Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 53.djvu/575

Rh country in the true sense is one that evokes this feeling in its sons and daughters, and evokes it not less in times of peace than in times of war.

It may here be remarked that the ambiguity of the word "great," as applied both to men and to nations, is the source of no slight perversion of moral judgment. When a man is spoken of as a "great" man without qualification, the inference is only too readily drawn that he is one who may serve as a model for imitation; and yet many so-called great men have had the most serious vices of character, and many have been guilty of the most appalling crimes. "Even so," their eulogists contend, "it can not be denied that they were great." So be it, only let it be understood that the word great so employed has no necessary connotation of moral excellence, of superior humanity, or of any of the qualities which might entitle a man to the love and gratitude of his fellows. The trouble is that, make what reserves we may, the word, as often as it is used, creates illusion, or else has the equally disastrous effect of making us think that where "greatness" is concerned moral considerations are of quite inferior importance.

So, when we speak of a great country, we are only too apt to think of its wealth and strength, and only too readily ignore the elements which go to make up a really great national character and a prosperous and stable commonwealth. We do not care to ask how it got its gold, or what it is doing with it, or at what moral cost it is maintaining its military organization. We do not ask whether liberty is flourishing within its borders, or whether its people are strong in the sum of their qualities, in energy, in resourcefulness, in a sense of public duty. We are ready to consider these things at other times; but the spectacle of military-strength imposes

on our imaginations; and, in schoolboy fashion, we account that nation especially great that has all its preparations made for striking a deadly blow at an enemy in the shortest possible time. It is lamentable that, in a country like this, such views should prevail to the extent to which they do, and that a large proportion of our people should have become enamored of the military ideal. The evil resulting from such a state of opinion is twofold: a wrong direction is likely to be given to our foreign policy, and the internal development of the country is in danger of receiving a serious check.

For, let it never be forgotten that the great problem which every community is set to solve is the problem of social evolution under the guidance of the principle of justice. Even the most military communities are working at this problem in their own way, but under disadvantages directly proportioned to the extent of their military organization and the amount of national energy which it absorbs. No reasonable person will deny that the highest well-being of any state depends upon the equity with which its laws are administered, the protection accorded to individual rights, and the scope allowed to individual initiative and energy. No one will deny either that the intellectual and moral condition of a people is, with reference to the ultimate ends of human existence, of vastly more account than their preparedness for offensive warfare. If these propositions are admitted, how can it be regarded otherwise than as a calamity that the ambition of our people, whose position is so eminently favorable to peaceful development, should be diverted into military channels and turned toward military ideals? Some day we shall have to turn back and seek for things that make for peace, the things that tend