To answer thesequestions, it has sometimes been imagined that, beyond the reason of indi-viduals, there is a superior and perfect reason from which that of individualsemanated and, by a sort of mystic participation, presumably acquired its mar-velous faculty: That superior and perfect reason is divine reason. But, at best,this hypothesis has the grave disadvantage of being shielded from all experi-mental control, so it does not meet the requirements of a scientific hypothe-sis. More than that, the categories of human thought are never fixed in adefinite form; they are ceaselessly made, unmade, and remade; they vary ac-cording to time and place.

erely to say it is inher-ent in the nature of human intellect is not to explain that power.

Under these conditions,to reduce reason to experience is to make reason disappear—because it is toreduce the universality and necessity that characterize reason to mere appear-ances, illusions that might be practically convenient but that correspond tonothing in things. Consequently, it is to deny all objective reality to that log-ical life which the function of the categories is to regulate and organize. Clas-sical empiricism leads to irrationalism; perhaps it should be called by that name

Durkheim seems to have been acutely aware that his active participationin the university and in the educational affairs of the Third Republic broughtwith it the danger that his sociological work would be overshadowed by politi-cal commitments

The Durkheimian spirit of civic morality had conquered the primaryschools, and both the Catholic Right and the Marxist Left felt threatenedsince they feared that their potential sources of recruitment might now dry up.All this helps us understand the feelings of the Catholic sociologist JeanIzoulet when he wrote:

philosopher Louis Liard, who in 1884 had become Director of HigherEducation at the Ministry of Public Education

neo-positiv-ism

But contemporaries testified that each issue of the Annee wasindeed an intellectual event for historians or social psychologists, as well as forsociologists

cle to "infiltrate" sociological ideas and approaches into other,older fields of scholarship

Suicide

The first, he writes, "initiated and defendedthe claim of sociology to intellectual legitimacy." Once the claim was heard,the true founders of modern sociology "pressed [this] claim to institutionallegitimacy, by addressing themselves to those institutionalized status-judges ofthe intellect: the universities."^^ Comte and Spencer had spent much of theirenergies in convincing the public that the new science deserved a hearingamong the educated. Their successors, though still continuing this struggle,faced the additional task of giving sociology an institutionalized strongholdwithin the confines of the academy

omte, Marx,and Spencer.

to replace the religious values with which he himself had been brought up.

French republican and secular society be-came for him a passionate object of love, replacing his attachment to the re-ligious community of his native home.

of communal prestige if not the powers that their forebears had onceenjoyed. Through them Durkheim belonged to the elite of the community.His break with the Jewish tradition of his father consequently must have beena traumatic and decisive event in his life

hand had their own courts of law and generally attempted to regulatetheir own affairs with only minimal interference by royal authority

he method and style of scientific work done there seemed exemplary to himand provided him with a model of how scientific research ought to be con-ducted in other fields of the social sciences

Morality must, then, be not only obligatorybut also desirable and desired.

subject matter of the study of religious phenomena.

antecedent general norms

Spencer's individualistic premises

he many polemical exchanges between them un-doubtedly helped Durkheim sharpen and refine his own views; as a result,Tarde,

everberations in Durkheim's work.

Andre had followedhis father to the Ecole Normale and had begun a most promising career as asociological linguist.

After more than three quarters of acentury, Comte's brainchild had finally gained entry at the University of Paris.

philosophy

hat he considered impera-tive was to construct a scientific sociological system, not as an end in itself,but as a means for the moral direction of society.

Philosophy, atleast as it was then taught, seemed to him too far removed from the issues ofthe day, too much devoted to arcane and frivolous hairsplitting

Republic

Son of a rabbi and descending from a long line ofrabbis, he decided quite early that he would follow the family tradition andbecome a rabbi himself.

