{ } = word or expression can't be understood
{word} = hard to understand, might be this

Student introduction: (Philosophy 58, May 13th, 1954)

[Opening remarks missing]

... strange enterprise to place the American history within the frame of reference of a universal history. For this, I had to go back one moment to { } the data of that strange church which the Pilgrim Fathers carried to this country. We figured that the ways the Christians had to open up at all times and still today are four-fold, and I tried to show you that the bloody sacrifices of the tribes, of the clans, the star-worship of the pharaohs -- of the big feeder as they have it now with Mr. Stalin again, or Malenkov -- or prosperity around the corner, that the Greek worship of curiosity, of mental enterprise, and the Jewish expectation of the coming of the Lord, in the scripture of The Messiah, that these ways were surpassed by the Christians because they enabled a man at any one time to choose between these four roads. And that was liter- -- that is -- was literally so, I tried to prove to you from the four Gospels, every one of them being written to open one of these four roads. And then we went to see that at the end of ancient Christianity, in the old Roman Empire, there was the same problem of giving man freedom -- that was Anthony -- of giving him the faith that he could regenerate what his forefathers had done, in the right creed even against an emperor -- that was Athanasius, with his trinitarian creed; the great problem of living in the proper era, that was the action of St. Augustine, who took the soul of Christianity, the citizens of Christianity out of the citizenry of the -- of Rome; and the freedom of speaking your own tongue, because the letter was not important, but the spirit, and that was the action of Jerome in translating the original Bible into a new language.

So these four people -- I first want to go into this for a moment to correct your notes. We haven't quite placed them. The dates of Jerome are -- which you want -- wish to add to your notes, 345 to 420. It is not superfluous to know these dates, gentlemen. You know so few dates in history, you -- perhaps sometimes you don't even know that Jesus is supposed to have been born in the year 0, but that's a fact. And these years from 250, the birth of Anthony, to 430 contain everything that the people who came to this country remembered. This is a second thing I now have to prove. If you ask me, "What filled these people, the Pilgrim Fathers, in their own heart in Europe?" you can find it in this very famous book, by Arber. Who knows this book, Arber, The Pilgrim Fathers? Well, it's the best present you can give to any girl of your friendship for Thanksgiving. The Story of the Pilgrim Fathers, as Told by Themselves, Their Friends, and Their Enemies. It's written by an Englishman, of course, because this country doesn't

care for the story that happened before on the other side. There are 346 pages in this book devoted to the state of heart and mind of the people at home. And then only the rest, another 300 pages, or not even that much, to the actions here of the people in the first years in the colony. I was asked whether this was only true of New England. You'll see from this book that it isn't true of New England, because the negotiations were carried on with the Virginia Company at home, Virginia Company being already in existence. And already in 1610, the Virginia Company had a song, sung in London, that they were going to plant a nation where there was no nation, yet. That's 1610, that's all -- happens all in England. Then there is a very strange passage on -- or not strange, but { } should expect, as a matter of fact -- why the people came here. And of course the reasons are all of a nature that -- quite unconnected with this continent. They hadn't been here when they decided that they should go. And at the end, there is a funny thing about the people who should not come to America. You'll see how this has changed, how now most people come for the reasons they are warned off in here, cautioned against.

"I heard some complaint of others for their -- ample reports of New England, and yet, because they must drink water here, and one -- many delegates they here enjoy in England, could presently return to the Old World with their mouths full of {clammoths}. And can any be so simple as to conceive that the fountains should stream forth wine or beer, or the woods and rivers be like butchers' shops and fishmongers' stores, where they might have things taken to their hands? If Thou canst not live without such things, and hast no means to procure the one, and wilt not take pains for the other, nor hast money to employ others for the rest where Thou art: for as a proud heart, a dainty tooth, a beggar's purse, and an idle hand be here intolerable."

I think these four words you should take down, gentlemen, the four things that are -- the four ways that are useless in America: "... a proud heart, a dainty tooth, a beggar's pur- -- purse, and an idle hand be here intolerable." So that person that had these qualities in Eng- -- in the New World is much more abominable. Now I think the world -- the New World is full of these abominable people, today with the standard of living. I think you will find many people who have a proud heart, a dainty tooth, a beggar's purse, and idle hand. But it isn't the American way. The American way is -- was to exclude these four. What was the positive content, gentlemen, of the faith of these people?

If you want to have it embodied in one old father of the Church, this way of life, you may turn to St. Ambrose. St. Ambrose was in a somewhat similar position as the Pilgrim Fathers. St. Ambrose -- perhaps you take this down, too -- lived from 340 to 397. He's very famous because he required the emperor of Rome to ask forgiveness for his slaughter of innocent people before he could be

received by Ambrose in Communion. That is, Ambrose was the first bishop who ascertained in actual fact the emperor's submission to the sacraments of the Church. As you know, that was the battle of Athanasius. And in this sense, Ambrose simply accepts the Athanasian creed that the emperor is not a Godman, or a man-god, and that therefore he has to humble himself, as anybody else.

That was -- be very much within the line of the Pilgrim Fathers, who also thought that the royal majesty was just a human being as anybody else, and didn't believe in the divine right of kings. That's Ambrosian. The second thing you hear from Ambrose, that he wa- -- introduced monasticism into his dioceses of Lombardy, the richest province of the empire, you may say. It's still today the most fruitful part of Europe. Cotton grows there, and maize, and -- and rice and the mulberry trees for the silk, and if you go through Lombardy, you can hardly compare any other region, even in this country, to it in fertility. Well, in introducing the monks to this richest part of the empire, you can see that he asked for the Puritan character of asceticism, of renouncing the world in some form. Whether you don't smoke, or whether you don't -- listen to television, in some form any reasonable people -- person has to draw the line between himself and the world that surrounds him. If you fall for everything that the world offers, you have lost your freedom.

So the Puritans, of course, are direct descendants of the monks. They are worldly, secular monks. And again, Ambrose is a person who, in a kind of synthesis, inherited from Anthony and the other monks this one feature. And he's very famous -- Ambrose -- in what you sing every Sunday in any service in the world here, is the father of the Ambrosian chant, Te Deum laudamus. Whether you -- sing, "Holy, holy, holy," that's all Ambrosian tradition, or any one of the other famous songs, from the first hymn in the hymnbook to the last, Fa- -- Ambrosius is the father of hymnody. He's the first who has written Latin hymns. And all our choral services stem from him.

