THE DEATH OF A CREED

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21975, 26 December 1936, Page 13

THE DEATH OF A CREED

MR LASKI ON LIBERALISM The Rise of Europeah Liberalism. By Harold J. Laski. Alba and Unwin, 287 pp. (7/6 net.) (Reviewed by ANTOINETTE POCOCK.J The generally accepted conception of Liberalism is that it was the outcome of the French Revolution, and was an attack on aristocratic and monarchical privilege, which it replaced by democratic institutions. To some it has an even narrower interpretation. The insular Englishman regards Liberalism as the now moribund political party, which reached its zenith under Gladstone. Mr Laski, with a far longer view of the trend of human developments, traces its origin back to the fifteenth century. The geographical discoveries of that period brought a new world into being, and a now truth was revealed —one which perhaps has caused the greatest revolution in history; namely, that wealth begets wealth. From the end of the fifteenth century, “The pursuit of wealth for its own sake became the chief motive of human activity,” says the writer of this book. Everything had to give way before it; and so men broke first with the church. Love of wealth after the sixteenth century replaced the love of God, and, as Mr Laski says, the individual became prepared to dispute with God for the right to supremacy over the destiny of the universe. The Progress of Mercantilism After the downfall of religion came the downfall of feudal conception of government. Mercantilism at first, under the Tudors, combined with the monarch to attack the privileges of the feudal lords; but when princes began to interfere with the freedom of trading enterprises, as occurred under both James I. and Charles 1., then war was inevitable. Gradually the business man predominated over the Puritan Parliament, “and the State became capitalist, almost despite itself.” Man, however, seeks a justification for his behaviour. As new social conditions arise, thinkers seek a new philosophy to rationalise their development. It was not possible to secure, at any rate at first when men’s minds were still under the influence of mediaevalism, a divine sanction for the pursuit of riches. Religion was not adopted as a vindication of capitalism until a later stage. At first it was substituted by a frank utilitarianism, and this was new in the history of thought. The philosophers developed a system of thought which justified the “effort of the middle-class to win its place in the sun.” This philosophy, emerging from religious toleration and from constitutional government, with its objective the right ol man to secure riches, is. according to Mr Laski, the ideology of Liberalism. Its gradual establishment can be traced throughout the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries in the writings of such eminent thinkers as Macchiavelli, Locke, Montaigne, Voltaire, and Burke, not 'to mention many others known only to so erudite a scholar as Mr Laski. It was not only in the sphere of politics and of metaphysics that it sought for support. Its most ardent allies were the scientists, who at this period had all the impetus and excitement of emancipation to urge them forward. The business man eagerly sought from the scientist a new control over nature; the scientist in return demanded what only Liberalism has given, the freedom to think as ho chooses. Philosopher and business man together formed an irresistible combination, from which emerged the force of public opinion. Thus, like all men, they erected “their particular necessity into a universal creed,” and “set the temper for 200 years.” From Liberalism to Socialism They cannot be accused, of casuistry; they were merely reflecting the mental temper of their time, as indeed all ages have done, never more so than to-day. They were genuinely enthusiastic for freedom, and, in fact, the results of their beliefs were better than those of previous centuries; but, as the author says, “All social philosophies contain in their birth the conditions of their own destruction.’* A philosophy which justifies capitalism must, of necessity, ignore the rights of the Working class* and thus sets boundaries to human nature which some day it will break. At first there was no pretence made as to their attitude to labour. The "sturdy Vagabond” of the sixteenth century was looked upon, not as an unfortunate, but as a criminal. As a potential producer of wealth, it was wicked of him to be unemployed, in the seventeenth century, a Writer says, ‘Grace in a poor man ... is beautiful but grace ih a rich man is more Conspicuous ahd more Useful.” To Voltaire the masses Were the “canaille”; to Burke, the “swinish multitude.” The doctrine of "Laissezfaire” which emerged in the eighbenth and nineteenth centuries reduced the labourer to a position of dependent helplessness. The theory justified itself by claiming that the interests of all Classes were equal and that the prosperous landlord would necessarily look after the good of the common people oh grounds of enlightened self-interest. Actually, of course, this was a tragic fallacy and its weakness is evident I? strah § e outcome that it was the business ifian himself who could not endure the implications of his own doctrines. Driven to intervene from sheer revulsion against the existing Conditions Of the poor, he 011 the long road of humanItarianism, from which he was Ousted eventually by those whom he sought to benefit. When the poor became conscious of their claims, they demanded as a right what had *j veSh th em in charity, and Liberalism merged ihto or wsfs supplanted by socialism. Thus Liberalism as the philosophy of capitalism is dead. Even as the democratic prmcipje of the years after the rtench Revolution it Would seem to be dead in Europe, except in England. Mr Laski, by relentless logic, has sounded its funeral note. Sentence by sentence, not one of which can be skipped, he has brought it to its melancholy end. It must, however, be wholesome to remember that any other political theory must of necessity die* even as Liberalism hds dpne. Communism, by denying its followers What was Liberalism’s glory, the right to freedom of speech, contains the seeds of its own ruin. Nor have the communists been able to settle the fundamental problem of unskilled, unintelligent work. Most of the world’s labour is drudgery, and we have yet to see who will carry it out Wheh men arc no longer compelled to work from sheer need.