|
The rather stodgy and uncharismatic Victor Berger never gained the outright sympathy vote that Eugene Debs (a man well known for his charm and wit) could gather even behind bars. Nonetheless, Bergerâs political career flourished in the postwar years as Wisconsin voters asserted their regional political autonomy and, at the same time, attempted to make up for the excesses of wartime hysteria. As the ãherd mentalityä subsided both regionally and nationally, Berger devoted his energies fully to war-related issues, much to the irritation of his fellow Congressmen in Washington, but much to the delight of his anti-Washington constituents in Milwaukee. Berger may have won his first reelection to Congress after the war because Milwaukee voters resented being told who was an acceptable candidate for national office; he won reelection after that because he maintained a well-oiled political machine in Milwaukee and because he continued to address war-related issues of importance. For instance, Bergerâs postwar attacks on wartime profiteering gained him renewed respect in light of increasing evidence that his original attacks on munitions makers and banking houses had been quite justified. In 1918, the Federal Trade Commission was the first official agency to produce well-documented instances of the corruption and ãinordinate greedä of wartime profiteers.123 Such revelations only increased over the decade, eventually culminating in the creation of the Nye Committee in 1934, which produced volumes of evidence condemning the profiteering of the wartime munitions industry.124 Thus, Bergerâs attacks on profiteering, which had brought him great censure during the war, became a source of increasing political strength in the disillusioned postwar world. Bergerâs popularity remained steady throughout the 1920s, as Wisconsin voters continued to elect him as a United States Representative until 1929. Berger derived much of his political strength during this period from his continued opposition to war. In an era of increasing isolationism and negative popular sentiments about war, Bergerâs positions were well-received. In fact, Berger attacked World War I as strongly after Versailles as he had done before the peace treaty. Until his untimely death, Berger advocated sweeping changes in American foreign and domestic policies to insure that America would never again become entangled in an imperialistic and capitalistic war. Berger believed serious flaws in United States foreign policy had to be corrected to prevent a recurrence of World War I. For one thing, Berger bitterly attacked the "war guilt clause" of "the hellish pact of Versailles."125 Berger denounced the Treaty of Versailles, claiming that it unjustly blamed Germany as the war's sole instigator. Berger believed all of the major European imperialist nations deserved equal blame for starting the war. Even more important, Berger believed the preposterous reparations which Germany had to pay as a result of the war guilt clause would precipitate "a European economic crisis"126 which would certainly lead to another war. To Berger, the future of European peace depended on an economically sound Germany. If the Allies forced Germany into economic disaster by demanding exorbitant reparations, Berger believed German leaders would almost certainly resort to militarism to regain lost colonies and resources.127 Also, foreshadowing arguments for the post-World War II Marshall Plan, Berger claimed that an unstable economic situation in Germany would be the perfect breeding grounds for a violent Bolshevist revolution.128 To prevent these troubles, Berger proposed that the United States ignore the provisions of "that pact of hate, the Versailles Treaty,"129 and instead provide a "credit of one billion dollars"130 to Germany at an interest rate of six percent to help strengthen the German economy. Berger also opposed the formation of the League of Nations. Although Berger had attended the first meeting of the League to Enforce Peace, William Howard Taft's organization dedicated to creating a post-war league of nations,131 Berger later maintained that the League of Nations created at the Paris Peace Conferences constituted nothing more than "an alliance of more or less plutocratic governments."132 Berger claimed that this alliance of capitalist rulers would do very little to reduce armaments in any country besides Germany, nor would the League have any power to prevent future wars.133 Besides denouncing the treaty as an imperialist and capitalist pact, Berger attacked the Treaty of Versailles for failing to address any of Woodrow Wilson's "14 points." The ideal of self-determination had been sorely neglected as "this peace of Versailles divided up 15,000,000 Germans among the hostile neighbors like sheep to be slaughtered."134 However, Berger did not necessarily believe self-determination was quite as wonderful an ideal as David Lloyd George and Woodrow Wilson had held it up to be. Berger, recognizing that ethnic hatreds have often been the cause of war in Europe, proposed that ethnic and national identities be subsumed by the formation of a "United States of Europe, framed after the pattern of Switzerland."135 On a more realistic note, Berger also proposed that a true international court and congress be set up in place of the League of Nations.136 Above all, Berger warned that the United States should not set itself up as "a world constable"137 to maintain peace. To Berger, history proved that attempts to play the role of peacekeeper inevitably led to war.138 Besides promoting modifications in American foreign policy, Berger advocated changes in domestic policy to help prevent another war. First, Berger claimed that if American industrialists did not raise the wages of their laborers, a revolution was sure to result. Berger maintained that the government's "main fight ought to be to combat poverty" because "poverty is the mother of misery and grandmother of revolution."139 Even during the war, Berger predicted that "any reductions of hours or wages after the war" would result in "strikes, boycotts, and blacklists" and workingmen would be led to revolutionary tendencies by "some radical organization of the I.W.W. type."140 As a Socialist, Berger firmly believed that if American capitalists maintained their stranglehold on the nation's wealth, workers would eventually revolt and the capitalists would fall in a bloody revolution.141 Berger also believed the United States government had to work more diligently to preserve the constitutional rights of its citizens in order to prevent another war. Berger could not easily forget the attacks he had suffered for speaking his mind during the war. Berger feared the government's repression of speech during the war had established a precedent which could allow future governments to declare war at will without fear of reprobation. As Berger noted, "the famous espionage act is still on the statute books."142 As a self-proclaimed student of political history, Berger also pointed out that systematic repression of rights very often leads to violent and bloody revolutions.143 To rectify the situation and prevent the recurrence of war, Berger promoted repealing the Espionage Act, freeing political prisoners who had lost their freedom during the war, and supporting the activities of the American Civil Liberties Union (which had been formed in 1920 in response to wartime rights violations).144 |
|
