The Rudolf Steiner Archive

9. Destruction and Reconstruction

[ 1 ] John Maynard Keynes has just had a book published in London on the economic consequences of the Peace of Versailles (The economic consequences of the peace by John Maynard Keynes C. B. Fellow of King's ColIege, Cambridge. Macmillan and Co, London). He states in the preface that he worked temporarily in the British Treasury during the war and was its official representative at the peace conference until June 7, 1919. He resigned from this post when he lost all hope that a prosperous development of economic life in Europe could result from what came about as "peace" under the influence of the leading personalities at this conference. He speaks as an Englishman. But as one who soberly asked himself the question: Is it possible that from the will of Wilson, Clemenceau, Lloyd George, something could result which would carry within itself viability as the economic organization of Europe? The remarks in his book show that on June 7, 1919, he said to himself. June1919: Wilson is a man who, living in abstract terms alien to life, can have no decisive influence on the intentions of Clemenceau and Lloyd George; Clemenceau is a personality inspired solely by the passionate will to dictate a peace to Europe which, disregarding developments since 1870, will enable France to feel as a "nation" in the world as it wanted to feel before 1870; Lloyd George is clever and gifted with knowledge of human nature, but only concerned with momentary successes. And Keynes answered the above question with the thought: What can happen under the influence of these three personalities must bring about the economic destruction of Europe. And he resigned from his post. I cannot find in his book any prospect of something that gives hope for a reconstruction of these economic conditions, but I do find a sentence at the end that says that salvation can only be expected if those forces of knowledge and outlook on life are set in motion that transform the prevailing opinions. One is probably not misunderstanding Keynes if one says that the book arose from the concern and fear that England had collaborated on a work that would lead to the destruction of Europe to such an extent that England itself could suffer badly as a result.

[ 2 ] Keynes' remarks are full proof that nothing of what the future of civilized mankind needs can emerge from the political views which have prevailed up to the present day and which have been carried into the so-called "work of peace" by the leading personalities still in power.

[ 3 ] In this hour of the world, the members of the German people are experiencing in the most bitter way imaginable what has come about under the prevailing impulses of modern civilization. Something is being demanded of them, the realization of which cannot be thought of for a moment. Those who demand it would pile up mountains of hatred against which the ones built so far would be tiny hills if the German people had thought of such a thing after their success in power. So we have reached the point where the apparently quite impossible can be regarded as a condition of a work of peace.

[ 4 ] People who want to maintain a sober view say that the leading personalities are working on the destruction of Europe; these leading personalities devise something as part of their "work of peace" from which measures are derived that are intended to bring about the complete spiritual self-destruction of the German people in addition to the economic destruction. (It makes no difference to the assessment of the "spirit" at work in such measures if amendments are made later. And it is this "spirit" that matters.)

[ 5 ] Have we not reached the point where a sufficiently large number of people might finally realize that the way out of Europe's impasse must be found by means quite different from those resulting from a continuation of the public ideas that have been rejected? Will people continue to believe that "peace" can be made if the public views that ushered in the twentieth century are to remain decisive for the shaping of the civilized world? It will not be possible to "sign" anything that ushers in "peace" as long as a new spirit does not lead to a different judgment than that which has been made up to now in the ordering of public affairs. A discussion about whether such a new spirit is necessary should actually already be ruled out today among those capable of judgment in view of what is happening in the old one. The courage, the determination for this new spirit should be instilled in a sufficiently large number of souls. This would have to lead to a work of reconstruction which could be effectively directed against the destructive spirit. The objection that in its present situation the German people alone could not stand up to the powerful victors with such a spirit should be seen through in its insignificance. For what is good will be accepted by the whole world in the end, if the insight into the merits prevails over prejudices.

[ 6 ] In reality, it is not this objection that drives the opponents of a new spirituality to reject it. It is the lack of courage which they do not admit to themselves and which they want to disguise with sham judgments. It is the low opinion that many have formed of the effectiveness of the spiritual in recent times and which is now bearing the worst fruit. The materialistic utopia, which has become reality, and which, as utopia, must live itself out in destruction, makes the truly practical, which today can only be drawn from a new spirituality, appear to wide circles as "utopia".

[ 7 ] For many, the situation is such that the external successes of this latest era have brought them an experience that was all too congenial to them. This prevents them from seeing that at the bottom of the development of these successes was the evil spirit that brought about the horrors of the last five years. They would like to make a "peace" out of these horrors, which would make them appear as mere episodes and put the old conditions back in the place of chaos. But only action based on a judgment that sees through how the external successes of the latest era were built on a destroyed foundation of lack of ideas, and how any return to the old without spiritual renewal would also have to sow the old seeds for a return of the horrors, can be promising for the future. Without the effective help of this judgment among a sufficiently large number of people, we will not emerge from confusion and chaos.