able to do this than an uncultivated
mind, and a man specially qualified than one who is not. From these two
last truths flow many other consequences, which, if the reader deigns to
reflect on them, he will have no trouble in defining.
Paris 1881.
NOTES:
[Footnote 0001: Page XLVI of the Introduction to the Edition by Robert
Lafont in 1986 by "Les Origines de la France Contemporaine".]
[Footnote 0002: From "HISTORIES", BOOK VI. 3. 3-4. 1 FROM LOEB'S
CLASSICAL LIBRARY, HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS.]
THE ANCIENT REGIME
PREFACE BY THE AUTHOR: ON POLITICAL IGNORANCE AND WISDOM.
In 1849, being twenty-one years of age, and an elector, I was very
much puzzled, for I had to nominate fifteen or twenty deputies, and,
moreover, according to French custom, I had not only to determine what
candidate I would vote for, but what theory I should adopt. I had to
choose between a royalist or a republican, a democrat or a conservative,
a socialist or a bonapartist; as I was neither one nor the other, nor
even anything, I often envied those around me who were so fortunate
as to have arrived at definite conclusions. After listening to various
doctrines, I acknowledged that there undoubtedly was something wrong
with my head. The motives that influenced others did not influence me; I
could not comprehend how, in political matters, a man could be governed
by preferences. My assertive countrymen planned a constitution just like
a house, according to the latest, simplest, and most attractive plan;
and there were several under consideration--the mansion of a marquis,
the house of a common citizen, the tenement of a laborer, the barracks
of a soldier, the kibbutz of a socialist, and even the camp of savages.
Each claimed that his was "the true habitation for Man, the only one
in which a sensible person could live." In my opinion, the argument was
weak; personal taste could not be valid for everyone. It seemed to me
that a house should not be built for the architect alone, or for itself,
but for the owner who was to live in it. Referring to the owner for his
advice, that is submitting to the French people the plans of its future
habitation, would evidently be either for show or just to deceive them;
since the question, obviously, was put in such a manner that it provided
the answer in advance. Besides, had the people been allowed to reply
in all liberty, their response was in any case not of much value since
France was scar
|