrialism are admirably pictured, for instance, in the
      autobiography of Mr. Charles Francis Adams, when he describes his native
      town of Quincy in the first half of the Nineteenth Century. In those early
      communities, poverty was negligible, there was no great contrast between
      rich and poor; the artisan, the farmer, the well-to-do merchant met on
      terms of mutual self-respect, as man to man; economic class consciousness
      was non-existent; education was so widespread that European travellers
      wonderingly commented on the fact that we had no &ldquo;peasantry&rdquo;; and with few
      exceptions every citizen owned a piece of land and a home. Property, a
      refuge a man may call his own, and on which he may express his
      individuality, is essential to happiness and self-respect. Today, less
      than two thirds of our farmers own their land, while vast numbers of our
      working men and women possess nothing but the labour of their hands. The
      designation of labour as &ldquo;property&rdquo; by our courts only served to tighten
      the bonds, by obstructing for a time the movement to decrease the tedious
      and debilitating hours of contact of the human organism with the machine,&mdash;a
      menace to the future of the race, especially in the case of women and
      children. If labour is &ldquo;property,&rdquo; wretches driven by economic necessity
      have indeed only the choice of a change of masters. In addition to the
      manual workers, an army of clerical workers of both sexes likewise became
      tenants, and dependents who knew not the satisfaction of a real home.
    </p>
    <p>
      Such conditions gradually brought about a profound discontent, a grouping
      of classes. Among the comparatively prosperous there was set up a social
      competition in luxury that was the bane of large and small communities.
      Skilled labour banded itself into unions, employers organized to oppose
      them, and the result was a class conflict never contemplated by the
      founders of the Republic, repugnant to democracy which by its very nature
      depends for its existence on the elimination of classes. In addition to
      this, owing to the unprecedented immigration of ignorant Europeans to
      supply the labour demand, we acquired a sinister proletariat of unskilled
      economic slaves. Before the war labour discovered its strength; since the
      war began, especially in the allied nations with quasi-democratic
      institutions, it is aware of its power to exert a leverage capable of
      paralyzing industry for a period sufficient to destroy the chances of
      victory. The probability of the occurrence of such a calamity depends
      wholly on whether or not the workman can be convinced that it is his war,
      for he will not exert himself to perpetuate a social order in which he has
      lost faith, even though he now obtains a considerable increase in wages.
      Agreements entered into with the government by union leaders will not hold
      him if at any time he fails to be satisfied that the present world
      conflict will not result in a greater social justice. This fact has been
      demonstrated by what is known as the &ldquo;shop steward&rdquo; movement in England,
      where the workers repudiated the leaders&rsquo; agreements and everywhere
      organized local strikes. And in America, the unskilled workers are largely
      outside of the unions.
    </p>
    <p>
      The workman has a natural and laudable desire to share more fully in the
      good things of life. And it is coming to be recognized that material
      prosperity, up to a certain point, is the foundation of mental and
      spiritual welfare: clean and comfortable surroundings, beauty, rational
      amusements, opportunity for a rational satisfaction of the human
      instincts are essential to contentment and progress. The individual, of
      course, must be enlightened; and local labour unions, recognizing this,
      are spending considerable sums all over the country on schools to educate
      their members. If a workman is a profiteer, he is more to be excused than
      the business profiteer, against whom his anger is directed; if he is a
      spendthrift, prodigality is a natural consequence of rapid acquisition. We
      have been a nation of spendthrifts.
    </p>
    <p>
      A failure to grasp the psychology of the worker involves disastrous
      consequences. A discussion as to whether or not his attitude is
      unpatriotic and selfish is futile. No more profound mistake could be made
      than to attribute to any element of the population motives wholly base.
      Human nature is neither all black nor all white, yet is capable of supreme
      sacrifices when adequately appealed to. What we must get into our minds is
      the fact that a social order that insured a large measure of democracy in
      the early days of the Republic is inadequate to meet modern industrial
      conditions. Higher wages, material prosperity alone will not suffice to
      satisfy aspirations for a fuller self-realization, once the method by
      which these aspirations can be gained is glimpsed. For it cannot be too
      often repeated that the unquenchable conflicts are those waged for ideas
      and not dollars. These are tinged with religious emotion.
    </p>
    <p>
      <a name="link2H_4_0004" id="link2H_4_0004">
      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
    </p>
    <div style="height: 4em;">
      <br /><br /><br /><br />
    </div>
    <h2>
      IV.
    </h2>
    <p>
      Mr. Wilson&rsquo;s messages to the American people and to the world have
      proclaimed a new international order, a League of Democracies. And in a
      recent letter to New Jersey Democrats we find him warning his party, or
      more properly the nation, of the domestic social changes necessarily
      flowing from his international program. While rightly resolved to
      prosecute the war on the battle lines to the utmost limit of American
      resources, he points out that the true significance of the conflict lies
      in &ldquo;revolutionary change.&rdquo; &ldquo;Economic and social forces,&rdquo; he says, &ldquo;are
      being released upon the world, whose effect no political seer dare to
      conjecture.&rdquo; And we &ldquo;must search our hearts through and through and make
      them ready for the birth of a new day&mdash;a day we hope and believe of
      greater opportunity and greater prosperity for the average mass of
      struggling men and women.&rdquo; He recognizes that the next great step in the
      development of democracy which the war must bring about&mdash;is the
      emancipation of labour; to use his own phrase, the redemption of masses of
      men and women from &ldquo;economic serfdom.&rdquo; &ldquo;The old party slogans,&rdquo; he
      declares, &ldquo;will mean nothing to the future.&rdquo;
     </p>
    <p>
      Judging from this announcement, the President seems prepared to condemn
      boldly all the rotten timbers of the social structure that have outlived
      their usefulness&mdash;a position that hitherto no responsible politician
      has dared to take. Politicians, on the contrary, have revered the dead
      wood, have sought to shore the old timbers for their own purposes. But so
      far as any party is concerned, Mr. Wilson stands alone. Both of the two
      great parties, the Republican and the Democratic, in order to make a show
      of keeping abreast of the times, have merely patched their platforms with
      the new ideas. The Socialist Party in the United States is relatively
      small, is divided against itself, and has given no evidence of a
      leadership of broad sanity and vision. It is fortunate we have been spared
      in this country the formation of a political labour party, because such a
      party would have been composed of manual workers alone, and hence would
      have tended further to develop economic class consciousness, to
      crystallize class antagonisms. Today, however, neither the Republican nor
      the Democratic party represents the great issue of the times; the cleavage
      between them is wholly artificial. The formation of a Liberal Party, with
      a platform avowedly based on modern social science, has become essential.
      Such a party, to be in harmony with our traditions and our creed, to
      arrest in our democracy the process of class stratification which
      threatens to destroy it, must not draw its members from the ranks of
      manual labour alone, but from all elements of our population. It should
      contain all the liberal professions, and clerks and shopkeepers, as well
      as manual workers; administrators, and even those employers who have
      become convinced that our present economic system does not suffice to meet
      the needs of the day. In short, membership in such a party, as far as
      possible, should not be based upon occupation or economic status, but on
      an honest difference of view from that of the conservative opposition.
      This would be a distinctly American solution. In order to form such a
      party a campaign of education will be necessary. For today Mr. Wilson&rsquo;s
      strength is derived from the independent vote representing the faith of
      the people as a whole; but the majority of those who support the
      President, while they ardently desire the abolition in the world of
      absolute monarchy, of militarism and commercial imperialism, while they
      are anxious that this war shall expedite and not retard the social reforms
      in which they are interested, have as yet but a vague conception of the
      social order which these reforms imply.
    </p>
    <p>
      It marks a signal advance in democracy when liberal opinion in any nation
      turns for guidance and support to a statesman of another nation. No
      clearer sign of the times could be desired than the fact that our American
      President has suddenly become the liberal leader of the world. The
      traveller in France, and especially in Britain, meets on all sides
      striking evidence of this. In these countries, until America&rsquo;s entrance
      into the war, liberals had grown more and more dissatisfied with the
      failure of their governments to define in democratic terms the issue of
      the conflict, had resented the secret inter-allied compacts, savouring of
