CHAPTER
XV
Some Lines of Fulfilment
WHAT
favoured form, force, system
among
the many
that are possible now or likely to emerge hereafter will be entrusted by the secret Will in things with the
external unification of mankind, is an interesting and to those who can look
beyond the narrow horizon of passing events, a fascinating subject of speculation;
but unfortunately it can at present be no- thing more. The very multitude of
the possibilities in a period of humanity so rife with the most varied and
potent forces, so fruitful of new subjective developments and objective
mutations creates an impenetrable mist in which only vague forms of giants can
be half glimpsed. Certain ideas suggested by the present status of forces and
by past experience are all that we can permit ourselves in so hazardous a
field.
We have ruled out of consideration
as a practical impossibility in the present international conditions and the
present state of international mentality and morality the idea of an immediate
settlement on the basis of an association of free nationalities, although this
would be obviously the ideal basis. For it would take as its founding motive
power a harmony of the two great principles actually in presence, nationalism
and internationalism. Its adoption would mean that the problem of human unity
would be approached at once on a rational and a sound moral basis, a
recognition, on one side, of the right of all large natural groupings of men to
live and to be themselves and the enthronement of respect for national liberty
as an established principle of human con- duct, on the other, an adequate sense
of the need for order, help, a mutual, a common participation, a common life
and interests in the unified and associated human race. The ideal society or
State is that in which respect for individual liberty and free growth of the
personal being to his perfec60n is harmonised with respect for the needs,
efficiency, solidarity, natural growth and
Page-372
organic perfection of the corporate being, the society or
nation. In an ideal aggregate of all humanity, in the international society or
State, national liberty and free national growth and self- realisation ought in
the same way to be progressively harmonised with the solidarity and unified
growth and perfection of the human race.
Therefore, if this basic principle were admitted, there might indeed be
fluctuations due to the difficulty of a perfect working combination, as in the
growth of the national aggregate there has been sometimes a stress on liberty
and at others a stress on efficiency and order; but since the right conditions
of the problem would have been recognised from the beginning and not left to be
worked out in a blind tug-of-war, there would be some chance of an earlier
reasonable solution with much less friction and violence in the process.
But
there is little chance of such an unprecedented good fortune for mankind. Ideal
conditions cannot be expected, for they demand a psychological clarity, a
diffused reasonableness and scientific intelligence and, above all, a moral
elevation and rectitude to which neither the mass of mankind nor its leaders
and rulers have yet made any approach. In their absence, not reason and justice
and mutual kindliness, but the trend of forces and their practical and legal
adjustment must determine the working out of this as of other problems. And just
as the problem of the State and the individual has been troubled and obscured
not only by the conflict between individual egoism and the corporate egoism of
the society, but by the continual clash between intermediate powers, class
strife, quarrels of Church and State, king and nobles, king and commons,
aristocracy and demos, capitalist bourgeoisie and labour proletariate, this
problem too of nation and international humanity is certain to be troubled by
the claims of just such intermediate powers. To say nothing of commercial
interests and combinations, cultural or racial sympathies, movements of
Pan-Islamism, Pan-Slavism, Pan-Germanism, Pan- Anglo-Saxonism, with a possible
Pan-Americanism and Pan- Mongolianism looming up in the future, to say nothing of
yet other unborn monsters, there will always be the great intermediate factor
of Imperialism, that huge armed and dominant
Page-373
Titan, that must by its very nature demand its own satisfaction,
at the cost of every suppressed or inconvenient
national unit and assert its own needs as prior to the need~ of the new-born
inter. national comity. That satisfaction, presumably, it must have for a time,
that demand it will be for long impossible to resist. At any rate, to ignore
its claims or to imagine that they can be put aside with a spurt of the
writer's pen, is to build symmetrical castles on the golden sands of an
impracticable idealism.
Forces take the first place in actual
effectuation; moral principles, reason, justice only so far as forces can be
compelled or persuaded to admit them or, as more often happens, use them as
subservient aids or inspiring battle cries, a camouflage for their own
interests. Ideas sometimes leap out as armed forces and break their way through
the hedge of unideal powers; sometimes they reverse the position and make
interests their subordinate helpers, a fuel for their own blaze; sometimes they
conquer by martyrdom: but ordinarily they have to work not only by a half.
covert pressure but by accommodation to powerful forces or must even bribe and
cajole them or work through and behind them. It cannot be otherwise until the
average and the aggregate man become more of an intellectual, moral and
spiritual being and less predominantly the vital and emotional half-reasoning human
animal. The unrealised international idea will have for some time at least to
work by this secondary method and through such accommodations with the realised
forces of nationalism and imperialism.
