WAR
As
A Socialist
Sees It
By NORMAN THOMAS
PRICE 5 CENTS
LEAGUE FOR INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY
1 1 2 EAST 19 TH STREET
NEW YORK CITY
FOREWORD
WAR ^S A SOCIALIST SEES IT
Copyright 1936
by
LEAGUE FOR INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY
This short pamphlet states briefly a case against war
and an analysis of its cause and cure which I have
developed more fully and adequately in War: No
Profit, No Glory, No Need. I am grateful to the publishers,
Frederick A. Stokes Company,for permission to quote from it.
In the light of events of the last few months, since the book
was written, I have developed somewhat more fully and ex-
plicitly than in the book the argument against collective mil-
itary sanctions as a way to peace. Here I have to thank the
editors of the Jewish Day for permission to make free use of
an article by me which they translated into Jewish and pub-
lished in their pages. The position I hold is a Socialist posi-
tion. It does not imply, however, that I am dictating in ad-
vance my party's platform. — N, T.
Library
UnivR- >ty «f Te*a#
Austin. Ti
WAR - AS A SOCIALIST SEES IT
By NORMAN THOMAS
CO
CD
CM
CO
Evebybohy who thinks at all agrees that the World War
of 1914-1918 wr.s stark calamity, in tanas of human
well being, no nation emerged victorious : there were
only degrees in defeat. The war cost directly 100 bil-
lion dollars; its indirect costs brought the faptcd to approx-
imately 338 billion dollars. Senator Gerald Nye in his speeches
has been quoting an estimate which runs as follows:
"The cost to the world of the four years of World War
would provide a $2,500 home with $1,000 worth of furniture
and five acres of land for every family in Russia, most of the
European nations, Canada, the United States and Australia;
then would give every city over 20,000 population a $2,000,-
000 library, $3,000,000 hospital and a $20,000,000 college,
and in addition would buy every piece of property in Germany
and Belgium."
Still worse, the war cost 20,000,000 wounded, about 30 s ~
000,000 soldiers and civilian dead. Professor L. Hersch, the
Swiss authority, brings the total up to 42,000,000 dead prin-
cipally by adding victims of the epidemic of influenza which
swept the world during the war.
There is no possible measurement for human misery of
soldiers in tranches and in the madness of the charge; of
prisoners of war; of refugees^ of the women who waited at
home. Neither is there any estimate of the biological conse-
quences to mankind from the death of its bravest youth, the
incredible training in brutality and sexual excess given to the
survivors — in short the general physiological and psycho-
logical effect of more than four years of mass murder.
430271
And out of this, by common consent, no ideal ends were
gained. The world was not made safe for democracy but, dur-
ing the war and after, democracy was all but killed in the
house of its friends. The war did not end war. Rather the
treaties which ended it sowed the seeds of new war.
Yet the world which accepts tlhese facts today regards new
war as virtually inevitable and is frantically preparing for it.
The United States of America, safest of all nations, is spend-
ing much more than a billion dollars a year on its army
and navy or more than the entire cost of the federal govern-
ment prior to 1916.
Everybody who thinks at all knows that a new world war
will be worse than the last. There are few dissenting voices
to the opinion that it will probably leave the great cities of
Europe and Japan smoking ruins. The actual suffering of
civilian populations, the hysteria of fear probable as a re-
sult of repeated aerial attacks on cities, their mass search for
safety, may destroy our complex civilization and bring some-
thing like new dark ages. Again two oceans make the United
States relatively, but only relatively, immune from the worst
of this horror.
At home, in every land, to carry on such warfare at all will
require propaganda, dictatorship, ruthless suppression of
dissent a hundred fold worse than what we suffered in the
first World War.
Yet the world which accepts these facts today regards new
war as virtually inevitable and is frantically preparing for it.
Why? A babel of voices answers, "War," an English gen-
eral was quoted to me the other day as saying, "is part of
the cosmic process of force and struggle by which planets are
born," More modestly, others assert that war is a biological
necessity, that "man is war," or that war springs from human
nature. Most of which is bosh masquerading as metaphysics
or science. War is not human frailty or greed or love of power
in general ; it is not struggle in general ; it is not even violence
in general. It is a highly specialized form of group violence.
It has nothing to do with the laws of the birth of planets or
the forces which keep them swinging in their orbits. As for
human nature, the most one can say is that it makes war
possible, not inevitable. The evidence goes to show that man,
fully developed in an evolutionary sense, existed through the
Old Stone Age without war longer than he has existed since
with war. Modern war is so far from being natural and in-
stinctive that it must be prepared for by an elaborately arti-
ficial training and supported by a propaganda whose first
victims are liberty and truth.
The principal root of war has always been economic —
the desire of a tribe for better lands, slaves, gold. In our day
and generation war is the expression of the maladjustment of
an interdependent world which tries to carry on under the
twin loyalties and institutions of the profit system and na-
tionalism. Nations fight for markets for excess goods and
capital and sources of supply for raw material. That is, they
fight for profit primarily for the ruling class in each nation.
