JX 
 
 F8Z 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 * 
 f 
 
 i> 
 
 r. 
 
 M 
 
 ^ 
 
 A 
 
 
International Conciliation 
 
 Sf^IAL BULLETIN 
 
 A JRIEF OUTLINE OF THE 
 
 NATURE AND AIMS OF 
 
 PACIFISM 
 
 BY 
 
 ALFRED H. FRIED 
 
 TRANSLATED BY 
 
 JOHN MEZ 
 
 APRIL, 1915 
 
 American Association for International Conciliation 
 
 Sub -station 84 (407 West 11 7th Street) 
 
 New York City 
 
^"/\\°\^oZ 
 
The objections raised against the Peace Movement 
 are mostly based upon an entirely wrong conception of 
 the problem. Generally those ideas that are so strongly 
 combatted, refuted and ridiculed are for the most part 
 not involved at all. 
 
 The following paragraphs contain a brief outline of 
 the fundamental ideas of Pacifism, which show how 
 unfounded the common objections are. 
 
 It is not intended thereby to convert every adversary 
 to Pacifism, but to crystallize the controversy and center 
 it about the real issues. 
 
 M250014 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 I. "Eternal Peace" 5 
 
 II. International Organization 6 
 
 III. Settlement of Disputes Without Force ... 8 
 
 IV. "Disarmament" 9 
 
 V. "War" under the Condition of International 
 
 Organization 10 
 
 VI. What is "War"? 11 
 
 VII. The Nation and International Organization . .12 
 
 VIII. Human Nature 13 
 
 IX. Extent and Effect of the Pacifist Movement . 14 
 
 X. Peace "At Any Price" 17 
 
 XI. The Attitude of Pacifism Toward War under the 
 Present Condition of International Disor- 
 ganization 18 
 
Ca? 
 
 JNIV, O'F 
 
 NATURE AND AIMS OF PACIFISM 
 
 "ETERNAL PEACE" 
 
 One must discriminate between "No War" and "Peace." 
 
 The condition existing at present under normal circum- 
 stances between nations is not that of peace, as understood by 
 Pacifism, but merely that of no war. Nor is it the object of 
 the peace movement to bring about that peace which is made 
 after a war. Such peace merely terminates war ; it does not 
 found peace. (An analogy as an illustration: A drunkard 
 sober between drinks is not an abstainer.) 
 
 Who does not discriminate between "peace" and "no war" 
 does not uiWerstand the fundamental principle of Pacifism ; 
 he reaches conclusions that do not touch the problem. 
 
 Only the so-called state of "peace" which really is a state 
 of "no war" can be prolonged by ever-increasing armaments. 
 (Therefore: "Si vis pacem, para bellum.") But this condi- 
 tion cannot be maintained permanently. (Therefore: "Eternal 
 peace is but a dream.") These conclusions are right in them- 
 selves, but their premises are wrong. 
 
 Peace as understood by Pacifism means a condition of or- 
 ganized liv-ing together of nations. 
 
 The disorganization ("anarchy") existing to-day in the 
 relations betvveen nations is gradually being replaced by In- 
 ternational Organization. 
 
 The fundamental problem of Pacifism, therefore, is not the 
 alleged desire permanently to avoid the conflict of ivar "without 
 changing the present disorganization still existing betzveen 
 nations, nor to establish "Eternal Peace" — zvhich tinder pres- 
 ent conditions zvoidd be impossible and zchicli in reality zvould 
 not mean peace. What Pacifism really wants is to do azi'ay .- 
 
 ^' ~ 
 
with that condition of disorganisation by developing inter- 
 national organisation from which, besides other advantages, 
 automatically will result the possibility of settling all disputes 
 betzveen nations zvithout force. 
 
 In short, Pacifism aims not to treat the symptoms, but to 
 remove the causes. 
 
 ,-/ 
 
 II 
 
 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 (a) Definition 
 
 This does not mean World State nor United States, nor 
 World Federation of nations; does not mean the dissolution of 
 all nations into one League of Humanity; does not mean the 
 abolition of national autonomy nor submission under one cen- 
 tralized power. 
 
 But it means a voluntary co-operation of autonomous nations 
 for their common interest, a greater efficiency for obtaining 
 their means of subsistence and a better guarantee for their 
 security with the least waste of energy, on account of this 
 mutual co-operation. (A substitution of the ideal of might by 
 the ideals of co-operation and mutual obligations.) 
 
