Rights, Obligations, and Opportunities
T h e deluge of the 1960's is almost ended. I t would be con~fortingto know that it somehow had cleansed and renewed us. Unfortunately it appears only to have confounded and enraged-intensifying our cynicism, disorienting our moral compass, shattering our happy dreams. Reason, integrity, and faith still prevail but they often are the reason of expediency, the integrity of paranoia, and the faith of the disaffected spirit. Many seem to have forgotten that to rave against the inadecluacies of man is to champion them. A fcw appear to believe that freedom of speech carries with it the obligation to play the fool's advocate. Still there are signs that we may be moving toward romething better than we had. The critical problem is whether we will recognize this when we reach it or whether all our alienation, babble, and misguided idealism will carry us hopelessly far beyond any realistic rallying point. There must be some fundamental principles of life or liviuc that nearlv all would accent as essential to a viable human society, and which might serve as a source of spirituillstrength or as a basis for reason and restraint in judging when wc are near this point. If we start wit,h the notion that all men love frcedom, and we recognize that complete freedom means complete chaos, then we must conclude that the freedom of individuals in society requires some regulation of conduct. Thus there is both the need for government and the need for the individual to accept govei-nment. Freedom is possible only as long as the government trusts the people and the people trust the government. But trust is possible only when there is understanding and consideration by both parties; and understanding and consideration are possible only when there is a will to understand and t,o show consideration. Moreover even this will must be conditioned by what Santaynna realized when he wrote, "No possible reforms can make life adorable or fundamentally just." I t is important to recognize that we did not inherit civilization and then proceed to despoil it. We created it over centuries of struggle and trial. And anyone who doubts that civilization has progressed over the centuries might well study the laws of the Athenian Republic or the Roman Empire and look again at the Magna Carta and a t Anglo-Saxon law to see how far we have come, and to sense the expanse of the gulf between human ideals and human nature-betweenwhat humans wish they could do and what they actually have been able to do. It there is anything to be learned from hisL.
I editorially I speaking tory that is more important than the folly of war, it is the madness of refusing to accept the tried and the good of the past. However not everything from the past is good, not a11 the good remains good, and the present day brings its own special problems to confuse and mystify iodividuals and issues. Perhaps the most momentous current problem for the individual himself is the fear of obsolescence or impotency in his work, the crippling thought that his life may serve no noble purpose. For many students this is neither a trivial nor a fleeting concern. As one student put it: "The thought that some imperfect men administering an imperfect system might control events so as to make my life count for naught is so repressive that even now I cry for revenge against this injustice." We hear this cry from a great many Americans today, and it is not limited to the poor or the young or the black. There is reason to believe that it will become more strident before it. subsides. We also hear the word "revolution," and this can hardly be a reasoned or a humanistic solution to our problems, unless by revolution in meant enlightenment of the mind and improvement of character-even National Charact,er. Perhaps one of the great lessons of the deluge of the 1960's has been articulated for us by the student whose statement is given above. In eff ect he is raising a question about the rights of man and the obligation of government. Part of what this student appears to be saying has been said in broader terms by Will Durant-"The rights of man are not rights to office and power hut t,he rights of entry into every avenue that may nourish aud test a man's fitness for office and power." Both the student and Durant are saying a good deal more than is usually implied in the phrase ( t equal opportunities for all." By implication they are speaking to the super efficiency of our society and its infringements on personal freedom which have resulted i n n paucity of really creative or fulfilling work for a great segment of our citizens, and they are suggesting that there is a clear obligation of government to establish a climate wherein each individual can find work in which he can be proud and productive, and through which he can realize the opportunity to make his life mean something. It would be a very interesting experiment if not only the government, but every citizen also assumed the r e sponsibility for establishing such a climate. WTL
Volume 46, Number 12, December 1969
/
793
