NATIONALISM AND INTERNATIONALISM

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 46, 19 November 1918, Page 3

NATIONALISM AND INTERNATIONALISM

(By l Bernard Bosanquet, author of "Tho Philosopliical Theory! of tho State.") We see it so constantly; two ideals both excellent,'both indeed, necessary. Yet iu times of excitement they are set against each other, and instead of,-reinforcing *ach other, as of course they ought, they become "Like two rpent swimmers, that do cling together, And choke their art." It is heart-breaking to a student, whose business it is to see .connections, especially if he is under impeachment, however ho may resent it, that he has championed tho one to. the rejection of the other. And it is so simple. It is only to note how grow; now they push forth tho flower and fruit 'hat were in them all along. Our nation, our country our State—England say; what has it always stood for to those who loved it right? For more things than I can tell; but for these at least, honesty, 'justice;, liberty. Of "bourse, wo were stupid and ignorant, and often wo thought that we alone stood for theso; and, so thinking, wo sinned, and took their namo in vain. But for all that, wo stood for them; wo helped Greece, and admitted that we wronged America. "England has always uicant tho cause of humanity; so has every nation, so far as it saw and fought for a true good. All saw the good differently; in the house of humanity aro many mansions ;\but all saw some of it, not in themselves alone, and knew darkly that they wore there to see it and to champion it.

Well; (lungs are getting clearer now, and England begins to' mean, more definitely what it has always meant. Our best men—and the world's best men throughout our crusaders' league—tell us, "You must learn to accept limitations; to put up with things you'niay not like, and with more perhaps than you now anticipate." Of course, they are right, and those, if any, who think with me will follow them to the end. It is only to see and follow what England has always meant—honesty, justice, liberty; did we ever seriously mean that, they were for us and for nono else? Surely, never.

And now to bo Epglish means at least to belong to the British Commonwealth. It means, that is. all it ever did mean, and that,''too; not less, but so infinitely more. To be Australian, too, and Canadian, and all of them; they too mean to belong to tho British Commonwealth, and they too mean all they meant before, and more, infinitely mor6.

And the further vistas open out, all expansions of the sajiie meaning; to belong to tho British "Commonwealth will mean belonging to the League of Humanity; tho great values and qu.Vikut. are to display .themselves and to show their full bearing for mankind. Is all this hostile to "the State"; Where did tho question come from, "What is man's soul for?" and the answer, "To live well"? From the' first great book on the State, did it not? Not the soul of Greek or Jew, but the soul of man-." Sovereignty will find it hard to accept limitations? Hard, very likely; Sovereignty is there to do hard things. To find your, own soul, in 'helping the soul of man; both of them aro hard things; but easier together, surely, than apart. Arc they in antagonism? i think not.—"Westminster Gazette."