The -- you find the Ambrosia center sung, the Ambrosian song itself out of which most of our modern hymns are in some way derived. Most what Watts -- Isaac Watts and Charles Wesley has composed is -- is enlarging on this. You find it also in the Catholic breviary, where the monks have -- pray it every day, at matin: Te Deum laudamus, te Dominum {confitemo}, and I think once in your life you should hear it. "We praise you, O L- -- God; We confess You to be the Lord; Thee as a father in eternity all the earth worships; To Thee all the angels, all the heavens, and the powers of the universe, to Thee the cherubim and seraphim with an incessant voice proclaim," -- now come this Number 1 of the ordinary hymnbook, "Holy, holy, holy, the Lord God Sabaoth, full are the Heaven and earth of the majesty of Thy glory." And now comes -- you must

think how important this was in the wilderness here, the very simple statement: "Thee, the glorious choir of the Apostles; Thee, the number -- praiseworthy number of the prophets; Thee, the white -- white ..." I have to translate from the Latin here, "... Thee, the white-clothed host of the martyrs, praises. Thee, over the whole orb of the earths, of the lands, the sacred Church confesses; and the father of immense majesty, as the unique Son and as the Holy Spirit."

So in these few words, gentlemen, you have the whole Old and New Testament and the history of the Church, the prophets, the Apostles, and the martyrs. And that, with this background, the people landed on these shores. So you have the Jews, and the Christians, and the verification through mission, which is in such three lines just enshrined in the heart of every one who came to this country in the first 200 years, to America. I think that's not unimportant. And you may take down Ambrosius then as the shortest quintessence of what the people in the 17th -- 18th, also 19th century, I would say, took for granted. They took it for granted that there was a meaningful history of God with His children. They took it for granted that there were {continue} this. They took it for granted that this history was known, and was told, and that they would have to tell it their children -- all the premises of a universal history we have spoken about, you remember. And that the whole same story had a direction, and an end.

It is very necessary for you, gentlemen, to know this. Protestants and Catholics, as you know, today still wage war -- I think it's a superficial war -- between themselves and the Jews too, as with regard to the meaning of the times between 500 and 1500, so-called Middle Ages. It is very important for you to see that the people who came to this country took the Church certainly of the 4th century with themselves. That is, not just the Gospel, and not perhaps the whole story of the -- but that burden wasn't necessary. But the four people -- Anthony, St. Augustine, Jerome, and Athanasius -- were with them. And I only mention St. Ambrose as a fifth father, because he is a kind of combination of these four ways of life. And when people ask you, gentlemen, "What is Christianity?" you must not say it's the New Testament. That's a book. And you can also not say it's the story of the last 1954 years, because that's much abused. And dissent, and heresy, and cruelty, there is the Inquisition. There are many things we cannot swallow.

The Protestants tried to throw out all the martyrs, what is called in the -- ma- -- the Saint -- Ambrosian song, the "candidate." But they kept the Creed, for example, which only dates from 325 of our era. Now I offer you a compromise here. You can see that the fight against the worldly powers of the 4th century is still in the Pilgrim Fathers very definitely. So that there is no such break between the Church and the New Testament as some people w- -- make -- try to make us believe.

Now we return to the American story itself, after I have reminded you of the -- once more of their -- of the treasure they though they carried with them: direction, promised future, and a great, glorious ancestry -- certain ways by which they could free themselves from the world by denouncing it, like all the vices, beginning with drunkenness and adultery, to smoking and dancing, or as I said, television and -- and similar things, according to the time, always different. We smoke, probably in -- or we drink, probably in 1650, you would also have thought some -- differently on these matters.

The second thing is the unity with the people of the past as expressed in the Creed, that there is a continuous minimum by which every human being is taken to task, by which even the greatest tyrant, be it Mr. Hitler, or be it Mr. Stalin, or be it Mr. James I of England, you see, is taken to task and put down. We cannot tamper with the freedom of conscious, of the individual, or with his right of resistance, or his right to emigrate. And as you know, this is again very practical today with the problem of the American passports.

The third thing is, so we have freedom of the living generation, gentlemen. But regeneration of the right living of the past, that's Athanasius. Then we have future, a free future, an era which is not yet to an end, but which has a clear destiny and a clear direction. And then we have in the language problem the tremendous task of every generation to be transported again to the pure source, and to bring forward new fruit. Now the people in the 18th -- in the 17th century, and this book is -- is a witness to this, thought that they would set an example for the people at home. And so in the 17th century, there are the Church in the wilderness, with the great expectation that the people in England would become so jealous that they would either call them home, or would conform to the life of the colony here. And the word "colony" therefore had at that time not the -- what you call "colonialism," but they were very proud that they were planters, the word "colony" meaning planting, plantations. And so Providence was called, as you know, Providence and Plantations. And it's -- also important for you to know that in the 17th century, nobody thought when he used the word "colony," that this was anything of second-rate. Quite the contrary. It was an improvement on the metropolis, to be colonial. Only if you hear the different color, you understand the Pilgrim Fathers. They did not think that they were second-rate because they were in a colony. As you know today we -- we debate colonialism, and we are torn, because we don't see why the Viet Minh shouldn't have their independence from the French, and why the American policy now to bet on the wrong horse. After all, we are against -- against -- we are for the small nations, so it's very terrible for us not to be on the side of -- of the independence, of the people in England. That's much more normal for us, and -- today.

But you must hear in the 17th century that these people were the Church in

the wilderness, and therefore very glad to be called the Plantation; just as Paul said that he had never planted a church, but he had watered it and irrigated it, and cared for it. Peter planted and {bought} -- fed it, or cultivated it, or pruned it. These are again colonial expressions. And you should see that the very word "colony" in the 17th century, gentlemen, was not a worldly expression, a secular, political expression. It was a religious expression. They felt that they were planted as a Church. And that is true of Roger Williams, just as well as of the theocracy of Massachusetts, or of the people of Virginia, that they were the branches of the Church universal. And it's very important that you must see, gentlemen, that whoever came here, of whatever denomination, whether it's -- were the Catholics in Maryland, or the -- the theocracy in Massachusetts who were the Congregationalists, or became the Congregationalists, and -- that they all far more -- if you had asked them at those days -- would first say that they are members of a Church before they would say that they are -- were members of a political commonwealth, or a political intent. And so the -- the result of the 17th century, which you have to keep in mind, is that in America, the Church is older than the state. The Church is older than the state. And all our problems in this country, now with the school bus, and the lunch -- school luncheon and so, come from this very fact that this is not clearly recognized, that in this country, the relation is the opposite from Europe. In Europe, the state is older than the Church, but in America, the Church is older than the state. The Church is first, and has then made certain concessions to the state. But the state is just tolerated. And if you give that up, you lose the background for the soul of the citizenry here. And that is in jeopardy at this moment.

