Might Is Right
Page 13
Whatever weapon your Enemy possesses, must be duplicated, or improved upon by you. If it suits him to challenge battle in open front, be sure and ambush him in the flank; or straightaway make a hidden detour to and charge him in the rear. It is your chief business to delude him, deceive him, decoy him, out-general him, if you can. If moral scruples and fear of “what the world will say,” prevents you from doing this, then you were born to subordination; and you had better surrender; for you can never hope to vanquish. You must be born again.
“Over an open grave” ever lies the road to success. In “the worlds broad field of battle,” every man is a combatant; and to be a successful combatant, he must not only be calculating, cool-headed, and brave but possessed of merciless strategy, a stout heart, a strong arm, and quiet indomitable determination.
Even the Siamese twins waged a life-long civil war. Man, as we have proved, is the King of the Great Carnivores. Homo Homini. By heredity and by training, all carnivores are instinctively strategic in their hunt-operations. They lie in wait for their prey, when they cannot capture it by other methods; but they do not hesitate to hunt in the open, if it pleases them to do so. Great animals (whether man or brute) never operate in strict accordance with prearranged rules of procedure. If they did do so, they could never prosper — and would die of hunger. Their greatness lies in springing surprises — in doing exactly what their antagonists (or intended quarry) don’t expect them to do — in being beyond and above all moral measurements whatsoever.
Genius in a first-class commander is always exemplified, not by his “goodness,” but by the originality and aggressive boldness of his pitiless tactics. When he is thought to be in full retreat, he whirls around and annihilates his pursuers. When his adversaries are preparing to give him a hot reception, “he foldeth his tents like the Arabs,” and silently wendeth away.
When it is whispered he will embattle his defensive legions on the frontiers of the Fatherland; he bridges the Rhine and bounds upon Paris with tooth and claw. When to invaders, he is expected to abandon Moscow and retire; he burns it to the ground; and while his foemen (imbedded in snow and ice) are freezing to death; he shells them with his field batteries. When wiselings predict that he will seize Gaul and establish a Colonial Dictatorship; he fords the Rubicon, marches on Rome and throttles the Law. When his nation’s foemen are embattled on Italian plains, he crosses the Punic foam and carries the war into Africa. When he is reported to be assaulting Babylonian Ramparts he digs a new channel for “the River” and writeth “mene mene rekel upharisin” on Balshazaar’s walls. When defenders believe he will march up the Slope with drums and banners gay he quietly scales the Heights of Abraham (in the night) and captures Quebec. When western diplomats think he is about to pounce on Constantinople; he runs Baldwin engines through the Great Wall and stuffs the title deeds of the moribund Chinese empire into his overcoat pocket.
5
The man-animal can never be rendered absolutely “moral” because by nature he is as full of wiles as a fox or a Jew. Should he insanely endeavor to abandon his predatory propensities, then he immediately begins to degenerate and ultimately becomes a feeble, diseased, ghost-ridden monstrosity, a horror to look at. Therefore those who conscientiously try to become “honest” and “good” are permitting themselves to be sacrificed — as burnt offerings on Idol Alters.
If all men were scrupulously honest, then honesty might be all right (although even that is questionable) but if one per cent are deliberately dishonest, then it is assuredly all wrong. Under such resultant circumstances the ‘ninety and nine’ actually become victims of ‘the one.’ Honest merchants are ruined by dishonest merchants, honest commanders out-maneuvered by dishonest commanders, honest workmen displaced by dishonest workmen, honest judges undermined by dishonest judges, and honest nations reduced to beggary and vassalage by dishonest nations.
Honesty is merely a policy — under given circumstances “the best policy” — nothing more. In all departments of human effort, honesty is used as a cloak for real designs; just as a wood, a ravine, or a stretch of rising ground serves (in campaigning) to hide squadrons deploying for flank movements.
Why then do parents inoculate the plastic minds of their children, with false conceptions of moral conduct, when they themselves know (from personal experience) that all such conceptions are a positive handicap in the race for Wealth and Power. What a witless procedure, to teach Ideals (at home, at school, and at college), that we know in our hearts, are thorough-going Lies, and then expect nobility of personal conduct to be the resultant? Turn out into the world a young man well trained in ‘moral principles’ and the chances are ninety-nine to one against him.
