PERPETUAL PEACE - Amazon Web Services

218 Pages·2002·6.44 MB·English

PERPETUAL PEACE
*For I dipt into thef uture, far as hamnn eye could TCC,
Saw the Vision of the world, and all thcw ondert hr: waxld Le;
Snw theh eavens fill with commerce, argosies of magics ails,
Pi!o!s of thop urplet wilight, dropping d>wnw ith eosrj? bales:
Heardt heh eavens fill withn lmlting,a ndt here rsin'd a ghastly dew
From the nations' airyn avies grappling in thec entm! b!uo;
Far dong the world.widc whisper of the south-wind rushing warm,
With the standards of the peoplesp lungingt hro' tkc thunder.storm:
Till thew ar-drum throbb'd no longer, and the bntt.e.flags were fuurl'd
In tho Parliament of man, the Federation of the world.
Thew the common sense of mmt shall hold a f3etf::l realm in awe,
And the kindly earth ahall dumbor, lapt in universal hw."
-' ' TSNNYSOLNcrR: slry HER
PERPETUAL PEACE
A PHILOSOPHICAL ESSAY
Tr7.rlSSLATED WITH INTRODUCTION
AND NOTES BY
31. CAMPBELLS MITH, M.A.
:67?'il .4 PREFACE BY I'I<CFl:'.SSOR LATTA
LONDON: GEORGE ALLEN & UNWIN LTD.
RUSKIN HOUSE 40 MUSEUSMT R EET, W.C.
NEW YORK : THE IvIAChlILLAN COMPANY

