Slavery and Freedom


312 77 10MB

English Pages [263] Year 1944

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD PDF FILE

Recommend Papers

Slavery and Freedom

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

NICOLAS BERDYAEV

Slavery and

Freedom

GEOFFREY ELEhi 'i'HE OEN'iENARY 52 DOUGHTY STREET, LONDON MCMXLIV

Jr'KEbb

fiiavcB

‘htj,‘'T ^ "C!: ?«'«/«/ ^7'//'- w,

'""'

^-od^ecr -v-ua;

^Itopcfl

yy

r\

(pp

,7

”’^JS

fj,^

^"£^isJi as

|5S

*’

*

\

~S:,!iasLi.„

',

am

"*&>

*« ist their own concepof honour, their own ideas of justice, and tlicir own code of

difference, that

tion

tilings winch do not exist m a state possessed by power Present-day believers in the romance of war arc fond of talking about tlie tragic acceptance of war War has become

morals and manners, the will to

too base a dung, too absolutely evil to give

do not thmk

rise to tragic conflict

would be true to speak ofjust and apphcaaon of a moral appraisement

it

I

unjust wars That

would be the to a phenomenon which lies outside any sort of morahty. In the past dicre have been wars which w'crc evil in but die smallest degree, sometimes dicy were waged m defence of nghtcousness Nowadays a w'ar cannot be an evd m just a small degree, nowadays its satanic nature is laid bare

The

idea

of a

war

‘holy’

w'as a

blasphemous mockery even

in the

past If dicrc has never been anydiing ‘holy’ in objcctiwzcd history at all

but merely a

‘liolmess’ to diat IS

a temptation

all

bestowal of the name, to apply die quahty' of

false

which

is

die expression

of the devil

States

of die extreme of w'orld

have never been

really ‘holy'*

evil

and

And the force of all diis is augmented

the less could wars be ‘holy’

when It is a question of present-day life, and remmd one more of a cosmic catastrophe

dic.w'ars

of today, which

Military conceptions of

honour have always been uncimstian and opposed

to die Gospel,

but present-day wars stand on an mimcasurably lower level than diosc conceptions of honour

of a back tion IS

arc rcmmisccnt not

murder Totahtarian

states

of a duel but

caimot have any concep-

of honour and neither can totahtarian wars The idea of honour

bound up widi personahty,

tion as

street

They

of the present time.

it

When

mere matenal, dicrc can be no

docs not exist

all

men

talk

m

the depersonaliza-

arc looked

about honour

upon

as slaves or

We are witnesses

m our day of a transition to a new mihtary society, but how naked and bare

it all is

days they

From

kill

in

comparison wndi die old mihtary' soacncs Now'a’

them no mihtary honours Renaissance men began to hold the opimon

off dieir encnucs and accord

the time of the

[

158

]

that thought,

knowledge, saence, hterature, and the pruitmg of

books had an mimense and commanding importance With our tune the reverse

movement

Agam men

begins

mandmg effectiveness is

that

consider

tliat

the

com-

of the sword, and what is more of how

form the front rank of mankmd, that war and murder are the principal means to achieve an end But those who act by the sword arc not kept -withm bounds by any of die higher prmaples, which was, at least, the case m the Middle Ages The very distinction between a state of war and a state of peace is bemg obhterated A state of peace is also a state of war and wars are earned on without any declaration of war At the present tune war is too debased a state for war to be declared, men are on too low a moral level The lure of mihtary heroism and might stdl continues to tempt, but it is mere propaganda, and always lymg repulsive a sword, that soldiers

propaganda

No

authentic, absolute heroism

for heroism presupposes the existence

day

state,

m

is

to be

for instance,

last resort

is

which has

m this life or

existed

kmd

m

is

moment of

the temptation of such

It is

This type of heroism

heroic experience of that

is

opposed to

recent centunes In the

connected with war

(it

war between nations or war between classes) and is apphed to war But war itself is of a character which leaves no room for heroism and has no need of it Heroism of that sort finds its place more readily m present-day techmeal mventions matters

which

nothmg whether

either

the ecstasy of the

from tune

Mahaux

the exaltation of thought

at all

found the idea of pure heroism which

come Pure heroism

heroic action, an emergence as,

possible,

of personahty The present-

no end, and which has no continuaaon

the hfe to

people

any longer

and the warfare of today recognize no personahty

In Nietzsche there leads to

is

are connected

it is

with victory over the elemental processes of

nature

The warhke uistmcts of man cannot be uprooted and dislodged They can only be switched over mto some other region and subhmated When the satamc techmque of war, the techmque of worldwide destruction, makes war finally impossible (probably this will be after a considerable part of the human race has been destroyed), the combative mstmets of man m the noble sense of the word, wiU be obhged to seek some other outlet for themselves Courage was the [

159

]

first

of

virtue

Its

m liuman soaety. It will remain a virtue, but the direction

apphcation will be different. Further, courage

a complex

is

phenomenon The man who distinguishes himself by bravery in war may display the most shameful moral cowardice as a atizen. And It IS just die totahtanan states which struggle for power and demand bravery m war, which do not permit moral and avic courage and tram cowards and slaves

The division of the world mto two camps, which is the principal method employed for the concentration of the forces of communism and

fascism,

is

a mihtary division and one

purposes of war dBut

Mamchaeism adapted

which

this division is the greatest

to the utihtanan ends

adapted to the

is

of

errors

It is

of strife and war This

men with hatred and prepares the psychological atmosphere of war The human race is not divided mto the Kingdom of Ormuzd and the Kmgdom of Ahnman In every man

intensified division

fills

two kmgdoms, of hght and of darkness and of truth and of falsehood, of freedom and of slavery The real division of the world and mankmd is much more comphcated The national enemy, the soaal enemy, or the rehgious enemy is not a concentration of world evd, he is not a villam, and he is not and cannot be nothmg but an there are

human properties of a national, social or rehgious group of people One must

enemy, an object of stop considering

‘holy’ hate

‘oturs’

as

He

is

a

man with

all

mvanably good while the

the

‘foreign’

is

mvanably bad The Gospel alone has proclaimed that one must love one’s enemies and escape fi-om the viaous circle of hatred and desire for vengeance

And

this

means

a revolution

m

the

world and a

demal of the laws of the natural world and of the natural order which reigns m it There is a fiindamental antagonism between the divme order and the order of

tummg

to the other world,

it

means

a radical

the world and here mutual adaptation

is

impossible, only change

is

possible here

The distmction between the absolute and come of abstract thought The truth which is IS

the relative revealed

is

an out-

m the Gospel

concrete and belongs to the realm of subjectivity, not to the realm

of

of the Kingdom of God the command ‘Thou shalt not kdl’ as the voice of God,

objectivity,

Obedience to

it

reveals the fireedom

[

men and women hut also of human soaetics But in order tliat human societies may obey this commandment dicy must turn aside from die way of die slavery of man, and enter upon die patli of die subjcctivization of human existence, diat is die padi of emancipation Widi this is combmed a iswthin the power not onl; of mdiMclual

radical

diangc

values

The

sucli

in die scale

of values, die

pcrsonalist transvaluation

of

of die idea and form of ‘die enemy’ which plays world history is dehumanizing, dcpcrsonahzmg

creation

a role

m

The

of the morality 'of the Gospels to human societies is personalism, it is die act of placing human personality at die centre, die recogmtion of it as die supreme value ‘The enemy’ is an objectivization of existence ui wluch the form of man objectivization

application

disappears and, dicrefore, diere blessing

lowng

is

nodnng more monstrous than

of war by die Christian Church, or die

soldiers’.