Indeed the majority of men never win success until they are middle aged; until they have had time to slough off the false Idealisms, they began the world with. Un-naturalism has never yet bred a race of heroes and never will. All great Races are predatory.
The ‘hungry-to-eat-a-man,’ tiger knows that if he first growls out his intentions, and then openly bounds up to his intended victim, he will (most probably) get an explosive bullet neatly lodged in his cerebrum. Consequently he ambushes himself in the shadow of a rock or behind a log, and leaps upon his ‘dinner’ with varying results. It is the same — exactly the same, among carnivorous bipeds. A few of them are tigers, hungry-to-eat-a-man, and the rest are — tiger’s-meat, hungry to be eaten. The fact is that Civilization’s moralisms are wholly ultra-rational, fundamentally un-natural and utterly inoperative. Christian principles and Natural principles mutually antagonize one another. Nature is Anti-Christ. Darwinism is the mortal foe of Hebraism.
Nature’s command is, “Be egoist, possess the earth and fight it out.” Jusus insists, “Be altruistic, abandon the world, and love your enemies.” Darwin proclaims, ‘All ye are rival carnivores! Be strong therefore, and bold, and fear — Nothing.’ Christ teaches, “All ye are dearly beloved brethren. Be obedient therefore and “good” and fear — Ghosts.” Jesus urges his devotees to pray for deliverance. Darwin gently intimates his heartfelt belief in the Law of Battle. ‘He who will not work, neither shall he eat’ is the Apostolic pronounciamento. “He who will not fight, neither can he eat” is Nature’s savage logic.
‘It is more blest to give than to receive’ is the vacuous baby-prattle of the Pastor. It is more blest to capture then to receive, is ordinary Common Sense.
He who denies man’s right to exploit man, impeaches, not the conduct of man, but the order of nature.
Who then is right — the Anglo-Saxon or the Israelite? The scientist or the oratorical wonder-worker? The Western thinker or the Eastern dreamer? Which is the True Faith: — Japhet’s logic or Shem’s Fabulism?
6
Common-sense provides no precise solution of Right or Wrong. “All moral philosophy is false and vain” for man is unlimited. In the realm of Ethics, most modern wiselings are fanatical and unreasonable bigots. They really believe that Ethical Principles are as a house built on a rock; whereas “the House” is an unfounded hypothesis, and “the Rock” non existent.
Good and Evil liveth only in men’s minds. They are not Realities but shadows — credos — ghosts — and only the maddest of the mad worship their own Shade.
What is Right — what is Wrong? These elemental interrogatories have been asked in every age, and every age formulates replies to suit itself. De facto Right and Wrong are no more than arbitrary algebraic signs, representing hypnagogic phantasies. They are mere symbols emblematic of belated fragments of insolent ecclesiastical crudities. In nature, all developments are essentially one and the same phenomenon infinitely transfused and intermingled. Good and Evil are human inventions, born of human foolery, narrowness, and short-sightedness. The organic brain is far too small and too contemptible, to completely comprehend what nature is driving at. What appears to be wrong to us, may be right in nature, and vice versa.
We can no more establish an infallible system of ethics, than we can establish infallible
systems of religion, philosophy or politics. All the Universe is in a state of flux, and men are but a swarm of querulous, heat-evolved insectivores, living aimlessly on the top of a floating cork, that whirls and darts and rolls over and over and over; amid the scum and froth and slime of a boiling, bubbling Alembic. Within his own sphere individual man is, and ought to be the supreme determinant. Outside of that sphere he knows absolutely nothing — and philosophy less than nothing.
As for the prophets of Futurity, from the days of Gautama, Bel, and Ishtar, down to Christ, Mahomet, Peter, Luther, Calvin, and Brigham Young; they have been strident “deceivers all” working on the emotional credulity of women — and doltish rabbles. A false teacher may be earnestly and honorably sincere in al his theoria, but that does not necessarily demonstrate intrinsic divinity. Many false prophets have been murdered (because of their opinions) besides Jesus of Nazareth, Judea; and Smith of Nauvoo, Illinois. The execution of the founder of Mormonism (inspired by political clamor) is an exact parallel to the execution of the founder of Christianity (inspired by priestly clamor). The point is — neither shooting nor crucifixion are satisfactory proofs of divinity or probity.
