Thus the genius of any illuminating public discussion is not to obscure
and censor private interest but to help it to sail and to make it sail
under its own colors. The true public, in my definition of that term,
has to purge itself of the self-interested groups who become confused
with it. It must purge itself not because private interests are bad
but because private interests cannot successfully be adjusted to each
other if any one of them acquires a counterfeit strength. If the true
public, concerned only in the fact of adjustment, becomes mobilized
behind a private interest seeking to prevail, the adjustment is false;
it does not represent the real balance of forces in the affair and the
solution will break down. It will break down because the true public
will not stay mobilized very long for anything, and when it demobilizes
the private interest which was falsely exalted will find its privileges
unmanageable. It will be like a man placed on Jack Dempsey’s chest by
six policemen, and then left there after the policemen have gone home
to dinner. It will be like France placed by the Allies upon a prostrate
Germany and then left there after the Allies have departed from Europe.
The separation of the public from the self-interested group will not
be assisted by the self-interested group. We may be sure that any body
of farmers, business men, trade unionists will always call themselves
the public if they can. How then is their self-interest to be detected?
No ordinary bystander is equipped to analyze the propaganda by which
a private interest seeks to associate itself with the disinterested
public. It is a perplexing matter, perhaps the most perplexing in
popular government, and the bystander’s only recourse is to insist upon
debate. He will not be able, we may assume, to judge the merits of the
arguments. But if he does insist upon full freedom of discussion, the
advocates are very likely to expose one another. Open debate may lead
to no conclusion and throw no light whatever on the problem or its
answer, but it will tend to betray the partisan and the advocate. And
if it has identified them for the true public, debate will have served
its main purpose.
The individual not directly concerned may still choose to join the
self-interested group and support its cause. But at least he will
know that he has made himself a partisan, and thus perhaps he may
be somewhat less likely to mistake a party’s purpose for the aim of
mankind.
Chapter XI
THE DEFECTIVE RULE
1
A man violates a rule and then publicly justifies his action. Here in
the simplest form is an attack upon the validity of the rule. It is an
appeal for a public judgment.
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