This is not to say that all wars are waged on the basis
of a wise calculation of profit. Sir Norman Angcll is right in
arguing that on such a plane war, at any rate great war,
would not be fought. Munition makers in every land sell to
any nation with the price and cynically promote hate. Their
story is a despicable commentary on mankind, more especially
on the profit system. Concession hunters deliberately promote
marine corps-sized wars. Yet it is doubtful if even the petro-
leum corporations deliberately plan large scale wars. What
they do is to seek profit in a world where men and nations arc
divided into the House of Have and the House of Have Not;
a world where patriotism masks greed and men expect an
American to be safer in Japan than hundreds of Americans
are in Chicago, in the flogging country around Tampa, Flor-
Ida, or the regions where blacks and whites »re slaves to King
Cotton, whose rule is a rule of violence.
Our capitalist nationalism requires ever expanding mar-
kets, ever new sources of supply for raw material. The strug-
gle for them psychologically and practically is part of its
life, even though it leads to death. Not man, but property —
private property, that is, the means by which all men live —
is war.
As I have written in War, No Profit, No Glory, No Need,
"Now, it is not nations as a whole which profit, at least
directly, from this struggle for raw materials, for markets,
or for opportunities to invest. It is the owning class in these
nations. The struggle for markets, with the consequent war
of tariffs and currency systems, would not take on anything
like its present dangerous form if the workers at home could
get the equivalent of what they themselves produce. Over-
production under capitalism is a consequence of undercon-
sumption by exploited workers* We should not have to worry
so much about cotton or textiles if those who produce them
could afford to use them; in plain English, if share-croppers
and mill-hands could buy underclothes for their children or
sheets for their wives. The problem of surplus goods is
peculiarly a problem inherent in the profit system. So, too, is
the matter of disposing advantageously of profits in the
hands of investors at the highest possible rate of interest.
"It is hard to do the wise thing even from the point of view
of theoretical capitalist economics, because so many people
have been led to believe that their fortunes or their jobs are
tied up with victory in the various manifestations of the
struggle for markets and raw materials. It is one of the most
ominous signs of the times that now, in an hour of depression
and capitalist disintegration, some men are turning wistfully
to a memory of our temporary, false and dangerous wartime
prosperity.
"The conclusion of the whole matter is this: War and
preparation for war are so bound up with the whole capital-
ist-nationalist system and all the quarrels of rival imperial-
isms that there is only a limited usefulness in proving that
there is no profit in war or in taking the profit out of war. We
have to prove that there is no advantage to mankind in the
entire capitalist-nationalist system of whose evil fruits war
is only one and the worst. The dominant class may be con-
vinced that large-scale war does not pay, but it is by no
means convinced that the system under which it enjoys power
and profit does not pay. Hence it stands by that system, either
blind to the true nature of war, or hoping against hope that
in an interdependent world we can keep our inadequate and
divisive loyalties and still escape war. War is psychologically
and emotionally, as well as historically and economically, tied
in with the profit system and our organization into nations.
"It does not follow that if America were to turn Socialist
automatically the danger of war would be over, even though
the scramble for private investments abroad and profits from
our foreign markets, a scramble inevitable under the profit
system, would be ended. But if the nations were turning to
Socialism, great would be the gain for the cause of peace. In-
stead, two great nations have already gone Fascist, and, to a
greater or less degree, Fascism menaces all the surviving po-
litical democracies. Everything which makes war likely is in-
carnate in Fascism to a greater degree than in the older
forms of capitalism. Fascism has destroyed the independent
organizations of the workers and hence their opportunity to
function internationally with their comrades to prevent war.
It seeks to regulate and defend the profit system by the
power and authority of the state. It has raised nationalism
to new heights of religion. It rejects any idea of loyalty above
loyalty to the national state controlled by a dictator. It
eulogizes militarism, even war itself, as good, not evil."
THE CURE FOB, WAR.
It follows from this analysis of the cause of war that its
cure lies in new loyalties and a new social organization. Such
a cure after centuries of struggle did bring internal unity and
peace to the petty kingdoms which were united in the great
nations of Europe. Strife within them today is class strife. It
is potential revolution, rather than war. The cure for war is
the end of exploitation : it is a federation of cooperative com-
monwealths in all of which there must be a harnessing of
machinery for the common good ; a recognition that above
all nations is humanity; that the whole world must be the
ultimate unit of our planning for peace and plenty, and that
to enjoy these blessings requires production for use, not for
private profit. This production for use requires social own-
ership of the principal means of production and distribution.
The principal business of mankind, almost its self preserva-
tion, requires the organization of men of every race and creed
and color and nation, workers all of them with hand and
brain, in the struggle for this new society*
Nothing but this new society will make freedom, peace and
plenty secure for us or our children. In our present troubled
world there is a five point program for America which may
help us to prevent particular wars while we change the system
that breeds war*
Again I summarize my fuller treatment of this subject in
War.
"1. An immediate, solemn declaration of national policy
by the President and Congress that the United States will
not supply, or permit its citizens to supply, arms, munitions,
or financial support to belligerents or prospective belliger-
ents. Our most likely road into new European war would be
the road that took us into the First World War: the road of
trade with one group of belligerents. The time to make up
our minds on this point is now t before the temptation to get
10
temporary prosperity out of war is too strong. It will re-
quire a strong campaign of education and organization to
keep us from following the lure of profit derived from others'
war into the abyss of our own war. We could forbid the ex-
port of articles which are obviously intended for war use,
and then fix a quota of those supplies which might be used
for purposes of either war or peace on the basis of a quota
equal to the average trade of the years immediately preceding
the war.
