Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution

Peter Kropotkin

1902





INTRODUCTION





    Two aspects of animal life impressed me most during the



journeys which I made in my youth in Eastern Siberia and Northern



Manchuria. One of them was the extreme severity of the struggle



for existence which most species of animals have to carry on



against an inclement Nature; the enormous destruction of life



which periodically results from natural agencies; and the



consequent paucity of life over the vast territory which fell



under my observation. And the other was, that even in those few



spots where animal life teemed in abundance, I failed to find --



although I was eagerly looking for it -- that bitter struggle for



the means of existence, among animals belonging to the same



species, which was considered by most Darwinists (though not



always by Darwin himself) as the dominant characteristic of



struggle for life, and the main factor of evolution.



    The terrible snow-storms which sweep over the northern



portion of Eurasia in the later part of the winter, and the



glazed frost that often follows them; the frosts and the



snow-storms which return every year in the second half of May,



when the trees are already in full blossom and insect life swarms



everywhere; the early frosts and, occasionally, the heavy



snowfalls in July and August, which suddenly destroy myriads of



insects, as well as the second broods of the birds in the



prairies; the torrential rains, due to the monsoons, which fall



in more temperate regions in August and September -- resulting in



inundations on a scale which is only known in America and in



Eastern Asia, and swamping, on the plateaus, areas as wide as



European States; and finally, the heavy snowfalls, early in



October, which eventually render a territory as large as France



and Germany, absolutely impracticable for ruminants, and destroy



them by the thousand -- these were the conditions under which I



saw animal life struggling in Northern Asia. They made me realize



at an early date the overwhelming importance in Nature of what



Darwin described as "the natural checks to over-multiplication,"



in comparison to the struggle between individuals of the same



species for the means of subsistence, which may go on here and



there, to some limited extent, but never attains the importance



of the former. Paucity of life, under-population -- not



over-population -- being the distinctive feature of that immense



part of the globe which we name Northern Asia, I conceived since



then serious doubts -- which subsequent study has only confirmed



-- as to the reality of that fearful competition for food and



life within each species, which was an article of faith with most



Darwinists, and, consequently, as to the dominant part which this



sort of competition was supposed to play in the evolution of new



species.



    On the other hand, wherever I saw animal life in abundance,



as, for instance, on the lakes where scores of species and



millions of individuals came together to rear their progeny; in



the colonies of rodents; in the migrations of birds which took



place at that time on a truly American scale along the Usuri; and



especially in a migration of fallow-deer which I witnessed on the



Amur, and during which scores of thousands of these intelligent



animals came together from an immense territory, flying before



the coming deep snow, in order to cross the Amur where it is



narrowest -- in all these scenes of animal life which passed



before my eyes, I saw Mutual Aid and Mutual Support carried on to



an extent which made me suspect in it a feature of the greatest



importance for the maintenance of life, the preservation of each



species, and its further evolution.



    And finally, I saw among the semi-wild cattle and horses in



Transbaikalia, among the wild ruminants everywhere, the



squirrels, and so on, that when animals have to struggle against



scarcity of food, in consequence of one of the above-mentioned



causes, the whole of that portion of the species which is



affected by the calamity, comes out of the ordeal so much



impoverished in vigour and health, that no progressive evolution



of the species can be based upon such periods of keen



competition.



    Consequently, when my attention was drawn, later on, to the



relations between Darwinism and Sociology, I could agree with



none of the works and pamphlets that had been written upon this



important subject. They all endeavoured to prove that Man, owing



to his higher intelligence and knowledge, may mitigate the



harshness of the struggle for life between men; but they all



recognized at the same time that the struggle for the means of



existence, of every animal against all its congeners, and of



every man against all other men, was "a law of Nature." This



view, however, I could not accept, because I was persuaded that



to admit a pitiless inner war for life within each species, and



to see in that war a condition of progress, was to admit



something which not only had not yet been proved, but also lacked



confirmation from direct observation.