It may be questioned whether by the time
that things are ready for the elaboration of a firm and settled system, the
idea of a just internationalism based on respect for the principle of free
nationalities may not by the efforts of the world's thinkers and intellectuals
have made so much progress as to exercise an irresistible pressure on States
and Governments and bring about its own acceptation in large part, if not in
the entirety of its claims. The answer is that States and Governments yield
usually to a moral pressure only so far as it does not compel them to sacrifice
their vital interests. No established empire will easily liberate its dependent
parts or allow, unless compelled, a nation now subject to it to sit at the
board of an international council as its free
Page-374
equal.
The old enthusiasm for liberty is an ideal which made
France intervene to aid the
evolution of a free Italy or France and England
to create a new Greek nation. The national liberties for which respect was
demanded during the war even at the point of the sword
- or, we should say now,
even with the voice of the cannon shell -
were those already established and considered therefore to have the right still
to exist. All that was pro- posed beyond that limit was the restoration to
already existing free States of men of their own
nationality still under' a foreign yoke.
It was proposed to realise a greater Serbia, a greater Rumania, the restoration
of "unredeemed" Italy, and the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France.
Autonomy under Russian sovereignty was all that was promised to Poland till the
German victory over Russia altered the interest and with it the idealism of the
Allies. Autonomy of a kind under an imperial sovereignty or where that does not
yet exist, under imperial "protection" or "influence" are by
many considered as more practical ideas now than the restoration of national
freedom. That is a sign perhaps of the obscure growth of the idea of federated
empires which we have discussed as one of the possibilities of the future.
National liberty as an absolute ideal has no longer the old general acceptation
and creative force. Nations struggling for liberty have to depend on their own
strength and enthusiasm; they can expect only a tepid or uncertain support
except from enthusiastic individuals or small groups whose aid is purely vocal
and ineffective. Many even of the most advanced intellectuals warmly approve of
the idea of subordinate autonomy for nations now subject, but seem to look with
impatience on their velleities of complete independence. Even so far has
imperialism travelled on its prosperous road and the imperial aggregate
impressed its figure on the freest imaginations as an accomplished power in
human progress.
How much further may not this sentiment
travel under the new impulse of humanity to organise its international
existence on larger and more convenient lines! It is even possible that the
impatience openly expressed by the German in his imperial days against the
continued existence of small nationalities opposing their settled barrier of
prescribed rights to large political and
Page-375
commercial
combinations may, while softening its rigour, yet justify its claim in the
future, may be accepted by the general sense of humanity though in a less
brutal, a less arrogant and aggressively egoistic form. That is to say, there
may grow up a stronger tendency in the political reason of mankind to desire,
perhaps eventually to insist on the rearrangement of States in a system of
large imperial combines and not on the basis of a status quo of mixed empires
and free nationalities.1
But even if this development does not
take place or does not effect itself in time, the actually existing free and
non-imperial States will find themselves included indeed in whatever
international council or other system may be established, but this inclusion is
likely to be very much like the position of the small , nobles in mediaeval
times in relation to the great feudal princes,
a position rather of vassals than of equals. The war brought into relief
the fact that it is only the great Powers that really count in the
international scale; all others merely exist by sufferance or by protection or
by alliance. So long as the world was arranged on the principle of separate
nationalities, this might have been only a latent reality without actually
important effects on the life of the smaller nations, but this immunity might
cease when the necessity of combined action or a continual active interaction
became a recognised part or the foundation of the world-system. The position of
a minor State standing out against the will of large Powers or a party of
Powers would be worse even than that of small neutrals in the present war or of
a private company surrounded by great Trusts. It would be compelled to accept
the lead of one group or another of the leviathans around it and its
independent weight or action in the council of nations would be nil.
