,marxism and ,darwinism ,,by ,,anton ,,pannekoek ,translated by ,nathan ,weiser4 ,,chicago ,,charles ,h4 ,,kerr ,,company ,,co-,,operative ,copyright1 #aiab ,by ,charles ,h4 ,kerr ,company ,illustration3 #fjf 8,,survival ,,of ,,the ,,fittest40 ,in northern climes1 the polar bear ,protects himself with fat and hair1 ,where snow is deep and ice is stark1 ,and half the year is cold and dark1 ,he still survives a clime like that ,by growing fur1 by growing fat4 ,these traits1 ,o bear1 which thou transmittest ,prove the ,survival of the ,fittest4 ,to polar regions waste and wan1 ,comes the encroaching race of man1 ,a puny1 feeble1 little bubber1 ,he has no fur1 he has no blubber4 ,the scornful bear sat down at ease ,to see the stranger starve and freeze ,but1 lo6 the stranger slew the bear1 ,and ate his fat and wore his hair2 ,these deeds1 ,o ,man1 which thou committest ,prove the ,survival of the ,fittest4 ,in modern times the ,millionaire ,protects himself as did the bear3 ,where ,poverty and ,hunger are ,he counts his bullion by the car3 ,where thousands perish still he thrives ,the wealth1 ,o ,croesus1 thou transmittest ,proves the ,survival of the ,fittest4 ,but1 lo1 some people odd and funny1 ,some men without a cent of money ,the simple common human race ,chose to improve their dwelling place3 ,they had no use for millionaires1 ,they calmly said the world was theirs1 ,they were so wise1 so strong1 so many1 ,the ,millionaires8there wasn't any4 ,these deeds1 ,o ,man1 which thou committest ,prove the ,survival of the ,fittest4 ,mrs4 ,charlotte ,stetson4 ,,contents4 ,,page4 ,i4 ,darwinism #g ,,ii4 ,marxism #af ,,iii4 ,marxism and the ,class ,struggle #ai ,,iv4 ,darwinism and the ,class ,struggle #bb ,v4 ,darwinism ,versus ,socialism #bg ,,vi4 ,natural ,law and ,social ,theory #cc ,,vii4 ,the ,sociability of ,man #cf ,,viii4 ,tools1 ,thought and ,language #db ,,ix4 ,animal ,organs and ,human ,tools #ej ,x4 ,capitalism and ,socialism #ed ,,marxism and ,,darwinism ,i4 ,,darwinism4 ,two scientists can hardly be named who have1 in the second half of the #aith century1 dominated the human mind to a greater degree than ,darwin and ,marx4 ,their teachings revolutionized the conception that the great masses had about the world4 ,for decades their names have been on the tongues of everybody1 and their teachings have become the central point of the mental struggles which accompany the social struggles of today4 ,the cause of this lies primarily in the highly scientific contents of their teachings4 ,the scientific importance of ,marxism as well as of ,darwinism consists in their following out the theory of evolution1 the one upon the domain of the organic world1 of things animate2 the other1 upon the domain of society4 ,this theory of evolution1 however1 was in no way new1 it had its advocates before ,darwin and ,marx2 the philosopher1 ,hegel1 made it even as the central point of his philosophy4 ,it is1 therefore1 necessary to observe closely what were the achievements of ,darwin and ,marx in this domain4 ,the theory that plants and animals have developed one from another is met with first in the nineteenth century4 ,formerly the question1 8,whence come all these thousands and hundreds of thousands of different kinds of plants and animals that we know80 was answered4 8,at the time of creation ,god created them all1 each after its kind40 ,this primitive theory was in conformity with the experiences had and with the oldest information that could be got4 ,according to the information1 all known plants and animals have always been the same4 ,scientifically1 this experience was thus expressed1 8,all kinds are invariable because the parents transmit their characteristics to their children40 ,there were1 however1 some peculiarities among plants and animals which gradually forced a different conception to be entertained4 ,they so nicely let themselves be arranged into a system which was first set up by the ,swedish scientist ,linnaeus4 ,according to this system1 the animals are divided into main divisions2 these divisions are divided into classes1 classes into orders1 orders into families1 families into species1 each of which contain a few kinds4 ,the more semblance there is in their characteristics1 the nearer they stand towards each other in this system1 and the smaller is the group to which they belong4 ,all the animals classed as mammalian show the same general characteristics in their bodily frame4 ,the herbivorous animals1 and carnivorous animals1 and monkeys1 each of which belongs to a different order1 are again differentiated4 ,bears1 dogs1 and cats1 all of which are rapacious animals1 have much more in common in bodily form than they have with horses or monkeys4 ,this conformity is still more obvious when we examine varieties of the same species2 the cat1 tiger and lion resemble each other in many respects where they differ from dogs and bears4 ,if we turn from the class of mammals to other classes1 such as birds or fishes1 we find greater differences than we find in the other class4 ,there is still1 however1 a slight resemblance in the formation of the body1 the skeleton and the nervous system are still there4 ,these features first disappear when we turn from this main division1 which embraces all the vertebrates1 and go to the molluscs 7soft bodied animals7 or to the polyps4 ,the entire animal world may thus be arranged into divisions and subdivisions4 ,had every different kind of animal been created entirely independent of all the others1 there would be no reason why such orders should exist4 ,there would be no reason why there should not be mammals having six paws4 ,we would have to assume1 then1 that at the time of creation1 ,god had taken ,linnaeus' system as a plan and created everything according to this plan4 ,happily we have another way of accounting for it4 ,the likeness in the construction of the body may be due to a real family relationship4 ,according to this conception1 the conformity of peculiarities show how near or remote the relationship is2 just as the resemblance of brothers and sisters is greater than between remote relatives4 ,the animal classes were1 therefore1 not created individually1 but descended one from another4 ,they form one trunk that started with simple foundations and which has continually developed2 the last and thin twigs are our present existing kinds4 ,all species of cats descend from a primitive cat1 which together with the primitive dog and the primitive bear1 is the descendant of some primitive type of rapacious animal4 ,the primitive rapacious animal1 the primitive hoofed animal and the primitive monkey have descended from some primitive mammal1 etc4 ,this theory of descent was advocated by ,lamarck and by ,geoffrey ,st4 ,hilaire4 ,it did not1 however1 meet with general approval4 ,these naturalists could not prove the correctness of this theory and1 therefore1 it remained only a hypothesis1 a mere assumption4 ,when ,darwin came1 however1 with his main book1 ,the ,origin of ,species1 it struck like a thunderbolt2 his theory of evolution was immediately accepted as a strongly proved truth4 ,since then the theory of evolution has become inseparable from ,darwin's name4 ,why so8 ,this was partly due to the fact that through experience ever more material was accumulated which went to support this theory4 ,animals were found which could not very well be placed into the classification such as oviparous mammals 7that is1 animals which lay eggs and nourish their offspring from their breast4,translator71 fishes having lungs1 and invertebrate animals4 ,the theory of descent claimed that these are simply the remnants of the transition between the main groups4 ,excavations have revealed fossil remains which looked different from animals living now4 ,these remains have partly proved to be the primitive forms of our animals1 and that the primitive animals have gradually developed to existing ones4 ,then the theory of cells was formed2 every plant1 every animal1 consists of millions of cells and has been developed by incessant division and differentiation of single cells4 ,having gone so far1 the thought that the highest organisms have descended from primitive beings having but a single cell1 could not appear as strange4 ,all these new experiences could not1 however1 raise the theory to a strongly proved truth4 ,the best proof for the correctness of this theory would have been to have an actual transformation from one animal kind to another take place before our eyes1 so that we could observe it4 ,but this is impossible4 ,how then is it at all possible to prove that animal forms are really changing into new forms8 ,this can be done by showing the cause1 the propelling force of such development4 ,this ,darwin did4 ,darwin discovered the mechanism of animal development1 and in doing so he showed that under certain conditions some animal-kinds will necessarily develop into other animal-kinds4 ,we will now make clear this mechanism4 ,its main foundation is the nature of transmission1 the fact that parents transmit their peculiarities to children1 but that at the same time the children diverge from their parents in some respects and also differ from each other4 ,it is for this reason that animals of the same kind are not all alike1 but differ in all directions from the average type4 ,without this so-called variation it would be wholly impossible for one animal species to develop into another4 ,all that is necessary for the formation of a new species is that the divergence from the central type become greater and that it goes on in the same direction until this divergence has become so great that the new animal no longer resembles the one from which it descended4 ,but where is that force that could call forth the ever growing variation in the same direction8 ,lamarck declared that this was owing to the usage and much exercise of certain organs2 that1 owing to the continuous exercise of certain organs1 these become ever more perfected4 ,just as the muscles of men's legs get strong from running much1 in the same way the lion acquired its powerful paws and the hare its speedy legs4 ,in the same way the giraffes got their long necks because in order to reach the tree leaves1 which they ate1 their necks were stretched so that a short-necked animal developed to the long-necked giraffe4 ,to many this explanation was incredible and it could not account for the fact that the frog should have such a green color which served him as a good protecting color4 ,to solve the same question1 ,darwin turned to another line of experience4 ,the animal breeder and the gardener are able to raise artificially new races and varieties4 ,when a gardener wants to raise from a certain plant a variety having large blossoms1 all he has to do is to kill before maturity all those plants having small blossoms and preserve those having large ones4 ,if he repeats this for a few years in succession1 the blossoms will be ever larger1 because each new generation resembles its predecessor1 and our gardener1 having always picked out the largest of the large for the purpose of propagation1 succeeds in raising a plant with very large blossoms4 ,through such action1 done sometimes deliberately and sometimes accidentally1 people have raised a great number of races of our domesticated animals which differ from their original form much more than the wild kinds differ from each other4 ,if we should ask an animal-breeder to raise a long-necked animal from a short-necked one1 it would not appear to him an impossibility4 ,all he would have to do would be to choose those having partly longer necks1 have them inter-bred1 kill the young ones having narrow necks and again have the long-necked inter-breed4 ,if he repeated this at every new generation the result would be that the neck would ever become longer and we would get an animal resembling the giraffe4 ,this result is achieved because there is a definite will with a definite object1 which1 to raise a certain variety1 chooses certain animals4 ,in nature there is no such will1 and all the deviations must again be straightened out by interbreeding1 so that it is impossible for an animal to keep on departing from the original stock and keep going in the same direction until it becomes an entirely different species4 ,where1 then1 is that power in nature that chooses the animals just as the breeder does8 ,darwin pondered this problem long before he found