arendt hannah imperialism nationalism chauvinism

8/12/2019 Arendt Hannah Imperialism Nationalism Chauvinism

1/24


2/24

Imperialism, Nationalism, ChauvinismBy Hannah Arendt"I would annex the planetsif I could "-Cecil Rhodes

IThe InnerContradiction,etween he National

and the ImperialPrinciples."Expansions everything,"aidCecilRhodesand fell into despair;

for he saw every night overhead"vast worldswhichwe can neverreach,"part of the universe o whichhe couldnot expand.1 He haddiscoveredhe movingprincipleof the new, the imperialistra; andyet, at the samemoment,he recognizedn a flashof wisdom ts in-herentinsanityand contradiction f human conditions. Naturally,neitherinsightnor sadnessprevented imfromexpanding.He hadnouse for his flashof wisdomthat had led him far beyondhis normalcapacitieswhichwere hoseof an ambitious usinessman itha markedtendency owardsmegalomania."Worldpoliticsis for a nationwhatmegalomanias for a singleperson" saidEugenRichter leaderof the Germanprogressive arty)at aboutthe samehistoricalmoment. But he gaineda Pyrrhicvictorywhen, throughhis opposition n the Reichstag,Bismarck'sproposalto supportprivate ompaniesn thefoundation f tradingand maritimestationssuffereddefeat. It seemedas thoughnationalpoliticiansandstatesmen-likeEugenRichter n Germany, r Gladstone n England,or Clemenceaun France-had lost touch with realityand did notrealizethat tradeand economicshad alreadyinvolvedevery nationin worldpolitics. The nationalprinciple ad led intoprovincialgnor-ance, and the battle fought by sanitywas lost. Businessmen whonever beforehad beenmuchinterestedn politics,reasonablyatisfiedas they were with the police functionof the National State whichguaranteedhemprotectionof theirproperty,decidedthat theirnew,expanding ffairswereno longersufficientlyafeguardednd thatthey

1 S. Gertrude Millin, Rhodes. (London, 1933), p. 138. The whole quotationreadsas follows: "These stars that you see overhead at night, these vast worlds which we cannever reach I would annex the planets if I could. I often think of that. It makes mesad to see themso clear and yet so far away."2 Ernst Hasse, Deutsche Weltpolitik. 1897. In: Alldeutsche Flugschriften, no. 5,p. 1.441


3/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICShad to go into politics for business' sake. They earnestly believedthat "patriotism in overseas possession is best carried out through"money-making" (Huebbe-Schleiden), that the national flag is a"commercialasset" (Rhodes) and they did their best to win the nation-al representativesas business-partners.

Even worse than corruption was the fact that the incorruptiblebecame convinced that world politics was a working reality and notthe megalomaniac product of imperialism. Since maritime stationsand access to raw materials were a necessity for all nations, they endedby secretly believing that annexation and expansion as such had tobe aimed at for the sake of the nation. They were the first not tounderstand the fundamental differencebetween the old foundation oftrade and maritime stations for trade's sake and the new policy ofannexation and domination.3 They believed Cecil Rhodes when hetold them to "wake up to the fact that you cannot live unless youhave the trade of the world," "that your trade is the world, and yourlife is the world, and not England," and that this is why they "mustdeal with these questions of expansion and retention of the world."4Without willing it, sometimes even without knowing it, they becamenot only the accomplices of imperialist politics, but were the first tobe blamed and exposed for their "imperialism." Such was the caseof Clemenceau who in his desperate worry about the future of theFrench nation turned "imperialist"because he hoped that colonialmanpower would protect French citizens against aggression. When,at the Peace table in 1918, during one of those short spells of anti-imperialist eruptions of public opinion, he insisted that he did notcare about anything as long as he could draft in French colonies andmobilize the "force noire" for the protection of France,5 he mobilized

3 Within the British Empire, we have to distinguish between the Maritime andMilitary Stations such as the Cape of Good Hope during the nineteenth century, theSettlementsor Plantations such as Australia and the other dominions and the colonialEmpire proper such as it was acquired after 1884, when the era of expansion began.Not only were, during the following decades, vast stretches of new territories and manymillions of people added to the older colonial possessionsthat had been acquiredthrough"fits of absentmindedness" r through"incidents of trade"; but these possessionsthem-selves, such as British India, received a new political significance and a new kind ofgovernment.4 Millin, op. cit., p. 175.5 Cf. Lloyd George, David, Memoirs of the Peace Conference (Yale, 1939), I,362ff. "M. Clemenceau seemed in his speech to demand an unlimited right of levyingblack troops to assist in the defence of French territory in Europe if France wereattacked in the future by Germany. . . . M. Clemenceau said that if he could raisetroops,that was all he wanted."

442


4/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMpublic opinionagainstthe "imperialisticchemes"of the only greatEuropeanpeople that did not have any. Compared o this blindnationalism n its last desperate tage,Britishimperialists,ompromis-ing on the Mandatesystem,looked like the guardiansof the self-determination f peoples,eventhoughtheyat oncemisusedt throughthe concept of "indirectrule" by which the British administratorgoverned"thepeople . . not directlybutthrough hemediumof theirown tribal and local authorities."

By adoptingimperialistmethodsof dominationClemenceauhasnot saved,as we now fully realize,the Frenchnation from Germanaggression, lthoughhis plan was followedup and carriedout by theFrenchGeneralStaff. Poincare's amousphrasesof 1923, "Francesnot a countryof forty millions;she is a countryof one hundredmillions,"became he watchword f Frenchnationalists nd has beenrecently repeatedby GeneralDe Gaulle. This imperialismor thesake of the nationhas changedfundamentallyhe very foundationsof French ule overconquered eoplesanddealt,unknowingly, dead-ly blow to whatmighthavebecomea FrenchEmpire. For the French,in contrast o all otherEuropeannations,actuallyhave tried in ourtimesto buildan Empiren the old Romansense,to combineus withimperium. They alone have attempted o developthe body politicof the nationitself into an imperialpoliticalstructure.They did notleavethe care of overseaspossessionso the expandingaffairsof busi-nessmen,butconceivedhemas the resultof "theFrenchnationmarch-ing . . . to spreadthe benefitsof Frenchcivilization;"hey triedtoincorporatehe conqueredpeoples nto the nationalbody by treatingthemas "both . . brothers nd . . . subjects-brothersn the fraternityof a commonFrenchcivilization, nd subjects hat they are disciplesof Frenchlight and followersof Frenchleading." This was thereasonfor giving coloreddelegatesseats in the FrenchParliamentandof incorporatingonqueredAlgeria nto the mothercountry. Thatall theseattemptswerefinallydefeatedand that Franceappears odayas an imperialistower ike others s partlydue to the European opu-

6 Ernest Barker, Ideas and Ideals of the British Empire. (Cambridge, 1941), p. 69.7 Ernest Barker, op. cit., p. 4. Cf. Also the very good introductoryremarkson thefoundations of the French Empire in: The French Colonial Empire. InformationDepartment Papers No. 25, publ. by The Royal Institute of International Affairs.(London, 1941), pp. 9ff. "The aim is to assimilate colonial peoples to the Frenchpeople, or, where this is not possible in more primitivecommunities, o "associate"them,so that more and more the difference between la France metropole and la Franced'outremer shall be a geographical difference and not a fundamental one."