      imperialism and containing the germs of future war. They are now looking
      across the Atlantic for leadership. In France M. Albert Thomas declared
      that Woodrow Wilson had given voice to the aspirations of his party, while
      a prominent Liberal in England announced in a speech that it had remained
      for the American President to express the will and purpose of the British
      people. The new British Labour Party and the Inter-Allied Labour and
      Socialist Conferences have adopted Mr. Wilson&rsquo;s program and have made use
      of his striking phrases. But we have between America and Britain this
      difference: in America the President stands virtually alone, without a
      party behind him representing his views; in Britain the general democratic
      will of the nation is now being organized, but has obtained as yet no
      spokesman in the government.
    </p>
    <p>
      Extraordinary symptomatic phenomena have occurred in Russia as well as in
      Britain. In Russia the rebellion of an awakening people against an
      age-long tyranny has almost at once leaped to the issue of the day, taken
      on the complexion of a struggle for industrial democracy. Whether the
      Germans shall be able to exploit the country, bring about a reaction and
      restore for a time monarchical institutions depends largely upon the
      fortunes of the war. In Russia there is revolution, with concomitant
      chaos; but in Britain there is evolution, an orderly attempt of a people
      long accustomed to progress in self-government to establish a new social
      order, peacefully and scientifically, and in accordance with a traditional
      political procedure.
    </p>
    <p>
      The recent development of the British Labour Party, although of deep
      significance to Americans, has taken place almost without comment in this
      country. It was formally established in 1900, and was then composed of
      manual workers alone. In 1906, out of 50 candidates at the polls, 39 were
      elected to Parliament; in 1910, 42 were elected. The Parliamentary Labour
      Party, so called, has now been amalgamated with four and a half millions
      of Trade Unionists, and with the three and a half millions of members of
      the Co-operative Wholesale Society and the Co-operative Union. Allowing
      for duplication of membership, these three organizations&mdash;according
      to Mr. Sidney Webb&mdash;probably include two fifths of the population of
      the United Kingdom. &ldquo;So great an aggregation of working class
      organizations,&rdquo; he says, &ldquo;has never come shoulder to shoulder in any
      country.&rdquo; Other smaller societies and organizations are likewise embraced,
      including the Socialists. And now that the suffrage has been extended,
      provision is made for the inclusion of women. The new party is organizing
      in from three to four hundred constituencies, and at the next general
      election is not unlikely to gain control of the political balance of
      power.
    </p>
    <p>
      With the majority of Americans, however, the word &ldquo;labour&rdquo; as designating
      a party arouses suspicion and distrust. By nature and tradition we are
      inclined to deplore and oppose any tendency toward the stratification of
      class antagonisms&mdash;the result of industrial discontent&mdash;into
      political groups. The British tradition is likewise hostile to such a
      tendency. But in Britain the industrial ferment has gone much further than
      with us, and such a result was inevitable. By taking advantage of the
      British experience, of the closer ties now being knit between the two
      democracies, we may in America be spared a stage which in Britain was
      necessary. Indeed, the program of the new British Labour Party seems to
      point to a distinctly American solution, one in harmony with the steady
      growth of Anglo-Saxon democracy. For it is now announced that the word
      &ldquo;labour,&rdquo; as applied to the new party, does not mean manual labour alone,
      but also mental labour. The British unions have gradually developed and
      placed in power leaders educated in social science, who have now come into
      touch with the intellectual leaders of the United Kingdom, with the
      sociologists, economists, and social scientists. The surprising and
      encouraging result of such association is the announcement that the new
      Labour Party is today publicly thrown open to all workers, both by hand
      and by brain, with the object of securing for these the full fruits of
      their industry. This means the inclusion of physicians, professors,
      writers, architects, engineers, and inventors, of lawyers who no longer
      regard their profession as a bulwark of the status quo; of clerks, of
      administrators of the type evolved by the war, who indeed have gained
      their skill under the old order but who now in a social spirit are
      dedicating their gifts to the common weal, organizing and directing vast
      enterprises for their governments. In short, all useful citizens who make
      worthy contributions&mdash;as distinguished from parasites, profiteers,
      and drones, are invited to be members; there is no class distinction here.
      The fortunes of such a party are, of course, dependent upon the military
      success of the allied armies and navies. But it has defined the kind of
      democracy the Allies are fighting for, and thus has brought about an
      unqualified endorsement of the war by those elements of the population
      which hitherto have felt the issue to be imperialistic and vague rather
      than democratic and clear cut. President Wilson&rsquo;s international program is
      approved of and elaborated.
    </p>
    <p>
      The Report on Reconstruction of the new British Labour Party is perhaps
      the most important political document presented to the world since the
      Declaration of Independence. And like the Declaration, it is written in
      the pure English that alone gives the high emotional quality of sincerity.
      The phrases in which it tersely describes its objects are admirable. &ldquo;What
      is to be reconstructed after the war is over is not this or that
      government department, this or that piece of social machinery, but Society
      itself.&rdquo; There is to be a systematic approach towards a &ldquo;healthy equality
      of material circumstance for every person born into the world, and not an
      enforced dominion over subject nations, subject colonies, subject classes,
      or a subject sex.&rdquo; In industry as well as in government the social order
      is to be based &ldquo;on that equal freedom, that general consciousness of
      consent, and that widest participation in power, both economic and
      political, which is characteristic of democracy.&rdquo; But all this, it should
      be noted, is not to be achieved in a year or two of &ldquo;feverish
      reconstruction&rdquo;; &ldquo;each brick that the Labour Party helps to lay shall go
      to erect the structure it intends and no other.&rdquo;
     </p>
    <p>
      In considering the main features of this program, one must have in mind
      whether these are a logical projection and continuation of the Anglo-Saxon
      democratic tradition, or whether they constitute an absolute break with
      that tradition. The only valid reason for the adoption of such a program
      in America would be, of course, the restoration of some such equality of
      opportunity and economic freedom as existed in our Republic before we
      became an industrial nation. &ldquo;The first condition of democracy,&rdquo;&mdash;to
      quote again from the program, &ldquo;is effective personal freedom.&rdquo;
     </p>
    <p>
      What is called the &ldquo;Universal Enforcement of the National Minimum&rdquo;
       contemplates the extension of laws already on the statute books in order
      to prevent the extreme degradation of the standard of life brought about
      by the old economic system under industrialism. A living minimum wage is
      to be established. The British Labour Party intends &ldquo;to secure to every
      member of the community, in good times and bad alike... all the requisites
      of healthy life and worthy citizenship.&rdquo;
     </p>
    <p>
      After the war there is to be no cheap labour market, nor are the millions
      of workers and soldiers to fall into the clutches of charity; but it shall
      be a national obligation to provide each of these with work according to
      his capacity. In order to maintain the demand for labour at a uniform
      level, the government is to provide public works. The population is to be
      rehoused in suitable dwellings, both in rural districts and town slums;
      new and more adequate schools and training colleges are to be inaugurated;
      land is to be reclaimed and afforested, and gradually brought under common
      ownership; railways and canals are to be reorganized and nationalized,
      mines and electric power systems. One of the significant proposals under
      this head is that which demands the retention of the centralization of the
      purchase of raw materials brought about by the war.
    </p>
    <p>
      In order to accomplish these objects there must be a &ldquo;Revolution in
      National Finance.&rdquo; The present method of raising funds is denounced; and
      it is pointed out that only one quarter of the colossal expenditure made
      necessary by the war has been raised by taxation, and that the three
      quarters borrowed at onerous rates is sure to be a burden on the nation&rsquo;s
      future. The capital needed, when peace comes, to ensure a happy and
      contented democracy must be procured without encroaching on the minimum
      standard of life, and without hampering production. Indirect taxation must
      therefore be concentrated on those luxuries of which it is desirable that
      the consumption be discouraged. The steadily rising unearned increment of
      urban and mineral land ought, by appropriate direct taxation, to be
      brought into the public exchequer; &ldquo;the definite teachings of economic
      science are no longer to be disregarded.&rdquo; Hence incomes are to be taxed
      above the necessary cost of family maintenance, private fortunes during
      life and at death; while a special capital levy must be made to pay off a
      substantial portion of the national debt.
