however，toucheswiderandwidercirclesofthepopulation，andtouchestheminanincreasinglyintimateandcoercivemanner。Inthenatureofthecase，therefore，theresistanceopposedtothisculturaltrendgivenbythemachinedisciplineongroundsofreceivedconventionsweakenswiththepassageoftime。Thespreadofmaterialistic，matter-of-factpreconceptionstakesplaceatacumulativelyacceleratingrate，exceptinsofarassomeotherculturalfactor，alientothemachinediscipline，comesintoinhibititsspreadandkeepitsdisintegratinginfluencewithinbounds。
　　Theperfectedsystemofbusinessprinciplesrestsonthehistoricalbasisoffreeinstitutions，andsopresumesaprotractedhistoricalgrowthoftheseinstitutions；butahighlyefficient，thoughlessperfect，businesssystemwasworkedoutinarelativelyshorttimebytheSouthandCentralEuropeanpeoplesinearlymoderntimesonthebasisofalessconsummatesystemofrights-Cf。Ehrenberg，ZeitalterderFugger；Sombart，Kapitalismus，vol。
　　Cf。Keane，Man，PastandPresent，ch。XIV；W。Z。Ripley，RacesofEurope；Lapouge，L’Aryen；Montelius，LestempsprehistoriquesenBubde，etc。；AndreasHansen，MenneskesloegtensAelde。
　　If，e。g。，hetakestomythmakingandpersonifiesthemachineortheprocessandimputesandbenevolencetothemechanicalapplications，afterthemannerofcurrentnurserytalesandpulpitoratory，heissuretogowrong。
　　Suchexpressionsas“goodandill，““meritanddemerit，““lawandorder，“whenappliedtotechnologicalfactsortotheoutcomeofmaterialseience，areevidentlyonlymetaphoricalexpressions，borrowedfromolderusageandserviceableonlyasfiguresofspeech。
　　Tarde，PsychologicEconomique，vol。I。pp。122-131，offersacharacterizationofthepsychologyofmodernwork，contrasting，amongotherthings，theworkofthemachineworkmanwiththatofthehandicraftsmaninrespectofitspsychologicalrequirementsandeffects。Itmaybetakenasatemperateformulationofthecentcommonplacesonthistopic，andseemstobefairlywideofthemark。
　　Forsomethingmorethanahundredyearspastthischangeinthehabitsofthoughtoftheworkmanhasbeencommonlyspokenofasadeteriorationornumbingofhisintelligence。Butthatseemstoosweepingacharacterizationofthechangebroughtonbyhabituationtomachinework。Itissafetosaythatsuchhabituationbringsachangeintheworkman’shabitsofthought，-
　　inthedirection，method，andcontentofhisthinking，-
　　heighteninghisintelligenceforsomepurposesandloweringitforcertainothers。Nodoubt，onthewhole，themachine’sdisciplinelowerstheintelligenceoftheworkmanforsuchpurposesaswereratedhighasmarksofintelligencebeforethecomingofthemachine，butitappearslikewisetoheightenhisintelligenceforsuchpurposesashavebeenbroughttothefrontbythemachine。Ifheisbynaturescantilyendowedwiththeaptitudesthatwouldmakehimthinkeffectivelyintermsofthemachineprocess，ifhehasintellectualcapacityforotherthingsandnotforthis，thentheminingofthemachinemayfairlybesaidtolowerhisintelligence，sinceithidersthefulldevelopmentoftheonlycapacitiesofwhichheispossessed。Theresultingdifferenceinintellectualtrainingisadifferenceinkindanddirection，notnecessarilyindegree。Cf。Schmoller，GrundrissderVolkswirtschaftslehre，vol。I。secs。
　　Hobson，EvolutionofModernCapitalism，ch。IX。secs。4and5；
　　CookeTaylor，ModernFactorySystem，pp。434-435；SidneyandBeatriceWebb，IndustrialDemocrocy，e。g。pp。327etseq。；K。Th。
　　Reinhold，ArbeitundWerkzeug，ch。X。particularlyp
　　andch。XIparticularlypp。221-240。
　　Cf。J。C。Sutherland，“TheEngineeringMind“PopularScienceMonthly，January
　　Cf。“IndustrialandPecuniaryEmployments“especiallypp。
　　AsG。F。Steffenhasdescribedit:“Thosewhohireouttheirlaborpowerortheircapitalortheirlandtotheentrepreneursareasarulenotabsolutelypassiveasseenfromthepointofviewofbusinessenterprise。Theyarenotsimplyinanimateimplementsinthehandsoftheentrepreneurs。Theyare，enterprisingimplements，foretagaadeverktygwhosurrendertheirundertakingfunctionsonlytotheextentdesignatedinthecontractwiththeentrepreneur。“-EkonomiskTidskrift，vol。
