Other books in English by the same author: Nmels: GATES OF HELL NIGHT OVER THE EAST MOSCOW 1979 BLACK BANNERS So&-political work: “)

THE MENACE OF THE HERD (under pseudonym “ Francis S. Campbell

The Challenge of our Time


Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn


Edited by P. HUGHES















10.51 First published


S.M.R. O.V.I.R. & R.I.R.

Le temps est trouble, le temps se esclarsira Apt% la plue l’on etent le beau tern@ Apr.& noises et grans divers contens Paix adviendra et maleur cessera. . . . . . Mais entre deulx que ma1 l’on suffrera !

















: .

. I2

The nineteenth-century political thinkers, Iz; the contagion of uniformism, 15 ; the illiberalism of democracy, zo; the prophets of totalitarianism, 41; the menace of the state’s growth, 48; the age of collectivism, 67; prophets of the Russian peril, 73 ; summary, 82.









The basic problem, 86; moral aspects of democracy, 91 ; difficulties and illusions, 97; self-government, 105 ; ethics I IO; knowledge, I 16 ; shadows of tyranny, and representation, 122; additional aspects of the problem, 127.










The question, 133 ; the essence of monarchy, 136 ; the caricature of monarchy, 143; monarchy compared wtth democracy, 150.













The social implications of Catholicism, 179; the Catholic 188; Catholicism and political behaviour, 198; character, Catholicism and the forms of government, 204. vii


. ..










of Lutheranism, 212 ; Introduction, 209; the prehistory Lutheranism in the rise of National Socialism, 217; the evolution of Protestantism and European politics, 233; the other threads in the ideological development to National Socialism, 239.










Once more : democracy and liberty, 246 ; the Hussite root of National Socialism, 248; the beginnings of the German National Socialist Party, 253 ; summary, 269.










272 285 369






















The Genealogy

of German




2 10


Percentage of Catholics Percentage Percentage

in Germany

( r 934 Census) . . .

224 224 224

3. 4.

of Nazi Votes, July of Communist

31, 1932

Votes, July

31, 1932

PREFACE an inner emotion and a certain feeling of hesitancy am I offering these pages to the Englishspeaking public. The emotion is due to the fact that I lived for over ten years on the hospitable soil of the United States of America-the native land of my second child-which to me is my second home. The hesitancy, on the other hand, is the result of the grim foreboding that this volume will be the cause of several misunderstandings and, in a number of cases, of downright resentment. Yet, as LCon Bloy has insisted, it is “ later than we think,” and the time for flattery, self-delusion and cheap optimism is over. complex An involved situation -a complicated problem-a issue cannot be dealt with in a few pages or in a simple way. This task has taxed the mental powers and the physical energies of more than one person; the author had to be assisted by an editor with a greater mastery of English than his own. Of course, as far as the material, the facts, and the views are concerned, these are entirely the author’s responsibility. The reader might conceivably ask himself why this book was written and published in this particular situation and at this particular time. Another edition, a German translation, will be published soon in Switzerland. But the author, an Austrian who will never forget his “ American decade,” and his years in Britain, believes that directly as well as indirectly he has dealt with problems which not only lie at the core of that particular internal crisis which darkens the horizons of the Occident’s future, but also form the very substance of the great and fatal misunderstanding between the Continent and the English-speaking nations. This catastrophic lack of comprehension of the rather opaque world east of Calais, aggravated by confusion about technical terms, is largely responsible for the grave disappointments America-and Britain also-have suffered after each ix


OT without

1918. June 28. 1951 . Tyrol. arranged It is our fervent hope that we have not and annotated. 1933.X PREFACE Each triumph for “ demomajor war won for their ideals. with a frightening set-back The years 1917. altogether failed in this endeavour. 1922. for the cause of liberty. KUEHNELT-LEDDIHN Lans. cracy ” has ended. on the Continent. In order to help Englishmen and Americans to distinguish more clearly between the forces of light and the forces of darkness the material for this book has been collected. The 1938 were a chain of defeats for the cause of freedom. Second World War resulted in military victory and political defeat.

?r’S AND BASIC HIS book is an essay in the narrowest sense of the term -an efirt to throw some light on certain phases and aspects of the century-old struggle between the principles of freedom and those of equality. It is obvious that this study cannot be exhaustive. Before defining our terms we think it important to “ show our hand ” and to declare our philosophical baggage. Since the present author is a Catholic. the subjects of our analysis have not been chosen at random. is not a strange. and by certain cognitions of the phenomenological school. a philosophy characterized by the utmost respect for human It is reason and one which strives towards objective reality. he is also deeply influenced by a theistic existentialism. but have been selected for special reasons. The Catholic reader who is curious as to the reasons which prompt him to deviate from Neo-Thomism-today so strongly dominating the philosophical scene in Catholic North America -is invited to peruse the note on this subject on pages 164-167. It is obvious that any writer trying to analyze political or sociological phenomena critically and methodically will be motivated by a more or less coherent system of philosophy. but not an intellectual meaning. the basis of our philosophy. it is. Although his philosophy is predominantly Thomistic. on the contrary. his philosophy has an intimate relationship with the theology of his Churcha relationship which can best be defined as co-ordination. nevertheless. The non-Catholic reader will not. Thomism. esoteric creed full of mysterious allusions. of course). between the ideologies of liberalism and of democracy (in their classic sense. be discouraged We want to assure him that by the admission just made.CHAPTER I PRINCIPLES DEFIiYITIO. we hope. The principle that “ philosophy is the handmaid of theology ” has for him only a personal. T B r .

naturally. When we speak about equality we do not refer to equity (which is justice). by relative. Its realism will insist that if statement A is correct. and about m ‘t &. Here. Man does not live by bread alone. subordinate psyc and feelings. Even the so-called “ Christian equality ” is not something mechanical. they are nevertheless adherents (and beneficiaries) of the Hebrew-Greek-Christian tradition which has something approaching a common denominator. When we talk about freedom and equality w-s o all practical purposes.l . as in some other basic matters./ newly-born babes are spiritually equal. Yet to the Christia a. although not belonging to the Church.&?&y~L Yet we will. and thus forms part of the It is obvious that under these circumstances common good. There is nothing magical or mysterious about the tenets of Thomism insofar as they underlie the philosophy of these pages.. most readers will probably admit that they see with us eye to eye because. and statemstradi be considered to be false. reasonable and other words isonomy. but their physic intellectual qualities (the lat qe in potent from the moment of conception unequa . y trends and tendencies rather than Freedom in this study means the greatest amount of self-determination which in a given situation is feasible. At the same time we are deeply concerned about the psychological reactions of man (either as a person or as an individual lost in a crowd).. it cannot be brutally sacrificed to the demands of absolute efficiency nor to efforts towards a maximum of m’aterial welfare. a philosophy of “ horse-sense ” with no patience for solipsism. they represent common sense. but merely subjection und -ztie. We shall not go into f the psychological reasons for the egalitarian and identitarian tendencies of our age. emotions and affections to object&e ea rtywithout forgetting the existence of the former. the denial of sensory apperception and the rejection of the simple laws of logic.2 LIBERTY OR EQUALIlT [Chap. As a means to safeguarding man’s happiness and protecting his personality it is an intermediary end. which we have dealt with elsewhere.

” A liberal is a man or a woman who is interested in having people enjoy the greatest reasonable amount of liberty-and this regardless of the Juridical type of government they are living under. the combatant and the civilian.e.) Whereas greed. he would choose the former. it is fatally doomed to develop I into tyranny. if we want to establish a complete plain we have to blast the mountains away and fill the valleys.. the absence of human intervention)‘-is anything but ( egalitarian. (It is obviously just to discrimfnate -within limits-between the innocent and the criminal.“> . If he thinks that a monarchy would grant greater liberty than a republic. are in essence contradictory. __ . It is true that the affinities between liberty and the various political forms are not identical. .: “i. m political labels none have been more frequently misused than the terms “ liberal ” and “ democratic. *-thus presupposes the continuous intervention of force which. Thus any liberal accepting Plato’s evaluation of democracy (Republic. but would subordinate his choice to the desire to see himself and his fellow-citizens enjoying a maximum of liberty.T’ as a principle. pride and arrogance are at the base of unjust discrimination. As anybody with a real knowledg~‘%Europe might expect. * I -’ . and so I on.. the adult and the infant. the driving motor of the egalitarian * and identitarian trends is envy9~ealousvs and“ NatureT’ i. the term “ liberal ” in its political sense is of Fpanish origin. .IPLES 3 shment of equality is as little compatible with libertv as the enforcement of.a. under certain circumstances he might even prefer the--@uuzrestrictions of a military dictatorship to the potential evolutions of a democracy. and the same time inalienable-is asceticliberty. ” ‘. In this whole discussion of liberty it should never be forgotten that the highest liberty-which is at one \..&& L laws of discriCna&n. _ &. according to this philosopher. equality. The fact remains that the true liberal is not pledged to any specific constitution. it is also true that while some political establishments show marked liberal trends they harbour nevertheless (through their dialectics) the danger ~ of far-reaching enslavement. is opposed to freedom. Book viii) would reject this form of government because. Liberty and equali ‘.J . .

and the type of its evolution thus depends merely on personal preference or temperament. has come to mean. a sensory fraud. there “ liberals ” often engaged in a veritable persecution of all those who preferred a different scope of views.” On the European continent the situation was not dissimilar. The driving force in a Christian liberalism will always be affection and generosity. Thus. There is another possible motive which can be harmonized with the Christian position-namely. called them ” sectarian liberals. outside the reach of the faculty of reason. For instance. or that it is humanly unattainable. genuine liberals (as. H. a piece of intellectual arrogance. for example. It appears for the first time after I 812 in the Iberian peninsula.” and ten years later we see Scott using the expression “ Liberaux”4 This term was used for the radical wing of the Whigs-which is not quite identical with the connotation In the United States “ a liberal ” I we attribute to this label. in order to distinguish themselves from communist sympathizers. Yet we also know of a liberalism derived from a basic philosophic nihilism.6 The strongly coercive tendency which crept into the late medieval .4 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. It is obvious that such a philosophy of despairwhich we reject-does not necessari&vresult in a liberal attitude. it may wind up in its opposite. the conviction that illiberalism is bad strategy. Hayes very adroitly ‘. and was soon adopted by the French. and even acknowledging the tenet that untruth has no intrinsic right or claim for toleration. like to call themselves “ oldfashioned liberals. the late Oswald Garrison Villard). While fully accepting the distinction between truth and untruth._a person who welcomes change. the “ strategic liberal ” will reject coercive measures simply because they do not lead to the desired result.“j _c c p s : 1 The philosophical and psychological motives for the liberal position show a great variety. it has been suggested that the Middle Ages died of a sort of “ uremic poisoning ” because of the practical impossibility of an individual seceding from the Church. Professor Carlton J. Southey (in the Quarterly Review) wrote in 1816 for the first time about “ British Liberales. which declares that truth is either a mere prejudice. and thus : would not be averse to embracing or fostering a totalitarian ideology.

I3 For the truly liberal solution of the problem 1. In this connectG it must also be borne in mind that true liberalism is hardly compatible with an unlimited capitalism of YI ’ Property is also a means to freedom. no adult) can be forced to become a Catholic. note the frequent insistence that Jews forcibly baptized were subject to the jurisdiction of the Church. but so also did the precepts of charity. I which imputed bad faith to every.“12 These changes of attitude.9 It must be admitted that during the Middle Ages the lower clergy were rather confused on this point. of view.14 the 11 DEFINITIONS AND BASIC PRINCIPLES . Democracy implies “ power (rule) of the people “. heretic. from a genuinely liberal point ‘. Thus when handing over a person found guilty to the secular authorities.e.ll not only did the Catholic teaching of the supremacy of conscience over all1 visible authority militate against the late medieval policy. Today the possibility of an honest..2. Already in 1818 Pius VII found strong words against the coercive principle.s and the Code of Canon Law is explicit on the point that nobody (i. ‘... Since private capitalism tends to concentrate property in &I. tragic conflict between conscience and truth is fully admitted. or dAsse&er. on the other hand. not-bad phi@& ---. The terms “ democracy ” and “ democratic ” are political.5 Church-partly as the result of an invitation by the State’ -took a couple of centuries to subside. or rather leave thee to the secular arm and the power of the secular court. efficaciously entreating said secular court that it temper its sentence close to and on this side of the shedding of blood and the peril of death.’ iL fewer and fewer hands it is. tx j of production we have to look to other prophets than Smith 5 < and Stalin. the inquisitors uttered a standard formula asking the State not to subject the culprit to capital punishment: “ We cast thee out from our ecclesiastical court and give thee over. only a lesser evil in comparison with state capitalism r I (socialism). have nothing to do with the adamant insistence on the infallibility of the Teaching Church in dogmatic matters.iO Nevertheless it could only be a question of time until the full impact of Catholic theology could be felt on the problem of force and coercion. the Manchester school. it was bad psychology. ’ .

IO and 14). Madison. as strict republicans.16 Yet the case of John Adams is not entirely clear. 1787. In fact Gouverneur Hamilton’s opposition to republicanism to his confusion of republicanism with democracy. Thomas. I 788 (“ On the Compromise of the Constitution “) and in the Federal Convention Morris ascribed on June 26. Fustel de Coulanges. St. l7 and we also know that he had qualms of conscience for having abetted the American Revolution insofar as it was the forerunner of the French Revolution and its sanguinary aftermath. Robert Bellarmine.C.” There does seem to have been among some of the American Founding Fathers a tendency to identify democracy rigorously with one of its manifestations-direct democracy: a limitation of the term for which Rousseau might have to be held responsible. St. to place a label \ like “ the democratic way of life ” in that category.. There is a classic concept of democracy.20 Thomas Jefferson is often glibly called a “ democrat ” and the founder of “ Jeffersonian democracy ” (as opposed to . Some people still cling to the classic sense of the term because it alone has a modicum of conciseness and clearness.J.) Mere affection for the lower classes is not “ democracy ” but “ demophily.“lj The reader is thus solemnly warned that we are dealing with a political concept on@. various sociological and social misuses of these expressions do not interest us here. they were also deeply critical of most of the principles of indirect democracy. S. Gouverneur Morris. Aristotle. ls Alexander Hamilton vehemently criticized democracy in his speeches on June 2 I. Father Mariana. Plato. for example. Marshall. (We have. This is evident when we read Madison’s definition of democracy in The Federalist (Nos. until the middle of the last century. a more complete perusal of his writings gives evidence of a strong opposition to the egalitarian principle. all vaguely agreed on the content of the term “ democracy.6 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. which lasted with minor variations from 500 B.19 There should be no doubt whatever that the vast majority of the Founding Fathers not only detested and opposed direct democracy but. or John Adams’ attack on democracy in his Defense of the Constitution of the United States of America. Alexander Hamilton.

for the instruction. And indeed.form. Depending on the manner of exercise of this “self-government ” -by the whole populace or by representatives-we speak of direct or indirect democracy. These are liberal tenets-they may or may not be present in a democracy.. the freedom of speech. of government is the best which provides most effectually for a pure selection of these natural aristoi into the offices of government ? 24 And in another page of the same letter he adds: Every one by his property. The respect of minorities. dated October 28. or by his satisfactory situation.“21 What. in the opposite case we have a republic rather than a democracy.who dreamt of a republic governed by an e’lite of character and intellect. Dr.II DEFINITIONS AND BASIC PRINCIPLES 7 “Jacksonian democracy “). it would have been inconsistent in creation to have formed men for the social state. 1814: The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature. and not to have provided virtue and wisdom enough to manage the May we not even say that that form concerns of society. Yet when we analyze the contents of democracy in its direct as well as in its indirect . Jefferson actually was an Agrarian Romantic . the limitations imposed upon the rule of majoritiesz3 have nothing to do with democracy as such. This is evident and based on the support of a free yeomanry. then. And such is interested in the support of law and order.22 and (2) “ selfgovernment ” based on the rule of the majority of equals. the trusts and government of society. men may safely and advantageously reserve to themselves . we must come to the conclusion that his stand was not ‘rdemocratic at all. It is also obvious that the representatives in an indirect democracy have the duty of repeating the views of the electorate. are the precepts of democracy? It has only two postulates: (I) legal and political equality (franchise) for a11. moreover. Mortimer Adler quite rithtly rejects ‘J efferson as a democrat and insists that “ the dawn of American democracy really begins with Jackson. when he writes in a letter to John Adams.

In a letter addressed to Washington on May I 7. whose monument in Washington is in front of the White House- . In that spirit he wrote to Madison a letter. and the instruments by which the liberties of a county are generally overturned. he called himself a “ republican federalist. to the august position of Patron Saint of the Common Man.8 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.27 His agrarianism never subsided. for instance: The mobs of great cities add just so much to the support of pure government. . they will become corrupt Europe. but the term “ democratic ” was again Yet the founder of American used by Pierce in 1852. although it found its most concrete expression in his younger years.2j His rejection of an urban proletariat was so outspoken that it is difficult to see how he could have been elevated. even temporarily. democracy undoubtedly remains Andrew Jackson. He wrote. . dated December 20. I consider the class of artificers as the panderers of vice. When they get piled upon one another the large cities of Europe. . and a degree of freedom. 1792. wholesome control over their public affairs. he was called by some of his supporters a “ democratic-republican ” (since both candidates Van Buren prided himself on used the “ republican ” label). being a republican. would be instantly perverted to the demolition and destruction of everything public.26 In his later age his views mellowed somewhat. which in the hands of the canaille of the cities of Europe. as long as they are chiefly agricultural this will be as long as there are vacant lands in any of America. I 787 : I think that our governments will remain virtuous many centuries .2* for : and part as in as in The expressions “ democrat ” and “ democracy ” hardly occur in the Monticello edition of Jefferson’s works.” But when Andrew Jackson ran against John Quincy Adams for the presidency in 1828. but he seems to have opposed female suffrage at all times. as sores do to the strength of the human body.” and in his first inaugural address he insisted that he was a “ federalist and a republican.

The names and works of nineteenth. A democracy regardless of who carries on the government. while the latter deals with the freedom of the individual. Thomas’ definition of democracy (De regimine principum. are probably fighting a losing battle. i. or liberalism in the classic sense. by carefully trying to distinguish between liberalism and democracy and between democracy and Most republicanism. so far. The Soviet use of the “ democratic ” label is by no means a shrewd political manmuvre of recent years. the Marquis de Lafayette and the Comte de Rochambeau. National and inte. but not for equality or majority rule: Tadeusz Ko&iuszko. can be highly illiberal :30 the 1Tolstead Act. the almost inseparable concomitant of the latter: whiggery. but a terminology already adopted by Lenin and continued by Stalin throughout the nineteen-twenties. Fascism.II DEFINITIONS AND BASIC PRINCIPLES 9 surrounded by the statues of four European noblemen who fought in America for liberty. interfered with the dinner menus of millions of citizens. and in this view becomes less hypocritical than observers in the Western hemisphere are wont to admit. But the vast majority of Americans and Englishmen talking about “ democracy ” always include the : liberal element in their concept of democracy-and this in : spite of the fact that democracy and liberalism are concerned The former is concerned with two entirely different problems.) Those who want to avoid confusion.29 people are not usually aware of the fact that one of the most important differences between the Continental and the AngloSaxon tradition of representative government has to be found in the important alloy which has been. I) we will find that the “ dictatorship of the proletariat ” (provided the proletariat forms a majority) is more democratic than the American . (Pulaski and Baron de Kalb have their representations in stone elsewhere. Baron von Steuben.and twentieth-century thinkers who have carefully distinguished between democracy and liberalism will be found in the next chapter (Xote 58).national Socialism repeatedly insisted that they were in Css&nce democratic-a claim which must be viewed in a strict philosophical and historical setting.31 If we accept St. and insist on clarity in political thinking. quite democratically voted for. with the question of who should be vested with ruling authority.

and our investigation itself is based on a specific philosophy. deals with the weaknesses and Scholasticism. selective service. in true Platonic fashion. although it is obvious that he cannot be democratic in the political sense. The first. On the other hand we can imagine an absolute ruler-an autocratic emperor. Fifty-one per cent of a nation can establish a totalitarian regime.IO LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. obligatory schooling. . but represent an effort to throw some light on various aspects of the problem. suppress minorities and still remain democratic. as in the two following essays our field of investigation is that of political sciences. Not only prohibition. We have tried to co-ordinate their views with those of our contemporaries. . There is little doubt that the American Congress or the French Chambers have a power over their nations which would rouse the envy of a Louis XIV or a George III. and thus to offer to the reader a sample of the history of ideas. which has been The second. scrupulously refraining from interfering in the private sphere of the citizens. while an old-fashioned dictator might reserve to himself only a very few prerogatives. declaration. for instance-who is a thoroughgoing liberal .” deals with the apprehensions of thinkers and observers who lived between x 7go and rg 14 and. Constitution-in which. premarital blood tests-none of these totalitarian measures would even the royal absolutism of the seventeenth century have dared to introduce. were they alive but also the income tax today. in contrast to the sacred books of communism.” previously published in a somewhat different form (in JVew rg46). After having established the character of the difference between democracy and liberalism. July. “ A Critique of Democracy. “ Democracy and Totalitarianism : the Prophets. In this as well inherent dangers of the democratic doctrine. feared the rise of totalitarian tyranny as an evolutionary or dialectic process from the very essence of democracy. . the fingerprinting of blameless citizens. we would like to give a few hints as to the plan of this book. the word “ democracy ” never figures. which consists of selected chapters on this subject-studies and essays which do not cover the whole ground.

and on the Czech National Socialists of 1897 . perhaps. or. We leave it to the And although at present the dice are reader to draw others. is a continuation of the second.II DEFINITIONS AND BASIC PRINCIPLES II The third. The last contribution tries to clear up a most dangerous misunderstanding. No. only time will tell whether freedom.” It is based on thorough factual documentation. shows the importance of such research. it deals with the historical and intellectual background of the Nazi party.” a study in comparative government. A slightly condensed version has already appeared in the Journal of the History of Ideas. pointing out some conclusions from the facts assembled. We conclude with a short summary. heavily loaded. The fifth. “ Hus. The next two studies are of a historical nature. 3 (June. and that Catholicism is also the dominant religion in the Western Hemisphere.” tries to revise the picture as to the inherent liberalism (and anarchic tendencies) of the Catholic nations. “ The Political Temper of Catholic Nations. . while the fourth. and also the influence of Hus on Luther and of Luther on the German National Socialists. “ Democracy and Monarchy. Luther and National Socialism. 338-71.” traces the direct influence of Hus on Mussolini. as well as to analyze the probability of democracy becoming a “ going concern ” in the larger part of Europe. equality. and we have given it the title “ The Rise of the National Socialist Party. IX. The fact that only thirteen per cent of the European continent is Protestant. inequality with a new servitude will prevail. his Italian interpreter. rg48).

2-3. GOETHE. -J. CHAPTER II : DEMOCRACY AND THE TOTALITARIANISM PROPHETS Verzeiht. : \ especially. the world grows better from century to century. the recruiting of criminals into T I2 . without exaggeration. IS).. es ist ein gross Ergetzen Sich in den G&t der Zeiten zu versetzen. and let optimism throw its glory over all our souls and all our lives henceforth and ever. but the description of this evolutionary process in Plato’s Republic (Books viii. we see the bodyguards paid by the demagogue. THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY POLITICAL THINKERS evolves naturally from HE notion that tyranny democracy can be traced back to the earliest political there are allusions to it in Aristotle’s theorists. GLADSTONE I. thse+ation of youth. Faust Above all things. the rejection of democracy by the desperate upper classes as a result of this development. W. because God reigns supreme. Zu schauen. Politics (v. wie vor uns ein weiser Mann gedacht. whereupon the masses select a “ leader ” whose task it is to protect “ the people “. the evolution from “ protection ” to tyranny. the ever mounting expropriation of the well-to-do-until-they begin to defend themselves. the militarization of the masses. men and women. from generation to generation. after 1930.E. 8. can be called an almost 1 perfectly accurate facsimile of the insidious transition which I’ took place in central and eastern Europe after 1917 and. Here we find a description of the mass rebellion against the klites. -W. Und wie wir’s dann zuletzt so herrlich weit gebracht. the spoliation of the temples. Let pessimism be absent from our minds. ix) provides us with a picture which. the flight of the wealthy and of the intellectuals.. believe me.

changes. Caesarism or totalitarian servitude. had been restricted to very small areas. offering the spectacle of quicklyrevived interest in organic political following transitions. Thomas to Montesquieu. from I 789 to 1815 had run the whole gamut of political evolution. who were convinced of democracy-the historical of the “ ultimate ” victory of course-were sharply divided between those “ ultimate. on the other hand. (For an explanation of these terms see below.*I- DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS I 3 the police force. apart from certain city governments. finally “ purges ” and a mounting wave of corruption. and thus had ceased to belong to an “ organic ” order. and those who-mindful of the experiences of 178g-regarded it merely as a preliminary step to tyranny. balance and legitimacy. 155-156. any longer be “ taken for granted. Some of the latter. but the debate about the intrinsic qualities of the various governmental forms continued in full vigour from St.” who expected from it a new stability. Still. The political theorist had to rely largely on antique and certain medieval patterns. the most populous and powerful country of Europe. the provocation of military conflicts in order i to impose emergency measures at home and thus a stricter national discipline. in a psychological sense.” Joseph de Maistre exhorted the supporters of royalism to defend the monarchic form of government with sure sign that the patriarchal intellectual arguments 32-a regimes henceforward were phenomena under discussion.) Those observers. From then on until the advent of the eighteenth century there was not much speculation about the nature of political evolution. like Alexis de . though the purely external forms of the ancien rbgime had to all appearances triumphed. France. the character of these analyses and investigations suffered somewhat from the relative uniformity of the political scene up to the American and French Revolutions. in the eyes of more far-seeing observers. defeats before it smashed the Revolution. the democratic trend was. and from now on it could not. pp. democracy. bound to gain the upper hand after recovering from its The ancien wgime had suffered grievous temporary set-back. The French Revolution. for instance. And.

others again were friends of the democratic ideology. Bachofen (1815-1887) and. PrtvostParadol (182g-r87o). Henry Adams (1838rgr8). J. J. and there is no doubt that the liberals in this group were the most . Lord Bryce (r838-rg22). It is important to note that about half the men mentioned could be called liberals. Alexandre Vinet (1797-1847) and Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881).1goo). W. Niebuhr (1776-1831). Count Montalembert (1810-1870). Amiel (1804-1881). B. M. which in time Among such men should here be proved to be well founded. Proudhon (r8og-r865). to a certain extent. at least. Renan (x823-1893). Tocqueville (x805-1859). Franz Grillparzer (17g1-1872). J. Sir Henry Maine (1822-1888). but they all had very concrete fears and apprehensions. also Herbert Spencer (r82o-1903) and F. inimical to many basic human ideals -freedom being one among them. Donoso Cartes (1809-r 853) and Benjamin de Constant (‘767-1830). RoyerCollard (1763-1845). Herman Melville (18rg-r8gr). principles and tendencies in democracy\ which were. mentioned Edmund Burke (I 729-r 797)) Alexander Herzen (1812-1870). either in their very nature or. thinkers who varied in their affinity and enthusiasm Some of these were outright enemies. overlooking the possibility of a peaceful and gradual were fascinated by the potentialities of the evolution. F. Burckhardt (r8r8-18g7). a direction of thought indicated by Plato and. Contemplating this list it is certainly no exaggeration to state that. They followed “ dialectics ” of democracy and democratism. H. a group of other analysts should be added. S. Constantine Ernest Leontyev (r831-r8gr). Dostoyevski (1821-1881).” Others. expected the rise of what Mr. Lecky (r838-igo3). some of the best minds in Europe (and in America) were haunted by the fear that there were forces. Hilaire Belloc aptly calls the “ servile state. J. up to a point. J. Among these we find Walter Bagehot (1826-1877). Seren Kierkegaard (1813-1855). J. Orestes Brownson (1803-1876). during the nineteenth century. towards democracy. Lord Acton (r834-rgo2). G. P.14 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. To the aforementioned. H. in their/ dialectic potentialities. by Aristotle also. Nietzsche (1844. F. Mill (1806-1873). E.

ethnic nationalism. in a certain sense. all deviations from that type will come to be considered impious. among others.33 in their denunciation of the 2. we ought to recall the fact that at the very bottom of all socio-political problems we find. If real resistance waits till life is reduced nearly to one uniform type. ideas of uniformity which sometimes take hold of great . Whereas the first-mentioned belongs. In his essay On Liberty. THE CONTAGION OF UNIFORMISM Before we turn to our inventory of prophetic views concerning the second quarter of the twentieth century. to the animal nature of man. mass production. when they have been for some time unaccustomed to see its6 This craze for uniformity had been criticized by Montesquieu He insisted that “ there are certain a hundred years earlier. It is precisely from this process of levelling and assimilation that -he expected some of the worst menaces to liberty. certain recurrent psychological factors. after enumerating the various technical causes for this general trend. immoral. become unable to conceive diversity. the latter is purely human. even Mankind speedily monstrous and contrary to nature. he demonstrated his independence from an orthodox Benthamite utilitarianism by declaring that this development should be resisted even at the cost of material sacrifices.34 Yet there can be no doubt that our modern civilization decidedly favours the excessive development of the former.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 15 concrete and the most vocal impending evil. Democracy. And then he added: The demand that all other people shall resemble ourselves grows by what it feeds on. militarism. however. mutually antagonistic drives : the identitarian instinct and the diversitarian sentiment. One of them we might call man’s subjection to the influence of two powerful.35 racialism and all tendencies toward “ simplification ” put the emphasis on identity and uniformity-a fact of which John Stuart Mill was deeply conscious.

Variety is life. Reviewing its powerful Napoleonic aftermath. and customs of a locality. Though patriotism exists only as a lively attachment to the interests.“37 Benjamin de Constant. recognized the paralyzing qualities of uniformism when he wrote: “ Variety is organization. our self-announced patriots declared war on all these things. edifice by breaking up and pulverizing the materials they should have used. uniformity is mechanism. when democracy appeared in its full totalitarian garb. because at bottom in both extremes was the desire of tyranny. deprived of all that strikes the imagination They began building the and speaks to the memory. the love of power soon discovered what immense advantage this symmetry gave it. The systematic spirit at first went into an ecstasy of symmetry. They came close to naming cities and provinces by numbers (as they did the legions and army corps). which replaced demagogy and made itself heir of the fruit of all these labours. minds (they affected Charlemagne). Today the admiration for uniformity-a real admiration in some small minds. manners. so much did they seem to fear that a moral idea might attach itself to what they were instituting! Despotism. The interests and memories which are born from local habits contain a germ of resistance which authority only reluctantly endures and It has an easier road with individuals: hastens to uproot. uniformity is death. a general idea. Constant wrote in 1814 : It is quite remarkable that uniformity never met with more favour than in a revolution raised in the name of the =rights and the liberty of men. They dried up this natural fount of patriotism.“3s It is uniformity again which figured so prominently in the French Revolution. but infallibly strike small ones. The two extremes at first found themselves in agreement on this point.16 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [chap. itWroIIs its enormous weight over them as easily as over sand. very adroitly followed the blazed trail.3B . an affected one in many servile of spirit-is received as a religious dogma by a host of assiduous echoes of every favoured opinion. who belonged to the eighteenth no less than to the nineteenth century. and wished to replace it by a fictitious passion for an abstract being.

the same regulations. . and (if one can arrive at it) eventually the same language-this is what one proclaims the perfection of any social organization. The same code of law. The Point for point Imperial France ! f$2ks $PZZZrence] are . . important aspects of her personal. in opposition strengthening and a union of all elements of anarchy. the same system of weights and measures. but also the newly conquered and incorporated territories had to suffer from this mania which proved to be so infectious. Contemporary conquerors-peoples or princes-want their empires to present only a uniform surface. The victory of the national. no secret to Constant that the imperialistic methods of aggression practised by the French Revolution and the military dictatorship which constituted its aftermath resulted in a strengthening of the principle of uniformity. stitution (of sufficient strength so that a man of genius will not dare to engineer a coup &Auf). her structures. indeed. from the broader and higher point of view which we are now taking. and now affected even the German victor of 187 I : egalitarianism. which increased in intensity with every decade until it reached a climax in our time. in no uncertain terms denounced41 this madness. her administration. who belonged to the following generation. these had influenced the structure of the two French Empires under the Bonapartes. her laws . a conThe “ pure race ” centralization. On all the rest today’s great word is UNIFORMITY. so insignificant that it is not worth while even to think about them. .~~ Donoso Cartes. racial [tribal] policy has thus personality.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 17 It was.42 Constantine Leontyev saw clearly how the basic “ uniformistic ” ideas of the French Revolution triumphed along the whole line. on which the proud eye of power can range without meeting any unevenness which may offend it or restrict its view. local culture have suddenly faded away. support to industry and to all the aforementioned-a trade and. Not only the original domains of France. brought to the Germans a loss of national Germany after her victories has been more “ gallicized ” than ever before-in her [very] being.43 C .

D. to Aristotle (cf. We once heard a great French statesman illustrate this. g. the tyrants who arose in all the Greek cities in the fourth and third . combined his immoralism with the notion that the principle of equality should be extended to plants and animals. when an eager cure’ said. The message flies through the air and they all suddenly agree on that one issue.“45 The known Walter Second interrelationship between dictatorship and equality. monsieur. and the whole fabric of the Empire will pass away. one of the most original defenders of democratic dictatorship.“4s The Marquis de Sade. Politics v. and was observing that he had no longer the power to help or hurt them. remarked: The complete programme contains Grant’s latest address. which points to a single state with one language as the necessary aim of a purely acquisitive world.47 N. Fustel de Coulanges considered levelling tendencies to be instrumental in keeping the power of the tyrants of antiquity: With two or three honourable exceptions. bitterness on Jacob Burckhardt. remove that feeling. Empire : In France. Grant. which hardly know each other. Lguliti is a political first principle. was no secret to The latter wrote about the French Bagehot either. But when the hour and the right material are at hand. if only on a sulky admission that “ there’s got to be a change. not only to man. with simple-minded personne ne peut rienjoy: “ Oui. He was giving a dinner to the clergy of his neighbourhood.- 18 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. maintenant ni le comte.44 His apprehensions using totalitarian were based on the fear of revolutionary methods and envisaging totalitarian risings aims : It seems that an essential condition for crises is to be found in the existence of a highly developed system of communications and the spreading of a homogeneous mentality over vast areas. and affects the most diverse populations. the whole of Louis Napoleon’s wgime depends upon it. 4-8). ni le proletaire. the contagion spreads with the speed of electricity over hundreds of miles. commenting with implicit a speech of President U. S.

wealth or merit.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 19 centuries reigned only by flattering whatever was worst in the mob and violently suppressing whoever was superior by birth. He has discovered “ equality. whose irresponsible omnipotence is going to manifest itself in a It will simply take the very crude and practical manner. Everybody belongs to all and all belong to each single one. Dostoyevski. (.*and regulate the rest according to it in a strictly Zscipl~ina~ way. As a final resort there will be calumny and murder . He wants the members of society to control each other and be in duty bound to denounce their majcrity of the popular mind as a measuring-%.4g Already Blake had remarked that “ one law for the lion and To Burckhardt. It must be remembered that ostracism. already noted by Plato.~O Still. is intrinsically democratic-in the classic sense. Thus he speaks of Shigalyov. egalitarianism as such the ox is oppressive.” was a destructive element. Yet what the state and the concept of the state are going to suffer in the meantime only the gods kno~. and was primarily directed against outstanding persons. All are slaves and equals in slavery. saw in the egalitarian .re rather than the result of tyranny. madness the cau. a roxim. a mania which would have to run its course before an equilibrium could be found again and a more constructive period in history re-entered : The refrain of the song is that human inequality will somehow again be reinstated. the modern state with its demo-liberal “ prehistory ” Thus would be the full executor of an egalitarian majoritism.” He has it all so beautifully written down in his copy-book. 61 . flourished in democratic Athens. Burckhardt wrote in a letter: But I know only too well the modern state. He believes in espionage. as a political institution.48 This technique. with his interest turned toward the future rather than the past. but the most important thing remains equality. the leftist ideologist in The Possessed: Shigalyov is a man of genius. on the other hand.

and iake a fancy to a Boulanger !“z -. the character of on the other a necessary mystique. encounter complaints about indifference towards liberty. The terribles simpl$cateurs whom Burckhardt expected to be the coming masters were far more potent and destructive than M. And the egalitarian tendency envisioned by Burckhardt and so typical of modern dictatorship.“54 No wonder that the modern dictatorships with their “ equality in slavery ” are so strongly based on the egalitarian system and on mass support. nevertheless. coming from below. according to the great seer of Base]. Herself a monstrous product of mediocre brains and their envy. but has. has been no exception to the rule. driven by dark instincts. has its obvious democratic background . Deroulede’s melancholy hero. He insisted : Democracy. are looking But herein they may be surprisagain for the exceptional. Yet it must be admitted that a new spirit. and the pushing place-hunters give her all desired guarantees of sympathy. has no enthusiasm for the exceptional. gets hold of the masses so that they. indeed. democrat). 53 Alexis de Tocqueville. clearly recognized the psychological roots of the levelling mania : Equality is a slogan based on envy. 3. for the totalitarian democrat of the type of Mr. not on e’lites or existing aristocracies (save those coming into existence through the new Il’ational Socialism of the German pattern bureaucracies). are already conditioned by tendencies which can be found in earlier forms of democracy. . These horrors.-. It signifies in the “ n’obody is going to occupy a heart of every republican: place higher than I. she hates it from the bottom of her heart. THE ILLIBERALISM OF DEMOCRACY An inevitable result of all levelling tendencies is an antiAlready in earlier stages of our history we liberal attitude. Herbert Read it is admittedly irrational. and where she cannot deny or remove it. hand. ingly badly advised.20 LIBERTY OR EQUALI-IY I [Chap.can use as tools only mediocre men.

Thus. 5D To practically all of these analysts. Donoso Cartes had no illusions about the alternatives of equality (which has to be enzrced) or liberty. it was self-evident that this form of tyranny has its roots in the democratic (plebiscitarian. who have seen the rise and the preliminary victories of contemporary totalitarianism.“’ Modern thinkers go far beyond this careful understatement. .5s They insist with varying degrees of emphasis on the fact that democracy and liberalism are two entirely different principles dealing with different problems. Calhoun.55 Yet these authors. that liberty and equality are so intimately united. who wrote .” have not fully faced the burning problem of th_e des antagonism between liberty and equality-an antithesis” to which we alluded in the Introduction. was quite aware of this difficult)-. egalitarian). He said: There is another error. Liberalism then has the distinction of being the doctrine most hated by Hitler. 56 John C. not less great and dangerous. principle. and the terrible truth is that there is a grain of truth to such claims . and not in the This would not have surprised a century ago: Orestes Brownson. writing about Kational Socialism. . while Gerrard Winstanley. majoritarian. writing in 1649.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 21 Dante has reminded us that even the freedom of the will (lib&as arbitrii) has not always been taken seriously (De monarchia i. but one fact stands out with perfect clarity in all the fog: Hitler has never claimed to represent true liberalism. being in a sense “ predemocratic. that liberty cannot be perfect without perfect equality. and which has been blissfully overlooked by the man in the street no less than by popular agitators and pamphleteers. avows that he has become disgusted with much empty talk about liberty. the “ Cast Iron Man ” of the Southern States. usually associated with the one which has just been considered. which is by its very nature opposed to coercion. 12). I refer to the opinion. a contemporaq author remarked : True Hitlerism proclaims itself as both true democracy and true socialism.

the popular democratic doctrine of this country. but we confess that we do not embrace and never have embraced. sooner or later. where he wrote: of Sir Erskine May’s The effective distinction between democracy and liberty. We are republicans. whose judgment was correct although his views seemed exaggerated to his contemporaries and at least “ premature ” to the generation succeeding him. Your fate. or both.64 Even more insistent was William Lecky. in 1857: who wrote to I have long been convinced that institutions purely democratic must.22 LIBERTY OR EQUALIT? ’ [Chap. though it is deferred by a physical cause. is certain. that a very able writer pronounced it long ago essential to a democratic state.62 Lord Acton was no less articulate “ Lectures on the French Revolution when he remarked. equality of the lower. Liberty was the watchword of the middle class. . Randall. I will frankly own to you that I am of a very different opinion. where the population is dense. . and the philosophers of the Southern Confederation have urged the theory with For slavery operates like a restricted extreme favour.and hinders socialism.63 He was even more forceful in his review Democraq in Europe. -+ the infirmity that attends mature democracies. with democracy. destroy liberty. . because republicanism is here the established order.6l This pessimism was shared by Macaulay. H. franchise. the effect of such institutions would be almost instantaneous . He said: A tendency parliamentary to democracy government. . does not mean a tendency to or even a tendency towards . In Europe. S. ” : in his SO The deepest cause which made the French Revolution disastrous to liberty was its theory of equality. an American friend. cannot Slavery has been so often associated be too strongly drawn. attaches power to property. . You may think that your country enjoys an exemption from these evils. as essential to liberty. or civilization. which has occupied much of the author’s thoughts. I believe.

“s7 declared that “ democracy is the ideal of the state projected to infinity. in our own day. . in the same place: . . both from history and from the nature of things. On the contrary. envy and insecurity of the voting masses tend to give new impetus to the egalitarian mania as well as to ever increasing demands for “ social security ” and other forms of “ economic democracy. but. this can only be attained by a constant. systematic. the strongest democratic tendencies are distinctly adverse to liberty. Proudhon.65 Yet since democracy cannot relinquish its egalitarian heritage.I cratic totalitarianism restricting personal liberties.” These cravings and desires result in specific measures. the jealousy.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 23 greater liberty. . stringent repression of their natural development . of the number and power of state officials. In ancient Rome the old aristocratic I republic was gradually transformed into a democracy. to show that democracy may often prove the direct opposite of liberty. Equality is the idol of democracy. and especially in the field of social regulation. with the infinitely various capacities and energies of man. no fact is more incontestable and conspicuous than the love of democracy for authoritative regulation. knowing that “ every state is by nature annexionistic.. J. A despotism resting on a plebiscite is quite as 1 natural a form of democracy as a republic. It means also a constant increase of taxation. This increase of state power means a multiplication of restrictions imposed upon the various forms of human action. and it then passed speedily into an imperial despotism. The exnansion of the authoritv cation of the functions of the State in other fields. . It means an increase of bureaucracy. and the multipli. .“s* Jacob Burckhardt formulated his ideas on the totalitarian tendencies of democracy in a more intuitive and poetic way: . . strong arguments may be adduced. Lecky wrote. is an equally apparent accompaniment of modern democracy. In France a corresponding change has more than once taken place.66 While P. and some of . and thus we see finally a bureau. which is in reality a constant restriction of liberty.

Herman Melville. for the most part. had no doubt that: The democratic idea favours the nurturing of a human type prepared for slavery in the most subtle sense of the term.24 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY ’ [Chap. including those of a spiritual nature.72 and they have been voiced in our days by certain political sociologists also. . in the past century.‘l Yet the preparation of the masses for totalitarian dictatorship through their “ penetration ” by politics was another. mobility and indecision. that is. yet in one respect invariable. was haunted by the same fears in . they have no souls and are incapable of tenderness. . cruel and hard-hearted. who have despaired about the ability of democracies to shorten wars by a negotiated and humane peace. Every democracy is at one and the same time an involuntary establishment for the breeding of tyrants. certain groups and castes --. and the state is expected to carry out all tasks which society might possibly neglect. an ideology merged from a thousand different sources and highly differentiated according to the various layers of her supporters. will be given a special guarantee of work and a living wage. blow against liberty. or even openly totalitarian trends. . Like corporations. is shared by a whole score of modern authors.6g Orestes Brownson went even further when he wrote: Democratic or democratically inclined governments are. though more oblique. As a result the boundary lines between state and society are obliterated.73 Nietzsche. Finally. we have besides as the common expression.74 The view that there is within the framework of democracy ample opportunity for anti-libertarian tendencies. in part of the ideas of the French Revolution and in part of the demands of modern reform movements. At the same time everything will be kept in a state off. taking the word in all its connotations. Thomas Mann in his younger years had such apprehensions. what is called democracy.‘* This judgment is similar to that made by modern authors. 75 A contemporary of Nietzsche on the opposite side of the Atlantic. that for it the power of the state over the individual CZ+ *“i never be sufficient.

but the analysis and premonition of this fervent. not the cause. unawed ? . when it exists. May on your vast plains shame the race In the Dark Ages of Democracy. . Europe. instead of a stationary proportion of mankind ? Not any superior excellence in them. will tend to become another China. What is ‘it that hitherto preserved Europe from this lot? What has made the European family of nations an improving. but their remarkable diversity of I character and culture.76 This vision is. what the Chinese educational and political systems are in an organized. see. were the deeper interconnections hidden. the character and the effects of the element of diversity in the European scene. Allowing himself to be swayed by the picture of a purely collectivistic China grimly opposed to all individuality. Dead level of rank commonplace An Anglo-Saxon China. Mill also became a victim of this misinterpretation of China (largely a visual error) . and after emphasizing the interdependence between diversity and .77 Mill then continued to analyze. He wrote: The modern kgime of public opinion is. not\\-ithstanding its noble antecedents and its professed Christianit\-. . first. friend of democratic values are as timely today as ever. admittedly. nor to De Tocqueville. though conditional.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 25 relation to his own country. and unless indil-iduality shall be able successfullv to assert itself against this yoke. but neither to Melville. Myriads playing pygmy partsDebased into equality : In glut of all material arts A civic barbarism may be: Man disennobled-brutalized By popular science-atheized Into a smatterer. which. cultural rather than political. nor to John Stuart Mill. he wrote with bitterness: How of the teeming Prairie-land ? There shall the plenitude expand Unthinned. exists as the effect. in an unorganized form.

Because I lozje freedom. . that it carries its devastations into all ] domains of life. the cultural anthropologist and friend of Burckhardt. as it may appear to them. . If the claims of individuality are ever to be asserted. if the conditions of Europe permit it and if great catastrophes do not lead the people back to the true foundations of a sound political life. 17et complete 1 democracy is the end of everything good. I hate 1 democracy. J. Of the egalitarian spadework of democracy he seems to have been less conscious-quite unlike J. Bachofen. home and family most severely. that it is not easy to see how it can stand its ground.7s In these pages Mill shows himself to be an unorthodox utilitarian. It will do so with increasing difficulty. while much is still wanting to complete the enforced assimilation. unless the intelligent part of the public can be made to feel its value-to see that it is good there should be differences. even though not for the better. for this is the 1 curse of democracy. to a certain extent. I don’t doubt that this ideology is going to proceed to all.7s With Burckhardt. to . It is only in the earlier stages that any stand can be successfully made against the encroachment. In summing up he wrote: The combination of all these causes forms so great a mass of influences hostile to individuality. the time is now. affects church. and distorts the true point of view on all questions. i I even the smallest ones. Republics have I the most to fear from it. Gonzague de Reynoldso-and. but because ‘J ‘. who could write : Since the victory of Lucerne the dogma of popular sovereignty and the omnipotence of democracy has become the practical basis of our public institutions. even its most extreme conclusions. not on account of property. some should be for the worse. even though.26 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. freedom. democracy throws us back into barbarism . he gave a short survey of all th)e forces opposed to diversity and favouring equality and identity. even with Amiel and Denis de RougemontBachofen belonged to the anti-democratic Swiss school. 1 tremble at the thought of its fiI expansion.

Amiel. In Bachofen’s allusion to his indifference towards Hab’ und Gut (i. who said in a letter to Jared Sparks that laws must be “ capable of protecting the rights of property against the spirit of democracy. had a religious foundation. And notwithstanding of direct democracy the Founding Fathers’ identification with democracy as such. Sudeten Germans in Czechoslovakia. property) we sense a hint of a fear already expressed by Madison. logical consequence of the democratic postulates has been supported in our days by the most divergent thinkersa Naturally. as well as the democracies ” with full majority deportation of whole minorities (Nisei in the United States. The confiscation (“ nationalization “) of property by ” progressive.e. have shown Madison’s fear to be not unfounded. a Calvinist -and existentialist-is rather%$ptical towards democratic claims than anti-democratic. Friedrich Engels was convinced that the democratic republic was the ideal form of government to serve as an arena for the class struggle.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 27 which we might also add Oskar Bauhofer. clearly recognized this interconnection.). who found with pers~onal security or the pure democracy “ incompatible rights of property ” (The Federalist. on decentralization. etc.8s The notion state capitalism) is the that socialism (i. in the dictatorship of the propertyless classes.) This is a school of thought which places its emphasis on the person.8b . His attitude is similar to that of the nineteenth-century Genevan H. visiting Germany in I 852. IO). there are constant efforts made to instill the spirit of pure democracy into the political structure of the United State+--efforts which might easily lead to the results dreaded by James Madison. ending . destroying the liberties in a blind furore of irrationality and emotional frenzy. unlike Mill’s. young support. He was not so much afraid of the egalitarian mania as of the vagaries of the masses torn awav from the moorings of their faith. on an organic continuity of tradition. an authoritarian final. No. who is a Catholic like De Reynold but a convert... we should not forget the partly Hegelian fatherhood of socialism : De Tocqueville. Bachofen’s trend of thought.“ar A similar idea is expressed in the Federalist papers by the same author. ADe Rougemont.e.

like ours. let us be careful that the democratic republics do not rehabilitate it.s7 I De Tocqueville’s Catholic background prevented him from becoming a cultural or historical deterministas. But that this should be impossible I would never be rash enough to believe. like individuals. as a process of dialectics. With resignation this he detested less than the “ next stage. We find it in the second volume of his Democrag in America. are nothing if not by the use of libertv-.86 It was with horror and melancholy fear that he contemplated the coming victory of democracy. he comes to the conclusion . nevertheless.sQ Yet the picture he painted of the coming senitudegrandiose and depressing by its very depth and accuracyshows a more pessimistic outlook. He wrote to Gobineau: In my eyes human societies. this Norman count has often been declared to be an outright supporter of democracy-which he decidedly was not. but in a direct and lo&Cal sequence. in a more precise and concrete way than all his contemporaries. It was also De Tocqueville who foresa’w. which. he was haunted by the spectre of a new des& which would engulf the nations of Christendom.28 LIBERTY OR EQUALIT?? [Chap. Because of his objectivity and balance in -judgment. contained in two chapters entitled “ What sort of despotism have democratic nations to fear ?“Qo He begins his speculation by remarking that during his sojourn in the United States (1831-32) and after his return to Europe.” great liberal wrote : The absolute monarchies have dishonourcd despotism. it must be admitted. After analyzing tyranny in antiquity. I have always said that liberty is more difficult to establish and to maintain in democratic societies. than in certain aristocratic societies which have preceded us. the chances for the sunival of liberty in the “ present ” democratic age he thought to be less than in the preceding aristocratic periods. the danger of an evolution from democracy-and especially from democratic He envisaged this evolution not ‘! republicanism-to tyranny.

no label. it was focussed on a few main objects and neglected the rest. That power is absolute. For their happiness such a government willingly labours. It seems to me that if despotism were to be established among the d. which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifi. foresees and supplies their necessities. I’ . R _D ~ . _ . ro- .: i He then insists that the coming form of tyranny ‘is going to be so fundamentally new that there is absolutely no term. I have 1 to define it. the totalitarian element was fairly absent: the natural and historical obstacles for a complete regulation of civic and political life over vast areas would have proved insurmountable. it Jvould have dill’erent characteristics: it Lvould be more extensive and more mild. directs their pleasures. minute. and since I cannot name it... agent and arbiter of that happiness: it provides for their security. provided they think of nothing but rejoicing. on the contrary..01 __. manages their principal regulates the descent of property. if. *_ * -I* A. no appropriate appellation he could use for it. brutality and vindictiveness of despots and emperors. and to watch over their fate. and their industry..h r *. i -* . provident and mild.” His descriptive analysis starts with a vision of masses of by small and vulgar men “ alike and equal ” attracted pleasures. regular._/.i cations. its object was to prepare men for manhood. to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice.. It would be like the authority of a parent. About these early despots he remarks that: their tyranny rested very heavily on a few but did not extend to a great number. it \vas violent but limited in its scope. subdivides their inheritances-what remains but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living?Q2 . facilitates concerns. Yet: abo\re this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power.emocratic nations of our days. but it chooses to be the sole ._ . but it seeks.11-j DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 29 that in spite of all the arbitrariness. “ The thing is new. like that authority. it vvould degrade men without tormenting I them..

degeneration)-a slow process of interaction and o‘f “ timing. Men whose civilian valour finds its supreme expression in pulling a lever behind a protective curtain will not have the courage to rebel. Yet if the whole process happens in an “ orderly fashion ” these excesses can be avoided.” If the political process is faster than the sociological (psychological.” as well as paralyzed) by abject terror. . Here we have to bear in mind that brutality and “t cruelty in the totalitarian state are merely means to achieve specific ends. This is an accurate picture of the rtotalitarian state. The vistas of De Tocqueville relate to a peaceful evolution (or. characteriological) decay. and oftentimes to look on them as benefitses3 He then continues to add a score of other details to the sordid picture. in other words. with men becoming gradually more His error is merely like mice. so that the population can be “ weeded out ” (and thus “ homogenized.” . Our author admits that the new tyranny not only might use libertarian slogans but even be established in “ the shadow Torn between the (surviving) of the sovereignty of the people.30 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. for instance. which sometimes reminds us of the democratic and at other times of the dictatorial governments of our days. or if class differences are too divisive a factor. The principle of equality has prepared men for these things: it has predisposed men to endure them. and concentration camps (actually a “ healthy sign ” because they denote resistance) will not exist. cultural. mass exiles. and states more like Leviathans. Such a situation will prevail if democracy has not had enough time to prepare the stage-if. if full political totality is reached before individuals are ready for it-a reign of terror and brutality must set in. only seemingly marred by the author’s emphasis on the element *> of mildness. if racial diversities are too pronounced. the religious background is too personalistic. Under these circumstances mildness will have to be replaced by concentration camps. if we prefer. until and unless a totally new and uniform generation grows up. deportations and gas chambers. Governmental paternalism And De Tocqueville remarks: will be acclaimed.

Q7 It is in the second volume of Democracy in America that De Tocqueville arrives at this pessimism. . but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it. the masses are prone to make a compromise by electing masters who give them the illusion that they are ruled by “ themselves ” after allQ4 It is at the end of this chapter96 that he meditates on the result of a form of government with an elected head but an unbending absolutism in the scope of its legislation and the execution of all regulations and laws: A constitution which would be republican in its head and ultra-monarchical in all its other parts has always seemed to me to be a monstrosity of short duration. which forced him to deal with the cultural and political rather than the legal aspects of the rising democratic trend.. Guglielmo Ferrero’s prematurely deceased son. not even because the term “ democracy ” was then on everybody’s lips. we think.“Qs He found precisely the same phenomena and developments in Europe-and this was the experience which. ___. prompted him to return to this theme. largely. The vices of the governors and the imbecility of the subjects could not fail to bring about its ruin.” not so much because Andrew Jackson had just risen to power when De Tocqueville visited the country. a “ magnifying mirror of Europe “99-hut. democracy the subject. I believe. . Our author confesses that the primary interest in his research and analysis was not the United States as a country.* demand for liberty and the desire to be led. at all times. The United States were ideal as a “ case history. simply .Q6 This meditation is continued in the next chapter (vii) where De Tocqueville insists again that the danger of a new tyranny is at hand: Despotism . And the people. as Leon Ferrero. but democracy as such: “ America was only my frame. tired of its representatives and of itself. I should have loved freedom. or because America is.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 3’ L-. appears to me peculiarly to be dreaded in democratic ages. called it. would create freer institutions or would soon give up and prostrate itself at the feet of a single master.

vi. he saw very clearly the autocratic element in democracy. with its manifold. generation. though ‘tis the Past From which she gets her saving partThat Good which lets her Evil last. because recent developments in the united States were bound Europe.lo3 Dostoyevski.io2 Herman Melville.&pi. but his remark about a turning of the people to “ freer institutions ” can be interpreted as predicting a resurgence of anarchist leanings-a reaction unfortunately far less likely than the trend to “ stretch out at the feet of a single master. not in her heart. if not The drift the great Russian novelist nihilistic. saw a fateful germination of the seed of destructive ideas. after all.32 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. to “ stick out ” more clearly than in the Old World. but they have found echoes of varying faithfulness in the writings of many contemporary observers. but where’s her planted bed? The future. the old liberal. who (in his Histories. transparent historical layers. the great American seer. what is that to her Who vaunts she’s no inheritor? ‘Tis in her mouth. It cannot be sufficiently emphasized that De Tocqueville’s vistas were evolutionary rather than revolutionary. knew only too well that the disappearance of the old traditional values in our civilization would leave the empty and evil shell of a naked democracy blind to the menaces of the future: Ay. 8-1 I) saw democracy ending in bestiality and savagery. This is evident when we read sensed was revolutionary. Still. he distinguished between the oldfashioned liberal-the representative of the late Russian Enlightenment-and the following far more radical. it is easier to read handwriting on a fresh sheet than on a paper already covered with numerous notes. to a recently published book : . of the reactions of Stepan Trophimovich. lops. which has also been recognized by modern authors. Democracy .“iOl His analyses were not those of Plato nor of Aristotle. however.loO It is doubtful whether he would have agreed with Polybius. The Past she spurns. obscures the clarity of political phenomena.

“ Were these the conclusions Who can understand the original we were striving for? idea in this ? “lo4 The liberal who continued to cling to a revealed religion and thus had an immutable basis for his philosophy. inequality which is the obvious basis of all activity and fecundity in social life. thus it dared to fight in every way the two foundations of all societies. was. we first sowed the seed. since equality cannot be imagined outside of tyranny. property. . “ but that makes it only more C. When elected to the Academy to take the chair of M. nurtured it. prepared the way. should not respect merit or wealth more than birth. not seen in our days that the privileges even of intellect have been challenged.” he said to me feverishly. To be sure. who was a convinced Catholic and a liberal. and indeed. and that appeals have been made to ignorance in order to save the revolution ? It cannot be doubted that the dogma of equality. . rejected democracy for political rather than for religious reasons. the last religion of bastard societies. I am not speaking about Christian equality. in another position. . mutilated ! ” he exclaimed. what could they say new. Droz he insisted in his inauguration speech (talking about the French Revolution) : Not being able to read in the book of history. . naturally. heavens ! How it’s all expressed. Have we cannot resist alone the onslaught of the levellers.--awful. tapping the book with his fingers. quite logically. It’s just our idea. which is at the same time the mother and the daughter of liberty. but about this democratic and social equality. whose real name is equity. after us? But. which is nothing but the canonization of envy and the chimera of jealous ineptitude. which shows that democracy degenerates everywhere into despotism. it undertook to establish democracy in France .“io. . Still Count Montalembert.11-j DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 33 “ I agree that the author’s fundamental idea is a true one. distorted.was never anything but a mask which could not become reality without the abolition of all merit and virtue .lo5 To Fustel de Coulanges it was not less evident that every and any inequality would be more bitterly resented in a D . . authority and inequality. exactly ours. This equality. . .

Speaking about the decline of authority in the social sphere. die Tyrannen. in the police court. The Genevan Henri Frederic Amiel. Alexander Herzen had his interest focused on the political rather than on the psychological problem. But is it not curious that the r@ime of individual right should . with his Calvinistic background. Goethe’s verse describes this situation in simple terms: Ich habe gar nichts gegen die Menge.34 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. Gewiss die Schelme. They call those scoundrels. I have nothing at all against the masses. democratic civilization than u(lder other conditionslo In order to establish a fuller equality the masses would submit to a Leader who would carry out their anti-libertarian wishes. Democracy and liberty are not one but two.lo7 Thus one should not be surprised when we hear genuine liberals of our own century demand the maintenance or the restoration of monarchies in order to preserve liberty. or at least pretend to bring their desires to full realization. In military uniform. in prison. he remarked in his diary on March 20.lo8 France. Analyzing the trend in France he wrote in his diary: . had similar apprehensions. So ruft sie. Doch kommt sie einmal ins Gedrange. lead to nothing but respect for ‘b’tiit‘gl strength ? Jacobi&m brings with it Caesarism . always officially emphasizing with increasing vehemence her adherence to the principles of freedom-a sure sign of menaced position. William James’ estimate of the French national character at the end of the last century1oQ is therefore almost similar to that made today of the Germans. the rule of the tongue leads to the rule of the sword. urn den Teufel zu bannen. But whenever they get into a tough spot In order to protect themselves against the devil. of course. 1865 : ’ The only counterpoise to pure equality is military discipline. or on the execution ground. was for a long time “ ahead ” in the downward evolutionary trend towards diminished liberties. there is no reply possible. the tyrants.

e. . Unity is motivated by love. by strengthening the individual. but they are in coalition. association of individuals who are in themselves weak. but ethically that is It is only after the individual . i. a despotic centralization. without centralization? we not seen that French democracy. A monolithic society was prepared by the rise of numerous mammoth associations and “ coalitions.lr2 Yet Dostoyevski ridiculed the concept even of a union based on purely material interests : When a nation abandons its religious concepts a wicked and fear-inspired craving for union is generated which has as its goal the salvation of the belly.” These frightened such observers as Kierkegaard. Those who are associated in coalitions are private enemies who band together against the public enemy. ciple of association. the statist Leviathan demanded a social Behemoth.has acquired an weakening. it strengthens numerically. Dostoyevski and Ernest Hello.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANIS M: THE PROPHETS 35 Have we not seen that a republic with governmental initiative. The people of the world have a common hatred which gives them a common occupation. ethical ‘outlook. favours the development of liberty far less than the English Have monarchy without initiative. The people of the world are not friends . in face of the whole world. and vice versa. an enormous army. which determines the goal of their activities. enervates him. who wrote his critical essays in the second He said: half of the last century. that there can Otherwise the be any suggestion of really joining together. it is an escape. is just as disgusting and as harmful as the marriage of children. a distraction Dialectically the position is this: the prinand an illusion. is the form nearest to limitless autocracy?110 This political evolution went hand in hand with a social evolution. equality in slavery. In this case social union has no other aim.lll Kierkegaard wrote in a similar vein: Nowadays the principle of association (which at the most is valid only where material interests are concerned) is not positive but negative. Coalition is motivated by hatred.

then. . its personal liberty is said to be less. who wrote about his country in roughly the same period (1838) : It is a besetting vice of democracies to substitute public opinion for law. quite naturally. will not be able to resist the encroachment of the total state. The majestic rule of the majority does better in the United States. In America the majority builds an impregnable wall around the process of thinking. . . but the evil is none the less because it is satisfactorily explained.r13 But whether the efforts of an egalitarian association will succeed or not. . than in almost every other country. .36 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. . . after all. . The Inquisition was never able to prevent the circulation in Spain of books opposed to the religion of the majority. .rl6 Especially in the history of small American towns do we see the tremendous influence exercised by public opinion-a . can be saved by their “ institutions ” considered by themselves ? If there are no brothers no institution will establish a feeling of fraternity.lr5 This statement is supported by the observations of James Fenimore Cooper. . and to defer more to those around them. This is the usual form in which masses of men exhibit their tyranny . It is not difficult to trace the causes of such a state of things. Although the political liberty of this country is greater than that of nearly every other civilized nation. This is the beginning of the end. Here. it has removed even the thought ofpublishing them. De Tocqueville was surprised at the phenomenon of group control in the United States. in pursuing even their lawful and innocent occupations. . But the “ salvation of the belly ” is the most impotent of all concepts of union. men are thought to be more under the control of extra-legal authorities. What. is precisely the . the “ horizontal pressure ” of the masses will help to produce a human type which.r14 He wrote: I do not know a country where there is in general less intellectual independence and less freedom of discussion than in America. In other words.reason why the French bourgeoisie bands together with no other reason than to save the belly. opposing the proletariat which knocks at its door.

But the price paid for this sort of intellectual pacification is the sacrifice of the entire moral courage of the human mind. As a preparation for the absolute rule of the tyrannical state these corrosive forces play a fatal role in relation to human personality. (Ob serve that effective civilian resistance during John 6 World War II came only from “ backward ” nations. A convenient plan for having peace in the intellectual world. that of the law is lighter. . entirely exempt from the blessings of good-neighbourly interventions. .liQ The picture painted characterizes the evolutionary rather than the revolutionary transition towards totalitarian dictatorAt the same time there ship-as befitted a Protestant nation. and this not only in the more retarded regions of the Deep South. In England. individual liberty will probably be as much exposed to invasion from the government. but also in the Middle West or in New England. as it already is from public opinion. opinions do not perceptibly gain. but induces men to disguise them. is little doubt that an analogous process also took place in continental and Catholic nations.) Stuart Mill. though the yoke of opinion is perhaps heavier.117 Neither is Britain. but continue to smoulder in the narrow. or to abstain With us. as soon as they were or . without ever lighting up the general affairs of mankind with either a true or deceptive light. . . When they do so. . wrote : Our mere social intolerance kills no one. fully conscious of these degenerative trends among his co-nationals. or even lose. . they never blaze out far and wide.lls And in a pessimistic vein he added: The majority have not yet learnt to feel the power of the government their power or its opinions their opinions. from the peculiar circumstances of our political history. and keeping all things going on therein very much as they do already.circles of thinking and studious persons among whom they originate. in spite of her aristocratic overtones. heretic from any active effort for their diffusion. roots out no opinions. than in most countries of Europe.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 37 drive sometimes using physical force. ground in each decade or generation.

as Albert Jay Neck remarked. .“120 This forms a curious parallel to Huey Long’s famous pronouncement that fascism in the United 1 States could only be victorious if it called itself “ Anti-Fascism ” \ -or “ democracy. One has only to remember Thomas Huxley’s dictum that “ we do not much mind heterodoxy over here if it does not proclaim itself as such. They have a temper of independence.” As to’ Mill’s oblique reference to the British dislike of the removal of “ labels ” (without minding the emptying of concepts of their very essence and substance) we have to keep in mind that this corrosive process is likely to happen wherever conservatism is coexistent with an absolute rule of public opinion and a superficiality in thinking. increased by an ever growing homogeneity. and a habit of uncontrolled action.123 Similar ideas have been expressed in this century.” “ those rising above the swinish multiprivileges tude “. and new steps have thus been made into the direction of totalitarianism. the connection between aristocratic privileges and freedom was fairly obvious. Even a Thomas Jefferson had believed in “ natural aristoi. He said about the political tendency of aristocratic bodies that I . of the social scene. they have a sense of equality among themselves. which makes them impatient of encountering in the management of the interior concerns of the country. The totalitarian and dictatorial menace was.38 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.124 The opposition against the hierarchies of birth-an opposition in itself often very healthy-shifts easily against the acceptance of all superiority.r2r and Madison had demanded political for those better qualified for the task of statesmanship. became “ progressive. and of constituting in themselves what is greatest and most dignified in the realm. at a later period. which makes. according to so many nineteenth-century thinkers. the levelling then.122 To Matthew Arnold. the machinery and regulations of a superior and peremptory power. their pride revolt against the overshadowing greatness and dignity of commanding executive. a Gleichschaltung. .” The intellectual hypocrisy and decomposition was yet only one part of the picture.r25 takes an intellectual character. .

. S. . The Philistine tries with diabolic determination to eat from a big kettle .r2* To Friedrich von Preen he wrote at a later date: Your analysis is right. .12’ All these tendencies and trends are deeply connected with the emergence of the new emphasis on quant$v fostered by the democratic principle of majority rule. As a result people will begin to howl if there are not at least a8hund. This tyranny. the worse. it practises a I .&l of them in an assembly. we are drowning! ” .126 The pettybourgeois character of fascism and nazism is today doubted by no serious observer. he could not enjoy the food otherwise. or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle. and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right. like moving cheese. Jacob Burckhardt remarked in 1866 : Even more serious is the steady increase of complete despair about every kind of smallness . great crowds of people in a nation are disgusting. yet the common man’s love for liberty and his readiness to make sacrifices for this ideal has not stood up too well to the test of recent llistory. Mill emphasized. .12Q The danger of this mass rule. like hills of ants. . oh Lord. Once the social hierarchies were destroyed or weakened beyond repair. or of fleas-the more. resulting in an immense “ horizontal ‘pressure ” has been commented upon by political theorists from Madison to RenC Schwob. Mill-whom it would be difficult to accuse of anti-democratic sentiments. based on quantity and majority. the political responsibilities were placed squarely on the masses. anybody who does not belong to a nation of at least thirty millions shouts: “ Help us. but also might assume purely social forms.130 The concept of a tyranny of a majority was very well known to J.” has found in our time a faint echo only. could be political in character.131 He added: -’ Society can and does execute its mandates . efforts are occasionally made to educate people for mass meetings.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARLANISM: THE PROPHETS 39 Emerson’s warning that “ without great men.

was .fact. EQUALITY [Chap. as Emil Lederer pointed out. and enslaving the soul itself. separate person Yet after the word democratic. “ This irresistible power is an enduring phenomenon. aristocracy. personality. he called an “ elective which. the word en masse. nonsense.40 LIBERTY OR.137 They all saw clearly the tidal i wave of collectivism which not only was used by the totalitarian mob-masters but.13s Orestes Brownson with no less pessimism bewailed the insidious influence of the masses on American government in its original concept. Thus we read in his diary: Books are written for “ the masses. even less encumbered by illusions than Mill. against the grin of shallowness. such is the . by those who understand how to write for “ the masses. or no evil.” who understand nothing. commented dryly on the power exercised by the “ greatest number “. “ Evil. The battle against princes and popes-and the nearer we come to our time the truer this is-is easy compared with struggling against the masses.132 De Tocqueville. and we must conform to it. baseness and bestiality.“136 In our days we have seen a whole host of thinkers dealing with the menace of the masses to sanity in government. though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties. Kierkegaard thundered against the oppressive rise of the masses. . . the tyranny of equality. since. social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression. ‘. and the coming rule by demagogues moved by the “ caprice of the mob.“133 Lord Canning.” was for him a certainty. in order afterwards to congregate ’ them into mobs. a simple. penetrating much more deeply into the details of life. it leaves fewer means of escape. who had a sharp eye for the signs of the times. stated that “ the philosophy of the French Revolution reduced the nation into individuals.” Its slow replacement by democracy under the pressure of the masses. and its employment for the good is a mere accident. and liberty. Yet he preached resignation.“134 And while Walt Whitman crooned in his Leaves qf Grass : One’s self I sing.” .

Marques de Valdegamas. The reasoning of Donoso Cartes.las (see below. and that oppression of the minority will extend to far greater numbers. He said: Of this I am certain.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 41 artificially fostered by other agencies. precisely the role the modern as well as the historic dictators wanted to assume. was deeply conscious of the character of its democratic prelude. whenever strong divisions prevail in that kind of polity. as they often must. Under a cruel prince they have the balmy compassion of mankind to assuage the smart of their wounds. was surpassed only by De Tocqueville in the accuracy of his In his famous speech before the Madrid Diet on expectations. since crowds could more easily be ealt with than true personalities.” the label freely applied to him). the majority of the citizens is capable of exercising the most cruel oppres. a conservative-liberal Catholic (though he was a personal friend of Veuillot. than can almost ever be apprehended from the dominion of a single sceptre. They seem deserted bv mankind. has similarities with that of De Tocqueville. In such a popular persecution. they have the plaudits of the people to animate their generous constancy under their sufferings : but those who are subjected to are deprived of all external wrong under multitudes. Joseph de Maistre and even of Arthur Koestler. SI). lpo 4. and will be carried on w+th much greater fury. that in a democracy. THE PROPHETS OF TOTALITARIANISM Among those plagued by visions of the character of modern tyranny Juan Donoso Cartes. consolation. who 4 oresaw the rise of Bonapartism p. as an opponent of Carlism he was hardly an “ ultra-conservative.I sions upon the minority. Burke. January 4. 1849. individual sufferers are in a much more deplorable condition than in any other. . this grim Spanish prophet made a public profession of his views concerning the future of Western civilization. overpowered x by a conspiracy of their whole specieslaV It seems obvious that these mass hatreds for dissenting And this is minorities need an organizer and director.

) “ slaves in uniform ” ? This was still not the end. gentlemen. Christianity.141 Then the speaker launched into an explanation of his theory thermometers ” : he surveyed the of the “ two interconnected ethics of Christianity. . fostered the rise of absolute monarchies all over Europe which. In order to be able to foretell these goal of the world. The world.42 LIBERTY OR EQUALM’Y [Chap. our marqds shared the fear of the effect of the modern means of communication. and added a critical analysis of history He insisted that the Reformation had based on his theory. finally. established permanent armies boasting millions of men. gentlemen. of all your errors [addressing himself to the left of the Chamber] consists in the fact that you do not know in what direction the world is moving. was the religion of liberty. Beginning his analysis of the general political situation he then said: Gentlemen. with De Maistre and Koestler he had in common the concept of external and internal forces. but we should not refrain from terrible words if they express the truthand I am decided on pronouncing them. With the French count. Liberty is dead! She is not going to rise again. . perhaps not even in three centuries. The religious thermometer continued to go further down and the political thermometer . and each weakening of this religious force was bound to be accompanied by an increase of “ external pressure. . not on the third day. The basis. He conceived an interconnection between what he called the “ political and the religious thermometers “. things one does not have to be a prophet. marches with rapid steps towards the establishment of the greatest and darkest despotism in This is the goal of civilization. when civilization and the world merely undergo changes. this is the human memory. not in three years. are (These figures. century.” His whole outlook was therefore deeply pessimistic. You believe that civilization and the world go ahead. these words may sound terrible. if applied to the eighteenth But what are soldiers if not certainly greatly exaggerated. For me it is sufficient to contemplate this terrible maze of human events from its only genuine point of view-from the heights of Catholicism. for Donoso Cartes.

tyranny . Tell me. religious thermometer. created ? What new institutions were then The Governments said : we have a million arms [brazes] . The governments decided that a million arms. in dealing with this problem. we need more . a million eyes and a million ears were not enough. . there could be in antiquity no tyrannies on a large scale But today. gentlemen. gentlemen.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 43 did not cease to climb. colossal. Thus the telegraph was invented. there are no physical obstacles. they wanted a million ears. we need a million eyes . universal and immense cleared for a gigantic. whether or not I am right in being preoccupied with the immediate future of the world.142 Even this was not the end of the downward trend of the It kept on falling. in spite of everything the religious thermometer went down-and they kept on rising. In spite of this. . In antiquity tyranny was savage and pitiless. gentlemen. He said finally: Consider one fact. then. and yet this despotism Lvas physically limited because all states were small and because inter-4s a result national relations were altogether non-existent. and there are no moral obstacles because all minds are divided and all patriotisms are dead. and so they established the police . I am not dealing with the real question. They are not sufficient. how with the exception of Rome. a million arms were not enough. the political thermometer and political repression continued to risesince. Continuing to talk about the mutual relationship between religion and government. Donoso Cartes emphasized that the alternative to the rising despotism was a religious reaction (which he thought highly improbable). and with the police a million eyes. there are no distances. a million eyes were not enough. there are no physical obstacles because. tell me whether.lq3 . For the governments. They insisted that they had to be everywhere at the same time. More repression. And they found them in the centralization of the administration. because with the steamships and the railroads there are no boundaries left. gentlemen. the paths have been things have changed ! Gentlemen. more supervision was necessary. thanks to the electric telegraph.

abdicate very easily.44 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.” the basis of the coming tyranny. and it never will. old monarchies claim the obedience of the people upon grounds of duty. Here again we find a minor miscalculation. but rather in “ progress. after commenting on the tactics and political strateLgy of Caesar. That he had very specific fears is evident from his We will return address of the following year in the Cortes. to this issue later. in time rather than in essence. that a democracy has been kept out of the control of the fiercest and most turbulent spirits in the society. and I will govern for your good and in your name. had him address “ the numerical majority of Roman citizens ” with these words: “ I am your advocate and your leader: make me supreme.145 Walter Bagehot. they say they have consecrated claims to the loyalty of mankind . they will breathe into it all their own fury. Donoso Cartes rightly expected the end of (a “ geographic “) patriotism and the rise of a “ rootless ” internationalism. the keen analyst of Bonapartism. His eyes were fixed on a world-wide tyranny. and make it subservient to the worst designs of the worst men. ancient Greece those who broke the grip of their aristocracies or threw them out were acclaimed as tyrants. they appeal to conscience. one will ever make an approach to understanding it who does not separate it altogether and on principle from the The despotisms of feudal origin and legitimate pretensions. who had declared at an earlier date that It has never happened in the world. even to . While Donoso Cartes saw. Jacob He said: Burckhardt followed Plato more closely. it was always taken for granted that these without fail would unceasingly carry out the will of the masses. in particular. In Democracies.l”” An even darker view of the character of democracy was taken by Fisher Ames. more limited collectivisms like ethnic nationalism cannot be found in his calculations.” No This is exactly the principle of the French Empire. not exactly in democracy. but the intermediary stages of other.

a leader whose intentions are known to the people and who devotes himself to its interests.149 Proudhon. ridicule all formahties and &Ynot impose conditional limitations on the depositories of power.fiil -. is a mistaken representative.146 A democratic despotism is like a theocracy: it assumes its own correctness.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 45 religion: but Louis Napoleon is a Benthamite despot. had no illusions about the despotic implications of democracy. Inclined towards suspicion and _ --~ since they are the people. it says that the Casar. “ A government which permits its principles to be questioned is a lost government. who has recently been accused of fascist leanings. he says. he is for the “ greatest happiness of the greatest number “. they have no which ~. who lacked the ostentatious admiration of modern totalitarians for the “ common man.” As Cavaignac once said. and they know that I know better. they do not care for intricate mechanisms or for checks and balances for which. that they are seeking.” wrote: . but he is the people’s agent .-. ~. on their own account.they considause.” He is not the Lord’s anointed. but incapable of 1 1 I \ . it is a boss in whose word they confide. . The people.14s Both Hitler and Mussolini insisted on the democratic character of their political systems. of the impatience of their desires. because I know what they should have. the people show a preference towards summary forms of authority. I am here because I know what they wish. This chief they provide with limitless authority and irresistible power. It says: “ I am the representative of the people. considering eyerythin. The thing they are looking for is not legal guarantees.-themselves. that he is not fit to be Casar. This early socialist.14’ The democratic aspects of modern dictatorship have also been emphasized by numerous other authors. of the urgency of their needs.. because of this ignorance of the primitiveness of their instincts. “ I am where I am because I know better than any one else what is good for the French people.-. .” All popular discussion whatever which aspires to teach the government is radically at issue with the hypothesis of the Empire. w_--. of which they do not have any idea and whose power they do not understand. the omniscient representative.

becomes manifest when we read of the outcry of H. they believe in nothing definite save will. Burckhardt’s terribles simpl&ateurs.151 this democracy was and it boasted of How deeply this desire for a personal leadership is rooted. tyrants have to come-as stalwart defenders of the lower classes against wealthy. have to be “ regular fellows ” etc.c. plutocrats. unpopular minorities (aristocrats. as we have repeatedly emphasized. we follow you! “152 Among modern authors the theme of the “ charismatic as distinguished from the strictly non-democratic leader.f. and we say to them: “ Men.) .“150 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. of the “ leading ” rather than the “ ruling ” . They have only in their creatures: In principibus. but also in socialism. has been dealt with by Max Weber. decent chaps “).” ruler. not only in democracy. reminding the reader : The curious thing about it is that sincerely convinced of its liberalism. alone can ideas. They do not have the “ religion of He then continued to analyze the foundations of the imperial autocracy in Rome through democratic forces.156 These tyrants (“ ordinary. ennobled by the choice of the people. show us the way into battle.) .46 methodical \I the human confidence hominum. Their only hope is man. tic dictators.153 Yet he was far from being alone in delineating and characterizing this contemporary phenomenon in connection with democratic Others15* have successfully analyzed these populisdemands. These nineteenth and early twentieth century vistas were Aristotle knew only too well that the not basically new. and. van Kol (“ Rienzi “) in his Socialisme en Vrijheit : To those who are called to lead us we promise loyalty and submission. discussion. the “ handsome fellows with the talents of non-commissioned officers “155 -a truly remarkable prophecy (but not quite as accurate as it seems . only a Gefreeiter-lance corporal or p. in jiliis They expect nothing from principles-which save them. Hitler was never a non-commissioned officer. representing equality and progress.

partly from a distance.161 were not simply personifications of the masses and hence “ born leaders. and rarely in kindness. Wilson’s concept implies a complete 1 union of the leader with the people as well as with the 1 spirit of the times. partly close to. it implies a certain (subconscious) cunning and shrewdness. his tyranny is less tolerable than that of any despot. The popular chief in such a case is armed with the power of a tyrant. These men are not always exceptional either in intellectual capacities or in talents. Yet they emanate a . but a lack of originality. or nearly all.l*O Still. worse in the case of there being no division of parties. if possible. I have had during my life-time the occasion to observe several such men. actually. The closer this co-operation between leader.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIAh’ISM: THE PROPHETS 47 type. the half mad “ counsellor ” of the ecstatic backwoods revolutionaries in Brazil. not in essence.159 Talking about the “ popular chief.” he adds: While his power continues. without feeling any of the tyrant’s dread either of the public indignation expressed by way of \ censure. Max Weber is right in maintaining that there is something magical in these unoriginal but nevertheless “ charismatic ” Not only Hitler but perhaps even Antonio Conselleaders. or of the same indignation breaking out in acts of i violence. In this as in many other respects they fit completely into the democratic pattern-as President Eliot of Harvard would have been forced to admit. The difference is in degree. the less the total aggregate of liberty. the people inclining one way. and all. it leaves no escape to its victim.” Involuntarily one is reminded of Goethe’s description of the “ daimonic man ” in the course of history: The demoniacal element has the most terrifying aspects if it is strongly represented in a human being.15’ President Wilson’s definition of a democratic leaderls* is. Finally we get the picture of the successful party leader as painted by Lord Brougham : It is. however. heiro. and no redress or consolation under oppression. identical with that of a totalitarian dictator. people and the integrating spirit of the times.

It State is the name of the coldest of all cold monsters. did many nineteenth-century thinkers The lie fear a distinctive menace to person and personality. The result of that is only too often Irving Babbitt’s “ efficient megalomaniac ” who-in the words of Burke-wants to “ improve the mystery of murder.162 The reference to the masses. frightening magnetic force and exert an incredible power over all creatures and even over the elements. now open your ears. the masses are attracted by them. exercised by “ the demoniac ” as formulated by Goethe on Burckhardt’s what Henri “ awful simplifiers ” preaching Hauser called. Who can tell how far such influence will extend? All the united moral forces are powerless against them. especially dangerous is the influence highly revealing.” hinted . but from the ever-growing state itself.jausses ide’esclaires. Seldom or never can one find several men of that type as contemporaries. is Finally. lies coldly and this lie crawls out from its mouth: “ I.” 5. who feel attracted to these leaders although the more intelligent people reject them. .” of “ state ” and “ nation ” moved Nietzsche to write these famous lines: Thus spake Zarathustra : State. and the more intelligent part of humanity tries in vain to unmask them as simpletons or frauds . . as sin against morals and rights . what is that? Well then.48 LIBER+IY OR EQUALITY [Chap. against which they have picked their fight. I am the People! ” Where there is still a real people it does not understand the State and hates it as the evil eye. of the identification of “ state ” and “ people. and nothing is able to overpo\cer them except the Universe itself. And it may well have been from such observations and remarks that that terrible sentence found its origin: herno contra deum nisi deus ipse. the State. now I will tell you my tale about the death of nations.I63 Merezhkovski. THE MENACE OF THE STATE'S GROWTH Not only from a variety of political processes. (Nietzsche’s) state-“ calling the Church-in opposition to the most burning of all miracles.

Christian and European character than the centralistic Second Reich. As to purely administrative centralization.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 49 This at an antithesis bound to culminate in a fatal crisis. where the Lutheran concept of a state based on the “ radical wickedness of man ” was and still is dominant. and Europe to perish.“r6’ Frantz. Under economic centralisation Asia is cheaper than Europe. All Centralisation is Civilisation. . . it must be kept in mind that its roots in western Europe go back to Louis XIV. declared in the past century: “ Federalism is nothing else but the secular aspect of the development of Christianity. if not further. . Yet centralism is opposed to the whole Christian tradition. true only if we accept the Teutonic (Spenglerian) definition of civilization as opposed to culture. and to ensure swift execution of governmental orders.le5 It is also evident that this tug-of-war would be of a different character in a Protestant country. naturally. The world tends to economic centralisation.i’j6 In order to crush all opposing forces and to facilitate the perfecting of the totalitarian machinery. with its libertarian and personalistic outlook.169 There are also economic aspects to the mania of centralization. the anti-Prussian ideologist of German federalism (f ed era 1 ism in its European sense. Henry Adams alluded to them in a rhapsodic statement: All Civilisation is Centralisation. Therefore all Civilisation is the sur\-ival of the most economical (cheapest).l(j8 was disappointed in his hopes for a loose German federalism-which would have been in a much better position to preserve Germany’s universalistic. implying emphasis on “ states’ rights ” -the opposite of centralism). to whom even the concept of a German capital remained distasteful. Therefore Asia tends to survive.“O This analysis is. it became necessary to step up the process of centralization. This alone is able to foster uniformity and egalitarianism.171 but that it received its most powerful impetus E .l** view has been repeated by other authors. Constantin Frantz.

Centralism can serve as a “ truncheon. not even a Supreme Being with a state worship.175 and Paul Bourget. fearing the rise of naked power without ethos or wisdom. had artificially revived a “ monarchical state absolutism. and then Napoleon I appeared on the scene. returning from a trip to the United States. recognized this clearly. nothing was missing in this new governmental machine. l i3 Deploring the fact that the French Revolution.“6 Irving Babbitt. . This machinery waited only for a clever engineer to show to a surprised world all the capabilities for oppression with which it had been furnished by its rash designers . the fault does not lie with her people but with her political centralization. absolutism desired centralization for mere while royal “ efficiency.50 LIfiERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. the anarchist. and mercilessly flayed the centralistic excesses of the French Revolution with its “ liberal ” pretensions and aspirations : We are con\-inced that if France has lost her liberty on two different occasions. Georges Sore1 saw this more accurately. . Bakunin. knew well that there was an organic connection between America’s liberty and her federalistic constitution emphasizing states’ rights-a structural characteristic so obviously lacking in France.l” was preceded in his visions by Jacob Burckhardt. and seen her democratic republic transformed into a dictatorship and a military democracy.li4 A “ clever engineer ” (habile machiniste) could also take over the centralized Weimar Republic and the Italian state unified Yet Bakunin forgot that by Cavour.” through terror and servitude “ order ” can be maintained-or which . by the National Convention-Robespierre and Saint-Just actually restored it. under the Jacobins. which for the first time in history had proclaimed the liberty of the citizen as well as the liberty of man.” he concluded : Reinstated anew by the Constituent Assembly-opposed.” republican centralism of the democratic pattern is also motivated by a craving for uniformity and equality. it is true (though with little success\. Mazzini and Garibaldi.

(C om p are the story in Keyserling’s Siidamerikanische Meditationen. The mob and the intellectuals derived from it the vision of a Golden Age which would arrive without fail once the noble human race could act according to its whims. . Centralization and the efforts to control all details < of civic and private life necessitate these unlimited hordes of i bureaucrats. private enterprise and the liberal professions to the mediocrities. a prty to naked p0wer.17Q It is evident that these regulating organs. same : The biggest mischief in the past century has been perpetrated by Rousseau with his doctrine of the goodness of human nature. quite autoThis danger matically. one might call ministerialism or adminisIts basic character is the centralization trative despotism. such as we see today in the U. unlike De Tocqueville. and finally the best talents in the country are attracted by public service. was no less apparent to Herbert Spencer. S. create a certain “ predictability ” of human existence which satisfies people of minor intelligence or vitality. Comte. 43. about the Italian boy repatriated from Leningrad who was afraid of freedom.R.S. increases in “ weight ” and prestige.lsO The state thus.) The bureaucratic careers themselves become desirable. as every child knows.lsl The fact that a totalitarian bureaucratic rule has its origin in a spiritual crisis was no secret even to a positivist like A.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 51 installed. as J. at first considered to be a nuisance. in the absence of a better label. Mill feared. As a result man becomes periodically. who could write: The final general result of the dissolution of spiritual power is the establishment of that type of modern autocracy which has no exact counterpart in history and which. leaving. Burckhardt saw the preparation of the coming slavery. p. in a dialectical process rather The result would be the than through a straight evolution. The result was. a complete disappearance of the concept of authority in the brains of all mortals.17s This “ naked power ” has to be exercised by an enormous army of civil servants (the “ ears ” in the prophecy of Donoso Cortgs).S.

in keeping with Aristotle’s observations (Politics v. centralization and bureaucratization is characterized by a furious hatred of personality and tradition. Its general medium of action is systematized corruption. . The Revolution has left nothing standing but individuals. .182 This whole interconnected process of democratization. with bold arrogance and the of a principle. These were powerful symbols of personal privileges. did not share the prerogatives of sovereignty-. 7-8). . properly theirs are public affairs. . in this respect. it has insinuated itself modestly.wations (“ purges “) of the Jacobinsls4 were imitated later on by the “ cleansings ” (chistka) of the Russian communists. E-et the period of “ consolidation ” produces-as Benjamin Constant has already remarkedl*sa full-fledged police system and a network of espionage which. . affairs of the State . g. . as a necessary evil.52 h~ER7-y 0~ EQUALITY [Chap. . saying that : We have seen the old society perish and \vith it this great number of local institutions and independent tribunals which formed part and parcel of it. but they set limits to it which honour defended with stubbornness! Not one of them has we . Centralization has not arrived. In modern. of power extended more and more beyond all reasonable limits. these tribunals. These institutions. Its inorganic individualism evokes the spectre of collectivism. .h ave nothing but “ individuals? ” all matters kvhich are not . RoyerCollard admirably portrayed this crisis in a speech before the Chamber of Deputies. it is true. . as so many other ’ no less dangerous doctrines.lEs . . and no new ones have been put in their place. I authority j as a consequence. helps to keep distrust among the citizens. \\. The e”. The dictatorship which set an end to it has. This is how we became an administered nation1s3 In a purely revolutionary period the bureaucratic machinery is still weak and the terror of revolutionary groups supplants the police force. From a society ground to dust emerged centralization. true republics tvithin the framework of the monarchy. . Indeed. the hopes for a successful revolt are fatally reduced. with their great technical vulnerability. completed the work of its predecessor . “ progressive ” societies.

lB1 . Then. well with “ proletarian ” or lower-middle-class Today the myth of with the accent on the “ common man.” The double meaning of the German Folk-“ ethnic nation ” or “ lower classes ” -has a deeper significance. I can conceive also of one of the lighter sides of the great movement-how the pale fear of death is going to affect the whole pushing. ambitious pack. sometimes in my imagination I can already see these fellows quite vividly. and I am going to describe them to you over a glass of beer Occasionally I ponder in anticithis coming September. only to amuse people as intensively as possible.isQ and thus harmonizes movement. which has its perfect parallel in the Slavic narod. is going to be when these developments are only in their first stage and the level of our culture has receded only a hand’s breadth. not “ pan-German.lQo his feeling was dynastic and particularistic. for example. seems to be at the present moment the most profitable policy ? Obviously.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 53 The methodical suppression of all dissent and criticism by modern dictators is the result of their nervousness towards public opinion-a basically democratic attitude. as a contemporary analyst points out. because naked power is going to preside again. The violent ethnic nationalism of the French Jacobins is too well known to be in need of further elucidation.l*’ Public opinion is “manufactured”and strictly supervised.” the Prussian Junker as the trail-blazer of ethnic nationalism in Germany has all but evaporated . Jacob Burckhardt had in his mind a clear picture of these terroristic aspects of the coming mobmasters when he wrote to Friedrich von Preen: My vision of the terribles simplijcateurs who are going to rule our old Europe is not a pleasant one. The enthusiasm for (ethnic) nationality is a tendency of the lower rather than the upper classes. race. pation what the fate of our scholarly endeavours. and keeping \--et what one’s trap shut will be obligatory for everybody. ethnic nationality. or* All these horrors would have no activating force without the collectivistic notion of the “ common denominator “which can be class.

if they are given a free hand . Franz Grillparzer.“) lg2 And Austria’s great dramatist 1859 when he wrote laconically Legitimitiit Auto&2 . Napoleon III of having committed a whole series of crimes against the cultural and political foundations of Europe.lQ4 writing not much later. with great foresight. which were motivated by his leftist nationalism. They have now laid the axe to the monasteries But they have not told us where and the Catholic Church. they cannot do everything at once.“) lg3 The Protestant Alexandre Vinet saw these possibilities of a further decline when he commented on the attack of the Radicals against the monasteries in the Swiss canton of Argovia in I 840 : They are going to abolish a lot of other things.Nationalitiit Absurditlit Seruilitiit Bestialitiit (“Legitimacy Authority Nationality Absurdity Servility Bestiality.54 ’ LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. accused Constantine Leontyev.ls5 Leontyev also leads enlarged on that theme in on “ Conditions in France ” : . but. they will stop. naturally. could write as early as 1849 : Der Weg der neuen Bildung geht Von Humanitiit Durch Xationalitiit <ur Bestialitiit (“ The way of modern evolution From humanitarianism Through nationalism To bestiality.

These. W. Lecky shared these apprehensions. if you permit me to be frank.iQQ Yet he saw even further than that. who were not free from This attitude of the author of The Life of Jesus racial notions.“205 of German (ethnic) nationalists. who had once insisted that the “ Semitic in comparison with the “ Indorace ” was inferior nevertheless became impatient with the claims Europeans.200 Sir Henry Maine. had come to similar conclusions. nationalism being the foremost among them.” are nothing but the blind instrument of the world-wide revolution which we Russians. . anti-traditional and anti-Christian. He knew . is clearly expressed in his second letter to David Strauss.2QQ The close interconnections between ethnicism and democracy have become common knowledge in our century. have supported since I 86 I . We believe that ours is a better one. noting that “ democracies are paralyzed by the plea of nationality. on the opposite side of Europe.lQ7 It is natural that Leontyev thoroughly condemned Panslavism.196 Of the Slavic “ tribal (folkic) policy ” (pZem&q~a @it&z) he wrote scathingly : Thus it is clear that tribal politics. he vigorously insisted that both phenomena were basically democratic. to “ zoological ” wars.“QQ1 Fearful of the ultimate effects of nationalism (in an ethnic as well as in a racial sense) on democracy. Criticizing the German claims on Alsace-Lorraine. yours is a policy of races. H.20Q he must have had forebodings of the advent of Woodrow Wilson. The division of mankind into races-apart from the fact that it is based on a scientific error.I that nationalism and internationalism were only differen@ degree but not in essencerQQ-desiring uniformity merely for areas of different sizes . E.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITAWSM: THE PROPHETS 55 feared a general drying-up of the cultural well-springs by a destruction of originality through the uniformistic forces of the age.204 Ernest Renan. he wrote: Our policy is that of the right of nations. antipersonalistic. usually termed “ national. unfortunately. which were based on ethnic grounds. since very few countries have a pure race-can only lead to wars of extermination. revolutionary.

Pomerania.206 Insisting on the effervescence of Panslavism. rather. Silesia. .210 He had a keener eye for the future than for the past. the rise of ethnic nationalism which provoked the rise of (biologic) racialism. of Worms (Borbitomagus) . strengthened by the support of Central Asia. if they point out on the map Obotritic or Velatabic villages ? Kation and race are not synonymous. Under the pretext of a Germanic etymology you claim this or that village of Lorraine for Prussia. The names of Vienna (l%zdohona). greatly stimulated by the theories of Darwin. if they install themselves along the Elbe or the Oder as you have done on the Moselle. for the reason that all these names are Slavic. which you have created and which. Comparative philology.20* Jacques Bainville. ridiculed20Q these predictions of Renan-which came true after 1945. 207 The territorial claims of Germany’s eastern neighbours would under these circumstances be based on arguments similar to those raised by victorious Prussia against Alsace-Lorraine : Don’t put your trust in ethnography or. he prophesied that the smaller Slav nations would join with Moscow. Berlin. Russia. very end of this fertile mixture composed of numerous elements-and all so necessary-which we call humanity. . you have brought into the political arena. but we are never going to claim these cities from you. or Mayence (Moguntiacum) are Gaulish. wrongly. and this political trend is going to be fatal to you. but what are you going to say if some day the Slavs decide to reclaim East Prussia. You have carried into this world the banner of ethnographic and archaologic politics replacing liberal policies . It was. Count Gobineau was the first to preach . naturally. It was the same Renan who showed such extreme pessimism as to the ability of a democratic French republic to resist further German onslaughts. will play you false. would then overrun Europe. The Slavs are becoming enthusiastic about it. himself no mean prophet.n 56 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. are of the same order as the life-and-death struggles of This would be the certain types of rodents and carnivores. don’t apply it too much to political matters. . an entirely new phenomenon in the European scene.

Augustine (he evidently accepted the Protestant deterministic interpretation of the Augustinian theology). badly understood. the strong people devouring the pale bourgeoisie. it is from this reading.214 . tell you that after having read you. both theories result in a very great limitation.213 Among these were also the socialists.211 Montesquieu. You can seems to me to be a cousin of pure materialism. accept your doctrine. . are human beings. false. and most certainly dangerous. and from social capacities to all sorts of capacities . that this racial determinism seemed to be spiritually connected with the theology of St.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 57 this doctrine in a somewhat coherent form. . if . summarized and popularized. in a cheap pamphlet. with the thin eating the fat. he wrote. had a century earlier expressed his surprise that God put a soul. I?mile Zola. But Soul-arine in a rather violent way expatrated on the stupidity of socialists who accept Darwin. who saw the inherent dangers of this trend.“212 When a hundred years later Darwinism swept Europe like a wildfire. in all likelihood. . now as before. He had read fragments. I remain I believe them to in extreme opposition to these doctrines. . that he had arrived at a revolutionary concept of the struggle for existence. all anti-religious groups picked up this biological hypothesis with great eagerness. wrote of one of his characters in Germinal: Etienne now read Darwin. a questionable liberal. of human liberty. I have to confess to you. into the Kegro’s black body. which always reason along the beaten paths. be. then one has to doubt whether we ourselves are “ Christians. liberal suspicions were aroused. He then added : This theory of predestination. they will be led straight from the race to the mdividual. but Alexis de His Catholic and Tocqueville quickly perceived its dangers. I must also not in a complete abolition. Jansenius and Calvin. and especially a If the Africans really good soul. in a memorable letter to Gobineau. this apostle of scientific mequality whose famous law of selection was good only for the philosophic supporters of aristocracy. be certain that if the masses.

that an aristocracy distinguished merely by wealth must perish from satiety. Anti-Judaism was virtually unknown in early American society. with its more pronouncedly aristocratic character. distinguished by their bodily vigour or their masculine intelligence .t 58 LIBERTY OR EQUALM-Y [Chap. 217 When the Nazis gained full power in Hungary they were supported in their ferocious persecution of the Jews by neither the nobility nor the peasantry. or even the very genealogically-minded nobilities. the mischief arising from the concept of racial superiority had actually far wider and more popular implications. the . In spite of Gobineau’s fathership of that theory. will assert itself. just like ethnicism. will assert their superiority and conquer a world which deserves to be enslaved.216 Racialism. so I hold it equally true that a people who recognize no higher aim than physical enjoyment must become selfish and enemated. and that our new philosophy has brought us back to that old serfdom which it has taken ages to extirpate. It evoked strong echoes on both sides of the Atlantic. and its implicit invitation addressed to all aristocracies of birth. He said : Ifitbetrue . On the other hand. The fact which was then largely overlooked was the possibility of “ democratizing ” and collectivizing the concept of racial superiority by elevating millions-whole nations. vast majorities-into a pseudo-aristocratic status. It seems that he considered racial qualities (in a eugenic rather than in an anthropological sense) to be rock-bottom factors which will reassert themselves with the collapse of all higher culture and civilization. which is the key of history. we also see conservative thinkers who took the racial element into consideration. . . . It will then be found that our boasted progress has only been an advancement in a circle. Benjamin Disraeli was interested in this problem. is a disease of the democratized masses rather than of the upper classes. Some human progeny. Under such circumstances the supremacy of race. in Germany no less than in the United States.216 and it is significant that the “ Nordic race ” was almost invariably put by the racial theorists at the top of the hierarchic ladder of human biology. as can be gathered from various remarks of “ Baron Sergius ” in his Endymion. .

Napoleon. surely no reactionary. several generations ago. closely allied with modern Nationalism was always militarism. especially those in the thraldom of Wilsonian expectations. ethnic nationalism has committed more mischief than the biologic mania. literature and constitution. 21Q Hatred among nations (Mkerhass) is seemingly of bourgeois origin. Laurence Sterne was feted by the court in Versailles while British and French soldiers fought on the battlefields of North America.QlQ It is well known that the Negroes in the United States.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 59 middle classes were less steadfast.221 It was Napoleon. with its uniformism. was bound to come to grief. as a true son of the French Revolution.“223 The optimism expressed by some democrats.2QQ So are democracy.224 Georges Sore1 had no illusions about aristocratic oligarchies having the least enthusiasm for fighting long-drawnout total wars. who introduced British the concept of the “ enemy alien “. it must be admitted that. James Bryce. are least afraid of the upper class. which in turn has strong totalitarian. customs.227 Jacob Burckhardt added cynically that the male tendency to appear . gave orders to the press to campaign for a collective hatred of Britain. sectarian liberalism and all the other “ progressive ” ideas of the nineteenth century. in spite of the blood-curdling excesses of racialism during World War II. introduced conscription and thus paved the way to “ wars of unrestrained conduct ” our total wars-Foch’s (guerres aux allures dichafne’es).000 subjects were interned by this plebiscitarian dictator.s2Q with its innate tendency toward unconditionalsurrender formulas and struggles to the bitter end.2QQ Prior to the French Revolution such an attitude was unknown. in historic perspective. flayed the merciless and pitiless cruelty of democratic warfare. had warned us that “ the racial or commercial antagonisms of democracies are as fertile in menaces to peace as were ever I the dynastic interest of princes. again. attacking her manners. about 10.QQ5 And Anatole France. Revolution that all men have equal rights and hence equal duties. democratic The principle of the French and collectivistic implications. especially in the South. democracy and nationalism. Still.

he shuddered at the thought of the developments in the twentieth He pointed out correctly that the basis of conscripcentury. Upstart from ranker villainage. tion is a “ social contract. Tame. conscription] has grown. his eyes was a picture such as was painted in words by Herman Melville. . however grim his picture of the past and present. who wrote prophetically about the forces of democracy : Behold her whom the panders crown. Harlot on horseback riding down The very Ephesians who acclaim This great Diana of ill fame! Arch-strumpet of an impious age.* 60 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. ‘Tis well she must restriction taste. and has thus been saddled with a new obligation of limitless significance.e. .” He wrote: From now on if he [i. From war to war this institution [i. with its twin brother. creditor never lets his assets lie fallow. brave under the eyes of women was another element adding to the great collective savagery in collective warfare. Yet a now has become one in relation to its members. pessimistic and accurate than Taine. and the state always finds reasons or pretexts to make them “ work ” . .” who was not the warrior of old. . Yet. he is also born a conscript.228 Yet of all visionaries of the horrors of total war none was Before more realistic. with universal suffrage . Nor lay the world’s broad manor waste. both blind and formidable leaders and regulators of future history. the state. like a contagious disease it has propagated itself from state to state . was fully conscious of the bourgeois character of the “ soldier..22Q In his description of the new war. at present it has got hold of all of continental Europe. .. with its collective and coercive nature. the citizen in a democracy] is born a voter.” a situation in which the people is “ sovereign ” (like their former royal masters) 231and thus also collectively “ highest war-lord.e. and it rules there together with the natural companion which always precedes or follows it. which so far was a creditor only in relation to its properties. like Ortega y Gasset. the one .

in their delicate and important field. with what perfecting of the means of destruction. manners and morals. With what promises of massacre and bankruptcy for the twentieth century. the other placing on the back of every adult a knapsack.233 The other danger is Bonapartism which. lvith what bitterness of revenge and international hatreds. But the moment in which that event shall happen. and in the fluctuation of all. until some popular general. Thus there is an increasing 1 reluctance among the professionals in the armed forces as well as in the various ministries-but especially so in the branch of the administration dealing with foreign affairs-to give up their independence and secretiveness. with what perversions of productive discoveries. the master of your whole republic. the person who really commands the army is your master. as most modern authors have asserted. Holland Rose. shall draw the eyes of all men upon himself. and \vho possesses the true spirit of command. the germ of suicide. of feelings. ivith what waste of human labour. These points have been well argued by J. in its 1 dialectics.” 235 Burke demonstrated even greater acumen with a prophecy made a few years before the rise of IXapoleon. A century and a half ago we heard John Adams and all his generals were but exclaiming that “ Iiapoleon creatures of democracy. military obedience in this state of things. to submit to the command of parliamentary majorities.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 61 of them placing in the hands of every adult a ballot.234 is entirely compatible with formal democracy. 232 It is obvious that democratic militarism harbours. saying in his Rejections on the Reaolution in France: In the tveakness of one type of authority. who understands the art of conciliating the soldiery. They are also unwilling. Armies will obey him on There is no other way of securing his personal account. the master of your assembly. Lvith what retrogression towards inferior and unhealthy forms of past militarized societies.236 . which characterized antiquity and tribal barbarism. the master (that is little) of your king. we know only too well. with lvhat backsliding in the direction of egoistic and brutal instincts. the officers of an army will remain for some time mutinous and full of faction.

Modern authors241 have stressed the fact that it was basically the ballot-box which helped Hitler into the saddle-thus assailing the conspiratorial legend about the rise of nazism. and who are most likely to follow with an absolute devotion some strong The sentiment of nationality penetrates very deeply leader. A democracy.23* Jefferson was tortured by visions of a republic destroyed through urbanization and the canaille of big cities with no stake in liberty. into all classes. a party and an army bear a close resemblance to each other. and those classes it is the work of democracy to II . they are all creatures of emotions and impulses. Its nature ordains that its next change shall .240 Still. . Yet the fear of Bonapartism via the medium of universal franchise rather than through sheer “ Boulangisme ” was the stronger of the two apprehensions. Fisher Ames feared the rise of a military dictatorship: A democracy cannot last.237 Madison feared the status of property and thus of liberty. and the slowest to mend its vices. . but in all countries and ages it is the upper and middle classes who have chiefly valued constitutional liberty. could write : There are other ways in which democracy does not harmonize well with liberty. dreading the defection of the upper classes from the cause of constitutionalism. This possibility was graphically foreseen by Lecky who. history has shown that a party dictatorship (owing to its intellectual and ideological implications) is a far greater evil than the mere despotism of uniformed simpletons. perhaps. John Adams saw revolutions as the result of popular franchise. Nevertheless it must be admitted that the democratic epoch preceding the full totalitarian tyranny has its destructive effects on the higher social layers. 23Q Some Europeans saw in America’s democratic development (leading away from the ideals of Washington and Hamilton) a dangerous turn of events which was bound to strengthen the revolutionary party in the Old World. the most prone to shift its head.8 62 LIBERTY OR EQUALIl=?T [Chap. . To place the chief power in the most ignorant classes is to place it in the hands of those who naturally care least for political into a military despotism-of all known governments.

. Schleicher and Papen was finally replaced by a regime on a “ broader ” (i.a4Q Jeremy Belknap in an “ Election Sermon ” preached before the General Court of h’ew Hampshire in 1785 advocated equal and compulsory education for all. may easily scare to the side of despotism large classes who.250 Benjamin Rush F----.” insisted that the children are a property of the republic. \‘. and thus sealed the fate not only of the upper classes but also of Germany. is in the more “ progressive ” democracies one of half-education rather than of “ illiteracy “-which is what renders it so dangerous.e. emphasizing that children belong rather 11 to the state than to their pracreators. 247 There can be little doubt that compulsory education was an extremely important step towards the totalitarian state-a step whose significance was by no means universally recognized. It has been pointed out that “ more education ” usually means a lowered education. and insecurity of democratic politics . the alarm which attacks on property seldom fail to produce among those who have something to lose. so deplored by Lecky.*- . to be found in the notion that the children belong to the state or to “ society ” rather than to their parents. De Sade. 248 The very idea lying at the basis of compulsory education has.245 intellectual tyranny of “ universal education ” which stifles all thought. if not all of Europe. Toynbee has emphasized the highly literate.243 The ignorance of the lower classes. would have been steady supporters of liberty. under other circumstances. 246an opinion voiced earlier by Sir Henry Maine.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 63 dethrone.244 and an intelligent analyst of the prehistory of nazism has insisted that Hitler’s creed could have hardly appealed to a nation which was not Arnold J. naturally. the “ divine marquis. The virtual dictatorship of Bruning. more democratic) basis which included the Xational Socialists as the dominant element.242 As we have seen. At the same time democracy does much to The instability weaken among these also the love of liberty. the energy to prevent the “ predatory adventurers ” from achieving full power may be lacking. the spectacle of dishonest and predatory adventurers climbing by popular suffrage into positions of great power in the State.

nothing but mere indictment. wanted general education for the establishment of a more uniform. no tradition is formed among them. of justice. or at least admit of being made. The advent of democracy starts an era of retrogression which will ensure the death of the nation and the State.254 and the judgment of Proudhon on the mental qualities of the voting masses made his pessimism well-nigh inevitable. no idea which acquires the force of law. Andrew Jackson.251 In 1791 Robert Coram. 64 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.. finally. with his New-World optimism could declare in his first Annual Message that “ the duties of all public offices are.J’2s8 Those endowed . they should be trained from the ages of two to sixteen in state boarding schools.“256 These views would hardly be shared in our days. not by reason. . should be entirely standardized.255 In a populace endowed with these fatal propensities it is hard to see how the elected could be superior to the electors. homogeneous and egalitarian nation. so plain and simple that men of intelligence may readily qualify themselves for their performance. no orderly spurt. 253 Still.. of the art of governing. Food and clothing. proposed schools in which religion. in the middle of the nineteenth century. Of politics they understand nothing except the element of intrigue. . on the other hand. campaigned for the compulsory education of all children by the state. rebel against the sway of the multitudes whose “ instability brings those who have political knowledge to despair.257 Spinoza was convinced that men of intelligence would. dead or foreign languages ( !) should not be taught25” -the dream of Hitler and Nazi school reformers. the improvement of general educational levels could not prevent the deterioration of the standards to be found in the leaders of the democratic state. He wrote: Left to themselves or led by their tribunes the masses never established anything. They have their face turned backwards.. Frances Wright. since they are ruled exclusively by emotions. . significantly. nothing but the ability to set up idols which are smashed the next morning. of liberty. as well as the intellectual fare. nothing except prodigality and force . Intellectual qualifications are contrary to the spirit of democracy.

Nobody.comprehension of political afhtirs: without understanding the aims rend means and difficulties. . . \vell before him. who also saw the dangerous. yet it can be demanded that those who have not the means of comprehension should restrain themsell-es. tvhose deeper. which needs a talent and an ability for training just as the other arts.oisier’s defence la\vyer. but interested in the common ‘. needless to say. not indeed entirely new under the sun.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 65 with knowledge and experience certainly resent the idea of being judged and controlled by the masses. 1820: and superficiality . an invitation to an overthrow of democracy by groups which are not necessari(v selfish.. wrote in 1830 (shortly before his death) to his friend Moltke: The truth of the ~vholc matter is the manifest pitiful poverty of the people. and to our politicians who have put money in the place of God it is still unthinkable : . when the latter insisted that his client was an eminent scientist j La -.esoteric quality. mounting tide of amateurism. L$‘e are in the position of Rome in the period following the . so that those who really have an insight-which itself is so rare-are bound to get furious knowing the people involuted. it is preparing something.sai.L revision of property.. wrote from Rome on March 25. which is unablt: to suffer it much longer . 259 This democratic amateurism is hostile to knowledge.260 But Niebuhr. . without or sad.has the right to ask that persons and conditions should be decisively judged at a distance.ants! ” All these elements were working tbwaris the estabfishment basis was well of a new s!avery. %d”k’nowledge was best expressed by the montagnard who shouted in the face of La\.” rt$ublique n’a pas Lcsoiu ddc . People talk now kvith arrogance about political problems and the most sublime aspects of this great art. which will always be characterized by a certain aristocratic and This inner antagonism between democracy . IG%X Niebuhr. \It:ithout having an\. the praising and decrying goes on. metaphysical Merezhkovski at the beginning of this guessed by Dmltri century. hut at Icast no such thing has happened for centuries. Here we face.

262 Ernest Renan was similarly afraid of the dialectics in militarism and revolutionism : inherent The need for order. is blind . 66 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. it does not continue to have full moral balance. and we-%% going to bless despotism if it insures our I realized long . 1 since that-intelligent men could act thus. can give commands quickly finds those who are born to obey.261 Describing the coming upheavals he concluded : Nobody should harbour the illusion that at least free constitutions would be the final result of all that. order is going to have its fanatics. and whoever thinks the question is fr&om. but they become pitiless if doubts as to their duration are suggested to them.263 This process was all the more likely because there were destructive evolutionary possibilities within the democratic framework. are the rule . The distinctive quality of people in modern Europe lies in their ability to be easily trained and broken in. people who YZlearn far more than that of Napoleon. obey easily.. and now I also understand Catiline. a herd animal-of He who a surprising intelligence to be sure-has evolved. *Like religion. is going to play havoc with external forms. External forms do not protect us any more. just as the Romans blessed Augustus. 264 The suspicion strong enslaving that modern technological development qualities was shared by De Tocqueville has and . and now I underc stand it fully . the development is going to lead very quickly to an absolute military despotism which. This will give to the governments an increased power in the same ratio as they lose it through the rising revolutionary fervour . Gracchi. which is so acute in our old European societies. Modern societies are characterized by a great mildness if their principles are not endangered .. is i fool. coincides with the perfection of weapons. a period full of frightful horrors-and whoever f does not see it. Nietzsche said : A man who has preserved a strong will together with an open mind has today greater chances than ever. A society which has been afraid is like a man who has been afraid.

of a complete repetition of Polybius’ Gva~‘~/\o~~c~ :“ turn of the wheel “) ending in Burckhardt’s enigmatic magnum mare-that dark and chaotic ocean of the unknown in which servitude and human degradation was the only certitude.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 67 Burckhardt. : -.I .s66 ‘m s . He said : Our economic development steers rather in the direction of a new serfdom. must get into this magnum mare and somehow learn to swim in it. a contemporary of Burckhardt.“2sv c Lu . societary and governHitler. control and combined (horizontal and vertical.. boasted before his mental) pressure. not entirely favourable to the spirit of freedom. cY * ” --) ” a’* . Constantin Frantz._ _ L^ ” 6. Many contemporary authors would agree with them.+ .2s7 Nor was Troeltsch fooled by the libertarian promises of parliamentarianism. THE -AGE OF COLLECTIVISM It is only too evident that the French Revolution was the real and conscious overture to this age of collectivism. we are told. as well as the paradox of the fatality of this relation-centralism slowly choking all life out of democracy.265 Burckhardt also detested the concomitant of industrialization-capitalism and socialism-whose fatal clash he foresaw when he wrote to Friedrich von Preen: All your young people. collaborators that “ this revolution of ours is the exact counterThe parallels between the part of the French Revolution.268 Thus we see how the foremost thinkers of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were tortured and haunted by the vision of enslavement and tyranny. and our big military and administrative states are. and ours too. And one day the dreadful capitalism from above and the greedy pressure from below are going to collide like two express trains trayelling on the same track. in spite of all their parliamentary institutions. of major collapses following the democratic interlude. under: stood the inner affinity between democracy and centralization.

