here that we join issue not only with doctrinaire liberals, but with
that large body of ordinary common-sense Englishmen who feel a general
and instinctive distrust of all state interference. That distrust, I
would point out, is really an anachronism. It dates from a time when
the state was at once incompetent and unpopular, from the days of
monarchic or aristocratic government carried on frankly in the
interests of particular classes or persons. But the democratic
revolution and the introduction of bureaucracy has swept all that away;
and governments in every civilized country are now moving towards the
ideal of an expert administration controlled by an alert and
intelligent public opinion. Much, it is true, has yet to be done
before that ideal will be realized. In some countries, notably in the
United States, the necessity of the expert has hardly made itself felt.
In others, such as Germany, popular control is very inadequately
provided for. But the tendency is clear; and nowhere clearer than in
this country. Here at any rate we may hopefully look forward to a
continual extension both of the activity and of the intelligence of
public officials; while at the same time, by an appropriate development
of the representative machinery, we may guard ourselves against the
danger of an irresponsible bureaucracy. The problem of reconciling
administrative efficiency with popular control is no doubt a difficult
one; but I feel confident that it can be solved. This perhaps is
hardly the place to develop my favourite idea of the professional
representative; but I may be permitted to refer to it in passing. By a
professional representative I mean one trained in a scientific and
systematic way to elicit the real opinion of his constituents, and to
embody it in practicable proposals. He will have to study what they
really want, not what they think they want, and to discover for himself
in what way it can be obtained. Such men need not be elected; indeed I
am inclined to think that the plan of popular election has had its day.
The essential is that they should be selected by some test of
efficiency, such as examination or previous record, and that they
should keep themselves in constant touch with their constituents. But
I must not dwell upon details. My main object is to show that when
government is in the hands of expert administrators, controlled by
expert representatives, there need be no anxiety felt in extending
indefinitely the sphere of the state.
"This extension will of course be primarily economic, for, as is now
generally recognized, the whole character of a society depends upon its
economic organization. Revolution, if it is to be profound, must begin
with the organization of industry; but it does not follow that it will
end there. It is a libel on the socialist ideal to call it
materialistic, to say that it is indifferent or hostile to the higher
activities. No one, to begin with, is more conscious than a true
socialist of the importance of science. Not only is the sociology on
which his position is based a branch of science; but it is a
fundamental part of his creed that the progress of man depends upon his
mastery of Nature, and that for acquiring that mastery science is his
only weapon. Again, it is absurd to accuse us of indifference to
ethics. Our standards, indeed, may not be the same as those of
bourgeois society; if they were, that would be their condemnation; for
a new economic regime necessarily postulates a new ethic. But every
regime requires and produces its appropriate standards; and the
socialist regime will be no exception. Our feeling upon that subject
is simply that we need not trouble about the ethic because it will
follow of itself upon the economic revolution. For, as we read
history, the economic factor determines all the others. 'Man ist was
er isst,' as the German said; and morals, art, religion, all the
so-called 'ideal activities,' are just allotropic forms of bread and
meat. They will come by themselves if they are wanted; and in the
socialist state they will be better not worse provided for than under
the present competitive system. For here again the principle of the
expert will come in. It will be the business of the state, if it
determines that such activities ought to be encouraged, to devise a
machinery for selecting and educating men of genius, in proportion to
the demand, and assigning to them their appropriate sphere of activity
and their sufficient wage. This will apply, I conceive, equally to the
ministers of religion as to the professors of the various branches of
art. Nor would I suggest that the socialist community should establish
any one form of religion, seeing that we are not in a position to
determine scientifically which, or whether any, are true. I would give
encouragement to all and several, of course under the necessary
restrictions, in the hope that, in course of time, by a process of
natural selection, that one will survive which is the best adapted to
the new environment. But meantime the advantage of the new over the
old organization is apparent. We shall hear no more of genius starving
in a garret; of ill-paid or over-paid ministers of the gospel; of
privileged and unprivileged sects. All will be orderly, regular, and
secure, as it should be in a civilized state; and for the first time in
history society will be in a position to extract the maximum of good
from those strange and irregular human organizations whose subsistence
hitherto has been so precarious and whose output so capricious and
uncertain. A socialist state, if I may say so, will pigeon-hole
religion, literature and art; and if these are really normal and
fruitful functions they cannot fail, like other functions, to profit by
such treatment.