its solution in the 8struggle for existence40 ,in this theory we have a reflex of the productive system of the time in which ,darwin lived2 because it was the capitalist competitive struggle which served him as a picture for the struggle for existence prevailing in nature4 ,it was not through his own observation that this solution presented itself to him4 ,it came to him by his reading the works of the economist ,malthus4 ,malthus tried to explain that in our bourgeois world there is so much misery and starvation and privation because population increases much more rapidly than the existing means of subsistence4 ,there is not enough food for all2 people must1 therefore1 struggle with each other for their existence1 and many must go down in this struggle4 ,by this theory capitalist competition as well as the misery existing were declared as an unavoidable natural law4 ,in his autobiography ,darwin declares that it was ,malthus' book which made him think about the struggle for existence4 8,in ,october1 #ahch1 that is1 fifteen months after ,i had begun my systematic inquiry1 ,i happened to read for amusement ,malthus on population1 and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long continuous observation of the habits of animals and plants1 it at once struck me that under these circumstances favorable variations would tend to be preserved1 and unfavorable ones to be destroyed4 ,the result of this would be the formation of new species4 ,here1 then1 ,i had at last got a theory by which to work40 ,it is a fact that the increase in the birth of animals is greater than the existing food permits of sustaining4 ,there is no exception to the rule that all organic beings tend to increase so rapidly that our earth would be overrun very soon by the offspring of a single pair1 were these not destroyed4 ,it is for this reason that a struggle for existence must arise4 ,every animal tries to live1 does its best to eat1 and seeks to avoid being eaten by others4 ,with its particular peculiarities and weapons it struggles against the entire antagonistic world1 against animals1 cold1 heat1 dryness1 inundations1 and other natural occurrences that may threaten to destroy it4 ,above all1 it struggles with the animals of its own kind1 who live in the same way1 have the same peculiarities1 use the same weapons and live by the same nourishment4 ,this struggle is not a direct one2 the hare does not struggle directly with the hare1 nor the lion with the lionunless it is a struggle for the femalebut it is a struggle for existence1 a race1 a competitive struggle4 ,all of them can not reach a grown-up age2 most of them are destroyed1 and only those who win the race remain4 ,but which are the ones to win in the race8 ,those which1 through their peculiarities1 through their bodily structures are best able to find food or to escape an enemy2 in other words1 those which are best adapted to existing conditions will survive4 8,because there are ever more individuals born than can remain alive1 the struggle as to which shall remain alive must start again and that creature that has some advantage over the others will survive1 but as these diverging peculiarities are transmitted to the new generations1 nature itself does the choosing1 and a new generation will arise having changed peculiarities40 ,here we have another application for the origin of the giraffe4 ,when grass does not grow in some places1 the animals must nourish themselves on tree leaves1 and all those whose necks are too short to reach these leaves must perish4 ,in nature itself there is selection1 and nature selects only those having long necks4 ,in conformity with the selection done by the animal breeder1 ,darwin called this process 8natural selection40 ,this process must necessarily produce new species4 ,because too many are born of a certain species1 more than the existing food supply can sustain1 they are forever trying to spread over a larger area4 ,in order to procure their food1 those living in the woods go to the plain1 those living on the soil go into the water1 and those living on the ground climb on trees4 ,under these new conditions divergence is necessary4 ,these divergencies are increased1 and from the old species a new one develops4 ,this continuous movement of existing species branching out into new relations results in these thousands of different animals changing still more4 ,while the ,darwinian theory explains thus the general descent of the animals1 their transmutation and formation out of primitive beings1 it explains1 at the same time1 the wonderful conformity throughout nature4 ,formerly this wonderful conformity could only be explained through the wise superintending care of ,god4 ,now1 however1 this natural descent is clearly understood4 ,for this conformity is nothing else than the adaptation to the means of life4 ,every animal and every plant is exactly adapted to existing circumstances1 for all those whose build is less conformable are less adapted and are exterminated in the struggle for existence4 ,the green-frog1 having descended from the brown-frog1 must preserve its protecting color1 for all those that deviate from this color are sooner found by the enemies and destroyed or find greater difficulty in obtaining their food and must perish4 ,it was thus that ,darwin showed us1 for the first time1 that new species continually formed out of old ones4 ,the theory of descent1 which until then was merely a presumptive inference of many phenomena that could not be explained well in any other way1 gained the certainty of an absolute inference of definite forces that could be proved4 ,in this lies the main reason that this theory had so quickly dominated the scientific discussions and public attention4 ,,ii4 ,,marxism4 ,if we turn to ,marxism we immediately see a great conformity with ,darwinism4 ,as with ,darwin1 the scientific importance of ,marx's work consists in this1 that he discovered the propelling force1 the cause of social development4 ,he did not have to prove that such a development was taking place2 every one knew that from the most primitive times new social forms ever supplanted older1 but the causes and aims of this development were unknown4 ,in his theory ,marx started with the information at hand in his time4 ,the great political revolution that gave ,europe the aspect it had1 the ,french ,revolution1 was known to everyone to have been a struggle for supremacy1 waged by the bourgeois against nobility and royalty4 ,after this struggle new class struggles originated4 ,the struggle carried on in ,england by the manufacturing capitalists against the landowners dominated politics2 at the same time the working class revolted against the bourgeoisie4 ,what were all these classes8 ,wherein did they differ from each other8 ,marx proved that these class distinctions were owing to the various functions each one played in the productive process4 ,it is in the productive process that classes have their origin1 and it is this process which determines to what class one belongs4 ,production is nothing else than the social labor process by which men obtain their means of subsistence from nature4 ,it is the production of the material necessities of life that forms the main structure of society and that determines the political relations and social struggles4 ,the methods of production have continuously changed with the progress of time4 ,whence came these changes8 ,the manner of labor and the productive relationship depend upon the tools with which people work1 upon the development of technique and upon the means of production in general4 ,because in the ,middle ,ages people worked with crude tools1 while now they work on gigantic machinery1 we had at that time small trade and feudalism1 while now we have capitalism2 it is also for this reason that at that time the feudal nobility and the small bourgeoisie were the most important classes1 while now it is the bourgeoisie and the proletarians which are the classes4 ,it is the development of tools1 of these technical aids which men direct1 which is the main cause1 the propelling force of all social development4 ,it is self-understood that the people are ever trying to improve these tools so that their labor be easier and more productive1 and the practice they acquire in using these tools1 leads their thoughts upon further improvements4 ,owing to this development1 a slow or quick progress of technique takes place1 which at the same time changes the social forms of labor4 ,this leads to new class relations1 new social institutions and new classes4 ,at the same time social1 i4 e41 political struggles arise4 ,those classes predominating under the old process of production try to preserve artificially their institutions1 while the rising classes try to promote the new process of production2 and by waging the class struggles against the ruling class and by conquering them they pave the way for the further unhindered development of technique4 ,thus the ,marxian theory disclosed the propelling force and the mechanism of social development4 ,in doing this it has proved that history is not something irregular1 and that the various social systems are not the result of chance or haphazard events1 but that there is a regular development in a definite direction4 ,in doing this it was also proved that social development does not cease with our system1 because technique continually develops4 ,thus1 both teachings1 the teachings of ,darwin and of ,marx1 the one in the domain of the organic world and the other upon the field of human society1 raised the theory of evolution to a positive science4 ,in doing this they made the theory of evolution acceptable to the masses as the basic conception of social and biological development4 ,,iii4 ,,marxism ,,and ,,the ,,class ,,struggle4 ,while it is true that for a certain theory to have a lasting influence on the human mind it must have a highly scientific value1 yet this in itself is not enough4 ,it quite often happened that a scientific theory was of utmost importance to science1 nevertheless1 with the probable exception of a few learned men1 it evoked no interest whatsoever4 ,such1 for instance1 was ,newton's theory of gravitation4 ,this theory is the foundation of astronomy1 and it is owing to this theory that we have our knowledge of heavenly bodies1 and can foretell the arrival of certain planets and eclipses4 ,yet1 when ,newton's theory of gravitation made its appearance1 a few ,english scientists were its only adherents4 ,the broad mass paid no attention to this theory4 ,it first became known to the mass by a popular book of ,voltaire's written a half century afterwards4 ,there is nothing surprising about this4 ,science has become a specialty for a certain group of learned men1 and its progress concerns these men only1 just as smelting is the smith's specialty1 and an improvement in the smelting of iron concerns him only4 ,only that which all people can make use of and which is found by everyone to be a life necessity can gain adherents among the large mass4 ,when1 therefore1 we see that a certain scientific theory stirs up zeal and passion in the large mass1 this can be attributed to the fact that this theory serves them as a weapon in the class struggle4 ,for it is the class struggle that engages almost all the people4 ,this can be seen most clearly in ,marxism4 ,were the ,marxian economic teachings of no importance in the modern class struggle1 then none but a few professional economists would spend their time on them4 ,it is1 however1 owing to the fact that ,marxism serves the proletarians as a weapon in the struggle against capitalism that the scientific struggles are centered on this theory4 ,it is owing to this service that ,marx's name is honored by millions who know even very little of his teaching1 and is despised by thousands that understand nothing of his theory4 ,it is owing to the great role the ,marxian theory plays in the class struggle that his theory is diligently studied by the large mass and that it dominates the human mind4 ,the proletarian class struggle existed before ,marx for it is the offspring of capitalist exploitation4 ,it was nothing more than natural that the workers1 being exploited1 should think about and demand another system of society where exploitation would be abolished4 ,but all they could do was to hope and dream about it4 ,they were not sure of its coming to pass4 ,marx gave to