443


5/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICSlation in the colonies, the so-called French colonials, who were notEmpire-builders ut a multi-nationalcliqueof businessmenwith imperial-ist ambitions, and partly to those nationalists in France herself whoconsidered the colonies as lands of soldiers and their populations as"a really economical form of gunfodder, turned out by mass-produc-tion methods."8

Imperialismis not empire-buildingand expansion is not conquest.The imperialpassion, old as history, time and again has spreadcultureand law to the four corners of the world. The conqueroreitherwantednothing but spoils and would leave the country after the looting;or he wanted to stay permanently and would then incorporate theconquered territory into the body politic and gradually assimilate theconquered population to the standard of the mother country. Thistype of conquest has led to all kinds of political structures-to empiresin the more distant and to nations in the more recent past. At anyrate, conquest was but the first step toward preparing a more per-manent political structure.

Conquest as well as empire-building,has fallen into disreputeduring the last century for very good reasons. The new concept ofthe nation, born out of the French Revolution, was based upon thesovereignty of the people and its active consent to the government(le plebiscitede tous les jours) and it presupposedthe existence of an8 See: W. P. Crozier, "France and her 'Black Empire'," Nevn Republic, January23, 1924.A similar attemptat brutal exploitation of overseas possessions for the sake of thenation had been made by the Netherlands in the Dutch East Indies after the defeat ofNapoleon had restoredthe Dutch colonies to the much impoverishedmothercountry. Bymeans of compulsorycultivation, the natives were reduced to slavery for the benefit ofthe Government in Holland. Multatuli's 'Max Havelaar', first published in the sixtiesof the last century,was aimed at the Governmentat home and not at the services abroad.(See: De Kat Angelino, Colonial Policy, Vol. II. The Dutch East Indies, (Chicago,1931)). This system was quickly abandoned and Netherland Indies, in a sense, hasbecome "the admiration of all colonizing nations." (See: Sir Hesketh Bell, ForeignColonial Administration n the Far East. (1928). Part I). The Dutch system has manysimilarities with the French brand of imperialism: the grant of European status todeserving natives, introductionof a European school system, etc., and has achieved thesame though less violent result: a strong national movement among the subject people.In the present article we shall ignore both Dutch and Belgian imperialism.The firstis a curious and changing mixture of French and English methods; in our context it isatypical because the Netherlands did not expand during the eighties, but only consoli-dated and modernized its old possessions. Belgium, on the other hand, would offer toounfair an example. Her expansionwas first of all the expansion of her King personally,uncheckedby any governmentor other control. The story of the Belgian Congo is suffi-ciently well known, but in its unequalled atrocity likewise atyptical for the initial stagesof imperialism.

444


6/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMindefinite number of equally sovereign national organizations. Thismeant in practical politics that whereverthe nation appeared as con-queror,it arousednational consciousnessas

well as desire for sovereign-ty among the conquered peoples, thereby defeating all genuineattempts at empire-building. The British "empire-builders"neversucceededn including heir nearestneighbor,he Irishpeople,in thefar-flungtructure f either he BritishEmpireor theBritishCommon-wealthof Nations. The "empire-builders"ut their trustin conquestas a permanentmethodof rule-and failedmiserably; ut when afterthe last war Irelandwas granteddominion-statusnd welcomedasa full-fledgedmembernto the BritishCommonwealth,t endedwitha new thoughless palpable ailure. The oldest British"possession"and the newestBritishdominionunilaterally enounced ts dominionstatus (in 1937), and severedall ties withthe Englishnationby notparticipatingn the war. The rule of permanent onquestsince it"simplyailedto destroyher"9 hadnot so mucharoused"the slumber-ing geniusof imperialism"0of the Englishnationas it hadawakenedthe national resistanceof the Irish. The national structureof theUnitedKingdomhadmade mpossibleuickassimilationndincorpora-tion of the conqueredpeople;the British Commonwealthever wasa "Commonwealthf Nations" but the heir of the United Kingdomand the politicalbody of one nationdispersedhroughouthe world;it was not, as can be seenby the Irishexample,an imperial tructurein whose frameworkmany and differentpeoplescould live togetherandbe contented.11This innercontradictionetweenhe bodypoliticof the nationand conquestas a politicaldevicehas been obviousever9 See Gilbert K. Chesterton,The Crimesof England (1915), pp. 57ff.10 As Lord Salisbury put it, rejoicing over the defeat of Gladstone's first HomeRule Bill. During the following twenty years of Conservative-and that was at thattime Imperialist-policy (1885-1905), the English-Irishconflictwas not only not solvedbut became muchmore acute.

11 For the historian,it still is a riddle why in the initial stages of national develop-ment the Tudors did not succeed in incorporatingIreland into England as the Valoishad succeeded in incorporatingBrittany and Burgundy into France. It may be, however,that this process was brutally interrupted through the Cromwellian Government thattreated the country as one great piece of booty to be divided among its servants.Afterthe Cromwellian revolution,at any rate, which for the formationof the English nationwas as crucial as the French Revolution became for the French, the United Kingdomhad already lost the power of assimilationand integrationwhich the body politic of thenation has only in its initial stages but loses gradually with its maturing. What thenfollows is, indeed, one long sad story of "coercion (that) was not imposed that thepeople might live quietly but that people mightdie quietly" (Chesterton,op. cif., p. 60.).For a historical survey of the Irish question that includes the latest developments,compare the excellent unbiased study of Nicholas Mansergh, Britain and Ireland. In:Longman'sPamphlets on the British Commonwealth.(London, 1942).

445


7/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICSsincethe grandioseailureof the Napoleonic ream. It is due tothisexperienceatherhan to merehumanitarianonsiderationshatconquestince hattimehas beenofficiallyondemnedndhasplayedbuta minor ole ntheadjustmentf borderlineonflicts.

The Britishhavetriedto escape hisdangerousnconsistencyfmodemattemptst imperialuleby leavingheconqueredeoplesotheirown devices s faras culture,eligion ndlawwereconcerned,by stayingaloof and by desistingromspreading ritish aw andculture.Thishashardly reventedhenativesromdevelopingationalconsciousnessndclamoringorsovereigntynd ndependence-thoughit mighthaveretardedhe processomewhat.It has,on the otherside,tremendouslytrengthenedhe newimperialistonsciousnessfa fundamental,ndnotonlytemporary,uperiorityf manoverman.This, in turn,has embitteredhe fightfor freedom f the subjectpeoplesand blinded hemto the unquestionableenefits f Britishrule. Fromheveryaloofnessf their dministratorsho"despiteheirgenuine espector thenativesas a people,andin somecaseseventheir ovefor them, . . almost o a man,do not believe hattheyare or everwill be capable f governinghemselves ithout uper-vision,"2 theycannothelpconcludinghattheyareto be excludedandseparatedrom herestof mankindorever.AlthoughheBritishattempt t combiningnational odyat homewithanempirebroaddidnothave hedesiredonsequencesf stabilizingheimperialtruc-ture,thadseriousconsequencesorthepoliticaltructuref themothercountry.Forempire'sake,theyhad to keepKingandHouse ofLords, othof whichare in contradictiono thefreedevelopmentfnationalsovereigntyutdesperatelyeededor the ruleoversubjectpeopleso whom necouldnotgivethestatus f citizens.Theresultwas thatthosewhofirstof allwereentitledo be British itizens adto remain ritishsubjects.Thefinaloutcomef all these ompromisesandclever eviceswas mperialism.

