On Both Sides of the Question
NOT many months since, one of the best known editors in these United States, through his papers, was calling together large assemblies in peace conventions. He made a very strong agitation in favor of having the United States exert all of its influence and power to bring about peace in Europe. At the present time the same editor, through the same papers, is conducting a most active propaganda in favor of building a large American navy and equipping and drilling a strong army. Thus the same man, through the same editorial pages, is very strongly in favor of peace, and also just as strongly in favor of war. Men do not seem to see any inconsistency in such a course. Yet if the United States could not exert an influence in Europe that would tend toward peace, why have the peace conventions? And if, on the other hand, she can exert such an influence, what is the need of the navy? It is apparent that this editor recognizes that there is a strong sentiment in the world in favor of peace. He also recognizes that there are strong influences working for war. And in spite of himself he finds that he and his papers are first in one camp and then in the other. This condition of things would not be so remarkable were it not for the fact that the prophets, as so often pointed out in these pages, have told us that the last days would be characterized by the anger of the nations, which would be driving them into the furies of war, and the same days would also be marked by the multitude who would be saying “Peace and safety.” These contradictory conditions are in the world. The editor to whom allusion is made in these paragraphs is only one of a multitude who are acting in the same way; and how remarkable it is that the prophet could have foretold it!