,libraries47       ,,the ,,morals ,,of  
,,economic ,,internationalism    ,by    
,j4 ,a4 ,,hobson  ,,author ,,of ,,the   
,,industrial ,,system1 ,,the ,,evolution
 ,,of ,,modern ,,capitalism1 ,,work     
,,and ,,wealth1 ,,etc4    ,,boston ,,and
 ,,new ,,york ,,houghton ,,mifflin      
,,company ,the ,riverside ,press        
,cambridge #aibj  ,,copyright1 #aibj1   
,,by ,,the ,,regents ,,of ,,the         
,,university ,,of ,,california  ,,all   
,,rights ,,reserved     ,,barbara       
,,weinstock ,,lectures ,,on ,,the       
,,morals ,,of ,,trade  ,this series will
 contain essays by representative       
scholars and men of affairs dealing with
 the various phases of the moral law in 
its bearing on business life under the  
new economic order1 first delivered at  
the ,university of ,california on the   
,weinstock foundation4     ,,the        
,,morals ,,of ,,economic                
,,internationalism   ,it ought not to be
 the case that there is one standard of 
morality for individuals in their       

relations with one another1 a different 
and a slighter standard for             
corporations1 and a third and still     
slighter standard for nations4 ,for1    
after all1 what are corporations but    
groupings of individuals for ends which 
in the last resort are personal ends8   
,and what are nations but wider1 closer1
 and more lasting unions of persons for 
the attainment of the end they have in  
common1 i4e41 the commonwealth4 ,yet we 
are well aware that the accepted and    
operative standards of morality differ  
widely in the three spheres of conduct4 
,if a soul is imputed at all to a       
corporation1 it is a leather soul1 not  
easily penetrable to the probings of    
pity or compunction1 and emitting much  
less of the milk of human kindness than 
do the separate souls of its directors  
and stockholders in their ordinary human
 relations4 ,there is a sharp           
recognition of this inferior moral      
make-up of a corporation in the attitude
 of ordinary men and women1 who1        

scrupulously honest in their dealings   
with one another1 slide almost          
unconsciously to an altogether lower    
level in dealing with a railroad or     
insurance company4 ,this attitude is    
due1 no doubt1 partly to a resentment of
 the oppressive power which great       
corporations are believed to exercise1  
evoking a desire to get a bit of your   
own back2 partly to a feeling that any  
slight injury to1 or even fraud         
perpetrated on1 a corporation will be so
 distributed as to inflict no           
appreciable harm on any individual      
stockholder4 ,but largely it is the     
result of a failure to envisage a       
corporation as a moral being at all1 to 
whom one owes obligations4 ,corporations
 are in a sense moral monsters2 we say  
they behave as such and we are disposed 
to treat them as such4  ,the standard of
 international morality1 particularly in
 matters of commercial intercourse1 is  
on a still lower level4 ,if1 indeed1 one
 were to press the theoretic issue1     

whether a state or a nation is a morally
 independent being1 or whether it is in 
some sense or degree a member of what   
may be called an incipient society of   
states or nations1 nearly every one     
would sustain the latter view4 ,we      
should be reminded that there was such a
 thing as international law1 however    
imperfect its sanctions might be1 and   
that treaties1 alliances1 and other     
agreements between nations implied the  
recognition of some moral obligation4   
,how weak this interstate morality is   
appears not merely from the fact that   
under strong temptation governments     
repudiate their most express and solemn 
agreements--to that temptation          
individuals sometimes yield in their    
dealings with one another--but also from
 the nature of the defence which they   
make of such repudiation4 ,the plea of  
state necessity1 which ,germany made for
 the violation of the neutrality of     
,belgium1 and which was stretched to    
cover the brutal mishandling of the     

,belgian people1 is unfortunately but an
 extreme instance of conduct to which   
every state has had recourse at times1  
and--still more significant--which every
 state defends by adducing the same     
maxim1 salus reipublic suprema lex4     
,here is the sharpest distinction       
between individual and national         
morality4 ,there are certain deeds which
 a good and honorable man would not do  
even to save his life2 there are no     
deeds1 which it is admitted that a      
statesman1 acting on behalf of his      
country1 may not do to save that        
country4 ,it is foolish to try to shirk 
this disconcerting admission4 ,the      
,machiavellian doctrine of reason of    
state is1 in the last resort1 the       
accepted standard of national conduct4  
,this does not signify that a nation and
 its government admit no obligation to  
fulfil their promises1 or even          
voluntarily to perform good offices for 
other nations1 but that there is always 
implied the reservation that the        

necessity1 or1 shall we say1 the vital  
interests1 of the nation override1      
cancel1 and nullify all such            
obligations4 ,and when necessity is     
stretched to cover any vital interest or
 urgent need1 it is easy to recognize on
 what a slippery slope such             
international morality reposes4         
,international morality is impaired1    
however1 not only by this feeble sense  
of mutual obligation1 but by the still  
more injurious assumption of conflicting
 interests between nations4 ,nations are
 represented not merely as              
self-centered1 independent moral        
systems1 but as1 in some degree1        
mutually repellent systems4 ,this notion
 is partly the product of the false     
patriotic teaching of our schools and   
press1 which seek to feed our sense of  
national unity more upon exclusive than 
inclusive sentiments4 ,nations are      
represented as rivals and competitors in
 some struggle for power1 or greatness1 
or prestige1 instead of as coperators in

