heretics-第37部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！



The　matter　may；　perhaps；　be　illustrated　by　a　parallel　from　our



modern　politics。　　When　men　tell　us　that　the　old　Liberal　politicians



of　the　type　of　Gladstone　cared　only　for　ideals；　of　course；



they　are　talking　nonsensethey　cared　for　a　great　many　other　things；



including　votes。　　And　when　men　tell　us　that　modern　politicians



of　the　type　of　Mr。　Chamberlain　or；　in　another　way；　Lord　Rosebery；



care　only　for　votes　or　for　material　interest；　then　again　they　are



talking　nonsensethese　men　care　for　ideals　like　all　other　men。



But　the　real　distinction　which　may　be　drawn　is　this；　that　to



the　older　politician　the　ideal　was　an　ideal；　and　nothing　else。



To　the　new　politician　his　dream　is　not　only　a　good　dream；　it　is　a　reality。



The　old　politician　would　have　said；　〃It　would　be　a　good　thing



if　there　were　a　Republican　Federation　dominating　the　world。〃



But　the　modern　politician　does　not　say；　〃It　would　be　a　good　thing



if　there　were　a　British　Imperialism　dominating　the　world。〃



He　says；　〃It　is　a　good　thing　that　there　is　a　British　Imperialism



dominating　the　world；〃　whereas　clearly　there　is　nothing　of　the　kind。



The　old　Liberal　would　say　〃There　ought　to　be　a　good　Irish　government



in　Ireland。〃　　But　the　ordinary　modern　Unionist　does　not　say；



〃There　ought　to　be　a　good　English　government　in　Ireland。〃　　He　says；



〃There　is　a　good　English　government　in　Ireland；〃　which　is　absurd。



In　short；　the　modern　politicians　seem　to　think　that　a　man　becomes



practical　merely　by　making　assertions　entirely　about　practical　things。



Apparently；　a　delusion　does　not　matter　as　long　as　it　is　a



materialistic　delusion。　　Instinctively　most　of　us　feel　that；



as　a　practical　matter；　even　the　contrary　is　true。　　I　certainly



would　much　rather　share　my　apartments　with　a　gentleman　who　thought



he　was　God　than　with　a　gentleman　who　thought　he　was　a　grasshopper。



To　be　continually　haunted　by　practical　images　and　practical　problems；



to　be　constantly　thinking　of　things　as　actual；　as　urgent；　as　in　process



of　completionthese　things　do　not　prove　a　man　to　be　practical；



these　things；　indeed；　are　among　the　most　ordinary　signs　of　a　lunatic。



That　our　modern　statesmen　are　materialistic　is　nothing　against



their　being　also　morbid。　　Seeing　angels　in　a　vision　may　make　a　man



a　supernaturalist　to　excess。　　But　merely　seeing　snakes　in　delirium



tremens　does　not　make　him　a　naturalist。







And　when　we　come　actually　to　examine　the　main　stock　notions　of　our



modern　practical　politicians；　we　find　that　those　main　stock　notions　are



mainly　delusions。　　A　great　many　instances　might　be　given　of　the　fact。



We　might　take；　for　example；　the　case　of　that　strange　class　of　notions



which　underlie　the　word　〃union；〃　and　all　the　eulogies　heaped　upon　it。



Of　course；　union　is　no　more　a　good　thing　in　itself　than　separation



is　a　good　thing　in　itself。　　To　have　a　party　in　favour　of　union



and　a　party　in　favour　of　separation　is　as　absurd　as　to　have　a　party



in　favour　of　going　upstairs　and　a　party　in　favour　of　going　downstairs。



The　question　is　not　whether　we　go　up　or　down　stairs；　but　where　we



are　going　to；　and　what　we　are　going；　for？　　Union　is　strength；



union　is　also　weakness。　　It　is　a　good　thing　to　harness　two　horses



to　a　cart；　but　it　is　not　a　good　thing　to　try　and　turn　two　hansom　cabs



into　one　four…wheeler。　Turning　ten　nations　into　one　empire　may　happen



to　be　as　feasible　as　turning　ten　shillings　into　one　half…sovereign。



Also　it　may　happen　to　be　as　preposterous　as　turning　ten　terriers



into　one　mastiff　。　The　question　in　all　cases　is　not　a　question　of



union　or　absence　of　union；　but　of　identity　or　absence　of　identity。



Owing　to　certain　historical　and　moral　causes；　two　nations　may　be



so　united　as　upon　the　whole　to　help　each　other。　　Thus　England



and　Scotland　pass　their　time　in　paying　each　other　compliments；



but　their　energies　and　atmospheres　run　distinct　and　parallel；



and　consequently　do　not　clash。　　Scotland　continues　to　be　educated



and　Calvinistic；　England　continues　to　be　uneducated　and　happy。



But　owing　to　certain　other　Moral　and　certain　other　political　causes；



two　nations　may　be　so　united　as　only　to　hamper　each　other；



their　lines　do　clash　and　do　not　run　parallel。　　Thus；　for　instance；



England　and　Ireland　are　so　united　that　the　Irish　can