    </p>
    <p>
      &ldquo;The Democratic Control of Industry&rdquo; contemplates the progressive
      elimination of the private capitalist and the setting free of all who work
      by hand and brain for the welfare of all.
    </p>
    <p>
      The Surplus Wealth is to be expended for the Common Good. That which
      Carlyle designates as the &ldquo;inward spiritual,&rdquo; in contrast to the &ldquo;outward
      economical,&rdquo; is also to be provided for. &ldquo;Society,&rdquo; says the document,
      &ldquo;like the individual, does not live by bread alone, does not exist only
      for perpetual wealth production.&rdquo; First of all, there is to be education
      according to the highest modern standard; and along with education, the
      protection and advancement of the public health, &lsquo;mens sana in corpore
      sano&rsquo;. While large sums must be set aside, not only for original research
      in every branch of knowledge, but for the promotion of music, literature,
      and fine art, upon which &ldquo;any real development of civilization
      fundamentally depends.&rdquo;
     </p>
    <p>
      In regard to the British Empire, the Labour Party urges self-government
      for any people, whatever its colour, proving itself capable, and the right
      of that people to the proceeds of its own toil upon the resources of its
      territory. An unequivocal stand is taken for the establishment, as a part
      of the treaty of peace, of a Universal Society of Nations; and recognizing
      that the future progress of democracy depends upon co-operation and
      fellowship between liberals of all countries, the maintenance of intimate
      relationships is advocated with liberals oversea.
    </p>
    <p>
      Finally, a scientific investigation of each succeeding problem in
      government is insisted upon, and a much more rapid dissemination among the
      people of the science that exists. &ldquo;A plutocratic party may choose to
      ignore science, but no labour party can hope to maintain its position
      unless its proposals are, in fact, the outcome of the best political
      science of its time.&rdquo;
     </p>
    <p>
      <a name="link2H_4_0005" id="link2H_4_0005">
      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
    </p>
    <div style="height: 4em;">
      <br /><br /><br /><br />
    </div>
    <h2>
      V.
    </h2>
    <p>
      There are, it will be seen, some elements in the program of the new
      British Labour Party apparently at variance with American and English
      institutions, traditions, and ideas. We are left in doubt, for instance,
      in regard to its attitude toward private property. The instinct for
      property is probably innate in humanity, and American conservatism in this
      regard is, according to certain modern economists, undoubtedly sound. A
      man should be permitted to acquire at least as much property as is
      required for the expression of his personality; such a wise limitation,
      also, would abolish the evil known as absentee ownership. Again, there
      will arise in many minds the question whether the funds for the plan of
      National finance outlined in the program may be obtained without seriously
      deranging the economic system of the nation and of the world. The older
      school denounces the program as Utopian. On the other hand, economists of
      the modern school who have been consulted have declared it practical. It
      is certain that before the war began it would not have been thought
      possible to raise the billions which in four years have been expended on
      sheer destruction; and one of our saddest reflections today must be of
      regret that a small portion of these billions which have gone to waste
      could not have been expended for the very purposes outlined&mdash;education,
      public health, the advancement of science and art, public buildings, roads
      and parks, and the proper housing of populations! It is also dawning upon
      us, as a result of new practices brought about by the war, that our
      organization of industry was happy-go-lucky, inefficient and wasteful, and
      that a more scientific and economical organization is imperative. Under
      such a new system it may well be, as modern economists claim, that, we
      shall have an ample surplus for the Common Good.
    </p>
    <p>
      The chief objection to a National or Democratic Control of Industry has
      been that it would tend to create vast political machines and thus give
      the politicians in office a nefarious power. It is not intended here to
      attempt a refutation of this contention. The remedy lies in a changed
      attitude of the employee and the citizen toward government, and the fact
      that such an attitude is now developing is not subject to absolute proof.
      It may be said, however, that no greater menace to democracy could have
      arisen than the one we seem barely to have escaped&mdash;the control of
      politics and government by the capitalistic interests of the nation. What
      seems very clear is that an evolutionary drift toward the national control
      of industry has for many years been going on, and that the war has
      tremendously speeded up the tendency. Government has stepped in to protect
      the consumer of necessities from the profiteer, and is beginning to set a
      limit upon profits; has regulated exports and imports; established a
      national shipping corporation and merchant marine, and entered into other
      industries; it has taken over the railroads at least for the duration of
      the war, and may take over coal mines, and metal resources, as well as the
      forests and water power; it now contemplates the regulation of wages.
    </p>
    <p>
      The exigency caused by the war, moreover, has transformed the former
      practice of international intercourse. Co-operation has replaced
      competition. We are reorganizing and regulating our industries, our
      business, making sacrifices and preparing to make more sacrifices in order
      to meet the needs of our Allies, now that they are sore beset. For a
      considerable period after the war is ended, they will require our aid. We
      shall be better off than any other of the belligerent nations, and we
      shall therefore be called upon to practice, during the years of
      reconstruction, a continuation of the same policy of helpfulness. Indeed,
      for the nations of the world to spring, commercially speaking, at one
      another&rsquo;s throats would be suicidal even if it were possible. Mr. Sidney
      Webb has thrown a flood of light upon the conditions likely to prevail.
      For example, speculative export trade is being replaced by collective
      importing, bringing business more directly under the control of the
      consumer. This has been done by co-operative societies, by municipalities
      and states, in Switzerland, France, the United Kingdom, and in Germany.
      The Co-operative Wholesale Society of Great Britain, acting on behalf of
      three and a half million families, buys two and a half million dollars of
      purchases annually. And the Entente nations, in order to avoid competitive
      bidding, are buying collectively from us, not only munitions of war, but
      other supplies, while the British Government has made itself the sole
      importer of such necessities as wheat, sugar, tea, refrigerated meat,
      wool, and various metals. The French and Italian governments, and also
      certain neutral states, have done likewise. A purchasing commission for
      all the Allies and America is now proposed. After the war, as an
      inevitable result, for one thing, of transforming some thirty million
      citizens into soldiers, of engaging a like number of men and women at
      enhanced wages on the manufacture of the requisites of war, Mr. Webb
      predicts a world shortage not only in wheat and foodstuffs but in nearly
      all important raw materials. These will be required for the resumption of
      manufacture. In brief, international co-operation will be the only means
      of salvation. The policy of international trade implied by world shortage
      is not founded upon a law of &ldquo;supply and demand.&rdquo; The necessities cannot
      be permitted to go to those who can afford to pay the highest prices, but
      to those who need them most. For the &ldquo;free play of economic forces&rdquo; would
      mean famine on a large scale, because the richer nations and the richer
      classes within the nations might be fully supplied; but to the detriment
      and ruin of the world the poorer nations and the poorer classes would be
      starved. Therefore governments are already beginning to give consideration
      to a new organization of international trade for at least three years
      after the war. Now if this organization produce, as it may produce, a more
      desirable civilization and a happier world order, we are not likely
      entirely to go back&mdash;especially in regard to commodities which are
      necessities&mdash;to a competitive system. The principle of &ldquo;priority of
      need&rdquo; will supersede the law of &ldquo;supply and demand.&rdquo; And the organizations
      built up during the war, if they prove efficient, will not be abolished.
      Hours of labour and wages in the co-operative League of Nations will
      gradually be equalized, and tariffs will become things of the past. &ldquo;The
      axiom will be established,&rdquo; says Mr. Webb, &ldquo;that the resources of every
      country must, be held for the benefit not only of its own people but of
      the world.... The world shortage will, for years to come, make import
      duties look both oppressive and ridiculous.&rdquo;
     </p>
    <p>
      So much may be said for the principle of Democratic Control. In spite of
      all theoretical opposition, circumstances and evolution apparently point
      to its establishment. A system that puts a premium on commercial greed
      seems no longer possible.
    </p>
    <p>
      The above comments, based on the drift of political practice during the
      past decade and a half, may be taken for what they are worth. Predictions
      are precarious. The average American will be inclined to regard the
      program of the new British Labour Party as the embodiment of what he
      vaguely calls Socialism, and to him the very word is repugnant. Although
