I.
Introduction
to
the 2nd German Edition of
“The Threefold Commonwealth”
The
practical problems, presented by the social life of our day,
cannot fail to be misinterpreted by anyone who approaches them
with the idea of any sort of Utopia. One's particular
views and sentiments may lead one to believe, that some special
form of institution, as planned in one's own brain, is bound to
make men happy; this belief may assume the force of
overwhelming conviction; one may try to promulgate this belief;
— and yet all one says may be completely wide of the mark
as regards the social question at the present time, and its
real significance.
One
may push this assertion even to the following, seemingly absurd
extreme, and yet strike the truth to-day. For suppose someone
to possess a quite perfect theoretical “solution”
of the social question, his ideas might nevertheless be wholly
impractical if he thought of tendering this brain-devised
scheme as a “solution” to mankind. For we are no
longer living in an age when one should think it possible to
influence public life to any purpose in this manner. With the
present constitution of men's souls, it is not to be expected
that they should say in respect to public life: “Here is
somebody who understands social institutions and what is
necessary; what he thinks to be the right thing, we will
do!”
This is not at all the way in which people are willing to
welcome any ideas about social life. The following book,
— which has already received a fairly wide circulation
— reckons with this fact. The intentions with which it
was written have been totally misunderstood by those people who
attributed to it anything of a Utopian character. The
people to do so more especially, were such as themselves
persist in thinking in Utopias; what they see in the other
person is the characteristic feature of their own habit of
mind.
For
the practical thinker, it is to-day one of the accepted
experiences of public life, that, with any idea of a Utopian
kind — be it never so demonstrably convincing —
there is absolutely nothing to be done. And yet many people
still have a notion, that they are called on to lay some idea
of this kind, — in the economic field, for
instance, — before their fellow-men. They will have to
convince themselves that they are talking in vain; their
fellow-men can find no use for their proposals.
This should be taken practically as a piece of experience. For
it points to a fact of great importance in modern public life:
— the fact namely of the life-remoteness of what is
thought, in comparison to the actual demands, for
instance, of economic realities. But how can one hope to
master the tangle of public life at the present day if one
approaches its intricate conditions with a thinking that
is life-remote?
Such a question cannot be exactly popular; for it involves the
admission that one's way of thought is remote from life. And
yet, without this admission there can be no approaching the
social question either. For the question is one that
affects the whole civilisation of the day, and that must be
treated seriously, before it can be possible to arrive at any
clear view of what is needed in our social life.
It
is the whole form of the spiritual life of our day which is
thereby called in question. Mankind in modern times has
developed a kind of spiritual life which is dependent to a very
large degree upon state institutions and economic forces. The
human being, whilst still a child, is brought under the
education and teaching of the State. He can be educated only in
the way permitted by the economic conditions of the environment
out of which he proceeds.
Now
it might easily be thought, that in this way a person cannot
fail to be well fitted to the conditions of life at the present
day, since the State thus has the means of giving such forms to
the whole system of education and teaching, (and thereby to the
principal part of public spiritual life) as shall prove of best
service to the human community. It might easily be thought too,
that a person is likely to be the best possible member of the
human community, when he Is educated in accordance with the
economic possibilities from which he proceeds, and placed by
his education at the post to which these economic possibilities
appoint him.
This book has to undertake the unpopular task at the
present time of showing, that the complications in our
public life arise from the dependence of the spiritual life
upon the State and upon the economic system; and it has to
show, that one part of the very burning social question is the
emancipation of the spiritual life from this dependence.
In
doing so, the book sets itself in opposition to errors that are
widely spread. The taking-over of the educational system by the
State has for a long time past been generally regarded as
something very good, and favourable to human progress. And
persons of a socialist turn of mind can hardly conceive of
anything else, than that the Community should educate the
individual to its own service after its own standards.