Right and Wrong, like Up and Down, East and West, are relative terms, without any fixed or finite meaning. What is good for the goose is not always good for the gander. Newfoundland lies East form Chicago, but West from Berlin. All depends upon the point of view. Consequently what may be ‘right’ in one age may, in another age, be wholly ‘wrong’.
In ancient Rome it was considered the height of impiety, heresy, and treason, for free born citizens to adore a circumcised Asiatic; but in modern Europe and America, it is considered pious and fashionable and highly commendable to do so.
Even what is right to one man, under one set of circumstance, may be utterly wrong to the same man under a different set of circumstances. Cromwell as colonel of the Ironsides, thought regal absolutism the essence of all diabolism: but as President of the Republic, he defended it (in himself) as — ‘a crowning mercy.’
When Government soldiers shoot down American “rebels” that is called “a glorious victory” but when Government soldiers shot Colonial rebels during the Red Flag Riots (inaugural of the War of Independence) that is conventionally labeled ‘wicked massacre.’
When a band of rich men plunder the poor, that is business shrewdness, practical statesmanship, of financial integrity; but if bands of poor men plunder the rich, that is larceny, burglary, highway robbery, and rebellion. When the Anglo-Saxon invader is cooped-up and slaughtered in India, that is mutiny and red-handed murder; but when he mows down the sepoys in battalions, or fastens them to the muzzles of cannon and blows them into ribbons, that is upholding the majesty of Law and of Order. When Cuban guerillas kill Spaniards, all American papers describe it as “war” but when the Spaniards retaliate and kill the Cubans, that is ‘horrible butcheries by General Weyler.’ Spanish cut-throats are glorified (in Spain) as dashing heroes, and the Cuban patriots described as brigands, outlaws, and brutal Negro murderers. All depends upon the point of view.
Victory sanctifies. In the realm of abstract Ethics there is no other Fact upon which the plain man can finally make up his mind. As far as Sociology is concerned, ethical principles are decided by the shock of contending armies. Right has always been emblazoned on the standards of Victory, and wrong on the draggled rags of Lost Causes.
“When Brennus, commander of the ancient Gauls, attacked the Clusians a Roman ambassador protested, asking ‘what offense have the Clusians given you?’ Brennus laughed at the question, and replied: — ‘Their offense is the refusal they make to divide the country with me. It is the same offense that the people of Alba, the Fidenians and Ardeans gave you: and lately the Vienans, the Falisci, and the Volsci. To avenge yourselves, you took up arms and washed your injury in their blood: you subdued the people, pillaged their houses, and laid waste their cities and their countries: and in this you did no wrong or injustice: you obeyed the most ancient laws, which gave to the Strong the possessions of the Weak; the sovereign law of nature, that begins with the gods and ends with the animals. Suppress therefore O Romans, your pity for the Clusians. Compassion is yet unknown to the Gauls: do not inspire them with that sentiment, lest they should have compassion upon those you oppress.”
History is full of similar logic. Brutus for instance, who poindered Julius Cæser (his friend and benefactor), has always been held up to public estimation as “the noblest Roman of them all;” whereas Booth, who slew Abraham Lincoln, is everywhere and at all times, spoken of as a malevolent assassin.
The operation of the ‘Law’ itself, is also an apt illustration of the paradoxical nature of Right and Wrong. Citizens who break the written law are hauled before judges, inquisitorially cross-examined, and chained for long years in State dungeons: but the statesmen and legislators may sell their country for gold, and break every statute law and constitution in the land without the least fear of legal intimidation. Indeed the approbation of the State, is all-sufficient nowadays to sanctify any crime — even the most abominable. In this particular (of granting absolution) the State is gradually supplanting and absorbing the Church.
(The Protestors of the past demolished the infallible imperialism of clericals over religio-individual thought; and the Protestantism of the future must demolish the insolent dictatorship of Politicals over private judgment, and the development of Personality.)
All ‘good christian men’ regard the judicial murder of Jesus as a crime of the blackest dye, but they chant church-paeans of joy over Jael’s murder of Sisera, and the assassination of Eglon King of Moab, etc. It is not very long ago since Catholic and Protestant idolators, mutually roasted each other alive “for the glory of God and the uplifting of his Holy Name.” Each side proclaimed themselves right, with rack and thumbscrew, and other little instruments of persuasion.