Imperialismannot venbe grantedheextenuatingircumstancesof being a mixtureof conquestand empire-building,lthoughtoccasionallyalls back o the old methods f the former ndalwaysboastsof the grandeurf the latter. The old "breakersf law inIndia"Burke)werepiratesndconquerorsf thelooting ypewhomthe Indianpeopleshadreasonableopeto see leave someday. If12 James Selwyn, South of the Congo, (New York, 1943), p. 326.

446


8/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMtheyhadchangedntomakersf law, heymighthavebecomempire-builders;ut theEnglishnationwasnot interestedn thisand wouldhardly ave upportedhem. As it was, heywere ollowedbyanun-ending eries f administratorsllof whomwanted theAfricano beleft an African," lthough few,whohadnot yet outgrownwhatHaroldNicholson ncecalled heir"boyhood-ideals"3wantedo aidthem o "become betterAfrican" 4-whateverhatmaymean. Inany case,theywerenot "disposedo applythe administrativendpolitical ystem f theirowncountryo thegovernmentf backwardpopulations"15 and failed consequentlyto tie the far-flung possessionsof the British Crown to the English nation. In contrast to true im-perial structures where the institutions of the mother country are invarious ways integrated into the empire as a whole, it is characteristicof imperialism that national institutions remain separated from thecolonial administrationalthough in its initial stages they are allowedto exercise some control over it. It is to the salutary restraining ofthese institutions that we owe those benefitswhich, after all and despiteeverything, the non-Europeanpeoples have been able to derive fromWestern domination. But the colonial services themselves have neverceased to protest against the interferenceof the "unexperiencedmajor-ity," namely the nation, that tries to press "the experienced minority,"namely the imperialists,"in the direction of imitation," governing inaccordance with the general standardsof justice and liberty at home.16

Here lies, incidentally, one of the many unhappy misunderstand-ings which still bar the way to adequate insight into the phenomenonof imperialism. The conscienceof the nation, represented n parliamentand free press, was equally representedby the colonial administrationsof all Europeancountries-be they England or France or Belgium orGermany. In England, however, in order to distinguish between theimperial government seated in London, and controlled by parliament,and local administratorsor the white local population, this influencewas called the "imperial factor," thereby crediting imperialism withthose merits and remnants of justice which it eagerly tried to elimi-13 These boyhood-ideals play a considerable role in the attitudeof British adminis-trators and officials when serving abroad. If they are taken seriously, they prepare forsuch tragedies as the life of Lawrence of Arabia. How they are developed and culti-vated is very well described in Rudyard Kipling's Stalk_ and Company.14 Ernest Barker, op. cit., p. 150.15 Lord Cromer, "The Government of Subject Races." In: Edinburgh Review,January, 1908.16 Lord Cromer,op. cit.

447


9/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICSnate.17 The political expression of the "imperialfactor" in Englandwas the concept that the natives are not only protected but in a wayrepresented by the British, the Imperial Parliament.18 Here, theEnglish come very close to the French experimentof empire-building,although they never went as far as giving actual representation tosubject peoples. Nevertheless, they obviously hoped that the nationas a whole could act as their trustee, and it is true that it invariablyhas tried its best to prevent the worst.

The imperialfactor, therefore,should rightly be called the nationalfactor in British imperialism;a factor which invariablycame into con-flict with the imperialists. The prayer which Cromer addressed toLord Salisbury during his administrationof Egypt in 1896: "Save mefrom the English Departments"19 has been repeated over and overagain until in the twenties of our century the nation and everythingit stood for was openly blamed by the extreme imperialistparty forthe possible loss of India. The reason: tie government of Indiathat "knew well enough that it would have to justify its existence andits policy before public opinion in England" felt itself not free toproceed to those measures of "administrativemassacre" 0 which hadbeen tried out immediatelyafter the close of the last war in the form

17 The origin of this misnomer s quite clear in the history of British rule in SouthAfrica. It is well known how-to take the most famous instance-local administrators,Cecil Rhodes and Jameson, involved the Imperial Government in the war against theBoers, much against its intentions. The situation was that "the Imperial Governmentretained, indeed, nominal control.... In fact Rhodes, or ratherJameson, was absoluteruler of a territorythree times the size of England, which could be administered withoutwaiting for the grudging assent or polite censure of the High Commissioner'."(See:Lovell, Reginal Ivan, The Struggle for South Africa, 1875-1899, (New York, 1934),p. 198). And what happens in territories n which the British Government has resignedits jurisdictionto the local European population that lacks all traditional and constitu-tional restraint of national States can best be seen in the tragic story of the SouthAfrican Union since its independence, that is, since the time when the Imperial Parlia-ment had no longer any right to interfere.

18 Cf. for instancethe discussionin the House of Commons in May, 1908, betweenCharles Dilke and the Colonial Secretary. Dilke warned against giving self-governmentto the Crown colonies because this would result in a rule of the white planter over thecolored worker. Whereupon he is answered that the natives, too, had a representationwhich is the English House of Commons. See: G. Zoepfl, "Kolonien und Kolonial-politik." In: Handtooerterbuchder Staaisrtissenschaften.3. Auflage.19 Lawrence J. Zetland, Lord Cromer (1932), p. 224.20 A. Carthill, The Lost Dominion. 1924, pp. 41-42, 93.

448


10/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMof "punitive forces" as a radical means of pacification.2l The sameconflict between the national and the imperialistfactor was character-istic of French rule. The Governor Generalsappointed by the FrenchGovernmentin Paris were either subjectto powerful pressureof Frenchcolonials as in Algeria, or they simply refused to carry out reformsin the treatment of natives, inspiredas they were, by "the weak demo-cratic principlesof my Government," n the words of the former asso-ciate of Petain, the Governor General of Madagascar, Leon Cayla.Everywhere, imperialist administrators felt that the control of thenation was an unbearableburdenand an open threat to domination.22

And in this, the imperialistsare perfectly right and know the con-ditions of modem rule over subject peoples better than those who, onthe one side, protest against government by decree and arbitrarybureaucracyand, on the other, hope to retain their possessions foreverfor the greater glory of the nation. Paradoxically the imperialistsknow that the body politic of the nation is not capable of empire-building. They are perfectly awareof the fact that the marchof the na-tion and its conquest of peoples, if it is allowed to follow its own in-herent law, ends with these peoples rising to nationhood themselvesanddefeating the conqueror.The French methods, therefore,which alwaystried to combine national aspirations with empire-buildinghave beenmucl less successful than the English methods which, since the eightiesof the last century,have been outright imperialistic,although restrainedby the mother country that had retained its national democraticinstitutions.

