VI
GERMANY IN THE INDIVIDUALISTIC ERA
THE development of Germany during the individualistic era was dominated by two features—the late arrival of capitalism, and the early arrival of the socialistic movement. Industrial capitalism in Germany became victorious a generation later, while a powerful Social Democratic party made its appearance in Germany a generation earlier than in any other nation. The result was that before the conflict between capitalism and feudalism was ended, capitalism had already to meet the attacks of socialism, and as the result in Germany industrial capitalism has in reality never gained as complete control of the nation and its government as was the case elsewhere.
The reactionary period of the unholy alliance was broken and the individualistic era finally established in France by the revolution of 1830 and the revolution of 1848 swept away the last remnant of feudalism and established individualism all over Europe, except in Prussia. There the revolution of 1848 was a draw, and the final conflict between capitalism and feudalism was waged in the Prussian parliament in the early 60's. Both parties endeavored to get the assistance of the labor movement which was then just beginning. Industrial capitalism organized labor unions on the lines of the early British trade-unions; these flourished for a little while, but soon weakened and died before the rising tide of socialistic labor organization. Bismarck endeavored to attach the young Socialist party to the assistance of the monarchical government, but nothing but complete surrender of the monarchy to democratic socialism would have satisfied the early Socialists, while the movement was not yet sufficiently strong to cause Bismarck to offer material concessions. Thus a three-cornered fight continued. With the consolidation of Germany under Prussian leadership, by the Austrian and the Franco-German war, capitalism finally gained the control of the nation, but at the same time the monarchy became so firmly established that all previous dreams of the reformers, of republicanism and complete democracy, vanished forever.
For a few years in the early 70's, during the business prosperity following the Franco-German war, Germany was under almost complete capitalistic government. But gradually Bismarck, as the leader of the monarchical forces, weakened and eliminated the more radical and oppositional elements of industrialism (the "democrats," "progressives," etc.), while the rising Social Democratic vote threatened capitalism and the monarchy alike. The time thus appeared ripe for an alliance between capitalism and the monarchy, against socialism; capitalism surrendering its demand of complete control of the national Government, while the monarchy conceded to share the Government with capitalism. Such an alliance thus followed, not as a formal agreement like that entered into between the German Social Democracy and the monarchy at the beginning of the present war, but as a tacit understanding. The ten years' war against the Social Democratic party was the result, under Bismarck as the leader of the joint forces of monarchy and industrial capitalism. Special laws were passed against socialism, and successively made more rigorous; labor unions were dissolved and their funds confiscated; industrial strikes suppressed by the military power of the Government; the Social Democratic party outlawed, its leaders expatriated and driven as homeless wanderers from place to place; all socialistic publications in Germany suppressed; the introduction into Germany of socialistic literature punished by heavy prison sentences, and new judicial interpretations created by the governmental judges. For instance, the official paper of the Social Democratic party was published weekly in Switzerland, as publication in Germany was forbidden. Its introduction, sale, and distribution in Germany were forbidden. In the first years of the war against socialism, only those were punished who were convicted of selling or distributing the paper. Later on the possession of several copies, even only two, of the same number, was accepted by the judges as evidence of the intention of distributing the paper, and finally men were punished with six months in prison for having a single copy of the paper, on the ground that in getting the copy of the paper they had "induced the editor [in Switzerland] to distribute the paper and thereby to break the law."
The ten years' war was won by the Socialists, and the allied forces of industrial capitalism and the monarchical government defeated; the persecution of the Socialists had to be abandoned, the special laws against socialism dropped, and the Social Democracy—now swollen to a party of over a million votes—recognized as a legitimate political party, and Bismarck, defeated and discredited, had soon to relinquish his power and retire into private life.
Then began the reorganization of the German nation, the change from individualism toward co-operation, which has made the industrial Germany of to-day.
In the mean time a new emperor, the present Kaiser, had ascended the throne, while politically and industrially the conflict was raging between the remnant of feudalism, represented by the "Junkers," the industrial capitalism, and the Social Democracy.
First the new Emperor reorganized the army and got complete control of it. This assured the safety of the monarchy against any revolutionary opposition, but also gave him the name of the "War Lord," which in foreign countries has clung to him until to-day.
By an effective progressive social legislation the masses were conciliated and attached to the monarchy, and socialism, deprived of its revolutionary character, became an evolutionary party, grew to the largest and most powerful political party, with six million votes, and by its demands and criticism pushed forward the social and industrial reorganization. Thus by effective and liberal governmental old-age insurance, sickness insurance, and unemployment insurance, the three great fears which hung over the masses in all other countries, were eliminated, extreme poverty vanished, slums disappeared, and the condition of the masses became superior to that in all other countries, even in America, where the neglect of social legislation is gradually making itself felt now. The outward sign was the disappearance of immigration from Germany, in spite of the rapidly increasing population; the inward evidence the absolute unanimity with which the masses, led by the Social Democratic party, stood back of the Government in the present war.
Corporate organization of the industries was assisted and pushed, often to the extent of the Government or the Emperor personally participating financially.
The industrial organizations were encouraged to expand and to combine, consolidation of corporations to syndicates and trusts assisted by the Government and even enforced—as in the potash syndicate—but at the same time an effective supervision and close control of the corporations and trusts established to safeguard the people against any possible abuse of the corporate power.