 (b) Hoiv is this to be obtained? 
 
 International organization cannot be capriciously con- 
 structed; its growth is dependent on those natural laws that 
 determine human progress. Mechanical forces have built and 
 made our society. They lead mankind on to ever higher forms 
 of organization, from the isolated cave-dweller to modern 
 world-empires and unions of nations, and finally beyond this 
 toward world organization. 
 
 The process of international organization has been working 
 for a long time. The entire lack of organization in the rela- 
 tions between states long ago ceased to exist. And more 
 and more and with increasing acceleration nations have be- 
 come organized and dependent upon each other. Economics 
 
 6 
 
have expanded into world-economics. World trade has cre- 
 ated international credit, world markets and an international 
 interdependence and has brought about an inseparable world- 
 community of interests. The nations have formed countless 
 world-unions, and an efficient and extensive international ad- 
 ministration is in operation. The number of international 
 treaties and agreements concerning economic, social, hygienic, 
 political, ethical, legal and scientific activities is constantly in- 
 creasing. Public world congresses for the management of the 
 common matters of civilization have become permanent insti- 
 tutions. All of these things are both the symptom and the 
 evidence of the constant increase of international organization 
 that will gradually replace the present disorganization.* 
 
 This process constitutes the problem of Pacifism. 
 
 Pacifism need not itself create international organization. 
 It merely has to recognize it and to call attention to its growth. 
 It merely wants to lay bare this natural trend of development 
 in order that men may direct their actions in accordance with it 
 and thus accelerate the process of organization. (Catalytic 
 reaction.) 
 
 (c) The Effects 
 
 The transformation of international life will result in a 
 change of society. In such degree as organization supersedes 
 disorganization, crude force will cease to play a role in inter- 
 national relations. (One sees that not War is to be eliminated, 
 but its causes.) 
 
 Conflicts between nations will not disappear, any more than 
 they have ceased to exist between individuals. But their char- 
 acter will be changed. The less they are caused by disorgan- 
 ization and the more they emanate from organization, the 
 
 *For further details see A. H. Fried's "Handbuch der Friedensbewe- 
 gung," 2nd edition, Vol. i, Chap. 3. "Die Organisation des Weltfriedens." 
 "Das internationale Leben der Gegenwart." (Teubner, Leipzig, Eng- 
 lish translation publ. by Holt, New York.) "Annuaire de la Vie Inter- 
 nationale" (Misch & Thron, Brussels), which comprises the constitu- 
 tion, history and activities of all existing international unions. (See 
 also Bridgman, World Organization, published by The World Peace 
 Foundation, Boston, Mass.) 
 
less menacing will disputes become and the easier will it be 
 to settle them by the application of reason. 
 
 Ill 
 
 SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES WITHOUT FORCE^ 
 
 K This does not mean to, replace the settlement by force 
 through settlement by law. * It is an error to believe that under 
 present conditions Pacifism wants to settle all conflicts between 
 nations by arbitration (as most of these conflicts are produced 
 by the very lack of organization between nationsW^/^ is not a 
 question of doing aivay with the consequences without the 
 causes having been changed, and therefore not of creating in- 
 stitutions of lazv for the settlement of disputes between nations, 
 but rather to change the character of these disputes sx) qs to 
 make possible a settlement through rational nieansA'^ This 
 transformation will be effected through the growth of organ- 
 ization between states. 
 ''V, Arbitration is, moreover, only one way of settling disputes 
 without force; not the only one.<^vThe most preferable way 
 will always be settlement by exchanging advantages and by 
 compromising, particularly during the present period of transi- 
 tion from disorganization to organizatiorr.'^ ' The more these 
 conflicts assume legal character, the more will they be gov- 
 erned and decided by principles of law so that the settle- 
 ment of disputes by institutions of law (arbitration, judicial 
 settlement, committees of investigation) will mean an accelera- 
 tion in the procedure of settlement. 
 
