heretics-第37节
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！
The matter may； perhaps； be illustrated by a parallel from our
modern politics。 When men tell us that the old Liberal politicians
of the type of Gladstone cared only for ideals； of course；
they are talking nonsensethey cared for a great many other things；
including votes。 And when men tell us that modern politicians
of the type of Mr。 Chamberlain or； in another way； Lord Rosebery；
care only for votes or for material interest； then again they are
talking nonsensethese men care for ideals like all other men。
But the real distinction which may be drawn is this； that to
the older politician the ideal was an ideal； and nothing else。
To the new politician his dream is not only a good dream； it is a reality。
The old politician would have said； 〃It would be a good thing
if there were a Republican Federation dominating the world。〃
But the modern politician does not say； 〃It would be a good thing
if there were a British Imperialism dominating the world。〃
He says； 〃It is a good thing that there is a British Imperialism
dominating the world；〃 whereas clearly there is nothing of the kind。
The old Liberal would say 〃There ought to be a good Irish government
in Ireland。〃 But the ordinary modern Unionist does not say；
〃There ought to be a good English government in Ireland。〃 He says；
〃There is a good English government in Ireland；〃 which is absurd。
In short； the modern politicians seem to think that a man becomes
practical merely by making assertions entirely about practical things。
Apparently； a delusion does not matter as long as it is a
materialistic delusion。 Instinctively most of us feel that；
as a practical matter； even the contrary is true。 I certainly
would much rather share my apartments with a gentleman who thought
he was God than with a gentleman who thought he was a grasshopper。
To be continually haunted by practical images and practical problems；
to be constantly thinking of things as actual； as urgent； as in process
of completionthese things do not prove a man to be practical；
these things； indeed； are among the most ordinary signs of a lunatic。
That our modern statesmen are materialistic is nothing against
their being also morbid。 Seeing angels in a vision may make a man
a supernaturalist to excess。 But merely seeing snakes in delirium
tremens does not make him a naturalist。
And when we come actually to examine the main stock notions of our
modern practical politicians； we find that those main stock notions are
mainly delusions。 A great many instances might be given of the fact。
We might take； for example； the case of that strange class of notions
which underlie the word 〃union；〃 and all the eulogies heaped upon it。
Of course； union is no more a good thing in itself than separation
is a good thing in itself。 To have a party in favour of union
and a party in favour of separation is as absurd as to have a party
in favour of going upstairs and a party in favour of going downstairs。
The question is not whether we go up or down stairs； but where we
are going to； and what we are going； for？ Union is strength；
union is also weakness。 It is a good thing to harness two horses
to a cart； but it is not a good thing to try and turn two hansom cabs
into one four…wheeler。 Turning ten nations into one empire may happen
to be as feasible as turning ten shillings into one half…sovereign。
Also it may happen to be as preposterous as turning ten terriers
into one mastiff 。 The question in all cases is not a question of
union or absence of union； but of identity or absence of identity。
Owing to certain historical and moral causes； two nations may be
so united as upon the whole to help each other。 Thus England
and Scotland pass their time in paying each other compliments；
but their energies and atmospheres run distinct and parallel；
and consequently do not clash。 Scotland continues to be educated
and Calvinistic； England continues to be uneducated and happy。
But owing to certain other Moral and certain other political causes；
two nations may be so united as only to hamper each other；
their lines do clash and do not run parallel。 Thus； for instance；
England and Ireland are so united that the Irish can
sometimes rule England； but can never rule Ireland。
The educational systems； including the last Education Act； are here；
as in the case of Scotland； a very good test of the matter。
The overwhelming majority of Irishmen believe in a strict Catholicism；
the overwhelming majority of Englishmen believe in a vague Protestantism。
The Irish party in the Parliament of Union is just large enough to prevent
the English education being indefinitely Protestant； and just small
enough to prevent the Irish education being definitely Catholic。
Here we have a state of things which no man in his senses would
ever dream of wishing to continue if he had not been bewitched
by the sentimentalism of the mere word 〃union。〃
This example of union； however； is not the example which I propose
to take of the ingrained futility and deception underlying
all the assumptions of the modern practical politician。
I wish to speak especially of another and much more general delusion。
It pervades the minds and speeches of all the practical men of all parties；
and it is a childish blunder built upon a single false metaphor。
I refer to the universal modern talk about young nations and new nations；
about America being young； about New Zealand being new。 The whole thing
is a trick of words。 America is not young； New Zealand is not new。
It is a very discussable question whether they are not both much
older than England or Ireland。
Of course we may use the metaphor of youth about America or
the colonies； if we use it strictly as implying only a recent origin。
But if we use it （as we do use it） as implying vigour； or vivacity；
or crudity； or inexperience； or hope； or a long life before them
or any of the romantic attributes of youth； then it is surely
as clear as daylight that we are duped by a stale figure of speech。
We can easily see the matter clearly by applying it to any other
institution parallel to the institution of an independent nationality。
If a club called 〃The Milk and Soda League〃 （let us say）
was set up yesterday； as I have no doubt it was； then； of course；
〃The Milk and Soda League〃 is a young club in the sense that it
was set up yesterday； but in no other sense。 It may consist
entirely of moribund old gentlemen。 It may be moribund itself。
We may call it a young club； in the light of the fact that it was
founded yesterday。 We may also call it a very old club in the light
of the fact that it will most probably go bankrupt to…morrow。
All this appears very obvious when we put it in this form。
Any one who adopted the young…community delusion with regard
to a bank or a butcher's shop would be sent to an asylum。
But the whole modern political notion that America and the colonies
must be very vigorous because they are very new； rests upon no
better foundation。 That America was founded long after England
does not make it even in the faintest degree more probable
that America will not perish a long time before England。
That England existed before her colonies does not make it any the less
likely that she will exist after her colonies。 And when we look at
the actual history of the world； we find that great European nations
almost invariably have survived the vitality of their colonies。
When we look at the actual history of the world； we find； that if
there is a thing that is born old and dies young； it is a colony。
The Greek colonies went to pieces long before the Greek civilization。
The Spanish colonies have gone to pieces long before the nation of Spain
nor does there seem to be any reason to doubt the possibility or even
the probability of the conclusion that the colonial civilization；
which owes its origin to England； will be much briefer and much less
vigorous than the civilization of England itself。 The English nation
will still be going the way of all European nations when the Anglo…Saxon
race has gone the way of all fads。 Now； of course； the interesting
question is； have we； in the case of America and the colonies；
any real evidence of a moral and intellectual youth as opposed
to the indisputable triviality of a merely chronological youth？
Consciously or unconsciously； we know that we have no such evidence；
and consciously or unconsciously； therefore； we proceed to m
