< prev
next>
168
THE EGO AND HIS OWN
low from this that every Jew can become a convert to
it? If he can, he does not fail to, and, if he fails to,
he--cannot. What does your demand concern him ?
what the call to be a man, which you address to him?
As a universal principle, in the " human society "
which the humane liberal promises, nothing " special "
which one or another has is to find recognition, noth-
ing which bears the character of " private " is to have
value. In this way the circle of liberalism, which has
its good principle in man and human liberty, its bad
in the egoist and everything private, its God in the
former, its devil in the latter, rounds itself off com-
pletely; and, if the special or private person lost his
value in the State (no personal prerogative), if in the
" laborers' or ragamuffins' society " special (private)
property is no longer recognized, so in " human so-
ciety " everything special or private will be left out
of account; and, when "pure criticism" shall have
accomplished its arduous task, then it will be known
just what we must look upon as private, and what,
" penetrated with a sense of our nothingness," we
must--let stand.
Because State and society do not suffice for humane
liberalism, it negates both, and at the same time re-
tains them. So at one time the cry is that the task of
the day is " not a political, but a social, one," and
then again the " free State " is promised for the future.
In truth, " human society " is both,--the most general
State and the most general society. Only against the
limited State is it asserted that it makes too much stir
about spiritual private interests (e. g. people's religious
MEN OF THE OLD TIME AND THE NEW 169
belief), and against limited society that it makes too
much of material private interests. Both are to leave
private interests to private people, and, as human so-
ciety, concern themselves solely about general human
interests.
The politicians, thinking to abolish personal will,
self-will or arbitrariness, did not observe that through
property * our self-will gained a secure place of
refuge.
The Socialists, taking away property too, do not no-
tice that this secures itself a continued existence in
self-ownership. Is it only money and goods, then,
that are a property, or is every opinion something of
mine, something of my own?
So every opinion must be abolished or made im-
personal. The person is entitled to no opinion, but,
as self-will was transferred to the State, property to so-
ciety, so opinion too must be transferred to something
general, " Man," and thereby become a general hu-
man opinion.
If opinion persists, then I have my God (why, God
exists only as " my God," he is an opinion or my
" faith"), and consequently my faith, my religion, my
thoughts, my ideals. Therefore a general human faith
must come into existence, the "fanaticism of liberty."
For this would be a faith that agreed with the " es-
sence of man," and, because only " man " is reason-
able (you and I might be very unreasonable!), a rea-
sonable faith.
As self-will and property become powerless, so must
[Eigentum, " owndom "] [Eigenwille, " own will "]