J. J. Ruedorffer , Basic Features of Contemporary World Politics, Berlin, 1914 (xiii + 252 pp.)
(The preface is dated October 1913.)
A pretentious book by a diplomat, who wraps up the imperialist aspirations of the German bourgeoisie in florid phrases. The chief theme is the struggle between national and cosmopolitan tendencies.
His sociological and philosophical pretensions = the stupidest neo-Kantian blather about the nation as an individual, comparisons with a forest (repeated dozens of times), about divinity and such like nonsense.
Actually, his is a topical theme, but it is wrapped up in catch-phrases about Aristotle’s “entelechy”, etc.
To complete her plans in Africa (the Cape-Cairo railway), Great Britain “now only needs to settle her differences with Germany and Belgium” (94)....
| N.B. |
...“Thus Portugal, and to a lesser degree Spain, are in reality dependencies of the British Empire. Japan cannot escape from the fetters of the British money market; Britain does not need to gain a footing in South America, for the London Stock Exchange finances, and thus rules over, Argentina, the most important South American state, and one with the richest future.... |
|
...“Britain’s world power has ... besides mastery of the seas, two other main pillars: the homogeneity of British culture, and the London Stock Exchange” (95) |
Germany has been put in a difficult position—deprived of possibilities for expansion (Asia for Russia, North Africa for France and Italy), hemmed in on both sides; has come too late (the colonies are taken) ((§7, Chapter 2, p. 101 et seq.)).
On the Moroccan issue she has had to give way to France (105).
“The fate of German world policy will be decided on the continent” (107).... “It is possible, perhaps, to imagine a German world policy without naval superiority, but certainly not without superiority on land” (ibidem).
(Victory on the continent of Europe is the key to everything for Germany.)
Morocco ... “retreat” (108): we had to retreat somewhat....
“This chapter of German world policy illustrates best of all the peculiarity of the Reich’s international position, its limited possibilities for expansion, the link between world and continental policy, the complex factors with which a German world policy has to reckon” (109)....
German nationalism, he says, is still young, ...“the manners of a parvenu” (112).
In America, the people, the nation, is only just taking shape (especially with Latin and Slav emigration).
“Financially, Argentina can be regarded as a colony controlled by the London Stock Exchange” (133).... The South American states “at the present time are, and probably will be for a long time to come, the object and not the subject of world politics” (131)....
“Present-day Japan is suffering from her successes” (137)—cannot cope with her colonies, has not built up strength, etc.... (Japan lacks a religious foundation: 138) ((what an idiot!!))....
The cosmopolitan tendency—prattle about catholicism ... about the cultural ideal....
“Capital and its power....
|
“If the history of the colonial expansion of the European Great Powers in recent decades is regarded from this standpoint, it will not be difficult to see that all the wars of recent times in which the Euro- pean Great Powers have taken part, if not actually contrived in the interests of capital, were at any rate brought about by its interests”[1] (157)... |
N.B. |
“The interweaving of the material interests of the civilised world, the emergence of a unitary world economy, is one of the basic facts of modern politics” (159)....
The struggle for “majority shareholding”[2] (161).... “All economic enterprises of immediate political importance, for example, railways, canal companies, etc., are today national in character even if their capital is international in its origin or form” (161)....
International law and international arbitration? “On the whole, the instrument of arbitration serves only to prevent the outbreak of undesired wars, which can arise from unforeseen incidents and do not affect vital interests of the nation; but nowhere yet have vital questions of the nation been settled by arbitration or a desired war been prevented with its help” (167)....
International socialism? (§5, Chapter 3, Part I, p. 172 et seq.).
