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

CRITICISM OF IDEALIST THEORY 755
In sum, then, the idealist theory of the State takes no
account of the feet that ethical obligations may conflict,
that an individual may owe allegiance to more than one
association, and that he may with good reason insist
that he has the right to decide for himself to which of the
different claims which, in times of emergency, may be
made upon him, he should give heed. In the face of this
right, the theory assumes without question that the State
is entitled to coerce individuals who decide to disown its
authority, and it assumes that such coercion is not only
legitimate in theory, but is bound to be successful in fact.
THE RIGHT or REVOLT. In making this assumption
it falls into the same error as that to which I have already
pointed in criticism of Hobbes's absolutist theory; 1
it
overlooks, that is to say, the right of revolt. There are
certain oppressions and interferences, rather than tolerate
which, people, as. to die. When they
history shows, have been prepared
are in this mood, they will revolt.
Their revolt may be either against the exercise of the
State's claims, or against the State's denial of their right
to choose between conflicting claims.
It is this factor of revolt that renders it impossible for
the State to be absolute in anything but name. So long as
people have the will and the power to deny its jurisdiction
on any particular issue, it is not, in fact, absolute; ad
the fact that on occasion they have had both the will
and the power convicts the theory of falsehood.
Were it not so, were the absolutist theory founded on fact,
the State would be entitled to inflict whatever arbitrary
humiliation upon its members it chose, and
morally bound to acquiesce without
State, for instance, to decree that everyj
be branded with the letter "T" on
ground that this was for the State's {
arisen "of which", in Dr. Bosanqu
constitutional methods is the so
* See Chapter XIII, pp.