the man versus the state-第32章

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！


。　Along　with　social　development；　the　formulating　in　law　of　the　rights　pre…established　by　custom；　becomes　more　definite　and　elaborate。　At　the　same　time；　Government　undertakes　to　an　increasing　extent　the　business　of　enforcing　them。　While　it　has　been　becoming　a　better　protector；　Government　has　been　becoming　less　aggressive　has　more　and　more　diminished　its　intrusions　on　men's　spheres　of　private　action。　And；　lastly；　as　in　past　times　laws　were　avowedly　modified　to　fit　better　with　current　ideas　of　equity；　so　now；　law…reformers　are　guided　by　ideas　of　equity　which　are　not　derived　from　law　but　to　which　law　has　to　conform。　　　　　　Here；　then；　we　have　a　politico…ethical　theory　justified　alike　by　analysis　and　by　history。　What　have　we　against　it？　A　fashionable　counter…theory　which　proves　to　be　unjustifiable。　On　the　one　hand；　while　we　find　that　individual　life　and　social　life　both　imply　maintenance　of　the　natural　relation　between　efforts　and　benefits；　we　also　find　that　this　natural　relation；　recognized　before　Government　existed；　has　been　all　along　asserting　and　re…asserting　itself；　and　obtaining　better　recognition　in　codes　of　law　and　systems　of　ethics。　On　the　other　hand；　those　who；　denying　natural　rights；　commit　themselves　to　the　assertion　that　rights　are　artificially　created　by　law；　are　not　only　flatly　contradicted　by　facts；　but　their　assertion　is　self…destructive：　the　endeavour　to　substantiate　it；　when　challenged；　involves　them　in　manifold　absurdities。　　　　　　Nor　is　this　all。　The　re…institution　of　a　vague　popular　conception　in　a　definite　form　on　a　scientific　basis；　leads　us　to　a　rational　view　of　the　relation　between　the　wills　of　majorities　and　minorities。　It　turns　out　that　those　co…operations　in　which　all　can　voluntarily　unite；　and　in　the　caring　on　of　which　the　will　of　the　majority　is　rightly　supreme；　are　co…operations　for　maintaining　the　conditions　requisite　to　individual　and　social　life。　Defence　of　the　society　as　a　whole　against　eternal　invaders；　has　for　its　remote　end　to　preserve　each　citizen　in　possession　of　such　means　as　he　has　for　satisfying　his　desires；　and　in　possession　of　such　liberty　as　he　has　for　getting　further　means。　And　defence　of　each　citizen　against　internal　invaders；　from　murderers　down　to　those　who　inflict　nuisances　on　their　neighbours；　has　obviously　the　like　end　　an　end　desired　by　every　one　save　the　canal　and　disorderly。　Hence　it　follows　that　for　maintenance　of　this　vital　principle；　alike　of　individual　life　and　social　life；　subordination　of　minority　to　majority　is　legitimate；　as　implying　only　such　a　trenching　on　the　freedom　and　property　of　each；　as　is　requisite　for　the　better　protecting　of　his　freedom　and　property。　At　the　same　time　it　follows　that　such　subordination　is　not　legitimate　beyond　this；　since；　implying　as　it　does　a　greater　aggression　upon　the　individual　than　is　requisite　for　protecting　him；　it　involves　a　breach　of　the　vital　principle　which　is　to　be　maintained。　　Thus　we　come　round　again　to　the　proposition　that　the　assumed　divine　right　of　parliaments；　and　the　implied　divine　right　of　majorities；　are　superstitions。　While　men　have　abandoned　the　old　theory　respecting　the　source　of　State…authority；　they　have　retained　a　belief　in　that　unlimited　extent　of　State…authority　which　rightly　accompanied　the　old　theory；　but　does　not　rightly　accompany　the　new　one。　Unrestricted　power　over　subjects；　rationally　ascribed　to　the　ruling　man　when　he　was　held　to　be　a　deputy…god；　is　now　ascribed　to　the　ruling　body；　the　deputy…godhood　of　which　nobody　asserts。　　　　　　Opponents　will；　possibly；　contend　that　discussions　about　the　origin　and　limits　of　governmental　authority　are　mere　pedantries。　〃Government；〃　they　may　perhaps　say；　〃is　bound　to　use　all　the　means　it　has；　or　can　get；　for　furthering　the　general　happiness。　Its　aim　must　be　utility；　and　it　is　warranted　in　employing　whatever　measures　are　needful　for　achieving　useful　ends。　The　welfare　of　the　people　is　the　supreme　law；　and　legislators　are　not　to　be　deterred　from　obeying　that　law　by　questions　concerning　the　source　and　range　of　their　power。〃　Is　there　really　an　escape　here？　