"I have thus indicated in outline the main features of the socialist
scheme--an economic revolution accomplished by a gradual and peaceful
transition and issuing in a system of collectivism so complete as to
include all the human activities that are really valuable. But what I
should find it hard to convey, except to an audience prepared by years
of study, is the enthusiasm or rather the grounds for the enthusiasm,
that animates us. Whereas all other political parties are groping in
the dark, relying upon partial and outworn formulae, in which even they
themselves have ceased to believe, we alone advance in the broad
daylight, along a road whose course we clearly trace backward and
forward, towards a goal distinctly seen on the horizon. History and
analysis are our guides; history for the first time comprehended,
analysis for the first time scientifically applied. Unlike all the
revolutionists of the past, we derive our inspiration not from our own
intuitions or ideals, but from the ascertained course of the world. We
co-operate with the universe; and hence at once our confidence and our
patience. We can afford to wait because the force of events is bearing
us on of its own accord to the end we desire. Even if we rest on our
oars, none the less we are drifting onwards; or if we are checked for a
moment the eddy in which we are caught is merely local. Alone among
all politicians we have faith; but our faith is built upon science, and
it is therefore a faith which will endure."
WITH that Allison concluded; and almost before he had done MacCarthy,
without waiting my summons, had leapt to his feet and burst into an
impassioned harangue. With flashing eyes and passionate gestures he
delivered himself as follows, his Irish accent contrasting pleasantly
with that of the last speaker.
"May God forgive me," he cried, "that ever I have called myself a
socialist, if this is what socialism means! But it does not! I will
rescue the word! I will reclaim it for its ancient nobler
sense--socialism the dream of the world, the light of the grail on the
marsh, the mystic city of Sarras, the vale of Avalon! Socialism the
soul of liberty, the bond of brotherhood, the seal of equality! Who is
he that with sacrilegious hands would seize our Ariel and prison him in
that tree of iniquity the State? Day is not farther from night, nor
Good from Evil, than the socialism of the Revolution from this of the
desk and the stool, from this enemy wearing our uniform and flaunting
our coat of arms. For nigh upon a century we have fought for liberty;
and now they would make us gaolers to bind our own souls. 1789, 1830,
1848--are these dates branded upon our hearts, only to stamp us as
patient sheep in the flock of bureaucracy? No! They are the symbols
of the spirit; and those whom they set apart, outcasts from the
kingdoms of this world and citizens of the kingdom of God, wherever
they wander are living flames to consume institutions and laws, and to
light in the hearts of men the fires of pity and wrath and love. Our
city is not built with Blue books, nor cemented with office dust; nor
is it bonds of red-tape that make and keep it one. No! it is the
attraction, uncompelled, of spirits made free; the shadowing into
outward form of the eternal joy of the soul!"
He paused and seemed to collect himself; and then in a quieter tone:
"Socialism," he proceeded, "is one with anarchy! I know the terrors of
that word; but they are the terrors of an evil conscience; for it is
only an order founded on iniquity that dreads disorder. Why do you
fear for your property and lives, you who fear anarchy? It is because
you have stolen the one and misdevoted the other; because you have
created by your laws the man you call the criminal; because you have
bred hunger, and hunger has bred rage. For this I do not blame you,
any more than I blame myself. You are yourselves victims of the system
you maintain, and your enemy, no less than mine, if you knew it, is
government. For government means compulsion, exclusion, distinction,
separation; while anarchy is freedom, union and love. Government is
based on egotism and fear, anarchy on fraternity. It is because we
divide ourselves into nations that we endure the oppression of
armaments; because we isolate ourselves as individuals that we invoke
the protection of laws. If I did not take what my brother needs I
should not fear that he would take it from me; if I did not shut myself
off from his want, I should not deem it less urgent than my own. All
governing persons are persons set apart. And therefore it is that
whether they will or no they are oppressors, or, at best, obstructors.