"It will not be easy to put an embargo against a prospec-
tive belligerent— in one sense all nations with armed forces
are prospective belligerents. But, when the intention to fight
was as clear as Mussolini made his last spring and summer, it
was contemptible hypocrisy for nations to sell him all the
war supplies he could pay for and then suddenly begin to act
virtuous and talk sanctions when at last he made his attack
with arms his critics had sold him.
"The objection that we ought to be free to place an em-
bargo against the aggressor nation only, would be more valid
if there were a better test of what constitutes an aggressor
nation and more assui T ance that such discrimination would
not sooner or later involve us in war. It seems best to lay
down the rule of no trade with belligerents and then make
any exceptions which may appear morally desirable by
formal act, as we now declare war by formal act. It must bc L
added that the application of an embargo on arms as well
as more extreme economic penalties solely against an 'ag-
gressor' nation requires for its ethical and practical effective-
ness an overwhelming weight of world-wide support.
"Congress has indeed adopted a policy of no trade in arms
or 'implements of war* with belligerents. The resolution for-
tunately includes a statement that the government will not
support the 'free right' of Americans to travel on ships of
belligerent powers. Unfortunately, it makes no mention of
11
loans, does not define or lay a basis for defining 'implements
of war,' and does not try to meet the problem of trade with
prospective belligerents,
"2. The second point in a national program for peace
should be the largest measure of disannament that the public
can be persuaded to accept. The United States is in a pe-
culiarly fortunate position to practice disarmament by ex-
ample. The long and happy history of peace on the com-
pletely disarmed Canadian border, a peace which has lasted
since 1815, is an example and symbol of what might be done.
We are far from the territorial quarrels of Europe or of
Asia and have no direct concern in them,
"Certainly a program of disarmament requires us not only
Ho take the profits out of war,' as the saying goes, but also
out of preparation for war. We cannot listen to the dis-
closures of the Nye Munitions Inquiry, cry out shame upon
the Merchants of Death, and then go about our business. This
sort of profit must be stopped, even though merely to stop
it will not of itself end the danger of war.
"It is horrifying that, with the shocking exposures of
conscienceless profiteering in the whole armament business,
Congress, while voting the greatest naval budget in the world,
should defeat amendments drawn to prevent a repetition of
some of the worst offenses revealed. It is disquieting that
there was no well-organized and effective labor opposition
either to the naval bill — which was accepted as providing em-
ployment — or to the increased military appropriations.
"Another logical accompaniment of a drastic approach to
disarmament is an end to military training in colleges. If we
mean business in our war against war we must dig out the
R.O.T.C, root and branch — polo ponies, pretty girl colonels,
snappy uniforms and all — even if we agree that the R.O.T.C.
does not really train men for war but for the acceptance of
war.
12
Libra tv
University ol Tc*m
AurtiA, Texas
"3. It is absurd to suppose that we shall have genuine dis-
armament or reduce our armament to a defensive level if
we are to continue the imperialist policies which are the logical
product of this stage of capitalism. We Americans have not
been so aggressively imperialist in the thirties as we were in
the twenties. Among other things we discovered that imperial-
ism of the aggressive sort in Latin America did not pay the
dividends that our bankers and concession hunters had ex-
pected. But the secret war for petroleum continues; dollar
diplomacy is not dead ; it is not even certain that it sleeps.
We must make a solemn declaration that Americans who seek
profit abroad cannot expect their fellow-Americans to pour
out money or blood to guarantee or collect those profits.
"4. We should end at once the insult we offer friendly
nations— China as well as Japan — by our Asiatic exclusion
laws. If necessary, we should regulate migration by mutual
treaties which would preserve the legitimate pride of Chinese
and Japanese.
"5, Since national isolation in our interdependent world
is neither possible nor desirable, the fifth and last point in our
peace program is: Isolation from all that makes for war;
cooperation with all that makes for peace. This is a slogan
that needs intelligent application, and honest men may differ
about applying it. We cannot have planned economy within a
nation and complete luissez faire between nations. Rut those
who admit this will agree that prohibitive tariffs are opposed
to both peace and prosperity. They will agree that we do not
show ourselves good neighbors by torpedoing economic con-
ferences in which we were originally interested. If in the proc-
ess of socializing its affairs, the United States should set up
boards to control exports and imports as a public monopoly,
that control should be exercised so as to encourage the warm-
est possible international cooperation, especially with other
nations making similar attempts, or with other nations in
13
430271
which there is an honest effort to raise the standard of liv-
ing for workers. Moreover we must steadily keep m mind
the necessity of working for international agreements on the
allocation of raw materials"
It will be observed that in these five points there is no
panacea suggested. Has not the experience of the years
taught us that there are no panaceas? We have suffered much
in the struggle for peace in over-emphasizing measures which
at best could give us only a little help in keeping out of war.
That fact is generally recognized. Yet today there is re-
newed interest in the possibility of using the League of Na-
tions, despite its long list of failures, as an instrument in the
collective guarantee of peace— a peace based on the status
quo which itself menaces peace? Temporarily international
politics have made queer bedfellows of pro-League liberals,
the majority of European Socialists, a minority of American
Socialists, mostly of the "Old Guard" persuasion, and the
Communists. The last group only a little while ago were de-
nouncing the League and proclaiming that all wars between
capitalist nations were wars to be first opposed by the work-
ers and then, if they came, to be turned into revolution. At
first men hoped that economic sanctions of the League could
be used instead of war. They now accept the probable neces-
sity of military sanctions, that is, war against the aggressor,
envisaged as one of the Fascist states.
