Conscription: Military and Industrial.

Maoriland Worker, Volume 3, Issue 45, 19 January 1912, Page 6

Conscription: Military and Industrial.

Many weil-nicaning adherents of the Australasian Labor Party arc Bupporting military conscription under tho impression that it will not only make for security against foreign aggression, but will nndenninr the power of capitalism to bring force to bear against. local work men.

Tho. militarist tells us that unless u<> arm and drill every able-bodied male, we shall be conquered some day by an Asiatic horde —Japanese most likely— that will confiscate all property, ravish all women, slay children, and enslave and degrade every worker. Our only means of becoming secure is by building up a powerful army and navy, which will be in the hands of the workers, and will be vised only for defence and never for foreign aggression.

If Norman Angell is right in his contention, and no one has attempted to disprove it, powerful armies and navies do not make for security. Tho most powerful military nations of Europ-n aro the least secure. Tin's insecurity is reflected in the financial position of those countries. The credit of the small comparatively-unprotected States stands higher than that of the greatnaval and military powers of Europe. Belgian 3 per cents, standing at 96 ami German at 82; Norwegian 3} per cents, at 102; and Russian 3J per cents, at 81; and so on, showing that the financial intelligence of Europe regards the so-called protected countries as risky places for investment as compared with those having little or no protection.

Further, tho standard of comfort is higher in smaller countries such as Scandinavia, Holland, Belgium and Switzerland, and wealth is more evenly distributed. Tho average wealth is also higher in the weaker countries; tho middle-aged German possesses (on the established average) 9000 francs; the Hollander 16,000.

In _ the most .military States, the strongest government and most complete regulation are to bo found, with tho least individual freedom. Democracy does not accept a situation in which tho "booted Prussian" may ride down the industrial citizen, or in which "it will always be possible" (in the words of tho Junker yon Oldenburg, member of tho Reichstag) "for the Germaai Emperor to say to a lieutenant, 'Take ten men and closo the Reichstag.' " — Angell. The further States advance from militarism the better are they for their citizens to dwell in. Angell says: "Tako the progression away from militancy and it gives us a table Eomothing like this: — Arabia and Morocco. Turkish territory as a whole. Tho more unruly Balkan States, Montenegro. Russia. Spain, Italy, 'Austria. Franco. Germany. Scandinavia, Holland, Belgium. England. America and Australasia might be added to tho table, for America is loss militarised than England, and Australasia less than America. The most militarised aro always at war, always in trouble and insecure They aro going the way of the ancient empires which gavo up to war their best and strongest men, and kept only their cripples and weaklings to frreed from.

If militarist writers were correct in their statement of tho case, the most military countries should bo tho most secure, and Arabia, Morocco, and Turkey should be taken as types of progressive nations, and England, America, and Australia as types of tho more decadent.

Tho fact ia that no nation can live by tho sword, and the Prince of Peace who once said: "Put up again thy sword into his place, for they that take up the sword shall perish with tho sword," uttered a truth that all history bears witness of. Tho position of Turkey and Persia and the stato of insecurity of all tho most military counErics should bo enough to make militarists pauKo and examine their premises. Tho position of Turkey and Torsi i <xmld nob have been worse had th j workers of thoso countries refused i> fight at the instance of the ~ The Arabs and Turks who resisted invasion at Tripoli wero ill-ad\ ised. Ha 1 they gone about tlieir work as usua', the invasion would havocuded in sniot'j so far as they weio concerned. The/ might have had a change of government aaxd rulers without being aay tho

The Sword and the Nation.

By W.R.W

uciM'. Under the leadership of the miiiiarists, however, they preferred to tigia, with tho result that the invaderb it?toiitd to all the barbarities of war.

in J'ersia tho same thing has hap- ]•( iKii. A foolish few huvo taken in liiiiid ihe work of opposing a more powtriul and botter-equipped enemy, with disastrous results to themselves. Had the Persian workers refused to light, they would have escaped the horrors of war, for tho Russian soldiers would have remained under control of their officers, and tho invasion would have been a peaceful one. It takes two to make a fight, and no modern army hat ever proceeded to exterminate defenceless non-combatants.

In the light of tho foregoing, Australasia, in becoming an mined nation, is rendering herself loss secure, is reducing her credit, lowering her standard of comfort; lessening tho wealth of her people; and destroying the liberty of her citizens.

"But without armaments we should b<: at the mercy of any nation wliicli cared to invade and conquer us," we are told. Well, even so, nothing very serious could happen to us. Every European Power has vital interests here, and no single Power would be permitted to annex every other Power's wealth here. The Japanese scare is mostly mythology or pure fiction, but if Japanese soldiers came to Australia and met with no armed opposition no massacres or ravages could take place. If the workers stood up to shuot and be shot at, the case would be dilt'eivnl. All the honors of war would then be experienced and the innocent would be most injured.

But the militarist says: "Tins is a degrading attitude to adopt. We can never be a nation respected by nations if we adopt this attitude. Nations can only win distinction and compel respect by military prowess, so we must bave a powerful army and navy."

