August Bebel

The Socialization of Society. The Socialization of Society. CHAPTER XX. The Social Revolution. 1.--The Transformation of Society.

The tide rises and undermines the foundation of state and society. Every one feels that the pillars are swaying and that only powerful props can support them. But to erect such props means great sacrifices on the part of the ruling classes, and there the difficulty lies. Every proposition, the realization of which would seriously damage the material interests of the ruling classes and would threaten to question their privileged position, is bitterly opposed by them and roundly condemned as a measure destined to overturn the present order of state and society. But, without questioning and ultimately removing the privileges of the ruling classes, the diseased world cannot be cured.

“The struggle for the liberation of the working class is not a struggle for privileges, but one for equal rights and equal duties and for the removal of all privileges.” This declaration of principles is contained in the Socialist platform. It follows that nothing can be attained by half measures and small concessions.

But the ruling classes regard their privileged position as natural and self-understood; they will admit of no doubt in its permanence and justification. So it is quite natural that they oppose and combat every attempt to shatter their privileges. Even proposed measures and laws that do not change their privileged position and the present order of society in the least, cause the greatest excitement among them, if their purse-strings are loosened thereby or likely to be loosened. In the parliaments mountains of paper are printed with speeches until the laboring mountains bring forth a ridiculous mouse. The most self-understood demands of workingmen’s protection are met with as much opposition as if the existence of society depended upon it. When, after endless struggles, some concessions are won from the ruling classes, they act as if they had sacrificed a part of their fortune. They show the same stubborn opposition when called upon to recognize the oppressed classes on a basis of formal equality; for instance, to discuss questions of labor agreements with them as with their equals.

This opposition to the simplest things and the most self-understood demands confirms the old experience that no ruling class can ever be convinced by reason, unless the force of circumstances compels discretion and compliance. But the force of circumstances may be found in the growing measure of understanding created in the oppressed by the development of our conditions. The class extremes are constantly becoming more severe, more noticeable and more evident. The oppressed and exploited classes begin to recognize that existing conditions are untenable; their indignation increases, and with it the imperious demand to transform and humanize conditions. As this perception grows and reaches ever widening circles, it finally conquers the vast majority of society, which is most directly interested in this transformation. But to the same extent in which this perception of the untenableness of existing conditions and the need of their transformation grows among the masses, the power of resistance of the ruling classes declines, since their power is founded upon the ignorance and the lack of understanding of the oppressed and exploited classes. This reciprocal action is evident, and therefore everything that advances it must be welcomed. The progress of capitalism on the one hand is balanced on the other by the growing perception that the existing social order is adverse to the wellfare of the vast majority of the people. Although the solution and removal of social extremes will require great sacrifices and many exertions, a solution will be found as soon as the extremes have attained the height of their development, toward which they are rapidly advancing.

What measures are to be resorted to at the various stages of development, depends upon circumstances. It is impossible to predict what measures will be necessitated by circumstances in particular instances. No government, no prime-minister, be he the most powerful person, can predict what circumstances will compel him to do a year hence. It is all the more impossible to predict measures that will be dictated by circumstances unknown to us at present. The question of measures is a question of tactics to be observed in a struggle. The tactics are influenced by the opponent and also by the resources at the command of both parties. Means that are splendid to-day may be harmful to-morrow, because the circumstances that justified their employment may have changed. It is but necessary always to keep our aim before us; the means for attaining same depend upon time and circumstances. But the most effective means that time and circumstances permit of should be resorted to. In depicting future developments we must therefore resort to hypothetical methods; we must surmise certain conditions.

Proceeding from this point of view, we surmise that, at a given time, all the depicted evils will have developed to such extremes and will have become so evident and tangible to the great majority of the population, that they come to be regarded as unbearable; that a general, irresistible demand for a thoroughgoing transformation will manifest itself, and that, accordingly, the quickest help will be considered the most appropriate.

All social evils, without exception, spring from the present social order, which, as has been shown, is founded on capitalism, on the capitalistic method of production. This method of production enables the capitalist class—the owners of all the means of production, the ground, mines, raw materials, tools, machines, means of transportation—to exploit and oppress the masses, which leads to insecurity of existence and to the degradation of the exploited classes. Accordingly the most rapid and direct way would be to transform capitalistic property into common, or social property by a general expropriation. The production of commodities will be socialized; it will become a production for and by society. Manufacture on a large scale and the increasing productivity of social labor, until now a source of misery and oppression for the exploited classes, will then become a source of well-being and harmonious development for all.

The transformation of all means of production into common property forms the new basis of society. The conditions of life and work for both sexes in industry, agriculture, traffic, education, marriage, science, art and social intercourse become radically different. Human life is given a new purpose. Gradually the organization of the state also loses ground; the state disappears; it, so to say, abolishes itself.

In the first part of this book we have shown why the state had to arise. It is the product of development from primitive society, founded on communism, that becomes dissolved as private property develops. With the rise of private property antagonistic interests are formed within society. Differences of class and caste arise that necessarily lead to class struggles among the different groups and threaten the maintenance of the new order. To keep down the opponents of the new order and to protect the threatened proprietors, an organization is required that opposes such attacks and declares property to be “righteous” and “sacred.” This organization, which protects and maintains private property, becomes the state. By laws the state secures the proprietor’s right to his property, and upon those who would attack the order laid down by law it turns as judge and avenger. By their innermost nature, then, the interests of the ruling, possessing class, and of the powers of the state, always are conservative. The organization of the state only changes when the interest of property demands it. Thus the state is the indispensable organization of a society founded on class rule. As soon as class extremes have been removed by the abolition of private property, it becomes unnecessary and impossible. The state gradually ceases to exist with the passing away of class rule, as surely as religion ceases to exist when belief in superior beings and occult powers is no longer met with. Words must have a purport; when they lose same they cease to convey a meaning.

Here a reader who is capitalistically minded may object and may ask on what legal ground can society justify these overthrowing changes? The legal ground will be the same that always was found, when similar changes and transformations were needful: The common wellfare. Society, not the state, is the source of law. The state is only clerk to the society, whose duty it is to measure and dispense the law. Until now, ruling society was always but a small minority, but this small minority acted in behalf of the entire nation and represented itself as being society, just as LouisXIV. represented himself as being the state: “L’État c’est moi.” (I am the state.) When our newspapers report: “The season has begun, society is returning to town;” or: “The season is over, society is hastening to the country,” they do not mean the people, but the upper ten thousand who constitute society as they constitute the state. The masses are the “plebs,” the vile multitude. In the same way, everything undertaken by the state for society in behalf of “the common welfare,” has, first and foremost, served the interests of the ruling classes. “Salus reipublicae suprema lex esto” (the welfare of the republic shall be the supreme law), is the well-known legal principle laid down by the ancient Romans. But who formed the Roman republic? The subjected peoples, the millions of slaves? No! The comparatively small number of Roman citizens, above all the Roman nobility, who permitted the slaves to support them.

When, during the middle ages, nobility and princes robbed the communal property, they did so on the legal ground of “the common welfare,” and in what manner they disposed of the communal property and the property of the helpless peasants, the history of the middle ages, down to recent times, has amply shown. The agrarian history of the past thousand years is a history of uninterrupted robbery of communal and peasant property, practiced by the nobility and the Church in all civilized states of Europe. When the great French Revolution then proceeded to expropriate the property of the nobility and the Church, it did so “in behalf of the common welfare,” and the greater part of the eight million of property holders who form the chief stay of Bourgeois France, owe their existence to this expropriation. In behalf of the “common welfare,” Spain took possession of much Church property, and Italy confiscated it entirely, applauded by the most ardent defenders of “sacred property.” The English nobility for centuries robbed the Irish and English nations of their property, and from 1804 to 1832 legally presented itself—“in behalf of the common welfare”—with no less than 3,511,710acres of communal property. When, after the great North American civil war, millions of slaves were emancipated, who had been the lawfully acquired property of their masters, without reimbursing the latter, this was done “in behalf of the common welfare.” Our entire bourgeois development is an uninterrupted process of expropriation and confiscation. In this process the mechanic is expropriated by the manufacturer, the peasant by the great landowner, the small dealer by the large merchant, and, finally, one capitalist by another. To judge by the declamations of our bourgeoisie, all this is being done to serve “the common welfare,” in the “interest of society.” On the 18Brumaire and December2, the followers of Napoleon “saved” “society” and “society” congratulated them. When society will save itself by taking back the property it has created, it will perform the most noteworthy deed. For then its actions will not purpose to suppress one to the advantage of another, but to obtain equality of opportunity for all and to enable each and every one to lead an existence worthy of a human being. It will be the grandest measure, morally, ever enacted by society.

In what forms this great process of social expropriation will be consummated and under what conditions, is of course quite impossible to predict.

In his fourth social letter to v.Kirchmann, entitled “Capital,”[211] Rodbertus says: “A confiscation of all private property in land, is not a chimera, but quite possible from the standpoint of political economy. It would also be the most radical help for society. For society suffers from the increase of rent in land and capital. With the abolition of private property in land, traffic and the progress of national wealth would not be interrupted for one moment.” What do the Agrarians say to this opinion of one who was formerly a member of their party?

The further course of events, after such a measure has been resorted to, cannot be definitely laid down. No human being is able to foresee how coming generations will shape the details of their social organizations, and in what manner they will best succeed in satisfying their requirements. In society, as in nature, there is constant change. One thing appears while another disappears; what is old and wasted is replaced by what is new and full of vitality. Inventions and discoveries along varied lines are made whose significance cannot be foreseen, and when applied, such inventions and discoveries may revolutionize human life and the entire social organization.

In the following, therefore, we can only discuss the development of general principles. They may be laid down as a logical outcome of the prior explanations, and to some extent it is possible to overlook in what manner they will be carried out. Even heretofore society could not be guided and directed by single individuals, although it sometimes appeared so. But appearances are deceiving; presuming to direct, we are being directed. Even heretofore society has been an organism that developed in accordance with definite, inherent laws. In the future the guidance and direction, according to the will of individuals, will be entirely out of the question. Society will then be a democracy that will have unravelled the secrets of its nature. It will have discovered the laws of its development and will consciously apply them to its further growth.

---

[211] Berlin, 1884.

CHAPTER XXI.
Fundamental Laws of Socialistic Society.

1.—Duty to Work of All Able-bodied Persons.

As soon as society has become the owner of all means of production, the duty to work of all able-bodied persons, regardless of sex, becomes a fundamental law of socialized society. Society cannot exist without labor. It therefore is justified in demanding that all who seek to satisfy their requirements, should also serve to the best of their physical and mental abilities in producing the commodities that are needful to satisfy the requirements of all. The silly assertion that the Socialists wish to abolish work is an absurdity. Lazy persons, shirkers of work, are met with in bourgeois society only. Socialism is agreed with the Bible in asserting that “he who will not work neither shall he eat.” But work shall be useful, productive activity. The new society will therefore insist that everyone choose some definite industrial, agricultural, or other useful activity, whereby he performs a certain amount of labor for the satisfaction of existing requirements. No enjoyment without labor, without labor no enjoyment.

Since all are obliged to work, all have the same interest in having three conditions of labor complied with. Firstly, that the work-day shall not be too long and that the work shall not require over-exertion; secondly, that the work shall be varied and as agreeable as possible; thirdly, that it shall be as productive as possible, since on this the length of the work-day and the number of obtainable enjoyments depend. But these three conditions again are determined by the number and the nature of the means of production and the workers; they are furthermore determined by the required standard of living. Socialistic society does not establish itself in order to lead a proletarian existence, but to abolish the proletarian manner of living of the great majority of people. It seeks to grant to everyone the fullest measure of the comforts and joys of life, and so the question arises: To what extent will the requirements of society grow?

In order to determine this an administration will be necessary that comprises all fields of social activity. Here our municipalities will form an appropriate foundation. If they are too large to permit of obtaining an insight, they may be divided into districts. As in primitive society, all members of the communities who are of age, regardless of sex, will participate in the elections and choose the persons who are to take charge of the administration. At the head of all local bodies there will be a central administration. This—let it be noted—will not be a government with ruling powers, but an executive board of managers. Whether this board of managers is to be elected by the entire population or by the local boards is not essential. These questions will not be as important then as they are now, for election to these offices will not mean greater power and influence and a higher income. They will be positions of trust to which the fittest, be they men or women, will be elected, and they can be recalled or re-elected, as conditions may demand, or as it may seem desirable to the voters. All offices are temporary. The persons who hold these positions, therefore, cannot be regarded as officials. Their function is not a permanent one, nor is a hierarchical order of advancement provided for. Viewed from this standpoint, it also becomes a matter of indifference whether there will be any intermediate bodies between the central administration and the local administrations, as provincial administrations, etc. If considered necessary they will be instituted; if not, they will be omitted. All that will be determined by experience. If progress in the development of society should make old institutions superfluous, they will be abolished without any ado and without any conflict, since no one is personally interested in their maintenance, and new ones will be instituted instead. This thoroughly democratic administration is very different from the present. At the present time—what battles in the newspapers, what a warfare of tongues in the parliaments, what piles of documents in the government offices, to accomplish an insignificant change in the administration or government!

To begin with, the main task will be to determine the existing forces, the number and kind of means of production, factories, workshops, means of transportation, area of land, and the previous productivity. Further it will be necessary to determine the supply on hand and the number of articles and products required to supply the demand in a given length of time. As at present the state and the various municipalities annually determine their budgets, this will in future be done for the entire social demand, and changes made necessary by new or increased demands can be fully taken into consideration. Statistics here become the main factor. They are the most important auxiliary science in the new society, since they furnish the standard whereby all social activity may be measured. Statistics are being used for similar purposes at present on a large scale. The budgets of nation, state, and municipality are founded on a great number of statistical investigations that are annually undertaken by the various branches of administration. Experience of long duration and a certain stability in current demands simplify them. Under normal conditions every manufacturer and every merchant is also enabled to determine his requirements for the coming quarter of a year and in what manner he must arrange his production and his purchases. Unless excessive changes occur he can meet them readily and without much difficulty.

The experience that the crises are brought on by blind, anarchistic production; that is to say, because goods are produced without any knowledge of the stock on hand, the sales, and the demand for the various articles on the world market, has caused the captains of industry in various branches—as already stated—to form trusts. The object of these trusts is to determine prices on the one hand, and on the other to regulate production. By the producing ability of each individual concern and by the sales it is likely to make, the amount of goods to be produced for the coming months is determined. Failure to comply with these rules is punished by a fine and by proscription. The manufacturers form these agreements not to benefit, but to harm the public, and solely for their own advantage. Their purpose is to use the power of co-operation to insure the greatest advantage for themselves. By regulating production it becomes possible to exact the payment of prices that can never be obtained as long as the individual manufacturers compete with one another. So the manufacturer enriches himself at the expense of the consumer, who must pay the fixed price for the article that he needs; and, as the consumer is injured by the trusts, so also the worker. Regulation of production by the manufacturers releases a number of workers and employes, and these, in order to live, must underbid their fellow-workers. Moreover, the social power of the trust is so great that the labor unions, too can rarely cope with them. The employers, accordingly, enjoy a double advantage; they receive higher prices and pay lower wages. This regulation of production by associations of employers is the opposite of that which will take effect in Socialistic society. To-day the interest of the employers is the determining factor; in the future it will be the interest of the general public. But in bourgeois society even the best organized trust cannot overlook and compute all the factors. Competition and speculation on the world market continue to rage, in spite of the trust, and suddenly it becomes manifest that the calculation is faulty, and the artificial structure breaks down.

Like industry, commerce also possesses far-reaching statistics. Every week the large centers of commerce and seaport towns publish lists of the supplies on hand of kerosene, cotton, sugar, coffee, wheat, etc. Sometimes these statistics are not exact, because the owners of the goods occasionally have a personal interest in preventing the truth from becoming known. But, taken all in all, these statistics are pretty reliable and enable those interested to judge the probable aspect of the market in the near future. But here, too, speculation enters into consideration that frequently deceives and upsets all calculations and often makes it impossible to carry on an honest business. Just as a general regulation of production is made impossible in bourgeois society by the conflicting interests of the countless private producers, so the regulation of distribution is made impossible by the speculative nature of commerce and by the conflicting interests of the great number of persons engaged in it. But what has been accomplished so far gives an idea of what can be accomplished as soon as private interests disappear and the common interest predominates. An example of this is, for instance, the harvest statistics compiled annually by various states, that make it possible to calculate the crops, the amount needful to supply the domestic demand, and the probable prices.

But in a socialized society conditions will be perfectly orderly, since the solidarity of society will have been established. Everything is carried out, according to plans, in an orderly way, and so it will be easy to determine the amounts required by the various demands. When some experience has been gained, everything will run smoothly. When the average demand for meat, bread, shoes, garments, etc., has been statistically determined, and when the output of the respective establishments of production is known, the average daily amount of socially necessary labor can be established. It, furthermore, can be determined whether more establishments of production are needed, or whether some can be dispensed with as superfluous and can be fitted out for other purposes.

Every individual chooses the branch of industry in which he wishes to be employed. The great number of very different realms of activity makes it possible to take the most varied wishes into consideration. If there is an excess of workers in one branch and a lack of workers in another, it will be the duty of the administration to make the necessary arrangements and to bring about an equalization. To organize production and to give opportunity to the various forces to be employed at the right place, will be the chief task of the elected administrations. As all perfect themselves in their particular tasks the wheels run more smoothly. The different branches of industry and sub-divisions elect their managers, who must control the work. But these are no slave-drivers, as overseers and foremen are to-day, but fellow-workers who simply practice the administrative function entrusted to them, in place of a productive one. It is not impossible that at a more advanced stage of organization and with a more perfect education of all its members, these functions will become alternating and will, in definite rotation, be overtaken by all persons concerned, regardless of sex.

2.—Harmony of Interests.

Labor, organized on a basis of complete freedom and democratic equality, with one for all and all for one, will call forth a rivalry and a desire to create that are nowhere met with under the present industrial system; and this joy of creation will enhance the productivity of labor.

Since all work for one another, they are interested in having all objects well made and with as little waste of time and strength as possible, be it to save labor, or to gain time for the manufacture of new products destined to satisfy higher demands. This common interest will cause all to seek to improve, simplify and hasten the process of work. The ambition to discover and invent will be stimulated to the highest degree, and people will endeavour to outdo each other in new ideas and suggestions.[212] So the opposite of what is claimed by the opponents of Socialism will be true. How many discoverers and inventors perish in bourgeois society! How many are exploited and cast aside! If intelligence and talent were to hold the foremost place in bourgeois society, instead of property, the greater part of the employers would have to make way for their workingmen, foremen, mechanics, engineers, chemists, etc. These are the men who, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, have made the discoveries, inventions, and improvements that are applied by the man with the full purse. How many thousands of discoverers and inventors have failed because they could not find a man who would furnish the money to carry out their discoveries and inventions, and how many meritorious discoverers and inventors are crushed by the social misery of daily life, is quite beyond our calculation. Not the persons endowed with a quick intelligence and a clear brain are masters of the world, but those endowed with ample means, which does not imply that a clear brain and a full purse cannot belong to the same person.

Everyone engaged in practical life knows with how much suspicion the workingmen regard every improvement, every new invention that is introduced to-day; and their suspicion is entirely justified. For, as a rule, not the workers but the employers are the only ones to derive any advantage from it. The worker must fear that the new machine, or the improvement, will make him superfluous and turn him out into the street. Instead of joyfully acclaiming a new invention that is a credit to humanity and ought to be a boon to him, he curses it. Many an improvement in the process of production invented by workingmen has never been introduced. The inventor keeps his invention to himself, because he fears that it will harm him, instead of benefiting him. Such are the natural results of conflicting interests.[213]

In Socialistic society the conflict of interests will be removed. Everyone will develop his abilities to serve himself and will thereby serve society. At present, satisfaction of personal egotism and service of society usually are extremes that exclude each other. In the new society these extremes will not exist. Satisfaction of personal egotism and service of society will be harmonious; they will coincide.[214]

The splendid influence of such a status of morals is obvious. The productivity of labor will rapidly increase. Especially will the productivity of labor grow, because the dissemination of forces among hundreds of thousands of tiny manufacturers with imperfect tools and insufficient means, will cease. It has been previously shown among how many small, medium-sized and large manufactories German industry is disseminated. By gathering in all the small and medium-sized manufactories into manufacture on a large scale in great establishments that will be furnished with all the most modern technical improvements, a tremendous waste of effort, time, material of all kinds (light, heat, etc.), and space will be removed, and the productivity of labor will be heightened. The difference that exists between the productivity of small, medium-sized and large manufactories, may be illustrated by an example from the industrial census of Massachusetts of 1890. There the factories in ten chief branches of industry are divided into three classes. Those that produced less than 40,000dollars’ worth were placed in the lower class; those that produced between 40,000 and 150,000dollars’ worth in the middle class, and those that produced over 150,000dollars’ worth, in the upper class. This division presented the following figures:

Twice the number of small factories, compared to the large and medium-sized ones, turned out only 9.4per cent. of the entire production, while the large factories, which formed only 23per cent. of the total number, produced almost 2½ times the quantity of all the others. But even the large establishments could be organized much more rationally still, so that the total production might yield a still far greater quantity.

How much time can be gained by placing production on a rational basis? That has been shown by interesting calculations made by Th.Hertzka, in his book on “The Laws of Social Evolution,” published in 1886. He calculated how much time and labor power would be needful to satisfy the demands of the population of Austria, which was 22millions strong at the time. For this purpose, Hertzka investigated the productivity of the large establishments in the various lines of industry and based his calculations on the results. This calculation includes the farming of 10½ million hectares of cultivated soil and 3million hectares of pasturage, which should suffice to supply said population with meat and the products of agriculture. Furthermore, Hertzka included in his calculation the building of homes, in such a manner that every family might have their own house, with a space of 150square meters, for a period of fifty years. It was found that, for agriculture, building, the production of flour and sugar, coal-mining, iron and machine industry, the clothing industry, and the chemical industry, 615,000 workers would be needed, who would have to work throughout the year for the present average number of hours daily. But these 615,000 workers formed only 12.3per cent. of the able-bodied population of Austria, not counting the women, nor the male inhabitants under 16 or over 50. If the 5million men available at the time of the calculation were employed like the 615,000, each of them would have to work only 36.9days, about six weeks annually, to supply the most needful requirements for 22million human beings. But, if we assume 300 work-days annually, instead of 37, we find that, under the new organization it would be necessary to work only 1?hours daily to supply the most necessary requirements.

Hertzka also takes the requirements of luxury of the better situated classes into consideration and finds that the manufacture of such articles, to supply the demands of 22million people, would require 315,000 more workers. According to Hertzka, then, about 1million workers, 20per cent. of the able-bodied male population of Austria, excluding those under 16 and over 50, would be needed to supply the entire needs of the population in sixty days. If we again take the entire able-bodied male population into consideration, we find that they would have to perform only about 2½ hours of work daily.[215]

This calculation will not surprise anyone who is well acquainted with existing conditions. If we furthermore assume that, with such a short work-day, only the sick and the invalids must be excluded, while men over 50 might still work, and youths under 16 might be active to some extent, and that the women might also serve in industry, except those who are engaged in child-rearing, the preparation of food, etc., we find that the hours of work might be shortened still more, or that the demands might be greatly increased. Nor will any one deny that tremendous, incalculable progress may still be made in perfecting the process of production, a factor that will create further advantages. On the other hand, many requirements will be satisfied that only a small minority can satisfy to-day, and, with the higher development of civilization, new requirements will arise that will also have to be satisfied. It must be iterated and reiterated: The new society will not elect to lead a proletarian existence. It will demand the existence of a highly civilized people for all its members from the first to the last. But it shall not only satisfy all the material requirements, it shall also grant to all ample opportunity and time for the study of science and art, and for recreation.