Undoubtedly, the right of small nations
to exist and assert their interests against imperialistic aggression is still a
force; it was one at least of the issues in the international collision. But
the assertion of this right against the aggression of a single ambitious Power
is one thing; its assertion as against any arrangement for the common interest
of the nations decided upon by a
1 If the ambitions of Italy, Germany and Japan and the Fascist idea
generally had triumphed, such an order of things might have eventuated.
Page-376
majority of the great Powers would very likely in the near
future be regarded in quite another light. The inconvenience of a number of
small neutrals claiming to stand out and be as little affected
as possible by an immense
international conflict was acutely felt
not only by the actual combatants who were obliged to use sometimes an
indirect, sometimes a direct pressure to minimise the inconveniences, but by
the smaller neutrals themselves to whom their neutrality was preferable only as
a lesser evil than the burden and disaster of active participation in the struggle.
In any international system, the self-assertion of these smaller liberties
would probably be viewed as a petty egoism and 'ff intolerable obstacle to
great common interests, or, it may be, to the decision of conflicts between
great world-wide interests. It is probable indeed that in any constitution of
international unity the great Powers would see to it that their voice was equal
to their force and influence; but even if the
constitution were outwardly democratic,
yet, in effect, it would become an oligarchy of the great Powers. Constitutions
can only disguise facts, they cannot abrogate them: for whatever ideas the form
of the constitution may embody, its working is always that of the actually
realised forces which can use it with effect. Most governments either have now
or have passed through a democratic form, but nowhere yet has there been a real
democracy; it has been everywhere the propertied and professional classes and
the bourgeoisie who governed in the name of the people. So too in any international
Councilor control it would be a few great empires that would govern in the name
of humanity.
At the most, if it were otherwise,
it could be only for a short time, unless some new forces came into their own
which would arrest or dissolve the tendency now dominant in the world towards
large imperial aggregations. The position would then be for a time very much
like that of feudal Europe while it was in abortive travail of a united
Christendom, - a great criss-cross of heterogeneous, complicated, overlapping
and mutually interpenetrating interests, a number of small Powers counting for
something, but overshadowed and partly coerced by a few great Powers, the great
Powers working out the inevitable complication of their allied, divided and contrary
interests by whatever
Page-377
means
the new world-system provided and using for that purpose whatever support of
classes, ideas, tendencies, institutions they could find. There would be
questions of Asiatic, African, American fiefs and markets, struggles or classes
starting as national questions becoming international; Socialism, Anarchism and
the remainder of the competitive age of humanity struggling together for
predominance; clashes of Europeanism, Asiaticism, Americanism. And from this
great tangle some result would have to be worked out. It might well be by
methods very different from those with which history has made us so familiar;
war might be eliminated or reduced to. a rare phenomenon of civil war in the
international commonwealth or confederacy; new forms of coercion, such as the
commercial which we now see to be growing in frequency, might ordinarily take
its place; other devices might be brought into being of which we have at
present no conception. But the situation would be essentially the same for
humanity in general as has confronted lesser unformed aggregates in the past
and would have to progress to similar issues of success, modified realisation
or failure.
The most natural simplification of the
problem, though not one that looks now possible, would be the division of the
world into a few imperial aggregates consisting partly of federal, partly of
confederate commonwealths or empires. Although unrealisable with the present
strength of national egoisms, the growth of ideas and the force of changing
circumstances might some day bring about such a creation and this might lead to
a closer confederacy. America seems to be turning dimly towards a better
understanding between the increasingly cosmopolitan United States and the Latin
Republics of Central and South America which may in certain contingencies
materialise itself into a confederate inter-American State. The idea of a
confederate Teutonic empire, if Germany and Austria had not been entirely
broken by the result of the war, might well have realised itself in the near
future; and even though they are now broken it might still realise itself in a
more distant future1 () Similar aggregates may emerge
in the Asiatic world. Such a distribution of
1 Unfortunately this result seems destined to disappear by the formidable
survival of a military Germany under the Fuhrer.
Page-378
mankind
in large natural aggregates
would have the advantage of simplifying a
number of difficult world-problems and with the growth of peace, mutual
understanding and larger ideas might lead to a comparatively painless final
aggregation in a World-State.
