Wars have always been a contentious issue. The current skirmishes in Afghanistan and the previous decade’s conflict in Iraq have been one of the most debated issues in contemporary history. The Vietnam War saw one of the largest anti-government protest movements in the United States, where youthful souls and sexually-liberated hippies defined the cultural revolution that was to shape the modern world. And yet, this is nothing new. American journalist John Reed, writing in 1914, has argued against his nation’s involvement in the First World War. His sentiments were echoed in the cynical style of his journalism, reflected in works such as “With the Allies” and “The War in Eastern Europe”. Using first-hand accounts of his traveling across Europe in the fringes of the frontline, Reed mixes realism with both satire and surrealism to drive home his anti-war message. In so doing, he makes a stand against United States involvement in the First World War, while making it clear to his audience that the fight in Europe is a futile exercise where the only victims are those soldiers fighting in the frontline.
John Reed’s anti-war argument is laid out for the reader in his scathing essay, “The Trader’s War”, published in 1914. Reed wrote the article upon his return from a lengthy stay in Europe, where he had covered the conflict in the frontlines. In Berlin a few years earlier, he was permitted to go the German lines, and there he grew close to the soldiers and officers on both sides of the conflict. Rather than paint a picturesque and patriotic picture of the war, Reed instead reveals that the real war, as opposed to that fought between Austria and Serbia, is that between traders and large business enterprises. He cited Germany as being born out of an amalgamation of commercial initiatives and business agreements, booming in the 1870s in the aftermath of the Franco-Prussian war. “Everything German leaped forward in a stupendous impulse of growth”, Reed observes (74). The nations that ensured the status quo in Europe, however, were not pleased. England and France, in particular, began annexing territories in Africa, including Egypt, South Africa, and Morrocco. A series of commercial compromises and détentes held off war for some time, but the tension was rising between England and France, on the one hand, and a rapidly-developing Germany, on the other. John Reed narrates: “The situation in short is this. German capitalists want more profits. English and French Capitalists want it all. This war of commerce has gone on for years” (76). Contrary to the belief in the United States, the war in Europe is a falling out among commercial rivals, not a battle against democracy and militarism, as most of the media at home would like the people to believe. This is not a war, according to Reed, where Liberalism is “going forth to Holy War against Tyranny. Thus, he stands on the position of continued American removal from the war.
This anti-war sentiment is visibly reflected in Reed’s other writings as a correspondent in Europe. Travelling across Europe, he grew close to both sides of the conflict, and found that they had in common the brutality of some of the officers, as well as a particular cynicism brought about only by war and constant conflict. In one instance, he contrasts the eager, patriotic celebrations of the youth traveling to the frontlines, with that of the veterans. While the greenhorns’ train carriages “rocked with singing and cheering”, the veterans neither cheered nor sang: “[t]hey went with that curious, detached professional air of a man going to work in a silk mill in the morning” (81). Reed also laments the fate of those idealistic greenhorns on their way to training, and notes that they are not too far from becoming the beasts that were the veterans:
“They were the youth and the young blood of Francebound for the military centers to undergo a training that should stamp out all their impulses and ideas, and turn them into infinitesimal parts of an obedient machine to hurl against the youth of Germany, who had been treated the same way” (81).
Wandering the French countryside, Reed and his companion come across a small village, “exposed to the full flame of battle”. It was the site of the Germans’ final stand, being sacked when they finally retreated. The houses, shops, and cafes were destroyed, their roofs blown away by mortar shells. For Reed, it was horrible to think that simple villagers had been slaughtered here, others fleeing the homes that they had kept for years, never to return.
While other journalists and correspondents might invent picturesque stories, might repeat the atrocity myths, might propagate the Allies’ legend of the fight for liberty and democracy, Reed wrote about the horrors and brutality of war. He documented accounts of his encounters with battle-hardened officers and idealistic greenhorns that he knew would either die or become mindless beasts that followed orders. Through this technique, he advanced his anti-war advocacy – a futile, albeit noble attempt at maintaining peace at home.
Works Cited
Reed, John. “The Trader’s War” The Education of John Reed: Selected Writings. New York: International Publishers, 1955. Print.