the labor movement and ,socialism a theoretical foundation4 ,his social theory showed that social systems were in a continuous flow wherein capitalism was only a temporary form4 ,his studies of capitalism showed that owing to the continuous development of perfection of technique1 capitalism must necessarily develop to ,socialism4 ,this new system of production can only be established by the proletarians struggling against the capitalists1 whose interest it is to maintain the old system of production4 ,socialism is therefore the fruit and aim of the proletarian class struggle4 ,thanks to ,marx1 the proletarian class struggle took on an entirely different form4 ,marxism became a weapon in the proletarian hands2 in place of vague hopes he gave a positive aim1 and in teaching a clear recognition of the social development he gave strength to the proletarian and at the same time he created the foundation for the correct tactics to be pursued4 ,it is from ,marxism that the workingmen can prove the transitoriness of capitalism and the necessity and certainty of their victory4 ,at the same time ,marxism has done away with the old utopian views that ,socialism would be brought about by the intelligence and good will of some judicious men2 as if ,socialism were a demand for justice and morality2 as if the object were to establish an infallible and perfect society4 ,justice and morality change with the productive system1 and every class has different conceptions of them4 ,socialism can only be gained by the class whose interest lies in ,socialism1 and it is not a question about a perfect social system1 but a change in the methods of production leading to a higher step1 i4 e41 to social production4 ,because the ,marxian theory of social development is indispensable to the proletarians in their struggle1 they1 the proletarians1 try to make it a part of their inner self2 it dominates their thoughts1 their feelings1 their entire conception of the world4 ,because ,marxism is the theory of social development1 in the midst of which we stand1 therefore ,marxism itself stands as the central point of the great mental struggles that accompany our economic revolution4 ,,iv4 ,,darwinism ,,and ,,the ,,class ,,struggle4 ,that ,marxism owes its importance and position only to the role it takes in the proletarian class struggle1 is known to all4 ,with ,darwinism1 however1 things seem different to the superficial observer1 for ,darwinism deals with a new scientific truth which has to contend with religious prejudices and ignorance4 ,yet it is not hard to see that in reality ,darwinism had to undergo the same experiences as ,marxism4 ,darwinism is not a mere abstract theory which was adopted by the scientific world after discussing and testing it in a mere objective manner4 ,no1 immediately after ,darwinism made its appearance1 it had its enthusiastic advocates and passionate opponents2 ,darwin's name1 too1 was either highly honored by people who understood something of his theory1 or despised by people who knew nothing more of his theory than that 8man descended from the monkey10 and who were surely unqualified to judge from a scientific standpoint the correctness or falsity of ,darwin's theory4 ,darwinism1 too1 played a role in the class-struggle1 and it is owing to this role that it spread so rapidly and had enthusiastic advocates and venomous opponents4 ,darwinism served as a tool to the bourgeoisie in their struggle against the feudal class1 against the nobility1 clergy-rights and feudal lords4 ,this was an entirely different struggle from the struggle now waged by the proletarians4 ,the bourgeoisie was not an exploited class striving to abolish exploitation4 ,oh no4 ,what the bourgeoisie wanted was to get rid of the old ruling powers standing in their way4 ,the bourgeoisie themselves wanted to rule1 basing their demands upon the fact that they were the most important class1 the leaders of industry4 ,what argument could the old class1 the class that became nothing but useless parasites1 bring forth against them8 ,they leaned on tradition1 on their ancient divine rights4 ,these were their pillars4 ,with the aid of religion the priests held the great mass in subjection and ready to oppose the demands of the bourgeoisie4 ,it was therefore for their own interests that the bourgeoisie were in duty bound to undermine the 8divinity0 right of rulers4 ,natural science became a weapon in the opposition to belief and tradition2 science and the newly discovered natural laws were put forward2 it was with these weapons that the bourgeoisie fought4 ,if the new discoveries could prove that what the priests were teaching was false1 the 8divine0 authority of these priests would crumble and the 8divine rights0 enjoyed by the feudal class would be destroyed4 ,of course the feudal class was not conquered by this only1 as material power can only be overthrown by material power1 but mental weapons become material tools4 ,it is for this reason that the bourgeoisie relied so much upon material science4 ,darwinism came at the desired time2 ,darwin's theory that man is the descendant of a lower animal destroyed the entire foundation of ,christian dogma4 ,it is for this reason that as soon as ,darwinism made its appearance1 the bourgeoisie grasped it with great zeal4 ,this was not the case in ,england4 ,here we again see how important the class struggle was for the spreading of ,darwin's theory4 ,in ,england the bourgeoisie had already ruled a few centuries1 and as a mass they had no interest to attack or destroy religion4 ,it is for this reason that although this theory was widely read in ,england1 it did not stir anybody2 it merely remained a scientific theory without great practical importance4 ,darwin himself considered it as such1 and for fear that his theory might shock the religious prejudices prevailing1 he purposely avoided applying it immediately to men4 ,it was only after numerous postponements and after others had done it before him1 that he decided to make this step4 ,in a letter to ,haeckel he deplored the fact that his theory must hit upon so many prejudices and so much indifference that he did not expect to live long enough to see it break through these obstacles4 ,but in ,germany things were entirely different1 and ,haeckel correctly answered ,darwin that in ,germany the ,darwinian theory met with an enthusiastic reception4 ,it so happened that when ,darwin's theory made its appearance1 the bourgeoisie was preparing to carry on a new attack on absolutism and junkerism4 ,the liberal bourgeoisie was headed by the intellectuals4 ,ernest ,haeckel1 a great scientist1 and of still greater daring1 immediately drew in his book1 8,natural ,creation10 most daring conclusions against religion4 ,so1 while ,darwinism met with the most enthusiastic reception by the progressive bourgeoisie1 it was also bitterly opposed by the reactionists4 ,the same struggle also took place in other ,european countries4 ,everywhere the progressive liberal bourgeoisie had to struggle against reactionary powers4 ,these reactionists possessed1 or were trying to obtain through religious followers1 the power coveted4 ,under these circumstances1 even the scientific discussions were carried on with the zeal and passion of a class struggle4 ,the writings that appeared pro and con on ,darwin have therefore the character of social polemics1 despite the fact that they bear the names of scientific authors4 ,many of ,haeckel's popular writings1 when looked at from a scientific standpoint1 are very superficial1 while the arguments and remonstrances of his opponents show unbelievable foolishness that can only be met in the arguments used against ,marx4 ,the struggle1 carried on by the liberal bourgeoisie against feudalism was not fought to its finish4 ,this was partly owing to the fact that everywhere ,socialist proletarians made their appearance1 threatening all ruling powers1 including the bourgeoisie4 ,the liberal bourgeoisie relented1 while the reactionary tendencies gained an upper hand4 ,the former zeal in combatting religion disappeared entirely1 and while it is true that the liberals and reactionists were still fighting among each other1 in reality1 however1 they neared each other4 ,the interest formerly manifested in science as a weapon in the class struggle1 has entirely disappeared1 while the reactionary tendency that the masses must be brought to religion1 became ever more pronounced4 ,the estimation of science has also undergone a change4 ,formerly the educated bourgeoisie founded upon science a materialistic conception of the universe1 wherein they saw the solution of the universal riddle4 ,now mysticism has gained the upper hand2 all that was solved appeared as very trivial1 while all things that remained unsolved1 appeared as very great indeed1 embracing the most important life question4 ,a sceptical1 critical and doubting frame of mind has taken the place of the former jubilant spirit in favor of science4 ,this could also be seen in the stand taken against ,darwin4 8,what does his theory show8 ,it leaves unsolved the universal riddle6 ,whence comes this wonderful nature of transmission1 whence the ability of animate beings to change so fitly80 ,here lies the mysterious life riddle that could not be overcome with mechanical principles4 ,then1 what was left of ,darwinism by the light of later criticism8 ,of course1 the advance of science began to make rapid progress4 ,the solution of one problem always brings a few more problems to the surface to be solved1 which were hidden underneath the theory of transmission that ,darwin had to accept as a basis of inquiry was ever more investigated1 a hot discussion arose about the individual factors of development and the struggle for existence4 ,while a few scientists directed their attention to variation1 which they considered due to exercise and adaptation to life 7following the principle laid down by ,lamarck7 this idea was expressly denied by scientists like ,weissman and others4 ,while ,darwin only assumed gradual and slow changes1 ,de ,vries found sudden and leaping cases of variation resulting in the sudden appearance of new species4 ,all this1 while it went to strengthen and develop the theory of descent1 in some cases made the impression that the new discoveries rent asunder the ,darwinian theory1 and therefore every new discovery that made it appear so was hailed by the reactionists as a bankruptcy of ,darwinism4 ,this social conception had its influence on science4 ,reactionary scientists claimed that a spiritual element is necessary4 ,the supernatural and insolvable has taken the place of ,darwinism and that class which in the beginning was the banner bearer of ,darwinism became ever more reactionary4 ,v4 ,,darwinism ,,versus ,,socialism4 ,darwinism has been of inestimable service to the bourgeoisie in its struggle against the old powers4 ,it was therefore only natural that bourgeoisdom should apply it against its later enemy1 the proletarians2 not because the proletarians were antagonistically disposed to ,darwinism1 but just the reverse4 ,as soon as ,darwinism made its appearance1 the proletarian vanguard1 the ,socialists1 hailed the ,darwinian theory1 because in ,darwinism they saw a corroboration and completion of their own theory2 not as some superficial opponents believe1 that they wanted to base ,socialism upon ,darwinism but in the sense that the ,darwinian discovery1that even in the apparently stagnant organic world there is a continuous developmentis a glorious corroboration and completion of the ,marxian theory of social development4 ,yet it was natural for the bourgeoisie to make use of ,darwinism against the proletarians4 ,the bourgeoisie had to contend with two armies1 and the reactionary classes know this full well4 ,when the bourgeoisie attacks their authority1 they point at the proletarians and caution the bourgeoisie to beware lest all authority crumble4 ,in doing this1 the reactionists mean to frighten the bourgeoisie so that they may desist from any revolutionary activity4 ,of course1 the bourgeois representatives answer that there is nothing to fear2 that their science but refutes the groundless authority of the nobility and supports them in their struggle against enemies of order4 ,at a congress of naturalists1 the reactionary politician and scientist ,virchow assailed the ,darwinian theory on the ground that it supported ,socialism4 8,be careful of this