    On the contrary, a lecture "On the Law of Mutual Aid," which



was delivered at a Russian Congress of Naturalists, in January



1880, by the well-known zoologist, Professor Kessler, the then



Dean of the St. Petersburg University, struck me as throwing a



new light on the whole subject. Kessler's idea was, that besides



the law of Mutual Struggle there is in Nature the law of Mutual



Aid, which, for the success of the struggle for life, and



especially for the progressive evolution of the species, is far



more important than the law of mutual contest. This suggestion --



which was, in reality, nothing but a further development of the



ideas expressed by Darwin himself in The Descent of Man -- seemed



to me so correct and of so great an importance, that since I



became acquainted with it (in 1883) I began to collect materials



for further developing the idea, which Kessler had only cursorily



sketched in his lecture, but had not lived to develop. He died in



1881.



    In one point only I could not entirely endorse Kessler's



views. Kessler alluded to "parental feeling" and care for progeny



(see below, Chapter I) as to the source of mutual inclinations in



animals. However, to determine how far these two feelings have



really been at work in the evolution of sociable instincts, and



how far other instincts have been at work in the same direction,



seems to me a quite distinct and a very wide question, which we



hardly can discuss yet. It will be only after we have well



established the facts of mutual aid in different classes of



animals, and their importance for evolution, that we shall be



able to study what belongs in the evolution of sociable feelings,



to parental feelings, and what to sociability proper -- the



latter having evidently its origin at the earliest stages of the



evolution of the animal world, perhaps even at the



"colony-stages." I consequently directed my chief attention to



establishing first of all, the importance of the Mutual Aid



factor of evolution, leaving to ulterior research the task of



discovering the origin of the Mutual Aid instinct in Nature.



    The importance of the Mutual Aid factor -- "if its generality



could only be demonstrated" -- did not escape the naturalist's



genius so manifest in Goethe. When Eckermann told once to Goethe



-- it was in 1827 -- that two little wren-fledglings, which had



run away from him, were found by him next day in the nest of



robin redbreasts (Rothkehlchen), which fed the little ones,



together with their own youngsters, Goethe grew quite excited



about this fact. He saw in it a confirmation of his pantheistic



views, and said: -- "If it be true that this feeding of a



stranger goes through all Nature as something having the



character of a general law -- then many an enigma would be



solved. "He returned to this matter on the next day, and most



earnestly entreated Eckermann (who was, as is known, a zoologist)



to make a special study of the subject, adding that he would



surely come "to quite invaluable treasuries of results"



(Gespräche, edition of 1848, vol. iii. pp. 219, 221).



Unfortunately, this study was never made, although it is very



possible that Brehm, who has accumulated in his works such rich



materials relative to mutual aid among animals, might have been



inspired by Goethe's remark.



    Several works of importance were published in the years



1872-1886, dealing with the intelligence and the mental life of



animals (they are mentioned in a footnote in Chapter I of this



book), and three of them dealt more especially with the subject



under consideration; namely, Les Sociétés animales, by Espinas



(Paris, 1877); La Lutte pour l'existence et l'association pout la



lutte, a lecture by J.L. Lanessan (April 1881); and Louis



Büchner's book, Liebe und Liebes-Leben in der Thierwelt, of which



the first edition appeared in 1882 or 1883, and a second, much



enlarged, in 1885. But excellent though each of these works is,



they leave ample room for a work in which Mutual Aid would be



considered, not only as an argument in favour of a pre-human



origin of moral instincts, but also as a law of Nature and a



factor of evolution. Espinas devoted his main attention to such



animal societies (ants, bees) as are established upon a



physiological division of labour, and though his work is full of



admirable hints in all possible directions, it was written at a



time when the evolution of human societies could not yet be



treated with the knowledge we now possess. Lanessan's lecture has



more the character of a brilliantly laid-out general plan of a



work, in which mutual support would be dealt with, beginning with



rocks in the sea, and then passing in review the world of plants,



of animals and men. As to Büchner's work, suggestive though it is



and rich in facts, I could not agree with its leading idea. The



book begins with a hymn to Love, and nearly all its illustrations



are intended to prove the existence of love and sympathy among



animals. However, to reduce animal sociability to love and



sympathy means to reduce its generality and its importance, just



as human ethics based upon love and personal sympathy only have



contributed to narrow the comprehension of the moral feeling as a



whole. It is not love to my neighbour -- whom I often do not know



at all -- which induces me to seize a pail of water and to rush



towards his house when I see it on fire; it is a far wider, even



though more vague feeling or instinct of human solidarity and



sociability which moves me. So it is also with animals. It is not



love, and not even sympathy (understood in its proper sense)