 the general advance of civilization4   
,this presumption of opposing interests 
is1 of course1 more strongly marked in  
the presentation of commercial relations
 than in any other4 ,putting the issue  
roughly1 but with substantial truth1 the
 generally accepted image of            
international trade is one in which a   
number of trading communities1 as1 for  
instance1 the ,united ,states1 ,britain1
 ,germany1 ,france1 ,japan1 etc41 are   
engaged in striving1 each to win for    
itself1 and at the expense of the       
others1 the largest possible share of a 
strictly limited objective--the world   
market4  ,now there are three fatal     
flaws in this image4 ,first comes the   
false presentation of the ,united       
,states1 ,britain1 ,germany1 and other  
political beings in the capacity of     
trading firms4 ,so far as world or      
international trade is rightly presented
 as a competitive process1 that         
competition takes place1 not between    
,america1 ,britain1 ,germany1 but       

between a number of separate ,american1 
,british1 ,german firms4 ,the immediate 
interests of these firms are not        
directed along political lines4         
,generally speaking1 the closer rivalry 
is between firms belonging to the same  
nation and conducting their business    
upon closely similar conditions4 ,one   
,lancashire cotton exporter competes    
much more closely with other ,lancashire
 exporters than he does with ,german1   
,american1 or ,japanese exporters of    
similar goods4 ,so it is everywhere1    
save in the exceptional times and       
circumstances in which governments      
themselves take over the regulation and 
conduct of foreign trade4  ,for certain 
purposes it is1 no doubt1 convenient to 
have balances and analyses of foreign   
trade presented separately1 so as to    
show the volumes and values of different
 goods which pass from the members of   
one nation to those of another4 ,but the
 imputation of political significance to
 these statistics1 taken either in      

aggregate or in relation to separate    
countries1 as if they were themselves   
indices of public gain or public loss1  
has most injurious reactions upon the   
intelligent understanding of commerce4  
,the second flaw is the assumption of a 
limited amount of market1 which carries 
with it the assumption that the groups  
of traders1 gathered under their        
national flags1 are engaged in a        
conflict in which they are entitled to  
embroil their governments4 ,by tariff   
bargaining and by all sorts of          
diplomatic weapons each government is   
called upon to assist its nationals and 
to cripple or exclude the nationals of  
other states4 ,now it is untrue that the
 world market is strictly limited1 with 
the consequence that every advance of   
one group of traders is at the expense  
of another group4 ,the world market is  
indefinitely expansible1 and is always  
expanding2 and commercial experience    
shows that the rapid expansion of the   
overseas trade of one country does not  

preclude the expansion of trade of other
 countries4 ,i do not1 of course1 deny  
that at a particular time and in        
relation to some particular lucrative   
opportunity1 genuine clashes of         
interests may arise4 ,but1 envisaging   
the whole range of foreign commerce1 one
 feels that the image of it as a prize  
which governments can1 and ought to win 
for their traders at the expense of the 
traders supported by other governments1 
has been a most fertile source of       
international misunderstanding4         
,perhaps the worst of the three         
fallacies1 and in a sense the           
deepest-rooted1 is the concept of export
 trade as of more value than import     
trade4 ,this is often traced back to the
 time when governments deemed it        
desirable to accumulate in their        
countries treasures of gold and silver  
and to this end encouraged the sale of  
goods abroad and discouraged the payment
 for them in foreign goods4 ,there are1 
however1 modern supporters of the       

assumption that it is more important to 
sell than to buy1 although the money    
received for sales has no other         
significance or value than its power to 
buy1 and trade can only be imaged truly 
as an exchange of goods for goods in    
which the processes of selling and of   
buying are complementary4  ,the economic
 explanation of the double falsehood of 
dividing buying from selling and of     
imputing a higher value to the latter   
process1 lies beyond the scope of this  
address4 ,but the injuries resulting    
from the superior pressure upon         
governments of organized bodies of      
producers and merchants who have things 
to sell1 to the detriment of the        
consuming public who have only buying   
needs1 are too grave matters to be      
neglected here4 ,it is not too much to  
say that1 if the interests of consumers 
and the interests of producers weighed  
equally in the eyes of governments1 as  
they should1 the strongest of all       
obstacles to a peaceful1 harmonious     

society of nations would be overcome4   
,for the suspicions1 jealousies1 and    
hostilities of nations are inspired more
 by the tendency of groups of producers 
to misrepresent their private interests 
as the good of their respective         
countries than by any other single      
circumstance4  ,this analysis has seemed
 necessary in order to clear away the   
intellectual and moral fogs which       
prevent a true realization of the       
economic1 and therefore the moral1      
interdependence of nations4 ,for every  
bond of economic interest involves moral
 obligation also4 ,if it is true that   
the fabric of commercial relations is   
all the time being knit closer between  
the different peoples of the earth1 then
 the moral isolation and the antagonism 
which earlier statecraft inculcated1 and
 which still obsess so many minds1 must 
be dissipated and give place to active  
sentiments of human coperation4  ,there 
were1 indeed1 those who thought that    
already the web of commerce and finance 

had been woven strong enough to save    
nations from the calamity of war4 ,their
 miscalculation arose from              
underestimating the power over the mind 
and the passions of that false image of 
trade4 ,but because the modern          
internationalism of commerce and finance
 did not prove strong enough to stem the
 full and sudden tide of war passions   
fed from the barbarous traditions of a  
dateless past1 we ought not to disparage
 the potentiality of this               
internationalism as the foundation of a 
new and better world order4 ,for1 though
 those bonds of common interest broke   
under the strain of war1 the confusion  
in which we find ourselves without them 
is itself a terrible testimony to their 
value4 ,the enforced sundering of       
ordinary trade relations between members
 of different countries has taught two  
clear lessons4 ,the first is this3 that 
hardly any civilized nation is or can be
 economically independent in respect to 
essential supplies or industries4 ,there

