The Question of Population and Socialism.
1.--Fear of Over-Population.
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 Sir James 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]
[276] That Darwin and others also become followers of Malthus only
proves that a lack of economic studies leads to the most biased
views in the realm of science.
2.--Production of Over-Population.
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 12,378,244 acres, but only 3,373,508 acres 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 14,805,046 acres of
meadow and pasture land and only 2,238,906 acres 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 8 millions at the beginning
of the nineteenth century, has declined to 4.3 millions, 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.
[277] In his pathetic poem, “Ireland,” Ferdinand Freiligrath sings:
The lord provides that stag and ox
For him the peasant’s toil may feed,
Instead of draining pools and bogs--
Ireland’s swamps, well known indeed!
Unused he leaves and useless quite
The soil that wealth of crops might bear,
There but the wild duck wings its flight
And guinea-hens are nesting there.
Aye, by the curse of God, a marsh
And wilderness, four million acres wide!
[278] “Two million acres, comprising the most fertile parts of
Scotland, entirely laid waste! The natural grass of Glen Tilt was
among the most nourishing of the County of Perth. The Deer Forest
of Ben Aulder was the best grazing ground in the wide district of
Badenoch; a portion of the Black Mountain Forest was the best pasture
for black-faced sheep. An idea may be gained of the extent of the
land laid waste for the pleasure of the chase, from the fact that it
is larger than the entire County of Perth. The great loss entailed
by this forcible destruction of the sources of production may be
ascertained by calling to mind that the soil of the Deer Forest of
Ben Aulder could pasture 15,000 sheep, and that, moreover, this
deer forest is _but one thirtieth of the entire hunting ground of
Scotland_. All this hunting ground is entirely unproductive. It might
as well have been caused to sink into the North-Sea.” The London
“Economist,” July 2, 1866. Quoted by Karl Marx in “Capital.”
3.--Poverty and Fecundity.
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. John Stuart 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.” Professor Adolf 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.
4.--Lack of Human Beings and Abundance of Food.
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 90 years, 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 879,970 hectares of grain soil,
by application of the steam plough, the average crop might be
increased from 6,140,000 cwts. to 9,000,000 cwt. European Russia,
measured by the present standard of the population of Germany, might
feed a population of 475 million instead of its present 100 million.
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 5 million hectares
were cultivated in 1892, but the country has 96 million 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 200 million hectares at least, while the United States, Austria,
Hungary, Great Britain and Ireland, Germany and France altogether
have cultivated only about 105 million hectares for the raising of
grain. About 40 years ago, Carey asserted that the valley of the
Orinoco alone, having a length of 360 miles, 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 8,524,000 square miles, with about 22 million inhabitants,
as against Europe’s 9,887,010 square miles, with about 430 million
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 1700 million,
instead of 90 million. 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.
[279] Rodbertus: “An Elucidation of the Social Question.”
[280] This is especially true of Germany also. Notwithstanding the
steady increase of the population, emigration has steadily decreased.
In 1891, 120,089 persons emigrated; in 1907, only 31,696. On the
other hand, immigration has increased, because there was a scarcity
of labor power in several branches of industry. In 1900, 757,151
persons immigrated, in 1905, 1,007,149.
[281] Kaerger estimates the harvests in Anatolia, even when the crops
are poor, at 26.40 to 30 cwt. The average is 26.40 to 39 cwt.; on well
fertilized and irrigated soil, 66 cwt. (International Agricultural
Competition, a Capitalistic Problem, by Professor Dr. Gustave Ruhland.
Berlin, 1901.)
[282] Even at the time of St. Basil (died 379), similar conditions
must have existed, for he calls out to the rich: “wretches, what
reply will you make to the divine Judge? You cover the nakedness
of your walls with tapestry, but you do not cover with clothes the
nakedness of man. You deck your horses with costly, soft blankets,
but you despise your brother who is clad in rags. You suffer your
grain in the barns and granaries to rot and to be eaten by rats,
and do not even cast a glance at those who have no bread.”
Moralizing has never yet availed with the ruling classes and never
will. Let the social institutions be changed so that no one can act
unfairly toward his fellowmen, and the world will be well off.
5.--Social Conditions and Reproductive Ability.
