public oral discussion, which for the adult population is even more important than the schools in the diffusion of social information and in the formation of public opinion. It is through these agencies that the adult citizens of a democracy must educate one another regarding public questions; hence the importance of keeping them free and untrammeled by selfish interests. If they are kept free, the schools will also maintain their freedom, and we should not need to fear that social education would become an instrument of political conservatism. Educators have every interest, therefore, in maintaining freedom of public discussion and a free presswithin the limits, of course, of courtesy, decency, and truth; for they are a part of the necessary machinery for the education of a democracyу.

But social education means much more than instruction in social studies, important as that is. The imparting of social knowledge and the development of social intelligence is its foundation, but the socialization of the will, the maximization of the attitude of service, is its crown. Just now the world seems more sadly in need of good will and of unselfish service than of knowledge. Any social education which does not eventuate in the inculcation of social values, standards, and ideals is abortive. But as we have already pointed out the best way to inculcate social standards and ideals is through the scientific study of social facts and conditions. Thus as soon as we have ascertained the conditions and effects of child labor we have the knowledge on which to base a scientific standard regarding it which will compel the assent of all reasonable minds. We have made the mistake in the past of thinking that moral values, social standards, and even patriotism can be taught effectively as abstractions or dogmas. The right way to teach these highest things in social education, however, is undoubtedly through the study of concrete situations and problems, in which these values naturally emerge. If so taught, there will be no danger that the student in later life will regard these things as "mere dogmas."

The school should maintain and teach the attitude of service at all times. This it should do not dogmatically, so as to stifle individual conscience and judgment, but as an elastic, dynamic ideal which will give a definite social direction to the student's mental

and moral life. Self-interest as a basis for social living has been shown to be inadequate both through the experience of the past and through the study of the laws of human living together. The service ideal of life accordingly will naturally emerge from the study of social conditions and laws, and the school by its discipline and spirit should reinforce this ideal. The inculcation of the service ideal of life of service beginning in the smaller, primary groups, such as the family and the local community, but extending to the nation and finally to humanity-is, then, the end to be sought in all education for citizenship in a democracy. Thus may we maximize co-operation and minimize conflict in the nation and in the whole world. Thus may we also, through the unexplored possibilities of co-operation or "team work," make our democracy some day so startlingly efficient that the boasted efficiency of autocracy will look small in comparison.

It should not be overlooked that such a thorough, socialized education for citizenship in a democracy would be essentially a religious education, in that it would aim to secure that consecration of life to the service of the community which ethical religion also aims at. It would be essentially a Christian education, not in a theological sense, but in the sense that it would inculcate the service of humanity as the highest end and aim of life. Thus social education would find that science, religion, and patriotism, now so often foolishly put in opposition to one another, are essentially harmonious and are all essential in education for ideal citizenship.

It should be unnecessary to point out that such a social education, which would throw the emphasis in education upon social intelligence and social service, would leave ample place for literary, physical, vocational, and every other sort of education needed for complete human living. Thus an education which did not include preparation for the serious work of life in a vocational sense would scarcely be worthy to be called social. Only social education would subordinate vocationalization to socialization. It would exalt the social man, the citizen, above his vocation, his physique, or his culture in the narrow sense of that word.

Two final matters of the utmost importance can only be touched upon in concluding our discussion of education for citizenship in a

democracy. The first is the necessity of educating leaders in a democracy. Democracies are like all other human societiesthey can achieve great things only through capable leadership. But in a democracy the people themselves must provide and select their own leaders. This means that the whole educational system should be devised to select and train the most capable for social leadership. This places the main responsibility for the success of democracy upon those higher educational institutions which are supposed to be equipped for the training of social and political leaders, namely, the colleges and the universities. Are American colleges and universities awake to their full responsibility in this regard?

