the whole course of history, have too often set nations at variance. If they have produced friendship and union, they have likewise produced discord, hate, and war. There is not a religion which has not, like Lady Macbeth, stains on the hand that all the vast oceans could never wash away. Moreover, for the sociologist as for the philosopher, there is a violation of right and of the freedom of conscience-there is an actual injustice in the indiscreet intrusions of preaching missionaries who seek to substitute a foreign for a national fanaticism. It is an established conclusion of sociology that every religion, however universal it claims to be, has always an ethnic and national basis corresponding to the needs and traditions of a race or nation. It is thus illogical to try and transplant it, either forcibly or through appeal to the imagination, and set it up among nations who already have a religion adapted to their race and nationality. Religion is not an "article of export." Once again, the only universal, the only really "catholic" things, in the Greek sense of the word, are science, philosophy, and morals. It is these things which we must peaceably introduce among races the most distant from our own. It is not the Christian religion which has transformed and will continue to transform Japan. It is science and industry. Men of science are to-day the true and only missionaries. The inventors of railroads and telegraphs have done more to link different races together than all the Francis Xaviers and Ignatius Loyolas. Each new truth discovered is one light more in the firmament that all men gaze at—a light, too, which all, save the blind, can see. It becomes the common heritage of all the races. It fosters in mankind, as we have seen, a common consciousness, a consciousness of man as man. It is just the same in the realm of pure moral ideas, which are based on the nature of men and things and give expression to the universal conditions of life and progress in society-in other words, of social statics and social dynamics. Try to draw from every religion and every race its whole moral and really social content, and then accept this without troubling about dogmas and particular symbols. In universal religious tolerance, combined with universal morality and science, we have the one great means of establishing mutual racial sympathy. If, notwithstanding, morality itself should vary from one race to another, let us be tolerant of such variations. They will gradually wear away under the influence of mutual friction and of a progressing civilisation which is becoming daily more uniform. Allow the Mahommedans to wed several wives openly and do not yourself wed several secretly. There must be a tolerance in morality no less than in religion and philosophy. Provided that there is no actual attack on other peoples' rights, you should shut your eyes to customs which are not those of your race or country. Wait till science and civilisation have gradually reformed them. In short, new forces are gaining ground, forces that are working in favour of peace. International life-a product of science, industry, and economic relations-is hardly yet born; yet it is daily becoming a more and more comprehensive reality, including within its sphere items whose number and importance are steadily increasing. Nor is this common life merely international. Might one not say that it is also inter-ethnic, in the sense of embracing the most diverse races, not only in Europe, but also in America, Asia, and Africa? Over the whole globe we are witnessing the spread and propagation of ideas that are also forces-motor ideas which are everywhere identical and are drawing very different minds in the same directions. For the sociologist, there is but one practical means of bringing races together, and that is to diffuse scientific, moral, and social instruction as widely as possible. Instruction of this kind, spread gradually among the different nations, is the one great means of ensuring peace. As we have shown in our Psychological Sketch of European Nations, it is a historical law that the progress of modern civilisation is marked by a continually growing ascendancy of scientific, social, and therefore intellectual or moral factors, over such as are racial, geographical, and climatic. The advance of science and of industrial invention is transforming, with ever-growing swiftness, the conditions of social life and labour and also the mutual relations of the various classes. No nation can flatter itself with the belief that its pre-eminence will last for ever. None, on the other hand, can be condemned to an incurable decline. Thanks to a universal solidarity, each race profits by the discoveries and experiences of the others. This law of solidarity in social environment is daily asserting itself more strongly against the conditions which favour a native originality due to racial temperament and physical environment. As I have already stated elsewhere, it is neither to Anglo-Saxons nor Germans that the future belongs, neither to Greeks nor Latins, neither to Christians nor Buddhists; but rather to those most qualified by their knowledge, industry, and morality. [Paper submitted in French.]! THE PROBLEM OF RACE EQUALITY "Backward" does not necessarily mean "inferior."-RATZEL. It is generally conceded that we should be considerate to all races of men regardless of their capacities; but there is equal agreement, and 'Esquisse psychologique des peuples européens.-Conclusions. rightly so, that we should be considerate to domesticated animals, for instance. Here, then, is our dilemma, for the most considerate of men, if he is sane, will not treat his horse exactly as he treats his compatriot, e.g., he will not expect both of them to converse, to reflect, to fashion and obey the laws. Accordingly, considerate actions have to be adapted to the nature of the being we have dealings with, and if some races of men should prove to be very decidedly inferior to other races in inherited capacity, it is evident that they would have to be treated apart to a very considerable degree, being excluded, perhaps, from all important functions in the community. This, of course, would not preclude our loving them tenderly and doing everything which conduced to their welfare. Now, since it is hotly contended that "the Negro is not a human being at all, but merely a different form of ox or ass, and is, therefore, only entitled to such kindness as a merciful man shows to all his cattle," and since this is as warmly contested by the Negroes and other races concerned, it becomes a vital matter to grapple with the problem of race equality. Especially is this important because many races are actually being treated, or even mal-treated, as inferiors, without any strong presumption in favour of the alleged race-inferiority. If to this be added the all-too-ready tendency to regard other races than our own as "inferior races," and to force these into becoming our hewers of wood and drawers of water, it is manifest that there is urgent need for some light to be thrown on the subject. Moreover, if the brotherhood of man is to become a reality, as poets and