Phi Beta Kappa Society Is Collaborating With JSTOR To Digitize, Preserve and Extend Access To The American Scholar

On the Importance of Being Unprincipled
Author(s): JOHN HERMAN RANDALL, JR.

Source: The American Scholar, Vol. 7, No. 2 (SPRING 1938), pp. 131-143
Published by: Phi Beta Kappa Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41206444
Accessed: 07-12-2015 23:38 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Phi Beta Kappa Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Scholar.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 23:38:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
On the Importanceof Being
Unprincipled
JOHN HERMAN RANDALL, JR.
therearemorepoliticalprinciples in activecircu-
lationtodaythanformanya longyear.One has onlyto
SURELYopen the morningpaper to be caughtin a barrageof
them.They volley fromthe Right, theythunderfromthe
Left; and even peaceablecitizens,anxiousto go about their
businessundisturbed in thebroadCenter,have had to lay in a
generousstockin self-defense. When we look acrossthe seas
we find the atmosphere from Moscow to Madrid so cluttered
up witheternalprinciples in irrepressible
conflictthatit is hard
to discernanymerelyhumanbeings.Even the British Lion is
goingthroughcontortions in theendeavorto put on the unac-
customedarmorof principle.We are all in a fightingmood
today.Mere name-calling, thoughsatisfying fora time,soon
exhaustsour stockof epithets;and then,graspinga principle
firmly in eitherhand,we sallyforthbravelyto thefray.
Side bysidewiththisstrifeof principleshas gonea marked
declinein whatwe used to regardas politicalintelligence. At
leastthe politicalintelligencethatwas once enoughto adjust
ourdifferences seemsno longeradequatenow thatwe disagree
so muchmoreviolently and,we are sure,so muchmorefunda-
mentally.Indeedwe have thoughtup elaborateif notwholly
respectable philosophiesto convinceourselvesthatthe intelli-
gencewe are certaintheotherfellowdoesn'tpossesshas really
no place in ourpoliticalquarrelsand thatwe have gotto fight
it out withhim,the soonerthe better.In the old dayswhen
one groupof us disagreedwith anotheraboutwhat oughtto
be donewe managedin theendto effectsomekindof working
I31
The AmericanScholar
compromise withthem.Today it has cometo be the fashion,
in Europeat least,to shoottheminstead.Whywastetimetry-
ing to argue?Direct actionis so muchsimplerand moreex-
peditious!Americahas so far proveda notableexceptionto
thisnew fashion.Undera consummate compromiser, a leader
quitegratifyingly unprincipled,it seems to be displaying more
politicalintelligencethananyothermajorcountry. And won-
derof wonders,thatintelligence has madeitsappearanceeven
in thesteelindustry!
Now thereseemsto be a verycloseconnection betweenthis
declinein politicalintelligenceand the rise of the appeal to
principles. In factmostof theworld'spoliticaldifficulties today
focusin men'spreference forlayingdownprinciples and fight-
ingoverthemratherthanengagingin thegiveand takeof dis-
cussionand eventualcompromise. So it seemsworthwhile to
emphasizetheimportance of beingunprincipled in politicalac-
tion.In politicalaction,mindyou- forin themselves principles
arefinethings.In theirproperplaceofcoursetheyarequitein-
dispensable. Butthatplaceis notto regulatethegroupactivities
of men. Men can live togetherand succeedin accomplishing
thingscooperatively onlyif theyhave thepatienceand thein-
to
telligence compromise. It wouldof coursesoundlessuncon-
ventionalif insteadof speakingof unprincipled actionI spoke
of "theprincipleof compromise/' meaningthereby theprinci-
ple of actingwithoutregardto one'sprinciplesin the interest
of actingwithothermen.And shouldsomedialecticianobject
that I too am advocatinga single principleof compromise
againstall othersI couldnotdemur.For whatis at issue,against
all the new politicalfaithsand certainties flyingaboutin our
is
world, very closeto what I conceiveto be theAmericanway.
It is commonly known,in fact,by a morefamiliarname.It is
not the name but thepoliticalmethodI am concernedwith} I
wantto makeclearwhatis reallyinvolvedin whatAmericans
conceivepoliticalintelligence to be.
Now anybodywho is at all capable of learninganything
fromexperienceknowsthatthe onlyway to get along with
132
of BeingUnprincipled
On theImportance
people,the onlyway to do anythingtogetherwith anybody
else,is throughcompromise. You don'tneedexceptionalbrains
to realizethat; youneedonlyto be marriedorto havea friend.