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 Gregory VII 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.~
[283] The immense ignorance of the Socialist-killer, Ferdy, is most
clearly seen from the following sentences, perpetrated on page 40
of his book: “The Socialists will go further in their demands than
the Neo-Malthusians. They will demand that the minimum wage be so
fixed that every workingman can beget the largest possible number
of children according to the social supply of food. As soon as
Socialism has drawn its ultimate conclusions and private property has
been abolished, even the most stupid would soon begin to question:
why should I work longer and harder because my neighbor chooses to
thrust a dozen new members into society?”
It would be well to know the A B C of Socialism before venturing to
write about it and such utter nonsense as that!
Conclusion.
We have shown, in the course of our argumentation, that the realization
of Socialism does not imply arbitrary destruction and construction,
but a process of historical evolution. All factors active in the
process of destruction, on the one hand, and in the process of
construction on the other, act as they are bound to act. Neither
“brilliant statesmen” nor “demagogues who incite the people,” can
direct matters at their will. They believe that they are pushing,
and are being pushed, themselves. But the day of fulfilment is not
distant.
In the course of these expositions, we have frequently referred
to an over-production of goods that leads to crises, a phenomenon
peculiar to bourgeois society, that was not met with at any previous
stage of development.
But bourgeois society does not only create an over-production of goods
and workers, but also an over-production of intelligence. Germany is
the classic land where this over-production of intelligence takes
place on a large scale, intelligence that the bourgeois world no
longer knows how to employ. A condition that has for centuries been
regarded as a misfortune to German development, has been instrumental
in producing this phenomenon. It was the great number of small
states that impeded the development of capitalism on a large scale.
The large number of small states decentralized the intellectual life
of the nation by creating many small centers of intellectual life,
that exercised their influence upon the whole country. In comparison
with a single central government the numerous states required a very
large official apparatus, for whose members a higher education was
needful. So a larger number of high schools and universities sprang
up than in any other European country. The ambition and jealousy of
the various governments played an important part in this development.
It was the same when some of the governments began to introduce
obligatory public education. In these instances the desire not to
be excelled by the neighboring state has had a good effect. The
demand for intelligence rose when increasing education, hand in hand
with the material advance of the bourgeoisie, awoke a desire for
political action, for popular representation and self-government. The
governmental bodies were small and represented only small countries
and districts, but they caused the sons of the upper classes to
covet seats in them and to adapt their education accordingly.
As it was with science, so with art. No other country of Europe has,
in proportion to its size, so large a number of artists, so many
art-schools and technical schools, so many museums and art collections,
as Germany. Other countries may have a greater accumulation of art in
their capitals, but no other country possesses such a distribution
of art thruout its entire realm. Only Italy can vie with it.
This entire development led to a deepening of the German intellect.
The absence of great political struggles gave people time and leisure,
as it were, to lead a contemplative life. While other nations
wrestled for the control of the world market, divided the earth
among themselves, and carried on great internal political struggles,
the Germans quietly remained at home, dreaming and philosophizing.
But this dreaming and philosophizing, favored by a climate that
necessitated hard work and a domestic life, gave the Germans that
keen, observing intellect that distinguished them after they had
awakened. While the English bourgeoisie had won a determining
influence over the state as early as the middle of the seventeenth
century, and the French bourgeoisie had come into power at the close
of the eighteenth century, it was not until 1848 that the German
bourgeoisie succeeded in winning a very modest influence over the
powers of the state. But the year 1848 was the year of birth of the
German bourgeoisie as a self-conscious class, that entered the arena
as an independent, political party, represented by “liberalism.” Here,
too, the peculiar nature of German development manifested itself. The
leading men were not manufacturers, merchants, men of commerce and
finance, but chiefly professors, writers, jurists and doctors of all
academic faculties. They were the German ideologists, and their work
was shaped accordingly. After 1848 the bourgeoisie was, for the time
being, silenced politically; but they employed the time of political
graveyard tranquility during the fifties to promote their task all
the more thoroly. The outbreak of the Austro-Italian war, and the
beginning of the Regency in Prussia, caused the bourgeoisie again
to reach out after political power. The movement for national unity
(“Nationalverein”) began. The bourgeoisie was too far developed to
tolerate any longer the numerous political barriers, that were also
economic barriers, between the various states. They threatened to
become revolutionary. Bismarck grasped the situation, and made use
of it in his way to reconcile the interests of the bourgeoisie with
the interests of the Prussian monarchy, toward which the bourgeoisie
had never been hostile, as it feared the revolution and the masses.
Finally the barriers fell that had prevented its material development.