So you have to -- there is an instinct now, many books on Jonathan Edwards are written on the Pilgrim Fathers, on the 17th century -- everybody feels in this country -- or not everybody, but the serious people feel -- that we must link up with the beginnings of America at this moment, that's also the meaning of the courses in American history, because if we do not link up with those people in the 18th and 17th centuries, before the Declaration of Independence, gentlemen, we'll make mistakes. For example, we will not deal rightly with the issues, Church and state, which will plague you and your children for years to come.

It's a very difficult issue. And I'm not going to offer you a cheap solution here at all. But I want to draw your attention to the fact why that must be so: because the people who came -- have come to this country belong to a church before they believed they belonged to the commonwealth on this side of the ocean, because they were at home carried out of their political bondage, because they had a second home -- their Church -- which told them, "Leave the state in Europe. Leave it, and come to another state." So you see that the sheath, or the tube, or the channel, or the way of hibernating, of lying in wait, of being in suspense, was that these people had an allegiance beside their allegiance to the political

kingdom of England, or the political unit of France, or wherever they came from, or the Palatinate, where the -- all the -- where Mr. Eisenhower's ancestors ca- -- have come from. Why did he come, Mr. Eisenhower, first? Because in the Palatinate, the princes there, the so-called Elector of Palatine, changed from Catholicism to Protestantism, I believe seven times, within 50 years, and that became intolerable for the inhabitants. And they were more serious than these princes, and so they left. And they left very early, as you may know. They left in the first half of the 17th century. I think Mr. Eisenhower's pedigree goes back to that. Does anybody know? It's very interesting, gentlemen. He's -- he's -- the Palatinate people are the old- -- one of the oldest groups of settlers in this country. I was quite amazed when I learned of it. When I came to this country, I met a Miss Knapp, K-n-a-p-p. She was the headmaster of her school in Concord, Massachusetts, and we became well acquainted. And I said to her one day, rather casually, if she was of German descent, and she said, "Well, it's 300 years back." Three hundred years back, she -- was 1642. So that starts -- startled me, of course.

So gentlemen, the Church is older than the state in any families arriving in this country. And whether you call this the Church, that doesn't matter. I call it this way, and I offer you that you have to find this as the best term, whether it's -- these were Jews, or heathen, or free masons, or anarchists, or Bolsheviks who came to this country, they all belonged -- while they were on the Atlantic Ocean, while they were on the Atlantic Ocean -- no longer to Germany or Austria, and not yet to America. But since nobody can live without belonging, you just have to ask yourself where they -- did they belong. Ja. Where did these people on the boat belong, who had left the last port of embarkation in Europe and had not yet reached New York; who were on these ships before 1840, as you know, sometimes three months; who were very seasick, who died in great -- large numbers; who buried their children on board ship; who saw children born on board ship. Who were these people? Have you ever thought of it? Who were they? They certainly were not just fish and cattle. They were real people. They were baptized. They were given a name. They were received into some community, but it was not a political community. And once you begin to ponder over this, you see that America is certainly the first country that wholesale has been settled as a Christian country. That has never happened before in the history of the world. It's a quite unique venture.

And I spoke to a very wise man about this some days ago. And he said, "Well, more has happened. More has happened. In the year 1945, there went a tremendous tremor through all of Europe, and 280 million people in Europe were ready to leave and to come to America, if they only would be allowed. That is, gentlemen, there has been one earthquake, in 1945, which you have to take together with the earthquake of 1620, and which means that at one time, the Europeans were all ready to board ship and to put Church before state, and to believe that

they should make a new start and drop their old history. Every one of them. That is a slight exaggeration, but not very large, because as you know, even the French today, the French youth, when you take a plebiscite in France, they have 60 percent of the younger generation said they would be willing to come to this country, preferable to staying at home.

The so-called annoyance with us in -- in Europe and the animosity is just the counter-picture of this, because they can't come. They have to prove to themselves that America after all is very bad. That is, at second thought, if you have to stay in Europe, you see, with the -- with the falling franc, and the lack of government there and so, you have to hate the Americans, because you can't -- you can't do it. But that's just an afterthought. I think the wave of pro-Americanism in 1945 to 1949 and the animosity at this moment against us is the same story, a tremendous shakeup of the foundations of the Old World, and a certain consciousness that we have an advantage. And that isn't just the automobiles, gentlemen, but the very foundations of America are different. Everyone here came as a person who knew that he belonged to two orders. Had to, had to, in order to live. And such a man is free. And such a man is -- has inherited Anthony and Athanasius, and he's -- has inherited St. Augustine and Jerome. He's free with regard to the language he speaks. He's willing here to learn a new tongue, and even to change his cockney accent of English to the American drawl, or the nasal sounds of Chicago. That is, even the English who emigrate change their tongue.

And so the four freedoms of which we speak in our politics, gentlemen, are not the best freedoms. I think every American inherits the four freedoms of Anthony, because he says, "I can do without the fleshpots of England, France, or Germany," what I read to you. "I don't expect to do anything but first to wash dishes in New York, when I land, to begin from scratch." That is Anthony. That is the -- that is the desert fathers, or the Pilgrim Fathers. He expects that nobody here shall be his boss, with ultimate authority. That is, he -- he subscribes to the Trinity against the Constantinian man-god of imperialism. He does, as I said, live in a new era that doesn't coincide with the history of France, or the history of Sweden. And he lives in a freedom that the language will not matter if his children should learn English, and he goes on to speak Italian, that will not break the intimacy of the family. They will still be his children, and he will still be their father, as you see in so many -- especially Italian families, or any other group, of course, in this country is exactly the same -- which is a tremendous experience for any simple mind, you see, that the language, the mother tongue is not the basis alone of mutual trust, and love, and hope.

All these things have to be experienced, gentlemen. In Europe, they clubbed each other to death. If you didn't speak the language of the country in which you lived, you were a traitor.