Man

but dus has nothing

ought

be a wamor, he

to

ver)'^ is

the

phrase ‘Chnst-

called to warfare,

m common widi a body of soldiers, which

is

an

extreme form of die servitude and enslavement of man This pouit of view must be sharply distmguished from bourgeois pacifism whicli

is

not only powerless to overcome war, but may even

war Bourgeois

uidicatc a baser condition tlian

simply a love of quiet and a care-free

It

the fear

may

denote

of catastrophe, and

of peace wluch is more abject than cannot be admitted diat peace should be purchased at any

even cowardice There war.

life,

pacifism

pnee The

is

a sort

war

real struggle against

is

itself also

war,

it is

the true

and wilhngness to accept sacrifice The martial spmt does not mvanably mean war against men as the enemy, agamst diosc who hold a different bchef, against people of another martial spirit, courage

Warfare must be waged, for example, against the class soacty, against the existence of classes founded upon the unjust soaal

class

of property and money, but not against the peoplqwho constitute the classes, not agamst men and women who have become simply and solely ‘enermes’ Christ brought peace, but He also distribution

brought the sword Separation IS

an astounding

horror because

it

is

necessary, but not hatred

thmg Many Chnstians presupposes murder and

And here

reject revolutipn

with

sheddmg of blood blessmg upon war which' the

But they accept and even bestow their sheds more blood and commits more murder than revolution L

^

[

l6i

B ]

And S

F

'

this

IS

due to the

different standard

They

die sake of them, they

dunk it is worth while

by

nught of tlie

IS

that

state

murder and bloodshed

and shed blood

of blood

die shedding

attitude to values

die Cluistian conscience

values dian die

to kill

diat for

and hbcration arc not recognized

wluch kilhng and

wordi while. But such an tolerated

of all,

tlicni as the higlicst values

social righteousness

values for die sake of

to a

consider the state and nationality to be such

high values, even puttmg

Whereas

dctcnnincd according

fact tliat values arc

as

arc

simply not to be

is

Freedom and justice

are lughcr

and nationality But die cluef point

arc evil and sinful whatever the end

view may be Revolution can be much

m

war But only a Chnstiamty wluch has been punfied, and emanapated from historical slavery is in a position to raise the question of war and of an

less

evil dian

revolution

Tolstoy desenbes as

how

an enemy and what

lus

But Nikolu Rostov was psychology Warfare

make war on

Nikolai Rostov rccogmzcd a Frenchman

is

expcnences were

man made

a

as a result

of this shock

for war, he liad the servile war

You

possible only agamst an object

a subject If

m your enemy you rccogmzc a subject, a

hvmg bemg, human personahty, war becomes War means that men have been turned mto objects concrete

armies there arc no subjects, no personahties

defence of war that there hatred wluch finds

its

is

no personal hatred

oudet

m

Is

kills

a man, converts that

which hatred

is

I

But can

it

yet

is

not.

only

m

a

could enter mto

hatred

m his enemy an

commumon with the secret

would become become

past,

and

objectivized

There

objects, is

where human

an eternal

conflict

bet\veen ‘war’ and ‘peace’, between ‘histoncal’ hfe and ‘pnvate’

between hfe which

is

the

impossible Hatred and murder exist

world where men have become

existence has

The

object, that agamst

personahty of the other, his hate would be a dung of the killing

there be

not directed

whom it is desired

dunk

man mto an

said in

expressed ceases to be a subject, and a person If the

existential subject, if he

of

warrmg

m

one who hates and is durstmg to kill, could recognize

act

In

sometimes

the one

to kill out of hatred, viewed as a subject?

impossible

It is

a durst for killing,

agamst another man, agamst a person^

which

cannot

‘objectivized’

‘subiectivity’

[162]

life,

and hfe which remams

m

The problem of war ul the life of the world is not only the problem of war which has been declared and has broken out, it is to an even greater extent the problem of preparation for war Human soaeues can pcnsh

as a result

of a mihtanst psychology, of the endless

pihng up of armaments, of the wdl to war, and of the fear of war IS

m reahty an atmospliere of mcreasmg madness

It

In the stnct sense of

preparation

may not actually break out, but human life becomes men camiot breathe freely Not only war itself, but the for war means that die freedom of man has reached its

minimum

Mobilization means the limitation of self-controUed

the

word, a war

mtolerable,

m actual fact Tnum^ over|the

movement War consciousness

changed This

IS

possibdity^of

m the structure of consaousness

change ness

determined by the structure of

is

is

The

war presupposes

direction

a

of conscious-

a spiritual victory over the slavery

of man,

over a servile consaousness But the servile consciousness stdl has the masteryterrible

which

m

world and war is one of its expressions, the most The satamc nature of war is open to no doubt The blood

IS

the

shed

m war

poison, consaence

By

Its

stmets,

is

does not flow for nothing,

It

is

irrational, it rehes

reasoned arming of

irrational

states

This

is

it

war

is

m-

m

presupposes the dehberately

a self contradiction of

war The

masses are moculated to produce a most irrational condition

of the soul nature

upon

presupposes rationalization Preparation for

the highest degree rational, and

human

disseminates a

troubled by it

very nature war

but

it

is

War

erotic,

presupposes the arousmg of erotic conditions,

not

ethical In this particular case, I include

its

m eras,

which has the same nature Hate is an erotic phenomenon And the mass of mankind is brought to a most irrational state of mind, to the madness of rational arming, it is upheld by rational disaphne, it works on a techmeal basis It is a demomacal combinaanti-eros also,

tion

of extreme nrationahsm, with extreme rationalism People hve

m the enslaving power of the myth of war, a myth which arouses evil erotic conditions

In a rationalized and technical civilization myths

continue to play an enormous part

They made

are

bom

m

of the

collective

a very rational use of subconsaous But these myths are manner The myth of the beauty and heroism of war, of the martial eras, which rises above the prosaic routine of everyday hfe, is an

