The code of chivalry said, "Thou shalt never lie, and shall remain faithful to thy pledged word." But a founding father of modern political science, Niccolo Machiavelli, said: "princes who have achieved great things have been those who have given their word lightly, who have known how to trick men with their cunning, and who, in the end, have overcome those abiding by honest principles."
The code of chivalry is noble, it is true; and Machiavelli's pronouncement is perfectly scientific. Yet, Machiavelli's science is far from wholesome. Its only claim upon us is one of practicality. But of course, modern man values practicality and expedience. We do not care for knights and their code of chivalry. The modern revolution does away with such things. In fact, dispensing with old-fashioned morality has been the hackneyed line of revolutionaries for the last 222 years; and it was a mainstay of the two great socialist revolutions of the twentieth century, Nazism and Communism.
Several hundred years ago Western society was dominated by a warrior aristocracy, and the Church. In terms of moral education, an emphasis was placed on warrior virtue, honesty and gentleness. In the paradox of medieval manners, the knight was supposed to be a fierce warrior and a gentle man. He was obliged to serve king and country, to fight for freedom and justice and all that is good. The knight should never attack an unarmed foe, or attack someone from behind. He must not tell lies, or cheat, or disobey the king's law. He was further obliged to protect the innocent and weak, to administer justice and exhibit self control. The knight must respect authority, and also respect women. He must avenge the wronged, oppose evil in all its forms, never abandon a friend or ally, keep his promises, maintain his principles, and demonstrate good manners.
But chivalry is dead, and the moral underpinnings of our society are gone. Simply look around at our neighborhoods, at our children, at our leaders, at our appalling cynicism and slackness. Do you imagine this is what America was like before 1950? The collapse of our ideals and standards, and their replacement by the slogans of a new religion, are already accomplished before our eyes. Yet we don't stop to think what it all signifies.
It was Edmund Burke who wrote, in his Reflections on the Revolution in France, that "our civilization ... depended for ages upon two principles; and were indeed the result of both combined; I mean the spirit of the gentleman, and the spirit of religion. The nobility and the clergy, the one by profession, the other by patronage, kept learning in existence, even in the midst of arms and confusions...." But the problem was, according to Burke, that learning and "science" had become the authors of a revolution against the nobility and clergy. Learning, debauched by ambition, was not satisfied to be mankind's instructor. It now aspired to be mankind's master. "Along with its natural protectors and guardians," warned Burke, "learning will be cast into the mire, and trodden down under the hoofs of a swinish multitude."
The new learning undid the nobility, then it undermined the clergy. Now it undermines science and learning itself, so that today's "learning" is little more than the hollow shell of political correctness (i.e., a formula for the suicide of an entire civilization). To grasp this revolution, in all its consequence, it is useful to consider the Ten Commandments of the Code of Chivalry as outlined by the French medieval expert Leon Gautier: "(1) Thou shalt believe all that the Church teaches, and shall observe all its directions; (2) Thou shalt defend the Church; (3) Thou shalt respect all weakness, and shalt constitute thyself the defender of them; (4) Thou shalt love the country in which thou wast born; (5) Thou shalt not recoil before thine enemy; (6) Thou shalt make war against the Infidel without cessation, and without mercy; (7) Thou shalt perform scrupulously they feudal duties, if they be not contrary to the laws of God; (8) Thou shalt never lie, and shall remain faithful to thy pledged word; (9) Thou shalt be generous, and give largess to everyone; (10) Thou shalt be everywhere and always the champion of the Right and the Good against Injustice and Evil."
Here is part of the secret of Western civilization; that is, the secret of its dominance, its economic success, its freedom and technological superiority. Once upon a time there was a code, which is now only a shadow, calling civilization's leaders to a higher standard. But science laughed at the code, and declared it "unscientific." And a new religion (i.e., socialism) has come to replace the old. Its code of conduct was summarized by Vladimir Lenin as follows: "Everything done to advance the proletarian cause is honest." In other words, we are to follow the advice of Machiavelli. This is the true significance of Karl Marx's "scientific socialism."
Consider what the Ten Commandments of revolutionary socialism would actually look like if anyone dared to state them openly: (1) You shall disbelieve all that the Church teaches; (2) You shall attack the church, even if you are a member of it; (3) You shall demoralize the weak; (4) You shall hate the country in which you were born; (5) You shall retreat before your enemy, and shamelessly appease him; (6) You shall praise the Infidel without cessation, giving him every opportunity to cut your throat; (7) You shall perform no duties, except to squeeze the rich harder; (8) You shall lie for the cause, and break agreements in the service of world revolution; (9) You shall appear generous, promising largess to everyone, but the result will be universal poverty; (10) You shall be everywhere and always the champion of women, non-whites, homosexuals, and the poor. (This is called "social justice.")
What we have before us, I believe, is what Friedrich Nietzsche called "the trans-valuation of all values." Good becomes regarded as evil, and evil becomes regarded as good. On this basis a new ruling class emerges, and this ruling class needs no virtue or goodness to justify itself. Those who aspire to become this new ruling class have been described in unflattering terms by such writers as Ludwig von Mises and Joseph Schumpeter; but the most in-depth description was offered by Gustave Le Bon more than a century ago in his Psychology of Socialism where he wrote, "The members of the various sects of Socialism manifest the same hatred of society, capital, and the bourgeoisie, and propose identical means to suppress them. The more pacific would simply deprive the rich of their possessions; the more belligerent would absolutely insist on completing this spoliation by exterminating the vanquished."
Contrary to Marxist dogma, the new ruling class is not the proletariat. It is the misfit demi-savants (i.e., the half-educated) of our universities. According to Le Bon the modern university has manufactured a host of malcontents who, "by reason of the intellectual anarchy they give rise to ... [are] one of the most corrosive factors of destruction; the middle class [further] help the downfall by their indifference, their egotism, their feeble will, and their absence of initiative or political perception...." As Le Bon explained, "Democracy has indirectly given rise to socialism, and by socialism, perhaps, it will perish."
It was the code of chivalry which brought us to the door of democracy. And now it is democracy that brings us to the door of socialism. And where does socialism bring us? The best thinkers on this subject have pronounced that socialism signifies a course of destruction in which socialism itself is consumed. Despite its humanitarian language, socialism is -- in Le Bon's words, "an agent of dissolution, destined to prepare the advent of new dogmas...." What these shall be, we may guess; for dissolution signifies war, and war leads us back to the warrior. In calculating thus, it seems perfectly obvious that warriors will take charge of society once again, as during the Middle Ages and antiquity. Perhaps, if we are lucky, they will revive the code of chivalry.
