Chapter XVI: Appendix: B

CO-OPERATION AND COMPETITION

In Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution, it seems to me (for all that it finds little favour with some men of science) that real light has been thrown on certain principles of cardinal importance which had been obscured in the too exclusive contemplation of the Darwinian principle of the survival of the fittest in the struggle for life. Ample proof is given by Kropotkin of the truth of the following passage:—

“As soon as we study animals—not in laboratories and museums
only, but in the forest and the prairie, in the steppe and the
mountains—we at once perceive that though there is an immense
amount of warfare and extermination going on amidst various
species, and especially among various classes of animals, there is,
at the same time, as much, or perhaps even more, of mutual support,
mutual aid, and mutual defence amidst animals belonging to the same
species, or, at least, to the same society. Sociability is as much
a law of nature as mutual struggle. Of course it would be extremely
difficult to estimate, however roughly, the relative numerical
importance of both these series of facts. But if we resort to an
indirect test, and ask Nature: ‘Who are the fittest: those who
are continually at war with each other, or those who support one
another?’ we at once see that those animals which acquire habits
of mutual aid are undoubtedly the fittest. They have more chances
to survive, and they attain, in their respective classes, the
highest development of intelligence and bodily organization. If
the numberless facts which can be brought forward to support this
view are taken into account, we may safely say that mutual aid is
as much a law of animal life as mutual struggle, but that, as a
factor of evolution, it most probably has a far greater importance,
inasmuch as it favours the development of such habits and
characters as ensure the maintenance and further development of the
species, together with the greatest amount of welfare and enjoyment
of life for the individual, with the least waste of energy” (pp. 5,
6. 1903).

From the mass of facts which Kropotkin has adduced in support of the above-quoted view, I cannot forbear quoting one, an observation of his own, relating to a creature of by no means high organization:—

“As to the big Molucca crab (_Limulus_), I was struck (in 1882, at
the Brighton Aquarium) with the extent of mutual assistance which
these clumsy animals are capable of bestowing upon a comrade in
case of need. One of them had fallen upon its back in a corner of
the tank, and its heavy, saucepan-like carapace prevented it from
returning to its natural position, the more so as there was in the
corner an iron bar which rendered the task still more difficult.
Its comrades came to the rescue, and for one hour’s time I watched
how they endeavoured to help their fellow-prisoner. They came two
at once, pushed their friend from beneath, and after strenuous
efforts succeeded in lifting it upright; but then the iron bar
would prevent them from achieving the work of rescue, and the crab
would again fall heavily upon its back. After many attempts, one
of the helpers would go in the depth of the tank and bring two
other crabs, which would begin with fresh forces the same pushing
and lifting of their helpless comrade. We stayed in the Aquarium
for more than two hours, and, when leaving, we again came to cast a
glance upon the tank: the work of rescue still continued! Since I
saw that, I cannot refuse credit to the observation quoted by Dr.
Erasmus Darwin, namely, that ‘the common crab during the moulting
season stations as sentinel an unmoulted or hard-shelled individual
to prevent marine enemies from injuring moulted individuals in
their unprotected state’” (pp. 10, 12). #/