Shut off from the breath of popular instinct, which is the breath of
life, they cannot feel, and therefore cannot think, rightly. And, in
any case, how could they understand, even with the best will in the
world, the multifarious interests they are expected to control? A man
knows nothing but what he practises; and in every branch of work only
those are fitted to direct who are themselves the workers.
Intellectually, as well as morally, government is eternally bankrupt;
and what is called representative government is no better than any
other, for the governors are equally removed in sympathy and knowledge
from the governed. Nay, experience shows, if we would but admit it,
that under no system have the rulers been more incompetent and corrupt
than under this which we call democratic. Is not the very word
'politician' everywhere a term of reproach? Is not a government office
everywhere synonymous with incapacity and sloth? What a miserable
position is that of a Member of Parliament, compelled to give his vote
on innumerable questions of which he does not understand the rudiments,
and giving it at the dictation of party chiefs who themselves are
controlled by the blind and brainless mechanism of the caucus! The
people are the slaves of their representatives, the representatives of
their chiefs, and the chiefs of a conscienceless machine! And that is
the last word of governmental science! Oh, divine spirit of man, in
what chains have you bound yourself, and call it liberty, and clap your
hands!
"And then comes one and says, 'because you are free, tie yourself
tighter and tighter in your own bonds!' Are these hands not yours that
fasten the knots? Why then do you fear? Here is a limb free; fasten
it quick! Your head still turns; come, fix it in a vice! Now you are
fast! Now you cannot move! How beautiful, how orderly, how secure!
And this, and this is socialism! And it was to accomplish this that
France opened the sluices that have deluged the earth with blood!
What! we have broken the bonds of iron to bind ourselves in tape! We
have discrowned Napoleon to crown ... to crown...."
He looked across at Allison, and suddenly pulled himself up. Then,
attempting the tone of exposition, "There is only one way out of it,"
he resumed, "the extension of free co-operation in every department of
activity, including those which at present are regulated by the State.
You will say that this is impracticable; but why? Already, in all that
you most care about, that is the method you actually adopt. The
activities of men that are freest in the society in which we live are
those of art and science and amusement. And all these are, I will not
say regulated by, but expressed in, voluntary organizations, clubs,
academies, societies, what you will. The Royal Society and the British
Association are types of the right way of organizing; and it is a way
that should and must be applied throughout the whole structure. Every
trade and business should be conducted by a society voluntarily formed
of all those who choose to engage in it, electing and removing their
own officials, determining their own policy, and co-operating by free
arrangement with other similar bodies. A complex interweaving of such
associations, with order everywhere, compulsion nowhere, is the form of
society to which I look forward, and which I see already growing up
within the hard skin of the older organisms. Rules there will be but
not laws, rules gladly obeyed because they will have been freely
adopted, and because there will be no compulsion upon anyone to remain
within the brotherhood that approves and maintains them. Anarchy is
not the absence of order, it is absence of force; it is the free
outflowing of the spirit into the forms in which it delights; and in
such forms alone, as they grow and change, can it find an expression
which is not also a bondage. You will say this is chimerical. But
look at history! Consider the great achievements of the Middle Age!
Were they not the result of just such a movement as I describe? It was
men voluntarily associating in communes and grouping themselves in
guilds that built the towers and churches and adorned them with the
glories of art that dazzles us still in Italy and France. The history
of the growth of the state, of public authority and compulsion, is the
history of the decline from Florence and Nuremberg to London and New
York. As the power of the state grows the energy of the spirit
dwindles; and if ever Allison's ideal should be realized, if ever the
activity of the state should extend through and through to every
department of life, the universal ease and comfort which may thus be
disseminated throughout society will have been purchased dearly at the
price of the soul. The denizens of that city will be fed, housed and
clothed to perfection; only--and it is a serious drawback--only they
will be dead.
