MIGHT IS RIGHT

_First published as one of the Oxford Pamphlets, October 1914_

It is now recognized in England that our enemy in this war is not a

tyrant military caste, but the united people of modern Germany. We have

to combat an armed doctrine which is virtually the creed of all Germany.

Saxony and Bavaria, it is true, would never have invented the doctrine;

but they have accepted it from Prussia, and they believe it. The

Prussian doctrine has paid the German people handsomely; it has given

them their place in the world. When it ceases to pay them, and not till

then, they will reconsider it. They will not think, till they are

compelled to think. When they find themselves face to face with a

greater and more enduring strength than their own, they will renounce

their idol. But they are a brave people, a faithful people, and a stupid

people, so that they will need rough proofs. They cannot be driven from

their position by a little paper shot. In their present mood, if they

hear an appeal to pity, sensibility, and sympathy, they take it for a

cry of weakness. I am reminded of what I once heard said by a genial and

humane Irish officer concerning a proposal to treat with the leaders of

a Zulu rebellion. 'Kill them all,' he said, 'it's the only thing they

understand.' He meant that the Zulu chiefs would mistake moderation for

a sign of fear. By the irony of human history this sentence has become

almost true of the great German people, who built up the structure of

modern metaphysics. They can be argued with only by those who have the

will and the power to punish them.

The doctrine that Might is Right, though it is true, is an unprofitable

doctrine, for it is true only in so broad and simple a sense that no one

would dream of denying it. If a single nation can conquer, depress, and

destroy all the other nations of the earth and acquire for itself a sole

dominion, there may be matter for question whether God approves that

dominion; what is certain is that He permits it. No earthly governor who

is conscious of his power will waste time in listening to arguments

concerning what his power ought to be. His right to wield the sword can

be challenged only by the sword. An all-powerful governor who feared no

assault would never trouble himself to assert that Might is Right. He

would smile and sit still. The doctrine, when it is propounded by weak

humanity, is never a statement of abstract truth; it is a declaration of

intention, a threat, a boast, an advertisement. It has no value except

when there is some one to be frightened. But it is a very dangerous

doctrine when it becomes the creed of a stupid people, for it flatters

their self-sufficiency, and distracts their attention from the

difficult, subtle, frail, and wavering conditions of human power. The

tragic question for Germany to-day is what she can do, not whether it is

right for her to do it. The buffaloes, it must be allowed, had a

perfect right to dominate the prairie of America, till the hunters came.

They moved in herds, they practised shock-tactics, they were violent,

and very cunning. There are but few of them now. A nation of men who

mistake violence for strength, and cunning for wisdom, may conceivably

suffer the fate of the buffaloes and perish without knowing why.

To the English mind the German political doctrine is so incredibly

stupid that for many long years, while men in high authority in the

German Empire, ministers, generals, and professors, expounded that

doctrine at great length and with perfect clearness, hardly any one

could be found in England to take it seriously, or to regard it as

anything but the vapourings of a crazy sect. England knows better now;

the scream of the guns has awakened her. The German doctrine is to be

put to the proof. Who dares to say what the result will be? To predict

certain failure to the German arms is only a kind of boasting. Yet there

are guarded beliefs which a modest man is free to hold till they are

seen to be groundless. The Germans have taken Antwerp; they may possibly

destroy the British fleet, overrun England and France, repel Russia,

establish themselves as the dictators of Europe--in short, fulfil their

dreams. What then? At an immense cost of human suffering they will have

achieved, as it seems to us, a colossal and agonizing failure. Their

engines of destruction will never serve them to create anything so fair

as the civilization of France. Their uneasy jealousy and self-assertion

is a miserable substitute for the old laws of chivalry and regard for

the weak, which they have renounced and forgotten. The will and high

permission of all-ruling Heaven may leave them at large for a time, to

seek evil to others. When they have finished with it, the world will

have to be remade.

We cannot be sure that the Ruler of the world will forbid this. We

cannot even be sure that the destroyers, in the peace that their

destruction will procure for them, may not themselves learn to rebuild.

The Goths, who destroyed the fabric of the Roman Empire, gave their

name, in time, to the greatest mediaeval art. Nature, it is well known,

loves the strong, and gives to them, and to them alone, the chance of

becoming civilized. Are the German people strong enough to earn that

chance? That is what we are to see. They have some admirable elements of

strength, above any other European people. No other European army can be

marched, in close order, regiment after regiment, up the slope of a

glacis, under the fire of machine guns, without flinching, to certain

death. This corporate courage and corporate discipline is so great and

impressive a thing that it may well contain a promise for the future.