People, in this matter, are very unwilling to come to a
recognition which is absolutely necessary to-day: the
recognition, namely, that, in the course of history, a thing
may come at a later age to be mistaken, which, at an earlier
stage of evolution, is right. In order for the new conditions
to grow up amongst mankind in modern times, it was
necessary that the educational system — and therewith
public spiritual life — should be taken away from those
in whom it was vested during the Middle Ages, and should be
made over to the State. — But to continue to maintain
this state of things is a very serious social mistake.
This is what the book has to show in the first part of it.
Spiritual life has grown up to freedom within the framework of
the State. It cannot flourish in this freedom as it should,
unless it be given full self-administration. The whole
character which our spiritual life has assumed, requires that
it should form a completely self-dependent branch of the body
social. The educational and teaching system, — which
after all form the ground from which all spiritual life grows,
— must be placed under the administration of those who do
the educating and teaching. In this administration nothing must
interfere, whether by voice or authority, which plays any part
in the State or in economic affairs. Every teacher must spend
so much time only on the actual teaching, as will allow of his
also being an administrator in his own province. This
means, that he will carry on the administration in the same way
as he carries on his educating and teaching. Nobody will
proscribe instructions, who is not himself at the same time
livingly engaged in the actual work of educating and teaching.
No parliament, and no individual, — who once taught
perhaps, himself, but does so no longer, — will have any
voice in the matter. What is learnt in the direct experience of
teaching, — this will pass over into the work of
administration too. And under such an arrangement it will be
natural for competence and practical sense to find their
fullest possible scope.
It
may of course be objected, that even under this
self-administration of the spiritual life everything will not
be perfect. But perfection is, after all, not to be
looked for in real life. All that can be aimed at, is the
realisation of the best-that-is-possible. The faculties,
ripening in the growing child, will really be passed on into
the human community, when the care of developing them is left
solely to a person who, judging upon spiritual grounds, can
form a competent decision. How far a particular child
ought to be brought on in the one or the other direction,
— this is a matter only to be judged of in a free
spiritual community; and only a community of this kind can
determine, what should be done to give such judgment due
effect. From a free spiritual community of this kind, both the
State-life and the life of Economics will receive those forces
which they are not able to give themselves, when they shape the
spiritual life from their own aspects.
It
lies along the lines sketched out in the book, that, as regards
their arrangements and subject-matter, all educational
institutes for the service of the State or the Economic System
will also be under the charge of the Free Spiritual Life and
its administrators. Schools of law, trade-schools,
training-institutes for agriculture and industry, will all take
the form which the free spiritual life gives to them. The book
will inevitably awake the hostility of many prejudices, if
these, quite correct, consequences be drawn from what is
said there. But what is the source of these prejudices? —
The antisocial spirit of them becomes plain enough, directly
one perceives that at bottom, unconsciously, they proceed
from the conviction that teachers are of course unpractical
people, out of touch with life, — people who, if left to
themselves, could not possibly be expected to make the sort of
institutions that would suitably supply the practical
departments of life, — that these institutions must be
shaped by those actually engaged in practical affairs, and that
the teachers must work along the lines directed for them.
Those who think so, do not see, that teachers who are
unable to direct their own lines, from the smallest
matter to the highest, are thereby made unpractical and out of
touch with life. And then, the principles given them may be
laid down by the most practical persons — to all
appearance, — and yet the teachers will educate no
practicians for actual life.
Our
anti-social conditions are brought about by the fact, that
people come into social life without a social sense acquired
from their education. People with a social sense can only
proceed from a form of education that is guided and directed by
persons who themselves have a social sense. The social question
will never be touched, unless the education question, and the
whole question of spiritual life, be treated as one of its
essential factors. Anti-social conditions are not created
simply by economic institutions, but by the fact, that
the human beings in these institutions behave anti-socially.
And it is anti-social to have the young taught and educated by
people, whom one cuts off from actual life by proscribing to
them from outside what they are to do and what lines they are
to follow.
The
State appoints schools for the study of law, and requires
that what is taught in these law-schools should be that code of
jurisprudence which the State itself has laid down from its own
standpoints, in accordance with its own constitutions and
rules. Law-schools, that originate solely in a free spiritual
life, will draw their teachings of law and equity from the
sources of the spiritual life itself. The State will have to
wait for what this free spiritual life shall encharge on it,
and will receive new seeds of life from those living ideas
which can proceed only from a spiritual life that is
free.
But
within the spiritual life itself, there will be those people
who go out into life from their own points of view, and spread
into all the branches of life's practice. Life's actual
practice can never be anything that grows out of educational
institutions devised by the mere practicians, and where
the teaching is done by people estranged from life; it can only
grow out of a teaching where the teachers understand life and
its practice from their own points of view. — The
administration of the spiritual life in detail, and the form it
will take, is described, or at least indicated, in the
book.
People of a Utopian turn of mind will raise any number of
questions in argument. Artists and spiritual workers of all
professions will anxiously enquire, whether artistic
talent is likely to flourish better under a free spiritual
life, than under the one at present provided by the State and
the powers of the economic world? — Those who put such
questions should reflect, that this book is in no respect
designed as a Utopia. Nowhere is there laid down in it any sort
of theory: Things should be thus or thus; but practical
suggestions are made for human communities, which, living and
working together, shall be able to bring about desirable social
conditions. Any person who judges life, not according to
theoretic preconceptions but actual experience, will say to
himself, that every worker, producing freely out of Ms own
creative talents, will have a prospect of his work being duly
appreciated, when there is a free spiritual community, able to
intervene in life's affairs from its own point of view.
The
“social question” is not something that has come up
in human life in these days, and that can now be solved by a
couple of individuals or by parliaments, and will then be
solved. The “social question” is bound up with
the whole of modern civilised life, and will remain so, once
having arisen. At every moment in the evolution of human
history it will have to be solved anew. For human life in these
latter times has entered upon a phase where all social
institutions continually give rise to what is anti-social. And
this anti-social element has constantly to be overcome afresh.
Just as any living body, after repletion, enters again after
awhile upon a phase of hunger, so too the body social, after
its organic conditions have once been ordered, comes again into
disorder. There is no more a panacea for the ordering of social
conditions, than there is a food that stills hunger for all
time. Men, however, may enter into such forms of community,
that, through their joint living co-operation, external life is
constantly redressed and turned into the social direction. And
one such community is the self-administering, spiritual branch
of the body social.
Just as, for the spiritual life, free
self-administration is a social necessity, called for by
the practical experiences of the modern age, — so, for
the economic life, is associative work. —
The economic process, in modern human life, consists in the
production of commodities, the circulation of commodities, and
the consumption of commodities. By means of this process human
needs are satisfied; and in this process are involved the human
beings with their activities. Each person has his own
part-interests in the process, and each must himself take part
in it with the peculiar activity of which he is capable. What
each person actually requires, he alone can know and feel; what
he ought to perform, he desires to decide from his own insight
into the life-conditions of the whole body. This was not so at
all times, and is not so to-day over all the earth; it is so in
the main, amongst the civilised part of the earth's population
at the present day.
The
economic life has drawn ever wider circles in the course of
mankind's evolution. The self-contained system of
household-economy grew into town-economy and this again into
state-economy. To-day we are confronted with world-economy.
— It is true, that in each new system a considerable part
still lives on of the old; and in each old system a good deal
of the new was already present in anticipation. But the divers
lots and lives of mankind are involved with the fact, that this
series of evolutionary phases have exerted in turn a
predominant influence in certain relations of life.
