what is property-第13部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


　OF　MAN；　having　fallen　into　idolatrous　hearts；　had　produced　nothing　save　innumerable　discords　and　a　quasi…poetical　mythology。　　Instead　of　developing　into　their　practical　consequences　the　principles　of　morality　and　government　taught　by　The　Word　of　God；　his　followers　busied　themselves　in　speculations　as　to　his　birth；　his　origin；　his　person；　and　his　actions；　they　discussed　his　parables；　and　from　the　conflict　of　the　most　extravagant　opinions　upon　unanswerable　questions　and　texts　which　no　one　understood；　was　born　THEOLOGY；which　may　be　defined　as　the　SCIENCE　OF　THE　INFINITELY　ABSURD。

The　truth　of　CHRISTIANITY　did　not　survive　the　age　of　the　apostles；　the　GOSPEL；　commented　upon　and　symbolized　by　the　Greeks　and　Latins；　loaded　with　pagan　fables；　became　literally　a　mass　of　contradictions；　and　to　this　day　the　reign　of　the　INFALLIBLE　CHURCH　has　been　a　long　era　of　darkness。　　It　is　said　that　the　GATES　OF　HELL　will　not　always　prevail；　that　THE　WORD　OF　GOD　will　return；　and　that　one　day　men　will　know　truth　and　justice；　but　that　will　be　the　death　of　Greek　and　Roman　Catholicism；　just　as　in　the　light　of　science　disappeared　the　caprices　of　opinion。

The　monsters　which　the　successors　of　the　apostles　were　bent　on　destroying；　frightened　for　a　moment；　reappeared　gradually；　thanks　to　the　crazy　fanaticism；　and　sometimes　the　deliberate　connivance；　of　priests　and　theologians。　　The　history　of　the　enfranchisement　of　the　French　communes　offers　constantly　the　spectacle　of　the　ideas　of　justice　and　liberty　spreading　among　the　people；　in　spite　of　the　combined　efforts　of　kings；　nobles；　and　clergy。　　In　the　year　1789　of　the　Christian　era；　the　French　nation；　divided　by　caste；　poor　and　oppressed；　struggled　in　the　triple　net　of　royal　absolutism；　the　tyranny　of　nobles　and　parliaments；　and　priestly　intolerance。　　There　was　the　right　of　the　king　and　the　right　of　the　priest；　the　right　of　the　patrician　and　the　right　of　the　plebeian；　there　were　the　privileges　of　birth；　province；　communes；　corporations；　and　trades；　and；　at　the　bottom　of　all；　violence；　immorality；　and　misery。　　For　some　time　they　talked　of　reformation；　those　who　apparently　desired　it　most　favoring　it　only　for　their　own　profit；　and　the　people　who　were　to　be　the　gainers　expecting　little　and　saying　nothing。　　For　a　long　time　these　poor　people；　either　from　distrust；　incredulity；　or　despair；　hesitated　to　ask　for　their　rights：　it　is　said　that　the　habit　of　serving　had　taken　the　courage　away　from　those　old　communes；　which　in　the　middle　ages　were　so　bold。

Finally　a　book　appeared；　summing　up　the　whole　matter　in　these　two　propositions：　　WHAT　IS　THE　THIRD　ESTATE？NOTHING。　　WHAT　OUGHT　IT　TO　BE？EVERY　THING。　　Some　one　added　by　way　of　comment：　　WHAT　IS　THE　KING？THE　SERVANT　OF　THE　PEOPLE。

This　was　a　sudden　revelation：　the　veil　was　torn　aside；　a　thick　bandage　fell　from　all　eyes。　　The　people　commenced　to　reason　thus：

If　the　king　is　our　servant；　he　ought　to　report　to　us；

If　he　ought　to　report　to　us；　he　is　subject　to　control；

If　he　can　be　controlled；　he　is　responsible；

If　he　is　responsible；　he　is　punishable；

If　he　is　punishable；　he　ought　to　be　punished　according　to　his　merits；

If　he　ought　to　be　punished　according　to　his　merits；　he　can　be　punished　with　death。

