T CHAPTER XII EDUCATION FOR DEMOCRACY 1 HE teaching profession, it seems to me, is singularly indifferent to the signs of the times. Either we are content to attend to business as usual because we don't know what else to do, or we fail to realize the significance of the revolution which is upon us. It would seem that of all vocations, ours should be the quickest to respond to the call to democracy, and the first to propose ways and means of making democracy safe for the world. Inasmuch as a confession of not knowing what to do belies our claims to professional leadership, and failure to understand the meaning of events implies an awful ignorance of precisely that history which we are supposed to teach, I am obliged, out of polite consideration for my coworkers, to seek elsewhere for the causes of our somnolence. Our faith in democracy. The truth is, as I see it, we teachers are much like other folks; we have not taken our democracy very seriously. We have all wanted to do as we pleased, and to be let alone in working out our own individual salvation. For this private advantage, we have been willing to entrust our civil government to the tender mercies of petty politicians and party bosses; we have winked at the violation of law, and tolerated slavery, and serfdom, and industrial oppression; we have 'A revised reprint from the TEACHERS COLLEGE RECORD, May, 1918. been indifferent to the ravages of plunder and greed, and to the losses due to administrative inefficiency. All these faults we have been guilty of at times, - and worse, if worse there be but such faults as these are in reality the concomitants of our virtues. We have sinned in these respects, simply because our faith in mankind is so strong. We are essentially optimists, and we have relied on the best in humanity to overcome the worst. In evidence of our national good intent I have only to point out what has happened when the public conscience has been aroused. Political parties have been punished for their shortcomings, slavery has been abolished, plunderers have been overwhelmed, the thraldom of child labor has been lightened, corporate greed has been checked, and the prohibition of social evils has been enjoined by highest law. It is characteristic of the democratic mind to believe the best of all mankind, to have faith that somehow the good will triumph over the bad. But it is equally true of the individualist that he wants his own way, and that he will wreak his vengeance upon those who persistently betray his confidence. The present world commotion shows that the optimists have been betrayed by those in whom they put their trust. Vengeance is mine, is their watchword. The outcome bids fair to match the bitterness of their disappointment. The obligation of democracy. The striving of the world towards democracy is as old as human society. The “inalienable rights of man" are the natural outcome of the instinct to self-expression and self-realization. The doctrine of brotherly love formulated by Jesus and propagated by the Christian Church as a world religion, has been bedded deep in the consciousness of the modern world. But nowhere has there been a democratic State. The age-long struggle between autocracy and democracy has never resulted in the complete suppression of the one or the complete victory of the other. At best the result has been an aristocracy or oligarchy, with leanings towards autocracy or towards democracy. The ordinary affairs of life go on much the same under any decent government. One must keep off the grass, if the park is worth preserving; keep the fire-escape clear, if safety is essential; observe the regulations of the health officer in time of quarantine; pay one's debts, and live up to contracts; help others when they are in need; tell the truth, fear God, and shame the devil. It matters a great deal, however, what is one's attitude toward these obligations and how one comes to recognize them as obligations. If the attitude is one of subservient acquiescence engendered by fear, or even by unquestioning obedience to external authority, the leaning is towards autocracy. If, on the contrary, conduct springs from an understanding of the necessity of such action, or if obligation is accepted after reasonable consideration by those concerned, the emphasis is democratic. A study in extremes. Our policy has been to abide by the rule of the majority. We have advocated liberty under the law, and assumed that the law was just. Now the previous question is being put. Is the law just? Who shall say? What is liberty? On the answer to these questions depends all our future happiness, all our hope for ourselves, for our children, and for our country. If justice cannot be assumed by the rule of the majority, who shall decide what is right? Shall a group of intellectuals? Shall a political party? Shall an industrial corporation? Shall a labor union? Shall any one class in the State enjoy the privilege of setting standards for all others? If not a class or a group or a party, shall each one decide what is right for himself? Our oldest history tells us in its own strong Biblical phrase, that when " every man did that which was right in his own eyes," there was anarchy in the land. It may be providential that we see clearly to-day the logical end of two extremes of government: Germany, the confessed autocrat, surfeited with ambition and drunk with power, trampling on the rights of individuals to gain world dominion for a favored few; Russia, the would-be democrat, impatient of restraint and blind to all sense of civic duty, groveling in anarchy, that each citizen may do as he pleases. If these lessons shall be learned, the war will not have been fought in vain. Living the Golden Rule. Whatever may have been the purpose of those who started the war, however selfish the intent of either party at the beginning, it is perfectly clear now that the public conscience of those opposed to the forces of autocracy is stirred to the depths. The whole world is leaning towards democracy. We may not know what democracy means; we may be blind to the evils of a system that easily substitutes license for liberty; we may be selling our birthright for a mess of pottage; but we have reached the decision that a change is inevitable. Indeed, the change has already come. Every day a new order of Government is handed down, regulating transportation by rail and water, fixing prices of necessary commodities, telling us what we shall eat and how we shall clothe ourselves—all to the end, it is said, that we may win . the war. It seems to me, rather, that we are being disciplined by an inexorable schoolmaster to meet the hardships of the future. Just now, like naughty children, we are doubtless scared into being good. Later on, when the fright is past, we shall be disposed to slip back into our old ways. The slogan, "Business as usual," will ring out over all the land. Trade and transportation will make desperate efforts to recoup their losses; store and factory, farm and market, school and college, will gravitate towards their old positions. Let no one, however, make the mistake of thinking that any of these enterprises will ever again be what they were before the war. A government that shows it can take over railroads and commandeer shipping fleets, will never again be helpless in the regulation of transportation; the power that can fix the price of coal and wheat, will have the chance to try it again on a larger scale, when the majority so decrees; if subsidies can be provided to buy farms, build workmen's houses, and supply luncheons for school children, it is only a short step to public largesses for all who are hungry or in need of financial aid. And by these very means democracy may be easily transformed into anarchy. Call it what you will-socialism, Bolshevism, or something worse, we have passed the era of free competition, where each stood on his rights and was disposed to define his rights to suit himself, into another era, wherein the ideal is justice for all, and for each the right to get what he deserves. The majority may continue to rule, but it must be a majority that exercises the duty of protecting the rights of the minority. While philosophers are striving to define the meaning of democracy and statesmen are giving a |