　　Cf。，ontheotherhand，Reinhold，ArbeitundWerkzeug，ch。
　　andXIV，wheredoubledealingisconfusedwithworkmanship，verymuchafterthemannerfamiliartoreadersofexpositionsofthe“wagesofsuperintendence，“butmorebroadlyandingeniouslythanusual。
　　Individualexceptionsare，ofcourse，tobefoundinallclasses，butthereis，afterall，amoreorlessconsistent，prevalentclassattitude。Asiswellknown，clergymen，lawyers，soldiers，civilservants，andthelike，arepopularlyheldtobeofaconservative，ifnotreactionarytemper。Thisvulgarapprehensionmaybefaultyindetail，andespeciallyitmaybetoosweepinginitsgeneralizations；butthereare，afterall，fewpersonsnotbelongingtotheseclasseswhowillnotimmediatelyrecognizethatthisvulgarappraisementofthemrestsonsubstantialgrounds，eventhoughtheappraisementmayneedqualification。So，also，aconservativeanimusisseentopervadeallclassesmoregenerallyinearliertimesoronmorearchaiclevelsofculturethanourown。Atthesametime，inthoseearlydaysandinthemorearchaicculturalregions，thestructureofconventionallyacceptedtruthsandthebodyofaccreditedspiritualorextra-materialfactsaremorecomprehensiveandrigid，andthethinkingonalltopicsismoreconsistentlyheldtotestsofauthenticityascontrastedwithtestsofsenseperception。Onthewhole，thenumberandvarietyofthingsthatarefundamentallyandeternallytrueandgoodincreaseasonegoesoutwardfromthemodernWest-Europeanculturalcentresintotheearlierbarbarianpastorintotheremoterbarbarianpresent。
　　Seeabove。
　　Cf。TheoryoftheLeisureClass，especiallych。
　　As，e。g。，MrW。G。S。AdamscogentlypointsoutinarecentnumberoftheJournalofPoliticalEcomnomyDecember。
　　AsMr。WebbshowsIndustrialDemocracy，
　　ThehistoricalexplanationofthisHouseofLordsreversaloftrade-unionpracticeisprobablytobefoundintheconservative，orratherreactionary，trendgiventoBritishsentimentbytheimperialistpolicyofthelasttwoorthreedecades，accentuatedbytheexperiencesoftheBoerWar。TheBoerWarseemstomarkaturning-pointinthegrowthofsentimentandinstitutions。Sincetheseventiestheimperialistinterest，thatistosay，thedynasticinterest，hasbeencomingintotheforegroundamongtheintereststhatengagetheattentionoftheBritishcommunity。Itseemsnowtohavedefinitivelygainedthefirstplace，andmaybeexpectedintheimmediatefuturetodominateBritishpolicybothathomeandabroad。Concomitantly，itmayberemarked，theBritishcommunityhasbeenslowingdown，ifnotlosingground，inindustrialanimus，technologicalefficiency，andscientificspirit。Cf。Hobson，Imperialism，partIIch。IandIII。
　　Allthisappliestoanarchismaswellastosocialism；
　　similarlytoseveralminorcategoriesofdissentients。Intheirnegativeproposalsthesocialistsandanarchistsarefairlyagreed。Itisinthemetaphysicalpostulatesoftheirprotestandintheirconstructiveaimsthattheypartcompany。Ofthetwo，thesocialistsaremorewidelyoutoftouchwiththeestablishedorder。Theyarealsomorehopelesslynegativeanddestructiveintheirideals，asseenfromthestandpointoftheestablishedorder。Thisappliestothelatersocialistsratherthantotheearlier，anditapplies，ofcourse，onlytothelower-class，“democratic“socialists，nottotheso-calledstateandChristiansocialists。
　　Anarchismproceedsonnatural-rightsground，andisaccordinglyintouchwiththepostulatesoftheexistingpropertyarrangementstothatextent。Itisamoreunmitigatedworkingoutofthesamepostulates。Itisasystemof“naturalliberty“
　　unqualifiedtotheextentevenofnotadmittingprescriptiveownership。Itsbasisisadivinelyinstitutedorderofnature，thekeynoteofwhichisaninalienablefreedomandequalityoftheindividual，quiteintheeighteenth-centuryspirit。ItisinthissenseanoffshootoftheRomanticschoolofthought。
　　Anarchismisadejureseheme，whichtakesnoaccountofmechanicalexigenciesbutrestsitscasealtogetheronanthropomorphicpostulatesofnaturalrights。Itis，fromthenatural-rightsstandpoint，substantiallysound，thoughsenselesslyextreme。
