Part 1 (1/2)

Plain Words From America.

by Douglas W. Johnson.

_February_, 1916.

Your two letters, with enclosed newspaper clippings, and your postal card were duly received. I can a.s.sure you that my failure to reply more promptly was not meant as any discourtesy. The clippings were gladly received, for I am always anxious to read what prominent Germans regard as able and convincing presentations of their side of disputed matters.

Your own letters, particularly the long one of July 9, were read most carefully. I appreciate your earnest endeavour to convince me of the righteousness of your country's cause, and am not unmindful of the time and trouble you spent in preparing for me so carefully worded a presentation of the German point of view touching several matters of the profoundest importance to our two Governments.

My failure to reply has been due to a doubt in my own mind as to whether good would be accomplished by any letter which I could write. I could not agree with your opinions regarding Germany's responsibility for the war, nor regarding her methods of conducting the war; and it did not seem to me that you would profit by any statement I might make as to the reasons for my own opinions on such vital matters. Your letters clearly showed that you wrote under the influence of an intense emotion--an emotion which I can both understand and respect, but which might well make it impossible for you to accord a dispa.s.sionate reception to a reply which controverted your own views. With your country surrounded by powerful foes, with your sons deluging alien soil in an heroic defence of your Government's decrees, with the nation you love most dearly standing in moral isolation, condemned by the entire neutral world for barbarous crimes against civilisation, you could hardly be expected to write with that scientific accuracy and care which would, in normal times, be your ideal.

For this reason I have not resented much in your letters which would otherwise call for earnest protest. I feel sure, for example, your a.s.sertion that I and my fellow-countrymen derive our opinions of German conduct wholly from corrupt and venal newspapers, or usually from a single newspaper which doles out mental poison in subservience to a single political party, was not intended to be as insulting as it really sounded. Your emotion doubtless led you to make charges which your sense of justice and courtesy would, under other circ.u.mstances, condemn. I believe also that in a calmer time you would not entertain the sweeping opinion that ”the daily press has become one of the direst plagues of humanity, an ulcer in the frame of society, whose one object it is, for private ends (wealth, political influence, and social position), to pit the races, nations, religions, and cla.s.ses against one another.” I realise that some of our papers are a disgrace to the high calling of journalism; I believe that some sacrifice honour for gain and that some are subservient to special interests; but the roll of American journalists is honoured by the presence of many names which command respect at home and abroad because of a long-standing reputation for honesty, fearlessness, and distinguished service in the cause of humanity. To one such name was added at our last commencement the degree representing one of the highest honours which Columbia University has to bestow upon a man of lofty ideals and honourable achievement. The paper edited by this man is among those most extensively read by myself and hundreds of thousands of other Americans who demand to know the truth.

However low may be the moral plane of some newspapers, your characterisation of all newspapers as mere business concerns, founded and carried on with the purpose of enriching their owners, and supporting certain special interests, ”quite regardless of their effect, beneficial or the reverse, upon the real public interests of their own country, regardless of truth and justice,” is not at all true of the cla.s.s of papers read by the majority of intelligent Americans. I am not sufficiently familiar with a large number of German newspapers to make a.s.sertions as to their standards; but, in spite of the smaller amount of freedom allowed to the press in your country, I can scarcely imagine that conditions are bad enough to justify your sweeping condemnation of all newspapers.

