Writers whose business it is to display exquisite2 sensibility, unbounded philanthropy, and unrivalled devotion to religion, have got into the way of saying, “Evil cannot enter into the providential plan. Suffering is no ordinance3 of God and nature, but comes from human institutions.”
As this doctrine4 falls in with the passions that they desire to cherish, it soon becomes popular. Books and journals have been filled with declamations against society. Science is no longer permitted to study facts impartially5. Whoever dares to warn men that a certain vice7, a certain habit, leads necessarily to certain hurtful consequences, is marked down as a man destitute8 of human feelings, without religion, an Atheist9, a Malthusian, an Economist10.
Socialism has carried its folly11 so far as to announce the termination of all social suffering, but not of all individual suffering. It has not ventured to predict that a day will come when man will no longer suffer, grow old, and die.
Now, I would ask, is it easier to reconcile with the infinite goodness of God, evil which assails12 individually every man who comes into the world, than evil which is extended over society at large? And then is it not a contradiction so transparent13 as to be puerile14, to deny the existence of suffering in the masses, when we admit its existence in individuals?
Man suffers, and will always suffer. Society, then, also suffers, and will always suffer. Those who address mankind should have the courage to tell them this. Humanity is not [p505] a fine lady with delicate nerves and an irritable15 temperament16, from whom we must conceal17 the coming storm, more especially when to foresee it is the only way to ensure our getting out of it safely. In this respect, all the books with which France has been inundated18, from Sismondi and Buret downwards19, appear to me to be wanting in virility20. Their authors dare not tell the truth; nay21, they dare not investigate it, for fear of discovering that absolute poverty is the necessary starting-point of the human race, and that, consequently, so far are we from being in a position to attribute that poverty to the social order, it is to the social order that we must attribute all the triumphs which we have already achieved over our original destitution22. But, then, after such an avowal23, they could no longer constitute themselves tribunes of the people, and the avengers of the masses oppressed by civilisation24.
After all, science merely establishes, combines, and deduces facts; she does not create them; she does not produce them, nor is she responsible for them. Is it not strange that men should have gone the length of announcing and disseminating25 the paradox26, that if mankind suffer, their sufferings are due to Political Economy? Thus, after being blamed for investigating the sufferings of society, Political Economy is accused of engendering27 those sufferings by that same investigation28.
I assert that science can do nothing more than observe and establish facts. Prove to us that humanity, instead of being progressive, is retrograde; and that inevitable29 and insurmountable laws urge mankind on to irremediable deterioration30. Show us that the law of Malthus and that of Ricardo are true in their worst and most pernicious sense, and that it is impossible to deny the tyranny of capital, or the incompatibility31 between machinery32 and labour, or any of the other contradictory33 alternatives in which Chateaubriand and Tocqueville have placed the human race; then I maintain that science ought to proclaim this, and proclaim it aloud.
Why should we shut our eyes to a gulf34 which is gaping35 before us? Do we require the naturalist36 or the physiologist37 to reason upon individual man, on the assumption that his organs are exempt38 from pain or not liable to destruction? Pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris; such is the declaration of anatomical science backed by universal experience. No doubt, this is a hard truth for us to receive—not less hard than the contested propositions of Malthus and Ricardo. But are we for this reason to spare the delicate sensibility which has sprung up all at once among our modern [p506] publicists, and has given existence to Socialism? Is medical science, for the same reason, to affirm audaciously that we are constantly renewing our youth and are immortal39? Or, if medical science refuse to stoop to such juggling40, are we to foam41 at the mouth, and cry out, as has been done in the case of the social sciences—“Medical science admits the existence of pain and death; it is misanthropical42; it is cruel; it accuses God of being malevolent43 or powerless; it is impious; it is atheistical44; nay, more, it creates the evil the existence of which it refuses to deny”?
I have never doubted that the Socialist45 schools have led away many generous hearts and earnest minds, and I have no wish to humiliate46 any one. But the general character of Socialism is very whimsical, and I cannot help asking myself how long such a tissue of puerilities can continue in vogue47.
In Socialism all is affectation.
It affects scientific forms and scientific language, and we have seen what sort of science it teaches.
In its writings, it affects a delicacy48 of nerve so feminine as to be unable to listen to a tale of social sufferings; and whilst it has introduced into literature this insipid49 and mawkish50 sensibility, it has established in the arts a taste for the trivial and the horrible; in ordinary life, a sort of scarecrow fashion in dress, appearance, and deportment—the long beard, the grim and sullen51 countenance52, the vulgar airs of a village Titan or Prometheus. In politics (where such puerilities are less innocent), Socialism has introduced the doctrine of energetic means of transition, the violence of revolutionary practices, life and material interests sacrificed en masse to what is ideal and chimerical53. But what Socialism affects, above all, is a certain show and appearance of religion? This is only one of the Socialist tactics, it is true—such tactics are always disgraceful to a school when they lead to hypocrisy54.
