THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

The Socialist Argument

BY CHARLES C. HITCHCOCK

CHICAGO

CHARLES H. KERR & COMPANY CO-OPERATIVE

To THE INTERESTS OF THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC.

253824

INTRODUCTORY NOTE.

The author of this book is a man who entered the mercantile business with his father, as a lad of twelve. He has spent fifty-three years in that business, and has built up in this industrial Massachusetts town a well equipped and successful Department store. He is a good example of the middle-class American business man. Though this man's life has been spent in the market-place, yet his deeper interests have been ethical rather than financial, and he has earnestly and fearlessly investigated for himself the great social and economic problems that press upon us. For these things we believe he deserves credit; and it is to be hoped that we have passed the stage where the fact that his study and thinking has led him to become a Socialist will in any wise detract, in the minds of candid people, anything from the credit due. We feel sure that the open-minded reader will find these essays as well worth while to him as they have been to us, Mr. Hitchcock's fellow citizens, to whom they were first read. And this book is timely, for it must be recognized that the questions herein discussed are the questions that press hardest today for solution. Sooner or later these social and economic problems must be faced and solved. Mr. Hitchcock's clear-cut Socialist Argument must be met by the thoughtful, and successfully refuted or finally accepted.

ROLAND D. SAWYER, Pastor, First Congregational Church,

Ware, Mass.

CONTENTS.

PAGE

INTRODUCTORY NOTE, REV. ROLAND D. SAWYER. ... 7

SOCIALISM VARIOUSLY DEFINED 10

DEFINITION OF TERMS 11

FOREWORD 13

BASIS OF OPINION 21

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 33

ECONOMICS OF SOCIALISM AND ECONOMICS OF CAP- ITALISM " 55

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH, INDIVIDUAL AND COL- LECTIVE 69

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 95

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 115

SOCIAL ASPECTS OF ENVIRONMENT.. . 157

SOCIALISM VARIOUSLY DEFINED

Socialism is: The collective ownership and control of those industries which are now used by the capitalists for the purpose of getting for themselves most of the earnings of the working masses. John M. Work.

Socialism is an order of society in which each producer of wealth will receive the product of toil in proportion to his creation of it. In other words, an order of society in which the able-bodied individual will not be allowed to accumulate a larger amount of wealth than he creates. Selected.

That organization of society in which industry will be democratically managed by the people themselves, for them- selves; and not by the Capitalist class, for the Capitalist class, as at present. Rev. Roland D. Sawyer.

The collective ownership and democratic management of all property, properly social. Ibid.

Genuine, unadulterated democracy in its purest, com- pletest sense — democracy social, political, industrial. A democracy in which the workers rule in all the affairs of life. Selected.

First — The collective ownership of the means of produc- ing the means of life.

Second — The democratic management by the workers of the collectively owned means of producing the means of life.

Third — Equal opportunities for all men and women to the use and benefits of these collectively owned and democrat- ically managed means of producing the means of life.

Walter Thomas Mills.

Socialism is a criticism of modern social conditions, a theory of social progress, an ideal of social organization, and a practical movement of the masses. Morris Hillquit.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

For the purpose of this discussion we define — Labor: The effort of man, either physical or mental, ex- pended in the production of individually or socially useful wealth.

Wealth: (As distinguished from Nature's gifts.*) The things provided or produced by the labor of man applied to land, or the products of Nature. It consists of such things as are needful, or of service to man for his maintenance and development.

Capital: Wealth employed in the production of more wealth and through the use of which, under our present sys- tem, labor is exploited. A more scientific definition, ac- cording to Fieldman: "Anything used for the purpose of exploiting labor."

Capitalism: The prevailing economic system; the promi- nent feature of which is that Capital is given power of in- crease (usury), as though it possessed the inherent power of production.

Socialism: Co-operative Commonwealth — Industrial De- mocracy— Abolition of Capital.

Usury: Interest, rent, profit, dividend.

Labor-hour: The unit of time by which to calculate wealth-values; a division of time which may be, in most cases, the hour of 60 minutes; or perhaps in some instances this period of time somewhat lengthened to discourage hu- man effort in a too crowded industry, or shortened to en- courage human effort in an unpopular industry.

*See footnote, page 69.

FOREWORD

The questions which today are pressing most earnestly for solution are those relating to Economics ; they are occupying the attention of every thoughtful mind.

Owing to the complex nature of our civilization these questions are considerably involved, and unless serious and prolonged study is given them they re- main confusing, if not apparently insolvable. How- ever, a thorough and unbiased study of the funda- mental economic principles involved reveals not only the "imperative necessity" of an industrial democracy, but also shows that Socialism is the "widest possible application of common sense to human relationships."

It is well to recognize the fact that, into whatever social state a people are born, that people are in a degree environed by a "web of customs, beliefs, tradi- tions, laws," etc., which tend to bind them to the past and to prejudice them against ii ovations. As we ac- quaint ourselves with the law of development, how- ever, we must recognize that this law is constantly operative not only in the inorganic and the organic worlds, but in social affairs as well.

We can trace the life history of man from the time when his numbers were few and his wants simple, through savagery and the various stages of barbarism, and on to the complex and still more complex relations of civilization, — a ceaseless round of change ; new con-

13

14 FOREWORD

ditions constantly arising-; new adjustments ever to be made. It is not reasonable, therefore, to assume that this law of development is not to continue to operate. There is much evidence tending to show that social evolution is taking place today more rapidly than ever in the world's history, and, we believe, with sure prom- ise of marvelous results bearing on the welfare of humanity. In fact, our social and economic develop- ment has of late been so rapid that our capacities are taxed to the utmost to make the adaptations de- manded by the new environing conditions.

The leading conflict of ideas today, between the old and the new, is that between Capitalism and So- cialism. Whether the transition from the present order to that of an industrial democracy will be a peaceful and orderly transition, or one accompanied by disorder and violence, will largely depend upon the attitude of the privileged classes. In our consid- eration of a question as important as is Socialism it will not do to dismiss the subject by saying that the arguments presented are too radical. We should seriously inquire whether or not they are founded on truth.

We must bear in mind that Socialism is a move- ment rather than a fixed order of society, just as were the various economic orders which followed one an- other, and to which we give the definite names, chat- tel slavery, serfdom, Capitalism. The last mentioned, our present system, has certain cardinal features

FOREWORD 15

which predominate throughout its course and give it its name ; but the Capitalism of today differs in many of its minor manifestations from the Capitalism of yesterday. Then again the various economic sys- tems overlap one another. The system of chattel slavery even appeared in our capitalistic system and persisted for several decades. *

And so of Socialism. While social ownership of socially useful wealth, abolition of capital, will be its distinguishing feature, the minor manifestations which arise during the course of its evolution will doubtless differ. It is not unreasonable to expect that the dominant feature of Capitalism, profit, will for a considerable time, but in constantly diminishing degree, persist in the Co-operative Commonwealth.

We not infrequently hear it said that no two so- cialists agree as to what Socialism is. We believe this accusation to be more apparent than real, yet there may be some ground for such criticism, in that socialists, while advocating the merits and claims of a Socialist Republic, naturally present co-operative society from the view-point of different stages in its development.

Industry, so far as production is concerned, is al- ready well socialized, or rapidly becoming so. It is the method of the distribution of the product of in- dustry which lags behind. It is to assist in remedy- ing our seriously defective methods of distribution that the writer's efforts are exerted.

16 FOREWORD

The reader's attention is called to our definition of the term "labor-hour." I do not believe, — and so far as I am aware, no socialist seriously believes, — were the nation at an early date to declare itself for the Co-operative Commonwealth, that in the near fu- ture wealth values would be measured very closely by this standard. The writer does believe, however, that in the course of the development of industry under the Co-operative Commonwealth, it will in time not only be generally recognized that such standard on which to base wealth values is highly equitable, but that it will be practicable as well.

As industry is carried on today the vitality — the life of the worker — is in some industries probably consumed in one-half the time that it is in some other callings. Why, then, should not such worker receive the same amount of wealth in return for his "hour" of 30 minutes as some other laborer receives for his "hour" of 60 minutes? In other words, why should not labor values be measured by the amount of vital- ity consumed in their production?

We believe that all aim to do right; that few are intentionally or wilfully evil in purpose or act. Most evil-doing is but action of retaliation against an op- pressive and an unethical environment, which the victim may thoroughly understand or may only dumbly feel. It is owing to our unjust and vicious economic system that fundamental principles of right and wrong are, to a greater or less degree, obscured.

FOREWORD 17

Our system is responsible for classes, the interests of which seriously conflict. We have not only class rule but a class code of morals ; what in the eyes of the ruling class is for the interests of that class, is natur- ally thought to be right for all. A Co-operative Com- monwealth will tend to harmonize our economic re- lations and modify the standards now imposed by the privileged classes.

These papers were prepared for and read from time to time before a local Study Club. The aim of the author has been to present as clearly as possible the fallacies of our present economic system, and to* set forth lucidly the fundamental economic principles of Socialism. With what measure of success he has been able to accomplish his purpose the reader must judge.

For assistance in the arrangement and revision of these essays the author acknowledges his indebt- edness to his daughter, Mary M. Hitchcock, to Com- rades Rev. Roland D. Sawyer and George G. Cutting, and to Rev. Arthur Chase.

Today (pardon the paradox) society is fundamentally anti-social. The whole so-called social fabric rests on priv- ileges and power, and is disordered and strained in every direction by inequalities that necessarily result therefrom.

Benj. R. Tucker.

THE BASIS OF OPINION

Eternal truths have always been the meat of the common people, but poison to the learned. The Clarion.

Tenacity of opinion, unaccompanied by a spirit of inves- tigation, is the mark of a small mind, and has caused the world untold misery. F. D. Gilmore.

Prejudice is a more dangerous enemy to Truth than Falsehood. Friedrich Nietzsche.

Neither antiquity nor nobility of origin is sufficient to shield any thought, or form of thought, from the demand that it shall prove itself true or die. Robinson.

Agitation awakens interest, and interest leads to knowl- edge, and knowledge makes Socialists. A. R. Williams.

But he is the strong man, the wise man, the leader of power, whose humility in the presence of facts has bestowed on him the gift to read the mind of his age aright, and to co-operate with its true purpose. Vida D. Scudder.

And he who remains wilfully ignorant of that which he might know, and ought to know, is so far forth preventing from realizing the demands of virtuous living. G. L. Ladd.

The Socialist Argument

THE BASIS OF OPINION

Calmness, moderation, laborious research, candid treat- ment of questions, and brave and honest devotion to truth, are the need of the hour; bigotry, narrowness and shallow- ness its greatest peril. R. S. Foster, D. D.

We are politically, one a republican, another a democrat, the third a laborite ; on economic ques- tions, one a protectionist, another a free trader; on questions of finance, one a gold monometalist, another a silverite, a third a greenbacker; relating to national policy, one an expansionist, another an anti-expan- sionist. Why? Why, on the various questions of the day, are we of such varying mind?

"We are what we are because we were so born and trained; heredity and environment account for what we are and for our opinions," says one. But man is by nature subject to a constantly changing environment. This changing environment stimulates inquiry, and inquiry naturally leads to growth. Why, then, do not all progress in the same direction and with equal speed? This essay is not a scientific analysis of the reasons which underlie or lead to con- viction. We merely present a few thoughts on the subject which may prove to be not without interest.

As to why we are of such varied opinions on the problems of the day, a more or less comprehensive reason can be stated thus: The universe of thought

21

22 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

and ideas is so immense that the mind of any one in- dividual, however great, can compass but a fragment of its knowledge — can touch nature on comparatively few points — and each mind sees things from a view- point differing more or less from all others. We may liken the universe to a kaleidoscope containing an infinite number of combinations, and in which each person, in adjusting it to the eye, sees a pattern un- like that seen by any other. An opinion, then, may be said to be the result of the interpretation of the universe as observed by the individual.

Our attention is naturally called to what is termed the personal equation of the individual. This personal equation is a factor which variously modifies opinion. The objects which in the kaleidoscope appear blue to one, appear green to another. To one the shading seems dark, to another light. One testifies that an object is warm, another that it is cold. To one a specified distance seems long, to another it seems short. This personal equation is manifest in the dis- play of our likes and dislikes. There is a saying something like this : "Some people we do not like because we do not know them, and we will not know them because we do not like them." It is not infre- quently thus with truth in a new form. We do not like it because we are not acquainted with it, and we will not become acquainted with it because we do not like it.

Again, the source from which an idea is presented to us may not be agreeable. One may not welcome

THE BASIS OF OPINION 23

a correction which comes from an uncongenial source. We have observed instances where the attitude plainly appeared to be one of decided opposition and antagonism to the ideas presented — a set and wilful determination not to be convinced — and evidently for the above reason. Opposition to new thought is sometimes shown to avoid the appearance of being influenced — from the fear of appearing weak. In- stead of being led to the investigation of the subject, every effort is bent to fortify one's position against conviction, thereby revealing weakness rather than strength of character.

A person of broad and generous nature is likely to interpret evidence in an entirely different manner from the narrow and selfish individual. The latter is often incapable of correct analysis and impartial judgment, especially on questions which affect his material interests. And what is true of individuals is true of whole classes. The trend of opinion of any social class is profoundly influenced by the material interests of that class. In fact, it has been said that history knows not one instance where a class has divested itself of power out of altruistic regard for the rights of a lower class.*

*Buckle expresses this idea in these words: "No great political movement, no great reform, either legislative or executive, has ever been originated, in any country, by its rulers." Wendell Phillips says: "No reform, moral or in- tellectual, ever came from upper class society — each and all came from the protest of the martyrs and victims."

24 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

This saying brings forcibly to mind a class strug- gle of the passing generation. It was not convenient or agreeable for the ruling class of a large and impor- tant section of our country to cast aside prejudice and self-interest, and dispassionately study the con- ditions which confronted them as affecting the God- given rights of a more numerous but subject class. This moral obliquity was remedied at the cost of the lives of thousands of our citizens, the ruin and deso- lation of mutitudes of homes, to say nothing of the destruction of billions of wealth.

This personal equation, as stated above, is ac- counted for in part by our previous training. One may be so educated that a new thought, which later is proved to be an inspiring and valuable addition to the world's knowledge, is rejected at once because it is so at variance with the previous experience of the individual that the mind cannot seriously entertain the idea but rejects it as not being worthy of con- sideration. Dr. Carpenter illustrates this state of mind somewhat after this manner: He supposes the mind to be like a man's house, well supplied with furniture of more or less satisfactory design. One or more new pieces are offered, for which the owner of the house can find no place simply because they are out of harmony with those he already possesses. The new pieces may be far more beautiful and more serviceable, but it will not do to take them in, as it will oblige him to refurnish the entire house to secure

THE BASIS OF OPINION 25

a harmonious effect. Quite likely he prefers not to know that what he already possesses is moth-eaten and dilapidated; it would at least be inconvenient to make a change. The writer recalls an instance in his personal experience where a larger and a richer truth was for a long time rejected as being utterly un- worthy of consideration, simply because it did not harmonize with what has since been proved to be his nearly antiquated stock of ideas.

After what has been said as to the personal equa- tion of the individual, observation teaches us that only a small minority of men possess what are termed the scientific and the judicial habits of thought and tem- perament. It matters little what wealth of observed fact one has at his disposal, these qualities of mind are essential to a proper classification and analysis of these facts, as well as to their correct interpretation.

The absence of the scientific habit of thought ac- counts in large measure for the great number of peo- ple who adopt absurd theories when combined with some observed good. Other conditions being equal, an opinion formed after careful and thoughtful con- sideration of a subject is much more likely to be cor- rect than an opinion formed carelessly or with but little investigation. In fact, the real basis of 'sound opinion — such only as is worthy of serious consider- ation— is an opinion reached through a broad and sympathetic study of the questions at issue.

26 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

The farther back in history we follow a movement, and the more carefully we note its present trend, the better able are we to form a correct prediction as to the future.

In our hurried strife, under the competitive sys- tem, few find the time to follow studiously many lines of thought. Most can be thorough in very few sub- jects, many in none. On a question which does not directly affect our pride, our prejudice, or our selfish interest, we usually accept the opinion of an authority without personal investigation, even to the belief in wonderful statements. At least, we do not reject the opinion of such authorities, especially if any consider- able number of them agree. Note the discoveries made in recent years in the science of astronomy as relating to the size, weight, motion, and composition of planets and suns — discoveries which seem almost beyond the possibility of human achievement. We accept these results as true simply on the authority of astronomers, yet let a new idea cross our self- centered and accustomed line of thought we too often blink our eyes like the toad in the well, which not only imagined, but calmly asserted, that the entire universe of matter and life was comprised within his range of vision.

What, then, in these stirring times of progressive thought is the rational attitude? First, we should study ourselves and make an effort to overcome our limitations. We should strive to eliminate our preju-

THE BASIS OF OPINION 27

dices and our personal interests, to correct our too conservative or too progressive tendencies. Few men are like the ostrich, which, without discrimination, gobbles up everything within its reach. A larger number, for want of time or from unwillingness or inability to think, treat a new idea as an interference —a disturber of the peace. They are like the clam which, on the intrusion of any foreign substance, with- draws within its shell and refuses to be troubled. Others, with abundant life, are like the tortoise, which snaps at any strange object thrust within its reach, and tenaciously attempts to crush it, even allowing its head to be severed rather than relax its hold.

The ideal man towers above all these. While he may hold to an opinion even before he has had time to investigate, he does so tentatively, all the while seeking more light. He welcomes additional knowl- edge and is ready to give due consideration to all phases of thought having a bearing on the question. Nor are we relieved from the duty of continued effort to reach a correct solution of the many problems which constantly confront us, by the oft-recurring warning that any radical opinion is sure to be errone- ous and therefore should not be adopted. Such rea- soners are probably not aware that the saying, "To be radical is but to have common sense," has been proved to be true in very many instances.

We cannot deny that many problems awaiting solution do present, by reason of surface indication,

28 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

a basis for varying opinion. A close study of a prob- lem will, however, generally reveal some fundamental principle of truth and justice which furnishes the key to its correct and final solution.

Under the evolutionary laws which govern the universe, no condition of life or matter is fixed ; no state of society is stable. While for a time the course of civilization may, to the casual observer, appear to run smoothly along fixed lines, yet eventually it is sure to culminate in conditions which demand a radi- cal readjustment of social relations. One of these culminating periods in the history of our country oc- curred in the middle of the present century. We have already alluded to the drastic manner in which this troublesome problem was solved.

As we stand upon the threshold of the 20th cen- tury, another problem of commanding importance presents itself. It is, I think, generally conceded by students of political and social economy that civiliza- tion is now passing through trying times — perhaps the most trying of any in its history.*

*This thought is presented by an able writer (Gustave Le Bon) in these words: "The present epoch is one of those critical moments in which the thought of mankind is undergoing a process of transformation. Two fundamental factors are at the base of this transformation. The first is the destruction of those religious, political and social be- liefs, in which all the elements of our civilization are rooted. The second is the creation of entirely new conditions of existence and thought, as the result of modern scientific and industrial discoveries."

THE BASIS OF OPINION 29

The educated teacher, whether preacher, editor, platform lecturer or professional instructor, as well as the lay student, has the rare opportunity and great privilege to lead and guide society calmly through the breakers into smoother waters. To ignore the ques- tions which confront us is but to lend an influence to the overthrow of organized society. The one alter- native is to transform it by educational means into a civilization better fitted to survive. It is transforma- tion or decay. To be indifferent or unfaithful in our attitude is to be recreant to our trust.