or　may　this　opening　be　effectually　closed？　　　　　　The　essential　question　raised　is　the　truth　of　the　utilitarian　theory　as　commonly　held；　and　the　answer　here　to　be　given　is　that；　as　commonly　held；　it　is　not　true。　Alike　by　the　statements　of　utilitarian　moralists；　and　by　the　acts　of　politicians　knowingly　or　unknowingly　following　their　lead；　it　is　implied　that　utility　is　to　be　directly　determined　by　simple　inspection　of　the　mediate　facts　and　estimation　of　probable　results。　Whereas；　utilitarianism　as　rightly　understood；　implies　guidance　by　the　general　conclusions　which　analysis　of　experience　yields。　〃Good　and　bad　results　cannot　be　accidental；　but　must　be　necessary　consequences　of　the　constitution　of　things；〃　and　it　is　〃the　business　of　Moral　Science　to　deduce；　from　the　laws　of　life　and　the　conditions　of　existence；　what　kinds　of　action　necessarily　tend　to　produce　happiness；　and　what　kinds　to　produce　unhappiness。〃（32*）　Current　utilitarian　speculation；　like　current　practical　politics；　shows　inadequate　consciousness　of　natural　causation。　The　habitual　thought　is　that；　in　the　absence　of　some　obvious　impediment；　things　can　be　done　this　way　or　that　way；　and　no　question　is　put　whether　there　is　either　agreement　or　conflict　with　the　normal　working　of　things。　　　　　　The　foregoing　discussions　have；　I　think；　shown　that　the　dictates　of　utility；　and；　consequently；　the　proper　actions　of　governments；　are　not　to　be　settled　by　inspection　of　facts　on　the　surface；　and　acceptance　of　their　prima　facie　meanings；　but　are　to　be　settled　by　reference　to；　and　deduction　from；　fundamental　facts。　The　fundamental　facts　to　which　all　rational　judgments　of　utility　must　go　back；　are　the　facts　that　life　consists　in；　and　is　maintained　by；　certain　activities；　and　that　among　men　in　a　society；　these　activities；　necessarily　becoming　mutually　limited；　are　to　be　carried　on　by　each　within　the　limits　thence　arising；　and　not　carried　on　beyond　those　limits：　the　maintenance　of　the　limits　becoming；　by　consequence；　the　function　of　the　agency　which　regulates　society。　If　each；　having　freedom　to　use　his　powers　up　to　the　bounds　fixed　by　the　like　freedom　of　others；　obtains　from　his　fellow…men　as　much　for　his　services　as　they　find　them　worth　in　comparison　with　the　services　of　others　　if　contracts　uniformly　fulfilled　bring　to　each　the　share　thus　determined；　and　he　is　left　secure　in　person　and　possessions　to　satisfy　his　wants　with　the　proceeds；　then　there　is　maintained　the　vital　principle　alike　of　individual　life　and　of　social　life。　Further；　there　is　maintained　the　vital　principle　of　social　progress；　inasmuch　as；　under　such　conditions；　the　individuals　of　most　worth　will　prosper　and　multiply　more　than　those　of　less　worth。　So　that　utility；　not　as　empirically　estimated　but　as　rationally　determined；　enjoins　this　maintenance　of　individual　rights；　and；　by　implication；　negatives　any　course　which　traverses　them。　　　　　　Here；　then；　we　reach　the　ultimate　interdict　against　meddling　legislation。　Reduced　to　its　lowest　terms；　every　proposal　to　interfere　with　citizens'　activities　further　than　by　enforcing　their　mutual　limitations；　is　a　proposal　to　improve　life　by　breaking　through　the　fundamental　conditions　to　life。　When　some　are　prevented　from　buying　beer　that　others　may　be　prevented　from　getting　drunk；　those　who　make　the　law　assume　that　more　good　than　evil　will　result　from　interference　with　the　normal　relation　between　conduct　and　consequences；　alike　in　the　few　ill…regulated　and　the　many　well…regulated。　A　government　which　takes　fractions　of　the　incomes　of　multitudinous　people；　for　the　purpose　of　sending　to　the　colonies　some　who　have　not　prospered　here；　or　for　building　better　industrial　dwellings；　or　for　making　public　libraries　and　public　museums；　etc。；　takes　for　granted　that；　not　only　proximately　but　ultimately；　increased　general　happiness　will　result　from　transgressing　the　essential　requirement　to　general　happiness　the　requirement　that　each　shall　enjoy　all　those　means　to　happiness　which　his　actions；　carried　on　without　aggression；　have　brought　him。　In　other　cases　we　do　not　thus　let　the　mediate　blind　us　to　the　remote。　When　asserting　the　sacredness　of　property　against　private　transgressors；　we　do　not　ask　whether　the　benefit