[163]

aspect of human slavery This

the

myth is connected with other myths, the myth of the majesty of sovereignty

myth of the chosen race,

and so on All these myths stand out

m opposition to

humamzation of life, they

personalism, they are always hostile to the are all

m revolt agamst the spirit of

tlie

the truth of

Gospel, they

all legalize

the

slavery of man

C THE LURE AND SLAVERY OF NATIONALISM NATION AND PEOPLE

I

T

he

spell

of nationalism and slavery to

form of slavery than

‘suprapersonal’ values

most to

easily

be

mduced

a part

it is

it,

constitute a deeper

slavery to the idea of the state to the value

to subject himself,

he most readily

of the national whole This

emotional hfe of man, more

of the national

Of all the man

that feels

himself

very deeply rooted

is

is

m die

But of which is advocated all parties the nght, itself nationalism, by is a complex phenomenon We shall see that the very idea of the nation and nationahty Solo\^fev

who

is

deeply than his relation to the state

a product of rationalization

m the eighties

of the

last

Vladimir

century carried on a fight

agamst Russian zoological nationalism, draws a distmction between the national and nationahty, analogous to the distmction between

egoism and personahty

thmg

as nationalism)

view

as

egoism

is

He

as reprehensible

personal egoism

IS

a

IS

national egoism (the same

from

die Christian

commonly supposed

It is

pomt pf

that national

moral duty of personahty and that it does not denote die

egoism of personahty but Tins

insists that

its

readmess for

a very remarkable result

dung which

is

evil for

man

is

sacrifice

of objcctivization

and

its

When

heroism the very

transferred to the collective reahtics

which are recognized as ideal and suprapersonal, it becomes a good and IS

even turned mto a duty Egoism, sclf-seckmg,

self-conceit,

pnde,

become virtues die wdi to power, hatred of others, violence, when transferred from personahty to die nation as a whole To the nation cverydung is permissible It is permissible even to comnut all

crimes

m

its

name,

it is

so to speak ^

made justifiable even from

f^64]

.

the

man The morahty of the nation shov* s any recogmdon to human nghts The hfe of

point of view of the orduiary

no uiclmation

to give

the mdividual

man is short,

may

whereas the hfe of tlie nation

is

long,

it

of years The hfe of die nation makes actual the link between peflods of time, winch the mdividual man cannot for thousands

last

man

do The mdividual

is

consaous of the hnk with precedmg

generations through the hfe of the nation

‘The national’ overawes

by Its deep-rootedness m a prolonged life Here we are faced by what IS all the while the same problem Where is die existential centre, where is the organ of consacnce ^m personahty or m the nation? Personahsm demes diat die existential centre, the centre of consaousness, is to be found m the nation or m any kmd of collective



T)ody, or non-human reahty

Personahty

is

not a part of die nation

part of personahty,

m

elements

man

This

m

is

and

it is

to

be found

quahtative content

its

m personahty

always

It is

A

sense

of nationahty

is

a

m personahty as one of the

The nation enters mto

die concrete

but a particular apphcation of the truth thit the umverse

m the umverse A sense of means of fostermg personahty, whereas nationalism on the other hand is a form of idolatry and slavery which anses from

IS

personahty and not personahty

nationahty

is

a

extenonzation and objecdvization Eros

is

connected with die ideas

of defiaency and want Nationahsm, which slavery

which

arise

from

IS

of an erotic character

IS

m

Its

the falling It is set

nature anti-ethical

m

is

one of the forms of

away of the umverse from man, motion by eros and anti-eros and

The apphcation of ethical

values to the

hfe of a nation conflicts

the makes nationahsm impossible This is one between eros and ethos Nationalism which is fundamentally

an erotic

spell

is

always nourished upon

lies,

and

it

cannot do without

hes

National self-conceit and

way

ludicrous and stupid

pnde

is

a he, just as

much

as it

is

by

National egocentncity, national

containment, and xenophobia, are

the

self-

m no degree better than personal

egocentnaty, self-contamment and hostihty to other people, and they also preapitate

men mto

a fictitious

and

fllusory hfe National-

an ideahzed form of the self-exaltation of man Love for one’s people (we shall see that the people is not the same thmg as the

ism

IS

nation)

is

a very natural and

good feehng But nationahsm [

165

I

msists

upon

hatred,

it

and contempt for other

requires hostdity towards

Nationahsm

war But the pnhapal he which is the outcome of nationahsm, arises from the fact that when men speak of the national’ ideal, of the good of the ‘national’ whole,

nations

of

national’

is

already potential

umty, of the

and so

‘national’ vocatiod,

forth, they

word ‘national’ with a mmonty, commonly with the class which

privileged, dominating

men and women

are never understood,

always assoaate the

‘nation’,

and

‘national’,

concrete beings, but an abstract pnnciple which social

groups In

tins fact is to

ideology

National ideology

While appeahng

suppress the parts

which

always connected with

is

whole they

desire to

of men and women, beings who

capable of suffenng and joy ‘Nationahty’ It

pleasmg to certain

usually manifested as a class

is

to the national

consist

is

be found the root of the distinction

between nation and people ‘The people’

men and women

By

possesses property

is

turned

are

mto an idol, and

demands human sacrifice as all idols do

The ideologists of nationalism pnde

themselves

upon

representing

a whole, while various other currents of thought represent parts, this

or that class But mterest of a

as a

matter of fact

class falsely as the

mterest of the whole This

both oneself and other people In

this

class

tnumphs over

it

is

to deceive

comiection the comparison of

national ideology with class ideology

ideology of a

possible to put forward the

it is

is

of immense mterest. The

has a very unprepossessmg extenor and rhetoncal

are

very easy The nation

as a

whole, existing

docs for thousands of years, has a higher value than a separate

which did not exist m the past and perhaps will not exist

as

it

class,

m the future

The Russian, French or German nation taken as a histoncal whplc is a more profomidreahty than the Russian, French or German proletanat But the problem is by no means solved, nor even stated, when men make such general observations At a certam histoncal moment the problem of a class may be more acute, and demand a solution which adnuts of no delay, more than the national problem and precisely for die sake of the very existence of the nation The national m personahty is a deeper dung than ‘class’ The fact that I am a Russian goes deeper than the fact that

none the

less

m objective fact die

than the ‘national’ mterest, that [

‘class’

is,

I

mterest can be

widim

166]

belong to the gentry Yet

more human

the sphere of class mterest

It IS

and violated dignity of man

possible to talk about die despised

about the value of human personahty Wliereas within the ‘national* interest

to

one can

about die ‘common’ which has no relation

talk

human existence With this IS connected

soaahsm.

