the instruments of war which is itself provocative of war, it is often contended that actual war is detrimental to their interests, as it is to Capitalism in general. Sir Norman Angell states this wider issue in the following terms: —
“That Capitalism as an economic system neither needs nor benefits by war; that it cannot use successful war in the modern world as a means of disposing of the surplus of its production, acquiring new markets, increasing its profits; that, on the contrary — as the position of the victorious capitalist states after a completely victorious war abundantly demonstrated — Capitalism has suffered disastrously and been incalculably weakened by war, and that another like the last will, as enlightened Capitalists are aware, probably destroy it altogether.”[1]
Now, though war, with its revolutionary aftermath, may well seem dangerous to the capitalist system, it is open to argument whether such risks may not appear worth running in view of the alternative piling up of unsaleable surpluses which the extension and improved methods of modern capitalism involve. For though war is the most wasteful and foolish way of disposing of the actual and potential surpluses which maldistribution of income involves, it does for the time being rectify the balance between productivity and consumption and give prosperity alike to capital and labour in the uninvaded and the neutral countries. During the Great War and for a few years after when the let-down-part of Capitalism was in course of restoration, both workers and capitalists were profitably employed in most of the affected countries. There has been, of course, a terrible aftermath with an unprecedented amount of unemployment and misery. But up to the disastrous
- ↑ Preface to Peace, p. 196.
