So then the separate interests and personalities had been scared away, and sacrifice for the State had become the shibboleth. One must give up _himself_, and live only for the State. One must act "disinterestedly," not want to benefit _himself_, but the State. Hereby the latter has become the true person, before whom the individual personality vanishes; not I live, but it lives in me. Therefore, in comparison with the former self-seeking, this was unselfishness and _impersonality_ itself. Before this god--State--all egoism vanished, and before it all were equal; they were without any other distinction--men, nothing but men. The Revolution took fire from the inflammable material of _property_. The government needed money. Now it must prove the proposition that it is _absolute_, and so master of all property, sole proprietor; it must _take_ to itself _its_ money, which was only in the possession of the subjects, not their property. Instead of this, it calls States-general, to have this money _granted_ to it. The shrinking from strictly logical action destroyed the illusion of an _absolute_ government; he who must have something "granted" to him cannot be regarded as absolute. The subjects recognized that they were _real proprietors_, and that it was _their_ money that was demanded. Those who had hitherto been subjects attained the consciousness that they were _proprietors_. Bailly depicts this in a few words: "If you cannot dispose of my property without my assent, how much less can you of my person, of all that concerns my mental and social position? All this is my property, like the piece of land that I till; and I have a right, an interest, to make the laws myself." Bailly's words sound, certainly, as if _every one_ was a proprietor now. However, instead of the government, instead of the prince, the--_nation_ now became proprietor and master. From this time on the ideal is spoken of as--"popular liberty"--"a free people," etc. As early as July 8, 1789, the declaration of the bishop of Autun and Barrère took away all semblance of the importance of each and every _individual_ in legislation; it showed the complete _powerlessness_ of the constituents; the _majority of the representatives_ has become _master_. When on July 9 the plan for division of the work on the constitution is proposed, Mirabeau remarks that "the government has only power, no rights; only in the _people_ is the source of all _right_ to be found." On July 16 this same Mirabeau exclaims: "Is not the people the source of all _power_?" The source, therefore, of all right, and the source of all--power![68] By the way, here the substance of "right" becomes visible; it is--_power_. "He who has power has right."