We come now, gentlemen, to the fact that from 1700, from the -- you may say from the founding of Yale University in 1702, which is a -- to a certain extent the end of a chapter in American history, from 1702 to 9- -- 1898, as I told you, for this country has glorified its existence as the new Israel, and as the new Greece. That is, from simply being the Christian Church in the wilderness and setting the example for Europe, obviously from 1702 to 1898, America separated from the Old World more and more, and went independent. And this independence, of course, had again to have some imaginative illumination. Now you go to Montpelier, in Vermont, or you go to Concord, New Hampshire, or you go to Washington, in the District of Columbia, and you go to the political buildings, and what do you see? They are built in the Greek Styl -- style, and they all have Latin names. They are called the capitol. That is, America went Greek and Roman in its political bearings, in its political interest. That was the great cradle of liberty, the Greek city. And Rome was the cradle of -- of political power and wisdom. And don't think that's a -- an accident. In no American -- European country do you find a capitol, except the old, real capitol in Rome. But in every of the 48 states, you do find this. And you all -- everywhere you find these pillars. They are either Corinthian, or Ionian, or Dorian. But they always have the same problem of impressing you with the classical civilization issue. The term "democracy," or the terms of our Constitution, of politics are Greek, obviously. The word "democracy" is Greek certainly, and the word "politics" is Greek. And in our worship, however, as you know, the sects have kept the balance to the Greek issue by being the -- the true Church, and being like the Puritans, very much in the paths of the Hebrew tradition. And the Psalms have formed the backbone in most services in this country, the Psalms of the Old Testament. And it has been often said, I need not -- you know all this, that the Puritans in many ways tried to be as strict as the people of the Old Testament.

That is, the renewal of the Church, when the Church ceased to be up in the air as the light for the heathen, when the Church comes into its own as a living matter, will always be the realization of Israel. That's especially true of the Presbyterians, and especially true of the Congregationalists, but it is true of all the other groups as well: that the strictness, the church discipline will always look very much to the -- alike to the pious Hebrews, to the patriarchs -- life of the patriarchs, and it is no accident that all the names of the Old Testament have been received here as given names into the families of this country.

When -- when Thomas Alva Edison invented the gramophone, a clergyman came to see him, and said, "I want to find out if you really -- if you really made this invention, or perhaps it is a hoax."

"Well," Edison said, "How are you going to find out?"

"Oh, I know," he said. And he said, "Can I speak -- bespeak one of your disks?" Or rolls it were, at the time.

And so Mr. Edison said, "Sure, go ahead."

And he immediately began to -- in a tremendous hurry to give -- a sequence of thousand names from the Old Testament. He said they're all the names of the people of my -- of my parishioners, which are actually still there. {Althenial} or, you see, and all these very {Anintophle} and so, very difficult names.

And when it was all through Edison said, "Now, so what?"

"Oh," he said, "I'm the only man in this country who can speak these names so rapidly, and also they are only from my own church, and therefore they -- if you can repeat them now, this cannot be a cheat. Then it's actually true that you have invented the gramophone."

So Edison was very satisfied, because he was able to reproduce the -- these names, only to show you that the names of the Old Testament have played a very great role here and that this must have been -- when did Thomas Alva Edison invent the gramophone? 1876? Later. Does anybody know? Gentlemen! Aren't you interested? Edison was my hero in my youth, but I'm ashamed to say I have -- I've forgotten the date. Nobody knows? When did he invent the gramophone. {Mark}, make a guess. When might it have been?

(1843.)

What? 1843? Does anybody know when he died?

(1924.)

(1931, he died. '31 or '32.)

Ja.

(1932.)

What? In the '90s he invented it, I'm pretty sure.

So gentlemen, the synagogue, and Greece, and Rome were the old ways which the Americans claimed to renew, to regenerate in a new way in the last two centuries. When you look at our college here, Dartmouth College, a liberal arts college, based on Latin, and Greek, and Hebrew, and preparing people for

the ministry and the law, and if you think of our orators, Daniel Webster, steeped in Cicero and Demosthenes, obviously, that was the thing to do, it's long ago; you hardly understand the importance of these models, but the people in this country were trying to be the people who regenerated these two ancient worlds: the worlds of Greeks, and of Jerusalem. And they meant it, and I think they did it. And that is the specific American character between 1700 and 1898 that nowhere in the world was this classical enthusiasm and this Old Testament enthusiasm taken so seriously, always on the basis of the New Testament. But the sequence, gentlemen, and now you may begin to observe the miraculous story of America, and its uniqueness -- trying to find a piece of chalk. Well. Your imagination will -- must help you.

The story begins here, with people hanging out far, on the European front, as the foremost Christians, the most vital ones, the most electrified, the most sensitized, the feelers, so to speak, of the whole animal, feelers stretching now into the -- future, and coming to this country as an avant-garde for the people who are the most advanced at home. For the Cromwells and the Miltons who stay at home, but who feel that here really the decision is made. And Roger Williams, for example, went from Providence in the '40s and spoke to Cromwell and told him what he had to do. And Cromwell said, "I wished we were over in America, because then we could institute all your radical measures. But at home, we are handicapped. We must stay -- go slowly." But they were great friends, and Roger Williams impressed him -- them as having the newest deal, a better deal than at home.

So gentlemen, if you kindly would now begin your strange draft of the American situation. On the left side, we said they begin from scratch in the most primitive earth, with conditions which are similar to those first men who settled in a new valley 5000 B.C. And you can then equate the wilderness of 1620 on Plymouth Rock with 5000 B.C. And on the other hand, you must equate the spirit of the people who land on Plymouth Rock with the foremost missionaries, the most modern man of 1650 at home, who were in advance of their time -- people in Europe. And you get this tremendous tension that people are in a situation of geography, of climate, of economy which is 6,000 years behind. And in spirit, they are a hundred years out in front. And that's America. Stretched out, not on a cross of gold, but on -- crucially between the most primitive situation of the pioneer, and the most advanced situation of the spirit. If you cannot grasp this, you do not understand how modern, how old-fashioned any American is at the same time. We all are. I, too, am, gentlemen, after 20 years in this country, I have to -- we have no help. We have to do everything ourselves, where the Europeans have very refined conditions. Today still you have no servants. And the man in this country has to do many chores, which no European would ever think of doing. So we are still more primitive in many ways, and on the other hand, we

are also more advanced, more simplified. We have reduced human tyranny, and human pride, and human daintiness, and human beggar's tooth, and what he calls here "idleness" to a considerable degree. You remember what the man said, who should not come into this country, these four points.

On the whole, I think, this has been very successfully done. If we have rich people, their -- their children are sure to waste their money so quickly that there is no great danger that this money can be abused for long.