. by turning him into a spee&list. and into these everything is tumbling. usurpation [i. and it is curious to see our radicals pontificating just like our Prince-President. who wrote on June 17. if I ’ may say so.. two historic events are so numerous that they should not be in need of any further elucidation. and by forcing him to lie to his conscience it robs him of the last consolation which is still left the oppressed.great . absolute monarchy] rules through silence and leaves man the right to remain silent. dictatorship] condemns him to speak. be it that of a single man or of the masses.274 No less acute was the judgment of Henri Frederic Amiel. to create no /. To crush the spiritual.27° in comparison with Benjamin Constant’s description of the demoralizing effect of modern tyranny. Materialism is the auxiliary doctrine of every tyranny. who had visions of Christianity being persecuted with means more refined than in the days of Nero. who said: The deeper reason for everything now happening lies in the circumstance that enormous cavernous hollows were formed in the European part of mankind by the a-anishing Christian belief.271 Yet it is obvious that the lack of widespread resistance against tyranny is bound to have deeper reasons. not only by Vladimir Solovyov. A perusal of the second stanza of Friedrich Georg Junger’s famous poem Der Mohn. moral.273 Of this religious or. despotism [i. It is equalIT strange to observe realistic teaching everywhere serving to choke under a compilation of “ facts ” the freedom to examine applied + to moral problems. The great crisis and collapse in our days was foreseen. 1852. reacting to the rise of Louis Napoleon whose plebiscitarian tyranny would leave us today unmoved: All despotisms have an uncanny and superior intuition for that which maintains human independence and dignity.272 but also by Vassili Rozanov.68 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.e. more correctly. but wheels of the . Constant wrote : In a word. irreligious background of modern slavery Max Weber was fully conscious. longer complete human beings. general human being. shows the ethical identity of both systems. it extends this persecution to the private sanctuary of his thought.e.

equality.appeal tv slaves to accept slavery. \~ y e&ability is “ an . The dilemma of-the Marxist faced by the paradox of a . when it is demonstrated that such and such a flow of humours. authors to their readers till it infects the whole mass of the community and gets possession of the public mind. . De Tocqueville could not help remarking that : Historians who live in democratic ages. : always quantity instead of quality. but deprive the people themselves of the power of modifying their own condition. your morality. becoming a dogma.113 DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARL4NISM: THE PROPHETS ~CJ social machinery . what are you going to do once we are here? What will happen to your laws.el of the Turks.2i6 From this remarkable prophecy of an orientalized form of Marxism we can turn to the “ Divine Marquis. numbers becoming “ reason ” . unity through uniformity. .” who was even more vehement on that issue when he exclaimed: Pedantic louts. a specific degree of acidity in the _ blood . the principle of mediocrity. not only deny that the few have any power of acting upon the destiny of a people. . which is so attractive! to those who write history in democratic ages.275 Materialism can (and in a sense must) assume a determinis tic nature.. a certain type of fibres. your hell. your powers. are sufficient to make of a man the object of I y your punishments or your rewards?277 It has been rightly maintained that the appeal to in. it will soon paralyze the activity of modern society and reduce / Christians to the le\. faith). substitution of the laws of moral nature (persuasion. passes from I.“*78 ---. a negative liberty which has no internal laws. If this doctrine of necessity. your paradise. Moral atomism and social unity. then. legislators. your Gods. to give them not conscience but society _ as a centre. and they subject them either to an inflexible Providence or to some blind necessity. your religion.‘to make the soul subservient to material ends& depersonalize man-that is the dominant tendency of our epoch. and finds its limitation only in brute force. hangmen. tonsured scum. . scribblers. . constancy.

-bourgeois sentimentality. 70 LIBER’IY OR EQUALITY materialist dogma on one hand and the rule of a party insisting on personal responsibility on the other is. 283 Herman Melville. and it is significant that Pravda featured. The totalitarians made full use of this technique. .R. it also. It is sufficient when one of the Christian Brothers says to a man “ This life is only a transition. . as Troeltsch admitted.. All the horrors i descending upon Russia (and invited by Stalin’s anti-Polish policy) were “ inevitable.S. The weakening of ecclesiasticism inevitably resulted (for psychological rather than philosophical reasons) in a grave impairment of the whole religious basis of our ethics . on the day of the German attack on the U. village cared for by a man who knows nothing but his catechism and whose principles I know.S. The whole issue of determinism versus free will i!: theological in its nature. . Religion is the vaccine of imagination.282 Napoleon was in this respect more perspicacious than many of his contemporaries and epigones when he said: Until now we have seen good education only in I prefer to see the children of a ecclesiastical institutions.” If you of the people: deprive the people of its religion you will have nothing but highwaymen. naturally. the great American prophet-himself not a Catholic-realized better than any of his compatriots that the Church of Rome.280 In this lengthy essay the notion of a Zibertas arbittii was ridiculed as a .” .281 broke the backbone of all ecclesiastical culture. Yet orthodox Protestantism has not only taken a more or less predestinarian stand. would be the main target of irreligious . enjoying a very central position in the world of religions. . without a solution. a catastrophe which prepared the road to disaster. and protects it from all dangerous and absurd beliefs.27s There can be little doubt that the intermittent invocation of a creed of predestination and determinism opens windows and doors not only to the worst slavery but also to the most inhuman savagery.8 [Chap. the forerunner of modern determinism. a full-page article dealing with the problem of free will. than by some sort of savant who has no [rational] basis for his moralitv and no stable ideology.

If Rome could fall ‘Twould not be Rome alone. republican institutions with an increase of brutality and totalitarian methods was foreseen by many leading nineteenthBurckhardt. but it c-an be exercised by supposedly republican . who was one of them.III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 71 forces. The weakening or fall of Catholicism would hasten the advent of the “ Dark Ages of Democracy ” so dreaded by the poet.“286 In the purely political sphere. unblest and blind As. wrote century thinkers. in such days as these. lawless despotism. the struggle in Europe was accentuated by the bitter antagonism between the two structural forms. but all Religion. to try To pull down Rome. and bear with me. All with Rome have tie Even the railers which deny. but no. Whatever vour belief may beIf well ye wish to human kind. . In Clarel he wrote: He [the Dominican] turned and would have gone. with whom he discussed primarily political problems : To me it has been clear for some time that the world is struggling against the alternatives of complete democracy The latter naturally could or absolute. in 1882 to his friend. . monarchy and republic. . because these are too soft-hearted. All but the downright Anarchist. when “ leaders ” seek to party bosses overshadow eliminate “ rulers. Friedrich van Preen. Red and \5triolist. Be not so mad.” and omnipotent Yet the growth of republicanism and surviving crowns. Christ-hater. This antithesis still throws its shadows into our time. New matter struck him: “ Ere I go Yet one word more. not be exercised by royal dynasties.“284 Yet his apprehensions that Geneva and Wittenberg would side with the forces opposed to historic Christendom were strong : ” Rome and the Atheist have gained: These two shall fight it out-these two. Q-otestantism being retained I For base of operations sly By Atheism.

comfort. no less than to Max Weber.&real function of the monarch was the protection of the weak and the control of concentrated power. to whom millions should sacrifice their liberty ! Under these conditions nothing else can be expected but a militav rule. etc. We drift towards conditions reminding us of the Roman Empire. and are going to rule instead with absolute brutality. the . which we will realize once we have lost them. 287 To him. Ortega y Gasset’s dicta2e0-have all come true. and this again means mutual antagonisms until one wins and is in turn overthrown. credits. while Germany is being driven into an alien servitude. Spain no less so ! It is possible that no punishment could be too mild for King Ferdinand. will not last six months.2RB B. industry. Not every hereditary dynasty falls into that category-it is possible that the sins of the House of Spain may have been formidable-but I still feel with complete certrtude that a catastrophe in that direction is the gravest misfortune.4nd here also no other wisdom seems to be available than the idol of flat uniformity. who naturally favoured the medieval rather than the Renaissance pattern of monarchy.2XD These prophecies-some of them strongly reminding one It is of J. if really enacted. G. Only one cannot yet contentedly imagine a world whose masters will be completely unconcerned with law. the Constitution. not quite clear what sort of “ foreign servitude ” Niebuhr expected for Germany. but remember my prophecy. sensing the drift. when ruled without legal succession.2R6 The fear of an absolute rule of parties under their leaders has also been voiced by Constantin Frantz. military dictatorships. Our absolute princes hereditary dynasties are our good fortune. ru’iebuhr. wrote with growing despair in 1820: All of Europe is menaced by wild revolutions and an iron despotism. this anarchical monstrosity. . as a matter of fact..but the passage below seems to indicate Russia: . enriching labour. Judging from another letter2s1 he conceivably feared France (der Tzj97 im W’esten).8 72 LIBERTY OR EQUALI’lY [Chap. A large part of the country will not have anything to do with it--whole provinces.

to emigrate to North America.2sb . Note 325). The pessimism of European liberals concerning America amounts almost to a tradition.“2Y5 He said : Europe and the louver classes are not going to risk everyFor such gambling the).293 Yet a far greater fear was manifested about Russia-a fear expressed by Catholics and Protestants. one between two powers neither of which are. ZB6 Such unmanly caution Herzen rejected for his fatherland : We are slaves and have no chance of freeing ourselves. due to their geographic character. which.are too thing in a revolution. . Heine no less than Keyserling doubted the freedom-loving character of the United States. with his usual perspicacity. for him. Gretchen [his wife] recently asked me in all seriousness whether I still plan. as during the Napoleonic period. according to Max Weber. PROPHETS OF THE RUSSIAN PERIL This alternative (America or Russia) is.2s’ The Russian is the right material for a radical change because: The thinking Russian is the most independent man in the world . destined to be havens of liberty (see below.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 73 God help us to bear what we cannot avoid. liberals and conservatives alike. Russia is never going to be Protestant.2g4 Alexander Herzen. thrown into compelling circumstances. And this fear was fanned by numerous Russian writers themselves. yet we won’t accept anything from our enemies. the Russian quickly frees himself from the faith and the morals of his fathers. Russia is ne\‘er going to be middle-of-the-road. was “ a mere extension of Western Europe. . civilized. If we only did not have children-whom I prefer to envisage as Germans under Russian domination than as 1 1 Anglo-Americans ! Zs2 7. armed with a clear outlook and an unbribable logic. sa\v the great chances of an extremist revolution in Russia-a possibility not existing in the Occident or in North America. from Herzen to Dmitri Merezhkovski.

He told us that Russian society. A despotism would also be a success in Russia because this form of government well suits very young or old and decadent nations. the views of Constantine Leontyev were also close to those of Herzen. just as Europe once had He added grimly: advanced to the Uralsso In any case this war will be an introduzione maestosa e marziale of the Slav world into general history. and then all vestige of an ecclesiastic principle.303 As to an estimate Dostoyevski had similar presentiments. will be dragged more rapidly than other societies along the And who knows whether. socialist Russia which would be able to rule Europe as far as the Atlantic. like the Jews who unexpectedly produced the teacher of a new faith.“301 The Slavs would be led by a revolutionary.306 The Marquis de Custine. on the other hand. which will cast off all class distinctions. absolute central power: The Emperor of Russia is social power personified. This bitter.74 LIBERTY OR EQUALMY [Chap.300 In the end a struggle would ensue between the Western world and the Russians. nationalism and “ liberalism ” nevertheless saw clearly that the relationship between capital and labour would have to be basically readjusted if the threat of a revolution were to be avoided. and at the same time una marcia funebre of the Old World. which is already egalitarian in its customs.307 . under him there is an equality to be found which otherwise appears only in the dreams of the French and American democrats and the supporters of Fourier. a country which might accept socialism as a national idea.305 Leontyev’s visions of the Russian revolution were in conformity with the reality of rgr 7.304 of the Russian character. “ barbarians who sense the approaching end of the old world and are its memento mori. conservative enemy of democracy. saw Russian egalitarianism as the result of a strong. we shall not suddenly give birth to Antichrist? He will spring from the bowels of our political system. 2ss Russia is the former. fatal road of general confusion.

but in the decrepitude of the world. for I abhor it. be more optimistic than Leontyev. There. and entirely beyond the reach of foreign attack (I have not the time But I am deeply convinced that it is now to tell you lvhyj.” the brilliant author of Le ge’nie du christianisme exclaimed in a social gathering: . . and because I believe these sources to be permanent. was afraid of Russia as a nation rather than of her revolutionary potential. is the misery of our situation. but because I long to see Spain. but a . Catholic aristocrat. He feared for the future of Europe and he was afraid of Russia. nor b) diplomatic precautions. I think.-in a hundred! the cloud is too dark for human vision. still less by placing sentinels along her frontier.W’. I think so more strongly because I have had peculiar opportunities of studying the real sources of her power. who belonged to the next French generation. not perhaps.30” iisked what an individual he answered : should do in such a tragic epoch. We owe to George Ticknor an account of his gloomy prophecies. Senior he wrote in I 855 : I think with you that Russia is a great danger to Europe. perhaps WC live.30s Alexis de Tocqueville. . only in the decrepitude of Europe. If I were without a family I would travel. from Russia to Sicily I foresee nothing but military despotism . In fifty years there will not be a legitimate sovereign in Europe. In a letter to N. that I may better estimate the power that threatens to overwhelm the world. it may almost be said.11-j DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 75 Nor could Chateaubriand (I 768-1848)) the liberal. too dark. . not because I love travelling. and I long to see Russia. to know what effect eight years of civil war have produced there. When I had seen these I should know the destinies of Europe. A temporary bulwark may be raised against her. “ I don’t believe in European society. that the Western powers will permanently stop her progress. not taking from her a town. to be penetrated by prophecy. or even a province. . and in a hundred.

imposed on the nation almost The national character 200 years ago. as you say in your letter. and so would western Europe -that is. I am convinced that Russia can be stopped only by raising before her powers created by the hatred which she inspires. nothing better than the quarrels of the Greeks m face of Philip. was deeply w-orried about Russia’s westernization. von Preen from Base& January 2. so far. according to the vain promises of Bismarck to his patriots. is a German river. not in its own barbarism.“311 Constantin Frantz had a similar vision.“312 He was convinced that Russia would and that in this coming war beinvade Western Europe313 tween Britain and Russia the United States would play a decisive r61e. and to keep her in. In other words by the resurrection of Poland. he talks about Russia “ who derived. from every conflict between Western nations. of the Russians in a minor sort of barbarism would have been much better and healthier. and this synthesis I find all the more menacing because ambition and fear-passions which . or a change of alliances or of domestic policy may render it useless. is now avenging itself. some direct or indirect profit.310 The Russian peril was also seen by Jules Michelet: “ It wrote prophetically.315 Buqckhardt. The detestable jealousies and ambitions of the European nations resemble. whose vital and constant interest it shall be to keep themselves united.314 The future belonged to the United States and Russia. “ whether the will be seen. mere accident may destroy it.” Michelet Danube.76 LIBERTY OR EQUALlTY [Chap. I do not believe that either of these means can now be adopted. but in a continuation of that of the Russians. 1880: “ In Russia the Petrean system of enforced occidentalization. and by the reanimation of Turkey. Not one will sacrifice her passions or her objects. He wrote to F.“316 Custine deplored the westernization of Russia with equal intensity. as could be expected. Thus he wrote about “ Russia in 1889 ” : It is in Russia that we find the result of this terrible combination of European science and intellectuality (esprit) with the genius of Asia .

the passive character exhausts the active one. and that western Europe must follow us for a hundred years. “ they are operation. an order apparently stronger and more terrible than anarchy. Adams. and able to overwhelm us at any point of contact. Whether she can do it then is no conundrum that I can settle. changed his mind somewhat: Sometimes I think that we are to be told to seek at Potsdam our ally against the tempests of Eastern Europe. then already a dying man. could see ahead to me now.317 De Tocqueville’s picture of a disunited Europe conquered by a Russian Philip was painted in the same colours and described in the same words by Irving Babbitte318 And Henry Adams decided in the last year of the nineteenth century: The sum of my certainty is that America has a very clear century start over Russia. unassailable to us.“320 In rgo1 he wrote cautiously to Elizabeth Cameron321 that Russia and America ought to be friends. in the most central position. except England which centres in America. bound to be the biggest mass. and concluded that “ the whole of Europe already centres in Russia. better than I can see ahead to the year 2000: and yet it was not easy guessing even for him.31s Henry Adams’ geopolitical instincts were well-developed. but in his next letter thoughtfully added : Xow: in the long run. Economy of energy is a kind of power. as can be seen from his meditation on a German-Russian co“ If they work together. because the evil behind it seems eternal.111 I)EMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANBIN: THE PROPHETS 77 elsewhere ruin people by making them talk too muchcreate silence over here. I imagine that my grandpapa. Russia and asia may clean us all out. and their after-outbreaks in the West. sitting here in this study ninety years ago. especially if Germany helps to run her.322 And when Germany started to crumble and Russia was in the throes of Communism.” he wrote. And this violent silence engenders an enforced calm.323 .” He doubted America’s active policy overseas. before Russia can swing her flail over the Atlantic.

He was more strictly geographically-minded than Alexis de Tocqueville.327 painted the following picture of a European Continent torn by discord.32R Donoso Cort&. of which Adams spoke. of the West. Her ships will be useless against the colossal empire which grips Europe with one hand and India with the other. also. will be the chastisement of England. Of no avail whatsoe\*er will be her fleet. when there is in Europe no patriotism. This immense realm will fall and break into pieces . then. that of the despoilers and that of the despoiled-then. arms shouldered. chaos and revolution: amount to eighty . did not. Petersburg and expectecl a “ Pugatschef d’uniz~ersite’” to become the dictator . it must be admitted. into our lands. the hour of Russia in the clock of time will have struck. once she had overcome the growing pains of her revolution. -+ that having been extinguished by the socialisy revoKtions . who had spent many years in St. The Western powers had no men of the calibre of Henry Adams in responsible positions. . bent on conquest. Certain contemporary analysts foresaw the rise of a strongly nationalistic Russia. gentlemen.325 but certainly the most clearsighted prophet of all was Donoso Cort&. this tremendous chastisement. Then Russia will be able to march peacefully. gentlemen. and the echo of its lugubrious groan and its all-pervading lament will be heard from pole to pole. in his second great by Russia and America. when nothing is left in the West but two camps.326 speech before the Cortes.78 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. when in the East the great confederation of all Slavic peoples has been established. For the would set in after the subjugation internal Russian scene he lacked the insight and acumen of De Maistre. envisage the conquest of Europe through a revolutionary In his opinion the revolutionary process in Russia Russia. the Slav nations. . Little did he realize that it would be in Potsdam that Russia would terminate a series of the most brilliant diplomatic victories in all history. as a result the head start of at least a hundred years.324 was brutally reduced. who reckoned with a coming world dominated Donoso Cortks. like Herzen. the world will witness the greatest chastisement in all history . gentlemen. Now. gentlemen. million souls.

thus both for men and for societies one pattern and one law will prevail. And in the moment the defeated nation considers itself an ally it becomes Russia’s The victories of Russia lead to victim and prey. would always animate Russia. if civilization if the human race is to a certain point perfectible.331 As to the possible new master of the world the general views of Donoso Cartes were not optimistic: Russia will fight in order to inflict defeats. The English. who pessimistically judged Britain’s assimilating and colonizing role in Asia. acts by its intentions. which Russia had to pay for. were able neither to transform the Asiatics into Britishers nor to settle Anglo-Saxons in larger Hence they were automatically beaten by the numbers.has no hmits. it is unavoidable that mankind in the future will follow the same principles in political no less than in religious matters. who already “ belonged ” to the Asiatic scene. preferably of an altruistic character.” he wrote. . .333 . according to Valera. Since we are living in one world. Under these circumstances it excuses its most revolting. and thus the clash is inevitable: is to a certain point progressive.32e Custine similarly recognized that a definite ideology. Donoso Cartes wrote that this struggle will be one of liberty versus absolutism. . and . Russians. . “ protection ” -her protection to death. and evil posing as a remedy ‘I .332 The vistas of this Spaniard on the Russo-British conflict were shared by his compatriot Juan Valera. they have shown us that despotism is never a greater menace than when it claims to do good. have given the world a great and useful lesson.II] DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 79 of this Eastern empire-a brilliant and prophetic characterization of Lenin.330 But speaking about the conflict between Western Europe (led by France and the Catholic Church) and the East (dominated by Russia and Greek Orthodoxy). and defeats in order to protect the defeated country. the spheres of these two domains will tend to overlap. “ Peter I and Catherine II. .

This is the reason she has turbulent ministries in times of peace and conservative cabinets in times of stress. nor even of her existence: I believe that Prussia has been tied to the cause of Satan since she was born. Donoso Cortis was not less vocal about Prussia. and that in peaceful periods she is in favour of revolution. one should not have illusions: England and the Re\Tolution is one and the same thing: this was so in the past. for Protestantism and by Protestantism. his Polish friend in the Prussian service. until the day when Protestantism folds up and disintegrates.s3” Donoso England’s her political supported written in CortPs was not anti-British. nor of her aggrandizement. . by his friend Count Raczynski.80 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. wrote of Prussia in 1849 that that country \vas bound to aspire for absolute leadership in the Protestant Xorth. when this happens Prussia will enter a period of rapid decadence. this is thr situation today and so it u-ill be tomorrow.33” It is obvious that the reasons for his dislike were partly of a Donoso Cortis. who was also ambassador religious nature. my friend. that England is always supporting order in times of war. because I am neither a friend of Prussia. . due to a historical fatality. but he considered influence on the Continent and its efforts to imitate In this view he was strongly structure dangerous. to Berlin. And he continued: Prussia cannot be more nor less. In a letter to Count Raczynski.ative cabinet in London replaces a revolutionar) one. The mystery of her glories lies in her Protestantism. . Prussia lives in Protestantism. nor of her policy. condemned to this bondage. forever . he poured out his heart: If you had not been my friend I would have attacked Prussia in the Parliament.337 . and it makes no difference whether or not a consen. if you analyze the contemporary policy of the United Kingdom you will discover two facts: first. which he disliked and distrusted. and I am convinced that she is.336 In a letter Paris in I 852 he said : In this matter. and so does the mystery of her death.

r)ne of’ conquest. of the ruler. .III DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM : THE PROPHETS 81 The similarity between this passage and the Durnovo Memorandum is obvious. one is more or less limited to . on the other side of the Jistula Ihere is a curtain.3”M Khomyakov. one can sa!’ that for a whole century the government of that countr\. behind \\-hii.339 Alexander Herzen discounted England’s ability in judging matters Continental.fl one cannot see clearly Is-hat happens inside the Russian Empire. After the fashion of the Orient. on the other hand. but so also does the description of the Wars of Coalition in 1814-15 : ” and the of the end .rites rarely and publishes nothing. and this limitation also al>plies to the Russian arm)-.guess\\-ark.has been constituted by one and the same man. .” Her blindness stems from her inability to conceive that nations might actually blaze entirely new trails and disdain old roads. because she is “ blind.342 but admitted that conditions in the big Eastern realm were not too well known. In 3 country \herc methodical efforts art’ made to hide c\erything from the public.343 He then remarks: Since the days of Peter the Great the policy of Russia has never ceased to ltt. from hvhich it took its origins and mannerisms: the Russian government is limited to the stud!.340 Herzen’s hopes constituted the liberal Abbe de Pradt’s apprehensions. He too sa\$. but \t.“341 He very intelligently compared Russia T\ith the I’nited States. was certain that Toryism in Britain was doomed and that materialistic and Protestant Whiggism of a leftist type was bound to get the upper hand permanently. Of that great Slavic state he remarked that “ it has as neighbours merely frightened countries and trembling vassals.far into the future. This contemporary of Metternich tried in a famous littie book to pain the nations of the Continent for an Anglophile polic)’ in order to protect themselves against Russia. by one and the same idea-that of methodical aggrandizement.:“” Not only do these allusions to an “ Iron Curtain Politburo strike us. he alone talks. especially Russian affairs. because : .

perhaps. the United States. who later became a moderate Vichyite. once this happened. Emperor Wilhelm II in his defeat was also something of a clairvoyant. And . Many of them. of the times of Louis XV. SUMMARY The visions and expectations of the nineteenth-century prophets of totalitarianism and tyranny were by no means comforting. like De Tocqueville and Amiel. Europe should have closed her ranks and reached mutual agreements in order to exclude from meddling in her affairs a power which has no legitimate interests in them. rightly or wrongly. . to certain members of the Holy Alliance. I thought of the Renaissance.82 LIBER’IT OR EQUALrrY [Chap. To the large number of reproaches that have been addressed. Yet the most pressing European problem is to prevent Germany from becoming the highway of the Russian armies. . of the Ptolemies. but. France. in his diary: Listening this evening to the conversation of some of our cultured men. Having had a major role in the alliance which defeated Napoleon.34s 8. when a joyful anarchy of the intellect was counterbalanced by a despotic power. he prophesied a “ second alliance against Carthaginian War ” and an Anglo-American Japan. I will without hesitation add the accusation of a lack of prudence for having admitted Russia to the decision relating to the affairs of Southern Europe. Russia and. But they are just about to open the avenue for them ! Nay. Italy and Japan against England.347 In matters of world politics one of the best prophets was Lucien Romier. Russia could not be excluded from the affairs which his downfall left unsettled. but which is strong enough always to turn the balance in its own favour. Amiel wrote already saw the increase of societary pressure. In 1925 he foresaw the following coalitions: Germany. they are even inviting them to use it!345 Especially impressive was De Pradt’s comparison between an Anglo-Saxon and a Russian policy of intervention on the Continent. his principal fear was the Russification of Germany. .34s Still.

They have been joined in our days by those who have a clear concept of the basicallv democratic and “ progressive ” Yet between character of present-day totalitarian tyranny.352 the cool analysis of our contemporaries and the tortured. This is the reason why author+ in that pleasant twentieth century will Izft her head again-a frightful head! At last the tendency to declare everything provisional.-----. They saw that civilization was thriving on merely the “ whiff from an empty bottle. _ .360 they were meditating on the final results of democracy. --1 . . sectarian liberalism. I have a vision which may look quite foolish at present. this assumed a priori right to everv inno\.111 DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 83 on the other hand I remembered England where political liberty is bought at the price of a party spirit and necessary prejudices . agnosticism. quite logically-. -- . egalitarian and technical trends of their own time.uniforms. bitter irony and a controlled rage in Burckhardt’s words when he says: The basic political character of nations is like a wall into which one can driv-e this or that nail. should be introduced is a certain controlled. materialism. WC hear sadness.-. progressivism. They could not help being pessimistic seeing their cherished ideal of liberty gravely endangered by the democractic. barbarism and absolute savagery would return. grim and prophetic visions of their forerunners is a certain qualitative difference.ation.promotions ----and .” and that once the timelag351 drew to its close and ethical precepts z&hout a religious basis were seriously challenged. shops cannot be left in all eternity to their despair and envy. what.___ degree of misery \\-ith .-_..s*s This dilemma was recognized by a greater number than we probably assume.---. this privilege of all cupidity. industrialism.353 Kor would the “ common man ” find heaven on earth: Thcrc is a curious future in store for the vvorkers. The best of them were disobeying Kierkegaard’s ironical recommendation not to make themselves unpopular by thinking ideas to their last logical conclusions. M-ill find its limits and its end. but I cannot get rid of it: the militarized state must become a mass These human agglomerations in the workmanufacturer. but the nail no longer takes hold.

Thus Britain’s leading progressivist was finally forced. according to my score of ratios and curves. Wells painted the future in rosy colours.“357 Yet at that time the foundations were already collapsing. Law. . M. Morality would become police. the ardent questioning of Edmond Schdrer. former president of the National Council of Switzerland.84 started and drums. at the accelerated rate of progression shown since 1600. . ‘L’irgile Rossel.3s4 Indeed. something in the style of the Roman Empire. Even Spcngler’s Decline qf the M’est did not break the ice. it will not need another century to tip thought upside down. It is like a convoy lost in darkness on an unknown coast. will have to give way to an increasingly harsh despotism. . possible that a few more or less tolerable decades. G. Disintegration would overcomr disintegration. Explosives would reach cosmic violence.35” When these prophecies did not come true b)r ‘1goo. the disdainful defiances of Renan.365 Henry wrote : Adams was not a whit more optimistic when he Yet it is quite sure. even if they are mad enough to attempt resistance. to write about Lbour world of self-delusion ” : It will perish amidst its evasions and fatuities. Igro. shortly before his death. The prospects of humanity during the last years of World W’ar II had lost their earlier glamour.36s . LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. under the beating of concluded every day there was not much hope left and it was . thr contemptuous condemnations of Maurras. would disappear as theory or a priori principle. in that case. are still ahead of us. preserved his optimism until 1934. when he wrote that “ the terrifying predictions of Guizot. that. Mr. or even 1930. but contemporary history later taught him a lesson. with quarrelling pirates in the chartroom and savages clambering up the sides of the ship to plunder and do evil as the whim may take them. the voices of the visionaries were treated with ridicule and contempt. . and give place to force. H. . are only out-dated eloquence. In fact I am of the opinion that democracy and the proletariat.

but none the less he hates and fights against them with all his strength. Indeed there is throat Ii0 ” compelling arxument ” not to slit anybody’s Though except the Commandments given on Mount Sinai.II] And DEMOCRACY AND TOTALITARIANISM: THE PROPHETS 85 later: -4fter all. every agony has a termination. Auf Deus auf nihil : God or nothing. He would rather our species endccl its story in dignity.0 ’ Yet today we live in an epoch for which the words of Goethe are fully valid: ! What kind of a time is this. W’ells was the last man to admit it: the religious breakdown was one of the most basic reasons for our rapid decline. days ” matters very little. New life is going to blossom on the ruins of M’hether zce are going to see these “ better our civilization. every deeper crisis. And it xvas God which our civilization rejected. x.hat our present prejudices call . . when one has to em’). Ever). for e\eryonc to decide for himself. the present writer has no compelling argument to convince the reader that he should not be cruel or mean or cowardly. and not like drunken cowards in a daze or poisoned rats in a sack.. the late Mr. H. But this is a matter of individual predilection. \ve ought to know whether in this traged).deca)-. kindliness and generosity. Edmond Scherer. of mediocrity. sixty years ago. put before his readers a \-cry pertinent question.35s In this lament we also see the bankruptcy of logical ethics f \ vvithbut a relig@s basis obliquely admitted. G. He said: It is important to kno\r whether at the end of this crisis? humanitv will ha\c lost any of x\. beauty. greatness. in this dreary and dreadful adventure of nations there is anything which will disappear from histor\. Thus some day humanity will return to the path from which it stra)-ed.genius.those . / ~‘110 ha\:e already been buried ?361 I . Such things are also in his own make-up in a large measure.

to be more precise. EDUARD vos HAHTMANN~~~ I.364 +bao&‘as reminds one of Diodorus’ statement (i. but nobody has a better solution. and reciprocal influence ceases. and the knowledge that this despised institution has to be carried over as a necessary evil into the twentieth centurv fdls the minds of the best of our contemporarik with anxiety. . yet never lose sight of the historical realities-in the widest sense of the term. philosophy becomes sterile tautology and history an incoherent succession of meaningless 1 facts. ROBINSOS. as in every other analysis of political phenomena. not to mention the example? of democracy in antiquity. A. we should always remain firmly grounded on philosophical I soil. THE BASIC PROBLEM K our investigation of the modern pattern of democracy.” -E. " Demos "362 The belief that the liberty of the people can be guaranteed by parliamentary government has ceased to exist for some time.CHAPTER III DEMOCRACY A CRITIQUE “ OF for the few shall save The many or the many are to fall Still to be wrangling in a noisy grave.” The record of democracy has been of an entirely different character in Protestant as compared with Catholic nations. the character of a culture’s religious basis-is the most important element in determining the affinities between nations and political forms. We are convinced that religion-or. Don Luigi Sturzo in one of his essays very correctly says: Philosophy and history will always remain two branches of If their convergence one knowledge and speculation of man.2) : “ iumpia 6s ~r]r&oh~S--history is the fatherland of philosophy. The world is fed up with parliamentarism. The success of specific political forms depends 86 Which .

but by no means least. We know very well that there are also other factors involved. geopsychological given moments. he will have strong majoritarian (and thus totalitarian) tendencies. whil<liberalis. leaders or demagogues.( __ g&cnment. as.. but we are inclined to put the religious realities first and the geographic element in second place. A purely military dictatorship based on the bayonets and sabres of a handful of professional soldiers has greater liberal . in which even accidents play an important role. Though admittedly dictator having this propensity is very small because. 3. while on the-other-hand an absolute ruler could be a thorough liberalEven without being for this reason the least bit democratic. a collective historical experience (as well as historical memories). as the leader of an ideologically-inclined mass party.poyer. for instance. let us repeat. establish a valid hierarchy of these factors. could be a liberal (see above.m deals the individua&-e-gzrdlgg&who carr& 0~1the w% thii?$e&-@p. is concerned wit-h--of ! ---who should be vested with runing. there is always an x of a purely historical character. the influence of geographic environment aspects). which has so fur been the inseparable concomitant of Atlantic democracy. would figure a great deal lower in our tabulation. for instance. as we have noted before. or liberalism in the classic sense. The interrelation between democracy and religion will be dealt with in Chapter V. 101.A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY 87 on the closeness and harmony of such affinities. The vast majority of Americans and Englishmen talking about “ democracy ” always include the element of liberalism365 in their concept of it-and this. in (i. And last. the likelihood of a modern PP. In our Introduction we have alluded to the fact that the main difference between Continental (primarily Catholic) and Anglo-Saxon (primarily Protestant) representative government is to be found in the important alloy of the latter: whiggery. the “ charismatic ” qualities of outstanding It is extremely difficult to rulers.e. economic realities or. A democracy can be highly illiberal. Race. a dictator. Democracy. theoretically. in spite of the fact that democracy and liberalism are concerned with two entirely different problems.

These specific ends we have in mind seem to be predominantly of a non-material natureof a human. \ i i ) i potentialities (one has only to compare France. an intermediary end-a condition ior precondition) rather than an ultimate goal. iOf course unanimity. Yet the question remains whether “ unanimity ” does not. not an “ animal ” nature. little doubt that the American Congress and the French Chambre have a power over their respective nations which would rouse the envy of a Louis XIV or a George III were they alive today.. as a matter of fact.” person considered superior is less oppressive than coercion exercised by equals-not to mention that exercised by those Even 51 per cent of a nation can establish felt to be inferior. and still remain democratic. Bv the I sheer weight of numbers and by its ubiquip the rule of gg per cent is more “ hermetic ” and more oppressive than the rule of I per cent. there is. prefers a subjective feeling of freedom to coercion. is not oppressive. in a sense. we have to ask the question whether the two principles of democracy-egalitarianism and majorit). that the vast majority of the people (the macrocosm of the “ av:erage man ” rather than of the “ common man “j aspires to liberty.367 is convinced that the democratic process is the best means for the safeguarding of liberty-assuming. Mussolini and Stalin). liberal democrat denied these possibilities.88 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. \\ ‘. Fisher Ames The M:estern. of necessity relative and not absolute). which was an early medieval principle of government. Kow liberty is. somewhat arbitrarily. There are certain ends which presuppose the existence of liberty. we also know of a craving for material goods which frequently can only be satisfied at the . by and large. Psychologically. (which itself is. as we have said. It should be self-evident that the principle of majority rule is a decisive step in the direction of totalitarianism.:. rule stemming from a obviate “ rule. Although it cannot be denied that mankind. Oliveira Salazar and Pttain with Hitler. suppress minorities.366 If we accept different categories of existence in regard to democracy and freedom (which is the postulate of liberalism).) a totalitarian and dictatorial regime.rule--are actually and teleologically compatible with freedom. for the purposes of our investigation.

the person accepting death and poverty-is free at all times) and thus also of his deeper. Goethe’s lines remain eternally true : I3ich rtcs G’liicX-der ErdenX-indrt Ist doch die Few%&‘chkeit ! -” the highest happiness of the children of earth is personali!y. man’s indispensable precondition for the development of his personality. we know of “ freedoms ” : which can only be preserved with sacrifice of material values. To the former belong the . implicit happiness. needless to say. A_------. which does not necessarily rise to the surface of his consciousness.--with -:.\_ societ!-.“368 There is.olutions come from above while their democratic counterparts come from below. . * This is a tragic dilemma which neither the Manchester liberal.-I democracy--the _ $emocra& -*_ doctrinaire --. this condition so ’ fundamental to various intellectual and spiritual ends. 41. part wiuolitical _.----.the ___ --. liberal rev. also another equally weli-known dilemma which knows of no ” practical ” solution-the problem of the toleration of error 1to M-hich we will refer in Chapter V of this study). Thus e’lites ha1.(of course only the saint-that is. freedom is the average gain purely material advantages.III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY 89 expense of liberty.4kin to this problem is also the question of the toleration of propaganda and agitation attacking the very foundations of a state. This dilemma in a political democraq 11 If-for reasons with a liberal sociep is completely insoluble.nion.e a real stake in the liberty of self-expression. nor the communist wants to face. liberal . in order ! Only certain to enjoy material or psychological advantages. Kor must it be forgotten that it is by no means easy to draw the exact line in individual cases.3c” which wc will discuss later on-we insist on freedom of discussion. Conversely. we must sacrifice either one thing or the other. TQs~_ll~~o~i. If we investigate the propensities of the masses we find i that they frequently sacrifice freedom. The profiteers have frequently paid lip-service to the ideals of freedom in order to Still. those who insist on all three elements will sooner or later have to face the rise of a totalitarian dictatorship..

I 222 (Golden Bull. Arunz Bulla). Mirabeau). intolerable. I 789 (Lafayette. as we pointed out in the Introduction. by breaking up familiar patterns they create uncertainties and fluctuations which cannot be easily controlled. Noailles. The devotees of Voltaire never suspected the rise of a Robespierre or a Napoleon. Egalitarianism and liberty are sometimes seemingly compatible but. 90 risings and rebellions of I 2 I 5. theologically analyzed. unhappiness. The situation is even worse when brutal efforts are made . if sincerely accepted and believed in. Moreover.force. I 825 (Dekabrists). intellectual and physical status of the characteriological. Yet it must not be forgotten that liberal revolutions (by the very fact of being revolutions) suffer from the inner contradiction of having to use . Egalitarianism under the best circumstances becomes hypocrisy . I 776. October. and to the enthusiasts of the Weimar Republic it was by no means manifest that the fall of the Hohenzollerns rendered the rise of Hitler possible. they are alternatives in their teleological aspects. Hatred.370 Potentiality and actuality should not be confused. its menace =. tension. If we focus our attention upon the biological. Then all actual inequalities appear without exception to be unjust. but this equality is not continuous throughout a person’s lifetime. but merely established xi&v values and new (physical as well as metaphysical) hierarchies.LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. 1688. individual. The spiritual equality of two new-born babes in the sight of God is merely a “ start. John the Evangelist closing his eyes on Patmos are spiritually not equals. a general maladjustment is the result. a principle opposed to liberty. is restricted to the equality of souls in the very beginning of their existence.” Judas Iscariot expiring in the noose and St. Christianity was by no means egalitarian. the Madrid professors who hailed the establishment of a republic in I 93 I hardly envisaged the rise of a Negrin or a little did the Russian intelligentsia expect a Red France. Human equality. immoral. A word of caution has to be said about the misuse of the term “ equality ” in connection with Christian doctrine. and result in conditions which are the very opposite of the liberal greater. the inequalities are even more apparent.

374 The validity of this statement cannot be doubted. --KOSALI~ &IURRAY~'~ One of our modern authors has made the remark that.91 to establish equality through a process of artificial levelling L (“ sc$al engineerin& “) which can only be done by force. any form of government has to be judged by the Christian primarily as to its ethical content. restrictions. of course. These thinkers often insist on debating their problem in vacua. not only. is faced by a tragic dilemma between the good and the useful. who traced the victory of Rome and the decline of Greece to the egalitarian statism of Rome and the individualistic disunity of the Hellenes. MORAL ASPECTS OF DEMOCRACY Conceptually. indeed. as distinct from practically. but even of the Catholic Church. the 1 choice between quality and quantity. their right. and that democracy actually is self-government. III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY _ 2.372 Even today our liberties are menaced by the same basic obsession. is crucial. when infinite wisdom has been attributed to collective judgments. as in other matters. proxidcd thry arc able to lvithstand .of the Protestant persuasion. It has been argued again and again that self-government pertains to man’s nature. the chorus of those defending democracy on ethical grounds has been considerably swelled in recent years. and it is theoretically possible that the Christian here. from a Christian point of view. and will not admit of compromise. This is. the best or the ( must.s$l The egalitarian and anti-personalistic terror of the French Revolution was perhaps partly prepared by the views of Abbe Mably. In spite of St.375 we have seen Neo-Thomists trying to prove conclusively that democracy is not only a good form of government but even the or@ truly moral one. But. the eficiency of democracy remains a secondary question. or terror. on the other hand. and the outcome is a complete loss of liberty. Only a Benthamite would refuse to see a potential The days are also past antithesis between these two notions. the ranks of the philosophic defenders of democracy have been strengthened by moral theologians. Thomas’ condemnation of democracy.

It must. ment in the narrow sense of the term. be admitted that Catholic political theory in general looks. are unable to agree with the Angelic Doctor. According to Catholic theology man-originally far more perfect than he is now-because of his F’all was deprived of his estraordinary gifts and weakened in his nature (spoliatus This result is not a punishgratuitis et zdneratu. Their mistakes are not only of a philosophical but also of a theological nature. is not only a social animal but also intrinsically a political anima1. but he can hardly overlook the reality which interests us here. since we cannot maintain that Adam had any ri<qht to the privileges he enjoyed before the Fall. artificial. from a strict Lutheran point of view. The agnostic will readily agree that we are mortal. The agnostic will certainly reject the Judao-Christian esplanation of our imperfections. according to St. Thomas Aquinas answers this problem in the affirmative. in fact. that our senses fail us. rather optimistic and even Roussellian. that we get tired. and that their desire to make a popular idea plausible may have blurred their vision. The reader without religious conviction or theological training has no good reason to become weary of our in\-estigation. that we forget. that their notions of the common good are out of focus. let us ask the question whether there would be government at all in a humanity without original sin? St. eternal life on earth. for instance. that their idea of society is a curious patchwork of opposites partly atomistic and partly totalitarian. There is a very strong flavour of Rousseau in their arguments. it is only too obvious that we are exposed to maladies.“7s Before we deal with the problem of a pure democracy in a more immediate fashion.377 Man. Kow first of all.92 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. As a matter of fact. to our It is regret. we have to make a digression into the field of original sin. He will also agree that he could imagine a state of human perfection which man does not possess .a7s k-et we. in naturalibus). whatever we have to say in this and the following paragraphs can be translated easily into secular terms. the temptation to introduce into their deliberations entirely We believe that their concept of man is fictitious elements. Thomas. To the first group of losses belongs. . that our whole moral fibre is “ shot through ” with weaknesses.

essential functions of the modern state-the waging of wars. on the principle that ” corruption of the best is that the perversion of society has the worst corruption.) factured in an eternalized paradise (the reader is reminded that Paradise has nothing to do with Heaven !) human beings would in all likelihood be perfect drivers. sanitation. in a sense.” also has such a dual aspect. and thus not be And even if we in need of green lights and traffic policemen. of society. Xetzsche’s “ coldest of all monsters ” State. in fact it might be argued. who considers the automobile to be an expression of human (physicalj mortality. being III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY . social legislation. it still must be pointed (rut that man prior to original sin might have enjoyed head-on collisions. by the way. It seems to us that the state is. days rated as a “ survival. regulation of education. the state has to discharge functions which unorganized society is unwilling or unable to perform. i:Society has also. the hard shell would terrify pre-Renaissance man.) These limits between social and political functions were in the The feudal system was of a Middle i\ges extremely unclear. suffered by original sin. It is evident that modern government has achieved an autonomy from society (we mean auto-nomy : the power to make and live by its own laws) which would hafIle and frighten the medieval observer. if we were immortal we could as well walk from New York to Los Angeles. We have only to remind the reader of the thesis of Jose Orte. Even monarchy.” resulted in evils more oppressive than the failings of the state. inspection of factories and y Gasset. in our social as well as of a political nature. law courts. a “ concretization ” of society: while society has to act where individuals fail.93 perhaps inadvisable to inject historical animadversions into a philosophic or theological argument. (Hence the indifference towards the time element in originally strongly religious civilizations-the mariana of the Spaniards and the Even if automobiles should be manuza&a of the Russians. and so on-then we have to doubt strongly that the state is compatible with Paradise. are wrong in this. but we cannot help thinking of certain evolutions which have taken place in the last few centuries. can now be separated from the body social like the And if we look now at the outer hull of a broiled lobster.

the results could be the centre of the nation. It is obvious that direct democracy. with his almost limitless pessimism as to the nature of man. restricted by size. and stupidity. has been so severely criticized by Pope Pius XII. disease. In the evening the vote could be taken and registered by electric adding machines in At IO p. which could work by inserting a latch key. and it still survives in New England town meetings and in certain Swiss cantons. At noon the citizenry could be informed over the radio by a steering committee in the capital about the various political and legislative propositions. which produced fatal consequences during the centuries following the Reformation. announced. Thus a nation could declare a war on Monday. went even a step further than we do.) Luther. .m.94 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. Moreover. no law school. no theology (as we understand it). yet he does not see in it a simple and logical -effect of original sin but rather a specially ordained punishment. We should also remember that even Rousseau found democracy desirable only in small political units. It would certainly be feasible to install black and white pushbuttons in every household. he agreed that the state results from the Fall. immortal he could not possibly take serious harm. has a good chance to escape the character of a mass-democracy which.379 (The secular version of this question is merely an inquiry as to whether the state is a result of the perfection or the imperfection of man. without the original sin there would be no universities as we know them-no medicine. Yet as a result of the many inventions of modern times direct democracy could today be realized in a large nation also.3s0 Protestant “ political theoloLq ” in Germany has always been deeply affected by this view. It is obvious that this whole question is a very important one because it is not immaterial to know whether the state belongs to the calamities in the wake of original sin or notwhether it is in the same category as painful childbirth. in recent years. no polytechnic. Under such ideal’ conditions the element of anonymity and irresponsibility can . But let us return to the main theme.d be brought down considerably. Direct democracy is feasible in small units. We know that democracy can be either direct or indirect.

but as an illustration of what the democratic principle pure and simple would mean: the most far-reaching possible harmonization of the general will (i. understand everything. Society is thus an agglomeration of cripples who have to help each other. Valid ethics have to be at least “ theoretically practicable. but with limitless and unerring intellectual capacities. endowed with firm.) A humanity consisting of perfect persons-not omniscient. Everybody could become an expert in poxs m as in other subjects). carefully synchronized with all popular desires and whims.) . . naturally. admit of no alloys. Moral philosophy and moral theology.III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY 95 suffer a defeat on Tuesday. (Would it. this proposition is divorced from any practical value. It is quite evident that political practices. the majority’s willj with current policies. To maintain that a thesis is true in the abstract and untrue in the concrete is pure manichaism or bombinatio in vacua. would be a sound proposition were it based on a population untainted by original sin. imperfect man has to concentrate on a few matters and listen to the advice of other experts within the society in which he lives.e. We have not made this proposition as a joke. this clumsy effort was rectified by the Lord who made them clothes of skins (Genesis Particularly in medicine is the dependence of the 3.. . laws. and so forth. layman on the expert noticeable.” We will admit that it is perhaps possible that a direct democracy. 21). and. well-grounded characters and with clearness of vision-could be trusted with such an otherwise suicidal constitution. Of symbolic value are the efforts of Adam and Eve. unlike chemistq. Thomas’ theory that intellectual gradations would still exist in a population free of original sin. by the way. turn out to-be a government by unanimity? This seems unlikely if we accept St. because the expert-in the narrow sense of the term-is precisely the result of our intelPerfect man could gradually learn and lectual imperfection. sue for an armistice on Thursday and re-open hostilities (if this were still possible) on a new motion on Saturday. after the Fall. but we have to ask ourselves whether a good (provided it really is a good) can becomean evil zfit exists in an unadulteratedform. to clothe themselves in aprons of leaves (Genesis 3.

no doubt that the majority of the population of the British lsles would not.&.&& tya... According to their views the inhabitants of individual provinces.c&.‘_E. Conversely it must be admitted that at least two counties (Fermanagh and Tyrone) would oppose the majority of Ulstermen and vote for union with Eire.. for instance. There is equally no doubt that a majority of Irishmen would have voted for secession from the United Kingdom./i4~ i. ) ?-JtCL . or when a local General Will in a corner of a province opposes the pan-provincial General Will. There is.~ p.L<’ i .%-.+. the majority of citizens of a nation disappr0l..Li..$$&f-& %-& .. those who have a real grasp of politics and s”tatt&Sft2 are few and far between. disregarding this fact would mean merely to rename international wars “ internal conspiracies and revolutions.*%d& & ... cities or villages should have the right to vote periodically on their status in relation to their state.i:&. . a--c .:* & . -=q ‘=A L”i .sTcy $*yEgy$yJ -: =rw-~. The ethical dogmatists of democracy run into equally hopeless difficulties when they have to deal with the problem of territorial allegiances. ..J J3a-L~ i.. whether they want to keep their ties.I . Whatever their answer.. @Q.. Yet it is precisely this overlooking of original sin with its moral and intellectual results that seduces the democratic ideologists of the Keo-Thomist persuasion to arrive at their rigid and dogmatic constructions. It is also manifest that the ma... : 2dL2-?7@ . there will always be sheer arbitrariness in the delineation of territorial categories.T. They have. It is rather naive to believe that borders arc felt merely on account of customs officials and No United States of Europe could have passport regulations. .. whether they vvant to join a ncighbouring state or whether they want An interesting dilemma thus arises when total independence._‘----yi a.k-fwiz+-. have given freedom to Ireland. %LL.d+s& + 3 .Ek-L.-.t : ‘+. . I..~y. The problem of boundaries and local allegiance would exist in a world state also. .c f&L. by necessity. been erected over the monstrosities of the rgr 9 boundaries. -P ‘:~a.. the most daring educational schemes which take into account neither innate intellectual inequalities nor the absolute limitations of our capacities.!++._flw.e of the results of local plebiscites.T ’ ~. on a purely plebiscitarian basis.&yl?&f.jority of the population of the six northern counties of Ulster would oppose the Irish majority and insist on keeping their ties with Britain.~ .“ .

.97 Already the idea has been sounded that a super-Gallup Poll would be a “ truer ” democracy than the present constitutional order (although the 1948 election may have weakened this But many calling themselves democrats idea somewhatj. their important moral aspects. Yet both. Britain) and those in which it is not (e. The Senate of the United States. III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY 3. -GEORGES BERNAXOS~~~ I 1 T Harold_LaskL thought that a sound rests on two pillars: (u) a common “ with and (b) a two-party system. .. 3s3 We agree wholeheartedly him.g. are intimately tied up with the history and the institution of parliamentarismwhose background and roots are in aristocratic or oligarchic soil. not candidates. would voice preference for a mixed form of governmentssr in which the democratic factor is counterbalanced by institutions and political organs which are not democratic in nature. DIFFICULTIES AND ILLUSIONS Man of the past does not resemble the man of today. from a functional point of view.g. the United States). These categories have. as we are going to see.-. for instance. is from the point of view of the modality of its election a republican rather than a democratic institution (Nevada with 93. but want to add that the former postulate is even more H . a senate trying to repeat public opinion is. a democratic body. and the voter can merely choose between Whether the Senate is democratic or republican in its function depends on the relationship of the senators to their constituents and on their personal convictions.000~ and 1C’ew York with I I . In some countries the personality of the parliamentarian overshadows his party allegiance. republicanism and inhabitants elect eachtwo Senators). in others the deputy is only the delegate of the party. In the former case we have to distinguish between parliaments in which the party discipline is strict (e.

. on the other hand. important than the latter. then the character of a mere provisional arrangement. the spirit of the constitution.98 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. they help connections between state and society.3s6 The situation in Britain used to be very similar. political language and a basic common politic&pF%@phy a < ’ real parlement-a “ dialogue ” between the parties-and Under these circumconstructive discussions are impossible. stances the parties cease to be mere “ ins ” and “ outs. in which all sorts of pictures may be hung. and thus the democratic principle of majority In Rump-Austria between rgrg and 1933. none of the three parties really supported the constitution of the democratic republic.384 The existence of more than two parties. nor prevent the rise of additional parties. is in a very different position.. The elections merely determine the strength of the wings.” and elections become minor social and political earthquakes. It must also be expected that in the case of fundamental differences the constitution and. and desires the number of parties reduced to a single one. rule is eliminated. together with the Grossdeutschedenied not only the constitution but the vep inde endence of the country. An outsider. may conceivably argue that the United States has basically a one-party system. And the vote often becomes. In the absence -ofAa common ‘. It has --_. not an ideological manifestation. a European for instance. Yet the e%&i & &%” and survival of both of Laski’s conditions fall into the mzof society: the free state can decree no common ideological denominator. with its “annexation ” of society. The totalitarian state. In these societal aspects of the Laski premises we get a hint as to the intrinsic Moreover. leads easily to minority rule. for instance.. A small party which holds the key to the absolute parliamentary majority can quite effectively run the country. will receive support only from a few parties or (as has frequently happened) from no parties at all.3ss Part of the success of the democratic and parliamentary . us to realize that constitutions are mere frames. The Christlichsoziale were Catholic crypto-royalists. especially. the Sozialdemokraten were Marxians with a totalitarian bent who. but simply a protest against persons in power. as Pan-Germans.

and Professor R. in drugstore conversations. with all their implications. Gabriel is right when he points out that democracy is part and parcel of American nationalism. It means conscious assimilation and amalgamation. In the United States practically a hundred per cent of the population believes in republicanism and democracy.4 . -+” -.lLznd jealously to preserve the common ideological u. which lacks the royal alloy) have tried w&. two oceans gird the United States. are taught and extolled in schools and theatres. Then even a plurality of pZYes could be permitted. To be an American is frequently not an accident but a matter of choice and free decision. and neither Canada nor Mexico are active exporters The common possession with Great of political ideologies. envisaged in the far future the democracy of a thoroughly restitutio75f parliamentary “ American ” character (see Chapter VI). And to the voluntaristic principle we have to add the simplicity of the historical background. in Europe almost every historical epoch leaves a distinct political heritage. This is probably the deeper reason why the Reichstag was only packed. III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY d -IA. And it is ’ interesting to note that National Socialism! repeatedly insisting on its democratic character.3R7 And. in sermons and at cocktail parties. H. last but not least. At first this phenomenon. “ Americanization ” of Germany then would be complete. The word Americanism is not without real significance. According to one of our informants the plan existed to revitalize the Reichstag once a new. almost unique in modern history.u \ &“: r-vi -1 I u i wX ‘. Britain of the English language is not conducive to ideological imports entirely alien to the American scene. there is the geographic factor.99 regime in the English-speaking countries has to be ascribed to the fact that the societies of these countries (and especially the society of the United States.’ WW s-S * . never abolished. in commencement speeches and in films. textbooks and radio comments. in novels. seems paradoxical in a country made up largely of a variegated immigration . thoroughly nazified generation had grown up. Republicanism and democracy. since all parties would automatically The represent merely various shades of National Socialism. in daily papers and in periodicals. but we have to keep in mind that America is built on a voluntaristic basis.

furthermore. the preservation of the tenet “ unity in necessary things ” presupposes something like an ideologically totalitarian society which condemns dissent and Since the politicized indil-idual persecutes the non-conformist. for instance. In Britain. To the foregoing problem it should be added that a law issued by one legislature can be cancelled by the next one. but also for the very stability of the country in the course of T&cBrty system ulone would never do without elections. The illusion of “ self-govern1’ ment ” breaks down. fight is lost. Matters are made worse if the deputies have been elected on a “ peace platform. voted into power in order to remove that unpopular piece of But if a hasty declaration of war is made and the legislation. bear iTm&d that a society consciously and collectively safeguarding a common political ideology is automatically pledged . The “ common framework of reference ” is. and the presenation of wellfunctioning parliamentary democracy demands a politically alert and “ mobilized ” society. (not to be mistaken for Aristotle’s “ political animal “) is a postulate of political democracy. obviously. necessary not merely for fruitful parliamentary debate. And the wheel of histo having been turned inexorably permits of 10 erasu_re of the e\‘ents which Even if the 6% majority of the voters have taken place.100 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. And we have to add that if the difference between the parties is considerable.” Yet as we have seen before. the electorate can only watch the actions of the government in impotent rage. the What common denominator is already of debatable validity. the first steps towards a We have. happens if the Labour Party actually carries out a very farreaching programme of socialization-and is defeated at the next elections ? Will the Conservatives be able to sell state property to the highest (private) bidder? We muszome to the conclusion that the actions qf ruling political parties haze a certain finality which creates historicaliy irredeemable and irrg&y&le situations. no subsequent defeat at the polls is going to bring back to life those who have fallen on the battlefields. the common’ e. every election means a bloodless revolution. disapproves of the decision of the government. thus the ship of state will soon be on the rocks. to totalitarianism are already taken.

the other one in the case of its absence.) The establishment and/or preservation of such conformity involves an extraordinary discipline and solidarity. conceive of a country with four parties : one royalist. The folly of those who would like to impose political forms on societies unwilling or ill-adaptedthough frequently made “ receptive ” by propaganda or defeat -becomes apparent if we bear this difficulty well in mind. a warning should be sounded in relation to religion as a suficient “ common denominator ” or framework of reference. conservative and Protestant.III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY 101 to common cultural values resulting in a rigorous homogeneity as to its “ way of life. Just because most religions have-in spite of their numerous ethical and political principles-no concrete uniform political ideology. another royalist. religious. We leave it to the reader to visualize all the difficulties and problems of such a situation. pressure or persecution. legislation is obviously helpless in the face of social disdain. a fourth socialist. Said Sholem Ash very correctly in his essay “ In the Valley of Death ** : “ A person’s constitutional rights are secure onI>. a third republican.” circumstances ? In all likelihood the political alignment The would cut across the lines of religious allegiance. a country with two roughly equal Catholic parties-one republican? the other royalist. conservative and Catholic. non-Marxist What would happen under such and “ non-sectarian. they would Let us imagine. which might rather adversely affect political. for argument’s sake. again. The . racial or ethnic “ dissenters ” . when his social standing in the community is secure.” (This political-cultural interrelationship has been well expounded by De Tocqueville in his De la &mocratie en Ame’rique. Bavarian wing of the Centrist (Catholic) party of Germany broke off in I grg because the Bavarian Catholic royalists did not see eye to eye with the Prussian Catholic collaborators of the W’eimar Republic. From the foregoing it also becomes fairly evident that an analysis of democracy in action has to use two separate vantage points : one in the case of the existence of a common denominator. We might. “ progressive ” and Catholic.“3B8 Since we have spoken about religious dissent. be too ” wide ” as a common denominator.

the transition to dictatorship can be made through bloodless and constitutional means. and thus the various constitutions become mere armistice agreements. On the other hand.102 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.) The agreement of parties on a given constitution only indicates the fact that none of them has an absolute majority. with its “ common denominator. ethical problem of self-government. If for any reason one party were re-elected with an overwhelming . the expediency of “ amendments. this transition often does not even need It must not be forgotten. that even after 1933 Germany continued as a republic. It is significant that. ever to get a majority incline towards revolutionary tactics.” for example.” the perpetuation in power of one single party does not favour the preservation of parliamentary democracy. will be dealt with later on. Here we merely want to point out that the political aspects of democracy on the European continent (with the exception of Switzerland) give us valuable negative insights into the character of parliamentary democracy. both situations rapidly following one another. and that the Weimar constitution was never abolished. There the two Laskian premises are absent. The elections thus receive the character of public manifestations demonstrating numerical strength. (In th is sense the two Austrian revolutions of February and July 1934 were nothing but the only honest and “ direct ” forms of the inter-party “ dialogue ” that had been going on since rg 19. Yet if one party receives an overwhelming majority. The famous bon mot that wars are nothing but continuations of diplomacy by other means may for this case be adapted to read that revolutions and civil wars are merely the continuation of democratic party politics by other means. Even in the United States. and that a final showdown resulting in a one-party dictatorship would be premature. as a principle. the plurality of parties becomes a temporary safeguard against one-party It is obvious that parties which cannot hope dictatorship. with things standing thus. but only suspended in parts. postulate and possibility. the impossibility of forming a coalition backed by a majority of parties can also lead to a deadlock and thus to a dictatorship The Nazis came to power by a combination of of a cabinet.

After the late Franklin D. III] ‘03 majority twelve consecutive times. because the socialist ideal has by and large conquered the lower clas_ses.I I able situation.. the elections of February 23.ePeati~ &cialist slogans. the soul of the 1 p@ttv r.5 per cent die-hard defenders of the Republican party. and only 34. Roosevelt’s re-election in 1944 the present author saw this danger in the United States. Still. since a (far more reliable!) estimate of the Gallup Poll tells us that 42. The safeguards ast tyrannyT^the--zt t 6%&itution are relative and not absolute. in spite of its Southe the Democratic party caters in nationwide relations to the &r-and this means to the bigger--“ half ” of the social gain ! _-. moreover.] From one point of view the situation in Britain is even more catastrophic. most checks and balances (inourt) would break down or become obsolele.” since the Tories. created something like an “ irredeem.” Socialism f in Britain has. Ig5o. In 1952 the Democratic Party will be able to look back on twenty years of governmental monopoly. the repeated victories of the Democrats are not in the least surprising. if ever victorious. the higher percentage of permanent Democratic vo . and wrote on the subject in no uncertain termsz! In the 1948 elections the United States made further progress on the road to the one-party state.5 per cent of the American voters are permanent supporters of the Democratic.-En. American Republicani=w? must remember Mr. lower-class _ -.inV a franr& effort . would lack ’ the courage to undo socialism and to auction off the socialized Thus (“ nationalized “) industries to the highest bidders. Yet. British National Socialism is here to stay. and socialism is capable of far worseblunders than~heideology of a mere lower-class party out only to “ soak the rich ” and not to “ kill the goose which lays the golden eggs. this is all the more likely as-the Conservatives. There is the added danger that their continued defeats will lead to a real demoralization of the opposition. a miracle either. The situation in Britain is very similar. Wendell Willkie’s “ me-too ” A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY _ .supp$. and there is little doubt that the Conservative Party has only slight hope [This remark was written before of getting back into power.7@-@one to sell-.

Sweden. unjust 1949 elections. Louis etienne St. just like Hindenburg.has gone a very similar wav As we c& see.e. Of stable republics of a non-totalitarian character there are only two or three left-if we place the United States. I-l 1 and legally evolve into its very contrary.R.I. Dewey. MacKenzie King was able to “ invest ” his successor.S.* ‘04 ! LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. with crown and sceptre. they are the logical results of the democratic process. L It is thus all the more significant that representative government in Europe-outside of Switzerland-was successful only if the royal. Laurent. L. The Constitution has been successfully adopted by many a South and Central American dictatorship (the Republic of Santo Domingo even has a two-party system? but for some time the two of them had only one presidential candidate-Dictator R. the warning words of America’s Founding Fathers. and the author. as in the case of Britain. who is neither an American aristocrat nor a perfect symbol of the “ common man. non-democratic alloy was present. I -r or even absolutistic.-theoretically acceptable a- . Denmark. Had he run I believed he would have won the elections. His article presaging the event3g0 was written upon General Eisenhower’s refusal to run for President. who won against the trend of the time by netting the “ G. who insisted that democracy ends in expropriation (i. it must again be recalled that constitutions in themselves are no guarantees whatsoever for a liberal democracy in the of the United States t Anglo-Saxon sense.” could not swim against the current. And the hopes of the Conservative opposition were swept away by the tidal lvave of the biggest Liberal I-ictory in history in the A monarchy might become inefficient. Norway-. Mr. The development in Canada has reached an even later stage. the Netherlands. attitude in face of the New Deal .. socialism). the developments in America and Britain are perfectly “ normal “. M. Truman’s re-election. Mr. \:ote ” of Germany in Ig21j. claims no originality or inspiration for having done so.S. Belgium. But unlike democracy it cannot peacefully. Trujillo) . Nevertheless. In this connection Switzerland and Finland in that category. who was one of the few European writers to predict Mr. and the constitution of the U. have not been heeded.

may break into the wildest. Vlll.-GOvERNMEwr III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY Every age is hefooled by the notions which are in fashion in it. was first used by the Austrian Xational Socialist Walther Pembaur. Postscript to I-eestcrda>.” “ thou ” and “ he:” but for the masses the dialogue is based The old egoism which so on “ we. for a few leaders. The collectivistic character of a (politically) democratic societv receives a certain psychological reinforcement from the essentially collectivistic structure of the political parties in a The political struggle may have parliamentary framework. governors and rulers the aspects of “ I. egotism.” “ you ” and “ they.391 of the European “ Nostrism ” is also highly characteristic blood brother of democraq--ethnic nationalism. . 4. paralleling Protestant bibliolatry. personally to all outward appearances humble. of course tacitlv including himself in the venerated is thus nothing but camouflaged ” Xostrism ” collective. we have even come to “ respect ” the nostrist. Our age is befooled bp ” democracy. and so on> flies ... one-man dictatorship. sELf. just what was ridiculed by Plato (Republic.‘05 by any Christian state-is in Russia the instrument of a totalitarian autocracy. there is in some countries a real worship of written constitutions and politico-legal arrangements. most shameless and most irrational praise of his nation. in opposiseemingly idealistic A IYOS tion to a brutal egoism and a Christian altruism.3R2 This disease has almost hopelessly poisoned the . 557). SIXSEH. A man. yet on account of its collectivistic implications it is infinitely more devastating in its results.+ut the window and is supplanted by a t&2 ) This expression.” often characterized personal rule (monarchy. Britain has no written constitution. but a man who sings the praise of his own nation is? after all. a man who extols himself is easily a target for ridicule. if infected by nationalism. a “ good patriot ” who has our sympathies as long as his nation shows no hostility to ours. As a matter of fact. modest and balanced. quoted by I.” -W.. C.LOPD MORRIS. but.

the rank and file of the minoritv can be said to have co-elected the President by merely participating in the process. IV.” if not into “ slaves. the few who for some reason are unable or unwilling to accept the constitution are out of luck.106 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. is in his political capacity an “ individual ” and not a “ person.” This statement is correct if we assume that the defeated minority inwardly abides by the decision of the majority. where the constitutions are met with contempt since they are only arenas constructed for the occasion-or racetracks w-hose spectators expect a$?zal winner terminating the racethe elections usually divide the voters into Spinoza’s “ citizens ” on one side and into “ subjects. a century and a half ago.396 Of course. This situation is not exactly the same in the ideal parliamentary democracy as in the endangered one lacking the “ common denominator.“395 In total anonymity and secretiveness he votes as the smallest mathematically indi\Gsible fraction of a nation. . admittedly. for instance. and has an iron grip on the social layer considered to be the backbone of every progressive nation-the middle class. can say with a certain degree of truthfulness: “ We elect our President.” An American.f self-government is viewed from a . (Neither should it be forgotten that this procedure represents the zenith of an invitation to \ \ irresponsibility. in the spirit of Rousseau: cf. majority elects its legislature and sometimes iz chief executive. political atmosphere of the Old World. had no illusions about this claim of democratic apologists.) \--et the impersonal nature of the voting process forces us to analyze the character of democratic “ selfgovernment ” more critically.) Of course.” on the There it can be truly said that nst the na&n but the other. Yet the voter in the parliamentary democracy. Since they will ha\-e to “ obey ” the victorious candidate of their political adversaries. they are not citizens in the sense in which Spinoza uses this term.3g3 but since the constitution “ universally ” accepted in the country makes this stipulation. The regulation determining that the majority should prevail over the minority may be entirely arbitrary and irrational.3B4 In “ democratic ” European countries. ii. no matter on which side of the Atlantic. (This notion is. Fisher Ames. Contrut social.

E-et such a point of view is only possible on a “ nostrist ” (and “ vostrist “) basis. It is obvious that all these vistas are unacceptable to anybody clinging to a non-materialistic philosophy. and political power from such a source . melancholically._-. man with all his glories and shortcomings. _ I ‘i.. Everybody is indispensable7 is unique. his faith and his despair. the voters of Yet let us go a step further..$.p ‘i portance. straight to $6 d&na%n%ove&f TEb%ka and C%wi$irn .xJ + -0 &#. one individual vote lvould measure not more than one three-thousandth part In a modern mammoth state the individual at of an inch. c 4 A 1c. say : “ Everybody Even at the risk of being accused Nobody can be replaced.Ne>v _Mechanism the difference between the i effectiveness of one person’s vote among five and among 1 joo. national elections is nothing more than a m&robe.them~~ statement in the Syllabus : ductoritas nihil aliud est nisi numeri et materialium summa (“ authority is nothing else than numbers and the sum of material things ’ ’ j . and emotions. whether he in particular goes to the polls or not makes hardly an! His person and personality. all his desires. /+4~ y & ..A..--%a . I : we. lvho faces history and politics -and not some imaginary polycephalic centipede.‘L. we have to reject them as figmentary and return consciously to the realities of the human person. longings. ---_. -. “ Nobody is indispensable ” is . It is._ OX ‘1 -Z---L. . If.” and if we simply identify the greater part with the whole-then the talk about “ self-government ” is justified.&LI I HA .ooo will be merely in degree. But “ existentially ” this is by no means I the case. his reason. for instance.a highly The conservatil-e and personalist would 4 democratic slogan.” of delighting in exaggerations and hyperbolic statements.&. This statement is mathematically correct.L _..i+ .-L -.* comes curiously near to the T&$. is counted and not weighed. France should be graphically represented by a solid column of the height of the Eiffel Tower (over 980 feet!. f I.insist that the aforementioned democratic slogan leads . and thus treated t Ear ’ ipHpuLv uXXtf jr< tcaT ’ iEiav---“ by number but not by im. as Aristotle stated difference.III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY ‘07 national or collectivistic point of view--if a multitude is considered to be one orga&sm with something like a responsible “ group soul.---. To the ph$osopher of the. ‘.i -+t. after all.“3g’i Thus. . y-+.

et plebiscitis scelera -SENECA When we survey the democratic scene one characteristic !) almost immediately captures our attention: lack ofzon$It is interesting to note that irresponxili?‘$ was the ( bility. sociology of political parties. Lloyd. family alliances and the heredity even democracy cannot of natural gifts. however. of democracy in action-with their final psychological implications. --CHARLES PEGUY. doubted theory of democracy.“4og Yet the advent of democracy has hardly increased the sense of responsibility.410 since democratic composite government has resulted in a division of responsibility which makes it ubiquitous and at the .405 James Burnham in his The Machiaoellians wrote a commentary on the oligarchic Sir Henry Maine. who were considered to be responsible to “ God only.110 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.406 In any case. so constantly overlooked by the apologists of the democratic dogma-gain new and more depressing perspectives. if democracy is actually in practice nothing but a conspiracy of small. To all this must be added a biological tendency towards oligarchy from intermarriage. analysis of Professor A. which probably Especially if we believe in the counteract successfully. entrenched groups cleverly “ manipulating votes. 404 and returned to it in a smaller work entirely dedicated to this issue. ETHICS AND REPRESENTATION Flatter les vices du peuple est encore plus l&he et plus sale que de flatter les vices des grands. s=dard charge against the monarchs.408 5. “ MCmoires et dossiers ” Ex senatus-consultis exercentur. all $\he expected from the democratic process was a new despotism. we are bound to see the spectre of an enslavement to oligarchy menacing “ free democracies ” even from these quarters.” the harsh judgment of Rene Schwab on democracy407 Thus the final moral aspects is indeed not far off the mark. H. $tThe creation of oligarchies or mites on a democratic basis.







same time-through a process of “ atomization “-illusory. The electors who have dropped their ballots in unmarked envelopes can deny their misdeeds with a straight face, and the deputies who after an initial failure were not re-elected can claim that the time of their tenure was too short to permit the completion of their plans. There is also a widespread tendency to restrict the tenure of chief executives (“ Power corrupts ! “). As a result the amateur incumbents of this high office not only are prevented from utilizing their meagre experience acquired at great cost, but the bar against their re-election or reappointment often puts them into a mood of frivolous indifference. And since the judges and censors of the politician’s actions are (seemingly) not God but the lay electorate, whose opinion has great “ practical ” but little ethical, historical or factual will be blunted. value, the sense of true responsibility T%aintaining one’s popularity with King Demos has nothing q whatsoever to do with a sense of true responsibility which, in i F+s finality, is always directed towards God. ‘J As, moreover, political power in a democracy is not inheritable except in a very oblique way, the judgment of history has The follies hardly to be feared, as in the case of a dynasty. of a Woodrow Wilson, a Cltmenceau, a Lloyd George, or a Sonnino had no direct ill effects on immediate members of their Most politicians are dead or in retirement when L families. But a Louis XVI, the results of their policies become manifest. a Charles I of Austria, a Nicholas II had to pay for the errors Still, the ethical problem of a or neglects of their ancestors. “ democracy in action ” is greatest in the moral position of the

What is the duty of the successful political candidate? To speak and vote according to his own lights, or to become the mouthpiece of his constituency, thus merely voicing public will favour the former theory, opinion ? Republicanism The republican aspect of popular democracy the latter. representation is one of a transfer of popular sovereignty to electees, while the democratic deputy is the representative of the “ voice of the people.“*12 The problem of the borderlines between these two norms is one of the first magnitude-especially in the United






States.* It is evident that the dishonest republican electee might sidetrack his own opinion to gain popularity, while a democrat might be unable to resist the \roice of his conscience. Yet, liewing this overlapping of theory and practice, the \\ psson adh_ering to Christian e$.hics- can-, on& approve of _\\ j the r-can, not of the democratic, thesis. To him _ ..-.. -_human action is permissible only -in conformity with one’s conscience (,see n’ote 688). The true Christian as a candidate in a thoroughly democratic state is almost unthinkable ; only in rare cases will he succeed in maintaining his position. Without a truly magic personality he can hardly expect success. Of course, there is the possibility of a deformed conscience prompting the deputy to act according to popular opinion and not according to his own conviction-thus making a sacr$cium intellectus. The ” election year scare ” and the “ Write to your senator! ” proposition are largely democratic phenomena--unless the latter is done in a spirit of enlightenment, and not of pressure menacing the deputy with the sanctions of the ballot-box.413 Several constitutions insist on the independence of the deputy from popular dernands,bla but we cannot help doubting whether in spite of these written injunctions the Damocles’ sword of pending elections remains ineffective. It must be admitted, though, that in countries with election-lists on a nationwide party basis (Listcn~ahlrechtj the danger in this dc-personalized system comes rather from the pressure of party discipline than from the retaliations of an irate electorate. In order to illustrate our ethical dilemma, let us imagine three candidates-a good Christian, a good pagan, and a bad pagan -running for office and holding an election meeting. They are heckled by the audience, and reply according to their lights. In order to illustrate our thesis we shall be rather typical and exaggerate their respective positions.
* It is obvious that these terms, viz., “ republican ” and “ democratic,” are not related to the respective -4merican parties. Though some Republicans * would openly reject the epithet ‘I democratic,” all Democrats are professed republicans. To make the confusion of labels worse the Democrats have in the Northern states a strong ega&arian wing, while their main strength in the South is derived from the former upholders of Slavery.






I. Question : “ We all want you going to vote for it? ”

the Caloosahatchie


“3 Are

The Good Christian : I am sorry but I am going tr) vote qainst the proj&t. I lino\v that you xl-o:lld benefit from it locally but your local benefit is out 0i all pmportiun to the expense5 u hit-h would have ta bc bornr lx. the taxpa)-crs df the whole nation.

The Good Pagan : Though the prospeclr are not \-cry bright I will do my best. As a representative of this area I Lvill put its interests al ivay‘s first.

The Bad Pagan: The Canal has al\\-ays been on the top of my agenda. Sure, I’ll vote for it. This state is going to have the j_. lmest, broadest, blucstandsmooth~ eh; canal in the 1 world !

2. Question : ” ‘CVhat are ;:ou going to do about our relations kvith Mexico? 1Yc don’t trust her.”

Thr f!kod Chistiaii : I have studied the problem of‘ (ii11 relations \t 1tl1 ’ Sicsico fr,:’ :11;;:1\’ year,, . ?‘c )ic ,-eI-: JLI t-i an exhausti\-e and hones; anslyer I would nc~d at least ttn-cc hwrs and I am not sure that y/au TGOUld even then understand what 1 mean.

‘The GM/d Pa:> : van It a11 drptands OIL wkt: the present Slcxi car GovernIYiint is ytring to do ‘ix :ti our in\ e~tments. It is j‘i-c ~habl~ prcmaturc to &kc plans at t 11~present momcnt. The intercsts of our n3tinn :Li‘C , naturall)-, paramu:mt to me.

TilC Bad Pagan: his r\;obod\ in senses cirer trusts IV c SIesico.
M.on’t ph\. sucker

10 he! qain arid the his stic!, rcmains the bit rwJic\.. \\‘e’rc going iu brcali off diplomatic relatic.x~s xvith herthat-s lvhat I am going to wte for !

3. Question : “ \1re w-ant better roads. \,Yc‘re qainst railroad subsidies. Wow are you going to vote in these matters ? ”

“4 The Good Christian : I have no idea. As a matter of fact I have never studied this problem and I know nothing about it. I will, though, investigate the matter, which might take me a couple of months. I’ve been told that it is a complicated question.




[Chap. The Bad Pagan: That highway-versus-railroad problem is very simple. Only a stuffed shirt or longhaired professor would make it appear complicated. 1’11 give you the lowdown in a nutshell. It boils down to the following simple facts. . . . (Follows a threeminute outline .)

The Good Pagan: Of course, better roads are necessary and I will vote for them. Like you, I view the railroad subsidies with mistrust. Yet I doubt that these matters will come up in the next session. Still, you can count on me.


This sketch could be continued ad nauseam. The Christian candidate would be sincere, frank, serious. He would confess ignorance where need be, he would oppose his constituents when his conscience advocated disagreement, he would refuse to distort facts by popularizing them or by “ boiling them down ” to a deceptive simplicity,415 thus flattering the intellectual vanity of the credulous masses.4rs The bad \ , pagan simply lies to his voters ; as Pascal put it: “ One must have a mental reservation, and judge everything by that, while nevertheless speaking like the people.“417 He pretends to understand problems he is not acquainted with, and simulates knowledge; he is determined not to stick to his promises or even to act against his conscience. The good pagan is in the worst situation of all: he lies, quite subconsciously, to himself. He believes, perhaps in all ! sincerity, that one can square the circle-that one’s own conscience, absolute truth, the feasible and permissible, the ‘) ethical and practical, public opinion and the useful, can ail ; be brought under the same denominator. The tragedy of \ Christian existence is not for him; he would flee what Jean i Wahl calls &&ions kierkegaardiennes.416 The calamities brought \ upon mankind by the Fall have for him no reality. L






I ‘j

And in the overall scene-in the struggle between the three above-mentioned types-a fatal Gresham’s Law is operating: the inferior human currency drives the better one out of &$atsK I&&ha&said, “ Itself a product of envy and mediocre men, it [democracy] can use only mediocre men for its tools.“41s The good Christian’s position is an almost hopeless one, since he is not willing to sacrifice ethical values to the Moloch of popularity.420 From the foregoing the inner weakness of the republican form of government is quite evident. St. Thomas rightly considers democracy to be the perversion of “ polity ” (republic), and it is ob&us that the difference between these two is conceptual rather than constitutional.421 (The same is true of the relationship between monarchy and tyranny, aristocracy and oligarchy.) Although the three bad forms of government can be established as such, the perversion of the good forms of government lies, not in a visible change oftheir structure, but in a per-version, a “ turning awry ” of their aim and purpose. Constitutionally very little can be done70 prevent the degeneration of a republic into a democracy, because the ulterior motives and aims of a person can rarely be judged by the outsider-just as, conversely, the monarch can appear to be (or actually change into) a tyrant, or the aristocrat into an oligarch. The decision of a ruler can seem to be purely in his own interest, whereas it will actually work for the common good ; and the reverse is also true. Sometimes not even history can tell us the truth. One factor-and a very important one-in the preservation of a republic lies in the moral standards upon which a society is insisting. Another one is the limited material and honorific rewards a political career should offer, thus providing the “ democrat ” with no economic (or other) advantages in, and incentives for, re-election. To the professional politician popularity, as a means to re-election, is the immediate goal. The republican, on the other hand, should view popularity with indifference, and failure in the elections with equanimity; this again is more !ikely if he has private interests, wealth and, perhaps, a career outside the political sphere. (Hencetheoid republican-but highly undemocratic-property qualifications.)



! ; -- -.


) ; /








And herein lies the very tragedy of republican government, which has to steer constantly between the Scylla of a camouflaged aristocratic rule and the Charybdis of a democracy -the extremes of the Venetian Christianissima Respublica and Hitler’s republikanischer Fiihrerstaat with a deutsche Demokratie.

6. La “ Coke

KNOWLEDGE ” ravage aujourd’hui 1s rcrre.

des Imbeciles

-GEORGES BERVAXOS, La France ronire les robots

! \

Having dealt with the ethical problem of the elector and elected, we have to investigate the intellectual aspects of democracy. Thus we come, first of all, to the problem of knowledge. Knowledge, in a narrow-er sense: is cognition of the true. An objective judgment can be made only if we know the nature of the object in question. Without a real knowledge of the object we cannot let reason make a -judgment. On,__ the other hand, a few +ternal aspects, if perceived, are sufficie$ tolet our emotiotzs @ct. - - -------: ..But while knowledge can discriminate between true and good and bad, the emotions untrue, can only express subjective feelings, “ likes ” and “ dislikes.” In this case there is no coqpehension but merely the recognition that something @?yrs$ikeable or unlikeable to an observer. Without a grasp of the Fe>>ature of a thing only appearances can be dealt with. The picture of the object in the mind of the “judging ” person becomes all-important-% wf&G and not the reality. “ Thus I like you, thus I dislike you,” says the person, It is obvious that real knowledge will, finally, correct that picture and basically alter the affective attitude of the observer. And under “ knowledge ” we might also distinguish between Vernunft and Verstand-reason and understanding. It ought to be conceded that there is a deeper I understanding, and even knowledge, possible through affection and i, love. Yet love might not only open eyes but also make blind! i The tenet “ I believe that I may understand ” (and “ I love

‘I7 that I may understand “) may entail rich rewards, but also terrible losses. Here lies the risk of a pure Augustinianism, as well as of a nuked existentialism. There still remains the question whether we can remain absolutely neutral towards a phenomenon. Knowledge, intuition and emotion in relation to an object under scrutiny can be contemporaneous ; but can we, especially tokvards objects which have a direct bearing on us, remain indifferent? In the absence of knowledge are we necessarily emotional? We are inclined to belie\-r that this is the case. Hence Jacob Rurckhardt’s criticism of the anti-rational character of democracy : “ \Ye do not have democracy in order to heed tX reason : if we had wanted that we could. have kept limited franchise and respect-for persons worthy ,of respect.“422 If Iye compare now, for instance, one of the Swiss cantonal diets in the Middle Ages, or a Xew- England town hall meeting, 433 with the elective processes in a modern mammoth democracy, we \,vill quickly discover that there is in the two first-mentioned cases the possibility of an equitable relationship between political decision and personal kno\vledge.424 Even today the problems which crop up in the Diet of Glarus can be grasped by the voting citizen?. I-et in a large nation, what is the actual relationship between the world problems of today and the popular representatives-not to mention the vast voting masses? The grave problems moving the world demand at least a superficial comprehension of histor!-, geography, economics, physics, international and constitutional law, foreign languages, military and naval science, agriculture, biology, racial psycholo~, diplomatic usage, and many more subjects besides. This need is some\\-hat subconsciously felt bv the advocates of democracl., who therefore indulge in grandiose schemes of mass education--vthich still fall completely short of the President Garfield, in reply necessa+bui unatt.aK&le goal. to %&aulay’s criticism, said: ” We confront the dangers of suffrage by the blessings of universal education.“425 Yet we see how the knowledge of the voters as well as of their representatives remains insufficient to be used in an evaluation of the momentous problems of the world. Even John Stuart











a “h. a w q 2~ k .A k-, ‘x’ ’ , Y I . h-i ..* 3 1 -\ 1%’ .\f.Y; < .“.; : 3.w * “y.

/ 1


y. $ -+ ,4 cr ‘L; i *A’< ~ ’ f _g

--Y Y “e -------c

J -! ?

Mill had his doubts about the egalitarian character of democratic suffrage ; 426 as a result of all this, emotions increasingly dominate the political scene; and the shrinkage on the other hand, rapidly multiplies the of “ one world,” number of questions having a bearing on individual nations. Owing to the perversity of this situation we have a never-ending series of failures, the. reaction--to which is often a cry for an These are asked to rule unlimited rule of experts. iFon fist, and to enforce a.pagan utilitarianism of the _. .worst Ethics and human freedom would then Bknthamite stamp. be_dispensed, with as .needlessimpediments. -‘I.- _ To these considerations the supporters of the democratic dogma will reply that the whole problem is not one of knowledge and efficiency; that the issue is purely moral, and concerned with such aims as “ self-government,” freedom, and volition. They will quote “ freedom of choice in cases of.$oubt “-and the disciples of the “ liberal heresy ” will point out that “ we have a right to be wrong ! ” It is, admittedly, sometimes prudent not to enforce truth; but a right to be wrong does not exist. In this connection we have to remember that government is not a final end. It is probably only a means to an intermediary end. And if good government is an art in the service of the common good, it is natural that those who have a higher skill in this art4” should, within proper limits, have a greater chance to serve the common good.428 It is perfectly true that a layman might make a better diagnosis of an illness with artistic inclinations might evening dress than a tailor. thing as prudence based on probaThe knowledge, skill and experience of physicians are those of tailors towards dressmaking. We also doubt that euery man is a political animal in the narrow sense of the term. It seems obvious that the political (like any other “ accorded ” power) should with the object-regardless whether the is a proposition faced by a legislator or the choice between candidates belonging to parties confronted by major decisions. 4n the latter case the hapless voter is also called upon to exercise his psychological skill in relation to persons he hardly

\ 1 ii T

We have already hinted at the multiplication of problems in a shrinking world. should be our programmethe verq”reverse of-$ie existing trends. continues to rise at a mad pace. Moral perfection and intellectualization for central governments. we want to repeat that the most pressing problem of good (and that auto. The Middle Ages and-their aftermath were characterized by a multitude of such autonomous and semi-autonomous spheres .” The question of expert knowledge versus amateurism is all the more pressing because. and specialized brains. in addition. the economic cycles. nevertheless rely more on the. coupled with air_estriction of their radius of actiyrz.430 Is it not more than certain that the burning problems of our age and time-atomic fission. though ham.ii meTsuGte ‘Gi&7iG 0% capacities.III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY “9 knows. if there ever was an equitable relationship between the voting masses and the issues confronting them. . to _5 f_ .f matically implies ethical) government lies today in building up defence machineries around spheres in whic_h the persm s should have power pd self-government approximately corn. European politics.” Totalitarian dictatorships. files. The characteristics of mo ern ma& government are: a central organ increasing in . In this quandary it does not matter whether the voter is one out of ten or one out of a million. kind. and putting (more or less) knowledge and experience to the service of whims and emotions. Far Eastern affairs.’ pered by irrational doctrines. standard individual knowledge (if at all!) only in an arithmetic one. medieval man frequently belonged to a variety of these. the knowledge necessary for the understanding of world affairs advances in a geometric progression. driven by emotions but employing bureaucratic staffs of varying qualifications and efficiency. it is now rapidly.waning.’ help of-experts-and they are. stored in millions of books. highly consciouspf’j the fact that emotions can be “ manufactured. It has been well said that “ ten million ignorances do not make one piece of 1 knowledge. thus placing the “ heart ” above the “ brain.“42g As to the problem of control by eserts. this situation is aggravated by our steadily decreasing relative While the actual knowledge of man(personal) knowledge.-a--totality and ubiquity-.

praise. double-dealing. It is to be doubted that the parliaments of the last fifty years have produced a single outstanding statesman. Oxenstierna’s injunction was never truer than today. He has a good right to do that. treachery. \ve often find a veq considerable difference between the homage paid to the constitutional order and the enthusiasm accorded to the deputies and other elected Of this discrepancy the citizens representatives of the nation. are sometimes not only conscious. It really seems that statesmanship is incompatible with “ politics ” in the democratic sense. Still. regardless of his qualifications.een of the general respect given to the k-u& constitution and that given to the constitution itself. CYe have seen great statesmen (of the ethical as well as of the Machiavellian pattern) in monarchies. lying. . The fact remains that in all democratic nations the person of the “ politician ” is treated with contempt.minority in every modern nation? By one in a thousand? Or is it one in ten thousand? But man will always judge.432 and “ politics ” are looked upon by a healthy public opinion as a cocktail of deceit. necessitating a constant preoccupation with mere “ politics. 433 dishonourable compromise and other vices. There is? how-ever. a time-lag bet\ . the question remains wheihn. \-et the complete lack of security of tenure. theft. insincerity. condemn. 431 It is fairly obvious that the enormous disorder and chaos in this world is not the result alone of the flagrant breach of practically eveq ethical postulate. perjury. but defunct. arrangement ‘* but the survival republican order. but even proud. Products of the old British oligarchy like Disraeli or Gladstone vvouid be unthinkable in the democratized parliamentary scene of today. object. graft.his emotional reactions should afect the common good. In countries where the constitution is not a mere ” armisticial of a grand. To the historian this antithesis is neither new nor particularly After two hundred years of cheerful and encouraging. aristocratic republics and post-revolutionary tyrannies. but is also due to the retreat of knowledge and reason from the domain of politics. imposture.” is a fatal handicap in democracies. criticize.

to prevent troubles.yIn this case greater __. and endure-it. The scholastic “ I distinguish ” has little bearing on the masses. . almost entirely.III] A CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY 121 ironic anti-clericalism the Reformation came after all. which by their very nature can never become fully “ democratized.“440 In the meantime we can observe how the tension between parliamentarians and bureaucrats rises in all those nations where the number of political appointees in the administration . This is especially true in the secretive war and foreign offices. In order to complete our line of argumentation we have to mention the possibility of an “ artistic ” (astheticj way of governing a nation-a pattern not based on pure emotions nor on reason and kno\vleclge.__. and then. reflected in their representatives. _ .. The L :’ total elimination of the parliamentary~machine~~thenbeco&s . since it appeals to the dark borderlines of reason. -. In a democracy you unnot do this. There -you .“43i The dilemma between the demand for intellectual qualifications-labelled as “ undemocratic “438-and the grave crises due to the usual democratic amateurism43g is insoluble..di~~atorye. ” &&& limited and the standards of the civil services are high. .-1 ~nrreaucra~s~nd the pro7.A--.435 In nations with a strong sense for aesthetic values the artistic element in the political leadership is of considerable importance. you can apply the remedy. leads finally to considerable tensions between the parliaments and the administrations..abi~itl-~f. t&?‘dG%i”o~the . .4”4 The probability and possibility of such an art of government is limited. perhaps.. Xeither can countries lacking expanding economies and natural defences afford the costly method of “ trial and error. although not to such an extent as generally surmised. tilzhas been felt and acknowledged._ efficGZv i s5L’pp!-omlsqL \the rebe%n ofthe%$erts against lay coG&ll&kes a particularly t. and destroyed the fabric of the Church in a number of nations.must-begin bythe evil. emotion and Pascal’s misons du mu gue la raison ne connait pas-“ reasons of the hrart which reason does not know.“436 The emotional. egoistic and irrational demands and vagaries of the masses. He said to Ticknor: “ I labour chiefly. ~.- .-i-.~._.. . tom e\il .” This was felt by Metternich as early as the second quarter of the last century.-----’ .






violent form. Entirely insoluble is the problem a democracy faces in a total war-not only during such a war, but even before the first shot is fired ; since democracy is “ rule by the people ” and no entire nation ever wishes a war, a tyrannical government, which can choose the exact moment of attack, has a simply ,Ftremendous advantage.441 7.




Compressing the idea into one syllable, Hamilton at a New York dinner replied to some democratic sentiment by striking his hand sharply on the table and saying : ” Your people, sir-your people is a great beast .” -HENRY ADAMS”*

The antinomy between the bitter reality of “ politics ” and the constitutional tradition are not the only factors in creating a certain cynicism and a general poison&g of the atmosphere in a democracy. Even more dangerous is the enforcement of the “ common framework of reference “-the bloc d’idies incontestables, the “ fund of indisputable ideas ” as Leibholz calls it.443 This particular task of a democratic society is not only not without spiritual perils, but it produces also a uniformity which can have adverse effects on the intellectual scene.444 The result is a lack of “ distance ” between the ‘-r person and society, which in this case is strongly annexationist; a secret police is conspicuously absent, but there are ostracism -+. and boycott, the typical forms of persecution sanctioned by democratic society and directed against the non-conformist. Consider the numerous colloquial (“ slang “) expressions denoting a non-conformist prevalent in democratic civiiizations : “ outsider ” is still literary, but we have also such terms as “ stuck-up,” “ stuffed shirt,” “ highbrow,” “ crack“ high-hat,” and so on---as opposed to “ ordinary, pot,” decent chap,” “ regular fellow,” “ regular guy,” “ square shooter,” “ fellow-like-you-and-me,” etc. The real ruler. becomes “ everybody,” “ they say so,” “John Q. Public,” ,,.- “ Mr. Average Man.“4e5 There is something essentially inhuman and even un\, Christian in the masses and in the “ this-worldly ” aspects of

123 society, which we do not necessarily find in the individual.446 Especially if a society harbours paganizing tendencies and strays collectively from the path of truth and virtue, the vigilance of the person easily becomes paralyzed. Christopher Dawson writes : It is the \.ery function of the Christian to be moving zainst the world, and to be protesting against the majority of voices. And though a doctrine such as this may be perverted into a contempt of authority, a neglect of the Church and an arrogant reliance of self, yet there is a sense in which it is true, as every part of Scripture teaches. “ Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil.” is its uniform inizcuon.44e .J
. _-’






Everywhere we can hear the exclamation: “ There’s nothing wrong about it; everybod? does it! ” And since the omnipotent society rules through the public praise of labels and shibboleths, we see as a result all heresies, mischievous actions, immoral propositions making their conquests under an e1ha.m camouflage, in order not to challenge openly the powerful forces %?he social Behemoth which can be far more potent than the state Leviathan. Thus we see communism in the democratic orbit proclaiming itself, not as messianic atheist proletarianism, but as “ streamlined democracy ” or as ” Twentieth-Century Americanism ” and ’ Huey Long very penetratingly said that when fascism came td the United States it would call itself democracy.448 The lack of frankness and courage,<.a.:+zell as the powerful sway of collective myths, drains the essence from most notions. In the basically non-democratic world with free societies and democratic constitutions, the situation is quite different. There the principles of indirect democracy (equality, election of representatives and majority rule) appear as a mere constitutional frame : any conceivable picture can be fitted into it. Hence the absolute futility of “ enforcing ” democracy. The Con“ frame ” might be imposed, the “ picture ” never. stitutions may be decreed, but societies are entities of natural growth-unless -- --.- -_-- sorne+ail-engineering.” we do Since these societies are divided into deeply antagonistic groups of an ideological pattern, none having sofar an absolute majority, no real picture but at best a mosaic can be offered.






Yet all parties will strive to reach an absolute majority in order to rule without being hampered and handicapped by partners in a coalition. We have likened the parliaments with their elections to race-courses in which finally, after many indecisive rounds, a real winner will appear. But the achievement of a f-- real majority by one single party usually signals the very end process ; in all likelihood a determined k fof the constitutional effort will be made to “ freeze ” this happy situation, and to cancel the struggle for supremacy once and for all by constitutional amendments. Thus J. C. Bluntschli was right in pointing out two dangers of democratic republics: (a) dLragogy and demagogues, by any superior power.44s When the Iiazis and parliamcntar)instability in monarchies. per cent of all seats in the their Kationalist tail won jr.4 Reichstag, the ” democratic process ” of the Weimar State had come to an end,450 and the Fiihrer as incarnation of the masses took over the reins of the Republic. (For a more complete analysis of the German constitutional tragedy, see below, pp. 261-263.) Of course: there are short cuts to modern tyranny by revolutions and pronunciamientos (Russia, Italy). Yet it must be borne in mind that all modern tyrannies were (and are) @;v dictatorships with a parliamentary ” prehistory.” And full party dictatorship is possible only in a republic, or in a monarchy camouflaged as such. A leader (Fiihrer, duce, vozhd’) is not a ruler. He “ marches ahead ” but is, theoretically at least, an “ equal.” As a modernized “ tribune of the people ” he is not only the product of political but also of “ social ” democracy. Thus in Italy the rupture between the dictatorship of the Fascist party and the monarchy had to come sooner or later--when Mussolini established his Reptibblica Sokale Italiana and thus reverted to his earlier republican programme. No wonder that it is the republic which has become synonymous with dictatorship, not the monarchy. Of liberal, democratic republics there are only three surviving : the United States, Switzerland and, perhaps, Finland; to which one might add the Irish experiment. All other republics are either ruled dictatorially or stand on the brink








of civil wars. “ True democracy ” (in the popular sense) is much more at home in the monarchies of north-western Europe and the British Commonwealth. And it is significant that all these nations, whether monarchical or republican, are, with the exception of Belgium, predominantly yrotestant . or _-..-__. _ have a superimposed Protestant culture. Thus the value of the monarchical alloy should not be underestimated. If society has failed to establish a common denominator for all political parties, a mere alloy, as the case of Italy in 1922 has demonstrated, is not sufficient, and a more effective strengthening of the monarchical factor becomes necessary. We have to ask ourselves whether in the most extreme cases, when violent temperament is combined with thorough ideological incompatibility (Spain, Portugal, Greece, South America), government from above on a bureaucratic basis is not the only safeguard against the alternative of anarchy and party dictatorship, which again reminds us of Plato’s warning : ” Trz+n-y,y, then, arises from no other form bt of government than democracy? Among tliese nat& the <6liti&51- ideologies a35 dynamite, a fatally disruptive force; to introduce such a highly explosive clement into the legislative body is sheer folly. It makes sense to let a couple of calm, well bred, gentle Catholic theologians debate the problems of Grace and Free Will. Such an interchange of ideas stands a good chance of being constructive and methodical. Yet a discussion between a member of the Federacih dnarquista Ibe’rica and a Navarrese Carlist on the curriculum of state secondary schools has no theoretical or practical value whatsoever. The final argument in such a discussion can only be civil war and the dialogue of machine guns. The attempt to stage discussions between people of widely divergent views is in itself quite harmless. A free society whose task is not to preserve the premises of a sound parliamentary democracy will always tolerate dissent. The suicide and downfall begins if dissent is made the essence of government. Nobody in his senses would elect a king suffering from schizophrenia to rule a country. As a matter of fact, a hereditary king suffering from schizophrenia, unlike a parliament divided against itself, would be automatically replaced by a regency.

<y-z. j 3
-4 i 2 ‘CJ 1 ,, 4 D ‘;‘ -P d






In contemplating this whole situation we must never forget that by far the greater part of Western civilization is either Catholic or Greek Orthodox. The Protestants on the European Continent form only I 3 per cent. of the population.451 Thus the relativism of the Protestant-Liberal world*52 is only a parochial phenomenon. The non-Protestant world would insist that if A is correct and B differs from A, then B must be wrong. Hence also the conspicuous absence of convinced democrats among Continental European thinkers of the first order. It would be very difficult to name more than a dozen of them-and our efforts to find more than two have failed. We are speaking of &,&rs, not of literati who not only crave a public as chaplains of King Demos, but are also attracted by the “ sentimental ” and “ artistic ” qualities of democracy, which so easily assumes the character of a secularized religion. Yet this relativism, which the clear thinker and logician rejects, plays an enormous role in the political and spiritual realm of democracy. We leave it to the psychologist to of such relativism. But Id etermine the feminine implications I relativism and readiness for compromise go hand in hand,& and an absolute refusal to compromise on fundamentals (a Catholic rather than a Protestant trait) would soon bring democratic machinery to a standstill. The political coalitions of the temporary democracies in the Catholic orbit have contributed more than anything else to the undermining of the moral prestige of politicians; yet the various coalition governments with their combinationi are not the only manifestations of compromise-the voter has, first of all, to make a compromise between his own views and those of the party he supports. The electee will have to compromise in a similar way. In the democracy with several parties the parties will have to compromise among themselves. They collectively will have to compromise with “ reality,” i.e., the “ facts,” This frenzy and also with the oscillations of public opinion. of compromise differs curiously from the noble device: Prius And it is mori quam ,foedari-“ Sooner die than compromise.” the most destructive moral and psychological preparation of the, c It is significant \ masses for facing oppression and enslavement.






that the most heroic resistance against the Nazi invaders came from “ backward ” nations which had a minimum of The resistance of the French, democratic experience. Belgians, Dutch and Danes cannot in the least be compared with that of the Poles, Serbs, Greeks or even the Italians. The heroic struggle of Warsaw is without parallel in the And so is its betrayal. history of the twentieth century. It is not surprising that the “ liberal heresy” is a much better foundation or lubricant for the smooth functioning of a democratic republic than a theology or philosophy insisting e liberal heresy, in turn, u’ on absolutes. In the religious field r Protestantism. Once we ’ harmonizes best with modern, liberal. reject either the existence of absolute truth or its human ,I attainability-and this is the essence, not of liberalism but of r the “ liberal -‘--there can be no virtue attached to a ’ We have only to stubborn defence of convictions of verities. remember the tragedy of the liberal heretic in the person of Pilate. In John 18. 37-38 we read how Our Lord insists in his presence that He is indeed a King who came into this Everyone bon of truth \ world in order to be a witness for t&z. will listen to His voice. And Pilate asks: r; &LV &~I’&z;-i “ What is truth?” He is convinced ___ --_ _._- can-get that he ----_ .~ answer----to this question ; he leaves the Son of Man, walks out tothe howli@g m%bxnd shifts in his predicament from liberal The _.__.e-majority shall doubt to democr_irtic...we-dure. --------.-.I-- -decide. . . . .---+ ---- ----.c 8.

certain historical periods one has to make circle of follies in order to return to reason.



Returning to the basic issue of democracy, we have again to ask ourselves whether indirect democracy is still full injunction can democracy.453 Just as no constitutional prevent a republic from becoming-partly or wholly-a democracy, this process can also happen in reverse. Such a development is, though, less likely, because the wages for the capital sin of disregarding public opinion are removal by the






ballot.454 But even if we take the sanctions of the masses into consideration, the fact remains that actual power, albeit for a limited time, is invested in a few. Viewed from this angle, 1 a republic or a democracy are oligarchical monarchies with a \ i time-limit. / Under these circumstances the differences between oligarchy and democracy (between aristocracy and republic) are gradual rather than fundamental. Direct democracy, as we have seen, is not feasible on any larger scale.455 The practicality of democracy begins only when we inject the “ aristocratic ” (parliamentary) or “ monarchical ” (presidentialj alloy. Yet the alloy is perfectly workable by itselj; as we know by historical The ethical defender of the democratic dogma experience. is thus in the curious position of having to admit either a total independence of reality from philosophy, or to project his calculations and visions into a hypothetical millennium of a super-race.456 Thus we seem to be confrontedlby the question whether government as such is not in its very e.&%?an activity emanating from one or only a few. Whatever the answer, it remains fairly certain that the number of ultimate governors dwindles with the size of the This paradox is no less evident country and its population. in Russia than in China, the Spanish Empire and the United States (whose monarchical organ, the President, enjoys The classic republics of an surprisingly great powers). oligarchic-aristocratic pattern (Venice, Genoa, the Hanseatic cities) never surpassed medium size. The democracies were The enormous expansion of the Roman even smaller.*j7 republic prior to and under Caesar and Augustus hastened its transition from democracy to the dictatorship of the Casarian Today the old evolution from tyranny or principate.45s dictatorship to legitimate monarchy is, for historical reasons, “ turn of the wheel ” (~YWI’XXWOLI.) less likely. Polybius’ is in an impasse. The evolution from democracy to tyranny can hardly be prevented by more and better education, nor can democracy be made workable by the plan of making everybody into a The advocates of this utopian dream comphilosopher-king. pletely overlook oriinal siy, with its effects on the moral tAN.nih &L iqvuwr6McLc-~






and intellectual .qualities of man. As a result we see in all democracies the tendency to increase education qumtitatively rimarilv by an extension of compulsory education), but, in $-der to ‘make it “ available to all,” the standards are constantly reduced. Of course, once the Ph.D. is made compulsory for all young Americans-there is already talk about an obligatory college education-American intellectual life will be annihilated. “ Indoctrinat&n ” (in the narrow, exclusi\re, European sense 6~EE~terrn) on the other hand, trying to establish the common framework of reference directly or indirect]>- and to guard it jealously, will not only fail to establifh a connection between the actual knowledge and that necessary to judge the great political questions-it will also peven? the formation of a necessary sovereignty of mind and the attainment of wider horizons. All it will accomplish is intellectual and spiritual inbreeding, if not total sterility. For these and other reasons a mass democracy is almost inevitable in any larger nation which is pledged to the democratic dogma. Some democratic Catholics took great comfort from the Christmas message of Pope Pius XII in 1943. Yet the Pope, ” democracy “-which in its dealing \cith the shibboleth popular connotation covers such a wide variety of ideals, institutions and political forms-merely outlined the sane and ethical forms of representative government as one example What the Pope had in of manv good forms of government. mind is the parliamentary fxut of a mixed go\.ernment; this is obvious from his reference to the possible monarchical alloy. The Pope did not “ under\\-rite ” democracy as \ve understand the term: he even took pains to point out that his condemnation of totalitarianism does not cover an absolute (The rthical evaluation of an absolute monarchy monarchs. depends ‘in each individual case on how accurately it aims at the common good-which includes respect for the freedom and the natural rights of man.) Still, it is quite amazing to see Mhat has been read into the Pontiff’s text. After making the observation that the irresponsibility of the dictators has evoked a general desire to control governmental action, he immediately launched into a

and a petty bureaucratic mentality. which will follow a zigzag course depending on the outcome of the elections (cf. He insisted that a “ mass democracy ” “ shapeless multitudes. pp. laid great stress on the fact that since the centre of gravity of a democracy normally set up resides in this popular assembly.” i.-Q have again to distinguish between nations with.” we have in the parties mere “ ins ” and “ outs. and nations In the former case without. This situation assumes a different character in ideologicallydivided nations.. deeply convinced of the validity of the Acton formula. if would be catastrophicwe take the anti-personal mass character of our megalopolitan civilization into consideration. of prosperity and decadence. for good or evil. from which political currents radiate into every field of public life. Yet the greatest damage will be done in matters of foreign policy.460 Now if we look at the voters in the democratic polity we S. where we find opposing political philosophies . of soundness or perpetual unrest. the question of the high moral standards. Then he attacked the concept of a mechanical equality. practical ability and intellectual capacip of parliamentary deputies is for every people living under a democratic regime a question of life and death.” to whom the choice of parties is a “ toss-up.LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.” often fosters graft and corruption. will vote on principle against any party which has been in This lack of security of tenure.e.” an extremely pessimistic statement. the “ common denominator. in turn.469 The fulfilment of these precepts seems to us out of the question in our present civilization. irresponsibility. ‘30 distinction between “ the people ” and “ the masses.” Under such circumstances we will find citizens who. power “ too long. Certainly one of the elements which militates against the attainment of this goal is the mechanical egalitarianism so strongly condemned by the Father of Christendom.” and there is no good reason why individuals should not easily shift their The necessary allegiance between the two (or more) groups. 159-160). flux of parliamentary government depends on the “ disloyalty ” of the “ shifters. noting that inequalities ought Finally he not to obviate a spirit of union and brotherhood.


r3* which are fairly often co-extensive with “ racial ” (ethnic) religious, or social groups. A follower of the “ Re-Reformed ” Dutch Church will hardly vote for the Catholic State Party, or a Calvinist Magyar intellectual from the Danubian region In the case c&such a for the Slovak Catholic People’s Party. The shift the accusation of treason would not be unjustified. final logical deduction from the democratic dogma was made by the great Czechoslovak democracy, which exiled the Sudeten Germans en masse-three and a half million, one quarter of the population---for having voted Nazi in 1938, The Austrian political situation, of which we have spoken above, today seems to be as “ frozen ” as it was in rgro : all but two of the federated states and the federal government have a Catholic, conservative control with slight royalist and agrarian implications, while Vienna (a state as well as a city) is administered by a party which holds membership in the Second International and traditionally has a strong antiChristian bias. Whereas the main support of the People’s Party comes from the peasants, the upper middle classes and the clergy, the Social Democrats are primarily represented among the workers and the lower bourgeoisie. Here we cannot expect much flux, and thus the democratic process in Austria lacks not merely the necessary conditions for a “ dialogue,” but also the element of change. Only a mass hysteria can change this situation-the number of real converts being too small to affect the ratio of deputies materially. The dangers besetting democracies and forcing them down the path to tyranny are so numerous that we have to be critical 1, of this form of government, not only on account of its intrinsic ’ It is also weaknesses but also for its evolutionav potentialities. often precisely the claim of the democratic governments that they truly represent the general will which paralyzes the opposition against the ensuing totalitarian development of inclined, the state. Monarchs in the past, when tyranically had to operate under much more difficult circumstances; the constitutional and psychological position of the Christian monarch was always a risky and tenuous one. Democracy, in its mobility and uncertainty, was always an entirely different proposition. Gonzague de Reynold, the brilliant Swiss





132 historian, judgment r penned :









The law of democracy is the law of numbers. But every government regulated by the law of numbers becomes a telluric phenomenon subject to its own fatality. j. This fatality consists in the fact that a moment will arrive in which it breaks loose from human control, from the lessons of experience, from the influence of reason. . . . This is why democracy, a party individualistic from its beginning, arrived at what one calls today the government of the masses. This is why, after having been the regime of the bourgeoisie, it is becoming the rule of the proletariat. This is why, having been the postulate of liberalism, it becomes that of socialism. . . . This is why, having turned into its own opposite, it preserves of its proper self nothing but the name, nothing but the labe1.461 We are fully conscious of the fact that the foregoing chapter so critical of democracy, yet written by a citizen of a European democratic republic, neglects to include a full comparison with other forms of government. The criteria we have examined include such items as reasonableness, morality, ethical pitfalls, human satisfaction, inherent dangers, and evolutionary directions; these should be applied to other simple or composite types of rule, Concerning this fact, we have to say that the present chapter contains only material for such further and necessary analysis.462 In the next chapter we will continue our investigation along these lines, singling out a specific form as a means of comparison. For this purpose we have chosen monarchy, because its historical record is the clearest and longest of all. The fact that no major work has been written about the monarchic idea-either in the U.S.A. or in Europe463-acted on us as an incentive to deal more extensively with this political phenomenon, which has still such a dominating role in recorded history-and such a bad name in our myth-ridden age.4s* And only the future can teach us whether monarchy, to the edification or the detriment of us all, will be able to say to our present-day parliaments and dictators the proud words: Time isyours, but eternity is mine.465






Mir ist das Volk zur Last: Meint es doch diess und das ; Weil es die Fiirsten hasst, Denkt es, es w&ire was. --GoEz-THE~~~ The hatred for the monarchical principle has gone \;iso f ar t h at p eo pl e want to have four-part solos. -S. KIERKECAARD~“’ 1

N the last chapter we tried to make a critical approach to democracy. In the course of that analysis we pointed out These several shortcomings of this form of government. alleged defects are to be found either in the non-fulfilment of specific claims made by the supporters of this political doctrine, or in its intrinsic character. We mentioned, moreover, certain qualities and needs of democratic parliamentary government which severely restrict its application to our civilization; and we have also tried to follow Don Sturzo’s warning not to separate history from philosophy. And, finally, we could not but hint at the various evolutionary processes-some of them due to extraneous forces, others emanating from the very nature of democracywhich tend to transform popular representative governments into the plebiscitarian tyrannies of our days. Our accusations against democracy can be summarized in the following catalogue :


I. Democracy,-with the exception of direct democracy, practical on a minute scale only-is not “ selfgovernment .” 2. It is emotional, at best irrational, and often antirational and anti-intellectual.