21 Compare the great article on "France, Britain and the Arabs" which T. E.Lawrence wrote on this occasion in The Observer (August 8, 1920); ". . . There is apreliminaryArab success, the British reinforcementsgo out as a punitive force. Theyfight their way . . . to their objective, which is meanwhilebombardedby artillery, aero-planes, or gunboats. Finally perhaps a village is burnt and the district pacified. It isodd that we don't use poison gas on these occasions. Bombing the houses is a patchyway of getting the women and children. ... By gas attacks the whole population ofoffending districtscould be wiped out neatly; and as a method of government t wouldbe no more immoral than the presentsystem." (Quoted from: T. E. Lawrence, Letters,edited by David Garnett (New York, 1939), pp. 311 ff.)

22 The same conflict between national representativesand colonial administrators nAfrica runs through the history of German imperialism. In 1897, Carl Peters wasremoved from his post and had to resign from the Governmentservice because of atroci-ties against the natives. The same thing happened to Governor Zimmerer.And in 1905,the tribal chiefs addressed their complaints for the first time to the Reichstag, with theresult that the colonial administratorshrew them into jail and the German Governmentintervened. See: P. Leutwein, (President of "Der Koloniale Volksbund"), KaempfeurnAfrika. (Luebeck, 1936).

449


11/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICSII

Imperialismnd the Disintegration f theNationalBodyWhen imperialismntered he sceneof politicsduring he scramblefor Africa in the eightiesof the last century, t was propagatedbybusinessmen,pposediercely ythosewhowere n powerand welcomedby a surprisinglyargesection of the educatedclasses. To the latterit appeared s a God-sent ife-saver, s a panacea or all evils, as aneasy way out of all conflicts. And it is true that imperialismn asensehasnot gonebackon thesepromises;t hasgivena new lease oflife to political and social structureswhich were even then quiteobviouslyunderminedby new social and politicalforcesand which,under othercircumstances,ven without the interferencef imperial-ist developments,t would hardlyhave needed two world wars todestroy. As it was, it conjuredawayall troublesand produced hatdeceptivefeeling of security,so universal n pre-warEurope,from

whichonly the most sensitivemindsescaped, ike Peguyin FranceorChestertonn England,whoknewbyinstinct hattheylivedin a worldof hollowpretensesand that stabilitywas the worstpretenseof all,andwho couldonly marvelat the miracleof longevity. The solutionof the riddle was imperialismnd the answer o the fateful questionwhy the European omityof nationsallowedthis evil to spreaduntileverythingwas destroyed, he good as well as the bad, is that allgovernments new well enoughthat theircountrieswere in a secretstateof disintegration,hat the body politicwasbeingdestroyedromwithin,and thattheylivedon borrowedime.

Innocently nough,expansion ppearedirstas the panacea or theevil of excesscapitalproductionand offeredits remedyof capitalexport.23 The tremendouslyncreasedwealth producedby capital-istic productionunder a social systembased on maldistribution adresulted n "oversaving,"hat is, in the accumulation f capitalthat,within the framework f the existingnationalcapacity or production

23 For this and the following compare J. A. Hobson, Imperialism,who already in1905 gave a masterly analysis of the driving economic motives and of many of itspolitical implications. When, in 1938, his early study was republished, Hobson wasperfectly right in stating in his introduction o an unchangedtext that this book is a realproof "that the chief perils and disturbances . . of today . . . were all latent and dis-cernible in the world of a generation ago . ." (p. v). Cf. Barker, op. cit., who in1941 still calls the colonial Empire proper-not the dominions-"an exportation ofEnglish money."

450


12/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMand consumption,as condemnedo idleness.This moneyactuallywassuperfluous,eededby nobodyhough wnedbya growinglassof somebodies.n thedecadewhichprecededmperialism,he ownersof thissuperfluousealthhadfirsttriedthe wayof foreignnvest-mentswithoutxpansionndwithoutoliticalontrol. hishadbroughtaboutanunparalleledrgyof swindles,inancialcandals,peculationandgamblingn the stock-markets.ig money esultingromover-saving howedhewayandbecamehepioneeror littlemoney,heresultof the littlefellow's ardwork. Domestic nterprises,n orderto keeppacewith hehighprofits f foreignnvestments,urnedike-wiseto fraudulent ethods ndattractedn ever-growingumberfpeoplewho n thehopeof miraculouseturnshrewheirmoneyoutthe window. The Panama candal n France, he Gruendungs-schwindeln Germanywere classical xamples.Tremendousossesresultedromthe promises f tremendousrofits. The ownersoflittlemoneyost on sucha scaleandat sucha tempohattheownersof superfluousigcapital oonsaw themselveseft alone n thefieldwhich,n a sense,wasa battlefield.Afterhavingailed o transformthewholeof societynto a communityf gamblers,heywereagainsuperfluous,xcludedrom henormal rocessf productiono which.after ome urmoil,llother lasses eturneduietlyhough omewhatimpoverishedndembittered.24

Export f money, oreignnvestmentssuchs notimperialismnddoesnotnecessarilyeadto expansions a political evice. As longas the owners f superfluousapitalwere ontentwithstaking"largeportionsf theirpropertynforeignands" ndalthoughhis endencyalready an"countero all pasttraditionsf nationalism,"5 theywouldonly haveconfirmedheiralienationromthe nationalbodyin whichhey edtheexistencef parasites.Onlywhen heyappealedfor governmentrotectionf their nvestmentsfterthe initial tageof gamblingadopenedheireyesto thepossible seof politics, idtheyre-enterhepoliticalife of the nation. In thisappeal, owever,theyfollowedhe establishedraditionf bourgeoisocietyhatsince

24 For France compare George Lachapelle, Les Finances de la Troiseme Repub-lique, (Paris, 1937) and D. W. Brogan, The Development of Modern France, (NewYork, 1940). For Germany, compare the interestingcontemporarytestimonies,such asMax Wirth, Ceschichte der Handelskrisen, (1873), Chapter XV, and A. Schaeffle,"Der 'grosse Boersenkrach'des Jahres 1873." In: Zeitschriff fuer die gesamfe Slaais-wissenschaft,(1874), 30 Band.25 J. A. Hobson, "Capitalismand Imperialism n South Africa." In: ContemporaryReview, (London), 1900.

