But is democracy worth preserving?
How fares that intangible something which was the
inspiration of this man’s living? Democracy,
the right of people to govern themselves, as opposed
to their control by a self-appointed few is
it a failure or a success? Has it proved itself
worth the dedication of this soldier spirit?
The French, for themselves, have answered
the question at the Battle of the Marne and at Verdun.
But how about America? Has the great American
democracy proved a success, as compared with government
by autocracy for example, as compared with
the government of Germany by the Prussian military
autocracy, headed by the House of Hohenzollern?
More than a century has passed since
the surrender of Cornwallis. Since then in physical
growth and material success the democracy of the United
States has more than fulfilled the highest hopes.
At that time these United States were only a strip
along the eastern seaboard, bounded on the east by
the Atlantic Ocean and on the west by an unexplored
wilderness; thirteen sparsely settled states, the settlements
widely separated from each other, with a population
of less than four million persons. Now the wilderness
is overcome. By the Louisiana Purchase we acquired
the Great Southwest. For a pittance we bought
the wastes of Alaska and then found them to be the
gold fields of the world. The Philippines, with
an area of one hundred and fifteen thousand square
miles, and the Hawaiian Islands mark the extension
of our western boundaries. Cuba is under our
immediate protection. Porto Rico is part of us,
and likewise the Danish West Indies. In Central
America we have built the Panama Canal. By the
Monroe Doctrine we are the protectors from foreign
interference of all of Central and South America.
Our population has grown to more than one hundred
million souls. Our material wealth is the greatest
of any single nation in the world.
Does this constitute success?
Look on the other side of the picture. Our form
of national government has been notoriously inefficient taking
Germany as the standard. Our state governments
at their best are mediocre, while at their worst they
stand pitifully paralyzed before mob law. Our
unpunished lynchings of coloured people, innocent as
well as guilty, make us contemptible in the eyes of
the civilized world. No other government on earth
remains silent and helpless while its citizens assemble
as for a holiday and burn a criminal at the stake.
Our municipalities are largely rotten with graft,
and the graft is accompanied by its inevitable handmaids,
extravagance and inefficiency. Enormous wealth,
in the hands of a few, dwells side by side with extreme
poverty. Our cities are overcrowded, and the country
of Whittier, where
“Shut in from all the
world without
We sat the clean-winged hearth
about,”
is handed over to the huts and shanties
of immigrants. Capital fights labour and labour
fights capital. Politics are such that most men
avoid them. The standard of work is not how well
you can do your job, but how much you can make out
of it. Is this democracy a success?
In answer to this, however, does not
an inner consciousness in each of us, perhaps the
spirit of Lafayette and perhaps our own, perhaps the
whispering of an unseen, great, and infinite power,
tell us that the really relevant question is not whether
we have yet achieved success, but whether a successful
democracy is worth striving for? If, however,
I should be obliged to answer the question by “Yes”
or “No” I would say, “Yes, it is
a success!”
The best route for the development
of any man lies along the hard and thorny road of
self-development. In the end, self-development,
by dint of hard work and mistakes, produces the best
man, provided he has the courage to “see it
through.” Nations are merely big collections
of individuals. In the end this self-development
produces the best nation. The road is filled
with difficulties, but so are most roads to goals
that are worth reaching.
Our national government may have been
inefficient in its details, but taken as a whole it
has created a country which for generations has been
a haven for the oppressed of the world. How many
hundred thousand Germans have immigrated to America?
How many Americans have ever emigrated to Germany?
We have lynchings in the South, but no other country
was ever left a more hideous problem of slavery, and
in 1861 when the supreme test came the government
rose to it; no one but a visionary can expect an immediate
Utopian readjustment. Our municipalities abound
in graft, but what country before ours ever faced
the problem of absorbing annually the enormous flood
of unlettered immigrants that is unceasingly poured
upon us by the Old World. The wonder is not that
we have graft, but that we have not more graft.
We have great wealth and extreme poverty, but they
are due to unusual economic causes, namely: great
national resources on the one hand, and ceaseless
immigration on the other. Our cities are overcrowded
and our standards of work are superficial, but would
this be cured by a despotism?
And always we have the hope that goes
with liberty, the undying strength that accompanies
the knowledge that you are master of your own soul.
A good despot at the head of a military autocracy
may for the time being make the most efficient government
in the world; certainly a bad despot at the head of
a military autocracy makes the worst government.
But I will never believe that the total surrender
of the individual to the guiding hand of a despotic
autocracy makes in the end for the progress of the
whole. History shows it to be untrue; the never-ceasing
efforts of democracy, as endless as the waves of the
sea, show that despotic autocracy cannot last; and
the hell let loose upon earth by Prussian autocracy,
its modern exponent, clinches the falsity of its creed
for all but the intoxicated or maniacs.