      he may never have heard of Marx, it is the Marxian conception that comes
      to his mind, and this implies coercion, a government that constantly
      interferes with his personal liberty, that compels him to tasks for which
      he has no relish. But your American, and your Englishman, for that matter,
      is inherently an individualist he wants as little government as is
      compatible with any government at all. And the descendants of the
      continental Europeans who flock to our shores are Anglo-Saxonized, also
      become by environment and education individualists. The great importance
      of preserving this individualism, this spirit in our citizens of
      self-reliance, this suspicion against too much interference with personal
      liberty, must at once be admitted. And any scheme for a social order that
      tends to eliminate and destroy it should by Americans be summarily
      rejected.
    </p>
    <p>
      The question of supreme interest to us, therefore, is whether the social
      order implied in the British program is mainly in the nature of a
      development of, or a break with, the Anglo-Saxon democratic tradition. The
      program is derived from an English source. It is based on what is known as
      modern social science, which has as its ultimate sanction the nature of
      the human mind as revealed by psychology. A consideration of the
      principles underlying this proposed social order may prove that it is
      essentially&mdash;if perhaps paradoxically&mdash;individualistic, a
      logical evolution of institutions which had their origin in the Magna
      Charta. Our Declaration of Independence proclaimed that every citizen had
      the right to &ldquo;life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,&rdquo; which means
      the opportunity to achieve the greatest self-development and
      self-realization. The theory is that each citizen shall find his place,
      according to his gifts and abilities, and be satisfied therewith. We may
      discover that this is precisely what social science, in an industrial age,
      and by spiritualizing human effort, aims to achieve. We may find that the
      appearance of such a program as that of the British Labour Party,
      supported as it is by an imposing proportion of the population of the
      United Kingdom, marks a further step, not only in the advance of social
      science and democracy, but also of Christianity.
    </p>
    <p>
      I mention Christianity, not for controversial or apologetic reasons, but
      because it has been the leaven of our western civilization ever since the
      fall of the Roman Empire. Its constant influence has been to soften and
      spiritualize individual and national relationships. The bitter
      controversies, wars, and persecutions which have raged in its name are
      utterly alien to its being. And that the present war is now being fought
      by the Allies in the hope of putting an end to war, and is thus in the
      true spirit of Christianity, marks an incomparable advance.
    </p>
    <p>
      Almost up to the present day, both in our conception and practice of
      Christianity, we have largely neglected its most important elements.
      Christian orthodoxy, as Auguste Sabatier points out, is largely derived
      from the older supernatural religions. The preservative shell of dogma and
      superstition has been cracking, and is now ready to burst, and the social
      teaching of Jesus would seem to be the kernel from which has sprung modern
      democracy, modern science, and modern religion&mdash;a trinity and unity.
    </p>
    <p>
      For nearly two thousand years orthodoxy has insisted that the social
      principles of Christianity are impractical. And indeed, until the present
      day, they have been so. Physical science, by enormously accelerating the
      means of transportation and communication, has so contracted the world as
      to bring into communion peoples and races hitherto far apart; has made
      possible an intelligent organization of industry which, for the first time
      in history, can create a surplus ample to maintain in comfort the world&rsquo;s
      population. But this demands the will to co-operation, which is a
      Christian principle&mdash;a recognition of the brotherhood of man.
      Furthermore, physical science has increased the need for world peace and
      international co-operation because the territories of all nations are now
      subject to swift and terrible invasion by modern instruments of
      destruction, while the future submarine may sweep commerce from the seas.
    </p>
    <p>
      Again, orthodoxy declares that human nature is inherently &ldquo;bad,&rdquo; while
      true Christianity, endorsed by psychology, proclaims it inherently &ldquo;good,&rdquo;
       which means that, properly guided, properly educated, it is creative and
      contributive rather than destructive. No more striking proof of this fact
      can be cited than the modern experiment in prison reform in which hardened
      convicts, when &ldquo;given a chance,&rdquo; frequently become useful citizens. Unjust
      and unintelligent social conditions are the chief factors in making
      criminals.
    </p>
    <p>
      Our most modern system of education, of which Professor John Dewey is the
      chief protagonist, is based upon the assertions of psychology that human
      nature is essentially &ldquo;good&rdquo; creative. Every normal child is supposed to
      have a special &ldquo;distinction&rdquo; or gift, which it is the task of the educator
      to discover. This distinction found, the child achieves happiness in
      creation and contribution. Self-realization demands knowledge and
      training: the doing of right is not a negative but a positive act; it is
      not without significance that the Greek word for sin is literally &ldquo;missing
      the mark.&rdquo; Christianity emphasizes above all else the worth of the
      individual, yet recognizes that the individual can develop only in
      society. And if the individual be of great worth, this worth must be by
      society developed to its utmost. Universal suffrage is a logical
      corollary.
    </p>
    <p>
      Universal suffrage, however, implies individual judgment, which means that
      the orthodox principle of external authority is out of place both in
      Christianity and democracy. The Christian theory is that none shall
      intervene between a man&rsquo;s Maker and himself; democracy presupposes that no
      citizen shall accept his beliefs and convictions from others, but shall
      make up his own mind and act accordingly. Open-mindedness is the first
      requisite of science and democracy.
    </p>
    <p>
      What has been deemed, however, in Christianity the most unrealizable ideal
      is that which may be called pacifism&mdash;to resist not evil, to turn the
      other cheek, to agree with your adversary while you are in the way with
      him. &ldquo;I come not,&rdquo; said Jesus, in one of those paradoxical statements
      hitherto so difficult to understand, &ldquo;I come not to bring peace, but a
      sword.&rdquo; It is indeed what we are fighting for&mdash;peace. But we believe
      today, more strongly than ever before, as democracy advances, as peoples
      tend to gain more and more control over their governments, that even this
      may not be an unrealizable ideal. Democracies, intent on self-realization
      and self-development, do not desire war.
    </p>
    <p>
      The problem of social science, then, appears to be to organize human
      society on the principles and ideals of Christianity. But in view of the
      fact that the trend of evolution is towards the elimination of commercial
      competition, the question which must seriously concern us today is&mdash;What
      in the future shall be the spur of individual initiative? Orthodoxy and
      even democratic practice have hitherto taken it for granted&mdash;in spite
      of the examples of highly socialized men, benefactors of society&mdash;that
      the average citizen will bestir himself only for material gain. And it
      must be admitted that competition of some sort is necessary for
      self-realization, that human nature demands a prize. There can be no
      self-sacrifice without a corresponding self-satisfaction. The answer is
      that in the theory of democracy, as well as in that of Christianity,
      individualism and co-operation are paradoxically blended. For competition,
      Christianity substitutes emulation. And with democracy, it declares that
      mankind itself can gradually be rained towards the level of the choice
      individual who does not labour for gain, but in behalf of society. For the
      process of democracy is not degrading, but lifting. Like Christianity,
      democracy demands faith, and has as its inspiring interpretation of
      civilization evolution towards a spiritual goal. Yet the kind of faith
      required is no longer a blind faith, but one founded on sane and carefully
      evolved theories. Democracy has become a scientific experiment.
    </p>
    <p>
      In this connection, as one notably inspired by emulation, by the joy of
      creative work and service, the medical profession comes first to mind. The
      finer element in this profession is constantly increasing in numbers,
      growing more and more influential, making life less easy for the quack,
      the vendor of nostrums, the commercial proprietor of the bogus medical
      college. The doctor who uses his talents for gain is frowned upon by those
      of his fellow practitioners whose opinion really counts. Respected
      physicians in our cities give much of their time to teaching, animating
      students with their own spirit; and labour long hours, for no material
      return, in the clinics of the poor. And how often, in reading our
      newspapers, do we learn that some medical scientist, by patient work, and
      often at the risk of life and health, has triumphed over a scourge which
      has played havoc with humanity throughout the ages! Typhoid has been
      conquered, and infant paralysis; gangrene and tetanus, which have taken
      such toll of the wounded in Flanders and France; yellow fever has been
      stamped out in the tropics; hideous lesions are now healed by a system of
      drainage. The very list of these achievements is bewildering, and latterly
