Chapter 10 Part 1 - Conclusion

The two opposites, rationality and ignorance, affect the vast majority of human beings.In a country, whichever side prevails, government agencies are likely to survive.Reason obeys itself; ignorance obeys whatever commands are given to it. At present, there are two types of governments popular in the world, the first is the representative government with elections; the second is the hereditary inheritance government.The former are generally called republics; the latter are commonly called monarchy and aristocracy. These two distinct and opposite forms are based on the two distinct and opposite foundations of reason and ignorance.Because governing requires intelligence and ability, and intelligence and ability cannot be inherited.It is evident, therefore, that hereditary succession requires the acquisition of a belief which is not acceptable to man's reason, but which can only be founded on his ignorance; and the more ignorant the people of a country are, the more adapted they are to this type of government.

Conversely, in a well-organized republic, the government need not acquire beliefs beyond human reason.He understands the whole system, its origin, and its operation; and, by virtue of the deepest understanding, and the strongest support, human faculties may be daringly exercised, and a great heroism may be exercised under this form of government. Since these two forms of government operate on different bases, the one acting on reason and the other on the basis of foolish freedom, our next step is to examine what it is that drives the type of government that is called mixed government. , which is sometimes absurdly branded as an all-encompassing government.

This type of government is motivated by the necessity of paying bribes.However imperfect electoral and representative representation may be, mixed governments have to be a little more rational than hereditary governments; rationality, therefore, has to be bought. A mixed government is an imperfect mixture that combines many discordant parts through bribery to act as a whole.Mr. Burke resented France's decision to make a revolution instead of adopting what he called "a constitution of the English type"; Defects are covered up. There is no accountability in a mixed government; the parts shield each other to the point of loss of accountability;Once the maxim that the king does not break the law puts him in the same safe position as the narcissist and the madman, there is no longer any responsibility for him.Responsibility then rests on the Prime Minister, sheltered by a parliamentary majority who, by means of position, pensions, and bribes, can always dictate; a parliamentary majority which uses the same powers which protect the Prime Minister to justify itself.In this circular fashion, parts of government and government as a whole throw responsibility out of the blue.

To say that any part of government is infallible means that it does nothing, but is merely the instrument of another power to do its will.In a mixed government, the king is replaced by a cabinet; and as the cabinet is always a part of a parliament whose members justify its inconsistencies, the mixed government remains a mystery, and since it takes a lot of bribes to unite the parties, let The nation bears all the costs of maintaining the government at the same time, and finally becomes a government of committees; in the committees, the advisers, the actors, the supporters, the justifiers, the responsible and the irresponsible are all the same party.

Through pantomime maneuvers and changes of scene and role, the various branches of this government help each other to do what no one can do alone.Once there is money to be made, gangs of all stripes vanish into thin air, departments try to flatter each other, each marvels at the wisdom, magnanimity, and incorruptibility of the other; and all lament the heavy burden of the nation. But in a well-organized republic, none of this union, admiration, and pity can take place; the representation is equal and perfect throughout the country, and whether representatives are placed in the legislative or executive branch, they have the same natural source.The various branches of government are not alien to each other like democracies, aristocracy, and monarchy.Since there is no rivalry, there is no need to compromise through bribery or to confuse right and wrong through intrigue.Public measures rely on the understanding of the people, based on their own achievements, without recourse to flattery.The whining of a mixed government against excessive taxation, however effective it may be, is alien to the mind and spirit of the same republic.If taxation is necessary, taxation is of course advantageous, but if taxation requires arrogance, that arrogance itself implies blame.So, why do people want to be fooled, or why should they allow themselves to be fooled?

How does a reasonable person understand the terms whenever people are called sovereign and subjects, or whenever governments are referred to under titles such as monarchy, aristocracy and democracy, individually or in combination Woolen cloth?If it were true that there were two or more distinct elements of human power, we should see multiple origins describable by these words; but since there is but one man, there can be but one The factor of power, and that factor is man himself.Monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy are mere creations of the imagination; a thousand other such things can be conceived besides these three.

From the revolutions in America and France, and from all the signs in other countries, it is evident that world opinion has changed the system of government, and that revolutions are no longer within the realm of political speculation.It would be too mechanical a measure of the moral force and quickness of reaction from which revolutions were produced, by the development of times and circumstances, which are attributed to the success of great revolutions; Shockingly, these revolutions were at one time considered more improbable, and more inconceivable, than revolutions now common in Europe.