theory10 he said to the ,darwinists1 8for this theory is very nearly related to the theory that caused so much dread in our neighboring country40 ,this allusion to the ,paris ,commune1 made in the year famous for the hunting of ,socialists1 must have had a great effect4 ,what shall be said1 however1 about the science of a professor who attacks ,darwinism with the argument that it is not correct because it is dangerous6 ,this reproach1 of being in league with the red revolutionists1 caused a lot of annoyance to ,haeckel1 the defendant of this theory4 ,he could not stand it4 ,immediately afterwards he tried to demonstrate that it is just the ,darwinian theory that shows the untenableness of the ,socialist demands1 and that ,darwinism and ,socialism 8endure each other as fire and water40 ,let us follow ,haeckel's contentions1 whose main thoughts re-occur in most authors who base their arguments against ,socialism on ,darwinism4 ,socialism is a theory which presupposes natural equality for people1 and strives to bring about social equality2 equal rights1 equal duties1 equal possessions and equal enjoyments4 ,darwinism1 on the contrary1 is the scientific proof of inequality4 ,the theory of descent establishes the fact that animal development goes in the direction of ever greater differentiation or division of labor2 the higher or more perfect the animal1 the greater the inequality existing4 ,the same holds also good in society4 ,here1 too1 we see the great division of labor between vocations1 class1 etc41 and the higher we stand in social development the greater become the inequalities in strength1 ability and faculty4 ,the theory of descent is therefore to be recommended as 8the best antidote to the ,socialist demand of making all equal40 ,the same holds good1 but to a greater extent1 of the ,darwinian theory of survival4 ,socialism wants to abolish competition and the struggle for existence4 ,but ,darwinism teaches us that this struggle is unavoidable and is a natural law for the entire organic world4 ,not only is this struggle natural1 but it is also useful and beneficial4 ,this struggle brings an ever greater perfection1 and this perfection consists in an ever greater extermination of the unfit4 ,only the chosen minority1 those who are qualified to withstand competition1 can survive2 the great majority must perish4 ,many are called1 but few are chosen4 ,the struggle for existence results at the same time in a victory for the best1 while the bad and unfit must perish4 ,this may be lamentable1 just as it is lamentable that all must die1 but the fact can neither be denied nor changed4 ,we wish to remark here how a small change of almost similar words serves as a defence of capitalism4 ,darwin spoke about the survival of the fittest1 of those that are best fitted to the conditions4 ,seeing that in this struggle those that are better organized conquer the others1 the conquerors were called the vigilant1 and later the 8best40 ,this expression was coined by ,herbert ,spencer4 ,in thus winning on their field1 the conquerors in the social struggle1 the large capitalists1 were proclaimed the best people4 ,haeckel retained and still upholds this conception4 ,in #ahib he said1 8,darwinism1 or the theory of selection1 is thoroughly aristocratic2 it is based upon the survival of the best4 ,the division of labor brought about by development causes an ever greater variation in character1 an ever greater inequality among the individuals1 in their activity1 education and condition4 ,the higher the advance of human culture1 the greater the difference and gulf between the various classes existing4 ,communism and the demands put up by the ,socialists in demanding an equality of conditions and activity is synonymous with going back to the primitive stages of barbarism40 ,the ,english philosopher ,herbert ,spencer already had a theory on social growth before ,darwin4 ,this was the bourgeois theory of individualism1 based upon the struggle for existence4 ,later he brought this theory into close relation with ,darwinism4 8,in the animal world10 he said1 8the old1 weak and sick are ever rooted out and only the strong and healthy survive4 ,the struggle for existence serves therefore as a purification of the race1 protecting it from deterioration4 ,this is the happy effect of this struggle1 for if this struggle should cease and each one were sure of procuring its existence without any struggle whatsoever1 the race would necessarily deteriorate4 ,the support given to the sick1 weak and unfit causes a general race degeneration4 ,if sympathy1 finding its expressions in charity1 goes beyond its reasonable bounds1 it misses its object2 instead of diminishing1 it increases the suffering for the new generations4 ,the good effect of the struggle for existence can best be seen in wild animals4 ,they are all strong and healthy because they had to undergo thousands of dangers wherein all those that were not qualified had to perish4 ,among men and domestic animals sickness and weakness are so general because the sick and weak are preserved4 ,socialism1 having as its aim to abolish the struggle for existence in the human world1 will necessarily bring about an ever growing mental and physical deterioration40 ,these are the main contentions of those who use ,darwinism as a defence of the bourgeois system4 ,strong as these arguments might appear at first sight1 they were not hard for the ,socialists to overcome4 ,to a large extent1 they are the old arguments used against ,socialism1 but wearing the new garb of ,darwinistic terminology1 and they show an utter ignorance of ,socialism as well as of capitalism4 ,those who compare the social organism with the animal body leave unconsidered the fact that men do not differ like various cells or organs1 but only in degree of their capacity4 ,in society the division of labor cannot go so far that all capacities should perish at the expense of one4 ,what is more1 everyone who understands something of ,socialism knows that the efficient division of labor does not cease with ,socialism2 that first under ,socialism real divisions will be possible4 ,the difference between the workers1 their ability1 and employments will not cease2 all that will cease is the difference between workers and exploiters4 ,while it is positively true that in the struggle for existence those animals that are strong1 healthy and well survive1 yet this does not happen under capitalist competition4 ,here victory does not depend upon perfection of those engaged in the struggle1 but in something that lies outside of their body4 ,while this struggle may hold good with the small bourgeois1 where success depends upon personal abilities and qualifications1 yet with the further development of capital1 success does not depend upon personal abilities1 but upon the possession of capital4 ,the one who has a larger capital at command will soon conquer the one who has a smaller capital at his disposal1 although the latter may be more skillful4 ,it is not the personal qualities1 but the possession of money that decides who the victor shall be in the struggle4 ,when the small capitalists perish1 they do not perish as men but as capitalists2 they are not weeded out from among the living1 but from the bourgeoisie4 ,they still exist1 but no longer as capitalists4 ,the competition existing in the capitalist system is therefore something different in requisites and results from the animal struggle for existence4 ,those people that perish as people are members of an entirely different class1 a class that does not take part in the competitive struggle4 ,the workers do not compete with the capitalists1 they only sell their labor power to them4 ,owing to their being propertyless1 they have not even the opportunity to measure their great qualities and enter a race with the capitalists4 ,their poverty and misery cannot be attributed to the fact that they fell in the competitive struggle on account of weakness1 but because they were paid very little for their labor power1 it is for this very reason that1 although their children are born strong and healthy1 they perish in great mass1 while the children born to rich parents1 although born sick1 remain alive by means of the nourishment and great care that is bestowed on them4 ,these children of the poor do not die because they are sick or weak1 but because of external cause4 ,it is capitalism which creates all those unfavorable conditions by means of exploitation1 reduction of wages1 unemployment1 crises1 bad dwellings1 and long hours of employment4 ,it is the capitalist system that causes so many strong and healthy ones to succumb4 ,thus the ,socialists prove that1 different from the animal world1 the competitive struggle existing between men does not bring forth the best and most qualified1 but destroys many strong and healthy ones because of their poverty1 while those that are rich1 even if weak and sick1 survive4 ,socialists prove that personal strength is not the determining factor1 but it is something outside of man2 it is the possession of money that determines who shall survive and who shall perish4 ,,vi4 ,,natural ,,law ,,and ,,social ,,theory4 ,the false conclusions reached by ,haeckel and ,spencer on ,socialism are no surprise4 ,darwinism and ,marxism are two distinct theories1 one of which applies to the animal world1 while the other applies to society4 ,they supplement each other in the sense that1 according to the ,darwinian theory of evolution1 the animal world develops up to the stage of man1 and from then on1 that is1 after the animal has risen to man1 the ,marxian theory of evolution applies4 ,when1 however1 one wishes to carry the theory of one domain into that of the other1 where different laws are applicable1 he must draw wrong inferences4 ,such is the case when we wish to ascertain from natural law what social form is natural and applicable1 and this is just what the bourgeois ,darwinists did4 ,they drew the inference that the laws which govern in the animal world1 where the ,darwinian theory applies1 apply with equal force in the capitalist system1 and that therefore capitalism is a natural order and must endure forever4 ,on the other hand1 there were some ,socialists who desired to prove that1 according to ,darwin1 the ,socialist system is the natural one4 ,said these ,socialists1 8,under capitalism men do not carry on the struggle for existence with like tools1 but with unlike ones artificially made4 ,the natural superiority of those that are healthier1 stronger1 more intelligent or morally better1 is of no avail so long as birth1 class1 or the possession of money control this struggle4 ,socialism1 in abolishing all these artificial dissimilarities1 will make equal provisions for all1 and then only will the struggle for existence prevail1 wherein the real personal superiorities will be the deciding factors40 ,these critical arguments1 while they are not bad when used as refutations against bourgeois ,darwinists1 are still faulty4 ,both sets of arguments1 those used by the bourgeois ,darwinists in favor of capitalism1 and those of the ,socialists1 who base their ,socialism on ,darwin1 are falsely rooted4 ,both arguments1 although reaching opposite conclusions1 are equally false because they proceed from the wrong premises that there is a natural and a permanent system of society4 ,marxism has taught us that there is no such thing as a natural and a permanent social system1 and that there can be none1 or1 to put it another way1 every social system is natural1 for every social system is necessary and natural under given conditions4 ,there is not a single definite social system that can be accepted as natural2 the various social systems take the place of one another as a result of developments in the means of production4 ,each system is therefore the natural one for its particular time4 ,capitalism is not the only natural order1 as the bourgeoisie believes1 and no ,socialist system is the only natural system1 as some ,socialists try to prove4 ,capitalism was natural under the conditions of the nineteenth century1 just as feudalism was in the ,middle ,ages1 and as ,socialism will be in the coming age4 ,the attempt to put forward a certain system as the only natural and permanent one is as futile as if we were to take an animal and say that this animal is the most perfect of all animals4 ,darwinism teaches us that every animal is equally adapted and