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！
of the people； created by the Revolution and established by its
institutions； have exercised a profound influence。 The military
work of the conqueror was soon dissolved； but the revolutionary
principles which he contributed to propagate have survived him。
The various restorations which followed the Empire caused men at
first to become somewhat forgetful of the principles of the
Revolution。 For fifty years this propagation was far from rapid。
One might almost have supposed that the people had forgotten
them。 Only a small number of theorists maintained their
influence。 Heirs to the ‘‘simplicist'' spirit of the Jacobins；
believing； like them； that societies can be remade from top to
bottom by the laws； and persuaded that the Empire had only
interrupted the task of revolution； they wished to resume it。
While waiting until they could recommence； they attempted to
spread the principles of the Revolution by means of their
writings。 Faithful imitators of the men of the Revolution； they
never stopped to ask if their schemes for reform were in
conformity with human nature。 They too were erecting a
chimerical society for an ideal man； and were persuaded that the
application of their dreams would regenerate the human species。
Deprived of all constructive power； the theorists of all the ages
have always been very ready to destroy。 Napoleon at St。 Helena
stated that ‘‘if there existed a monarchy of granite the
idealists and theorists would manage to reduce it to powder。''
Among the galaxy of dreamers such as Saint…Simon； Fourier； Pierre
Leroux； Louis Blanc； Quinet； &c。； we find that only Auguste Comte
understood that a transformation of manners and ideas must
precede political reorganisation。
Far from favouring the diffusion of democratic ideas； the
projects of reform of the theorists of this period merely impeded
their progress。 Communistic Socialism； which several of
them professed would restore the Revolution； finally alarmed the
bourgeoisie and even the working…classes。 We have already seen
that the fear of their ideas was one of the principal causes of
the restoration of the Empire。
If none of the chimerical lucubrations of the writers of the
first half of the nineteenth century deserve to be discussed； it
is none the less interesting to examine them in order to observe
the part played by religious and moral ideas which to…day are
regarded with contempt。 Persuaded that a new society could not；
any more than the societies of old； be built up without religious
and moral beliefs； the reformers were always endeavouring to
found such beliefs。
But on what could they be based？ Evidently on reason。 By means
of reason men create complicated machines： why not therefore a
religion and a morality； things which are apparently so simple？
Not one of them suspected the fact that no religious or moral
belief ever had rational logic as its basis。 Auguste Comte saw
no more clearly。 We know that he founded a so…called positivist
religion； which still has a few followers。 Scientists were to
form a clergy directed by a new Pope； who was to replace the
Catholic Pope。
All these conceptionspolitical； religious； or moralhad； I
repeat； no other results for a long time than to turn the
multitude away from democratic principles。
If these principles did finally become widespread； it was not on
account of the theorists； but because new conditions of life had
arisen。 Thanks to the discoveries of science； industry developed
and led to the erection of immense factories。 Economic
necessities increasingly dominated the wills of Governments and
the people and finally created a favourable soil for the
extension of Socialism； and above all of Syndicalism； the modern
forms of democratic ideas。
2。 The Unequal Influence of the Three Fundamental Principles of
the Revolution。
The heritage of the Revolution is summed up in its entirety in
the one phraseLiberty； equality； and Fraternity。 The
principle of equality； as we have seen； has exerted a powerful
influence； but the two others did not share its lot。
Although the sense of these terms seems clear enough； they were
comprehended in very different fashions according to men and
times。 We know that the various interpretation of the same words
by persons of different mentality has been one of the most
frequent causes of the conflicts of history。
To the member of the Convention liberty signified merely the
exercise of its unlimited despotism。 To a young modern
‘‘intellectual'' the same word means a general release from
everything irksome： tradition； law； superiority； &c。 To the
modern Jacobin liberty consists especially in the right to
persecute his adversaries。
Although political orators still occasionally mention liberty in
their speeches； they have generally ceased to evoke fraternity。
It is the conflict of the different classes and not their
alliance that they teach to…day。 Never did a more profound
hatred divide the various strata of society and the political
parties which lead them。
But while liberty has become very doubtful and fraternity has
completely vanished； the principle of equality has grown
unchecked。 It has been supreme in all the political upheavals of
which France has been the stage during the last century； and has
reached such a development that our political and social life；
our laws； manners； and customs are at least in theory based on
this principle。 It constitutes the real legacy of the
Revolution。 The craving for equality； not only before the law；
but in position and fortune； is the very pivot of the last
product of democracy： Socialism。 This craving is so powerful
that it is spreading in all directions； although in contradiction
with all biological and economic laws。 It is a new phase of the
interrupted struggle of the sentiments against reason； in which
reason so rarely triumphs。
2。 The Democracy of the ‘‘Intellectuals'' and Popular Democracy。
All ideas that have hitherto caused an upheaval of the world of
men have been subject to two laws： they evolve slowly； and they
completely change their sense according to the mentalities in
which they find reception。
A doctrine may be compared to a living being。 It subsists only
by process of transformation。 The books are necessarily silent
upon these variations； so that the phase of things which they
establish belongs only to the past。 They do not reflect the
image of the living； but of the dead。 The written statement of a
doctrine often represents the most negligible side of that
doctrine。
I have shown in another work how institutions； arts； and
languages are modified in passing from one people to another； and
how the laws of these transformations differ from the truth as
stated in books。 I allude to this matter now merely to show why；
in examining the subject of democratic ideas； we occupy ourselves
so little with the text of doctrines； and seek only for the
psychological elements of which they constitute the vestment； and
the reactions which they provoke in the various categories of men
who have accepted them。
Modified rapidly by men of different mentalities； the original
theory is soon no more than a label which denotes something quite
unlike itself。
Applicable to religious beliefs； these principles are equally so
to political beliefs。 When a man speaks of democracy； for
example； must we inquire what this word means to various peoples；
and also whether in the same people there is not a great
difference between the democracy of the ‘‘intellectuals'' and
popular democracy。
In confining ourselves now to the consideration of this latter
point we shall readily perceive that the democratic ideas to be
found in books and journals are purely the theories of literary
people； of which the people know nothing； and by the application
of which they would have nothing to gain。 Although the working…
man possesses the theoretical right of passing the barriers which
separate him from the upper classes by a whole series of
competitions and examinations； his chance of reaching them is in
reality extremely slight。
The democracy of the lettered classes has no other object than to
set up a selection which shall recruit the directing classes
exclusively from themselves。 I should have nothing to say
against this if the selection were real。 It would then
constitute the application of the maxim of Napoleon： ‘‘The true
method of government is to employ the aristocracy； but under the
forms of democracy。''
Unhappily the democracy of the ‘‘intellectuals'' would simply
lead to the substitution of the Divine right of kings by the
Divine right of a petty oligarchy； which is too often narrow and
tyrannical。 Liberty cannot be created by replacing a tyranny。
Popular democracy by no means aims at manufacturing rul