The reason for this change, this hope against hope in the
League, this new belief in the probable necessity of support-
ing a new war for democracy— this time against Fascism — is
obvious. It is to be found in the well grounded fear and hate
of Fascist aggression which fills the hearts of decent men.
Hence men who at least in retrospect condemn the "good"
war for democracy of 1914, accept it as possible or probable
in 1936. And it must be admitted that there is some difference.
In 1914 there was no workers' republic like Soviet Russia
14
-
to be defended, and there was in older imperialism no such
menace to civilization as Hitler's cruel, anti-Semitic, anti-
labor Nazism. Moreover, there was in Germany all during the
war an organized Socialist and labor movement to which one
might reasonably appeal for support for a negotiated peace.
Hitler has crushed that movement and driven, what is left of
it underground. And to this menace of Germany under Hitler
must be added in the Far East the menace of Japan. Because
of this situation, by a somewhat different set of rationaliza-
tions, the Communist Party everywhere, and the majority of
Socialists in Europe, take virtually the same stand that the
majority Socialists of England, France and Russia took in
1914. That is, they will support a new war for democracy —
bourgeois democracy or capitalist democracy — against Fas-
cism if and when they consider such a war necessary. These
differences between 1914 and 1936 are real. Yet those who
urge them are in danger of forgetting that emotionally the
case for war against the Kaiser after the invasion of Belgium
seemed to sincere men in 1914 about as compelling as a pos-
sible war against Hitler seems today. It is only in the light
of hindsight that their case seems so weak.
Nor is the reason for grave skepticism about the doctrine
of the possible "good" war based wholly on analogy. There
are reasons for fear concerning the attitude of European
Socialists — reasons even weightier when the problem is, what
ought American Socialists to think and do. Here the reasons
arc as I see them.
1. Any world war, as we have seen, no matter how high and
holy the alleged end, involves the most: catastrophic destruc-
tion the world has seen. Its end may not be the victory of any
belligerent, but a kind of general chaos of misery, fear and
hate. It cannot be fought without putting all the belligerent
nations under the severest military control with denial of all
real civil liberty. Its consequences, biological and sociological,
15
will be dreadfully inimical to all the conditions on which the
establishment of a new and glorious social order depends. Ter-
rible as will be the suffering of continued war, there is little
reason to think that once it is begun it will be won by sharp
and sudden victory or a collapse of the enemy* This is not the
assertion of Tolstoian pacifism ; it is a statement of cold fact
concerning the nature of war, especially modern war, as an
instrument of any sort of emancipation,
2, The real enemy, as we have seen, is capitalist-national-
ism. Fascism is the worst stage of capitalist-nationalism in
our present day world; it is, however, a stage. All the ele-
ments of Fascism are present in capitalist-nationaHsm. Fas-
cism itself grew out of those elements. It was fertilized by the
blood of the slain in the last war; warmed into maturity by
the two hates precipitated by miscalled peace treaties. Why
should we expect a different result from the next war between
capitalist states?
3. No capitalist nation, whatever its professions to the
masses, will go into war for democracy. It will go in for its
own concent of national advantage. We know now that it was
the very nature of capitalist-nationalism which made the
peace of Versailles a peace of vengeance and subverted the
League of Nations into a league of fairly well satisfied states
to enforce the peace of a status quo against the dissatisfied
nations in the House of Have Not. The League has ignored or
bungled every major issue. It never dreamed of acting against
British or French imperialism; it gave no protection to the
Riffs against France nor did it protest against British bomb-
ing of tribes on the northwest frontier. Japan successfully
snapped her fingers at the League and took Manchuria. Ger-
many walked out of the League and temporarily settled the
question of armaments, with which the League had vainly
wrestled, by rearming. Never did the League find it possible
to correct major injustices in the peace treaties or, what
16
i
would have been more important, break down any economic
barriers or make any sort of allocation of raw materials,
thereby lessening the case for conquest in the mind of the
nations shut in the House of Have Not. It did, indeed, act
against Mussolini and for Ethiopia. There was a genuine
pro-League, anti-imperialist idealism behind that action, but
how bungling and hypocritical was the performance and how
successfully did British Tories subvert that idealism to then-
own political ends at home and the protection of their im-
perial power in the Mediterranean! Mussolini was not warn-
ed when the warning might have worked; League nations sold
him all he wanted up to the actual invasion of Ethiopia, well
knowing for what he wanted it. Even then they halfheartedly
applied ineffective economic sanctions, perhaps because, with
some reason, they feared that effective sanctions would bring
war, not avert it. The United States was guilty in the matter
of oil shipments, but for the League nations to shift guilt for
their own course on the United States was sheer hypocrisy.
In the light of all this, there is no guarantee at all that
Great Britain under its Tory government will really back
France and Russia against Hitler or that, if it should begin
a war in such an alliance, it would stay with it. British Tories
love Soviet Russia as little or less than they love Hitler, and
they do love a balance of power on the European continent
which they might think the conquest of Germany would dis-
turb in a way adverse to Britain. The one sure thing is that
Britain will act for the British Empire. Labor's fear of Fas-
cism will be a factor, but not a dominant factor. And France,
unless it goes overwhelmingly left, farther left than a people's
front will lead, will be for Russia only so far as French
nationalist interests are served.