Cooperationbetweenhumanbeingsis possibleonlyif theyare
willingto compromise}and politics,the art of cooperation, of
groupaction,is at bottomnothingbutthepracticalapplication
of the methodof compromise.Only two kindsof men can
reallyaffordthe luxuryof actingalwayson principle:those
who neveract at all, who live in a sortof socialvacuum,who
nevertryto getothermento do anything;and thosewho have
so muchpowertheydon'thave to regardthe wishesor habits
of othermenbut can just give commands.These are the two
kindsof menwho knownothingaboutthe artof cooperation,
the impotentand the omnipotent - the college professorand
theSupremeCourtJustice, forexample.
But of courseno one everreallydoesact on principlealone,
withcompletelogicalconsistency. For no manis so omnipotent,
notevena Dictator,thathe doesnothave to resortto all kinds
of compromises withhisfollowersto securethepowerto shoot
thosewho disagreewithhim.And no man is so impotentthat
he nevertriesto cooperatewithhis fellowsat all. Should he
begintoactthatwaywe havea specialinstitution madeforhim
in which we lock him up- the insaneasylum.Even college
professors, who oftenhave the brainsto thinkup all kindsof
principles the irresponsibility
and to advocatethem,are likely
to forgetall about them,blithelyand intelligently, when it
to
comes college affairswhere they have some power and some
responsibilityforaction.They becomegoodcollegepoliticians.
And shouldtheyriseto be "administrators/' deansand presi-
are
dents,they notoriously likely to become the mostunprinci-
pled of men.To be suretheyare apt to retainthebad habitof
talkingabout principles.This is a little unfortunate, for it
makesthemseemhypocrites. It is reallyonlyan occupational
disease, shared by most intelligent administratorswho happen
also to be intellectuals.
In generalit is onlyintellectuals,thosewho thinkbutdon't
133
The AmericanScholar
haveto act,whomayunderstand thingsclearlybutneverreally
try to do anything about it, that can affordta have political
principles.It is preachers,teachers,writersand literarymen
who can getdownto therootsof thingsand reallyunderstand
them.They are freeto be politicalradicals.The onlyaction
suchmeneverhave to engagein is to protest, in the nameof
theirprinciples, at what othermen are doing. Principlesare
greatthingsforprotesting. That is in factabouttheonlykind
of actionyou can reallyaccomplishwiththem.Such intellec-
tualsareneverfacedbytheproblemof getting something done,
of cooperating withothermen.It is significant thatradicalin-
tellectuals, thosewhohavethefirmest and oftenthemostpene-
trating are
principles, notoriously incapableof cooperating with
each other;and thatgroupswhichbeginby protesting against
thingsin generalare apt to end in bitterprotestagainsteach
other'sprinciples.That is at bottomwhypracticalmen,trade
unionistsfor example,are so suspiciousof intellectuals;they
have too manyprincipleswhich seem quite irrelevantto the
problemsfaced in daily living.They are so unable to com-
promise - theyhave neverbeen forcedby experienceto learn
how! They have so littlepoliticalintelligence.
A friendrecently returned touniversity teachingfromWash-
ington where he had been engaged in severalof the manyen-
terprises theregoingon. "Now thatyou'rebackagain/'a col-
leagueremarked, "youcan affordto be radicaloncemore.You
have no furtherresponsibility for gettinganythingdone."
"Yes," the ex-scholar in politicsreplied,"now I can get back
to criticizing. Why,therein WashingtonI was toobusytrying
to set up and get thoseimportant agenciesgoingever to ask
whetherwhatI was doingwas reallyconsistent withmyprin-
ciples."
The reasonwhyprinciplesare irrelevant to anypoliticalor
cooperative action lies in the very nature of principles.Princi-
ples, as defined by Aristotle, who discovered them,are those
ideasin termsof whichsomething is understood. They are the
set of conceptsand axiomswhich make it intelligibleto us.