3. It is corrupting in most of its implications and thus morally dangerous. 4. It is wasteful from the point of view of the “ human material.” 5. It is historically closely bound up with the liberal heresy (“ sectarian liberalism “), with the despair of the attainability of objective truth, and with the maladies of militarism, ethnic nationalism and racialism. 6. It is, because of its egalitarianism, teleologically incompatible with liberty. , 7. It is the last step in the political evolution towards the modern form of tyranny. 8. It prospers only with the support of strict, semitotalitarian or totalitarian societies exercising control in the form of “ horizontal pressure.” % g. It is collectivistic and anti-personalistic. IO. It failed for these and other reasons in Catholic Europe, and flourished in Protestant countries only. To the full elucidation of the last-mentioned point we are devoting Chapter V of this study. Still, it is certain that our critical remarks on the failings of democracy, in spite of their severity, have a relative value only. We have already (in the preceding chapter) given our reasons why, deviating from St. Thomas, we consider government to be necessitated by fallen human nature;4e8 it is, therefore, questionable to us whether there can be such a thing as an even theoretica& perfect form of government-perfect not in its nature and structure, but in its relation to man. We can imagine a “ perfect crutch ” which can give the very best service to a man deprived of a lower extremity; but even the “ perfect ” crutch, being a crutch, will compress the axillary arteries and deprive the hands of their freedom of action. No crutch fully replaces a limb, and even the “ perfect crutch ” remains, in a sense, a hypothetical notion. (Nevertheless, we do not, for obvious reasons, want to toy with the illogical concept of the “ necessary evil.“) Thus the question is whether one crutch can be better than another one-or, continuing our analogies, whether artificial limbs fulfil the purpose better

‘35 than crutches. We have to ask ourselves whether the shortcomings of democracy are greater or less than those of other forms of government, for example of aristocracy or monarchy. In the preceding part we have dealt with democracy in its classic sense as well as in its modern, popular formulation, which signifies representative mixed government based on majority rule, legal equality and the liberal tradition (the last an extraneous element). We will omit the comparison with the republic controlled by a hereditary aristocracy or a “ closed oligarchy,” although such a form of government is, historically, by no means rare; the British monarchy after 1688, for instance, was in practice nothing but a camouflaged aristocratic republic. The type of monarchy we want to compare with the democratic state is the hereditary monarchy, operating through an officialdom, but possessing local organs of self-government and opinionating bodies with moral weight. Not the feudal, medieval monarchy, but rather the enlightened absolutism of Maria Theresa should serve us as a means of comparison. We do not consider this to be the best type of monarchy (nor the worst), but rather a “ pure ” type which, unlike aulic absolutism has as its officially proclaimed aim the weal of the As Frederick II state, the much-discussed “ common good.” of Prussia observed, “ A prince is the first servant and the first 1 magistrate of the state.“469 It is evident that the common good cannot be summed up It abounds, moreover, with inner in a simple formula. The present, pagan tendency of conflicts and “ choices.” seeing in the cogood the sum total of material advantages for the community, regardless ICI the sacrifice of immaterial of n-values, has to be thoroughly rejected. Even John Stuart Mill, who had opposed an orthodox utilitarianism, had warning words on this subject.470










Monarchy seems to be the most natural sort of government, for whatever nature produces with more than one head is esteemed monstrous. -From the Athenian Mercuric”’

The difficulty we face at this artic pr time and place with %aracter and in the this analysis lies precisely in the u uniformity of the political scene in the United States. Whereas an average Frenchman might easily imagine his country being transformed into an absolutistic monarchy-a plebiscimilitary dictatorship-an anarchictarian monar thy-a syndicalistic federation or a communist tyranny, an American (fortunately, we must say) has not the same doubtful advantage. In comparison with revolutionary and deeply divided Europe, plastered with an endless amount of thin historical layers, the American monolith tends towards conservatism. If, and governmental by some magic, the present constitution institutions were removed, the I 53,000,000 Americans would be faced by an absolute political void.472 Hence, although a constitutional monarchy is only an overnight train trip from New York City, an alien form of government like monarchy, though perhaps intellectually understwdable in its functional mechanism, remains in its very natux&‘,%Zi& .&&p-5$* a unintelligible to the educated person no less than to t e in the street in the United States. The Mstorical notion that republics are more ” progressive ” than the “ backward ” monarchies already creates It is conveniently forgotten that an initial prejudice.473 Europe returned to republicanism (and to democracy) when her culture and civilization were obviously in decline. The imitation of political forms from the city-states of the pre’ Christian era is characteristic of the present dotage of both the Old World and the “ Kew.” American cult& and civilization are, needless to say, as old as their European equivalent. A Californian and a Scottish writer are in time equidistant from Shakespeare. The reality of the Roman-Greek background or the Judeo-Christian inheritance is not stronger in Denmark The very absence of “ young ” historical than in Wisconsin.

‘37 monuments in the United States-medieval monasteries, Renaissance palaces, Baroque cathedrals-emphasizes the senility on the western side of the ocean, while Europe still enjoys the remnants of these youthful forms. Thus American democracy and republicanism are part and parcel of the dotage of our ” White,” one-time Christian civilization. Democratic forms of government in ear& tribal stages are very frequent,474 and therefore the accusation levelled by R. de Scoraille, S.J., against St. Robert Bellarmine’s thesis of the transference of ruling authority through the people is, historically at least, not justified. Yet whatever the reasons, the fact remains that in the United States any attempted explanation of the monarchical order encounters enormous psychological difficulties;475 and Ernst Bruncken was far from wrong when he wrote: Evev teacher of comparative political science will discover what enormous effort it requires to impart a clear notion of European monarchical institutions to even quite mature students. A Napoleonic tyranny, a dictatorshipthis is easily within the realm of their comprehension. But a legitimate monarchy seems to the American a simple absurdity, and he cannot understand how otherwise quite intelligent people can have faith in such a thing.476 This is perhaps surprising when we remember (as Lieber points out”‘:) that the Declaration of Independence in no way attacks the institution of monarchy, but merely disqualifies George III for his high office. But to the teacher of history this attitude is a serious handicap, because the whole growth of our Christian civilization is politically interwoven with the We have thus immediately to ask institution of monarchy. ourselves whether this symbiosis-not always a peaceful and harmonious one, but a symbiosis nevertheless-was purely accidental or had some deeper, inner reason. It is obvious that there is theologically no coactive connection between Christianity (or Catholicism) and-an2 particular form of government. Neither does the popular antithesis of “ government by persons ” and “ government by law ” enter our argument. It must not be forgotten that the Christian










European monarchy was through most of its history of a constitutional pattern, which circumscribed and limited the ruler’s sphere of action by the law of God and the law of the land.*‘* Some of the strength of the monarchical idea in Europe was derived from the circumstance that it stood for an institution which was at the same time social and political, and that it lent itself to M Francis Joseph, once perpetuation. asked in a moment of candour by Theodore Roosevelt what he considered to be the r6Ae of a monarch in the present day and age, replied: “ To, aamy nations from their governments ! ” Yet even greater importance has to be attributed to the fact that it fitted harmoniously into the general cultural picture. To the cultural anthropologist monarchy is a patriarchal institution.47s Its underlying ideology is thus “ familistic.“480 The ideal monarch is a jidzr481-a concept expressed in the The symbolic pictorial representation of kings and emperors. king of the playing-cards, or of the illustrations in children’s stories, is usually a bearded, middle-aged or old man with eyes expressing a mixture of benevolence, jollity and occasional severity. He appears to be neither too young nor too smartHe exudes authority, and he is decidedly not a superman.482 but he nevertheless gives the impression that shrewder subjects could get the better of him. Now, a father in the narrower sense is a creator, a procreator with a subsequent evanescent authority; a father in a wider sense is a man with full responsibility over minors, and a position of respect, seniority and leadership in relation to mature persons. This relation is intimate, emotional and affectionate. There is a mutual interest which is partly perpartly “ generational,” i.e., directed towards the Baruch ruler’s family, and thus transferable to the heir. Spinoza thought that monarchy is a form of government in which subjects are treated like children, whereas tyrants treat monarchy the relationthem like slaves. Yet in a traditional ship between king and subject is that of a middle-aged father and his mature son, not that of a young father and an infant. In a similar way Dante saw (De monarchia, iii, 16) in the Holy



Roman Emperor a “ first-born son of the Pope,” him reverence, but not Ecu@ obedience. 483 The Catholic world, &-patriarchal in nature, had a variety of fathers: not only physical fathers and kings, but also patres (confessors, Beichtzliiter, spiritual fathers) ,484 and-in Rome-a Holy Father. Above them was the Father in Heaven, Creator as well as Regent.4s5 The view has been expressed that the psychological influence of monotheistic Christianity-in its Catholic form-greatly contributed to the strengthening of the monarchical idea in Japan, and helped it to secure its final victory in the nineteenth century over the oligarchic Sh6gunate4s6 Abel Bonnard in Les mode?& wrote quite rightly about the kings: “ The king was the father of his people, only because every father was king in his family.“487 Vladimir So10vyov~ the great prophet and philosopher, rightly saw in the principle of fatherhood the basis of a Catholic order, though in his concept of the paternite’ permanente he fully subordinated the monarch to the Pope, thus pointing to a To St. Robert Bellarmine also “ generational hierarchy.“4ss the inner relationship between fatherhood and the patriarchal principle was clear;48g whence his preference for a pure monarchy over a pure democracy, 490though his real enthusiasm < was for a composite type of government. Now we have to look at political institutions from the point ) Since the patriarchal relationt,L of view of cultural harmony. ship dominates in the the@ogical, eccle@stic and biologicali sphere, it is psychologically not easy to organize politican& We are familiar i along egalitarian and “ numeralistic ” lines. with the traditional division between private, political and ecclesiastical society; but the fact remains that man has a unity without which a well-rounded, balanced certain personality cannot be imagined. Thus the breaking up of #,h, pattern- of. existenc_e in our atomistic age has certainly not . . fostered the development of @re personality.4g1 ’ ks* *+ Yet although the patriarchal ;dea in recent times&ii!-as tie ‘ greatly weakened, the father-son relationship is and remains an ineradicable element in the psychological structure of societies. Freud has tried to explain all relationships within the family by sexual motives, but his pansexualism suffers

‘39 who owes






fi-om basic rational defects repeatedly conf&&r~ca_auses a..& effects, means and-en& these various shortcomings have been &cized ~$rticularly by such psychologists as C. G. Jung, R. Allers, R. Wahle, and S. Behn.492 All this does not obviate the fact that there is in our psyche the active and passive desire After all, the biological sphere of our for “ fatherhood.” existence presents us with an example which has its deeper analogies in theology, society and politics. It is natural to have reverence and affection for one’s father. It is natural to have a desire for being or becoming a father. It is also natural to have a fatherly and benevolent interest in those who are, for some reason or other, our charges. And although we all, more or less, crave recognition, like to be esteemed or listened to, we also have a tendency to follow others whose superior qualities we readily recognize or whom we consider to have been placed by a generally accepted custom in a I position of command and leadership. Our soul is not a windowless monad, but it rejoices in loving command and proud service. (It is only the inferior man who indulges in arrogant supremacy and servile inferiority-the stigma of : false hierarchies.) Neither does man according to his nature hanker after a sterile scepticism ; he has a desire for belief. Man wants to believe not only in truths and deities,493 but also-with reason, measure and clarity-in persons. The family is, in a sense, a its members have to believe in each “ fideistic ” institution; Mater semper certa est-“ one can always speak with other. legal certainty of the mother ” was a principle of Roman law; but the father-son relationship in the biological order rests And a tempered, non-hysterical on ji2ith in a woman’s word. belief is also necessary in state and society. A sneering, contemptuous attitude, pregnant with suspicion and animosities, It is, moreover, evident is neither natural nor constructive. that sound hierarchies (without which Church, state and society are unimaginable) can only be based on affection and reason. Joseph de Maistre was correct when he said that “ no sovereign power is strong enough to govern several millions of men unless it is aided by religion or slavery, or both.“Ce4 We doubt that reason alone would be a sufficient

141 ligament for a hierarchica&&%$ o.ther order; human nature demands the inclusion of &o&mments, and there is no doubt that among these love is the noblest and most construcharmony tive one. There is also an inner (Augustinian) Love, as we have already observed between love and reason. (see above, p. I IS), can make blind, but it can also open eyes. As soon as we leave the safer ground ofpersonal relationships built on reason and affection, and enter the realm of collective emotions (of a “ fraternal ” rather than a patriarchal order) we are already on dangerous ground. Animalism, antirationalism and egoism-properly camouflaged as “ nostrism ” (the ego is always included in the nos) ass--often reign here supreme. It is true that the general or personal enthusiasm for the monarch can, in its extreme, assume idolatrous forms ; on the other hand-which is the collective self-worship, psychological basis of democracy, the real source of nationalism, class pride and racialism-is already dangerous in its initial stages.496 _ LG.& c L-+.-J CL The whole history of the rise of European civilization and culture is written in terms of the familistic affection for rulers, an attachment which has lasted in some countries right into the twentieth century. The Hungarian noblemen who shouted, after Maria Theresa’s passionate plea for help, Moriamur pro rege nostro, Maria i%eresia!--” Let us die for our king, Maria Theresa “- (and meant it) have their successors in the citizens of Brussels who wept openly in the streets in September 1935 at the news that their Queen had died in an accident.* But the good monarchs, it must be admitted, never ” die “; Charlemagne, according to legend, still resides in the Untersberg; Frederick Barbarossa lives on in the Kyffhauser and Arthur in Avalon, and Emperor Joseph II still keeps on
* The present anti-Leopoldism in Belgium-a sentiment of a predominantly non-republican character-has its deeper roots in the King’s remarriage. The rebellion is directed against a “ stepmother ” who. to make matters She worse, is a “ sister “-a commonerand not a ” mother ” in any way. could never replace notre bonne r&e As&d. Actually during the campaign for the plebiscite in 1950 the Socialists let the cat out of the bag by printing a poster with the picture of Queen Astrid in a black frame. NOUS VOTERONS A monarchv involves ah the troubles, problems ‘( NON ” , said the text simply. and joys of family life, on a large and public scale.







supporting the poor. The most miraculous of all is undoubtedly Sebastiao of Portugal, the rei encuberto, who fell in the battle of Alcazarquivir in 1579, but was expected by his people to return on Good Friday in 1808.4~’ These great loyalties, affections and affinities may seem to be naive; but the emotional aura surrounding the dynasty in a monarchical nation is still potentially saturated with Christian valuescertainly more so than the hustle and bustle of a presidential election campaign, or the mass hysteria enveloping a totalitarian “ nostrist ” Leader. The monarchs, it must also be kept in mind, were, just like the dynasties, part of their co&ties---not of their nations. In old plays the king of France is simply “ France ” and the monarch of Spain is “ Spain.” But an Empereur des Fraqais is merely a crowned plebiscitarian dictator. His star, like that of a president, lasts only as long as his luck. The real monarch, on the other hand, belongs to the “ scenery,” just like the mountains, rivers or cathedrals. He cannot logically be a nationalist or a racialist,49s since his ancestors are mainly aliens; his wife, his mother, his in-laws, his grandchildren and grandparents are mostly foreigners.499 He is a ruler and not a leader; a person thoroughly different from the nation, and thus not its “ embodiment ” or personification. Opposed to the monolithic principle of totalitarianism, monarchy stands for differentiation, not “ identity.” Republicanism and democracy owe their rise in Europe to -the fausse ide‘eClaire of “ self-rule,” but it is, nevertheless, highly sigr&&%atalf modern republics-unlike their forerunners in antiquity-have the pseudo-monarchic institution of the presidency, 5oo even though the “ president ” of the Swiss Confederacy is only a chairman. Thus the modern republic is unable to deny its historical monarchic background. Still, the fact remains that it took a long time until the familistic principle found expression in the political sphere. an institution of the highest Monarchy was to Disraeli evolutionary development. He said in his Coning& (Book V, Chapter viii) : “ The tendency of an advanced civilization Monarchy is indeed a government is in truth monarchy. which requires a high degree of civilization. . . . An educated

143 nation recoils from the imperfect vicariate of what is called a representative government.” Donoso Cartes had very similar notions,501 and even Thomas Jefferson must have leaned to the conviction that there is something essentially immature about democracy.s02 And the very strength of the monarchical creed among intellectuals is documented by the fact that twenty-seven out of forty “ immortals ” of the Acadkmie.franfaise belonged as late as 1900 to various royalist groups .503 Although royalism-losing in active historical memory ever since-has also yielded ground among our 1 thinkers, qthis decline has pot favoured i the ‘w&4 ^-6 -.&.a - -. &. * I-.= yyL&~,+/‘&;, democratic ‘dogma. -L , L 3. THE



Je suis nC le vingt-sept septembre mil neuf cent trois, Sans Dieu sans maltre sans roi ET SANS DROITS. -E. L. T. MESENS, Troisikme front (London. 194.4) If we incline to too much democracy, we shall soon shoot into monarchy. --4LEXANDER HAMILTO?~

The transition of democratic republics and parliamentary monarchies into full-fledged tyrannies and dictatorships has a variety of aspects. Some of them are of a moral nature, especially if we take the negative moral qualities of the masses, as others are of a technical or such, into consideration;506 and these we have discussed in constitutional character, Chapter III of our study- (see above, pp. 122-127). De Tocqueville, Plato, D. Cartes, Constant, Burckhardt, De Reynold, Dawson, Riipke, Spengler and others have well of ageing described this process, which is a concomitant democracy and perhaps its “ natural: form of death, To C. L. von Hallerxe f&l “ choice ” -of-a democracy was merely between an ” inner ” and a foreign military conNot only have we, in recent decades, seen queror.joG democracies saved from total annihilation merely by a favourable geographic location (Britain, the United States), but it has also been demonstrated to us that the slowness of democratic constitutional machinery results in grave diplomatic

in disguise or in distortion. .I44 a LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. even among those who have note emancipated themselves from the social father-son relationship. occupation. they are the caricature of traditional monarchy which. But modern dictatorships. . 1’ery revealing in this connection is the lecture delivered in I g I 9 by the Viennese Freudian psychoanalyst Dr. supra-national.e. non-racial and familistic. that the grave setback suffered by the patriarchal principle on account of the political revolutions in I 917 and 19 I 8 was only incompletely repeated in the other spheres of human relations. and with whom they can This is also the enter into a new father-son relationship. the democratic repubhc] is indeed struggling with the greatest psychological handicaps.. as connected with all I have explained before. the paternal friends. (Contrast Hitler’s week-end invasions and crises. in Europe? was always Christian (it is difficult to say whether a pagan monarchy or a pagan democracy would be more oppressive. religion and ideology. de Gasparin607 was more afraid of the latter). sociological and The author admitted religious concepts of Western society.or another-openly. . Paul Federn. The suspicion that “ monarchy ” would return in one way. while democratic in the most d classic sense of the term. A. similar person who corresponds to their father-ideal. intimately personal ties. His paper contains a survey of the relationship between the concept of fatherhood and the various political. He closed his lecture with the following remarks: The. in which he dealt intelligently with the reasons for the undeveloped “ father complex ” in the United States. . are also monarchic from a structural as well as from a psychological point of view. Yet while they are the fulfilment of classic democracy. finally. property and labour. such as our relationships to the mother. the basic attraction to it nevertheless remains so strong that they merely wait for the appearance of a nelv.growth of a new political order [i. as Czarism.) With the disappearance of distances the fatal weaknesses of “ democratic procedure ” will become fully manifest. and political defeats. the relatives. royalist restoration or straight tyranny-occupied not only historians but also psychologists. the wife. The patriarchal tendency is inherited and.

Count Albert Apponyi.IV1 DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY ‘45 reason why after the fall of monarchies republics have yielded with great regularity to the rule of a popular leader. . Jozef Pilsudski. as and in France of yesterday (and in the Iberian peninsulajil tomorrow?). plebiscitarian and totalitarian) version510 The dictators are. which alone gives nation-wide cohesion and historic consciousness. lack of marital ties within the nation. .e. Georges Clemenceau. a post-card painter. Fatherhood is a fact.. though often in a democratized (i. naturally. Vladimir Ma?ek. If the dictatorship is not of a definitely military pattern. training for the profession. religious and social sphere. a K . Such deeply Spain. with the paternal and patriarchal principle still continuing strong in the biological. Father Hlinka. Paul von Hindenburg. the post-monarchial nations. Mussolini \vas merely a successor of Giolitti. rarely dismissed but die in harness. inheritance of office. absence of vested interests in specific classes. brothers Bratianu. and as an inherited sentiment. The personal dictatorship of party leaders \vas a substitute for the royal institution. etc. The “ grand old men ” are. . Stambulov. monarchs minus their essential attributesinterrelationship. and will probably this time too prevent the establishment of a completely “ fatherless ” society. were weak through their lack of homogeneity and the absence of an all-pervading principle. Eleutheros Venizelos. by and large. Professor Iorga. France and Hungary have seen the return of one-man rule. -4ristide Briand. Yet ‘on account of family education.“** And indeed. it cannot be abolished. Depretis and Crispi-a mere party man and not a Casar. To Gqlielmo Ferrero. the dictator is necessarily of ” lowly origin “-an ex-seminarian and son of a cobbler. Nikola Pa%. the father-son motif has suffered a very grave defeat. Russia. it is deeply anchored in the hearts of mankind. Germany: Austria.509 There is in Europe also the institution of the political “ grand old man ” or ” elder statesman ” which plays a much greater role on the Continent (and in Asiaj than in the EnglishOne has only to remember men like the speaking world. monarchical and patriarchal states as Portugal.

be in my place. the guillotines. enforced by terror. as the colour of self-effacement and modesty. Naturam expellas .” (The Marshals. And behind the true-hearted. blonde girls with pigtails .513) Unmarried or keeping their humdrum wives carefully in the background. returns by the back door. lurk the horrors of the concentration camps. who promises to be more democratic. and the ’ ironically benevolent gaze of the duce. The victorious party. the “ Chinese death ” Land the mass graves of nameless victims.5r4 these “ papa-leaders ” have given the impression of being in love solely with their nation or their motherland (rodina). but he also appeals to the father-son motif. endeavours to bring the whole nation under the same ideological denominator. race or ethnic nationaltries ity. and a better-because more efficient-provider than the father-ruler of old. It says: “ I am only your leader. a mechanic. symbolic value. we have seen him harvesting with a broad grin among fascist youngsters. though they make full use of the ineradicable human desire for its realization. camouflaged. bricklayer. while an additional uniformity of class.515 “ permanent paternity ” the dictators are Of solovyov’s mere caricatures. We have seen the papa-leader in a grey military overcoat in the Red Square smiling under his cosy walrus moustache. I am not better than you and you could. dressed in fancy uniforms and plastered with decorations.’ ECh YT to p EQUALk ‘\I ’ a .512 And he not only embodies the masses. The limitations of the Christian law are absent. desperately to establish a general feeling of fraternity based ” is then on identity.furca tamen usque recurret.146 LIBERTY OR’ ‘I pj m q. whose leader he is. The “ nation of (identical) b@ provided with the father-leader. After a democratic interlude the “ monarchy ” returns with a vengeance. assassination or deportation.. Yet it seems that the nations in spite of all want to pay the price for the privilege of having a synthetic father. or exposing a hairy chest in the wintry sun of Sestrieres. we have seen him in an equally grey (feldgrau) uniform patting the cheeks of little. ingenuous eyes of the Fiihrer. quite easily. like Goring and Tito. the warm twinkle of the vozhd’. The greyness. do not fit into this pattern. masked and diabolically perverted-a blood-curdling metamorphosis we know only from nightmares or surrealist . is of deeper.

Still. in the continued existence of legitimate royal and .IV DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY ‘47 films. Anderley (Lord Norton).l@ren. over a longer period of time. Polybius had identical. was interrupted by a foreign invasion. restrictive measures can be relaxed in proportion as his rule gains security and even a semblance of “ legitimacy ” (a purely psychological legitimacy. fortunately or unfortunately. this evolution. of coursereform enacted by compare. Finally. Yet the consummation of this development would be the slow transformation of personal granny into monarchy. we have to “ decayed altars are inhabited by demons. who hoped for an easy shortcut through a temporary “ Cromwellian ” dictatorship. for example. 616 According to Plato. so frequent Without in the remote past. Junger. who started out as plebiscitarian dictators. and Aristotle similar concepts. plebiscitarian Casarism develops into monarchy. we have to seek them in the general weakening of the familistic principle and.jlg The Bonapartes. The reassertion of the natural father-urge does not result in the restitution of the paternal kingdom but in the rise of the Terrifying Father. a_Kronos devouring his o_wj c. which Their experiment failed.518 But. B. had better chances. the transition from democracy to tyranny is a natural and almost unavoidable process. who are paralyzed by his magnetic glare like rabbits facing a boa constrictor. and we have to seek them in the popularity of democratic and pseudo-democratic trappings. a completely clear slate it could hardly be imagined. the constitutional Napoleon III in 1869). Achmed Zogu’s attempt. inner acceptance beckons. last but not least.517 What we then witness. If the regime of the tyrant becomes consolidated. in the words of E. so significant for the totalitarian dictatorships . though a greater optimism was manifested by C. The causes of this modern inability to make a peaceful transformation (Prevost-Paradol even foresaw a period of anarchy before the final establishment of tyrannyjzO) are manifold. Ferrero’s terminology-nothing but qua&legitimacy. achieved-to use G. a general.” remember that the rise of the pitim ve -b=-impo?sible ~without-the mor&decay-of aslavish wary. seems today out of the question. Indeed. is primarily an exchange of e’lites (or dynasties) .

moreover. assassinations. The fraternal and matriarchal elements. theoretically at least. can be argued that republics claiming rule by law instead of rule by men have to derive their inner strength from abstractions But these are always of a feminine expressed in symbols. The notions of \ monarchy in the United States are still largely coloured by / Mark Twain’s A Connecticut Yankee at King drthur’s Court and Soglow’s “ Little King. the Pilgrim Fathers and the Founding Fathers. Yet the perpetuation of personal tyranny in the democratic guise involves sanguinary struggles among eligible successors-purges. the situation is. which acts as a powerful psychological obstacle. In the U. imperial families in exile. a strongly feminine factor. different. and their popularity would have been obliterated immediately. . T\. and the dazzling Madame Columbia. Marianne is. a thin.522 This does not mean that America is insensitive to the The picture of Uncle Sam. early-nineteenth-century New Englander. where the last vestiges of a Public opinion have been eliminated. been ’ thoroughly exploded . by the way. far outweigh the patriarchal In masses there is. a more effective symbol than Britannia (John Bull is her real equivalent).” plus the menacing moustache of the Kaiser-the legend of whose war guilt has. needless to say. The father-son motif in European politics is still little understood in the U. A coronation of either Hitler or Mussolini would have covered these dictators with ridicule. symbol of paternity. from a demorepublican point of view. trials. it republican symbol-Helvetia-is feminine. conspiracies. nature.. Looking to other democracies. is possibly motivated by the father-image . paternal in nature also are the other two guiding groups.S.ot so long ago a Catholic weekly a letter from a reader in Texas who openly publishedjzl declared his preference for dictatorial leaders (like Hitler and Stalin) over monarchs-an attitude which.S. Yet in addition to these we find the feminine symbol of Liberty with the raised torch. and not only the French but also the Swiss Of course. so strong in all democratic civilizations.148 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. The “ royalization ” of the Leaders certainly lacks today its psychological props. is entirely logical.S.R.

Though we have seen self-styled “ personalists ” acclaiming democracy enthusiastically. It seems that kings. about “ that reverence which Europeans. dictators and “ strong men ” are going to rule the Continental scene forever. Britain also must understand this hard fact. Is a vertical pressure worse than a horizontal one-a governmental persecution. 52* p hilosophers have displayed considerable reluctance to face this important issue of our collectivistic age. We have only to ask a prospective inmate of a jail whether he would prefer a prison with hostile warders to one with hostile fellow prisoners. its necessary social controls and pressures. All these problems are. queens (as depositaries of male linesj. are likely to direct toward dictators or mere politicians. We think that he would. can lead us to a rebirth of personal values. of greater importance for the Continent than for America. at the present moment. in an article about Queen Wilhelmina published by Life. masses and parties. a lesser evil than social wrath ? The simplest answer to this problem would be an empirical one.523 Although psychologists have shown great interest in the curious behaviour and mentality of crowds. which so frequently seem bereft of th&%%human qualities. IV1 DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY . when deprived of royalties.” The attitude of the grocer in Little Lord Fauntleroy towards royalty is therefore not necessarily conducive to liberty in the Old World.‘49 essence. and not shirk this issue in spite of its psychological remoteness and strangeness. The question which truly liberal nations have to ask themselves is simply this: “ In any given country. other things being equal. manifesting itself in irrationality and the supremacy of emotions over reason. we doubt whether democracy with its horizontalism (and anti-verticalism). its operation with crowds. what form of government offers the relatively best guarantee for the preservation of a reasonable maximum of individual freedom? ” Noel Busch wrote quite aptly.

in the historicopolitical perspective.e. The President (or Prime Minister) is a “ party man. one vote. only serves to demonstrate the pitiful helpv\\lessness of the inarticulate individual. and the opposition is thus “ His Maje$y’s Most Loyal Opposition. Stahl or Wagner on monarchs was at least as great as the persuasive influence of other thinkers or writers on the political masses.‘50 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY WITH DEMOCRACY he is // / [Chap. not as person) is. Amiel or Vinet than was French eighteenth-century aristocracy by the philosophes?525 And now to the points of comparison. Yet since the educational standards of monarchic rulers are usually above average. parliampntaryparchy are in the “ constitutional royalist parties imaginable . The effective influence of such men as Leibniz and Voltaire. 2. on the other hand. The monarch is the political and social head of the nation. One would therefore expect in a democratic society to see the thinker depreciated on account of his ineffectuality.. Monarchy is by its nature dissociated from party rule. Only ” (i. De Reynold. MONARCHY COMPARED The absolute ruler may sometimes Titus or Marcus be a Nero. practically powerless.” He lacks originally-and often permanently-genera1 backing.” Democracy is by nature\pz$~ rule. has as great or small a chance to exercise his political influence under either form of government. We have said before that the democratic principle of “ one man. . I. Hobbes. thm -RIVAROL We have to preface this section with the observation that the individual (as individual. Who can doubt that the Swiss nation is far less affected by the writings of Burckhardt. for better or worse. q+me qonarchy all parties accept the common monarchic denominator. The articulate (and “ original “) person. have greater chances in a royal framework. He acts in total anonymity. secrecy and legal irresponsibility. 4. the persuasive efforts of intellectuals. but Aurelius.” viewed against a background of voting masses numbering several millions. yet in a soun p . who functions at the polls as the smallest indivisible arithmetical (and not always algebraic) unit.

The democratic leader coming into power is always “ unprepared. but @ition pure and simple. in order to arrive at %r intellectual justification of their theory.. Als wann ein Baur zum Herren wird. but also moral and spiritual. rule not only through the mechanism of the laws but also though his prestige-an “ endogene ” force. What they do not take into considerationof original s@.of having received. they steer their course towards the noble goal of education and “ brains ” for all. the advantage.. 4.” The monarch can. is decidedly not a “ social ” leader.” and in mo_st cas-es he is nothing but a dilettante (see below.“26 tech&al training of those with a “ late vocation. The education which the ideal monarch can enjoy is not only intellectual. point 25). unlike a republican leader. das scharffer schiert. where popularity combined with autocracy and lac-k of religious humiljty show the most de\. Yet the goals they set can only be reached by small fractions of highly gifted individuals.“ There is no sword which cuts sharper than when a peasant* On the other hand. Caught between the Charybdis of intellectual qualifications for the franchise (which are plainly incompatible with very elementary democratic principles) and the Scylla of an orgy of emotional irrationalism. even though his wife figures -unofficially-as the “ first lady. whose raison d’&e is not truth. Even a monarch of mediocre talents and natural gifts h&s. the continuous becomes a master.” It is the sudden or quick rise (especially if it is from obscurity) to fame and authority which turns the mind and upsets the balance of the careerist in a democracy. .s2* efficacy. an education for-h& A democratic leader can only have the hasty pfession_. propose an enormous increase in general education which will enable all citizens to judge the important issues of the da).“530 .IV1 DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY ‘5’ r(i The President of the United States. on the other hand. Some apologists of democracy. -.&s’ Yet this harmonizes well wi$ the general tenor of democracy. and 1 reflection. study.astating -r&ul?s~ 6immelshausen wrote : Es ist kein Schwerdt. 3.. This corruption through I power: naturally. reason.jz9 is the hard fact of-human imperfection. is worse in a plebiscitarian dictatorship.

during the height of the papacy’s political prestige. begins practically at the cradle. )/. The ruling families-all intermarried and forming a single breed-had biologically a better qualification for their profession than the average man. cf If we interpret Acton’s thesis as relating to the Vatican’s secular power it is equally erroneous. with a king. not be subjected to such a degrading ceremony.emocracy. Fenelon. b” LIBERTY OR EQUALlTY [Chap.535 There can be no doubt that the intermarriage of those endowed with a superior talent for sfecifir tasks results in a breed with an aptitude above normal.53” 6. After the Reformation the King of England could. and heredity rather than environment --‘-. corruption there had not been prevalent or conspicuous. etc. and distributed silver pennies instead. 5. in&ted that true royalists lezn The respect for the human person to&rd’ ~Catholici~rn. but merely a hereditary tendency strengthened through centuries of breeding and inbreeding. the biological theory that acquired characteristics cannot be inherited is today strongly under fire. absolute / Pp */ His ‘.thk rights of the subjects were strongly emphasized in the education of a ruler. Kingship was not only an office with religious implications (the coronation of a Catholic ruler is a sacramental) .536 This implies no intrinsic racial superiority. (It should b e noted that inbreeding is not in .here plays the determining r61e.I rdc ra theory smacks of environmental determinism.~~~ aiid .P ower corrupts absolutely “) with many resen. This is why we have to accept the famous dictum of Lord Acton (“ Power corrupts. It seems to be a proven fact that there is a noticeable difference in the I. 533 The foot-washing ceremony to which Catholic rulers were obliged on Maundy Thursday could not fail to leave a deep impression in the minds of princes and rulers alike. usually prevents this loss of 5’ y& all sense of proportion. Bolingbroke.ations.152 .‘s of different social classes. Protestantism and-hated d. preparation for the exercise of power which. naturally. I+rkegaard. \vho{>isliked. and would make the papacy permanently the most corrupt power in the world.631 but the whole traditional Christian monarchy was deeply imbued with a religious spirit. this has been stressed by every author writing tracts for the education of princes--Bossuet.Q. . .

7. Alexander II of Russia. first-rate civil servants like Queen Victoria. and the &eczpospolita Polska. and so were wars on a nation-wide basis with great collective passions. and Dom Pedro II of Brazil. who as Austrian ambassador \vas forced to have Paris at the outbreak of the IV1 DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY * . it merely accentuates the qualities inherent in common ancestors. still coloured the Napoleonic Wars-can clearly be seen in the description of Wintzingerodc’s capture. a county.” not progressive enough to belie\. a scene brilliantly depicted by Caulaincourt in his memoirs. Considering only those who lived since 1840 we could mention Archduke John of Austria. King Albert of the Belgians and so on. After the battle of Solferino the Emperor Francis Joseph said simply: He was “ I have lost a battle and I pav with a province.e’in ” unconditional surrender ” and in the guerre aux allures de’chainkes-nor did Napoleon 111.) was thoroughly dispossessed.j3’ political units were of a relative and restricted natureh”abinettskriege. Archduke Francis Ferdinand. is the scene of the departure of’ Count Hiibner. 539 The true nature of‘ these ” cabinet wars “-which. Francis Joseph.4lbcrt. from our modern point of view. as the Germans say.‘53 itself evil. Prince Consort . no Christian kingdom was eliminated from the map.) Monarchs and royal princes of extraordinary intelligence or genius abound in history. and the casualties among the Italian republics.540 Hardly credible also. Monarchy in the Christian world is an international As long as it was a living force the wars between institution. Another list might be made of men and women who were no more-but no less-than hard-working. King Gustav \*.63” Conscription was an invention of the French Revolution. Queen Wilhelmina. the “ Polish Commonwealth ” under an elected King who was-to the greatest misNo monarch fortune of the country-“ nobody’s ” relatix-e. Between I IOO and 1866 permanently A. King Edward VII.D. King Leopold I (and II) of the Belgians. to a limited extent. and the price to he paid for military defeat was merely a city. Carol I. (Naturally we exclude from consideration the Napoleonic period. King Ferdinand of Bulgaria. a pro\-incr. Queen Maria Christina of Spain.

and immediately told the Lord Mayor of Berlin: “ The reception festivities are exquisitely arranged. indeed. Their relatives are foreigners. on an even lower level than Napoleon. : One does not have to due. : don’t let us continue. . are ethnically “ mixed. . It is He who has i done great things for Prussia . the showy trophies in the windows of the arsenal must be 1 removed. returning from the Napoleonic Wars. cannons and banners in front of the armoury and directly opposite my lodgings. who himself once distinctly let the cat out of the bag when he said: “ I am a child of the Revolution. an offspring of the people. Tomorrow’s celebrations should be a feast of \ pious gratitude and humility before God. the old arrogance [ which brought us nothing but misery. in our good luck. The magnificent victory columns. but they are much too pompous. Hiibner himself tells us how the Marquis de Pimodan. a former colonel in the Austrian army. from the point of view of a long-suffering humanity. to Him alone all honour \*. unlike democratic leaders. I am displeased by the accumulation of trophies.“j41 A French citizen in a German uniform at the Gare de 1’Est in Paris in the early days of August.” They are usually of foreign origin. “ He wore the white Austrian uniform. It is opposed to : good manners to hurt the feelings of peoples with whom one 1 has just concluded peace by frivolously exhibiting cannons / and banners. one must never jeer This is despicable boasting.and peace-criminals of all camps in the last forty years. Narrow limits are set to their (ethnic) 154 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY . . came to the station to say good-bye to the members of the departing embassy. This nefarious and arrogant mob was.[Chap* hostilities in 1859.” writes Hiibner. The spirit of non-progressive. I shall not tolerate being insulted like a king! “543 8. and ! at the vanquished enemv. I 914. unenlightened but forgiving reaction was even stronger at the beginning of the last century. when Frederick William III? King of Prussia. was accorded a much too triumphal reception. and I honour them as expressions of our loyalty. “ and nobody objected. Monarchs. would certainly have been mobbed.“S4S This attitude compares very favourably with the mentality of the various war.

Monarchy is also interracial. Thomas characterized I= I& L% zp’mine >rincij&n. as democracy is by necessity. and William II counted Genghiz ( i. . from which ‘ all paternity in heaven and earth receives its between the king name ‘-Eph. narod). Ferrer0 uses this is ” legitimate.. bblk. (See Notes 498 and on the other hand. monarchy fits organically into the ecclesiastic and familistic pattern of a Christian society.” to P.-..“4i 12. 3. Monarchy more than any other form of government i.” 155 it.IV1 DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY nationalism-if they ever develop 499._. a government which qualifies as ” organic a solemn -1 manifestation of .““46 I o. as Werner Sombart points 1?gilance and suspicion towards the out. I I. Frederick II (the “ Great “j was overwhelmingly of French “ blood.-Yet the bourgeois.I di. The monarchic principle-is thus. closely related and interdependent.-Every election. (C om p are the teaching of Pope Leo XIII: “ Likewise the powers of fathers of families preserves expressly a certain image and form of the authority which is in God. Sorokin’s termiterm. melther is a sound monarchy oligarchical. Twentieth-century racialism desires “ nobility for the majority. brother of the Counter-Pope Anaclet II. n-ot a dividing p. and aristocracy by nature.. as -St. Elizabeth-who belong to the Christian European orbit-but also Semites like Mohammeds4j or the Jew Pierleone.” Not only have the European monarchs common ancestors like Charlemagne and St. 15.on the nther hand.qion.“s50 magistrate are thus the true “ republican virtues. Racialism is possible only with the emphasis on the +’ people ” (race.“) 548 The relationship as “ the father of the fatherland “jqs and the people is one of mutual love.” 13. are . a uniting. The “ mother-line ” of Maria Theresa goes back to Polovtsian chieftains. Tartar) Khan among his ancestors.. Due to its inherent patriarchalism.-~ -*__r..&ple . and ” ideational ” according The “ organic ” character was well nology (see Note +pj. described by the lines of Kipling: ” Ancient rights unnoticed As the breath we dravv.) Democracy and nationalism.e.j44 g.” in the sense in which G. is not “ erotic.

and in the hour of death.‘&’cannot constantly refer to mandates received from the people. and demand constant examination of conscience. given an impressive example of manliness and religious devotion. one should mention Frederick William III. affection and religion. not been unfavourable to their moral and spiritual development. Since monarchy is “ rule from above ” and thus does not have to exercise a horizontal pressure. cap. it is by its nature more liberal than democracy. Nevertheless. King Christian X of Denmark. The responsible monarch (like the responsible Christian statesman) has far more often to face decisions encompassing the most cruel alternatives than the man in the street. Charles I of Austria.Queen Astrid of the Belgians. years who have. and Queen Maria Christina of Spain. 15. 14. King Albert of the Belgians. At the same time the very issues in their complexity are seductively ambiguous. for several reasons. it will more easily assume an “ organic ” status than any other governmental variety. xxii) to carry their sceptre like a cross Among the rulers in the last hundred and fifty is not small. Among their female counterparts one should mention Queen Louise of Prussia. Just because monarchy stresses the element of continuity. Robert Bellarmine (De gjkio principis.551 The calendar of saints shows that royalty has contributed more than any other lay estate to the ranks of those who have been accorded the honour of the altars-though it must be admitted that many of them were canonized before this procedure was made so rigorously severe. earlier or later in life. The bourgeois avoidance of good and evil is nevertheless almost impossible. The choice is only too frequently between Machiavellian diabolism or utter renunciation.555 . Even a Louis XIV would probably have been slain twenty-four hours after proclaiming prohibition. their radius of action is psychologically more limited than that of democratic leaders.156 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. The position of monarchs has. the number of monarchs who have taken the advice of St.’ ‘\: promulgated as a matter of routine by modern parliaments. Alexander 15j2 and Nicholas II of Russia. and George III might have been quartered by the staunchest Tories had he dared to impose laws which are . Louis SVI553 and King George I of Greece.554 Just because monarchs .

curiously enough. left few lasting values.” bribery or theft. I 23-125). the financial scandals of the French Third Republic bequeathed no Versailles and no Louvre to the nation. Since. the societal enforcement of the “ common framework of reference ” in the ideological sphere is not necessary. little doubt that the professors (and the students) of the University of Vienna enjoyed greater liberties under Francis Joseph than. whereas the picture galleries left by the imperial dynasty of Russia were greatly valued by the Soviets. 17. however.557 It can be argued that the monarchs who squandered money most lavishly still spent it almost exclusively among their own subjects. the controlling forces of society can be relaxed. Freedom of opinion and self-expression thus becomes more likely656 and. it is incompatible with liberty. Neither is there any need for flattering large parts of the population. under the Hanoverians. The security and perpetuity of tenure enjoyed by monarchs makes them less exposed to “ graft. their colleagues do at present in the average American university or college.i IV1 DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY I57 16. if granted. There is. Hence Proudhon’s remark : ” Money. and became largely responsible for the amassing of great art treasures and architectural monuments which were either made accessible to the public or were shared with the citizenry. Flatt&nie is the basic technique . always money? that is the nerve of i democracy. and when the Germans destroyed Peterhof and Oranienbaum there was. xg. with a plutocratic and oligarchic character. -4 monarchy.“560 The transition from the truly royal Stuart monarchy in England to the camouflaged republic. a violent outcry in the Soviet press. The corruption of democratic republics.55g The rule of money has always been more pronounced in democratic or oligarchic republics. Proudhon said rightly : “ Democracy is more espensive than monarchy-. is the very keynote of Hilaire Belloc’s interpretation of modern English history. pp.“jj” 18. for instance. it will not be as destructive as in a purely parliamentary state (see above. under ordinary circumstances. Bismarck’s persecution of the Socialists was the main point of disagreement between himself and William II. let us say. is not plutocratic. in a monarchy.

secretly voting masses on a purely numerical basis. powerless and l%-r uential unm minorities-just because he is “ everybody’s monarch. (Take.” of not getting re-elected (and of being impeached in only the grossest cases of corruption). This collective judgment of moral acts is one of the . The monarch. as well as plebiscitarian tyrannies. on the other hand. 2 I. The fact that a monarch is responsible “ to God alone. 20.js2 subject to the sanction emphasis on “ responsible government. who in times of stress blissfully disregard constitutional injunctions. we have always seen tiny. the masses can. the case of the N&i in the United States during World War II. but while God cannot be fooled. at least. The protective role of kingship is clearly seen in the oath of the Holy Roman Emperor. rejecting the Thus we get today the immoral electors for their “ mandates. It is even impossible to trace the empowering individual. The monarch is a responsible person.158 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. is potentially the rotector of minorities-especially the small. While it is perhaps true that “ one cannot fool all the people all the time.) A monarch can.” idea of making whole nations responsible for the deeds and misdeeds of their rulers..great maladies of the democratic a. for especially the centuries. and thus we get what French authors call the “ cult of irresponsibility. In spite of the republican-democratic history of religions.” The all resp y.jsl In democratic republics. be reminded of his coronation oath. . can e%i$y-game electees. on the other hand.” rather than to an assembly or a popular majority. and art of governing political parties. unpopular minorities being sacrificed to the whim of the majorities. the demo-republican government nevertheless derives its authority from anonymous. The constant counting and (comparing of numbers characterizes all egalitarian-parliamentary regimes.” it seems that one can fool millions for History abounds in such examples. regardless of whether these had majority support or not. \ . but the citizenry stands under no special obligation or pressuresa\-e from their weak and vacillating consciences. is rather shocking to an agnostic mind .” The very concept of a “ minority ” is nonmonarchial and democratic.

The Swedish dynastic law permits marriage with non-royaltv-provided the partner is a foreigner. a dynasty can plan policies on a grand scale-for the remote as well as for the immediate future. we have to take the subtly monarchical undercurrents in a republic into consideration. can be claimed by every subject. Ferdinand of Austria. and Senator Taft probably owes at least some of his political influence to his Presidential father. The monarch will be restrained in his actions by the thought of the integrity of his patrimony. the aristocracy. the . On the other hand. even more so. In the United States we have seen two Adamses. Thus at least a relationship between the ruling dynasty and any existing class within the country is being avoided. On the Continent rigid marriage laws prevent any intermarriage between royalty and all classes. 23. Nevertheless. the latent patriarchalism of the masses supports this tendency. because the changes in political directions are fewer. Democratic the “ great gamblers ” legitimate leadership knows of no such selfish scruples.IV1 DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY 159 22. two Harrisons and two Roosevelts as Presidents-and a third Roosevelt now beginning a political career. The wife of the Archduke (a Countess Chotek) belonged to the aristocracy of Bohemia. which he intends to Rarely were leave unimpaired to his son or any other heir. including. but the alliance of the dynasty with (I) a specific class from (2) a specific region was considered to be incompatible with the principle of monarchic impartiality and “ neutrality. heir to Francis Joseph. by voting members of the same family into power.563 but he is also classless. Again and again we see politicians who aspire toward a repetition of their careers by a son or a near relative. The monarch is not only a public property which.” Royalty is thus practically forced to marry outside of the country-the alternative being wedlock with a distant relative of the same family. were deprived of their right of succession to the crown-their mother would never have been accorded the title of an empress. A monarch and.564 There can be relatively more mutual confidence in a monarchical world. monarchs. in a sense. The children of Archduke Francis naturally. 24.

“j’j5 25. more disproporty of democracy for the former. the skills_which -becomes more and.and excitement-seeking mob must be kept down by the power of a prudent upper class. In most cases we can judge the value of a regime in historical perspective only-yet we must not forget that the judgment of history and the judgment of historians is not the . The relationship between actual knowledge and the facts which ought tobe kno~. 2. Thomas had no doubts about the role of knowledge and wisdom in the human order (see Summa. The judgment of nations is not the judgment of history. whereas bad monarchs hold their office for life. I.” have aggravated a situation which places purely parliamentary regimes in a dangerous situation. and the increase of the latter. Bykhardt wrote:.“567 The phrase so often repeated in democratic nations insisting that “ bad presidents ” would incur the wrath of the voters. Historical evolution.j66 St. conditioned by “ progress. elected by emotional masses. stands no critical investigation. demanding special skills and knowledges. and insisted that “ an enjoyment. we must bear in mind. resulted in a general resentment against “ perfidious Albion. national election.” -26. Even Freud had no trust in the masses. is not “ sensible. ad 2). a. The rank amateur. q. all certainty IS at an end. than a shifting democratic officialdom. frequent cabinet changes in Britain during the eighteenth century. “ Since politics . We are here faced by the “ illogical ” phenomenon of a constantly rising democratic voluntarism and amateurism in an increasingly complicated world. The advantages of “ voting out ” or “ voting in ” heads of government are of a highly problematic nature. especially if they are confronted by quickly moving totalitarian dictatorships aided by a Machiavellian adroitness.” Today all of Europe nervously watches every American ‘\. is less and less capable of facing the monumental issues of our day.160 LIBERTY OR EQUALlTY [Chap. Monarchy coupled with a “ bureaucracy ” is intrinsically better adapted to the complex modern age.n~-_ncluding. each coupled with a subsequent change in policy. has Y been based on people s inner fermentations. 92.

The “ turnover ” is greater in a democracy. 27. well-known fact. or through . but the moral level of these products of civil strife cannot measure up to the better proteges of the monarchic system. for instance. Bohemia-Moravia. It can be stated without danger of refutation that the parliaments of the Western world have not yielded since 1890 a single truly outstanding. 29. Germany. even more heavily loaded against an elected than against an inherited government. Through the agency of the internationally organized ideological parties. not liter&) of this w-orld have only in the most exceptional cases favoured the democratic system. not been generally a favourable factor in government. Thus great statesmanship is either vested in monarchs. A Richelieu or a Mazarin was superior to a Marat or a Robespierre-a Bismarck to a Hitler-a Cavour to a Mussolini-a Pobyedonostsev to a Stalin-a PaSiC to a Tito. but rapid change has. 56g Pascal knew that very we11. Monarchy is a safeguard against foreign intervention in the internal affairs of the country.“‘l Austria. have suffered further declines in financial ethics. constructive statesman-not even a genuinely successful Machiavellian. \*ugoslavia and Bulgaria. their appointees. The outstanding thinkers (we mean thinkers. so far. The historical record on this matter is not open to doubt. probably.IV DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY 161 same thing either. the dice are. it is at least equal in the case of a monarchy and that of a democratic republic . members of aristocratic oligarchies or in the products of re\-olutions-but almost never in purely parliamentary figures.570 The greater susceptibility of democracies to corruption is an equally Hungary. Nor can it be argued that nations really As to the element of chance. 28. that much is true. after 1945.56” Only chaos and revolution have given the same chance to outstanding men as monarchy. were all far more corrupt after rgrg than under imperial aegis. Even the seemingly irrational aspects of monarchy-as. Italy. Even parliamentary monarchy showed a “ diminished return ” of political geniuses. The rise of great statesmen has been fostered more by monarchic than by democratic government. know their political appointees. the inheritance laws-have upon closer analysis a rational core.

573 Mussolini then established the “ Italian Social Republic. His country is a Grossinsel. a Caesarian monarchy.” Where neither imply “ backwardness. the Crown and the Party continued in a very uneasy partnership--the Crown actually remaining in a position of inferiority. republican in character. All other totalitarian states were. a&o&in& cotntries. a Big Island protected by two Oceans.&qg. one Sea and the Arctic-not counting Canada or But any Roman standing on the Palatine Hill and Mexico. a kingdom. - E_eBr=. forms of government such as monarchy or republic would nor “ modernity. a barbarian kingdom. To him.&.. the inner antithesis between a plebiscitarian party-dictatorship and a monarchy must be mentioned.+t fore: n‘ ..j’* Yet the discredited monarchy was defeated at the polls by a combination of Fascist. a republic.y$iy whew bx-+v__es+. but not least._%.e opportunity is offered . thus confirming Mussolini’s step and creating a situation which will make the rise of another dictator much easier than in 1922. a hierocracy. parlia. -_etlu+. Only the enormous weakening of the Party in the “ Fascist War ” gave the Crown the belated courage and opportunity to strike against its hostile bedfellow.” .572 30.states to interv~ne_efficjentJy in the tier A-e --. or to an Athenian. a -1qu. erno_craQc+nation. The average American’s difficulty to take monarchy seriously stems mostly from historic and geographic factors. then of an aristocratic republic.. through all the period from 1922 until x94-3. 162 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. Last. Catherine II of Russia was f&ioti&hen the Poles c&&$l over to the hereditq monarchy in 17g2.~sggxyoup. a kingdom and again of a republic. . Socialist and Communist votes. then of a democratic and finally of a plutocratic republic followed by a military dictatorship.: a au-s of a. Only in the Italian monarchy have we seen the rise of a dictatorship on a party basis-a phenomenon due entirely to the weakness of the “ quasi-legitimate ” (in Ferrero’s terminology) status of the Italian kingship. and probably always will be.-mi.. overlooking the Eternal City would see that this city has once been part of a monarchy.” thus returning to the original republican programme of the Fascist party. Still.

character. whether his country would soon be a monarchy he would have sounded a most hilarious protest.” he might have retorted. . Of course we have also an Imperator. We also call him princeps. Only\ now it was evident to all and sundry that the Republic had) gone the way of all flesh. an anti-Christian. a democratic republic which I murdered Socrates and forced Aristotle into exile. Wasn’t it the glory of Rome to have dispensed with such an Asiatic form of government ? Ten years later Caesar loomed large on the Roman scene. . quite rightly. Yet if we had asked a Roman in the year 70 B.” Yet in 284 Diocletian became Roman Emperor. demanded Pros@nesis (prostra-i tion) and had himself adorned with a golden crown. but that means ‘ general ’ and a general is not a monarch. “ Well. The comedy had come to an end< Diocletian abolished the Senate.D.‘63 there is a king today in Athens there has been a democratic republic 2. these are just linguistics. but that means ‘ first man ’ and nothing else. Pronouncing Imperator like Emperor and Princeps in the way of Prince-well. To these considerations the historical observation must be added that the rise of our Christian civilization took place under the aegis of monarchy which. Christianity declined or suffered minor persecutions. la possibilite’ du bien-the least evil [and] the possibility of good. “ The IV DEMOCRACY AND MONARCHY . The idea that we ever could become a monarchy is today as preposterous as 350 years ago.C.000 (or 20. has been characterized as embodying ” le moindre mal. he would have been unable to see the irony in our account.57j Under the emphatically parliamentary monarchies and the democratic republics.” The anti-monarchic currents in the last hundred and sixty years had a more or less anti-Catholic if not. And had we had the chance to repeat this conversation with a descendant of the same Roman in the year 280 A.300 years ago .000?) years. as in many cases. aren’t we still a republic. These facts are not quite obvious to Americans and they have difficulties in visualizing anything but an American I Republic for the next 10. “ We have a Senate. He was not another Vespasian who insisted on having it written on Capitol Hill that he had received his power from the people.

illiberal. was even encyclopedic skeleton.” says Monsignor Ronald “ has had much to suffer from the democracies. das ist sehr schrk. it is obvious that a writer trying to analyze a political or social phenomenon critically and methodically will be motivated by a more or less coherent philosophy. Neither is it sheer coincidence that in the latest war the Church has received abuse from all sides. in particular. In the totalitarian. it is only fair to relieve the reader from the onerous task of guessing at or reconstructing the content of his philosophy. We are convinced that there is a psychological bridge between these facts.164 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY Catholic Church. They cannot be merely accidental. The Summa. and this approach so strongly dominates the present-day philosophical scene of Catholic Britain and the United States. to a certain degree. abrr dns Leben ist nicht so ! ’ -HUSTER GLTHRIE.678 As we have already remarked. S. logically consistent and. Thomas is to be found in his effort to provide Catholic theology with a wonderful.J. in particular.“576 Knox. written as a textbook-the most impressive and exhaustive . plebiscitarian republics. in a sense. the fratricidal strife between the three heirs of the French Revolution: democratic nationalism. Since the point of view of the author deviates from the ICTeo-Thomist one. these systematic molestations changed into sanguinary persecutions and efforts for a final extermination. national socialism and socialist internationalism-all of them claiming to be the sole and only embodiment of true democracy. j7’ SUPPLEMENTARY KEO-THOMISM AND THE PROBLEM NOTE OF AUTHORITY I We remember here the reaction of a German professor toward the magnificent structure of Thomism : ‘ Ja. We believe that the true significance of the work of St. and has suffered most grievously and unjustly in a struggle which was.

is a rootless psychology. The great Aquinate has striven primarily to elucidate objective reality. as to the subsidiary question : (6 How is man ? “579 We will readily confess that the philosophical and theological achievement of the Church. a vague sentimentalism. But those toying with phenomenological approaches or with existential philosophy. whether St. either. Thomas as an enormous cupboard with thousands of little drawers filled with replies-an inflexible theological and philosophical “ Information. in spite of his prodigious capacity for work. it is true. Even those who treat the work of St. far outshines the more meagre results of psychological investigation.” face considerable risks. warm flesh on it with suspicion and dismay. and a reversal of the relationship is the very stigma of neoWe prefer an ingenuous philosophy or theology paganism. but they will never lose themselves completely. or absolute nihilism. Nevertheless we often wonder. there is nothing surprising in it. to the diabolic monstrosity of an “ expert ” psychology withou n immutable values. rightly so--that St. This fact has been overlooked by some of our Neo-Thomists. who are deeply in love with this skeleton and view all efforts to put living. perhaps.) The osteophilia of many of our Neo-Thomists. might prevent them from reaching the summits from which the final glories of knowledge and wisdom can be seen. by the way. resting on the two powerful pillars of reason and revelation. The alternative. especially if they I disjense with the “ skeleton. fitted so well into the Middle Ages “ Pure ” Thomism THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORITY . could only give many hints. Thomas himself was able to answerfully the question: “ What is man? ” It also often seems to us that the great doctor. in all humility. which must remain at all times the starting point and the dorsal spine of every true philosophy. (The simian ability to pull out the right little drawer within a fraction of a second has. It has therefore been argued-and. If we think the situation over.165 textbook. but not an exhaustive reply. we think. often been considered to be the most important criterion of an accomplished scholastic philosopher. Thomas was not a Thomist. Please “-can rarely go entire& astray. in its finality. of all time.

exhorted philosophers to use the writings of the Angelic Doctor as a starting point. a crying need for the analysis and illumination of suprarational values. The author of this .166 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY because a skeleton was most appropriate to a historical epoch which was over-rich in meat-the “ meat ” of Catholic spiritual and cultural values. An enormous solar system appearing as a star in the sky might possibly harbour intelligent beings. (Here it may be sufficient to refer to the volitional concept of “ the people.580 Of course. and so on. with the sentiments. is man a philosopher. artistic and “ sentientive ” qualities of man. In a terrestrial sense man is the measure. the dangers are even greater in Unamuno’s ideal picture (in his Del sentimiento trdgico de la vida.“5s1 but also bear little relation to fundamental qualities of human neither to nature. but it is a different one.) If we deal with man we have to start with the (God-created) person and end with the (God-created) person. with the whole soul and the whole body.” We believe that a “ naked ” Thomism lends itself too easily to intellectual constructions which not only do not stand the practical test and are intrinsically “ unconvincing. There is today. and operate with concepts conforming psychological nor to philosophical reality. as a melancholy disc over a romantic lake. it has become a weapon of attack and defence in a time of confusion and chaos.” or “ multitude. The “ multiple function ” is often purely material. who has contributed so much to the revival of Thomism.” which is entirely figmentary. The significance of Thomism today is not less. often material and spiritual. p. not as a destination. furthermore. The full nature of the moon has to be understood not on&y in astronomical terms.” “ community. but also as human experience-as faint light over a path. 31) of the philosophic man: “ Kot only with reason but with the will. Yet it must be borne in mind that Cardinal Mercier. taking into account man’s subjective existence in the light of otjective reality.but it is also possible that it is only a tiny embellishment of a summer night. Thus we have seen this “ ISew Mechanism ” neglecting the cultivation of the intuitive. with the flesh and the senses. to attract the attention of a casual wanderer and to gladden his heart. and is thus really a “ world “.

you know. THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORITY II “ As a matter of fact. Robert Bellarmine have given us their points of view on authority in almost complete . In modern American legal thinking the chaos in this matter is ever widening. warm flesh. but of a personal world-picture of man created by and reverting to God. he is. not of a wild subjectivism. middle of the room and. -DOSTOYEVSKI.5s3 Though not affecting the question of the various forms of government directly. and did not All of a sudden he rose in the verv breathe a word. who is perfectly willing to discuss the problem of authority and the problem of political forms in separate compartments.” Shatov declared. Others have endeavoured---mainly in the Old World-to work on that synthesis. especially so in circles denying the natural law. threw up his hands and left. We hold that a constructive approach to problems in the sphere of political theory is feasible only when at last the strong skeleton of Thomism is clad with the soft. how can I then be a captain ? ” He took his cap. Suarez and St. moreover. “ if there is a revolution in Russia.” An old. it will have to start with the propagation of atheism. The Possessed5B’ The moral problem of political authority is the most important and basic in the whole discussion of political theory. lest the bones become brittle and the flesh deformed. it has. nevertheless. tough captain with grey hair sat and sat in silence. but also all his shortcomings and imperfections. to all those sympathetic towards an existentialist approach. convinced that a fruitful discussion of political forms is possible only if we accept the “ human reality ” and avoid the New Mechanism which turns us so swiftly into bombinantes in vacua. This implies taking into account not only all the glories of man. a psychological importance. said aloud just asif speaking to himself: “ If there is no God. 584 This might conceivably puzzle the pure Thomist.‘67 book has to confess to being influenced to a certain degree by Christian existentialism. We have merely followed them along the trail they have blazed.

but certainly as a psychological “ invitation.1-T is well known and has received. the rule rather than the exception. especially from the hands of the Reformers. S. has its philosophic charms. we ought to consult Scripture first.585 does not doubt that St.J.5s3 while Luther tended (implicitly at least) towards monarchism. Stahl. 594 . but we are not certain whether they did not themselves see the deeper. it is probably safer still to appeal to the Locke-Hooker-St.58s The Bellarmine-Jefferson legend. not. perhaps. 58s though factually untenable. Robert Bellarmine was fundamentally a monarchist. rough treatment.168 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY detachment from the question of the validity and inner quality of the various forms of government. in coactive logicality.6s0 Focusing our attention on the problem of authority proper. J. and Luther’s view that the state as such is an added punishment for the Fall served as a foundation for the leidender Gehorsam. Thomas connection. inner connections between these two investigations. The early Jesuit theory of political authority emanating from God and passing through the people to their appointed rulers and magistrates-a theory by no means without medieval backing-has an intrinsically demo-republican character. J. to general opinion-were not very different. who mistook the views of these seventeenth-century theologians for early Rousseauism. 13. S.587 Yet it must be conceded to a certain American school of political thought that the basic philosophical vistas of Suarez and Bellarmine point in a far more democratic direction. Father Servitre. but if we want at all costs a Catholic pedigree for American political and constitutional philosophy.5s2 though it could be asserted that he was by temperament rather an aristocratic oligarch. the ” suffering obedience ” to the caprices Calvin’s teachings in these matters-contrary of the rulers.68s but could not refrain from insisting that monarchy is superior to democracy if we have to choose between these two types in their pure form. who preferred a more or less mixed form of government for reasons of political expediency. The text Rom. as well as Father James Brodrick. among these authors..” We must therefore be indulgent towards F.. 5s1 The confusion between power and author+ is.

Since we be1iel. even maternity recreational institutions and places of learning wards. claiming authority but methodically destroying the values of the The satanic aspects common good. is not a “ helpmate of God ” (bitourgh the&) It can and thus has no claim to authority and to obedience. “ a servant of God. ordained towards its natural end. the intentions of its exercisers.iew all actions and activities critically-to reflect.. well established and entrenched. on all scores and in every respect. even be argued that power. Opposition for opposition’s sake would lead to curious results in matters theological . To be the& dia’konos.e that there are other will-powers in this universe besides that of God. a point of view as remote as possible from a Protestant or any other non-Catholic position. established by the state can be designed to build up armies intended for aggressive warfare. An exousia-regardless of whether we translate this Scriptural term to have a positive relationas “ authority ” or “ power “-has ship towards its purpose. is diabolic in character. but misusing it by woefully harming the common good.e. Neither would it be a sound procedure for a Catholic thinker to take. it certainly would be rash to reject entirely the external evidence of the crude fact of an existing power. Such an attitude would be un-Scriptural. its effects. the common good.” i.‘69 Whatever the distortions. A ruler in the possession of power. There should be no difficulty in accepting the scholastic tradition of the right of resistance against the tyrant. to conform or oppose or resist. although these notions frightened not only pious seventeenth-century THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORITY . we have a good right to \. of such government combining power (a divine attribute) with wickedness and irrationality are usually underscored by it rarely opposes the common good a quality of confusion. misinterpretations and exaggerations of the Reformers and their theological epigones. Thus it is evident that all power being exercised is subject to critical analysis by investigation of its purpose. though its positive actions are often means to nefarious ends: for example. on principle. it is an attitude which would rather agree with a sect on the lunatic fringe than with members of the Church of Christ. to speculate.” it is necessary that a power be “ reasonable.

There would be an England even without the Hanover-s and the Coburgs. Since rebellion is likely to evoke bloodshed. an unwarranted military occupation by a foreign power). a helpmate of God. And this situation is.. But it is also evident that legality (even legality according to international law) is part and parcel of the common good .. legal according to the natural law. we do not see why this should obviate authority in the least. a possessive right) of the monarch to crown and kingship-which can hardly be treated as property. but there would not be an Austria without the Habsburgs. to be careful not to fall into an arid legalism. Their misuse or abuse should result in confiscation or deposition. a government legal in the juridical in the moral sense) can be excused only if its continued trespasses against other more important aspects of the common good justify steps which according to the secular (constitutional) law are illegal. it becomes justified only if all peaceful societal and constitutional efforts have Still. we have failed to provide a remedy for the situation. but also to the very creation of a nation.e. rebellion against a “ legal “’ but not government (i. we think. intelligently and virtuously. independent of majority consent. it is obvious that it is in the nature of a “ last resort “. under these circumstances. 5s7 It is only too well known that the mobs of the medieval cities . nor to adopt a concept of the common good which is too wide or too narrow.170 LIBERTY OR EQUALm Protestants. cannot be sneered at. for example. in the political sense. We have hinted that power acting according to reason. The case becomes less clear when the merits of a dynasty are related not only to services rendered.e. power and property-have to be used to foster the common good.5ss If a vast majority of the citizenry is opposed to good or just government. Under ordinary circumstances it would be difficult to demonstrate a specific right (i.5s6 A ruler has the same obliga3othtion to the right use of power as the owner of property. has authority as a genuine Zeitourgds theoti. It certainly is not diabolic. that is. ordaining its efforts towards the common good and not offending against it through its mere existence (as. and therefore legitimacy. but even Hege1. Thus. but become.

in turn.jgR It seems to us then. are related to the highest as well as to the lowest intellectual virtues-love and prudence. the two-thirds majority at a papal conclave). whose fountainhead is God. Without the elements of reason. no philosophical quality at all. no correlation between those in power and the common good is possible. in conformity with Royer-Collard. is vested “ secondarily ” in the people imultitudo). There are. it could not in the least serve for the purpose of a genuine transference of authority. but the alternative-majoritism-has. of course. exile or suppression of the Jews came from the lower classes. knowledge and wisdom.‘7’ were often bitterly anti-Jewish. for instance. and these. the papacy protected the people of Our Lord. At best it can be an arbitrav convention (as. 6ooand political authority in particular. but we still think that it is neither Cartesian nor contrary to sound Catholic doctrine.599 that reason is the indicator which points to authority in general. Royalty. also powerful psychological factors involved in the concept of the common good . nie pozwalam or liberum veto ruined Poland. X-et the first difficulty which we experience in accepting this view lies in the problem of transference. above all. has roots which admittedly go further back than Suarez and Bellarmine. It is not sheer coincidence that the earlier Middle Ages insisted in most of their elections on the use of the principle of unanimity-a principle of great destructive effect in practice. including the lower clergy. which enter the concept of “ legalit)-. and that the desire for the massacre. In this case reason and virtue were on the side of these high-placed minorities. 602 Yet the philosophical reasons for this demand are !:would elections without original sin show quite evident unanimous results ? Would plebiscites ?) and we should not be surprised to see the principle of unanimity in full action until ~y~go---at least in one count? and in connection with one The function : the roval election by the Polish nobility. who transfer it to their magistrate. The theory that authority. THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORITY . in our opinion.“601 Such an “ occasionalist ” view is frankly undemocratic as lvell as antidemocratic. the majority of bishops and.

(voters and non-voters alike) had the strongest possible convictions on it. as we have pointed out. Yet the so-called “ larger and sounder part ” is usually delinquent in training its reason. we will admit. often not even their names. multitudes are called to judgment and action.rational judgment would take several months. an irrational mass emotionalism which is plainly of an animal nature is When the present author and his wife bound to follow. first arrived in the United States in 1937 the New Deal was still the question of the day. In the preceding paragraphs we have insisted that reason can only be applied to matters whose nature is understood. the rarest of all cases “ adequate “-among the multitudes as well as among the magistrates. the gulf between the things known and the things which ought to be known is constantly widening. realizing that a study enabling us to arrive at an). banking on the phrase securus iudicat orbis turarum--” the whole world is a safe judge “-has shown something we might call a “ statistical optimism. thus necessitating judgment in the absence of knowledge-an and. After collecting data on the question and working feverishly for a couple of weeks on the available material. These vast masses also lacked any deeper and mentalities of their insight into the minds. The concept of a “ larger and sounder part ” of a nation (wielding authority over a “ smaller and less sound part ” ?) makes little sense if we give to the expression “ sounder ” any wider or deeper meaning than the simple word “ sane. intellects representatives who had to deal with this subject in legislation -men whom to all practical purposes they did not know at all. a certain Catholic political tradition which. Yet in this case we certainly . We estimated then that only a few thousand Americans could possibly be in a position to make a sound judgment on this yet at least seventy million Americans economic policy. if action which necessarily results in emotionalism.” There is. faces or professed views! The majority principle has been evoked by some Catholics by referring to papal elections.172 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY Neither has majority rule any theological value.” but we are unable to agree with it. we gave up. while political knowledge is onl!.

we do not have much reason to believe that the procedure in civil society should be a different one. Clearly. attention and consideration. a papal dynasty would be possible. not in all. by this selection the magistrate is chosen. however.c forms of government. following in the footsteps of those in the preceding century who called themselves “ philosophers. (The intervals between these acts of designation or election are entirely arbitrary. theoretically.) In a hereditary monarchy without plebiscites or elections. Indeed very many in recent days. govern a republic may. wherefore they say that those who exercise it in the state do not exercise it as their own. Catholics disagree. in some matters. a Catholic’s letter. though probably not desirable. filial respect. . to say the least. The latter actually has a stronger case. that the peoplekbqm 2:.THE PROBLEM OF APTHORITY ‘73 find no transference of authority at all. but a designatory act pure and simple. . and on this condition. be chosen by the will and judgment of the masses. . but still of an encyclical and a papal These documents merit. . may recall it at their pleasure. And just as papal authority is in no way transferred from God via the College of Cardinals. “ More democracy ” would mean smaller and smaller intervals.: ‘1 it is given. moreover. if no Catholic doctrine oppose. . obvious that a repeated act of designation takes place only in specif. The practical difficulties of the Catholic supporters of the thesis of popular sovereignty (entirely based on the concept of God as the original source of authority) are so many that the principle of a possible designation seems to us more logical.” say that all power comes from the people. The modalities of the conclave are mere laws of the Church. as from a natural and necessary principle. . It is. Here it is worth while to note that those who are to. but as given to them by the people. even the passive support of the population remains an unexpressed secret and a mystery. because it enjoys the support of papal authority-not of a dogma pronounced solemnly ex cathedra. . for they derive the powei to rule from God. We refer to Leo XIII’s encyclical D&unum i&d and to Pope Pius X’s letter The encyclical says : condemning the Sillon movement.

in the election of the Holy Roman Emperors) or by an entire population-including infants.)607 After all.604 We think that this is unequivocal.I74 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY but the rights of his magistracy are not conferred. because voters die and minors come of age. which it places first in the people. At any given moment the “ verdict ” of the last election may have been cancelled. (All age limits are entirely arbitrary and conventional.“05 who sought to prove that the encyclical Diuturnum illud does not involve a refutation of the populistic theories of Suarez and Bellarmine. no connection between popularity and authority. “ Popularity always But in our opinion authority is the basis of authority. of course. for instance. the problem of authority-and .” But. Adolf Hitler (who so frequently claimed to be an Erzdemokrat-an “ archdemocrat “) said.“60s rests merely on the “ external ” evidence of power. but it is decided by whom it shall be exercised. since it is of its nature to descend. nor is the authority conferred. There is. be in a minority. aside from its being abnormal for delegation to ascend.606 It is certainly not necessary to point out that the act of designation rests on no quantitative principle. and the necessary “ internal ” evidence of ordination towards the common good. Leo XIII has refuted in advance this attempt to reconcile Catholic doctrine with the error of the philosopbs. and we cannot be swayed by the explanations of Cardinal Billot. leaving in our mind no doubt as to the meaning of the encyclical of his predecessor. through the normal biological process. descend from God-but in such a way that “ it ascends from below in order to reach a higher level. to which he expressly alludes: No doubt the “ Sillon ” movement makes this authority. the relation between a government and the population changes rapidly after every election. 603 Pius X is equally clear and explicit. To the citizen (or subject). Designation can be made by a small group of electors (as. while in the organisation of the Church the power descends from above in order to reach a lower level. and the former majority.

be said to have “ organic government.” Most of the present-day governments in Catholic ” (“ governments in flux “). Nor must it be forgotten that almost all of us are born into a political community. with a stretch of the imagination. and never achieve objective perfection. strongly personal aspects of a somewhat existentialist nature. countries are “ quasi-legitimate and a great many are thoroughly “ illegitimate ” (” governments by force “j. The magistrate’s intentions preThe difficulties ceding every “ plan ” are of a hidden nature. 205-06. Every analyst must most carefully take into consideration two imperfections-his own and that of the matter under review. The lack of an organic character goes hand in hand with a virtual monopoly of republicanism among Catholic nations-the notable exception again being Luxemburg. thus gravely impairing its claim to factual authority. The “ internal in spite of its rational character. (On the paradox of Protestantism becoming the religion of modern monarchies. see below. in appraising the “ internal evidence ” are often considerable. The loss of religious fervour among the masses was synchronized with the rise of republicanism and with cultural decay.) But it must not beforgotten that these aforementioned categories are of a purely psychological nature. is not always evidence. pp. and we must admit that flagrant and persistent violation of the common good is manifest only in the more extreme cases.” the multitudo will give to it their implicit assent by not questioning its intrinsic truth and value.THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORITY I75 obedience also-has. and even the most “ organic ” government can trespass violently against the common good. in the practical field. there are situations when “ governments by force ” can claim true authority while harshly enforcing the common good among a decadent population. Chapter V. Many of us are lacking “ distance.“60e Under the type of rule we have called “ organic government. and that custom and habit often impair our objectivity.” immediately recognizable. Yet if we scrutinize the Catholic world we find that today Luxemburg alone can. for . Owing to man’s imperfection the total of “ internal evidence ” will always be an approximation. We believe.

resent him. The Emperor had power. of great actuality.176 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY instance. It may. Has he authority? Certainly.?ind still. and with the help of this weapon and a stentorian voice is able to establish order and give directions. The passengers. He uses it for the common good. perhaps. He has power. ?r’or is it a refutation to say that this is Life is emergency. The situation would be more complicated in the case of a Bourbon legitimist under the rule of Napoleon III. an emergency. . A stramer is about to sink. loyalty. :‘. reason). not be unwise to illustrate our thesis. and the passengers fight madly. but. Yet one of the passengers draws a revolver. Actually. let us describe a simple case. charity.. we think. unfortunately. equity. a rebellion ? The only argument our revolutionary-minded Royalist could have put forward is a firm belief that the Bonapartist regime. They cannot claim to be leitour ’ theozi. that governments repressing some of their citizens on racial grounds-regardless of whether they comprise 0. have been materially and historically . It can also be supposed that he had popular backing during most of the Had our legitimist the right to foment time of his regime. non-material matter of the common good (justice. legality. that their claim to authority is invalid-and this in spite of a thoroughly unquestioned swal-. At first. The officers of the ship have lost their heads.” and that all the horrors of a revolution would be a small price to be paid for a restoration (or “ liberation “). freedom. In other words-he had to be convinced that Bonapartism would make France lose her “ soul. tradition. e and rebellion arises-a question. fearful of his weapon. he should be obeyed.9 per cent or 55 per cent of the population610-are so fundamentally opposed to important. by its very existence. obey him. such a calculation would. Under these circumstances the question of resista!I!‘. was opposed to very important immaterial values-continuity-. -611 there is no good reason to believe that he did not strive for the common good.for the lifeboats. There is no contract between him and the other passengers. He enjoys no popularity. thwarted in their immediate desires.

613 anyhow. against revolutions is fairly strong. the balance-sheets of all Whatever revolutions and civil wars prove this conclusively. Ninety-nine per cent of a population might be blissfully happy under a tyranny based on the torture and exploitation of one per cent. especially if they enjoy ‘I organic ” status. dual ” in order to come to a personal decision. minor positive results the French Revolution may have had.612 Ail intellectual virtues. After all. To the opponent of the theory of popular sovereignty (either in its Roussellian or in its Rellarminian form) there is no philosophical connection between rebellion and public opinion. usually lack the conscriptional character of modern wars . as we have hinted before. but this does not obviate the possibility that a person earnestly consulting his conscience would come to a different conclusion. I 7gn--France ne\‘er found her political equilibrium again. even a just war can only be started if there is a chance of winning it.sacrificed if they. or e\-en though The they may be useless or oppressive for the moment. the ” body ” of political psychology.) It also ought to be clear to all participants in a rebellion that the elimination of traditional political institutions. Their sadistic instincts could bc fully satisfied by the sufferings of a few fellolv citizens.THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORITY ‘77 wrong.more remote than e\-er. totalitarianism and conscription M . are dangerous operations on After r78o-or rather. The final decisions always rest with the individual. It is admittedly easy to theorize about rebellion. the problem whether a rebellion supported by only one per cent of the population can succeed-at first glance a purely practical question-cannot be brushed aside. the gifts of neo-nationalism.undergo a crisis. Traditions which have slowly grown and finally achieved organic status-institutions t\-hich are generally considered to bc integral parts of a cultural pattcr:i--should not be lightly. and her psychological recovery is today. have to be mobilized by the “ lonely indivi(Revolutions. violent destruction of institutions in an ij@asse has brought The purely historical argument untold harm to the vvorld. Nevertheless. but we face here more than in other matters the complexities of individual conscience.

not only towards ourselves and our kin. whom theology cannot provide in all situations with an elaborate and infallible casuistry. not to mention the direct sufferings and the far-reaching political. .178 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY alone far outweigh these gains . All these decisions lie with the individual. but also towards that seemingly never ending process affecting mankind with all its pitiless forcesthat great drama of which God is the everlasting spectatorhistory. . a mere fragment of that terrible responsibility which all of us have. finally. spiritual and intellectual consequences. . And here we face.

1849.?& they will influence our temperaments. Scotland before and after the Reformation. to economics : the disproportionate wealth of French Protestants Max Weber. sociology. Latvia or Germany. J. perhaps. One has only to compare the inhabitants of Catholic and of Protestant islands in the Hebrides616 in order to appreciate the importance of the religious factor. 0 F all the “ external 179 . 61) I. the strongest. England before and after the Reformation. nourishment.s17 Norway before and after the Reformation. Les confessions d’un rbvolutionnaire ’ (PaliS. history. were different The influence of the religious factor also extends nations. biology. Tawney. meteorology. it points out a a evident that di . in Hungary.CHAPTER V THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS It is surprising to observe how constantly we find t.Bo. An invisible line divides the cultural patterns Switzerland. Troeltsch. entirely new behaviour patterns emerge. THE SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF CATHOLICISM ” elements shaping the character of individuals as well as of groups religion is. yet the great changes resulting from the conversion of large groups cannot leave us unimpressed. PROUDHON. -P.11 theology at tile bottom of our political questions. j?. even though they speak the same language and obey the same laws. This should i er religion offers us an almAost ev iverse . or to compare villages belonging to these two different religious communities in central in the Netherlands.616 Fanfani and Krauss have written profusely on this subject.615 We should never underrate the effect of such other factors as geography. shows it sufficiently. Even after a short time. of these communities.

but not by the “ enlightened ” man in the street.” has remained unchanged. 624the gradual abolishment of the very articles of faith. St.Germar-peoqle could not and cannot but be devout.foi (“ diminution of the faith “).“G19 -I To this Catholic saint1. rather than on the Forced.622 Such strictures might be passed upon them by fundamentalists or backwoods preachers.. that of the Protestant is also subject to the r&rkissement de la foi (“ narrowing of the faith “). The reader is. of being too broad-minded.180 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. and their rejection of divorce and euthanasia. stances. . absolute standards. is our aim. we will try to compare the attitude of Catholic (and Greek Orthodox) nations and ethnic groups with those of their Comparison. In this chapter the searchlight of our investigation will be focused on the political behaviour pattern. but at the same time endeavouring to avoid the grossest over-simplifications. and not the setting of Protestant equivalents. is in a constant process of Whereas the faith of Catholics can be exposed to evolution. of being swayed by the fads of their age. as well as against the Renaissance and Humanism. except for an “ increase in volume. Clement Maria Hofbauer declared about the Reformation : “ The revolt from the Church began because the.620 But because of its inherent dialectics. liberal Protestant would accuse the Catholics of placing the accent on man rather than on God. the process of diminuation de la. who is impressed by the existence of a Legion of Decency. and commentary on it has \Taried only within certain limits. easy-going and carna1. reminded that the Reformation set out as a “ rigoristic ” reaction against late medieval laxity and liberalism. under these circumideologies. G23 Catholic dogma. to generalize on this matter. on the other hand. No modern. of Catholic nations. Protestantism. non~hbertarian character of the Reformation was obvious. deepiyrehgious.G21 levelled against Catholicism are today just the reverse of those directed against the Church four hundred years ago. first of all. the efforts by Catholics to enact anti-birth-control legislation. the. Protestantism came in subsequent centuries to occupy a stand diametrically opposed Hence almost all Protestant criticisms to its original position..

but I 5 I I. had been hidden to him and the fact that the synthesis becamev. Thus. There is a real process of theosix envisaged-as we find it. back to some sort of imaginary catacomb Church. back to the Old 1 U&s-we areTab& 5) picture Luther wandering Testament. Here was a man from the backwoods of Christendom aghast at the grandiose effort toward a synthesis between Christendom and the immortal and lasting The annexationist character of Catholicism values of antiquity. Hence the veneration of saints._ on Broadway in r\:eG-York. if we prefer. . will be struck by the sight of professors in medieval gowns and \ mortar boards teaching pragmatist and instrumentalist philo. in a different form.VI THE POLmCAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS 181 Still. there are only very minor figures among the Reformers who The tried to ride the crest of the wav-e of Humanism. This is documented by the fact that Protestantism clung to the Gothic style long after it had become obsolete in the Catholic world. for the first time in his life was face to face with the Renaissance.” Of course. with the exception of Melanchthon and Zwingli. the Augustinian friar on his mission in Rome. After all. Even today the Gothic style is prevalent among American churches and colleges with the Catholic minority “joining in. Anybody visiting that Gothic skyscraper. man was created in the image of God and his destiny was to become more god-like after death. back to the Middle Ages. when Martin Luther. patterns.” culture had turned to an elliptic form with two foci. post-medieval. also in Eastern theology. Thus the real year of the Reformation is not 1517.. Yet what he disapproved of was the cultural aspect of the Renaissance From a “ circle ” Catholic which said <‘ God and Man.1 Yet the fasade remains and also many thought sophy. we do not understand the initial spark which started the 16th-century wave of Reformers. in Rome-. it cannot be denied that Protestant “ Medievalism ” has been emptied of its soul through a relatil-izing and liberalizing process. But the Reformers replied to these efforts ” Soli Deo Gloria! ” and tried desperately to go back. the fact remains that Protestantism is essentiabl_v medieval._ -. around-. only perfect in the Baroque he could not guess. a hill-brlly preacher from the Alleghanies -_ .. the “ Cathedral of Learning ” of Pittsburgh University.

The painting of Grant Wood shows us a very Protestant American farmer and * The sex act within the marriage bond thus receives sacramental characterhence the insolubility of a genuine ~zatr~monium consummatum.4nd while Catholic culture centred around the dual focus of the Glory of God and the Glory of Man. so did Reuchlin.” Yet it took him years to disentangle himself from the notions imparted to him by Ruskin.182 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.) Especially the inner understanding of the Baroque is by no means easy to those belonging to the English-speaking nations and E. it is defending primarily the very dignity t and significance of the sex act. the Renaissance and the Baroque. . She is a-‘< baptized ” Venus. Protestantism was engaged in a new rigorism. sex and marriage. an understanding and appreciation of the cultural. Thomas later to the cause of the Church Universal. earthlv and divine love. for the Protestant as well as for the Catholic of the British Isles and North America. The Birth of Venus follows a pagan pattern.” His concept of who “ overvalued Promarriage is one of “ carnality to end all carnality. artistic and intellectual values of Humanism. I. (The fact that Irish Catholicism has only very peripherically been through this evolution is of paramount importance. yet expressing a real synthesis of Eros and Agape. . towards man and woman in the nude (” as God made them “).* Thus the key to the real understanding of the Catholic cultures of the European Continent and of South and Central America is. surrounded by a hardly perceptible glow of sensuality.” testantism is very profoundly anti-erotic. In order to come to symbolic comprehension of the Catholic-Protestant antithesis one must compare two paintings : the Birth of Venus by Botticelli and American Gothic by Grant Wood. so did Erasmus. but every sensitive person will perceive that this is a Christian Venus. most outstanding Humanists everywhere rallied sooner or So did St. the great anti-clerical who had fought monkish narrowness all through his life. And it would be very naive to believe that the stand of the Church against artificial contraception is essentially “ demographic “. Watkin is one of the few who came to see the true greatness of the “Jesuit style. It is a grave mistake to see in Luther a confirmed libertine. while Catholic painters directed their interest towards the objects of this world. More.

wretchedness.ed brutal suppression by the state authorities. This was -_-__ --. Protestantism and Prostration “hardly sounds more attractive. The man holds in his hand a pitchfork with painfully pointed prongs. sanctio-n.political and cultural manifestations. imp&&ions. his thin lips. -and -Luther’s belief . In spite of Ins fideism.___ ----_. Lawrence and Everett Dean who emphasized the fact that Americans ha\. Gothic wooden church in the background. . Catholicism and Individualism.7 though blessed with a rigid and authoritarian ecclesiastical organization. through his concept of “ private interpretation.626 Neither should it be doubted that Luther.__. This is by no means an “ original theory. H.” Thus it has escaped the attention of many neutral observers not conversant with the respective theologies that Catholicism. which relegated all deceased non-Christians to the everlasting horrors of hell fire. Gooch is right when he calls Calvin the father of modern democracy in spite of himself. planted seeds which centuries later produced an astounding harvest._. at least. and his emphasis on the divine prerogatives of the . Still. P. Romanism and Rebellion ” was somehow not without substance when we translate this accusation with “Joie de _ vivre. and Luther conferred excessive authority on the magistrate.-. The outcry of bigots which could be heard at the end of the 19th century that the Democratic Party in New York stood for “ Rum. the reverse-“ Prohibition. . his clean spectacles no less than his prim and severe wife at his side frightened no less a man than Albert Jay Neck. while the teachings of Luther and Calvin are characterized -_ by a meta@hisZal&erity which hadjands&&mes~stii‘I has) ---. and his notions on church organization. -i-ccOncr&e -__.had. G.” his subjectivism.--.” To our ears. but never “ thought themselves out them. ..of in the hiiiman.utter.VI THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS t his wife with a white. His balding pate.6L5 .. has a liberal and “ personalistic ” theology. in _ itself no liberal_ .” but a alluded to by D. Calvin’s dogma of predestmation -.----~ most evident in the political sphere: Cal\-in established in Geneva the first truly totalitarian police-state in Europe.e tried to flee the Middle Ages.nature after the Pall.

however. 105. This secular order. in accordance with the whole H’eltbild. emphasized democratic values more strongly than Protestantism on either side of the Atlantic. and he could see in numerous churches murals representing Hell peopled \ by tortured popes.184 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY Dw. Traditional Catholic culture was always of a basically patriarchal pattern. a. Although Catholicism. can also be found among the late Jesuit Scholastics. To proceed from theological and philosophical concepts to delicate and highly intellectualized formulations in political matters is one thing. kings and bishops. find a strong psychological echo among the masses. and other democratic leanings. q. expresses in the Summa (I-II.62s characterized by a ubiquity of fatherhood which automatically fostered royal over republican institutions. he is through a long dialectic process a forefather of modern democracy. but to make them widely accepted is quite another.628 Yet by no means all theological opinions. religious or intellectual forces and tendencies of Catholic societies. was ‘\\I by no means egalitarianism. prior to the American and French Revolutions. The idea of popular sovereignty. The Catholic Weltbild or “ view of the world ” lacked in its fundamental aspects most of the qualities that would have been needed to absorb a politically democratic order which bore no relationship to the social.s27 The Catholic theological paternity of democracy is of a much more direct character. no means contradicted the other. the affinity between the Church and democracy was -for all practical p urp oses never a very strong one. and not even all dogmas. magistrate. though insisting in De regimine principum on the superiority of an (elective) monarchy (the supporters of an elective monarchy. Even the medieval serf knew that simple fishermen were among the saints. metaphysical hierarchy of souls.G30 The concept of society. by the way. I) a preference for a mixed government. are always royalists suspicious of the principle of heredity). Thomas. St. Egalitarianism in the modern sense existed nowhere: what appears to be egalitarianism is . was hierarchic: the main pressures and the very “ grain ” of existence were vertical rather than horizontal.

631 “ He has filled the hungry with good things. where the beggar is a “ useful ” member of society and commercialism is not highly appreciated. i.e. he is greeted by a monk who blows out a candle-admonishing him not to forget that he is mortal like the rest of humanity.YJ ‘85 merely the strong consciousness of the mystery of the human soul which. Professor Allison Peers was once accosted in Madrid by a beggar who uttered the following request: Una limosna.L success as a sign of divine favour and next-worldly promise is absent in Catholic nations. defeats and victories which rapidly destroy the initial pattern of spiritual equality. The connection Switzerland between death and freedom is. and sent the rich empty away. 1861) and in ( I 847). sen’or.. as in the United States (I 776. It is significant that sanguinary revolutions did not take place in Protestant countries after the evanescence of the earlier rigorism. where the Habsburgs. the key to their latent revolutionism as well as to their peculiar craving for freedom. partially. Civil wars in Protestant countries were henceforward interterritorial wars. an obvious one.” It would be wrong to consider these vistas to be without strong “ this-worldly ” implications.g33 This thanatocentrism of Catholic nations is also. though equal with all others at its inception. que en la plenitud de mi juventud me ha quitado la gana a!e trubujar (” An alms for the love of God. Besides this notion of what we may call--quite arbitrarilythe hidden soul.par el amor de D&s. experiences. Who in the fullness THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS . after 1700. are buried. where all cards will be reshuffled for a new dea1. “ Human equality ” in the Catholic orbit is thus nothing but the acute feeling of man’s inability to scrutinize 11 and evaluate the status of souls. there is the knowledge that the roles played by persons here on earth may be thoroughly reversed on the other side of the grave. of course. When the the quondam masters of Christendom.634 The Calvinistic and Old Testament notion of taking earthly. but the very symbol of what is usually taken for “ Catholic democracy ” (in the social sense) 632is the skull and crossboneswhose omnipresence is nowhere more impressive than in the vaults of the Capuchins in Vienna. Peter’s for the coronation ceremony. has to face struggles and temptations. Pope enters St.

Thomas Aquinas considered trading a licit activity only under extraordinary circumstances (SWWXZ. 3).g37 The urban share of Protestants in organically grown societies will always be larger than that of Catholics though immigration created a different picture in the United States. to’ plant a tree.636 As for commercialism. a. St. thus constitutes a psychological problem in Catholic societies. which forces the Church to “ raise money ” for the subsistence of the clergy. with a relative (functional) hierarchy. The separation of State and Church. q. etc. It is hardly necessary to refer to the works dealing with the relationship between capitalism and Protestant& In Portugal we have the poor farmer.. II-II. who supplements his meagre income by professional begging. Under these circumstances. 77.) It is obvious that external as well as internal influences d can adversely affect. to write a book “). 4) and objected to a large commercial class in an ideal city (De regimine principum. agriculture and artistry (Compare with -a perfectly “ reactionary ” pattern. it was never forgotten by Catholic nations that the merchants and money changers in the Temple were the only people physically chastised by Our Lord. of my youth has taken from me the appetite for work “) . which are demophile but not democratic.638 Catholic “ programme ” is probably best expressed by a Spanish saying : Tener un hijo Plantar un arbol Escribir un libro Here (“ To have a son. the cabaneiro. large segments of this . it is not surprising that Catholicism has a greater affinity with agrarian than with urban society. Mussolini’s Un libro e un moschetto--fascista perfetto--” a book and a musket make a perfect Fascist ” : intellect and the old Petrine curse-brute force . or even destroy. harmonizes best with the traditional mentality of Catholic The nations. ii.186 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY Pw. Patriarchalism. especially in the Traz-os-Montes region. where the businessman has little social status-and bishops are rarely chosen for their commercial qualifications. we find the synthesis of patriarchalism.

This has happened again and again in the last 160 years. illiberal and “ populistic.63Q This is the reason why the Catholic world in both hemispheres has never recovered its health. The resulting “ uneasy ” compromises between the religious genius of Catholic nations. and their often totally uncongenial forms of government. Hence Hegel despaired of the possibility of seeing a sensible constitution (verntinzige Verfassung) realized within the framework of the Catholic religion. Neither event seems probable in the near future. Although there are some minor Cartesian and Jansenistic elements in the political philosophy of ‘89 and ‘92. In the meantime we have seen repeated perversions of traditional Catholic socio-political trends. To illustrate this we have shown in the preceding chapter how the drives fostering personal dictatorship of the mass-party pattern (the plebiscitarian tyranny) came from residues of patriarchalism-notwithstanding the fact that this perversion of patriarchal sentiments was deeply egalitarian and democratic. since they involve a series of intellectual and psychological conflicts.) It is also obvious that the ideological substance of the French Revolution is almost in its entirety the product of Protestant f dialectics. Holland and Switzerland. which has been spared Rousseau and Robespierre. theological) notions. their shaken societies. (F rench Canada. It is thus very doubtful whether any stability in the Catholic world could be regained short of either the total destruction of the Catholic religion or the restitution of a Catholic way of life in conformity with a homogeneous Catholic view of the world.. create grave tensions and perpetuate the revolutionary fervour.” VI THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS . of a revolutionary rather than an evolutionary nature. sanity and cultural fertility since the hormones of the French Revolution were injected into its system.e.‘87 pattern without necessarily eliminating basic (i. Such changes are. Britain. the main impulses came from America. is the rather significant exception.

Even Protestant neo-orthodoxy is partly a reaction against li&& co-m. In matters of dogma the rigidity is. not always and not forever. LIBERTY THE OR EQUALITY CHARACTER [Chap. and often prefers to suffer rather than to conform. the ship of Protestantism drifts along the currents. While modern. while Greek Orthodoxy stays in a drydock of now has to sail against the wind immobility. Though an impediment so far as momentary advantage is concerned. because we are again beginning to live in an age of dogmatic affirmations. this dislike for compromise in essentials is no less helpful to the Church than her exclusiveness. Catholic .“642 I Among the Protestant faiths it is subjectivism-embodied in the principle of private interpretation-and the lack of a central. anyhow. infallible teaching authority which render them so “ up to date “. therefore. complete. what does it matter? The Poles are like the Irish.64O The rigidity and relative immutability of Catholic teaching. 641 This attitude has influenced the character of Catholic nations. perhaps.” Thus when Harry Hopkins. CATHOLIC It is not surprising. Catholic dogma and the whole Catholic mentality prevented all permanent co-operation.188 2. naturally. was blamed for having agreed to the fifth partition of Poland. President Roosevelt’s emissary to Stalin. ’ ! he answered quite characteristically: “ After all. This is the reason why it so frequently seems out of tune with the spirit of the times-frequently but. While Luther rejected rationality in the strongest terms. deprived of a captain and torn frequently from its moorings. that practically all efforts to establish a lasting organic connection between Catholicism and the “ new regime ” were bound to fai1. . liberal Protestantism is easily swayed and influenced by the issues of the day and the opinions of the world. which often have been decried as “ unreasonable ” and “ unto-operative.644 and thus fostered the rise of fideism and subjectivism. in an age when the failure of a Roussellian humanitarianism and of shadowy ethical notions without a religious foundation are so evident. 643 Catholicism and against the currents. They are never Satisfied with anything. Catholicism is relatively unpliable.

none of two contradictory statements can be right-but pas both. L Protestantism. will confirm this. frequently tended to adopt the view that a superficial half. Still. The modern “ liberal ” attitude that i@h can be --r‘-~ right “ in their own ways ” springs from the supposition that \ either objective truth does not exist or is humanly unattainable. greatly reduces the antagonisms between political parties. (or “ inspiration “). which works for an intellectual discipline. The strong intellectualization of the professional classes in French Canada contributes to the . In democracies there will always be resentment and contempt for the “ highbrow ” and the illiterate.” A comparison of the French Canadians ‘with their English-speaking co-nationals. If the latter have a broad common denominator. or of Americans with Argentines. Thomas (and to Luther.6*5 Yet it must also be added that the Church has always been apprehensive about the misuse of reasos. produces also an The 1 exclusiveness characteristic of all systems adhering to logic. Thomas646 In contradiction to St.VI THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS 189 theology emphasized reason and logic very firmly. the indulgent voter will see in .647 and thus in Catholic countries we saw (and sometimes still see) a large number of illiterates side by side with an intellectual The Protestant goal of education is t%te of high standards.” nevertheless gave him the Bible without explanatory footnotes. ) Such a position automatically engenders a latitudinarianism which. on the other hand. In Quebec City. wicked. the intellectual and the “ peasant. trusting in his intelligence Catholicism. after all) the Church often seemed to take the position that man is rather stupid than. i . typical Catholic thinker would always insist that only onp or . the poems of Claude1 are sold at Woolworth’s L/ and Kresge%.II education was much worse than no education at a11. among Protestants for instance. usually one okd averaethe optimum for a democracy. this stand has not been affected by the strongly rationalistic and realistic character of Catholic theology since the days of St. encourages interfaith movements. though rather pessimistic about the spiritual qualities of the “ sin-cripple. and.” for instance. in the political scene. the emphasis on reason in Catholic theology. incompatibility between the two “ races.

“ you are mistaken. . Greek Orthodox or Jewish backYet political criminals were treated in most ground.) Catholic nations.“649 Convictions.‘90 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. but for a persuasion ? To the convinced Catholic his religion is true and rational.g50 It is significant murders in the last hundred years was carried out predominantly by people with a Catholic. a Congregationalist minister.s51 . And thus a social totalitarianism soon ensues. once erroneously reported as having embraced Protestant&m. a faith . went even further and insisted that “ private interpretation ” led dire& to intolerance and. If they are liberal. was congratulated on his conversion by an enthusiastic lady. the results of elections and even brutal coercion frequently cannot cope with the forces of dissent. One might die a martyr’s death for a conviction. Very significant is the popular modern expression “ persuasion ” for religion. whether religious or political. Everett Dean Martin. have an entirely different turn of mind. involve supreme sacrifices. circumscribed the outlook of many men with an unimaginative liberalism and rationalized the crowd’s will to power. 124. prompted by a subconscious fear of total atomization. an indispensable quality for every nation governed by parliamentary institutions.” may be right without impinging on one’s own “ subjectiveobjective ” correctness of view is.648 and not from any notion that contradictory opinions are mutually inclusive.” (LiberQ. At the same time it is obvious that there are (often fairly narrowly-set) limits to the “ agreed dissent “. among the multitudes. indeed. nations with a Catholic culture and Catholic religious convictions of varying intensity. Protestant societies will frequently watch the “ common denominator ” with jealous zeal. p. their liberalism springs from gee. “ fortified ignorance with the delusion of infallibility. that is. in the Catholic world assume an absolute character. . I have lost my faith. and sometimes even Mere laws and regulations.” the former Catholic and agnostic neophyte replied. I have not lost my reason. constitutional charters. The notion that an adversary them mere “ ins ” and “ outs. “ Madam. rebellions and assassinathat the vast majority of political tions. which will retaliate by revolutions. We have heard it said that James Joyce.

The “ communist martyrs ” are thus practically all victims It must also be of mob violence or of the Civil War period. As a result we find in Catholic countries a tendency towards violence which. sometimes takes the most extreme forms. Chapter VII. a novel dealing with the First Carlist War. The Catholic would reason that if the sentence is too light. to cite an example. the latter in agnosticism. Friedrich Adler. is not classifiable as a “ Protestant country ” (see b e1ow. Of course one must not forget that many Catholic nations are also “ racially ” more excitable than their northern. In Russia in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries only assassins or would-be assassins of members of the imperial family were executed. the assassin of Count Sttirgkh. Holland) or indiscriminate death penalty for all major crimes (Britain) . There he features a discussion between a nun and her bellicose old uncle. went to either of two extremes in their penal procedure : abolishment of death penalty (Scandinavia. Protestant neighbours.6s2 The former attitude has its roots in humanitarianism. yet Germany. the criminal still will have to pay the balance in the next world. etc.) noted that most Western countries had special “ gentlemanly ” jails for political offenders: “ fortress ” in Germany.‘9’ Catholic countries with a mildness which would shock Protestant nations. but released from jail after two years. the Marques de Bradomfn. Austrian Prime Minister in 19x6 was condemned to death. the assassin of the Archduke Francis Ferdinand. Yet if we want a vivid description of Catholic revolutionary absolutism we have to turn to a passage of Ramitn de ValleInclan’s Los crurados de la cmsa. received a prison sentence only. (There was no death penalty for any other crime. But Protestant countries. coupled with the Catholic thirst for the absolute. for a variety of reasons. But even a philosopher like Miguel de Unamuno. was strong in his denunciation of peace65s and yearned for a civil war-which finally broke out the year before he died. “ state prison ” in Austria and Hungary. pp. 243). including murder. significantly. Even Bavaria is more “ radical ” than Prussia (and Austria more “ radical ” than Bavaria) . 232. The nun says: NATIONS VI THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC . Gavrilo Prindip.

in order to make justice triumph in this way.” rechter Keerl).“6s6 And it is precisely the contempt Catholic cultures have for the concept of compromise.“654 In this splendid piece of Spanish extremism655 we see an illustration of that Catholic tendency. Modern Protestantism. so aptly described by Leon Bloy. uniformity and authority. the male ideal of the democracies A famous saying of Goring’s and plebiscitarian dictatorships. and in Alava and in Biscaya. the “ fiftyfifty ” so indispensable for parliaments with a pluriparty system.ic=: t l 1. 669 But if we ask the average person with an average education whether Protestantism stands for individualism. p.” “ co-operation ” and “ solidarity. which is so necessary for the ideals of “ neighbourliness.” The voice of the guardian sounded with a muffled echo in the vastness of the hall: “ God depopulated the world by the Flood. half of Spain will have to be depopulated. “ Don Carlos is still not going to rule in Spain. we will probably get an -. which degrades the figure of democratic politicians in the public eye more than in Protestant countries. When people see in politicians mere street-walkers ready for every “ trade ” or “ deal.” The nun joined her hands with a gesture which was at the same time graceful and determined. We cannot entirely agree with Huizinga’s dictum (The Waning qf’ the Middle dges. yet the psychological effects are quite another matter. ” But.” Intellectually the Catholic will reject all such empiricism. on the other hand.192 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. to be or to become pklerzns de l’absolu--” pilgrims of the absolute.” “ He will in Navarre. uncle. 48) that “ to the Catholic soul the unworthiness of the persons never compromises the sacred character of the institution. decent chap. ) I I . and Catholicism for collectivism..” respect for political institutions will also suffer in due time.: I . diversity and freedom. has developed a real enthusiasm for the concept of compromise. was : “ What we want is regular fellows! “638 The Catholic is not in such need of this lubricant of human intercourse because he is not communitarian. but personalistic or individualistic.“657 The opposite attitude would be incompatible with the pattern of the friendly “ regular guy ” (“ ordinary.

Lawrence’s vistas on the nonliberal essence of America are of a similar character. in their sociological meaning.6s0 Yet as soon as we deal with the matter critically and compare specz$ national characters our informant will. H.“667 Nonconformity is thus more difficult in a Protestant than in One has only to ask the American tourist a Catholic society. The inquisition of public opinion overwhelms. for as yet it is but n-&with us. actually. not only become hesitant but even apologetic about his first. Vienna. Madrid. into most Continental languages) can exercise an authority and control with a cold ferocity which can only be matched by the ubiquitous police network of a totalitarian state. Prague.661 This is why Count Keyserling calls America sotialistz’c in a deeper sense and arrives at the conclusion that “ most Americans want to obey as no soldiers have ever done. Oslo. and the subsequent results from the point of view of individual freedom can thus be at least as disastrous as in a case of a tyranny from “ above. the freedom asserted by the law in theory. Rome. Felix de Beaujour sensed a lack of freedom in America. W. Munich. more anarchic and opposed to rules and regulations-the Austrian or the Prussian? The Lithuanian or the Latvian? The Irishman or the Englishman? The Spaniard or the Scandinavian? And if we speak about authoritarianism. Venice and Innsbruck-or in Amsterdam. Debrecen.Yl 193 answer in the afhrmative.663 James Tufts doubts that one can choose “ individualism as an adequate term to characterize American life and instituD. the implication is only too often that all pressure comes from “ above.666 and tions. Geneva.” “ The (the two terms are untransneighbours ” and the community latable. Cologne. it can also be horizontal (i. Berlin. Budapest.e..” But we know that “ authority ” is not necessarily vertical. rash answer. societal instead of political). owes to it that of moral emancipation also.“662 D. And who is.“664 these criticisms of American “ horizontal pressure ” are nothing new. N THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS . in practice. where he felt traditionally freer: in Paris. Brogan supports him in this and even Jefferson felt compelled to write: ” The country which has given to the world the example of physical liberty.y 4 1 1 1 . perhaps.

had. exacting and rigid than modern Protestantism.6ss (except when moved by personal affections). 673 Slavery.677 In the case of war. informalism and patriarchalism for instance. since Catholics are hostile to the disciplinarian monotony and rigour of the machine age. South and Central America) a character entirely at variance with this institution in Anglo-Saxomy. To be sure the Catholic religion is far more uniform.671 These are also the reasons why the Catholics of Catholic countries are. patriarchal pattern. Count Sforza said: “ A profound liberty in regard to dogma and discipline. in Catholic countries (the Iberian peninsula. 674 Army life in Catholic countries is similarly of a much more personal and liberal nature. the soldiers of Catholic nations must be thoroughly convinced of the sensibleness of the cause. therefore. Hence the greater reliability of Protestant groups and organizations 194 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY .s6* individualistic.“672 non-practising Catholic was probably best represented by t Charles Peguy . regardless of the intensity of their religious feelings. in the French and Spanish is impossible-as.“67s If. Aberdeen and Salt Lake City. for one reason or another. mutinies or mass desertions may easily result. even though one is the \ instrument of “ fascism ” and the other of “ democracy.675 There can be no doubt that the present Spanish army has a far less rigorous discipline ! than the Army of the United States. but the fact remains that Catholic nations are unto-operative bY “ nature ” lawless. the relationship . Foreign Legions-the remaining alternative is one between brutality and anarchy. do they show a truly Protestant discipline. Only in dispersion. or on the fringes of the area inhabited by Catholics.[chap.! between superiors and subordinates in these armies assumes an informal. and at the same time an instinctive avoidance of all formal heresy: these are the two most characteristic and constant traits of the religious conscience In France the classic type of the fervent but in Italy. so frequently indifferent towards the commandments of their Church. If these convictions are lacking among Catholic soldiers-who often do not feel bound by the Protestant concept of “ duty ” (Pfliht). aloofa70 and independent.

“ Mechanical action ” is fairly alien to the Catholic. But in 19 18 they simply had run away before the Germans. the Portuguese in the Spanish Foreign Legion (the Tercio) were among the best soldiers. though well acquainted with the authoritarian and monarchic6s‘J structure of the Catholic Church and confused by the claim of Rome to absolute truth have only too frequently aspects of Catholicism. It was said that South Italian soldiers during World War I often applauded with shouts of Bravo. trying to lead them into action. etc. Compare the Spanish proverb : “ To the king must be sacrificed one’s estate and one’s life. moreover. went “ over the These sons of workers and peasants had not the slightest top. so prevalent in the Catholic orbit. but liberal and “ personal&tic ” in its theology. but also a rejection of the idea that the VI THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS . but honour is the patrimony of the soul-and the soul belongs to God only. more important which is characterized by a com#dexio oppositorum. These will act efficiently and according to plan even if their belief and conviction in the cause has vanished a long time ago. Not only do we find in Catholicism an affirmation of free will (Zibertus arbitrii. is authoritarian in its organization. may seem highly paradoxical.” interest in dying for the cause of a North Italian irredenta. during the recent civil war they had accepted the explanation that this struggle was a crusade. to be more correct). produces quite different effects. promises.“670 At first the violent craving for independence. Catholicism. who is primarily motivated by his (frequently very subjective) conscience. All of which reminds us of Paul Valtry’s outcry about the Germans : “ Savoir et a!evoir. capitano! their officers who.“678 On the other hand. vous &es suspects. on the other hand. The Spanish pride. a cause dear to the hearts of their officers with a very different Yet to generalize about Italian “ cowardice “-political outlook. The Italian soldier has almost the selfsame reactions.‘95 bound by oaths. is nonsense and merely betrays a lack of imagination. Liberal Protestant critics. since they had not the slightest desire to make Sleswig-Holstein or the Carpatho-Ukraine safe for democracy. ignored the other. It seems that only a filial affection can supplant conscience and convictiona mere appeal to “ duty ” (or “ law “) will not do the trick.

684 The possible salvation of a heretic. although some rearguard actions are still being fought.681 The problem of free will is dealt with so delicately in the Thirty-nine Articles that it is not easy to decide whether Anglicanism is as predestinarian as pure Calvinism. Catholic clericalism should not be exaggerated.” The repressive tendency within the Church is today definitely on its way out. or that those who reject truth with full intellectual knowledge must be in bad faith. can make infallible pronouncements and can in certain matters “ demand ” absolute obedience. Canto V. non-Christian cannot be saved. a cherished medieval concept (see. 14) . that supra-natural grace is not imparted outside the Visible Church. who had expressed a hope to meet with Plato and Socrates in Heaven. It is evident that the strong 19-25.LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.ss2 These two erroneous notions are not based so much on bad theology as on bad psychology and a misunderstanding of the real nature of man. was expressly condemned by Pope Clement XI in 1713. fideism of orthodox Protestantism has to result in an exclusiveness in matters of salvation which could never be shared by Rome. Although the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ.. Thomas calling all Christians “ kings and priests ” (De reg. i. beyond doubt. This was well illustrated by the recent suspension of Father Feeney and of the three professors at Boston College. nevertheless haunted the Church for many centuries. On the one hand we see St. but free will was. print. a Jew or a pagan is not only a theological “ view. on the . Again we will quote Pascal’s “ The heart has its reasons which reason does not know. and his De monarchia. I 2). Luther. for instance. and the Pope as the Vicar of Christ on earth. and rudely rebuked Zwingli. The Jansenist tenet. The idea that the true religion can be enzrced.” No theologian of renown would today question the possibility of the salvation of the non-Catholic as well as the non-Christian.ss3 The Canon Law says clearly ($1351) that “ no one may be forced to embrace the Catholic faith against his will. \ decidedly rejected free will (see Notes 768-6g).” but definitely Catholic doctrine. on the other hand. 196 . Dante’s Paradiso. the highest forum for the Catholic still remains his own conscience.

‘97 other we have the “ democracy ” of the beyond with its “ new deal ” placing popes. significantly.) The serious character of the supremacy of conscience is described by Father Karrer in the following words : The Church takes this doctrine about the primacy of conscience so seriously that she proclaims through her teachers : Even in a given exceptional case where an ecclesiastical authority-a priest.6*7 According to Catholic theology it is. bishops and kings in Hell. When a respected theologian of the Middle Ages. B%aw was very much mistaken when he claimed Saint Joan of Arc for Protestantism. and St. quite possible that John Hus’ soul went straight to heaven after his death at VI THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS . or even the pope -were to demand something from a Catholic which would be wrong for his conscience. Peter Lombard. insisted on an unconditional validity of conscience. during the i process. no less than Bonaventure and. Thomas Aquinas. and regardless of threats of the heaviest ecclesiastical penalties. had brought up the matter of a temporary yielding to episcopal pressure. the Canonists themselves. Yet Luther. as in Dante’s Divine Comedy.60b The formula “ binding in conscience ” can thus be very misleading. Father 0. It was \ precisely her defiance of ecclesiastical authority and her ’ strict adherence to her conscience which made her canonization possible.@6 (It was the Devil’s Advocate who. Yet the Catholic who has the misfortune of losing his faith and who honestly accepts the teachings of another religious body commits a mortal sin if he does not (publicly) embrace wh_actev believes in. therefore. Karrer -___I very wisely poinis out that G. educatingxd conforms as closely as possible to the precepts of God and His Church. later on. was then still in the cowl of a Catholic friar. he would not be permitted to obey under any circumstances. he was universally opposed. The Catholic has the duty t&i-mng his conscience so that it of forming. Theodore de B&e’s “ Freedom of conscience is a diabolic doctrine ” can well be compared with Luther’s defiant attitude at the Diet of Worms (“ Here I stand and cannot do otherwise “). a bishop. proclaimed a contrary doctrine.

688 3.LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.” is written is entitled --GANNET. with their intellectual flexibility-often amounting to irrationalismssO-their relativism. how many of our own people are actually outside [the Church] .” has at all times been accepted by the Catholic Church. luckily. and thus remained “ frozen ” through decades. Yet it is the second Laskian precept which is so conspicuously absent in Catholic nations-and this includes countries with considerable Catholic minorities like Germany. cvi. and thus the evolution towards dictatorship was spared to that nation. however erroneous. He quoted Lord Balfour : “ Our whole political machinery presupposes a people so fundamentally at one that they can safely afford to that they are bicker . the Netherlands and Latvia.“6Ee Although Catholic nations have occasionally produced a two-party system-we have to remember the shortlived experiment of the First Austrian Republic-it has to be borne in mind that these parties often had the character of camouflaged Estates (with philosophical “ fixations “). provided he sincerely believed in his own views. The philosophical abysses between the political parties on the European continent are far less conspicuous in Protestant nations. CATHOLICISM AND POLITICAL BEHAVIOUR in clear to do The legal ideal of the Spaniard would lie in the possession of a document on which and simple words: “ This man whatever may enter his mind. Ideariunt Espmiol In Chapter III we have pointed out the premises which Professor Laski considered to be indispensable for a sound parliamentary democracy: (a) a two-party system and (6) a common framework of reference-a common “ language ” for all (but preferably only two) parties. last but not least. . and. and so sure of their own moderation not dangerously disturbed by the never-ending din of political conflict. The Netherlands had. 198 the stake. 14): “ How many who do not belong to us are really inside. a monarchical constitution. The Augustinian dictum (In psalm.

