THINGS AND THOUGHTS.

Otago Witness, Issue 2715, 28 March 1906, Page 78

THINGS AND THOUGHTS.

By John Christie.

INDIVIDUAI LIBERTY AND COLLECTIVE AUTHORITY.

They err who think that democracy means government by crowds. Of course, the pivotal principle of democracy is that the multitude, or people collectively as a body, have important social and political functions ; but these can be exercised only under certain conditions, which are £ot usually recognised by crowds as mere cowds. For instance, to fulfil its democratic function a crowd must be co human;«eA, so enlighteii&cf. that it shall give the utmost liberty to individuals, so long as individuals claim for themselves nothing that is inconsistent with the crowd's own authority as a community, which is the custodian, of the indefeasible rights of its separate members. But when a crowd of men collectively impose their mobbish authority on anyone amongst themselves they simply play the autocrat — an undemocratic part, — because democracy does not mean the tyranny of the crowd 1 , but the freedom of every one of its individual members. Yet tyranny will also eneue if tbc crowd, as a crowd, delegates, its mobbish authority to any representative man or body of men; for it is rot likely that the authority thus set up will be exercised in the interest of the rights of individual members of the community, but in the- interest of sections or classes of ' persons with interests that clash- more or i less with the interest of the individual. | And this is not only quite natural, but I practically inevitable, because the authority has not originated in a determination to maintain the integrity of the equal rights i of every individual member of the com- ! munity, but in some passion or impulse cf the community acting merely or mainly ss a mob. When a multitude acts in. this way its purpose is almost certain to be alien to the true personal interests of its units. Fully to se« why this is so, study the crowd's character 'as a. social phenomenon. When tins is done, is it not found that pvery crowd is, as a crowd, primarily influenced not by any thing or any purpose that is beautiful or becoming in itself, or by what is conducive to the personal and intimate welfare of its members as separate persons? Is every crowd, which acts merely a? a- crowd, r.ot merely the organ of ioaie passion or impulse common to itself as an emotionalised multitude, which is so monstrously constituted that it cares nothing for the indefeasible personal rights «md interests of its units? Let any man id a -multitude of men put these questions to himself as an individual, and see what an. 1 wer he receives from his intellectual conscience. If he is. true to hie own intel'ligenc* 1 , and not the victim of mobbish inebriety, he will surely pee that a crowd 1.-. too often a collection of human beings v ho are not individually influenced by what is befct in themselves and best for themselves, but, unitedly, by some folly common to them all ; and that, therefore, a. crowd as such, and everything appertaining to a crowd as such, should be regarded; with suspicion as something which is, prima facie, alien to the best interests of a country or community, because^its purpose is, also prima facie, opposed to the personal freedom and perranal interests of H=> individual members. But this is not all. for by an impartial study of the constitution of crowds in--sphed by a mobbish spirit wo see thafe there is no essential difference between the tyranny of one man and the tyranny, of ten thousand. In both cases those who are within the scope of the tyranny ara prevented from being themselves — from being true to what is best in their natures. Tn fact, the individual man is not allowed to call hie soul his own. In both instances, therefore^ tyranny is an intolerably evil

thing, and: yet it is more monstrous id the case of the crowd than m that of the autocrat. In a sense the autocrat has a certain natural interest in depriving other people of their freedom of thought, speech, and action, for in tihat way he asserts and gratifies his own Trill, which, by the way, iuay be the product of dssease in mind or body, or in both 1 ; still, its gratification is conducive to his eelf-realisation, even though he may be an unconscionable criminal or an outrageous madman. But the tyranny of the crowd involves a much more appalling tragedy, for it means that with regard to themselves, and to those who stand witMn the circle of their influence, so many men, by acting in the spirit of a mob, consciously or unconsciously conspire to deprive themselves as individuals, and. all otiher individuals, of that liberty, that rational freedom, that right to dissent, without which cp one amongst them can be his true, his better self, or the master of his own soul. This is pitiful in the highest degree, for it 6hows men — under the influence of the mobbish spirit — constraining each other to submit slavishly to some unwholesome emotion common to them all as a mob. Thus they not only do what would be disgraceftil in them as- individual men, but that which compels them, as such, to surrender their souls to a of their own making.

Popular cries, crazes, hobbies, fads, fashions, party shibboleths, and the baseless" bogey called public opinion, are as froth and scum that indicate the workings of this mobbisli spirit in human beings ; and every man who would preserve his own soul or freedom, or the souk and freedom of his fellow men, is therefore supremely interested in resisting that spirit. Does its operation interfere with the exercise of hm own individuality — then resent it and resist it ; on the other hand, does the indulgence or realisation of what is personal oi peculiar to himself interfere with any general enterprise, cause, or undertaking which is conducive to the freedom and welfare of all other men as individuals, and not prejudicial to their GDllective integrity and efficiency as a commonwealth — then his individuality must restrain and circumscribe itself, or submit to be restrained and circumscribed by the comHinnity. That would seem to be the gospel of Individual liberty and collective authority.

So it comes to this : that every man in a crowd or community is as much interested in opposing the tyranny of that crowd or community as he is in opposing that of a military adventurer or political autocrat, for in each casp tli? tyranny i* opposed to the true freedom of the individual and j the realisation of bis best personal it?* icsts at a man. The only purpose iei ,%hich a crowd or community can legitimately vomhine, and apply the power whick inheres in combination, is that of seeing that every one of its units is- left with freedom and opportunity to live his life to the Tjest advantage, " but without prejudice to the freedom and opportunity of each other; or that of seeing that no individual or class within itself is allowed to establish a personal, sectional, or communal ascendancy which would be inimical to that order of things — that ethical balance between personal or individual liberty and public or collective authority. When the people, as crowd or community, behave in this way, their voice — their deliberate determination to act — is indeed the voice of God ; for the object is to extend and assure to every one of themselves such perfect personal liberty that it is qualified by only one condition — namely, that its exercise must be such as to subserve the creation and maintenance of the collective efficiency of the whole population as an organ that exists in the interest of that liberty in every one of its units. But when the people, as crowd or community, behave in a way quite' opposite to that, then their voice — their passionate determination — is verily that of the devil ; otherwise of a moB— a monster with a million heads, but no reasoning, reflective mind, no heart, no soul; and no purpose except the maniacal one of preventing its units from exercising their minds, hearts, and souls in their own interests, or even in that of the miserable wild thing itself. For it. salvation consists in its disintegration as a mob and in its recombination as a body of sane and reasoning men and women, collectively determined to maintain the integrity of their individual liberties, and not less determined to see that no one amongst them uses his individual liberty in a way lifc«3^ t-o impair- tliitt oollec:tl^-« axrtfaoritv while it exists and is exercised in the interest of individual liberty ; or, rather, while it is exercised in the maintenance of that equilibrium between individual liberty and collective authority which is necessary to their mutual integrity. "Come near, ye nations, to hear; and hearken, ye people."