In this issue we continue the study of the book Posthumous Works, published after Allan Kardec disembodied and containing texts written by him. The present work is based on the translation made by Dr. Guillon Ribeiro, published by the Brazilian Spiritist Federation.
Questions for discussion
137. What is the meaning of the word “aristocracy”?
138. What was the first of all aristocracies?
139. Why didn’t the authority of the patriarchs continue along the times?
140. How did the aristocracies appear in which the power of money and then the power of intelligence were the predominant factor?
141. Will the aristocracy of intelligence be the last one? Is it the highest expression of civilized Mankind?
Reading text
137. What is the meaning of the word “aristocracy”?
Aristocracy comes from the Greek aristos, the best, and kratus, power. The aristocracy, therefore, in its literary sense, means: Power of the best. Obviously, the primitive sense of the word was sometimes singularly diverted; but Spiritism, due to its influence, can make it return to its original meaning. This requires we take things from the starting point and follow them through the ages to be able to figure out what may occur later. (Posthumous Works - Aristocracies).
138. What was the first of all aristocracies?
At no time and in no people, men in society could refrain from having leaders; they are found among the most primitive peoples. This is related to the fact that, because of the diversity of skills and character inherent to the human species, we find men who are not capable, and need to be guided, weak men who need to be protected, passions that have to be pressed; hence the need of authority. Within primitive societies, this authority was granted to the heads of the families, the elderly, the old, in a word, to the patriarchs. This was the first of all aristocracies. (Posthumous Works - Aristocracies).
139. Why didn’t the authority of the patriarchs continue along the times?
The reason was that, since the number of societies increased, the discussions between the different people caused fighting; therefore, younger stronger, vigorous and intelligent men were needed, instead of the old men: hence the military chiefs. Being victorious, the authority was given to these leaders, counting on their courage to fight back the attacks of the enemies; and many of them, abusing their position, took authority into their hands. Then the winners subdued the losers, or reduced them to servitude, this resulting in an authority of raw power, which was the second aristocracy.
Naturally, the strong ones past their authority and their properties to their children, and the weak ones, under pressure, said nothing and slowly got used to accepting that the heirs of the strong ones would take over the rights conquered by their fathers, and therefore, would be their superiors too. Hence, the society was divided into two classes: the upper and lower classes, those who command and those who obey; it gave place to the aristocracy of birth, which was as dominant as the power taken by force. With the power in their hands, those who held it took several privileges for themselves; laws were made to give them the prestige of legality, but that was not always enough. So they had the idea of considering them a divine right, thus making them respectable and inviolable. And to ensure the respect of the part of the submissive class, which became more numerous and more difficult to settle, even by force, there was only one way: preventing it to become aware, i.e., keeping it in ignorance. (Posthumous Works - Aristocracies).
140. How did the aristocracies appear in which the power of money and then the power of intelligence were the predominant factor?
As time went by, the submissive class began to see clearly and realized the little consistency of the prestige that opposed it; feeling stronger, by the number, it abolished the privileges and proclaimed equality before the law. This marked the end of the aristocracy of birth, which was only nominal and honorific, because it did not grant additional legal rights. Then a new power stood up, the power of money, because with money men can buy men and things. What was no longer granted to titles was now granted to fortune, and it had equal privileges.
Then people began to realize that to make a fortune it was necessary to have a certain amount of intelligence, and little by little, money began to lose its moral prestige, and another type of aristocracy appeared: the one supported by intelligence, before which all could bend without degrading oneself, because it belonged to both the poor and the rich. (Posthumous Works - Aristocracies).
141. Will the aristocracy of intelligence be the last one? Is it the highest expression of civilized Mankind?
No, because intelligence is not always a guarantee of morality and the most intelligent man can do a very bad job of his faculties. On the other hand, morality - alone - may be unable. It is therefore necessary the union of these two faculties, intelligence and morality, to create a legitimate preponderance, to which the mass will submit blindly, because it will inspire all the confidence due to its enlightenment and its righteousness.
That, yes, will be the last aristocracy, the one that will be the result, or sign of the advent and the kingdom of goodness on Earth. It will come naturally by force of circumstances; when the men in this category are numerous enough to form an imposing majority, the mass will entrust its interests to them.
As we see, all aristocracies had their reasons for being, for they were born in accordance with the stage of Humanity, but they were not based on a moral principle. However, only this principle can give place to a lasting supremacy, because what supports them is justice and charity, and we will call it: the moral-intellectual aristocracy.
Can this happen with the selfishness, pride, and greed of the sovereigns on Earth?
"Yes," says Kardec firmly. It is not only possible, but it will actually be accomplished, because it is unavoidable.
Today intelligence dominates; it is sovereign, no one can challenge it; and this is so true that we see commoners occupying the highest positions. Is this aristocracy not fairer, more logical, and rational than that of brute force, of birth or money? Why, then, would it be impossible to add morality? Of course, it is necessary that morality dominates numerically and for this there is a lot of work to be done. But, once again, there would be a foolish presumption to say that Humanity has reached its peak, when it is seen marching unceasingly in the way of progress.
The good ones are not quite as rare in this world as believed; the evil are numerous, unfortunately this is true; but what makes them seem more numerous is that they are more daring and feel that this boldness is needed for them to succeed. The good ones, on the contrary, do not display their qualities; they do not put it in evidence; that is why they seem so few in number. (Posthumous Works - Aristocracies).
