Activate Javascript or update your browser for the full Digital Library experience.
Previous Page
–
Next Page
OCR
ISSUES AND EVENTS
traffickers who promote war and preparations for war--
“preparedness.”
He charged that the Navy League, which inspired
and financed largely the present agitation for “prepara-
tion,” was founded by a group made up largely of war
traffickers. He also charged that among the most
active members and officers of the League today are
men who not only will profit from “preparedness,” but
who actually hold a monopoly on the materials for war
which the Government must purchase-that these war-
trafiicking men are in agreement with war munitioners
of Europe, barring the possibility of the United States
Government purchasing supplies of war at any price
but that fixed by the war-traffickers of the United
Statas. Mr. Tavenner’s charges never have been re-
ute .
The very men who pile up the armament of all na-
tions-and it is true that the same firm will often arm
both sides in a conflict-will find an enemy for any
country they arm. And they will arm, that enemy, too,
for the profits on arms are great, and the industry is a
monopoly.
This state of affairs has been brought right home to
Americans in the past few years in Mexico, where we
have seen the same arms manufacturers arming every
side. And the President, by raising the embargo on
arms, certainly did nothing for the peace of the world.
We ought to realize that it is the people who not
only pay the bills of these munitions makers, but pay
the penalty also in the death and misery the use of these
arms must bring.
Do we need preparedness?
The President himself, in his speeches made recently
in the middle west, could find no fear of invasion, and
his inconsistencies were pointed out even by the most
ardent editorial advocates of the “preparedness” plan.
In December, 1914, the President, in his message to
Congress, said: “Let there be no misconception. The
country has been misinformed. We have not been neg-
ligent of national defense.”
Since that time the President said he had changed his
mind. No personal vacillation, however, can change
the facts, and in spite of rumors and suggestions of fear
there have been no material facts placed before the
people of the country to show that the President had
any military reason for his change of mind.
The people should think for themselves and demand
to know facts. V
VVhatever the standing of the country’s safety, this
much is due the people; they should be allowed to
share the secret terrorizing dispatches the President
declared in his recent tour he received almost hourly.
The nation is great enough and the people strong
enough to bear the worst, to know what threatens
them. . I
Not only that, but it is the right of the people to
demand of their President the causes for his alarm.
And if that alarm is not genuine, they have a right to
know why it was uttered by the head of the nation.
The people of the United States are patriotic. But
it is time for all to realize that patriotism does not con-
sist merely of dying for one’s country I believe that
patriotism consists more in living for the benefit of the
whole world, of giving others a chance to live for them-
selves, their country and the world. A man is naturally
patriotic, and to cry patriotism at him as is now being
done throughout the country is more of an insult than
a compliment.
I believe, too, that many more men have died be-
cause of ambition, avarice and insincerity than ever
died in a just cause. I have dedicated my life's work
to the education of men on this subject, with the hope
that if war comes again men will know before they
march against the machine guns whether -they are
159
marching for a just cause or for ambition, avarice and
insincerity. -
It is a regrettable fact that many of'the mediums of
education in the United States have been swayed to
the cry for big armament. Not only is this true, but. it
is equally true that these same organs have bred racial
hatred by the printing of incendiary news stories and
articles, preaching fear of one of the European bellig-
erents, giving prominence to rumors of unneutral acts
of violence, and paying slight regard to oflicial denials
of the same. . .
These organs tell us that one of the warring factions
in Europe is bleeding to crush militarism, yet in the
same pages the assumption of this beginning of mili-
tarism is declared to be the solemn duty of the United
States.
For a hundred years, with Europe fully armed and
strong, we have been safe. Now, with Europe locked
in a deadly,-embrace and bleeding to death, we are called
upon to fear its invasion of our shores.
The following from the New York Times of Febru-
ary 9, printed prominently by the Times, but not con-
spicuously treated by the great majority of city news-
papers, gives some idea of the facts:
“Washington, February 8.-Testimony that pleased
the pacifist element in the House was furnished to the
Committees on Military and Naval Affairs today by
General Nelson A. Miles, U. S. A., retired, and Rear
Admiral Victor Blue, Chief of the Bureau of Naviga-
tion. General Miles said he did not fear an invasion of"
the United States and that an invading enemy could.
quickly be driven from the country. Admiral Blue-
declared the navy now was ready to meet any enemy it.
might be called upon to encounter in the Pacific.”
And, remember, aside from the fact that we are able
to do this, there remains still the greater fact that noth-
ing more than generalities regarding the possibility of"
any attack have been advanced in justification of the
attempt to work up an artificial hysteria as a prelim-
inary to inoculation with the rabies of war.
Those who have opposed this militaristic scheme have
been characterized as cowards, poltroons and unpatri--
otic. They are less cowardly than the most ardent mili--
tarists, because it is fear that is inspiring those who are
not looking for the profits. And this fear is a fear with-
out foundation in reason. Is it unpatriotic to wish for-
world peace instead of a universal war over commer-
cial rights of a few men or to uphold an unpopular gov-
ernment? .
The sooner the government of the world gets down-
to a business basis the better off the world will be. I
cannot conceive how any business man in the United”
States, after viewing the result of military preparation:
in Europe, realizing the geographical situation of the
United States, and considering the result of the Dar-
danelles operations, could so allow his fears to be-
played upon by military bargainers as to approve the
plan to make this nation an armed camp. There have
been fine words about “preparedness” and “militarism”
.being totally different, but Europe knows today that
the only difference is in spelling.
Congressman Kitchin, who has risked his leadership
ofthe Democrats in the House to oppose the “prepared-
ness” measure, calls attention to the fact that the
United States has been spending of late years a greater
part of its revenue for military equipment than has
any other nation in the world. With the billions that
would be spent under the proposed extravagant pro--
gram, the taxpayers would be giving nearly 70 per cent.
of what they contribute to government revenue for the
support of an army and navy.
Would any man, preparing to fight a fire in his shops,
store those same shops with tons of inflammables? Yet
that is what “preparedness” does. And then, of course,
must come the inevitable. -