The Glenwood post., 1910-06-11


which separate the new nations one
from another and tho ''old" nations one
from another. There are in each case
very real differences between the new and
the old nation-difrerences both for good
and for evil; but in each case there is
the same ancestral history to reckon with,
the same type of civilization with its at
tendant benefits and shortcomings; and,
after the pioneer stages are passed. the
problems to be solved. in spite of superb
elal differences. are in their essence the
same; they are those that confront all
civilized peoples. not those that confront
peoples struggling from barbarism into
civilization.
So. when we speak of the death" of
a tribe. nation or a civilization. the term
may be used for either one or two totally
different processes the analogy with
what occurs In biological history being
complete. Certain tribes of savages, the
Tasmanians. for instance. and various lit
tie clans of American Indians, have within
the last century or two completely died
out: all of the individuals have perished.
leaving no descendants. and the blood has
disappeared. Certain other tribes of
Indians have tribes disappeared or
are now disappearing: but their blood
remains. being absorbed into the veins of
the white intruders, or Of the black men
introduced by these white intruders: 30
that in reality they are merely being
transformed into something absolutely
different from what they were.
A like wide diversity in fact may be
covered In the statement that a civiliza-
ton has died OUT
Phenomena That Puzzle.
In dealing, not with groups of human
beings In simple and primitive relations.
but with highly complex. highly special
lied. civilized. or semi-civilized societies
there Is need of great caution In drawing
analoEies with what has occurred in the
development Of the animal world. Yet
even In these cases II Is curious to sec
how some of the phenomena in the
growth and disappearance of these COM
plex. artificial groups of human beings
resemble what has happened in myriads
of instances in the history of life on this
planet.
Why do great artificial empires. whose
citizens are knit by bond of speech and
culture much more than by q bond of
blood. show periods of extraordinary
growth. and again of sudden or lingering
decay? In some cases we can answer
readily enough; in other cases we can
not as yet even guess what the proper
answer should be. II in any such case
the centrifugal forces overcome the CEN
tripetal, the nation will of course fly to
pieces. and the reason for its failure to
become dominant force IL patent to
every one. The minute that the spirit
WHICH ltS neallny 0eveIODment IN
local self-government, and In the antidote
to the dangers of an extreme centraliza-
ton. develops into mere particularism,
Into inability to combine effectively for
achievement of q common end. then 1t Ii
hopeless to expect great results. Poland
and certain republics of the western
hemisphere are the standard examples of
failure Of this kind: and the United States
would have ranked with them, and its
name would have become a byword of
derision. II the forces of union had not
triumphed In the civil war. So the
growth of soft luxury after 1t has reached
certain point becomes a national danger
patent to ALL Again, 1t needs but little of
the vision of seer to foretell what must
happen In any community II the average
woman ceases to become the mother of
family of healthy children, II the average
man loses the will and the power to work
up to old age and to fight whenever tho
need arises. II the homely, commonplace
virtues die out II strength of character
vanishes In graceful self-indulgence, II the
virile qualities atrophy. then the nation
has lost what no material prosperity can
Offset.
But there are plenty of other phenom-
ena wholly or partially inexplcable. 1t Is
easy to see why Rome trended downward
when great slave-tiled farms spread over
what had once been a countryside of
peasant proprietors when greed and lux
VI y aho schsudhty dlc ike AClOS INTO the
fiber of the upper classes, while the mass
Of the citizens grew to depend, not upon
their own exertions. but upon the state,
for their pleasures and their very liyeli-
hood. But this does not explain why the
forward movement stopped at different
times, so far as different matters were
concerned; at one time as regards litera-
ture. at another time as regards architec-
ture. at another time as regards city
building. We cannot even guess why the
springs of one kind of energy dried up
while there was yet no cessation of an
other kind.
Holland as an Example.
Take another and smaller instance. that
of Holland. For period covering q
Holland. like some of the Italian city
states at an earlier period, stood on the
dangerous heights of greatness beside ma
tions so vastly her superior in territory
and population as to make 1t inevitable
that sooner or later she must fall from the
glorious and perilous eminence to which
she had been raised by her own indomita
BILE soul Her fall came; 1t could not
have been indefinitely postponed: but II
came far quicker than 1t needed to come.
because of shortcomings on her part to
which both Great Britain and the limited
States would be wise to pay heed Her
government was singularly Ineffective tbo
decentralization being such as often To
permit the separatist, tho particuiarist,
spirit of the provinces to rob the central
authority of all efficiency This was bad
enough. But the fatal weakness was that
SO common in rich. peace-loving societies.
where men hate to think of war as pos.i-
BILE and try to Justify their own reluctance
to face 1t either by high-sounding moral
platitudes or else by q philosophy Of
short-sighted materialism. The Dutch
were very wealthy. They grew to be-
lieve that they could hire others to do
their fighting for them on land; and ON
sea. where they did their own lighting.
and fought very well. they refused in
time Of peace to mako ready fleets so ef-
f1cient as either to insure the Dutch
against the peace being broken or else
to give them the victory when war
came. To be opulent and unarmed 10 to
secure ease In the present at the almost
certain cost Of disaster in the future.
1t Is therefore easy to see why Holland
lost when she did her position among the
powers: but It In far more difficult to ex-
plain why at the same time there should
have come at least q partial loss of no~i.