　　Whatmaybecalledthenormalsocialism，socialismofthelater，moredangerous，andmoreperplexing，kind，doesnotbuildonthereceivedmetaphysicalbasisofthe“naturalorder。“Itdemandsareconstructionofthesocialfabric，butitdoesnotknowonwhatlinesthereconstructionistobecarriedout。Thenaturalrightsoftheindividualarenotacceptedasthestandardexceptbycertainlargebodiesofneophytes，especiallyruralAmerican，whoarecarryingundersocialistmottoestheburdenofanimositiesandpreconceptionsthatoncemadepopulism，butnothingdefiniteisputintheplaceofthisoutwornstandard。
　　Thesocialistsoftheline，insofarasthereisanyconsensusamongthem，professthatthemechanicalexigenciesoftheindustrialsystemmustdecidewhatthesocialstructureistobe，butbeyondthisvaguegeneralitytheyhavelittletooffer。Andthismechanicalstandardizationcanmanifestlyaffordnobasisforlegislationoncivilrights。Indeed，itisdifficulttoseehowanysehemeofcivilrights，muchorlittle，canfindaplaceinasociallsticreorganization。
　　19。The“scientificsocialism“ofMarxandEngelsaspromulgatedduringthethirdquarterofthenineteenthcenturywasnotofthisnegativecharacter。ItwasaproductofHegelianismblendedwiththeconceptionsofnaturalrights，itschiefcountbeingthe“claimtothefullproductoflabor。“ThissocialismnevermadeseriousinroadsamongtheworkingclassesoutsideofGermany-
　　thehomeofHegelianism。EveninthatcountrythemostvigorousgrowthofsocialisticsentimentcameafterHegelianismhadbeguntoyieldtoDarwinianmethodsofthought，andthislatergrowthhasbeenprogressivelylessMarxianandlesspositive。Marxismisnowlittlemorethanaproformaconfessionoffaith。Avowedsocialismispracticallytakingonthecharacterdescribedabove，exceptsofarasithasgrownopportunistandhassoughtaffiliationwiththeliberaldemocraticmovementandthereformers。
　　Wheremembersofthewell-to-doclassesavowsocialisticsentimentsandidealsitcommonlyturnsouttobeamerelyhumanitarianaspirationforamore“equitable“redistributionofwealth，areadjustmentofthesehemeofownershipwithsomeimprovedsafeguardingofthe“reasonable“propertyclaimsofallmembersofthecommunity。What“socialist“reformcommonlymeanstothiscontingentofwell-to-doirregularsissomesehemeofequalrightsofownershipforall。Whereastosocialistsofthelineequalrightsofownershipisasidleapropositionasanequalrightofcitizenstoselltheirvotes。Insteadofareformofownershipthesocialistscontemplatethetracelessdisappearanceofownership。
　　Unlessitbeinthelatestextremesofconservatism，suchasisshownintherecentofdynasticpoliticsinGermany，TorypolicyinEngland，andpredatorypoliticalidealsinAmerica。
　　22。SocialisticnotionsareapprentlymakingsomeinroadsamongtheruralpopulationoftheAmericanprairieregion，whereamechanicallyorganizedandstandardizedmethodoffarmingprevails，withalargeuseofmechanicalappliances。
　　SostrikinghasbeenthefailureoftheGermansocialists，forinstance，intheirattemptsupontheintegrityofthefarmingcommunity，thattheyhavelatterlychangedtheirtactics，andinsteadofattemptingtoconvertthepeasantstoafullsocialisticprogramme，theyhaveturnedtomeasuresofcompromise，inwhichthecharacteristicandrevolutionaryfeaturesofthesocialisticprogrammearesoftenedbeyondrecognition，ifnotsuppressed。Thehabitsoflife，andthereforethehabitsofthought，ofthepeasantfarmersmoveontheancientleveisofhandicraft，pecuniarymanagement，personalconsequence，andpreseriptivecustom。
　　Ifthisaccountoftheclasslimitationofthesocialistbiasisaccepted，ithasanimmediatebearinguponaquestionwhichislatterlyengagingtheattentionoftheadvocatesofsocialism。
　　Thequestionisastothepartplayedbypropertylessofficeemployeesandbythebusinessmenwhomthemodernconsolidationsofbusinessreducetothepositionofsalariedmanagersandsuperintendents。Withafaithpromptedbytheirownhopesratherthanbyobservedfactsorbythelogicofevents，thespokesmenforsocialismarestronglyinclinedtoclaimthis“businessproletariat“asacontingentwhichthecourseofeconomicdevelopmentisboundtothrowintothesocialistcamp。Thefactsdonotinanyappreciabledegreecountenancesuchanexpectation。