prophets have fondly dreamed, and if the great nations of the world, irrespective of race, are to create a World Tribunal and a World Parliament, it is indispensable that the leading varieties of mankind shall be proved substantially equals. A parliament composed of human beings very widely differing in capacity is a palpable absurdity, only realisable in Alice in Wonderland. Firmin, seeing the bearing of this, wisely remarks, "Les races, se reconnaissant égales, pourront se respecter et s'aimer" (De l'Egalité des Races Humaines, 1885, p. 659). However, we need not include in our problem every tribe and race whatsoever, but only the vast aggregate of mankind, say, China, Japan, Turkey, Persia, India, Egypt, Siam, the Negro, the American Indian, the Philippino, the Malay, the Maori, and the fair-white and dark-white races. These constitute, perhaps, nine-tenths of the human race. If an insignificant people here and there, say the Veddahs or the Andamanese, the Hottentots or the Dyaks, should be shown to be unquestionably inferior, this would constitute no grave inter-racial problem. The rare exception would prove the rule, and the broad rule would make the reality of the rare exception doubtful. 1 A century ago the issue we are discussing might have been very difficult of approach. Our knowledge of other races was then a negligible quantity, and of most of the important races we had no compelling evidence of higher aptitudes. This is altered now. know almost intimately the various great peoples, and fortunately there exists to-day a common standard by which we can measure them at least in one respect. This standard is supplied by the University. As a mere matter of theory it is conceivable that not one non-Caucasian should be capable of graduating at a University, and it is even possible to conceive that a number of peoples should not be able to force their way through the elementary school. The data, however, favour no such conclusion, for individuals of all the select races which we have mentioned above have graduated in modern universities and in diverse subjects. To appreciate this statement, especially in the light of disparaging remarks to the effect that the facial angle of certain races more nearly approaches that of apes than that of Caucasians, we must remember that not a solitary ape has yet been known to have reached the stage of being able to pass the entrance examination to an infant school or kindergarten. We must agree with Ratzel, who says, "There is only one species of man; the variations are numerous, but do not go deep." An objector might argue that the academic member of an inferior race is a shining exception, a freak of nature, and that from his feat nothing can be deduced regarding the average capacity of his race. This theoretical objection can be disposed of in various ways. We might meet it with the irresistible contention that no member of any species departs far from the average, for else a lioness could give birth to a tiger. Or we might, what is more satisfactory, test the objection by the data to hand. For example, of the ten million Negroes in the United States, many are said to be lawyers as well as surgeons and physicians, several thousand have graduated in Universities, hundreds of thousands ply trades or have acquired property, and a few, such as Dr. Booker Washington and Professor DuBois, are recognised as men of distinction.3 Nor is even this a 1 Certain inquiries at European universities where Asiatic and African students are to be found, tend to show that there is no good reason for thinking that they possess less ability than European students. * See Prof. W. G. B. DuBois's searching volume, The College-bred Negro.' 3 M. Firmin, a Haitian, a full-blooded Negro, I am informed, has written a highly learned and remarkably judicious and elegant work on the Equality of the Human Races. Another Haitian, of humble and pure descent, but who later became President of the Republic of Haiti, General Légitime, has composed a luminous and comprehensive introduction to philosophy. A West Indian of immaculate Negro descent, Dr. Th. Scholes, has issued two excellent treatises on the races question. The Hon. John Mensa Sarbah, a West African, has written with conspicuous ability on the Fanti National Constitution. Many other works of equal worth, composed by Negroes, exist. fair statement of the case. The Negro population of the United States is despised if not downtrodden, largely deprived of elementary education, and lacking, therefore, generally wealth and the corresponding opportunities for culture. Manifestly, if we assumed that the Negro race ceased to be thus severely handicapped, the possible number of university graduates among them would materially increase. There remains alone the academic argument that under equal conditions the white race might show a greater proportion of professors or graduates, but the figures are wanting to decide this. Suffice it that we cannot speak of exceptions where thousands of graduates are involved. A final objection might be raised relating to the absence of great men among the Negroes of the United States. They have produced no Shakespeare, no Beethoven, no Plato. Which is perfectly true; but neither have the teeming millions of the white race of America produced one such towering giant through the centuries. Moreover, the time of the recognition of great men appears to be from about the age of fifty onwards, and altogether only a little over forty years have passed since slavery was abolished in the United States. Needless to say, what is stated in the preceding paragraphs regarding the capacities of the Negro race-which, according to Sir Harry Johnston, embraces some 150,000,000 souls-holds with increased force of the great Oriental peoples, who can point to complex civilisations and to illustrious sons and daughters.2 We must now examine the contention that man is more than intellect, and that while the various races may be possibly equal on the whole as regards intelligence, they differ much in enterprise, morals, and beauty. Enterprise is a vague term to define. So far as the qualities of the warrior are in question, these appear to be universal. The Greeks, the Romans, and the Carthaginians were certainly bold and daring. The Egyptians, the Persians, and the Hebrews fought intrepidly. The Middle Ages found Christians, Turks, and Huns, accomplished in the fine art of massacre. Gustav Adolf of Sweden, Frederick the Great, Napoleon, Wellington, splendidly led superb armies. Japan recently showed the world what matchless fighting stuff is to be found in the Far East. And so-called savage tribesnorth, south, east, and west-appear to be no whit behind in the matter of dauntless bravery. It might be said that many of the so-called Negro graduates are not full blacks. Since, however, very many of them are, the argument remains unaffected. It should also be noted that "coloured" people are treated precisely as if they were full-blooded. "I consider that your propositions could be abundantly supported by instances taken from India," writes a Civil Servant who occupied for many years a responsible post in India. |