The Kingdom of God Is Within You, Leo Nikoleyevich Tolstoy [books to read fiction .TXT] 📗
- Author: Leo Nikoleyevich Tolstoy
- Performer: -
Book online «The Kingdom of God Is Within You, Leo Nikoleyevich Tolstoy [books to read fiction .TXT] 📗». Author Leo Nikoleyevich Tolstoy
playthings? (The peasant’s children never play at soldiers, by
the way). Why do good men and even women, who have certainly no
interest in war, go into raptures over the various exploits of
Skobeloff and others, and vie with one another in glorifying them?
Why do men, who are not obliged to do so, and get no fee for it,
devote, like the marshals of nobility in Russia, whole months of
toil to a business physically disagreeable and morally painful—
the enrolling of conscripts? Why do all kings and emperors wear
the military uniform? Why do they all hold military reviews, why
do they organize maneuvers, distribute rewards to the military,
and raise monuments to generals and successful commanders? Why do
rich men of independent position consider it an honor to perform a
valet’s duties in attendance on crowned personages, flattering
them and cringing to them and pretending to believe in their
peculiar superiority? Why do men who have ceased to believe in
the superstitions of the mediaeval Church, and who could not
possibly believe in them seriously and consistently, pretend to
believe in and give their support to the demoralizing and
blasphemous institution of the church? Why is it that not only
governments but private persons of the higher classes, try so
jealously to maintain the ignorance of the people? Why do they
fall with such fury on any effort at breaking down religious
superstitions or really enlightening the people? Why do
historians, novelists, and poets, who have no hope of gaining
anything by their flatteries, make heroes of kings, emperors, and
conquerors of past times? Why do men, who call themselves
learned, dedicate whole lifetimes to making theories to prove that
violence employed by authority against the people is not violence
at all, but a special right? One often wonders why a fashionable
lady or an artist, who, one would think, would take no interest in
political or military questions, should always condemn strikes of
working people, and defend war; and should always be found without
hesitation opposed to the one, favorable to the other.
But one no longer wonders when one realizes that in the higher
classes there is an unerring instinct of what tends to maintain
and of what tends to destroy the organization by virtue of which
they enjoy their privileges. The fashionable lady had certainly
not reasoned out that if there were no capitalists and no army to
defend them, her husband would have no fortune, and she could not
have her entertainments and her ball-dresses. And the artist
certainly does not argue that he needs the capitalists and the
troops to defend them, so that they may buy his pictures. But
instinct, replacing reason in this instance, guides them
unerringly. And it is precisely this instinct which leads all
men, with few exceptions, to support all the religious, political,
and economic institutions which are to their advantage.
But is it possible that the higher classes support the existing
order of things simply because it is to their advantage? Cannot
they see that this order of things is essentially irrational, that
it is no longer consistent with the stage of moral development
attained by people, and with public opinion, and that it is
fraught with perils? The governing classes, or at least the good,
honest, and intelligent people of them, cannot but suffer from
these fundamental inconsistencies, and see the dangers with which
they are threatened. And is it possible that all the millions of
the lower classes can feel easy in conscience when they commit
such obviously evil deeds as torture and murder from fear of
punishment? Indeed, it could not be so, neither the former nor
the latter could fail to see the irrationality of their conduct,
if the complexity of government organization did not obscure the
unnatural senselessness of their actions.
So many instigate, assist, or sanction the commission of every one
of these actions that no one who has a hand in them feels himself
morally responsible for it.
It is the custom among assassins to oblige all the witnesses of a
murder to strike the murdered victim, that the responsibility may
be divided among as large a number of people as possible. The
same principle in different forms is applied under the government
organization in the perpetration of the crimes, without which no
government organization could exist. Rulers always try to
implicate as many citizens as possible in all the crimes committed
in their support.
Of late this tendency has been expressed in a very obvious manner
by the obligation of all citizens to take part in legal processes
as jurors, in the army as soldiers, in the local government, or
legislative assembly, as electors or members.
Just as in a wicker basket all the ends are so hidden away that it
is hard to find them, in the state organization the responsibility
for the crimes committed is so hidden away that men will commit
the most atrocious acts without seeing their responsibility for
them.
In ancient times tyrants got credit for the crimes they committed,
but in our day the most atrocious infamies, inconceivable under
the Neros, are perpetrated and no one gets blamed for them.
One set of people have suggested, another set have proposed, a
third have reported, a fourth have decided, a fifth have
confirmed, a sixth have given the order, and a seventh set of men
have carried it out. They hang, they flog to death women, old
men, and innocent people, as was done recently among us in Russia
at the Yuzovsky factory, and is always being done everywhere in
Europe and America in the struggle with the anarchists and all
other rebels against the existing order; they shoot and hang men
by hundreds and thousands, or massacre millions in war, or break
men’s hearts in solitary confinement, and ruin their souls in the
corruption of a soldier’s life, and no one is responsible.