In a number of other very essential points the socialistic co-operative system will differ from the bourgeois individualistic system. The cheap and poor goods that make up a large portion of bourgeois production, and necessarily must make up a large portion of it, because a majority of the customers can afford to purchase only cheap goods that wear out quickly, will be eliminated. Only the best will be produced that will last long and will not have to be renewed as often. The fads and follies of fashion that only favor extravagance and bad taste will disappear. Doubtless our wearing apparel will be better suited to its purpose and more tasty than to-day—for the fashions of the last century, especially those of the men, have been conspicuous by their bad taste—but new fashions will no longer be introduced every few months. The present follies of fashion are caused, on the one hand, by the competition of women among themselves, and on the other by conceit and ostentation and the desire to display one’s wealth. Moreover, a great many persons depend upon these follies of fashion to-day, and it is to their interest to encourage and stimulate them. Together with the follies of fashion in dress, the madness of fashion in the style of dwellings will disappear. Here eccentricity is rampant to-day. Styles that have required centuries to become evolved among various nations—we are no longer satisfied with European styles, but turn to those of the Japanese, Indians, Chinese, etc.—are used up in a few years and set aside. Persons engaged in mechanical arts hardly know what to do with all the designs and models. They have barely adapted themselves to one style, trusting to recover their expenses, when a new style appears that necessitates further sacrifices of time and money and of physical and mental forces. In this mad rushing from one fashion to another and from one style to another the nervousness of our age is vividly reflected. No one would claim that there is any sense or reason in this rush and haste, or that it might be regarded as a healthful state of society.

Socialism will give greater stability to the habits of life. It will make rest and enjoyment possible and will liberate us from the present haste and excitement. Nervousness, the scourge of our age, will disappear.

Work will be made as agreeable as possible. To accomplish this, the places where production is carried on will be furnished practically and tastily, every means will be resorted to that danger may be eliminated, and that evil smells, smoke, etc., and all unpleasant and harmful factors will be done away with. At first the new society will produce with the means of production taken over from the old society. But these are insufficient. The workshops are scattered and are not properly constructed or furnished, and tools and machinery do not come up to the demands of the great number of persons employed and their desire for safety and comfort. To create a great many large, light, airy, well-equipped workshops becomes an imminent necessity. The arts and crafts, genius and skill, are immediately given a vast realm of activity. All branches of machine manufacture and the manufacture of tools, the building trades and the trades of interior decoration find ample opportunity for occupation. Whatever the human mind is able to invent in the way of convenient and agreeable buildings, appropriate ventilation, lighting and heating, and technical and mechanical improvements, will be instituted. To save motor-power, light and heat, as well as time and labor, and to insure the comfort of the workers, it will become desirable to concentrate the workshops in definite places. The dwellings will be separated from the workshops and freed from the unpleasantness of industrial activity; and the unpleasantness will be diminished and finally abolished by all sorts of institutions and appliances. Even the present status of technical knowledge gives us sufficient means to deprive the dangerous occupations, like mining, the chemical trades, etc., of their dangers entirely. But these means are not applied in bourgeois society, because they entail a heavy expense and because no one is duty bound to do more for the protection of the workingman than is absolutely necessary. The dangers of mining, for instance, could be removed by working the mine in a different manner, by a thorough system of ventilation, by the installation of electric light, by a considerable shortening of the hours of work, and by a frequent change of shifts. It does not require special ingenuity to find safety appliances that will make accidents in the building trade next to impossible and to make this sort of work particularly agreeable. For instance, ample contrivances might be made to shield the workers at large buildings and at all out-of-door work from the sun and the rain. In socialistic society, which will control an abundance of labor power, it will also be a simple matter to have frequent relays of new workers and to concentrate certain tasks upon definite seasons or definite hours of the day.

The problem of abolishing dust, smoke, grime and unpleasant odors, can also be solved entirely even to-day by chemistry and mechanics. But it is not done, or insufficiently done, because the private employers do not care to meet the heavy expense. The future places of production, wherever they may be, below the earth or above, will differ most favorably from the present ones. In private industry improved appliances are mainly a question of money. If they pay they will be established. If they do not pay, the health and life of the workingman are of no concern.[216]

In socialistic society the question of profits will have ceased to exist. This society will recognize no other consideration but the welfare of its members. What is to their advantage must be established. What is likely to harm them must be refrained from. No one will be compelled to enter into dangerous undertakings. If tasks are undertaken that entail dangers one may be assured that there will be many volunteers, all the more so because the undertakings will not serve destruction but the advancement of civilization.

A far-reaching appliance of motor-power, and of the most perfect machines and tools, a detailed division of labor and a skillful combination of the various forces, will so heighten the productivity of labor that the necessary quantities of all commodities can be produced, notwithstanding a considerable shortening of the hours of work. Increased production will be to the common advantage of all. The share of each individual increases with the productivity of labor, and the increased productivity of labor again makes it possible to reduce the time required for the performance of socially necessary labor.

Among the motor powers that will be applied, electricity will most likely hold the foremost place. Bourgeois society everywhere presses it into service, and the more this is done the better it is for general progress. The revolutionizing effect of the most powerful of all natural forces will only hasten the overthrow of the bourgeois world and help to usher in Socialism. But only in socialistic society will the force be generally applied and turned to the best advantage. Both as a motor-power and as a source of light and heat it will contribute largely to the improved standard of living of society. Electricity is distinguished from every other force by the fact that it exists in nature in abundance. Our streams, high and low tide of the sea, wind and sunlight will furnish countless horse-powers when we shall thoroughly understand how to apply them.

“A wealth of energy that by far exceeds all demands is furnished by those parts of the surface of the earth that are so regularly subjected to the heat of the sun that it might be applied to regular technical operations. Perhaps it would not be an exaggerated precaution if a nation would even now secure a share in such places. The required areas need not even be very large; a few square miles in Northern Africa would suffice for the requirements of a country like the German Empire. By concentrating the heat of the sun a high temperature can be produced, and thereby everything else—portable mechanical work, charging of batteries, light and heat, and, by electrolysis, even fuel.”[217] The man who opens up these vistas is not a dreamer, but an appointed professor at the Berlin University and president of the Royal Physical and Technical Institute, a man who ranks high in the scientific world. At the 79th congress of the British Association in Winnipeg (during August, 1909), the famous English physicist, SirS. Thompson, said: “The day is not too far distant when our life will be revolutionized by applying the rays of the sun. Man will liberate himself from his dependence upon coal-and-water power, and all large cities will be surrounded by immense apparatus, real sunbeam traps, into which the heat of the sun will be gathered, and the obtained energy will be stored away in tremendous reservoirs. It is the force of the sun, stored away in coal, in waterfalls, in nourishment, that performs all the world’s work. How great is this tribute of force that the sun pours down upon us becomes evident when we consider the fact that the warmth received by the earth when the sun is high and the sky is clear, according to the researches of Langley, equals an energy of 7000horse-powers per acre. Although our engineers have not yet found the way to apply this gigantic source of power, I do not doubt that they will ultimately succeed in finding it. When the supply of coal in the bowels of the earth has been exhausted, when the water-powers will no longer suffice to meet our requirements, then we will obtain from this source all the energy needed to complete the work of the world. Then the centers of industry will be removed to the glowing deserts of Sahara, and the value of the land will be measured by how well it is suited to the erection of the great ‘sunbeam traps.’”[218] According to this, our anxiety that we might at some time lack fuel, is removed. The inventions of the accumulators would make it possible to store a large quantity of force away for future use at any time and place; so that, besides the power furnished by sun and tide, the power furnished by the wind and by mountain torrents, which can be obtained only periodically, might be stored and applied. So there may finally be no human task for which motor power cannot be supplied if necessary. Only by the assistance of electricity has it become possible to employ water-power on a large scale. According to T.Koehn, eight European states have the following supply of water-power at their disposal.

Of the German states, Baden and Bavaria control the largest amount of water-power. Baden alone can obtain 200,000horse-powers at the Upper Rhine. Bavaria has at its disposal 300,000horse-powers that have so far not been applied, besides 100,000 that are applied. ProfessorRehbock estimates that the theoretical energy of the entire amount of water flowing upon the surface of the earth amounts to eight thousand million horse-powers. If only the sixteenth part of this could be efficiently applied, 500millions of permanently serviceable horse-powers could still be won, an amount of energy ten times as great as the energy obtained by the mining of coal during the year 1907, approximately calculated at 1000million tons. Although such calculations are of a purely theoretical character at present, they still show what achievements we may anticipate in the future from the use of “white coal.” The Niagara Falls alone, which flow from lakes covering an area of 231,880kilometers—about 43per cent. of the entire area of Germany—might furnish more water-power than exists in England, Germany and Switzerland combined.[219] According to another calculation quoted in an official report, the United States have water-power at their disposal of no less than twenty million horse-powers, which represent an equivalent of three hundred million tons of coal annually.[220] The mills that will be driven by means of this white or “green” coal, with the force of the gushing mountain streams and waterfalls, will have no smokestacks and no fire.

Electricity will also make it possible to more than double the speed of our railroads. At the beginning of the nineties of the last century, Mr.Meems, in Baltimore, declared it to be possible to construct an electric car that would make 300kilometers an hour, and ProfessorElihu Thomson, in Lynn, believed that electric motors could be constructed that would make it possible to cover 260kilometers in an hour. These expectations have nearly been realized. The trial-rides made on the military railway Berlin-Zossen, during 1901 and 1902, showed the possibility of speed up to 150kilometers an hour. During experiments made in 1903, the Siemens car attained a speed of 201kilometers, and that of the General Electric Company, 208kilometers. In the succeeding years steam locomotives have also attained a speed of 150kilometers an hour, and more. The present aim is to attain 200kilometers per hour. Already, August Sherl has entered the arena with his new project of rapid transit, which relegates the existing railway lines to freight service and proposes to connect the large cities by monorail train service, with a speed of 200kilometers.[221]

The question of transforming railroad service from steam into electricity is a current topic in England, Austria, Italy, and America. Between New York and Philadelphia an electric train is to run at a speed of 200kilometers an hour.

The speed of ocean vessels will increase in the same manner. Here the determining factor is the steam turbine.[222] “It holds the foremost place in technical interest at present. It seems destined to displace the piston. While most engineers still regarded the steam turbine as a task of the future, it had become a present-day problem that attracted the attention of the entire world of technics by its success. It remained for electrotechnics, with its rapidly running machinery to create a large field for the practical application of this new power engine. The by far greatest number of all steam-turbines in use to-day serves to drive dynamos.”[223] The turbine has especially proved its superiority over the piston in navigation. The English steamship “Lusitania,” which is equipped with steam-turbines, during August, 1909, made the journey from Ireland to New York in 4days 11hours and 42minutes,[224] with an average speed of 25.85knots an hour. The steamship “America,” constructed in 1863, the fastest vessel at the time, made 12.5knots an hour.[225] The day is not distant when the problem of electric propellers for large vessels will be satisfactorily solved. They are already in use with smaller vessels. Simplicity, safety, good self-regulation, and absence of shaking make the steam-turbine the ideal power for the creation of electric energy on board. Electricity will eventually be generally applied to both railway and steamship service.

By electricity the technics of moving loads has also been revolutionized. “Steam-power, having made it possible to construct lifting-engines with natural force, electric transmission of power led to a complete revolution in the construction of lifting-machines by giving these machines freedom of motion and constant readiness for use.” Electric power has, among other things, led to a complete transformation in the construction of the cranes. “With its massive curved beak of rolled iron, resting upon a heavy foundation of stone-masonry, with slow motions and the hissing noise of the puffed-out steam, the steam-crane conveys the impression of resembling a gigantic, prehistoric monster. When it has grasped a load it exhibits a tremendous power for lifting, but it needs the assistance of human beings, who, by means of chains, fasten the weights to its hook. Owing to its clumsiness and slow motions it is serviceable only for the lifting of very heavy loads, but not where quick action is needed. Even externally the modern electric crane presents an entirely different aspect. We behold graceful steel trellis-work stretched above the hall, and from this is stretched out a slender pair of tongs, which is movable in all directions. The whole mechanism is controlled by a single man. By means of a gentle pressure on the levers, he directs the electric currents and drives the slender steel limbs of the crane to rapid action. Unaided, they grasp the glowing steel and whirl it through the air, while no other noise is heard but the low buzzing of the electro-motors.”[226] Without the aid of these machines the steadily increasing transportation of masses of goods would not be possible. By a comparison of the wharf-crane at Pola and that at Kiel, the development, in regard to the increase of lifting-power from the middle to the end of the nineteenth century, may be judged. The lifting-power of the former was 60tons, that of the latter, 200tons. The manufacture of Bessemer steel only is possible when rapidly working lifting-machines are at hand, for otherwise the tremendous quantities of liquid steel that are produced in a short time could not be transported in the casting-moulds. In the iron-works of Krupp, in Essen alone, 608 cranes are in action, having an aggregate lifting-power of 6513tons, equal to a freight train of 650 cars. The low cost of freight, which is a condition of present-day international commerce, would not be possible, could not the capital invested in vessels be put to such intense use by the rapid process of unloading. The equipping of a vessel with electric cranes led to a reduction in the annual cost of traffic from 23,000 to 13,000marks, almost by one-half. And this comparison takes into consideration only the progress of a single decade.

The technics of navigation and transportation present new achievements almost daily along all lines. The problem of aerial navigation, which seemed insoluble but two decades ago, is practically solved. At present the dirigible balloons and flying machines do not serve the easier and cheaper transportation of the masses, but only sport and military purposes. But later on they will enhance the productive forces of society. Great progress has also been made by wireless telegraphy; its industrial value grows each day. In a few years, accordingly, traffic will be placed on a new basis.

Mining, too, is in a state of transformation at present that still seemed inconceivable ten years ago. Electricity has been introduced and has revolutionized the machines, the pumps, and the winding-engines.

Marvelous are the prospects revealed by the former French minister of public instruction, ProfessorBerthelot (died March18, 1907), in an address on the future significance of chemistry, delivered at a banquet of the syndicate of manufacturers of chemicals. In this address, Mr.Berthelot depicted the possible achievements of chemistry in the year 2000, and, though his description contains some humorous exaggerations, it also contains much that is true, of which the following is a brief synopsis. Mr.Berthelot gave a resumÉ of what chemistry had accomplished in a few decades and enumerated, among other things: The manufacture of sulphuric acid, of soda, bleaching and dyeing, beet-sugar, therapeutic alcaloids, gas, gilding and silvering, etc. Then came electro-chemistry, which completely transformed metallurgy, the chemistry of explosives, which provided mining and warfare with new engines, and the marvels of organic chemistry in the manufacture of colors, perfumes, therapeutic and antiseptic remedies, etc. But all this, said the lecturer, was only a beginning. Far greater problems would soon be solved. In the year 2000, agriculture and peasants would have ceased to exist, as chemistry would have made cultivation of the soil superfluous. There would be no coal-mines and, accordingly, no miners’ strikes. Fuel would be replaced by chemical and physical processes. Tariff and warfare would be abolished; aerial navigation, employing chemicals as a means of locomotion would have done away with these antiquated institutions. The problem of industry consists in finding sources of power that are inexhaustible and can be renewed with the least possible amount of labor. Until now we have generated steam by the chemical energy of burned coal. But the coal is difficult to obtain, and the supply is diminishing daily. It becomes necessary to utilize the heat of the sun and the heat inside the earth. There is good reason to hope that both these sources will find unlimited application. Thereby the source of all heat and of all industry would be made accessible. If water-power were also applied, all imaginable machines might be run on the earth. This source of power would barely diminish in centuries. By means of the warmth of the earth many chemical problems might be solved, among others the chemical production of food. Theoretically this problem is already solved. The synthesis of fats and oils is long since known, sugar and the hydrates of carbon are known also, and the synthesis of the nitrogen-compounds will soon become known. The problem of food is a purely chemical one. As soon as the necessary cheap power could be obtained, by means of carbon from carbonic acid, oxygen and hydrogen from water, and nitrogen from the atmosphere, food of all kinds would be produced. What had heretofore been done by the plants would henceforth be done by industry, and the products of industry would be more perfect than those of nature. The time would come when every one would carry a box of chemicals in his pocket from which he would satisfy his need of nourishment in albumen, fat and hydrates of carbon, regardless of time and seasons, of rain and drought, of frost, hail and destructive insects. This would lead to a transformation that was as yet beyond our conception. Orchards, vineyards and pastures would disappear. Man would become more gentle and humane, because he would no longer live upon the murder and destruction of living beings. Then the difference between fertile and unfertile regions would also disappear, and perhaps the deserts would become the favorite resorts of man, since they are healthier than the damp and marshy plains where agriculture is carried on at present. Then art and all the beauties of human life would attain their fullest development. The earth would no longer be disfigured by the geometrical figures drawn on its surface by agriculture, but would become a garden in which grass, flowers, shrubs and forests might be grown at will; all humanity would dwell in plenty, in a golden age. But man would not fall a victim to laziness and corruption. Work is needful to happiness, and man would work as ever, since he worked for his own welfare, for the development of his mental, moral and Æsthetic possibilities.

The reader may accept as true from this address of Berthelot whatever he chooses. The fact remains that future development will lead to a tremendous improvement in the quantity, quality and variety of products, and that the comforts of life of coming generations will increase to a degree that we can barely conceive to-day.

Professor Elihu Thomson agrees with Werner Siemens, who declared at the convention of scientists in Berlin, in 1887, that it would become possible by means of electricity to transform the elements directly into food. Werner Siemens held the opinion that it might be possible, at a remote time, to produce artificially a hydrate of carbon, as grape-sugar or starch, whereby the possibility would be given “to make bread of stones.” The chemist, Dr.H. Meyer, declared that it would be possible to make ligneous fibre a source of human nourishment. In the meantime (1890), Emil Fisher has actually produced grape-sugar artificially, and has thereby made a discovery that Werner Siemens considered possible only “at a remote time.” Since then chemistry has made still further progress. Indigo, vanilla and camphor have been artificially produced. In 1906, W.Loeb succeeded in achieving the assimilation of carbonic acid, outside of the plant up to the production of sugar by means of electric tension. In 1907 Emil Fisher obtained one of the most complicated synthetic bodies that is closely related to natural protein. In 1908 Willstatter and Benz produced pure chlorophyl and proved it to be a compound of magnesium. Thereby the main problem of organic chemistry—to obtain albumen—may find its solution in a future not too far distant.

A need, deeply rooted in human nature, is the desire for freedom of choice and for the opportunity of a variation of occupations. Just as the best food becomes disgusting if the same thing is constantly placed before us, so an occupation repeated daily in treadmill fashion weakens and dulls. Man performs his task mechanically and does what he must do, but without enthusiasm or joy. A number of talents and abilities are innate in every human being that need but to be awakened in order to find expression and produce favorable results. Only thereby man becomes a perfect human being. Socialistic society will offer ample opportunity for the satisfaction of this desire for variation. The immense increase in productive forces, combined with a simplified process of work, will not only make it possible to limit the hours of work considerably, it will also make it easy to master a number of varied accomplishments.

The old system of apprenticeship has already been abandoned. It still exists, and is possible only among undeveloped and antiquated forms of production, as represented by small manufactures. But as these will completely disappear in the new society, all forms and institutions peculiar to them will disappear also. New ones will take their place. Even at present it can be seen in any factory how few workingmen have learned and practice a definite trade. The workingmen employed in some line of production or other may have learned the most varied trades. Usually a short time is sufficient for them to gain experience in one detail of the process of production, and to this one detail they are tied down then, according to the prevailing system of exploitation, for long hours, without the slightest variation, and without any regard for their personal tastes and inclinations. At the machine they become machines.[227] This state of affairs, too, will be removed by the new social order. There will be ample time to practice manual skill and to develop the mechanical arts. Large, splendidly equipped polytechnical schools will make it easy for both young and old to learn an occupation. Chemical and physical laboratories, in keeping with the standards of these sciences, will be erected, and capable teachers will be on hand. Only then will people fully recognize what a wealth of talent and ability has been suppressed or wrongly developed by the capitalistic system of production.[228]

Not only will it be possible to satisfy the desire for variation, it must be regarded as the purpose of society to satisfy this desire, since the harmonious development of man depends upon it.

The professional types that we meet with in present-day society—be these types the product of a definite, one-sided occupation or of laziness—will gradually disappear. There are exceedingly few persons to-day who possess the possibility of a variety of occupations. Rarely one finds persons so favored by special circumstances, that they can escape the monotony of their daily task and can, after the performance of physical work, recuperate by mental work. On the other hand, we sometimes find mental workers who devote part of their time to some manual work, gardening and the like. The beneficial effects of an occupation founded on a variation of mental and physical work are obvious. Such occupation is the only one adapted to natural needs. It is taken for granted, of course, that every occupation must be practiced with moderation and according to individual strength.

In his book on “The Significance of Science and Art,” CountLeo Tolstoi condemns the hypercritical and unnatural character that art and science have assumed as a result of our unnatural social conditions. He roundly condemns the fact that present-day society holds physical labor in contempt and advises a return to natural conditions. He asserts that every human being who wishes to live naturally and to enjoy life should spend his day—firstly, at physical work in agriculture; secondly, at some manual trade; thirdly, at some mental occupation, and fourthly, in intellectual social intercourse. No human being should perform more than eight hours of physical work. Tolstoi himself lived up to this ideal and claimed that he has only become truly human since he adopted this mode of life. But Tolstoi overlooks that what is possible for him, the man of independent means, is not possible for the vast majority of people under present-day conditions. A man or woman who must work ten or twelve hours daily, and sometimes longer, to make a bare living, and who has grown up in ignorance, cannot adopt Tolstoi’s mode of life. Neither can all those adopt it who are in the midst of the struggle for existence and must conform with its requirements; and of the few who might live in this manner, many would not wish to. It is one of the illusions in which Tolstoi indulges, to believe that exhortations and examples might transform societies. The experience made by Tolstoi, in regard to his mode of life, proves it to be a rational one. But to make this mode of life general, different social conditions, a new society, will be needed.

The coming society will establish such conditions. It will produce countless scientists and artists, but all of these will devote a part of the day to physical labor, and the remainder of the day they will devote to their studies, their arts and to social intercourse, according to their tastes and wishes.[229]

The present contrast between mental and manual work, a contrast that is intensified by the ruling classes, who are anxious to secure their mental superiority also, will, accordingly, have to be removed.

The above enumerated facts prove that panics, crises, and unemployment will be impossible in future society. Crises arise because capitalistic production, incited by the desire for profit, and without any reliable means of estimating the true demand, leads to over-production and to over-stocking of the market. Under capitalism the products assume the character of goods that their owners indeavor to exchange, and the consumption of goods depends upon the consumer’s purchasing ability. But this purchasing ability is very limited among a vast majority of the population who are not paid the full value of their labor and whose services are not wanted if their employers cannot squeeze profits out of them. Purchasing ability and the ability to consume are two entirely different matters in bourgeois society. Many millions are in need of new clothes, shoes, furniture, linens and articles of food, but they have no money, and so their needs, their ability to consume, remains unsatisfied. The market is over-stocked, but the masses are hungry; they wish to work, but cannot find anyone willing to purchase their labor-power, because the employers can derive no profits from employing them. Perish, become a vagabond, a criminal, I, the capitalist, cannot help it, because I cannot use goods that I cannot sell at a profit. In his position the capitalist is entirely justified in taking this attitude.

In the new society this contradiction will be removed. The new society will not produce “goods” to be “bought” and “sold,” it will produce commodities for consumption, not for any other purpose. The ability to consume will not be limited by the purchasing ability of each individual, but by the common ability to produce. If there is sufficient labor-power and sufficient means of production, every want can be satisfied. The social ability to consume knows no bounds except the satisfaction of the consumers.

If there will be no “goods” in the new society there will ultimately be no money, either. Money appears to be the counterpart of goods, but is goods itself. Yet, at the same time, money is the social equivalent, the standard of value for all other goods. But the new society will not produce goods, it will produce commodities whose manufacture will require a certain measure of social working-time. The average time required to produce a given commodity is the only standard by which it will be measured for social consumption. Ten minutes of social working-time at one commodity equal ten minutes of social working-time at another commodity, no more and no less. Society will not wish to “earn,” it will merely wish to bring about the exchange of commodities of the same quality and of the same value among its members, and eventually it will not even be necessary to determine the value. Society will simply produce what it needs. If it should become evident, for instance, that three hours of work daily are necessary to produce all the required products, three hours will be the fixed time.[230] If the means of production should be improved to such extent that the supply can be furnished by two hours of work, it will be two hours. If, on the other hand, the demands should grow and the increased productivity of the process of work would not suffice to satisfy these demands, the working-time would be lengthened.