Aided by Germany’s wealth in coal and minerals, and by the presence of
an intelligent, but easily contented working class, the bourgeoisie,
within a few years, attained such a gigantic development, as has not
been attained by the bourgeoisie of any other country in an equally
short time, with the exception of the United States. Thus Germany
quickly came to hold the second place in Europe as an industrial
and commercial state, and she is anxious to obtain the first.
But this rapid material development has its dark side also. The
system of seclusion that had existed among all German states, until
national unity was established, had insured the existence of a very
numerous class of small mechanics and farmers. When all protective
barriers were suddenly torn down, this class was confronted by the
unbridled development of the capitalistic process of production.
As a result their position became a desperate one. The period of
prosperity at the beginning of the seventies made the danger appear
less great at first, but it became all the more noticeable when the
crisis set in. The bourgeoisie had utilized the period of prosperity
for its fullest development, and by excessive production created a
ten-fold pressure. From now on the chasm between the propertied and
the non-propertied classes was rapidly and tremendously widened. This
process of absorption and decomposition, that is accomplished more
and more rapidly, favored by the increase of material power on the
one hand, and by a decline of the power of resistance on the other,
is intensifying the distress of entire strata of the population.
They find their position becoming more and more precarious and their
ruin certain.
In this desperate struggle many seek salvation in a change of their
profession. The old people cannot accomplish this change any more,
and only in rare cases are they able to leave a fortune to their
children, so they make desperate efforts and employ their last means
to obtain for their sons and daughters positions with a fixed income,
that require no capital. These are the civil service positions in
the empire, states and municipalities, teaching, positions connected
with the postal and railway service, the higher positions in the
service of the bourgeoisie in offices, stores and factories as clerks,
managers, chemists, technicists, engineers, constructors, etc.,
and also the so-called liberal professions: jurists, physicians,
theologians, writers, artists, architects, teachers, etc.
Thousands upon thousands who would formerly have taken up a trade,
now seek professional positions, because there is no longer any
possibility of maintaining an independent and decent livelihood by
practicing a trade. All strive for learning and a higher education.
High schools, colleges and polytechnical institutes spring up like
mushrooms, and the existing ones are overcrowded. In the same
measure the number of students at the universities increases, and
the number of scholars in physical and chemical laboratories, in art
schools, in trade and commercial schools, in the higher institutions
of learning for women, etc. All departments, without exception,
are over-crowded, and the stream is still rising. New demands are
constantly being made for the establishment of colleges and higher
institutions of learning, to accommodate the large number of pupils
and students. Officials and private persons issue warnings upon
warnings, now against the study of one subject and then against the
study of another. Even theology, (that formerly threatened to dry
out on account of a lack of candidates) now receives its share of
blessings from the abundance and finds its positions filled again.
“I will preach belief in ten thousand gods and devils, if required,
only give me a position that will support me,” is the general cry.
Sometimes the respective ministers even refuse to give their consent
to the establishment of new educational institutions, “because the
ones in existence amply supply the demand for candidates in all
departments.”
This state of affairs is rendered more severe by the fact that
the competitive and destructive struggle of the bourgeoisie among
themselves, compels many of their sons to seek public positions.
Moreover, the steadily growing standing army, with its mass of
officers, whose promotion is exceedingly slow during a long period
of peace, causes many of them to be pensioned during the best years
of their lives, and these, aided by the state, seek employment in
all kinds of official positions. The great number of candidates for
civil service positions, from lower grades of the army, rob other
strata of their living. To this must, furthermore, be added that
the swarm of imperial state and municipal officials of all degrees,
educate, and must educate, their children mainly for professions,
like the ones enumerated above. The social position, education and
requirements of these classes make it necessary to withhold their
children from the so-called lower occupations, but these, as a matter
of fact, are over-crowded also. The system of one-year voluntary
service in the army, that, upon the attainment of a certain degree
of education and a certain material sacrifice, permits young men
to complete their military service in one year instead of in two
or three, also increases the number of candidates for offices and
positions. There are, especially, many sons of wealthy peasants who
do not care to return to their native villages and the professions
of their fathers.
As a result of all these circumstances, the proletariat of scholars
and artists and of the so-called liberal professions, is more numerous
in Germany than in any other country. This proletariat is constantly
increasing, and is bearing the fermentation and dissatisfaction with
existing conditions into the highest strata of society. This youth
is aroused and incited to a criticism of the existing order, and
helps to hasten the general decomposition. So these conditions have
brought about that the German Social Democracy took the leadership
in the gigantic struggle of the future. German Socialists were the
ones to discover the laws underlying modern social development, and
to demonstrate scientifically that Socialism will be the coming form
of society. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels took the lead. They were
followed by Ferdinand Lassalle, whose agitation fired the masses.
