THE STATE VERSUS THE MAN. 169 



I will briefly resume the motives given by Mr. Herbert Spencer to 

 show that any wish to improve the condition of the working-classes 

 by law, or by the action of public power, so as to bring about a greater 

 degree of equality among men, would be to run against the stream of 

 history, and a violation of natural laws. There are, he says, two types 

 of social organization, broadly distinguishable as the " militant " and 

 the "industrial" type. The first of these is characterized by the 

 regime of status, the second by the regime of contract. The latter 

 has become general among modern nations, especially in England and 

 America, whereas the militant type was almost universal formerly. 

 These two types may be defined as the system of compulsory co-opera- 

 tion and the system of voluntary co-operation. The typical structure 

 of the one may be seen in an army formed of conscripts, in which each 

 unit must fulfil commands under pain of death, and receives, in ex- 

 change for his services, food and clothing ; while the typical structure 

 of the other may be seen in a body of workers who agree freely to 

 exchange specified services at a given price, and who are at liberty to 

 separate at will. So long as States are in constant war against each 

 other, governments must perforce be on a military footing, as in an- 

 tiquity. Personal defence, then, being society's great object, it must 

 necessarily give absolute obedience to a chief, as in an army. It is 

 absolutely impossible to unite the blessings of freedom and justice at 

 home with the habitual commission of acts of violence and brutality 

 abroad. 



Thanks to the almost insensible progress of civilization and to 

 gradual liberal reforms, the ancient militant State was little by little 

 despoiled of its arbitrary powers, the circle of its interventions grew 

 narrower and narrower, and men became free economically, as well as 

 politically. We were advancing rapidly towards an industrial regime 

 of free contract. But, recently, the Liberals in all countries have 

 adopted an entirely opjDOsite course. Instead of restricting the powers 

 of the State, they are extending them, and this leads to socialism, the 

 ideal of which is to give to government the direction of all social ac- 

 tivity. Men imagine that, by thus acting, they are consulting the 

 interests of the working-classes. They believe that a remedy may be 

 found for the sufferings which result from the present order of things, 

 and that it is the State's mission to discover and apply that remedy. 

 By thus acting they simply increase the evils they would fain cure, 

 and prepare the way for a universal bondage, which awaits us all the 

 Coming Slavery. Be the authority exercised by king, assembly, or 

 people, I am none the less a slave if I am forced to obey in all things, 

 and to give up to others the net produce of my labour. Contemporary 

 progressism not only runs against the stream of history, by carrying 

 us back to despotic organizations of the militant system, but it also 

 violates natural laws, and thus prepares the degeneration of humanity. 

 In family life the gratuitous parental aid must be great in proportion 