It is

nist, that IS

the appraisement of nationalism and

not to be disputed that nationalism

whereas soaahsm

of Clinstian

is

value of man, mdess there

mterest

the

m people

some

is

is

ongm Soaahsm

to say not the fascist type)

oudook upon

at all

is

(not the

mterested

distortion

of pagan

ongm

commu-'

m people, m

ansmg from

the

a false

world Nationalism on the other hand has no

To it the highest value is not man but objectivized

collective reahties

which

not an existence but a prmaple

are

‘Soaahsm’ can be more spintual than ‘nationalism’, for ‘the soaal’

may constitute a demand that man shall be a brother to man and not a wolf, y^hereas the common national hfe can be wolfish Nationalists certainly do not want human hfe to be more communal, more just and humane With the tnumph of nationalism the strong state dommates over personahty and the nch classes dommate over the poor

more commumty hfe withm this but poorly They lead to

Fascism and national soaahsm want

a

given nationahty, but they reahze

a

monstrous ^tatism and behave hke a wild beast to other nationahties National soaahsm

is

possible,

but

m

it

the soaal element

is

the

more

human while the raaal and national element means dehumanization We shall speak about socialism agam later on It must be emphasized once as

more

that nationalism

patnotism Patriotism

is

the love

is

by no means

of one’s native

of one’s people Nationalism, on the other hand, as a collective

land,

same thing

of one’s

not so

soil,

much love

egocentnaty, self-conceit, the will to power and

violence over others ideology,

is

the

Nationalism

which does not

and egoism are just

exist

as sinful

egoism, but their effects are

is

a fiction

m patriotism

and stupid

as

much more

of the mind, an

National self-conceit

personal self-conceit and fateful

In the same

way

more ominous a character than German national messianic self-

family egoism and self-conceit have personal egoism and self-conceit conceit, IS

even as found

m men of gemus, such as Fichte, for example,

of a ludiCTOus character

simply mtolerable JEvery projection

It is

and obiectivization of personal

evil

and sm

[

1^7

]

is

a transference to the

-

maximum of evil and Thus the slavery of man is reinforced

and gives nse to the

collective

maximum of sin

expresses the

\

To draw a distinction between nation and people, between what is of the nation and what is of the people,

more evident m and Volk) The people is

a

much more primary and

than the nation hi the people there

The nation

the rational

and so

tion,

thing of

human

all,

it is

a

not a mere matter of words

is

other languages [nation and peupJe, Nation

It IS Still

is

natural reahty

somethmg which

hes beyond

complex product of history and civilizaproduct of rationahzation The most important

however,

a

is

is

that the people

is

a reahty

which

is

more

The people means men and women, an

than the nation

women who have attained to unity, taken a defimte shape, and acquired their own specific quahties The nation on the other hand is not men and women The nation is a prmaple which dommates over men and women, it is a ruhng idea enormous quantity of men and

It

might be

said that^&e people

abstractly ideal

mendation ivization

The word

On

is

concretely real while the nation

‘ideal’ is

the contrary

it

not

mdicates a greater degree of object-

and estrangement of human nature,

dehumamzation The nation

is

is

m this particular case a coma greater degree

more mtimately connected with

of the

state

than the people are Narodmtehestvo^ has frequently had an anti-

state

and anarcluc character, whereas nationalism has always been

the affair of the state and always desures a strong state, always values the state

more" than culture The people

expression to

own

style,

its

while the nation

the state,

it

nature and bemg, is

it

is

eager to give

establishes

customs and a

bent upon expressmg

constructs the vehicles

means the

word

is

‘national’

used, as

loss it

itself

m the might of

and agenaes of power The people

has a facial expression while the nation wears a the fascist type

m fact

mask Nationahsm of

of the national

firequendy

is,

self-portrait (if tins

m a sense identical with

no dung whatever national in it It means the acute rationalization of die life of the people and its 'organization on a teclimcal basis In no degree does it set any store ‘belongmg to the people’), there

by

culture

another

as

is

All present day forms of nationahsm are as like one

two drops of water All

dictatorships, all organizations of

* See note on

[168]

p 4

'

production of armaments,

political police, all plants for

tions for sport,

Before tlic

Its

how absolutely alike they are

decisive

forms of

common

which

but after

its

national socialism

set the

was one of

orgamc and communal

hfc of the people in opposition to the

formal organization of the Gcscllschqft,

German

\ ictor)’’

iiarodiiilchcstvo

of die

character

organiza-

all

state

stood for Gcmciuschaft

It

tnumph

final

agamst

as

became

national sociahsm

by the will to state power, and die narodnik elements m it were weakened The tradition of German culture was broken up possessed

Nationalism attaches not die

value to spintual culture and

least

it

always persecutes the creators of it Nationalism always leads on to

tyranny The nation

The

slaver}*^

is

one of die

one of die sources of human

sovereignty of the nation

sovereignty of die state and as

sovereignty of die nation has tight

idols,

wnng expression and

it

die

same error

upon

sovereignties

all

its left

is

wmg expression just as it has its

aKvays tyrannizes over

But even

source of easily

human

the people can

slavery Narodnitchestuo

assumes mystical forms

soul of die

soil,

—such

man The people

is

become an one of the

as die soul

of die people

die mystical surge

This

cardi

docs at least stand nearer to labour as die foundation of soaal nearer to nature

die

as

pletely lost in this elemental surge It

life

and

idol

and

a

lures

and

it

of die people, die

Man

can be

com-

an mhcritance from, and a

is

survival of, primitive collectivism before die

awakening of spirit and

personahty Narodnitchestuo always belongs to die soul and not to the

spmt Personahty ness

as the existential centre, as die centre

may

and consaence

take

people In personahty there the people (the national)

personahty

is

forms of slavery

Him,

m

fact diat

that

bosom But

must be remembered

crucify Him’,

prophets, teachers and great

IS

bosom, and

is its

Slavery to the people

the people

It

fact that the centre

which

m

is

of Man and the Son of God

estvo there

a maternal

opposition even to the

which

is

of

the revolt of

die victory of spirit and freedom over the natural and

elemental surge

‘Crucify

is

m

stand

its

of conscious-

when

It

has

men

of conscience

demanded This

not

is

m

tfie

them

the

Son

the crucifixion of all

suffiaent evidence

m the people

owoi truth and right but there

expressed

one of the

that the people cried out

there stood before

is

is

is

its

of the

In narodnitch-

also a great falsity,

reverence paid by personahty to the coUec[

169

]

by quabty

tive, IS

to quantity,

by the mmonty to

the majonty Truth

always to be found in personahty, in quahty, in

truth

m

must

the people,

it

its

hvmg

mmonty But this

manifestation be connected with the

life

of

does not mean isolation and self-contamment National

mcssiamsm is a temptation,

it is

mcompatiblc with Christian umver-

sahsm But behefln the vocation of one’s people

is

necessary for

its

histoncal existence

In actual expenence ‘national’ and ‘belongmg to the people’ are

confused and arc often used

m

one and the same

and Gememschaft arc The

Gesellschaft

sense, just as

‘national’ contains a higher

degree of rationalization than ‘belonging to the people’, but both die

one and the other rely upon the

whch

powerful emotions

Man

existence

collective subconscious,

lead to the cxtenonzation of

needs a v/ay out of his lonchness

fi-cczing strangeness

of the world This

man is mcapable of fcelmg directly that he belongs necessary for

him to belong

to a

human

m the prevaihng m the family,

takes place

it

m nationahty, m the national commumty

takes place

upon very

The mdividual

to

mankind

narrower and more concrete

It is

circle

man feels the link of the generations, the link of the past with the future Mankmd has no existence outside man, it exists m man and m man is the greatest rcahty With this rcahty

