A slightly different POV:
Patriotism: A Menace to Liberty
by Emma Goldman
from the book
Anarchism and other essays
What is patriotism? Is it love of one's birthplace, the place of childhood's recollections and hopes, dreams and aspirations ? Is it the place where, in
childlike naively, we would watch the fleeting clouds, and wonder why we, too, could not run so swiftly? The place where we would count the milliard
glittering stars, terror-stricken lest each one "an eye should be," piercing the very depths of our little souls? Is it the place where we would listen to
the music of the birds, and long to have wings to fly, even as they, to distant lands? Or the place where we would sit at mother's knee, enraptured by
wonderful tales of great deeds and conquests? In short, is it love for the spot, every inch representing dear and precious recollections of a happy,
joyous, and playful childhood?
If that were patriotism, few American men of today could be called upon to be patriotic, since the place of play has been turned into factory, mill, and
mine, while deafening sounds of machinery have replaced the music of the birds. Nor can we longer hear the tales of great deeds, for the stories our
mothers tell today are but those of sorrow, tears, and grief.
What, then, is patriotism? "Patriotism, sir, is the last resort of scoundrels," said Dr. Johnson. Leo Tolstoy, the greatest anti-patriot of our times,
defines patriotism as the principle that will justify the training of wholesale murderers; a trade that requires better equipment for the exercise of
man-killing than the making of such necessities of life as shoes, clothing, and houses; a trade that guarantees better returns and greater glory than
that of the average workingman.
Gustave Herve, another great anti-patriot, justly calls patriotism a superstition-one far more injurious, brutal, and inhumane than religion. The
superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain natural phenomena. That is, when primitive man heard thunder or saw the lightning, he
could not account for either, and therefore concluded that back of them must be a force greater than himself. Similarly he saw a supernatural force in
the rain, and in the various other changes in nature. Patriotism, on the other hand, is a superstition artificially created and maintained through a
network of lies and falsehoods a superstition that robs man of his self respect and dignity, and increases his arrogance and conceit.
Indeed, conceit, arrogance, and egotism are the essentials of patriotism. Let me illustrate. Patriotism assumes that our globe is divided into little
spots each one surrounded by an iron gate. Those who have had the fortune of being born on some particular spot, consider themselves better,
nobler, grander, more intelligent than the living beings inhabiting any other spot. It is, therefore, the duty of everyone living on that chosen spot to
fight, kill, and die in the attempt to impose his superiority on all the others.
The inhabitants of the other spots reason in like manner, of course, with the result that, from early infancy, the mind of the child is poisoned with
bloodcurdling stories about the Germans, the French, the I Italians, Russians, etc. When the child has reached manhood, he is thoroughly saturated
with the belief that he is chosen by the Lord himself to defend his country against the attack or invasion of any foreigner It is for that purpose that we
are clamoring for a greater army and navy, more battleships and ammunition. It is for that purpose that America has within a short time spent four
hundred million dollars. Just think of it-four hundred million dollars taken from the produce of the people. For surely it is not the rich who contribute
to patriotism. They are cosmopolitans, perfectly at home in every land. We in America know well the truth of this. Are not our rich Americans
Frenchmen in France, Germans in Germany, or Englishmen in England? And do they not squander with cosmopolitan grace fortunes earned by
American factory children and cotton slaves? Yes, theirs is the patriotism that will make it possible to send messages of condolence to a despot like
the Russia'` Tsar, when any mishap befalls him, as President Roosevelt did in the name of his people, when Sergius was punished by the Russian
revolutionists.
It is a patriotism that will assist the arch-murderer, Diaz, in destroying thousands of lives in Mexico, or that will even aid in arresting Mexican
revolutionists on American soil and keep them incarcerated in American prisons, without the slightest cause or reason.
But, then, patriotism is not for those who represent wealth and power. It is good enough for the people. It reminds one of the historic wisdom of
Frederick the Great, the bosom friend of Voltaire, who said: "Religion is a fraud, but it must be maintained for the masses."
That patriotism is rather a costly institution, no one will doubt after considering the following statistics. The progressive increase of the expenditures
for the leading armies and navies of the world during the last quarter of a century is a fact of such gravity as to startle every thoughtful student of
economic problems. It may be briefly indicated by dividing the time from 1881 to 1905 into five-year periods, and noting the disbursements of several
great nations for army and navy purposes during the first and last of those periods. From the first to the last of the periods noted the expenditures of
Great Britain increased from $2,IOI,848,936 to $4,143,226,885, those of France from $3,324,500,ooo to $3,455,109,900, those of Germany from
$725,ooo,200 to $2,700,375,600, those of the United States from $1,275,500,750 to $2,650,900,450, those of Russia from $1,900,975,500 to
$5,250,445,100, those of Italy from $1,600,975,750 to $1,755,500,100, and those of Japan from $182,900,500 to $700,925,475.