Five　years　after　the　publication　of　the　brochure　of　Sieyes；　the　third　estate　was　every　thing；　the　king；　the　nobility；　the　clergy；　were　no　more。　　In　1793；　the　nation；　without　stopping　at　the　constitutional　fiction　of　the　inviolability　of　the　sovereign；　conducted　Louis　XVI。　to　the　scaffold；　in　1830；　it　accompanied　Charles　X。　to　Cherbourg。　　In　each　case；　it　may　have　erred；　in　fact；　in　its　judgment　of　the　offence；　but；　in　right；　the　logic　which　led　to　its　action　was　irreproachable。　　The　people；　in　punishing　their　sovereign；　did　precisely　that　which　the　government　of　July　was　so　severely　censured　for　failing　to　do　when　it　refused　to　execute　Louis　Bonaparte　after　the　affair　of　Strasburg：　they　struck　the　true　culprit。　　It　was　an　application　of　the　common　law；　a　solemn　decree　of　justice　enforcing　the　penal　laws。＇1＇

＇1＇　If　the　chief　of　the　executive　power　is　responsible；　so　must　the　deputies　be　also。　　It　is　astonishing　that　this　idea　has　never　occurred　to　any　one；　it　might　be　made　the　subject　of　an　interesting　essay。　　But　I　declare　that　I　would　not；　for　all　the　world；　maintain　it；　the　people　are　yet　much　too　logical　for　me　to　furnish　them　with　arguments。




The　spirit　which　gave　rise　to　the　movement　of　'89　was　a　spirit　of　negation；　that；　of　itself；　proves　that　the　order　of　things　which　was　substituted　for　the　old　system　was　not　methodical　or　well…　considered；　that；　born　of　anger　and　hatred；　it　could　not　have　the　effect　of　a　science　based　on　observation　and　study；　that　its　foundations；　in　a　word；　were　not　derived　from　a　profound　knowledge　of　the　laws　of　Nature　and　society。　　Thus　the　people　found　that　the　republic；　among　the　so…called　new　institutions；　was　acting　on　the　very　principles　against　which　they　had　fought；　and　was　swayed　by　all　the　prejudices　which　they　had　intended　to　destroy。　　We　congratulate　ourselves；　with　inconsiderate　enthusiasm；　on　the　glorious　French　Revolution；　the　regeneration　of　1789；　the　great　changes　that　have　been　effected；　and　the　reversion　of　institutions：　a　delusion；　a　delusion！

When　our　ideas　on　any　subject；　material；　intellectual；　or　social；　undergo　a　thorough　change　in　consequence　of　new　observations；　I　call　that　movement　of　the　mind　REVOLUTION。　　If　the　ideas　are　simply　extended　or　modified；　there　is　only　PROGRESS。　　Thus　the　system　of　Ptolemy　was　a　step　in　astronomical　progress；　that　of　Copernicus　was　a　revolution。　　So；　in　1789；　there　was　struggle　and　progress；　revolution　there　was　none。　　An　examination　of　the　reforms　which　were　attempted　proves　this。

The　nation；　so　long　a　victim　of　monarchical　selfishness；　thought　to　deliver　itself　for　ever　by　declaring　that　it　alone　was　sovereign。　　But　what　was　monarchy？　　The　sovereignty　of　one　man。　　What　is　democracy？　　The　sovereignty　of　the　nation；　or；　rather；　of　the　national　majority。　　But　it　is；　in　both　cases；　the　sovereignty　of　man　instead　of　the　sovereignty　of　the　law；　the　sovereignty　of　the　will　instead　of　the　sovereignty　of　the　reason；　in　one　word；　the　passions　instead　of　justice。　　Undoubtedly；　when　a　nation　passes　from　the　monarchical　to　the　democratic　state；　there　is　progress；　because　in　multiplying　the　sovereigns　we　increase　the　opportunities　of　the　reason　to　substitute　itself　for　the　will；　but　in　reality　there　is　no　revolution　in　the　government；　since　the　principle　remains　the　same。　　Now；　we　have　the　proof　to…day　that；　with　the　most　perfect　democracy；　we　cannot　be　free。＇1＇

＇1＇　　See　De　Tocqueville；　〃Democracy　in　the　United　States；〃　and　Michel　Chevalier；　〃Letters　on　North　America。〃　　Plutarch　tells　us；　〃Life　of　Pericles；〃　that　in　Athens　honest　people　were　obliged　to　conceal　themselves　while　studying；　fearing　they　would　be　regarded　as　aspirants　for　office。