134
On the Importanceof Being Unprincipled
Whenoncewe see themtheneverything else fallsintoa con-
sistentpattern;it all makessensewe say.Justwhatideas will
makea thingintelligibleto us, Aristotlepointedout,depends
on ourexpérience;and we have foundout sinceAristotlethat
thesamethingscan be understood in a greatvarietyof ways,
depending whatour experienceof themhas been- thatis,
on
thata singlethingcanbe madeintelligible in termsof a number
of differingsetsof principles,as ourexperience of it has varied.
are
Principles accordingly instruments not of actionbut of
understanding. Theirplace is notin thepracticalartof politics
butin theknowledgethatis science.The history ofourscience
hasbeenthehistory ofthechangeand modification of theprin-
ciples thatenabled men to understand as their experiencehas
beenchangedand enlarged.Now scienceor organizedunder-
standinghas builtup a kindof cooperativeexperienceshared
Thereforethereis a fairmeasureof agreement,
byall scientists.
at anyone time,on the principlesin termsof whichthe sub-
ject-matter of anyone scienceis to be understood, thoughno-
-
toriouslyit is these principlesof explanation the way in
whichtheobservedfactsare to be understood - thatformjust
thataspectof scienceaboutwhichthereis mostdifference of
opinion.Thereis in factno sciencein whichthereare notvari-
ous "schools,"so faras "theory"goes,variousprinciplesenter-
tained; thoughon the experimental findingsthereis substan-
tial agreement.
But whatis a minorfactorin scienceis the prevailingrule
with practicalproblems.There are no two men who under-
standa givensituationin preciselythe same terms,for there
are no two men whosepreviousexperiencehas been precisely
the same.Anyonewho has everservedon a committee knows
thatif there are 1 1
5 members,5 really informed men, 15 ex-
perts, therewill be 15 differentslantson the committee's prob-
lem, 15 different sets of principlesthroughwhich it is ap-
proached.Especiallyis it truethatthereare no two economic
groups,whoseadjustmentand cooperationfurnishthe major
taskof present-day politics,which see problemsin the same
135
The AmericanScholar
lightor whichhave had the sameexperience.How could one
expectKansas farmers, Detroitauto-workers, Lawrencemill-
handsand New York bankersto understand anythingin the
sameterms?Each grouphas foundforitselfdifferent princi-
ples; and evenshouldtheyall agreethattheywantthe same
thing - security forexample - it wouldinevitably meansome-
thingdifferent foreach group.
In suchpoliticalproblemsthereis no possibility, thatcould
be morethanverbal,of agreement on principles,no possibility
of reallyunderstanding theproblemin thesameway.You can
neverhope to get two groups,two partiesto a controversy, to
see it in thesamelight,to have it make sensein the same way,
forsuchpartiesneverlook out on theworldthroughthe win-
dowsof thesameexperience. What youcan hopeto getagree-
menton is somespecificmeasure,someconcreteprogramof ac-
tion.That programwill notcompletely satisfyanybodyor any
group and each will understand it and criticizeits shortcom-
ingsin thelightof theirownprinciples.But if it is a success-
ful compromise it will give all of themenoughof whatthey
wantto makethemsupportit.
The way it actuallyworksis familiarenough.A group,let
us say a committee, meetsto tacklea problem.Each member
beginsby layingdown his principles,how it shapesup for
him,hisslantuponit. This takesa lot of talking.Then, if the
members are goodpoliticiansand possesspoliticalintelligence,
theystoptalkingaboutprinciples and getdownto therealbusi-
nessof workingout a compromise measurewhich will meet
themajorobjections and do something to satisfythe mostin-
sistentdemands.The resultis finallylaid beforethe groups
concerned, who, not havingbeen presentat the previousdis-
cussion,repeatthe sameobjectionsthatweretheredealtwith.
There is a new outburstof principlesand criticism.If this
keepsup too long the plan is modifiedto satisfythe loudest
protests and thenput intoeffect.In itsactualoperationit will
havecertainconsequences thatno one foresawand therewill be
moreroars.Somethingthenhas to be done to appeasethem;
136
On theImportance
and so it goeson. This is the politicalmethod,the methodof
compromise at work.It is obviouslya never-ending process.It
is theonlywayof gettingmento worktogether, the onlyway
of reallyenlisting theircooperativeinterest
and effort, no mat-
terwhatprinciples theymayseverally have or think theyhave.
We call thismethod"democratic"accordingto how earlyin
the processthe different groupsconcernedhave a chance to
talk, to make theirwantsknownand to object. Under any
schemeof organizinghumanactiontheywill do so in theend,
and if theyare strongenoughtheywill make theirdemands
feltand haveto be givensomething.