4, The hope that, despite the dominance of nationalism
and capitalism, labor can somehow manipulate new war for
its own ends, is Utopian. Never is capitalist nationalism
.17
stronger than in war; never is the state more truly the instru-
ment of the owning- class. Its armies will not function as red
armies and no propaganda of minority groups can make them
serve this function unless and until they have been disillus-
ioned by defeat ! And no one wants his country to go to war
against Germany or Japan in order to be defeated !
Even an anti-capitalist nation like Soviet Russia with a
record of real devotion to peace, when forced to play the
game with capitalist powers, is compromised. The Soviet sale
of oil to Mussolini is indefensible in terms of Socialist prim
ciple. It could have been stopped, at least as far as direct
sales were concerned, at the beginning by a general declara-
tion of Soviet policy. It is absurd to say that thereby Russia
risked war I It is more absurd to say that, by continuing
the sale, Soviet Russia was in a position to compel all the
League nations to adopt more effective sanctions. The record
shows that she did nothing of the sort. But she did stop all
talk of effective workers' sanctions such as the refusal of
transport workers to carry oil.
5. Important as is the physical defense of Russia against
Germany, Japan or both, it is dangerous for any internation-
al revolutionary movement to make the defense of any one
land the first and last of its commandments. If it does it
may find in the end it lias defended the shell and lost the
substance. Is not Russia today strong enough to take care of
herself without risking actual military alliance with capital-
ist powers? By the Communist appeal for military action of
bourgeois states against Fascism do they not weaken the
appeal to workers of the world, even the workers in Fascist
countries, to strive for the deliverance of the world?
I grant that European nations, and the Socialist parties in
them, are caught in a terrible trap. They are reaping the
consequences of their own actions and failures to act* They
may see nothing but a bitter choice between war and some
18
degree of Fascist victory. But America is out of the League.
The conditions on which the Socialist Party could have sup-
ported our entrance — assurance that we should not be bound
to go to war to enforce peace, and that the League should be
democratized in structure and aim — -were not fulfilled. By all
means let us stay out.
If the workers in Europe will have an almost impossible task
to manipulate the armies of their nations for other than im-
perialist ends, how much more completely impossible, short
of crushing defeat, would be that task in America when the
Socialist and labor movement is still weak. If we fight Japan,
it will be for reasons agreeable to William Randolph Hearst,
not to Earl Browder of the Communist Party. If after terrible
struggle we win, we should be likely to stay in some part of
China to "civilize it." And if a common foe, Japan or Ger-
many, makes us temporary allies of Russia, the Russian gov-
ernment would have to watch its ally, united to it only by a
common hate, with sharper eyes than a hawk's.
The minute we get into the war we shall pass under a
vigorous, ruthless dictatorship, Fascist in character, if not in
name at home.
Nor is this all. If we are likely to be compelled to go to
war it is plain common sense to prepare. It is no good for
our pro-League and Communist friends in one and the same
breath to advocate support of League sanctions and readiness
to use military sanctions, and then to oppose preparedness.
They may, if they want, turn amateur experts and denounce
waste, but not sound preparedness. Neither does it make sense
in a crazy world to say that collective sanctions make for a
smaller burden on each nation. Look at England and France
and Russia as frantically arming as if there were no League !
If we are going in for possible war, we are going in for prepar-
edness and have no good argument against it. In the next war
no more than the last will we merely furnish the supplies.
19
And if we arc to go on year by year increasing our army
and navy, we shall increase militarism. The army will be used
against the workers. Didn't General Sherrill, representing
the New York State Chamber of Commerce, arguing with me
over WOR, say that one reason for a bigger army was to
keep the workers quiet I
In -view of these weighty considerations surely we must con-
clude that only in carrying out the slogan "workers of the
world, unite," is there hope against war. Difficult as they may
be to carry out, workers' sanctions against war, against the
production and shipment of war supplies, strikes against
mobilization offer far more hope than the machinations of
capitalist governments. In the building of the underground
movement in Italy and Germany and the working class move-
ment in Japan is to be found a sure strength against Fascism
that no manipulations of the Tory government of imperial
Britain or the military minded government of capitalist
America can afford.
This struggle against war cannot move on any single track.
It requires personal devotion as well as a political program.
It requires a steadfast resolve of the individual not again to
be coerced and cajoled by profiteers and patrioteers into
new war. Then it requires of him cooperation in unions and
in a Socialist or workers' party to wage peace.
Our victory depends not only upon ending the capitalist-
nationalism which causes war, but also upon the discovery
and effective use of methods of struggle against it which do
not of themselves involve war. There are circumstances under
which a general strike against a would-be dictator may be
more effective than war.
Just as war and the loyalties on which it depends have
been taught children by parents and teachers from the time
they could first understand words, so must peace and the
loyalty to a genuine brotherhood of man, organized in the
20
federation of cooperative commonwealths on which peace
depends, be taught. Such teaching is consistent, not inconsist-
ent, with the highest sort of love of country.
In this, the struggle for this glory of peace, every foe of
war must join. Each must find his post, and that not as a
free lance opponent of war, but in comradeship with his fel-
lows. The victories of peace will not be won by passivists nor
by individuals, intent perhaps on saving their own souls, who
cannot or will not organize to deliver themselves and their
children from the dark and terrible night of war.
