oting age in the United States to-day who thought they had
been educated were under the obligation to reeducate themselves.
He suggested, whimsically, a vacation school for Congress and all
legislative bodies as a starter. Until the fact of the utter inadequacy
of the old education were faced, there was little or no hope of solving
the problems that harassed us. One thing was certain--that they couldn't
be solved by a rule-of-thumb morality. Coincident with the appearance
of these new and mighty problems, perhaps in response to them, a new and
saner view of life itself was being developed by the world's thinkers,
new sciences were being evolved, correlated sciences; a psychology
making a truer analysis of human motives, impulses, of human
possibilities; an economics and a theory of government that took account
of this psychology, and of the vast changes applied science had made in
production and distribution. We lived in a new world, which we sought
to ignore; and the new education, the new viewpoint was in truth nothing
but religion made practical. It had never been thought practical before.
The motive that compelled men to work for humanity in science, in
medicine, in art--yes, and in business, if we took the right view of
it, was the religious motive. The application of religion was to-day
extending from the individual to society. No religion that did not fill
the needs of both was a true religion.

This meant the development of a new culture, one to be founded on the
American tradition of equality of opportunity. But culture was not
a weed that grew overnight; it was a leaven that spread slowly and
painfully, first inoculating a few who suffered and often died for it,
that it might gradually affect the many. The spread of culture implied
the recognition of leadership: democratic leadership, but still
leadership. Leadership, and the wisdom it implied, did not reside in the
people, but in the leaders who sprang from the people and interpreted
their needs and longings.... He went on to discuss a part of the
programme of the Citizens Union....

What struck me, as I laid down the typewritten sheets, was the
extraordinary resemblance between the philosophies of Hermann Krebs
and Theodore Watling. Only--Krebs's philosophy was the bigger, held
the greater vision of the two; I had reluctantly and rather bitterly to
admit it. The appeal of it had even reached and stirred me, whose task
was to refute it! Here indeed was somet