Elaboration 24

This seems so contradictory to everything most people have ever heard, that only a Spencer could form the correct attitude in this regard, towards trade-unionism. Spencer remarked that e.g. coal-miners on strike, increase the price of coal, of which ... the poor are the victims, not the governors or the employers against whom the action is directed. They punish the poor, for a rise in pay. 'No one', says Tacitus, 'has ever made good use of powers evilly gained'. Indeed, an organized-, closed-, group or union, is an evilly gained power. While it is a basic law of ethics that when A has a complaint against B, this gives him no right to violate the rights of C, D, or the whole nation, in my country it is allowed to block all traffic on the roads and water ways. The police force being not able to protect the fundamental rights of the citizens, the free passage (51.1). The rights of the citizen seems determined by number. One chauffeur who willfully blocks the road, like the one workman who breaks contract, is culpable, but when he does the same in a group, he goes scot-free. In other words, not the act (ion) is anti-social, as we would expect, but the number of doers. The citizen or taxpayer, is the victim of unionism, of employees with a grudge against, not the citizen, but somebody, the employer, a minister, who is himself not bothered by the action. Mill's paradox consists of precisely this. The right of every individual to form his own opinions AND the right of every individual to express (indoctrinate, suggest, dictate, extort, etc.) his own opinions. The two are incompatible. You can be willed (commanded) to will, for instance, to break contract with your employer. You can be taught to be stark blind (Hitler could make you see black as white), for the unemployed who would give their fingers for being allowed to do the very job that you forsake. All ethics based upon such a paradox MUST be anti-social! There is only one solution, and that is the most strict censure for the second part of the paradox, a condition. Utter censure for telling the truth, the whole truth, nothing else. Such a school or course as Wells meant, simply cannot teach human rights and duties. Naturally there have been, and always will be, less scientifical people who are of the same common sensical opinion about the fundamental rights and duties of man. They, however, are even less heard (see e.g. Lord Marsh). All right, you are a worker, you'd hate to be whipped for remaining at work by some foreman or employer. But you must also hate to be whipped away from the factory gates when you just want to go and work while a strike is called. Whipped by your fellow-workers that is.