the americans combat individualism by the principle of interest rightly understood

when the world was managed by a few rich and powerful individuals, these persons loved to entertain a lofty idea of the duties of man. they were fond of professing that it is praiseworthy to forget one's self, and that good should be done without hope of reward, as it is by the deity himself. such were the standard opinions of that time in morals. i doubt whether men were more virtuous in aristocratic ages than in others; but they were incessantly talking of the beauties of virtue, and its utility was only studied in secret. but since the imagination takes less lofty flights and every man's thoughts are centred in himself, moralists are alarmed by this idea of self-sacrifice, and they no longer venture to present it to the human mind. they therefore content themselves with inquiring whether the personal advantage of each member of the community does not consist in working for the good of all; and when they have hit upon some point on which private interest and public interest meet and amalgamate, they are eager to bring it into notice. observations of this kind are gradually multiplied: what was only a single remark becomes a general principle; and it is held as a truth that man serves himself in serving his fellow-creatures, and that his private interest is to do good.

i have already shown, in several parts of this work, by what means the inhabitants of the united states almost always manage to combine their own advantage with that of their fellow-citizens: my present purpose is to point out the general rule which enables them to do so. in the united states hardly anybody talks of the beauty of virtue; but they maintain that virtue is useful, and prove it every day. the american moralists do not profess that men ought to sacrifice themselves for their fellow-creatures because it is noble to make such sacrifices; but they boldly aver that such sacrifices are as necessary to him who imposes them upon himself as to him for whose sake they are made. they have found out that in their country and their age man is brought home to himself by an irresistible force; and losing all hope of stopping that force, they turn all their thoughts to the direction of it. they therefore do not deny that every man may follow his own interest; but they endeavor to prove that it is the interest of every man to be virtuous. i shall not here enter into the reasons they allege, which would divert me from my subject: suffice it to say that they have convinced their fellow-countrymen.

montaigne said long ago: "were i not to follow the straight road for its straightness, i should follow it for having found by experience that in the end it is commonly the happiest and most useful track." the doctrine of interest rightly understood is not, then, new, but amongst the americans of our time it finds universal acceptance: it has become popular there; you may trace it at the bottom of all their actions, you will remark it in all they say. it is as often to be met with on the lips of the poor man as of the rich. in europe the principle of interest is much grosser than it is in america, but at the same time it is less common, and especially it is less avowed; amongst us, men still constantly feign great abnegation which they no longer feel. the americans, on the contrary, are fond of explaining almost all the actions of their lives by the principle of interest rightly understood; they show with complacency how an enlightened regard for themselves constantly prompts them to assist each other, and inclines them willingly to sacrifice a portion of their time and property to the welfare of the state. in this respect i think they frequently fail to do themselves justice; for in the united states, as well as elsewhere, people are sometimes seen to give way to those disinterested and spontaneous impulses which are natural to man; but the americans seldom allow that they yield to emotions of this kind; they are more anxious to do honor to their philosophy than to themselves.

i might here pause, without attempting to pass a judgment on what i have described. the extreme difficulty of the subject would be my excuse, but i shall not avail myself of it; and i had rather that my readers, clearly perceiving my object, should refuse to follow me than that i should leave them in suspense. the principle of interest rightly understood is not a lofty one, but it is clear and sure. it does not aim at mighty objects, but it attains without excessive exertion all those at which it aims. as it lies within the reach of all capacities, everyone can without difficulty apprehend and retain it. by its admirable conformity to human weaknesses, it easily obtains great dominion; nor is that dominion precarious, since the principle checks one personal interest by another, and uses, to direct the passions, the very same instrument which excites them. the principle of interest rightly understood produces no great acts of self-sacrifice, but it suggests daily small acts of self-denial. by itself it cannot suffice to make a man virtuous, but it disciplines a number of citizens in habits of regularity, temperance, moderation, foresight, self-command; and, if it does not lead men straight to virtue by the will, it gradually draws them in that direction by their habits. if the principle of interest rightly understood were to sway the whole moral world, extraordinary virtues would doubtless be more rare; but i think that gross depravity would then also be less common. the principle of interest rightly understood perhaps prevents some men from rising far above the level of mankind; but a great number of other men, who were falling far below it, are caught and restrained by it. observe some few individuals, they are lowered by it; survey mankind, it is raised. i am not afraid to say that the principle of interest, rightly understood, appears to me the best suited of all philosophical theories to the wants of the men of our time, and that i regard it as their chief remaining security against themselves. towards it, therefore, the minds of the moralists of our age should turn; even should they judge it to be incomplete, it must nevertheless be adopted as necessary.

i do not think upon the whole that there is more egotism amongst us than in america; the only difference is, that there it is enlightened—here it is not. every american will sacrifice a portion of his private interests to preserve the rest; we would fain preserve the whole, and oftentimes the whole is lost. everybody i see about me seems bent on teaching his contemporaries, by precept and example, that what is useful is never wrong. will nobody undertake to make them understand how what is right may be useful? no power upon earth can prevent the increasing equality of conditions from inclining the human mind to seek out what is useful, or from leading every member of the community to be wrapped up in himself. it must therefore be expected that personal interest will become more than ever the principal, if not the sole, spring of men's actions; but it remains to be seen how each man will understand his personal interest. if the members of a community, as they become more equal, become more ignorant and coarse, it is difficult to foresee to what pitch of stupid excesses their egotism may lead them; and no one can foretell into what disgrace and wretchedness they would plunge themselves, lest they should have to sacrifice something of their own well-being to the prosperity of their fellow-creatures. i do not think that the system of interest, as it is professed in america, is, in all its parts, self-evident; but it contains a great number of truths so evident that men, if they are but educated, cannot fail to see them. educate, then, at any rate; for the age of implicit self-sacrifice and instinctive virtues is already flitting far away from us, and the time is fast approaching when freedom, public peace, and social order itself will not be able to exist without education.