SELECTION: ORGANIC AND SOCIAL 227 



is overthrown by another less evolved ? The only 

 thing a nation dies of is lack of men : and is 

 there not disquieting evidence of the increase of 

 incapables ? It is said that we cannot relax one 

 spine of our national belligerence, since we must, 

 at all costs, uphold our national supremacy, having 

 all these teeming millions to feed. But is this not, 

 in part at least, a vicious circle ? The question 

 arises whether it is not in great part preoccupation 

 with militarism that is responsible for keeping up 

 our national misery. With a little money saved 

 off belligerence, what might not be done towards 

 social improvement ! 



An end, then, to the courage and the daring and 

 the chivalry which war has ever kept alive ! But 

 can any one seriously believe this ? The story of 

 the exploration and conquest of earth and sea is 

 full of heroes, whose work was constructive, not 

 destructive. The man who has grit enough to 

 bring about the afforestation or the irrigation of 

 a country is not less worthy of honour than its 

 conqueror. 



SUMMARY OF THE 'ARGUMENT. In early days 

 there was a keen struggle for existence with the 

 forces of nature, with wild beasts, and between 

 fellow-men. There was much natural selection. 

 Gradually the venue changed, there has been a 

 persistent emancipation from the yoke of natural 

 selection, and among civilised peoples it has now 

 but little sway. This exposes our race to the 

 gravest risks of retrogression. To obviate this, 

 some suggest that we should return in part to the 

 old regime ; other advise the practice of some 

 social surgery ; but neither of these suggestions is 

 feasible for general tactics at least. It is also 



