第 五十九 章 · World
The Marquis de Condorcet was one of the noblest characters among the
small group of honest enthusiasts who were responsible for the outbreak
of the great French Revolution. He had devoted his life to the cause
of the poor and the unfortunate. He had been one of the assistants
of d’Alembert and Diderot when they wrote their famous Encyclopédie.
During the first years of the Revolution he had been the leader of the
Moderate wing of the Convention.
His tolerance, his kindliness, his stout common sense, had made him
an object of suspicion when the treason of the king and the court
clique had given the extreme radicals their chance to get hold of the
government and kill their opponents. Condorcet was declared “hors de
loi,” or outlawed, an outcast who was henceforth at the mercy of every
true patriot. His friends offered to hide him at their own peril.
Condorcet refused to accept their sacrifice. He escaped and tried to
reach his home, where he might be safe. After three nights in the open,
torn and bleeding, he entered an inn and asked for some food. The
suspicious yokels searched him and in his pockets they found a copy of
Horace, the Latin poet. This showed that their prisoner was a man of
gentle breeding and had no business upon the highroads at a time when
every educated person was regarded as an enemy of the Revolutionary
state. They took Condorcet and they bound him and they gagged him and
they threw him into the village lock-up, but in the morning when the
soldiers came to drag him back to Paris and cut his head off, behold!
he was dead.
This man who had given all and had received nothing had good reason to
despair of the human race. But he has written a few sentences which
ring as true to-day as they did one hundred and thirty years ago. I
repeat them here for your benefit.
“Nature has set no limits to our hopes,” he wrote, “and the picture
of the human race, now freed from its chains and marching with a firm
tread on the road of truth and virtue and happiness, offers to the
philosopher a spectacle which consoles him for the errors, for the
crimes and the injustices which still pollute and afflict this earth.”
[Illustration: WAR]
The world has just passed through an agony of pain compared to which
the French Revolution was a mere incident. The shock has been so great
that it has killed the last spark of hope in the breasts of millions of
men. They were chanting a hymn of progress, and four years of slaughter
followed their prayers for peace. “Is it worth while,” so they ask, “to
work and slave for the benefit of creatures who have not yet passed
beyond the stage of the earliest cave men?”
There is but one answer.
That answer is “Yes!”
The World War was a terrible calamity. But it did not mean the end of
things. On the contrary it brought about the coming of a new day.
It is easy to write a history of Greece and Rome or the Middle Ages.
The actors who played their parts upon that long-forgotten stage are
all dead. We can criticize them with a cool head. The audience that
applauded their efforts has dispersed. Our remarks cannot possibly hurt
their feelings.
But it is very difficult to give a true account of contemporary
events. The problems that fill the minds of the people with whom we
pass through life, are our own problems, and they hurt us too much or
they please us too well to be described with that fairness which is
necessary when we are writing history and not blowing the trumpet of
propaganda. All the same I shall endeavour to tell you why I agree with
poor Condorcet when he expressed his firm faith in a better future.
Often before have I warned you against the false impression which is
created by the use of our so-called historical epochs which divide the
story of man into four parts, the ancient world, the Middle Ages, the
Renaissance and the Reformation, and Modern Time. The last of these
terms is the most dangerous. The word “modern” implies that we, the
people of the twentieth century, are at the top of human achievement.
Fifty years ago the liberals of England who followed the leadership
of Gladstone felt that the problem of a truly representative and
democratic form of government had been solved forever by the second
great Reform Bill, which gave workmen an equal share in the government
with their employers. When Disraeli and his conservative friends talked
of a dangerous “leap in the dark” they answered “No.” They felt certain
of their cause and trusted that henceforth all classes of society would
co-operate to make the government of their common country a success.
Since then many things have happened, and the few liberals who are
still alive begin to understand that they were mistaken.
There is no definite answer to any historical problem.
Every generation must fight the good fight anew or perish as those
sluggish animals of the prehistoric world have perished.
If you once get hold of this great truth you will get a new and much
broader view of life. Then, go one step further and try to imagine
yourself in the position of your own great-great-grandchildren who will
take your place in the year 10,000. They too will learn history. But
what will they think of those short four thousand years during which
we have kept a written record of our actions and of our thoughts?