 is no ,european country that does not  
rely for the subsistence of its         
inhabitants upon supplies of goods and  
raw materials from foreign lands1 mostly
 from countries outside the ,european   
continent4 ,while ,britain both leaned  
more heavily upon other countries and   
contributed most to other countries from
 her surplus produce1 every other       
country1 in larger or less degree--great
 countries such as ,france1 ,germany1   
,austria1 ,italy1 little ones like      
,belgium1 ,holland1 ,switzerland1       
,scandinavia1 and ,denmark--were        
increasingly dependent upon outside     
sources for their livelihood4 ,it is    
true that there remained a very few     
great backward countries1 such as       
,russia and ,china1 where a life of     
economic isolation was possible had they
 been willing to dispense with the      
higher products of civilized industry   
and with the fertilizing streams of     
capital without which progress is       
impossible4 ,no civilized ,european     

country was self-sufficing in the vital 
factors of a productive and progressive 
civilization--food1 raw materials1      
machinery1 fuel1 transport1 finance1 and
 adequate supplies of skilled labor4    
,the services which countries near or   
distant rendered to one another were    
becoming constantly more numerous1 more 
complex1 and more urgent4 ,the          
obstructions and stoppages of war has   
driven home the lesson painfully to the 
inhabitants of every ,european country1 
belligerent or neutral4 ,what lesson8   
,that we have erred in permitting       
ourselves to grow dependent on the      
industry1 goodwill1 and intercourse of  
other nations1 and that we should       
endeavor to hark back to an earlier     
economic state of national independence8
 ,well1 there are even in ,britain      
rhetorical politicians who speak of the 
necessity of retaining all key or       
essential industries within their       
national control--who propose to reverse
 the tide of social evolution by some   

flimsy apparatus of tariffs and         
subsidies4 ,this is impossible4 ,the war
 has left the ,european peoples1 one and
 all1 more than ever dependent for their
 economic livelihood upon one another1  
and upon the material resources and     
labor of other continents4  ,the second 
lesson is that1 other things equal1 it  
is the most highly civilized and highly 
developed countries that are the most   
dependent upon others4 ,in a word1 there
 is a presumption that economic         
internationalism is an essential feature
 of civilization4  ,you will observe    
that so far ,i have made no mention of  
,america4 ,and yet all that ,i have been
 saying is1 in a sense1 introductory to 
the unique problem presented by this    
country4 ,america is the only civilized 
country in the world that is virtually  
self-sufficing as regards the primary   
requirements of her economic life4 ,her 
soil can and does supply nearly all her 
essential foods1 her natural resources  
include the materials of her great      

textile1 metal1 and other basic         
industries1 the heat1 light1            
electricity1 and other forms of natural 
energy which satisfy her national needs4
 ,she has access to skilled and         
unskilled labor sufficient to develop   
and utilize all these natural resources4
 ,most of her pre-war imports might be  
placed under four heads3 articles of    
luxury and taste in dress1 jewelry1     
etc42 certain chemical and other        
scientific products2 supplementary      
supplies of some foods and materials1   
from other countries of the ,american   
continent1 for manufactures and export  
trade2 and a number of tropical         
products1 almost all of subsidiary      
significance in the production and      
consumption of the ,american people4    
,this slight dependence upon foreign    
countries has been considerably reduced 
as the result of war exigency4 ,the art 
products of ,france and ,italy1 the fine
 textile goods from ,britain1 the       
dye-stuffs1 drugs1 and scientific       

instruments from ,germany--in a word1   
the great bulk of the imports from      
,europe1 have either been cut out of    
,american consumption or have been      
displaced1 temporarily1 at any rate1 by 
home products4 ,for several generations 
the main dependence of ,america upon    
,europe and particularly upon ,britain  
was for capital to supplement home      
savings that she might make use of the  
stream of immigrant labor in the        
development of her great continent4     
,this dependence upon ,european capital1
 of greatly diminishing importance      
during the last three decades has1 of   
course1 now been reversed1 and the      
principal ,european countries are heavy 
debtors to the ,united ,states4  ,one   
other important economic lesson war     
experience has taught1 viz41 the vast   
capacity for increased productivity     
which every industrial nation possesses1
 and ,america especially1 in better     
organization and fuller utilization of  
natural and human resources4 ,it is     

evident that1 far from the age of great 
inventions and of mechanical development
 drawing to a close1 we are in the      
actual process of reaching new          
discoveries in wealth production1 which 
will make the most famous advances of   
the nineteenth century mean by          
comparison4 ,but without drawing upon a 
speculative future1 a better and more   
systematic application of the knowledge 
which has been already tested--enlarged 
production1 elimination of waste1 and   
improved business methods--is clearly   
capable of doubling or trebling the     
output of material wealth without       
involving any excessive strain upon     
human effort4  ,here1 as in other ways1 
,america stands in a place of unique    
vantage by reason of the magnitude and  
variety of her national resources1 and  
the vigor and enterprise of her people4 
,it is evident that1 if any country can 
afford to stand alone in full economic  
self-sufficiency1 that country is       
,america4 ,it is feasible for ,america  