which induces a herd of ruminants or of horses to form a ring in



order to resist an attack of wolves; not love which induces



wolves to form a pack for hunting; not love which induces kittens



or lambs to play, or a dozen of species of young birds to spend



their days together in the autumn; and it is neither love nor



personal sympathy which induces many thousand fallow-deer



scattered over a territory as large as France to form into a



score of separate herds, all marching towards a given spot, in



order to cross there a river. It is a feeling infinitely wider



than love or personal sympathy -- an instinct that has been



slowly developed among animals and men in the course of an



extremely long evolution, and which has taught animals and men



alike the force they can borrow from the practice of mutual aid



and support, and the joys they can find in social life.



    The importance of this distinction will be easily appreciated



by the student of animal psychology, and the more so by the



student of human ethics. Love, sympathy and self-sacrifice



certainly play an immense part in the progressive development of



our moral feelings. But it is not love and not even sympathy upon



which Society is based in mankind. It is the conscience -- be it



only at the stage of an instinct -- of human solidarity. It is



the unconscious recognition of the force that is borrowed by each



man from the practice of mutual aid; of the close dependency of



every one's happiness upon the happiness of all; and of the sense



of justice, or equity, which brings the individual to consider



the rights of every other individual as equal to his own. Upon



this broad and necessary foundation the still higher moral



feelings are developed. But this subject lies outside the scope



of the present work, and I shall only indicate here a lecture,



"Justice and Morality" which I delivered in reply to Huxley's



Ethics, and in which the subject has been treated at some length.



    Consequently I thought that a book, written on Mutual Aid as



a Law of Nature and a factor of evolution, might fill an



important gap. When Huxley issued, in 1888, his



"Struggle-for-life" manifesto (Struggle for Existence and its



Bearing upon Man), which to my appreciation was a very incorrect



representation of the facts of Nature, as one sees them in the



bush and in the forest, I communicated with the editor of the



Nineteenth Century, asking him whether he would give the



hospitality of his review to an elaborate reply to the views of



one of the most prominent Darwinists; and Mr. James Knowles



received the proposal with fullest sympathy. I also spoke of it



to W. Bates. "Yes, certainly; that is true Darwinism," was his



reply. "It is horrible what 'they' have made of Darwin. Write



these articles, and when they are printed, I will write to you a



letter which you may publish. "Unfortunately, it took me nearly



seven years to write these articles, and when the last was



published, Bates was no longer living.



    After having discussed the importance of mutual aid in



various classes of animals, I was evidently bound to discuss the



importance of the same factor in the evolution of Man. This was



the more necessary as there are a number of evolutionists who may



not refuse to admit the importance of mutual aid among animals,



but who, like Herbert Spencer, will refuse to admit it for Man.



For primitive Man -- they maintain -- war of each against all was



the law of life. In how far this assertion, which has been too



willingly repeated, without sufficient criticism, since the times



of Hobbes, is supported by what we know about the early phases of



human development, is discussed in the chapters given to the



Savages and the Barbarians.



    The number and importance of mutual-aid institutions which



were developed by the creative genius of the savage and



half-savage masses, during the earliest clan-period of mankind



and still more during the next village-community period, and the



immense influence which these early institutions have exercised



upon the subsequent development of mankind, down to the present



times, induced me to extend my researches to the later,



historical periods as well; especially, to study that most



interesting period -- the free medieval city republics, of which



the universality and influence upon our modern civilization have



not yet been duly appreciated. And finally, I have tried to



indicate in brief the immense importance which the mutual-support



instincts, inherited by mankind from its extremely long



evolution, play even now in our modern society, which is supposed



to rest upon the principle: "every one for himself, and the State



for all," but which it never has succeeded, nor will succeed in



realizing.



