A FRENCH INDIVIDUALIST.*
THE distinguished French thinker who writes under the name of Leon Hendryk has published a new volume in which he develops on philosophic lines the teaching of his romance, Le Devoir de Bonheur. Let us say at once that he does not here devote much space to the relations of the sexes ; and this is well, since his merciless French logic drives him further than we believe to be right for mankind in that sphere. He considers that two perfectly harmonious spirits are in duty. bound to mate if they come across each other, regardless of former ties. Apart from other and stronger and better reasons, we hold that such " harmony " entails too great a rupture of other "harmonies," however faulty, with too cruel results to other people, to be allowable. When one discusses " rinstable at le stable se conditionnant sans cease reciproquement " in human life, one must be pardoned for refusing to be bound absolutely by logic. Again, the author claims that " l'agnosticisme est Ia seule attitude qui convient it l'intelligence," and we deny that, even if this were proved, it would necessarily be right for imperfect human beings who have spiritual needs that cannot be satisfied by the cold comforts of logic :— "Let reason then at her own quarry fly,
But how can finite grasp Infinity ?"
But for our author "le divin " is "la Volonte de Puissance unie it Ia Volontd d'Ilarmonie."
Having hoisted these danger-signals, we can proceed to praise the clear thinking and sound sense of the book. The author feels that "la philosophic: et la litterature de ces dernibres annees devoilent one evident° renaissance du cults de l'energie, de l'action, de la vie intense," and that it is time to draw attention to harmony as a power which should be in exact equilibrium with force. He does not oppose directly the Nietzschean doctrine of the deter- minism of force. He will accept if necessary the instinct that gives pre-eminent rights to the superman, but "encore fantil que cet instinct s'accorde avec lee instincts de touts Mite." " La Puissance " has now a false preponderance over " l'harmonie " in men's minds : they are complementary, but at present the coherent power of " l'harmonie" is neglected. A proof that he is right is found in the fact that, with the exception of M. Yves Guyot, he discovers scarcely any contem- porary French writer to quote since Bastiat. Among British authors he finds support in none since Buckle and Spencer ; but he might have, since his theme is just that which Mr. Mackay, for instance, so happily called "the beneficence and organizing power of liberty." "La liberte a ceci de • re Volont1 crIlormseir. Par Lion Headryk. Paris: B, Grasset, Mr. fool -merveillaux, qu'elle eat a noire aotivite et a notre volontk la foie lestimulant le pins energique et in frein le plus dm" For us who have been saturated with fiscal argument, the best illustration of the " Volonte d'Harmonie" may be taken from commerce, where the free play of supply and demand con- stitutes the most delicate balance imaginable combined with an eventually irresistible power. So delicate is the balance that clumsy meddlers cannot realize the power : they make their political efforts to interfere by introducing arbitrary force; then they learn the overwhelming power of the free play of markets. The author keeps his argument upon a high plane of ethics, far above anarchy or passivity or mere hedonism, and of abstract thought. In only one case is a descent to the concrete unfortunate. He' speaks of the " uniformes de soldats von& a centre-tner ou des donaniers °coupes a paralyser reffort humain I" We can allow the scorn of
&maniere," but when he proceeds in his anti-militarist vein he goes too far, or does not see far enough. He is justified in wishing that such nations as France should give up all idea of wasting effort in war with other nations that profess an equal degree of civilization, but he forgets that if Europe having dismissed its internal rivalries, were to lay down its arms, it would be at the mercy of races less civilized. Besides, men do not fight for plunder, but to have liberty of action— to make good their " We won't " in reply to other men's " You shall." Let M. Hendryk consult the famous scene between the Swedish captain and Hamlet. That will, if properly understood, purge away the anti-militarist dross from his thought. With regard to labour unrest he is more scientific.
He clearly distinguishes the good and bad points of Trade Unionism to-day, condemning only "le syndicat qui vent introduire les rapports de subordination dans la vie economique oh sont seals valables les rapports d'echange, tel eat a l'heure actuelle l'ennemi mortel de la civilisation, c'est-a-dire des harmonies sociales." A State should recognize " sans ancune restriction toutes les associa- tions morales, celles qui ne pretendent exercer h regard de leant concitoyens ancune action, aucnne pression, ancon marchandage, mais user uniquement de la persuasion." But he condemns " les gonvernements fondes sur le suffrage du nombre" when they commit "a regard des commitment&
representent one veritable trahison, en laissant s'etablir an Bela de ces communautes la puissance syndicale ; pire encore en la flattant dans la ;mauve oh elle pent leer apporter des bulletins de vote." The analysis of those artificial idols called the State or Society leaves them very threadbare. "La societe, loin d'être une realite qu'on puisse valablement opposer
Tindividu, est moins encore qu'une abstraction." Of the collectivist State the writer says: " Cette souverainete qu'on revendique avec solennite, qu'on poursuit avec inconacience on avec cynisme, porte on entre nom : c'est le droit du plus fort, droit qui ne pent finalement se determiner que par la guerre eons toutes see formes." The excuse for the existence of the State is the purpose of reducing constraint, and it is defined as "rorganisme social destine a garantir toutes lea libertes ft tortes les responsabilites par la confiscation leur profit de tons lea moyens de contrainte," a neat variation of a well-known formula. Politicians " confondent tortes les relations humaines, celles de subordination, celles crechange et celles de bienveillance, dans la meme et vague conception dune barmonie providentielle, harmonic qu'ils esperent en vain substituer, an moyen des ressources prises an basard dans la patrimoine de tons at distribuees sans egard a la valeur individuelle de °bacilli, It cello resultant du plein exercice de to liberte et de la responsabilite." The main thesis may be summed up in the author's words : "Les harmonies humaines ne emit pas antre chose en definitive qua requilibre, plus on moins henrensement realise par l'homme, de ces elements de vie, Eldon quit respecte plus on moins lee lois de is liberte et de la responsabilite." With that we heartily agree.
Previous page
