First World War Centennial

The bitter experiences of this war will prove to all nations that the system of small group alliances, armed to the teeth and eternally growling at one another, is a poor way to run the business of the world. It seems practically certain that instinct, as well as reason, will react against this system of armed peace toward some larger federation of the nations.

Convention of the League to Enforce Peace, Washington, D. C, May 26th, 1916.

NO class has more to lose and less to gain in war than the workers. No class renders such sacrificial service during war and bears such staggering burdens after war as does labor. In war, Labor sees the results of years of struggle for wider justice swept away. In one mad moment the clock of industrial progress may be turned back for a generation. War diverts the mind of peoples from the constructive work of hu­manizing and democratizing the relations of men. Recognizing them, working men the world over have avowed their allegiance to the cause of peace and have sworn undying opposition to the forces that make for war.

Before the present war, the working people of the several countries now in conflict sincerely gave inter­national pledges that they would not fight each other. I confess that I banked strongly on these pledges, but in an hour of crisis, brought about by forces over which working men had little control, their pledges were shattered by the hurried ultimatum of Kaiser and King, or President and Czar. Secret diplomacy and arbitrary autocracy lifted the battle standards, raised the cry that the integrity of the fatherland was at stake, and placed the working men of all the nations in a position where adherence to their pledges and to the larger interests of humanity would have branded them as traitors. Under the urgency of the situation, with autocracy and militarism resorting to their accustomed stage tricks for arousing patriotic emotions, instinct prevailed over reason and the laboring men of the na­tions rushed into the paths that had been marked out by the diplomatic and ruling classes.

But when the smoke of this conflict is cleared, with renewed energy, the laboring men of the world will begin to lay anew the foundations for an international peace that will safeguard and minister to the interests of justice, democracy, and larger opportunity for all.

But for even a more immediate reason, America's workers are vitally interested in the kind of settlement that shall come at the end of the war and in its effect upon industrial conditions in the United States. For it is obvious that at the end of this war, Labor may have to enter into great struggles to get and hold its just dues. These struggles may become more acute in the United States should an industrial reaction en­sue after the close of the war.

Organized labor stands, of course, for group action instead of an individual competitive scramble with those in direct need setting the standard. Of course, when there is a scarcity of work and a multitude of workers, collective bargaining faces an added diffi­culty.

And yet such conditions are the definite outlook, if the settlement of the present war is an ordinary one, a mere diplomatic jockeying on the part of the na­tions for the best position in the next race for arma­ments, the kind of settlement that is sure to be made unless labor, agriculture, business, the chief elements in life and all classes, can effectively coöperate for a different and better kind of settlement.

Let me state briefly what will cause this reaction, if it comes. If, at the end of this war, nothing but war is left as a method for settling the future disputes that are bound to arise between nations, every nation, our own included, will be forced into an extravagant competition in armaments as a defensive preparation against the next great conflict that will be but a ques­tion of years. The interest bills and the expense of reconstructing demoralized industries will be burden enough to bend the back of Europe for a generation, but if there be added the greatest naval and military appropriations of history, it becomes clear that Europe will face the most desperate need of income she has ever known. To meet this need, Europe must carry over into the economic struggle for the recovery of the markets of the world much of the grim spirit of sacrifice that she has shown in war, and institute the most severe and destructive competition known to in­dustrial and business history. In that competition, our democracy, its institutions, its methods, and its prosperity will be put under a greater strain than it has ever known.

Whether or not this suicidal competition is to be inevitable depends, largely, upon whether or not the mind and heart of the world unite in substituting a higher standard of morality-law for war, in the set­tlement of future disputes between nations, thereby making less necessary another competitive race for armaments, and thus removing one of the biggest ex­penditures that will make necessary the destructive race for trade which I have mentioned.

