The Spectator at war

The Spectator at war: A call to arms

12 August 2014

8:00 AM

12 August 2014

8:00 AM

Let us say once more what we said as emphatically as we could last week – that the first thing to do is to get Lord Kitchener the five hundred thousand men who he must have to make the country safe. Till that is done, till we have got the men for the firing line, all philanthropic schemes, however good, nay, however essential in themselves, must wait. Sterilized dressings are absolutely necessary, but they must not get in front of the rifles. Therefore, once again, the first duty of ever man between nineteen and thirty is to join Lord Kitchener’s Second Army.  That is his way to help. And the first duty of every lad under nineteen and of every man over thirty is to induce men of military age – we wish, by the way, it has been put at nineteen to thirty-five instead of nineteen to thirty – to go and do their duty.  That is their way to help. Get the men who also have been trained and enlisted long ago, as they are trained and enlisted in Switzerland, into the ranks. It may be annoying that they are not there already, but even now it is not too late, and, at any rate, crying over spilt milk would be utterly foolish.

A word to those whom age compels to accept the duty of merely inducing others to serve at the front. To begin with, let them explain to the young men a fact which unfortunately has not been made quite clear in some of the advertisements and proclamations, although it is distinctly set forth in the latest on which we reproduce elsewhere. Many men are clamouring to go into the Territorials, which are full, rather than into Lord Kitchener’s new battalions which are empty. The reason why the Territorials are preferred is because people think that they will be able to get out of them more easily when the war is over. As a matter of fact, the reverse is the case. Nominally, no doubt, the men under Lord Kitchener’s scheme are asked to become Regulars, but they are not Regulars at all in the old sense. They will get their discharge directly the war is over, whereas Territorial enlistment is for four years. Therefore a less arduous obligation is undertaken by those who join the new force than by those who join the Territorials. It is a great pity that anything was said in the appeal about the three years, because, unfortunately, a great many people have fastened upon that and said: “That means they will keep us for three years in any case.” As a matter of fact, it merely means, and was only intended to mean, that if the war was to last longer than three years a man could claim his discharge at the end of three years. But that is an empty privilege, for no one would dream of claiming it till the war is over. The terms mean “Till the war is finished”, and nothing more or less.


But the war must be finished before three years are over, for it is absolutely impossible for it to continue on the present scale for more than a year, if that. It may be said, perhaps, in explanation of the desire to join the Territorials rather than the new force, that the Territorials will not be sent out of the country. This is surely a mistake. If the need should arise for sending Territorial out of the country, they will be asked to volunteer, and they will be certain to respond to the call. Indeed, a large number of them have already volunteered. As a matter of fact, the moment man is in the army during a war what he wants to do is to go on foreign service, and not to kick his heels in a garrison town or camp in England. It will be seen, therefore, that there is no special advantage in a Territorial enlistment. There is nothing now but war enlistment – and, in the matter of time, there is a distinct advantage in the terms of enlistment of Lord Kitchener’s new force. This force will be the first to be disembodied and sent home. Enlisters should explain that fact to hesitating young men. They should also explain to the relatives that their lads will be doing the best for themselves by entering the Army. Whoever has to go short, if bad times come, it will not be the soldier. He, at any rate, will be fed and clothed, and looked after, for he has become essential to the nation, and must therefore be first served. In the case of the breadwinner of the family, it may very often be better for him to be in the ranks than at home. He is likely, indeed, to be able to do more bread-winning in the Army than at home. No soldier will be unemployed…

One more word to those who are inducing young men to go into the ranks. At this moment it is the duty of all employers, rich or poor, to discharge no man but this does not apply to men of military age – i.e., those between nineteen and thirty, who are sound in wind and limb. In our opinion, employers not only have a moral right to discharge such men if they will not go into the fighting line, but in many cases also have a positive duty to do so. Rich men who are over military age need not to continue keeping soft billets, footmen, under-gardeners, stable boys, or young game keepers merely because the occupants of these pleasant places may not care to learn the prime duty to defending their country. Again, fathers of families and employers must see to it that young men do not excuse themselves from doing their plain duty by joining some fancy force, or saying they can really do better work by entering a Rifle Club or a Village Guard or a Local Patrol. All these things are excellent for the older men and are their most appropriate work, but they are not the appropriate work for men between nineteen and thirty. For them there is but one duty, and that is to join Lord Kitchener’s force until the five hundred thousand men are made up. “But if everyone does that there will be too many” is a criticism which will be made at once made by the captious. No doubt; but in that case the lucky man will be the man who applies first. We shall never get the five hundred thousand we need unless everybody is not only ready to but offers to go. The man who says in his heart: “I won’t offer myself till just the very end when they are sure not to want me”, and acts on this belief, must stand disgraced before the country, and will deserve the opprobrium he gets.

