*o
ti- ■'
5. • .
IS! <
f 1
illllll
Ethical Pamphlets
A World Morally Out of Joint
M
By Felix Adler
Senior Leader of the New York Society for Ethical Culture
•J #-
Published by
THE AMERICAN ETHICAL UNION
2 West 64th Street, New York City
FEBRUARY, 1923
-
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT*
BY FELIX ADLER
IN SOME RESPECTS the situation at present is worse than
it was during the war. I remember reading, I think it was
in 1915, a touching letter written from the trenches by one
of the French intellectuals, in which he says that his one cOnsola-
tion for the horrors which he witnesses and in which he must
take part, is the belief that this is "a war to end war," and that
by destroying German militarism, militarism in general will be
abolished. I do not know whether the writer is still living today,
but if he is, and if his letter should again come under his eye, I
wonder what will be his poignant comment?
The situation is in so far worse in that the hope of a pacific
after-war settlement has steadily diminished. "The clouds
return after the rain"; the difficulties that beset the human race
in its endeavors to straighten out its tangled affairs are every-
where thickening. And not only has the progress of civilization
received a setback, but the belief in progress has been wounded
—a deep pessimism has settled on many minds; instead of faith
in moral progress there is a more or less resigned acceptance of
moral retrogression as a fact.
My object today is, if possible, to lift the heavy load of such
reflections, this kind of nightmare, to help some who have
suffered under this oppression to breathe more freely.
To begin with I shall take advantage of a trenchant statement
recently published by the President of the Chamber of Com-
merce of the State of New York, in which he declares that two
parties have tried their skill at the reorganization of a disordered
world, namely, the militarists and the official heads of govern-
ments. Both having failed, it is time, he pleads, that a third
party, namely, the business men, should enter on the scene.
* An address delivered before the New York Society for Ethical Culture
Sunday, January 28, 1923.
4
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
The criticism of the two parties that have failed is just. The
militarists have cut up Europe with the sword, but have not
brought peace. The politicians in their turn have left confusion
worse confounded. And before going on perhaps it may be
instructive to consider for a moment the cause of their respective
failures.
First, then, as to the militarists. The militarist mind, in its
great exemplars, is a wonderfully vigorous and flexible instru-
ment both for thinking and action. Military science embraces
an extraordinary number of difficult subjects. The control of
the movements of vast hosts of men, counting in modern warfare
by the millions, demands in the commander a combination of
qualities that challenge from one point of view the utmost
admiration. Competent he is and must be as the directing
genius of battles, as the executive of conquest. On the other
hand, the very excellence he attains in the science and art of his
profession unavoidably tends to discourage or suppress certain
essentially human traits. For as the surgeon is compelled to
f orget pity for the sufferer in using the knife (in this case to save
life), so the militarist must dismiss from his mind compassion and
relenting in carrying out his purpose, which is to destroy life.
He would indeed be an incredible monster did he not justify to
himself the destruction of life by the ends of patriotism, but his
conception of patriotism is bound to be na rrow. The glory, the
predominance, the territorial aggrandizement of his own people
he pursues at the expense of other peoples. The more disin-
terested patriotism, that which desires the welfare of one's own
nation consistently with that of its neighbors, the patriotism of
the larger human fellowship, is foreign to his way of thinking.
He is, as I have said, fit to be the executive of conquest, but the
last person in the world that should be called in as the counsellor
and maker of peace.
Moreover, in virtue of his profession the militarist acquires the
habit not only of sacrificing the lives of men, but also that of
subjecting their will to his own will. Implicit obedience is
exacted of the soldiers. Such a thing as affirming a will of their
own against the will of their superiors is not to be thought of.
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
5
The morale of the army, it is true, is kept up by starting waves
of enthusiasm, by appeals to national pride, or by holding up
some phantasm of idealism. But the discipline is and must be
iron. Not only the life, but the will of the soldier is in the hand
of his commander.