6g3 A Freemasonry which does not insist on its deistic philosophy-a socialism which is ready to skip the notion of the dictatorship of the proletariat-a neo-Lutheranism which doubts the virgin birth and the divinity of Christ-a spiritualism which is scientific and materialistica pro-communism based on vague sentimentalities.6s2 It would be very unjust to charge such persons with insincerity or hypocrisy. for everybody sufficiently courageous and irrational694 to try the synthesis. since the ideologies they adhere to have been so strongly “ relativized ” in the liberal Protestant climate that they have ceased to be mutually exclusive and\ antagonistic. Yet it is precisely this relativism of almost all ideasexcluding the Catholicism of the dispersion‘jQ5-which makes for the easy and swift establishment of a common denominator. would not be far different. human synthesis is the rule in Protestant civilizations. they exist nevertheless. The Mexican anti-clerical firebrand who sends his daughters to a convent school is a good I example. especially if we consider the persecution of all who deviate from the Communist party line in Russia. can all be blended harmoniously. This naturally does not exclude the phenomenon of an intellectual “ schizophrenia. To all this must be added an abundance of myths. let us imagine a Norwegian commissioned officer who is: a Freemason. and a liberalism which rejects free enterprise. But the rigidity of the concepts in the Catholic orbit would provoke. Yl THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS .691 which are often very helpful in averting “ distractions ” and in preserving the status quo. but especially in Russia. a member of a Lutheran parish. and we have known several of them.‘99 their totalitarian societies with their conformity and their automatic antagonism towards all radical dissenters.) In order to illustrate the first-mentioned characteristics. and a subscriber to a genuinely Although we do not venture to say that such liberal paper. it seems to us that the “ conserving ” myths far outnumber the “ destructive ” myths. (Though we will never have statistics on that subject. a Social Democratic voter. a monarchist of a sort. an avalanche of excomThe situation in the Greek Orthodox world munications.” which we might encounter in any nation.

who talked of Aryans and non-Aryans.6Q6 The division of the political parties between mere “ ins ” and “ outs ” is the logical result of this ideological uniformity. mutatis mutandis. In every conscript.se7 That is. to a lesser degree. All this fosters the growth of a virulent (though frequently not admitted) nationalism. which in turn is quite rigorously enforced by all social agencies.200 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. divided humanity into bourgeois and proletarians. and to a lesser degree in Italy. it is brought under the influence of the State’s doctrine.” had to lead to anarchy or to the iron rule of one victorious party. every teacher teaches it through the years of childhood and adolescence. whether military or industrial. the process is continued. c racialists. precisely the situation in all countries with a well-established democracy. conscription. where social forces jealously guard the “ common denominator. It is obvious that the situation which existed in the Weimar period of the German Republic. nevertheless. every cinema gives it visual suggestion. Sir Norman Angel1 very accurately described human existence in a totalitarian state when he wrote : From the day that a child is born in Nazi Germany or Russia. every book suggests the prevailing orthodoxy. (b) ethnicists. yet the Thus a “ working democracy ” becomes possible. compulsory educationagE (and. (d) “ cleri2s . strengthened by an amazing conformity which makes all Basic dissent impossible.” There is no doubt that the great pride of the democracies.” Before 1933 the supremacy was contested among (a) w SociaJst parties which saw in each other abject traitors but. ” who thought in the categories of saints and sinners or . every paper shouts it. price which has to be paid for it in terms of social control is one which the Catholic nations (in the long run at least) are not willing to pay. who distinguished between Germans and non-Germans. when parties were totally unable to establish a real “ dialogue. is a prime factor in this process of forming the minds of citizens into a uniform pattern. and such a victory could be achieved either in accordance with or in circumvention of the “ democratic process.

yet Catholic countries also produced a few leftist movements which were federalistic (see Lord Acton’s History of Freedom. and (e) democrats deeply in love with the principle of numerical divisions. a fate was meted out to them which was even worse than that of the American Loyalists-of whom George Washington is supposed to have said that he could see “ nothing better .Yl THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS 201 believers and non-believers. anticentralistic) tradition of the Catholic cantons. than to commit suicide. condemning Europe was always federalistic centralization and separatism alike.. but the situation as it prevailed in partly C a th o1’ Germany has its significance IC for every Catholic country. Protestant cantons eager to enforce centralization. The opposition of American Catholicism to the Child Labour Amendment was due to its proposed character of a federal law. The War of Confederacy (Sonderbundskrieg) of I 847 saw the Catholic cantons (save one) lined up in defence of “ federalism ” against the This war.“699 Racialism in Catholic countries is less in evidence than in the Protestant orbit. as opposed to the two genuinely Spanish movements-Anarchism . Pseudo-conservatism in Spain is centralistic. the dreaded mass democracy could not develop.e. Federalism in the European a&-centralistic sense has always been part and parcel of Catholic political ideologies. paralleled those of I 861-65 (the American War between the States) and 1866 (the so-called Austro-Prussian War). and some sort of familial colour in the political system can be preserved. save in the small Catholic Swiss cantons where. And since the Jews could not conform to the desired racial pattern. 98). When the Nazis came to power they immediately proceeded to bring about complete uniformity in all matters. in a sense. Catholic personalism and individualism found its most concrete expression in the strong federalistic (i. Almost all leftist movements were practically or programmatically centralistic. due to their size and predominantly agrarian character. . . p. The whole Catholic and conservative movement in in outlook. From these and similar observations it is quite obvious that the political temper of Catholic nations is singularly unfit for parliamentary government.

As a result anarchism rather than communism or socialism is the classic form of “ radicalism ” in the Catholic orbit. The superior propaganda of the Third International has unfortunately attracted millions in western Europe who are anarchists at heart but.” In France and Italy the comedy of errors continue with millions expecting from Communism the end of all controls and total liberty-not total control and a planned economy. and never a member of a Protestant nation. then a wild individualism takes precedence over its opposite form. ‘01 Yet if there must be extremism. We are faced here by a tragic misunderstanding. what it demands is variety in unity. and Carlism-which are federalistic and in favour of local autonomy. lacking something better. where a local cult soon developed with the toleration of the Fascist authorities. brother of the dictator.202 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.700 Hence also the manifoldness of Catholic religious orders. It is for the anarchist. because these regions had the privilege of “ visual education. Neither atomization nor levelling lies within the Catholic religious tradition. The assassin with a black beard and a smoking bomb is neither an Englishman nor a Swede nor a Prussian. but possibly an Irishman or-even more likelya Spaniard. wrote a leading article on the two revolutionaries in the Popolo d’ltalia. Vanzetti’s earthly remains were interred in an Italian cemetery. which was incorporated into the aforemen- . then. A book about the two executed anarchists was published in Naples. without parallel in Catholic Germany or Austria. what in European conversations is often glibly called a “ bolshevik ” is in reality frequently an anarchist. Even in the Protestant mind the anarchist will always be an individual from a Catholic or a Greek Orthodox country.‘02 Arnaldo Mussolini. Rarely has public opinion in the Old World been more stirred. Incidentally. vote the Communist ticket. but black is also the colour of the anarchist flag. an Italian or a Russian. regardless of party affiliations. than by the Sacco and Vanzetti case. that even the European Catholic rightist had a weak spot in his heart. which show such a wide range in their character and structure. In Continental parlance the Catholics are often referred to as “ the black ones “.

in conquering the Reich from the north. he succeeded democratically. ‘04 including English Catholics will manifest scepticism towards the bourgeois The reasons for this attitude are manifold. while the younger son was named Arnaldo after Yet unlike Arnaldo di Brescia.203 tioned volume as a preface. Marx. but those of the multitudes in Catholic nations have to be analyzed. and gave to his older son the Spanish name of Benito for Benito Jukez (the Italian form would have been Benedetto) . of course. Adam Smith. ‘09 Here. Rousseau and Thomas Paine. including France. peasant. his older brother. is a stranger in the modern world. in spite of its historical paternity. Non-Catholic cultural patterns affect even the Tyrolean the most Catholic of civilizations. the great anti-papalist rebel. bias. 710 Hitler’s revolution failed. it can be said that racialism in Catholic countries was always weak. psychological as well as religious. was nothing new in the Mussolini family. or between VI THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS . Bentham. From all the foregoing it is evident that Catholicism (including Greek Orthodoxy) does not harmonize with the bourgeois spirit and the whole mentality of the middle class. ‘05 Even the more sensitive Germany. they have to be found in the democratic affinities of the urban middle classes. as in all other fields of our investigation. they are values. not the attitude of individual Catholics (who in the dispersion may easily be affected by the traditions of the majority). significantly enough. it must never be forgotten that Catholicism. and that anti-judaism in Catholic and Greek Orthodox countries always had a religious. About the attitude of Catholic cultures towards racialism we have written elsewhere.708 nazism and other totalitarian heresies. Anarchism.‘07 affinities whose teleology leads clearly to communism. Still. historical as well as sociological. Arnaldo always followed a “ papal ” orientation. Moreover. The difference between racial concepts in British and French colonies. by elections. ‘06 Last but not least.703 This disharmony affects all Continental countries. Descartes. the father of the duce himself was an anarchist. in Black Munich. the Italian Benedictine monk and the Basque Jesuit are influenced to a certain degree by Calvin. and not a biological.

not at all. Dr. Whether one prefers their intensely “ human ” world to that of enlightened Protestantism is primarily a matter of religion. in more basic attitudes derived from religious notions. a seemingly egalitarian taken. generalize. unto-operative. partly cynical and partly devout. tending towards extremes . in a social sense. these nations emerge as a rather individualistic712 and violent crowd. they still can claim to be liberal in the original sense of the term. hardly given to respect or reverence. proud. in one aloof. in the worst case for hire rather than for sale. this choice would depend on Still.204 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. it must be repeated again. strong in their hatreds and affections. even more so. Lacking belief in a specific creed. The full realization that the Catholic world is faced by the simple alternative of the patriarch or the policeman would have spared millions of lives. it must be borne in mind personal tastes and affinities. sense splendidly adjusted to this world and. the openminded Bostonian traveller. 4. 7l3 And just because these nations are not genuinely egalitarian. America and Brazil. does not exclude the fact that Catholic nations can. noted in his diary : “ In all three monasteries. the picture the Catholic nations offer us If we are permitted to contains light and dark sides. But no intelligent man is entitled In a sense that remains true. CATHOLICISM AND THE FORMS OF GOVERNMENT This alternative.” ‘I4 Over a century ago George Ticknor. to conclude from that fact that Europeans no longer love freedom. “ democratic. who in Austria went from monastery to monastery. that. undisciplined and sceptical . whatever our stand may be.711 Taken all in all.” Just because the Church insists that only God can see into the position is often heart of a person. . The reasons have to be found in religious commandments and. Henry Smith Leiper wrote very correctly : “ Europe is often said to have rejected democracy. be more more demophile than Protestant countries. in another one. religious patterns are of the greatest political importance. and more admirable under stress and duress than in everyday life. independent. is obvious.

the results of all these endeavours have been disastrous. established only relatively free governments. Yugoslavia. tradition and religion.” democracy. liberalism. I have found a more liberal and even republican tone the prevalent one. becomes more and more synonymous with tyranny. the future of constitutional democratic government is promising neither in Germany and Austria nor in France and Italy.Yl THE PoLlTICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS 205 as well as in the two or three monks I saw at Heiligenkreuz. Bulgaria. republicanism in Europe form of government.“‘15 The intellectual absolutism of Catholicism has not even impaired the “ individualistic ” aspects of medieval civilization. There are only these three well-established liberal-democratic republics in the world. . Civil liberties in Russia. with a Switzerland of mixed religion (42 per cent. . of the European Since only I 3 per cent. Hungary. The short demo-liberal interlude is terminated by the advent of tyranny.7r6 If we are looking for free societies we have to search for them among the Catholic and Greek Orthodox nations. Experience also has taught us that the change from the republican form of government to tyranny is far swifter than from democracy to monarchy. Poland. thus the great efforts in the immediate past to enforce democracy in the Old World (and in the New) 717have ended in the long run with dictatorship and a catastrophic decline of personal liberties. at best. yet these have. of the population continent are followers of Protestant creeds. The revolutionary ferment has destroyed all Catholic monarchic institutions (save in Belgium). Protestantism. Czechoslovakia. As a result-quite paradoxical at the first glance-monarchy has become the Protestant Conversely. Portugal. and since the efforts to “ make the world safe for democracy ” were largely directed against the Catholic and the “ mixed ” zone. They have to choose between monarchy and dictatorship. the United States and Finland. Catholic) trailing after them. on the other hand. . . with its flexibility. and Albania are today considerably less than in rgoo. and the outlook in the Greek Orthodox world is not much brighter. There are now only two free Protestant republics. Spain. was able to effect a synthesis between “ progress.

naturally. were temporarily jailed by the Western Allies. 1 but this hope is extremely dim. monarchical restoration. and are historically and psychologically bound to oppose it.S.S. just released from Nazi concentration camps. are no less conscious of this commonplace than the intellectuals And yet there is at the same time a fareager for liberty. The United Kingdom is in a very similar situation. be a great error to think that Continental Europeans do not have a genuine desire for liberty and a healthy framework for the free development of their The only possible hope they have is a personalities.‘le nor in Germany. may well be a still-born child. nor in the Balkans. nevertheless.. Under the circumstances. If we judge this military leader by his famous book. The necessary conditions for a sound parliamentary democracy are. The U. there can be little hope for an integration of social inclinations and political forms in the Old World. in the quest for bread and security.S. France. And we can doubt whether they ever will be. nor in Danubia. balance and peace. Italian democracy. rg46). and the U.206 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.R. strangled at the moment of its birth by the umbilical cord of a not so very democratic peace treaty. nor on the Volga. The masses. the recognition that the “ good old times ” are those of monarchical “ tyranny ” prior to 1914 is quite general. can be called lucky if she becomes a dictatorship under De Gaulle-as the least of all evils. In 1945 Austrian monarchist leaders. neither on this nor on the other side of the Mont C&is. nor anywhere south of the Rio Grande. do not favour restoration. Nor in Spain (this is quite evident when we read the thumbnail sketch of Spanish political history given by General Franc0 in a speech to the Cortes in May. because the cultural pattern . Not even a miraculous destruction or quick elimination of Catholicism would help. It would.718we must come to the conclusion that he has always been a frank and wholehearted supporter of an authoritarian regime. Le jil de l’e’pee. Curiously enough. perhaps. reaching disbelief in the possibility of a return to this one and only form of government that harmonizes with the Catholic temper and promises a minimum of sanity.A. on the other hand.

207 remains for some time even if its theological cause is removed. Madariaga’s thesis that Spaniards are moved by two historical forces-dictatorship and separatism. in the same hemisphere. a metaphysical goal-which even elections.720 The alternative to this choice remains unalterably the familial order of monarchy based on affection. They have not recovered from the blows of the last few centuries. nor found the political institutions congenial to them. slavery and anarchy-is true for the rest of the Catholic world. a final end. Nothing can replace it. 723 are going through an enormous crisis . with their love for personal liberty. enforced and impressed by the outside.722 The importance lies in the fact that the Catholic world coexists with America on the same planet. They have not been able to adapt their societies to the forms of government fostered and favoured. 721 All this is of great importance to America-not because she harbours millions of Catholics. but they are also in an agonia in the Spanish sense of the word. they are culturally assimilated and follow a political tradition which harmonizes very well with a specific Catholic school of political thought.724 They (and even more so the observers on the sidelines) have understood neither the basic difference between liberalism and democracy nor the teleological Yet it is virtually antithesis between these two trends. in an internal struggle for life and death. more calories and better dental care are not going to obviate. Nor should it be forgotten that the countries of continental Europe all need a mission. 72s their earthly pessimism. T27 This must be borne in mind by all their friends and wellwishers. they are not only decimated by the war and under pressure from the colossus in the east. increased exports. 726 will never in their hearts accept parliamentary democracy. though the Spanish case is the most extreme of a11. who should remember Vauvenargue’s saying: “ The Yl THE POLITICAL TEMPER OF CATHOLIC NATIONS . Joseph de Maistre’s dictum that large nations can only be ruled by religion or slavery-one or the other-is as true today as it was a hundred and twenty years ago. certain that the Catholic nations. without on the same continent. Today the Catholic nations. their pride and scepticism. exception.

a tierra libre y real-a and Royal Land.72B they the conto Free .” European continent to find its own soul will they act thus can the Continent hope structively.208 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY usual pretext of those who make others miserable is that Only if they strive to help want to do them good. 72s Only become again what it used to be.

P. on Mussolini. The pedigree we are offering here is by its very nature incomplete. has through a long process of The dialectics stimulated the growth of modern democracy. (We will refer to the forerunners of Hus only very Luther. also to Jansenius. the N. Nevertheless.D. Jahn influenced Miroslav Tyrs . whereas Chapter VII aspires to be a fragment of straight historical research. From the point of view of the history of ideas we are convinced that Hu exercised some influence on Luther. therefore. German nationalism. I~R~DUCTI~N T HE last two chapters of this book deal with two aspects of the genesis of National Socialism: (I) the problem of the Lutheran fatherhood of National Socialism itself. National So-which also claimse of theu%W Hus also inspired nineteenth-century (Taborite) heritage.A. it is merely a contribution to an investigation which necessarily should have a wider scope. together with Calvin. two chapters are. perC& socialism fathered Czech haps. cursorily.S.‘ CHAPTER VI HUS. e_quality. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM Movement-I The Genesis of a Totalitarian I. only occasionally and incidentally a “ prehistory ” of Nazi thought. the problems which dominate this book-authority. an a3. German nationalism produced Jahn. since almost all threads lead through him. The present chapter is primarily a sample of the history of ideas. These and (2) the origins of the Nazi parp. Tyrl is the most important 0 209 . French Revolution has roots which go back to Calvin and. orthodoxy and heresy-still figusere onxost every page.on the Czech socialist (the Social Democratic) party.) in turn. freedom.

THE GENEALOGY OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM .210 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY wtau Wycliffe . Descartes ?s& Has I( m MGds -i w -- n ( Fig. I.

which produced Sorel. Treitschke. influenced Schonerer. these currents of influence. a new society. And Mussolini in(F or a schematic representation of some of fluenced Hitler. far from being the founder of nazism. and istic. Marx is also behind French socialism. the admirer of Hus. hand. and Schijnerer influenced Hitler.. All of them have their affinities with to be “ progressive. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCXALISM 211 figure in Czech nationalism. xthey all favour the / and claim rise of an omnipotent state. who in turn is admittedly the spiritual father of the young socialist Mussolini. All ceaselessly influenced each other. All these philosophies are anti-Catholic. and their prehistory is nothing but an endless and ceaseless repetition of “ incestual ” alliances and inbreeding. Luther is also a forerunner of Hegel. Hegel is the mentor of Marx and Treitschke. They are materialistic. Hitler. -I but competing heresies with a common origin. nationalism and statism.VII HUS. National Socialism of thzch as well as of the German pattern---clGd to be democytic. nature. anti-traditional. ethnic nationalism. None of them claimed to be liberal. merely entered a small but well established movement. on the other Austrian and Czech socialists alike. hence the trailblazer of socialism. Democracy and ethnic nationalism co-operated in Europe most closely. they divide-freedom-Zhe p human beings into specific categories.) Czech National Socialism (inspired by Hus) provoked in Bohemia and Moravia a National Socialist political organization among the Germans of these two provinces (the so-called Sudeten Germans). fasa. All have common ancestors. I . want to build are opposed to the. All were hostile in varying degrees towards Catholicism. see Fig. The whole bitter struggle among them is desperate and pitiless on account of its fratricidal They do not see in each other strange opponents. thetilook solely to the future. anti-monarchical. Almost all of these ideologies-socialism. Marx gave his doctrine to German.” the French Revolution. .

we do not have full clarity on the problem of the missing link between Wycliffe and Hus. Gospels. To be sure.730 of Bogumil and Mani.732 The influence of Wycliffe on Hus. by proclaiming royal power supreme in a secularized state and society.731 undoubted. .acher ” was merely a populaLhir regis the next logical step \‘. Wycliffe in his De servo arbitrio. others at a certain Faulfisch. it would not be easy to find a direct influence of Marsiglio on Luther. and thus whose T completely “ annulled ” the concept of priesthood.212 LIBERTY OR EQUALITy 2. Marsiglio. 733 others again emphasize the role of Peter Payne. THE PRBHISTORY OF LIJTHERAN~SM [Chap.o-orJre. Waldo and perhaps even of the Albigensian heresiarchs. Edmund’s Hall. IIn this Reforme~e~&io was taken. stake Hus died as a witness for Wycliffe’s teachings. which interested the German reformer. in turn. ** If we were tempted to write a complete prehistory of Lutheran&m. and contemporary critics remarked on his indebtedness to his English forerunner. the queen of Ring Richard II . a burgher of Prague . Still. rather than his political deducHe mentioned tions. Luther went throughprecisely the same motions and came But it?iius?%e-emphasize !I to th~?&on?lus&s -c_ 11 wmffe’s basic theology. we would certainly have to include not only the name of Hus. vice-principal of St. and it is no exaggeration to say that Hus was not much more than the Bohemian propagandist for When he was burned at the and translator of Wycliffe. of the .\ Wycliffe’s ‘Ip. is the first Protestant in our sense. Not a few authors hint at members of the court of Anne of Bohemia. but also those of Wycliffe. on the other hand. has never been questioned. The Oxford cleric. but very soon after the rise of the Reformer we see a revival of the writings of the Italian His influence on Wycliffe is statist in the Germanies. In his De eucharistia he opposed Transubstantiation. who went to live in Payne was domiciled for some time in Saaz (zatec) Bohemia. status is primarily based on the supr form bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

yet there is no indication Bohemia prior to the death of Hus.740 The latter believes that the influence of the “ Brethren ” (br&) on Luther was especially decisive. Peter Turnov (died at the stake at Speyer in 1426).‘~~ In spite of the great influence of the works and thoughts of Wycliffe in Bohemia. stake in Worms in 1425.742 As in the case of Hitler. we find also contemporary rumours referring to a Bohemian origin of Luther. BartoS deserve special mention. proud of their compatriot. the existing material and literature is fairly rich. Jan Herben mentions the Erfurt theologian Johann Wesel.VII HUS. the “ agrarian who was burned at the saint ” Bohm.746 Capito von Hagenau insisted that the seed of Hussitism survived not only in Moravia and England ( ?).741 To the Catholic authorities prosecuting Luther. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM with Peter ChelEick$.735 one should not underestimate the The use of the term influence of the Beghards (Picards). Hussite ideas had found their way into Germany partly through the Taborite invaders and partly through individual missionaries of the Husso-Wycliffite ideology. M. one of the founders of Tabor.~~~ the German Lutherans have rather tended to “ play it down. it was said that he was born in Bohemia743 or that he had a wife and children in Bohemia. Friedrich Reisert. the connection between him and Hus was obvious from the beginning.737 It was used by the priest Vanek. have put considerable emphasis on Hus’ partial paternity of Luther’s ideas. and who is said to have been consecrated by MikulriS Pelhiimovsky . 213 that he was in .’ As to Hus’ influence on Luther. convicted of Taborite errors. and Johann Drzhndorf. To these he adds the latter’s friend. executed in 1458.” Czech authors. Whether he had Hussite notions before his disputation with Dr. Although a few Catholic authors writing in German have noted the connection between Luther and Hus. Among these Jaroslav Go11 and F. Matthias Hagen (burned in 1458)) and Nicholas Rutze (died 1508) .744 Against these false allegations he protested vigorously. Eck in Leipzig also remains a matter of conjecture. “ Third Empire ” for the coming millennium was undoubtedly adopted by the Taborites from their Beghard forerunners.

” he continues. in spite of this somewhat unclear admission. some Utraquist priests.214 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.747 But it seems that Luther. but in later years he publicly refused to see in Hus a “ saint “75O-a stand probably due to Luther’s concept of the fundamental rottenness of all human nature. 15 19. admitted that the Reformer. Luther expressed himself in the following way : I have just received from Prague in Bohemia letters of two priests of the Utraquist faction-men indeed learned in . Eck accused him of repeating the errors of the “ Bohemians “-a phrase which recurs in the papal bull expressing Luther’s excommunication. one of the most outstanding Protestant experts on Luther. sent Luther in July 1519 a We libellum of Hus’ ” which he wrote about the Church. “ anti-Hussite ” stand74g was fundamentally altered. “ I heard a lot of things which made me wonder. Boehmer’s views are amply supported by some of Luther’s letters and other passages in his writings. 748 His original writings. when Dr.“751 are not in a position to know with certainty just what pamphlet or pamphlets they were that had been sent to the Reformer by his Bohemian correspondent. had been driven into a corner by his adversary. Only then he proceeded to read some of Hus’ which roused his enthusiasm. I have found out that he was indeed a dear and very enlightened man. Ecks collectively could not have defeated. under a Wittenberg dateline. Heinrich Boehmer.” the years of my childhood. whom even twenty thousand Dr. a Czech nobleman. In a letter addressed to Staupitz on October 3. and it increased constantly until I too fell upon it.“746 similar confession when he wrote in 1520: Thus in many places of Germany there remained from old times a certain amount of incoherent talk about John Hus. “ In but especially in the Germanies “ among old people. so far fairly ignorant of Hus’ position. together with the letters of It could have been Hus’ De ecclesia. had felt no personal affinities towards Hussitism prior to his disputation in Leipzig. but then I did not understand Luther himself made a very where it would finally lead. Wenzel von Roidalowsky.

756 Luther’s testimony in this matter is full of contradictions. in a letter dated July 20. his admissions are counterbalanced by denials like the following : . but Hus’ prophecy is.‘j2 To these. Just consider the surprising situation into which we have come without the Bohemian leader and doctor. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 215 the Sacred Scriptures-together with a pamphlet of John Hus which I have not yet read.“755 Luther added the comment that Hus expired at the stake in 1416. In Luther’s commentary on the twelfth chapter of Daniel we read that “ Hus dealt a fatal blow to the papacy ” and that “ the papacy sank after John Hus into great contempt. \ without knowing it. In mid-February 1520 he wrote to Spalatin in full admiration of Hus. John Staupitz. we are all Hussites origins. at a time \chen he had not yet received either the letter or the bnoklets from Roidalowsky. whether he had read the books of Hus-that is.” whose coming he prophesied when he said: “ In a hundred years you will have to answer God and me. power. whereas the scandal about indulgences came to a head in 1517 . [and] the name and teaching of John Hus could not be repressed nor destroyed by any Hus is there expressly called a forerunner of Luther. also taught them. I5 I g. [and say that] that is the pure theology which I teach.‘j3 Yet it should not be forgotten that Luther had already asked Spalatin. especially in view of the admission quoted above concerning the talk about Hus in so many German localities. unaware of their In brief. needless to say. a vaticinium ex post and quite unhistorical. Luther referred again and again. Kot to mention Paul and Augustine who are Hussites to the letter.” and also: “ You are going to broil a goose (Hus means goose) but a swan will succeed me and him you will not roast. and probably also to other writings. but emphasized again his previous ignorance of the Czech Reformer’s writings : Hitherto I have unwittingly taught and held all [the opinions] of John Hus. They exhort me to constancy and patience.VII HUS.7j4 It is difficult to know whether Luther’s interest in Hus is really so recent as the Leipzig disputation.

and that he read at least some of his works. to lay the foundations . we have to take into consideration human vanity. for better or worse. all the evidence together. it is difficult to deny that Hussitism had served as a pattern and had blazed a trail which smoothed the path of the sixteenth-century Reformation. When the “ Nightingale of Wittenberg ” started to sing. but later on it grows up powerfully. not sheer coincidence that the Thirty Years’ War started Taking where the Hussite crusade had left off-in Bohemia.216 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. Finally I protest that if John Hus and Hieronymus of Prague were burned for no other cause (as it seems) than because of these Articles. Luther’s identification of the papacy with Antichrist is most typically Hussite. Luther’s sudden which tends to claim originality of thought. an injury was done them.i5g Whereas we cannot see with full clarity the influence of Hus on Luther prior to his disputation with Eck (July 4-5. moreover. from what preceded and what followed I see that their sense was most Christian. 1520). it is difficult to doubt that the Reformer was acquainted with his Bohemian forerunner.‘j’ Naturally. changes of mind appear also in other aspects of this controversy. legious murderers. certain that the stature of Master John was growing in Luther’s eyes during the following years. that John Hus’ book is available to me. it is. Thus I could not then refute But now the sense which the admirer of the Pope gave. [but] I saw that their words were most Christian. the slumbering Taboritism and the still virulent Utraquism It is of Bohemia and Moravia swung into Luther’s camp. when he writes: John Hus was the seed or semen which must die and be buried in the earth. It has thus of our helped. Thus at one time he may boast that Wycliffe and Hus were is most certainly an mere critics of papal abuses 7S8-which underestimation of their x%les-while at other times he is fully conscious of the importance of Hus. and the Pope and his minions were to them most cruel and sacrienemies of Christ and His Church. Whoever will read these remarks will be my witnesses to his faith and my confession. I indeed did not know at Leipzig the meaning of the Articles.

the results of these elections were falsified. influence of the Reichstag fire. LUTHERANISM IN THE RISE OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM In order to come to a fuller understanding of the inner aspects of National Socialism we have made statistical maps (see Figs. Even in England there were still considerable remnants of a Wycliffe-inspired Lollardy when Tyndale spread word of Martin Luther. 1932.) The comparison of the religious map with the electoral maps demonstrates at first glance that there is the most obvious connection between the two. 1933. The November election showed a decline of Nazi votes. an aspect detectable only after detailed calculations in relation with the Communist vote.1 munist votes. showing the interrelationship of political and religious affiliations. with an extremely big Communist vote. we find a high percentage of Corn. one cannot fail but be impressed by the religious aspect of the map showing the National Socialist votes. and in Thuringia.) Still. had clearly not only strategic but also political implications. as an index for the Nazi votes. This is especially the case in Western Saxony. based on the Kreise division of Germany. were the main “ producers ” of the Nazi votes. The complaint of Bishop Tunstall to Erasmus in 1523 about the impetus given to the new creed by Lollard undercurrents is well known. and in March. the election of July 3 I. in November. We have chosen. and that t with exceedingly few exceptions. and was no indication of their full The March elections were held under the popular potential. and we also have proof that in certain areas. Two more elections were held. thus placing the Russian domain within 120 miles of the Dutch border. (The latter was decided upon only after prolonged deliberation. especially in southern Bavaria. In those Protestant districts where the 1 h%%%?e-&&ely few. . (The inclusion of these areas-both west of the Elbe Riverin the Soviet zone of occupation. and. as a medium of comparison for the religious distribution. 2-4). the results of the 1934 census. 1932.VII HUS.75B” 3. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 217 modern civilization.

Only if we accept an identification of Prussia and Protestantism can we operate in a certain sense with the “ Prussian-Nazi ” thesis (see Note 335).” instance.” including was strongly opposed to National Socialism. Catholic regions with a tradition of religious and political opposition had. naturally. the “ capital of the movement. for It is inhabited by “ Bavarians.” Bavaria. The Upper Franconian area of Bavaria. yet these are Protestant. Communism no less than National Socialism was vigorously opposed by the Catholic Church. though fundamentally a lower-middle-class movement. better averages than the more complacent Nothing could be more significant for Catholic Bavarians. by the way.) It is interesting.218 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. the German \‘armians who voted anti-Nazi were deported in the years 1945-1947. the fact remains that the South and the West were the We have the regions least affected by the Hitler movement. Socialism. that whereas the Lutheran Polish Nazi voters were allowed to remain undisturbed. and juridically they belong to “ Prussia.7G1 The remarkable resistance of Catholicism and individual Catholics also impressed other observers who lived during the war years in . And yet. (The map showing the distribution of Nazi votes features this horizontal line of ethnic division.” This may give us an idea how careful one has to be with labels. In East Prussia we are faced by the odd situation of the Lutheran Polish Masurians voting overwhelmingly Nazi. had a large peasant support at the polls--a phenomenon due to the age-old political naivetC of the peasantry. Yet it is obvious that Catholic and Protestant districts National produced no uniform picture by themselves. and thus traditionally democratic and with little enthusiasm for the Wittelsbach dynasty. testimony of a journalist of renown who insisted that “ Black Munich. birth rate in all of Germany. while the German Catholic Varmians living in the heart of East Prussia remained in opposition to the Brown Creed. was strongly Nazi. the close interrelationship between intensity of religious feeling and political orientation than the case of the combined Catholic Kreise Aschendorf-Hiimmling : here we have not only the lowest percentage of Nazis (three per cent).760 Still. but also the highest Yet these are peasant districts.

must be specified and proved with more solid arguments. M. Among these there are such outstanding Protestant churchmen as Karl Barth.766 So far. and the popular leader of .VII HUS. Yet the guilt of Luther in the rise of nazism in Germany. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 219 Germany. Karl Otten. If we consider only the human nature and character of Jesus-His lofty social principles and general attitude . if it exists at all. we have heard Herr Streicher insisting during the trial in Nuremberg that were Luther still alive he would have been among the accused for his antiJewish views. political analysts and historians (in their overwhelming majority non-Catholics) have pointed an accusing finger at Luther as the main culprit in the rise of German National Socialism. which-in spite of the admiration of certain Catholics for Mussolini-could hardly be matched in the “ opposite camp ” : It cannot be said of Hitler that he is a dictator of the German people. Gooch. so good. Germany. who likes to weigh P. Our investigation has first to deal with the views and the teachings of Luther in order to find whether his ideology (his philosophy and theology) has (It is obvious that a few affinities strong Nazi implications. . his remarks. towards society-we may say that there are certain resemI blances between Jesus the man. P. and that the accusation of an Even Comintellectual paternity must be well substantiated. but their humble leader and representative. Even G. Franz Neumann. Reinhold Niebuhr and Dzan Inge. munism is unthinkable without the Christian background. during ‘And in the past we have seen Lutheran publishers and authors in the United States producing and printing gems like the following. Werner Hegemann. a leading liberal American Protestant weekly.) . W. McGovern.rB2 A full story of Catholic resistance against nazism is yet to be given to the English-speaking public. has harsh words for Luther. . exist between most ideologists. . Among the secumminaries we find E&h Frmm. an acrimonious debate about Luther’s guilt went on I 946. sociologists. Wiener and others.765 In the Christian Century.763 On the other side of the ledger.764 And a whole score of theologians.

Indeed. are far from being in absolute harmony. if we can prove that Luther can justly be called a “ Nazi forerunner. The attitude of Luther towards predestination. which was only to a very limited extent in keeping with the spirit of On the whole. scholarly edition of his works published by the house of Bijhlau in Weimar contains so far about seventy volumes. dialectic change767 and last. as expressed in De servo arbitrio. Especially in the realm of the history of ideas we find not only the element of continuation. for instance. and many of them would be astonished-if not dismayed-at the quotation of certain passages of the Reformer. The modern.768 and the views of the Evangelical Church. degeneration.000 words each. And. as we have humanism and the Renaissance. of about 250. This alone should give us an indication of the limitations which a wide popularity of the real Martin Luther would almost automatically encounter. And we even find considerable differences between the personal vyiews of Luther and sixteenth-century Lutheranism. it was a reaction against the spirit of the times. The series was started in 1883. but not least. The study of Luther’s life work is a Herculean task. made a moving . and thus “ medieval ” in the popular sense. and are numbered accordingly. said before. through his Legate. Neither should the effects of popular historical falsifications in the minds of the masses be underestimated.76g Another matter is the spirit of the Reformation itself. In this respect the picture of the past. there are few Lutheran clergymen who are well versed in Luther’s writings. (1523) Pope Hadrian VI. Intelligent Catholics have always understood that the Reformation was a movement towards and for more At the Diet of Nuremberg religion rather than the opposite. The Bricfwechsel and the Tischreden each belong to a separate series. up-to-date. is of importance. We have also to differentiate moral and “ mechanical ” guilt.220 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. and not completed in 1939. of antinomian reaction. but also those of distortion. it was a r@stic movement. rather than the past itself.” we have still to deal with the question whether the Nazi or Nazoid views of the German Reformer had a real causative effect on the rise of National Socialism in between the last few decades.

It must be borne in mind that not so much the authoritarian organization but the liberal theology of Catholicism was the target of the reformers. Chancellor of Austria. more affinity with the Wahhabis than with the Catholics from which they stem.770 Many Catholics-as. Nothing could be more erroneous than to follow in the footsteps of nineteenthcentury liberal opinion and to see in Luther a herald of the Chromium Age. and Giovanni Papinisee not in the Middle Ages but in the Renaissance and the Baroque the great Catholic age.e. for instance. refrigerators and the U. at least culturally. the late Mgr.. “l Of all earb Reformers probably only Zwingli was a humanist. disclaiming the possibility that irrational inspirationalism.” civil liberties. bath tubs. We should therefore not be surprised by the declaration of the Reformer that it is impossible to harmonize faith and reason. which reminds us so strongly of the acceptance of the “ irrational values ” by the National I Socialists and their programmatic rejection of objective truth. its puritanism and messianism. There was something decidedly Islamic in original Protestantism. Even today some of the survivals of original (i. Lawrence was at least symbolically right when he wrote that the Pilgrim Fathers ran away from the new European liberty of the Renaissance. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 221 declaration which squarely blamed the Church for the Reformation. that reason is opposed to faith and ought to be killed and interred. preached a holy war against the “ paganized ” Catholic Church.773 One of the most fundamental breaks with Catholic tradition was Luther’s rejection of reason.VII HUS.772 with its idea of an all-controlling hidden God and His infallible Prophet. Holland. H. pre-liberal) Protestantism in remote parts of Scandinavia.N. no less than Calvin. D. Scotland and the United States have. anybody might correctly judge his doctrine-even the angels.774 an attitude they have in common with some of the Luther was often moved by an pseudo-liberal philosophies. “ sleepwalker’s certainty ” (traumwandlerische Thus Hitler’s Sicherheit) was anticipated by several centuries. while Luther. its secularization of marriage. Seipel. just around the corner. a humanitarian and a liberal. with “ democracy. that .

Luther was also convinced that all earthly bondage constitutes a lasting and selfperpetuating punishment for the Fall. conquer. Neither Lutheranism nor Calvinism produced a complete Stuatslehre. the statements in the works of Luther delineating the rights and privileges of the government are numerous enough. restricted itself to a relatively small community (i. We cannot doubt that this relationship of command and subjection in the Reformer’s eyes had not only the character of a mechanical result of the extraordinary weakening of human nature through original sin.779 . we find a mixture of emotionalism and fideism which fostered a certain mobility and facilitated. know no boundaries and have a universality of their own. the North Germans and Scandinavians). The starting-point of Luther’s view on the prerogatives of the magistrate (die Oberkeit) is the complete wretchedness of man since the Fall-a notion still shared by many modern Lutheran theologians.775 This characteristic of Luther’s theology has to be kept in mind in order to understand its other aspects. not by rebellion or violent resistance . the rise of antinomian reactions. annihilate and destroy all reason. and never gained the world-wide importance of either Catholicism or Calvinism. at a later period. through the abandonment of the rational elements in its theology. all-embracing “ logical&m ” of the Scholastics. 778 There is an abundance of remarks by Luther on the hierarchic superiority of all those in a commanding position (not only the magistrate) over their charges. a teaching deplored even by an authoritarian historian like Treitschke.777 Still. and that those who want to enter Heaven must abandon. This situation could only be met by a suffering obedience (Mender Gehorsam). At the same time it can be argued that Lutheranism. Instead of the strict.776 who considers any attempt in that direction as a Catholic tendency..222 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. I I II J there is nothing as contrary to faith as law and reason. Reason and objective truth (as well as the striving for them).e. a complete political philosophy of their own-a fact strongly emphasized by Emil Brunner. though there is an avoidance of all speculation on the intrinsic value of the various constitutional forms.

for instance. the right to punish wickedness.7s2 Or in “ Von weltlicher schuldig sei ” : Oberkeit wie weit man ihr Gehorsam but rather suffer it.7s3 Such views are natural if we bear in mind his exclamation: The princes of the world are gods. One has to be nor take revenge. because he is in God’s place. yet One ought not to resist outrage one should not approve of it.780 A similar idea is expressed in the Reformer’s “ Ermahnung zum Frieden auf die 12 Artikel der Bauernschaft in Schwaben ” : Even if the magistrate is wicked and unjust there should For not everybody has be no excuse for rioting or rebellion. namely rebellions. as. children. obedient to him solely for the sake of God.781 The same has been said in his “ Ob Kriegsleute seligen Stande sein konnen ” : such im It is better that the tyrants be a hundred times unjust to the people than that the people inflict one injustice on the tyrants. only the secular authorities in the possession of the sword. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 223 Trinitatis ” In his “ Evangelium Luther wrote : am 23. Sonntag nach Thus one has to suffer the power of a prince. through whom God sometimes accomplishes what He would otherwise accomplish through Satan. If there must be injustice it is to be preferred that we suffer from the authorities than that the magistrate suffer from the subjects. as punishment for wicked men. in his “ Sermons on the Fifth Book of Moses ” : Preachers. If he misuses his power one should not turn one’s back on him. the common people are Satan.784 The idea that those enjoying a position of command are “ gods ” or in God’s place finds frequent representation.VII HUS. parents and tutors are gods in relation to their wards. nor punish him actively. servants and pupils because they act in the .

hold it tight and force it to work with the fist. . and who have to be beaten with switches because they would Thus the magistrates have to drive on not move otherwise. they have to beat. This is the God does not want the law way to keep within limits. to behead and to break them on the wheel so that they [the magistrates] will be feared. . the mob. is the Since God has given us such laws and since He knows that nobody keeps them. gods . He also wants someone to drive it. our Mister Omnes. in all spheres of life. which he attributes to the laxity of the pope and the machinations of the devil: These are the reasons for the complaints about the servants in this world.7s6 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. Also David and the other princes Indeed. He appointed also men who swing the rod. were . to burn. This is the reason He gave a sword into the hands of the magistrate. and that they coerce and dominate the rough and unpolished Mister Omnes just as one coerces and dominates swine and wild animals. thus it was much better.787 Even stronger. In times gone by when we had discipline and coercion nobody dared to remonstrate lest he have the fist on his head. God knew this well. merely to be told to the people. or brutal punishment and terrorization. He even laments the impertinence of servants. .224 place of God.788 Luther’s savagery apparently knew no limits when he dealt .786 The same attitude can be found in matters political: The donkey wants to be beaten and the mob wants to be ruled by force. ply the goad and hold the reins-this is how Scripture They have to act like the calls the magistrate in a parable. Thus it is necessary that the masters of the law lord it over the people. the pope and the princes are responsible for this lack of authority and for the fact that everybody behaves as it pleases him. to choke. Luther truly revelled in the idea of subordination and subjection. drivers of donkeys on whose necks one has to lie all the time. to hang. . . and not a foxtail. The devil. following : and completely lacking in charity.

lgtl is @j 509h-77oq6. 3oq6-40$. fw-% 7096 85j6.FIG. W--W. L 4 t h 0 0-w . z-Percentage of Catholics in Germany (1934 census) LEGEND Gtholic pop&k. .

FIG 3 -PercentafSe of m m m Districts whose poputrtionr N SDAP a$--50%. to the extent of 50% ad over.. zs-‘w~r--??an .4% 37. 37.9) (The natmu .~ .jI. _ _. O-35$ ___~.. -. -- voted ioc rhc avenge \<‘a @ I 35% _ 37.4%.446. ..).

.-- ~. 1932 OCCUPATION ZONES SET UP IN 1945 Ncuc on the lqe map the high peme of Communis VCRS the regions now in the RussianZone. . 4 .liWl_--rl~*-~C _” _. -.FIG. ...- __ ‘_ .- ..__c/ ...w ~r+ws--.r.TR--*- I . in r~yF~. =. ...~...-“* .PCrCCntagC Of Communist Votes.. _.~-.*“&l’~T....+.-“’ .. July 31...~. __ (.-. 1_ .^..

He constantly harps on the theme that generosity. On account of such weakness and forbearance the country became full of crooks. the amiable Elector of Saxony. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 225 with a fellow Reformer like Thomas Munzer. that the (Catholic) bishop who made Munzer a captive did not use a torture effective enough to break him down: I will write to the bishop and send you a copy of the letter. . Oh. always used to say: Well. The world is too wicked intelligent and pious princes. Yes. since the peasants are possessed by such a mentality.7go The complete wickedness of the world demands the existence of brutal princes devoid of piety: You should know that an rare bird ever since the world They bird is a pious prince. But the magistrate.7s1 These rather monstrous princes and magistrates. P . was too timid and stupid to punish the criminals. They [the princes] had been persuaded by monks to be gracious. laxity and kindness are Catholic survivals which he would eliminate in time: Duke Frederick. yet a much rarer are usually the greatest fools and not worthy of having frogs must have storks. . Elector of Saxony. intelligent prince has been a has existed. the princes and lords should not be soft. or the worst rogues. They have not given Thomas Mtinzer the right type of torture.VII HUS. especially the poor thieves. it is high time that they should be strangled like mad dogs. he said.78g This attitude of the Reformer is by no means simply the spirit of the times.7g2 although they are “ in God’s place ” they are forced to sin. need special forgiveness for the sins which they commit constantly in their office . Lord God. it is easy to take a man’s hfe but one cannot return it to him. benevolent and peaceful. naturally. I would have handled him quite differently. he still may become a pious person. And Duke John. an activity which to a fideist (“ Believe strongly like Luther is not so repugnant after all. the egalitarian In a letter Luther complained peasant leader and Anabaptist. .

226 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.7D3 e Luther’s implicit statement that authority and ppr are get it in his identical is by no means isolateX?Ve “ Heerpredigt “794 and in his famous “ Appeal to the Christian Nobility.“) logian insisting on salvation by faith rather than by good works. who know that even the Turk is to be For I am sure borne and honoured because of his power? that no power is established without. Luther remained entirely logical.a curious transformation of St.“‘Qb In the concrete sense of the term the notion of Hence despotism or usurpation could hardly exist for Luther. the gravity of the accusation of having laid the foundations for the modem German tyranny. as Peter says. which distinguished clearly between the ethos of this world and that of the next: The proverbs which talk about mercy belong to the kingdom of God and to the Christians. he insisted. It is quite evident that Luther’s political views suffer from \) the old confusion between power and authority.7e* This agrees with the general tenor of Luther’s outlook on life. 7s7 Yet according to Luther the shedding of blood had its spiritual charms: We are now in such an amazing age that a prince can merit Heaven more easily by shedding blood than others by mere praying. the will of God. but not to the earthly kingdom. As a theeAugustine’s “ love and then do what you will. As a Realpolitiker and a person alien to the concept of legitimacy (a shortcoming he shared with Calvin) he expressed the belief that all those in possession of factual political power have an absolute claim to obedience: What is this to me. ) and then sin bravely “. A Christian not only should be merciful. and implored the princes to be very pious and to go to Mass frequently. considered political power as something dangerous in itself. but he . always towards government.7e6 The break with the past is more evident when we read of Luther’s boast of having eliminated the Catholic attitude The Catholics.

It should not be and a foretaste of hell and eternal death. (The public and the private spheres later suffered a separation in Spinoza’s political thought also.VII 227 should suffer all sorts of things: robbery. The Wends were for him “a vile nation that God has burdened us with. Only the lastmentioned is forbidden. and the pernicious. merciful. while the jocular lie is permissible. their omission would plainly have been sinful.so3 Even the Nazi practice of exterminating the insane seems to have had an early advocate in Luther. Jews. Luther advised that he be choked to death. fire. especially the peasantry. function. and Teutons other than Germans. In fact. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM Thus one should not be surprised to find in Luther a dualism of ethics which is frankly Machiavellian. devil and hell. “ because I simply think he is a mass of flesh without a soul. but a naked sword. the jocular. whom he considered to be truly . kill. but severe. This highly pragmatic attitude in ethical matters was also This is evident represented in the sphere of private morality.7eB HUS. broken $omises and broken assurances are thus entirely within keeping in Lutheran doctrine. is nothing but the servant of God’s ire toward the wicked. Slavs. and the official lie debet jeri-“ ought to be told ” !sol Hitler’s Gemanische Kriegslist. was most un-Christian. who was once questioned what one should do with a twelve-year old male cretin leading a purely animal life. murder.“sO4 There is no indication that Luther was a racialist.s02 attitude towards the lower classes.“80b whereas the Dutch and the Flemings were as bad as Italianized Germans. Yet the secular kingdom or wreak vengeance on anybody. an approval which shows not only his indifference to logically coherent ethics but also His contemptuous to the very concept of law and legality. though he himself should not slaughter.) *O” The Reformer divided lies into three groups : the official. but there is little doubt that he was an (ethnic) nationalist with a fair dislike for Latins. earnest and wrathful in its office and Its tool is not a rosary or a little flower of love. Someone having asked “ for what reason? ” he replied. if we read Luther’s approval of a most amazingly immoral (though probably untrue) anecdote.

228 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. whose editor admittedly had read the pamphlet of the Reformer.*lb . and even a scholar like A.sO7 Racialism. Rome. of course.s14 In his Iom S&m Camphoras und vom Geschlecht Christi Luther implored the authorities to treat the Jews in the following way : Therefore one should act here in the same way. the “ blood ” brother of ethnic nationalism. just as Moses did in the desert. and the disappointed lover started to attack the Jews in a torrent of abuse which found its expression in numerous treatisesal Most of them contain invectives and are written in a style which reminds one painfully of Julius Streicher’s Der Stirmer. von Hamack advocated-before the rise of the Nazis-giving up the pre-Christian elements of the Bible. and slew three hundred thousand so that the whole tribe would not perish. with the quantitative superiority of the Old Tes nt.s1l In an earlier pamphlet he reminded his readers that Jesus Christ had been according to His human nature a Jew. who had suffered such great disabilities and had enjoyed proportionately few privileges under Catholic rule. he hit on the Jews. religious rather than Keenly looking out for allies in his struggle against racial. Greek Orthodoxy and Catholicism. The veneration of the Bible.80D Luther’s anti-Judaism is. to note that many Lutheran pastors under Nazi influence were quite willing to part with the Old Testament. force them to work and treat them with a complete lack of mercy.s1z But when the expected success failed to materialize his initial sympathies turned into a flaming rage. prohibit them from doing anything I have said before. always been a vice of Protestant civilizations rather than a shortcoming of the Mediterranean “ Big Three “Mohammedan&m.s1° He was convinced that their conversion had been retarded by Romish malpractices. and thus set out to win them over to his new faith. has. bum their synagogues. has transferred a good deal of the old Jewish Yet it is interesting racialism w to bibliolatric Protestants. “ incarnate devils.“so6 His anti-Italianism went hand in hand with his anti-papalism. with the exception of the Netherlands (but not of Boer South Africa).

(3) to confiscate all their prayer books. but also in other texts. complete expropriations17 we have here the complete programme of the National Socialists. (5) to deprive them of the privilege of moving around freely (dass man den Juden das Geleid und Straspe gantt und gar au&&e) .229 The most precise plan for dealing with the Jews is contained in another pamphlet. (4) to prevent their rabbis. and that there is no other efficient remedy but to follow the example of England.s21 that he was he an “ early Nazi ” ? There is little indication . (6) to take away all their money. called this piece of writing “ the most complete. stated about the author of this programme : A man who makes such demands would today back up the measures of which the new Germany in her struggle against Jewry. France. It provides the persecutor of the Jews with a complete blueprint for action. More than that! situation today is much more perilous. after Thus. Talmuds and other sacred writings. who was one of them. so that they will earn their livelihood in the “ sweat of their noses.s20 Going over these quotations there is little doubt that Luther a nationalist and a Jew-baiter. he would even more draconic procedure. Karl Kindt. This programme contains seven points and advises the authorities: (I) “ to burn down the synagogues or schools of the Jews and to cover what will not burn up with earth so that nothing at all will remind one of them “. entitled Von den Juden und ihren Liigen (I 534). axes. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM Luther’s anti-Jewish references are to be found not only in his pamphlets. from preaching or teaching. Walter Linden. the most thorough and the most profound treatise on the Jews of all times. rakes and distaffs.“s1s Another disciple of Hitler. short of the gas chambers. (7) to provide the young Jews and Jewesses with shovels. under pain of capital punishment.*I6 (2) to treat their houses in the same way. But was an authoritarian.” After these recommendations the Reformer concluded that they would not do much good after all.s10 certainly approves Since the advise an VII HUS. Spain and Bohemia and to expel the whole lot.

The romantic image of the pale young monk aglow with piety and seriousness. with a new sense of responsibility Luther thus appears as the spiritual ancestor and rationality.sss) In all these respects Luther is still a genuine son of the Middle Ages. And in spite of a few slender brochures and Streicher’s confession we must doubt that his attacks against the Jews affected even the Nazi leadership. We must also bear in mind that-contrary to the opinion of some of his Catholic critics-Luther’s irrationalism is rather ’ a na’ive reaction against the aridity of late scholasticism than a conscious appeal to the lower instincts. bitterly pamphleteering and thundering Saxon ex-Augustinian. and neither ethnic nor racial. was a totalitarian.s24 Yet to the Nazi extremist Luther’s work was only a halfhearted attempt to break with the Mediterranean past. superstition. His anti-Judaism is purely (Naturally. It obviously does not lend itself easily to popularization. Thus. waxed indignant when Lutherans looked Romeward. “ innate ” anti-Semitism of the Germans is also a myth. we see a kind and utterly bourgeois “ quiet man of God ” who replaced Catholic Latinity. of Raabe and Miiricke. and not a democratic “ leader ” who tries to identify himself with the masses. internationalism and materialistic slyness with the idyllic and matrimonial parsonage. sobriety and enlightenment.822 Luther’s prince is essentially a hierarchic ruler. howling. who was anything but a Protestant past.” or even a Christian. of the principle that cleanliness is next to godliness. but that is all. claiming to be their supreme personification. the religious. We have already referred to the voluminous size of his lifework. virtuous and poetical Germany as depicted by Madame de StaEl.23” LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. with common sense. and of charming. There is somewhere the vague notion that the Reformer could also be strong and unyielding if need were. backwardness. the whole popular picture of Luther in the Germanies is an entirely 1 mytholo&als Instead of the irascible. although a minor collectivistic note can here and there be discovered in his writings. immorality. as well as of the elusive Junker Georg translating the Bible into the . though he enjoyed among them a certain popularity as “ a great figure of the German Alfred Rosenberg.

Few Germans suspect that this “ champion of freedom and tolerance. The Scandinavian countries did not go through the same politico-military crises and disappointments as Germany. Small lakes have only small ripples. has a variety of reasons. The distribution of Socialist or Communist votes almost never follows the pattern of the denominational map. We have thus to shift our investigation to the character of Protestantism in general and of German Lutheranism in particular. dominates the general picture of Luther. The Reformation in these countries was not a conscious revolution but a most carefully camouflaged and cleverly enacted change from the old to the new creed. we could brush the whole Luther thesis aside and deny that there is any connection between the German reformer and the National Socialist mass movement. We are.826 (Only in Iceland was the change sanguinary.) 2. The Scandinavian countries lack the so-called “ German ” . with the preservation of many Catholic externals. 3. forms in Scandinavia.VII HUS. The fact that the Catholics had their big Centre Party (including the Bayrische Vo’olkspartei)while the Protestant political groups never achieved prominence does not invalidate this particular accusation. had anything to do with anti-Judaism. nevertheless. and play an important psychological role. on the other hand. 4.“82b often mentioned in the same breath with Goethe. as well as the relative immunity of these nations from the Nazi virus. the holidays of Our Lady are even today strictly official. The monarchical institutions of the main Scandinavian countries are above the parties. Knowing that popular concepts rather than historical truth a&t the imagination of the masses. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 231 vernacular so that the Book could become the German family’s common literary treasure. 5. We want to enumerate merely the five most important ones: I. The last-mentioned step is all the more necessary because there is the puzzling Scandinavian example of a number of Lutheran countries remaining stalwart defenders of liberalism The survival of these and (a composite form of) democracy. in Finland. prevented from dropping the case by the irrefutable argument of the election maps.

just because Germany is hybrid and not really Protestant. present in the works of Gozthe. Although German Protestantism went through evolutions similar to those of the Evangelical creeds abroad. The Lutherans The corresponding situation could not be never protested. this process could be only partial& completed. In modern Germany. Schiller and Wagner. . in the Holy Roman Empire. Old World to its doom. and they carried the very heart of the 1. but these would have remai within limits. of gravitating towards extremes. which in the German world is due to the fact that almost half of the Germanspeaking community is Catholic. A solidly Protestant or a solidly Catholic Germany would never have produced the Nazi phenomenon as we know it. on the “ far horizon ” of the Mediterranean and. ‘9‘\ 2 r\ LIBERTY OR EQUALlTY [Chap. Most Evangelical Germans lived in the shadow of Catholicism. The Germans inside and i outside of the “ Reich ” have a tradition of thinking in absolutes. if the Federal Chancellor was a Catholic in (which was frequently the case since rgr 7)) he participated Berlin’s public Corpus Christi procession. Their religious composition has preI vented the Germans (as a collective unit) from becoming a “ Protestant nation ” in the sense the English. and thus of parliamentary prepared the soil for the realization democracy. these Lforces could develop freely within the loose frame of a parliamentary democracy. i”’ w. in the shadow of medieval cathedrals. the Scats or the Americans are today Protestants. Old heretical strains from Bohemia were necessary to stimulate the refuse of Catholic Germandom-men like Hitler.232 y‘ ’ v’ Y-. of disdaining compromises. There could have been aberrations. inflexibility and hankering after the Absolute. Catholicism is until 1806. It is the combination of the degenerative process o Protestantism with Catholic absolutism and extremism which became 3 such a dangerous explosive mixture. expected in the United States. Without the control and the necessary corrective of monarchy. and thus of being basically allergic to the demo: parliamentary system. Himmler and Goebbels-who in turn were acclaimed by the Protestant masses.

authority in dogmatic matters. commanding) . (The results of the former changes are often wanted or expected. for and damnation are preinstance. they hardly foresaw the ultimate consequences in the whole religious. those of the latter are rarely foreseen. central. cultural and political spheres of human existence. THE PROTESTANTISM POLITICS EUROPEAN Having put the evolutionary aspects of Protestantism under the magnifying glass. LUTHER EVOLUTION ANI3 NATIONAL OF SOCIALISM AND 233 4.. sectarian liberalism and “ democracy ” is a factor of the utmost importance for the understanding of newer European history. and the first is of an extremely involved nature outside the grasp of a simple and ready-made explanation. Is this evolution the result of the dialectics of Protestantism? Or is it a logical evolution moving in a straight line from the original premises? Or is it a “ reaction ” pure and simple? Probably we find all three elements responsible for the change. Yet whereas the last is a matter of psychological speculation. But when the Reformers disestablished papal (i. became the centre of New England Unitarianism and transcendentalism. which had seen the totalitarian tyranny of Ma&e Jehan Cauvin. and with those producing extrinsic or exogenous effects. taught that salvation ordained by God. once a Jerusalem of the Puritans. When we concern ourselves primarily with this factor.e. we will soon make the discovery that we have to deal separately with theological tenets producing intrinsic. produced Rousseau and became the seat of the Red Cross and the League of Nations. Boston.VII HUS. Geneva. the psychological relationship between the believer and his Master was automatically put on a basis different from that in the old Church. When Calvin. we have to come to the conclusion that the slow change of the Evangelical creeds from a rigoristic movement to a fertile ground of secularism.) . it seems to us that the factor of logical evolution not only explains the transformation with comparative ease. but also figures as the most powerful reason for this phenomenon.

R. been underrated. of this cultural totalitarianism. as there is a Catholic Periodical Index. Gooch. moreover. Soli Deo Gloria! Whereas Catholicism has created an intensive and all-permeating religious culture.234 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. The Reformers rejected the whole secure “ shell ” which Catholicism gave to its faithful. Protestantism wanted none of this pan-ecclesiasticism. religious medals. H. but some Protestants might easily have invented it. man was to face the mysterium tremendum as a naked soul. Especially in a nation of visual publicity. even to “ christening ” the landscape and the skyline (and has thus sometimes unavoidably included materialistic elements jn her catholic and Catholic sphere). is much more exposed than Catholicism have. Catholicism in the United States has become to a certain extent the religion -and this in spite of its wide unpopularity. Amintore Fanfani. even in the United States. Culture “ Religion is a and cjvilization are and remain secular. that the materia and external has an important bearing on the spiritual and 3 4 . The fact. private matter ” is a socialist slogan. The reason is an does not lend itself entirely mechanical one : Protestantism easily to pictorial representation. Ernst Troeltsch. saints’ corners. Werner Sombart. as a religion as well as a cultural whole. a nun is more expressive of the concept “ religious woman ” than a praying stenographer or a meditating housewife. extending to wayside shrines. the Lutheran (and the Calvinist) face God alone. etc. There is not. a Protestant Periodical Index. Tawney. others of an intellectual or psychological nature. some of a sacramental. Thus whereas the believing Catholic is in frequent human or psychological contact with priests and saints. were eliminated. by and large. The literature on the intrinsic effects of Protestantism is very rich (we have to remember the works of Max Weber. P. The Baroque finds no parallel in the European North. and religion should remain a hidden relationship between him and the deus absconditus.s27 As a result we find no religious culture in Protestant countries after the Reformation.) . Typical of this situation is the absence of a modern Protestant novel. with popes and angels. but the exogenous forces to which Protestantism. G. Christopher Dawson. many of the major and minor supports and consolations.

It..e. and then captured whole We do not sectors of Protestant culture and civilization. came to naught. From the1 There are also certain direct developments stemming from the teachings of the Reformers which evolved independently. their calls to simplicity. simply cannot be doubted that the process of external as well as internal secularization has made for greater progress in Protestant than in Catholic countries. secular jaway by the stream of the “ world “-i. Their psychology was even weaker than their philosophy. their appeals to Verinnerlichung and Entliusserlichung. But this secularization is not only the psychological result of the planned policy and the convictions of the Reformers. the Reformers.*SO British-American . who had such a low opinion of man. ’ 7 the boat of religion. and personal feelings and sentiments made the arbiter of truth and law._resistance he-+@ be able to develop . completely overestimated his 11 -$‘-. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 235 internal was unluckily ignored by the Reformers. Thus all the rigoristic efforts of the Reformers.. crippled so i thoroughly by original sin.s2g The Protestant background of the French Revolution has. \’ st=gLtl . tendencies of man. reason attacked.VII HUS.~-. was carried the natural.\ as to--the . not been sufficiently analyzed._-I 1aenst a visually a secularize civili atio . so far. but there are undoubtedly very important connections between the remnants of French Calvinism. Once the central authority was destroyed. quarrel with Rmile Doumerguea2* and numerous other authors who have traced the pedigree of modem democracy back to the Reformers and especially to Calvin-although they frequently omit in their “ chains ” the factor of antinomian reactions. assumed purely secular forms. it is also the result of the “ new mobility ” which Luther and Calvin brought into the world. We are faced here with a paradoxical situation. earnestness and severity. torn loose from its moorings.

countries. Modern Protestant countries (which have broken with the notion of orthodoxy) are rather evolutionary. Hence the endless disappointment of all Protestant nations in of Catholic or Orthodox the “ progressive ” movements Enthusiastically acclaimed in their initial stages. of the Continent have most “ left-of-centre ” movements quickly lost their British and American sympathies. nationalism and socialism. which is opposed to collectivism Co-operation and the and to concerted societal action. yet these movements quickly assumed a revolutionary character because they were fundamentally incompatible with the existing order. nationalistic and socialist movements which arose in the Catholic countries frequently had the moral support of general public opinion in the neighbouring Protestant world. Revolution are symptomatic of this relationship. Consequently we see that almost all Catholic countries have broken with their ancient political traditions. It is significant that the modern democratic. team spirit are not well developed in Catholic civilizations. I.sS1 and the French Revolution. by its very nature.8s4 the mentor of Treitschke and Marx.sS3 Luther’s indirect influence was strengthened in the nineteenth century by the commanding position of Hegel.832 It was only too natural that the Jacobins did not feel the same hatred for the Protestants as for the Catholics. Catholic personalism. Protestantism. There is a reluctance to “ come to terms “-unless it is done No virtue is attached to it.236 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. The completeness (catholicity) of Catholicism which. the father of statism. Thus the Austrian Social Democrats were more revolutionary-minded than their parallel organization in Prussia. The “ misunderstandings ” ended rapidly in mutual hatreds and Burke’s changing attitudes toward the French recriminations. while Catholic The reasons for this are manifold : countries are revolutionary. culture and mentality of the Catholic world. The Catholic tendency to think in absolutes. and offer us the picture described in the preceding part. 2. is antagonistic to all other “ complete ” ideologies ( Weltanxhauungen) . Protestant societies (which can “ afford ” democracy) are characterized . in a spirit of cynicism. 3.

more genuine pattern. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM .237 by a uniform public opinion on all fundamentals. in a rable from the traditional picture of sectarian liberalism with democratic and bourgeois overtones. though not averse to monarchy. But all these superstitions are only to a very limited extent descended from the original Protestant heritage. He more or less realized that the boat of Protestant Christianity was leaking and that the human-all too human-trends of the world were slowly but surely seeping into the vessel. A great many of these “ dawnist ” illusions were organically The Nazi underincorporated into National Socialism. was opposed to hierarchic concepts in the Church and had certain democratic ideas about appointments in the ministry. the “ general will. to wit : a mechanical and naive concept of freedom.836 Yet the unquestioned sway of public opinion in modern Protestant societies. ground movement in Austria prior to 1988 constantly used in its clandestine propaganda the vocabulary of sectarian liberalism and anti-clericalism. euthanasia. an enthusiasm for amateurism . which was the despair of a man like Seren Kierkegaard.*36 is “ Lutheran ” ( or “ Calvinistic “) only in a dialectical sense.” and majority rule. divorce laws. Luther himself. clamouring for the introduction of civil marriage. a childlike Roussellian trust in public opinion. are deeply In their aggregate they can become rooted in human nature.837 Yet in spite of his probable ignorance of the historical Reformers and the Reformation. because it seems that the great Danish genius His picture of the had a scant knowledge of the real Luther. All these trends and beliefs. a sentimental belief in “ progress ” coupled with an optimistic faith in some sort of natural evolution assuring the survival of the fittest. Reformer was entirely the popular and conventional onethat is. the mythological fiction of the last two hundred years. non-sectarian public schools and a “ break ” for the “ common VII HUS. Kierkegaard’s reactions to ojjicial Protestantism are interesting to study. his evaluation of the religious dangers of modern Protestantism was a very correct one. so illusory in their character. making parliamentary democracy feasible. eugenic measures.

Goebbels once said: “ Besides.“840 . We will not deny that Lutheran doctrines have here and there favoured the growth of the National Socialist ideology.” he led. This is a guilt which. There can be no doubt that irreligion in the Protestant parts of the Reich was greater than in the Catholic districts. (The democratic cult of anonymity also finds expression in the worship of the “ unknown soldier “. I pay homage to the French Revolution for all the possibilities of life and development that it brought the people. most decidedly transcends the boundaries of Germany. In this connection it must not be forgotten that the republican character of the Third Reich was never in doubt. and the democratic fatherhood of .238 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.” the Mann auT der Doppelreihe. In that sense one could say. Still. morally speaking. it was “ a people’s republic ” (eine v6lkische Republik) with “ a Fiihrer who represents the community in its personality. the fact remains that the Austrian direction for in“ progressive ” turned in a north-westerly spiration. we will never be able to tell exactly whether the excessive strength of the Party in these areas was due to Protestantism as such or to the powerful agncic inroads which characterized Evangelical Germany. Thus.National Socialism. only the sincere anti-democrat should in good conscience support the Lutheran thesis of the origins of National Socialism. that I am a democran”83g If we look at the purely religious aspect of the Nazi vote in the Protestant regions. the Mann aus der Doppelreihe is nothing but a Here we witnessed not only the living “ unknown soldier. if you like. in the perspectives of modern and recent history.*s* If he had lived longer he would have seen that they often only made a detour. its being and its He incorporated the “ subconscious will of those character. but the capital guilt of modern Lutheranism (and of Protestantism in general) in the triumph of the Brown Creed can only be maintained effectively if we accept the Protestant fatherhood of modern democracy. the volonte’ ge’ne?ale. Hegel insisted that the ideas of the French Revolution finally triumphed in Protestant countries only. but also the transfer and “ fanning out ” of these values into the Catholic world. man.“) irruption of secularism into the Protestant vacuum.

*47 although for reasons mentioned the psychological evolution of . borne by every individual and by the whole people in an independent community welded together through a common tribal feeling-that must be the aim and content of our German political and folkic thought.842 The author then insisted that the Jewish race could wellnigh serve as a pattern for this new racialism. Ethnic nationality and biological race were his basis for nationality. THE OTHER THREADS IN TO THE NAZISM IDEOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT When we speak of the effects of Luther’s illiberalism on the Germans.844 we must not forget that Calvin was even less of a liberal than Luther.” And in this new German democracy blood was to be the determining factor for citizenship. One author writing even before the collapse of the German army in 1918 demanded a German democracy which is “ the rule of the whole people over the whole people. The break with the past and the advent of the republic was a very fortunate one : The Prussian political ideal of the Hohenzollerns can be But the “ leadershipfully realized only in a democracy. it should relate to all persons of German blood on this earth.VII 239 These terms were used in 1938. .841 Even more concrete were the demands of a certain Wilhelm Wiskott. ideal ” must permeate the whole nation. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 5.845 The Master of Geneva was the founder of the first totalitarian state in our civilizations4~ At the same time he is also a forefather of democracy. but they did not constitute a very new language. The basic truths of the Prussian state. . whose German Popular Programme was published in rgzo.” This view implies a broadening of the concept of the nation beyond the boundaries of the Reich. And complete unity was the goal of real democracy : In the future we have to include all folkic comrades who belong racially and linguistica& to the German people in the concept “ German nation. .sU HUS.

if the government went about its task only tolerably well!848 There is even something prophetic in the way Boehmer describes the attitude of Lutheran peoples towards bad government : Just as strikingly as in this stern conception of work. The great German biographer of Luther (died 1927) wrote as follows : The result of these innovations was also a great secularization. principally in favour of the temporal power. Italian fascism. For the old division of society into estates at first remained. (b) with the monarchy. gained full freedom of movement throughout the wide field of secular life. Heinrich Boehmer’s enthusiasm over the termination of this forceful dialogue strikes one today as rather odd. wherever was victorious. for instance. too. and religion continued to be treated in principle as public matter. and (c) with the latent anarchism of a Catholic nation. at last. Of greater importance than Luther’s authoritarianism was probably the elimination of the age-old antithesis between secular and ecclesiastical government-a tension which in Catholic countries always prevented the creation of a monolithic state of the Prussian or Russian pattern. But how much better fitted for action and achievement this new state was ! What amazing force it could display. claimed authority over all departments of social life. Britain or in the United States. Luther’s spirit manifests itself in the patience and long suffering with which the Lutheran people endure bad government and social and political abuses. the peculiar picture of the evangelical state. never became as totalitarian as either nazism or Russian communism because it had to cope (a) with the Church. it soon succeeded in obtaining the direction of all purely spiritual matter. Holland. even in unfavourable circumstances. the evangelical movement Thus there arose. This at first was apparently only distinguished from the medieval state by the fact that government. as the holder of the paternal power. The latter. indeed. The revolutionary humour which prevailed among the masses at the .240 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. what a mighty progress it could effect even in a small nation. as in the Middle Ages. Calvinism in Western Germany was not the same as in France.

He was then already in a concentration camp and suffered for his religious convictions. a few passages from the hand of Calvin in which he expresses sympathy with the notion of the “ consent of the governed. Thus to Catholics the attitude of Pastor Niemoller remained incomprehensible. in the pastor’s eyes. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM 241 beginning of the sixteenth century has already completely vanished at the time of Luther’s death.s50 We have. it is true. and in evil times comforts itself with its remarkably numerous songs of religious consolation. with their history rich in assassinations and revolutions. The Lutheran people show no tendency to revolt even under the worst government. the difference is strongly overrated. As long as its faith is not attacked. Yet the “ suffering obedience ” is not as exclusively Lutheran as some like to thjnk. and the more pronouncedly democratic and liberal tendencies in the Calvinistic orbit stem from dissenting and reacting groups. basically. Hitler had power and therefore. To compel the abolition of any public abuses by force is to the Lutheran an unpardonable crime.s52 Yet.“s51 There are also some mildly egalitarian implications in his theology. it submits with patient obedience to every harshness. Calvinism in Western Germany (the Palatinate) had. The Q . perbut the thing which is called haps. This certainly involves a notable lack of initiative in all questions of public life. but I merely an action strictly in keeping with Lutheran theology. The different evolution of Calvinism in Western Europe and in the United States had prompted some analysts to “ find ” an unbridgeable abyss between the political thinking of the two Reformers.VII HUS. He looks on all such evils rather as a visitation sent by God to test his faith. a democratic touch. the Genevan is aristocratic. also authority. Thus Niembller’s “ act of surrender ” was nothing of that sort. when he offered in 1939 his services to Hitler as a U-Boat captain.s49 This is indeed a picture different from that of the Catholic nations. We want here to recall the fact again that the black colour in Europe symbolizes not only the Catholics (and the “ clerical parties “) but also the anarchists. “ Prussian&m ” has very strong Calvin&tic aspects. Actually.

lamented that everybody who dares to think an idea to its bitter end becomes unpopular. Miss Butler tried to blame the “ Greek Tyranny ” for this German tendency towards extremism. 18. William James about the French. we see a continuation of France-Prussian sympathies. we must doubt the validity of her argumentation: For the Germans cherish a hopeless passion for the absolute.856 Frederick II was more French than German. in turn. which soon afterwards became the Kingdom of Prussia. under whatever name and in whatever guise they The Russians have had stranger visions .867 Wars and Prussian domination over the Rhineland changed that picture fundamentally.s56 All through the eighteenth century Berlin was an outpost of French civilization. 29. are decidedly Calvinistic virtues. aggressive and bureaucratic state. after all. 1685) deeply affected the Brandenburg Electorate.854 Even after Prussia. and especially Danton. absolutism and and when we read certain remarks of ideological folly. pr&qs). The French Revolution was an orgy of extremism. became the new ally of Britain. Hohenzollerns were Calvinists through several generations. the classic ally of France. and when the French Revolution was well under way the Revolutionaries.s59 This is well-nigh true of Scandinavia and Denmark. preached against “ moderation ” (me. we might easily think that they refer to the Germans. French have shown themselves more capable of embodying .858 Kierkegaard. and it was the French Huguenot immigration which thoroughly altered the character of Prussia from a happy-go-lucky feudal monarchy into an efficient.242 iJBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. This French influence.853 The Prussian virtues. industrialized. Too little has been written on that subject. hoped and strove for the Only the Napoleonic closest France-Prussian collaboration. hardly impaired German extremism.rure. but there can be no doubt that the repeal of the Edict of Nantes (Oct. but not of the Germanies. 1685) and the issuance of the Edict of Potsdam (Oct. the absolutist. The French ideal of “ clarity ” (clurtc’) is not and the pklerins de l’absolu have often opposed to intolerance. the imagine it. and though the descriptive part of her thesis is a correct one.

one has only to remember the religious picture of Britain and America in the seventeenth century. their tragic political history are all impregnated with this dangerous idealism. Spanish and Russian revolutions clearly show that the Germans are by no means alone in their striving towards the absolute. Even Anatole France. Their great achievements. “ Nothing is endurable but extremes. The German’s intellectual habit of thinking things on to their logical conclusions is common to all non-Protestant nations of Europe. quite successful.VII 243 abstract ideas in political institutions. unfortunately.” sceptical aloofness.860 HUS. but the Germans are unique perhaps in the ardour with which they pursue ideas and attempt to transform them into realities. with their “ pagan. it may truly be said of the Germans that they are at the mercy of ideas. generating a tendency towards absolutes. or sixteenthClemenceau thought that “ madness ” in century Geneva.” The old. subsoil covered with a democratic layer. the United States accumulated in small quantities “ unspent. their catastrophic failures.866 In other words. non-pragmatic Protestant cultures had this “ madness ” too. If most of us are the victims of circumstances.” finally exploding in major fireworks of nonsense. but also fostered .863 The “ holy folly ” of the Cross and the craving for the “ middle of the road ” do not mix. on the other hand. only their efforts towards the realization of these ideas-due to their devotion towards “ objects “861are often. the Poles and the Czechs. notwithstanding the fact that the National Socialist movement achieved fatal growth only on a Protestant. although they follow their goal with a disconcertingly methodical stubbornness. certainly not a Catholic but a product of Catholic culture.864 Yet the French. The Italians. and especially Lutheran. not only made an organic parliamentary republic psychologically impossible. think that the Germans are in this respect not very different from most other tru&~ Continental nations.862 Yet this “ madness ” of Catholic nations (which certainly exists in the eyes of Protestant countries) can also be found among the Russians and the Spaniards. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM We. wrote with all sincerity in L’fle des pingouinr. the Catholic element in German culture. are perhaps the least absolutarian of Catholic nations.

was due to a variety of reasons. (It is significant the German July 1944 conspiracy consisted of Catholics and It is equally significant that Hitler orthodox Protestants. At the same time it must be emphasized that the Church. To these phenomena one completes the ideological picture.8ss From the foregoing it is evident that the rise of National Socialism.I patriarchal. Paradoxical as it sounds. The Catholics70 character of the “ Continental ” and partly German scene. counterparts in the Reich.866 In Germany. ’ matism in American legal thought is already purely Nazi. Bohemia-Moravia. egalitarianism. the disappearance of the . was the strongest stumbling-block to the victory of that the hard core of National Socialism. and also Groethuysen’s two main forms of religious evanescence. This does not mean that one ought to approve of such a development. on the other hand. ‘\ militarism. monarchical element removedE6’ the last barriers to the erection of a plebiscitarian and pFlishctu_rannL ! based on a synthetic religion combining the most powerful j identitarian and collectivistic movements of the last hundred and fifty years: nationalism. opposed this solution. but the dialectic of Protestantism leading to democracy. in Alsace-Lorraine. a victory of Pan-Germanism at an earlier period would have made a parliamentary victory of nazism quite impossible. socialism. All these are phenomena unknown in purely Protestant areas. Lutheran numbered within the Reich.” aspects. from a purely ideological point of view. \ Prag‘a since pragmatism ends finally in complete barbarism. royalist. the reductio ad absurdurn in the ideological field. German-speaking Catholics were numerous in the areas adjoining Germany-in Austria. It can be argued that an Anschluss in rgrg would have materially changed the electoral picture in 1932. i. racialism. and not from clergymen.244 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.ss8) Hopelessly outconservative. with its absolutism in the tradition of thought. received his “ spiritual ” support from liberal. with the votes of the Austrian Socialists and Clericals added to those of their Yet ClCmenceau and Wilson. played a leading part in this process. personalistic and clerical with all her “ reactionary. I\ fearful of a Ca&olic Germany. . democracy. which are evolving peacefully towards a liberal pragmatism.

s71 HUS. the rise of the Nazi Party. but for the world at large. But it is evident that the little-known history of the Party cannot be entirely divorced from the ideological development.VII 245 has to add certain historical elements such as the tragedy of the First World War and the economic crisis. written down a century and a quarter ago. still holds true: One can maintain as a general principle that no authority is strong enough to govern millions of men unless it is aided by religion or slavery or both. Yet the final implications of agnosticism. and the teleology of democracy. will be dealt with in the next chapter of this book. LUTHER AND NATIONAL SOCIALISM . The material and the spiritual are always interconnected. are full of ominous menaces-not only for Germany subjected to a super-Versailles. creating dangerous vacuums. The organizational aspects. The dictum of Joseph de Maistre.

“873 It is precisely this illiberalism which disappoints and frightens the English-speaking observer. and national temperament can do nothing about it. one can also be a democrat without being a liberal or a libertarian. that is the truth. If The modem totalitarian parties are all fundamentally “ democratic . Democracy offers no defence to dictators. Maritain-that I. of hearing it said-even the democracies are the opposite of the dictatorships. ONCE MORE: DEMOCRACY AND LIBERTY this stage of our book we do not deem it necessary to repeat our main thesis. Every democracy can at any moment have an acute attack of dictatorship.CHAPTER VII SOCIALIST Movement-II PARTY THE RISE lk OF THE NATIONAL Genesis of a Totalitarian \ I am tired. or a libertarian without being a democrat.874 of egalitarianism are too obvious to need further elucidation. Renan has cautioned us that “ the activists in the democratic camp who now create disturbances in practically all European states do not in any way whatever have the American republic as their idea1. we must add. because he frequently forgets that his enthusiasm belongs to One can be a liberal I j two ideals which are not interconnected. -G .” They have all insisted on their right to use ’ the democratic label. and he has been asked to remember that Continental democracy has a far stronger tendency to dispense with the liberal values than democracy in the Anglo-Saxon world. as one has an acute attack of appendicitis. the reader has consistently been warned not to confuse the democratic with the liberal principle. Mr. Roosevelt. And each has been vocal in representing T A 246 . BFENANOP~ by M. Nor. is a parliament of its very nature a liberal or libertyAnd the anti-liberal implications preserving institution.

which can boast of few genuinely German traits besides its gruesome thoroughness.247 its political leader as the personification of “ everybody. (Among the Nazis. illiberal phase. and probably the most complete synthesis. because the Church is an opponent. and to strip them of all the additional propaganda which made nazism more hateful to the American masses and thus bolstered “ morale ” during the war. but the very personification of the community. the Church and the monarchical institutionss77 are the main targets of the forces of collectivism. Now. received in those days their most concrete formulation. of all the ideas springing directly or indirectly from the French Revolution. The totalitarian parties will undoubtedly speed up this process-if they are parochial.sao We do not allude to the accounts of atrocities. because the Church is a competitor. the notion that the Leader of the single party was not the organ of the state. its second.“*76 The hatred of minorities. also under attack. classes and races. not a “ relapse into the Dark Ages ” or a “ putting back of the c10ck.875) At the beginning of this modern trend stands the French Revolution-or more precisely. The inherent acquisitiveness of the modern state makes a struggle between it and the Church almost everywhere inevitable.” feudalism and THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY .” of the “ common man. was put forward by the “ most advanced ” National Socialist theorists . it was a fu&lment. Hitler declared : “ This revolution of ours is the exact counterpart of the French Revolution. the collective condemnation of whole groups. quite naturally. With the exception of biological racialism.“87s In order to come to a fuller understanding of this terrifying phenomenon.” of the entire nation. as a libertarian and international “ estate. the judgment of individuals according to status rather than according to personality or conviction which characterize the great totalitarian movements of today. nothing essentially new has since been added.” is. it is necessary to analyze current Marxist interpretations more thoroughly. as then. if they are international. but to the pictme of nazism as nothing but a continuation of “ Kaiserism.878 National Socialism was ideologically the full heir. which were often only too true. The nobility.

an almost entirely new picture ought to be drawn. Up to 1946 only the interior oE Bohemia (and Moravia) was inhabited by Czechs. and many others. THE HUSSITE ROOT OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM The scene of the rise of National Socialism. later by Germanic peoples. Goebbels. but Slavic names of rivers. short stories and movies featuring Nazi barons. conservatives. This is a region originally settled by Celts (it was named after the Boii. and its more immediate forerunners in the last five hundred years. and an outstanding German of Czech extraction once claimed quite rightly that there is. Still it must be said that they never matched the distortion of a Soviet film which depicted S. Kressmann Taylor.248 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.“*81 American propaganda continued in 1933 and in 1941 where it had left off in 1918. fables and operettas. Louis Bromfield. a Celtic tribe). insisted very adroitly that the capitulation of Italy could never be duplicated in Germany because “ in the first place at the head of the Reich is the Fuhrer and not a traitor In the second place. for a fuller understanding of the catastrophe. clerics and other “ reactionaries ” And Dr.S. 1943. later again largely by Slavs until a German counter-drive set in. plays. Germany is a republican Fuhrer-state. 2. in the Sportpalast in Berlin. The Slavic background is especially strong in the area north of Bohemia. Ellin Berlin. apart from a different sociological . Lillian Hellman. Ethel Vance. must be sought in Bohemia and in an area within a hundred miles from the boundaries of that ancient kingdom. kings occur here only in like Badoglio. were always in bad grace with the Nazis. in a speech delivered on October 3. men and cowled Catholic monks joindy torturing brave workers. “ medievalism. which was racially extremely mixed.” Yet in the United States and also in Britain we have seen numerous books. Among the writers who have harped on that curious theme are Sir Philip Gibbs. counts and members of the lesser nobility. It must be borne in mind that monarchists. mountains and villages are frequent in the whole area.

Ratibor. and the latter was born and reared in the immediate neighbourhood of Bohemia. Choltitz. Treitschke (i. a&Germanism. very little difference between Czechs and Prussians. TrCka) on his Czech origin. Zeppelin. anti-Hungarianism. In many a Junker family east of the Elbe tradition even fostered the use of Slavic first names.” and we would not be surprised if perhaps one third of the names among the East-Elbian Junkers were Slavic in origin. sectarian liberalism. and direct Latin influences are almost nil. Bonin. Hus strongly inspired German nationalists as a protagonist of ethnic “ folkdom ” (V’Zkstum)ss* and as His influence on Benito a hero of “ anti-Romanism. The heroes of the poems of Detlev von Liliencron. Manstein-Lewinski.. if not anti-Catholic. The whole region in and around Bohemia was outside the old Roman Empire. Clausewitz. Anglophilia and Russonationalism.” . Radowitz. mostly have Slavic Christian names. Flotow. anti-Polonism. Drygalski. Saxony. Billow. Hus’ influence on Luther has been dealt with in the preceding chapter. harmonizes with a great many traditions and trendswith anti-Austrianism. with pro-Communism. And although Bohemia and Moravia are still overwhelmingly Catholic. It is less well known that.” Hus preceded Luther. Reventlow. in spite of his Czech nationality. between the Oder and the Elbe are today almost purely Protestant in religion. the Czech tradition is to a certain extent nonCatholic. “ democracy. Posadowsky. Bredow. Tschirschky. Nietzsche prided himself on his Polish.VII-j THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY 249 structure. agnosticism and tion.sB2 The former have often been called “ the Prussians among the Slavs. Podbielski. Pogrell. Below. the bard of the Junkers. Waldow.” “ laicism. Lichnowsky. Zobeltitz.*83 This anti-Catholicism. Itzeplitz. Bassewitz. with pro-Americanism. Jagow. in turn. Hitler’s parents were born in the vicinity of the Bohemian Thuringia and the Prussian provinces border. the Hussite tradiphilia. Mechow. Cunow.e. One of the most popular nationalist authors in recent years was Bogislaw von Selchow. Rantzau. Welczek. Brauchitsch. Gallwitz. Other well-known Slavic names in that social layer (including the aristocracy) are Prittwitz. Koscielski.

*s6 Of all the Hussite movements. are a trifle exaggerated.” as the historians of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries liked to depict it-cannot be proved conclusively.s8s The roots of Hus’ theology clearly go back to Wycliffe. but historical facts. Liberal ideas were on the other hand. Their claims. the fact remains that democracy ” is probably Taboritism. Fascism was also anti-clerical and particularly anti-Catholic. the militant Hussites fought for their millenarian ideals with utter brutality. Prokop Holj preached socialistic ideas and totalitarianism. Mussolini in the Italian dictator’s earlier Socialist and anticlerical period has also been overlooked. and the populistic mass-movement of a decidedly leftist character. yet there are two American editions of Mussolini’s John Husse5 and it is evident that the nature and the aims of the Taborite movement must have greatly impressed the young Socialist.sse and also to the Beghards (Pickards) . are one thing and The latter the effect of a historical legend quite another. It is even doubtful whether he would have approved of the Taborite ideals .ss’ and that his insistence on the cultivation of the Czech language was not revolutionary. . at least. to Marsiglio of Padua.89* And although the picture of Hussitism as “ progressive national inaccurate. advocated a general expropriation. which they displayed not only towards their opponents but also against their own radical dissidents (Adamites and the like). Taboritism interests us more than all others as a forerunner of Central European National Socialism.25” LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.8s2 The great Czech historian Josef Pekai. It must be admitted that Hus himself was only mildly nationalistic. strange to him. Italian fascism had two different aspects: the “ Roman ” statism. Peter ChelEickj and the Brethren (brats’) followed And whether Taboritism Hus’ ideals more closely than Ziika. It was only the latter which influenced National Socialism.8g3 is frequently more potent than the former. including %ika’sssl semi-moderates. Ziika’s anti-monarchism. is totally unhistorical. as we know only too well. was the first true synthesis of ethnic nationalism and socialism -or “ democracy. had strong of anti-clericalism and elements of ethnic nationalism.has thoroughly corrected the picture drawn by popularizers and nationalistic historians alike.

ministers. Dicta like . Jung and Rieger also had. and strove for a more total reform. So had the two post-war prime a German background. and pro-Austrian The memory of Hus and the Hussites had already been revived by FrantiSek Palacky. the Sokol (“ Falcons “). who headed the revolutionaries of 1619.and Czech-speaking Bohemians. naturally. Fierlinger and Gottwald. century the nationalistic Young Czech movement. united by a common patriotism. Neither Count Mathias Thurn. the followers of Husnot Hus himself-had been looked upon as bloodthirsty ruffians whose memory should best be blotted out. of the crown of St. K. and a direct influence of his revised picture of the sanguinary events of the fifteenth century deeply influenced the writings and speeches of Miroslav TyrS. biologism. was at an ebb in Bohemia in the eighteenth and even-in the The struggle between the countries early nineteenth centuries. TyrS in certain respects copied Turnrater Jahn. lived peacefully together. If we run through TyrS’s writings we gain a composite picture of anti-clericalism. Tonner. nor the ill-fated Frederick of the Palatinate. A change now took place. under Jung. militarism and democracy. gradually gained ascendancy over the more conservative “ Old Czechs ” under Rieger. Wenceslaus and the Habsburgs in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries following the Lutheran Reformation had a patriotic and religious rather than an ethnic character. the founder of the great athletic organization. Until the days of Palacky. And until about eighty years ago German. S. we must mention the brothers Gregr (Greger). nationalism.” were Czechs. the “ Winter King.805 but this translator of Darwin and Taine into Czech was more modern than his German forerunner. once strong in the days of Hus and”%ka. Most of the co-founders of the Sokol movement were of German background: besides the two leaders Miroslav TyrS (originally Thiersch) and Jindi’ich Fugner. “ Bohemianism “894 yielded only slowly to the evil of a In the second half of the nineteenth rising ethnic nationalism.VII] THJI RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCL%LIST PARTY 25’ Ethnic nationalism. Cernj and Nbprstek. Germans and Czechs suffered equally from the consequences of the Battle of White Mountain (Bila Hora). we must bear in mind. Amerling.

national and humanitarian super-Church which “ will rule the world. amalgamation of ethnic .003 In the various Czech encyclopediaseo4 we see the emphasis on the same or similar points: no bias against religion. always been international rather than anti-national. but “ opposition to clerical influence ” (which reminds us of the Nazi “ positive Christianity ” coupled with a methodic warfare against “ political Catholicism “) . It is significant that the word “ workers ” was dropped by this new N. the interest of the nation is much more esteemed than the interest of individuals .S. . the Ndrodn.252 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.S.” and so on. which had a good chance of finding concrete expression in this new movement. is these can be found: all .“898 Because of the strong industrialization of Bohemia. A sword in each hand! Military organization!897 TyrS had a vision of a totalitarian. A group headed by KlofaC.&sol The ideology of this party was thoroughly based on the picture (not on the reality) of the Hussite (Taborite) traditions. totality is more highly valued than the parts.S. Moravia and Silesia.s02 Karel Hoch characterizes the N.! Socialistickxi Strana testi. underwent a schism.” The Czechs would be the first members of this new “ Church. a member of the Second Internationale. and Hussite influences in the Czech Social Democratic Worken Party was never denied.000 Yet the mild nationalism of this political organization did not satisfy all members. indifference and cowardice. .S.8ss the break with cherished ethnic notions was never complete. a vigorous Czech Socialist (or Social Democratic) Socialism on the Continent has Party was soon organized. Stiibrn$ and Franke rejected the international notions of the Social Democrats and formed the Czech National Socialist Party. and in 1896 this party.6. only a healthy nation is able to defend itself. “8s6 or: “ Personality is nothing-totality In a healthy nation there is no room for treason. in the following way: “ Collectivizing by means of development : the surmounting of the class struggle by national discipline: moral rebirth and democracy as the conditions of socialism: powerful popular army.

BeneS. for this new group. peasants and petty bourgeois. The split in the Czech Socialist Party in 1896 must have also inspired certain German-speaking workers and petty bourgeois in Bohemia. a nonMarxist attitude in a limited socialism.@“’ The rivalry between nationalism and socialism among the Sudeten Germans was not one of necessity. according to Josef Pfitzner. and they aspired to far-reaching social reforms which had no place in Schbnerer’s bourgeois programme. In northern Germany F. on the other hand. Naumann’s “ German Social Party ” had already gained a few adherents.S.S. unlike Dr. added glamour in the form of a historical appeal. 3. opposition to the nobility and support for the worker. The Social Democratic Party. there was. nationalism and socialism.) so5 This new party was. The time for a synthesis had come. and its leadership too obviously Jewish. was too international for their tastes. nevertheless. and since the Hussite wars had been generally represented as a democratic. its Czech forerunner (Yet President Masaryknever had an anti-Jewish platform. a powerful synthesis of the most dynamic collectivistic trends of the end of the century. The gap was soon to be filled by the German Workers’ Party of Bohemia and Moravia which. . both organizations-the Czech as well as the German. who. socialistic and nationalistic manifestation.006 Yet these members of the lower classes extended their hatreds also to the nobility. 1931) features (V. who were imbued by Schonerer’s ethnic nationalism. was never a member of the N. anti-Judaism and anti-clericalism. 47).i:. “ united the two great currents of the century (die beiden Jahrhundertkrtiyte) . Unlike German National Socialism. and the rejection of class strife (since it “ divides the nation “).complained of Austria’s favouritism towards the Jews . under the heading “ Narodnt Socialni Strana ” (National Socialist Party). THE BEGINNINGS OF GERMAN NATIONAL SOCZALISM It is not sheer coincidence that the Czech encyclopedia Masarykliv Ottiv Xauc’n$ (Prague.VII] THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOC'IALIST PARTY 253 nationalism and socialism.

the “ Nazi ” Party.) was quite genuine and honestly conceived. The following year (I 898) a Deutschviilkischer Arbeitertag (“ German nationalistic workers’ meeting “) was convoked in Eger (Cheb) . who in 1897 transferred a small newspaper. German socialism and Marxism meet-and even in the criticism of capital and its function. had received support from H. a printer. which made Czech an additional official language in the Germanspeaking districts of Bohemia and Moravia.S. * We add the Czech names of the cities in parentheses.) Burschofsky. Friedjung and Viktor Adler.D. both of Jewish extraction.P. from Vienna to Eger (Cheb) . (This. in the daughter party. leader of the “ Mghrisch-Trtibauer Verband “----a co-ordinating organization (what the Germans call a “ roof organization “) of nationalistic workers’ associations in Moravia-was elected chairman at the Eger meeting. a programme of twenty-five points was agreed upon.A. which in many respects was similar to Schonerer’s Linger Programm of 1882.D.sll Stein belonged to a tiny Arbeiterbund. . S. Der Hammer. .* He wrote: “ Nevertheless. A certain Hans Knirsch had become managing leader (Gesctij%ftihrer) of this organization in rgor .P. Baron Gal&-a (who often and Ludwig Vogel. 1933.LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. and he was.A. one of the few original National Socialists who remained after January.“s12 The organization. in the criticism of capitalism.. together with Jung and Krebs.“s0s Rudolf Jung dates the rise of German National Socialism back to the activities of Ferdinand Burschofsky. had resulted in a sudden rise of nationalist feelings. and of the social struggle. until it broke into its constituent parts in 1908. . the “ Deutschnationaler language regulations of Prime Minister Count Badeni.s10 freely copies from Hans Krebs’ Ein Kampf urn B6hmen) seems to be more exact when he mentions a certain Frank0 Stein.P. and thus these borderlands [of Germany] were far ahead of the mother country. 254 completely in its programme .“s08 The socialist ideology contained in this movement and in its various successors (D .N. the N. a bookbinder.013 For some time to come the Mahrisch-Trtibauer Verband played an active role. as attested by Professor Karel Englig of the Masaryk University of Brtinn (Brno) .S. curiously enough..

In the same year we hear of another move to change the name of the struggling party.000 members were organized in the above-mentioned league. Schonerer’s middle class national-liberal party. and in December of the same year a mass-meeting in Reichenberg (Liberec). the stricter application of democratic principles in army promotions.P. at the first party congress in Trautenau (Trutnov) the programme of the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (D. The party Arbeiterpartei in 8sterreich. The leader now was a certain Wilhelm Prediger. 1903. now renamed Deutschpolitischer Arbeiterverein fiir fisterreich (“ German Political Workers’ Union for Austria “).” soziale ” or “ Nationalsozialistische He was not successful. who proposed to call the party the “ DeutschDeutsche Arbeiterpartei .916 There were also other demands made.A. clerical and capitalist privileges. A political party was finally formed on November 15.VII] THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY 255 In April. At that time the D. . had two newspapers. we witness in Saaz (Zatec) a meeting of the Reichsorganisation der nationalen Arbeiterschaft (“ National Organization of Nationalistic Workers “).) received its lasting basic content-which subsequently underwent many changes in detail. It solemnly severed all its connections with the pronouncedly bourgeois Deutschnationale Partei. nationalist party which fights strenuously against reaction. but none in essence. against feudal. The reasons are obvious: the move was blocked by the Bohemian groups. such as the separation of Church and State. which were afraid of being accused of copying the Czech National Socialist Party. as well as against all alien influences. one in Mahrisch-Triibau (Moravska Tiebova) and one in Gablonz (Jablonec) . 1902. At last the nationalist workers had something more tangible and effective than a mere was provisionally called “ Deutsche Verein .g14 At that time 26. It was then declared : We are a liberal.A. It came from the Moravian Hans Knirsch.“g1S and less than a year later. in Aussig (Usti-nad-Labem) .P. and the nationalization of mines and railroads-the usual tenor of “ progressive ” Continental parties.

Shadows Nationalist passions of doom and despair were over Austria. was held in Prague. Krebs was the editor-in-chief of the Iglauer Volkswehr. from Vienna (Floridsdorf) to Bohemia. three deputies were again sent to Vienna. but again they failed.A. in order not to be found unprepared when the day of the division of the Dual Monarchy arrived. at the party congress in Vienna-the first and last to be held in Austria proper before the proclamation of the Republic-the change was .A. and the only event of importance in 1916 was the campaign of the D. We hear then of new men: Rudolf Jung.e1e joined the party. At a meeting in Aussig in April.A. and in 1913 four representatives were elected to the Moravian Diet. while Burschofsky and Knirsch remained in the steering committee.P. but such were not lacking among the Marxian socialists either. 1918. who had been transferred. The party then owned seven newspapers and seven trade union periodicals. a civil engineer employed by the national railways.P. to the Reichsrat (Imperial Diet)-thus advertising the ideology of the party in Austria proper. themselves. and he was defeated by a vote of 29 to 14.” But the reopening of the secretariat of the party in late rg I 7 (in Aussig) brought a new period of feverish activity. Yet the outbreak of the war brought a lull in party activities. These were “ bourgeois ” additions.A.000 ballots.P. delegate Gattermayer again demanded the change of name. and the Moravian groups tried again to achieve a change in the label. Walter Riehl.256 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. At the elections of I 91 I. for a punishment. while Adler was supported by 30.g1E Hans Krebs.*17 In Igo5 the D. the Reichsrat was suspended. tried to oppose Viktor Adler. The various ethnic groups were already arming were rising. they wanted to take the wind out of the sails of the Social Democrats. Yet in rgo6 three deputies were sent by the D.000 votes.P. In 1909 a Reichskonferenz (“ national caucus “) of the D. the former German nationalist now running for office for the Social Democratic Party in Reichenberg (Liberec) .~~~ But a month later. and Dr. a lawyer. but they polled only 14. organ Freie Stimmen in favour of adopting the name “ National Socialist.

. clerical.* were an international group. countries in Europe M-here the Jews had a more favourable position than in the Dual hlonarchy).VII] THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY 257 finally effected. Masaryk. . and never revived again. .P. democratic and pseudo-liberal curThe claim of being rents of the earl\. .twentieth century. it demands the elimination of the rule of Jewish banks * over our economic life and the establishment of People’s Banks under democratic control . . . feudal and capitalistic privileges. It is a liberal and strictly folkic party fighting against all reactionary efforts. mtm. anti-Habsburg there were few feudal. anti-monarchic.N. of plebiscitrs (referenda) . liberal (‘jkheitlich) \vas still upheld. it demands the introduction for all important laws in the country . . . egalitarian. . democratic (in the Continental sense) in demanding direct democracy for the decision of all important issues. \vas anti-clerical. Clemenceau. K mow- . and dared to be different-the mortal sin in egalitarian or identitarian societies-the offensive against them was a founder of thr I’m-Europe * Count Richard Cou~cnho~e-~al~rpi. .4ustro-Hungarian monarchy as vehemently as did Wilson. . It was pan-German.g2” and anti--4ustrian. antiThe Vienna programme. majoritarian.S.) was born-at a time when Adolf Hitler was still fighting as a private first class (lance corporal) in France. . Since the Jews were in the process of becoming in central Europe a new dite. It was anti-Jewish.g21 It was then declared : . it stands for the interests of every decent and honest enterprise. . moreover. Lloyd It was sincereiy George or BeneS. but before all against the increasing influence of the Jewish commercial mentality which encroaches on public life . the German National Socialist Workers’ Party is not a party exclusively for labourers. . repea.A. It demanded the dissolution of the . it demands the amalgamation of all European regions inhabited by Germans into a democratic and socialized Germany . but finally dropped when Hitler took over.41~ c&d the JNY the nen ~IW~KIXC~ d lbl-~p~. The “ Deutsche Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei ” (D. .922 This programme was the very synthesis of all collectivistic.

Czechs Ohne Juda.s24 Rousseau.258 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap* symbolic synthesis of the attacks against capital. wird erbaut Gerand Catholic priests.A.A. and the first party congress in the new republic took place in Dux (Duchov) on November 16. the old “ bourgeois ” nationalist. Hans Knirsch. manias Dom (“ without Juda. who had always worked for the dissolution of the rotten Habsburg state. IgIg. The whole programme was extremely “ progressive ” and “ up to date “. where the party protested violently against the establishment of the Czech state.N.P. Robespierre and Gracchus Baboeuf in its final consummation.5.D. there was.N. Hans Knirsch attacked the new state violently. (This speech has been published in pamphlet form. traces the background of the N. He died in 192 I.S. .A. but expressed satisfaction over the fact that the leaders of Czechoslovakia were such nationalists as Masaryk and Tush?.g29 In Aussig the first National Socialist monthly.s2* In the Czechoslovak elections of June. international clergy and hierarchic nobility. Marat. Hans Knirsch published a flamboyant appeals25 which extolled the political unification of all Germans into one state. the D.s28 SchGnerer. in Czechoslovakia. to the establishment of a Freier Ausschuss fur einen deutschen Arbeiterfrieden (“ Free Committee for a German Workers’ Peace “) in Bremen at the beginning of 1918. Volk und Gemeinde. ohne Rom.” Here was the common heritage of Ziika. IgIg.P. was then still alive. which included the whole Sudeten German area. without Rome. der alte Sehnsuchtstraum der deutschen Demokraten (“ the old nostalgic dream of the German democrats “). he had a home in Zwettl near the Bohemian border. no “ putting the clock back ” and no “ medievalism. Jan van Leyden. Germania’s cathedral is built “). in the whole ideology. Anton Drexler organized on March 7. and Rudolf Jung (who was soon to flee Germany) were extremely active. But Hans Krebs.s27 was his slogan. was able to poll 42.P. Hitler’s most outstanding biographer.S. Of Konrad Henlein we hear nothing yet.) Konrad Heiden. from which he thundered occasionally against Jews. was published.000 votes. The breakdown of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy did not materially hinder the development of the D.

which took place in Salzburg (Austria) on August 7 and 8.N.” which in rgrg changed its name to “ Deutsche Arbeiterpartei “-another D.g35 The demand for a union of all Germans in a “ democratic. 7. and the N. And Rudolf Jung provided the young party with an almost complete outline of a readymade ideology .S. with an upper chamber on a corporative basis. and proposed to call it “ Social Revolutionary Party. were quickly established.P. was accused of being of Czech or part Czech originesl-was the owner of Membership Card No. A certain Adolf Hitler-who.A. a branch of this league in Munich. and Streicher. and instead of Gottfiied Feder’s “ positive Christianity ” we hear about the postulate for a “ development of the religious life in a German spirit “-a phrase perhaps even more ambiguous. and from rg2o to I 922 so-called ~wischenstaatliche Vertretertagungen (“ interstate meetings of representatives “) were held in order to At the first of these meetings.” renaissance was stressed.B80 The same Drexler became Member No. who prevailed upon him to follow the pattern of the D.P.u34 provided an even more virulent anti-Judaism.A.P. I of this “ cell.A. the volume published in Aussig in 1g rg.) was born.D33 Hitler merely added a few confused ideas about foreign policy. its small Austrian splinter.A. like Luther. and there was some talk A moral about an “ equal and general right to vote.. . The onomastic evolution of the Bohemo-Moravian motherparty had been closely imitated. co-ordinate political activity.S. 1918. was repeated almost verbatim. Contacts between the D.g36 It is worth mentioning that the collective signatory of the programme appears to have been the “ Nationalsozialistische THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY .“932 It was Rudolf Jung.P. the refugee from Czechoslovakia.S.S.VII] 259 1918. the Vienna programme of May 15.N.. a Franconian teacher and formerly active in the Democratic Party. and thus-with a very slight change in the name-the Nationalsotialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (N.D. .P. Yet Hitler was not happy about the name of the party. social German Reich ” was retained.D. New was the demand for a two-chamber system.A. deviations are to be found in minor details only.

1934. Socialist publications in that year.S.“g41 The Church. 1923.” June 30. (Von Kahr and Von Lossow were murdered in the Reichsmordwoche.A. Guderian and “ die Keitel. Drucker was quite right when he said of Hitler’s relation to the German army that the Fiihrer “ hated it just as much as any German liberal did.g3g The D. the German group with only one paper.” P. the “ Blood Purge. of Czechoslovakia thus became nothing but a The S. through an open rebellion in Munich.A. also opposed Hitler on principle. and failed. to accommodate the Ftihrer.838 Hitler then made his first bid for power in November. (Sudetendeutsche Partei) founded tail on Hitler’s kite. Corneliusstrasse r 2.” and the same label figures. by the Czechoslovak government was nothing but a badly camouflaged revival of Dr. The inter-state meetings were continued until 1922. The Polish group (headed by Herr Kotschi in Bielitz) had no house organ. F.P. Munchen. finally. the Viilkische Beobachter-the name and address of the editor are given: Adolf Hitler. ably led by Cardinal von Faulhaber. temporarily at least. was foiled through the efforts of the local Reichswehr under the command of Von Lossow. The Czechoslovakian and Austrian parties were trailing.) From that time on Hitler’s hatred for the the Reichswehr and all clerical politicians was Junkers. by Konrad Henlein after the outlawing of the D.N.P.P. at the head of the tabulation in Rudolf Here we find a list of all National Jung’s opus (1922 edition).N.260 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. boundless: his paladins in the army were in the end all nonJunkers such as Jodl.g37 The “ Sudetenlgndische Gruppe ” is mentioned first with eleven periodicals and newspapers. and the refusal of Von Kahr.940 to unseat the German government in November. in co-operation with General Ludendorff. By the middle of rgr3 the German group must have increased considerably. Hitler’s attempt. 1923.S. but when he was released from the fortress of Landsberg in 1924 the Bohemo-Moravian mother-party formally accepted his leadership. The plan to conquer Germany from the Catholic domains . BeneS’s Germanic counter-party.D. Bavarian Prime Minister. Partei des deutschen Volkes. then the Austrian organization with two periodicals (in Vienna and Salzburg) and.

decreased finally to 5 seats. .VII] THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY 261 had thus proved a failure.. In the autumn of 1930 the National Socialists won 107 seats. the National Socialists. If we divide them into three groups. 1928 . gaining triumph after triumph in the northeast-in East Prussia (with the exception of Catholic Varmia). and the “ Demo-Liberals ” (Democratic. 346 116 107 196 288 “9 24 ‘3 What had happened? Not only did the National Socialists succeed in mobilizing the inert non-voters.. who ordinarily show no interest in political matters.* but they also gobbled up the “ demo-liberals. . After a prolonged and partly enforced lull the conquest of Germany began by legal meansthat is.. The first states which fell a prey to Hitler were Saxony and votes for clne se:lt in the Reichstag-the total number of deputies rose from 481 to 647. in Pomerania. but also does the study of the increase and decrease of the individual parties. within the framework of the democratic process.” The German Democratic Party (later called Staatspartei) . 1932 March 5. 1933 .. Igy) November 6. the “ Rigid Ideologists ” (Nla t ional Consematives. . viz. which had over 80 mandates in 1919 and in 1928 still had 25 deputies.. The “ Wirtschaftspartei des Mittelstandes. Protestant..” which boasted of 23 deputies in 1928. non-partisan peasant and middle-class parties). had none * With strict proportional rrprescntation-60. Socialists and Communists). the “ private citizens ” (idiotae). 12 May20. . Liberal. . 363 $2. and Sleswig-Holstein. we get for four of the elections of that period the following picture : ELECTION DEPUTIES ELECTED BY DemoNational Socialists Liberals “ figid ” . Catholics. Mecklenburg. Not only does the comparison of the religious with the political map of Germany tell a striking story. September 14. Nothing is more revealing than a study of the election results of the whole period between rg28 and 1933.

“ scientific ” rather for example. The Socialists had small losses.943 Hitler. Yet the royalist “ Bavarian People’s Party ” maintained and slightly increased its number of supporters. collaboration is sometimes the best form of “ attack. managed to maintain their hold. the heirs of Bismarck’s National Liberals. Nazis was smaller than the Protestant. Occasionally support was given to the Nazis by noblemen. it Volkspartei ” must have been negligible.” a Bickermeisterbewegung. The renegades from the upper classes who supported this mass movement of petty bourgeois and workers acted perhaps sometimes in good faith. On the other hand the Deutsche Volkspartei. It was German gradually declined from 45 to 2 members.262 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. The Catholic votes for the “ Staatspartei ” or the ” Deutsche Furthermore. The attacks of some of the Nazi leaders against Christianity could have been written by any French Radical Socialist or contributor to such Soviet periodicals as Byezbodnik or Antireligioznik. bankers. But if opposition becomes hopeless. hoping against hope to tame the beast. the Communists increased the National Conservatives fluctuated but considerably.“944 About the religious implications of the elections we have The Catholic share of the written in the preceding chapter. Some others started to pay “ protection ” and “ conscience money ” before Hitler came into power. yet essentially the National Socialists were always a “ movement of grocers. declared : “ National Socialism is not a religion with a cult but a popular movement based on the exact sciences.g42 These attacks were often than racialist-emotionalist. in 1933. liberalism and German bourgeois democracy which had turned National Socialist. opposed to Catholicism and orthodox Protestantism alike. must be kept in mind that the National Socialists never denied their democratic and socialist heritage.945 because the Catholics were also less conspicuous in the “ demo-liberal ” parties.” When Hitler was taken into . whereas the Catholic Centre Party rose slowly from 61 to 73 seats. This is not surprising if we remember that German liberalism was strongly sectarian. manufacturers and individual scientists.

946 Papen and his supporters had become afraid of their own isolated and unconstitutional position. which enjoys not only the support of all Jews but also of many aristocrats.” We were certain that they would accept our imitation without guile. freely and gladly.” For instance. but also hoped to destroy nazism by saddling it with responsibilities-and confronting it with “ insuperable difficulties. hanged together] . 1932. . In an open letter he had described Papen’s motives ironically and correctly. great care was taken that each post in the cabinet allotted to a National Socialist was counterbalanced by another position filled by a non-Nazi. the Nazis] into our cabinet. although they are mostly of simple origin and often living in dire poverty. putting the following words in his mouth: In this emergency only one thing could help. who do not belong to “ Herr von Papen’s world ” but “ want to be the most faithful sons of our people.. the ruling clique not only bowed to the democratic principle of parliamentary support. They changed their minds. We wanted to invite them [i. and with innumerable sacrifices. who in October. had haughtily rejected Papen’s first offer to collaborate. “ Insuperable difficulties ” there were none. for a new and better German Reich. 1933.e. but so also had Hitler. Once they shared our Mitgefangen ! company they could hardly withdraw.” Yet the trick of collaboration did not work.VII] THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY 263 the government in January.” This community of millions of German workers of the “ forehead and the hand ” and of the German peasants “ does not fight with the lips but with a suffering borne thousandfold. The silly cavalry officer had underestimated the shrewd post-card painter.947 This letter was terminated by Hitler’s proud insistence on the loyalty of his supporters. Then we would slowly start to pull their poison fangs. because the Western powers made concessions to Hitler which they had never made to Briining. or to any one of his immediate successors. hfitgchangen! [caught together. conservatives and members of the “ Stahlhelm. The clique around the President had underestimated the crushing power of mass movements functioning in complete harmony with the spirit of the age.

