The Crimes of England | Page 3

"red fluid" in defence of their culture, we
point out to you that cultured people do not employ such a literary style.
Or when you say that the Belgians were so ignorant as to think they
were being butchered when they weren't, we only wonder whether you
are so ignorant as to think you are being believed when you aren't. Thus,
for instance, when you brag about burning Venice to express your
contempt for "tourists," we cannot think much of the culture, as culture,
which supposes St. Mark's to be a thing for tourists instead of historians.
This, however, would be the least part of our unfavourable judgment.
That judgment is complete when we have read such a paragraph as this,
prominently displayed in a paper in which you specially spread
yourself: "That the Italians have a perfect knowledge of the fact that
this city of antiquities and tourists is subject, and rightly subject, to

attack and bombardment, is proved by the measures they took at the
beginning of the war to remove some of their greatest art treasures."
Now culture may or may not include the power to admire antiquities,
and to restrain oneself from the pleasure of breaking them like toys.
But culture does, presumably, include the power to think. For less
laborious intellects than your own it is generally sufficient to think
once. But if you will think twice or twenty times, it cannot but dawn on
you that there is something wrong in the reasoning by which the
placing of diamonds in a safe proves that they are "rightly subject" to a
burglar. The incessant assertion of such things can do little to spread
your superior culture; and if you say them too often people may even
begin to doubt whether you have any superior culture after all. The
earnest friend now advising you cannot but grieve at such incautious
garrulity. If you confined yourself to single words, uttered at intervals
of about a month or so, no one could possibly raise any rational
objection, or subject them to any rational criticism. In time you might
come to use whole sentences without revealing the real state of things.
Through neglect of these maxims, my dear Professor, every one of your
attacks upon England has gone wide. In pure fact they have not touched
the spot, which the real critics of England know to be a very vulnerable
spot. We have a real critic of England in Mr. Bernard Shaw, whose
name you parade but apparently cannot spell; for in the paper to which
I have referred he is called Mr. Bernhard Shaw. Perhaps you think he
and Bernhardi are the same man. But if you quoted Mr. Bernard Shaw's
statement instead of misquoting his name, you would find that his
criticism of England is exactly the opposite of your own; and naturally,
for it is a rational criticism. He does not blame England for being
against Germany. He does most definitely blame England for not being
sufficiently firmly and emphatically on the side of Russia. He is not
such a fool as to accuse Sir Edward Grey of being a fiendish
Machiavelli plotting against Germany; he accuses him of being an
amiable aristocratic stick who failed to frighten the Junkers from their
plan of war. Now, it is not in the least a question of whether we happen
to like this quality or that: Mr. Shaw, I rather fancy, would dislike such
verbose compromise more than downright plotting. It is simply the fact
that Englishmen like Grey are open to Mr. Shaw's attack and are not

open to yours. It is not true that the English were sufficiently
clearheaded or self-controlled to conspire for the destruction of
Germany. Any man who knows England, any man who hates England
as one hates a living thing, will tell you it is not true. The English may
be snobs, they may be plutocrats, they may be hypocrites, but they are
not, as a fact, plotters; and I gravely doubt whether they could be if
they wanted to. The mass of the people are perfectly incapable of
plotting at all, and if the small ring of rich people who finance our
politics were plotting for anything, it was for peace at almost any price.
Any Londoner who knows the London streets and newspapers as he
knows the Nelson column or the Inner Circle, knows that there were
men in the governing class and in the Cabinet who were literally
thirsting to defend Germany until Germany, by her own act, became
indefensible. If they said nothing in support of the tearing up of the
promise of peace to Belgium, it is simply because there was nothing to
be said.
You were the first people to talk about World-Politics; and the first
people to