按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
f 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 ward off foreign intervention； which was seriously threatened。 The populations of Europe； especially of France and England； were decidedly anti…slavery； and if the war here appeared to them a war； not solely for the unity of the nation and the integrity of its domain； as it really was； in which they took and could take no interest； but a war for the abolition of slavery； their governments would not venture to intervene。 This was the only consideration that weighed with Mr。 Lincoln； as he himself assured the author； and induced him to issue his Emancipation Proclamation； and Europe rejoices in our victory over the rebellion only so far as it has liberated the slaves； and honors the late President only as their supposed liberator； not as the preserver of the unity and integrity of the nation。 This is natural enough abroad； and proves the wisdom of the anti…slavery policy of the government； which had become absolutely necessary to save the Republic long before it was adopted； yet it is not as