If you had stopped to consider the radically different relations existing between the press and the Government in Germany and in America, you would scarcely have fallen into the error of a.s.serting that a considerable proportion of our papers, in common with those of other nations, have ”laboured in the employ or at the instigation of” the Government, ”with all the implements of mendacity and defamation, to spread hatred and contempt for Germany.” Unlike your own, our press is wholly free from Government control. Any attempt on the part of our Government to dictate the policy of any newspaper would be hotly resented, and would be doomed to certain failure. Americans do not believe in the German doctrine that the press must be ”so far controlled as is requisite for the welfare of the community,” and hold that absolute freedom of speech is essential to true liberty. There is no censors.h.i.+p of the American press. You have a censors.h.i.+p which all the outside world knows has been wonderfully effective in keeping some important facts from the knowledge of the German people. No American paper can be suppressed because of what it prints. You are, of course, well aware that, on more than one occasion, German papers have been suppressed for certain periods because your Government did not believe that what they said was for the good of the country. I enclose a message received by wireless under German control which is only one of the many announcements telling of suppression of your papers. It does not alter the situation to say that censors.h.i.+p and suppression are necessary for the good of the Fatherland, and that the papers in question deserved to be suppressed. The vital fact remains that your newspapers are not free to publish anything they like. Ours are thus free. Every issue of your papers must be submitted to your police, so that your rulers may control what you write and read. Not a paper in America is submitted to any official whatever. You cannot read anything which your Government believes it wise to keep from you. We can read everything, whether the Government likes it or not. Americans believe there can be no truly free press, and no real unfettered public opinion, with the possibility of punishment hanging over the press of a country. Where the police, representing the ruling power, controls the press there is no true liberty. Whatever else may be said against the American press, it must be admitted that it is free from Government control. It is not necessary, therefore, to inquire whether the American Government has employed or instigated the public press to attack Germany, since, even if it desired to do so, it would not dare make the attempt.

There are many other statements in your letters which can only be explained as the result of writing under stress of intense emotion; you would probably wish to modify many of these were you writing under happier circ.u.mstances. It is not my desire, however, to dwell upon this phase of your correspondence. I do not for a moment doubt your sincerity, and believe you were yourself convinced of the truth of all you wrote. My purpose in writing this letter is to accept in good faith your expressed wish for a better understanding between two peoples who have long been on friendly terms with one another, and to contribute toward this end by removing, at least so far as we two are concerned, one serious misunderstanding which now exists.

As you are well aware, the American people, with the exception of a certain proportion of German-born population, are practically unanimous in condemning Germany for bringing on the war and for conducting it in a barbarous manner. You, together with hosts of your fellow-countrymen, believe this unfavourable opinion is the result of the truth being kept from the American public by improper means. It is, of course, a comforting thought to you that when the whole truth is known we will revise our opinions and realise that Germany acted righteously, and was not guilty of the crimes which have been charged against her. But, as a scientific man, devoted to the search for truth, no matter where it leads you, you would not want to deceive yourself with such a comforting a.s.surance if it were founded on false premises. If, therefore, you really want to know the conditions under which American opinion of Germany's conduct has been formed, I will endeavour to describe them with the same calmness and careful attention to accuracy which I earnestly endeavour to observe in my scientific investigations. In discussing this vitally important matter, I will first endeavour to picture the American opinion of Germany and the Germans before the war, since this was the background upon which later opinions were formed. I will then explain the sources of information which were open to Americans after the war began; and will next describe how this information produced an American opinion unfavourable to Germany, as observed by one who has read widely and watched the trend of his country's thought with keen interest. If this a.n.a.lysis is successful in convincing you that American opinion does not rest on English lies, is not the result of a venal press controlled by British gold, but has a far more substantial foundation, then my letter will not have been written in vain. If you are not convinced, but prefer to retain the comforting belief that if America only knew the truth it would applaud Germany's actions, then I shall, at least, have the satisfaction of knowing that I earnestly endeavoured, in good faith, to return the courtesy which you showed me when you wrote so fully, by telling you with equal fulness the truth as I see it.

I.

First, then, let me picture the background of public opinion toward Germany and the Germans as I saw it before the war began. Inasmuch as one's vision may be affected favourably or unfavourably by his personal experiences, it is only fair that I state briefly my own experiences with people of German birth or parentage. One of my earliest recollections is of a German maid in our household who taught me to make my wants known in the German language, and also taught me to love her as I did members of my own family. In college, one of my two favourite professors and one of my college chums were of German parentage. Both these men are still valued friends, and both believe in the righteousness of Germany's cause. I have spent parts of three summers in Germany, and have many German friends, both in America and in Europe.