| N.B. |
“If international socialism succeeds in completely divorcing the worker internally from the fabric of the nation and in making him merely a member of the class, then it will have conquered; for purely forcible means, by which the national state may then still attempt to keep the worker bound to it, must by themselves prove ineffective in the long run. If, however, international socialism does not succeed in this, if the internal links which connect the worker with the organism that is called the nation remain, even unconsciously, then the victory of international socialism will be open to doubt as long as these links persist, and will turn into defeat if it should prove that in the last analysis these links are the stronger”[3] (173-74).... There is no “impoverishment” and no accentuation of class differences (174). The workers become involved in the intensified national struggle and nationalism (175).... “Hence it can be said that although the socialist movement since that time” (the recent period) “has experienced a prodigious upswing, and although in all countries the socialist parties have greatly increased their power and influence, the international factor in the movement has not only not grown correspondingly during the same period, but has even lost in importance and drive” (175). |
||
| N.B. | |||
| N.B. |
|
The electoral struggle of recent years has caused the German Social-Democrats to “conceal or play down” their internationalism (176).... |
|
...“It” (German Social-Democracy) “has rejected with indignation the assertion of its opponents that in the event of war the Social-Democrats would inspire the mass of the workers supporting them to turn their weapons against their commanders and thus, jointly with the French socialists, try to prevent a war, it even treats the charge of lack of patriotism as an insult.... “The question (of the “national” tendency) is in the centre of the discussion, it becomes the kingpin of social- ism”[4] (176) |
||
|
...“The question is only that of the actual significance of these manifestations” (in support of internationalism, etc., on the part of labour and socialist parties) “for political events and for the political deci- sions of the peoples and their leaders, It is very small in the case of all states with strong national sentiments. In general, it can be said that on all questions on which the governments can appeal to the national feeling of the people, they do not need to pay any attention to the internation- alism of their socialist parties, that so far no national war has failed to take place because of the socialists’ hostility to war, nor will it fail to take place in the future on that account. It is possible that, in deference to the peace theories of socialism, the governments will perhaps be impelled to carry out their actions under the cover of national feeling. This does not alter in any way the essence of the matter, but only makes some changes in the political form and technique which modern politics have to employ”[5] (177-78). |
N.B. ! N.B. ! |
||
| !! he thinks they can be easily deceived! |
|
Cf. p. 103: “The Social-Democratic Party, too, in its parliamentary actions and its propaganda among the people, must year by year take greater account of the national argument” (idem, p. 110). |
|||
| N.B. |
The British colonies are introducing preferential tariffs for the mother country (206)—Canada, Aus- tralia, South Africa=“a de facto increase in customs duties against non-English producing countries” (206).... |
||
“A Franco-Italian antagonism over hegemony [in the Mediterranean and Africa] seems to be taking shape” (211)....
...“So long as Russia has little difficulty in expanding in Mongolia and Persia, her urge for expansion will not be directed against Austria-Hungary, the Balkans and Constantinople” (211)....
|
Russia is protected by her geographical position “against national ruin” (216).—“In the event of defeat she has to fear at most the victory of the revolution and a slowing-down (?) of her development” (216).... |
|||
| N.B. | |||
In general, wars can now be waged only in cases of “need” (218), but what does this mean?
| N.B. defence or attack? |
“It is quite easy to distinguish in words between defence and attack, but extremely difficult in practice to decide beyond dispute who is the aggressor and who the defender” (218). |
“It is not true that though the modern Great Powers arm, they do not make use of their arms” (219).—Their armaments enter into “calculations”, they are taken into account in diplomatic negotiations, in exerting “pressure”, etc., etc
| N.B. N.B. |
“The European alliances have crystallised around the two big antagonisms, the Franco-German and the Austro-Russian” (224).... |
|
“Politically, however, her (Britain’s) behaviour is wholly according to plan, her great influence in South America, especially in Argentina, is based on the activity of the London Stock Exchange in the issue of securities; also, in part, the vassal dependence of Portugal and Britain’s predominant influence in Spain” (235).... |
| N.B. |
“This method of financial imperialism finds its purest expression in modern France. France has become the world’s banker not because of her great wealth, but because of the greater liquidity of her capital. Germany, Britain and the U.S.A. are today far richer; but none of these richer countries has so much liquid, investment-seeking capital as France” (235-36).... |
||
There are two reasons for this: the greater “thriftiness” in France and the smaller demand for money for the needs of the economy.
The Germans have been wrongly blamed for not using the Moroccan incident so as to seize the “opportunity”— “to keep Spain on anti-French lines” (236)....
|
“The opportunity never arose, for Germany could not even dream of breaking the financial ties binding Spain to France and of undertaking to finance a country so much in need of money. France has always more or less openly given Austria and Hungary to understand that it is only because of their friend- ship with Germany and the Triple Alliance that their requests for money meet with difficulties on the Paris Stock Exchange” (236).... |
N.B. | ||||
| N.B. | |||||
| N.B. |
|
...“If the German Reich still builds its international political influence only to a small degree on the flotation of loans, this is primarily due to the fact that, although richer than France, its capital is not so liquid” (237).... With a more rapid economic development, Germany is herself in need of capital... |
|
...“Turkey has often found support in German banks against the political conditions attached to French loans; the same applies to Rumania, Hungary and other countries. In general it can he said that resistance to French financial imperialism will cause German policy to follow the same course” (238). |
N.B. |
End
[1] See present edition, Vol. 21, p. 244.—Ed.
[2] Ibid.—Ed.
[3] See present edition, Vol. 21, p. 244.—Ed.
[4] Ibid—Ed.
[5] Ibid—Ed.
| | |
| | | | | | | ||||||