It
is a senseless idea to want to organise the forces of economic
life into an abstract all-world community. The individual
economic organisms have to a large extent merged, in the course
of evolution, into the economic organisms of the various
states. But the state-communities arose out of other forces
than purely economic ones; and it was the endeavour to convert
these state-communities into economic communities, which has
resulted in the social chaos of these latter times. Economic
life is struggling to assume shapes given to it by its own
proper forces, independent of State-institutions, and
independent too of State ways of thinking. It can only do so,
when associations come together, composed purely
from economic points of view, and drawn conjointly from circles
of consumers, traders, and producers. The size of such
associations will be regulated of itself by the
circumstances of actual life: — over-small
associations would prove too costly in the working, over-large
ones too complicated, economically, for provision and
control. The actual requirements of life will lead the
different associations to find the best ways of regulating
intercourse one with another. There is no need to fear, if a
person's life has to be spent in constant change of place, that
he will find himself restricted by associations of this kind.
Transition from one to the other will be easy, when the
interests of trade and industry effect the transit, and not
state-organisations. One can conceive arrangements between such
an organic system of associations, which would work with all
the ease of a money-currency.
Within any particular association, a very general harmony of
interests can be made possible by practical sense and a
thorough understanding of the departments of business.
Instead of laws regulating the production of the commodities,
their circulation and their consumption, the people
themselves will regulate them through their own direct insight
and immediate interest in the matter. Standing themselves in
the midst of this associative life, the people are able to
possess the requisite insight; and the fact, that the various
interests must find their level by means of contract, will lead
the commodities to circulate at proportionate prices.
Such joint association according to economic points of view is
something quite different from what exists, for instance, in
the modern trades' unions. The trades' unions exert their
action in economic life; but they do not come together
according to economic points of view. They are constructed
after the principles which in modern times have grown out of
habitual dealing with political, or State, points of view. They
are parliaments, in which the people debate; not where
they meet to settle together, according to economic points of
view, what service one should render the other. In the
associations, there will not be sitting ‘wage-labourers’
exerting their power to extract as high a rate of wages as
possible from the employer of labour; but the manual workers
will be collaborating with the spiritual directors of
production and with those whose interests lie in the
consumption of what they produce, jointly endeavouring so to
adjust prices, that one service may find a suitable
reciprocation in the other. This cannot be done by debating in
parliamentary assemblies; people will be very chary of such
things; for, who would ever be working, if any number of people
had to spend their time negotiating about the work! It all goes
on in agreements between man and man, between association and
association, — along with the work.
What is sketched here, is no plan for a Utopia. It does not say
in the least, that anything ought to be arranged in this way or
in that. It simply points out how the people themselves will
arrange things, when they want to work effectively in
communities that accord with their own insight and
interests.
That people will actually join together in communities of this
kind, is a matter which human nature takes care of on the one
hand, — when it is not hindered by state-Interference,
— since nature creates the wants. And on the other hand,
the free spiritual life will take care of it; for a free
spiritual life develops the kinds of insight that are needed
for action in the community. Anyone, whose thinking rests on
experience, must admit, that associative communities of
this kind could be formed at any time, and that there is
nothing utopian involved in them. Nothing whatever prevents
their existing, except the fact, that the modern man is so bent
upon “organising” economic life from outside, that
the idea of “organisation” might be said to have
become a sort of psychic suggestion with him. In direct
contrast to this “organising,” which tries to join
men together from outside in the work of production, is
this other picture, of the living economic organisation which
rests on free associative union. In the course of joint
association, one man forms links with the other, and the
general system of the whole body grows out of the intelligence
of its individual members.
One
may say of course, ‘What is the use of the Have-Nots
associating together with the Haves!’ One may perhaps think it
better that all production and consumption should be regulated
“justly” from outside. But this sort of
“organising” regulation hampers the free creative
energies of the individual, and deprives economic life
from receiving what such creative energies alone can produce.
Only let the experiment for once be made, in spite of all
existing prejudices; let an association be formed even between
the Have-Nots of to-day and the Haves; and if no forces
intervene save economic ones, he-who-has will of necessity be
obliged to balance services with him-who-has-not, reciprocal
service for service.
