The Unilateral Aberration 119 



exchange and robbery; even if it does not go so far 

 as to examine the inevitable social reactions which 

 result from aggression — the resistance of the vic- 

 tim, the increasing reciprocal preparations for 

 defence, and the increasing diversion of labour 

 from productive to unproductive purposes. Where 

 the processes of exchange have been established 

 the amount of grain available, of course, will 

 increase with the proportion of labour which 

 can be used for productive purposes, or with the 

 security of the country. But the effect of war is 

 precisely to retard the work of productive agricul- 

 ture, on account of the insecurity which it creates in 

 the country. At no time, and in no place, neither 

 at "the beginning" nor at the present time, has 

 war facilitated the means of obtaining subsist- 

 ence. Its effect has always been diametrically 

 opposite. 



The error of false comparison runs through much 

 of the philosophy of force. Plants struggle for 

 sunlight or moisture in a field, therefore, the 

 advocates of this philosophy claim, struggle is a 

 natural law, and the citizens of civilized states 

 ought to massacre each other until the end of 

 time. It would be difficult to find a "therefore" 

 more arbitrary, on account of the enormous 

 difference between plants in a field and the 

 citizens in a civilized state. The true biological 

 analogies have been pointed out in a preceding 

 chapter, and the superficial comparison of the 

 philosophy of force is mentioned again here only 