950 Yet Hitler. democracy.. also in Mein Kumpf (Munich: Eber.” and they had died in battle.” of the masses. 1935 (V. 1944. May 21.. about 20 were high civil servants. calls himself an arch-democrat. The whole dangerous decay was seen by a few in utter clarity. calls the National Social&t constitution Berlin. of the prevailing trends. 99 : “ The truly Germanic democracy with the free election of the Leader.. December I I. the duty of the “ wave of the future.s4s And the percentage of noblemen in the conspiracy of July.” Rudolf Hess. 1935) .264 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. 1938) . May 22. \vho definitely had his eye set on the multitudes. riding It is. and they had acted accordingly even before 1944. needless to say. calls National Socialism the ” truest Berlin. Edgar Jung (murdered in 1934) was one of those who had correctly analyzed the deadly “ democratic ” aspects of-National Socialism. I 940) . 1938 (?‘. p.949 They had fought a movement and an ideology which a discerning French novelist had called a “ late cancer which had thriven on the French Revolution. November IO. January 31. Men like Jung had rejected it because they had always repudiated all collectivistic movements. ‘937) .” true e’lites to oppose the masses if they err.I?. 4 were priests and ministers. and to prefer death to compromise: prius mori quam superari. January 30. 1937 (F. over 60 were army and navy men. rg3g). The following are only a few instances : Hitler: Attack against Eton and Harrow. Some others again were convinced that they should act as clercs in the sense in which Julien Benda uses this expression-as servants of the “ general will. Dr. repeatedly called National Socialism “ democratic ” and So did Goebbels and styled himself an “ arch-democrat. among the I Ig persons condemned to death by the People’s Court no less than 41 had titles.” democratic. December IO.II. shows that the old virtues were even then not entirely dead.” Goebbeh : Calls National Socialism an ” authoritarian . Munich. I 540 ( V6Zkischer Beobachter. Other “ collaboration&s ” thought cynically with Baron Steiger : ” La garde se rend mais elle ne meurt pas ” (“ The Old Guard surrenders but does not die “). who is obliged to assume full responsibility for all his actions. November 8.B.

the idea that private property is sacred. with its Slavic parallel narod (which. . V. and Ladislas Ottlikgj” is a deep.r. is etymologically stronger in its racial implications than either Folk or populus. 1933) . who has to produce what he is told at a prescribed price. Ethnic nationalism in Europe started distinctly as an an. The term deulsch (diutisk) had also the double meaning of German and popular. frequently characterized by a strong anti-Catholicism. who has to invest his money in a definite manner. May 3 I. is an “ owner ” Reventlow ridiculed or a “ master ” not even on sufferance. Peter It is also obvious that there Viereck.95* calls National Socialism ” the noblest form of European democracy.g5~ Neither was the assertion of the socialistic character of the It is self-evident that in Party and the rCgime an imposture. is not merely coincidental. June 2 I. Rudolf He. belongin? to the “ upper crust.B.\: Calls Kational Socialism the “ most modern democracy of the world ” based on “ the confidence of the majority.Q6j And if we look at the social background of the party members and their leaders we find the upper classes in a distinct minority. private property loses all its reality. 1933). Denis de Rougemont.VII] 265 democracy ” (speech b ef ore the press. admits that Nazis do not talk much about democracy but insists they are nevertheless the executors of the “ general \vill ” (V. DClos.“ 7 per cent. April 25. Ducatillon. Siegmund Neumann.i-aristocratic and antimonarchic movement. who has to make specific donations at certain intervals and has to deal with governmental trade unions. nationalism and democracy. Frankfurt. 1934. the syllable-rod means “ sex “). J. whose factory can be confiscated at a moment’s notice without compensation. however. where the government wields an absolute A manufacturer power.. T. Professor Abel found among a large group of leading Nazis only 7 per cent."Q32 THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY The democratic character of n’ational Socialism has also been clearly recognized by such observers as J. 1933) . The ambiguity of the word J*olk.” March ~g. intrinsic connection between nationalism and populism. calls National Socialism a “ Germanic democracy ” (speech before the press. a totalitarian state.

The Communist reception of his proposals was friendly. which shows the following curious passage : The German Workers’ Party wants the ennoblement of the German worker.967 At the beginning a certain confusion could be seen on the “ proletarian ” issue. peasants.A. Goebbels declared in 1932 : Where can we get the moral justification to attack the proletarian concept of a class war if the bourgeois classstate has not been first fundamentally smashed and replaced by a socialist structure of the German community?961 And another National Socialist meditated sadly : The fact that we lost the war [World War I] is not the worst of all. and in the Rehse collection of early National Socialist documents we see not only violently anti-capitalist handbills but also the original programme of the (German) D. Doriot and DCat . from various leftist elements.962 After 1939 the National Socialists received not only open support from the Communists (until 1941) but also.“9~g Later he tried to establish a common front between National Socialism and Communism. and 51 per cent.P. Still. in France. Dr. but the subsequent electoral defeats of the National Socialists deprived them of much of their bargaining power. The skilled and settled workers have a right to be considered members of the middle classes. Yet that they cheated us out of the revolution. A sharp line of demarcation should be drawn between workers and proletarians. 35 per cent. who belonged to the lower middle class.956 The Jacobin and revolutionary element was never dormant in National Socialism. ExSocialists and ex-Communists like Laval.266 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. Count Reventlow insisted on a mere juxtaposition between “ Nationalsozialismus ” and “ Internationalsozialismus.. that is really preposterous. based on Russo-German collaboration and the “ common destruction of the Polish state. Belgium and Denmark.Qj* This attitude disappears at a later stage.“960 The Communist organ Rote Fahne published and commented on two of his open letters. The number of school teachers was especially high in the party hierarchy. workers.

were intrinsically connected with the socialist attitudeg6” and the acceptance of the “ common man ” as the very pillar of the rPgime. a different matter. his anti-Judaism took a decidedly racialist turn. with complete omission of all racialist argumentation: ” The National Socialist is an anti-Semite because he is a socialist.968 but also in his private letters. But why blame them when such an outstanding “ liberal ” 1 as David Lloyd George declared solemnly that Hitler was wonderful. the German people the happiest under the sun. The attack against the upper classes. The left CEuvre became pro-Nazi.ertheless Marxism will hang the bankers and persecute A the Jews. by and large.96g where. Goebbels declared frankly.. who probably did more for the “ common man ” than any other rPgime before ! them. the bourgeois with status. however. \ Ne\. also collaborationists.g64 The philosophical dangers of Gemeinnutz geht ~‘or Eigennutz--” the good of all takes precedence over the good of the individual “-are. . The man in the street could hardly guess that it led straight to Frank’s Recht ist was dem deutschen J’olke nuti+--” whatever is of advantage to the German people is right. is a Judaic interpretation of history. as well as the violent anti-Judaism. curiously enough. gentlemen. The Finnish Social Democrats under V&n6 Tanner were in the same boat.96i Marx himself could be violently anti-Jewish. Some Belgian Socialists led by Hendrik de Man were.“966 The inherently anti-Jewish attitude of socialism in general was well outlined by Antonio Machado : -=-I THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY Marxism. not only in his essays. VII] 267 became collaborators. Some of his remarks about Lasalle have a distinctI. and the nobleman. The Danish Social Democrats under Stauning collaborated until 1943.” He could not possibly foresee what the final implications of such a dictum ~ might be. and only forty of the original Socialist deputies were able to run again for Parliament in 1945. 1 and the fate of Poland rightly deserved ?Q63 On the other hand it would be unjust to overlook the social welfare activities of the National Socialists.

.Q72 And it would be a great mistake to believe that the position of the Jews in the U.” As for instance Kleo Pleyer’s: out even more clearly.National Socialism had naturally also a local colour. so. Und a’ennoch kommt aiu D&e Reich! We National Socialists Want no reaction. brothers. Long live the German Revolution ! (Re$?ain) Onward. 975 or: Wir Wir Wir Ein Nationalen Sozialisten. wollen keine Reaktion hassen 3wdenund Marxisten Hoch a& &utschen Reuolution! (Refrain) Drum B&r auf die BarriXaden! Der Fiihrer ruf. to the barricades ! The Fiihrer calls.O’O Yet Lasalle also gave vent to his anti-Jewish feelings. follow him now! Reaction has betrayed him But the Third Reich comes nevertheless. for instance. apart from shaping (to a certain . We are the army of the swastika.R. We loathe Jews and Marxists. thus almost implicitly announcing the Yacht der langen Messer-“ the night of the long knives. Unfortunately we cannot reproduce here the melodies of Nazi songs. Mi‘r sind das Heer vom Hakenkreuz. but merely the synthesis of i practically all ideas dominant in the last 160 years. and must be analyzed in its living reality. It is I obvious that the roots of these ideas antedate the French J Revolution.O’l and even Engels was not free from this vice. We are inclined to think that remote historical events.TLIT Freiheit bahnen. Hebt hoch die roten Fahnen! Der de&&en Albeit wollen wir Den Weg . L_. is neither a conservative ! nor a reactionary movement. Raise high the red banners ! We want to build German labour’s Road to liberty.“974 Its text lamented those killed by the “ Red Front ” and victims of the “ competitors ” and “ Reaction ” alike-the In other chants the leftist note comes those of the “ enemies. which were often very telling and characteristic of the mentality of the movement. folget gleich Die Reaktion hat ihn verraten.87s All in all it might be said that the spirit of National Socialism has to be treated in a factual way. Streicheresque tenor. has a distinctly sombre.S. -7 I- National Socialism.268 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.S. is a very happy one. but how much of it is based on historical reminiscences going back for centuries is difficult to decide. as we have seen. The Horst Wessel Lied. menacing and even melancholy tune.

it is possible that the East German. SUMMARY In tracing the origins of the Nazi Par9 we have first outlined the relationship between nazism and democracy and nazism and the Reformation. A more difficult matter is the copying of the Czech example by the German-speaking proto-Nazis of Bohemia. we have to bear in mind that the movement was a failure in the Bohemo-Austro-Bavarian domain. in such fields as have been hitherto neglected by most authors.LY. is too well known to need further emphasis. 4.VII] THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY 2% extent) a national character.“Q7s Characteristics which I/ {/I are usually termed “ Nazi ” can be found in most nations-but especially_i71flproqressive ” a& “ democratic _I’ nat&s. but often downright historical falsehoods. it is hardly necessary to concern ourselves with this connection any further. Since the conscious living up to this picture has always been freely acknowledged by these two Czech groups. representations ” provoked by entirely new political happenings.-. and that its important victories were reaped in Northern Germany. nor did the . Moravia and Silesia. We certainly do not believe that National Socialism as a basic movement was any more “ German ” than “ Czech ” or “ Austrian ” or .” but are revived in “ re. rather than to the still fairly unexplored world of ethnic psychology ( Volkspsychologie) . We would therefore act more wisely. That these re-representations are sometimes not only slightly inaccurate. On the other hand. “ Germanized Slav ” or “ Prussian. to look first and foremost to competing and opposing philosophies. After this preparatory work we investigated the influence of the popular conception of Hus on the Czech Socialists and National Socialists. Czechs” and North Austrian character has certain affinities and certain traits which made it receptive to specific manifestations of the phenomenon whose genesis we have tried to trace. It is evident that neither did the Czech National Socialists want to boast of their Teutonic epigones. if we debate the gyrations of an ideology. Of course. do not mysteriously slumber in some sort of “ racial subconscious.

. The expression “ Workers’ Party ” actually “jumped a generation ” and was adopted by the D.C.S.981 Those who wrote inside the Reich after 1933 had to be careful about it lest they steal the thunder of the Ftihrer-there was always the danger of &se-majest&-but some Nazi authors tried to minimize the influence. against the acceptance of the term “ National Socialist ” shows this very clearly. when Hitler was still a paid informer in Munich. Of course.A.. among the Austrian Nazis. men of the D. whereas the Czech agrarian population had no such material invitation to anti-Judaism. from 1904 to 19 I 8.D. on the N.A. Rudolf Jung’s influence must have been considerable as co-ordinator.980 When we come to the influence of the D.S. and the D.P. The whole struggle. Yet the ideological connection is undeniable. and we know that numerous Germans and Czechs crossed over incessantly to the other ethnic community.N.S.A.N. He had a ready-made ideology by 19 I g. desire to acknowledge their Slavic forerunners. we see it confirmed by three authors whose works have been published in English. was always very great-a situation which later. assumed grotesque proportions.P.P.A. is no counter-argument. in their ethnic and racial pride. Yet we have only to read the various programmes from the meetings in Trautenau up to the Interstate Congress of Salzburg in Ig2o (where Adolf Hitler participated) in order to see the unbroken chain.P.A. The symbiosis between Germans and Czechs was also a very close one (no German in Bohemia lived more than forty miles from the Czech ethnographic area).97e There are many obvious psychological reasons for it.A.S.982 others (especially Sudeten Germans) gave cautiously factual accounts without analyzing them. from its “ grandfather.P.S.A. and D. there are also other prehistoriesg83 of National . The lack of anti-Semitism in the N. It is also interesting that not only Czech but also German encyclopedias used a common heading for all National Socialist parties.270 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. The number of “ Germans ” with Czech names in the D.P. Only Pfitzner claimed a full fatherhood.N.” the Czech Socialist Workers’ Party.S.P. The highly industrialized Sudeten Germans often faced Jewish capitalists.

Wrote David Rousset. have been very needlessly invoked as forerunnersBE The powerful religious angle and other cultural factors have been ruefully neglected. unless realized on a world-wide scale. even the destruction of the Th%dRei& is --jfer all too minor an incident to thwart or 1 permanently discredit these evil powers and negative currents i which are present everywhere. unfortunately National Socialism is by no means a phenomenon of the past. It must be borne in mind that socialism. of our civilization __-_. Thus c~--.-.S. a narrower one which deals with the genius loci of Germany.ont&ntal tradition of ---. is bound to be a national socialism. is one between South Slav and Russian national socialism. clings to the Western World.” which at all times had to be replaced for the period when by “ Fascism ” or “ Hitlerism “-save Russian national socialism was allied with German racialsocialism. 186-87. et criminelle..R. deadlmtheszwxy r?iiZns-be el~~~~~. gue de pre’tendre qu’il est impossible aux autres peuples de faire une expekience analogue pour des raisons d’opposition de nature.. and although British “ national socialism. The Teutonic Knights or Arthur Moeller van den Bruck. the quarrel between Yugoslavia and the U. . ega&agggmL socialism&d utilit~~~~~~-. Nietzsche. some invalid.” with its liberal nostalgia. Nor has this study only the interest of a post-mortem. . totahtwm. pp. ry46).S. Spengler.VII] THE RISE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY 271 Socialism.-oX&&ion of ends to means.ethnic nat&G sub--T--.a~~&~~Xe danger of a new. Some of the material unearthed in these researches is valid.---.i~~a~~ti~its -. Though nazism is overthrown and Hitler dead (they tell us).-~--~ed~feat.’ * L’Lini?*ers Concenirutionmirr (Paris : Editions du Pavois. democracy-as ---.___. and a broader one which includes world-wide influences. Major General Haushofer and Stefan George.-.. the G.long as racia&. we have to face them as 1__ collectivism. Nothing is more significant than the Soviets’ strict ban on the use of the term “ National Socialism. a former inmate of one of the deadliest German concentration camps about National Socialism and its horrors : Ce serait une duperie.

A monarchy IOO A. -GOETIII: I wili not cease to hold under the banner of religion in one hand the oriflamme of monarchy. A harmony between constitutional GAS 27” . he may have expected the rejection of totalitarian tyranny. and truly liberal order the writer of these lines would propose. No monarchic “ restoration ” is offered in these pages to the United States. -CIIATEAUBRIAND (I 827) very well imagine that the patient English or American reader who has followed me to the bitter end and has often asked himself what sort of blueprint for the estabI lishment of a lasting.D. more intelligent and more enterprising. I see the time coming when God will lose His delight in mankind. The author is very well aware of the fact that there are countries. that there are situations. and it took the Romans centuries of imperial rule until they realized that their republic had gone. Whoever peruses this book cannot fail to make the observation that these studies have by and large a negative. a critical character. the “ universally accepted ” palliative of democracy. Yet at this point an important remark has to be inserted. but certainly not better. just. but psychologically there was not the slightest chance for a return to Tarquinius Superbus. historical periods and environments. a political change of that sort could at present onl): end in ridicule-and disaster. and when He will let it be beaten into fragments so that creation can be remade and rejuvenated. but probably not the no less emphatic condemnation of the “ only ” alternative. which narrow the scope of psychological in Rome around the year practical choices. and ir. might have prevented the outbreak of the civil wars which shook the nation to its foundations. the other the flag of the civil liberties. IIumnnity is perhaps going to be shrewder and more clerer.CHAPTER VIII POSTSCRIPT 7% : C.

but the necessity of having them brought into some sort of organic relationship cannot be disregarded. The former contains philosophical statements. which has also “ grown into ” these clothes. history of democracy in republican Europe and republican South America should be a terrible lesson to all pan-democrats -not only because it meant bitter suffering for the millions but also because these truly “ awful ” directly involved. Political theory. It is true that the drafters of the Constitution had the aims of the Preamble in mind. but the Constitution always remains a means to a specific end. political practice. and in different times. in different countries. we do not want to create the impression that we believe America faces these problems merely in the The frightening channels and the media of foreign policy.*s5 had clearly not been heard. liberty and the pursuit of happiness ” The catastrophic may be more reasonable and effective.Y86 The time is not far off when it will no longer be possible to skirt this problem by a shallow optimism. or by the empirically . P.POSTSCRIPT 273 forms and national characters is absolutely necessary. The latter is a political blueprint tailored to the measure of the United States. Another and no less menacing danger lies in the occasional non sequiturs besetting well-meaning nations. mistakes are literally “ brought home ” to Americans by the recurrent necessity of sending millions of their sons and fathers to the sausage grinders of the Old World. On the other hand. and human realities are to a certain extent distinct elements. not to reduce the guarantees of liberty to a single. von Segesser. Augustine could be repeated: Acceperunt mercedem suam uani vanam. other means for the preservation of “ life. A. There are only too many Americans who cannot clearly distinguish between the r61e of the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence and that of the Constitution. and nothing is more calamitous than to overlook this fact. The exhortation of the great Swiss conservative thinker. invariable pattern. victories of technology render the issue of amateurism versus expert knowledge as serious in America as in the Old World. Here the grim lament of St. and these are either universally true or not true at all.

the utilitarian and values in Turn have to be subordinated to the rational commands of ethics and religion. officials coming from all layers of the population. plus one or two probationary years after having thus demonstrated their knowledge and ability. countries of the non-Protestant world.274 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. . Our proposal for a form of government adapted to preserve liberty in modern times. to use a Latin term). administering The representatives in the corporative the “ bureaucracy. Neither the popular representation nor the executive has an The popular representation expresses ideological pattern. they are employed on the basis of competitive examinations.) Still. (3) the ideological and philosophical struggles. have to be relegated to the private sphere of society. we want to use as the background for our own constitutional blueprint countries other than the United States and Switzerland--in other words. which can neither be suppressed nor made an organic part of the governmental machine. We are naturally conscious of the fact that dabbling in blueprints for ideal forms of government would invite a great many scholars to raise their eyebrows.” The administration consists of ” Diet ” are freely elected. (2) the party system must be abolished because of its inherent drive and tendencies toward totalitarianism . . postulates: (I) the greatest reasonably possible liberty of the person must be preserved and protected. But such a projection and speculation is precisely the thing we here have in mind. ‘i. honestly and freely the wishes and demands of the various groups In a sense it consists of interest (ordines. (4) the will of the majority has no right to prevail over the reasonable and the useful. since liberty is part and parcel of the common good. and steer clear of the calamitous errors we have described. since they do not want to deal with even “ theoretically possible ” utopias. On the basis of the first three premises we therefore propose to establish a constitutional “ equality ” between a corporative popular representative body and the executive.” (This sort of frivolous credulity we find even in the Catholic camp. is based on four premises or. + untenable assertion that to deny the average man’s perspicacity in political matters is “ sheer Manicheism. rather.

tries to attain the usqful and thefeasible. make-believes and dishonesties of mere “ politics ” can thus be dispensed with. and receive the signature of the head of the state.helping to work out a compromise. This Supreme Court. It is self-evident that this whole system has to be based on a constitution which clearly defines and limits the prerogatives and powers of the state.VIII] POSTSCRIPT ‘7.” The executive. But the ministries also can issue regulations. It will be evident that this writer prefers a hereditary monarch as the chief of state. and partly of men delegated by the Diet.” Yet the monarch’s main task is certainly not procreation buttogether with a Crown Council-to act as an umpire between He can vote with the L’ people ” the people and the experts. through a representative whose members are appointed Diet. or with the He can latter against the representatilres of the corporations. by the Church (or churches) and the universities. Thus we get a clear and unequivocal separation of the two things: “ What is good. the Supreme Court or the chief of the state.yH7 Taine spoke of ” the family.5 * of “ lobbies. because through the biological process he can also represent the element of continuity. His Crown Council consists partly of his appointees.” and “ What the people want. also act as an intermediary h>. all laws and decide as to their compatibility with (a) the The Supreme constitution and (b) the moral law and ethics. the only cure for death. The fourth organ is the Supreme Court. (the Diet) against the experts and bureaucrats. The corporative Diet can reach decisions which have binding power if they are unopposed by the executive or the Supreme Court. The rights and liberties of man . Thus the monarch is the neutral element in the state. dominated by the ministries. Court with its two departments holds a right of absolute veto. but can be vetoed by a three-quarter majority of the Diet. It is obvious that a deep religious cleavage or a variety of denominations would constitute a not inconsiderable obstacle to the establishment of such a court. which become laws if they are not vetoed by the Diet. the executive and the Supreme Court. which also has the in the right to propose motions.” The pretensions. has to examine $1 .

s”s This very rough blueprint could be supplemented by an endless score of minor details.ernment: with the exception of those belonging to the rare type 01‘ the direct democracy. private property and so on). the necessity of a totalitarian society bent on preserving at all costs the ** common denominator ?’ since it is not based on the Diverging political views.ful& applied in our “ royal free state. which we leave to the imagination of the reader. Yet every go\. are governments-from-above. “ Parties ” on an ideological basis will ha\-e the opportunity to organize as private associations with the right to propagandize their ideas. After reading this proposal a person with Iibcrtarian convictions might ask himself what liberal implications this concept of a government has. (The individual person. Ideas and ideologies would probably make themselves felt in the Diet no less than in the executive. since it is definitely a government-from-above. Rousseau no less than lYoltairesss rejected democracy for larger units outright. the very last unit. The smaller the unit. association.276 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap.fuxdamental&yalways “ self-governing. existence of political parties. The principle of federation would have to be . will hardly assume that destructive character it has in the purely parliamentary state of the non-Protestant pattern.” The democratic principle could find a limited expression not only in the corporate Diet but also in the administration of smaller units. is . and even in the Supreme Court. ought himself to First of all our plan eliminates be able to provide the answer. but their strife. not being able to find full expression. and if the otherwise so dangerous gap between the issues under judgment and the general level of knowledge is practically absent. (liberty of the press. must be duly safeguarded in such a written document. printing.“) Democracy becomes a rational proposition if the danger of mass anonymity and irresponsibility can be avoided. and the reader: if he has closely followed our line of reasoning. after all. the more justifiable the application of democracy. different interests and even opposing ideologies \rcluld probably manifest themselves in the “ Parliament ” and in the admini- .

no Supreme Court which a political party long enough in power. The reader.” but while the whole level of the I. will remember that there is no inherent connection between the precepts of democracy and those of liberalism.277 stration without being able to tear the state asunder or. we have also tried to give to the “ administration ” the character of an e’lite which might frighten a certain type of libertarian who suspects quality in an administration because quality gives prestige and prestige arrogance.Constitution by all those serving it and that these solemn -_. administrating and “ co-ordinating ” bodies. What we usually get now is unstable. cannot “ pack.” Hence also our proposal to remove it altogether from the control of one of the three legislating. only subzct to religious convictions and thus to religious sanctions. in the -last resort. Thus also the totalitarian element inherent in every political party imbued by a fixed ideology could be dispensed with. Yet it stands to reason that if we cannot avoid having administrators we should use the best ones available. was much higher than that of the rank and file chinovniki. What a reasonable libertarian has to wish for is stable. the actual power of the Indian Civil Servant was far more curtailed than that of his Russian colleague.naZ& on the oaths given to the . what is worse.C.S. administrative) We also have to admit units. the family and the smaller political (i. unjust and fair& eficient VIII] POSTSCRIPT . furthermore.-. to enslave it. had a better training for their offices but far less power than modern parliamentarians over the destinies of the citizens.. in a democracy. just and ine@cient oversized govemment in the “ democracies ” and stable. the crowned absolutists like Maria Theresa or Frederick II. . just and e&cient minimal government. On the other hand. Similarly. Every other system of purely human checks and balances rests on sand. Both the Russian chinovniki and the members of the Indian Civil Sen-ice in the old days were representatives of “ an absolutism. oaths are.e. There is. that this blueprint rests f.-. he remembers that the masses are the poorest guardians of liberty which has its real guarantee not in large numbers of voters (who might prefer security to libertyj but in immutable laws curtailing the prerogatives of the state and protecting the rights (and privileges) of the individual.

military affairs. each other. maximal government in the totalitarian dictatorships. Yet this discrepancy is equally apparent in the modern “ politicized ” executives. a Talleyrand. Wells. had the fine experience of selling champagne. to rely increasingly on government by experts. resembles in many respects the old way. racial psychology. Usually their linguistic capacities are so limited that without the help of interpreters they could only bark at We have seen in the immediate past men who . anyway. G.H. and we have pointed out before that the discrepancy between the things which are theoretically known.99o We are being forced. the manners and the experience of a Metternich. This is a race between an arithmetical and a geometrical To ask a peasant from Central Switzerland in a progression. agrarian sciences. the grim truth has to be found in the indispensable. geography. economics. the scienda. and to ask a man in the street in Kalamazoo or Welwyn Garden City what sort of diplomacy should be used towards Mao-Tse-Tung’s China is quite another. geopolitics and a whole score of other disciplines seem to be And yet. twenty years of delving into such additional subjects as international law. We have to look for a third wqy which. Even ifit is true that general education is improving and that the general level of education is rising-which we sincerely doubt-the political and economical problems with their implications as well as the scientific answers for their solution are growing in number as well as in complexity. a vom Stein or a Humboldt. In I 815. and those which ought to be known by the “ politicized ” masses. Twenty years of intensive study and travel. Today such knowledge. at the Congress of Vienna. fact that our modern foreign ministers have not ten per cent of the knowledge. it was sufficient for a Foreign Minister to have a good grasp of history. is increasing by leaps and bounds. it so happens. would be entirely insufficient. even theoretically. the insight. genealogy and human psychologybesides the mastering of the French language.278 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. the scita. . of driving buses or imbibing their knowledge for their tasks from reading And the decline from I 815 to the level of \. Landsgemeinde whether a concession should be given to a cheese factory is one thing. a Castlereagh.

be respeci&?~X ’ -. Yet one day on a trip through the South Seas. a poet and. on the self-same boat there is a young man of excellent qualities. philosopher. Let us imagine \ve have suffered an attack of appendicitis and have been duly warned by a qualified physician that in case of a repetition of the pains an operation should be immediately.--. It must tirevented from becommg’a weapon\ fo7 G-&~~emGn /t ph . Yet Will we turn in our emergency to what stands to reason? the horrible surgeon or to the brilliant young man? It is . no solution. Hearing about our predicament. disregarded. A chimney-sweep sitting in council with three medical experts will hardly derive a profit from the exchange of their opinions.VIII] 1919 POSTSCRIPT 279 I 91 g is probably as great as the d2gringolade from to 1945. On the other hand.. nor will a theologian listening to three atomic physicists Knowledge cannot be 1 debating an aspect of nuclear fission. it must. thousands of miles from the coast. thinker. democracy offGs. he offers his help. an alcoholic with trembling hands and ill-fitting glasses. dirtiest doctor we have ever seen in our life. a painter and who receives our whole-hearted admiration.tO ~~CGZGiiG&oC 211 the solution of such I?erty. And herein lies the advantage of mediocre monarchs trained for their jobs over dashing popular amateurs. because the masses.qmgmgh-k 5:. there is an encyclopedia in the saloon with diagrams of the human body and he sincerely promises to do his best. & u irZts-pGZ cU * Let us even load the dice and comrjare the brilliant amateur with the miserable professional..GZh personal libert . choosing between freedom and the illusion of economic .. in a note.a problem.performed. . he can borrow a scalpel from the doctor or a knife from the kitchen. another severe attack sets in. that the system of bricklayers lording it over architects will not work because it is opposed to reason and that knowledge is even necessary to choose experts or to co-ordinate their divergent views. We have insisted before. needless to comment any further on the obvious answer. On board the ship there is the nastiest._.----ut ----. >or s@iFi?y<th a maximiim~i ~. Thus the problem of our time remains-to have good governrGG. L .

After having fallen prey to the fausse ide’e Claire of democracy they will succumb to the even falser ide’e Claire of national or international socialism. and for over a hundred years the Continentals had tried to make a synthesis with the new forces. almost in the expectation that the bombastically heralded New Experiments were bound to fail. the comfortable fiction that the parliaments are “ us. and this without an inquest. and bankruptcy arrived not within a It came in a thousand years. the crown to many a are at a loss to find any parallel. was made up of murder. procrastination. but also when he reflects upon the sly process of enslaveresting on ment in the West. inefficiency. when among 150. . intrigue. all the optimistic demagogy about the superb qualities of the Common Man comes to our mind. indeed is a symbol of freedom-not only when he thinks of the terrors of the East. There popular representations. And fail they did ! The ancien Ggime had lasted a thousand years. corruption. immorality. When we mention the masses. Indeed. European. especially to a Central European.” “ our- .000 killed at least two-thirds perished fully conscious in the fiery flames . the old monarchies were far from being models of perfection. but within half a generation. narrowness. deceit and pettiness and it had long been in need of radical reform when it disappeared. . egoism. The ancien Ggime. and all the victims of the Inquisition burnt at the stake through centuries did not amount to one-fourth of the number of those cremated alive one afternoon in Dresden. will usually head straight for the will-o’-the-wisp. It murdered liberty by entirely new methods and it repeated the errors of the Old Government on a colossal scale: all the persecutions of Jews through the ages were dwarfed to microscopic size by Hitler’s delirious mass murders. . . Then the stage was entirely left to the “ Dawnists. Yet it never promised a New Dawn or a Paradise on Earth and it must be conceded that it relinquished the stage of history with little opposition. if we look merely at its seamy side. the Common Man. without the slightest effort to establish a real or even a subjectively imputed guilt at the very end of a war.280 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. : Ii :! security.” to our noble friend. swift and deadly way. To the horrors of the concentration camps almost girdling the globe we Thus.

various party leaders in the democracies must be weighed not so much as to their effect abroad as to their possible repercusThe disappearance of an effective sions at the next elections. considering the level of our parliaments in wisdom and manners. and. which republicanism and A Council of democracy have by no means achieved. not to unify Europe. by an insuperable language problem. Not only would it be faced. .” Even a Louis XIV. on the other hand. but a process which takes place in a Vale of Tears. It has got past the stage of tribal affiliations. Democracy rose in our civilization when the condition of the world least warranted it. European Monarchs could be an effective co-ordinating body for Europe. It put tremendous weapons of technical progress into the hands of those least qualified to use them. conscription. History. it It is would merely serve to break up. .” that is. not to mention “ nationalization ” which is a specious form 1 of theft. because monarchy alone would by now possess the full necessary supra-national outlook. but. could not. allied with nationalism. monarchy is a special blow to the co-operation and amalgamation of the Old World. party-politics. is not rational or strictly logical. it now becomes a powerful The obstacle to the necessary unification of large regions. but such verbal exchanges between a Communist gentleman from Toulouse and a Carlist gentleman from Pamplona might have deadly . centralist and breaker of many of the best traditions as he was. as well as their ideological divisions.” control the private lives of the “ citizens ” to a far greater extent than the monarchs of the past would ever have dared to regulate the doings of their “ subjects. as a genuinely elected body of Popular representatives.VIII] POSTSCRIPT 281 selves. Federation of Europe is lamentably handicapped by “ poliand every word spoken by the tics. one thing that French deputies in the Chamber should shout at each other Scde‘rai! Assassin! Voleur!. an all-European Parliament. and an income tax involving annual economic “ confession ” to the State . autocrat. would hardly have ventured to exercise three prerogatives which “ progressive democracies ” have claimed and do claim without batting an eye : prohibition of alcoholic beverages. unfortunately.

in everything charity. are playfully moved by the wind. Let us remember. in doubtful things liberty.” the branches and leaves Yet the totalitarian societies of our the “ doubtful things. the old programme: “ In necessities unity. we do not identify such dites with classes or castes. Xeedless to say. rich in leaves. as in the “ People’s Democracies.” Is Catholicism in its own way not of a fairly totalitarian nature ? We would like to answer this question by two illustrations. He may have told himself that our numerous ironic remarks about the character of a totalitarian society watching grimly over the purity and uniformity of the “ common framework of reference ” lose much of their pungency if one k eeps in mind that our Catholic convictions must force us to defend something ” rather similar. And creation as well as creativeness stands in constant need of liberty. “ Civil wars ” on an unprecedented scale could be the result.” . And since only real elites have a genuine psychological and intellectual interest in liberty. Sooner or later this flux will congeal into the Little it tyranny or the virtual dictatorship of a mass-party. consequences. This issue cannot be shirked or permanently delayed by preserving the illusory fluidity of democratic institutions which have final control of the central government. The trunk and the roots are the “ necessities. matters whether such rule is based on repeated elections won through permanent appeals to the lower half of the social pyramid. it is evident that they must have a position in political life which is more substantial than their numerical share. Little it matters that finally a new oligarchy arises which methodically suppresses even those layers who helped to establish its sway.282 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY [Chap. Thus the historical problem of our day is and remains the establishment of mgmal government-from-above assuring and maintaining personal liberty. they are the people capable of creative action.” This programme should be heartily endorsed. The first two postulates can well be likened to a tree standing with its trunk well rooted in the soil while its long branches. We are also convinced that the attentive reader will approach us with yet another question.” on the efficiency of a ubiquitous police. first of all. or whether it rests squarely.

but also their real freedom of thinking! And it is also self-evident that a society with different premises. compulsory education and we have to doubt sincerely not only the “ progress ” -then logicalitv of their capacity to think. The guests have arrived in a great variety of clothes. and even the costumes of the males show the most adventurous diversity. Democracy. i j ( ’ 1 . while its branches and leaves are screwed to long metal poles and have thus become immovable. Based on this common denominator. has betrayed its posed for so long. the role in which it has Democracy. that “ democracy. but bent upon achieving the same results from its “ thinking ” process. majority rule. a vegetarian with Hinduist notions. has to exercise a far greater pressure than one with a uniform religious basis. and a “ Freethinker *’ consider it as natural that they all believe in equality. and arrive at the very rejection of methodic thought.” has failed the expectations of mankind. In its stark irrationalism such a society must be strictly antiintellectual. all of them with clean-shaven faces. This picture-at first glance-may seem to be rather unjust. But let us conjure up the memory of a late medieval feast. it is nevertheless fairly obvious in spite of the ubiquity of this term. a Barthian. But they all w-ould have belonged to one faith and one basic ideology. The concrete political situation of the present moment is not the subject of our analvsis. no less than its bitter fruit-the tyranny of the one-party state-has foundered as a guarantor of freedom. moreover. monotony all of them uttering in unison with parrot-like the same identical political and social cliches. Yet we can veq well imagine a dinner given in a “ modern democracy “-and not only a so-called “ people’s democracy ” of the Eastern pattern !-in which all the men arrive in a black uniform (the tuxedo or “ tails “1. they would have uttered a whole score of views. After some questioning and investigation one would nevertheless find that this monotony stems from a chaotic cauldron of the most variegated religions and philosophies.VIII] POSTSCRIPT 283 modern era can be compared to a tree whose roots are perversely hanging in the air. If a deist Mason. ’ I : . a Catholic.

America would act wisely if she would return to her great traditions. in tired confusion. must find the way back to her eternal well-springs or perish. Yet how inefficient this giant can be at times in face of the planning powers of evil we have seen when. on the other hand. yet tyranny with its monarchical externals is at least a sinister concentration of material forces and drives. enslaved. it surrendered at the green table after so many splendid military triumphs. Victory gained through the twin hierarchies of industry and the armed forces. . heralded by the dark cloud of corroding and demoralizing fear. The illusions. no less than modern tyranny. was thrown away by the politicians. is faced by a categoric imperative. Democracy. Therefore we need forms of government which can give us both freedom and strength-forms of government which fulfil the ethical as well as the practical demands of the timesof all times.284 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY own idealism (which found such pregnant expression in the “ Atlantic Charter “) with greater levity than any modern despotism. Europe. and its safe distance. a whitened sepulchre. is morally dead. its numerous citizenry. is addressed to all of us. myths and lies of the last hundred years are going to save neither her soul nor her precarious physical existence. a living corpse. represented a unique counterweight. the western rim of the Old World would have lost its freedom twice within the last decade. through its dimensions. The latter’s physical menace. If historical and geographic accidents had not favoured the rise of a gigantic empire on the western rim of the Atlantic which. insofar as she is not She must.

they seem to be now on the verge of ousting all others except the j me capitalistic.$e An&e. A Generation of Materialism (Sew rork: Harper and Brother. 5~’ b I Y. The Oxford En&h Diciionary. of truth and vice. Emerson’s “ nothing is more disgusting than the crowing about liberty by slaves. x941).NOTES NOTES TO CHAPTER ONE i See Francis Stuart Campbell [pseud. Pitirim Sorokin. facteur d’harmonie. 314. note. VI.. of E. adding that he thanked God continually for having at last driven all thoughts of persecution from the world. (Their opponents were named semiles. The Menace of the Herd: Pmcrustes at Large (Milwaukee : The Bruce Publishing Company. It also serves frequently to satisfy sadistic cravings among the persecutors. February I. op. Hayes. 2. 104. George Ticknor.” ’ Cf. 238). 1s On the teleological identity of ‘* capitalism ” and ” socialism ” cf.“-Henry A urns and his Friends. In the Holy Roman Empire the Inquisition functioned only for a few decades during the thirteenth century. note. cit._ _ -. 301-2. E. p. The Crisis of Our Age: The Social and Cultural Outlook (New York: Dutton. Letters and 3ournulsof Gez$. op. but it does make clear the basic position of the Church. “ liberal. by those who have never dared to think or act. 6 Campbell. W. 8 Cf. and the flippant mistaking for freedom of some paper preamble like a Declaratton of Independence. i 0 . p. van Kuehnelt-Leddihn].iberal. or the statutory right to vote. though violence might promote hypocrisy. Vol. H. (Boston : James Osgood. lo Here we disagree with James Parkes’ otherwise excellent The Jew in the Mediaeval Community (London: Soncino Press. F.-~-i~~@tter toJ%h~duxx.Fiz . Cater (Boston: Houghton lVIiWin. G>stave Thibon. :1rticle I 35 I : Ad nmplexandum fidem cotholirnm nemo invitm cogntrrr. ii Cf. p. Campbell.” 9 Codex Irrris Canonici. II (1939). D. 2 Cf. 187ol. 1943). ed. 78. p. 1946.. Nothing should appear to an intelligent Christian more diabolic than the synthesis of error and virtue. Philip II tried in vain to persuade Pope Pius V to establish the Inquisition in the Papal States. pp. It could only be established upon governmental e-x% in the majority of European countries prior to or after the Reformation. p. “ L’inegalitt. r947< p. p. claims that the term Ziherales was used of the supporters of free press in 1810. Compare Henry Adams in his letter to Brooks Adams. p. Tlze Life.) 5 Carlton J. 1938). which comes to the same result by any road. 173-74. R. 134. VI. 1941). cit. It is evident that persecution creates martyrdom. v. s. ’ The Inquisition was basically ecclesiastical appraisal. 1939). October 21. Kuehnelt-Leddihn.” Etudes carmdlitaines. as most men are. 12. 1899: “ Some day I may find it convenient to know about socialist theories . Historia de1 carlismo (Bilbao: Ediciones Fe. pp. dated Parrs. “ Thoughts on ‘ The Faith of a L. 1818 : “ The Pope talked a good deal about our universal toleration: and praised it as much as if it were a doctrine of his own religion. Compare this with R. 3 Cf. 49.’ ” The Catholic World. in the service of the --requesmi?I%t state. since persuasion was the only possible means of promoting piety. Roman Oyarzun.v. This formula does not exonerate collaboration in a \-cry dubious cause. H.” Br (Vol. 724. July. S. Part I. I2 Cambridge Mediaeval Hi&q.

). Defence. 12. 24 T.403.” Only in modem Greek (Koine’) is no pejorative sense whatever attached to this term. James Madison. etc. Hart (Washington. Hirzel. Adams (Boston: C. ?jew Series. 493-95.C. 635-36 (letter to Benjamin Rush. Ralph Adams Cram. de Reynold. Andrew Proceedings of the American Antiquarian ” Democracy and Constitution. 163. The End of Democracy (Boston: Cunningham MacLaughlin. 1923). Charles A. x851).. London. ed. Politik. 88. II. 310. On the early horror for the republican form of government cf. 63. xxiv-xxvii Nicholas Murray Butler. ed. 1794). War Department’s military manual TM 2000-25. Emile Faguet. Jefferson. a8As quoted in J. 296. The Works of Thomus Jefferson. sometimes it was practically synonymous with ochlos.. P. 516 (letters to John Taylor). p. p. 6: “ The basic principle On the assumption of the equality of all human of democracy is equality. 183. 14-15. 267-68 (letter to James Madison. Lesson 9. The definition IX. 25 Ibid. Bere Here Today (New York: Putnam. E. 6. 1943). Charles F. a’ Jefferson. Heinrich van Treitschke Uniuersitiit zu Berlin (Leipzig: S. pp. Adams. 1’ Cf. his First Annual Message of Congress in -4 Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents (Washington: Bureau of National Literature. ‘j On demophily cf. . Brown. Herbert Agar (Boston: If Hamilton Houghton. Van Buren quite rightly saw in Hamilton a monarchist: cf. 1859)~ 1. Miller. works. L’Europe tragique. “ Representative is somewhat limited to direct democracv. Philosopher of the Constitution (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. D. r1 M. Martin van Buren. ed. IMarshall Jones. Brown. 1867) p. 462. Burns. 1932). 499. $#ersonian Principles and Hamiltonian Prin:ciples (Boston: Little. p. IX. “ the mob. p. P. The Formative Years.. 73. also X. x947).. dated June 17. VII. John C. by his son (New York: Hurd and Houghton. 131-32. 472. 1897). and Gonzague .” Society. Paul L&ester Ford (New Tork: G. ed. 1892). Henry Adams.” r3 Cf. III. As to Andrew Jackson’s conviction about 4 the superfluousness of experience and education in statecraft cf. (new ed. IOI 1-12. XXII (1912). x937). xl-. dated August 28. Little and J.. T. IOIZ). The Enc3xlopaedia Britannica (14th ed. *OOne of the last correct definitions of democracy in an oficial publication can be found in the U. III. Or&ins of the American Revolution (Boston: Little. M. 1817). I. published in 1928 and in use for four succeeding years.S. I. I9 Cf. Arthur H. “ In Terms of What Moral Principle Is Democracy the Best Government ? ” The Philosop?y of the State: Fifteenth Annual Proceedings of the American Catholic Phzlosophical Association.orlesungen gehalten an der ‘* Cf. See especially Section Government ” (pp. 2bJefferson. Adler. beings rest not only the ideals but also the illusions of democracy. IX. Mifflin... 1904). Vandenberg. 1811). inquiry into the Origin and Course of Political Parties itt the United States. 41-44 . Why Should M’c Change Our Form of Government ? (New York: Charles Scribner. 317. The Works of rolzn Adams. 2o Cf.. ed. 20. 1938).286 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY i4 Note that the Greek word demos had the meanings of the Latin plebs and populus . Brown and Co. Putnam. Washington (New York: Derby and Jackson. a History of the United States During the Administrations of Jefferson and Madison. 91-92). I8 Ibid. Le cultr de I’incompPtence. 1939). Monticello Edition (Washington. VI. ed. Collected Writings. I6 See John Adams. rgoo).--.

Vilfredo Pareto. IS-30. De l’esprit de conqu3te et de l’usurpation duns leurs rapports az!ec la ciuilisation europbnne. in a future period I could have been truly constructive . complktes (Lyons. Kalinine. 2 and 4. 91. 520. 13. Veuillot (Paris: Librairie Auguste Valon. Liyre XXIX. “ Demagogy ” is here the revolutionary “ despotism ” the Napoleonic period. On many things his judgment was warped. and 39Ibid. 155-56. On Liberty (London: Dent. V. pp. Op. we do not consider to be one of the genuine conseryatives. and supported the Emperor in return for a brilliant position. 664 ($1115. iv.obvious that there is no connection between intellectual and moral qualities. a fact testified to by his own confession written on October r6th. 1884-87). I. Instincts of the Herd in Peace and in war (New York: Macmillan. and this for the simple reason that he was a ” libertarian ” only in a very indirect way. We prefer this Central European terminology to the vagueness of British and American usage. much too late.I. 348 (No.” implications.. p.. 1935). ai Montesquieu. where “ citizenship ” is often synonymous with “ nationality. Oeuvres. xiii. Beta and $1126. A. PP. Stalin. ed Prince Richard Metternich-Winneburg (S’ienna: Wilhelm Braumiiller. Brace. XI. now I actually feel good for nothing. 131. pp. Marques de Valdegamas. p. Y. 207-208. 3 41 Cf. Aus ’ IMetternich. 31. . The Mind and Society. though. [” Everyman’s s6 John Stuart Mill.379. and “ nationality. thus having before me the twentieth century. II. 131. ed. The Life of Reason (New York: Scribner. iy.a (Berlin: Izdatelstvo Granit. to the first great temptation. cf. 35. De I’esprit des lois. 40Ibid. in some other respects his vistas were remarkably clear. George Santayana. Ob osnovakh leninizma. I ought to have been today I spend my life propping up decaying buildings. 42 Among modem authors cf. k voprosam leninizma (Moscow: Partizdat. 1932). Que fait le pouvoir sovi&tute pour r&liser la dtmocratre? (Paris: Bureau d’edttions de diffusion et de publicite. 1858). p. 35 We distinguish between “ citizenship ” (a legal term). Beta 2). ai Cf. ed. 212.” Oeuwres science. 1910 Library “I).” and “ race ” is given alternatively ethnic and biological meanings. Trotzki. 1926) . Sotchinenz”a. 29-30. today it is a “ Lettre d’un royaliste savoisien. 1919). This volume was first published in 1814 (it was written during Constant’s sojourn in Hanover). r8 Benjamin Constant. It is. III. Adoratski and others (~‘Ioscow. yet he had learned too much from his enemies-much more than was good for the cause he sincerely professed to stand for. 4. s’ See Francis Stuart Campbell [Erik van Kuehnelt-Leddihn]. VII. born in rgoo. 1819 : “ My life I was born either much too early or fell into a disgusting historical period. De l’esprit des lois. 18. 164-70. XII. 50. Livingston (New York: Harcourt. Parlamentnaya re-z‘o1utsij. ed. period. Lenin. during the Hundred Days. L. pp. At an earlier period I would have enjoyed life. “ race ” (a biological which has cultural (primarily linguistic) characteristic). pnblib par so famille. 442). ?lachgelassenen Papieren. Wilfrid Trotter. 1930).“-Cf. ss Mettemich.“-Joseph de Maistre. 1935). together with Adolphe (Paris: Gamier F&es. Montesquieu.. Yet the reader is reminded that this most penetrating analyst of the French Revolution and the plebiscitarian dictatorship of Napoleon succumbed in 1815.NOTES 287 so Cf. formerly it was an instinct. Chap. NOTES TO CHAPTER TWO s? “ Know how to be royalists. 1881). 1924 [ ?I). Juan Donoso Cortb. also M. Partizdat. cit. r9z6-32): XXIV. He felt rather uncomfortable in his period.

191. 403. p. 64 “ Fragments des entretiens de Tocqueville avec Nassau W. “ Essay on Steme and Thackeray. Eugen Duehren “1.-(These passages are not contained in the Spanish edition of Espaiia Invertebrada.1937).” Friedenswarte. Petegorsky. p. Introduccirjn a la teoria de1 estado nacionalsindicalista (Barcelona: Bosch. Vol. Forrest Morgan + Walter Bagehot. 5-6 of Die Ropke. The Possessed. N%ton. 4x0.” Banner’ Festgabi fiir E”. p. D%arl’ Schmitt. Mildred Adams (New York: W. _ is ‘Cf. Comment on President Grant’s Second Inaugural Address. p. 404-405. Invertebrate Spain. 1901 .“Works. 96-98. “ Demokratie und Liberalismus. 392-93. 1932 [Sammlung Giischen.-_ . pp. Fustel de Coulanges.. 1923). (Berlin: Barsdorf. I (October. 1891). 1888). p. 2.. Cha&erlin. 36. lot. Karl Jaspers. “Jacob Burckhardt. Aguado. ed. W. I+$I). La cite’ antique (8e edition. The Heart oj Europe (New York: Putnam. Rossi~a i Slavyanstvo.288 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY 4a Constantine Leontyev. 298. 1853)s P. cit. Luis Legaz y Lacambra. dated Februarv 15. 171. 62 . ‘* Numa D. S. 26-27. 56. 1912). P. x897). XXXIX (Z&rich. trans. “ Das Zeitalter der Tyrannis.+). Jahrg. rgro). 1915). PP. Dr. cit. pp. op. pp. 1863: Jacob Burckhardt. ‘I Ibid. x925). 192. 65 Cf. 6s Cf. Emil Strauss (Stuttgart S: Berlin: Deutsche Verlagsanstalt. 61 Letter to F. Fudel). viii. 6’Jacob Burckhardts Briejh an Seinen Fret& Friedrich van Preen 1864-1893. 1921-22. J. Leontyeva (Moscow: Izdanie V. 137. pp. The story is from Montalembert. Dostoyevski. Petko Staynov. Vol. Laterza. sir. Dr. 1922). Christopher Dw. Calhoun. 46-47. rzg-26.1. The World’s Iron Age (New York: Macx924). Madrid. Vogelin. 428 (here this later supporter of National Socialism affirms the compatibility between dictatorship and democracy) . ed. millan. The Judgment of the Nations (New York: Sheed and Ward. “ Plemennaya politika kak orudie vsemirnoy revolyutsii ” (Pisma k 0. in Fo’ostok. Weltgeschichtliche Betrachtungen. 222 (letter. 274. Paris: A. The Politics of an Unpolitical (London: For a critique of these egalitarian tendencies cf. Michalon. but in Ortega’s Castilla y sus castillos (Madrid: Afrodisio 1949 [Coleccidn ” Mas Alla “I). ed. Irving Democracy and Leadership (Boston: Houghton Mifflin. ‘* Cf. Fritz Kaphahn (Leipzig: Alfred Rriiner. ” Jacob Burckhardt. D.” in Eugene Eichthal. 114. 1942). Rechtsphilosophie (Leipzig: Quelle und Meyer. ” “ Oh. 1939)‘ p. 247. Vol. 1943). now no one has any power-neither count nor proletarian. dated March 17. Oeri (2nd ed. Donoso CortCs. II.. David W. P.. Berlin & Stuttgart: Spemann. 1940). p. Alexis de Tocqueville et la de’mocratie lib&ale (Paris : C. 8 . . M. 49. Die geistige Situation der &it (Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter. A Disquisition on Government (New York: Appleton. “ Die eeisteseeschichtliche Lage des heutieen Parlamentarismus. p. pp. for instance Herbert Read. 1873. Guido de cgiero St&a de1 liberalism0 europeo (Bari: G. Briefe ZUT Erkenntnis seiner geistigen Gestalt. ” John C. Paris : Hachette. VI of Sobraniye Sochineni$ K. Sablina. M. IOOO]).-Gustav Radbruch. . ed. 34-43. Zitelmann (Mumch and Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot. Left-Wing Democranl in the English Civil War: a Study of the Social Philosophy of Gerrard Winsianle~ (London: Gollancz. pp. ” Cf. Levy. pp. Jose Ortega y Gasset. ” F. 1932). Hermann Hefele.” ~lochland. Part II. Routledge. made on March 4.. Iwan Bloch [“ Dr. yes. . 66 sq. p. 18W. 1901).” (Hartford: Travelers’ Insurance Co. 1941).. p. p. XXII. Denis de Rougemont and Charlotte Muret. Senior. Le Marquis de Sade et son temps. 208. 1940). Wilhelm special reprint of No.

” Open Court. See also ibid. See Note 366.” Oeun!res (Paris: Marpon et Flnmmarion. (I.NOTES 2% Kompetentnost i narodovlasti~: polititsheski izutshramia vcirkhu krizata na pariamentarisma i demokratsiJ. 63-64. B0Eduard Heimann. 88. ed. 39 (only in Bulgar.). x946).d. Lecky.ew York: Sheed and Ward. p. Frank Thiess. especially p. but excellent and comprehensive). 195x). r941). 285-87. Hertling. ” Der Staat II. . a Congregationalist minister and writer. Staat und Gesellschaft (Kempten and Munich: Josef Kosel. 38. Mohr. 256-57. p. 66Ibid. his Me’moires d’Outre-Tombe. TO quoted by bran As Whalen. 61. 86. Adalbert Stifter.) ” C’est la presence universelle d’un universe1 Tibere. 1922). 371. Thomas Mann. 5. Betts.: ‘I Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft.” in Constitutiom&= Donauzeitmzg.” Les homnws de hnmzc rwlonti (Paris : Flnmmarion.” p. 64. Vol. “ Solution du probleme sociale. Green and Co. Proudhon. 1922). in Essays on Theolog?. Braumiiller. XX\‘. Du principe de fhd&ation. H.) e5 William E. v. VI. 1852). Figgis and Laurence (London: Macmillan. I 940). 108. pp. dated April 26. I. 126). uhiquith de la tvrannie populaire. 2 ‘l Orestes Brownson: . ed. 745 (Tubingen: J. n. on universal suffrage. Cf. pp. 161. (Italics ours. Maurice Levaillant (Paris: Flammarion. where he writes with great insight: ” Authority. B?Quoted in full in Charles H. R. p. E. Years Armistice and Ajter (London : Eyre and Spottiswoode. i1 Cf. Bernard Wall.. was a critically gifted thinker of keen insight.d. pp. Democracv and Libertl. p. 7? Cf. The Histoy. 3-4. 197-198. 146.. identifies democracy with liberty. G. pp.. quoted by Sir Charles Petric in Twwtj. PP. Proudhon’s fears stemmed partly (Paris : Librairie Internationale. 9. p. T + . Chateaubriand also was haunted by the fear of the Cf. 6i J.~rl~icl~tliche Betrachtutzgen. Dalberg-Acton. from the electional aspects of democracy. B. 76-77. 50. XXX11 (191X). III .4bt. 1929). Granite for God’s House (?. p. RIarx (Leipzig : KrBner. 1930) has perhaps )-the greatest valuncf. 479. The author. (New York: Longmans. 1-111. ed. Max Weber. 273 sq. 1939).. 42. European Notebook (London: Sheed and Ward. B. 390-91.ata (Sofia: Pridvoma Petshatnitsa. Plato and Aristotle have similar notions. 1907). Recht. 107-8. pp. Frh.” Legitimacy and Revolution ” (written in x848). 4 (November. x929). Grundriss der Sozialiikonomik. pp. C. der Roman eines~ahrtausends (\-ienna and Leipzig: Zsolnay.” es J&b Burckhardt. Betrachtungen &es Unpolitischen (Berlin: S. Fischer. Among other authors who have stressed the distinction between democracy and liberty cf. 1852. pp.. n. ix. pp.” he adds. 1948).). Mohr. 3. ” The Rediscovery of Liberalism. 56 (about democracy and majority rule) and p. Weltge. in democracy 11 is the aim of government. I 2. Das Reich der Dri’monen.” Social Research. which in monarchy is the principie of governmental action. and by Raymond Aron. s3John H. also his letter. in Lcs fuerrcs f?z chninr (&I%: Gallimard. On the other hand. 203. 1896).to the democratic dogma in the frenzy of two World Wars hds heen shown by Jules Ronrains in ” Le tapis magique. pp. p. p. Anatole France. 64 Ibid.. ss Proudhon. Pobt~cs and Sociahsm (New York: Sadlier. 1941). p. the degradation of the term ” liberal ” in the United States is without parallel and without limit. 1950). 237-58. Hans Kelsen in Vom Wesen und Wert der Demokratie (Tiibingen: J. C. “ Macaulay’s Criticism of Democracy and Garfield’s Reply. ” Yet how stupidI> the \Vestern Powers subordinated their hopes for greater lihert!. P. 19z3). 1941).4mong American ’ sources ETDean VI&s Liberf). (New Tork: Sorton. 18 reprinted in Politisches rermdchtnis (Vienna: Klassiker der Staatskunst. of Freedom and Other Essays. VIII of his Oeur:res compI>tes 1868). No.

II. Capitalism. 135. 92. ‘I8 Ibid. Cf. Gaetano Mosca. r939). pp. ed. Intellectual America: Ideas on the March (New York: Macmillan. r894).” and: “ Democracy --zr and aristocracy are not states which are free by their nature ” (ibid. Elliot (Philadelphia: Lippincott. 1941). 1925). r~. F. pp. H. 1917. VIII. 1939). 194. 40-41. 238-40. 260.” II. Friedrich A. La mystique demorratique (Paris: Flammarion.” ed. 127 28. Brace. I 852. Friedrich Engels. theoretically towards socialism but practically to plutocracv. See p. Putnam. October. 1943). p. 295f. 82-83.4. . ‘5 Cf. also La conscience de la Suisse: billets ci ces messieurs de Berne (Neuchatel : Baconniere. Gonzague de Reynold. Aufzeichnungen. permitted one of his heroes to derive bolshevism from democracy: see 0. s* Cf. 1940). T. de Tocqueville (Paris: Perrin. pp. 1924). H. 8” Cf. Schumpeter.” Ilbmorrozc. Dietz. 1935) . July 22. 6. trans. Blocher. von Hayek. Liberty but not democracy. Der Ursprung der Familie. 1862). pp. A. S. Jean de M&axe. 1921). pp. p. I love with passion freedom. xxv-xxvi.. Arthur Moeller van den Bruck..). 69. Philosophy and Religion. W. 1934). Brace. Ben Hecht. % 85 Cf. Schumpeter. Bachofen. von Mises. If Hamilton Were Here Today. Socialism and Democracy-. Capita&m. 3 (Jan. 241-43. ” Mill. Comme d&it M. The Road to Serfdom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Germany’s Third Empire. Arthur Livingston (New York: McGraw-Hill. Harold Laski. P. the resPect for. 1889). Alain Locke’s lecture on “ Pluralism and Intellectual Democracy ” at the Conference on Science. Compare I have profited from the this with Chateaubriand’s: “ I am born a nobleman. Karl Mannheim. “ Ecclesia malignantium. Hayek. Lorimer (London : Allen and Unwin. Works. . 128 f. pp. IOI. No. Joseph A. t ss Cf. The Works of Herman Melville (London: Constable. Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time (London: Allen and Unwin. 102-3. “ Jenseits von Gut und Bose. this means that I detest and fear the masses. pp. Vandenberg. 129-31. 381. letter to M. Christopher Dawson. x944). *i James Madison. and ed E 0. 74 Friedrich Nietzsche. The Life of Reason. dated Bonn. “ Autobiographische See also ibid. 1941. 50x. also Montesquieu’s dictum (Esprit des ltis. Socialism and Democraq (New York: Harper. Beyond Politics (London : Sheed and Ward. 276. 207-8. p. “ Ourselves As We Are. Letters and Remains of Alexis de Tocqueville (Boston : Ticknor and Fields. 367.290 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY ‘Ia Cf. 328-29. xv. 1929). so Cf. p. 181. 1942). ro8f. is the foremost of my passions. Louis Rougier. L’Europe tragique (Paris : Spes.rightsThese things are at the bottom of m-art . Erik Dorn (New York: G.” Werke (Leipzig: Kroner.. “ Clarel. ” J. in Memoirs. II. Stuttgart: I. 47-48.. x940). but I am an aristocrat by instinct. A. s6 He once wrote in a letter : “ I have for democratic institutions an intellectual preference.. The Ruling Class. pp. Man and Society in an Age of Reconstruction (New York: Harcourt. 17. George Santayana. 503. 249-50. 1910). Eliot. Alexis de Tocqueville. des Privateigenthums und des Stunts (6th ed. (Senator) Arthur H. Cargill. On Libt?Yty. pp. ‘6 Herman Melville. etc. September. 70-71. 257-58-in which this author maintains that democracy leads Mr. in the past at least. IX. Stringfellow Barr. 4). That’s the truth! ” Quoted in Antoine Redier. p. and I have always kept this strong love for freedom . 2) that ” the power of the r--people has been confused with the liberty of the people. I 18-19 (compare with J. p. Bash-r Fahrbuch. p. pp. T&-Idea of a Christian Society (New York: Harcourt. and the thesis of L. and Ben Hecht. \ pp. I. legality.” La nouvelle relt?ve. J. de Corcelles. 1938h P. advantages of my birth. r943). p. 84. etc. trans.

1 p. as can be seen from the following remark: ” The unbalanced views of the liberal parties are lbeing used by the radical groups in order to bring about a full control of the free movements of the citizens in the most tvrannical fashion. 1921). The omnipotence of the state. III. 1836. 814. gme Pcriode. 65. French text. Oeuores de A. 357. lo2 Cf. vii (516 ff. the Total State in the World at War (New York: Harper. Permanent Revolution. whose intolerance impressed even a Mettemich. One of the reasons why De Tocquevillc left for America was’the July’revolution. 810. p. Reeve (1898). 522-23: Reeve’s trans. 1910).-On De Tocqueville’s political views and his preference for a constitutional hereditary monarchy to other forms of government. 523. l’abbe Baunard. 1884). 750-51 n. III. deeply suspicious of democracy and its kindred. p. Reeve (1898). Paris : Poussielgue F&es. III. Reeve’s trans. 518. Tome XL [Paris. p. p.35. p. James X. . de Tocqueville (14th ed. 1959). x942). n. centralisation and ? utilitarianism. and the result is the most far-reaching limitation of indiwidual freedom in the shadow of the omnipotence of a personified idea. 78-79.). dated November IO. Reeve’s trans. 524. 1942). equality. s6 Oeuvres. Mill. A Combine of Aggression: Masses. r898). “ Die . trans. p.4ufli%ung der liberalen Demokratie in Deutschland und das autoritare Staatsbild. p.” -M&noires d’outre-tombe (Paris : Penaud F&es. III. 1939). 292-93 .. _‘. I. 536 (No.“-Aus Metternichs nachgelassenen Papieren. III. Bowen & Bradley (New York: Alfred A. Democrarj. sj Oeuvres. 812. 91 De Tocqueville. LGon Ferrero. lo1 But apart from these tendencies there is also such a thing as a doctrinaire liberalism. pp... Gilman in an introduction to De Tocqueville’s Democracy* in . 810. 811-12. whose last hour has now struck. (1898). La foi et ses victoires duns le sibcle present (2nd ed. which displeased this strictly legitimist nobleman. Paris : Michel Levy-. I 12. S. ?iiiI. 23. 539. O” Cf.. p. III. 520. VIII. also Francis J. s) Oezrvres.” Cf.4merica. Oeuvres. se Letter dated January 24. Oeuores. trans. op. Henry Reeve (New York: The Century Co. pp. and the Will to Power (New York: Knopf. p.). O9Cf. 9LILetter to J. a3 Oeuvres. s’ Quoted in A. trans. (1898). de Tocque\ille. published in Revue des deux mondes. Onlv the confusion between libertv and democracv could turn the count into a i’ democrat. Lippitt. Reeve’s trans.NOTES 291 which belongs so eminently to the aristocracy.” Wissenschaftliche AbhandDuncker und Humblot. grows out of the teachings of modem constitutionalism just as the result from its cause. M.“-Lectures on the French Revolution (London: Macmillan. vi. lungen und Reden (Munich: . miroir grossissant de I’Europe (Paris : Editions Rieder. p. cit. Reeve’s trans. Democracy in dmerica. pp. whose letter (dated July 24. I&e and Dictatorship (London: Allen and Unwin. 808. III. III. II. (1898).#. 3-4: Karl Qtten. (1898). g?De Tocqueville. Democracy in -4merica. 1854. 812-13.iime’rique.” Cf. A. Georges Bernanos. of this ideal means [of coercion]. ed. 1933). 19071. Oerrvres. Ann&e LXXVII. run Cf. ** Cf. I?. 221 . 1942). Lettrc aux -4nglais (Rio de Janeiro: Atlantica Editora. Gerhard Leibholz.d. Sigmund Neumann. p. 1897) is quoted by Daniel C. 316 f. pp. also Lord Acton : ” For De Tocqueville was a Liberal of the purest breed-a Liberal and nothing else. Tocyueville and Beaumont in America (New York: Oxford University Press. 7. x938). 87 Oeuwres. 1864). xvii: “ From the ensemble of our conversations I certainly did carry away with me an impression that his political views and sympathies were not favourable to democracy. or Democrag* in America. Redier. 1945). 520-21 . VI. Knopf. II. Wood. see George Wilson Pierson. former war attache in Paris (r834). 523. (1898).

Humphrey Weard (Sew York: Brentano. 5X-66) Hello’s famous ” L’homme mediocre.) i\lonthlf Press. Historic of Ancient Woodhury. On Liberty. ‘3. ‘II. also p. pp. and also Bertha Damon.” 1947)~ pp. II 3.@res. The Works ?f Herman Melville. Scholasticism and Politics. 1280-82. trans. 1928). Ii2 Saren Kierkegaard. about the persecution of Joseph Palmer of Fitchburg. iI’ On the political necessity of group control in a democracy (i. 187. Dru and W. Comme disait M. The State of the Masses: the Threat of a Classless Society. Part I. D&s. W. Conn. ii5 Cf. Sociologic du communisme (Paris : Gallimard. Redier. 183 f. trans. lo6 Cf. it renders it more painful. Emil Lederer. Holbrook. . p. Fustel de Coulanges. ___ lo9 Cf The ‘Letters of WiZliam . Byelozerski. lo5 Speech delivered February 5. pp.. 1922 [Collection Hel\+tique]). II (June I. Mortimer Adler (New Pork: Macmillan.” lo4 F. Life. No. Connecticut. who m the 1830’s displeased his fellow citizens by wearing a beard. ris Mill. I~ZO). Fragmrnts d(un journal intime.. Bernard Bouvier (Geneva : George et Cie. 397: I‘ Democracy does not suppress misery . in La guerre. p. la vie-la treal: Editions \-arietes. 1941). The equality of political rights makes the inequality of status stand out by contrast.” an excellent analysis of nineteenthcentury agnostic decadence. p. Amiel. Year XXXIII. compfete’c par unr partie iniditr du Journal d’un kriuain. I 14. 136~37. Stewart H. the enforcement of a homogeneous opinion for the insurance of a common framework of reference).. p. Mrs. “ A propos de cent cinquante ans de la revolution. “ The Slavophiles. Compare with G. x940). No. ed. 1852. Assume the name as he w-iil. 1935). Norton. 240. pp. Part II. 1919). 136: “ There has been an attempt to give modern democracy ancestors-the democracies of antiquity. quoted by J. Notes 705 and 858. trans. The Possessed. p. the urban and peasant democracies of the Middle Ages. XXII. ed. Cf. \:. n. 61-62. F. Brace. pp. Mass. 161-62. Lowrie (.” Hevue de Paris. These are only pamtings acquired bv a no~zv~rr richr to give elegance to his mansion. and trans. (New York: W. I. L’Europe tragique (Paris: Spes. on the contrary. 187z). Henry James (Boston: Atlantic (See below. 19+9). 1938). 367-68. Ducatillon. 1940). “ Le monde. 81-82. La confession de Stavroguinc. lo5 Cf. 2. 242 sq. I IO.292 LIBERTY OR EQUALIn- Jacques Maritain.. -4. Tl~c Present Age. 141-42. Ii3 T.” in L’homme. 1922).+zerican Democrat (I\. . Jules Monnerot. 92-93. ed.. science-l’art (Moni1i Ernest Hello. 1945). XV. “’ Cf. the Westerners and ii0 As quoted in N. ce:te revolution (Kew York: Maison Francaise. for instance William Cothren. VI (Nov. pp. 1898). O. p.e. 109. Chapter iv. 2 (Jan. For good examples of “ horizontal pressure ” in the Southern United States see William March’s narratives ” Happy Jack ” and “ Trial Balance ” in his Collected Short Stories (New York: Harcourt. 98-100. No.. 94-95 . r93r). pp. lo3 Herman Rlelville. de Tocqueville. An&e XLVI.” Vestnik I’evrop~. 321. de Reynold.” ioi H. I 865.ew York: Knopf. Amiel’s Journal. 32-33.4.. Entry of i%Iarch 20. see pp. 200-1. in La vie intellectuelle.). J. Elie Halperine-Kaminsky (Paris : Plan. “ Clarel.P. Dostoyevski.d. &I. Cf. he does not belong.” II . 1940). pp. Vol. PP. This collection contains aiso (pp. Dostoyevsky. 1657-1872 (Woodbury. T. La cith antique. 98. pp.%ew York & London: Oxford University Press. “ Lost Men of American History. Reprint in pamphlet form by the Academic FranCaise. Herzen. 64. Grandma Called It Cur& (?r’ew York: Simon and Schuster. . pp. Drieu la Rochelle. The . ii6 James Fenimore Cooper.

ed. 1. 67-68. T/z Life of John Marshall (Boston: Houghton and Milan. p. 301. p. his letter to Randolph. 1880). Faulkner. Beveridge. 1943). The Man who zL’as Thursdaj (New York: Dodd. 1082 (p. pp.” See Harold U. P. September. 24. 117-18. aggre&zness of his co-religionist and contemporary Le Play.. ed. bl. VII. I. Chesterton. No. pp. on democratic theory ! ‘ICharles de Ribbe. Mixed Essays (?. . 1317 (p. p. 1930 [Etudes politiques et sociales. 13. R. Brace. Cf. 53.” millan.” VI. Compare with President Wilson’s declaration in 1917 will be the only virtue. Rladison. p. 68. . without reserve. From LyersailZes to the New Deal (New Haven: Yale University Press. Human Nature in Politics (Boston: Houghton. 63. 1916). pp.ei socialc (Brussels : Editions Eglantine. pp. 198. 88 . PP. as quoted by Emil D&r. Brieje an s&en Freund Fried&h zon Preen. Slavery and Freedom. p. 1896). 1938). Ia6 0. Leonard Huxley (New York: Appleton. No. 386) and No. James . 8r . On Libert?. 275 (citing Stapleton’s Canning). lz8 Letter to VGpelin. Freiheit und Macht (Basel: Helbing-Lichtental. Mifflin. 13s Red&.. 396. Rudolf Leonhard. 1938).944) . ?vI. Das Reich der Dtimonen. Mead. There are also egalitarian tendencies ccithin some of the nobilittes. Life and Letters of Thomas H. Jacob Burckhardt. p. 82. dated Basel. Philosopher of the Constitution (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Brownson. Comme disait M. . Dru (L. 1863 . G. und Humblot. 1y+2). letter to Haeckel. p. 1788. 657 (p. ID4 Cf. see also Dorothy Thompson. Is1 Cf. The Fruits of Fascism (New York: Harcourt. 13KThe “journals of Saren Kierkegaard. trans. lzB Cf. 1916). E. 168-69.ondon 8. Berdvaev. XIII. politiqut.v and Leadership. r884).” Finanz-und roirtschajtlicheZ&fragen. la2 Cf. Nov. pp. R&a of Politics. New York: &ford University Press. B ed.4. x902). 394. French (Kern York: Scribner. 1866. Memoirs of a Superfluous Man (New York: Harper. p.ew York: Maclz3 Cf. Writings. And at the outbreak of World War I: “ Conformity every man who refuses to conform will have to pay the penalty. I I. Xo. I26 Cf. 140. Democracy and the M’iU to Power. P. 130 (letter dated Basel. ~a). trans.3. 248. 1879). 19171. Ia6 Cf. V. . Hunt. de Tocqumille. IO. 500).Wood. Helmut Kuhn. I (Jan. XXIX [Stuttgart. 34. and Reuoltctionism (Xew Tork : Sadlier.. 1908). Jan. Georg Simmel. Phguy. X94’). 47. ‘32 Ibid. K. Listen.NOTES 293 I19 Ibid. I.4bout the concept of the una eademque nobiiitas in Poland cf. who. 330) and No. Infernational Economic Disintegration (New York: Macmillan. 328. exclaimed : “ We must make a frontal attack. 18[’<If. Jan. Paul Leicester Ford (New York: Putnam. 1y44). Le Play d’apr& sa correspondance (Paris: Firmin-Didot. Matthew Arnold. A. Sozioio~c (Leipzig: Duncker Irving Babbitt. Herbert L. Huxlqz. 190. 1\‘. Frank Thiess. I?’ Cf. 1864r89. p. also No. This resirrnation and defeatism is a far cry from the 1852). John Stuart Xlill.Wadison. lzl Jefferson. 176 . 377). 43-44. ed. 71-72. lx1 Cf. p. p. 1943). Graham \Vallas. p. I 14. 204). No. Hans (New York. p. 959 (p. Albert Jay Neck. xx]). x918). 1950). also James 7%. 1908).. 4. No. ” Democracy. Leg&mar\. Burns. Matthews. quoted in Albert J. p. 1310 (p. 298: Roger Secrbtain. Max Adler. . “ The Common Man on Trial. Tlze Writings sf Thomas Jefferson. 13. p. Dimocratie.. soldat de la liberte’ (hlontreal: Valiquette. ” Zur Soziologie des Polentums. lea Thomas Huxley. 1063 (p. I942). Democrac.223. Wilhelm RBpke. p.

Das Spektrum Europas (Heidelberg: Niels Kampmann. The B’ar Against the ?Vest . H. II. Max Weber and German Politics (London: Faber and Faber.294 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY ‘s’ Cf. [Paris]. so enthusiastic about charismatisches Fiihrertum. The passages on pp. State of the Masses. 64-65.. r891). pp. 1923. and notes. Mayer. 1946). 98. 53-54. Son’alirme et Ziberte’ (Paris: Giard et Briere. I IO--I I. Abteilung. Cf. nouvelle version (New York: Brentano. that See Denis totalitarian tyranny is nothing but la . James N. is4 Cf. Compare this with the dictum of Burckhardt’s present-day compatriot. Donoso Cortb.. PP. p. 170-71. p. Principles of Democratic and Mixed Governments (Paris : Baudry’s European Libraw. P. 201. 143Ibid.“ lzl Ibid. Max Weber. Theodor Geiger. B. J. Dutch text. op. J. ed. A. Weber. is9 Burke’s Rejlections on the Revolution in France. 31).forme basse de la de’mocratir. January zoth. p. “ Du principe de federation. cit. his remark (p. Die Masse und ihre Aktion (Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke. I12 Ibid. F. (This was written in 1865. 1844). “ Letters on the French Coup d’Etat. Marqu& de Ihldegamas.%&es.” Fisher Ames expected democracies to become military despotisms. ed. Wood. 1835)v P. 487-88. “ Loneliness will be a real terror.. p. Emil Lederer. Cf. IA3 Cf. I*’ Ibid. p. 1892). Francisco de Sales. 156.” ias Cf. 264-265). Guglielmo Ferrero. Die gkstige Situation der Zeit. ed. 1919). Norton. “ La vague dictatoriale. 105.” L’lllustration. C. Historical Sketches of Statesmen who Flourished i?z the Time of George III. Mohr. Instincts of the Herd in Peace and in Wur (New York: Macmillan. foIlowed bl. ed. 34. 1922). 82-83 . 75 : “ However discordant all the parts of a democracy may be. 76.” Walter Bagehot (Hartford: Travelers Insurance Co. 87. pronunciado en el congreso. Auril Kolnai. z ~01s. Wilfrid Trotter. P. Jose Ortega y Gasset. iso Cf. Oeri. iA5 Fisher Ames. 51. de Rougemont. Cf. “ Discurso de1 4 enero 1849. Lord Brougham. they all seek a centre. van Kol (“ Rienzi “). is2 H. Fortun. ‘944)> P. Lederer. The Inftuence of Democracy on Liberty. 440. Mildred Adams (New York: W. p. was responsible for the direct election of German presidents in the W&mar constitution whose drafting he had influenced. Parker. II1 J.. Don Juan Juretschke (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos. Denis de Rougemont. I’& Weltgeschichtliche Betrachtungen. 147 so.” Cobras de DonJuan Donoso CortPs. The Works of 146Walter Bagehot. pp. J. 318-19. pp.. pp. x937). Hermann. 5-6. Propert? and the Happiness of Society Considered by an American (London : John W. 89. 35. 29-30. which express exactly the same idea. to which are added Remarks on the French Revolution. trans. Socialisme en Vrijheit (Amsterdam: J. 67-68. p. pp. p. Invertebrate Spain. 139-40. Selby (London: Macmillan. isa Cf. unsurmountable by reason. Grundriss der Sozial~konomik. Graf Keyserling. unmistakably show Burke’s influence. La parf du diable.. p. 1944). x924). and that centre is the single arbitrary power of a chief. Orti y Lara (Madrid: Sociedad Editoria Y. International Economic Disintegration. Democracy and the Will to Power. 1898). Karl Jaspers. II. pp. p. M. Compare p. p. “ Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft ” (Tubingen: J. Proudhon. 1926). 1893). New . G. W. III. ia9 See Chapter l-11 (pp. 445. Better are the modern Obras completas de Don Juan Donoso Cortis. Henry. p. 91. 253.) ip8 Among these Wilhelm Ropke.. 188. x928).

Politics. feared ‘I that odious combination sovereignty and paternalism. Quoted by Dr. - . pp. IO. 150. rz9: “ And so the evangelist arose. Zur Soziologie des Parteienwesens. 243. p. TheJacobins (New York: Macmillan. quoted 4. Frantz.” i6s Frantz. 145-46. 318. (Boston : American Unitarian Association. PP.. ed. Historical Sketches. i6i Cf. p. 89. VI. . 1889-97). 60.. i70 Letter to Brooks . Friedrich Gogarten. VI. ‘95. Charles W. ia6 Cf. 8: “ It has been said that the best leaders are those with ordinary opinions and extraordinary abilities. La socie’te’ des Jacobins (Paris.) Compare with Denis de Rougemont’s ‘* Gedanken iiber den Mass und Wert. pp. of popular is5 Alexandre Vinet. 156Cf. Foderalismus. op. Euclides da Cunha.d. iu3 Frirdrich Nietzsche. Stamm in the preface to Frantz’ Deutschland und der F6deralismus (Stuttgart & Berlin: Deutsche Verlagsanstalt. Also sprach Zarathustra. 1919). 1938). too. i6’ Constantin Frantz. Politische Ethik: T~ersurh einrr GrundIegung (Jena: Eugen Diederichs. (Allahabad Mission Press. them. Lord Brougham. Die Weltpolitik. nevertheless. p. Henri Perrochon (Lausanne and Geneva: Payot et Cie.NOTES 295 (London: Gollancz. by Crane Brinton. he was doing no more than to condense the obscurantism of three separate races. 1917). p. etc. that absorption of all liberties and the whole civilization in a single liberty. F. von Goethe. k Rwolyutsii. When all is said. had no illusions about the conflict between the federalistic prmciple and the spirit of modernity. p. pp. 5. March-April. die moderne Demokratie (Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot. 1’2 Cf. 1932). The Religious Ideals of the President irs Quoted by Stanley A. so to speak. Eliot. 1932). 345-46. pp. Ce qu’il faut connaitre de la dictature (Paris: Boivin. 1944). Aristotle. 1930). [Zurich]. Aulard. Lucien Romier. i6* Cf. E.). loo Ibid. 1938~. 19x4). IQ9Ibid. 1939). p.4thens. ed. cit. Explication de notre temps (Paris: Grasset.. 1911). and trans. p. J. Mifflin. 1925). Samuel Putnam (Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Book XX. that they can walk at the front and show the paths by which the things generally purposed can be accomplished . p. 41. 163. that of a faction or a system . 67-68. in Werke (Leipzig: Kroner. Rousseau and Romanticism (Boston: Houghton. rz5 . 69 f. 1940. . r914). Mayer. a monstrous being. Hunter. Drzynxik (Petrograd : @vi. Alexandre Vinet. 8. F. 217. 317-18. April 2.” Is7 Cf. those who hold the opinion of the generation in which they live. .. L’be des tyrannies (Paris: Gallimard. Twentieth Century Christianit?. Mifflin. p. 1921). Dmitri Merezhkovski. (For the original title see Note 312. P. Political Thought: the European Tradition (London: Dent. Robert Michels. Irving Babbitt. 47. 1898. pp.” I02 J. who won trust by beratmg the outstanding. uphold it with such vitality. Chapter iii. but an automaton. r89z-1918 (Boston: Houghton. z-3 : “ The majority of tyrants are the product of demagogues. i6j Cf. Funck-Brentano. cf. xi. p. n. Litt&ratuw et histoire suisses. w. he moved man who swayed the masses was but a puppet. 1938). This Passive as a shade.. And he grew in stature until he was projected into history. 36-37. i’i Cf.I’-Cf. p. pp. Rebellion in the Backlands (OS Sertdes). Elie Hal&y. perceive it with such executive insight. Ot 170in>.4dams. v. Worthington Chauncey Ford. Dichtung und Wahrheit.” 1&S Cf. Letters of Henry Adams. 1928). 475-76.

but also. VI. he sounds a note of deep pessimism. 1930). p. Psychologie des deutschen Menschen und seiner Kultur. Beck (2nd ed. lB4 Alexandre Vinet. 278. p. lee Ibid. “” Wilhelm Ropke verv adronlr pointed out the fact that ethnic nationalism and xenophobia are diseases of the-lower social layers and not of the aristocracies. 188. 126 f. 933-34. as quoted by Charles Maurras. p. Briefe an Preen. Herbert Spencer. p. C. “ Ftderalisme. r887). r’s Cf.. Georges Sorel. Irving Babbitt. 248 (letter dated July 24. 32-21. Wilhelm Ropke. IV&e (Stuttgart: Cotta.” Oe~wres (se ed. Democracy and Leadership. 189j). Shaplen (yew Haven : Yale University’Press. International Economic Disintegration (New York: Macmillan. PP. . 1871). ” Plemennaya politika. la1 Cf. igi. 1942). cit. 40. IV. la6 Cf. 18sAs quoted in M. Rlunich. an author dealing effectively with the xenophobia of the masses which dislike all deviations from Friedrich van Hayek. Richard hliiller-Freienfels. II. Considtations SW le pouvoir spirituel (1826). 248. ed. cit. p. via nationalism to nazism “). I. 130-31. J. p. socialisme et antitheologisme. dated July 2. 206-7. iv. II. 1’4 Ibid. de Barante. Cf. ‘r9 Cf.. 1908 r‘ ktudes sur le devenir social. Brie-fe an Preen..296 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY I’* Michel Bakounine. Paris: Stock. Outre-mer. State (Caldwell. p. I” Cf. 1947). p. 1946) to the effect that nations can only communicate through their e’Zites. the worshipful attitude towards Volk gave tremendous impetus to both democracy and nationalism . 1’6 Cf. 2x3.. Les illusions du progrk (Paris: Rivibre. l%tions de la chronique sociale de France. op. Cf. La vie politiquc de M. Dallin The Real Soviet Russia. 178.” I]). Metapolitics from the Romantics to Hitler (New I-ork: Knopf. 1861). p. Peter Viereck. op. 1si Ibid. Cf. Romanticisme et r&oZution (Paris : Xouvelle Librairie sationale. “ The Coming Slavery. Siimmtliche Werke (Stuttgart: Cotta.“) ‘s’ Cf. pp. r&+4). Is8 Ibid. Riipke. (” Individual ” is here obviously of “ person . cit. their own patterns.. isi Cf.. but not through their masses. 1889). p. pp. W. x940). p. 1907). 1925). 9 f. pp. lB1 Cf. ” Die Nationalisierung des Rlmschen. On Liberty. pp. notes sur Z’tlm&ique (Paris: Lemarre. Geneva. x940). Constantine Leontyev. pp. 36.. 7y. The Road to Serfdom. also Joseph Folliet. II. 314. pp. Royer-Collard (Paris : the opposite Didicr. trans.” file&r. De l’esprit de conqr&e. Quoting Rent Gillouin (Aristarchie ou rechmchr d’w gorrvernement. -4 Chart for Rough FVater (sew York: Doubleday Doran. II.. ii. p. 18XAuguste Comte.” Sobraniye sotshinyeniy. 9 (September. is3 Fran2 Grillparzer. 11-12. 235. I*’ Cf. David I. 8-9. rili Jacob Burckhardt. II. . 56 (“. Crane Rrinton. 189. 139. 164. LPS chrdtians au cavefour (Lyon: IO~O). Paul Bourget. 194. p. lo2 Franz Grillparzer. 3. 195-96. Jacob Burckhardt. Crane Brinton. 166.” iVun z’ers~1s Idaho: Caxton Printers.1). 35-36 (letter. x47-52. I” Cf. Waldo Frank. op. Benjamin Constant. pp. John Stuart Mill. 18’ Cf. x872). 94-95. p. 1s8 Cf.

IV.). 163.) 207Ibid. Xikolay tsheZoe?yetshestvo (Sofia: Rossipsko-bolgarskoye PP. E. 182. p. Histoire ge’nhrala et sysl>me compari des Iangues sbmitiques (Paris: M. 19411. ti70.vs h‘ationalism (New York : blacmillan. . p.. La rttine du monde antique: conception matdrialiste de l’histoire (3rd ed. 1853). Trubetz! koy. De l’esprit des lois. 13.. The Saga of ~3merican Socictr: a Record of Social Aspirations. Cyr pr& de Tour. Denrorrtrr\. 211 Cf.Press. The L$e of . Popular Governnrenf: Fo:otrr Essu~s (London: John Murray. 179. These ideas later greatly influenced not only the Ku Klux Klan but also the immigration legislation of 1921 and 1924. Hermens. ed. 4. p. H._ Cl-I?.om Menschen: I’ersuch einer geisteswissenschajtlichen Anthropologic (Berlin: Buchholz und Weisswage.. 2x? Cf. 366. 1937). p... 200-1. 1933 [” Etudes sur le devenir social. 1904). Jahrg. On8 Ibid. op. John Holland Rose.\ mondes. “I9 Cf. 69 sq. Hayes. x944). p. Ferdinand A. June 8. Hayes. 4. 1~46. Georges Sorel. XL [ November 17. Eyre and Spottiswoode. p. . The Holy. L&y F&es. 1. letter to Count Gobineau (dated: St. Constantine Leontyev. Carlton J. Re-cuc des deu. p. _ ZooCf. n. 27. cit. ‘lul Sir Henry Maine. 1607-1937 (Sew York: Scribner’s. I. 49. Lucien Romier. 62 f. 206Ernest Renan. je pCriode. P. 1938). 287-88. p. cit.. Paris : Michel L&y. Ymropa i knigoizdatel’stvo. pp. x863). 1928). F. x52-53. 194. pp. i\nnCe 77. 426. p.d. 78 sq. a13 Cf. The English Saga. S. on 1926). 1941). x*0 Cf. etc. XV. “I* Emile Zola.VapoZeon (London: Bell. 69. pp.. Carlton J. Germinal (Paris: Fasquelle. 1920). 1942). pp. Werner Sombart. p.mnt’s War and the People’s Peace (Chicago : Chicago University. 297 -..). NO. Montesquieu. 479 2”1 Cf. H. p. ?li! Cf._ -S. Behrman in The A-erc Yorker.NOTES 19* Cf. 1885). p. Josef Leo Seifert.. *“3 James Brvce. Ernest Renan. Robert Lansing’s letter in The Intimate Papers of Colonel House. x90:]. ““I Cf. p. 200. 28..4). dn Americun Dilemma: the Negro Problem and lllodern Democracy (New To&: Harper. %03 William E. H.2iorule(3rd ed. 1930). II. Green. ?I7 Cf. 376. op. pp. Lecky. (This letter was written towards the end of 1871. Die Weltrevolutioniire: Lenin (Vienna: Amalthea. Paris: Rivikre. with their obvious racial implications (the ” zoning ” of Italy. 2”8 Ernest Renan.. ?‘” Cf. 248-50. Gunnar I\‘Ivdal. L-1. ?I8 Cf. A Generation of Materialism (Sew York: Harper. cit. La Rhjorme Intrllectrrellc ef . p. Koman Empire (New York: Macmillan. 199. w? Ibid. Molnir to 5. 150. and Liberty (Bew York: Longmans. x872). ZIG Cf. ZE* Cf. Cf. 1840-1940 (London: Collins. 1896). 13-14. zho. LES ConsPquencespolitiques de la paix (Paris : Nouvelle Librairie Nationale. The T\. Charles Seymour (Boston: Houghton PIifflin. 44 sq. Leopold van Wiese in Kiilner Tvierteljahrsschri’t fiir Soziologie. A. . 46. Hut zu won Bogumil iiber --. p. 5. Jacques Bainville. de Tocqueville. Dixon Wetter.. rdzo).. op. ‘I6 Benjamin Disraeli (Lord Beaconsfieldf as quoted in Arthur Bryant. Sp6Cf. ?08Cf.” XIX]).

Clarel (London: Constable. Geschichte der Demokratie in derl T’ereinigten Cf. 247. 1909). pp. z37 Cf. 202. 5s8Compare (%nateur) Edmond Scherer. 1832). III. June 17. The Rise of Democracy (London: Blackie and Sons. The SeIected Writings of John and John Quince ddams. Church (London: Longmans.. 1884). 240. 304. 75. 238-39. B’orks. pp. P&sAmong those who did recognise it cf. IV. Toynbee. p.. Pitirim Sorokin. 1940). 70. 1942). 26’ Ibid. p. the thesis of Hoffman Nickerson (the best American author on this subject) in The Armed Horde. ld5 Cf. Popular Government. Day. 21* Cf. p. see pp. Louis Rougier. 1793-1939 (New York: G. “ Le regime moderne. P. z38 Fisher Ames. -4 similar attitude can be found in ComClis de Witt. ilmerrcan Democrat\. 19'j8). 248Cf. p. 485.” Cf. rg+r). p. Invertebrate Spain. p. Politics iv. H.” Les origines de la France contemporaine (Paris: Hachette. 1946). Alexis de Tocquer*ille. Iv. 216 (letter. pp. S. P. Hans Kohn. Aristotle. Holland Rose. p. 13 I.the unpopular dictatorships of 1931-33 to the yielding of the ” junkers Papen. 3a2 Lecky.: xi.. 250Cf.--8zzJA%n. part I. 15. 227-28. The God of the Machine (New York: G. De Sade. Ig43). ed. 20. Ortega y Gasset. ?ss John . ed. Z3sEdmund Burke. 259-60.4dams. Green. rz7 Cf. L’oeuvre du marquis de Sade: pages choiries. Rejlections on the Revolution in France. p. Koch and Peden (New York: Knopf. 1940). Bozman and +k Hahn (New York: Viking. 2*6 Cf. Putnam. p. T&e. Peter Viereck. +T The Machiavellians (NTew York: John <. Stnaten van I\iord-dmerika (Gottingen: Vandenhoek und Ruprecht. ed. p. Cicely Hamilton. Social and Cultural Dynamics (New York: American Book Co. pp. became a traitor in the eyes of democrats. 196-97. 36.e. 1862). P. 2*8 Herman Melville. 74. 307. 288-89. Putnam. The Idea of Nationalism (New York: Macmillan. La de’mocratie en France: itudes (Paris: Librairie Nouvelle. Influence of Democracy. 2~ Cf. A Study of History. rg39). 232H. 1851)) VI. Jefferson and translation from the a Historical Study. John adams to James Madison. Arnold J. 2~ About the dilemma of democratic critics who preferred to see the continua{ tion of . II. ?. Metapolitirs.298 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY sss Cf. Adams (Boston: Little and Brown. 91 n. Briefe an Preen. J. authorized Ap.3!he?ze James Bumham. Isabel Paterson. 259-60. r943). 1887). Les mystiques &momiques (Paris : Librairie de &‘Udicis. PP. French by R. Twenty Years Armistice and After (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode. the . Sir Henry Maine. ” democratizing by letting in the biggest parq. P. Modern Sweden (London: Dutton. Guillaume Apollinaire (Paris: Bibliothbque des Curieux. 203. Jacob Burckhardt. r31 Cf. in \ and militarists ” to the Nazi volontk ghnirale. 258-59. 12. z33 Cf. igzz). 1817 . 189x). Democracy and Liberty. ed. Selby (London: Macmillan. 1924). 1944). trans. p. s&O Johann Georg Hiilsemann. pp. Mayer. p11Among these cf. 262-63 “) the narrow basis of his dictatorship broadening (i. J. Sir Charles P&e. so Cf. dated Oct.. Charles F. 4.

1899. 26sErnst Troeltsch. 491-99.p. Schneider. 1944. ‘LBs Ernest Renan. PP. 275. Pirozhkova. “5n Baruch Spinoza. ljD Barthold Georg Niebuhr. ” The United States Government. 262Ibid. 1927). II. 269Cf. XVIII. pp. whereas a monarch (for life) is the Recently former natural head of a permanent administrative machinery. cf. Compare with the slightly shrewder prophecy of Henry Adams: ” So with the capitalists. x937).NOTES 299 Z53Cf.” Stimmefz der Zeit. Campbell. p. V. G. 1882). S.p. Lebensnachrichten ran Bnrthold Georg AVietvrhr (Hamburg: F. La rPforme intrllecrrtelle. 138. 1935). Hitler Speaks (London: Thornton Butterworth. SCIX (19x9). C. G. S. Petersburg: Izdanie XI. 600. p. Gr~vzdushchi~~ Kham i Tshekhm i Gorkij. Part I. p. F. “ The Literary Revolt against Nazism. Hermann Rauschning. 155 Proudhon. Radical. Theodore Maynard. 498. ” Der Wille zur Macht. and It should not be forgotten that even such a fiery democrat Ethics. p. Kritik uller Parteien (Berlin: F. P. js. 1X62). cap. 266Jacob Burckhardt. Der Mohn (Berlin: Widerstandsverlag. Fragments d’un journal intime. Catholic (New E-ork: Macmillan. and have adopted socialist j There seems to be no reason w-hy the capitalist should not practices. 160. On amateurism and democracy cf. 1925). Die Bedeutung des Protestantismus fiir die Entstehung der modernem Welt (blunich & Berlin: Oldenbourg. Du principe defidde’rution. p. Bouvier (Paris: Stock. %larch 25. 1939). as J. L1er Arbeiter: Herrschaft und Grslolt (Hamburg: Hanseatische Verlagsanstalt. op. Fischer. 5. Mill was not entirely averse to intellectual differentiations m political matters . 36-37. Orestes Brownson: 1~ankee. Musarion-Ausgabe (Munich.. cf. 2x1Cf. II. dated Bonn. Zgj Among them Ernst Jiinger. Lettas qf Henry Adums. p. 35. 1838). 429. 1906). Mill. See also F. also Henri FrCd&ic Amiel. J S. S. D. 58. 5. IV. 96 (no. November 22. I~II). p. Solidarity is now law.” The Catholic World. Merezhkovski. 271. Politics and Emotion (New York: Liveright. About the origin of the term Kham (from Ham) and its implications.) a5i Cf.“-Letter to Brooks become a socialist functionary. Ends and Means (London: Windus. “51iThe spoils system partly fathered this view. P. 1932). not from amateurs. 274 (letter No. 260Cf. Tribune. President Herbert Hoover.” Gesamme/te Werke.188. L6TCf. ship by professionals.” he wrote in a letter to the -4merican University . Niebuhr. Paris. . cit. Die moderne Demokmtie (Jena: G. Tractatus theologico-politicus. 248. They have abandoned their old teachers and principles. 128). III'. Felix Wiercinski. vi and xvii. Adams. Sept. 290. Geoffrey Bourne. Considerations on Representatizle Government (New York. p. Briefe an Preen. U’ Cf. ‘LBa Friedrich Nietzsche. p.. 32. whose libertarian views cannot be doubted. with preface by B. 49. i\ldous Huxley. Perthes.230. 200. Frantz. pp.“ needs direction bv trained public servants rather than administration by haphazard political appdintees-leader(Chicogo Sundq. J. War. p. 192x). I 830). 174.. Kov. ” Zur Vorgeschichte des russischen Bolschewismus. Jiinger. 261B. (St. Wilhelm Hasbach. IOZ. Administrative government and democracy are not fully compatible. Chatto and 1941). 194x).” 1951. p. came out vigorously for expert leadership..

II. 276De la dkmocratie en ~4m&ique. 280 (letter to Dorothea Hensler. Diar?.” Gesammelte Aufsfsiitze ZNT Religionssoniologie (Tubingen : J. La revolution surre’ualiste.c to Declare? (View York: Knopf. quoted by Rlaurice Baring in his Have You Anythin. es3As reported by M. S. dated April 13. d7. 1830). “ Die Protestantische Kapitalismus. 127. Kozanov. 197. “ Svoboda i Neobkhodimost. Nov. 178 (letter. V. lS1 On the problem compare F. 88. 1853). Maria Gorres (Munchen : Literarisch-Artistische Anstalt. pp. ssRWhat roused Weber’s ire against Kaiser William II was primarily his Eib. *OaCf. Dec.i Henri Frederic Amiel. 1945). ” Deutschlands kiinftige Staatsform. p. x863).. Pravda. 1854). PP. p. Vladimir Solovyov as quoted by Miguel de Unamuno. dated Jan. Srhriften. pp. 1945. 87.J resistance against the military clique during World War I. VIII. Lyon: Georg. 1929). Keyserling’s estimate of “ socialist ” America. Niebuhr. VI. 296A. p. .300 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY a” Benjamin Constant. 1882). pp. x’: De Sade as quoted by Paul Eluard. (Xlunich : Dreimasken-Verlag. “‘~3V. cit. ilmerica Set Free (London and New York: Harper. 343.” Betrachtungrn iiber die preussische I‘erfassungskrise (Stuttgart: Cotta. March 25. 285Ibid. p. Campbell. 20-27. p. ssR B. 289 sq. . 67-68. P. ‘904).. 45 (entry of June 17. I. trans. 1X78). . seaHerman Melville. Sochirzem&a (Geneva. Our translation is from the *American edition (Sew York: Knopf. zn8 Burckhardt. Drucker. p.” ?sl Cf. pp.. an6Ibid. 257-258. G. 155 56. Niebuhr. YTet the same violent rejection Cf. 276. ~1 Cf. p. Del sentimiento trrigico de la oida (7th ed. 1941.. Herzen. z79Cf. Merezhkovski. Ernst Troeltsch. Williams in Sotshineniya dleksye>la Stepanovitsha Kkomyakwa (Moscow: Kunsheryev. Buenos Aires: Espasa-Calpe. 2r. 2. Max Weber. “ Apokalipsis x927). Mohr. Briefe an Preen.v. 22. 8. 209 (letter to J. 85. Invertebrate Spain. 2 (Paris. 2~ Cf. *92 Ibid. Max Gesammelte politischc Schriften . Pirozhkov. “ The Whiff from the Empty Bottle. No. Die Bedeutung des Protestantismus . 51. editor of the English Republic. nashego vremeni. 180L. Petersburg: V. 5. 429-30 (letter dated Rome. 1945 [” Coleccibn Austral “I). B. . Cf. 1937). Igoj). 287Cf. p. nT8Peter F. S. Compare with Khomvakov’s letter to the Rev. D. Jo& Ortega y Gasset. Ethik und der Geist der 274Cf.. p. pp.” I’Zrst. pp. 442. 1820). C. Linton. p. Marquiset. Clarel (London. 1941). 255. Hardy (New York: Macmillan. Kuzmin. 1922). June 22. Michelet. 20. 282. October. 275 (letter to Moltke. 19. p. wT Ibid. Arthur Koestler. x920). . p.183O). p. G. 46. 1851). Pyott i Alexey (. “ Die Quelle des cbels. pp. his Gesammelte of the juste milieu had been made by Josef van Giirres. Darkness ut Noon. 8. 256 (letter to V. 209.St. 143-44.” The Catholic World. ed. op. 1921). 1942). Basel. 2911). I. So. p. Constantin Frantz. P. 240. The Future of Industrial Man (Sew York: John Day. B.. To Heinrich Heine the United States were an ungeheures Freiheitsgeftingnis (” immense prison of freedom “).. G. z’2 Cf. Lebetzsnachrichten. 1X54). De I’esprit de conqut%e.

704. Bles. w6 Ibid. It can 1843). 1854).” have been expressed by F. Quatre chapitres i&d&s SW la Russie (Paris: Vaton Freres. Irving Babbitt. dated February 20. Petersburg. 16. \I... pp. Linton. Reavey (London: G. Letters and Remains of Ag. p. 1880 i 1881 godi. I929). 141. dated February 17. not so far been discovered in between Russia and Europe is inevitable “-has yet the passages repeated here imply practically Herzen’s works or letters.) al3 Ibid. I jo. 26-27: “ Thus exposed without preparation. dated Paris. 1855). a’. The passage quoted in Prince Lobanov-Rostovsky’s Russia and Asia (New York: Macmillan. a01Ibid. unter besonderer Bezuxnahme auf * staatliche wrd intmnationalr Organisation. p. 1933). so4 Cf. (Reprinted in Stuttgart in 1921 under the title Deutschland und der FGderalismus. 012. 186. Tire Ilhtion. 178. Note 474. s*@Letter to Brooks Adams. 312-“ On the wings of socialism. p.” Ko..NOTES 301 p08Ibid. Harold Dean Cater. 1947). ai8 Burckhardt. Briefe XT Erkenntnis . II.. Ibid. Compare with Imbart de la-Tour-du-Pin. 1871). La Russie en 1839 (Paris: Librairir d’Amyot. 1862). 171. 17. 19-p). that Russia finallv “ lived up ” to the picture painted by her detractors-iust as Germany which warred Worid n‘ar II in a fashion described by -4lfied propagandists during World War I.. p.. 311Jules XIichelet. p. La Russie en 1839. 92. pp. ao3Herzen. 296-97 (letter to p\. the same thought. M. Letters of Henry Adams: 1892-1918. be admitted. p. Ford (Boston: fioughton Mifflin. 314. 347-48 (letter to Elizabeth Cameron. Kirchheim. .. p. F. 207. Yet Custine must be read with historical discretion. trans. ed. Dostovevski. 296. Sotshinemya (>Ioncow and Leningrad : Gosudarstvennoye Izdatel’stvo. 1859). =I2 C. Sept. p. 185.. 2608 (June. G. The French original was published in rS71 in Florence. Frantz. p. 1876). p. I. a1oMemoirs. France Before Europe (Boston : Roberts Brothers. the Russians infallibly and brusquely went from superstition Similar views to atheism. 1879). 3a6 C. 484. Henry Adam7 and his Friettds: a Collection of his Unpublished Letters (Boston: Houghton Mifflin.).eont~e23... Sept. de Tocquesille (Boston: Ticknor and Fields. ai0 Henni Adams. so3 Ibid. pp.. op. 266. a09Ibid. C. dated Tocqueyille. 1915). cit. Compare with Joseph de Maistre. p. Leontyex-. am Quoted in Life. 170. p. “ The Breakdown of Internationalism. W” Ibid. ISj4). 31nCf. x938).. V. I. I. as quoted by Nicholas Berdyacv in Konstanfin I. M. Der F~deralismus als das ieitendr Prinzip jiir die soziale. 430. p14Ibid. though. p. cit. Letters and Journals of George Ticknor (Boston: James Osgood. aOsHerzen. 1900).. Deutschland (Mainz: F. 21. Senior. p. soi Le Marquis de Custine. Oct.. Linton. 60-62. 317Le Marquis de Custine. p. This struggle Russia can fly over the whole of Europe and reach the Atlantic. p. Dostoyevski in The Idiot. 289 (letter to V. XII (Dn~ennik pisatelyu zn xX77. 140. W:. from passive obedience to unbridled activity. 271 (letter to V. dated St. 1899.

perhaps. England or Spain we could do nothing but await it. Oct. . I am glad to think I shall be dead before I am ruled by the Luckily society will go to pieces then. 313Ibid. Looking into the future. who wrote before World War I in connection with the invasions of Asiatic hordes on the European Continent : “ Europe has even now to fear the Russian Empire and Eastern Asia which represent elements half or fully Mongol. 341. G. p. I. pp. p.” Archiv fiir Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik. Tyringham. June I I. A.. . 337-38). 347-50.. p. August 17. 19x8). An interesting parallel to Adams’ speculations are the musmgs of the Austrian Catholic historian and essayist Richard von IQ-a&k. cit. Mass. his letter to Brooks Adams.. 483-84.“tirade Unions of the Twentieth. similarly spoke about the necessity of putting 19. of Sozialismus und so&ale Bewegung] (Berlin. stated that Germany had. he wrote at the beginning of this century: “ No new continent is at our disposal. 3z4 Ibid. Cf. Oct. 1918. This issue marks the most decisive struggle in world history which is the antagonism between East and West. Still. II. 227. M. In an earlier letter he had wlselv confessed: ” Much as I loathe the regime of Manchester and of Lombard street in the ‘nineteenth century. just as in later Antiquity we see large continental areas cut off from the sea on whose plains we see assembled huge populations but which are monotonous and favour the establishment of ‘ schemaOnly in Russia and in the United States new cultures can tic ’ civilizations. But it will always be possible to defeat them as Belisarius. and that the Americans will occupy Rome. escaped the Russian knout. 1942). 484). Cater.) sLz Ibid.) st5 Cf. as in the 13th century the Mongols. . Nor is it unthinkable that it will. p. Perthes A. It is equally possible that American ships will rule the Mediterranean just as the Normans did it in the past. in a letter to Professor Friedrich Crusius (Nov. ” Zur Lage der biirgerlichen Demokrats-in Russland. 341 (letter dated Moscow. at least for the time being. p. Letter to Brooks Adams. as the Turks in the 16th and 17th centuries. Souvenirs d’Alexis de Tocqueville (Paris: Gallimard. 164. pp. Even in the realm of economics everything indicates a coming decrease of liberties. it is moving accurately l on time. 1901). 3. 499. Gaskell (Ashintully. be America which pushes back the Asiatic East on European soil very much to the advantage of our civilization. or that they appear before Vienna.. Adams was no mean prophet. dated Washington. 1916): “ As for the war-cloud. Charles Martell or Eugene of SavTy did in the past. 1899 (H. repulsed the Moors . London.. Byzantium and Alexandria thus emulating the Goths and the Vandals.. Werner Sombart. 438). 19x8). \i’ to reduce Germany to absolute extinction. De Tocqueville The .“--Op. Wirth in Der Gang der Welfgeschichte (Gotha: F. the Frank. or that they get to Germany.” arise because these countries have little history and vast plains. 19ob. Cf. either as to technical or as to economic de\velopment. 1901)... August 21. Germany on her feet in order that she could resist a Russian onslaught. 1924). based in 1863.302 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY “I Letters of Htyr~~ Adams. tit. His prediction as to the collapse of Germany appears in a letter to C. On my figures. Custine said substantially the same thing when he insisted that only Germany could parry the blow while “ in France. Here the future will by no means spare us disagreeable surprises. D. 21.” (Cited by A. Yet Max Weber was almost equally afraid of the United States. p. 339 (letter dated Moscow. Max Weber. Max Weber. The basic identity of capitalism and socialism was well known to him : cf. it should take you till August. 1913. Paris. 1898 (Ibid.. ‘) -traditional French policy of keeping Germany weak and divided he rejected with rare foresight. just as Charles Martell. It is possible that Asiatics penetrate France and Spain as it happened in the 8th century. 24. Der proletarische Sosialisvw (Marxismus) [moth ed. p. pp. op. 649 (letter to Charles Milnes Gaskell. but that danger had not been averted for all time to come: see Weber’s Gesammelte Schriften. Feb.” (The great retreat started in that year and month. XIII (IV) Tiibingen.

The correspondence between Donoso Corms and Count Raczynski in its French original is contained in Deux diplomates: le Comte Raczvnski et Donoso Co&s .” letter dated Paris. pp. 1856). Juan de Valera. pp.. 27.NOTES 303 8pBDe la de’mocratie en AmeXque. Durnovo’s Memorandum (February.” starting point is different. 138-39. J. 1942).. 220-21 (entry of Dec. 154. 343Ibid. in Documents of Russian History. 345Ibid. 270). 346Ibid. 284. I. p. 436-37. Quatre chapitres . but about Russia he says: “ The second in a way concentrates Summing up. H. ar2 Ibid. sss Cf. II. Obras completas (2nd ed. pp. B. ed. cit. p. La Russie en 1839. 1866). II. ss8 Cf. F. 156. Our text is from the Spanish translation in the Obras. ss9 Cf.” letter dated Berlin. 3*9 Henri Frederic Amiel. 273. Diary. W. II 623 (letter dated Paris. 330Le Marquis de Custine. 1941). 3’S Cf. I. x947). V. Hayes. 430-3 I. 1906). IV. December 28. saaDonoso Corms Obras. 134. 1922). Linton. and even Dostoyevski was subject to depressed feelings of national inferiority upon sensing the hostility of Europe : cf. No. 170. Obras. “ Cartas politicas acerca de la situation de Prusia en 1849. 3ournals. 1880). A. 116-19. w Ibid. Petersburg: Izdatelstvo Pirozhkova. 1852). s28Donoso Corms. x900). 310 Cf. Carlton J. sar la Russie. II. Albert Ballin.. 138. Golder (Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.. he concludes: “ Their in one man all the power of society. Petersburg. A Generation of Materialism (New E’ork: Harper. v. p. 333Cf. Herzen. . op. 1531 (letter dated St.” 38’ Corms’ speeches before the Diet in Madrid were famous all over Europe. 1850. 237-38). 361 About the concept of the time-lag cf.” Obras. “ Discurso de1 30 jan. y 331 Donoso Corms. II. “ Cartas politicas acerca de la situation en Francis en 1851 y 1852.. x823). their paths divergent: nevertheless. . 47X-72. and Herzen commented on them (cf. 3sBSee the letter of Count Raczynski to Donoso Cortb (January 4. 579. 5r 5-16. p. 158-jg. 148-49. . 332 Ibid. and A. Does God Exist? (New York: hlacmillan. p. Soren Kierkegaard.. 1927). suiui d’un aper$tr SUT la G&e (Paris: Bechet Aim?. It must also be borne in mind that all Russians were not always in an aggressive mood. Huldermann. 1849 (Obras. pussin~. pp. . June 12. A.. 51 I (1845). 82s Cf.” Obras. III. M’ Ibid. Parall& de la puissance anglaise et TUSSC6 I’Europe. second letter to 1’. Eggers (London : Cassell. Taylor. 13. trans. aJ1 Abbt? de Pradt. “ Estado de las relaciones diplomaticas entre Fran& Espana. 3*i Donoso Corms. 143. Herzen. May 24. Joseph de Maistre. Madrid: Aguilar. D. s5 Donoso Cartes. Adhemar d’Antioche (Paris: Plon. S. 1848-1853. Sochineniya. 16X... ed. 1849) in Corms Obras. p. Khomrakov’s letter on England in his Polnoye sobram:ve sotshinenii (Moscow: Universitdtskaya Tipografiya. E. Here the author calls America individualistic. Prorok russkoi revolutsii: k YzrbileJTtc Dostoyalskago (St. p. Merezhkovski. 11. p. 560. each of them seems called by a secret plan of Providence to hold in its hands some day the fate of half the world.. 1852. p. dip&hes et correspondance politiqzce. March IO. 1914). A.

La d&nocratie en France. 287-88 (letter. 252-53. 1849.. p.” nobody has to be afraid of evervbody else. 35* H.&coh Burckhardt ztnd Aiietxche (Basel: Universitatsbibliothek. p. 262 (letter. dated April 26. (Italics ours. 18. Politik. p. and William i\ylott Orton’s The Liberal Tradition (pljew Haven: is nearer to Yale University Press. 1946). LIBERTY OR EQUALITY *ss Cf. Everett Dean Martin. p. s61J. Zur &itgeschichte. 36( Thought. W. Burckhardt’s pessimism was not so complete. p. seeThere is. in Cater. since the issuance of the Atlantic Charter. dated September 14. 25. Washington.e. naturally. “’ Letter to Henrv &born Taylor. ou Grandeur et mist& de lo dtmocratie (Paris : Marcel Riviere. Wells. Alma Hartmann (Leipzig: . is conspicuous through its Yet these are psychological considerations of a purely \ almost total absence). 372. but only Malism (excuse the insipid word). G. iiber Staat. 1875 : I‘ Finally there will be a world war between optimism and-not pessimism. We think of Emmet J. also such a thing as a confusion between liberty and If all arc equal. ed. 62. and absence of fear is a verv genuine and real type of freedom (i.304 193x). sz Letter to Hermann Schauenburg. 1946. von Goethe. 1938). 192.h PP. -4. ‘s5 Jacob Burckhardt. Le purple roi. 192% P. we still prefer the concept of Professor Orton.. Rougier has written in a similar vein: cf. a65 It is interesting to note that the term “ liberalism ” has recently been used by two Catholic authors in a very different sense. 1867). p. 14. 360E. II. He wrote to F. p. Treitschke has tackled this question verv wisely by alluding to Herodotus’ remark that “ the majority in democracies is taken for the whole. Politik.. P. 1945 [” Collections Princeps “I). psychological reasons. Though hIr. reprinted in Waldo R. his La ddfaite des w4inqueu~s (Paris and Brussels: the theories Editions du Cheval Ail& x947). 1905 . *. pp. Browne. n. theoretical nature which have little to do with the problems of state or society. 1872).. 35. cit. “ Demos. 15.“Briefe an Preen. 1946). 1945). VII). whose book bears the descriptive subtitle 9 Study* of thr Socicd and Spiritul Conditions of Freedom. The Mired at the End of its Tether (New York: Didier. See Heinrich von Treitschke. “ The Religion of the State ” (Colver Lectures. KOTES TO CHAPTER THREE a6?E. Scherer. p.” equating it with the wolutzte’ g&z&rule. s5Q Ibid. Hughes. March. as quoted by Edgar Salin. 558-559 35i Rossel. pp. WUE Tagc. Burckhardt did”‘irot reject the possibility that this battle could be won.” Collected Poems (sew York: Macmillan. 1890).$ragen. Briefe an Preen. nobody is equality resting on deeper. p. van Preen on Sept. Gedanken 363Eduard van Hartmann. 216 . Sozialismus.d. Briefe an Preen. Jan. 86. 1934 [” Librairie des sciences politiques ou sociales “I). “ superior. Hughe\’ formulation that of Pius IX. Robinson.” and to Rousseau’s arbitrary theory of “ Freedom. Yet how self-defeating . ” Maximen und Reflexionen.LUfred Kroner. 1944). The Church and the Liberal Society (Princeton : Princeton University Press. 17. the “ Freedom from Fear ” which.” We& (Stuttgart: Cotta. 84. Sept. 230 (No. Let&than in Crisis (New York: Viking.) “‘Jacob Burckhardt. 19. p. 15. and Bertrand de Jouvenel’s excellent Du pouvoir: Moire nature1 de so croissance (Geneva: Les Editions du Cheval Ail&.