 .\t'*It is necessary to realize that the casues of war have a twofold 
 character. Wars may result from a real case of dispute, or simply from 
 a desire for conquest. Disputes always have some legal basis and 
 could be settled by principles of law or mutual compromise. Formerly, 
 also such cases were settled by force, but to-day practically all of them 
 are settled without force. Against the desire for conquest there is no 
 influence of law. It is illegal (anarchic) in its nature. It may be pre- 
 vented by threat or repulsed by force. But the application of force 
 for the prevention of disorganized force is nol zcar in the modern 
 sense. (See Chapters V and VI.) 
 
 8 
 
IV 
 "DISARMAMENT" 
 
 The mutual competition of armaments is one of the gravest 
 consequences of the disorganization between nations, and at 
 the same time its most visible evidence. 
 
 The absence of security by mutual guarantee compels every 
 nation to seek to protect itself by its own armaments, and this 
 provokes on the part of the other nations counter-measures 
 against every defensive measure. Thus every defensive meas- 
 ure of one nation reacts upon others and creates a new menace 
 to the nation which has increased its armaments. This leads to 
 the ruinous and never-ending competition of armaments, which 
 exhausts the people of every nation. 
 
 These endless armament increases can achieve neither abso- 
 lute security nor peace as understood by Pacifism. They only 
 make the outbreak of war more difficult, but they can merely 
 serve to prolong that condition that has been characterized as 
 "no war." (See above, Chapter I.) 
 
 Pacifism, of course, does not think of accelerating the 
 elimination of the present international disorganisation through 
 disarmament, i.e., to attempt to change a cause by removing 
 its consequences. To the Pacifist the competition of arma- 
 ments is but a symptom of the present disorganisation, which 
 with the development of international organization will gradu- 
 ally disappear. For there are in this ve^ complex problem 
 various grades which cannot be adequately characterized by 
 the word "disarmament." We must distinguish betzveen "Un- 
 limited Competition of Armaments," "Limitation of Arma- 
 ments," "Temporary Stand-still of Armaments," with con- 
 tinually growing intervals, "Reduction of Armaments" and 
 "Total Disarmament." Pacifism holds both extremes, total 
 disarmament as well as unlimited competition of armaments, 
 equally senseless. The solution lies between these extremes. 
 In proportion to the development of international organization 
 will the single intermediary solutions be effected. The prob- 
 lem for the present is, in order to check at least partly the 
 intolerable waste of energy through stipulated regulations, to 
 equalise armaments. 
 
 \ 
 
"WAR" UNDER THE CONDITION OF INTERNA- 
 TIONAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 Total disarmament is not thought of, not even when inter- 
 national organization will be established. For even then the 
 necessity of applying physical force would not be done away 
 with any more than it is within the nation of to-day. The 
 possibility must be assumed that within international organ- 
 ization nations will still have to resist attacks from less civil- 
 ized countries which refuse to join or which must of necessity 
 be kept out of it. (It is possible, also, that nations will have 
 to defend themselves from lawbreakers within the community 
 of nations.? The employment of force will, however, become 
 extremely rare, but should it nevertheless prove necessary, it 
 will not be "war" in the present sense, if only because it will 
 not be a supreme effort on the part of the whole organism, as 
 war is to-day for the nation. It will only be made by the 
 organs established for this purpose, without strongly affecting 
 the normal life of the nation, just as to-day some police action 
 does not affect the life of civilized nations. The security of 
 organized nations will be absolutely effected through precisely 
 that organization. But the application of force will be funda- 
 mentally different from "zvar" of to-day. Force will serve 
 taw, and not — as in ivar — substitute for it. It will but establish 
 law, without violating it, and therefore leave behind no hatred, 
 nor any desire for revenge. Application of force will, there- 
 fore, never be a matter of glory, but merely a simple duty, 
 and thus the cult of force, to which history at present is sub- 
 servient will totally disappear. It will no longer be disorgan- 
 ized force, but regulated force. And regulated force is law. 
 The burglar who kills the man in the street exercises anarchic 
 force; the policeman who kills the burglar practices regulated 
 force. The actions are the same in both cases, but they are 
 different in nature. 
 
 // is apparent, therefore, that the mirage of "eternal peace" 
 is not found in the program of Pacifism. 
 
 lo 
 
VI 
 WHAT IS "WAR"? 
 
