FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   >>  
need scarcely keep up. If it is admitted, the Suffragists have not merely to awaken an indifferent, but to convert a hostile majority. ***** II. ON CLEANLINESS IN EDUCATION On re-reading my protest, which I honestly think much needed, against our heathen idolatry of mere ablution, I see that it may possibly be misread. I hasten to say that I think washing a most important thing to be taught both to rich and poor. I do not attack the positive but the relative position of soap. Let it be insisted on even as much as now; but let other things be insisted on much more. I am even ready to admit that cleanliness is next to godliness; but the moderns will not even admit godliness to be next to cleanliness. In their talk about Thomas Becket and such saints and heroes they make soap more important than soul; they reject godliness whenever it is not cleanliness. If we resent this about remote saints and heroes, we should resent it more about the many saints and heroes of the slums, whose unclean hands cleanse the world. Dirt is evil chiefly as evidence of sloth; but the fact remains that the classes that wash most are those that work least. Concerning these, the practical course is simple; soap should be urged on them and advertised as what it is--a luxury. With regard to the poor also the practical course is not hard to harmonize with our thesis. If we want to give poor people soap we must set out deliberately to give them luxuries. If we will not make them rich enough to be clean, then emphatically we must do what we did with the saints. We must reverence them for being dirty. ***** III. ON PEASANT PROPRIETORSHIP I have not dealt with any details touching distributed ownership, or its possibility in England, for the reason stated in the text. This book deals with what is wrong, wrong in our root of argument and effort. This wrong is, I say, that we will go forward because we dare not go back. Thus the Socialist says that property is already concentrated into Trusts and Stores: the only hope is to concentrate it further in the State. I say the only hope is to unconcentrate it; that is, to repent and return; the only step forward is the step backward. But in connection with this distribution I have laid myself open to another potential mistake. In speaking of a sweeping redistribution, I speak of decision in the aim, not necessarily of abruptness in the means. It is not at all too late to restore an app
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   >>  



Top keywords:
saints
 

cleanliness

 

godliness

 
heroes
 
practical
 
resent
 

important

 

forward

 

insisted

 

details


touching
 
PEASANT
 

PROPRIETORSHIP

 

England

 

necessarily

 

abruptness

 

possibility

 

ownership

 

distributed

 

reverence


deliberately
 

people

 

restore

 
luxuries
 

emphatically

 
decision
 
repent
 

thesis

 

Socialist

 

unconcentrate


return

 

property

 
Trusts
 
Stores
 

concentrate

 
concentrated
 

backward

 

mistake

 

speaking

 

sweeping


stated

 

redistribution

 
potential
 

distribution

 
connection
 
effort
 

argument

 

reason

 
chiefly
 

possibly