Kings，priests，and nobles had somehow established this unnatural order；and to sweep them away summarily was the way of bringing the natural order into full activity.The ideal system was already potentially in existence，and would become actual when men's minds were once cleared from superstition，and the political made to correspond to the natural rights of man.To this Malthus had replied，as we have seen，that social inequality was not a mere arbitrary product of fraud and force，but an expedient necessary to restrain the primitive instincts of mankind.He thus coincides with Bentham's preference of 'security'to 'equality，'and illustrates the real significance of that doctrine，Property and marriage，though they involve inequality，were institutions of essential importance，Godwin had pushed his theories to absolute anarchy；to the destruction of all law，for law in general represented coercion or an interference with the state of nature.Malthus virtually asserted that the metaphysical doctrine was inapplicable because，men being what they are，these conclusions were incompatible with even the first stages of social progress.This means，again，that for the metaphysical method Malthus is substituting a scientific method.Instead of regarding all government as a kind of mysterious intervention from without，which has somehow introduced a fatal discord into the natural order，he inquires what are the facts；how law has been evolved；and for what reason.His answer is，in brief，that law，order，and inequality have been absolutely necessary in order to limit tendencies which would otherwise keep men in a state of hopeless poverty and depression.
This gives the 'differentia'of the Utilitarian considered as one species of the genus 'Radical.'Malthus's criticism of Paine is significant.68He agrees with Paine that the cause of popular risings is 'want of happiness.'But Paine，he remarks，was 'in many important points totally ignorant of the structure of society'；and has fallen into the error of attributing all want of happiness to government.
Consequently，Paine advocates a plan for distributing taxes among the poorest classes，which would aggravate the evils a hundredfold.He fully admits with Paine that man has rights.The true line of answer would be to show what those rights are.To give this answer is not Malthus's present business；but there is one right，at any rate，which a man does not and cannot possess：
namely，the 'right to subsistence when his labour will not fairly purchase it.'He does not possess it because he cannot possess it；to try to secure it is to try to 'reverse the laws of nature，'and therefore to produce cruel suffering by practising an 'inhuman deceit.'The AbbéRaynal had said that a man had a right to subsist 'before all social laws.'Man had the same right，replied Malthus，as he had to live a hundred or a thousand years.He may live，if he can without interfering with others.Social laws have，in fact，enlarged the power of subsistence；but neither before nor after their institution could an unlimited number subsist.Briefly，the question of fact comes before the question of right，and the fault of the revolutionary theorists was to settle the right without reference to the possibility of making the right correspond to the fact.