 During the period when nations were isolated units, the 
 business of poHtics was to execute the will of the nation as 
 against the outside. It was carried out peacefully so long as 
 there was no opposition ; by force when there was, which was 
 the usual thing under a condition of total disorganization in 
 the relations between states. War was a permanent institution 
 destined to carry out the nations' needs, and was really, as 
 Clausewitz defined it, "the continuation of politics, only by 
 other means." In the present time of increasing and almost 
 accomplished international organization, politics have become 
 the art of securing the various interests of individual nations 
 in such a way as not to interfere with the common interests of 
 all other nations. War is no longer the "continuation" of poli- 
 tics, but their failure. 
 
 War has, therefore, to-day ceased to be an institution; it is 
 a condition which may occasionally occur owing to the lack of 
 the establishment of international order, and owing to that 
 particular disorganization that still allows individual nations 
 to obtain real or supposed advantages over other nations. The 
 condition of war is the outcome of anarchic motives. 
 
 The application of force in itself is not necessarily charac- 
 terized by war. In the latter we can see working two dif- 
 ferent kinds of force — attack and defense — which equally cre- 
 ate that complexity of conditions which make themselves felt 
 as evil (waste of life and wealth, devastating diseases, inter- 
 ruption of traffic and intercourse, of law, economics, etc.). 
 The one is the application of force emanating from disorgan- 
 ized conditions, and the other that of the regulated force op- 
 posed to it for its control. Only he who applies the first kind 
 of force is responsible for these evils, only he literally "makes" 
 war. Not he who resists it. The action due to this disorgan- 
 ized condition — not necessarily always the assailant's — is the 
 primary cause of war; resistance only a secondary form, its 
 complement. (See Chapter V, concerning disorganized and 
 regulated force.) 
 
 "Preventive" Pacifism, in its fight against war, is, of course, 
 
 II 
 
( \ 
 
 ranged against the underlying causes of war, i.e., application 
 of force arising from disorganized conditions ; not against the 
 resistance impelled by it, which is but its consequence. 
 
 But as a rule it is exactly this secondary form of war that 
 those ivho oppose Pacifism have in mind, because they think \ 
 that war may also be necessary or even moral. But what \ 
 appears necessary or moral in this case is not zvar itself, but j 
 only that secondary action, the resistance against it; this pro- / 
 tection against aggression is, therefore, precisely what Pacifism / 
 seeks to achieve through the more rational means of preven- / 
 tion. ^...i-^ 
 
 VII 
 
 THE NATION AND INTERNATIONAL 
 ORGANIZATION 
 
 The misconceptions as to the nature and aims of Pacifism 
 have caused the reproach of an anti-national attitude, espe- 
 cially the erroneous assumption as if it were a question of 
 limiting the armaments merely of one's own nation, and of 
 the so-called "Peace at any price," i.e., the abandonment of 
 all resistance against aggression, of opposition to armies by 
 principle. Such ideas are against reason. They have noth- 
 ing to do with the true nature and aims of Pacifism. Besides 
 that, for many people with strong patriotic feeling, the word, 
 "international" includes a significance of anti-national." As 
 a matter of fact, the conception "international," in its true 
 meaning, plays absolutely no part in Pacifism. It only appears 
 to do so because we are accustomed to it in our terminology, 
 and because it is used rather on account of its conciseness and 
 adaptability. The Pacifist ideal is not concerned with the 
 relations between nationalities, but between nations, i.e., with 
 the governments and the people (often of mixed nationalities), 
 for which a term like "zwischenstaatlich," i.e., "as between 
 states" or "inter-governmental," would be more expressive. 
 The union between states that is in question should serve, first 
 of all, to secure for each nation advantages which it could not 
 obtain by itself, or only by disproportionate sacrifices. "Inter- 
 
 12 
 
nationalism," in its modern sense, is therefore not an anti- 
 national, but a very national conception; its true meaning is 
 the obtaining the highest welfare and security with the least 
 waste of energy. 
 
 The main reason why this is so often misunderstood by the 
 opponents of Pacifism, and, indeed, why they often denounce 
 these patriotic aims as being unpatriotic, is that they still look 
 upon each nation as a separate unit, incoherent, self-contained 
 and utterly independent of other nations ; therefore they con- 
 sider the peace movement as a force working excliisively within 
 their own respective countries. 
 
