IcanturnandtwistasIwill,itisnotaquestionofthefacts。Myexistenceisundersuspicion,myinnermostbeing,myindividuality,isconsideredbad,anditisforthisopinionofmethatIampunished。ThelawpunishesmenotforanywrongIcommit,butforthewrongIdonotcommit。Iamreallybeingpunishedbecausemyactionisnotagainstthelaw,foronlybecauseofthatdoIcompelthelenient,well—meaningjudgetoseizeonmybadframeofmind,whichiscleverenoughnottocomeoutintheopen。
Thelawagainstaframeofmindisnotalawofthestatepromulgatedforitscitizens,butthelawofonepartyagainstanotherparty。Thelawwhichpunishestendencyabolishestheequalityofthecitizensbeforethelaw。Itisalawwhichdivides,notonewhichunites,andalllawswhichdividearereactionary。Itisnotalaw,butaprivilege。
Onemaydowhatanothermaynotdo,notbecausethelatterlackssomeobjectivequality,likeaminorinregardtoconcludingcontracts;no,becausehisgoodintentionsandhisframeofmindareundersuspicion。Themoralstateassumesitsmemberstohavetheframeofmindofthestate,eveniftheyactinoppositiontoanorganofthestate,againstthegovernment。Butinasocietyinwhichoneorganimaginesitselfthesole,exclusivepossessorofstatereasonandstatemorality,inagovernmentwhichopposesthepeopleinprincipleandhenceregardsitsanti—stateframeofmindasthegeneral,normalframeofmind,thebadconscienceofafactioninventslawsagainsttendency,lawsofrevenge,lawsagainstaframeofmindwhichhasitsseatonlyinthegovernmentmembersthemselves。Lawsagainstframeofmindarebasedonanunprincipledframeofmindonanimmoral,materialviewofthestate。
Theyaretheinvoluntarycryofabadconscience。Andhowisalawofthiskindtobeimplemented?Byameansmorerevoltingthanthelawitself:
byspies,orbypreviousagreementtoregardentireliterarytrendsassuspicious,inwhichcase,ofcourse,thetrendtowhichanindividualbelongsmustalsobeinquiredinto。Justasinthelawagainsttendencythelegalformcontradictsthecontent,justasthegovernmentwhichissuesitlashesoutagainstwhatitisitself,againsttheanti—stateframeofmind,soalsoineachparticularcaseitformsasitwerethereverseworldtoitslaws,foritappliesadoublemeasuring—rod。
Whatforonesideisright,fortheothersideiswrong。Theverylawsissuedbythegovernmentaretheoppositeofwhattheymakeintolaw。
Thenewcensorshipinstruction,too,becomesentangledinthisdialectic。Itcontainsthecontradictionofitselfdoing,andmakingitthecensor抯dutytodo,everythingthatitcondemnsasanti—stateinthecaseofthepress。
Thustheinstructionforbidswriterstocastsuspicionontheframeofmindofindividualsorwholeclasses,andinthesamebreathitbidsthecensordivideallcitizensintosuspiciousandunsuspicious,intowell—intentionedandevil—intentioned。Thepressisdeprivedoftherighttocriticise,butcriticismbecomesthedailydutyofthegovernmentalcritic。Thisreversal,however,doesnotendthematter。Withinthepresswhatwasanti—stateasregardscontentappearedassomethingparticular,butfromtheaspectofitsformitwassomethinguniversal,thatistosay,subjecttouniversalappraisal。
However,nowthethingisturnedupside—down:theparticularnowappearsjustifiedinregardtoitscontent,whatisanti—stateappearsastheviewofthestate,asstatelaw;inregardtoitsform,however,whatisanti—stateappearsassomethingparticular,thatcannotbebroughttothegenerallightofday,thatisrelegatedfromtheopenairofpublicitytotheofficefilesofthegovernmentalcritic。Thustheinstructionwantstoprotectreligion,butitviolatesthemostgeneralprincipleofallreligions,thesanctityandinviolabilityofthesubjectiveframeofmind。