The two Europeans in my special field of science for whom I have the greatest personal affection are German professors in Berlin and Leipzig respectively. I have more personal friends in the German army than in the Allied armies. My sister is married to a professor of German descent and German sympathies. Surely, therefore, if personal relations.h.i.+ps prejudice me at all, they should prejudice me in favour of Germans and things German.

In my opinion, the American estimate of Germany and her citizens prior to the war was, in general, most favourable. Certainly America looked with admiration upon the remarkable advance achieved by Germany in the short s.p.a.ce of forty years. To your universities we have always acknowledged a great debt. We have profited much by your advances in economic lines and admired the combination of scientific research and business which made your countrymen efficient in many lines. The large number of your people who have emigrated to America have, in the main, made good citizens, and we have welcomed them as among the best of the foreigners who flock to our sh.o.r.es. German music and German musicians find nowhere a more cordial welcome than here where admiration for their achievements is unstinted. Nor have we forgotten the heroic services of the many Germans who laid down their lives in defence of our flag, that the Union might live. The Germans' love of honour and family has touched the American heart in a tender spot, and many of my acquaintances admit that with no other foreigners do they establish such intimate and affectionate relations as with their German friends.

This admiration and friends.h.i.+p has not blinded us to certain defects in the German character, any more than has your friends.h.i.+p for Americans closed your eyes to our defects. The bad manners of Germans are proverbial, not only among Americans, but all over the world; so much so that certain German writers, admitting that Germans as a nation are ill-mannered, have sought to find in this fact an explanation for the world-wide antagonism toward Germany's policy in the war. I do not believe, however, that, so far as American sentiment is concerned, there is any considerable element of truth in this explanation. It is true that we do not like the lack of respect accorded to women by the average German; that the position of woman in Germany seems to us anomalous in a nation claiming a superior type of civilisation; that the b.u.mptious att.i.tude of the German ”intellectual” amuses or disgusts us; and that the insolence of your young officers who elbow us off the sidewalks in your cities makes us long to meet those individuals again outside the boundaries of Germany, where no military Government, jealous of their ”honour,” could protect them from the thras.h.i.+ng they deserve. It is also true that, at international congresses, excursions and banquets, attended by both men and women representatives of all nations, the Germans have gained an unenviable reputation for bad manners because they have pushed themselves into the best places, crowded into the trains ahead of the women, and generally ignored the courtesies due to ladies and gentlemen a.s.sociated with them. But, in spite of our full recognition of this undesirable national trait, I doubt whether any great number of Americans have permitted a dislike of German manners to affect their opinion as to German morals in the conduct of war, though some do hold that lack of good manners is a characteristic mark of inferior civilisation. On the whole, we have been inclined to be tolerant of German rudeness, regarding it as in part due to the rapid material development of a young nation, and possibly as, in part, the result of over-aggressiveness fostered by a military training.

It is only fair to say, also, that our admiration of Germany's achievements in art, literature, and science never led us so far as to accept the claim of superiority in these lines advanced by many Germans on behalf of their country. The insistence with which this claim has been reiterated and proclaimed abroad by Germans, often with more of patriotism than of good taste, may have led a part of the public to believe it. But the more intelligent and thoughtful portion of the people, accustomed to a.n.a.lyse such claims by careful comparison with the products of non-Teutonic civilisation, has been unable to find any adequate basis for the a.s.sumed superiority. Indeed, while intelligent and fair-minded Americans are not slow to recognise Germany's great contributions to the world's art, literature, and science, they believe that, with the possible exception of music, greater contributions have been made in these lines by France, England, and other nations. In the realm of invention, we fully appreciate the skill and resourcefulness manifested by the German people in adapting new discoveries to their own needs; but we cannot deny the fact that most of the discoveries which have played so vital a part in the development of modern civilisation have been made, not in Germany, but in other countries.