equally perfect in form to suit its special environments1 and ,marxism teaches us that every social system is particularly adapted to its conditions1 and that in this sense it may be called good and perfect4 ,herein lies the main reason why the endeavor of the bourgeois ,darwinists to defend the foundering capitalist system is bound to fail4 ,arguments based on natural science1 when applied to social questions1 must almost always lead to reverse conclusions4 ,this happens because1 while nature is very slow in its development and changes within the ken of human history are imperceptible1 so that it may almost be regarded as stable1 human society nevertheless undergoes quick and continuous changes4 ,in order to understand the moving force and the cause of social development1 we must study society as such4 ,it is only here that we can find the reason of social development4 ,marxism and ,darwinism should remain in their own domains2 they are independent of each other and there is no direct connection between them4 ,here arises a very important question4 ,can we stop at the conclusion that ,marxism applies only to society and that ,darwinism applies only to the organic world1 and that neither of these theories is applicable in the other domain8 ,in practice it is very convenient to have one principle for the human world and another one for the animal world4 ,in having this1 however1 we forget that man is also an animal4 ,man has developed from an animal1 and the laws that apply to the animal world cannot suddenly lose their applicability to man4 ,it is true that man is a very peculiar animal1 but if that is the case it is necessary to find from these very peculiarities why those principles applicable to all animals do not apply to men1 and why they assume a different form4 ,here we come to another grave problem4 ,the bourgeois ,darwinists do not encounter such a problem2 they simply declare that man is an animal1 and without further ado they set about to apply the ,darwinian principles to men4 ,we have seen to what erroneous conclusions they come4 ,to us this question is not so simple2 we must first be clear about the differences between men and animals1 and then we can see why1 in the human world1 the ,darwinian principles change into different ones1 namely1 into ,marxism4 ,,vii4 ,,the ,,sociability ,,of ,,man4 ,the first peculiarity that we observe in man is that he is a social being4 ,in this he does not differ from all animals1 for even among the latter there are many species that live socially among themselves4 ,but man differs from all those that we have observed until now in dealing with the ,darwinian theory2 he differs from those animals that do not live socially1 but that struggle with each other for subsistence4 ,it is not with the rapacious animals which live separately that man must be compared1 but with those that live socially4 ,the sociability of animals is a power that we have not yet spoken of2 a power that calls forth new qualities among animals4 ,it is an error to regard the struggle for existence as the only power giving shape to the organic world4 ,the struggle for existence is the main power that causes the origin of new species1 but ,darwin himself knew full well that other powers co-operate which give shape to the forms1 habits1 and peculiarities of animate things4 ,in his 8,descent of ,man0 ,darwin elaborately treated sexual selection and showed that the competition of males for females gave rise to the gay colors of the birds and butterflies and also to the singing voices of birds4 ,there he also devoted a chapter to social living4 ,many illustrations on this head are also to be found in ,kropotkin's book1 8,mutual ,aid as a ,factor in ,evolution40 ,the best representation of the effects of sociability are given in ,kautsky's 8,ethics and the ,materialistic ,conception of ,history40 ,when a number of animals live in a group1 herd or flock1 they carry on the struggle for existence in common against the outside world2 within such a group the struggle for existence ceases4 ,the animals which live socially no longer wage a struggle against each other1 wherein the weak succumb2 just the reverse1 the weak enjoy the same advantages as the strong4 ,when some animals have the advantage by means of greater strength1 sharper smell1 or experience in finding the best pasture or in warding off the enemy1 this advantage does not accrue only to these better fitted1 but also to the entire group4 ,this combining of the animals' separate powers into one unit gives to the group a new and much stronger power than any one individual possessed1 even the strongest4 ,it is owing to this united strength that the defenseless plant-eaters can ward off rapacious animals4 ,it is only by means of this unity that some animals are able to protect their young4 ,a second advantage of sociability arises from the fact that where animals live socially1 there is a possibility of the division of labor4 ,such animals send out scouts or place sentinels whose object it is to look after the safety of all1 while others spend their time either in eating or in plucking1 relying upon their guards to warn them of danger4 ,such an animal society becomes1 in some respects1 a unit1 a single organism4 ,naturally1 the relation remains much looser than the cells of a single animal body2 nevertheless1 the group becomes a coherent body1 and there must be some power that holds together the individual members4 ,this power is found in the social motives1 the instinct that holds them together and causes the continuance of the group4 ,every animal must place the interest of the entire group above his own2 it must always act instinctively for the advantage and maintenance of the group without consideration of itself4 ,as long as the weak plant-eaters think of themselves only and run away when attacked by a rapacious animal1 each one minding his life only1 the entire herd disappears4 ,only when the strong motive of self-preservation is suppressed by a stronger motive of union1 and each animal risks its life for the protection of all1 only then does the herd remain and enjoy the advantages of sticking together4 ,in such a case1 self-sacrifice1 bravery1 devotion1 discipline and consciousness must arise1 for where these do not exist society dissolves2 society can only exist where these exist4 ,these instincts1 while they have their origin in habit and necessity1 are strengthened by the struggle for existence4 ,every animal herd still stands in a competitive struggle against the same animals of a different herd2 those that are best fitted to withstand the enemy will survive1 while those that are poorer equipped will perish4 ,that group in which the social instinct is better developed will be able to hold its ground1 while the group in which social instinct is low will either fall an easy prey to its enemies or will not be in a position to find favorable feeding places4 ,these social instincts become therefore the most important and decisive factors that determine who shall survive in the struggle for existence4 ,it is owing to this that the social instincts have been elevated to the position of predominant factors4 ,these relations throw an entirely new light upon the views of the bourgeois ,darwinists4 ,their claim is that the extermination of the weak is natural and that it is necessary in order to prevent the corruption of the race1 and that the protection given to the weak serves to deteriorate the race4 ,but what do we see8 ,in nature itself1 in the animal world1 we find that the weak are protected2 that it is not by their own personal strength that they maintain themselves1 and that they are not brushed aside on account of their personal weakness4 ,this arrangement does not weaken the group1 but gives to it new strength4 ,the animal group in which mutual aid is best developed is best fit to maintain itself in the strife4 ,that which1 according to the narrow conception appeared as a cause of weakness1 becomes just the reverse1 a cause of strength4 ,the sociable animals are in a position to beat those that carry on the struggle individually4 ,this so-called degenerating and deteriorating race carries off the victory and practically proves itself to be the most skilful and best4 ,here we first see fully how near sighted1 narrow and unscientific are the claims and arguments of the bourgeois ,darwinists4 ,their natural laws and their conceptions of what is natural are derived from a part of the animal world1 from those which man resembles least1 while those animals that practically live under the same circumstances as man are left unobserved4 ,the reason for this can be found in the bourgeoise's own circumstances2 they themselves belong to a class where each competes individually against the other2 therefore1 they see among animals only that form of the struggle for existence4 ,it is for this reason that they overlook those forms of the struggle that are of greatest importance to men4 ,it is true that these bourgeois ,darwinists are aware of the fact that man is not ruled by mere egoism without regard for his neighbors4 ,the bourgeois scientists say very often that every man is possessed of two feelings1 the egotistical1 or self-love1 and the altruistic1 the love of others4 ,but as they do not know the social origin of this altruism1 they cannot understand its limitations and conditions4 ,altruism in their mouths becomes a very indistinct idea which they don't know how to handle4 ,everything that applies to the social animals applies also to man4 ,our ape-like ancestors and the primitive men developing from them were all defenseless1 weak animals who1 as almost all apes do1 lived in tribes4 ,here the same social motives and instincts had to arise which later developed to moral feelings4 ,that our customs and morals are nothing other than social feelings1 feelings that we find among animals1 is known to all2 even ,darwin spoke about 8the habits of animals which would be called moral among men40 ,the difference is only in the measure of consciousness2 as soon as these social feelings become clear to men1 they assume the character of moral feelings4 ,here we see that the moral conceptionwhich bourgeois authors considered as the main distinction between men and animalsis not common to men1 but is a direct product of conditions existing in the animal world4 ,it is in the nature of the origin of these moral feelings that they do not spread further than the social group to which the animal or the man belongs4 ,these feelings serve the practical object of keeping the group together2 beyond this they are useless4 ,in the animal world1 the range and nature of the social group is determined by the circumstances of life1 and therefore the group almost always remains the same4 ,among men1 however1 the groups1 these social units1 are ever changing in accordance with economic development1 and this also changes the social instincts4 ,the original groups1 the stems of the wild and barbarian people1 were more strongly united than the animal groups4 ,family relationship and a common language strengthened this union further4 ,every individual had the support of the entire tribe4 ,under such conditions1 the social motives1 the moral feelings1 the subordination of the individual to the whole1 must have developed to the utmost4 ,with the further development of society1 the tribes are dissolved and their places are taken by new unions1 by towns and peoples4 ,new formations step into the place of the old ones1 and the members of these groups carry on the struggle for existence in common against other peoples4 ,in equal ratio with economic development1 the size of these unions increases1 the struggle of each against the other decreases1 and social feelings spread4 ,at the end of ancient times we find that all the people known then formed a unit1 the ,roman ,empire1 and at that time arose the theorythe moral feelings having their influence on almost all the peoplewhich led to the maxim that all men are brothers4 ,when we regard our own times1 we see that economically all the people form one unit1 although a very weak one2 nevertheless the abstract feeling of brotherhood becomes ever more popular4 ,the social feelings are strongest among members of the same class1 for classes are the essential units embodying particular interests and including certain members4 ,thus we see that the social units and social feelings change in human