the american republic-第52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！


ticular　states　or　nations　are　never　absolutely　independent　of　　each　other　but；　bound　together　by　the　solidarity　of　the　race；　so　　that　there　is　a　real　solidarity　of　nations　as　well　as　of　　individualsthe　truth　underlying　Kossuth's　famous　declaration　of　　the　solidarity　of　peoples。〃

The　solidarity　of　nations　is　the　basis　of　international　law；　　binding　on　every　particular　nation；　and　which　every　civilized　　nation　recognizes　and　enforces　on　its　own　subjects　or　citizens　　through　its　own　courts　as　an　integral　part　of　its　own　municipal　　or　national　law。

The　personal　or　individual　right　is　therefore　restricted　by　the　　rights　of　society；　and　the　rights　of　the　particular　society　or　　nation　are　limited　by　international　law；　or　the　rights　of　　universal　societythe　truth　the　ex…governor　of　Hungary　　overlooked。　　The　grand　error　of　Gentilism　was　in　denying　the　　unity　and　therefore　the　solidarity　of　the　race；　involved　in　its　　denial　or　misconception　of　the　unity　of　God。　　It　therefore　was　　never　able　to　assign　any　solid　basis　to　international　law；　and　　gave　it　only　a　353　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　conventional　or　customary　authority；　thus　leaving　　the　jus　gentium；　which　it　recognized　in　deed；　without　any　real　　foundation　in　the　constitution　of　things；　or　authority　in　the　　real　world。　　Its　real　basis　is　in　the　solidarity　of　the　race；　　which　has　its　basis　in　the　unity　of　God；　not　the　dead　or　abstract　　unity　asserted　by　the　old　Eleatics；　the　Neo…Platonists；　or　the　　modern　Unitarians；　but　the　living　unity　consisting　in　the　　threefold　relation　in　the　Divine　Essence；　of　Father；　Son；　and　　Holy　Ghost；　as　asserted　by　Christian　revelation；　and　believed；　　more　or　less　intelligently；　by　all　Christendom。

The　tendency　in　the　Southern　States　has　been　to　overlook　the　　social　basis　of　the　state；　or　the　rights　of　society　founded　on　　the　solidarity　of　the　race；　and　to　make　all　rights　and　powers　　personal；　or　individual；　and　as　only　the　white　race　has　been　able　　to　assert　and　maintain　its　personal　freedom；　only　men　of　that　　race　are　held　to　have　the　right　to　be　free。　　Hence　the　people　of　　those　States　felt　no　scruple　in　holding　the　black　or　colored　race　　as　slaves。　Liberty；　said　they；　is　the　right　only　of　those　who　　have　the　ability　to　assert　and　maintain　it。　　Let　the　negro　prove　　that　he　has　this　ability　by　asserting　and　maintaining　his　　freedom；　and　he　will　prove　his　right　to　be　free；　354　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　and　that　it　is　a　　gross　outrage；　a　manifest　injustice；　to　enslave　him；　but；　till　　then；　let　him　be　my　servant；　which　is　best　for　him　and　for　me。　　　Why　ask　me　to　free　him？　　I　shall　by　doing　so　only　change　the　form　　of　his　servitude。　　Why　appeal　to　me！　　Am　I　my　brother's　keeper？　　Nay；　is　he　my　brother？　　Is　this　negro；　more　like　an　ape　or　a　　baboon　than　a　human　being；　of　the　same　race　with　myself？　　I　　believe　it　not。　　But　in　some　instances；　at　least；　my　dear　　slaveholder；　your　slave　is　literally　your　brother；　and　sometimes　　even　your　son；　born　of　your　own　daughter。　　The　tendency　of　the　　Southern　democrat　was　to　deny　the　unity　of　the　race；　as　well　as　　all　obligations　of　society　to　protect　the　weak　and　helpless；　and　　therefore　all　true　civil　society。

At　the　North　there　has　been；　and　is　even　yet；　an　opposite　　tendencya　tendency　to　exaggerate　the　social　element；　to　　overlook　the　territorial　basis　of　the　state；　and　to　disregard　the　　rights　of　individuals。　　This　tendency　has　been　and　is　strong　in　　the　people　called　abolitionists。　　The　American　abolitionist　is　so　　engrossed　with　the　unity　that　he　loses　the　solidarity　of　the　　race；　which　supposes　unity　of　race　and　multiplicity　of　　individuals；　and　falls　to　see　any　thing　legitimate　and　　authoritative　in　355　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　geographical　divisions　or　territorial　　circumscriptions。　　Back　of　these；　back　of　individuals；　he　sees　　humanity；　superior　to　individuals；　superior　to　states；　　governments；　and　laws；　and　holds　that　he　may　trample　on　them　all　　or　give　them　to　the　winds　at　the　call　of　humanity　or　〃the　higher　　law。〃　　The　principle　on　which　he　acts　is　as　indefensible　as　the　　personal　or　egoistical　democracy　of　the　slaveholders　and　their　　sympathizers。　　Were　his　socialistic　tendency　to　become　exclusive　　and　realized；　it　would　found　in　the　name　of　humanity　a　complete　　social　despotism；　which；　proving　impracticable　from　its　very　　generality；　would　break　up　in　anarchy；　in　which　might　makes　　right；　as　in　the　slaveholder's　democracy。