Similarly a habit is engendered in the mind of the militarist of
lightly regarding or despising the will of the peoples who are not
immediately subject to his orders. He never allows for the
instinct of independence which is inborn in human creatures, for
the impulse to resist force, especially alien force; he never takes
into his reckoning the spontaneities of human nature. And this
was the error that time and again has been the pitfall even of the
greatest of military commanders. When they had to deal with
subjugated populations they did not realize that there is a point
beyond which the screw cannot be turned without causing an
explosion. This was the mistake that finally caused the down-
fall of Napoleon when he came into contact with the national
resistance, first of the people of Spain, then of Russia, then of
Germany. This was the error of the great genius of Moltke
when he seized Metz in order to provide for the "security" (sic)
of the German Empire. And this is the tragical error which is
once more being repeated in the Ruhr,—as if security could
possibly be achieved by a pressure which will inevitably produce
the mcst vehement rebound. At the time of the Peace Con-
ference it was reported that Marshall Foch not only insisted on
annexing the left bank of the Rhine, but that he expected to so
train and discipline the German inhabitants of the annexed
territory that they would be willing to fight their brothers on
the opposite bank. The conception of human wills as pliable to
the imprint of alien force could hardly be more drastically illus-
trated than by this proposal. In a word, the psychology of the
militarist disables him from being the maker of durable relations
between victor and vanquished.
But the prime ministers have shown themselves equally incom-
petent to bring about a settlement. And that chiefly because,
under the parliamentary form of government, the power of the
political leader is so insecure. He may be a convinced liberal,
6
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
the policy which he has really at heart may be broad and far-
sighted, but he cannot hope to carry it out unless he succeeds in
maintaining his power. Power first and last and always must be
his objective. To climb to the highest position, to defend his
position against rivals on his own side as well as against oppo-
nents, this is his engrossing task. And again, he must watch the
currents of public opinion. At times he will even be tempted to
influence public opinion in a direction contrary to his ultimate
purpose for the sake of a temporary advantage, and will thus
create a Frankenstein which he cannot afterwards control, as Mr.
Lloyd George did during the Khaki Election.
There is a ship sending out signals of distress. The ship is
Civilization. A life-boat is setting out to her rescue. The
political leader -is steering it. But other men are in the boat
alongside of him, on whom he must ever keep his eye, for they
are eager to push him from the helm; and, moreover, in order to
secure a temporary advantage, he allows his boat to drift into a
current that bears it in a direction opposite to and away from
the sinking ship, hoping to tack afterwards,—but failing to do so.
It is even Mr. Lloyd George whom this simile fits. It was he
who piled on the impossible reparations, he who used the ex-
pression: "Germany lies on the ground in convulsions, like a
beast with its back broken"; and it is he who now vainly de-
nounces the French proceedings in the Ruhr. And yet, remem-
bering his attitude during the Boer War, as well as his land
legislation, we cannot help believing that he would have served
the public cause of Europe and the world if. he could have done
so while playing the slippery game of politics.
So it is plain that these two, the militarist and the politician,
have failed. And now we are told that the problem before the
world is a business problem, an economic problem, and that
business men must step forward and settle it. But why have
they not come forward before this? or rather, when they did, as
in the Bankers' Paris Conference, why did they adjourn without
results? Was it not in part because the issue at stake is not
merely economic, but, as everyone knows, is complicated with
international antipathies and fears; and partly because it is pre-
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
7
cisely the conflict of economic interests under the surface, and
not very far beneath the surface, that seems to prevent accom-
modation? Oil, certainly at Mosul, for instance, instead of
lubricating, appears to be clogging the negotiations at Lausanne.
And ex-Premier Nitti of Italy has recently expressed the delib-
erate opinion that the enterprise in the Ruhr is being conducted,
not for the sake of security or reparations at all, but in the interest
of the metal industry of France. However that may be, eco-
nomic considerations did not prevent the Great War, and will
not suffice to make an end of the war after the war which is now
going on. Enlightened self-interest teaches plainly enough the
close economic interdependence of the different peoples. The
trouble is that self-interest never is enlightened enough, that what
is best for all concerned in the long run is forgotten in the eager
greediness to snatch temporary advantage.
