Probably one half of the talk of the world is wasted, but the other half counts. Some examples. Everything that is said has some effect. But the other half certainly tells. We know this from the change in ideas from generation to generation. We see that opinions which at one time everybody held became absurd in the course of half a century - opinions about religion and morals and manners and government. Nearly every man of my age can recall old opinions of his own, on subjects of general interest, which he once thought highly respectable, and which he is now ashamed of having ever held. He does not remember when he changed them, or why, but somehow they have passed away from him. In communities these changes are often very striking. The transformation, for instance, of the England of Cromwell into the England of Queen Anne, or of the New England of Cotton Mather into the New England of Theodore Parker and Emerson, was very extraordinary, but it would be very difficult to say in detail what brought it about, or when it began. Lecky has some curious observations, in his History of Rationalism on these silent changes in new beliefs apropos of the disappearance of the belief in witchcraft. Nobody could say what had swept it away, but it appeared that in a certain year people were ready to burn old women as witches, and a few years later were ready to laugh at or pity any one who thought old women could be witches. . . ... The belief in witchcraft may perhaps be considered a somewhat violent illustration, like the change in public opinion about slavery in this country. But there can be no doubt that it is talk-somebody's, anybody's, everybody's talk - by which these changes are wrought, by which each generation comes to feel and think differently from its predecessor. No one ever talks freely about anything without contributing something, let it be ever so little, to the unseen forces which carry the race on to its final destiny. Even if he does not make a positive impression, he counteracts or modifies some other impression, or sets in some train of ideas in some one else, which helps to change the face of the world So I shall, in disregard of the great laudation of silence which filled the earth in the days of Carlyle, say that one of the functions of an educated man is to talk, and, of course, he should try to talk wisely. 227. The influence of the leader 1 Where individuals habitually come in contact with one another, The infiuence of men there is a constant stream of talk. Ideas are interchanged, questions in social are asked and answered, there are attempts at persuasion and resist- intercourse varies. ance, accusations are made and denunciations are returned. But in this complex of social intercourse, all men are not alike. Some say little and think less; some are timid, others are aggressive and voluble. And though communities vary, there is everywhere a tendency among men to be dominated by natural leaders, to follow the strong, The leader. the self-assured, and the aggressive. Leadership is an important factor in the formation of Public Opinion, as Professor Cooley points out in the following selection: must be a great deal of a man. If we ask what are the mental traits that distinguish a leader, A leader the only answer seems to be that he must, in one way or another, be a great deal of a man, or at least appear to be. He must stand for something to which men incline, and so take his place by right as a focus of their thought. Evidently he must be the best of his kind available. It is impossible that he should stand forth as an archetype, unless he is conceived as superior, in some respect, to all others within range of the imagination. Nothing that is seen to be second-rate can be an ideal;. if a character does not bound the horizon at some point we will look over it to what we can see beyond. The object of admiration may be Caesar Borgia, or Napoleon, or Jesse James the train-robber, but he must be typical, must stand for something. No matter how bad the leader may be, he will always be found to owe his leadership to something strong, affirmative, and superior, something that appeals to onward instinct. He must be strong, affirmative, and superior. To be a great deal of a man, and hence a leader, involves, on the The leader one hand, a significant individuality, and, on the other, breadth of must possess sympathy, the two being different phases of personal calibre, rather than separate traits. It is because a man cannot stand for anything except as he has a self-reliance. significant individuality, that self-reliance is so essential a trait in leadership: except as a person trusts and cherishes his own special 1 From Charles Horton Cooley, Human Nature and the Social Order. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1902; pp. 293-297, 310. and breadth tendency, different from that of other people and usually opposed by them in its inception, he can never develop anything of peculiar value. He has to free himself from the domination of purposes already defined and urged upon him by others, and bring up something fresh out of the vague underworld of subconsciousness; and this means an intense self, a militant, gloating "I." Emerson's essay on selfreliance only formulates what has always been the creed of significant persons. On the other hand, success in unfolding a special tendency and of sympathy. giving vogue to it, depends upon being in touch, through sympathy, with the current of human life. All leadership takes place through the communication of ideas to the minds of others, and unless the ideas are so presented as to be congenial to those other minds, they will evidently be rejected. It is because the novelty is not alien to us, but is seen to ourself in a fresh guise, that we welcome it. . . . Qualities of a man who can dominate the minds of others in a crisis. The first is, not to be the way. The man of action who, like Napoleon, can dominate the minds of others in a crisis, must have the general traits of leadership developed with special reference to the promptness of their action. His individual significance must take the form of a palpable decision and selfconfidence; and breadth of sympathy becomes a quick tact to grasp the mental state of those with whom he deals, so that he may know how to plant the dominating suggestion. Into the vagueness and confusion that most of us feel in the face of a strange situation, such a man injects a clear-cut idea. There is a definiteness about him which makes us feel that he will not leave us drifting, but will set a course, will substitute action for doubt, and give our energies an outlet. Again, his aggressive confidence is transmitted by suggestion, and acts directly upon our minds as a sanction of his leadership. And if he adds to this the tact to awaken no opposition, to make us feel that he is of our sort, that his suggestions are quite in our line, in a word that we are safe in his hands; he can hardly be resisted. . . . Another phase of the same truth is the ascendancy that persons of belief and hope always exercise as against those who may be superior in every other respect, but who lack these traits. The onward and aggressive portion of the world, the people who do things, the young and all having surplus energy, need to hope and strive for an imaginative object, and they will follow no one who does not encourage this tendency. The first requisite of a leader is, not to be right, but to lead, to show a way. The idealist's programme of political or economic reform may be impracticable, absurd, demonstrably ridiculous; but it can never be successfully opposed merely by pointing out that this is the case. A negative opposition cannot be wholy effectual: there must be a competing idealism; something must be offered that is not only less objectionable but more desirable, that affords occupation to progressive instinct. The merits and defects of Public Opinion as a Public Opinion is admittedly a powerful and pervading influence. If we go beyond this general statement, however, we come to a somewhat complicated situation. Public Opinion is powerful, but sometimes it reacts to the injury of the community instead of to its benefit. Public Opinion has important merits; on the other hand, control. it has serious defects. Let us begin a brief analysis of the subject means of social by seeing what are the substantial merits of Public Opinion. These Its merits: Lord Bryce outlines as follows: ... of Public Opinion is continuous, that of Now let us compare the influence upon the conduct of public The action affairs which is called, somewhat loosely, the rule of Public Opinion, with the direct control exerted by the citizens when they vote either on a question submitted (Referendum) or for a candidate. The voting action of opinion is continuous, that of voting occasional, and in the occasional. intervals between the elections of legislative bodies changes may take place materially affecting the views of the voters. . . . At elections it is for a candidate that votes are given, and as his personality or his local influence may count for more than his principles, the choice of one man against another is an imperfect way of expressing the mind of a constituency. The result of an election may be determined by the action of an insignificant knot of voters specially interested in a question of slight importance. Anti-vaccinationists, or a few dozens of government employees demanding higher wages, have thus turned elections in English boroughs where parties were of nearly equal strength. 1 From James Bryce, Modern Democracies. The Macmillan Company, New York, 1921. Vol. 1, pp. 158-161. |