PREFACE
THISt ranslation of Kant’es ssay on PerptuaP
Peace was undertaken by Miss Mary Campbell
Smith at the suggestion of thlea te Professor
Ritchie of St. Andrews, who had promised to write
for it a prefacei, n dicating the value of Kant’s
work in relation to recent discussions regarding the
possibility of making wars to cease.” In view
‘I
of the general interest which these discussions have
arouseda nd of thev ague thinking and aspiration
which have too often characterised them, it seemed
to Professor Ritchie that at ranslation of this wise
and sagaciouse ssay would be both opportunea nd
*
valuable. His untimely deathh asp reventedt he
fulfilment of his promise, and I have been asked,
in his stead,t o introduce thet ranslator’s work.
This is, I think, the only completet r anslation
into English of Kant’s essay, including all the notes
as well as thet ext,a ndt he translatorh as added
a full historicalI ntroduction, along with numerous
notes of her own, so as (in Professor Ritchie’s words)
‘I to meet the needs (I) of the student of Political
vi Preface
Sciencew ho wishes to understandt her elation of
Kant’s theories to those of Grotius, Hobbes, Locke,
Kousseau etc.,a nd (2) of theg eneralr eaderw ho
wishes tuo n derstantd h e significance of Kant’s
proposals in connection with the ideals of Peace
Congresses, and with the developmento f International
Law from the end of the Middle Ages to the Hague
Conference.”
Although it is moret han 100 years since Kant‘s
essay was written, its substantial va!ue is practically
unimpairedA. nyone who is acquainted with the
generalc haracter of the mind of Kant will expect
to find in him soundc ommon-sense, clearr ecogni-
tion of the essential facts of the case and a remark-
able power of analytically exhibiting the conditions
on which the facnt se cessarily dependT .h ese
characteristics are manifest iu the essay on Perpetual
A,ore. Kant is not pessimist enough to believe
that a perpetualp eace is an unrealisable dreamo r
a consummationd evoutlyt ob e feared, nor is he
optimiste nought o fancy thati t is an ideal which
could easily be realised if men would butt u rn
their hearts too nea notherF. orK antp erpetual
peace is an ideal, nomt erelay s a speculative
Utopian idea, with which in fancy we mayp lay,
but as am oralp rinciple,w hich oughtt ob e,a nd
therefore can be, realised. Yet he makes it perfectly
clear that we cannot hope to approach ther ealisation
Preface vii
of itu nless we honestly face political facts and get
a firmg rasp of thei ndispensablec onditions of a
lasting peace. To strive after the ideal in contempt
or in ignorance of these conditions is a labour that
must inevitablyb ee ither fruitless ord estructive of
itso wne nds, Thus Kantd emonstratest he hope-
lessness of anya ttemptt os ecurep erpetualp eace
betweein n dependennt a tionsS. ucnh a tionms ay
maket reaties;b utt hesea reb indingo nly for so
longa si t is nott ot hei nterest of eitherp arty to
denouncteh em. To enforcteh em is impossible
while then ationsr emaini ndependent.“ There is,”
as Professor Ritchie put it (Sttrdies in Political and
Social Ethics, p. 169), lionly one way inw hich war
betweeni ndependent“ ’nationsc anb ep revented ;
andt hat is byt hen ationsc easingt ob ei ndepen-
dent.B” uth t ids o ens o n te cessarilmy eatnh e
establishment of da espotismw, hethear u tocratic
ord emocratic.O nt heo therh and,K antm aintains
that just aps eaceb etweeni n dividuals within a
statce a on n lby pe e rmanentlsy e curebd ty h e
institution of a“ republican ” (that is to say, a
representative) government, so the onlyr eal guarantee
of pa e rmanenp te acbe e tweenn a tions is the
establishment of a federation of free“ republican”
states.S uch a federation her egards as practically
possible. “For if Fortune ordains that a powerful
11
ande nlightenedp eoples houldf orm a republic-
viii Preface
which by its veryn ature is inclined top erpetual
peace-thwi os uld serve a centre of federal
unionf oro thers tatesw ishingt o join, andt hus
secure.’conditionso ff reedoma mongt hes tatesi n
accordancew itht hei dea of thel aw of nations.
Graduallyt, h rough different unions of thisk ind,
thef ederationw oulde xtendf urthera ndf urther.”
Readers who area cquaintedw itht h eg eneral
philosophy of Kant will find manyt races of its
influence int hee ssayo n Perpetual Peace. Those
who haven ok nowledge of hisp hilosophym ay
find some of his forms of statement rather difficult
to understand,a ndi tm ayt hereforen otb eo ut of
place for met oi ndicatev ery briefly them eaning
of some terms which hef requently uses, especially
int heS upplementsa ndA ppendices.T husa tt he
beginning of theF irstS upplement,K antd raws a
distinctionb etweent hem echanicala ndt het eleo-
logical view of things, between “nature and Provi-
” “
dence ”, which depends upon his main philosophical
position.A ccordingt oK ant,p urer eason has two
aspectst h, eoreticaal n pd r actical. Acs o ncerning
knowledge, strictly so called, the a priori principles
ofr eason (e.g, substancea nda ttribute,c ausea nd
effect etc.a) r e valid only within thre e alm of
possible sense-experience. Such ideas, fori nstance,
cannobt ee xtendedt o G ods, ince He is not a
possible object of sense-experience, They are limited
Frefare ix
t
to the world of phenomena. This world of pheno-
mena nature or the world of sense-experience)
(‘1 ”
is pa urely mechanical system. But in order to
understand fully thep henomenal world, thep ure
theoretical reasonm ust postulate certain ideas( the
ideas of the soul, the world and God), theo bjects
of which transcends ense-experience. Thesei d eas
are nott h eoreticallp valid, butt h eir validity is
practicallye stablished by the pure practicalr eason,
which doesn ot yields p eculative truthb, upt re-
scribes its principlesd ogmatically ” in the form of.
imperatives to the will. The will is itself practical’
‘\
reason, andt husi t imposesi t s imperativesu pon.
itself. The fundamental imperative of the practical’
reason is stated by Kant in Appendix I. (p. 175) :-
Act so that thou canst will that thy maxim should
(I
be a universal law, be the end of thy actionw hat
it will.” If thee nd of perpetualp eace is a duty,
it must be necessarily deduced from this general
law. AndK ant does regard it as da u ty. We
mustd esire perpetual peacen ot only as a material
good, but also as a state of things resulting from
our recognition of the precepts of duty ” (loc. lit.).
This is further expressed in the maxim (p. 177):-
“Seek ye first the kingdom of pure practical reason
and its righteousness, antdh oe b ject of your
endeavour, the blessing of perpetual peace, will be
addeud n to you.” The distinction between the
Preyme
X
moral politician and the political moralist, which is
developed in Appendix I., is an application of the
gcneral distinction between dutya nde xpediency,
which is a prominent feature of the Kantian ethics.
Methods of.e xpediency, omitting all reference to
the purpe racticarl e asonc, a no nly bringa bout
re-arrangements of circumstances in the mechanical
course of nature. Theyc an never guaranteet he
attainment of theire nd:t hey can never make it
more than a speculative ideal, which may or may
notb e practicable. But if thee nd can be shown
to be a duty, we have, from Kant’s point of view,
the onlyr easonableg round for a conviction that
it is realisable. We cannoti, n deedt, h eoretically
know that it is realisable. “Reason is not suffi-
cieutly enlightened to survey the series of predeter-
mining causes which would make it possible for
us to predict with certainty the good or bad
results of human action, ast hey follow from the
mechanical laws of nature; although we mayh ope
that things will turno uta s we should desire” (p.
163). On the other hand, since the idea of perpetual
peace is a moral ideal,a ni dea of duty ”, we are
entitled to believe that it is practicable. Nature
,. I(
guarantees the coming of perpetual peace, through
the natural course of human propensities ; not indeed
with sufficient certainty toe nable us to prophesy
She future of this ideal theoretically, but yet clearly