. r’O Cf. also St. q. 985Cf. p. LittPvatzrre et histoire suisses. Fisher Ames. Brownson. viii. 493-94. P.5. 9S. It is to him that we owe the expression “ the double he of an illiberal stability and of an irreligious liberalism.” Thought. ru’ourrit et Cie.J. col. 368The Christian values of liberty were felt with great clarity by Alexandre Vinet. 19081. 1851-1859 (Paris: Plon. Thomas and democracy cf. pp. 10. 2. Snmma Throl. Friedrich Julius Stahl. ” -4quinas and Popular Sovereignty. Cf. 13. Demokratir (Zurich: Max Niehand. I.. ). Thomas recommmd~. as2 Georges Bernanos. Obsenutiom SW Ies Grccs (Geneva: Compagnie des Libraires. a. cap.). p.. 96. January 18. 1853). Compare also Nicholas Berdyaev.. Szrnrfnn contra Gentiles. CXI.Ilar: (New PO&: John Day. on St. III). in 1Iigne. a. a6s Cf. Pope <Gregory VII. r942). pp. Grewzen der Freiheit in del. x932).“-Vinet. September. ‘sl \Vhich St. 2 (Autumn). Brozcnsorr’s Lot&r LiJc. I’atr. 1948. 12. \‘. 440 (Spring. 80-81. p.” etudes carm&taines. by the acutely observant Austrian ambassaSee his Neuf ans de souvenir d’un ambassadeut dor to Paris. Augustine. p. iii.1 r6’ Cf. X. q. letter 21 (IOSO A. p. Lat. 1947).NOTES 305 of Rousseau on liberty in connection with the General Will can be at times was very well shown. p. 175. Der Protestantiwzus uls polttisches Binzip (Berlin: Wilhelm Schultze. 3’7 Summa Theol. Thomas Aquinas. p. No. Carl Schmitt. 23. 21. 0reste. ” Bin Sendbrief von dem harten Buchlem wider die Bauern.” Y ’ . 3h9). ” Political Terms and Spiritual \-alueb. Degen. a. which states only that ‘I all men are created equal. I~OO). also Bernard Iddings Bell. Aurcle Kolnai. q. Wladimir -4strow. A. fwm 1855-1876 (Detroit. 72-73.. 376Cf. p. Henry F.” 3’1 Cf. 29. 56-57. Count Hiibner. Thomas. 594-601. No. I. 75. I. ISo. 9. Donald Attrvatcr (London : Shecd and Ward. and I. also St. “ We Lack Leaders. NeunJahre der Erinnerungen (Berlin: Paetel. S5. I. p. a. as far back as 1852.” Lava1 thPologique et philosophiqur. 29-30. Cf.s Broxruon. Epistuk. S. Influence of Democracy.” The Dublitr Review. trans.\-III. 1749). d’r-lutriche SWS le Second Empire. 9. 1941. XVIII. 346. The Futuue of Industrial . Wilfred Parsons. p. Is Education at Fault ? ” T/F A-ez York Times Magazine. Jacques hlaritain very wisely proposes to replace the misleading term “ equality of man ” with unit& du genre hunrain: see his arttcle “ L’cgalitc chrctienne. 1940).. I-II. x7?Abbe de Mabl!. “ Lage des heutigen Parlamentarismua. ad lit. Peter F. P. 579Cf. the American Declaration of Independence. p.” Ti’evke: kritische Gcsamtausgnbc (Weimar: Bohlau. I. Drucker. Xor did he overlook the fact that a liberalism without a religious basis was bound to founder in nihilistic barbarism (ibid.sIV (1939). 50-51. 186. 179. pp. ‘947). The pro-democratic tendencies of somr: of : our modern Catholic thinkers would have received strong censure from men ! Cf. 19oq). quoted by Theodom Maynard.---0n the “ identitarian hostility” to otherness cf. 1904). 1938): pp. La France contrc les robots (Paris: Kobert Laffont. I. The End r$ Our Time. 37bCf. 96. “ Privilege and Liberty. 3id Cf. 367. Sunzma Tizeol. pp. hlartin Luther. 30. 65. 3. 70. Orrrtes like Orestes Brow-nson in the 19th century. 8. [Original text Graf Joseph A. 373Kosalind &Iurra\-. Dr.. P. Harold La&i Pa7liuntcntar~~ Gozlernment in E&znd (New York : The Viking Press. 310Cf. St.D. von Htibner. 270-71. I. 4. aer Cf. 3i5 De regimine principum. i.

Tractatus theologico-politicus. asa Cf. Francis S. 332-33. XVI. Um&rsalismus und Pers&zlichkeit (Berlin : Reuther und Reichard. as quoted by Henry James. B. R. Individualismus. 358n. 36. a*’ Hence the reluctance to display flags in Catholic churches on the Continent Whereas no American (not even a (save old.A. not a vertical (statist) phenomenon. Feb. Spiller (New York: Oxford University Press.To what extent the Christian opposition in the Third Reich clung to existential. cap. Jacques Maritain.” the citizen of a democCf. 1907). Cooper. 354-55. pp.Sochinem~u. . also Hans Dehickbr. 1935). 356. some Democratic And their feud is dramatic. aa9 Cf. 7. I 9461. 1947). 1907). men are “ citizens ” in a republic. Southerner with a Confederate ancestry) would object to receiving Holy Communion under the Stars and Stripes. See also . 97-1x6. pp. 193~1945 (Munich: Josef Kosel. Paris: Desclee de Brouwer. Part III. American Traits from the Point of l’iew of a German (Boston: Houghton Mifflin. and a Bavarian conservative might not even have liked the colours black.306 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY **s Compare the lines of Ogden Nash’s “ The Politician ” (The Selected Verse of Ogden Nash [New York : Random House. Cooper. Three Reformers (London: Sheed and Ward. 230. ! non-collective notions can be seen in Theodor Haecker’s famous Tug-and hhchtbiicher. It is obvious that American discipline and obedience is a horizontal (societal). Democrat. I. 108-9. E. Charles W. 1902). 200. A.. 1917 [Philosophische Vortrage der Kantgesellschaft No. Hugo Miinsterberg. p. Eliot (Boston: Houghton. March 27. 391 In his Riationalismus und Ethik (Vienna: Braumiiller. 174-75.J. white and red. p. “ Prasidentschaftskandidaten in den U. p .” Raue intern&on& de I’ensei~nement. But except for the name They are indentically the same. x936). x930). S. **” Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn. Garrigou-Lagrange. Even the President can be elected by a minority of voters (though by a majority of electors). II. discarded regimental banners). x928). ii. “ children ” (subjects) in a monarchy and “ slaves ” in a tyranny. The American racy is a respecter of public opinion.Y. other flag could have been used ? A royalist would have objected to the blackred-gold design. Mifflin. pp. et les form&s dogmatiques (3rd ed. I. reprinted by the Librairie G&n&ale de Droit et de Jurisprudence (Paris.” Die Furche. Tke Mindnrrd Heart of Love (New York: Henry Holt. pp. 3u4 Cf. 359. 1907. Le sens commun. Campbell [Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn]. 1947). ed. Historische und politische Aufsdtze (Berlin. principle is merely a means for transferring political power or designating political appointees. 357. James F. According to Spinoza. a few years ago it would have been Yet what hard to imagine a German Catholic worshipping under a swastika. la philosophic de 1*&e PP. z I 5) : Some politicians are Republican. and it is by. Spinoza. Note 496 and Henri Gaidoz. A similar situation exists in a score of other countries. 157.. D’Arcy. Compare with Ottmar Dittrich. ‘I Is America -* Menaced by Totalitarianism ? ” Thewldm5. April-June. Gleanings in Europe. 1928). 388K.S. 19-25. ” Introduction pohtique. [Vienna]. and M. Times Magazine. se5 Cf. 1948. a I’etude d’ethnographie as2 Cf. Khomyakov. R. S. ‘943. p. The majoritarian principles cannot possibly be defended as absolute by any philosophical reasoning. x4]). Resentful of commands from “ above. no means universally applied. so3 The majoritarian principle in the American Constitution (which avoids The majoritarian the term ” democracy ” all through its text) is accidental. 169 f. James F. and see also the remark of President Eliot of Harvard. 18-24. 97. p. p. C. The term “ government by the people ” does not necessarily imply majority rule. 23-25. 124.

Neck. of course. B. Cf. 146. John C. but a spiritual shortcoming.” Works (Boston: Little. 84. 169. p. His view on the impotence of the voter in the parliamentary democracy is. p. Dr. A Disquisition on Govern ment (New York: Appleton. 54. The Future of Industrial Man. 1950). this being the object of its legitimnte attack. 1939). Democratic 400 Cf. Mysteries of the Soul. 19x5). In Cf. incidentally. 17o-71. . -4merican Journal of Sociology.). not an entirely new one. 1949) letter dated Canaan. 1893). I. Discourse VIII.d. Drucker.” The First Reith Lectures (London : Allen and Unwin. p. rightly. 18. Miiller’s argument is almost exactly the same as Russell’s. established parliamentary nations. The Good Pagan’s . 9: “. pp. after all. 3e6 Cf. ” The Duplicity of Democracy. he speaks of a “ Christian individualism. 1931). Chesterton said quite rightly that a gentleman was a man who could keep one thousand commandments-but -y--. You are therefore much more conscious of being governed than of governing. Green. Cram offered in his The the devotee of parliamentarism what to propose. See The Letters from -illbert Jaz. which is not a political. 60. Calhoun. Richard Miiller-Freienfels. See his The Conquest of Happiness (London: Allen and Unwin.” See Verlag Der Neue Geist. . his Vom Ewigen im Menschen (Leipzig: 1921). trans.. this htin~ the proper object of its ideol endeaworrr. 1936): pp. is also one of the few modem authors to stress the factor of envy and jealousy in the democratic ideology.. ‘37-39. A. I&k fiildkr-Lot (Paris: Aubier. op. We find it in Melville’s Mardi and. democrat>. 173-74. Peter F. -____. der Gegenwart (Erlenbach-Ztirich: Eugen Rentsch. . a twenty-millionth share in the government of others. but Albert Jay Neck saw. p. . Ortsbestimmung other words. Inflt+ertcrt&Democracy. especiallv in English-speaking countries. p. is a secularized version of the knightly ideal): cf. p. pp.” NO. “ Appeal from the New to the Old Whig. 165-66. IV. 1945). hts Idea of a University. crushing the few. Reich. Fisher Ames. a Mehrheitsiiberlageruug. (Caldwell: Caxton Printers. n.Se7Cf. Russell. buf?. 39. Equality and the Principle of Relativity. . 399 Cf. T-on der Nothwendigkeit einer theologischen Grundlage der gesammtm Stantswissenschaften und der Staatszcirtschaft insbesondere (Vienna and Leipzig : Wilhelm Braumiiller. 87.” Max Scheler alone seems to differ. 286.. Influence of Ihnocrac~. and Nicolas Berdiaeff: trans. and the inception of an aristocracy of some higher order. Alfred H. The “ gentleman ” thrives ifi>ukKan atmosphere of minor issues . x74-75. 1866).NOTES 307 Miguel de Unarnuno." Iv1 Cf. 1gzq--1945 June 10. There still remains the problem of R. p. Chapters ix and s. Edmund Burke. Compare also Failure (New York: Longmans. Brown.must mark at once the closing stage of an aristocracy of some lower order. 91. in the writings of Adam van Miiller. p. Fisher Ames. Adam Miiller. uber die zi‘usserung des T’olkswillens in der Demokratie (Base1 : R. cit. but only a twenty-millionth share in the government of yourself. Francis Lleber. Reinhold. even earlier. p. 398 The cultivation of sportsmanship is characteristic of old. Miall (New York: I(nopf. pp. Del sentimiento trdgico de la vida (Buenos Aires : EspasaCinuue me’ditations SUY l’exiitence. End of Democrrrcx a reform of the voting system. Yet sportsmanship is only possible if the issues are@fliQg and in the nature of a game. XXI.“-“ Authority and the Individual. 1853). I (July. Kosalind Murray. Lloyd. it is true. 1949). Alexander R&tow.eivman was rightly suspicious about the compatibilic of Christianity and the gentlemanly ideal (which. not Ten. 1929). p. Kern. 176): ” Democratic metaphysics misunderstand the problem of personality. with Bertrand Russell’s dictum: ” You have. 178-79. no chances for putting it into effect. The illiberal essence of democracy probablv also stems from Lthe fact that it is essentially domination of the many. Calpe. - . 120. 1943. E. Hd remarks (p. 247 (on statistical thinking).

Roberto hlichels. and even a Louis XV died with fear in his heart for the Le dix-huitihme sit?& (Paris : diT:ine judgment. The Liberal Tradition. Cf. p. Compare with Charles Peguy. H. and “ Avertissement du monde sans Dieu.l di Perugia. trans. General Theor). Clarke (London: Macmillan. by consequence.” Cahiers. 1923). 1’” ” To flatter the vices of the people is even more cowardly and dirty than to fiatter the vices of the great. Edmond Scherer. for absolute principles. Yet a contrarv oninion we find exuressed bv Ham K&en. 1936). “ D. Anticipations. 303. of Law and State. 1946). 389 sq. “ Solution du probleme sociale. since he knows onlv too well that ” intelligence never resides in the callous f&t. May 12. 228-29.. CLSSXIX. p. 289.” Cahiers de ia quinxzinc. 48-49. I>. 147. William E. Article 21 of the N-eimar Constitution : ” the deputirk arc rrpresentatives of all the people. March I. cf. ” Studi sulla democrazia e sull’ autoriti. (The first edition was published before World n:ar I. I. Robert Michels. 24-25 (Firenze: La Nuova Italia.” Cahiers. Iiene Schwab. II.” A similar wording can be found in the Swiss constitution (Article 91). *I? For a criticism of the lox popvli z’os Dei notion cf. No. 411Cf. p. u4 Cf. This oligarchy Proudhon called (p. J. I:. Universit. 1938). James Bryce.” Oeuvres compl&es. Casimir Stryienski. pp. Francis Lieber. F. m7 Cf. Moises Yakovlevitch Ostrogorski. quoted by Graham Wallas. 25. 41Y( About the desirability of the independence of deputies from their constituents cf. P. 265. La dimocratie en France.. pp. 1902). It is simpliste. because the former alnoa~~ lies consciouslv. 217 n. “ Le r&gne de I’imposture. 121-22. PP. *I.on a far lower level than the adulator one finds at courts.&bats parlbmentaires. Zur Soziologie des Purteienwesens (Leipzig: KrGner. 7%~ Government of Switzerland (New York: Van sostrand.) Jns Cf. No. author of the &rsr Republican Au&& constitution. 64. 15 (July. p. Wells. Hachette. . 188-89. VI. Hans Nelsen.“-Heinrich \-on i’reitschke. hlauriac and Eugenio d’Ors (Paris: Plon. Rappard. -is-56. Bossuet attacked Louis XIV personally with his sermons in the King’s private chapel before an audience. 632.” a1o On the type of the politician. is the passion for the simple ideas and. 1903. there remained a lan&aKe in which to reproach them. ” i\l&noires et dossiers.” 403Cf. Proudhon. 50: ” One of the vices of democracy. and William Aylott Orton. 59. Human Nature in Politics (New York: Crofts. . 5568 (Jan.308 LIBERTT OR EQUALITY *08 Cf. PoZitik.” The next step is obviously the rise of Burckhardt’s “ terribles simpli’cateurs. they are subject only m-their conscience and are not bound to particular promises or mandates. New York: Macmillan. pp. p. p. pp. Still. 1947). cf. 1904. Democracy and the Organization of Political Parties. Popular Gowrnment: Four Essays (London. 1885). Collanu di studi fax&i. 1925). He insists that the representatives have merely to voice the opinions of their constituents. G. 1937). U’ Treitschke made the remark that the average of the demagogues is morall>. Wedberg (Cambridge: Harl-ard University Press. 1933). ux Maine. JoR Cf. 1901). 479 f. trans. ed. Cf. . 1911). ai present h professor at the university of Chicago. just as of all half-cultures.” The Tablet. pp.: John Murray. Cf. the analvsis of Sir Cyril Burt’s Itltelligcnce and FerertiiitJ (London: Hamish Hamilton: 1946) by Christopher H&is in an article entitled ” Eugenics and the Sew Inequalities. The ilmeriran Commonwealth (new ed. -4. IIe S&rie.” in L’homnre et la pe’che’. op cit. 8. F acolta fascista di scienze politiche. No. 59) a “ patriciat de m&liocrit&.” in R. a05 Even religious kings admittedlv neglected their duties or became virtual tyrants. 23.“--Charles Piguy.

1939). The Catholic Cetttre (New ‘seork: Sheed and Ward. Burckhardt.vp0. ed. iii. 02. Rlarch 17. 1948). Christmas.. pp. “ How We \Von the War and Lost the Peace.ew York: \V. vii. ed. a. q. Pal. 11 ad 3 . International Edition. 27. Levaillant. p. No. Tire Challenge of Factr and Other Essqx. William Graham Sumner. 120. ” The idea that the multitude is more likely to be right than the dissenting fen. x . 481.c. i. St . In Heptnteuch. Politics. these evils must become continually more apparent. intuitional element is practically forced to replace reason and knowledge-and with what disastrous results-we can gather from accounts of that supreme amateur. Albert Jar Sock. van Preen. 7 (Sept. Watkin. 1911). have a \-er$ short radius of operation . II. where a man knows from birth that he must account to God even for his idle words ? “--Ohras. H. 139. p. \$e all are aware that not onlr the vision of the ordinary man. Naturally. we have reached a point at which its and. x88. 3x5. in J. je me fais peuple.5.” iza Compare with E. a86 : “ Democracv is only available as a political system in the simple society of a new count. Giraud (Paris: Crb. V.” (See Chateaubriand. 13f. 78. Jlimoires d’OutreTombe. TZx. Srcmma Theol. E. 1948). p. libri I’IZ. the State (New Tork: William Morrow r935). I.1 Compare this with the words of Prince Sapieha in Schiller’s The /j Demetrz’us (first scene) : ” One ought to weigh votes. Keller (New Haven : Pale University Press.” (19x81.Augustine. 1. St. A. 42r Cf.” 434 Cf. lectio 4 . for instance. G. 421-4 description of the essence of a republic (” representative government “) can be found in James Bryce. William C. 136: ‘. Roosezdt I Knezp (New York: 1. x924). 96. . Orti y Larra. Pen&es. aoo.) Brie& an 41s Letter to F. Briefe an Preen. lcct. I-II. 48. that is. in I’III lib. Frances Perkins. P. The spiritual pitfalls of ” popular sovereignty ” can be gathered from Napoleon’s cvnical declaration : “ Voudrait-on retablir la souverainete du peuple ? Eh l&n. X-XII a?6 c‘. Preen.q -it is not. are the equivalent of an ass in abstrucio and that is a terrifying animal. 7 . 81 . cd. Cf. Summn contra Gentiles. Betts. . who asked the question: “ What would happen to parliamentarism in a people truly Catholic. Which reminds one also of Franz Grillparzer’s statement in his ” Aphorismen zur Welt-mid Menschenwiirde I’: ” In certain countries the opinion seems to be held that the addition of three asses results in an Several asses in conaeto intelligent man. q. 1946). Yet to what estent the irrational.iking Press. 42zLetter to F. Sloane Associates. right feelings. xxvi. p. 413 Cf. van Preen. ~53 . p. Thomas Aquinas. The dmericun Commomcealth (New York : Macmillan. dans ce cas. Aristotle.“-Everett Dean &lartm. car je pretends dtre toujours la oil se trouve la souverainetc. state must sooner or later perish when the majority triumphs and ignorance i! decides. p. cji-aj4. I. in J. 287. p. 416Representative Goaernment. V. Bullitt. 3 and 4. 282-88. 34 and 352. This is completely erroneous. but also his wisdom and sentiment. 2. art. aza. i.NOTES 309 ‘i’ Blaise Pascal. pp.” Life. not count them. LizwYiJ. II. ” Macaulay’s Criticism. 1888. the> cannot be stretched over an area of much more than township size.” open court. . Burckhardt. 418This was well foreseen bv Donoso Corn%.” (This was writtm in 1877. the late President Roosevelt. Our Enem?. ed. &istot&.is really an assertion of the superiority of intuitions. 19x4). and The Stilwell Papers (Ir. lectio I . pp. iii. adequate for a great nation. x86 (No. nation. when reason abdicates intuition has to take its place. 298-311.. 336). in the growth and advance of the faults and imperfections are m@&+ous. belief over reason as a guide to behaviour. p.

a. and Jan Ciechanowski. rgz8). also II-II. and I-II. Henry Adams. Kultura 6s politika: tanulmdnyok (Budapest: Franklin. Gabalda et Cie. 4. Ig28). Thomas in Summa Theol. The author paints a picture devoid of all historical. q. 2. The Economist. sociological. an ideal opening wedge for a system favouring a utilitarian totalitarianism. No. 96. giving a “ snapshot ” of Mr. q. pp. II. 152. 1947). 77 sq. I. I. Maurice Blonde1 (Paris: Lecoffre. 195X). a politikai Iilek vizsgdlata (Budapest: Franklin. h-0.. 7. 488Cf. 1935h P. p. 57. pp. F. rg4o). D<feur in Victor\. 1939). 1872). offers us part of a definition which is potentially pregnant with that particular danger. 43p French taxi drivers like to use the insult : “ Espece de depute ! ” Bismarck was no more optimistic when he said: “ Politics destroys character. La dc!mocratie en France. P. J . and AZ alZamf&I. 34. also Gyula Komis. needless to say. 45. Art and Scholasticism. terms were not translatable unto the earlier. a. col. No. 63. 253: “ 11 y a deux exccs: exclure la raison et rien admettre que la raison. Compare ibid. 4. The Tendency of History (New York : Macmillan. of majority rule with great vigour. 103-4. even the mathematics became higher hyper-mathematics .. 223. Summa Tkeol. q. geographic. I. 95. St. the Unknown (New York: Harper. 1933). *Se For two sketches describing actual situations cf. 4 ad 3. 1947). Recently Pope Pius XII criticized the dogmatic concepts x934). The Living Thoughts of Thomas Jefferson (New York : Longmans. On the dangerous numerahsm of the democracies cf. p. x944). q. Die moderne Demokratie. racial or economic implications. Henri Frederic Amiel. I. 32 (Jan. p.041 (April 7. Cf. p. ad 2. q. Here is also.” Cf. A. 1937). ed. St&tin&s as a Secretary of State. entirely contrary to those of Jefferson : cf. Man. II-II. Aldous Huxley.” 4a’ These notions are. Dewey. No. incidentally l? (in its misdefinition). 170: ” The average man in 1850 could understand what Davy or Darwin The later had to say. 5393 (Jan. CLII. Edmond Scherer. 2. pp. 277. p. 245-49. I. 451. . For a definition of art see Jacques Mar&in. a. he could not understand what Clerk Maxwell meant.. Riforme intellectuelle et morale.. 434 On the object of reason cf. I-II. gz. p. q. a.. Valensin : and Y. p. Time Must Have a Stop (New York: Harper. Aldous Huxley. viii. 20-21 (describing President Roosevelt and Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau arbitrarily fixing the value of the dollar by referring to “ lucky numbers”). p. 285-294. a. a. 79. trans. L&on Brunschvicg (Paris: Hachette. de Montcheuil. I-II. 3. 271. 200. 9 ad 3.3x0 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY A azn Compare with Alexis Carrel. Wilhelm Hasbach. : ‘(33This element of imposture is closelv connected with the equation : majority = entirety. 113. 4a* Ernest Renan. q. End~r and Means (London: Chatto and Windus.) Yet the doctor angelicus implies rightly that the gubernatorial use of those more naturally gifted and or instructed conforms with the common good: Summa Theol. Green. ed. r. 435An “ artistic ” description of the aesthetic-daimonic aspects of nazism can be found in Ernst Jiinger’s symbolic narration Auf den Marmorklippen (Hamburg: Hanseatische Verlagsbuchhandlung. (Garden City: Doubleday. J. Petzse’ees. Bouvier. 436Pascal. 50. 1934). The lvew York Times. 458. 6-7. 174. Diary. James Bryce on the American presidency in The American Commonwealth.” *si The correct definition of the “ common good ” is one of the trickiest blems for the philosopher and the theologian. Scanlan (New York: Scribner. 25. p. 1926). a. p. da0Cf. (Cf.

1gz). No. The Formative Years. Droit nature1 et dPmocratie (Fribourg: Oeuvre de St. ” the Protestant share is bound to shrink because of “ surgical interventions the higher Catholic and Greek-Oriental birth rates. 18. Aug. Q* Compare with S. III. Quintiliano Saldana. .” 456 For a contrary opinion cf. 150-5 I “’ The Tablet. compare with Douglas Jerrold. Her foreign policy has to be judged in a more pessimistic vein. for the reasons given. true only of her internal affairs. Watkin. 2 (January. 292-95. part i. ” The Geographic and Demographic Aspects of Religion in Europe. J. p.7 PQ-L S. 1g45). “ They ” is the mystical power which rules: ” Th& raise our taxes. 119. 443 Cf. Life. p. 45. ~ournuZs. pp. G. Guido de Ruggiero. for the majorities in the Fascist countries suF+?ppp. This author insists that only direct democracy is true democracy. Cf. 19zz). of a (subjective) private interpretation of the Bible laid the foundations for the ’ subjectivistic relativism of our days. Storia de1 liberalism0 europeo (Paris: Latena. 1938). x948).the) draft us. III. 1941). 583 f. the pessimistic conclusion of Hanson W. Cf. II. The Catholic Centre. nevertheless. and that it could be realized in larger areas. PP. *41 Cf. I~ZO). 3’3-43. 5493 ([London]. Georg Liittke Verlag. 4j3 For the definitions of democracy in antiquity cf.” Foreign Affairs. 50. oder Theorie des natiirlichgeselligen Zustandes (Winterthur : Steinersche Buchhandlung. Democratic amateurism in the United States has not-so far-produced fatal results. 374. On subjective relativism cf. ‘4a Henry Adams. A similar view was expressed by Carl Ludwig van Hailer. 1836). The Future of Freedom (New York: Sheed and Ward. 1851): “ Statecraft m modern states is not what must one do in order to be a minister. 44 Bertrand de 3ou&n2 in his Du pouvoir: histoire naturelle de sa croissance L(Geneva: Editions Zi-Cheval Ail&. No. 2. which received a prize from the Prussian Academy of Sciences. ilm . 4(8 Lehre vom modernen Staat (Stuttgart: Cotta. He is convinced that indirect democracy is nothing but a camouflaged oligarchy. 1923). 444 Cf. van KuehneltLeddihn. 15. Yet even without these this percentage has again been somewhat decreased. who looked at the ethical aspect of this problem: cf. VI. possesses in itself little value. Kierkegaard. 1945 [” Collection Princeps “1) points out that the elimination of monarchs has resulted in a depersonalization of power. and that the referendum should be more liberally applied. a&2This is especially true of modern. Catholic opposition to relativism is fully appreciated in this work. Ticknor. E. His only reference to demo46oE. p. Eduard Rlay. Gerhard Leibholz. Kierkegaard. so highly CZ vaunted. I 16-117. p. Teil. 262. Revue interna&onale de soriologie._i one do in order to berome a minister.” Archives de philosophie et de droit juridique. p. 74. and not so much Yet the principle y of sixteenth and seventeenth century Protestant orthodoxy. XXVI. “ La nature et les formes de la dkmocratie. 382-83. No. . I r-12 “ La democratologie. cracy in his work can be found in a short footnote: “ Democracy. p. No. II. This is. XXX. Present Age.lax Beerbohm’s Zuleika Dobson (London : Heinemann.” anks to the cwus humanitarianism of the Potsdam Decisions. 133. 1210 (i\pril. his Restauration der Staatszcissenschaften. but what must . pp. liberal Protestantism.-Dec. p. Paul.” Bulletin of the Polish Institute of Arts a& Sciences..” 446See the humorous analysis of the mass mind in n. Letters andJournals. Baldwin in his article “ The Myth of Security. p. 34 (1936).4bgrund des Relativismus (Berlin: Dr. -_ ‘9a/EA?O: ____. Jaccoud. I. CLXXXITI. [Kew York].NOTES 31’ LM Cf. 17 (July I. pp.” (No\-. 1876). pp. Yio. B.

1944. . 1888). Croiset. 158Pius XII and Democraqv. 9. 46i On democracy in antiquity cf. LXXVI. many innocents. 20 (January 25. 1944.’ are going to disappoint hopes and increase despair “. a transitory stage through which society has to go. Consrience de la Srissr: lcttrcs d ces messieurs de Berm. Dec. John B. had such visions. C. with unconditional and uncompromising sway. Demos und Monarch (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. No. We have only to remember Newman’s comparison of the wilful theft of one farthing with the perishing of the whole world in terrible agony! Needless to say that Newman preferred universal cataclysm to sin. as is clearly demonstrated by the u-ords of the Swiss Protestant. U” 1 et more than a hundred years ago the possibility of a Christian-democratic synthesis was gravely doubted. ..” With such Ubermemchen in the guise of “ sweet democratic despots ” even democracy was bound to succeed. 25.“-Alexandre Vinet. ahead of any known. aR3This omission has been noted bv Karl Loewenstein in Political Reconstruction (New York: Macmillan. I. trying to derive a lesson from the examples of antiquity. is perhaps nothing but an important crisis. Christianity has made the family the unique basis of civil society. i cheerful. Hans Bogner.S.” the level was supposed to be rather elevated. as nobody can deny. Cf. 58. 161Gonzague de Reynold. revised translation by Rev.I’ Is* Compare -4ristotle on the tyrannical potentialities of democracy. democracy ’ . La de’mocraties untiques (Paris: Flammarion. without the gravest restrictions and reservations would open the gates to the worst immoraiities. St.1. ought to come to an opposite conclusion. 1922). These explanations have to be supplemented by Mr. This is true if we identify the common good with the material advantage of the & majority (” the greatest happiness of the greatest number “)-a formula which. Politics. It seems that this neglect is partly . the Christmas Mrssage of Pope Pius XII. Die verzoirklichtc Demokratie: die Lehre der ilntike (Hamburg : Hanseatische Verlagsbuchhandlung. n.aist du XIXc si&lc (Paris: Librairie Fischbacher. p. The lastmentioned author. which can be found in the Vienna Communist newspaper Dir F’ollwtimmc (issue of January 22. and a few lines later he talks about a ‘+ modern Clean-as it seems that Bismarck was the last Pericles. . and not only by Catholics. reconstituted. for example. 1948). Harney. 43. many guilty 7‘s. The attribute ’ Christian ’ makes little difference. vi. a”” VVe have not dealt with the concept of a popular democracy (” people’s democracy “) of the East European strle. t Whitman dreamt of a ” copious race of superb American men and women. ‘s* Walt Whitman. Italics ours. p. II. “ hImc de Stael et Chateaubriand.4nd though the ideal race of the future should be a “ divine average. Matthew RBkosi’s declaration. 1946). 1949). p.” N~ppszava. considered today to be the final . 220) about Germany’s post-war years: “ Various persons are going to offer themselves under the mask of the ‘ best man. it is in the spirit of the Christian family that society must be . The Christian focusing his attention on an actixx trespass (one guilty 7%~. his postulate : “ I demand races of orbit bards. r 930) . 2. that tyranny of a majority is better than the tyranny of a single person. 12. December 24. sweet democratic despots of the West! “-Democratic Vistas (London: Walter Scott. 92. Gustav Strohm. A. 1945). Come forth. let Democracy. there you have the final aspect of Chateaubriand’s But if.Vezc E’ork Times. religious. $6.3x2 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY I-* . also in The . i\lexandre V’inet : “ A ’ Christian perspectives. (New Tork: The Paulist Press. one innocent).d. The humanitarian will prefer a town participating in the lynching of an innocent to a tyrant exterminating all the innocent inhabitants of a city.P. $39. Thomas Aquinas (De regimi~~e principum) thinks x-. wrote prophetically (p.” l?tudes SW la litt&atwe fmn(. An authoritative explanation of this term can be found in Endre S&s’ article” A demokratak demokrdciaja. ~916) . . in such a combination of words the noun devours the adjective.

C.” A situation similar to that in the United States exists in the hostile to the U. The passage is from a late seventeenth-century number of the magazine. Sorokin’s notion of “ ideational. Yet curiously enough it is. op. . 4C’A.. and ed.R.VoodrufI in The [London] Tablet. But later in the same book he concedes the totalitarian character of this ” liberty “: “ The citizen is only \\ It is more a paradox. 31. E._ to live-and does not believe it can-without inscribing this word on its Aag.” Filmer argued that Adam was the first king.” The psychological attraction lies in killusion. Mohr. where the younger generation.Csick body. Campbell “I.” Part 2. For reasons which it would lead us too far to enumerate and to analyze.” i. Louis Rougier. 30. x943). where may he found the definition of the term “ organic. 3-4. it is the free through the will of the community. 1837). Sweden. von Goethe.S. il’2 Cf. Norway. the closing paragraph of Chapter iii of his On Liberty. Hans Kelsen. Yard and Co. NOTES TO CHAPTER E‘OIIR “’ J. B. 17-18. Such is the empire of the word democracy that no government. No.around the efficacy of p@ative m&ines. p. \V. For a deeper understinding of the “ mystique ” of democracy cf. Neither should it he forgotten that the Fall not only necessitated the state hut also corrupted society-the latter effecting the former. see his Vom Wesea und Wert der Denrokratie (Tubingen: J. and that his kingdom increased numerically with those generations which he ruled patriarchically (as a grandfather. x767). pp. which is the source of most evils. Without the Fall there still would have been society as well as a family. nevertheless.” Thought. 46’~ournnls. it is corrupt human society. van Kuehnelt-Leddihn [” Francis S. “I As quoted by Douglas \. pp. “ Ode sur le temps. ~Ilhmoires de Brandebourg (Berlin. 179 (Dec. pp. “ Organic Government and the Reconstruction of Europe. P. La m~sstipur! de’mocratiquc (Paris: Flammarion. no party dares d. i6* Still. pp. . . 1942. I s-16. II--12. 93) can well he imagined. 19x3). “ liberty. ‘s4 For an analvsis of the term “ mvth ” cf. &Ioreau de St. 123. 68 (March.. “ Zahme Xenien.---L _A -_473Hugo Miinsterherg wrote‘-fhat :4mericans frequently see in monarchy ” : cf.-* Yet the confusion between liberty and equality is as old. American Republic. 1929). not the (naturallv ” unsatisfactory “) state. I.e.” Poe’sies divenes (Lyon: Frtres Per&e. the remainder of the the British COYTUnOnWedkh. his American Patriotism and Other Social a basicall! “ rotten institution Studies (New Y-ork: M&at. a sway which Guizot wrote as early as 1849: $ been continuing for more than a century. l%o. February 28. is thoroughly unable eve? to_\isualig a concrete.S. cit. 121. r947).. trsl.. and thus a kingship with purely social aspects (see below. 88. which will not heal a pezmnnently. 46Q Frederic le Grand. p. we mav give the devil his due and remember the argumentation offered by Sir Robert Filmer in his Patriarcha for the so-called “ divine right of kings. of “ self-government. Thomas (1732-85). 192$). and so on). with the exception of Switzerland and Finland. Kenneth and Anna M.” Hans Kelsen is.NOTES 3’3 due to the immense sway of the fausse id& cl&e of democracy.. (‘O Cf. Roberts (Garden City: Doubleday.= libert\-. r7ji). L. though frequently present regime.alternative.. very symbol of democracy when the word LIBERTAS could be read over the *’ gates of the jails of the Genoese Republic and on the chains of the galley the few theorists who make the equation : democracy. monarchical world-viz. From a theological point of view Kelsen’s vistas of democracy remind one of Maurras’ view of monarchy. Mb-y’s American &uney 1793-1798. if not older. than the Cf. Our whole discussion here turns -. XVIII.” in conjunction with Ferrero’s concept of ” leeitimacy ‘* and P..

would have applauded their assassination if I+ ‘< had ordered the deportation of the Ruthenian minority and their confinefkia ment in “ relocation centres. Marquis de la-Tour-du-Pin la Charce. on Jefferson. 4’9 Cf. I~JI).” Harper’s Magazsne. Knopf. 191 I). Daniel Walther.). 1844. the word ‘ republic ’ has an almost magical significance for Americans.. The Aboriginal Tribes of HFderabad. 35-37. had told them [the framers of America’s Constitution] that it was almost as vain to expect permanency from democracy as to construct a palace on the surface of the sea. 1932). Wilhelm Schmidt. 555-60. Professor W. 19. 1909). for instance. 1941)~ PP.4phorismes de politique so&de On democratic condi(Paris : Nouvelle Librairie Nationale. Giambattista Vito. Chiistoph von Finer-Haimendorf. it should never be forgotten that politically they regard it as a childish institution. pp. Plutarch. referenda. Sieber and Franz H. 263.” 4’6 Ernst Bruncken. Gonvemeur Mowis. Hermann Sacher (5th ed. Landtmann.d. <pp. III. p. E. p. Emphasis is placed in this work on the relation between theism and patriarchalism. On Civil Liberty and Self-Government (Philadelphia: Lippincott. 1948). it is now part of the American credo that onlv citizens of a republic can be free. Die amerikanische Volksseele (Gotha: Perthes. to whom monarchy appeared to be one of the soundest forms of government. the Russians during World War I. “ Istoria fondamentale de1 diritto romano “). Heye Foundation.314 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY (I the Nether+$d and Belgium. pp. cit. le li e ev ry betrayal of the constitu1 tion. by plebiscites. A. had a good deal to do with this . Louis: Herder. ed. 6 . which can. *‘s Cf. a devoted subject of last two Austrian emperors. 146 : “ In the same way.+-j). September. I: The Chenchus (London: Macmillan. Samuel L. And no matter what romantic interest Americans may display in the human side of monarchs. 84-160. 1874).” Staatslexikon der Goewesgesellschaft. Bonger.-which the average American “ progressive. The present author is almost certain that his late father. P. n. 28. aaDCf. pp. Principi di scienza nuova d’intorno alla commune naturole delle nazioni.” Some of them had actually sympathized with. tkmoin de deux re’volutions (Lausanne: Imprimerie Merinat. Sylvester A. p. amendments. 38-42. In fact.. Francis Lieber. can always See the depressing ” to the “ mandate of the people. 309-10. 363-66. The presumed “ guardians of the %&%&mver. 73-74. 474Cf. ed. Josef Leo Seifert. “ I’atemale Staatstheorie. Op. G.+). the parent of political science. Richard Hofstadter. 47i Cf. D. tions among primitives cf. On the person and views of Morris cf. Lothrop. as Mr. Mueller. The Religion of Earliest Mrm (London: Catholic Truth Society. Problemen der Demokratie: een sociologische en psvchologische Studie (Groningen and Batavia: Noordhoff. K. p. in William Thomas Walsh. 4’8 Cf. . Freiburg: Herder. The -4merican Charactm (New York : Knopf. Truebner. 19x4). American Political Thought (New York: A. The Indians of the Tierra de1 Fuego (New York: Museum of the American Indian. pp. The Social Life of Prtmitive Man (St.” -In Jared Sparks. 1832). enlightened Yet how different were the views of Gouvemeur Morris. The Life of Gouverneur Morris with Selections of His Correspondence (Boston: Gray and Bowen. W. 257. 167-69.” j~~~~~?~ ~~~~~~~~illiam~ “ Moving the West-Coast Japanese. p. L$-II-I$ ’ \ i ’ aV . The Origin of Inequality of the Social Classes (London: Paul. cd. 1938). Ferrara (Milan : Societa Tipografica dei Classici Italiani. the Founding Fathers were by no means all opposed to monarchy in principle: cf. but a monarch was at least supposed to uphold the constitution he had sworn to protect. Philip II (New York: Sheed and Ward. Yet minorities in a democratic age and environment are always at the mercy of the majority.. but whatever the origin of the belief. I++. IX. parts of the abdication speech of Charles V.. pp. He wrote to Robert Walsh in 181 I : “ History. p. etc. Wells once suggested. Winter. 123. Gmar Kegan. 1937). Trench. 1928). 46 so. 1942. Brogan. A. r-14.

even the so highlv cherished ” natural man ” are nothing but incoherent. No. *8s Cf. ” Paternitc et dcmocratie. 1947). 35.” The Thonust.” Lava1 theologique et philosophique. Faguet similarly demonstrated his knowledge of the incompatibility between democracy and the family spirit (Le culte de I’incompttence. 19+9). lib. Force et faiblesse de la famille (Paris : Edition du Seuil. the home axonomicus. q. rg&). 6 ad I. Le drame du present (Paris : Grasset.NOTES 315 481Cf. Heliopolis (Tubingen: Heliopolis-Verlag. c-it. fosters tyranny. the homo religiosus. 367. “ The Fatherhood of the Priest. pp.e. the homo familiaris. 1913). 1’s. x947). nontheistic and anti-familistic movement has been written by Jean Lacrorx. March. too. pp. La Russie et I’Rglise Universelle (2nd ed. Thomas Aquinas. p. The same idea has been expressed by St. Allers. just because it denies all hierarchy. 483Dante is frequently accused of Averroistic leanings. I (Les mod&es). i. 227-31. 1939. 22-29. and for this reason a warning has been sounded against his political theories. Igzg). 748-so. 1906). especially PP.-Also incorporated in J Lacroix. II. and Geoffrey Gorer used the absence of a strong patriarchal tradition in the United States as the guiding idea in his book The American Peqple (New York: W. isolated monstrous bipeds without true reality or real relationships. No. Sadism and Masochism: a Psycholog>.” Esprit. Of considerable importance for the whole subject matter (i. a certain antagonism and rivalry between family and state.. lib. Robert Bellarmine. Wilhelm Stekel (an ex-Freudian). “ The Relationship between Bushido Ethics and Christianity.” Shigaku Zasshi. I?MZ p&e (Paris: Nouvelle Librairie Nationale. 304. on the other hand. x949). See p. M? Of the manv works of these authors we would like to refer merely to three: R. p. The very influential German political author Ernst Jtinger insists that the key for a better future depends upon a new synthesis of authority and love. Ebisawa Arimichi. Aurele Kolnai. Georges Valois. 2. 141-43).. No. sorton. monarchy and Christianity) is Erik Peterson. “ must be based on a new conception of the word father. op. 1935). 486Cf. Also there can be.” Cf.” All modem tyrants are ‘I supermen “. a. Summa Theol. xv. cap. De Roman0 ponti’ce. 426. Robert Bellarmine. 3 (July.” . *82 The “ superman ” is definitely a product of democratic imagination. 271-306. 1940). 11. Cf. But Etienne Gilson has defended him warmly against these attacks: see I?. Peterson decidedly rejects the notion of a Christian ” political theology. 1936). pp. -The Successful Error: a Critical Study of Freudian Psychoanalysis (New York: Sheed and Ward. which moves in categories different from those we have adopted. 133 (May. 3. cap. I (r946)> P. and “ L’amour et l’instinct. Der Monotheismus als politisches Problem (Leipzig: Jakob Hegner. 1948). 1. On the character of the royal office see also Reinhold Schneider. pp. &** Cf. Vladimir Soloviev. 69. the home ludens. . ” The solution. 491Today. i. pp. Dante et la philosophic (Paris: J. 488 Cf. 3. 210-15. in fact. Thomas in De regimine principum i.. Cf. ” Paternity ” is the leitmotiw of this famous book. A brilliant essay on democracy as a “ fraternal ” and anti-patriarchal. and typologically an apotheosis of the ” common man. Vrin. the egalitarian principle. W.” &s7Abel Bonnard. Macht und Gnade (Salzburg: Anton Pustet. Paris.” he says. Henessey. 4sQ Cf. St. I. which could not be printed in Russia. ” Le culte de l’homme commun et la gloire des humbles. Gilson. E. 40” St. of Hatred and Cruelty (New York: Horace Liveright. Thomas E. 1939). S.

151-. Also Tom& Garcia Figueras. and Alfred Schuetz. Portugul E’oung and Old (Oxford: Clarendon Press. cf. Ko. 0~ the advantage of the alien as to objectivity cf. pp. 1240 f. 1948.” Nerve Politik. Sozzologre (Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot. 1945) is exactly the same: either we are ruled bv brutal external forces. CLI. Victor Cousin.. A patriot is enthusiastic A patriotic. XXI. pp. Ij.316 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY &&es cmm~1litaines. Democracy and Liberty (New York: psychoanalys . vous autres. 201 f. p. “ heart ” and intellect. Tacitus De Germaniu xxxiv : “ It is holier and more reverent to belimv in than to knoec the acts of the gods. Anteiro de Figueiredo. p. How can WP be ” the others ” ? Is this an effort to remove the “ I ” from the “ We ” ? [The forms cited probably owe their origin merely to a need for strengthening the unstressed nos. Cf. 8. No. 1881). IOOj. 331-71. 1946). programme %?ls enunciated by St. Lisbon & Paris.. Josef Bemhart in his German version of the Summn (Krijner edition) translates pierns very correctly with a long but intelligently coined word: Bbtspflichtoetbundenheit . A tutialist suffers from a biological mania. William E. Vol. 363.” Y y ” ed. 20. “ Die Illusion einer Gepnwart. p.. the “ Romanovs. Pascal has written with deep insight on the relation between love and reason. 397 sq.” Holstein-Gottorps.” The American Journal XLIX. naturally. George Young. The Portuguese “ BraganGas ” were actually Coburgs . Siegfried Behn. pp. Lecky. U’ Sir Richard Burton found traces of a still virulent “ Sebastianismo ” even in the interior of Brazil. 491De Xlaistre. his “ Discours sur les passions d’amour. Quntre chopitres in6dit. (1554-1578) (7th ed. H.] (s6 Cf. 506-7. who said to his son: “ A kingdom of one language and one culture is frail and (17&s linguae uniuque moris regnum fragile et imbecilic est. II. King of Hungary. Stephen. 64.2). SWFor the anti-democratic character and intentions of the Constitution of the United States cf. affection and reason. 1944).” Reviita de estudios politicos. or we yield voluntarily to an inner voice. There were no less than ten “ Prussian ” Hohenzollems dynasties of German origin ruling outside of Germany and Austria. Lat. *ss Cf. Kuehnelt-Leddihn. not his nation. 1859). 163-79. Vol. ” La leyenda de1 sebastianismo. 49sAn (ethnic) nationalist would focus his attention on the language of his He would want to eliminate all fort&n ebic elements-by fellow citizens. Aiio 4. Rodolphe de Arthur Koestler’s main idea in Maistre (Paris: Vaton F&es. oosotros and the French nous au&es. ‘W Psvchologically interesting is the Spanish nosotros. p. delineating their common ground . Georg Simmel. col. Revue des deux EdZ: ~~~2S~ii~ 21?Yt(P843qt~t. Religion is. XCVIII Chaves. VII. but antiabout his country (“ fa herland “). ‘es In 1909 only the KaragjorgjeviC of Serbia and the Petrovid-Njegoa of Montenegro were genuine local dynasties. “ The of SOLOMON. XXVIII. cf. x931).” Patr. August 19. nationalistic.r SW la Russie. his translation of Camcies (London. p. II (February. The Yogi and the Commissar (London : Jonathan Cape. 1917).” 0 htituto.” Hochland.)-Migne. “ 0 sebastianismo: Dom SebastirSo rei de Portugal (1941). assimilation or exile-and to ” liberate ” all “ folkic comrades ” living in foreipn countries. ed. an Essay in Social Psychology. I (April. Luis mistica de restauraqlo. also E. -. 6 (May. De Tocqueville’s observations on democratic self-worship in De la dhmocratie en Am&&e (Eueres complttes. 1908).. 1. and the were Suabians. Editions Ailland et Bertrand. Yet in this connection the fact also must be mentioned that has a Catholic defender in the person of Roland Dalbiez. pp.-ED. von ” Riickkehr zur Einzahl . 13. stupid. eine Laienpredigt.” Belief (faith) and pietas belonged closely together (our ” piety ” is again a derivation from the latter). 1925). Stranger.

339. p. his letter to Mann Page. 1885). Putnam. zz). 553. monarchy is by no means a dead issue in Europe can be seen from the earnest description of the people’s longing for a king in Reinhold Schneider. I. 612 Cf. 1934). 37. V&Id VVar II its climax. von Haller. S. I]). Henry Cabot Lodge (New York: G. “ Social and Political Thought in France. Brown & Co. 611 Including Portugal. 1276. to be found in The Complete Jeflerso~z. ZUT Psychologie der Revolution: die vaterlose Gesellschaft w ienna: -4nzengruber Verlag. 24. 5o6Cf. Still. Efforts were c. and consequently the Causes of the American Republic. I 925). it should not be forgotten that .NOTES 3'7 It is well known that Alexander Hamilton Longmans. Still. Brother of Frederick the Great (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. 6o7L’l?galite’. Kierkegaard. L. p. 76. Der Kronprinz: ein politisches Drama (Munich: Karl Alber. aO@ Guglielmo Ferrero. So8Paul Federn. Mayer (London: Dent.” in 603Cf. pp.4merican Left-wing organizations featured Jefferson very widely and that the Am. 1946). . journals. Padover (New York: Duell. 5o4 The U’orks of Alexander Hamilton. to DuPont de Nemours m r8&(d Vol V ?-. Adams. under. 27 f. 1795 in The Writings of ThomasJPfferson. Gorham and Von Steuben to induce Prince Henry of Prussia (a brother of Frederick II) to become a hereditary sovereign of the United States. pp. p. when he used the expression “ the swinish multitudes ” . 256-57. Op. J. E. Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War (London: T. Restauration des Staatswissensckaften. CEtrvres (Paris.. 1858). Hdrom nemzede’k 6s ami utdna ktictkezik (Budapest: Kirilyi Magyar Egyetemi Nyomda. Gyula Szekfii. who called Prime Minister Oliveira Salazar into the government (originally as a Minister of Finance) some time after his military coup d’e’tat. ed Paul Leicester Ford (New York: Putnim. x942). 6o* Cf. Green. cf. trans. x896). 391. ed. cf. XV: “ a dictatorship that is at once near-fascist in its ideology and Brazilian and paternalistic in appearance. p. Lord Acton pointed out that Jefferson “ subverted with his doctrines the republicanism of America.” Republic itself. Cf. 66-67. 234). The official President-Dictator of the Portuguese Republic was until his recent death General Carmona. 339. 51s Cf Gilbert0 Freyre speaking of the Vargas dictatorship in his The Masters hnd the Slaves. p. Saul K. J. T. studi e precisioni (Milan: Rassegna Internazionale. 1799. 210-11. Chester V. made by N. rd. for instance. ed. No. Kohn-Brahmstedt. Sloane and Pearce. 1920). Putnam (New York: Knopf. Jeffersonian Principles and Hamiltoniatl Principles (Boston: Little. II.$can Corn unists held their meetings e Th e J% erson-cult reached during frequ-cntly. Fisher and Unwin. P. p 589. Paul Reiwald quotes Freud to the effect that the innate inequality of man results in the necessity for leaders: see his k’om G&t der Massen (Zurich: Pan-Verlag. 437. so2 This much is apparent when we read an entry in his diary for January. VI. Wilfred Trotter. in a letter written Vol. Cf. P. huge Jefferson portnuts. Part II. But these efforts failed. cit. p. p. 1946 [InterThat nationale Bibliothek fiir Psychologie und Soziologie. Donoso Cartes. his ” Political in Acton. renublican character of the United States. II. 1932). Prince Henry* of Prussia. in the Washington Edition of Jefferson’s Works we find onlv a @le f ien ly ref rence to-democracy. zrz--13. x948). X. Political Thought. Fozdition. r919). p. 1939). p. 1896).” Cf. In unguarded moments Jefferson even slipped into the jargon of anti-popular reactionaries-as. The major effort that is being put forth . regretted the strictlv . La democratia in It&a. p. p. J0bCompare with S. 610Cf. pp. The old Dutch constitution would have served as a pattern. 741 (p. 273. C. 1943). 116. -4ugust 30. Easum..

401 : ” His power consists in two things: his own greatness and the lowliness of an enormous majority of his followers. p. Chapter xxi. Marie Antoinette. especially pp.476. January 27. Maria of Hungary (wife and widow after Louis II). which %M ontesquieu even insisted that clemency is the main characteristic distinguishes a monarchy from a republic: cf. 2x6-37). oteckestwo (fatherland). Treitschke was convinced that the Roman Cresarate never became a genuine monarchy (Politik. not be brushed aside as r” entirely irrelevant. 1931 [” Loeb Classical Library “I). Anderley [Baron Norton].. Compare above. democratic politicians and their oligarchic society by Emile Faguet in his Le culte de I’incomphrzce (Paris : Bernard Grasset. the criticism of mediocrity. Emil Diirr (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlagsaustah. 1945.318 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY by the apologists of the present dictator is in the direction of popularizing him as the ‘ Father ’ of the people. their “ personification ” of the masses. pp. longer American ancestry. the great anti-aristocratic populist. 1876). Dmitri Merezhkovski. pp. The Catholic Pattern (New York: Simon and Schuster. Hon. rgrz). Europe Incapable of American Democracy (London: Stanford. 1g2g). Tsarstwo Antikhrista (Munich: Dreimasken-Verlag. 8 [Oct. seems that the Umted where democratic _. 178 sq. Rt. IO. In vain snatching at Democracy they may wreck our Aristocracy. 45: “ Our best luck would then be if the wreck got into the pilotage of another Cromwell. pp. (See his article “ The American Epoch in the Catholic Church. II. Gesamtausgabe. Obviously there must be a connection between this fact and his insinuation that “ the lay American Catholic insists more emphatically on his ’ Americanism ’ The than do Protestants or atheists of.” Yet a genuine patriarchal mentality is almost inseparable from clemency. Book VI. Ann&es (London: Heinemann. Russianism. 111. Such outbursts of mass jealousy happened with startling regularity. rgIg). 24-50. under the circumstances.” Life. p.” szo Cf. 516Cf. it would return to some mutilated form of its former self. C.” latter remark has also been made by Dean Sperry of Harvard in Religion in . consider the animosities against Queen Henrietta Maria. popular hatred was always directed primarily against the (foreign-born) queen or empress. VII. International Edition. ed.” can. On the interrelationship between feminality. 519Cf. Here we see how Augustus shied away from every open acceptance of the royal dignity.” si’ Compare with Tacitus. dogma adopted by most Compare Thomas Woodlock. sls The other expression. an ideological epigone and relative of Mar&s. 55-63). Queen Ena of Spain. 196-97).” Werke. Caesar himself was a demo-militaristic dictator. Orthodoxy and the monarchy cf. 612 (iii. perhaps. VII. 45-46. De l’esprit des Zois. 518Yet this change of klites by no means always applies an improvement in their quality. 56). Jacob Burckhardt on Cromwell. Mettemich saw in the Roman emperors nothing but “ early Bonapartists ” (Aus Metternicks nackgelassenen PapiWrZ. that “ many American prelates speak as though they believed t-hat rep&&native majority government were of divine institution. but through anarchy and temporary dictatorship. Especially in democracies the political oligarchies are frequently of a very inferior fibre since they owe their position to their very Cf. B. 1867). rg42). in “ Historische Fragmente aus dem Nachlass. No. 233-234. is now rarely used in Russia. the Empresses Zita of Austria and Alix of Russia. the ‘ Father ’ of the workers or the poor. 19491. especially pp. 621America [New York]. It has been wholeheartedlyStates is the only country Catholic theintellectuals. The observation of Evelyn Waugh. his La France nouvelle (Paris: Calmann-Levy. Notes 475. &I4 Prior to the outbreak of anti-monarchical revolutions.

as a Reformer. ‘so This is a failing which had struck Guizot almost a hundred years ago: cf. I. p. as3 Cf also the letter of Leopold II to his sister. Kurfiirst Maximilian II won Baymn und s&Jahrhundert (Munich : Franz Ehrenwirth.” h32 Cf. pp. 49. A. rg27). rejected it sharply. Renan. 88. “. Socialism and Democracy. his Nos me’comptes et espt+unces (Berlin: Schneider et Comp. On the influence of thinkers and philosophers on monarchs cf. 1924 [ ?]). Capitalism. One sees what havoc has perhaps been wrought with the universal accusation against the Catholic that he is not sufficiently provincial-minded. 21). D. Karrer. Dent. See also the testament of Maximilian in Kurt Pfister. The Life of Don Quijote arrd Sancho. was less radical than his colleague in Geneva. identity of sense of the term. 293.. 0. 1926). p. or old men from a paupers’ asylum. Yet it would be a mistake to argue that the spirit of “ enlightenment ” found in these letters was II. Calvin himself was no democrat.” ” Nicocles or the Cyprians ” in Isocrates. rulers because they will choose as advisers “ sagacious rather than popular men. p. 3. George Norlin (London : Heinemann. Robertag (Berlin & Stuttgart: Spemann. pp. 1893). Our souls are exclusive possessions. Cf. P. p. Simplizius Simplizissimus. 523Cf. ssl Rambaud. compare also with Albert Jay Neck. p. The End of Our Time. hisJournals.NOTES 3’9 America. M. but through the dialectics of his theology he has laid the foundations of democracy more effectively than Luther who. 29. reason is suspended. Elector of Bavaria something new. his “ De l’esprit de conquCte et de l’usurpation.. “ patriotic. 230. in the crudest Personality is paralyzed. 1930). trans. 5. Earle (New York: Knopf. ” included in Adolphe (Paris: Gamier F&es.” &a2Even Arthur Rosenberg. Benjamin Constant-certainly no lcgitimist-saw very clearly the advantages of a royal upbringing. 2-3. entry of Oct. 88. p. 1855). Schicksal und Wiirde des Menschen (Einsiedeln-Koln: It is not out of the question that the frightening Benziger. Col.. Gerold. in A.On Representative Government. trans.). 76-77. S. member of the Independent Socialists and official investigator. calls the coronation of the monarch “ the eighth sacrament. Maria Christina eon Listekeich(Vienna: Verlag G. 1835 (Ko. Mill. 631 In Catholic countries the beggars. Attwater (London : Sheed and Ward. I. 343 n. 1871-1918 (Berlin: Rowohlt. 66-67. Miguel de Unamuno. where the queen or empress . s*s Cf. Nieblu (Buenos Aires: EspasaCalpe. his Die Entstehung der deutscherz Compare with Joseph Republik. 13. 516 Cf. 136. 580Grimmelshausen. op. rg39 [” Coleccion Austral “I). ” in Utilitarianism. 1884). n. E. cit. “ Careers of Bevin and Morrison Reveal Background Similarities ” in The New York Times Isocrates remarked that monarchs are better (March IO. in his Histoire de la citilisation franfaise (5th ed. Schumpeter. x943). p. thought and actions dominates the scene. p. 30. but our bodies-biologically all related-are of a collective nature. 1867) p. J. 84 f. 175.e. H. trans. 1951). Paris: Armand Colin. p. phenomena of mass psychology are of an “ animal ” nature.d. La riforme intellectuelle et morale (Paris: CalmannLevy. p. 167. p. ‘** Cf. 193z). Nicholas Berdyaev. 1940). Memoirs of a Super@nu Man (New York: Harper. Wolf. 184. p. were afterwards invited to a dinner by the ruler. 5t6 Cf. rgz8 [” Loeb Classical Library “I). Book I. Cf. p. ed. 3gg f. 5Zi Compare with the revealing report by Joseph Frayman. 79. Liberty and Representative Goziernment (London: J.. Ernest Renan. I. p. rg4g).

M. R’aar and western Ciuilizatiotz (London: Duckworth. ‘943. pp.” America?r Journal of Sociology. Petersburg. 36. I. Capo d’Istria (a Greek). Fuller. Nesselrode. Compare also Note 408. sp. 36. p. C. 1946). lnstittrtiolles irrris publici et rcclesiustici. Pozzo diBorgo.32“ LIBERTY OR EQUALITY and her ladies-in-waiting served the meal. La Harpe.” Cf. Stackelberg. 1933). also Richard von Kiihlmann. x933). 1939-1944 (New York: Putnam. 5 (&larch. 1938). is superior to any one family. Peace and Bbr. Nickerson. 1918).906) . trans. The RevoZutio?z in Wqfare (London: Faber and Faber. H. Obviously the “ generosity ” of Francis Joseph was morally permissible only in a non-democratic. Otto Ammon. Compare with Orestes Brownson in Broz~m. 89-90. considered as a unit.rotz’s Qorks. I~G-300. 412. 18-29. 268-69 (a graphic prophecy of the nature of “ total war I’). Pritchard (London: Macmillan. 309). surrounded himself systematically with foreigners : Wintzmgerode. A. F. and only recently selective service has been called by a leading theologian a maz&mz i&&a civibus-a ‘ ’ very great injustice to the citizens ” (cf. The Catholic Church always disliked the democratic notion of conscription. Guglielmo Ferrero. Belloc (London: Chapman. cit. while in St. Pitirim Sorokin. Rome. I. Otto Fiirst Bismarck. pJg Cf. Equally impressive was the highly egalitarian burial ceremony of the Habsburg emperors. by his son. Mme. E‘. Alfred0 Ottaviani. A. also F. XLIX. Mme.. x924). Sutton (New York: The Macmillan Company. IX. rgr. Kotzebue. Principles of IVur. pp. Alexander I of Russia. FranGo&-Joseph (Paris: Artheme 1945)~ PP. 65’ This internationalism finds full expression in a genuine/~ monarchic Kriidener. x939). J. 209 f. “ The Role and the Position of the Common Man. Prince Czartoryski. may be seen in the little book Zwei Fayard. Woods. The Armed Horde (New York: Putnam. 1~. How well disciplined soldiers were. basically liberal world with a fair amount of selfgovernment. for a description of which see Comte de Saint-Aulaire. has Cf. x896). Liddell Hart. be it that of noble or commoner. pp. Toynbee. and Denis de Rougemont. The Influence of Monarchs (New York : Macmillan. Carl J. The Fruit of the FarniLs Tree (Indianapolis: Bobbs-hIerril1.. where a transfer of sovereignty does not imply a complete change in our way of life or methodical extermination of all dissenters. One can well imagine the furious outcries of our modern “ patriotic ” mobs should any President follow in his footsteps. Woods. Ferdinand Foch. p. Wiggam. Felhorska and S. also F. E. Maj. r940 and 1942). pp. trans. Press. p. A Study of History (London: Oxford I?. and the works of Lecomte du Nouys and his school. I 9r 3). Note 33). Mental and Moral Heredity in Royalty (New York: Henry Holt. 1944). E. 6s8Cf. p. ss’ Cf. and how humanely they behaved even as late as the mid-nineteenth century. Gedunken und Erznnerungen. Even during Bismarck’s younger years the best recommendation for an ambitious young “ Prussian ” diplomat was considered to be the status of a son uf a foreign minister or ambassador In fact. Msgr. No. r932). Arms and H. Die GescIlschaftsordnung und ihte nntiirlichetz Grundlagen (Tena. L’umour et Z’occident (Paris: Plon. Hoffman Nickerson. pp. Studnicki. and we may say without danger of refutation that the royal breed. Iv. . . G. Thoughts on GermanS. roj-7. Policy.'). r932). was accredited in Berlin. de Stael. Friedrich. 30.. 59-60. 194. 297-81. I have no wish to modify this extreme statement. the Due de Richelieu. pp. Armametzt and History. 428. and see p. 1944). 41. ed. for instance. asked by Alexander II to enter his service (cf. A. trans. Bismarck himself. p. Plan)? i marzen& mlodziezy o przyszloSci (Warsaw & Lwow: Nat&owe Towarzystwo Pedagogicme. p. Hall. Ferrero. A. Contemporary Sociological Theories (New York: Harper. Gen. \-orn Stem. 257: “ I have made the assertion that there is no doubt but that modem royalty as a whole has been decidedly superior to the average European in capacity.. 1939). 4-5. B. (New York: Scribner. 526-27.

from the elastic monarchical basis everI. for only love does not separate right (rule) from duty (service). or allowing oneself to be possessed. Weil in her L’Enracinement (Paris: Gallimard. on the other hand. 1935). 17. h46Cf. Iv Search of Two Characters: Some Intimate Aspects of Pv’upoleon and His So?z (Sew York: Scribner’s. XIV. 3 and Livre III. Metapolitics (New Ivorli: Knopf. jin Encvclical Diuturtrum iliud.. pp. 1949). 830 (February. Oeuz’ves de Bossuct (Paris: Firmm-Didot. in Contemporar>. R. Pellet. 611Comte de Hiibner. 65oCf. n’eufans. x72-73. p. 2. and thus became one of the ancestors 01 practically all European royalty and a large share of the European nobility. 1’. p. 428.ii.~~rlnlcL)ei. NeunJahre. II. Part III. Cf.r CY. The Abbe Ravnal. 1946). possession from being possessed. L. wrote with great insight in spite of his republican 4 convictions as long as r 70 years ago : “ Peace and security are necessary to the ’ monarchies.\. in ilcfa Sanrtae Sedis. 1866). Jean Hanoteau (Paris: Plon. 1780).I no less than fifteen Presidents of the United States out of thirty-two had had officer’s rank. Patrologia Graeca III. x00-8. Hoffmann (Leipzig: Bethmann.. 262. See his Pulitik. pp. (17x1.~ Erzherzogs Franc Ferdinand pot1 iistetreich Estr (l’ienna and Leipzig: Hahn und C. I. Orton.)..\Iignc. Evlert. Ko. William A. ojiciu priwipi. I RIO). 3). :A4 Ci. 381. II. p.” 1866). ” Vierzig SPtze aus einer religi8sen Erotik. H. 1940).” (C om p arc this with the thesis of Iioestler and de Maistre. U’i. 481). The Liberal Tradition.! Such wds also the view of Sirnone the cry for the pseudo-patriarchal leader. Review. 325 (‘I Politique tirCe des propres paroles de l’l?criture Sainte. II. Republican systems often develop a cold statism which in turn provokes \. WJ See Mimoires du Gbkral de Caulaincourt. R. ‘54.O~~TW:. du~~hlarccht~gste. jdY At the samr time. 263. F. also the characterization of political powe. 111. 1950). 1Sj3). married a Spanish princess. 120. 299. Enchiridion s~mbolo~unr ( 19001. x933). 40.Z. and Jacques Bossuet. vii. 186: ” Only love makes one truly liberal. Peter Viereck. And it is worth noting that -. Hinrichshofenschen Buchhandlunx. 210. p.“-Cf. ed. or had seen active service in either the Army or the Navy of the United States. V . p. Fran&e. Werner Sombart. his Histoire philosophique et politique des Ctablissements et du commerce dam les I&e& (Geneva: J. I. 5~ Cf. Charaktrr-Ziigr und historische Fragmente aus dem Leben c/es k76nigs &NJ Preussen Friedrich Wilhelm III (Rlagdeburg: Verlag der x846). The Course of Bmerican Democratic Thought (New York: Ronald Press. 194X [Sammlunc Leo XIII’s encl-clical 1~1nl.. Dormer Creston. 546-4 Moorish prince-descendant of Mohammed-turned Christian in Castilian captivity. 12. S (. Cf. p 406. IX. Das Geheimnis des BMcs (Vienna: ReinholdI(~JZ) . 1941).oldmann. in Compare also with Denzinger. 6-7. Otto Forst de Battaglia. the republics need restlessness and menace of an enemy. 6*3 Cf. Ahnen-Tqfel seiner kaiserlichen und k6niglicheri Hoheit der Verlag.evolutionary development is possible. 11. Gabriel. Robert Bellarmine.OI. Co!. H.. Vol. Der Bourgeois (Munich: Duncker und Humblot. pp. ed. iv.~~rlzscilaftliclle Genculogie (Bern: A.:~.6-5.) A similar idea has been developed by Sigmund vun Radecki in his essay Uber die Freiheit (Olten: Summa Verlag. 243. I-‘owys Greenwood.” Gesammelte Schriften. 13-10 . 58?Cf. rgz. Treitschke justly calls monarchy the Proteus amonE the forms of government. Tomus Prior. Dion)-s&s Areopngiticus If. cap.” Livre II. also Franz van Baader. but always the General of the last mobilization period. St. Note 494.NOTES 321 Monate preussisch (Btin: Redaktion der “ Neuigkeiten. Sor is it th e picture of the President of the Swiss Confederation which adorns public buildings in the Helvetic Republic. 416. Section I.

Hobhouse Lectures (London: Oxford University Press. Leon Lubimoff. October Terms 1873 and 1874 (Washington. in some minds. frankness and uprightness: cf. once reserved to small “ sophisticated ” &l&s. 1939). 58-59.” Hochland. M&&es SW la vie pri&e de Marie Antoinette (Paris: Baudouis Freres. but it is no e t d Wm. to whose heart the cause of American independence was very dear. De la d&zocratie en Am&ique. Alexander I.‘ Loeb Classical Library “I). made in 1815.. Nos. democratic depository of power. if you choose to call it. XX. and Marie Antoinette.” Oeuvres compl2tes (Lyon: Grabit. pp. To St. Nikolai Sementowski-Kurilo.Lat. the liberty and the property of its citizens subject at all !’ tunes to the absolute disposition and unlimited control of even the most It is true it is a . and h as painted a very pessunistic picture. II. II. p. No. if a man is to hold all t # at e 1s ccustomed to call his own. rg32).Col. 234. American Opinion of France (New York: Knopf. 865 Cf. 1939). A government which recognized no such rights. 201 (Confessions. 289 sq. is after all but a despotism. This view tallies with that of . D. Marie Antoinette’s advice to the poor to eat “ cake ” (brioches) if they had no bread is entirely unhistorical. p-51. also Philippe Sagnac. Laformation de la socie’te’ fiun@se modeme (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.322 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY **I Karl Mannheim had meditated about tbe probable results of the democratic masses facing these moral issues. Die Geschichte der sozialen Bewegung in Frankreich. iii.C. I7g6).rroz. IV. ’ i despotism of the many. I. cit. “ Le mystPre d’un Tsar. 5 I. de Campan. 792-800 (May II-/-July 12. See also Georges Bernanos. G. of the majority. never does liberty exist more serenely than under a conscientious king. 260). trans.“-See Cases Argued and Adjudged by the Supreme Court of the United States of America. his “ Rational and Irrational Elements in Contemporary Society. enjoys a reputation for absolute stupidity and heartlessness. III. who declared as early as 1874. Long before Claudianus had declared that “ he is wrong who believes there is slavery under a good prince. 1922 [. whether it is not miser that this power should be exercised by one man than by many. White. p. 33. If there “ must ” be despotism. Cf. Leo “ Zar und Starez. Morrison. Ambrose the good monarch was a lover of liberty. This notion was also entertained by Mr. 113-15.. 1875).” The L. Cf. Book vi). Lorenz van Stein.XVI. Oeuvres. Justice Miller of the Supreme Court of the United States. Rausch und Einkehr einer Seele (Ziirich: Scientia A. II. See also Reinhold Schneider’s historical novel Tagamog. pp. rg46).: W. a purely alcoholic one . Even Mettemich refused for a long time to believe in the demise of the Emperor in Taganrog (sp. Francis Lieber. pp. s6* Alexander I’s peregrinations after 1825 as the staryets Fyodor Kuzmitchlong considered to be a fable-can now be accepted as historical fact: cf. s&4Cf.“Claudiamu. 663The fact that two Bourbons (Louis XVI of France as well as Charles III of Spain) are the godfathers of the nascent American republic is consciously known with full awareness by very few Americans. all in which he has placed his happiness and the security of which is essential to that happiness. 368. 252. which held the lives. 1823). XXXVII. H. Jnust be conceded that there are such rights in any free government beyond /the control of the state. T.Migne. p.” Can&&. Lecture IV.. Maurice Platnauer (London: Heinemann. On Civil Libert_v. who had so enthusiastically supported American liberty.Patr. under the unlimited dominion of others. 21. and 0. 376-401. Ig3g). A man of worldwide experience like Gouvemeur Morris jubilantly greeted the restoration of the Bourbons. XX. can be found in Elizabeth B. in his decision on the case of the Loan Association V. rg34). Topeka: “ It . also de Tocqueville. It may well be doubted. It seems that the autocracy of a single person is preferable to a suppressIon by multitudes. Mme. La France contre les robots. The most charitable association with the name of this dynasty is. His ditbyrambic speech. 662. See p. 2 (November. 156. H. Kobylinski-Ellis. Rousseau told the same story about an unidentifiable lady in 1740: see Rousseau’s “ Confessions. 516 f.

Edmund Burke was more apprehensive of the internal effects of democracy. trans. 521.NOTES 323 Aristotle who saw in the ideal monarch a man pre-eminent in virtue and in monarchy the best of all forms of government. 153-55 . Cf.G. especially of prospect the possibility that ” property might be sacked and ravaged “-a Cf. Holland Rose said warning words to his English countrymen in The R&c of DemorrarJ* (London: Blackie. peaceful state it is innocent of alI excesses-but finds a thousand quiet ways of reducing human personalities to uniformity and stifling free-spiritedness. 1884). Knopf.1912 [Godkin Lectures at Harvard University. B. Cf. 665Burckhardt. Briefc on Precrr. VI. J. von Hailer.” Oeuores. p. Restaurotion der Staatswissenschaften. 485. Miall (New York: Harper. p. 1g49). with conviction (Politik. The End of Our Time. 568 Proudhon. lot. The Democratic Mistake (New York: Scribner. Yet abroad the suspicion of parliamentary England is nothing new. Ludwig Halmann. Arthur G. Levack. xxi. his Nicomackian Ethics. S. VIII. p. The Kaiser 2’s. which materialized in the twentieth century only. 259).. Sedgwick. with both male and female spectators standing on chairs to get a better view. R. Webster. dated Nov. p. Pregnancies of queens. 28. II. ed. 7. II. (Green. 702. 75. p. pp. p. for instance. Dus socinle K6nigthum: ein Ausspruch Lasalles uttd die sociale Praxis h2iser Wilhelms. p. also William Graham Sumner. 75. I. 21. p. XV. Lasalle himself confessed that he would dispense immediately with his republicanism the moment monarchy ‘would adopt a programme of social justice: cf. S. 1878). even today. At the end of the nmrteenth century J. eine Schrift x den Wahlen (Berlin. Gesammelte Werke. Gamma. and Treitschke is certainly right when he maintains that the masses cannot conceive of plans reaching into *’ The esprit d’escafier is essentially democratic. There was probably more real liberty of spirit in the days when the fires of the Spanish Inquisition were blazing than in the middle class of today. L--. 193x). L. . 16’ Cf. 563Thus. 1792. Rokoko bis sr. ad* In democracies this is by no means the case. to be present at a royal delivery : cf. Petersdorff (Berlin: Deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft. Nesta H. and Mallet du Pan in the Mercure Britannique. pp. 240. Bismarck. 1886). or collapse into a republic if it does not have the courage to become a monarchy of social reform. III.. the deliveries of Marie Antoinette were public &airs. Nicholas Berdyaev. 90-91. 1902). der Trnum ?>on By-an(Berlin: U mversitas-Deutsche P. p.J. Hans Roger Madol. Dar Naturreckt (Innsbruck: Tyrolia. r&18. In its normal. publicly announced. cit. IO-and his Politics. L66Cf. Cf. Louis XVI and Marie -4ntoinette (New York: Putnam. Costa-Rossetti favoured the monarchy with a corporative (stiindiscke) representation. The Challenge of Facts. Die elegante Frau: eine Sittengeschichte vom Grethlein und Co. 192x). Philosophia Moralis seu Institutiones Ethicae et Iuris Nuturae (Innsbruck: Rauch. I 78 : “ Democracy is fanatical only at times of revolution. Gertrud Aretz. Ig23-35). 167-68. p. Bismarck. For a Catholic view on an ideal form of government see Julius Costa-Rossetti. since the nation is a family in the wider sense of the term. 247-48. Jan.r Gegenmort (Leipzig und Ziirich: The Bulgarian Prime Minister had also every constitutional right PP. Compare with Lorenz von Stein. 41: “ Every monarchy will henceforth either become an empty shadow or a despotism. I 17 (letter. aa quoted by Sir Bernard Mallet in Mallet du Pan and the French Revolrction (London: Longmans. 05gCf. Ferdinand van Bulgtien: Verlags A. A. rg5o). Burke’s Politics (New Tork: A. Bossuet talking about “ la perfide Angleterre ” in “ Sermon sur la circoncision. 264. Geschichte der sozialen Bemegung in Frankreich. 129 note. 56* See C.” 5o0Proudhon. rg29).” Oeuvres complttes. agog]).. “ Solution du problhme sociale. 94. empresses and crown princesses are. 189.” he wrote the remote future. x937). Hoffman and. 271.L pp. 381 n.” A more moderate disillusionment in the claims of democracy can be found in Johannes Messner. 5Bt Cf.-.

du caractbe (Paris: Edition du S&l. 1861). 256. at whose apex the king stands. Max Weber. (c) flexible. Giraud (Paris: C&s. and the friends of freedom must recognize that without a monarchical constitution there can be no assurance of continued liberties. inefficient and accommodating to majority wishes. \ ‘\. to make a fatal cocktail out of them or thoroughly confused by the lack of unanimity give up the reasoning process and to rely on his own “ hunches ” or “ intuitions “--A la Hitler and Roosevelt. yet the layman faced by the bitter!y quarreiling physicians All he can do is is lost since he has no knowledge to evaluate their views. either to “ fall ” for one of the opinions. x919). Un grand lib&al-Prkvost-Paradol (Paris : Fasquelle. La France nouvelle. Per&es.. I. 1947). III. ed. 571Cf.“-Constant. We only hope that it is not necessary to deal with the old nihilistic argument of the democratists maintaining that expert knowledge is “ worthless ” since there are so many expert opinions on one and the same subject. also Joseph A. to extract some positive knowledge from them. 293-94. 1924).. PP. p. 180). 1946). as cited by Emmanuel Mounier. points out that absence of any real qualifications is almost a requirement of a popular leader. 1934). at least. Already Isocrates knew very well that a monarch might be poorly equipped by nature in an intellectual way. if well-meaning layman facing three doctors furiously contradicting each other. 341. pp. “ Politik als Ben. Alfred Aubert. Even if the former has to listen to three divergent views he still might be able to co-ordinate these opinions or.&” Gesammelte politische Sch+iften (Munich: Duncker und Humblot. 2. 1931 [” Bibliothhque Charpentie “I). ” Nicocles or compensated by experience of long duration. p. The fact that the disappearance of the monarchs led straight to . xvi. IO difendo la monarchia (3rd ed. ’ m Cf. Rome: De Fonseca. (d) generous and liberal. XII. Elected bureaucracies are notoriously corrupt. 396 sq. 86. Trait. Arthur de Greeff. One can only hope that the defenders of the democratic myth will find out some day that a medical expert sitting in council with three others is a very different matter from a na?ve. IV (194~46). 5’3 Cf. is a bureaucracy. pp. 6e’ S. Sincere supporters of democracy like Lord Bryce and Ferrer0 shared the same pessimism. “’ Cf her letter to the ambassador in Warsaw. Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War (London: Macmillan. On the inferior intellectual qualities of the big majorities cf. 1921). Part 2.” nothing basically wrong about a first-rate bureaucracy which is (a) efficient and competent. Edouard Laboulaye (Paris: Guillemin et Cie. Schumpeter. Lorenz von Stein. 215: “ This There is administration. 640. 516. 116. Socialism and Democracy (New York: Harper. 27. the Cyprians. Soziologie.” Bulletin of the Polish Institute of Srts and Sciences in Atica. Georg Simmel. p. Geschichte a% sozialen Bewegung. 320 (p. -r \ / *. “ Meine Ber&rung mit Josef Popper-Lynkeus. We find it eloquently expressed in Seneca’s ” De beneficiis “. but that such shortcomings would easily be Cf. sg* On the human quality fostered by the democratic process cf. Pietro Silva. xii. Capita&sm. Isocrates. In face of the totalitarian dangers one must remember the words of Benjamin Constant: “ The friends of the monarchy must realize that without constitutional liberties there cannot be a stable monarchy. I. PrevostParadol. Cf. Pascal. Wilfred Trotter. p. Freud. 165-67. ed. Dr. see Seneca’s &iorai Essays (London : Heinemann. 36-37. &‘OCf. COWS de politique constitutionnelle. 66D Cf. 1942). pp. ” in Isocrates.324 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY . cited by Jan Kucharzewski in his “ Xemarks on the Attitude of the Western Powers to Poland’s Struggle for Independence. p. (b) small. etc. III. xx. So.” Gesammelte SchTiften (Vienna: Intemationaier Psychoanalytischer Verlag. 1935 [“ Loeb Classical Library “I). Cf. 417. Kor is the realization of the liberal essence of monarchy something new.

. 168: ” It is. S. “ His tendency henceforward is to become the graduate of these institutions: an angry champion of faith and morals. A NOTE ON THE PROBLEM OF AUTIlOIIIT~’ 678Hunter Guthrie. S. S. 267. 3. 180~~ 1860 (New York: hlacmillan. (3) a national army. Cf. p. 230. Cf. and (5) development of co-operatives. “ Existentialism. Copleston.” Compare with William F. Hil!. The original mentality of Fascism can well be gleaned from Achille Pasini’s Impcro unico (Milan : Berlutti. (London: Bums. x940). p. to make the antag. p. 1924). 1934). No. 106 f. McKinnon. No. “ Existentialism PP. 576Nazi and Nazarene (London: Macmillan. 681Dostoyevski. Max Horkheimer (Paris: FClix Alcan.” The American Bur Association Journal. The Reconstruction of Europe. p. Cf. spa For the original Fascist programme of 1921 cf. cit. 347-48. 633-34. Introduction au problt?me de I’histoire de la philosophie (Paris : FClix Alcan. 1938).” Revue des questions historiques. Heliopolis. LXXX11 (1907) and LXXX111 (1908). “ Studien iiber Autoritiit und Familie. hlarch 13.” haI Cf. however. 1946). V. 1943. x947). 1927).” Schriften des Instituts fiir Sozialforschung. 190-91..J. the less psychologi&ally sound they may be. Chap. jsO On the results of the one-sided emphasis on scholastic and late-scholastic philosophers in American Catholic colleges cf. IOFIIO.J ..” From the Housetops. p. I. S. F.NOTES 315 totalitarian dictatorship is now widely accepted in Central Europe. pp. Funck-Brentano. “ Les id&s politiques Bellarmine. 1941). Such frank avowals are rare in a time when the tendency prevails. 17-19.J. pp. Op.” institutions out to the letter. 373-74. pp. 19a8). Our Legal Thinking. ed. The Possessed. (4) progressive taxation for inherited wealth. ‘I The Higher Law: Reaction has Permeated s83 Cf. trans. The Protestant Crusade.” Dublin Review. William B. pp. *X. 57i Compare with G. The Life and Work of Blessed Robert Francis Cardinal Beilarmine.. ” Why So Mr. 90. I. and explained that Fascism had so far refrained from abolishing the three liberal institutions. Ernst Jiinger. Ferrero. p. Confusion of Faces (London: Faber & Faber.” and doubts whether his Christianity is “ really organic. F. Miller. 18. and John C. 1936). Oates and Washboume.. and with and Religion. 135. T. 684On some of the psychological aspects of our problem cf. 50-63.xX111. 2 (February. Its five cardinal points were: (I) a republic. Joseph de la Servike. No. Pasini dedicated this book to Mussolini. 575Compare also with Ray Allen Billington. notorious that life lavs a trap for logicians.3. Macomber. The more logically sound they are. p. 579The suspicion that this “ insufficiency ” of Thomism-New and Oldmight possibly lie in our own defects and the paganization of our generation has been beautifully voiced by Theodor Haecker in his Scht’pfeer und Schiipfung (Leipzig: Hegner. ‘Spring 1947. and Erich Meissner. the Crown. C. Jaeckel (New York: Putnam. even among Catholics. pp. Origins of the American Revolution. the Senate and the Chamber-but that these By 1944 this programme had been carried “ will have to go. Part II. I. also James Brodrick. H111says about Few Writers ? ” in America. i. 7. Orestes Brownson. du Cardinal 681. 17. Harold R. (2) separation of Church and &ate. Theodore Maynard.onism between their Church and democracy disappear by a clever legerdemain. p.

dated Monticello. 27-30. For a “ Neo-Protestant ” view on this matter cf. Les deyenseurs dc la souverainete’ du peuple sous le rgne de Louis XIV (Paris: Fischbacher. 1859). Emil Brunner. reasons) who refused to distinguish distinction logically not po sible in a universe restlessly ordered. a /. quite rightly. 123 (letter to Dr. Comment.” Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences. Frank Puaux. 1825)... Friedrich J. The Conspiracy of the Curpenters (New York : Simon and Schuster. . cap. 103). ” L’origine du pouvoir politique d’apres St. Jefferson. it must be admitted that the strougly anti-Calvinist stand of the autocratic Louis XIV resulted in a reaction among French Calvinists. 470-77. trans.326 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY sss Cf. I Samuelis. pp. I. dated Monticello. in his first inaugural address. Hoskins (London: Oxford University Press. n. on the “ sacred principle ” of majoritism: see his Works. 27. 648. X. 1919). ZII--12. Monticello ed..” Gesammelte Schriften (Tubingen: I. iv.” Fromm.” Revue Thomiste. 1917). a’ De summa pont. 2. p. If any simple form of government must of necessity be chosen. IForks. soi See Chapter VI. XVII (I~IO). Stahl. Jacques Zeiller. Thomas on that subject cf. Sept. C. No. 132 f. Ernst Troeltsch. XVI. but would be difficult to prove. Calvin’s Institutiones iv. Still. 1823). pp. did not preach unconditional obedience to the ruler (ibid. cap. Jurieu. Recently the attitude of certain Neo-Thomists has been less rigidly anti-Roussellian in matters of political theory than hitherto.” Cf. Der Protestantismus als politisches Prinzip (Berlin: Schultze. . E._. I. Stimtliche Werke (Stuttgart : 585Cf. IMohr. o*3 Calvin was both an “ oligarcho-democrat ” and a fatalist (for theological between authority and power . St. ed. Was Jurieu influenced by the late scholastics ? Such an influence is not out of the question. 1825). C. Chap. . The Epistle to the Remans. Washington (New York. Robert Bellarmine. 589Cf. also De summa pontifice. especially pp. phrase: what the majority wills is right. D. 26. 20. 1853): p. 30.d. Willmoore Kendall. unlike Calvin. Praelationes in Jeremiam. 6. This volume also contains the text of important chapters of Pierre Jurieu’s Lettres pastorales adressPes aux j?dEles de France qui g6missent sous la captivith de Babylon. 1943). Actually neither the right nor the left in Spain was in the least interested in who polled more votes for a cause which was right independent of its “ popularity. 691Cf. xxxviii.). p. 5BB Compare this thesis with Jefferson’s insistence. 1936. “ Die Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen. 532. 2: “ The first proposition is approved-that simple monarchy is better than simple aristocracy and democracy. 9. B. 29. XXVI (1941). 426 (letter to James Madison. 1904).” 188Cf. Karl Barth. points out that the “ latent premise ” in Locke’s majoritism is the assumption that “ right is what the majority wills. directed and permeated by God’s Wil3 Cf. Das Gebot und die Ordnungcn (New York: Amerikanische Hilfskommission. pp. Aug. i. During the Spanish civil war it was curious to watch the furious debate between France’s adversaries and friends in the United States about the results of the elections of February. II. Dr.” “ John Locke and the Doctrine of Majority 6ei Cf.” (Co m p are with the well-known i “ Forty million Frenchmen can’t be wrong! “) 698See the interesting political novel of Herman Borchardt. ii. (Washington. in libr. 95-124. 60911. who ended up in accepting the theory of popular sovereignty: cf. his “ Philosophie der Geschichte. dated Monticello. Thomas d’Aquin. James Mease. without doubt monarchy should be chosen. De ecclesiastica monarchia: “ Because of the corruption of human nature we judge a monarchy blended from aristocracy and democracy better for men at this time. This author. 2. 5*o On a certain contradiction in the works of St. XVI. 1928). 1933). 3. Rule. 118-19 (letter to Henry Lee. May 8. 68z Cf. XV. VIII. 222-226. p.

Michael Cronin. tyranny. 602Cf. 4. Rome. x921). H. in the face of the Pope’s language. 459: “. also B. 616. La vie politique de M. I (January. de la politique et de la religion (Avignon & Montpellier : Seguin. III : “ Power is only a duty and not a right. Adler (New York: Macmillan. also the somewhat contrary view on p..J. M. 589-91. but only when it is rightly claimed in the name of God alone. rational one-is only rarely applied. the principle of majority vote-which today seems to us the only In that period the votes were not counted.. where this author quite rightly attacks Royer-Collard’s theory of the sovereignty of reason as undemocratic. p.” Cf. act to the best interests of all. x910). 1940). and the debate over the inherent qualities of the forms of government. . p. 411. in the name of Truth.” Royer-Collard. 1936). we do not see how it can henceforward be maintained amongst theologians with any show of probability. expressed in 1907. Manuel des institlrtionsfraryaises (Paris : Hachette. II. ‘i J. 16 (August 31. ed. ‘49. December.” W* ilcta Apostolicae Sedis. sofi Cf. II. XIV (1896). p. Les doctr&esp&tiques de Royer-Collard (Paris: Giard et Brieres. sive continuotio theologiae de verbo (4th ed. The question of the transfer of authority. pseudo-liberalism and anti-Christianity. reason and truth. S. This author insists that the Bellarmine-Suarez thesis is a contractual theory after all. p.) incarnate . 180.” The Irish Ecclesiastic RevieeL. “’ Even in our daily language we acknowledge a connection between command. Mirkine-Guetzevitch. is not particularly helpful. No. “ Corporatisme et democratic. 1909). whatever it be.” quoted in M. p. also Nicholas Berdyaev. the only one which merits the name. The Stience of Ethics (Dublin: I. Parmiter. p. 1908). The difficulty of this problem is characterized by the fact that the condemnation of the ultraroyalist Action franGuise in 1926 met with the disapproval of Billot. pp.” Revue de m&physique et de morale.” Cf. II. another sovereignty. 303. Gill. Letters and Remains. II. “i A moving appeal to the relationship of law and love has been made in the famous defence speech of Sir Roger Casement. Rev. 483-504. No.-The footnote on p.. according to the rules of justice and reason. de Barante. Luchaire. 1892). 1936). 704: “ But we think the Encyclical deals a serious blow at the probability of the opinion [popular sovereignty]. A.NOTES 327 This novel is a brilliant attempt to describe fictionally the inner connection between democracy.” “ Pope Leo on the Origin of Civil Power. de Tocqueville’s letter to Freslon (July 8. Tract&us de erclesia Christi. ‘*’ Cf. 1881. cf. The End of Our Time. 1861). Roger Casement (London: Barker. Rqver-Collard: ses discours et ses &its (Paris: Didier. Royer-Collard in Robert de Nesmes-Desmarets. Ludovicus Billot. and indeed. so6 Cf. Geoffrey de C. (On monarchy. 251 : “ But it must be remarked that here. who resigned as a cardinal. a sovereignty immutable and immortal like its author-I mean the sovereignty of reason. 33: “ If a power. a liberal Catholic royalist.) in Les wais principes oppost!es aur erreurs du XIXe sidcle. 501-3.” 6o3Scta Snnctae Sedis. cf. as in all the assemblies of the Middle Ages. Vol. but weighed. only true legislator of humanity. 106 of Maritain’s Scholasticism and Politics. thus saw the ruler taking his authority from reason emanating from God (” its author “). p. On Royer-Collard see &SO A. 1858) in Memoirs. IV. which deals with the stand of Pius X and Leo XIII in this matter. we speak of “ quoting authorities on a subject. it is a just power not when it is claimed in its own name or m that of the claimant’s. Cf. 1833). 178-79. p. see pp. ou notions pontives SW les points fondamentaur de la philosophic. Cf. also his remark there is the legitimate power which everyone should obey. (The clause in italics is a quotation from a speech of Marc Sangnier in Rouen This papal observation reminds one of De Bonald’s view. . XLIII. were neatly divided in his mind.

wicta Catoni.) His breach with Suarez is by no means complete (vide paragraphs 484-485) yet he certainly ranks among the most original Jesuitic political theorists of all ages. Paragraph 551. G. children and criminals. 1939). moreover. quite naturally. 1901).aa2i%oX a more timeless wav. Iwan Bloch]. Luigi Taparelk.. who during World War II became the most outstanding literary opponent of Nazism. Pouvoir (New York: Brentano. pp. moral man. 1942). ’ ‘la Such a decision had to be faced by Count Klaus von Stauffenberg. a hopeless rebellion-could be made in order to demonstrate the “ whereabouts ” of justice. Yet a ‘* futile gesture “-a obviously doomed to failure. Vincenzo Mansi. as Cf. whether they like it or not. Hitler’s would-be-assassin--a devout Catholic who wore a scapular of Our Lady. begins by wrote in complete contradition : ” The attack against authority acclamation. plants and animals have no hierarchic differences. Preface to No. Passerin d’Entr&ves.J. working for the common good but without power. pp. 185: ” In reality democracy imposes itself today on the adolescent Swiss or American in the same way as monarchv formerly imposed itself on the younger generationas a power pre-established by foregoing generations which is placed tocl high above them for them not to bow to it. The “ divine marquis. p. xli-xiii. The dii are here the blind forces of history. 1765). 608&f&n Kampf (Munich: Eher. with the problem of placing a timebomb which might harm and kill less guilty officers-since the earlier loss of his right arm made it impossible for him to use a more direct weapon. Watkin.9 per cent of the population of Germany before Hitler.” Italian scholar has logically used this as an argument against a very prevalent -Aquinas: Selected Political Writings. 579. Dawson (Oxford: Blackwell.Negroes form about 55 per cent of the population of Mississippi. If we understand Taparelli correctly-his style is not conducive to clarity-the essence of his theory of the origin of authority is not very far from ours. I. 1948).. p. G. thesis. P 3 5 : ‘3 \9 x 328 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY 4 \‘ ‘. Ferrero. and thus should be “ equals. 610The Tews were about 0. 2 of Essays in Order (London : Sheed and Ward. We .“--BIiitter und Steine (Hamburg: Hanseatische Verlagsbuchhandlung. Livornese. insisted that man.” This is roughly the situation characterized by Luigi Taparelli! S. 232-34. etc. pp. Yet it seems that the unknown author of this work considers the climatic factor to be of greater importance than the religious one. NOTES TO CHAPTER FIVE -St 61’ Cf. “ Aphorismen. Part 2. E. of Dr. Eugen Duehren [pseud. just war 612 So most Catholic theologians.” the most radical democrat of all time. He had to grapple. 1934). One of the first books on this subject is La physique de l’histoirr ou Considt+ation sur les principes eUmentaires du tempt+ament et du caractke des peuples (The Hague. The concept “ adult ” or “ mature person ” is p &&uy./. xvi-xiii. J. 611We have. 392-93. 193x). Michalon. Le Marquis de Sade et son tetnps (Paris: A. (Paragraphs 663-667. and Cato. Opera de1 P. the. not dealt with the problem of a magistrate We are not in paradise. Proudhon ironically suggested (in a letter dated April 26. pp./ i P: \ f -‘I Cf. 1852) that horses and donkeys should also be permitted to vote. * . -4. Chapter 9. 9.” 30. Saggio the fatti anteriorti. 185r). Oo9 Cf. Livorno: teoretico di dritto naturale appoggiato sul fatto (2~3 ediz. t Thomas who 1s frequently cited as a defender of popular sovereignty has nevertheless insisted that political disorder “ arises from the fact that A leading somebody seizes power without the praeeminentia intellectus. Cf.” As staunch republicans demanded the franchise for women. transl. Such an action might still or 1 victory benefiting the common good m a wider and deeper Viictris causa diis placuit. fatti non liberi. Ernst Jiinger.. sed ” ZZZitu:“.

‘om M’ert des Leibes ?n Antike. is closely. 267. often it becomes difficult to make a specific factor responsible for a specific national trait. Thomas (Summa. XXX\‘. Cf. considt+ation. 7: iv. 85.Aristotle. 130-82. p.. for the first time. But. a.. 4-referring to. Yet living for some time in a Catholic. 8 . Hoffet’s explanation of the latent anarchism of Catholic nations. John O’Ha Hutterfielf (New York: Grosset and Dunlap. Ludwig Bergstraesser. 1948). Ho&land. Schroteler. The circumstance that this French Protestant author speaks z&h great pride of the Protestant paternity of the modern world is rather surprising to a reader living in this i century of blood. 130. H. Christopher Herold. Even in Switzerland the dividing line between the cleaner Protestants and the dirtier Catholics will strike the foreign observer. v. natural result of the ” decapitation ” of Irish so&t! bv the English conquerors. Very much to the point is also Ernst Wiechert’s description of the way the Lutheran &Iasurian Poles view the poor and sloppy Catholic Poles from across the border. J. 1938). 116. Bemhart. a concerted effort to compare methodically the characters of the Catholic and Protestant nations and regional groups. 169. XXVI (Oct. Christentum und . tears and self-destruction on a colossal scale. Muckermann and others (Salzburg: Anton Pustet. and it must be regretted that it is also marred by constant evidence of anti-Catholic bias. 23o-jt. Austrian. v. 8) is positively sinful. 1936). pp. (This particular trait. fi17 Cf. ” Where Three Countries Meet. E. x933). discounting the Protestant tenet “ Cleanliness is next to godliness. Here we have. Ternus. 283-84 (a comparison between Protestant Lewis and Catholic South Uist in the Hebrides). E. pp. 1945). 103. Hallidav Sutherland. Arches of the yeear (?. to St.“1sL. Ethics. A volume important for its freshness of approach and its intellectual couragethough from a scholarly point of view not quite satisfactorv-is Frederic Hoffet’s L’impe’rimlisme protestant. II.” The American Geographic &view. his main thesis is well-nigh unassailable. cl. 1948). 615 On Catholic good humour and hilarity cf. For a svmposium on the Catholic attitude towards the body cf. Cf. The Swiss Wr’ifhotrt n Halo (New York: Columbia University Press. Unfortunately this work is full of factual errors.” would be less given to hvgiene and or cleanliness plus plumbing.duplicated in French Canada whose upper layers returned to France after 1763. Lack of’ u-t . Wallace Xotestein. 1946).O 3&Y have written on the inthtence of the purely geographic factor on the psychology of nations elsewhere. 1935).sur le destin in&al des peuples 0 protestants et cathoZiques duns le monde actuel (Paris : Flammarion. l. Wiechert. 122-23. from the stronger medieval The Irish cultural situation is sui getteris. J. E.” Ti~ught. Kuehnelt-Leddibn. though one has to take exception to M. Cf. German-speaking community on the Swiss border in the close proximity of Protestant Latins we had ample opportunit> to learn to differentiate between ethnic and religious characteristics . accordmg .) ” Der Protestantismus in Frankreich. Thr Scot in Historic (New Haven : Yale University Press. 182). J. Cf. The Protestants of France number about . I most ” Germanic ” characteristics among the Protestant Rhaeto-Romans.” 6in Cf. XXI. Apart undertones owing to the absence of the Renaissance and Baroque stages of evolution which formed the Catholic nations of the Continent (see p.c. p. 18 (March. most so-called ” Latin ” traits were found among the Austrian Catholic Teutons. “ Plainsman and Mountaineer. pp. 2 (April. Dir Jerominskinder (Linz: Briickenverlag. though. 1948).ew Tork: William Norrow. with contributions from J. Kuehnelt-Leddihn. Obviouslv the Catholic way of life. 1946). ii. II-II. 616 Cf. I. Of course. Yet all this should not lead one to the belief that Catholicism looks at the human body in XIanichaean terms. there This is the is also the dual rOle of the Irish clergy as First and Second Estate.4nthropologie der Gegenwart.

1945). Thomas. cl. p. Gilchrist. I-II. there is even sacramental significance to the sexual act in marriage. Letzter Glans der M&3wrstadt (Vienna: Ring Verlag. Boegner and A. “ For the multitude the right of private interpretation worked in the opposite direction and produced illiberality of mind. Cf. M. in Catholicism. P. and No. Liberal Protestant Friends. 1939). Bavaria. for instance. Cf. Watkin: see his The Bow in the Clouds. Ig37). 38-39. un Essay towards the Integration of Experience (New York: Macmillan. 7. ~otestantis?riefYoffctir (Paris: Plon. X932). of the Viennese Protestants was similarly more elevated than that of their Catholic fellow citizens. “ progress. Karl Adam. 182-83. 1926). not only because thev are less spoiled a%te?ray \’ by. The Spirit of Catholicism. 73. p. a. ” but also because they offer (unless psychologically unknown in the Protestant nations) a social es and freedo i netghbourmg “ problematic ” world. “ Christendom Must be Served: a Letter to My B??Cf. . Ireland. Dom J. 4 / 019Cf. yet of the so-called “ Two Hundred Families ” controlling most of the wealth of France. 124). are less grave than those of a spiritual or intellectual nature (Summa. New York: Macmillan. 191 I).” in M. M. more than one third) are Protestant. IOzpWe borrow thz terms from Bernard Groethuvsen~rigiigines de l’esprit bourgeois en France (Paris : Gallimard. Belgium. “ Le groupe protestant cevenol. The sins of the flesh.. It is self-evident that a strong subjectivism in large masses )rfosters the tendency to lean in directions prescribed by the human law of gra\tty. 1 I 821 Cf. “ Die Regenten Frankreichs” Hochlund. 121-25. Forster in Where Angels Fear to Tread and by D. H. according to St. Such a phenomenon is strictly post-Reformation. J.e.5 per cent of the total population. 2 (Spring-Summer. P. Dr. Mary Messer and Alyse Gregory in Twice a Year. -pp. Austria. 623Tet the modern Protestant simply loves to travel in Catholic countriesFrance. See also the letters of Randolph Boume to Carl Zigrosser. p. English Democratic Ideas in the Se-wnteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge Die Bedeutung des Unixrq. Otto Friedlander. 1928). inconsistency is the chief characteristic. 5). 191. and thus to come to terms with the ” world. p.“not the Reformers. There is. the Province of Quebec. The relationship between sexuality and religiosity has been strongly stressed by the Catholic philosopher E. trans.. It fortified ignorance with the elusion of infallibility. Of the latter. Poe& (Valladolid. 174. 49. cf. Spain. June. Jose Maria Pernan. No. 407 sq. XXIII (Januarv. has been well described by E. Hungary. G. also Ernst Troeltsch. 1927). Andre Siegfried. x927).330 LIBERTY OR EQUALM’Y 2. The conflict between such a sati i Protestant Protestant who in a Catholic country experiences not only a hitherto unknown freedom and absence of controls but therefore also a new tragic sense of life. 1948).” Columbia. Press. pp. Siegfried. the Rhineland. Puritanical tendencies in the Catholic world are either the result of Jansenist undercurrents or of an imposed competition with Protestant neighbours. 8i Berlin: Protestan tsmus fiir dte Entstehung der modernen Welt (Munich Oldenbourg. circumscribed the outlook of many men with an i\lb ‘unimaginative liberalism and rattialized the crowd’s will to power ” (Liberty.” Everett Dean Martin thought that Protestant subjectivism also produced very unexpected results. also much emphasis on the sacredness of the body. 3-where may be found a tabulation of the contrary orthodox and liberal Protestant reactions to Catholicism. Mexico. The situation pp. I. seventy-six (i. Italy. p. 1945. Gooch: “ Modem democracy is the child of the Reformation. Lawrence in Aaron’s Rod. Compare also with Werner Wittich. 5-6 (Spring-Summer. Catholicism has no anti-sexual doctrines. I (L’&l&e et la bourgeoisie). McCann BzoOn the other hand we still have to cope with a number of misconceptions about Catholic asceticism.

also Ernst Troeltsch.4merica. (London: Ernest the name of Kohn. An excellent condemnation of egalitarianism from a philosophical point of view is Gabriel Marcel’s “ Considerations sur l’egahte. I. 195-96). ” in Etudes carm&taines. I. 44. 361). Oldenbourg. 3. 6aoCf. SJ . Hungay>. 19x1). 157). p. Yet not onlv the Church herself but all “ clerical ” governments and regimes were socially far more democratic than the selfprofessed democracies. A So&Z Register could not Ilya Ehrenburg.. 42 sq.” cit. Cf.orre (American edition). Giulianus. . The Church herself is called by Pope Pius S. 1947. XXIV.” Gesammelte Werke. Cf. I: De clericis. pointed out that no grandee sitting on the same park bench with a beggar could possibly refuse to taste from his convent soup. II. lib. St. Brownson. Bismarck. 6*’ Manteuffel was perfectlv right when he wrote to Bismarck: “ The constitutional system which proclaims the rule of majorities I consider to be thoroughly Protestant. 1945). pp. p. also H. Gabriel Marcel’s Catholic and existentialist views are well corroborated by the non-Catholic Richard M. J. 671. The rigorism of Geneva is also well attested by Calvin’s successor Theodore de B&e. Vol. Toumai and Paris: Desclee. and a poorly functioning control of public morality (ibid. ?‘o. who accused the Papists of having an inefficient Inquisition. i. there should be little doubt that democracy in the social sense is more present 5 in the Catholic than in the Protestant world. stronger in the United States than in Belgium or Bavaria. Book III. A. De l’esprit des lois. The German Mind and Outlook (London.. Gooch. 1906). sympathetic towards Spain. 1934). 62y Cf. “ De membris ecclesia: militantis.~ Compare also with H. 40-48. 83. pp. Cf. II. 1936).B 33 6*6 For a popular description of Geneva under Calvin. 1948). II. xxiv. p. 1924). 1869 and 1899). Berm. for instance. 1922). by no means even be imagined in Hungary or Transylvania. iii. 1897).7 (pp. July ‘5. I. R. 631 Both De Tocqueville and James Fenimore Cooper commented on the familiarity between masters and servants in France as compared to Britain or . and others. 1928). 127. Weaver. Victor Spanish Family. On Calvin’s political views cf.4 sq. especially pp. The totalitarian aspects of Calvin’s state are brilliantlv described in Kampschulte. Grace Hegger Lewis. op. 160. “ My New (Detroit : Brownson. Ginsberg. Hans Baron. democracy was especially strong in the Church. a society ei et natura sua ineqrralis (” unequal by necessity and by its nature I’). L The Right to Hereq: Caste&o a ainst C&I (New York: Viking. p. S.. in his brilliant little book Ideas Have Conscquencec (Chicago: University of Chicago Press. vii (II. 18. ed. in his encyclical Ibhementer (Feb. (Naples : J. 556 sq. Thomre Aquince hodiernis moribus accomodata (Rome. Equality and Demonac> if offered. also Franciscus Suarez.IV”1E. Under Francis Joseph Austria had a Prince-Archbishop of Olmiitz (Olomouc) with Cf. I. 832 ‘I Social " . oi?ixmG&-5d ampschulte’s Johann Calvin: seine Kirch e und s&n Staat in Gent (Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot. De la de’monatie en Amtiique. see Stefan Zweig. also Gleanings in Europe. “’ Cf. stronger in Switzerland (with the most exclusive aristocracy in Christendom) than in France.z). 702-3. James F. Spiller (New York: Oxford LTniversny Press. The American Democrat (New Y*ork: Knopf. Defensiofidei catholica adversus ilnglican~ secta errores (Naples : Ex Typis Fibrenianis. “ Die Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen. Robert Bellarmine. 139. Calvins Staatsanschauung and das konfessionelle Zeitalter (Munich and Berlin: R. also Tanquerey. Class consciousness is far stronger in England than. Indeed. Montesquieu. See De Tocqueville. hIacartney. 4. 16r-71. Cooper. I Chapter v. 5. 02* Cf. in Italy. Gedanken und Erinnerungen. Synopsis theologire dogmaticce ad mentem S. 609. 22. F.“-See 0. Disraeli’s W-aldershare in his Endymion. I.” in Disputationes Roberti Bellarmini Politiani. cap. 1X57).-27.

1x8 sq. n. 89. W. Cf. trans. France to live in. Essais. No. Karl Sell. Francis pnra vi&. D. p. 1924).. Brown. 189. 36-38. Cf. Hopeman (London: Arnold. p.” St”: 686 Cf. when it showed in some regions of Europe a morbid intensity. Jo&. W. 1930). for instance. 38-39. also the Spanish saying: Italia para nacer. 63i Cf. Plattard (Paris: Roches. 1945). 138. 19.o~~~~e. x948. 1947). xXx111. von Radowitz. I 17) : ” Qui a apris a mourir.). Le smvoir chap. 1931). Rebuilder of Portugal (London: Hodder and Stoughton. Brogan. pp.” On p. 6a8 The cult of death probably reached its zenith in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. 336 and 325 note. pp. Yet it is also interesting to note that in Protestant B&am.d. p. Spain (New York: Dodd. p. A. OaoThese efforts were often animated by the best will and the greatest intellectual honesty. Cf. 1947). 124 sq. _-------. J. for instance. B. Cf. aspects of the Catholic countries cf. Fischer. We can gather that. p. N. Life and Pwerty. but also from the remarks of other observers. 273. an enthusiasm originally offered to an entirely different cause-the cause of social \ . Italien: Ansichten und Sircipichtcr (Berlin: Bomtraeger.19 See above. p. J.--establis~~t__-. also Karl Larenz.” II nuwo Corriere della Sera. A vivid description of a Basque chamelhouse is to be found in Victor Hugo’s Letters to his Wife and Others. 186 he concludes: “ The history of Spain is a This Spanish thanatocentrism is also perpetual aspiration towards death. Government On the demophile of thePeople (Xew York: Harper. 1943). Labour. mourir nous afranchit de toute subjection et contrainte. StTangers Should Not Whisper (New York: L. under Philip II. Peers. The Wating of the Middle Ages. Book I. Somerset Maugham. 19. only to remember the enthusiasm of certain French Catholics for the ” nationalizations ” after the Second World War. 1905)~ pp. C. What Ails Mankind? trans. 250. and the same author’s Tag-und Nachtbiicher. 1908). x933). p. 6sBCf. Johan Huizinga. where the class differences are more marked than in the Catholic nations. ZGeig.. “ L’sme espagnole. Zweig.” La Grande Revue. p. A. Jannary. trans.” well described by the famous Italian journalist Indro Montanelli in his article. Elie Faure. Katholizismus und Protestantismus (Leipzig: Quelle und Meyer. For this reason. Dole (Boston: Estes and Lauriat. 193y-1ytf. ed. ‘U Cf. F. 34.. the sympathies of the workers and the “ proletariat ” for the aristocracy and the “ plutocrats ” are greater than for the middle classes. 53-54. EspaZa para morir (” Italy to be born in..332 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY H&n. but they very often ended in fantastic perversities. Gustice.-Yet the fact also remains that America has a death problem which troubles her subconsciously. Egerton. One has. Gustave Thibon. the only one which has really gone to the extreme of Catholicism-death. Reimer. 86-87. Creatures of Circumstances (London and Toronto: Heinemann.i. ‘z* On class sentiment in American politics cf. IgZg). a third of the population lived in monasteries and convents. H. 184: “A whole people desperate to die. pp. It is quite absurd-and sublime nevertheless. 1933). Montaigne. 1929). 261-62. il a desapris a servir. p. the great Prussian Gerammelte Schriften (Berlin : Georg romantic statesman J. Labour. not only from Eve1 4 Waugh’s witty satire The Loved One (Boston: Little. Note 595 . F. 22 note. Nearly all great Spaniards of the two great literary centuries are priests or soldiers.+7). I:. Cf. xx (p. the great praise bestowed upon the peasant by Theodor Haecker in Was ist der Mensch Y (Leipzig: Hegner. C. IV. 6. which is hardly served by&e -. among the two religions cf. 1854). For the statistical distribution of the German peasantry. Mead. . p. Life and Pwerty (London: Victor Gollancz. Willard Hill (New York: Sheed and Ward.” Reichsidee und Staatsgedanke: Festschrift fiir @lius Binder (Berlin: Junker und Diinnhaupt. in this connection. p. IZ (Dec. Spain to die in “). For a Catholic defence of begging cf. Salazor. “ A spasso per Madrid i condannati a morte. “ Staat und Religion bei Hegel. 1948).

Allen not only the conspiring officer. xliv. 1x5. a. d. P. I. 3 . pp. came from a Catholic family. 66. Jan Ciechanowski. 6’6According to St. 1922). and above. 1947). trans. q.J. **’ A position immortally stated (in his “ Essay on Criticism “) by a not too exemplary Catholic. a. 83 sq. q. Putnam (New York : Knopf. a. The Masters and the Sluves. III. 1935). 382-87. you do not intend to become a protestant ? --I said that I had lost the faith. a view which we also support: see his “ 11 tirannicidio nel pensiero dell’ Acquinate. s*s Cf. pol. mquired from a priest whether his Subsequently religion permits tyrannicide.. 338. in “ Discrimen regis et tyranni. Thomas implicitly permits tyrannicide. also St. I-II. Cf. 157. 1946). Exp. defended tyranmcide.” Annah’ de scienzc politiche. A&tot. 1921). 2. XII. Thomas the virtutes intellectuales are higher than the virtutes morales: cf. s5r Count Klaus von StaufIenberg. Christianity and Philosophy. q. So did Count Arco-Valley.” The Hispanic-American Historical lie&em. also “ Predigten uber etzliche Kapitel des Evangelisten Matthiii. 178. Defeat in Victor*. ratuz. XLIV. 22. q. kritische Gesommtaucgabe: (Weimar: Bohlau. Gilbert0 Freyre. Yet because of the Manichrean dualism so characteristic of the Eastern Church. Germany’s UndergTound (New York : ~Iacmillan. 2. The answer was in the affirmative. Watkin. Fernando d’Antonio came to the conclusion that St. Cf. Etienne Gilson. Sententire. but cheh ” (Auc Metternichs nachgelassenen Papieren. Summa. Thomas prohibits tyrannicidr. 1946). 452). VI. Alexander Pope: 1 A little learning is a dangerous thing. MacDonald Gilson also admits that the acumen (New York: Sheed and Ward. 61* Compare with the following passage in James Joyce’s ” Portrait of the Artist as a Tioung Man. Stephen answered. 2. s’s For a picture of a liberal South American society (Brazil) cf. Cf. A Catholic appraisal of the positive values of liberalism can be found in E. 1949). Werke.. F And drinking largely sobers up again. 42. 135-49. Hitler’s would-be assassin. II-II.. 54. ~!t~~~~$~~ $ ~i. who believed that the people was ” ed. 2. pp. I. xiv-xv. p.~hom~~ “ h~$%& WJLkiB et the cmdmporary Catholic concept we find represented by Metternich. I-II. the assassin of Kurt Eisner.. she is quite capable of entering into the most astounding political “ arrangements. . or taste not the Pierian spring: There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain. 109. also Lewis Hanke. Compare also with II-II. Martin Luther. Fast. 1-2 (March-June.a_ NOTES 333 w This is well expressed by the agnostic hero of AndrC Maurois’ Les &cours du &cteur O’Grady (Paris: Grasset.” The PortableJames Joyce (New York: Viking. 1939). 1850). trans.” De rege et 1. 156. 5. 173-74. pp.” Gesammelte Werke (Erlangen. but also his adviser was hanged. but permits and even advises rebellion. lect. q. Welsh Dulles. 3 ad 3. Note 620. 19q+ attempt to overthrow the Hitler government. *‘s Cf.” Tischreden sa4 Cf. ad 3. Summa. but was opposed by other theologians of his order. 1939). A Philosophy c$ Form (New York: Sheed and Ward.! had lost that be to floisakcan &dit ‘herent’and to embrace a faith which is illogical an _‘L S. but not that. DD. s4s This 1s true from a theological point of view. ” Free Speech in Sixteenth Century Spanish America. 6718). a. a. p. One of the conspirators in the July. said Cranly. 143 (No. S. R. Drink deep. St. Thomas. Major Ludwig von Loenrod. XX\‘I. No. 154. p.ncMariana. 5x4: -Then. 2 (May.

