Class. Book,. " • 3> ipi#? .f\v I CoipghtN?. \'&V COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT CHURCH AND STATE AXD OTHER ESSAYS INCLUDING MONEY; MAX AXD WOMAN: THEIR RESPECTIVE FUNCTIONS; THE MOTHER; A SECOXD SUPPLEMENT TO THE KREUTZER SOXATA BY COUNT LEO TOLSTOI nu BOSTON, MASS. BEXJ. R. TUCKER, PUBLISHER 1891 -±\D \J? COPYRIGHT, BY BENJ. R. TUCKER, 1891. /z-'&fVp/ CONTENTS. PAGE Church and State 5 Money. . . 33 Man and Woman : Their Kespectiye Functions . 137 The Mother . . . 7 147 A Second Supplement to the Kreutzer Sonata . 159 CHURCH AND STATE. Translated by Victor Yarros. CHURCH AND STATE. Faith is that which invests life with mean- ing, that which gives strength and direction to life. Every living man discovers this meaning and lives upon it. Having failed to discover it, he dies. In his search, man avails himself of all that humanity has achieved. All that has been achieved by humanity is called revelation. Revelation is that which helps man to com- prehend the meaning of life. _J3uch is the relation of man to faith. What a wonderful thing, then ! Men appear, who toil unceasingly to make other people enjoy just this and no other form of revelation ; who cannot rest until others accept their, just their form of revelation, and who damn, execute, kill, as many as they can of the dissenters. Others 7 . 8 Church and State. do the same : damn, execute, and kill as many as possible of the dissenters ; still others also do the same. And thus, all damn, execute, kill, one another, demanding that all shall believe as they do. And the result is that there are hun- dreds of faiths, and that all damn, execute, and kill one another. At first it was amazing to me how such an evident absurdity, such an evident contradic- tion, failed to destroy faith itself. How could there remain people who believed in this delusion ? And indeed, from a general point of view, this is inconceivable, and irresistibly proves that every faith is a lie, and that the whole thing is superstition, — which is what the reigning phi- losophy does prove. Looking from the general point of view, I too had irresistibly been driven to the admission that all faiths are human delusions ; but I could not fail to pause at the reflection that the very silliness of the delusion, its manifestness, and the fact that nevertheless humanity submits to it, — that this very thing proves that at the Church and State, 9 foundation of this delusion rests something that is not a delusion. Otherwise, it were all so foolish that people could not deceive themselves. The very submission of entire humanity, w T hich truly lives, to the delusion, obliged me to acknowledge the significance of that phenom- enon which is the cause of the delusion ; and upon this conviction I began to analyze the Christian doctrine, which serves as the foun- dation of the delusion of entire Christian humanity. So it appears from the general point of view ; but from the personal point of view, from that inconsequence of which every man (and I), in order to live, must have faith in the meaning of life, and has such faith, — this fact of compul- sion in the matter of faith is still more amazing in its absurdity. Realty, how, why, to whom, can it be neces- sary that another should not only believe, but profess, in the same way that I do ? A man lives, consequently he knows the meaning of life. He has fixed his relation to 10 Church and State. God ; he knows the truth of truths, and I know the truth of truths. The forms of these may be different. The substance must be one and the same, — we are both men. How, why, what may compel me to demand from anybody that he shall manifest his truth absolutely as I do ? Compel him to change his faith I cannot; either by violence, cunning, or deception. (False miracles.) Faith in his life, — how then can I take away his faith and give him another? It is like tak- ing his heart out and putting another in. I can do it only if faith, his as well as mine, is — words, and not that whereby he lives ; if our faith is an excrescence, not the heart. Another reason why this cannot be done is that it is impossible to force a man to believe that which he does not believe, — that is, to fill his relation to God, — and because he who knows that faith is the relation of man to God cannot wish to determine the relations of an- other man to God through force or fraud. Church and State. 11 This is impossible, but it is clone and has been done everywhere and always ; that is, it could not be done, since it is impossible, but something is being done and has been done that is very much like it. What is being done and has been done is the imposing by some on others the likeness of faith, and the acceptance of this likeness of faith by the others, — like^. ness of faith, — that is, the delusion of faith. Faith cannot impose itself, and cannot be adopted for the sake of anything, — violence, deception, or utility ; and hence it is not faith, but the delusion of faith. And this delusion of faith is the ancient condition of the life of humanity. In what, then, does this delusion consist, and on what is it founded? What produces it in the deceivers, and what sustains it in the deceived? I will not speak about Brahminism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Mohammedanism, in which the same phenomena have taken place ; not, however, because the same would not be found to be the case. To every one who has read about those 12 . Church and State. religions it will be clear that with those faiths it is the same as with Christianity. I will speak exclusively about Christianity, as a faith familiar to us, needful and dear to us. In Christianity the whole delusion is built on the fanatical idea of Church, based on noth- ing, and astounding, at the commencement of the study of Christianity, in its unexpected and useless absurdity. Of all the godless ideas and terms, there is no term and concept more godless than the 'idea of Church. There is no idea that has produced more evil, no idea more hostile to the doctrine of ^Christ, than the idea of Church. At bottom, the word Eeelesia means collection and nothing more, and so it is used in the Gospels. In the languages of all new peoples the word Eeelesia signifies house of worship. Further than these significations, in spite of the fifteen centuries' existence of the delusion of Church, this word has not advanced in any language. Church and State. 13 According to the definitions given to this word by those priests who need this delusion of Church, it is nothing else than an introduc- tion to this effect: " Everything I am about to say is truth, and, if you will not believe, I shall burn you, or damn you, and in every way work you injury." This idea is a sophism, necessary for certain dialectical purposes, and it remains the inheri- tance of those who need it. Among the people, and not only among the people, but in society, and among educated men, in spite of the fact that the Catechism teaches it, this .idea does not exist. This definition (however ashamed one may be to analyze it seriously, it has to be done, seeing that so many people put it forward as something important) is totally false. When it is said that the Church is the con- gregation of the truly-faithful, nothing is really said ; since, if I say that a chapel is the con- gregation of all true musicians, I say nothing if I do not declare whom I call true musicians. 14 Church and State. While, according to theology, the truly-faith- ful are those who follow the doctrine of the Church, — that is, are in the Church. To say nothing of the circumstance that of such true faiths there are hundreds, the defi- nition tells us nothing, and would even seem useless, did not the trace of a certain ear-mark become perceptible here. The Church is true and one, and in her are the pastors and papacies ; and the pastors, ap- pointed by God, teach this true and unitary doctrine, — that is, " By God, Everything We are Going to Say, everything is genuine truth." And nothing more ! The whole delusion is here, in the word and in the idea, Church. And the delusion only signifies that there are people who have an immoderate desire to teach their faith to others. But for what end do they wish so strongly to teach others their faith ? Did they possess genuine faith, they would know that in faith is the meaning of life, the relation to God, fixed by every man individu- Church and State. 15 ally, and that it is therefore impossible to teach faith, but only the delusion of faith. But they desire to teach. To what end? The simplest answer would be that the Pope needs cakes and eggs, the bishops a castle, fish- pie, and a silken cassock. But this answer is insufficient. Such, no doubt, is the inward, psychological motive of the delusion, the motive maintaining it; but, reasoning thus, how could one man (executioner) venture to kill another against whom he has no malice? It would be inadequate to say that the execu- tioner kills because he is not given brandy, a loaf of white bread, and a red shirt ; just in the same degree w^ould it be inadequate to say that the Metropolitan of Kieff and the monks fill sacks with straw which they call saints' relics, just for the sake of getting an income of thirty thousand. Both acts, the one and the other, are too ter- rible and repugnant to human nature to allow such an explanation to be adequate. 16 Qhurch and State. As the executioner, so the Metropolitan, in explaining his act, will cite a whole series of proofs, the chief basis of which will be historical tradition. "It is necessary to execute men; since the world came into existence there have been exe- cutions. If not I, then somebody else. I will do it, I hope, with the aid of God, better than another," will say the executioner. "Formal worship is necessary ; since the world came into existence, the relics of the saints have been honored," will say the Metropolitan ; " the relics of the caves are honored; people come here. If not I, then somebody else will play the host here. And I, with the aid of God, hope to dispose of the money, got by blasphe- mous fraud, in a way more pleasing to God." To understand the delusion of faith, it , is necessary to go to its source, to the origin. We speak of that which we know in reference to Christianity. Turning to the original Christian doctrine in the Gospels, we find a doctrine directly exclud- ing formal vorship, censuring it, and one that Qhurch and State. 17 with particular plainness and positiveness denies all teaching. But since Christ's time, and down to ours, we find a deviation of doctrine from the founda- tions laid by Christ. This deviation begins at the time of the apostles, especially with that lover of teaching, Paul; and the wider Christianity extends, the more it deviates and appropriates the methods of that very external worship and dogmatism the denial of which was so positively expressed by Christ. But in the first days of Christianity the idea of Church is used only as a representation of all those who share the faith which I consider the true one. y ^- A wholly true idea, provided it does not in- clude mere verbal manifestations of beliefs (but expressions by means of the entire life), since beliefs cannot be manifested by words. The conception of the true Church was also used as an argument against the opponents ; but until Emperor Constantine and the Nicaean Council, Church was only an idea, r > 18 Church and State. But since Constantine and the Nicsean Coun- cil the Church has been a thing, and a thing of fraud. The fraud begins with the Metropolitan and the relics, the priests and the Lord's Supper, Synods, and the like, which so astound and horrify us, and which, from their ugliness, do not find an adequate explanation in the mere advantage derived by those persons. The delusion is old, and did not proceed from the mere advantages to private persons: there lives no such man, monster, who would deter- mine to do it if he were the first and if there were no other causes. The causes that led to it were bad ones. " By their fruits shall you know them." The source was evil : hate, human pride, hos- tility toward Arius and others, and another still graver evil, — the union of Christianity with power. Power: Constantine, emperor, according to heathen ideas one who stands at the height of human grandeur (he was counted among the gods), accepts Christianity, furnishes an ex- Church and State. 19 ample to the whole nation, converts the nation, and extends a helping hand as against heretics, and through the ecumenical council fixes the unitary orthodox Christian faith. The Christian Catholic faith is fixed forever. So natural was it to yield to that delusion that even unto this day men believe in the salu- tariness of that event. While the event was really such that, thanks to it, the majority of Christians have repudiated their faith. That was the point where the overwhelming majority of Christians took the heathen road, which is still followed. Charles the Great, Vladimir, continue the same work. And the delusion has continued up to our time, the delusion being right here, — for the acceptance of power by Christianity is needful for those who understand the letter, but not the spirit, of Christianity. In reality, the acceptance of Christianity without the repudiation of power is a mockery and perversion of Christianity. The consecration of governmental power by 20 Church and State. Christianity is blasphemy, is the doom of Chris- tianity. Having lived fifteen hundred years under this blasphemous union of pretended Christian- ity with Government, it is necessary to make a great effort in order to forget those intricate sophisms which for fifteen centuries, every- where, at power's pleasure, have perverted the doctrine of Christ, to make it compatible with Government, and the attempts to explain the sacredness, legitimacy of Government, and the possibility of its being Christian, At bottom, the words, " Christian Govern- ment " are like the words, " warm, hot ice." Either there is no Government, or there is no Christianity. To understand this clearly, it is necessary to forget all those phantasies in which we are care- fully educated, and plainly inquire into the import of those sciences, historical and judicial, which we are taught. These sciences are without any foundations ; all these sciences are nothing else than an apol- ogy for violence o Church and State. 21 Passing by the history of the Mecles and Persians, etc., let us take that Government which first made a union with Christianity. There was a cut-throats' nest in Rome. It spread by robbery, violence, murder. It con- quered nations. The robbers and their descend- ants, with chiefs (who were called, now Caesar, now Augustus) at their head, plundered and tortured the people to gratify their desires. One of the descendants of these cut-throats, Constantine, having read a great deal in books and having become satiate with his voluptuous living, preferred certain dogmas of Christianity to previous beliefs ; to the bringing of human sacrifices, he preferred grand mass ; to the wor- ship of Apollo and Venus and Jupiter, he pre- ferred the one God, with his Son Christ ; and he ordered the introduction of this faith among those who were under his authority. " Kings rule over their peoples ; this shall not be among you. — Do not kill. — Do not com- mit adultery. — Abjure riches. — Do not judge ; do not condemn. — Endure evil." All this nobody told him of. 22 Church and State. "Oh, you wish to call yourself a Christian and continue to be the chief of the cut-throats, — to assault, burn, fight, do mischief, execute, and revel ? All right ! " And they furnished him a Christianity, and made it very comfortable, — better than could have been expected. They anticipated that he might, on reading the Gospel, bethink himself that there more is demanded of him than the building of churches and the visiting them, that a Christian life is there required ; and they thoughtfully and with foresight constructed such a Christianity for him that he could without embarrassment live in the old, heathen way. On the one hand, Christ, the Son of God, appeared for no other purpose than to redeem him, Constantine, and all the others. Because Christ died, Constantine can live as he pleases. And if this is not enough, one may repent and swallow a piece of bread with some wine ; — in this there will be salvation and all will be for- given. And not satisfied with this, they even consecrated his ruffianly power, and said that he was from God ; and anointed him with oil. Church and State. 23 For this he, too, arranged for them as they desired. He called a council of priests, had them declare what the relation of every man should be to God and every other man, and the same he ordered to be repeated. And all were satisfied; and thus for a thou- sand years has this faith lived in the world, and other cut-throat chiefs have introduced it, and they are all anointed, and everything, every- thing, is from God. If some villain plunders everybody, massa- cres many people, he will be anointed by them, — he is from God. Some nations have had husband-slayers and libertines. The French have had Napoleon. And the priests, in compensation for this, not only are from God, but almost are themselves gods, since in them resides the Holy Ghost. He resides in the priests as well as in the Synod, with its commanders, the officials. And as soon as a certain anointed — that is, a cut-throat chief — becomes possessed of the desire to massacre another as well as his peo- 24 Church and State. pie, holy water is at once made for him, some of it is sprinkled, the cross is taken up (that very cross carrying which Christ died, because he repudiated these very cut-throats), and a blessing is bestowed on massacre, hangings, and beheadings. And everything would be well ; but even here they could not agree among themselves, and the anointed proceeded to call each other cut-throats (that which they really are), while the people began to listen and ceased to believe either the anointed or the keepers of the Holy Ghost, but learned from their own lips to call them by their real names, as they themselves call each other, — namely, cut-throats and im- postors. But to the cut-throats we have only referred a propos, since they had traduced the impostors. Our talk is properly about the impostors, the pretended Christians. Such they have become in consequence of the union with the cut-throats. And it could not be otherwise. They deviated from the path at the first minute that they con- Church and State. 25 secrated the first Emperor, and assured hini that he could help the faith with his violence, — the faith of humility, self-denial, and the endurance of injury. The whole history of the actual Church, — not the fantastic, — that is, the history of the hierarchy under the authority of the emperors, is a series of vain attempts on the part of this unfortunate hierarchy to preserve the truth of the doctrine, while propagating it by means of lies and abjuring it in practice. The importance of the hierarchy is based only on the doctrine which it intends to teach. The doctrine speaks about humility, self-abne- gation, love, destitution; but the doctrine is propagated by violence, hatred, and evil. That the hierarchy may have something to teach, that there may be disciples, it is needful not to forsake the doctrine ; while in order to whitewash itself and its illegitimate union with power, it is necessary to disguise by the shrewd- est considerations the substance of the doctrine and to transfer for the purpose its centre of gravity, from the substance of the doctrine to its formal side. 26. Church and State. And this is what the hierarchy is doing, — this is the source of that delusion of faith prop- agated by the Church. The source is the union of the hierarchy with violence under the respective names of Church and power. As to the source of people's desire to teach their faith to others, it is found in the fact that faith unmasks them, and they are obliged to substitute, in place of genuine faith, one of their own invention, to be justified by it. Genuine faith may exist everywhere except where it is obviously false, — that is, addicted to violence. Everywhere, but not in Government-imposed faith. Genuine faith may exist in all so-called schisms, heresies, but certainly cannot exist only where it is united with Government. Strange to say, but the appellations, ortho- dox, Catholic, Protestant faith, as these words are fixed in common speech, signify nothing else than faith united with power, Government faith, and hence false. Church and State. 27 The conception of Church, — that is, una- nimity of many, of the majority, and at the same time the proximity to the source during the first two centuries of Christianity, — was but one of the weak formal arguments. Paul said: "I know from Christ himself." Another said: "I know from Luke." And all said: "We think rightly, and the proof of this is that there is a large congregation of us, Ecclesia, Church." But only after the Mcsean Council, arranged by the Emperor, did the direct and conscious delusion begin for a part of those who professed the same faith. "It pleases us and the Holy Ghost," they began to say then. The conception of Church became not merely a poor argument, but also, for some, a power. The Church united with power, and began to act as a power. And everything that united itself with power 28 Church and State. and yielded to it ceased to be faith, and became delusion. What does Christianity teach, whether under- stood as the doctrine of a given church, or of all churches? Analyze it as you like, shift or subdivide, the Christian doctrine will at once separate itself into two sharp parts : 1. The doctrine of dogmas, beginning with God's Son, Holy Ghost, and the relation be- tween these personalities, down to the Lord's Supper, with or without wine, with fresh or sour bread. 2. And the moral doctrine, — humility, in- difference to wealth, bodily and spiritual purity, charity, emancipation from slavery, bonds, and worldliness. Notwithstanding all the efforts of the Church to blend these two phases of the doctrine, they never intermixed, and, like oil and water, have always kept apart from each other in large or small drops. The difference between these two sides of the doctrine is clear to every one, and every one Church and State. 29 may trace the fruits of one and the other side of the doctrine in the lives of nations, and from these fruits may conclude which side is the more important ; or, if one may say truer, then which one is the truer? Glance at the history of Christianity from this side, and a terror will come upon you. Without exception, from the very beginning to the very end, to our time, wherever you will look, whatever dogma you will glance at, even at the first, — the dogma of the divinity of Christ, — and down to the communion, with or without wine, the fruits of all these intellectual labors upon the elucidation of dogmas are : mal- ice, hatred, executions, expulsions, the massa- cres of wives and children, stakes, and tortures. Look at the other side, — the moral doctrine : from the retiring to the desert for commun- ion with God, down to the custom to carry loaves of bread to the prison, the fruits of this doctrine are all our ideas of good, all our joy, consolation, and light. Those men before whose eyes the fruits of the one and the other have not yet clearly mani- 30 Church and State. fested themselves could fall into error, could only fall into error. Those, too, could fall into error who were sincerely carried away by the disputes about dogmas, not perceiving that they, by these dogmas, served the devil, not God, not noting that Christ explicitly said that he had come to destroy all dogmas. Those, too, could fall into error who, having inherited the traditions about the importance of those dogmas, received such a wrong mental training that they cannot see their mistake. Those, too, may err who are ignorant and to whom these dogmas represent nothing but words and fantastic images. But we, to whom is open the original mean- ing of the Gospels, which denies all dogmas ; we who have before our eyes the fruits of these dogmas in history, we may not err. History is for us the test of the truth of the doctrine, a test almost mechanical. The dogma of immaculate conception, is it needful or not? What has resulted from it? Wickedness, abuse, derision. Church and State. 31 Was there any benefit? None. The doctrine that the adulteress is not to be condemned, is it needful or not? What has resulted from it? Thousands and thousands of* times have men been mollified by this reminder. Another consideration. Take any dogma whatever, are all agreed upon it? No. And about giving to him who begs? All. Thus, the first, the dogmas, on which there is no agreement, which nobody needs, which ruins men, — this the hierarchy has advanced and is advancing as the faith ; while the second, that on which all are agreed, which all need, and which saves men, — this, though the hierarchy has not dared to deny it, it also has not dared to advance as the doctrine, for this doctrine denies the hierarchy itself. MONEY. Translated by Victor Yarros. MONEY. Money ! What is money ? Money repre- sents labor. I have met people who even held that money represents the labor of him who possesses it. I confess that formerly I vaguely shared this opinion. But it was essential for me to learn fully what money is. And in order to learn this, I turned to science. Science says that money is not at all unjust or pernicious ; that money is the natural condi- tion of social life, indispensable : 1. To facility of exchange ; 2. To determination of measures of value ; 3. To purposes of saving ; and 4. To make payments. The potent fact that I, having three roubles in my pocket which I do not want, only need to whistle in order to gather around me, in 35 36 Money. every civilized city, a hundred men, ready, for the three roubles, to perform the hardest and most disgusting jobs, — this fact, it is alleged, is not due to money, but to highly complex con- ditions of the economic life of nations. The rule of some people oyer others is not due to money, but to the fact that the laborer does not receive the full value of his labor. And the failure of the laborer to receive this full value is due to the properties of capital, rent, and wages, and the complicated relations between these factors and the processes of pro- duction, distribution, and consumption of wealth. In plain language, it might be said that those who have money can do what they please with those who have none ; but science says that this is irrelevant. Science says : " In every species of production these factors take part: land, store d-up labor (capital), and labor. And from the different relations between these factors, and from the fact that the first two factors — land and capital — are in the hands, not of the laborers, but of other persons, Money, 37 with all the complex combinations consequent upon it, results the enslavement of some men by others." How does that rule of money come about, which astounds us by its injustice and cruelty? How does it come about that by means of money some people rule over others ? Science says : It results from the division in the factors of production and the combinations consequent upon it which oppress the laborer. This answer has always appeared strange to me, not only because it ignores one side of the question, — namely, the role played by mone}^, — but also on account of that division in the factors of production which, to an unprejudiced man, always appears artificial and non-natural. It is asserted that in every act of production three factors take part : land, capital, and labor ; and it is implied that wealth (or the money equivalent) naturally gets divided among those who possess one or another of the factors. Rent, the value of the land, belongs to the landlord, 38 Money. Interest, to the capitalist, and Wages for labor, to the laborer. Is it not so ? But is it really true that in any production these factors take part ? As I write these lines, people around me are occupied in producing hay. What are the elements constituting this pro- duction ? I am told: There is the land on which the grass was grown, the capital, — scythes, rakes, hayforks, and the carts for the getting-in of the hay, — and the labor. But I see that this is not true. Besides the land, there enter into the pro- duction the sun, water, the social organization which protects the meadow from cattle, the skill of the laborers, their facilities of speech and understanding, and yet many other factors which, for some reason, are not taken cogni- zance of by political economy. The properties of the sun are just as much a factor as, and more indispensable than, land. Money. 39 I can imagine people living in a condition where (as in cities) some people consider them- selves entitled to shut others out of the sun- light by walls or trees. Why then is not the sun included in the factors of production ? Water is another factor equally indispensa- ble with land. Air, still another. And I can also imagine people deprived of water and pure air, because other people claim the right to dispose at will of the water and air needful to the first. Social safety is an equally indispensable factor. Food and clothing for the laborers, another factor, as indeed some economists allow. Education, which makes it possible to intro- duce reason into production, is also a factor. I could fill a volume with such ignored factors. Why, then, are the above three factors se- lected and made the basis of science ? Why are not the rays of the sun, water, food, educa- tion, assigned as factors, while only land, means of production, and labor are assigned? The only reason I can think of is that but 40 Money. very seldom do men claim the privilege of appropriating sunlight, water, air, food, etc., while the claims upon land and the means of production are constantly and perpetually made in our society. There is no other ground; and thus I see that the division of the factors of production into three categories is wholly arbitrary and not in harmony with the essence of things. But perhaps this division is so natural to men that, wherever economic relations develop, these three factors straightway become prominent? Let us see if this be so. First, I look at the nearest case, of the Rus- sian colonists, of whom there are a million. These colonists arrive at their destination, settle upon the land, and begin to work. It does not enter anybody's head that a man who does not use land can have any rights over it, while the land itself does not make any claim to distinct rights. On the contrary, the colo- nists deliberately proclaim the land to be com- mon property, and think it just for each to sow and reap as much as, and where, he likes. Money. 