H G WELLS: THE OUTLOOK FOR HOMO SAPIENS (c. 1939-1942)

§22 AMERICAN MENTALITY

Wells's overview of the USA makes rather sad reading. He dates the USA more or less from 1776, and thinks it was influenced by the French and American 'Revolutions'. He thought the ideas of 'democracy' were fought out in the USA; the sad facts of its construction as a temporary Jewish operation, to precede the 'post-democratic era', was not predicted by him. He has absolutely no idea of the Jewish and Freemasonry roots which make the claims to democracy a distracting irrelevance and mistake. Probably it was decided by Jews that a pretence of 'democracy' would introduce mass voting and voter fraud; allow manipulation of mass populations; and allow Jews legal entry into accepted power structures, after which they could take over those modern castles.
      Wells thinks the Civil War emancipated slaves, and was a triumph for the idea of equality; he doesn't bother with the Indian Wars or southern America. He doesn't bother with religion, and doesn't see the vast intrusion of Jewish ideas and stories and concealed beliefs into the territory. He doesn't observe the Federal Reserve, or the resulting effort of Jews to bankrupt the USA so Jews could buy it up and get legal power over it. He even likes F D Roosevelt. Whom re regards as a wealthy, patrician type. He does not explain how someone after not even two centuries could be rich; this question does not arise so obviously in Europe, obscured by millennia of development. (There's a similar puzzle over South Africa, where Rhamaphosa has been made richer than any of his ancestors could have imagined).

      Wells mentions waste and raw materials, and attributes Theodore Roosevelt with noticing these things. Wells skips over the Great War and depression. He does not mention the aesthetic nullity of the Jewish influence, making their environment hideous and depressing, an attraction to Jews. I doubt whether any part of Europe had towns uglier.
      Wells is scathing about universities around the world, and regards the collective US mind as at the level of a horse. He has a spirited argument with an imaginary American critic. It's amusing but inconclusive.

      At each point in his reasoning, Wells accepts what could be called the 'Mainstream' interpretation. With the Internet age, people have a wider pool of information to fish in, so there's some possibility of avoiding the media mental straitjacketing. Wells considered the USA the most educated of all countries—books expensive, as in other huge countries, but this problem overcome, he thought, by public libraries and universities. But he clearly had enormous doubts.
      Wells, all his life, understandably thought of authors as standalone authorities; he was uneasy with anonymous, regularly paid, career hack writers of the media and church and 'public information' type, though I don't think he ever assembled a full critique of them.

Raeto West   7 Jan 2024


      FINALLY, IN THIS STOCKTAKING of human forces, we come to the countries more directly affected by the American and French revolutions at the end of the eighteenth century, the countries in which, beyond the shadow of the British oligarchy, radical and liberal and democratic ideas have had a maximum freedom of expression. Chief of these, and charged now, it would seem, with the main burthen of their common destiny, is that third great mass of human beings with any sort of solidarity, the United States of America, China, Russia, North America; these vast countries make more than a third and nearly a half of humanity; they occupy most of the north temperate zone, which is the zone of maximum human energy, and with the British Empire they constitute the greater part of mankind. They are all fermenting with change. And the most free-spoken, active, perplexing and various of all these great vats of destiny is the United States.
      The United States is of primary significance in world affairs for a number of reasons. In the first place its population is almost entirely literate, that is to say, it can read. How it reads and what it reads is another matter. There are no cheap books in America such as there are in Great Britain and France; most books worth reading can be got in England for sixpence, while in America they cost from ten times as much upwards; and outside a limited world even prosperous people hear very little of any but those best sellers which follow each other like epidemics across the continent. But the newspaper Sunday Supplements and the public libraries largely compensate for these present imperfections of the book supply. So the American public as a whole, over the vast areas it covers, is simultaneously accessible, if need be, to new ideas, and that accessibility is greatly enhanced by the nation-wide distribution of the cinema and the radio. And next it has a tradition of free discussion. The American says what he thinks, and even when he doesn’t think he is apt to say it. You can always contradict him, and there is no handicap to help any opinion to win.