Fortunately the young women of all classes are going to take charge of this. In the last resort they are the best recruiting agents, and the people best qualified to put on that firm pressure that may be need for about one per cent of our young men. If it is made quiet clear that young men who do not use their best endeavours to get into Lord Kitchener’s new force will be known and noted for what they are by their countrywomen, we shall have precious little “shirking and lurking”. Men can bear plenty of things from women with out any feeling of resentment, but there is one thing they cannot bear – that their womenkind should think them lacking in courage. The cautious or shy lad, then, had better get it over at once. If not, he will in the end be forced by public opinion to do what he ought have done without compulsion at the beginning.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • Dean Jackson

    In one of the many senseless campaigns fought on the Western Front, the Cambrai campaign (20 November 1917 – 7 December 1917) witnessed more than 44,000 casualties, including 7,000 servicemen of the United Kingdom and South Africa dying for zero ground claimed. That 44,000 casualty figure should have been used instead for the more critical campaign against the Bolsheviks in Petrograd, resulting in the re-entry of Russia into the war, thereby sparing the exhausted Allies the prospect of facing (1) thirty German divisions previously deployed against Russia on the Eastern Front; (2) Austro-Hungarian divisions freed from the Russian Western Front; and (3) Ottoman divisions freed from the Caucasus Campaign. In fact, a 60,000 strong Allied military unit was already in Russia (the Ukraine) at the time–the Czechoslovak Legion–and could have been used to overthrow the Bolsheviks if the Allied powers so wished. Instead, the Czechoslovak Legion was sent on a 6,000 mile odyssey across Russia, its destination Vladivostok on the Pacific coast for passage back to Europe and the war, instead of sending the legion 700 miles due north to Petrograd and collapse the Bolshevik coup. The politicians of the West were doing all they could to (1) protect the fledgling Bolshevik regime in Petrograd; while (2) sabotaging every opportunity to immediately get Russia back into the war before the Bolshevik position had strengthened throughout Russia. Only when the position of the Bolsheviks was relatively secure would the Allied powers mount campaigns to supposedly overthrow the Bolsheviks (North Russia Intervention and Siberian Intervention), campaigns that were sure to fail due to the lackluster number of soldiers assigned to both missions (though the Japanese contingent of 70,000 soldiers deployed to the the Siberian Intervention is a minimum number one would expect from the combined American, British and French contingent, whose actual total complement registered an anemic 10,250 soldiers up against 600,000 Bolsheviks) and the remote locations for the soldiers’ landings–Archangel (British, French, Italian and American), Murmansk (British, French, Italian and American) and Vladivostok (American, British, French, Canadian, Italian, Polish, Chinese and Japanese)–far from the Bolshevik’s Command and Control center located in Petrograd (Saint Petersburg), where too the Bolshevik’s leadership (Central Committee) is located.

    The following is a discovery I made in May regarding the fake collapse of the USSR, and what that fraudulent collapse proves about the institutions of the West…

    When Soviet citizens were liberated from up to 74 years of horrific Marxist oppression on December 26, 1991 there were ZERO celebrations throughout the USSR, proving (1) the ‘collapse’ of the USSR was a strategic ruse; and (2) the political parties of the West were already co-opted by Marxists,* otherwise the USSR (and East Bloc nations) couldn’t have gotten away with the ruse.

    ZERO celebrations, as the The Atlantic article inadvertently informs us…

    For more on this discovery see my blog…


    The West will form new political parties where candidates are vetted for Marxist ideology, the use of the polygraph to be an important tool for such vetting. Then the West can finally liberate the globe of vanguard Communism.


