Wausau pilot. [volume] (Wausau, Wis.) 1896-1940, 1910-07-12
RooSeVeIfS Napoleonic Demo
cracV.


cracy as if he were democrat. Prob
ably he thinks he is one. But his
democracy, like the democracy of Ma
poleon Bonaparte whom he ominouslv
resembles in personal characteristics
and unaccountable popularity, is of
that spurious kind which evolves en-
pires and breeds despots 1t is the
exact reverse of the American ideal
His speech in Egypt. and his supple
mentary one at Guildhcll, London.
which have been attributed to shirt
sleeve manners, are worse than that:
they are rightly denounced by the
Sacramento Bee as un-American.
The Bee calls them 'sblasphemy upon
the lips of an American citiZen,n for
stultifying the elemental and prim-
AIRY declaration of Americas great
proclamation of universal liberty.''
that governments derive their lust
powers from the consent of the gov
erned. And so interpreted, those
speeches are now justified by the Out
look, magazine with which Mr..
Roosevelt is editorially connected
and which faithfully reflects his Ma
poleonic democracy. LII its issue of
| June is, the Outlook asserts it's be-
lief that 1.-THE statement in the De-
| claration of Independence that gov
ernmentS derive their just powers
from the consent of the governed IS
| false"
The fact that Mr.. Roosevelt is A
contributing editor to the Outlook.
would not be enough in itself to make
him responsible for this categorical
denial of American democracy. Nor
can 1T be urged that he may have con-
| tributed the Outlook editorial from
which we quote; the author of that
editorial is evidently more candid or
| less sophisticated than Mr.. Roose-
velt. But this number of the Out
look appears to have been edited with
| the distinct purpose of exploiting and
| Justifying Mr.. RooSevelt's type of
| democracy. The purpose is so evil
dent that nothing short of a repudia-
| ton OF the blunt climax we quote
can make even the most friendly
reader suppose that it misrepresents
| Mr.. Roosevelt's views. An indiscreet
| generalization 1t may be, but not an
| inaccurate one. In the same issue of
| the Outlook a paper on ''the spirit of
| democracy" figures prominently. This
| is by DIR. Lyman Abbott, the editor
in chief, who finds that there is now
new American democracy, child of
two conflicting American democracies
OF the Nineteenth century-the ideal
istic of Hebrew and Puritan ancestry
through New England, and the
materialistic from Rome and France
through Virginia, which is now
struggling With the contradictory
| characteristics it inherits from its an
cestors. Also in this issue of the Out
look there is stenographic report of
an eXtemporaneouS speech by Mr.
| Roosevelt at Christiania, Norway
edited by him for publication but
| hitherto unpublished which, ex-
| pounding "the colonial policy of the
| United States, he defends the Subiu-
cation of the Philippines in terms
that would have delighted George III
and Lord North had they been uttered
| with reference to the American colon
les. Then there is the editorial
climax, which may or may not have
had Mr.. Roosevelt's approval, but
which seems to be correct generali-
Zation of his views: 1--WE believe
that the statement in the Declara-
ton of Independence that. govern
ments derive their just powers from
the consent of the governed is false :"
The unSoundneSs of that belief as a
political principle may be put aside:
to argue against it as a principle
might be called academic by the
Outlook, and sentimental, or "fool-
ish,' or indecent" by Mr.. Roose-
velt. Nor would it be worth while
to quote the words of Abraham Lin
coin and his compeers who founded
the Republican party, or the fathers
of the Republic itself, who, as Lin
coin said, conceived it in liberty and
dedicated it to the proposition that
all are created equal. To bark back
| to those men might be challenged as
an appeal from the youthful Ameri-
can democracy of the Twentieth CEN
| fury to the dead democracy of the
Nineteenth. But waving all such
sentimental and academic con-
| siderations, it behooyes the Ameri-
can people to consider the possibili-
ties under present circumstances of
Mr. Roosevelt's democracy as general
lied by the Outlook, with reference
to their own safety.
Following its assertion of the falsity
of the Declaration of independence
in so far as that document assigns
| Ullc Juob pONClS W Tile
consent of the governed, the Outlook
| adopts as railways, everywhere and
| eternally true" the ''principle en-
bodied in the declaration that gov
ernmentS exist for the benefit of the
governed Accordingly it reasons
| that whether the Filipinos consent
or do not consent to, the government
| exercised over them is not the funda-
l fs.1 Ion, h. e.. L.
| mental question is whether that gov
| eminent is exercised over them for
| their benefit" Although the partic-
| ular application is to the Philippines
the principle is generalized by the
| eternally true" Manifestly, then,
| with reference to American citizens
| themselves, the democracy of Roose-
and evident from his own recent
speeches, rests fundamentally upon
| the monarchical principle. Whether
| the American people "do or do not
| consent to the government exercised
question, but "the fundamental
question is whether that government
is exercised over them for their bene-
fit.n This is RooSeyelt's democracy,
| as it is the Outlook's as it is the EN-
peror Williams, as it was Napoleon's.
The sultanic impudence of Reese
| yelt's assumption in this respect
would surpaSs belief if the man him.
self had left room for a doubt. But
its danger is the prime consideration.
Declaring that he will lead his coun-
try to higher levels of democracy, and
| i'm his SuDprlatiyp eUOtiSm hpljevinU
it no doubt, he beckonS it on toward
the potter's field of every republic in
history that came under the influence
of a parsonage like himself. lie
would tear away the very basis of
this Republic, the rock-bottom prin-
ciple it rests upon, which is not that
British monarch might not govern
| us better for our own benefit than
j o. -.