      Education is in the hands of the forty-eight state governments of the Union, and varies widely in its standards and organisation from state to state; schools, colleges and universities are scattered abundantly over the land; they range from sheer imposture upward, and the best of them are as good as or better than anything else in the world. There are great endowments for education and for educational enterprises. There are probably more highly educated people in the United States than in any other single country whatever, and when it comes to what we may call the half-educated, people whose minds, already loosely furnished, could easily be quickened, there is no comparison. In one or two backward states, modern scientific teaching—of evolution, for example— is prohibited in the state schools, and discriminatory obstacles are put in the way of the education of coloured people. These are exceptions to a general freedom. The intellectual possibilities of this vast country are unlikely to be seriously threatened by invasion, extreme war stresses or civil convulsions for some time. They are threatened just enough to stimulate them and prevent their becoming lethargic.
      Like all the rest of the world, the Union has felt the impact of the new conditions of human life, the progressive abolition of distance, the immense increase of material power and the ensuing dislocations of economic and social order, but less confusedly and with more time and elbow-room for consideration than any other country. It has been able to look and see; it has been able to think more plainly about the change that has come upon us all. It has only realised in the last decade that it has an accumulating surplus of unemployed.
      There is a vast elementariness about the past hundred and fifty years in America. It is as if social and political life in the United States was simplified and made plain for demonstration purposes to all the rest of the world. We have there in unqualified contrast the East and the West, the North and the South, White and Black; no petty nationalisms, no traditional hatreds, no language difficulties, no localised religions obscure the broad issues. The War of Independence left the country a democracy, democracy at its first stage, the state of political equality and individual liberty. The extension of the democratic idea to include socialism, educational equality and universally accessible information, which we have traced in §6 [WHAT IS DEMOCRACY?], scarcely affected America until the close of the nineteenth century. Throughout all that century she worked out the possibilities for good and evil of a hard individualistic democracy. The Civil War, though it arose out of a number of economic and political stresses, simplified out at last to a logical completion of the equalitarian idea by the abolition of slavery and the enfranchisement of the liberated slaves.
      Life throughout that period resolved itself into a scramble for wealth. The whole nation thought dollars, talked dollars. For several generations it was a distinctly exhilarating scramble. There were so much unexploited land, such reserves of natural wealth available, that it was possible to accumulate vast fortunes and still find fresh employment for everyone who chose to work. After the Civil War came a great development and organisation of industry. American invention, American enterprise, soon led the world in the expansion of big business and the mechanisation of life. For a time it was not realised that this march of Triumphant Democracy [Footnote: Andrew Carnegie, Triumphant Democracy (1886)] was essentially the rape of virgin resources that could never be replaced. Triumphant Democracy poured across the continent, destroying the forests and so changing the climate for the worse, ploughing up pasture that presently became sandy desert, exterminating animal species, using up coal, oil, mineral wealth as though there was no end to any of these things.
      It was only as the “Wonderful Century” drew to its end that the immensity and the menace of Waste dawned upon people’s minds. Everyone was so keen to get dollars that many of them forgot to get children, but the supply of labour for all that vast ploughing-up, cutting-down and tearing-out was sustained by a tremendous immigration. In 1906 a million immigrants poured into America, mostly people who knew no English and had a far lower standard of life than the native worker. They were divided among themselves at first by their special ignorances; they supplied a far more manageable type of labour from the point of view of the exploiting employer. [Footnote: See my The Future in America (1906); Two Studies in Disappointment] The home-grown strain hoped to save money, get on, escape from employment, and so it was slow to develop any class solidarity until it realised that every door to hopeful competition was being closed upon it. Labour legislation in America therefore fell far behind that of Great Britain. Not only was the immediate real wealth of America being turned to dollars; a rapid deterioration of the common life was also going on. Very reluctantly would America admit that the great uprush was over. Theodore Roosevelt’s campaign for Conservation was the first practical recognition in America that Americanism had gone too far.
      This is not a history, but a survey of existing possibilities, and we will say nothing here of the events that exalted and depressed American life for the next third of a century, the War, the boom, the collapse, until we come to that nation-wide realisation of crisis and panic that brought Franklin Roosevelt in as the saviour of a staggering social system.
      Sometimes a work of art can do more to present reality than a whole library of reports and statistics, and that tremendous genius, John Steinbeck, in his Grapes of Wrath (1939), has given an unforgettable picture of the last stage in that process of material and moral destruction and disillusionment with which the story of sturdy individualism in America concludes. He gives it all, from the exhausted soil dribbling down to dust, to the broken pride, the hopeless revolt and the black despair of the human victims, without rhetoric, without argument, but with an irresistible effect of fundamental truth.