I think in a discussion of this kind one must separate between
emergency measures and ultimate measures. Europe, as we hear
from every side, is at present heading straight for the precipice.
There is an emergency. Not the business interests, but the
people as a whole, therefore, the American people, must step in
and bring pressure to bear upon their government to compel
action. The American people bear today a momentous respon-
sibility. They are not sufficiently aware of their responsibility,
because, despite all that has been said in the newspapers and by
popular orators, they are not yet sufficiently aware of their power.
Responsibility goes with power. The American people are re-
puted to be a boastful people, and perhaps they are, but boast-
fulness is a sign of the lack of real inward self-confidence. We
have been too distrustful of ourselves as compared with the older
powers of Europe. We have been disposed to follow their lead.
It is time, in this present emergency, that America herself should
take the lead. Let the administration drop its timid apologetic
attitude; let a world conference be called, here in America, at
Washington, like the conference that issued in the Four Power
Treaty, and let the world see that we are in earnest to avert the
danger of new bloodshed and of communism spreading over Cen-
tral Europe. In the light of publicity let the measures be con-
8
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
certed that are immediately necessary to stabilize exchange. If
a partial cancellation of debts is indispensable, and if Congres-
sional legislation is in the way, then, under the influence of an
instructed American opinion, instructed by the publicity of such
a world conference, Congress would yield. The United States is
the only power that can step in; the United States should act.
But, looking ahead to the future, and to ultimate steps toward
a new and better world order, where lies our hope? "I lift up
mine eyes to the hills, whence cometh my help." How beautiful
upon the mountains are the feet of them that bring glad tidings
of peace! We strain our ears to catch the first echo of their
footfalls.
There are those who still pin their faith to the League of
Nations. The League of Nations, in its administrative activi-
ties, has demonstrated its usefulness, but as an organ of inter-
national accommodation it is, to say the least, premature. The
Council can act on the graver issues only by unanimous consent,
and the Council is dominated by powers who are determined to
maintain the status quo, that is, the territorial possessions which
they have unjustly seized as the spoils of conquest. The League,
it is admitted could not possibly function unless all the great
nations were admitted—Russia and Germany among the rest.
But conjure up to your mind for a moment a session of the
League cf Nations with such participants as, under present con-
ditions, would be assembled around the council board. Ger-
many, bruised and beaten to the ground, a member on sufferance;
Soviet Russia, which has postponed but not surrendered its
intention to spread revolution, sitting side by side with the
governments which it expects to undermine; strained relations
between England and France, Mussolini with his army of Black-
shirts behind him; Kemal Pasha, too will be present; Gandhi will
be knocking for admittance at the door. What hope of concord
or wisdom from the deliberations of such a body? Conferences
called ad hoc, for the untangling of special international situations
would seem to be more promising in the present state of the
world. Moreover, I am bound to add that the very ideal of the
League is to my mind tainted with materialism, and so far is as
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
.9
an ideal unworthy of acceptance. For, it is the ideal of peace for
the sake of prosperity, that is, of wealth, of power. True, for the
prosperity of all, of the strong as well as of the weak, of the
wolves as well as of the lambs. But vain is the belief that the
strong will ever respect the rights of the weak when it is to their
temporary profit to ignore them and when no higher end than
prosperity is held up as the ideal.
Now I plead that if we look far ahead as we are now trying to
do, if we think of the ultimate state of this discordant human
race of ours whose members are warring against each other, we
must at last come to the point of agreeing that only a very pro-
found change can avail, a change of heart, a new attitude of
people towards people, and that a larger moral ideal than that
with which the religious and moral teachings of the past furnished
us is the supreme need.
The most civilized nations have thus far derived their moral
instruction from Christianity. And Christian moral teaching has
indeed in one respect been fruitful of unspeakable good. It has
penetrated into the private life of men, and has often sweetened
and transformed the personal relations of individual to individual.