German Socialists have also been the pioneers of Socialistic thought
among the workingmen of other countries.
Half a century ago, Buckle wrote, as a result of his studies of
German education and culture, that Germany possessed a number of the
greatest scholars, but that in no other country, the gulf between
the class of scholars and the mass of the people were equally great.
This was true of Germany, as long as science was limited to that
circle of scholars who stood aloof from that practical life. But,
since Germany has been revolutionized economically, science has been
pressed into the service of practical life. Science itself became
practical. People began to recognize that science attained its full
value only when it helped to promote the comforts of life. The
development of capitalistic production on a large scale forced this
recognition upon us. As a result, all branches of knowledge have been
democratized in Germany during the last decade. The great number
of young men trained for the practice of learned professions, have
helped to carry science among the people, and the general education,
that has attained a higher degree in Germany, than in most other
countries, has disseminated many products of the intellect among the
masses. But the Socialist movement, especially, with its literature,
its newspapers, its societies and meetings, its parliamentary
representation and its constantly practiced criticism on all fields
of public life, has considerably raised the intellectual level of
the masses.
The exceptional laws enacted against the Social Democrats (from 1878
to 1890) have in no wise changed this. They merely hemmed in the
movement to some extent, and slackened its pace. But they also helped
to make the movement more profound, and to arouse much bitterness
against the ruling classes and the powers of the state. The final
repeal of the exceptional laws was only due to the development of
the Social Democratic Party, under these laws, and to the economic
development of the nation. Thus the movement is progressing, as it
must progress, under the given circumstances.
As the Socialist movement has progressed in Germany, it has also
progressed, beyond all expectations, in other states of the civilized
world. The international congresses of labor, whose attendance is
constantly increasing, furnish an eloquent proof of this progress.
So the great war of the minds has begun in all civilized countries
of the world, and is being waged with the greatest ardor. Beside the
social sciences, the wide realm of the natural sciences, hygiene,
history and philosophy, furnish the weapons for this war. The
foundations of existing conditions are attached on ~all~ sides, and the
strongest blows are directed against the pillars of the old régime.
Revolutionary thoughts penetrate the most conservative circles, and
create confusion in the camp of our enemies. Artisans and scholars,
farmers and artists, merchants and officers, even manufacturers and
bankers, in short, men of all positions, join the workingmen, who
form the bulk of that great army that is striving for victory, and
is bound to win it. All mutually support and supplement each other.
Woman, too, and especially the proletarian woman, has been called
upon, not to lag behind in this struggle that is being fought
for her liberation and redemption also. It is up to her to prove
that she has recognized her true position in the movement, and in
the struggle of the present for a better future, and that she is
determined to participate. It is the duty of the men to help her to
cast aside all prejudices and to take part in the great struggle.
Let no one underestimate his strength, and think that his help is
of no consequence. In the struggle for the progress of mankind, no
power, not even the weakest, can be spared. The steady fall of drops
will finally hollow the hardest stone. Many drops make a brook,
the brooks make a river, and the rivers make a stream. Finally, no
obstacle is strong enough to hem the stream’s majestic course. It
is the same with the development of man. If all who feel called
upon devote their whole strength to this struggle, the ultimate
victory will be certain. This victory will be all the greater, the
more eagerly and unselfishly each one pursues the mapped out path.
Doubts, whether the individual for all his sacrifices, toils and
efforts, may still live to see the dawn of a new, more beautiful
period of civilization, must not effect us, nor must they prevent us
from pursuing the chosen path. We can neither determine the length,
nor the nature of the phases of development, that this struggle for
the highest aims must still pass thru; we can do this as little as
we have any certainty in regard to the duration of our lives. But
as we are dominated by the joy of living, so may we also cherish
the hope that we may live to see this victory. We are living in an
age that rushes forward “with seven league boots,” and that makes
all enemies of a ~new, higher~ order of society tremble.
Every day furnishes new proof of the rapid growth, and the tremendous
spread of Socialist thought. Everywhere there is motion and progress.