Other nations think the same, and international competition in armament sets in, reason becomes powerless, and all the forces of States aro pressed into the service of militarism. The solo object of cacli State must be to invent larger guns, larger ships, and build up a larger army and navy than its neighbour. The anti-militarist must bo put down. He must bo disfranchised, prosecuted and finally refused the right to own property in tho fruits of his labor. As Senator Pearce recently said, the "enemy within" must becombattcd as well as the enemy without.

An anti-militarist strike would not be tolerated by Senator Pearcc's Defence Department, and an industrial strike endangering supplies would bo treated as a strike against national interests. It would be treason. "Strikes in future will not bo tolerated," several State Premiers havo asserted, while in England steps are being taken to fill the places of strikers with soldiers. "Whether you like arbitration or not, strikes wili not bo allowed," and the parties who talk this way aro tho parties who are moving- heaven and earth to fasten military conscription upon tho workers. They mean not only compulsory training, but compulsory wagedom ; not only military conscription, but industrial conscription also.

With the success of military conscription, wo may expect a cunning attempt at industrial conscription, if fighting men aro to rule, industrialists must be disciplined bo obey. Tho militarist says iv effect: "You, being defenceless and lidplesa, would, if loft to yourselves, soon become enslaved by others, so to save you wo will enslave you." But aro wo as defenceless and helpless as the militarist supposes?

"While our opponents go on building larger and larger engines of war, may wo not turn in the other direction and see what modern science is doing for iis? In the vast domain of physics, the GO-feet telescope has its opposite in the microscopo, and though the militai"isb may have, for death-dealing, liia guns 50ft. or GOffc. in length, the microbiologist has liis microscopo and tho deadly microbe —tho fearful bacilli of typhoid, smallpox, cholera, bubonw, anthrax and others which he can cultivate ill a iilin of gelatine and store in a phial, to bo let loose at will upon a death-dealing mission.

A new terror to the militarist is tho aeroplano> which at 50001't. is very hard to pick out, even in a very clear sky. Afc 10,000f!i., which was Hauid's heighb as ho crossed the English Channel and coast line on October 12, it is invisible and inaudible. A roan in an

aeroplane Hiay in the future, from a safe height, drop the most deadly cultures upon an arm.v winch no long gnu could roach imr shrapKol injure. It might be in tho mar future written of the destruction ol an army, as Uyron wrote of the destruction of Sennacherib's army, that: "The angel of death spread his wings in the blast And breathed in the face of the foe as he pasa'd." And some modern Moses might plague a tyrannical Pharaoh with plouro for his cattle, pink-eye and redwater for his horses, rabies for his dogs, cholera for his chickens, trichina for his swine, and so on ad libitum. Wo are not so powerless on , hopeless, perhaps, when a glass tube promises to be more deadly than a rifle, and a bladder more destructive than a shrapnel shell, or when a tyrant may be struck down with a weapon not larger than the twenty-thousandth part of an inch, and rendered incapable of active villanny either permanently or for many months at a time. The possibilities arc inexhaustible in this direction, and the militarist has an alarming outlook.

But it is more than probable that the weapons which modern science is forging will be rendered unnecessary by the spread of international amity, and the knowledge that war is economically Futile and war-mongers homicidal maniacs. Wβ can safely trust the future, in the meantime bending our efforts, not to popularise the armed nation, but to pacify, and reassure those timid souls who believe that the time for peace and goodwill is not y«t. The time for peace-lovers is now, when the majority of every warlike nation are beginning to question the right of a few to make war in their own interests, when rven ii: Japan increased army and iiavy estimates arc being defeated, and when our young jni'ii are, being misled and taught to believe that war is not only inescapable, but glorious; and when, if we arc not ashamed of our shortsighted statesmen, others are disgusted with them. .Norman Angell, the author of "The Great Illusion," writing to the English "Labor Leader," the organ of the British Labor Party, says: "The definite repudiation of the doctrine of universal brotherhood, a repudiation embodied in legislation of a rigid, harsh, and sometimes cruel character, has come first from advanced democrats. I refer to the anti-alien, anti-negro, anti-Chinese, anti-Japanese legisation of Australia, Canada, and tho United States. What ia the use of saying that the Labor movement is anti-militarist? In Australia and New Zealand the demooracy, in some respects the most advanced in the world, is not antimilitarist, either in practice or in spirit; they are for the most part truculently militarist, and it is under a Labor Government that has been enforced the first compulsory military service under the British flag."

Walter Walsh, the author of "The Moral Damage of War," as famous in America as in Europe, writing to the writer, Sept. 16, 1911, Bays: "Am gratified to know that my book is likely to help you in your fight, which I have been watching."

These two sterling friends of humanity, with thousands of "other intellectuals, have beca. watching our fight against militarism. We had it in our power to give them such a lead as would hearten them in their fight, but our Labor politicians fell beforo tho military Moloch and worshipped.

Let tho Socialists fight on until that wrong is undone.