You claim that this picture is overdrawn, that you cannot see any such dangers as are portrayed. That these conditions are not recognized by the majority is no proof that they do not exist. Illustrations are not wanting which convey a lesson on this point. We are aware that on the field of battle there are often instances where whole regiments, and even entire bat- talions, from the nature of the positions occupied, are unable to observe any indications of reverse. They are made aware of defeat only after the retreat is begun or the retreat turned into a rout. Only the leaders, or such as by chance occupy commanding positions of view, are able to grasp the situation cor- rectly and recognize which way the battle is turning. Is it not the duty of every leader of thought to oc- cupy these commanding positions — to be well to the front in the engagement? He need not be afraid to be called a "crank," "a visionary," "a runner after every

30 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

new thing," "an unsafe leader of men." Such epi- thets are cheap, and are hurled only by those who know, and thereby reveal, their own weakness. It is preferable to be in the skirmish line, even at the risk of many wounds, than to be a skulker in the rear, never with a clear conscience in the song of victory accomplished.

Forty billions of lives destroyed within the historic period by a process that selects the more vigorous for destruction and the weaker for survival. Who can measure that effect? Forty billions of dollars expended and as much more lost by checks on production; three billions of dollars spent in our country for pensions and two more still to be spent as a result of wars now past; two hundred millions annually spent on army and navy by a country that has, within the hemi- sphere where it is located, no neighbor capable of endan- gering it; debts that rest crushingly on many a land and are counted by millions of dollars — such figures as quickly cited, make no adequate impression on the mind, but if pondered at leisure, reveal the dimensions of an evil which it would not seem possible that civilization should knowingly tolerate.

Prof. John B. Clark.

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM

Socialism is the only solution of modern problems, and a clear understanding of its principles and purposes is the one great need of the world today. Vail.

By far the greatest calamity that can remain among men is the calamity of a divided interest. And, therefore, by far the highest employment of human thought is that which seeks to end it; and, therefore, again, no deeds are so im- mensely effective as those directed against capitalism, no cause so morally and scientifically sure as the cause of So- cialism, no thought so fundamentally free, fair and fruitful as the collectivist thought. Peter E. Burrowes.

Socialism stands for social progress, social justice, and

social reason, and progress, justice, and reason cannot be argued, legislated, or clubbed out of existence — they are bound to prevail. Hillquit.

/ The curtain is going up on a world-drama the like of Avhich history has never shown before; and it is your privi- lege to be a spectator — it is a privilege that I would not / exchange for a ticket of admission to all that goes before / since the human race began. And alas for you if you are one of those unfortunates who sit cold and inattentive, be- cause they do not understand the language in which the great drama is played. Upton Sinclair.

The universality of education will make the competitive principle in any department of human affairs an insult to en- lightened intelligence. Socialism is the next great political creed to occupy our attention, ^and the central problem in this creed is the question of the distribution of wealth.

Prof. Henry Davits.

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM

Property has taken the place of Slavery as an economic force. Hadley.

In considering the complicated question of social

economics it is important for us to determine so far as possible, what are the underlying principles in the discussion. If we can see these principles clearly we shall be prepared to work intelligently for the solu- tion of the economic problems that continually chal- lenge our attention.

What, let us ask, are some of the rights that nat- urally and inalienably belong to every individual born into the world?

Our Birthright — No one disputes our birthright to a necessary share of the life-sustaining atmosphere. Is a human being less entitled to a standing-place on the earth or to sufficient soil for his support? The sustenance of all mankind comes from the soil. If then we grant that the individual has a right to life, can there be any doubt* that the earth also should be his by inheritance, inalienable, except for such time as he may refuse to devote his portion of labor, di- rectly or indirectly, to tilling it for the maintenance of his existence? Is it not also a self-evident truth that every worker is entitled to the product of his toil?

If we disentangle our thoughts from the shackles of our present laws and customs and look to first

33

34 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

principles, we claim it will be made clear that man's right to the atmosphere, to the soil, and to the prod- uct of his labor has the complete sanction of justice. With these points established, let us briefly consider what have been the methods of civilized society in relation thereto.

Fortunately the exploiter has found no way to monopolize the atmosphere, hence that necessary life- element has continued to be man's birthright genera- tion after generation. As to man's right to the earth, we need not go beyond the history of the settlement of our own land to illustrate the general trend of our social development in this particular.

Private Ownership in Land — In a new country with vast reaches of land sparsely populated, there appears little necessity for restricting the acreage which an individual may occupy. And when schem- ing leaders in the development of our country enclose their fields in their desire for ownership, laws are framed in their interest without great disturbance to society, for there is land in abundance yet unoccu- pied. However, with the increase of population, land becomes more sought after and all desirable acres are appropriated. There is none for the dispossessed or for the rising generation except at a price which places them at a decided disadvantage. Let us give an illustration of methods not uncommon within the memory of the present generation.

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 35

An enterprising individual pushes out to the bor- ders of civilization, and at a moderate cost gains pos- session of a fertile valley comprising, it may be, sev- eral thousand acres. He advertises the advantages of his location, or perhaps waits a few years for the natural growth of population to overflow into his sec- tion. As an inducement to assist in the development of the water power, of the valley, a factory site near one of the numerous water falls is donated to a pros- pective manufacturer. As an additional attraction to settlers, locations for school houses and other public buildings are given to the newly incorporated town. Laborers continue to flock in to obtain employment on the new buildings and to assist in the development of the water power or of the near-by mineral lands. Farm lands and building sites are sold at constantly increasing prices. After a time, through the growth of the city, lands which originally cost, perhaps, five dollars per acre, sell for many thousands of dollars per acre. The original purchaser or his successor reaps enormous returns for lands possessing not a penny greater intrinsic value than when first secured. The favored few are made rich by this increase, hav- ing performed but little, if any, productive labor. This increase, reaped by one or by a few, was cre- ated wholly by society, but is lost to society through a system of private ownership in land which gives to the schemer the unearned increment which he was only an insignificant factor in creating. Thus a part

THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

of our population is made rich at the expense of the toilers.

Machinery of Production Privately Owned — Let us next consider our industrial evolution. We call to mind that wealth is created by labor and that without productive labor there can be no wealth (as we define the term) excluding nature's products*.

Before the advent of complicated machinery the worker owned his tools. His product, whether cloth, shoes or other commodities, were disposed of at full value.

As we trace industrial development through its rapidly advancing stages — an advance made possible by ingenious inventions, including the application of steam, and by the division and concentration of labor in larger and larger aggregates for greater efficiency — we are able to discover how the laborer ceased to own his tools, and how the greater portion of the product of his labor became diverted to other than his own benefit. We will give a typical illustration of the method of this divorce of the worker from his imple- ments which makes our point more clear.

Let us for the moment regard ourselves as shoe- makers. Each works at his own bench with awl and hammer and such other simple devices as are found useful. The product of our labor we dispose of to such as are in need of it, receiving full value therefor.

With a desire on our part to increase our product, and at the same time lessen our muscular effort, we

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 37

devise a pegging machine, a sewing machine and a lasting machine. In these efforts we are aided, not only by untold ages of mechanical experience of the race, but by some genius of our number who seeks to display his inventive skill. Through these and other devices we should be able to turn out our usual amount of finished product in perhaps one-tenth the time for- merly occupied in labor, or by working the full day we should produce ten times as many shoes as by our former primitive methods.

Here let us note just what happens in the transi- tion to the methods of today.

The machines we have invented are complicated and costly. From lack of experience we are blind to the results to be obtained through organization and co-operation, and moreover, we are unable to fore- see the dependent conditions of the workers which time will prove inevitable as our tools in this evolu- tion of industry pass out of our control. We there- fore naturally accede to the plans of some far-seeing neighbor who has become wealthy, perhaps through the unearned increment in land. He offers to erect a building, equip it with power machines and give us employment.

The new way which promises so much does in some respects prove advantageous. We must, how- ever, add that experience has since demonstrated that in other respects the new methods are seriously de-

38 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

fective, so much so as to become a menace to the sta- bility of society.

Exploitation of Labor — Those of us who find work under the new conditions are enabled by a system of piecework to receive considerably higher wages than we were previously able to earn. But he whom we now term manufacturer does not employ all of our number because by the use of power machinery a very much smaller number of workers are able to pro- duce far more than our former amount. Those who are unable to secure work in the factory cannot com- pete with the machine methods. We do, however, compete with each other in offering our services at a constantly reduced rate rather than remain idle. Our children also under the changed industrial order be- come our competitors. The labor-assisting machine, so-called, has become the labor-displacing machine. The result is that we are exploited, in that since we are dispossessed of our tools, we receive only a small portion of the product of our labor; the surplus, or such portion of it as is not wasted in the strife of competition, being retained by our employer under the name of profit. Competition among laborers seek- ing employment is so keen that wages are in the main fixed at nearly if not quite the cost of subsistence. Thus in the evolution of industry does our present system furnish conditions especially favorable to the exploitation of labor.

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 39

History reveals that the golden age of labor was in the fifteenth century, when the average wage for an eight-hour day was equal in purchasing power to about three dollars of our money. This was under a system of hand labor aided only by the use of in- dividual and primitive tools, "and in England with royalty to support." Today, by the aid of ma- chinery which increases the productiveness of labor not less than ten and probably more than twenty times, the average wage of the workers for a longer day is not far from one-half as much, while the present purchasing power of the dollar is much less than formerly. According to Gladstone the manu- facturing power of the world doubles every seven years. It was claimed twenty years ago that through the use of machinery, we in Massachusetts, were pro- ducing as much as fifty million men could accom- plish by hand power.

The product of labor belongs to the laborer; there is therefore no valid reason why, with the aid of inventions which multiply the product of his efforts many fold, the worker should not receive proportion- ate returns.

Faulty Method of Wealth Distribution — If we but seriously consider a few of the surface facts of cur- rent every-day history we ought to be able to see that some system of distribution other than that which prevails is imperatively demanded.

Statistics show that three one-hundredths of one per cent of our population own twenty per cent of

40 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

the wealth of the nation; tfiat gine. ppr rp^t nf tlip population own seventy-one per cent of the wealth; the remaining ninety-one per cent of the population therefore own but twenty-nine per cent of the wealth.

It has been said of one of our capitalists who died a few years ago that he was worth nearly two hun- dred millions, having commenced life without a dol- lar. The fortune he accumulated in his short life equaled the total amount of the earnings of one man for three hundred thousand years at the rate of two dollars per day for the entire time, without allowance for cost of living. It was reported that during one year (1890) twelve men in New York, all doing busi- ness on one street, secured an income aggregating eighty million dollars — a sum exceeding by ten mil- lion dollars the combined earnings of the one hundred and eighty-two thousand laborers in four of our New England States at that time. s

Miss Nellie Mason Auten, in the American Jour- nal of Sociology, gives facts and statistics regarding the Italian workers in the Chicago sweatshops. These workers were dressmakers, tailors, pant finishers, seamstresses, etc. Their weekly earnings were found to range from ninety cents to six dollars and twenty- two cents, averaging two dollars and forty-nine cents. They found employment on an average 31.18 weeks in a year. The average yearly earnings for each indi- vidual were $76.74; for each family, $297.29. The average earnings per week per individual were $1.48;

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 41

per family, $5.72. She found only twelve who were able to earn over $300 per year. One hundred and nineteen were earning less than $100 per year. Forty- three did not exceed $1 per week. One woman was working sixty hours each week for forty cents. One worked sixty-six hours per week for thirty cents. In forty-eight weeks she earned fourteen dollars. Facts of similar import to these we have enumerated are constantly being forced on our attention.

The rapid accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few — the severe struggle for the necessaries of life by the large majority, to say nothing of the destitute condition of many — all this in face of the fact of our enormously increased volume of production should go far to make evident the crude state of our economic development.

Readjustment Necessary — If a comprehensive knowledge of existing conditions is not alone suffi- cient to lead us to seek for a readjustment of our eco- nomic system, then there are the fundamental rea- sons to which we have already referred which make the task imperative. To repeat — these fundamental reasons are: First, the fact that man has been dis- possessed of the land, when it is from the soil, in the last analysis, that the sustenance of life must come. Second, the fact that the laborer has been divorced from his tools, which were designed to assist him, this separation resulting in the diversion to other than his own benefit of the larger portion of the wealth he creates.

42 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

At this point we may note that our customs rela- tive to private property in the means of production are maintained by force, armed force.

Social Development — The development of society from an early state, which we may call tribal com- munism, has been through the successive stages of slavery, serfdom, individual production, to that of combined and specialized effort under machine pro- duction, which may be fairly termed a condition of wage slavery. )

This continuous evolution of society, which the stu- dent recognizes as having been in operation since long before the dawn of history, obviously brings us to the next advanced condition — Socialism, or Industrial Democracy. Isador Ladof says of scientific Socialism, "It is nothing else but conscious social evolution, a rational system of philosophy of human social life in the light of the theory of evolution."

In previous ages man had little insight into the meaning of history. He was not able to perceive the tendencies of social development. Today, our ad- vance in sociology enables us to interpret, as never before, the purport of current events. This fact alone enables society to assist understandingly and effec- tively in the shaping of its future environment. For these reasons, if for no other, our transition from the age of commercialism to that form of society which is to follow is likely to be comparatively rapid. Indeed, social evolution is proceeding with such accelerated

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 43

speed, and the change likely to be brought about through the ballot will doubtless be so radical, that the movement may fairly be termed revolutionary.

Scientific Socialism, in the opinion of millions of thinking men throughout the civilized world, is the only practical state of society in the near future. So- cialism is making rapid headway and is the only theory of society which meets with growing favor. If Soci- alism is not practical, we call upon its critics to present a plan for society which is practical. The car of prog- ress is ever advancing. We either eventually assist in its passage or are ground to earth beneath its advancing wheels.

Socialism a System of Scientific Economics — So- cialism may be said to be scientific co-operation ap- plied not only to production but to the distribution of the product of industry. In other words, Socialism is scientific economics. It is the industrial rule of the people, by the people, for the people, according to well formulated and well developed plans, to the end that human effort shall not be wasted in antagonism and strife, but that the effort of each shall in full meas- ure contribute to the welfare of the producer and to society as a whole.

It will not be out of place to give one or two illus- trations contrasting the capitalistic with the socialistic method.

In a certain large town, it became a social neces- sity that each house be provided with some means for

44 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

disposing of an increasing amount of refuse. Here is one method which could have been pursued, and to an extent was followed until found impracticable. Each householder could have laid a separate conduit to a distant and safe place for the discharge of waste.

Another and a more highly socialized plan, yet seriously defective in that it embodies the evil features of Capitalism, would have been to allow a few indi- viduals to organize a company, secure rights of way throughout the town, and construct sewers of suffi- cient capacity to accommodate each householder. Un- der this system each householder making connection therewith would have been charged annually an amount sufficient not only to cover the cost of main- tenance, but in addition a sum sufficient to cover an annual interest charge on the entire investment.

Another plan, the one adopted, denoted a still high- er state of social development. The citizens collec- tively secured well prepared plans, and built a system to accommodate the entire community. The cost of construction as is usually the case under this method was distributed over a series of years, but when paid for there was no burden of profit, or charge to cover interest on the many thousands of dollars invested, or, as is often the case, on many other thousands of watered capital.

The first method, that of a separate sewer for each house, is costly and impracticable — the method of indi- vidualism. The second method is the one usually per-

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 45

sued in connection with most of our industries termed "public utilities." It is the typical method of Capital- ism, and is also in a way "individualistic." The third method, as illustrated, is the truly co-operative method, and^me by which exploitation is avoided. This meth- od secures to all the people the best economic results. It is the method of Socialism.

At this point I hear a voice, of the banker or the merchant, which says, "But look, under this last sys- tem all this work is accomplished and it shows no profit. No one makes any money out of it. How can such a system be called a success?" Just here lies the merit of the co-operative system. A way is found which prevents exploitation of the many by the few. It is not out of place here to state that interest, rent, profit, should have no place in any well developed state of society.

We often hear it said, and the remark is usually made by those who have given the subject little thought, "Yes, we fully appreciate the deplorable state of our present society; we admit that we have little fault to find with conditions as you picture them under Socialism. The conditions you predict under a social democracy are so radically different, the changes to be brought about seemingly so numerous and so com- plex, that we do not readily trace the process of transi- tion. We ask you to explain how this socialistic state of society is to be brought about."

46

THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Transition from Capitalism to Socialism — In reply, let us determine whether or not a change from our warring, destructive, competitive system to one of co- operation is desirable. If we decide in the affirma- tive our task is already half accomplished, for when we clearly recognize that a change is desirable and necessary, society will not be backward in finding ways and means to successfully accomplish the task.

While Socialism, or Industrial Democracy, may be ushered in in any one of several ways, a little obser- vation will make it evident that the very processes we now see in operation, if sufficiently extended, will in time result in common ownership of most, if not all, the means of production.

The functions of the state are being constantly en- larged. The people collectively have for a long time been taking possession of, controlling and operating schools, roads, bridges, parks, mail transportation, cer- tain farm lands, public buildings, sewers, water sup- ply, etc. More recently the tendency is to include elec- tric lighting plants, street railways, transportation lines, employment bureaus, bathing resorts and tene- ment houses, not to mention many other lines of activity. The growth of public sentiment is very marked, and progress in this direction is likely to be greatly accelerated.

A favorite method of taking over to collective own- ership the larger industries is, as advocated by many, to agree on a purchase price and issue bonds at a low

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 47

rate of interest to be gradually retired from the earn- ings of the plant. When the plant is fully paid for the property becomes fully co-operative. In case of disagreement as to valuation, a duplicate plant can be built by the collectivity.

Some students of this phase of the subject claim that when the time arrives to take over to public own- ership undertakings of great magnitude, confiscation will be the most practical method.

Let us not be frightened by the sound of a word. Taxation even at the ordinary rate of assessment is confiscation. As a matter of fact capital (mines, ma- chinery, etc., used in production) has been gradually confiscated from its rightful owners to the present possessors through the workings of our unjust eco- nomic system.

However, the precise method of taking over to pub- lic ownership the now privately owned industries will depend upon the state of public opinion at the time the transitions are made. Public sentiment relating to public ownership — means and methods of transition from the old to the new — is likely to undergo great modification as time goes on. It is safe to assume that when the transitions are made no method will be per- sued which is not fully sanctioned by the prevailing public sentiment as just and equitable.

The funds needed by society collectively, for the extension of the co-operative principle may be acquired in several ways.

48 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Suppose a municipality desires land for a school site or for a town farm. The people take possession by right of eminent domain, if they do not succeed in agreeing on a purchase price. The municipality calls on private property holders for funds sufficient to pro- cure the land and to erect the desired building.

If a tax rate of $12 per thousand is not sufficient to supply the wants of the community, it may be made $15, $18, $20 or more, according as the requirements of the community are expressed in their demands when they make their appropriations. While the levies by the community, for the purpose of carrying out any specified enterprise, may be extended over a series of years, the holders of private property are obliged to pay each his proportion into the public treasury, and it becomes public property.

Another method of transferring property from pri- vate to collective ownership is by tax on industry or occupation. Thousands of dollars are collected in this manner yearly by many municipalities in Massachu- setts. Other methods are, by demands on the part of the community for a portion of the annual income of the well-to-do, and for a portion of inherited prop- erty; in many instances the larger the income or the inheritance the greater the proportionate demands of the state.