451


13/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICSits beginningsadwantedo usepoliticalnstitutionsxclusivelyorthe protectionf property.It was the firstclass in historywhoseorigin,as wellas ultimate im,wasownerships suchandthat sofarhadbeen atisfied ithbeing hedominantlassof societywithoutaspiringo direct ule. Throughhefortunateoincidencef theriseof thisclass fproperty-holdersnd he ndustrialevolution,heformerhadbeentransformedntoproducersndstimulatorsf production.As longas theyfulfilledhis basic unction f modernocietywhichessentiallys a communityf producers,heirwealth adaneminentlyimportantunctionorthe nationas a whole. The owners f super-fluousapitalwerehe irst ection f theclasshatnolonger rofiteeredfromsomerealsocial unction-evenhought be the function f anexploitingmployer-andwhomconsequentlyo police n the longrunwouldhavebeenable o save rom he wrath f thepeople. Forthis wrathrarely trikes hose who derive heirpower romsomenecessaryctivity.It is not aroused y mereabuses, ut it becomesviolentandimplacables soonas profiteeringulfillsno function tall,even houghheprofiteers ayhave ostallrealpower ndexploitnobody.26Expansionhenwasnot onlyescape or thesuperfluouscapitaltself,but stillmore oritsownersrom hemenacingrospectof remainingntirely uperfluousndparasitical. t saved he bour-geoisiefromthe consequencesf maldistributionnd gave a newleaseof lifeto itsownershiponcepthatonlynow,whenwealth ouldno longerbeusedas a factor f productionithin he nationalrame-work,hadcome ntoconflictwith the productiondealof the com-munity sa whole.Older han hesuperfluousealthwasanotherby-productf capi-talistproduction.Thiswasthehuman ebrishatevery risis,ollow-ing invariablypon eachperiodof industrialrowth,wouldper-manentlyliminateromproducingociety,whowouldbecomeper-manentlydleandassuperfluousor thecommunitys theowners fsuperfluousealth. Thattheywerean actualmenaceo societyhadbeenrecognizedor decades ndtheirexporthadhelpedo populatethedominionsf Canada ndAustraliaswellas theUnitedStates.Thenew actof the mperialistra s that hesewosuperfluousroups,

26 This has been conclusively demonstratedby Tocqueville with respect to theFrench aristocracybefore the Revolution. The more the aristocracy lost its real powerof governmentand administration, he more its privileges were hated by the people thatno longer understoodits very existence. See L'Andien Regime et la Revolution. LivreII, chapitre I.

452


14/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMthe owners of superfluouscapital and the owners of superfluouswork-ing power, joined hands and left the country together. The conceptof expansion, of exporting government power and of annexation ofevery territory in which nationals had invested either their wealth oftheir work seemed the only alternative to increasing losses of wealthand population. Imperialismwith its idea of an unlimited expansionseemed to offer a never-ending remedy to an increasing and never-ending evil.27

Ironically enough, the first country where superfluouswealth andsuperfluousmen were brought together was itself in a position in whichonly a miraclecould save it. South Africa had been in British posses-sion since the beginning of the century because it assuredthe maritimeroad to India. The opening of the Suez-canal, however, and thefollowing administrativeconquest of Egypt left the old trade stationof the Cape without any greater importance. The British would,in all probability, have withdrawn from Africa as, before them, allEuropean nations had withdrawn whenever their possessions and tradeinterestsin India were liquidated. "As late as 1884 the British Govern-ment had still been willing to diminish its authority and influence inSouth Africa." 28 If any spot of the earth was threatened with be-coming superfluousthen, it was certainly South Africa.

The second ironical (and almost symbolical) fact about the un-expected development of South Africa into "the culture-bedof Im-perialism"29 lies in the very nature of its sudden attractiveness afterit had lost all value for the Empireproper. In the seventies, diamondfields had been discoveredand the eighties brought about the discoveryof large gold mines. Gold became the god for the owners of super-fluous wealth as well as for the superfluousmen who came from the

27 These motives are especially prominentin German imperialism.Among the firstactivities of the "Alldeutsche Verband"-founded in 1891-were efforts to preventGerman emigrants from changing their citizenship, and the first imperialist speech ofWilhelm II, on the occasion of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the foundation of theReich, contained the following typical passage: "Aus dem Deutschen Reiche ist einWeltreich geworden. Ueberall in fernen Teilen der Erde wohnen Tausende unsererLandsleute. . . . An Sie, meine Herren, tritt die ernste Pflicht heran, mir zu helfen,dieses groesseredeutsche Reich auch fest an unser heimisches zu gliedern."28 See the masterly study of C. W. De Kiewiet, A History of South Africa. Socialand economic, (Oxford, 1941), p. 113.29 E. H. Damce, The Victorian Illusion, (London, 1928), p. 164. "Africa, whichhad been included neither in the itinerary of Saxondom nor in the professional philoso-phers of imperial history, became the culture-bedof British imperialism."

453


15/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICSfour corners of the earth;:"" reventing, with Government support, thedevelopmentof all industries for the production of consumergoods,:'they establishedthe firstparadiseof parasiteswhose lifeblood is gold.'3'Imperialism, the result of superfluous money and superfluous men,began its startling career by producing the most superfluous and themost unreal goods.

It may still be doubtful whether the panacea of expansion wouldhave been so great a temptation for national statesmen as it actuallybecame, if it had offered its dangerous solutions only for those su-perfluous forces which, in any case, were already outside the pale ofthe body corporate of the nation. The curious weakness of nationalopposition to imperialism,the numerous inconsistencies and outrightbroken promises which were so characteristicof the behavior-patternsof modern national politics and which frequently have been ascribedto either opportunism or bribery33have another and deeper motive.They sprang from the conviction that the national body itself wasso deeply split into classes, that class-strugglewas so universal a symp-tom of modern political life, that the very cohesion of the nation wasutterly jeopardized. Expansion again appeared as a lifesaver if andinsofar as it could deliver a common stake to the nation as a whole,and it is mainly for this reason that imperialistswere allowed to be-come "parasitesupon patriotism."34

Partly, of course, such hopes belong to the old vicious deviceswhich try to overcome domestic conflicts by foreign adventures andconquests. The difference, however, is marked. Adventures in politicsare by their very nature limited in time and space; they may succeedin overcoming conflicts temporarily, although as a rule they wouldeven fail in that and rather tend to sharpen them. The imperialistadventure of expansionappearedfrom the very beginning as an eternalsolution, because expansion was conceived as unlimited. Furthermore,imperialismdid not even appear as an adventure in the usual sense,

30 See: Reginald Ivan Lovell, The Struggle for South Africa, 1875-1899. A studyin economic imperialism, (New York, 1934). On the Uitlanders, p. 403.31 See: Selwyn James, South of the Congo, (New York, 1943), pp. 333 ff.32 See De Kiewiet, op. cit. Chapter VII.33 The instances are too numerousto be quoted. Interesting n our context, further-more, are only those in which the honesty of the persons involved is beyond doubt.Such for instance is the famous case of Gladstone who as the leader of the LiberalParty had promisedto evacuate Egypt; when, however, his party came into power, theliberal governmentdid not evacuate.34 J. A. Hobson, op. cit., p. 61.

454


16/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMbecauset basedtself esson nationalistsloganshanon theseeminglysolidbasisof economicnterests.Withina society f clashingnterestsin which he common ood had beenidentifiedwith the commoninterest,xpansions suchappearedo be a possibleommonnterestof the nationas a whole. Sinceeverybodyadbeenconvincedytheowning nddominantlasseshateconomicnterest nd hepassionfor'ownershiprethesoundbasis orthebodypolitic,nationaltates-menwereonlytooeasilypersuadedo yieldwhena commonconomicinterestappearedn thehorizon f possibilities.

