have risen by their own efforts, or the supercilious and intrusively tactless, though always kindly, condescension of certain fashion¬ able ladies, who are by way of sympathizing with the people. These certainly sin more from lack of instinct than they can possibly understand. Thus they are astonished to find that the results of their readiness for social work are always nil and often produce violent antagonism ; it is held up as a proof of the people’s ingratitude.
Such minds refuse to understand that social work is beside the point and, above all, must not look for gratitude, since it is not a question of distributing favours, but of restoring rights.
I perceived even then that in this case a twofold method was the only way to improve matters ; namely, a deep feeling of social responsibility for creating better principles for our development, combined with ruthless determination to destroy excrescences which could not be remedied.
Just as Nature concentrates not on maintaining what exists, but on cultivating new growth in order to carry on the species, so in human life we may not exalt the existing evil, which, owing to the nature of man, is impossible in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, but assure better methods for future development from the start.
During my struggle for existence in Vienna I per¬ ceived clearly that the social task may never consist of welfare work, which is both ridiculous and useless, but rather in removing the deep-seated mistakes in the organization of our economic and cultural life, which are bound to end in degradation of the individual, or at least may lead him astray.
Since the Austrian State practically ignored social legislation altogether, its inability to abolish evil excrescences loomed large before one’s eyes.
I do not know what most appalled me at that period—the economic misery of our fellow-workers, their moral crudity, or the low level of their spiritual development.