ItmakesthecensorinsteadofGodthejudgeoftheheart。Thusitprohibitsoffensiveutterancesanddefamatoryjudgmentsonindividuals,butitexposesyoueverydaytothedefamatoryandoffensivejudgmentofthecensor。Thustheinstructionwantsthegossipofevil—mindedorill—informedpersonssuppressed,butitcompelsthecensortorelyonsuchgossip,onspyingbyill—informedandevil—mindedpersons,degradingjudgmentfromthesphereofobjectivecontenttothatofsubjectiveopinionorarbitraryaction。
Thussuspicionmustnotbecastontheintentionofthestate,buttheinstructionstartsoutfromsuspicioninrespectofthestate。Thusnobadframeofmindmustbeconcealedunderagoodappearance,buttheinstructionitselfisbasedonafalseappearance。Thustheinstructionwantstoenhancenationalfeeling,butitisbasedonaviewthathumiliatesthenation。
Lawfulbehaviourandrespectforthelawaredemandedofus,butatthesametimewehavetohonourinstitutionswhichputusoutsidethelawandintroducearbitrarinessinplaceoflaw。Wearerequiredtorecognisetheprincipleofpersonalitytosuchanextentthatwetrustthecensordespitethedefectsoftheinstitutionofcensorship,andyouviolatetheprincipleofpersonalitytosuchanextentthatyoucausepersonalitytobejudgednotaccordingtoitsactionsbutaccordingtoanopinionoftheopinionofitsactions。Youdemandmodestyandyourstartingpointisthemonstrousimmodestyofappointingindividualservantsofthestatetospyonpeople抯
hearts,tobeomniscient,philosophers,theologians,politicians,DelphicApollos。Ontheonehand,youmakeitourdutytorespectimmodestyand,ontheotherhand,youforbidustobeimmodest。Therealimmodestyconsistsinascribingperfectionofthegenustoparticularindividuals。Thecensorisaparticularindividual,butthepressbecomestheembodimentofthewholegenus。Youorderustohavetrust,andyougivedistrusttheforceoflaw。Youreposesomuchtrustinyourstateinstitutionsthatyouthinktheywillconvertaweakmortal,anofficial,intoasaint,andmaketheimpossiblepossibleforhim。Butyoudistrustyourstateororganismsomuchthatyouareafraidoftheisolatedopinionofaprivateperson;foryoutreatthepressasaprivateperson。Youassumethattheofficialswillactquiteimpersonally,withoutanimosity,passion,narrow—mindednessorhumanweakness。Butwhatisimpersonal,ideas,yoususpectofbeingfullofpersonalintrigueandsubjectivevileness。Theinstructiondemandsunlimitedtrustintheestateofofficials,anditproceedsfromunlimiteddistrustintheestateofnon—officials。Whyshouldwenotpaytitfortat?Whyshouldwenotlookwithsuspiciononpreciselythisestateofofficials?Equallyasregardscharacter。Fromtheoutsetonewhoisimpartialshouldhavemorerespectforthecharacterofthecriticwhoactspubliclythanforthecharacterofthecriticwhoactsinsecret。
Whatisatallbadremainsbad,whoeverpersonifiesthisbadness,whetheraprivatecriticoroneappointedbythegovernment,butinthelattercasethebadnessisauthorisedandregardedfromaboveasanecessitytorealisegoodnessfrombelow。
Thecensorshipoftendencyandthetendencyofcensorshipareagiftofthenewliberalinstruction。Noonewillblameusifweturntothefurtherprovisionsoftheinstructionwithacertainmisgiving。揙ffensiveutterancesanddefamatoryjudgmentsonindividualsarenotsuitableforpublication。擭otsuitableforpublication!Insteadofthismildnesswecouldwishthatanobjectivedefinitionofoffensiveanddefamatoryjudgmentshadbeengiven。揟hesameholdsgoodforsuspicionoftheframeofmindofindividualsor?(asignificantor)搘holeclasses,fortheuseofpartynamesandothersuchpersonalattacks。?Inadmissible,therefore,alsoareclassificationbycategories,attacksonwholeclasses,useofpartynames?andman,likeAdam,hastogiveeverythinganameforittoexistforhim;partynamesareessentialcategoriesforthepoliticalpress,揃ecause,asDr。