INDEPENDENCE.
"That independence Britons prize too high Keeps man from man and breaks the social tie."
OLIVER GOLDSMITH wrote these words in 1764. If he had lived in 1902, would be have written them ? The social tie which binds men together is very strong now and is strengthening every day, while the barriers which kept them apart are falling down daily. Of course there is a sense in which independence has increased, but it is class independence rather than individual independence. No set of men needs to be servile any longer, and none claims the right to be insolent Yet almost all men desire to be kept in countenance by company. The reserve for which Englishmen were once famous is no longer their distinguishing character- istic. The virtues now cultivated in every class are the social virtues. Churlishness is a quality very little seen nowadays and very severely punished. Broadly speaking, freedom has increased; but the majority impose stricter and stricter limits 413can individual liberty. Few people have the courage to be singular; eccentricity is coldly looked on where it is not harshly condemned. Every man, it is true, has a right to Us convictions, a right which, by the irony of fate, was no sooner conceded than men perceived that convictions do not come by right. We are all welcome to as many as we like, and most ofus are thankful if we can get any at all. f Life is a less alarming affair than it was, but, oddly enough, ewer People feel able to face it alone. The horrors of disease ve been mitigated; the chances of living till we have had enough of life are greatly increased. The standard of comfort tag gone up by leaps and bounds, hit every increase in the amenity of life has increased the need for sympathy. In its ?relent aspect it is a new need, and it amounts to a positive ;raying. The world is becoming mentally communistic. We u° not like any longer to work alone.—witness all the Guilds, Societies, and Trade-Unions. We do not like to play alone,— look at the innumerable clubs springing up in all directions for the organisation of diversion. We do not like even to think alone. We discuss our innermost thoughts, we thilik again that we may argue, we learn that we may tell. Tolerance is universal. We all understand each other's point of view, and only wish we felt more sure of obr own. It takes a war to make a heretic. In times of peace no one likes a man the less for anything be believes or disbelieves. We are all willing to give way a little for the sake of solidarity. The spirit of cohesion is in the air. The strength which comes of combination is clearly understood. The dangers of independence are continually remembered, the dangers of interdependence are in a fair way to be forgotten. Lord Derby's dictum that "an independent politician is a politician who cannot be depended upon" is in danger of too wide an application. Manners have changed and habits of thought have changed rapidly during the last fifty years, as we believe for the better, but human nature remains very much the same underneath. Still, the minority long to lead ; still, the majority look to be led. A strong man shouts and the people rally round him, not one by one, slowly, each man struggling with his preconceived ideas, carefully guarding his right to go back, as used to be the case, but en mane, by flocks and herds. Each clump of men is accustomed to work together, to talk together, to make daily sacrifices of individualism. They form a splendid weapon whose efficacy for good or evil depends on the wielder. The same thing happens in the realm of abstract thought. A man of genius starts a theory. In a moment he has an organised following. An able man can hardly have au opinion but he must found a sect.. Ask the average man his views on any subject, and he will not be at the trouble of stating them, but will reply "I agree with So-and-so." We all live in such close mental quarters that contagion spreads like wildfire. We all drink together the heady wine of new thought, and are all apt to mistake the elation it engenders for the inspiration of the spirit of truth. What we are losing out of life is not originality. That was always rare, and can never be lost. What we are losing is variety, and it is a con- siderable loss. The mass of men are becoming—to borrow a phrase from the jargon of philanthropy—" institutionised." We are striving to kill variety out. From the first to the last days of a boy's education lie is taught to regard himself as one of a number, to fill his place in a rank, to sup- press whatever in his personality is inconvenient to the community. He must work to attain to a common standard; he must play for the common glory. If he can- not excel, he must at least make common cause with the gifted beings who win matches and colours; but what- ever his attainments or shortcomings, there is one thing be must not do, and that is to "loaf about alone." When he leaves school and enters some profession or some trade the atmosphere is still heavy with rules,—rules made in the interests of the majority, in accordance with which he must sacrifice his private interests, his private feelings, some- times even his private duty. If pride, prejudice, or principle leads him to rebel, he is immediately an outlaw, and must cast in his lot with those whose more impeachable motives have led them to seek a living as freelances. Fine qualities are no doubt induced by this discipline. The soldierly virtues gain ground every day. Loyalty is taking the place of inde- pendence. What sort of substitute will it make for the latter, for that "native hardiness of soul, true to imagined right, above control," which used to distinguish the English:. man ? It is difficult to say, but the change is, we believe, the inevitable result of our civilisation. A great increase of numbers and a great increase of work lie at its root. To keep the Empire together an immense amount of labour, both physical and mental, is required of many millions of people, and nothing but strict organisation can enable them to get through it. To be independent in the sense in which we have been using the word necessitates a certain amount of individual latitude, and in the England of to-day there is no space to spare for eccentricity. The professions are packed, the trades are packed, every one must march in order, the pleasant doctrine of " Go as you please" can no longer be safely practised. Another thing which has, we believe, con- tributed to the new social ideal is the present revival of the uractieal side of Chrilst&nitY, whcise ethics demand the
sacrifice of independent advantage wherever it clashes with the general good. But from whatever cause, the mental characteristics of the people are being seriously modified by the necessity for co-operation, and it is a question whether or no that modification is for good. The natural growth of their moral strength, on which in the long run the well-being of a State rests, appears to have been, however, in no way impeded.
Civilisation means always the power to bear more law, and loyalty is a voluntary bondage entailing none of the evil effects of a forced obedience. It does not sap the courage or encourage servility. It cuts at the root of selfishness. It has in a lesser degree something of the effect of worship upon the mind of the multitude, whether the indi- vidual is required to sacrifice to the common good in the abstract, or to obey a leader elected to further a common cause. A leader, however, will almost always arise. The danger is that that leader should be unworthy of the trust his followers place in him. It is strange—to our mind, it is somewhat disheartening—to see how democracy leads back to the government of the few. The safeguard is that there is a sense in which a worthy people can never have unworthy leaders. While the people believe in the moral excellence of their leaders they must remain uncorrupted by the moral worthlessness of those leaders, and so long as they are free they can remove them as soon as they find them out. The life of a people is long enough to prove that righteousness pays ; the life of an individual is so short that the evidence often looks the other way. No people goes down till it loses its morale, and the seriousness of an accident brought about by bad advice history proves may be easily exaggerated. We believe this loss of apparent independence to be a necessary step forward. The landscape of life is being steadily brought under cultivation. The process is profitable. It is not, however, picturesque.
Previous page
