My fears were justified.

At first the conversation was commonplace, and I related various experiences in a desultory fashion.  Those that were mildly amusing were most appreciated.  But gradually we drifted towards more vital issues and then the long and futile argument began.  The weapons of sarcasm and denunciation were denied to me by the laws of politeness and etiquette.  I beat in vain against the solid walls of obstinate prejudice and superficiality.  His statements were uttered with dogmatic emphasis.  They expressed beliefs held with all the self-assurance born of ignorance.  They were based on no independent reasoning or observation, but had been assimilated either directly from the daily Press or from a circle of acquaintances whose entire political outlook was the creation of the Press.  It was only then that I realized the immense power of newspapers.

For most people “thinking” is just the discovery of convenient phrases or labels, such as “pessimist,” or “socialist,” or “pacifist” or “Bolshevik.”  When any puzzling mental attitude comes before their notice, they pin one of their labels to it, and, having labelled it, they think they understand it.  The Press supplies them with these labels, and, consciously or unconsciously, they store them up in their minds and always have a few ready for immediate use.

So familiar and commonplace were the phrases which my opponent selected from his store in order to reply to my every utterance, that I could almost tell what he was going to say before he said it.  Moreover, the fact that he had travelled abroad and had associated with foreigners, instead of widening his view had only narrowed it.  Had he never travelled he might have been sufficiently modest to admit that he knew nothing of foreign countries and he might have suspended judgment about them; but the mere fact that he had travelled filled him with a deep conviction that he knew all about the places he had visited, and this conviction, enunciated with pompous emphasis, supplanted the real knowledge and understanding derived from honest observation.  Like so many people who do not possess the faculty of experiencing, he continually appealed to his own experience and continually referred to his maturer years, as though old age of itself brought wisdom.

As for the war itself he took no deep interest in it, although he glanced at the war news every day.  But to understand it, to analyse its causes, to grasp its significance, to realize its true nature, that he never attempted to do.  His labels and his alleged experiences and his years were sufficient to cope with the entire question and answer it satisfactorily for himself.  I almost envied him for his self-sufficiency.  He would never suffer acutely from any mental strife or agitation due to any but immediate and personal causes.  Perhaps such a stable mentality that can without effort reject all inconvenient data is the most desirable of all and the most conducive to happiness.  Certain it is that the stability of society and the very existence of civilization itself depend upon the preponderance of that particular type.