Moreover, they are, within the circle of their own kin, affectionate and

dutiful beyond the average of human society. If they succeed in their

worldly ambitions, it will be a triumph of plain brute morality over all

the subtler movements of the mind and heart.

On the other hand, it is true to say that history shows no precedent for

the attainment of world-wide power by a people so politically stupid as

the German people are to-day. There is no mistake about this; the

instances of German stupidity are so numerous that they make something

like a complete history of German international relations. Here is one.

Any time during the last twenty years it has been matter of common

knowledge in England that one event, and one only, would make it

impossible for England to remain a spectator in a European war--that

event being the violation of the neutrality of Holland or Belgium. There

was never any secret about this, it was quite well known to many people

who took no special interest in foreign politics. Germany has maintained

in this country, for many years, an army of spies and secret agents; yet

not one of them informed her of this important truth. Perhaps the

radical difference between the German and the English political systems

blinded the astute agents. In England nothing really important is a

secret, and the amount of privileged political information to be gleaned

in barbers' shops, even when they are patronized by Civil servants, is

distressingly small. Two hours of sympathetic conversation with an

ordinary Englishman would have told the German Chancellor more about

English politics than ever he heard in his life. For some reason or

other he was unable to make use of this source of intelligence, so that

he remained in complete ignorance of what every one in England knew and

said.

Here is another instance. The programme of German ambition has been

voluminously published for the benefit of the world. France was first to

be crushed; then Russia; then, by means of the indemnities procured from

these conquests, after some years of recuperation and effort, the naval

power of England was to be challenged and destroyed. This programme was

set forth by high authorities, and was generally accepted; there was no

criticism, and no demur. The crime against the civilization of the world

foreshadowed in the horrible words 'France is to be crushed' is before a

high tribunal; it would be idle to condemn it here. What happened is

this. The French and Russian part of the programme was put into action

last July. England, who had been told that her turn was not yet, that

Germany would be ready for her in a matter of five or ten years, very

naturally refused to wait her turn. She crowded up on to the scaffold,

which even now is in peril of breaking down under the weight of its

victims, and of burying the executioner in its ruins. But because

England would not wait her turn, she is overwhelmed with accusations of

treachery and inhumanity by a sincerely indignant Germany. Could

stupidity, the stupidity of the wise men of Gotham, be more fantastic or

more monstrous?

German stupidity was even more monstrous. A part of the accusation

against England is that she has raised her hand against the nation

nearest to her in blood. The alleged close kinship of England and

Germany is based on bad history and doubtful theory. The English are a

mixed race, with enormous infusions of Celtic and Roman blood. The Roman

sculpture gallery at Naples is full of English faces. If the German

agents would turn their attention to hatters' shops, and give the

barbers a rest, they would find that no English hat fits any German

head. But suppose we were cousins, or brothers even, what kind of

argument is that on the lips of those who but a short time before were

explaining, with a good deal of zest and with absolute frankness, how

they intended to compass our ruin? There is something almost amiable in

fatuity like this. A touch of the fool softens the brute.

The Germans have a magnificent war-machine which rolls on its way,

crushing all that it touches. We shall break it if we can. If we fail,

the German nation is at the beginning, not the end, of its troubles.

With the making of peace, even an armed peace, the war-machine has

served its turn; some other instrument of government must then be

invented. There is no trace of a design for this new instrument in any

of the German shops. The governors of Alsace-Lorraine offer no

suggestions. The bald fact is that there is no spot in the world where

the Germans govern another race and are not hated. They know this, and

are disquieted; they meet with coldness on all hands, and their remedy

for the coldness is self-assertion and brag. The Russian statesman was

right who remarked that modern Germany has been too early admitted into

the comity of European nations. Her behaviour, in her new international

relations, is like the behaviour of an uneasy, jealous upstart in an

old-fashioned quiet drawing-room. She has no genius for equality; her

manners are a compound of threatening and flattery. When she wishes to

assert herself, she bullies; when she wishes to endear herself, she

crawls; and the one device is no more successful than the other.

