5. Social Distinctions in Democracies and Democratic
Ideas in Various Countries.
When men were divided into castes and differentiated chiefly
by birth, social distinctions were
generally accepted as the consequences of an unavoidable natural
law.
As soon as the old social divisions were destroyed the
distinctions of the classes appeared artificial, and for that
reason ceased to be tolerated.
The necessity of equality being theoretical, we have seen
among democratic peoples the rapid development of artificial
inequalities, permitting their possessors to make for themselves
a plainly visible supremacy. Never was the thirst for titles and
decorations so general as to-day.
In really democratic countries, such as the United States,
titles and decorations do not exert much influence, and fortune
alone creates distinctions. It is only by exception that we see
wealthy young American girls allying themselves to the old names
of the European aristocracy. They are then instinctively
employing the only means which will permit a young race to
acquire a past that will establish its moral framework.
But in a general fashion the aristocracy that we see
springing up in America is by no means founded on titles and
decorations. Purely financial, it does not provoke much
jealousy, because every one hopes one day to form part of it.
When, in his book on democracy in America, Toqueville
spoke of the general aspiration towards equality he did not
realise that the prophesied equality would end in the
classification of men founded exclusively on the number of
dollars possessed by them. No other exists in the United States,
and it will doubtless one day be the same in Europe.
At present we cannot possibly regard France as a
democratic country save on paper, and here we feel the necessity,
already referred to, of examining the various ideas which in
different countries are expressed by the word
“democracy.”
Of truly democratic nations we can practically mention
only England and the United States. There, democracy occurs in
different forms, but the same principles are observed—notably, a
perfect toleration of all opinions. Religious persecutions are
unknown. Real superiority easily reveals itself in the various
professions which any one can enter at any age if he possesses
the necessary capacity. There is no barrier to individual
effort.
In such countries men believe themselves equal because all
have the idea that they are free to attain the same position.
The workman knows he can become foreman, and then engineer.
Forced to begin on the lower rungs of the ladder instead of high
up the scale, as in France, the engineer does not regard himself
as made of different stuff to the rest of mankind. It is the
same in all professions. This is why the class hatred, so
intense in Europe, is so little developed in England and America.
In France the democracy is practically non-existent save
in speeches. A system of competitions and examinations, which
must be worked through in youth, firmly closes the door upon the
liberal professions, and creates inimical and separate classes.
The Latin democracies are therefore purely theoretical.
The absolutism of the State has replaced monarchical absolutism,
but it is no less severe. The
aristocracy of fortune has replaced that of birth, and its
privileges are no less considerable.
Monarchies and democracies differ far more in form than in
substance. It is only the variable mentality of men that varies
their effects. All the discussions as to various systems of
government are really of no interest, for these have no special
virtue of themselves. Their value will always depend on that of
the people governed. A people effects great and rapid progress
when it discovers that it is the sum of the personal efforts of
each individual and not the system of government that determines
the rank of a nation in the world.
