gallery　they　are　also　in　the　polling　booth。　We　are　all　now　under
  what　Burke　called　〃the　hoofs　of　the　swinish　multitude。〃　Burke's
  language　gave　great　offence　because　the　implied　exceptions　to　its
  universal　application　made　it　a　class　insult；　and　it　certainly
  was　not　for　the　pot　to　call　the　kettle　black。　The　aristocracy　he
  defended；　in　spite　of　the　political　marriages　by　which　it　tried
  to　secure　breeding　for　itself；　had　its　mind　undertrained　by　silly
  schoolmasters　and　governesses；　its　character　corrupted　by
  gratuitous　luxury；　its　self…respect　adulterated　to　complete
  spuriousness　by　flattery　and　flunkeyism。　It　is　no　better　to…day
  and　never　will　be　any　better：　our　very　peasants　have　something
  morally　hardier　in　them　that　culminates　occasionally　in　a　Bunyan；
  a　Burns；　or　a　Carlyle。　But　observe；　this　aristocracy；　which　was
  overpowered　from　1832　to　1885　by　the　middle　class；　has　come　back
  to　power　by　the　votes　of　〃the　swinish　multitude。〃　Tom　Paine　has
  triumphed　over　Edmund　Burke；　and　the　swine　are　now　courted
  electors。　How　many　of　their　own　class　have　these　electors　sent　to
  parliament？　Hardly　a　dozen　out　of　670；　and　these　only　under　the
  persuasion　of　conspicuous　personal　qualifications　and　popular
  eloquence。　The　multitude　thus　pronounces　judgment　on　its　own
  units：　it　admits　itself　unfit　to　govern；　and　will　vote　only　for　a
  man　morphologically　and　generically　transfigured　by　palatial
  residence　and　equipage；　by　transcendent　tailoring；　by　the　glamor
  of　aristocratic　kinship。　Well；　we　two　know　these　transfigured
  persons；　these　college　passmen；　these　well　groomed　monocular
  Algys　and　Bobbies；　these　cricketers　to　whom　age　brings　golf
  instead　of　wisdom；　these　plutocratic　products　of　〃the　nail　and
  sarspan　business　as　he　got　his　money　by。〃　Do　you　know　whether　to
  laugh　or　cry　at　the　notion　that　they；　poor　devils！　will　drive　a
  team　of　continents　as　they　drive　a　four…in…hand；　turn　a　jostling
  anarchy　of　casual　trade　and　speculation　into　an　ordered
  productivity；　and　federate　our　colonies　into　a　world…Power　of　the
  first　magnitude？　Give　these　people　the　most　perfect　political
  constitution　and　the　soundest　political　program　that　benevolent
  omniscience　can　devise　for　them；　and　they　will　interpret　it　into
  mere　fashionable　folly　or　canting　charity　as　infallibly　as　a
  savage　converts　the　philosophical　theology　of　a　Scotch　missionary
  into　crude　African　idolatry。
  I　do　not　know　whether　you　have　any　illusions　left　on　the　subject
  of　education；　progress；　and　so　forth。　I　have　none。　Any
  pamphleteer　can　show　the　way　to　better　things；　but　when　there　is
  no　will　there　is　no　way。　My　nurse　was　fond　of　remarking　that　you
  cannot　make　a　silk　purse　out　of　a　sow's　ear；　and　the　more　I　see
  of　the　efforts　of　our　churches　and　universities　and　literary
  sages　to　raise　the　mass　above　its　own　level；　the　more　convinced　I
  am　that　my　nurse　was　right。　Progress　can　do　nothing　but　make　the
  most　of　us　all　as　we　are；　and　that　most　would　clearly　not　be
  enough　even　if　those　who　are　already　raised　out　of　the　lowest
  abysses　would　allow　the　others　a　chance。　The　bubble　of　Heredity
  has　been　pricked：　the　certainty　that　acquirements　are　negligible
  as　elements　in　practical　heredity　has　demolished　the　hopes　of　the
  educationists　as　well　as　the　terrors　of　the　degeneracy　mongers；
  and　we　know　now　that　there　is　no　hereditary　〃governing　class〃　any
  more　than　a　hereditary　hooliganism。　We　must　either　breed
  political　capacity　or　be　ruined　by　Democracy；　which　was　forced　on
  us　by　the　failure　of　the　older　alternatives。　Yet　if　Despotism
  failed　only　for　want　of　a　capable　benevolent　despot；　what　chance
  has　Democracy；　which　requires　a　whole　population　of　capable
  voters：　that　is；　of　political　critics　who；　if　they　cannot　govern
  in　person　for　lack　of　spare　energy　or　specific　talent　for
  administration；　can　at　least　recognize　and　appreciate　capacity
  and　benevolence　in　others；　and　so　govern　through　capably
  benevolent　representatives？　Where　are　such　voters　to　be　found
  to…day？　Nowhere。　Promiscuous　breeding　has　produced　a　weakness　of
  character　that　is　too　timid　to　face　the　full　stringency　of　a
  thoroughly　competitive　struggle　for　existence　and　too　lazy　and
  petty　to　organize　the　commonwealth　co…operatively。　Being　cowards；
  we　defeat　natural　selection　under　cover　of　philanthropy：　being
  sluggards；　we　neglect　artificial　selection　under　cover　of
  delicacy　and　morality。
  Yet　we　must　get　an　electorate　of　capable　critics　or　collapse　as
  Rome　and　Egypt　collapsed。　At　this　moment　the　Roman　decadent　phase
  of　panem　et　circenses　is　being　inaugurated　under　our　eyes。　Our
  newspapers　and　melodramas　are　blustering　about　our　imperial
