ose in it. . . . And if
a single subject or group of subjects be once admitted to discussion,
ere long the habit of discussion comes to be established, the sacred
charm of use and wont to be dissolved. "Democracy," it has been said
in modern times, "is like the grave; it takes, but it does not give."
The same is true of "discussion." Once effectually submit a subject to
that ordeal, and you can never withdraw it again; you can never again
clothe it with mystery, or fence it by consecration; it remains forever
open to free choice, and exposed to profane deliberation.[3]

The strength of custom or established authority lies in prompt and
undivided action against external enemies; but its weakness lies in its
excessive cost to the interests within. And when there is leisure and
security for deliberation, the policy and organization of society must
respond at once to the claims of these interests. Development is now
due to a moral rather than to a mechanical principle; that is, the
surviving type of life is due not to pressure and elimination from
without, but to a provident concern that emanates from within. There
is a deliberate intention to promote survival, those interests alone
being restricted or suppressed which do not comply with this intention.
There evolves not a selected group of strong individuals, but a strong
community, strong because both full of life, or rich {134} in
incentive, and also harmonious. And within such a community the
strength of individuals lies not in a sheer power to resist the strain
of competition, but in the rational and moral capacity to utilize the
resources of the entire community. Through moral organization the
strong are made stronger at the same time that the weak are made strong.

Strictly speaking, there is only one internal principle of progress,
namely, _rationality_. By rationality, in this connection, I mean the
knowledge of the good, and the correction of existing usages through
which it is accidentally or wantonly frustrated. If fulfilment be the
motive of life, and maximum fulfilment be the good, then any existing
usage stands condemned when it is proved to involve unnecessary
sacrifice. And such usages will be condemned, and in the long run
rejected, wherever there is an opportunity for self-assertion and
discussion among the various interests concerned. But such correction
may be initiated either by a positive or a negative motive. It may
result either from