Crime was normal in that no society could enforce total conformityto its injunctions, and if society could, it would be so repressive as to leave noleeway for the social contributions of individuals

To explain a social fact it is not enough to show thecause on which it depends; we must also, at least in most cases, show its func-tion in the establishment of social order

it is important to recognize his pioneering contribution to the studyof the correlations between specific systems of thought and systems of socialorganization.

et, being eager as they were to give moralunity to a disintegrating society, he urged men to unite in a civic moralitybased on the recognition that we are what we are because of society.

ocietyis the father of us all; therefore, it is to society we owe that profound debt ofgratitude heretofore paid to the gods. The following passage, which in itsrhetoric is rather uncharacteristic of Durkheim's usual analytical style, revealssome of his innermost feelings

In contrast to WilliamJames, for example, Durkheim was not concerned with the variety of religiousexperience of individuals but rather with the communal activity and the com-munal bonds to which participation in religious activities gives rise.

maintained without religious sanctions.

In this respect he was in quest of what would today be described•as functional equivalents for religion in a fundamentally a-religious age.

Hence Durkheim turned, in the last periodof his scholarly life, to the study of religious phenomena as core elements ofsystems of common beliefs.

modern types oforganization rest on organic solidarity obtained through the functional inter-dependence of autonomous individuals. In modern societies, social solidarity isdependent upon, rather than repressive of, individual autonomy of conduct

No trade or barter can take place without social regulationand some system of positive and negative sanctions

Durkheim was indeed a thinker in the conservative tradition to the extentthat he reacted against the atomistic drift of most Enlightenment philosophyand grounded his sociology in a concern for the maintenance of social order.As Robert Nisbet^" has shown convincingly, such key terms as cohesion,solidarity, integration, authority, ritual, and regulation indicate that his sociol-ogy is anchored upon an anti-atomistic set of premises. In this respect he waslike his traditionaUst forebears, yet it would be a mistake to classify Durkheimas a traditionalist social thinker. Politically he was a liberal—indeed, a defenderof the rights of individuals against the state. He also was moved to warnagainst excesses of regulation over persons even though the major thrusts ofhis argument were against those who, by failing to recognize the requirementsof the social order, were likely to foster anomie states of affairs. Anomie, heargued, was as detrimental to individuals as it was to the social order at large.

Durkheim's treatment of altruistic suicide indicatesthat he was trying to establish a balance between the claims of individualsand those of society, rather than to suppress individual strivings

anti-individualistic philosophy

To put the matter differently, when therestraints of structural integration, as exemplified in the operation of organicsolidarity, fail to operate, men become prone to egoistic suicide; when thecollective conscience weakens, men fall victim to anomic suicide.

Hence, "abnormally" high rates in specific groups or socialcategories, or in total societies, can be taken as an index of disintegrating forcesat work in a social structure.

When social regulations break down, the controlling influence of societyon individual propensities is no longer effective and individuals are left totheir own devices.

could moral unity be assured.

mechanical and organic solidarity

Protestantism "concedes a greater freedom to individual thought thanCatholicism ... it has fewer common beliefs and practices."'

People who are well integratedinto a group are cushioned to a significant extent from the impact of frustra-tions and tragedies that afflict the human lot; hence, they are less likely toresort to extreme behavior such as suicide

Concern with the rates of occurrence of specific phenomena rather thanwith incidence had an additional advantage in that it allowed Durkheim toengage in comparative analysis of various structures.

For ex-ample, a significant increase of suicide rates in a particular group indicatesthat the social cohesion in that group has been weakened and its membersare no longer sufficiently protected against existential crises

e showed that such group propertiesare independent of individual traits and must therefore be studied in their ownright.

According to this formulation, constraint is nolonger a simple imposition of outside controls on individual will, but rathera moral obligation to obey a rule. In this sense society is "something beyondus and something in ourselves."

every way of acting, fixed or not, capable ofexercising on the individual an external constraint.

They endure over time while par-ticular individuals die and are replaced by others.

hey have, according to Durkheim, distinctive socialcharacteristics and determinants, which are not amenable to explanations onthe biological or psychological level

But it was only in his Paris years that he was converted to socialismthrough contact with some of its major protagonists and through a thoroughreading of their works—some of which he had already begun to peruse inGermany, having been guided in this respect by Hess and by Lorenz vonStein's Socialism and Communism in Contemporary France (1842)

Hegel had taught them to see how throughoutmankind's past, philosophical thought had always been critical of a givenstate of affairs, how the negative critique of philosophy had been a key instru-ment for destroying the complacency of the given and for preparing the wayfor the birth of new cultural possibilities.