Protestants still think it a crime and a scandal to worship the mother of their god; but Catholics consider it right and proper to deify the Hebrew maid, who remained a maid (what a paradox?) after borning a son.
To eat pork and beans is frightfully wicked for a Jew, but passable for a cultured Bostonian. To drink whiskey is iniquity to a Turk, but exhilarating to a Scotlander. Roast beef is a goodly dish to and English ‘barbarian,’ but famine-stricken orthodox Hindoos die rather than taste thereof. Dueling is honorable in some countries but dishonorable in others. So also pugilism, private revenge, tyrannicide, bull-fighting, regicide, and warfare. The Quakers, Anarchists, and Young Men’s Christian Associations, are unceasingly railing against ‘war and all its horrors,’ whereas there are not a few benighted infidels, (including the author) who regard war as nature’s Greatest Prophylactic.
Polygamy is “wrong” in England and America, but monogamy is righteous, and polyandry “right” (being licensed by the state); whereas in Eastern Europe and among all “savage” tribes, polyandry is iniquity; polygamy — blessedness; and monogamy — vileness.
In ancient Lacadæmon stealing was considered highly meritorious if not found out, as in modern America. Solon places theft among the professions, and he knew what he was doing. Aristotle includes ‘robbery’ among the different kinds of hunting. (There was no hypocrisy about these classical authors. They called a spade a spade, and searched Nature (not libraries) for facts. Herein is the secret of their genius and undying renown.) If a man steals a horse or a steer, he is lynched (if captured) as an ‘enemy of society’ but if he steals the value of a million horses by wrecking a savings bank; he is straightaway made a Senator or Knighted. It is a criminal act to burglarize another man’s house, but it’s “enlarging our markets” to steal Texas from the Mexicans; Alsace and Lorianne from the French; Egypt from the Turks; or Madagascar from the Hovas. The fact is, that all the greatest statesmen and kings have been (most commendably) the Higher Criminals. Wars are marauding expeditions and all kingships and property originates in Warfare.
Slay one man (in order to rob him) and you are a
murderer. Slay a million men (in order to rob them) and you are a renowned general. Annex from one person and you are a felonious ruffian, but annex from the whole population, or from rival nations, and you are made Chancellor of the Exchequer; Chairman of Ways and Means; or decorated with the grand cross of the Legion of Honor. Maraud direct for your own profit, and you are a heinous rascal, counterfeiter, forger, bandit; but maraud indirect, ‘on public service only’ and you are proclaimed “our opulent fellow-citizen and distinguished patriot.”
Take from the peasantry even an infinitesimal proportion of their petty property, and they will lynch you as a lazy thievish tramp; but take two-thirds of their harvests by law and rule (rent, interest or tax assessments) and they will turn out in the middle of the night, to cheer you in your steam-horsed palace car, as it whirls through their ‘God forsaken’ villages.
To “steal the goose from off the common” is awful rascality, but “to steal the common from the goose” is splendid statesmanship. Men who write down Holy Fables in books are called Apostles of God, or canonized as saints; but men who tell regulation lies in the ordinary course of business are popularly supposed to be wicked and ungodly scamps. The delightful story-teller who prints a pleasing yarn, coined out of his alcoholic imagination, is known as a gifted author: but the plain blunt writer who interprets Facts and proclaims them openly, is an incarnation of iniquity, madness, blasphemy — a veritable Apollyon, Satan. “What is one man’s meat is another man’s poison.”
Again, he who prevaricates in a pulpit for ‘the Glory of God’ is everywhere known as a Doctor of Divinity, but he who bears false witness in an ordinary Court of Justice, is universally condemned as a perjured villain.
It is questionable if there is one codified crime that would be considered a crime in every land on earth. Just as there are a thousand different icons and ideals of god, so there are a thousand mutually repellant views of Right and Wrong. Every climate, every nation, every community, has its own notion of what Virtue means. Moral Dogmas are manufactured to suit the occasion, and are always used as instruments of intimidation. They are not necessarily in harmony with, or based upon Nature: except in the sense that Fraud is natural. Biologically and historically considered — ‘there is nothing either Right of Wrong, but thinking makes it so.’