It behoves all those, therefore, who nowadays [p90] feel this craving for liberty, and who are tempted to follow wherever and whenever it is upheld before them as a cause, thoroughly to understand what it is they are invited to fight for. They must not allow themselves to be led astray by those who would promise them unconstrained freedom of action, for that is a physical impossibility, a lie, an illusion, and a mirage only of the ignorant. They must not be deceived by agitators who lead them to imagine that this “freedom” for which they are invited to strive, is a sort of paradise of fairies, from whom the natural cares and responsibilities of this world have been miraculously lifted. Nor must they suppose that it has much to do with the kind of government which their country enjoys,--whether monarchical, aristocratic, plutocratic or Bolshevik. Modern governments in their nature can do little for the spiritual requirements of the working man. As far as that freedom is concerned which consists in finding expression in one’s daily duties for the strongest impulses of one’s being, the masses of the working people in this country were infinitely more “free” under the despotic Tudors than they are at present under the benign rule of the people’s elected representatives. Thus the only kind of freedom that the most honest politician can definitely promise, political freedom--is in itself one of the most wanton deceptions ever practised upon humanity. For what does this political freedom consist of?--It begins and ends with the vote. But in what manner does this constitute freedom? To what extent does [p91] the voter at the poll secure or realise his own freedom by the vote he registers? He gives his vote on a programme which frequently has only a very remote relation to his private life or interests. What can his vote accomplish then in the cause of his own freedom? In registering his vote he is bound to choose one out of two or three men who stand as candidates for his constituency. He may heartily dislike every one of them, and yet be driven to vote for A because A’s programme is a little less pernicious than that of B or C. After having voted for A, if our voter is lucky, A may get into Parliament. Every time A votes in the House itself, however, he may be out-voted by other members, so the very reason for which our voter elected A may be frustrated when once A is an M.P. If, however, our voter does not succeed in getting A into Parliament, he may be one of six or even ten thousand in his constituency who will not be represented in Parliament for four or five whole years. Every Parliament that sits in England fails in this way to be representative of millions of voters. In what manner have these millions of voters achieved their own freedom, or in what manner are they safeguarding it? For even if we grant that it is right that millions of voters should not be represented in Parliament