162 THE POVERTY OF PHILOSOPHY
logical developments, but certain forms, often well developed, in saying that competition is industrial emula- tion, the actual mode of being free, responsibility in labor, the constitution of value, a necessary condition for the future of equality, a principle of social economy, a decree ‘of destiny, a necessity of the human mind, an inspira- tion of eternal justice, liberty in division, division in liberty, an economic category.
“Competition and association support each other. So far from, excluding each other they are not even divergent. Who speaks of competition already supposes a common end. Competition therefore is not egoism, and the most deplorable error of Socialism lay in having re- garded it as the overthrow of society.”
Who speaks of competition speaks of a common end, and that proves, on the one hand, that competition is association ; on the other, that competition is not egoism. And does not he who speaks of egoism, speak of a common end? Each egoism operates in society and by reason of the existence of society. It, therefore, presup- poses society, that is to say common ends, common wants, common means of production, &c., &c. Can it by chance be that, therefore, the competition and the asso- ciation of which the Socialists speak are not even divergent ?
The Socialists know very well that modern society is based upon competition. How can they reproach com- petition with overthrowing the existing society, which they desire to overthrow themselves? And how can they reproach competition with the overthrow of the so- ciety of the future in which, on the contrary, they see the overthrow of competition ?
M. Proudhon says, further, that competition is the
