Page 143 [143]
OCR
What can I hope for (from politics)? 1141 It rests upon the supposed existence of a wonderful little piece of mechanism thanks to which force, on entering into the sphere of human relations, becomes an automatic producer of justice. The economic liberalism of the nineteenth century middle classes rests entirely upon the belief in such a mechanism; the only proviso being that in order to possess this property of being an automatic producer of justice, force must take the form of money to the exclusion of all use either of arms or of political power.” However, the apparent neutrality of currency, which makes everything comparable with everything else and which realises the enforced relations of superiority and inferiority in the form of “objective” quantitative connections, is an enormous lie. Reconciling this lie with the freedom of the individual or with the principle of social justice is impossible. This is the reason for the huge success of Nazi demagoguery. Hitler, she writes, represents the victory of a coherent lie over an incoherent one. “There is only one possible choice to be made,” she wrote in her final work. “Either we must perceive at work in the universe, alongside force, a principle of a different kind, or else we must recognize force as being the unique and sovereign ruler over human relations also.” Ihe question is not whether we prefer the power game to be regulated by scientific planning, the will of the majority or the individual’s thirst for profit, but whether we accept the rule of force in social relations. Yet we must accept it if we have no other principle that we can oppose to the blind necessity of power relations (“real” relations! what a soothing expression). However, this different principle exists! It exists and few would deny its fundamental importance in human contact. What protects from force and what Weil calls the radiance of the spirit is reason itself. Not the reason that guards the order of industrial society in the form of rational calculations, but the capacity to understand others, which creates a whole new kind of connection among people. Participating in others’ lives with understanding is exactly the opposite of knowing how to deal with them, of the power of knowledge. Not only does it fail to help one do away with them, harm them or rule over them, but it makes one incapable of doing so (as Emmanuel Lévinas explains). Following Simone Weil — and others, such as Alasdair MacIntyre — we can boldly state that the incoherent lie forming the foundation of modern Western civilisation is none other than the removal of goodwill and mutual assistance (which has continued to be valued in private 12° Simone Weil: The Need for Roots — Prelude to a Declaration of Duties Towards Mankind. Routledge, London, 2002, p.236. 133 Ibid. pp.235-36.