      The crisis discovered a great man in Franklin Roosevelt. As I have written elsewhere, [Footnote: Experiment in Autobiography, Chapter IX, §9, and World Brain, The Fall in America, 1937] he is a “patrician” rather in the vein of Lord Grey and Arthur Balfour than a typical American politician. He is rich and his peculiar health makes him float rather above the level of everyday temptations. He has the boldness of imagination needed to meet the challenges of the time, but he has the great gentleman’s disposition to look to subordinates for the detailed execution of is designs. None too soon he has carried America forward to the second stage of democratic realisation. His New Deal involves such collective controls of the national business that it would be absurd to call it anything but socialism were it not for a prejudice lingering on from the old individualist days against that word.
      At the beginning there was much talk of the Brain Trust, which he had gathered about him to realise the vast changeover of American affairs he had in hand. I was tremendously excited by this Brain Trust idea, and I went off to America, as my Experiment in Autobiography relates, to have a good look at it. He had imagined that the universities could and would give him men of exhaustive knowledge and capacity in sufficient amount to create, on the spur of the moment, a civil service competent to meet the huge demands of this great transition he was so gallantly attempting. These Brain Trusters were what the universities produced for him. My wits were not quick enough to size them up at once. They seemed to be an extremely interesting and miscellaneous set of men, but I had a feeling from the outset that they were not going to justify the President’s expectations. He was under an easy delusion about the American universities. He thought they were untapped reservoirs of wisdom. They are not. They were quite unable to give him the knowledge, understanding and responsive imaginations necessary to convert his magnificent gestures of social and economic reconstruction into a working reality.
      I went, a travelling note of interrogation, from him to Stalin, because I realised that the same insufficiency of mental resources and support which was baffling the American President, the lack of any adequate mass and structure of administrative knowledge in the state, must also be crippling the socialist thrust in Russia. Was Russia meeting or attempting to meet that difficulty? In some way of its own? And in Russia I found Gorky in a dream of Russia’s greatness, unfolding the plans of non-existent universities to my incredulous eyes, and nothing else but intolerant dogmatists and intriguing commissars.
      Both Roosevelt and Stalin were attempting to produce a huge, modern, scientifically organised socialist state, the one out of a warning crisis and the other out of a chaos, and the lack of a brain organisation to give that state consciousness and coherence was a difference not in nature, but degree.
      The brain organisation of the United States is not up to its new job. It needs to be revised, expanded, turned round to face the future. I have compared the head structure of the Russian giant to the brain of a newt. To carry on the biological analogy, the knowledge and will structures of the United States seem to be somewhere about the level of a horse. It has a cerebrum all right; it remembers almost too well within a limited range, it shies at shadows, stampedes very readily, and has no particular zeal for learning new things. Something very much better than that is demanded.
      For the great, closely-organised human community that socialism contemplates, a World Brain is essential. The third aspect of a complete democracy is a tremendous educational expansion, that not only opens the way to the White House to Everyman but gives him the necessary mental equipment, if he can use it, to get there. Such an educational organisation has been latent in America for a century and a half. The fathers of the Republic were not unmindful of it. In every state, land was set aside to supply the endowment for a state university, and sometimes that turned out well, and sometimes it did not. In addition, there were older endowments of the British type, and fresh benefactions expanded these and added to their number. The whole community was concentrated upon that fascinating dollar hunt, but when one of the winners felt public-spirited and generous, it seemed a fine thing to him to get some more knowledge and education for the people. And being essentially a business man, he went and bought the stuff; he bought the best in the market; and it did not occur to him—and why should it—that America might be in need of something at least as new and distinctive of her as the great business plants and concentrations that he and his fellow-magnates were, with such vivid immediate success and such ultimate bad consequences, making. So that the extensive and complicated university system of America remained essentially European, first upon the British pattern and then with an increasing German influence. To this day it clings to the medieval cap and gown, the degree-giving and medieval lecturing of the old world.
      Dollar preoccupation was almost as effective in leaving unchallenged the ascendancy of Europe and European patterns in the world of thought and artistic creation. Boston, which had played a vigorous part in British intellectual life in colonial days, resented this acceptance of inferiority, but until well into the latter quarter of the nineteenth century the European ascendancy was tacitly admitted in the rest of America. Lowell might complain of a “certain air of condescension” in the visiting English of his time. This air of condescension had this much justification that in many strata of the American world it was accepted. There were insurgent spirits and many protests indeed, but the War of Independence only reached the realm of literary criticism towards the turn of the century, and then it came as a great shock to the British writers of my generation, who had taken the American tribute for granted. To-day no young American writer would dream of sedulously imitating or indeed resembling a British model. And in many fields of thought, the new history and sociological speculation for example, individual minds broke into distinctive American methods. Some thirty-odd years ago the American climate, by way of a protest, killed all the cherished ivy on those red-brick colleges, but it did nothing further in the matter. To this day the shape of the knowledge organisation and education, and particularly of the higher education, remains in precisely the same state of picturesque headlessness and material ineffectiveness as the older, natural-grown European disorder of institutions. The erection of facsimile buildings, Magdalen Tower in Chicago, for example, is merely the extreme expression of this reverential attitude.