The second matter is the need of a national system of education in a democratic nation. Training for intelligent citizenship must be the first concern of the nation, if the nation is to live and to realize its destiny. Such education is a national concern and cannot be left with safety wholly to local interests. It is to our credit that we have devised a system of government which reconciles local and national interests. It should not be difficult to devise a system of education also which will reconcile local and national interests. We need a national minimum in education, and Congress should pass without delay the Smith-Towner bill, or some better bill, to provide at once a national system of education as the one indispensable measure for national reconstruction.

In conclusion, may I say that we need a deeper faith in education as a savior and regenerator of democracy? We need to realize that education is the conscious method of social evolution and so, in the last analysis, the only rational means of social progress. We need to see the vital relation between democracy and education, that both must rise or sink together. But we need especially a practical faith in education, such as will lead us to match every dollar spent for army or navy or military training by at least another dollar spent for our schools. Then, perhaps, we shall be able to safeguard our own democracy, and thus do our bit in making a world safe for democracy.

THE WAR AND THE COMMUNITY MOVEMENT

WEAVER PANGBURN

Division Secretary, War Camp Community Service

I

While the war-born hope of international understanding and co-operation seems doomed to disappointment, the patriotic forces for unity set up within nations still give promise of bearing permanent fruit. The United States made a relatively small sacrifice in the struggle but shares equally with other nations the benefits of victory. The war shook America out of its provincialism and, like some powerful chemical, cast into more complete solution the various elements of its population. That old southern mountaineer spoke with significance who declared that the Hickory Division and the Twenty-seventh New York "done bust the Mason and Dixon Line" when they together broke the Hindenburg line. What years of patient education and exhortation in peace time failed to bring about the war swiftly advanced-an enlarged capacity for co-operative effort in good causes. The impetus to the community movement is the most conspicuous illustration of this hopeful phenomenon.

The armistice signed, public attention shifted from the arena of the war to the arena of community life. The nation functioned through the community in fighting to win the war; now it looks to the community to conserve the fruits of victory. The patriotic motive has been translated into a civic sense transcending that of pre-war days. The great religious and social organizations created or enlarged by the war, now that the soldier has returned, aim to build up in his home town a community life that will reflect the democratic ideal for which he fought. Concentrating on the instruction of women in rural and isolated communities, urging the war nurses to enter public health service rather than private, and enlarging and intensifying activities of local chapters, the Red Cross is endeavoring to build up higher standards of community health. The Y.M.C.A. has appealed to the returning soldier and

sailor to carry into his home community the lessons of the service and has striven to find for the soldier and sailor in every community friendship, the church of his choice, and some unselfish service. The National Catholic War Council found easy the transition from the activities of the Knights of Columbus in the training camps and in France to a full-fledged social program in the community. The activities of the War Camp Community Service in organizing and stimulating the resources of cities for the recreation of the men in uniform, instead of diminishing, have been intensified and are emerging into a broad peace-time movement for the general enrichment of the lives of all citizens. The welfare organizations are continuing in peace time and infusing their enthusiasm into the normal economic and social activities of the community.

While on the one hand the spirit of industrial conflict seems to be increasing, yet on the other the more far-sighted leaders of both labor and capital are interpreting the business of production in terms of association and partnership between employer and employee. Social well-being as well as material gain is declared to be the object of industry. Understanding the other fellow's problems and viewpoint, it is asserted, is the sine qua non of contentment and progress in industry.

The war itself and the social by-products of the war constitute no mean challenge to the church. The simple Christianity of the trenches is in order at home. Rabbi, priest, and minister are agreed that theories, beliefs, and doctrines must make concession to practical service. Ecclesiastical propaganda must yield to an emphasis on life, works, and social justice. An enlarged sense of community obligation has infected all creeds. Points of agreement and unity between sects, rather than points of divergence, are emphasized. The community church appears less impractical than formerly. Personal salvation, the importance of the hereafter, the emphasis on negations, many declare are secondary to social service, the urgency of the present, and a positive gospel. Fraternity, churchmen say, must be practiced as well as preached. The democratic tendency to give laymen a large place in the affairs of the church which was in evidence before the war has been greatly