The Spectator at war

The Spectator at war: The German military mind

16 August 2014

8:00 AM

16 August 2014

8:00 AM

From ‘The German military mind’, The Spectator, 15 August 1914:

All Englishmen are now agreed that Germany made the war, and that the moving force within the German nation was and is German militarism. The astonishing thing is in looking back is that any one here should have doubted what would happen if we either weakened our Navy below the safety points, or hesitated in the support of France and Russia. Our Navy, we admit, was not “let down,” but Germany thought she had enough evidence that Britain would remain neutral if France was attacked. For the German military mind this was good enough. Before Germany had discovered her mistake she had committed herself to war. Liberals, who never believed in what we have been saying for years was bound to happen if their extreme policy were adopted, are at least convinced that Germany has been playing a cynical and unscrupulous part. Mr. Massingham, who has worked perhaps harder than any Liberal writer for cutting down the Navy and denying all obligations to France and Russia, made a public retraction of his confidence in Germany in the Daily News of Monday: –

“I think that those of us to whom the idea of a European war, and of our country taking part in it, has brought a measure of personal distress which exceeds even our private griefs, must say with frankness what is in their minds. I confess that Sir Edward Grey’s speech left me unconvinced and hostile on the subject of our individual intervention, and that my ultimate reserves as to policy remain. But I must say, too, and publicly, that the reading of the White Paper produced a tremendous revulsion. Things being what they were, engagements standing as they stood the character of the ruling power in Germany being revealed for what it was, nations being subjected to their engagements and line of action which do actually influence and control them, I could not resist the evidence that they were being forced into war…. The die has been cast. Who cast it? Apparently one of the least intelligent and moral groups in the world. With what result? To give over Europe to the temporary control of such influences. A grievous, a terrible conclusion. Religion, science, art, literature, all voiceless and powerless. Ruthless, senseless force – tearing up treaties, disregarding neighbourliness, and every decency and every nobility of life – in supreme control.”


Mr. Massingham, not for the first time, has had the courage to say that the facts are against him. Mr. Bernard Shaw, also, having ridiculed every kind of preparation for war, now urges his country on in a letter to the Daily News without apparently suffering from any embarrassment or any sense of incongruity: –

“Prussian militarism,” he says, “has bullied us for forty years; and a month ago neither Germany nor France believde that we would fight when it came to the point. That is why there was such a wild explosion of delighted surprise when the French Chambers learnt that we were game after all. That is why the Kaiser, though reckless of every other interest concerned, offered us the best excuse he could invent for our neutrality, believing that we were only too ready to snatch at it. And that is also why we had to take off our coats and sail in… Our immediate business is therefore to fight as hard as we can; for our weights when the settlement comes will depend on the parts we shall have played in the conflict.”

Blindness is now at an end, though the cure of it has indeed been such a risky one that, but for a series of fortunate accidents, it might have endangered the life of the patient. There has never really been any secret as to how the German military mind works and as to what it aimed at. In 1904 German military preparations took a new and deeply significant turn. In that year the German General Staff came to the conclusion that, as France must be virtually crushed before Russia could bring her weight to bear, Germany must deliberately ignore the neutrality of Belgium, Luxembourg and, if necessary, Switzerland. Strategic railways were built up to the front tiers of Belgium and Switzerland and along those frontiers.  Great camps were constructed on the same frontiers. It was impossible to hide these preparations, and the Germans did not attempt to do so. The strategy of envelopment required the use of neutral territories, and the law of necessity was openly preached as sufficient excuse for violating treaties. The doctrine was explained by the Emperor himself. On January 1st, 1908, he read to the highest Army officer a document which had been drawn up by Field-Marshal von Schlieffen, and which expounded and justified the necessity of going round the French defences through neutral territory. This document was published. It was no secret…

This war will be fought in vain and all the blood and money wasted if the result is not to free Europe from the terrible influence and dictation of the German military mind. That is the whole subject of the war.

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.

  • GenJackRipper

    Long live the Empire of Germany. Never has the world seen such a splendid country, excelling in everything they tried (well, until the end anyhow).

    Probably that’s why the powers that be wanted them taken down.

  • WFB56

    An interesting article to reprint, thank you.

    I don’t think that the level of political discourse and the ability to agree to disagree is as evident today.