 The peace movement is working in all countries, and, whether 
 it has more or less support in one country or another, it is 
 always based upon the co-operation of all civilized nations. 
 In asking for means of securing world peace, the creation of 
 international order and the abandonment of conquest, it does 
 not expect any one single nation to fulfill these demands while 
 the others remain deaf to them; the solution of the problem 
 can only be achieved by common action. Thus understood, 
 these efforts protect every nation in the most practical and 
 most "patriotic" sense. 
 
 VIII 
 
 HUMAN NATURE 
 
 Not struggle is to be eUminated, but only its crudest form, 
 physical struggle. This is a process that is developing almost 
 automatically ; the whole evolution of mankind has more and 
 more narrowed the plane of physical force and replaced it by 
 spiritual struggle. To contest this would mean to contest his- 
 tory. Only between nations physical force is still applied, 
 and even there not without certain restrictions. Psychic force 
 has already gained a prominent place. Even the present com- 
 petition of armaments may sometimes be called "a war of 
 numbers," and, therefore, psychical struggle. As a rule, the 
 power concentrated in the armies and navies is not exercised 
 any more, but merely indicated, as zvith a hank the paper money 
 
 13 
 
merely indicates its actual capital lying in its safes. Struggle 
 is not eliminated through its refining; this only makes it more 
 complex and more manifold. And the more it becomes com- 
 plex, the less effective will physical force be, and only struggle 
 is the father of all things; not — as one so readily confuses it — 
 war, which is becoming more and more an impediment to 
 progress. 
 
 In nature, "struggle for existence" is never carried on for 
 the extinction of its own species. Among all living beings this 
 tragic destiny may only be observed in mankind. 
 
 On the other hand, throughout nature the lazv of "mutual 
 assistance" prevails among the same species. The struggle 
 for existence has a justification only in the struggle of man 
 against nature because only there is it productive, and it is 
 exactly this struggle that drives men to co-operation and to 
 organization. Thus even the natural "lazv of struggle" justi- 
 fies pacifism. 
 
 It is not necessary, as skeptics hold, for men to become 
 "angels" before war can be eliminated from international rela- 
 tions. They only need to be what they are by nature: egoists; 
 but egoists who must first learn to realize their true interests. 
 
 From this results the invalidity of the objection that war is 
 ineradicable because it is grounded in "human nature." But 
 supposing this objection were justified: Sexual instinct is also 
 grounded in human nature. Nevertheless society knozvs hozv 
 to protect itself when some one oversteps the harriers it has 
 erected against this powerftd natural instinct. Nobody zvould 
 any longer excuse sexual criminals by pleading "natural 
 laws." 
 
 IX 
 
 EXTENT AND EFFECT OF THE PACIFIST 
 MOVEMENT 
 
 The extent of Pacifism is not limited to the societies formed 
 for propagating it (peace societies and similar organizations). 
 
 14 
 
These are but the msible signs of a condition that is due to, 
 and inseparably connected with, the character of modern civ- 
 ilization. Everyone who works in the direction of civilization 
 promotes pacifism. Almost all our modern institutions are 
 means to its realization. The number of those working in the 
 direction of Pacifism is immeasurable. It is by no means 
 identical with the number of the members of peace organiza- 
 tions. There we find united only the conscious and leading 
 Pacifists. But besides that, there are the great masses of 
 unconscious Pacifists who work without willing it, simply 
 through the pressure of things directing them. Then there 
 are those who, though convinced, are too easy-going to take 
 a leading part. The opponents, too, are co-workers, for their 
 pressure exacts reaction. 
 
 It would be entirely wrong to believe that the Pacifist or- 
 ganizations had been founded in order to carry the peace 
 idea artificially from outside into our present time. In reality 
 they are born out of the present time and indicate its true 
 tendency. How ridiculous, therefore, to fight the peace organ- 
 izations ! As if one should destroy the thermometer to dimin- 
 ish heat or cold ! 
 
 Nor do the Pacifist organisations fortn one distinct unit. 
 There is no such thing as an "International League of peace" 
 extending all over the world, as some people think. The vari- 
 ous Pacifist organizations are created by the various political 
 tendencies of our time and have the physiognomy and char- 
 acter of the different elements that compose them. 
 
 According to the different principles upon which they are 
 formed or to the different viewpoints which they put into the 
 foreground (as religious, scientific, social, philosophical views) 
 they are striving for various goals by different methods, or 
 they confine themselves to certain partial aims. The only 
 thing they have in common is : 
 
 (i) the starting point, which is the opposition against the 
 present system of international relations; 
 
 (2) the direction of their efforts, which is to alter that 
 system. 
 
