io 4 



exploit the primitive and savage basis of 

 hatred for a foreigner. 



But that does not mean that international 

 socialism may not be, even from this point of 

 view, a definite, moral scheme and an in- 

 evitable phase of human evolution. 



In the same way and in consequence of the 

 same sociological law, it is not true to claim 

 that in constituting collective ownership, 

 socialism will do away with every kind of 

 individual ownership. 



We must repeat again that one phase of 

 evolution cannot suppress all that has been 

 realised in preceding phases : it only suppresses 

 the manifestations which have ceased to be 

 vital, because they are in contradiction with 

 the new conditions of existence created by 

 the new phases. 



In substituting for individual property 

 social ownership of the land and means of 

 production, it is evident that the ownership 

 of food necessary for the individual will not 

 have been suppressed, nor that of clothing 

 and objects of personal use which will con- 

 tinue to be articles of individual or family 

 consumption. 



This form of individual property will then 

 always exist even in a collective regime, 

 because it is necessary and perfectly com- 

 patible with the social ownership of the land, 

 mines, factories, houses, machines, instruments 

 of work and means of transport. 



Does the collective'ownership of libraries 

 which we are seeing at work under our eyes 

 take away from individuals the personal 