Kant in particular, although holdingonto the belief in human progress, injected a more pessimistic note. For him,antagonism between men was the ultimate driving force in history.

the ideaof progress, whether peaceful or conflictive; the idea of alienation; the idea ofperfectibility; and the holistic view of society and of historical epochs.

Both his mother and father came fromlong lines of rabbis, Heinrich's in the Rhineland and Henrietta's in Holland.^

As societies emerge from originally un-differentiated hordes, the division of labor leads to the emergence of stratifica-tion, of classes of men distinguished by their differential access to the meansof production and their differential power

In the course of their history men increasinglytransform nature to make it better serve their own purposes. And, in theprocess of transforming nature, they transform themselves.

to the con-ditions of production and the producers of these ideas, and if we thus ignorethe individuals and the world conditions which are the source of these ideas.

his is the relationship of theworker to his own activitiy as something alien, not belonging to him, activityas suffering (passivity), strength as powerlessness, creation as emasculation,the personal physical and mental energy of the worker, his personal life . . .as an activity which is directed against himself, independent of him and notbelonging to him.

The object produced by labor, its product, now stands opposed to it as analien being, as a power independent of the producer.

Money is the alienated essence of man'swork and existence; the essence dominates him and he worships it.

It can evolvea consciousness, but it is always a "false consciousness," that is, a consciousnessthat does not transcend its being rooted in an economically competitive modeof production. Hence neither the bourgeoisie as a class, nor the bourgeois state,nor the bourgeois ideology can serve truly to transcend the self-interest en-joined by the bourgeoisie.

each man, working in his own interest, con-tributes both to the necessary functioning and to the final destruction of theregime."

because of the in-herent competitive relations between capitaHst producers, was incapable ofdeveloping an overall consciousness of its collective interests

But he considered it axiomatic that the potential forclass conflict is inherent in every differentiated society, since such a societysystematically generates conflicts of interest between persons and groups differ-entially located within the social structure, and, more particularly, in relationto the means of production.

In the world of capitalism, for example, the nuclearcell of the capitalist system, the factory, is the prime locus of antagonism be-tween classes—between exploiters and exploited, between buyers and sellers oflabor power—rather than of functional collaboration.

Marx's class theory rests on the premise that "the history of all hithertoexisting society is the history of class struggles

t a certainpoint the changed social relations of production come into conflict with exist-ing property relations, that is, with existing divisions between owners andnonowners.

Man is inevitably en-meshed in a network of social relations which constrain his actions; therefore,attempts to abolish such constraints altogether are bound to fail

These property relations inturn give rise to different social classes. Just as a man cannot choose who is tobe his father, so he has no choice as to his class

t is notthe consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary,their social being determines their consciousness.'

Marx considered such categories as typical only for specific historicalperiods, as products of an historically transient state of affairs

New needs evolve when means are found to allow the satis-faction of older ones.

strife was the father of allthings, and social conflict the core of historical process.

The fortunate absence among them of our stupid scholastic culture enablesthem

He resumed lecturing after his illness and again enjoyed a number ofeminent men in the audience, among them four members of the Academy ofSciences

When it finally became clear that he wouldnever attain the hoped-for institutionalized role, he resolved to create a newrole for himself, that of a prophet

From then on, Comte had hardly anyfriends with whom he could deal on the basis of intellectual equality. A fewmen, Hke the physiologist de Blainville, remained close to him for over aquarter of a century, but even that friendship broke in the end

We no longer haveeither hope or expectations, not even two little pieces of black wood beforewhich to wring our hands. . . . Everything that was is no more. All that willbe is not yet."

nd children became additional breadwinners.