It can easily be calculated how much social labor will be necessary for the manufacture of each product.[231] Thereby the relation of this portion of work to the entire working-time can be calculated.

Any kind of certificate, a printed piece of paper, gold or tin, enables the holder to exchange same for various kinds of commodities.[232] If he finds that his wants are less than what he receives for his services, he can work less, accordingly. If he wishes to give away what he does not use, nobody will prevent him from so doing. If he voluntarily chooses to work for another, so that the other one may idle, or if he wishes to divide his share of the social products, no one will restrain him. But no one can compel him to work for another person’s advantage, no one can deprive him of a part of the share he is entitled to for his services. Everyone will be able to satisfy all desires and requirements possible of fulfillment, but not at the expense of others. He receives from society the equivalent of what he produces, no more and no less, and remains free from exploitation.

“But how will you discriminate between thrifty and lazy, intelligent and stupid persons?” That is one of the questions most frequently asked by our opponents, and the answer we give them puzzles them greatly. But these wise questioners never stop to think that, among our hierarchy of officials, the distinction between thrifty and lazy, intelligent and stupid persons is not made, but that the length of service usually determines the salary and promotion. Teachers and professors—many of whom are the most naÏve questioners—have their salaries determined by the position they fill, not by the value of their services. In many cases officials, military men and scientists, are not promoted according to their abilities, but according to rank, relationship, friendship, and the favor of women. That wealth is not measured either by intelligence and thrift, may be seen by the three-class-electoral-system of Prussia. We find saloon-keepers, bakers and butchers, many of whom are not able to speak grammatically, enrolled in the first class, while men of intelligence and science, the highest officials of the state and the nation, are enrolled in the second or third class. There will be no difference between thrifty and lazy, intelligent and stupid persons, because that which we understand by these terms will have disappeared. Society, for instance, calls some people “lazy” because they have been thrown out of employment, have been driven to a life of vagabondage, and have finally become real vagabonds. We also apply this term to people who are the victims of a bad education. But whoever should venture to call lazy the man of means who spends his time in idleness and debauchery would commit an insult, for the rich idler is a “respectable” man.

Now what aspect will matters assume in the new society? All will develop under similar conditions of life, and everyone will perform the task assigned to him by ability and inclination. Therefore the differences in achievements will be slight.[233] The social atmosphere that will incite each to excel the others will help to level the distinctions. If a person should realize that he is unable to accomplish in one line of work what others accomplish, he will choose some other line better suited to his strength and his abilities. Everyone who has worked together with a great many persons knows that people who were inefficient at one task have proved very efficient when given another. By what right can anyone ask for privileges? If some person is so incapacitated by nature that it is quite impossible for him to accomplish what others accomplish, society cannot punish him for the shortcomings of nature. On the other hand, if some one has been endowed by nature with abilities that elevate him above the others, society need not reward him for that which is not his personal merit. It must, furthermore, be remembered that in Socialistic society all will have the same opportunities for education, so that all can develop their knowledge and ability in accordance with their talents and inclinations. As a result, knowledge and ability will be far more developed than in bourgeois society. It will be more evenly distributed and yet more varied.

When Goethe, during a journey along the Rhine, studied the Cathedral of Cologne, he discovered, by perusal of the architectural deeds that the architects of old had paid all their workingmen alike by time; they did so because they desired good workmanship conscientiously carried out. To bourgeois society this seems an anomaly. Bourgeois society has introduced the piece-work system, by means of which the workingmen compel one another to overwork and make it all the easier for the employer to under-pay and to resort to a frequent reduction in wages. What is true of material productivity is equally true of the mental. Man is the product of time and circumstances. If Goethe had been born in the fourth instead of in the eighteenth century, under equally favorable circumstances, instead of becoming a great poet and scientist he would probably have become a great father of the Church who might have outshone St.Augustine. Again, if Goethe had not come into the world as the son of a rich patrician of Frankfort, but as the son of a poor shoemaker, he would hardly have become minister to the Grand-duke of Weimar, but would have lived and died a respectable master-shoemaker. Goethe himself recognized of what great advantage it was to him to have been born in a materially and socially favorable position which helped him to attain his development; he thus expresses himself in “Wilhelm Meister.” If NapoleonI. had been born ten years later he would never have become Emperor of France. Without the war of 1870 to 1871, Gambetta would never have become what he has been. If a gifted child of intelligent parents should be placed among savages it would become a savage. Men are what society has made them. Ideas are not the product of higher inspiration sprung from the brains of a single individual, but they are a product, created in the brains of the individual by the social life and activity amidst which he lives and by the spirit of his age. Aristotle could not have the ideas of Darwin, and Darwin had to reason differently from Aristotle. We all reason as the spirit of our age—that is, our environment and its phenomena—compels us to reason. That explains what has been frequently observed, that different people sometimes follow the same line of reasoning simultaneously; that the same inventions and discoveries are made at the same time at places situated far apart. That also explains that an idea expressed fifty years ago may have found the world indifferent, but the same idea expressed fifty years later, may agitate the whole world. In 1415 EmperorSigismund could dare to break the promise given Huss and to have him burned at the stake in Constance. In 1521, CharlesV., although a far greater fanatic, had to permit Luther to go in peace from the diet at Worms. Ideas are the product of social co-operation, of social life. What is true in regard to society in general, is especially true in regard to the various social classes that compose society at any given epoch of history. Because every class has its peculiar interests, it also has its peculiar ideas and views. These conflicting ideas and interests have led to the class struggles that filled the annals of history and have attained their culmination in the class extremes and class struggles of the present day. The feelings, thoughts and actions of a person are, therefore, determined not only by the age in which he lives, but also by the class to which he belongs. Without modern society no modern ideas could exist. This is clear to everyone. In the new society—let it be remembered—the means that each individual will employ for his education and development will be the property of society. Society cannot feel obliged to reward particularly what it alone has made possible, its own product.

So much in regard to the qualification of physical and mental labor. From this the further conclusion may be drawn, that no distinction will be made between higher and lower grades of work; as, for instance, at present mechanics consider themselves superior to day-laborers who perform work on the roads, etc. Society will have only such work performed as is socially useful, and so every kind of work will be of equal social value. Should it not be possible to perform some kinds of dirty and disagreeable work by means of mechanical or chemical devices—which will undoubtedly be the case, to judge by the present rate of progress—and should there be no volunteers, it will be the duty of each worker to perform his share of such work when his turn comes. No false pride and no irrational disdain of useful labor will be recognized. These exist only in our state of drones, where idleness is considered enviable, and where those workers are the most despised whose tasks are the hardest and most unpleasant ones, and often the most needful to society. To-day the most disagreeable tasks are the ones most poorly paid. The reason for this is that we have a great many workers who have been maintained at a low level of civilization, whom the constant revolution in the process of production has cast out into the street, as a reserve force, and who, in order to live, must perform the lowest kinds of work, at wages that even make the introduction of machinery for such work “unprofitable.” The crushing of stone, for instance, is notoriously one of the most disagreeable and most poorly paid employments. It would be a simple matter to have this crushing of stones done by machinery, as is generally being done in the United States. But in Germany there is such an abundance of cheap labor, that the introduction of the stone-crusher would not “pay.”[234] Street-cleaning, the cleaning of sewers, collecting ashes and garbage, work in shafts and caissons, etc., might, even at the present time, with the aid of proper machinery, be performed in such a manner that most of the unpleasantness connected with them for the laborers, would disappear. But, as a matter of fact, a workingman who cleans sewers, to guard human beings against the dangers of germs of disease, is a very useful member of society, while a professor who teaches falsified history in the interest of the ruling classes, or a theologian who seeks to mystify the minds by the teaching of supernatural doctrines, are very harmful individuals.

A great many of our present-day scientists and scholars represent a guild that is employed and paid to defend and vindicate the dominance of the ruling classes, by means of the authority of science, to let this dominance appear just and necessary, and to maintain existing prejudices. In truth, this guild, to a great extent, poisons the minds, and performs work hostile to the advancement of civilization, in the interest of the bourgeoisie and its clients.[235] A social condition that will henceforth make the existence of such elements of society impossible, will perform a liberating deed.

On the other hand, true science is often connected with very disagreeable and revolting work. For instance, when a physician dissects a corpse in a state of decomposition, or operates upon a purulent part of the body, or when a chemist examines fÆces. These tasks are often more revolting than the most disagreeable work performed by unskilled laborers. Yet no one will admit that this is so. The difference is that the performance of the one work requires profound study, while the other work can be performed by anyone without previous preparation. This accounts for the great difference in their estimation. But in future society, where, by means of equal opportunities of education for all, the distinctions of educated and uneducated will disappear, the distinction between skilled and unskilled labor will disappear also. This is all the more so because the possibilities of technical development are unlimited, and much that is manual work to-day will be performed by machines and mechanical processes. We need but consider the present development of our mechanical arts; for instance, engraving, wood-cutting, etc. As the most disagreeable tests often are the most useful ones, so our conceptions, in regard to pleasant and unpleasant work, like many other conceptions in the bourgeois world, are superficial and founded entirely on outward appearances.

As soon as the new society will have placed production on the basis sketched above, it will—as we have already noted—cease to produce “goods,” and will only produce commodities to supply the social demand. As a result of this, trade will also cease to exist, as trade is needful and possible only in an organization of society founded on the production of goods. By the abolition of trade a great army of persons of both sexes will be mobilized for productive activity. This great army becomes one of producers; it brings forth commodities and enables society to increase its demands, or makes possible a still further reduction of the hours of work. To-day these persons live more or less like parasites on the products of the toil of others. Still they often work very hard and are burdened with cares, without earning enough to supply their wants. In the new society commercial men, agents, jobbers, etc., will be superfluous. In place of the dozens, hundreds and thousands of stores of all kinds that we find in every municipality to-day, according to its size, there will be large municipal store-houses, elegant bazaars, entire exhibitions, that will require a comparatively small number of persons for their administration. The entire bustle of trade will be transformed into a centralized, purely administrative activity. The discharge of its duties will be simple and will become still more simplified by the centralization of all social institutions. Traffic will experience a similar transformation.

Telegraph and telephone lines, railroads, mail service, river and ocean vessels, street-cars, automobile cars and trucks, air-ships and flying machines, and whatever all the institutions and vehicles serving traffic and communication may be called, will have become social property. In Germany many of these institutions, like the mail, the telegraph, the telephone system, and most railroads, have already been made state institutions; their transformation into public property is a mere matter of form. Here private interests can no longer be injured. If the state continues to operate in the present direction, so much the better. But these state-owned institutions are not socialistic institutions, as is erroneously assumed. These institutions are exploited by the state, according to the same capitalistic principles as if they were privately owned. Neither the officials nor the workingmen are particularly benefited by them. The state does not treat them differently from a private employer. When, for instance, in the bureaus of the national navy and the railroad administration orders are issued not to employ workingmen who are over forty years of age, that is a measure which proves the class character of the state as a state of exploiters, and is bound to rouse the indignation of the workers. Such and similar measures resorted to by the state in its capacity of employer, are much worse than when resorted to by private employers. The latter is always a small employer compared to the state, and the employment that he refuses may be granted by another. But the state, monopolizing certain branches of employment, may, by such maxims, with one blow drive thousands into poverty. These are not socialistic but capitalistic actions, and Socialists have every reason to protest against the assumption that the present state-owned institutions are socialistic in character and may be regarded as a realization of socialistic aims.

As large, centralized institutions will replace the millions of private dealers, and agents of all kinds, so the entire system of transportation will also assume a different aspect. The millions of small shipments that are sent out daily to an equal number of owners, and entail a great waste of work, time and material, will be absorbed by shipments on a large scale, sent out to the municipal store-houses and the large centers of manufacture. Here, too, work will become greatly simplified. As it is much simpler to ship raw material to a factory employing 1000 workingmen than to ship it to hundreds of scattered small factories, so the centers of production and distribution for entire municipalities, or for parts of same, will mean a considerable saving. This will be to the advantage of society, but also to the advantage of each individual, for public interest and personal interest will then be identical. The aspect of our places of production, of our means of transportation, and especially also of our residences, will thereby become entirely changed. They will obtain a much more cheerful aspect. We will be freed, to a great extent, from the nerve-racking noise, speed and confusion of our large cities, with their thousands of vehicles of all kinds. The building of streets, street-cleaning, the manner of living, the intercourse of people with one another—all will experience a great transformation. It will then be possible to carry out hygienic measures easily, which to-day can be carried out only at a great expense and insufficiently, and often only in the residential quarters of the wealthy classes.

Under such conditions traffic and transportation must attain their highest development. Perhaps aerial navigation will be the favorite means of transportation then. The means of transportation are the veins that conduct the exchange of products—the circulation—through the entire body social, and are therefore particularly adapted to the dissemination of an equal standard of comfort and culture. To provide for the extension and ramification of the most perfect means of transportation to the remotest portions of the provinces will become a necessity to the public welfare. Here the new society will set tasks for itself that by far exceed those of present-day society. This highly perfected system of communication will also decentralize the masses of humanity that at present congest our large cities and centers of industry, and will scatter them broadcast over the land. This will not only be of the greatest benefit to public health, it will also have a decisive influence on the material and intellectual progress of civilization.

Land, being the prime raw material for all human labor and the basis of human existence, must be made the property of society, together with the means of production and distribution. At an advanced stage of development society will again take possession of what it owned in primeval days. At a certain stage of development all human races had common ownership of land. Common property is the foundation of every primitive social organization; it is essential to its existence. Only by the rise and development of private property and the forms of rulership connected with it, has common property been abolished and usurped as private property, as we have seen, not without severe struggles. The robbery of the land and its transformation into private property formed the first cause of oppression. This oppression has passed through all stages, from slavery to “free” wage-labor of the twentieth century, until, after a development of thousands of years, the oppressed again convert the soil into common property.

The great importance of the soil to human existence was the reason why the ownership of the soil constituted the chief cause of conflict in all social struggles of the world—in India, China, Egypt, Greece, Rome, the Christian middle ages, the realms of the Aztecs and Incas, and in the social struggles of modern times. Even at the present day men like Adolf Samter, Adolf Wagner, Dr.Schaeffle, Henry George, and others, who do not believe in other forms of common property, favor the common ownership of land.[236]

The welfare of a population depends primarily upon the cultivation of the soil. To develop this cultivation to the highest degree is eminently to the interest of all. That this highest degree of development cannot be attained under the rule of private property, has been shown. To obtain the greatest possible advantage from the soil, not its cultivation alone must be taken into consideration. Other factors must be considered to which neither the largest private owner nor the most powerful association is equal, factors that may exceed even the jurisdiction of the state and require international consideration.

Society must consider the land in its totality, its topographical condition, its mountains, plains, forests, lakes, rivers, ponds, heathers, swamps and moors. Besides the geographical location, which is unalterable, this topographical condition exerts a certain influence upon the climate and the nature of the soil. This is a vast field of activity, where much experience is still to be gained and much experimentation still to be performed. Until now the state has accomplished but little along these lines. Only moderate means have been applied to such tasks of civilization, and even if the state desired to adopt effective measures, the large landed proprietors, who have a decisive voice in legislation, would prevent the carrying out of such measures. Without interference with private property nothing effectual could be done. But since the state is founded on the “sanctity” of private property, and since the large owners of private property are its chief supporters, it is prevented from proceeding in the manner that has been designated. It would be necessary to undertake the amelioration of land on a grand scale, to plant forests here and cut down forests there, to irrigate and to drain; to mix different kinds of soil, to break ground and to plant, in order to attain the highest degree of fertility.

A highly important factor in the amelioration of the land would be an extensive system of rivers and canals, to be conducted according to scientific principles. The question of cheap transportation by water, so important to present-day society, would be of minor importance to the new society. Nevertheless transportation by water will be regarded as a very convenient means of transportation, requiring the least expenditure in strength and material. But of the greatest importance an extensive system of rivers and canals will be for purposes of irrigation and drainage, for the transportation of manure and other materials for the amelioration of the land, and for the distribution of the crops.

It has been determined by experience that countries where water is scarce, suffer much more from cold winters and hot summers than countries having an abundant water supply. For this reason maritime countries rarely suffer from extremes of temperature. Such extremes of temperature are neither advantageous nor agreeable to plants or human beings. An extensive system of canals, combined with measures for the preservation of forests, would have a beneficial influence. Such systems of canals and large basins, to collect and preserve masses of water, would prove especially beneficial, when the melting ice and snow, in spring, or heavy rain-falls cause rivers and streams to rise and to overflow their banks. The construction of similar canals and basins would be required for the mountain torrents. Floods, with their ravaging effects, would then become impossible. Extensive surfaces of water and the increased evaporation would probably also cause rain to fall more regularly. These improvements would also make it possible to establish pumps and lifting apparatus for an extensive irrigation of the land whenever necessary.

Wide stretches of arid land might be made fertile by artificial irrigation. Where at present the grazing sheep barely find sufficient nourishment and where, at best, only emaciated looking trees stretch their lean branches skyward, an abundance of crops might be raised and a dense population might obtain nourishment and enjoyment. It is, for instance, only a question of the amount of labor employed, to transform the stretches of sandy soil of the March, humorously called “the sand-box of the German Empire,” into an Eden of fertility. This was pointed out by one of the lecturers at the German agricultural exhibition, in Berlin, during the spring of 1894.[237] But the landowners of the March do not have sufficient means to undertake the building of canals, irrigation, amelioration of the land, etc., and so, just beyond the walls of the national capital wide stretches of land remain in a condition that will seem incredible to coming generations. On the other hand, by means of canalization, wide stretches of swamps, moor-land and marshes might be drained and won for cultivation; thus, in northern and southern parts of Germany, the canals might further be used for the breeding of fish, and small communities that are not located near rivers might use them to erect bathing establishments.[238]

A few examples will suffice to show the influence of irrigation. In the vicinity of Weissenfels, 7½hectares of irrigated meadows yielded 480cwt. of hay, while 5hectares, located beside these, that were not irrigated, yielded only 32cwt. The former produced more than ten times as much as the latter. Near Riesa, in Saxony, 65acres of irrigated meadows increased the net proceeds from 5,850 to 11,100marks. By an investment of 124,000marks for irrigation of the arid lands at the right bank of the Lippe, an annual gain of approximately 400,000marks was obtained. The amelioration of the land undertaken in Lower Austria cost about one million crowns and increased the value of the produce by about six million crowns. The expensive improvements paid. Other parts of Germany, besides the March have an exceedingly sandy soil, and here the harvests are only fairly satisfactory, after a rainy summer. If these vicinities could be furrowed with canals, properly irrigated and ameliorated, they would shortly bring forth five and ten times their present amount. Examples are at hand in Spain, showing that well-irrigated soil brought forth 37 times as much as soil that had not been irrigated. So water is all that is needed to bring forth fresh masses of nourishment from the soil.

Hardly a year passes in which not one or the other of the German states and provinces is ravaged by floods. Large tracts of the most fertile land are carried away by the force of the water; others are littered with stones, sand and rubbish, and are made unfertile for years to come. Entire orchards that have required decades to be grown are uprooted. Houses, bridges, streets and dams are washed away, railroads are ruined and human lives are sacrificed, flocks perish and crops are destroyed. Wide stretches of land that are exposed to frequent ravages from floods are not cultivated at all, or only slightly, since their owners do not wish to suffer constant loss. Devastation of the forests, especially on the mountains, and particularly by private owners, increases the danger from floods. The mad devastation of the forests, prompted by a desire for profit, has led to a diminution of the fertility of the soil in the German provinces of Russia and Pomerania, in Corinthia and Styria, as also in Italy, France, Spain, Russia, and other countries.

Frequent floods are the result of the devastation of forests on the mountains. The inundations of the Rhine, the Oder, and the Vistula are ascribed mainly to the devastation of forests in Switzerland, Galicia, and Poland. The same causes lead to the frequent inundations in Italy, especially of the River Po. As a result of the same causes, Madeira, large portions of Spain, the most fertile provinces of Russia, and stretches of land in Asia Minor, which were at one time fertile and blooming, have lost much of their fertility.[239]

At last even bourgeois society has begun to recognize that, in this respect, it will no longer do to maintain the policy of “laissez faire,” and that, by sensible measures, applied on a large scale, the destructive forces can be transformed into constructive ones. So the construction of large dams was undertaken to collect immense quantities of water and to utilize the water-power to supply electric power to industry and agriculture. The Bavarian state especially has undertaken to dam the mountain streams on a grand scale to obtain power for the running of electric railways and other industrial undertakings. Agrarian old Bavaria is thereby rapidly becoming a modern industrial state.

3.—Changed Methods of Farming.

It is self-understood that these great tasks cannot be accomplished at once; but the new society will devote all its strength to these and similar undertakings, since it will be the avowed purpose of this new society to perform tasks in the interest of civilization and to permit nothing to interfere with their performance. In the course of time it will accomplish works the very thought of which would make present-day society dizzy.

Measures and institutions like the ones described above will make agriculture much more favorable. Still other points are to be considered in connection with the improved methods of farming. At present many square miles of land are planned with potatoes to be used mainly for the distilling of whiskey, which is consumed almost exclusively by the poor and needy portion of the population. Whiskey is the only stimulant they can obtain, the only banisher of care. But among the truly civilized people of the new society the consumption of whiskey will disappear; the soil and the labor power will be employed to raise wholesome food. We have already pointed to the cultivation of sugar-beets and the manufacture of sugar for export. In Germany more than 400,000hectares of land, best suited to the raising of wheat, are devoted to the cultivation of sugar-beets, to supply England, Switzerland, the United States, etc., with sugar. Our standing army, the scattered methods of production and distribution, the scattered methods of farming, etc., make it necessary to breed millions of horses, and large areas of land are required to pasture them. The thoroughly transformed social and political conditions will enable the new society to utilize most of this land for agricultural purposes. Recently areas of many square kilometers have been withdrawn from agriculture, entire villages have been wiped out, because the new long-range firearms and the new methods of combat necessitate drilling-grounds on which whole troops may manoeuvre. Such use will never be made of the land in the future.

The great realm of agriculture, forestry and irrigation has already been made the subject of discussion, and a considerable literature exists on the subject. No particular field has remained unconsidered. Forestry, irrigation and drainage, the raising of grain, the cultivation of vegetables, fruit, berries, flowers and ornamental plants, the raising of fodder for domestic animals, cattle-breeding, raising of poultry, fish and bees, the preparation of dung and manure, the use of waste materials in farming and in industry, chemical examinations of the soil, and its preparation for one or another kind of crop, the nature of seeds, rotation of crops, farm implements and machinery, proper construction of farm-buildings, conditions of climate, etc.—all these things have been made subjects of scientific discussion and investigation. Almost daily new discoveries and experiences lead to improvements along one line or another. Since the researches of Thaer and J.v.Liebig agriculture has become a science. Indeed it has become one of the first and foremost sciences and has attained a degree of importance that few realms of productive activity can equal. But if we compare this tremendous progress along all lines with the true status of agriculture, it must be admitted that, so far, only a small fraction of the private owners have been able to make use of this progress, and all only pursue their private interest, regardless of the public welfare. The great majority of our farmers, we may say about 99per cent. of them, are quite unable to make use of the progress and the advantages offered by science and by technical improvements, because they lack the necessary means, or knowledge, or both. Here the new society will find a field that has been well prepared, both theoretically and practically, and that it will only need to organize to attain the grandest results.

While even among Socialists some persons still hold the opinion, that small farmers are able to compete with the large agricultural enterprises by means of their own thrift and that of their families, experts have come to hold a different opinion. By over-exertion the peasant may achieve his utmost, but from the standpoint of a civilized human being his position is a deplorable one. No matter how much he may achieve, the modern technical development and the science of agriculture can achieve more. But, above all, only by the appliance of science and technique does the peasant attain the full development of a civilized human being, while to-day he is the slave of his property and the helot of his creditor.