1924). all anti-Communists. Among Jewish political assassins should be mentioned Judas M. March 14. La guerra car&a: 10s cruzados de la causa It is fairly 1944 [Edition Austral]). Wart und see Theodor Rittler. 1933). x948). p. (Buenos Aires : Espasa-Calpe.” Wahrheit. ss2 It is significant that in Austria-Hungary. “ official?” Catholicism radical enough. Jahrhundert. \ revered fair play. Herschel Grynszpan-with the exception of the two last mentioned. Schwarzbard. III. 2 (February. and in fact have been on many glorious occasions. 293. the would-be assassin of President F. 154 (under date of March 6. p.d. p. and so did Joseph Zangara. “ Die Todesstrafe und das 20. de Unamuno. vii-viii: cannot contrive a compromise. only one non-military execution took place between the years 1903 and r9r8-while during the same period hundreds of people were hanged in much more “ progressive ” Britain. Earle (New York: Knopf.e.). pp. 1933. we have obvious that this extremism “ ties in ” with the thanatocentrism Cf. sss Cf. 212-13. whether it be with Almighty God or with his compromise savours of his so-muchfellow mortals.“-“ Espaiia coma pensamiento. Guiteau. who made an attempt on the life of President Theodore Roosevelt in 1912. Kannegiesser. with a population of fifty millions. Mon joumul (Paris: Mercure de France. sterling was summarily sentenced to the gallows. Of the American presidential assassins (Booth. already mentioned. 1937). As a matter of fact. x927). To an Englishman. trans. OSR Leon Bloy. 1942).” Accidn espaiiola. p. The tradition memorabile of Ravaillac and of the facinus Clement has indeed no parallel in the Protestant world. Count Arco was also arrested by the police in March. 1914). But J. and where the guiding rule of life is not the thought that we shall all some day lose it. XVIII (March. n.” was for the Spaniard often not 855” Italian. IOO. The list of assassins with a Catholic or Greek Orthodox background in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is a most impressive one.. Czolgosz). 93-105.” i. La vida de Don Quijote y de Sancho (Madrid : Renacimiento. D. The Life of Don Quijote and Sancho.” : sK7Cf. P. Miguel de Unamuno. I (x896Cf. At the end of his El sentimiento trdgico de la vida he piously wishes for his readers that God will spare them peace. pp. Roosevelt who killed Mayor Cermak of Chicago. belonged to a Catholic family. H. 1899). for planning an assassination of Hitler (see the New York Herald Tribune. only the last mentioned had a Catholic background (Guiteau was of Huguenot stock).” This contrasts i with the Spanish revolutionary song from 1821: I beautifully Muera quien quiere Moderacidn Y viva &mpre Y siempre viva Y viva siempre La exalt&& . 375. M. 1899) : “ Their [the Protestants’] tolerance. Compton Mackenzie in a preface to Jane Lane’s King James the Lust “ The English suspect a man who C (London: Dakers. 186: “ Unhappy those European countries where one lives only thinking of life ! Unhappy those countries where one does not think continually of death. until 1831 every British thief who had appropriated an object to a value exceeding two pounds On the statistics for Austria. Jose Pemartm does not exaggerate when he savs: ” Hence we Spaniards have a right to be more Papist than the pope. His own I national Church is the most ingenious of compromises. Dora Kaplan.334 LIBERTY OR EQUALMY the Leftist Bavarian leader. and he could never support any action or subscribe to any i opinion which suggested that half a loaf was worse than no bread. a demoniac defiance of substance. No. ?‘britPs arbitraires (Paris : Sagittaire. Stem. Schrank. which is besides illusory. is nothing but an unheard-of want of an absolute. ss4 Ramon de Valle-Inclan.

They melancholicallG admit a non-existing state of affairs. see Giorgio Sansa. p. To Alexander Herzen. -%I everybody knows only too well etc. 19z3). January 13. ed.OOO copies. The Menace of the Herd. M. Melville (Xew York: Sheed _ fl Catholic interpretation of this great American -. II.” Essqs in Honor of John Dewey (New York: Henry Holt & Co. I : The Spirit of Place. Hordyk p. Better be secure under one king. p. 1939 [Cathohc University Philosophical Studies. Weicher.” The Shock of Recognition. 56. 111. Longmans? Green.:’ \> the possible synthesis of Catholicism and liberty.” On Herman Melville’s notions on democracv cf.NOTES 335 -“ Death to whoever wants moderation. 660Of course. his ‘I Studies in Classic American Literature. Knopf. James Hoban. 1814). Compare with Everett Dean Martin’s view: “ Coming to America when they did. -. though oneself be one of them. A. See also F. 1943). ‘I has nothing to fear from the dogmas [of the Church]. 1944).“-In Melchor de Ahnagro San Martin’s foreword to Mar&o Jose de Larra [” Figaro “1. but they ‘get the shock of their lives once they venture into the anarchical Catholic world. Campbell. The Thomistic Concept \ 1 of persqn and Some of tts Social Implications (Washington. 3. Have not the American people sailed away from the medievalism rather than It seems to me that as a people the Americans thought the way out of it? of the preceding generations renounced the tutelage and traditions of medieval Europe. pp. (New York : 6G7 Thomas Jefferson’s Living Thoughts. s6’ See above. 164. see p. 1940). No. n. 1948. than exposed to violence from twenty millions of monarchs. IQ+)). ZII. II. but were not greatly influenced by the philosophy of life which supplanted the medieval and IS the basis of whatever is distinctly modem in the culture of the Western World ” (Liberty. pp.” Ii nuovo Corriere della Sera. That author! on the other hand.Protestantism was the personification of the ” golden middle way “. 666 See his Aper~u des Etats-Umis au commencement du XIXe sit?& (Paris: Michaud & Delaunay. Race Criminality. wrote. . had a full appreciation “ Even the freest spirit. 32-34. 1939). 1944). his as Reisetagebuch eines Philosophen (Darmstadt: Otto Reich1 Verlag. p. forgotten that some of these statistics have to be analyzed more carefully. .). 354-56. . 433). S. ~85. E. long live extremism. Yet it must not be (New York: Columbia University Press. Wilson (Garden City: Doubleday. which sold more than IOO. Erich Kuhn’s book. p. Dr. long live. and Ward. Willem Adriaan Bonger. 907 f. Note 395. p.. He also cautioned his fellow Americans on this page against the concept of a “ free ” America faced by ” slave-nations. p. p.. but who rules me. 688Cf. ed. 663Cf. 1929). 865 The American Character (New York: A. 06?Count Hermann Kevserling.d..C. Catholic! i F Untversity. ” Gli inglesi a casa loro non possono fare i matti. Sch& anstiindige Kerle ! (Berlin: T. whose Catholicity then they often will be inclined to doubt. See also P.“From his Mardi-and a Voyage Thither (Boston: Maynard and Co. 183. Geoffrev Stone. I. 398. 1943).~_~~n~te trsa= a ” etc. and long live. there are also a lot of American Catholics who walk straight : “ It’s into the tra an~~~s~9~-~~~-W~t~~efl~~. 79.“-Cf. Ammica Set Free (London and New York: Harper. an authoritative thinker and writer. ‘. 81). 664” Individualism and American Life. . M. 73. John Dewey Compare also James Fenimore Cooper. It is not who rules the c r-3 state. ‘= Cf. . our Colonial ancestors who gave the country its traditions of culture and liberty. *61 Herman Melville was keenly conscious of these matters when he wrote: “ Thus. p. Atticulos completes (Madrid: Aguilar. 19zg). XXV. Gleanings m Europe. freedom is more social than political. D. missed the liberalizing influences of the Renaissance. 528. On the “ regularity ” of British life viewed with Italian eyes. trans.

) For a cultural comparison between the Greek-Oriental (Pravoslav) and the Protestant outlook turn to Saltykov-Shtshedrin’s short story “ Mal’chik v shtanakh i mal’chik byez shtanov. sT2Carlo Sforza. s70Frederick II of Prussia considered Catholics to be an inferior type of citizens for monarchies as well as for republics.’ teenth Centur>l (London: Constable. Bubnoff.p. Three Studies in /. I (ZUT Lebensgesrhichte). Meertens.” in X. p. European Conservatism: Metterm’ch.) A country like Austria is in a Mettemich confessed: ” I have governed certain sense “ ungovernable. . perhaps. Cf. 35. the Catholic Church in the Nine. I (Spring 1950). While Switzerland is a Pan-American Union).336 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY they give a final picture only if we correlate religion and class. 1922) . Guizot. Italian immigrants and second-generation Italians in the Argentine or in Brazil is considerably lower than in the United States. 13. p. 1888). Compare with Nathaniel Hawthorne’s astonishment about the individualistic character of worship in Catholic churches: see his “ French and Italian Note Books.” originally published in El Fare. the (Paris : A.). 1934).” Works (Boston: Houghton. also Henri Chevrt+..” Revue de Psychologie des Peuples [Le Havre] V. 169-70. rgrg). forbidden is allowed. Chateaubriand. p. p. but here again the class aspect must be taken intc consideration-as well as the increased We must not forget that the crime rate of criminality in a competitive society. Oeuvres de Fred&c le Grand (Berlin: R. his allusions in his article entitled “ Las Reformas de Pio IS. i.lfe’moires d’Outrr-Tombc. PP. Russisches Lesebuch (Heidelberg: Julius Groos. ed. 45. \‘. No. See also : Erik van Kuehnelt-Leddihn. I 13. L. Xp Cf. Austria has traditionally been the country of “ don’ts ” and prohibitions. 95-96. de h’ladariaga. he still seems to be an anarchist to his Protestant countryman. Donoso Cortgs pointed out quite rightly that Catholic libertarianism rested on the twin pillars of the supremacv of conscience and the Freedom of the Will. S. Cf. but Austria never. . 873Among the numerous biographies (Secretain. 1947). his remark in Die protestantische Theologie im 19. Tharaud. Typical is also the personal reaction of Chateaubriand towards France after his return from Protestant England. II. vguy and it IS. In this connection it is interesting to note that the highly nazified parts of Ge-y had a lower criminality than the anti-Nazi regions! Among the criminals in the United States the Catholic element is conspicuously represented. I. 1944). reprinted in Obras Completes de Donoso Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos Carte’s. L’a”me italienne (Paris. Dr.LIichel. 86-87. Annr&u o jerarquia (Madrid: Aguilar. Decker. In the same volume cf. etc. 269-298. 181.“-See E. 3 (Fdll 1950). pp. (Cf. As much as the Dutch Catholic may seem a “ disciplinarian ” to the Central or South-European Catholic. 1. Woodward. 185-93. 1892). 17. “ RCflexions sur le caracthre nationale autrichien. J. Cf.” Revue de Psychologie des Peuples [Le Havre]. “ Le caracttire nhrlandais. .‘iew (pu hshed bq’the “ On the relations between the Americas. and S. 1935). 208-9. 167 sq.” Europe at times. not wvlthout significance that Karl Barth sees in originality a Catholic and non-Protestant trait. Jahrhundert (Zollikon: Evangelischer Veriag. rgzg).” (The real psychological countrv “ where everything attraction of nazism in Austria prior to 1938 was its revolutionary characterand revolution implies violence and illegality. 1847. I. Gesammelte Schriften und Denktirdigkeiten (Be&n : E. #‘l Some pertinent remarks on this subject can be found in Am f$lco -9 Points of T. P. the excellent description of the Polish character bv Count Helmuth van Moltke. Cf. The social maladjustment of the lower layers naturally fosters a higher criminality. pp. 1846). Nov. MifXin. A ceur qui reviennent (Paris: Tequi. also the description of the Spanish character. p. Cf. Mittler. 99.” 1940). I (December. HalCl?-. Don Juan Juretschke (Madrid: 1946).

40. This process is of long standing. onlr given for acts of bravery before the enemy withoui military orders or even ‘m defiance of such orders. Negro 3’ rojo: 10s anarquistay en la rewluci&r espaiiola contemporanea (Mexico Crty. r946). 1947). the highest Austrian military distinction was. led. 1906). by-laws which still functioned at that time and orders (p. Driving in Rome is therefore a nerve-racking experience. r932). significantly enough. graphic des F. Tize Revival of Aristocracy (London : Probsthain. If we can believe the Communist author. 1948. Sane and Citizen: the Negro in the Americas (New York: Knopf. Oscar Lev-v. the irate public immediately tore them down. r8j-204) not onlv felt the freedom nowhere so strongb as in Spain. p. trans. Ilse Barea (New York: Reynal and Hitchcock. Philip a few traffic lights. The death cult. the greater progress of technology and industry in Protestant countries has been a prime factor in accentuating the uniformity and conformism of Protestant nations. but also remarked enthusiastically on the complete indifference of Spaniards towards royal or any other governmental laws. On the difference between obedience and L loyalty cf. well more fully aware of is that of obedience to his conscience. ” Aus der Selbstbioofficers in the first half of the nineteenth century. December 4. They were highly valued by their Austrian Cf. was aiwars (The regimentai song of the Tern‘o very strong in that military organization. football games with the ‘. The Order of Maria Theresa. 264. L’rimt TUW’ (Paris. caused the downfall of Spanish “ democracy. L. “ Obeman& et fide%te.. Jesus Hernindez.57. 13. ET’ Cf. Siidamerikanischr Meditationen (Stuttgart und Berlin : Deutsche Verlagsanstai:. 1946). ” Winds from the Pampas. Gabriel Marcel. traffic policemen.” Hbmo -T. p. Hemdn Cot&s (New York : Macmillan.A.) The theme of death-worship was also well brought out in the French film La bandera. The same spirit seems to have prevailed e\-en during the latest civil war. Ernst M&hel. encouraged by Spanish officers. the description of the Spanish Foreign Legion by Arturo Barea in his Tke Forging of a Rebel. I-et uniformity and conformity always imply obedience-so also in the matter of traffic regulations. the Anarchist jails must have been the most delightful resorts. starts with the words SO)J tzovio de la muerte. cit. The Holy Inquisition. 33. made with the active co-operation of the Tercio in 1934. On Russian anarchism cf.NOTES 337 *” Indispensable for a full understanding of this interesting problem is Frank Tannenbaum. Cf. when the city of Buenos Aires (three million inhabitants) tried to put in ‘.r be excellent soldiers. George Ticknor (op. I. Naturally. (1816) was a target of jokes (p. piayed highly traitorous Such laxity. Salmdor de Madariaga. Yet the “ duty ” the Catholic is The Itaiians. 876In certain *lean regiments of the old Imperial and Royal . 268. 1944). 6ii Cf. 273-78. 1947).” The New Yorker.“----Cf.’ ? ’ Again. up to and including the rank of captain. and Graf Hermann Keyserling.i’dtor IPai-is’: Editions Montaigne. cf. according to Comrade Hernandez. pp. p. Hugo Frh. In the Eternal City there are (as of 1948) only three traffic lights and about two . %I. 1947). p. x934). P. Jules Legras. On the typical Spanish attitude of “ obeying the King’s orders without 11 carrying them out ” (se obedece p em no cumple). von Weckbecker.Soaialgeschichte der industrirllen Arbeiterwelt (Frankfurt am Xlain: Josef knecht.” l-on Maria Theresia zu w k . ‘. 193). W* Valery. Cf. on the Xragon front the men of the F. fascists ” of the opposite trenches. The religious aspect of the question is almost fully developed. P ‘Hamburger. ca.4rmy. p. 192).I. Varariktc (Paris. p. Thus we know that all the factor& of the large Austrian monarchy taken together had in the early 18th centurv a smaller output than those of the Dutch city of Leyden. 79.. chez Aubier. the commissioned ofhcrrs were not appointed but freely elected. Jesus Hcmandez. 1941).

trans. 1931). van Hiigel. 31 . permitting the restriction of the religious activities of non:Catholics in Catholic countries. Religions of Mankind. p. Joseph Bemhart. IO) and St. Compare with Richard Egenter. 0.-Last but not least. 20%IO. (This passage was omitted in the stage version. 194. G. Cardinals who were laymen were no rarity even in modem times. a8pCf. N. I 926). col. St. Karrer. xx. the devoutly Catholic leader of French Canada and Canadian Premier for many years. rg39). 107. iii. Eduard Zeller. Patr. Das theologische System Zuinglis (Tiibingen: L. Das Wesen des Katholizismus (Diisseldorf: Schwann. has strong illiberal implications. Karrer. statements of Leo XIII and Boniface VIII on this subject are almost diafor instance metrically opposed. 683For instance. 6) have insisted that the pope has no secular ruling power. ii.x’c’II. I. trans. 8B’L Cf. Watkins (New York: Sheed and Ward. Shuster (New York: Longmans. Das Her. the Curia compels even its enemies to pay it respect. 1939 and 1945). 41 I. Watkin in The Catholic Centre (New York: Sheed and Ward. 443. . x946). 163-64. 234-35. 1936). Fues. 229 f. 2 (November. 12. The high. pp. note. Religion (London: Dent. pp. 1949).B. On6 Cf. being bolstered up not only by divine rights. 53. And even seemingly “ clerical ” cultures-as the socio-political pattern of the Province de Quebec-rest on the existence of a politically powerless clergy. Von der Freiheit des Christenmenschen in der katholischen Kirche (Einsiedeln and Cologne: Benziger. The specifically Christian concept of honour has been well defined by Franz Werfel in his JacobozuskJj and the Colonel (New York: Viking. and by E. Already Suarez (De leiibus. 4. pp. 107. 1939). 1941). Campbell. 373).” Hochland.) 88oCf. x853). quoting Juan de Lugo. “ On Modem Intolerance. R. the masses always voted Liberal.” 8a1Cf. x934). Augustine. 1934). “ Rojo y Gualda. XXIV. Addresses on the Philosophy of 7.und das Kommende (Vienna : Amandus Verlag. Von der Freiheit der Kinder Gottes (Freiburg i. Sir Wilfrid Laurier. F. 76.: Herder. But it is not what its adulators would make of it. pp. The Menace of the Herd. x944). p. 239. Karl Adam. letter to Deogratias (Migne. E. The Vatican as World Power. zwei Lebensbilder aus dem alten dsterreich (Berlin: Verlag fiir Kulturpolitik. Mathias Laros in “ Laie und Lehramt in der Kirche. May 9. Die Kultur der Renaissance in Italien (Leipzig: It must also be borne in mind that papal views on the Kriiner. It is rather the purest incarnation of absolutism. pp. trans. MacDonald (London: Sheed and Ward.. pp. Robert Bellarmine (De romano The Po% v. 75. priestly position of the layman has also been emphasized by Fr. p.” Coleccidn de obras completas (Madrid: Hemando. pp. has been severely castigated by E. 1939). w8 Ricardo Leon. simple and majestic alike. 1941. prerogatives of the Holv See over the secular power have profoundly changed. xix. On the violent criticism of the papacy by priests and monks during the Renaissance cf. Essays and. )i). Vaughan. p. Though the hierarchy of French Canada has been traditionally Conservative. always manfully resisted the demands of the bishops. 0. 685The present exaggerated reverence for higher ecclesiastics (including the popes). p. No. 78-79. Francis S. De fide disput. 32-33. 1929). 8. 33. 45 f. August Zechmeister. IO.. especially p. For a balanced Catholic refutation cf. it should not be forgotten that a layman (even a married layman) could theoretically be elected Pope. w Ibid. 155-56.338 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY Franz Joseph.” Commonweal. so prevalent in some countries. p.. p. p. Green. the Rvan-Boland thesis. an ideal coordination of antagonistic forms of government. but by the consciousness of representing God’s kingdom on earth. James N.. Jacob Burckhardt. Gilson in Christianity and Philosophy. Lat. I. and his Retractiones. 301-2. as was the old idea of the monarchy. “ A structure of harmonious proportions. F.

3 : De malo. q. “ Nochmals : Katholizismus Denkfreiheit. a. *’ Nationalism Character. who finally admitted that the] difference between the Catholic and the Iiantian thesis was not as complete as he thought . C’Iv (Ig22--Ig23). Auguste Belanger. I. Karl . Alphonsus of Liguori. ed. CII (1922).” Richter-Friedberg.” Theolo&cal Studies. 465-94. Vatican=. Suarez. Purr.NOTES 339 The repressive laws of modern Sweden against Catholics can be found in a summing up in Time. II (October. Antonin (Mainz. 1912. I-II. 1949). p. 1949).. Lane (London: and National Sheed and Ward. 8. Lat. I 5.. 245-246. 163-64. F. Elysee de la vqtivit& > ” L’expCrience d’Ibn Arabi est-elle surnaturelle ? ” ac hdes carmhlitaines. 134 (quoting Pope Innocent III). 1941). n.vol. Summu. Courtney Murray. No. a. No. 204 7. De Romalzo ponti’ce. III. St. Racine. IV. “ De veritatq. q. .??tudes. II. Dus U’esen des Katholizismrts. Toulouse: Grand Seminaire. (Qillefranche: Hardi. H. RBB the primacy of conscience cf.” Opera omnia (Rome. Lettres chuisies de Christine. Additional material on the question of the salvation of non-Catholics and non-Christians can be found in Louis Cap&an. Quodlibet. but also from the address of AbbC eolbert to Louis XIV after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes-an address written bv Racine himself. No. (especially und modemes Denken. ibid. a. VIII. II. dist.J. “ Epistola 185. p. Thomas and Torquemada). col.29 and iv. 60-61. Max Pribilla. 4. 8. Inge.” Stimmen der Zeit. M. XVI. 17).” The Qzrrrrterl~~ Review. J. pp. CCSXVII. I 5 . Noldin. moral& (Innsbruck: Rauch-Pustet. IV. to whom we owe some of the following data on St. 255 f. see also the significant canon of Pope Urban II in Corpzrs iuris canonici (2nd ed. 9. Freiburg: Herder. Dtfemio jidei. Mass.J. Victor Cathrein. Vol. v. No. p. 26. XXXII. 630-56. p. wine de S&de.” Hochland. LIV. 21~22 (on the oblqation to follow an erroneous conscience). iv. 38: W’.. Leipzig: 1879). X. ” Katholisches Autoritiitswesrn und moderne der Zeit.” Ibid. 549 (July. p. 839 sq. pp. St. On the tolerance of non-Catholics by Catholic governments cf.. 365 . 2 ad 8 . 1909). Tract&us primers de corwientia. 457. Thomas Aquinas. XXXIX (1902).” Stimmen P. p. CFuc7es complites (Paris: Garnier Fr&res. q. p. De principiis theologia Rome : Typogr. ~~Zoralphilosophie (2d ed. Augustine. Biirck. Sententice. de Ligorio (editio nova. CV (x923). R. we are greatly indebted to Pribilla. q. in the spring of 1949. 19.lil. Torquemada (Turrecremata). 216-17.20: I‘ When we saj that conscience is superior to all human judges.4dam. in Migne. 430 f. 5. 267). I 13-38. 4. trans. St. 92. and his “ clna Sancin ” in katholisther Sirht (Diisseldorf: PatmosVerlag.L.d. Roman0 Guardini. illph. 6. 11.17-18. I~I). 13. S. A. also Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn. 1893). 9. “ Katholische Toleranz ?” Wart rrnd Uhhr&%t. . The -. ” Bedeutung und Bildung der Gewissens. 240.” und modemr Denkfreiheit. 406 (q. II. an unorthodox Neo-Kantian. and St. I. 1939). ‘* Autoritlt und Gewissen. Robert Bellarmine.. 1760). The change from the intransiwance of the latter half of the Middle Ages and the earlier days of the Reformation to the more modem (and simultaneously more ancient) concepts can well be shown not only from the attitude of the recentlv converted Queen Christina of Sweden. On pp. 6. Le probltme du salut des infiddles (Paris : Beauchesne. p. 5210 (on the merits of following an erroneous conscience).). pp. No. Cf. I (July 4. we wish to say nothing else than that he whose own conscience is clear should not fear damnation by God “. a. Dist. J. 1948). q.-- . 1932). Die Lehre vom Gezcissen nach dem hl. 2. x934). and the approving review of this article bv J. 1910). 4 (January. rgro). a.-53. 1949).~. 342. S. Conrciencr. The excommunication of the supporters of the suspended Father Leonard Feeney of Cambridge. XXXVI. 96 f. 3 (September. Summa de ecclesia Domrm. ‘* Une loi injuste oblige-t-elle en conscience ? ” in . August Messer. 413-16. 1570). pp. Filocrate. 5 (May. in his paper ” On Religious Freedom.. in Opera moralia S. Some of them are being changed now. 3. 39. (the last three articles contain a debate with Dr. 2. 106. drew general attention in the United States. and I’. ” Katholisches Stimmnz der Zeit.. Mathias Laros.

item “ Couple in Boston Heresy Case Say Church Refuses to Wed Them. p. 689Laski. as can be seen from Mardi--and a Voyage Thither (Boston: hlaynard and Co. Hermann Iieyserling. e the law over the fa t. 6a3The extreme liberalism of certain sectors of American Protestantism is well represented by Professor Henry N.” No. Cf. II. October r3. pp. Appleton. E. fond of logic. " The cold penetrating spirit of a Royer-Collard was satisfied with this formula: ‘ I scorn a fact. 17984. weakened and reduced by British and American theologians: cf. p. J. 52. II. Cf. Scene. Lally. 881On the character of mvths cf. ’ I even hate the sound of the words which express them. 7 (Paragraph 5). ~947. British representatives adapt their attitudes to the immediate possibilities which a remarkable realism allows them to discern. 8. Parliamentary Government in England. 23-30. p. was rigorously enforced.).340 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY heresy this circle was accused of was precisely the teaching that the nonCatholic cannot be saved. rgr. over the particular. H. I&am in an article entitled “ Reply to a Liberal.-Compare also with Ilya Ehrenburg. Our Jungle Diplomacy (Chapel Hill: Unixrersity of North Carolina Press. Das Sfiefitrunr Cf. Jew&h by his background. his Znstitutiones. The excommunication. III. Essai d’une ps~zhologie politiquc du people anglais au XXe siecle (Paris: Armand Colin. 27. also the Paris Temps. every place and circumstance. Louis Rougier.” It would lead us too far to discuss here the inner connection \ between pragmatism and anti-rationalism. p. the theory over the personal experience. pp. 1944). Wieman of the Divinity School of the University of Chicago. Clark and Co.’ The inflamed genius of a Burke does not hide from us his disgust with abstractions . La mystique d8mocratique (Paris: Flammarion. Catholic “ rationalism ” is to many a Protestant a hidden plant. vet WV. 1932). according to Rudolf Otto. liTed in a Greek Orthodox environment which had many aspects in common with Judaic orthodoxy. George Morrell is of the opinion that Continental Protestant theologians produce original and extremist views which are. W. differences not only of a ‘I denominational. Sands and J. 1930). ri6-j.” The Ives York Herald Tribune. IT-IS. The strength of political myths in his country was well known to Herman hIelville. I. M.. cf. n. He con ssed: “ The feeling of the pre-eminence of the general 4. 1910: ” In Europas. 3 (Spring. Lecky admitted that the Jesuits counted among the members of their society some of the most “ rationalistic intellects ” in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. had been smuggled into Protestantism by Schleiermacher. his 1s There a God? (Chicago: Willett. later on. This liberalism is not unconnected with a certain neoProtestant subjectivism which. 1932). practically expressed m the See the news refusal to administer the Sacraments. \ which are only seemingly mutually exclusive. also Emile Boutmy. 1949). Thus thev often contradict themselves. February 2.). . originated m me at an early df. Yet there is also an older subjectivism which we find in Calvin’s writings. 1884). and our French spirit. I IO. Yet there are differences between the various Protestant groups. his History of the Rise and Injlupuenc~ of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe (New York: D. ed. i.d. 1901). 600On British anti-intellectualism cf. Miller and Shires (New York: Riorehouse Goreham.’ ” Trotski.. Ispanij*a (Moscow: Federatsija. 1929). he savs.” m2c iVezc Iyork Tinzes Magazine. Brown. his paper in Christinnity and the Contemporary. 13. p. Cf. seeks in vain the worked-out system which explains their variable undertakings. The prevalence of m?hs in the United States was noted by Sartre: cf. pp.. Dns Heilige (Breslau.. L.” but also of a geographic nature.) e and was strengthened with the years. F. ‘*:: Cf. 1949.“--Mova Zhbn’ (Berlin: Granit. This thesis has been expounded by Raymond From the Housetops. June I. 149-50. ‘* Chief Prophet of the Existentialists. moderated. IO.

-In&can So&t?. inter-famoration Yet to what extent misunderstandings and even mm 0 m. 17. Nicholas Berdyaev. predestination and “ the religion of drmocracv. trans. be found only in Anglo-Saxo&. x944). but still believes that countries like Britain. Page 359 of the Somervell condensation of A. Constantine Leo~zf>~. anti-slavery.” 685Although the Catholics in the dispersion (i.. but not in Boston (at least not on anything like the same scale). Cnmparicr de dote meses en Havana y Las ptovincias vascongadas con el General Zumaiaccirregui. Note 248. ISI-&. . p. 161.86. 78. This effort cannot be demanded from everybody.) Still. After all. R. _ . 1935). p. II. also R. The harder struggle of Protestant nations against illiteracy is natural if we keep in mind that a good average education for the masses without educational extremes (&es and illiterates) is a healthy condition for a democracv. H. even Prussia. 213.” Cf. scious of this alternative.” Leo XIII’s condemnation of “ Americanism. x939). Hayes. Protestantism in its surest and clearest A public Corpus mod&n form can. J. 123: A. (New Haven: Tale University Press. 1940).Vationalism (sew York: Macmillan. w Sir Norman Angel1 in UVz~ Freedom Afatten (London. Carlton J. Cf. with its YO per cent. w Cf. Reavey (London: Bles. F. Ephraim Douglas Adams. their religious exclusiveness is stall consldered to be fundamentally “ alien ” and ” unIn the United States the issue has been highlighted by Pope democratic. ‘W Cf. permanent. and thus the demand for rationality is in itself “ undemocratic “-no less so than intellectual qualifications for the franchise.e. J. and on a large scale : it is much stupidity... In Protestant bibliolatry we have an old psychological invitation to a mod&m of learning: yet the “ Three R’s ” are also indispensable to a commercial or business civilization. 7” played an important rhle in this condemnation can be gleaned from -4bbC Felix ” (Paris : Klein. Christi procession can well be imagined in Berlin. that we have to reach the painful decision whether we prefer freedom. The koursc of American Democratic Thought (New York: Ronalds Press. Paul Lagarde was conscious of this antithesis between democracy and cultivation. 44 ff. quoted by Robert Graves and . pp. 1926). even at the price of liberty. in the demo-Protestant orbit) are frequentI:. there is little doubt that the masses of the solidlv Catholic nations have decided 1 I in favour of the first alternative. Power Ideals in . Oyarzun (San Sebaatiaxr: Editorial Espariola. 416. 3.willing to sacrifice before the secular gods. pp. with its 75 per cent. 1948). of Catholics. Netherlands have 39 per cent. Works. p. Cnuada Today and Tomorrou~ (London: Stanley Paul. trans. 6*4 It must be admitted that rationality demands a greater intellectual effort than irrationality. p. p. Toynbee’s Study of Histoq could hardly have been written by an American non-Catholic. 397 (” Letters on the French Coup d’Etat. or whether we stand for order. The Catholic roots of Protestantism have in Europe a historical and architectural “ visibilitv ” which they lack in the United States..4lan Hedge in The Reader over Your Shoulder (New York: Macmillan. H. 1947). Basil Fuller. the Nether(The lands and Switzerland have succeeded in reaching a happy compromise. in his is fullv conCivitas Hunratra (Erlenbach : Eugen Rentach. Walter Bagehot. Hennigsen.NOTES 341 1943). A Study ofHisfor~. ed. r”” Yet it must be admitted that we are all f-aced by an alternative.. Souvenirs. Switzerland 42 per cent of Catholics. 2. tidiness and discipline s~:~~:s~f~ costs. ESSUJY on . Somervell. According to this author these ideals are : nationalism.” So.” that is. probably. p. Holstein and Hamburg belonged to the Holv Roman Empire until 1806. ease and a certain efIicienc\. “ Cne heresie fantome : L’AmCricanisme Plon. 1940). 66 f. 6ys Cf. Toynbee.-On the mixture of anarchism and authoritarianism in Spain in the early nineteenth century see C. Gabriel. I\-. ves. G. 3) : ” I fear you will laugh when I tell you what I conceive to be about the most essential mental quality for a free people whose liberty is to be progressive. Wilhelm Rdpke. 1940). 1913). p.

Numero dedicate al razzismo (March.) Of priceless value is Madame d’Aulnoy. ‘lo Cf. Inge. as quoted by Sham Leslie. 52-60. 1933): “ What has been and is the Spanish genius ? Precisely this: it is anti-racist. ‘O” Luigi Rusticucci. r933). Catherine Bowen. -4 Free Artist: the Story of . in his Protestant&n (London: Ernest Berm. 169-70. For what may be called the revolutionary party there has developed through insensible grades of rationalism out of the old.“-Letter to Henry P. 161-62. 76. At Rubinstein’s first great public concert. E. “ Manning. Rus’. pp. R. to him. VII. cit. ‘s8 Cf. . The accounts of her trip in 1679 are amusing as well as frightening and do not fail to enrich the reader interested in the psychology of nations. The Fourth Republic. Tragediu e supplizio di Sarco e Vanzetti (Naples: G. Lettre aux Anglais (Rio de Janeiro: Atlantica Editora. pp. religious and social. 241-42.. wrote: “ Catholicism dislikes the middle class. Dimitri Myerezhkovski’s The Blossom of the Bourgeoisie. pp.. “ An Anatomy of Racial Intolerance. This little volume also contains extracts from the Tevere. .” American Catholic Sociological Rwtew. -No. which ends with this rather accurate political analysis : “ But. pp. 1919. 1926). America and Democracy. would yet be kept from cutting each other’s throats by the intermediate links. Cambridge. trans. Prince Evgeny Trubctzkoy. r 3). 1927). pp. the Corriere della Sera and the Vatican’s Osservatore Romano.. x931). orthodox The process has been a continuous modificaconceptions. pp.4nton Rubinstein and his Brother (New York: Random House. 1931). I.” The D&in Review. Yet. 176-85. 28-31. ‘03 Cf. 24-32.. Compare this with the scathing analysis of the French character by William James. Bowditch. Rocco. 1937). which in religion is democratic and independent . Enquiries into Religion pp. For Spain the Jewish problem never . tion of positive belief. ‘Os Cf. p. 1928). R. Miguel de Unamuno’s comparison between the monk and the Anarchist in El sentiminento trdgico de la vida. in The Letters of William~ames. April 8. Emperor Nicholas I rushed out onto the stage Cf. Richard Benz. The ‘OSCf. 187-91.M. IZ Proshlago (Vienna : and embraced the artist. originally published in 1836. even if they had no respect for each other and no desire for mutual accommodation (which I think at the bottom they have).d. ‘Or Cf. especially pp. 1920). 141-42. p. G&t und Reich urn die Bestimmung des Deutschen (Jena: Diederichs. von Kuehnelt-Leddihn. ‘Op Cf.4). 210-12. 1939).” Compare with Christopher Dawson. Ernest0 Ximenez Caballero’s article in Anti-Europa.342 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY (The English text. 202-4). Protestantism would seem to have a good deal to do with the fundamental cohesiveness of society in the countries of German blood. I. ‘si Cf. cit. 194. Georges Bernanos. on the other hand. also Cardinal Manning’s journal. pp. pp. Waldemar Gurian.). French democrat though he is. Der Bolschewismus-EinfiihTItng in Geschichte und Lehre (Freiburg: Herder. Hoffet is convmced that the Germans will never qualify for a democratic regime (op. ed. This book gives a good picture of the social status of the baptized Jew in Imperial Russia. 1942). French (New York : Scribner. Dean u’. n. SI aver? and Freedom. To0Cf. July-August-September. to a certain extent with Frederic Hoffet’s opinion that Catholicism is by no means a religion for the lower social layers. the characteristic little storv referred to by Major Geoffrey McNeillMoss in The Epic of the Alcaxzr (London: Rich and Cowan. . 1871. I. ‘ii Cf. 169-70). but rather one for the spiritual and social e7ites (L’impbialisme protestant. and the extremes. Voyage d’Espugne (Paris: Klincksieck. is unfortunately unavailable to me. p. is merely a constitutional interlude (op. pp. by his son Henry James (Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press. Nicholas Berdyaev. he has no illusions about the future of French democracy either. All this tallies and Culture (New York: Sheed and Ward.

Montanelli. p. rr3 Cf. a. No. a problem of r d e. was killed in action. yet-viewed from the vantage point of Cahinistic predestination-not without good reason. 167.” Cf. upon the totality of individuals.d. 1922). Cf.“) Cf. . 22-41. 1836. Lewis.. II. 193-94. 4 (October. 849 sq.” ed. March I I. It is precisely the Catholic’s (subconscious) notion of the “ hidden soul.” No. 35 : ” The idea of equality so dear to the Latin races has no place in Calvinism. Italics ours. p. The Classics of International Law. 20. According to this author the Catholics are ” communitarian ” (and thus “ inclusive “) whereas the Protestants. Ernest Nys (Washington. for instance. but rather a problem of faith. 1934). Letters and Journals. whose defeat gave birth to a series of dictatorships. ‘I1 “ European Protestantism tomorrow. also St.” lost his throne because he liberated the slaves. XXXII. 117. also E. “ Individualism should be “ Social Philosophy. the “ Lincoln of Brazil. Masarvk. a special PCguy number (IV. 75. ” On the Indians and the Laws of War Made bv the Spaniards on the Barbarians. “ La sua ‘ insomnia ’ si chiama Gottwald. The son of Thomas G. Cf. 1944. To what extent Catholic individualism (” personalism “) can go can be seen from the stand taken bv Franc&us de Vitoria. 30. n. I 948. F. was a captain in an Imperial and Royal Hussar regiment while his father conspired 1 in Britain and America against his sovereign. it is most important to re-evaluate the “ reactionary spirit ” of the Central Europe monarchies. For it is through his participation in the community that the individual in the Catholic view gains recognition as a person. regardless whether these noble endeavours were backed up .” An interesting optical delusion. R. Scott &own. in : Genito. p. I-II.” is obviously a misprint: it chapter. pp. Popular Government: Four Essays (London: John %lurray. also Donald Pierson.” This explanation is undoubtedly a tour de force. iiF We think here primarily of the tragedy of Maximilian of Mexico. I. also Sir Henry S. The younger Masaryk-who later committed suicide or was murdered--once confessed to Indro Montanelli that the liberal and magnanimous attitude of the Habsburg monarchy could never be seriously questioned. during the winter of 1914-15. Depotestate ecclesire. VIII. ‘I6 Cf. as a French officer. 42-43) with the picture of the French poet and thinker on the cover. Relecciones de1 Maestro Frau Francisco de Victoria (Madrid. Philosophy and Civilization in the Middle Ages (Princeton : Princeton University Press. indeed. nor will be. fiegroes in Bmzil: a Study of Race Contact at Bahia (Chicago : University of Chicago Press. Summa. January 19. the Berlin periodical Die Aktion pubhshed. Inge. who insisted that a single person could wage a war (against a whole state.). nothing of that sort could ever have happened in either Britain or the United States. No. The efforts of the United States to create “ more democracy ” among her Southern neighbours were necessarily doomed to failure. ed. Mutatis mutam&. (The title of this and Social Industry. 1946).” The Christian Centq.. ?I5 Entry of July 6. p. ‘I? Cf. if necessary). “ Organic Tendencies in American Political Science Review. 1885). is not. a liberal and a Mason. which account for his underdeveloped or lacking racialism. Medieval Political Thought. The Catholic conceptions tend to lay emphasis upon the community.NOTES J 343 was. pp. Emperor Pedro II. Cf. 1942). are self-conscious : ” Distinguishing characteristics are identified with a group [and] automatically increase groupconsciousness. 21. And. II. Franciscus de Vitoria. Thomas Aquinas. 4 ad 3. hlaurice de Wulf. I.3 . ii. but neither to democracy nor to liberty. de Vitoria. q. p. J. hlaine. Dean W. Protestantism. Cf. 5 (Oct. p. Life. And when P&guy. 1938).” Review of PoZitics.” I1 nuovo Corriere della Sera. Quoted by Jacques Maritain in “ The Person and the Common Good. as individualists.” and his individualistic refusal to place human beings in neatly divided pigeonholes.

i”2 Extraordinary efforts have been made to prove that the political tradition of the United States has definite affinities with Thomism and even with the late Jesuit scholastics.4flairs. 92-93. dated Paris. 107. Efforts were also made by the United States to write into the Austrian treaty a stipulation forbidding a monarchic restoration. The reason probably lies in the nor in Quebec nor south of the Rio Grande. Cater. The volume is dedicated CIU.” p. “ The United States will be here two hundred years.” -See Burton 1. Tllo~rght. 1946). This attitude is in the best democratic. pp. Page and co. involved intellectualist character of the arguments used by this school. N.R. pp. Note 717.” 7”1 America’s lack of such an “ end ” has been stressed by L&on Ferrer0 in his A4m&ique. The question remains why that seed has not thrived on the other side of the Ocean. Salvador de Madariaga. A brilliant analysis of Russian anarchism resulting dialectically in tyranny has been written by Edward Crankshaw. ‘ar There has been in Austria and Germany an active suppression of monarchist movements-not only by the Russians but also by the British and the Americans. this action. recorded by Page himself. Ross J. Henry Adams and His Friends. All this is vividly illustrated by a conversation between Ambassador W. ‘I8 Charles de Gaulle.” International What this author has to . miroir grossissant de I’Europe (Paris: Rieder. These arguments are rationalizations remote from the living reality of Catholic cultural patterns. what then ? ” [Page] “ Make ‘em vote and live by their decisions. Page and Sir Edward Grey in 1913... XI. pp.344 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY 4 by machine guns. 72oCf. x947). 553 : “ -4 lunatic Muscovite bent on wrecking the world. Aug. has often been exaggerated by patriotic Catholic authors. ry39). [Page] “ Yes. and it can continue to shoot men for that little space till they learn to vote and to rule themselves.~himself. Cf. Espaiia: e. S. x938).” ‘I9 Cf. Hendrick. the main thesis is not without its merits.S. ‘13 The Irish political experiment is yet too young to be conclusive. 4 (October. Lodge. 501-10. pp. Here we get a full picture of Wilsonian Pan-democratism in action against Mexico : [Grey] “ Suppose you have to intervene. ZI : “ If vou could bury a Russian desire under a fortress it would blow it up “: anb Henry Adams in H. XXII. I.S. ” L’gme espaqnole. The Life atfd Letter. can go far ” (Letter to Anna C. “ The Spanish Question in \Vorld Politics. SW la Russie. p. There are very strong Protestant overtones in Irish culture. Compare Joseph de Maistre.” [Grey] “ But suppose they will not so live ? ” [Page] ” We’ll go in again and make ‘em vote again. it was the hair-shirt of this undisciplined people. H.” [Grey] “ And keep this up two hundred years I ” asked he. 14. 10. We cannot fully agree with the late son of Guglielmo Ferrer0 in this analysis. Y. No. 1942).) . 18b. No. Lefil de l’t!pie (Paris : Editions Berger-Levrault. anti-liberal tradition. 1932). (Cf. say about the Russian mentality is applicable to the whole Catholic and Qmtre chapitres Greek Orthodox world.More’rhal P&in.. “ Russia in Europe : the Conflict of Values. Se&n O’Faoliin. Pane (Garden City.” said I. D. naturally. had the warm support of the U. See also I?lie Faure.: Dbubledap. King of the Z& Beggars: the Life of Daniel O’Connell (New York. as well a. Although this affinit?. Allied author&es have arrested Austrian legitimists who previously had been in Nazi concentration camps. p. XXII. Hoffman. 1904). p. 195: “ The Inquisition appears to have been a necessary evil. 1925).7 of M’nlter H. 26-z. 84 (March. 14. and monarchical undertones which should not be overlooked.unyo de historia cotrtemporanea (Buenos Aires: Editorial Sudamericana. / i there is very definitely such a thing as American messianism.

1943).” Jose Primo de Rivera. Gorchius. has enthusiasticallv praised the democratic achievements oY’-F%&--rationahsts. a convert with a Calvinist back round. See also p. 38.” This is not a condemnation of parliamentarism. de Madariaga) are either printed in Spain or imported from abroad.. For these and many other reasons we should not be surprised at seeing Catholics who look longingly ” beyond the walls. you. Cf. Siidamcrikanische Meditationen. neither in men nor in nations.%cri scrcerdotii defensio (Culogne. their life a torture. one is painfully reminded of Stanley Baldwin (Lord Baldwin of Bewdleyj.“--Chri~ficrlrit?.“-Count Hermann Iieyserling. Bartolomt ‘se A hrase used bv peasants in the early sixteenth centun-. are papers . “i Cf. Elliot The books Roosevelt. -4uthors like Thomas Mann. . 36X. Hus. his speech in the Cartes on December 19. CXC. Fred Gladstone Bratton. Dr. ‘sy Cf. their elections battles . de las &s.Catlmpprar not only a form of mediieval Protestantism but a harbinger of twentiethcentury liberalism. of thr Librrul&rit (Kew S-ork: to have been Scribner. i28 For this purpose a real understanding of the Continent is an absolute necessity. ‘934. p. Luther.“-Cf.” Such extreme statements are true only if we see in the Shakers typical Protestants or in Marshal Stalin a twentieth-century liberal. their liberty anarchy. in his Uhrcts comple~ru (Barcelona : Ediciones Fc. 401. on who confessed after his resignation: packing up mv traps and leaving Downing Street : NOW. Richard Scholz. LXV.? ‘*a Cf. NOTES TO C‘HAPTER SIX ) i q 2 . but the formulation ‘. American Puritains and . atheistic Russian Communists. manifested ’ publicly ’ as it is called. 8~. 10 integridad 3’ ia d&&dad de1 hombre. would remain very . T/W Le.” . -anson (New York : Scribner. ‘a6 Bitter is the complaint of Simon Bolivar about the (South) i\mericans: Their treaties “ There is no faith in America. p. During the winter 1949-50 T. No. 43. 5 sq. p.I need never speak to <-another foreigner again. 1876j. II. Doris C. i%o. Historia ha las Indias Book III.” energetically protested against the insinuation that his supporters wanted to deify the state. p. 5 (January. and human law ” seems to permit an interpretation which implies condemnation of the plebiscitarian change of an established authority.4t the height of the German victories this ” fascist ” rejected the whole concept of democratic totalitarianism and insisted on the maintenance of a form of government serving “ la libertad. 394. constitutes a supreme law independent of all divine and human law. Bruce Bliven have no difficulties in getting published. chief founder of the “ Falange.. x907). Plivier’s Stalingrad is one of the best-sellers. “ Talking at Random. p..NOTES 345 ‘y6 Even under the present military dictatorship in Spain the fundamental Catholic respect for the principles of liberalism cannot be entirely suppressed or obscured. their constitutions are books . Johann RofIens. trans. &umentos inhditos pora la historia de I. in Colecrio‘n dt. Cf.~acr. ‘si The encyclical Quanta Cura of Pius IX (1864) anathematizes the thesis that ” the will of the people. Wessel. And to what extent libertarian concepts can be found even in the ideology of the ” Falanpe ” is shown by an the article by one of the co-founders of that organization-Garcia Valdecasas in Rex&a de estudios politicos. 9. 7-e eleventh -centur>.” Jacques Maritain. whether by a vote or in any other way. r 525) : ” Take away Vl-iclif. I (Nov. and l)emocrar~.-entitled ” Los Estados totalitarios y rl Estado espaiiol.” The Tablet. 1947). p. Douglas Woodruff. The freedom of speech is complete and the censorship over books is almost non-existent. “ That was the first thing I said. “ Marsiiius von Padua und die Idee der Demokratie. 5613 (December 20. Such an understanding has to rest on a certain affection and In this connection sympathy--so frequently lacking among Anglo-Saxons.“Zktscilrifrf‘iir Politik. 1942). 1944). of emigres (like those of Antonio Machado or S. II. 193~).Jpaficr (Madrid: Miguel Ginesta.

“ Literzbni Einnost M. (“ 2 Einnosti n8meck$ch husit6 “). M. ed. M. which is of bronze. in Dr. op cit. and endeavouring in vain to blow it to a flame. 164. 1825). cf. op. is a special service in honor of John Huss. De gestis et variis accidentibus regni Boemiae. Bruckmann.. accused Faulfisch of having imported Wycliffe’s books. 712 Cf. 190. Luther bearing a Ticknor also refers to a sixteenth-century book mentioning 17 blazing torch. III. as if he were one of the saints of 3 the Church. No.. Laurentius de Brezina identifies-curiously enough-the Beghards with the Adamites. p. for instance. on St. 60-80. John’s day.346 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY lean and emaciated. 51o).. p. ‘3’i A “ Third Empire ” is mentioned in the Bible (Dan. Cf. cap. “ Geschichte der B&mischen Pikarden und Adamiten” . Metzler. also ix. Magister Laurent& de Brezina (Brezowa ?).. cit.. also Frantilek Palack+.437f. Dr. Prague: TempskJ-. DJjiny ncirodu feskiho w Cechach a w Morawe (3rd ed. Wyclif und Hus. . cit. lot. Fiihrer. 390. 96 f. 9. F. from a family which is called ’ putrid fish.) ‘3n Cf. and below. trans. i14 Ibid. in which. which. he was considered in the sixteenth century. X414-22. also cap. cap. ‘*s Cf. 389. IO. Fontes rerum -4ustriacarum (Vienna. 1934). 1894). No. op. Barto. 1931). It is followed bv a “ Fourth Empire. 1909). offended with the books of John Wycliffe. 1856). p. iii.. in Kaiserl. xlix: “ Of whom a certain man of noble birth. 73s Cf. M. Loserth. Huss. Husitstvi a cizina (Prague: kin. B. splendidly illustrated. p. Die Sehnsucht nach dem D&ten Reich in deutscher Sage und Dichtung (Stuttgart: J. 233 f. ‘p1 Barto. Letters and 3ourmZs. tadii: Sustermann.” Cf.” ‘3J On Peter Payne cf. pp. Barto. 19. Johann Loserth. 1699). Jana Rokycana. 148-49. Historische Kommission. 1520). January.4cts of the Royal Bohemian Acad. xxxv. 1934). I. Wilhelm M.) forth that deep religious mcnrement in Bohemia. James Baker. (Citing also Dobrowsk?. 71. cit. (Not satisfactory. 13-14.(x880). 20.” Sbirka pramenir k pox&i iitercirniho Sivota L’eskoslovenske’ho. Sendschreiben und Bedenken. p. 71-72. 189 (Luther to Spalatin. Schwiirmer und Rebellett (Munich: F. no. Luther’s letter to Spalatin. lighting a candle at the spark. z21--23. of Sciences. Wickliffe striking fire with a steel and flint. Evans (London: This Austrian author leaves the question 3< Hodder and Stoughton. 1836 (Life. Petra Payna. Ioannes Cochlaeus Historiae Hussitarum libri duodecim (Maim. M. p..” Cf. pp. ‘53 Cf. M. Theodor Brieger. open.. L. F. Luther und Luthertum in der ersten Entwicklung (Maim: Kirchheim & Co. with the music belonging to it. I. II.” I ( divusJohannes Huss. 1549). 1768. Zwei bisher unbekannte Entwiirfe des Wormser Ediktsgegen Luther (Leipzig. quoting also Ludwig van Sagan’s Tractatus de longevo schismate. LIT. In the margin are three well-finished miniatures-the upper one.’ studying literature at the city of I Oxford in England. 66. 1877).. viii.” ‘N On the Beghards (Picards) cf. Johann Loserth.. Rev. p. Jana Piybrama. also Julius Petersen. 77: “ It was the works of Wiclif which first called (Loserth’s italics. Rent Fiilap-Miller. the Life and Work of Peter Payne the Wiclifite (London : The Religious Tract Society. also George Ticknor’s diary for June 15. Jan. Reimer.” Cusopis Musea KrdZovrtvi eeskiho. de Wette (Berlin: G. p. the middle one. A Forgotten Great Englishman. Heinrich Denifle and Albert Maria Weiss. III (1928). “ Jak soudil Luther o Husovi. 1894). J. Akademie der Wissenschaften. 1910). ‘N Cf. ‘30 Cf. 1520. But Aeneas Sylvius (Pope Pius II) in his Historia Bohemica (Helmesxxvii. describing the Collegium Clementinum in Prague : “ I was shown too a curious book for the service of the church. FrantiBek Palack?. Martin Luthers Briefe. in fact. 2 : 3y). no. Jaroslav Gall.

jiir protrstontische Tkeologie urzd Kirche.” This anti-Hussite statement is rare in its unfriendliness towards Hussite ideas. 431: ” Not merely some.Dr. Grisar. as some Bohemians do. Luther. No. 196-97. II. 1853). 1~301. 1869). 882 (104). 1941). Luther was perusing Hus’ De ecclesin in February. Der junge Luther (2nd ed. 7s* M. Werke (Weimar. W&mar edition (Weimar. Erlangen edition. p. 591.. E. 7j2 Ibid.. Erlangen edition No. 3522.” (Erlangen. ‘46 Quoted b>. written in 1524. Martin Luther. 761Ibid. Leipzig: Koehler und belang. Luther. 41y-20. Stirk. ry~o). ‘S Cf Heal-Encvkloptidie . x888). Kerke.) ‘51 Briefuerhsel Ma& L&hers (N:eimar. 40 (Epist. 1X47). pp. ErgPnzungsheft zu Euphorion (Leipzig. 316.” Weimar edition (Weimar.. 17). foresaw the coming of eagles and other birds with sharp sight-but not of an indigestible swan. p. “’ “ Operations in Psalmos. 1892). ” Grund und Ursach aller Artickel D. Compare with ” Tischreden. Carl Schmidt. an exclamation of Hieronvmus. p.ft fiir historische Theologie. kl. iZ’ Cf. Spirit (London : Faber and Faber. D.366-Y ‘w Cf.25657. Part 3. ed. Luther. James Gairdner..” No. Erlangen *land edition (London: - York: Macmillan. XLI. Siimmtliche Werkc. 71-72. ‘48 Cf his Tischreden. “ iiber die Sekten zu Strassburg im Mittelalter. 1840). 387.” op. 1854).. Werke.263-64.NOTES 347 “I. 337. 246. III. 143. He had already seen some of Hus’ writings in his monastery library. Lttflreu. 455 : ” I will make of Johann Huss no saint nor yet a mawr. F. Erlangen edition (Erlangen. Herzog and Besser (Stuttgart 8r Hamburg. Ear a well%ilanced \-iew on Prussia cf. (Erlangen. Hus. Cf. “ Ton der neuen Eckischen Bullen und Liigen ” (1520). Lamond (London: Kegan Paul. I. p. Bles. I. XXX.treated. Ivo. ‘* Tischreden. Lollardy and the Reformation in Macmillan. 106. Copied from a text by Wolff KSpphel. S. LI). 347. VII. and some artificial addenda-can be gleaned from Documenta magi& Iohannis Hus. 19391. Heinrich Boehmer. szo durch Komische Bulle unrechtlich vordampt svn ” (I ~zI). LVIII. VI. Waldensians and Papists misuse the Gospel. PP. Werke (Weimar. “ Tischreden. 1914). VI. Palack< (Prague. LVIII. Huss and His Followers (London: G. (Erlangen. 4jI-j2. Luther. 1897). is3 Ibid. 1345 (104).” Werke (Weimar. S. “ Neu Fischart-Studien.PP. trans. Cf Jan Herben. 306-7. 42. j16: “ Hussites.J. V. The Prussian . but all the articles of Johann Huss condemned at Constance are quite consistent with Christian teaching “. writing from his jail in Constance. 1908). 1828).. 155. Karl LleAenstein Political Recorzstruction (ru’ew 1946). 422.” pp. I. 547M. l-1. 881 . 1520. Werke. XV. cit.” Zcitschr. 514. and Adolf Hauffen’s paper in 7. Luther. 750nCf. It is interesting to compare the phrase “ Sanct Iohannes Huss ” in this passage with the remark contained in sate 750 above. though I realize that he was unjustI>. 1926). Werke. According to Iiartmann Grisar. 111. ‘js M. Compare also lvith Luther’s sermon ” -4m Tage des heiligen Warleichnams Christi. but he had not been Impressed by them and had put them aside. 375. 164-65. 191j). It’erke. II (Leipzig.” (This pamphlet also contains a condemnation of the views of the Pighartten on the Eucharist. ed. 748Cf. 153x). The actual basis of this legend--consisting of a letter of Hus. H. M. RP?e-36. 1856). Compare also his ” Glosse auf das vermeintliche Kaiserliche Edikt ” (ca. 750Cf.

---I I ! ‘(I Cf. 46-47 (Aug.411emagne. whether in things pertaining to salvation or damnation. as so many of our fellow-Catholics rashly assume. x942). 296 : Peter F. E. simplv a malicious neurotic. 49-51 . :‘” Cf. Reinhold Piiebuhr: Christianity and Power Politics (New York: Scribner. pp. i71 Cf. 19241. pp. pp. 1942).-Sept. 1943. Karl . pp. LIV. pp. 133. 1941). Yet the present author would like to make it known that he does not share the Denifle-Hartmann thesis on Luther. pp. and Paul J. 194. PP. 1950). . 148-59. No. Smith. O.. V. No. Friedrich Gogarten. 70. April 30. 1941). 1946). 31. “s He wrote: ” Besides. The question title page. 19x3).348 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY . The Fear of Freedom (London : Kegan Paul. but believes that the Reformer hadLuther as a French Jesuit admitted--une exp&ience religieuse authentique. “ Nationalism Review. Christ versus Hitler x937). Johannes Hessen. 50.. Last Train from Berlin (P\iew York : Knopf. (London: Hutchinson. also Yves Conpar. and National Character. Entlawte Geschichte (Amsterdam: Querido. of Goebbels’ Catholic background. Journal d’un pre^tre ouvrier tn Allemagne (Paris : Editions du Seuil. Note 663.” The Commonweal. William M. The Protestant character of National Socialism has also been freely acknowledged by Pastor Georg Casalis in his article “ L%glise &angt%que en . pp. Pierre J.u See the Philadelphia Record. Johann Neuh%usler. 549 (July. rgoz). Trubner.” 7Bi Cf. x8 Manv of the salient pastoral letters of the German bishops were published in The (L&don) Tablet (e. either to God’s will or Satan’s. Huss. x68-69 . the movement was Protestant in character. 1946. Franz Neumann. Die Bedeutung des Protestantismus fiir die Entstehung der modernen Welt (Munich and Berlin: Oldenbourg. Kreuz und Hakenkreuz (Munich: Kiisel. ham Personlighed og Forudsaettningeme for ham reformntorisk Vaerk: en ps>‘kiatrisk-historisk Studie (Copenhagen : Westermanns Fsrlag. ed. in Luther: vom unfreien Wilien (Berlin: Kaiser. 1944. 21 (March. rg@). Brace. Behemoth (New York: Oxford University Press. and above all. editor and commentator. Compare also with Ambassador Dodd’s Diary. in respect to God. p. II. McGovern. 1940.. -4 Combine of Aggression: Masses. May 27. 1945). 1 \ . Luther in katholischer Sicht (Bonn. \\ erner Hegemann. CCLXXVII. etc. 1942). Elite and Dictatorship. 369. XVIII. Howard K. 336-37. 265-66. but is a subject and a slave. was not. 389: “ In spite of Hitler’s.P. 638. p. 18 (Aug. he [man] does not have free will. x943). Nos.). I‘ ’I ’o Move Toward Christian Unity. Wiener. 277 and 280. pp. pp. pp. Karl Otten. p. 3-6. September 28. Erich Fromm. To the contrary cf. p.). ‘. Dodd (New York: Harcourt. 1941). and -?lartin Luther: Hi utlook. 85 sq. Rlifflin. . Heil and Farewell (London: Herbert Jenkins. “’ Cf. 64-65. 1946). From Luther to Hitler (Boston: Houghton. 195x). 782Cf. 30-35 . Eughne Choisy. 423. W. R. 67-68.4dam.” The Quarterly Dean W. Trench. L’itat chritien calviniste ci Gem&e au temps de Thc!odore de Z%ze (Geneva: Eggimann.. rgrr). and M. ‘85 See Barth’s letter in &vangile et liberti. also Henri Perrin. 568.g. German with Tears (London : Cresset Press. IO. p. For a balanced and more constructive Catholic analysis of Luther cf. 1942) . P. February. Inge. Fairlv comprehensive is Mgr. 1940).” Temps Modernes. 1908).” -Werke (Weimar. Arvid Fredborg in the London DaiZ-v Eapress. Ernst Troeltsch. p. p. 766Wilhelm K&t. 32 and 75. “ Luther vu par les Catholiques ” in T-ers l’l:nith Chr&ienne. 4.

Erlangen edition. x921). Werkc. 1899). Erlangen edition. ‘*’ “ Tischreden. There are r*’ Werke. and J. 1525). LIII. XXXIII. t’* Cf. Zetter. 1932). *’ Luther’s Political ConceEt&ns. p.” Weerke. 1932). ‘ai Werke. W&mar edition (Weimar. Erlangen edition. n.) “a Weerke. --Seton-Watson (Lon~?Longmas. (Written in 1525. 195-97. Father and Son (London: Heinemann. Weimar edition. 449. F. pp. ‘91 “ V-on weltlicher Oberkeit. 89-90. for instance. T. This is also the reason why we have no “ authoritative ” or ” definitive ” work There is even no Iutheran on the political theory of the Reformers. Erlangen edition. Werke. ‘a* Cf. . “4 Cf. 228. Compare with Bruno Xlalitz. 258-59. 217. 162. Weimar edition (Weimar. 2341. van Treitschke. 238. Les soiriecs de Saint-Pe’tersbourg (Paris : Garnier. VI. 285 (-No. M.. “6 Cf.” Werke (Weimar. ed. Luther. Briefwecksel. II. S. ‘*a Werke. Erlangen edition. 1912). ‘*s Letter to Johann Ruhel (March 30. ‘*’ Warke. No. Greenslide. n. J. Manz. x938). I. “’ Nor did Tvndale produce a coherent political philosophy.NOTES 349 For a good description of the puritanical spirit in Protestant&m see Edmund Gosse. XVIII. pp. Weimar edition (Weimar. Erlangen edition. equivalent to Hans Baron’s C&ins Staatsanschal/lr?rg und dns konfessionelle Zeitnlter (. Hans Erichsen.d. p. Luther. 302. 1903). XXXI. 303. 1930)~ 1. 227. Cf. 79 (No. r” Cf. wie weit man ihr Gehorsam schuldig sei ” (1523). tire&. XLIV. ‘*s “ Am Tage der Opfcrung Christi in dem Tempel ” (Kirchenpostille). though he favoured an all-powerful state. Weimar edition (Weimar. Emil Brunner. (Written in I 523. liberal sport ruins it! ” “’ Cf. 89. Tischredetl. Cf. 6944). Allen. Joseph de Maistre. “ Predigten iiber etzliche Kapitel des Evangelisten Matthai. H. XXIII. ‘s’ “ Ein Sendbrief van dem harten Biichlein wider die Bauern ” (1525). Cf. IX. 7001) Especially p. 1908). 761-62. 309. XXIX. ‘*’ Werke. 309. LX. also J. 1850). L.). Cf. VVeimar edition (Weimar. 1944). 1886). 197-201. IV’. 263. 1924). Po’olitiscke Ethik (Jena: Diederichs. XI.” No. 171). ‘43 6718). M. Weimar edition (Weimar. 7u3Letter to Spalatin. 1908).\lunich and Berlm : Oldenbourg. “a Cf. I I 6. 389. The Work oj William Tindale (London : Blackie. Friedrich Gogarten.) ia4 TischvedeTl. Erlangen edition. Die Leibesfibungen in der nationa2so=ialistischen Idee (Munich: F. 612-13. Hayek. Erlangen edition. 413. several contradictions in this chapter which make the rest unclear. “ De servo arbitrio. II. Werke. XIV. The Road to Serfdom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wcrke. V. Der Stoatsbegri bei Luther (Hamburg. U’erkc. Werke. 1926). 356. Erlangen edition. Dns olte Lutherturn end der neue Protestuntismus (Regensburg : G. 1924). I 56-57 . VI.‘* Tudor Studies. W&mar edition (VVeimar. 792 Tischreden. SIX. 1949 [Penguin Books. I 5 19 . Eher. h1. Weimnr edition. also “ Von Kaufshandlung und Wucher ” (r524). p. Erlangen edition. p. VII. “I Werke. XXIV. W. 632. (30. Historischc und politische ilufsl’tze (Leipzig. XVIII. p. Besides those mentioned below cf. 28 : “ National Socialist sport strengthens the body. Das Gebot und die Ordnungen. March 5. “a See above. 305. x897).

: Dropsie College. 1926). *’ The Popes and the Jews. The latter is probably the last piece of the Reformer’s writing published during his life time. 1937). II. Gregorovius. No. 245 (1936). Tischreden. 440. The failure of his “ proof ” turned him against the Jews. Melanchthon. 1933). ‘* Abendland und Altes Testament.” Werke. F.7 Iinmpfschriften gegen das Judentum (Berlin : Klinkhardt und Biermann. s13 Other works not quoted: Wider die Sabbather (1538). 308. 4997). S. Mohr. 23-30. 1935). Riimisches Reich Dezctscher Nation (Berlin & Zurich: Atlantis Verlag. 439 (April. also the reply by Engelbert Krebs. Compare also soLI Cf. ‘B7 Cf. 104-5. 1946). 45.? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Heinrich Boehmer. . so7Cf. Erlangen edition. sll Cf. 8-9 (xo. The yew in the Medi~ul Commum’ty (London: Soncino Press. Tischreden. III. 208. 19x2). first published at Wittenberg in 1523. *I* Das Jhesus CJuistus evr geborner Jude sey. Emmanuel Rodocanacchi. van ihm aus Leipzig unschuldig verjagt ” (1533). C. p. 526. Cf. XX. Der junge Luther. XVIII.350 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY “s Recently an interesting effort was made to shift some of the blame to Cf. 1933).” Melunchthon. 1908). We&e. Der Ghetto und di. 179. on Jewish-Protestant cultural interrelationships. XVIII. the paper of J. 389. Weimar edition (Weimar 1914). 523 f. Father Oesterreicher holds that Luther was convinced of the pope’s identity with Antichrist. CXXIII. LIII. x946). p. 196 (Nos. “* “ Widier die mordischen und riiubischen rotten der bauren. Cecil Roth. XXXII. wie weit man ihr Gehorsam schuldig sei. 1891). Weimar edition (Weimar. XXXI. Trartatus theologico-politicus (Ann Arbor. G. 236 f. Urkirche und Judentum (Berlin : Philo-Verlag. “ Verantwortung des aufgelegten Aufruhrs. p. p. would coincide with the Day of Judgment. I. Hinrichs.) 13. Kicarda Huch. Weimar edition (Weimar. 103-4 (summing up the papal attitude). Erlangen edition. Weimar edition (Weimar.. aoRCf. 8o1 Tischreden. Luther. 7’S “ Ein Sendbrief van dem harten Biichlein wider die Bauern. M. I~ZO). so’ Cf. 606 (No. Weimar ed. C. 1919). 193s). sammt einen Trostbrief an die Christen. p. ‘OS Tischreden. [erroneously “ H. The Church and the yews in the Thirteenth Century (Phila. *‘( Tischreden.” Werke. cap. Le Saint-Siige et les Jr&.” TIze ChurcJz Quarterlv Review. *Ifi Werke. 1942).” Werke. James Parkes. I. according to tradition and scriptural exagesis. i%Iichigan. sn Cf. 8o9Cf. no. van Herzog Georg. Franz Hildebrandt. 75. 1934). Vermahnung gegen die Juden (1546). Weimar edition. 1908). 2507). (Weimar.“] Oesterreicher. IV. Benedictus de Spinoza. *I* An obliquely Nazi book by a young Lutheran theologian is Erich Vogelsang’s Lathers Kampf gegen die r&en (Tiibingen: J. 195.Juden in Rom (Berlin: Schocken. Solomon Grayzel. also II Esdras (Neh. xvi. 139-41. a~3Cf. Weimar edition (Weimar. so0Cf. 259. “ Van Weltlicher Oberkeit. the Reformer I thus hoped for a tangible confirmation of his thesis. Werke. IO. Weimar edition (Weimar.. 818Walter Linden. the “ schoolmaster of Germany. le ghetto d Rome (Paris: Firmin-Didot. Erlangen ed. pp. 3585). 1935). “ The Jewish Question. 3594 and 1733). Since the conversion of the Jews. his Marcion (Leipzig: J. 1916). III. Herbert Sch6ffler. B. Esdras 9. A&n OT All>. 361.” The Dublin Review. 811Ibid. 432 (Ko. sli. 1921).” K6lner anglistische ilrbeiten (Bochum.

view cf. 1916). significantly. 66 (London. Beyond AZ1 Fronts (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Company. Weimar ed.. ‘I Pilgrims to Rome. but not opposing. I. but also in the United States and in Britain. Brace. 1948). Alfred Rosenberg. 121. Edmond Broeckx.” -4rcJziues de philosophic du droit et de sociologic juridiqne. For a different. Emile Doumergue. p. Luther und die Obrigkeit (Munich: Ernst Reinhardt. Compare with Max Jordan. p. but had a Catholic dynasty. Wilhelm Ropke. p. pp. 323. 1945). “ Religiose Emeuerung. 1-2. “ Luthers Kampf gegen das Judentum. II. 823 Cf. s3’ On the total human dependence on God cf. a Catholic Secretary of State of part Japanese extraction in the U. 1944).” p. This author points out quite rightly that Luther was “ Hobbesian. 1329. 147-48. Saxony was over ninety per cent Protestant. also Kurt Matthes. No. p. insists on the desire for loneliness as a typical Puritanic trait. The Tischreden. 50. 24.-Dec. . pp. L. Die deutsche Frugc (Erlenback and Zurich: Eugen Rentsch Verlag. MacGiffert. No. February. l’om Ewigen im Menschen (Leipzig: Der Neue Geist). yet this yearning for solitude hardly cancels the eminently cornmunitarian character of Puritanism. W. 825 : “ Thus Calvin. See also p. sz2 Cf. the English Puritans and their glorious revolution. -. Franz Neumann. La cntharisme: P&es SW les doctrines.” .The burning of witches continued in the American colonies (not to mention Scotland) long after this practice was given up in Catholic Europe. “ Calvin et I’entente de Wilson a Calvin.. had to make the solemn promise neither to travel. trans. 1927). TJze Protestant &cc. III.” Friends of Europe Publications. *26 The Protestant Boy Scouts of Hungarv accepted the invitation of the Swedish Scouts at the Jamboree of Godollo (1933) to share in their worship. 389. The conscious-subconscious identifications of race and religion are not rare. declaring that they had never suspected the Swedes of being papists. 1918).. 1-24. France had several Protestant presidents and prime ministers. The most tolerant Protestants were those of Germany. 74. .. Wilson . 77. 1936). and we find them not only in Germany. ” Hobbes et l’etat totalitaire. XXV (Sept. 295. ss* Cf. 38. Adams (Chicago: Chicago University Press. John Knox. Chambers. nor even to eat alone. 206.NOTES 35’ sn Karl Kindt. pp. J. p. Rome had a Jewish mayor. p. 298. sza Cf. or a Catholic mayor in Belfast or Edinburgh. s4ja Cf. 1937). ++I (No. the brilliant passage in R. Cathari.. Behemoth. Martin Gumpert. the American Puritans and their Bill of Rights. the Declaration of ‘89 in France. sz5 The “ greater tolerance ” of Protestant cultures is also quite mythological. szl Cf. NonCatholics can be cabinet members in Brazil. not totalitarian. p. RenC Capitant. 5 sq. On the problem of a “ religious culture ” viewed from a Protestant angle cf. 1)39). Weimar ed. Sir Ernest Barker in his book The National Character and the Factors in its Formation (London and New York: Harper.S. VI (1936). 368. 5028). Italy had a Protestant foreign minister of part Jewish extraction It would be difficult to imagine (Sidney Sonnino). Paul Tillich. Cf. 19x8). p.” Die neue Literatur. la vie religieuse et morale avant la Croisade (Louvain: Hoogstraten. C. (IV&e: and IV. the links are splendid and the chain is unbreakable. the Betrayal of Luther. 130. No. Almost all the externals of the Catholic Mass are preserved in Sweden’s Lutheran ritual. p. H6lle im Paradics (Stockholm : Bermann-Fischer. 622. Luther’s attacks against the idea of personal solitude. 820 Tischreden. Max Scheler. Cf.” Revue de m&physique et de morale. The Hungarians left during the service. 112. No. Protestant Thought Before Kant (New York: Scribner. On Luther’s political theories cf. 3597). A.” but that Hobbes was autocratic. Thomas More (New York: Harcourt. but Swedish ministers of state have to be Lutherans. 1939. P. r929).

Cf. 312-13 .” Revtrc de m&uph>?n’que et de morale. 614. ihre mrtaphysische Grundlegung und ihre politische Formung. G. 573> 577. van York: Macmillan. W. p. 19271. Ulrich Bernstein. pp. I. Grund und Vrsach aus tier Schrift ” (1523). Lad::. Bernard Fai:. 276 sq. C. x918). 225 sq. 35.: Colonial Press. Note 593. Brown. Nos. Der frnnziisische Protestantismur: sein Kez bis zur fronr6&hen Rmolution (Munich: C. Buckle saxv a connection between the Jansenists. I-‘. Charles Reade.“-Hegel’s.” Tilt Rfvterv *3a Cf. Washington et les Protestants de France. The PhiZosophJ. 2X-30. The Present Age. PP. 835 Cf. 30. . p. IV. 4. Collection co?np!t?te des outrages publi& sur le gowzernement reprbentat<t. 1869). quoted by \V. January.” Gesummelte Werke (3d ed. L. 18. T/je racobins (?. x937).” Bulletin historique et litt&zire. 831 Cf. L14” Hans J. Deutschc Demokratie (&‘Iunich: J.” Revue des Revolution cf. in the sovereignty of the peonle.. 1406.Lutheran ‘Background. 1819). 003-4. x930). Cf. 241. 25729 (June 26. Fischer. trans. rkforme de Luther et les problemes de In culture pr&ente. M. also Joseph Chambon. G.352 LIBERTY OR EQVALITY - OasCf. No. 569. III (1939). : London : Little. 192x). 453. abzusetzen. Ernst Troeltsch. 8s9 Interview in the PetitJoura$‘No. 836Cf. -4. (Weimar. XXV. 452. Tiibingen: J.” 830H. 5. Soren Kierkegaard. In this connection it is worth while to remember that the French Calvinists of the late seventeenth century tended to believe C’C.” List-Studiex. Joseph de Maistre. LI (1892). Wolff. I. Benjamin Constant. 8ai Cf. F. Die neue Regierungsform des deutschsn Reiches (Tiibingen : Cf. who in “ Die Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen. rgoo). etc. sl’ Dr. p. of Religion. Papierc. 1310.ote Centur>j (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 185b).ais. Quatre chapitres. rottrnai:. Bulletin historiqur et Zitt&aire. pp. admits that “ both [Calvinism and Anabaptism] have more prepared modern democracy and provided it a spiritual backbone than created it.” no. H. Gooch. Hegel. p. And besides. pp. Edmund Burke. x900). English Democratic Ideas ~‘71 Sezenteenth the 831 See ?. Luther. J. 1939. RenC de Laboulayc. the first step took place agamst the genuine character of Calvinism. LII (1X93).ein-und Werlmar ed. Jlrke. p. :92y). 83’ On the Calvinist-Girondist connections cf. pp. C. B. Lehmann. p. Fick. 1925). On the Calvinistic background of the French “ Calvin et la maconnerie. secret memorandum for Alexander I (l\-uchg. pp. IO+]). Iletternich Cf. of History. Bekjamin Cons&t pro&et1 against the anti-Protestant riots in -Ximes in 181 j. p.. pp.” Works (?rd ed. “ Die Staatsauffassung Carl Ludwig eon Hallers. 3. the Fronde and the French Revolution. Kaiser Verlag. 63-64. 8J8 Cf. 208. 01-62. Histoire des Protestants de France (Paris: Cherbuliez. Mohr [Paul Siebeck]. 28. which resulted from the prorevolutionaattitude of the Calvinists : cf. 533 f. L’esprit r&olutionmzire en Frnnce et nux l&at. “ Dass eine christliche Versammlung oder Gemein(d)e Recht und hlacht habe.” in %ci&e de l’histoire du protestantisme franc. Mohr. 2 (Jena: G. 1399. his convmced of the American influencr on the French revolutionaries. -1’4 sq. XI. Crane Brinton. III. Sc?ren Kierkegaard. II-IS. 828. P. Sibree (London si N. de Felice. No. III. 702-3. (Paris: Plancher. C. B. “ Lt demier chapelain de l’ambassade de S&de B Paris: Charles-Christian Gambs. C. 237-64. 151. “ La questions historiqum [Paris]. 407). 1933 r‘ Necht und Staat iE Geschichtc und Gegenwart. G. . 1933). . F.-IIIe sit%-le (Paris: Champion. 1880). “ Remarks on the Police of the Allies.+Unis himself was ci la fin du Xl. A.Y. van Sonntag. Bernouilli. 153. alle Lehre zu ertheilen und Lehrer zu berufen. his History of Civilization in Englmd (Yew York : Appleton. “ Laiayette. T.

Compare this with Note 793 above. G. Conclusions: pp. 27 (” He [the kinr: of Babylon] possessed the kinadorn. and Comment. ein deutsches Volkspro~ramm (Berlin: Karl Curtius.” Raw d’hiztoirc. p. C. Vol. Conmmr. Cf. 649-50. Errnan et R&clam. “j Cf. Die Sozinllehuen der ciwistli&w h&cherr. Mercier. also -4. r 93 I ).in. Prarlntiones inJererniam.. R4P Ibid. Luther and the Reform&n in the Light of Modern Reseurch.” Prercssische Jahrbiicher. p. “*r Cf. 2i-20.” In the&g\he was at least as S’S This is true of Calvin’s practical views. I\-. but the “ liberty of the Scriptures from papist corruption.. 318-19. Potter (S. I’. cap. ” Die politischen Ideen Luther!: und ihr Einfluss auf die innere Entwicklung Preussens. On the relationship between Calvin and Kow:<eau cf. tmns. Cf. France under thp Republic (N. concern for the defence of common convictions. p. pp. Chambeau.~. “ Start und Gesrlischaft des Iieformationszeitalters. Cf. 50-53. Institutiones. IZ (on the rectitude of human \vill). 193s). van Brzold. Pauli Epist. 671 so.. 1938). xx. p. cap.f. J. -ii. x782-99) . Dip . I. 8u Cf. a16See abow. C&U&Z err Roussrarr (Sijmegen S: Utrecht : Dekker. 2~ (” A bad king is an ire de Die/r who must he \-enerated just like a good ltinr ” ): IV. the sentiment of social duty. II. 1934). xtir. II. p. pessimistic and authoritarian. “* H&rich 5 oe h mer. Die Hugenottelz in Ue~tschla~rJ (Essrn: Essener verkqsanstalt.genwart.IVOTES 353 sdz Wilhelm Wiskott. and constantly engendered devotion to one’s native land. 427. 8z’ Cl’. Du> Gebot rtrrd die Ordnwr~en. pp. 3 (” Resistance against tyrants is permissible only in a iegal form “I..<tone Lectures (Princeton)]). *” Cf. Dr Hellmuth Erbe. E. i. On the democratic tendencies in sixteenth-centurx French Calvinism cf. 4 (on salvation outsrde the Church). it spread Protestant civilization over a wider area and But when the I’ranco-Prussian EVat was in tune with the spirit of the age.: Dial Press. S. x920). Caluiw et la muyotznwie. “” C. r940). xx. 275.erein. Briefc und kleine Schrijten (x868). Ernst Troeltsch. which possession alone showed that he was placed on the throne by the order.t Fmnkreirh md such auf Dmicidtit~d md die Deutscken (Berlin: Hugenotten 1. x . Brogan. 423. Jean Louis -Armand de Quatrcfages de Breau. also Calvin. CXIII (1903). 609. pp. jmtitrftt:mex.. No.T. Cornelissen. No wonder that Grillparzer considered Berlin to be essentially ” French and Jewish. trans.~hwandernrrg der Hgrenotten aus Eitrnkreich nr1. See also Calvtn. 5 f. XXX. 11 . in I. cap. Labouiay. II. IX-T-) . IO.oi God “).ecsl&iastiquc. Geurges de Lagarde. p. f61I : Emil Brunncr.s dcms les Ihats du Roi (Berlin.: Harper. S. A. Kuypers. Recherches sur l’esprit politiyuc de la Ke’furme (Paris: Picardc. “U Cf . 843Ibid.” Compare with Georg Jaeger. Die Volksherrschaft als nationales Ziel. 490: ” The Calvinist spirit was a spirit of solidarity. p. The Prussian Race Ethnolo&r-all! Considerc~d. I). par. I\‘. Cab. Hrt Calz:inismc (timsterdam Sr Pretoria : Hoveckker. p. par. pp. p. cap. Choisy. W. der . Libri Sa7itueli. Igzh).” broke out even the American Congress applauded the “ good news. xx. 61.” Cf. 1899 [ ?] [. “ Call-in et la democratic. rg. About four million inhabitants of Prussia can claim part Huguenot ancestry. I (Januar>-. xviii.” 854 Cf. As to the differences between Genevan and extra-Geneva Calvinism cf. II. Ernst Troeltwh.T. ad Horn. i1Ie’moires pour se&r a l’i&oirc des r&~rb frmr(:oi. lsabella Innes (London: \-irtue and Co.lusz:irkung . and Heinrich Boehmer. The ” liberty ” the Reformers spoke about was not personal freedom. 1930). Note 625. L’&t calviniste ti Gen&zw. Soziallehuen. 556: I‘ Britain had regarded the unification of Germanv under Prussia (once it was achieved) with approval . p. ii.” Kultw der Ge. p. 326-27. II.

by any guarantee of force. their everlasting cry of ‘ traitor. sfi3 Cf. Hermann Keyserling. tells us that during the A similar middle of the eighteenth century about half of Berlin was French. I. 116. No. 136. sB( Cf. *60 Cf. No. their love of external mechanical order. It seems to me that every society rests on the death of men..I’infame is the only watchword on either side. practical stride towards civilization ” (see his letter to his mother.. no one feels secure against what he considers evil. . P. 138). The want of true sympathy in the French character. Ssren Kierkegaard. Unto Caesar (New York: Putnam. This tallies well with the jubilation in Paris when the news of Austria’s defeat at Sadowa arrived. Butler. himself a be found in Frederic Hoffet. Brace. The Tvanny of Greece oz!er Germany (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3 (April. 51 I (p. Keyserling. Brtinmg wanted to restore the monarchy as a last resort PP. 2x2-13. 54-55. 867This fatality was deplored by such acute observers as F. is the ultima . II.” The Quest.” Bulletin of the Polish Institute of Arts and Sciences in Americn. How any order is possible except by a Caesar to hold the balance. II. “ L’initiation americane de Georges Clemenceau. . 126-27. takes Germany off the list of Protestant nations. 1871): “ In England. F. No. cit. 64. April 8. 23 (February. VI. Das Spektrum Europas. Jr. VIII (1928). 161-62 (letter to Henry Bowditch. rationalism and the “ revolutionary party ” in Protestant countries. s50Cf.: “ I loathe war but I do think I think that the sacredness of that man at present is a predatorv animal. ratio. 4 (July. 1941). E. se5A fairly good analysis of the non-Protestant character of Germany is to Hoffet. van Hiigel’s “ The German Soul and the Great War. pp. a regular advance is possible . a chasm. pp. 168-69. 1938). I. I. 19j5). ’ 36 and 41. p. Protestant background. Harold R. IZZ-23. 1944). &use-. L’impe’rialisme protestant. Das Spektrtrm Europas. nothing of that sort. McKinnon. I believe that force. pp. No. x928). op.“-James. himself of Huguenot descent. ‘ai Cf. ’ Compare with Justice 0. Note 583). III. Protestant.. of John Jay Chapman’s act in Edmund Wilson. 147. No. it is hard to see. I (Jan. H. quite logically. W. 23 f.’ all point to it. M. “ But in France Belief and Denial are separated by. pp.“Holmes-Pollock Letters (Cambridge : Harvard University Press.on p.” Le Mois Suisse. hoped for a unification of Germany under Prussia as a “ great. VIII. 857See the well documented paper by Jan Kucharzewski. 1867. he thinks all is forever lost.” Revue de litte%ature cornpar&. 3-4. Journals.354 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY a Washington et l’opinion Othon Guerlac. June 12. and Peter Viereck. 1938). 1941). Seep. pp. ss6 Cf. reminds one strongly 1915). “ Le suicide de Prevost-Paradol americame. . and if his opponents get uppermost. The step once made. “ Du Testament de Richelieu a Jacques Bainville. dated Dresden. “ The Higher Law ” (see above. A. America and Germany.” James concluded quite shrewdly that religion must be at the bottom of these attitudes. 227. . The Letters of William ‘jumes. The story of Margarete Peter related. Holmes. their satisfaction in police regulation. 862A brilliant analvsis of German extremism can be found in Baron F. Femand Baldensperger. The Triple Thinkers (New Yet Chapman had a very orthodox York: Harcourt. Grimm. human life is a purely municipal idea of no validity outside the jurisdiction. mitigated so far as mav be by good manners. . Cf. but in France. Voigt. p. 1014-1076. *j8 Cf. *No.-Mar. ss6 Theodor Fontane. Metapolitics. p. 368. 95 and Note 705). He lauded the peaceful co-operation of religion. ” Delusions of the West and First Warnings.” Revue de litte?uture cornpar&. situation prevailed in Magdeburg.

Gernzan~~‘s I :nderground.ouis Veuillot who wrote in his ‘* Parfum de Rome ” [Oeuzres romplt2e. Compare with Max Irlinger. There are only about forty-five miles in North Sleswig and on the Dutch border near Emden where German Protestants border on Protestants of other nations. NOTES 8”Letfrf TO CHAPTER SEVE?. pp. 1926). 153. The Hidden -D~)amti~c (New York: Harcourt. John W. 95 sq. Hindenburg. 1914. p. Quatre rhapitres. 20. clearly foresaw the rise of a wild nationalistic movement within the framework of a defeated Cf. Hall (Boston: the President said. Reinhard Hahn. also the preface of James H. Sept. Sinndeutuxg der deutschen RPuolution. Compare also with James dtem. S?crul of the parliaments to preserve the personal liberties. These considerations have to be understood in the light of Goring’s remark: ! “ Hitler is the German people and the German people is Hitler ” (Karl Otten. 7-8. p.. Wheeler-Bennett. nationalist as a monarchist--and perhaps cz’en more so? ” (Italics ours. pp. Mifflin. 145. 147. p. ed. pp. p. Die deutsche Frage. 230. p.” *‘O The German Protestant area is almost entirelv encircled by Catholic territory. Nichols to the American edition of J. Disraeli uttered a similar warning to those who confused British and Continental liberalism: see his Endymion (London. Compare also with Edgar J. 353-68. Benito Mussolini in his Gespriiche mit Emil Ludwig (Berlin. I947). 167-77. sri Cf. s’i Cf. 297: “ Theoretically. 1920). For a full understanding of the nationalistic aspects of the French Revolution. 869Cf. p. Burckhardt’s Weltgeschichtliche Betrachtungerz-Force and Freedom (New York: Pantheon. a monarchical restoration in Germany. Jung. *sa Cf Allen Welsh Dulles. Fiihrergeualt (Tubingen. 1926). objectionable to Italy. si3 Ernest Rcnan. Bede Jarrett. 1934) and Gottfried Neesse. Innsbruck. La riforme intellectuelle et morale (Paris: Calmann-Levy. Thus it is also not surprising that Professor Wilhelm Riipke. and Gerhard Kroll.5. Lane and L. both quoted by Franz Neumann. W. p. 1 Combine of -4ggression. Brown. 46~. Brace and Co. 1884). p. 1939). L’Action franguise. p. 227. Hitler Speaks (London: Thornton Butterworth. 89-90.NOTES 355 to stem the Nazi tide. Lane. H. p. 19391. 22. as all were of one language and one race. PP. Austria should go to Germany. 7. p. especially pp. and would be particularly The final argument cannot be taken seriously. Theories of the Middle A4~es(Boston: Little. A. nztsilnglais. these accounts. compare with Note 839. Dir Wandlung im staatsrechtIichm Denken (Hamburg. I 14.) Europe’s leading neo-liberal. And Jacques Bainville. Cf. IFus ist der Staat? (Munich: Schnell und Steiner. but this would mean the establishment of a great central Roman Catholic nation which would be under the control of the papacy. p. Die Rechte des Fiihrers und Reichskanzlevr als Stnatsoberhaupt des Deutschen Reiches (Dissertation . 3571: ” Allemagne ! Allemagne! a qui le ciel avait tout donni ! Quand tu verras reparaitre un fantcime d’empereur . see Crane Brinton. German Houghton. pp. w. Letters of Franklin K. x940). 27-28. in a memorandum to the Allies recommended Cf. pp. 29. siB As quoted in Hermann Rauschning.v (Paris: Lethielleux. 74: and Leipzig: ZSOhy. 1943). 8’S Cf. 1936). 71. Behemoth. Vienna “ Can’t a republican be quite as much a 1932). si* Both Guicciardini and Savonarola were rather sceptical as to the ability Cf. Joseph de &Iaistre. 1950). I I 5-r 6. the French historian. 3 I 3).) The non-monarchical nationalist Fiihrer of Germany was foreseen br the prophetic 1. 1922). but failed: cf. IX. TheJacobins. Germany turned into a republic. Ropke. Y(We have verified the Wooden Titan (London: Macmillan.

et qui ne tiendra pas la glaive pour proteger la justice et defendre le vieux droit. be constitutional and democratic-as befits the nation of Hus.” i\ few weeks later ” parliamentarism ” and ” democracv ” triumphed again.” Nothing is more pathetic than to read the VI.” s’s On the non-aristocratic aspects of racialism cf. he remarked that ” Bohemia will. 28-29). 287. s8’ Cf. Heinrich van Gleichen) on Jan. Rudolf Xadolnv (former German Ambassador in Ankara and delegate to the League of Xations). for this urhole system of a popular community. p. in relation to German National Socialism. implies that all elections are purely a matter of publicity and ” hard cash. Freedom Forgotten and Remembered (Chapel Hill: University of Iiorth Carolina Press. Yet more than four-fifths of Bohemia . Ferrero. was Protestant.i fixed by the fact that the bulk of anti-Hitler literature. . also Edgar A. x941). p. 50.” Rezimr of Politics. ni l’oint du Christ. Schriften der deutschen Hochschule “ Amerika und der Nationalsozialismus. President Hodfa The ministers Hurbin. the French Revolution reaped its full victory oniy in 1922. Helmut Kuhn. See G.” fiir Politik (Berlin: Junker und Diinnhaupt. It is not surprising that this I\jazi author sings hymns of praise for Jefferson and damns Alexander Hamilton (pp. 3 I) : ” There is no better and more beautiful word than the expression Democnq~ for our new government of the people. Oct. and so was Frantibek Palacki. The Germans in Hisfor? (New York: Columbia University Press. 302. Gernunj. 1945). 328 : ” The positjon of Hitlerism in public discussions has been iargelv . “ The Common Man on Trial. 1933). ry28). the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.. 8m”Cf. CheiEickT. Src Sate 190. 1943)s P. had left the Church.I:. mais qui se dira l’empereur du peuple et la glaive du droit nouveau. Prince Hubertus 2u Lowenstein. hlasaryk as well as his son. but also the . on the “ conspiratorial theory ” which! quite undemocratically. \ Koz& Vavreeka were all non-Catholics. also dealt with the myth of the Nazi movement as “ a conspiracy of wealthy manufacturers. for better or worse. Cf. (unsigned) article published in the ultra-consen-ative weekly L)cr Ring (ed. an economist of Austrian extraction. And. W. 1942). I (Jan. and the bicgest party. Mowrer.5. pp. Friedrich Schonemann. I. 4. the “ anti-feudal ” Common Man. About the opposition of the Prussian Junkers to Bismarck’s unification plans. Gustav Stolper. I-‘&s the Clock Back (Sew York: W.” Stolpcr.3.) The three Czechs mentioned were all non-Catholics. took the same step. cf. Leopold Schwarzschild.” throne. 221. ss3 In the memorandum which Thomas Masarvk handed to Sir Edward Grey in April. The New E-or-k Times Magazine. The demo-nazi spirit of our friend. and Moravia are Catholic. “ Six Delusions about Germany.” s*? Cf. 21-23. Germanisierung oder Slau~isierung? (Berlin: Otto Stollberg Ye&g. is also adroitly expressed in the pamphlet of Dr. alors ce sera l’heure de la grande expiation. particularly in the early phases of the regime? was written by Marxist authors of various denominations. had to lean. Ferrero. Osuskv. Jan. later Foreign Minister.a As their political thmking was tied down to the Procrustean bed of primitive social philosophy. 6. of course.o. Vojta BeneS. 21.” 1944. 1933. 323. rgrg. . Helmut Kuhn. 1944). I\.and (At the same time he proposed a Romanov prince on Bohemia’s Comenius. all they had to do was to fit the phenomenon of Hitierism into their ready-made scheme. pp. he says proudly (p. Morrow. The Reconstrurtio?i of Europe (Kew York: Putnam. entitled ” Der Sieg der preussischen Konservativen iiber die Hitler-Bewegung.56 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY qui ne sera ni 1’Clu de tes princes.4merican NeoRoussellians.” Tet not only the Marxists. pp. 878In Italv also according to G. 203-204. 1934). who refused to believe in the stupidity of the large masses. nominated the Chancellor. This Age of Fable (New York: Reynal and Hitchcock. senator and brother of President Bents.

p. Die Reihen dicht geBanners high I Ranks closed. Cast 3 (1929).4bout besides Freiligrath. can be gleaned from Professor . (This does not tally very well with the Duce’s later motto. as can be seen from his last letter addressed to his wife. early childhood. 1. Jekek. 734. in 1928. by his It is interesting to compare the last lines of this son (Prague. marschiert mit ruhig festem Schritt.” -4ccording to Professor Iiraus (p. p. p. 1. More about the influence of Hussitism on Germans.zech or Hussite themes. be brave ! und drauf. New York. I:. The closing words are: “ Thus the history of the progressive liberation of the human race from the shackles of dogmatic belief knows nc. E. which was written during his journalistic period in Trent. 109 f. kiihnc Jupend. and the demo-nationalist Alfred MeisTner. bra\. 1913). wrote in his Deutscklund. was the most important poet of the ‘48 movement. Ebert (T?asta and Brestislazu). firm. W’ Cf. Gino di Sanctis. 9. so. 150).51). 48 (November 30. interruption as it proceeds from century to century ” (p. 149). il reridico (Rome. Cf. . This volume contains numerous errors. Hratri a demokrath: m”kolik studii o timeckl iiteratuie s hlediska humanit?. and . Benito Mussolini. J. the I‘cmcious. him cf. (I demokra tie (Prague: Nikladem Vlastnfm. ” La vedova dell ‘impero. was written m 1X53. 1923). issued in 1939 another edition of the first-named work under the tItleJohn Huss. Hiram The blotherwell. such as Ii. although conscious of Hus’ Czech sentiments. Church State in Fascist Italy (London and I\. 201. P. XIoritz Hartmann (Kelch und Schwert). Meissnet-. III. Mussolini The same Kew York house lr(~ stmprr rrqiSiom~--” Mussolini is always right. Daniel Binchv. and especialh on modern German literature. 1929). Dr. but first published in 1871. Italian Book Co. Mussolini’s novel The Cardinal’s M&tress. “ Huss und Hieronymus. calm stride. ed. German-Bohemian anti-clerical nationalist’s verse with the opening rhymes of the Horst Wessel Lied. der in die Schlacht It is his suirit which leads vou in battle ! . There were other German authors who dealt with C. Still. nevertheless produced a poem fanatically praising the victim of the Council of Constance. geographical as well as historical.Iussolini saw in Taboritism a so&-political rather than a religious movement (p. bold youth.” L’Europeo.“) published. who wrote a I-olume of poems around iiZka. and reaction has shot Marschiern im Grist in unsern &larch along in spirit in our ranks. x947).ew York: Oxford Univer&y Press. Only go forward ! hTichts hemmt ein mutig Herz im Nothing restrains a courageous Sieceslauf ! heart in its victorious march ! The Horst IVessel I&d: Die Fahne ho&.” Gesammelte Gedichte vonJustus Frq’. German ** Hussism ” is said to have prepared the way for Luther and Protestantism (p. before his death Mussolini returned to the faith of his Cf. 18991. a National Socialist poet.4rnoZ: Kraus’ ” Husitstvf Xdkladem ceskd akademie r@d a v ncmecke literature devatngctehn stoleti. schlossen The Storm Troopers march with S. trans. Kam’raden.NOTES 357 **’ Robert Hohlbaum. 1925) a poem in praise of Hus as a German.! Nur dran Be brave. A. Reihen mit. Justus Frey. 296) the quoted poem urn&i. euch fiihrt ! Bra\-.. whom the Red Front tion erschossen. die Rotfront unJ ReakComrades. Frey’s verse reads : Die Fahnen hoch ! Die Trommeln Banners high ! Beat the drums laut geriihrt ! loudly Es ist sein G&t. originally published in Italian under the title Giovanni Hus.John Hus (New Torh : Albert and Charles Boni. rgq). kn Sonettenzyklus (Reichenberg. 886On Fascist and RIussolinian anti-clericalism cf.

x926). and E. 1886) Thomas G. G. a Taborite sub-sect. 88’ On the nationalism of Hus cf. No. FlajLhans and others. V. 70-96.. though the general influence of the Pickards (Beghards) on the Hussites is undeniable. Laurentii a Mosheim. we see that even Engels was deeply influenced by the picture of Hussitism as drawn by Palack? and the other demo-nationalists when he prophesied that every genumely nationalistic movement in Bohemia was bound to be IL proletarian ” no less than traditionally Hussite (hrrssitisch-reminis. on the other hand. Masaryk both believe in the liberal-democratic theory of Palack?.” Die 6sterm’chische Furche. I 54-55 Dr. 305-6. 1856 in Karl Marx. pp. 1930). p. VIII. We have found no confirmation of this particular statement. Under the Auspices of the MarxKritsche Geramtausgabe. trans. represents the same point of riew. Mullike (London: Fisher and Linwin. of a lesser importance . Heft 2. Cf. cit. 233. ‘*’ Cf. “ Mittelalter geistert an der Moldau: in den Spuren van Johannes Hus. and Zizka’s eulogy of the Czech language. Josef Pekai deals with the Pickards mostly in Vols. op.-en=Ierisch). The French (Breslau: Osteuropa Insfitut. I. Certain details enumerated by of the ancient Czechs. witness to the fact that Pickards and Waldensians were popularly connected . 181-83. NBS very critical of Pekaf. Cf. Hugo Hassinger in Die Tschechoslovakei (Vienna : Rikola-Verlag. The very organizers of this government-ordered and government-inspired worship of the Taborites are the Czech Xational Socialists rather than the Communists. Vilimek. Vol. pp. Bles. Barto:. 53-54. J. authors Prof. 1871). n. p. Utraquisten und Tuboriten (Gotha: Perthes. 888The question of the real character of the Hussite wars is. dated March 7. 115. 1925). Die Weltree. Professor KvaEala of Pressburg. Cf. 51. An extreme leftist view of Hussitism and Taboritism was taken by the Marxist Karl Kautsky. The thesis of Pekai. Engels-Institute in Moscow (Berlin. in Hus et la guerre des Hussites (Paris: E. 1949).. 1790). Friedrich Engels. Cf. Friedrich van Bezold’s Zur Geschichte des Husitenthums.). himself was a thorough supporter of the aforementioned thesis. RI.” the Leger (pp. cult is no less anti-Western than it is anti-Catholic. 194-95. Josef I. pp. p. Cf. believed Luther is a in the Pickard background of the Adamites. also Leopold Krummel. Cochlaeus. p. ii&ha 0 j&o doba (Prague: Vesmir. De Beghardis et Beguinibus commentarius (Leipzig: Libraria Weidmannia. in ~~ou~elles ktudes des SZaues (Paris : E. 2. finds support in Dr. 1927). in which the idea was expressed that Fascism could harmonize only with Protestantism. I and IV of his &ka a j4ho doba. Ernest Denis. C. remind one of the proclivities of the Germanic eplgones of Hussitism. mentions the Pickards (Picards) as proclaiming the advent of the Third Empire (Drittes Reich) in southern Bohemia. r79-81). 194-95. but we believe that the argumentation of Josef Pekai and his documentary evidence are sounder and more conclusive than those of F. Huss and his Followers (London : Also VBclav FlajShans. Histork Hussitarum Zibri duodecim (Mainz. 3.d. on the other hand. pine culturhistorischr Studie (Munich : Ackermann. 36 (Sept.olutioniirc. x925). pp. 1-2. Josef R. D. 880On the influence of Marsiglio on Taboritism cf. IV. Edit. as can be seen from his paper inJuhrbiicher fiir Kultur und Gesrhichte der Slawen Ig32). Iv. 122. especially pp. Still. 1897). Leroux. 1549). such as the “ &vocation egalitarianism within the army. Rjazanow. 111. Engels’ letter. It is interesting to note that the present communist Czech regime is making This frantic efforts to revive and emphasize the cult of Hus and the Taborites. Mistr Jan GeLen+ G. x874)> PP. L. Communism in Ce?ttraZ Europe at the Time of the Reformation. Seifert. 63.. especially Josef Pekai. x926). Hus z Husince (Prague: Nikl. p. rZote 736.358 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY Interesting is also Giuseppe Gangale’s Rivoluzione protestante (Turin. as testified by his&n Hus: n&e obrozeni a n&e reformice (Prague. M. Jan Herben. Hors. Leroux. 134. 148. 1878) and Louis Leger. 118-19. from the point of view of our thesis. Josef Pekai.

No. 147-48.” @is? filosofickh fakulty Masarykovy Z?rziuersiteta ~1Brnf. Vol. 1533). born in southernmost Bohemia near the Austrian boundary and not very far from Husinec (Hus’ This is also Seifert’s view. Marzismu sociologicke’ a sns Cf. pp.” . birthplace). Cf. Geschichte der Evnngelischen Kirche in Biihmen (Bielefeld 8. Masaryk. We have been unable to obtain the original text of Trrs . xikladJ flosoficke’ (Prague: Jan Laichter. PP. 1941). IO. Cf. cf. i\Iichael ~Antonowytsch. i. It may mean “ the one-eyed. Ur. pp. 1938). 1898). T\.” calisthenics in a collectivistic age. 379. ~~ouvelles r’tudes des Slaaes. 1949). Paul T&h-Szabo. x881). Miroslar. Der Kampf zzoische~r Tschecken und Deutsrhen (Reichenberg. C. LXIII. 883Cf. *95 The first American author to draw attention to the important role of Jahn as a forerunner of National Socialism is Peter Viereck. P.workmen in Bohemia arrive at socialism by way of religious meditation. cf. in B’e&e. Rudolf Urbanek. 6. der Dienst und Ceremonien der Btider in Biihmen und M&en.. and Dr. 168. so0 Cf. Friedrich Ludwig Jahn (Berlin. See also Viereck’s Conservntism Revisited: the Tet one would Revolt aguinst Revolt (New York: Scribner. On Jahn’s influence on Bismarck see Bismarck. T. especially These descriptions do not support the claims of Alois Hajn. Wolf.” Tyr? was fully conscious of his debt to Jahn. also Carl Euler. “ Das Rltsel B&men. I. 1928).D. 1854). I. 898Ibid. 48-50. 82-83. p. Osi In Domorazek. who ” dared ” to address a Czech physician in a German-Bohemian town in Czech: see H. 129. welche von etlichen Pickarten und von etlichen Waldenser genennet werden ” (A.” but 891His name is somewhat enigmatic. IQ2j). p. Karl Domorazek. U’ir Sudetendentsche (Berlin: Runpe. p. “ Un philoaophe de l’energie nationale : Miroslav Tyri. 67-68. p. 8 (IQ&) believes that ZiZka is a corruption of Zikrnunt (Sigismund). 19r7). as expressed in but also the psychological impact of mass ” the writings of the ” Turnvater. O&&a socidlni. ein Beitrag zur Geschichte Historische Studien. Ein Sudetenderrtscher ergibt sich nicht (Karlsbad. IQ37). June25. Tausend Jahre Geistesknmkf im Sudetenraum. Hans Krebs. also Eduard Winter. I 928).” La Re-ne hehdomadaire.” in H. Kaergel. Mistr Jon Hus a j&o qznam v do& pritomni (Prague: Ndkladem Svazu Karodniho Osvobozeni. Gedunkcn und Erintterungen (1898). 152-59. Valuable sst Cf.” Spis~v jilosoficke’fakult?* iMasarykoq* Universiteta 7’ Bmi. snl This expression is from Emanuel Radl. was of German origin. (Erlangen. also the reaction of the Nazi Hermann Wolf to the ” supra-nationalism ” of Emperor Francis Joseph. The original Czech edition was lYlicilk~r Cechu s ~&an’ (Prague : Gin. p. A cseh-kuszitn mozggalmak is uralom tc?rt&nete Afq~arorszrigon (Budapest: Hornyansksy. Leipzig: VTelhagen und Klasing. 1939). das religicse Ringer1 zmeier I’6Zkev (S&burp 8: Leipzig: Otto Miiller. “ Friedrich Ludwig Jahn. 319 f. The Evolution of Socialism in Czechoslovakia (Prague : Executive Committee of the Czechoslovak Social Democratic Workers’ Party. i920). CCXXX. 4QQ sq. have liked to see Viereck stressing not only Jahn’s ideolom.NOTES 359 with the “ Bohemians “. material can also be found in Dr. the Father of tke Sokol Unio?l (Prague : Ceskoslovensky Cizinecky Ui-ad. pp. p. Jules Chopin. 4. Louis Leger. nor those of Bernhard Czerwenka. p. der Anfange des deutschen Nationalismus. 3: “ And today many. 1869). B96Cf. for they see in socialism a continuation of the old communistic communities of the Taborites. in his Metapolitics (New York: Knopf.. Erlangen ed. Rare1 Tit2 in an essay “ 0 ptvodu jmena ZiZka. “ Ziika v pamatkach a ucte lidu Eeskeho. especially I. 1932. op. cit. 1924). 3. pp. his “ Vorrede zu der Schrift: Rechenschaft des Glaubens. It is possible that ZiZka.

s0’ Cf.” No. pp. racy-socialism. 18. p. x43-44. whereupon foreign journalists were instructed to refer to it as the “ People’s Socialist Cf. 437. 272-76. As to the close alliance between early Czech anti-Germanism and antiund Alldeutschtum. 1940). About the real position of the Jews in the bliddle Ages in the Germanspeaking countries see Guido Kisch’s monumental work. 3. 1922). also Dr. 268. and Die detrtsche Frage. Cisterrtich: Erbe und Sendung im deutschen Rattm (Salzburg: Anton Pwtet. Wickham Steed (London : . Theodor Heuss (today President of Western Germany). Party. Cizitas Humana. p. mob in Prague on December I. I 129. H. truly formed a closed circle. Emil Capek (Prague: Sfinx.C. Ceskoslowenskd VlastiwMa. of the book. p. Especially important are his descriptions of the ideological bridges between German nationalism on one hand and democracy and socialism on the other. Georg Schiinerer G&ringer Akademischr Reden. Professor Botzenhart. Robert J. 203. Ott& slounik naucq (Prague. 91). H. Part V (” The State “). Paul I\ltrlisch.. Die deutschen Hochschulen in &terykch and die politisch-nationale Entmicklung tracir dem Jahre 1848 (Munich: Drei Nationalism-anti-Semitism-democMasken Verlag. Cf. Between 1919 and 1926 the N.411m and Unwin. the ideology of the N. p. Graham in Czechoslovakia. republished by the Bohemian National Alliance. (Yet the difference between soziul and sozialistisch should always be kept in mind. On the socialistic tendencies of the earlier nationalist movements in Austria (1860-1880) cf. I. 22-23. 250-55. 479 (article “ Politick+ vyvoj a strany v C. Cf. IV.S. called itself “ Czechoslovak Socialist Party.” Cf. x927). also Adolf Damaschke. pp. Wickham Steed. Was Naumann is mentioned as a ” forerunner. and a shorter outline in the Slozmik ndrodnohospod&sk$. 984-85. Prague: Orbis. so4 Cf. 1916. p. 439. p.) See also Note 810. pp.S. pp. \:nluable insights into the ideological aspects of the German national movement in Austria can be gained from Karl Braunias’ paper “ Osterreich als Volkerreich. TheJews in Medical German? (Chicago: Chicago University Press. ed.” yu3 The Political Parties of Czechoslovakia (2nd ed. Schonerer is mentioned several times in Hitler’s Mein Kanrpf. 8 (1939).S. 1909). 1900).” thereafter. cf.R.” Neues Judaism see Herman Munch. the article by W. as well as the sketch in an earlier edition. Part III. 9o5 The Making of a State.S. No. 1932).7 Reich als Republik 191%-19-8 (Stuttgart & Berlin: Cotta. und die Entwicklung des .C. Masarvkuv ottuv naufny (Prague. The very slogan Blut und Boden (blood and soil) stems from the socialist author i\ugust Winnip. Oo3Cf. ed. “ National Socialist Czechoslovak Party. 1928).” The Edinburgh Review.360 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY M1 But it was soon pick edup again by its German competitor. 1925).4lldeutschtums in der Ostmark (Vienna. “ A Programme for Peace. is based on the religioussocial tendencies of the Hussite period.” This appellative became rather embarrassing after the phenomenal rise of the German Nazis. also Her-wig. “ Panslawismus The riots of the Czech Abendland [. Here Cf. 1912-13). 1950). his Da. Also cf. 1936 Tabulation at the end “ Czechoslovak Sources and Documents.“). ‘I Georg Ritter von Schonerer. 1936).4ugsburp]. He was seconded by his editor in this accusation.) .S. socidlni a politicky (Prague.” in Josef Nadler and Heinrich van Srbik.” Kerner (Berkeley : University of California Press. 193x). ed. XXVIII. pp. the article by Karel SlaviEek in the Ot& ilocnik nau&q nosh doby (Prague! 1936).” ist National-SoAl? Eine Antwort (Berlin-Schorreberg. Hi&s Weg (Stuttgart: Union Deutschc Verlagsgesellschaft. 1933). -According to this paper. soGOn Georg van Schiinerer cf. 1897 were conducted amidsts the shouts : “ Down with the Germans ! Down with the Jews ! “. 1’. Wilhelm Kopke. 7 (July. For the pre-Nazi aspects of German socialism (“ Social Democracy I’). ein Vorklmpfer des volkisch-sozialen Gedankens in der Ostmark. 315-16. 1949.