to contract within very narrow limits   
her commercial and political relations  
with the rest of the world1 or1 if she  
chooses1 to confine her commercial and  
financial relations to this continent1  
leaving the old world to get on by      
itself as well as it can4 ,this view is1
 indeed1 conformable with the main      
tradition of ,american history up to the
 close of the last century4 ,even the   
,spanish war1 with its sequel of        
imperialism1 was but a slight and       
reparable breach in this tradition4 ,the
 world war seems at first sight to have 
plunged ,america deeper into the        
,european trough4 ,but even this more   
serious committal is not irretrievable4 
,she can step back to the doctrine and  
policy of ',america for ,americans' and 
refuse any organic contact with a       
troublesome1 a quarrelsome and1 as it   
seems1 a ruined ,europe4 ,america's     
economic status in ,europe is not such  
as to preclude her taking this course4  
,i may be reminded that the indebtedness

 of ,europe to ,america is a solid      
economic bond1 for it cannot be presumed
 that ,america would pursue the policy  
of liberalism so far as to cancel this  
debt4 ,but1 large as is this credit1 it 
need not constitute a strong or a       
lasting bond of commerce1 compelling    
,america to receive such large imports  
of goods from ,europe as materially to  
impair her self-sufficiency4 ,a large   
and increasing part of the interest and 
capital of this indebtedness would be   
defrayed by the expenditure of ,american
 travellers and residents in ,europe1   
while the importation of objects of art 
and luxury would not interfere          
appreciably with the policy of economic 
nationalism4 ,if ,america decides to go 
no further in this business1 it will not
 be too late to draw out4  ,the choice  
before her is momentous4 ,so far ,i have
 presented it as an economic problem4   
,it is also quite evidently a political 
and moral problem of the first          
significance1 for economic national     

self-sufficiency is a phase of political
 independence4 ,but business and        
politics alike belong to the wider art  
of human conduct2 and the choice before 
,america is primarily a moral choice4   
,by saying this ,i do not wish to appear
 to prejudge the issue4 ,i have always  
felt that a stronger case could be made 
for the political and economic isolation
 of ,america than for that of any other 
country1 partly because1 as ,i have     
said1 she has within her political      
domain all the resources of national    
well-being2 partly1 also1 because it is 
of supreme importance that the great    
experiment of democracy should not be   
unduly hampered by excessive inpourings 
of ill-assimilable foreign blood1 and by
 dangerous contacts with obsolete or    
inapplicable ,european institutions4 ,as
 an economist1 steeped in the principles
 of ,cobden and his ,british school of  
liberals1 my predilections 7prejudices  
if you will7 have always been in favor  
of the freest possible movement1 alike  

of trade and persons1 and against fiscal
 protection and immigrant restrictions4 
,but1 when confronted with the special  
situation of ,america1 ,i have          
recognized that a reasoned argument     
could be addressed to prove that the    
economy of national security and        
progress for this country lay along the 
lines of political1 economic and        
defensive self-containedness4 ,i am     
convinced that many must be led to      
support this policy1 not on grounds of  
selfishness1 because they desire to     
conserve for ,america alone her great   
opportunities1 and not mainly from fear1
 lest ,america should be embroiled again
 in the dangerous quarrels of distant   
,european nations1 but because they are 
animated by that pure desire1 which has 
inspired so many generations of         
high-minded ,americans1 that ,american  
democracy should grow to its full       
stature by its own unaided efforts and  
save the world by its example4  ,i wish 
to give due respect to the sincerity of 

this conviction the more because ,i wish
 to lay before you some grounds for     
questioning its ultimate validity4 ,it  
is no problem of abstract politics or   
ethics with which ,i here confront your 
minds1 but one of concrete and immediate
 urgency4 ,distinctively economic in its
 substance1 it brings right into the    
daylight the hitherto obscure issue of  
the duty of nations as members of an    
actual or potential society of nations4 
,as a result of the destruction of war a
 large part of ,europe lies today in    
economic ruin4 ,by that ,i do not only1 
or chiefly1 refer to the material havoc 
wrought by the direct operations of war 
in ,france1 ,belgium1 ,poland1 ,servia1 
and elsewhere4 ,i mean the imminent     
starvation which this winter awaits     
large populations of those and other    
countries1 both our allies and our late 
enemies1 and the misery and anarchy     
arising from their utter inability to   
resume the ordinary processes of        
productive industry4 ,it is not only    

food and clothing but raw materials1    
tools1 machinery1 transport1 and fuel   
that are lacking over a large part of   
the ,european continent4 ,if they are   
left to their own unaided resources1    
millions of these people1 especially in 
,russia1 ,poland1 ,austria1 and sections
 of the late ,turkish ,empire1 will     
perish4 ,they cannot feed themselves4   
,the land remains1 but large tracts of  
it have been untilled2 large numbers of 
the peasantry have fallen in the war1 or
 are wandering as disbanded soldiers1   
far from home2 the women and the aged   
and the children1 underfed and broken in
 health and spirit1 are utterly unequal 
to the task of growing the food for     
their livelihood4 ,the factories and    
workshops are idle or are ill-equipped1 
for materials1 tools1 and fuel are      
everywhere lacking2 unemployment holds  
large industrial populations in         
destitution and despair4 ,even where    
plant and materials are present1 the    
physical strength of the workers is so  

let down that efficient productivity is 
impossible4 ,even in countries that are 
not war-broken1 the blockade1 and the   
long stoppage of normal commerce1 have  
caused great scarcity of many important 
foods and materials1 and famine prices  
bring grievous suffering to the poorer  
classes4 ,britain alone among the       
belligerent countries is not in         
immediate distress1 but only because she
 has had larger outside resources and   
larger borrowing powers on which to     
draw4 ,even the few neutral nations     
which are said to have profited by war  
are severely crippled by the lack of    
some essentials of their economic life4 
,all in different degrees are economic  
victims of the havoc and the waste of   
war4 ,it is not ,central ,europe only1  
together with large parts of the        
,balkans1 of ,russia1 and of ,eastern   
,asia1 that is in this evil plight4     
,europe as a whole is unprovided with   
the foodstuffs with which to feed its   
population and the raw materials with   

