General View of Positivism — Chapter 6 Conclusion. The Religion Of Humanity Part 6

[We are not yet ripe for the normal state.

But the revolution of 1848 is a step towards it] From this view of the practical side of the religion of Humanity taken in connexion with its intellectual and moral side, we may form a general conception of the final reorganization of political institutions, by which alone the great Revolution can be brought to a close.

But the time for effecting this reconstruction has not yet come.

There must be a previous reconstruction of opinions and habits of life upon the basis laid down by Positivism; and for this at least one generation is required.

In the interval all political measures must retain their provisional character, although in framing them the final state is always to be taken into account.

As yet nothing can be said to have been established, except the moral principle on which Positivism rests, the subordination of Politics to Morals.

For this is in fact implicitly involved in the proclamation of a Republic in France; a step which cannot now be recalled, and which implies that each citizen is to devote all his faculties to the service of Humanity.

But with regard to the social organization, by which alone this principle can be carried into effect, although its basis has been laid down by Positivism, it has not yet received the sanction of the Public.

It may be hoped, however, that the motto which I have put forward as descriptive of the new political philosophy, _Order and Progress_, will soon be adopted spontaneously.

[First revolutionary motto, Liberty and Equality] In the first or negative phase of the Revolution, all that was done was utterly to repudiate the old political system.

No indication whatever was given of the state of things which was to succeed it.

The motto of the time, _Liberty and Equality_, is an exact representation of this state of things, the conditions expressed in it being utterly contradictory, and incompatible with organization of any kind.

For obviously, Liberty gives free scope to superiority of all kinds, and especially to moral and mental superiority; so that if a uniform level of Equality is insisted on, freedom of growth is checked.

Yet inconsistent as the motto was, it was admirably adapted to the destructive temper of the time; a time when hatred of the Past compensated the lack of insight into the Future.

It had, too, a progressive tendency, which partly neutralized its subversive spirit.

It inspired the first attempt to derive true principles of polity from general views of history; the memorable though unsuccessful essay of my great predecessor Condorcet[13].

Thus the first intimation of the future influence of the historical spirit was given at the very time when the anti-historical spirit had reached its climax.

The long period of reaction which succeeded the first crisis gave rise to no political motto of any importance.

It was a period for which men of any vigour of thought and character could not but feel secret repugnance.

It produced, however, a universal conviction that the metaphysical policy of the revolutionists was of no avail for constructive purposes.

And it gave rise to the historical works of the Neo-Catholic school, which prepared the way for Positivism by giving the first fair appreciation of the Middle Ages.

[Second motto, Liberty and Order] But the Counter-revolution, begun by Robespierre, carried to its full length by Bonaparte, and continued by the Bourbons, came to an end in the memorable outbreak of 1830. A neutral period of eighteen years followed, and a new motto, _Liberty and Public Order_, was temporarily adopted.

This motto was very expressive of the political condition of the time; and the more so that it arose spontaneously, without ever receiving any formal sanction.

It expressed the general feeling of the public, who, feeling that the secret of the political future was possessed by none of the existing parties, contented itself with pointing out the two conditions essential as a preparation for it.

It was an improvement on the first motto, because it indicated more clearly that the ultimate purpose of the revolution was construction.

It got rid of the anti-social notion of Equality.

All the moral advantages of Equality without its political danger existed already in the feeling of Fraternity, which, since the Middle Ages, has become sufficiently diffused in Western Europe to need no special formula.

Again, this motto introduced empirically the great conception of Order;

understanding it of course in the limited sense of material order at home and abroad.

No deeper meaning was likely to be attached to the word in a time of such mental and moral anarchy.

[Third motto, Order and Progress] But with the adoption of the Republican principle in 1848[14], the utility of this provisional motto ceased.

For the Revolution now entered upon its Positive phase; which indeed, for all philosophical minds, had been already inaugurated by my discovery of the laws of Social Science.

But the fact of its having fallen into disuse is no reason for going back to the old motto, Liberty and Equality, which, since the crisis of 1789, has ceased to be appropriate.