"Oh!" he broke out, "if I could but get you to see that this whole
order under which you live is artificial and unnecessary! But we are
befogged by the systems we impose upon our imagination and call
science. We have been taught to regard history as a necessary process,
until we come to think it must also be a good one; that all that has
ever happened ought to have happened just so and no otherwise. And
thus we justify everything past and present, however palpably in
contradiction with our own intuitions. But these are mere figments of
the brain. History, for the most part, believe me, is one gigantic
error and crime. It ought to have been other than it was; and we ought
to be other than we are. There is no natural and inevitable evolution
towards good; no co-operating with the universe, other than by
connivance at its crimes. That little house the brain builds to
shelter its own weakness must be torn down if we would face the truth
and pursue the good. Then we shall see amid what blinding storms of
wind and rain, what darkness of elements hostile or indifferent, our
road lies across the mountains towards the city of our desire. Then
and then only shall we understand the spirit of revolution. That there
are things so bad that they can only be burnt up by fire; that there
are obstructions so immense that they can only be exploded by dynamite;
that the work of destruction is a necessary preliminary to the work of
creation, for it is the destruction of the prison walls wherein the
spirit is confined; and that in that work the spirit itself is the only
agent, unhelped by powers of nature or powers of a world beyond--that
is the creed--no, I will not say the creed, that is the insight and
vision by which we of the Revolution live. By that I believe we shall
triumph. But whether we triumph or no, our life itself is a victory,
for it is a life lived in the spirit. To shatter material bonds that
we may bind closer the bonds of the soul, to slough dead husks that we
may liberate living forms, to abolish institutions that we may evoke
energies, to put off the material and put on the spiritual body, that,
whether we fight with the tongue or the sword, is the inspiration of
our movement, that, and that only, is the true and inner meaning of
anarchy.
"Anarchy is identified with violence; and I will not be so hypocritical
and base as to deny that violence must be one of our means of action.
Force is the midwife of society; and never has radical change been
accomplished without it. What came by the sword by the sword must be
destroyed: and only through violence can violence come to an end. Nay,
I will go further and confess, since here if anywhere we are candid,
that it is the way of violence to which I feel called myself, and that
I shall die as I have lived, an active revolutionary. But because
force is a way, is a necessary way, is my way, I do not imagine that
there is no other. Were it not idle to wish, I could rather wish that
I were a poet or a saint, to serve the same Lord by the gentler weapons
of the spirit. There are anarchists who never made a speech and never
carried a rifle, whom we know as our brothers, though perhaps they know
not us. Two I will name who live for ever, Shelley, the first of
poets, were it not that there is one greater than he, the mystic
William Blake. We are thought of as men of blood; we are hounded over
the face of the globe. And who of our persecutors would believe that
the song we bear in our hearts, some of us, I may speak at least for
one, is the most inspired, the most spiritual challenge ever flung to
your obtuse, flatulent, stertorous England:
Bring me my bow of burning gold,
Bring me my arrows of desire,
Bring me my spear; O clouds unfold!
Bring me my chariot of fire!
I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
Till I have built Jerusalem
In England's green and pleasant land.
"England! No, not England, but Europe, America, the world! Where is
Man, the new Man, there is our country. But the new Man is buried in
the old; and wherever he struggles in his tomb, wherever he knocks we
are there to help to deliver him. When the guards sleep, in the
silence of the dawn, rises the crucified Christ. And the angel that
sits at the grave is the angel of Anarchy."
