War and the Workers. Reflections on the Eastern Crisis
The world has not changed much since 1914. The League of Nations, after innumberable conferences, and in spite of the Pacts and Covenants and solemn pledges ol statesmen and the enthusiastic support of millions of well-meaning men and women of all nations, has not stopped war, any more than it stopped the preparations for war. The conflict between China and Japan shows up the same forces struggling for lordship as did the Great War, the same rivalries between the sections of the capitalist class, and the same readiness to destroy the lives and health of the toilers in the interests of their masters.
The war in the East is 1914 over again, with the same diplomatic deceptions and militaristic propaganda, the same subordination of lives to profit, and the same swallowing of lies by a working class nourished on the illusions of ignorant and credulous “Labour” leaders.
It is interesting to glance at the newspaper accounts of the origin and course of the dispute. In the middle of January a Chinese “mob” attacked some Japanese monks in Shanghai. A Japanese “mob” retaliated by setting fire to a Chinese towel factory and by attacking Chinese policemen. (With recollections of the use authorities have often made of seemingly spontaneous disorders, we may well wonder to what extent the acts of these mobs were condoned, if not instigated, by the Governments.) The Japanese Government then presented a demand for apologies and amends, and at the same time sent warships, marines and aircraft to Shanghai—protesting meanwhile against the suggestion that they had any but peaceful intentions. The Chinese Mayor of Greater Shanghai agreed to the demands of Japan, but the latter proceeded with the landing of forces “to protect Japanese nationals.” The Chinese resisted, and fighting began. So far there was no formal declaration of war, the mutual butchery being still on a “friendly” basis. Japanese aeroplanes dropped bombs on railways and caused loss of life and property to Chinese civilians. China appealed to the League of Nations, and the British and American Governments protested against the violation by Japan of the neutrality of the International Settlement at Shanghai. Japanese warships then shelled Nanking “without warning,” and after two weeks of feverish preparation a big Japanese offensive opened on Saturday, February 20th.
So the game goes merrily on—with the workers as pawns; workers in the armies and navies, workers in the bombing planes, and in the factories and slums on which the bombs are rained, all engaged in protecting the interests of the capitalist class. Workers so blind to their own interests that they offer themselves up willing victims.
All the secondary evils of war are to hand on this occasion. The stories of “atrocities”—as if war could be anything but an atrocity—the “dum-dum bullets” accusation, to which the Japanese delegates at the League of Nations replied, somewhat illogically, “Japan never made use of dum-dum bullets during the Russo-Japanese War. How could we use them now?” (Daily Express, February 20th). The “backward country” excuse is pleaded by Japan as justification for enforcing “order” in China, backed up with the telling jibe that the protesting powers had themselves played the same role in China in the past (Daily Express, February 20th). Diplomatic evasions are used by Japan in a crude way that rather shocks the more polished liars who serve the Western Governments. Japan, sending 10,000 reinforcements to Shanghai, assured the U.S.A. Government point blank that no such force was being sent (Daily Herald, February 5th). When the troops which were “not being sent” actually arrived, the U.S.A. Ambassador at Tokyo informed the Japanese Foreign Minister that he was unable any longer to believe statements made by Japan. To this the Japs replied that they had to lie in order to prevent the Chinese from finding out, although it was the Chinese who first reported the despatch of the troops !
In 1932, as of old, the capitalists of the world rush to supply the weapons of destruction to both sides—at a profit—and the shares of armament firms are rising. The Daily Herald (February 10th) showed that war material had been pouring into Japan and China from manufacturers in Great Britain, Norway, Germany, the U.S.A., and elsewhere. British firms were supplying both sides, and when the Board of Trade were asked if it was proposed to place an embargo on this traffic, they replied that to do so would be an “unfriendly act” (Daily Herald, February 10th).
The Governments of the world and the newspapers have taken sides in the dispute according to their interests and prejudices. Several Governments have sought to restrain the Japanese forces, for the reason disclosed by The Times in a somewhat threatening article : —
“Other countries than Japan have immense vested interests in the great Chinese trading centre (Shanghai), and they will not remain inactive while a privileged position is created by violence.” (“Times,” 3rd February.)
The truth is, of course, that Japan the other Powers are interested in China because their capitalists have money invested in manufacturing and trading concerns on Chinese soil. Japan has little coal and iron within her own boundaries, and is attempting to make up the deficiency by developing the coal and iron deposits of Manchuria and the region near Hankow. It has been estimated that Japanese capitalists have £200,000,000 invested in Manchuria, hence the determination to control this and neighbouring Chinese provinces. For the same reason the British, American, French and other capitalists, with hundreds of millions of pounds invested in Shanghai, the Yangtze valley and elsewhere, are anxious to prevent Japan from furthering her interests in China at their expense.