The struggle itself is hard and stern. "The odds," let me
repeat, "are against the pioneers of peace. But the nrlds are
not hopeless. We who have enlisted in the crusade against war
have to aid us, first of all a sure knowledge that war is for
our day and generation the way to utter destruction; and,
second, the sure hope that a world rid of the menace of war
can discover new means of making ever more glorious the
fellowship of free men who shall dwell together the whole
world round in security and in peace,"
21
Excerpts fbom St. Louis Declaration of Socialist Party,
1917
War Proclamation and Program Adopted at National Con^
mention, Socialist Party, St. Louis, Mo., April, 1917.
The Socialist Party of the United States in the present
grave crisis, solemnly reaffirms its allegiance to the prin-
ciple of internationalism and working-class solidarity the
world over, and proclaims its unalterable opposition to the
war just declared by the Government of the United States.
Modern wars as a rule have been caused by the commercial
and financial rivalry and intrigues of the capitalist interests
in the different countries. Whether they have been frankly
waged as wars of aggression or have been hypocritically rep-
reseated as wars of "defense," they have always been made
by the classes and fought by the masses. Wars bring wealth
and power to the ruling classes, and suffering, death and
demoralization to the workers.
The Socialist Party of the United States is unalterably
opposed to the system of exploitation and class rule which is
upheld and strengthened by military power and sham national
patriotism. We, therefore, call upon the workers of all coun-
tries to refuse support to their governments in their wars. The
wars of the contending national groups of capitalists are not
the concern of the workers. The only struggle which would
justify the workers in taking up amis is the great struggle
of the working class of the world to free itself from eco-
nomic exploitation and political oppression, and we particu-
larly warn the workers against the snare and delusion of de-
fensive warfare. As against the false doctrine of national
patriotism we uphold the ideal of international working-class
22
solidarity. In support of capitalism, we will not willingly
give a single life or a single dollar; in support of the struggle
of the workers for freedom we pledge our all.
In each of these countries, the workers were oppressed and
exploited. They produced enormous wealth but the bulk of it
was withheld from them by the owners of the industries. The
workers were thus deprived of the means to repurchase the
wealth which they themselves had created.
The capitalist class of each country was forced to look
for foreign markets to dispose of the accumulated "surplus"
wealth. The huge profits made by the capitalists could no
longer be profitably reinvested in their own countries, hence,
they were driven to look for foreign fields of investment*
The geographical boundaries of each modern capitalist coun-
try thus became too narrow for the industrial and com-
mercial operations of its capitalist class.
• * *
The working class of the United States has no quarrel with
the working class of Germany or of any other country. The
people of the United States have no quarrel with the people
of Germany or any other country.
The American people did not want and do not want this
war. They have not been consulted about the war and have
had no part in declaring war. They have been plunged into
this war by the trickery and treachery of the ruling class
of the country through its representatives in the national ad-
ministration and national Congress, its demagogic agitators,
its subsidized press, and other servile instruments of public
expression.
We brand the declaration of war by our government as a
crime against the people of the United States and against
the nations of the world.
In all modern history there has been no war more unjusti-
23
fiable than the war in which we are about to engage.
No greater dishonor has ever been forced upon a people
than that which the capitalistic class is forcing upon this
nation against its will.
In harmony with these principles* the Socialist Party em-
phatically rejects the proposal that in time of war the work-
ers should suspend their struggle for better conditions. On
the contrary, the acute situation created by war calls for
an even more vigorous prosecution of the class struggle.
II
Excerpts from platform of the Socialist Party of the United
States in the national campaign of 1932
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
While the Socialist party is opposed to all war, it be-
lieves that there can be no permanent peace until Socialism
is established internationally, In the meanwhile, wc will sup-
port all measures that promise to promote good will and
friendship among the nations of the world including:
1. The reduction of armaments, leading to the goal of total
disarmament by international agreement, if possible, but, if
that is not possible, by setting an example ourselves. Soldiers,
sailors, and workers unemployed by reason of disarmanent to
be absorbed, where desired, in a program of public works, to
be financed in part by the savings due to disarmament. The
abolition of conscription, of military training camps and the
R.O.T.C,
2. The recognition of the Soviet Union and the encourage-
ment of trade and industrial relations with that country.
3. The cancellation of war debts due from the allied gov-
ernments as part of a program for wiping out war debts and
24
reparations, provided that such cancellation does not release
money for armaments, but promotes disarmament.
4. The entrance of the United States into the World Court.
5. The entrance of the United States into the League of
Nations under conditions which will make it an effective in-
strument for world peace, and renewed cooperation with the
working class parties abroad to the end that the League may
be transformed from a league of imperiatist powers to a demo-
cratic assemblage representative of the aspirations of the
common people of the world.
6. The creation of international economic organizations
on which labor is adequately represented, to deal with prob-
lems of raw material, investments, money, credit, tariffs and
living standards from the viewpoint of the welfare of the
masses throughout the world.
7. The abandonment of every degree of military interven-
tion by the United States in the affairs of other countries.
The immediate withdrawal of military forces from Haiti and
Nicaragua.
8. The withdrawal of United States military and naval
forces from China and the relinquishment of American extra-
territorial privileges.
9. The complete independence of the Philippines and the
negotiation of treaties with other nations safeguarding the
sovereignty of these islands.
10. Prohibition of the sales of munitions to foreign powers.
* * i
Committed to this constructive program, the Socialist
Party calls upon the nation's workers and upon all fair-
minded and progressive citizens to unite with it in a mighty
movement against the present drift into social disaster and
in behalf of sanity, justice, peace and freedom.
