THE LAND OF THE SLEEPLESS WATCHDOG

If from almost any given point in the United States you start out towards

the Southwest, you will reach in time the Land of the Sleepless Watchdog.

On each of the scattered farms, defending it against all intruders, you

will find a band of eager and vociferous dogs--dogs who magnify their

calling because they have no other, and who, by the same token lose all

sense of proportion in life. It is "theirs not to reason why," but to put

up warnings and threats, and to be ready for the fight that never comes.

If you enter a domain without previous understanding with them, you are

powerless for mischief, for you are in the center of a publicity beside

which any other publicity is that of a hermit's cell. The whole farm knows

where you are, and all are suspicious of your predatory intentions. You

can have none under these conditions. Meanwhile the whole pack voices its

opinion of you and your unworthiness.

This is supposing that you are actually there. If you are not, it amounts

to the same thing. Every dog knows that you meant to be there, or at any

rate, that to be there was the scheme of someone equally bad. The

slightest rustle of the wind, the call of a bird, the ejaculation

responsive to a flea--any of these, anything to set the pack going.

And one pack starts the next. And the cries of the two start the third and

the fourth, and each of these reacts on the first. The cry passes along

the line, "We have him at last, the mad invader." There being no other

enemy, they cry out against each other. And of late years, since the

barbed wire choked the cattle ranges, and gave pause to the coyote, there

has been no enemy. But the dogs are there, though their function has

passed away. It is but a tradition--a remembrance. Only to the dogs

themselves does any reality exist.

Yet, such is the nature of dogs and men, the watchdog was never more

numerous nor more alert than today. He was never in better voice, and

having nothing whatever to do, he does it to the highest artistic

perfection. At least one justification remains. Civilization has not done

away with the moon. In the stillness of night, its great white face peeps

over the hills at intervals no dog has yet determined. Under this weird

light, strange shadowy forms trip across the fields. The watchdogs of each

farm have given warning, and the whole countryside is eager with

vociferation.

Men say the Sleepless Watchdog's bark is worse than his bite. This may be,

but it is certain that his feed is worse than both bark and bite together.

In the language of economics, the Sleepless Watchdog is an unremunerative

investment. He has "eaten his master out of house and home," and by the

same token, he imagines that he himself is now the master.

* * * * *

By this time, the gentle but astute reader has observed that this is no

common "Dog Story," but a parable of the times we live in; and that the

real name of the Land of the Sleepless (but unremunerative) Watchdog is

indeed Europe.

And because of the noisy and costly futility of the whole system in his own

and other countries, Professor Ottfried Nippold of Frankfort-on-the-Main,

has made a special study of the Watchdogs of Germany.

The good people of the Fatherland some forty years ago were drawn into a

great struggle with their neighbors beyond the Rhine. To divert his

subjects' attention from their ills at home, the Emperor of France wagered

his Rhine provinces against those of Prussia, in the game of War. The

Emperor lost, and the King of Prussia took the stakes: for in those days

it was a divine right of Kings to deal in flesh and blood.

The play is finished, the board is cleared, Alsace and Lorraine were added

to Germany, and the mistake is irretrievable. A fact accomplished cannot

be blotted out. But hopeless as it all is, there are watchdogs who, on

moonlight nights, call across the Vosges for revenge--for honor, for War,

War, War. And the German watchdogs cry War, War, War. The word sounds the

same in all languages. The watchdogs bark, but the battle will never

begin.

It is Professor Nippold's purpose, in his little book _Der Deutsche

Chauvinismus_, to show that the clamor is not all on one side. The

watchdogs of the Paris Boulevards are noisy enough, but those of Berlin

are just the same. And as these are not all of Germany, so the others are

not all of France. A great, thrifty, honest, earnest, cultured nation does

not find its voice in the noises of the street. On the other hand,

Germany, industrious, learned, profound and brave, is busy with her own

affairs. She would harm no one, but mind her own business. But she is

entangled in mediæval fashions. She has her own band of watchdogs, as

noisy, as futile, as unthinkingly clamorous as ever were those of France.