As we observe mankind, under monarchical and hereditary governments, drawn from home by one power, or driven out by another, and impoverished and made miserable by taxes worse than their enemies When the situation is such that it is evident that these institutions are bad, a complete reformation of the principles and institutions of government is necessary. Isn't the government just managing the affairs of a country?It is not, nor could it be, by its nature, the property of any particular person or family; but can only be the property of the whole society, as it is maintained at its expense; Usurpation into hereditary government, but usurpation doesn't change things as they are.Sovereignty as a right belongs only to the nation and not to any individual; the nation of a nation has at all times an inalienable and inherent right to abolish whatever government it deems unfit, and to establish a government which is in its interest. , will and happy government.The absurd and barbaric division of man into prince and subject, though agreeable to courtiers, is not fit to citizenship; and this practice is broken by the principles on which the present government is founded.Every citizen is a member of the sovereign, and therefore cannot be subject to the individual: he can only obey the law.

When one considers what government is, it must first be assumed to understand all the objects and matters over which it will exercise its power.From this point of view of government, the republics created by America and France have the effect of extending to the whole nation; and the knowledge necessary to the interests of the various branches of government is in the hands of a nucleus elected by each branch.But the old government was founded on the exclusion of knowledge and happiness; and a government ruled by monks who knew nothing of the world beyond the monasteries had nothing to do with government ruled by kings.

The so-called revolutions in the past were nothing more than replacing a few people or changing the local situation slightly.The ups and downs of these revolutions are taken for granted, and their success or failure has no effect on areas other than the place where the revolution took place.But, thanks to the revolutions in America and France, we now see a new natural order of things in the world, a set of principles as universal as truth and human existence, and uniting morality with political perfection and national prosperity. "1. Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. The honor of citizenship, therefore, can be founded only on public service.

"2. The purpose of all political associations is to protect the natural and inviolable rights of man; these rights are: liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression." 3. The nation is the source of all sovereignty; 'any individual' or ' No group' has any powers not expressly derived from the nation. " Nothing in these principles can throw a country into chaos by fanning ambition.They are meant to call forth wisdom and ability to serve the common good, not the promotion and fortune of a particular group or family.Sovereignty, the enemy and source of misfortune of mankind, was abandoned; sovereignty itself was restored to its natural and original place, and returned to the nation.If this situation spread throughout Europe, the source of war could be eliminated. Around 1610, King Henry IV of France—a man of magnanimity and kindness—made a proposal to eliminate war in Europe.The plan was to establish an all-European congress, or, as the French sponsors say, a peaceful republic, composed of delegates appointed by the nations, who would act as arbitral courts in the event of disputes between nations. Had this plan been adopted at the time it was proposed, England and France, the two parties concerned, would have each been able to reduce their taxes by at least ten million pounds a year from the beginning of the French Revolution. To study why this plan was not adopted (there was no congress to prevent the war, but only one to end the war after years of useless waste), it is necessary to regard the interests of the government as distinct from those of the nation. Benefit. Regardless of the reason for taxing the people, it is a means for the government to increase revenue.Every war ended with an increase in taxes, with which the revenue of the government increased, and in any war started and ended in the manner in which it existed, the power and interest of the government grew.As wars tended to justify the necessity of taxation and creation of offices, they were, by their frequency, an essential part of the old system of government!And to establish any means and means of abolishing war, however advantageous it may be to the nation, would eliminate that most profitable branch of such government.To go to war recklessly because of a trivial matter shows the intention and greed of governments to maintain the war system and exposes their motives for waging war. Why didn't the Republic go to war?Simply because the nature of their government does not admit of an interest contrary to that of the nation.Even a republic as incompletely constituted as Holland, whose trade spread all over the world, was nearly a century free from war; and when the constitution of government in France was changed, the republican principles of peace and domestic prosperity, and economy, arose with the new government; The results will follow this path in other countries. As war is the law of governments founded upon old structures, the mutual hatred of nations is but a device employed by these governments to keep this law alive.Each government denounced the other for treachery, scheming, and ambition in order to stimulate the imagination of its own citizens and incite them to hostilities.If it were not for the government's interference, human beings would not be enemies with each other.It is therefore better, instead of crying out against the ambitions of kings, to direct the voice to the principles which these governments promote; and than to seek to reform individual men, it is better that the wisdom of the people be employed in reforming the institutions of government. Here it is not to be questioned whether the forms and principles of government which are still in force were adapted to the world situation in which they were founded.The more obsolete these forms and maxims are, the less adapted they are to the present state of things.Time, and changing circumstances and opinions, make systems of government obsolete, as customs and customs do.Agriculture, commerce, manufactures, and the arts, which best promote the prosperity of nations, require a different system of government than that of past ages, and a different kind of knowledge to direct it. From the standpoint of human progress, it is not difficult to see that hereditary governments are dying, while a revolution based on broad foundations of national sovereignty and representative government is advancing in Europe, anticipating its coming, and using reason and adaptability to promote It is wiser to let revolutions happen than to allow them to become riots. From what we see now, any change in politics is not out of the question.Now is the age of revolution, in which anything can happen.The intrigues of the courts of the nations to maintain the system of war may bring forth a League of Nations to abolish war; and a Congress of Europe to sponsor the progress of free government and to promote the cultural exchange of nations is more likely than ever before. The Franco-American Revolution and alliance came big.