26
in
E&cerpt from 1934 Detroit Declaration of the Socialist Party
referring to opposition to war
The Socialist Party is opposed to militarism, imperialism,
and war. It proposes to eradicate the perpetual economic
warfare of capitalism the fruit of which is international con-
flict War cannot be tolerated by Socialists, or preparedness
for war. They will unitedly seek to develop trustworthy work-
ing class instruments for the peaceable settlement of inter-
national disputes and conflicts. They will seek to eliminate
military training from schools, colleges and camps. They
will oppose military reviews, displays and expenditures,
whether for direct war preparedness or for militaristic prop-
aganda, both in wartime and in peacetime. They will loyally
support, in the tragic event of war, any of their comrades
who for anti-war activities not in contravention of Social-
istic principles, or for refusal to perform war service, come
into conflict with public opinion or the law.
Moreover, recognizing the suicidal nature of modern com-
bat and the incalculable train of wars' consequences which
rest most heavily upon the working class, they will refuse
collectively to sanction or support any international war;
they will, on the contrary, by agitation and opposition do
their best not to be broken up by the war, but to break up
the war. They will meet war and the detailed plans for war
already mapped out by the war-making arms of the Govern-
ment, by massed war resistance, organized so far as prac-
ticable in a general strike of labor unions and professional
groups in a united effort to make the waging of war a prac-
tical impossibility and to convert the capitalist war crisis
into a victory for Socialism.
26
IV
Excerpt from speech delivered by Eugene V. Debs, Socialist
Leader, at Canton, Ohio, for which he was sent to Federal
Penitentiary on a charge of "Attempting to cause * . .
mutiny , . . within tlie military forces of the United States,
and the utterance of words intended to procure and incite
resistance to the United States, and promote the cause of the
Imperial German Government"
"Are we opposed to Prussian militarism? Why, we have
been fighting it since the day the Socialist movement was
born ; and we are going to continue to fight it, day and night,
until it is wiped from the face of the earth. Between us there
is no truce — no compromise.
"Multiplied thousands of Socialists have languished in the
jails of Germany because of their heroic warfare upon the
despotic ruling class of that country. . .
"I hate, I loathe, I despite junkers and junkerdom. I have
no earthly use for the junkers of Germany, and not one par-
ticle more use for the junkers in the United States . . .
"Wars throughout history have been waged for conquest
and plunder. In the middle ages when the feudal lords who
inhabited the castles whose towers may still be seen along the
Rhine concluded to enlarge their domains, to increase their
power, their prestige and their wealth they declared war upon
one another. But they themselves did not go to war any more
than the modern feudal lords, the barons of Wall Street go
to war. The feudal barons of the middle ages, the economic
predecessors of the capitalists of our day, declared all wars.
And their miserable serfs fought all the battles. The poor,
ignorant serfs had been taught to revere their masters ; to
believe that when their masters declared war upon one an-
27
other, it was their patriotic duty to fall upon one another
and to cut one another's throats for the profit and glory of
the lords and barons who held them in contempt. And that is
war in a nutshell. The master class has always declared the
wars; the subject class has always fought the battles. The
master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while
the subject class has had nothing to gain and all to lose —
especially their lives . . .
"And here let me emphasize the fact — and it cannot be
repeated too often — that the working class who fight all the
battles, the working class who make the supreme sacrifices,
the working class who freely shed their blood and furnish the
corpses, have never yet had a voice in either declaring war or
making peace. It is the ruling class that invariably does
both. They alone declare war and they alone make peace.
Yours not to reason why ;
Yours but to do and die.
"That is their motto and we object on the part of the
awakening workers of this nation . . .
"Do not worry over the charge of treason to your masters,
but be concerned about the treason that involves yourselves.
Be true to yourself and you cannot be a traitor to any good
cause on earth."
36
Excerpts from Debs address to the court, after having
been found guilty
"From what you heard in the address of the counsel for the
prosecution you might naturally infer that I am an advocate
of force and violence. It is not true. I have never advocated
violence in any form. I have always believed in education, in
intelligence, in enlightenment, and I have always made my
appeal to the reason and the conscience of the people.
I admit being opposed to the present social system. I am
doing what little I can, and have been for many years, to
bring about a change that shall do away with the rule of
the great body of the people by a relatively small class and
establish in this country an industrial and social democracy.
From the beginning of the war to this day I have never by
word or act been guilty of the charges embraced in this in-
dictment. If I have criticized, if I have condemned, it is be-
cause I believed it to be my duty, and that it was my right to
do so under the laws of the land. I have had ample precedents
for my attitude. This country has been engaged in a number
of wars and every one of them has been condemned by some
of the people, among them some of the most eminent men of
their time . . .
The revolutionary fathers who had been oppressed under
king rule understood that free speech, a free press and the
right of free assemblage by the people were fundamental prin-
ciples in democratic government. The vcr}' first amendment
to the constitution reads :
^Congress shall make no law respecting an establish-
ment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ;
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the
right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the government for a redress of grievances.'
That is perfectly plain English. It can be understood by
a child. I believe the revolutionary fathers meant just what
is here stated— that Congress shall make no law abridging the
freedom of speech or of the press, or of the right of the peo-
ple to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for
a redress of their grievances.
That is the right I exercised at Canton on the 16th day of
last June; and for the exercise of that right, I now have to
answer to this indictment. I believe in the right of free speech,
in war as well as in peace. I would not, under any circum-
stances, gag the lips of my bitterest enemy. I would under
no circumstances suppress free speech. It is far more danger-
ous to attempt to gag the people than to allow them to speak
freely what is in their hearts.
