In the preceding examples it is especially time that has been made to intervene as the principal factor in the changing of the meaning of words.If, however, we also make race intervene, we shall then see that, at the same period, among peoples equally civilised but of different race, the same words very often correspond to extremely dissimilar ideas.It is impossible to understand these differences without having travelled much, and for this reason I shall not insist upon them.I shall confine myself to observing that it is precisely the words most often employed by the masses which among different peoples possess the most different meanings.Such is the case, for instance, with the words "democracy" and "socialism" in such frequent use nowadays.
In reality they correspond to quite contrary ideas and images in the Latin and Anglo-Saxon mind.For the Latin peoples the word "democracy" signifies more especially the subordination of the will and the initiative of the individual to the will and the initiative of the community represented by the State.It is the State that is charged, to a greater and greater degree, with the direction of everything, the centralisation, the monopolisation, and the manufacture of everything.To the State it is that all parties without exception, radicals, socialists, or monarchists, constantly appeal.Among the Anglo-Saxons and notably in America this same word "democracy" signifies, on the contrary, the intense development of the will of the individual, and as complete a subordination as possible of the State, which, with the exception of the police, the army, and diplomatic relations, is not allowed the direction of anything, not even of public instruction.It is seen, then, that the same word which signifies for one people the subordination of the will and the initiative of the individual and the preponderance of the State, signifies for another the excessive development of the will and the initiative of the individual and the complete subordination of the State.[13]
[13] In my book, "The Psychological Laws of the Evolution of Peoples," I have insisted at length on the differences which distinguish the Latin democratic ideal from the Anglo-Saxon democratic ideal.Independently, and as the result of his travels, M.Paul Bourget has arrived, in his quite recent book, "Outre-Mer," at conclusions almost identical with mine.
2.ILLUSIONS
From the dawn of civilisation onwards crowds have always undergone the influence of illusions.It is to the creators of illusions that they have raised more temples, statues, and altars than to any other class of men.Whether it be the religious illusions of the past or the philosophic and social illusions of the present, these formidable sovereign powers are always found at the head of all the civilisations that have successively flourished on our planet.It is in their name that were built the temples of Chaldea and Egypt and the religious edifices of the Middle Ages, and that a vast upheaval shook the whole of Europe a century ago, and there is not one of our political, artistic, or social conceptions that is free from their powerful impress.Occasionally, at the cost of terrible disturbances, man overthrows them, but he seems condemned to always set them up again.Without them he would never have emerged from his primitive barbarian state, and without them again he would soon return to it.Doubtless they are futile shadows; but these children of our dreams have forced the nations to create whatever the arts may boast of splendour or civilisation of greatness.
"If one destroyed in museums and libraries, if one hurled down on the flagstones before the churches all the works and all the monuments of art that religions have inspired, what would remain of the great dreams of humanity? To give to men that portion of hope and illusion without which they cannot live, such is the reason for the existence of gods, heroes, and poets.During fifty years science appeared to undertake this task.But science has been compromised in hearts hungering after the ideal, because it does not dare to be lavish enough of promises, because it cannot lie."[14]
[14] Daniel Lesueur.
The philosophers of the last century devoted themselves with fervour to the destruction of the religious, political, and social illusions on which our forefathers had lived for a long tale of centuries.By destroying them they have dried up the springs of hope and resignation.Behind the immolated chimeras they came face to face with the blind and silent forces of nature, which are inexorable to weakness and ignore pity.
Notwithstanding all its progress, philosophy has been unable as yet to offer the masses any ideal that can charm them; but, as they must have their illusions at all cost, they turn instinctively, as the insect seeks the light, to the rhetoricians who accord them what they want.Not truth, but error has always been the chief factor in the evolution of nations, and the reason why socialism is so powerful to-day is that it constitutes the last illusion that is still vital.In spite of all scientific demonstrations it continues on the increase.Its principal strength lies in the fact that it is championed by minds sufficiently ignorant of things as they are in reality to venture boldly to promise mankind happiness.The social illusion reigns to-day upon all the heaped-up ruins of the past, and to it belongs the future.The masses have never thirsted after truth.
They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduce them.Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim.
3.EXPERIENCE