BOOKS
461
to an American reader who, at the present turning point of history, asks
himself one of the current and more or less well stated questions about
Germany and Germans. He will learn from Croce that the quarrel
be–
tween Germany and Europe is a "spiritual dissension" and, as such, can
be solved only by spiritual means. Nazism, on the other hand, represents
an historical crisis of German development and German antagonism
to Europe which must be healed by historical means, namely, "all means
that present themselves when and as they become necessary, from rigor
to indulgence, from exclusion to collaboration, from severity to cordiality,
from conflict to conciliation." In other words, on the spiritual plane
you are allowed to use only spiritual means, but when it comes to his–
torical contingencies any means are good enough.
"Upon this," Croce adds,, "there is no longer any need to dwell, all
thf! more because not a few, in England and America, have understood
this necessity and have begun to meditate around it expounding con–
cepts and designs which are both human and wise." One would like
to know the names o£1 these wise men, but Croce's certificate of wisdom
and humaneness is issued to anonymous characters. Could it be that he
is referring to Vansittart
&
Co.? Anyway, while objecting to the dis–
memberment of the German nation (because be believes nations to be
necessary categories of human life) and agreeing that "no poisonous
humiliation" should be inflicted on the German people, Croce would
accept the application of "all means that present themselves" to the
healing of the German evil. One is then entitled to deduce that nothing
prevents a reasonable measure of dismemberment and a moderate dose
of poisoning humiliation from presenting themselves, at a given moment,
as necessary and appropriate pedagogical means.
It seems that so long as these means do noq claim an absolute phil–
osophical validity, everything is as it should be.
The American will probably be puzzled, and deem it rather point–
less that an oustanding European philosopher should expound such ir–
relevancies on such a grave problem. An Italian, however, will simply
recognize Croce's old skill in avoiding the real issues, and discussing
only their shadows on Croce's private wall.
If
Croce's conclusions on Germany and Nazism are so immaterial,
it is, of course, because he had to dodge too many facts and defend too
many things at the same time.
In his early days, the Neapolitan scholar loved not only German
culture, but also State power and power politics, maintaining that Force
should rule unhampered the relations between peoples, and consequently
admiring the German Empire as the state endowed with the best political
philosophy in Europe. And these ideas were not peculiarly his own. They
were shared in varying degrees of clarity and moderation, by a consider–
able section, of the Italian ruling class and the intellectuals. Now Croce
has seen not only domestic fascism, but the very face of unhampered