Thesethenare the reasonswhynationalismevelopedo clearatendencyowardsmperialism,heinner ontradictionf thetwoprin-ciplesnotwithstanding.romheverybeginningf thenewmovementandin all countrieslike, mperialistsouldpreach and boast)oftheirbeing"beyondhe parties,"ndclaim o be the onlyonestospeak or the nationas a whole. This languagewouldattract nddeludepreciselyhosepersonswho still had somekindof politicalidealismeft andsomefeeling or patriotism.The cryfor unityre-sembled reciselyhe battlecries ithwhichpeoples lwayshadbeenled to war;andyet,nobody etectedn theuniversalndpermanentinstrumentf unity hegerm f universalndpermanentar.35

The groupwhichengagedmostactivelyn thenationalistrandof imperialismndcontributed ostefficientlyo the businessman'sconfusion f imperialismithnationalism,ere he governmentffi-35 The slogan "above the parties"has been repeated again and again in the courseof the German imperialist movement. All Leagues, societies and groups propagatingoverseas expansion pretended to direct their appeals to "men of all parties," to "standfar removed from the strife of parties and representonly a national purpose"-as thePresident of the Kolonialverein Hohenlohe-Langenburgput it in 1884. (See: Mary E.Townsend, Origin of Modern Colonialism. (New York)). Likewise the official historianof the Pan-German League insists on its being "above the parties; this was and is avital condition (for the League)." (See: Otto Bonhard, Ceschichte des alldeutschenVerbandes. (1920)). The first party to claim to be "above the parties" as a "Reichs-partei" was the national-liberalparty under the leadership of Ernst Bassermann. (See:Daniel Frymann (ps. for Heinrich Class), Wcnn ich der Kaiser nsaer'-PolitischeWahrheiten und Notlendigkeiten. (1st ed. 1912.)The situationin England is far more complicated, althoughthe disinterest of imperi-alist politicians in domestic politics is very marked and well known. (See for instance:Harold Nicolson, Curzon: The Last Phase. 1919-1925, (Boston-New York, 1934), p.7). More important han this, more importanteven than such beyond-parties foundationsas the Primrose League is the disturbinginfluence of imperialismupon the two-partysystem,which finally has led to the Front-Benches system. The "diminutionof the powerof opposition"in Parliament and the increasing "power of the Cabinet as against theHouse of Commons"as "chiefly attributable o Imperialism"have been noted already byHobson (op. cit., pp. 146 ff.). The working of this system has been describedby HilaireBelloc and Cecil Chesterton,The Party System. (London, 1911).

455


17/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICScials. The national state has created, its functioning depending uponthem,the civil servicesas a permanentbody of officialswho serveregard-less of classesand regardlessof government changes. Their professionalhonor and their self respect-especially in England and Germany-derived from their being servants of the nation as a whole. Theyconstituted the only class that had a direct interest in supporting thefundamental claim of the State to independence from classes andfactions. That the authority of the national state itself depends to alarge degree on the economic independenceand political neutrality ofits civil servants has become obvious in recent times when the declineof nations invariablystarted with the corruptionof its permanentser-vants and with the general conviction that these were in the pay-notof the state-but of the owning classes. At the close of the century,the owning classeshad becomedominantto a point where it was almostridiculous for a state-employeeto keep up the pretense of serving thenation. The disintegration into classes had left them somehow out-side the social body and had forced them into forming a clique of theirown. In the colonial services, they escaped the actual disintegrationof the national body. In ruling foreign peoples in far-awaycountries,they could much better feel themselves to be heroic servants of thenation, as those "whoby their serviceshad glorified the British race,"36than if they had stayed at home. The colonies were no longer simply"a vast system of outdoor relief for the upper classes" as James Millstill could correctlydescribethem; they were to become the very back-bone of British nationalismwhichfound in the dominationof far coun-tries and the rule over strange peoples the only way to serve Britishand nothing but British interests. The services actually believed that"the peculiar genius of each nation shows itself nowhere more clearlythan in their system of dealing with subject races."37

The point is that only far from England or Germanyor France, anational of these countries could be nothing but an Englishman or

36 As Lord Curzon put it at the unveiling of Lord Cromer'smemorialtablet. See:Lawrence J. Zetland, Lord Cromer, (1932), p. 362.37 In the words of Sir Hesketh Bell, former governor of Uganda, NorthernNigeria etc. See: Foreign Colonial Administrationin the Far East, (1928), Part I, p.300.The same sentimentsprevailed in the Dutch colonial services. "The highest task, thetask without precedent is that which awaits the East Indian Civil Service official . . . itshould be consideredas the highesthonor to serve in its ranks . . . the select body whichfulfills the missionof Holland overseas." See: De Kat Angelino, Colonial Policy (Chi-cago, 1931), Vol II, p. 129.

456


18/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMGermanor Frenchman.Within his owncountryhe was so entangledin economic nterestsor socialloyalties hat he felt actuallyclosertoa member f his classin a foreigncountry han to a manof anotherclass in his own. Expansion ave nationalism new leaseon life andthereforewas acceptedas an instrumentof nationalpolitics. Thisshows n howdesperate statetheEuropeanountriesoundthemselvesbeforethe start of imperialism;ow fragiletheir institutionshad be-come;howoutdated heirsocialsystemproved n the faceof the grow-ing capacityof man to produce. The meansfor preservationweredesperateoo; and in the end, the remedyhas provedworsethan theevil which, ncidentally,t did not cure.

IIIChauvinismnd the BridgebetweenNationalismand Imperialism

Imperialismarriesout the declineof the nation. The more ill-fittednationsarefor the incorporationf foreignpeoples(whichcon-tradicts he constitutionof theirown body politic), all the morearethey temptedto oppress hem. In theory,there is an abyssbetweennationalism nd imperialism;n practice,t can and has beenbridged.Ideologically peaking, he bridgebetween hem is calledchauvinism.In contrast o imperialism,hauvinisms an almostnautralproductof the nationalconcept nsofaras it springsdirectly rom the old ideaof the "nationalmission." It has a logicalaffinitywithexpansionbe-cause a nation'smissionmightbe interpreted reciselyas bringing tslight to other,less fortunatepeoplesthat, for whatever easons,havemiraculouslyeenleft by historywithouta nationalmission. As long,however,as this conceptdid not developinto the ideologyof chau-vinismand remainedn the rathervague realm of nationalor evennationalisticpride,it frequently esulted n a high sense of responsi-bilityfor the welfareof backward eoples. It produced hat typeof

menwhomone could findscatteredn all the colonialservices,particu-larlythe British,whowouldtakea fatherlynterestn the peoples heywere ordered o rule and who would easily assumethe role of thedragonslayer,hereby ulfillingin a manlyfashionthe gallant idealsand dreamsof theirboyhood.3838 For a magnificentexample of this attitude. see Rudyard Kipling's tale "TheTomb of His Ancestors." The Dal's Work. (New York, 1898).

457


19/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICSThe troublewith the "nationalmission" s that it impliesa holymission, hat it presupposes kindof divineoriginof the peopleandthat it claims"chosenness."Since, by its very definition,nationaldivineelectioncan begrantedonlyto onepeople,thisconceptdestroysthe ideaof the unityof mankindwhich,basedon the divineoriginofman, s inconsistentwithanydoctrineof thedivineoriginof peoples.39Whether heexistence f peopless explainedhroughnatural nfluences(Herder) or whetherthey are considered he productof politicalorganization s in the best Frenchtradition,underno circumstancesshould heyberegardeds of divineorigin. Foronlyas longaspeoples

arerecognizedo be theproductof Man, can man remain he creationof God. Any claim to divinemission-be it the German"Wesen andem die Welt genesensoll," or the British"whiteman'sburden,"or"la missionde la Franceeternelle"or Polish Messianism-automati-callymakes he members f one people superhuman,nd the membersof all otherssub-human.

