The ethical dimension of Saint-Simonianism

“There is a science”, Saint-Simon stated, “far more important for society than physical and mathematical knowledge: it is the science... on which society is based: moral science” ([1825] 2012, 3223).

Saint-Simon and his followers, as already noted, thought that human society could not forever exist in a state of social criticism - a regime in which men and women do not accept society’s institutions, do not agree with the principles and values which are the moral and political basis of their community. This attitude had only a short-lived utility.

Critical times, in the past, were... a vital condition [of] progress, being indeed the way to shift from one organic period to another. Destruction was necessary before thinking about construction and it has hitherto been plain that the overall endeavour to carry out this task was, when necessary, far from superfluous.

(Bazard and Carnot 1832, 6)

But negativity meant turning one’s back on religion, insofar as religion is what links individuals with each other: “To bring man together with what is not him­self, such is the purpose of any religion, as shown by the etymology of this word” (Bazard and Carnot 1832, 225). Critical periods are “non-religious” (Bazard and Carnot 1832, 5). The spiritual bond with the past is broken, as well as that between individuals. Industrial society is in absolute and very urgent need of a new religion to create a single synthetic, “organic” social life. Saint-Simon’s last and unfin­ished book, Nouveau christianisme, certainly had a great deal of influence on his followers.

Following Saint-Simon and in his name, we hereby declare that mankind has a religious future, that the religion of the future shall be greater, stronger than that of the past It shall not only dominate the political order, but the political order shall as a whole be a religious institution.

(Bazard et al. 1831, 334)

Saint-Simon persisted in calling his new religion Christianity. However, he thought this new religion should be linked universality, with the future fundamental char­acteristic of an organic society. He saw no contradiction in this at all, since he con­sidered that Christianity had originally possessed that universal dimension. Jesus was addressing mankind as a whole when he declared that men shall behave like brothers towards each other. The new religion entirely adhered to this “sublime

principle” [which] “contains all of Christianity’s divine dimension” ([1825] 2012, 3184). All humans can identify with such a universal principle, and can therefore convert to the new religion.

“Jesus trusted his apostles with the sublime mission of organising the human species in the interest of the poorest class” ([1825] 2012, 3202). This approach to a future society that “shall strive to improve the moral and physical condition of the poorest of classes” ([1825] 2012, 3216) recurs in the pages of Nouveau christian- isme, and then later in Saint-Simonian writings and homilies. As for this new reli­gion, it would essentially be based on two fundamental principles: brotherhood and “the social happiness of the poor” ([1825] 2012, 3226). For the Saint-Simonians this was their master’s major message. They recommend the abolition of all privi­leges of birth, notably inheritance, according to these two principles. Like Saint- Simon, they were convinced that “true Christianity shall not only make men happy in Heaven, but on earth” ([1825] 2012, 3204).

Religion, however, was a relevant issue in a far more decisive way for the Saint- Simonians. They organised themselves into a rigorously hierarchical “real church with its dogma, apostles and priests” (Picon 2004, 10). This led to their being called a “sect”, but they rejected this.

The word sect refers to secessionist opinion: but we are no secessionists, we are of the future.... It is the power of Saint-Simon’s doctrine’s to bring together all of today’s divergent feelings, ideas, interests into a general doc­trine, a Religion.

(Bazard and Carnot 1832, 17)

This religion was also granted a character that made it different from its original form, and entirely suitable for the spirit of industrial times: the reconciliation of mind and body (or matter). It was the perfect time to free oneself from the idea that suffering was inevitable. In the past,

since suffering was the rightful retribution for a previous sin, he [man] would accept the pain and submit to it in resignation, maybe joyfully, rather than consider that it indicated the need for some progress, so that a better condi­tion be brought about, for his own good.