Public ownership and control extended to include all lines of transportation and communication, ownership and operation of all mines, should not and will not

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 49

stop there. The public ownership idea restricted to what are called public utilities will not be likely to furnish any very great amount of relief from the evil effects of our present system. The progress would be in a socialistic direction only. The state, i. e., the people collectively, must acquire control of productive industry as well.

The oil industry is fairly well organized and ready for government ownership. This ownership would in- clude oil lands, wells, refineries, pipe and transporta- tion lines, tank cars, local tanks and delivery wagons. And thus with other industries, including the produc- tion and distribution of coal, steel, sugar, flour, beef and the various textiles, etc. The business agents for Rockefeller and others would be equally pleased to do the same work for the people. In taking over private industries to public ownership, it should be plainly stated that the socialist does not propose remunera- tion on an inflated valuation.

Collective Ownership Necessary — Any and all in- dustry can be organized by the people, so far as manu- facture and distribution are concerned. Their ability in this direction is practically demonstrated in that wonderfully effective branch of the public service, the Postal Department. It is not until ownership of land and the machinery useful in production is vested in the people collectively, that the desired, radical and far-reaching changes in the economic and ethical well- being of society are likely to appear. Again, the so-

50 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

cialist claims that one more factor is essential before we can become in reality a true Social Democracy, namely, the state must pass over into the control of the producers. It is a fundamental principle of the socialistic philosophy that the workers themselves shall organize and control the productive forces of society in the interest of all producers; it is then that condi- tions will best favor equality of opportunity, abolish class distinctions, and ensure to the wealth producers, immeasurably improved material support and sur- roundings, a larger individuality, education, leisure, and a better physical and freer ethical growth.

Social Unrest — Under the existing system which so favors his exploitation, the working man is growing restless and aggressive. It is owing to our false the- ories of economics and to the resulting state of unrest and dissatisfaction on the part of the producer that we are face to face with social and economic changes so marked that they may be called revolutionary. These radical changes may, and we trust will, be brought about in an orderly and peaceful manner ; but if met with too great resistance by the intrenched and privileged classes, the movement may culminate in a violent social upheaval.

Melvin L. Severy says: "The question now is no longer will the old regime survive, but rather what will succeed it, and will the displacement be the result of orderly and constructive evolution or chaotic and destructive revolution. Come it must in one way or

SANCTIONS FOR SOCIALISM 51

another, and for ourselves we do not hesitate to say that, if the present system could be displaced only by a revolution, we should consider the end to be attained a noble justification of the means employed. The agonized sufferings of our submerged brothers tear our hearts with pity, fill our eyes with tears and nerve our sinews with a strength of determination which shall not be in vain. Too long already has the world been dominated by a fanatical thirst for power and a demoniacal lust for pelf. We stand upon the threshold I of a new and better dispensation, and we ourselvesf expect that the human race will enter into it in orderly^ peace."

A Knowledge of Economics Necessary — Most if not all questions relating to the welfare of society resolve themselves primarily to a consideration of economics. It is in a study of economics that we find the sanctions for Socialism.

The more intelligent and thoughtful among the producers, owing to economic pressure, and through the extension of educational facilities, are rapidly be- ing led to a comprehensive knowledge of the economic principles involved in their struggle for existence. And herein do we find encouragement that the necessary changes in our methods of distribution will be peace- fully brought about. It is to avoid disastrous social results that every effort is put forth by the socialists to disseminate sound economic information. To use the words of Mr. Wilshire, "The mission of the social-

52 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

1st is to prepare society for an inevitable change and so to prevent dangerous and stupid resistance to an inevitable evolutionary development."

As a closing thought we present this antithesis: The competitive system means warfare, destruction, slavery. Co-operation means the very opposite — or- der, peace, conservation, construction, freedom.

Just as the survival of the fittest can never be the sur- vival of the best until the environment becomes ideal, so can the pursuit of happiness never become the pursuit of the highest happiness, until the life which is the object of this happiness becomes an ideal life. The whole problem of regenerative society is merely a problem of replacing selfish happiness, as an end sought, by altruistic happiness. When we realize that we can never attain the greatest possible happiness save as we find it in the perfect social happiness, we shall have laid down the major premise of millennial joy. Thus it is that man shall find his higher self even by losing his lower self. Melvin L. S every.

SOCIALIST AND CAPITALIST ECONOMICS

All values are labor values. Any other alleged values are either outright fictions, or less subtle errors growing: out of improper definitions. Melvin L. Severy.

It is not easy to gather from the economists a precise idea of what interest really is, except that it is always an excuse for an idle man to live on the labor, of an industrious one. Ibid.

The produce of labor constitutes the natural recompense or wages of labor. Adam Smith.

Rent, Interest, and Industrial Profit are only different names for different parts of surplus value of the commodity, or the unpaid labor enclosed in it, and they are equally de- rived from this source, and from this source alone.

Karl Marx.

By far the greatest problem, the most far-reaching in its stupendous importance, is that problem, or rather group of problems, which we have grown to speak of as the labor question. Theodore Roosevelt.

Our present distribution, based upon the struggle of pri- vate interests, can satisfy no benevolent person who has intelligence enough to see what it means. R. T. Ely.

The elimination of rent, interest and profit, and the pro- duction of wealth to satisfy the wants of the people; that is the demand. Eugene V. Debs.

SOCIALIST AND CAPITALIST ECONOMICS

Non-dividend paying capital is the solution of the labor question. Horace Mann.

Mere financial dishonesty is of very little importance in the history of civilization. Who cares whether Caesar stole or Caesar Borgia cheated? Their intellects stayed clear. The real evil that follows in the wake of a commercial dis- honesty as general as ours is the intellectual dishonesty it generates/ One need not mind stealing, but one must cry out at people whose minds are so befuddled that they do not know theft when they see it. /. /. Chapman.

A study of economics reveals to the inquiring mind the sanctions for Socialism. Let it be our task to point out some of the fundamental economic truths under- lying the socialistic philosophy. We believe that it will then become evident that these truths directly impeach our present capitalistic system.

Two Fundamental Truths — Two great truths are vital to our argument:

(1) Labor produces all wealth.

(2) The laborer is entitled to his product.

All Wealth Produced by Labor — Who doubts that labor produces all wealth? If we scan the range of human effort we find no exception. Labor tills the earth, builds the railroads, mines and transports the coal, gathers the ores, builds and operates the smelt- ers, moulds and refines the metals, invents and con- structs every machine from the simplest to the most intricate. Labor plans and erects our factories, fires

55

56 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

the boilers, operates every machine and conveys the products to our doors. The energy of man, in the last analysis, is the creator of all wealth other than that produced by nature.

It is self-evident that the worker is entitled to the product of his effort ; yet the laborer under our present system receives but a small portion of. his product. This is clearly shown by statistics and by a study of our capitalistic system.

Speculators Not Wealth Producers — Direct your attention for a moment to the schemers who manipu- late the stock market, or to the speculators who corner the grain market, securing thereby enormous profits without having performed an iota of productive labor. Note also the foreign holders of our bonds and stocks who absorb annually millions of dollars of our wealth without having contributed one moment's thought or effort to its production. -

• It is a matter of common observation that many revel in wealth and luxurious living who neither sow nor reap; that there are thousands who do not con- tribute either by mental or muscular exertion to the production of anything, v. It is also a matter of com- mon observation that there is a much larger number who toil incessantly for a scanty subsistence.- -From this fact alone, that many who perform no labor ac- cumulate wealth in abundance — the product of labor — it follows that labor does not receive its full reward.

Wealth, How Diverted — The natural inquiry at this point is : How is wealth diverted to the use of others

SOCIALIST AND CAPITALIST ECONOMICS 57

than those who create it? This leads to the considera- tion of the economics of Capitalism. Wealth in what- ever form, whether machinery, raw material, manu- factured goods, or that which under ordinary circum- stances is considered its equivalent — money, possesses no inherent power to produce more wealth.

Given a machine, as perfect of its kind as can be devised; not a wheel turns, not a movement is made by the machine. Connect it with other machinery, with shaft and gear, with engine and boiler, and yet there is no movement, no product. In a thousand years it could not produce anything. This is not to deny that machinery is exceedingly useful in the hands of man. Through its use human energy becomes im- mensely more effective than without it. But machin- ery— all capital — is inanimate and therefore has no power of initiative, no power to produce. Were all capital, all wealth, all machinery destroyed human labor would again reconstruct it. What man has done, man can do.

We grant that accumulated wealth may represent the extra exertion or the self-denial of the individual. This gives him the right to use that wealth when and as he pleases provided he does not use it in a manner to exploit or oppress his brother man. Our conten- tion is that wealth in any form has no power to add to, or multiply itself. To illustrate : A baker, besides pro- viding for himself and family may, by economy, have succeeded in accumulating a surplus, say of one hun-

58 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

dred loaves. Have these one hundred loaves power to become one hundred and ten loaves? A boat maker or a wagon maker, by working overtime, may have created a surplus of two boats or two wagons. Have these two boats or two wagons capacity to become more boats or more wagons? Surely not. On the con- trary, wealth once created soon begins to deteriorate. The wealth of the world would soon disappear were it not continually recreated by labor.

A piece of silver coined into money — one dollar, for instance — is not capable of producing anything, not even more money. It possesses neither brain, muscle, nor reproductive organs; how then can money create anything?

State the inquiry in mathematical terms, thus : One hundred dollars plus nothing are how many? We say plus nothing, because wealth in any form has no power to add more than nothing to itself; hence we ask, one hundred plus nothing are how many? The answer is one hundred, not one hundred and four or one hun- dred and six. But you reply that one hundred dollars placed in a bank for a year amounts at the end of that time to one hundred and four dollars. That is equiva- lent to saying that one hundred plus nothing is one hundred and four — an absurdity. Take a twenty-dol- lar gold piece, place it where you will, leave it as long as you wish, it is never more than a twenty-dollar gold piece.

Wealth Diverted from the Producer Through Usury — By manipulating capital in a manner con-

SOCIALIST AND CAPITALIST ECONOMICS 59

V

trary to mathematical law labor is deprived of its full reward. Through the channel of usury, made legally effective through the private ownership of social neces- sities, wealth in the form of capital is manipulated as though it had the power to multiply itself — so as to make one hundred plus nothing amount to one hun- dred and four, one hundred and six, or one hundred

and ten. Rockefeller insists that one hundred plus

* ?».-

nothing shall amount to one hundred and forty-five. Thus is labor exploited.

Usury is a form of injustice imposed by the strong on the weak. It has had the sanction of society for ages, and still has the general approval of popular sentiment. Thoughtful men, however, through interesting themselves in economics, have come to recognize the injustice of all forms of usury, and to expose its fallacy.

Interest — Professor Carver Answered — Professor Carver of Harvard says of interest in general: "It is the difference between the future value of future goods, and their present value in presenrgoods." He then asks this question, "Would you give as much in present goods for a piece of goods to be delivered ten years hence, as you would to have it delivered now?"

We admit that his statement harmonizes with our capitalistic system. But it does so because capital is enthroned, and made to exact tribute during the time. Under a Co-operative Commonwealth, with exploita- tion abolished, Professor Carver's theory falls. In

60 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

fact, under Socialism, with our present wants sup- plied, future goods, delivered as needed for our con- sumption in a month or a year hence, as the case may be, would be of more value than present goods, be- cause wealth deteriorates more or less rapidly as soon as created. In truth, the creator and lender of wealth is the debtor because by loaning his wealth, were there borrowers to be found, he would be relieved of the care and trouble of housing and preserving his wealth — whether bread, wheat, clothing or of whatever it might consist — until such time as it was needed for consumption or use. At most, all the producer or lender could in equity demand would be the return of the loan in as good condition as when delivered.

Usury Equivalent to Robbery — Our present process of diverting wealth from the producer to the capital- ist through the channel of usury is termed exploita- tion, yet in effect it is equivalent to robbery. Rocke- feller, who through usury practically insists that one hundred plus nothing shall equal one hundred and forty-five, or one hundred and forty-eight, is in effect a robber of the community. But does Rockefeller's method of exploitation differ, except in degree, from that of the successful merchant or manufacturer who by careful business methods succeeds in clearing a profit on his invested capital of, say, six, eight or ten per cent? And is the laborer in turn any less truly a robber who, from his scanty wage of one dollar and one-half per day, has succeeded in saving fifty dollars

SOCIALIST AND CAPITALIST ECONOMICS 61

on which he draws four per cent interest through some savings bank? As a matter of fact the only members of society who are not robbers are those who have no accumulations on which usury is exacted. It is evident to the thoughtful that our whole present capitalistic system is a system of piracy, the members of the community pitted against each other, with this result — the greatest measure of success to the most cunning or to the most fortunately situated.

Relief Through Organized Movement — The condi- tions peculiar to our economic system cannot be rem- edied by any individual or by a minority group of individuals. Relief must come through a general movement of society organized for that purpose. It is this deplorable capitalistic system which the social- ists seek to replace with the Co-operative Common- wealth.

The conflict between Socialism and Capitalism is a conflict between economic truth arrd economic error. The fundamental economic truths underlying the socialistic philosophy are, as stated : first, that labor produces all wealth ; second, that labor is entitled to the wealth it produces.

The main economic error underlying Capitalism and directly antagonistic to the economic truths of Socialism, is that, of usury made operative through the private ownership of the means of production. Pri- vate ownership furnishes exceptionally favorable op- portunity whereby to exploit labor. This exploita-

62 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

tion is made effective through some one or more of the various charges against labor, termed interest, rent,* profit, dividend, etc.

Periods of Depression — At this point let us briefly consider that condition of stagnation in industry known as "hard times," when our factories are silent and laborers out of employment. Let us trace these effects back to their cause.

A variety of conditions, such as lack of confidence, a close money market, etc., may be the precipitating factor of this industrial misfortune. An apparent cause is that of machine production. Through the use of power machinery a larger quantity of manu- factured goods is produced than under our present system can be consumed, the markets becoming over- stocked and the mills compelled to close. While the warehouses are filled with goods, the consumers — un- der ordinary circumstances unable to satisfy their wants — are now, with income curtailed or entirely cut off, prevented from consuming their normal amount, and consequently this condition of stagnation is great- ly prolonged.

But the fundamental cause is seen in the fact that the machinery of production is in the hands of the capitalist who controls the product of labor. The laborer at such times is shut out from its use, and we have as a result destitution and starvation in the midst

*It is obvious that that portion of so-called rent necessary to keep a property in repair is legitimate.

SOCIALIST AND CAPITALIST ECONOMICS 63

of plenty. The implements of production were wrested from the hands of the producers in the evolution of industry from hand to power production. Were these implements under the control of the producers they would be operated as needed to supply their wants ; there would be no serious shortage or overstock of manufactured goods.

Under our present system the capitalist's incentive to production is profit, not utility ; interest on capital, not human well being. And here in this prominent feature of our«capitalistic system, u_sury, based on pri- vate ownership of the means of life, we find a factor which leads directly to a train of economic ills such as long hours of daily toil, low wages, poverty, dis- tress and crime. It is the mission of Socialism to substita^c.ojl^ctixe__awnership of the implements of production in place of private ownership, and thus do away with exploitation through usury.

The Remedy — In the establishment of the Co-oper- ative Commonwealth we find the only practical method to accomplish this end. Were we to pass laws abolish- ing usury, and were it possible to enforce them, the remedy would be worse than the disease. Under our present system profit is the incentive to industry ; were this prohibited, production would be likely to cease and we would be in danger of starvation, for we discontinue the manufacture of commodities as soon as our efforts become unprofitable.

Socialism takes over to collective ownership all nature's gifts and the machinery of production, to be

64 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

operated by and for the people — eventually without interest, rent or profit to anyone. The Co-operative Commonwealth practically merges all the productive forces of the nation into one grand corporation in which each worker holds his share, and to which he contributes his portion of creative effort; a corpora- tion from which he receives in return, directly or indi- rectly, the full product of his toil.

We should as soon expect to see a hungry man refuse to eat, as a laboring man refuse to become a Socialist when he comprehends the principles involved.

We repeat, Socialism is a practical movement on the part of organized society to abolish usury and thus prevent the exploitation of labor.

The entire history of the social evolution of the human race has been a long, agonizing struggle for a more harmonious adjustment of the individual to the social whole. Socialism is a continued, conscious and intelligent movement of the social units in the same direction, and is based on the modern conception of the "perfect solidarity of the interests of all mankind." As far as we can foresee, the Co-operative Common- wealth is the crowning glory, the blossom and fruit- age of social development. On this foundation, £qual- ity- of economic opportunity, the socialist finds the basis for a marvelous growth of the higher aspirations of man.

A thoughtful and able writer, Isador Ladoff, in his book, "The Passing of Capitalism," says : "To be

SOCIALIST AND CAPITALIST ECONOMICS 65

called a socialist is to receive the highest compliment one man can pay to another; to be a true socialist is the highest distinction a man can attain on earth." Recapitulation — Our argument is intended to show :

1. That wealth is the product of labor.

2. That in equity labor is entitled to its product.

3. That under our present system, a large portion of wealth is diverted from labor which created it.

4. That this wealth is diverted through the chan- nel of usury. Wealth possessing no inherent power of increase, it follows that any additions to capital through usury must come from the creations of labor, and this results practically in the enslavement of labor — in wage slavery. We have stated that this exploi- tive system was forcibly imposed by the powerful up- on the defenseless, and that it is today sanctioned and maintained by general consent. With the exception of a few thoughtful individuals, neither capitalistic nor laboring classes are yet conscious of the injustice of usury. This is owing to our capitalistic environment and training, which have seriously befogged the mind and obscured the principles involved.

5. That the conflict between Socialism and Capi- talism is a conflict between economic truth and eco- nomic error.

6. That it is the mission of Socialism to abolish the exploitation of labor.

Finally, this conflict can have but one outcome. Like all previous conflicts between truth and error,

66 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

economic truth must inevitably prevail. Social neces- sities— nature's bounties and the machinery of pro- duction— must be taken over from private ownership and control to ownership and management by and for the people collectively, and thus a Socialist Republic established.

The prevailing commercial opinion is that which justifies the methods under which one's wealth is gathered. It is doubtful if any bias exists at the present day that acts with more blinding power upon men than the bias associated with their money income. There is scarcely any rich source of pecuniary profit for which the average citizen will not find ethical justification. Brooks, "The Social Unrest."

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH

To love one's neighbor and hate one's enemy, undoubt- edly expresses the moral sentiment of one side of the Old Testament morality. And to deceive or even to be in war is not today regarded as a breach of essential morals by the great majority of Christian people — while the same majority, hot as it is to resent cruelty or savagism when turned against itself, looks with tolerance, if not with approbation, upon its own cruel and savage treatment of so-called inferior races. Among the mercantile class how few are they whose moral consciousness is at all sensitive to the customary false weights, false labels and deceitful advertisements.

G. F. Ladd.

The appeal to purely moral incentives, while it brings blessings to many individuals, is helpless to attain, unaided, the decent society, which, to our shame, two thousand years of Christianity have failed to reach. Vida D. Scudder.

The determinist has perceived, what the idealist has too often ignored, that the most effective type of spiritual power always arises as the natural product of a concrete situation.

Ibid.

The most signal victories in life are gained, not by con- quering others, but conquering for them. We overcome, not by excluding our fellow men from the circle of self-realiza- tion but by enlarging the circle so as to include others within the area of common interests and sympathies.