If the membersof our committeeare not good politicians,
if theyare intellectuals withoutmuch intelligence, theywill
on
naturallykeep talking about a
principles lot longer.Each
will tryto convertthe othersto his own. That will probably
resultin a deadlockand nothingwill be accomplished. If some-
thingsimplyhastobe donetherearetwochiefwaysout.Either
thetalkwill go on untileveryonemanagesto understand each
other'sprinciplesand thereis generalagreementthateach is
rightfromhis own pointof view. The committeewill then
be able to compromise on a practicalplan. Or else somebody
will proposea new principle,moregeneralthan thoseprevi-
ouslyarguedfor- so general,in fact,thateach can acceptit
withhis own privateinterpretation. Then theywill get down
to business.In either case the committee will neverbeginto
get anywheretill the principleshave been removedfromdis-
cussionby some meansor other.The easiestway of dealing
withsuchprincipledmen is to agree immediately to all their
principles.It is in facttheonlyway of gettinga man withno
politicalsensewhateverto compromise. Usually,afterevery-
bodyhas growntiredof talkingabout principles - or rather
aftereverybody has growntiredof hearingthe otherstalk
abouttheirs,forno maneverweariesof expounding hisown-
and it is clear that the discussionis gettingnowheresome-
bodywill remark,"Now thatwe are all agreedin principle" -
and thenthereal compromising begins.
137
The AmericanScholar
This is themethodof politics.Of courseif youdon'treally
wantto getmento do anything, if youdon'thave to solvethe
problem,youcan stickto yourprinciplesand refuseall traffic
with compromise. This will normallybe eitherbecauseyou
don'twantto act at all, becauseyouare irresponsible and don't
have to,and preferto be freeto criticize;or else becauseyou
wantto fight.Now principlesare perfectly grandforfighting.
You can't reallyfightwell withoutthem; at least you can't
fightverylong withoutacquiringa set. For a principleis by
definition a postulate,
an assumption: it is an idea thatcannotbe
provedbyanything elseor it wouldnotbe a principle.Nor can
it be verifiedbyan experiencedifferent fromyourown. Since
you can't therefore prove it if it is questionedyou can only
supportit byfighting forit. To call a thinga principlemeans
thatthe case is closedand the argumentover.You are going
to act,no matterwhattheconsequences;youare goingto fight
to the bitterend. It has become"a matterof principle"with
you.Those wordsare utteredwhenfaithburnsbrightand you
are resolvedto turnfromwordsto deeds.And whenyou have
made such a resolveof courseyou have to formulateprinci-
ples to justifyyourintransigeance.
In practicalmattersno particularproblemis eversolvedby
an appeal to principles.To make such an appeal leads to a
fightand is intendedto lead to a fight.When thefightis over
and the principle"established,"or when both partieshave
finallygot tiredof fightingfortheirprinciples,the problem
still remainsto be solved,and to be solved by the political
methodof compromise and adjustment of conflicting interests
and demands,in an atmosphere now made doublydifficult by
thefighting psychology and the passionatedevotionto princi-
plesthathavebeengenerated. The reallybigfights, likerevolu-
tions,usuallygive riseto a situationin whichpoliticalintelli-
gence,the abilityto compromise, is quite destroyed. And the
successfulrevolutionists normallystartfightingamongthem-
selvesovertheirprinciplesuntiltheyare kickedasidebysome
politically-minded man who knowshow to get men to com-
138
On theImportance
promiseand worktogetheron theirproblems.The mostfa-
mous man of resoluteprinciplein the world todayis Leon
Trotsky.
Of coursethereis oftennothingto do but fightif political
intelligencebe so lackingthatsomeentrenched grouprefuses
to admitthispoliticalmethod,refusesto meetand discussand
bargainand compromise.Industrialcorporations have been
knownto act thusunpolitically towardtheiremployees.Then
the politicalmethodbecomesitselfa principlethathas to be
foughtfor.In factthe onlythingthatfightingdoes seemto
be able to win is the adoptionof a certainmethod,and it can
achievepermanentgains onlyif that methodbe the method
of politics.Experiencerevealsthat the only principlereally
worthfightingfor is the extensionof the principleof com-
promiseto a new area in whichit has not prevailedbefore -
tothefieldof industrial relations,forexample,orto thoseprob-
lems where the SupremeCourt says political compromise
mustn'tbe applied.It is significantthatourpoliticianpresident
has seemedwillingto compromise on anything and everything
excepttherefusaltoallowcompromise ortopermitthepolitical
methodto be employed.He seemswillingto fightto enable
politicalintelligenceto function.
It is thepoliticianwho is theexpertin themethodof com-
promise.He possessestheartof gettingconflicting groupsand
interests togetherin some workingbalanceof effective forces.
