Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1922-02-16
The RESPONSIBILITY of Those
Fa;1;nq to Prevent War
VIZ HAT appears to be highly potent
M body of German and of European

thought speaks through d ISCSuC al
ticle in the WELT AM MONTAG, by H. Won
Gerlach, beginning in this wise: He who
SAYS another war is impossible is mad; he
who fails to do all in his power to prevent II
is criminal
Notwithstanding the tide of world feeling
against war, there are certain strong cross
currents and under-currents which 1t be-
hooves us not to lose sight of. The Bolshe-
visits, supposedly given to pac1flsm, are, IN
fact, disciples of the sword as possible
means of starting an earth-w1de revolution.
They would if they could, have destroyed
Polands new-won freedom, because it stood
athwart their ambition to Bolshevise the
world. They have attacked the unoffendlng
socialist republic of Georgia, because it will
not chime with the shibbaleth of Len1ne. And
now TrotZky "boasts an army OF one and a
half million men," In another quarter, and
with a different motive the war dogs, al
though carefully kenneled, are kept we'll fed
--in Hungary. There the Indictment is to re-
store the old monarchy, an adventure impos-
sible without war. Of his own country Herr
Gerlach writes with most interesting candor.
There are few nationalist in Germany, he
says, $50 mad as to count on war in the near
future. But unhappily there are many Ger
mans who dream of war. Often they dream
out loud, and the unsuspecting foreigner looks
at speeches expressing desire for revenge
rather than at the physical imposslb1lity OF
Germany's starting another war, and rather
than at the moral opposition of the German
masses to any war whatever" AS for France,
while admitting that she now has the air of
being veritable Bellona's bridegroom, he as
cribes her manner and her policy to nervous
ness far more than to outright militarism.
1.-THE Frenchman says to himself, we are
forty millions against sixty-two million Ger
mansi He hears manifestations of German
nationalism. He wants guarantees. Nervous
ness is bad adviser. France wants peace.
But in arming so strongly she encourages the
military spirit everywhere.
Such evidences would be ominous indeed
had not the trend of world thought profound
ly changed in these, last six or eight upheav-
ing years. True enough, it is that he who
counts another war impossible is mad" But
more important is the manifest fact that mil
lions throughout Europe and America and the
East are of intense conviction that he who
fails to do all in his power to prevent another
war is criminal" Never before, perhaps, in
human history has this persuasion come so
keenly home to mems business and bosoms.
Never before have so many persons in so
many lands realized what war betides to their
deepest and dearest interests-their l1vell~
hoods, their homes, their heart treasures.
What Othello called 'the pride, pomp, and
circumstance of glorious war; has lost its
ancient lure to the rank and file, who cannot
see the glamour for bitter tears, cannot hear
the music for the groans of mangling multi
tudes. War adventure no longer ap-
peals, save to abnormal covetousness or am
bition here and there. Fanatics, like the lead
ers of Bolshevism, or harkers back to the old
regime in Germany and Hungary, or heady
imperialists in France who are really more
Prussian than French, these may still look
upon war expedient or romantic. But to
the reasonable majority of mankind it has
come to appear calamitous and sordid, no
longer a contest of human will against will
and sinew against sinew, but devilish, ghast-
ly inter-writhing of slaughter-machines and
poisons, a gruesome dance of death from
which the truly human has been stripped.
This was the conviction that spoke pre-
vailingly in the Arms Conference. The seven
resultant treaties on which the Senate of the
United States is seen to pronounce for the
worlds veal or woe, are voices of new in
sight into war and new impulse to peace. The
Treaty of Versailles found critical hour in
history, but hardly critical that upon
which these fresh covenants for international
goodwill and co-working have come. Should
America reject these as the other was reject
ed, what cheer ahead? And how dark would
be the responsibility of those failing to do
all in their power to prevent war!