A Century of War: Lincoln, Wilson, and Roosevelt
by
David Gordon
by David Gordon
DIGG THIS
Given this
fact, one can readily understand why unscrupulous political leaders
actively seek war: they wish to increase their own power. But
of course war, with all its appalling massacres and horrors, is
very much against the interests of the great majority of the population.
Here our problem arises: how do the political leaders manage to
enlist the general population behind their murderous crusades?
Denson
finds the answer by appealing to a well-known fact. Most people,
despite their aversion for war, are not pacifists. If they have
been attacked, they will fight back; and, once battle is joined,
matters usually get out of hand. This gives the political leaders
their opportunity. They have only to provoke an enemy into an
attack. By doing so, they will be able to rally their nation to
"defend" against an assault they have themselves instigated.
In one prime example of this tactic, Secretary of War Henry Stimson
noted in his diary for November 25, 1941, "The question was
how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of
firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves"
(p. 101). Denson discusses in detail two instances of this phenomenon:
Abraham Lincoln's attempt, knowing that this would induce an attack,
to provision Fort Sumter, and Franklin Roosevelt's aggressive
policy toward Japan, which led to the Japanese assault on Pearl
Harbor. Denson also considers in less detail Woodrow Wilson's
similar tactics toward Germany in Word War I.
The
key to Lincoln's policy toward to the states that had seceded
may be found in a passage of his First Inaugural, delivered on
March 4, 1861. Here he said that he would not initiate force against
the departed states, even though in his view they had acted illegally
in seceding. His seemingly conciliatory policy was belied by a
qualification. He said that he would not use force, except to
the extent necessary to collect the duties and imposts.
The government
of the United States depended at that time for its revenue principally
on tariffs. These operated to the disadvantage of the South, a
largely agricultural area, which had to pay high prices for imports.
Tariffs redistributed wealth from the South to the North.
Copyright ©
2008 Ludwig von Mises Institute
David
Gordon Archives
|