Now the -- the second phase, gentlemen, adds then to this far-flung, far-out position, a building-backward into the past of Israel and Greece. You'll remember, Israel and Greece are the two worlds of antiquity which came last, came before the coming of Christ, and were not the first forms of life on this earth, but already rather refined and complicated forms.

Now 1898, as you know, we went to war against Spain. And that was nothing superfluous, gentlemen. It was a complete change of scene. After the frontier had been closed, and the promised land and God's country had been occupied, and Arizona and -- had become a state, America changed its whole character, and it's still changing since two world wars, as you know. And we have far-flung bases. We have the Philippines; Heaven knows how we got there, but there we are. That is, although they are independent, we must defend them. And we have even Okinawa. And we have -- although we don't say it, we are disinterested in the Suez Canal, but we would be very angry if we couldn't have our fly -- Air Force around the Suez Canal somewhere, and we are against Gibraltar, because that's colonialism, but we are just building air bases in Spain.

So we are certainly turning towards a world order. And the word on the -- are the -- on the money of the United States, "novus ordo {oritor}", a new order arises, perhaps you don't know that this sentence is found on your -- on their dollar bills, but there it is. Novus ordo {oritor} has a very profound meaning at this moment, because novus ordo oritor -- we become suddenly today the police force of the whole globe. And that's all we're debating today in the papers. Really, I'm so sorry that the good people in government don't have time to devote themselves to this question, but have to devote themselves to very superfluous things. That is suddenly the responsibility of our government for prosperity, for Point 4; that is, even for the prosperity of the other nations in the Marshall Plan, for example, and especially for the prosperity in this country. You think that's natural, gentlemen. But do you think that in 1800, any farmer of New England believed that his crop depended on the government in Washington? He prayed for his crops. And in -- at Thanksgiving he thanked for his crops some other power. And there were no rainmakers at that time. Or if they were, they didn't function.

And that is, in other words, gentlemen, Greece and Israel are two orders of life in which the economy has nothing to do with politics or with religion, but in which everyone is fending for himself, and in which a farmer certainly knows that if he has weeds on his plot of land, it's his fault, and not the president's in Washington. But today the man in economics -- in economic field meets weeds, he immediately has a lobby in New -- in Washington and says, "These weeds should not be. Will you kindly do something about it in Washington?"

This is Egypt, gentlemen. This is empire. This is the world before Greece and Israel, which is suddenly coming into your -- slowly rising into your consciousness. And that's why you are so different from your great-grandfathers, or from the people who fought the Civil War. You would not go to war for your own personal enterprise because you have none. You are employees. And therefore, you don't understand the whole problem of a hundred years ago, when the majority of the people were not only independent from England politically, but independent personally, economically, and making their own weather. And not blaming the government at -- when they had nothing to eat. We do that, and perhaps we have to, because it's so complicated today that you and I probably would starve if the good man in Washington wouldn't do something for us. But we have a little bit become like the red Indians, who also speak of the Great White Father in Washington. And at least we should have an uncle there.

Now gentlemen, this is a change that nobody can have. It's all over the world. Where you get machinery, and where you get powers like the atom bomb -- nuclear power, and sea power, and solar energy, these energies, gentlemen, go beyond individual use. As you may know, in 1935, some very decent people in this country formed a committee on economic power. Paul Hoffman was one of their leading -- spirits. And he said, "Let's forget all these damned European slogans about capitalism, and socialism. We have no interest in these in America. But there is a very simple, other process. A plot of land plowed up one yard deep, that is -- can be under the care of an individual. An oil drill going deep 5,000 yards cannot be under the care of an individual. If you touch the -- the -- the -- the ground so deeply, that's different. If you dive into the deep sea for the algae, for food, you get so much capital invested, that no individual can handle that." And that's our problem with Aramco, in Arabia, with the oil. And they just investigate it and grade it, so to speak, things and then say -- they said, "Tie, here -- this tie can be made by an individual enterprise. And this clothes still can. And the shoes still can. That is, what you wear that you can have for yourself." Already with these bulbs, it becomes a -- a corporation. These bulbs are not made by a small man in your hometown. And -- it's General Electric. And you know how often these -- these bulbs anger you, because they stop burning. If you had a local man, you would be very energetic and go to another local man. But you can't do this with the bulbs, because electric power is far more concentrated. And

you cannot create it everywhere.

So this committee on economic power, this group just showed that we hang in different nets of energy, and if it comes to -- when it comes now to nuclear power, or cobalt power, or -- or hydrogen power, the whole earth has to unite, or we go -- are ruined. So we have to live in various societies. You can still have your bread baked at home. But already your button which you sew on, you cannot produce -- the Amish men were very wise, as you know, in Pennsylvania, they don't wear buttons, because they thought -- felt that would make them dependent on the next city. And the Amishmen have no buttons, as -- if -- as you know this, to this day, because it was the first discovery that they would then become dependent on the -- an economy which would not be free enterprise, which would enslave them. And they would become dependent on the merchants in Philadelphia.

That's very wise. If you and I could live in self-made things, we would be very proud people, probably. But it's useless to talk about this, because we live for everything we use in a different radius, in a different circle. At a const- -- conference of technicians, and engineers, and architects and -- three years ago, I was the co- -- master of ceremonies, and I had to sum up what these inventors and -- technicians said. And it was quite interesting that we were able to formulate the law of modern technology. And the modern law of modern technology is very simple, gentlemen, so simple that you hardly can believe it. It says that every new invention accelerates the timespan for the act, destroys the social group in which before we have been living, and enlarges the space on which we depend -- the area on which we depend. If you take this down, you have the reason why the United States at this moment can no longer live like the Greeks and the Jews in antiquity. We cannot li- -- simply live in 48 states, because the 48 states, as you know, politically have lost their meaning. Earl Warren is -- could tell you something about this, in his country in California, where he abolished even the dif- -- the distinction between the Democratic and the Republican Party. The 48 states are just too small now because, gentlemen, with the cable of electric power carrying -- or the water of the Hoover Dam carrying the water into California, the whole problem is how to distribute the water between Arizona, and New Mexico, and California, and Nevada, as you know very definitely. And if they wouldn't unite, they would have to go to war against each other. And therefore these four states formed for all purposes of water consumption absolutely, you see, closed-knit unit and they cannot make any decision, any one of these states on their own account.