Might is Right; but the sort of might which enables one nation to govern

another in time of peace is very unlike the armoured thrust of the

war-engine. It is a power compounded of sympathy and justice. The

English (it is admitted by many foreign critics) have studied justice

and desired justice. They have inquired into and protected rights that

were unfamiliar, and even grotesque, to their own ideas, because they

believed them to be rights. In the matter of sympathy their reputation

does not stand so high; they are chill in manner, and dislike all

effusive demonstrations of feeling. Yet those who come to know them know

that they are not unimaginative; they have a genius for equality; and

they do try to put themselves in the other fellow's place, to see how

the position looks from that side. What has happened in India may

perhaps be taken to prove, among many other things, that the inhabitants

of India begin to know that England has done her best, and does feel a

disinterested solicitude for the peoples under her charge. She has long

been a mother of nations, and is not frightened by the problems of

adolescence.

The Germans have as yet shown no sign of skill in governing other

peoples. Might is Right; and it is quite conceivable that they may

acquire colonies by violence. If they want to keep them they will have

to shut their own professors' books, and study the intimate history of

the British Empire. We are old hands at the business; we have lost more

colonies than ever they owned, and we begin to think that we have learnt

the secret of success. At any rate, our experience has done much for us,

and has helped us to avoid failure. Yet the German colonial party stare

at us with bovine malevolence. In all the library of German theorizing

you will look in vain for any explanation of the fact that the Boers

are, in the main, loyal to the British Empire. If German political

thinkers could understand that political situation, which seems to

English minds so simple, there might yet be hope for them. But they

regard it all as a piece of black magic, and refuse to reason about it.

How should a herd of cattle be driven without goads? Witchcraft,

witchcraft!

Their world-wide experience it is, perhaps, which has made the English

quick to appreciate the virtues of other peoples. I have never known an

Englishman who travelled in Russia without falling in love with the

Russian people. I have never heard a German speak of the Russian people

without contempt and dislike. Indeed the Germans are so unable to see

any charm in that profound and humane people that they believe that the

English liking for them must be an insincere pretence, put forward for

wicked or selfish reasons. What would they say if they saw a sight that

is common in Indian towns, a British soldier and a Gurkha arm in arm,

rolling down the street in cheerful brotherhood? And how is it that it

has never occurred to any of them that this sort of brotherhood has its

value in Empire-building? The new German political doctrine has bidden

farewell to Christianity, but there are some political advantages in

Christianity which should not be overlooked. It teaches human beings to

think of one another and to care for one another. It is an antidote to

the worst and most poisonous kind of political stupidity.

Another thing that the Germans will have to learn for the welfare of

their much-talked Empire is the value of the lone man. The architects

and builders of the British Empire were all lone men. Might is Right;

but when a young Englishman is set down at an outpost of Empire to

govern a warlike tribe, he has to do a good deal of hard thinking on the

problem of political power and its foundations. He has to trust to

himself, to form his own conclusions, and to choose his own line of

action. He has to try to find out what is in the mind of others. A young

German, inured to skilled slavery, does not shine in such a position.

Man for man, in all that asks for initiative and self-dependence,

Englishmen are the better men, and some Germans know it. There is an old

jest that if you settle an Englishman and a German together in a new

country, at the end of a year you will find the Englishman governor, and

the German his head clerk. A German must know the rules before he can

get to work.

More than three hundred years ago a book was written in England which is

in some ways a very exact counterpart to General von Bernhardi's

notorious treatise. It is called _Tamburlaine_, and, unlike its

successor, is full of poetry and beauty. Our own colonization began with

a great deal of violent work, and much wrong done to others. We suffered

for our misdeeds, and we learned our lesson, in part at least. Why, it

may be asked, should not the Germans begin in the same manner, and by

degrees adapt themselves to the new task? Perhaps they may, but if they

do, they cannot claim the Elizabethans for their model. Of all men on

earth the German is least like the undisciplined, exuberant Elizabethan

adventurer. He is reluctant to go anywhere without a copy of the rules,

a guarantee of support, and a regular pension. His outlook is as prosaic

as General von Bernhardi's or General von der Golt's own, and that is

saying a great deal. In all the German political treatises there is an

immeasurable dreariness. They lay down rules for life, and if they be

asked what makes such a life worth living they are without any hint of

an answer. Their world is a workhouse, tyrannically ordered, and full of

pusillanimous jealousies.