Nor　is　that　all。　　The　nation…king　cannot　exercise　its　sovereignty　itself；　it　is　obliged　to　delegate　it　to　agents：　this　is　constantly　reiterated　by　those　who　seek　to　win　its　favor。　　Be　these　agents　five；　ten；　one　hundred；　or　a　thousand；　of　what　consequence　is　the　number；　and　what　matters　the　name？　　It　is　always　the　government　of　man；　the　rule　of　will　and　caprice。　　I　ask　what　this　pretended　revolution　has　revolutionized？

We　know；　too；　how　this　sovereignty　was　exercised；　first　by　the　Convention；　then　by　the　Directory；　afterwards　confiscated　by　the　Consul。　　As　for　the　Emperor；　the　strong　man　so　much　adored　and　mourned　by　the　nation；　he　never　wanted　to　be　dependent　on　it；　but；　as　if　intending　to　set　its　sovereignty　at　defiance；　he　dared　to　demand　its　suffrage：　that　is；　its　abdication；　the　abdication　of　this　inalienable　sovereignty；　and　he　obtained　it。

But　what　is　sovereignty？　　It　is；　they　say；　the　POWER　TO　MAKE　LAW。＇1＇　　Another　absurdity；　a　relic　of　despotism。　　The　nation　had　long　seen　kings　issuing　their　commands　in　this　form：　FOR　SUCH　IS　OUR　PLEASURE；　it　wished　to　taste　in　its　turn　the　pleasure　of　making　laws。　　For　fifty　years　it　has　brought　them　forth　by　myriads；　always；　be　it　understood；　through　the　agency　of　representatives。　　The　play　is　far　from　ended。

＇1＇　〃Sovereignty；〃　according　to　Toullier；　〃is　human　omnipotence。〃　A　materialistic　definition：　if　sovereignty　is　any　thing；　it　is　a　RIGHT　not　a　FORCE　or　a　faculty。　　And　what　is　human　omnipotence？




The　definition　of　sovereignty　was　derived　from　the　definition　of　the　law。　　The　law；　they　said；　is　THE　EXPRESSION　OF　THE　WILL　OF　THE　SOVEREIGN：　then；　under　a　monarchy；　the　law　is　the　expression　of　the　will　of　the　king；　in　a　republic；　the　law　is　the　expression　of　the　will　of　the　people。　　Aside　from　the　difference　in　the　number　of　wills；　the　two　systems　are　exactly　identical：　both　share　the　same　error；　namely；　that　the　law　is　the　expression　of　a　will；　it　ought　to　be　the　expression　of　a　fact。　　Moreover　they　followed　good　leaders：　they　took　the　citizen　of　Geneva　for　their　prophet；　and　the　contrat　social　for　their　Koran。

Bias　and　prejudice　are　apparent　in　all　the　phrases　of　the　new　legislators。　　The　nation　had　suffered　from　a　multitude　of　exclusions　and　privileges；　its　representatives　issued　the　following　declaration：　　ALL　MEN　ARE　EQUAL　BY　NATURE　AND　BEFORE　THE　LAW；　an　ambiguous　and　redundant　declaration。　　MEN　ARE　EQUAL　BY　NATURE：　does　that　mean　that　they　are　equal　in　size；　beauty；　talents；　and　virtue？　　No；　they　meant；　then；　political　and　civil　equality。　　Then　it　would　have　been　sufficient　to　have　said：　　ALL　MEN　ARE　EQUAL　BEFORE　THE　LAW。

But　what　is　equality　before　the　law？　　Neither　the　constitution　of　1790；　nor　that　of　'93；　nor　the　granted　charter；　nor　the　accepted　charter；　have　defined　it　accurately。　　All　imply　an　inequality　in　fortune　and　station　incompatible　with　even　a　shadow　of　equality　in　rights。　　In　this　respect　it　may　be　said　that　all　our　constitutions　have　been　faithful　expressions　of　the　popular　will：　I　am　going；　to　prove　it。

Formerly　the　people　were　excluded　from　civil　and　military　offices；　it　was　considered　a　wonder　when　the　following　high…　sounding　article　was　inserted　in　the　Declaration　of　Rights：　　〃All　citizens　are　equally　eligible　to　office；　free　nations　know　no　qualifications　in　their　choice　of　officers　save　virtues　and　talents。〃

They　certainl