416 Lord Beay [May 14, 



forbidden to be proprietors of the means of production, then what 

 is to determine whether a thing is a means of production or an 

 object of enjoyment ? Take this instance. A citizen presents labour- 

 checks enough to let him have a pony out of the State breeding-stud, 

 and another presents a sufficient number of labour-checks to get a 

 hansom. If they combine and ply for hire in their leisure hours, 

 in exchange, of course, of labour-checks, the pony and the hansom 

 cease to be a means of enjoyment of private individuals, and become 

 a means of production, though not owned by the State. If in- 

 spectors are to be appointed to determine the limit between objects 

 of enjoyment and means of production, and to keep people within the 

 limits of enjoyment and out of the limits of production, I do not 

 envy their task. 



Socialism, it is clear from these remarks, is not Communism. 

 Individual labour is remunerated, inheritance is not impossible, 

 family life does not come to an end, education need not be moulded in 

 one particular form, a division of goods does not take place, saving — 

 though it has not the incentive, which the bearing of interest gives to 

 it — is not hopeless. That improvidence would arise in such a com- 

 munity is evident, and — unless forced labour were adopted — it is not 

 clear how it would be dealt with. 



The great fundamental error of social democracy is that it con- 

 stitutes society on the basis of acquisition for society, whereas 

 human nature compels the individual to acquire for himself. Social 

 democracy is therefore Naturividrig, not consonant with human 

 instincts. 



According to the advanced evolutionists, carbon, hydrogen, oxy- 

 gen, and nitrogen constitute a plastidule, the most minute indepen- 

 deut living mass of protoplasm. The soul with which it is endowed 

 is called " die Plastidul Seele," or protoplastic soul. Virchow very 

 wittily speaks of Carbon and Co. as the " Grilnder " or promoters 

 of the protoplastic soul. " Griinder " being a term of reproach for 

 the founders of unsound financial concerns, Virchow embraces in 

 one common hatred Carbon and Co., and the socialists. With due 

 regard for the vehemence of this learned sarcasm, I venture to doubt 

 whether a rapprochement between social democracy and evolution 

 can be established, as Virchow does. I do not venture, in these 

 precincts sacred to science, to attack or to defend the theory of 

 evolution, but whatever it is, it is essentially opposed to socialism. 

 Out of original simplicity and unity evolution develops a multitude 

 of phenomena, a complex organism ; socialism wants to reduce this 

 complex organism to abnormal simplicity. The contrast is even more 

 striking, when we take the theory of natural selection. It starts 

 from the inexorable competition of all living creatures, and then 

 allows only the fittest to survive. The aristocracy — taking the word 

 in its proper sense — instead of disappearing, are the only class who 

 have a chance. Socialism starts from exactly opposite premises, and 

 takes from the " fittest " their vitality, clips their wings. Whatever 