which to furnish employment4 ,if there  
were prevailing among them the best of  
wills and of coperative arrangements1   
the ,european peoples could not keep    
themselves alive this winter and make   
any substantial advance towards         
reparation of the damage of war and     
industrial recovery4 ,if human          
coperation is to save these weak and    
desperate peoples1 it must be a         
coperation of more than the nations of  
,europe4 ,only by the better provided   
nations of the world coming to the      
rescue can the worse-provided nations   
survive and recover4 ,it would be       
foolish to mince words in so grave an   
issue4 ,we are all acquainted with the  
main facts of the world situation and   
are familiar with the place which       
,america occupies in it as the chief    
repository of those surpluses of foods1 
materials1 and manufactured goods which 
,europe needs so sorely4 ,the term      
'surplus' is1 of course1 somewhat       
deceptive4 ,surplus depends largely on  

home consumption1 itself an elastic     
condition4 ,but for practical purposes  
we may take the exportable surplus to   
mean the product which remains for sale 
abroad after the normal wants of the    
home population are supplied4 ,it might 
mean something more1 viz41 that the home
 population would voluntarily keep down 
or reduce their consumption1 in order   
that more might be available for export4
 ,the ,american people actually did     
exercise this self-denying ordinance to 
an appreciable extent1 in order to help 
win the war4 ,are they willing to do the
 same in order to help the world in a   
distress as dire as war itself8  ,it may
 be said1 perhaps truly1 that this      
presumes that ,america is in the peace  
as much as she was in the war1 that she 
has decided to link her destiny closely 
and lastingly with that of ,europe1 that
 she definitely accepts a proffered     
place as a member of the society of     
nations1 and under circumstances which  
make an immediate call upon her economic

 and financial resources in a manner in 
which there can be no direct            
reciprocity4  ,now it may reasonably be 
urged that ,america is not prepared for 
such a committal1 that such obligations 
as she undertook1 as an associated      
power1 in the conduct of the war1       
terminate with the making of peace2 and 
that1 as regards the future structure of
 international relations1 she proposes  
to preserve full freedom to coperate    
with other nations1 or to stand alone1  
according to her estimate of each       
occasion4  ,it is here convenient to    
treat separately two issues which are   
none the less closely related1 viz41 the
 issue of international coperation for  
the immediate work of the salvage and   
restoration of ,europe1 and the issue of
 a permanent coperation or agreement for
 the equitable use of the economic      
resources of the world4 ,the urgency for
 ,europe of the first issue has been    
already indicated4 ,if the weaker       
,european nations are left to the       

ordinary play of economic laws for the  
supplies they need1 they must lapse into
 starvation and social anarchy4 ,a      
lifting of the war blockades and        
embargoes hardly helps them4 ,the formal
 restoration of free commerce is little 
better than a mockery to those who lack 
the power to buy and sell4 ,free        
commerce would simply mean that         
,america's surplus1 the food1 materials1
 and manufactured goods she has to sell 
abroad1 would be purchased exclusively  
by those more prosperous foreigners who 
have the means to pay in money1 or in   
export goods available for credit       
purposes4 ,now the populations and the  
governments of these broken countries   
have neither money nor goods in hand4   
,the return of peace has left them with 
depleted purses and empty stores4 ,if   
the purchase and consumption of the     
available surplus of foods1 materials1  
and manufactures from ,america and other
 prosperous countries is distributed    
according to the separate powers of     

purchase in the ,european countries1 the
 countries and the classes of population
 which are least in need will get all1  
those which are most in need1 nothing4  
,how can it be otherwise1 if immediate  
ability to pay is the criterion8 ,in    
ordinary times the machinery of         
international finance does tend to      
distribute surplus stocks according to  
the needs of the different nations1 for 
the production of the actual goods for  
export trade with which imports are paid
 for1 the true base of credit1 is       
continually proceeding4 ,but the war    
broke this machinery of regular         
exchange4 ,it cannot be immediately     
restored4 ,america or ,argentina cannot 
sell their surplus wheat in the ordinary
 way to ,poland1 ,austria1 ,belgium and 
other needy countries1 because1 largely 
for the very lack of these goods and    
materials1 their industries are not     
operating1 so that the goods they should
 produce1 upon which credit would be    
built1 are not forthcoming4  ,this is   

one of the most terrible of the vicious 
circles in which the war has bound the  
world4 ,the weak nations cannot buy1    
because they are not producing goods to 
sell2 they cannot produce1 because they 
cannot buy4 ,what are the strong        
nations1 those with surplus goods1 the  
transport1 and the credit1 going to do  
about it8 ,it is a question of emergency
 finance based on an emergency morality4
 ,the nations which have surpluses to   
sell abroad must not only send the goods
 but provide the credit to pay for them 
if they are to reach the peoples that   
need them most4 ,but how1 it is said1   
can you expect the business man in      
,america or any other country to perform
 such an act of charity8 ,how can you   
expect them to sell to those who have   
not credit and cannot pay1 instead of   
selling to those who have credit and can
 pay8 ,the answer is sometimes stated   
thus4 ,it is not charity you are asked  
to perform1 but such consideration for  
customers as a really intelligent sense 

