Suchergebnisse

Autocracy and Democracy are mutually antagonistic. A dictatorship, whether that of the proletariat or one established by a totalitarian state, is a menace to popular government. We have all seen in the recent past how it has shown itself a foe to liberty; to freedom of the person, freedom of opinion and speech, freedom of the press, and hostile to religious toleration. Autocracy, relying upon force, is necessarily militaristic and readily assumes an aggressive attitude towards other forms of government.

Intensive campaigns of hostile and subversive propaganda against the territorial integrity and political order of foreign states have constituted one of the most disturbing factors in the international life of the postwar period. Powerful groups, frequently with governmental toleration or support, clamor for the incorporation in their several states of territories inhabited by populations of like nationality. Vigorous and systematic incitement of foreign subjects to disaffection or revolt against their own governments is the method generally adopted to attain this end. The consequent state of tension in the relations of the states concerned presents a real and actual threat to international peace. The dangerous situations which always result from a lack of coincidence between national and political frontiers have been intensified by the rise in several states of dictatorial régimes, which are disposed to press with special vigor their territorial claims. Hostile propaganda, especially if carried on with the sanction of nationalistic governments, "inevitably results in what might be termed the obliteration of the border-line between the state of peace and the state of war." It tends always to create an atmosphere conducive to the occurrence of those "incidents" which have so frequently led to major conflicts.

Among the men who have profoundly affected the development of mankind and have given their best energies to the promotion of toleration, reason, and justice, Voltaire stands without a peer. Gifted as he so evidently was by nature for intellectual leadership and literary supremacy in France and in Europe, he was never content with these honors alone. His prolonged activity was to mean more to the world than an author's gift of over half a hundred volumes, filled with flashing wit and sparkling with the brightness and charm of a brilliant writer. Upon everything in France Voltaire fastened his keen gaze, and with rare insight and remarkable discrimination he analyzed the situation, devoting his life to an attempt to win recognition of the essential and pressing need of his program of reform.He had read the history of all nations and of all times, and had studied politics and literature, philosophy and science. He did not always go to the heights and depths of things unknown; he may even at times have been superficial. But with versatility far surpassing that of most mortals, with an adroitness in expression and thought, with flexibility in manner, he used his knowledge and pressed his cause, so that willing homage was paid to his gifts and genius by the man of moderate intelligence, by the philosopher, by the humble citizen, and by the sovereign. Yet, appreciated as Voltaire was by those who realized the importance of his endeavors, he had to submit to indignities from those who could have given him the most assistance.

Of all the clauses in the Bill of Rights, the free speech guaranty stands foremost in the significance of the political principle it defends, and in the enduring vitality of the problems it puts before us. In an age of toleration bordering on indifference, the phrase protecting the free exercise of religion has been reverently consigned to a life of honored retirement; in the days of conscription "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" finds a place in constitutional structure similar to that of the vermiform appendix in the human body; and the good old search and seizure clause now is roused from a senile contemplation of other days only at rarest intervals, relapsing soon into a customary desuetude. But no such fate will ever befall the free speech clause. The human interest it defends is in a very real sense the most fundamental and permanent in the Bill of Rights, and no changes brought by the onward movement of civilization are ever likely to make the need for its protection less necessary.For as long as human beings have tongues and minds they will say what they think, and they will think differently. Where the question is important and the issues vital or seemingly vital, such hatred and bitterness is likely to develop as will require a very strong constitutional guaranty and a reverential respect for the written word if oppression is to be prevented. In fact, all the rancor and bitterness attached to actual physical conflict are frequently found in scarcely diminished intensity to have gathered about mere polemics.