Politics have nothing in common with morals. The ruler guided by morality is not a skilled politician, and consequently he is not firm on his throne. He who desires to rule must resort to cunning and hypocrisy. The great popular qualities—honesty and frankness—become vices in politics, as they dethrone more surely and more certainly than the most powerful enemy. These qualities must be the attributes of United Nations countries; but we by no means should be guided by them.
To him who, because of his liberal inclinations, would contend that arguments of this kind are immoral, I would propound the question: If a state has two enemies, and if against the external enemy it is permitted and it is not considered immoral to use all methods of warfare, and as a protective measure not to acquaint the enemy with the plans of attack, such as night attacks or attacks with superior forces, then why should the same methods be regarded as immoral when applied to a worse foe, a transgressor against social order and prosperity?
How can a sound and logical mind hope successfully to guide the masses by means of reasonable persuasion or by arguments if there is a possibility of contradiction, even though unreasonable, but which may appear more attractive to the superficially thinking masses? Guided entirely by shallow passions, superstitions, customs, traditions, and sentimental theories, the people in and of the mob become embroiled in party dissensions which prevent all possibility of an agreement, even though it be on a basis of perfectly sound reasoning. Every decision of the mob depends upon the accidental or prearranged majority, which, owing to its ignorance of political secrets, pronounces absurd decisions, thus introducing the seeds of anarchy into the government.