I have told you that I am no lawyer, but it seems to me
that I know enough to know that if Congress enacts any law
that conflicts with this provision in the constitution, that law
is void. If the Espionage law finally stands, then the consti-
tution of the United States is dead , . .
I cannot take back a word I have said. I cannot repudiate
a sentence I have uttered. I stand before you guilty of having
made this speech. I do not know, I cannot tell, what your
verdict may be; nor does it matter much, so far as I am con-
cerned.
I am the smallest part of this trial. I have lived long
enough to realize my own personal insignificance in relation
to a great issue that involves the welfare of the whole people.
What you may choose to do to me will be of small consequence
after all. I am not on trial here. There is an infinitely greater
issue that is being tried today in this court, though you may
not be conscious of it. American institutions are on trial here
before a court of American citizens. The future will render
the final verdict."
30
Publications of the League for Industrial Democracy
NORMAN THOMAS
Why I Am A Socialist (L.I.D.) f off
The Plight of the Sharecropper (L.I.D.) ZZZZ. !l0
HARRY W. LAIDLER
How America Lives (L.I.D.) 13
America In the Depression, Supplement to How America Lives 10
Incentives Under Cnpttalism and Socialism (L.I.D.) 15
Public Ownership Here and Abroad (L.I.D.) .. 15
Unemployment and Its Remedies (L.I.D,) .25
Socialist Planning and a Socialist Program— Edited by Dr. Laidier .85
Putting the Constitution to Work (L.I.D.) 15
STUART CHASE
Waste and the Machine Age (L.I.D.) is
Poor Old Competition (L.I.D.) „.,„.,. J JZZZZZZ'Z" !l»
JOHN DEWEY
Education and a New Social Order (L.I.D.) .05
HAROLD J. LASKI— Karl Marx (L.I.D.) 25
Fascism, A Diagnosis of the Causes of Fascism 10
MAURICE GOLDBLOOM, JOHN HERL1NG, JOEL SK1DMAN and
ELIZABETH YARD— Strikes Under the New Deal (L.I.D.) IB
HOWARD KESTER— Revolt Among the Sharecroppers. "Z. .80
JOSEPH P. LASH— Campus Strikes Against War (L.I.D.) .10
JOHN BAUER— America's Struggle for Electric Power (L.I.D,) .10
HELEN ALFRED— Municipal Housing „ 10
Looking Forward, Discussion Outlines, 1934, 1085, I99G , ., .10
HERBERT SOLOW— Union Smashing in Sacramento 05
Wisdom, Justice and Moderation— The Case of Angela Herndon
IMO per lim or .". y0i
Tampa— Tar and Terror— fl.50 per 100 or 02
The Scottsboro Case— The Scottsboro Defense Committee Z.ZZZZ. !os
The Truth About the Waterfront— International Longshoremen's Aes'n .05
WALTER WILSON— Militia— Friend or Foe of Liberty .i«
BOOKS
NORMAN THOMAS
War— No Profit, No Glory, No Need (Stokes, 1955) 1.50
Human Exploitations. (Stokes) 2 75
The Choice Before Us (Maemillan. 1934) " j'50
As I See It (Maemillan) £ 00
America's Way Out (Maemillan) ..„...„ £.»&
HARRY W. LAIDLER
A Program for Modern America (Crowell, 1D8&) 2.50
Socializing our Democracy (Harpers, 193S) .."!"!"" s.oti
Concentration of Control In American Industry (Crowell) 1 75
The Road Ahead (Crowell) " 1 00
History of Socialist Thought (Crowell) ,,., JZZZZZ'. BJJC
(Lower Prices for Quantity Order$)
LEAGUE FOR INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY
112 East 19th Streel, New York City
f
NEW FRONTIERS
PERIODICAL STUDIES IN ECONOMICS AND POLITICS
Ten Monthly Issues During the Year, Each
Devoted to a Detailed Work of Research on a
Current Vital Problem—the Kind of Authentic
Research Material You Can't Get Elsewhere,
PLUS One Volume— A Full-Sized Book on
Economics or Social Problems in a Special
New Frontiers Edition
All for $2.50
Active Members of ihe LJ.D.
(Paying $3.00 annual dues)
Get This Periodical Service FREE
This Is not "just another new magazine." It is an essential research
service lor all interested in the basic lacts of life and living today
and is an attempt io analyze these factors in the light of Ihe forces
malting lor the world of tomorrow
"New Frontiers" is grandl The whole thing is splendidly done, and
I especially congratulate you on the handsome style and printing.
This is one of Ihe best things the League has ever done."
—REV. JOHN HAYNES HOLMES
BOARD OF EDITORS
FREDERICK V. FIELD
MARY DUBLIN
MARY FOX
ABEAM HARRIS
SIDNEY HOOK
HARRY W. LAIDLER
JOSKPH P. LASH
ROBERT MORSS LOVETT
ALONZO MYERS
ORLIE PELL
CAUL RAUSHKNBUSH
ESTHER RAUSHKNBUSH
JOEL SEtDMAN
MAXWELL S. STEWART
ROBERT G. WOOLBERT
THERESA WOLFSON
o o o
Send subscriptions to
LEAGUE FOR INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY
112 East 19th Street, New York Cily
Open Library