the state spoke for consumers, and consumers in turn spoke for society as a whole, Weyl had no qualms about a "servile state." He saw it as the institutional expression of the new cooperative spirit. In the clash between the "old poverty ethics of survival and the new wealth ethics of social improvement," the state stood on the side of progress. Its monopoly of physical force put an end to private violence and to the need for violent revolution. The expansion of its protective powers guaranteed the "rights of children" and replaced the "parental tyranny of former days" with "enforced parental responsibility." Its power of taxation socialized consumption, as Weyl put it, by discouraging "fashion, conspicuous waste, [and] absurd extravagance"—for example, by laying heavy duties on tobacco and alcohol. Its powers over education could be used by civicminded reformers to create a "differentiated, modernized" educational system that would discourage "mere competitive egoisms" and "guide society and individuals in the wise consumption of wealth."

More efficient production, a more equitable distribution of its fruits, and a more discriminating use of leisure summed up Weyl's view of the tasks confronting democracy. Americans had been too busy with the conquest of the continent, Weyl thought, to master the intelligent use of leisure. He reminded those who were "obsessed by the doctrine of the strenuous life" that a more equitable distribution of wealth was more important than feats of moral heroism. Democracy had "put down the mighty 'great man,' who once obsessed history," and exalted the "unnamed multitude." The Carlyles might sneer, but "until the material problems which beset mankind are solved, ... humanity will not be able to essay the problems of mind."

____________________

ever they wanted to justify a new regulation or stricter enforcement of the existing ones.

-344-