The military expenditures of each of the nations mentioned increased in each of the five-year periods under review. During the entire interval from
1881 to 1905 Great Britain's outlay for her army increased fourfold, that of the United States was tripled, Russia's was doubled, that of Germany
increased 35 per cent., that of France about 15 per cent., and that of Japan nearly 500 per cent. If we compare the expenditures of these nations upon
their armies with their total expenditures for all the twenty-five years ending with 1905, the proportion rose as follows:
In Great Britain from 20 per cent. to 37; in the United States from 15 to 23; in France from 16 to 18; in Italy from 12 to 15; in Japan from 12 to 14.
On the other hand, it is interesting to note that the proportion in Germany decreased from about 58 per cent. to 25, the decrease being due to the
enormous increase in the imperial expenditures for other purposes, the fact being that the army expenditures for the period of 1901-5 were higher
than for any five-year period preceding. Statistics show that the countries in which army expenditures are greatest, in proportion to the total national
revenues, are Great Britain, the United States, Japan, France, and Italy, in the order named.
The showing as to the cost of great navies is equally impressive. During the twenty-five years ending with 1905 naval expenditures increased
approximately as follows: Great Britain, 300 per cent.; France 60 per cent.; Germany 600 per cent.; the United States 525 per cent.; Russia 300 per
cent.; Italy 250 per cent.; and Japan, 700 per cent. With the exception of Great Britain, the United States spends more for naval purposes than any
other nation, and this expenditure bears also a larger proportion to the entire national disbursements than that of any other power. In the period
I881-5, the expenditure for the United States navy was $6.20 out of each $1.00 appropriated for all national purposes; the amount rose to $6.60 for
the next five-year period, to $8.10 for the next, to $11.70 for the next, and to $16.40 for 1901-5. It is morally certain that the outlay for the current
period of five years will show a still further increase.
The rising cost of militarism may be still further illustrated by computing it as a per capita tax on population. From the first to the last of the five-year
periods taken as the basis for the comparisons here given, it has risen as follows: In Great Britain, from $18.47 to $52.50; in France, from $19.66 to
$23.62; in Germany, from $10.17 to $15.51; in the United States, from $5.62 to $13.64; in Russia, from $6.14 to $8.37; in Italy, from $9.59 to $11.24,
and in Japan from 86 cents to $3.11.
It is in connection with this rough estimate of cost per capita that the economic burden of militarism is most appreciable. The irresistible conclusion
from available data is that the increase of expenditure for army and navy purposes is rapidly surpassing the growth of population in each of the
countries considered in the present calculation. In other words, a contamination of the increased demands of militarism threatens each of those
nations with a progressive exhaustion both of men and resources.
The awful waste that patriotism necessitates ought to be sufficient to cure the man of even average intelligence from this disease. Yet patriotism
demands still more. The people are urged to be patriotic and for that luxury they pay, not only by supporting their "defenders," but even by
sacrificing their own children. Patriotism requires allegiance to the flag, which means obedience and readiness to kill father. mother, brother, sister.
The usual contention is that we need a standing army to protect the country from foreign invasion. Every intelligent man and woman knows, however,
that this is a myth maintained to frighten and coerce the foolish. The governments of the world, knowing each other's interests, do not invade each
other. They have learned that they can gain much more by international arbitration of disputes than by war and conquest. Indeed, as Carlyle said,
"War is a quarrel between two thieves too cowardly to fight their own battle; therefore they take boys from one village and another village, stick
them into uniforms, equip them with guns, and let them loose like wild beasts against each other."
It does not require much wisdom to trace every war back to a similar cause. Let us take our own Spanish-American war, supposedly a great and
patriotic event in the history of the United States. How our hearts burned with indignation against the atrocious Spaniards! True, our indignation did
not flare up spontaneously. It was nurtured by months of newspaper agitation, and long after Butcher Weyler had killed off many noble Cubans and
outraged many Cuban women. Still, in justice to the American Nation be it said, it did grow indignant and was willing to fight, and that it fought
bravely. But when the smoke was over, the dead buried, and the cost of the war came back to the people in an increase in the price of commodities
and rent-that is, when we sobered up from our patriotic spree it suddenly dawned on us that the cause of the Spanish-American war was the
consideration of the price of sugar; or, to be more explicit, that the lives, blood, and money of the American people were used to protect the interests
of American capitalists, which were threatened by the Spanish government. That this is not an exaggeration, but is based on absolute facts and
figures, is best proven by the attitude of the American government to Cuban labor. When Cuba was firmly in the clutches of the United States, the
very soldiers sent to liberate Cuba were ordered to shoot Cuban workingmen during the great cigar makers' strike, which took place shortly after the
war.