The dawn of a better day is drawing nigh. So let us struggle and
strive onward, regardless of “where” and “when” the boundary-posts
of a new and better age for mankind will be raised. If we should
fall in the course of this great struggle for liberation, others
will take our place. We will fall with the consciousness of having
done our duty as human beings, ~and with the conviction that the
goal will be attained, no matter how the powers hostile to humanity
may oppose and resist the triumphal march of progress~.
“~The future belongs to Socialism, that is, primarily, to the worker
and to woman.~”
[Transcriber’s Notes:
The texts of pages 365 and 366 (part of Chapter XX, Section 1) are
out of order in the original. The texts of these pages are in the
correct order in this e-text.
The list of Contents has been moved from the end of the book. Headings
and page numbers have been matched to those in the main text.
The styling of headings has been made consistent. Missing section
numbers in section headings have been supplied.
To fit the width restriction for this text version, some tables have
been reformatted and/or split.
Errors in punctuation have been corrected.
No changes to the numerical figures and words in the text, including
those with inconsistent hyphenation and variant spellings, have been
made except those listed below. Changes involving footnote markers
and table column headings have been made based on the 62nd German
edition (published 1973).
Page 25, “goddesses” changed from “godesses” (goddesses Astarte,
Demeter); “Isis” from “Iris” (Latona, Isis, Frigga).
Page 26, “Andombies” changed from “Audombies” (Andombies on the
Congo).
Page 28, “antiquity” changed from “anitquity” (states of antiquity);
“necessitated” from “ncessitated” (necessitated special knowledge).
Page 34, “Thesmophoria” changed from “Thermophoria” (celebration
of the Thesmophoria).
Page 36, “Eumenides” changed from “Euminedes” (the Eumenides reply).
Page 40, marker for footnote [13] was inserted (by Aristophanes,[13]).
Page 43, “Athens’” changed from “Athen’s” (Athens’ greatest rival);
“across” from “acros” (across the Taygetus).
Page 44, “Isis” changed from “Iris” (Egyptian festivals of Isis).
Page 48, “furthermore” changed from “furthemore” (can furthermore
be gathered); “Araucanians” from “Araunanians” (among the
Araucanians).
Page 49, “Tarnowsky” changed from “Tarnowsgy” (Tarnowsky was told).
Page 52, “Nabataeans” changed from “Nabastaeans” (Nabataeans,
an Arabian tribe); “Rechabites” from “Rachebites” (Among the
Rechabites).
Page 53, “trampled” changed from “trampeled” (and trampled upon).
Page 54, “adulteriis” changed from “adultriis” (lex Julia de
adulteriis).
Page 59, “neighbor’s” changed from “neighbors” (that is his
neighbor’s).
Pages 73–74, “praiseworthy” changed from “praisworthy” (this
praiseworthy town).
Page 74, “maintenance” changed from “maintainance” (maintenance
of brothels).
Page 93, “harassing” changed from “harrassing” (harassing and
persecution); “intellectual” from “intellectuel” (their intellectual
horizon).
Page 97, “develop” changed from “devlop” (to develop normally).
Page 98, “knowledge” changed from “konwledge” (we decry knowledge).
Page 104, “Mill” changed from “Mills” (John Stuart Mill says in
regard).
Page 105, “Atheneum” changed from “Antheneum” (fragments of
‘Atheneum’).
Page 111, “Mill” changed from “Mills” (John Stuart Mill says: “Men).
Page 116, “twenty” changed from “tweny” (be twenty and).
Page 127, “strata” changed from “starta” (and other strata).
Page 134, “471,519” changed from “471-519” (and 471,519 in 1899).
Page 136, “illegitimate” changed from “illigitimate” (their
illegitimate relations); “thirtieth” from “thirthieth” (attained
the thirtieth year); “Constantinople” from “Contanstinople” (In
1872 at Constantinople).
Page 137, “2236” changed from “22236” (from 1902 to 1906, 2236).
Page 138, “interdite” changed from “enterdite” (paternité est
interdite); “conçu pendant” from “concupendant” (L’enfant conçu
pendant).
Page 139, “retrogressive” changed from “retogressive” (a
retrogressive one).
Page 140, “abortions” changed from “obortions” (of criminal
abortions).
Page 148, “characteristics” changed from “charactecistics” (that
these characteristics).
Page 150, “equally” changed from “equaly” (are equally ignorant).
Page 153, “physician” changed from “physican” (the physician must).
Page 154, “characteristics” changed from “charecteristics”
(differences and characteristics).