 From this it follows that the whole of Pacifism can never 
 be held responsible for the viewpoint, activities and methods 
 
 15 • 
 
of each of the single organizations. Pacifism is only the 
 highest scientific doctrine, which must accord with the actual 
 state of politics. 
 
 For the rest, it is not necessary to decide which organiza- 
 tion is the best or the most consistent and most effective, each 
 of them being adapted to a different circle and therefore 
 servifig their cause in their ozvn field, and not in that of an") 
 other organisation. Just as one's coat must be cut to one's 
 own measure, and one universal measure for humanity would 
 be impossible, so must the nature of the Pacifist organization 
 adapt itself to the various material and spiritual needs of men. 
 
 It is not, therefore, so much a question of creating the one 
 organization that applies the one right method and holds to 
 the one right formal aim, but rather to have organizations 
 adapted for all measures of purpose and strength. In accord- 
 ance to the moral: the final aim is nothing; the movement is 
 everything. 
 
 One must not believe that any peace organization will some 
 day bring about universal peace by applying a better program 
 or a better method. This will not be achieved by a sudden 
 acceptance of recommended principles of any branch of the 
 general movement ; but by a gradual penetration of Pacifism 
 into the national mind whereby its leading men often uncon- 
 sciously and without being converted will begin to act in 
 accordance to Pacifism after others have worked out the ideas 
 of Pacifism. Universal peace will come about through an 
 entire change of ideas and of estimation of advantages. This 
 general change of ideas will be effected not because Pacifism 
 has put forward certain claims, but solely because of the move- 
 ment that it has started, the thinking that it has awakened, the 
 discussion for and against its claims that it has created. Not 
 the uniformity and consistency of the peace programs, nor the 
 number of subscribing members of the single peace societies 
 will effect this change, but the strength, the power and the 
 extent of the whole movement, and through this its growing 
 influence and acceleration. 
 
 i6 
 
PEACE "AT ANY PRICE" 
 
 In order to express a distinct difference, the representatives 
 of the peace movement, who generally had been called "Peace 
 Advocates," or "Friends of Peace" ("Friedens-freunde"), 
 named themselves "Pacifists." For there is a fundamental 
 difference between being a "Friend of peace" and a "Pacifist." 
 Every normal man will look upon war as evil, and will agree 
 to the desirability of peace and therefore be a "friend of 
 peace." Even the most ardent militarist will feel this way. 
 But that does not yet make one a "Pacifist" ; first, because to 
 the mere friend of peace it is only a question of having "no 
 war," which differs essentially from the Pacifist conception of 
 peace, as has been shown at the beginning of this discussion. 
 Moreover, the "friend of peace" will desire a condition with- 
 out war only so long as an actual conflict or some real or sup- 
 posed interests of his own people do not impel him to think 
 that a settlement by force might be useful. He will be a 
 "friend of peace" as long as no actual war is in prospect, and 
 as long as his desires seem satisfied. But he will always reckon 
 with war as a necessary and valuable medium. The Pacifist, 
 to whom peace means not merely a pause in the employment 
 of force between two wars, but the substitution of international 
 disorder by international order and law, does not content him- 
 self to being solely a "friend" of this "peace," which means the 
 pause between wars, but seeks to create means and guarantes 
 that make it possible to avoid application of force precisely 
 in case that serious conflict should arise. The Pacifist does not 
 content himself to love peace in times of peace, hut aims to 
 secure international order for the case of conflict. 
 
 This attitude appears, of course, most conspicuously during 
 times of impending conflict when public opinion is stirred to 
 war. Thus the Pacifists have borne with the reproach of their 
 opponents, that they wish "peace at any price." This reproach 
 embodies a stigma of lack of patriotism. It would imply that 
 Pacifists want to avoid war even when national honor and 
 national interests are endangered. It creates the impression 
 that Pacifists are guided by senseless fanaticism, just as the 
 