Sassafrassupposes,EveryillnessforitscureMustfirstreceiveaname。?Allthisisincludedinpersonalattacks。Howthenisonetomakeastart?Onemustnotattackanindividual,andjustaslittletheclass,thegeneral,thejuridicalperson。Thestatewill?andhereitisright?toleratenoinsults,nopersonalattacks;butbyasimple搊r?thegeneralisalsoincludedinthepersonal。By搊r?thegeneralcomesintoit,andbymeansofalittle揳nd?welearnfinallythatthewholequestionhasbeenonlyofpersonalattacks。Butasaperfectlysimpleconsequenceitfollowsthatthepressisforbiddenallcontroloverofficialsasoversuchinstitutionsthatexistasaclassofindividuals。
揑fcensorshipisexercisedinaccordancewiththesedirectivesinthespiritofthecensorshipdecreeofOctober18,1819,adequatescopewillbeaffordedfordecorousandcandidpublicity,anditistobeexpectedthattherebygreatersympathyfortheinterestsoftheFatherlandwillbearousedandthusnationalfeelingenhanced。"
Wearereadytoadmitthatinaccordancewiththesedirectivesfordecorouspublicity,decorousinthesenseunderstoodbythecensorship,amorethanadequatefieldofplayisafforded?thetermfieldofplayishappilychosen,forthefieldiscalculatedforasportivepressthatissatisfiedwithleapsintheair。Whetheritisadequateforacandidpublicity,andwhereitscandidnesslies,weleavetothereaders?perspicacity。
Asforexpectationsheldoutbytheinstruction,nationalfeelingmay,ofcourse,beenhancedjustasthesendingofabow—stringenhancesthefeelingofTurkishnationality:butwhetherthepress,asmodestasitisserious,willarousesympathyfortheinterestsoftheFatherlandweshallleaveittodecideforitself;ameagrepresscannotbefattenedwithquinine。Perhaps,however,wehavetakentooseriousaviewofthepassagequoted。Weshall,perhaps,getatthemeaningbetterifweregarditasmerelyathorninthewreathofroses。Perhapsthisliberalthornholdsapearlofveryambiguousvalue。Letussee。Italldependsonthecontext。TheenhancementofnationalfeelingandthearousingofsympathyfortheinterestsoftheFatherland,whichintheabove—citedpassagearespokenofasanexpectation,secretlyturnintoanorder,whichimposesanewconstraintonourpoor,consumptivedailypress。揑nthiswayitmaybehopedthatbothpoliticalliteratureandthedailypresswillrealisetheirfunctionbetter,thatwiththeacquirementofrichermaterialtheywillalsoadoptamoredignifiedtone,andinfuturewillscorntospeculateonthecuriosityoftheirreadersthroughcommunicationofbaselessreportstakenfromforeignnewspapersandoriginatingfromevil—mindedorbadlyinformedcorrespondents,bygossipandpersonalattacks?atrendagainstwhichitistheundoubteddutyofthecensorshiptotakemeasures。?Inthewayindicateditishopedthatpoliticalliteratureandthedailypresswillrealisetheirfunctionbetter,etc。However,betterrealisationcannotbeordered,moreoveritisafruitstilltoheawaited,andhoperemainshope。Buttheinstructionismuchtoopracticaltobesatisfiedwithhopesandpiouswishes。Whilethepressisgrantedthehopeofitsfutureimprovementasanewconsolation,thekindlyinstructionatthesametimedeprivesitofarightithasatpresent。Inthehopeofitsimprovementitloseswhatitstillhas。ItfareslikepoorSanchoPanza,fromwhomallthefoodwassnatchedawayunderhiseyesbythecourtdoctorinorderthathisstomachshouldnotbeupsetandmakehimincapableofperformingthedutiesimposedonhimbytheduke。
AtthesametimeweoughtnottomisstheopportunityofinvitingthePrussianwritertoadoptthiskindofdecorousstyle。Inthefirstpartofthesentenceitisstated:揑nthiswayitmaybehopedthat?