    It may be objected to this book that both animals and men are



represented in it under too favourable an aspect; that their



sociable qualities are insisted upon, while their anti-social and



self-asserting instincts are hardly touched upon. This was,



however, unavoidable. We have heard so much lately of the "harsh,



pitiless struggle for life," which was said to be carried on by



every animal against all other animals, every "savage" against



all other "savages," and every civilized man against all his



co-citizens -- and these assertions have so much become an



article of faith -- that it was necessary, first of all, to



oppose to them a wide series of facts showing animal and human



life under a quite different aspect. It was necessary to indicate



the overwhelming importance which sociable habits play in Nature



and in the progressive evolution of both the animal species and



human beings: to prove that they secure to animals a better



protection from their enemies, very often facilities for getting



food and (winter provisions, migrations, etc.), longevity,



therefore a greater facility for the development of intellectual



faculties; and that they have given to men, in addition to the



same advantages, the possibility of working out those



institutions which have enabled mankind to survive in its hard



struggle against Nature, and to progress, notwithstanding all the



vicissitudes of its history. It is a book on the law of Mutual



Aid, viewed at as one of the chief factors of evolution -- not on



all factors of evolution and their respective values; and this



first book had to be written, before the latter could become



possible.



    I should certainly be the last to underrate the part which



the self-assertion of the individual has played in the evolution



of mankind. However, this subject requires, I believe, a much



deeper treatment than the one it has hitherto received. In the



history of mankind, individual self-assertion has often been, and



continually is, something quite different from, and far larger



and deeper than, the petty, unintelligent narrow-mindedness,



which, with a large class of writers, goes for "individualism"



and "self-assertion." Nor have history-making individuals been



limited to those whom historians have represented as heroes. My



intention, consequently, is, if circumstances permit it, to



discuss separately the part taken by the self-assertion of the



individual in the progressive evolution of mankind. I can only



make in this place the following general remark: -- When the



Mutual Aid institutions -- the tribe, the village community, the



guilds, the medieval city -- began, in the course of history, to



lose their primitive character, to be invaded by parasitic



growths, and thus to become hindrances to progress, the revolt of



individuals against these institutions took always two different



aspects. Part of those who rose up strove to purify the old



institutions, or to work out a higher form of commonwealth, based



upon the same Mutual Aid principles; they tried, for instance, to



introduce the principle of "compensation," instead of the lex



talionis, and later on, the pardon of offences, or a still higher



ideal of equality before the human conscience, in lieu of



"compensation," according to class-value. But at the very same



time, another portion of the same individual rebels endeavoured



to break down the protective institutions of mutual support, with



no other intention but to increase their own wealth and their own



powers. In this three-cornered contest, between the two classes



of revolted individuals and the supporters of what existed, lies



the real tragedy of history. But to delineate that contest, and



honestly to study the part played in the evolution of mankind by



each one of these three forces, would require at least as many



years as it took me to write this book.



    Of works dealing with nearly the same subject, which have



been published since the publication of my articles on Mutual Aid



among Animals, I must mention The Lowell Lectures on the Ascent



of Man, by Henry Drummond (London, 1894), and The Origin and



Growth of the Moral Instinct, by A. Sutherland (London, 1898).



Both are constructed chiefly on the lines taken in Büchner's



Love, and in the second work the parental and familial feeling as



the sole influence at work in the development of the moral



feelings has been dealt with at some length. A third work dealing



with man and written on similar lines is The Principles of



Sociology, by Prof. F.A. Giddings, the first edition of which was



published in 1896 at New York and London, and the leading ideas



of which were sketched by the author in a pamphlet in 1894. I



must leave, however, to literary critics the task of discussing



the points of contact, resemblance, or divergence between these



works and mine.



    The different chapters of this book were published first in



the Nineteenth Century ("Mutual Aid among Animals," in September



and November 1890; "Mutual Aid among Savages," in April 1891;



"Mutual Aid among the Barbarians," in January 1892; "Mutual Aid



in the Medieval City," in August and September 1894; and "Mutual



Aid amongst Modern Men," in January and June 1896). In bringing



them out in a book form my first intention was to embody in an



Appendix the mass of materials, as well as the discussion of



several secondary points, which had to be omitted in the review



articles. It appeared, however, that the Appendix would double



the size of the book, and I was compelled to abandon, or, at



least, to postpone its publication. The present Appendix includes



the discussion of only a few points which have been the matter of



scientific controversy during the last few years; and into the



text I have introduced only such matter as could be introduced



without altering the structure of the work.



    I am glad of this opportunity for expressing to the editor of



the Nineteenth Century, Mr. James Knowles, my very best thanks,



both for the kind hospitality which he offered to these papers in



his review, as soon as he knew their general idea, and the



permission he kindly gave me to reprint them.







Bromley, Kent, 1902.