The fear of an industrial and business reaction in America is not born of theory, but is based upon evi­dent proof that the present military war is to be fol­lowed by an economic war unparalleled in the inten­sity and destructiveness of its competition. Definite organization is already under way in practically all of the nations of Europe in preparation for a race for markets that will be the goal of this economic war. This organization is being directed not only by the governments of Europe, but also by the private indus­trial and business interests of Great Britain, France, Russia, Germany, and other belligerents. It is the de­clared purpose of the statesmen and commercial lead­ers of Europe to convert the present military alliances into future trade alliances. The plans being made for this economic war are animated not only by a desire for retaliation against former enemies, but to capture the greatest possible share of the trade of the world, as a means for liquidating war debts, sustaining credit, rebuilding war-damaged industries, and financing such military preparations for the future as conditions may render inevitable.

Every day brings added proof also that the nations of Europe will, at the end of the war, set up formid­able tariff barriers that will seriously restrict trade between the nations now at war and force them to compete more keenly in the neutral markets of the world, including the invitingly rich market of the United States. The erection of these tariff barriers will be forced upon the governments of Europe, not only to meet the urgent need of revenue, but also to make each nation as nearly self-sufficient as possible, for this war will have proved and enforced the fact that a nation that could most nearly supply all its needs by its own industries were it walled in from the world, will be best able to protect itself and conserve its interests in the event of war.

The extraordinary pressure for funds will force ex­ports from Europe upon a bigger scale than ever be­fore. Europe will be more eager to sell and less able to buy than ever in history. If Europe exports at a maximum and imports at a minimum, the outlet for the products of American labor will, of course, be re­stricted. The poverty of Europe will make her not only a poor customer but also a fierce competitor. Our whole problem of foreign trade will be made increas­ingly difficult. The result may be the piling up in America of a great surplus of manufactured goods. Even before the war, we were beginning to feel the pressure of our surplus and the necessity for increased foreign trade. Such a serious limitation upon the ex­portation of American goods, as any extensive busi­ness reaction after the war would involve, would, in a short time, make for scarcity of work and react in­juriously upon American labor.

Going back a moment to the proposition with which we started: The prosperity and welfare of American labor are largely dependent upon the prosperity and welfare of the American nation. Granted great pros­perity to the nation, with a wide margin of profit to the employers, and granted the proper organization of labor for collective bargaining, there is always the chance, at least, to reach justice and equity; but if the United States suffers a serious business reaction, the American employer may have a less margin on which to deal with the problem of wages, and collective bar­gaining will face an increasingly difficult problem.

All of which means that American labor has far-reaching interests at stake in doing its share to help bring about such a settlement of the present war as will prevent any abnormal reaction upon the prosper­ity of the United States, and will give the industrial and business interests of the whole world an oppor­tunity to compete along more nearly normal lines.

But above and beyond the desire of America's work­ers to secure a settlement that will safeguard their own and the nation's material interests, is their desire to see a settlement that will render war less probable and peace more permanent in the future; for the in­terests of the men and women of labor are identified with those of peace. War has never meant for them opportunity for gain or exploitation. It has always meant to them sacrifice and suffering in the actual fighting of the war and the bearing of heavy burdens after the war. Certainly working people have bought with their flesh and blood the right to a voice in de­termining the issues of peace and war; and in the general organization that will follow the present war, the workers will insist upon having voice and influ­ence. Labor is committed to the principle that peace is the basis of all civilization.

Peace is not a chance by-product of other condi­tions; it is the fundamental necessity of all govern­ment and of all progress—industrial, intellectual, so­cial and humanitarian. One of the main purposes, therefore, of governments and of all classes within governments must be the maintenance of more per­manent international peace.

Since the burdens of war fall more heavily upon the workers than upon any other class, and since war diverts attention from the progress of that social and industrial democracy which holds the hopes of Labor in its balance, it follows that Labor, more than any other class, is interested in the establishment and maintenance of a more permanent international peace.

Although bearing most of its burdens, Labor has had little to say in the declaration and conduct of the wars of the past, but in self-defense and in the in­terest of civilization, Labor must have an increasing voice in the peace of the future.