This period of political revolutions and popular revolts was also theperiod of the Industrial Revolution which, in France, came into its own onlyduring the post-Napoleonic years.

Auguste Comte Hved through seven political regimes and an untold num-ber of insurrections, uprisings, and popular revolt

To cite only one, the aristocratic Saint-Simon never failed to putgreat stress on the ideal of individual self-realization in all his Utopian dreams.His followers would develop this notion and stress sexual liberation, the "re-habilitation of the flesh." In contrast, Comte, the son of a petty functionary,pictured the man of the future as an ascetic—a self-abnegating, self-denyingcreature totally devoted to the Whole.

the stress on the need to reconstitute spiritual power in the handsof an elite of scientists;

The time had nowcome for the emergence of a fully positive Science of Man that would revolu-tionize the institutions of Europe. At this point, "Morals will become a positivescience. Politics will become a positive science. Philosophy will become a posi-tive science. The religious system will be perfected.

The members tithed themselves to assure the livelihood of the masterand vowed to spread his message.

Comte now vowed to devote the rest of his life to the memory of "hisangel

Emile Littre

The sketches and essays that Comte wrote during the years of close as-sociation with Saint-Simon,

former Protestant pastor named DanielEncontre, a man of broad learning and catholic concerns.

Comte, especially in his later years, considered himself not only a socialscientist but also, and primarily, a prophet and founder of a new religion thatpromised salvation for all the ailments of mankind.

In thepositive sociocracy of the future, the scientist-priests of the rehgion of humanity,having acquired positive knowledge of what is good and evil, would sternlyhold men to their collective duty and would help suppress any subversive ideasof inherent rights.

He elaborateda complex blueprint of the good positive society of the future, a societydirected by the spiritual power of priests of the new positive religion andleaders of banking and industry.

To this extent, he mustsurely be regarded as one of the earliest functional analysts of society, for henot only considered the consequences social phenomena have on social systems,but he stressed the interconnectedness of all these phenomena.

The inconveniences of the division of functions increase with its charac-teristic advantages.

Language

he family is the most elementarysocial unit and the prototype of all other human associations, for these evolvefrom family and kinship groups. "The collective organism is essentially com-posed of families which are its true elements, of classes and castes which formits true tissue, and finally of cities and townships which are its true organs

There can be no scientific study of society either in its conditionsor its movements, if it is separated into portions, and its divisions are studiedapart,"

Henceastronomy, the most general and simple of all natural sciences, develops first.In time, it is followed by physics, chemistry, biology, and finally, sociology

such a division of employment ... as could not take place among smallernumbers: and ... the faculties of individuals are stimulated to find sub-sistence by more refined methods. ... By creating new wants and newdifficulties, this gradual concentration develops new means, not only of prog-ress but of order, by neutralizing physical inequalities, and affording agrowing ascendancy to those intellectual and moral forces which are suppressedamong a scanty population

Similarly, in the firststage the family is the prototypical social unit, in the second the state risesinto societal prominence, and in the third the whole human race becomes theoperative social unit.

In organic periods, social stability and intellectualharmony prevail, and the various parts of the body social are in equilibrium.In critical periods, in contrast, old certainties are upset, traditions are under-mined, and the body social is in fundamental disequilibrium.

the Theological orficticious; the Metaphysical or abstract; and the Scientific or positive. ... Inthe theological state, the human mind, seeking the essential nature of beings,the first and final causes (the origin and purpose) of all effects . . . supposesall phenomena to be produced by the immediate action of supernatural beings.In the metaphysical state . . . the mind supposes . . . abstract forces, veritableentities (that is, personified abstractions) . . . capable of producing all phe-nomena. ... In the final, the positive state, the mind has given over the vainsearch after Absolute notions, the origin and destination of the universe, andthe causes of phenomena, and applies itself to the study of their laws—that is,their invariable relations of succession and resemblance.

Historical com-parisons throughout the time in which humanity has evolved are at the verycore of sociological inquiry. Sociology is nothing if it is not informed by asense of historical evolution

as when social differences have been ascribed to the politicalinfluence of climate, instead of that inequality of evolution which is the realcause.

