Boer Politics by Yves Guyot
page 16 of 167 (09%)
page 16 of 167 (09%)
|
case, who only began to entertain doubts after the exposure of the Henry
forgery. I have been asked "Why have you not answered Dr. Kuyper's article in the _Revue des Deux Mondes_?" and it appears that Dr. Leyds has been heard to say in Brussels: "M. Yves Guyot has made no answer to Dr. Kuyper's article." As though it were unanswerable! I might well retort with the question: "Why does the Pro-Boer press never reply to counter arguments save by vague phrases, and evading the real issue? Why does the French press, in particular, confine itself to lauding "the brave Boers" and the "venerable President Krüger," and to extolling the virtues with which it credits them, instead of studying their actual social condition, and giving its readers the plain facts? Why do we not find one word in our papers of the articles by M.M. Villarais and Tallichet, published in the _Bibliothèque Universelle_.[3]" It is an exact repetition of the method employed by the Anti-Dreyfusard papers in the Dreyfus case. But the odd thing is, that many who were then exasperated by it, now look upon it as quite natural, and are not surprised to find themselves bosom friends of Drumont, Rochefort, Judet, and Arthur Mayer. The Transvaal question unites them in a "nationalist" policy, which, if it were to go beyond mere words, would result in a war with England and might complete, by a naval Sedan, the disaster of 1870. The majority of Frenchmen have brought to the scrutiny of the matter a degree of pigheadedness that clearly proves the influence of our method of subjective education. We state our faith on words, and believe--because it is a mystery. |
|