But there has also been another force at work of equally far-reaching
importance. This force is the modern idea of democracy, in which
_justice is modified by good-will_. With the ancients justice meant
"that every man should practise one thing only, that being the thing to
which his nature was most perfectly adapted." [10] Equality upon the
highest plane of human capacity was limited even in theory to a
privileged class. But since the advent of Christianity it has never
been possible for European society to acquiesce with good conscience in
a limited distribution of the benefits of civilization. For the new
enlightenment teaches that when men's potentialities are considered,
rather than their present condition, _there are no classes_. As a
consequence men demand representation not for what they are, but for
what they may become if given their just opportunity. The body of
citizens whose good is the final end of government virtually includes,
then, all men without exception. It is no longer possible simply to
dismiss large groups of human beings from consideration on grounds of
what is held to be their unfitness. For they now demand that they be
made fit. Burke expresses this enlightenment when he says, in speaking
of the lower strata of society:
As the blindness of mankind has caused their slavery, in return their
state of slavery is made a pretence of keeping them in a state of
blindness; for {159} the politician will tell you gravely, that their
life of servitude disqualifies the greater part of the race of man for
a search of truth, and supplies them with no other than mean and
insufficient ideas. This is but too true; and this is one of the
reasons for which I blame such institutions.[11]
And so does every man now demand of the community as a whole that he
shall be permitted to share equally in its benefits, and also, in order
that his claims may be represented, that he shall have a voice in its
councils. Do not misunderstand me. I do not mean that all men,
therefore, must here and now be held to be equal; but only that they
must be held to be capable of being as good as the best until they have
demonstrated the contrary by forfeiting their opportunity. Nor do I
mean that all men must therefore be given the ballot. We are
discussing a question not of instrument, but of principle. I do mean
that there is an idea that the best of life is for all; and that if
there are many that are incapable of entering into it, then they must
be helped to be capable. And I mean, furthermore, that _this idea
works irresistibly_. It commands the support of the whole army of
interests. It will never be abandoned because it makes for the
increase of life on the whole; and hence no social order will from
henceforth be stable that is not based upon it.
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