Thisthatgovernsawholeseriesofprovisions,namely,thatpoliticalliteratureandthedailypresswillrealisetheirfunctionbetter,thattheywilladoptamoredignifiedtone,etc。,etc。,thattheywillscorncommunicationofbaselessreports,etc。,takenfromforeignnewspapers。
Alltheseprovisionsarestillmattersforhope;buttheconclusion,whichisjoinedtotheforegoingbyadash:揳trendagainstwhichitistheundoubteddutyofthecensorshiptotakemeasures?absolvesthecensorfromtheboringtaskofawaitingthehoped—forimprovementofthedailypress,andinsteadempowershimtodeletewhathefindsundesirablewithoutmoreado。Internaltreatmenthasbeenreplacedbyamputation。揟oapproachthisaimmoreclosely,however,requiresthatgreatcarebetakeninagreeingtonewpublicationsandneweditors,sothatthedailypresswillbeentrustedonlytocompletelyirreproachablepersonswhosescientificability,positionandcharacterguaranteetheseriousnessoftheireffortsandtheloyaltyoftheirmodeofthought。?Beforewegointodetails,letusmakeonegeneralobservation。Theapprovalofneweditors,henceoffutureeditorsingeneral,isentrustedwhollytothe?greatcare?,naturallyofthestateofficials,ofthecensorship,whereasatleasttheoldcensorshipdecreeleftthechoiceofeditors,withcertainguarantees,tothediscretionofthepublisher:揂rticleIX。Thesupremecensorshipauthorityisentitledtoinformthepublisherofanewspaperthataproposededitorisnotsuchastoinspiretherequisitetrust,inwhichcasethepublisherisboundeithertotakeanothereditoror,ifhewantstoretaintheonedesignated,tofurnishforhimasecuritytobedeterminedbyourabove—mentionedstateministriesontheproposaloftheabove—mentionedsupremecensorshipauthority。?Thenewcensorshipinstructionexpressesaquitedifferentprofundity,onecouldcallitaromanticismofthespirit。Whereastheoldcensorshipdecreedemandsanexternal,prosaic,hencelegallydefinable,security,ontheguaranteeofwhicheventheobjectionableeditoristobeallowed,theinstructionontheotherhandtakesawayallindependentwillfromthepublisherofanewspaper。Moreover,itdrawstheattentionofthepreventivewisdomofthegovernment,thegreatcareandintellectualprofundityoftheauthorities,tointernal,subjective,externallyindefinable,qualities。If,however,theindefiniteness,delicatesensitivity,andsubjectiveextravaganceofromanticismbecomepurelyexternal,merelyinthesensethatexternalchancenolongerappearsinitsprosaicdefinitenessandlimitation,butinafantasticglory,inanimaginaryprofundityandsplendour?thentheinstruction,too,canhardlyavoidthisromanticfate。
Theeditorsofthedailypress,acategorywhichincludesalljournalisticactivity,mustbecompletelyirreproachablemen。?Scientificqualification?
isputforwardinthefirstplaceasaguaranteeofthiscompleteirreproachability。
Nottheslightestdoubtarisesastowhetherthecensorcanhavethescientificqualificationtopassjudgmentonscientificqualificationofeverykind。
IfsuchacrowdofuniversalgeniusesknowntothegovernmentaretobefoundinPrussia?everytownhasatleastonecensor?whydonottheseencyclopaedicmindscomeforwardaswriters?Iftheseofficials,overwhelmingintheirnumbersandmightyowingtotheirscientificknowledgeandgenius,wereallatoncetoriseupandsmotherbytheirweightthosemiserablewriters,eachofwhomcanwriteinonlyonegenre,andeveninthatwithoutofficiallyattestedability,anendcouldbeputtotheirregularitiesofthepressmuchbetterthanthroughthecensorship。Whydotheseexpertswho,liketheRomangeese,couldsavetheCapitolbytheircacklingremainsilent?Theirmodestyistoogreat。Thescientificpublicdoesnotknowthem,butthegovernmentdoes。
Andifthesemenareindeedsuchasnostatehassucceededindiscovering,forneverhasastateknownwholeclassescomposedsolelyofuniversalgeniusesandencyclopaedicminds?howmuchgreatermustbethegeniusoftheselectorsofthesemen!Whatsecretsciencemustbetheirsforthemtobeabletoissueacertificateofuniversalscientificqualificationtoofficialsunknownintherepublicofscience!Thehigherweriseinthisbureaucracyofintelligence,themoreremarkablearethemindsweencounter。Forastatewhichpossessessuchpillarsofaperfectpress,isitworththetrouble,isitexpedienttomakethesementheguardiansofadefectivepress,todegradetheperfectintoameansfordealingwiththeimperfect?