Chauvinism as beenlatentin nationalism ver since its consciousbeginningsat the end of the eighteenthcentury. For a long time,however, t was hardlyallowedto influencepracticalpoliticsand leda kindof innocentdreamexistence n the mindsof romantic ntellect-uals, preciselybecause ts trendtowardsexpansionof the nation wasin itself a hopelessaffair. Up to the era of imperialism,hauvinistschemeswouldbe judgedand condemned or their lack of realism.When Eugen Richterdenouncedworld politicsas megalomania, espokeup against his absenceof common ense,of balance,of modera-tion whichhad so far beencharacteristicf chauvinistdevicesonly.

Chauvinism,however,marked he nationalismof all imperialistsfromthe beginning. This has much to do with the fact that the su-perfluous lasseswhich n one wayor anotherwerealienated rom thenormaldestiniesof their countrymen,would discovertheir nationalfeelingsfar awayfrom the motherlandwhere he simplefact of beingthe citizenof a European ountryassumedan importancehat it hadheldnowhere lse. It was not only CecilRhodeswho detectedwhat

39 Very typical are, in this respect, the recent remarksof Adolf Hitler on the sub-ject: "God the Almighty has made our nation. By defending its very existence we aredefending His work." Speech of January 30, 1945. Quoted from Nei' York Times,January 31, 1945.

458


20/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMa "rareand lovely virtue" it was to be born an Englishman40 and itwas not only Carl Peters who left his country and went to Africa forthe outspoken purpose of becoming a member of a "master-race."41Chauvinism was the result of experiencesthat had severed the nationalconsciousness from the national soil, that had alienated nationalismfrom the country where the nation happened to live, that had shiftedpride and loyalty of nationals from the visible achievementsembodiedin the whole of the national world and representedby its material aswell as its spiritual aspects, to the qualities of the "soul" which everymemberthrough the accident of birth shared with every other memberof the same people. This made possible the degrading identificationof love for one's own self and love for one's nation. In the wordsof one of the last representativesof this chauvinist brand of imperial-ism, "Soul means race as seen from within, whereas race is the exteriorof the soul."42 In other words, not Germany, or France, or Englandwas the center of their pride and loyalty, but rather they themselves.Cecil Rhodes, convincedthat he came from "the first racein the world,"saw himself as the incarnation of Saxondom and expected to be re-memberedat least four thousand years,43whereas the much less luckyCarl Peters, after being dismissed from the German colonial servicesfor excessivecruelty,propagatedamong his countrymenthe developmentof Germandomto a "national race" whose incarnation he felt himselfto be.44

This inherent arrogance of all chauvinists who would think ofthemselves-not as Germans, or Englishmen, or Frenchmen-but asthe German, the Englishman, the Frenchman, made them not onlyprone to criticize their countries and countrymen according to thesingle yardstick of what this country and these countrymen owe tothem, but formed the psychologicalbasis for that stressof the "personalelement" in colonial administration which characterized imperialistsfrom the beginning and has later been transformed nto (or hidden by)

40 "If Rhodesdid not realizethe advantage f beingEnglish n blood and bonebefore he arrived n Kimberly,he learntto appreciatet there .. it seemeda rareandlovelyvirtue." . GertrudeMillin,op. cit.,p. 15.41 "Ichhattees satt unterdie Pariasgerechnetu werden,und wollteeinemHerren-volkangehoeren." uotedafter:PaulRitter,Kolonienmdeutschenchrifltum.1936).42 Alfred Rosenberg, er My3hosdes zuanzigsten ahrhtiuderts,. 22.43 Millin,op. cii., p. 346.44 CarlPeters,"Deutschtumls Rasse."In: DeutscheMonatsschrift,d. Lohmeyer.Bd. VII, April, 1905.

459


21/24

THE REVIEW OF POLITICSthe regime of experts.45 Each of these administrators,once shippedabroad for domination purposes, condemned to the "artificial life (ofa superior caste) removed from all the healthy restraint of ordinaryEuropean society,"46 could feel himself so much the incarnation ofall his country's possible virtues as in an emergency this country'smight would be compelled to back anything he personally stood for-his best or his worst, his beneficence as well as his malfeasance.

Chauvinism in countries with overseas possessions would be essen-tially a severance of national sentiments from the national territory,but not from the state (in whose services more often than not theimperialists could be found). Chauvinism in those countries thataspiredto continental empiresand had no or only small overseas hold-ings was characterizedby severanceof national loyalty from the state.This was the case in the so-called pan-movements-in pan-Germanismas well as pan-Slavism-both of which originated in nationality-stateswhere the State was not even supposed to represent the sovereigntyof the people but appearedas a supra-nationalbureaucraticmachinerywhoseauthoritywas vested in the ruling houses. The oppressed peoplesof Austria-Hungary became chauvinistic before they were given achance to achieve nationhood, because the cautiously administeredminimum of national freedom given to the nationalities amounted tonothing more and nothing better than the oppression of other nation-alities. Over the exploitation of Czechs by Germans, of Slovaks byHungarians, of Ruthenians by Poles rose the structure of the supra-national state-as the supra-socialstate of the homogeneous nationswas supposed to rise over the fissures of class-struggle.

Since the dynasty put dynastic interests above all others, none ofthe numerous nationalities, not even the dominant ones, like the Ger-45 Up to the times of Nazi-imperialism, history has known only one clear-cut caseof domination in which the "personal element" was allowed complete 'freedom fromcontrol. This was the well-known case of the King of Belgium's business enterpriseinthe Belgian Congo which reducedthe native populationfrom between 20 and 40 millionsin 1890 to 8,500,000 in 1911. (Cf. Selwyn James, op. cit., p. 305.)An early insight into the importanceof the personal element in imperialist politicscan be found in Lord Cromer's letters with respect to the situationin Egypt. ". . . theworking of the whole machine depends, not on any written instrument,or, indeed, onanything which is tangible, but on the personal influence which the English ConsulGeneral can exert on the Khedive . .." (Letter to Lord Roseberry in 1886). One yearearlier in a letter to Lord Granville (a Liberal) he was still dubious "whether it wouldbe advisable to continue the presentsystemof government n Egypt" precisely because "itsworkingdepends very greatly on the judgmentand ability of a few individuals."Quotedfrom Zetland, op. cit., pp. 134, 219.46 Hobson, op. cit.. pp. 150-151.

