Cook and Cook: Biology and Government 



251 



restrict ourselves further and further 

 toward mediocrity and inferiority. 



That useful talents may appear in 

 "lower levels of society," as Professor 

 Conklin points out in the May number, 

 may mean that our system fails to place 

 good stocks under favorable conditions, 

 or that our judgment of conditions is at 

 fault. The need is to give special 

 ability or usefulness a selective value, to 

 preserve and increase the family stock, 

 but our system works generally in the 

 opposite direction of using up and 

 exterminating talent as rapidly as 

 possible. Thus there are biological 

 problems that need to be studied from 

 the standpoint of politics, as well as 

 questions of government that need 

 biological answers. 



Mr. Ireland's "broadest generaliza- 

 tion," from his investigation, "that the 

 best governed countries were those in 

 which the mass of the people had the 

 least control over the administration of 

 public affairs," indicates Germany as 

 the shining example, although not so 

 stated. Germany, at least, will do 

 very well to show the advantages and 

 the disadvantages of such a govern- 

 ment, for certainly there w^-s no ap- 

 proach to effective control of public 

 affairs by the people. Germany was a 

 hereditary monarchy, so that the govern- 

 ment was in the hands of one who had 

 not only special training as a ruler 

 but any hereditary advantages of de- 

 scent from a line of kings. More than 

 that, the fabric of government in 

 Germany had woven in it a fairly strict 

 caste system, so that not only the ruler, 

 but the governing class as well, was not 

 selected by mere numbers. At any 

 rate, the numbers were so well balanced 

 that they had no disturbing effect. 

 The Krupp works employed about 

 18,000 men in peace times, and the 

 directors of the firm had 18,000 votes 

 allowed them in the elections; the 

 "blind God of Numbers" was pro- 

 pitiated. 



Superficially, at least, the results 

 attained by this system seemed all that 

 could be desired. German cities were 

 cleaner than English or American cities. 



The visitor to Germany did not see the 

 docks of Hamburg lined with human 

 scarecrows, or little children going 

 barefoot in the snow, as in the streets of 

 Liverpool. Disheveled slums like those 

 of London or New York did not exist. 

 The tenement population of Berlin 

 lived in improved modern buildings, 

 along wide, clean pavements. There 

 were no hungry beggars or aimless peo- 

 ple wandering about in rags. Irresponsi- 

 ble indigence was as strictly forbidden as 

 other misdemeanors. Everybody had 

 something to do, and somebody to keep 

 him at it. Only the Kaiser could do 

 as he pleased. 



Yet all these busy Germans were dis- 

 contented. They knew that their ac- 

 tivities, and even their prosperity, were 

 artificial and that they were intended to 

 serve the purposes of the military caste, 

 as pigs are fattened for the slaughter. 

 Indeed, they often referred to themselves 

 and to their children as "cannon- 

 fodder," foreseeing their fate as inevit- 

 able. With a less efficient government 

 the Germans might have been less in- 

 dustrious, less clean, less orderly, and 

 less aggressive. Internal dissensions 

 and party struggles might have been 

 carried farther and interfered with 

 preparations for attacking other nations. 

 Probably a democratic Germany will 

 not be so much governed, and devotees 

 of efficiency may weep for the good old 

 days of Hohenzollern power. 



No doubt autocracies are the ' ' strong- 

 est" governments, or can be made very 

 strong in the hands of a practical and 

 prudent clan like the Hohenzollerns. 

 The trouble with the most benevolent 

 autocracy, whether it be a monarchy, 

 an oligarchy, or any system in which a 

 single class has full authority over other 

 classes, is that it does not stay benevo- 

 lent, or humane, or practical, or prudent, 

 but generates destructive abuses of 

 power. Courts of monarchs are seldom 

 frequented by wise micn, but have ever 

 been the haunts of parasitic adventurers. 

 If monarchs seek advice from anybody, 

 it is from military men to strengthen 

 their armies or from financiers to in- 

 crease their revenues. Dominance of a 



