684 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
vistic minimum, because for each particular group, and for each individual, it is the most inevitable form of the instinct of self- preservation. The more various the elements are which unite, the smaller is the visible number of the interests in which they coincide ; and in the extreme case it reduces to the primitive impulse, namely, the ultimate instinct of self- preservation. In reply to expressions of anxiety on the part of the employers over the possible unification of all English trade organizations, one of their most ardent adherents asserted that even if it should go so far, it could be exclusively for defensive purposes alone.
Among the cases in which the solidifying effect of struggle is projected beyond the moment and the immediate purpose, which may occur in the case of the above discussed minimum of the same, the extension again sinks to the cases in which the unifica- tion actually occurs only ad hoc. Here two types are to be dis- tinguished, namely: the federated unification for a single action, which, however, frequently involves the total energies of the elements, as in the case of actual wars. In this case an unlimited unity is formed, which, however, after attaining, or failure in attaining, the definite purpose, releases the parties again for their previous separate existence, as, for instance, in the case of the Greeks, after the removal of the Persian danger. In the case of the other type the unity is less complete, but also less transient. The grouping takes place around a purpose which is less a mat- ter of time than of content, and which occasions no disturbance of the other sides of the elements. Thus in England since 1873 there exists a federation of associated employers of labor, founded to antagonize the influence of the trades unions. In the same way, several years later, a combination of employers as such was formed in the United States, without reference to the various branches of business, in order, as a whole, to put an end to strikes. The character of both types appears, of course, most evidently when the elements of the struggling unity are, in other periods or in other relationships, not merely indifferent, but even hostile to each other. The unifying power of the struggle- principle never shows itself stronger than when it produces a temporal or actual consensus out of relationships of competition or animosity.
