« AnteriorContinuar »
amalgamation in some degree, in the extreme southern parts of the United States in large degree. At least threefourths of the 7,000,000 or 8,000,000 of negroes inhabiting the United States reside in the commonwealths lying south of the Ohio and east of the Mississippi rivers, and make up about one-third of the population of this section. As I have already remarked, they do not amalgamate with the white races; or more correctly, the white races do not amalgamate with them. They seem destined to maintain a separate race existence. On the other hand, the 8,000,000 or 9,000,000 of foreign-born inhabitants of the United States - in large majority Germans and Celts -- are scattered, for the most part, over that part of the territory of the United States lying north of the thirty-seventh degree of north latitude; and while they do not amalgamate as freely with the Anglo-Americans as these latter do among themselves, still there are no such insurmountable impediments in the way of the same as manifest themselves when the white races are brought into contact with negroes and Mongols. Finally, there are a few Indians and Chinese, hardly to the number of half a million, resident within the territory of the United States. Their presence would scarcely be felt except for the fact that about 250,000 of the Indians inhabit a separate part of this territory and live under tribal organizations, and threefourths of the Chinese reside in a single commonwealth, viz; California
NATIONAL POLITICAL CHARACTER.
This is a very difficult and, in some cases, a very puzzling subject. Some nations manifest apparently contradictory traits at different periods of their development. I think we should take this fact as evidence that such traits should be excluded from our estimate of national character. Only such traits as perdure through all the periods of a nation's life should be regarded as peculiar to that nation. If we adopt this rule, I think we shall be delivered from much confusion of thought.
The great races from which the nations of modern Europe and North America have sprung are the Greek, the Latin, the Celt, the Teuton and the Slav. I shall therefore confine my treatment of political psychology to these races. I shall not trouble my readers with an enumeration of the political traits ascribed to these different nations by the long list of writers upon this subject. I shall simply take the peculiar political institution which each of these races has produced and to which it has clung, as expressive of its innermost political life in all the periods of its development; and from this I shall attempt to lead up to a recognition of the political ideals peculiar to each race. It seems to me that in this manner we shall gain a surer foothold and shall be less likely to substitute fancy for fact.
1 Waitz, Anthropologie der Naturvölker; Vollgraff, Erster Versuch einer wissenschaftlichen Begründung, sowohl der allgemeinen Ethnologie durch die Anthropologie wie auch der Stats- und Rechtsphilosophie durch die Ethnologie oder Nationalität der Völker.
First. The Greeks and Slavs. To my mind the political institution in which the political life of the Greeks incorporated and still incorporates itself is the community. In this the Greek and the Slav agree, and for this reason I treat of them under the same heading. In the organization of the community, the narrowest circle of political life, the political genius of the Greek and Slavonic natures has been chiefly occupied and almost exhausted. According to their political psychology the whole power of the state must be in the community; i.e. the sovereignty must be in the community. Any wider organization could be regarded only as an interstate league, exercising delegated and very limited powers, while the rights of individuals as against the community could have no existence. In this form of political organization the way lies open for a development, in richest variety, of other qualities of genius, such as music, poetry, art, eloquence, philosophy and religion, provided the germs of the same exist in the psychologic character of the nation; but the race that clings to this form of political organization manifests a low order of political genius. Its failings must quickly reveal themselves in political history in three general directions, viz; in the poverty and insecurity of individual rights, in the inability to regulate the relations between different communities, and in weakness against external attack. All three of these failings point in the same direction. They make it absolutely necessary that the political organization, in highest instance, of the Greek and Slav nations should be undertaken by a foreign political power. It is no play of chance nor contradiction in character that Greece has been obliged to receive its general constitution from the Roman, and then the Turk, and now the Teuton; nor that the Slavs are subject to the autocratic government of the Osmanli and the Teutonic dynasties of Rumanoff and Hapsburg. This is the natural result of their want of any comprehensive political genius, and of the exhaustion of their political powers of production in the creation of the lowest forms of political organization. Whether they will ever become educated up to higher degrees of political capacity or are destined permanently to work upon the development of other lines of culture than the political is, I think, still a question. I do not believe that a consciousness of the political principles which we call modern has been awakened in any considerable number of the Greeks or Slavs, and I do not think that these few more enlightened minds are aware how totally unpolitical their national genius is. They are constantly being disappointed by the want of support from the masses in projects of general political reform. I remember that some eight years ago a distinguished professor of the University of Moscow, one of the best lawyers and publicists of the Slavic race in Russia, said to me that he expected the Russian revolution to be an accomplished fact before his return to Moscow, which was to be in about six months from the date of this conversation. Time has shown that he was wofully mistaken, and his mistake was in the assumption that the imperial government appeared as unnatural and tyrannic to the mass of the Russian subjects as to himself. I do not suppose there is an American schoolboy fifteen years of age, who has not wept bitter tears over the fate of Poland, and who does not think he could reform the government of Russia; and I have no doubt he would begin by dethroning the Czar, abolishing the army and disestablishing the Church; and I am sure that the practical result of the procedure would be that in less than twenty-five years there would be little left of the civilization of Russia and possibly of the civilization of Europe. Let the Cæsarism of Russia be made as honest
1 Laurent, Études sur l'histoire de l'humanité, Tome II, pp. 1-26; Curtius, Griechische Geschichte, Bk. I, S. 1–32, 175; Bluntschli, Lehre vom modernen Stat, Bd. I, S. 37, 40; Leroy-Beaulieu, L'Empire des Tsars et les Russes; Wallace, Russia; Foulke, Slav or Saxon, p. 64. Freeman, Federal Government,
and benevolent as possible, but Cæsarism must be the general system of its political organization so long as the political psychology of the Slav is what it is and what it has been. Let the Danish monarchy in Greece educate its subjects politically with patience and probity, but the Teutonic power must remain there if Greece would be preserved in the future from the political barbarism of her past. The same is true in regard to the Slavs of Austria and the Danubian principalities. Foreign genius and power must continue to make for them their political organizations of highest instance as it has done in the past and does now; for in all of these cases the incapacity is not one of degree simply, but one of kind. There is a diversity of gifts among nations as among individuals, and political genius seems no more to have been bestowed equally than other kinds of genius. The dispensation of history seems rather to be and to have been that some nations shall lead the world in religion, others in art, science and philosophy, and still others in politics and law.
Second. The psychology of the Celt is, if anything, still more unpolitical than that of the Greek and the Slav. This is somewhat singular, since the Celts were further removed, territorially, from the influences of Asia than the Greeks and Slavs. The Asiatic ideals, customs and traditions are all unpolitical, as I have elsewhere shown, and it might naturally be expected that when the branches of the Aryan stock migrated into Europe, those going farther westward would be under better conditions for curing this failing in the Asiatic character. However that may be, the Celts made nothing of it. On the other hand, while they produced and elaborated a great religion, and developed a learned and powerful priesthood, they have never created anything in the political world, which they can call distinctively their own, higher than the personal clanship. Personal attachment in small bodies to a chosen chief is the peculiar political trait of the Celtic