PHRASES

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 204, 17 May 1918, Page 6

PHRASES

THE CAMOUFLAGE OF IGNORANCE

A TILT AT SOME WAR PLATITUDES

Major Lord "Willougbby de Broke, in the "National He-view," has some hard hits at those zealous patriots who would win the war with their tongues. In an article which he heads "Phrases" he says:—

"Since the outbreak.of war we have been flooded with phrases invented and reiterated either to conceal our own unreadiness for war, or to tell us what wo aro fighting for, or to illustrate from the war the political abstractions of the coiner or circulator of the phrase. All those who havo thought the matter out havo long ago come to. tho conclusion that, in fact, wo entered upon and aro now waging the war for such dull things as our food and clothes and homes, and all the primary elements of individual and national existence. But some of us are easily captivated by phrases. Indeed, we were once warned by a great patriot and thinker that our reckless appetito for government by phrases was one of our greatest dangers. It) therefore seems to be vital that we should try to realise what we are really fighting for, and whether' the real reason is not camouflaged by rhetoric. i "All phrase makers and all who try to make the world square with their own pet abstract theories rather than apply the test of experience and common sense to things as they find them—in a word, all whom Disraeli used to call 'the ab-stract-principle gentlemen'—generally get into difficulties when they are brought up against-hard facts. Sorno of us were nanguine enough to hope that the hard facts of the war would have cured them of tho old habit. Not at all. The rhetoricians have given themselves full rein. And now that the strain of war is tighter than ever before, and may well be still tighter before long, those who in their hearts are fighting or working for England, and not for any abstract theorj', may justly try to examine one or two ideas, and ask their authors for some jus-, tification and practical definition. We have not lately heard 60 much of 'the rights of small nationalities.' But we want to know what is a 'nationality' and what are its 'rights,' and whether these 'rights' are to bo the exclusive property of small 'nationalities.' Is Ireland a 'nationality' ? If tho rights of small 'nationalities' include self-expression by means of the exercise of sovereign power, are those who 60 glibly uso this pliraso prepared to grant full sovereign power and independence to Ireland ? Those who since the war began have been talking 60 much about 'the rights of small nationalities' seem to havo forgotten that they were fitting out an expedition against Ulster at the very moment when Germany was waiting at the end of tho wire to know when tho British Government had let loose tho dog 6 of war at home, in order that she might with the greater safely do the same. thing in Europe. But, on the other hand, diplomacy may have dictated the appeal to Ismail nationalities.' If it be .seriously intended to back up this formula and to vanquish Pan-Germanism, and so to hasten tho end of the war by enlisting, on the side of England, all tho peoples who are bullied aud oppressed by Germany, according to the policy indicated by M. Andre Clieradnme, well and good. But very few soldiers would bo induced to 'go over the top,' and very few women would be induced to wait patiently for soveral hours in a food queue, with no further stimulant than 'the rights of Bmall nationalities.'

"But a much moro favourite formula, though probably quito as unconvincing to the man in the trench and to the woman in tho queue, is that we are at war to overthrow 'Prussian militarism.' Many, indeed, who have no lurid past to conceal sometimes use this term for the simple reason that it has by constant repetition found its way into the glossary of the war. It is, however, used with special unction by those who flouted Lordßoberts, and view with profound alarm any system of universal military training after the war as being fatal to their own plan of political and social reconstruction. This frame of mind is prone to select those aspects of Germany which correspond to things that it dislikes, and to hold them up to publicodium as a warning to England. The exportation to overthrow 'Prussian militarism has been employed with a view I to preserving the oid fallacy that the good old fat German of the beer garden and the picture book has no hatred of England, but forms part of a. submissive peasantry under the heel or before the too of the Prussian jack boot. Now this is a dangerous fallacy. Let us hope that it is weakening in its hold, but it canno.t too often bo pointed out that we are at war with the whole German nation. We ought to have learut by tow that all Germans, hate the English with that deadly hatred that is the more remorseless, unscrupulous, and vindictive because it is inspired, not by any wrong we have done to Germany, but by jealousy, and perhaps by fear, and may be, as a clever writer who knows Germany has recently suggested, by a spice of admiration into tho bargain. Bel'oro tho war no sensitive Englishman could stay very long in Germany without feeling in his bones the universal German dislike of the English. Since tho war began abundant and authentic evidence of tho malice of the whole German nation has come to hand. Trustworthy witnesses who know Germany from within have told us of it. And if we want further evidence, tho reception of our prisoners of war by a mob of German civilians is more than enough. Tho chagrin caused by our taking up arms agninst Germany nt Ihe Jnst minute after all our smooth words and pacifist talk and neglect of military preparation may, quite unreasonably, have intensified the hatred. "A. right understnding of oureelves and Germany requires .something more than phrases. The .German military machine is ■ something more than the creation of Jankers and Prussians. The Gorman military machino is the German people. Every German man is cither a soldier or the possible father of soldiors. Every German women wishes to bo the mother of soldiers. The machine must sooner .or later be beaten in the field, and so discredited, if we are to have anything like a durable peace in Europe. "So much for phrases and doctrinaires. What, then, are wo fighting for? Plain men would say, and rightly say, that they are not fighting to vindicate any social or political theory, but that they are fighting to beat tho Boclie. This seems to bo an obvious and fundamental truth; but even now it is in danger of being lost in an embroidery of other talk. The fact is that we aro fighting to beat tho Boclie now and for aH, time. We are fighting for our very existence. We are fighting to inflict such a defeat upon him as to make ourselves and our Allies secure. The greatest service wo can render them and to the cause of pcaco is to put against him our own security and independence. If a league of nations is wanted, why not work upon the material ready to hand in tho shape of a united British Empire? But let us i first regain our own self-respect and earn that of others by once more being masters in our own house and ruling over a United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Wo have to make our own choico here and now between union and separation. Concessions to tho separatists, whether Nationalists or Sinn Feiners, have proved to be a ghastly failure. While this is being written we do -not know which course the Government will pursue. But tliey cannot have it both ways. Home Rule is too great a price to pay Jot a promise of Irish conscription. And there Is no proof that we need pay it. Thero is no reason why we should not have Irish conscription as well as the maintenance of the union. German agents would seo to it that a promise of conscription was rendered of no effect."