entury of comparatively peaceful life the
co-operative principle has once more laid hold on the imagination of the
Irish townsman and the Irish countryman. The communal character is still
preserved. It still wills to express itself in its external aspects in
a communal civilization, in an economic brotherhood. That movement alone
provides in Ireland for the aristocratic and democratic elements in
Irish character. It brings into prominence the aristocracy of character
and intelligence which it is really the Irish nature to love, and its
economic basis is democratic. A large part of our failure to achieve
anything memorable in Ireland is due to the fact that, influenced by the
example of our great neighbors, we reversed the natural position of the
aristocratic and democratic elements in the national being. Instead of
being democratic in our economic life, with the aristocracy of character
and intelligence to lead us, we became meanly individualistic in our
economics and meanly democratic in leadership. That is, we allowed
individualism--the devilish doctrine of every man for himself--to be the
keynote of our economic life; where, above all things, the general good
and not the enrichment of the individual should be considered. For our
leaders we chose energetic, common-place types, and made them represent
us in the legislature; though it is in leadership above all that we
need, not the aristocracy of birth, but the aristocracy of character,
intellect, and will. We had not that aristocracy to lead us. We chose
instead persons whose ideas were in no respect nobler than the
average to be our guides, or rather to be guided by us. Yet when the
aristocratic character appeared, however imperfect, how it was adored!
Ireland gave to Parnell--an aristocratic character--the love which
springs from the deeps of its being, a love which it gave to none other
in our time.

With our great neighbors what are our national characteristics were
reversed. They are an individualistic race. This individualism has
expressed itself in history and society in a thousand ways. Being
individualistic in economics, they were naturally democratic in
politics. They have a genius for choosing forcible average men as
leaders. They mistrust genius in high places, Intensely individualistic
themselves, they feared the aristocratic character in politics. They
desired rather that general principles should be asserted to encircle
and keep safe their own national