In any program looking toward the establishment of more permanent peace among nations, Labor will insist upon the following principles:

I. It must be a program under which the military forces of the world will be rescued from the dicta­tion of arbitrary autocracy and absolute secret diplo­macy and dedicated to the maintenance of a higher standard of morals, law and justice; a program that will so safeguard the use of military power that it cannot be used by the reactionary forces of privilege in imperialistic aggression, or dragged like a red her­ring across the path of democratic progress.

2. It must be a program elastic enough to admit of those fundamental changes that the growing life of the world makes inevitable. Any international ar­rangement that does not afford peaceful methods of securing the results that now can be achieved only by successful fighting will make little headway against war. Labor will oppose any federation of nations so organized that the more powerful nations can use the machinery to maintain the status quo against the de­mands for change made in the interest of democracy and larger opportunity for the masses.

3. It must be a program under which the small na­tion, as well as the large nation, will have a free hand in every just and individual development; a program that will make it impossible for a few strong nations to dictate the policies and development of the world. It must not deny to small and dependent states that final right of revolution that sometimes is the only road to justice and freedom.

4. It must be a program that will give the masses greater influence in those decisions that plunge nations into war; that is to say, a program under which the powers of autocracy and absolute secret diplomacy cannot, over night, rush a nation into war before the citizenship of the nation has a chance to express it­self. 5. It must be a program under which the interna­tional machinery that is created will afford a medium through which all classes of society can voice their judgment and register their demands. We must not delude ourselves into thinking that the international problem will be solved entirely by the establishment of an international court along traditional lines, pre­sided over by lawyers to pass judgment upon viola­tions of established international law. The fact is that the real causes of modern wars are not so much violations of established law, as they are conflicts over new problems and new needs that have not yet be­come a part of international law. So that any ade­quate international program must include the estab­lishment of a system of stated international confer­ences in which the representatives of such democratic interests as labor and business can present and dis­cuss, not under any established rules of evidence, but in the spirit of impartial examination, those difficulties and differences that threaten to give rise to war.

These principles represent not only the interna­tional program for which Labor will work in the fu­ture, but they represent essentially the program for which Labor has been contending through the years. But Labor understands that a program so vast, involv­ing as it does the interests of every human group, can­not be established and maintained by one class alone. Labor understands that humanity is one, that the prob­lem of humanity is a common problem, that any in­ternational order of things to be permanent must safe­guard the interests of all classes. Therefore, Labor is profoundly concerned in the creation and adoption of some international program for which all classes, Labor, agriculture and business, can work side by side in sincere coöperation for those principles that will best insure the triumph of justice and opportunity for all classes the world over.

In so far as the program of the League to Enforce Peace represents an effort to meet the conditions I have outlined, it demands the interest and careful scrutiny of every man who has the interests of labor at heart.

As I understand it, the essential proposals of the League to Enforce Peace are these:

1. That the nations shall band themselves together in a federation and agree to delay, in every instance, the actual declaration of war until the dispute at issue has been thoroughly examined by an international tri­bunal, and the public opinion of the world given a chance to express itself.

2. That there shall be an International Court to con­sider what can be decided upon established law and evidence.

3. That there shall be a Council of Conciliation to consider questions that are not ordinarily regarded as justiciable, such as questions of national honor.

4. That in addition, there shall be at stated inter­vals international conferences for the progressive amendment of international law.

5. That the nations of the League shall agree to turn their united strength—first in the form of a business and economic boycott, and finally in con­certed military action if the boycott is not effective—against any one of their number that wages war with­out first submitting its dispute for complete examina­tion to one of the International Tribunals created.