Though the human race as a whole has progressedin a single and uniform manner, various populations "have attained extremelyunequal degrees of development"

But "experimentation takes place whenever the regularcourse of the phenomenon is interfered with in any determinate manner.

Hence, ob-servation can come into its own only when it is subordinated to the staticaland dynamic laws of phenomena/* But within these limits it remains indis-pensable

They are,first of all, the same that have been used so successfully in the natural sciences:observation, experimentation, and comparison.

Theintellectual reorganization now dawning in the social sciences "requires therenunciation by the greater number of their right of individual inquiry onsubjects above their qualifications.

Once men recognizethe overriding authority of science in the guidance of human affairs, they willalso abandon the illusory quest for an unfettered "right of free inquiry, or thedogma of unbounded liberty of conscience."

All investigationinto the nature of beings, and their first and final causes, must always beabsolute; whereas the study of the laws of phenomena must be relative, sinceit supposes a continuous progress of speculation subject to the gradual im-provement of observation, without the precise reality ever being fully disclosed.. . . The relative character of scientific conceptions is inseparable from the trueidea of natural laws.

The new positive science dethroned the authority of perennial tradition.Comte's oft-repeated insistence that nothing is absolute but the relative lies atthe very core of his teaching.

But at the same time, men will also be enabled to act deliberatelywithin given limits by curbing the operation of societal laws to their ownpurposes.

The discovery of the basic laws of society will cure men of overweeningambition; they will learn that at any historical moment the margin of societalaction is limited by the exigencies of the proper functioning of the socialorganism.

When this was the case, a Hobbesian model of society,in which only power and the willing acceptance of power permit a semblanceof order, seemed appropriate and plausible. But things are different oncesociology can teach men to recognize the invariable laws of development andorder in human affairs.

sociology

Every scientific theory must be based on observed facts,but it is equally true that "facts cannot be observed without the guidance ofsome theory."

Its field of action is therefore notlimited by the absolute growth of social wealth, or in other wordsby the absolute limits of accumulation. Capital grows to a hugemass in a single hand in one place, because it has been lost bymany in another place. This is centralization proper, as distinctfrom accumulation and concentration

It is concentration of capitals already formed, destructionof their individual independence, expropriation of capitalist b

Over-taxation is not an accidental occurrence,but rather a principle. In Holland, therefore, where this system ·was first inaugurated, the great patriot, De Witt, extolled it in hisMaxims* as the best system for making the wage-labourer sub-missive, frugal, industrious ... and overburdened with work.

The public debt becomes one of the most powerful levers of pri-mitive accumulation

oday, industrial supremacy brings with it commercial suprem-acy. In the period of manufacture it is the reverse: commercialsupremacy produces industrial predominanc

As late as the first half of theeighteenth century, complaint is made if the cottage of the agri-cultural labourer does not possess an adjunct of one or twoacres of land. Nowadays the labourer is lucky if it is furnished witha small garden, or if he may rent a few roods of land at a greatdistance from his cottage.

They took a course to take awaydepopulating inclosures, and depopulating pasturage

Legislation shrunk back in the face of this immense change. Itdid not yet stand at that high level of civilization where the 'wealthof the nation' (i.e. the formation of capital and the reckless ex-ploitation and impoverishment of the mass of the people) figures asthe ultima Thule+ of all statecraft. In his history of Henry VIIBacon says this: 'Inclosures at that time' (1489) 'began to be morefrequent, whereby arable land, which could not be manured§ with-out people·and families, was turned into pasture, which was easilyrid by a few herdsmen; and tenancies for years, lives, and at will,whereupon much of the yeomanry lived, were turned into de-mesnes.

The latter werealso in practice peasants, farming independently for themselves,since, in addition to their wages, they were provided with arableland to the extent of four or more acres, together with their cot-tages.