He helpsthemthinkout someplan to whichnonewill object
too violently.Inevitablythe measuresthatresultfromhis ef-
fortsarelikelyto be inconsistentwhenjudgedbyanyprinciple.
They are alwaysfaulty,in the sensethattheyneverdo every-
thingthatany groupwants; theyneverdo all thatany clear
principlewould demandtheyshould. They stand always in
needof amendingand re-amending. They are a register
of the
effective demandsof thoseconcerned, workedout by pressure
and
groupspressing lobbyists lobbyingand a finalslow process
of compromise. Men withprinciples, especiallyif theyare ir-
responsible and don't have to take partin thecomplexprocess,
139
The AmericanScholar
are alwaysproneto exclaim:How muchbetterif we had real
leaderswithclearprinciples, able to forcethroughwhat is so
obviously desirable!If some groupsdon'twantwhat I see is
neededtheyshouldbe madeto takeit and like it.
Othernationstodayhave foundsuch Leaders. They have
sweptaway the politiciansand substituted coercionfor com-
promise.To be sure,even such leadershave to be politically
mindedand have to compromise withany reallyinsistent de-
mand.But mostAmericanswouldagreethatthereis a genuine
difference. These Leaders are prettyruthlessabout coercing
minority groups,or largergroupsthat are weak and get the
worst of the officialadjustmentof conflicting interests. Poli-
ticiansand the methodof politicshave theirvirtuesin com-
parisonwith Dictatorsand StormTroops and the Gestapo.
Perhapsthemostimportant function of politiciansis to act as
a buffer in ourgroupconflicts. They softenbitterpassionsand
moderatethestormsthatwithoutthemmightso easilylead to
the violentcoercionof weakergroups.Politiciansmayon oc-
casionbe lessthanwhollyhonestand veraciousbut theydon't
shootus- and whatis stillmoreimportant, theykeepus from
shootingeach other.They giveus enoughof whatwe demand
to keep our principlesslightlybelow the boilingpoint.With
politicians in chargetheway.,we know,is alwaysopento com-
promise. The dangerbeginswhen anythingis definitely re-
movedfrompoliticsand made a matterof principle,forthen
theshootingis likelyto begin.
Politicianscan performtheir functionof effecting com-
and
promises softening clashes if
only they have no principles
of theirown. Their mostengagingquality,in fact, is that
theyare so largelyunprincipled themselves and can therefore
get downto businessso easily.At leasttheykeep theirprinci-
ples fortheirspeechesand rarelylet theminterfere withtheir
work.And the wholepoliticalprocesscan go on onlyif men
are willingto grantthateverygroupknowsits own problems
and itsownneedsbetterthananyoneelse and is therefore en-
titledto getas muchof whatit wantsas it can. Once get the
140
idea thatyouknowbetterthanothermenwhatis reallygood
forthem,onceget faithin someprinciplewhichwill tell you
just whatthe nationmustdo to be savedand just what every
manoughtto be workingfor,and youwill have littlestomach
forthepoliticalmethod.Whatyousee clearlyas theone thing
needfulwill seemso important thatyou will have no patience
withthosewhoseeincorrectly. If youhavethevirusof political
principlesyou will always be losingyourpatiencewith the
foolsor the rascalswho see somethingelse. Impatienceis the
characteristicmarkof the over-principled. They cannotwait
-
to persuadeor educate or learn.They haveto act rightaway,
on principle.They have to get otherpeopleto act; theyhave
to forcethemto act. Anymeansand anymethodwill be justi-
fiedbyyourprinciple:thatis wheresingle-minded devotionto
politicalprinciplealwaysendsup. Such a man will naturally
hatetheverythoughtof compromise;he will muchpreferto
shootor even to get shot.Europe is full of just such men of
principletoday;and withso manyprinciplesand suchintense
faithin themit will be veryluckyto get offwithoutfanatical
religiouswarson a grandscale. It has verylittlepoliticalin-
telligenceleft: it has lostthe abilityto compromise.
In Americawe have not reachedsuch a desperatestateas
yet.We do nottakeup armsafteran electionbecauseour side
has lostor won. It seemsthatnoteventheLibertyLeague be-
lievedin itsprinciples.The nearestapproachto suchintensity
of faithis probablyto be foundin some of our Communist
friends.But I have neverknowna Communist in thiscountry
who seemedreallycapableof shooting;and if theypersistin
theirpresentpolicyof a unitedfront(that is of politiccom-
promisein action) theyare boundsooneror laterto lose their
principles- -thoughit is too much to expect that theywill
everstoptalkingaboutthem.