John Grier Hibber.

I have set you in the same plow yoke together, and ye could easily kick each other to death. But know, the fate that overtakes one will overtake the other. Ye will stand together, or together ye will fall. Bouck White.

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH

LIFE AND LABOR

Here on a languid deck how tranquilly we float!

Seafaring now seems easy, thanks to — call it coal! — Who blames us all for idling on an idle boat?

Fools, stand and watch one moment in the stoker's hole!

Arthur Stringer.

On the planet Earth one problem rises incessantly before every being. Whether it is the monad moping about in the sea-slime, the miser conning his accumulations, the wild bird incubating her brood, the firefly kindling its twilight torch, or the lawyer lying about his client, the problem is the same. There is no other problem; for all other problems are frac- tions or inflections of this one. It is the relation of each individual to the rest of the universe.

/. Howard Moore, in "Better World Philosophy."

Wealth — We define wealth as the things provided or produced by the labor of man applied to land or the products of nature. It consists of such things as are needful or of service to man for his maintenance and development.*

Each individual unit of society consumes wealth in the form of food, clothing, shelter, etc., while the collectivity demands wealth in certain forms for use in common. It is the use of wealth both by the indi-

*The atmosphere, the soil, the mines, the forests, etc., are nature's products and belong by inherent right to the race collectively. The individual has a moral right to appro- priate to his personal ownership only such values as he may have added to nature's gifts by his personal creative energy.

69

70 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

vidual and by the social body as a whole which we consider.

Let us first refer to the ownership and consumption of wealth by the individual.

Incomes of the World's Producers — It is obvious to all that there is a vast disparity in the amount of wealth which the various members of society have at their disposal. The average yearly wage of the indi- vidual workers in the manufacturing industries of the country, according to government statistics, is not far from $500 per year — less than $1.75 per day. Gov- ernment statistics for 1900 report that there are de- pendent on each worker on the average 2.6 non- workers.

In every industrial center there are many families comprising father, mother and several children who of necessity, as industry is now organized, are obliged to subsist on an amount of wealth represented by a weekly income of $7 to $12. A larger income is re- ceived in case the children work, or as in many in- stances, the mother becomes a wage earner. Accord- ing to the Report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the State of New York for 1892, the average family income of the laboring class was approximately $750. The average family expenditure was as follows : for subsistence, $377; clothing, $136; rent, $90; fuel, $38; sundry expenses, including savings, $113. The sta- tistics for the State of Massachusetts correspond very closely with those for the State of New York.

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 71

Robert Hunter, in his book, "Poverty," states that there are ten million people in the United States whose command of wealth is so limited that they are either in or on the verge of poverty. The same authority also states that in New York City there are thousands of children who are sent to school either without break- fast or so under-nourished that they are not in a con- dition to apply themselves efficiently to their tasks. William B. Waudby, Special Agent of the United States Department of Labor, states that there are 1,750,000 children between the ages of ten and fifteen years employed in the mines and factories of the United States.

Unquestionably the laboring classes as a rule are not lavish in their consumption of wealth. It is a fact also that the great majority of wealth-producers would become destitute after a few months of en- forced idleness. As industry is now carried on, eco- nomic security to the individual can be had, if at all, only through the accumulation of a considerable amount of wealth. It is only by depriving himself of many desirable things, and to a considerable extent even of things necessary to a comfortable living, that the average laborer can accumulate sufficient wealth to attain a condition approaching security. The fact is, we claim, that the standard of living for the laboring class is not as high as it should be. The workers as a class are not as well nourished, as well clothed, as well housed, or as well educated, as they should be.

72 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Many are not adequately protected from disease or well cared for in sickness. They are deprived of the advantages of travel, and in large measure denied lei- sure for recreation and improvement.

It is probable that of the two evils which threaten the average wealth-producer today, a dependent old age, or a life of scanty subsistence, the latter in many cases should be considered the lesser evil. It is our contention, however, that with our facilities for wealth production, NEITHER OF THESE ALTERNA- TIVES SHOULD EXIST.

Incomes of the Rich — We next refer to the con- sumption of wealth by the middle and upper classes.

In almost every community of a few thousand inhabitants there are families which consume wealth represented by $5,000 to $10,000 per annum— $15 to $25 per day and upwards. In the large cities there are many thousands of families whose annual consump- tion of wealth is represented by $200,000 to $300,000, $600 to $800 and over daily. These amounts do not include extraordinary expenses, such as refurnishing a house or the purchase of automobiles, expenditure for yachts or an additional mansion.

One of the New York "smart set," writing recently of their manner of life says: "The average man in this class is expected to spend any amount varying from $1,000 to $5,000 a year for clothes, a woman from $3,000 to $10,000 not including jewels."

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 73

A few years ago it was reported that a multi-mil- lionaire was building a house in New York City at a cost of $4,000,000. Such expenditure on the part of one individual for a home represents the labor of one man, if reckoned at $4 per day, for three thousand three hundred years.

The income of one of our most prominent men is estimated to be $50,000,000 per annum. It may be less than this amount and be equivalent to a daily income represented by a column of twenty-dollar gold pieces exceeding fifty feet in height.

We cannot continue to dwell on the details of ex- treme poverty, with which we are all in a measure familiar, nor on the conditions surrounding the ex- tremely wealthy. The manner of life of both classes is adequately set forth in prominent publications and current literature of the day. Definite knowledge, however, on the part of the student regarding the ma- terial conditions, the life, and the thought of the vari- ous classes in society is essential to a comprehensive understanding of our economic and sociological de- velopment. We cannot form any correct estimate of the amount of poverty existing in our own country without being overwhelmed by the enormous extent of it, and of the suffering, the ignorance, intemper- ance, insanity and crime which it engenders.

Distribution of Wealth — We next briefly refer to what may fairly be considered abnormal conditions pertaining to our method of wealth distribution.

74 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Under our modern system of production, the dis- tribution of the product of labor remains a problem of no minor importance. Government statistics for the year 1890 show that, at that time, one per cent of the families of our nation received nearly one-fourth of the total income. From the same source it is ascer- tained that the wealthiest ten per cent of our families received about the same total income as the remaining ninety per cent; that one-eighth of the families re- ceived more than one-half of the aggregate income, and the richest one per cent received a larger income than the poorest fifty per cent. It appears that a small class of wealthy property-owners received FROM PROPERTY ALONE, AS LARGE AN IN- COME AS ONE-HALF THE PEOPLE RECEIVED FROM THEIR INVESTMENTS AND THEIR LABOR.

The conditions depicted are facts of momentous import and it may well be claimed that a practical solution of this problem of wealth distribution has become the task of the century.

That our argument may be made clear, let us define the use of the term wealth-producer.

Who Is a Wealth Producer — From the point of view of the social economist the terms worker, labor- er and wealth-producer, refer to the individual who contributes by his creative effort to the furnishing of the means of subsistence, or whose effort contrib- utes to supplying the needs of an industrially well organized community,

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 75

The effort of a teacher does not add to the stock of things we eat or wear or by which we are sheltered ; the teacher does, however, devote his energies to the training of the young, and in thus preparing the rising generation for citizenship there is an expenditure of effort which commands universal approval, meeting as it does the requirements of every cultured society; and hence the teacher should be classed as a wealth- producer. To those who have given little thought to the production of wealth, it may appear that every individual who employs his time and energy in acquir- ing the means of subsistence is a wealth-producer. A very little reflection will convince the inquirer that this is not the case. A schemer is not a wealth-pro- ducer. To illustrate: a speculator buys stocks, a house, a farm or a lot of grain ; he sells for twice as much as he pays and gains, say $1,000. His effort has not added anything to the world's store of wealth.

Waste Effort — The merchant of today is to a con- siderable extent an exploiter of the community. In- dividual firms expend yearly all the way from a few hundred to many thousands of dollars in advertising. Some of the larger firms employ skilled and high- salaried writers of advertisements; illustrations are produced, type is s«t, presses are run, advertisments folded, addressed and distributed by an army of em- ployes who are not producers. They produce no wealth whatever. Not an ounce of food, not a yard of cloth is thereby added to the world's store. It has

76 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

been estimated that nearly $2,000,000 each day are expended in the United States in this way— $600,000,- 000 per year — energy wasted in strife among merchants and manufacturers to secure under the name of profit, wealth already created by other laborers. In many instances the cost of placing goods on the market exceeds the factory cost. Note also the enormous amount of wealth consumed in the construction and maintenance of the vast armies and navies of the world, neither of which in the slightest degree is a factor in wealth production.

Waste — unproductive expenditure of energy — at- tending our present profit system is enormous. For want of space we hardly more than allude to it. The elimination of this unnecessary expense is one of the most pressing economic problems before the world today. With this evil corrected, as it certainly will be when the implements of production are placed un- der democratic ownership and control, we have what? Socialism; in place of the capitalistic state we have the Co-operative Commonwealth.

The observer will recognize that the small but very wealthy minority of our families, as a rule, con- tribute little if anything to the world's store of wealth while they consume enormous quantities of it. This minority occupy their time mainly either in consum- ing wealth or in devising ways and means whereby they may secure the wealth created by others.

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 77

Pertinent Questions — At this point let us ask a few pertinent questions, all of which call for adequate answer.

Why are we confronted with such extremes of wealth and poverty? Why are many thousands of our laboring families deprived of a comfortable liv- ing, many in poverty even, while our storehouses are filled with goods? Why do we at great cost expend Targe sums in opening foreign markets and in trans- porting merchandise to distant shores when there are so many willing workers at home whose wants are not reasonably well provided for? Why are the few enabled to revel in wealth created mainly by others while there are multitudes whose energies are freely expended in production who are permitted to con- sume but a small portion of their product? To state the question a little differently : Why is it that many who create but little are enabled to consume much, while a multitude who create much are allowed to consume but little?

The social economist answers these inquiries relat- ing to the great disparity in wealth consumption by referring to our faulty, unscientific and unjust meth- ods of wealth distribution. Tolstoi ^correctly states the cause of our social ills when he says : "The misery of the people is not caused by individuals, but by an order of society by which they are bound together in a way that puts them in the hands of a few."

What is this order of society to which he refers;

78 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

this order of society which has dominated our civili- zation to such an extent that it has become a menace to our social health and advancement?

It is the capitalistic or profit system which allows the laborer, who creates wealth, an average of approx- imately $1.50 per day, while wealth is appropriated in sums running up into millions in a single year by others who produce nothing.

The capitalistic order has decreed that inanimate capital shall practically compete with living tissue in the division of wealth which is created only by the brain and muscle of that portion of humanity which applies itself to production. Our statutes prescribe, in effect, that material wealth in the form of capital may for its possessor exact its pound of flesh from the toiler; that capital shall have the power of perpetual increase for the benefit of him who owns and con- trols it, as against him who operates it and thereby creates wealth. This condition of things is made oper- ative by reason of the private ownership of the means of life.

We repeat, because trained in our present system as we are, it is with difficulty that we are enabled to see that Capitalism is economic jugglery. Capital has, by custom and by law, been enthroned as though it were a wealth-producer, thereby relieving its posses- sor of personal effort in production. The individual possessing capital, and drawing wealth under the form of interest, rent, profit or dividend, is shown to be a

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 79

parasite on that portion of humanity which exerts its energies in creating wealth. Capital, the product of toil, which should be completely subservient to man, has come to dominate and rule over the destinies of humanity. As McKenzie says : " "Things are in the saddle and ride mankind.' In this expression the whole evil of our present condition is summed up."

The task of the century is the establishment of a system of scientific economics — a system which will furnish equality of opportunity and thereby provide for an equitable distribution of wealth ; wealth to him who produces wealth.

Equality of Opportunity Demanded — It is claimed by sociologists that the well-being of any civilized nation is in direct ratio to the economic equality of her social units. While socialists do not seek economic equality, they do demand equality of opportunity — opportunity for each and every individual to apply their energies to wealth production as their desires may prompt or needs dictate. The program of the socialist may be considered radical. It is unquestion- ably revolutionary. It is no less surely sensible, and when understood is seen to be eminently practical.

The work before us is the dethronement of capi- tal— the annihilation of our present profit system which today dispossesses the creator of wealth of a large portion of his product. Wealth is to be produced pri- marily for consumption, not for profit, as at present under Capitalism. From the standpoint of the wealth

80 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

producing class, profit is waste. We seek to eliminate waste.

How Secured — The task is great, yet when the plan is understood it is seen to be a very simple one. It is the taking over to public ownership and control nature's resources and the machinery of production; that is, in addition to all natural resources, that por- tion of wealth which we use in the production of more wealth for the purpose of exploitation, and which we term capital. It is the establishment of a co- operative industrial society, whether under the name of Socialism, Socialist Republic, Co-operative Com- monwealth or some other term. It is the substitution to the fullest extent of the principle of co-operation in economics in place of the competitive and destruc- tive warfare which now prevails under Capitalism.

Income Proportionate to Production — Concisely stated, the task of humanity is to establish an order of co-operative society in which, especially in its ear- lier although fairly well developed stage, each pro- ducer of wealth will receive the product of his toil in proportion to his creation of it; in other words, an order of society in which the able-bodied individual will not be allowed to accumulate more wealth than he creates.*

*Under a highly developed order of co-operative society it is not unlikely that wealth may be distributed accord- ing to needs rather than according to deeds. *

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 81

Let us briefly illustrate the operation of this prin- ciple as the writer sees it. From the individual whose tastes are simple, the new order would require but little in the way of economic effort. From those having more elaborate wants, more effort in pro- duction would be required; effort proportionate to the amount of wealth appropriated. Bear in mind, that a co-operative commonwealth furnishes free access to the best of labor-saving machinery.

Personal Extravagance the Child of Capitalism — Under a Socialist Republic there would be little temp- tation to excessively extravagant living. Extravagance is the child of Capitalism. But let us assume for the sake of argument that some individual might desire a mansion on the "Green lanes of Boston," a $500,000 villa at Newport and another in the Adirondacks. He might think he must have a $300,000 yacht, half a dozen motor vehicles, stables filled with expensive horses and carriages, a parlor car and various other things. What would the new order say to such a man? Simply this: We impose but one condition. Appropriate any amount of wealth you may desire, provided you add to the world's store of goods, by your own creative energy, as much wealth as you consume. We say, "as much," yes, in all cases a per- centage more for the use of the immature, the infirm, and for certain society uses. A little investigation re- garding the means and methods of wealth production will f.eveal the fact that life's span is not long enough

82 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

for any one individual to produce such an amount of wealth. Furthermore, were such a feat possible, this vast store of wealth would be of little use to the pro- ducer, as he could not afford the time to enjoy it; his attention must constantly be given to the task of its production.

In a Co-operative Commonwealth will there then be no princely estates, no millionaires? Adequate answer to this question can be given by asking an- other: Why should one individual or set of individ- uals create wealth for other able-bodied people to consume, thereby relieving them of the task of its production?

Changed Economic Environment — Let us next consider the probable effect of a changed economic en- vironment on the use of wealth individually. Let us consider what would be the state of affairs under an industrial democracy, a condition of society in which each individual has free access to all natural resources and to the machinery of production, exploitation thus being eliminated, and where each consumer of wealth is allowed its use in proportion to his effort in pro- duction.

With our constantly increasing facilities for pro- duction there will be an abundance of wealth to supply all reasonable needs.

Personal Expenditures Under Socialism and Under Capitalism — A Co-operative Commonwealth furnishes an environment directly tending to great simplic-

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 83

ity of living; liberal consumption by the individual of wealth in forms which contribute to comfort and the conveniences of life; great frugality in the use of wealth for display. As we have intimated, our com- petitive system is responsible for our extravagant and ostentatious display. This tendency is manifest in our surroundings from the cradle to the grave. We are not satisfied with that which is serviceable and even artistic; our expenditure must reveal our financial standing. Pretentious houses, show in dress, rivalry in entertainment, are a few of the forms in which wealth is lavishly consumed today. The poorer classes are led on to a greater or less extent in the same direc- tion, few being content to appear greatly inferior, in an economic way, to their neighbors.

There will be little incentive to the hoarding of wealth, as it could not be invested in the sense in which we now use that term. The energy consumed in producing wealth would more than offset any imag- ined good to be derived from hoarding it. Effort in production would be likely to be restricted to supply- ing actual needs; thus a great amount of human en- ergy would be conserved. Today our wants, to a con- siderable degree, are artificial ; we consume an enor- mous amount of wealth which does not contribute to our comfort, but merely to our pride.

Fashion Under Capitalism — The units of society would not, to any such extent as now, be influenced by the demands of fashion. Capitalistic environment

84 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

is responsible for our slavery to its dictates. Today, wealth being produced primarily for profit, capitalistic interests demand periodical and often radical changes in style, so that the renewed demand for goods occa- sioned by these changes may furnish the capitalist with additional profit. The wealthy here find occa- sion to display their wealth by a prompt adoption of the new fashions. Under a co-operative form of so- ciety the prevailing consideration, in our clothing for instance, where fashion most conspicuously dominates, will be adaptability, serviceability, artistic effect. If a garment meets these requirements it will be likely to remain in good taste until well worn.

Unnatural Standards of Taste — Diamonds and pre- cious stones are used mainly as a distinguishing badge of wealth. Those who wear them are led to frown on those who would wear an imitation as being "shoddy" — as pretenders. But a good imitation can in appearance be distinguished from the genuine only by an expert. If, then, these sparkling points or clus- ters are truly ornamental and desirable for use because of their artistic effect and intrinsic beauty, why do we demand that such ornaments shall be used which can be procured only by the wealthy? Why should it not be equally good taste to secure the same effect at a fraction of the expense of the diamond? Our question needs no further reply than to point out that our capitalistic system is responsible for unnatural standards of taste.

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 85

Under a Co-operative Commonwealth the cost in average "labor hours" of any product, whether cloth, iron or any other form of wealth, could be closely determined. Even today in well-organized factories the labor cost is determined with a fair degree of ac- curacy.

Just Measure of Value — We have intimated that the socialist's measure of value is labor-time. He sees the average "labor-hour" to be a much more accurate measure of values than money, or any other medium of exchange.

Exploitation abolished through public ownership of

^

social necessities, a necessary step before equity in distribution can be attained, what more just exchange can be made — with a modification to be referred to later — than to allow each individual who produces wealth as much wealth, in the same or any other form, as is produced by the same expenditure of energy by any other producer? In other words, human pro- ductive effort is the only equitable measure of value.

Doubtless the thought occurs that some workers turn out, in a given time, a much larger product than others; under the average "labor-hour" basis of ex- change, therefore, it may be claimed that the rapid workman is discriminated against in that he receives no more product than the moderate workman.

Under our present system of production there is an occasional worker whose amount of product is considerably above the average, and on the other

86 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

hand, an occasional worker whose product is consid- erably below the average. In exceptional cases the most rapid workman may produce, under the same conditions, twice as much wealth as the most moderate workman. We should bear in mind, however, that our present system does not furnish to the individual an environment favorable to a wide latitude of choice in the selection of his life-work. Economic necessity has compelled the great majority of workers to accept their sphere of activity regardless of special aptitude or taste for their calling. Had so-called inferior work- ers been given an occupation requiring a different order of ability, it is not unlikely that their productive capacity would have been greatly increased. The worker who excels at the loom might be a poor musi- cian or inventor; the inferior weaver might excel as a teacher or farmer.

