A REPLY TO HAECKEL 127 



the different orders. For instance, the socie- 

 ties of bees are 'monarchies', those of ants 're- 

 publics'. But in either case, biological varia- 

 tion determines the form of these societies. 

 Queen bees, drones, and workers are of or- 

 ganically different structure and equipped 

 with different specialized organs. The queen 

 bee is equipped only for the duties of con- 

 ception and the laying of eggs. The drone 

 cannot perform any other function but that 

 of fertilizing the queen. The worker alone has 

 organs for gathering flower dust, honey, and 

 manufacturing wax." Class divisions in bee 

 society are therefore "biological" and not 

 economic. But Haeckel's comparison ignores 

 this vital distinction. Before this argument 

 can be used against the Socialist advocacy of 

 class abolition, it must be shown that a queen 

 cannot wash clothes with starvation as an 

 alternative, and that a pleb woman could not 

 wear a coronet, should her father invest in 

 a busted duke. 



True there are other animal societies which 

 have no such biological division. But these 

 have no private property in the means of life, 

 and therefore no classes. Pelicans and crows 

 recognize only three grounds as justification 

 for idleness — infancy, old age and sickness or 

 accident. 