      we are given hope of the prolongation of life itself. Here in truth are
      Christian deeds multiplied by science, made possible by a growing
      knowledge of and mastery over Nature.
    </p>
    <p>
      Such men by virtue of their high mission are above the vicious social and
      commercial competition poisoning the lives of so many of their fellow
      citizens. In our democracy they have found their work, and the work is its
      own reward. They give striking testimony to the theory that absorption in
      a creative or contributive task is the only source of self-realization.
      And he has little faith in mankind who shall declare that the medical
      profession is the only group capable of being socialized, or, rather, of
      socializing themselves&mdash;for such is the true process of democracy.
      Public opinion should be the leaven. What is possible for the doctor is
      also possible for the lawyer, for the teacher. In a democracy, teaching
      should be the most honoured of the professions, and indeed once was,&mdash;before
      the advent of industrialism, when it gradually fell into neglect,&mdash;occasionally
      into deplorable submission to the possessors of wealth. Yet a wage
      disgracefully low, hardship, and even poverty have not hindered men of
      ability from entering it in increasing numbers, renouncing ease and
      luxuries. The worth of the contributions of our professors to civilization
      has been inestimable; and fortunately signs are not lacking that we are
      coming to an appreciation of the value of the expert in government, who is
      replacing the panderer and the politician. A new solidarity of teaching
      professional opinion, together with a growing realization by our public of
      the primary importance of the calling, is tending to emancipate it, to
      establish it in its rightful place.
    </p>
    <p>
      Nor are our engineers without their ideal. A Goethals did not cut an
      isthmus in two for gain.
    </p>
    <p>
      Industrialism, with its concomitant &ldquo;corporation&rdquo; practice, has
      undoubtedly been detrimental to the legal profession, since it has
      resulted in large fees; in the accumulation of vast fortunes, frequently
      by methods ethically questionable. Grave social injustices have been done,
      though often in good faith, since the lawyer, by training and experience,
      has hitherto been least open to the teachings of the new social science,
      has been an honest advocate of the system of &lsquo;laissez faire&rsquo;. But to say
      that the American legal profession is without ideals and lacking in the
      emulative spirit would be to do it a grave injustice. The increasing
      influence of national and state bar associations evidences a professional
      opinion discouraging to the unscrupulous; while a new evolutionary and
      more humanitarian conception of law is now beginning to be taught, and
      young men are entering the ranks imbued with this. Legal clinics, like
      medical clinics, are established for the benefit of those who cannot
      afford to pay fees, for the protection of the duped from the predatory
      quack. And, it must be said of this profession, which hitherto has held a
      foremost place in America, that its leaders have never hesitated to
      respond to a public call, to sacrifice their practices to serve the
      nation. Their highest ambition has even been to attain the Supreme Court,
      where the salary is a mere pittance compared to what they may earn as
      private citizens.
    </p>
    <p>
      Thus we may review all the groups in the nation, but the most significant
      transformation of all is taking place within the business group,&mdash;where
      indeed it might be least expected. Even before the war there were many
      evidences that the emulative spirit in business had begun to modify the
      merely competitive, and we had the spectacle of large employers of labour
      awakening to the evils of industrialism, and themselves attempting to
      inaugurate reforms. As in the case of labour, it would be obviously unfair
      to claim that the employer element was actuated by motives of
      self-interest alone; nor were their concessions due only to fear.
      Instances could be cited, if there were space, of voluntary shortening of
      hours of labour, of raising of wages, when no coercion was exerted either
      by the labour unions or the state; and&mdash;perhaps to their surprise
      employers discovered that such acts were not only humane but profitable!
      Among these employers, in fact, may be observed individuals in various
      stages of enlightenment, from the few who have educated themselves in
      social science, who are convinced that the time has come when it is not
      only practicable but right, who realize that a new era has dawned; to
      others who still believe in the old system, who are trying to bolster it
      up by granting concessions, by establishing committees of conference, by
      giving a voice and often a financial interest, but not a vote, in the
      conduct of the corporation concerned. These are the counterpart, in
      industry, of sovereigns whose away has been absolute, whose intentions are
      good, but who hesitate, often from conviction, to grant constitutions. Yet
      even these are responding in some degree to social currents, though the
      aggressive struggles of labour may have influenced them, and partially
      opened their eyes. They are far better than their associates who still
      seek to control the supplies of food and other necessities, whose
      efficiency is still solely directed, not toward a social end, but toward
      the amassing of large fortunes, and is therefore wasted so far as society
      is concerned. They do not perceive that by seeking to control prices they
      merely hasten the tendency of government control, for it is better to have
      government regulation for the benefit of the many than proprietary
      control, however efficient, for the benefit of the few.
    </p>
    <p>
      That a significant change of heart and mind has begun to take place
      amongst capitalists, that the nucleus of a &ldquo;public opinion&rdquo; has been
      formed within an element which, by the use and wont of business and habits
      of thought might be regarded as least subject to the influence of social
      ideas, is a most hopeful augury. This nascent opinion has begun to operate
      by shaming unscrupulous and recalcitrant employers into better practices.
      It would indeed fare ill with democracy if, in such an era, men of large
      business proved to be lacking in democratic initiative, wholly unreceptive
      and hostile to the gradual introduction of democracy into industry, which
      means the perpetuation of the American Idea. Fortunately, with us, this
      capitalistic element is of comparatively recent growth, the majority of
      its members are essentially Americans; they have risen from small
      beginnings, and are responsive to a democratic appeal&mdash;if that appeal
      be properly presented. And, as a matter of fact, for many years a leaven
      had been at work among them; the truth has been brought home to them that
      the mere acquisition of wealth brings neither happiness nor
      self-realization; they have lavished their money on hospitals and
      universities, clinics, foundations for scientific research, and other
      gifts of inestimable benefit to the nation and mankind. Although the
      munificence was on a Medicean scale, this private charity was in accord
      with the older conception of democracy, and paved the way for a new order.
    </p>
    <p>
      The patriotic and humanitarian motive aroused by the war greatly
      accelerated the socializing transformation of the business man and the
      capitalist. We have, indeed, our profiteers seeking short cuts to luxury
      and wealth; but those happily most representative of American affairs,
      including the creative administrators, hastened to Washington with a
      willingness to accept any position in which they might be useful, and in
      numerous instances placed at the disposal of the government the
      manufacturing establishments which, by industry and ability, they
      themselves had built up. That in thus surrendering the properties for
      which they were largely responsible they hoped at the conclusion of peace
      to see restored the &lsquo;status quo ante&rsquo; should not be held against them.
      Some are now beginning to surmise that a complete restoration is
      impossible; and as a result of their socializing experience, are even
      wondering whether it is desirable. These are beginning to perceive that
      the national and international organizations in the course of construction
      to meet the demands of the world conflict must form the model for a future
      social structure; that the unprecedented pressure caused by the cataclysm
      is compelling a recrystallization of society in which there must be fewer
      misfits, in which many more individuals than formerly shall find public or
      semi-public tasks in accordance with their gifts and abilities.
    </p>
    <p>
      It may be argued that war compels socialization, that after the war the
      world will perforce return to materialistic individualism. But this
      calamity, terrible above all others, has warned us of the imperative need
      of an order that shall be socializing, if we are not to witness the
      destruction of our civilization itself. Confidence that such an order,
      thanks to the advancement of science, is now within our grasp should not
      be difficult for Americans, once they have rightly conceived it. We, who
      have always pinned our faith to ideas, who entered the conflict for an
      Idea, must be the last to shirk the task, however Herculean, of world
      reconstruction along the lines of our own professed faith. We cannot be
      renegades to Democracy.
    </p>
    <p>
      Above all things, then, it is essential for us as a people not to abandon
      our faith in man, our belief that not only the exceptional individual but
      the majority of mankind can be socialized. What is true of our physicians,
      our scientists and professional men, our manual workers, is also true of
      our capitalists and business men. In a more just and intelligent