society4 ,these changes are brought about by economic changes1 and the higher the stage of economic development1 the higher and nobler the social feelings4 ,,viii4 ,,tools1 ,,thought ,,and ,,language4 ,sociability1 with its consequences1 the moral feelings1 is a peculiarity which distinguishes man from some1 but not from all1 animals4 ,there are1 however1 some peculiarities which belong to man only1 and which separate him from the entire animal world4 ,these1 in the first instance1 are language1 then reason4 ,man is also the only animal that makes use of self-made tools4 ,for all these things1 animals have but the slightest propensity1 but among men1 these have developed essentially new characteristics4 ,many animals have some kind of voice1 and by means of sounds they can come to some understanding1 but only man has such sounds as serve as a medium for naming things and actions4 ,animals also have brains with which they think1 but the human mind shows1 as we shall see later1 an entirely new departure1 which we designate as reasonable or abstract thinking4 ,animals1 too1 make use of inanimate things which they use for certain purposes2 for instance1 the building of nests4 ,monkeys sometimes use sticks or stones1 but only man uses tools which he himself deliberately makes for particular purposes4 ,these primitive tendencies among animals show us that the peculiarities possessed by man came to him1 not by means of some wonderful creation1 but by continuous development4 ,animals living isolated can not arrive at such a stage of development4 ,it is only as a social being that man can reach this stage4 ,outside the pale of society1 language is just as useless as an eye in darkness1 and is bound to die4 ,language is possible only in society1 and only there is it needed as a means by which members may understand one another4 ,all social animals possess some means of understanding each other1 otherwise they would not be able to execute certain plans conjointly4 ,the sounds that were necessary as a means of communication for the primitive man while at his tasks must have developed into names of activities1 and later into names of things4 ,the use of tools also presupposes a society1 for it is only through society that attainments can be preserved4 ,in a state of isolated life every one has to make discoveries for himself2 with the death of the discoverer the discovery also becomes extinct1 and each has to start anew from the very beginning4 ,it is only through society that the experience and knowledge of former generations can be preserved1 perpetuated1 and developed4 ,in a group or body a few may die1 but the group1 as such1 does not4 ,it remains4 ,knowledge in the use of tools is not born with man1 but is acquired later4 ,mental tradition1 such as is possible only in society1 is therefore necessary4 ,while these special characteristics of man are inseparable from his social life1 they also stand in strong relation to each other4 ,these characteristics have not been developed singly1 but all have progressed in common4 ,that thought and language can exist and develop only in common is known to everyone who has but tried to think of the nature of his own thoughts4 ,when we think or consider1 we1 in fact1 talk to ourselves2 we observe then that it is impossible for us to think clearly without using words4 ,where we do not think with words our thoughts remain indistinct and we can not combine the various thoughts4 ,every one can realize this from his own experience4 ,this is because so-called abstract reason is perceptive thought and can take place only by means of perceptions4 ,perceptions we can designate and hold only by means of names4 ,every attempt to broaden our minds1 every attempt to advance our knowledge must begin by distinguishing and classifying by means of names or by giving to the old ones a more precise meaning4 ,language is the body of the mind1 the material by which all human science can be built up4 ,the difference between the human mind and the animal mind was very aptly shown by ,schopenhauer4 ,this citation is quoted by ,kautsky in his 8,ethics and the ,materialist ,conception of ,history0 7pages #aci-dj ,english ,translation74 ,the animal's actions are dependent upon visual motives1 it is only by these that it sees1 hears or observes in any other way4 ,we can always tell what induced the animal to do this or the other act1 for we1 too1 can see it if we look4 ,with man1 however1 it is entirely different4 ,we can not foretell what he will do1 for we do not know the motives that induce him to act2 they are thoughts in his head4 ,man considers1 and in so doing1 all his knowledge1 the result of former experience1 comes into play1 and it is then that he decides how to act4 ,the acts of an animal depend upon immediate impression1 while those of man depend upon abstract conceptions1 upon his thinking and perceiving4 ,man is at the same time influenced by finer invisible motives4 ,thus all his movements bear the impress of being guided by principles and intentions which give them the appearance of independence and obviously distinguishes them from those of animals4 ,owing to their having bodily wants1 men and animals are forced to seek to satisfy them in the natural objects surrounding them4 ,the impression on the mind is the immediate impulse and beginning2 the satisfaction of the wants is the aim and end of the act4 ,with the animal1 action follows immediately after impression4 ,it sees its prey or food and immediately it jumps1 grasps1 eats1 or does that which is necessary for grasping1 and this is inherited as an instinct4 ,the animal hears some hostile sound1 and immediately it runs away if its legs are so developed to run quickly1 or lies down like dead so as not to be seen if its color serves as a protector4 ,between man's impressions and acts1 however1 there comes into his head a long chain of thoughts and considerations4 ,his actions will depend upon the result of these considerations4 ,whence comes this difference8 ,it is not hard to see that it is closely associated with the use of tools4 ,in the same manner that thought arises between man's impressions and acts1 the tool comes in between man and that which he seeks to attain4 ,furthermore1 since the tool stands between man and outside objects1 thought must arise between the impression and the performance4 ,man does not start empty-handed against his enemy or tear down fruit1 but he goes about it in a roundabout manner1 he takes a tool1 a weapon 7weapons are also tools7 which he uses against the hostile animal2 therefore his mind must also make the same circuit1 not follow the first impressions1 but it must think of the tools and then follow to the object4 ,this material circuit causes the mental circuit2 the thoughts leading to a certain act are the result of the tools necessary for the performance of the act4 ,here we took a very simple case of primitive tools and the first stages of mental development4 ,the more complicated technique becomes1 the greater is the material circuit1 and as a result the mind has to make greater circuits4 ,when each made his own tools1 the thought of hunger and struggle must have directed the human mind to the making of tools4 ,here we have a longer chain of thoughts between the impressions and the ultimate satisfaction of men's needs4 ,when we come down to our own times1 we find that this chain is very long and complicated4 ,the worker who is discharged foresees the hunger that is bound to come2 he buys a newspaper in order to see whether there is any demand for laborers2 he goes to the railroad1 offers himself for a wage which he will get only long afterwards1 so that he may be in a position to buy food and thus protect himself from starvation4 ,what a long circuitous chain the mind must make before it reaches its destiny4 ,but it agrees with our highly developed technique1 by means of which man can satisfy his wants4 ,man1 however1 does not rule over one tool only1 but over many1 which he applies for different purposes1 and from which he can choose4 ,man1 because of these tools1 is not like the animal4 ,the animal never advances beyond the tools and weapons with which it was born1 while man makes his tools and changes them at will4 ,man1 being an animal using different tools1 must possess the mental ability to choose them4 ,in his head various thoughts come and go1 his mind considers all the tools and the consequences of their application1 and his actions depend upon these considerations4 ,he also combines one thought with another1 and holds fast to the idea that fits in with his purpose4 ,animals have not this capacity2 it would be useless for them for they would not know what to do with it4 ,on account of their bodily form1 their actions are circumscribed within narrow bounds4 ,the lion can only jump upon his prey1 but can not think of catching it by running after it4 ,the hare is so formed that it can run2 it has no other means of defense although it may like to have4 ,these animals have nothing to consider except the moment of jumping or running4 ,every animal is so formed as to fit into some definite place4 ,their actions must become strong habits4 ,these habits are not unchangeable4 ,animals are not machines1 when brought into different circumstances they may acquire different habits4 ,it is not in the quality of their brains1 but in the formation of their bodies that animal restrictions lie4 ,the animal's action is limited by its bodily form and surroundings1 and consequently it has little need for reflection4 ,to reason would therefore be useless for it and would only lead to harm rather than to good4 ,man1 on the other hand1 must possess this ability because he exercises discretion in the use of tools and weapons1 which he chooses according to particular requirements4 ,if he wants to kill the fleet hare1 he takes the bow and arrow2 if he meets the bear1 he uses the axe1 and if he wants to break open a certain fruit he takes a hammer4 ,when threatened by danger1 man must consider whether he shall run away or defend himself by fighting with weapons4 ,this ability to think and to consider is indispensable to man in his use of artificial tools4 ,this strong connection between thoughts1 language1 and tools1 each of which is impossible without the other1 shows that they must have developed at the same time4 ,how this development took place1 we can only conjecture4 ,undoubtedly it was a change in the circumstances of life that changed men from our ape-like ancestors4 ,having migrated from the woods1 the original habitat of apes1 to the plain1 man had to undergo an entire change of life4 ,the difference between hands and feet must have developed then4 ,sociability and the ape-like hand1 well adapted for grasping1 had a due share in the new development4 ,the first rough objects1 such as stones or sticks1 came to hand unsought1 and were thrown away4 ,this must have been repeated so often that it must have left an impression on the minds of those primitive men4 ,to the animal1 surrounding nature is a single unit1 of the details of which it is unconscious4 ,it can not distinguish between various objects4 ,our primitive man1 at his lowest stage1 must have been at the same level of consciousness4 ,from the great mass surrounding him1 some objects 7tools7 come into his hands which he used in procuring his existence4 ,these tools1 being very important objects1 soon were given some designation1 were designated by a sound which at the same time named the particular activity4 ,owing to this sound1 or designation1 the tool and the particular kind of activity stands out from the rest of the surroundings4 ,man begins to analyze the world by concepts and names1 self-consciousness makes its appearance1 artificial objects are purposely sought and knowingly made use of while working4 ,this processfor it is a very slow processmarks the beginning of our becoming men4 ,as soon as men deliberately seek and apply certain tools1 we can say that these are being developed2 from this stage to the manufacturing of tools1 there is only one step4 ,the first crude tools differ according to use2 from the sharp stone we get the knife1 the bolt1 the drill1 and the spear2 from the stick we get the hatchet4 ,with the further differentiation of tools1 serving later for the division of labor1 language and thought develop into richer and newer forms1 while thought leads man to use the tools in a