460


22/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISM 461mansand Hungarians,couldfeel representedy it. Furthermore,nthis area of Europewhereeveryspot is a placeof mixedpopulations,the lackof political epresentationouldnotbecompensatedorthroughlove of a homogeneously opulated eritory. Most of these peopleshad neversucceededn striking uchdeeproots in their soil as thoseof WesternEurope. Nationality, herefore,wasalreadydivertedromterritoryo a certaindegreewhenit cut loose fromthe stateabsolutelyand becamea value in itself. The fact of being bom a German,aCzech,or a Slovaktook the placeof all otherloyaltiesnormal n thedevelopment f nationalstates. Used to living amongother nation-alitiesand in constantcompetitive trugglewith them,their nationalconsciousnesstselfwouldawakewiththe stressingof personalvirtuesratherthan past or presentcommonachievementswhich no bodypoliticcouldadequately epresent nd for whichno living communitycould.give adequate estimony.47

This chauvinism,wide-spreadmongthe nationalitiesn Austria-Hungary,took the mostdangerous nd aggressiveormsin those twothat had fellow-nationalsbeyondthe borderlines f the country-theGermans nd the Slavs.48 They becameadherents f expansion-notof theirowncountries utof theneighboringnes,Germany r Russia,that would bring them national redemption as a gift.49 Used tonationaloppression,heywereas willingto recognize he "mastership"

47 The Czechs are the exception that prove the rule. They were lucky to find anddeserve praise to have listened to men who, like Masaryk, consciously stressed commonhistory, common language and common spiritual achievements in order to achieve thetransformationof their people into a nation in the genuinesense of the word.48 It is a well-established fact that the pan-German aspirations of the Germanminority in Austria-Hungary were much more radical than those of the correspondinggroups in Germany proper. The "Alldeulsche Verband" complains frequently abouttheir aggressiveness,and the "exaggerations"of the Austrian movement. (Cf. Otto Bon-hard, Ceschichle des alldeutschen Verbandes, (1920), pp. 58 if.) In 1913, the All-deutsche Verein fuer die Ostmarkpublished a programwhose clear-cut aggressiveaimsat that time were almost unequaled; its main point was the "Aufrichtung eines . . .deutschen Mitteleuropaumfassenden einheitsstaatesauf arischerGrundlage . . . der.denMittelpunktdes gesamtendeutschen Lebens des Erdballs bildet und der mit allen Ger-manen-Staaten verbuendet ist." (Quoted from Eduard Pichl (alias Herwig), GeorgSchoenerer, (1938), 6 Bde. Bd. VI, 375).Russian pan-Slavists recognized very early in 1870 that the destruction of Austria-Hungary would be the best possible startingpoint of a pan-Slav federation or a pan-Slav Empire. (Cf. K. Staehlin, Geschichte Russlands von den Anfaengen bis zurGegenwrart. 923-1939. 5 Bde. Bd. IV/1, p. 282.)49 "Das deutsche Volk (in Oesterreich) sezt seine Hoffnung nur noch auf dasdeutsche Reich," said a delegate in Austria's Parliament in 1888 (See Pichl, op. cit.,V, pp. 60 if.). It is in the same vein that quite recently the Bulgarian Metropolitan ofSofia called upon "the Russian people (to) remember heir messianic mission." (From aradio broadcaston October 17, 1944, quoted from Politics, January, 1945).


23/24

462 THE REVIEW OF POLITICSof the big brother50 nd to bow underhis superiority s they werepreparedo achievenationhood t the expenseof othersandto assumeruleoverweakernationalitieslacking hegoodfortuneof a big brotherbeyondthe borderline.Their nationalism,n otherwords,was chau-vinisticfrom the verybeginningand stimulatedby dreamsof oppres-sion.51 Living in territorieswhere frontierswere not time-honoredbut had changednumerous imes, their dreamsof expansionwereunlimitedalthoughclashingwith one another.52These Slavsand theseGermanswere the first Europeanswho en masseand not in smallgroupsbecamechauvinistic.

The secretof thesuccessof thepan-movementsromwhichmodernracialimperialism as inheritedmore than from any other form ofimperialism r chauvinism,53ies in the solid mass-basis f people.Within the doublemonarchyhe peoplewerealreadyorganizedn abodycorporatehat as a rulecouldbe realizedonly after the destruc-tion of the nationalbody. Chauvinism, reatedby the dissolutionof the old trinityof people-territory-state was the naturalthoughperverted orm of theirnationalfeelings. Here weremassesat handwho had not the slightestidea of the meaningof patria,not thevaguestnotion of the responsibilityf a common imitedcommunityand no experience f politicalfreedom. They indeedwerereadyforadventureand ripe for imperialist xpansion. The chauviniststateof mind of the Germanminorities, catteredas they were all over

50 Enthusiasm and admiration for Bismarck were unbounded among pan-GermanAustrians; and Slav peoples-they already at the time of the Crimean war, had beencalled the only reliable allies of the Czar (See: Staehlin, op. cit., V, p. 35)--were onlytoo willing to help that 'die Oberhoheit des grossrussischenStammes ueber die ganzeslawische Welt zur unanfechtbaren Tatsache werde," (as Dostoyevsky once put it,(Ibid.), p. 281.)51 This is especially true for the German brand. "Nicht gleichberechtigt,"saidSchoenerer,"wollen wir werden mit jedem Juden, Bosniaker und Zigeuner. Wir wollenuns das Recht der Erstgeburtnicht rauben lassen." Pichl, op. cit., VI, pp. 355-56.52 It was upon this situation that during the last war French politicians based theirhopes of defeating German domination in Europe. "Ce qu'il faut opposer a la Con-federation germanique, c'est la Confederation slave, autrement dit le Panslavismeorganise." And: "II nous faut une revanche absolue de la race slave contre le ger-manisme."See: L. Leger, Le Panslavisme et l'intaret ranfais. (1917) It is obvious thatwe today witness an attemptedrevival of this policy with, however, much better chancesof success. Whether this actually is in support of French interests or whether Francedoes not ratherput herself between the devil and the deep sea-remains to be seen.53 Adolf Hitler has frankly recognized his indebtedness to the Austrian Pan-Germans. There is little reason to doubt his words when he says: "Ich erhielt (in Wien)die Grundlage fuer meine Weltanschauung m Grossen und eine politische Betrachtungs-weise im Kleinen, die ich spaeter nur noch im Einzelnen zu ergaenzen brauchte, diemich aber nie mehrverliess."Mein Kampf, p. 137.


24/24

IMPERIALISM,NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISMEurope, was one of the main reasons that German imperialismchosethe continental way of expansion rather than the way of colonialacquisitions.54 The "Germansabroad" were not only easy stepping-stones for further expansion, they generated not only a comfortablesmoke-screenof the right to national self-determination,but they alsoprovided the very models for organization at home.

Chauvinism may be the condition of continental or the result ofover-seas imperialism. It is, at any rate, the only ism that preparesthe nation or the people for expansion, induces it into that greatadventure which essentially is beyond the possibilities of a nationalbody politic and lures it, under the pretext of empire-building, nto theruin of imperialism. For the only limit in space of permanent ex-pansion is destruction and its only limit in time is death.

54 For the early conceptionof colonial possessionson the continent see Ernst Hasse.Deutsche Poliik. Especially Heft 3: Deutsche Grenzpolitik, pp. 167 ff. and Heft 4:Die Zukunft des deutschen Volkstums, pp. 132 ff. (1907). The same subject was evenmore systematically dealt with by Reismann-Grosse. "Ueberseepolitik oder Festlands-politik? 1905." In: Alldeutsche Fluvschriften.No. 22.

463

arendt hannah imperialism nationalism chauvinism

Documents