The more one thinks of it the more he will see that conflict and
co-operation are not separable things, but phases of one process which
always involves something of both. Life, seen largely, is an onward
struggle in which now one of these phases and now another may be more
conspicuous, but from which neither can be absent.
You can resolve the social order into a great number of co-operative
wholes of various sorts, each of which includes conflicting elements
within itself upon which it is imposing some sort of harmony with a view
to conflict with other wholes. Thus the mind of a man is full of
wrangling impulses, but his struggle with the world requires that he act
as a unit. A labor-union is made up of competing and disputing members;
but they must manage to agree when it comes to a struggle with the
employer. And employer and employees, whatever their struggles, must and
do combine into a whole for the competition of their plant against
others. The competing plants, however, unite through boards of trade or
similar bodies to further the interests of their city against those of
other cities. And so the political factions of a nation may be at the
height of conflict, but if they are loyal they unite at once when war
breaks out with another country.
And war itself is not all conflict, but often generates a mutual
interest and respect, a “sympathy of concussion.” A scholar who perished
in the trenches of the German army in France wrote: “Precisely when one
has to face suffering as I do, it is then a bond of union enlaces me
with those who are over there—on the other side.... If I get out of
this—but I have little hope—my dearest duty will be to plunge into the
study of what those who have been our enemies think.” It is not
impossible to think of the battling nations as struggling onward toward
some common end which they cannot see. They slay one another, but they
put a common faith and loyalty into the conflict; and out of the latter
may come a clearer view of the common right. It is a moral experiment to
which each contributes and defends its own hypothesis, and if the
righteous cause wins, or the righteous elements in each cause, all will
profit by the result. So it was with the American Civil War, as we all
feel now. North and South say: “We differed as to what was right. It had
to be fought out. There might have been another way if our minds had
been otherwise, but as it was the way to unity lay through blood.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account