Nor do we stand alone in waging war for such causes. The curtain is beginning to be lifted on the motives of the terrible Russo-Japanese war, which
cost so much blood and tears. And we see again that back of the fierce Moloch of war stands the still fiercer god of Commercialism. Kuropatkin, the
Russian Minister of War during the Russo-Japanese struggle, has revealed the true secret behind the latter. The Tsar and his Grand Dukes, having
invested money in Corean concessions, the war was forced for the sole purpose of speedily accumulating large fortunes.
The contention that a standing army and navy is the best security of peace is about as logical as the claim that the most peaceful citizen is he who
goes about heavily armed. The experience of every-day life fully proves that the armed individual is invariably anxious to try his strength. The same
is historically true of governments. Really peaceful countries do not waste life and energy in war preparations, with the result that peace is
maintained.
However, the clamor for an increased army and navy is not due to any foreigner. It is owing to the dread of the growing discontent of the masses and
of the international spirit among the workers. lt. is to meet the internal enemy that the Powers of various countries are preparing themselves; an
enemy, who, once awakened to consciousness, will prove more dangerous than any foreign invader.
The powers that have for centuries been engaged in enslaving the masses have made a thorough study of their psychology. They know that the
people at large are like children whose despair, sorrow, and tears can be turned into joy with a little toy. And the more gorgeously the toy is dressed,
the louder the colors, the more it will appeal to the million-headed child.
An army and navy represents the people's toys. To make them more attractive and acceptable, hundreds and thousands of dollars are being spent for
the display of these toys. That was the purpose of the American government ;~m equipping a fleet and sending it along the Pacific coast, that every
American citizen should be made to feel the pride and glory of the United States. The city of San Francisco spent one hundred thousand dollars for
the entertainment of the fleet; Los Angeles, sixty thousand; Seattle and Tacoma, about one hundred thousand. To entertain the fleet, did I say? To
dine and wine a few superior officers, while the "brave boys" had to mutiny to get sufficient food. Yes, two hundred and sixty thousand dollars were
spent on fireworks, theater parties, and revelries, at a time when men, women, and children through the breadth and length of the country were
starving in the streets; when thousands of unemployed were ready to sell their labor at any price.
Two hundred and sixty thousand dollars! What could not have been accomplished with such an enormous sum? But instead of bread and shelter, the
children of those cities were taken to see the fleet, that it may remain, as one of the newspapers said, "a lasting memory for the child."
A wonderful thing to remember, is it not? The implements of civilized slaughter. If the mind of the child is to be poisoned with such memories, what
hope is there for a true realization of human brotherhood ?
We Americans claim to be a peace-loving people. We hate bloodshed; we are opposed to violence. Yet we go into spasms of joy over the possibility of
projecting dynamite bombs from flying machines upon helpless citizens. We are ready to hang, electrocute, or Iynch anyone, who, from economic
necessity, will risk his own life in the attempt upon that of some industrial magnate. Yet our hearts swell with pride at the thought that America is
becoming the most powerful nation on earth, and that it will eventually plant her iron foot on the necks of all other nations. _ Such is the logic of
patriotism.
Considering the evil results that patriotism is fraught with for the average man, it is as nothing (_ compared with the insult and injury that patriotism
heaps upon the soldier himself,-that poor, deluded victim of superstition and ignorance. He, the savior of his country, the protector of his nation,-what
has patriotism in store for him? A life of slavish submission, vice, and perversion, during peace; a life of danger, exposure, and death, during war.
While on a recent lecture tour in San Francisco, I visited the Presidio, the most beautiful spot overlooking the Bay and Golden Gate Park. Its
purpose should have been playgrounds for children, gardens and music for the recreation of the weary. Instead it is made ugly, dull, and gray by
barracks,-barracks wherein the rich would not allow their dogs to dwell. In these miserable shanties soldiers are herded like cattle; here they waste
their young days, polishing the boots and brass buttons of their superior officers. Here, too, I saw the distinction of classes: sturdy sons of a free
Republic, drawn up in line like convicts, saluting every passing shrimp of a lieutenant. American equality, degrading manhood and elevating the
uniform!