4ussig in 1919. This seems to have been written in mid-October of that year (r9t8). 75-80. Josef Pfitzner. Walter Riehl und die Geschichte des Nationalso3ialismtts. 130. His statistics Socialism is essentially decayed ” liberalism. phetien wider das Dritte Reich. SWKarel Eng1i. Dr. The reason for Jung’s (Berlin: Juncker und Diinnhaupt. ” traits can be found in it.4us den Srhriften des Dr.) ‘ii Cf. cit. Das Sudetendeutschtum (Cologne: Herrnann Scha&stein. 135. op. Cf. Aus dcr Geschichte der detrtschen nationalro:rniistischen L4rbeiterbewegung rlltiisterreichs rend der Tschechoslozcnkei (Aussig. ‘i” Cf.“ on the disappearance of ” liberal ” and democratic votes which have been Cf. *I? Galera. 301322. p. p. pp. Johann Steiner. p. Galera’s title is doubtful. Cihula. 23-24. r 932). 39. A biography whose purpose was to extol the merits of Dr. pamphlet Unser Endaiel ! Einr Flugschrift fiir deutschen n.) The emphasis on the synthesis between the national and the socialistic element in nazism can also be found in the views of Friedrich Meinecke. s’5 Cf. Proch and Iiroy-probably none of them with a Teutonic background. 200. 78. cit.ationalso=icllirmur (Leipzig and Vienna. nor Burschofsky. (Pfitzner was executed by the Czechs in Prague in 1945.c. 1938).4ustria-the Nazi schismatics under the leadership of a certain Schulz-had separated from Hitler’s control at an earlier date. Sudetzn~leelctsclzland. also Hans Knirsch. Der notionale Sozialismus: seine Grundlagen. Munich : Deutscher \-olksverlag Dr. op. Gerlich und des Peters Itqbert Nanb OFM (Munich: Schnell und Steiner. pp. Gerlich’s article in Uer Geradr Beg (1932). Of course. Another group in . Riehl for the Nazi cause was Alexander Schilling-Schletter’s Dr. 918Cf. pp. Neither Stein (judging by his first name). 1936’1. The reader is warned that the difficulties in translating such terms as freiheitlich or national (not to mention social) are considerable. 38. (The first edition.” p. 46]). Krebs. 1y3y). 8’1 Cf. 67. e13 Cf. ‘ifi In A. transfer was his agitation on behalf of a nationalistic organization of railroad employees. nor Galera arc of German origin. profile. 70. p.~Heimkehr i?ISReich (Leipzig. . F. Rudolf Jung. 1918). 39. op. was unfortunately not available to us. arc most enlightening. cit. Froswitched to the Nazis. 1946). 39. Ciller. *ip He later became the leader of the National Socialists of Rump Austria. 1y50). 1~32). mit &em Anhang: Hitler in Oesterreich . Krrbs. published in . 39 and 82. p. Cf. Dr. p. Cf. Lc “ socialisme ullemund I’ : programme du parti allegmand des SudPtes (Prague: Orbis. b.. . on the “ Reichenberg -4ppea1. p. 1922). sein Werde@nl: and seinr Zielc (2nd ed. Gwtav . Die derrtschc Nationalbewegung Ibljl--193. Kumpf unr Biihmerz (Berlin: Volk und Reich. Krebs. p. The exact (‘iller also mentions as other earlv equivalents are not available in English. . Galera.3 1939). Karl Siegmar Baron yen Gal&a. H. 38. *I’ Krebs.NOTES 361 *OnCf. also Hans limbs. 1938 [” Sources et documents tchecoslovaques. 75. and. Even “ conservative-revolutionar) Die komenrative Rewlution in Deutschlarld ?yrS-~yj? (Stuttgart: Friedrich Vorwerk.4rmin Mohler is also right when he says the ideoloF of National Socialism is sometimes so vague that it is difficult to draw its exact Cf.. The term ” freiheitlich ” comes near to ” liberal ” and when we take the exact character of Central-European ” liberalism ” into consideration then the murdered Dr. ForlCufer des ~~ntionolooaiulisniris (Vienna : Ertl. p. Boepple. pp. insisting that Xational tells us the truth. organizers is. p.4dolf van Metnitz.” After the outrages of 1934 there was a rift between him and Hitler. Dr. p. the veteran German historian..

\~nveyshqw istoriya ?. 1938). The philo-Semitic attitude of the Habshurgs is also attested by S. ” Lance Corporal. 92AA courageous German writer. cit. p. Walter Schneefuss. I939). cf.~ Schicksal und Weg der Sudetendeutschen (Leipzig: Wilhelm Solmann. p. made Jan van Leyden (Hitler very thinly camouflaged) the “ hero ” of a biography: Bockelson. die najste Geshichte fiin yidishn Folk (Berlin and Warsaw: Kiiltiir Lige. 589. 14. 1947. not Corporal. quite rightly denied it. 76). A. 925A reproduction of it may be found in Krebs. 145. The tone of this volume indicates that efforts must have been made in certain Nazi circles to minimize Dr. dream was “ a socialism free of Romish and Jewish influence ” (cf. p. Wilhelm Bockelmann. p. T’orliiufer des Nationalsozialismus. P. Ein Sudetendeutscher.” writers. Captain Wiedemann. 285. 12. and on He may still p$Af. p.362 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY (Leipzig: Forum-Verlag. 53. W. die Karriere einer Idee (Berlin: Rowohlt. Hitler’s superior. 1937). . cf. 1932). P. OzzlGqfwiter. 1933). Riehl’s and that nazism was a synthesis of both-nationalism and socialism. Riehl had been profoundly influenced by the non-Jewish Social Democrats (Engelbert Pernerstorfer among them). Jun 6 was active in 1939 in Germany. 9”2 See A. C~c11. from Die Fur&e. saw to it that the later “ Fiihrer. 421 sq. Dubnov. Billing . p. p. . Hitler’s rank was Private First Class. y28 On Hans Krebs cf. 9. (no page number). 83. E. Fritz Reck-Rlalleczewen. cit. cit. die alte Tsajtn bis tsii hajotigen Tsajt. gymnastics teacher and ex-Catholic.A. pp. No. Gwchichte fines . Ottuc slovnik naucn\’ nm*P doby (Prague. p.3 (Ziirich : Europa-Verlag. Karl Vietz. The was misinterpreted by American British translation. Notes 743 744. 78. and still lives as a private citizen in iiustria. 393-94. R. 1919 (ibid. Geschichte des Nationalsozialismus.P. cf. Pvorliiufer des Nationalsozialismus. Parts of his remarkable defence speech can be glean. pp. Konrad Heiden.. The accusation was made that Hitler’s mother Geschichte kner Bewegung spoke no German. I. On Hans Knirsch (1877-1933). e 909Cf. Hans Krebs was executed by the Czechs in February. (In Yiddisch. adorned with a modified swastika. On the friendliness of the naroda (Berlin : Izdatelstvo “ Granit. p.+lassenzcahnes (Berlin : Schiitzen-Verlag. 9zo Krebs. 83. r931!. Aulaire. p.mreyskago 1928).’ Cf.. Ettinghausen (New York: Covici Fnede. Riehl broke entirely with National Socialism in later years. PP. 1933).. Van Marx zu Hitler (Munich: Franz Eher. Ciller. Riehl’s Of special value in this book is the insistence rBle in early National Socialism.sch?t Folk. 930Cf. Ciller. Fallen Bastions (London: Victor Gollancz. Geburt des D&ten Reiches: die Geschichte des n’utionalsozialisnrus bis Herbst 193. 200-I. Part III. St. 1938). g2i Cf.. “ Ein Leben fiir die Freiheit. never Hindenburg repeatedly referred to received the rank of a ” non-corn. Elizabeth Wiskemann. 831Cf. NSDAP: (Munich: Funk. 19. Deutsch-B~}lnlmischesisc~le. was so named on January 5. 4. The second D.s and Germam (London: Oxford University Press. Gedye. ‘934). 19.Jung..) There is also a Russian edition : S. I. op. 64. op. 89 sq. Hitler. -41~0 C. R. 12). M. Kaergel. Another facsimile shows a further appeal. Rudolf Olden. p. 1928). 916On Konrad Henlein. Dubnow in his Algemajne Geshichte fiin yidi. trans.” Hitler as der biihmische Gefreite. ibid. x936). III. Konrad Heiden. of this Nazi apologist on the fact that Dr. p.” in H. C. Yet Reck1lalleczewcn was ” found out ” and he died heroically in a concentration camp. s23 Cf. I 19.. op. p. 1934).” who was so extraordinarily disliked by his fellow soldiers.” Hohenzollerns to the Jews see Dr.

S. 984 On Streichrr’s earlier career cf. Compare also with Joseph C. 112. which was published in pamphlet form (Berlin. p. pp. This author mentions (p. Soldaten der Freiheit (Berlin: E. Billing. . XVII. “’ On the S&burg meeting cf. Geschichte der Nationalso=icclistischen Bewegung (2nd ed. Catholics were IO per cent. (Fully one third of the population of the Reich. 838On earlier nazism in Austria proper cf. 1946). “y42. pp. Conrad Heiden. p. Cf.NOTES 363 “’ Cf. private. Hans Fabricius. and 42 per cent. January 27.A.. Erich F.. Reschny and ILeh& in 1920. sondern eine auf These are Hitler’s words exakter Wissenschaft aufgebaute Volksbewegung.P. K.4rmy ? ” in the I-irginicl Quarterly. 3 (September. pp. p. could see in him a D&l With Top H&--the title under which a refugee author wrote about him) can he gleaned from hia lengthy deposition to American . This is also confirmed by Dr. 1932. p. also Bei unseren deutschen Briidern in der Tschechnslowakei. VII. 1933). Dec.” as noted down b\. are Catholics. His father was a postal employee in Posen (Poznari). No.79). Rudolf Jung. A.U. reprinted in The (London) Tablet.q. R. of Aussig was primarily recruited from the ranks of railroad employees. I. 1938). 1936).” Journal of Modern Hisfor?. XL-III. 313. No.S.021 (Tiibingen.. 190. 181-210. WBS unable to get data for 62 per cent. w Cf. Carl Landauer. Offetter Brief an Herm z’on Papen. Altiller. “ Les dCbuts du national-socialisme. dated Coburg. 821. Cf. Oct. 15. Berendt. 1~38. “’ Cf. 1942). The oficial published text (as so often) shows minor deviations. 192x). De7 nation& SoSzli. pp. “ The Allies and German>-‘s Future.of ” forerunners. p. by Benedikt. at WUY (-New \-ark: Foreign Poliq’ Association. 47) a “ Deutschnationalsozialistischer Verein fiir Oesterreich ” in 1919: and the establishment of an Austrian S.and state-employed white collar workers. Rohan d’O.) R’hJ Hitler Came into Power (New Y&k: Prentice Hall. 1937). pp. 1932). the speech by Deputy Fiihrer Martin Bormann. who wrote a book about The Roots of h’utional Socialism (New York : Dutton. 15.P. 9x Cf. 259-260. Harsch. p. 8 1-83. Butler. 91* ” Der Nationalsozialismus ist keine kultische Religion. German>. in his panel of six hundred leading Kational Socialists.wzrrs.. s37Ibid. Of these only six (Igraph?. rgzo-Jan. p. 38-3~. Berlin : Spaeth. 16. 1942) provides it with an--admittedI>rudimentar~-biblienumerating: sixty-four of them. I 9. 42.N.” Revue d’Allenone. 818 Professor Theodor Abel. 1934). SAT Hitler.” are Catholics (including two Frenchmen). Abel. The D. 71 (Sept. Hans Blever-HLrtl. @*’ “ What became of the Prussian . 8p3 Cf. and some workers. C. Ringer1 um Reirlr und Recht: zwei Jahrzehnte politisrher Anzcult ir. and rejected the title offered to him bq’ William II. is perfectly correct. 46-47. and Protestants 28 per cent. pp. T. 933Aussig was probably the most important centre of early Nazidom. 1 I 3. Etthofer. Oesterreich (Berlin : Traditionsverlag Rolk.A. teachers. But he figures erroneously as I-on Ludendorff in many an English and American book. “IL Conrad Heiden’s description and commentarr in his Die Gebrcvt des Dritten Reiches: die Geschichte des A’ationalsozialismu~ bis Herbst 1933 (Ziirich: Europa. l*orliizrfer des -~ationalso=iulismlts.this writer in September. Berichte der vom Kationalen Studentenbund Ttibingen (im deutschrn Hochschulring) in die Tschechoslowakei zum Studium der Lage der dortigen Deutschen entsandten dreikijpfigen Studienkommission. A. IO&IZ. Yet how incrediblv simple-minded Franz vnn Papen really was (only the very na<vt. . of those ethnically German. 9111 Ludendorff was not a Tunker. Ciller. Ko.

Soon after July 20.. Ley made a speech against the “ blue-blooded swine. Cf. I IO--I I. 398. pp. 311.“ -4 mai vildg kipe. “ Politikai rendszerek. “ Le confessioni di Vittorio AIussolini. Franz Neumann. n. so. Nationaler Sozialismus im neuetl Deutsckland (Berlin: Zeitgeschichte Verlag. and Gerhard Leibholz. and many an inmate in these camps also felt acutely the identiv Compare with Christopher Burnc~. Politisches ABC des neuen Reich. 356. Gottfried Keesse. the *’ right. vewats&en Kegen D. 226. pp. x945). Hitler. 243. especially pp. August 8. II (Politikai &et). 1933). x940). 145. “i Cf. x947). “ La nature et les formes de la denx~cratie. rc5 . Edgar Jung. Dec.wch einer Rechtsdeutung (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Y.” Cf.” a6RCf. is a notion which was also entertained by European Jews. Beck.” Thus the experience of Nazi-Communist collaboration was not isolated. Der HochHis trip to Rome in 1938 increased his anti-monarchic feelings. 399. hated the monarchy no less than the aristocracy.. and The San Francisco Chronicle.+). Ktirntner Zeitung. Mussolini also suffered from a morbid hatred of the nobility: cf. 98. 156. 1944). Cf. Strahl. 1933).csless Society (N. pp.d. 1935). ssi Cf.. 1944. cit. 50. 194.56. ssHCf. 24. 85. 1946).after the Anschluss.Guide Schmidt. sj? Cf. ed. 135. 34. Denis de Rougemont. r933)-see especially the append&. for instance. Die Sammlung Rehse: Dokumente der Ztitgeschichte (Munich: Eher. 377. p. E. *U Cf. 59. : W’. p. 212-13. Fischer. on the other hand. Die Sinndeutung der deutschen Revolution (Oldenburg: Stalling.Y. I 3. \ Immediately. The State of the Masses: the Threat of a Cla. Richard h’liiller-Freienfels. nouvelle version (N. p. 54-55. 1044. pp. Reventlow in Die Reichswarte. La dPmocmtic (Paris : Librairie Delagrave. Jules Romains. 7. Walter Rathenau.” and the Gauleiter of Carinthia compared the aristocracy to “ international Jewrv. 1939). Der Hoch verratsprozess gegen Dr.: Brmtano. 5 (Nov. Emil Lederer. Haensel and R. W’. w Cf. p.Iletapolitics. 1-2. 1938).r (sic) (Stuttgart: Engelhorn. 950 Cf. Gus&v Gratz (Budapest: Kirdlyi Magyar Egyetemi Nyomda. 202 (Julr. 1919). Norton. Dr.). The documents on pp. p. . Behemoth. XLIII. 187. Die WUP Gesellschaft (Berlin: S. BsQ Cf.. It was reprinted by Commonwed. 949-4 list of the victims has been published by Die Neue Zeit (Berlin) in an article by Emil D&fat. No. incidentally. 36X. H. p. Peter Viereck. 1930 : ” There is no such thing for us as the sanctity of private propem. op. Psvchologie des deutschen Jfenschen und seiner K&u (LIunich: C. 193oj. Dungeon L)emorrar~ (New York: Duell. See also Note 102. . of two German authors published in French: Hodolphe Laun (Hamburg). Document PS 3300 (thirty-first day of the trial). Guido Schmidt (Vienna: osterreichische Staatadruckerei. p. This Compare with the works author’s definition of Nazi democraq is on p. 379. VI (r936). Dit. 3-4. 40.atio~zalso=ialistischr -4rheiterpartei: LVer. 1948.” IL Tempo. Februav 23. 22-23. P. See p. p. Rome. yo-yi show an even more violent anti-capitalistic bias. Stadholder Biirckel announced in \‘ienna that he extended a friendly hand to everybody-including the CommunistsFor the Nazis the real enemy stood on but certainlv not to the Lepitimists.364 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY rnilitan authorities and presented in the Guido Schmidt case: cf. Die Deutsche A. La part du diable. The of Nazi and Communist rule. 151. Lhzld Ottlik. Reventlow. es5 Cf. x12-15 (where the name of the author is misspelt as “ Dorfat “). 16. A. This. p. C. No. VII. Dresler and Fritz Maier-Hartmann. w Cf. pp. p.” ilrrhives de philosopkie du droit et de sociologiejuridiqrre. 307. Dr. Sloane and Pierce.

Compare also with II. collaboraThis is nothing new when we remember ” liberal “-absolutistic tion. 271. * racialism. 968Cf.S. 861Cf. The lack of intellectual freedom. Conservatism Revisited. pp. 5+* Cf. 1939. Rjazanow (A. P. 88-97. TosC Ortega y Gasset.. Der . 1864). the Communist and the Nazi “ common man ” something verv new.. I 934).sammttrusguhc. H.. “ Politikai rendszerek. In this connection it is interesting to note that the Polish armtes carried our 30 pogroms.staged 106 (ibid. Karl Rlars and Friedrich Engels. r9.. 3 I. s. 159. historisch-kritischc Ge. dated March 7. 1929). No. Les e’&vains jvanrais et le mirage allenmud 1Sg0-1940 (Paris: Bovin et Cie. p. “’ Cf. (JO. 1937. 192 (letter of Engels dated Xobember 2. Jean-Marie CarrC. 371 . Brirf+---. . IO. III. 122 (letter of Engels. 84 (letter from Mars TOEngels.4nti-Semitism This article is limited to antimentary. 01. nothing paradoxical about anti-Judaism within a socialistic in Socialism.NOTES 365 ‘O” Reventlow. 17-38. naturallv. Schriften.R. Browne.” Commentary. July 30.-62. in recent years cf. IMamr (hlunich : Eher. but that the Red Arm>. pp..” ComCompare also with Samuel Gringauz.41. ‘71 n. Peter Viereck. gas Cf. 676-77. the experiences of Papen’s nephew in a concentration camp: F&s van l’apen. Stenning (New York: Inter50 national Publishers. 1950). Schwarz. Simon Dubnow. Cf. Ohrar complcfas (%Iexico Cite: Edici6n Seneca. trans. . 708 (Oct. pp.: Munich: Eher. Jewish tendencies in French socialism. Ernest Henan was. 384-85.*+l. p.. op. p. p. Compare also with Erik v. 174-80 . Vc%isch-kommunistische Einigung ? (Leipzig : Graphische Werke. S. pp. 6 . Crossman. 1924). 1930). 137-38. Friedrich Enpels. sB3As quoted in an Associated Press report. II.4pril.” in Waldo 961Cf. trans.” pp.52)-an impressive series of massacres among the Jews by a body allegedly free from the taint of 1. Brieje Ilistoriscll-krifisclre Ge. 5. pp..iszld Ottlik. did not weigh heavil! on those who had nothing to say.Ioscow : Marx-Engels Institute.” also ibid. Sept. 1950). ” . *’ The New Antl-Semitism in the Soviet Union. 12. 371-73. and the Governed. 435-48. As to the development of anti-Judaism in the U. 702. Obviously. Hitler Speaks. PP. Dr. A. 172-73. III. 1938). 185. Cf.~mtattsgabe. bourgeois love for loot. Dubnow. Karl Marx. Ernst Iiiefer. I~. p71Cf. Cf.-X. x57-61. Hermann Rauschning. S 11. IS. L. cit. 365. Karl Marx. Goebbels. And the lack of liberties is verv relative and personal. IS. “ Government R. Weltgcschichtc des jiidzschm T-~Jkcs. 1. Selected Essays..Xbteilung of Ti’erkc. Historia como sistemn 3‘ Del imperia romano (Xladrid: Neither is thr collaboration between Kevista de1 Occidente. ~\~ove~~sl~cr~a Istoriya. H. 82. OBF Goebbels.>. 28. ~0 Ibid.43). p. The Universal Jercish EncJ~ciopaedia (New York. ” Xational19471. -4ntonio Machado. 072Cf. D. 1926). This author was a Spanish exile who diedln 1939. at times. N. I). J. II. 366. celebrated the Austrian defeat at K(iniggriitz (Sadova).%‘a&Sozi: Fragen und Antzc>ortm jiir den Nafionalsozial~~fen (4th edn. Oo7 Cf.). 22. 4 (. 19401. there is framework. I. xS56). Ein vote Pope>2 spricht (Nijmegen. quoting Hitler as follows: “ I am not only the conqueror but also the executor of >. stripped of its Jewish Talmudic dognxa. VII.&-Sozi.laraism-of that part Cf. 1862).S. J. 973 Cf. 1936 and in The Nero Ibrk Time. 3h. ed. pp. VIII. 1942). and of the materialistic. p. Sept. sozialismus und Common Sense.. Der A. Steinberg (Berlin: Jiidischer Verlag. DW unhekanntc S.” Schzceizer Rundschau. that is essential and justified. almost fanatically pro-Prussian and Michelet Cf. 100-3. No. III. Brirjc. Kuehnelt-Leddihn.

December 8. Nationalbolschewismus (Hamburg : Hanseatische Verlagsanstalt 1933). Werkowitsch. pp. 1932).p. was executed in April.” Heft I]). ed. Vol. and that he ohares no “ Austrian ” animosity against the Czechs-or any other people. Dr. Czechs and Germans. Foppa. IoZk und Gem&de (Aussig : Nationalsozialistische @8P Johann von Leers. who died in !936. Albrecht. Ehart (ed. 535-45. Sudetendeutsche Einheitsbewegung: Werden und Erfiillung (Karlsbad. Dollfuss’ assassin Planetta came from Vischau in bloravia. Wurnig. 2. p.” 9’5 From G. A History of National Socialism (London: Sudetendeutscher Methuen.varhkriegs (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. fiir Volk und Heimat (Eger. who is the modern coiner of the term “ Drittes Reich. terror is another aspect of the dictatorial movements. Other sources: Erich Kline. also with E&ch Miiller.” Der ‘C’Uische Beobachter. 310. XCIX. Der deutsche d&and: Cf. Domes. II. Sevss (Zajic). Unter Hitlers Fahnen: grossdeutsches Liederbuch (K. Berdinik. 3: “ Terror makes proselytes for the Chouans as it does for the Jacobins : one joins them to be spared. Wanek. He was violently attacked by Alfred Rosenberg in an article entitled “ Gegen Tarmmg und Fiilschung. 1050). Jagschitsch. Derda. p. XIII. 1793-1798.). s80Cf.” committed suicide in 1924. Jerabek. 186: Dyrssen belonged “ National Socialism is the primitive form of Prussianism. 57.). or the Economic Consequences of Mr. n. 315. J. and there are Chouans by force as there are republicans by force. Correspondance i&d& de Mallet du Pan avec la cow de Vienne. 1934). last page. 4. Kozich. Slupetzky. his The party allegiance of his would-be accomplice Feike from Prerau (Prefov). OS4 Arthur Moeller van den Bruck. Papez.: Verlag Grossdeutschland. 651 (March I?. Kewes (London : Oxford University Press. 33.d.I\ustrian Nazis: Michalek. Spengler. 9’7 We would like to mention that the present author is partly of Czech (Taborite) ancestry. 1936 [” Nationalsozialistische Bibliothek. No. 1946). B6hmerlanajahrbuch Monatshefte. Konrad Heiden. The Carthagitian peace. Reschny. p. E. 1932). the tabulations in Etienne Mantoux. 44-46 . Brockhaus (1932 ed. p. 1932). Foglar. Wiskemann. The crisis in Germany was not graver during 1932 than in the f United States. p. Die Botschaft des &tens (Breslau. 1945. s’9 In Metnitz’ Die deutsche h’ationalbewegung and Bleper-HBrtl’s Ringen urn Reich und Recht we find the following names of . 1931). p. Blaschke. Formanek. s78Cf.366 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY e (June. Jakubitschek. Andre Michel (Paris: Plon. Wessely. I I 5. Gustav Stolper. 1933. dir Revolution des . and Haushofer himself was forced to . P. Mallet du OV4 She. C&i. Vol. pp. Juv.). I. Hudl (Hudal ?). assassin Drtil is doubtful. Pan commented on its efficiency during the French Revolution: cf. Carl Dyrssen. Haushofer’s son. 197. ?r‘eh&. Woitsche. He writes about Bohemian National Socialism : “ For all practical purposes it influenced Adolf Hitler’s founding of the party very little. Schicksalskampf (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut. 1884). Cf.24. n. Nietzsche was furiously criticized for his pro-Jewish and anti-German utterances. and was bitterly assailed by the party press. Pfitzner.8-29. Das Programm der NSDAP (Munich: Eher. 1934). Bolek. Mantoux also quoted Das deutsche Volkseinkonrmen vor und nach dem Kriege: Einzelschrifte?t zur Statistik des deutschen Reichs (Berlin. Gall& Blosch. was prevented from pubhshing the second volume of his Jahre der EntschetdunKen. and The New York Times.” Compare to the stronglv pro-Russian. Tomschitz. x949). Kral. Suchenwirth (Suchanek). Oal Cf. This Age of Fable.” 983The economic reasons for the rise of the movement as such are often overemphasized. 1937). 1921).IL'O. Mattausch. National Bolshevik wing of the party. pp. 22-25. pp. 876 Cf. Feder..

“ Le risque au service de la prudence.) Add to Note 535. George F. 1951). 104.” Etudes carmf!litaines. for that mv 1 seize the sentiments are continually quoted ajiainst the good party. whether for seven years or for the life of the King. P. de Lafayette.l. rejecting the notion of a ” democratization ” of Russia. Paris: Calmann-L&y. 52 note. 188X). I. Gustave Thibon.” Cf. XXIV. Anne Gary hlorris (New York: Scribner.“Cf. On the relationship between Christian theism and the ” father imart ” in medical psycholog\. opportunity to tell him that I am opposed to the democracy from regard to liberty. the article “ Tradition ist wichtiger als Umwelt ” in Salzburger Nuchtrirhten(VI1. XXIX. 98’ Hence Dr.Gouverneur aIorris. Stefan George died in Switzerland and willed that his body should not be brought back to Germany as long as the Nazis ruled. The Habeas Corpus is the single advantage which our government has over other countries. sy (September. the paper of Dr. 1789: ” . 103-4. von Segesser. See his Dialogues et fragments philosophiques (13th ed.” Psyche’. 196. ” America and the Russian Future ” in Foreign ilffairs. SCPPLE&lENTARY NOTES . I.4dd to Sate 79.4t dinner 1 sit next to &I. 1y51). pp. stressed the relativity of the means of achieving lasting freedom. J. ed.) Cf. . Devastating for the democratic and egalitarian assumptions were the results of a large-scale investigation of the intelligence of a quarter million German schoolchildren between the ages of IO and 14. 9. Diaries and Letters of Gowerneur . 583-88. Vol. who tells me I injure the cause. ” Studien und Glossen zur Tagesgeschichte. *s8 Cf. Voltaire Dictionnairc de philosophic (Paris : Lebigre F&es. 3. Nappold. 3 (April. 355-56. X-1.Worris. who wrote on June ~3. Wysz. $‘” It is therefore refreshing to see a high official of theU S. @s6 Ernest Renan saw a monstrous increase of human inequality in spite of the “ democratic ” triumph of technology. 1936). The confusion about the Teutonic Knights comes from the fact that the National Socialists established training schools called Ordensburgen . I. 20-21.. 1834). (This paper was read at the Second International Catholic Congress of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy. 325.” Sammlung kleiner Schriften (Bern: K. 1y43). appears to me so immaterial that I would not give half a crown to turn the scale one way or the other.” Cf. pp. 185) August II. State Department Cf. Johnson could say: ” The duration of Parliament. we are faced here by two successive (but basically identlcalj manifestations of the corruption of political man. Towards a New ilristocracy (London: Faber and Faber. p. Kennan. C. NOTES TO CHAPTER EIGHT S’s Cf. Rhaban Liertz ” L’imagr du p&-e et son influence sur l’iducdtion religieuse. ’ s88“ One should never forget that totalitarian tyrannv is the result of the democratic and humanitarian m?stiqus. Von Segesser. Add io Note 4XII. the great Swiss Catholic leader of the nineteenth century. r877). 1951. The same sentiment was voiced b\. pp. III. A. The former is not opposed to the latter as the remedy is to the disease.NOTES 367 resign from his position in the German Academy of Sciences as early as 1935. (Research Project of the Institur fiir empirische Soziologie in Hanover. then i\merican Ambassador to Paris.

hge+ ” reaction. is. in modern societies than the prmciple that there are no absolutes .3. The Fijhrer expressed his gratitude to the German Socialists for having destroyed the monarchical institutions in German)-. Hannah iZrendt in her thoughtful volume The Origim of Totnlitarianisnz (New York: Harcourt Brace. 258. I u+) I. 30.4dr/ to Note 9. ” Ibrlers Tis. Henry Picker. ed. pp. . A comparison between the German and the New World brands of anti->emitism can be ftbund in the book of thy Jewish convert Karl . On the American influence in France prior to the Revolution cf.” (i:f.ote 823. recent contribution to American nihilism and relativism in legal thinking can be found in Chief Justice \-inson’s opinion upholding ” Zothinr: is more certain the conviction of eleven Communi. Baron de Barante (Paris : Central Curcq:c (with the direct co-operation of Rome and higrade.s~in~.19. Riggnes de Louis XV et Louis XVI. June IS. pp.) .368 LIBERTY OR EQUALITY Add to Xote 553. Mhnroires. ” I>emocracy ” and modern tyranny like to league toeether acamst all forms of Compare also with Dr. makes a good case for the notion that Italian Fascism (as ” Fascism ” m general) at its worst is ” semi-totalitari.” True totalitarianism she sees only in the Russian and German experiments. 195-97. Add to Note 725.New York: Harcourt Brace.I’re~>. 195r).t leaders. .” II. T/W Pillar of Fire (. /~.‘s article in Borrov‘s mag:rzinr. 1951).Stem.. 24. Add to Note X66. PP. Add to I\. 787 sq.“L)uirk (11unich. prachr. p..m. we must reply that all concepts are relative. June r. and tl:r nicer< indirrcr support of Czechoslovakia) can be seen from Elizabeth \\-iskcmann’~ Y’/w KONIEHuh . IV. x929).-Ixif (London : Oxford l’niversit>. Hitler und die KDnipe. also Comte de Saint Priest. 243-41. To what extent Hitler and the wholt~ Nazi macliinc pursuc~d an anti-Habsburc and anti-monarchical p&c!.” ‘. 1951. Friix 1\Iorle:. rggr).


14. 320 Alix. 160.. 191 Adler. Friedrich. refer to the main theme of this book. 351 Alcaxarquivir.339. 27879. 78 Albert I. (Czech). 74. King of the Belgians. 237. 200. 125.. 298 Adler.299. 6. 345. Counter-Pope.” ror ” Americanism ” (heresy).2gr. 341 Amerling! K. 298. 315 371 since they Alliances. 219. 344 Anarchists. 34x-42. 83. are listed only in parts.4dler. 302. r 9r Agrarianism. 311.. Prince Consort. 13.” 121 Administration. 286 Adams. (Catholic) 191. 285. 236 Academic Francaise.53. 257. 303. 265 Antichrist. the (Catholic implications). 356 203. 192-93. Frsher. 311 Anschluss.INDEX liberalism. 305. 286 Adler. 7. I 82 Agar. 201-02. John Quincy. 320 Anaclet II. 205. Sir Norman. 129 Almapro San Martin.295. 310. freedom. 82 ” Alloy. 202-03. 320. 152. 34. Herbert. 300. Ephraim D. 68.62. 317 Adams. 368 Anti-Leopoldism (Belgium). see United States American Catholic Philosophical -4ssociation. 300. Karl. 251-53. Theodor. 352 ” American way of life. 336. 244-45 Absolutism. 277. 14. 322. Lord Angell. 24. 339 Alsace-Lorraine. 143 Acton. Emperor of Russia. 286 Age limits. C. 142 Alexander I. 84.. 311. 109.” monarchical. 141 n . 240. 216 Anti-clericalism. James T.3or. Queen of England. 99. 82-83. 265-66.348 Xdamites. 3 I 8 Alleghanies. 365. B. 285. see Norton... Lord (John Dalberg-Acton). 299. Henri-Frederic. 280 Anderley. I 96 Anne of Bohemia. military. Emperor of Russia. 286 “ American Gothic. 174 Agnosticism. 286. 140. Viktor. St. Empress of Russia. A Abel. 344 Adams. Mortimer.4 Altruism. 128. 212. President of the United States. 3.286. 298. 153.. 310.” 182-83 American Revolution. 337 An&m RPgime. 62. 13. 322 America. 44. 346 Adams. 88. The terms libmty.. 267-68. ~24 Advisers (royal). Anti-Judaism. 95. 330.52 Alexander II. 302 Adams. John.338. 244 Anti-Catholicism. S. democracy. 319. 2. 324 Ambrose. Dr. Albert. 335 Alfons of Liguori. 251 i\mes. Brooks. 307 Amiel.201.238. 341 Anglicanism. 122.289. 294. equality. 360. 14. 170-71. 295. Otto. Rudolf. Charles F. 141. 8. rag Amateurism. 26. 273-74. 159. 6. 313 Adam. 106. 203 Anarchist leanings.22. 19’~ 242. Max. 156. see Evolution. 34’ Adams. 3 16 Agape.299.241. 65. 292. 293 . President of the United States. 254. 150. 212 156 Anonymity. I 8 I Allers. 286.298 Adams. 27. Henry. 357 Anti-fascism. 153 Albigenses (Cathari). 363 Absolute. Dr. Melchor de. 55-56. ‘59. 150. 130. 77-78. St. 270. 243.256 “ -Esthetic government. 228-230. 58. political Anarchism. 3ro Ammon. 155 Ana/&losis. 753. 317 Adam (and Eve). 38 Anti-Hitlerism (Marxist).

213. Armed 147. Felix de. 30. 31 I Beggars. Walter.” 47. 44-45. Lord. Dr.. (National Socialists in) 361. 2 I 8 _. 295 d’a4uInoy. 237. F. 226. 174-75 Authority. Marshal Pretro. 185-86. S. I 55 IOO. 256. 314. Aristotle. Count Casimir. 259 Austria. Franz von.. 288. 38. 79 Assassination. 258 Bachofen. Tames. 61. Gertrud. 3 I 5 AnJ. Count Anton A.67. Michael.ry. 293. da Cunha on) 295 d’Antonio Fernando.5. Stanley (Lord). 54 Arimichi. 336. 2o4Q5. 295. Ebisawa. 198. 338. 248 Bagehot. Bernard Iddings. 167-68. 171. 213. 51. Amaldo di Brescia. 328 Association (see also Coalition). 145 Arco-Valley.. 49. fOrCeS 162 (SfIDy). 337 Baring. 339 Augustinianism. Maurice. 31 I Baldwin. 326. 71 Athens. 217. Benjamin Beaujour. thesis) 327. 293 Aron. 107. 190-91. 52. 289 B Baader. 334 Austro-Prussian War. 240-41 Authorities. 314. 256. 247. 345 Balfour.Suarez 32. 18. 331 Be:. Fernand. 162 Atlantic Charter. 88 Averroism. 368 ilretz. 48. 50. 354. 359 Apponyl. 38 Aristocracy (form of government). 20. 318 Aulard. Hannah. 174. 331. (German national movement in) 360. Austro . 182. 215. 200 Aschendorf-Htimmling (district). 76. 258.. Le Jumel.. Count Albert. 168-77. 193 Beerbohm. 3 I =J of. Jeremy. 305 Atheism. 38. 339 Belgium. 289 Aryans. Stringfellow. secular. 339 . J. acclamation) 328 Authority. 12. 356 Baunard. 35-36 Astrid. (and 171-74. (E. Gracchus. 297. 14.5 Bellarmine. Anti-Semitism. 63 Bell. 244. 14. 331 Bavarian People’s Party. 304 Aubert. 156. Hanson W. 32. 170. evidence of. Picards. 358-59 Behn. 192-93. 333-34 Arendt. 324 Augustine. 128. Matthew. 302 Belknap. Robert. 333 Antonowytsch. Baron de. 23 I. Jacques.Hungarian monarchy. 315. 139.363 102 Austrian revolutions. 316 Behrman. 140. Belisaiius. 57. 294. Pickarts). 303 Barante. Arturo. 346. 300 Barker. 254 Badoglio. 58. 288. 107. 296. r4r n. 327 Barea. Marie C. 191. 98. see Anti-Judaism Antonine. 25% 346. 297 Belanger. 202.26. begging. natural. Aristocracy.. 6. 296 Baldensperger. 198. examples. 25% 260. 309.290 Badeni.372 INDEX Authority. Alfred.: FF6h (as opposed to knowledge). Auguste. I 01. I *7 Augustus. Siegfried. 203 Arnold. St. Bavarians.46. Beaconsfield. Albert. 131. 291 Bavaria. 339 Antonio “ Conselheiro. 305. 323 Argovia (Aargau). Queen of Belgians. 198 Ballin. 156 Astrow. 42-43. 34’ Bainville. political. 194-95 political. 321. 241. 296. M&h%. 354 Baldwin. Wladimir. 7. Max. (Bellarmine . 141 n. 257. 331.. 201 Authoritarianism. Irving. hia. Hans. Raymond. 56. St. 355 Baker. 57. 273. 332 Beghards (Bepards. 746 Baku&. 6. 262 see Disraeli. 336. 35 r Baron. 349 Baroque. 326 . 258. St. 161. 141. 348 Bartos.. N. 50. 137. 14. 253. 321 Babbitt. in monarchies. 218. 191. 3or Baboeuf. Sir Ernest. 219. 176-77 Authority. 18. 337. 255. 141. 206. F. 355 . 234 Barr. Lord. transference 327 Average man. 290 Barth: Karl. 342 -4ussig (csti-nad-Labem). 221. 77. J. 28. 362. 283. 223-27 Authority. 338. M. 331. 344. Abbe.

pubiishers. 320. 345 Bloch Iwan. Crane. 330 Boutmy.373 Bellarmine-Jefferson legend. 152. Martin. 212-16. 309 Beveridge.. ” agrarian saint. 319 Beze. 357 Binder. 97. 314. Protestant. Ernest. Vicomte de.. 242. 299 Bourne. 365 Brownson. 20. 346 Brinton. 305. 137.Jeren<y. Fred Gladstone. 263. 352 Bestiality. 239 Bloy. 352. Ernst. 2~1 Blake. 330 Boegner. John Wilkes. 197 Bongar.321. Theodor. 203 Benz. 320. 34:. 258 Brethren (b&i). 348 Bismarck. 342 Boy Scouts. Voita. Eugen Blondel. Ludwig. J. C. 264 Ben&. 295.‘ Bonarenture. 305.. 293 Bevin.). L. Sandra.. 351 Bro.293. Louis G. van. so. Hermann.). Edmond. 3 56 Bentharn. 299 Bowen. Maurice. Dr. 330 Boehmer. Catherine.. Marc. 14. J. 63. 250 Briand. 352 Bernstein. Edward. A. Professor. 353. Abel. 351 Bremen. 362 Bockelson. 323. 24. Pope. 310. Paul. 314. 342 Berendt. 353 Bromfield. General Georges (Boulanoism). 307. ‘William. Erich F. 366 Billington.308. 240-41. Jacques B. 348 Bezold. 329 Berlin. 17. 196 Botticelli. 161. Ray Allen. 299. Prince Otto.” 251 Bohlau. Gegman. 332. 248 Bernanos. 350 Boulanger. 257. 355 “ Britannia ” (symbol). Leon. 312 Boeurnil.. Charles H. 139. Albert J. Cardinal Louis. y” Boii. 332 Birth-rates.. 3~1. B. 325 Broeckx. 338 Bernouilli. 203 Bourget. Bruce. Dr. 122 Bourgeois (spirit). 351 Braganca (House of). Henry F. Simon. 340 Browne. 152 Bolivar. 331 Briining. 350. 304. 305 Brownson. 354 Briinn (Brno).. Heinrich. Berdiaeff. Waldo R. Nicholas. . 202. 296 Bourne. 341. Josef. Karl. 353 Bogner. 242 Bratianu. 192. 742 Berdvaev (Berd&er. 124 Bockelmann. 325.wn.. Orestes A. 294. 2I I Bishops. 230-3 I Bibliolatry. 316. 168.ism (see also Caxzarism). Lord. 253. Julius. 319. 358 Bible.. 248 Brougham. Hans. 293. 326-27 Bormann. 145 Brieger. House of. 214. Dr. 334 Bluntschli.. 193. roj Billing. 76.” 21. Geoffrey. 315 Booth. I IS. Hilaire.J. 289. Dr. 349. 197. 212 Bohemia-Moravia. 19 Bleyer-Hartl. R. S. Georges.. 354 Berlin. 248 Bolingbroke. 295 Brown. 323~ 327. St.. 323 Boston. Heinrich. 345 “ Bolsheviks?” 202-03 Bonald. 260.. Julien. ZI-22. 246. 54 Betts. 211. 41. etc. 203. 254 Bruncken. 157 Benda. 327 Binchy. 322. SUEIan van Levden Body.. D. J. 305. Emil. 220 BGhm.. 353.. r&. Hans. F. 360 Brazil. 312. 141 . 296.. 329. 345 Braunias. 233 Boston College. James (S. 326. 334 Borchardt. Ionel and Vintila. 161. 154. Catholic-view of. Theodore de. 325 Billot. Ellin. Ulrich. Daniel. 353 Brussels. 363 Bossuet. 335 Boniface VIII. 327 Bonaparte (House of). 342Bernhart. 47. 363-66 Bliven. 340 Bourier. 47. 145 Bratton. 168 Belloc.. Randolph. W. A.4ristide.z.. 407 289. 338 Bonnard. 157. 174. 24% 249%251-S&356 ” Bohemianism. C. Electorate of. 182 Botzenhart. 244. 363 Bergstraesser. 331. 33’~ 359 Black (colour). 356 BeneS. Emile. 310 Blood. Louis. 147 Bo. 314 Brunner. see Duehren. Richard. 62 Bourbon. 362. 291. W. Wilhelm. 316 Brandenburg. 148 Brodrick. Lord. 2 I 3. 14.

308. Edmund.). 44. revolutions) 185 . 298. 298 &UT& E. 316 Busch. 345 Casement. 278 Cater. 298. KuehneltLeddihn). 234 “ Catholic Programme.2. Cap&ran. 324' 14. 352 Buenos Aires. 23-24. I 53-54 Caesar. 338. Jean-Marie. Calvinism. 5x-52. 184. 2 I 2 Capitol Hill. 241. William C. 294. Alexis. 306.56. 61. 293 Capitant.irine II.67.7I-72. 193-94.II7. 318.. 5. Bureaucracy (official$. 243 Catholic Periodical Index. 48. 126. Christopher.307. 287. Elizabeth. Louis. van. 160. 161 “ John Bull. 288. 187 Casalis. 239. 186 Cabinet wars. (and 1ih-w) 335 Catholicism 318 144.Bwe. 328 Caulaincourt. 46. 309. 300.323..355 121-22. 309.228. Madame de. 183. 26. 43. 317 Carol I. 351 Caoito von Haeenau. Armand A. 339 Catiline. II". 331>340. 163 Capuchin crypt (Vienna).288. (character of) 188208. Sir Roger. Rent!.67. MiSS E. S'-51. Harold Dean.234. 354 Butler. (E. 339 Biirckel. 41. John C. 66 Cato. Sir Cyril. Calhoun. 254. 364 Burnham. Bartolome de las. Marquis X53-549321 de. 365 Carrel.349. N. 222 . 77. 24X-42.74 313>335? 338 352 Cathrein. Catholics. H. (libertarian implications of) 282-83 . T. (internal tensions) 186-87. Conte di. bishop. Catholic culture. 86-87.232. 299 Bubnoff. Ca%licism Catholicism: Catholicism. &I.. 285 Cameron. Calvinists. 363 Byelozerski. 322 Campbell. I I5 Cargill. Spanish 334 in the ’ United 199. (Centre) 2j1. 286 Butler. 19-20. Victor (S. 301. Jacob. 183. x+9 Bu. 337 Bulgaria. 173 Careers. 70-71. 307 Calvin. IIO. 262 Partv of Germany-.” 148 Bullitt. J. 128. Eugene. 293. 301 C’amoes. 334 Capital. 316 Campan. 302 Ca. 201-02 Carmona. 50-52.297. 45 Cavour. c~sa~m.71121 (at German elections) 262.340. Burschofsky..361 Burt.. J.76. James.67. 59-60. 226. 299. I4. College of. M. 308 Burton. Cavaignac. (logic and reason) 189.. 323. 324 Capitalism 302 and socialism. 235. General.. Ca%olicism Catholicism’ 318-19 234- 221. O. C. 20. 353 319. James (Lord). 289. _ . General. capitalism. 348 Casas. 147. 326. 79. 236. v. 3 10 Cartesian philosophy. 22-23.298.352~ Burney. 327 Castlereagh. 248 Centralization. Camillo.. J. Ferdinand. I 84 (and Catholic nations. centralism. 50.34.196-98. (development of) 239-40. 300. 242-43. F. 365 294.59. 364 Burckhardt. 299. 17. 153 CarrC. 309 Biirck. Georg.). Sir Richard.35I. I I. democracy) 299 48.” 186 Catholic society. 304. Lord. Butler. 290 Carlism. 191. 233. Rohan d’O. . political. Francis S. (and Burke. 296. 286. 41..65-66.. 57. 285.201 Centrist IOI. Empress of Russia. French 334 Irish. Cambridge Medieval History. 209. John. 285. 292 C Cabaneiro. 203. 308. N. 336 Buckle. 190.236.ISo. Nicholas Murray. States. 193 Catholicism. Gauleiter of Austria. 161 Celts. Luis de. 1's~ pictorial character.r6essman (m Catholic societies). 18. Noel.. 163. 301. 21. 196. in the dispersion. 339 Capital punishment. President of Portugal. 185 Cardinals. King of Rumania. 14. 53.

see War between the States Civil War. 346 Colonies. 2S2-83. 19698’. 161 Chapman.90. 68. 315 Church. 27 Claudel. . 247. (” schematic “) (Christian) I 63-64. international. 339 (Austrian Christlichsoziale Catholic Party). 302 . 293 . 126 Coburg. House of. 145. 159 Christ.216. 104 Conscription. (totalitarian) 199. 296 Conclave. Eugene. 103 Will) 336.5. “ Common &Ian. 310. Ii’. 277 Choisy. 75. 33S-39 Free Civil liberties. 219 266 Communism. Georges. G. 128 Chinomiki (Russ. British and French. 302 Chateaubriand. 5. 312. 3 14 Charles I. W. 358-59 Code of Canon Law. 336 Chaves. 89. 213. 346. W. 196 Christina. Francois R. 333 Cihula. 287 Conpar. 338 Coalition. 289. 157. Conservative Party of Canada. ISS. Paul. 13.. r4t. 203 Columbia (symbol). 186. city of. ZOI China. Evangelical. 244. 351 Chambon. 170. Peter. Emperor of Austria. 356 Chesterton. 106 Citizenship (as opposed to nationality or race). Colonel. ‘95. 48 Ciechanowski. 243. ” 334 Cernjr.205 Party (of Great Britain). 42. 52. American. H. Catholic. I 73 Confederacy. 70 Christianity. 196. John Jay. 198.INDEX Cermak. 320 Conspiratorial thesis of National Socialist rise. 288 Chambers. A.316 Cochlaeus. 3 18 Clement XI. 332 Class pride. 240 Community feelings.244. Countess Sophie (Duchess of Hohenberg). Pope. Communism. 25 I Chambeau.P. Luis. Jan. political.. Sonderbmdskrieg). (end of) 84-S5 . War of. 290-91. 146. 237-38. 361 Communism. Russian. 83-84. 120. 170. 60-61. 356 Commercialism. 54. 267 Colleges.auguste. German. 16. 337. 163-64. 353 Chopin. 261 Confidence. Holy Roman Emperor.. 316 ChelEicky. 196 Clement. King of Denmark. 196 Christian X. 220 Church (compared with State). Clemency. Queen ofPt.228. 141 Class struggle.285 Co-election. 250. 106. 307 Chevr& Henri. 352 Change of governments. 174.. co-founder of Sokol. 106 Colbert. 5x-52. 32 j Collegium Clementinum. 353 Chamberlin. K. 193 Compromise. Civil War. 359 Chotek.). 334 Clericalism. AbbC. Jacques. 350 Christ. Mayor of Chicago. 347 . I 56 Christian Brothers. 189 Claudianus.ien. 362 Citizen. 196-98. 336 Child Labor Amendment (U. 217-18. 155 Charles V. R. 322 Charles Martell. 10. II I. Vicomte de. (and forms of government) 137-38 Christians. 309. role of. 153. 191 Civilization 49. SS Conscience. 272. 192.247> 331 375 Class feeling. 25. Josef. 156 Charles III. Yves (O. 127. 199. 45-46. 334-45 Comte. according to Spinoza.” 88.r. Amos (Komensk?). 322 Clemenceau. 203.). Johannes. 5. 201 Ciller.S. Jules. 348 Congress. 339 Co!lectivism.354 Charlemagne. 189-90. Common good (bonum commune). officials). 257. Mystical Body of. 34S. 148 Comenius. 309. 35. 240. 97-102. 79. 354 111. Jesus. 186 Common denominator (common framework of reference). 159-60 Conformity. 361. (and Conservatiyr 100. 280. 98 Church. 356 Constance. communists. Catholic in the United States.. 122. 176 8. Holy Roman Emperor. 52. American. Anton J. 293. 267. King of Spain. 200--01. Austrian xational-Socialist. Russian.

348 Denis. 180. 81 Custine. Martin C. 308 Deroulede. 103. Jacksoman. 90-91 Criminals. 56-57.). 264 Democracy. 359 Czotgosz. Dormer. 360 National E. 64 Comelissen. 24x-49. -234 Dewey. 145 Crossman. Astolphe. 27. 3 I I.P. 203 Designation (of authority) 2’. 334 D D. 309 Democracy. Death. 310. T. 265..251-53 Czerwenka. I-&s. R. 52. 3 I 2 Democracy.P.J. 335-36 Criminals. 321 Criminality. total (example of). 127--2X.. 232 Corpus Iuris Canonin’. I 12. 331. Bertha. 112 n. Dr. 292. see German Socialist Workers’ Party Daimonic man. Christian. 306 Demophily. 315 Danton. delegation.. Adolf. 280 Davy. Benjamin. 52. 82. (S.. 225 Crispi.233-35 143-44 . direct.” 239. 187. 242 D’Arcv. 173-74 Deliveries (of queens). see Code of Canon Law Corruption. Heinrich (O. Georges J. 32 I Depretis. 251. 7 Democracy. 259. Sir Humphry. 292 Coudenhove-Kalergi. Christopher. 94-95 Democratic Party (of the United States). 306. Roland.). X7-88 Democracy. 306 Darwin? Charles.J. J. artificial. 20 Descartes. Agostino.. 301. military weakness of. Lord Dalbiez. Victor. Thomas..33 I Denifle.273. 323 DClos. 79. Acton.337 342 Constant de Rebecque.. 316 Cram.. definition of. Constitutionalism. John. M. 340 Contraception. 3. James F. 6. 310 Dawson.204. Francesco. 307 Democracy and progress. H. 185~334. 207-08. Prophet.). 296 Damaschke. 184 Democracy. S.3 19.S.376 INDEX Damon. 80. 206. Count Richard. Catholic. oligarchic aspects of. 109-10. 358 Denzinger (Enchiridion). 16-17. 14. independence of. 94-95. Protestant. I 86. 123. A. 3 I 6 Dallin. 76-77. C. see of '37. 286. 47-48 Dalberg-Acton. s-10. 81. German. 353 152. Edward.. 290. Ralph Adams. Leon. Hendrik. Rent. 234-35. 310 Darwimsm. 351 Cunha. 302.300. 365 Cromwell. 68. 127. . 325 Coram. 234. 21. 182 n Contractual theory. 215 Dante Ahghieri. Arthur.307 Crankshaw.52 Constitution of the United States.J. Euclides da.311 “ Democracv. according to National Socialist leaders. William. 7. 13X-39. 303 Czechoslovakia. Friedrich. 292 Daniel. 3 I 2 Democracy and Catholic doctrine. 3x9 Coronation. 36. Michael. political. Julius (S. 234. 264-65 Democracy. Bernhard. (S. 292. Robert. de Greeff. 257 n Cousin. 327 Cooper. 327 Croiset. 296. 324 de Man. 6.305 Independence Dekabrists. 292 Demagogues. 324.. 234-35 Culture.indirect? 7 Democracy. 62 Continent. 6 Democracy. 344 Creston. 258. John H.. 306 Delegation (of authority) ts. A. 267 Declaration (American). Oliver. Marquis de. F.N. oo Delbriick. demagogy. (in New York State) 183. J. see Tvrannv De& abscohditus. 104 Dialectics. religious. Ernest. 295 Curtain (. 145 Deputies.). 346. 335 Dewey. David J.7 IL. 335 Copleston. European. 182. 197. Jeffersonian. 173 Desuotism. 312 Crusius. 323 Corpus Christi procession. 323 Coterell. 260 Czechs. 6.‘ Iron Curtain “). 3 r 8 Cronin. punishment of. 128. Democracy. 161 Costa-Rosetti. 131. Corporative representation. 302 Culture. Paul. q-41 Democracy in antiquity. 157.A. designation. (during the Hundred Days) 287 .

41-44. Helhnuth. 222 Emperor. 204. dictators (see also Tyr-yj. Ottmar. 257. 278-79 Education. 297. Ilya. 3 I 5 Dyrssen. 129 Edward VII. Clites. 292. 318 Enc~clop~dia Britannica. 337 Dux (Duchov). England 179. Emil. 303. 292 Droz. Ralph W. 282. 254 Enerton. 364 Driihndbrf. 300 Elvste de la ?. 266 d’Ors. Dr. political. training). 180 Diocletian. 159-60.. 302. 121. Richard. I 18. T.. 231. 59 Enpels. 153 Efficiency. 280 Drexler. 303 Dun. Johann (Maier). Karel. emotionalism. 118. plebiscitarian. 340 . 265. 317. Queen of Spain. 333 Elbe River. 71-72. 143. Joseph. Kurt. 306 Diutumum Illud (Encyclical). 288. Paul. 353 Equality(human). Eluard. 173-74 ” Diversitarian ” sentiment. 170. I 57D&t (Landtag). Peter F. S. German. 341 Egalitarianism. 145-49 Dictatorship. z. 365 Ducatillon. (anti-intellectualism) 9 Erasmus of Rotterdam. 81.‘232 Empiricism.217 Erbe.. Czechoslovak.P. 23. 356 Discipline. see Ors Dostayevski.5.. 260. 19. 47. 245 377 58 Economic Middle Class Party (WirtschaftspartPi des Mittelstandes). 366 DomorBzek. ambassador). 10. 20. XT. Chester V. authors. 213 Dresden. 14. Karel. 318. Friedrich. 362. 293 D&es. 74. 301. 2 17 ..90-91. 346 Dodd. F.” 145 Elections. 357 Eck. 358. 258 Dynasty. (U. 39. 296. 290. 285 Emotions. 331.. 63-64. 104 Eisner. 292 Duehren. Marques de Valdegamas. (of Hungary). Carm. Emil. French collaborationist. 18485.. 338 Eger (Cheb). 307 Dubnoa (DubnoT). 117.‘Io. Dwight D. 218. 286 Enemy alien. 340 Eiffel tower. Eugene. 288. 361 English-speaking Nations. 64. 353 Erichsen. 33 Drucker. for Iwan B&h). 14. 89-90. 26167. 300. 27. 14. 167. J. Hans. 5% 142-43. Carl. 138-39. family background of.. 17.. 294. 366 E East Prussia. 51. 305. Charles W..S. 125 D&a&Ii.ativite 264. 35-36. 336 Doriot. C. 261 Easum. 74. 213. 288.). 359 Donoso Co&s. 17-19. 91. C. 172. St. 287. 328 Diirr. 192 Ena. Eugen (pseud. Allen Welsh. I 5 I. (national) 267 Ehrenburg (Erenburg). 32-33. I 5 Dobrowsky. Fyodor M. 277. 63-64 Education (experience..INDEX Dictators. Smile. 182. 364 Drieu la Rochelle. Holy Roman. 155 Elite. a4nton. I71 Elections. I 3. Dr. 268. 2 E&den.5 Doumergue. X. 130. 355 Dittrich. 217 ” Elder Statesmen. W. 322 (0. 321 Diplomats.1x. 331. K. 343 En@. 339 Emerson. 333. 32% 331 Epenter.3. 295. 163 Diodorus. 256 Diminution of the faith. 216 Economic crisis (1929-1935). 145-46 Dictatorshin. 217-18. 86 Dionysius Areopagiticus. 317 Ebert. 53. 32. Johi&. 109. 194-95. Economic security. Engelbert. 348 Dollfuss. Moravian. 258-59. 157~8: (election of) 174. Eugenio. E. Pierre. King of Great Britain. destruction of. 355 Durnovo Memorandum. Simon. 309. 261-62 Eliot. 306 Eliot. 288 Eisenhower. 332 Egoism. F. 107 Eichthal.). 254. 351 Dovifat. compulsory. 349 Erman and R&lam. dynasties. Benjamin (Lord Beaconsfield). (O. 200 Elizabeth. Juan. I 5 IEdzation general level of 278 Educationklism. 194-95 Discussion. 7. 355 365 (see also Great Britain). 75-8c. Empire: Holy Roman.

Guglielmo. 344 Fausses idies claires. 67. co-founder of Czech NationalSocialist Party.318. see Patriarchalism Fatherland.. Francis-Ferdinand. image of.. see Nationalism. 317 Feeney. Carl. 127-28. 148-49 Fenelon. toleration Esdras (I). 144-45. 85 Ethics (Christian). 132. 141. prevention of.. 173. Vbclav. 96 Ferrero.359 Father-son x44-45. 90. 3 I 3 Finland. (Catholic) 188. I 16-17 Experience. 231. R. 299. 352 Fideism. Michael von. F. Franchise. Zdenek. 350 INDEX of. 65. 315 Fanfani. Emperor of . 19x- 118-22. 153. 141 n. Francois de. 180. 348 146. 351. 89 Felhorska. Harold U.141. 76. 148. I 14. 92-96. 4-5. 320 Fontane. 332.250. 324 Expert knowledge. 138-39. Joseph. 159. 320. 83. Esprit d’escalier.320>331~ 338. 33. Marshal. 50. 330 Fortress (confinement in). (love of freedom) 204 Evil. 260 Faulkner. ethnic! Eugene of Savoy. Bernard. 234 Fascism (Italian).. r 12-r 14 Ethnicism. 294. (original programme of) g. 191 Founding Fathers. 38. M. 153 Ferdinand VII. 138.4ustria. 152 Ferdinand I. Czar of the Bulgars. Faith. Francisco. 252 Frantz. 344. 59. Joseph. 352 Feder.291. Eli. 139. Waldo. 72 Fermanagh. 352 Femininity. 315. Spanish Chief of State. 206. F. Hans. 295. 315 . Constantin. 315. (pro-Germanism in) 365. 358 Flattery.. 240. 226 Falange. Leonard. expert rule. American. 49. 79. 222 Faith. 354 Folliet. 201 Fedem. 45. revolution. 323 Ethics. 147-48. Emile. cycles). 74 France. 148 138. 324. 157. 243. 267 Flags (in churches). royal. 188. 3 I 9 Fredborg. 183-84. 342. E. '47 67. 37-38 Exclusiveness. 326 France-Prussian collaboration. Tomas Garcia. 152-53 Family. 324 Extremism. grnod anti-clericalism) 7 <7 : testantism) 358’. 25 1 Figueiredo. 359 Europe. 321 F Fabricius. $67 Forst de Battaglia. 49. Archduke. 363 Faguet. 73-77.146. 296 Franke. Dr.299>300>3'='1 Fraternalism. 321 Forster. 104. 49. 191. 316 Filmer. 196. x28-29. 203. Francois Charles. 28-33.378 Eros. Otto. I+S. FauIhaber. King of Hungary. 153. 240. 314 Fourier. 123. 31.4. F. &8 ’ Father. King of Spain. bishop. 345 Ferrero. 31. 325. 308 Foch.59. Anteiro de. 36.. 147.356 3'7. 316 Figueras. 3 I 8 Faulfisch (student from Prague). Fatherhood.196. Prince. 367 17. Anatole. 6. 286. Gottfried. 366 Federalism (anti-centralism). Sir Robert. 151.222.339-40 346 France y Bahamonde.d. Ferdinand. 267 Frank. Ey%. U. 162. Arvid. popular. 320 Felice. 302 Euler. 259. 144-45. 353-54 Frank. Hans. 313 Families. 108. political (political 12-13. 160. relationship. 321 1. 194. Cardinal. I 88 Existentialism. 157. de. 354. 202. 138. 205. Catholic. IZI Evolution. G. 34-35. salvation by. 373. 296 Foreign Legion (French and Spanish). Leo. 194-953337 318 Fall (original sin). (qualifications for) 341 Francis Joseph I. 293 Faure. 182 Error. hIintOre. 206. 22-23. Evolution z’. Frayman. 328. 104. 157-58. 306 FlajShans. 48 Fay. 9. 212. 72. Theodor. 62. 222 Fierlinger. 179. Paul. 289 108-09. 242 France-Prussian war. France.278-79. 344 Fick.

183. 99.51 Frederick II. 328-29 Georg I. 296 Gilman. 330 Friedrich. 240. Agenor Comte de. 259. 18-19. 321. Sigmund. 247. 70. xX0. 354 German Federal Execution against Prussia. of the Palatinate. 248 Gilchrist. Fritz. R.344. 78. Major-General J. 291 Gilson. 91. 56-58. 325 Fustel de Coulanges. 341 Gaidoz. 187. Reginald (O. Christoph van. 135. Numa. 313 Gentleman. 59. D. 187. 38 354. 82. 73. Daniel. 294 General Will (oolonte’&&ale). 361 Gallup Poll. 12 Glarus. 2X7-19.P. King of Prussia. 306 Gairdner. 329 French Relrolution. 225 233. 368 French Revolution and National Socialism. Ferdinand. King of Prussia.288. 139-40. Funck-Brentano. Henri. 314 so.. delegate. 203. 336 379 Gaskell. Erich. 260-71. 49. E..268. 295. 350 George. Heinrich. 363 German Social Party (Deutschoziale German Workers’ Partv (D. 153. 179. F. James A. Otto. 333. 254. 347 Gal&a. 289 Garibaldi. George. 6. 40. Charles Milnes. 255 Gabriel. Basil. 265. 270 88.). 14. 305 Generosity.342. 33-34. 52. 242. 156. 2. James. 312. 256 Gaulle. 225 Free Will (freedom of choice. . 96. Theodor.. 353 Genghiz Khan. 155 Genius.. 352 Gangale.P. 214. 341 Fiilop-Miller. 255 German National Socialist \Vorkers’ Party (D. 27. Joseph A..A. Angel. 344 Gedye. 6. 3. 256. Charles-Christian. 58. Future. 28.A.355 Gobineau. Elector of Sasonv. 301 . 128. Frederick William III. 255. 306 German extremism. 101. Etienne. C. 97. Jindi-ich.P. 67-W 209. 277.S. Germans (Italianized). Giovanni. 198 Garfield. I)j. Gablonz (Jablonec). 137.4 Gattermayer. visions of the. 103 Gambs.. 259.. 202. 3x3.INDEX Frederick I Barbarossa. 34. Charles de. 355-56 G 292 15-85. German Workers’ Party (D. 315. 238. 50 Garrigou-Lagrange. Rene. 13. Sir Philip.35'. 160. 320 Fromm. 251 Ftihrer-State. 333 Friedjung. Iibevtas arbitrii). 271 Gerlich. I 56 George III. (resistance to Russia) 336. Karl Siegmar Baron.A. 156 227-28 17. 254 Friedlander. King of the Hellenes.298. 269 Gibbs. Carl J. I 53 Genoa. 230-32. 328. (intellectual) 365 Freemasonry.P. Justus. 239. Gilberto. 189. 3’3. King of Great Britain. 330 Gillouin. G. King of Bohemia. 124. 198. 261 German National Party (Deutschnationale Lvolkspartei). 338 Giolitti. 254. 358 Ganivet. 324 Frey. 248 Fuller. H. 346 Fiirer-Haimendorf. 191. 321 Frederick III. Holy Roman Emperor. Germans. Christian. 154.. 2. J. 22. F.). 331. 206. 357 French Canada.P. I I 7 Gkichchaltung. 94. 141 Frederick V. 332 Freud. W. 307 Geographic factor. ITT155. 348 Fiigner. 219. 195-96 Freedom (definitions). Germany.N. 199 Freiligrath. I. Duke of Saxony. 361 German Democratic Party (Staatspart&).. Geneva..A. 241-4j. 320 Fuller. C. 302. I 17. 312. 161. 302 Gasparm. 253. Comte 297 de. 270. 266 . (in relation with equality) 304. 145 Gladstone. Diet of. President of the United States. 164.257: (programme of) 258. 238.. republican. Rene. M. (character) 242-43. Giuseppe.) of Bohemia-hloravia. 77. 243. Stefan. Giuseppe. 357 Freyre. see Austro-Prussian War Germany. R. 317-18. 302. northern. 260. (Protest:mt aspects of) 235-36.) of Bavaria. 211. 362 Geiger. E.

Joseph C.169. 288 Graves. 343 Government. 31 I. 3 17 GBring. 336 Gumpert. William Henry.219. 231. 333 Hanover. 87.. 330 Group control. 365 Grisar. Karl August.. organic forms of. 78. Prince. 115 Grey. 85. mixed forms of. 157. C. Eduard van. 228.. 159-60. 355 Gorres. 167-68 Government. 337 Hamilton. Francesco. 277. Sir Edward (Lord Grey Fallodon). parliamentary. 286. 354 Guicciardini. Greece.Goebbels. 335 Great Britain. Edmund. 248. :2. 2oj Government. General. 47-48. 133. Friedrich. 96. Philip. Gooch. 365 Godij116. 159 Harsch. 119. Lewis. 109 Government. 66 Grace (supra-natural). Nathaniel. 34. political. 104. S. 192. 92-94. Hermann.G. 367 Habsburg. 323. 203. 62. Charles E. 82. H. 187. Geoffrey.234. 349 Gothic style. 213 Hajn.348 Hartmann. 220-21 Haeckel.. A.158. Benjamin.348. see de Greeff. IIamilton. C. 315 Gorham. 18. Halmann. Hartmann (S J . 334 Guizot. Powys.. Constitution of. 282 Government. 6. 36 “ Grow soul. 77. H. Joseph van. von. 347 Groethuvsen. Pope.. 331. 105. Greek Orthodox countries. 300 Gosse. basic forms of.. Bernard. 272. 319 353 of 309. 25I. 293 Haecker. 205. Matthias. Solomon. 274-77 Gracchi. 264-65. 146. radius of action. 85. 296. minimal. von. 351 Gurian.356 352 143. 125 Government. L.330> 348. 226 of the Government. 344. 64. 352 331. 97. 191. Col. 364 Hagen. 79. 355 Guiteau. 76.313. 356 Grillparser. x99. 306. 333 Greenslide. Pope. F. J. 251. 143. Arthur.” 113-14 Gorer. 357 . 3<2 170.P.. 89. 181 Gottwald. 286 Hartmann. Johann Wolfgang van. 238. 351 Goethe. Pravoslavism). Theodor. 134-j j Government. 164. 90 Gall.. F. House of.266. 305 GrCgr brothers. from above. Jaroslav." 107 Grynszpan. Waldemar. Martin. 122. 295 Hailer. 341 Grayzel. 14. 97. good and bad forms of. 196 Graham. 257. 349 Golden Bull (Aran3) BulZu). Moritz. 321 Gregorovius. 333 Hal+. 319. 360 Grant. representative. Cicely. Government. 298 Hanke. 332. A. 342 H Habeas Corpus. Franz. Catholic view of. F. 86. W. 9. 213. 295. 349 '35 104 Gringauz. 339 Guderian Heinz.204 INDEX Greenwood. Ulysses S. 151. 326 Government. 63. Alexander. I 18. 278 Harnack.243>248. 228 Harrison. Alois! 339 Half educanon. 159 Harrison. “ Good Pagan. 128 Hardenberg. Carl L. 332 Haensel.P.31+.. Grimm. Samuel. 348.267.304. 325. x83. 350 Great Britain. 232. 103. 304. H. 115 Government. 175 Government..173. 260 Guerlac. 336 Greek Orthodoxy (Eastern Schism. Elie. House of. 81. Ludwig. Herszel. President of the United States. President of the United States. by consent governed. Josef Paul.). 188. Othon. Ernst H. President of the United States. 323 Hamburger. 185. 334 Guardini. 170 Hanseatic Cities. Robert. 251 Gresham’s Law. suggested forms of. Hadrian VI. 346 380 God. 277 Government. Romano. 350 Gregory VII. 203. 232. 354 Grimmelshausen. van. 363 Hart. 37.. 54. Klement. 295. Charles J. 91 Greeff.G. 313 Gogarten.

:7%. 24951. 67-68.310 Hassinger. 344 Hofstadrer. 202 ” Heliretia ” (sqmbol). 357 Hildebrandt. C‘:iunt. Wilhelm. avtixz. jonann Gcoi g.m..3.. Andrew. 260. 90. Dorothe:l. 197~9$‘. 296. 258. 48 u>seph A. Carlton J. 368 ” Hitler&m. u. C. William E. 34-35.+. 58. Remhard.2-53. J. . 148. 47.z Herd.. 3. Hensier. 241. G. 337 Hrrodotu. 357 Hiihn. 357. rgz. 236. 90. 331. 349 Hayes. 14s Hendrick. j:+S Heterudoq. 66. 232. 299. Heinrich. 32% 333. ?c:>.~’ 3” Heredit!.. 27. 35s Huss. 161. St. 355 Holbrook. Jr.. 358 Hxizonta: pressui-e. Theodor.o lliibner. Federal German Republic. Fcr&narui. 3jj IIess.< Hiiisemann. 324. 3o. 203. I CS Hoover. 232 z Hindenburg. Xlexnclci-. 35 $ kiupo. 362 History.rI. 216. 3 I 6 I3oly ?Jliance. 219... Conrad. 2bzi Huch. 197 Hellman. Burton J. xc. Karl. 2cjh Hil. 3. 3.. 360 Hierarchy. iho Hoffet. Rulidi. House of. 300.ictor. (S. 3. 170. 363. c. 267. Thcimas E.. Herbert. ?!I. 24s Hello.. 145. Hessen. F. 14. 271. iR& 101 Humanity. 321 Hiiprl. Adolf. X2 1-looker. 366 Ilaushofer.INDEX Hasbach. -4lbrecht. Jar. 347. Friedrich A.. H&lb~uu~. 262. 221. 161. Comte Viaid -. 341 Hebrides.. S. 20j 381 Heimann.2 q umour. 270. House of. Jesus. 259. 306 Hoist Wessei Lied. Stewart II. Katnaniel. H. 285. 344 Henessey. Queen of En&id.56 Hofbauer. 364. 323.. Richan:. 2%) Herwig. 348 . Christopher. Gmlev -4. P. 257. 247. 358 Hauf’ien. Ricer-da. 191 Hunter. Ben. Hugo. l’re.. Paul van.I. Eduard. Clement Rlaria. 329. gh Pie&lent of the Hems. ?03 Humanism.. 366.15 Hoban. 361-62. 348 Hehn. zi3. 219. Alan. 45. 366 Heiligenkreuz (Austrian monastery). &mad. iho. 260. 299.iric. human. 329 Hecht. etc.: Huldermann. 209.. 297 Hernindez. 31s Henry: VIM. 3. 242. 341 Hod&i. Emn~c: . 329 I ilungary. 329 HeSlinK. 238. Frederic.icient of the United States. 351 Hoch. johannes. 360 Hcrzen. Ross J. Werner. 332. 353 Huizinga. Robert. 280. 271.3.-. 174. 240. 331-32 Heiden. 336 Hayek. 292.. 315 Hus. 334 Herold. 3553 360. 303 Herhen. Thomas. 289 Heinc.J .. 297. Heinrich. 2. 346.54 Hoffman..x Holstein-Gottorp. 160 Hitler. James.. 347 Hauser. 252 Hodce. 30s llolmts. 249.. 34 Henrietts Maria. 264.. 104. 299 Hopkins. Adolf.. i Sh Hota. Oliver 1r-endrli. Pierre J. 362. 366-67 Hawthorne. Franz. 362 Hennigsen. 300 Hell.of Prussi:. 221 I-Iumanitarlaiii. 355. 62. Frirdrich.365. j Chrismpher. 179. 2gP. Comt . 86-87. John. Lillian. 335 Hobbes... 352 Hegemann. 1. 363. Iiarel. Ahian. . ‘32 IIugUc”“t>. van. 2q2. 32~ Hermens. Ernest.269. 325 Himmier.” 271 Hlinka. 3r.. Bal-0:: 211. 187. . 342. 290 Hefele. 350 Hill.. 3 r. 179.iedricli \-on. 139-40 Hieronymus of Prague. Henri. Hermann. 264-6. President of the German Reich. : .q Hohcnzollern. 2~ &his. err-10. 303. 46. ihi.). 3 15 Henlein. 263. R. Hair\-.)h. 73174SI. President of Czechoslot akia. 296. 348. 239. i. Richard. 288 Hegel. 347. \. Major-General. 4.

5. 359. William. 150. 25+5X. 323 Insane. x94-95. 30Identity and uniformity. extermination of the. ~98. 159 International. 161 Innocent III. M. C.382 INDEX Jaeger. (Christian) 307 .). 252 Internationalism. W. 360. Edgar. 152-53 Indian Civil Service (I.. 311 Joyce. 147. 228-30.53 John. 287 Kampschulte. 227 Intelligence (among classes). 140 Jung. 161-62 Intolerance. Uritzki. 152. 51. 6-8. Karl. 202. 34. 294 Jefferson. 240. 367 Intermarriages. 264. Friedrich. (American moral emancipation 209. 201. 356 239. Friedrich Georg. 333 Juarez. 334 KaragjorgjeviC. Bertrand de. 260. 351. 367 Jordan. 154-5 j.” 40. J. legislation relating to. 367 h-w. P. 50. C. Jansenius. U. Bede (0. Thomas. 23 I ldentitarian instinct. 68. 145 Ireland (Eire). 251. 339. 244 Ideologies. Jan van Leyden (Bockeleon). F. 257-58. 332 Jouvenel. 258. Baron Jean de. 355 354 258. Elector of Saxony. 188. 3 I 6 325. 324 Isonomy. B. I. (in the American scene) 193 . 270. 297 Inbreeding. 351 Intuition. 64. 7. 145 Iceland. foreign. 286. Max. 9 Kalininr. Dean. 331 Kannegiesser. 3jj Irrationalism. 125. Jurieu.). 357. Dora. 359 Jamboree. 31. 320. 298. President of United States. 359 Huxley. J. G. 317. 203 Judas Iscariot. 292. 285. Kaplan. 8. 364.C. 317. 355 Jaspers. Thomas. 38. 63. 337-38. 31% 314. 196. House of. Mar. 309 Irresponsibility.365 Jeiek. 242. Second. (in Ages). 342. Jiinger. 3 I0 Illegitimacy.. 201. General Alfred. 256. 259. Japan. August R. von. 292. 213-15. 309 Iorga. 348 Inheritance laws. 162. North-German. 306 James. 357 Joan of Arc. Hussites. 38. 326.296 Jacobins. 124. 52. 260.. 310 I Iberian Peninsula. 362 187. on) Jerrold. 52. the Irish. 90 Jung. (Catholic) 336. 343 Individuality. 288. 168. 254. 55. I 5.364 Jung. 201. royal.James. 350. -4rchduke of Austria. 62. (Protestant) 190. 146. 299 Junker. IrlZ4. Jansenism. 58. 3 I I Jesuits. 209. 343. 361. A. 260 Kalb. 36-37 . 339 Inquisition. the Middle 193... Evangelist. Andrew. Pierre. 3 5 I James.S. 96. 329. 305 15-18. 326 Ii Kabinettskriqe. 189. J. 352 143. 225 Johnson. Rudolf. see Baroque Jews. 363 Jung. 320 Interracialism. 340 Ignorance. 299.. “ individuals. 249. lonely.. 50. Benito. Ernst. I 3 I. Italians. 362 Kahr. St. 196. H. 342-43. 82. 53. r 75 Illiteracy. 72. leader of “ Young Czechs. 170-71. 358. 299. 311 Jackson. progressive.. 26 Inequality. 90 John. 33. 177 Individualism. 351 Joris. Douglas. 355. Nicola. 362.S. Samuel. set Cabinet wars Kaergel. Georg. 315. 138-39 Jarrett. 341 Immigration. Jaccoud. F. 36.ter. 53. Pope. 31. 236 J the 334 .” 251 Jiinger. assassm of M.283. 310. Dr. (Jesuit Scholastics) 184 Jesuit style. St. 293. ‘55 Intervention. 335. 346-47 (see u&o Taborites) Hussitism. Henry. 5. 197 Jodl. 2 Italy. 117. 328. 277 Individual. 312. 194-95. 304. 250-51. 219. 206.. 260 John. 353 Jahn. 293. 1. 280. 319..190. 328 298 r6r. 158 Isocrates.

Jean. kkamstvo (slavery). 367 Lagarde. 363 Lundsgemei&e (Swiss cantonal direct democracy).avo~sler. Erich. 14 I-42 .4bb& F&x.eck\-. 364 Lee. hr&z94. 62-63. 302 Kraus.. Paul. 305. J. Erich.).. Llathias. 34. 300. 313 Kendall. 9 Kraft. .5 Kuhn. Jan. 362 Kroll. 3 ji Lecomte du Noup. 315 Kgpphel. Georges. 193. r\nroinr L.. Raymond. L. I. 320 Ledere~-. charismatx. relative shrinkace of. 362 Knowledge. 335. IOO Lacroix.255. 314 Laboulaye. Karl. 319. 317 Kolnai. 351 King: MacKenzie. 3313 l.aski. 353 Lagarde. 238. S. 221. 16. Count Hermann. . royal. 340 Landauer. 133. 46-48. 350. Mpr. 347 Komis. 319 355 Leaders.atins. 40. 83. J. 330 ” Leader ” (Fiihwr. I. 33f. 346 I. 198. 278 Landtmann. 242. 324. 322 Koestler. Carl. Ernst. I+ I. 321 Kahn. 35X Ku Klux Klan. 285.aun. 313.-a. 197. 293. Marquis Marie-Jean de. Robert. 361. 365 Kiihlmann. 3 I o Koiciuszko.acamb. 179. 300 KvaEala.&... Hans. Ken& de. 307 Keynes. 317. 254. 1). 348 Kralik. 365 Kierkegaard. 354 Kham. 354 Kindt. Pierre. 367 Kern. 294. 172: (related to political problems) 278-79 Knowledge. 366 I. 22-23. teaching of. 298. 237.. Gyula. 342. Johann van. 33. 357 Krauss (S. 266 I. 309 I. Arno. A. Wilhelm. 229. H. Harold. 334 Languages.Socinlism.J. 90. Seren. 350 Krebs. I-1.eftism. 323 L. Gerhal-d. 1~. Thaddeus (‘I‘atlvusz). 3Oj. John. Richard van. 364 Laurent& de Brezina (Bi’ezina). 155 Kisch. 145.a-Tour-du-Pin i%mpiS de.aval. Enyelbert. VBclav. 336. 340. L 1 141 I. Ronald. Abraham.r. Rudyard. 30b. 316. 290. 308. 311. 303. %I. 65 Law. 142. 34O I. IOZ. 299 Khomyakov. 343 L.. Henry. 260 Kelsen. 326 Leers. \V. 124.l’ierrc. Guido. de la Charce. 298 Kahn-Bramstedt. Wilhelm. 297 Kucharzewski. Erik van (SPP&o Campbell. 341 KlofZ.aurier.atvia. Canadian Prime Mmister. Hans . 320 Ktihn. 94. Rodolphe. 352. Ixgaz y l. 353 Labour Party of Great Britain. 170 Krebs. 256. 3. Richard van. 104 Kipling. 301. 355 Lane. 339. Leopold. 358 KyffhBuser (mountain). leadership (as opposed to “ rule “1. 338 Kautsky. 303. General. 297 I. 146.INDEX Karam. 81. 317. 353 Kuzmin. 316. 222 ” l. 352. 254. E. S. Imbart. 268. 25X. 266-h7 Ixgal theories (in the United States). 294. Hans. 2%). 147 383 Kiihne. 300.. I 16-22. 152. 306 Kiefer. 2qz.1 Knox. 300. 292. 355 IirOIlOS. 119-20 Knox. 97-9s. George F. Otto. Hans. 252 Knirsch. Karl. 338. Sir C\-ilfrid.eo.. 14. ‘* Yoyalization ” of. Franklin K.. Emil. Arthur. 361. 341 I. early National Socialist. 293. 51. 14. 366 Keyserling. 147-48 Leadership. Wolff. 339 Lasalle. E. Willmoore. 316. 103. duce). Helmut. E. 345. 297. Ferdinand. 360 Klein. 289. 255.).. Karl. 314 Lane. 204. 315 Lafayette. Jane.. 3x1. 71-72. 329.arenz. 3-P Kroy.” $32 Lawrence. 340 Karrer. 6S . 36 1 Krummel. 40-41. 163-64 of number>. 326 Kennan. 332 Laros. 183. Gunnar. 2X8 Legends. 55. 354 Kuehneit-Ixddihn. 366 Kuypers. 41-42. 64 Lansing. 65. European and National. 358 Keitel. Lord (John Maynard).

svmbol of. Queen of Prussia. ISI. (origin of term) 285. David. V. A. I-I. 123 Loser& Johann.216 Lenin.28& ~96~297. 286. 344. Francis J. 301. Erich. Hubertus. Walter. 22 Loyalists. King of France. 153 Leslie. 91. 49. 14. 294 267 301 333 355 . 341 Leopold II. A. 367 Louise. 364 Leidender Gehorsam (suffering obedience). Locke. 63. 319 Leopold I. 262 Libertarian ideals. 201 Loyalty. 308. Oscar. S’ladimir. (on man’s intelligence) 189: 1~6. 321. 308. 249 Linden. H. 41-42. A.loyd George. King of France.222. 209-31. 239-40. Emil. 320 Liebrr. 22. 349. Juan de. 327. 337 Lubimoff.. Lobanov-Rostovsky. 34-5 of the Madison.337 Leibholz. 291 Listenzmhlrecizt (voting for parties). 112 Lutherans. 347 Lollards. 257. 174. (on sex and marriage) 182. 240-41 Luxemburg.. General van. 207. 351 Machado. 5455. Basil H. 245. 343 Ley. Pope. 3-4. American (Tories). 319. Francis. 260. Gabriel de (Abbh). 364 “ Liberal heresy. James. 222-23 (Moravski Mlhrisch . Antonio. 323 Magistrate. 217 Loneliness. Leon. I 75 M MabiT-. Care>-. 38. 341 Lecin.. 345-S LuthersniSm. 94. 323 Ler>-.231-32. 260 Lothrop. (on reason) 188 . type) 305 . Kmg of France. 300. 55. 79. . 365 Mackenzie. 338 Luther. A. 116. II I. 8. (royal) 343 . 213. 331 Xlacaulay. 336. I I I. Constantine. 227 Liliencron. 321. 303. 9. I I 7. 286 Macomber. 17.240-41 358.289. 87-88. 161 Lloyd. Sir Henry. 309 AIacek. 303 Lippitt.156. Samuel L. 321. INDEX Long. Karl. Th. Sir Shane. 259. prerogatives of. 9. 290. 326 h%adness (folly). John. 313 Lwas. 3x1. Huey. 214. X40-42. 316. 314. 39.. 197. 304. 316.281. 346 Lossow. 287 Leo XIII. 305 Macartney.Trtibau Tiebova). E. 171 Liddell Hart. 338 Leonhard. 338. 291. 140. I\lartin. Loewenstein. LGwenstein. 13. 350 Linton.326. 334 MacLaughlin. 204 Leipzig (disputation of). c.3% her. Alain. 322 Lies.” 127 Liberal. President cmted Stntes. 359 147. 343 Maistre. 325 MacWilliams.. 122. Robert. 213. 337. (Continental and British) 355 Liberalism. Rudolf. I 57 Love (affection). 293 Leontyev.55 Litmoti.. Holy Roman Emperor. King of the Belgians. Vladimir Ilyitch (UlyPnov). IIO. 153 Leopold II. 298. 35293. 148 Libmrnz I’eto. Ricardo. 243 %Iadol. 109. Major.2r2. 14. 307.. 249. Joseph Comte de. 168. 156 Louvre. 277-78 Liberty. 308. IO. 305.. 314 Louis XIV. King of the Belgians.308. 307 1. liberalism.. 322.339 Louis XV. 137. 173. . 255 Maier-Hartmann.33!i. Gerhard.. 207. 301. Luther’s views on. (Lord). 290 Locke. 293. Fritz. 215. A. 355 Lugo. Prince. 229. 298. Henry Smith. Paul.. see Freedom Liberty. Cardinal. 345. Ludwig van. 322 Luchaire. 168.301. I IO. Salvador de.348. Lo6 Legitimacy. 327 Lower classes. 327 Ludendorff. 6. Compton. Detler van. 297. 326 Lods. 168 L&per.74. 88. 287. 323. 337 Lewis. (irreligiou:. B.. Jutes. 343 Levack.4ndrew C. 312. 145 i\lacG&ord. 344. General. William F. 367 Louis XVI. 226.. German. Hans Roger. 352 Loenrod. Prince A.. 155. 314 Madariaga. 363 Ludwig. 364 Maine. 78. 156.

Jules. Giuseppe. 337 Maria. 258. Emperor of Mexico. Gabriel. 294. 231 Masaryk. Empress. 332 Maundy Thursday. 211. 106. 318 Marquis&. 323 Mallet du Pan. 173. W. 333.). 148-49 Matrimonium consummatum. >. 219.298 Maynard. 336 bleinecke. 40.. 308 Middle Ages. 81. Thomas. Kurt. 366 JIrtternich. 343. 39. Jan. 200. 4-5.INDEX 385 Masses (multitudes.345. 313 Maximilian I.. 143 Llesser. 2x9. Cardinal.Ietnitz. Francois. 212 Manichaeism. Ernst. 293 hlarsiglio (&larsilius) of I’adua. 92-93 &Ian. 33s .. 333 Maurras. Queen of France. 166 Merezhkovslti. algebraic nature of. 366 Marat. 161. Marxism. 331 Mantous. WI. democratic. Erich. 333 Mann. Clement. 348 . 301. I’. 325 Melanchthon. 172.23I. I 6 1. Karl. Majority.41. 323 l\letaphpsics. 358. 305.J. J. 130 Mass (Catholic)..156 Maritain. 290.. 267.J. 265. 14. 34. Elector of Bavaria.\iar. 69-70. 257.. 308 blaurois. (character of) 287. 300. 135..35~ 2 12. 318 Queen of Spain.ZIcIiinnon. 27s. Queen of Hungxy. 366 Man. 354 Mc%eill-hloea. 76. 84. Bruno. 68-69 Matthes. 330. 50 McGovern. 254 Mass democracy. 293 Matriarchalism. Jacques. 295. 322 Manning. 121. 24-25. I&ire. 305..323 Masurians 329 (East Prussian Poles). Btienne. 182 n !vIausham. 183. 148 Marie Antoinette. 65.Adolf von. Cardinal.” symbol of Prance. 362. T. 165-66. 24. rule. 73. 203. 349 Mallet. 59. Alfred. 85.299. 171 Middle class.303. 337 hbchelet. 327. Andre. 181. 161 Mazzini. &l&axe. 292. 322. 22 bIayer. 230. Dmitri. 356 Masaryk.360 of 343. 261 ILledievalism. John. 322.jI8. igo.130. 29% 300. C. Philip. 253. I 52 Mauriac. 325 hlazarin.5~>350. 339 Rlessner. 331. 250. theological and philosophical aspects of. W. William. 323. IRI Manchester school. 361. 704. psychological aspects of. L. 333 ” Marianne. ‘55. 357 Meissner. Prince. Herbert L. I X2-X3 Mediocrit). bo. Majority consent. 2h7 Mary.P. Karl. 300 Meertens. Friedrich. Alartin. 310. 22. 306. Dean. Jacques. President Czechoslovakia. 106. 108 Man. 336. Somerset. 340 292. 323 . 291.57>64.” 304 Malitz. 170 “ Malism. 3’9 Mariana.. 126 majority 124. Archduchess of Maria Christina. Sir Erskine. 295. 88.300. Jean de.x. 290 Rlercier. Juan de (S. 305 Masaryk University.. Edwin. 30. 3’9. Jules. 365 203. 39. Gustax. 337 March. Charles.295. 292 Maria Theresa. 345 Xlannheim. 343 Maximilian II. 335. 345 Marius. 196 Man. Harold K. 350 Melville. 258 Marcel. 165-66. 3 jj hlercier. 218. 36.3. r41. Sir Bernard. 342 Materialism. 342 Riecklenburg. 73. 329. United States intervention in. Jean Paul. Everett 709. 296. crowds). 3=9 Manteuffel. -4ustria. 89 Mani. Theodore. 289. St. 109-10. 48. 306. 300 Marshall. 325. Order of. 356. Thomas G. 343-44 aIiche1. 70-7’9 335. =9”. 277 hlaria Theresa. 361 RIeissner. &la>-. 299. -4ugust. Herman. 323 153. Maria Christina. 309. %Iajor Geoffrey. Johannes. E. 6.342 Xlesens. Hene Edward. Robert. 35 I Michels. 31 I slay. 351 Matthews. Baron. Protestant. 307. Eduard. Al. 6. political aspects of. 352 hlesico. Cardinal.

247. 360 Miinsterberg. van. Josef. 13. (in 206-207 240. Count Hellmuth General.50. 71-72. 42..386 INDEX Middle West. Comte de.hI. 21. (and liberty) 324-35 Monarchy.). 66.. 276 Muret. 319 Monarchs. 228 Mohler. Arnaldo. 231. education of. Monarchy. Paul. IF-163. Supreme Court. 307.S. 240. Thomas. see National Socialist German Workers’ Party N. Hermann. 59.). Jacques Paul. T. 14. Monarchy 20j 129 elective. Myths (political). 321.C. 299. 104. 37. 290 Mississippi (State of). 272. 340 313.. 313 Morganatic marriages.A.” 146 Mounier. Samuel Freeman. 162. 29. 117-18. Monarch?-. 225 Multiple function. 37 Migne. 135. 376 Baron 57. 297. 203. 124. 9. 368 Morrell. J. 66. Courtney (S. 364 Miinch. Mussolini. 217-20. the.J . 6. Gaetano. 82.. 159 Morgenthau. 166 Munich. Benito. 319 Miller. 297 “ hlystery of Murder. 314. Arnim. 332 Montalembert. 161. see Bonapartism. 3 I 9 Mosca. 18. Gouverneur. 325. dr. 262 National Socialism. IA. 339 h’lurray.+~68.. Eduard F. Gunnar. 292. 364 211. Edgar A. 202-03 Mussolini. 2. F. 293. 253. 164. Franz H. see National Socialist Party of Czechoslovakia Saab. 15-16. Monnerot. Charlotte. 23 I . 124. 45. 360 Molnhr. 306. 34. 343 Montcheuil. 61. 25 I Nash. . Herbert. Richard. 221. 105 Morrison. 366 Mohammed. of. 13. G: Riqueti. 6263. 321 Nap&on). 250. 50. Napoleon 297. 356 hluckermann. 290. 332. 31r Montesauieu. e rom six Soviet capital cities)( id: f Mirabeau. Ogden. 102. Arthur.D. 3 I 3 Miinzer. 4---t5. N 313. 329 Mueller. 247-48. Adam van. Henry. 322. 90. Moltke. John Stuart. 158.. 314 ” Minus Six ” ex. 323.F. 307 Miiller. 367 Morris. 320 52. George. Edict of. 291. 242 Napoleon 1. 135-143. Michel de.I 33. 321 Mohammedanism. 229-30.. 324. Indro. Hugo. 288 hlontanelli. 219. 109. 280-81. 290. 325 Miller. 161-62. I 39 Montaigne. 82. 199. 318. 145. 148. 286. ethnic. 367 N Bprstek. 322 Minorities. 300.. Rosalind. 339 Militarism. C.E. 59-62. 203. 361 Nadler. Comte Charles de. 65. 305. 33’ 1 Napoleonic wars. M.S. Ingbert (O. Monarchy. in Protestant 161 N. 186. 296. 355. Boulangism. 290 Mosheim. 287. 320. 292 Monotheism. 28. 271.262.S.. Mill. 314 Miiller. ‘54. 360 Nantes. 38-40. 203. 336 Monarchs. Justice of the U. 242 Nappold. 25-26. 310 Miirike. Vittorio. 224 Moderation. 27. Secondat de. 306. 133. H.4 parliamentary. 290.. Jules. 20. 307 Mussolini. 132.. Moreau de St. 288 Murray. (international character of) 316 . 357~ 209. 338. etc. 58. 155. 340 Morris. Ludwig van. 36X National Liberals.P. 124. Erich. 230 Morley. 99. H. 3x8. Emmanuel. 90 Mirkine-Gu&z&tch. absolute. M&y. 358 “ Motherland. 237-38. (Louis 153. III 309. Scandinavia) 93. X3 sloeller ran den Bruck. 150-61. countries. John C. 287. 314. Ferenc. Felix.S. 324 Mowrer. 218. co-founder of Sokols. essential character 142. . 322. 364 Myrdal. B. Lloyd. Monarchy. 361 Molisch.” 48 123. 305. 209-11. 328 Mob. 14. 334-35 Modernity. 252 Military dictatorship. 322.L. 243-45. 15. 51. I X4 pagan. 296. Laurentius van. 91. Jr. 366 Miiller-Freienfels. 68. 327 Mises. . Charles.

I9 Ostrogorski. continued (revolutionary element in) 266 . 258. Anderley). 291 Nevada. 211. Japanese).288. 72. Nuremberg. 310. freedom of. 72-73. 183. 344 Oder. 240. 314 Noailles. 319 Noldin. 364 Neumann. 251 Old Testament. Sean 344 O’Hard. Martin.. 54. 316. 255>269-70. (class structure of) 265-66.S. Daniel. H. I IO. 313 d’Ors. the. 350 O’Faoliin. Jameh H. 368 Nimes. 352 Nisei (U. 337 Obedience. 187. Rudolf. 2 i 9. 265.). Franz. Gottfried. 329 Nude. (universal spread of) 271 .365 Otto. 265. 350. 60. 363 Neo-orthodox! . 4. 209. 320 Niebuhr. 269-77.365 Orton. 58 Norton. 35’>356. 322 One-party-system. 59. 27. 308. 347.. 22X Olden. 344 Paine. 299. 308 Ortega y Gasset. Ambassador W. 181 Newman. 35% 360 National Socialist votes. 98 .5. 147. Frantisek. 318 NOl-Wa>-.A. Robert de.S. 2-p-41 O’Connell. 35s Palatinate. Friedrich. I. Don Jose. 96. 199 National Socialism. 355 Nickerson. Rudolf. 332 Nationalism. 97. 340 Oyarzun. 321 Ostracism. 198. 348 Niemoller.359-67 National Socialism (marxist interpretation of). 348 Neumann. B.. 135. 304. H. 227-28. 239. 355~358. 291. X-9 Nostrism. 259-65. 157 Organic government. 241 Palatine Hill. 292 Pan-Germanism (Pan-Germans). Protestant.. 327 179. ethnic. 356. Diet of. 2x5 P 3’8 156 Pagans. 219.” 18. Wallace. 93.. 250. 181. 14. 298. 265. 245.S. 293. Juan. noblemen. G. 336 Neuhiiusler. 307. 200. 249s 271. 104. 253.359> 360 Naumann. 308 Oswiecim. John. 312 Nicholas I. 253. suffering. 172 New England. 14. Roman.C. Joseph. B. Friedrich. 337 Nehez. 304. Tom. 79 Opinion. 362 Oligarchy (oligarchies). 348. 355. 299. 360 Nazi. see Salazar. Karl.ouis h’Iarie Vicomte de. Lord (C.29& 300. 122. river. 241 Nietzsche. 209. 309. 331 One-man-rule. Netherlands. 93. 346. early Austrian Nazi. Eugenio. 339 Non-conformism. William Aylott. 254. 59. 107-08. I I 1. 217-18 ” Nationalisation ” (socialisation). 57. 329 Old Czech Party. 295. 44. 19h Page. 105.INDEX 387 No& Albert J.294.S. 351. Pastor. 13.. 219. 24. 233 New York. 193 Nordic race. 310. 203 Palacki. 164-67 Nesmes-Desmarets. 53. National Socialist German Workers’ Party (N. 366 Nihilism.. I07 Otten. Emperor of Russia. A. Zj*-53. I. 191. Antonio Oliveird Olmiitz (Olomouc). 300 Niebuhr. 90 Nobility. 235 Neo-Thomism. 12s. (religious composition of) 363 National Socialist Party of Czechoslovakia (N.). Ladislas (Laszli). 97 New Deal. 290. 107.P. 355. 155-56. 91-92. see National Socialism Neesse. ‘54-5. 348. 349. 220-21 Nuremberg trials. 179. Johann. 364. Emperor of Russia. 56 Oesterreicher. 188. 182 Numeralism. 364 Negrin. 348 Ottlik. 90 Negroes. 27. 247 . Henry Cardinal. 251. 38. 98 ‘* One World. 2 I 9 0 312 Obedience. 158. 162 Palmer.. 141. 65-66. philosophic. Moises T. John M. 209--II. Hoffman. Reinhold. 25253. 222-26. 37. in art. Nichols. 141 Notestein.D. 48. 342 Nicholas II. 55. Oliveira Salazar. Sigmund.

Pontius. 159. 2&i5. 3 14 Plutocracy. Sir Charles.252 “ Persuasion. 89. 365 Papen. 25-26. Marquis de. 152. 13%41. 285. 5 Pius IS. 2 I 3 Peman y Pemartin. David W. 79. 327 Parsons. 67. 305 Parties. 308. 319 Pfitmer. see Evolution. I 57 Pobyedonostsev.s:. Josef. 3” Politicians. 166 Personalism.. 6282 14.” 3jsT50 Peopie’s Party (Volkspartei). 310. 355 Parmiter. political ” Political theology. 330. 285 Pius VII. 86. 345 Plutarch. 336. Kurt. 145 Pimodan. Franklin. 266. r II People. St.ikola. 291. 298 Pfister. 43 Politbureau. St. 157 Petersen. E. 298. 298 Patriarchalism. King of Spain. Henrt Philippe. James. 281 Parliamentarism. Plivier. 361. 197 Peter. 14. 324 PaiiC. 8 ’ Pierleone (Pierleoni).. 58. (Catholic) 236. P. 14649.). 44. 100 Political cycles. 201 . 354 Peterhof. 145. 148. 343 Pierson.J. 312 “ People’s Emperor. 124. Isabel. 343 Peers.388 INDEX Pan-Slnvism? 55. Pilgrim Fathers. 222 Picker. 350 Parliament. 343 Peka?. Marshal. 263. Emperor of Brazil. A.. 120 Pomerania. Frances. r 10. 94. 97 Party rule. 86. 304. ” 3 I 5 Politician. “ Piety. 344 Petegorsky.. 194. 48. political. Peter. Julius. 12. 309. 105. lgz. 161. 332 Pepu?. 246. Otto. 366 Plar64.. Emperor of Russia. ?. Achille. 162. 366 Philip of Macedonia. 44. 346 Peterson. 309 Pernerstorfer. Blaise. (Apostle). 62. (Christmas message) 129 310. Charles. totalitarian. 155 Pierson. 188 Police.. 212-13. 162. common (Luther’s view). Franz van. Walther. g(. 106. 13 I Perkins. 165 Philosophy.. 328 Passiveness. 221 Pijsudski. PiebisLites. 181 Pius II (Aeneas S. moral position of. Piccolomini). 223.” r 90 P&in. 19. George Wilson. 2S9. C. 248 Persecution of convictions. 70-71 . 3 j3 Payne. 250. 280-81. 81 Peter Lombard. 215-16. Vilfredo.316 321 Patriotism. 343 Personality. 77 Paterson. flattery of.” 316 Pilate. 368 Pareto. 270.155. parson. 76 Philip II. 295 Party discipline. Donald. 226 Peter the Great.225. (Apostle). 150 Pascal. 338 Papen. 122-23. Felix von. 227 People. 287 Parkes.. 358 Pelhiimovsky. 63. 309 Parliaments. 185. x21. XI Political animal. 153. Jdzef. 246-47 Party dictatorship. 139. 265 Pe+z’s Court (Ckrman>. 171. Wilfrid (‘S. UlC. 264 People’s Democracy. Alhson. 150. 368 Pierce. 161 Pasini. 315 Petrie. 346 Pius V. Jose l?Iaria. 285 Person (as opposed to individual). 334 Pembaur. 312 Planetta. 161 Poland (Polish Commonwealth). 154 Peasants. . Geoffrev de C. family. IIO.332 Pedro II. Henri. 362 Perrin. 215. 97. all-European. 144-45. 316. 16. Engelbert. 253. Erik. Margarete. 24 Peace-criminals. 201. x 1 I-15. 26 r . 76. 288 Peter. President of the r:. 196.332 Philosophy. 109. (definition) Paul. 114. Josef. I%* 3147 3’5. 56 Papacy (Vatican).227. 336 Pius XII. T. 171. Mikula8. 32. Henry. 346 Peace. 1h5-86.267 Poles. 325 Passerin d’Entreves. 105 People. 153-54 Pittsburgh Universitv. 363.

109. permann. 14: 23. 53. 191. 24a-41 Protestant society. g Purge (kprrration). 199. liberal. 296.ois. 126. 188.. 188. 30s Rathenau. 244 Prague. 80. 130 Quality. 144-45.226 316. 321 Radicals. II. 196. Wilhelm. 53. 321 04. 5. technical. 149. Holy (” the Bald “11. 196 Puaux. 163. Franc. 332 Rikosi. 289. 64-65. 244. j48 Prrdiger Wilhelm 2-r Preen. I90 Private spheres. 72. position of. pious and merciful.INDEX Pope. 76. Quatrefaers de Brrau. 2-30 Race. 156. 212. F. J. 328 Prussia. Jean. I 15. evolution of. (edict of) 242 Power. 324. j8 Proch (early Nazi). 56. 299. 22 Rappard. Josef. H. Ho. gI Quantity. psychological aspects. 353 Quebec (citv). conversion to. 29% 299.355-56 . 201. 318 R Raabe. 39. 151. 366 ” Prussianism. 294. 288 Radecki. intellectual. animosity against. Lucien Anatole. 234-35 Protestants in Catholic countries. 326 Public opinion. 17374. 39. 311. 338 Pradt. 195 Potsdam. 330 Protestantism. W&et. I09 Privileges. 335. 329-30 Protestants. I37 Primo de 83. 54 Rid]. Emanuel. 157. 223 PrinCip. 127. Casimir. 345 Princes.. 327 Popularity.3. 212 Power. 316 Psychology. 303 Pragmatism. orthodox. 125. 364 Rauschning. (prim spirit) 340. 9 Prokop. 346 Pravda. 299. horizontal. rgj Protestantism. *zj Princes. 333 Protestantism. 300. urban. 179. Alfred Sicoiaz. 237 Pulaski. Count Athanasius. 45-46. 311. 239. 84 Property (private). 330 Protestantism. 340-41. 65-66. 91 162. s.” 241. 182. j66 Prussians. J. 333 Popper-Lynkeus. vertical. French. 324 Popular sovereignty. 241 Power. 309. Russian. 2 I 2 Primitive &i&es (and democracy). 184.1. (in the U. Frank.250 Proletariate. 293. 312 Rambaud. 339 Priesthood. j 1o Randall. (and education) 189. I+-99. royal.. 147. 149. 288. secular. power of. 106. 77. T. 67.342-43. 242. 36-38. I-/j. 163 Protection. 81-82. Sigmund van. 231-38. 179. 165. 34i> 353. 189 Queens. 191 Private interpretation. 70 Predestination (determinism). Gavrilo.S. 233 Protestantism. 6976. 3043 309. 334 Raynal. 183. 26. A. 2jg. 120 Proskynesis. 308.) zgz Pressure. rjg-40. 351 Q Qualification. Dominique Dufour de. Portuguese! 186. (and capitalism) 186. 78. 151-52. Gustav. 177. 303 Radbruch. 249 Psychoanalysis. 86-87. 170. 323. 326. 3. de. (reliiious implications) 351 Raclniism. 51. 323 Presidents of the U. rXo83 . 354-55 389 Protestentism. English. German. 141. hIax. 218. 217-10 Proudhon. 8. 14. 192. Abbe. William E..321 Pressure.S. 174 Portugal. 221. 155. Raczyc’. 861 Progress. 256. Jean L. 193. 53. 203Kacine. 193 PrCvost-Paradol.‘P. 57. 55-59. 175 Quasi-legitimacy. 226. jj8 Power. Alexander. 79. 353 Pribilla. 8 I Protestant Xations. qualification. van. 80. 174. 225-27 Princes. 365 Ravaillac. Jose. RI&y&. 185. eccirsiastic. 355. (AbbB). 43 Prohibition. 27. 323 Property. Griedrich dont’j9. 359 Radowitz. 330 I-‘rOteStantS. 168. G. 52 Puritans.

188. 229. B.295. 296. 21-22.290. 126.. 314. 352 Reality.272. 80 Revolution. Emmanuel. 171. 368 Resistance (Catholic in Germany). Johann. 293 220- Reformers. 350 Rougemont. Gonzague 242 Comte 150. 99 Reisert.rO> 324 Rome. 140. Francis Ladislas von. Dr. 162.. 159. 232 Reich. Cecil. 288.344 Royalism. 161. 266. A. Fritz. '43. 02.” 192 Reich. Antoine. 307 . Ernest. King of England. 136-37. 304 Roth. 291. x31-32. 289. 271 Royalism. Wenzel von. 168 Rousset. 127. 244 Reformation. 25 I Riehl.292. 307 Rulers (as opposed to leaders). 20. D. 165 Reason. Socialist. Franklin D. 6. 218-19 Robinson. 265.91.. 297. Rose. 170 Reck-Malleczewen. Guido de. 162.” 155 Republicanism (in early U.286. 179. 292. 287 2"3>233>25&276.337 159. 86-S7. “ Rum. Paul. E. Arthur. 206. de. Romain.). 334 Rivarol. Charles de. 181. Johann.297 Roosevelt. monarchical. 298. Wilhelm.” Reynold.355.353 340 implications. 142. Vassili: 6X. Representatives. 336 Romains. enforcement of.310. Anton.3I9. 157 Republican Party (U.355 24% 273. 138. 169-70. Rousseauism. 220-21 Renaissance painting. 50. 255. 42. Friedrich. 32 Ruggiero. 14. 268 365 Rozanov. 290. Denis de. 368 Religion. 22x-22. David. National 266.360 297>299. 334 Riipke. Elliot. 300 Roidalowsky. Count E. 745 Roosevelt. Roosevelt. Resistance x76-779353 (civilian). Reduzh’o ad absurdurn. see van Kol Rigorism. 51. 288. 180. 362 Red Cross. 37. 182 Russell. 341+351. 183 142 124.71-72. 55-56.246. 49 Reichenberg.295. 84. 3 I 9 Rossel. 349 R&tow. Johann.x63. 364. Benjamin. 286.286 Ruskin. intellectual Roper-Collard. 214-15 Rubinstein. Paul. Pierre 340 Responsibility. 364 Romier. 187. French (Third). 150 Roberts.66. 106. 256 Reichstag..S. 256. III. 306 “ Republican virtues. 245 Religion. 354. republicanism. 14. 205-06. 309. 172. Alexander. (national socialist). 182. 7 Republic. Theodore. 6344. 298. 364. 354Re::ogression of faith. J. 304 Rochambeau. 152. x21. objective. 317 Relativism. J. 196 Renaissance. Republic. 90. Kenneth and Anna M . Maximilien de. Jules. 350 Roffens. Rush. 26. 3x1. 179-83.258 9 Read. Antoine de. Louis.~ 294. 323 Rosenberg.S. 171. 366 Rosenberg. 32. Bertrand. 70. 21. IO.312 Rhineland. Romanism and Rebellion. 351.365~ 366 175. 103-04.288 Reade. J. 182 Reventlow. 294. 112 n. 345 Rolland. 9. 73. Revolution. 187. Rousseau. (as opposed to democracy) 97. hClen. 288. 309>3. 6.390 INDEX Ribbe. 2 I 2 Richelieu. Rodocanacchi.355. 86. 361-62 Rienzi. I 80. 349 “ Regular guy. 364 Rougier. Holland.71. protestant. 296. 313. 2 I 3 Reiwald. 61. political ideas of. Comte de. 327 Rebellion. 84. liberal. 265.). J. 321. Charles. Armand Jean du Plessis. degeneration of. 354 Rieger. Virgile. Alfred. 31 I Riihel. 71. 26-27. 158 Restoration.269 309. 3x6. 293 Richard I I. I 15 Republic. political. 180 Reuchlin.304-05~322. 90 Revolutionism. 182 Renan. I IO-I I. 64.82. 94. Second. 26. Walter. 233 Red&.. 304. Theodor. 3 I 3 Robespierre.. 320. 290. 52. John... I 82 Rittler. 293. 104. 161. Herbert. 1&r--90. Cardinal.

259. r95Salzburg. 314 Rutze. -4. Michael E. Wilhelm (S. 355 Schwab. 97 Seneca. Luigi. Quintiliano. E. 332 258.. 139 Sieber. 39. SBPSudeten German Party Saaz (iatec). R. 327 Sansa. 345 Schonemann. 314 Schmitt-Dorotid. 288. 245 SlaviEek. de (S. Philippe. 108.R. 367 Seifee. Alfred. 221 Servants’anci masters. Georg. 91. 148. Friedrich D. 110. 100.). 271. Comte de.). 249 Self expressron. 324 Sin. Reinhold. Guignard de. 157.D. L. Sedgwick.. 350 Scholasticism (late forms). 63 Ychleiermacher. Or). 173-74 Siiva.. J. A. L. 3 16 Serfdom (modem slavery). 301 Serbia. Sylvester A. 183. 290 Santa Domingo. 266 Rusticucci.. 365-60 Russian Revolution. 322 Schoffler.J. 206. Republic of. W.INDEX 391 Russia (U. 304 Scheler. 51.). 230. 324 Simmel. 142. F.72-79. 308 Scita and srienda. 255 Sacco and Vanzetti. 217. 2 j4.. P. W. 300. 308.S. N. 104 Sartre. 74. 322 Saint-Aulaire. 335 Santayana. 268. 196-98 Salvation of non-Christians. 351 Scherer. 336 Salvation by faith. Walter. Jean Paul. 368 Saints. Joseph A. 361 Schumpeter. 361 Schleicher. 298. 323 Segesser. 1973 338 Schrank.). imnertinence of. George. 142.Sands. 330 Sforza. 307. F. 355 Saxonv. assassin of Petiyra. 33. 316 Secretain. 305 Schneefuss. Herbert. Friedrich van. 109. 359 Seipel. 191. 89 Self government (self rule). 31 j. L. 67. 213 Ryan-Roland thesis.V. 124. Russrans. I85 Slavery. 90. 4. ‘364 Schmidt. 314 Siegfried. III. 334 Schriiteler. klax. Bosislaw van. Pietro. 357 . Carl. Monsignor Ignaz. 287. 316. Roger. 317. 278 Scoraille. 340 Sangnier. Nikolai. 3% 358. E. 128. 75. 365 Schwarzbard.. 340 Schmidt. 328 Sagan. Comtc F. Count Carlo.. Donatien A. 356 Schiinerer. 2g8. 342 Ruthenians (in Austri+Hungary). 303. 362 96. 243 “ Russianism. Friedrich. Rene. Leopold. 310 Schiller. 329 Schuetz.. 319. 7% 248-49 . General Kurt van. Hermann. jj Senate (U. S. 50 Saint-Priest. -4ntonio Olivrira. hthUr G. 338 s Schneider. 297. Serviere. 8x-82. 301.S. hIarc. 315. 226 Salvation of heretics. ~47 Schmidt. IX. de R.gunate. Ludwig van..P. 320. 307 Self worship. 336 Shi. 293 Sectarian liberalism (liberals). King of Portugal. 1x0. &id. 346 Sagnac. Nicholas.” 18. 232. 322 . 2KS.). Gino de. 324 Schwarz.J. 261 Scandinavia. 182 n Sexuality. 191. Giorcio. Edmond (senateur). 22 I Selchow.” 318 Russo-German collaboration. 360 Sementowski-Kurilo. 309 Schilling-Schlettere. Alesunder. Fra Girolamo. 84.D. 141 sell. Joseph (S. 340 Satan. 231 Schauenburg. 168. 360 Slav% 55-56. 270 Sanctis. I 18. 55. 31 I Saltykov-Shtshedrin. 312 Skull and crossbones. de. Carl. 330 Sillon-letter. Georg Ritter van. 288. bemltlc race. 325 Sex act. J.S. 68 Servants. 253. S. 85. 63. I 56 Salazar. 324 Senior. 202 Sade. Guidon. 260. 223 Savonarola. 140. J. 316 Schulz-Group in Austria (Nazi). 137 Scotland. ~4.. Andre. 290. 293. 194. 334 Schwarzschild. 332 Saldana. 273. 302. 212. 304. 326 Scholz... ” Marquis de. 179 Sebastian. Richard. van. 237 23 j Secularization. 56. 362 Saint-Just. Karel.

211. 161 Statesmen. 312 Stahl. Baron Sidney. Austrian and Ckxman. 157. 104 St. 364 Strauss. gq. 84. 123 Social pressure. Sos. set Saint-Aulaire St. 345 “ Southern Bourbons. 324 Steiner. 138.262.299. r3q. 366 Sperry. Herbert. 27. 253 . iM. Secretary of State. John. George Burkhardt. 106. 148. 25 I Soldier. rq6 Soglow. Czech. Geoffrey-. 148 Sokol organization. 347 Stolper. 26 Steckel. 168. Statistical optimism. Heinrich Ritter van.~~6~~~~~~~~ Spalatin. 104. 244. 366 Stone. 125. Socialism (movement and party) Czech (Czech Socialist Socialism. battle of. 212 St. Gustav. Thorvald. Madame de. Casimir. 360 St. 75. 266-67 “ Social engineering. Count 333 321 172 Klaus van. ~~0. 253. I qq Socrates. see Socialism State omnipotence (Metternich’s opinion). Edmund’s Hall.” rqr Statesmanship. 3x2 Souls. 297. 27.” qr . 4 Soviet zone in Germany. St.QQ. 267 Staupitz. Werner. Peter’s in Rome. 210. 51.306. national.. 17. 230. Laurence. Sonntag.9~-96.). Jared. totalitarian. Stefan N.253.” 103 Southey. 18s Stacl. 322. 350 Stauninp. Joseph. L. 90.. 261 Smith. 302. Edward. free. Heinrich Baron vom. 278 Stein. 5. Karl. 300. Louis Etienne. 205 Society. \‘ladimir. Georges. 131. 254. 252 Strohm.360. 248 Srbik. Robert. 266-67 Society. 162. Jiiy co-founder of National Sociahst Party.“~. q. Danish.. 291 “ State prison. 120