a scanty food supply only allowed a small 

 increase in the population ; we find polygamy 

 and a patriarchate at the time and in the place 

 where this fundamental economic reason does 

 not rule tyrannically. With historic times 

 appears the best and most advanced form, 

 monogamy, although that still needs to be 

 delivered from the absolutist conventionalism 

 of the indissoluble bond and of the prostitution 

 disguised and legalised (for economic reasons) 

 which sullies it in our epoch. 



Why claim that the constitution of property 

 ought to remain eternally what it is now, un- 

 changeable in the midst of this gigantic 

 current of social institutions, and of moral 

 rules subject to continued and profound 

 evolutions and transformations? Property 

 alone should be subjected to no change, and 

 should remain petrified in its form of private 

 monopoly of the land and of the means of 

 production ! 



Such is the absurd claim of economic and 

 legal orthodoxy. To the irresistible state- 

 ments of the theory of evolution only this 

 single concession has been made: the accessory 

 rules may vary, the abuses may be diminished. 

 The principle itself is not to be touched, and 

 a few individuals may appropriate for them- 

 selves the land and the means of production 

 necessary for the life of the whole social 

 organism, which thus remains for ever under 

 the domination, more or less direct, of these 

 holders of the physical basis of life.* 



* The partisans and opponents of free will are in 

 exactly the same position. 



Ancient metaphysics granted to man (the unique 