It was ratherthat the great feudal lords, in their defiant opposition to the kingand Parliament, created an incomparably larger proletariat byforcibly driving the peasantry from the land, to which the latterhad the same feudal title as the lords themselves, and by usurpa- .tion of the common lands

The prelude to the revolution that laid the foundation of thecapitalist mode of production was played out in the last third ofthe fifteenth century and the first few decades of the sixteenth. Amass of 'free' and unattached proletarians was hurled onto thelabour-market by the dissolution of the bands of feudal retainers,who, as Sir James Steuart correctly remarked, 'everywhere use-lessly filled house and castle'

Capital can grow into powerful masses in asingle hand in one place, because in other places it has been with-drawn from many individual hands.

At the same time the progress of accumulation increases thematerial amenable to centralization, i.e. the individual capitals,while the expansion of capitalist production creates, on the onehand, the social need, and on the other hand, the technical means,for those immense industrial undertakings which require a pre-vious centralization of capital for their accomplishmen

namelyco-operation and the possession in common of the land and themeans of production produced by labour itself

Along with the constant decrease in the number ofcapitalist magnates, who usurp and monopolize all the advantagesof this process of transformation, the mass of misery, oppression,slavery, degradation and exploitation grows; but with this therealso grows the revolt of the working class, a class constantlyincreasing in numbers, and trained, united and organized by thevery mechanism of the capitalist process of production. The mono-poly of capital becomes a fetter upon the mode of productionwhich has flourished alongside and under it

as soon as the capitalist mode of productionstands on its own feet

At a certain stage of develop-ment, it brings into the world the material means of its own de-struction. From that moment, new forces and new passions springup in the bosom of society, forces and passions which feel them-selves to be fettered by that society. It has to be annihilated; it isannihilated. Its annihilation, the transformation of the indivi-dualized and scattered means of production into socially concen-trated means of production, the transformation, therefore, of thedwarf-like property of the many into the giant property of the few,and the expropriation of the great mass of the people from the soil,from the means of subsistence and from the instruments of labour,this terrible and arduously accomplished expropriation of the massof the people forms the pre-history of capita

In so far as it is not the direct trans-formation of slaves and serfs into wage-labourers, and therefore amere change of form, it only means the expropriation of the im-mediate producers, i.e. the dissolution of private property based onthe labour of its owner.

With the development of capitalist production during the periodof manufacture, the public opinion of Europe lost its last remnantof shame and conscience. The nations bragged cynically of everyinfamy that served them as a means to the accumulation of capital.Read, for example, the naive commercial annals of the worthyA. Anderson.

The loans enable the government to meet extra-ordinary expenses without the taxpayers feeling it immediately,but they still make increased taxes necessary as a consequence.

It wasnot long before this credit-money, created by the bank itself,became the coin in which the latter made its loans to the state,and paid, on behalf of the state, the interest on the public debt

to dealings in negoti-able effects of all kinds, and to speculation: in a word, it has givenrise to stock-exchange gambling and the modern bankocracy.

According to one of the lists laid beforeParliament, the Company and its officials obtained £6,000,000 be-tween 1757 and 1766 from the Indians in the form of gifts.Between 1769 and 1770, the English created a famine by buyingup all the rice and refusing to sell it again, except at fabulousprices.

The barbarities and desperate out-rages of the so-called Christian race, throughout every region ofthe world, and upon every people they have been able to subdue,are not to be paralleled by those of any other race, however fierce,however untaught, and however reckless of mercy and of shame,in any age of the earth.' 4

Hardon their heels follows the commercial war of the European nations,which has the globe as its battlefield. It begins with the revolt of theNetherlands from Spain, assumes gigantic dimensions in England'sAnti-Jacobin War, and is still going on in the shape of the OpiumWars against China, etc

The discovery of gold and silver in America, the extirpation,enslavement and entombment in mines of the indigenous popu-lation of that continent, the beginnings of the conquest and plunderof India, and the conversion of Africa into a preserve for the com-mercial hunting of blackskins, are all things which characterizethe dawn of the era of capitalist production.