These Socialists55 are perpetually talking to us of Christ; but I would ask them, how it is that while they acknowledge that Christ, the innocent par6 excellence56, prayed in His agony that “the cup might pass from Him,” adding, “Nevertheless, not my will but Thine be done,” they should think it strange that mankind at large should be called upon to exercise resignation also.
No doubt, had God willed it, He might have so arranged His almighty57 plans that just as the individual advances towards inevitable death, the human race might have advanced towards inevitable destruction. In that case, we should have had no choice but to [p507] submit, and science, whether she liked it or not, must have admitted the sombre social déno?ment, just as she now admits the melancholy58 individual déno?ment.
But happily it is not so.
There is redemption for man, and for humanity.
The one is indued with an immortal soul; the other with indefinite perfectibility.
点击收听单词发音
1 bent | |
n.爱好,癖好;adj.弯的;决心的,一心的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 exquisite | |
adj.精美的;敏锐的;剧烈的,感觉强烈的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 ordinance | |
n.法令;条令;条例 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 doctrine | |
n.教义;主义;学说 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 impartially | |
adv.公平地,无私地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 par | |
n.标准,票面价值,平均数量;adj.票面的,平常的,标准的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 vice | |
n.坏事;恶习;[pl.]台钳,老虎钳;adj.副的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 destitute | |
adj.缺乏的;穷困的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 atheist | |
n.无神论者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 economist | |
n.经济学家,经济专家,节俭的人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 folly | |
n.愚笨,愚蠢,蠢事,蠢行,傻话 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 assails | |
v.攻击( assail的第三人称单数 );困扰;质问;毅然应对 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 transparent | |
adj.明显的,无疑的;透明的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 puerile | |
adj.幼稚的,儿童的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 irritable | |
adj.急躁的;过敏的;易怒的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 temperament | |
n.气质,性格,性情 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 conceal | |
v.隐藏,隐瞒,隐蔽 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 inundated | |
v.淹没( inundate的过去式和过去分词 );(洪水般地)涌来;充满;给予或交予(太多事物)使难以应付 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 downwards | |
adj./adv.向下的(地),下行的(地) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 virility | |
n.雄劲,丈夫气 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 nay | |
adv.不;n.反对票,投反对票者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 destitution | |
n.穷困,缺乏,贫穷 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 avowal | |
n.公开宣称,坦白承认 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 civilisation | |
n.文明,文化,开化,教化 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 disseminating | |
散布,传播( disseminate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
26 paradox | |
n.似乎矛盾却正确的说法;自相矛盾的人(物) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
27 engendering | |
v.产生(某形势或状况),造成,引起( engender的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
28 investigation | |
n.调查,调查研究 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
29 inevitable | |
adj.不可避免的,必然发生的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
30 deterioration | |
n.退化;恶化;变坏 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
31 incompatibility | |
n.不兼容 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
32 machinery | |
n.(总称)机械,机器;机构 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
33 contradictory | |
adj.反驳的,反对的,抗辩的;n.正反对,矛盾对立 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
34 gulf | |
n.海湾;深渊,鸿沟;分歧,隔阂 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
35 gaping | |
adj.口的;张口的;敞口的;多洞穴的v.目瞪口呆地凝视( gape的现在分词 );张开,张大 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
36 naturalist | |
n.博物学家(尤指直接观察动植物者) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
37 physiologist | |
n.生理学家 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
38 exempt | |
adj.免除的;v.使免除;n.免税者,被免除义务者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
39 immortal | |
adj.不朽的;永生的,不死的;神的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
40 juggling | |
n. 欺骗, 杂耍(=jugglery) adj. 欺骗的, 欺诈的 动词juggle的现在分词 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
41 foam | |
v./n.泡沫,起泡沫 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
42 misanthropical | |
参考例句: |
|
|
43 malevolent | |
adj.有恶意的,恶毒的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
44 atheistical | |
adj.无神论(者)的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
45 socialist | |
n.社会主义者;adj.社会主义的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
46 humiliate | |
v.使羞辱,使丢脸[同]disgrace | |
参考例句: |
|
|
47 Vogue | |
n.时髦,时尚;adj.流行的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
48 delicacy | |
n.精致,细微,微妙,精良;美味,佳肴 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
49 insipid | |
adj.无味的,枯燥乏味的,单调的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
50 mawkish | |
adj.多愁善感的的;无味的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
51 sullen | |
adj.愠怒的,闷闷不乐的,(天气等)阴沉的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
52 countenance | |
n.脸色,面容;面部表情;vt.支持,赞同 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
53 chimerical | |
adj.荒诞不经的,梦幻的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
54 hypocrisy | |
n.伪善,虚伪 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
55 socialists | |
社会主义者( socialist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
56 excellence | |
n.优秀,杰出,(pl.)优点,美德 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
57 almighty | |
adj.全能的,万能的;很大的,很强的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
58 melancholy | |
n.忧郁,愁思;adj.令人感伤(沮丧)的,忧郁的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
欢迎访问英文小说网 |