ng
itself to be the latter's opponent. But the difficulty which confronts
this normal method of reasoning is to show how the opponent of healthy
commonsense and of moral dignity came to be born, and to drag out a
remarkably tenacious life for centuries. Nothing simpler. For
centuries healthy commonsense and moral dignity were non-existent. In
other words, the sense and the morality of centuries answered to the
institution of princedom, instead of contradicting it. And even this
sense and this morality of bygone centuries are not understood by the
"healthy commonsense" of to-day. The latter does not grasp it, and
therefore despises it. It flees from history to morality, which allows
it full play to the heavy artillery of its moral indignation.

In the same fashion as political "healthy commonsense" here explains
the rise and continuance of princedom as the work of unreason, in the
same way religious "healthy commonsense" explains heresy and unbelief
as the work of the devil. In the same manner irreligious "healthy
commonsense" explains religion as the work of the devil, of the
parsons.

But once Mr Heinzen has explained the origin of princedom by means of
moral commonplaces, the "connection of princedom with social
conditions" follows quite naturally. Listen: "An individual
sequestrates the state, and more or less sacrifices a whole people,
not only materially, but also morally, to his person and his
supporters, institutes a graduated series of ranks, divides the
people, as if they were fat and lean cattle, into various classes,
and, solely on the ground of affection for his own person, makes every
member of the State the official enemy of the other."

Mr Heinzen has in mind the princes upon the top of the social
structure in Germany. He does not doubt for a moment that they have
made and are daily renewing their social foundation. Can a simpler
explanation be afforded of the connection of the monarchy with social
conditions, of which it is the official political expression, than by
making this connection the work of the princes? What is the connection
between representative chambers and the modern middle-class society
which they represent? The former have made the latter. Similarly
political divine right with its apparatus and its gradations has made
the profane world, of which it is the holy of holies. By a parity of
reasoning religious divine right has made the secular conditions of
which it constitutes a fantasti