It is not impious to be hopeful. A Germanized world would be a

nightmare. We have never attempted or desired to govern them, and we

must not think that God will so far forget them as to permit them to

attempt to govern us. Now they hate us, but they do not know for how

many years the cheerful brutality of their political talk has shocked

and disgusted us. I remember meeting, in one of the French Mediterranean

dependencies, with a Prussian nobleman, a well-bred and pleasant man,

who was fond of expounding the Prussian creed. He was said to be a

political agent of sorts, but he certainly learned nothing in

conversation. He talked all the time, and propounded the most monstrous

paradoxes with an air of mathematical precision. Now it was the

character of Sir Edward Grey, a cunning Machiavel, whose only aim was to

set Europe by the ears and make neighbours fall out. A friend who was

with me, an American, laughed aloud at this, and protested, without

producing the smallest effect. The stream of talk went on. The error of

the Germans, we were told, was always that they are too humane; their

dislike of cruelty amounts to a weakness in them. They let France escape

with a paltry fine, next time France must be beaten to the dust. Always

with a pleasant outward courtesy, he passed on to England. England was

decadent and powerless, her rule must pass to the Germans. 'But we shall

treat England rather less severely than France,' said this bland apostle

of Prussian culture, 'for we wish to make it possible for ourselves to

remain in friendly relations with other English-speaking peoples.' And

so on--the whole of the Bernhardi doctrine, explained in quiet fashion

by a man whose very debility of mind made his talk the more impressive,

for he was simply parroting what he had often heard. No one criticized

his proposals, nor did we dislike him. It all seemed too mad; a rather

clumsy jest. His world of ideas did not touch our world at any point, so

that real talk between us was impossible. He came to see us several

times, and always gave the same kind of mesmerized recital of Germany's

policy. The grossness of the whole thing was in curious contrast with

the polite and quiet voice with which he uttered his insolences. When I

remember his talk I find it easy to believe that the German Emperor and

the German Chancellor have also talked in such a manner that they have

never had the smallest opportunity of learning what Englishmen think and

mean.

While the German doctrine was the plaything merely of hysterical and

supersensitive persons, like Carlyle and Nietzsche, it mattered little

to the world of politics. An excitable man, of vivid imagination and

invalid constitution, like Carlyle, feels a natural predilection for the

cult of the healthy brute. Carlyle's English style is itself a kind of

epilepsy. Nietzsche was so nervously sensitive that everyday life was an

anguish to him, and broke his strength. Both were poets, as Marlowe was

a poet, and both sang the song of Power. The brutes of the swamp and the

field, who gathered round them and listened, found nothing new or

unfamiliar in the message of the poets. 'This', they said, 'is what we

have always known, but we did not know that it is poetry. Now that great

poets teach it, we need no longer be ashamed of it.' So they went away

resolved to be twice the brutes that they were before, and they named

themselves Culture-brutes.

It is difficult to see how the world, or any considerable part of it,

can belong to Germany, till she changes her mind. If she can do that,

she might make a good ruler, for she has solid virtues and good

instincts. It is her intellect that has gone wrong. Bishop Butler was

one day found pondering the problem whether, a whole nation can go mad.

If he had lived to-day what would he have said about it? Would he have

admitted that that strangest of grim fancies is realized?

It would be vain for Germany to take the world; she could not keep it;

nor, though she can make a vast number of people miserable for a long

time, could she ever hope to make all the inhabitants of the world

miserable for all time. She has a giant's power, and does not think it

infamous to use it like a giant. She can make a winter hideous, but she

cannot prohibit the return of spring, or annul the cleansing power of

water. Sanity is not only better than insanity; it is much stronger, and

Might is Right.

Meantime, it is a delight and a consolation to Englishmen that England

is herself again. She has a cause that it is good to fight for, whether

it succeed or fail. The hope that uplifts her is the hope of a better

world, which our children shall see. She has wonderful friends. From

what self-governing nations in the world can Germany hear such messages

as came to England from the Dominions oversea? 'When England is at war,

Canada is at war.' 'To the last man and the last shilling, Australia

will support the cause of the Empire.' These are simple words, and

sufficient; having said them, Canada and Australia said no more. In the

company of such friends, and for the creed that she holds, England might

be proud to die; but surely her time is not yet.

Our faith is ours, and comes not on a tide;

And whether Earth's great offspring by decree

Must rot if they abjure rapacity,

Not argument, but effort shall decide.

They number many heads in that hard flock,

Trim swordsmen they push forth, yet try thy steel;

Thou, fighting for poor human kind, shalt feel

The strength of Roland in thy wrist to hew

A chasm sheer into the barrier rock,

And bring the army of the faithful through.

England and the War · 第 8 / 13 题