The answer is: This is all substantially true (which is the definition of caricature). Comfortable folk too commonly ignore the prosaic foundations of imperishable things. Many of the more delightful virtues are impossible vices to men struggling for the bare necessities of life (as you may see any day if you try to practise ordinary courtesy in mounting a ’bus), and it is complacent cant to propose such virtues to them. And men so struggling are not altogether delightful. The point about them is, by what right or merit of yours do you live so much more easily, with so many more opportunities of the good life; and do you use your opportunities? And can you be of any use to others less fortunate than yourself? For the rest:
(1) The argument defends too much. It defends every status quo against all change. But change, though not necessarily progress, is evidently necessary to progress; and, even if progress be despaired of, change is in itself nearly always healthy. It prevents men from going to sleep.
(2) When all the world is delightful, all men will be able to enjoy delightful companionship. Meanwhile, the pioneers must suffer, and hope for better things for their children.
If it be argued that education does not make men delightful, in fact very much the contrary, I answer that that depends upon the education, and that, if genuine education doesn’t, nothing will; which is absurd.
(3) When all the world loves lovely things, then lovely things will be easily come by, and ugly things will not be tolerated. This is not a generous illusion but a simple economic truth. Suppose I manufacture purple handkerchiefs adorned with green dragons: I do it because there is a demand, and if you want one perfectly plain (and if nobody else does) you will have to pay twice as much for it because it is a “special”; but if all the world wanted them plain, they would be a stock line and you could have them for half the money. Meanwhile, the pioneers must pay double or go without.
(4) When all the world has passed through the stage of intelligent scepticism and examined its foundations, it will worship the unknown god without fear and without reproach—a very right and proper thing to do. Meanwhile, the pioneers must be damned dissenters.
That is the gist of this study: “Methinks I see in my mind a noble and puissant nation....” Good (b) is in itself better than (c); and it is a half-way house to (a), which (c) is not.
All the textbooks tell us about the nature and origin of belief. I have but shown a few examples of what incredible things men believed almost down to our own day, and still believe. One of the chief functions of History is to show what wrongs good men have tolerated, and what absurdities wise men have believed, as a warning to their later sons to look warily about them for the like. In that sense this study may claim to be true history.
That low man seeks a little thing to do,
Sees it and does it: