Page:Peter Alexeivitch Kropotkin - Modern Science and Anarchism (1912).pdf/83

 draw from the study of the tendencies of modern economic life conclusions so different from their conclusions as regards what is desirable and possible; in other words, why we come to Free Communism, while they come to State Capitalism and the Collectivist Wage System.

It is possible that we are wrong, and they are right. But the question as to which of us is right, and which wrong, cannot be settled by means of Byzantine commentaries as to what such or such a writer intended to say, or by talking about what agrees with the "trilogy " of Hegel; most certainly not by continuing to use the dialectic method.

It can be done only by studying the facts of Economics tn the same way and by the same methods as we study natural sciences. The following few abstracts from the letter of a well-known biologist, a Belgian professor, which I received while I was reading the proofs of the French edition of this work, will better explain what is meant by the above lines; the passages in straight brackets […] are added by me:—

"In proportion as I advance in the reading of 'Fields, Factories, and Workshops,' I become more and more convinced that henceforward the study of economic and social questions will only be accessible to those who have studied natural sciences and are imbued with the spirit of these sciences. Those who have received the so-called classical education only are incapable of understanding the present movement of ideas, and are equally incapable of studying quite a number of special questions.

"……The idea of integration of labour, and of the division of labour in time [that is, the idea that it would be advantageous for society if every one could work alternately in agriculture industry, and intellectual pursuits, in order to vary his work and to develop his individuality in all directions], is sure to become one of the corner-stones of economic science. There is a mass of biological facts which are in accordance with the above underlined idea, which show that this is a law of Nature [in other words that in Nature an economy of energy is often obtained by this means]. If we examine the vital functions of a living being during the different stages of its existence, or even during different seasons, and in some cases during different hours of the day, we find an application of that of labour in time, which is intimately connected with division of labour between the organs (Adam Smith's law).

"Men of science unacquainted with natural sciences are incapable of understanding the real scope of a Law in Nature; they are blinded by the mere word law, and they imagine that a law like that of Adam Smith, has a fatal force from which it is impossible to escape. When they are shown the other side of this law—i.e., its deplorable result from the point of view of individual development and happiness—they reply 'This law is inexorable,' and very often this reply is; given with a sharp intonation which shows a feeling of infallibility. But the naturalist knows very well that science knows how to annul the bad effects of a

By using still the same method, the Anarchist comes to his