Is the theory of the social Revolution Incompatible with the Law of Evolution?

Maoriland Worker, Volume I, Issue 8, 20 April 1911, Page 15

Is the theory of the social Revolution Incompatible with the Law of Evolution?

Essay read before Students' Class, Wellington Branch, N.Z.S.P., by "The 'Clarion' Scout."

Opponents of the Social Revolution are agreed it could n't, wouldn't, and shouldn't come. It is not the change from the capitalist I mode of production to production for use that excites our so I much. Many ? of them believe some such social order "may" obtain in the dim and distant future. What raises their ire is the Marxian forecast of the manner in AAdiich it Aviii c« mc about. According to oppon ants the change cannot possibly be either "sudden or violent." For ail these defenders of the capitalist faith are violently opposed to violence when it affects their immediate material interests. The latest charge against the theory •of the Social Revolution is that it is incompatible with the laws of evolution. "All cv r olution proceeds in a sloaa- and uniform manner," they tell us. It is this charge that we propose to iiiA'estigate. Inorganic Evolution. First of all Aye AA'ill deal Avith inorganic evolution. Is all change accomplished here by the method of a step at a time? One of the mightiest temporal Avorks of nature is the vast -oceans Avhich envelop two-thirds of the globe's surface. The thought must have occurred to you, as to how in the first place these oceans AA r ere formed. Well, take two atoms ;.f hydrogen and one atom or oxygen ai d ignite them. An explosion and a drop of AAater is the result. In my opinion in some such manner did our oecans ■first come into existence. Geological evidence points conclusively to the theory that the earth at a very early stage of its history, Avas but a gloAving mass of semi-nebulous red-hot matter. A reasonable hypothesis is that in pro•cess of cooling, gases were thrown off into surrounding space, until a' point AA r as reached in which the tAVO gases hydrogen and oxygen in the exact proportion of two to one encompassed our planet. One can imagine the titanic explosion that folloAved the ignition of this mass of gas per medium of some volcano or subterannean fire. In a fraction of time our earth would be SAvamped in a mighty deluge of v/tter thousands of feet deep. There you've had Revolution ! I know of no other logical explanation of the formation of the oceans, for if formed by a .slow process of a drop at a :ime, the of millions of y< 'vrs that would have been necessary won d clash with all other astronomical and geological data. Organic Evolution. Turn from inorganic to organic evolution and see Avhat takes place there. We plant an acorn, for instance, and the sun and rain allied with the chemical properties of the soil, do the r Avork, until the culminating x 3 °i n t is> reached when the seed bursts and the little green shoot springs forth. Or -again : Take an egg : If you showed one of these delicacies of the breakfast table to a capitalist minded per.son for the ifrrst time and mentioned that one day it might evolve into a chicken, he would laugh you to scorn. '*Why," he would say, "you ire an impossibilist! It is hard and solid and unchangeable, besides, it would lead to free love and the breaking up of the home!" Or again, if you shoAA'ed it to a Lib-Lab. he would admit some change might take place, but it must necessarily be of a sloav and tedious nature. The bourgeois reformer Avould tell you in effect, that in the course of time a little beak would •sprout out at one end and a little tail at the other, to be followed in a million years or so by a pair of Avings one at each side, and finally, Avhen this earth is a frozen body no longer fit for habitation, our glorious ideal is reached at last, and our little chicken's legs appear just in time to shuffle off this mortal coil. Unfortunately for the politico-evolutionist the facts are quite different. To all outward appearances the egg is hard and solid but when placed in a favourable environment evolution proceeds to do its

work, and when the culminating point is reached there is the devil to pay inside that egg. A rending, cracking sound is heard, the uoav useless 6hell of capitalism is split asunder, and our perfectly formed little Socialist chick hops into the light of day. Once more you've had Revolution ! Social Evolution. I am aware of the insufficiency of draAving analogies between organic and social evolution, for the same laws may not apply to both, so I will now refer to the French revolution of 1789. The causes that led to this change in French society must be looked for in the change that was taking place in the economic conditions from the latter part of the 17th century. The Third Estate comprised the small landholders in the country, and the merchants of the towns; the common labourer or serf, like the chattel sld%e, Avas unclassified. Owing to the advance taking place in the means of production, the Avealth and poAA'er of the Third Estate had increased enormously. The power of the nobles and clergy became a fetter upon the mode of production, that had sprung up beneath their iule, until at length a point was reached Avhen the growing capitalist system became incompatible Avith its Feudalists integument. This integument Avas burst asunder. The knell of Feudalism sounds and the nobles were expropriated. The Third Estate, taking advantage of the misery of the Avorkmen in the towns, caused through the introduction of labour saving machinery from Britain, and taking advantage of the misery caused the peasants in the country through the failures of the crops, called the French people to arms, and united them under the banner of "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity." The economic evolution had been proceeding along quietly for years, but as soon as conditions were ripe, the political Revolution took place in a comparative short space of time. Revolution. To sum up, Aye can say as a matter of fact that sudden leaps are almost as frequent in nature as sloav changes, and the figure used by Marx, that of a bursting shell, may be considered its most common and most perfect example. In conclusion, we can safely predict the collapse of the capitalist mode of production. The tendency is undoubtedly for capital to become more and more concentrated into fewer and fewer hands, (America is a case in point) and as Kautsky points out, if this tendency is- allowed to continue unhindered, a time Avould be reached when one individual Avould own and control the whole Avealth of the Avorld. But such a condition of affairs never can be reached, because labour saving machinery, the limitations of the Avorld's markets, and the restricted purchasing power of the proletariat, cause what is vulgarly known as overproduction, producing in their turn industrial crises. These industrial crises cause misery to the great bulk of society, and in the years to come the working class, by their political and economic organisations, will seize the means of production, turning them into common property. By which proletarian revolution we shall have a*i association in which the free development of each is the free development of all.