lyQ  the  socialism  of  TO-DAY.
equality,  or  even  the  application  of  the  maxim,  “to  each
according  to  his  needs;"  while  Collectivism  claims  to  assure
to  every  one  the  integral  enjoyment  of  the  product  of  his  labour.
Thus  the  true  and,  in  reality,  the  sole  incentive  to  economical
activity,  namely,  personal  interest,  which  is  entirely  abolished
by  the  first  system,  is  in  some  degree  maintained  by  the  second.
Phe  principle  of  Communism  leads  to  consumption  in  common,
as  in  the  family,  or  rather  as  in  the  convent  or  the  barracks;
while  Collectivism  is  consistent  with  the  separate  existence  of
families.  Communists  would  absolutely  abolish  the  right  of
hereditary  succession  ;  whereas  Collectivists  preserve  it  as  to
everything  not  belonging  to  the  State.
The  question  of  the  right  of  succession  was  keenly  discussed
at  the  Congress  of  Bâle.  The  Collectivists,  represented  chiefly
by  De  Paepe,  invoked  the  very  strong  arguments  habitually
made  use  of  in  favour  of  the  hereditary  transmission  of  property.
Suppose  a  person  makes  himself  a  fortune  by  deductions,  not
out  of  the  produce  of  another  person’s  labour,  but  out  of  that
of  his  own,  and  by  depriving  himself  of  certain  pleasures  ;  is  it
not  fair  that  he  should  be  able  to  transmit  his  savings  to  his
children?  Will  not  this  power  evidently  be  an  incentive  to
work  and  a  check  upon  squandering,  and  therefore  a  gam  to
society  as  a  whole  ?  If  everybody  receives  a  thorough  education ­
  and  the  means  of  production,  individual  inheritance  cannot
violate  rational  equality.  Although  there  was  a  strong  current
of  Communism  in  the  congress,  the  abolition  of  the  right  of
inheritance  obtained  only  thirty-two  votes  out  of  sixty-eight,
and  consequently  it  was  treated  as  rejected.
It  would  interrupt  this  rapid  sketch  of  events  too  much  to
discuss  thoroughly  the  theoretical  ideas  admitted  by  the  Inter
national.  I  shall  limit  myself  to  two  summary  remarks.  The
new  social  organization,  longed  for  by  Collectivism,  supposes
that  agricultural  and  industrial  enterprises  would  pass  into  the
hands  of  autonomous  co-operative  associations.  But  will  these
associations  be  able  to  subsist  on  an  exclusively  republican
and  elective  basis,  without  the  principle  of  authority  and  of
the  hierarchy  at  present  represented  by  the  master?  In  the
factory,  as  on  board  ship,  discipline  and  obedience  are  indis-