      The United States, let alone the world, cannot carry on now with an unorganised mentality, a scattered higher education that has no power over the press or the common schools or political consciences. It produces no adequate civil service, no well-informed and easily co-operative administrators. It cannot compass any of the major problems before the nation. The resort of the undergraduate world to the realities of the playing-fields is a sure indication of the unattractiveness of its array of subjects. They yell. Every university has a yell. And well may they yell and go wild and frantic in their stadiums, for their lives and their powers are being largely wasted.
      Yet it is in America now that the clearest hope for a beginning of that World Brain resides. A country habituated to the rapid development of vast commercial and industrial enterprises must surely be capable of attempting an intellectual and educational enterprise beyond the imagination of men bred in smaller and more tradition-ridden communities. So far it has been impossible to awaken any influential and resourceful people to this patent, if unprecedented, necessity. It is unhappily so novel that they seem afraid to realise how obvious it is and unavoidable. There is no time to lose about it. It is hard to guess what may happen when this abnormal phase of personal government by one inspired, insufficiently able man of genius comes to an end. There is no one to replace him and nothing to replace him. Nothing is being prepared. America may relapse in quite a little time into something as acephalous and incalculable as Russia.
      And so I return to my refrain: “We need a World Brain,” and to my insistence that the creation of a greater mental superstructure to reorient the mind of the world is an entirely practicable proposal.
      At this point I imagine an angry critic interrupts. He has been skimming through this book—he wouldn’t deign to read it or mark the course of its argument—looking for occasion for offence. And now he cries: “Who are you, Mr. Know-all, to tell us that all these splendid institutions, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Chicago, Johns Hopkins and a multitude of others, and abroad Oxford, Cambridge, Paris, London, Coimbra, Upsala, Tokio—one could count a thousand galaxies of clustering colleges and dreaming spires —and all these wise and good men, thousands of them, men of eminent learning, men of distinguished character, doctors, teachers, investigators, scholars, not one who is not in every respect a far better man than yourself, that all together they amount to nothing! that this I great constellation, this veritable shining skyful of gifts and powers is not sufficient for the needs of the world to-day! that altogether it amounts to no more, scale for scale—what did you say?—than the brain of a horse! that it needs something far more powerful, some far vaster embodiment of knowledge and purpose— some queer fad of yours?”
      To which I answer: What are they doing now? So far from lighting the world, the skies are so overcast that these starry constellations seem scarcely to be shining.
      And far from being “Mr. Know-all”, I am helpless ignorance, in a sea of unconscious ignorance. There is one thing, and one thing only, I know that you do not seem to know, and that is this—that neither you nor I know enough, nor know the little that we do know well enough, to meet the needs of the world’s occasions.. Unless we do something about this ignorance of ours, this universal blinkered ignorance, we shall be overwhelmed, we shall destroy one another.
      If only some small fraction of the still considerable wealth and energy of America could be turned not merely to a campaign against the ignorance of others but against its own far more dangerous ignorance; if only this absolute necessity for an organised World Brain, a gigantic but still possible super-university, set above all these admirable but ineffective scattered foundations to utilise and consolidate them, if only that could fire the imagination of a few energetic spirits; then the whole outlook of the human species might still be changed.
      There is a last possibility to consider in this survey. Some such appeal as I am making may presently gather force, attract a measure, but an insufficient measure, of support and not enough critical attention. The thing may be tried, the effort may be made, and, as people say, it may fall into the wrong hands. Instead of a living World Brain we may have a sham World Brain. The effort may be made. Money may be forthcoming; the demand may grow. Something to look like a world encyclopedic organisation may be brought into being, good enough to pacify most of the clamour, good enough for those people who say you cannot have everything at once—you must have a beginning. When embryonic tissue cannot build an organ it can still produce a cancer. We may have some large and plausible organisation of platitudes, irrelevances and compromises, as adequate as an organisation of knowledge as the old League of Nations was of world peace. There may be great academic comings and goings, ceremonies and solemn consecrations. And at last something in the nature of Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler and President Grover Whalen will appear enthroned, side by side, organisers of the World Brain triumphant, the World Brain of To-morrow, brooding profoundly over the unmitigated destiny of mankind. [Footnote: Cp. The Columbia Encyclopedia.]