A Co-operative Commonwealth, we have reason to believe, would furnish to the individual an environ- ment which would give great latitude of choice in the selection of his sphere of effort; and under such cir- cumstances the relative capacities of the individual workers would be much more nearly equal than at present. Again, we should bear in mind that the indi- vidual is a social product. The units of society are not, to any great extent, self-made; the individual is largely what he is because of his environment; because society has made him such. This being the case, we believe that we will be led eventually to see that we

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 87

cannot in equity deny any individual who applies his best effort in production during a given time, the average individual product during the same length of time. At all events, this is a question pertaining to the distribution of wealth which will be determined by the workers themselves, and which they will be perfectly competent to decide. It has been said with truth that there is no greater heresy than to distrust the integrity of the common people.*

Individual Ownership of Capital a Menace — An important feature attending our social progress is that of appropriation and use of wealth by the col- lectivity. Under our present system large aggregates of wealth individually owned are seen to be a menace to the well-being and stability of society; while our social welfare is enhanced by an abundant store of it held collectively for the use of society at large.

Collectively owned wealth in the form of roads, parks, school and other public buildings, museums,

*The boy who helps his father by doing the roughest of the chores is sure of just as good a seat at the family table as his brother who is in the bank. There is no moral right at all to the idea that higher work ought to have higher pay. Why should it? The estimation in which it is held is itself a higher reward, which is natural and sufficient. And if a coarser or less agreeable task has been well done of its kind, why should not society meet the faithful laborer with an equal emolument? It is just and fraternal and wise to do so. No application of this principle of human brotherhood can be plainer than this; but we dwell upon it a little because it, nevertheless, evokes so much hostility.

William H. Randall

CO THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

libraries, hospitals, sewer and water-works systems, etc., mark the advance of civilization. Progress in the direction of social ownership is constantly being made, and economic education of the people is creating the demand that land and the machinery of production be transferred to social ownership and democratic con- trol. The socialist sees that until the means of life are socialized there can be no civilization worthy of the name. With this advance secured, the individual will, practically for the first time in history, have di- rect access to power-machinery and be able to produce in abundance the wealth desired for his maintenance and development.

Under Socialism Liberal Expenditure for Com- munal Use — We have intimated that the producer of wealth will recognize the advantage of contributing a percentage of his product to the public treasury for communal use. In addition to the familiar forms of collectively-owned wealth which the community main- tains today, under the new order we shall have the machinery of production to keep in repair. Also the invention and construction of new machinery, to still further lighten our task of production, will call for collective rather than individual expenditure. Edu- cational facilities doubtless will be much more liber- ally provided. Not only will our common-school sys- tem call for enlargement, but manual and technical schools, and schools of art, and universities for higher education will be demanded. The store of communal

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 89

wealth, we believe, will be made ample to provide for the wants, not only of the incompetent, but for the maintenance by society of each individual from birth to maturity.

Our present system of life insurance will doubtless be supplanted under a Co-operative Commonwealth, in part as we have intimated, and further and completely by some system of old-age pensions. It is not un- reasonable to expect that after contributing to society a liberal portion of the individual product throughout an active life devoted to production of wealth, society should provide for her social units a period of freedom and repose during the declining years of life. Even under our present system progress is being made in this direction.

We cannot dismiss this subject without reference to the attitude of a social democracy toward art. Em- erson says: "Without the great arts that speak to his sense of beauty, man seems to be a poor, naked, shivering creature." In the same line of thought John Ward Stimson says : "One sacred pole-star of life, among the weltering billows and rocks of doubt, confusion and despair, is the growing consciousness of the race that Principles of Immortal Beauty forever cheer, console, sustain, upon every plane of mortal experience, because they are vital to the experience of God himself, and visibly insistent upon every side of his activity."

90 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

The socialist believes that the longings of the indi- vidual for the beautiful in art can most economically be provided for through collective expenditure. Today it is not, and doubtless it will not in the near future be practical for each wealth-producer to erect his house of expensive marbles, or to store it with costly statuary and artistic paintings. The desires of the in- dividual in this direction can be adequately provided for through communal expenditure. We believe it will be practical under a Co-operative Commonwealth for every social center to provide its free art gallery or museum, and that the public buildings — library, school buildings, public halls, etc. — in every center should be erected with lavish expenditure of labor, rarely known today, to secure beautiful material and to erect it in harmony of line and color and perfection of detail.

The capitalistic environment obviously tends to conservatism in public expenditure of wealth ; and as obviously it encourages lavish expenditure by the individual. Our argument attempts to make it ap- parent that a co-operative order of society will reverse the capitalistic order; that under Socialism the indi- vidual will be more frugal in the use of wealth, while the appropriation of wealth for collective use will be on a much more liberal scale than at present.

The modern historian views the entire course of human history as the struggle of the race towards a more perfect state of socialization. It is only recently that the study of sociology and of economics has been

CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH 91

sufficiently advanced to enable us to interpret broadly the meaning of the conflicts of classes, and also of tribes, and of nations.

For this reason the progress of humanity has been blind and halting, and attended with great waste of wealth and life. It has heretofore been a movement without conscious purpose or definite meaning, so far as the social destiny of the race is concerned. Today we have become conscious that we have the power to shape our social environment — to control conditions so that they will directly contribute to the well-being of society and to the individuals of which society is composed.

Socialism a Science — In conclusion: Capitalism may, in a sense, be scientific application of energy in wealth production. Socialism is more than that: So- cialism is science applied not only to the production of wealth, but to its distribution. Socialism is scien- tific application of human energy in supplying the economic needs of mankind, individual and collective. While Socialism is scientific economics, the philosophy based thereon is the most lucid philosophy the world has ever known. It furnishes a key to the interpre- tation of social phenomena which readily unlocks a tangle otherwise inextricable.

As Prof. Rauschenbusch says : "The man who un- derstands the socialist philosophy has today a supe- rior insight into the problems of society."

92 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

In "The Changing Order," a recent volume by Os- car L. Triggs, we find this quotation from Maeter- linck: "There are about us thousands of poor crea- tures who have nothing of beauty in their lives; they come and go in obscurity, and we believe all is dead within them; and no one pays any heed. And then one day a simple word, an unexpected silence, a little tear that springs from the source of beauty itself, tells us they have found the means of raising aloft, in the shadow of their souls, an ideal a thousand times more beautiful than the most beautiful things their ears have ever heard or their eyes ever seen."

To many burdened souls Socialism is this ideal which gives added courage and strength to bear pa- tiently the deprivation and disappointments of life while they work for and witness the dawn of a better civilization. Yes, Socialism is more than an ideal. THE CO-OPERATIVE COMMONWEALTH IS A COMING REALITY.

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM

To love one's neighbor and hate one's enemy, undoubt- edly expresses the moral sentiment of one side of the Old Testament morality. And to deceive or even to be in war is not today regarded as a breach of essential morals by the great majority of Christian people — while the same major- ity, hot as it is to resent cruelty or savagism when turned against itself, looks with tolerance, if not with approbation, upon its own cruel and savage treatment of so-called infe- rior races. Among the mercantile class how few are they whose moral consciousness is at all sensitive to the custom- ary false weights, false labels and deceitful advertisements.

G. F. Ladd.

The appeal to purely moral incentives, while it brings blessings to many individuals, is helpless to attain, unaided, the decent society, which, to our shame, two thousand years of Christianity have failed to reach. Vida D. Scudder.

The determinist has perceived what the idealist has too often ignored, that the most effective type of spiritual power always arises as the natural product of a concrete situation.

Ibid.

The most signal victories in life are gained, not by con- quering others, but conquering for them. We overcome, not by excluding our fellowmen from the circle of self-realiza- tion but by enlarging the circle so as to include others with- in the area of common interests and sympathies.

John Grier Hibber.

Clearly things economic and things moral are less widely separated than we sometimes think. Prof. John B. Clark.

The war of competition is infinitely more cruel and effects a vastly greater number, than the competition of actual war- fare. It is more merciful to shoot your enemy through the heart in warfare than to shoot him in the stomach in com- merce. Melvin L. Seven1.

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM

A faulty political economy is the fruitful parent of crime.

Dr. Thomas Arnold.

No one could tell me where my soul might be.

I searched for God, but God eluded me.

I sought my brother out, but found all three.

Ernest Crosby.

Mankind Affected by Environment — While mod- ern Socialism relates primarily to the economic wel- fare of the individual and of society, yet it is evident that the improvement in economic conditions which it proposes to bring about will furnish an environment which will markedly contribute to the ethical welfare of mankind.

The socialist is often confronted with the criticism . "Well, your theory may be all right, including the claim that Socialism will promote a higher morality, but before we can apply the principles of Socialism we shall have to wait until the race has reached a much higher plane of morality than now exists." With this remark the critics doubtless intend to imply that when we have attained to this high plane we shall have no need for Socialism.

This position indicates a very superficial under- standing of the subject as related to the laws of cause and effect. It is on a par with the reasoning displayed a few years ago when society was deeply concerned as to a means for diminishing or avoiding the ravages

95

96 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

of fever, diphtheria, and other contagious diseases which were so much more prevalent than at present. At that time it was claimed that the effective means for exempting society from these various forms of dis- ease was for the individual to secure and maintain a more perfect condition of bodily health.

This was good advice, no doubt, had it been prac- tical. But the plan advocated by those who had a comprehensive knowledge of the subject was embod- ied in the advice : Sewer your towns, secure a pure water supply, abolish your cesspools and open sink wastes, drain and air your cellars, reclaim your swamps, provide sanitary closets, better ventilation and improved bathing facilities; in a word, make a complete and radical change in your sanitary sur- roundings if you would gain exemption from conta- gious diseases.

The results obtained justified the advice and proved that the recommendations were based upon a thor- ough knowledge of the laws of cause and effect as re- lated to these diseases. The practical advice was not, be healthy and you will not be attacked by diseases; but it was, make your sanitary environment directly conducive to a healthy condition. And here is the gist of our argument as we apply it to the question un- der consideration — the ethics of Socialism.

Change in Economic Environment Necessary — And so, today, to gain effective relief from many of the evils which so manifestly afflict society it is not,

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 97

be generous, be sympathetic, be just, be honest, and the present economic order will be found to be all that is desired, but it is this — bring about a radical readjustment in economic environment. Instead of striving against one another in the effort to gain sub- sistence, substitute to the fullest extent the principle of co-operation. Abolish a system in which, in a large measure, gain to one member of society is dependent on loss to another, and we will find that the changed economic conditions will be markedly effective in ele- vating the individual and society to a higher ethical plane.

The practical sociologist does not claim that our aspirations and ideals have no influence or bearing on our ethical and material condition. He admits that intemperance, dishonesty and lack of energy and thrift are factors to be considered in a study of the cause of the poverty of the individual or of a people. He does claim, however, that our environment reacts on and affects character in far larger measure than is generally recognized.

Poverty the Cause of Intemperance — By way of illustration, let us briefly consider the temperance question. The consensus of opinion among students of the subject may be summed up in the words of Prof. Commons, Frances Willard and Mr. Gunton. Prof. Commons, in his book, "Social Reform and the Church," says: "The overwork of mothers in factory and sweatshop is the very hot-bed of drunkenness for

98 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

generations to come. Whatever bequeaths a defective or deficient nervous system will predispose the inher- itor to inebriety."

Frances Willard states that twenty years of ex- perience have convinced her that poverty is the prime cause of intemperance.

Says Mr. Gunton, in "Wealth and Progress:" "Drunkenness is as much a social disease as cholera and smallpox are physical diseases. Indeed, they are both primarily due to the same general economic causes — poverty and its consequent degrading social and unwholesome sanitary conditions. . . . Drunk- enness, like all other social diseases, has its tap root in economic conditions."

We do not claim that intemperance does not tend to pauperize its victims, but we do claim that defective life conditions must of necessity and according to the laws of nature produce distorted lives; that an unfa- vorable economic environment is at the bottom of many of the ills which beset our civilization.

Capitalism the Cause of Poverty — If our present capitalistic system is the fundamental cause of pov- erty, and is, as we claim, responsible for many of our moral deficiencies, it surely is opportune to consider seriously the claims of Socialism.

The sociologist, if scientifically thorough in his investigations, can with reasonable accuracy trace the laws of cause and effect as they apply to the capital- istic and the socialistic systems. He can note the ap-

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 99

plication of these laws in their ethical as well as their material bearings.

Mr. Mill says of our present system : "Morally considered, its evils are obvious ; it makes every one the natural enemy of all others who cross his path ; and every one's path is constantly liable to be crossed.

"Under the present system hardly any one can gain except by loss or disappointment of one or many oth- ers. In a well-constituted community every one would be a gainer by every other person's successful exer- tions; while now we gain by each other's loss and lose by each other's gain."

It has been well said : "A true economic science is in complete accord with a true morality;" also that "the question as to whether economic brotherhood (i. e., Socialism) is practical, is a question of whether Christianity is practical." If these sayings are true, does not our present economic system in its ethical bearings stand condemned without argument?

Evils of Capitalism — We will, however, give in brief the socialist's indictment of our present system, after which let us inquire if this system is in accord with a higher morality.

• From the socialist's standpoint our present indus- trial system is a direct encourager of selfishness, an- tagonism and strife, a promoter of poverty and squalor on the one hand, and of excessive wastefulness, luxury and vanity on the other. It is the prime cause of civic corruption so prevalent in general and local politics,

100 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

and in state, national and municipal government. It is responsible in large measure for thejdrjnk evil, and for by far the greater portion of crime which disgraces our civilization, including many of the more serious offenses, such as theft, robbery, forgery, perjury, arson and murder. It is a breeder of servility and hypocrisy. It is owing to economic pressure that few if any are at all times manly and frank.

It is today utterly impossible in any adequate de- gree to apply the principles of the golden rule. Chris- tianity has been preached for nearly two thousand years, yet we have not been Christianized. Mankind is in a state of fierce economic warfare, and where economic strife prevails there can be no true brother- hood of man, no true Christianity.

\^aste of wealth and effort under our present sys- tem is a serious evil. When we consider the loss to society from adulterated and shoddy manufactures and from expensive and wasteful methods of placing goods on the market ; when we take into account the imple- ments and vessels of war, and the maintenance of armies and navies, we cannot but stand appalled at the vastness of the burden of waste incident to our capitalistic system. The expenditures incurred in ad- vertising amount to a prodigious sum ; and this, to- gether with many other of our present costly methods, will under Socialism be saved to society; for Social- ism displaces the system which alone fosters these wasteful methods. In addition to the waste in ma-

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 101

terial goods under our present system, note what Prof. Marshall says as to the waste of human effort : "More than one-half of the best natural genius born into a country is born among the working classes, and to a large extent lost on account of the lack of opportu- nity."

Capitalism is a system which is the cause of the dissipation and loss of more than one-half of the pro- ductive labor-force of man. Its influence is not only to divert, but pervert the energies of mankind to the most sordid of pursuits. So earnest have we become, so carried along in the rush for what our system teaches us to be pre-eminently the test of merit and honor — namely, financial success — that we miss a large part of the true meaning and right aim of life.

The passion born of pelf,

The insanity for self,

Has shut the gates to happiness and health,

And flushed the reeking reservoirs of wealth.

The few, the very few, stand as it were,

Within the portals of prosperity. They hold the helm of state, directing her

Across the surface of a threatening sea. The multitude of men Look upward now and then, But poverty enwraps them in her coil, And all their higher aspirations spoil.

There were a full sufficiency for all,

If all received according to their deed: If civil codes were fashioned to forestall The swinish purposes of human greed. But money moves the earth; All else is little worth — A monster clinging to the public throat, While down Niagara rapidly we float.

102 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

If such a serious indictment can be sustained against our present economic system (and it is abun- dantly sustained by the actual conditions prevailing'), is it not worth while to seriously consider the ethics of Socialism? If, as we have argued, a favorable en- vironment produces good results, then let us try to dis- cover the effects which must necessarily follow the socialistic environment.

Merits of a Socialistic Environment — Socialism im- plies such an intelligent and systematized rearrange- ment of our economic affairs as will, by conservation of our energies, provide for all the material require- ments of daily living and leave opportunity for an immeasurably enlarged and accelerated ethical growth. It is a condition of society which prohibits the ap- propriation of wealth by the individual in excess of his production of it. It calls for such readjustment of the industrial order as will make labor-saving ma- chinery the collectively-owned property of the work- ers, to the end that they may enjoy the full product of their labor.

A comprehensive study of Socialism clearly reveals that, under a reasonably well-advanced state of so- cialistic society, a few hours of daily labor on the part of each individual will suffice to furnish him with all the modern conveniences and comforts of life, in- cluding many of the luxuries. This condition of so- ciety is to be attained through the abolition of the present system of warlike and destructive strife for

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 103

gain through privately owned capital, and the substi- tution of a co-operative organization of society based on the public ownership of land, mines, and machinery useful in production. Socialism implies emulation — yes, rivalry — in the accumulation of public wealth and in all good works tending to the material and ethical welfare of society as a whole. Its motto is: "Each for all, and all for each."

As to what Socialism is and what it seeks to ac- complish in the way of natural benefits, we refer to other pages. In the opinion of the writer, the sanc- tions for Socialism are, to those who think, so obvious and so logical that they are really axiomatic. As Rev. F. M. Sprague says: "The nature of the socialistic state will be found to rest upon the most improved principles of social utility and justice." George Doles does not misstate the case when he says: "Rather than Utopian, it is the widest possible application of practical common sense to human relationships in the place of inherited prejudice and privilege with their countless train of barbarities."

Ethics of Socialism — For the time being, at least, kindly grant the premises so far as the material condi- tions under Socialism are concerned, that we may consider the ethical results which naturally follow such change in material environment.

Under the competitive system selfishness is brought to the front and made to appear as one of the leading traits of our nature. This is what we might

104 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

naturally expect as the result of conditions where the economic interests of each are antagonistic; where the success of one is obtained at the expense of an- other.

Elimination of Selfishness — Rev. C. H. Vail says: "Man cannot love his neighbor as himself when he is compelled to fight with his neighbor for his daily

**

necessities." The socialistic system furnishes condi- tions peculiarly adapted to the development of human sympathy and the spirit of helpfulness. It reveals the truth that great personal gain is made through our effort for the good of the whole. It gives new force and practical meaning to the saying, "He that loseth his life shall find it;" and to the other saying, "It is more blessed to give than to receive."

Under Socialism the terrible conditions of destitu- tion and poverty so common to our civilization will be done away with, for these conditions are, as we have said, the direct result of the capitalistic system. Where one is rich another must of necessity be poor, for the riches of on%e are gained through loss to an- other. With nature's bounties and the machinery used in production owned and controlled by collective society, rivalry for excessive accumulation of indi- vidually owned wealth will cease, for under true co- operation wealth cannot be used as an instrument of oppression or as a lever for extorting wealth from others, as at present.

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 105

•^ Elimination of Vanity — It is well claimed that the vice of vanity and the tendency to luxurious habits peculiar to our civilization will disappear under So- cialism. Under our present system the few who are enabled to acquire wealth are consciously or uncon- sciously tempted to make a display of their gains, and thus advertise their superiority in this direction. Others who have been less fortunate strive to make an equal show. Possibly they are led to commit one of the more serious crimes in order to provide the means for gratifying their desire for display rather than acknowledge themselves in any way inferior to their neighbors. Our desire for showy apparel, for gems, or for the personal possession of costly works of art, etc., is not owing so much to any real need we may have for them, or on account of any intrinsic value or usefulness which they may possess, as that, under our economic system, we are led to prize those things which are difficult to obtain and which, when secured, serve to give us distinction and importance in the community. Under Socialism, with the baneful incentive to the accumulation of large private wealth removed, there will result a much more natural and simple mode of living.

