92 SOCIAL HEREDITY AND SOCIAL EVOLUTION 



one 's enemy. At first the enemy was anyone belong- 

 ing to another family. Later it was the member of 

 another clan or tribe. Later still it was only the 

 foreign kingdom or nation, and last of all the foreign 

 nation only in times of declared war. But in the 

 whole history wherever man recognized an enemy he 

 felt himself free from obligations toward him. Aris- 

 totle taught that the Greek had no more obligations 

 to barbarians than to beasts. 



So far as principle is concerned we do not stand 

 upon a higher plane to-day. To be sure, our sym- 

 pathies have broadened and we recognize obligations 

 extending over a much wider range. We are begin- 

 ning to speak of a universal brotherhood of man, 

 which involves, of course, universal obligations. But 

 we must remember that war was the universal condi- 

 tion of early people, and even to-day, let a period of 

 war arise, and we find our sense of obligation toward 

 the enemy vanishes at once. Even in times of peace 

 our methods of diplomacy are based upon the laws of 

 hostility rather than friendship. In settling ques- 

 tions of diplomacy the principles of justice and hon- 

 esty admittedly play a very small part. We are hop- 

 ing for a time when justice shall settle international 

 disputes, but it has not come yet. In diplomatic con- 

 tests each party endeavors to gain his point by every 

 possible advantage, and does not hesitate to use 

 force, trickery, argument, or deceit, and expects sim- 

 ilar treatment in turn. This actual state of affairs 

 to-day shows us that in principle we are upon the 

 same plane as early man, with love for our friend 

 and hate for our enemy. The difference lies simply 

 in our having extended the limits over which we 

 apply the name ''friend." To-day nation bears to 



