It is a truism that the successful operation of a liberal democracy depends on the general level of education. But a level of education sufficient for the conduct of domestic affairs may not suffice for the conduct of foreign affairs. The classic example is in the account Thucydides gave of how the procedures whereby foreign-policy decisions were made by the Athenian citizenry as a whole brought about the downfall of what had been the most advanced society of its day. Until the present century it had been generally assumed that the conduct of foreign relations, in addition to requiring such secrecy as limits public debate, calls for a special sophistication beyond what even the best general education can normally be expected to provide.

The problem this poses arose so poignantly for President Washington during the first generation of American independence that it provided one of the principal themes of his Farewell Address. It troubled Alexis de Tocqueville when he reported on his visit to a United States that, under the presidency of Andrew Jackson, was transforming itself from an oligarchic republic into an egalitarian democracy. But all this was back in the days when the American society was still able, for the most part, to stand aloof from the great world of international politics.

In those days the worldwide reponsibilities that have since been thrust upon the American democracy were borne principally by Great Britain. But there was no thought in Britain of discharging them through the developing procedures of democratic decision that were being applied to domestic affairs. Until World War I, the conduct of foreign relations was normally