True Individuality — We have said the present sys- tem tends to breed servility and hyprocrisy — a natural result of the dependent condition of the many. Under Socialism, with equality of opportunity, tendency in this direction will be corrected, and every encourage-

106 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

ment given to the development of true individuality and integrity of character. This, from an ethical point of view, will mean a great improvement in society.

Elimination of Intemperance — The evils of intem- perance will, under a socialistic state of society, grad- ually grow less. With the abolition of the element of private gain in the sale of liquors and drugs, there will be no pecuniary incentive on the part of manufac- turers and dealers to extend their use. More potent in the elimination of this evil will be the resulting better nourished and better cared for physical condition of humanity. With food of better quality and more in- telligently selected and prepared, with less exhausting exertion in daily toil, with enlarged opportunity for physical and mental relaxation and enjoyment, with a broader and more thorough education, with a re- sulting improved heredity to the rising generations, there is good reason to think there will be little incli- nation to the vice of intemperance.

Elimination of the "Social Evil" — Let us allude to another blemish of our civilization. Students of soci- ology claim that, among the many thousands of wom- en in our land who have fallen victims to what is known as the "social evil," only a minority are car- ried in that direction by mere weight of passion. A large majority are impelled to such a life mainly by our severely adverse economic conditions. Socialism will largely do away with this evil, for under social- istic society, with our material ivants easily provided

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 107

for, even the minority alluded to will in large degree be protected from this pitfall, since economic condi- tions will not, under Socialism, tend to postpone or to prevent the formation of life attachments and family union.

Insanity and Crime — A word in regard to the scourge of insanity. Statistics show that this affliction is on the increase. A constantly larger percentage of the community, it is claimed, are thus stricken, and the impression is gaining ground that it is in part at least owing to the state of economic insecurity on the part of the great majority, to the increasing severity of our struggle for the means of life, or to the desire for commercial supremacy that these conditions pre- vail. Socialism will lift from humanity an immeas- urably oppressive load of mental strain and anxiety, and thus doubtless tend greatly toward the relief of the race from this great evil, and from other forms of disease as well.

Even slight acquaintance with our subject reveals the incontrovertible fact that the greater part of crime finds its expression mainly in offenses against prop- erty and is directly traceable to our present economic system — a system of individual ownership and control of nature's resources and the machinery of production. This evil carries with it the greater part of our vast and expensive machinery of penal institution and law. Crime will largely disappear under a system the Nat- ural laws of which tend to simplify our tastes and

108 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

provide a large degree of comfort and happiness in return for a minimum amount of labor.

Political Corruption — Under Socialism political cor- ruption will largely be done away with. It is clearly seen that it is the private ownership of the means of life and the consequent incentive to accumulation of so-called dividend paying capital which leads to, and is directly responsible for much of our unseemly scramble for office, for the lobby, and for the buying up of public officials and the betrayal of public trusts. With the element of private profit eliminated the motive for bribery will be gone, and there will be little incentive to dishonesty.

As Professor Ely says : "It is idle to say : 'Wait until our civil service is better, and then we will in- troduce the principle of public ownership and the management of natural monopolies/ The industrial reform must precede, for that alone can open the door to thorough-going reform in our administration." So- cialism will, we believe, be found to be the effective remedy for political dishonesty. It strikes at the root of the evil.

The state, as we know it, assumes the nature of an instrument serving in undue measure the interests of the capitalistic classes, thereby tending to retard the advance of a true democracy. Socialism will gradu- ally change the nature of the state until it assumes the functions of an industrial bureau as a prominent feature.

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 109

Higher Culture — Under Socialism opportunity will be had for all to become better educated. Enlarged facilities will be provided for the many which are now procurable only for the favored few. Since there will be no ignoble work, the highest degree of culture will not unfit one for the practical affairs of life obtaining under a socialistic form of society, and thus a problem which now confronts our educators will be solved.

Recapitulation — To recapitulate. Our effort has been to show :

I. That culture, character, and the moral tone of a people are largely conditioned on, and determined by, environmental conditions.

II. That the present code of ethics has deplorably failed in practice, and that our economic system is in a large measure accountable therefor.

III. That the economics of Socialism will furnish a radically changed environment.

IV. That the economic system of Socialism will, as surely as effect follows cause, tend to eliminate ex- cessive manifestations of selfishness, and the numerous shortcomings which follow in its train ; and that it will be effective in the building up of a nobler civilization.

A Promising Outlook — I can take little satisfac- tion in .the contemplation of the present economic system. But with the vision of "the city which is to be" constantly set before me, I am impelled to exert my influence in hastening the day of the over- throw of a system which so evidently stands in the way

\ 110 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

of the true achievement of the individual and of soci- ety as a whole. Especially is this true when I see clearly that a socialistic state of society is not vision- ary but eminently practical, and, I believe, in a large degree attainable within the present century.

A quotation from Edward Bellamy may not be inappropriate here. He says : "There have been many movements for a nobler order of society which should embody and illustrate brotherly love, but they have failed because the time was not right; that is to say, because the material tendencies of the age did not work with the moral.

"Today they work together. Today it matters lit- tle how weak the voice of the preacher -may be, for the current of affairs, the logic of events, is doing his work and preaching his sermon for him. This is why there is ground today for a higher-hearted hope, that a greater deliverance for humanity is at hand than was ever before justified.

"When sun and moon together pull the sea, a mighty tide is sure to come. So today, when the spirit- ual and economic tendencies of the time are for once working together; when the spirit of this age, and the divine spirit of all ages, for once are on the same side, hope becomes reason and confidence is but com- mon sense."

Socialistic Zeal — Those who. have not arrived at a full comprehension of the principles of Socialism doubtless are at a loss to account for the enthusiasm

ETHICS OF SOCIALISM 111

exhibited by its advocates. In this connection a few words from Richard T. Ely's book, "Socialism and Social Reform," may prove instructive. He says:

"The ethical ideas of Socialism have attracted to it generous souls and have enlisted in its ranks its best adherents. It is these ethical ideals which have inspired the rank and file of the socialistic army with fiery zeal and religious devotion. It may be said, in- deed, that nothing in the present day is so likely to awaken the conscience of the ordinary man or woman, or to increase the sense of individual responsibility, as a thorough course in Socialism.

"The study of .Socialism has proved the turning point in thousands of lives and converted self-seeking men and women into self-sacrificing toilers for the masses. The impartial observer can scarcely claim that the Bible produces so marked an effect upon the daily habitual life of the average man and the aver- age woman who profess to guide their conduct by it, as Socialism does upon its adherents.

"The strength of Socialism in this respect is more like that of early Christianity as described in the New Testament.

"The person who takes up socialistic works, having a conscience at all sensitive, will find it quickened and stimulated by passage after passage giving a new view of life which is based upon the worth of every human being."

112 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Shall we not, then, change our conditions from those which put a premium on selfishness and strife, to those which naturally encourage concord, sympathy and brotherhood ; from conditions which compel us to fight with our neighbors for our daily necessities, to those which will enable us to work in concord and to love our neighbors as ourselves?

Shall we not change the flinty and barren capitalis- tic soil of our civilization, which at best produces a stunted and misshapen growth, to one in which the plant of human life will spring up and mature with the blossom and fruitage more beautiful than the world has ever known?

THE RED FLAG

They chose the color red for their emblem, not to signify that they favor violence or the shedding of blood, as the unin- telligent suppose, and as actions of those in authority often lead people to believe, but for the purpose of typifying the common brotherhood of all men of all nations through the same red blood which flows through the veins of all, and to the end that all war and violence shall cease.

Major Wm. J. Gaynor.

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED

Excuse us, O Lord, but this truth of thine comes alto- gether too soon for safety. Next year, or next century, the world may be ready for it. But now it is utterly impossible to get it established. To attempt to disseminate it will only produce vain agitation and bitterness. Pray, take it back to thyself again. Keep it hidden till a more auspicious sea- son, and leave us for the present harmonious and happy in our error. W. J. Potter.

No religious institution that the world has ever seen has had a religion strong enough to control its conduct when its economic security was in any way threatened.

Judges and courts seldom have a sense of justice strong enough to render decisions adverse to the prevailing inter- ests. God may not always be on the side of the biggest bat- talion, but justice, love, truth and all the virtues are always interpreted by every form of society on the side of the domi- nant economic interests. If slavery means dollars in the pockets of the ruling interests, then slavery is a divine insti- tution, of course. Rev. Roland D. Sawyer.

The universality of education will make the competitive principle in any department of human affairs an insult to enlightened intelligence. Socialism is the next great political creed to occupy our attention, and the central problem in this creed is the question of the distribution of wealth.

Prof. Henry Davies.

The substitution of the co-operative or socialist system of production for the capitalist system of production is in the interest, NOT OF THE PROPERTILESS CLASS ALONE, BUT OF THE INDIVIDUALS IN ALL OTHER CLASSES AS WELL. The same as slavery was an injury to the individual slave-holder, and its abolition tended to promote his highest interests, so is the present system of private ownership in the implements of labor injurious, in the highest sense, even to the landlords and capitalists them- selves, and its abolition would redound to the benefit of these as well. Karl Kautsky.

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED

Answer solidly or be convinced. Milton.

There may be many objections to this or that indi- vidual's conception of Socialism. But to Socialism — a condition of Industrial Democracy freed from exploi- tation in its varied forms — there is no well-founded objection. To be sure there are many so-called prac- tical men of affairs, men ~6f great capacity in certain lines, who scoff at the Co-operative Commonwealth -a-s—being the dream of impractical visionaries. But we think it fairly within the truth to say that the meas- ure of the criticism of this class quite generally is in proportion to their lack of investigation in the field of social economics and social progress.

The so-called practical men of a former day were sure that the earth was flat. Had they not been thus taught? Moreover, does not any man of ordinary sense know, they said, that if the earth were round the inhabitants, except those on the upper side, would fall off? Surely from their point of view the question was settled beyond further controversy.

The truths unveiled from time to time are not al- ways first seen by the so-called practical man of affairs. The history of human progress clearly shows that newly discovered truths are grasped only by those whose minds are prepared to receive them. A preju- diced state of mind is not infrequently a great ob-

115

116 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

stacle to the recognition of truth. In fact, it is a greater hindrance than misrepresentation. The latter can be exposed, while it is next to impossible to con- vince a man who will not reason fairly or who prefers not to see that which a little honest investigation is likely to reveal. Prejudice, like falsehood, can be of no real injury to truth; it can only slightly retard its general acceptance. Greater injury by far is wrought to him who allows himself to be influenced by it. Pope characterized the wilfully obstinate man when he said of him, "He does not hold opinions, but they hold him."

With these cautions before us let us briefly con- sider some phases of what is claimed by many com- petent students of sociology and economics to be the greatest movement for the emancipation of man the earth has witnessed in a thousand years.

Under our unscientific capitalistic system of distri- bution, wealth received by individuals in excess of their production of it is secured at a corresponding loss to others who produce it. Under the co-operative system the product of labor is secure to him who cre- ates it. And here do we see the contrast between an Industrial Democracy and Capitalism. One is a har- monious co-operation in productive effort, resulting in conservation of human energy; the other is effort under conditions of a more or less pronounced state of warfare, conditions always prolific in waste of energy and destruction of wealth.

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 117

In the warfare of early times havoc was wrought by the use of unconcealed weapons — the bow, the spear, the club. Today while conflicts between na- tions are waged with weapons of magnified destruc- tive power, yet by far the greatest havoc to property and to life is wrought by disguised weapons; society not yet recognizing under their delusive names their destructive nature. The sociologist takes minute ac- count of the destruction being wrought, while it is the task of the social economist to disclose to us the meth- ods by which these deplorable results are brought about. He traces from effect to cause, and demon- strates beyond possibility of error what these weap- ons are and their true nature. Their names are inter- est, rent, profit and dividend.

The Socialist's Plan Too Visionary — The radical plan of the socialist seems to our critics to be vision- ary and impractical. They assert that the industrial and social .changes which we predict are too great. It does not seem reasonable to them that such trans- formation can be brought about for centuries to come.

To these critics we reply by calling attention to what I think investigation will show to be a fact, viz. : That the changes, especially the industrial changes which have already taken place within the memory of men now living, have been vast — as great probably as will be required to place us in a fairly well devel- oped condition of industrial democracy; while the so- cial results of such industrial progress toward a Co-

118 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

operative Commonwealth will probably exceed those of any movement in history.

Unless one has given attention to social progress he can have no adequate conception of the extent of the movement which is constantly taking place in social affairs. Bear in mind, too, that the socialist claims that the past one hundred years have been years of special preparation for the coming of the Co- operative Commonwealth ; and that social changes are taking place today probably more rapidly than at any previous time in the world's history.

The science of social economics is being firmly established in place of the less scientific political econ- omy. Educational facilities have been wonderfully multiplied, with the result that the common people, as never before, are becoming conscious of their rights, their privileges and their power; while the course of industrial development is fast reaching that condi- tion which not only foreshadows but impels the transi- tion to a Co-operative Commonwealth.

The unfolding of the leaf and the slow development of the bud until it suddenly bursts into bloom, trans- forming the tree in a day, we believe to be typical of occasional transitions in the social world. Recall the movement for the freeing of the chattel slaves. Dec- ades passed in agitation, during which time the casual observer could note but little progress; then finally, in a few months affairs reached a crisis, and in a day, by the stroke of a pen, millions of human slaves were

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 119

set free. True, the millennium for the liberated race was not at once realized. It has not been to this day, yet the achievement of freedom was of necessity the only starting point for true racial development.

And thus we predict it will be with Socialism. For society to organize and declare for the removal of a fundamental error in our capitalistic system is the essential step, and one likely to be taken in the not far distant future. And in this case also we need not expect a sudden transition to a millennial state of society. No thoughtful socialist expects it. There will be required a long period for organization, dur- ing which much vexation and discouragement is likely to be met. Yet the Co-operative Commonwealth is a certainty because an economic necessity. Social development cannot reach to the high plane ever set before us without it. The measure of the success of our civilization at any period is, I believe, the degree of advancement made toward the establishment of a true Industrial Democracy — Socialism.

The Poverty Stricken the Advocates of Socialism — We are told that socialists are mainly of those who have failed of financial success, the poverty stricken, etc. The natural inference is, as I interpret these crit- ics, that they consider the opinions of this class of little account. As to who are the socialists — whether the claim of our critics is correct or otherwise — sta- tistics can decide. We will, however, say this : The appeal of the humblest or most lowly of our fellow-

120 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

men for justice and for equality of opportunity calls for respectful and thoughtful consideration.

The Socialist Incites Discontent — To teach the economics of Socialism, some say, is to incite dissatis- faction and discontent on the part of laboring men, and to cause class hatred and strife, which is likely to culminate in violence and destruction of life and property.

The masses of laboring men are aware that there is a master class and a serving class; they already recognize that something is wrong. A spirit more or less inclined to violence is manifest to all observers. It is useless to preach content when content is impos- sible until conditions which promote discontent and strife are removed. The masses are crying for jus- tice. Labor as a body may not fully understand the causes which make conditions what they are, but they are profoundly impressed that injustice exists. Now the socialist asserts that to ignore the claims of labor, to discourage free and open discussion of all phases of industrial, economic and social life, is but to invite — yes, incite the violence which our critics fear. The socialist is, in the present crisis, the active friend of humanity, in that he scientifically analyzes existing conditions and indicates a practical method whereby a truly harmonious and prosperous state of civiliza- tion can be attained. The socialist, through a careful study of economics, is able to point out the funda- mental fallacy in our present capitalistic system, ar,d

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 121

to present the only feasible method of reaching a peaceful solution. The crux of the whole question comes right here : Is the usurer a parasite on the producer? Does our system of interest, rent and profit-taking, defraud labor?

The majority of men love justice, and in its cause are willing to bear patiently any necessarily imposed hardship. If then our present system is founded on correct and just economic principles, the more re- search and discussion we give the subject the clearer will it be shown that justice already prevails and con- sequently suspicion will be allayed and peace estab- lished. On the other hand, disparagement of earnest search to discover the real causes of discontent, fail- ure to recognize unjust principles in our economics, and opposition to effective remedial measures, are the potent factors in promoting the spirit which leads to violent disastrous results.

Socialism Impracticable — Socialism will not work, others say. With the industries owned by the people there would be too many to please. They never could agree.

We answer our critics in this way. At the present time we, the people, own a few of the industries, and manage them in a manner approaching very closely to the democratic plan. Let us see if our experience to date warrants our critics in making the assertion that there are too many to please; that we never could agree.

122 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Our social effort in the management of schools, roads, bridges, water works, sewers, etc., etc., are conspicuous examples of fairly successful co-opera- tive management. From an executive or economic point of view, these industries are matters of consid- erable importance. To be sure differences of opinion as to ways and means are from time to time conspicu- ously manifest, yet the opportunity afforded for free discussion, under a rule by the people, actively enlists the intelligent interests of the masses. Experience shows that decisions arrived at through the declared will of the majority are as a rule readily accepted. As to the extension of the co-operative principle, there is not a single good reason why the system can- not be extended to cover the entire field of industrial effort.

In the course of this paper we cite a few practical illustrations of the way in which the socialistic prin- ciple actually works. If we are sufficiently inter- ested to observe closely we shall find that there is scarcely a feature of the Co-operative Commonwealth that is not in successful operation somewhere at the present time. Its practicability is therefore already demonstrated. Yet had we no practical illustrations before us, a study of economics impels us to the opin- ion that mankind must adapt itself to it, must make the co-operative principle workable, or much of value in our civilization will be destroyed*

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 123

Too Great a Task — Says another: The industrial affairs of the nation are of such magnitude that the executive ability of the people will not be equal to the task of administration.

Who manages our industrial affairs under Capi- talism? Do not the people of the nation, although in various detached, contending and conflicting groups? Is it not reasonable to assume that the task of admin- istration and operation would be greatly simplified if brought under the principle of co-operation? One* of the most important, if not the most important fea- ture of the successful management of any large indus- try is thorough organization.

A word as to a practical method of procedure re- lating to executive management. Assume that we have already declared for the Co-operative Common- wealth and are ready to take over some of our larger industries, the oil industry for instance, which is now well organized. Would it not be perfectly feasible to choose a manager in chief to stand at the head of this industry? Could not he with a corps of assistants superintend its affairs as is the case with our postal system, one of the largest business enterprises in the entire world?

And thus with the shoe industry. A chief man- ager might be chosen under whom could be a first assistant having charge of the supplies and findings, a second assistant in charge of the labor-saving ma- chinery, a third assistant whose duty could relate to

124 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

distribution, a fourth assistant whose attention could be given to location of factories, etc. The sugar, the woolen, the cotton, the distributive, and every other industry, could be severally provided for in a practical manner. The administrative management of each sep- arate industry under co-operation would in many ways be similar to that under Capitalism today.

Complicated Code of Laws— We are told that the Co-operative Commonwealth would require such a minute code of laws that Socialism could not be made to work.

Our present complicated system of laws is very largely a direct result of class rule. Under a true democracy there would be comparatively little call for restrictive measures or legal enactment. We have not the space here to consider this question at length, but it can be readily seen that with the establishment of the initiative and referendum, with power of recall, there would be little need for laws. A few constitu- tional rules to the effect that whatever the people want, that they can have, with further provision marking out the line of procedure or method for ascer- taining the wishes of the people, would be sufficient.

