Doctrine of Natural Rights 107
ideology is the whole of life. There are impulses and pow-
ers in human nature, thank God, over and above all systems.
In the last analysis these impulses and powers reside in all
men and women, to whom the Creator has given a common
humanity. The defense of their soil by the Russians is mag-
nificent, and, like you, I have followed it with growing ad-
miration of the possibilities of my fellow men. But this does
not blind me for a moment to the principles which underlie
Russian communism, nor to the practical consequences of
those principles which we all know. It is possible that, as
Maurice Hindus would have us believe, the experiences
through which the Russian people are going is bringing a
change in their ideology and a greater emphasis on the value
of the individual. It may be, but we are here talking about
what we know to be the present ideology of the system.
Let us not, I repeat, be deceived by the confusion of
tongues about us. It seems beyond doubt that we have for
some time been in a revolutionary period of human history.
What the outcome will be depends at least in part upon the
dominant assumptions about man and his destiny which
emerge or survive.
Our present order has been ruled by the democratic
dogma of inalienable human rights and by the conviction
that men are subject to a universal moral law to which gov-
ernments must submit and against which unjust governments
cannot stand. The totalitarian revolutions in Russia and
Germany explicitly reject this dogma. They hold that there
is no moral law superior to the customs of the people and
the decrees of government.
Many of you will doubtless say that it is precisely this
dogma for which we are now fighting—that is why this is
an ideological war. But how many in the democratic coun-
tries as well share this naturalistic conviction regarding man
and his destiny? It is surely time to ask whether we can