In the utter absence of social convictions, it has obtained a sort of official resuscitation; but this will not prevent men of good sense and right feeling from adopting spontaneously the motto _Order and Progress_, as the principle of all political action for the future.

In the second chapter I dwelt at some length upon this motto, and pointed out its political and philosophical meaning.

I have now only to show its connexion with the other mottoes of which we have been speaking, and the probability of its adoption.

Each of them, like all combinations, whether in the moral or physical world, is composed of two elements;

and the last has one of its elements in common with the second, as the second has in common with the first.

Moreover, Liberty, the element common to the two first, is in reality contained in the third; since all Progress implies Liberty.

But Order is put foremost, because the word is here intended to cover the whole field that properly belongs to it.

It includes things private as well as public, theoretical as well as practical, moral as well as political.

Progress is put next, as the end for which Order exists, and as the mode in which it should be manifested.

This conception, for which the crisis of 1789 prepared the way, will be our guiding principle throughout the constructive phase of the Western Revolution.

The reconciliation of Order and Progress, which had hitherto been impossible, is now an accepted fact for all advanced minds.

For the public this is not yet the case; but since the close of the Counter-revolution in 1830, all minds have been tending unconsciously in this direction.

The tendency becomes still more striking by contrast with an opposite movement, the increasing identity of principles between the reactionary and the anarchist schools.

[Provisional policy for the period of transition] But even if we suppose accomplished what is yet only in prospect, even if the fundamental principle of our future polity were accepted and publicly ratified by the adoption of this motto, yet permanent reconstruction of political institutions would still be premature.

Before this can be attempted, the spiritual interregnum must be terminated.

For this object, in which all hearts and minds, especially among the working classes and among women, must unite their efforts with those of the philosophic priesthood, at least one generation is required.

During this period governmental policy should be avowedly provisional; its one object should be to maintain what is so essential to our state of transition, Order, at home and abroad.

Here, too, Positivism suffices for the task; by explaining on historical principles the stage that we have left, and that at which we shall ultimately arrive, it enables us to understand the character of the intermediate stage.

[Popular dictatorship with freedom of speech] The solution of the problem consists in a new revolutionary government, adapted to the Positive phase of the Revolution, as the admirable institutions of the Convention were to its negative phase.

The principal features of such a government would be perfect freedom of speech and discussion, and at the same time political preponderance of the central authority with proper guarantees for its purity.

To secure perfect freedom of discussion, various measures would be taken.

All penalties and fines which at present hamper its action would be abolished, the only check left being the obligation of signature.

Again, all difficulties in the way of criticizing the private character of public men, due to the disgraceful legislation of the psychologists, would be removed.

Lastly, all official grants to theological and metaphysical institutions would be discontinued; for while these remain, freedom of instruction in the true sense cannot be said to exist.

With such substantial guarantees there will be little fear of reactionary tendencies on the part of the executive; and consequently no danger in allowing it to take that ascendency over the electoral body which, in the present state of mental and moral anarchy, is absolutely necessary for the maintenance of material order.

On this plan the French assembly would be reduced to about two hundred members;

and its duty only would be to vote the budget proposed by the finance committee of government, and to audit the accounts of the past year.

All executive or legislative measures would come within the province of the central power; the only condition being that they should first be submitted to free discussion, whether by journals, public meetings, or individual thinkers, though such discussion should not bind the government legally.

The progressive character of the government thus guaranteed, we have next to see that the men who compose it shall be such as are likely to carry out the provisional and purely practical purpose with which it is instituted.

On Positive principles, it is to the working classes that we should look for the only statesmen worthy of succeeding to the statesmen of the Convention.

Three of such men would be required for the central government.

They would combine the functions of a ministry with those of monarchy, one of them taking the direction of Foreign affairs, another of Home affairs, the third of Finance.

They would convoke and dissolve the electoral power on their own responsibility.

Of this body the majority would in a short time, without any law to that effect, consist of the larger capitalists; for the office would be gratuitous, and the duties would be of a kind for which their ordinary avocations fitted them.

