The Great Illusion · Chapter
Synopsis explained
This chapter outlines the fundamental motives behind the Anglo-German armaments rivalry, challenging the assumption that national prosperity depends on political power and territorial expansion.
What happens
This chapter outlines the fundamental motives behind the Anglo-German armaments rivalry, challenging the assumption that national prosperity depends on political power and territorial expansion. The author argues that in the modern economically civilized world, wealth is based on credit and commercial contract, making military conquest economically futile. He further contends that military power cannot impose moral or social ideals on conquered peoples, as modern communication and interdependence have made nations internally divided on moral questions. The chapter concludes by suggesting that modifying European opinion could reduce the motive for aggression and thus the need for defense.
Themes in this chapter
Economic Futility of War
The chapter argues that military conquest cannot enrich a nation because wealth is based on credit and commercial contract, which are undermined by conquest.
Interdependence of Nations
The chapter highlights how economic interdependence and rapid communication have made nations reliant on each other, rendering military force futile.
Illusion of Political Power
The chapter challenges the assumption that a nation's prosperity is determined by its political power, showing that small states without such power can thrive.
Key passages
“Conquest in the modern world is a process of multiplying by x, and then obtaining the original figure by dividing by x.”
Conquest is a futile operation that yields no net gain, as the conqueror ends up with nothing more than what was originally there.
This illustrates the economic futility of conquest.
“War has no longer the justification that it makes for the survival of the fittest; it involves the survival of the less fit.”
War no longer ensures the survival of the strongest; instead, it leads to the survival of the weaker elements.
This challenges the biological analogy used to justify war.