The advantages of farming on a large scale are immense. To begin with, the area that can be utilized is considerably enlarged, because the numerous paths and roads and ridges necessitated by the disjointed properties, disappear. Fifty persons, working on a large farm—regardless of the more rational implements used by them—can accomplish much more than 50 persons working on scattered farms. Only farming on a large scale makes it possible to combine and direct the forces so as to obtain the best results. To this must be added the immense advantage derived from the application of all kinds of machinery, the use of the produce for industrial purposes, the more rational methods of cattle and poultry breeding, etc. Electric appliances especially furnish advantages to agriculture that overshadow every other method of cultivation. P.Mack[240] has ascertained that the introduction of machinery led to a saving of over 5000days’ labor by horses, and that a single investment of 40,000marks’ capital led to a cheapening of the product of over 12,000marks or 48marks per hectare. This computation did not even take into consideration the increase in produce from the introduction of deep ploughing, or the more exact cultivation by machinery.[241]

Deep ploughing led to an increase of from 20 to 40per cent. in the cultivation of grain, and up to 50per cent. in the cultivation of potatoes, turnips, and the like. Taking an average of only 20per cent., Mack showed that, on the farm under consideration, this meant a gain of 55.45marks per hectare; together with the saving referred to above, this made a gain of 103.45marks per hectare. Mack pointed out that it was necessary to establish a sufficient number of power plants, whereby not only all the machinery employed could be set in motion, but heat and light could also be supplied. By means of the electric plants, the dwellings, streets, stables, barns, store-houses and factories can be lighted, and if it should become necessary, crops can be reaped at night. Mack calculated that, by the general introduction of electricity, two-thirds of the animals employed for drawing and carrying loads (1,741,300 heads) might be dispensed with, which would imply an annual net profit of 1,002,989,000marks.

The application of electricity makes agriculture more and more a purely technical, industrial process. The following compilation shows the manifold applicability of electricity in agriculture:[242] The following can be run by electric motors: 1.Machines that heighten the gross proceeds: A.for tilling: seed-assorter and electric ploughs. B.for the harvest: mowing-machines with binders; machines for reaping potatoes; irrigation-works. 2.Machines for reducing the cost of production: A.lifting machines, unloading machines in barns, grain elevators, pumps for liquid manure. B.means of transportation: groves, straps and bellows, field-railways, spindles and cranes. C.for utilization: straw-presses, corn-mills, chaff-cutters. 3.Machines of agricultural industry: A.distillery machines and machines for the manufacture of starch; water-pumps for various purposes. B.dairy implements: refrigerators, centrifuges, churners, kneaders, presses, etc. C.saw-mills, circular-saws and saw-frames. D.drills, turning-lathes, machines for wheel-making. 4.Food-chopping machines, for cattle-breeding: chaff-cutters, turnip-choppers, meal, potato and oat-grinders, etc.; squeezers, water-pumps. Investigations have shown that about 15per cent. of all farm-labor can be performed in this economical way, by the aid of electric motors.

The amount of manual labor power required for the threshing and preparation of 1000kilograms of grain was ascertained:

There is nothing to prevent the general introduction of electric ploughs. Like the electric railway, the electric plough has already attained a high degree of development. The heavy and expensive steam-plough can be rationally employed only on large areas and for deep ploughing. It is especially serviceable for heightening the crops of potatoes, etc. But the electric plough can be used equally well for deep and shallow ploughing. It makes it possible to cultivate the soil on steep inclines, where it is difficult to plough with horses, or oxen even. It is a great labor-saving device, as may be seen from the following comparison of expenses for ploughing, when horses, oxen, a steam-plough and an electric plough were used:

The simple supply and distribution of electric energy, the ease and simplicity with which electric machines can be run and kept in order, make their advantages to agriculture paramount, especially as a thin wire suffices to supply the power to extensive areas. As the employment of electric machines would necessitate a network of electric wires across the country, electric motor-power in agriculture could easily be combined with electro-cultivation, the direct influence of electricity on the growth of plants.

During recent years plant physiologists, as also practical agriculturists, were eagerly engaged in studying the influence of electricity on the growth and fructification of plants, especially the various kinds of grain. The task was accomplished by the late ProfessorR.S. Lemstroem (died 1906). He spread a net of wire across a large area of cultivated ground which, by means of a battery, he charged with positive electricity, while the negative pole remained on the ground, and subjected a field, or part of one, to an electric current during its entire period of vegetation, while an adjacent field, which was under observation also, remained uninfluenced. The experiments were tried upon various areas of different size, and, wherever carried out properly, they all showed the same favorable results. Firstly, the crop increased from 30 to over 100per cent.; secondly, it ripened in a shorter time, and thirdly, the quality was considerably improved. There were still a few practical short-comings connected with this method, which Newman, an English agriculturist, succeeded in removing. He succeeded in interesting a famous English physicist, Oliver Lodge, in Lemstroem’s method. According to recent reports from Lodge these experiments have been successively tried from 1906 to 1908; the area under observation has been extended to ten hectares, and it was satisfactorily proven that the charged wire net may be spread as high as five meters above the ground, without lessening the favorable influence of the electric current on the harvest. This altitude makes it possible to drive loaded wagons beneath the wire net and to perform all agricultural tasks without interference, while Lemstroem’s net was not to be more than 40centimeters above the plants to be influenced by the electric current.[243] Several millers instituted comparative baking experiments, and the electrified wheat was found to make better flour than that which had not been electrified. So the new method is ripe for being successfully introduced into agriculture and horticulture.

Fowler’s steam-plough, with two compound locomotives, requires an area of 5000hectares for its satisfactory application, which is larger than the cultivated area of most peasant communities. It has been calculated that, if the soil under cultivation in 1895 had been cultivated with the application of all available machinery and all other modern advantages, a saving of 1600million marks would have been realized. According to Ruhland[244] the successful combating of the diseases of grain alone would make the import of grain into Germany superfluous. In his book on “Our Meadows and Produce of the Fields,” Dr.Sonnenberg informs us, that Bavarian agriculture suffers a loss of 30per cent. annually, owing to the spread of weeds in the fields. On two areas of 4square meters each, one of which was full of weeds, while the other had been kept clear of weeds, Nowatzki attained the following results:

Dr. v. Ruemker, Professor at the Agricultural Institute of the University of Breslau, declares that a careful economy of the nourishment of the soil is almost entirely wanting in Germany. The cultivation of the soil and the sowing are done in such a thoughtless manner, according to old, acquired habits, and by means of such insufficient and imperfect tools, that the returns of all the labor must remain poor and unsatisfactory. He claims that the German farmers do not even perform the easy task of rationally assorting their seed. Professorv.Ruemker showed by the following table how the harvest can be increased per hectare by assorting the seed:

So, according to this table, 1200kilograms more of corn might be obtained per hectare by properly assorting the seed, which, valued at 15marks per cwt., represents a gain of 180marks. Estimating the cost of assorting 4.40marks per hectare at the most, there still remains a clear cash profit of 175.60marks per hectare for the grain alone, not counting the additional gain in straw and chaff. By a number of experimental cultivations, Ruemker furthermore ascertained that by selecting that kind of grain best suited to each particular vicinity, the harvests might be increased and the gross receipts improved, on an average, as follows:

The gain obtained from assorting the seed and from a proper selection of the kind of wheat taken together, would, in the raising of wheat alone, increase the harvest by 1500 to 2000kilograms of grain, or by 220 to 295marks per hectare.

In a paper on “The Future of German Agriculture,” it has been shown how tremendously all agricultural products could be increased by sufficient and appropriate fertilization, by supplying mineral manure, as hypophosphate, phosphoric acid, etc. The German harvest of wheat might be increased on an average of 36cwts. per hectare, and the harvest of rye by 24cwts. per hectare. Moreover, a considerable portion of the land used for the cultivation of rye at present, might, by proper manuring, be used for the cultivation of wheat, so that the average harvest of grain for bread—two-fifths of wheat, three-fifths of rye—might amount to 28.8cwts. per hectare. After the deduction of seed and of grain of inferior quality, there would still remain 26cwts. per hectare to feed the nation. The 7.9million hectares that are planted with wheat and rye at present might be increased by an additional 1.5million hectares of pasture, fallow-ground, heaths and moor-land, so that, with an average crop of 26cwts. per hectare and a cultivated area of 9.4million hectares, a production of 251.92million cwts. of grain for bread might be obtained. With an annual consumption of 175kilograms for every person, enough grain for bread could be raised to supply the needs of 144million persons. At the time of the census of 1900, Germany had a population of approximately 56,345,000 inhabitants, and even at that time science and technics were sufficiently far advanced that the German soil might have supplied a population two and a half times as large with bread. Under the present agricultural system, with the scattered private ownership of land, Germany is obliged to import annually about one-ninth of its requisite supply of wheat and rye. If, under the present agricultural system, similar quantities were to be raised, it would mean so great an increase in the cost of articles of food, that a majority of the people could not afford to buy them, and that would not answer the purpose. These results can be obtained only by communistic methods, when carried out on the largest scale; but of course the authors quoted above do not think of that possibility. According to calculations made by them, by means of an intensified cultivation of the soil, the products of German agriculture might be increased as follows:

If we furthermore take into consideration the suggestions by Mack, quoted above, showing that a very great number of animals for drawing and carrying loads might be dispensed with by the introduction of electric power, we find that the breeding of cattle for nourishment might be considerably increased, or that much of the land used for pasture might be planted with food for man.

Another field of agricultural activity that might be developed to a far greater extent, is poultry breeding. The value of eggs imported by Germany annually amounts to 149.7million marks (1907), and that of live poultry to over 40million marks. The institutions for raising and breeding poultry are still sadly undeveloped. The concentrated methods of agriculture on a large scale will lead to the concentration of farming establishments, such as stables, store-houses, ice-houses, fodder and feeding; much time, labor and material will be saved, and practical advantages will be obtained that are inaccessible to small and medium-sized establishments, and are but rarely enjoyed by large ones. How insufficient, for instance, are the hygienic institutions in most stables, how inadequate are the provisions made for the feeding and care of the cattle and poultry! That cleanliness, air and light are as necessary to animals as to human beings and have a favorable influence on their condition, is a fact known but little among peasants of the twentieth century. It is self-understood that, by a general dissemination and application of this knowledge, milk, butter, cheese, eggs, honey, meat, etc., will be obtained under far more sanitary and favorable conditions than at present. By a skillful combination and application of human labor power and machinery, not only the cultivation of the fields, but also the reaping of the harvest will be done by ways and means unknown to us to-day. The erection of great halls for shelter will make it possible to gather in the crops during any kind of weather, and, by bringing them in quickly, the enormous losses will be avoided that are so frequent now. According to v.d.Goltz, during one single unfavorable harvest-time, 8 to 9million marks are lost on crops in Mecklenburg, and in the government district of Koenigsberg, from 12 to 15million marks.

5.—Vine-Culture of the Future.

The cultivation of fruit and berries and horticulture will also attain a degree of development in the future that hitherto seemed almost impossible. To what extent the cultivation of fruit is still neglected in Germany, although the German climate is particularly favorable to the cultivation of orchards, especially apple-orchards, may be seen from the fact that more than 40million marks’ worth of fresh fruit and more than 20million marks’ worth of dried fruit are imported annually. One look at the poor condition of our fruit-trees in the greater part of Germany, even in countries like Wurtemberg, which are famed for their orchards, makes this easily understood. Here a wide field presents itself to agricultural and horticultural activity. The cultivation of berries is just begun and presents a no more favorable aspect.

By applying artificial heat and moisture in large, sheltered halls, it becomes possible to raise vegetables, fruit and berries in large quantities during any season of the year. The florists’ show-windows in our large cities present as gorgeous an array of flowers in mid-winter as they do in summer. Wonderful progress in the line of artificial cultivation of fruit, is marked by the artificial “vineyard” of Garden-Director Haupt, in Brieg in Silesia, which has since been imitated elsewhere, and already had been tried in other countries; for instance, in England. Its equipment and the results achieved were so enticingly described in the “Vossishe Gazette,” of September27, 1890, that an extract of this description follows:

“The glass-house is situated upon an approximately square field of 500square meters. It is from 4.5 to 5meters high, and its walls face exactly north, south, east and west. It contains twelve rows of double fruit-walls, running from south to north, 1.8meters apart, which at the same time serve as supports to the flat roof. In a bed 1.25meters deep, resting on a bank of earth 25centimeters strong, which contains a net of pipes for drainage and ventilation of the soil, a bed, whose heavy ground has been made loose and fertile by the introduction of chalk, rubbish, sand, manure, bone-dust and potash, Mr.Haupt planted 360 grapevines of the kinds that yield the best grape-juice in the Rhine Province: White and red Riessling and Traminer, white and blue Moscatelle and Burgundy.

“The ventilation of the place is effected by several apertures in the side walls and by slats 20meters long attached to the roof, which can be opened and closed by a lever, and afford protection from the storm in any position. Twenty-six showers serve to water the vines. They are attached to rubber pipes 1.25meters long that are suspended from a tank above. But Mr.Haupt has introduced still another truly ingenious contrivance for quickly and thoroughly watering his ‘wine-hall’ and his ‘vineyards’: an artificial generator of rain. Under the roof four long copper tubes are attached that contain fine perforations half a meter apart. Through these perforations fine streams of water are driven upward, strike small round sieves made of gauze, and, by being filtered through them, are scattered in fountains of a fine spray. It takes several hours to water the place thoroughly by means of the rubber tubes; but one need open only one faucet, and throughout the building a gentle, refreshing rain falls down evenly upon the vines, the ground and the granite walks. Without any artificial heating, only by the neutral qualities of the glass-house, the temperature can be raised from 8 to 10degreesR. above the outside air. In order to protect the vines from their most dangerous and destructive enemy, the vine-louse, in case one should appear, it will suffice to close all the drain-pipes and open all the faucets. Thereby an inundation of the vines will be caused which, as is well known, this enemy cannot resist. The glass walls and roof protect the vineyard from storm, cold, frost and superfluous rain. A fine wire netting, spread over roof and walls, affords protection from hail. The artificial rain contrivance is a safeguard against drought. The wine-grower in such a vineyard makes his own weather and can mock the dangers of all the incalculable whims and treacheries of indifferent or cruel nature that threaten with ruin the fruit of the wine-grower’s toil and care.”

Mr. Haupt’s expectations were fully realized. The vines thrived splendidly in the even temperature. The grapes ripened to their fullest perfection, and in the fall of 1885 yielded a juice that was not inferior in richness and sweetness to any obtained along the Rhine. The grapes thrived equally well in the following year, and in that most unfavorable year, 1887. When the vines have attained their full height of five meters and bear an abundance of grapes to their very top, in this establishment about 20hectoliters of wine can be produced annually, and the cost of wine per bottle to the producer will not exceed 40“pfennige” (10cents).

There is no reason why this new and most favorable system of vine-culture should not be introduced on a large scale. Glass-houses like this one, covering one-fifth of an acre, can without doubt also be erected on areas of one acre, or more, equipped with the same contrivances for ventilation, drainage and artificial rain. Here the vegetation will set in some weeks earlier than in the open air, and during the time of bloom the young vines will be protected from May-frosts, rain and cold; while the grapes ripen they will be protected from drought, from pilfering birds and thieves and excessive moisture; during the entire year they will be protected from the vine-louse, and the berries will remain safely on the vine until November or December. In an address delivered before the Society for the Advancement of Horticulture, in 1888, from which I have taken several technical terms in this description of Haupt’s “vineyard,” the inventor and founder of same closed with the following alluring perspective of the future: “Since this vine-culture can be carried on throughout Germany, also on otherwise barren, sandy or stony soil (as, for instance, in the March), after it has been made arable and watered, it becomes evident that vine-culture under glass becomes a matter of national interest. I would like to call this method the vine-culture of the future.” The author then described how the wine obtained form the grapes had met with the highest approval of experts, and added: “The vineyard also left sufficient room for the cultivation of other plants. Thus Mr.Haupt, between every two vines raises one rose-bush, which presents a wealth of bloom during April and May. On the eastern and western walls he also raises peaches, and during April their luxuriant blossoms must impart to this glass palace a fairy-like appearance.” Recently Belgium has bestowed special attention upon this method of fruit-culture. But in Germany also it is being extensively applied, for instance, in raising pineapples. Nothing will prevent the establishment of similar hot-house plantations for various kinds of plants, so that, with many products of the soil, we may enjoy the luxury of a double or threefold harvest. At present these undertakings are primarily a question of profit, and their products are enjoyed only by the favored few. But in Socialistic society the only question will be whether sufficient labor-power is obtainable. This being the case the task will be accomplished to the common advantage of all.

So we see that, even under present-day conditions, a thorough transformation in the methods of procuring food is taking place. But the utilization of all these discoveries is extremely slow, because powerful classes—the agrarians and their social and political supporters—are profoundly interested in suppressing them. Although in spring weekly prayers are offered up in all churches for a good crop, individual members of the congregations may feel like that pious man who implored his patron saint: “St.Florian, protect my house, set others on fire!” For if the crops turn out well in all countries the prices are lowered, and this possibility is dreaded by agrarians. What is advantageous to others is harmful to him, and therefore he is a silent opponent of every discovery or invention that benefits others besides himself. Our society dwells in constant discord with itself.

In order to maintain the soil in a fertile condition and to improve it, sufficient manure is essential. To obtain same will be an important task for the new society also.[245] Manure is to the fields what food is to man, and just as not every kind of food is equally nourishing to man, so not every kind of manure is of equal value to the soil. The ground must be given exactly the same chemical substances that have been withdrawn from it by the reaping of a crop, and such chemical substances, as are required for the cultivation of a certain kind of plant, must be introduced in large quantities. Therefore the study of chemistry and its practical application will develop to an extent unknown to-day.

Now animal and human excrements contain the very chemical substances that are suited to the cultivation of human food. Therefore it is important to obtain and properly distribute them. Little is done in this respect at present. Especially the cities and industrial centers, which receive large quantities of food, return very little of the valuable offal to the soil. As a result the farms that are situated far from the cities and industrial centers and that annually ship the greater part of their products into these, suffer from want of manure. Often the offal obtainable on the farms does not suffice, because the human beings and animals from which it is obtained have consumed only a small portion of the crops. So an exhaustion of the soil would be sure to take place, unless the want of natural manure were made up for by artificial manure. All countries that export agricultural products and receive no manure in return, will sooner or later be ruined by the impoverishment of their soil. This is the case with Hungary, Russia, the Danubian principalities, etc.

In the middle of the last century, Liebig solved his theory of the reproduction of substance for arable soil, which led to the use of concentrated manure. Schultze-Lupitz proved that certain plants, although not given manure containing nitrogen, still added nitrogen to the soil, a phenomenon that was explained later by Hellriegel. He showed that the millions of bacilli, acting on certain leguminous plants, obtain the nitrogen for the nourishment of the plant directly from the air.[246] Chemistry constitutes one phase of modern, scientific agriculture, and bacteriology constitutes the other. In its deposits of potash, Thomas-slag, hypophosphate and phosphoric acid, Germany possesses a number of inexhaustible sources of mineral manure. A proper application of these, combined with an appropriate tilling of the soil, makes possible a production of enormous quantities of food.

An idea of the importance of the various kinds of artificial manure may be gained from the following figures: During 1906 Germany consumed about 300million marks’ worth of artificial manure. Among these were sulphate of ammonia for 58.3millions; nitrate of soda for 120, and the rest was expended for Thomas-slag, hypophosphate, potash, guano, etc. The most important of these fertilizers are the ones containing nitrogen. The great importance of this substance may be seen from the following: Investigations made by Wagner showed that crops of oats from a field in Hessia diminished by 17per cent. when there was a dearth of phosphoric acid; by 19per cent. when there was a dearth of potash, and by 89per cent. when there was a dearth of nitrogen. The net profits for one year per hectare were: When the fertilizer contained all the needful ingredients, 96marks; when the potash was omitted, 62marks; when phosphoric acid was omitted, 48marks; when nitrogen was omitted, 5marks. It has been calculated that if Germany would double its nitrogen-manure, it could produce not only sufficient grain and potatoes to supply the demands of its own population, but could also export considerable quantities. And the chief sources of this valuable manure, the deposits of nitrate soda in Chili, like the deposits of guano, are rapidly being used up, while the demand for nitrogen preparations constantly increases in Germany, France, England, and, during the last ten years, in the United States of America also. As early as 1899 the English chemist, William Crookes, propounded this question and designated it as one of greater importance than the possibility of proximate exhaustion of the British coal mines. He therefore regarded it to be one of the most important tasks of chemistry to manufacture nitrogen fertilizers from the tremendous nitrogen reservoir of the atmosphere. It must be remembered that the quantity of air covering one square centimeter of ground, weighs approximately 1kilogram, and that four-fifths of it are nitrogen. From this may be calculated that the nitrogen contained in the atmosphere of the earth, amounts, in round figures, to 4000million tons. The present annual consumption of nitrate of soda is, in round figures, 300,000tons. So even if the nitrogen in the atmosphere were not replaced, it would suffice to supply the demand of the entire earth during 14,000million years. This problem has been practically solved. In 1899, A.Frank and N.Caro produced cyanide of potassium that contains from 14 to 22per cent. of nitrogen. The new fertilizer has been introduced upon the market under the name of calcareous nitrogen. But Frank’s and Caro’s method is not the only one. In 1903 the Norwegians, C.Birkeland and S.Eyde, succeeded in transforming the atmospheric nitrogen into nitric acid by combustion, by means of electricity. This second method furnishes a product that is equal to Chili nitrate of soda in every respect and even superior to it for certain kinds of soil. In 1905 Otto Schoenherr succeeded in finding a method still superior to that of Birkeland and Eyde. For, besides the electric power, only the cheapest materials are required, i. e., water and limestone. So agriculture has been given a new fertilizer that can be obtained by a purely technical industrial process, and has an unlimited supply at its disposal.[247]

According to A. Mueller, a healthy adult secretes annually on an average of 48.5kilograms of solid and 43.8kilograms of liquid matter. Estimated by the present prices of manure, these materials represent a value of about 5.15marks. The great difficulty in fully utilizing this material lies in the establishment of large and appropriate contrivances for collecting same and in the high cost of transportation. A great portion of the excrements from the cities is conducted into our rivers and streams and pollutes them. In the same way, the offal and refuse from kitchens and industrial establishments that might also be used for manure, are usually carelessly wasted.

The new society will find ways and means to prevent this waste. It will solve the problem more easily, because the large cities will gradually cease to exist owing to the decentralization of the population.

No one can adjudge our modern large cities a healthy product. The prevailing economic and industrial system constantly attracts great masses of the population to the cities.[248] They are the chief seats of industry and commerce, and there all the highways of traffic converge. There the owners of great fortunes reside, and there the civil, judicial and military authorities are located. In the cities are found the great institutions of learning, the academies of art, the places of enjoyment and recreation, exhibitions, museums, theatres, concert-halls, etc. Thousands are attracted by their occupations, thousands by pleasure, and thousands of others by the hope of greater gain and a more pleasant life.

But this formation of great cities, figuratively speaking, reminds one of a man whose girth is constantly increasing while his legs are constantly growing leaner, until they can no longer carry the load. In the immediate vicinity of these cities all the villages assume an urban character also, and here the proletarians flock together. These usually poor municipalities must tax their members to the utmost and still are unable to meet all demands. When they have finally extended close to the large city they are swallowed up by it, as a planet that has come too close to the sun. But thereby the conditions of life are not improved. On the contrary, they become more unfavorable by the crowding of masses in congested dwellings. These gatherings of masses are necessary in present-day development and, to a certain degree, form the centers of revolution; but in the new society they will have accomplished their purpose. Their gradual dissolution will be inevitable, for then the contrary will take place. The population will migrate from the large cities to the country, will form new communities adapted to the changed conditions, and will combine industrial and agricultural activity.

As soon as the urban population, as a result of the development of the means of transportation, methods of production, etc., is enabled to transfer to the country all its accustomed requirements of culture, its institutions of learning, museums, theaters, concert-halls, libraries, social centers, etc., the migration will begin. Life will offer all the advantages of the former large city without its disadvantages. The dwellings will be far more sanitary and pleasant. The rural population will participate in industry, and the industrial population will participate in agriculture and horticulture, a variety of occupations that only a few persons can enjoy at present, and only by excessively long and hard labor.