Would you repeat the -- take down this law, gentlemen? Any technological progress accelerates the time, widens the area, and destroys the previous social group. When I have a pump, water pump on my lot, on my house -- in my house,

over in -- across the river, as I had in the beginning, I depend on my own power to pump, by hand. If I install an electric pump, I immediately become dependent on the power corporation. If in White River, or at the dam, or anyplace where there is a strike of the electricians, I have no water in my house, which is a very serious matter. I no longer am self-sufficient. Even with regard to water, let alone to light, { } I used to have a kerosene stove. I have an electric stove, so if anything burns through, a fuse and I have no fuse in my house, I have to wait until I can get an electrician to repair my stove. It happened the other day. I had a new -- a new stove. And I was very proud of it. And it was a Westinghouse. And out went my old -- my old stove, and I had a kerosene stove in reserve. And I said, "Now I can part with my kerosene stove," and gave it away. Well, the next day, I wa- -- couldn't cook, because the fuse had burned through and I had to wait until the electrician found time to repair it. And I thought I was very funny having a house in the country, not being able to cook. But that's how we live today.

That is, the electricity enlarged the area which has to be integrated. It certainly accelerates the process by which I have been able to cook. Because I just push a -- button, instead of having to carry the wood from my woodlot into the -- into the -- and lit- -- and fill the stove. So the time is infinitely curtailed, abbreviated, and shortened, but the area, which must be integrated, is infinitely lengthened. And certainly the people with whom -- on whom I have to rely in my neighborhood, change with every invention. That man who had to repair my stove could not be found in Norwich, where I live. That is, the group -- social group with which I have neighborly bonds of economical identity and solidarity, changes the very minute I depend on Sears, Roebuck, or on General Electric, or on any such institution, because I must wait until the space between those people and myself is bridged, and I lose interest in some of my neighbors in the next -- in the same town, because I no longer can integrate my -- situation with theirs. We have nothing to say to each other. We have no dealings in an economic sense. So we meet at square dances, and for other nice purposes, but that's just merriment, and that isn't necessary, and that isn't really neighborhood.

So gentlemen, this is a strange law, which is very -- little known. And this was done, as I said, in -- in Darmstadt, in Germany, at the international con- -- conference of technicians. And I'm very proud that I formulated it, and it was accepted, this law, that any technological invention accelerates the time, or shortens the time, lengthens the area -- it is perhaps better to say: shortens the time, lengthens the space, and -- or widens the space, and destroys the so- -- the hitherto social group. You must now link up with other people, living far away. That's the case with anything we call progress. That's the essence of technological progress. And people are very blind. They don't want to admit that this is just so.

That's why we have to come to terms with the other half of the world. I think if you don't want to -- to -- that's a serious business now, because nuclear energy obviously can only be dealt with wholesale. And that's what people don't like to hear at this country. So -- I saw an article on how to protect American industry against the bomb. That isn't the issue. But it is the issue, as you well know, that the chain reactions can get out of hand, and whoever produces the bomb -- the Russians, or we, it makes no difference -- they -- if their chain reaction gets out of hand, or our chain reaction out -- gets out of hand, while we produce this, or while we experiment with it, the -- the geographical boundaries, political boundaries will not respect, you see, will not make this chain reaction stop. And I think that a few years from now, or even shorter, the people on both sides will be -- get so afraid of this chain reaction business that they will say, "Well, we'd better do something." You see, we had an explosion. Now, as you know, that was 17,000 megatons, instead of 5 thou- -- 5 million -- was it? Or 5 -- 15,000? What was it? 15,000?

(Twenty megatons, instead of 4.)

Wie?

(Twenty instead of 4.)

Twenty instead of 4 megatons. Well, that gives you a foretaste of the kind -- what I call chain reaction, that while you are doing with something, something very different happens. And if you know these dimensions, it just means that no smaller unit than the whole of mankind can handle this energy. But that's true already of electricity, gentlemen. It was already true of the steam engine. And we are very lazy in our thinking. It has taken us 200 years to discover this law, which James Watt set in -- mobilized in 1760. This law, that any new invention accelerates and widens, it shortens the time and widens the area, and destroys the previous social group. If you once think this through, gentlemen, you know what we are in for. And it's ridiculous to think that in Hanover you can pass this resolution on peace and make a dent. It's not the issue.

The issue is that when you work larger units of energy, you have to form a larger group that works as energy. And you can't -- there's no -- no way out of this. It is impossible to have an electric power plant in Hanover alone, or in -- into -- in Norwich alone, except under the most exceptional circumstances. You have a private Niagara Falls, you may do that. But if you have this, you will want to export the energy, and I think the people in Buffalo don't benefit very much from Niagara Falls, for themselves, the electric power. I don't know. Does anybody know how the electric power is exploited there? Do we have -- electric power from Niagara Falls?

(Oh, the power, all the power developed { } and all of Niagara Falls is shipped all over the Eastern -- yeah, Eastern New York state.)

And how about Canada?

(Oh, Canada's now developing its own side.)

What?

(Canada's now developing its own side, in addition to the plant that it already has. That new project there will create double the power output.)

For them. For them.

(Yeah. { })

So they do participate. So it's already an international source of power, is it? Well, the same is true of the energy, you see, of Swedish, and Swiss ener- -- electricity, all Germany, up to Westphalia and the Ruhr gets electric current from -- from Switzerland.

So gentlemen, the degree of energy determines the degree of cooperation, or the -- the -- the size, perhaps one should say, of the energy, of the source of the energy determines in what units we have to work. Now this poses for the first time the same problem as the Nile Valley and the Tigris and Euphrates valley posed in antiquity. It is the river, as you know, that made Egypt. It is the river that made -- the rivers that made China. And it is now the energy that makes the new economic units, however you like to call them in the future, inside which we must exist, and inside of which we alone can have our dai- -- bread and butter, because either they destroy us by being bombs, or they feed us by giving us work, or also by making us unemployable. Whatever you do, you cannot get out of the cycle created by the sources of energy, which we now begin to use, and which are like the -- the Cataracts of the Nile, which determined the fleshpots of Egypt, and which en- -- enthroned these emperors of China, or the Peruvians, or -- or the Aztecs in Mexico.