of self-interest will endorse4 ,we ask  
you to put up a temporary bridge over   
the financial chasm in order to afford  
time for this restoration of the        
ordinary processes of exchange4 ,if the 
enfeebled industrial peoples can be     
furnished now with foods and materials  
they will set to work1 and in the course
 of time they will be able1 out of the  
product of their industry1 to repay your
 advances and reestablish the normal    
circle of exchange4  ,in presenting this
 course as a policy of intelligent      
self-interest1 ,i am not really         
disparaging the claims of humanity or of
 morals4 ,i am merely maintaining the   
utilitarian ethics which insist that    
morality1 the performance of human      
obligations1 is the best policy1 that   
policy which in the long run will yield 
the fullest satisfaction to social      
beings4 ,if ,i were an ,american        
exporter in control of large amounts of 
food1 it would doubtless pay me better  
personally at the present time to sell  

it to firms in ,european countries which
 have good credit1 for consumption by   
people who are in no great want4 ,as an 
individual business man1 ,i could hardly
 do otherwise with any assurance of     
financial profit4 ,i am not here        
presenting the issue as a matter of     
individual morals4 ,if the surplus of   
economic supplies is to be distributed  
according to needs1 on an emergency     
credit basis adjusted to that end1 it is
 evident that this can be done only by  
international coperation4 ,this shifts  
the moral problem from the individual to
 the nation4 ,rich nations1 or their    
governments1 are asked to assist poor   
nations by making an apportionment of   
goods and credit which the individual   
members of the rich nations1 the owners 
of the surplus1 would not make upon     
their own account4 ,the edge of this    
issue should not be blunted4 ,if the    
people and government of ,america were  
only concerned to let their individual  
citizens extort the highest prices they 

could get for their surplus in the best 
markets1 they would let ,central and    
,eastern ,europe starve4 ,if1 however1  
they also take into account the social1 
political1 and economic reactions of a  
starving ,europe upon the future of a   
world in which they will have to live as
 members of a world society which must  
grow ever closer in its physical1       
economic1 and spiritual contacts1 they  
may decide differently4 ,the issue      
arises in the highest economic sphere1  
that of finance4 ,are the nations and   
governments of the world sufficiently   
alive to the urgency of the situation to
 enter into an organization of credit   
for the emergency use of transport and  
for the distribution of foods and       
materials on a basis of proved needs8   
,the richer nations1 in proportion to   
their resources1 would appear to be     
called upon to make a present sacrifice 
for the benefit of the poorer nations in
 any such pooling of credit facilities4 
,that risk of sacrifice1 however1 need  

not be great1 and need not be felt at   
all by the individual members of rich   
nations1 provided that the hitherto     
unused resources of national credit can 
be built into a strong structure of     
mutual support4 ,if ,america were       
invited to find adequate credits for    
,italian or ,polish needs at the present
 time1 she might well hesitate4 ,but if 
a consortium of ,european governments1  
including ,britain and the richer       
neutrals1 were joint guarantors of such 
advances1 this coperative basis might   
furnish the necessary confidence4 ,it is
 not within my scope to discuss the     
various forms a financial consortium    
might take2 whether ,america1 as        
representative of the creditor nations1 
should enter such a consortium1 or      
should approach the organized credit of 
,europe in the capacity of a friendly   
uncle4 ,it must suffice here to indicate
 the moral test which this grave issue  
presents to the nations regarded as     
economic powers4  ,upon the policy      

adopted for this emergency will         
doubtless depend in large measure the   
whole future of economic                
internationalism4 ,for not only does    
confidence grow with effective          
coperation1 but upon this post-war      
coperation between nations for an       
emergency commerce and finance1 or its  
rejection1 will depend not only         
,america's future place in a world      
society but the structure of that world 
society in its essential character4     
,for in each great nation of the world  
the same great choice1 the same great   
struggle of contending principles and   
policies1 is taking place4 ,national    
self-dependence or                      
internationalism--that is everywhere the
 issue4 ,it is true that in no ,european
 country can that issue be so sharply   
presented as in ,america4 ,for economic 
self-sufficiency in a full sense and1   
therefore1 political isolation1 is not  
possible for any ,european state4 ,even 
a peaceful and reviving ,russia must    

lean upon her more advanced neighbors   
for the economic essentials of capital  
and organizing skill4 ,but the several  
nations can strive to reduce their      
interdependence and their national aid  
to the narrowest dimensions1 and where  
they cannot free themselves from        
extraneous alliances they can restrict  
the area of economic dependence within a
 chosen circle4 ,britain1 for example1  
could set her policy closely and        
consistently to make her world-wide     
empire into a self-sufficing system1 and
 if1 as is likely1 she learned that even
 the diversified fifth of the entire    
globe which owns allegiance to her      
,crown could not satisfy all her wants1 
she could eke out this inadequacy with  
some carefully selected and purchased   
friendships4  ,this harking back to an  
economic nationalism is a natural       
reaction of the war1 and is fed by a    
dangerous and precarious peace4 ,fear1  
greed1 and suspicion prompt the         
victorious nations to guard their gains 

by reverting to a close nationalism or a
 ringed alliance2 humiliation1 without  
humility1 the bitter pain of thwarted   
ambitions1 resentment at their          
punishment1 dispose the vanquished      
nations to keep their own company and   
form if possible1 an economic system of 
their own4 ,a prolonged war1 followed by
 a bad peace1 may leave this indelible  
scar upon the growing economic          
internationalism of the world4  ,the    
richly nourished patriotism of war      
breeds divisions and antagonisms which  
are easily exploited afterwards by      
political1 racial1 religious1 and       
cultural passions1 but most of all by   
economic interests4  ,before the war    
internationalism was visibly advancing  
with every fresh decade4 ,the bonds of  
commercial and financial intercourse    
between the peoples of different        
countries were continually woven closer2
 the policy of self-sufficiency was     
continually giving way before the       
superior economy of specialization on a 