Themoreofthesecensorsyouappoint,themareyoudeprivetherealmofthepressofchancesofimprovement。Youtakeawaythehealthyfromyourarmyinordertomakethemphysiciansoftheunhealthy。
MerelystamponthegroundlikePompeyandaPallasAthenaincompletearmourwillspringfromeverygovernmentbuilding。Confrontedbytheofficialpress,theshallowdailypresswilldisintegrateintonothing。Theexistenceoflightsufficestoexpeldarkness。Letyourlightshine,andhideitnotunderabushel。Insteadofadefectivecensorshipwhosefulleffectivenessyouyourselvesregardasproblematic,giveusaperfectpresstowhomyouhaveonlytogiveanorderandamodelofwhichhasbeeninexistenceforcenturiesintheChinesestate。
Buttomakescientificqualificationthesole,necessaryconditionforwritersofthedailypress,isthatnotaprovisionconcerningthemind,nofavouringofprivilege,noconventionaldemand?Isitnotastipulationasregardsthematter,notastipulationasregardstheperson?
Unfortunatelythecensorshipinstructioninterruptsourpanegyric。Alongsidetheguaranteeofscientificqualificationisthedemandforthatofpositionandcharacter。Positionandcharacter!
Character,whichfollowssoimmediatelyafterposition,seemsalmosttobeamereoutcomeofthelatter。Letus,therefore,takealookatpositioninthefirstplace。Itissosqueezedinbetweenscientificqualificationandcharacterthatoneisalmosttemptedtodoubtthegoodconsciencethatcalledforit。
Thegeneraldemandforscientificqualification,howliberal!
Thespecialdemandforposition,howilliberal!Scientificqualificationandpositiontogether,howpseudo—liberal!Sincescientificqualificationandcharacterareveryindefinitethings,whereasposition,ontheotherhand,isverydefinite,whyshouldwenotconcludethatbyanecessarylawoflogictheindefinitewillbesupportedbythedefiniteandobtainstabilityandcontentfromit?Woulditthenbeagreatmistakeonthepartofthecensorifheinterpretedtheinstructionasmeaningthatpositionistheexternalforminwhichscientificqualificationandcharactermanifestthemselvessocially,themoresosincehisownpositionascensorisaguaranteeforhimthatthisviewisthestate抯view?Withoutthisinterpretationitremainsatleastquiteincomprehensiblewhyscientificqualificationandcharacterarenotadequateguaranteesforawriter,whypositionisanecessarythird。Nowifthecensorweretofindhimselfinaquandary,iftheseguaranteeswereseldomorneverpresenttogether,whereshouldhischoicefall?Achoicehastobemade,forsomeonehastoeditnewspapersandperiodicals。Scientificqualificationandcharacterwithoutpositioncouldpresentaproblemforthecensoronaccountoftheirindefiniteness,justasingeneralitmustrightlybeasurprisetohimthatsuchqualitiescouldexistseparatelyfromposition。Ontheotherhand,oughtthecensortohaveanydoubtsaboutcharacterandsciencewherepositionispresent?Inthatcasehewouldhavelessconfidenceinthejudgmentofthestatethaninhisown,whereasintheoppositecasehewouldhavemoreconfidenceinthewriterthaninthestate。Oughtacensortobesotactless,soill—disposed?Itisnottobeexpectedandwillcertainlynotbeexpected。Position,becauseitisthedecisivecriterionincaseofdoubt,isingeneraltheabsolutelydecisivecriterion。
Hence,justasearliertheinstructionwasinconflictwiththecensorshipdecreeowingtoitsorthodoxy,nowitissoowingtoitsromanticism,whichatthesametimeisalwaysthepoetryoftendency。Thecashsecurity,whichisaprosaic,realguarantee,becomesanimaginaryone,andthisimaginaryguaranteeturnsintothewhollyrealandindividualposition,whichacquiresamagicalfictitioussignificance。
Inthesamewaythesignificanceoftheguaranteebecomestransformed。
Thepublishernolongerchoosesaneditor,forwhomhegivesaguaranteetotheauthorities,insteadtheauthoritieschooseaneditorforhim,oneforwhomtheygiveaguaranteetothemselves。Theolddecreelookedfortheworkoftheeditor,forwhichthepublisher抯cashsecurityservedasguarantee。Theinstruction,however,isnotconcernedwiththeworkoftheeditor,butwithhisperson。Itdemandsadefinitepersonalindividuality,whichthepublisher抯moneyshouldprovide。Thenewinstructionisjustassuperficialastheolddecree。