The secret of agriculture at that time, and the secret of energy in our time lead to the same prob- -- way of life, gentlemen. And we will call it for brief -- for brevity's sake the problem of the Great Feeder. The problem of the Great Feeder. As I told you before, I think, already in this class, it is very strange, your generation really thinks that the man in Washington is responsible for prosperity. The clothesworkers of America, the textile workers { } they said it, last -- two days ago, there. They accused the government that they didn't do enough for prosper-

ity. I'm very old-fashioned and I still think that a government is a political institution for justice, and I still hope that enough private enterprise is left in this country so that the worst can be done -- can be -- how would you say? -- can be avoided by the reasonable action of private economy. I think that is to be hoped, because I don't -- hate to see a tyranny established, like the Egyptian tyranny, or the Mexican tyranny, where the emperor has to say, you see, what you plant, and what you do, and what you earn. But we are on a -- in a lonely fight, it seems to me. More and more people in this country simply believe that they -- people in Washington owe them a living. And the more people come to think that, the more we make this man the -- into a Great Feeder, feeder, I mean, a captain who is not a captain for justice, or for political freedom; but a captain for jobs, and a captain for -- for salaries, and a captain for bread, and so on and so forth. And as you see, we are in a very exciting period, because what began with the prelude in 1898, when we went to look at -- take a look at the globe and say, "We must be -- pick up the last relics of the Spanish-American empire" and took the Philippines, that is now the case all over the globe. This whole business in Indochina is a case in point. Of course, I need not tell you this. It may be that it is a semi-globe. It may be that we are only responsible for the sea lanes. I am inclined to think that America is an empire of the seven sea lanes, much more than of the land masses. But there we are. Fifty percent of the earth, certainly are self- -- have fallen to our care, and in the process, we are also responsible for the -- using the energy of this half of the globe, while { } in this nuclear business, of nuclear energy, you see the handwriting on the wall, that we have to budget the energy ...

[tape interruption]

... in this way and that's all the problem of the pharaoh, of the pharaoh, the idea of feeding people, which had never occurred to the days of -- in the days of the Republic under Washington. It wasn't George Washington's business to feed the people.

Now I can -- you can hardly exaggerate, gentlemen, the transformation. Greece and Egypt, gentlemen, how are they -- how do they differ politically and mentally? As -- when you grow up -- or your fathers -- in one of the 48 states of this country, with one capitol, and a golden cupola on top of the capitol, in the -- in the center of your state, the idea was that the world was wide, and import, and export, and travel and immigrate, and -- and {some} money everywhere and capital and labor could move freely all over the world, capital goods and labor moved, and you lived in your little home country. And from there, you directed your energies, exactly like the Greeks. In Greece, gentlemen, and in America in the 19th century, your home country was smaller than your trade, than your trade. And your economic interests could be larger, wider than your political

loyalty. That's the important thing of Greece. You remember when I said that -- were 258 cities in Greece. Well, every Greek was a trader, a sailor, a merchant, a jeweler, and he sold his goods all over the globe. You find Greek vases in Northern Italy with the Etruscans, and you find them in Spain, you see, and obviously the Greeks, you see, were between -- between all the other great countries, you see. That is, their home political unit was small, and their interest was worldwide. Mr. Walter Crane produced bathtubs. He went 32 times to Russia, selling his bathtubs. And so we have a great foundation now, under which people are sent to Russia, you see, for study for a year. He left it. That was a typical American enterprise. His bathtubs covered a much wider realm than his political loyalty. When he cast a vote in Illinois for an election that was limited to Illinois. But when he produced bathtubs; that was unlimited.

Now gentlemen, in a pharaonic kingdom, this is the opposite. When you make the man a Great Feeder at the center of your government, then he is responsible for the oil in Arabia, where you can't have possibly any political interest. And actually Mr. Eisenhower is responsible for the peace in the Near East, because the Near East is the buffer between Russia and us, and what happens in Turkey, and what happens in Saudi Arabia, and what happens in {Zion}, and what happens in Egypt is of ut- -- greatest concern to us, in every respect. But you and I -- you can still trade in a much smaller area. That is, we are not Greeks anymore, with regard to the world. Everything is changed. We live within a -- one-half of the globe. The political order, gentlemen, now is one-half of the globe. And your economic interest is dispersed. You may still export to Sweden, or to France, but you -- probably there were -- I don't know if there was any enterprise in this country that is more global than the politics of the United States must be. For the first time, the home in which we have our political loyalty is bigger than the area in which we trade, as individuals. Even as corporations, but certainly as private people.

Therefore, gentlemen, we are topsy-turvy. From the whole -- before 1900, it was a valid suggestion to say that an American had a home -- political homecommunity, and a wide area of import and export. For example, he got his books from England in the 18th century. So the book trade, obviously, you see, was larger. He bought books from the country from the country with whom he had separated politically, you see. And you get all these lecturers from Europe, like Mrs. Jennie Lee. And that was quite reasonable in the 18th century. I don't think it is, nowadays. I think we didn't learn much from this lady.

Well, it's a habit, you see, still from the old days of the Republic. But we think we must import these people, for lectures. You must include this into -- to see the American scene, gentlemen, by -- why do I call it Greek, and why do I call it Israel? When a great sociologist of Europe in the '90s or the first years of the 20th

century came to this country, he said, "I didn't know America. That's a wonderful country. I'm a ..." he was a Calvinist, himself, in -- and he said, "You know, in America, I -- you must believe -- belong to some little group, some church, a congregation, a community, a club, in order to be something, in order to -- to make -- to make a career in politics. You have to have some background, and some contacts. And we think of America as a mass of people. But no! One is a free mason, and the other is a Baptist, and the other is a southern Baptist. And you have to know this, and that makes all the difference. And that's why there are 56 men who are Methodists -- Methodists in the Congress, because they are close-knit." And he described this wonderfully and as a matter of fact. It's the best thing this man has ever written. It's the famous sociologist Max Weber, W-eb-e-r. And I have never -- I otherwise think he's not a very sound thinker, but he was overwhelmed by the closed-knittedness, by the grassroot idea in this country, that you have to belong somewhere. And you know the constitutional expression of this fact is that you have to have residence in the place where you are elected, for Congress or for anything. That doesn't exist in Europe. In England, Mr. Disraeli, or Mr. Palmerston, or Mr. Churchill, you see, just sends a young man to Manchester and the people in Manchester have to elect him. Now if this were so simple, you see, you know what would happen in Wisconsin. But it can't happen, because if you {aren't} at home in Wisconsin, you can't be elected there. Nothing doing. That is, we still have this political at-homeness in the small town, or in the small district or in the town meeting, which the Europeans have given up long ago, and that's why I call it Greece, because that was the power of the Greeks, that they had 258 little states in which you could be at home, and make a career, and become famous, and become a pest for the rest, for the 257 other states.