These fetters vanished with the dissolution of the feudalbands of retainers, and the expropriation and partial eviction ofthe rural population

The money capital formed by means of usury and commercewas prevented from turning into industrial capital by the feudalorganization of the countryside and the guild organization of thetowns.

Thedemand for wage-labour therefore grew rapidly with everyaccumulation of capital, while the supply only followed slowlybehind

Thisis an: essential aspect of so-called primitive accumulation.

hus were the agricultural folk first forcibly expropriated fromthe soil, driven from their homes, turned into vagabonds, andthen whipped, branded and tortured by grotesquely terroristiclaws into accepting the discipline necessary for the system ofwage-labour

Even at the beginning ofthe reign of Louis XVI, the Ordinance of 13 July 1777 providedthat every man in good health from 16 to 60 years of age, ifwithout means of subsistence and not practising a trade, shouldbe sent to the galleys.

The spoliation of the Church's property, the fraudulent aliena-tion of the state domains, the theft of the common lands, theusurpation of feudal and clan property and its transformationinto modem private property under circumstances of ruthlessterrorism, all these things were just so many idyllic methods ofprimitive accumulation. They conquered the field for capitalistagriculture, incorporated the soil into capital, and created for theurban industries the necessary supplies of free and rightlessproletarians

hese estates were given away, sold at ridiculousprices, or even annexed to private estates by direct seizure

he poor-ratewas declared perpetual by 16 Charles I, c. 4, and in fact only in1834 did it take a new and severer form.

he device of King Henry VII,' says Bacon, in thetwenty-ninth of his Essays, Civil and Moral, 'was profound andadmirable, in making farms and houses of husbandry of a standard;that is, maintained with such a proportion of land unto them asmay breed a subject to live in convenient plenty and no servilecondition, and to keep the plough in the hands of the owners andnot mere hirelings.

And this is what distinguishes centralizationfrom concentration, the latter being only another name for repro-duction on an extended scale

Moreover, all progress in capitalist agricul-ture is a progress in the art, not only of robbing the worker, but ofrobbing the soil; all progress in increasing the fertility of the soilfor a given time is a progress towards ruining the more long-lasting sources of that fertility.

Thus it destroys at thesame time the physical health of the urban worker, and the in-tellectual life of the rural worker

Bythe destruction of small-scale and domestic industries it destroysthe last resorts of the 'redundant population', thereby removingwhat was previously a safety-valve for the whole social mechan-ism.

Thechildren and young persons, therefore, in all such cases mayjustifiably claim from the legislature, as a natural right, that anexemption should be secured to them, from what destroysprematurely their physical strength, and lowers them in the scaleof intellectual and moral beings.'

That monstrosity, the disposableworking population held in reserve, in misery, for the changingrequirements of capitalist exploitation, must be replaced by theindividual man who is absolutely available for the different kindsof labour required of him; the partially developed individual, whois merely the bearer of one specialized social function, must bereplaced by the totally developed individual, for whom thedifferent social functions are different modes of activity he takesup in turn

At thesame time, it thereby also revolutionizes the division of labourwithin society, and incessantly throws masses of capital and ofworkers from one branch of production to another.

As soon as they get too old for such children's work, that is atabout 17 years old, at the latest, they are discharged from theprinting establishments. They become recruits for crime. Attemptsto procure them employment elsewhere come to grief owing totheir ignorance and brutality, their mental and bodily degrada-tion.

It appears, for example, in the frightfulfact that a great part of the children employed in modern fac:.tori es and manufactures are from their earliest years riveted to themost simple manipulations, and exploited for years, without be-ing taught a single kind of skill that would afterwards make themof use, even in the same factory.

As RobertOwen has shown us in detail, the germ of the education of thefuture is present in the factory system; this education will, in thecase of every child over a given age, combine productive labourwith instruction and gymnastics, not only as one of the methods ofadding to the efficiency of production, but as the only method ofproducing fully developed human being

They are, inreality, declaring that consumption and the other pulmonary dis-eases of the workers are conditions necessary to the existence ofcapital.1

What could be more characteristic of the capitalist mode ofproduction than the fact that it is necessary, by Act of Parliament,to force upon the capitalists the simplest appliances for maintain-ing cleanliness and health?