In these private relations the Christian rule of conduct has proved
a Golden Rule. But at the same time we have come to recognize
more and more that Christianity has failed to control the business
life and the political life of mankind. Christianity, it has been
repeatedly asserted, was subjected to the acid test during the
late war, and it failed to meet that test. It failed to prevent the
war, and, despite its insistence on the forgiveness of enemies, it
now fails to bring about even the tolerance of enemies by each
other. And this is so, not because moral ideals, as some think,
have no hold upon human nature—are a mere wind that fans the
surface of the mind without reaching the springs of conduct,—
nor is it as others say, because of the perversity of men—Chris-
tianity having failed because there are no Christians, because men
are too gross to live up to its teachings. No, but the Golden
Rule has failed because it is an inadequate rule, because it em-
phasizes the likeness of men to one another, and ignores their
difference, because it is effective only when men actually find
ie
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
themselves in like situations, so that the precept: Put yourself in
the other's place, is sufficient to mark out the course of duty (as
when I see a man in the act of drowning).
But the Golden Rule does not serve in the organic relations,
where different functions have to be performed, and where it is
not the likeness, but the differences that count. Where in fact
the moral problem is to intensify the differences, that is, to bring
about the best and purest expression of the differences (on the
basis, of course, of the fundamental unity) and then to produce
consonance between the different functions and functionaries by
holding in view an overarching end which in diverse ways they
are jointly to realize.
This organic conception applies, for instance, to modern in-
dustry, where the organizing mind, the executive mind, the mind
of the scientist who works in the research laboratory connected
with the industrial plant, the minds of the mechanics, etc., are to
be brought into concordant action with a view to the more
effective rendering of the social service which industry is designed
to perform. (The Golden Rule does not answer in industry.
The executive is not to put himself in the place of the mechanic,
neglecting his executive function, nor is the mechanic to put
himself in the place of the executive, thereby hindering direction
and producing confusion.)
And the same problem on a vast scale appears in the relation
of people to people. The international problem is that of
organizing the relation of nations to one another, that of estab-
lishing a society not as in the League of Nations, on the principle
of co-ordinate association, but rather a true organism, a corpus
spirituale of humanity, in which each people shall be recognized
as having some fine contribution to make to world civilization,
which will best come to light through vital interchange with its
sister nations.
What would follow from the acceptance of this organic moral
ideal is that no one people would seek to trample on another, or
to subjugate, or to curtail the territory or the wealth of another
any more than the right arm would seek to mutilate the left, or
the hand would seek to extinguish the eye; what would follow is
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
II
that each people would be regarded by the others as a precious
asset, as one to be helped in developing the best that is potential
in it for the sake of the reaction on the best that is potential in all
the rest.
Does this seem abstract to you, this language of functions and
functionaries and organic unity? Let me in closing point out
the vital meaning of it all by an illustration. The span of my
life has been long enough to include two events of worldwide
significance: first the proclamation of the German Empire in the
Mirror Gallery at Versailles in 1871, the arrogant 'triumph of
Bismarck and Moltke, and second the abject humiliation of Ger-
many in the same place. In 1871, I being then a young American
student in Berlin, protested indignantly to Germans of my
acquaintance against the unjust treatment of France, against the
policy of "blood and iron." There were few, however, who
shared, or would even listen to such sentiments in a country
intoxicated with victory, and I was told to consult safety by
holding my tongue. The end it was said justified the means.
And the rapid increase of material prosperity in Germany seemed
indeed to stamp the work of Bismarck with the imprint of sue-
cess. For there is nothing apparently that succeeds like success.