better way1 to improve old and invent new ones4 ,so we see that one thing brings on the other4 ,the practice of sociability and the application to labor are the springs in which technique1 thought1 tools and science have their origin and continually develop4 ,by his labor1 the primitive ape-like man has risen to real manhood4 ,the use of tools marks the great departure that is ever more widening between men and animals4 ,,ix4 ,,animal ,,organs ,,and ,,human ,,tools4 ,in animal organs and human tools we have the main difference between men and animals4 ,the animal obtains its food and subdues its enemies with its own bodily organs2 man does the same thing with the aid of tools4 ,organ 7organon7 is a ,greek word which also means tools4 ,organs are natural1 adnated 7grown-on7 tools of the animal4 ,tools are the artificial organs of men4 ,better still1 what the organ is to the animal1 the hand and tool is to man4 ,the hands and tools perform the functions that the animal must perform with its own organs4 ,owing to the construction of the hand to hold various tools1 it becomes a general organ adapted to all kinds of work2 it becomes therefore an organ that can perform a variety of functions4 ,with the division of these functions1 a broad field of development is opened for men which animals do not know4 ,because the human hand can use various tools1 it can combine the functions of all possible organs possessed by animals4 ,every animal is built and adapted to a certain definite surrounding4 ,man1 with his tools1 is adapted to all circumstances and equipped for all surroundings4 ,the horse is built for the prairie1 and the monkey is built for the forest4 ,in the forest1 the horse would be just as helpless as the monkey would be if brought to the prairie4 ,man1 on the other hand1 uses the axe in the forest1 and the spade on the prairie4 ,with his tools1 man can force his way in all parts of the world and establish himself all over4 ,while almost all animals can live in particular regions1 such as supply their wants1 and if taken to different regions cannot exist1 man has conquered the whole world4 ,every animal has1 as a zologist expressed it once1 its strength by which means it maintains itself in the struggle for existence1 and its weakness1 owing to which it falls a prey to others and cannot multiply itself4 ,in this sense1 man has only strength and no weakness4 ,owing to his having tools1 man is the equal of all animals4 ,as these tools do not remain stationary1 but continually improve1 man grows above every animal4 ,his tools make him master of all creation1 the king of the earth4 ,in the animal world there is also a continuous development and perfection of organs4 ,this development1 however1 is connected with the changes of the animal's body1 which makes the development of the organs infinitely slow1 as dictated by biological laws4 ,in the development of the organic world1 thousands of years amount to nothing4 ,man1 however1 by transferring his organic development upon external objects has been able to free himself from the chain of biologic law4 ,tools can be transformed quickly1 and technique makes such rapid strides that1 in comparison with the development of animal organs1 it must be called marvelous4 ,owing to this new road1 man has been able1 within the short period of a few thousand years1 to rise above the highest animal4 ,with the invention of these implements1 man got to be a divine power1 and he takes possession of the earth as his exclusive dominion4 ,the peaceful and hitherto unhindered development of the organic world ceases to develop according to the ,darwinian theory4 ,it is man that acts as breeder1 tamer1 cultivator2 and it is man that does the weeding4 ,it is man that changes the entire environment1 making the further forms of plants and animals suit his aim and will4 ,with the origin of tools1 further changes in the human body cease4 ,the human organs remain what they were1 with the exception of the brain4 ,the human brain had to develop together with tools2 and1 in fact1 we see that the difference between the higher and lower races of mankind consists mainly in the contents of their brains4 ,but even the development of this organ had to stop at a certain stage4 ,since the beginning of civilization1 the functions of the brain are ever more taken away by some artificial means2 science is treasured up in books4 ,our reasoning faculty of today is not much better than the one possessed by the ,greeks1 ,romans or even the ,teutons1 but our knowledge has grown immensely1 and this is greatly due to the fact that the mental organ was unburdened by its substitutes1 the books4 ,having learned the difference between men and animals1 let us now again consider how they are affected by the struggle for existence4 ,that this struggle is the cause of perfection and the weeding out of the imperfect1 can not be denied4 ,in this struggle the animals become ever more perfect4 ,here1 however1 it is necessary to be more precise in expression and in observation of what perfection consists4 ,in being so1 we can no longer say that animals as a whole struggle and become perfected4 ,animals struggle and compete by means of their particular organs4 ,lions do not carry on the struggle by means of their tails2 hares do not rely on their eyes2 nor do the falcons succeed by means of their beaks4 ,lions carry on the struggle by means of their saltatory 7leaping7 muscles and their teeth2 hares rely upon their paws and ears1 and falcons succeed on account of their eyes and wings4 ,if now we ask what is it that struggles and what competes8 the answer is1 the organs struggle4 ,the muscles and teeth of the lion1 the paws and ears of the hare1 and the eyes and wings of the falcon carry on the struggle4 ,it is in this struggle that the organs become perfected4 ,the animal as a whole depends upon these organs and shares their fate4 ,let us now ask the same question about the human world4 ,men do not struggle by means of their natural organs1 but by means of artificial organs1 by means of tools 7and in weapons we must understand tools74 ,here1 too1 the principle of perfection and the weeding out of the imperfect1 through struggle1 holds true4 ,the tools struggle1 and this leads to the ever greater perfection of tools4 ,those groups of tribes that use better tools and weapons can best secure their maintenance1 and when it comes to a direct struggle with another race1 the race that is better equipped with artificial tools will win4 ,those races whose technical aids are better developed1 can drive out or subdue those whose artificial aids are not developed4 ,the ,european race dominates because its external aids are better4 ,here we see that the principle of the struggle for existence1 formulated by ,darwin and emphasized by ,spencer1 has a different effect on men than on animals4 ,the principle that struggle leads to the perfection of the weapons used in the strife1 leads to different results between men and animals4 ,in the animal1 it leads to a continuous development of natural organs2 that is the foundation of the theory of descent1 the essence of ,darwinism4 ,in men1 it leads to a continuous development of tools1 of the means of production4 ,this1 however1 is the foundation of ,marxism4 ,here we see that ,marxism and ,darwinism are not two independent theories1 each of which applies to its special domain1 without having anything in common with the other4 ,in reality1 the same principle underlies both theories4 ,they form one unit4 ,the new course taken by men1 the substitution of tools for natural organs1 causes this fundamental principle to manifest itself differently in the two domains2 that of the animal world to develop according to ,darwinian principle1 while among mankind the ,marxian principle applies4 ,when men freed themselves from the animal world1 the development of tools and productive methods1 the division of labor and knowledge became the propelling force in social development4 ,it is these that brought about the various systems1 such as primitive communism1 the peasant system1 the beginnings of commodity production1 feudalism1 and now modern capitalism1 and which bring us ever nearer to ,socialism4 ,x4 ,,capitalism ,,and ,,socialism4 ,the particular form that the ,darwinian struggle for existence assumes in development is determined by men's sociability and their use of tools4 ,the struggle for existence1 while it is still carried on among members of different groups1 nevertheless ceases among members of the same group1 and its place is taken by mutual aid and social feeling4 ,in the struggle between groups1 technical equipment decides who shall be the victor2 this results in the progress of technique4 ,these two circumstances lead to different effects under different systems4 ,let us see in what manner they work out under capitalism4 ,when the bourgeoisie gained political power and made the capitalist system the dominating one1 it began by breaking the feudal bonds and freeing the people from all feudal ties4 ,it was essential for capitalism that every one should be able to take part in the competitive struggle2 that no one's movements be tied up or narrowed by corporate duties or hampered by legal statutes1 for only thus was it possible for production to develop its full capacity4 ,the workers must have free command over themselves and not be tied up by feudal or guild duties1 for only as free workers can they sell their labor-power to the capitalists as a whole commodity1 and only as free laborers can the capitalists use them4 ,it is for this reason that the bourgeoisie has done away with all old ties and duties4 ,it made the people entirely free1 but at the same time left them entirely isolated and unprotected4 ,formerly the people were not isolated2 they belonged to some corporation2 they were under the protection of some lord or commune1 and in this they found strength4 ,they were a part of a social group to which they owed duties and from which they received protection4 ,these duties the bourgeoisie abolished2 it destroyed the corporations and abolished the feudal relations4 ,the freeing of labor meant at the same time that all refuge was taken away from him and that he could no longer rely upon others4 ,every one had to rely upon himself4 ,alone1 free from all ties and protection1 he must struggle against all4 ,it is for this reason that1 under capitalism1 the human world resembles mostly the world of rapacious animals1 and it is for this very reason that the bourgeois ,darwinists looked for men's prototype among animals living isolated4 ,to this they were led by their own experience4 ,their mistake1 however1 consisted in considering capitalist conditions as everlasting4 ,the relation existing between our capitalist competitive system and animals living isolated1 was thus expressed by ,engels in his book1 8,anti-,dhring0 7page #bic74 ,this may also be found on page #ei of 8,socialism1 ,utopian and ,scientific0 as follows3 8,finally1 modern industry and the opening of the world market made the struggle universal and at the same time gave it unheard-of virulence4 ,advantages in natural or artificial conditions of production now decide the existence or non-existence of individual capitalists as well as of whole industries and countries4 ,he that falls is remorselessly cast aside4 ,it is the ,darwinian struggle of the individual for existence transferred from ,nature to society with intensified violence4 ,the conditions of existence natural to the animal appear as the final term of human development40 ,what is that which carries on the struggle in this capitalist competition1 the perfectness of which decides the victory8 ,first come technical tools1 machines4 ,here again applies the law that struggle leads to perfection4 ,the machine that is more improved outstrips the less improved1 the machines that cannot perform much1 and the simple tools are exterminated and machine technique develops with gigantic strides to ever greater productivity4 ,this is the real application of ,darwinism to human society4 ,the particular thing about it is that under capitalism there is private property1 and behind every machine there is a man4 ,behind the gigantic machine there is a big capitalist and behind the small machine there is a small capitalist4 ,with the defeat of the small machine1 the small capitalist1 as capitalist1 perishes with all his hopes and happiness4 ,at the