What Germany Thinks - BestLightNovel.com
You’re reading novel What Germany Thinks Part 12 online at BestLightNovel.com. Please use the follow button to get notification about the latest chapter next time when you visit BestLightNovel.com. Use F11 button to read novel in full-screen(PC only). Drop by anytime you want to read free – fast – latest novel. It’s great if you could leave a comment, share your opinion about the new chapters, new novel with others on the internet. We’ll do our best to bring you the finest, latest novel everyday. Enjoy
its author is a Socialist member of the Reichstag.
[Footnote 90: "Die deutsche Sozialdemokratie und der Weltkrieg," by Dr.
Paul Lensch, published by the Vorwarts Publis.h.i.+ng House. Berlin, 1915.]
In dealing with England he refers to their former admiration for this country and proceeds to prove that it was wrong--wrong in the interests of Germany, and the world. England's fight against Napoleon for European freedom Dr. Lensch disposes of in a sentence: "Consumed by greed, England took the long-yearned-for opportunity and fell upon her rival, France" (p. 16).
He informs his readers that England and Russia are two beasts of prey.
England's disarmament proposals were only intended to secure her naval supremacy, because Germany seemed to be escaping from the strangulation cord which. England had drawn tight round her throat. Therefore three problems present themselves to Dr. Lensch, which the war must solve:
(1.) Shall the German people continue to exist as an independent nation?
(2.) Shall the danger of Czarism continue to threaten West European culture?
(3.) Shall Britain's naval supremacy be eternalized or overthrown, seeing that Britain only allows other nations to develop, so far as they are compatible with her national interests? (p. 15).
"England's oft-praised freedom is based upon the enslavement of the world; the peoples now recognize that England's wealth, freedom, and greatness are merely the corollary to their poverty, slavery and wretchedness (p. 20).
"International Socialism has not the slightest interest in helping to bolster up this supremacy (p. 22).
"When this monopoly is broken the English working cla.s.ses will lose their present privileged position. They will be reduced to the same level as the workmen of other lands. Then Socialism will flourish in England (p. 23).[91]
[Footnote 91: The author had fondly imagined that the British workman stood foremost as the result of his own battles. In any case, it is to be hoped that British Socialists will be grateful for "Genosse" Lensch's prayers for their downfall.]
"No party stands to lose more by a British victory than Social Democracy. The overthrow of England's world-position would clear the way for the continuation of the world's progress on the right historical lines, and its economic development (p. 25).
"In the present world war the interests of the internationalists are bound up in a German victory. Hence a German victory would be a victory for Marx's internationalism, and only then, would the hearts and heads of English workmen be open to the intellectual schooling of the Socialistic idea (p. 27).
"As early as the eighties in the last century, Friedrich Engels proved that the ruin of England's industrial monopoly had begun. What the scientist had foretold, became evident to all eyes two decades later.
The social system of the greatest, world-ruling industrial State was shaken to its foundations. International Socialists had every reason to welcome this peaceful downfall of England's world power" (pp. 21-22).
"Marx once wrote that war is like a locomotive in the history of the world. May this war have that effect and under full steam lead to a finish the work which peaceful development had already commenced, _i.e._, the downfall of English supremacy. If the war hastens and concludes this process, then the sacrifices in blood and treasure will not have been in vain. A great stumbling-block to human progress and especially to the proletarian fight for freedom will have been hurled out of the way" (pp. 27-8).
Having failed during a peaceful fight of over forty years, to hurl German autocracy and militarism out of the world, these hot-headed pioneers of liberty (Kaiserdom?) wish to destroy the very State which was their place of refuge when German "liberty" overwhelmed them with its kindly attentions.
Still we cannot be too grateful to Dr. Lensch for his lucid statement.
It is an effective reply to Germany's sympathizers in this country, and if British workmen should ever see these lines, it will interest them to know that German Socialists are anxious to pull them down a little, in the belief that if British workmen are cut short in their luxuries they will become better Socialists and Internationalists.
Dr. Lensch has only one step more to take, and he will certainly gain the highest German order--_pour le merite_. The famous Communist manifesto of Marx and Engels concludes with the words: "Proletarians of all lands, unite!" It is much to be desired that Dr. Lensch should amend this by adding to Marx's phrase a few words, so that the amended form would run:
"Proletarians of all lands, unite to sing 'Deutschland, Deutschland, uber alles.'" By this simple means the learned doctor would condense the entire teachings of his book into a single sentence.
"The position to-day is that the interests of freedom and democracy are utterly at variance with a French victory (p. 42).
"Greater Prussia was founded by the war of 1866, while the 1870 struggle established a Little Germany. Through the present war Great Germany will be created" (p. 46).
On another page this Socialist-Chauvinist proclaims that "the freedom of the oppressed must be the work of the oppressed themselves," which is a principle that the I.L.P. and U.D.C., etc., would do well to note. "The peculiarity of our situation is to be found in the fact that extraordinarily advanced ideals have penetrated into our unripe conditions."[92]
[Footnote 92: Louis Bamberger in an essay on German Social Democracy in the _Deutsche Rundschau_, vol. 14, p. 243.]
It is to these "unripe conditions" that Lensch, Liebknecht, David, Hildenbrand and the remaining leaders of German Social Democracy should give their undivided attention. Last year the Berlin Government published a record of crimes committed in Germany. It is the most awful record of any nation in the world, and the above gentlemen would do well to study Volume 267 of the _Vierteljahrshefte_. There were hundreds of thousands of brutal crimes committed in Germany by German proletarians during the year 1912.
For half a century Marx, La.s.salle, Bebel, Liebknecht and their successors have been busily engaged in intellectualizing Germany's proletarians; now it is advisable for the Socialist party to begin the work of humanizing them. Their efforts to internationalize the world have resulted in a hopeless _debacle_; let them now begin the task of humanizing Germany. They have all evidently forgotten the German proverb: _Kehr vor deiner eignen Tur!_ (Sweep first before your own door.)
