of the representatives of big capital, the rationalistic professoriate, and the ordinary literati who eat at the table of these esteemed gentlemen and have to write and give speeches for them daily, and which, bearing in mind their current influence among the people, has (until a new catchword becomes fashionable) taken the name of the joint company “Nationalverein” [“National Association” ] and “Fortschrittspartei” [“Progressive Party”], as well as the actual radical party, which is otherwise distinguished from the great liberal party by way of a certain honest consistency. Both are united in the belief that unconditional occupational freedom is a postulate that can no longer be disputed. At this point, we are not judging if this is true; instead, we maintain that, even if occupational freedom is necessary, one should still not conceal from the people that unconditional occupational freedom immediately and necessarily leads to this condition for the entire working population. Those parties resemble a supposed friend who pushes his friend into the waters and then, standing on the shore, develops any number of possible theories about how this drowning man might be rescued, and who, by way of this benevolent activity, then claims for himself the virtues of humane conviction and moving friendship, without ever thinking that it was he himself who put his friend in this situation in the first place.
In saying this, moreover, I do not wish to come to the defense of compulsory guilds everywhere in their latest stage of development – and just as little do I wish to dismiss all efforts calling for greater occupational freedom. In order to avoid this appearance, we must take a closer look at this matter.
There is something about authority and freedom that makes them based on eternal divine ideas, [ideas] upon whose development the salvation of human beings depends; but because they [authority and freedom] are managed by human beings, they never emerge in complete purity; instead, they are always tainted by human wretchedness and abused by human selfishness. So it goes with authority; it contains a divine idea, it is a direct outflow of divine authority itself and should represent [that authority] in every circumstance in which it appears, in the highest and lowest forms. It is utterly laughable for this authority to attempt to seek a kind of surrogate in the people’s will. But authority, whose essence is so divine, is managed by human beings, and in truth this management is not always divine; it is abused in the service of egoism and can bring the affairs of human beings on earth to the brink of ruin. Then, unfailingly, the moment comes when abused freedom erupts with the inner necessity of nature. Freedom is also founded on an indestructible divine idea; but managed by human beings, it too is unspeakably abused. The form in which the abuse of freedom comes to light is disobedience, rebellion against legitimate law and legitimate authority. In Christianity this is a sin. It too can lead to utmost ruin, at which point it also elicits its opposite [authority] with a certain necessity. Thus, these two opposing forces sway on
print version
return to list
previous document