The leisure class lives by the industrial community rather than in it. Its relations to industry are of a pecuniary rather than an industrial kind. Admission to the class is gained by exercise of the pecuniary aptitudes -- aptitudes for acquisition rather than for serviceability. There is， therefore， a continued selective sifting of the human material that makes up the leisure class， and this selection proceeds on the ground of fitness for pecuniary pursuits. But the scheme of life of the class is in large part a heritage from the past， and embodies much of the habits and ideals of the earlier barbarian period. This archaic， barbarian scheme of life imposes itself also on the lower orders， with more or less mitigation. In its turn the scheme of life， of conventions， acts selectively and by education to shape the human material， and its action runs chiefly in the direction of conserving traits， habits， and ideals that belong to the early barbarian age -- the age of prowess and predatory life.
The most immediate and unequivocal expression of that archaic human nature which characterizes man in the predatory stage is the fighting propensity proper. In cases where the predatory activity is a collective one， this propensity is frequently called the martial spirit， or， latterly， patriotism.
It needs no insistence to find assent to the proposition that in the countries of civilized Europe the hereditary leisure class is endowed with this martial spirit in a higher degree than the middle classes. Indeed， the leisure class claims the distinction as a matter of pride， and no doubt with some grounds. War is honorable， and warlike prowess is eminently honorific in the eyes of the generality of men； and this admiration of warlike prowess is itself the best voucher of a predatory temperament in the admirer of war. The enthusiasm for war， and the predatory temper of which it is the index， prevail in the largest measure among the upper classes， especially among the hereditary leisure class.
Moreover， the ostensible serious occupation of the upper class is that of government， which， in point of origin and developmental content， is also a predatory occupation.
The only class which could at all dispute with the hereditary leisure class the honor of an habitual bellicose frame of mind is that of the lower-class delinquents. In ordinary times， the large body of the industrial classes is relatively apathetic touching warlike interests. When unexcited， this body of the common people， which makes up the effective force of the industrial community， is rather averse to any other than a defensive fight； indeed， it responds a little tardily even to a provocation which makes for an attitude of defense. In the more civilized communities， or rather in the communities which have reached an advanced industrial development， the spirit of warlike aggression may be said to be obsolescent among the common people.
This does not say that there is not an appreciable number of individuals among the industrial classes in whom the martial spirit asserts itself obtrusively. Nor does it say that the body of the people may not be fired with martial ardor for a time under the stimulus of some special provocation， such as is seen in operation today in more than one of the countries of Europe， and for the time in America. But except for such seasons of temporary exaltation， and except for those individuals who are endowed with an archaic temperament of the predatory type， together with the similarly endowed body of individuals among the higher and the lowest classes， the inertness of the mass of any modern civilized community in this respect is probably so great as would make war impracticable， except against actual invasion.
The habits and aptitudes of the common run of men make for an unfolding of activity in other， less picturesque directions than that of war.
This class difference in temperament may be due in part to a difference in the inheritance of acquired traits in the several classes， but it seems also， in some measure， to correspond with a difference in ethnic derivation. The class difference is in this respect visibly less in those countries whose population is relatively homogeneous， ethnically， than in the countries where there is a broader divergence between the ethnic elements that make up the several classes of the community. In the same connection it may be noted that the later accessions to the leisure class in the latter countries， in a general way， show less of the martial spirit than contemporary representatives of the aristocracy of the ancient line. These nouveaux arriv閟 have recently emerged from the commonplace body of the population and owe their emergence into the leisure class to the exercise of traits and propensities which are not to be classed as prowess in the ancient sense.