Do the people today desire municipal coal yards? It is impossible of realization under Capitalism be- cause prohibitive laws have been framed by and in the interests of the commercial classes. The people are not even allowed to directly express their wishes in the matter. Under the Co-operative Commonwealth,

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 125

with the law-making power vested directly in the peo- ple, each question of policy as it arises would be read- ily settled through direct expression of their will.

The Coming Slavery — Socialism, says another, will result in the suppression of individuality; in a bond- age of the individual to the state; a condition far more objectionable than our present wage system.

This conception on the part of our critic of man's condition under Socialism reveals the fact that he can- not have given serious thought to the subject. In his idea of the relation of the individual to the state he evidently has in mind what is sometimes miscalled State Socialism but which is in reality State Capital- ism. Bear in mind that the state under Socialism dif- fers radically from the state as we observe it today. Under Socialism the state would be the people; its underlying principle, the greatest good of all. It is absurd to argue that the people are going to enslave themselves.

Suggestive are the thoughts of Rev. Geo. Willis Cooke. In "New Commonwealth" he says as to So- cialism and regimentation : "It is absurd to speak of Socialism as a process of regimentation, in view of the fact that the socialists are the most pronounced individualists to be found anywhere. They are not willing, however, to have individuality reserved for the educated and prosperous; but they wish to have it extended to the very humblest of society, with opportunity to make it real and effective. That is,

126 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

they are the only genuine democrats, for they wish all to enjoy a full measure of personality, and to be able to join in the government of the country." The Co-operative Commonwealth furnishes conditions whereby is secured to the units of society the only true sovereignty of the individual.

Men Are Too Selfish — Socialism is not practical, it is claimed, on account of man's selfish nature.

Although these objectors have been repeatedly and adequately answered, we will give further con- sideration to this phase of the subject.

Let us draw a lesson from animal life. When we go into a forest animals ordinarily seek retreat at the appearance of man. Should we visit the Yellowstone Park, the animals native to that section are easily approached. If we visit the parks in our cities the squir- rels instead of fleeing from us may search our pock- ets ; the birds not infrequently light on our hand. Ani- mal nature— -the nature of the squirrel or of the bird — is not so radically different in the protected park and the unrestricted forest ; but the expression of that nature is very different, depending largely upon the environment which may develop the trait of fear, or that of confidence and trust. Now man is not less susceptible to the influences of environment than a beast, but more so. The difficulty with our critics is, evidently, that they do not fully perceive that the Co- operative Commonwealth furnishes surroundings to and influences over the individual radically different from those of our capitalistic system.

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 127

The effect on man of the co-operative environment cannot be gathered from any superficial consideration of our present system. If we are students of physical geography and desire to get a comprehensive idea of the arid plains of the West, or of the eroded regions of the Pacific slope, we do not attempt to do so by observation of the scenery of the Atlantic coast. The most careful study of our New England landscape as a whole will not give us the desired knowledge. To comprehend the effect of the socialistic state on the disposition of man we must, in thought, surround our- selves with the conditions obtaining under a truly co- operative form of society; in the meantime noting carefully the influence of the present unjust capitalis- tic environment.

A careful study of the relation of man to his en- vironment reveals clearly the fact that the ultra self- ishness manifested under the present system is owing very largely to the system itself — the competitive struggle for existence under conditions of great and unjust inequality of opportunity. In fact, we are to witness a brotherhood of man, not because of any essential change in human nature, but because of the impending change in the economic relations of man- kind. Under the present order our material interests are largely antagonistic. It is the conflict of eco- nomic interests which is responsible for our unseemly strife with all its deplorable results. Under the changed industrial order, with Capitalism abolished,

128 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

our material interests will be mutualized to such an extent that there will be little tendency to be other than brotherly. This is not to argue that there is no call for improvement in the character of men, but rather that in order to have a Co-operative Common- wealth it is today only necessary to acquire a better understanding of economics, a knowledge being rap- idly disseminated among students. This will bring about a radical readjustment in our industrial affairs. Careful reflection will convince the inquirer that So- cialism is inevitable BECAUSE HUMAN NATURE IS JUST WHAT IT IS.

Strife for Leadership — Others assert that Socialism is not practicable because there will be a fearful strife for place — for leadership. So many individuals will desire to be leaders that co-operation will not work.

The notable success of the numerous co-operative societies and industries in Belgium and England does not substantiate this view. Referring to the various labor organizations of our own country, we are not aware that strife for official positions has at any time been a conspicuous feature, or that self-seeking has in any way seriously interfered with the business man- agement of the various labor unions. It is integrity, capacity, power to serve well their interests which is demanded by these democratically organized bodies.

Labor Organizations doubtless at times make mis- takes in their selections for responsible positions. It would be strange if they did not. But ability to

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 129

serve their interests is what they seek, and when they secure itjself-seeking on the part of aspirants is not even under Capitalism a seriously disturbing factor. Nor would it be so under a Co-operative Common- wealth.

Corruption — The Co-operative Commonwealth is not practical, says another, because of corruption. Corruption in municipal, state and national affairs would abound to a degree which would prove fatal to the success of Socialism.

In the transition from Capitalism to co-operation, corruption will doubtless manifest itself to a consid- erable extent. Under Capitalism it is certainly very conspicuous. It is also witnessed today in certain of our affairs which are already partially socialized. But what is the cause and what is the cure for this evil? First, as to the cause. The corruption which we wit- ness, surely is not owing to the principle of co- operation, but rather to the cancer of Capitalism which still lurks in our co-operative form of effort. This should be obvious to all, but we will illustrate by re- ferring to our postal service. Here in this partially socialized enterprise we note certain features calling for severe criticism. We pay excessive rates to the railroads for transportation service. We pay to these same corporations scandalously exorbitant charges for rental of the postal cars — a larger yearly rental, it is said, than the cars cost when new. Certain frauds also connected with the purchase of postal supplies, etc.,

130 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

have been revealed. In each case either individual or corporate greed for gain or profit is responsible for these evils.

Now what is the remedy? We find it in two words: "More Socialism." Extend our co-operative principle and take over to ownership of the people, operation by the people and for the people, the rail- roads, the car shops, and the supply factories. This done, legislators and others would have no personal interest in railroad dividends or profits, and corruption in this quarter would cease.

Yes, our critics say, but there would still be many inducements to corruption left.

We acknowledge that corruption will doubtless continue to manifest itself until the grasp of the octo- pus of Capitalism is destroyed. The remedy still is "More Socialism," and thus until all industry is social- ized. For recollect, we cannot have the true Co- operative Commonwealth until the profit system is abolished. Our freedom from corruption at any time will be found to be in proportion to the progress made in the destruction of Capitalism, i. e., towards a Co- operative Commonwealth.

The Disagreeable Work — There would be no one to do the menial work, says another.

Under the Co-operative Commonwealth where equality of opportunity prevails there would be no menial work. Labor becomes menial only under con- ditions where wealth and poverty are found side by.

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 131

side — where one individual has power over another because of economic necessity for the means of sub- sistence. As to the dirty work, so-called, we observe that sanitary appliances are in a large measure solv- ing that problem.

However, we admit that there will be certain forms of work which today we leave to the socially infe- rior. Yet with the advent of the Co-operative Com- monwealth, objection to this kind of labor would largely disappear. With human effort systematized and our prodigious waste eliminated, so that we could supply abundantly our economic wants in compara- tively few hours of daily application, these arduous forms of labor would be reduced to a means for healthy exercise. Such labor, to the extent required, would not be drudgery for any normal person. It is the excess of work, the long hours of steady unremit- ting toil to which most of mankind are obliged to sub- mit, which makes labor drudgery.

Yet it must be conceded that there may be some forms of labor less desirable than others. If there are not a sufficient number of individuals whose tastes naturally lead them to choose the forms of labor al- luded to, such toil can be made sufficiently attractive by shortening the "labor hour."*

Cessation of Progress — Under Socialism invention and industrial development would cease, say others.

*See page 11.

132 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

We think otherwise, and give our reason. First, as to invention. It is not reasonable to suppose that, with the labor of the world performed by the people in their own interests, these same people would be backward in encouraging effort on the part of those having inventive capacity. Strenuous effort would be made to devise every means to lighten the burden of labor. Under our present system, in which the ma- chinery of production is owned by an exploiting class, many economically useful inventions are secured by capitalists and suppressed because their introduction and use would be detrimental to private capitalistic interests.

As to the promoter: Of what use to the commu- nity is a promoter? His incentive is that of exploita- tion. It is the evil of exploitation which is strangling our civilization. When a community needs a new school house, a bridge, or a system of water works, its construction under our present socialistic meth- ods in these matters is not usually long delayed. And thus it is under Socialism with any industry ; when the people want a thing they are competent to inaugurate a movement to secure it. The promoter of today, in- spired by the vision of future profits, merely antici- pates a prospective want which a little later would be likely to be recognized and provided for by the com- munity. Today under Capitalism the needs and inter- ests of the people are often neglected. It is the influ- ence of Capitalism which denies us the conveniences of a parcels post.

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 133

Lack of Incentive — Socialism would offer no incen- tive to effort, we are told.

No incentive to put forth our energies for the pur- pose of amassing large amounts of individually owned wealth? We admit it. No incentive under Socialism to exploit our brother, thus depriving him of the larger portion of his product? We have no contention on this point. The speculator or the bank robber, who under our present system are energetic in laying skillfully devised plans to secure the treasure of oth- ers, would, under the environment of the Co-operative Commonwealth, lose their incentive. Would it not be as well if they did? Our critics are in a measure cor- rect. Under Socialism there would be little incentive to effort in many directions.

But let us continue our inquiry a little further.

Today, those who create wealth labor eight to twelve hours a day and receive but little more than subsistence. Under Socialism the people owning and controllingthe machinery of production, thereby largely eliminating waste, the present standard of living could be maintained by comparatively few hours of daily toil. Can our critics seriously think that there would be less incentive to effort under a system which would require two to four hours of labor to accomplish that which now demands eight to twelve hours? That we would lose our incentive under a system which would secure a largely increased amount of the material comforts, luxuries and leisure of life, in return for n

134 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

largely diminished amount of exertion? Would the majority of mankind who earn their bread by the sweat of their brow lose their incentive under a sys- tem which would return to them their full product instead of less than one-half, as today under Capital- ism?

One objector cites the case of three young men in the employ of a certain firm in which he is also inter- ested. He states that these men receive $12 to $15 each per week, yet have no ambition to excel. They perform as little work as possible in return for their wages. We do not doubt that the case is as stated. Such instances can be multiplied by the thousand. But this is an indictment against Capitalism, not against the Co-operative Commonwealth.

Let us look for the cause of this lack of interest. Is it not probable that under our present system these young men were under economic necessity to accept the first position open to them — that they drifted by force of circumstances into a line of work for which they had neither taste nor training? These same indi- viduals would doubtless make first-class men should employment suited to their tastes be offered them.

Again it may be that one or more of the number may have inherited a weak vitality, or they may have become weakened by excessive labor in early youth and consequently are without the strength to be ag- gressive. It is not unlikely that such cases of weak- ened vitality are in many instances traceable to our

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 135

capitalistic system. Normally healthy persons are not, I believe, averse to active, aggressive labor in reason- able amount along lines adapted to their temperament.

Huxley and Momsen were indefatigable workers — their incentive was their joy in achievement. Huxley felt an inward impelling force to do his best. He was not satisfied to do less than his utmost. Momsen, when his voluminous works were referred to, replied that he scarcely expected any one to read much of what he had written; that his incentive had been the pleasure of production.

Much of the best work of man is performed in the interests of the social body, with no regard to material remuneration. That this sort of effort is not more general is, I believe, owing to the fact that the great majority of mankind are slaves to their economic necessities. The commercialism of today is not con- ducive to the formation of ideals, neither does it fur- nish conditions favorable to their fulfillment. Our observation as to the motives which actuate mankind in daily affairs leads us to the belief that man gen- erally will find abundant incentive under the Co- operative Commonwealth in the mere joy of accom- plishment.

Under our present system capital is the god of our civilization. The greater portion of man's energies are expended in securing it, and more often by means which will not bear careful scrutiny. Were some- thing else far more worthy of effort substituted for so-

136 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

called income-producing wealth, is it reasonable to assume that our incentive would be lessened? Today so much of our energy is expended in our competitive warfare to maintain our present economic position that we have little incentive for effort in higher spheres of activity.

There is an unlimited field calling for effort and achievement, which today is scarcely seen by the average man, simply because his energies are so com- pletely absorbed in acquiring the material means of life, or in strife for economic supremacy, that he has neither time nor strength remaining for achievement on the higher plane of intellectual and ethical develop- ment.

The individual who closely conforms to the pre- vailing thought of our commercial age is trained to the view that his success in life depends upon the amount of wealth he can accumulate. If he "suc- ceeds in business," "accumulates a competence," not- withstanding that he may be conspicuously lacking in mental and social development, his life, according to the popular standard of this age, is called succeessful. This, in face of the fact that there is not one farthing of his fortune which has taken his life energies to acquire, but must soon be left behind.

A man does not have to be a profound philosopher to become aware of the fact that true success in life should be measured only by the net amount of his influence towards the advancement of civilization. If

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 137

an individual does not contribute towards the better- ment of human conditions and human enjoyment, does not by his effort leave the world and the genera- tions to come a little better off than would have been the case without him, his life work may be said to be a failure. By this standard alone can man's efforts rightly be termed successful.

We may liberally endow a college or found a library, but if to do this we deprive labor of a por- tion of its prbduct it is a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul, and the account shows no balance to our credit. The man who accepts the commercial stand- ard, "financial success," as the chief measure of life's value, and does not discover his error before his active years are past, may well be spared the pain of such tardy enlightenment.

An Easy Time Not Desirable — An opponent says that he does not believe in Socialism because he be- lieves in personal effort. He thinks that when an indi- vidual has an "easy time" — when his economic wants are supplied by the community, or by somebody else, without great personal exertion by the recipient, that such a state of existence is not desirable.

Now it is one of the cardinal features of the Co- operative Commonwealth that each able-bodied indi- vidual shall be obliged to provide for his economic wants by his own personal exertions ; that he shall produce wealth in proportion to his consumption of it ; that he shall not be allowed to be an idler, a para- site on those who do produce.

138 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

If our critic had a few cords of wood to saw, would he advocate that it would be best that he use a chop- ping block for a sawhorse and a dull saw to accom- plish his task, or would he see that he had the most approved appliances for the work in hand? Evi- dently our critic does not comprehend the economics of Socialism, or else his philosophy is sadly out of harmony with his practice.

The philosophy of Socialism demands that we con- serve our energies expended in wealth production in order that we may have energy to make progress in other than material lines — education, music, art, ethics, etc.

Rights of a Man to Enjoy Fruits of His Own Labor — A prominent capitalist in a recent speech used this expression: "Now, personally, I am utterly opposed to Socialism. I believe that the principle of private property — the incentive to self-help which comes from the right of a man to enjoy the fruits of his own labor — is as important, in its way, as the principle of per- sonal liberty." Other eminent capitalists have said substantially the same thing.

These critics give, as reasons why they are opposed to Socialism, the very reasons the socialists give for advocating a Co-operative Commonwealth.

The socialist desires the abolition of a system (the capitalistic system) which gives to the few without labor wealth produced by others who labor to produce it. Today much wealth (in many instances vast

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 139

amounts of it) is obtained through our false and un- just economic system, by those who are not personally instrumental in producing it. In other words the capi- talist class, a minority, have an "easy time," so to speak, in that their economic wants are supplied by the exertions of the laboring class; and this is the very reason why there is a socialist movement.

We socialists assert — to him who produces not, no wealth ; to him who labors, the wealth he creates, and this calls for exertion on the part of each in propor- tion to the amount of wealth consumed by each. This is common sense. This is equity. This is Socialism.

To repeat, socialists give as a reason why they advocate Socialism substantially the same reason the capitalist critics give for opposing it. The explana- tion is that these critics are oblivious of the fact that usury — interest, profit, rent — is robbery of labdrT

Freedom of the Individual — Our critics have much to say about individualism as distinguished from col- lectivism.

There is considerable confusion in the minds of many about the use of this word. Now the days of individualism in production are already past; not be- cause of prohibitory laws, but because the evolution of industry has been such that it is, as a rule, imprac- ticable for the individual, or small corporation, to manufacture by hand or on a small scale as was the case a century ago. As the socialization of industry progresses individual rights will not be interfered

140 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

with, except by changed conditions, which are likely to make isolated individual initiative even more im- practicable than today. There are not now, nor will there be, restrictions or coercive measures to prevent the individual from setting up a hand loom for the manufacture of cotton cloth, for instance, should he desire to do so. Industry in production is already so far socialized that our individual and social wants are much more economically provided for through collec- tive effort.

On the other hand, as to freedom from coercion, a Co-operative Commonwealth would furnish an en- vironment which would encourage individual freedom and independence of thought and action to a degree little appreciated today by those who are not familiar with the philosophy of Socialism.

The Family-T-Socialism would destroy the home

i ""IN

life, say dtrfers.

This same critic lived in the early days of the Re- publican party and busied himself by saying that Re- publicanism would destroy the institution of the family.

If to double or to treble the purchasing power of the income of laboring men and women, thus enabling affectionate pairs easily to maintain a comfortable home without dread of poverty; if, I say, such eco- nomic conditions contribute to the destruction of the family, then our critics are doubtless correct. If a system which secures to creative labor its full prod-

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 141

net, thereby abolishing poverty, will work injury to the family, then Socialism will stand convicted, for Socialism will in time surely abolish poverty from the face of the earth.

Let us assume that we are a community of farmers. Suppose further that through some new discovery, or series of discoveries, we are enabled at the same cost of labor and material to increase greatly the produc- tivity of our lands and to abolish loss by frost, drought and flood, would such economic prosperity tend to the injury of the family? Obviously not.

Socialism does not dictate as to the nature of the family. It will make it easy for the average young man and woman to establish and maintain a home, in- stead of exceedingly difficult as is the case ordinarily today. Socialism will not force any woman through economic necessity to accept a man for whom she entertains no affection merely for the sake of mate- rial support, as is frequently the case under Capital- ism. It is Capitalism which in various ways breaks up the home. One conspicuous factor to this end is the fact that today it is an economic necessity in a multi- tude of instances for the wife or mother and likewise the undeveloped child to leave the family home to become a worker in the factory or elsewhere.

The socialist claims that under the Co-operative Commonwealth the ethics of the family, in that the weak are not in an economic way seriously discrim- inated against, will be extended to society at large.

142 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Differences in Endowment — An objector says that men are born into the world with different endow- ments and capacities and, under whatever system, these differences of power or ability will show, and it is right that they should be manifest.

The socialist takes no exception to this statement as thus made. It is in entire harmony with the social- istic philosophy. The socialist does say, however, that this difference of capacity need not and should not be manifest between the members of society in a strife for the means of life, to the detriment of those less highly endowed.

The main factor of the socialist argument relates to economic support. The socialist claims that strife between the members of society for economic sup- port is unethical because unnecessary. He points out that under our methods of social production by the use of power machinery competition for the means of life should, and under the co-operation plan would, be abolished.