THUS abruptly he brought to a close his extraordinary peroration, to
which I fear the written word has done but poor justice. A long
silence followed; in it there was borne to us from below the murmur of
the hidden fountain, the wail of the nightingale. It was night now;
the moon had set, and the sky was thick with stars. Among them one
planet was blazing red, just opposite where I sat; and I saw the eyes
of my neighbour, Henry Martin, fixed upon it. He was so lost in
thought that he did not hear me at first when I asked him whether he
would care to follow on. But he assented willingly enough as soon as
he understood. And as he rose I could not help admiring, as I had
often done before, the singular beauty of his countenance. His books,
I think, do him injustice; they are cold and academic. But there was
nothing of that in the man himself; never was spirit so alert; and that
alertness was reflected in his person and bearing, his erect figure,
his brilliant eyes, and the tumultuous sweep of his now whitening
beard. He stood for a moment silent, with his eyes still fixed on the
red star; then began to speak as follows:
"If," he said, "it be true, as certain mystics maintain, that the world
is an effect of the antagonisms of spiritual beings, having their
stations in opposite quarters of the heavens, then, I think, MacCarthy
and myself must represent such a pair of contraries, and move in an
antithetic balance through the cycle of experience. I, perhaps, am the
Urthona of his prophet Blake, and he the Urizen, or vice versa, it may
be, I cannot tell. But our opposition involves, on my part at least,
no hostility; and looking across to his quarter of the sky I can
readily conceive how proud a fate it must be to burn there, so red, so
sumptuous, and so superb. My own light is pale by comparison, a mere
green and blue; yet it is equally essential; and without it there might
be a danger that he would consume the world. I speak in metaphors,
that I may effect as gently as possible the necessary transition, so
cold and abrupt, from the prophet to the critic. But you, sir, in
calling upon me, knew what you were doing. You knew well that you were
inviting Aquarius to empty his watering-pot on Mars. And Mars, I am
sure, will pardon me if I obey. Unlike all the previous speakers, I
am, by vocation, a sceptic; and the vocation I hold to be a noble one.
There are people who think, perhaps, indeed, there is almost nobody who
does not think, that action is the sole end of life. Criticism, they
hold, is a kind of disease to which some people are subject, and which,
in extreme cases, may easily be fatal. The healthy state, on the other
hand, they think, is that of the enthusiast; of the man who believes
and never doubts. Now, that such a state is happy I am very ready to
admit; but I cannot hold that it is healthy. How could it be, unless
it were based upon a sound, intellectual foundation? But no such
foundation has been or will be reached except through criticism; and
all criticism implies and engenders doubt. A man who has never
experienced, nay, I will say who is not constantly reiterating, the
process of criticism, is a man who has no right to his enthusiasm. For
he has won it at the cost of drugging his mind with passion; and that I
maintain is a bad and wrong thing. I maintain it to be bad and wrong
in itself, and quite apart from any consequences it may produce; for it
is a primary duty to seek what is true and eschew what is false. But
even from the secondary point of view of consequences, I have the
gravest doubts as to the common assumption that the effects of
enthusiasm are always preponderantly if not wholly good. When I
consider, for example, the history of religion, I find no warrant for
affirming that its services have outweighed its disservices. Jesus
Christ, the greatest and, I think, the sanest of enthusiasts, lit the
fires of the Inquisition and set up the Pope at Rome. Mahomet deluged
the earth with blood, and planted the Turk on the Bosphorus. Saint
Frances created a horde of sturdy beggars. Luther declared the Thirty
Years War. Criticism would have arrested the course of these men; but
would the world have been the worse? I doubt it. There would have
been less heat; but there might have been more light. And, for my
part, I believe in light. It may, indeed, be true that intellect
without passion is barren; but it is certain that passion without
intellect is mischievous. And since these powers, which should be
united, are, in fact, at war in the great duel which runs through
history, I take my stand with the intellect. If I must choose, I would
rather be barren than mischievous. But it is my aim to be fruitful and
to be fruitful through criticism. That means, I fear, that I am bound
to make myself unpleasant to everybody. But I do it, not of malice
prepense, but as in duty bound. You will say, perhaps, that that only
makes the matter worse. Well, so be it! I will apologize no more, but
proceed at once to my disagreeable task.