Category: BOOKS
The Character of Peoples by André Siegfried
People 1: Latin Realism
People 2: French Ingenuity
People 3: English Tenacity
People 4: German Discipline
People 5: Russian Mysticism
People 6: American Dynamism
The core question Siegfried poses is whether nations actually have a national character.
The book was written in 1952, just after the Second World War, the book looks at how the face of Europe and European life, attitudes, and values were changed forever by the two World Wars.
Siegfried argues that in the psychology of all peoples, there's a certain permanent basis that constantly makes itself felt in many of our traits.
The French still resemble the Gauls, and characteristics Tacitus noted in barbarians and Jews are still visible in modern Germans and Jews. However, these are, of course, modified over time.
The book seeks to understand what this solid basis of Western peoples really consists of and to what extent they could adapt to the revolutionary conditions they found themselves in after the two World Wars.
Siegfried makes it clear that it wasn't just simple evolution, but a revolution in the exact and ruthless sense of the term. Nothing was any longer in its familiar place. The value of things had shifted, relations between men were turned upside down, and conceptions of the universe and its laws had undergone such violent changes that the very basis of morality and ways of thought were shaken.
While the Industrial Revolution had already been fermenting these changes at the end of the 19th century, the two World Wars weren't the causes themselves, but rather accelerated a fundamental tendency to a fantastic degree.
Siegfried felt they were facing something quite new, something for which the past had offered little preparation. He uses a powerful analogy of a man leaving his refuge after a bombardment, wondering what would still be standing.
Indeed, Siegfried argues that the world that surrounded them in 1952 was geographically new, more extra-European than European, with its centre of gravity having shifted gradually.
The catastrophes of the World Wars had taught the old world a pessimism that wasn't natural to it, as previous generations had an unshakable faith in progress.
The 19th century, despite believing itself to be a century of nationalism and imperialism, was in reality internationalist and liberal under the aegis of the accidental White race, or European as he calls it.
A form of world unity, reminiscent of the Roman Empire, had been brought about, functioning under the "opes of Great Britain" in a sort of international mercantile republic where White men enjoyed the same rights. While nationalism and protectionism existed, their influence was limited.
The general atmosphere was one of almost free exchange, with astonishing liberty, freedom of trade, and ease of communications, despite transport techniques that now seem infantile. The solidity and stability of those past times, with firm financial bases, monetary stability based on gold, and remarkable contractual stability, also astonished Siegfried.
This stability was reflected in the social structure, where Western man had deep roots, the peasant was attached to his soil, and the artisan tradition was alive. The Bourgeois seemed inseparable from his surroundings, marked by thrift and a love of order. There was a firm belief in the permanence of their conditions and the continuous march of progress.
However the germs of the coming crisis were already present in the effect of the machine, industrial concentration, the social problem, and the rapid growth of non-European countries.
Yet, for a long time, no one paid much attention to these things. The First World War was the first awakening, but many still naively believed in a return to the status quo ante. It took the world crisis of 1929 to truly open Western man's eyes, and the Second World War destroyed any remaining illusions, making it clear that a revolution affecting the whole of human life had taken place.
Siegfried then delves into how these wars changed the world. Firstly, there was a revolution in the internal equilibrium of states, with war becoming total and governments gaining unprecedented economic, social, and technical powers.
Private interests became increasingly subject to the collective, a regime that, while imposed by the tension of war, the state showed no intention of abandoning. To justify this, the state would use its power to satisfy the material and psychological needs of the masses, leading towards a situation where the masses delegate their sovereignty to governments, potentially ending in a dictatorship within a democratic framework.
He laments that the individual seemed no longer prepared to take responsibility for his own affairs, asking and even demanding that the state take care of them, prioritising security over freedom. Society was becoming more equalitarian and homogeneous but less liberal, with liberalism itself being seen as an outworn doctrine.
Siegfried also discusses the shift from the Artisan Epoch to the mechanical Epoch and now into an administrative age, where organisation and administration were becoming more important than pure technique.
This necessitated big productive units and a totalitarian control of production by the state, a trend accelerated by the two World Wars. The big undertaking naturally becomes political and seeks to control the state, while the state in turn seeks to dominate it, leading to a narrowing of public power without checks.
Individualist societies were no longer adequate, with the state needing to settle everything by laws and decrees. While man had gained certain considerations due to trade unions and social reforms, he had lost individual initiative, risking a sort of societal sclerosis.
Furthermore, there was a complete change in the equilibrium of the world as a whole due to rapid communications. While the aeroplane had abolished distance, the time gained was often lost in an administrative jungle of formalities.
The conceptions of power had also changed, with only large territories and vast, highly organised populations able to exist as first-class powers.
Quantity was replacing quality, leading to the United States and the USSR taking over leadership from Europe. Europe, ruined and territorially reduced, was no longer in a position to play its former leading role.
The centre of world gravity had shifted to the advantage of the United States and a "sixth or seventh continent" one might call Eurasian. The problems of peace after the Second World War were no longer viewed solely from a European standpoint.
The civilised world was becoming less European and more Asiatic and American. The geography of world routes had changed, with previously remote spots now on intercontinental routes.
Siegfried also touches on the revolution in speed, leading to the definite end of all isolation. The advancements in travel were astounding, but he questions whether this "riot of speed" had resulted in better relations between men, noting the increase in political and administrative obstacles.
The 19th century had almost brought about economic unity, but the world was now tending to break up into independent political and economic units. Neither goods nor people could circulate freely, with a new, more stringent form of protectionism based on quotas and exchange regulations. Even travel had become difficult due to passports and visas.
Finally, Siegfried notes a striking moral degeneration in this century of fire and steel, with horrors unimaginable to previous generations becoming commonplace. Humanism appeared merely as a rear-guard action. The transition from the tool to the machine had fundamentally altered production and labour morale, with the dignity of labour and the artistic spirit giving way to speed and coordination.
Social relationships had also been revolutionised, with the Individualism of the artisan becoming an anachronism in a society grouped around the machine. Even private life could not escape standardisation.
Siegfried concludes by emphasising that this was not just a political or social revolution, but a human revolution forcing a revision of all values and a questioning of the very reasons for existence. The past seemed like another age, and it would be folly to try and restore what was no more.
Man had to adapt to the new technical, economic, social, and political environment, demanding a revision of moral ideas and the individual's position within the group while still permitting independence of spirit. The various Western countries faced this problem with varied possibilities based on their traditional psychology.