ew. The general truth seems to be that War, whether it be
apparently victorious or apparently unsuccessful, is always profitable
for a small commercial class in each belligerent nation.[61]
Unfortunately the profits thus earned by the economic effects of war are
not diffused vertically throughout the whole nation from top to bottom,
but rather horizontally along a shallow commercial stratum in every
nation. In every nation war diminishes the national wealth, but
concentrates the residue with greater inequality in one particular
class. The representative of this class, commonly called the Capitalist,
is the real cosmopolitan, because his interests in each belligerent
nation are identical, and the war, successful or not, contributes to his
financial advantage. It is an illuminating coincidence that the classes
in every nation which most enthusiastically demand the violent
prosecution of the war seem to be proportionately anxious to annul the
hardly-won privileges of democracy. Thus the _Saturday Review_, in a
passage already quoted, solemnly, openly and unforgettably declares the
secret wishes of the militarists; and we may be surprised to consider
how many safeguards of democracy, how many rights of free thought and
free speech, how many of the precarious limitations of sweating and
child-labour and wage-slavery have been quietly suppressed since the
beginning of the war. But if war is ultimately unprofitable for the
nation as a whole, it might be argued that Trade itself must ultimately
be involved in the national loss. The answer is that even if the
Trader's interests were identical with those of the nation and were
ultimately bound to suffer with the nation as a whole, he would
undoubtedly ignore the possibility of a loss so much remoter than his
immediate and obvious profits; especially as he is certainly ignorant of
the economic fact that in modern times military victory and military
defeat are equally unprofitable, and if he ever did pause to consider
the results for the whole nation he would certainly, perhaps in good
faith, identify the national interest with his own, and assume, for
psychological rather than economic reasons, that his own interests
demanded a military victory; real ignorance and emotional excitement
sufficing to explain his apparently hypocritical professions of
patriotism. As a matter of fact however his private interests are not
dependent on those of the whole nation; for commercial wealth is no