As on all other fields, the bourgeois world is paving the way for this development, as each year a greater number of industrial establishments are transferred to the country. The unfavorable conditions prevailing in the large cities, high rents and high wages, compel many manufacturers to transfer their establishments to rural districts. On the other hand, the large landowners are becoming industrialists (manufacturers of sugar, distillers, brewers, manufacturers of cement, earthenware, bricks, woodwork, paper, etc.) Even to-day tens of thousands of persons who work in the large cities have their homes in the suburbs, because the improved means of transportation enable them to live in this manner.

By the decentralization of the population the present contrast between urban and rural population will be removed. The peasant, this modern helot, who, until now, in his isolation in the country, has been excluded from all modern cultural development, will then become a civilized being[249] in the fullest sense of the word. The wish once expressed by PrinceBismarck, that he might see the large cities destroyed, will be fulfilled, but in a different sense than he anticipated.[250]

When we review what has been set forth so far, we find that, with the abolition of the private ownership of the means of production, and their transformation into social property, those evils gradually disappear that bourgeois society presents on all sides, and which are becoming more and more unbearable. Class rule will cease. Society will apply all its activities according to its own plans, and will guide and control itself. By abolition of the wage system, the exploitation of man by man, deception and fraud, adulteration of food, speculation, etc., will be eradicated. The halls of the Temples of Mammon will be empty, for stocks, bonds, promissory notes, mortgages, etc., will have become waste-paper. The words of Schiller: “All old scores shall be erased and the world shall make its peace,” will be realized, and the scriptural saying: “In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat thy bread,” will then prevail with the heroes of the stock-exchange and the drones of capitalism, also. The employers and capitalists will be relieved forever of that worry about their property which, so they pathetically assure us, is often even harder to bear than the workingman’s lot of uncertainty and privation. The excitements of speculation, that give so many of our stock-jobbers heart-diseases and apoplexy, and cause them to be the victims of nervous prostration, will be spared them in the future. Freedom from care will be their lot and that of their descendants, and they will not deplore this lot.

With the abolition of private property and class antagonism, the state, too, will gradually pass out of existence. “As the capitalistic method of production converts ever greater numbers of the population into proletarians, it creates the power that, under penalty of its own destruction, is destined to bring about the transformation. Since its tendencies are to convert into state property the socialized means of production, it blazes the trail for the achievement of this transformation....

“The state was the official representative of society as a whole, its unification in a visible body; but it was this only in so far as it was the state of that particular class which itself represented society as a whole at its time; in antiquity, the slave-owning citizen; in mediÆval days, the feudal nobility; in our own day, the bourgeoisie. By finally becoming the actual representative of society as a whole, it renders itself superfluous. As soon as there will be no social class that needs to be repressed, as soon as the conflicts and excesses will be removed that are rooted in the present anarchistic methods of production and the individual struggle for existence, there will be nothing to necessitate a special power of repression, a state. The first act wherein the state will appear as the true representative of the whole body social—the act of taking possession of the means of production in behalf of society—will at the same time be its last independent act as state. State interference with social relations will become superfluous in one domain after another and will finally fall into disuse. Instead of a government of persons, there will be an administration of things and a direction of the processes of production. The state will not be ‘abolished,’ it will die out.”[251]

Together with the state will vanish its representatives: ministers, parliaments, standing armies, police, courts, lawyers and district attorneys, prison officials, collectors of taxes and duty; in short, the entire political apparatus. Armories and other military buildings, palaces of justice and administration, prisons, etc., will then serve better purposes. Tens of thousands of laws, decrees and regulations will become just so much waste-paper; their only value will be an historical one. The great and yet so petty parliamentary struggles, during which the men of the tongue imagine that by their orations they rule and guide the world, will disappear. They will make room for colleges of administration and administrative delegations, whose purpose will be to consider and determine the best means and methods of production and distribution, to decide how large a quantity of supplies is required, to introduce and utilize new appliances and improvements in art, science, education, traffic, etc., to organize and direct industry and agriculture. All these are practical, visible, tangible objects that will be objectively viewed by all, because no one will have any personal interests hostile to the interests of society. It will be to the common interest of all to have everything provided for and arranged in the most effective and advantageous manner.

The hundreds of thousands of former representatives of the state will enter various professions, and by their intelligence and strength will help to increase the wealth and comforts of society. Neither political nor common crimes will be known in the future. Thieves will have disappeared, because private property will have disappeared, and in the new society everyone will be able to satisfy his wants easily and conveniently by work. Nor will there be tramps and vagabonds, for they are the product of a society founded on private property, and, with the abolition of this institution, they will cease to exist. Murder? Why? No one can enrich himself at the expense of others, and even the murder for hatred or revenge is directly or indirectly connected with the social system. Perjury, false testimony, fraud, theft of inheritance, fraudulent failures? There will be no private property against which these crimes could be committed. Arson? Who should find pleasure or satisfaction in committing arson when society has removed all cause for hatred? Counterfeiting? Money will be but a chimera, it would be “loves labor lost.” Blasphemy? Nonsense! It will be left to good and almighty God himself to punish whoever has offended him, provided that the existence of God is still a matter of controversy.

Thus all the fundamental principles of the present “order” become a myth. In later days parents will tell their children about them like about legends of days gone by; and, when told of the persecutions to which men of the new ideas were subjected, they will be impressed by these accounts just as we are impressed by the accounts of the burnings of heretics and witches. All the names of those “great” men who distinguished themselves by their persecutions of the new ideas and were applauded for it by their narrow-minded contemporaries, will be forgotten. At best they will only attract the attention of the historians engaged in the research of old documents. Unfortunately we are not yet living in that happy age when humanity may breathe freely.

As with the state, so it will be with religion. It will not be “abolished,” God will not be “dethroned,” people will not be “robbed of their faith,” as all the foolish arguments are worded that are directed against atheistic Socialists. Such follies Socialists leave to bourgeois idealists who attempted such measures during the French Revolution and, of course, failed utterly. Without any forcible attack or expression of opinions, of whatever nature they may be, the religious organizations will gradually disappear and the churches with them.

Religion is the transcendental reflection of the social condition of every age. In the measure in which human development progresses and society is transformed, religion is transformed likewise. “Religion,” says Marx, “is the striving of the people for an imaginary happiness; it springs from a state of society that requires an illusion,[252] but disappears when the recognition of true happiness and the possibility of its realization penetrates the masses.” It is to the interest of the ruling classes to prevent this recognition, and so they seek to uphold religion as a means for preserving their rule. This is clearly expressed in the well-known saying: “Religion must be preserved for the people.” This business of preserving religion for the people becomes an important official function in a society founded on class-rule. A caste is formed that assumes this function and concentrates all its ingenuity upon maintaining and expanding the structure, for this means the maintenance and expansion of their own power and authority. At the lowest stages of civilization, among primitive social conditions, religion is mere fetichism. With a higher development religion becomes polytheism, and at a still higher stage, it becomes monotheism. It is not the gods who have created man, but man who has created the gods, or God. “In the image of himself (man) he created him (God)”; not vice-versa. Even now monotheism has dissolved itself into an all-comprising, all-penetrating pantheism that is constantly becoming more volatile. Science has reduced the doctrine of creation of the earth in six days to a myth. Astronomy, mathematics and physics make heaven a phantom. They make of the stars in heaven on which angels are enthroned, suns and planets that preclude angelic existence.

The ruling class, seeing its existence threatened, clings to religion, the support of all authority, as every ruling class has done.[253] The bourgeoisie itself does not believe, and by its entire development and by modern science that sprang from its lap, it has destroyed the faith in religion and in all authority. Their belief is hypocrisy, but the Church accepts the support of this false friend, because it is sorely in need of aid itself. “Religion must be preserved for the people.”

For the new society no considerations will exist. Uninterrupted human progress and unadulterated science will be its device. If some one should have religious needs, he may satisfy them with those who share his belief. Society will pay no attention to them. Even the priest must work to live, and as he will improve his mind by work, the time will come when even he will recognize that it is our highest destiny to be human.

Ethics and morality exist even without religion. Only fools or hypocrites would assert the contrary. Ethics and morality are the expression of conceptions that regulate the actions and mutual relations of men, while religion comprises the relations of men to supernatural beings. But, like religion, our moral conceptions, too, arise from prevailing social conditions.[254] The cannibal considers it moral to eat human flesh. Greeks and Romans regarded slavery as a moral institution. Serfdom seemed moral to the feudal lords of the middle ages, and the modern capitalist deems wage-slavery, the exploitation of women and the demoralization of children by industrial labor, a highly moral condition.[255] These four stages of social evolution present four different conceptions of morality, but in none of them does the highest moral conception prevail. The highest moral condition is one in which all human beings will be free and equal; it is one in which the principle, “do unto others as you would have others do unto you,” will dominate all human relations. In the middle ages a man’s pedigree was the decisive factor; at the present time his social status is determined by his wealth; in the future every human being will be valued for his own true worth, and the future lies with Socialism.

The late member of the German diet, Dr.Lasker, delivered a lecture in Berlin, during the seventies, in which he arrived at the conclusion that it is possible for all members of society to have an equal standard of education. But Dr.Lasker was an anti-Socialist, a rigid upholder of private property and capitalism, and the question of education under present-day conditions is pre-eminently a question of money. Therefore an equal standard of education for all is impossible at present. Some may attain a higher education even under unfavorable circumstances, by overcoming many difficulties and by applying an amount of energy that few possess. But the masses can never attain it so long as they must live in a state of social dependence and oppression.[256]

In the new society the conditions of existence will be the same for all. The requirements and inclinations will differ and will always continue to differ, since these differences are rooted in the nature of man. But each individual will be able to develop under conditions equally favorable to all. The uniform equality, imputed to Socialism, is like so many other imputations, sheer nonsense. It would be useless, indeed, if Socialism should strive for uniform equality, for it would then come into conflict with human nature itself and could not hope to see society develop in accordance with its principles.[257] Indeed, if Socialism should succeed in forcing society into unnatural conditions, these new conditions would soon make themselves felt as shackles that would be torn asunder, and Socialism would be doomed. Society develops by innate laws and acts accordingly.[258]

A proper education of the young must be one of the chief tasks of the new society. Every child that is born will be a welcome addition to society. In the child society beholds the possibility of its own continuity, its own further development. Therefore it will also recognize the duty of amply providing for the new being. The first object of its care must, accordingly, be the child-bearing woman, the mother. Comfortable homes, pleasant environment, institutions of all kinds suited to this stage of motherhood, considerate care for her and for the child—these are the first requirements. It is self-understood that women will be enabled to nurse their children as long as necessary and desirable. Moleschott, Sonderegger, all hygienists and physicians are agreed that no other nourishment can fully substitute the mother’s milk. Those who, like Eugen Richter, grow indignant at the suggestion that young mothers shall give birth to their children in a lying-in-hospital, where they will be surrounded by every care and comfort that only wealthy persons can afford to-day, and that even they cannot obtain as perfectly as it can be provided in institutions especially equipped for the purpose, should remember that at present at least four-fifths of all children who come into the world are born under the most primitive conditions that mock civilization. Of the remaining one-fifth of our mothers again only a small minority are able to enjoy the care and the comforts that should be bestowed upon every woman in this condition. Even to-day some cities have splendid provisions for child-bearing women, and many women gladly make use of these institutions when they feel their time approaching. But these institutions are so expensive that only few women are able to make use of them; others, of course, are prevented by prejudice. Here again we have an example how the bourgeois world everywhere contains the germs for future transformation.

Motherhood among women of wealth and fashion becomes rather peculiar by the fact that these mothers transfer their maternal duties as soon as possible to a proletarian wet-nurse. It is well known that the Lausitz (Spreewald) is the region that supplies the bourgeois women of Berlin, who do not or cannot nurse their infants, with nurses. “The breeding of nurses” is carried on as a trade, since country girls do not hesitate to become pregnant, because they find it profitable, after the birth of their babies, to hire out as nurses to rich families in Berlin. It is not an unusual occurrence that girls have three or four illegitimate children in order to hire out as nurses, and if they earn enough money by this trade they are regarded as desirable wives by the young men of the Spreewald. Regarded from the view-point of bourgeois morality, such actions are despicable; but regarded from the view-point of the family interests of the bourgeoisie, they become praiseworthy and desirable.

As soon as the child will have outgrown infancy it will join companions of its age in common play under common care and direction. Everything needful or desirable for the child’s physical and mental development will be supplied. Every observer of children knows that they can be most easily educated in the company of other children. This quality can be successfully applied to the system of education.[259] The play-halls and the kindergarten will be succeeded by a playful introduction into the rudiments of knowledge and the various industrial tasks. They will be succeeded by appropriate mental and physical work, combined with gymnastic exercises and unrestricted motion on the playground and in the gymnasium, the skating-rink and the swimming-pool. There will be exercises, drills and wrestling-matches for both sexes, for the aim will be to bring up a healthy, hardy race that will be normal both physically and mentally. Step by step the children will be initiated into the various practical activities, horticulture, agriculture, manufacture, the technics of the process of production. Mental education in the various realms of knowledge will not be neglected.

The system of education will be purified and improved, just like the system of production. Many antiquated, superfluous methods and subjects, which only serve to hamper the child’s mental and physical development, will be dropped. The knowledge of natural things, adapted to the child’s understanding, will incite a far greater desire for study than a system of education where one subject conflicts with and contradicts another; for instance, when, on the one hand, children receive religious instruction as taught by the Bible, and, on the other, are taught science and natural history. The equipment of the schools and the methods and means of education will be in keeping with the advanced stage of civilization of the new society. All the books and objects required for education and study, food and clothing, will be furnished by society; no pupil will be at a disadvantage with the others.[260] This is another chapter that causes indignation among our bourgeois “men of order.”[261] They claim that Socialists seek to turn the school into barracks, and to deprive the parents of all influence over their children. Socialists do not aim at anything of the sort. In future society, parents will have far more time at their disposal than the great majority of parents have to-day. We need but point to the fact that at present many workingmen are employed ten hours daily, and even longer, and that many employees in the postal and railroad service, prison and police officials, etc., as well as mechanics, small farmers, merchants, military men, physicians, etc., must devote an equal length of time to their occupations. In future parents will be able to devote themselves to their children in a measure that is quite impossible to-day. Moreover, the parents will control the educational system and will determine the measures and methods that are to be adopted and introduced. For then society will be thoroughly democratic. There will be boards of education consisting of parents—men and women—and of the educators. Does anyone presume that these will act contrary to their sentiments and interests? That is done in present-day society, where the state carries out its ideas of education contrary to the wishes of most parents.

Our opponents pretend that it is one of the most agreeable things to parents to have their children about them all day and to be constantly occupied with their education. As a matter of fact, this is not so. Every parent knows that the education of a child is no easy task. Several children facilitate education, but they cause so much work and worry, especially to the mother, that she is thankful when they are old enough to attend school, and she is relieved of their care for a part of the day. Moreover, most parents can educate their children but insufficiently, because they have no time. The fathers are engaged in their trades or professions and the mothers in their household tasks, and sometimes the mothers are breadwinners, also. But even those parents who have sufficient time usually lack the ability. How many parents are able to follow up the mental development of their children at school and to assist them? Mighty few. The mother, who, in most cases, might be best enabled to render such assistance, rarely has the ability, because she has not been properly trained herself. Moreover, the methods and subjects are changed so often that they are foreign to most parents. For most children the facilities at home are so insufficient that they have no proper order, comfort or peace for doing their home-work, nor are they helped by anyone. Often the home is small and overcrowded; the entire family are huddled together in a few small rooms, the furniture is scanty, and the child wishing to study lacks every comfort and convenience. Not infrequently light, air and heat are wanting. The books and school supplies are either wanting entirely or are of the poorest quality. Frequently also the little ones are tortured by hunger, which destroys all inclination for study. Hundreds of thousands of children are put to work at all kinds of domestic and industrial occupations that rob their childhood of its joy and incapacitate them for mental work. Sometimes children must contend with the opposition of narrow-minded parents, who object to it that the children devote time to their studies or to play. In short, there are so many obstacles that it is to be wondered at that the young are so well educated. This is a proof of the health of human nature and of its innate desire for progress and perfection.

Bourgeois society itself recognizes a number of these evils and facilitates the education of the young by introducing free public instruction and, here and there, by also furnishing the school supplies. As late as the middle of the eighties the then Minister of Education of Saxony, designated both these institutions as “Socialistic demands.” In France, where public education had long been neglected and then progressed all the more rapidly, progress has advanced still further; at least, this is the case in Paris. Here the public-school meal, at the expense of the municipality, has been introduced. Poor children are given the meals free of charge, and the children of parents who are in better circumstances must pay a nominal sum into the municipal treasury. Here we behold a communistic institution that has proved entirely satisfactory to parents and children.

The insufficiency of our present educational system—it often fails to accomplish the moderate aims it has set for itself—becomes evident from the fact that thousands upon thousands of children are unable to get along at school on account of insufficient nourishment.

Every winter there are thousands of children in our cities who come to school without breakfast. Hundreds of thousands of others are chronically underfed. To all these children public feeding and clothing would be a blessing. In a community that will, by proper care and nourishment, teach them what it means to be human, they will not become acquainted with a house of “correction.” Bourgeois society cannot deny the existence of this misery, and so compassionate souls unite to found free-lunch establishments and soup-kitchens, to perform, as a charity, what ought to be performed by society as a duty. Recently a few municipalities have undertaken to feed poor children at public expense. But all this is insufficient and must be accepted as a charitable gift, while it should be demanded as a right.[262]

It is well that the amount of home-work is being reduced in our schools, since the insufficiency of home facilities has been recognized. The child of wealthy parents is at an advantage over his poorer schoolmate, not only because he is privileged by outward circumstances, but also because he is helped at home by a governess or a tutor. On the other hand, laziness and carelessness are fostered in the child of wealthy parents, because their wealth makes study appear superfluous to him, and because demoralizing examples are frequently placed before him and he is approached by many temptations. He who learns daily and hourly that rank, position and wealth count for everything, acquires a peculiar conception of human duties and of the institutions of state and society.

When we examine this question more closely we find that bourgeois society has no reason to become indignant over the communistic methods of education aimed at by Socialists, for it has itself introduced such methods for privileged classes, but in a distorted manner. We need but point to the cadet schools, the seminaries and colleges for the clergy. Here thousands of children, some of them belonging to the upper classes, are trained in the most absurd and one-sided way and in strict monastic seclusion for certain occupations. Many members of the better classes, like physicians, clergymen, officials, manufacturers, large farmers, etc., who live in small towns where there are no higher institutions of learning, send their children to boarding-schools in large cities, and do not see them during the entire year, except at vacation time. It is a contradiction, then, when our opponents decry a communistic system of education and estrangement between parents and children, and at the same time introduce a similar system of education, only in a wrong, insufficient and distorted manner, for their own children. Only too frequently are the children of the rich not educated by their parents at all, but by nurses, governesses and tutors. A special chapter might be written on this subject that would not cast a favorable light on the family relations of these classes. Here, too, hypocrisy prevails and conditions are anything but ideal, both for the educated and the educators.

In accordance with the entirely altered system of education that aims at the physical and mental development and culture of the young, the teaching force must be increased. The training of the rising generation should be provided for in the same way as the training of the soldiers is provided for in the German army. Here one officer has charge of from 8 to 10 men. If in future a similar number of pupils will be placed under the guidance of one teacher, the desired aims will be attained. Introduction into mechanical activities in the splendidly equipped workshops, and into horticultural and agricultural activities, will also constitute an important factor in the future education of the young. Everything will be taught with a proper variation of occupations and without over-exertion, in order to educate harmoniously developed human beings.

Education must be the same for both sexes and must be given in common to both. Separation of the sexes is justifiable only in cases where the differences of sex make it absolutely necessary. In this manner of education the United States is far advanced over Europe. Here education has been introduced from the primary school to the university. Not only is education furnished free, but the school supplies also, inclusive of the tools for manual training, lessons in cooking, and articles used by the pupils in the study of chemistry and physics. Many schools are equipped with gymnasiums, swimming-pools and playgrounds. In the higher schools the girls are trained in gymnastics, swimming, rowing, running, etc., as well as the young men.[263]...

The Socialistic system of education will attain still higher results. Properly regulated and ordered and placed under able control, it will continue until the age at which society declares its young men and women to be of age. Then the members of both sexes will be fully prepared to perform all duties and to enjoy all rights. Then society will be certain of having educated capable, fully developed members, human beings to whom nothing human is foreign, who are as familiar with their own nature as they are with the nature and condition of society, into which they forthwith enter, enjoying full equality. So the excesses of our modern youth that are daily increasing, and that are a natural product of our disintegrating social conditions, will disappear. Unruliness, lack of self-control, immorality and brutal sensuality, which characterize the modern young men at our higher institutions of learning, our colleges and universities, and that are the result of domestic demoralization and unrest and of the baneful influences of social life, will not mark the young men of the future. The evil influences of the factory system and the congested dwellings, that cause young people to be self-assertive and unbridled at an age when human beings are in the greatest need of education and of being trained to exercise self-control, will also disappear. Future society will avoid all these evils without being obliged to resort to compulsory measures. The social institutions and the resulting intellectual atmosphere that will dominate society will simply make the existence of such evils impossible. In society, as in nature, diseases and the destruction of organisms take place only where a process of decay has set in.

None will deny that our present system of education is afflicted with great and serious defects, and, as a matter of fact, these defects are more marked with the higher schools and institutions of learning than with the lower ones. A village school is a model of moral healthfulness compared with a college; a sewing school for poor girls, a model of morality compared with a number of fashionable boarding schools. It is not hard to find the reason for this. Among the upper classes of society every striving after higher aims has been smothered; they are devoid of ideals. Owing to the lack of ideals and loftier aspirations, the unbounded love of enjoyment and the inclination to excesses are disseminated, with their resulting physical and moral deterioration. How can young persons, growing up in such an atmosphere, be different? A purely material enjoyment of life, carried to extremes, is all they see and know. Why should they strive after higher aims when the wealth of their parents makes every endeavor appear superfluous? The maximum education of the great majority of sons of the German bourgeoisie, consists in their passing the examination for one year’s voluntary service in the army. When they have attained this aim, they believe that they have absorbed all knowledge worth knowing and regard themselves as demi-gods. If they have obtained a reserve-officer’s certificate, their conceit and arrogance knows no bounds. The influence exercised by this generation, most of whose members are weak in character and knowledge, but strong in servility, characterize the present period as the “age of reserve officers.” Its peculiarities are: Ignorance, lack of character, and a servile disposition. Men fawn on their superiors, and are arrogant and brutal to their inferiors. Most of the daughters of the upper classes are trained to be society ladies, walking fashion plates and silly dolls. They rush from one enjoyment to another, until they grow weary with the boredom of their empty lives, and fall victims to many real and imaginary diseases. When they grow old they become religious fanatics, spiritualists and faith healers, who turn up their eyes at the wickedness of the world and preach asceticism. In regard to the lower classes, efforts are being made to further diminish their standard of education. The fear prevails that the proletarian might become too wise, that he might tire of his subjection and rebel against his earthly gods. The more ignorant the masses are, the more easily can they be governed and controlled. Large landowners from the East-Elbe province have repeatedly declared in their meetings: “The most stupid workingman is the one most welcome to us.” An entire program is contained in this one sentence.

So present-day society is as helpless and aimless in regard to the question of education as it is in regard to all other questions. What methods, then, does it resort to? It calls for punishment and preaches religion; that is, it preaches submissiveness and contentment to those who are far too submissive and contented already; it teaches abstinence, where poverty compels people to abstain from the very necessities of life. They who brutally rebel against this state of affairs are placed in so-called “reformatories” that are generally controlled by religious influences. That is the limit of the pedagogical wisdom of our society. The vicious methods of education applied to neglected and demoralized proletarian children become manifest by the frequent cases of abuse and ill-treatment committed by the directors, overseers, etc., in these “homes”(!) Here it has been shown time and again how religious fanatics of the deepest dye have, with a perverted pleasure, ill-treated poor, helpless children with unspeakable brutality; and how many of these horrors may never become known!

