it is not the important point whether Tom； the day laborer； has
more than Dick or Harry； whether the grocer； Jones； earns more
than Brown； whether the banker； Bleichroder； has better luck in
his speculations than the banker； Hanseman； about this general
judgments will only occasionally be formed。 The average wages of
the day laborer； the average condition of domestic workers； the
average profits of the class of promoters； the average profits of
grocers； of landed proprietors； of farmers on the other hand are
considered by public opinion and judged to be justified or not。
And these earnings are surely not dependent on fortune or chance；
they are the result of the average qualities of the respective
classes in connection with their relations to the other classes
of society； they are in the main the result of human
institutions。
The prevailing rights of property； inheritance and contract
form the centre of the institutions which govern the distribution
of incomes。 Their forms for the time being determine a democratic
or aristocratic distribution of wealth。 Who； for instance； has
made the division of landed property； which generally determines
the distribution of both wealth and income？ Is it nature； luck or
chance； or demand and supply？ No； in the first place the social
and agrarian institutions of the past and present。 Wherever small
peasant proprietorship prevails to…day； it is derived from the
mediaeval village community system and the law of peasant
succession。 Wherever we meet with a system of large estates we
see a result of the baronial and feudal system； of the later
manorial regime and of the system of estates； at present the
institutions of mortgages and leases play a part； the legislation
touching the commutation of tenures and system of cultivation
were of the same importance to Germany as the colonial system of
other governments to their colonies。 In the distribution of
personal property individual qualities are more prevalent than in
that of real estate。 But nevertheless the institutions of ancient
and modern times seem to us the most important。 The forms of
undertakings and the legal status of the laboring classes are the
essential points ： wherever slavery prevailed it governed at all
times the whole economic life； the whole social classification
and the distribution of incomes； guilds were； at the time of
their consistent maintenance； as much an institution of
distribution of incomes as an organization of labor； and the same
is true of the domestic system of industry of the seventeenth and
eighteenth century with its governmental regulation； the ruling
considerations were the needs of commerce and technical practice
on the one hand； the situation of the laborers in a domestic
system of industries on the other。 And are not to…day the
institutions of unrestricted trade and interest on loans； of the
exchanges and the system of public debts； the forms of
undertakings； the system of joint stock companies； of
co…operative associations； the unions and corporations of
employers and laborers； all labor law； the institutions of
friendly and similar societies the material foundation and cause
of our present distribution of incomes？ The individual causes and
the chance of luck effect within the bounds of these institutions
the little aberrations of personal destiny； the position of
social classes in general is determined by the institutions。
What are economic institutions but a product of human
feelings and thought； of human actions； human customs and human
laws？ And just this causes us to apply the standard of justice to
their results； just this makes us inquire whether they and their
effects are just or unjust。 We do not require the distribution of
incomes or wealth to be just absolutely； we do not require it of
technical economic acts which do not concern others； but we do
require the numerous economic acts which on the basis of barter
and division of labor concern others and entire communities to be
just。
Where such acts come into consideration our observations
discern moral communities； their common aims and the human
qualities； which are connected with these aims。
The most primitive barter is impossible； unless。 between the
parties practising it regularly； a certain moral understanding
exists。 There must have been an express or silent mutual
agreement to preserve peace。 The barterers must have common
conceptions of value； must recognize a common law。 Every seller
forms with the purchaser； who stands before him at the moment of
the transaction； a moral union of confidence。
In epochs of primitive culture； in the social communities of
families； of kinship； of tribes； of leagues； there exists an
uncommonly strong feeling of solidarity which therefore leads to
very far…reaching demands of justice within these circles； as
well as to a complete obtuseness of the same feeling beyond them。
With a higher degree of culture these small communities lose； the
individual and the greater communities gain in importance。 Now
the individual and now the community appears more in the
foreground； and accordingly the consciousness of the community of
interests will change in intensity。 In the periods in which the
individual's or the family's technical economic life still forms；
without more extensive intercourse； without more elaborate
division of labor； the centre of gravity in economics； the
feeling of community in economic matters will recede。 The further
the division of labor progresses； the more inextricably will the
threads of intercourse involve the individual in an insoluble
social community； the more the whole production will assume the
character of a general； not an individual concern。 Then the
common functions of the local and the national community will
thrive； individuals will be more and more dislodged by social
leaders。 Every larger undertaking； whenever it unites
continuously a certain number of men for a common economic
purpose； reveals itself as a moral community。 It governs the
external and internal life of all participants； determines their
residence； school； division of time； family life； to a certain
degree their mental horizon； education and pleasure。 The
relations of those concerned necessarily exchange a merely
economic for a generally moral character。 And therefrom the
conception arises； here a common production exists； hence a moral
community。 And that leads to the question： Is the relation
between the participants； is the division of the products a just
one？ And similar considerations follow for whole industries； for
whole social classes； and this all the more； the more frequently
the employers and the laborers are organized into associations
and societies。 They also result for whole States and unions of
States。
The moral communities； which play a part in economics； follow
sometimes purely economic purposes； sometimes other purposes； as
above all do local communities and the State。 The narrower their
circle； the simpler and clearer their purpose； the more evident
become the qualities； according to which moral judgment compares
and classifies men。 The more comprehensive they are； the more
manifold their purposes； the more complicated becomes the
question which qualities are concerned； the more fluctuating
becomes the judgment of what is just； the more indispensable for
customs and laws become conventional presumptions and standards
in order to attain something definite at all。
In times of primitive culture； in the small circles of
economic and moral communities all men； or at least all men able
to bear arms； may readily appear equal； and so it there appears
just to give each the same allotment of land； the same share of
booty。 The guild sought to secure to each member as nearly as
possible an equal share of profit。 With higher culture begins the
necessary discrimination。 Formerly the greater allotments were
often given to the bravest soldier and to the noble families；
distinctions now become more general。 All inherited preference is
considered just； in the measure in which public sentiment values
not the qualities of the single individual； but of families as a
whole； a conception which decreases more and more with higher
culture。 Inherited wealth； as long as it appears necessarily and
obviously coupled with its possessor； is under some conditions
regarded as a just standard of the distribution of goods。 So the
distribution of public lands according to the possessions in
cattle and real estate appeared quite just to many a day laborer
and 〃kossaeth〃 in the eastern provinces of Prussia； while to one
who knew the public land systems in France or southern Germany it
seemed an outrageous injustice。
For all community of production； labor is the most obvious
standard； hence perhaps it is the most usual； most generally
comprehensible。 As soon as it becomes necessary to compare many
different kinds of labor； only an abstraction totally foreign to
public sentiment will conceive the idea of reducing all this
labor to mere quantities of handiwork； natural public sentiment
will simply value more highly the labor which requires more
education or talent。
Those qualities will always be most highly considered which
serve the common objects； those which only relate to the
individual and his selfish aims are less esteemed。 Only a
complete misconception therefore could establish individual needs
as a standard of distributing justice。 Older socialism wisely
held aloof at all times from this aberration。 Even the first
really social…democratic platform in Germany； that of Eisenach of
1869； did not vet venture to commit such a folly。 The progressive
victory of vulgarity and rudeness first demanded in the Gotha
platform of 1875 the division of the aggregate labor products
among individuals according to their 〃reasonable needs。〃 The
proviso of reasonableness was intended to prevent excesses； it
does not remove the low conception。 With his needs a man serves
himself only； with his labor； his virtue； his accomplishments； he
serves； mankind； and these determine the judgment which esteems
them as just。
When the great social communities which follow the most