“The Most Advanced Nation on the Path of Liberty”: Universalism and National Difference in International Freethought

Abstract

When William Heaford, a key figure in Britain's National Secular Society, introduced a new section on "Freethought in Other Lands" for the periodical The Freethinker, he argued that the movement should not be seen through a national lens: "The glory of Freethought shines forth in the fact that it is not […] a mere by-product of the English intellect, or some casual parochial characteristic chained down to a particular spot, or rooting itself to some eccentric local centre of manifestation." Instead, freethought was "cosmopolitan, international, and widespread as civilisation itself." 1 Such statements were far from exceptional. Protagonists of international freethought frequently stressed the universal nature of their cause when promoting their vision of secularity. In analytical terms, their agenda was associated with a particular "dynamic of secularization" -one that, in José Casanova's words, "aims to emancipate all secular spheres from clerical-ecclesiastical control." 2 Professions of unity among freethinkers must not be taken at face value. Although their ideas and actions had cosmopolitan features, these were subject to many boundaries. 3 This chapter examines how freethinkers sought to construct the universality of their cause while expressing notions of national difference, either explicitly or implicitly. An investigation of these ambivalences is particular relevant because recent literature has highlighted the existence of "multiple secularities" and different "secularisms." 4 While such work has drawn particular attention to non-Western categories and experiences, the debates within the IFF shed light on pluralities even within European settings. As such, the case of the organization reveals overlaps and intersections between different ways of framing "the secular" as a sphere and objective.