In
discussing these things to-day, people talk, not from the
life-instincts which arise out of experience, but from those
moods of mind which have grown up out of class-interests and
interests of all kinds, other than economic, — and which
have been able to grow up, for the reason, that in this modern
age, when the economic life especially has become ever more and
more complicated, people have been unable to keep pace with it
with purely economic ideas. What prevented them, has been the
unfree spiritual life. The people engaged in economic life are
caught up in its routine. The forces in action, that shape the
economic processes, are not fully clear to them; they work
without any insight into the totality of human life. In the
associations, each will learn from the others what it is
absolutely necessary that he should know. There will come to be
a collective economic experience as to what is possible;
because the people, of whom each has insight and experience in
his special department, will put their judgments together.
Just as, in the free spiritual life, the only forces at work
are those which reside in the spiritual life itself, so too, in
the associative system of economy, the only economic
values will be those which result from the associations. In the
economic life, what any particular person has to do in it, is
the outcome of his life in conjunction with those with whom he
is economically associated. This means, that he Will have
exactly so much influence upon the general economic process as
corresponds to the service he renders. — The case of
those who are unfit for service, and the place they
occupy in the body social, will be found discussed in the book.
To shelter the weak from the strong: this can be done by an
economic life that is shaped solely by its own, economic
forces.
The
body social will fall then into two self-dependent parts, which
are able mutually to support one another for the very reason,
that each has its own peculiar administration, proceeding
from its own special forces. But between the two, there must be
a third form of life at work. This is the ‘State’
branch, strictly speaking, of the body social. What here finds
scope, are all those things which are, and must be, dependent
on the judgment and sentiments of every grown-up human
being. In the free spiritual life, each person busies
himself according to his own special faculties. In the
economic life, each person occupies his
particular place in the way that results from the associative
connection in which he stands. In the political, or State
life of Rights, he comes to his account purely as a man,
— insofar as this is independent of the faculties he may
be able to exert in the free spiritual life, and independent
too of whatever value the associative economic life may give to
the commodities that he produces,
Labour is shown in this book, as regards hours and
manner of work, to be a concern of the political, or State
Rights life. In this system of the body social, every
man meets his fellow man on equal ground; because, here, the
only affairs transacted, or administered, lie in provinces
where every man alike is equally competent to judge. Men's
rights and men's duties find their regulation here.
The
organic unity of the whole body social will grow out of the
independent development of these, its three systems. The book
will show, what form the action of movable capital, — the
means of production, — may assume under the joint working
of the three systems, as well as the use of land and soil.
Anybody, who wants to ‘solve’ the social question by means of
some economic device hatched out in the brain, will think the
book not practical. But if anybody, starting from life's actual
experience, wants to promote those forms of association,
amongst human beings, in which they may learn to understand and
to apply themselves to the social problems — then he may
be not quite unwilling to allow the author's attempt
towards a genuine practice of life.
The
book was first published in 1919. To what was verbally
delivered at the time, I added a series of supplementary
articles, which appeared in the paper,
‘Dreigliederung des sozialen
Organismus,’
and have now come out in book-form under the title
“In Ausführung der Dreigliederung
des sozialen Organismus”
[obtainable in English through the anthroposophical
book-shops under the title,
“Studies in the Threefold Commonwealth.”].
It
will be found, that in both books there is comparatively
little said about the “aims” of the social
movement, and much more about the paths that must be trodden in
social life. Anyone, who thinks along the lines of practical
life, knows, that a particular aim may present itself under a
variety of shapes. Only those people who live in abstractions,
see everything mapped-out in single contours. Such people often
find fault with what is really practicable, as being not
‘clear’ enough, ‘too vague in its outlines.’
Many, who fancy themselves ‘practical people,’ are often
just these very abstractionists. They do not reflect, that life may
assume all manner of shapes. It is an element of flux; and whoever
would go along with it, must adapt himself in his own thoughts and
sentiments to this trait of constant fluctuation. Social
problems are only to be grasped by this kind of thinking.
The
ideas in this book have been wrung from observation of life; it
is from the observation of life that they ask to be
understood.
|