All this is unknown here. It's very strange. We should be proud of this, gentlemen, but we should also be very serious, because obviously there are now two giants that are trying to win our new loyalty. We are going before Homer, and before the Old Testament. We are pre-Homeric men, now, once we begin to believe that the government owes us a living. Wherever we do believe it -- as far as we do believe it -- the farmers seem all to believe it already -- we think of our human situation in terms of one great economic order. And for this reason, we're beginning then to think our -- shift our loyalty from this small home-community and our political career in it, and our -- the little church with the white spire, to the man who can give us jobs, to the famous 60 million job-man, of whom Henry Wallace spoke 10 years ago. You have forgotten this, that Henry Wallace, once vice-president of the United States published a book at the beginning of the Second World War, 60 Million Jobs, and that ever since, instinctively, all the statisticians and the professors of economics have looked at the labor statistics and have always -- found comfort in reading the figure, 61 million jobs, 62 million jobs, and 63 million jobs, because he had laid out this rule -- laid down this rule

that America had to be a country of at least 60 million jobs if it should be prosperous. You know we had 40 million jobs in 18- -- in 1929. And in 1933, we had 30 million jobs. So to have 60 million jobs is quite some achievement. The value produced of national income in 1939 was 83 billions. And this year, as you know, it was 325 billions. Compare these two figures. It's just unbelievable, even if you -- if you accept the increase of the -- of the -- or the decrease of the m- -- value of the dollar, it is still staggering.

That's why we are in for a change. And I -- as I said, it is good for you to remember that the three events -- the Spanish-American War, which placed us squarely into the world at large, into the Pacific Ocean, and into the Atlantic Ocean, and didn't allow us to speak of our country as a wilderness, or as a beach, or as a frontier, or as something -- you wouldn't -- rolling, so to speak, on, something infinite in space, but which defined our place between Russia and China, Japan and Europe, you see, for good, that this first event then was followed by two world wars, in which we got more and more cornered. And now we are brought to bay with the bomb. We are vulnerable. We are in the midst of the world. Detroit is more vulnerable than any other city in the whole world, because you cannot defend this whole, vast Arctic region north of Detroit. The -- that's nowhere. And there is the Northern Pole. That certainly -- this -- we should have never discovered the North Pole, obviously, because it's now the most dangerous point in the world.

Well, I mean to say, gentlemen, we are suddenly oriented. Egypt was oriented. You'll remember what we said about orientation. We are fixed. In 1800, when we conquered -- when we -- when Jefferson bought Louisiana, a man wrote, "We are thrown into infinite space, like a meteor -- like a flash of a meteor." This letter shows you how the Americans felt at that time. It was all indefinite. "We are thrown into infinite space." Today we are in the opposite position. From all sides, the people encroach on us. We find that suddenly, because of air warfare, our two seashores do not protect us anymore, and we are cornered. And that's a new experience for America. Nobody could say today we are thrown into infinite space. But we are pinned down into finite space. That would be today the -- the term that we use. And gentlemen, that's a complete change of feeling. The Greeks in their islands never felt anything but infinite space, because this -- they went to the other shore, and freely sailed, like our clipper, the China clippers. These people from Maine who went around the -- the -- South America and Straits of Magellan, and went out to China to sell ice. Fantastic. Infinite space. Going nowhere and coming from nowhere, so to speak. Everything is changed. We are suddenly in the midst of something; and it isn't very agreeable, this something.

And therefore, gentlemen, we are building up -- we have to build an empire

around ourselves, or we find ourselves being now empire builders. We have an empire state, and we have an empire building, and we even have empire-builders, I'm afraid to say. Or I'm not afraid, but I'm very conscious that it has to be said. That is, gentlemen, the Church in the wilderness, those Christian pioneers and messengers have been followed by the new Israel, and by the new Greece and Rome. And now we -- building a new world order, which very much looks like the old Egypt. The feeding problems is uppermost. We must take the tide of -- by the flood-lock, and we have to organize energy. And that is simply the same problem which the old empire-builders had to face with their irrigation projects.

And the third -- last thing is, gentlemen, that coincident, of course, with this tremendous order of a whole globe, this global problem, we have to get clannish. We have to integrate our little groups. Otherwise we freeze to death. The community, a city-state like Nevada or Vermont are unreal today. They are unreal. Any community is. If I would limit myself to the people who live in my own town, for my friendship and acquaintance, I would starve to death, morally and spiritually. That's true of every man in our little town. We are 1500 people, and every one of us has to have friends elsewhere. If you want to live happily today in this country, you must say to yourself, the whole country is one big city, and that you have friends everywhere. And then you will be happy. But as soon as you say, "I only have friends in Podunk," and you have to live in Podunk, you are lost. If you want to live in Hanover, I advise you to have friends in White River Junction, in Norwich, in Etna, in Thetford, in White -- in Windsor. That is, neglect the accident that this is called Hanover. It has no meaning any more for your life. It hasn't, I assure you. That's a secret. Most people practiced long ago this. Think of all the people in New York, who -- who have this commuting frenzy. But we all live this way, gentlemen. The old homes, towns, and homecommunities are gone. We have to create them in -- betwixt and between. One of your friends may live in Clairemont, and the other may live in Woodstock, and the fourth may live in Thetford, but woe to you if you think -- you must limit yourself to your friends who live actually in the accident of your political community. You can't afford it. These aren't your neighbors. Your neighbors are everywhere, or certainly regardless of the accident of these -- these political boundaries. This is new. That the -- of course, the automobile has enabled us to do this, and the telephone. It's a fact. All the attempts of the ministers to reintegrate the neighborhood, gentlemen, they've all been aborted. It just didn't work.

Now therefore, gentlemen, the clannish, the spiritual tribe, the spirit of -- the groups are of the utmost concern to everybody who wants to educate at this moment in this country. Take the Dartmouth alumni. That is a solidarity which is spiritually created. It has nothing to do with any community. Has nothing to do with any boundary of a state. Out of 48 states these people come, and still they are devoted to some common link.

And next time I'll -- we have then to follow out this: the consequences, gentlemen, of our no longer reviving simply the last stages of antiquity, but the underlying orders of tribes and empires changes our task. And American history therefore has entered a new phase. But it also shows you that we can't escape this. It's a part of the universal tradition of the human race which now has to be re-created on these shores. And I think that's a very honorable task.