The War and Democracy | Page 3

the way in which that responsibility is realised
and discharged depends the future of the democratic principle, not only
in these islands, but throughout the world.
Democracy is not a mere form of government. It does not depend on
ballot boxes or franchise laws or any constitutional machinery. These
are but its trappings. Democracy is a spirit and an atmosphere, and its
essence is trust in the moral instincts of the people. A tyrant is not a
democrat, for he believes in government by force; neither is a
demagogue a democrat, for he believes in government by flattery. A
democratic country is a country where the government has confidence
in the people and the people in the government and in itself, and where
all are united in the faith that the cause of their country is not a mere
matter of individual or national self-interest, but is in harmony with the
great moral forces which rule the destinies of mankind. No form of
government is so feeble as a democracy without faith. But a democracy
armed with faith is not merely strong: it is invincible; for its cause will
live on, in defeat and disaster, in the breast of every one of its citizens.
Belgium is a living testimony to that great truth.
British Democracy has carried this principle of confidence to the
furthest possible point. Alone among the States of Europe, Great
Britain relies for her existence and for the maintenance of her

world-wide responsibilities upon the free choice of her citizens. Her
privileges are extended to all: her active obligations are forced upon
none. Trusting in the principle of individual freedom, and upon the
sound instinct and understanding of her people, she leaves it to each
citizen to make his choice whether, and in what manner, he shall serve
his country. Never have responsibilities so arduous and so urgent been
laid upon the citizens of any community: and never have the citizens
been so free to choose or to decline the burden. The world will judge
Great Britain, and judge Democracy, according to the measure of our
free response.
What is the nature of the responsibility cast upon us at this crisis?
It is threefold. It concerns the present, the past, and the future. There
are three questions which every citizen must needs ask, and try to
answer, for himself. The first and most urgent is a matter of present
decision: What is my duty here and now? The second involves a
judgment of past events: Why is it that we are at war? Are we fighting
in a just cause? The third involves an estimate of the future and of the
part which British public opinion can and should play in shaping it:
What are the issues involved in the various belligerent countries? What
should be the principles of a just settlement? How can Great Britain
best use her influence in the cause of human progress and for the
welfare of the peoples involved in the war?
It is with the second and especially with the third of these
responsibilities that this volume is concerned.
"What is the war about?" "Are we fighting in a just cause?" Every one
by now has asked himself this question, and most people have studied
some at least of the evidence, and tried to satisfy themselves as to the
answer. The Foreign Office White Paper and numberless books and
pamphlets have enlightened the public on many of the questions at
issue. Yet the fact remains that the necessity of this educative campaign
involves a confession of failure--or at least of grave neglect--on the part
of British democracy. Under our democratic constitution the people of
Great Britain have assumed the responsibility for the management of
their own affairs. One great department of those affairs, the most vital

of all, they and their representatives have systematically neglected.
Deeply engaged and interested in domestic problems, they have left the
control of their foreign relations in the hands of expert advisers. And so
it was with something like stupefaction that they discovered, one day in
August, that they were called upon to honour the obligations contracted
in their name.
There has been no desire to evade those obligations. But there has been
a very real desire to understand them, and also a fixed determination
never again to allow such a lack of contact, on vital issues, between the
mind of the people and the activities of their ministers.
But no mere changes in the machinery of democratic control can avail
to save the people from the consequences of their own ignorance and
neglect. There is only one way in which we can achieve full
Democracy in this country, and that is through Education.
In the sphere of domestic affairs, particularly in connection with social
and industrial questions,