Butwhereasthelatterbyitsnatureexpressedanddelimitedprosaicallydefinedprovisions,theinstructiongivesanimaginarysignificancetothepurestchanceandexpresseswhatismerelyindividualwiththefervourofgenerality。
Whereas,however,asregardstheeditor,theromanticinstructionexpressestheextremelysuperficialdefinitenessinatoneofthemosteasy—goingindefiniteness,asregardsthecensoritexpressesthevaguestindefinitenessinatoneoflegaldefiniteness。揟hesamecautionmustbeexercisedintheappointmentofcensors,sothatthepostofcensorshallbeentrustedonlytomenoftestedframeofmindandability,whofullycorrespondtothehonourabletrustwhichthatofficepresupposes;tomenwhoarebothright—thinkingandkeen—sighted,whoareabletoseparatetheformfromtheessenceofthematterandwithsuretactknowhowtosetasidedoubtwherethemeaningandtendencyofawritingdonotinthemselvesjustifythisdoubt。?Insteadofpositionandcharacterasrequiredofthewriter,wehaveherethetestedframeofmind,sincepositionisalreadythere。Moresignificantisthatwhereasscientificqualificationisdemandedofthewriter,whatisdemandedofthecensorisabilitywithoutfurtherdefinition。
Theolddecree,whichisdrawnupinarationalspiritexceptinrespectofpolitics,callsinArticleIIIfor?scientifically—trained?andeven?enlightened?censors。Intheinstructionbothattributeshavebeendropped,andinsteadofthequalificationofthewriter,whichsignifiesadefinite,well—developedabilitythathasbecomeareality,thereappearsinthecaseofthecensortheaptitudeforqualification,abilityingeneral。Hencetheaptitudeforabilityhastoactascensorofactualqualification,howevermuchinthenatureofthingstherelationshipshouldobviouslybethereverse。Finally,merelyinpassing,wenotethattheabilityofthecensorisnotmorecloselydefinedasregardsitsobjectivecontent,andthis,ofcourse,makesitscharacterambiguous。
Further,thepostofcensoristobeentrustedtomen搘hofullycorrespondtothehonourabletrustwhichthatofficepresupposes?
Thispleonasticpseudo—definition,toselectforanofficemeninwhomonehastrustthatthey(will?)fullycorrespondtothehonourabletrust,certainlyaveryfulltrust,reposedinthem,isnotworthfurtherdiscussion。
Finally,thecensorsmustbemen"whoarebothright—thinkingandkeen—sighted,whoareabletoseparatetheformfromtheessenceofthematterandwithsuretactknowhowtosetasidedoubtwherethemeaningandtendencyofawritingdonotinthemselvesjustifythisdoubt?Earlier,ontheotherhand,theinstructionprescribes:"Consideringthis?(namely,theinvestigationoftendency),搕hecensorsmustalsopayspecialattentiontotheformandtoneofwritingsforthepressandinsofaras,owingtopassion,vehemenceandarrogance,theirtendencyisfoundtobepernicious,mustnotallowthemtobeprinted。?Ononeoccasion,therefore,thecensorhastojudgeofthetendencyfromtheform,onanotheroccasion,oftheformfromthetendency。
Ifpreviouslycontenthadalreadydisappearedasacriterionforcensorship,nowformalsodisappears。Aslongasthetendencyisgood,faultsofformdonotmatter。Eveniftheworkcannotberegardedexactlyasveryseriousandmodest,evenifitmayappeartobevehement,passionate,arrogant,whowouldlethimselfbefrightenedbytheroughexterior?Onehastoknowhowtodistinguishbetweenformandessence。Allsemblanceofdefinitionshadtobeabandoned,theinstructionhadtoendinacompletecontradictionwithitself;foreverythingbywhichtendencyissupposedtoberecognisedis,onthecontrary,determinedbythetendencyandmustberecognisedfromthetendency。Thevehemenceofthepatriotisholyzeal,hispassionatenessisthesensitivenessofthelover,hisarroganceadevotedsympathywhichistooimmeasurabletobemoderate。
Allobjectivestandardsareabandoned,everythingisfinallyreducedtothepersonalrelation,andthecensor抯tacthastobecalledaguarantee。Whatthencanthecensorviolate?Tact。Buttactlessnessisnocrime。Whatisthreatenedasfarasthewriterisconcerned?Hisexistence。Whatstatehasevermadetheexistenceofwholeclassesdependonthetactofindividualofficials?