When, in the new society, the young generation has come of age, the further education will be every person’s own concern. Every one will do whatever his inclinations and talents prompt him to do. Some will devote themselves to one or another branch of the natural sciences that will be more and more fully developed: Anthropology, zoology, botany, mineralogy, geology, physics, chemistry, the prehistoric sciences, etc. Others will take up history, etymology, or the history of art. Some will become musicians, others artists, sculptors, actors. In the future there will be neither “corporate” artists and scientists nor corporate mechanics. Thousands of brilliant talents that have so far been suppressed will develop and will prove their knowledge and ability wherever an opportunity presents itself. There will no longer be professional musicians, artists, actors and scientists, but these will be all the more inspired by enthusiasm, talent and genius. Their achievements are likely to excel present-day achievements on these fields as vastly as the industrial, technical, and agricultural achievements of future society will excel those of modern society. An era of art and science will arise such as the world has never known, and the achievements that will have created it will be correspondingly great.

The coming renaissance of art that will result from the introduction of conditions more worthy of human beings, has been foreseen by no less a man than Richard Wagner, who expressed himself on this subject as early as 1850, in his book on “Art and Revolution.” This book is especially noteworthy because it was published right after a revolution that had been beaten down and in which Wagner himself participated. In this book, Wagner predicts what the future will bring. He directly turns to the working class, who must help the artists to establish true art. Among other things, he says: “When, for the free human beings of the future, it will no longer be the purpose of life to obtain the means of subsistence, but, as a result of a new belief, or rather, knowledge, they will be certain of obtaining the means of subsistence in return for an appropriate natural activity, when, in short, industry will no longer be our mistress, but our servant, the true purpose of life will become the enjoyment of life, and by education we will endeavor to make our children capable of its real enjoyment. An education founded on the exercise of strength and the care of physical beauty, will, owing to the love for the child and the joy at the development of its beauty, become a purely artistic one, and every human being will, in some way, be a true artist. The diversity of natural inclinations will develop the most manifold tendencies in an unthought of wealth.” This is a thoroughly Socialistic conception and coincides with our description.

In the future, social life will become ever more public. Its trend of development can be best judged by the completely altered position of woman. Domestic life will be limited to what is absolutely essential, while the desire for sociability will be given the widest field. Large meeting halls for lectures and the discussion of public affairs—that will in future be decided upon by the people at large—dining-halls, reading-rooms, libraries, playgrounds, concerts, theaters, museums, gymnasiums, public baths, parks and promenades, institutions of education and learning, laboratories, etc., all splendidly equipped, will afford ample opportunity for entertainment and sociability, and will enable science and art to attain the highest degree of development. In the same way the institutions for the care of the sick, the infirm and the aged will meet the highest demands.

How petty will our present age seem in comparison! This fawning for favors and good-will from above, this servile disposition, this envious struggle against one another for the best place, carried on by the lowest and most spiteful means, and, at the same time, suppression of one’s true convictions, concealing of good qualities that might displease those whose favor it sought, emasculation of character, the feigning of opinions and feelings that one does not possess—all these qualities that may be termed cowardice and hypocrisy, are daily becoming more pronounced. Qualities that are truly ennobling, self-confidence, independence and incorruptibility of one’s opinions, are usually turned into faults and short-comings under present-day conditions. Persons who cannot suppress these good qualities are often ruined by them. Many are so accustomed to their degradation that they do not even perceive it. The dog regards it as a matter of course that he has a master who is sometimes ill-tempered and whips him.

The altered conditions of social life will also thoroughly revolutionize our literature. The theological literature, which furnishes the largest number of works in the annual catalogues of literary productions, will be eliminated, together with the judicial literature. For the one there will be no more interest, and for the other no need. The products that have reference to the struggles over institutions of the state, will also be eliminated, because these institutions will no longer exist. They will assume the character of historical studies. The numerous literary products of a highly superficial nature, which are just a proof of bad taste and sometimes are made possible only by a sacrifice of the author’s pride, will be dropped. Even from the present point of view, we may say that four-fifths of all literary products might disappear from the market without a loss to one single interest of civilization, so great is the mass of superficial or harmful products and obvious trash on the field of literature.

Fiction and the press will be affected in an equal measure. There is nothing more superficial and insipid than the greater part of our journalistic literature. If our standard of civilization were to be estimated by the contents of our newspapers, it would be deemed a low one, indeed. People and conditions are judged by the opinions of past centuries that have long since been proven untenable by science. A great many of our journalists are persons who, as Bismarck correctly said, have missed their vocation, but whose standard of education and salary are in keeping with the bourgeois interest in their trade. Moreover, the newspapers, as well as a majority of the magazines, have a very unworthy mission in their advertising sections, and their reports of the money-market serve the same interests on a different field. The material interest of the publishers determines the contents. Modern fiction is, on an average, not much better than journalistic literature. It cultivates the excesses of sexual relations. It either renders homage to superficial enlightenment, or to antiquated prejudice and superstition. The purpose is to let the bourgeois world appear as the best of worlds, regardless of the numerous short-comings that are, to some extent, admitted.

On this wide and important realm future society will have to clear up thoroughly. Science, truth, beauty and the conflict of opinions as to what is best, will alone control it. Every person of talent and ability will be enabled to participate. The writer will no longer depend upon the favor of the publisher, financial interest or prejudice; he will depend upon the judgment of impartial experts whom he will help to select and against whose decisions he may appeal to the community—all of which is impossible to-day with a publisher or the editor of a newspaper, who only take their private interest into consideration. The naÏve conception, that a difference of opinions would be suppressed in a Socialistic community, can be maintained only by those who consider the bourgeois world a perfect state of society, and, out of hostility to Socialism, seek to slander and belittle it. A society founded upon perfect, democratic equality, will bear no oppression. Only perfect freedom of thought makes uninterrupted progress possible, which is the principle of life for society. It is a gross misrepresentation to depict bourgeois society as a defender of real freedom of thought. Parties that represent the interests of the ruling classes will only publish that in the press which is not adverse to class interests, and woe to him who would do otherwise! His social ruin is certain, as every one knows who is acquainted with conditions. The writers know how the publishers treat literary works that do not suit them. Finally, the press and criminal laws betray what spirit dominates the ruling classes. True freedom of thought appears to them as the most dangerous of all evils.

Man should be given an opportunity for perfect development. That is the purpose of human association. So he must not remain tied down to the spot where he has been placed by the chance of birth. One should become acquainted with the world and people not only through books and newspapers, but also by personal observation and practical experience. So future society must enable all to do what many are able to do even in present-day society, though at present the force of want usually forms the motive. The desire for change in all human relations is deeply rooted in human nature. This is due to the impulse of seeking perfection that is innate in every living being. The plant that is placed in a dark room extends and stretches, as if conscious of the ray of light that penetrates some crevice. It is the same with man. An instinct, that is innate in man, must find rational satisfaction. The desire for change will not be opposed by the conditions prevailing in the new society; the satisfaction of this desire will, on the contrary, become possible to all. The highly developed system of communication will make it easy, and the international relations will demand it. In the future far more persons will travel through the world, for the most varied purposes, than heretofore.

Society will require an ample supply of all the necessities of life to meet all demands. Society will therefore regulate its hours of work according to the needs. It will lengthen or shorten them, as the demands or the season of the year make this appear desirable. During one season it will devote more time to agriculture, and during another it will devote more time to industry and to artistic crafts. It will direct the labor forces as the needs may let it appear desirable. By combining various labor forces with the most perfect technical appliances, it will be able to carry out large undertakings playfully, that seem practically impossible to-day.

As society provides for the young, so also will it provide for the old, the sick and invalid. If any one has, by some misfortune, become incapacitated for work, society will provide for him. This will not be an act of charity, but a simple performance of duty. The assistance will not be a morsel graciously given, but support and care provided with every possible consideration, bestowed as a matter of course upon him who performed his duty toward society as long as he was able to do so. The evening of life will be made beautiful by all that society has to offer. For every one will hope himself to receive some day what he bestows upon other aged persons. No old person will be harassed by the thought that others are awaiting their death to inherit their possessions. They are also freed from the terror of being cast aside like a squeezed lemon when they have become old and helpless. They must neither depend on the kindness and support of their children, nor on public charity.[264] How unfortunate is the position of most parents who in old age must depend upon the support of their children, is a well-known fact. And how demoralizing to children and to relatives is the hope of inheriting! What degrading passions are aroused and how many crimes are caused thereby—murder, suppression, legacy-hunting, perjury and blackmailing!

The moral and physical condition of society, the nature of its work, homes, food, dress, its social life, all will tend to prevent accidents, sickness and debility. Dying a natural death, the normal decline of the vigor of life, will become the rule more and more. The conviction that heaven is upon earth and that death means the end, will cause people to lead a rational life. He who enjoys longest, enjoys most. The clergy themselves, who prepare people for “the hereafter,” know how to value a long life. Their care-free existence enables them to attain the highest average age.

Food and drink are prime necessities of life. People who believe in the so-called “natural manner of living” frequently ask why Socialists remain indifferent to vegetarianism. Everyone lives as best he may. Vegetarianism, that is, the doctrine of an exclusive vegetable diet, found its chief supporters among the persons who are so comfortably situated that they are able to choose between a vegetable and an animal diet. But the great majority of persons have no choice. They must live according to their means, and the scantiness of their means compels them to live on a vegetable diet almost exclusively and often on one of the poorest quality. For the German laboring population in Silesia, Saxony, Thuringia, etc., the potato is the principal article of food; even bread comes only second. Meat only rarely appears on their tables, and then it is meat of the poorest quality. The greater part of the rural population, although they raise cattle, also rarely eat meat; for they must sell the cattle, and, with the money obtained, must satisfy other needs. To these numerous people who are obliged to live as vegetarians, a solid beefsteak or a good leg of mutton would mean a decided improvement in their nourishment.[265] If vegetarianism opposes the overeating of an animal diet, it is right. If it combats the partaking of meat as harmful and detrimental, mainly for sentimental reasons, it is wrong; when it is claimed, for instance, that natural feelings forbid to kill an animal and to partake of a “corpse.” The desire to live in peace compels us to wage war upon and destroy a great many living creatures, such as vermin, and, in order not to be devoured ourselves, we must kill and exterminate wild beasts. If we could allow “the good friends of man,” the domestic animals, to live undisturbed, these “good friends” would multiply to such a degree that they would “eat” us by robbing us of nourishment. The assertion that vegetable diet creates a gentle disposition is false, too. Even in the gentle, vegetarian Hindoos the “beast” was aroused, when the severity of the English drove them to rebellion. The nutritive value of an article of food cannot be estimated only by the amount of albumen that it contains. It must be taken into consideration how large a quantity of the albumen consumed remains undigested. Considered from this view-point, we find, for instance, meat and rice, or potatoes, as 2.5 to 20 or 22. In other words, of 100grammes of albumen consumed with meat, 2.5grammes will pass out of the system undigested. Of 100grammes consumed with rice or potatoes, respectively, 20 and 22grammes will pass out. The famous Russian physiologist, Pawlow, and his scholars have shown that, with the digestion of bread, there is much more ferment than with the digestion of meat. Pawlow has furthermore shown that the gastric juices produced by the pancreas glands are of two kinds. They are produced through stimulation of the mucous membrane by the food itself, and are also produced as “appetite juices” by stimulation of the senses. The quantity of our appetite juice depends upon our psychic condition for the time being; for instance, on hunger, grief, annoyance, joy, etc., and it also depends upon the nature of the food. But the importance of the appetite juice differs with different articles of food. Some foods, as, for instance, bread, boiled albumen, as contained in eggs, or pure starch, cannot be digested at all, unless the digestion is introduced by the appetite juice, as has been directly proved by experiments. They can only be digested when they are eaten with an appetite, or together with other food. But meat, as Pawlow has shown, can be partly digested without appetite juice, although, with the aid of appetite juice, meat is digested much more rapidly (five times as fast). “We must therefore take factors into consideration that depend upon the psychology of man. Here a connection has been established between facts of the physiology of nutrition and social conditions. The modern residents of large cities, especially the masses of the working class, live under social conditions that are bound to destroy their normal appetite. Work in the squalid factory, the constant worry over their daily bread, absence of mental repose and pleasant impressions, complete physical exhaustion, all these are factors that are destructive of appetite. In this psychological condition we are unable to furnish the appetite juice required for the digestion of vegetable food. But in meat we possess an article of food that—if we may thus express it—provides for its own digestion. A considerable quantity of meat can be digested without appetite; it also acts as a stimulant and a creator of appetite. So meat aids the digestion of vegetables consumed at the same time, and thereby insures a better assimilation of the consumed matter. This appears to be the great advantage of an animal diet to modern man.”[266]

Sonderegger hits the nail on the head when he says: “There is no order of rank among articles of food, but there is an immutable law regarding the combination of their nutritive qualities.” It is true that no one can live on an animal diet exclusively, while one can live on a vegetable diet, provided that the diet can be properly selected. On the other hand, no one would care to content himself with one specific kind of vegetable food, no matter how nutritive it might be. Thus, beans, peas, lentils, in one word, the leguminosÆ, are the most nutritive of all articles of food. But to live on them exclusively—which is said to be possible—would be a torture. Karl Marx mentions, in his first volume of “Capital,” that the mine-owners in Chili compel their workingmen to eat beans all the year round, because this nourishment gives them an unusual amount of strength and enables them to carry loads as no other nourishment will. The workingmen refuse the beans, notwithstanding their nutritive value, but are compelled to content themselves with this diet. Under no circumstances does the happiness and welfare of man depend upon a definite kind of food, as the fanatics among vegetarians claim. Climate, social conditions, custom and personal taste are the determining factors.[267]

In the measure in which civilization advances, exclusive meat diet, as is met with among hunting and pastoral tribes, is partly replaced by vegetable diet. The variety of cultivated plants is a proof of higher civilization. On a given area, moreover, much more nourishment can be obtained by the cultivation of plants than by the breeding of cattle. This development gradually causes the vegetable diet to predominate. The supply of meat from distant countries, especially South America and Australia, will be exhausted in a few decades. On the other hand, animals are raised not only for their flesh, but also for wool, hair, bristles, hides, milk, eggs, etc. Many industries and a number of human needs depend upon it. Much offal in industry and housekeeping could not be more usefully employed than by cattle raising. In the future the ocean, too, will have to yield to man its wealth of animal food in a larger measure. Then it will not occur that loads of fish will be used as manure, owing to the high cost of transportation, or canning, that prevent their sale, as is frequently the case at present. It is quite probable that the abolition of the extremes between city and country, when work in closed shops will be combined with work in the open fields, will again lead to a preponderance of the vegetable diet. Of course the absence of stimulants in a vegetable diet can be equalized by a proper and rational preparation of the food with the aid of spice. But that future society should live on vegetables exclusively is neither probable nor necessary.

In the matter of nutrition quality is far more important than quantity. Much food is not beneficial if the food is not good. But quality may be greatly improved by the manner in which food is prepared. The preparation of food should be conducted as scientifically as any other human activity, in order to be as advantageous as possible. This requires knowledge and proper equipment. That our women who are chiefly engaged in the preparation of food do not possess this knowledge and cannot possess it, requires no further proof. The equipment of the large kitchen has already attained a degree of perfection that the best equipped domestic kitchen cannot come up to. The kitchen equipped with electricity for lighting and heating is the ideal one. No more smoke, heat, or disagreeable odors! The kitchen resembles a workshop furnished with all kinds of technical and mechanical appliances that quickly perform the hardest and most disagreeable tasks. Here we see potato and fruit-paring machines, apparatus for removing kernels, meat-choppers, mills for grinding coffee and spice, ice-choppers, corkscrews, bread-cutters, and a hundred other machines and appliances, all run by electricity, that enable a comparatively small number of persons, without excessive labor, to prepare a meal for hundreds of guests. The same is true of the equipments for house-cleaning and for washing the dishes.

To millions of women the private kitchen is an institution that is extravagant in its methods, entailing endless drudgery and waste of time, robbing them of their health and good spirits, and an object of daily worry, especially when the means are scanty, as is the case with most families. The abolition of the private kitchen will come as a liberation to countless women. The private kitchen is as antiquated an institution as the workshop of the small mechanic. Both represent a useless and needless waste of time labor and material.

The nutritive value of food is heightened by its easier assimilation; this is a decisive factor.[268] Only the new society will be able to provide a rational nutrition for all. Cato sets forth with especial praise that in ancient Rome, up to the sixteenth century of the city (200B.C.), there were men versed in the art of healing, but that they found little occasion to practice their art. The Romans led such simple and temperate lives that sickness was rare among them, and most people died from old age. Only when extravagance and idleness, in short, a dissolute life, set in, on the one hand, and poverty and excessive work on the other, matters were completely changed. In the future, extravagance, idleness and dissoluteness will be impossible, but misery, want and privation will be impossible likewise. There is an abundance for all. Heinrich Heine has sung ere now:

“He who eats little lives well” (that is, long), said the Italian Cornaro, in the sixteenth century, as quoted by Niemeyer. Finally, chemistry, too, will be active in the future to produce new and improved articles of food. To-day this science is frequently abused to adulterate food; but it is clear that a chemically prepared article of food that has all the qualities of a natural product, serves the same purpose. The manner in which food is obtained is a matter of secondary importance, provided that it answers all requirements.

As the kitchen, so our entire domestic life will be revolutionized, and countless tasks that must be performed to-day will become superfluous. As the central kitchen will do away with the private kitchen, so central heating and electric lighting plants will do away with all the trouble connected with stoves and lamps. Warm and cold water supply will enable all to enjoy daily baths. Central laundries and drying-rooms will assume the washing and drying of clothes; central cleaning establishments, the cleaning of carpets and clothes. In Chicago carpet-cleaning machines were exhibited that cleaned carpets in an incredibly short time, calling forth the wonder and admiration of the ladies who visited the exposition. The electric door opens at a slight pressure of the finger and shuts off itself. Electric contrivances carry letters and newspapers to every floor of the houses, and electric elevators save one the trouble of climbing stairs. The interior furnishing of the houses, the coverings of walls, floors, furniture, etc., will be so arranged as to make house-cleaning easy and to avoid the gathering of dust and germs. Garbage and all kinds of offal will be carried out of the houses by waste-pipes like the water that has been used. In the United States, and in some European cities, for instance, in Zurich, Berlin and its suburbs, London, Vienna, Munich, we already find wonderfully equipped houses, in which well-to-do families—others could not meet the expense—reside and enjoy a great many of the advantages described above.[270]

Here again we have an illustration of how bourgeois society paves the way for the revolutionizing of domestic life, though only for its chosen few. But when domestic life will be generally transformed in the manner we have pointed out, then the domestic servant, this “slave to all whims of the mistress,” will disappear. But the “lady of the house” will disappear also. “Without servants, no civilization,” Mr.v.Treitschke exclaims, horror-stricken, with an amusing pathos. He can picture society without servants as little as Aristotle could picture it without slaves. It comes as a surprise to us, though, that Mr.v.Treitschke regards our servants as the “standard-bearers of our civilization.” Treitschke, like Eugen Richter, is also worried over the shining of shoes and the cleaning of clothes, which people cannot possibly attend to themselves. As a matter of fact, nine-tenths of the people do polish their own shoes and clean their own clothes to-day, or women do it for their husbands, or daughters or sons do it for the family, and we could answer that what has been done so far by the nine-tenths might as well be done by the remaining tenth, also. There might be still another way. Why should not, in future, young persons, regardless of sex, be called upon to perform such and similar necessary tasks? Work is no disgrace, not even when it consists of shining shoes. That has been experienced by many an officer of noble birth who had to make his escape to the United States on account of debts, and there became a porter or a boot-black. In one of his pamphlets, Mr.Eugen Richter even has the shoe-polishing problem cause the downfall of the “Socialist chancellor” and the disruption of the “Socialist state.” For the “Socialist chancellor” refuses to polish his own shoes, and that is his great misfortune. Our opponents have enjoyed this description hugely and have thereby only proved that their demands on a criticism of Socialism are exceedingly modest. Mr.Eugen Richter lived to experience the great grief that a member of his own party, in Nuremberg, invented a shoe-polishing machine, shortly after the publication of his pamphlet, and that, at the World’s Fair, at Chicago, an electric shoe-polishing machine was exhibited that performed the task to perfection. So Richter’s and Treitschke’s main argument against Socialistic society has been shattered by an invention made within bourgeois society itself.

The revolutionary transformation that is changing all human relations completely, especially the position of women, is being consummated under our very eyes. It is only a question of time when society will take up this transformation on a large scale, will hasten and generalize the process, and will thereby enable all to participate in its countless and multiform advantages.

This chapter may be brief. It merely contains the conclusions that may be drawn in regard to the position of woman in future society, from all that has been said so far; conclusions that every reader can easily draw for himself.

In the new society woman will be entirely independent, both socially and economically. She will not be subjected to even a trace of domination and exploitation, but will be free and man’s equal, and mistress of her own lot. Her education will be the same as man’s, with the exception of those deviations that are necessitated by the differences of sex and sexual functions. Living under normal conditions of life, she may fully develop and employ her physical and mental faculties. She chooses an occupation suited to her wishes, inclinations and abilities, and works under the same conditions as man. Engaged as a practical working woman in some field of industrial activity, she may, during a second part of the day, be educator, teacher or nurse, during a third she may practice a science or an art, and during a fourth she may perform some administrative function. She studies, works, enjoys pleasures and recreation with other women or with men, as she may choose or as occasions may present themselves.

In the choice of love she is as free and unhampered as man. She woos or is wooed, and enters into a union prompted by no other considerations but her own feelings. This union is a private agreement, without the interference of a functionary, just as marriage has been a private agreement until far into the middle ages. Here Socialism will create nothing new, it will merely reinstate, on a higher level of civilization and under a different social form, what generally prevailed before private property dominated society.

Man shall dispose of his own person, provided that the gratification of his impulses is not harmful or detrimental to others. The satisfaction of the sexual impulse is as much the private concern of each individual, as the satisfaction of any other natural impulse. No one is accountable to any one else, and no third person has a right to interfere. What I eat and drink, how I sleep and dress is my private affair, and my private affair also is my intercourse with a person of the opposite sex. Intelligence and culture, personal independence,—qualities that will become natural, owing to the education and conditions prevailing in the new society,—will prevent persons from committing actions that will prove detrimental to themselves. Men and women of future society will possess far more self-control and a better knowledge of their own natures, than men and women of to-day. The one fact alone, that the foolish prudery and secrecy connected with sexual matters will disappear, will make the relation of the sexes a far more natural and healthful one. If between a man and woman who have entered into a union, incompatibility, disappointment or revulsion should appear, morality commands a dissolution of the union which has become unnatural, and therefore immoral. As all those circumstances will have vanished that have so far compelled a great many women either to chose celibacy or prostitution, men can no longer dominate over women. On the other hand, the completely changed social conditions will have removed the many hindrances and harmful influences that affect married life to-day and frequently prevent its full development or make it quite impossible.

The impediments, contradictions and unnatural features in the present position of woman are being recognized by ever wider circles, and find expression in our modern literature on social questions, as well as in modern fiction; only the form in which it is expressed sometimes fails to answer the purpose. That present day marriage is not suited to its purpose, is no longer denied by any thinking person. So it is not surprising that even such persons favor a free choice of love and a free dissolution of the marriage relation, who are not inclined to draw the resulting conclusions that point to a change of the entire social system. They believe that freedom in sexual intercourse is justifiable among members of the privileged classes only. In a controversy,[271] in which she opposes the emancipation of women as set forth by the writer, Fanny Lewald, Matilde Reichhardt-Stromberg says the following:

“If you (F. L.), demand complete equality for women in social and political life, George Sand must also be justified in her struggles for emancipation, that strove for nothing else but to possess what has long since been man’s undisputed possession. For no good reason is to be found why only woman’s head, and not also her heart, shall participate in this equality, why she shall not give and take as freely as man. On the contrary: if nature gives woman the right, and thereby also the duty,—for we shall not bury a talent bestowed upon us,—to exert her brain to the utmost in competition with the intellectual Titans of the opposite sex, it must also give her the right to preserve her equilibrium, just as they do, by quickening the circulation of her heart in whatever manner she may see fit. We all read without being shocked in the least how, for instance, Goethe,—to choose the greatest as an example,—again and again wasted the warmth of his heart and the enthusiasm of his great soul upon some other woman. Intelligent people consider this perfectly natural, and only narrow-minded moralists condemn it. Why, then, deride the “great souls” among women? Let us assume that the entire female sex consisted of great souls like George Sand; let us assume that every woman were a Lucretia Florini, whose children are all children of love, but who brings up these children with true motherly love and devotion, as well as in a rational and intelligent manner. How would the world fare? There is no doubt that the world could continue to exist and develop as to-day, and might even fare exceptionally well.”

