You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
In the Freeman for March 31, 1920, the editor states his opinion of the difference between a liberal and a radical. With that statement so far as it covers the situation, I have no fault to find. However, I consider it very inadequate, because it speaks only in terms of the objective factors of liberalism and radicalism and ignores wholly the diversity of mental types among liberals as well as among radicals and conservatives. I think there is very great need of clarifying our thinking upon this subjective or psychologic aspect of the different kinds of conservatives, of liberals and of radicals. This psychologic understanding is important for those who can tolerate the natural progress of democratization by peaceable (that is educational) methods, which can only develop and accelerate the potentialities of a normal social evolution. Those who are sufficiently intelligent and dispassionate to do this, will not be afraid of, even the most radical result that is within the potentialities of a normal social evolution. It is equally important for the most conservative of persons, if they have sufficient sense to be willing to subordinate their feelings (their longing for relative omnipotence) to the reign of natural law in the social realm.