The　abolitionists；　in　supporting　themselves　on　humanity　in　its　　generality；　regardless　of　individual　and　territorial　rights；　can　　recognize　no　state；　no　civil　authority；　and　therefore　are　as　much　　out　of　the　order　of　civilization；　and　as　much　in　that　of　　barbarism；　as　is　the　slaveholder　himself。　　Wendell　Phillips　is　as　　far　removed　from　true　Christian　civilization　as　was　John　C。　　Calhoun；　and　William　Lloyd　Garrison　is　as　much　of　a　barbarian　and　　despot　in　principle　and　tendency　as　Jefferson　Davis。　　Hence　the　　great　body　of　the　people　in　the　non…slaveholding　States；　wedded　　to　American　democracy　as　they　354　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　were　and　are　could　never；　as　much　　as　they　detested　slavery；　be　induced　to　make　common　cause　with　　the　abolitionists；　and　their　apparent　union　in　the　late　civil　war　　was　accidental；　simply　owing　to　the　fact　that　for　the　time　the　　social　democracy　and　the　territorial　coincides　or　had　the　same　　enemy。　　The　great　body　of　the　loyal　people　instinctively　felt　　that　pure　socialism　is　as　incompatible　with　American　democracy　as　　pure　individualism；　and　the　abolitionists　are　well　aware　that　　slavery　has　been　abolished；　not　for　humanitarian　or　socialistic　　reasons　but　really　for　reasons　of　state；　in　order　to　save　the　　territorial　democracy。　　The　territorial　democracy　would　not　unite　　to　eliminate　even　so　barbaric　an　element　as　slavery；　till　the　　rebellion　gave　them　the　constitutional　right　to　abolish　it；　and　　even　then　so　scrupulous　were　they；　that　they　demanded　a　　constitutional　amendment；　so　as　to　be　able　to　make　clean　work　of　　it；　without　any　blow　to　individual　or　State　rights。

The　abolitionists　were　right　in　opposing　slavery；　but　not　in　　demanding　its　abolition　on　humanitarian　or　socialistic　grounds。　　　Slavery　is　really　a　barbaric　element；　and　is　in　direct　antagonism　　to　American　civilization。　　The　whole　force　of　the　national　life　　opposes　it；　and　must　finally　eliminate　it；　or　become　itself　　extinct　357　　　　　　　　　and　it　is　no　mean　proof　of　their　utter　want　of　sympathy　　with　all　the　living　forces　of　modern　civilization；　that　the　　leading　men　of　the　South　and　their　prominent　friends　at　the　North　　really　persuaded　themselves　that　with　cotton；　rice；　and　tobacco；　　they　could　effectually　resist　the　anti…slavery　movement；　and　　perpetuate　their　barbaric　democracy。　　They　studied　the　classics；　　they　admired　Greece　and　Rome；　and　imagined　that　those　nations　　became　great　by　slavery；　instead　of　being　great　even　in　spite　of　　slavery。　　They　failed　to　take　into　the　account　the　fact　that　when　　Greece　and　Rome　were　in　the　zenith　of　their　glory；　all　　contemporary　nations　were　also　slaveholding　nations；　and　that　if　　they　were　the　greatest　and　most　highly　civilized　nations　of　their　　times；　they　were　not　fitted　to　be　the　greatest　and　most　highly　　civilized　nations　of　all　times。　　They　failed　also　to　perceive　　that；　if　the　Graeco…Roman　republic　did　not　include　the　whole　　territorial　people　in　the　political　people；　it　yet　recognized　　both　the　social　and　the　territorial　foundation　of　the　state；　and　　never　attempted　to　rest　it　on　pure　individualism；　they　forgot；　　too；　that　Greece　and　Rome　both　fell；　and　fell　precisely　through　　internal　weakness　caused　by　the　barbarism　within；　not　through　the　　force　of　the　barbarism　358　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　beyond　their　frontiers。　　The　world　has　　changed　since　the　time　when　ten　thousand　of　his　slaves　were　　sacrificed　as　a　religious　offering　to　the　manes　of　a　single　Roman　　master。　　The　infusion　of　the　Christian　dogma　of　the　unity　and　　solidarity　of　the　race　into　the　belief；　the　life；　the　laws；　the　　jurisprudence　of　all　civilized　nations；　has　doomed　slavery　and　　every　species　of　barbarism；　but　this　our　slaveholding　countrymen　　saw　not。

It　rarely　happens　that　in　any　controversy；　individual　or　　national；　the　real　issue　is　distinctly　presented；　or　the　precise　　question　in　debate　is　clearly　and　distinctly　understood　by　either　　party。　　Slavery　was　only　incidentally　involved　in　the　late　war。　　　The　war　was　occasioned　by　the　collision　of　two　extreme　parties；　　but　it　was　itself　a　war　between　civilization　and　barbarism；　　primarily　between　the　territorial　democracy　and　the　personal　　democracy；　and　in　reality；　on　the　part　of　the　nation；　as　much　a　　war　against　the　socialism　of　the　abolitionist　as　against　the　　individualism　of　the　slaveholder。　　Yet　the　victory；　though　　complete　over　the　former；　is　only　half　won　over　the　latter；　for　　it　has　left　the　humanitarian　democracy　standing；　and　perhaps　for　　the　moment　stronger　than　ever。　　The　socialistic　democracy　was　　enlisted　by　the　territorial；　not　to　strengthen　the　government　at　359　home；　as　it　imagines；　for　that　it　did　not　do；　and　could　not　do；　　since　the　national　instinct　was　even　more　opposed　to　it　than　to　　the　personal　democracy；　but　under　its　antislavery　aspect；　to　　soften　the　hostility　of　foreign　powers；　and　w