sometimes　rule　England；　but　can　never　rule　Ireland。



The　educational　systems；　including　the　last　Education　Act；　are　here；



as　in　the　case　of　Scotland；　a　very　good　test　of　the　matter。



The　overwhelming　majority　of　Irishmen　believe　in　a　strict　Catholicism；



the　overwhelming　majority　of　Englishmen　believe　in　a　vague　Protestantism。



The　Irish　party　in　the　Parliament　of　Union　is　just　large　enough　to　prevent



the　English　education　being　indefinitely　Protestant；　and　just　small



enough　to　prevent　the　Irish　education　being　definitely　Catholic。



Here　we　have　a　state　of　things　which　no　man　in　his　senses　would



ever　dream　of　wishing　to　continue　if　he　had　not　been　bewitched



by　the　sentimentalism　of　the　mere　word　〃union。〃







This　example　of　union；　however；　is　not　the　example　which　I　propose



to　take　of　the　ingrained　futility　and　deception　underlying



all　the　assumptions　of　the　modern　practical　politician。



I　wish　to　speak　especially　of　another　and　much　more　general　delusion。



It　pervades　the　minds　and　speeches　of　all　the　practical　men　of　all　parties；



and　it　is　a　childish　blunder　built　upon　a　single　false　metaphor。



I　refer　to　the　universal　modern　talk　about　young　nations　and　new　nations；



about　America　being　young；　about　New　Zealand　being　new。　　The　whole　thing



is　a　trick　of　words。　　America　is　not　young；　New　Zealand　is　not　new。



It　is　a　very　discussable　question　whether　they　are　not　both　much



older　than　England　or　Ireland。







Of　course　we　may　use　the　metaphor　of　youth　about　America　or



the　colonies；　if　we　use　it　strictly　as　implying　only　a　recent　origin。



But　if　we　use　it　（as　we　do　use　it）　as　implying　vigour；　or　vivacity；



or　crudity；　or　inexperience；　or　hope；　or　a　long　life　before　them



or　any　of　the　romantic　attributes　of　youth；　then　it　is　surely



as　clear　as　daylight　that　we　are　duped　by　a　stale　figure　of　speech。



We　can　easily　see　the　matter　clearly　by　applying　it　to　any　other



institution　parallel　to　the　institution　of　an　independent　nationality。



If　a　club　called　〃The　Milk　and　Soda　League〃　（let　us　say）



was　set　up　yesterday；　as　I　have　no　doubt　it　was；　then；　of　course；



〃The　Milk　and　Soda　League〃　is　a　young　club　in　the　sense　that　it



was　set　up　yesterday；　but　in　no　other　sense。　　It　may　consist



entirely　of　moribund　old　gentlemen。　　It　may　be　moribund　itself。



We　may　call　it　a　young　club；　in　the　light　of　the　fact　that　it　was



founded　yesterday。　　We　may　also　call　it　a　very　old　club　in　the　light



of　the　fact　that　it　will　most　probably　go　bankrupt　to…morrow。



All　this　appears　very　obvious　when　we　put　it　in　this　form。



Any　one　who　adopted　the　young…community　delusion　with　regard



to　a　bank　or　a　butcher's　shop　would　be　sent　to　an　asylum。



But　the　whole　modern　political　notion　that　America　and　the　colonies



must　be　very　vigorous　because　they　are　very　new；　rests　upon　no



better　foundation。　　That　America　was　founded　long　after　England



does　not　make　it　even　in　the　faintest　degree　more　probable



that　America　will　not　perish　a　long　time　before　England。



That　England　existed　before　her　colonies　does　not　make　it　any　the　less



likely　that　she　will　exist　after　her　colonies。　　And　when　we　look　at



the　actual　history　of　the　world；　we　find　that　great　European　nations



almost　invariably　have　survived　the　vitality　of　their　colonies。



When　we　look　at　the　actual　history　of　the　world；　we　find；　that　if



there　is　a　thing　that　is　born　old　and　dies　young；　it　is　a　colony。



The　Greek　colonies　went　to　pieces　long　before　the　Greek　civilization。



The　Spanish　colonies　have　gone　to　pieces　long　before　the　nation　of　Spain



nor　does　there　seem　to　be　any　reason　to　doubt　the　possibility　or　even



the　probability　of　the　conclusion　that　the　colonial　civilization；



which　owes　its　origin　to　England；　will　be　much　briefer　and　much　less



vigorous　than　the　civilization　of　England　itself。　　The　English　nation



will　still　be　going　the　way　of　all　European　nations　when　the　Anglo…Saxon



race　has　gone　the　way　of　all　fads。　　Now；　of　course；　the　interesting



question　is；　have　we；　in　the　case　of　America　and　the　colonies；



any　real　evidence　of　a　moral　and　intellectual　youth　as　opposed



to　the　indisputable　triviality　of　a　merely　chronological　youth？



Consciously　or　unconsciously；　we　know　that　we　have　no　such　evidence；



and　consciously　or　unconsciously；　therefore；　we　proceed　to　m