Statues of Bismarck were erected all over the land, and in foreign
newspapers, too, the worship of the idol of Success was well nigh
universal. Few there were, outside of or within Germany, who
reflected that the mutilation of France was a wound to Germany
itself,—that France would not only be turned with redoubled
energy to strengthening her military equipment in preparation
for the day of revenge, but that the companionship between
French and German savants, their bright emulation in science
and literature, the tie of true civilization which had begun to
form between them, would be rudely rent, and that Germany
would suffer infinitely, mentally and spiritually, because of the
harm she had done to her neighbor. For the triumph of mili-
tarism would strengthen the power of militarism within the Ger-
man people, and the worship of material success would cause the
decline of those idealistic tendencies which had been Germany's
finest distinction. Often since then, when the weight of Bis-
12
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
marck's apparent demonstration that might makes right op-
pressed my moral consciousness, I yet reflected that success of
that sort could not in the nature of things be lasting, and I held
to the belief, expressed from time to time to a few of the most
enlightened of my German friends, that the German people would
never be spiritually sound until they renounced and disavowed
and wholly put away from them the method of Bismarck and
abjured the policy of iron and blood. They are learning that
lesson now, in sorrow and tribulation. The blood has flowed, the
iron is entering into their souls.
And now the boot is on the other leg; the present rulers of
France have adopted Bismarck's method, and there is no one
who protests,* no one who loves France deeply enough, loves the
soul of France, the generosity, the magnanimous humanitarianism
of which she is capable, the spiritual qualities with which she is
gifted, to warn her as a most faithful friend against the fatal
error which she is committing, against the peril not merely from
without, but the decline within which she is challenging.!
I considered in the beginning of my address how one can lift
the nightmare of the present from one's breast, and find peace of
mind in a world morally out of joint. My answer is that hu-
* Soviet Russia is the one exception.
f As for the attitude towards Germany, the psychology engendered by the
war no doubt sufficiently explains. Nevertheless, the following remarks
recently reported as made by the British Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs
stand perhaps unequalled for naked cynicism among official utterances:
"We believe [he says] that the French are going to starve the goose, or even
to cut its throat. We want to feed it enough to enable it to lay. We have
no love for the bird, but we want its eggs."
One hardly ever sees the question raised to what extent a people is respon-
sible for the misdeeds of its rulers. There are sixty million Germans more or
less, among these the women who had no vote, the young persons now twenty-
one years of age who were twelve when the war broke out. Then there is the
next generation and no one knows how many future generations that will have
to suffer. The habit of coining a collective name like Germany for a multi-
tude, the habit of personification, is of great use in creating the illusion of
indiscriminate guilt.
Again, in the treatment of the subject, one fact seems to be astonishingly
overlooked, namely, that the German people existed for centuries before it took
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
13
manity, like the individual, must learn to find its way by trial
and error. He who has made a serious mistake will find new
courage and hope in honestly facing his mistake and in learning
from it the right way which hereafter he must pursue. Humanity
must do the same. We must face the fact that the moral force
with which we have attempted to combat the evil tendencies has
been inadequate, not because morality itself is weak, but because
our conception of it, our moral ideal, was too narrow; and on the
other hand the vision of a more sublime moral ideal than the past
has known, together with the strength, the tranquillity that comes
from such a vision, will be our consolation. For it is an ideal not
only to be realized by collective action, but one to which every
one of us can immediately contribute in our several stations and
walks of life. Everywhere the ethical problem is the same. It
is that of organizing our relations to others, in the family, in the
vocations, etc., it is that of steadfastly looking for the best that
is latent in others, and of producing the best in ourselves in the
effort to evoke the best that is in them.
As for the shipwreck of civilization which many foresee, we
need not be so greatly moved by these sinister predictions. The
world, our world, is still young; and if the worst should come to
the worst it is not civilization but one type, our type of civiliza-
tion that will go under. Other civilizations have perished before
our day, Babylon and Egypt and Greece and Rome, and again
and again humanity put forth more vigorous efforts. And ever
the fatal turn during the last fifty years, and that in its philosophy, in its
music, in its science, in its literature, it has been one of the great assets of the
human family,—has been and therefore still may be,—and that it is worth
while saving this member, not for its own sake merely, but in the general
interests of mankind. The utmost concession that one hears nowadays is that
the German people must be put economically on their feet in order that they
may reimburse the victors, in order that they may continue to be customers
of English goods and of American farm products and cotton. The ethical
view of the relation of nation to nation is evidently far out of sight; the busi-
ness point of view is the only one that competes with the international antip-
athies and hatreds. And the teachers of religion, too, are silent. Have they
nothing to say? Does the doctrine of the forgiveness of foes, for instance, not
apply to so-called enemy nations?