The hope of the League's program is, I take it, that by forcing nations to stop and count ten before strik­ing, there will result a cooling-off period that will greatly reduce the probability of war, if not prevent most wars. There is no proposal that the decrees of the Court or Council shall be enforced; if, after the decision of the Court, a nation feels that it must fight to gain justice and freedom for its rightful develop­ment, the League provides no organized penalties. The program does not propose any tightly organized inter­national government, but suggests that the nations shall coöperate to form a sort of International Vig­ilance Committee and say: If any one nation starts to "shoot up" the world without first giving legal processes a chance to adjust the difficulty, the other nations shall treat that nation as an outlaw and shall pool their economic and military power in an effort to force it to give law a chance.

It is not for me, by word of mouth, to commit the laboring men of America to any particular program in international affairs; but I may be permitted to com­ment upon the way the proposals of the League to Enforce Peace appeal to me as a representative of labor.

The League's program wisely refrains from at­tempting to stop the present war. Hating war as I do, I am free to confess that if I could stop this war now by a turn of my hand, I would not do it. I hold that something must be determined by this war, and that something is, whether the future belongs to au­tocracy and militarism or to democracy, liberty, and humanity. These are the points at issue and they have not yet been determined.

The League's program also wisely recognizes that we have not yet reached a point where the total dis­armament of nations is a practically possible pro­posal. The labor movement is a militant movement, and the workers understand the necessity for power and its uses. The labor movement has never advo­cated the abolition of agencies for the enforcement of right and justice, or the abolition of the military arm of government, but it does demand that military forces shall be so organized as to prevent their misuse and abuse as instruments of tyranny against the workers; to render impossible the pernicious results of mili­tarism—the building up of a separate military caste and the subversion of civic life to military govern­ment and military standards. If this program can succeed in making our military and naval forces not only our arm of defense, but, in addition, our contri­bution toward the maintenance of more permanent peace throughout the world, a long step in this di­rection may have been taken.

The League's program wisely recognizes the dan­ger of creating a League of Nations that would un­dertake to enforce the decisions of an International Court, and contents itself with enforcing the submis­sion to an International Court of all disputes for ex­amination. Until democracy is more nearly univer­sal, until democracy becomes a social and industrial fact as well as a political watchword, a League with power to enforce decisions would almost certainly be­come the repressive tool of the reactionary and priv­ileged forces of the world.

The League's program, by suggesting the use of an economic boycott on an international scale as a means of enforcing law and justice, pays a tribute to the increasing importance and power of industrial forces in world affairs. But such a boycott must be left to the voluntary action of the peoples of all nations. What an International Court or League should do is to invite the representatives of all nations involved in a dispute for a hearing and then declare its findings, holding the nation at fault, guilty of such violations as the judgment of the Court or League may deter­mine.

If a nation or nations fail or refuse to be repre­sented, judgment should be taken by default, but in either event the opinion of the Court or League should be declared to the world as to which nation is re­sponsible for the threatening conditions. An official or compulsory boycott must be avoided at all haz­ards.

Labor will insist that such careful thought and con­structive statesmanship be put into the working out of the methods in each country by which a boycott would be applied, that the workers would be insured against the possibility of being forced to bear more than their just share of the necessary sacrifice in­volved, and that their freedom of action would not be jeopardized. The wage earners of the United States, who have so often proved their patriotic loy­alty in the civic life of the nation, as well as in the na­tion's wars, stand ready to bear their just share of any economic sacrifice that may be necessary to maintain the peace of the world, but they must insist that it be only their just share.

But the final question is not whether, at this stage, we all agree upon every detail of a program. Evidence is daily accumulating that indicates that some such a League of Nations is practically certain to be formed, if not at the end of this war, in the not far distant future. The bitter experience of this war will prove to all nations that the system of small group alliances, armed to the teeth and eternally growling at each other, is a poor way to run the business of the world. It seems practically certain that instinct, as well as rea­son, will react against this system of armed peace toward some larger federation of the nations. Since such a Court or League as contemplated appears to be the inevitable goal toward which the whole evolu­tion of law and government is tending, laboring men of this and every other nation will feel it their duty and privilege to lift their voice in counsel at every step of the plans and propaganda, in order to make more certain the triumph of democratic principles and methods, in whatever may be the final form of such an international institution.