Page 155, “than” changed from “that” (more women than men).
Page 157, table, supplied missing first comma in “174,914,119”.
Page 165, “revolution” changed from “revolntion” (a complete
revolution).
Page 169, “lowered” changed from “lowerred” (has been somewhat
lowered); “pensioners” from “pensioneers” (pensioners with their
families).
Page 171, second table, “925” changed from “225”; “1008” from “008”.
Page 174, “strongly” changed from “stongly” (particularly strongly at).
Page 175, “innate” changed from “inate” (an innate vice).
Page 176, the sentence “~But they do not draw ... conditions.~”
is bold only up to “different” in the original.
Page 182, “associates” changed from “asociates” (everyone who
associates).
Page 188, “afflicted” changed from “afflcted” (afflicted with this
disease); “secrets” from “secets” (reveal their secrets).
Page 189, “tournament” changed from “tournamentt” (eel-catching
tournament).
Page 192, “Buenos” changed from “Buneos” (and Buenos Ayres); inserted
“to” in “paid to the agents”.
Page 201, “désignés” changed from “designés” (ils seront désignés);
“Aucune” from “Aucunne” (Aucune autre qualification).
Page 203, “Bertillon” changed from “Bertillion” (Bertillon claims,
that).
Page 205, “appalling” changed from “apalling” (reveal appalling
facts).
Page 206, “increased” changed from “in creased” (have increased by).
Page 207, “about” changed from “abo t” (about one-fifth);
“gonorrhoea” from “gonorrheoa” (about one-fifth, become diseased
with gonorrhoea); “unmarried” from “unmaried” (of unmarried
life).
Page 208, “Russia” changed from “Rusia” (Russia, 40.5); changed
periods in “121.55” and “121.94” from commas (in 1905 121.55
cases and in 1906 121.94 cases).
Page 211, table, supplied missing period in “61.1”.
Page 212, table key, footnote marker [126] inserted after row
heading “United States of America”.
Page 213, footnote marker [128] inserted after “to the entire
population.”
Page 213, table column heading, “persons” changed from “person”
(Of 100 persons gainfully employed).
Page 215, first table, “−” sign before “162,049” changed from “+”
sign; supplied unclear fifth digit “9” in “180,690”; supplied
missing third digit “9” in “179,153”.
Page 215, second table key, row heading “Independent” changed from
“Indepent”.
Page 215, third table, supplied respective second, third, and fifth
column headings “1907”, “1895”, and “%”; changed period in “21.77”
from comma.
Page 217, first table, supplied heading “1901” for third column;
“manufacture” changed from “manufacfacture” (manufacture of
machinery).
Page 218, “good” changed from “goed” (a good wage).
Page 219, table, data “2.0” changed from “0.6”.
Page 224, “$6” changed from “$4” ($3.75 to $6).
Page 225, second table, fifth row, supplied missing period in
“$2.50”.
Page 229, “preceded” changed from “preceeded” (preceded by an
operation); “paraffine” from “peraffine” (quinine, soda, paraffine).
Page 230, “degeneration” changed from “deegneration” (increase
of immorality, degeneration); “mortality” from “morality” (and
infant mortality).
Page 232, “object” changed from “obejct” (object of hatred).
Page 242, “narrow-chested” changed from “narow-chested” (small,
narrow-chested).
Page 247, “narrower” changed from “narower” (narrower vascular
system); “possesses” from “possessses” (that he possesses).
Page 248, “would” changed from “wonld” (would not differ).
Page 249, “Gauss” changed from “Ganss” (famous mathematician Gauss).
Page 250, “independent” changed from “dependent” (independent of
one another).
Page 252, “otherwise” changed from “othrwise” (what otherwise
remains).
Page 258, “make” changed from “maks” (so they make desperate
efforts).
Page 261, “Abyssinia” changed from “Abysinnia” (India, Abyssinia,
Persia).
Page 262, “dentistry” changed from “dentristry” (medicine and
dentistry); “enumerated” from “ennumerated” (were already
enumerated); “the” from “they” (that the girls’ colleges).
Page 266, “successor” changed from “successer” (appointed his
successor).
Page 273, “admitted” changed from “admited” (unmarried women were
admitted).
Page 279, “patriarchal” changed from “patriarchial” (the patriarchal
superiority).
Page 281, “Ursins” changed from “Ursin” (Princess of Ursins).
Page 289, “organized” changed from “orgainzed” (the territory was
organized).