  destiny；　but　our　eyes　and　hearts　turn　eagerly　to　the　American
  millionaire。　As　his　hand　goes　down　to　his　pocket；　our　fingers　go
  up　to　the　brims　of　our　hats　by　instinct。　Our　ideal　prosperity　is
  not　the　prosperity　of　the　industrial　north；　but　the　prosperity　of
  the　Isle　of　Wight；　of　Folkestone　and　Ramsgate；　of　Nice　and　Monte
  Carlo。　That　is　the　only　prosperity　you　see　on　the　stage；　where
  the　workers　are　all　footmen；　parlourmaids；　comic　lodging…letters
  and　fashionable　professional　men；　whilst　the　heroes　and　heroines
  are　miraculously　provided　with　unlimited　dividends；　and　eat
  gratuitously；　like　the　knights　in　Don　Quixote's　books　of
  chivalry。
  The　city　papers　prate　of　the　competition　of　Bombay　with
  Manchester　and　the　like。　The　real　competition　is　the　competition
  of　Regent　Street　with　the　Rue　de　Rivoli；　of　Brighton　and　the
  south　coast　with　the　Riviera；　for　the　spending　money　of　the
  American　Trusts。　What　is　all　this　growing　love　of　pageantry；　this
  effusive　loyalty；　this　officious　rising　and　uncovering　at　a　wave
  from　a　flag　or　a　blast　from　a　brass　band？　Imperialism：　Not　a　bit
  of　it。　Obsequiousness；　servility；　cupidity　roused　by　the
  prevailing　smell　of　money。　When　Mr　Carnegie　rattled　his　millions
  in　his　pockets　all　England　became　one　rapacious　cringe。　Only；
  when　Rhodes　（who　had　probably　been　reading　my　Socialism　for
  Millionaires）　left　word　that　no　idler　was　to　inherit　his　estate；
  the　bent　backs　straightened　mistrustfully　for　a　moment。　Could　it
  be　that　the　Diamond　King　was　no　gentleman　after　all？　However；　it
  was　easy　to　ignore　a　rich　man's　solecism。　The　ungentlemanly
  clause　was　not　mentioned　again；　and　the　backs　soon　bowed
  themselves　back　into　their　natural　shape。
  But　I　hear　you　asking　me　in　alarm　whether　I　have　actually　put　all
  this　tub　thumping　into　a　Don　Juan　comedy。　I　have　not。　I　have　only
  made　my　Don　Juan　a　political　pamphleteer；　and　given　you　his
  pamphlet　in　full　by　way　of　appendix。　You　will　find　it　at　the　end
  of　the　book。　I　am　sorry　to　say　that　it　is　a　common　practice　with
  romancers　to　announce　their　hero　as　a　man　of　extraordinary
  genius；　and　to　leave　his　works　entirely　to　the　reader's
  imagination；　so　that　at　the　end　of　the　book　you　whisper　to
  yourself　ruefully　that　but　for　the　author's　solemn　preliminary
  assurance　you　should　hardly　have　given　the　gentleman　credit　for
  ordinary　good　sense。　You　cannot　accuse　me　of　this　pitiable
  barrenness；　this　feeble　evasion。　I　not　only　tell　you　that　my　hero
  wrote　a　revolutionists'　handbook：　I　give　you　the　handbook　at　full
  length　for　your　edification　if　you　care　to　read　it。　And　in　that
  handbook　you　will　find　the　politics　of　the　sex　question　as　I
  conceive　Don　Juan's　descendant　to　understand　them。　Not　that　I
  disclaim　the　fullest　responsibility　for　his　opinions　and　for
  those　of　all　my　characters；　pleasant　and　unpleasant。　They　are　all
  right　from　their　several　points　of　view；　and　their　points　of　view
  are；　for　the　dramatic　moment；　mine　also。　This　may　puzzle　the
  people　who　believe　that　there　is　such　a　thing　as　an　absolutely
  right　point　of　view；　usually　their　own。　It　may　seem　to　them　that
  nobody　who　doubts　this　can　be　in　a　state　of　grace。　However　that
  may　be；　it　is　certainly　true　that　nobody　who　agrees　with　them　can
  possibly　be　a　dramatist；　or　indeed　anything　else　that　turns　upon
  a　knowledge　of　mankind。　Hence　it　has　been　pointed　out　that
  Shakespear　had　no　conscience。　Neither　have　I；　in　that　sense。
  You　may；　however；　remind　me　that　this　digression　of　mine　into
  politics　was　preceded　by　a　very　convincing　demonstration　that　the
  artist　never　catches　the　point　of　view　of　the　common　man　on　the
  question　of　sex；　because　he　is　not　in　the　same　predicament。　I
  first　prove　that　anything　I　write　on　the　relation　of　the　sexes　is
  sure　to　be　misleading；　and　then　I　proceed　to　write　a　Don　Juan
  play。　Well；　if　you　insist　on　asking　me　why　I　behave　in　this
  absurd　way；　I　can　only　reply　that　you　asked　me　to；　and　that　in
  any　case　my　treatment　of　the　subject　may　be　valid　for　the　artist；
  amusing　to　the　amateur；　and　at　least　intelligible　and　therefore
  possibly　suggestive　to　the　Philistine。　Every　man　who　records　his
  illusions　is　providing　data　for　the　genuinely　scientific
  psychology　which　the　world　still　waits　for。　I　plank　down　my　view
  of　the　existing　relations　of　men　to　women　in　the　most　highly
  civilized　society　for　what　it　is　worth。　It　is　a　view　like　any
  other　view　and　no　more；　neither　true　nor　false；　but；　I　hope；　a
  way　of　looking　at　the　subject　which　throws　into　the　familiar
  order　of　cause　and　effect　a　sufficient　body　of　fact　and
  experience　to　be　interesting　to　you；　if　not　to　the　play…going
  pub