GUIDE TO THE PHILOSOPHY 1938 - 1947.pdf - Rare Books at ...

736 ETHtCS AND POLITICS: THE MODERNS
society which alone enables a man to develop his full
nature, and that it is only, therefore, as a member of
society that he. can be really free; we may add that
the freedom of the castaway is a purely abstract freedom,
since, though he is at liberty to do whatever he
pleases, there is practically nothing that it pleases him
to do. But the admission of the truth of these propositions
does not entail the omnipotence of the State. The State
exists for individuals; individuals do not exist for the State.
Liberty has meaning only for the individual, and the welfare
of the State has neither meaning nor value except
in terms of the welfare of the individuals who compose the
State. The State, in short, is not an end in itself, it is a
means to the well-being of men and women.
Once this is realized, it follows that any theory
of the
State which admits the possibility that the welfare of the
State may be achieved, apart from or at the expense of
ttip tinppinftt of individuals, and justifies its admission on
the ground that the personality of the State contains and
transcends that of die individual, is, in effect, putting
the cart before the hone. Nor is it legitimate to meet this
criticism, as supporters of the theory do, with the contention
that it is not possible for the State to promote its
welfare at the expense of that of the individual, or even
to tyrannize over the individual, since the welfare of the
State v that of the individual, and the will of the State,
even when tyrannizing, is the will of the individuals who
are the victims of the tyranny. A decision does not become
my personal decision because it is carried against my will
ami vote by an association of which I am a member. The
fact that a man is a member of a society with which his
will is on a particular issue in disagreement, doe* not make
him the victim of a social miracle whereby his will is transformed
into its direct opposite, any more than, when a
minority is outvoted on the committee of a cricket dub, the
decision ofthe committee represents the will ofthe minority.
Nor is there any substance in a distinction between a
44
real" will erf which I may be unaware and a so-called