basis of natural or acquired advantages4
 ,any reversal of this policy would be  
far costlier than may at present appear1
 even for those countries best qualified
 by size and resources to stand alone4  
,for it is not merely the direct        
sacrifice of the wider world economy of 
production and exchange1 the advantage  
of a wider over a narrower area of free 
commerce1 that is involved4 ,it is the  
indirect perils and costs of the policy 
of close nationalism or restricted      
economic alliances that count heaviest4 
,for economic nationalism means         
protective and discriminative tariffs1  
and a conservation of national1 imperial
 or allied resources within a circle of 
favored beneficiaries4 ,this is the     
temptation held out to the ,british     
people today by the protectionist       
interests working upon the animosity of 
the war spirit and the sentiment of     
imperialism4 ,the welding of an empire  
into an independent economic system1 the
 conservation of essential or key       

industries and the safeguarding of our  
industries against dumping1 are the     
ostensible objectives of a policy whose 
chief driving motive and end is the     
establishment of strong industrial1     
commercial and financial trusts and     
combinations1 defended by tariff walls1 
and endowed with the profits of         
monopoly4  ,there are two difficulties  
in such a course of action1 which1      
though especially urgent in the case of 
,britain1 beset every great country that
 chooses the same path1 and not least1  
,america4 ,the first is the fomentation 
of a class war1 based upon divisions of 
interests between capital and labor1    
producer and consumer1 protected and    
unprotected industries4 ,the initial    
skirmishes of such a conflict are       
already visible in every country where  
wages1 prices1 and profiteering are     
burning issues4 ,i would most earnestly 
appeal to thoughtful citizens in this as
 in my own country to pause before      
heaping fuel on these fires4 ,for the   

policy of national self-sufficiency or  
isolation means nothing less than this4 
,not merely does it strengthen the power
 of capitalistic combinations and       
thereby incite labor unions to direct   
action1 blackmailing demands1 and       
sabotage4 ,not merely does it let loose 
upon the business world all sorts of    
ill-considered governmental             
interferences for the fixation of prices
 or subsidies to consumers4 ,it keeps   
alive and feeds the habit and the spirit
 of strife4 ,for it was no accident that
 the great international war left as its
 legacy smaller international class wars
 in ,european countries4 ,remove from a 
nation the economic supports it formerly
 received from other nations1 markets   
wherein to buy and sell1 and you starve 
that nation2 and starvation breeds class
 war and anarchy4 ,can any one doubt    
this with the terrible examples of      
,russia and ,hungary before their eyes8 
,but it is not a matter of war          
conditions alone4 ,carry through a      

policy of economic nationalism1 under   
which all the large and well-equipped   
nations and empires conserve for their  
exclusive uses the national resources   
they command1 and what happens8 ,the    
smaller and the poorer nations1 however 
free in the political sense1 become     
their economic bond slaves1 at the mercy
 of the master states for their foods   
and other necessaries of life4 ,take the
 case of ,austria under the new         
conditions1 with a thick population     
concentrated in a great political       
capital suddenly deprived of all free   
access to its former sources of supply  
and the markets it used to serve4 ,for  
her it is a sentence of economic        
strangulation4 ,here is an extreme      
instance of the effect of economic      
isolation on a weak country4 ,but the   
dangerous truth may be more broadly     
stated4 ,a very few great empires and   
nations today control the whole         
available supplies of many of the foods1
 fabrics1 and metals1 the shipping and  

finance1 that are essential to the      
livelihood and progress of every        
civilized people4 ,are ,britain1        
,america1 ,france1 and ,japan--and      
especially the two greatest of these    
powers--going to absorb or monopolize   
for their exclusive purposes of trade or
 consumption these supplies which every 
country needs1 or are they going to let 
the rest of the world have fair access  
to them8 ,i think this to be upon the   
whole the most important of the many    
urgent issues that confront us4 ,for1 if
 close nationalism or imperialism should
 prevail1 the weaker placed nations     
could not acquiesce4 ,close economic    
nationalism is not for them a           
possibility4 ,they must win access to   
the world's supplies1 peacefully if     
possible1 or else by force4  ,the       
fatality of the great choice is thus    
evident4 ,nations must and will fight   
for the means of life4 ,close economic  
nationalism or imperialism on the part  
of the great empires must1 therefore1   

compel the restricted countries to      
organize force for their economic       
liberation4 ,this in turn will compel   
the great empires to maintain strong    
military and naval defences4 ,it is     
impossible for the other nations of the 
earth to leave the essential supplies of
 metals1 foods1 and oils1 and the       
control of transport in the exclusive   
possession of one or a few close        
national corporations or a permanent    
,big ,four4 ,under such conditions the  
sacrifices of the great war would have  
been made in vain4 ,nothing would have  
been done to end war1 or to rescue the  
world from the burden of militarism4    
,the pre-war policy of contending       
alliances and of competing armaments1   
draining more deeply than ever the      
surplus incomes of each people1 would be
 resumed4 ,and it would bring no sense  
of security1 but only the postponement  
of further inevitable conflicts in which
 the very roots of western civilization 
might perish4  ,the renewed and         