Through national

humanness

is

life

connected The nation appears to be more existent

exists

man But m the last resort this is an illusion The nation also only m man The objective rcahty of the nation is extenonza-

tion

It IS

outside

one of the

results

of objcctivization and no more But

vanous degrees of objecavization give vanous degrees of nearness, completeness, fullness

Mankmd

appears as though

it

were remote

humamty of man Nationalism crushes man, human personahty and humamty alike It crushes not the actual quahty of ‘nationahty’ m man but the objcctivization of this quahty and turns it mto a rcahty which stands above

and

abstract while all the tirac it is humanness, the

mam

Both

ivization

‘nation’

and ‘people’ arc readily

Objcct-

of powerful emotions takes place Tlic most mediocre and

the most msignificant his share

mmed to idols

m what

is

man

feels

‘national’

himself exalted and raised through

and of the people

One of the causes of enslaving enchantments hes m this that they give man a greater feehng of power While making himself the slave [170]

most human smcc anti-human,

the*

it is tlic

most

characteristic

most cnslavmg of man

of man, and the most

to exteriorized

power

It is

mistaken and superficial to suppose that the defence of a German, of a Frenclunan or of a Russian

whereas

tlie

man

is

die defence

not the very deepest at

and

diat,

That is

of that winch

is

to say

it is

deepest

of the

bemg The

is

The

abstract properties

while die defence of man

is

a

man,

is

defence of

of a

man

and

m his humanity

the defence of die image of God

the defence of the integrated form in man,

m man and not liable to ahcnation, like the

national and class properties

man as a concrete bemg,

just die opposite

It is

m the name of Ins humamty

m man

of a concrete bemg,

defence of a man, of every man, because he

of an abstraction

the defence

national

the defence

is

as

of a man

It is

precisely the defence of

personahty, of a unique and unrepeatable

so-called national

and

social quahtics

of man

are repeat-

able, they are hablc to generalization, to abstraction, to conversion

mto

which stand above man But bchmd

quasi rcahtics

this

is

core of man

The defence of this human depth is humanness, it is a work of humamty Nationahsm is treason and perfidy in relation to the depth of man, it is a ternblc sm m relation hidden the

to the

mmost

image of God

m man

He who

does not see a brother

m man,

but another nationahty, who, for example, refuses to see a brother a Jew, such a

one

proper humamty,

ism

eject

man on

the object

human

is

not only not Christian, but he

his

own human

is

losmg

his

m

own

depth The emotions of national-

make man a slave of world The emotions of nationahsm are much less to the surface and, therefore,

than the soaal emotions, and are

m a much smaller degree

evidence of the fact that personahty is growing in man

I

D THE LURE AND SLAVERY OF ARISTOCRACY THE TWOFOLD IMAGE OF ARISTOCRACY >

T

here

is

a speaal lure of aristocracy, a satisfaction in belonging

the aristocratic stratum of society Aristocracy

is

a very

to

com-

phenomenon and requires a complex appraisement The very word ‘aristocracy’ mvites a favourable estimate Aristocrats are the plex

[172]

best, the

born But

meant

Aristocracy

well-boni

is

best

best, the

well-

ansfocracy has not by any means

in actual fact historical

tlic

of the

a selection

and the most well-boni

It is

necessary to mal.c a

distmcaon between aristocracy in a social sense anti aristocracy spintual sense Aristocracy in die soaal sense tal cs shajic hi

soaal

life

and

ls

subject to the law

anstocrac) belongs to the realm

of that

in a

everyday

social routine

In this sense

of determinism and not

to the realm

s

of freedom Aristocrats in the sense of a raccwliicii has cr)stalhzedoiit in die

course of history, arc

men who

mined, dicy arcdcicrmincd b\ aristocratic

prniaplc

inhcntancc

is

even more

mhcntanccnnd family

in social life

pnncijile

is

determinism weighing

dun detenumism,

Soaal anstocrace

is

a raaal

arc in a special degree deter-

it is

down upon

die fate

and not

cracy

A

It,

pndc of origin v

brodicrK attitude to

{

inheritance,

pei'^onahty,

of race, the

f.ite

a id

50 racial jirnh

bicli is d,e principal

wnpi„

is

icr

The and ii

is

of blood

a j'er^onal anstoerac), a

ofraaal qu-’hnes, not personal qualities, nected V idi

of

tradition

matter is

con-

of ansio-

estremely difheuli for the

wluch bestows pnvileges upon him A man’s gifts are received firom God, not from his family and not from property The personal mequahty of men and their social mequahty are distinct and even antithetic pnnaples The soaal levellin g process which is mtended to abohsh the class privileges of society may all the same inequality

contnbute to the appearance of effective and ties

m men, that

How

is

to say to the disclosure

real personal

of

mequah-

a personal aristocracy

The higher quahties and once by vast human masses

does a soaal aristocracy take shaped

attamments cannot be achieved

all at

The emergence of quahties takes place to begin with m small groups of people In them a higher cultural level is worked out, more refrned fechngs and more refined morals Even the bodily form of man becomes nobler and reaches higher levels It

would be

less

coarse

culture always takes shape and

by way of anstoaacy

unjust and untrue to regard soaal anstoaacy as

always evd There has been

aacy

A

much

positive value

m

also In ansto-

it

there have been admirable charaaenstics of nobdity,

of

magnanimity, good breedmg, capaaty for a seff-sacnfiong under-

standmg of other people, things of which the parvenu has no conception as he struggles to climb upwards The anstoaat makes no effort to raise himself higher,

beginning In

he

feels

contradicts the aristocratic success and' advance

pnnciple,

himself to be

this sense the pnnciple

it is

is

ongm

Selection

reversed

m

be

first,

the first shall be

a revolutionary

attractive charactenstics

repellent

A

is

struggle for a naturalistic

Chnstiamty does not acknow-

ledge selection In contrast to the laws of this world ‘the last shall

top from the

selection actually

pnnaple of ongm The

not anstoaatic

of biological

at the

of aristocratic

last’

manner But

it

proclaims that

All the old values are side

by

side witli the

of aristocracy there have been

also

the

pecuhar insolence, a haughty behaviour to then soaal

mfenors, contempt for labour, raaal pnde wluch does not corre-

spond with personal quahties, exclusiveness of caste, aloofiicss firom the hvmg movement of the world, an exclusive preoccupation widi the past (‘whence’ and not ‘whither’), self-isolation

The

exclusive aristocratic group cannot

mam tarn itsclfmdcfliutcly

however much it struggles for its own preservation The basis becomes broadened New strata enter mto tlie privileged anstoaatic [

174

]