      organization of society these will be found willing to administer and
      improve for the common weal the national resources which formerly they
      exploited for the benefit of themselves and their associates. The social
      response, granted the conditions, is innate in humanity, and individual
      initiative can best be satisfied in social realization.
    </p>
    <p>
      Universal education is the cornerstone of democracy. And the recognition
      of this fact may be called the great American contribution. But in our
      society the fullest self-realization depends upon a well balanced
      knowledge of scientific facts, upon a rounded culture. Thus education,
      properly conceived, is a preparation for intelligent, ethical, and
      contented citizenship. Upon the welfare of the individual depends the
      welfare of all. Without education, free institutions and universal
      suffrage are mockeries; semi-learned masses of the population are at the
      mercy of scheming politicians, controversialists, and pseudo-scientific
      religionists, and their votes are swayed by prejudice.
    </p>
    <p>
      In a materialistic competitive order, success in life depends upon the
      knack&mdash;innate or acquired, and not to be highly rated&mdash;of
      outwitting one&rsquo;s neighbour under the rules of the game&mdash;the law;
      education is merely a cultural leaven within the reach of the
      comparatively few who can afford to attend a university. The business
      college is a more logical institution. In an emulative civilization,
      however, the problem is to discover and develop in childhood and youth the
      personal aptitude or gift of as many citizens as possible, in order that
      they may find self-realization by making their peculiar contribution
      towards the advancement of society.
    </p>
    <p>
      The prevailing system of education, which we have inherited from the past,
      largely fails to accomplish this. In the first place, it has been
      authoritative rather than scientific, which is to say that students have
      been induced to accept the statements of teachers and text books, and have
      not been trained to weigh for themselves their reasonableness and worth; a
      principle essentially unscientific and undemocratic, since it inculcates
      in the future citizen convictions rather than encourages the habit of
      open-mindedness so necessary for democratic citizenship. For democracy&mdash;it
      cannot be too often repeated&mdash;is a dynamic thing, experimental,
      creative in its very essence. No static set of opinions can apply to the
      constantly changing aspect of affairs. New discoveries, which come upon us
      with such bewildering rapidity, are apt abruptly to alter social and
      industrial conditions, while morals and conventions are no longer
      absolute. Sudden crises threaten the stability of nations and
      civilizations. Safety lies alone in the ability to go forward, to
      progress. Psychology teaches us that if authoritative opinions,
      convictions, or &ldquo;complexes&rdquo; are stamped upon the plastic brain of the
      youth they tend to harden, and he is apt to become a Democrat or
      Republican, an Episcopalian or a Baptist, a free trader or a tariff
      advocate or a Manchester economist without asking why. Such &ldquo;complexes&rdquo;
       were probably referred to by the celebrated physician who emphasized the
      hopelessness of most individuals over forty. And every reformer and forum
      lecturer knows how difficult it is to convert the average audience of
      seasoned adults to a new idea: he finds the most responsive groups in the
      universities and colleges. It is significant that the &ldquo;educated&rdquo; adult
      audiences in clubs and prosperous churches are the least open to
      conversion, because, in the scientific sense, the &ldquo;educated&rdquo; classes
      retain complexes, and hence are the least prepared to cope with the world
      as it is today. The German system, which has been bent upon installing
      authoritative conviction instead of encouraging freedom of thought, should
      be a warning to us.
    </p>
    <p>
      Again, outside of the realm of physical science, our text books have been
      controversial rather than impartial, especially in economics and history;
      resulting in erroneous and distorted and prejudiced ideas of events, such
      for instance, as our American Revolution. The day of the controversialist
      is happily coming to an end, and of the writer who twists the facts of
      science to suit a world of his own making, or of that of a group with
      which he is associated. Theory can now be labelled theory, and fact, fact.
      Impartial and painstaking investigation is the sole method of obtaining
      truth.
    </p>
    <p>
      The old system of education benefited only the comparatively few to whose
      nature and inclination it was adapted. We have need, indeed, of classical
      scholars, but the majority of men and women are meant for other work;
      many, by their very construction of mind, are unfitted to become such. And
      only in the most exceptional cases are the ancient languages really
      mastered; a smattering of these, imposed upon the unwilling scholar by a
      principle opposed to psychology,&mdash;a smattering from which is derived
      no use and joy in after life, and which has no connection with individual
      inclination&mdash;is worse than nothing. Precious time is wasted during
      the years when the mind is most receptive. While the argument of the old
      school that discipline can only be inculcated by the imposition of a
      distasteful task is unsound. As Professor Dewey points out, unless the
      interest is in some way involved there can be no useful discipline. And
      how many of our university and high school graduates today are in any
      sense disciplined? Stimulated interest alone can overcome the resistance
      imposed by a difficult task, as any scientist, artist, organizer or
      administrator knows. Men will discipline themselves to gain a desired end.
      Under the old system of education a few children succeed either because
      they are desirous of doing well, interested in the game of mental
      competition; or else because they contrive to clothe with flesh and blood
      some subject presented as a skeleton. It is not uncommon, indeed, to
      recognize in later years with astonishment a useful citizen or genius whom
      at school or college we recall as a dunce or laggard. In our present
      society, because of archaic methods of education, the development of such
      is largely left to chance. Those who might have been developed in time,
      who might have found their task, often become wasters, drudges, and even
      criminals.
    </p>
    <p>
      The old system tends to make types, to stamp every scholar in the same
      mould, whether he fits it or not. More and more the parents of today are
      looking about for new schools, insisting that a son or daughter possesses
      some special gift which, under teachers of genius, might be developed
      before it is too late. And in most cases, strange to say, the parents are
      right. They themselves have been victims of a standardized system.
    </p>
    <p>
      A new and distinctly American system of education, designed to meet the
      demands of modern conditions, has been put in practice in parts of the
      United States. In spite of opposition from school boards, from all those
      who cling to the conviction that education must of necessity be an
      unpalatable and &ldquo;disciplinary&rdquo; process, the number of these schools is
      growing. The objection, put forth by many, that they are still in the
      experimental stage, is met by the reply that experiment is the very
      essence of the system. Democracy is experimental, and henceforth education
      will remain experimental for all time. But, as in any other branch of
      science, the element of ascertained fact will gradually increase: the
      latent possibilities in the mind of the healthy child will be discovered
      by knowledge gained through impartial investigation. The old system, like
      all other institutions handed down to us from the ages, proceeds on no
      intelligent theory, has no basis on psychology, and is accepted merely
      because it exists.
    </p>
    <p>
      The new education is selective. The mind of each child is patiently
      studied with the view of discovering the peculiar bent, and this bent is
      guided and encouraged. The child is allowed to forge ahead in those
      subjects for which he shows an aptitude, and not compelled to wait on a
      class. Such supervision, of course, demands more teachers, teachers of an
      ability hitherto deplorably rare, and thoroughly trained in their
      subjects, with a sympathetic knowledge of the human mind. Theirs will be
      the highest and most responsible function in the state, and they must be
      rewarded in proportion to their services.
    </p>
    <p>
      A superficial criticism declares that in the new schools children will
      study only &ldquo;what they like.&rdquo; On the contrary, all subjects requisite for a
      wide culture, as well as for the ability to cope with existence in a
      highly complex civilization, are insisted upon. It is true, however, that
      the trained and gifted teacher is able to discover a method of so
      presenting a subject as to seize the imagination and arouse the interest
      and industry of a majority of pupils. In the modern schools French, for
      example, is really taught; pupils do not acquire a mere smattering of the
      language. And, what is more important, the course of study is directly
      related to life, and to practical experience, instead of being set forth
      abstractly, as something which at the time the pupil perceives no
      possibility of putting into use. At one of the new schools in the south,
      the ignorant child of the mountains at once acquires a knowledge of
      measurement and elementary arithmetic by laying out a garden, of letters
      by inscribing his name on a little signboard in order to identify his
      patch&mdash;for the moment private property. And this principle is carried
      through all the grades. In the Gary Schools and elsewhere the making of