The result was that the antagonism of the masses against the corporations, which here in America paralyzes our rapid industrial progress and threatens to destroy our prosperity by interfering with the industries' most effective tool, the corporation, has never appeared in Germany, but consolidation has proceeded unchecked.
The educational system was reorganized, and the university idea extended into the industrial field, and a universal system of industrial education established, from the vocational school which takes the graduate of the public schools and does in a more efficient manner what the apprenticeship of former times did, the teaching of a trade, up to the large polytechnic schools leading to the highest fields of engineering.
Thus the individualistic age of everybody for himself gradually gave way before a co-operative organization of the nation, giving everybody the best opportunities for his or her development as an efficient and effective member of society, guaranteeing to everybody the right to live, but imposing the duty to work.
The result was obvious: an enormous increase of efficiency in every direction, in industry, science, commerce, and administration. Thus Germany became the leading industrial nation of the world, forcing England into second rank, and making it difficult even for our country, in spite of our vast natural resources, to hold our own.
With the conquest of the markets of the world by industrial Germany came wealth, and Germany became a financial power, and British capital began to meet the competition of German capital in the exploitation—or "development," as we call it—of foreign countries. It is true that England's financial strength was, and still is, very much greater than Germany's. But England, no more the leading industrial nation, needed the return of her invested capital for her support, while Germany still more than supported herself by her industries, and the returns of her foreign investments thus were additional wealth. Therefore, in her foreign investments Germany, not depending on the returns, could offer terms which England, depending on the return of her capital for her support, could not meet, and Germany's rising financial power thus not merely threatened England's prosperity, but threatened the very existence of the British nation. For some time matters were compromised; in the Morocco affair, in the interference of German capitalistic interests with the consolidation of England's African empire (Cape to Cairo railroad, etc.) in the Bagdad railway, etc. But inevitably a final conflict had to come, and to allow Germany's increasing financial power to drive British capital out, or reduce its returns to the low values which Germany's surplus capital could meet, meant suicide for England.
Thus either England or Germany had to be wiped out as a financial power, and for England this would have meant national disaster. Financially, English capital could not fight German capital, as explained above, and the only possible solution thus was recourse to force—that is, war.
Thus it is true that in this war England is fighting for her existence; she is fighting for her financial supremacy, and on this depends the existence of the England of to-day. But in this, also, lies England's weakness in the present war. It was easy for the German Government, by merely repeating the loose talk indulged in England at the beginning of the war, of "crushing the Prussian Empire," and "breaking up Germany in many little independent nations," etc., to make all Germans realize that they were fighting for the existence of their nation, and therewith of their superior social and industrial conditions. But it is much more difficult to make the masses of England realize that in fighting for British financial supremacy they are fighting for their own welfare, especially when they feel that they have not shared in England's financial prosperity, that England's financial power has contributed rather to the lowering of their standard of living, by making England independent of its industrial success, and that all that they have secured in the last years was by fighting against the same financial powers which now call upon them for help against Germany.
This explains the great difficulty England has in raising her armies, while Germany has no such difficulties; it is obvious that by nature the Anglo-Saxon is no less patriotic than the Teuton.
It explains, also, why all the reasons given as the cause of the war appear so insignificant and insufficient to explain the catastrophe. They are not the reason, but are mere incidents; but the real reason, the inevitable clash between Germany's rising financial power and England's threatened financial supremacy, on which her existence depends, could not be given, as it is not such as to be generally understood, not such as to cause the universal national enthusiasm which is required to lead a successful war.
It explains that the war was inevitable, just as that of the feudal nations against the French Republic at the end of the eighteenth century, Germany, organized as a co-operative centralized industrial nation, could not be defeated in the industrial or financial field by the individualistic industrial capitalism of England and the other nations.
Thus the present world's war is the conflict between the passing era of individualistic industrialism and the coming era of co-operative industrial organization, the former represented by England, the latter by Germany. It thus constitutes an epoch in the history of man just as that ushered in by the French Revolution, which made the transition from feudalism to individualism. And in many other respects there is a striking similarity. One nation—France in the previous, Germany in the present, epoch—adopted the new principles and introduced them in its national organization, and the increase in its economic efficiency, resulting from the new era, threatened the stability and safety of the nations which held to the old era, and caused them to ally themselves against the reformer in the attempt to suppress by forcible means, by war, the "dangerous" new conceptions of human society. Just as the individualistic era conquered, though France, its exponent, was finally defeated in the field of Waterloo, so in the present war the new era of co-operative organization has conquered, whatever may be the outcome of the military war; for already England, the exponent and leader of individualism, had to throw over all her individualistic tenets and adopt as rapidly as possible the co-operative organization, which has created Germany's industrial strength and therewith the danger to the other nations. Thus we see in free and individualist England such tyrannical interference with personal liberty as contained in the "Defense of the Realm Act," compulsory military conscription, requisition of private factories for military use, governmental blacklisting of private corporations which refuse to co-operate, commandeering of private property by the exchange against war loans, of industrial securities deposited in trust and fiduciary, interference with luxuries, food, etc., and even here in America, far away from the war, we talk about preparedness, compulsory military training, mobilization of the industries, etc., etc.
Thus, even if Germany should be utterly defeated and crushed, it would be only by the adoption by the Allies of the co-operative industrial organization against which they went to war, and the era of individualism thus is passed forever, though a temporary reaction may still give it an apparent but short life, and the era of co-operative social organization is at hand.