Democratization takes place and the quahtative level

stratum

lowered Then new quahties emerge The exclusiveness of the cratic

is

aristo-

group mevitably leads to degeneration The renewal of ex-

hausted blood

after the process

After

necessary

IS

of levelling there

rmnghng and

democratization,

takes place a reverse process

of

But it can take place accordmg to vanous cntena, not necessarily on the basis of family, mhentance and birth The anstocracy of the chosen race is doomed to disappearance but an anstocracy may be formed out of the bourgeoisie, as it may be formed out of the working peasant masses In this case anstocracy aristocratic selection

will assume different psychological properties

In the social process vanous groups are

and

differentiation,

ovm

formed by way of selection

and every group which

forms of enslavement for

every society which

organized

is

spread and to mcrease

man

its

mto

out has

its

Bureaucracy takes shape

m

crystallizes

a state

It

has a tendency to

importance Bureaucracy

is

formed on an

pnnaple from anstocracy, that is to say it is formed on the basis of the professions and functions to be found m a soaety which has been made mto a state But it is mchned to regard itself as bemg also an anstocracy Bureaucracy is meant to render services to the people, but it shows a disposition to consider itself as a selfentirely different

suffiaent authonty, to regard itself as master

m this hes the mward contradiction of mto

its

m the house of hfe, and

existence

It is easily

turned

of unlimited expansion Bureaucracy may take shape any kmd of social sdructure of soaety A revolution overthrows the old bureaucracy and immediately creates a parasite with the possibdity

m

a

new one stdl more expanded, and m fact for this purpose makes use

of the cadres of the old bureaucracy which are prepared to take service any kmd of regime The fate of Talleyrand and Pouchy is

m

symhohc The Russian communist revolution aeated a bureaucracy to an extent which had never existed before It is the formation of a

new

bureaucracy or a new' proletanan anstoaacy

histoncal anstoaacy

and adapt mtely,

quahty,

That

IS

it

it

itself to sets

no

is

closed

new store

and limited,

conditions

by

A

it

An

had no wish

authentic to

expand

bureaucracy expands mdefi-

exclusiveness and the preservation

readily adapts itself to all conditions

why it can never be called an [175]

and

to every

of

regime

anstoaacy The upper layer of

wluch mutates an

the bourgeoisie

aristocracy

and climbs mto

aristocracy also can never be called an anstocracy

The

the

bourgeoisie

has an entirely different psychological structure But of that later

The real anstocracy was formed not by way of amassing wcaldi and power and not by way of functions rendered to the state but by the sword The ongm of aristocracy is war Laurence Stem even says that caste is the absolute tnumph of society over the state Aristocracy is

a caste

and

state In a

m

certam sense

conffict

doms

It

adapts itself with difficulty to the organization of the

it

with feudalism, with anstocracy and

might even bcvsaid

democratic Freedom feudal

freedom of the the state, but

on

that

freedom

is

its

grown up

pnvileged free-

and not

aristocratic

m the past was a pnvilcge of anstocracy

kmght defended

freedom and mdependence

his

Tlie

m His castle

m his hand

The drawbndge was the defence of tht feudal kmght It was not freedom withm soaety and

with his weapons

truly

anti-state State absolutism has

it is

freedom from soaety and the

this subject

It is

state

Ortego writes very

frequently forgotten that freedom

is

not

only freedom withm society but also freedom from soaety, that

it

which soaety does not wish to recognize m relation to human penonahty The masses of the people set htde store by freedom and have httle sense of the lack of it Freedom is a property of IS

a frontier

spmtual anstocracy Chivalry was an enormous aeative achievement

m

The

the sphere of moral consaousness

aristocrat

was

the

first

m human society to have the feehng of personal digmty and own honour But his hrmtation lay m the fact that he felt this for person

liis

caste

only The anstocracy of freedom, the anstocracy of personal

digmty ought

to be transferred to the

because he

a

is

man But few

anstoaacy have recognized

this

whole people,

people

who

But here

to every

have issued from the

the question

is

precisely of

the transference of positive anstoaatic quahnes to the broad

masses

It is

a question of the

mward,

it is

man

a question

human

of the formation

of an mtenor anstoaacy

At one time m Egypt the digmty of immortahty was attnbuted only to the kmg, all the rest of the people were mortal In Greece to

begm with only gods regarded

as

or demi-gods or heroes and supermen were

immortal, the people were mortal Chnstiamty alone

has recognized all men as worthy of immortahty, that is to say it makes

[176]

'

But a process of putting the life of the people on a democratic basis which does not mechamcaUy place men on a level, which does not deny quahty, is to make an aristocracy It is the commumcation of aristocratic quahties and aristocratic nghts to others Every man ought to be

the idea of immortahty absolutely ^democratic

recognized

an aristocrat

as

preasely the proletanan

It is

a spaal revolution ought to destroy,

it

such that

as

should destroy proletanan

depnvation and humihation Chnstiamty has overthrown the principles

of Greco-Roman

culture,

m

and

so doing has affirmed the

digmty of every man, of his sonship to God It has affirmed the image of God m every man, and Chnstiamty alone is able to umte democracy, the equahty

pnnaple of

of man

m the sight of God, with the aristocratic

personality, the spintual equahty

of persons, which

is

not dependent upon soaety and the masses Christian aristocracy has

nothmg

m common with caste aristocracy

Pure Chnstiamty

profoundly antithetic to the spint of caste which

is

double slavery, the slavery of the aristocratic caste slavery of those over

cracy of Cato

is

the

spmt of

itself

is

a

and the

whom the caste desires to dominate The ansto-

exclusive

and

finite

Chnstian spintual aristocracy

is

thrown open and mfimte

The working out of personahty is tic

type, that

blended with

is

to say

his

of the

the

man who

working out of an

aristocra-

does not allow himself to be

impersonal world environment,

who

is

inwardly

mdependent and free, who rises to every higher quahtative content of hfe, and descends to the lower world which is suffering and abandoned The pnnapal mark of true aristocracy is not exaltation but self-sacnfice and magnanimity, which are derived from riches, a readiness to descend,

family aristocracy

as it

is

seen

mabdity

mward

to feel resseuttment Racial

and

m history, fives m slavery to the past,

ceremomous It is hidebound It lacks all power to select values and fireedom of movement Personal aristocracy, on the other hand, is just that fireedom of ap-

to ancestry, to tradition

and custom

praisement and fireedom of

It is

movement

mdependent of soaal environment "With aristocracy

is

connected

not hidebound

this the

[

177

]

is

It is

twofold form of

Personal aristocracy, that

quahtative attainment of personahty,

M

It is

is

to say the

soaahzed and transferred to B

'

»