Barrack life further tends to develop tendencies of sexual perversion. It is gradually producing along this line results similar to European military
conditions. Havelock Ellis, the noted writer on sex psychology, has made a thorough study of the subject. I quote. "Some of the barracks are great
centers of male prostitution.... The number of soldiers who prostitute themselves is greater than we are willing to believe. It is no exaggeration to say
that in certain regiments the presumption is in favor of the venality of the majority of the men.... On summer evenings Hyde Park and the
neighborhood of Albert Gate are full of guardsmen and others plying a lively trade, and with little disguise, in uniform or out.... In most cases the
proceeds form a comfortable addition to Tommy Atkins' pocket money."
To what extent this perversion has eaten its way into the army and navy can best be judged from the fact that special houses exist for this form of
prostitution. The practice is not limited to England; it is universal. "Soldiers are no less sought after in France than in England or in Germany, and
special houses for military prostitution exist both in Paris and the garrison towns."
Had Mr. Havelock Ellis included America in his investigation of sex perversion, he would have found that the same conditions prevail in our army
and navy as in those of other countries. The growth of the standing army inevitably adds to the spread of sex perversion; the barracks are the
incubators.
Aside from the sexual effects of barrack life, it also tends to unfit the soldier for useful labor after leaving the army. Men, skilled in a trade, seldom
enter the army or navy, but even they, after a military experience, find themselves totally unfitted for their former occupations. Having acquired
habits of idleness and a taste for excitement and adventure, no peaceful pursuit can content them. Released from the army, they can turn to no useful
work. But it is usually the social riff-raff, discharged prisoners and the like, whom either the struggle for life or their own inclination drives into the
ranks. These, their military term over, again turn to their former life of crime, more brutalized and degraded than before. It is a well-known fact that
in our prisons there is a goodly number of ax-soldiers; while, on the other hand, the army and navy are to a great extent supplied with ex-convicts.
Of all the evil results I have just described none seems to me so detrimental to human integrity as the spirit patriotism has produced in the case of
Private William Buwalda. Because he foolishly believed that one can be a soldier and exercise his rights as a man at the same time, the military
authorities punished him severely. True, he had served his country fifteen years, during which time his record was unimpeachable. According to Gen.
Funston, who reduced Buwalda's sentence to three years, "the first duty of an officer or an enlisted man is unquestioned obedience and loyalty to the
government, and it makes no difference whether he approves of that government or not." Thus Funston stamps the true character of allegiance.
According to him, entrance into the army abrogates the principles of the Declaration of Independence.
What a strange development of patriotism that turns a thinking being into a loyal machine!
In justification of this most outrageous sentence of Buwalda, Gen. Funston tells the American people that the soldier's action was "a serious crime
equal to treason." Now, what did this "terrible crime" really consist of? Simply in this: William Buwalda was one of fifteen hundred people who
attended a public meeting in San Francisco; and, oh, horrors, he shook hands with the speaker, Emma Goldman. A terrible crime, indeed, which the
General calls "a great military offense, infinitely worse than desertion."
Can there be a greater indictment against patriotism than that it will thus brand a man a criminal, throw him into prison, and rob him of the results of
fifteen years of faithful service?
Buwalda gave to his country the best years of his life and his very manhood. But all that was as nothing. Patriotism is inexorable and, like all
insatiable monsters, demands all or nothing It does not admit that a soldier is also a human being, who has a right to his own feelings and opinions, his
own inclinations and ideas. No, patriotism can not admit of that. That is the lesson which Buwalda was made to learn; made to learn at a rather costly,
though not at a useless price. When he returned to freedom, he had lost his position in the army, but he regained his self-respect. After all, that is
worth three years of imprisonment.
A writer on the military conditions of America, in a recent article, commented on the power of the military man over the civilian in Germany. He said,
among other things, that if our Republic had no other meaning than to guarantee all citizens equal rights, it would have just cause for existence. I am
convinced that the writer was not in Colorado during the patriotic regime of General Bell. He probably would have changed his mind had he seen how,
in the name of patriotism and the Republic, men were thrown into bull-pens, dragged about, driven across the border, and subjected to all kinds of
indignities. Nor is that Colorado incident the only one in the growth of military power in the United States. There is hardy a strike where troops and
militia do not come to the rescue of those in power, and where they do not act as arrogantly and brutally as do the men wearing the Kaiser's uniform.
Then, too, we have the Dick military law. Had the writer forgotten that?