But why should only “great souls” lay claim to this right, and not also the others who are no great souls? If a Goethe and a George Sand,—to select only these two from among the many who have done and are doing likewise,—could follow the inclinations of their hearts, if on Goethe’s love affairs, especially, entire libraries are published that are devoured in a sort of reverend ecstacy by his admirers, why should we condemn in others what becomes an object of admiration in the case of a Goethe, or a George Sand?

Of course, it is impossible to assert the free choice of love in bourgeois society, as we have shown by our entire line of argument, but if the community were placed under similar social conditions as are enjoyed to-day only by the few who are materially and intellectually favored, all would have the possibility of a similar freedom. In “Jacques,” George Sand depicts a husband who judges the illicit relation of his wife with another man in the following manner: “no human being can command love, and none is guilty, if he feels or goes without it. What degrades the woman is the lie; what constitutes the adultery is not the hour she grants to her lover, but the night that she thereupon spends with her husband.” As a result of this conception, Jacques feels it to be his duty to make way for his rival (Borel), and philosophizes accordingly: “Borel, in my place, would have calmly beaten his wife, and would not have blushed to receive her into his arms afterwards, degraded by his blows and his kisses. There are men who would not hesitate, according to oriental custom, to kill their faithless wife, because they regard her as their lawful property. Others fight a duel with their rival, kill or remove him, and then beg the woman, whom they claim to love, for kisses or caresses, while she either withdraws full of horror or yields in despair. These, in cases of conjugal love, are the most common ways of acting, and it seems to me that the love of hogs is less vile and debasing, than the love of such men.” To these sentences, Brandes observes:[272] “These truths, that are elemental ones to educated persons to-day, were atrocious sophisms fifty years ago.” But the propertied and cultured classes do not venture even to-day, openly to avow the principles of George Sand, altho they actually live in accordance with them. They are hypocrites in marriage, as they are hypocrites in morals and religion.

What was done by Goethe and George Sand, is being done by thousands of others to-day, who cannot bear comparison with Goethe or Sand, without suffering a loss of social esteem. Everything can be done if people hold a respected position. Nevertheless the liberties of a Goethe and a George Sand are immoral from the standpoint of bourgeois morality, for they are in opposition to the moral laws laid down by society, and are in contradiction to the nature of our social system. Compulsory marriage is the normal marriage to bourgeois society. It is the only “moral” union of the sexes; any other sexual union is “immoral.” Bourgeois marriage is,—this we have irrefutably proved,—the result of bourgeois relations. Closely connected with private property and the right of inheritance, it is contracted to obtain “legitimate” children. Under the pressure of social conditions it is forced also upon those who have nothing to bequeath. It becomes a social law, the violation of which is punished by the state, by imprisonment of the men or women who have committed adultery and have become divorced.

But in Socialistic society there will be nothing to bequeath, unless house furnishings and personal belongings should be regarded as hereditary portions; so the modern form of marriage becomes untenable from this point of view also. This also settles the question of inheritance, which Socialism will not need to abolish. Where there is no private property, there can be no right of inheritance. So woman will be free, and the children she may have will not impair her freedom, they will only increase her pleasure in life. Nurses, teachers, women friends, the rising female generation, all these will stand by her when she is in need of assistance.

It is possible that there will be some men, even in the future, who will say, like A.Humboldt: “I am not built to become the father of a family. Moreover, I consider marriage a sin, the begetting of children a crime.” What does it matter? The force of the natural impulse will establish the equilibrium with others. We are not alarmed either by Humboldt’s hostility to marriage, or by the philosophic pessimism of Schopenhauer, Mainlander or v.Hartmann, who hold out to man the prospect of self-destruction in the “ideal state.” We are fully agreed with Dr.Ratzel, who writes on this subject:

Man should no longer regard himself an exception to natural laws. He should finally strive to recognize the laws underlying his own thoughts and actions, and should endeavor to live in accordance with these laws. He will eventually learn to arrange his life with his fellow-beings, that is, the family and the state, not according to the precepts laid down in centuries gone by, but according to the rational principles derived from an understanding of nature. Politics, morals, laws, that are at present drawn from various sources, will be shaped according to natural laws. An existence worthy of human beings, that mankind has been dreaming of for thousands of years, will become a reality at last.[273]

This time is rapidly approaching. For thousands of years human society has passed thru all phases of development, only to return to its starting point: communistic property and complete liberty and fraternity; but no longer only for the members of the gens, but for all human beings. That is what the great progress consists of. What bourgeois society has striven for in vain, in what it failed and was bound to fail,—to establish liberty, equality and fraternity for all,—will be realized by Socialism. Bourgeois society could merely advance the theory, but here, as in many other things, practice was contrary to the theories. Socialism will unite theory and practice.

But as mankind returns to the starting point of its development, it will do so on an infinitely higher level of civilization. If primitive society had common ownership in the gens and the clan, it was but in a coarse form and an undeveloped stage. The course of development that man has since undergone, has reduced common property to small and insignificant remnants, has shattered the gens and has finally atomized society; but in its various phases it has also greatly heightened the productive forces of society and the extensiveness of its demands; it has transformed the gentes and the tribes into nations, and has thereby again created a condition that is in glaring contradiction to the requirements of society. It is the task of the future to remove this contradiction by re-establishing the common ownership of property and the means of production on the broadest basis.

Society takes back what it has at one time possessed and has itself created, but it enables all to live in accordance with the newly created conditions of life on the highest level of civilization. In other words, it grants to all what under more primitive conditions has been the privilege of single individuals or classes. Now woman, too, is restored to the active position maintained by her in primitive society; only she no longer is mistress, but man’s equal.

“The end of the development of the state resembles the beginnings of human existence. Primitive equality is reinstated. The maternal material existence opens and closes the cycle of human affairs.” Thus Backofen, in his book on The Matriarchate; and Morgan says: “Since the advent of civilization, the increase of wealth has been so enormous, its forms so varied, its application so extensive, and its administration so skillful in the interest of the owners, that this wealth has become an invincible power against the people. The human mind is helpless and bewildered in the face of its own creation. And yet the time will come, when human intelligence will be sufficiently strong to master wealth, when it will determine both the relation of the state to the property that it protects, and the limit of the rights of individual owners. The interests of society are absolutely paramount to individual interests, and both must be placed into a just and harmonious relation. Pursuit of wealth is not the ultimate aim of man, if progress is to remain the law of the future as it has been the law of the past. The time that has elapsed since the advent of civilization is only a small fraction of the past existence of humanity; it is only a small fraction of its coming existence. We are threatened by the dissolution of society as the termination of a historic career, whose sole aim is wealth; for a career of this sort contains the elements of its own destruction. Democracy in administration, fraternity in social relations, general education,—these will initiate the next, higher stage of society, toward which experience, reason and science are constantly leading us. It will be a resurrection, only in a higher form, of the liberty, equality and fraternity of the old gens.”[274]

So men, proceeding from the most varied standpoints, arrive at the same conclusions, as a result of their scientific investigations. The complete emancipation of woman, and her establishment of equal rights with man is one of the aims of our cultured development, whose realization no power on earth can prevent. But it can be accomplished only by means of a transformation that will abolish the rule of man over man, including the rule of the capitalist over the laborer. Then only can humanity attain its fullest development. The “golden age” of which men have been dreaming, and for which they have been yearning for thousands of years, will come at last. Class rule will forever be at an end, and with it the rule of man over woman.

But an existence worthy of human beings cannot be the manner of living of a single privileged nation, for, being isolated from all other nations, it could neither establish nor maintain this condition. Our entire development is the product of the combined action of national and international forces and relations. Altho the national ideal still dominates the minds to a great extent and is used as a means for maintaining political and social rulership,—for this is possible only within national bounds,—we are already deeply imbued with internationalism.

Treaties of commerce, tariff and navigation, the world postal union, international expositions, congresses on international law and international measurements of degrees, other international scientific congresses and associations, international expeditions of exploration, commerce and trade, and especially the international conventions of workingmen, who are the heralds of the new era, and to whose influence it is due that, during the spring of 1890, upon an invitation from the German Empire, the first international conference on workingmen’s protective legislation was held in Berlin,—all this proves the international character that the relations of civilized nations have assumed, notwithstanding their national seclusion. Beside speaking of national economy, we speak of international economy, and consider the latter more important, because the welfare of the different nations depends upon it to a great extent. A great many of our domestic products are exchanged for foreign products, that we can no longer dispense with. As one branch of industry suffers when another flags, so the entire national production of a given country is very materially injured by a crisis in another country. The relations of the different countries to one another are constantly becoming more cordial, regardless of the passing disturbances, like wars and the instigations of national hatred, because these relations are dominated by material interests, the strongest of all. Every new highway, every improvement in the means of transportation, every invention or improvement in the process of production which leads to a cheapening of commodities, strengthens these relations. The ease with which personal relations are established between widely separated countries and nations, is a new, important link in the chain of connections. Emigration and colonization are other powerful levers. Nations learn from one another and strive to excel each other. Beside the exchange of all kinds of material products, an exchange of intellectual products takes place, both in their original forms of expression and in translations. To millions of people it becomes a necessity to learn foreign languages, and beside material advantages, nothing is more likely to remove prejudice and to arouse sympathy, than an acquaintance with the language and intellectual products of a foreign nation.

The effect of this process of approach on an international scale is an increasing resemblance in the social conditions of the various nations. With the most advanced civilized nations, that may therefore be regarded as the standard, this resemblance is so great, that whoever knows the economic structure of one nation, practically knows it of all. It is as in nature, where animals belonging to the same species have skeletons that are identical in organization and structure, and if a scientist is given some parts of such skeleton he can theoretically reconstruct the entire animal.

A further conclusion is that, wherever similar social conditions exist, the results springing from them must be similar. Accumulation of great wealth points to the opposite extreme of wage-slavery, oppression of the masses by the system of production, rule of the masses by the propertied minority, and all the resulting evils.

As a matter of fact, we see that the class antagonism and class struggle, which is raging in Germany, is stirring all of Europe, the United States of America and Australia. In Europe we meet with a spirit of unrest and dissatisfaction from Russia to Portugal, from the Balkans, Hungary and Italy to England and Ireland. Everywhere we perceive the same symptoms of social fermentation, general dissatisfaction and decomposition. Altho these movements differ outwardly, according to the degree of development and the character of the population, they all are identical in character. Profound social antagonism is the underlying cause. With each year this antagonism is growing more pronounced, the fermentation and dissatisfaction pervades the body social more and more, until perhaps some slight provocation will cause an outbreak that will spread with the rapidity of lightning over the entire civilized world, and will everywhere arouse men to side with one or the other party in the great conflict. It will be the struggle of the new world against the old. Masses will enter the arena, and the struggle will be conducted with an amount of intelligence such as the world has never seen in any previous struggle, such as it will never see again; for it will be the last social struggle. Standing at the beginning of the twentieth century, we can see this struggle approaching its last stages in which the new ideas will be victorious.

The new society will construct itself upon an international basis. The nations will fraternize, they will join hands, and will endeavor to extend the new conditions to all nations of the world.[275] One nation will no longer approach another as an enemy, to exploit and to oppress it, or as the upholder of a foreign religion that it seeks to force upon it, but as a friend, endeavoring to make civilized beings of all men. The tasks of colonization and civilization of the new society will differ as radically from those of the present in their very nature, and in the means employed by them, as the two social orders differ from one another. Neither powder and lead nor “fire-water” and the Bible will employed. The mission of civilization will be undertaken by peaceable means, that will make the civilizers appear to barbarians and savages not as enemies, but as benefactors. Reasonable voyagers and explorers have long since experienced how successful these methods are.

When the civilized nations are united in a mighty federation, then the time will have come when the trumpets of war shall be silenced forever. Eternal peace will then no longer be a dream, as uniformed gentlemen would have the world believe. This time will arrive as soon as the nations will have recognized their true interests. These interests are not advanced by quarrels and conflicts, by warlike preparations that destroy countries and nations, but by peaceable agreements and common works of civilization. Moreover, the ruling classes and their governments see to it,—as has been previously set forth,—that armaments and wars come to an end by means of their own enormity. So the last weapons, like so many that have preceded them, will be gathered into old curiosity collections to prove to coming generations how men, for thousands of years, often lacerated one another like wild beasts of the jungle—until man finally triumphed over the wild beast within him.

That national characteristics and differences lead to wars,—these characteristics and differences being artificially stimulated by the ruling classes, so that a great war may, in case of necessity, counteract dangerous tendencies in the interior,—is confirmed by an utterance of the late General Fieldmarshal Moltke. In the first volume of his posthumous work that deals with the German-French War of 1870–71, he says, among other things, in the introductory remarks: “So long as nations lead a separate existence, there will be differences that can only be settled by force of arms. But it is to be hoped that the wars may become rare as they have become more terrible.”

This national separation, that is, this hostile exclusion of one nation from another, is passing away in spite of all endeavors to maintain it, and so coming generations will find it an easy matter to carry out tasks, that gifted minds have long since planned and have attempted to accomplish, but unsuccessfully. Condorcet already conceived the idea of introducing a universal language. The late ex-president of the United States, UlyssesS. Grant, said in an address: “Since commerce, education, and the quick transportation of thoughts and objects by telegraph and steam have transformed everything, I believe that God is preparing the world to become one nation, to speak one language, and to attain a degree of perfection in which armies and navies will be superfluous.” With a full-blooded Yankee, God must, of course, be the adjuster, instead of recognizing that matters are being adjusted in consequence of historic evolution. That is not to be wondered at. Ignorance or hypocrisy in religious matters are nowhere greater than in the United States. The less the power of the state guides the masses by its organization, the more must it be done by religion, by the church. Therefore the bourgeoisie appears most pious wherever the power of the state is weakest. Beside the U.S., this is the case in England, Belgium and Switzerland. Even the revolutionary Robespierre, who played with the heads of aristocrats and priests as with bowling balls, was, as is well known, exceedingly religious. Therefore he had the “supreme being” solemnly reinstated after its recent dethronement by the convention,—an action of equally bad taste. Since before the great revolution the frivolous and dissolute aristocrats bragged about their atheism, Robespierre regarded it as being aristocratic, and thus denounced it before the convention in his speech on the “supreme being:” “Atheism is aristocratic. The idea of a supreme being that watches over the innocent oppressed and punishes triumphant crime, has sprung from the midst of the people. If there were no God it would be necessary to invent one.” Virtuous Robespierre divined that his virtuous bourgeois republic could not remove social extremes. Therefore he preached belief in a supreme being, avenging wrong and equalizing what men could not yet equalize; therefore this belief was a necessity to the first republic.

Times change. One progress leads to another. Mankind will set ever new tasks for itself, and will lead them to a degree of development in which national or religious hatred and wars will no longer be known.

There are people who regard the question of population as one of the most important and urgent of all, because, they claim that we are threatened with over-population, indeed, that it is already at hand. Therefore this question must be specially treated from an international standpoint, for nourishment and distribution of the population have become more and more a matter of international concern. There has been much discussion on the law governing the growth of population since Malthus. In his famous and notorious book, an “Essay on the Principle of Population,” that Karl Marx has described as a “school-boyish, superficial plagiarism on SirJames Stewart, Townsend, Franklin Wallace, etc., declaimed in a priest-like manner and not containing a single original thought,”—Malthus propounds the theory that mankind has the tendency to increase at the ratio of geometrical progression (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc.), while food increases only at the ratio of arithmetical progression (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.). The consequence, he asserts, is that a disproportion arises between the number of human beings and the food supply which must lead to wholesale starvation, and that, therefore, it becomes necessary to impose abstinence upon one’s self in the procreation of children. He, who has not sufficient means to support a family should not marry, as there would not be sufficient room at “nature’s table” for his descendants.

The fear of over-population is a very old one. As we have shown in this book, it existed among the Greeks and Romans and was met with again at the close of the middle ages. Plato and Aristotle, the Romans, the small bourgeois of the middle ages, they all were dominated by this fear. It also occupied Voltaire, who wrote a treatise on this subject at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Other writers followed him, until Malthus finally gave this fear the most poignant expression.

The fear of over-population is always met with at periods when existing social conditions are in a state of decay. The general dissatisfaction that prevails at such times is ascribed to the superabundance of human beings and the lack of food, instead of being ascribed to the manner in which food is obtained and distributed.

Every exploitation of man by man is founded on class rule. The first, and principal means of establishing class rule is to take possession of the soil. Common property at first, it gradually becomes private property. The masses become propertyless and are obliged to earn their share of food by serving the propertied class. Under such circumstances, every addition to the family, or new competitor, becomes a burden. The specter of over-population appears, and spreads terror in the same measure in which the soil becomes monopolized and loses its productivity, either because it is not sufficiently cultivated, or because the best ground is turned into pastures, or because it has been reserved for the pleasures of the hunt of its masters, and thus withdrawn from cultivation for human food. Rome and Italy suffered from the greatest lack of food at the time when the land was owned by about three thousand latifundia proprietors. Hence the cry of fear: the latifundia are destroying Rome! The Italian soil was converted into immense hunting grounds or parks for the pleasure of its noble owners. Sometimes it was also left uncultivated, because its cultivation by slaves was more expensive than to import grain from Sicily and Africa; this state of affairs favored the usury in grain, in which the rich nobility of Rome likewise participated. The nobility profited more by the usury in grain than by cultivating grain in their own country.

Under such conditions the Roman bourgeois, or the pauperized nobleman, preferred to refrain from marriage and the procreation of children. The premiums placed on marriage and the birth of children, to prevent a diminution of the ruling classes, remained ineffectual.

A similar phenomenon occurred at the close of the middle ages, after the nobility and the clergy had, for centuries, by force and by stealth, robbed many peasants of their property and usurped the common land. When the peasants revolted as a result of all the abuses they had suffered, but were beaten down, the robbery of the nobility was continued on a still larger scale, and the reformed princes also practiced it on the property of the church. At that time the number of thieves, beggars and vagabonds increased as never before. Their number was greatest after the reformation. The expropriated rural population poured into the cities; but here, too, the conditions of life had been growing steadily worse, owing to causes that have been set forth in previous chapters, and so “over-population” prevailed everywhere.

The appearance of Malthus coincides with that period of English industry when, as a result of the new inventions by Hargreaves, Arkwright and Watt, tremendous mechanical and technical changes took place. These changes especially affected the cotton and linen industries, and deprived tens of thousands of workingmen of employment, who were engaged in these domestic industries. The concentration of property in land, and the development of industry on a large scale, assumed great dimensions in England at that time. With the rapid increase of wealth on the one hand, there was growing misery of the masses on the other. During such a time the ruling classes, who have good cause to consider the world, as it is, the best of worlds, had to seek a plausible explanation, relieving them of all responsibility, for so contradictory a phenomenon as the pauperization of the masses in the midst of increasing wealth and nourishing industry. Nothing was more convenient than to blame the too rapid increase of the workingmen by their having too many children for this state of affairs, instead of blaming the fact that they were being made superfluous by the process of production, and the further fact that the soil was becoming accumulated in the hands of the landlords. Under such conditions the “school-boyish, superficial plagiarism declaimed in a priest-like manner” which Malthus published, contained an explanation of existing evils that expressed the innermost thoughts and wishes of the ruling classes, and justified them before the world. That explains why it met with so much success on the one hand, and with such bitter opposition on the other. For the English bourgeoisie Malthus had spoken the right word at the right time, and so—altho his book did “not contain a single original thought,” he became a great and famous man, and his name came to stand for the entire doctrine![276]

The conditions that caused Malthus to utter his cry of warning and to set forth his brutal doctrines,—they were addressed to the working class, which meant adding insult to injury,—have since expanded with every decade. They have expanded, not only in the native land of Malthus, Great Britain, but in all countries of the world that have a capitalistic method of production, which implies robbery of the soil and subjugation of the masses by means of the machine and the factory. This system,—as has been shown,—consists in the separation of the worker from his means of production, be it the land or tools, and their transfer into the hands of the capitalists. This system constantly creates new branches of industry, developes and concentrates them, but it also constantly turns out into the street new masses of the population and makes them “superfluous.” In many cases it also promotes, as in ancient Rome, the latifundia ownership with all its results. Ireland is the classic land of Europe that has been afflicted worst of all by the English system of robbery. As early as 1874 it already had an area of meadow and pasture land of 12,378,244acres, but only 3,373,508acres of cultivated fields, and every year the population decreases, and hand in hand with this decrease proceeds the further conversion of cultivated land into meadows and pastures for sheep and cattle and into hunting grounds for the landlords.[277] (In 1908 there were 14,805,046acres of meadow and pasture land and only 2,238,906acres of cultivated land.) Moreover, the agricultural land of Ireland is, to a great extent, rented by small tenants, who are unable to improve upon the cultivation of the soil. So Ireland presents the aspect of a country that is retrogressing from an agricultural to a pastoral country. At the same time the population that numbered 8millions at the beginning of the nineteenth century, has declined to 4.3millions, and a few million still are “superfluous.” This clearly explains the rebellion of the Irish against England. Scotland presents a similar picture in regard to the ownership and cultivation of its land.[278] The same thing is re-enacted in Hungary, which entered upon modern lines of development only a few decades ago. Few European countries possess such a wealth of fertile soil as Hungary, and yet it is burdened with debts and the population is pauperized and is at the mercy of usurers. Despair drives the people to wholesale emigration. The land is concentrated in the hands of modern magnates of capital, who apply their rapacious system to the forests and the fields. It is likely that in a time not far distant, Hungary will cease to be a grain exporting country. Italy presents a similar picture. In Italy, as in Germany, political unity of the nation has favored capitalistic development, but the industrious peasants of Piedmont and Lombardy, of Tuscany, Romagna and Sicily, are constantly growing poorer and are being utterly ruined. Already swamps and marshes begin to reappear, where, up to a few decades ago, were the well cultivated fields and gardens of small peasants. Before the very gates of Rome, in the district known as the Campagna, are hundreds of thousands of hectares of land that are left uncultivated, in a vicinity that was one of the most flourishing of ancient Rome. Everywhere are swamps exhaling their poisonous miasms. If the necessary means were employed to drain the swamps and to introduce a proper system of irrigation, the population of Rome would obtain a rich source of nourishment and enjoyment. But Italy suffers from the ambition to become a great power; so it ruins the population by bad administration, military and naval armament and colonization, and has no means left for true tasks of civilization, such as the cultivation of the Campagna. In southern Italy and Sicily conditions are similar as in the Campagna. Sicily, at one time the granary of Rome, is ever growing poorer. In all Europe there is no poorer, more exploited and worse treated population. The sons of the most beautiful country of Europe, flood half of Europe and America, and because their needs are few they serve to lower wages. They emigrate in masses, because they do not wish to starve on their native soil, which they no longer own. Malaria, that awful fever, has spread to such an extent thruout Italy, that in 1882 the government became alarmed and instituted an investigation. This investigation revealed that of the 96 provinces of the country, 32 were already severely afflicted, 32 others were infected and only 5 remained free from the disease. Formerly known in the country only, the disease was carried into the cities, where the congested proletarian population, increased by the rural proletariat, formed the central seat of the infection.

No matter from what side we view the capitalistic system of production, we arrive at the conclusion that the poverty and misery of the masses is not due to a lack of food, but to an unequal distribution of same, and to wrong methods, that create an abundance for some and compel others to live in want. The assertions of Malthus have sense only from the standpoint of capitalistic production. On the other hand, the capitalistic method of production urges the production of children. Cheap “hands,” in the shape of children, are needed for its factories and work-shops. Among proletarians the procreation of children becomes a sort of calculation, as they earn their own living. The proletarian employed in domestic industry is even obliged to have many children, for they help him to be able to compete. This is assuredly an abominable system; it increases the pauperization of the workingman and his dependence upon the employer. The proletarian is compelled to work for lower and lower wages, and every labor law destined to protect workingmen, that does not include the persons engaged in domestic industry, only causes the employer to widen the circle of those so employed, for wherever this form of production is possible, it offers particular advantages to the capitalist.