The socialist speaks in a general way of eliminat- ing competition. This is because the strife of today is chiefly economic strife. It is in the field of economics that our energies are so fiercely put forth under con- ditions of special privilege and of great inequality of opportunity to the great injury of the weaker mem- bers of society, all other forms of competition under our present capitalistic system being secondary. To speak accurately, the socialist does not seek to elim-

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 143

inate competition. There is a large field in other than economic lines for rivalry between the variously endowed members of society, and where the full exer- cise of any differences in endowment, mental or physi- cal, hereditary or acquired, will injure none. It is this unnecessary and fearfully destructive competition un- der conditions which deny equality of opportunity for obtaining the means of a healthful and comfortable subsistence which the socialist would eliminate, and until special privileges are abolished and equality of opportunity furnished for all no really high state of civilization can be reached by the human race.

With our capitalistic system replaced by the Co- operative Commonwealth, the energies of the race would have a free field in which ability could con- spicuously shine to the glory of the individual and the great good of mankind.

Socialist Too Positive — Other critics say that the socialists are too sure that their views are correct — too positive to be agreeable.

Here we will make no defense except to ask, of what use is education in any line if it does not enable the individual to know? As another has said, "The object of education is to make a man know what he knows and to know how much he does not know." Surely, to object to a truth because it is not presented in the most agreeable manner or because it comes to us through a socially inferior class is unreasonable. Occasionally, truths are radically stated just for the

144 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

sake of testing the judicial caliber of the hearers. There is much truth in the saying, "There is no great- er test of genuine intelligence and breadth of view than the ability to discover the elements of truth in an opponent's position."

This question of Socialism vs. Capitalism is fun- damentally a study in economics, and economics, in the last analysis, is resolved to a mathematical problem. Mathematics we all know is an exact science. Have you then threshed out the problem to a solution? If so, you know whereof you speak, and must of neces- sity be a socialist.

Yes, says a critic, your theory sounds well and may be all right as theory, but it will never work in practice. In this admission, that the theory is right, he has conceded all we claim, because any plan which is correct in theory is certain to be practicable.

Not Ready for Socialism — A critic says that there are many good things about Socialism, but we are not ready for it.

If the Co-operative Commonwealth will furnish bet- ter conditions for humanity, why are we not ready to adopt the principle? However, the socialist agrees with our critic that we are not ready for it, but per- haps for a very different reason. The task of the socialist today is mainly one of education. As the units of society are brought to recognize the full value of the co-operative principle, they naturally make rec- ord of the fact at the polls. When a majority of the

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 145

nation so record themselves, then and not until then, are we ready to proceed to inaugurate a Social Dem- ocracy. It would be inopportune to attempt to inau- gurate the Co-operative Commonwealth with the reins of power in the hands of a government hostile to the movement.

Hostile to Religion — Our critics assert that Social- ism is an enemy to religion and the church.

The attitude of Socialism to religion is this : Re- ligion is a private matter, a question for individual decision. Socialism being an economic question does not directly concern itself with religion. This in sub- stance is the declaration of the socialists as expressed by delegates representing every state and territory in the Union, in convention assembled.

We admit that many churchmen, professed follow- ers of Jesus, brand the socialist as standing for every- thing that is evil. Is it not natural that some of the socialists strike back? If, then, the church is not held in high respect by many socialists it may be well to carefully inquire if there are not reasons.

This phase of the question cannot be treated intel- ligently without definition of terms.

When we speak of religion do we refer to one or more of many theological statements of belief, more or less sincerely advocated or taught, as a rule, by organizations of so-called believers? Or, in our use of that term, do we refer to that sentiment of heart union with and dependence on the great Father of

146 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

all, by whatever name we may designate the great First Cause? If the latter, we wish simply to assert our belief that there are none more truly religious than the socialists.

When we speak of the church, what have we in mind? Do we refer to "That great church that holds the world within its starlit aisles, that claims the great and good of every race and clime; that finds with joy the grain of gold in every creed and floods with light and love the germs of good in every soul?" Or, do we refer to the institution, the organized church? If the latter, we must admit that while not all, yet a large following among the socialists are out of sympathy with the church. \

But let us look at this question a little further and see if we can discover the underlying reasons which contribute to this condition.

Dr. Josiah Strong has given considerable thought to the question regarding the attitude of the^Taboring class to the church, and for this reason, if fo'rno- other, his views are worthy of some consideration. \ More- over, Dr. Strong is not a stranger to most of -us, and being a Doctor of Divinity, it is fair to assume that he gives the church as favorable a showing as the con- ditions warrant.

In his book, "The New Era," he says, in relation to church attendance: "In the aggregate there are many wealthy people and many intelligent people who do not attend church, and many of the laboring classes

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 147

who do ; but speaking broadly, it is the well-to-do classes which constitute the church-goers and the poor- er classes — the 'masses' — which constitute the non- church-goers."

Again, "Working men are generally indifferent to the church, when they are not positively hostile to it." Continuing on page 217, he says: "It has been repeat- edly said by working men that they do not disbelieve in Christianity, but in 'Churchianty/ The distinction was made clear and marked by the great audience in New York which applauded the name of Christ and hissed a mention of the church." "We need not stop to inquire," he says, "In what sense these men who disbelieve in the church believe in Jesus. This dis- tinction, on which they insist, forbids the assumption that the masses are indifferent or hostile to the gospel, and forces upon us the question whether the church really teaches and exemplifies the gospel of Christ." On page 218 Dr. Strong says : "The working man, even though he never goes to church, knows that Christ taught the duty of loving our neighbor as we love our- selves. He does not see this duty exemplified by the church and perhaps makes a sweeping charge of insin- cerity or at least of inconsistency against its members. Almost the only contact between the artisan class and the well-to-do church members is contact in business, and business which is intensely competitive and self- ish. How could men whose knowledge of Christians is gained by such contact avoid wrong impressions of the church?"

148 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

"The committee on the work of the churches of the Massachusetts Congregational Association," says Dr. Strong, "made inquiries as to the attitude of the work- ing man toward the churches. Circulars were sent out and replies received. Most of the replies expressed the opinion that laboring men have been alienated from the churches." He further says: "There is a great discontented class; and there is a great non- church-going class. Let us now weigh the fact that these two classes are substantially one and the same. It's the masses who are discontented ; it is the masses who will determine our future; it is the masses who constitute the non-church-goers."

Dr. Strong cites an article in the Forum, August, 1892, by Rev. John P. Coyle, who says, as quoted by Dr. Strong on page 214 : "The causes given of aliena- tion are all modifications of the charges that preachers and churches are allied with and subservient to the oppressing class."

Dr. Strong says that in seeking an explanation of a condition, "It is more important to find the cause than the causes." While he states what he thinks are several of the causes of the conditions referred to, he says: "The Cause is the fact that the church has failed to teach and exemplify the gospel of human brotherhood."

We have then to concede that there is a large ele- ment in the laboring classes (many of them socialists) who are out of sympathy with the organized church.

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 149

The cause of this disaffection, Dr. Strong says, is that, "In their struggles, working men have little expecta- tion of sympathy or help from the churches."

Perhaps this may be considered a digression, but I desire to say a few more words in connection with this subject.

While the majority of laboring men have not as yet traced to their cause the ills of which they com- plain, nevertheless they are profoundly impressed that something is wrong, and that the organized church shows little inclination to assist them in any vital or practical way. Large numbers among them, however, are students of social and economic life, and are rap- idly coming to perceive that our present system is fundamentally unjust. This view is sanctioned by large numbers of competent students who have made a scientific analysis of economics.

That the pastors and ministers of our churches are in very trying positions there can be no doubt. They are at the head of organizations largely supported and controlled by the capitalistic classes. Their imme- diate personal self-interest may call for one course, while the future welfare of the institution they in a measure represent, may, in some instances, call for more of a sacrifice than they can be reasonably ex- pected to make. It is noticeable, however, that there is a constantly increasing number among the minis- try who are accepting and preaching the economics of Socialism.

150 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

An open letter from an elder to the members of the Presbyterian Assembly recently held at Vancouver, B. C, is worthy of attention. I quote from this letter as follows :

"Gentlemen : As no other opportunity presents it- self, I use this method of addressing you, to draw your attention to a question of vital importance to the com- munity ; which question has had my own most earnest and prayerful consideration and study for some years past. . . .

"You may or may not agree with me, that the church today is fast losing its hold on the working classes, especially in large centers, and wonder at the cause. The fact is, this class of the community is beginning to believe that the church has no interest in them, or in the class struggle that is continually going on. They think the well-to-do, who can support the church, are the ones cared for and welcomed, the poorer people tolerated, and in many cases looked down on by the better-off. I full well know the dif- ficulties of the earnest minister who sees these things in his congregation and cannot find adequate means to prevent or remedy them. Now I have faith in the organizations of the various denominations to do a much greater work for the cause of humanity than they have ever done in the past, when they wake up (as wake up they must) to the opportunities offered them by a study of the question of Socialism, and it is to this end that I write, to beg, to appeal to you

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 151

with all the power, all the force at my command to study the question, drop all preconceived ideas, get its literature and study it out, each for yourself, and on its merits let it stand or fall. I can assure you there is more love, brotherhood, justice, fairness and kindness in it than you can conceive of. Were it in force today 95 per cent of your church difficulties would vanish, and 'Thy Kingdom Come' would at least be nearer than it appears to be today, when we see in our legislative halls political and municipal debauchery, and business competition so hard, so cruel, that earnest Christian men solemnly affirm they cannot do business on right principles and suc- ceed. . . .

"Today thinking men of all classes are fast real- izing the fact that we are face to face with an eco- nomic and social crisis, one that portends great change — possibly bloodshed and revolution. It is the aim and desire of Socialism the world over to prevent this. To that end we are bending every energy ; to that end we are preparing a gospel of peace — the Brotherhood of Man, the Fatherhood of God for all His children. We see vast thunder clouds gathering. Capital against labor — both like powerful dynamos charged with electricity. We see corruption, prostitution, vice and drunkenness rampant. We see women and children working for bread to exist. These present evil conditions cannot last, but must be replaced by a new economic and social system of society in which

152

THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

all shall have an opportunity to work, in which labor, the producer, shall have the full value of what he produces; every child an education, and every man, woman and child be economically free. This we can- not have under our present laws, and it is the system of today we fight — not men, not millionaires. . . .

"I conclude by beseeching you in the name of God and humanity, in the name of the Carpenter of Naz- areth, in the name of the people, to read, to study, not in the light of men long since dead, but in the light of modern thinkers, men who love their human kind, who see the evils, who know the cause and its remedy, and then come out boldly — fear not. God and one are a majority. If we are on God's side, which is one of justice, no power can possibly prevent success. God speed the day, and may you one and all be workers in the great cause — the cause of the common people.

"I am, gentlemen, respectfully yours,

"W. H. MARCON, "Elder Presbyterian Church of Canada, Victoria,

British Columbia."

Closing Thought — As music is science in produc- tion of sound waves, as mathematics is science in the use of numbers, so Socialism is science applied in the the economic field. In our manipulation of the keys of a piano, if we do not make use of scientifically ar- ranged notes, the result is inharmony, discord. In our use of numbers, if we disregard the science of

OBJECTORS TO SOCIALISM ANSWERED 153

mathematics, whether intentionally or otherwise, our result is erroneous. In the economic field, if we, as a social body, are unscientific in the application of our effort, the result is, just as truly as in the field of music or of mathematics, discordant and unsatisfac- tory.

Conversely, if our economic effort results conspic- uously in inharmony, the proof is positive of unscien- tific application of effort. That capitalism does not result in a fearful discord one must be bold to assert.

On the other hand, should our economic effort in production and distribution of the means of life be scientifically applied, the result must of necessity be an approximation to harmony.

And this, after an earnest, careful and protracted investigation, is the claim we boldly make for Social- ism— the Co-operative Commonwealth — that it is sci- entifically applied effort in the production and distri- bution of the material means of life.

Socialism instead of taking property away from every- body, will enable everybody to acquire property.

Lawrence Gronlund.

With the use of machinery one man, or even a girl, can produce as much in one hour as our forefathers could pro- duce in ten hours. Why, then, do not the workers of today have ten times as much? Or why could they not have an equal amount of products by working one hour per day instead of ten? Why is it that right here in the United States, where the utilization of improvements has been the greatest, and with its inexhaustible natural sources of wealth, the workers receive a smaller percentage of their products than those of any other country in the world? And, finally, why should there still be a condition of general poverty?

W. W. Passage.

SOCIAL ASPECTS OF ENVIRONMENT

In the affairs of this world we must not simply consider the present moment. THAT WHICH IS usually has very small importance unless we remember that THAT WHICH IS produces THAT WHICH SHALL BE. Tallyrand.

The mass life of a period largely determines the char- acter and mind of the individual, and what has determined the mass life, has not been the caprice or peculiarities of individuals, but in their economic relations, how they get their living together. And progress and change has always depended upon some advance in the development of the economic resources of the race. Change here has spelled advance above. Rev. Roland D. Sawyer.

Life itself and everything that meanwhile makes life worth living, from the satisfaction of the most primary needs to the satisfaction of the most refined tastes, all that be- longs to the development of the mind as well as the body, depends first, last and always, on the manner in which the production and distribution of wealth is regulated.

Edward Bellamy.

Modern capitalism has created an environment for the millions of the world's workers that breeds disease and cul- minates in death. Its apologetic writers, looking at sur- face manifestations only, lay the blame of individual failure, mental deformity or immorality upon the suffering victims themselves. They are wholly unmindful of the fact that the industrial system is responsible in large part for the deprav- ity and misery in the world. Selected.

SOCIAL ASPECTS OF ENVIRONMENT

Economic relations and not individual caprice are at the bottom of social institutions. The social institutions thus determined constitute the environment which forms the character and determines the nature of individuals.

A. M. Simons.

THE SOCIAL NATURE OF THOUGHT

We have always believed that thought is individual, but of late years philosophers and psychologists have attacked this idea, and have claimed that we think, as we act, only because we are a part of a social whole.

"Thought is caused by facts outside ourselves," by con- tact with the lives of those about us, by changes in environ- ment to which we must adjust ourselves and to meet which our mechanical habits are insufficient. Thus every thought with which we meet New Conditions is itself moulded by our previous social experience. We have long admitted the "social consequence of action," but action itself is a con- sequence of thought and its usefulness depends on the ade- quacy of the thought to meet the need which has aroused it, that is, on the "fullness of past experience and the complete- ness with which the past social contact is brought to bear on the New Situation." Thought, as well as action, is a social process, and when it becomes a consciously social process its adequacy in producing action is increased. Adelard Draper.

In this paper the essayist lays no claim to pro- fundity of thought. He merely gives the result of casual observation and reading, together with some reflection on subjects which are of interest not only to professional sociologists, but to most people inter- ested in the social problems of the day.

Which is the most influential factor in the life his- tory of man, Heredity or Environment?

157

158 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Before proceeding we define our terms.

Definition of Terms — Heredity: "The organic or generic relation between successive generations."

Environment: "The aggregation of surrounding things or conditions."

It may be claimed that heredity is the more funda- mental factor in determining the life history of the in- dividual because were there no heredity there could be no environment. On the other hand, it is obvious that without a favorable environment there can be no heredity.

Regarding heredity, I shall have but little to say. On this, a biological subject, whatever opinion I might entertain as a matter of personal observation and study could be of no value whatever. The subject is such an intricate one, the workings of the life prin- ciple so obscure, that the opinion of trained biologists alone would carry weight.

Heredity Little Understood — While there is a con- siderable amount of firmly seated conviction which finds ready expression on the part of the laity, and even on the part of the educated and professional classes, biologists warn us that many of these cur- rent opinions are not well founded, being unsubstan- tiated from the standpoint of today's biological knowl- edge. In the words of another, "many widespread impressions on the subject are misleading." In fact, the biologists admit that while many specialists have given a lifetime to the investigation of this subject, they as yet know very little about heredity.

SOCIAL ASPECTS OF ENVIRONMENT 159

We do inherit a physical and mental organization. We inherit varying degrees of vital power and of men- tal capacity. The inheritance of any two individuals, however, is not exactly the same. The offspring of the same parents never precisely resemble the parents, or one another. There is a law of variation, if it can be called a law, the causes of which are not yet under- stood. It is through the workings of this law of variation, as we understand it, that nature has pro- duced many diverse forms of animal life. It is by tak- ing advantage of this law that the scientific breeder (by providing certain environmental conditions) is able to show many strains or breeds of animals — horses, dogs, pigeons, fowls, etc. The unknown cause of these variations is, as we understand, inherent in the germ cells.

Term Heredity Often Incorrectly Used — The term heredity is used very loosely. In ordinary conversation the term is very often used when environment would be acknowledged to be the proper word.

From the strictly scientific standpoint heredity ap- plies to that which is inherent in and is transmitted by the germ cells. The germ cells after union has taken place are subject to various environmental in- fluences. Insufficient nourishment may be one. Fetal life may be subject to contagion. Again, it is reason- able to assume that children are born with a weakened vitality owing to long-continued exhausting toil on the part of the mother previous to the birth of her child.

160 THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

Strictly speaking, conditions like these imposed on offspring should be classed as environmental rather than as hereditary influences.

Professor J. Arthur Thomson says : "The fertilized egg-cell implicitly contains, in some way which we cannot imagine, the potentiality of a living creature, a tree, a daisy, a horse, a man. If this rudiment is to be realized there must be an appropriate environment, supplying food and oxygen and liberating-stimuli of many kinds. Surrounding influences — maternal or ex- ternal— begin to play upon the developing germ, and without these influences the inheritance could not be expressed, the potentialities could not be realized. Thus, the organic inheritance implies an environment, apart from which it means nothing. Indeed, it is only by abstraction that we can separate any living creature from an environment in which it can live. Life im- plies persistent action and reaction between organism and environment."

All Nature Evolutionary — In this argument the writer takes the position that all nature, animate and inanimate, is one. That man, like a grain of sand, like a kernel of wheat, like the planet Jupiter, like a distant sun, is a part of the Great Cosmos, a special- ized manifestation of the eternal energy, of Immortal Mind, a child of God, if you prefer that term. I ad- mit, however, that the latter term, owing to its having been freighted with so many crude conceptions, so many childish and fanciful beliefs, does not convey to

SOCIAL ASPECTS OF ENVIRONMENT 161

the writer that largeness and grandness of conception conveyed by other terms.

In the working of this life-creating and life-sus- taining power, the ever-constant changes which we witness in all nature, animate as well as inanimate, are traceable to, are apparently the outgrowth of, pre- existing conditions. In order that we may not be misunderstood we will say that the method of this creative power appears to be evolutionary.

The social institutions of today are clearly trace- able to, are the outgrowth of, conditions which pre- viously existed and gave them birth. The present is the child of yesterday. And so of the individual man, whatever he may be as to character, habits, mental acquirements, education, morals, religion, he is largely the child of that which was and is — environment.

Acquired Characteristics Not Transmitted — There are biologists who believe that characteristics acquired during the life of an individual are handed down, transmitted to descendants. The consensus of opinion, however, as I understand it, agrees with Weismann, who says, in substance, that characteristics acquired by an individual during the period of life, whether physical, mental, ethical or religious, are not trans- mitted. If this opinion is correct, the theory that he- redity is the predominating factor in determining our life career is not well founded.

Professor Thomson says : "The question resolves itself into a matter of fact: Have we any concrete

162 .THE SOCIALIST ARGUMENT

evidence to warrant us believing that definite modifi- cations are ever, as such or in