Changes would occasionally be necessary in the central government; but since it would consist of three persons, its continuity might be maintained, and the traditions of the previous generation, as well as the tendencies of the future, and the position actually existing, might all be represented.

Such a government, though of course retaining some revolutionary features, would come as near to the normal state as is at present practicable.

For its province would be entirely limited to material questions, and the only anomaly of importance would be the fact of choosing rulers from the working classes.

Normally, this class is excluded from political administration, which falls ultimately into the hands of capitalists.

But the anomaly is so obviously dependent simply on the present condition of affairs, and will be so restricted in its application, that the working classes are not likely to be seriously demoralized by it.

The primary object being to infuse morality into practical life, it is clear that working men, whose minds and hearts are peculiarly accessible to moral influence, are for the present best qualified for political power.

No check meantime is placed on the action of the capitalists; and this provisional policy prepares the way for their ultimate accession to power, by convincing them of the urgent need of private and public regeneration, without which they can never be worthy of it.

By this course, too, it becomes easier to bring the consultative influence of a spiritual power to bear upon modern government.

At first such influence can only be exercised spontaneously; but it will become more and more systematic with every new step in the great philosophical renovation on which the final reorganization of society is based.

The propriety of the provisional policy here recommended is further illustrated by the wide scope of its application.

Although suggested by the difficulties peculiar to the position of France, it is equally adapted to other nations who are sufficiently advanced to take part in the great revolutionary crisis.

Thus the second phase of the Revolution is at once distinguished from the first, by having an Occidental, as opposed to a purely National, character.

And the fact of the executive government being composed of working men, points in the same direction; since of all classes working men are the most free from local prejudices, and have the strongest tendencies, both intellectually and morally, to universal union.

Even should this form of government be limited for some years to France, it would be enough to remodel the old system of diplomacy throughout the West.

Such are the advantages which the second revolutionary government will derive from the possession of systematic principles; whereas the government of the Convention was left to its empirical instincts, and had nothing but its progressive instincts to guide it.

A special report was published in 1848 by the Positivist Society[15], in which the subject of provisional government will be found discussed in greater detail.

[Positive Committee for Western Europe] Quiet at home and peace abroad being secured, we shall be able, notwithstanding the continuance of mental and moral anarchy, to proceed actively with the vast work of social regeneration, with the certainty of full liberty of thought and expression.

For this purpose it will be desirable to institute the philosophical and political association to which I alluded in the last volume of my _Positive Philosophy_ (published in 1842), under the title of _Positive Occidental Committee_[16].

Its sittings would usually be held in Paris, and it would consist, in the first place, of eight Frenchmen, seven Englishmen, six Germans, five Italians, and four Spaniards.

This would be enough to represent fairly the principal divisions of each population.

Germany, for instance, might send a Dutchman, a Prussian, a Swede, a Dane, a Bavarian, and an Austrian.

So, too, the Italian members might come respectively from Piedmont, Lombardy, Tuscany, the Roman States, and the two Sicilies.

Again, Catalonia, Castille, Andalusia, and Portugal would adequately represent the Spanish Peninsula.

Thus we should have a sort of permanent Council of the new Church.

Each of the three elements of the moderating power should be admitted into it; and it might also contain such members of the governing class as were sufficiently regenerated to be of use in forwarding the general movement.

There should be practical men in this council as well as philosophers.

Here, as elsewhere, it will be principally from the working classes that such practical co-operation will come;

but no support, if given sincerely, will be rejected, even should it emanate from the classes who are destined to extinction.

It is also most important for the purposes of this Council that the third element of the moderating power, women, should be included in it, so as to represent the fundamental principle of the preponderance of the heart over the understanding.

Six ladies should be chosen in addition to the thirty members above mentioned: of these, two would be French, and one from each of the other nations.

Besides their ordinary sphere of influence, it will be their special duty to disseminate Positivism among our Southern brethren.

It is an office that I had reserved for my saintly colleague, who, but for her premature death, would have rendered eminent service in such a Council.