Page 293, “administration” changed from “adminstration” (in the
administration of schools).
Page 296, “same” changed from “asme” (and be elected to same);
“British” from “Birtish” (the British colony).
Page 297, “permitted” changed from “permittel” (permitted to
exercise).
Page 299, “possessions” changed from “possesions” (and no
possessions); “favor” from “faver” (compels them to favor).
Page 305, “reorganization” changed from “reorgainzation” (A thorough
reorganization).
Page 309, “subsistence” changed from “subsistance” (of its means
of subsistence).
Page 313, “$” inserted before “1,215,000,000”; “million” changed
from “milion” (16 to 20 million men); in “~uncontrollable~ and
~indirigible~”, “uncon” not bold in the original.
Page 316, “committed” changed from “commited” (worst crimes are
committed).
Page 317, “penalties” changed from “penalities” (with severe
penalties).
Page 321, first table, supplied missing “9” in column heading
“1895”; supplied missing second to the last “1” in “2,338,511”;
supplied missing period in “121.46”; supplied missing comma in
“432,491”; supplied missing second “7” in “477,695”.
Page 321, second table, supplied missing second “6” in “26,386,537”.
Page 325, “number” changed from “uumber” (we find that their
number).
Page 327, “Wurtemberg” changed from “Wurtemburg” (excluding Bavaria,
Wurtemberg).
Page 327, second table, supplied third column heading “Commercial”.
This heading reads “Darunter gewerbliche” in the German 62nd
edition.
Page 336, inserted “per cent.” in “84.3 per cent. of all taxpayers”.
Pages 336–337, syllable “in” in “~income of more than ... taxpayers~”
is not bold in the original.
Page 338, “insidiously” changed from “insiduously” (and insidiously
disparaging).
Page 346, “wherever” changed from “whereever” (But wherever the
control).
Page 348, “affect” changed from “effect” (affect the peasant as well).
Page 349, “affected” changed from “effected” (has affected the rural
districts).
Page 354, “other” changed from “ohter” (in other districts).
Page 357, “Windischgraetz” changed from “Windischgraatz” (Alfred
Windischgraetz).
Page 359, “humidity” changed from “humiditty” (decrease in humidity).
Page 360, “Samara” changed from “Ssamara” (district of Samara);
“Buguruslan” from “Buguruslaw” (district of Buguruslan);
“Novousensk” from “Novausensk” (Nikolajewsk and Novousensk);
“With” from “Wtih” (With the cutting down).
Page 362, “meteorological” changed from “meterological”
(meteorological and political); “déluge” from “deluge” (Après
nous le déluge!).
Page 366, “organization” changed from “orgainzation” (an organization
is required).
Page 367, “c’est” changed from “cèst” (L’état c’est moi);
“reipublicae” from “reipublica” (~Salus reipublicae suprema lex
esto~).
Page 373, “possesses” changed from “posseses” (commerce also
possesses).
Page 374, “statistically” changed from “statistictlly” (been
statistically determined).
Page 375, “endeavour” changed from “endeavours” (people will
endeavour).
Page 379, “Hertzka” changed from “Hertza” (Hertzka also takes).
Page 382, “and” changed from “nad” (institutions and appliances).
Page 386, exchanged positions of footnote markers [219] and [220].
Page 392, “artificially” changed from “artifically” (produced
grape-sugar artificially).
Page 396, “and” changed from “nad” (crises, and unemployment).
Page 397, “suffice” changed from “sufficice” (would not suffice
to satisfy).
Page 399, “questions” changed from “quetsions” (one of the questions).
Page 405, “bazaars” changed from “bazzars” (elegant bazaars).
Page 406, supplied missing “c” in “municipalities” (for entire
municipalities).
Page 412, “124,000” changed from “124.000” (investment of
124,000 marks).
Page 413, “Pomerania” changed from “Pommerania” (of Russia and
Pomerania).
Page 417, “oat-grinders” changed from “oat-ginders” (oat-grinders,
etc.).
Page 419, “succeeded” changed from “succeded” (succeeded in
removing).
Page 420, “than” changed from “that” (make better flour than that).
Page 423, inserted “will” in “material will be saved”.
Page 425, “generator” changed from “generater” (an artificial
generator); “drought” from “draught” (safeguard against drought).
Page 437, “progresses” changed from “pregresses” (human development
progresses).
Page 452, “our children capable of its real enjoyment. An edu” in
“~certain of obtaining ... wealth.~” is not bold in the original.