What we Americansare proneto call our "principles" -
suchthingsas freedom,security, equality,democracyand the
-
like are reallynotso muchideals to be debatedand fought
over as problemsto be workedout by politicalmethodsin
141
The AmericanScholar
particularinstances.Absolutefreedomand absolutesecurity
are notgivento mortalman. Human freedomand humanse-
curityare specificproblemsto be dealt with in specificcases.
They can be solvedonlyif theyare made questionsof fact,of
inquiryabout the meansof securingthem,of gettingcom-
promises nottoounsatisfactory to thoseconcerned. They can be
solvedonlyif theconditions are established thatwill transform
conflict and debateintoinquiryintoa problem:only,thatis,
if the politicalmethodof compromise is enabledto function.
Any solutionof our social and industrial difficultieswill there-
fore depend on our becomingas a people more politically
minded,onourdevelopingmorepoliticalintelligence. We need
moreactualexperiencein compromising on measuresfordeal-
ing withparticularproblemsunderparticularconditions;we
mustbecomeless ratherthanmorecontentto take refugein
generalprinciples, to sitback,criticize,protestand fight.
Thereis greathopeforthespreadof suchpolitical-minded-
nessin the countless boardsand committees of the agenciesset
up by the present administration. The A. A.A. was peculiarly
successfulin thispoliticaleducationbuteventheN.R.A. played
itspartand thetrainingit gave seemsto have had a good deal
to do withthepoliticalintelligence recently displayedby both
the CLO. and employers. The spreadof labor organization,
especiallyalong industrial lines,in whichcountlesslocals and
boardsreallyface the problemsof theirindustry as a whole,
cannot but be a factor in generating further politicalintelli-
gence.Onlywithsuchpolitical-mindedness can Americahope
to escapethe devastating effects of the essentially unpolitical
class-strugglethat has afflicted Europe. That is the veryantith-
esisof the methodof politics,the method of compromise and
politicalintelligence: it is the method of for
fighting princi-
ples and of ruthlesscoercion forthe vanquished. And lestsome
troubledsoul riseat thispointto ask whetherAmericareally
can escapethe fateof Spainor Germanylet me anticipatehis
querybyinsisting thatI do notknowand thatI knowthathe
does notknow,nor does any one else. But I do knowthatto
14a
act on the principlethatAmericacannotescape is the surest
way to destroypoliticalintelligence.There will doubtlessbe
manyparticularfightsto establishthe conditionsof political
compromise;therewill be a generalfightonlyif bothsides
abandonpoliticsforprinciples.
What I have beencalling"politicalintelligence"and "the
methodof compromise" is usuallycalled "democracy."I have
preferred not to use that term,fordemocracyis usuallytaken
as an ideal, a goal, a principle - that is, as somethingquite
meaningless and irrelevant to politicalproblems.I have been
considering whatis impliedin democracytakenconcretely as
a method,a methodof dealing with particularproblemsby
the activeparticipation of as manyas possibleof thosecon-
cernedand therehammering out a workingsolutionto be re-
visedinthelightof further experience. The democratic method
doesnotconsistin sendingmento Washington witha majority
to installsome schemewhich will usherin the millennium.
That is notthe democraticmethodat all; thatis the method
of Hitler,all exceptthemillennium.
In ourstruggling worldtheproblemsarelargelysetforus-
set by what different groupsof men want and by the oppor-
tunitiesand thelimitations of the naturaland technicalmate-
rialswe have to work with. We possessthetechnicalskillto give
menwhattheywantin abundance.We alreadypossessa sur-
prisingamountof economicintelligence:we knowhow to go*
farin relievingour economicinsecurity. The greatproblemis
how to getmento applythisskilland intelligence, how to get
themto agreeto use the intelligencenow availablein our so-
ciety.Our pressing needis forpoliticalintelligence.The means
whichAmericanshave the chanceto employis the methodof
democracy - themethodof politics,of compromise on particu-
lar measures, in disregardof ourprinciples, howeverdear.
H3

Phi Beta Kappa Society Is Collaborating With JSTOR To Digitize, Preserve and Extend Access To The American Scholar

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phi Beta Kappa Society Is Collaborating With JSTOR To Digitize, Preserve and Extend Access To The American Scholar

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

On the Importance of Being Unprincipled

Author(s): JOHN HERMAN RANDALL, JR.

You might also like