At the bottom of the social scale soldiers, armed with guns,
pistols, and sabers, injure and murder people, and compel men
through these means to enter the army, and are absolutely
convinced that the responsibility for the actions rests solely on
the officers who command them.
At the top of the scale—the Tzars, presidents, ministers, and
parliaments decree these tortures and murders and military
conscription, and are fully convinced that since they are either
placed in authority by the grace of God or by the society they
govern, which demands such decrees from them, they cannot be held
responsible. Between these two extremes are the intermediary
personages who superintend the murders and other acts of violence,
and are fully convinced that the responsibility is taken off their
shoulders partly by their superiors who have given the order,
partly by the fact that such orders are expected from them by all
who are at the bottom of the scale.
The authority who gives the orders and the authority who executes
them at the two extreme ends of the state organization, meet
together like the two ends of a ring; they support and rest on one
another and inclose all that lies within the ring.
Without the conviction that there is a person or persons who will
take the whole responsibility of his acts, not one soldier would
ever lift a hand to commit a murder or other deed of violence.
Without the conviction that it is expected by the whole people not
a single king, emperor, president, or parliament would order
murders or acts of violence.
Without the conviction that there are persons of a higher grade
who will take the responsibility, and people of a lower grade who
require such acts for their welfare, not one of the intermediate
class would superintend such deeds.
The state is so organized that wherever a man is placed in the
social scale, his irresponsibility is the same. The higher his
grade the more he is under the influence of demands from below,
and the less he is controlled by orders from above, and VICE
VERSA.
All men, then, bound together by state organization, throw the
responsibility of their acts on one another, the peasant soldier
on the nobleman or merchant who is his officer, and the officer on
the nobleman who has been appointed governor, the governor on the
nobleman or son of an official who is minister, the minister on
the member of the royal family who occupies the post of Tzar, and
the Tzar again on all these officials, noblemen, merchants, and
peasants. But that is not all. Besides the fact that men get rid
of the sense of responsibility for their actions in this way, they
lose their moral sense of responsibility also, by the fact that in
forming themselves into a state organization they persuade
themselves and each other so continually, and so indefatigably,
that they are not all equal, but “as the stars apart,” that they
come to believe it genuinely themselves. Thus some are persuaded
that they are not simple people like everyone else, but special
people who are to be specially honored. It is instilled into
another set of men by every possible means that they are inferior
to others, and therefore must submit without a murmur to every
order given them by their superiors.
On this inequality, above all, on the elevation of some and the
degradation of others, rests the capacity men have of being blind
to the insanity of the existing order of life, and all the cruelty
and criminality of the deception practiced by one set of men on
another.
Those in whom the idea has been instilled that they are invested
with a special supernatural grandeur and consequence, are so
intoxicated with a sense of their own imaginary dignity that they
cease to feel their responsibility for what they do.
While those, on the other hand, in whom the idea is fostered that
they are inferior animals, bound to obey their superiors in
everything, fall, through this perpetual humiliation, into a
strange condition of stupefied servility, and in this stupefied
state do not see the significance of their actions and lose all
consciousness of responsibility for what they do.
The intermediate class, who obey the orders of their superiors on
the one hand and regard themselves as superior beings on the
other, are intoxicated by power and stupefied by servility at the
same time and so lose the sense of their responsibility.
One need only glance during a review at the commander-in-chief,
intoxicated with self-importance, followed by his retinue, all on
magnificent and gayly appareled horses, in splendid uniforms and
wearing decorations, and see how they ride to the harmonious and
solemn strains of music before the ranks of soldiers, all
presenting arms and petrified with servility. One need only
glance at this spectacle to understand that at such moments, when
they are in a state of the most complete intoxication, commander-in-chief, soldiers, and intermediate officers alike, would be
capable of committing crimes of which they would never dream under
other conditions.
The intoxication produced by such stimulants as parades, reviews,
religious solemnities, and coronations, is, however, an acute and
temporary condition; but there are other forms of chronic,
permanent intoxication, to which those are liable who have any
kind of authority, from that of the Tzar to that of the lowest
police officer at the street corner, and also those who are in
subjection to authority and in a state of stupefied servility.
The latter, like all slaves, always find a justification for their
own servility, in ascribing the greatest possible dignity and
importance to those they serve.
It is principally through this false idea of inequality, and the
intoxication of power and of servility resulting from it, that men
associated in a state organization are enabled to commit acts
opposed
Comments (0)