Page 453, “suppression” changed from “suppresison” (suppression
of one’s); deleted duplicated “the” in “from the present point
of view”.
Page 454, “difference” changed from “dlfference” (difference of
opinions).
Page 459, “Pawlow” changed from “Pavlow” (Russian physiologist,
Pawlow).
Page 461, “measure” changed from “measue” (measure in which
civilization).
Page 465, “answer” changed from “ansewr” (we could answer);
“necessary” from “necsssary” (similar necessary tasks).
Page 470, “marriage” changed from “marirage” (hypocrites in
marriage); “irrefutably” from “irrefutibly” (we have irrefutably
proved).
Page 471, “Schopenhauer” changed from “Schoppenhauer” (pessimism
of Schopenhauer).
Page 479, “principal” changed from “principle” (first, and principal
means).
Page 480, “affected” changed from “effected” (These changes
especially affected).
Page 481, “bourgeoisie” changed from “bourgoisie” (For the English
bourgeoisie).
Page 496, “reproductive” changed from “reproductiive” (on
reproductive ability).
Page 504, “commercial” changed from “commerical” (and commercial
schools).
Footnote [28], “Yves” changed from “Yoes” (Yves Guyot).
Footnote [52], “Mayer” changed from “Meyr” (George v. Mayer).
Footnote [69], “détruit” changed from “detruit” (empire est détruit).
Footnote [70], table, supplied respective second and third column
headings “Women” and “Men”.
Footnote [83], “Hygiene” changed from “Hygienne” (Text Book of
Hygiene).
Footnote [84], “Th.” changed from “H.” (Th. Bade).
Footnote [89], “Severus” changed from “Severns” (Dr. H. Severus).
Footnote [99], “institutions” changed from “institutioons” (benefit
fund institutions).
Footnote [162], “strength” changed from “strenght” (size and
strength).
Footnote [182], “subtlety” changed from “sublety” (With that
subtlety).
Footnote [188], “mobilières” changed from “mobilièrs” (des valeurs
mobilières).
Footnote [189], “Aristotle” changed from “Aristotel” (Aristotle
says).
Footnote [206], “Rau’s” changed from “Raus’s” (first adaption of
Rau’s).
Footnote [234], “Mill” changed from “Mills” (Mill has honestly
tried).
Footnote [236], “that” changed from “tht” (that will disappear).
Footnote [246], “Delbrueck” changed from “Delbruek” (Dr. Max
Delbrueck).
Footnote [247], “Bernthsen” changed from “Benthsen” (According to
Prof. Bernthsen).
Footnote [252], “Philosophy” changed from “Philisophy” (Philosophy
of Law).
Footnote [257], “society” changed from “socity” (society would
introduce); “arbitrarily” from “arbitrarely” (_arbitrarily
created_).
Footnote [259], “1907” changed from “1097” (Stuttgart, 1907).
Footnote [264], “society” changed from “socitey” (treated in
bourgeois society?).
Some portions of the text that appear to be typographical errors
are printed as such in the original book. A list of these possible
misprints follows:
Page 37, “gynacontis” apparent typo for “gynaiconitis” or
“gynaikonitis”.
Page 216, the sentence
It is especially noteworthy that during 1881, the year of a
crisis, the number of men emparent one, since most of the
wives and daughters of number of women employed increased
by 80,638.
is apparent typo for
It is especially noteworthy that during 1881, the year of a
crisis, the number of men employed decreased compared to 1871
by 486,540 persons and the number of women employed increased
by 80,638.
In the German 62nd edition, the corresponding sentence reads
“Besonders bemerkenswert ist in der Tabelle, daß, obgleich im
Jahre 1881, das ein Krisenjahr war, die Zahl der beschäftigten
männlichen Personen im Vergleich zu 1871 um 486.540 Köpfe abnahm,
die Zahl der weiblichen um 80.638 zunahm.”
Page 323, table, the following data are apparent typos:
“7,474,046” for “5,474,046”
“4,338,123” for “4,438,123”
“5,390,288” for “5,490,288”
“9,071,097” for “9,039,097”
“12,816,552” for “12,784,552”
“13,694,160” for “11,413,892”
“4,161,961” for “6,422,229”
“17,856,121” for “17,836,121”
Page 387, apparently missing “an hour” or “per hour” after “speed of
201 kilometers”, “208 kilometers”, and “speed of 200 kilometers”.]