      things in the shops, the modelling of a Panama Canal, the inspection of
      industries and governmental establishments, the designing, building, and
      decoration of houses, the discussion and even dramatization of the books
      read,&mdash;all are a logical and inevitable continuation of the abstract
      knowledge of the schoolroom. The success of the direct application of
      learning to industrial and professional life may also be observed in such
      colleges as those at Cincinnati and Schenectady, where young men spend
      half the time of the course in the shops of manufacturing, corporations,
      often earning more than enough to pay their tuition.
    </p>
    <p>
      Children are not only prepared for democratic citizenship by being
      encouraged to think for themselves, but also to govern and discipline
      themselves. On the moral side, under the authoritative system of lay and
      religious training, character was acquired at the expense of mental
      flexibility&mdash;the Puritan method; our problem today, which the new
      system undertakes, is to produce character with open-mindedness&mdash;the
      kind of character possessed by many great scientists. Absorption in an
      appropriate task creates a moral will, while science, knowledge, informs
      the mind why a thing is &ldquo;bad&rdquo; or &ldquo;good,&rdquo; disintegrating or upbuilding.
      Moreover, these children are trained for democratic government by the
      granting of autonomy. They have their own elected officials, their own
      courts; their decisions are, of course, subject to reversal by the
      principal, but in practice this seldom occurs.
    </p>
    <p>
      The Gary Schools and many of the new schools are public schools. And the
      principle of the new education that the state is primarily responsible for
      the health of pupils&mdash;because an unsound body is apt to make an
      unsound citizen of backward intelligence&mdash;is now being generally
      adopted by public schools all over the country. This idea is essentially
      an element of the democratic contention that all citizens must be given an
      equality of opportunity&mdash;though all may not be created equal&mdash;now
      becoming a positive rather than a negative right, guaranteed by the state
      itself. An earnest attempt is thus made by the state to give every citizen
      a fair start that in later years he may have no ground for discontent or
      complaint. He stands on his own feet, he rises in proportion to his
      ability and industry. Hence the program of the British Labour Party
      rightly lays stress on education, on &ldquo;freedom of mental opportunity.&rdquo; The
      vast sums it proposes to spend for this purpose are justified.
    </p>
    <p>
      If such a system of education as that briefly outlined above is carefully
      and impartially considered, the objection that democratic government
      founded on modern social science is coercive must disappear. So far as the
      intention and effort of the state is able to confer it, every citizen will
      have his choice of the task he is to perform for society, his opportunity
      for self-realization. For freedom without education is a myth. By degrees
      men and women are making ready to take their places in an emulative rather
      than a materialistically competitive order. But the experimental aspect of
      this system should always be borne in mind, with the fact that its
      introduction and progress, like that of other elements in the democratic
      program, must be gradual, though always proceeding along sound lines. For
      we have arrived at that stage of enlightenment when we realize that the
      only mundane perfection lies in progress rather than achievement. The
      millennium is always a lap ahead. There would be no satisfaction in
      overtaking it, for then we should have nothing more to do, nothing more to
      work for.
    </p>
    <p>
      The German Junkers have prostituted science by employing it for the
      destruction of humanity. In the name of Christianity they have waged the
      most barbaric war in history. Yet if they shall have demonstrated to
      mankind the futility of efficiency achieved merely for material ends; if,
      by throwing them on a world screen, they shall have revealed the evils of
      power upheld alone by ruthlessness and force, they will unwittingly have
      performed a world service. Privilege and dominion, powers and
      principalities acquired by force must be sustained by force. To fail will
      be fatal. Even a duped people, trained in servility, will not consent to
      be governed by an unsuccessful autocracy. Arrogantly Germany has staked
      her all on world domination. Hence a victory for the Allies must mean a
      democratic Germany.
    </p>
    <p>
      Nothing short of victory. There can be no arrangement, no agreement, no
      parley with or confidence in these modern scions of darkness&mdash;Hohenzollerns,
      Hindenburgs, Zudendorffs and their tools. Propaganda must not cease; the
      eyes of Germans still capable of sight must be opened. But, as the
      President says, force must be used to the limit&mdash;force for a social
      end as opposed to force for an evil end. There are those among us who
      advocate a boycott of Germany after peace is declared. These would seem to
      take it for granted that we shall fall short of victory, and hence that
      selfish retaliative or vindictive practices between nations, sanctioned by
      imperialism, will continue to flourish after the war. But should Germany
      win she will see to it that there is no boycott against her. A compromised
      peace would indeed mean the perpetuation of both imperialism and
      militarism.
    </p>
    <p>
      It is characteristic of those who put their faith in might alone that they
      are not only blind to the finer relationships between individuals and
      nations, but take no account of the moral forces in human affairs which in
      the long run are decisive,&mdash;a lack of sensitiveness which explains
      Germany&rsquo;s colossal blunders. The first had to do with Britain. The German
      militarists persisted in the belief that the United Kingdom was
      degenerated by democracy, intent upon the acquisition of wealth,
      distracted by strife at home, uncertain of the Empire, and thus would
      selfishly remain aloof while the Kaiser&rsquo;s armies overran and enslaved the
      continent. What happened, to Germany&rsquo;s detriment, was the instant
      socialization of Britain, and the binding together of the British Empire.
      Germany&rsquo;s second great blunder was an arrogant underestimation of a
      self-reliant people of English culture and traditions. She believed that
      we, too, had been made flabby by democracy, were wholly intent upon the
      pursuit of the dollar&mdash;only to learn that America would lavish her
      vast resources and shed her blood for a cause which was American. Germany
      herself provided that cause, shaped the issues so that there was no
      avoiding them. She provided the occasion for the socializing of America
      also; and thus brought about, within a year, a national transformation
      which in times of peace might scarce in half a century have been
      accomplished.
    </p>
    <p>
      Above all, as a consequence of these two blunders, Germany has been
      compelled to witness the consummation of that which of all things she had
      most to fear, the cementing of a lasting fellowship between the English
      speaking Republic and the English speaking Empire. For we had been severed
      since the 18th Century by misunderstandings which of late Germany herself
      had been more or less successful in fostering. She has furnished a bond
      not only between our governments, but&mdash;what is vastly more important
      for democracy&mdash;a bond between our peoples. Our soldiers are now side
      by side with those of the Empire on the Frontier of Freedom; the blood of
      all is shed and mingled for a great cause embodied in the Anglo-Saxon
      tradition of democracy; and our peoples, through the realization of common
      ideas and common ends, are learning the supreme lesson of co-operation
      between nations with a common past, are being cemented into a union which
      is the symbol and forerunner of the democratic league of Nations to come.
      Henceforth, we believe, because of this union, so natural yet so long
      delayed, by virtue of the ultimate victory it forecasts, the sun will
      never set on the Empire of the free, for the drum beats of democracy have
      been heard around the world. To this Empire will be added the precious
      culture of France, which the courage of her sons will have preserved, the
      contributions of Italy, and of Russia, yes, and of Japan.
    </p>
    <p>
      Our philosophy and our religion are changing; hence it is more and more
      difficult to use the old terms to describe moral conduct. We say, for
      instance, that America&rsquo;s action in entering the war has been &ldquo;unselfish.&rdquo;
       But this merely means that we have our own convictions concerning the
      ultimate comfort of the world, the manner of self-realization of
      individuals and nations. We are attempting to turn calamity into good. If
      this terrible conflict shall result in the inauguration of an emulative
      society, if it shall bring us to the recognition that intelligence and
      science may be used for the upbuilding of such an order, and for an
      eventual achievement of world peace, every sacrifice shall have been
      justified.
    </p>
    <p>
      Such is the American Issue. Our statesmen and thinkers have helped to
      evolve it, our people with their blood and treasure are consecrating it.
      And these statesmen and thinkers, of whom our American President is not
      the least, are of democracy the pioneers. From the mountain tops on which
      they stand they behold the features of the new world, the dawn of the new
      day hidden as yet from their brothers in the valley. Let us have faith
      always that it is coming, and struggle on, highly resolving that those who
      gave their lives in the hour of darkness shall not have died in vain.
    </p>
    <p>
      <br /> <br />
    </p>
    <hr />
    <p>
      <br /> <br />
    </p>
<pre xml:space="preserve">