      That may be. The history of most religions supports this possibility. There is nothing whatever between the stars and the atoms to show why the end of Homo sapiens should not be absurd as well as tragic. The price of human salvation is eternal vigilance, incessant fearless criticism and unrestricted wit. How can one tell beforehand whether that price will be forthcoming? Without unrestrained free speech and irreverence, how can we defeat the universal human tendency to be satisfied with and tolerant towards plausible, pretentious things? There can be no rest, no tactful acquiescences, no mental toleration, no enfeebling politeness, in the kulturkampf ahead, if man is to escape the evils that close in upon him.
      In the design of this book three primary themes interlace and pursue and develop each other. There is first, that invention and science have completely altered the material environment of human life. Next, that the disruptive driving-force of an excess of bored and unemployed young men, which must in some manner find relief, will probably shatter life altogether under the new conditions. And thirdly, that the existing mental organisation of our species is entirely insufficient to control the present situation, which nevertheless might, with an adequate effort, be controlled. These are the Change of Scale theme, the Youth Pressure theme and the World Brain theme. The first two create the problem to which the third indicates the only possible solution.
      About the role of those young men; its cardinal importance is still not recognised plainly by sociologists, historians and writers of contemporary history. In practice, however, it is plainly apprehended, and a very considerable amount of propaganda to capture the imagination of this vital stratum is carried on, and particularly by the more aggressive contemporary states. They pursue their co-nationals abroad, and make strenuous efforts to win over opinion in neutral states and bring local conditions into parallelism with their own. Nazi patterns are being studied in South Africa, for example, and we have noted the Fascist disposition of General Chiang Kai Shek. There is a great totalitarian propaganda, and now, awakening and responding to it, there is counter-propaganda.
      On the whole the totalitarians make the more exciting and attractive promises and give the brooding young man the most immediate prospect of authorised masterful activities. Official Great Britain pays the dole and encourages no presumptuous hopes. But in America and elsewhere there is a definitely anti-Fascist organisation called the World Youth Movement. This is a brotherhood and fundamentally a pacifist organisation, a combination of a great number of more specialised associations, which attempts to bring the opinions and demands of the young for security from massacre and for employment, training, adult education, health culture and so forth, to bear upon governing and administrative bodies, and exert a critical, helpful and mediatory influence upon their social welfare work. It has the open support of both the President and his wife, more particularly of Mrs. Roosevelt, and it extends its liaison work into most of the so-called democracies—and Russia. Its activities vary with the country and occasion, but its general objective is to keep its young people busy with work of public importance, developing their capacity with use aad experience. This World Youth Movement claims to represent and affect the politico-social activities of a grand total of forty million adherents— under the age of thirty. Of these, twelve million are credited to Russia, though I cannot imagine how these figures are checked. It includes also a number of War Resisters whose ideas stop short at a repudiation of war. They will have nothing to do with war, but how human affairs are to be carried on in a warless world they do not trouble to think. Anyone else can bother about that, it seems, not they. They carry passive resistance to the pitch of know-nothingness. With a certain disapproval they offer us their bodies to be protected and their mouths to be fed
      I mention the World Youth Movement here, but I am quite unable to estimate its possibilities. It may fade out. It may play an important and increasing role in the consolidation of a new world order.
      The President and Mrs. Roosevelt, though they seem acutely aware that a developing Youth Movement may play an important part in the political drama of to-morrow, have neither of them betrayed any consciousness of the immense intellectual reorientation of which the world is now in. such urgent need. Their circumstances have never directed their attention to that. I doubt if these two fine, active minds have ever enquired how it is they know what they know and think as they do. Nor have they ever thought of what they might have been if they had grown up in an entirely different culture. They have the disposition of all politicians the world over to deal only with made opinion. They have never enquired how it is that opinion is made.
      The only representatives of Youth I have ever met who seemed to be aware that they were under-educated and improperly educated were some Burmans I met in Rangoon. “We are taught to be clerks in European-owned factories,” they complained. “What we want is technical knowledge and the science of our own country and circumstances so as to give us a clear conception of our role in the world. ... ”
      Now that was saying something.