The Camel and the Needle's EyePonsonby, Arthur Ponsonby, Baron
Philosophy
The Camel and the Needle's Eye
Ponsonby, Arthur Ponsonby, Baron
Wealth; Wealth -- Moral and ethical aspects
“For where is the justice that noblemen, goldsmiths, and usurers
and those classes who either do nothing at all or in what they do
are of no great service to the commonwealth, should live a genteel
and splendid life in idleness or unproductive labour; whilst in the
meantime the servant, the waggoner, the mechanic, and the peasant
toiling almost longer and harder than the horse, in labour so
necessary that no commonwealth could endure a year without it, lead
a life so wretched that the condition of the horse seems more to be
envied?... Thus after careful reflection, it seems to me, as I hope
for mercy, that our modern republics are nothing but a conspiracy
of the rich pursuing their own selfish interests under the name
of a republic. They devise and invent all ways and means whereby
they may, in the first place, secure to themselves the possession
of what they have amassed by evil means; and in the second place,
secure to their own use and profit the work and labour of the poor
at the lowest possible price.”
Would he find words to express himself were he alive to-day?
But of them all no one has emphasised so clearly or insisted so
strongly on the vanity and danger of worldly goods as Christ did.
The rich man consults Him, and tells Him that all the chief
commandments he has observed from his youth. But Christ sees what is
amiss, and the man goes away grieving, “For he had great possessions.”
Then follows the great generalisation: “How hardly shall they that have
riches enter into the Kingdom of God. It is easier for a camel to go
through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of
God.” As to whether or not the “needle’s eye” was the name of a narrow
gate of the city through which heavily laden camels could not pass,
does not signify. The meaning is clear beyond question. In the Kingdom
of God upon earth, that is an ideally constituted human society, there
is no place for a man encumbered with riches; his presence would
assuredly disturb the even balance of the whole. Rousseau saw that it
was a condition of good government that no citizen should be rich
enough to buy another, and no citizen poor enough to be compelled to
sell himself.[32] If all the social organisation of humanity, the
arrangement of which rests apparently to a great extent in our control,
were so constituted as to allow each man a full competence, far from
its producing a deadening equality as some pretend, it would free
the human race to make the most of its varied natural capacities and
talents which are now mostly lost, and a competition of achievement and
service founded on altruism would take the place of a competition for
gain and profit based on egoism. The ideal may be unattainable for the
present because we have drifted so far from it, but that is no reason
for discarding it altogether and turning our faces in the exactly
opposite direction.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account