Here is yet another dazzling vindication of the free-tradedogma that, in a society of mutually antagonistic interests, eachindividual furthers the common welfare by seeking his own per-sonal advantage!

here also comes atime in every industrial cycle when a forcible reduction of wagesbeneath the value of labour-power is attempted so as to cheapencommodities.

feverish production, aconsequent glut on the market, then a contraction of the market,which causes production to be crippled

A new and international division of labour

By constantly turning workers into'supernumeraries', large-scale industry, in all countries where ithas taken root, spurs on rapid increases in emigration and thecolonization of foreign lands, which are thereby converted intosettlements for growing the raw material of the mother country,just as Australia, for example, was converted into a colony forgrowing wool. ss A

All the persons employed in textile factories and in mines, takentogether, number 1,208,442; those employed in textile factories andmetal industries, taken together, number 1,039,605; in both casesless than the number of modern domestic slaves.

The number of workers they employ is directly pro-portional to the demand created by these industries for the crudestform of manual labour.

Machine produc-tion drives the social division of labour immeasurably furtherthan manufacture does, because it increases the productive powerof the industries it seizes upon to a much greater degree

The contradictions and antagonisms inseparable from the capitalist application of machinery do not exist, they say, be-cause they do not arise out of machinery as such, but out of its capitalist application!

Hence, after the introduction of machinery, society possesses as much of the necessaries of life as before, if not more, for the workers who have been displaced, not to mention the enormous share of the annual product wasted by non-workers.

Crippled as they are by the division oflabour, these poor devils are worth so little outside their old trade that they cannot find ad-mission into any industries except a few inferior and therefore over-supplied and under-paid branches

But in any case, since machinery is continually seizing on new fields of production, its 'temporary' effect is really permanent

The whole system of capitalist production is based on the worker's sale of his labour-power as a commodity. The division of labour develops this labour-power in a one-sided way, by reducing it to the highly particularized skill of handling a special tool

He is in revolt against this particular form of the means of production because it is the material foundation of the capitalist mode of production.

Factory work exhausts the nervous system to the uttermost; at the same time, it does away with the many-sided play of the muscles, and confiscates every atom of freedom, both in bodily and in intellectual activity

They reason that since Communism promotes militant atheism, what noblercause could there be than to fight those who deny God? And, since Communistatheists hate America and plot its destruction, what more patriotic cause isthere than to thwart those who would wreck this nation? For such Catholics,the Birch Society provides an opportunity to combine piety and patriotism ina single endeavor.

The large majority of the Catholic hierarchy may have been clearly disturbed by this behavior.

De Gaulle was perceived as anagent of the Bilderberger-Communist conspiracy whose “betrayal” ofFrench Algeria “fit in very well with Bilderberger plans

The linkage of William Morgan, Dr. William Wirt, and Joe McCarthy, asthree Americans who were killed for trying to expose the conspiracy, pointsup the continuity of the opposition with which Welch historically identifies

The Illuminati are credited with founding the Communist conspiracy inthe nineteenth century and with being behind it ever since.

Communism is sometimes used as anothergeneric term for the total conspiracy; but as a specific phenomenon relatedto Moscow or Peking, it can only serve as a related subplot

Of this low-educated group, those who were pro-McCarthy more often mentioned Jews as being Communist than did thosewho were anti-McCarthy.

those who were favorable to Jewishcandidates— were much more likely to be pro-McCarthy than those whowere against Jewish congressional candidate

But McCarthy did not; tothe contrary, he relied heavily and publicly on several Jewish advisers,such as Roy Cohn and David Schine. The evidence of surveys furtherindicates that McCarthy’s supporters were not any more anti-Semitic thanhis opponents.

McCarthy’s main targets were never the North Korean or Chinese orRussian Communists— not even seriously, Communist spies in America—but rather the American establishment

Clearly, many who approved the Senator forhis anti-Communist activities were not prepared to back him or candidateshe favored in elections.