A great misfortune with most of our writers is that they are absolutely ignorant on current events, or that, lacking honesty, they will not speak of
these matters. And so it has come to pass that the Dick military law was rushed through Congress with little discussion and still less publicity,-a law
which gives the President the power to turn a peaceful citizen into a bloodthirsty man-killer, supposedly for the defense of the country, in reality for
the protection of the interests of that particular party whose mouthpiece the President happens to be.
Our writer claims that militarism can never become such a power in America as abroad, since it is voluntary with us, while compulsory in the Old
World. Two very important facts, however, the gentleman forgets to consider. First, that conscription has created in Europe a deep-seated hatred of
militarism among all classes of society. Thousands of young recruits enlist under protest and, once in the army, they will use every possible means to
desert. Second, that it is the compulsory feature of militarism which has created tremendous anti-militarist movement, feared by European Powers far
more than anything else. After all, the greatest bulwark of capitalism is militarism The very moment the latter is undermined, capitalism will totter.
True, we have no conscription; that is, men are not usually forced to enlist in the army, but we have developed a far more exacting and rigid
force---necessity. Is it not a fact that during industrial depressions there is a tremendous increase in the number of enlistment's? The trade of
militarism may not be either lucrative or honorable, but it is better than tramping the country in search of work, standing in the bread line, or sleeping
in municipal lodging houses. After all, it means thirteen dollars per month, three meals a day, and a place to sleep. Yet even necessity is not
sufficiently strong a factor to bring into the army an element of character and manhood. No wonder our military authorities complain of the "poor
material" enlisting in the army and navy. This admission is a very encouraging sign. It proves that there is still enough of the spirit of independence
and love of liberty left in the average American to risk starvation rather than don the uniform.
Thinking men and women the world over are beginning to realize that patriotism is too narrow and limited a conception to meet the necessities of our
time. The centralization of power has brought into being an international feeling of solidarity among the oppressed nations of the world; a solidarity
which represents a greater harmony of interests between the workingman of America and his brothers abroad than between the American miner and
his exploiting compatriot; a solidarity which fears not foreign invasion, because it is bringing all the workers to the point when they will say to their
masters, "Go and do your own killing. We have done it long enough for you."
This solidarity is awakening the consciousness of even the soldiers, they, too, being flesh of the flesh of the great human family. A solidarity that has
proven infallible more than once during past struggles, and which has been the impetus inducing the Parisian soldiers, during the Commune of I871,
to refuse to obey when ordered to shoot their brothers. It has given courage to the men who mutinied on Russian warships during recent years. It will
eventually bring about the uprising of all the oppressed and downtrodden against their international exploiters.
The proletariat of Europe has realized the great force of that solidarity and has, as a result, inaugurated a war against patriotism and its bloody
specter, militarism. Thousands of men fill the prisons of France, Germany, Russia, and the Scandinavian countries, because they dared to defy the
ancient superstition. Nor is the movement limited to the working class; it has embraced representatives in all stations of life, its chief exponents
being men and women prominent in art, science, and letters.
America will have to follow suit. The spirit of militarism has already permeated all walks of life. Indeed, I am convinced that militarism is growing a
greater danger here than anywhere else, because of the many bribes capitalism holds out to those whom it wishes to destroy.
The beginning has already been made in the schools. evidently the government holds to the Jesuitical conception, "Give me the child mind, and I will
mold the man." Children are trained in military tactics, the glory of military achievements extolled in the curriculum, and the youthful minds
perverted to suit the government. Further, the youth of the country is appealed to in glaring posters to join the army and navy. "A fine chance to see
the world 1" cries the governmental huckster.- Thus innocent boys are morally shanghaied into patriotism, and the military Moloch strides
conquering through the Nation.
The American workingman has suffered so much at the hands of the soldier, State and Federal, that he is quite justified in his disgust with, and his
opposition to, the uniformed parasite. However, mere denunciation will not solve this great problem. What we need is a propaganda of education for
the soldier: antipatriotic literature that will enlighten him as to the real horrors of his trade, and that will awaken his consciousness to his true relation
to the man to whose labor he owes his very existence.
It is precisely this that the authorities fear most. It is already high treason for a soldier to attend a radical meeting. No doubt they will also stamp it
high treason for a soldier to read a radical pamphlet.
But, then, has not authority from time immemorial stamped every step of progress as treasonable? Those, however, who earnestly strive for social
reconstruction can well afford to face all that; for it is probably even more important to carry the truth into the barracks than into the factory. When
we have undermined the patriotic lie, we shall have cleared the path for that great structure wherein all nationalities shall be united into a universal
brotherhood,-a truly free society. |
