BENEDICT DE SPINOZA: Theological-Political Treatise

Afreestate
understand nothing. Surely no one could ¢nd anything else in such an
exemplum than a desire to emulate or at least to extol it
[14] In order, then, for loyalty to be valued rather than £attery, and for
sovereigns to retain their full authority and not be forced to surrender to
sedition, freedom of judgment must necessarily be permitted and people
must be governed in such a way that they can live in harmony, even though
they openly hold di¡erent and contradictory opinions. We cannot doubt
that this is the bestway of ruling, and has the least disadvantages, since it is
the one most in harmony with human nature. In a democratic state (which
is the one closest to the state of nature), all men agree, as we showed above,
to act ^ but not to judge or think ^ according to the common decision.
That is, because people cannot all have the same opinions, they have
agreed that the view which gains the most votes should acquire the force of
a decision, reserving always the right to recall their decision whenever they
should ¢nd a better course. The less people are accorded liberty of judgment,
consequently, the further they are from the most natural condition
and, hence, the more oppressive the regime.
[15] Examples are easily available to o¡er further con¢rmation [of our
thesis that] that no disadvantages stem from such freedom, something
which cannot be suppressed simply by the authority of the sovereign but
which can, of itself, readily keep men from injuring each other, even where
they maintain di¡erent opinions. I do not need to go far to ¢nd instances of
this. Amsterdam is a ¢ne example of a city which enjoys the fruits of this 246
liberty, with its great growth being the admiration of all nations. In this
£ourishing republic, this superb city, people of every sect and nation live
together in the greatest harmony. Before they make a loan to someone, they
just want to know whether he is rich or poor and whether he is known to
behave with good faith or deceitfully. For the rest, religion or sect does not
come into it because this does not help to win or lose a case before a court,
and no sect is so hugely resented by others that its members (provided they
harm no one and give each man his due and live honestly) 4 are not defended
by the public authority and under the protection of the magistracy.
On the other hand, when the controversy about religion between the
Remonstrants and Counter-Remonstrants began to agitate o⁄ce-holders
4 Justinian, Institutes, 1.1.
257