Irepeat,allobjectivestandardsareabandoned。Asregardsthewriter,tendencyistheultimatecontentthatisdemandedfromhimandprescribedtohim。Tendencyasformlessopinionappearsasobject。Tendencyassubject,asopinionofopinion,isthecensor抯tactandhissolecriterion。
Butwhereasthearbitrarinessofthecensor?andtosanctiontheauthorityofmereopinionistosanctionarbitrariness?isalogicalconsequencewhichwasconcealedunderasemblanceofobjectivedefinitions,theinstructionontheotherhandquiteconsciouslyexpressesthearbitrarinessoftheOberprasidium;trustisreposedinthelatterwithoutreserve,andthistrustreposedintheOberprasidentistheultimateguaranteeofthepress。Thustheessenceofthecensorshipingeneralisbasedonthearrogantimaginaryideathatthepolicestatehasofitsofficials。
Thereisnoconfidenceintheintelligenceandgoodwillofthegeneralpubliceveninthesimplestmatter;buteventheimpossibleisconsideredpossiblefortheofficials。
Thisfundamentaldefectisinherentinallourinstitutions。Thus,forexample,incriminalproceedingsjudge,accuseranddefenderarecombinedinasingleperson。Thiscombinationcontradictsallthelawsofpsychology。Buttheofficialisraisedabovethelawsofpsychology,whilethegeneralpublicremainsunderthem。Nevertheless,onecouldexcuseadefectiveprincipleofstate;itbecomesunpardonable,however,ifitisnothonestenoughtobeconsistent。Theresponsibilityoftheofficialsoughttobeasimmeasurablyabovethatofthegeneralpublicastheofficialsareabovethelatter,anditispreciselyhere,whereconsistencyalonecouldjustifytheprincipleandmakeitlegitimatewithinitssphere,itispreciselyherethatitisabandonedandtheoppositeprincipleapplied。
Thecensor,too,isaccuser,defenderandjudgeinasingleperson;controlofthemindisentrustedtothecensor;heisirresponsible。
Thecensorshipcouldhaveonlyaprovisionallyloyalcharacterifitwassubordinatedtotheregularcourts,whichofcourseisimpossiblesolongastherearenoobjectivelawsgoverningcensorship。
Buttheworstmethodofallistosubjectthecensorshiptocensorshipagain,asbyanOberprasidentorsupremecollegeofcensors。
EverythingthatholdsgoodOftherelationOfthepresstothecensorshipholdsgoodalsooftherelationofthecensorshiptothesupremecensorshipandthatofthewritertothesupremecensor,althoughanintermediatelinkisinterposed。Itisthesamerelationplacedonahigherplane,theremarkableerrorofleavingmattersaloneandwantingtogivethemanothernaturethroughotherpersons。Ifthecoercivestatewantedtobeloyal,itwouldabolishitself。Everypointwouldrequirethesamecoercionandthesamecounter—pressure。Thesupremecensorshipwouldhavetobesubjectedtocensorshipinitsturn。Inordertoescapefromthisviciouscircle,itisdecidedtobedisloyal;lawlessnessnowbeginsinthethirdorninety—ninthstage。Becausethebureaucraticstateisvaguelyconsciousofthis,ittriesatleasttoplacethesphereoflawlessnesssohighthatitescapestheeye,andthenbelievesthatlawlessnesshasdisappeared。
Thereal,radicalcureforthecensorshipwouldbeitsabolition;
fortheinstitutionitselfisabadone,andinstitutionsaremorepowerfulthanpeople。Ourviewmayberightornot,butinanycasethePrussianwritersstandtogainthroughthenewinstruction,eitherinrealfreedom,orinfreedomofideas,inconsciousness。
Raratemporumfeticitas,ubiquaevelissentireetquaesentiasdirerelicet。
Signed;ByaRhinelander