The

the soaal group

shape

of the

aristocracy

m accordance with various characteristics hierarchy of princes of the Church

caste, a

proper sense of nobihty of family

withm

a class

winch

and the peasantry. group

is

It

not

aristocratic, for

may be

m accordance with

It

may be

It

group may take

social

may be

It

may

a clcncal

be a caste

an anstocratic selection

example, the bourgeoisie

the formation of an anstocratic social

mtellectual and spmtual quahties,

cannot extend to larger bodies of people, for example, an

academiaans, scholars and waters ahst

Hue

is

mehned

aristocratic caste,

occult orders

to"

may be formed Every

sclf-cxaltation

and displays

may

m the

all

and

isolation

which iltte

of

intellcctu-

It also' is

an

the marks of a caste All sorts of

represent dicmselvcs to be aristocratic castes and

the imtiated ones, so

may

freemasons

who

have a similar shade of

mysticism about diem

The forms of soaal

anstocracy winch transfer the aristocracy of

personahty to the aristocracy of a soaal group are of very vanous lands but they always give nse to die slavery of life,

gifts

for example, personal anstocracy, that

and

quahties, find expression

m

is

man

In rehgious

to say, speaal personal

prophets, aposdes, samts,

spmtual gmdes, and rehgious reformers, while a soaal rehgious anstocracy finds astical

its

m a setded

expression

and

crystallized ecclesi-

hierarchy which does not depend upon personal quahties,

personal spmtuahty, diat

is

to say personal

anstoaacy Personal

rehgious anstocracy comes under the category of fireedom, while social rehgious anstocracy

tion

and

easily passes

same phenomenon

m man

is

" history by

as

comes imder the category of determina-

mto enslavement. Here we are met with the everywhere else The fountain-head of slavery

objectivization This objectivization

is

way of vanous forms of socialization,

brought about that

is

in

to say the

ahenation of personal quahties and then transference to soaal groups,'

where

these quahties lose their real character

and acquire a symbohe

symbohe anstocracy and not a real one Its quahties which evoke feehngs of pnde are not personal human quahties but mere signs and symbols of ongm It is for this reason that the form of anstocracy is twofold The anstocratic formation of personahty is above all antithetic to the parvenu 1)^)6 a bourgeois is a parvenu m ongm, although among

character Soaal anstocracy

is

a



[

178

]

people wlio arc

those

who

m type, but very fine and noble people

The

come from the bourgeois classes

by no means parvenu

comes down from

typical aristocrat always

may be

there

his level, the typical

The fechng feehngs The feehng

parvenu is always puslung and uismuatmg himselfupwards

of guilt,

feehng of pity, are aristocratic

anfi die

of bemg injured and offended and the feclmg of envy use the

word

‘plebeian’ here

meamng of the sense

of mjury and envy,

who

of the

always leads to

seff-exaltation,

it

and sympathy But the is

that instead

this,

is

contempt of the lower

of truly

make

more

socializa-

to say the creation

spiritual properties, quite different properties

pnde,

whom

and of

aristocratic spiritual type, that

aristocratic caste

m the

are not disposed to expenence a

ressentiment,

chatacteostic to feel gudt and pity tion

The whole

the psychological sense

existence of the aristocratic spiritual type hes

of a type of people

existence

m

are plebeian I

of an

aristocratic

their appearance,

classes,

defence of their

own pnvileges The average man of all social classes and groups never has very high personal quahties, he

vironment and IS

IS

determmed by

is

common

under the sway of the

his

soaal

soaal en-

spirit

Caste

always an enslavement of man, depersonalization, the aristocratic

The

bourgeois and proletanan castes alike

caste, the

may become properties

their appearance in

it

human digmty

m people of other classes

there are only

good people They

overcome the

spirit

are



self-exaltation,

demal of

There are no good

good

classes,

to the extent that they

of class in themselves, and the spint of caste, to

the extent that they reveal personahty

man True

and then the same bad

a caste, a false aristocracy,

make

proletariat also

aristocracy

is

a vision of the

Caste

is

an enslavement of

image of personahty, not of

the image of a soaal group or class or caste

There

and

that

is

is

one more important problem connected widi anstoaacy, the distinction between the rare people who are great and

There are people who have a thirst for an does nor resemble the everyday life which

the usual mediocre people

uncommon hfe, one that overwhelms man on all sides

This docs not altogether comcide with

the question of

and genius

gifts, talents,

gifb can be mediocre and ordinary

gemuses Such are stage

tlic

A man

with

uncommon

The realm of routine knows

its

majority of the so-called great actors on the

of history, statesmen, gemuses of objcctivization [

179

1

And that man

IS

who

to be called unusual, and remarkable,

himself to

commonplace routme and

tlie

is

unable to reconcile

of

limitations

existciice,

man withm whom there is a break-through into infimty, who does not consent to the final objectivization of human existence Objectivthe

izauon knows

its

This fact makes aristocratic

great

its

men, but they are ordmary mediocre people

appearance also in saence and the

theones which see the meaning of human

appearance of notable and great men,

There are

arts

m the

histor)'

men of gemus, while they look

upon all the rest of mankmd, the mass of mankind, as a fertilized soil, manured as the means of producing dus blossoming of humanity The superman of Nietzsche is the final expression of this sort of doctrine

the spell of false aristocracy

It is

to Christian consaousness

which

mtolerable alike

is

and to simple human consaousness Not

one smgle human bemg, though he be the most insignificant of men, can be the means, the

and remarkable men This too aristocracy

which

is

True anstocracy is not a nght or gives,

The

m

aristocracy remains

establishes

it

of personal

that objectivization

True

creates slavery

realm ofinfimtc subjectivity,

It

production of unusual

fertilized soil for the

no

a privilege,

it

the

sort

of objective sway

asks

nothmg

for

itself.

imposes responsibihty and the obhgation of service

it

rare

and notable

man who is endowed with speaal gifts is not

man to whom everydung is permitted On the contrary, he is a man to whom nodung is permitted It is fools and insignificant

a

people to

whom everydung is pernutted

die nature

immense It

of gemus (gemus gift)

aristocratic nature like

the entire nature and not only a sort of

is

does not occupy any particular position

m soaety.

denotes die impossibihty of occupying any particular position

of

in society, the unpossibihty

breedmg is by no means as Nietzsche,

lus

widi

own self The

a breed

his hatred

m

objectivization

of the

those relations

tive

and

suffers

much

and mconsidcratc The master,

a plebeian affair In die process

plebeian aspect

thought,

state

breed

is

m opposition

to

a breed of men who cannot

of master and

ordmary objective world holds by The ordinarily sensitive

Real anstocratic

of masters, a vocation to dommation,

real aristocratic

occupy a position

IS

But

slave

aristocratic

which the

breed

is

extra-

Masters arc coarse and mscnsi-

m fact,

is

a plebeian,

domination

of objectivization spmt

takes

on

a

The formation of an objccavizcd society is a plebeian f

180]

But does this mean that a personal anstocracy remains, as it were, shut up m itself and in no way finds expression m the extemaP Of course not But it expresses itself m a different perspective, not m the hght of commumon, not m the hght of the hght of soaety, but soaahzation but m the light of commumcation, m the personalist affair

m

community of with

‘he’,

people, the

commumon

not with an object This

relation to this world, but

it

is

of

‘I’

with

It

means

also that

but not

an eschatological perspective

denotes the changing of

break-through, an mterrupUon of that mertia which ivization

‘thou’,

is

this

due

man will no longer play the

m

world, a

to object-

master over

man

I '