intolerable burdens of such a           
militarism1 with its accompaniments of  
autocracy1 must let loose class war in  
every nation which has gone through the 
agony of the ,european struggle and has 
seen the great hope of a peaceful       
internationalism blighted4  ,it is      
predominantly upon ,america and ,britain
 that this great moral economic choice  
rests1 the choice on which the safety   
and the progress of humanity depend4 ,a 
refusal by either of these great powers 
can make any league of nations and any  
economic internationalism impossible4   
,the confident consent of both can      
furnish the material and moral support  
for the new order4 ,if these countries  
in close concerted action were prepared 
to place at the service of the new world
 order their exclusive or superior      
resources of foods1 materials1 transport
 and finance--the economic pillars of   
civilization--the stronger pooling their
 resources with the weaker for the      
rescue work in this dire emergency1 this

 political coperation would supply that 
mutual confidence and goodwill without  
which no governmental machinery of a    
,league of ,nations1 however skilfully  
contrived1 can begin to work4  ,i have  
spoken of ,britain and ,america as the  
two countries upon whose choice this    
supreme issue hangs4 ,but the act of    
choice is not the same for the two4 ,the
 ,british imperial policy 7apart from   
that of the self-governing dominions7   
has been conducted on a basis of free   
trade or economic internationalism4 ,a  
reversion to close imperialism would be 
for her a retrogression4 ,the ,united   
,states1 on the other hand1 has         
practised a distinctively national      
economy1 and the adoption of a free     
internationalism would be a great act of
 faith1 or--as some would put it--a leap
 in the dark4  ,i prefer the former term
 as indicative of the new truth which is
 dawning on the world1 the conviction   
that just as an individual can only     
fully realize his personality in a      

society of other individuals1 that is1 a
 nation1 so nations cannot rise to the  
full stature of nationalism save in a   
society of nations4 ,for only thus can  
nationality1 either in its economic or  
its spiritual side1 make full use of its
 special opportunities for the          
development of a distinctive national   
character4 ,the supreme challenge is1   
therefore1 not to the continental       
,european nations1 not even to ,britain1
 but to ,america4 ,for her alone the    
choice has the full quality of moral    
freedom4 ,for she alone is able to      
refuse4 ,other great western nations    
might seek to stand alone for economic  
life and for defence4 ,they could not   
long succeed2 they are too deeply       
implicated in one another's destinies4  
,even ,britain with her vast            
extra-,european territories could not   
hope to disentangle herself from the    
affairs of her near neighbors4 ,america 
could do this1 at any rate for some     
considerable time to come4 ,true she has

 economic committals in ,europe4 ,she   
has loaned ,european governments and    
peoples some ten milliards of money4    
,she is still lending her credit to     
support the large surplus supplies of   
foods and other goods she is selling    
,europe4 ,if this business is to        
continue1 it will implicate her even    
closer in ,european affairs4 ,europe in 
its present case can hardly be presented
 as a safe business proposition4 ,if    
,america proceeds along this path1 it   
will be because she looks beyond the    
immediate risks to the wider future of a
 safer and more prosperous world4 ,she  
could now draw out2 she could cut the   
present economic losses of her ,european
 loans2 she could divert her attention  
from the ,european markets to the       
development of the ,american continent  
as the principal area for the disposal  
of her surplus goods and energies4  ,it 
is open to her to take this course4     
,prudence may seem to dictate it4 ,the  
reckless mismanagement of ,european     

governments1 the wild unsettlement of   
peoples1 the badness of the peace1 are1 
indeed1 strong arguments for ,america   
cleaving to her old ways4  ,europe has  
no rightful claim upon ,america1 either 
for the urgent work of economic rescue1 
or for participation in the permanent   
project of a society of nations4        
,america not only has the right to      
refuse2 it is probably to her immediate 
interest to refuse4 ,but1 at the risk of
 misinterpretation1 as an officious     
outsider1 ,i will venture to present an 
appeal to the wider and deeper interests
 of ,americans4 ,the refusal of ,america
 not only shuts the gate of hope for    
millions of war-broken1 famine-ridden   
people in ,central and ,eastern ,europe1
 it removes the keystone for the edifice
 of a society of nations4 ,for effective
 international coperation in economic   
resources and opportunities is the      
indispensable condition of such a       
society4 ,no ,league of ,nations can    
survive its infancy without this        

economic nourishment4 ,the world's      
wealth for the world's wants3 unless    
this maxim can in some effective way be 
realized1 no such escape has been made  
from the pre-war policy of greed and    
grab as will furnish a reasonable hope  
for a world redeemed from war--a world  
clothed and in its right mind4  ,is it  
not the larger and the longer hope and  
interest of ,america to live as a great 
partner in such a society of nations1   
rather than to live a life of isolated  
prosperity1 perhaps the sole survivor in
 the collapse of western civilized      
states8 ,i make this appeal in the      
language of ,edmund ,burke1 in his great
 plea for conciliation with ,america1   
when he reminded his hearers that       
,magnanimity in politics is not seldom  
the truest wisdom4 ,this1 ,i venture to 
say1 is the true appeal of ,europe to   
,america today4 ,burke's words1 ,i feel1
 must kindle conviction in every        
generous heart1 for in the last resort  
it is the desire of the heart and not   

the calculation of the intellect that   
governs and should govern human conduct4
 ,for morality among nations1 as among  
individuals1 implies faith and          
risk-taking1 not recklessness1 indeed1  
but dangerous living1 a willingness and 
a desire to take a hand in the largest  
game of life and continually to pluck   
out of the nettle1 danger1 safety2 but  
this safety itself only as a momentary  
resting-place in the unceasing urge of  
nations to use their nationality1 not   
for the achievement of some selfish     
separate perfection1 but for the ever   
advancing realization of national ends  
within the wider circle of humanity4    
,the ,riverside ,press ,,cambridge      
,,massachusetts ,u  ,s  ,a