A substitute for war, not a sermon against it
If pity and arithmetic have not stopped a single war, what will? Addams answers that war ends only when something else asks for the same courage, and she finds that something in the work of keeping people alive.
Two arguments had carried the peace movement, and Addams sets both aside. Tolstoy and the painter Vereshchagin appealed to pity, the banker Jean de Bloch to prudence, and Britain went to war in South Africa soon after the first Hague Conference. Both appeals only say stop. She wants an ideal that is aggressive in its own right, and takes up the demand for a moral equivalent for war. The miners of Pennsylvania, she notes, bear more pain and danger each year than as many men in European barracks. War will pass when correcting the wrongs of industry looks as magnificent as fighting for the nation.
- war
- peace
- militarism
- patriotism
- nonviolence
- humanitarianism
- compassion
- social change
Enter a dialogue
- Tolstoy's pity and a banker's sums both told people to stop fighting, and wars went on. Why does a peace built only on 'stop' fail?
- You call the old ideal of peace 'dovelike' and ask for one that is aggressive. What would an aggressive peace actually do on an ordinary day?
- A young man craves danger, comradeship and a cause, and the army offers all three. What can peaceful work offer him that is not dull by comparison?
- Miners in Pennsylvania endure more pain and danger each year than as many soldiers in European barracks. Why is their courage not admired like a soldier's?
- In your reading of Isaiah, swords become ploughshares because the poor must be fed, not because anyone resolves on peace. Is a peace movement then unnecessary?