But let there be no mistake about the real nature of the privilege for which the Powers are struggling. It is not simply for the right to work coal and iron deposits, or to develop trade, that they are prepared to go to war. Neither the Japanese nor any other capitalist has an urge to go hewing coal in a Manchurian mine. What moves the capitalists is the lust to exploit the workers. What they want is “surplus value,” the difference between the value of the goods produced by the workers and their cost of maintenance, in the form of wages. To protect their hold on the means of production ami distribution, and to gain new markets and areas for raw material, the ruling class will stick at nothing. In the light of this over-ruling purpose, war to them, appears as a regrettable necessity.
With this in mind, we can see how logical it would be for the workers of all countries to unite against their exploiters and refuse to support their interests either in peace or m war. By the same standard we can see how utterly the “Labour” leaders fail to give expression to working-class interests. Instead of urging the workers of all countries, including both Japan and China, to unite against capitalism and capitalist war-makers, we see the British Labour Party protesting against Japanese aggression ! As if the lust of the Japanese capitalist to rob the workers of China and Japan is in any way different from the lust of the British, the Chinese, or the American capitalist ! Thus the Daily Herald, in an editorial (February 18th), charges Japan with having committed “outrages,” and demands that “Japan must stop.” Mr. Lansbury, leader of the Parliamentary Labour Party, in an interview given to the Daily Herald (February 2nd), asks the European Powers and the U.S.A. (which means, in fact, ihe capitalist Governments of those countries) to—
“make it plain that they will boycott Japan unless it acts reasonably.”
He urges : —
“not a farthing for the Japanese, not a gun, not a stroke of business with them until they arc prepared to sit down round a table and discuss their grievances peaceably.”
Mr. Lansbury says not a word about the real object of capitalist enterprise—the exploitation of the workers. All he asks is that they discuss their “grievances” reasonably. Not a word about the Chinese Government’s brutal suppression of trade unions and other workers’ organisations, and the horrible conditions in Chinese factories and mines—brutality and misery paralleled in Japan, U.S.A., the British Empire, and in all capitalist countries. Mr. Lansbury and the Labour Party are content to demand that the other capitalist Powers shall exert pressure to restrain Japanese capitalist interests, and to secure the discussion at a round table of the wav in which the fruits of the exploitation of the Chinese workers are to be divided up between Chinese, Japanese, and other capitalists.
Thus the Labour Party repeats its crime of 1914. Instead of profiting from the experiences of that war, they have forgotten everything and learned nothing. It is “poor little Belgium” over again, with China in the leading role.
From information published in the Press Bulletin of the “Labour and Socialist International” (January 23rd), the largest Chinese trade union, the “General Union of Mechanics,” with a membership of over 100,000, shares the illusions of its European Labour associates. This organisation issued a letter of protest against the aggression of Japan in taking possession of—
“our territories in Manchuria and Mongolia. . . . thus threatening, as did Germany, under the Kaiser, the freedom of the world.”
Of course, “our territories in Manchuria and Mongolia” belong to the Chinese workers no more than did the territory of Germany and England in 1914 belong to the English and German workers, or than it does to-day in the “free world” for which millions threw away their lives. It is of minor importance to the workers whether their exploitation goes on under one flag or another. Any resistance to aggression should be directed, not against the foreign enemies of their capitalist exploiters, but at home against the capitalists of each country; that is, against those who keep the workers out of possession of the means of life. Fighting the foreigner is playing the capitalist game.
There are, no doubt, other workers in China who realise this truth, in spite of the bad advice given to them by their Labour leaders. From Japan comes news that the “National Industrial and Agricultural Working Masses Party,” right at the commencement of the dispute, took a “definite anti-war attitude.” Attempts were made to carry on active opposition to the war, but were suppressed by the police, who further suppressed a conference called to protest against the actions of the Japanese Government.
The Socialist Party of Great Britain, which from 1914 to 1918 maintained its attitude of Socialist opposition to the War, urges the workers in all countries to recognise the interest they have in common against the capitalists. “National defence,” “national independence,” “protection of national interests” are phrases used by capitalists to set the workers against each other in the interests solely of the national groups of capitalists. There is not at stake here any issue justifying the shedding of working-class blood.
H.