Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 6.djvu/178

 1 64 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

end to social progress, and would, in fact, inaugurate a process of degeneration. This would, of course, mean that future genera- tions would suffer from such a policy, but those now living would realize a higher degree, or at least a greater amount, of comfort and pleasure than would otherwise fall to their lot.

The bald utilitarianism and the consequent irrationality of all pure forms of altruism which Kidd maintains we cannot stop to criticise. To some extent what has already been said in the argument which has gone before will serve the purpose. But admitting for the nonce that self-interest in its strictest sense should rule, is it true that individual and race interests are antagonistic and irreconcilable ?

If Kidd had merely said that, as at present organized and operated, our social system is one in which race progress is secured at the expense of individual welfare, that would have been a simple statement of fact, to answer which it would merely be necessary to examine thoroughly existing social conditions, and from such an examination to determine, if possible, whether or not this were so. But this is not what is declared. In Social Evolution the assertion is made, and declared to have been demonstrated, that the two interests, race and individual, are inherently irreconcilable ; that, in other words, it is impossible, under any conceivable social regime, to secure at once race prog- ress and general individual success.

The demonstration of the incorrectness of this assertion depends directly upon the same reasoning which we have applied to the theories of Spencer. The source of the error of Kidd lies in his failure to comprehend the full possibilities of the competitive principle. To him, filled as his mind is with the laws of mere physical life, competition seems to mean little more than a struggle for sustenance and bare existence. We are in hearty accord with Kidd as to the general beneficence among men of a regime in which merit and success are determined by a fair and free contest, and we confess our inability to conceive of any other distributive method that would be of equal social efficiency either for stimulating the development of desirable characteristics or for bringing into the fullest and most effective