“The War and Socialism” by H. G. Wells – A Socialist Dream of Abolished Conflict by Prokop Martínek

Written like a manifesto and formatted like a propaganda pamphlet, H. G. Well’s The War and Socialism depicts socialism as a system of ethics capable of vindicating modern society from its culture of conflict. After all, enmity is merely the material product of clashing philosophies and mindless conviction. Based on this assumption, Wells uses his work to forewarn the public of modern society’s trajectory to drown in the horrors of capitalism. And the solution? Reorder society to banish private industry and private thought, instead merging public interest into a centralized form of management and planning.

In form, language, and purpose, The War and Socialism seems to invert V. I. Lenin’s Socialism and War as a redesigned call for civil action in the name of the collective good. Published in 1920, merely 12 years after its likely inspiration, Well’s statement reminds readers of an underground political manifesto. This potential link perhaps sheds light on the background of Well’s ideological foundation, stemming from the growing militant socialist narrative of Eastern Europe but critiquing its call for armed action. Instead, Wells replaces this approach with a more pacifist vision for the future. He does so by paraphrasing Lenin’s aversion to private ownership but proposing to unite society through an “appeal for clear intentions” (Wells, p.8) instead of further conflict. In this sense, his aim is not only to end war but also the sheer notion of it.

The War and Socialism’s inexpensive form resembles a seemingly commonplace leaflet designed to be passed around between workers, soldiers, and other members of the proletariat. Selling at the price of a single penny, the cost of the pocket-sized manifesto further sheds light on its likely purpose to be thoroughly disseminated throughout the population. This assumption is further endorsed by the simple cover design lacking any ornaments or decorations more typical for readings by the educated and wealthy bourgeoise. In this sense, gaining access to War and Socialism’s original form sheds light on its true purpose. In the post-war day and age, calls for action weren’t cried out loud but discreetly exchanged. Merely examining the manifesto’s contents in online form would prevent the reader from contextualizing the work in terms of its target audience and, thus true purpose.

Both War and Socialism, and “A Dream of Armageddon” resemble a non-fiction depiction of a fictional world. The former uses the horrors of the status quo to forewarn against an imagined future. In contrast, the latter inverts this approach by drawing upon the horrors of an imagined future to appeal to the status quo. In simpler terms, both works combine imagined elements to warn against the exploitative tendencies of capitalist society. “A Dream of Armageddon” does so by describing a vivid nightmare of a collapsing paradise consumed by war. Reading War and Socialism makes it clear that this dream is a vision of the future, where all that one loves is consumed by the product of individual greed manifesting in the form of large-scale conflict. Both works thus build on horror to critique capitalist organization and promote socialist thought. In the case of War and Socialism, this horror has already come to pass in the form of the Great War caused by what Wells describes as the greed of the private armament industry capitalizing on war. In the case of “A Dream of Armageddon”, this horror is yet to come to pass and exists only (for now) in the dream realm, thus allowing for a glimmer of hope if appropriate action is taken. Both works thus use war to critique the current nature of social structures.