14
A WORLD MORALLY OUT OF JOINT
something of the best that was in each civilization has been
handed on to its successors. The best that was in Greece sur-
vives; even something of the best that was in Egypt which we
had not known of is just now coming to light. But we must learn
to think, not of centuries, but in terms of the ten thousand years.
Let us only see to it that we produce in our own place and time
some best thing, some crystalline nucleus of wisdom and leading
for life which the ages that follow us will not suffer wholly to
perish.
Copies of this pamphlet (and, if desired, descriptive literature
relative to the Ethical Movement in America and the work of
its local organizations) will be sent without cost on application to
THE AMERICAN ETHICAL UNION
2 West 64th Street, New York City
On Sale at the Above Address, or Mailed at Prices Quoted,
the Following
BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS ON ETHICAL SUBJECTS
By Felix Adler. An Ethical Philosophy of Life, $3.25. The Religion of
Duty, 50 cents. Moral Instruction of Children, $2.00. Life and Destiny,
cloth, 50 cents. The World Crisis and Its Meaning, $2.00. Marriage and
Divorce, $1.00. The Spiritual Meaning of Marriage, 10 cents. The Vision of
New York as the Democratic Metropolis of the Future, 10 cents. The Pun-
ishment of Children, 10 cents. The Protestant Reformation, 10 cents. The
Moral Prerequisites of a League of Nations, 10 cents. The Punishment of
Individuals and of Peoples, 10 cents. National Self-Determination and Its
Limits, 10 cents. Nationalism and Zionism, 10 cents. Religion and the Joy
of Life, 10 cents. The Revival of Anti-Semitism, 15 cents. Disarmament:
Its Ideals and Possibilities, 15 cents.
By William M. Salter. Moral Aspiration and Song (36 Hymns with Music),
25 cents. Ethical Religion, $1.50. In Quietness and Confidence Shall Be
Your Strength, 15 cents.
By Walter L. Sheldon. Citizenship and the Duties of a Citizen, $1.15.
The Life of Jesus for the Young, new edition, $1.00. A Sentiment in Verse
for Every Day in the Year, 75 cents. A Wisdom Gem for Every Morning and
Evening in the Year, 75 cents. Thoughts from the Writings and Addresses
of Walter L. Sheldon, 75 cents.
By Alfred W. Martin. Foundations for Faith in a Future Life, $2.00. The
Dawn of Christianity, $2.00. Psychic Tendencies of To-day, $2.00. Great
Historic Ideals of Life, 25 cents. The Modern Ideal of Marriage, $1.00. The
Community Church and the Ethical Movement, 15 cents. The Symphony of
Religions, 25 cents. The World's Greatest Religions (Semitic) and the Re-
ligion of the Future, $2.00. The Ethical Message of the "Divine Comedy,"
25 cents. Sixty Years of Christian Science (1862-1922), $1.10.
By William James. Is Life Worth Living? 10 cents.
By Horace J. Bridges. Criticisms of Life, $2.00. The Religion of Expe-
cents. The Armaments
rience, $1.25. Worry: Its Cause and Cure, 40
Limitation Conference and its Problems, 15 cents.
By F. J. Gould. Children's Book of Moral Lessons. Four Series, 75 cents
each. Stories for Moral Instruction, 75 cents. Brave Citizens, 75 cents.
By Percival Chubb. The Religion of Young America During the War—and
After, xo cents. Our Ethical Faith, 15 cents. Why There Can Be No Con-
flict Between True Religion and Science, 10 cents.
By Henry Neumann. Teaching American Ideals Through Literature, 5
cents. Moral Values in Secondary Education, 5 cents.
By George E. O'Dell. Movies and Morals, 10 cents.
By J. S. Mackenzie. Ethical Religion, 20 cents.
iiiH: Si3* *
IHm
iiiH
IBlpi j
igiilii { j
illlliipil
.....I
IS