41 * The colonists introduce implements for the cultivation of the fields, for planting gardens, and building houses, and again, it does not enter anybody's mind that the instruments of production could of themselves produce any revenue, while capital clamors for no rights. On the contrary, the colonists deliberately con- clude that any profit from the use of the imple- ments, from the loan of grain, from capital, is an injustice. The colonists work, on free land, with their own implements or with such as are loaned to them without interest, every one for him- self or all together for the common interest, and in such a commune neither rent, interest, nor wages can be found. In speaking of such communities, I am not inventing, but describing that which has existed at all times and which exists now, not only among Russian colonists, but everywhere, as long as the natural qualities of men remain unperverted by anything. I am describing that which represents itself to everybody as natural and rational. 42 . Money. Men settle on land, and each member goes about his vocation. Having made the neces- sary tools, each proceeds with his work. If it appears more convenient to work together, a cooperative organization is formed. But neither in private holdings nor in such or- ganizations will there be distinct factors of production; there will simply be labor and the necessary conditions of labor : the sun, warming all ; the air, which all breathe ; the water, which all drink ; the land, which all till ; clothes on the bodies; food in the stomach; a shovel, a plough, a machine by which they work. And it is evident that neither sun, nor air, nor water, nor land, nor clothes, nor plough, can be the property of anybody except those who use these things, who enjoy the sun's rays, breathe the air, drink the water, eat the bread, cover their bodies, and use the shovel or the machine, because these are needful only to those who use them. And when people act thus, we all see that they act as befits men, — that is, rationally. Thus, when I observe the formation of men's Money. 43 economic relations, I fail to find that the division of the factors of production into three categories is natural to men. I see, on the contrary, that it is unnatural and irrational. But perhaps this division is unnatural in primitive societies alone, while upon increase of population and development of the arts and sciences it becomes indispensable? Per- haps it is true that this division has been accomplished in European society, and we can- not refuse to acknowledge the accomplished fact? Let us see if this is so. We are told that this division of factors of production is accomplished, — that is, that some men possess the land, others the means of pro- duction, while still others are destitute of both land and capital. The laborer is without land and instruments of production. We are so accustomed to this assertion that we no longer are struck by its strangeness. If, however, we ponder over this statement, we at once see its injustice and even its absurdity. 44 Money. In that statement there is an essential con- tradiction. The conception of the laborer includes the conception of the land on which he lives and the implements with which he works : if he did not live on land and did not possess in- struments of labor, he would not be a laborer. There never has been, and never can be, a laborer without land and instruments of labor. There can be no farmer without land to farm on and without scythe, cart, horse. Likewise there can be no shoemaker without a house built on land, without water, air, and tools to work with. If the farmer does not possess land, a horse, and a scythe ; if the shoemaker has not a house, water, and awl, — then that means that some 1 body has driven the farmer off of his land, and has taken away from him, by force or fraud, his scythe, cart, and horse ; but it in no way signifies that there may be farmers with- out scythes or shoemakers without tools. As it is impossible to think of a fisherman on dry land and without fishing implements, Money. 45 unless we think of him as driven away from the w T ater and robbed of his fishing imple- ments, so it is impossible to think of a peasant without land and tools, unless we imagine that somebody drove him from the land and took away his implements. There may exist people who are driven from one place to another, who have their imple- ments taken away from them, and who are compelled to make with others' tools things they do not want; but this does not signify that such is the character of production; it means only that there are cases where the natural character of production is perverted. If, however, we are to consider as factors of production all that a laborer might be deprived of by force, then why not consider the claim on the person of the slave