They will think of Napoleon as a contemporary of Tiglath Pileser, the
Assyrian conqueror. Perhaps they will confuse him with Jenghiz Khan
or Alexander the Macedonian. The great war which has just come to an
end will appear in the light of that long commercial conflict which
settled the supremacy of the Mediterranean when Rome and Carthage
fought during one hundred and twenty-eight years for the mastery of
the sea. The Balkan troubles of the 19th century (the struggle for
freedom of Serbia and Greece and Bulgaria and Montenegro) to them
will seem a continuation of the disordered conditions caused by the
Great Migrations. They will look at pictures of the Rheims cathedral
which only yesterday was destroyed by German guns as we look upon a
photograph of the Acropolis ruined two hundred and fifty years ago
during a war between the Turks and the Venetians. They will regard
the fear of death, which is still common among many people, as a
childish superstition which was perhaps natural in a race of men who
had burned witches as late as the year 1692. Even our hospitals and our
laboratories and our operating rooms of which we are so proud will look
like slightly improved workshops of alchemists and mediæval surgeons.
And the reason for all this is simple. We modern men and women are
not “modern” at all. On the contrary we still belong to the last
generations of the cave-dwellers. The foundation for a new era was laid
but yesterday. The human race was given its first chance to become
truly civilised when it took courage to question all things and made
“knowledge and understanding” the foundation upon which to create a
more reasonable and sensible society of human beings. The Great War
was the “growing-pain” of this new world.
[Illustration: THE SPREAD OF THE IMPERIAL IDEA]
For a long time to come people will write mighty books to prove that
this or that or the other person brought about the war. The Socialists
will publish volumes in which they will accuse the “capitalists” of
having brought about the war for “commercial gain.” The capitalists
will answer that they lost infinitely more through the war than they
made—that their children were among the first to go and fight and be
killed—and they will show how in every country the bankers tried their
very best to avert the outbreak of hostilities. French historians will
go through the register of German sins from the days of Charlemagne
until the days of William of Hohenzollern and German historians will
return the compliment and will go through the list of French horrors
from the days of Charlemagne until the days of President Poincaré.
And then they will establish to their own satisfaction that the other
fellow was guilty of “causing the war.” Statesmen, dead and not yet
dead, in all countries will take to their typewriters and they will
explain how they tried to avert hostilities and how their wicked
opponents forced them into it.
The historian, a hundred years hence, will not bother about these
apologies and vindications. He will understand the real nature of the
underlying causes and he will know that personal ambitions and personal
wickedness and personal greed had very little to do with the final
outburst. The original mistake, which was responsible for all this
misery, was committed when our scientists began to create a new world
of steel and iron and chemistry and electricity and forgot that the
human mind is slower than the proverbial turtle, is lazier than the
well-known sloth, and marches from one hundred to three hundred years
behind the small group of courageous leaders.
A Zulu in a frock coat is still a Zulu. A dog trained to ride a bicycle
and smoke a pipe is still a dog. And a human being with the mind of a
sixteenth century tradesman driving a 1921 Rolls-Royce is still a human
being with the mind of a sixteenth century tradesman.
If you do not understand this at first, read it again. It will become
clearer to you in a moment and it will explain many things that have
happened these last six years.
Perhaps I may give you another, more familiar, example, to show you
what I mean. In the movie theatres, jokes and funny remarks are often
thrown upon the screen. Watch the audience the next time you have a
chance. A few people seem almost to inhale the words. It takes them but
a second to read the lines. Others are a bit slower. Still others take
from twenty to thirty seconds. Finally those men and women who do not
read any more than they can help, get the point when the brighter ones
among the audience have already begun to decipher the next cut-in. It
is not different in human life, as I shall now show you.
In a former chapter I have told you how the idea of the Roman Empire
continued to live for a thousand years after the death of the last
Roman Emperor. It caused the establishment of a large number of
“imitation empires.” It gave the Bishops of Rome a chance to make
themselves the head of the entire church, because they represented the
idea of Roman world-supremacy. It drove a number of perfectly harmless
barbarian chieftains into a career of crime and endless warfare because
they were for ever under the spell of this magic word “Rome.” All these
people, Popes, Emperors and plain fighting men were not very different
from you or me. But they lived in a world where the Roman tradition was
a vital issue—something living—something which was remembered clearly
both by the father and the son and the grandson. And so they struggled
and sacrificed themselves for a cause which to-day would not find a
dozen recruits.
In still another chapter I have told you how the great religious
wars took place more than a century after the first open act of the
Reformation and if you will compare the chapter on the Thirty Years
War with that on Inventions, you will see that this ghastly butchery
took place at a time when the first clumsy steam engines were already
puffing in the laboratories of a number of French and German and
English scientists. But the world at large took no interest in these
strange contraptions, and went on with a grand theological discussion
which to-day causes yawns, but no anger.
