按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
presently show； there is a danger that they may form an anonymous
State more powerful than the official State。 France has thus
come to be governed by heads of departments and government
clerks。 The more we study the history of revolutions the more we
discover that they change practically nothing but the label。 To
create a revolution is easy； but to change the soul of a people
is difficult indeed。
CHAPTER IV
THE PART PLAYED BY THE PEOPLE IN REVOLUTIONS
1。 The stability and malleability of the national mind。
The knowledge of a people at any given moment of its history
involves an understanding of its environment and above all of its
past。 Theoretically one may deny that past； as did the men of
the Revolution； as many men of the present day have done； but its
influence remains indestructible。
In the past； built up by slow accumulations of centuries； was
formed the aggregation of thoughts； sentiments； traditions； and
prejudices constituting the national mind which makes the
strength of a race。 Without it no progress is possible。 Each
generation would necessitate a fresh beginning。
The aggregate composing the soul of a people is solidly
established only if it possesses a certain rigidity； but this
rigidity must not pass a certain limit； or there would be no such
thing as malleability。
Without rigidity the ancestral soul would have no fixity； and
without malleability it could not adapt itself to the changes of
environment resulting from the progress of civilization。
Excessive malleability of the national mind impels a people to
incessant revolutions。 Excess of rigidity leads it to
decadence。 Living species； like the races of humanity； disappear
when； too fixedly established by a long past； they become
incapable of adapting themselves to new conditions of existence。
Few peoples have succeeded in effecting a just equilibrium
between these two contrary qualities of stability and
malleability。 The Romans in antiquity and the English in modern
times may be cited among those who have best attained it。
The peoples whose mind is most fixed and established often effect
the most violent revolutions。 Not having succeeded in evolving
progressively； in adapting themselves to changes of environment；
they are forced to adapt themselves violently when such
adaptation becomes indispensable。
Stability is only acquired very slowly。 The history of a race is
above all the story of its long efforts to establish its mind。
So long as it has not succeeded it forms a horde of barbarians
without cohesion and strength。 After the invasions of the end of
the Roman Empire France took several centuries to form a national
soul。
She finally achieved one； but in the course of centuries this
soul finally became too rigid。 With a little more malleability；
the ancient monarchy would have been slowly transformed as it was
elsewhere； and we should have avoided； together with the
Revolution and its consequences； the heavy task of remaking a
national soul。
The preceding considerations show us the part of race in the
genesis of revolutions； and explain why the same revolutions will
produce such different effects in different countries； why； for
example； the ideas of the French Revolution； welcomed with
such enthusiasm by some peoples； were rejected by others。
Certainly England； although a very stable country； has suffered
two revolutions and slain a king； but the mould of her mental
armour was at once stable enough to retain the acquisitions of
the past and malleable enough to modify them only within the
necessary limits。 Never did England dream； as did the men of the
French Revolution； of destroying the ancestral heritage in order
to erect a new society in the name of reason。
‘‘While the Frenchman；'' writes M。 A。 Sorel； ‘‘despised his
government； detested his clergy； hated the nobility； and revolted
against the laws； the Englishman was proud of his religion； his
constitution； his aristocracy； his House of Lords。 These were
like so many towers of the formidable Bastille in which he
entrenched himself； under the British standard； to judge Europe
and cover her with contempt。 He admitted that the command was
disputed inside the fort； but no stranger must approach。''
The influence of race in the destiny of the peoples appears
plainly in the history of the perpetual revolutions of the
Spanish republics of South America。 Composed of half…castes；
that is to say； of individuals whose diverse heredities have
dissociated their ancestral characteristics； these populations
have no national soul and therefore no stability。 A people of
half…castes is always ungovernable。
If we would learn more of the differences of political capacity
which the racial factor creates we must examine the same nation
as governed by two races successively。
The event is not rare in history。 It has been manifested in a
striking manner of late in Cuba and the Philippines； which passed
suddenly from the rule of Spain to that of the United States。
We know in what anarchy and poverty Cuba existed under Spanish
rule； we know； too； to what a degree of prosperity the island was
brought in a few years when it fell into the hands of the United
States。
The same experience was repeated in the Philippines； which for
centuries had been governed by Spain。 Finally the country was no
more than a vast jungle； the home of epidemics of every kind；
where a miserable population vegetated without commerce or
industry。 After a few years of American rule the country was
entirely transformed： malaria； yellow fever； plague and cholera
had entirely disappeared。 The swamps were drained； the country
was covered with railways； factories and schools。 In thirteen
years the mortality was reduced by two…thirds。
It is to such examples that we must refer the theorist who has
not yet grasped the profound significance of the word race； and
how far the ancestral soul of a people rules over its destiny。
2。 How the people regards Revolution。
The part of the people has been the same in all revolutions。 It
is never the people that conceives them nor directs them。 Its
activity is released by means of leaders。
Only when the direct interests of the people are involved do we
see； as recently in Champagne； any fraction of the people rising
spontaneously。 A movement thus localised constitutes a mere
riot。
Revolution is easy when the leaders are very influential。 Of
this Portugal and Brazil have recently furnished proofs。 But new
ideas penetrate the people very slowly indeed。 Generally it
accepts a revolution without knowing why； and when by chance it
does succeed in understanding why； the revolution is over long
ago。
The people will create a revolution because it is persuaded to do
so； but it does not understand very much of the ideas of its
leaders； it interprets them in its own fashion； and this fashion
is by no means that of the true authors of the revolution。 The
French Revolution furnished a striking example of this fact。
The Revolution of 1789 had as its real object the substitution of
the power of the nobility by that of the bourgeoisie； that is；
an old elite which had become incapable was to be replaced
by a new elite which did possess capacity。
There was little question of the people in this first phase of
the Revolution。 The sovereignty of the people was proclaimed；
but it amounted only to the right of electing its
representatives。
Extremely illiterate； not hoping； like the middle classes； to
ascend the social scale； not in any way feeling itself the equal
of the nobles； and not aspiring ever to become their equal； the
people had views and interests very different to those of the
upper classes of society。
The struggles of the assembly with the royal power led it to call
for the intervention of the people in these struggles。 It
intervened more and more； and the bourgeois revolution rapidly
became a popular revolution。
An idea having no force of its own； and acting only by virtue of
possessing an affective and mystic substratum which supports it；
the theoretical ideas of the bourgeoisie； before they could act
on the people； had to be transformed into a new and very definite
faith； springing from obvious practical interests。
This transformation was rapidly effected when the people heard
the men envisaged by it as the Government assuring it that it was
the equal of its former masters。 It began to regard itself as a
victim； and proceeded to pillage； burn； and massacre； imagining
that in so doing it was exercising a right。
The great strength of the revolutionary principles was that they
gave a free course to the instincts of primitive barbarity which
had been restrained by the secular and inhibitory action of
environment； tradition； and law。