End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of An Essay On The American Contribution
And The Democratic Idea, by Winston Churchill

*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AMERICAN CONTRIBUTION ***

***** This file should be named 5399-h.htm or 5399-h.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
        https://www.gutenberg.org/5/3/9/5399/

Produced by David Widger


Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.

Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.



*** START: FULL LICENSE ***

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase &ldquo;Project
Gutenberg&rdquo;), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
https://gutenberg.org/license).


Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works

1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B.  &ldquo;Project Gutenberg&rdquo; is a registered trademark.  It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.  See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (&ldquo;the Foundation&rdquo;
 or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.

1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase &ldquo;Project Gutenberg&rdquo; appears, or with which the phrase &ldquo;Project
Gutenberg&rdquo; is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org

1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase &ldquo;Project Gutenberg&rdquo; associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.

1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.

1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.

1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
&ldquo;Plain Vanilla ASCII&rdquo; or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original &ldquo;Plain Vanilla ASCII&rdquo; or other
form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that

- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
     address specified in Section 4, &ldquo;Information about donations to
     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.&rdquo;

- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
     License.  You must require such a user to return or
     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
     Project Gutenberg-tm works.

- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
     of receipt of the work.

- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.

1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
&ldquo;Defects,&rdquo; such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.

1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the &ldquo;Right
of Replacement or Refund&rdquo; described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you &lsquo;AS-IS&rsquo; WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.


Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm

Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm&rsquo;s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.


Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service.  The Foundation&rsquo;s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state&rsquo;s laws.

The Foundation&rsquo;s principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation&rsquo;s web site and official
page at https://pglaf.org

For additional contact information:
     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
     Chief Executive and Director
     gbnewby@pglaf.org


Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit https://pglaf.org

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate


Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.


Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.


Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:

     https://www.gutenberg.org

This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

</pre>
    <p>
      <br /><br /><br /><br />
    </p>
  </body>
</html>
generated by cgit v1.2.3 (git 2.25.1) at 2026-08-22 15:06:31 +0000