Another possible solution is suggested by
the precedent of the evolution of the nation-type out of its first loose feudal
form. As there the continual clash of various forces and equipollent powers
necessitated the emergence of one of them, at first only prominent among his
equals, the feudal king, into the type of a centralised monarchy, so
conceivably, if the empires and nations of the world failed to arrive at a
peaceful solution among them- selves, if the class troubles, the
inter-commercial troubles, the conflict of various new ideas and tendencies
resulted in a long confusion and turmoil and constant changing, there might
emerge a king-nation with the mission of evolving a real and settled out of a
semi-chaotic or half order. We have concluded that the military conquest of the
world by a single nation is not possible except under conditions which do not
now exist and of which there is as yet no visible prospect.
. But an imperial nation,
such as England for example, spread over all
the world, possessing the empire of the seas, knowing how to federate
successfully its constituent parts and organise their entire potential
strength, having the skill to make itself the representative and protector of
the most progressive and liberal tendencies of the new times, allying itself
with other forces and nations interested in their triumph and showing that it
had the secret of a just and effective international organisation, might
conceivably become the arbiter of the nations and the effective centre of an
international government. Such a possibility in any form is as yet entirely
remote, but it could become under new circumstances a realisable possibility of
the future.
Conceivably, if the task of organising the world proved too difficult,
if no lasting agreement could be arrived at or no firmly constituted legal
authority erected, the task might be undertaken not by a single predominant
empire, but by two or three great imperial Powers sufficiently near in interest
and united in idea to sink possible differences and jealousies and strong
enough to
Page-379
dominate or crush all resistance and enforce some
sort of
effective international law and government1 The process
would then be a sufficiently painful one and might involve much brutality of
moral and economic coercion, but if it commanded the prestige of success and
evolved some tolerable form of legality and justice or even only of prosperous
order, it might in the end conciliate a general moral support and prove. a
starting-point for freer and better forms.
Yet another possibility that cannot be
ignored is that the merely inter-governmental and political evolution which
alone we have considered, may be broken in upon by the long-threatened war of
classes. Labour internationalism broke down, like every other form of
internationalism - scientific, cultural, pacific, religious
-
under the fierce test of war
and during the great crisis the struggle
between Labour and Capital was suspended. It was then hoped that after the war
the spirit of unity, conciliation and compromise would continue to reign and
the threatened conflict would be averted. Nothing in human nature or in history
warranted any such confident trust in the hopes of the moment. The interclass
conflict has long been threatening like the European collision. The advent of
the latter was preceded by large hopes of world-peace and attempts at a
European concert and treaties of arbitration which would render war finally
impossible. The hope of a concert between Labour and Capital idyllically
settling all their acute causes of conflict in amoebaean stanzas of melodious
compromise for the sake of the higher national interests is likely to be as
treacherous and delusive. Even the socialisation of governments and the
increasing nationalisation of industry will not remove the root cause of
conflict. For there will still remain the crucial question of the form and
conditions of the new State socialism, whether it shall be regulated in the
interests of Labour or of the capitalistic State and whether its direction
shall be democratic by the workers them- selves or oligarchic or bureaucratic
by the present directing classes. This question may well lead to struggles which
may easily
1 If, for instance, a struggle
came to a head between the democratic and the totalitarian Powers, the combined force of
a victorious Britain, France and America or in the contrary event, of the
Fascist Powers, might impose an initial order in the world.
Page-380
grow into an international or at
least an inter-European conflict; it might even rend each nation in two instead
of uniting it as in the war crisis. And the results of such a struggle may have
an incalculable effect, either in changing the ideas and life of men
dynamically in new directions or in breaking down the
barriers of existing nations and empires.1
1 This hypothetic forecast was fully justified - and
tended to become more and more so - by the post-war development of national and
international life. The inhuman butchery in Spain, the development of two
opposite types of Socialism in Russia, Italy and Germany, the uneasy political
situation in France were examples of the fulfilment of these tendencies. But
this tendency has reached its acme in the emergence of Communism and it now
seems probable that the future will belong to a struggle between Communism and a
surviving capitalistic Industrialism in the New World or even between Communism
and a more moderate system of social democracy in the two continents of the Old
World. But generally speaking, speculations noted down in this chapter at a time
when the possibilities of the future were very different from what they are now
and all was in a flux and welter of dubious confusion, are out of date since an
even more stupendous conflict has intervened and swept the previous existing
conditions out of existence. Nevertheless, some of them still survive and
threaten the safe evolution of the new tentative world-order or, indeed, any
future world-order.
Page-381