The problem which faces the modern world is the combination of individual initiative with the increase in the scope and size of organizations.  Unless it is solved, individuals will grow less and less full of life and vigor, and more and more passively submissive to conditions imposed upon them.  A society composed of such individuals cannot be progressive or add much to the world’s stock of mental and spiritual possessions.  Only personal liberty and the encouragement of initiative can secure these things.  Those who resist authority when it encroaches upon the legitimate sphere of the individual are performing a service to society, however little society may value it.  In regard to the past, this is universally acknowledged; but it is no less true in regard to the present and the future.

Chapter V:  National Independence and Internationalism

In the relations between states, as in the relations of groups within a single state, what is to be desired is independence for each as regards internal affairs, and law rather than private force as regards external affairs.  But as regards groups within a state, it is internal independence that must be emphasized, since that is what is lacking; subjection to law has been secured, on the whole, since the end of the Middle Ages.  In the relations between states, on the contrary, it is law and a central government that are lacking, since independence exists for external as for internal affairs.  The stage we have reached in the affairs of Europe corresponds to the stage reached in our internal affairs during the Wars of the Roses, when turbulent barons frustrated the attempt to make them keep the king’s peace.  Thus, although the goal is the same in the two cases, the steps to be taken in order to achieve it are quite different.

There can be no good international system until the boundaries of states coincide as nearly as possible with the boundaries of nations.

But it is not easy to say what we mean by a nation.  Are the Irish a nation?  Home Rulers say yes, Unionists say no.  Are the Ulstermen a nation?  Unionists say yes, Home Rulers say no.  In all such cases it is a party question whether we are to call a group a nation or not.  A German will tell you that the Russian Poles are a nation, but as for the Prussian Poles, they, of course, are part of Prussia.  Professors can always be hired to prove, by arguments of race or language or history, that a group about which there is a dispute is, or is not, a nation, as may be desired by those whom the professors serve.  If we are to avoid all these controversies, we must first of all endeavor to find some definition of a nation.

A nation is not to be defined by affinities of language or a common historical origin, though these things often help to produce a nation.  Switzerland is a nation, despite diversities of race, religion, and language.  England and Scotland now form one nation, though they did not do so at the time of the Civil War.  This is shown by Cromwell’s saying, in the height of the conflict, that he would rather be subject to the domain of the royalists than to that of the Scotch.  Great Britain was one state before it was one nation; on the other hand, Germany was one nation before it was one state.