The "Sleepless Watchdog" in France is known as a Chauvinist, in England as

a Jingo, in Prussia as a Pangermanist. They all bay at the same moon, are

excited over the same fancies; they hear nothing, see nothing but one

another. All alike live in an unreal world, in its essentials a world of

their own creation. With all of them the bark is worse than the bite, and

their "Keep" is more disastrous than both together.

And as each nation should look after its own, Dr. Nippold

lists--blacklists if you choose--the Chauvinists of Germany.

At first glance, they make an imposing showing. A long series of

newspapers, dozens of pamphlets, categories of bold and impressive

warnings against the schemes of England and France, a set of appeals in

the name of patriotism, of religion, of force, of violence. A long-drawn

call to hate, to hate whatever is not of our own race or class; and above

all the banding together of the "noblest" profession as against the

encroachments of mere civilians, of men whose hands are soiled with other

stains than blood.

We have, first and foremost, General Keim, Keim the invincible, Keim the

insatiable, Keim of the Army-League, Keim the arch hater of England and of

Russia and of France, Keim the jewel of the fighting Junker aristocracy of

Prussia--the band of warriors who despise all common soldiers--"white

slave" conscripts, and with them all civilians, who at the best are only

potential common soldiers. "War, war, on both frontiers," is Keim's

obsessing vision. War being inevitable and salutary, it cannot come too

soon. The duty of hate, he urges on all the youth of Germany, maidens as

well as men. It is said that Keim is the only man of the day who can

maintain before an audience of Christians such a proposition as this: "We

must learn to hate, and to hate with method. A man counts little who

cannot hate to a purpose. Bismarck was hate."

From Gaston Choisy's clever character sketch of General Keim, we learn

that as a soldier or tactician, he was a man of no note. He has no ability

as a thinker or as a speaker, but this he has: "the courage of his

vulgarity." "At the age of 68, suffering from Bright's Disease, he

travelled all Germany, his great head always in ebullition, gathering

everywhere for the war-fire all the news, all the stories and all the lies

susceptible of aiding the Cause." "Without Bismarck's authority, he had

his manner--a mixture of baseness, of atrocious joviality, a studied

cynicism and a lack of conscience." "How generous are circumstances! The

spirit of Von Moltke the silent, with the speech of an _enfant terrible_,

an endless flow of language, an endless course of words."

To the Chauvinists of France, Keim is indeed Germany. As to his own

country, Von Ferlach sagely remarks: "Keims and Keimlings unfortunately

are all about us. But they are a vanishing minority." The great culture

peoples do not hate one another. ("Die grossen Kultur-volker hassen

einander nicht.")

Next on the black list, comes General Frederick von Bernhardi, with his

_Germany and the Next War_, the need to obliterate France, while giving

the needed chastisement to England. A retired officer of cavalry, said to

be disgruntled through failure of promotion, a tall, spare, serious, prosy

figure, a writer without inspiration, a speaker without force. Germany has

never taken him seriously; for he lacks even the clown-charm of his rival

Keim, but the mediæval absurdities and serious extravagances in his

defense of war are well tempered to stir the eager watchdogs in the rival

lands. In spite of his pleas, "historical, biological and philosophical,"

for war, he is a man of peace, for which, in the words of General

Eichhorn, "one's own sword is the best and strongest pledge."

Doubtless other retired officers hold views of the same sort, as do

doubtless many who could not be retired too soon for the welfare of

Germany. Into the nature of their patriotism, the Zabern incident has

thrown a great light. "Other lands may possess an army," a Prussian

officer is quoted as saying, "the army possesses Germany."

The vanities and follies of Prussian militarism are concentrated in the

movement called Pangermanism. Behind this, there seem to be two moving

forces, the Prussian Junker aristocracy, and the financial interests which

center about the house of Krupp. The purposes of Pangermanism seem to be,

on the one hand, to prevent parliamentary government in Germany; and on

the other, to take part in whatever goes on in the world outside. Just

now, the control of Constantinople is the richest prize in sight, and that

fateful city is fast replacing Alsace in the passive role of "the

nightmare of Europe." The journalists called Conservative find that

"Germany needs a vigorous diplomacy as a supplement to her power on land

and sea, if she is to exercise the influence she deserves." And a vigorous

foreign policy is but another name for the use of the War System as a

means of pushing business. From the daily press of Germany may be culled

many choice examples of idle Jingo talk, but analysis of the papers

containing it shows their affiliation with the "extreme right," a small

minority in German politics, potent only through the indiscretions of the

Crown Prince, and through the fact that the Constitution of Germany gives

its people no control over administrative affairs. The journals of this

sort--the _Tägliche Rundschau_, the _Berliner Post_, the _Deutsche

Tageszeitung_, and the _Berliner Neueste Nachrichten_ are the property of

Junker reactionists, or else, like the _Lokal Anzeiger_, the

_Rheinisch-Westphalische Zeitung_, the organs merely of the War trade

House of Krupp. Out from the ruck of hack writers, there stands a single

imposing figure, Maximilian Harden, the "poet of German politics," who

"casts forth heroic gestures and thinks of politics in terms of æsthetics,

the prophet of a great, strong and saber-rattling nation," whose force

shall be felt everywhere under the sun.

Bloodthirsty pamphlets in numbers, are listed by Nippold. But the

anonymous writers ("Divinator," "Rhenanus," "Lookout," "Deutscher,"

"Politiker," "Activer General" and "Deutscher Officier") count for less

than nothing in personal influence. They do little more than bay at the

moon.

Impressive as Nippold's list seems at first, and dangerous to the peace of

the world, after all one's final thought is this: How few they are, and

how scant their influence, as compared with the wise, sane, commonsense of

sixty millions of German people. The two great papers that stand for peace

and sanity, the _Berliner Tageblatt_ and the _Frankfurter Zeitung_, with

the _Münchener Neueste Nachrichten_, are read daily by more Germans than

all the reactionary sheets combined. The Socialist organ _Vorwaerts_,

avowedly opposed to monarchy as well as to militarism, carries farther

than all the organs of Pangermanism of whatever kind.

We may justly conclude that the war spirit is not the spirit of Germany, a

nation perforce military because the people cannot help themselves. So far

as it goes, it is the spirit of a narrow clique of "sleepless watchdogs"

whose influence is waning, and would be non-existent were it not for the

military organization which holds Germany by the throat, but which has

pushed the German people just as far as it dares.

A second lesson is that while forms of government, and social traditions,

may differ, the relation of public opinion towards war is practically the

same in all the countries of Western Europe. It is in its way the test of

European civilization. Each nation has its "sleepless watchdogs," and

those of one nation fire the others, when the proper war scares are set in

motion by the great unscrupulous group of those who profit by them. The

war promoters, the apostles of hate, form a brotherhood among themselves,

and their success in frightening one nation reacts to make it easier to

scare another.

This the reader may remember, as a final lesson. There is no civilized

nation which longs for war. There is nowhere a reckless populace clamoring

for blood. The schools have done away with all that. The spread of

commerce has brought a new Earth with new sympathies and new relations, in

which international war has no place.

If you are sure that your own nation has no design to use violence on any

other, you may be equally sure that no other has evil designs on you. The

German fleet is not built as a menace to England; whether it be large or

small should concern England very little. Just as little does the size of

the British fleet bear any concern to Germany. The German fleet is built

against the German people. The growth of the British army and navy has in

part the same motive. Armies and navies hold back the waves of populism

and democracy. They seem a bulwark against Socialism. But in the great

manufacturing and commercial nations, they will not be used for war,

because they cannot be. The sacrifice appalls: the wreck of society would

be beyond computation.

But still the sleepless watchdogs bark. It is all that they can do, and we

should get used to them. In our own country, whatever country it may be,

we have our own share of them, and some of them bear distinguished names.

No other nation has any more, and no nation takes them really seriously,

any more than we do. And one and all, their bark is worse than their bite,

and the cost of feeding them is doubtless worse than either.

The Unpopular Review, Volume II Number 3 · 第 27 / 30 题