(Bazard and Carnot 1832, 235)

This situation was the result of the powerlessness of human beings in the face of nature, matter’s almighty power. But thanks to the development of new “material activity”, industry, humans can free themselves from being doomed to “slavery”. Thanks to industry they can create the material and spiritual context within which they can submit nature to their will and desire. Men must become aware of their lasting ability to innovate and develop their material living conditions. They must become aware that “perfectibility” is the fundamental requirement ofhuman history.^[223]

At first sight, the strongly hierarchical structure of the Saint-Simonian church may seem to be in complete contradiction with the principle of brotherhood, according to which all individuals are equal. But for Saint-Simonians equality is perfectly compatible with hierarchy and inequality. Everything depends on the existence or absence of “love” - they often write this word in capital letters - between superiors and inferiors, and also between all individuals considered as associates of the new society. In the Saint-Simonian world, “love” means “union”. This general idea was expressed in sophisticated texts of a high philosophical and poetical level, addressing this idea in books, articles, homilies and letters (Barrault et al. [1832-33] 1991).

The Saint-Simonian approach to hierarchy radically opposes the domination and exploitation regime prevailing during critical times.

For the Saint-Simonians the highest form of love, the most sacred of unions, is the love and union between man and woman. With regard to women the Saint- Simonians proved as revolutionary as their contemporary Charles Fourier (Le Bras- Chopard 2019, 169-72, Perrot 2019, Riot-Sarcey 1998, 160-5, Delvallez 2006). Like other nineteenth-century social reformers, they condemned the exploitation of man by man, but did not forget to denounce “the exploitation of woman by man”. Women should not wait for the emancipation of the working class to also free them­selves, as other socialists presumed. Freeing women is the condition for freeing mankind. “It is written”, says Chevalier, “that the woman shall someday crush the head of the snake, that is, of war and slavery” (in Barrault et al. [1832-33] 1991, 7).

In terms of ethics and anthropology, all confrontation between men and women must once and for all be left behind.

Saint-Simonians, particularly Enfantin, considered that limiting the improve­ment of women’s conditions to political, economic and legal matters was insuf­ficient for their effective emancipation. Women’s sexual liberation was also necessary. Women had to have control over their own body, thus freely choosing their partner. Such a revolutionary purpose required a radical reconsideration of the institution of marriage. Just like human institutions obey the law of evolution, so should marriage adapt to the modern world. Its rules should be reformed, taking the variety of desires and passions into account. Some individuals are “immobile” and others are “mobile”: “The same man with the same woman fora lifetime, this is one form of the religion. Divorce and a new union with a new husband, that is a new form of the religion” (Enfantin [1831] 1872, 195)

Despite Enfantin’s strong protestations to the contrary, many adherents of the Church suspected that the idea or desire for the “community of women” lurked behind this idea of “mobility”.

Sessions of public preaching, developing revolutionary ideas about universal association, the abolition of privileges of birth, the end of the exploitation of man by man, the emancipation of women, all of this was appealing to an increasing number of visitors. For the authorities, this began to go beyond anything tolerable. Eventually, after only eight months, the police put an end to the retreat. The school was dissolved, and Enfantin and Chevalier were sentenced to a year’s imprison­ment. Followers dispersed. However, one group of believers, strongly encouraged by their supreme Father and under Barrault’s authority, accepted to convert and became “Companions of the Woman” (“Les Compagnons de la Femme”) in order to travel to the Orient, looking for the “Female Messiah”. After lengthy travels (Le Bras-Chopard 2019), the Saint-Simonians returned to France - via Cairo, where they suggested to Viceroy Mehmet Ali that a canal be constructed linking the town of Suez to the Mediterranean^{[225] [226] - and integrated back into civil society, pursuing their careers since they felt comfortable within the world of industry and business. Michel Chevalier, for example, firmly opposed to the prevailing powers during the Menilmontant period, had a dazzling career and became one of France’s most dis­tinguished liberal economists. Over a period of twenty years, he was appointed as official economic counsellor first to Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, then Napoleon III (see Walch 1975; Coilly and Regnier 2006, 173). Enfantin continued with his pas­sion for the Orient and colonial issues. Between 1839 and 1841 he went to Algeria and, as the outcome of his stay, wrote Colonisation de ΓAlgerie (1843).[227]}

5.