第 52 节
作者:公主站记      更新:2021-04-30 17:05      字数:9322
  ticular states or nations are never absolutely independent of  each other but; bound together by the solidarity of the race; so  that there is a real solidarity of nations as well as of  individualsthe truth underlying Kossuth's famous declaration of  the solidarity of peoples。〃
  The solidarity of nations is the basis of international law;  binding on every particular nation; and which every civilized  nation recognizes and enforces on its own subjects or citizens  through its own courts as an integral part of its own municipal  or national law。
  The personal or individual right is therefore restricted by the  rights of society; and the rights of the particular society or  nation are limited by international law; or the rights of  universal societythe truth the ex…governor of Hungary  overlooked。  The grand error of Gentilism was in denying the  unity and therefore the solidarity of the race; involved in its  denial or misconception of the unity of God。  It therefore was  never able to assign any solid basis to international law; and  gave it only a 353                conventional or customary authority; thus leaving  the jus gentium; which it recognized in deed; without any real  foundation in the constitution of things; or authority in the  real world。  Its real basis is in the solidarity of the race;  which has its basis in the unity of God; not the dead or abstract  unity asserted by the old Eleatics; the Neo…Platonists; or the  modern Unitarians; but the living unity consisting in the  threefold relation in the Divine Essence; of Father; Son; and  Holy Ghost; as asserted by Christian revelation; and believed;  more or less intelligently; by all Christendom。
  The tendency in the Southern States has been to overlook the  social basis of the state; or the rights of society founded on  the solidarity of the race; and to make all rights and powers  personal; or individual; and as only the white race has been able  to assert and maintain its personal freedom; only men of that  race are held to have the right to be free。  Hence the people of  those States felt no scruple in holding the black or colored race  as slaves。 Liberty; said they; is the right only of those who  have the ability to assert and maintain it。  Let the negro prove  that he has this ability by asserting and maintaining his  freedom; and he will prove his right to be free; 354                                                  and that it is a  gross outrage; a manifest injustice; to enslave him; but; till  then; let him be my servant; which is best for him and for me。   Why ask me to free him?  I shall by doing so only change the form  of his servitude。  Why appeal to me!  Am I my brother's keeper?  Nay; is he my brother?  Is this negro; more like an ape or a  baboon than a human being; of the same race with myself?  I  believe it not。  But in some instances; at least; my dear  slaveholder; your slave is literally your brother; and sometimes  even your son; born of your own daughter。  The tendency of the  Southern democrat was to deny the unity of the race; as well as  all obligations of society to protect the weak and helpless; and  therefore all true civil society。
  At the North there has been; and is even yet; an opposite  tendencya tendency to exaggerate the social element; to  overlook the territorial basis of the state; and to disregard the  rights of individuals。  This tendency has been and is strong in  the people called abolitionists。  The American abolitionist is so  engrossed with the unity that he loses the solidarity of the  race; which supposes unity of race and multiplicity of  individuals; and falls to see any thing legitimate and  authoritative in 355                  geographical divisions or territorial  circumscriptions。  Back of these; back of individuals; he sees  humanity; superior to individuals; superior to states;  governments; and laws; and holds that he may trample on them all  or give them to the winds at the call of humanity or 〃the higher  law。〃  The principle on which he acts is as indefensible as the  personal or egoistical democracy of the slaveholders and their  sympathizers。  Were his socialistic tendency to become exclusive  and realized; it would found in the name of humanity a complete  social despotism; which; proving impracticable from its very  generality; would break up in anarchy; in which might makes  right; as in the slaveholder's democracy。
  The abolitionists; in supporting themselves on humanity in its  generality; regardless of individual and territorial rights; can  recognize no state; no civil authority; and therefore are as much  out of the order of civilization; and as much in that of  barbarism; as is the slaveholder himself。  Wendell Phillips is as  far removed from true Christian civilization as was John C。  Calhoun; and William Lloyd Garrison is as much of a barbarian and  despot in principle and tendency as Jefferson Davis。  Hence the  great body of the people in the non…slaveholding States; wedded  to American democracy as they 354                               were and are could never; as much  as they detested slavery; be induced to make common cause with  the abolitionists; and their apparent union in the late civil war  was accidental; simply owing to the fact that for the time the  social democracy and the territorial coincides or had the same  enemy。  The great body of the loyal people instinctively felt  that pure socialism is as incompatible with American democracy as  pure individualism; and the abolitionists are well aware that  slavery has been abolished; not for humanitarian or socialistic  reasons but really for reasons of state; in order to save the  territorial democracy。  The territorial democracy would not unite  to eliminate even so barbaric an element as slavery; till the  rebellion gave them the constitutional right to abolish it; and  even then so scrupulous were they; that they demanded a  constitutional amendment; so as to be able to make clean work of  it; without any blow to individual or State rights。
  The abolitionists were right in opposing slavery; but not in  demanding its abolition on humanitarian or socialistic grounds。   Slavery is really a barbaric element; and is in direct antagonism  to American civilization。  The whole force of the national life  opposes it; and must finally eliminate it; or become itself  extinct 357         and it is no mean proof of their utter want of sympathy  with all the living forces of modern civilization; that the  leading men of the South and their prominent friends at the North  really persuaded themselves that with cotton; rice; and tobacco;  they could effectually resist the anti…slavery movement; and  perpetuate their barbaric democracy。  They studied the classics;  they admired Greece and Rome; and imagined that those nations  became great by slavery; instead of being great even in spite of  slavery。  They failed to take into the account the fact that when  Greece and Rome were in the zenith of their glory; all  contemporary nations were also slaveholding nations; and that if  they were the greatest and most highly civilized nations of their  times; they were not fitted to be the greatest and most highly  civilized nations of all times。  They failed also to perceive  that; if the Graeco…Roman republic did not include the whole  territorial people in the political people; it yet recognized  both the social and the territorial foundation of the state; and  never attempted to rest it on pure individualism; they forgot;  too; that Greece and Rome both fell; and fell precisely through  internal weakness caused by the barbarism within; not through the  force of the barbarism 358                        beyond their frontiers。  The world has  changed since the time when ten thousand of his slaves were  sacrificed as a religious offering to the manes of a single Roman  master。  The infusion of the Christian dogma of the unity and  solidarity of the race into the belief; the life; the laws; the  jurisprudence of all civilized nations; has doomed slavery and  every species of barbarism; but this our slaveholding countrymen  saw not。
  It rarely happens that in any controversy; individual or  national; the real issue is distinctly presented; or the precise  question in debate is clearly and distinctly understood by either  party。  Slavery was only incidentally involved in the late war。   The war was occasioned by the collision of two extreme parties;  but it was itself a war between civilization and barbarism;  primarily between the territorial democracy and the personal  democracy; and in reality; on the part of the nation; as much a  war against the socialism of the abolitionist as against the  individualism of the slaveholder。  Yet the victory; though  complete over the former; is only half won over the latter; for  it has left the humanitarian democracy standing; and perhaps for  the moment stronger than ever。  The socialistic democracy was  enlisted by the territorial; not to strengthen the government at 359 home; as it imagines; for that it did not do; and could not do;  since the national instinct was even more opposed to it than to  the personal democracy; but under its antislavery aspect; to  soften the hostility of foreign powers; and w