Utopia of Usurers | Page 8

Now, it is true that any
positive creed, true or false, would tend to be independent of itself. It
might be Roman Catholicism or Mahomedanism or Materialism; but, if
strongly held, it would be a thorn in the side of the Servile State. The

Moslem thinks all men immortal: the Materialist thinks all men mortal.
But the Moslem does not think the rich Sinbad will live forever; but the
poor Sinbad will die on his deathbed. The Materialist does not think
that Mr. Haeckel will go to heaven, while all the peasants will go to pot,
like their chickens. In every serious doctrine of the destiny of men,
there is some trace of the doctrine of the equality of men. But the
capitalist really depends on some religion of inequality. The capitalist
must somehow distinguish himself from human kind; he must be
obviously above it--or he would be obviously below it. Take even the
least attractive and popular side of the larger religions to-day; take the
mere vetoes imposed by Islam on Atheism or Catholicism. The
Moslem veto upon intoxicants cuts across all classes. But it is
absolutely necessary for the capitalist (who presides at a Licensing
Committee, and also at a large dinner), it is absolutely necessary for
him, to make a distinction between gin and champagne. The Atheist
veto upon all miracles cuts across all classes. But it is absolutely
necessary for the capitalist to make a distinction between his wife (who
is an aristocrat and consults crystal gazers and star gazers in the West
End), and vulgar miracles claimed by gipsies or travelling showmen.
The Catholic veto upon usury, as defined in dogmatic councils, cuts
across all classes. But it is absolutely necessary to the capitalist to
distinguish more delicately between two kinds of usury; the kind he
finds useful and the kind he does not find useful. The religion of the
Servile State must have no dogmas or definitions. It cannot afford to
have any definitions. For definitions are very dreadful things: they do
the two things that most men, especially comfortable men, cannot
endure. They fight; and they fight fair.
Every religion, apart from open devil worship, must appeal to a virtue
or the pretence of a virtue. But a virtue, generally speaking, does some
good to everybody. It is therefore necessary to distinguish among the
people it was meant to benefit those whom it does benefit. Modern
broad-mindedness benefits the rich; and benefits nobody else. It was
meant to benefit the rich; and meant to benefit nobody else. And if you
think this unwarranted, I will put before you one plain question. There
are some pleasures of the poor that may also mean profits for the rich:
there are other pleasures of the poor which cannot mean profits for the

rich? Watch this one contrast, and you will watch the whole creation of
a careful slavery.
In the last resort the two things called Beer and Soap end only in a froth.
They are both below the high notice of a real religion. But there is just
this difference: that the soap makes the factory more satisfactory, while
the beer only makes the workman more satisfied. Wait and see if the
Soap does not increase and the Beer decrease. Wait and see whether the
religion of the Servile State is not in every case what I say: the
encouragement of small virtues supporting capitalism, the
discouragement of the huge virtues that defy it. Many great religions,
Pagan and Christian, have insisted on wine. Only one, I think, has
insisted on Soap. You will find it in the New Testament attributed to
the Pharisees.

VI. SCIENCE AND THE EUGENISTS
The key fact in the new development of plutocracy is that it will use its
own blunder as an excuse for further crimes. Everywhere the very
completeness of the impoverishment will be made a reason for the
enslavement; though the men who impoverished were the same who
enslaved. It is as if a highwayman not only took away a gentleman's
horse and all his money, but then handed him over to the police for
tramping without visible means of subsistence. And the most
monstrous feature in this enormous meanness may be noted in the
plutocratic appeal to science, or, rather, to the pseudo-science that they
call Eugenics.
The Eugenists get the ear of the humane but rather hazy cliques by
saying that the present "conditions" under which people work and
breed are bad for the race; but the modern mind will not generally
stretch beyond one step of reasoning, and the consequence which
appears to follow on the consideration of these "conditions" is by no
means what would originally have been expected. If somebody says:
"A rickety cradle may mean a rickety baby," the natural deduction, one