istic teachings in this respect, can give fully adequate reasons why they should live a moral life. These reasons are in no way dependent on public opinion, or on any relation to success or happiness here, and are, therefore, calculated to influence conduct under the most extreme conditions of temptation or secrecy. Hence the only Rationalistic and adequate incentive to morality - the only full and complete affirmative answer to the question, "Why live a moral life? "-is that which is based upon the conception of a future state of existence systematically taught by Modern Spiritualism. CHAPTER XXII THE CAUSES OF WAR, AND THE REMEDIES In response to a request from the Editor of L'Humanité Nouvelle, I give my views, briefly, on the questions submitted to me.1 (1) Under the existing conditions of society in all civilized communities, and as a consequence of the principles and methods of government which prevail in them, war cannot cease to be more or less prevalent among them. The conditions which almost inevitably lead to war are the existence of specialized ruling and military classes, to whom the possession of power and the excitements and rewards of successful war are the great interests of life. So long as the people permit these distinct and independent classes to exist, and more than this continue to look up to them as superiors and as necessary for the proper government of the country and for the effective protection of individual and national freedom, so long will these rulers continue to make wars. 1 These questions were as follows : 1. Is war among civilized nations still necessary on the grounds of history, right, and progress? 2. What are the effects of militarism-intellectual, moral, physical, economic, and political? 3. What is the best solution of the problems of war and militarism in the interests of the future civilization of the world? 4. What is the most rapid means of arriving at this solution ? A French translation of the larger part of this article appeared in the special supplementary number of L'Humanité Nouvelle for May, 1899, which contains replies by more than 130 writers, including Tolstoy and seven English authors. All civilized governments, whatever may be their professions, act on the principle that extension of territory and the absorption of adjacent or remote lands, so as to increase both the extent of country and the population over which they have sway, is a good in itself, quite irrespective of the consent of the peoples so absorbed and governed, and even when the peoples are alien in race, in language, and in religion. Although they may not openly avow their acceptance of this doctrine, yet they invariably act upon it, though in some cases they think it necessary to make excuses for their action. They declare that such conquest and absorption is necessary for the national safety, for the increase of trade, and for many other reasons. The majority of the workers, and of educated people who do not belong to the ruling or the military classes, however, do not accept this principle. They more or less decisively hold the opinion that governments can only justly derive their power from the consent of the governed, and that all wars for territory and all conquests of alien peoples are wrong. The reason of this difference of opinion is very simple. Every addition of territory, every fresh conquest even of barbarous nations or of savages, provides outlets and additional places of power and profit for the ever-increasing numbers of the ruling classes, while it also provides employment and advancement for an increased military class, in first subduing and then coercing the subject populations, and in preparing for the inevitable frontier disputes and the resulting further extensions of territory. Wars and conquests and everexpanding territories are thus found to be essential to their existence and continued power as superior classes. But the people outside these classes derive little, if any, benefit from such extensions, while they invariably suffer from increased taxation, either temporarily or permanently, due to increased armaments which the protection of the enlarged territory requires. Almost without exception every war of modern times has been a dynastic war-a war conceived and carried out in the interests of the two great governing classes, but having no relation whatever to the well-being of the peoples who have been forced to fight each other. In every case the people suffer by the loss or disablement of sons, husbands, and fathers, by the destruction of crops, houses, and other property, and by increased taxation, due to the increase of armaments that always follows such wars even in the case of the victors. Hence the material and moral interests of the mass of the people of every country are wholly opposed to war, except in the one case of defending their country against invasion and conquest. They are therefore more open to the influence of moral and humane considerations, while they alone feel the full force of the numberless evils which war brings upon them. Except in very rare cases, a plébiscite fairly taken would decide against any other than a defensive war. (2) To discuss the effects of militarism under the various heads suggested in the question would require much space and some special knowledge which I do not possess. That these effects have both good and evil aspects may be admitted. The evil effects have been often set forth and are sufficiently known, both in their vast extent and far-reaching consequences, while the greatest of them-the perpetuation of war and the desire for military glory-has already been alluded to. I will, therefore, confine my remarks to the partial good that undoubtedly exists in this fundamentally evil thing, chiefly for the purpose of showing that whatever good there is in it may be obtained in other ways which are as essentially humane, moral, and beneficial as war is essentially cruel, immoral, and hurtful. The good that results from militarism arises wholly from the perfection of its organisation, of its training, of the habits of order, cleanliness, and obedience which the soldier soon learns are essentials to efficiency; from the social and brotherly life of the soldier, whether in camp or in the field; from the esprit de corps which grows out of its systematic organisation and companionship, leading to generous rivalry and to those deeds of heroism and self-sacrifice which are universally admired. And, further, every soldier learns by experience the marvellous power of organized labour under skilled direction to overcome what to the ordinary man seem insurmountable difficulties. He sees how foaming torrents or broad rivers can be rapidly bridged; how roads can be made over morasses or across mountains; how the most formidable and apparently impregnable defences are attacked and taken; and how a few bold men in a " forlorn hope," by the sacrifice of their lives, often ensure the success of the army to which they belong. Many of the finest qualities of our nature are thus called into action by the soldier's training and during his struggle against the enemy; and so greatly has humanity developed among us that it may be fairly argued that these good effects more than balance the evil passions of cruelty, lust, and plunder which even now are to some extent manifested in every great war, though to a far less degree than even fifty years back. But every one of these good results of militarism could certainly be obtained by any equally extensive and equally skilful organization for wholly beneficial purposes. If labour, where organized for military ends, is so effective in results and so beneficial as a training, it would be equally effective and equally beneficial when devoted to overcoming the obstacles to man's progress presented by nature; to the production of the necessaries of civil life; to sanitary works for the preservation of health; and to everything that facilitates communication and benefits humanity. If the same amount of knowledge, the same amount of energy, and the same lavish expenditure where absolutely required, were devoted to the training of great industrial armies, to their maintenance in the most perfect health and efficiency, and to their employment in that great war which man is ever waging against Nature, subduing her myriad forces to his service, guarding against those sudden attacks by storm and flood, by avalanche and earthquake, which he cannot altogether avoid, and in the production of all the essentials of human life and of a true and beneficent civilization, the good effects on character would surely be as much greater than those produced by mere military training, as the objects aimed at and the results achieved |