    * The failed socialist inspired and controlled pan-European revolutions that swept the continent in 1848(1) thought Marxists and socialists a powerful lesson, that lesson being they couldn’t win overtly,(2) so they adopted the tactic of infiltration of the West’s political parties/institutions. In the case of the United States…(continue reading at DNotice)…

    Now you know why not one political party in the West requested verification of the collapse of the USSR, and the media failed to alert your attention to this fact, including the “alternative” media. When determining whether the “former” USSR is complying with arms control treaties, what does the United States do to confirm compliance? Right, the United States sends into the “former” USSR investigative teams to VERIFY compliance, yet when it’s the fate of the West that’s at stake should the collapse of the USSR be a ruse, what does the United States do to confirm the collapse? Nothing!

    The fraudulent ‘collapse’ of the USSR (and East Bloc) couldn’t have been pulled off until both political parties in the United States (and political parties elsewhere in the West) were co-opted by Marxists, which explains why verification of the ‘collapse’ was never undertaken by the West, such verification being (1) a natural administrative procedure (since the USSR wasn’t occupied by Western military forces); and (2) necessary for the survival of the West. Recall President Reagan’s favorite phrase, “Trust, but verify”.

    It gets worse–the “freed” Soviets and West also never (1) de-Communized the Soviet Armed Forces of its Communist Party officer corps, which was 90% officered by Communist Party members; and (2) arrested/de-mobilized the 6-million vigilantes that assisted the Soviet Union’s Ministry of the Interior and police control the populations of the larger cities during the period of “Perestroika” (1986-1991)!

    There can be no collapse of the USSR (or East Bloc nations) without…

    Verification, De-Communization and De-mobilization.

    The West never verified the collapse of the USSR because no collapse occurred, since if a real collapse had occurred the West would have verified it, since the survival of the West depends on verification. Conversely, this proves that the political parties of the West were co-opted by Marxists long before the fraudulent collapse of the USSR, since the survival of the West depends on verification.

    The above means that the so-called “War on Terror” is an operation being carried out by the Marxist co-opted governments of the West in alliance with the USSR and other Communist nations, the purpose being to (1) destroy the prominence of the West in the eyes of the world, where the West is seen (i) invading nations without cause; (ii) causing chaos around the globe; and (iii) killing over one-million civilians and boasting of torture; (2) close off non-Russian supplies of oil for export, thereby increasing the price of oil, the higher price allowing oil exporting Russia to maintain economic stability while she modernizes and increases her military forces; (3) destroy the United States Armed Forces via the never-ending “War on Terror”; the ultimate purpose of the aforementioned to (4) bring about the demise of the United States in the world, opening up a political void to be filled by a new pan-national entity composed of Europe and Russia (replacing the European Union), a union “From the Atlantic to Vladivostok”; which will (5) see the end of NATO.

    Now you know how Bolshevik Russia survived in 1917; how the West “lost” China to the Communists in 1949; why the Eisenhower administration turned a deaf ear to the anti-Communist Hungarian uprising in 1956; why the Eisenhower administration in 1959 was indifferent to the Castro brothers’ Communist fidelity, actually used the CIA to overthrow the Batista government; why the Nixon administration abandoned Taiwan for Communist China, and signed treaties/provided economic aid to the USSR; why the Nixon administration refused to tell the American People that over 50% of North Vietnamese NVA regiments were actually Chinese People’s Liberation Army soldiers (attired in NVA uniforms, and proving that the Sino/Soviet Split was a ruse, as KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn told the West back in 1962), thereby (1) ensuring the Vietnam War would be lost; (2) destroying the prominence of the United States abroad and at home; (3) breeding distrust between the American people and their government; and (4) securing Communist victories in Southeast Asia. Working in the background within the political parties of the United States and Great Britain were Marxist agents doing their best to (1) ensure the survival of Communist nations when they popped up; and (2) sabotage any policies that would bring down a Communist nation. That’s why after the fake collapses of the East Bloc nations and USSR there was no mandatory Western verification process to ensure the Communists weren’t still in control.