But the capitalistic system does not lead only to an over-production of goods and of workers, but also to an over-production of intellect. Intellectuals, too, find it increasingly difficult to obtain employment, as the supply constantly surpasses the demand. There is only one thing in this capitalistic world that is never superfluous, and that is capital and its owner, the capitalist.

If the bourgeois economists are followers of Malthus, they are what they must be in accordance with their bourgeois interests. Only they should refrain from transferring their bourgeois prejudices to Socialistic society. JohnStuart Mill says: “Communism is that very state of affairs of which one may expect, that it will vehemently oppose this sort of selfish immoderation. Every increase of the population that would diminish the comfortable status of the population or increase its toils, would cause direct and unmistakable inconvenience to each individual member of the association, and this inconvenience could no longer be ascribed to the rapacity of the employers or the unfair privileges of the rich. Under such circumstances, public opinion could not fail to make known its disproval, and if this would not suffice, punishments of one kind or another would be resorted to, in order to suppress this and similar immoderations. The danger of over-population, then, is not advanced by the communistic theory; this theory, on the contrary, tends to counteract this danger in a marked degree.” ProfessorAdolf Wagner says, in Rau’s “Text-book of Political Economy:” “Least of all could a Socialistic community grant absolute freedom of marriage or freedom in the procreation of children.” The authors both proceed from the opinion that the tendency toward over-population is common to all social systems, but they both grant that Socialism will be better able to maintain an equilibrium between population and nourishment than any other form of society. The latter is true, but the former is not.

There were, indeed, some Socialists who were infected by the ideas of Malthus, and feared that over-population was “an imminent danger.” But these Socialistic Malthusians have disappeared. A better understanding of the nature of bourgeois society has changed their opinion on this subject. The complaints of our agrarians also teach us that we have too much food—viewed from the standpoint of the world market—and that the resulting lowering of prices make the production of food unprofitable.

Our Malthusians imagine,—and the chorus of bourgeois leaders thoughtlessly echo their fears,—that a Socialistic society upholding freedom of choice in love and maintaining an existence worthy of human beings for all its members, would foster rabbit-like propensities. They imagine that people, under such conditions, would indulge in an unbridled satisfaction of their lusts and in unlimited procreation of children. Rather the contrary is likely to be true. So far not the well-to-do classes have had the greatest number of children, but, on the contrary, the poorest classes. Indeed, we may say without exaggeration: the poorer the position of a proletarian stratum is, the more numerous is its blessing of children; occasional exceptions are, of course, conceded. This opinion is confirmed by Virchow, who wrote, in the middle of the last century; “as the English laborer in his deepest degradation, in the utmost emptiness of mind, knows only two sources of enjoyment, intoxication and cohabitation, so the population of Upper Silesia, until recent years, had concentrated all its desires and endeavors upon these two things. The enjoyment of liquor and the satisfaction of the sexual impulse had become the supreme factors of its existence, and so it can be easily explained that the population increased as rapidly in numbers, as it deteriorated physically and morally.”

Karl Marx expresses himself similarly in “Capital.” He says: “Not only the number of births and deaths, but the absolute size of the families also is in reverse ratio to the height of the wages, that is, to the means of subsistence at the disposal of the various categories of laborers. This law of capitalistic society would sound absurd among savages or even among civilized colonists. It reminds one of the enormous reproduction of species of animals that are individually weak and much hunted.” Marx furthermore quotes Laing, who says: “If the whole world lived in comfortable circumstances, the world would soon be depopulated.” So Laing holds the opposite view from Malthus. He maintains that an improved standard of living does not increase the number of births, but diminishes them. Herbert Spencer expresses a similar opinion thus: “always and everywhere perfection of the species and its procreative ability are opposed to one another. From this follows that the further development of man will probably lead to a decrease in procreation.” We see, then, that men, maintaining different standpoints on other subjects, are fully agreed on this one, and we fully concur with their conception.

The whole question of population might be disposed of by saying, that for a long time to come this fear of over-population is absurd, for we are confronted with an abundance of food that increases each year, so that we would be more justified in worrying over how to apply this wealth, than in worrying over whether it will suffice. The producers of food would even welcome a more rapid increase of consumers. But our Malthusians are indefatigable in raising objections, and so we must meet these objections, lest they assert that they cannot be answered. They claim that the danger of over-production in a not distant future lies in the “decrease of the productivity of the soil.” Our cultivated soil, they claim, is becoming “weary of yields,” an increase in crops could no longer be expected, and since fresh soil that still might be cultivated is becoming rarer, the danger of a scarcity of food, if the population continues to increase, is imminent. In the chapters on agriculture we have, so we believe, already proved irrefutably of what enormous progress mankind is still capable in the matter of obtaining new masses of nourishment, judging even by the present state of agricultural science. Nevertheless we will add some further illustrations. A very capable large land-owner and an economist of recognized worth, who, therefore, far surpassed Malthus in both respects, as early as 1850, at a time when agricultural chemistry was in its beginnings,—expressed the following: “The productivity of raw products, especially of food, will in future not lag behind the productivity in manufacture and transportation. In our days agricultural chemistry is just beginning to open up vistas to agriculture that may lead to some errors, but that will ultimately place the production of food into the power of society, just as society has the power to-day of furnishing any desired quantity of cloth, provided that there is a sufficient supply of work.”[279]

Justus v. Liebig, the founder of agricultural chemistry, holds the opinion that “if there is sufficient human labor power and sufficient manure, the soil is inexhaustible and continually yields the richest crops.”

The “law of decrease of the productivity of the soil” is a notion of Malthus that could be accepted at a time when agriculture was very undeveloped, but it has long since been refuted by science and experience. The yield of a field is in direct ratio to the amount of human labor power (including science and technic) expended on it, and to the amount of proper fertilizers applied to it. If the small peasantry of France have been able to more than quadruple the yields of their soil during the last 90years, while the population has not even doubled, what results may be expected from a Socialistic society! Our Malthusians overlook, furthermore, that under present day conditions not only our own soil must be taken into consideration, but the soil of the entire earth, including countries whose fertility is twenty and thirty times as great as that of our fields of the same size. The earth is largely occupied by man, but with the exception of a very small fraction, it is nowhere cultivated and utilized as it might be. Not only Great Britain could produce far more food than it is producing at present, but also France, Germany and Austria, and the other European countries might do so to a still greater extent. In little Wurtemberg alone, with its 879,970hectares of grain soil, by application of the steam plough, the average crop might be increased from 6,140,000cwts. to 9,000,000cwt. European Russia, measured by the present standard of the population of Germany, might feed a population of 475million instead of its present 100million. At present European Russia has about 19.4 inhabitants to the square kilometer; Saxony has over 300. The objection that Russia has vast stretches of land that cannot be rendered more fertile owing to their climate, is true. But it is equally true that other stretches of land in the southern part of Russia have a climate and a fertility that Germany cannot come up to. Moreover, the greater density of the population, and the increased cultivation of the soil, will cause changes in the climate that cannot be estimated to-day. Wherever men aggregate in masses climatic changes result. We do not pay sufficient attention to these phenomena. Moreover, we cannot observe them to their full extent, because we have no occasion to do so and because, as matters are at present, it is impossible to undertake experiments on a large scale. Thus Sweden and Norway, who are both sparsely populated, with their immense forests and inexhaustible wealth of metals, their numerous streams and their sea-coasts, might become a rich source of nourishment to a dense population. Under existing conditions it is impossible to obtain the proper means and appliances to disclose the wealth of these countries, and so even a part of the sparse population emigrates.

What has been said of the north, applies to a still greater extent to the south of Europe, to Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, the Danubian Provinces, Hungary, Turkey, etc. A delightful climate, a soil so rich and fertile as it can hardly be found in the best regions of the United States, will some day provide an abundance of food for unnumbered masses of the population. The rotten social and political conditions of these countries cause hundreds of thousands of persons to leave Europe and cross the ocean instead of remaining in their native lands or settling down in much nearer and more conveniently located places. As soon as rational social and political institutions have been established, fresh millions of people will be needed to place those wide and fertile countries on a higher level of civilization.

In order to achieve higher objects of civilization in Europe, we have, for a long time to come, not a superabundance of human beings, but rather a dearth of same, and under such circumstances it is absurd to entertain any fears in regard to over-population.[280] At the same time we must always keep in mind that the utilization of existing sources of nourishment by the application of science and labor is practically unlimited, and that every day brings us new discoveries and inventions whereby the sources of nourishment are increased.

If we turn from Europe to other parts of the earth, we find that the lack of human beings and the abundance of food is still more pronounced. The richest and most fertile lands of the earth still lie entirely, or almost entirely, unused, because their cultivation and utilization cannot be undertaken by a few thousand persons; here colonies of many millions would be needed only partly to master the over-abundant nature. Such countries are, among others, Central and South America, an area of hundreds of thousands of square miles. In Argentine Republic, for instance, only about 5million hectares were cultivated in 1892, but the country has 96million hectares of fertile soil at its disposal. That soil of South America that is fit for the cultivation of wheat, but still lies fallow, is estimated at 200million hectares at least, while the United States, Austria, Hungary, Great Britain and Ireland, Germany and France altogether have cultivated only about 105million hectares for the raising of grain. About 40years ago, Carey asserted that the valley of the Orinoco alone, having a length of 360miles, might produce sufficient nourishment to feed the entire human race. If we accept but half of this statement, an abundance still remains. At any rate, both Americas alone, could feed many times the number of persons living on the earth at present. The nutritive value of a territory planted with banana trees yield 12 to 20 times its seed; rice, in its native soil, yields 80 to 100 times and corn 250 to 300 times its seed. In some regions, for instance in the Philippine Islands, the productivity of rice is estimated at 400 times its seed. With all these articles of food it is, moreover, a matter of importance, to make them as nourishing as possible by the manner in which they are prepared. In matters of nutrition chemistry has an inexhaustible field for development.

Central America and South America, especially Brazil, abound with a luxuriance and fertility that cause the marvel and admiration of travellers. These countries also possess a boundless wealth of ores and metals. Brazil itself is almost as large as all of Europe, having 8,524,000square miles, with about 22million inhabitants, as against Europe’s 9,887,010square miles, with about 430million inhabitants. But to the world these countries are barely disclosed, because their population is indolent, too few in numbers and on too low a level of civilization to master the grandeur of nature. The discoveries of recent decades have enlightened us in regard to matters in Africa. Altho a great portion of Central Africa will never be available for European agriculture, there are other territories of a wide range that can be utilized to a marked degree as soon as rational principles of colonization are applied. In Asia, too, there are wide stretches of fertile land that could provide food for countless numbers. The past has shown us how, in regions that are unfertile and almost desert at present, the climate can produce a wealth of nourishment if man will but provide the soil with water. The destruction of grand water-works and contrivances for irrigation in Asia Minor, along the Tigris, Euphrates, etc., by cruel wars of conquest and by insane oppression of the people, have transformed thousands of square miles of fertile land into a desert.[281] The same is true of northern Asia, Mexico and Peru. Give us millions of civilized human beings and inexhaustible sources of nourishment will be disclosed. The date palm thrives in Asia and Africa in marvelous abundance, and requires so little room that 200 of these trees can be grown on one acre of land. In Egypt the durria bears fruit three thousand fold, and yet this country is poor. It is poor, not owing to an excessive population, but owing to a system of robbery that causes the desert to widen and expand with each decade. What marvelous results European agriculture and horticulture might obtain in these countries is incalculable.

The United States, measured by the standard of their present agricultural production, could easily maintain a population 15 or 20 times as large as the present one; that is, 1250 to 1700million, instead of 90million. At the same rate, Canada could provide food for several hundred millions, instead of for its six millions. Then there is Australia, the numerous and to some extent exceedingly fertile islands of the Pacific and Indian Ocean, etc. In the name of civilization man should be exhorted to multiply, not to decrease.

Everywhere it is the social institutions—the existing methods of production and distribution of the products—that cause misery and want, not a too great number of people. A number of rich crops in succession lower the prices of food to such an extent, that many a farmer is ruined thereby. The lot of the producers grows worse instead of being improved. At the present time a great many farmers regard a good harvest as a misfortune, because it lowers the prices. And such conditions are supposed to be rational? To keep out the rich crops of other countries, high duties are imposed on grain, to make the importation of grain more difficult and to raise the price of the domestic product. There is not a lack of food, but a superabundance of food, just as there is a superabundance of the products of industry. Just as millions of persons are in need of all kinds of industrial products, but cannot satisfy their needs under the existing conditions of property and production, so millions are in need of the most essential articles of food, because they cannot pay for them, altho there is food in abundance. The madness of such conditions is obvious. When the crops are good, our speculators in grain often intentionally allow a part of it to go to waste and ruin, because they know that the price increases at the same rate at which the supply diminishes. And with all this, we should be in fear of over-population? In Russia, southern Europe and elsewhere, hundreds of thousands of hundredweights of grain are destroyed, because there is a lack of appropriate store-houses and means of transportation. Many million hundred-weights of food are wasted annually, because the provisions for gathering in the crops are imperfect and insufficient, or because there is a lack of hands at the decisive time. Many a granary, many a replenished barn, indeed, entire farms are burned down, because the insurance premiums heighten the profits. Food is destroyed for the same reasons that cause people to sink ships with their entire crews.[282] Our military drills cause the destruction of large crops each year. The cost of a single manoeuvre, lasting a few days only, amounts to hundreds of thousands of marks, altho the estimates are very moderate, and there are a number of such manoeuvres annually. For the same purpose entire villages have been razed and large areas are withdrawn from agriculture.

We must not forget that to all the sources we have enumerated, the ocean must be added, whose surface is to the area of the earth as 18 to 7. The surface of the water is, accordingly, two and a half times as large as that of the land, and is still awaiting a rational utilization of its enormous wealth of food. The future, then, opens up a vista very different from the sombre picture drawn for us by our Malthusians.

Who can say when our chemical, physical and physiological knowledge will have reached their limit? Who could venture to predict what gigantic undertakings future mankind will carry out to bring about marked changes in the climates of various countries and the utilization of their soil?

Even to-day, under the capitalistic system of society, we see undertakings executed that would have appeared impossible and insane a century ago. Broad isthmuses are cut thru and oceans connected; tunnels, many miles long, connect countries that are separated by the highest mountains; others are dug under the bottom of the sea to shorten distances, and to avoid disturbances and dangers that occur where countries are separated by the sea. Where, then, might one say: “thus far and no further?” Not only must the “law of decrease of the productivity of the soil” be answered in the negative, it must be reasserted that there is an abundance of cultivatable soil, that will require millions of human beings for its cultivation.

If all these tasks of civilization were to be undertaken at the same time, we would not have too many people, but too few. Humanity must still multiply considerably to do justice to all the tasks that are awaiting it. The soil is far from being cultivated as it might be, and almost three-quarters of the surface of the earth are still uncultivated, because there are not enough people to undertake its cultivation. The relative excess of population that to-day is continually produced by the capitalistic system to the detriment of the working class and of society, will prove a blessing on a higher level of civilization. A numerous population is not a hindrance to progress. It is, on the contrary, a means to advance progress, just like the present over-production of commodities and food, the disruption of marriage by the employment of women, children in industry and the expropriation of the middle class by the large capitalists, are the preliminary conditions of a higher stage of civilization.

The other side of the question is: do people multiply indefinitely, and do they wish to? In order to prove the enormous reproductive ability of man, the Malthusians like to point to the abnormal cases of some families or peoples. But these examples do not prove anything. There are other cases where, regardless of favorable conditions of existence, complete sterility sets in, or the reproductive ability is very slight. It is surprising how quickly wealthy families often die out. Altho the conditions for an increase of the population are more favorable in the United States than in any other country, and hundreds of thousands of persons in the prime of life emigrate into the United States every year, the population doubles only once in thirty years. The claim that populations double once in twelve or twenty years is not born out by the facts anywhere.

As has already been indicated by the quotations from Virchow and Marx, the population multiplies most rapidly where it is poorest, because, as Virchow correctly says, beside drink, sexual intercourse forms their only enjoyment. When GregoryVII forced celibacy upon the clergy, the clergy of lower rank of the Diocese of Mayence,—as previously mentioned,—complained that they did not have all kinds of enjoyments like the prelates, but that their only joy was woman. Lack of a variety of occupations may also account for it that the marriages of the rural clergy are usually so richly blessed with children. It cannot be disputed, furthermore, that the poorest districts in Germany, the Silesian Eulengebirge, the Lausitz, the Erzgebirge and Fichtelgebirge, the Forest of Thuringia, the Harz, etc.—districts in which the potato constitutes the chief article of food, are at the same time the most densely populated. It is furthermore certain that the sexual impulse is particularly strongly developed with persons afflicted with consumption, and such persons often beget children in a stage of physical decline in which this seems almost impossible.

It is a law of nature, as expressed in the utterances of Herbert Spencer and Laing, which we have quoted, to supply in quantity what is lacking in quality. The most highly developed and strongest animals, lion, elephant, camel, etc., our domestic animals, as horse, donkey, cow bring forth but few young, while animals of a lower order multiply in inverse ratio, as all kinds of insects, most fish, etc., and also the smaller mammals, like rabbits, rats, mice, etc. Darwin has shown that certain species of animals, for instance the elephant, lose their fecundity when they are captured and tamed by man. All this proves that altered conditions of existence and the resulting changed mode of life have a decisive influence on reproductive ability.

Strange to say, the Darwinians share the fear of over-population, and our modern Malthusians lean on their authority. The Darwinians seem to be unfortunate as soon as they seek to apply their theories to man, because they employ roughly empirical methods and do not take into consideration that man, altho the most highly developed animal, is distinguished from animals by the fact that he has learned to understand the laws of nature, and may consciously and intelligently apply these laws.

The theory of the struggle for existence, the doctrine that the germs of new life exist in a far greater measure than could be maintained by the existing means of subsistence, would be equally applicable to man, if human beings, instead of exerting their brain and employing technics for the conscious utilization of land and water, would graze like cattle or would yield, like monkeys, to an unbridled satisfaction of their sexual desires, thereby reverting to monkeys. Incidentally, be it noted, that beside human beings, monkeys are the only creatures with whom the sexual impulse is not limited to certain periods. This alone furnishes a striking proof of the close relationship between the two. But, altho closely related, they are not identical. They cannot be placed upon the same level or measured by the same standards.

It is true that so far, owing to the conditions of property and production, the struggle for existence has prevailed, and still prevails, for individual human beings, and that many were unable to obtain the needful means of subsistence. But this was so, not because the means were wanting, but because social conditions withheld the means from them in the midst of plenty. It is a mistake to assume that because conditions have been such until now, they must always and unalterably remain so. This is the point where Darwinians make a great mistake. They study biology and anthropology, but they fail to study sociology, and thoughtlessly become the followers of bourgeois ideologists. Thus they arrive at false conclusions.

The sexual impulse is perennial in man. It is his strongest impulse, and must be satisfied if his health is not to suffer. As a rule this impulse is strongest with healthy, normally developed human beings, just like a hearty appetite and good digestion are proofs of a healthy stomach and are essential to a healthy body. But satisfaction of the sexual impulse and the procreation of children are not one and the same thing. Many are the theories that have been propounded in regard to the fecundity of man. On the whole, we are still groping in the dark concerning these important questions, mainly because, for centuries, a foolish reticence has prevailed that prevented an investigation of the laws of the origin and development of man and a study of human procreation and evolution. Only gradually will our conception change on this subject, and it is highly important that they should. Some claim that higher mental development and strenuous intellectual activity, in fact all increased nervous activity, has a repressing effect on the sexual impulse and diminishes the productive ability. By others this is denied. People point to the fact that the well-to-do classes generally have fewer children, and that this cannot be ascribed to preventive measures only. It is certain that a strenuous mental activity has a repressing influence on the sexual impulse, but it cannot be claimed that such activity is carried on by a majority of our propertied class. Excessive physical exertion also has a repressing effect, but any kind of excessive exertion is harmful and therefore not to be desired.

Others assert that the mode of life, especially the nourishment, beside certain physical conditions on the part of the woman, have a decisive influence on procreation and conception. The food, they claim, also influences procreation among animals more than any other factor. Here, indeed, the determining factor may be found. The influence of the nature of food on the organisms of certain animals, has been revealed in a surprising manner among bees. By feeding the larvae on special food, they can produce a queen at will. The bees accordingly are further advanced in their recognition of the development of sex than man. Probably they have not been preached to for thousands of years that it is “indecent” and “immoral” to concern one’s self with sexual matters.

It is also known that plants grown in rich and well manured soil thrive luxuriantly, but do not yield seed. It is hardly to be doubted that, with human beings, also the nature of food influences the composition of the male sperm and the fecundity of the female egg, and so it may be that the reproductive power of a population depends largely upon its food. There are other factors besides, whose nature is but slightly known.

In the future one factor will be decisive in regard to the question of population: the higher, freer position of woman. As a rule, intelligent and energetic women are not inclined to regard a number of children as a “Godsend,” and to spend the best years of their lives in a condition of pregnancy, or with babes at their breasts. Even at present, most women have an aversion against a too numerous progeny, and this aversion is likely to increase rather than decrease, regardless of the care that a Socialistic society will bestow upon pregnant women and mothers. This is the main reason why, in our opinion, the increase of population is likely to progress more slowly in Socialistic society than it does in bourgeois society.

Our Malthusians assuredly have no cause to rack their brains in regard to the increase of population in the future. Until now, nations have been ruined by a diminution of their numbers, but never yet by an excess. In a society, living according to natural laws, the number of the population will ultimately be regulated without harmful abstinence, or unnatural preventive measures. Karl Marx will be vindicated on this subject also. His conception, that every economic period of development has its special law of population, will prove true under the rule of Socialism.

In a book on “The Artificial Limitation of Progeny,” H.Ferdy sets forth the following opinion: “The strong opposition of Socialists to Malthusianism is a piece of roguery. The rapid increase of the population favors pauperization of the masses and fosters discontent. If the over-population could be checked, the spread of Socialism would come to an end, and the Socialist state with all its splendor would be buried forever.” Here we behold Malthusianism as a new weapon for combatting Socialism.[283]

Dr. Adolf Wagner is one of those who are in fear of over-population, and, therefore, favor restriction of the freedom of marriage and freedom of settlement, especially in the case of workingmen. He bewails the fact that workingmen marry too young, as compared with the middle classes. He and others holding the same views, overlook that the male members of the middle class do not attain a position until later in life, that enables them to support a family according to their standard of life. But they seek recompense for this renunciation with prostitution. If marriage is made more difficult for the workingmen also, they will be driven upon the same devious path. But, then, do not let us complain of the results, and cry out at the “decline of ethics and morality.” Neither let us grow indignant, then, if men and women,—since the natural impulses reside, in women as in men,—if men and women satisfy their natural impulse in illegitimate relations, and if hosts of illegitimate children populate town and country. But the views of Wagner, and those who agree with him, are also averse to the interests of the bourgeoisie and to the interests of our economic development that requires a large supply of “hands” in order to possess forces that enable competition on the world market. By petty, shortsighted suggestions, born of retrogressive and philistine minds, the evils of the age cannot be cured. At the dawn of the twentieth century there is no class and no power of the state that is strong enough to retard the natural evolution of society. Every attempt is bound to fail. The current of evolution is so strong that it overcomes every obstacle. Not backward, but “forward,” is the word, and he who believes in retarding progress fools himself.

In Socialistic society, when mankind will be placed upon a natural basis, and will be truly free, man will consciously guide his own development. In all preceding epochs, man acted in regard to production and distribution, and in regard to the increase of population, without any knowledge of their underlying laws; he, therefore, acted unconsciously. In the new society man will act consciously and methodically, knowing the laws of his own development.

Socialism is science applied to all realms of human activity.