Then I turn to the politicians, and of these it is to be remarked that, however much befogged they may be, they always are certain that they see much more clearly than the world at large.  This circumstance would invest their opinions with a peculiar authority, if only they did not contradict one another flat.  We are doubling the electorate:  what result will the General Election produce?  Politicians who belong to the family of Mr. Despondency and his daughter, Muchafraid, reply that Monarchy will be abolished, Capital “conscripted” (delightful verb), debt repudiated, and Anarchy enthroned.  Strangely dissimilar results are predicted by the Party-hacks, who, being by lifelong habit trained to applaud whatever Government does, announce with smug satisfaction that the British workman loves property, and will use his new powers to conserve it; adores the Crown, and feels that the House of Lords is the true protector of his liberties.

Again, there are publicists who (like myself) have all their lives proclaimed their belief in universal suffrage as the one guarantee of freedom.  If we are consistent, we ought to rejoice in the prospect now unfolding itself before us; but perhaps the mist has got into our eyes.  Our forefathers abolished the tyranny of the Crown.  Successive Reform Acts have abolished the tyranny of class.  But what about the tyranny of capital?  Is Democracy safe from it?

I do not pretend to be clearer-sighted than my neighbours; but in the mist each of us sees the form of some evil which he specially dislikes; and to my thinking Bureaucracy is just as grave a menace to Freedom as Militarism, and in some ways graver, as being more plausible.  We used to call ourselves Collectivists, and we rejoiced in the prospect of the State doing for us what we ought to do for ourselves.  We voted Political Economy a dismal science (which it is), and felt sure that, if only the Government would take in hand the regulation of supply and demand, the inequalities of life would be adjusted, everyone would be well fed, and everyone would be happy.  As far as we can see through the blinding mist which now surrounds us, it looks as if the State were about as competent to control trade as to control the weather.  Bureaucracy is having its fling, and when the mist clears off it will stand revealed as a well-meant (and well-paid) imposture.

Closely related to all these problems is the problem of the women’s vote.  Here the mist is very thick indeed.  Those who have always favoured it are naturally sanguine of good results.  Women will vote for peace; women will vote for temperance; women will vote for everything that guards the sanctity of the home.  Those who have opposed the change see very different consequences.  Women will vote for war; women will vote as the clergyman bids them; women will vote for Socialism.  All this is sheer guess-work, and very misty guess-work too.