same time the struggle is a race of capital4 ,large capital is better equipped2 large capital is getting ever larger4 ,this concentration of capital undermines capital itself1 for it diminishes the bourgeoisie whose interest it is to maintain capitalism1 and it increases that mass which seeks to abolish it4 ,in this development1 one of the characteristics of capitalism is gradually abolished4 ,in the world where each struggles against all and all against each1 a new association develops among the working class1 the class organization4 ,the working class organizations start with ending the competition existing between workers and combine their separate powers into one great power in their struggle with the outside world4 ,everything that applies to social groups also applies to this class organization1 brought about by natural conditions4 ,in the ranks of this class organization1 social motives1 moral feelings1 self-sacrifice and devotion for the entire body develop in a most splendid way4 ,this solid organization gives to the working class that great strength which it needs in order to conquer the capitalist class4 ,the class struggle which is not a struggle with tools but for the possession of tools1 a struggle for the right to direct industry1 will be determined by the strength of the class organization4 ,let us now look at the future system of production as carried on under ,socialism4 ,the struggle leading to the perfection of the tools does not cease4 ,as before under capitalism1 the inferior machine will be outdistanced and brushed aside by the one that is superior4 ,as before1 this process will lead to greater productivity of labor4 ,but private property having been abolished1 there will no longer be a man behind each machine calling it his own and sharing its fate4 ,machines will be common property1 and the displacement of the less developed by the better developed machinery will be carried out upon careful consideration4 ,with the abolition of classes the entire civilized world will become one great productive community4 ,within this community mutual struggle among members will cease and will be carried on with the outside world4 ,it will no longer be a struggle against our own kind1 but a struggle for subsistence1 a struggle against nature4 ,but owing to development of technique and science1 this can hardly be called a struggle4 ,nature is subject to man and with very little exertion from his side she supplies him with abundance4 ,here a new career opens for man3 man's rising from the animal world and carrying on his struggle for existence by the use of tools1 ceases1 and a new chapter of human history begins4 ,library of ,science for the ,workers ,to understand modern ,socialism1 you must understand ,evolution4 ,socialists predict the speedy end of the capitalist system as a result of irresistible ,,natural ,,laws1 the workings of which have been studied for two generations since their discovery4 ,most of the books in which these laws are explained are too difficult to read and too expensive to buy1 except for the leisure class4 ,the ten books here described will give you a clear understanding of the great process in which ,socialism is the next step4 #a4 ,the ,evolution of ,man4 ,by ,wilhelm ,boelsche4 ,contains absolute proof of the truth of ,darwin's theory of the descent of man4 ,illustrated4 #b4 ,the ,triumph of ,life4 ,by ,wilhelm ,boelsche4 ,describes the resistless triumph of the ,life ,force over all obstacles4 ,illustrated4 #c4 ,life and ,death4 ,by ,dr4 ,e4 ,teichmann4 ,a study in biology1 explaining how and why life began and how the life of each individual ends4 #d4 ,the ,end of the ,world4 ,by ,dr4 ,m4 ,wilhelm ,meyer4 ,a study of the natural forces that will some time destroy all life on earth4 ,illustrated4 #e4 ,the ,amazons4 ,by ,emanuel ,kanter4 ,an excellent analytical study of the phenomenon of ancient fighting women1 the ,amazons1 from the standpoint of dialectical materialism4 #f4 ,germs of ,mind in ,plants4 ,by ,r4 ,h4 ,france4 ,a remarkable work proving that 8mind0 is not limited to man or even to animals1 but is found in plants also4 ,illustrated4 #g4 ,the ,struggle ,between ,science and ,superstition4 ,by ,arthur ,m4 ,lewis4 ,this book deals with what is on the whole the most interesting and dramatic element in social development4 ,side by side with the struggle between social classes1 there is waged a bitter conflict between ancient ignorance and new knowledge4 ,the new knowledge is the natural ally of the essential social classthe proletariat4 #h4 ,science and ,revolution4 ,by ,ernest ,untermann4 ,a history of the growth of the ,evolution theory1 showing how at every step it was fought by the ruling classes and welcomed by the workers4 #i4 ,social and ,philosophical ,studies4 ,by ,paul ,lafargue4 ,the causes of belief in ,god and the origin of abstract ideas explained in a brilliant and convincing way4 #aj4 ,evolution1 ,social and ,organic4 ,by ,arthur ,m4 ,lewis4 ,a volume of popular lectures in which the relation of the evolution theory to ,socialism is fully explained4 ,these ten volumes are handsomely bound in cloth1 in volumes of uniform size4 ,price1 #fj;c each postpaid4 ,,charles ,h4 ,,kerr ,,company #cda-cdi ,east ,ohio ,street1 ,chicago ,the ,origin of the ,family ,,private ,,property ,,and ,,the ,,state ,by ,frederick ,engels ,the book on which are based all subsequent works on property and the ,state written by ,socialists and ,communists4 ,what is the ,state8 ,how did it arise8 ,does it represent all the people8 ,will it ever disappear8 ,what is its function8 ,when did ,private ,property arise8 ,and how8 ,has the institution of the ,family changed and evolved8 ,just now all over the world socialists1 anarchists1 syndicalists and communists are divided upon the subject of the ,state1 its origin1 its function and its future4 ,which group are you in1 and do you know why8 ,this book explains these vital questions for you4 ,cloth1 #bag pages4 #fj cents4 ,socialism ,,utopian ,,and ,,scientific ,by ,frederick ,engels ,when may we expect a proletarian revolution8 ,can we plan to have it at a certain time8 ,can we carry a revolution by propaganda8 ,does it depend on what we desire8 ,we all want tickets to the ,new ,society of the ,workers4 ,how can we know how near we are historically8 ,engels gives us the signs in this book4 ,they never fail4 ,when we understand them we can know how to use social and economic forces to carry us forward to the ,new ,day4 ,cloth4 #fj cents2 paper1 #be cents4 ,,charles ,h4 ,,kerr ,,company ,,co-,,operative ,,publishers1 ,,chicago ,,capital ,a ,critique of ,political ,economy ,by ,karl ,marx ,this work is beyond comparison the greatest of all ,socialist books4 ,it is a scientific analysis of the society in which we live1 showing the precise method by which the capitalists grow rich at the expense of the wage-workers4 ,,volume ,i1 entitled 8,the ,process of ,capitalist ,production10 is practically complete in itself4 ,it explains the thing which1 up to the time that ,marx came on the scene1 had confused all the economists1 namely1 ,surplus ,value4 ,it explains exactly how the capitalist extracts his profits4 ,this volume might be called the keystone of the ,socialist arch4 #hfi pages1 #b4ej4 ,,volume ,,ii1 8,the ,process of ,circulation of ,capital10 explains the part that the merchant and the banker play in the present system1 and the laws that govern social capital4 ,unravels knots in which previous writers had become entangled4 #fah pages1 #b4ej4 ,,volume ,,iii1 in some respects the most interesting of all1 treats of 8,the ,process of ,capitalist ,production as a ,whole40 ,predicts the ,rise of ,trusts and makes clear the ,cause of ,panics and ,industrial ,crises4 ,shows how the small capitalist is swallowed4 ,explains for all time the subjects of ,land1 ,rent and ,farming4 #a1jdh pages1 #b4ej4 ,the complete work sells for #g4ej1 and contains over #b1ejj large pages1 in three handsome volumes1 bound in cloth and stamped in gold4 ,any capitalist publishing house would charge at least double our price4 ,ours is a socialist co-operative house1 owned by three thousand comrades who expect no dividends but have subscribed for shares to make possible the circulation of the best socialist literature at the lowest possible prices4 ,ask for catalog4 ,,charles ,h4 ,,kerr ,,company #cda-cdi ,east ,ohio ,street1 ,chicago ,,centenary ,,edition ,the ,positive ,outcome of ,philosophy ,by ,josef ,dietzgen ,one of the best books we have ever published is ,,the ,,positive ,,outcome ,,of ,,philosophy4 ,we have sold many thousands of ,josef ,dietzgen's books1 and readers everywhere have testified to their educational value and to the enjoyment and enlightenment they obtained from the study of ,dietzgen4 ,december #ith1 #aibh1 was the hundredth anniversary of the birth of ,josef ,dietzgen4 ,to commemorate the event we published1 with the kind assistance of his son1 ,eugen ,dietzgen1 a new translation of ,,the ,,positive ,,outcome ,,of ,,philosophy4 ,this new translation from the original ,german is by ,w4 ,w4 ,craik1 an ,englishman1 resident of ,hamburg4 ,good as our former edition was1 we do not hesitate to assert that this translation is immensely superior4 ,it is in clear and expressive ,english1 which simplifies the study4 ,craik has certainly done his work well4 ,to those who have formerly read the philosophy of ,josef ,dietzgen1 it is not necessary to comment upon its merits1 but to those who have not yet participated in this pleasure we wish to give here a brief outline of its content4 ,it deals with the nature and substance of thinking4 ,it strips the human mind of the mysticism that is usually attached to it1 and shows the functioning of the brain as a perfectly natural process4 ,just as ,karl ,marx and ,frederick ,engels traced history and economics along evolutionary lines1 to the logical conclusion that a new social order is inevitable1 so ,josef ,dietzgen traced the evolution of human thought1 as expressed through philosophy1 to its positive outcome4 ,he shows that the natural sciences have taken over every branch of the old-time philosophy1 leaving only the thinking process itself to be explained4 ,this latter he accomplishes in a masterly fashion in his chapter on 8,the ,nature of ,human ,brain-,work40 ,the ,centenary ,edition of ,,the ,,positive ,,outcome ,,of ,,philosophy is handsomely bound in maroon cloth with gold stamping and contains a portrait of its famous author4 ,price #b4jj1 postage paid4 ,,charles ,h4 ,,kerr ,,company #cda ,east ,ohio ,street1 ,chicago ,,anti-,d,,hring ,herr ,eugene ,dhring's ,revolution in ,science ,by ,frederick ,engels ,also contains 8,the ,mark0 and the author's introduction to 8,socialism1 ,utopian and ,scientific0 ,part ,i treats with ,philosophy1 giving the most comprehensive statement of ,marx and ,engels with regard to this question than anywhere else in their published writings4 ,part ,,ii is1 in effect1 an outline and introduction to the three volumes of ,capital1 along with interesting data on the force theory and warfare and militarism4 ,part ,,iii explains the basis of modern socialism in its entire range of program1 strategy and tactics4 ,anti-,dhring is the only work compressing into one volume the ,marxian world-outlook in its relation to the various fields of knowledge and science and the society of the future4 ,engels says of this work3 8,i had to treat of all and every possible subject1 from the concepts of time and space to bimetallism2 from the eternity of matter and motion to the perishable nature of moral ideas2 from ,darwin's natural selection to the education of youth in a future society4 ,anyhow1 the systematic comprehensiveness of my opponent gave me the opportunity of developing1 in opposition to him1 and in a more connected form than had previously been done1 the views held by ,marx and myself on this great variety of subjects4 ,and that was the principal reason which made me undertake this otherwise ungrateful task40 ,price1 postpaid1 #b4jj ,write for complete list ,,charles ,h4 ,,kerr ,,company #cda-cdi ,e4 ,ohio ,st4 ,chicago1 ,illinois ,transcriber's ,notes3 ,text in italics is enclosed by underscores 7italics72 text in bold by 8equal0 signs 7bold74 ,punctuation and spelling inaccuracies were silently corrected4 ,archaic and variable spelling has been preserved4 ,variations in hyphenation and compound words have been preserved4