In regard to munic.i.p.al government and various forms of social legislation, we have long recognised the high position held by your nation. But in the more vital matter of the relation of the individual to the supreme governing power, we have always held, and still believe, that Germany is sadly reactionary. For half a century your professors, in the employ of an educational system controlled by a bureaucratic Government, have taught what we condemn as a false philosophy of government. Your histories, your books on philosophy, your whole literature, glorify the _State_; and you have accepted the dangerous doctrine that the individual exists to serve the State, forgetting that the State is not the mystical, divine thing you picture it, but a government carried on by human beings like yourselves, most of them reasonably upright, but some incompetent and others deliberately bad, just like any other human government. We believe that the only excuse for the existence of the State is to serve the individual, to create conditions which will insure the greatest liberty and highest possible development to the individual citizen. It has never seemed to us creditable to the German intellect that it could be satisfied with a theory of government outgrown by most other civilised nations. That you should confuse efficiency with freedom has always seemed to us a tragic mistake, and never so tragic as now, when a small coterie of human beings, subject to the same mistakes and sins as other human beings, can hurl you into a terrible war before you know what has happened, clap on a rigid censors.h.i.+p to keep out any news they do not want you to learn, then publish a white book which pretends to explain the causes of the war, but omits doc.u.ments of the most vital importance, thereby causing the people of a confiding nation to drench the earth with their life-blood in the fond illusion that the war was forced upon them, and that they are fighting for a n.o.ble cause. Most pitiful is the sad comment of an intelligent German woman in a letter recently received in this country: ”We, of course, only see such things as the Government thinks best. We were told that this war was purely a defensive one, forced upon us. I begin to believe this may not be true, but hope for a favourable ending.”

Certainly in what you wrote to me you were thoroughly sincere and honest; yet your letter was full of untrue statements because you were dependent for your information upon a Government-controlled press which has misled you for military and political reasons. How can a nation know the truth, think clearly, and act righteously when a few men, called the ”State,” can commit you to the most serious enterprise in your history without your previous knowledge or consent, and can then keep you in ignorance of vitally important doc.u.ments and activities in order to insure your full support of their perilous undertaking? Such is the thought which has always led America to denounce as false the old theory of ”divine right of kings,” long imposed upon the German people in the more subtle and, therefore, more dangerous form of ”the divine right of the State.” Our conviction that such a government as yours is reactionary and incompatible with true liberty, and that it stunts and warps the intellects of its citizens, has been amply confirmed by extended observation in your country, and more particularly by the unanswerable fact that millions of your best blood, including distinguished men of intelligence and wealth, have forsaken Germany to seek true liberty of intellect and action in America, renouncing allegiance to the Fatherland to become citizens here. Some of them still love the scenes of their childhood, but few of them would be willing to return to a life under such a Government as Germany possesses.

To summarise what I said above: Americans, prior to the war, admired the remarkable advances made by Germany in recent years in economic and commercial lines; held in high regard your universities and many of your university professors; loved your music, and felt most cordial toward the millions of Germans who came to live among us and share the benefits of our free inst.i.tutions. The prevalence of bad manners among Germans we regretted, but made allowance for this defect; and we did not fail to recognise that some Germans are fine gentlemen of the most perfect culture, while most of them have traits of character which we admired.

We recognised the immense value of Germany's contributions to art, literature, and science, but did not consider Germany's contributions in these lines as equal to those of other nations. We never have regarded German culture as superior, but rather as inferior, to that of certain other countries; and the Germans' loud claims to superiority have seemed to us egotistical and the result of a weak point in the German character. For your form of government and the philosophy of history taught by your university professors we could never have much admiration or respect. Both seemed to us unworthy of an intelligent, civilised people, and sure to lead to disaster. Your military preparations, evident to every observant visitor, have long caused us to distrust your Government and to consider your country a menace to the world's peace.

In a word, we admired and loved your people, although we considered them neither perfect nor even superior to other people; but we disapproved and distrusted your reactionary military Government.

II.

Such was our att.i.tude when the war burst upon the world. Since that time what opportunities have the American people had to form an intelligent opinion as to who was wrong and who was right? What sources of information have been open to us, what means of getting at the facts?

Have we been drowned in English lies, as several of your professors have written me is the case? Have we relied on one corrupt party newspaper, as you intimate is our habit? Have we been dependent on a press bought up with English gold, as is continually a.s.serted by the German press?