 17 
 
fanatics of law in earlier times formulated the proposition, 
 "Fiat justitia, pereat mundus." Therefore, the Pacifists, in 
 their struggle to avoid war, would go so far as to cause a 
 greater evil. This, of course, would be illogical. But in all 
 striving for human betterment, logic is the valve which pre- 
 vents reason from becoming nonsense, benefit from becoming 
 misery. The elimination of war is aimed at by the Pacifists 
 only to secure advantages for humanity. This regulates the 
 "price" at which peace shall be secured. The fact that we ask 
 for peace only so long as it means an advantage over war is 
 the valve that automatically prevents the Pacifist aims from 
 falling into the extreme which their opponents attribute to 
 them by accusing them of aiming at "peace at any priced 
 
 This logic has but to be comprehended. The adversaries of 
 Pacifism who cannot or zvill not understand this by making 
 such reproaches merely seek to obtain a freehand for inciting 
 war, which has already been interfered with seriously through 
 the Pacifist propaganda. They only want to nullify the forces 
 of reason that are working for peace by discrediting them. 
 The slogan "peace at any price" has no other meaning than to 
 protect those who are making war from interference, and to 
 safeguard the interests of a few at the expense of the welfare 
 of the community. 
 
 XI 
 
 THE ATTITUDE OF PACIFISM TOWARD WAR 
 
 UNDER THE PRESENT CONDITION OF 
 
 INTERNATIONAL DISORGANIZATION 
 
 The peace movement works against war because war is still 
 possible and constantly impending. This is the justification of 
 its existence. The movement would be superfluous if a condi- 
 tion of peace zuere assured. 
 
 Curiously this simple truth is misunderstood by the public 
 to an incredible extent. For it is precisely during a time 
 of international disturbance and of impending armed conflict 
 that the peace movement is called untimely. As though to 
 
 i8 
 
 \ 
 
li'ork for peace ivere justified only zvlicn its breaking aph^cai 
 impossible! The fact that a crisis exists can never '.^lake ^, 
 pear unnecessary the elTorts to prevent it. Hygienic proi 
 ganda is not superfluous because, on account of a lack 
 proper sanitary precautions, pestilences actually do arise. The^ 
 demand for impregnation of inflammable material ii not use- 
 less because fires actually do break out because no such pre- 
 ventive nieasures have been taken. \^^ 
 
 The wrong concention as to the position of Pacifism toward \ 
 actual war may be clue to the superstitious belief that war is i 
 a natural phenomena beyond human control. This is why j 
 Paciiists aTe usually looked upon as people whose attitude / 
 toward this alleged inevitability is to confine themselves to ' 
 "loving" and "praising" peace, as one prefers a smooth sea 
 to a rough sea or fine weather to cloudburst. In the same 
 way one confines oneself to regarding Pacifists as people who 
 prefer the good and the beautiful to the bad and ugly, but 
 whom one has to pity when events occur which are no more 
 "good" and "beautiful" and which are therefore believed to 
 be very disappointing to them. Such must have been the 
 trend of thought of the high official who, during the Balkan 
 crisis, said to me, "/ would not like to be a Pacifist at present," 
 which means, of course, "I only want to be a friend of fine 
 weather when the sun shines, because otherwise in storm and 
 rain I would have to suffer for my predelictions." It is hardly 
 necessary to show how distorted this view is, least of all to 
 those who have read the foregoing fundamental argumen- 
 tations. 
 
 Then there are those who make Pacifists responsible when 
 war breaks out. They cry out upon us emphatically and 
 accuse us of hypocrisy because we were working against war 
 only in time of so-called peace, when, in their opinion, it is 
 unnecessary to do so. They do not know that one cannot 
 fight actual war, that one must change the causes that pro- 
 voke it. in order to shun the outbreak of hell. To them we 
 say, "JVe ^nre jio t_Jirenien zvhom one calls in to put out ajire. 
 \J'c are but flic sup'p'ffc'Fslrr'a'nTcdiiTnrfor fi re h roofi ng which 
 by timely af'/^'icaii";! ^'ould prevent tJic coiifiaorafion." 
 
 19 
 
6' 
 
 14 DAY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 HFC 31972:3 2 
 
 .# 
 
 
 ■^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 •§^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 > 
 
 vO^ 
 
 13^ 
 
 LD 21-40m-2,'69 
 (J60578l0i476 — A-32 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
 
 (^ yv/^-/^^^ 
 
II r BERKELEY LIBRARIES 
 
 1111 
 
 C031347M15 
 
 iv;J250014 Jll^ 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA UBRARY 
 
 "^r 
 
'^•/ 1