BRAVE NEW WORLD

Yesterday Mr. Conant began his speech by asking the question whether a "free and classless society" was a valid ideal or an illusion. Thereupon he set out to prove that the former was true. His argument might be staked out in two claims: first, that the essence of a classless society is a high degree of "social mobility"--or equality of opportunity for each member of a new generation regardless of his inherited social position; and second, that this social mobility can be largely obtained by, education. After hearing him out, most of his listeners must have been unconvinced.

One can even fight Mr. Conant on his own ground by granting him his sweeping generalization of the classless society. But it is impossible to concede to him that such a society is so easy of attainment. Mr. Conant must be over-impressed with the importance of his profession if he believes that education is a force powerful enough to go far in annihilating caste barriers. It seems necessary--even if it is trite--to remind him that equality of ability and equality of training do not mean equality of opportunity. Economic power still continues to be a decisive factor in the determination of position.

Before social mobility could be attained it would be necessary to break the back of economic power. It would be necessary for the government to adopt extreme measures such as completely confiscatory inheritance taxes. It is true that Mr. Conant briefly takes cognizance of these problems, but he vastly under-rates them. The fact remains that it is impossible automatically to redistribute power and privilege at the end of each generation unless there is a simultaneous radical redistribution of wealth.

Most of Mr. Conant's listeners are probably still of the opinion that a society without caste never was and never will be. Even his own Utopia, where education catapults the men with intellect or talent into positions of power, is possessed of a caste system--with caste resting upon intellect and talent. Even if the ruling class turns over to a certain extent, it is still a ruling class; and there is no real or universal freedom.

This, of course, does not mean that Mr. Conant's world is not a better place than the one we now live in. It undoubtedly is. He is to be warmly applauded for being conscious of the rising class problem in the first place, and then for suggesting such basically sound measures. In so far as a free and classless society is relative--and at one point Mr. Conant says it is--his solution is the best one possible. Be that as it may, the classless society remains an ideal and an illusion.