the better for the hopes of the world,
since the apparent growth of anarchy is only the measure of the rate of
improvement. History, as far as we are capable of history (which is
not saying much as yet), shows that all changes from crudity of social
organization to complexity, and from mechanical agencies in government
to living ones, seem anarchic at first sight. No doubt it is natural
to a snail to think that any evolution which threatens to do away with
shells will result in general death from exposure. Nevertheless, the
most elaborately housed beings today are born not only without houses on
their backs but without even fur or feathers to clothe them.

ANARCHISM NO PANACEA

One word of warning to those who may find themselves attracted by
Siegfried's Anarchism, or, if they prefer a term with more respectable
associations, his neo-Protestantism. Anarchism, as a panacea, is just as
hopeless as any other panacea, and will still be so even if we breed
a race of perfectly benevolent men. It is true that in the sphere of
thought, Anarchism is an inevitable condition of progressive
evolution. A nation without Freethinkers--that is, without intellectual
Anarchists--will share the fate of China. It is also true that our
criminal law, based on a conception of crime and punishment which is
nothing but our vindictiveness and cruelty in a virtuous disguise, is
an unmitigated and abominable nuisance, bound to be beaten out of
us finally by the mere weight of our experience of its evil and
uselessness. But it will not be replaced by anarchy. Applied to the
industrial or political machinery of modern society, anarchy must always
reduce itself speedily to absurdity. Even the modified form of anarchy
on which modern civilization is based: that is, the abandonment
of industry, in the name of individual liberty, to the upshot of
competition for personal gain between private capitalists, is a
disastrous failure, and is, by the mere necessities of the case, giving
way to ordered Socialism. For the economic rationale of this, I must
refer disciples of Siegfried to a tract from my hand published by the
Fabian Society and entitled The Impossibilities of Anarchism, which
explains why, owing to the physical constitution of our globe, society
cannot effectively organize the production of its food, clothes and
housing, nor distribute them fairly and economically on any anarchic
plan: nay, that without concerting our social action to a m