T IS \

E THE LURE OF THE BOURGEOIS SPIRIT SLAVERY TO PROPERTY AND MONEY

here

is

a spell and a slavery of anstocracy

But soil more is

there

and slavery of the bourgeois spint The bourgeois spint not only a soaal category, it is connected with the class structure a spell

of society, but it is also a spintual category

moment pnnapally with

I

sh^ be concerned

at the

the bourgeois spint as a spintual category

Perhaps Ldon Bloy, hims elf a bourgeois, has done more than anyone else

for the service of

wisdom

m his

astonishing

book Exighe

des

hens conmuns The antithesis between the bourgeois spmt and socialism is very relative and does not touch the depth of the problem

Hertzen very well understood that socialism can be bourgeois The general

oudook of the

greater

number of socialists

is

such that they

do not even grasp the fact that there is a spintual problem m the bourgeois spmt The bourgeois m the metaphysical sense of the word IS a man who firtnly beheves only m the world of visible thmgs, which enforce recognition of themselves, and who desues to occupy a strong position m that world He is a slave of the visible world and of the hierarchy of position established m that world He forms his estimate of people not by what they are, but by what they have The bourgeois is a auzen of this world, he is a kmg of the earth To have conceived the idea of becoming kmg of the earth is to be bourgeois [I8l]

The aristocratic has taken possession of the

In that has been his mission

world, by the power of the sword he has promoted the organization

of kingdoms But even so he was not able

become king of the of this world, for him there were limits, which he has

earth, a citizen

to

never been able to overstep

The bourgeois is deeply rooted m this world, he is content with the world m’ which he has established himself The bourgeois has htde sense of the vamty and futihty of the world, and of the insigmficance

of the good things of this world The bourgeois

takes econo-

mic power very senously and not infrequently worships estedly

it

disinter-

The bourgeois hves m the fimte, Ije is afraid of the expanse of

the infimte It is true that he acknowledges the infimty of the develop-

ment of economic power, but

He

desires to take cognizance

by

this is the

only in&nty of which he

screens himself from spiritual i nfini ty

the fhuteness of the order he has established

the infimty life,

but

m hfe

He recognizes

of growth m prospenty, of the development of organized

this

merely shackles him to fimteness The bourgeois

is

a

bemg who has no desire to transcend himself The transcendent hampers him m settlmg down on earth The bourgeois may be ‘behevmg’ and ‘rchgious’, and he even calls upon to safeguard his position

geois

is

m the world

But

‘faith’

and ‘rehgion

the ‘religion’

of the bour-

always a rehgion of the fimte, sliacEed to the fimte,

it

always

The bourgeois is an mdmdualis't, particularly when property and money are die matter m quiTstion, but he is antipcrsonahst The idea of personahty is foreign to him In reahty conceals spintual infimty

the bourgeois

is

a collectivist, his consaousness, Kis consacnce, his

judgments arc soaahzed, he mtcrcsts arc

one

is

who

belongs to a group His

mdmdual, while his consciousness is collective

who

of this world, the prolctanaifis a being IS depnved of the atizcnship of this world and has no conscious-

ness

of that

If die bourgeois

is

a atizcn

There

citizenship

is

no room

the hope tins earth

which

is

attached to the proletarian that he will transfigure

and create a

commonly not

new

fulfilled,

he becomes a bourgeois, king of the earth

hmi on this cardi, he With dns is connected

for

must look for his place ui a transformed earth

And

hfe

m it This hope m die prolctanan

because a

when

the prolctanan

is

is

victonous

atizcn of this transformed world and the

then the same endless story begins 1

182]

all

over

again

The bourgeois

is

a perpetual figure in this world, he

is

not

with any particular structure of soaety, though regime that he reaches his clearest expression and

necessarily connected it is

in the capitalist

achieves his greatest triumphs correlatives

and

pass over

The proletarian and

the bourgeois are

one to the other Already

m his youthful

works Marx de:^ed the proletarian as a man m whom his human nature was estranged to the utmost His human nature ought to be restored to him But the easiest thing of all is to restore it to him as bourgeois nature The proletarian wants to become a bourgeois, but

become not an mdmdual bourgeois but a collective, that is to say, m a new soaal structure SoaaUy the proletarian is absolutely nght m his quarrel with the bourgeois But there ought not to be soaal opposition to the fact that he has become a bourgeois, there ought to be only spmtual opposition' Revolution agamst the kingdom of the bourgeois spint is spiritual revolution It is by no means opposed to to

nght of the soaal revolution, to a change m the soaal position of the proletanat, but spmtuaUy it changes and transfigures the truth and

the character of that revolution

The bourgeois

is

a

bemg who

has

been objectivized to the utmost, completely ejected mto the external, in the highest degree estranged firom the infinite subjectivity

human

existence Bourgeois nature

is

loss

of

of fieedom of spirit, the

subjection of human existence to determinism

everything for hims elf, but firom out of his

The bourgeois wants

own

he produces

self

nothing in thought or speech, he possesses material property, but he

no spmtual property The bourgeois is an mdividual and

has

dual, but

he

is

not a personahty

He

at times a

very inflated mdivi-

becomes a personahty to the

extent to which he gets the better ofhis bourgeois spirit

element in the bourgeois spmt

is

The essential

impenonak JEvery

displays a tendency to enter the impersonal bourgeois

social class

atmosphere

The anstoaat, the proletarian, die member of the mtclhgentsia, many of them become bourgeois The bourgeois cannot overcome his bourgeois nature The bourgeois is alv/ays a slave He is the slave of his property and of his money, he is a slave of the vnll to enrichment, a slave of bourgeois public opinion, a slave of position, social

he is the slave of those slaves whom he exploits and of whom be lives in fear

To

be bourgeois is to he unemandpated [

183 ]

m spmt and in sce-

It

means the subjection of the whole of life to external determination

The bourgeois

He

creates a

realm of thmgs, and things take control of

amount for the dizzy development of techmque, and technical knowledge has control of him, he makes man a slave with the help of it The bourgeois has rendered services m the past, he has displayed immense mitiative, he has made many discovenes, he has developed the productive powers of man, he lias overcome the power of the past and turned towards the future, which presented itself to him as an endless growth of power To the bourgeois the pnnapal matter is him.

has done i frightful

not ‘whence’ but ‘wluther’

day But

m

the

yet a bourgeois

Robmson Crusoe was

penod of his

creative

a bourgeois

m his

youth the bourgeois was not

He setdes down to the bourgeois type later on

The fate of the bourgeois must be undentood dynamically, he has not always been one and the same That turning of the bourgeois to the future, that 'wiU to

rise,

place, creates the type

that will to enrichment, to secure the first

of the arnvist

Amvism

the bourgeois

is

oudook upon life par excellence, and it is profoundly antito any form of anstocracy There is no sense of ongm m the

general thetic

bourgeois, he has but a poor

memory of his ongm and his past, as who remembers them all too well

compared with the anstocrat

Chiefly he creates a vulgar luxury