ABSTRACT
Aristocrats, Democrats, and Bureaucrats The family and the State have been opposing forces ever since the State first existed: only in the Royal Family could the two harmonise emotionally. Consequently a pretence arose that the nation was a large family, of which the sovereign was the head. This view prevailed in China and Japan, in Mexico and Peru, and to some extent wherever the conception of divine kingship was strong. By such means a strong State could be created: the sentiment which made men loyal was partly religious veneration and partly respect for the head of the family. The impersonal State was a creation of the Greeks and Romans, especially the latter: the elder Brutus sacrificing his sons for the public good is a story embodying what may be called the religion of public spirit. In the East, this religion is quite recent, and a product of European influences. Confucius deliberately put filial piety above the law, and blamed a son who surrendered a criminal father to justice. In Japan, patriotism still has a great deal of the ancient character of devotion to the divine Head of the Family; when, as must happen, this sentiment decays under the influence of rationalism, it is doubtful whether the Japanese polity will survive, and it is not improbable that it may give place to a government more on the Russian model. In China there has been a persistent attempt to create a modern patriotism in place of the old family feeling; this attempt has centred round the Kuo Min Tang party and the almost religious veneration for Sun Yat-sen. In India a modern patriotism is arising through hatred of the English. But in all these countries, since they lack the Roman tradition, patriotism as we understand it is still somewhat exotic.
