The Freeman 1972 - The Ludwig von Mises Institute

1972 THE NATURE OF MODERN WARFARE 209with support for this hypothesis. 2It is important to note that betweenthe wars, for example, allEuropean nations resorted to verystrict anti-immigration laws, inmost cases prohibiting immigrationaltogether. Every nation waseager to protect its wage levelagainst enchroachment from nationswith still .lower wage levels.Such policies were bound to engenderserious international friction.Moreover, like the "Sozialpolitik"of pre-1914 Germany, Hitler'sGermany endeavored to raise thewage rates of its workers. In doingso, prices were forced up.Since this would have encouragedimports and thus thwarted thestatist schemes, tariff barrierswere established. However, theGerman ban on imports meantthat no nation could acquire thenecessary German exchange topurchase German exports. Germany,an industrial nation, waslargely dependent upon foreignfoodstuffs. It had· to export itsindustrial commodities in order toobtain much of the needed food.By eliminating imports, it eliminated,in a like degree, the onlymeans by which it could peaceablyattain these necessary agricultural2 Easily the most lucid and cogent delineationof this position is to be foundin Ludwig von Mises' Omnipotent Government(New Rochelle: ArlingtonHouse, 1969).and other products. So, Germanyhad but one alternative; it had togo to war and take them.Rise of Aggressive NationalismThe nineteenth century was governedlargely by classical liberalprinciples. It was, for the mostpart, a peaceful century. The onslaughtof war accompanied theabandonment of these principles.The question to be considered,therefore, is precisely why thesepolicies were discarded. The answercanbe perceived if one realizesthat an integral element ofthis liberalism was democraticrule. It is imperative, however, toappreciate that this was the democracyof Tocqueville; that is, alimited democracy. Under the classicalliberal ideal, the power ofthe state - the apparatus of compulsionand control - was severelycircumscribed. The crux of thisconcept was the recognition ofindividual rights; the sole functionof the state was simply thesuppression of attempts by individualsto suppress -other individuals,that is, to provide a secureand peaceful framework to facilitatesocial cooperation. While themeans for determining who heldthe reins of government was to bedecided democratically, the powerand functions of government weresignificantly curtailed; the democracyof the classical liberal