And so it goes. A thousand years from now, the historian will use the
same words about Europe of the out-going nineteenth century, and he
will see how men were engaged upon terrific nationalistic struggles
while the laboratories all around them were filled with serious folk
who cared not one whit for politics as long as they could force nature
to surrender a few more of her million secrets.
You will gradually begin to understand what I am driving at. The
engineer and the scientist and the chemist, within a single generation,
filled Europe and America and Asia with their vast machines, with
their telegraphs, their flying machines, their coal-tar products. They
created a new world in which time and space were reduced to complete
insignificance. They invented new products and they made these so cheap
that almost every one could buy them. I have told you all this before
but it certainly will bear repeating.
To keep the ever increasing number of factories going, the owners, who
had also become the rulers of the land, needed raw materials and coal.
Especially coal. Meanwhile the mass of the people were still thinking
in terms of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and clinging to the
old notions of the state as a dynastic or political organisation. This
clumsy mediæval institution was then suddenly called upon to handle
the highly modern problems of a mechanical and industrial world. It
did its best, according to the rules of the game which had been laid
down centuries before. The different states created enormous armies
and gigantic navies which were used for the purpose of acquiring new
possessions in distant lands. Wherever there was a tiny bit of land
left, there arose an English or a French or a German or a Russian
colony. If the natives objected, they were killed. In most cases they
did not object, and were allowed to live peacefully, provided they did
not interfere with the diamond mines or the coal mines or the oil mines
or the gold mines or the rubber plantations, and they derived many
benefits from the foreign occupation.
Sometimes it happened that two states in search of raw materials
wanted the same piece of land at the same time. Then there was a
war. This occurred fifteen years ago when Russia and Japan fought
for the possession of certain territories which belonged to the
Chinese people. Such conflicts, however, were the exception. No one
really desired to fight. Indeed, the idea of fighting with armies and
battleships and submarines began to seem absurd to the men of the early
20th century. They associated the idea of violence with the long-ago
age of unlimited monarchies and intriguing dynasties. Every day they
read in their papers of still further inventions, of groups of English
and American and German scientists who were working together in perfect
friendship for the purpose of an advance in medicine or in astronomy.
They lived in a busy world of trade and of commerce and factories. But
only a few noticed that the development of the state, (of the gigantic
community of people who recognise certain common ideals,) was lagging
several hundred years behind. They tried to warn the others. But the
others were occupied with their own affairs.
I have used so many similes that I must apologise for bringing in
one more. The Ship of State (that old and trusted expression which
is ever new and always picturesque,) of the Egyptians and the Greeks
and the Romans and the Venetians and the merchant adventurers of
the seventeenth century had been a sturdy craft, constructed of
well-seasoned wood, and commanded by officers who knew both their crew
and their vessel and who understood the limitations of the art of
navigating which had been handed down to them by their ancestors.
Then came the new age of iron and steel and machinery. First one part,
then another of the old ship of state was changed. Her dimensions
were increased. The sails were discarded for steam. Better living
quarters were established, but more people were forced to go down into
the stoke-hole, and while the work was safe and fairly remunerative,
they did not like it as well as their old and more dangerous job
in the rigging. Finally, and almost imperceptibly, the old wooden
square-rigger had been transformed into a modern ocean liner. But the
captain and the mates remained the same. They were appointed or elected
in the same way as a hundred years before. They were taught the same
system of navigation which had served the mariners of the fifteenth
century. In their cabins hung the same charts and signal flags which
had done service in the days of Louis XIV and Frederick the Great. In
short, they were (through no fault of their own) completely incompetent.
The sea of international politics is not very broad. When those
Imperial and Colonial liners began to try and outrun each other,
accidents were bound to happen. They did happen. You can still see the
wreckage if you venture to pass through that part of the ocean.
And the moral of the story is a simple one. The world is in dreadful
need of men who will assume the new leadership—who will have the
courage of their own visions and who will recognise clearly that we are
only at the beginning of the voyage, and have to learn an entirely new
system of seamanship.
They will have to serve for years as mere apprentices. They will
have to fight their way to the top against every possible form of
opposition. When they reach the bridge, mutiny of an envious crew may
cause their death. But some day, a man will arise who will bring the
vessel safely to port, and he shall be the hero of the ages.