But is this liberty indefinite, or are there bounds within which it must be confined? If there are, by what signs will we know when these bounds have been crossed or when the disputes degenerate into dangerous factions? What will the consequences be? Such are the points we propose to elucidate at a time in which abuse of words, anarchical doctrines, and political absurdities are growing into an intense force to lead the incautious astray and justify enormous crimes.
In an already constituted society, the conflict of opinions can never be about the truly essential foundations of society, that is to say, about the agreements and laws that secure individual guarantees. For all men feel deeply embedded in their being the need to preserve, by all possible
[print edition page 89]
means, their security, their liberty, their property, because they left the forests and formed societies only with this preeminent goal. The unanimity of this feeling is thus immutable, and dissent will be only the most offensive degradation or the most foolish ignorance. Thus, all opinion that openly or deceitfully attacks it is criminal by its nature.
Nor can there be differences over clearly constitutional laws, which are, according to Lanjuinais, “those which, created or agreed to by the representatives of the nation or by the nation itself, determine the nature, the extent, the limits of public powers, so that this code is truly the supreme law and has a special character of permanence that distinguishes it from ordinary laws.” The permanence that must be an essential characteristic of the constitution is contrary to discussion that tends to change it, for otherwise society would never have that firm and permanent repose indispensable for achieving its goals, and the continual fluctuation would end in destroying society and making it the prisoner of tyranny.
Let us note that not all the articles of a constitution are constitutional, but rather only those that sanction national independence, the form of government, the division, limitation, and sphere of public powers. Such sanctions are a sanctuary where no one should go except to worship the protector deity of societies. Even when a better worked out constitution can be imagined, the one that exists, established by the vote and respect of the nation, will always be preferable, and the difficulties of the change can never be counterbalanced by whatever advantages are imagined, for a new constitution has been written only on the ruins and ashes of the nation that dictates it; and as long as the guarantees are respected, as long as the laws are observed and the constitution gives security to some and energy to others, the people are happy, they will live in tranquility, and they will not remember the terrible right of resistance, whose use should be so rare, it is even more unusual for altering the constitution, and so that resistance more often has restoration as its object than change. The classes that actually make up the nation will never risk their fate and well-being to the setbacks of an unfortunate commutation. Such desires are from those who, without industry or love of work, pursued relentlessly by poverty and provoked by fierce ambition, base their hopes on the upheaval and ruin of the patria.
The very broad field of combat is in the methods of administration; in the management, investment, and good use of public revenues; in the
[print edition page 90]
application of political economy to the needs of the nation; in the rules and procedures of justice; in the plans for education and national instruction; in the great and various matters that the legislative body examines; . . . the political subjects that, in a free system, can be clarified by public writings cannot be enumerated; in them each one can and must deploy the talents and knowledge that nature and his work have afforded him, keeping what is most useful and refuting the errors of his opponents. The beneficial truths are deepened and refined in these disputes; and if one wishes to give them the name of parties, these are necessary and advantageous for the people, for even those that are incorrect are useful at least occasionally so that the truth can be recognized and triumph. A good government does not remain indifferent amidst violence, and it makes good use of the enlightenment that is spread, impartially chooses the better, and stimulates the discussion necessary for success.
But going beyond this well-defined territory, and when heightened and base passions are substituted for the calm and sincerity of discussion, inasmuch as they cannot openly and impudently attack those primary and essential aims, they seek detours and tunnels to undermine them; they are not content with reasons; they take hold of seduction, convert error, the absurd, to practice; they set out as their sole aim that the inventions and cunning means of injustice take root. Then the old resentments are unearthed, the bitterness of the struggle is inflamed, hatred explodes like a volcano, vomits slanders and calumnies, intellectual darkness grows, and they do not consider the nature of the methods they use to destroy and annihilate the opponent. Unfortunate nation that carries in its breast these frenzied sons who, cutting each other to pieces, break and crush the nation. These are the true parties or factions of whom the dignified Hume justly says,
As much as legislators and founders of states ought to be honoured and respected among men, as much ought the founders of sects and factions to be detested and hated; because the influence of faction is directly contrary to that of laws. Factions subvert government, render laws impotent, and beget the fiercest animosities among men of the same nation, who ought to give mutual assistance and protection to each other. And what should render the founders of parties more odious is, the difficulty of extirpating these weeds, when once they have taken root in any state. They naturally propagate themselves
[print edition page 91]
for many centuries, and seldom end but by the total dissolution of that government in which they are sown. They are, besides, plants which grow most plentifully in the richest soil; and though absolute governments be not wholly free from them, it must be confessed that they rise more easily and propagate themselves faster in free governments, where they always infect the legislature itself, which alone could be able, by the steady application of rewards and punishments, to eradicate them.
In truth, if, in a free government, the factions come to grow and progress to that extreme, one can infer that its agents are either imbeciles or depraved, because every constituted society has in its authorities, in its laws and tribunals, means that are quite sufficient to stifle at their outset and root out the factions that disrupt the order. No excuse can vindicate a government that sees and acquiesces to a faction that increases greatly because the government acquiesced to it, for if it had not, the faction would have perished when it was first arising.
But to what must this willingness to oblige be attributed? What interest can the government have in pretending not to notice destructive factions? This is clear to anyone who knows that in free governments there must be a persistent conflict between them and their subjects. The power exercised by men, no matter how broad it might be, always brings with it an irresistible drive to extend itself more and more, becomes annoyed with the obstacles that the law puts up against it, and, like a torrent, constantly pushes and hollows out the dikes in which the general will keeps it contained, always watchful and ready to invade if there is no resistance. As it cannot openly and clearly trample on the laws, it avoids them, glosses them in accord with its intentions, varnishes its transgressions with lovely names, hypocritically takes as a motto what society most esteems, that is, its independence and tranquility, pretends dangers, feigns or exaggerates conspiracies, and uses the vague and insignificant name of circumstances (when it is not possible to have them because of injustice) as a veil to hide its lies and as a weapon to destroy all social benefits.
But the personal interest of each member of society, spurred on by the danger that threatens it, claims offenses on the part of the authority, demands observance of the laws, cries out against abuses, criticizes the conduct of those who govern, and, with the weapons of reason and
[print edition page 92]
justice, encircles its guarantees against the assaults of the power, calls the nation to its aid, and because of this valiant resistance they end up thwarted.
It also happens that in