CHAPTER VII
"NECESSITY KNOWS NO LAW"
On August 2nd, 1914, Belgium announced her neutrality in the European war; France had already declared her intention to respect Belgian neutrality at all costs. On the other hand we have Bethmann-Hollweg's word that he knew French armies were standing ready to strike at Germany through Belgium. This statement he has never supported by any proof, nor even mentioned his authority for the same.[93] In view of the facts that no military preparations had been made on the Franco-Belgian frontier, and that the German armies first came into contact with French forces long after the fall of Liege, we are compelled to declare the German Chancellor's statement to be a pure invention.
[Footnote 93: So-called "evidence" has been given by Richard Gra.s.shoff in his book "Belgien's Schuld" ("Belgium's Guilt"), pp. 14-20. Gra.s.shoff quotes the sworn statements of a German corporal who resided in Boitsfort, near Brussels. The corporal states that he saw two French and one English officer in Brussels on July 26th, and eight French soldiers on July 29th.
The statements of three French soldiers, prisoners of war in Germany, are also cited; these men maintain that they entered Belgium on the 31st of July and the 2nd of August.
With regard to this "evidence," we must note that Gra.s.shoff is a German official, the corporal a German spy, and that the Frenchmen have made these statements in a prisoners' camp, a place where they were exposed to the temptation of German gold and the influence of Teutonic bullying.
Lastly, the Berlin General Staff has recorded that the German armies first came in touch with French troops on August 19th, near Namur.]
Moreover Germany's excuse for invading Belgium is given in the t.i.tle of this chapter. Had Germany possessed any proof that French officers in disguise were organizing preparations in Belgium, or that French airmen had crossed the latter's territories in order to drop bombs by Wesel, etc., then Bethmann-Hollweg would have had no reason to admit in the Reichstag that his country was committing a breach of international law.
Under such circ.u.mstances Belgian neutrality would no longer have existed; the Chancellor, instead of "necessity," could have pleaded justification and the world could scarcely have withheld its approval.
In the early hours of August 4th the Germans crossed the Belgian frontier, although the _Cologne Gazette_ had published a notice three days before announcing that Germany had no intention whatever of taking the step, and that no German troops were near the frontier.
General von Emmich immediately issued this proclamation in French: "To my great regret German troops have been compelled to enter Belgian territory. They are acting under the compulsion of unavoidable necessity, for French officers in disguise have already violated Belgian neutrality by trying to reach Germany, via Belgium, in motor-cars.[94]
[Footnote 94: One wonders what military purpose these officers had in view. They would have been inevitably arrested at the German frontier.
The fable was made public by Wolff's Agency, and has been ridiculed even by the German Press, _vide_ pp. 96-7.]
"Belgians! it is my most ardent desire that it may yet be possible to avoid a struggle between two peoples which up till now, have been friends, formerly even allies. Remember the glorious days of La Belle Alliance, when German arms helped to found the independence and future of your Fatherland.
"Now we must have a free way. The destruction of tunnels, bridges and railways will be considered hostile actions. Belgians! you have to choose. The German army does not intend to fight against you, but seeks a free path against the enemy who wishes to attack us. That is all we desire.
"Herewith I give the Belgian people an official pledge that they will not have to suffer under the terrors of war; that we will pay ready money for all necessaries which we may have to requisition; that our soldiers will show themselves the best friends of a nation for which we have the highest esteem and ardent affection. It depends upon your prudence and your patriotism whether your land shall be spared the horrors of war." (Appeared in the _Cologne Gazette_, August 6th.)
A Dresden paper of the same date contains an illuminating statement. "We have just received official information that the German General Staff had been informed by an absolutely reliable source that the French intended to march through the valley of the Meuse into Belgium. The execution of this plan had already commenced, therefore France was by no means prepared to respect Belgian neutrality."
"For years past the King of Belgium has conspired with England behind the backs of his ministers, to damage German interests. His telegram to the King of England was a trick planned long ago. These facts will soon be supplemented by a large number of doc.u.mentary proofs; from this the necessity has arisen to direct Germany's advance through Belgium irrespective of neutrality considerations."[95]
[Footnote 95: _Leipziger Neueste Nachrichten_, August 9th.]
Here we have the first clumsy attempts to prove that Belgian neutrality did not exist. These after-thoughts have grown during the past year into no inconsiderable literature. Probably the two motives which have inspired Germany--official and unofficial--to print many volumes on Belgian neutrality have been the indignation aroused in neutral countries and the fact that a complete German victory was not obtained in three months of war.
German newspapers again betray the plot against Belgium, and a search through their files reveals in the clearest manner possible how Wolff's Bureau was again the source of a widespread campaign to prove that Germany was right, and simultaneously to lash public opinion into hatred for the Belgian "barbarians and beasts."
In the first few days of August the Press was filled with reports concerning the murder and ill treatment of Germans in Belgium, before any act of war had taken place. No doubt a justified fear for the mighty, brutal neighbour existed in the popular imagination, and fear may be the father of ill-considered deeds. Nevertheless, there is no proof that mob law prevailed in Belgium, as it did in Germany. Moreover, the latter country outlawed herself when she proclaimed the law of necessity. In the light of this consideration the German outcry that the Belgians were breaking both the laws of humanity and international jurisprudence lacks sincerity and remains unconvincing.
A country which announces her intention to ignore existing laws and "hack a way through at all costs," should surely be the last to declaim on the alleged offences against the laws of war by a small, weak, unprepared neighbour. If these considerations are insufficient, there remains the fact that Germany herself began war against unarmed Belgian civilians.